Tag: Elevator Pitch

Until Proven Guilty: The Lack of Justice in And Then There Were None

On By sabowdenwritesIn SarahLeave a comment

I want to question the idea of justice in Agatha Christie’s And Then There Were None.  There are arguments aplenty on if U. N. Owen is justified or even interested in justice when they (singular) murder ten people, each of whom is accused of getting away with killing someone.  A closer look at how Owen accomplishes their idea of justice, and the people who are punished under it, reveals much more ambiguity. First, we must consider the “criminals” killed. One character, Emily Brent, is accused of causing a teenage girl’s suicide—even though Brent didn’t cause the suicide or tell the girl to kill herself.  Two other characters are never even confirmed guilty. They also happen to be, some say, the most minor: Thomas and Ethel Rogers, the butler and cook. But a New Critical lens reveals the Rogerses’ so-called underdevelopment makes them ripe for a range of interpretations, and their opaqueness is not classist ignorance on Christie’s part, but an unsolved mystery within a mystery.  Because we know so little about them and we never hear their thoughts, we never know if they’re guilty or innocent. In fact, there’s no conclusive evidence they committed murder. This ambiguity severely disrupts U. N. Owen’s master plan.  

Second, we must ask if Owen can enforce justice alone.  Under the English system, justice was jointly administered by the police, jury, judge, and executioner.  While Owen finds this unable to bring every killer to justice, Marti’s and Saks’s meta-analysis shows the importance of having many people involved in court proceedings.  When only one person is police, judge, jury, and executioner, it inherently contaminates the system’s integrity.  

Considering the potential innocence of the “guilty,” and the limitations of the one-person judgment, it becomes apparent that U. N. Owen’s plan for “justice” is poorly thought out at best.  At worst, it’s not justice at all.  

Potential Sources

Saks, Michael J., and Mollie Weighner Marti. “A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Jury Size.” Law and Human Behavior, vol. 21, no. 5, 1997, pp. 451–467. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/1394327.

Vurmay, M. Ayça.  “Detection or Endless Deferral/Absence in Detective Fiction: Agatha Christie’s And Then There Were None.”  DCTF Dergisi, 57.2, 2017, pp. 1127-1150.  

Lesser Known Keats, Refined

On By vaxjonesIn VaxLeave a comment

I am still interested in Keats’ lesser known poetry, namely the poems from his collection published in 1817, as well as individual poems that were published in 1816. These are the earliest of his poems, and they are quite distinct next to his famous odes, which were mostly written in 1819-1820. Thus, this project now specifically acknowledges that these works were his early works, though I implied as much in my last pitch. I am still interested in examining the literary discourse around these works in Keats’ own moment and now, as I have found minimal discussion in both periods. This discussion is dwarfed by the conversation around the poems Keats wrote later. At the least, though, these poems are practice for the odes. More likely, in my opinion, they are genius of their own. In looking at the little criticism around these lesser known works, and the relatively large lack thereof, I want to get to the core of what Keats’ “genius” actually is and how these poems feed into that rather than detract from it. I believe this will create a more dimensional and cohesive understanding of Keats’ entire body of text, rather than finding certain pieces in contention with each other or simply not acknowledging large sections.

 Since there is an element of examining the criticism around Keats’ work over the past two hundred years, I believe there is a historical and/or cultural context here that is working for some of his poems and perhaps working against other. I plan to implement New Historicism in parsing this out. I think perhaps part of the answer to the secondary question of what Keats’ genius is could lie in that as well, but I also feel like there’s another type of criticism that would be useful for specifically outlining that. I’m not sure about any of the ones we have studied already right now.

As for an additional source, I found an old examination of two critiques that came out when Keats first published his initial collection. This gives me a clearer idea of what people were thinking at that time and why, specifically in terms of Keats in relation to other poets. This relationship to the other Romantics, who seem to have cast a long shadow over Keats, could very well be relevant to why these works are left relatively untouched.

Additional Secondary Source

 Cornelius, Roberta D. “Two Early Reviews of Keats’s First Volume.” PMLA, vol. 40, no. 1, 1925, pp. 193–210. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/457276.

Celebrated Writing Groups: The Genius of Eliciting Reader Response

On By jsmith26washcollIn JacquelynLeave a comment

Writing groups have existed throughout written history. From Plato’s Symposium to the Brontë sisters to Benjamin Franklin’s Junto, it’s a familiar model. A group of people with aspirations to write get together, share their writing (and often wine), critique one another’s work, and help each other hone their craft.

Some writing groups through history have enjoyed a great deal of success compared to others. There were other groups of writers working together in the same period as many of the writing groups we’re most familiar with. Why did they not experience the same lasting success? What made the Brontë sisters so successful? What did their triad possess that other writing groups in their time did not? What was it that has scholars and the general public still consuming their literature?

Perhaps it is a spark of genius that elevates some writing groups while others receive no wide acclaim, and that genius is to elicit a response from the reader that is potent enough for their work to survive long after the works of their peers.  Aspiring writers who do not possess the gift of working with themes and characters that resonate with their readers may become serviceable writers, but their writing does not capture the imagination and hearts of the readers. Texts that strike a chord with the reading public are lasting and celebrated because of the way readers connect with them.

The book, “Writing Groups: History, Theory, and Implications” by Anne Ruggles Gere looks at writing groups throughout history and their evolution into social groups that democratized scholarship in all sorts of communities. It is a very interesting starting point to look at the mechanics of writing groups and the theories behind their function.

Works Cited

Gere, Anne Ruggles. Writing Groups: History, Theory, and Implications. Published for the Conference on College Composition and Communication Southern Illinois University Press, 1987.