Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Analysis of a slave narrative
Analysis of a slave narrative sample
Literary analysis slave narratives
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Analysis of a slave narrative
John Henry was born a slave in the 1840s or 1850s. He was one among a legion of African Americans freed from the Civil War; John Henry went to work rebuilding the Southern states whose territory had been severely damaged by the Civil War. The war granted equal civil and political rights on African Americans, sending hundreds of men into the workforce, in bad conditions and for poor wages. John Henry was hired as a steel driver for the C&O Railroad Company. The C&O 's new line was working efficiently, until Big Bend Mountain blocked its path. Then one day a salesman came along to the railroad site. He had a steam powered drill and said it could out drill any man. The men working on the railroad were upset that they may be replaced by a machine, so John Henry issued a challenge and put himself against this drill to see who could handle the job …show more content…
If the meaning behind the John Henry myth could no longer be practiced then people would not take pride in their and settle for less. What is most misunderstood about the John Henry myth is the cultural meaning between Caucasians and African Americans, but the overall meaning of the story to not let the machine completely take the place of human beings no matter the race. John Henry is a tale for all generations young and old. John Henry heroically faced death. He was conscious of his own fate and willingness to fulfill that fate at the total disregard of himself is a truly sacrificial and heroic act. The story of John Henry has the power to inspire and motivate in this day in age. The legend of John Henry has been persevered, because it is a reminder of a time in history that should not be forgotten. The tale of John Henry is a modern American myth that continues to be relevant to all audiences
Henry's first-person narrative is the most important element of these stories. Through it he recounts the events of his life, his experiences with others, his accomplishments and troubles. The great achievement of this narrative voice is how effortlessly it reveals Henry's limited education while simultaneously demonstrating his quick intelligence, all in an entertaining and convincing fashion. Henry introduces himself by introducing his home-town of Perkinsville, New York, whereupon his woeful g...
Patrick Henry communicates the idea of love and agreement which brings to attention the love God has for the world and His purpose of integrating man to Himself, because of that devotion of love. To begin with, Mr. Henry initially could have stated that some ignored the problem with hope of it vanishing. However, He states “having eyes, see not and, having ears, hear not”. Jesus frequently said “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.” To move on...
Patrick henry is considered a rationalist, he wrote and took part in “give me liberty, or give me death” on march 23, 1775. In this work, we can see evidence of the characteristics, themes and style identified with the rationalist movement which was extant in American letters between 1750 and 1800. Patrick henry wrote during this time period of American literature, and as such, remains one of the most identifiable and iconic writers of his time.
Henry is somewhat naïve, he dreams of glory, but doesn't think much of the duty that follows. Rather than a sense of patriotism, it is clear to the reader that Henry goals seem a little different, he wants praise and adulation. "On the way to Washington, the regiment was fed and caressed for station after station until the youth beloved
Henry Starr was a real man, in the real Old West. He wrote his life story while in prison in a book called Thrilling Events. Although the book I read is based on a true man, some of the events are exaggerated, or retold differently then the actual event.
For hundreds of years, those who have read Henry V, or have seen the play performed, have admired Henry V's skills and decisions as a leader. Some assert that Henry V should be glorified and seen as an "ideal Christian king". Rejecting that idea completely, I would like to argue that Henry V should not be seen as the "ideal Christian king", but rather as a classic example of a Machiavellian ruler. If looking at the play superficially, Henry V may seem to be a religious, moral, and merciful ruler; however it was Niccolo Machiavelli himself that stated in his book, The Prince, that a ruler must "appear all mercy, all faith, all honesty, all humanity, [and] all religion" in order to keep control over his subjects (70). In the second act of the play, Henry V very convincingly acts as if he has no clue as to what the conspirators are planning behind his back, only to seconds later reveal he knew about their treacherous plans all along. If he can act as though he knows nothing of the conspirators' plans, what is to say that he acting elsewhere in the play, and only appearing to be a certain way? By delving deeper into the characteristics and behaviors of Henry V, I hope to reveal him to be a true Machiavellian ruler, rather than an "ideal king".
As time progressed Henry also thought of the injustice in working and paying the wages he had earned to a master who had no entitlement to them whatsoever. In slavery he had been unable to question anything of his masters doing. He was unable to have rage, sadness, or even sickness, for he would be b...
In the first part of the novel, Henry is a youth that is very inexperienced. His motives were impure. He was a very selfish and self-serving character. He enters the war not for the basis of serving his country, but for the attainment of glory and prestige. Henry wants to be a hero. This represents the natural human characteristic of selfishness. Humans have a want and a need to satisfy themselves. This was Henry's main motive throughout the first part of the novel. On more than one occasion Henry is resolved to that natural selfishness of human beings. After Henry realizes that the attainment of glory and heroism has a price on it. That price is by wounds or worse yet, death. Henry then becomes self-serving in the fact that he wants to survive for himself, not the Union army. There is many a time when Henry wants to justify his natural fear of death. He is at a point where he is questioning deserting the battle; in order to justify this, he asks Jim, the tall soldier, if he would run. Jim declared that he'd thought about it. Surely, thought Henry, if his companion ran, it would be alright if he himself ran. During the battle, when Henry actually did take flight, he justified this selfish deed—selfish in the fact that it did not help his regiment hold the Rebs—by natural instinct. He proclaimed to himself that if a squirrel took flight when a rock was thrown at it, it was alright that he ran when his life was on the line.
Following the Civil War, life in the south was dramatically changed. America faced an arduous task of rebuilding the devastated economy and social infrastructure in former Confederate states. This new movement was known as the Reconstruction era, and it was responsible for the emergence of a multifaceted industrialization of manufactured goods and transportation networks. In the book, Steel Drivin’ Man, Scott Reynolds Nelson conveys the intensity of political debate during the Reconstruction era. The conflict revolved around the role of the federal government in domestic affairs as well as the status of recently freed African-American slaves. This period marked the emergence of John Henry, a former African-American slave that became a classic figure of American folklore myths. He was known as the man who defeated the steam-powered drill in a race, but died shortly after from inhaling the rock dust generated by the steam drills. The story of John Henry emerged out of and reflected the histories of southern reconstruction by outlining the political, social, and economic changes that undermined black equality.
The Chinese and Irish laborers answered strongly when asked to help build the Transcontinental Railroad that connected the Pacific and the Atlantic Coasts. During the long process the immigrant workers encountered harsh weather and living and working conditions. Their work produced the Great Iron Trail in an incredibly short time with minimal resources and equipment. Their struggles are often overlooked and their overseers credited with the building of the railroad. The Chinese and Irish found what entertainment they could, often challenging each other to lay more track in one day than the other. Both found a hostile country in the management of the railroad companies and the U.S. government that rejected them from the work place and drove them to accept the poor conditions presented by the railroad positions. The two groups couldn’t have been more different, yet they came together to create a revolutionary railway and opened a new era in the United States. Their great influence may have made the completion of the transcontinental railroad possible.
Who was Doc Holliday? Was he just an old western figure who went down in history to be remembered as a famous gunman and gambler who was apart of the legendary shootout at the O.K. Corral, or was he more?
At the beginning, Henry Fleming has an undeveloped identity because his inexperience limits his understanding of heroism, manhood, and courage. For example, on the way to war, “The regiment was fed and caressed at station after station until the youth [Henry] had believed that he must be a hero” (Crane 13). Since he has yet to fight in war, Henry believes a hero is defined by what others think of him and not what he actually does. The most heroic thing he has done so far is enlist, but even that was with ulterior motives; he assumes fighting in the war will bring him glory, yet another object of others’ opinions. At this point, what he thinks of himself is much less important than how the public perceives him. As a result of not understanding
She seems like an unlikely hero but she saves her love John from being killed. “I’m going and get it, Ham’ she announced as she stepped over the threshold to freedom. ‘Lawd! He’ll kill me sho’s you born.’ Her feet were already on the stairs. I’ll have that key or die. Ham, you put some victuals in that rowboat.” (38) Another Hero is John De Conquer in High John De Conquer. John de Conquer is a symbol of freedom for anyone in need and who summons him but especially for slaves. He is highly renowned in the story as a savior and the person who freed the slaves. He is compared to the great historical figure King Arthur. The author writes “Like King Arthur of England, he has served his people, and gone back into mystery. He waits to return when his people shall call again.”(142) This is an example of John de Conquers great power and leadership. John de Conquer was considered the true freer of the slaves. He put the idea of ending slavery into the people's heads and gave slaves hope for when it would end. The author portrays this when writing: “John de Conquer had done put it into the white folks to give us our freedom, that's what Old Massa fought against it, but us could have told him that that it wasn't no use. Freedom just had to come.” (143) John de Conquer was a Great Hero in this story because he was a symbol for hope and freedom and that is what he gave the
This is an odd little book, but a very important one nonetheless. The story it tells is something like an extended parablethe style is plain, the characters are nearly stick figures, the story itself is contrived. And yet ... and yet, the story is powerful, distressing, even heartbreaking because the historical trend it describes is powerful, distressing, even heartbreaking.
O. Henry integrates his own personal beliefs into the narrative The Ransom of Red Chief.