I was really intrigued by your title! It feels like you are arguing that people are perpetuated into treating others poorly (captors and slaves). I don’t think most people believe that whites, the ones helped perpetuate the triangle trade, are institutionalized like slaves are.

Equiano in writing his story definitely sought to gain the hearts of his readers by appealing to their Christian values. He definitely looked for advocates to his cause.

Free-Indirect Discourse is essential for understanding how Austen’s narrative style functions–this is so important to explore. What exactly is “free indirect discourse,” though? What does it allow Austen–or her narrator–to do?

This is true. With the type of narration for this piece, readers definitely sympathize with Fanny. She endured many obstacles and difficult circumstances, but when reading the introduction I came to learn that this character is least favorable with readers.

I agree although family was meant to serve as a source of stability and identity, characters still felt constraints.

You’re ahead of the curve! Remember that we’re reading Maria; or, The Wrongs of Woman for the meeting of the 7th!

This is a very interesting response, which I think capitalizes on a central point in the novel–the danger of artifice, particularly in the hands of a sexually-driven woman. Megalena and Theresa, too, share both the sexually-driven quality and the powers of artifice (77, 105, 109). In each case, the language of “seduction” is used to join sexuality with a kind of hyper-masculinized power–notice the language of wildness, pride, fierceness, turbulence, adventurousness, and so on, all of which are associated with Victoria and Megalena. You put it well when you describe Victoria’s “absolutely dominant position.” This post is interesting in that it gets at the role of seduction in the novel; however, I wonder if it reads these characters from an unacknowledged ideological perspective. For instance, Berenza is passionately in love with Victoria–perhaps? Isn’t there anything about Berenza that we should also be suspicious of? And, remember, he is drawn to her difference, her fierceness, her wildness, her “strong and resolute mind” (76).

In every story plot there arises a problem and a solution to fix the problem. In this case Madame Duval’s character is problematic. Could this be a commentary on aristocratic individuals at the time?

I am trying to be more focused on a topic, but it seems like I’m not doing very well on that, it strays from the point by the middle part…Anyway, what I’m trying to say is: Double standard and class discrimination is a social phenomenon, which was never seen as a problem before the idea of “equality” was brought to us.(Not saying it’s perfect today, but we’re always trying) And it seems that the author of this book is suggesting that some people, including the author herself, sees this as something unpleasant and hopefully changeable — pointing out the problem is already a great leap at 18 century.
It is very interesting to learn that doctor is a higher class above us; perhaps that’s a culture difference? I’m not sure what you guys do here, but personally, I would prefer the same respect for all work nature and income class.

We can definitely look at the way that different classes are treated differently in this book; let’s start there! What different classes (or “kinds” of people, if we don’t make it into socioeconomic class) are evident in the novel? How are they distinguished from one another? And then, are there moments where these distinctions break down? Note the structure I’m embedding into this response.

For instance, the Branghtons are routinely held up as ridiculous by Burney; their manners are poor, they are boorish, they don’t understand polite taste. Orville, however, is held up as admirable by Burney; his manners are impeccable, and his understanding of taste is elevated and polite. Evelina is described as “naturally” genteel, though she may lack polish. Evelina elevates Orville’s taste over that of the Branghtons’. Is it merely a coincidence that Orville is a member of the nobility, while the Branghtons are steeped in the middle-class world of commerce? Can they ever, in this system, be “genteel”? That is a question we can ask of the novel, and of Burney’s own blind spots and class-based agenda.

Interesting insight. The language used in the novel is very ironic. Meaning that it has to be read on a deeper level. I wonder how his use of language affects how we perceive the characters he comes in contact. It is almost as if we envision these characters based on Yoric’s description to be kind, subtle, or helpful.

I love your map! I thought about doing that myself to see where he traveled, but thankfully don’t have to because you did it! I agree that Yorick does come off as somewhat of a Lothario during his “adventures.” It is interesting that you and Sana concentrated on the sentimental aspect of his personality, especially in regards to women (who seem to be the gender he’s most interested in).
You say, “it is almost like the female has heard what his thoughts and answering him,” which makes me wonder how much of the conversation the reader is actually privy to. I also wonder how much of his meetings with women are embellished to make himself appear more attractive to the reader.

I think you’re right, that Yorick’s sentimentalism is rather erotic–this is also about power, though, and his ability to “condescend” or “feel for” these beautiful, fragile, less-fortunate women. I am not sure it’s a question of him either being sentimental to women or removed from men, however; what is similar in his relationships to those less fortunate than himself? Might there be anything broadly “erotic” in that relationship?

The map is a great idea! Several readers have made similar maps, and we’ll look at this one tomorrow as a great example of the novel’s spatial imaginary: http://enec3120.neatline-uva.org/neatline/show/a-sentimental-journey