In A Raisin in the Sun, we see another example of protagonists resisting forces that constrain their lives and their potential for growth. I'd like you to learn about two American thinkers who promoted resistance against oppression in their own ways. Watch these videos about HENRY DAVID THOREAU and MALCOLM X, then post a response giving your personal opinion on their approach to resistance as well as a comparison with characters from Raisin. How much do you agree with their views and actions, and how do you think characters like Beneatha and Walter Lee and Mama or Ruth would agree with them?
HENRY DAVID THOREAU Mini-Bio Animated Summary: "The Duty of Civil Disobedience" MALCOLM X: Mini-Bio Speech Excerpt: "By Any Means Necessary"
33 Comments
Luke Devine
1/25/2016 04:04:21 pm
I think that both of these forms of resistance could work in society in order to change unjust laws. At first Henry David Thoreau's style, called Civil Disobedience, should be applied. These peaceful protests could change people's ideas, without anyone getting hurt. If that method does not work, then people must resort to Malcom X's method. He said that people have the right to fight back if someone else is denying them freedom. Some people may be injured or jailed in the process, but the ultimate message would get across quicker. Mama and Ruth would believe in Thoreau's ways, as they are both peaceful, calm characters. Walter Lee and Beneatha are both impatient but passionate, and so they would support Malcom X. Henry David Thoreau and Malcom X had two very different styles of protest, however they are both successful in changing unjust laws and ideas in society.
Reply
Olivia Jordan
1/25/2016 05:32:49 pm
Malcom X's resistance towards oppression was strong but peaceful. He did not believe that you should go along with the ways of the oppressor and continue to be belittled. He felt that in order to reach freedom you need to stand up and do whatever it takes,“If you’re not ready to die for it, put the word ‘freedom’ out of your vocabulary.” (Malcolm X). Mama would be the character to mostly agree with his ideas because throughout all of the heartache that the family endured she for the most part had a continuous optimism and courage. She never gave up on her family even when they were at their weakest.
Reply
Biggs
1/25/2016 06:51:53 pm
Do you think Beneatha would support Malcolm X?
Reply
Olivia Jordan
1/27/2016 07:14:17 pm
Yes, I do believe Beneatha would agree with Malcolm X. She has a very stubborn and strong-willed personality that would push her to never give up just as Malcolm X continued to do.
Willow Martin
1/25/2016 06:33:33 pm
In respect to the American thinkers, I agree with Thoreau. We must all utilize the knowledge we've gathered through our experiences to assess every situation we are in and to determine whether the actions being carried out (either by ourselves or others) are morally right. In short, we should all follow our consciences. And should we decide that certain laws be unjust, we must resist them and strive to change them. Civil disobedience, promoted by Thoreau, should always be used initially in response to oppression. I believe Beneatha especially would agree with this. She, in her revolution against racism, strives to become a doctor in the play. In this, she rubs against the common grain of society, grinding through the stereotypes imposed on African Americans through peaceful methods. Asagai also exhibits Thoreau's beliefs, for he too transcends his traditional role in society through the pursuit of education, destabilizing the oppressive rule of the white man simply by attending college.
Reply
Biggs
1/26/2016 04:42:29 pm
It does seem that violence breeds more violence - hence why V, for example, wanted Evey to take over and break that cycle, as Proctor did when he refused to sacrifice others to save himself. At the same time, there are some forms of oppression that I don't think can be overcome without violence, simply because they themselves are so violent (to give a really small example that we can all agree on, the British would forcibly occupy colonists' homes and seize their property, and would not have stopped if they hadn't been forced out through the violence of the American Revolution). Can violent revolution be a form of "Self defense" when a system itself has become violent, as in the Hunger Games?
Reply
Willow Martin
1/27/2016 03:46:59 am
Yes, I believe so. Self defense doesn't have to be looked at simply in a short term sense, like when someone punches you and you have to punch back to protect yourself. Self defense can also be used to protect one's self from a more long term form of harming (i.e. Nelson and the black people of South Africa were willing to engage in physical combat in order to free themselves from apartheid, a measure which was indeed justified to be taken). When neither civil disobedience nor diplomacy are capable of ending oppression, and one's oppressors act so violently, I do believe the one has the right to revolt violently.
Trey Soya
1/25/2016 06:52:31 pm
Henry David Thoreau believed in civil disobedience, which is trying to peacefully disobey an unjust system. He's beliefs were based off what was morally right or wrong. I think of Mr. Lindner using this method of resistance towards the younger family. He peacefully tried to reason with the family not to move into their new house. He even resisted Walter and tried to reason with Mama. Walter would use civil disobedience also, he would resist the offers of Mr. Linder peacefully. With these methods there was no bloodshed and everything worked out fine.
Reply
Biggs
1/26/2016 04:37:30 pm
So you would agree with Malcolm X on the point that we can't simply rule out violence, even though it's BETTER to do things without it, because some situations of oppression call for force? (This is essentially the same argument made by America's founding fathers in relation to Britain, which I find pretty interesting, since Malcolm X is considered so controversial).
Reply
Suubi Mondesir
1/26/2016 02:42:14 pm
In my opinion, both American thinkers had pros and cons to their methods on fighting the resistance. Henry David Thoreau believed in Civil Disobedience, which is a non violent approach yet still affective. For example boycotting or protesting. Malcolm X on the other hand was willing to do whatever it took to secure justice for African Americans, even if it meant using force and violence. An example of this was an organization called 'The black Panther" which also saw violence as the only effective course of action. However both American thinkers sought justice for the lesser and oppressed. Yet, I don't believe that violence is a positive or impactful way to get a point across. I feel that Civil Disobedience is a better solution because it still accomplishes the goal. So why choose to harm others to achieve the same thing?
Reply
Biggs
1/26/2016 04:35:11 pm
Is there a point at which violence becomes necessary? If so, where is it? If civil disobedience fails? If your opponents are using violence against you? I ask because Martin Luther King, who strongly identified with Thoreau's ideals of nonviolence in contrast to X's wiillingness to consider force, began to reconsider toward the end of his life. He never embraced violence, obviously, but he was increasingly frustrated with the entrenched power structures in America and interested in thinking beyond civil disobedience.
Reply
hannah daitz
1/26/2016 04:16:59 pm
Henry David Thoreau believed that you should follow your conscious even if it contradicts with the law. He strongly believes that one person’s actions can cause a spark that ignites a change. Thoreau believes in a peaceful change called Civil Disobedience. This can be best displayed in the characters Mr. Lindner and Mamma. They both use their words to display their feelings and are not afraid to hold back. On the other hand Malcom X is slightly more violent. He believes what you believe in is worth fighting for and you shouldn’t be afraid to fight for it. Beneatha and Walter can more identify with him because of their strong opinions. Both Malcom X and Thoreau were great Americans who sparked a great deal of change to our world.
Reply
Biggs
1/26/2016 04:31:48 pm
Do you think Beneatha and Asagai would go as far as violence? On the one hand Malcolm X's argument is pretty simple and hard to deny: it's wrong to tell someone they can't punch a bully who hits them first, especially if the bully keeps hitting them. And there was certainly violence against blacks in Chicago at this time. But on the other hand, I feel like they would be uncomfortable with engaging in violence themselves. What do you think?
Reply
Makenzie Lowrey
1/26/2016 05:25:32 pm
Thoreau believed in "civil disobedience", which was nonviolently rejecting the laws, while X believed in putting up a physical fight for justice and freedom. I am more on board with Thoreau's belief, because I believe that if we break laws to prove the point that we aren't law breakers, nothing gets solved. However, protests, public demonstrations, ect. are very legal and very moving. I think that Walter would believe in X's thoughts. Walter is very straightfoward, and believes you have to take to get ahead.
Reply
Meghan Pawlak
1/26/2016 05:52:07 pm
In my opinion I strongly agree with both resistances in how we should calmly fight for the social or political justice that not only benefits them but everyone as whole. While physically fighting and rioting feels like the right thing to do in the moment it won't solve the long term problem. I think that Mama and Ruth would be more Henry David with peace and calm while Beneatha and Walter would put up a physical fight for the justices they deserve. Again I would more likely lean towards the rosa park of sitting in a different spot than Ferguson's riots and chaos. However I would not object if it where any means necessary.
Reply
Kathleen Patterson
2/10/2016 12:10:08 pm
I believe that there is historical proof to support to your belief that physical fighting/protesting won`t solve a long term problem. Henry David Thoreau`s method of civil disobedience has had successful effects when used in political and social movements, such as those of Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. However, while I agree that Walter is one to get hotheaded and impulsive, do you think that Beneatha might be one to peacefully protest, as in the production she spends a lot of time thinking and just trying to peacefully be her own person?
Reply
Kay Franzese
1/26/2016 06:29:03 pm
Henry David Thoreau believed that people should follow their conscious on moral grounds then be another piece in and unjust system. Thoreau took a peaceful approach when arguing for equality. I believe that Beneatha would agree with Thoreau's ideas of peaceful approaches because she is more aware of the world and how cruel it can be ,so she wants to be on the safe side and follow the rules of society without abandoning her own conscious. Also, Mr. Lindner took the peaceful approach to giving the bad news to the Youngers. He did not want to cause any trouble that wasn't necessary. I believe that if he had gone into the Younger's house with a forceful, violent attitude he would have been beaten up by Walter. He did his best to keep the peace between himself and the people he considered the "others".
Reply
Brad Chavero
1/26/2016 08:25:56 pm
Personally, I can see both Henry David Thoreau’s and Malcolm X’s approaches of resistance as effective. I think that it depends on specific situations on which approach is better though. For example, if a group wants to resist a certain law that asks for a small tax on a product and enough people dislike it, a more Thoreau (ha puns) response would be most appropriate since the resistance is to a minor inconvenience. Civil disobedience in this case (a more minor and calmer form of resistance) would be a great solution since the law causes no harm and civil protests also would cause no harm. However, if a law is passed where killing becomes legal to government employees in our country, a Malcolm X approach is far more necessary! Some rights deserve more immediate attention than others where any form of resistance may be required. In this case, any form of resistance, including violence may indeed be needed in order to resist such an unfair law. Basically, it depends what you are resisting for which approach is best. If you want to resist a more deadly force or extremely unfair rule, a Malcolm X approach would serve best as to fight something strong, you need something strong. Civil protests won’t phase a force trying to kill you. However, if the resistance is to a minor inconvenience or not violating of your basic rights, a Thoreau response serves best because there is absolutely no need to bring a gun to a rock paper scissors fight. Violence would be too overkill for these issues and likely cause more problems. After also reading A Raisin In The Sun, I would say that Walter would be more of a Malcolm X person during the beginning of the book but would then join Beneatha, Mama and Ruth by the end to choose a Thoreau approach. In the first half of the book, Walter shows his personal greed more than anything. He truly wants the money that Mama is about to receive and he tries convincing all the family that he will use it well in the investment towards the liquor store. Walter’s ego was definitely that of Malcolm X’s, eager and willing to do anything, no matter how legal to get what you want. In this case it was resistance from everybody so he could continue with the liquor store plan. Walter proves this when he does finally get his way and gets the part of the amount of money he wanted. However, he takes some that was supposed to be for his sister too, proving he was willing to do anything necessary to resist his current lifestyle and be able to support his family. The ladies all prove their Thoreau perspective by always trying to calm, tolerate , and enlighten Walter with their peaceful conversations, even after huge fights. They all then show their civil disobedience together when Mr. Linder visits for the second time. Together, the family reject and resist Linder and the white community’s request for them to not move in; and all in such a peaceful manner where the most aggressive one was actually Linder himself with his mean/threatening comments. As for my opinion on these characters’ actions mentioned before, I would have to side with the family at the end agreeing with Thoreau because at the beginning of the play up until the end, Walter held his family back by attempting to resist Malcolm X style by making mistakes in who to trust with so much money, proving that a more civil, broader train of thought was required to make the whole family happy, not just Walter.
Reply
tyhler Harty
1/27/2016 04:34:29 am
I believe that Henry David Thoreau has the right way to deal with resisting. The reason is because "civil disobedience" shows that you are a good cause to other people since you are the ones that are being beaten up on by the law and you are not fighting back. Malcolm X on the other hand said that to become equal African Americans must do anything necessary. This eventually resulted in violence. I believe that mamma and Ruth would agree with Henry David since they them selves do not want to cause harm to other people and seem they would peacefully protest.
Reply
Kelly Farley
1/27/2016 02:09:45 pm
Henry David Thoreau and Malcolm X had different approaches to the issue of oppression in our society. Although different, both had positive effects to their ideas. Thoreau had very strong ideas but they were peaceful and involved no violence. In summary, Thoreau's ideas were to do what you wanted(follow your conscience) and break the law on "moral grounds". He said to disobey the rules you found unjust and go against the oppression to "stop the machine". On the other hand, Malcolm X sought violence as the answer to the oppression. He fought to attain civil rights using militant self defense. Malcolm X, a leader of violence, was a counterpoint to MLK and his civil rights movement. He created energy within his followers, inciting fear and controversy within them. In my opinion, Thoreau's views are are better answer to the problem. If he was not getting any results then maybe I could see why Malcolm X's ideas come in, but he was getting reactions. Out of the characters in "A Raisin in the Sun", I see Mama as Thoreau and Walter as Malcolm X. Mama is the quieter one (compared to Walter and Bennie) in this novel. She is very passionate and has worked hard to get where she is now and she would be against violence and would keep the peace. She is very good at keeping peace, especially when it comes to her two children. Meanwhile, I can see Walter as Malcolm X. In this novel, he always has good intentions which often do not end as planned. Although he was never violent in the novel, he does let his anger get ahead of him sometimes so I do see the violent characteristic in him. These two people in history, despite having differing ideas, influenced our society.
Reply
Courtney Fenty
1/27/2016 04:41:41 pm
I feel that the characters from "A Raisin in the Sun" would have agreed that there was civil unjustice in their situation. They had the stereotypical lifestyle of a black person in that time period. When given the opportunity to improve that lifestyle they were not welcomed by the white people in the community. Mama would have agreed with Thoreau because he believed that you had to stand up for what you believe is right, just like Ghandi and Rosa Parks they were set on non-violence and standingn your ground. Mama didn't want Walter to give up the house just for money, she wanted him to show the white community that they can't win anymore. Walter would have agreed with Malcom X because of his strong desire to prove to people why he deserves to be treated like a human being and if he has to use violence then he doesn't have a problem with it, especially since his anger usually gets the best of him. Thoreau believed in peaceful protest, while Malcom X was more a do what you need to do even if it involves violence, type of activist.
Reply
Will Spencer
1/27/2016 06:08:50 pm
While watching the two excerpts, I realized their points. Henry Thoreau feels strongly about protesting against the government, but in a peaceful manner. However, I don't feel very strong about this. I do believe that everyone should have the right to protest against the government, because after all that's what our founding fathers allowed, (1st amendment). I find that some protesters say that their "rallies" are going to be peaceful, however that's simply not the case. As evident in Ferguson, and all these other places where certain groups claim to be peaceful, but next thing you know they're trying to shut down the Christmas tree lighting in NYC. Thoreau believes that his idea of civil disobedience is non-law breaking, but that isn't always the case. I relate his ideas to Mr. Linder in Raisin. Linder approaches the family in a nice calm matter, and asks them peacefully to remove themselves from Clybourne Park. Walter and his family also respond in peace. They respectfully declined, and that was that. Unfortunately that wasn't always the case back in the civil rights era. Malcom X on the other hand, is all for human rights and how everyone should be treated equally, which is how it should be. During the time period where he was speaking, tempers were flaring over civil rights, especially the Jim Crow laws. I can relate Malcom X to Beneatha in Raisin. Beneatha always was force civil rights. The only difference, however, was that Malcom X thrived to change it, and Beneatha, apart from thriving to be a doctor, didn't do much about it.
Reply
Melissa velazquez
1/27/2016 06:39:58 pm
Henry David Thoreau has more personal and natural thoughts. He believes In non violence and civil disobedience. Mama from The Rasion in The Sun is more like Henry I believe because she is more trusting towards God and peace. She is most calm in rough situations. Just like the movement in society. Both Malcolm and Henry wanted the same thing; to have equal rights and social injustice. Henry's approach is to the black community to sort of rebel against rules that seem unfair. An example of not following unfair rules is when Rosa Parks did not give her seat for a guy of her opposite race. Which resulted in arrest. She did not use violence but her word, "no" Henry said "let your life be a counter-friction to stop the machine". Mama wanted to keep the new house she bought for her family when Mr.Linder kind of scared her of and or somehow lied about her and her family's race in the neighborhood is not good. Yet, the youngers stood their ground due to their pride. Malcolm x's view is prideful and a bit threatening towards the community from the black nationalists and black brothers. Malcolm is more violent towards these laws and rules. Stating that if we do not do something about the unfair rights; their going to start fighting back. Walter and Bennie are similar to Malcolm's approach. Walter does not want to stay in his poor situation. Bennie is very prideful and has a guard up when even her family have doubts towards what is socially acceptable. In conclusion, having civil disobedience like Henry said could only get them so far until they have to start fighting back like Malcolm stated.
Reply
Erin Ostrowski
1/27/2016 07:05:40 pm
To get anything done in an unjust society, a little bit of Thoreau’s and Malcolm X’s forms of resistance should be applied. To begin, Thoreau believed in defying the government in a civil and peaceful manner. However, Malcolm X believed the opposite. He thought that fighting to get what they want will get the job done a lot faster and that they had to take action to make sure they won against their unjust government system. All things considered, I agree with Thoreau more because the one side saw the other as dangerous and inferior so, they resisted giving them what they wanted even more. Showing peace would show them that they are not as different as they had thought, leading them to changing laws and resolving the issue. Although fighting may be faster, the government still has the final say in changing laws and if they continued to see the African-American people as dangerous from all of the violence, they would not be so willing to grant them equality.
Reply
Olivia Smelas
1/27/2016 07:06:50 pm
Generally, Malcolm X took a more aggressive approach to the pursuance of freedom, while Henry David Thoreau was more passive, working to achieve freedom more peacefully. There are definitely perks to both approaches. Malcolm X's methods would achieve freedom/any goal much more quickly, while Thoreau's method of civil disobedience would take longer to have a real effect. Both theories are applicable to society today, but which would be more effective and necessary definitely depends on the issue at hand. If people are being actively killed and harmed, Malcolm X's approach is absolutely the better option. But, if the issue was one that didn't affect human lives as time passed, Thoreau's methods would be more efficient. In terms of A Raisin in the Sun, I think Walter Lee and Beneatha would side with Malcolm X, and Mama and Ruth would side with Thoreau. Bennie and Walter are definitely the most aggressive characters in the play, constantly questioning, antagonizing, and arguing. The siblings would appreciate Malcolm X's approach because of its time efficiency and display of strength/power. Ruth and Mama would side with Thoreau because they are the more passive characters in the play, Ruth is at times submissive to Walter's aggression, and Mama at times seems afraid/too old to deal with the conflicts between her children which shake the entire house.
Reply
Shelley Banfield
1/27/2016 07:17:09 pm
I agree with David Thoreau's approach to oppression in government and society. Thoreau thought civil disobedience supported his cause against the government's oppression effectively. He states that refusing to support the cause which oppresses you (like not paying taxes because you don't support a certain law) effectively expresses a message. Beneatha exemplifies this when she went against the status quo by letting her hair natural. Walter is another example when he defied racial precedents of where to live and decided the Younger family should move into Clybourne Park. These small acts of civil disobedience showed that Beneatha and Walter unwillingly complied with the current social oppression. Both characters in Raisin in the Sun broke through with civil disobedience and started their character growth. Although they didn't completely dissociate by not cooperating completely, Beneatha and Walter showed smaller forms of civil disobedience to express their discontent.
Reply
Ford Zacks
1/27/2016 07:25:34 pm
Thoreau’s idea of civil disobedience ties in to the entire Younger family. They peacefully deny Lindner’s offer to go against what they thought was unjust. In this case it was not a law that they broke. It was just an opinion of the people of Clybourne Park, but it is the same premise. They denied what would regularly be considered correct in a peaceful way to show that they did not agree. Malcolm X on the other hand believed that people should be willing to fight and use violence for what they believe in. This ties in mostly to Beneatha specifically. She is the most outgoing about changing the world, and based on her passion for her culture and heritage, she would fight. However, in Raisin, she never actually fights, she only shows signs that she would if it came to it. So clearly both of these are interesting approaches to insight change. I agree with Thoreau. In the U.S. every man has the right to revolt against the government, whether it is peaceful or violent. I think people should be able to break unjust laws to fix what is broken. However, it is all a matter of conscience and beliefs.
Reply
Ash Riegler
1/28/2016 08:16:14 am
Both of these views on how to make a change could work. But obviously both could also fail to get the desired result. Each one comes in its own situational requirements. If one has the right to keep it to the calmer level of 'civil disobedience' as proposed Thoreau. In this case it keeps violence out of the matter and chooses instead to try and peacefully solve the problem. Of course, it is still 'disobedience' but it's not the kind that will wind up hurting people. On the other side of the spectrum is Malcolm X's view- one in which violence is to be used against violence. And even this is necessary in some cases. If someone has a knife to your back, I don't think trying to talk it out is going to help. So in that case, violence is a necessary means for change. Sometimes you can fight fire with fire as long as the blaze is for the right cause.
Reply
Ash Riegler
1/28/2016 08:19:20 am
In the case of Raisin in the Sun, the Younger family fits completely in the 'civil disobedience' part of the spectrum, since none of their actions were violent. But then again, that doesn't mean they would not be willing to go as far as Malcolm X's view if it came down to it. Beneatha being the strongest 'resister' but still I do not believe she would ever become violent. But Walter, I believe, could be pushed to such a reaction if later on, something threatens his family severely enough to call for such actions.
Reply
Alie Talavera
1/28/2016 03:26:26 pm
In response to resisting oppresion in society, I agree with Henry Daid Thoreau and his ideas of civil disobideince. He believes that refusing to support unjust laws that oppress you will effectively send a message. As stated, "There will always be laws thoought to be unjust in every society across the globe," if people sought violence as an asnswer to their problems like Malcolm X suggests, peace would never be achieved. Thoreau presents the use of a silent message that will go against the action of oppression. In A Raisin in the Sun, the entire Younger family denies Linder's offer to go against what they felt was unjust which ties in with Thoreau's ideas of civil disobedience. By defying this request to sell their home, they are able to make a statement and show that they are willing to stand up to those who see them as less which is why I feel Thoreau's method is more effective.
Reply
Matthew vanderveer
1/28/2016 06:25:33 pm
Henry David Thoreau believed in civil disobedience in which oppressed people should follow their conscience and break the law. This idea inspired other figures in history to stand up for themselves even when it was against the law. Malcom X was similar but he believed that what ever it took to end persecution should be done while Henry David Thoreau believed it should be more passive. I believe that most of the characters in Raisin in the sun would agree with Henry David Thoreau, they would passively resist oppression. The exception to this would be Beneatha, she would do what ever it took which is more like Malcom X's beliefs. I believe that they were both doing the right thing by standing up for what they believed in even with the consequences.
Reply
Daisy Major
1/28/2016 07:32:13 pm
Henry David Thoreau and Malcolm X both had similar ideas that people should resist oppression and stand up for themselves, but their ways of doing so were different. Thoreau believed that we should resist and be strong for ourselves but in a passive manner. He showed everyone that even if something was against the law, they should stand up against oppression. Malcolm X believed that going against oppression should be done aggressively. He thought that fighting oppression should be done by any means.I believe that the characters of Raisin in the Sun should agree with Thoreau's beliefs more because they were more passive about fighting oppression, especially Ruth. Everyone would agree with Thoreau except Beneatha because she was more harsh about her freedom of oppression so she would probably agree with Malcolm X,
Reply
Jackie Izzo
1/31/2016 06:09:55 pm
Henry Thoreau believed that people in society should follow their conscious and not follow the law of society. The philosopher felt that citizens should follow what they feel is morally right and protest the unjust laws of the government. Malcom X he argued that African Americans should defend their rights. I feel both of these historical figures make very good points about how society should be operated. I think people themselves should make their own decisions. I think all the characters from Raisin would agree with these two people. All the characters just want to make their own choices and have their rights defended as African Americans. Morally I feel they want to do what’s best for the family and to be equal in society.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Categories
AuthorMr. Justin Biggs Archives
August 2016
|