An Essay on Man

Alexander Pope, a celebrated English author that lived from 1688 to 1744, wrote An Essay on Man to describe and validate the role of God and his placement of man in the Great Chain of Being to all of mankind. In the writing of An Essay on Man, Pope discusses the concept of theodicy and the role that disorder-- the byproduct of man's quest to dominate the chain and understand God's divine will-- plays in life, proving that evil must coexist alongside God's goodness in order for the earth, as a whole, to remain in motion. 

Pope states, essentially, that God knew what he was doing in the creation of the world and all of its inhabitants, from the tiniest microorganism all the way up to Himself. Man makes a fool of himself by questioning his part in the chain, making himself appear to be more god-like than he actually is, judging situations that he cannot possibly judge. The search for knowledge on why God did what he did creates chaos in the chain. Each link (or "being") on the chain contributes to the strength of the overall chain. If even one link were to be displaced, the chain would be rendered useless. 

So, it is to be understood that everything happens for a reason, and God's reason, at that. Man is placed where he is because of his command of the faculties of desire and judgment, faculties which animals and lesser organisms are not able to use, yet the human brain is such a fickle thing that the balance between desire and judgment are often thrown, creating the tension that contributes to evil. In this, one can see that God has given the chain, and especially those toward the top of it, the innate ability to be good and do good, but by having free-will, man has the capacity to create the misery that must coexist with the good. 

I am not religious, so to ask whether I find Pope's arguments believable is almost unfair. My answer will always be "no" when being presented with a question such as this. However, the message still stands, even when religion is taken out of the equation. Is it believable to think that good and evil must coexist for the world to keep turning? The world could operate on goodness, alone, though it is unrealistic to believe the world could ever be peaceful, so good and evil are forced to coexist for the world to keep moving. If goodness gives up and evil wins, the world will cease to function. We all have our place in the chain of life, and we all have the ability to be the best possible version of who we are. We do not need more knowledge than this to do the best with what we have. 



Pope, Alexander. "An Essay on Man." The Norton Anthology of World Literature. Ed. Martin Puchner. 3rd ed. Vol. 2. New York: W.W. Norton, 2013. 90-97. Print.

Montaigne

Michel de Montaigne, a brilliant writer, historian, and ethnographer, was born in 1533 during the illustrious Renaissance Era. He dedicated himself to his literature, writing honestly and modestly on topics of which he had interest and knowledge, but he also chose to highlight the cultures and interests of others, continuously seeking more than what already lived in his own mind, intrigued by the lives of others. Montaigne was extraordinarily neutral on the lives and customs of others, choosing not to critique those outside of European customs, but rather to try to understand their mindset and culture. He asserted that "each man calls barbarism whatever is not his own practice," a notion that meant that Europeans (his control-population) will demoralize the "other," regardless of their customs, simply because it is not what they, themselves, adhere to. This is not an antiquated notion with no place in today's world; people still believe this to be true, though the measure of barbarism is not whether the practice is merely different, but whether or not it hurts humanity.

In his Essays, Montaigne described a group of Brazilian cannibals. The word "cannibal" typically does not need further explanation before a person would condemn the group responsible, so Montaigne went above and beyond to describe the tribe in question. He stated early in his essay "Of Cannibals" that it is crucial that "...we should beware of clinging to vulgar opinions, and judge things by reason's way, not by popular say" (1651). "Popular say" refers to the idea that one's mother culture sets president in the opinions and ideals that a person holds dear to themselves. However, this is not an accurate way to measure whether one ideal is better than another. 

Montaigne tried his hardest to dispel the notion that the European "way" was any better than the Brazilian-cannibal "way" by stating that the act of cannibalism was customary only after killing a violent enemy (1656). Of course, a European would look down upon this act, to which Montaigne points out that the taking and using of human flesh is not unique to the Brazilian tribe discussed in the essay-- it has been used in various points throughout history with little backlash because it was deemed necessary, and with explanation. However, because Europeans only knew what they heard through the grapevine about the Brazilian tribe, they were quick to point fingers and deem them barbaric. Montaigne points out that they were brave individuals, worthy of praise for their courage and honor and willingness to defend one another and act as a whole unit rather than separate parts, but because they committed cannibalism, a typical European would never even hear of their bravery-- just that they ingested people (1650). 

Of course, it is simple to say that we should defend the customs of others as being solely their own, as they should look upon our own customs (referring to any separate cultures), although putting that into practice is more difficult than it sounds. I remember, years ago, it was the first time I learned about the concept of leblouh, (or intense gavage), which is the force-feeding of young girls in Mauritania, to prepare them for marriage. I was absolutely appalled. A heavy-stature is desired in this part of the world; it means that a woman will be fertile, and is just generally viewed as what is beautiful. 

It's perfectly acceptable for a man or woman to find another large man or woman to fulfill their standards of beauty. What is unacceptable is the force-feeding of up to 16,000 calories a day to a young girl, threatening torture for refusal, or making them eat their own vomit when they inevitably cannot hold it all in. It would be easy to say "who am I to judge?" which is a comment I make in many situations regarding cultural norms or religious practices that do not bring harm to humanity. However, leblouh is intensely harmful to these girls, and it is never their choice. In a country where most girls wed between 12 and 14 years of age, their parents choose that life for them, paying people to make their girls obese. Is it barbaric because it isn't my own practice? No. It's barbaric because it's a violation of human rights. 

Moreover, I feel as though Montaigne might agree with me on this one. The cannibals were not hurting a living being, as Montaigne points out. They were not torturing their prisoner in life or eating him alive. They were just carrying out their death-rite custom. Leblouh is not comparable. It is just complete agonizing torture for those girls. 



Haworth, Abigail. "Forced to Be Fat." Marie Claire: Politics. Marie Claire, 20 July 2011. Web.

Puchner, Martin. “Michel de Montaigne”. The Norton Anthology of World Literature: Shorter Third Edition. Two-Volume Set. W.W. Norton. Ed. M Puchner. 2013. 1647-1650. Print.

Puchner, Martin. “Essays”. The Norton Anthology of World Literature: Shorter Third Edition. Two-Volume Set. W.W. Norton. Ed. M Puchner. 2013. 1650-1655. Print.

Sanjuta

When a born-and-raised American thinks of a wedding, our mind will automatically think of big white dresses, bridesmaids and groomsmen, churches, and elaborately-decorated reception halls with too much food, too much imbibing, and very often, families that do not mingle so well. This is not an indicative view of marriage customs found around the world, especially throughout the ages, and definitely not in parts of the world other than ours, namely undeveloped countries. Evidence of this can be found in literature.

One such example can be found in the West African Epic entitled Sanjuta, a story of the Mande Peoples. The first chapter, "The Search for a Wife of Destiny," foretells the subject of the chapter-- the King, Maghan Konfara, is searching for his bride. Maghan Konfara was a king who seemingly had it all-- wealth, power, and popularity (1518). Unfortunately, what he wanted more than anything else was a child. For this to happen, he needed to find a bride.

Amidst this, he hears that a nearby village is suffering at the hands of a woman (Do Kamissa) who has transformed herself into a buffalo. An award for her death had been offered-- three girls that the victor may choose from to be his own (1519). Maghan believed that it was a suitable way to find a wife. However, when Maghan is set to kill Do Kamissa, she instructs him to not choose from the girls given as reward, but instead marry her sister, Sogolon, insisting that his reward would be great, despite her renowned "ugliness" (1525). 

Because she had several issues barring her from easy mobility, she is unable to make her grand bridal entrance. The women of Maghan's village pick her up, instead, singing a motivational song to ease her discomfort: "Walk well,/Bride of my brother,/Walk well./Do not put us in the dust." (1536). The song, though seemingly sort of self-serving in nature, was meant to dispel the uncomfortable notion of having to be carried by strange women to Sogolon's own wedding, also showing her that she is not just marrying Maghan, but essentially marrying the whole village. This is stated to be the first ever occurrence of the bride-carrying custom and song practiced by the Mande People.

In searching for more interesting wedding ceremonies and customs from around the world that are also still practiced at present, the one that I found most intriguing is the "blackening of the bride" ceremony in Scotland. The bridegroom is also a target here, and it is not practiced in every part of Scotland, though it used to be a wide-spread ritual employed to rid the couple of evil spirits that might destroy their marriage (Emerson). 

The bride, groom, or both, would either be "kidnapped" and coated in a mixture of soot, flour, feathers, and other odd items. In earlier times, they would then be tied to a lamp post or tossed into a shallow part of the sea for all to see, very likely inhibited from struggling through intense inebriation. This, of course, is unheard of in a modern USA-style wedding, where our biggest "before the wedding" custom is the bachelor/bachelorette party. Talk about culture!  


Emerson, Stephen. "Scottish Word of the Week: Blackening." The Scotsman: Scotland's National Newspaper. Johnston Publishing Ltd., 27 Mar. 2014. Web. <http://www.scotsman.com/heritage/people-places/scottish-word-of-the-week-blackening-1-3356224>.

Sunjata: A West African Epic of the Mande People. C. 13^th – 14^th c. The Norton Anthology of World Literature. Martin Puchner, et al. 3rd ed. Vol. 1. New York: Norton, 2013. 1517-1596. Print.