Introduction
Literature has always been as much a commentary on society as an examination of human nature. Political authority and resistance against it have become a central theme of many literary works that attempt to ascribe the relations of power between structures, societies, and its subjects. Such works can inspire political consciousness and provide a relatable narrative of resistance in the face of oppression and the fate of a regular human in complex political events.
Through an examination of works where authority and social structure plays the key role in maintaining control as seen in the totalitarian control of knowledge and perception in Fahrenheit 451, the role of fear to create authority in The Crucible, and a struggle against systematic racial prejudice in I look at the world – the human nature to demonstrate either resistance or submission is based on the acceptance of the social status quo and deeply rooted desire to provide an unbridled display of personal aspirations against intrusions of formal authority.
Fahrenheit 451
Fahrenheit 451 is a novel by Ray Bradbury published in 1953 which is considered one of the classics of dystopian fiction. As a staple of dystopian fiction, the novel presents an authority figure in the form of a government which has banned all paper books and, in this world,, firefighters are brigades charged with finding and destroying these books since those who possess them are considered radicals. The world is driven exclusively by visual media entertainment and most find themselves unaware of their surroundings and have very limited interpersonal human interaction. Most have accepted this as the status quo and despise books despite never having read them, driven by propaganda. The protagonist, Guy Montag, is a firefighter who participates in book burning but develops both a consciousness and an interest after seeing people die to protect the books as well as being influenced by girl who unlike all the others displays curiosity and awareness of what the world had become. After wrestling with his own self and his loyalties, Montag rebels against society and escapes to join a group of scholars who are tasked with rebuilding society with their knowledge from books after its destruction from nuclear annihilation (Bradbury).
Bradbury represented almost the ideal state in Fahrenheit 451, a society deprived of intellectual life and controlled by tools of media and entertainment which has virtually numbed any sort of meaningful emotion or reasoning. Most of society indulges in this behavior, and views books and intellectualism as a relic of the past and complete madness. The majority of the population are in this system that provides ultimate control, while those are not in the system are tracked and destroyed. When Montag is tracked and bit by the mechanical hound in the end, the poison serves as a metaphor which symbolizes Montag’s “dissidence within the ideology of a regime devoted to maintaining the so-called health of the body politic; but the displaced hunger of his other limbs suggests a desire that will take him out of that dominant ideology” (Seed 235).
The irony and symbolism of firefighters actually burning down things creates an eye-opening juxtaposition of how powerful this authority is in the novel, one that is never revealed but through a quiet intelligent and surprisingly relatable Captain Beatty, who despite his own deep knowledge of literary texts, chose to pursue the life of obedience to the authority and status quo. Montag resisted countering the dominant discourse, a society that is corrupted by consumerist culture and controlled by a totalitarian authority while Beatty represented a conformist who despite having knowledge, chose to enforce the anti-book propaganda that extinguished free thought (Irsyad 9). Similarly, Montag’s wife is so disillusioned that she attempts to commit suicide and has absolute ignorance and indifference to the world around her, with her media entertainment being the most valuable thing to her, caring more about a virtual world more than her own husband. Submission was expected and carefully construed in Fahrenheit 451, to the point that most were unaware of their own support of the system.
Unlike many other dystopian novels, resistance in Fahrenheit 451 does not come in the form of a grand revolution or uprising. Although in the end, the reader is made aware of a movement against the authority by construing a group of people who have memorized different books and pass that knowledge to each other in hopes of continuing retaining the knowledge, this is small part of the novel. The biggest aspect of resistance comes privately to characters such as Montag and Clarisse who struggle with being different in the society and their own identities. In itself, this is a significant act of resistance since the authority in this novel despises differences and a lack of emotional control over individuals. Clarisse is shown to be a curious individual that sees happiness and beauty in the simplest things. For this, she is an outcast for her peers and is forced into “therapy,” likely some sort of brainwashing method in this society. Although it is never revealed if Clarisse has read any books, she shows defining insight for both her age and the indifferent society in which she lives.
Meanwhile, Montag is a firefighter, a highly respected position that represents the very power of the system to destroy and eliminate opposition. However, as shown, he both struggles with the violence that the job takes, often resulting in people’s deaths as well as curiosity as to why the books are so important that the government is trying to hunt them down and people are willing to die for them. His opposition builds slowly until he can no longer take the indifference and the world that does not care about even such things as the death of a nice girl like Clarisse and a life outside the virtual reality in their households. It is then he realizes that books are a symbol, for knowledge, emotion, awareness, and power, that the mysterious authority of this world is trying to control. As Montag’s resistance becomes privileged in his understanding of books, he appropriates the fire symbolism to his own purposes, as a symbol of rebirth and a state of separation from the destructive society (Seed 238). It is then that his personal struggle turns to acts of revolution.
The Crucible
The Crucible is a famous play written by Arthur Miller which tells a fictionalized story of the Salem Witch trials and is meant to be an allegory of the ongoing McCarthyism Communism scare that was ongoing in the 1950s when the play was published. The story is set in a Puritan colony in Salem, Massachusetts in the 1690s where strange behavior and illnesses are blamed upon witchcraft which was banned by the religious community and could result in the death penalty. The majority of the play explores complex social and personal dynamics in which various individuals use the situation to their advantage to accuse others of being involved in witchcraft, for personal gain or to divert away blame from themselves. Despite privately realizing the absurdity and consequences of their actions, many of the characters continue to involve themselves in the public hysteria and as a result, lead to a temporary dysfunctional collapse of their society and the deaths or ruined lives of many innocent people (Miller).
Authority in The Crucible takes on several forms, but almost universally it is driven by fear and manipulation of it in the context of subversive public hysteria. Mr. Parris who is the town preacher uses the crisis to his advantage as his power has been fading in the face of a dwindling congregation. The fear of witchcraft and his preaching of damnation provide him with greater authority. Furthermore, there are figures who transform into authority such as Mary Warren who is only a terrified servant girl, suddenly becomes a vengeful and selfish figure as the court grants her authority to name “participants” in witchcraft. Meanwhile, the head judge Danforth who has the final say to decide the fates of the accused, his authority relies on public support and this drives his decision-making in the trial. The authority becomes society led by these individuals who find themselves with the ability to dictate the fates of others and the community using the public appeal to fear.
Salem was a theocratic society where discipline and obedience were expected in the religious context as well as safety in unity. The rigid structures implied that exemplifications of individuality were seen as subversive and dangerous, likely to create suspicion. It created a situation where social unity was at the same time protecting and endangering individual safety. When the drama of the witchcraft accusations began, it led to the magnification of petty, selfish arguments since individual desires to date were curbed by the authoritative state. As the situation spirals, the arguments develop extensively into uncontrollable altercations for both individuals and society, and as a result, the already exaggerated authority intensifies, used as a malignant process to inflate personal grievances into socially important hatred (Bonnet 33).
Resistance in The Crucible is formed by those who choose to stand against the mass hysteria and call out the injustice of the ongoing due process as well as blatant manipulation of fear by certain characters and authorities. In contrast, obedience and suppression was taken by most, by closing their eyes on the evident truth and hoping to not be named in the witch hunt. It was a direct result of the fear created and unwillingness to create personal conflicts with those figures who had the power to name those associated with witchcraft. The group of girls obeyed Abigail and listed undesired individuals, leading to their arrests and deaths. Obedience to the religion that had control over their lives and became an abstract force which decided if they were to live on. Ultimately, it can be argued that obedience led to the mass hysteria, and had it been taken away, the crisis could have been avoided. However, there those who stood by their principles and voice the unwelcome truth. While most accused villagers confessed to a crime, they did not commit in exchange for prison sentences, John refused to do so even with the threat of death. John says that he is refusing to confess not because of religious beliefs but because of the contempt he holds against the mockery that the court and the accusers made of the community. He is hanged, but it is implied that it became a last straw for the community which has suffered enough and could potentially turn on its authoritative figures (Adler 77).
I look at the world
The poem I look at the world was written by the leader of the Harlem Renaissance, Langston Hughes and serves an example of how authority has shaped racial prejudice of African Americans and the resistance that the poem inspires. In short, the poem describes the narrator coming to a realization that as a black person, they have been pushed into a corner and their life severely limited by oppression, all because of the color of their skin. However, the narrator understands that he and others like him have much to offer, strong potential of their mind and body, and calls upon his comrades to break out of this mold and find their purpose (Hughes). The poem was written in 1930, in the midst of the American Great Depression and prevalent structural racism that existed through public discrimination and the so-called Jim Crow Laws. Hughes as a well-known black writer faced racism on a daily basis and had an understanding of the scale of this perverse racial oppression. The poem takes on a sermon-like theme with familiar rhetorical devices to inspire a radical resistance. Hughes understood the power of poetry as both a passion of commitment as well as a tool of propaganda (Rampersad).
Hughes was a brilliant professional writer and is universally known in the American poetry canon. It is also believed by many that Hughes was strongly involved in social politics, supporting the leftist agenda with his writing. He is believed to have had an idealistic commitment to “champion the cause of the politically disenfranchised from a position of moral and political rectitude” (Duffy 3). He was a social critic and prominent political figure for leftist groups attempting to break the status quo. The poem I look at the world was never officially published during his lifetime but revealed to have been written by Hughes in his private notes. This reflects his private feelings and view of the world which has created severe oppression for African Americans in America for generations. He never knew of an America where lynching was not a threat to black individuals.
Like many of his other poems, I look at the world seeks to explore the place of the African American people in society and their being as a race, culture, and humans in relation to social change. The authority figure in this poem is more abstract that the works examined previously, it is represented by society itself that has taken on a position that inherently forced a whole race of people into a corner, taking away many opportunities and creating systematic methods of fear and control. For Hughes, identity was inseparable and crucial to one’s artistry and purpose. Through his work he attempts to enter the consciousness of people with varying experiences and offer comfort, inspiration, and unity connected to the identity of the “Black man” (Borden 333). In I look at the world, he calls upon an indirect resistance to this social authority, a cry to release the metaphorical shackles that have been placed on African Americans long after slavery was outlawed. He does so through appeal to the realization of personal strength and racial unity, and also implying that submission to the status quo is giving up the future and allowing the oppression to continue building its “walls.”
Thematic Analysis
These three works are drastically different, coming from varying genres and based in time periods far apart. However, they share the common theme of resistance to an authority or unfair systematic social status quo. So why is this theme so common in literature and what are some of its main elements. As evident by these three works, and many other literary pieces, authority is not commonly centered around a specific figure despite common misconception, but rather it is an ominous presence that is demonstrated through society. Ultimately, it is society which becomes an authority of sorts, despite ironically being controlled by it as well. A general authority is characterized through an idea, let it be dystopian control of knowledge, religion, colonialism, racism, or some other rather general element. Therefore, when the narrative describes acts of resistance or submission against an authority, it is not aimed at a specific figure, but rather the ideology that stands behind it. While most works have a personification of that ideology, such as Beatty in Fahrenheit 451 or Parris in The Crucible, they are ultimately only enforcers rather than its leaders.
On the other hand, the acts of resistance or submission are highly personal, demonstrated in specific characters and their human nature. While they may also represent a group of similarly thinking individuals that act in one way or another to this authority, the narrative in all three works makes it a personal struggle as characters examine their individual values and desires in the context of their actions. In the modern world, authority and dominance is shown as control over autonomous activity of human beings and society. In turn, it is the longing for identity and the right to control one’s life that drives resistance. Resistance requires both tools to defeat the power over the characters but also bravery to confront the oppression and violence. This is unique and fear often causes the majority to rely on submissiveness to survive. Ultimately these are subjugated victims that often do not know better. Resistance on a mass scale arises only when anger at the status quo overwhelms society, and it is usually led by protagonists in the analyzed works who refuse to bow down, even if all is lost and death is inevitable.
Perhaps, an underlying theme to this topic is ultimately the struggle for power. In the three examples analyzed in this essay, the protagonists attempt to stand up to an authority, but by doing or planning to do so, they challenge its power. In both real-life history of resistance and fiction, power is the ultimate decider. It is the intricate innerworkings of power, and the persons or groups that have that power, as well as its consequences that drive forward many narratives. In storytelling as a reflection of the real world, “adopting a concept of power as a contingent outcome in a social transaction, they emphasize that not only dominant, institutionalized power but also resistance to institutionalized authority draws from a common pool of sociocultural resources, including symbolic, linguistic, organizational, and material phenomena” (Ewick and Silbey 1328). Although the outcome may not lead to institutional change, the act itself has consequences beyond and can extend the social influence of the act of resistance. The heroes are always trying to acquire power, but sometimes to reduce the power of the authority in order to establish a new status quo. It is never easy, and almost always fails, requiring switching to a plan B, which is an improvisation of sort, a desperate flirtation with the human weaknesses of the protagonist. Thus, through failure and struggle, the protagonist is reborn and with that usually arrives a change or challenge to authority.
Discussion
Authority, revolutions, resistance, and submission are all quite literally aspects of real-life events, historic and current. Literature has always been a tool which is used to relay the history, motions, and emotions of resistance movements. It is a reflection of reality, where resistant movements and revolutionaries are faced with critical decisions to preserve their life and not endanger their families or act on what they believe is right. So called resistance literature can be history specific and fictional. The works of literature hold historical importance at times and serve as a reminder of the unnerving status quo and what it means to resist authority (Al-Hudawi 1). Including these elements help develop “literature, as an art form, is affected not only by external determinants but by a dynamism within art itself that promotes or impedes change” (Welleck 50). Sometimes, works of fiction work better at relaying aspects of authority, nature of knowledge, and societal development than academic policy (Lewis et al. 198).
All things considered, literary works focusing on authority and resistance to it in addition to sharing these common themes often also try to bring certain lessons to its readers. Some describe tendencies or events that are already ongoing (public hysteria of The Crucible or racial prejudice despite significant breakthroughs of the Hughes poem) while others describe a bleak future (Fahrenheit 451) if humanity continues on its current path of social and political behavior. In all these works, unity or stability in society which is often seen as a positive thing in real life, turns out to be a method of authoritative control. People lack full information and awareness when making decisions or choosing an ideology, both concepts that are very relevant to 2020. While resistance, speaking up against the status quo, often makes one an outcast or a target. Therefore, despite these works being written more than half a century ago, they accurately capture the essence of human society, authority and control, and how challenging it to resist the status quo.
Conclusion
In the detailed analysis of Fahrenheit 451, The Crucible, and I look at the world, it was found that authority is an abstract control that pressures society into certain behavior or ideology, often lacking a concrete figure but rather enforcers which force it upon others. Resistance or submission to said authority is based as much on individual factors of virtues and identity as much as it is a social measure to overcome the status quo. The protagonists in these literary works demonstrate resistance primarily through the acts of finding themselves and their identity, then calling out the rest of society to showing indifference to certain evident but valuable truths. Both fictionally and historically, the concept of resistance literature is reflective on the struggle against authority and subjugation, but it comes at a high personal cost. To overcome these pressures of society, the narrators are often forced to endanger their own lives and their loved ones in order to achieve the ultimate goal of shifting power away from the unjustified authority.
Works Cited
Adler, Thomas P. “Conscience and Community in Enemy of the People and The Crucible.” The Crucible – Arthur Miller, edited by Harold Bloom, Infobase Publishing, 2008, pp. 69-82.
Al-Hudawi, Shafeeq. “Re-Discovering Identity: A Study on the Theme of Resistance in Ghassan Kanafani’s Selected Novels.” SSN, 2014, Web.
Bonnet, Jean-Marie. “Society vs. The Individual in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible.” English Studies, vol. 63, no. 1, 1982, pp. 32-36.
Borden, Anne. “Heroic “Hussies” and “Brilliant Queers”: Genderracial Resistance in the Works of Langston Hughes.” African American Review, vol. 28, no. 3, 1994, pp. 333-345.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. Simon & Schuster, 2012.
Duffy, Susan. The Political Plays of Langston Hughes. SIU Press, 2000.
Ewick, Patricia, and Susan Silbey. “Narrating Social Structure: Stories of Resistance to Legal Authority.” American Journal of Sociology, vol. 108, no. 6, 2003, pp. 1328-1372.
Hughes, Langston. “I look at the world.” Poetry Foundation, 2009, Web.
Irsyad, Izzaty. “Book Banning Discourse and American Society in Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451.” Vivid: Journal of Language and Literature, vol. 4, no. 2, 2015, pp. 1-10, Web.
Lewis, David, et al. “The Fiction of Development: Literary Representation as a Source of Authoritative Knowledge.” Journal of Development Studies, vol. 44, no. 2, 2008, pp. 198-216.
Miller, Arthur. The Crucible. Bloomsbury, 2013.
Rampersad, Arnold. “On Newly Discovered Langston Hughes Poems.” Poetry Foundation, 2009.
Seed, David. “The Flight from the Good Life: Fahrenheit 451 in the Context of Postwar American Dystopias.” Journal of American Studies, vol. 28, no. 2, 1994, pp. 225-240, Web.
Welleck, Rene. “Chapter II: Resistance and Subjugation.” 2020. Web.