A few days ago I stumbled upon an interesting Ted Talk by a Harvard
professor named Shawn Achor. The Ted Talk, which was titled The Happy Secret to Better Work, was a discussion
of positivity’s effect on human performance. In his presentation Achor proposes,
“It is not necessarily the reality that shapes us, but the lens through which
your brain views the world that shapes your reality.” This notion suggests that
people are not a product of their environment but rather a product of how their
brain perceives the world around them. Implying that by “switching the lens,” a
person may have the ability to reshape the outcome of a situation. Examples
that validate Achor’s claims can perhaps be found in a number of places,
however, for the purpose of this discussion I would like to focus on how both a
person’s internal perceptions of the world, as well as the influence of external
factors help to shape an individual’s “reality” and how examples of this idea are represented
in Mark Twain’s novel, Puddn’head Wilson.
In the beginning of the novel, Roxy, the mother of the main
character Chambers, is under the impression that the only way to save her son
from being “sold down the river” is to kill both herself and him. Feeling that
there is no way out she says, “Oh, I got to kill my chile, dey ain’t no yuther
way, - killin’ him wouldn’t save de chile fum goin’ down de river. Oh, I got to
do it, yo’ po’ mammy’s got to kill you to save you, honey’…” (Twain 69). This
demonstrates Roxy’s initial perception of her reality and the belief that the
only way to escape an inevitable fate is through death.
Later after putting her son Chambers in the clothes of her master’s son Tom Driscoll, she realizes the similarities between the two boys and decides to switch them. “Now who would b’lieve clo’es could do de like o’ dat? Dog my cats if it ain’t all I kin do to tell t’ other fum which, let alone his pappy” (Twain 71). Roxy believes that her son Chambers will not be sold down the river on account of being perceived as “black” and is convinced that he will have the chance to be successful and find opportunity in society under the identity of Tom Driscoll. The irony is that the lens through which Roxy views the world leads her to believe that switching the children will solve the problem and save her son from his destiny, however, the fact is that when the truth is exposed and society learns that Tom (Chambers) is “colored,” he ends up getting sold into slavery down the river anyways.
Later after putting her son Chambers in the clothes of her master’s son Tom Driscoll, she realizes the similarities between the two boys and decides to switch them. “Now who would b’lieve clo’es could do de like o’ dat? Dog my cats if it ain’t all I kin do to tell t’ other fum which, let alone his pappy” (Twain 71). Roxy believes that her son Chambers will not be sold down the river on account of being perceived as “black” and is convinced that he will have the chance to be successful and find opportunity in society under the identity of Tom Driscoll. The irony is that the lens through which Roxy views the world leads her to believe that switching the children will solve the problem and save her son from his destiny, however, the fact is that when the truth is exposed and society learns that Tom (Chambers) is “colored,” he ends up getting sold into slavery down the river anyways.
In the middle of the book, upon hearing the truth about his family
lineage from his mother Roxy, Tom begins to question his own “reality” for the
first time. He begins asking himself “Why were niggers and whites made? What
crime did the uncreated first nigger commit that the curse of birth was decreed
for him? And why is this awful difference made between white and black?” (Twain
117). This explores Tom’s initial perception of his reality and demonstrates how
that perception of reality is turned upside down when Tom discovers that he is a
“nigger.” The lens through which Tom initially perceives the world was one of
privilege and power, a viewpoint that was shaped during his childhood by the
actions of those around him. Later the external perceptions of what it means to
be “black” force Tom to fear for his entire social welfare and ultimately to
recognize the irony of his own existence.
Fundamentally, an individual’s “reality” is shaped by both their
internal perception of the world around them, as well as by the influence of
the external environment in which they live. Twain’s novel Puddn’head Wilson helps us to better understand these individual perceptions of reality and criticize the ways in which these perceptions are formed. By working to expose the influence that these factors have on shaping an individual’s identity in
society, Twain ultimately sheds light on the irony of the human condition and the ways in which society must change in order to have a better future.
Works Cited
Twain, Mark. Pudd'nhead Wilson ; And, Those Extraordinary
Twins. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1986. Print.
Amber- Do you think you could post a link to the TED talk that you mentioned? I would be interested in watching it. I think you bring up a good point about identity and reality in Pudd'nhead Wilson. I agree that perspective is a large reason for someone's "reality". However, I also think that at the time laws and customs also played a large role in creating these characters "realities". They were brought up to only see one reality, and weren't really given the opportunity to view themselves differently.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ted.com/speakers/shawn_achor
ReplyDeleteSorry Amber! My comment didn't seem to go through last night when I submitted it..I thought..luckily I saved it..
ReplyDeleteI really loved the way you followed Roxy and Tom's change in perception throughout the course of their journey to reinforce your point that, "...by “switching the lens,” a person may have the ability to reshape the outcome of a situation." It actually made me wonder if human's can ever really make the "right decision" - you talk about Roxy considering going from killing herself and her child to imposing the potential of being sold down the river from her own child onto another innocent child. Her judgment is so quickly changed and for such extreme "solutions" it made me think 'well, somehow she managed to justify both options to be the best thing' versus 'who decides which lens is the appropriate one to use to make your decisions?' I don't know if that completely makes sense but I'm basically trying to say that their is a tremendous fragility to our judgment and I wonder if Twain uses this story to comment on that as well as its correlation to our external environment that seem to influence our identity most.
Amber, it's terrific how you're able to draw connections between Twain's writing and these contemporary ideas. Certainly you've shown well how Twain affirms the ideas you heard in the Ted talk about perception. I would now push all of you to consider how Pudd'nhead Wilson also challenges the idea of these perceptions, by making them entirely ironic, their lenses themselves somehow defective.
ReplyDeleteYou mention irony here: "The irony is that the lens through which Roxy views the world leads her to believe that switching the children will solve the problem and save her son from his destiny, however, the fact is that when the truth is exposed and society learns that Tom (Chambers) is “colored,” he ends up getting sold into slavery down the river anyways." Can you explain how irony works here? It seems to me here that Roxy is correct in believing that switching the children will save her own from slavery. She might have gotten away with it, too (if it weren't for PW). The irony, it seems to me, is that *someone* else had to be enslaved in order for her child to be free. Her lens corresponds correctly with her reality - but the reality itself, shaped by the law, is corrupt. Here's Otto's point about the role of the law is significant.
Very thoughtful post!