creation of the media pg. 47-111 / "Moral & Useful"

Sometimes, when I'm reading for class I get a little into my note-taking. This began around the time that I realized that the running commentary in my head could be manipulated, and used for good, rather than for evil. Instead of trying to suppress my own silly questions and sarcastic remarks, I began to write them down along with more serious notes, and among quotations that I wanted to highlight.

In my notes for this week, I have a quote from pg.53 of Starr, "As a result of limited education for women and the denial of literacy to slaves, three out of four people in colonial Virginia were 'largely or entirely confined within the oral medium'." Just underneath this quote, I'd added "yikes, doesn't paint a very pretty picture of Virginia" and below that "sometimes I think it's amazing that we, as a human race, survived as long as we did without modern technology".

Reading back through my notes in preparation for this week's blog post, I rolled my eyes at my cheeky commentary, but also felt that it reflected much of what I'd highlighted as important (or at least interesting to me) in this week's readings. I suspect that some of my confusion may be related to the way Starr reflects on history, but I found myself highlighting passages where I felt a genuine sense of wonder at the sheer ingenuity of early Americans. I know, right? That's pretty sappy stuff. As amazed as I was by early decisions about freedom of press, I was wowed even more by the way education played out….it's a bit of a bizarre feeling, really.

So, apparently, one of the lessons I am learning quite poignantly, is that I don't know diddly squat about history. And I'm about to make a slightly awkward transition, because what I'm referring to currently is a lack of knowledge about general history….but next I want to talk about someone I was surprised I'd never heard of: Matthew Lyon!

Okay first of all, Starr's description of Lyon: "a member of Congress and former printer from Vermont, who had come to America as an indentured servant and risen to political success partly by means of the newspaper he published"(79). How have I never heard of this guy?! And then later on? "Lyon was reelected to Congress while he was still in jail" (80). This may be a silly thing to point out, but why hasn't Leonardo DiCaprio played this dude in a movie yet? (and don't even get me started on his Wikipedia page….) Leave it to me to pinpoint this very brief moment in Starr's reading to obsess over, but there you have it. A glimpse into my weird psyche.

Finally, I found Starr's mention of when the newspapers began to refer to the colonists as "Americans" very interesting. This brought up a range of questions about identity and nationality, but it also made me wonder about the evolution of American slang, and how important the media is in shaping and helping create and perpetuate these ideas.

As far as my archive search went, I found my article in The Boston Weekly Magazine, Devoted to Morality, Literature, Biography, History, the Fine Arts…..(I thought this specification was funny - okay! We get it! You're very classy, Boston Weekly)-- and the article appeared on June 30, 1804. This piece is a letter from a reader, supposedly, who is responding to the Boston Weekly's call for examples of exceptional women, and it is called "Moral and Useful: Miranda- A Character".

"I have been pleased to observe in your useful Miscellany, an endeavor to promote the intellectual improvement of the female sex, by setting before them examples of virtue, fortitude, piety, and every commendable pursuit: I wish to assist your laudable design, but sending the character of a lady with whom I have the happiness to be acquainted, which I hope you will permit to appear in your Magazine."

The letter goes on to describe Miranda, who is "endowed with all the graces that can excite admiration, all those virtues that can command respect". The letter-writer clarifies that Miranda is "pleasing, rather than beautiful" and spends an entire paragraph describing her musical skills, "which lead[s] one to prefer a simple air performed by her to the most brilliant execution of a finished amateur" (even though her voice is not strong). Most importantly, however, is the "high cultivation" of Miranda's mind. The writer highlights not only Miranda's "extensive reading and knowledge of the world", but also mentions that she is careful to "adapt her conversation to the taste and understanding of her companions". I found this to be the most interesting bit of this letter, because it acknowledges that along with great knowledge of the world, there also comes a great responsibility to not be a jerk about it to others. This seems somewhat surprising to note, particularly for a female intellectual.

However, although Miranda is very well read, she is also the perfect domestic partner, and performs her service to her family "without ever appearing hurried or in confusion". Hence, most likely, her usefulness. While I thought that this article was surprising in that it included education as a point of notability in female character, it did spent its majority depicting a more traditional female role.

"Charge of the Irish Bishops"

Considering my search term: "pernicious books", and the periodical in which it appears, United States Catholic Miscellany (1822-1835), I was fairly sure of what to expect from this article before even opening it. The title of the article struck my attention, "Charge of the Irish Bishops", but I was surprised to find that the article wasn't written originally for the US Catholic Miscellany, but rather from the London Truthteller. "Charge of the Irish Bishops" appears in the March 30, 1825 edition of the American periodical, as a reprint of a "pastoral charge" that had been issued by the Irish Catholic Bishops, so the piece is literally a charge sent down from Catholic higher ups to the people of the Catholic church, and it's purpose is to reaffirm the church's position on "pernicious books" and to forbid "the use, the perusal, the reading, or retaining of them".

Several things struck me about this article, the first being the way that it was framed by the US Catholic Miscellany by a brief introduction which serves to inform the reader of the periodical's position on the following charge:

• " 'A pastoral charge has been issued by the Irish Catholic Bishops, couched in the most impressive, admonitory, and eloquent language. Indeed it reminds us of the primitive times of Christianity, and reflects a lustre on the illustrious Catholic Hierarchy of Ireland. Our limits will not allow us to copy the whole, but we cannot refrain from laying the following extract before our readers, as it has been the subject of much animadversion and gross misrepresentation in the prints in the interest of the Biblicals."

It was around here that I decided to look up the United States Catholic Miscellany, and I discovered that it, apparently, was the first Catholic newspaper in the US, and that the founder, Bishop John England (who likely wrote the preface to the charge, above) was kind of a big deal. The more you know!

This, however, lead me to all sorts of other questions about the article, in particular the motivations Bishop England may have had in reprinting the charge (he was a native of Ireland himself), how the readership may have responded to the charge and what kind of value they placed on the publication, and most importantly, if there had ever been anything printed in the United States Catholic Miscellany, which would've been deemed inappropriate by those leaders issuing the strongly-worded charge.

Another aspect I found interesting was the transatlantic connection between the US Catholic Miscellany and the London Truthteller. Because the majority of the article is a reprint of what appeared in the Truthteller, there isn't a lot of opportunity to observe the interplay between the charge and the American publication reprinting it. The most we have is the introduction, which reads enthusiastically, but offers no other information.

This is a bit of a tangent, but out of curiosity I managed to track down the US Catholic Miscellany's prospectus from the original publication. In describing the goals of the publication, Bishop England includes: "The correct statement of occurrences regarding the Catholic religion: for the purpose of better discharging which duty, communications and periodical publications from Rome, Paris, London, Dublin, Canada, South-America, the various parts of the United States, and other portions of the world will be obtained, and are, solicited." Clearly this article reflects this, and it would be interesting to see how often Bishop England ran these types of stories.

Finally, I have to point out some of the highlights of The Charge itself. There are so many excerpts that surprised me by the strong wording, but I've plucked out one in particular. Here, the Irish Bishops are urging their followers not only to avoid pernicious books, those that "are not sanctioned by us, or by any competent authority in the Catholic church", but also to avoid incorrect interpretations of the scriptures:

• " 'In reading, therefore, the sacred scriptures, dearly beloved, seek only to become wise to salvation, and avoid that most perverse of all errors, that source of numberless evils, that pride and presumption which has desolated the church, and which would tempt you to set up your own weak and fallible judgment against the judgment of the ONE HOLY CATHOLIC and APOSTOLIC CHURCH, which is THE PILLAR AND GROUND OF TRUTH, illuminated by the Holy Spirit, and directed and governed in all her decisions by the son of God.' "

Okay, so I was not surprised to find that the Irish Bishops weren't terribly fond of books which contained blasphemy, criticisms of the church, or something crazy like witchcraft, but I have to say that I was surprised that they seem to be offering very little alternatives, and even discourage reading the Bible for fear of "good scriptures" being "badly understood". The charge continues on to focus more and more on pernicious books and describes several heartbreaking historical instances of book burnings as shining examples of the power of the church, but I am trying to keep in mind that this is an excerpt, and that there may have been a lot more in the original London Trtuthteller publication.

Though reading Starr's introduction and first chapter had me somewhat prepared, the idea of censorship has never been so clear to me as it is after reading this piece. It exhibits a real fear of the literacy and intellect of the people, and does so in an authoritative tone that is not afraid to use words like "suppression" and "prohibited", and is also not afraid to insinuate a bit of hellfire to drive its point home:

• " 'Hence, dearest brethren, such books have been, and ever will be, execrated by the Catholic church; and hence also those salutary laws and ordinances, whereby she has at all times prohibited her children to read or retain them; nay, why she has frequently ordered them to be committed to the flames.' "

Yikes.

- Charge of the Irish Bishops. United States Catholic Miscellany (1822-1835); March 30, 1825; 4, 13; American Periodicals pg.204
- Prospectus. United States Catholic Miscellany (1822-1835); June 5, 1822; 1, 1; American Periodicals pg.1