Wednesday, April 1, 2009

Phase Four: Hapgood

For my archival research project, I have decided to utilize Hapgood's work over the Sacco-Vanzetti trial. Though only two chapters of "No Tears for My Youth" are on hand, she explores a tremendously wide variety of ideas that extend beyond the trial. Some of the things that I feel would be most interesting for me to concentrate on in my paper would be the stance that she takes while she presents the information and how she positions herself to be a persuasive author while still presenting the facts. Also, I feel that really looking into her version of what "crime" really means would be a very interesting topic to explore. I feel that this woul be interesting because of the fact that the Sacco-Vanzetti case is so controversial and it seems that their guilty verdict depended mostly on their immigrant, poor status rather than their actual guilt. I think that exploring the class systems and what those social standings infer during that time period could be very enlightening.

Some of the sources that I found that are directly related to the case include: The Case that Will Not Die by Herbert B. Ehrmann and The Untried Case by William G. Thompson. I am having trouble deciding what lens I could use to really discuss these details in depth. I could possibly utilize Ong to discuss how Hapgood fictionalizes her audience as she takes positions on certain subjects. I'm not sure if Addams or Harper would be beneficial or not, but I could possibly incorporate them as well? I also found an article on JStore called "Social Hierarchy and the Death Penalty: A social Dominance Perspective" by Michael Mitchell and Jim Sidanius. This article looks into the social aspects of why individuals are put to death at a higher rate than in other areas. I feel like this could be an interesting attribute to my paper.

1 comment:

  1. I think that looking at how Hapgood defines “crime” could be very interesting. Is her description of crime based on religious principles, societal morals, governmental laws, or a combination? Does she utilize any tropes when describing crime?

    Does she focus on discrimination against poor immigrants, or does she extend her message to a general view of human justice? What was Hapgood’s aim in her writings? Did she simply want to present her views about the Sacco-Vanzetti trial, or is there a specific action that she wants from her audience?

    I think it’s great that you found other sources about the case that were written by men. Maybe you could do a comparison between their writings and Hapgood’s. Are there any main themes or “facts” that are different? How do the male authors position themselves? If the authors had similar goals, then is there a way that you could possibly evaluate which texts were more effective?

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.