Reading Thomas Paine gave me a sense of déjà vu. I had the sense I had read his work before, but in reality I had not. The illusion came from having read John Winthrop. They both have an eloquent style that appeals to the whole human experience. They write in different time periods, but both speak from the circumstances of their times which have striking similarities. Winthrop is establishing a settlement; Paine is dealing with the conflicts that arose when the settlements became colonies.
They, however, differ on the topic of religion. In Winthrop’s case, he uses the Bible as the foundation for a cohesive settlement, but Paine walks away from religious foundations preferring scientific research and religious diversity. Both accounts have a historical approach and can be appreciated as such, but what impressed me was their eloquence in speech and the aesthetics of style.
Winthrop intertwines Biblical text in a very effective manner to convince people of his ideas. These Biblical examples flow in a free style and are contextualize in a social method. By the time he is done citing all the Biblical examples, he seems to have a written a constitution. The manner in which Winthrop uses Scripture beautifies his literary work.
Paine is different in that he does not cite the Bible. Instead, he uses social examples to appeal to people’s reasoning rather than their faith. In the introduction of Thoughts on the Present State of American Affairs, he opens by saying, “I offer nothing more than simple facts, plain arguments, and common sense.” My interpretation of this is that his work is easily read and understood, but his style of not simple, nor plain. Throughout his writings, he uses a lot of illustrative language such as, “Europe is too thickly planted with kingdoms…, and a government of our own is our natural light.” Paine appeals to people’s sentiment and reason in a thought provocative style. The beauty of his literary works comes from the simple yet sophisticated use of language.
I find John Winthrop and Thomas Paine to be talented leaders, convincing politicians, and gifted writers.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
When reading Paine I had a similiar sense of deja vu. They both have such powerful, convincing way of speaking that i was halfway convinced by what they were saying. I found it surprising that their writing syles were so similar yet they were basing it on two completely different topics.
The similarities and differences you point out are very interesting. I never really thought much about comparing these two, but what you say is true: Winthrop's inspiration is Biblical where as Paine's is more about appealing to emotions. I guess the best way to explain there styles is that they are a consequence of their intended audience...still, what is more interesting to me is that Paine's arguments probably carry more weight with today's reader while Winthrop's could arguably be considered too dated for modern thought.
Do you prefer one method over the other? I wonder which would be more convincing if I was a person of the times. It's a good point that these two men have gone through similar circumstance, yet that their writings are during two different periods of colonization in America.
Post a Comment