English Essay- Lesson 105(Mark Twain)

Would you read more of Mark Twain's writings even if they were not assigned in a course? Why or why not?"


I would most definitely read more of Twain's writings, whether or not they were assigned to me in school. Personally, I find his works highly amusing and interesting, even though they are so old. With what I've glimpsed so far, I think they are exceptional and intriguing pieces of art. Mark Twain had the fine gift of expertly attracting his readers/fans with each and every story that he composed. It's nearly impossible, I think, to become bored whilst lost in one of his tales. They have a timeless air about them, one that doesn't become faded and outdated even in the modern day. This is why his books have been popular best-sellers throughout the course of three long centuries.

I specifically thought his monologue on the chambermaids was funny, as well as the dissertation on Franklin's aphorisms. He humorously discusses how Benjamin Franklin's lifestyle was modeled by many families, much to the distress of their sons. He uses himself as a reference, saying how much he detested the rigorous rules he was subjected to. Twain recalls that as a young boy, he thought his parents were too strict and overworked him. This, he claimed, was all due to what they had read in Poor Richard's Almanac. They followed Ben Franklin's guidelines to a T, believing his precepts to be the preeminent solution for their son. Like many others in their time, they found no fault with taking advice from this respectable, successful man.

It was their earnest desire that their son should turn out just as wonderfully as Franklin, once he was grown to adulthood. They thought there was only one definite way for him to flourish, as they wished him to. Wisely taking to heart every nugget of insight from the learned, knowledgable Franklin was the key.Mark Twain was quick to point out that he saw little outcome from these well-meant efforts. He didn't see any improvement or difference, as a result of the extra hours he spent in tireless study and endless toil. He makes it abundantly clear that nothing was accomplished, but does so in a classic and comical tradition.


The short sketch on bachelorhood was the other anecdote that I found hilarious. It is a brief look into the lives of working bachelors and their trials with chambermaids. Twain loudly expresses his detest for these hotel maids he encountered in his business travels. He tells how they consistently fumbled with his things while cleaning, rearranging them in the most aggravating manner. His complaints sounded a lot like those of a husband, annoyed with his meddlesome wife. It paints a perfect picture of how men and women have completely contrasting views on home organization.

Twain makes himself look like a helpless, agitated man, at the mercy of these cumbersome domestic goddesses. Always out to make his life miserable, he'd concluded that there was nothing but trouble when it came to them. He repeatedly recounts different instances, where he came home to find his boarding room in total disarray(from his perspective). I feel sure many a bachelor in Twain's time could relate to his tribulations.

Mark Twain was a witty and remarkably intelligent character, with a knack for invoking laughter in all his readers. People appreciated the comfort and distraction of merriment in the awful aftermath of the Civil War drama. It was a balm to their troubled, weary hearts to relax in the company of his novels.


So I would infer that Mark Twain's publications were hugely enjoyable to me and I would love to explore more of them in the future.

Lesson 105 Review Essay(not yet completed)

1. The tenth and eleventh centuries brought an onset of issues to the church, with debilitating conditions increasing within it's borders. The level of discipline was horrendous among the monks and only continued to go downhill, as time progressed. Bishops, abbots, and priests were chosen by laymen, who were not qualified to make this crucial decision(this was known as lay control.) This was evident by the fact that they appointed some notoriously awful popes. One such example was Pope John XII, who ruled from 955 to 964. He was a godless, cruel and depraved human being, certainly not deserving of his position at all. Pope John was known for indulging in many forms of immoral behavior, including the rape of two of his own sisters!
He also toasted to the devil himself, murdered a cardinal, and attempted sex with women visiting his domain. What was intended as a holy palace soon became a foul site and a brothel. Pope John even took a warped delight in conducting orgies, some of which took place at the holy grave-places of Saints Peter and Paul. If Pope John wasn't an indication of the the laymen's incompetence, then I don't know what is. Their conclusions were based solely on politics and never for religious reasons. They were incapable of making wise, appropriate selections, especially as they were never meant to do so. A general amount of hostilities went on between aristocratic families as well. They were all venturing, along with some emperors, for the papal office.

Pope Leo IX made some attempts to make amends for the terrible events going on in the church. He was a follower of moderate reform, where he tried desperately to put a stop to simony and clerical marriage(Simony was the illegal sale of church offices and clerical marriage was the marriage of the clergy.) He firmly believed in the legitimate appointment of popes and bishops, ones who were actually respectable applicants. Pope Leo himself rose to his status in the proper way, to show he wasn't a hypocrite in his conviction. However he still didn't deal with the root problem;which was limiting the laymen's ability to appoint church officials at all.

2.Pope Gregory VII and King Henry IV had a heated disagreement, over the roles of church and state during this time. It was an intense conflict, to say the very least, one that brought dire consequences to King Henry. Pope Gregory was passionate about reinstating the pope's power and also ending the practice of lay control. He thought it was scandalous that they had been allowed to decide on bishops, without holding a church office. So he set out to stop what he looked upon as a highly inappropriate custom.
He also wanted to put his foot down and end the act of lay investiture. This was where laymen would endow bishops with their symbols for spiritual authority. King Henry, on the contrary, was astounded when he found out Gregory's plans for change. It was his opinion to accept ritual as it was, and not generate radical reform. In rebellion to Gregory, King Henry went ahead and invested a new bishop in Milan, Italy. The Pope was in favor of keeping the old bishop, who was instated by a insurgent movement. He was apt to warn Henry of his impending punishment, but the king recklessly persisted. Naturally, afterwards, he was overthrown by Pope Gregory at the Council of Worms. Gregory even went as far as to liberate the King's subjects from loyalty.Realizing the gravity of his error, Henry's attitude became contrite and broken after some time.

Desperate for restitution, he traveled in the bitter snow of the Alps to reach Canossa. After three long nights, he was at last able to retain Gregory's forgiveness. Shocking as it was, he fell right back to his old ways after recanting and being granted pardon! The pope proceeded to excommunicate him once again, for such impudence. Eventually Gregory won the battle between them, returning the papacy to it's rightful spot of authority.
This bitter fight between Henry and Gregory was symbolic, because it paved a fine line between church and state. It showed that their roles were not to be confused with each other,where one would dominate completely over the other.






3. Christendom during the 1100s was a universal religion that overshadowed every part of the world. It was an understand pact between people everywhere, something that brought them all together in cohesive integration or "unity'. Evidence of this brotherhood abounded everywhere. Monasteries would frequently send their monks from one country to another, to minister to people. The gospel was spread quickly throughout the globe in this manner.

What were the problems besetting the Church in the tenth and eleventh centuries? What was "moderate reform"?

(2) Describe the events that took place during the conflict between Pope Gregory VII and Henry IV. What was at stake?

(3) What was Christendom?

Western Civ. Week 20

(1) Describe the ninth- and tenth-century invasions. Apart from the physical destruction involved, how did they affect life in the West?

(2) Describe feudalism and manorialism.

(1).The 9th and 10th centuries were a disastrous time for the Carolingian Empire, one of uncontrolled insanity and destruction. Pandemonium was dominant throughout western Europe, with frequent attacks from three primary groups, the Muslims, Magyars, and the Vikings. These assaults were particularly violent and brutal, when attempted by the warlike, vicious Vikings. This fierce, tireless tribe dealt out terror and villainy without fail, leaving a trail of bloodshed in their wake. They became such a prevalent part of the scene, that a new prayer was added to the Catholic church"From the fury of the Norseman, good Lord deliver us." The inhabitants of these fear stricken provinces were beside themselves to know what to do. The kings were powerless to protect the citizens of their dominion, completely undependable for aid or provision.They were weak and unstable, exerting no measure of their authority. Order was dissolved altogether, and it was soon the norm to live in constant alarm and distress. Everyone was searching vainly for direction and peace, in light of the chaos surrounding them from every quarter. The Muslims overwhelmed them in Spain, whilst the Vikings were raiding cities throughout France,and the Magyars were invading Germany and Northern Italy.

The Vikings or Norseman were a group of Scandinavians, known for being wild and uncivilized to say the least. They were notorious for their merciless attitude, burning down cities and ravaging the towns to take their gold and silver. These experienced warriors also forced their victims into slavery The Muslims, who came from Africa, were also well practiced in the art of looting. They were eager to kidnap people in the places they encountered, in addition to stealing spoils. The Magyars played their own role in the misery of these raids, by torching French monasteries and bringing home the plunder.












(2) Feudalism was one of two methods or systems that people resorted to, in their desperate search for security
during the invasions. It was an exchange between a local townsperson and a member of the nobility, commonly referred to as a Lord. The Lord would give a portion of his land to a designated person who would agree to work on it as a vassal, or a holder of land.The vassal was given a land grant that afforded him his income and expected to give guidance to his Lord.  As a trade-off, he would be protected by the Lord from the ruthless tribes of Vikings, Muslims etc., as they swept throughout the countryside. Lords were specifically known for ensuring that widow, orphans and the poor were taken care of.

Manorialism was similar to feudalism, but instead was a relationship between a "serf" and a Lord. The serf would maintain the land of his Lord, in return receiving food and protection. Their basic needs were fulfilled in abundance, as long as they farmed and kept the Lord's land in fine condition.