Contrast between The Goophered Grapevine and Sociable Jimmy - Essay Example

Contrast between “The Goophered Grapevine” and “Sociable Jimmy” When reading the work by Charles W. Chesnutt named The Goophered Grapevine alongside his writings, it is evident that his setting, dialect and the sense of the characters being real; are different from other authors such as Mark Twain. Twain wrote an article in 1874 named “sociable Jimmy,” which appeared in the New York Times Newspaper. Unlike Twain’s, the Goophered Grapevine was Chesnutt’s first published work, which grants the reader a clear understanding of the story and what the author is talking about (Erik, 2003).

For instance, Chesnutt used the right language in the story and knew how to use the same as the best reader’s transition (Wright & Ernestine, 2010). In addition, the language gives every reader a better understanding of the main themes and know what the characters are talking bout.The African American culture had a significant influence on the work and the style of Twain. As a result, Twain’s book is not satisfactory as a whole in terms of the extent by which characters, Jimmy, a young male he came across on his lecture tour come to life in portraying the principal idea and theme in the story (Kidd, 2004).

Unlike Chesnutt’s work, Twain’s are in short of proper setting use and dialect use. This point outlines that Chesnutt is the author who shows a greater technical expertise than Twain. The story by Chesnutt involves a straightforward narration of a nameless male alongside his lovely and sickly wife by the name of Annie. The narration becomes appealing because the characters are real similar to what people encounter and read each day (Philip, 2011). As the reader proceeds on reading the story, it is clear how the estate resting on the possession is either “conju’d, bewitch” or “goophered.

” It is from the story that the readers gets a transition back before the start of the Civil War, where the illiterate would gain such as a view.The characters in Chesnutt’s work are real in the sense that the story fits to the opinion of an illiterate Negro in today’s life. More so, it relates to what such a person would think if under the same situation as the characters in Chesnutt’s story (Wright & Ernestine, 2010). After reading his difficult text, it grants the reader a significant feeling of his presence at the time the author narrated the story.

In addition, the seven pages long narration, hardly give the reader a break to the unclear gibberish (Philip, 2011). Unlike Twain, this is a unique intent the author used to help the reader slow down while at the same time allowing the significant themes sink and understand the entire text.In fact, throughout the narration by Chesnutt, the reader feels as if a real person is narrating the story (Erik, 2003). This implies that the unnamed male is narrating the story of a lonely Negro where the narration tactic is similar to the way the man heard it.

Regardless of whether it is the nameless man or Chesnutt tells the story, it is clear that another method of reading the same might be from a critical point of view.As the difficult discussion in this article ends, it takes the reader to a more relaxed text in a scenario where the narrator indicates that the nameless man ignores the advice from the black male (Kidd, 2004). In a nutshell, the language use and transition in the story by Chesnutt are not solely different, but also assist the reader in several ways although slows down the reader.

Work CitedKidd, Kenneth B. Making American Boys: Boyology and the Feral Tale. Minneapolis, Minn. [u.a.: Univ. of Minnesota Press, 2004. Print. Redling, Erik. "speaking of Dialect": Translating Charles W. Chesnutts Conjure Tales into Postmodern Systems of Signification. Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann, 2003. Print. Wright, Susan P, and Ernestine P. Glass. Passing in the Works of Charles W. Chesnutt. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 2010. Internet resource. Yannella, Philip. American Literature in Context from 1865 to 1929.

Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011. Print.