Reply to comment

Just a thought I had concerning Stowe's writing after seeing the play in The King and I: it seemed no more heavy-handed and histrionic than the novel itself does, despite the play seeming an almost romanticized fairytale as someone mentioned in class.

Interestingly, these highly emotional events in the book are the events which get us closer to the "real" of the religious world which Stowe presents. Religion and crying seem to go hand-in-hand, though this is possibly due to Christians not being able to stand by and let these cruelties of slavery stand-thus they turn to their God in these emotional times. Or perhaps the overly emotional religious scenes (say any of the deaths or misfortunes) is to appeal to the Christian women to which the book is appealing.

At any rate, all emotional scenes seem to be heavily laden with the nauseating preaching, with which I assume the original readers would identify- making the end of slavery a religious mission. Even I didn't mind the excessive religion for the first few hundred pages, which is saying quite a lot. So, I feel that the "use of crying" is to enliven not only the motherly/humane aspects; also, as it is coupled with religion, Stowe appeals to a broader audience, calling them to action rather than mere sympathy/empathy or shrugging slavery off as "just how things go" because in the "real" of the afterlife, those who supported slavery would be damned. Unfortunately, the increasing role of religion as the book goes on- at least in these scenes- makes me much more disinterested in the emotional aspects. So, while crying may have been an appeal to religion missionary work in the original purpose, it has made the religion in the novel that much more tedious to me.