For Their Own Good

Reading Montaigne’s and Rochefort’s accounts of Cannibalism among native populations gives the reader a sense that these graphic depictions serve not just to inform, but also to entertain in a twisted way. In the same way that modern audiences flock to theatres to see every severed limb fly in Saw 14 or 15, the gruesome cannibalistic details of these narratives seem to play to a desire in the European audience for gory entertainment. Montaigne describes natives “roast”ing a captive and then “Eat[ing] (the captive) amongst them, and send[ing] some Chops to their absent friends” (397). He letter outlines a process of cooking a man that involves “teraing a Body Limb from Limb, by Racks and Torments, that is yet in perfect Sense, in roasting it by degrees, causing it to be bit and worried by Dogs and Swine” (398). Rochefort explains that the natives think “the French are the most delicate, and the Spaniards of the hardest digestion” (399). He goes on to describe how “as soon as (an) unfortunate person is laid dead upon this place, the young men take the body, and having wash’d it cut it in pieces, and then boyl some part, and broil some upon wooden Frames” (401). This gratuitous detail seems to serve some function other than sheer relaying of information.

William Dampier further complicates the issue when he asserts that in all his travels he has “never (met) with any such People: All Nations or Families in the World…having some sort of Food to live on…and would scarce kill a Man purposely to eat him” (402). With this conflicting account, one must ask what purpose it serves for Montaigne, Rochefort, and their contemporaries to paint native peoples as terrifying savages in the most vivid detail.

One possible explanation is that Montaigne and Rochefort use such depictions to rationalize an imperial system that grows increasingly brutal. One common justification of colonization was that Europeans were bringing civility to uncivilized people. The ultimate example of lack of civility is Cannibalism. The more vivid these images become, the easier it is to justify Imperialism. In Robinson Crusoe, Robinson states surprisingly, “I See little difference between that (Cannibalism) and our Way, which in War is frequent in Heat of Action” (403). In this passage, Robinson seems to acknowledge the occasional savageness with which his own people behave. Perhaps Montaigne, Rochefort, and their readers saw something similar and their wild characterizations of Cannibalistic native peoples helped them assure themselves that the West was colonizing for the good of those colonized.

Marriage Advice from a Newlywed

Benjamin Franklin wrote “Rules and Maxims for Promoting Matrimonial Happiness” as a result of events happening in his personal life. Franklin had a son named William in 1729, a time when he went around with many women to the point where he did not know the mother of his child. Although the two were relatively strangers, they decided to fool everyone and create the impression that William was legitimate by telling others he was born two years later. He published "Rules and Maxims for Promoting Matrimonial Happiness" in the Pennsylvania Gazette in 1730, a little over a month after his common-law marriage to the mother of his son. He claimed that the set of rules were for women because they were "better disposed to receive and practice it," although he later mentions that husbands should practice a lot of the same things he directs at women. It is rather bold of Franklin to make suggestions regarding marriage when he didn’t even know the mother of his first-born son. Not only did he not know her, he lied to everyone about his son’s birthday to make himself seem like less of a womanizer. Franklin then has the nerve to make the point that the best way to marry a good man is to act in kind as a lady of class. Class? One could argue he isn’t always the best example of that himself. Ironically, he speaks on the act of deception too, warning women against ever trying to manage their husbands and to never deceive or impose on them. Franklin suggests that a good wife avoids trying her husband’s patience but instead always tries to be respectful and affectionate. A “team” approach is promoted, where a healthy couple takes on life’s obstacles together, avoiding dispute because of the possible emotional effects. I found it interesting how even though Franklin attempts to include some universal rules in his writing he still makes it clear he believes that a woman's power and happiness are based on her husband's love and attention. I am not sure where Franklin has picked up such expertise, or how he can sincerely believe in some of his ideas regarding fidelity when he had recently been promiscuous himself. Franklin tells men not to stray from their wives, but time will tell if he can live what he preaches.

Franklin- dishing out what he can't take in return

“Being frequently censur’d and condemn’d by different Persons for printing Things which they say out not to be printed, I have sometimes though it might be necessary to make a standing Apology for my self, and publish it once a Year, to be read upon all Occasions of that Nature.” These are Benjamin Franklin’s words in Apology for Printers, which is essentially a list of “particulars” that Franklin requests “all who are angry with him to calmly consider.” I find it interesting that Franklin is quick to defend what he writes from the standpoint that what he prints are mere opinions. He takes the attitude that people should relax because one can never please everybody. Perhaps Franklin should take a look in the mirror at the man who wrote Printer’s Errors and Rules for The New-England Courant. Both publications quickly and aggressively point out his issues with each publication, but even if one does not support religion, who is he to suggest that the newspaper is need of rules simply because, “Religion is our safety and security, and if we lose the Honour of that, no small part of our strength and Glory will be lost with it.” Ironically, Franklin preached the acceptance of all churches despite his affiliation as a Puritan. For a man who believes in religious acceptance and believes in one’s right to defend his publications, he is abrasive with others who he judges to be doing harm to the community. It is evident that Franklin has tolerance for any pious man, but for the individual who has no religious association he has no patience. Not only does he not have patience for the non- religious man, he will publically defame the publication of the individual who does not emphasize or perhaps deemphasizes the church in a way that does not suit Franklin. The publisher of the Pennsylvania Gazette misspells a few words and Franklin classifies it as not gentleman-like and obvious in exposing “the continual Blunders of your Contemporary.” I sure hope Franklin never misspells a few words, I have a feeling his peers would be quick to jump on the man who apparently thinks, “That it is unreasonable to imagine Printers approve of every thing they print, and to censure them on any particular thing accordingly.”