Conventions to Travel With In the years when explorers and settlers traveled to the undiscovered land of the Americas, travel narratives became a hallmark of the area’s literature. Feeding the hunger for excitement and adventure, their popularity skyrocketed. Not only do these stories inspire wonder in the reader, they provide insights into life and events of the time. Two famous narratives, in particular, remain an essential part of learning about such travels. John Smith’s The General History of Virginia, New England, and the Sumer Isles and William Bradford’s Of Plymouth Plantation recount the founding of two unique settlements. John Smith was an influential member of the Jamestown settlement. Further north, William Bradford assisted in founding the Plymouth settlement along with the Pilgrims. While these are not the only authors of earlier American travel narratives, certainly their books contribute an essential part to the study of this genre.
A travel narrative contains certain elements that differentiate them from other works. They serve to easily distinguish a travel narrative. These common characteristics have been compiled into eleven conventions which include: 1. …show more content…
Survive ‘difficult ocean passage,’ 2. Deride earlier reports from other explorers/discoverers, 3 Report ‘advantages of European technology,’ 4. Describe geography of the New World, 5. Mix ‘practical advice with rhetorical landscape definitions,’ 6. Encounter ‘nature and ‘savages’ as friendly and ferocious,’ 7. Show an ‘expedition plagued by intrigue and disunity,’ 8. Emphasize ‘flaws and virtues of the expedition leaders,’ 9. Compare ‘virtues of life in a strange land with the idleness and corruption of the old world,’ 10. Catalog ‘New World plenitude,’ 11. Recount ‘initial successes followed by defeats.’ (Campbell) Looking at the excerpts from The Norton Anthology of American Literature, Both Smith’s and Bradford’s work contain some of the features necessary to classify them as travel narratives. When analyzed, it is interesting to see the similar aspects of these different stories. To begin exploring the conventions of travel narratives, John Smith’s book proves significant. Working from the selection of Smith’s General History of Virginia, New England, and the Summer Isles found in The Norton Anthology of American Literature, five of the conventions emerge. The most apparent convention in his narrative was the encounters with the natives. John Smith’s relationship with the natives varied from cooperative to aggressive during his time in Jamestown. Although he guarded against aggression, Smith hoped to have peaceful trading relations with the natives. At one point, kindness even showed as Smith described, “. . . each hour expecting the fury of the savages, when God the patron of all good endeavors, in that desperate extremity so changed the hearts of the savages, that they brought such plenty of their fruits, and provisions, as no man wanted” (60). To the settlers’ surprise, the natives gifted food during a time of scarcity. In the end, however, hostility prevailed. Unwilling to trade, the natives “scorned him [Smith] as a famished man, and would in derision offer him a handful of corn, a piece of bread, for their swords and muskets . . .” (Smith 61). Smith responded “as necessity enforced; though contrary to his commission, let fly his muskets. . .” which chased the natives away (61). This, of course, the natives reciprocated with an attack. While the skirmish eventually reached a settlement, conflict continued to trouble the settlement. Smith would even be later captured. Truly, this creates an epic travel narrative. A second travel narrative convention seen in Smith’s work comes in the form of sly criticism for their leader. Apparently, President Edward Wingfield started looking out for his own interests and disregarding those of his followers. Smith accuses him of gluttony “for engrossing to his private, oatmeal, sack, oil, aqua vitae, beef, eggs, or what not, but the kettle;” (60). The rest of the group struggled to stay alive while the President scarfed up any excess supplies. Smith’s party went through several Presidents for mostly negative reasons. Here, Smith exposes this flaw in one of the leaders. Along the same lines, a clearly seen convention in Smith’s General History consists of the discord and disunity within the party. Twice the President tried to escape the hardship and return to England. Smith
A travel narrative contains certain elements that differentiate them from other works. They serve to easily distinguish a travel narrative. These common characteristics have been compiled into eleven conventions which include: 1. …show more content…
Survive ‘difficult ocean passage,’ 2. Deride earlier reports from other explorers/discoverers, 3 Report ‘advantages of European technology,’ 4. Describe geography of the New World, 5. Mix ‘practical advice with rhetorical landscape definitions,’ 6. Encounter ‘nature and ‘savages’ as friendly and ferocious,’ 7. Show an ‘expedition plagued by intrigue and disunity,’ 8. Emphasize ‘flaws and virtues of the expedition leaders,’ 9. Compare ‘virtues of life in a strange land with the idleness and corruption of the old world,’ 10. Catalog ‘New World plenitude,’ 11. Recount ‘initial successes followed by defeats.’ (Campbell) Looking at the excerpts from The Norton Anthology of American Literature, Both Smith’s and Bradford’s work contain some of the features necessary to classify them as travel narratives. When analyzed, it is interesting to see the similar aspects of these different stories. To begin exploring the conventions of travel narratives, John Smith’s book proves significant. Working from the selection of Smith’s General History of Virginia, New England, and the Summer Isles found in The Norton Anthology of American Literature, five of the conventions emerge. The most apparent convention in his narrative was the encounters with the natives. John Smith’s relationship with the natives varied from cooperative to aggressive during his time in Jamestown. Although he guarded against aggression, Smith hoped to have peaceful trading relations with the natives. At one point, kindness even showed as Smith described, “. . . each hour expecting the fury of the savages, when God the patron of all good endeavors, in that desperate extremity so changed the hearts of the savages, that they brought such plenty of their fruits, and provisions, as no man wanted” (60). To the settlers’ surprise, the natives gifted food during a time of scarcity. In the end, however, hostility prevailed. Unwilling to trade, the natives “scorned him [Smith] as a famished man, and would in derision offer him a handful of corn, a piece of bread, for their swords and muskets . . .” (Smith 61). Smith responded “as necessity enforced; though contrary to his commission, let fly his muskets. . .” which chased the natives away (61). This, of course, the natives reciprocated with an attack. While the skirmish eventually reached a settlement, conflict continued to trouble the settlement. Smith would even be later captured. Truly, this creates an epic travel narrative. A second travel narrative convention seen in Smith’s work comes in the form of sly criticism for their leader. Apparently, President Edward Wingfield started looking out for his own interests and disregarding those of his followers. Smith accuses him of gluttony “for engrossing to his private, oatmeal, sack, oil, aqua vitae, beef, eggs, or what not, but the kettle;” (60). The rest of the group struggled to stay alive while the President scarfed up any excess supplies. Smith’s party went through several Presidents for mostly negative reasons. Here, Smith exposes this flaw in one of the leaders. Along the same lines, a clearly seen convention in Smith’s General History consists of the discord and disunity within the party. Twice the President tried to escape the hardship and return to England. Smith