korrigieren wäre sehr lieb

tbalii · Gast

Also es handelt sich um eine Analyse der Kurzgeschichte "Saturday Afternoon" von Erskine Caldwell. Wäre super, wenn es jemand korrigiert, der die Geschichte sogar kennt und eventuell nicht nur grammatik-mäßig helfen könnte. Falls nicht, auch egal, dann hab ich wenigstens erst einmal einen grammatikalisch richtigeren Text Augenzwinkern

The short story “Saturday Afternoon“ written by Erskine Caldwell was first published in the year 1936 and deals with the lynching of a Negro by some white people because they are jealous of him making too much money by his succesful way of growing cotton.
With his little story, Caldwell wants to express that the Blacks were still discriminated against and even murdered by the Whites although they had apparently the same rights.
This is what Caldwell shows: He invents a third person narrator taken from the story who describes an probably absolutely ordinary Saturday afternoon on which several dozen white people in the South haven’t got anything better to do than search for a more or less good reason to kill a man just because of his “wrong” skin colour.
Exactly this action is taking place and it is described with such a casualness as if it was daily routine.
Therefore the story begins with Tom’s words “Everything’s slick as a whistle with me, but my old woman’s got the chills and fever again” (ll. 26f.) and finishes with closely the same words (l. 225f.) as if in the meantime, when there was the lynching, nothing had happened.
Another stylistic device Caldwell uses for pointing out the lynching as natural is that he is compressing the time when the Negro is burned, shooted and even hanged up.
He presents the discrimination against the Blacks thus as natural and nobody pays attention or spends time on it. Furthermore, after this murder, everybody’s life is going on like before.
Contrary to this, he is expanding the time of the rest of the story what shows that he assigns an unimportant role to the (lynching of the) Negro. For example, he describes in detail the butcher-shop of the protagonist, Tom, which smells badly and is full of dirt and buzzing flies. Nevertheless, almost all the people in this town seem to buy their meat there which by the way already forshadows the absence of law and order.
Next to this unhygienic and nasty butcher-shop there is also the idyllic and beautiful nature where the Black is lynched. The weather is so hot that there is even a boy from a drugstore selling Coca Cola during the lynching what makes it appear like a ceremony. This is also underlined with the words “There were only a hundred and fifty or seventy-five there today. There had not been enough time for the word to get passed around.” in line 161f. So the murdering of a Black seems to be a big event in which many people participate.

What Caldwell describes with perversity as well as cruelty is nothing but the truth in the American 1930s. Although after the Civil War Black people had officially the same rights and so on as the Whites, they were maltreated, discriminated and even murdered. This wrong ehtic attitude is also given to the next generation which is represented by the little boy selling Coca Cola.
To draw a conclusion I would say that Caldwell rightly criticises the social injustice account of many Black people.

Danke im Voraus,
tbali

Gast

The short story “Saturday Afternoon“ written by Erskine Caldwell was first published in (the year) 1936. It deals (das "and" wirkt merkwürdig, da die beiden Dinge null Zusammenhang haben) with the lynching of a Negro by some white people because they are jealous of him making too much money by his succesful way of growing cotton.
With his little story, (kein Komma - warum auch...?) Caldwell wants to express that the Blacks (black people wäre schöner, "whites" wäre imho klein zu schreiben) were still discriminated against and even murdered by the Whites (white people wäre schöner und wenn, dann klein)although they had apparently the same rights.
This is what Caldwell shows (nicht eher: This is what Caldwell does / This is how Caldwell shows the above mentioned setting o.ä.?): He invents a third person narrator taken from the story who describes an (kein n) probably diese drei Wörter hintereinander wirken etwas schwerfällig, vielleicht könntest Du probably oder absolutely einfach weglassen) absolutely ordinary Saturday afternoon on which several dozen white people in the South haven’t got anything better to do than search for a more or less good reason to kill a man just because of his “wrong” skin colour.
Exactly this action is taking place and it is described with such a casualness as if it was daily routine.
Therefore the story begins with Tom’s words “Everything’s slick as a whistle with me, but my old woman’s got the chills and fever again” (ll. 26f.) and finishes with closely the same words (l. 225f.) as if in the meantime, when there was the lynching, nothing had happened.
Another stylistic device Caldwell uses for pointing out the lynching as natural (er stellt das Lynchen als natürlich dar - eher nicht, oder? Eher alltäglich oder so.) is that he is compressing the time when the Negro is burned, shooted (shot! nicht shooted!) and even hanged up hanged - ohne up.
He presents the discrimination against the Blacks thus as natural Ich glaube nicht, dass Caldwell ernsthaft die Position vertritt, dass das natürlich ist (siehe auch oben), er beschreibt es als für diese Leute natürlich oder als damals alltäglich oder so...and nobody pays attention or spends time on it das klingt als würde niemand Zeit mit dem Diskriminieren verschwenden, was weder wahr ist, noch das, was Du aussagen wolltest ;-). Furthermore, after this murder, everybody’s life is going on like before.
Contrary to this, he is expanding the time of the rest of the story what shows that he assigns an unimportant role to the (lynching of the) Negro Wieder die Frage: Findet er diese Rolle unwichtig oder versucht er durch ebendiese Stilmittel die Unwichtigkeit, die die Schwarzen für die Weissen dort haben, zu vermitteln? Ein feiner, aber entscheidender Unterschied!). For example, he describes in detail the butcher-shop of the protagonist, Tom, which smells badly and is full of dirt and buzzing flies. Nevertheless, almost all the people in this town seem to buy their meat there which by the way already forshadows the absence of law and order or simply the absence of any other butcher (was sehr gut sein könnte in einem kleinen Südstaaten-Kaff).
Next to this unhygienic and nasty butcher-shop there is also the idyllic and beautiful nature where the Black is lynched. The weather is so hot that there is even a boy from a drugstore selling Coca Cola during the lynching what makes it appear like a ceremony. This is also underlined with the words “There were only a hundred and fifty or seventy-five there today. There had not been enough time for the word to get passed around.” in line 161f. So the murdering of a Black seems to be a big event in which many people participate. Richtig. Daraus schliesse ich mal, dass die Schwarzen nicht unwichtig waren, sondern diskriminiert - wieder ein kleiner aber wichtiger Unterschied. Die Weissen befanden die Schwarzen nicht für wichtig, aber ihre Rolle (Sündenbock) war wichtig für die Gesellschaft.

What Caldwell describes with perversity as well as cruelty is nothing but the truth in the American 1930s. Although after the Civil War Black people black kleinhad officially the same rights and so on as the Whites whites klein, imho, they were maltreated, discriminated and even murdered. This wrong ehtic Tippfehler: ethicattitude is also given to the next generation which is represented by the little boy selling Coca Cola.
To draw a conclusion I would say that Caldwell rightly criticises the social injustice account of many Black people black klein.

grün für Stil, also diskutierbar / rot für Fehler

imho = in my humble opinion (ganz sicher bin ich nicht, aber ziemlich)

Ich hoffe, ich habe nix übersehen und nix falsch korrigiert...

Liebe Grüsse

Gast

Noch ein paar Dinge zusätzlich...