[the] ENGLISH-BLOG [.com]

Using the dominant force in contemporary literary studies, I have decided to use the New Critical/Formalist approach to explain the connection with the reading by Mark Twain called “Lucky”. This reading emphasizes on the detailed explanation of Lord Arthur Scoresby. This story is more of a contemporary reading of how many people characterize each other.
Lord Arthur Scoresby is at a banquet in his honor because people feel he is a great achiever in life (242). He went through the military and worked his way up to being a captain in a marching regiment (243). He did this much easier than anyone else could have. But he had a lot of help. He was crammed and tested with the same questions that he would need to know while the other very smart people who studied, did not do as well as Scoresby. I feel this is more contemporary because now days, unfortunately for some people, to get by easier in life, you have to know certain people and make your way through. This is not always fair, but it is true on different occasions. People thought that Scoresby was a lucky man, and a fool, because of how he got by so easy in life. But in a way, he kind of cheated and made his way through, but he made it a long way and ended up being a hero against the Russians in the Crimean war (244).

“Luck” was written by Mark Twain in 1891. Twain wrote this story to convey luck, and how individuals can become lucky. Some major issues that Twain deals with is luck, and how it effects people. In the story “Luck” Twain narrates a story about Lieutenant-General Lord Author Scoresby and his journey to Lieutenant-General. About forty years ago since the story was written, Scoresby took his examination for the military. However, Scoresby was not smart enough to pass this exam. Furthermore, he would have failed the test miserably. Feeling bad, a clergymen, who was the instructor of the military exam at the time, helped Scoresby prepare for the exam. The clergymen told Scoresby exactly what would be on the exam. By doing this, Scoresby surprisingly remembered everything that he studied, and passed the test with flying colors (243).
Than in 1853, the Crimean War broke out. Scoresby was appointed caption in the marching regiment. This angered Twain because how could a guy like Scoresby hold such responsibility? Plus, everybody thought that Scoresby was a “genius” Which was upsetting because in fact, he was not. Surprising, Scoresby prevailed, and won the war against Russia.
Now, Scoresby is being honored at a banquet in London in honor of one of the three conspicuously illustrious English military names of his generation (242). Still, many do not know of his ignorance, and of his stupidity.
This story fits into Twain’s career because, the events are based on a true story, which Twain was present in. Also, as a writer, inspiration from stories can come from anywhere, and a lifestyle like Scoresby is only one that you find in a book.

Lyndsay Krall

New Critical/Formalist

A major aspect of Mark Twain’s “Luck” is that the story is a cross between being born a fool or being born lucky. The action is a banquet, held in honor of Lieutenant-General Lord Arthur Scoresby, one of the illustrious English military names of the generation. This much seems clear, but to the clergyman, the precise nature of Scoresby’s position as captain of a marching regiment is not. In the story, the clergyman states that privately, Scoresby is an absolute fool. Clergyman now, but had spent the first half of his life as an instructor in the military school at Woolwich where he had mentored Scoresby because for pity sake he didn’t know anything. Purely by “cramming”, Scoresby went through with flying colors on examination day, and got compliments too. Could this particular type of study actually be a result from studying, or just being lucky?
Even at the story’s end these uncertainties remain. For this reason one may conclude that Twain deliberately creates the uncertainties to reveal how people like Scoresby seem to be what is considered lucky, or simply being in the right place at the right time.

1.30.2007

Mr. Hobbs,

Mark Twain’s story, “Luck”, discusses the issue of good fortune and whether it really does happen by chance, or if our actions influence positive outcomes. I chose to look at the moral/intellectual critical approach to this story, because the Robert’s text states that through this approach the reader can decide whether the story supports a particular lesson, and whether the reader can benefit from it or not, and I think that “Luck” can teach its readers something who take time to analyze it.

“Luck” has a lesson similar to the old cliché, “don’t judge a book by its cover”. Although the Reverend stated several instances where General Scoresby had no idea about the subject being discussed, he also stated various instances where Scoresby was very knowledgeable and successful. Scoresby aced the mathematics exam, and in my experience, it is very hard to get a good grade on math exams without understanding the concepts very well. Scoresby was also ranked high enough to take over for the colonel. I think that Scoresby’s talents were overlooked by the Reverend based on what he saw in him previously.

Even though the story is titled “Luck”, I think that Mark Twain wrote it in a way so that the reader could make their own decisions about Scoresby. Some readers may have read “Luck” and said that Scoresby was simply lucky, and others may agree that he must have worked hard enough during his military experience to have a banquet in his honor years later.

Sincerely,
Jen Naugle
Humanities Literature MWF 11:45-12:45

Professor Hobbs,

In the story called “Lucky”, Mark Twain, the author, accounts for a story told to him by his reverend friend about a “fool” in the English military. To the reverend, this “fool”, Lieutenant-General Lord Arthur Scoresby, seems to have a great amount of luck that helps him to continually achieve a higher rank in the military, despite his concealed stupidity. During the Crimean War, the colonel of the army dies in battle and leaves the direction of the army to the next man in line which happened to be Scoresby. To this the reverend replies that everyone will very soon be in Sheol, the Hebrew word for hell. His reason for saying this is because he believes Scoresby will make a huge mistake, like he normally does, and this time he will not get lucky, he will cause a huge catastrophe. Even though Scoresby was seen to be an idiot in the eyes of some, he somehow seemed to become lucky with every choice he made. Scoresby worked himself up in rank from a student at Woolwich military academy to holding the title of captain in the marching regiment, all the way to the position of colonel of the whole army, all by his good fortune.

Sincerely,
Stephanie Vrabel

April H.

The short story “Luck,” by Mark Twain can be categorized into the New Critical/Formalist literary studies. New criticism focuses on literary text, such as the short story “Luck,” in which that it targets different formal works of art. In much greater detail the New Critical/formalists approach emphasizes on the importance of detailed explanations of poems and of an entire passage. It also uses a certain outline of required material such as the point of view, tone, plot, characters, and structure to generate the story. In relation to this idea I believe “Luck” falls into the category of a short passage of a literature story. The story has well rounded characters, a great plot, and a certain structure that allows people to understand the purpose of the authors reasoning’s.
The most important question that the literary device aims for is “what specifically does a work say?” Ultimately it is asking if the author is getting his point across in a well thought out form. For example in the story, “Luck” the main topic is based on luck. Mark Twain goes into great detail about the plot of the story, but at the same time he utilizes a way to refer everything to luck. He creates a character, Scoresby, that is made out to be something his not. He is a low ranked officer, however by some chance he ends up becoming the top ranked officer due to certain events in the story. He creates this event in order to get his point across.
Overall the New/Critical formalists approach relates to this story because it utilizes different techniques to the short story. It also gives details about the plot, characters, tone, and structure. The story follows the same format as the New/Critical approach. The story has a valuable meaning behind the plot. It teaches a lesson on how life can be so unfair for some, but luck can find a way through certain people who may not deserve what they get. Furthermore, Mark Twain created a setting in which luck can be based on certain events and people.

30 January 2007
Mr. Hobbs

Mark Twain’s “Luck” raises the issue of “luck” and beating the system to get ahead. In this short instance of a telling of an unspecified Lieutenant, a man’s intellect worthiness is put in exposure for examination. According to Twain’s old acquaintance, the Reverend explained how this “man” referred to as Scoresby was not to be admired but to be viewed as a fool incapable of any rational thinking all of which in essence suggest that the banquet they were in attendance to celebrate Scoresby was a joke. The question to be pondered is if the Reverend speaks out of spite or is in fact being sincere in his accusations.

According to a detailed account that Twain full hearted believed to be true, Scoresby really was a fool. The Reverend explained how he had gone to great measures after seeing Scoresby’s lack of intelligence and knowledge to help the fellow prepare to pass his tests. Is the Reverend’s act of a pity ethical? Was it his responsibility to test the destiny that fate had planned for another individual? Continuing in his story, he went to on to explain how he drilled Scoresby on material that would be included on the tests so he would be able to retain the information long enough to succeed. This is obviously cheating in anyone’s eyes. Just because it was done in good intentions, should someone of great honor like a Reverend have participated in such actions?

As soon as Scoresby passed everything and did indeed succeed over other men of greater credibility, the Reverend realized how big of a mistake he had made by helping this man. Since they were in a war, Scoresby would actively be involved and would be subject to show his true intelligence to others without The Reverend’s help to prepare him. Now, in such a dangerous situation filled with such great responsibilities and risks, should the Reverend have done what would be safest for the troops and admit his own actions? In the end Scoresby’s stupidity ends up saving the day and is seen as a great hero. The Reverend is in great regret of his creation and now realizes how deep the damages of his helpfulness could have been if there wouldn’t have been so much luck involved. Should the Reverend be so silent in his knowledge after such a scare? Wouldn’t it be in his best interest to save others from future harm by reporting the truth even if he is punished for his wrongfulness in the end?

Bettina Herold
ENGL121.003 Humanities Lit. MWF 1145-1245

“Luck” By Mark Twain

In order to critique the story “Luck” by Mark Twain I have decided to use the Moral/Intellectual Approach. In the story Arthur Scoresby attends a military academy where he is not exactly the brightest student of the bunch. Therefore, one of the instructors feels as though it is their responsibility to help him study for his examinations. While most would expect him to fail these examinations, he amazingly passes them with flying colors. Then, continues to remain lucky as he moves up in rank and becomes victorious. After reading “Luck” the question that we are all left with is that of luck: is there such a thing as luck or is it just a silly superstition?
Luck is defined as good fortune by chance. In this case Arthur Scoresby received the good fortune of passing the examinations by cramming. But was that luck? Luck doesn’t happen to everyone and that is what causes people to have different perspectives on luck. In the story Arthur Scoresby is said to be lucky for this to happen to him. The secret of his “cramming” was never known to anyone, except him and his instructor. It was luck that this never broke out that he was getting help. But, was this really luck or did he just have really good short term memory?
If it were luck then good for him, but where will that bit of lucky “cramming” get him in the military. Everything he learns in the academy will make him a better leader in the military itself. But, as the war began officers were lost and luckily for Scoresby he got pushed up further and further in rank. Then, when he is victorious over the Russians he is said to be a genius, when truly he luckily went the wrong way. As most found Scoresby to be a genius, it was found that he was “an absolute fool” (245). A fool because he never really learned everything, he luckily just had good fortunes placed upon him. Overall, it was pure luck that he was even in the military.

Katie Kovac
English 121 003

Mark Twain’s story Luck is easily analyzed through the historical/topical critical approach. This approach emphasizes how the time period has an impression on the story vicariously through the author.
This story written by Twain in 1884 has a lot of references to the time period it was written during. Twain uses language reflected upon the people of this time. He also paints a picture in your mind of the Crimean war and how the Russians were out done by the less equipped English. As stated in our text the language, difficult to understand, in the historical critical approach is used frequently. (WAL pg.183.5) Also as we discussed in class Monday the 29th, words such as shiel and prodigious are words not commonly understood by people of modern time.
Mark Twain uses this anecdote to tell a story of something in his life? He could be trying to tell a story of someone he knew or maybe him himself?

Thomas Nolf

Interpreting “The Luck” in a moral and intellectual way one comes to realize some things about this story. First of, this story provides an anecdote which is that having luck could be a good thing or a bad thing. A good example of this is this whole battle time promotions that the men in Lt. General Scoresby’s platoon encountered, it was lucky for the men who lived but unlucky for the men who died. Also at Lt. General Scoresby’s banquet, even though he’s being honored and praised the clergyman describes him as being a fool because he realizes who Scoresby really is being that he used to be an instructor at the military school. One of the quotes I thought best described this was at the end when the clergyman mentions “they are proof that the very best thing in all this world that can befall a man is to be born lucky.”(245, WAL)

Professor Hobbs,

The new criticism approach of this short story “Luck” by Mark Twain begins in London at a banquet, honoring Lieutenant--General Lord Arthur Scoresby. At this moment the reader is probably thinking why this man is being honored? We would soon later find out.
The Man sitting next to Mark Twain is a “clergyman” who we later find out is a Reverend and an old friend of Mark’s. He knows a secret that no other man is aware of. He states that Scoresby is “an absolute fool” (242). That statement came as a big surprise to Mark and well as the readers. I’m sure the readers are questioning why there would be a banquet celebrated for someone considered a fool? Seems rather contradictory to the banquets purpose.
By the end of this story we come to learn that the reverend had fed Scoresby all his knowledge, explaining examples in which he had taught him throughout the years. Scoresby was considered the “supremest ass in the universe” retaining no knowledge other than what the Reverend crammed into his head; even “mistaking his right hand from left” (244). Scoresby seemed as though he had been a man who was born lucky, but still “an absolute fool” ( 245).

Sincerely,
Tina W

Lauren Wozniak

The New Critical/formalist critical approach emphasizes detailed examination and explanation. It helps explain the content of the works with the insight needed for evaluating the piece of work.
The New Critical/formalist critical approach helps readers to understand “Luck” by explaining in detail where the story is taking place and what is going on. Mark Twain describes where the banquet is, and who it is in honor for. Twain also describes exactly what the General accomplished and did not accomplish in life. He explained all of his mistakes and made it clear to the readers that he succeeded in life on luck, which was the point of the story.

Lorin Gdula

Luck

When studying literature in a moral or intellectual way you have to look deep into the text, studying every little thing, for it could possibly turn out to be something you probably never even realized by reading it through the first time. In Luck a reverend helped a young man study and cram so he could do well on these exams but he really didn’t want him to do well he just felt bad for him. But he kept helping him Scoresby kept succeeding. All the other men tried so hard and were not getting as much attention as Scoresby; while in return, Scoresby was getting all these metals.

I think the moral of the story was that the reverend ended up feeling bad because he made it seem like Scoresby wasn’t capable of doing this all on his own and the narrator created an illusion to make it seem that he was capable from going to knowing just about nothing to accomplishing so much. You just question whether Scoresby was acting and just taking in everything the reverend said and using it as an advantage towards the others or if he truly didn’t know a lot about anything. It’s hard to say what Scoresby really wanted out of this. Was he truly a fool? Or did he just not show every enough what he really was made of and that he was really capable of doing this on his own.

Mark Twain’s short story “Luck” is relevant to historical context of the Crimean of the 19th century. Twain exemplifies the ideologies of Luck versus hard work. He tells the story of Lieutenant General Lord Author Scoresby, whom is being awarded at a banquet in London. Scoresby is awarded for his bravery and ability to guide troops during the war.

The clergymen told the story of how Lieutenant Scroesby is a fool. He stated how everyone his “idiotic blunders”, when he accompanied him to Crimean during the war. This story is based on historical facts of the Crimean War, however depicts the symbolism of pure luck versus hard work. Scoresby never experienced hard work because he was always blessed with luck throughout the story.

Dr. Lee Hobbs
In class we were assigned to read the short story titled “Luck” by Mark Twain. In Luck, Mark Twain explains the moral of the story by the meaning of luck through Lieutenant General Lord Arthur Scoresby and the Crimean war. It starts out at a banquet which is being held for one extraordinary English Military man. Through out the entire banquet they withhold his real name and address him by Lieutenant General Lord Arthur Scoresby. In this story he is portrayed to be an “absolute fool” (page 242 Roberts).

In “Luck” the issue that is being brought up is Scoresby was all around just lucky his entire life and nobody knows it but the narrator of the story and Scoresby himself. I previously stated that the narrator withheld his real name, in order to save that individual from embarrassment. Since this story is based on the Crimean War, which leads us to believe that the story is true. This story portrays a simple message about luck, which is basically being at the right place at the right time. The main idea this story brings up is Scoresby being able to be so lucky, and the ideas to support the ideas are great. I believe that Mark Twains “Luck” helps people or the readers to understand and and lead better lives as well as understand the world better, and to realize that luck doesn’t happen to anyone.

Sincerely
B.Decker

Moral/Intellectual Response
In the short story, Luck by Mark Twain, a blundering fool by the name Scoresby is known as a brilliant military mind. He is well decorated and being honored at a banquet, which Mark Twain happens to attend. During the banquet of this prestigious military mind only to find a old friend who happens to be a man of the clergy. The clergyman lets Twain in on a secret, Scoresby is a fool. Since he was a trusted man of the church, he believed the story of how it is better to be lucky then be good.
The clergyman, who helped instruct Scoresby as a young cadet at a military academy, knew him for being an idiot who does not know his right from left. He only knew and studied one thing at a time but yet by luck that is what he was quizzed upon every time. When he would make a grave error, someway only by luck, it would turn into a pot of gold. Once he earned command on the battlefield by default, he led his troops to the slaughterhouse. But once again, luck is Scoresby’s middle name. The Russian troops thought his blunder was part of a brilliant counterstrike that would wipe them out. That was not the case; he had misinterpreted his instruction to fall back. This essay proves that it is not always best to be good, but good to be lucky.

Melisa Parsons
January 29,2007

Luck

Luck is a presence that I believe can be positive or negative and many people have different opinions on this subject. Some people believe that we are born with good luck or cursed with bad luck , I believe that these people do not live their life realistically. Then, there are other people who do not believe in luck at all they believe in a higher power which is their faith and they believe that everything will be fine as long as they stay faithful. There are other people who do not believe in luck or a higher power they believe that in order to succeed in life they have to work hard to get what they want and or need.
I do not believe in good or bad luck. I believe in “God “ and also believe that we should work to get what we want. Hard work will determine one’s future, if you work hard in life you will be rewarded and if you do not you will not be rewarded. My opinion what you get out of life is what you put into life.

Professor Hobbs,

The moral and intellectual approach deals with searching the literature for some kind of teaching or message that the writer is trying to convey. The purpose of the story’s moral ending may be to improve the quality of their own lives or to gain an appreciation of the world around them. This type of approach can also lead the reader to decide if the moral of the story is accepted and valued in their own life.
In the story called “Lucky”, Mark Twain, the author, accounts for a tale told to him by his reverend friend about a man in the English military. To the reverend, this man, Lieutenant-General Lord Arthur Scoresby, is an absolute “fool” whose good fortune seems to help him in continually achieving a higher rank in the military. Scoresby, originally a student at Woolwich military academy, was able to work his way up to becoming the colonel of the whole army.
A potential moral of this story is to not judge a person just on an impression. To the reverend, Scoresby was nothing more than a fool who got lucky and succeeded in times where he should have failed. Though the reverend might have thought he knew Scoresby very well, he might not have known him well enough. For instance, Scoresby might have understood that cramming the night before was enough time for him to comprehend the material, especially with the help of a professional. He also might have known more about the Russians plan than the reverend thought he did during the Crimean War.
Another possible moral of this story may be that you cannot completely rely on luck in life. Scoresby’s accomplishments were seen to be greatly influenced by luck, though, in the general population a person needs more than luck to succeed in life. In order for someone to achieve their goals, it is very important that they work hard to get there, and to actually understand their job.

Sincerely,
Stephanie Vrabel

Mr. Hobbs,

The moral or intellectual critical approach centers on determining whether or not a story includes a moral lesson. This approach is based on stories having a demonstration of right or wrong included in them. Simply put, this approach is focused on identifying a moral lesson within a story, to enable the readers to learn from.

The moral lesson included in “Luck” focuses on living your life in such a way so you will not regret decisions later on. It was unmoral for the Reverend to help Scoresby just because he did not want Scoresby to look ridiculous. Unfortunately for the Reverend, his unethical decision to help Scoresby not only helped Scoresby blend in, but also allowed him to get a leadership position which he should have never received. To this day, the Reverend regrets what he did, because he knows he should not have helped Scoresby and there were more qualified men for the position that Scoresby received. Many intelligent men were ranked lower than Scoresby, because he received help.

Therefore, it is important to live your life always thinking about the future. Never dwell on something in the present that you may regret later on in life. You should always do what you think is right for the present and the future.

Thank you for your time,
Jaime Hersh

Jenny Troutman
ENGL 121 – Humanities Literature
“Luck” Assignment
1/29/06

“Luck” Topical/Historical

“Luck” was about a man named Lieutenant – General Lord Arthur Scoresby and he wasn’t quite the brightest in math but he was considered a fool. Scoresby would get appraisal from anything he supposedly “accomplished” as a lieutenant. Scoresby was also known as a hero from the Crimean War. Other soldiers couldn’t understand why he would be honored with so many medals and people appraising him like he is an intelligent and bright. They had a banquet in honor of him and the clergyman was telling the story of Lieutenant – General Lord Arthur Scoresby.

Scoresby was a well known General but most soldiers and people who were under him, knew that he wasn’t bright in math. Scoresby would “cram” information in and then later on forget everything a few hours later on. When the Crimean War broke out, they put Scoresby in charge. Since he didn’t do well in math, he never knew how to count or he couldn’t tell his men how many soldiers were coming upon them.

People have known him as a sweetest and loving person but he wasn’t bright as many people. Scoresby would present and show off all his shinning medals and everyone would honor and praise him for a job well done. Scoresby had medals from all of the worlds and basically he was born lucky. Even though he as born lucky, he was still considered as a fool.

Dr. Hobbs,

While reading the Mark Twain story of "Luck", I kept thinking that the Reverend was just jealous of Scoresby, so I thought I would look into it a bit.

Luck of the Genius

In Mark Twain’s short story, Luck, Twain relates a party which he attended to celebrate the achievements of one of his esteemed friends, Lord Arthur Scoresby. He speaks with one of Scoresby and his mutual friends, a clergyman, learning that Scoresby is actually “an absolute fool” (Twain 360). Twain does not think twice about the Reverend’s opinion, but accepts it as true, knowing the Reverend to be “a man of strict veracity and … his judgment of men was good” (Twain 361). However, why would a man decorated for his glorious achievements in battle, who attained first prize in his testing for the military position (Twain 361) , be a fool? How could he be when his genius was clearly seen on the battle field and in life? Lord Scoresby is far from being a fool, only he is greatly underestimated by (and perhaps makes jealous) his friend the Reverend.
Throughout the story, Twain ‘listens’ quietly as the Reverend rails off recollection after recollection of Scoresby’s shortcomings and lack of intelligence. He explains how he felt sorry for the boy, and in not wanting him to fail miserably at his tests, the Reverend crammed Scoresby’s mind full of knowledge and waited, trying to make the blow of failure fall just a bit less harshly (Twain 361). Much to his chagrin, Scoresby aces his tests with flying colors. Could a simple fool really be able to do such a thing? What if they had a wonderful short term memory? In analyzing this thought, it is clearly seen that young Scoresby must have had some magnificent talent in him that the Reverend was not apt enough to see. Perhaps this was due to a fraternal need to protect the young Scoresby. Perhaps it was due to some amount of jealousy at the young man’s prodigious nature where the Reverend himself failed.
Scoresby rises through the ranks quickly on the battlefield as superior officers get gunned down. The Reverend becomes worried, feeling that their time is at hand when he sees Scoresby make what he (the Reverend) determines to be their final stand (Twain 362). However, it is the very opposite. The Russians take flight at the sudden appearance of Scoresby’s troops and the day is won (Twain 362). Everyone around him proclaims Scoresby a hero, a military enigma of genius. His only doubter is the Reverend who is constantly chalking all of Scoresby’s successes up to the man’s luck while at the same time downing his mental capabilities.
A true fool, no matter how lucky he be, would never accomplish all that Scoresby does in his lifetime. The Reverend however, is constantly following in Scoresby’s shadow, condemning him ridiculously, leading one to believe there is a hidden seed of jealousy beneath the Reverend’s “judgment”. He underestimates his friend throughout the story harshly, saying every goal completed in Scoresby’s life is not of his own doing but because the fate’s smiled that day. There cannot be truth in this; the fates do not smile that often on one person.
The harsh criticism is simply the Reverend underestimating Lord Scoresby out of jealousy and first impressions he had of the younger man so many years ago. The Reverend is the true fool; an intelligent man would not trust a ‘fool’ with his life. Why then does he profess his good friend a foolish man? Jealousy will make one condemn others, but only an idiot would follow a fool into battle.

Thanks and see you tomorrow.

Erin Knisley
English 121.003 1-30-07

Shayne Schmidt

New Critical Approach “Luck”

In this story called “Luck” by Mark Twain the information is unclear to why Scoresby was a fool or just lucky. It seems like the characters really do not assess his whole life but rather just a couple of events that Scoresby has encountered. To me a man needs to be recognized for his whole life’s work. Anyone can be province as a fool or being just lucky when in the right situation at the right time. Could anyone get lucky at the right time on the right day and also look like a fool on the wrong day?
Also in the story you hear the opinions of two men meanwhile the group is honoring him. I feel if you examine someone for a constant time period you will find flaws that will make anyone look like a fool. I also feel that anyone can get lucky at anytime just by their actions. It seems these two may be jealous or envies of Scoresby and very negative towards him.

Rebecca Shenkle
1/30/07

When reading "Luck" by Mark Twain, I thought about what luck really
is. In the story, the narrator talks about Lieutenant-General Scoresby as
having luck because he was able to gain his position without a lot of work
on his part. The narrator also called him a fool because he was born lucky
and therefore didn't have to work much to get to where he was in life.
I believe luck is an issue that deals with morals and values. Some
people don't believe there is such a thing as pure luck because it
interferes with their beliefs. The definition of luck according to The New
American Webster Handy College Dictionary, is a trend of chance events or
good fortune. Some people can argue that there is no such thing as a
"chance event" or good fortune and that those things are gifts from God,
not just something that happened because you are lucky.
One can analyze the story "Luck" keeping those thoughts in mind.
Perhaps Lieutenant-General Scoresby wasn't just lucky, but that he was
given a gift from God to gain his position in authority. It's all a matter
of opinion, and of morals and values.

Mr. Hobbs,

In “Luck”, by Mark Twain, the narrator is attending a celebratory banquet in honor of the heroic Lt. General Lord Arthur Scoresby Y.C., K.C.B., etc., etc. whose actions during the Crimean War (1853-1856) helped stem the tide of battle and rout a reserve of enemy forces. Mr. Twain mentions that Scoresby is a fictional name given as an alias for the very real subject of the story. The most logical reason for this would be to protect the subject from unneeded embarrassment; for if the truth was told, Scoresby would face an onslaught of negative correspondence, press, and feelings. While Mr. Twain vouches for the story’s truthfulness, he might have used the changing of the subject’s name as a ruse to get more readers to believe the story as non-fiction. Conversely, it may be that Mr. Twain took the actions of one James Brudnell, the 7th Earl of Cardigan and his “Charge of the Light Brigade” and fashioned a nice yarn from it.

While reading a breakdown of “Luck” online I found a reference to a poem titled: “The Charge of the Light Brigade” by Lord Alfred Tennyson. In the poem Tennyson describes the efforts of a Light Cavalry Brigade (made up of 5 or so regiments), led by James Brudenell, to attack and capture a massing of Russian artillery at the end of a valley. From what I was able to gather, the orders that were issued to Brudenell stated that he was to attack a Russian position on the left side of the valley but he instead lead his men to the opposite end of the valley into an even larger enemy force. The cavalry men were able to turn the Russians back but suffered tremendous losses.

The events seem to be similar to those the Reverend describes to Mr. Twain about how Scoresby, instead of retreating and supporting the right flank charges and attacks to the left, surprising and routing a Russian reserve force. However, at this time I have not been able to find any evidence in the history of the 7th Earl of Cardigan suggesting that he was a “blunderer” or “absolute fool”. In conclusion, Mr. Twain’s retelling of the Reverend’s tale seems to follow the actions of Earl Cardigan, but without more forthcoming evidence I can’t be sure it’s fiction or non. I can say that it was an entertaining read.

Best Regards,

Justin Bleggi

Mark Twain’s story, “Luck,” illustrates many ideas of moral meaning throughout it, and through the moral/intellectual approach of analyzing the story these ideas can be seen. The story begins at a banquet in honor of a man named Lord Arthur Scoresby. The narrator, Mark Twain, explains his gratitude and respect in the opening paragraph, as Scoresby is illustrated in all his valor. Unbeknownst to Twain at the time, this feeling of envy quickly turns into a feeling of pity for the “foolish” Scoresby as he learns the truth about the great war hero. An old and wise clergyman and a former military instructor, whom the narrator had known for quite some time recalls Scoresby’s training experience as well as a first-hand account of what really happened on that fateful day during the Crimean War. From the accounts told by the clergyman, it seems as though Scoresby is indeed not the great warrior that everybody admired so. A major idea of this story, and one that should be highlighted, is the contrast between the reputation and reality of Scoresby’s apparently illegitimate fame and success.
The reputation of Lord Arthur Scoresby is noted in many ways as being large and strong. His admirers, which seemed to be a great deal of people, think of him to be a truthful, honorable battle hero that can only be seen and recognized as a successful leader. First, he was appointed Lieutenant-General of the English army at a ripe early age, a rank that most who fill it fight all their lives to do so. He then led his soldiers into battle against the Russians during the Crimean War, and arose victorious. Because of this great defeat for the English army, instant fame and fortune came to the newly-appointed high-ranking officer. Everybody from England knew his name, as Scoresby’s reputation sky-rocketed.
However, as it turns out, the reality of Lord Arthur Scoresby’s rise to fame had little to do with what his admirers knew and loved about him. In fact, he was known by his former military instructor to be a complete fool, having great deals of trouble completing tasks and even correctly speaking the English language. When the miraculous instance came about that Scorseby was to lead troops, including his instructor from Woolwich Academy, the clergyman was absolutely speechless. Knowing of Scorseby’s sheer lack of knowledge in just about every aspect life, the instructor told of the “great hero’s” climbing the ranks due to the deaths of the ranking officers above him. When in battle, the clergyman recalled clearly noticing the plethora of blunders made by Scorseby. He also recalled of Scorseby’s attempt to retreat, and in trying, brought his remaining marching fleet face to face with the entire Russian army. Thinking they were going toe to toe with the entire English army, the Russians turned around and retreated. From the information recollected by the clergyman, it is clear that Scoresby climbed to the top of the English military through true luck, and it seems as though none of his worshippers knew anything of this. The reputation of Scorseby compared to the reality of Scoresby are both on completely different ends of the spectrum.

Mr. Hobbs,

Today for class, we read “Luck”, by Mark Twain. I am using the Moral/Intellectual approach to critique this.

In the story entitled “Luck”, Mark Twain and a clergyman were at a banquet for a man named Lieutenant-General Lord Arthur Scoresby. The clergyman was an old acquaintance of Mark Twain. They started talking, and the clergyman reveals to Twain that he thinks Scoresby is an absolute fool.

This work conveys a message to the reader because Scoresby was not a smart man whatsoever. It was just by luck that he got to the place he is now. Not everyone survives on luck. So I think Mark Twain wrote this to show the readers that they need to work hard to get what they want out of life, because not many people can just survive merely on luck.

Thank you,

Amber Dunmire

Is presenting an unworthy candidate with a chance towards greatness a morally-wrong thing to do? According to “Luck” A story written by Mark Twain it is. In the story the setting is at an awards ceremony honoring Lieutenant-General Lord Arthur Scorresby, an apparent military stand out in the English Army.
The author meets a man with a different story “Privately- has an absolute fool.”(p242) says the clergyman. The story unfolds on to how this tool of god, had given Scoresby the ability to begin his military career through extra guidance, and how on that fateful day on the Crimean battle front was a lucky mistake.
Although nothing went wrong that day we find the Reverend still after all these years lamenting on the thought of what if the mistake did go wrong; would it have been his fault by sliding Scoresby the unworthy candidate through military school.
Though critics generally bash the moral or intellectual approach of analyzing text, this story was incredibly well written. The subject Scoresby did not sacrifice many lives on that day of battle, but rather winning the day that propelled him through to an incredible military career. Through all of this we see a man still wondering about the negative what-if of the story. What if the regiment went down, and the Russian army succeeded?
The moral point of this story is shadowed by success it makes you think more into it, and still gives you the option of deciding if what the clergyman did was the morally wrong thing to do or not. This story is well written.

I was in groups 1&2. My question was:
Why does the speaker withhold the name of the subject? What would happen if he hadn’t? Does that make this story fiction? Do we have reason to believe the story?

I think the reason he withheld the name of the subject was because he did not want to embarrass the person because if we knew who the person was and he was someone important or just someone well-known we might be quick to judge him. It could be that the person just did not want to be known in the story. It could be just to make the story better so that it adds some mystery to it. I don’t think this makes the story fiction.
I think there are many reasons to believe that this story is true. He withheld the name which could have been to protect the person. Mark Twain talks about events that really did happen in the time period. There is some evidence to prove that it could be real and probably is but people could also argue that Mark Twain just used history as a background to his story.

Dear Mr. Hobbs,

It is my belief that Mark Twain’s short story, Luck, could easily represent the school system (especially with the way it is set up today). Teachers, like the reverend, do not want their students to fail. And because there is far more emphasis on passing test scores than there is on practical applications of knowledge, a passing test score is translated into the success of the student. Lieutenant-General Lord Arthur Scoresby is a product of this failed belief. By the fact that he was capable of memorizing the information for his tests, Scoresby proves that he could be capable of at least understanding the information on a basic level. However, the system he was in set him up for “success” after “success” once he was such an “accomplished” student (with such high test scores, and what not) it seemed that he could do no wrong.
Scoresby is an embodiment of illiterate high school graduates everywhere. The system has failed them, and although the teachers meant well, an accurate failing mark would be far more useful that a false passing grade. At least a student with an “F” can admit that they have a problem. A student like Scoresby on the other hand, is tricked into believing that they are all that they can be, and they choose not to work harder in order to better themselves.

Sincerely, Erika Knox

Professor Hobbs,
Moral/Intellectual Response

The story Luck, as I see it, conveys the message that sometimes trying to do the nice thing for someone can have disastrous consequences. In this story the clergyman helped Scoresby in his younger years while he was at the military academy because he was a good man and the clergyman didn’t want to see him fall so hard on his tests. I’m sure a lot of people would’ve done the same thing because it’s hard not to feel bad for a nice person when you know they’re setting themselves up for failure.. So because of his good nature the clergyman helped him study, thinking he would still fail, but miraculously he passed with flying colors. One would think this is all fine and dandy but when these tests are for becoming military officers, a lot can go wrong by having an idiot pass.
Once becoming an officer Scoresby made mistake after mistake. Fortunately all of his mistakes turned out to be good decisions. The message I get from this is that sometimes you should not help people out, because if they can’t do it for themselves they have no business being there. Even though in this story Scoresby turned out to be a very, VERY lucky man, that won’t always be the case. The consequences of trying to help Scoresby do better on his tests could have been much worse, not only did the clergyman’s help put Scoresby in danger, he also endangered the lives of nearly everyone serving under Scoresby. Sometimes you just have to let people do things on their own and just be there to help them when their feelings are hurt.

Sincerely,
Jeff Hoover

Andy Hood
Moral/Intellectual Approach

The moral or intellectual approach is concerned with finding the hidden message within the content of the story. I am quite familiar with this approach because this is how I have always subconsciously interpreted literature. Now I simply know the proper term for this approach. I enjoy reading stories that have a hidden lesson which can direct my mind in a few different directions.
The story we were instructed to read was entitled “Luck” by Mark Twain. This is a story of a young man who begins in military school by receiving a “little” help from the Reverend. The reverend feels the young man is so unprepared that he would fail miserably. Feeling sorry for the man, the Reverend decides to help him just enough that he would fail so miserably. However, the young man succeeds and ends up receiving great honors. Now the young man will be faced with many challenges in the real world that the Reverend feels he will not be ready for so the Reverend continues to follow the young man. He finds the young man succeeds throughout his life by what seems to be “dumb luck”. A possible lesson taken from this serious of events in the story is that all it takes is just a little extra help or work to succeed. The story inspired me and showed me that just a little more work on my part will produce results. On the other hand, a little extra help from me may help someone else I know succeed.
Now if you were to take a lesson from the Reverend, you might find your mind wandering in different directions. The entire story, the Reverend feels bad for helping this young man who wasn’t prepared because he is afraid he may have endangered others in doing so. He argues with himself the whole story trying to decide whether he was morally wrong or not.
The title of this story may give a lesson similar to the one I have taken from it. I decided to take the story as a kick in the butt to put in a little extra rather than just getting by and maybe it will produce results. The title implies that all it takes is a little extra luck on your side to get where you want to go.

Coming from the time period in which Mark Twain lived his life, it does not surprise me that Twain had written about a famous military general that he had heard rumors about. During the 1800s and early 1900s there was a fair share of wars and violence happening in the world at this time. Military leaders were probably well known in society at this time. Mark Twain had survived the Spanish-American War and the Civil War and these events will be incorporated into Twain’s future works of literature.

Kyle Lahue

When the Crimean War broke out in the short reading “Luck” the speaker of the story (clergyman) seemed very unhappy and upset. The reason for that is because he saw that Scoresby was making nothing but mistakes on the battlefield. For the most part everyone else around Scoresby thought he was a genius because the things he wasn’t supposed to do always ended up being the right thing. The speaker of the story was so disgusted with all the so called blunders that Scoresby was making. When the colonel went down in the battle the clergyman finally realized that Scoresby was next in command which could further down the road prove to be fatal. It made the speaker so sick that Scoresby had such good luck throughout his lifetime so far

Students,

For the record, today's SAs were Nicole N. & Kendra S. Thanks folks, you did a great job! You are exempt from the homework assignment.

Here are the details of your homework assignment: Choose one of the options listed below, follow the instructions and post your answer on the English-blog.

NOTE: You DON’T have to type out the question first. Instead, work it into your answer.
ALSO: You DON’T have to e-mail me that you did it (I’ll already know!).

By the way, look at Dudley D.’s responses on the past two assignments. This is how the answers should look. Make them look like a well-thought out letter to me.

Your answer should be original and have at least two or three paragraphs. Those who aren’t really answering the questions (this means evidence of “engaging” with the text) aren’t getting credit for their response. Don’t forget that Turnitin.com alerts me to plagiarism, so don’t even try!

Also, please DON’T waste your time (and mine) just putting up some junk! Simply posting, “sorry I don’t know this stuff” will not get you credit. This course is all about thinking and if you don’t take the time to brainstorm and/or ponder the subject matter, you probably won’t come up with anything.

Today we practiced our abilities to do a Close Reading. Your readings in Appendix B (Roberts 181-185.5) covered three possible theoretical approaches to reading, studying, understanding, writing about or otherwise interpreting literature. These were the:

(1) Moral/Intellectual approach,
(2) The Topical/Historical approach, and
(3) the New Critical/Formalist approach.

Edgar Roberts graciously gives you examples of how to do each one based on Hawthorne’s “Young Goodman Brown.”

Instructions: Choose ONE of these approaches and apply it in a similar fashion to Mark Twain's “Luck.” Remember to credit any outside source you use to support your argument (for example, if you use a date for some event, tell me from where . . . if you reference something from the story, put the page number in parentheses). Submit this first to Turnitin.com and second to the English-blog (here).

Option 1: Do a Moral/Intellectual reading/explanation of “Luck” in 2-3 paragraphs

Option 2: Do a Topical/Historical reading/explanation of “Luck” in 2-3 paragraphs

Option 3: Do a New Critical/Formalist reading/explanation of “Luck” in 2-3 paragraphs

-------------

Don’t forget your readings for Wednesday:

WAL 185.5 – 189.5 &

WD Part 1, Ch. 1-14

Remember that our in-class Watership Down chapter discussions begin on Wednesday. Tatiana, Deidra, Erin K., Jeff, Justin, Melisa, Shayne, Lorin, Jennifer N., Steph, Amber, Joe, Erin R. and Lyndsay are scheduled to present their chapters. See the .pdf file I already e-mailed you if you’ve forgotten your assigned/chosen chapter.

--------------------------------------------

*NOTE* The deadline for this assignment has now passed. Comments are no longer being accepted for this exercise

~Lee