FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W28261632> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W28261632 startingPage "79" @default.
• W28261632 abstract "ZORA NEALE HURSTON'S Conscience of the Court, originally published the Saturday Evening Post March of 1950, is little-known and rarely discussed story. Considering the recent attention Hurston's importance the development of African-American women's writing, it seems unusual discover this neglect of one of her works. One cause for this neglect may be the the last Hurston published during her lifetime, period which her popularity as writer waning. And even Robert Hemenway, Hurston's biographer, suggested the weak. He wrote Hurston, once again financial trouble and working as maid on Rivo Island near Miami, desperate publish story. Hemenway proposed the story's faults probably stemmed from the fact it heavily edited by the Post's staff, and by the knowledge [Hurston] badly needed sell story (327). Although Hemenway shifted the blame for the weaknesses of the the editors of Post, it is still clear he believed the not Hurston's most exemplary piece of writing. Other biographers and critics have expressed their lack of interest by simply ignoring the story. One exception is Lillie P. Howard who mentioned only the circumstances surrounding its publication without commentary on the text itself. These circumstances are certainly noteworthy: Miami Herald reporter discovered Hurston was dusting bookshelves the library while her mistress sat the living room reading the Saturday Evening Post--and discovering written by her `girl' (quoted Hemenway, 325). This disapproving analysis of Hurston's Conscience of the Court is not the only instance of pessimism towards Hurston's writings, for her career is riddled with negative criticism. Her peers blacklisted her and dismissed her on the grounds her personality, charming and amusing as it was, considered an expression of her need to reach wider audience (Hughes, 238), is, white one. Often, her writing given little value. In fact, Wallace Thurman described her as a short writer more noted for her ribald wit and personal effervescence than for any actual literary work (229). Langston Hughes remembered only in her youth she always getting scholarships and things from wealthy white people, some of whom simply paid her just sit around and represent the Negro race for them (238). Most of the negative criticism centers on how her characters are portrayed. For example, after the publication of Mules and Men, Sterling Brown wrote the characters the book should be more bitter; it would be nearer the total truth (quoted Hemenway, 219). Having included one of her stories The New Negro, Alain Locke nonetheless concerned with her representation of rural African Americans: The elder generation of Negro writers expressed itself ... guarded idealization.... Be representative: put the better foot foremost, the underlying mood. But writers like Rudolph Fisher, Zora Hurston ... take their material objectively with detached artistic vision; they have no thought of their racy folk types as typical of anything but themselves or of their being taken or mistaken as racially representative. (50) Likewise, Richard Wright felt the novel Their Eyes Were Watching God counterrevolutionary portraying simple, minstrel-show African-Americans: he complained Hurston's characters existed that safe and narrow orbit which America likes see the Negro live: between laughter and tears (25). Overall, Hurston criticized because she opened up whites too easily, practiced cultural colonialism by collecting folklore, wasn't bitter enough about the African-American condition, and used folklore too obtrusively her fiction. Although not explicitly stated, it would seem cause for the unease with Conscience of the Court most likely stems from Hurston's portrayal of stereotypical characters. …" @default.
• W28261632 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W28261632 creator A5080584354 @default.
• W28261632 date "1999-09-22" @default.
• W28261632 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W28261632 title "Significant Stereotypes in Hurston's Conscience of the Court" @default.
• W28261632 hasPublicationYear "1999" @default.
• W28261632 type Work @default.
• W28261632 sameAs 28261632 @default.
• W28261632 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W28261632 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W28261632 hasAuthorship W28261632A5080584354 @default.
• W28261632 hasConcept C10180917 @default.
• W28261632 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W28261632 hasConcept C138496976 @default.
• W28261632 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W28261632 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W28261632 hasConcept C159390177 @default.
• W28261632 hasConcept C169760540 @default.
• W28261632 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W28261632 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W28261632 hasConcept C2606647 @default.
• W28261632 hasConcept C2778047097 @default.
• W28261632 hasConcept C2781095916 @default.
• W28261632 hasConcept C39432304 @default.
• W28261632 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W28261632 hasConceptScore W28261632C10180917 @default.
• W28261632 hasConceptScore W28261632C124952713 @default.
• W28261632 hasConceptScore W28261632C138496976 @default.
• W28261632 hasConceptScore W28261632C142362112 @default.
• W28261632 hasConceptScore W28261632C15744967 @default.
• W28261632 hasConceptScore W28261632C159390177 @default.
• W28261632 hasConceptScore W28261632C169760540 @default.
• W28261632 hasConceptScore W28261632C17744445 @default.
• W28261632 hasConceptScore W28261632C199539241 @default.
• W28261632 hasConceptScore W28261632C2606647 @default.
• W28261632 hasConceptScore W28261632C2778047097 @default.
• W28261632 hasConceptScore W28261632C2781095916 @default.
• W28261632 hasConceptScore W28261632C39432304 @default.
• W28261632 hasConceptScore W28261632C95457728 @default.
• W28261632 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W28261632 hasLocation W282616321 @default.
• W28261632 hasOpenAccess W28261632 @default.
• W28261632 hasPrimaryLocation W282616321 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W102162868 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W122082231 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W135599177 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W2063544482 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W2073638709 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W2201159571 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W2227133020 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W2318750066 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W2492877439 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W255025528 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W257626609 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W2726922580 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W28160707 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W317440041 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W35690515 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W41398275 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W63455957 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W854408269 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W140714637 @default.
• W28261632 hasRelatedWork W2185538590 @default.
• W28261632 hasVolume "41" @default.
• W28261632 isParatext "false" @default.
• W28261632 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W28261632 magId "28261632" @default.
• W28261632 workType "article" @default.