“Melchizedek’s Three Rings” and “Behind the Official Story”: Articles Comparison

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

On the surface, “Melchizedek’s Three Rings” by Carole McDonnell and “Behind the Official Story” by James C. Scott seem to be absolutely different. However, a more detailed analysis of these articles shows that they have much in common. They both discuss different aspects of power and social subordination as having relation to power. In addition, they both mention the minority groups and social difficulties they face. “Melchizedek’s Three Rings” and “Behind the Official Story” express similar points of view regarding the correlation between power and fear, pay attention to the issue of the public transcript, and express the subject of minority groups (African-Americans) and their isolation from the White community.

To begin with, one of the themes both the authors bring up is the correlation between power and fear. Those who possess certain power are afraid to express it because society can react inadequately to this expression. Thus, for instance, McDonnell in “Melchizedek’s Three Rings” gives several examples of people who tried to conceal the truth and their power correspondingly in order to save themselves from misunderstanding.

One of such people was Melchizedek who was asked by Saladin which of three main religions, Judaism, Christianity, or Islam was the only authentic one (McDonnell, 2006, p. 189). Melchizedek was in a dangerous situation, because, on the one hand, he knew that Jews and Christians peacefully coexisted in Saladin’s kingdom and, on the other hand, he could not “deny his own religion [or] praise another.” (McDonnell, 2006, p. 189)

Melchizedek evaded a direct answer to the question and his “using discretion to avoid a trap” (McDonnell, 2006, p. 190) saved him his life. Another example is the film Village, the characters of which possessed the ability “to choose words wisely” (McDonnell, 2006, p. 192) and were powerful due to their discretion. Scott, in his turn, mentions George Elliot when expressing his ideas on the same subject.

Elliot claimed that “no action [is] possible without little acting,” (Scott, 1992, p. 522) which means that the power may be exercised through pretending and only when a person does not directly show his/her powers, he/she can easily subdue the others. Scott also tells a story about a French tenant farmer, Old Tiennon, who has always concealed his intelligence: “I had endeavored so to conduct myself as not to become obnoxious to the white inhabitants, knowing as I did their power, and their hostility to the colored people.” (Scott, 1992, p. 522) Therefore, people may be afraid to show their power and their superiority over others and this is why they try to conceal them.

Another theme raised in both the articles under consideration is the public transcript. Scott pays more attention to this theme, whereas McDonnell only slightly touches upon the cases where public transcript takes place. For instance, Scott, defining public transcript as a systematic form of social subordination, gives several examples of such subordination. These include subordination of “the worker to the boss, the tenant or sharecropper to the landlord … the slave to the master … a member of a subject race to one of the dominant race.” (Scott, 1992, p. 522)

These relations often lead to numerous conflicts, because the one who is dominant is constantly trying to show his/her powers over the subordinated; moreover, the subordinates know about their lack of power and often have to hide their emotions. One more example is Old Tiennon who was already mentioned before. Scott gives excerpts from his narratives to illustrate the unpleasant aspects of subordination. Old Tiennon, a black slave, had to be amiable to a landlord who he felt contempt for.

However, he could not show his emotions due to his social subordination. One more example given by Scott is Orwell’s essay “Shooting the Elephant” where the protagonist had to shoot the elephant and was hesitant. He had to do what the “natives” expected of him (Scott, 1992, p. 529). He was afraid that the crowd would laugh at him, and this can be regarded as a form of social subordination, because he was not free to himself in this situation. (Scott, 1992, 530)

The examples given by McDonnell on the same subject are the relations between Saladin and Melchizedek, a king and a “wealthy but miserly Jew” (McDonnell, 2006, p.189), as well as the relations between the black writer and the white reader in which the former should not “come out,” because “in a multicultural, democratic word, there will always be those who disagree with [him/her].” (McDonnell, 2006, p.194) Thus, both the authors discuss the issue of public transcripts and provide examples to support this theme.

Finally, both the authors raise the theme of minority groups (mainly African-Americans) and their isolation. Though this theme is not central to any of the articles, it can still be felt that the authors wanted to deliver it to the readers. This is true especially about McDonnell who, as it was mentioned in the article not once, is a black writer. This is why one of the examples is herself, who belongs to a minority group and who pictures the isolation of black people from the white ones.

This can be seen at the beginning of the article where McDonnell tells about her inability to air her views to her black colleagues because there were certain points about white people on which all the members of the literary group agreed and it was easier for her to “keep [the] mouth shut and accept their interpretation of the books.” (McDonnel, 2006, p. 186) To support this idea, McDonnell once more reminds us about The Village where people also “had created a world of like-mindedness.” (McDonnel, 2006, p. 189)

By this, she creates an allusion of their literary group to people from the film The Village. Scott, in his turn, names the minority groups “the dissembling of the weak in the face of power,” (Scott, 1992, p. 521) though he does this indirectly. Scott introduces Mary Chestnut as an “observant member of the dominant group” (Scott, 1992, p.523); she displayed negative attitudes towards black people who, when they heard the news from the front during the civil war, remained silent.

Mary believed that this silence meant that people were hiding something: “They go about in their black masks, not a ripple of emotion showing…” (Scot, 1992, p.523) Thus, McDonnell and Scott discuss in their works the minority groups and their isolation from the white society.

In conclusion, the articles under consideration discuss several common themes. Firstly, both the articles state that possessing certain power leads to some people’s fear to display this power, like in the case with Old Tiennon and Melchizedek whose superiority over the others could bring them troubles. Secondly, the articles abound with examples of the public transcript or social dominance of one person over the other. Lastly, the articles talk about the separation of black people from white society.

Therefore, a number of parallels can be drawn between McDonnell’s “Melchizedek’s Three Rings” and Scott’s “Behind the Official Story,” which means that the authors are preoccupied with almost the same social and cultural issues.

Reference List

McConnell, C. (2006). Melchizedek’s Three Rings. Nobody Passes: Rejecting the Rules of Gender and Conformity. Seal Press.

Scott, J. C. (1992). Behind the Official Story. Domination and the Art Resistance: Hidden Transcripts. Yale University Press.

Click Here To Order Now!

“Melchizedek’s Three Rings” and “Behind the Official Story”: Articles Comparison

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)