The Kentucky Cycle Lacks Character

    I think it’s a general consensus throughout the classroom that Robert Schenkkan, author of The Kentucky Cycle, is a nincompoop. He is not Appalachian, had only spent a handful of days in Appalachia as part of a tour, and yet he took it upon himself to write this masterpiece about Appalachia and its people. I’m sure you’ll hear about how horribly he misrepresented mountain people from my classmates, so I’ll just discuss his shortcomings from a literary point of view.

     As an unbiased reader, I rather enjoyed The Kentucky Cycle. The plot was interesting—murder, intrigue, and greed always are. It kept me engaged, and I found myself clambering through the pages faster and faster, trying to get to the end. Part of what had me flipping pages was the desire to know how the events that just occurred would affect the next generation. Choosing to follow a single family through multiple generations and years was a good approach to the play, especially considering its major themes. So kudos to Schenkkan.

     He loses points, however, for his characters. They are certainly fascinating entities, that cannot be denied, but they are too one-dimensional. Schenkkan picked the worst traits and focused solely on those. This is understandable in the face of the prevailing theme, but still not acceptable. He presented stereotypes—stock characters. The hillbilly, the old fashioned coal miner, the abusive husband, the cheating husband, the greedy mountain man…the list just keeps going. In a well told story all characters should have many facets, but not even Schenkkan’s protagonists had that extra something that made them seem human. On the other hand, with the way the characters were presented, I’m not even completely sure there were any protagonists. But I digress. The point is Schenkkan wrote a play about stock characters. Anyone in theater will tell you that is a huge no-no. The characters should be complex individuals. They should seem so real that the audience expects to walk out of the theater and actually encounter the character in real life. A play about one-dimensional characters will always fall flat, just short of the best it can be.

-J

The Revenge Cycle

In my opinion The Kentucky Cycle should have been named The Revenge Cycle, hence the title above.  I say this because throughout the book there is this reoccurring theme of revenge.  Michael Rowen kills Earl Todd over the guns Todd sold to the Indians they later used it attack Zion. That’s just one of many instances of revenge in the Kentucky Cycle.  Now I’m tasked with tying revenge to the modern world. Is there revenge in the modern world? Oh yes, it’s everywhere! A few years ago there was a story of a man killing a whole family just because someone in that family ran over the man’s dog. In the killers eyes it was an eye for an eye. It was a way for him to cope with his dog’s death. I could sit here and give examples of revenge in today’s society, but I’m going to talk about why it happens. Revenge is a primitive, destructive, and violent response to anger, injury, or humiliation. It is a misguided attempt to transform shame into pride. Many governments, religions, traditions, and cultures provide guidance on when revenge may and may not be sought. Unfortunately this guidance is often unsatisfactory because it can lead to escalated violence.  So revenge isn’t anything to play around with. It has got many people the death penalty or a life time in jail. Revenge has no place in the world today. The passion for revenge is strong and sometimes almost overwhelming. But our intuitive logic about revenge is often twisted which makes it extremely dangerous. In many cases it could have avoided, in the Kentucky Cycle and in the real world. But in the Kentucky cycle it’s a stereo type in play. It depicts Appalachian people as violent people. But were not at all, if people would take the time to see us they would realize were just like them. We all know we can’t fix ignorance.

-L

I’ve always been told that I was an optimist. I agree, I’ve always tried to believe that there was always a solution, that there’s always hope… even if it takes a little longer than usual for hope to get there. And because I’m a diehard optimist, it will definitely seem like I’m biased when I mention that The Kentucky Cycle by Robert Schenkkan made life in Appalachia, life in Kentucky, way more awful and violent then it actually probably was.

Now don’t get me wrong; there was serious bloodshed in the mountains. Ever since the first settlers battled with the Native Americans, there was a history of violence and retaliation in Appalachia among locals, world powers, and the people who travel through it. There were infamous family feuds that made headlines, internal battles that set towns ablaze, and labor problems that turned into revolutions. There was definitely violence, but it was seemingly necessary violence. Schenkkan portrays violence as a natural aspect of a day-in-the-life, but he never experienced a day-in-the-life. What does he know aside from the mild slice of Kentucky that he actually saw and a few shows off of the History Channel?

Nottthhinngg!

Seriously.

All the research in the world doesn’t come close to actually sitting down into what you’re studying. While The Kentucky Cycle was perfect for entertainment purposes, unfortunately less informed people would be lead to wonder, “Oh my God, they still do that there?? D:” and form a few unbecoming stereotypes that have undoubtedly stuck with us since the time of its publishing.

-Re



           Throughout taking Appalachian Literature, I’ve learned reoccurring themes that are tied with the Appalachian Mountains and the people born and raised in Appalachia. The themes I’ve caught onto is revenge and poverty. Both the insider perspective, the author of Storming Heaven, had similar themes as the outsider of Appalachia, Robert Schekkan, the author of The Kentucky Cycle. Appalachians take offense to the themes and plots in the play and the book, but if it wasn’t somewhat accurate, why would both an author from Appalachia and an author that isn’t write about similar themes?

           Our area is known to be poor because we make ourselves out to be and outsiders believe it. Our pregnancy rate in West Virginia is so high which causes a lot of young moms to resort to welfare. Another financial issue is how many in the southern part of West Virginia rely on coal mining which in modern day; many mines have been closing down leaving those without much education jobless. In the past though, coal mining was expected as the man’s job and wages were low causing poverty. Poverty is everywhere but since we don’t hide the fact such as the southern part of West Virginia having a high poverty rate, outsiders of our region will attack on that idea.

            Revenge seems to be the main theme in most Appalachia books. Whether the author is from the area or not, they know to cover the theme of revenge. I think everyone knows to tie revenge with Appalachia because of the Hatfields and McCoys. Whenever someone thinks of Appalachia, one instant relation may be their story. Although revenge is seen in all parts of the world, it’s easier to attack Appalachia because we have a story like Hatfields and McCoys representing us to some people.

          I feel as if the themes in all the Appalachia books are self imposed. Outsiders and natives writing about Appalachia have to be inspired from something. A lot of the fictional books do get too far-fetched for what our area is actually like. Even though they do too get too far-fetched, I still believe there is a part that is said to be true or loosely tied and the writers just stem their idea off of that.

-M

Often, the people of Appalachia, especially West Virginia and Kentucky, are subject of stereotypes: stereotypes that are hurtful and offensive. But, if we stop and ask ourselves where these stereotypes came from, we might be surprised.

No stereotype springs from thin air. They must be based in some form of general truth. People today claim that West Virginians don’t wear shoes because their ancestors could not afford many shoes and tended to go barefoot and save them for Sunday meetings. People say we all make moonshine because moonshining was a common practice during depressions and the Prohibition as a way to support oneself and one’s family.

The one stereotype I don’t understand is inbreeding. It is not, and has not ever been, common here. Since the dawn of marriage as an institution, there has been a taboo against marrying members of one’s own family. Perhaps, since in the early years there were few families in the mountains, it comes from the marriage of cousins. If that is the case, however, why don’t people mock the aristocracy of the Old World instead, where the practice of marrying cousins, to “keep all that lovely money in the family,” was so common it is almost passé?

But I digress.

When Robert Schenkkan uses common stereotypes in The Kentucky Cycle, he does not create them. The stereotypes in his play existed already in society, and for good reason. The bloodthirsty Rowen family sprang from the average outsider’s idea of how the fiercely independent mountain people lived and behaved towards each other and strangers. These ideas aren’t wrong so much as…over-concentrated. A truth, that may have only been true sometimes, was boiled down into a generalization, which was further reduced to an extract or essence of behavior and mindset.

So, we could all benefit from a good lesson in letting it go. Schenkkan didn’t use stereotypes to make the people of Appalachia angry at him. He did it to sensationalize the play, to sell more seats, to make more money. Society doesn’t used stereotypes malignantly, just misguidedly. Since that’s not going to change any time soon, the only thing left to do is grin and bear it.

-M

Passion in Appalachian : an Observation of the Hatfield and McCoy Story and The Kentucky Cycle

Passion and Obsession. These are two things that can drive anyone to do anything. To be passionate or obsessed, depending on what connotation is appropriate for the situation, means that the person will not stop until their cause has been fulfilled. In many circumstances, passion (and sometimes even obsession) is great. Passionate people help save lives and jobs. There are a couple of cases, sadly, from Appalachian history that represent just the opposite.

An example of this is the feud between the Hatfields and the McCoys. What started out as a disagreement over land turned into an all-out war leading to many deaths on both sides. Both ‘Devil’ Anse Hatfield and Randall McCoy first had a passion for the land they each thought rightfully belonged to them. Later on this turned into an obsession with defeating each other that instead thoroughly defeated themselves and their families. The popularity of their feud grew to the point where it is now in history books, been transformed into a miniseries, and a popular topic of conversation in a 21^st century classroom.

When Robert Schenkkan first wrote the play The Kentucky Cycle, he was probably a bit passionate about exposing the Kentucky he very briefly saw to the rest of the world. What he may not have expected was the intensity of the uproar from the people of Kentucky and Appalachia in general. Schenkkan’s characters sure were passionate (obsessed) with many things that enhanced some already prominent stereotypes about the region. Michael Rowen killed and betrayed several people simply for land. He and the generations of his family were so obsessed and materialistic with their land that they were determined to eliminate (murder) any threat to it. The play ends with the family in pieces and the land being sold. Shortly after being released, many Appalachains became passionate about rejecting it.

Both stories about obsession started out with good intentions that later led to the destruction of many. What the Hatfields and McCoys as well as the characters in Schenkkan’s play failed to realize was that while being passionate about something important  can be good, it is important to stick with one’s own morals. It can be easily argued that Rowen did not have morals. Perhaps the Hatfields and McCoys just lost track of theirs. Appalachains are very passionate about what they care about: people, history, and many other great things. I find it unfortunate that the story of the feud as well as the play represent this negatively.

-R

Outsiders

                The Kentucky Cycle by Robert Schenkkan is the perfect example of Hollywood stereotyping Appalachia. They place the illiterate, anger prone male brute into the rural wilderness of Kentucky to “accurately” portray how all Appalachian people act. Natives to the region tend to react negatively to this stereotype, but in truth, this isn’t the first time Hollywood has glamorized the American “hillbilly”, but it was only start of a new millennium of Appalachian based films.

Movies based around the Civil War to about 1950 portray Appalachians to be the rugged, mountain men who have no sympathy for outsiders. For example, the television miniseries Hatfield’s and McCoy’s shows how ruthless and revenge-filled the mountain people are. The Kentucky Cycle shows this same view and the feuding that goes along with it. However, both of these works make the feuding and warfare between families seen as never-ending with no hope for a truce.

                Another large issue surrounding The Kentucky Cycle and Hatfield’s and McCoy’s is the fight for land. Michael Rowen begins the play by stealing land from the Cherokee tribe, a common act for settlers to do. The Hatfield’s and McCoy’s fought over timber rights on a mountain and who they actually belonged to. The Rowen’s wanted land to show their wealth and superiority over the Indians and to have a piece of land to give to heirs. The Hatfield’s and McCoy’s, however, wanted land for economic gain.

                In truth, feuding was very uncommon in the Appalachian region and rarely escalated to the legendary height of the Hatfield and McCoy feud. The feuding and fighting in The Kentucky Cycle amounts to nothing but worthless bloodshed over land and sanity. Movies and television try their hardest to make the area of Appalachia seem as ruthless as possible, even though it was a fairly civil area. For a change, why doesn’t Hollywood create a film about the actual Appalachia?

-C

Appalachian Education

To me, the words “high school” are a euphemism for “teenage day care facility”. Parents drop their tired and exhausted teenagers off at campus each morning before the crack of dawn and expect them to learn until 2:30 or 3 in the afternoon. In fact, most high school students would much rather sleep in the extra hour or two and come to school around 8:30 or 9 am, when there is light outside, making it easier to stay awake and pay attention in class. With a block schedule, students have to sit through 4 hour and a half classes each day, causing them to grow tired and restless especially in the morning.

            Sadly, there is plenty of teacher and administrative bias in the public school system. Teachers may teach their kids or their kids’ friends and give them leeway towards homework but not other kids in the class who are “unruly” or “not likable”. Another big issue in public schools is dress code, with some kids being able to get away with wearing extremely revealing clothes to school whereas some kids are called out for a shirt that looks fairly conservative compared to other scantily clad students. This bias is completely unfair and not particular to West Virginia. It happens all over the country and is not just an Appalachian education stereotype.

            Coming from an honors and AP level student, I have an extremely tough time focusing in a classroom setting. It’s not that I don’t understand the material (which I do); I just can’t sit through an hour and a half monotone lecture every day. Most high schools in West Virginia are structured just like every other school in the country: students arrive around 7 or 8 am, sit through hours of classes, and then leave at either 2:30 or 3 pm. The classes are set up for students who can learn by sitting in a classroom and listen to a teacher for hours on end. They are also set up to prepare kids for college, even though most classes do not prepare you for the real world.

            In almost every education system there is some sort of standardized test that is designed to measure student’s abilities. In West Virginia there is WESTEST, a four part test that is used to test student’s abilities in the core classes. The one flaw with this standardized test is that it tests kids on the material their grade level should be learning. However, with the amount of kid’s taking advanced placement classes, they most likely learned the material years before and might not remember it as well as a student who took the class that year. Therefore, the honors or AP student will not always do well on the standardized test and be forced to take a remedial course that they shouldn’t be in. The standardized tests need to be based on individual student and the courses they are taking, not on the core standards for that grade level.

            One of the things I would change about Appalachian school system is create more magnet schools dedicated to each child’s personal interests and hobbies and not about what the so called “average student needs.” By having magnet schools, students interested in the arts could have their own school; students interested in the sciences could go to another school, etc. Small classroom sizes are a must as well. Consolidating two or three smaller schools into a larger school is not the answer because students do not get the one on one comfort with their teachers like they did in the smaller school. Smaller schools can cater to a child’s individual needs, whereas the larger schools will lump certain groups of students together like cattle and send them on a fast paced journey to either struggle or survive.

            In the long run, Appalachian schools will lag behind the rest of the country if they continue to run on a very administrative biased school system, standardized tests, and consolidated schools. The schools need to be more catered to individual students who want to learn at their own pace instead of forcing kids to struggle in a large classroom setting where they can’t learn and will not succeed later in life.

                                                                                                                      -C

The Art of Invisibility

     Across the country, and in every school, there are those individuals that believe their time is best served outside the classroom. Just as in nature, the prey must hide from the predator. In my school, the predator is Officer Ball and the prey is the heavily camouflaged adolescents commonly known as, “rednecks”. These kids don’t like classrooms and classrooms don’t like cigarette smoke or tobacco juice. Now, although they may be evasive, they are also lazy. Their answer to avoiding our Officer is full camo. Cloaked in Mossy Oak and Realtree, these individuals are some of the best. They have gone through rigorous training programs to master their ability, sitting up in a tree for hours on end, just waiting for the perfect moment to take a shot. From the many triggers pulled, their index fingers have become used to moving quickly; the opportunity for the perfect hit is sporadic and somewhat random. They are impervious to cold weather, and just like a congregation of emperor penguins, they huddle in groups to stay warm; aided only by the fire in between their fingers.

     The art of invisibility is a skill that many don’t care on obtaining, for it represents the, “I’m better than everyone else,” attitude. From a young age children are taught to respect school, and use is to achieve their goals. These people that try so hard to turn invisible, have only achieved this because everyone else has stopped caring; it is no longer a teacher’s responsibility to track them down. They believe they are masters at what they do, associating their success to the massive amount of foliage located in the hallways. They never ask themselves if it is truly the camouflage that allows them to hide, or is it the camo itself, representing that they are a waste of time.  

  

                                                                                                                                                            

-K