The wonderment of literature is that readers continually relate recently read information to their surrounding world far after they have closed the pages of a book. This is true of American society, as it expanded and prospered the role of literature was to be the guiding light for those who were ready to embrace the new frontiers. However, literature is not a one sided coin that only opens the readers' eyes to fantastic and innovative ideas. The power of writing also retains a far greater ability. Most do not realize that something as simple as literature can be used as a stepping-stone to bring about Earth-shattering change. Even a brief and concise piece of work possesses the ability to alter the face of society and life forever. Famous twentieth century thinker, Michel Foucault discovered that literature possesses "revolutionary action," in which the only means to produce social revolution is through the "simultaneous agitation of conscious and institutions" (Foucault 228). This concept has been presented in writing throughout human existence, from Thomas Jefferson, Martin Luther King Jr., and Nikki Giovanni. While the situations were different for each writer, the basic principal was included into their work. Jefferson expressed his beliefs in a mandate during the birth of the United States. Years later King demanded social equality in the form of a letter from a jail cell, and Giovanni fought the injustice of war through poetic verses. These literary geniuses were able to morph society into their desired dreams. The power of social change in literature rests in its ability to awaken hibernating emotions in one's soul and rupture the foundations of unjust institutions. 

In order to view literature's social power it is essential to begin by describing the faults of society and how to rectify those faults. Michel Foucault's detailed illustration of the current repressive society in Revolutionary Action: "Until Now" provides an example of when change should take place and how. Foucault believed that society's tyrannical state emerged through the distribution of knowledge. Those who are in power are the ones who decided what is to be learned and what is to fall to the wayside, thus only a select few predetermine all that is to remain important for an entire culture. Therefore, one of the most obvious culprits of repression resides in the schools. It is believed that a student's education stems from "biased information" deeply rooted in the schools. For example, during the typical studies in a history course students are taught certain aspects of the past, which conforms to the fixed information supplied by those in charge, and to disregard anything that contradicts or subverts the said information. The information that they receive forms the basis of their knowledge and is used to create standards for the rest of their lives. However, who is to say what is to be taught and disregard during the course of their studies? The powerful and elite in a society are the ones in control of the students' predetermined education. Furthermore, they advance their stranglehold on the system by planning out their education in a particular fashion. They condition students by first teaching past history while they are young and slowly working their way to contemporary events. Due to this fashion, Foucault says the system is declaring, "if you wish to understand and perceive events in the present, you can only do so through the past, through an understanding – carefully derived from the past – which was specifically developed to clarify the present" (Foucault 220). Through this preparation, students become numb to the present situations and are unable to act against them. Even when a minority forms to take action against a wrong in society, success is not guaranteed. Foucault discusses in detail the revolution against the French universities in May 1968. While some deemed the revolution as a success, Foucault and his colleagues hardly believed that a rift was created in the system. If anything had happened to the system it was only a little surface scratch, nothing that would be considered damaging to the institution. It becomes necessary to realize that the normal productions of change, i.e. long hair, drugs, petitions, rallies, etcetera, do not cultivate their desired effect anymore. In the eyes of Foucault, something more drastic is needed, and he calls for "revolutionary action." Ultimately, social change can only be achieved when one attacks both the mind and the body of a culture (Foucault 228). Presently, writing is the most effective medium to express "revolutionary action." The freedom of writing satisfies all the requirements to be considered revolutionary and it is able to "engage it [the system] on all fronts" (Foucault 230). Can writing truly achieve this revolutionary action and shake the very foundation of a corrupt and unmoral society? History provides numerous literary examples that were able to reshape the world around us.

One of the greatest pieces of revolutionary literature is undoubtedly the "Declaration of Independence" by Thomas Jefferson. It gains its rebellious status from what it was able to accomplish and how it stood the test of time. First, it was able to raise the awareness of the early American settlers and brought to their attention the wrong doings of the King of Great Britain. He demonstrated the offensive behavior by listing every unjust act done by the king against the settlers, thus providing one of the essential elements of "revolutionary action." The historical parchment paper included atrocities like the inability to pass their own laws, the failure to elect representatives, and forcing taxes on the colonies without the settlers' approval.

Jefferson believed that every human being is granted certain rights through natural law, and the institution of a monarch hinders individuals from obtaining these liberties. It is crucial that everyone "holds these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed …with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" (Jefferson 1007). Second, the document was able to make it abundantly clear that the colonies and its settlers will not stand by while these unreasonable and unjust acts take place. They will do everything in their power to overthrow the despotic government because "it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new Guards for their future security" (1007). Moreover, in the final paragraph Jefferson states firmly and proudly that the United Colonies should and ought to be free states and dissolve all bonds with the British government. He successfully destroyed the crimpling British authority over the colonists with a few swift strokes of a quill. The final element of the Declaration's greatness is that it was written and published. Since it was written, it can be used by further generations as a benchmark for their own revolutionary literature. Countries, for example Greece, have turned their wary heads to the Declaration of Independence when faced with their own hopes of national revolution. There is no doubt that it would have been powerful if it was given as a speech to raise the consciousness of the colonies, but as a written document it has an unseen power. Those are Jefferson's words on the page, not someone who wrote down the speech. Not someone who could of jumbled the wording or changed the tone. Those influential words by Thomas Jefferson that are etched in parchment continue to move people now as effectively as it did in 1776. Even in the not so distant past people have placed their faith in the Declaration of Independence and "revolutionary action" to justify their own causes, most famously civil rights.

The eloquence and vividness of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "Letter from Birmingham Jail" make his piece of work as powerful as the Declaration of Independence. King was able to arouse emotions with his colorful and detail description of African American life, as illustrated in the following passage concerning the need for action:When you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate-filled policemen curse, kick, and even kill your black brothers and sisters; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six-year-old daughter why she can't go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little mental sky, and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white people (King 1233).Clearly, he was not just saying African Americans lead a rough life. That would be a gross and vulgar understatement. King was effectively opening the eyes of people who are sheltered from this abuse. These images were not flashed across the six o'clock new with dramatic commentary. The most that anyone could expect out of the six o'clock news was a tiny blurb on how violence erupted in a remote area of the world, far from reach of typical suburban America.

Literary masterminds like King successfully raise the attentiveness of those that need change the most, thus beginning his own revolution. Through his writing he was able to open the doors of conversation in the south and have his input mean something other than the silent cries of a black man. Later in his letter, King argues that if his cries cannot be heard then it is justifiable for him to take action. He believed that the only righteous act in an unjust situation is to break the laws of that unjust society. King submits that " an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law" (King 1234). By breaking the law the foundation of southern racism will crack and in time it will crumble along with all its injustice. Kings words, coupled along with Foucault's ideas, help the current readers grasp the greatness of King's masterful plan. As the letter concludes a sense of urgency overtakes the reader and everyone realizes that King must leave nothing but the rubble of a segregated society left for the future generations of African Americans.  Obviously, political essays provide a great forum to stress change, but change can be called for in other forms of writing.

Red roses and young love are the usual topics for poetry, but poems can be used to express much more than a teenager's lust. Nikki Giovanni leads the reader away from the path of the common poem down a darker, distressed path in her poem "For Saundra." Written in a time when war loomed over the States, Giovanni grumbled in her poem that there was nothing to write about. Concerned with her unsatisfied poetry, Giovanni said she sought help from a neighbor. Filling her mind with beauty and trees, Giovanni states in that writing on such topics would be pointless. Sprawled in the verses Giovanni reveals, "I'll write a beautiful green tree poem, peeked from my window, to check the image, noticed that the school yard was covered, with asphalt, no green – no trees grow, in manhattan" (Giovanni 1191). Finally in despair she decides not to write at all and instead clean her gun and check her kerosene supply because "these are not poetic times at all" (Giovanni 1192). It is evident that her poem is calling for social change, but the way she illustrates her point is unusual. She brings attention to it not only with words but also with the form of her poem. Her poem does not follow the traditional format with capital letters at the beginning of the sentence and periods. Also, each line contains a different amount of words or syllables, at most a line containing ten syllables and at the very least a line containing one. The disorganized fashion of the poem can be thought as a metaphor for the disorganized times she is living in. In her poem one line is different from the next representing one day different from the preceding. Furthermore, the lack of periods might represent no end in the chaos and confusion. The format itself is enough to raise the awareness of readers and call for normalcy to return to the world. Like Jefferson and King, Giovanni was able to complete her own revolutionary action. When compared with Foucault, Giovanni's style was unique enough to satisfy the necessary requirements for change and still remained edgy to grip the average reader. Certainly poems can provide world-shattering action, but readers must pay extra attention to the format as well as the substance.

The unseen power of literature can rustle emotions and eradicate institutions. In a sense, it is able to move mountains and change the geopolitics of the world. Maybe activists should abandon their efforts of shouting "no war" at the top of their lungs and instead write down their views in a clear argument. They may actually achieve what they crave.

 

Works Cited 

Barnet, Sylvan, et al.  Literature for Composition: Essays, Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. New York: Longman, 2003.

Foucault, Michel. Language, Counter-Memory, Practice. Ed. Donald F. Bouchard. Ithaca, New York: Cornell U, 1977.

Giovanni, Nikki. "For Saundra." Barnet 1191.

Jefferson, Thomas. "Declaration of Independence." Barnet 1007.

King, Martin Luther Jr. "Letter From Birmingham Jail." Barnet 1231.