Response to Scandal at Bizarre

Cynthia Kierner’s Scandal at Bizarre, in my opinion, was a wonderfully written book to understand not only micro-history but the transitional period in colonial America. She uses various themes such as gender, social hierarchy, political structures/virtues, cultural representations, race, honor, and public opinion to understand the social and political structures in post-revolution America through a micro-history lens.

According to Kierner, “honor is a cluster of ethical rules, most readily found in societies of small communities, by which judgements are ratified by community consensus. In other words, an honor culture is one that subscribes to a system of values within which you have exactly as much worth as others confer upon you” (Kierner, 37). I agree with Meryn when she stated she did not believe there to be a particular agent of change for Kierner. I believe the individuals drive to act independent and possess power prompted these individuals to act in varying ways. For example, Nancy strives for a virtuous woman’s life. She was determined fix her reputation and protects her son from the public ridicule. She, like many others in the book, used the public and politics to undermine those who opposed her. Meanwhile, Jack was determined to denounce Nancy’s reputation and restore his “good” family’s name. Both individuals were destined to restore honor to themselves by any means necessary.

Ultimately, I believed Kierner’s book to have a great deal of symbolism in it. Maybe this is me over thinking this, but I am going to say it anyways. I viewed the character of Nancy to that of America – someone who despite the obstacles was still determined to become virtuous. On the other hand, I viewed Jack as Great Britain. His main goal was to restore what was once his and hold onto the past – much like what Britain was trying to while America was revolting.