“Galloping Hessian of the Hollow”
“A closer look at this “galloping Hessian of the Hollow,” and specifically at the ambiguity which surrounds the question of whether he is or is not real supernatural being…” Provides the author’s argument on how Irving was able to pr4esent the comic picture of the headless horse ghost and still maintaining the ambiguity of supernatural being. Ichabod and Brom represent the typical depiction of American consideration of what supernatural should be in terms of the clashing of the urban and country characterization. The author argues that Irving’s decision to ignore Headless horseman is circumstantial because the author lives the reader open in interpreting the character is supernatural or not. Smith equates how the author displays the supernatural with Ichabod’s inability to be influential politically or materialistically. However, “scoffers,” such as Brom, who has interacted with the headless horseman, acquire wealth, but this does not mean that he is used to ridiculing those who believe in the ghost. However, the author sharply explores the ambiguity of “The Legend of the Sleepy Hollow” in interpreting the issue of psychology when it comes to American culture. The imaginative character represented the quest of the existing society that was eager to embrace the supernatural, which had been suppressed due to cultural beliefs. The mystery that Brom Bones might have been the headless head horseman portrays a possibility that a ghost of decapitated Hessian trooper might have had a hand in Ichabod’s disappearance. The lack of Irving interpreting if the farmer who came with information that Ichabod was not dead further provides the ambiguity that rules out in this American greatest supernatural comic. Ichabod’s disappearance highlights the argument of a real apparition as the headless horseman. The last paragraph by Knickerbocker’s last two paragraphs further invites the reader to rule out if or not Ichabod is supernatural or not where the description of wives catalyzes this as “judges.” The postscript that precedes the story mainly where the business tells the story mockingly where the listeners see this story as a hoax while the narrator tells the story out of amusement. According to Smith, this proves the ambiguity of the “The Legend of the Sleepy Hollow” where again, the reader’s interpretations are left open. The author argues that the ambiguity of the story by Irving is what makes the “Sleepy hollow” so compelling and popular. The comparison of the headless horseman ghost ambiguity and its correlation with the American culture makes \it the most famous ghost stories. The story provides a disguise of Brom Bones, Ichabod, and headless horseman provides a path to avoid unnecessary limitation to the imagination.
Critical Response
Smith’s argument provides the possibility of imagining the headless horseman “ghost” as a tool for the ambiguity that Irving wanted to express in his comic works. However, I think the supernatural character should not be interpreted in a way that seems to insinuate what made the “Sleepy Hollow” popular. There is always an intended message in mythical stories that the author wants to express or teach the readers. Smith argues that “Whether or not “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” qualifies as “a genuine tale of cosmic fear” is debatable…as its effects upon the reader is assumedly not quite harrowing” (175). The assumption that all the readers would not find Irving’s work a genuine tale seems superficial and generally-oriented, which is not what comic works are all about when it comes to interpreting the supernatural world.
However, I think the author sufficiently argues this argument by offering substantial reasons as to why “Sleepy Hollow” is hard to interpret by offering its ambiguity directly. The instance of not understanding the Ichabod disappearance is the most outstanding argument because it goes against the direct interpretation of other author’s work when it comes to fiction.
The fact that the teacher spoke about Ichabod being alive and well after a ghostly disappearance provides the reader with a possibility that headless horseman might be natural or supernatural. I agree that understanding the supernatural is confusing and hard to comprehend, which authenticates the author’s argument about the possibility of ambiguity in Irving’s work. Additionally, Ichabod’s depiction as uninfluential shows the mystery in his existence and power because, in American culture, power amounts to wealth and influence. Irving was able to leave the interpretation to the reader of whether there is ghost existence through a possibility of an “explanation” is what makes this story exciting and popular among American ghost tales. I think “The Legend of the Sleeping Hollow” shows American people’s beliefs and culture due to its optimistic and opportunistic inclination. Thus, as the author has argued in this article, “Sleepy Hollow” interpretation can only be left to individual beliefs of the existence of a ghost or not. Similarly, I think the argument surrounding this popular comic should be left open to discussion and discussion on whether headless horseman was responsible for the Ichabod disappearance or linkage of Brom Bones.
