George Sheldon is one of the best recorders of local history. He also founded the Pocumtuck Valley Memorial Association. He is mentioned in O’Connell’s essay because he let future historians know where to look for the history of the town. It is not simple or innocent because the memorial was created and is entirely for the settlers. The quick mention of the Native Americans does not do them justice. Later in the article, as O’Connell points out, Sheldon tries to justify what the early settlers did as fine. I fully agree with O’Connell seeing this as not innocent. How could it be innocent? The Native American’s story was not told in the memorial. The memorial was created by racist people and their views. History could still be useful to a
...d Native Americas in a negative light, such as Carl Wimer’s Abduction of Daniel Boone’s Daughter, George Caleb Bingham’s Concealed Enemy, and Horatio Greenough’s The Rescue. These two paintings and statue in particular should be included because they depict the views of people in that era. The view of Native Americans was that of savagery. In the painting by Wimer the woman is depicted a fair skinned maiden, due to the white dress who is being brutishly taken away. The statue by Greenough, which depicts a man protecting his family from a savage Native American, was outside of the United States Capital for nearly a hundred years before it was taken down. These views of indigenous people during the 19th century have lasting impacts on our country. It is our job to tell the real story of what happened to the Native Americans as victims of our view of manifest destiny.
Alan Taylor has written the book, William Cooper's Town so affluent in texture and implicative insinuation that it is arduous to do it justice in any brief review. His work defies simple categorization as it moves in a seamless manner between William Cooper's world and that of his novelist son. Taylor deserves the highest accolade for availing us to rethink the nature of the historians art while conveying us to a particular frontier of the early American republic.
Looking at the title, King of the World, with its photograph of Cassius Marcellus Clay, Jr./Muhammad Ali, I assumed it was a biography. It isn't. Jumping to my next conclusion I thought it was a book about the "sweet science;" it isn't. Okay, maybe it's a tell-all about the seamy side of the boxing 'business.' It's not.
Though a vast majority of students learn about Columbus’ great conquests and celebrate him as a hero, very few know of the horrible atrocities he caused when he first landed in America. While considered a hero by most in the United States, Zinn argues that people should think twice about Columbus’ actions, and question whether his behavior to the Indians was necessary. In quotes one and five, Zinn clearly depicts his thoughts on the atrocities done by Columbus and other colonists to the natives living in America.
Philbrick makes it apparent he disagrees with the treatment of the Natives and the outcome and handling of the trial for Sassamon using phrases with sarcastic and negative connotations (Philbrick 231). Philbrick calls the Pilgrims’ perseverance to maintain/regulate the Natives as “stubborn insistence on rectitude was to dehumanize the Indians so they seemed wanton and senseless instruments of God’s will,” (Philbrick 231). Philbrick calls out the Pilgrims for not making proper use of the Natives’ supplies and fort simply because the idea is “abhorrent,” (Philbrick 277). It’s truly bigoted to not take advantage of the enemy’s supplies. Philbrick scrutinizes the Pilgrims for their hypocritical lack of morality as compared to the Natives. The English would rape female captives and literally and “enthusiastically butcher” captives and torture them by “cut[ting] the young warrior apart, finger by finger and toe by toe...before clubbing them to death,”(Philbrick 319-320). The Natives are much more humane in this aspect, never raping a female captive or abusing captives like the English (Philbrick 320). Philbrick denounces the Pilgrims and Puritans for never admitting the necessity of Native tribes, Andros and Mohawks, to win the war (Philbrick
American school and culture ingrains U.S. history into children’s mind from an early age. They tell heroic, brave accounts of pilgrims fleeing England for religious freedom and working peacefully with Natives to cultivate a difficult land, culminating in the first thanksgiving. However, these neat, tidy stories are far from the truth. Edmund Morgan and Karen Kupperman attempt to clear these historic myths, by narrating the many hardships and fewer successes of Jamestown, Virginia, the first permanent colonial settlement. However, Morgan achieves this goal more effectively than Kupperman because he portrays the founding of Jamestown in a more realistic, impartial view, fighting his American biases, to reveal that the English colonists were at
Today, memorials are built with the purpose of remembering and connecting with the past. Although memorials and monuments are unique landscapes, it must be noted that memorials are often dedicated to those who have been victimized, while monuments offer a celebration or remembrance of a specific person or event. However, both do not fail in shaping the world as it is today. People remember, people learn, and people move on. In memorializing an event and in creating a monument, one should consider its location, cost, and meaning. Failing to do so might provoke controversy among those who are innocent and those who are against it.
Cowley, Malcolm. “Introduction". Sherwood Anderson: A collection of critical essays. Ed. Walter B. Rideout.Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice Hall, 1974.
According to Barry Sharge “How can this be in this country, in this city, so near to the graves of patriots who fought for freedom and liberty in this place.” On August 15, 2017 the Boston Holocaust Memorial was vandalized. People were horrified at how heartless someone could be. The families of victims were upset and offended. This was very disrespectful to anybody involved in the or their families. The cost in damages was expensive. This wasn’t the first time the memorial was vandalized. We must take action to keep this level of disrespect from happening
The works of Bradstreet, Adams and Wheatley in a sense distill the hardness of colonial life, though each having come from various degrees of perceived privilege at the time. Each had a unique existence in the life of the prevailing culture, though the subject and intended audience of the writing of each tends to put into focus the narrative of the times but addressed to an intimate. In reading all three, it was quite evident that the personal struggles for first survival, followed by recognition from their inner circle, combining these two into a commentary on the larger world. Wheatley speaking of her experience as a house slave, herself a revolutionary and first lady, and Bradstreet speaking to being a new immigrant settler. Out of these three writers Adams is the only one who had been born in the colonies, the other two were brought.
This monument is intended to honor all the people that do nothing but good for this world and are treated unfairly because of what they look like or how they think. These people should be remembered because they were treated poorly and even though they were treated badly they continued to do nothing but good for the world and no matter how hard times got they continued to stay strong without using any form of violence, but only peace to get their ideas across. We owe it to them because they help us every day without us thanking them or even recognizing it. The fact is that we need those kinds of people, the kind that helps their neighbors without asking for any pay, the kind that selflessly put themselves in danger for the sake of others, and
The ways in which the author could strengthen the book, in my opinion, is instead all the descriptive, to me meaningless points as how they were coloring themselves, the author should have put a little bit more facts in there to make it more documentary. Anyhow, overall the book has strength in letting the reader understand the history from both sides, whites and Indians. Many people have different views on the persecution of Native Americans, some think that it was all Indians’ fault and that they caused their own suffering, which I think is absolutely ridiculous, because they were not the ones who invaded. And Native Americans had every right to stand up for the land that was theirs.
In Thomas King’s novel, The Inconvenient Indian, the story of North America’s history is discussed from his original viewpoint and perspective. In his first chapter, “Forgetting Columbus,” he voices his opinion about how he feel towards the way white people have told America’s history and portraying it as an adventurous tale of triumph, strength and freedom. King hunts down the evidence needed to reveal more facts on the controversial relationship between the whites and natives and how it has affected the culture of Americans. Mainly untangling the confusion between the idea of Native Americans being savages and whites constantly reigning in glory. He exposes the truth about how Native Americans were treated and how their actual stories were
Kupperman, Karen Ordahl. “Thomas Morton, Historian”. The New England Quarterly, Vol. 50, No.4 (Dec., 1977), pp. 660-664. The New England Quarterly, Inc. .
Indeed, the language of mid-nineteenth-century reviews of Leaves of Grass reflects nostalgia for the community focus of early Jeffersonian America, a focus that was fading in a cul...