Explain the Great Awakening and assess the extent to which it, an intensely religious movement, contributed to the development of the separation of Church and State in America.
The Great Awakening was an American religious revival of the 1730s and 1740s. It originally began with Jonathan Edwards of Northampton, Massachusetts, who gave fiery speeches that scared people back into faith. This movement eventually came to be led by George Whitfield, who hosted and preached at revivals, speaking with passion and charisma that made people roll in the snow with religious excitement. The Great Awakening was also the first spontaneous mass movement of Americans, and it united them as a single people.
However, although the Great Awakening was a religious movement, it also contributed to the separation of Church and State in America. First, this is because of the many schisms that occurred during the movement. With so many new churches, it became increasingly harder for a single religion to be viewed as the colonies' "official" religion. In addition, many people became baptists, who were in favor of separating Church and State. More importantly, the Great Awakening revived religious in an individual sense. Emotion became much more common in religion, so religion became more personal. It became something that people would not want to associate with those ruling over them.
It is also possible, since the Great Awakening united Americans, that it severed Church and State further because the unity of the two reminded Americans of their overseas rulers. Much like an angsty teen, America's increase in religious toleration and non-government sponsored churches could have been an act with the purpose of rebellion. Also, since many colonists left England in flee of religious persecution, they knew the flaws of the unity of Church and State. England had taught Americans to hate such a unity.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
America is okay sometimes I guess. (American Landscape)
I find this picture representative of America because it has varying geological features. Just like this photo, the United States is too many things to be described in a few words other than diverse. Good or Bad or Beautiful or Ugly or Rich or Poor just aren't enough.
The comic is from picturesforsadchildren.com
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
History in Music Activity
Songs 1-3
The recording artists of these three songs tried to accurately recreate music from a time in history just as European settlers reached the New World, and, of course, before any recording technology existed. They may have liked the music themselves or wanted to recreate it to better understand the past. Song 1 is what music would have been like in Europe at the time, while Songs 2 and 3 are reproductions of Native American music.
Song 4- Brave Wolfe by Mark O'Connor and Wynton Marsalis
This song was written in 1997 for the "Libery! The American Revolution" soundtrack. It is about folk and military hero Major-General James Wolfe, who was a key figure in securing Quebec for the British at the battle of the Heights of Abraham on September 13, 1759 during the Seven Years War. Many other folk songs exist under the same title and tell how he won the battle but died at the moment of victory. The song starts with a slow trumpet, which is often featured in military themed music, although it seems more lementful than other music of its genre, perhaps in reference to Wolfe's fate. Around half-way through the song, the tempo picks up into a section representing the battle. I'm indifferent to the song. I found the transition to be to abrupt and the ending to be rather unexciting. Usually military music will feature a crisip snare drum, which I think could've greatlyimproved the song. From this song I learned the story of Wolfe, a story I'm surprised I had not heard before.
Song 5- Johnny Has Gone for a Soldier by Mark O'Connor and James Taylor
Records of this song go back to the seventeenth century during the American Revolution. However, it is to the tune of the Irish song Shule Aroon which dates to earlier in the seventeenth century. While there are some small variations of lyrics in differents versions which changes the perspective of the singer, this version is from the perspective of an anonymous narrator who describes the misery, sacrifice, and faithfulness of a woman whose lover has gone off to war. The lyrics are sad and striaght-forward, while the music features a slow and lamentful violin that complements the lyrics. I did enjoy this song, mostly because of the nice violin part. This song and its origin show how music from different areas of the world, such as Ireland, had an influence on the development of American music.
Song 6- Hard Times Come Again No More
This song was written by famous American song writer Stephen C. Foster in 1854. It was popular among both sides during the American Civil War. The song is about people who are experiencing, of course, hard times. The song simply describes people in a deeply troubled state and was inspired by poverty and likely slavery. I did like this recording some. It was pretty standard singer, organ, and drums with overused dramatic windchimes and a nice, mellow guitar solo. I can't say there's a whole lot to learn from this song. THere will always be hard times.
Song 7- Paddy's Lament by Sinead O'Connor
This song was written in 2002. It tells of a man who poor man from Ireland who, likely due to the Great Famine, comes to America in hopes of making a fortune. Instead, he is drafted into the Civil War and is woefully forced to fight. This song is sung from the perspective of the man. I enjoyed listening to the story. This song helped me put occurances such as the potato famine and the Civil War together on my mental timelime, since I never thought of those two coinciding.
Song 8- Jesus Christ by Woody Guthrie
This song was written in 1940. The song suggests that if Jesus were to preach of selling all of one's possessions and giving them to the poor in modern capitalist America, he would suffer the same fate as 2000 years ago. The song for the first few verses tells how Jesus preached this message in his day and was killed for it. The very last verse delivers the powerful moral of the song. I liked this song, music and lyrics, and thought it had a create approach to giving the message. It teaches that even in times when America was doing okay financially, there were still people who argued against capitalism powerfully enough to suggest we'd kill Jesus again.
Song 9- Do Re Me (live) by Ani DiFranco
This song originally written in 1940 by Woody Guthrie. It describes the situation in California during the time of Dust Bowl migrants. The song is in the format of a warning that California already has too many people and not enough work. I really like the guitar in this song as well as its format. I knew little of the Dust Bowl migrants until I heard this.
Song 10- Strange Fruit by Billie Holiday
This song was originally a poem written in 1936 written by Abel Meeropol. It was inspired by a lynching he saw in Indiana. The song later went on to be greatly influencial in the Civil Rights Movement and Billie Holiday closed all her shows with it. Metaphors are used to describe hanging bodies as bloody and gruesome fruit. I found this song to be very powerful, especially in its imagery. I was surprised to learn that such violent murders and their public display was still going on in the 1930s.
Song 11- A Change in Gonna Come by Seal
This song was written in 1963 by Sam Cooke, inspired by Bob Dylan's "Blowin' in the Wind". The song speaks out against racism during the Civil Rights Movement. It is sung from the perspective of the singer, who has himself experienced the effects of racism and hopes for an end to it. I found the lyrics were good but not too powerful, but I greatly enjoyed music, especially the great horn part. This song was a good primary source on racism during the Civil Rights era.
Song 12- Youngstown by Bruce Springsteen
This song was written in 1995. It is about a steelmill worker who is fired after returning from Vietnam. It is told from the perspective of the worker, who gives a brief history of the blast furnace and his family's history working there. I enjoyed the guitar and other strings combination and the almost eerie tone of the song. The song describes how many working class faced hardships as they lost their factory jobs.
Song 13- The Times They Are A-Changin' by Bob Dylan
This song was written in 1964. Dylan wanted the song to become an anthem of change, especially for the Civil Rights Movement. The song calls all people for a rapid revoltion thats purpose is never said, though many refrences are made to the oppressed overcoming their oppressors. Call it a sin, but I don't care for most Bob Dylan; I think it's because of his voice and the way he sings. This song is not quite historical but irather calls for history to be made.
Song 14- The Hands That Built America by U2
This song was originally written in 2002 for the movie "Gangs of New York". The song is praise for America the melting pot and for those who made it what it is. It does so by first telling of Irish emigrating due to the Potato Famine, then describing the American dream, followed by Bill Clinton's mediation of Ireland and Northern Ireland, and finally the events of September 11th, although none of these descriptions are directly stated to be what they are. The chorous describes different nationalities and religions that make up America. My feelings toward this song are mixed: I'm not a fan of the whipsering of nationalities and religions in the chorous, I find the events described in the song to be somewhat irrelevent to each other, and, being a hipster, I think U2 are sellouts without an original sound. However, I do like the xylophone in the chorous. Research on this song taught me about the mediation that Clinton did in Ireland.
Song 15- We Didn't Start the Fire by Billy Joel
This song was written in 1989. It describes the frantic state that the world has always been in to put down criticisms of the Baby Boomers. The format it takes is a list of people and event that were from the time Joel was born to the time the song was made. When the song started, I was pretty indifferent to the tune. But then it continued. And continued. And not once did it a-change. So I'm not a fan. Well, there can be l lot of important terms to be learned from this song, but no details. I guess it could serve as a "things to look up list".
Things Joel forgot: my brother, Calvin and Hobbes, and Bloom County. Bill and Opus '88!
The recording artists of these three songs tried to accurately recreate music from a time in history just as European settlers reached the New World, and, of course, before any recording technology existed. They may have liked the music themselves or wanted to recreate it to better understand the past. Song 1 is what music would have been like in Europe at the time, while Songs 2 and 3 are reproductions of Native American music.
Song 4- Brave Wolfe by Mark O'Connor and Wynton Marsalis
This song was written in 1997 for the "Libery! The American Revolution" soundtrack. It is about folk and military hero Major-General James Wolfe, who was a key figure in securing Quebec for the British at the battle of the Heights of Abraham on September 13, 1759 during the Seven Years War. Many other folk songs exist under the same title and tell how he won the battle but died at the moment of victory. The song starts with a slow trumpet, which is often featured in military themed music, although it seems more lementful than other music of its genre, perhaps in reference to Wolfe's fate. Around half-way through the song, the tempo picks up into a section representing the battle. I'm indifferent to the song. I found the transition to be to abrupt and the ending to be rather unexciting. Usually military music will feature a crisip snare drum, which I think could've greatlyimproved the song. From this song I learned the story of Wolfe, a story I'm surprised I had not heard before.
Song 5- Johnny Has Gone for a Soldier by Mark O'Connor and James Taylor
Records of this song go back to the seventeenth century during the American Revolution. However, it is to the tune of the Irish song Shule Aroon which dates to earlier in the seventeenth century. While there are some small variations of lyrics in differents versions which changes the perspective of the singer, this version is from the perspective of an anonymous narrator who describes the misery, sacrifice, and faithfulness of a woman whose lover has gone off to war. The lyrics are sad and striaght-forward, while the music features a slow and lamentful violin that complements the lyrics. I did enjoy this song, mostly because of the nice violin part. This song and its origin show how music from different areas of the world, such as Ireland, had an influence on the development of American music.
Song 6- Hard Times Come Again No More
This song was written by famous American song writer Stephen C. Foster in 1854. It was popular among both sides during the American Civil War. The song is about people who are experiencing, of course, hard times. The song simply describes people in a deeply troubled state and was inspired by poverty and likely slavery. I did like this recording some. It was pretty standard singer, organ, and drums with overused dramatic windchimes and a nice, mellow guitar solo. I can't say there's a whole lot to learn from this song. THere will always be hard times.
Song 7- Paddy's Lament by Sinead O'Connor
This song was written in 2002. It tells of a man who poor man from Ireland who, likely due to the Great Famine, comes to America in hopes of making a fortune. Instead, he is drafted into the Civil War and is woefully forced to fight. This song is sung from the perspective of the man. I enjoyed listening to the story. This song helped me put occurances such as the potato famine and the Civil War together on my mental timelime, since I never thought of those two coinciding.
Song 8- Jesus Christ by Woody Guthrie
This song was written in 1940. The song suggests that if Jesus were to preach of selling all of one's possessions and giving them to the poor in modern capitalist America, he would suffer the same fate as 2000 years ago. The song for the first few verses tells how Jesus preached this message in his day and was killed for it. The very last verse delivers the powerful moral of the song. I liked this song, music and lyrics, and thought it had a create approach to giving the message. It teaches that even in times when America was doing okay financially, there were still people who argued against capitalism powerfully enough to suggest we'd kill Jesus again.
Song 9- Do Re Me (live) by Ani DiFranco
This song originally written in 1940 by Woody Guthrie. It describes the situation in California during the time of Dust Bowl migrants. The song is in the format of a warning that California already has too many people and not enough work. I really like the guitar in this song as well as its format. I knew little of the Dust Bowl migrants until I heard this.
Song 10- Strange Fruit by Billie Holiday
This song was originally a poem written in 1936 written by Abel Meeropol. It was inspired by a lynching he saw in Indiana. The song later went on to be greatly influencial in the Civil Rights Movement and Billie Holiday closed all her shows with it. Metaphors are used to describe hanging bodies as bloody and gruesome fruit. I found this song to be very powerful, especially in its imagery. I was surprised to learn that such violent murders and their public display was still going on in the 1930s.
Song 11- A Change in Gonna Come by Seal
This song was written in 1963 by Sam Cooke, inspired by Bob Dylan's "Blowin' in the Wind". The song speaks out against racism during the Civil Rights Movement. It is sung from the perspective of the singer, who has himself experienced the effects of racism and hopes for an end to it. I found the lyrics were good but not too powerful, but I greatly enjoyed music, especially the great horn part. This song was a good primary source on racism during the Civil Rights era.
Song 12- Youngstown by Bruce Springsteen
This song was written in 1995. It is about a steelmill worker who is fired after returning from Vietnam. It is told from the perspective of the worker, who gives a brief history of the blast furnace and his family's history working there. I enjoyed the guitar and other strings combination and the almost eerie tone of the song. The song describes how many working class faced hardships as they lost their factory jobs.
Song 13- The Times They Are A-Changin' by Bob Dylan
This song was written in 1964. Dylan wanted the song to become an anthem of change, especially for the Civil Rights Movement. The song calls all people for a rapid revoltion thats purpose is never said, though many refrences are made to the oppressed overcoming their oppressors. Call it a sin, but I don't care for most Bob Dylan; I think it's because of his voice and the way he sings. This song is not quite historical but irather calls for history to be made.
Song 14- The Hands That Built America by U2
This song was originally written in 2002 for the movie "Gangs of New York". The song is praise for America the melting pot and for those who made it what it is. It does so by first telling of Irish emigrating due to the Potato Famine, then describing the American dream, followed by Bill Clinton's mediation of Ireland and Northern Ireland, and finally the events of September 11th, although none of these descriptions are directly stated to be what they are. The chorous describes different nationalities and religions that make up America. My feelings toward this song are mixed: I'm not a fan of the whipsering of nationalities and religions in the chorous, I find the events described in the song to be somewhat irrelevent to each other, and, being a hipster, I think U2 are sellouts without an original sound. However, I do like the xylophone in the chorous. Research on this song taught me about the mediation that Clinton did in Ireland.
Song 15- We Didn't Start the Fire by Billy Joel
This song was written in 1989. It describes the frantic state that the world has always been in to put down criticisms of the Baby Boomers. The format it takes is a list of people and event that were from the time Joel was born to the time the song was made. When the song started, I was pretty indifferent to the tune. But then it continued. And continued. And not once did it a-change. So I'm not a fan. Well, there can be l lot of important terms to be learned from this song, but no details. I guess it could serve as a "things to look up list".
Things Joel forgot: my brother, Calvin and Hobbes, and Bloom County. Bill and Opus '88!
Mayflower Questions
1. What beliefs and character traits that typified the Pilgrims enabled them to survive in the hostile environment that greeted them in the New World? Did some of the same traits that helped them survive limit them in other ways? How so?
The greatest factor that enabled the Pilgrims to survive in the New World was the strong bond that they shared through their faith. Motivation came from that close bond and from the faith itself, as the Pilgrims were willing to work hard for each other and to prove that they were among the elect. The Pilgrims were also trusting, which helped them gain a strong early bond with the Natives. However, this trust cost them time and money early on in their journey, and got them into a tough financial situation with the Adventurers Club.
3. Philbrick shows us that many of the classic images that shape our current view of the Pilgrims—from Plymouth Rock to the usual iconography of the first Thanksgiving—have been highly fictionalized. Why has America forsaken the truth about these times in exchange for a misleading and often somewhat hokey mythology?
No one likes to look back on their wrongful doings of the past. It is often painful and embarrassing. The same goes for a country. The Pilgrims were the among the first to English to successfully settle in the New World. That would be something America would want to celebrate, if it weren't for some of the wrongful actions of the Pilgrims. However, celebration usually takes priority over grieving and apologies, and the more complimentary truth of Pilgrims exploits became the popular and exaggerated truth.
4. The Pilgrims established a tradition of more or less peaceful coexistence with the Native Americans that lasted over fifty years. Why did that tradition collapse in the 1670s and what might have been done to preserve it?
Successful trade between the Native Americans and the Pilgrims existed for a number of years. As the Natives ran out of things to trade with the Pilgrims, and as the Pilgrims began to expand, the Natives began to trade their land away. This started out slowly, but soon massive areas of land were being given to the Pilgrims for very small prices. When the Indians decided that this had to stop, Bradford and Massasoit, two great leaders, were dead, and their replacements were less willing to a diplomatic approach to the solution. This could have been prevented by the pilgrims putting a check on their greed and by Indian traders being more careful with their land.
5. Discuss the character of Squanto. How did the strengths and weaknesses of his personality end up influencing history, and why did this one man make such a difference?
Squanto was lucky to be able to learn English language and culture and then be able to return home. After being taken as a slave by his fellow Indians, he got lucky once more when the Pilgrims arrived and he proved useful as a translator. His experiences on both sides (English and Indian) allowed him to become a trusted source of information of one party to the other. His greed got the better of him, though, and although he had a brilliant plan to make himself sachem by turning the two parties against each other using paranoia, luck and chance, which had been so faithful to him on previous occasions (which he perhaps started to depend on), got in the way. Squanto, who was on the brink of single-handedly starting a war, revolution, and coup, was discovered as a trecherous schemer.
6. The children of the Pilgrims were regarded in their own time as “the degenerate plant of a strange vine,” unworthy of the legacy and sacrifices of their mothers and fathers (p. 198). Why did they acquire (and largely accept) this reputation? Was it deserved? Were the denunciations of the second generation a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy?
The first generation of pilgrims went through many hardships and trials before they even reached the New World, where they were awaited by more challenges, such as building a settlement and maintaining relations with the Indians. Although by no means spoiled, the Pilgrims' children grew up to a life many of these challenges having been already faced and possibly seeming easy to maintain. The Pilgrims may have recognized this and worried that their children may not have been able to maintain the success of the settlement. As the children grew and began to run the settlement, they began to take advantage of the Indians and let their greed get the better of them, which would lead to the outbreak of war. It might have been the first generation's fear and worry of their successors that led to their relative failure. Perhaps this worry caused the original Pilgrims to stay in control as long as possible, since they knew how to run things, without completely passing on their methods.
8. Compare Philbrick’s portrayals of natives in Mayflower with the ways in which they have been represented in popular culture, for instance, in Hollywood movies. How does Mayflower encourage us to rethink those representations? On the other hand, are there some popular images of Native Americans that seem to be somewhat rooted in what actually happened in the seventeenth century?
While my knowledge on popular depictions of Native Americans is extremely limited (I'm not even sure I could describe to someone what happens in Pochahontas), and what little I have seen in movies and television are more modern and respectful depicitons of Native Americans or stereotypes of modern day Native Americans who apparently run casinos, the way these questions are asked assume I have seen movies where Indians are represented as scalping savages (not that I doubt their existence, I just haven't seen any movies about Indians). Also, I know such depictions of Indians as " the bad guys" exist.
Anyways, onto the questions. Philbrick's portrayals of natives show that they are not simply flat characters who want nothing more than the destruction of the pilgrims. They originally wanted peace with the Pilgrims (and many tribes always did) and were eager to trade. Philbrick's portryal also shows that some popular images may be rooted in the truth, too. For instance, there are stereotypes of Indians being supersticious or having far less sceintific knowledge than the Pilgrims, which is supported when Philbrick writes how Squanto was able to convince the other Native Americans that the Pilgrims were able to control the Plague.
9. In the chaotic, atrocity-filled conflict known as King Philip’s War, does anyone emerge as heroic? If so, what are the actions and qualities that identify him or her as a hero?
While I can't say I find anything involved in the war to be something to be looked up to, I do admire Church's attempts to put a quick end to the war and the sachems that tried to remain out of the war to keep their people safe.
10. As Mayflower shows, the American Indian tribes of New England were not a monolith, either culturally or politically. However, the English were not consistently able to think of them as separate tribes with different loyalties and desires. How did misconceptions of racial identity complicate the politics of King Philip’s War?
The English did not mentally seperate the native tribes and their different goals, and this led to numerous complications. For instance, when King Philip's War began, the English had an easy victory beofre them. However, seeing the Indians as one entity, some English went and attacked the Naragansetts, a large force the planned on staying out of the war. This attack caused the Naragansetts to enter the war, which significantly added to the causualties and duration of the war.
11. During King Philip’s War, significant numbers of Native Americans sided with the English. How do you regard those who took up arms against their fellow natives? Do you see them as treacherous, opportunistic, or merely sensible? If you had been a native, which side would you have taken, and why?
As stated in the previous question, the tribes were seperated and had different goals and cultural differences. So if a tribe were to fight another tribe, it should not be considered betrayal. Although the sachems should've kept their people out war, sometimes fighting was neccessary for their safety, in which case fighting was sensible. If I had been a native, I would have tried to saty out of the fighting, but it that was not an option, my alligence would vary at different points of the war. For instance, when the war began, I would side with the English, but when the Narageansetts joined, I would side with the natives. Sure, it may seem wrong and weak to side with whoever's winning, but I don't believe either side had a particularly good cause, and like I said, I would avoid fighting if i could.
12. Philbrick shows that the English, as well as the American Indians, engaged in barbaric practices like torturing and mutilating their captives, as well as taking body parts as souvenirs. Could either side in King Philip’s War make any legitimate claim to moral superiority? Why or why not?
This question is pretty simple. No side was more moral than the other. Both committed unspeakable acts of violence which should have never occurred. It doesn't matter who started it or who killed however many people. Both sides continued the violence for an unneccessary amount of time.
15. One reviewer of Mayflower asserted that Nathaniel Philbrick “avoid[ed] the overarching moral issues [of his subject] and [took] no sides.” Do you find this to be true? Are there moral lessons Philbrick wants us to learn? If so, what are they?
I'm not sure if Philbrick avoided moral criticisms, but he criticized both sides, and he never did take a side or condemn one party more than the other. As for moral lessons, I don't know that Philbrick went out of his way to point any out, but simply by stating what happened, lessons can be learned, such as toleration, open-mindedness, humility, and that racism, stealing, murder, torture, and greed are all wrong. Almost all basic ethical lessons can be learned from the story of the PIlgims.
The greatest factor that enabled the Pilgrims to survive in the New World was the strong bond that they shared through their faith. Motivation came from that close bond and from the faith itself, as the Pilgrims were willing to work hard for each other and to prove that they were among the elect. The Pilgrims were also trusting, which helped them gain a strong early bond with the Natives. However, this trust cost them time and money early on in their journey, and got them into a tough financial situation with the Adventurers Club.
3. Philbrick shows us that many of the classic images that shape our current view of the Pilgrims—from Plymouth Rock to the usual iconography of the first Thanksgiving—have been highly fictionalized. Why has America forsaken the truth about these times in exchange for a misleading and often somewhat hokey mythology?
No one likes to look back on their wrongful doings of the past. It is often painful and embarrassing. The same goes for a country. The Pilgrims were the among the first to English to successfully settle in the New World. That would be something America would want to celebrate, if it weren't for some of the wrongful actions of the Pilgrims. However, celebration usually takes priority over grieving and apologies, and the more complimentary truth of Pilgrims exploits became the popular and exaggerated truth.
4. The Pilgrims established a tradition of more or less peaceful coexistence with the Native Americans that lasted over fifty years. Why did that tradition collapse in the 1670s and what might have been done to preserve it?
Successful trade between the Native Americans and the Pilgrims existed for a number of years. As the Natives ran out of things to trade with the Pilgrims, and as the Pilgrims began to expand, the Natives began to trade their land away. This started out slowly, but soon massive areas of land were being given to the Pilgrims for very small prices. When the Indians decided that this had to stop, Bradford and Massasoit, two great leaders, were dead, and their replacements were less willing to a diplomatic approach to the solution. This could have been prevented by the pilgrims putting a check on their greed and by Indian traders being more careful with their land.
5. Discuss the character of Squanto. How did the strengths and weaknesses of his personality end up influencing history, and why did this one man make such a difference?
Squanto was lucky to be able to learn English language and culture and then be able to return home. After being taken as a slave by his fellow Indians, he got lucky once more when the Pilgrims arrived and he proved useful as a translator. His experiences on both sides (English and Indian) allowed him to become a trusted source of information of one party to the other. His greed got the better of him, though, and although he had a brilliant plan to make himself sachem by turning the two parties against each other using paranoia, luck and chance, which had been so faithful to him on previous occasions (which he perhaps started to depend on), got in the way. Squanto, who was on the brink of single-handedly starting a war, revolution, and coup, was discovered as a trecherous schemer.
6. The children of the Pilgrims were regarded in their own time as “the degenerate plant of a strange vine,” unworthy of the legacy and sacrifices of their mothers and fathers (p. 198). Why did they acquire (and largely accept) this reputation? Was it deserved? Were the denunciations of the second generation a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy?
The first generation of pilgrims went through many hardships and trials before they even reached the New World, where they were awaited by more challenges, such as building a settlement and maintaining relations with the Indians. Although by no means spoiled, the Pilgrims' children grew up to a life many of these challenges having been already faced and possibly seeming easy to maintain. The Pilgrims may have recognized this and worried that their children may not have been able to maintain the success of the settlement. As the children grew and began to run the settlement, they began to take advantage of the Indians and let their greed get the better of them, which would lead to the outbreak of war. It might have been the first generation's fear and worry of their successors that led to their relative failure. Perhaps this worry caused the original Pilgrims to stay in control as long as possible, since they knew how to run things, without completely passing on their methods.
8. Compare Philbrick’s portrayals of natives in Mayflower with the ways in which they have been represented in popular culture, for instance, in Hollywood movies. How does Mayflower encourage us to rethink those representations? On the other hand, are there some popular images of Native Americans that seem to be somewhat rooted in what actually happened in the seventeenth century?
While my knowledge on popular depictions of Native Americans is extremely limited (I'm not even sure I could describe to someone what happens in Pochahontas), and what little I have seen in movies and television are more modern and respectful depicitons of Native Americans or stereotypes of modern day Native Americans who apparently run casinos, the way these questions are asked assume I have seen movies where Indians are represented as scalping savages (not that I doubt their existence, I just haven't seen any movies about Indians). Also, I know such depictions of Indians as " the bad guys" exist.
Anyways, onto the questions. Philbrick's portrayals of natives show that they are not simply flat characters who want nothing more than the destruction of the pilgrims. They originally wanted peace with the Pilgrims (and many tribes always did) and were eager to trade. Philbrick's portryal also shows that some popular images may be rooted in the truth, too. For instance, there are stereotypes of Indians being supersticious or having far less sceintific knowledge than the Pilgrims, which is supported when Philbrick writes how Squanto was able to convince the other Native Americans that the Pilgrims were able to control the Plague.
9. In the chaotic, atrocity-filled conflict known as King Philip’s War, does anyone emerge as heroic? If so, what are the actions and qualities that identify him or her as a hero?
While I can't say I find anything involved in the war to be something to be looked up to, I do admire Church's attempts to put a quick end to the war and the sachems that tried to remain out of the war to keep their people safe.
10. As Mayflower shows, the American Indian tribes of New England were not a monolith, either culturally or politically. However, the English were not consistently able to think of them as separate tribes with different loyalties and desires. How did misconceptions of racial identity complicate the politics of King Philip’s War?
The English did not mentally seperate the native tribes and their different goals, and this led to numerous complications. For instance, when King Philip's War began, the English had an easy victory beofre them. However, seeing the Indians as one entity, some English went and attacked the Naragansetts, a large force the planned on staying out of the war. This attack caused the Naragansetts to enter the war, which significantly added to the causualties and duration of the war.
11. During King Philip’s War, significant numbers of Native Americans sided with the English. How do you regard those who took up arms against their fellow natives? Do you see them as treacherous, opportunistic, or merely sensible? If you had been a native, which side would you have taken, and why?
As stated in the previous question, the tribes were seperated and had different goals and cultural differences. So if a tribe were to fight another tribe, it should not be considered betrayal. Although the sachems should've kept their people out war, sometimes fighting was neccessary for their safety, in which case fighting was sensible. If I had been a native, I would have tried to saty out of the fighting, but it that was not an option, my alligence would vary at different points of the war. For instance, when the war began, I would side with the English, but when the Narageansetts joined, I would side with the natives. Sure, it may seem wrong and weak to side with whoever's winning, but I don't believe either side had a particularly good cause, and like I said, I would avoid fighting if i could.
12. Philbrick shows that the English, as well as the American Indians, engaged in barbaric practices like torturing and mutilating their captives, as well as taking body parts as souvenirs. Could either side in King Philip’s War make any legitimate claim to moral superiority? Why or why not?
This question is pretty simple. No side was more moral than the other. Both committed unspeakable acts of violence which should have never occurred. It doesn't matter who started it or who killed however many people. Both sides continued the violence for an unneccessary amount of time.
15. One reviewer of Mayflower asserted that Nathaniel Philbrick “avoid[ed] the overarching moral issues [of his subject] and [took] no sides.” Do you find this to be true? Are there moral lessons Philbrick wants us to learn? If so, what are they?
I'm not sure if Philbrick avoided moral criticisms, but he criticized both sides, and he never did take a side or condemn one party more than the other. As for moral lessons, I don't know that Philbrick went out of his way to point any out, but simply by stating what happened, lessons can be learned, such as toleration, open-mindedness, humility, and that racism, stealing, murder, torture, and greed are all wrong. Almost all basic ethical lessons can be learned from the story of the PIlgims.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
