History is skewed to the white man.
I don't know anyone who could argue that.
I am a history minor. I love history. If I get into Teach For America that's what I want to teach. Because of this, reading Zinn's, A People's History, has been really interesting. But not just because I am learning new perspectives, but because I am learning about how my fourth grade social studies teacher influenced my thoughts.
Side note: I hated my 4th grade SS teacher.
I also hated all history classes until college.
Back on track.... Reading about the stories of the Pilgrims and Christopher Columbus and the Indians all from the vantage point of the oppressor all my life has done some things to my head.
In my American Lit class yesterday, we were discussing Mary Rowlenson's Autobiography about her captivity in the Narragansett Tribe during King Phillip's War. When I was reading this novel, I kept wondering when she would talk about being raped. Why? Well in fourth grade, I was taught that Indians were violent. They were savages. They killed women and children after raping or torturing them. I was taught that the white man did nothing wrong-- or if they did, it was justified. I was taught that the white man's only crime was trying to save (convert) these ungodly people.
How awful right?!?
Now this book is challenging those thoughts and ideas from so long ago and I love it!
Other thoughts... The first 22 pages of this book are filled with horror-histories of genocide and mass violence by westerners to the Indians. Stories so violent that my stomach was turning and I wanted to look away as I was reading. (Just so everyone knows, I am a big baby when it comes to goriness.) But reading about this made me wonder, Why has killing and mass murder been such a prominent part of our culture since the beginning? I know sometimes there have been decent justifications for murder, but even since I was young, I have never really understood them. I know that that may come across as stupid, but I am serious. Why such desire to kill? Why is an instinct inside of us to fight or to injure or to go to war or to seek revenge?
I wanted to end with this quote from Zinn on page 10:
"My point is not to grieve for the victims and denounce the executioners. Those tears, that anger, cast into the past, deplete our moral energy for the present."
While I don't want to deplete my "moral energy for the present," I do think getting a grasp on the idea of murder my help. Any thoughts?
I don't know anyone who could argue that.
I am a history minor. I love history. If I get into Teach For America that's what I want to teach. Because of this, reading Zinn's, A People's History, has been really interesting. But not just because I am learning new perspectives, but because I am learning about how my fourth grade social studies teacher influenced my thoughts.
Side note: I hated my 4th grade SS teacher.
I also hated all history classes until college.
Back on track.... Reading about the stories of the Pilgrims and Christopher Columbus and the Indians all from the vantage point of the oppressor all my life has done some things to my head.
In my American Lit class yesterday, we were discussing Mary Rowlenson's Autobiography about her captivity in the Narragansett Tribe during King Phillip's War. When I was reading this novel, I kept wondering when she would talk about being raped. Why? Well in fourth grade, I was taught that Indians were violent. They were savages. They killed women and children after raping or torturing them. I was taught that the white man did nothing wrong-- or if they did, it was justified. I was taught that the white man's only crime was trying to save (convert) these ungodly people.
How awful right?!?
Now this book is challenging those thoughts and ideas from so long ago and I love it!
Other thoughts... The first 22 pages of this book are filled with horror-histories of genocide and mass violence by westerners to the Indians. Stories so violent that my stomach was turning and I wanted to look away as I was reading. (Just so everyone knows, I am a big baby when it comes to goriness.) But reading about this made me wonder, Why has killing and mass murder been such a prominent part of our culture since the beginning? I know sometimes there have been decent justifications for murder, but even since I was young, I have never really understood them. I know that that may come across as stupid, but I am serious. Why such desire to kill? Why is an instinct inside of us to fight or to injure or to go to war or to seek revenge?
I wanted to end with this quote from Zinn on page 10:
"My point is not to grieve for the victims and denounce the executioners. Those tears, that anger, cast into the past, deplete our moral energy for the present."
While I don't want to deplete my "moral energy for the present," I do think getting a grasp on the idea of murder my help. Any thoughts?
I too question myself that same thing (why does violence exist?) or at least why have we let it get so bad? As I am reading this cruel reality in Zinn's book I am just torn. I personally don't like how man kind sometimes solves problems with violence and torture just like how it happened with the Europeans and Dutch killing and using the Indians and Africans. This whole matter to kill is so intertwined in our society too that it is hard to say if murder is justified. I really do feel that people are able to change with the right help but desires for revenge kind of goes hand in hand with murder that it's all just a vicious circle. It's up to us to change it.
ReplyDeleteHey Morgan,
ReplyDeleteI had similar feelings while reading the two Zinn chapters assigned. I kept thinking, "I always learned that the Indians were enemies and hindering the expansion of the United States," or, "hey, I thought Rockefeller and Carnegie were smart ethical business men we should all look up to." Sometimes I heard people talk about how history is written by the "victor," but I just wondered how "different" the stories could really be. It's occurring to me that this misrepresentation of history that is prevalent in US society must be a huge reason oppression is systematic. Hearing about citizens building communities and striking was empowering to me. It makes me more interested in the local Occupy movement going on in Austin.
I enjoyed your post! See you tomorrow.
-Katy
Morgan, it's so sad to realize that history is skewed, inconsistent and always told by the winner. Yet it's so critical to have an understanding of history to help us understand systemic oppression. I can't seem to understand why there has been so much bloodshed throughout our history. Is aggressiveness part of our human nature? Are we violent beings? I struggle with these questions.
ReplyDeleteI like that you're minoring in history, thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Morgan, I can feel your rage about the mass killings of the past (and present). It makes no sense to me either how some people so readily take another's life -- many times, rooted in a misunderstanding, or fear about someone who's different. We're all different, for if not, the world would be a very boring place.
ReplyDeleteThough what we've all been taught about our history has obviously been skewed, do we really know who to believe? Who's telling the full truth? Hmm..........
Your fourth grade teacher was just f'd up in the head. An even more troubling question, than these pedantic discusions about human nature and yata-yata, is how this women was ever given (or allowed to keep) her job!? It really makes me question the biases in our school system and whether or not it is in human nature to be delusioned with what we don't want to see... oh shit... you damn hippie, socialwork academics are turning me in to one of you!
ReplyDeleteI MENT to say, MERICA!MANIFEST DESTINY! REAGAN BUSH 84'!