This quarter in Writ 101 has been great in every way possible, helping me develop as a more confident writer. This year I learned:
• That I can consistently think on a college level basis, and translate these thoughts onto paper
• How to organize a essay so its more effective, and use transitions better for clarity
• How to make an emphatic thesis
• How to create an outline that’s organized and effective
• That I need to improve my research skills to have clearer and stronger content
• How to apply strong topic sentences at the beginning of every paragraph for clarity
• That I can write a essay with a specific deadline, even if the directions aren’t as clearly laid out as they were in high school
• That I have personal voice when I write
My second essay was where I struggled the most this year. Every part of the essay was repulsive to me, I hated the time frame we had, and the creative writing mixed with the analytical writing. I also found the research to be extremely difficult, especially compared to essay number one. That affected my content as seen in this line, “Our ancestors were forced to flee from Britain to escape religious persecution; now however, we are strong enough to fight back that same cause.” They weren’t fighting religious persecution in the revolutionary war. But I can’t deny I did learn from the experience. I learned I don’t work well when writes genres are mixed, but I can still manage to get it done in time. My grade on it pleasantly surprised me, and next time I will make sure I have only one genre to work with.
However, my first essay was something that I am very proud of. In the beginning, I was extremely worried because this was my first real assignment as a college student. This seemed like the first big obstacle, not to mention the stories I had heard about Craig’s grading that did nothing to soothe my nerves. But, for the first time, I let my fear motivate me and worked consistently on it for the entire three weeks. When I got my score back I was thrilled. As much as I wanted an A, I think a B was both fair and exciting. I liked the following lines from my essay because they show my voice, and an example of they say I say templates. “I believe his actions were equal to little more than a colonial-age stress ball. I concede that he brought change, and did indeed act as the liberator of the settler’s anger, but I maintain that his actions were little more than cowardice.”
Another thing I am proud of was when Craig said I was one of the best people for peer review. I had spent a considerable of time helping other people with their essay as much as I could, and it was great to be recognized for the time I put in.
Form my shaky start, I think PSEC and especially this writing class has helped me immeasurably. The thing I learned in this quarter I will be using for the rest of my academic career. Along with academic skills like being able to introduce “They say” into my writing, I received something I thought I wouldn’t from any scholarly setting: self confidence and pride in what I write. Everything I work on feels like a challenge, and everything I completed is testimony to how hard I worked.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Portfolio: Essay 1
How do you tell the difference between heroes and villains? Some would say the difference is actions, others say about perspectives. Since history is an art of interpretation, it gives us different versions of the same people or events. For example, take Nathanial Bacon of Bacon’s Rebellion. In some reports, he seems to be the picture of heroism, a man who led the poor and underprivileged to revolt against their malign government. Other articles aren't so willing to paint him as the hero... I believe he wasn’t a hero at all.
Bacon: A Hero
The desperately poor farmers, the indentured servants, exploited slaves of multiple races, and the lower class settlers all saw Nathanial Bacon as hope for a brighter, freer future. The people had multiple reasons for their unrest; their poverty, the growing distinctions between classes, promises of wealth and land that wouldn't be fulfilled, the growing anger at the government for lack of protection, and the racial tension; all of this was simmering below the surface of the shining new world the settlers had tried to hard to create. It seems implied that the poor white Englishmen had no one else to turn to for reform and protection from the government. Bacon did have his reasons for leading this sordid group of people who were robbed of their promised wealth.
First, Bacon claimed in his Declaration that Governor Berkeley, “…raised great unjust taxes”, “advancing [advanced] to places of judicature… scandalous and ignorant favorites”, and “…assuming [assumed] monopoly of the beaver trade” among other crimes. The government was also unwilling to help protect outlying settlers from Indian attacks, on the grounds that a war with the natives would damage the fur trade. Second, they would see him a person of his word because he fought along side them in the battles he led. He sacrificed his social status and favor with The Virginian government to execute this plan. Modern day scholars might say that his actions were noble because there were multiple races in the band of rebels he lead. He was the first to (briefly) unite blacks and whites in any major political cause. Historymatters.edu agreed, “Virginia’s planters long remembered the spectacle of black and white acting together to challenge authority”. Finally, they would see him as virtuous because the colonists already had prejudice against the Indians. The natives were not innocent, and the people jumped at the chance to retaliate in force. But it must be said that he wasn’t the settler’s choice, he was their only chance to improve their situation. In his wife’s letter to her sister, she tells a story of how he is doing good for the community, risking life and limb to protect the colonists from the “troublesome Indians”.
Bacon: A Martyr
There are other accounts of Bacon being less than noble. First, in his declaration, he believes himself a tragic hero, a defender of the poor and unprotected, a champion of justice. He said himself, "Judge therefore all wise and unprejudiced men...the aspersion of Traitor or Rebell", playing the long suffering martyr in his own documents. (Note: I'm using the definition of martyr, “A person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.”) Second, it is true that he had reasons to be angry, but what I don’t understand is why he choose to act in the way that he did. In his list of Gov. Berkeley’s crimes, he listed “prevention of civil disobedience” as one of the governor’s faults. Raiding the elite’s estates and destroying nearby villages does not constitute civil disobedience. Thirdly, he was not “one of the people”, as some sources imply. He was wealthy, and far from experiencing the suffering of the people he represented. Now if he was not in the masses shivering in worn boots and worrying about his family’s next meal, what were his motivations for rebelling? Was he simply an angry colonist searching for justice? Or was he a malicious leader, killing whenever or whoever he deemed fit?
It also must be said that the people on whom he focused the settler’s guns were innocent. True, not all Indians were guiltless at this time, but the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes that he lead attacks on were peaceful. Indeed, the tribes were so reluctant to offend the settlers that they did not raise a hand to defend themselves. His attack ruined trust with those and other Native American tribes. The government had placed peace treaties upon their land, which he ignored completely.
Zinn and Steffof emphasize Bacon being merely a leader in their book. They reiterate that the colonists concern was not either the Indians or Government, but a combination of both. They also observe the overall stress inflicted on the colonies by the over-zealous taxation by England. The book acknowledges, “He probably cared more about fighting Indians than about helping the poor."[Pg 36].
Michael Puglisi elucidates in his article,” Whether they be Friends or foes”, "He [Bacon] claimed that he was providing a release for the colonist’s frustrations." [Pg 77]. Puglisi forgot to mention that killing and plundering innocent Indian villages is hardly a hobby. Both these documents imply that Bacon had no reason to attack the Indians; that the attacks against the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes were merely retaliation against Gov. Berkley's crimes.
Bacon: What I think
If the sources are to be taken as truth, I believe there were no heroes in Bacon's Rebellion. Each side of the conflict had their own faults and wrongdoings. Each side had reasoning for their anger; reasoning that may have been misguided, but was present nonetheless.
The Indians played a major role in this conflict, but I believe they were the most innocent our all the parties involved. For example, in, “A True Narrative of the Late Rebellion in Virginia” by the Royal commissioners, they show the example the following Indian conflict. “…Indians… stealing some hoggs… were pursued by the English on a boate… whereupon the Indians complained to their superiors that they had been… abused and cheated… so they took the hoggs for their own satisfaction” This emphasizes that the Indians did not steal for their own gain, they acted in revenge, which may have been part of their culture, “a eye for and eye” situation. The Indians stole property, attacked, killed, and even tortured settlers. But their actions, though far from being justified, had at least motivation based in a logical place.
The government’s crimes also contributed to the revolution. If we interpret Nathanial Bacon’s Declaration as truth, Governor Berkley was largely at fault. But I am wary of classifying had Declaration as a truism. There are fewer sources stating that the government was at fault for the rebellion, (the higher taxes, the favoring of friends in political positions of power, monopoly of the fur trade ect…). The document that stated Governor Berkeley was guilty of these crimes was a highly official document; signed by many colonists, so it does have credentials. Then again, it was signed by people who were against him and his actions, they were not exactly bipartisan. In any case, the Government was obviously a factor in causing public unrest, and the people were champing at the bit to receive the equality and protection they deserved.
And finally, Nathanial Bacon. I believe his actions were equal to little more than a colonial-age stress ball. I concede that he brought change, and did indeed act as the liberator of the settler’s anger, but I maintain that his actions were little more than cowardice. In anger at the authority, he attacked an uninvolved 3rd party? I see no heroism there. Any man who endorses the destruction of the innocent should not be awarded medals of honor. His lack of personal suffering implies that his motivations were more of prejudice and anger than for justice and economic equality. That brings up the question, was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation? I believe a little of both. He was a leader, but he was a man who could rally a crowd, assign guilt, acts as arbiter, aim a gun. That, I believe, is the extent of his leadership capabilities. And that extent is also the extent of his authority.
In conclusion, as I stated before, Nathanial Bacon was not a hero to the early Virginian colonists. The argument that state his intentions were noble is quelled by the fact that his actions were motivated by racism and were completely irrational. There is no denying that he did bring revolutionary ideas, but the long term significance out shadows his reasoning. His revolution foreshadowed the American Revolution, and therein lies Nathanial Bacons heroism in history.
Bibliography
“Bacons Rebellion: The declaration (1676) by Nathanial Bacon” (online) available at http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5800
“Nathanial Bacon Declaration, 1676” Reading the American past, pg 55
Puglisi, Michael “Whether they be friends or foes: The roles and reactions of tributary native groups caught in colonial conflicts” Marian College, pg 77
Zinn, Howard and Steffoff, Rebecca. A Young People’s History of the United States. Pg 35-51.
Bacon: A Hero
The desperately poor farmers, the indentured servants, exploited slaves of multiple races, and the lower class settlers all saw Nathanial Bacon as hope for a brighter, freer future. The people had multiple reasons for their unrest; their poverty, the growing distinctions between classes, promises of wealth and land that wouldn't be fulfilled, the growing anger at the government for lack of protection, and the racial tension; all of this was simmering below the surface of the shining new world the settlers had tried to hard to create. It seems implied that the poor white Englishmen had no one else to turn to for reform and protection from the government. Bacon did have his reasons for leading this sordid group of people who were robbed of their promised wealth.
First, Bacon claimed in his Declaration that Governor Berkeley, “…raised great unjust taxes”, “advancing [advanced] to places of judicature… scandalous and ignorant favorites”, and “…assuming [assumed] monopoly of the beaver trade” among other crimes. The government was also unwilling to help protect outlying settlers from Indian attacks, on the grounds that a war with the natives would damage the fur trade. Second, they would see him a person of his word because he fought along side them in the battles he led. He sacrificed his social status and favor with The Virginian government to execute this plan. Modern day scholars might say that his actions were noble because there were multiple races in the band of rebels he lead. He was the first to (briefly) unite blacks and whites in any major political cause. Historymatters.edu agreed, “Virginia’s planters long remembered the spectacle of black and white acting together to challenge authority”. Finally, they would see him as virtuous because the colonists already had prejudice against the Indians. The natives were not innocent, and the people jumped at the chance to retaliate in force. But it must be said that he wasn’t the settler’s choice, he was their only chance to improve their situation. In his wife’s letter to her sister, she tells a story of how he is doing good for the community, risking life and limb to protect the colonists from the “troublesome Indians”.
Bacon: A Martyr
There are other accounts of Bacon being less than noble. First, in his declaration, he believes himself a tragic hero, a defender of the poor and unprotected, a champion of justice. He said himself, "Judge therefore all wise and unprejudiced men...the aspersion of Traitor or Rebell", playing the long suffering martyr in his own documents. (Note: I'm using the definition of martyr, “A person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.”) Second, it is true that he had reasons to be angry, but what I don’t understand is why he choose to act in the way that he did. In his list of Gov. Berkeley’s crimes, he listed “prevention of civil disobedience” as one of the governor’s faults. Raiding the elite’s estates and destroying nearby villages does not constitute civil disobedience. Thirdly, he was not “one of the people”, as some sources imply. He was wealthy, and far from experiencing the suffering of the people he represented. Now if he was not in the masses shivering in worn boots and worrying about his family’s next meal, what were his motivations for rebelling? Was he simply an angry colonist searching for justice? Or was he a malicious leader, killing whenever or whoever he deemed fit?
It also must be said that the people on whom he focused the settler’s guns were innocent. True, not all Indians were guiltless at this time, but the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes that he lead attacks on were peaceful. Indeed, the tribes were so reluctant to offend the settlers that they did not raise a hand to defend themselves. His attack ruined trust with those and other Native American tribes. The government had placed peace treaties upon their land, which he ignored completely.
Zinn and Steffof emphasize Bacon being merely a leader in their book. They reiterate that the colonists concern was not either the Indians or Government, but a combination of both. They also observe the overall stress inflicted on the colonies by the over-zealous taxation by England. The book acknowledges, “He probably cared more about fighting Indians than about helping the poor."[Pg 36].
Michael Puglisi elucidates in his article,” Whether they be Friends or foes”, "He [Bacon] claimed that he was providing a release for the colonist’s frustrations." [Pg 77]. Puglisi forgot to mention that killing and plundering innocent Indian villages is hardly a hobby. Both these documents imply that Bacon had no reason to attack the Indians; that the attacks against the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes were merely retaliation against Gov. Berkley's crimes.
Bacon: What I think
If the sources are to be taken as truth, I believe there were no heroes in Bacon's Rebellion. Each side of the conflict had their own faults and wrongdoings. Each side had reasoning for their anger; reasoning that may have been misguided, but was present nonetheless.
The Indians played a major role in this conflict, but I believe they were the most innocent our all the parties involved. For example, in, “A True Narrative of the Late Rebellion in Virginia” by the Royal commissioners, they show the example the following Indian conflict. “…Indians… stealing some hoggs… were pursued by the English on a boate… whereupon the Indians complained to their superiors that they had been… abused and cheated… so they took the hoggs for their own satisfaction” This emphasizes that the Indians did not steal for their own gain, they acted in revenge, which may have been part of their culture, “a eye for and eye” situation. The Indians stole property, attacked, killed, and even tortured settlers. But their actions, though far from being justified, had at least motivation based in a logical place.
The government’s crimes also contributed to the revolution. If we interpret Nathanial Bacon’s Declaration as truth, Governor Berkley was largely at fault. But I am wary of classifying had Declaration as a truism. There are fewer sources stating that the government was at fault for the rebellion, (the higher taxes, the favoring of friends in political positions of power, monopoly of the fur trade ect…). The document that stated Governor Berkeley was guilty of these crimes was a highly official document; signed by many colonists, so it does have credentials. Then again, it was signed by people who were against him and his actions, they were not exactly bipartisan. In any case, the Government was obviously a factor in causing public unrest, and the people were champing at the bit to receive the equality and protection they deserved.
And finally, Nathanial Bacon. I believe his actions were equal to little more than a colonial-age stress ball. I concede that he brought change, and did indeed act as the liberator of the settler’s anger, but I maintain that his actions were little more than cowardice. In anger at the authority, he attacked an uninvolved 3rd party? I see no heroism there. Any man who endorses the destruction of the innocent should not be awarded medals of honor. His lack of personal suffering implies that his motivations were more of prejudice and anger than for justice and economic equality. That brings up the question, was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation? I believe a little of both. He was a leader, but he was a man who could rally a crowd, assign guilt, acts as arbiter, aim a gun. That, I believe, is the extent of his leadership capabilities. And that extent is also the extent of his authority.
In conclusion, as I stated before, Nathanial Bacon was not a hero to the early Virginian colonists. The argument that state his intentions were noble is quelled by the fact that his actions were motivated by racism and were completely irrational. There is no denying that he did bring revolutionary ideas, but the long term significance out shadows his reasoning. His revolution foreshadowed the American Revolution, and therein lies Nathanial Bacons heroism in history.
Bibliography
“Bacons Rebellion: The declaration (1676) by Nathanial Bacon” (online) available at http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5800
“Nathanial Bacon Declaration, 1676” Reading the American past, pg 55
Puglisi, Michael “Whether they be friends or foes: The roles and reactions of tributary native groups caught in colonial conflicts” Marian College, pg 77
Zinn, Howard and Steffoff, Rebecca. A Young People’s History of the United States. Pg 35-51.
Portfolio: Coll 101 assignment.
Amber Springer
Coll 101 assignment
College fair review
1. Provide the name and a brief description of the following colleges
A public college –
Alberta College of Art
A famous arts college, I like this college because it had the exact degree programs I want, they will accept transfer credits because they receive so many students from other countries. I love that they specialize and are most know for the two majors I want to go to most, Photography and Graphic Design. Its now one of my choice schools, tuition is relatively low, especially for an arts college, they have a job placement program and a small- medium freshman class size. They are a small college, with a low teacher to student ration, at 1:9. The only reason I could see why this would not be a choice school for me would be that it is out of the country, living there would be a challenge, I would need to get housing (I believe on campus housing is available) and a job in Canada.
A private college –
Cornish College of the Arts
This is also a renowned college is the world of art, the name of Cornish is very famous. I like that if I attend, I would have that name backing me up, rather than a smaller or more unknown college. The tuition is more expensive than my choice schools, by about 10,000 a year. But I love the small college feel and with only 800 students you know if you are accepted, you are among the best up and coming artists. They have my choice degree programs. I love their location as well, I wouldn’t have to adjust my life seriously to attend there, I would be within driving distance of my current location, and it being in Seattle would give me plenty opportunity for fun while working, studying and in my free time.
A rural college –
Northwest College of the Arts
Because of the college fair, this is now my choice school. I love the rural location; they have a large waterfront campus close to Seattle. The tuition is the lowest I have encountered. I also like the dual major program, witch would allow me to learn and apply both of my most desired degrees (fine arts and design). Also, they have an accelerated curriculum, where I would be done in 3-4 years instead of 5 like most dual major programs. I was also impressed by the representative, he was extremely helpful in answering my questions, and I will contact him in the future for further admission questions.
A traditional large university –
Art Institute of Seattle
This would be my 3rd college of choice, and once again this college has already made a name for itself in the artistic community, witch is very helpful when looking for a job as a graduate. Although the schools I have seen before were relatively small, the Art Institute is widely established all over the country, if I decided to move out of state, the name would carry with me. I like a lot of the same things about this college that I do about others, like the rest, they are hands on, trying to focus on small class sizes in which to best stimulate creative ability, a urban campus ect. They are medium tuition, about 15,000 more than Northwest College of Art.
A small alternative college –
I did not look for a alternative college, I have a very specific major, so all of the colleges I am looking at have specialized degree programs, I don’t want to be back burnered by a institution that has a photography degree as a small, relatively unnoticed program they offer. If there was a small alternative arts college, I would certainly look into it. 2. Select a college major; describe three colleges with quality degree programs in that major.
My most desired major is a fine arts degree in photography. At the college fair I saw 4-5 prospective colleges with quality degrees in that field.
One of them was California College of the arts. CCA did not impress me much in person, the tuition is very expensive, and the first year you do not get to choose the classes you take. Their brochure was much more informative and inviting. I was impressed, however, with the representative of CCA. She was knowledgeable in my degree program, and her advice even helped me that day during the college fair. She addressed the high tuition costs and told me that a lot of it could be waived they had more scholarship opportunities than most. Considering the price of tuition, and the face that I would need to move out of state upon acceptance, I would probably not apply to this college. But if it was in state, I would be interested I attending.
The second college I explored was Alberta College of Art and Design. I was also favorably impressed by the rep there, she was friendly and knowledgeable. I did not discover anything too profound about this college, I think the only thing that really sets it apart in my eyes would be its location, I wouldn’t have considered a college that was out of country before the fair. I would like to attend this college, but I think the transition would be one of the hardest; I do not want to be that far away from my family and friends. I don’t see the educational experience being that terribly different than anything I had already seen; they are a small college, with relatively low student to teacher ratios, low tuition and an urban campus.
The last and final college I explored for their photography degree was Northwest College of the Arts. I was by far the most impressed with this college. They have almost obscenely small class sizes and teacher-student ratios. They are a private college, and I would appreciate the challenge of getting accepted there. I love the low tuition and the spacious natural campus. They have modern, state of the art facilities as they have recently moved due to expansion. They I could double major in both my fields of choice, and actually graduate faster than if I was enrolled in another dual major program. If they accepted my transfer credit, I may save a truly incredible about of money and time in college, the experience would be completely different here than any other college.
3. After attending a seminar at the college fair, describe its content and evaluate the information received.
The workshop I attended was “How to Write a Better College Essay.” I found the information very useful. She had been a dean of admissions, and she has read literally thousands of essays. The speaker told us the importance of a few main items, the first one being something as simple as follow the directions. Her next points stressed the importance of personal voice in your essay. She said be real, be yourself, use whatever talents you have. One of the best pieces of advice she gave me was to play to your strengths. If you are good at creative writing, then write it like a story. I didn’t know you could do that, I thought it had to follow the traditional essay format, that’s something I will be using when I write my own college entrance essays. She said there have been many cases where she could see talent, but the student’s refusal to brag about their own qualities in their essay may have cost them admission. She was entertaining, and what I learned in that seminar I will be able to use in other essays as well, so that was 30 minutes of my time very well spent.
4. Write a personal evaluation of the college fair experience.
The college fair was a complete success for me, but only because I was prepared in advance. If I had just shown up there, the experience would have been completely chaotic and nearly worthless. The fact I came prepared with what was important to me, the questions I wanted to ask, was invaluable.
The information I received that was the most important was probably when I asked the rep from NWCA how I could impress the admissions officers most with my portfolio or application. He told me that my portfolio was extremely important, that showing examples that you could grow and had talent was consequential. “But even more that that”, he said “you can impress us by showing a desire to learn, a desire to attend, a passion for your art.” That’s something you won’t get offline.
I don’t think I have any unanswered questions that I didn’t ask at the fair. Now my question is will my credits be transferred? But that will be part of the next step, which is starting communication with these colleges now. I should start thinking about my portfolio, and how it will affect me in the admissions process.
The fair was a great experience for me, I had fun, and I learned more in a few hours that I could have online. I met people, I shook the hands that might hold my admissions essay, I got numbers for the people Ill be talking to throughout the next three years, with all luck.
Coll 101 assignment
College fair review
1. Provide the name and a brief description of the following colleges
A public college –
Alberta College of Art
A famous arts college, I like this college because it had the exact degree programs I want, they will accept transfer credits because they receive so many students from other countries. I love that they specialize and are most know for the two majors I want to go to most, Photography and Graphic Design. Its now one of my choice schools, tuition is relatively low, especially for an arts college, they have a job placement program and a small- medium freshman class size. They are a small college, with a low teacher to student ration, at 1:9. The only reason I could see why this would not be a choice school for me would be that it is out of the country, living there would be a challenge, I would need to get housing (I believe on campus housing is available) and a job in Canada.
A private college –
Cornish College of the Arts
This is also a renowned college is the world of art, the name of Cornish is very famous. I like that if I attend, I would have that name backing me up, rather than a smaller or more unknown college. The tuition is more expensive than my choice schools, by about 10,000 a year. But I love the small college feel and with only 800 students you know if you are accepted, you are among the best up and coming artists. They have my choice degree programs. I love their location as well, I wouldn’t have to adjust my life seriously to attend there, I would be within driving distance of my current location, and it being in Seattle would give me plenty opportunity for fun while working, studying and in my free time.
A rural college –
Northwest College of the Arts
Because of the college fair, this is now my choice school. I love the rural location; they have a large waterfront campus close to Seattle. The tuition is the lowest I have encountered. I also like the dual major program, witch would allow me to learn and apply both of my most desired degrees (fine arts and design). Also, they have an accelerated curriculum, where I would be done in 3-4 years instead of 5 like most dual major programs. I was also impressed by the representative, he was extremely helpful in answering my questions, and I will contact him in the future for further admission questions.
A traditional large university –
Art Institute of Seattle
This would be my 3rd college of choice, and once again this college has already made a name for itself in the artistic community, witch is very helpful when looking for a job as a graduate. Although the schools I have seen before were relatively small, the Art Institute is widely established all over the country, if I decided to move out of state, the name would carry with me. I like a lot of the same things about this college that I do about others, like the rest, they are hands on, trying to focus on small class sizes in which to best stimulate creative ability, a urban campus ect. They are medium tuition, about 15,000 more than Northwest College of Art.
A small alternative college –
I did not look for a alternative college, I have a very specific major, so all of the colleges I am looking at have specialized degree programs, I don’t want to be back burnered by a institution that has a photography degree as a small, relatively unnoticed program they offer. If there was a small alternative arts college, I would certainly look into it. 2. Select a college major; describe three colleges with quality degree programs in that major.
My most desired major is a fine arts degree in photography. At the college fair I saw 4-5 prospective colleges with quality degrees in that field.
One of them was California College of the arts. CCA did not impress me much in person, the tuition is very expensive, and the first year you do not get to choose the classes you take. Their brochure was much more informative and inviting. I was impressed, however, with the representative of CCA. She was knowledgeable in my degree program, and her advice even helped me that day during the college fair. She addressed the high tuition costs and told me that a lot of it could be waived they had more scholarship opportunities than most. Considering the price of tuition, and the face that I would need to move out of state upon acceptance, I would probably not apply to this college. But if it was in state, I would be interested I attending.
The second college I explored was Alberta College of Art and Design. I was also favorably impressed by the rep there, she was friendly and knowledgeable. I did not discover anything too profound about this college, I think the only thing that really sets it apart in my eyes would be its location, I wouldn’t have considered a college that was out of country before the fair. I would like to attend this college, but I think the transition would be one of the hardest; I do not want to be that far away from my family and friends. I don’t see the educational experience being that terribly different than anything I had already seen; they are a small college, with relatively low student to teacher ratios, low tuition and an urban campus.
The last and final college I explored for their photography degree was Northwest College of the Arts. I was by far the most impressed with this college. They have almost obscenely small class sizes and teacher-student ratios. They are a private college, and I would appreciate the challenge of getting accepted there. I love the low tuition and the spacious natural campus. They have modern, state of the art facilities as they have recently moved due to expansion. They I could double major in both my fields of choice, and actually graduate faster than if I was enrolled in another dual major program. If they accepted my transfer credit, I may save a truly incredible about of money and time in college, the experience would be completely different here than any other college.
3. After attending a seminar at the college fair, describe its content and evaluate the information received.
The workshop I attended was “How to Write a Better College Essay.” I found the information very useful. She had been a dean of admissions, and she has read literally thousands of essays. The speaker told us the importance of a few main items, the first one being something as simple as follow the directions. Her next points stressed the importance of personal voice in your essay. She said be real, be yourself, use whatever talents you have. One of the best pieces of advice she gave me was to play to your strengths. If you are good at creative writing, then write it like a story. I didn’t know you could do that, I thought it had to follow the traditional essay format, that’s something I will be using when I write my own college entrance essays. She said there have been many cases where she could see talent, but the student’s refusal to brag about their own qualities in their essay may have cost them admission. She was entertaining, and what I learned in that seminar I will be able to use in other essays as well, so that was 30 minutes of my time very well spent.
4. Write a personal evaluation of the college fair experience.
The college fair was a complete success for me, but only because I was prepared in advance. If I had just shown up there, the experience would have been completely chaotic and nearly worthless. The fact I came prepared with what was important to me, the questions I wanted to ask, was invaluable.
The information I received that was the most important was probably when I asked the rep from NWCA how I could impress the admissions officers most with my portfolio or application. He told me that my portfolio was extremely important, that showing examples that you could grow and had talent was consequential. “But even more that that”, he said “you can impress us by showing a desire to learn, a desire to attend, a passion for your art.” That’s something you won’t get offline.
I don’t think I have any unanswered questions that I didn’t ask at the fair. Now my question is will my credits be transferred? But that will be part of the next step, which is starting communication with these colleges now. I should start thinking about my portfolio, and how it will affect me in the admissions process.
The fair was a great experience for me, I had fun, and I learned more in a few hours that I could have online. I met people, I shook the hands that might hold my admissions essay, I got numbers for the people Ill be talking to throughout the next three years, with all luck.
Portfolio: Final Exam- Frame 1
There are certain skills I would expect college graduates to have. They’re probably able to think analytically, form complex arguments and analyze and solve complex problems. It’s not a tall order to believe that they should be able to read. And yet some graduates “can barely fill out a simple application” according to Geoffrey Meredith. How is that remotely possible? Society spends its time pointing fingers; at the parents of these students, at the education system for making class sizes too large resulting in little personal attention, at teachers and professors for not caring about their students success. But the general population should not blame one thing for the rather large oversight of a graduate not being able to read an application, let alone “Pride and Prejudice”. Illiteracy in this scale is the result of something much larger than one professor’s teaching.
In “The Demise of Writing”, Mr. Meredith explains the tragedy of “functional illiteracy”. When reading is not only recommended, not only required, but essential to the workforce, this situation is truly inexcusable. One out of 5 people are unable to read at an acceptable level, most of that statistic being graduates who can’t analyze low to medium level difficulty text. Most disturbing of all, Meredith says that the baby boomer generation may be the best educated in history… and in the future.
My mother has personal experience in this problem as well. One of my mother’s co-workers is one in the previously mentioned statistic. This woman often comes over to my mother to ask her to explain a document. This woman does this consistently, nearly on a daily basis, despite it being part of her job to analyze these documents. That wastes both my mother’s time and the company’s. How does an oversight like that occur in an interview? Did this woman say, “I work well with people and I have a great work ethic. Also, I can’t read past an 8th grade reading level.”?
One might ask, “What’s the harm here? These people obviously can function in society, if they don’t want to learn, it’s not our job to babysit them.” Ill return with a question. These “graduates”, where do you think they’re working? I don’t want someone who can’t read as an air traffic controller or working in a police force! Of course it’s not anyone’s job to make sure people have higher education. But to say that its not the educational departments job to make sure a high school graduate can read a basic text is ridiculous. I will concede that if a student doesn’t want to learn, they won’t. But that excuse goes by the wayside when it comes to college alumni. They spend a lot of resources on gaining a higher education, having that large of a skill deficit is intolerable.
This is a paramount issue screaming for a solution. If I were in the education department I would propose a law stating that any capable student that cannot read at a 12th grade reading level will not be allowed to graduate. No exceptions. This society requires literacy. The purpose of education is to prepare a student for the future. If a student stares at his first application and cannot fill it out past his name, there is blame to be shared and work to be done.
In “The Demise of Writing”, Mr. Meredith explains the tragedy of “functional illiteracy”. When reading is not only recommended, not only required, but essential to the workforce, this situation is truly inexcusable. One out of 5 people are unable to read at an acceptable level, most of that statistic being graduates who can’t analyze low to medium level difficulty text. Most disturbing of all, Meredith says that the baby boomer generation may be the best educated in history… and in the future.
My mother has personal experience in this problem as well. One of my mother’s co-workers is one in the previously mentioned statistic. This woman often comes over to my mother to ask her to explain a document. This woman does this consistently, nearly on a daily basis, despite it being part of her job to analyze these documents. That wastes both my mother’s time and the company’s. How does an oversight like that occur in an interview? Did this woman say, “I work well with people and I have a great work ethic. Also, I can’t read past an 8th grade reading level.”?
One might ask, “What’s the harm here? These people obviously can function in society, if they don’t want to learn, it’s not our job to babysit them.” Ill return with a question. These “graduates”, where do you think they’re working? I don’t want someone who can’t read as an air traffic controller or working in a police force! Of course it’s not anyone’s job to make sure people have higher education. But to say that its not the educational departments job to make sure a high school graduate can read a basic text is ridiculous. I will concede that if a student doesn’t want to learn, they won’t. But that excuse goes by the wayside when it comes to college alumni. They spend a lot of resources on gaining a higher education, having that large of a skill deficit is intolerable.
This is a paramount issue screaming for a solution. If I were in the education department I would propose a law stating that any capable student that cannot read at a 12th grade reading level will not be allowed to graduate. No exceptions. This society requires literacy. The purpose of education is to prepare a student for the future. If a student stares at his first application and cannot fill it out past his name, there is blame to be shared and work to be done.
Revised reflective letter
This quarter in Writ 101 has been great in every way possible, helping me develop as a more confident writer. This year I learned:
• That I can consistently think on a college level basis, and translate these thoughts onto paper
• How to organize a essay so its more effective, and use transitions better for clarity
• How to make an emphatic thesis
• How to create an outline that’s organized and effective
• That I need to improve my research skills to have clearer and stronger content
• How to apply strong topic sentences at the beginning of every paragraph for clarity
• That I can write a essay with a specific deadline, even if the directions aren’t as clearly laid out as they were in high school
• That I have personal voice when I write
My second essay was where I struggled the most this year. Every part of the essay was repulsive to me, I hated the time frame we had, and the creative writing mixed with the analytical writing. I also found the research to be extremely difficult, especially compared to essay number one. That affected my content as seen in this line, “Our ancestors were forced to flee from Britain to escape religious persecution; now however, we are strong enough to fight back that same cause.” They weren’t fighting religious persecution in the revolutionary war. But I can’t deny I did learn from the experience. I learned I don’t work well when writes genres are mixed, but I can still manage to get it done in time. My grade on it pleasantly surprised me, and next time I will make sure I have only one genre to work with.
However, my first essay was something that I am very proud of. In the beginning, I was extremely worried because this was my first real assignment as a college student. This seemed like the first big obstacle, not to mention the stories I had heard about Craig’s grading that did nothing to soothe my nerves. But, for the first time, I let my fear motivate me and worked consistently on it for the entire three weeks. When I got my score back I was thrilled. As much as I wanted an A, I think a B was both fair and exciting. I liked the following lines from my essay because they show my voice, and an example of they say I say templates. “I believe his actions were equal to little more than a colonial-age stress ball. I concede that he brought change, and did indeed act as the liberator of the settler’s anger, but I maintain that his actions were little more than cowardice.”
Another thing I am proud of was when Craig said I was one of the best people for peer review. I had spent a considerable of time helping other people with their essay as much as I could, and it was great to be recognized for the time I put in.
Form my shaky start, I think PSEC and especially this writing class has helped me immeasurably. The thing I learned in this quarter I will be using for the rest of my academic career. Along with academic skills like being able to introduce “They say” into my writing, I received something I thought I wouldn’t from any scholarly setting: self confidence and pride in what I write. Everything I work on feels like a challenge, and everything I completed is testimony to how hard I worked.
• That I can consistently think on a college level basis, and translate these thoughts onto paper
• How to organize a essay so its more effective, and use transitions better for clarity
• How to make an emphatic thesis
• How to create an outline that’s organized and effective
• That I need to improve my research skills to have clearer and stronger content
• How to apply strong topic sentences at the beginning of every paragraph for clarity
• That I can write a essay with a specific deadline, even if the directions aren’t as clearly laid out as they were in high school
• That I have personal voice when I write
My second essay was where I struggled the most this year. Every part of the essay was repulsive to me, I hated the time frame we had, and the creative writing mixed with the analytical writing. I also found the research to be extremely difficult, especially compared to essay number one. That affected my content as seen in this line, “Our ancestors were forced to flee from Britain to escape religious persecution; now however, we are strong enough to fight back that same cause.” They weren’t fighting religious persecution in the revolutionary war. But I can’t deny I did learn from the experience. I learned I don’t work well when writes genres are mixed, but I can still manage to get it done in time. My grade on it pleasantly surprised me, and next time I will make sure I have only one genre to work with.
However, my first essay was something that I am very proud of. In the beginning, I was extremely worried because this was my first real assignment as a college student. This seemed like the first big obstacle, not to mention the stories I had heard about Craig’s grading that did nothing to soothe my nerves. But, for the first time, I let my fear motivate me and worked consistently on it for the entire three weeks. When I got my score back I was thrilled. As much as I wanted an A, I think a B was both fair and exciting. I liked the following lines from my essay because they show my voice, and an example of they say I say templates. “I believe his actions were equal to little more than a colonial-age stress ball. I concede that he brought change, and did indeed act as the liberator of the settler’s anger, but I maintain that his actions were little more than cowardice.”
Another thing I am proud of was when Craig said I was one of the best people for peer review. I had spent a considerable of time helping other people with their essay as much as I could, and it was great to be recognized for the time I put in.
Form my shaky start, I think PSEC and especially this writing class has helped me immeasurably. The thing I learned in this quarter I will be using for the rest of my academic career. Along with academic skills like being able to introduce “They say” into my writing, I received something I thought I wouldn’t from any scholarly setting: self confidence and pride in what I write. Everything I work on feels like a challenge, and everything I completed is testimony to how hard I worked.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Reflective essay Draft
This quarter in Writ 101 has been great in every way possible. The class has helped me develop as a more confident writer. This year I learned:
• That I can consistently think on a college level basis, and translate these thoughts onto paper
• How to organize a essay so its more effective, and use transitions better for clarity
• How to make an emphatic thesis
• How to create an outline that’s organized and effective
• That I need to improve my research skills to have clearer and stronger content
• How to apply strong topic sentences at the beginning of every paragraph for clarity
• That I can write a essay with a specific deadline, even if the directions aren’t as clearly laid out as they were in high school
• That I have personal voice when I write
My second essay was where I struggled the most this year. Every part of the essay was repulsive to me, I hated the time frame we had, and the creative writing mixed with the analytical writing. I also found the research to be extremely difficult, especially compared to essay number one. I found it one of the most difficult pieces of writing I have ever attempted. But I can’t deny I did learn from the experience. I learned I don’t work well when writes genres are mixed, but I can still manage to get it done in time. My grade on it pleasantly surprised me, and next time I will make sure I have only one genre to work with.
However, my first essay was something that I am very proud of. In the beginning, I was extremely worried because this was my first real assignment as a college student. This seemed like the first big obstacle. Not to mention he storied that I had heard stories about Craig’s grading that did nothing to soothe my nerves. But, for the first time, I let my fear motivate me and worked consistently on it for the entire three weeks. When I got my score back I was thrilled. As much as I wanted an A, I think a B was both fair and exciting.
Another thing I am proud of was when Craig said I was one of the best people for peer review. I had spent a considerable of time helping other people with their essay as much as I could, and it was great to be recognized for the time I put in.
Form my shaky start, I think PSEC and especially this writing class has helped me immeasurably. The thing I learned in this quarter I will be using for the rest of my academic career. Along with academic skills like being able to introduce “They say” into my writing, I received something I thought I wouldn’t from any scholarly setting: self confidence and pride in what I write. Everything I work on feels like a challenge, and everything I complete is testimony to how hard I worked.
• That I can consistently think on a college level basis, and translate these thoughts onto paper
• How to organize a essay so its more effective, and use transitions better for clarity
• How to make an emphatic thesis
• How to create an outline that’s organized and effective
• That I need to improve my research skills to have clearer and stronger content
• How to apply strong topic sentences at the beginning of every paragraph for clarity
• That I can write a essay with a specific deadline, even if the directions aren’t as clearly laid out as they were in high school
• That I have personal voice when I write
My second essay was where I struggled the most this year. Every part of the essay was repulsive to me, I hated the time frame we had, and the creative writing mixed with the analytical writing. I also found the research to be extremely difficult, especially compared to essay number one. I found it one of the most difficult pieces of writing I have ever attempted. But I can’t deny I did learn from the experience. I learned I don’t work well when writes genres are mixed, but I can still manage to get it done in time. My grade on it pleasantly surprised me, and next time I will make sure I have only one genre to work with.
However, my first essay was something that I am very proud of. In the beginning, I was extremely worried because this was my first real assignment as a college student. This seemed like the first big obstacle. Not to mention he storied that I had heard stories about Craig’s grading that did nothing to soothe my nerves. But, for the first time, I let my fear motivate me and worked consistently on it for the entire three weeks. When I got my score back I was thrilled. As much as I wanted an A, I think a B was both fair and exciting.
Another thing I am proud of was when Craig said I was one of the best people for peer review. I had spent a considerable of time helping other people with their essay as much as I could, and it was great to be recognized for the time I put in.
Form my shaky start, I think PSEC and especially this writing class has helped me immeasurably. The thing I learned in this quarter I will be using for the rest of my academic career. Along with academic skills like being able to introduce “They say” into my writing, I received something I thought I wouldn’t from any scholarly setting: self confidence and pride in what I write. Everything I work on feels like a challenge, and everything I complete is testimony to how hard I worked.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Essay 2 Reflection
This essay was without a doubt one of the worst I have ever written. There were other things going on in my life that distracted me and left me unfocused. The time frame felt too short as well. I had a horrible time with research, I'm not sure if it was the use of the data bases or maybe I wasn’t creative enough with my search terms.
There was nothing I did well or enjoyed on this essay. I resented the “analytical with creative elements”, Even though Craig said that could have been simply a guideline. I didn’t like that we were split into states. Although the one thing I liked was the community posting of useful sources, that was potentially helpful.
I feel the best way to learn from this experience is to either
A. Forget everything about this essay and move on or
B. Look at this essay as a negative example for all further writing.
Next time we start an essay, hopefully there won’t be so much going on at home so I will be able to focus and really put some time into my research. If that happens, maybe Ill have something worth reading next time.
There was nothing I did well or enjoyed on this essay. I resented the “analytical with creative elements”, Even though Craig said that could have been simply a guideline. I didn’t like that we were split into states. Although the one thing I liked was the community posting of useful sources, that was potentially helpful.
I feel the best way to learn from this experience is to either
A. Forget everything about this essay and move on or
B. Look at this essay as a negative example for all further writing.
Next time we start an essay, hopefully there won’t be so much going on at home so I will be able to focus and really put some time into my research. If that happens, maybe Ill have something worth reading next time.
Friday, November 21, 2008
Essay 2 Final
As a citizen of the state of New Jersey, I know where my loyalties lie. I have seen, as my fellow patriots have, the many injustices and tyrannies committed by Great Britain against us. Their behavior is incorrigible and indefensible. She strikes now at the very core of our values, taking from us what is never meant to be taken. I have seen horrible battles and unnecessary bloodshed taking place in my own backyard caused by conflicts with the Tories. Our ancestors were forced to flee from Britain to escape religious persecution; now however, we are strong enough to fight back that same cause. Those that blindly and willingly support this tyranny over us are just as dangerous as the great power we seek independence from. As patriots, our duty to those who are fighting now, to those who died in their fight for freedom, and to those brave men who will spill blood for our cause isn’t blind support. Our duty is to demand change. Demand that the monarchy gives us back the rights we were born with, and demand that we be given the same rights as any Englishmen. I am a patriot to fight these unjust laws, underhanded taxes and vicious oppression.
Firstly, in enforcing these unjust laws and underhanded taxes, Britain has infringed on our natural rights. The purpose of government is to serve the interests of the people. The rights of the monarchy stop at cruelty, and they have far surpassed that line. It is not wrong that one group of people should lead over the masses? In our own constitution, we are entitled,” That all criminals shall be admitted to the same privileges of witnesses and counsel, as their prosecutors are or shall be entitled to.” (Avalon). There have been too many instances to name where the accused have been tried with no impartiality. Further, Britain chooses to fight New Jersey on our ground. Coming to this land, this state, they attempt to deprecate the ideas of the hearts and minds of people. The monarchy is compromised, instead of a pillar of strength; a greedy clique taxes the people of this state into poverty.
Britain has slapped us with a title akin to slave. Our society is built on the principal of justice; we are receiving neither justice nor respect. The king had long abused all of the colonies, treating us like enemies instead of kin. There is no difference between New Jersyians and menial workers now. We are having our core taken from us, our backbone, inarguable birthrights. Patrick Henry concurs, “I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery”. Do we wish to bend our backs to the cruelties committed? Will we bend like serfs to the will of a power 3000 miles away? No. We should stand together united, as a single thinking force. We are no different than those souls in England. We are the same people, suffering under the same despotism. Why are we impaired by laws, why are our towns filled with soldiers, why are we crippled from full potential? It isn’t equitable.
What could be more critical than our independence from this despotic government? As Tomas Paine stated, “The sun never shined on a cause of greater worth”. If you do not wish to raise a fist against injustice for yourself, if you as a citizen do not care about the deprivation, the starvation of freedoms that are rightfully yours, consider the future generations. One who inflects cruelties will do it again, even larger in scale. For your children, for your husbands and sons facing an imposing army, the cause is of utmost importance. Britain can burn our towns, it may exert more wrongs upon us, and patriot blood will be spilt. But we are a state, tied together, bonded through our hardships, our sights singularly focused on the great power looming over us. The time is now for revolutionary behavior. This is a war that will be remembered by all, because it is just that: a revolution. As a united whole, the people state of New Jersey will join this desperate fight. Oppression will be stopped. Taxes will be revoked. Laws will be repealed. The people of New Jersey are worthy of fair governing, just taxes, and freedom from oppression.
Bill, Alfred Hoyt. New Jersey and the Revolutionary War. Rutgers University Press, 1992.
“Constitution of New Jersey; 1776” http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/nj15.asp
Henry, Patrick. "Give me Liberty or Give me Death." 23 Mar 1775 Page 1, Paragraph 1. 17 Nov 2008 .
Paine, Tomas. "Thoughts on Present State of American Affairs." Common Sense Page 1, paragraph 4. 17 Nov 2008 .
Firstly, in enforcing these unjust laws and underhanded taxes, Britain has infringed on our natural rights. The purpose of government is to serve the interests of the people. The rights of the monarchy stop at cruelty, and they have far surpassed that line. It is not wrong that one group of people should lead over the masses? In our own constitution, we are entitled,” That all criminals shall be admitted to the same privileges of witnesses and counsel, as their prosecutors are or shall be entitled to.” (Avalon). There have been too many instances to name where the accused have been tried with no impartiality. Further, Britain chooses to fight New Jersey on our ground. Coming to this land, this state, they attempt to deprecate the ideas of the hearts and minds of people. The monarchy is compromised, instead of a pillar of strength; a greedy clique taxes the people of this state into poverty.
Britain has slapped us with a title akin to slave. Our society is built on the principal of justice; we are receiving neither justice nor respect. The king had long abused all of the colonies, treating us like enemies instead of kin. There is no difference between New Jersyians and menial workers now. We are having our core taken from us, our backbone, inarguable birthrights. Patrick Henry concurs, “I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery”. Do we wish to bend our backs to the cruelties committed? Will we bend like serfs to the will of a power 3000 miles away? No. We should stand together united, as a single thinking force. We are no different than those souls in England. We are the same people, suffering under the same despotism. Why are we impaired by laws, why are our towns filled with soldiers, why are we crippled from full potential? It isn’t equitable.
What could be more critical than our independence from this despotic government? As Tomas Paine stated, “The sun never shined on a cause of greater worth”. If you do not wish to raise a fist against injustice for yourself, if you as a citizen do not care about the deprivation, the starvation of freedoms that are rightfully yours, consider the future generations. One who inflects cruelties will do it again, even larger in scale. For your children, for your husbands and sons facing an imposing army, the cause is of utmost importance. Britain can burn our towns, it may exert more wrongs upon us, and patriot blood will be spilt. But we are a state, tied together, bonded through our hardships, our sights singularly focused on the great power looming over us. The time is now for revolutionary behavior. This is a war that will be remembered by all, because it is just that: a revolution. As a united whole, the people state of New Jersey will join this desperate fight. Oppression will be stopped. Taxes will be revoked. Laws will be repealed. The people of New Jersey are worthy of fair governing, just taxes, and freedom from oppression.
Bill, Alfred Hoyt. New Jersey and the Revolutionary War. Rutgers University Press, 1992.
“Constitution of New Jersey; 1776” http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/nj15.asp
Henry, Patrick. "Give me Liberty or Give me Death." 23 Mar 1775 Page 1, Paragraph 1. 17 Nov 2008 .
Paine, Tomas. "Thoughts on Present State of American Affairs." Common Sense Page 1, paragraph 4. 17 Nov 2008 .
Monday, November 17, 2008
Essay 2 rough draft
As a citizen of the state of New Jersey, I know where my loyalties lie. I have seen, as my fellow people have, the many injustices and tyrannies committed by the state of Great Britain against us. Their behavior is incorrigible and indefensible. Once a warm and loving parent, she now strikes at the very core of our values, taking from us what is never meant to be taken. I have seen, in my own backyard, horrible battles and unnecessary bloodshed. Our ancestors fled from Britain to escape persecution; now we are strong enough to fight back for a similar cause. The loyalists are just as dangerous to us as the great power we seek independence from. They support, blindly and willingly, tyranny of men. This is our duty to those who are fighting now, to those who died in their fight for freedom, and to those brave men who will spill blood for our cause. Patriotism is the most important cause we will live to see.
Firstly, in enforcing these unjust laws and underhanded taxes, Britain has infringed on our natural rights. It is not intrinsic (inherent) that one group of people should lead over the masses. The time is now for revolutionary ideas and rebellious behavior. This is a battle that will be remembered by all, because it is just that. A Revolution. Further, Britain chooses to fight New Jersey on our ground. Coming to this land, this state, they attempt to deprecate the ideas of the hearts and minds of people. The monarchy is compromised, instead of a pillar of strength and purity; now a greedy clique taxes the people of these colonies into poverty. The purpose of government is to serve the interests of the people, the rights of the monarchy stop at cruelty, and they have far surpassed that line. As Tomas Paine stated, “The sun never shined on a cause of greater worth” (Paine)
They have slapped us with the aspersion of slave, not citizen. Our society is built on the principal of justice; we are receiving neither justice nor respect. The king had long abused all of the colonies, treating us like were enemies instead of kin. There is no difference between New Jersyians and menial workers now. We are having our core taken from us, our backbone, inarguable birthrights. Patrick Henry concurs, “I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery”(Henry) . Do we wish to bend our backs to the cruelties committed? Will we bend like serfs to the will of a power 3000 miles away? No. We should stand together united, as a single thinking force. We are no different than those souls in England. We are the same people, suffering under the same despotism. Why are we impaired by laws, why are our towns filled with soldiers, why are we crippled from full potential? It isn’t equitable.
The people of New Jersey are worthy of freedom. We are no longer a small group of people 3000 miles away from home; we are no longer a huddled mass waiting for handouts. New Jersey is “The best country I have seen for people of middling fortunes who live by the sweat of their brows”- Jonathan Belcher. (Bill 3-4).
What could be more critical than our independence from this despotic government? If you do not wish to raise a fist against injustice for yourself, If you as a citizen do not care about the deprivation, the starvation of freedoms, that are rightfully yours, consider the future generations. One who inflects cruelties will do it again, even larger in scale. For your children, the cause is of utmost significance. For your husbands and sons facing an imposing army, the cause is of utmost importance. Britain can burn our towns, it may exert more wrongs upon us, patriot blood will be spilt. We are a state, tied together, bonded through our hardships, our sights singularly focused on the great power looming over us. But now we have the strength to fight. As a community, as a united whole, the people state of New Jersey must join this desperate fight. We will win.
Bill, Alfred Hoyt. New Jersey and the Revolutionary War. Rutgers University Press, 1992.
Henry, Patrick. "Give me Liberty or Give me Death." 23 Mar 1775 Page 1, Paragraph 1. 17 Nov 2008 .
Paine, Tomas. "Thoughts on Present State of American Affairs." Common Sense Page 1, paragraph 4. 17 Nov 2008 .
Firstly, in enforcing these unjust laws and underhanded taxes, Britain has infringed on our natural rights. It is not intrinsic (inherent) that one group of people should lead over the masses. The time is now for revolutionary ideas and rebellious behavior. This is a battle that will be remembered by all, because it is just that. A Revolution. Further, Britain chooses to fight New Jersey on our ground. Coming to this land, this state, they attempt to deprecate the ideas of the hearts and minds of people. The monarchy is compromised, instead of a pillar of strength and purity; now a greedy clique taxes the people of these colonies into poverty. The purpose of government is to serve the interests of the people, the rights of the monarchy stop at cruelty, and they have far surpassed that line. As Tomas Paine stated, “The sun never shined on a cause of greater worth” (Paine)
They have slapped us with the aspersion of slave, not citizen. Our society is built on the principal of justice; we are receiving neither justice nor respect. The king had long abused all of the colonies, treating us like were enemies instead of kin. There is no difference between New Jersyians and menial workers now. We are having our core taken from us, our backbone, inarguable birthrights. Patrick Henry concurs, “I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery”(Henry) . Do we wish to bend our backs to the cruelties committed? Will we bend like serfs to the will of a power 3000 miles away? No. We should stand together united, as a single thinking force. We are no different than those souls in England. We are the same people, suffering under the same despotism. Why are we impaired by laws, why are our towns filled with soldiers, why are we crippled from full potential? It isn’t equitable.
The people of New Jersey are worthy of freedom. We are no longer a small group of people 3000 miles away from home; we are no longer a huddled mass waiting for handouts. New Jersey is “The best country I have seen for people of middling fortunes who live by the sweat of their brows”- Jonathan Belcher. (Bill 3-4).
What could be more critical than our independence from this despotic government? If you do not wish to raise a fist against injustice for yourself, If you as a citizen do not care about the deprivation, the starvation of freedoms, that are rightfully yours, consider the future generations. One who inflects cruelties will do it again, even larger in scale. For your children, the cause is of utmost significance. For your husbands and sons facing an imposing army, the cause is of utmost importance. Britain can burn our towns, it may exert more wrongs upon us, patriot blood will be spilt. We are a state, tied together, bonded through our hardships, our sights singularly focused on the great power looming over us. But now we have the strength to fight. As a community, as a united whole, the people state of New Jersey must join this desperate fight. We will win.
Bill, Alfred Hoyt. New Jersey and the Revolutionary War. Rutgers University Press, 1992.
Henry, Patrick. "Give me Liberty or Give me Death." 23 Mar 1775 Page 1, Paragraph 1. 17 Nov 2008 .
Paine, Tomas. "Thoughts on Present State of American Affairs." Common Sense Page 1, paragraph 4. 17 Nov 2008 .
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Essay #2 draft (unfinished)
As a citizen of the state of New Jersey, I know where my loyalties lie. I have seen, as my fellow people have, the many injustices and tyrannies committed by the state of Great Britain against us. Once a warm and loving parent, she now strikes at the very core of our values, taking from us what is never meant to be taken. I have seen, in my own backyard, horrible battles and unnecessary bloodshed. Our ancestors fled from Britain to escape persecution; now we are strong enough to fight back for a similar cause. This is our duty, to those who died in their fight for freedom, to those who are fighting now, and to those brave men who will spill blood for the patriot cause.
In enforcing these unjust laws and underhanded taxes, Britain has pushed us too far. Our society is built on the principal of justice; we are receiving neither justice not respect. The king had long abused all of the colonies, treating us like were enemies instead of kin. The monarchy is compromised, instead of the pillar of strength and purity it was; now it’s a greedy corrupt clique taxing the people of these colonies into poverty. They do not have the right to control our people like they are. The purpose of government is to serve the interests of the people, the rights of the monarchy stop at cruelty, and they have far surpassed that line. As a community, as a united whole, the people state of New Jersey must join this desperate fight. We will win. Britain can burn our towns, it may exert more wrongs upon us, but this is a cause that has the most importance. As Tomas Paine stated, “The sun never shined on a cause of greater worth” (Thomas Paine, “Thoughts on the present state of American affairs”). What could be more critical than our independence from this despotic government? If you do not wish to raise a fist against injustice for yourself, consider the future generations. One who inflects cruelties will do it again, even larger in scale. For your children, the cause is of utmost significance. For your husbands and sons facing an imposing army, the cause is of utmost importance.
There is no difference between New Jersyians and menial peons now. We are having our core taken from us, our backbone, inarguable birthrights. Do we wish to bend our backs to the cruelties committed? Will we bend like slaves to the will of a power 3000 miles away? No. We should stand together, united, as a single thinking force. Patrick Henry concurs in his article, Give me Liberty or Give me Death, “I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery”. We are no different than those souls in England. We are the same people, suffering under the same despotism. Why are we impaired by laws, why are our towns filled with soldiers, why are we crippled from full potential? It isn’t equitable. New Jersey is, “The best country I have seen for people of middling fortunes who live by the sweat of their brows”- Jonathan Belcher. (Bill 3-4)
The people of New Jersey are worthy of freedom. We are no longer a small group of people 3000 miles away from home. We are no longer a huddled mass waiting for handouts. We are a state, tied together, bonded through our hardships, our sights singularly focused on the great power looming over us. But now we have the strength to fight.
Bill, Alfred Hoyt. New Jersey and the Revolutionary War. Rutgers University Press, 1992.
In enforcing these unjust laws and underhanded taxes, Britain has pushed us too far. Our society is built on the principal of justice; we are receiving neither justice not respect. The king had long abused all of the colonies, treating us like were enemies instead of kin. The monarchy is compromised, instead of the pillar of strength and purity it was; now it’s a greedy corrupt clique taxing the people of these colonies into poverty. They do not have the right to control our people like they are. The purpose of government is to serve the interests of the people, the rights of the monarchy stop at cruelty, and they have far surpassed that line. As a community, as a united whole, the people state of New Jersey must join this desperate fight. We will win. Britain can burn our towns, it may exert more wrongs upon us, but this is a cause that has the most importance. As Tomas Paine stated, “The sun never shined on a cause of greater worth” (Thomas Paine, “Thoughts on the present state of American affairs”). What could be more critical than our independence from this despotic government? If you do not wish to raise a fist against injustice for yourself, consider the future generations. One who inflects cruelties will do it again, even larger in scale. For your children, the cause is of utmost significance. For your husbands and sons facing an imposing army, the cause is of utmost importance.
There is no difference between New Jersyians and menial peons now. We are having our core taken from us, our backbone, inarguable birthrights. Do we wish to bend our backs to the cruelties committed? Will we bend like slaves to the will of a power 3000 miles away? No. We should stand together, united, as a single thinking force. Patrick Henry concurs in his article, Give me Liberty or Give me Death, “I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery”. We are no different than those souls in England. We are the same people, suffering under the same despotism. Why are we impaired by laws, why are our towns filled with soldiers, why are we crippled from full potential? It isn’t equitable. New Jersey is, “The best country I have seen for people of middling fortunes who live by the sweat of their brows”- Jonathan Belcher. (Bill 3-4)
The people of New Jersey are worthy of freedom. We are no longer a small group of people 3000 miles away from home. We are no longer a huddled mass waiting for handouts. We are a state, tied together, bonded through our hardships, our sights singularly focused on the great power looming over us. But now we have the strength to fight.
Bill, Alfred Hoyt. New Jersey and the Revolutionary War. Rutgers University Press, 1992.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Essay 2 Outline
Patriotism in New Jersey is the only course of action because:
I. Our natural rights are being infringed upon
A. It is not constitutional that one group of people should lead over the masses (oligarchy/ monarchy)
B. This is a cause that will set a precedent for all future generations
i. “The sun never shined on a cause of greater worth” (Thomas Paine, “Thoughts on the present state of American affairs”
II. Because we will be turned into slaves
A. If we continue to let Britain strip us of our rights, what is the difference between us and slaves?
i. “ I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery” (Patrick Henry, “Give me Liberty or Give me Death”
III. We have outgrown Britain
A. Their governing has become tyrannical in nature
i. “We may as well assert that because a child has thrived upon milk, that it is never to have meat.” (Tomas Paine, “Thoughts on the present state of American affairs)
ii. “ She [Britain] did not protect us from our enemies on our account, but from her enemies on her account” (Tomas Paine, “Thoughts on the present state of American affairs)
B. We are strong enough to hold our own( stable enough to be a world power)
I. Our natural rights are being infringed upon
A. It is not constitutional that one group of people should lead over the masses (oligarchy/ monarchy)
B. This is a cause that will set a precedent for all future generations
i. “The sun never shined on a cause of greater worth” (Thomas Paine, “Thoughts on the present state of American affairs”
II. Because we will be turned into slaves
A. If we continue to let Britain strip us of our rights, what is the difference between us and slaves?
i. “ I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery” (Patrick Henry, “Give me Liberty or Give me Death”
III. We have outgrown Britain
A. Their governing has become tyrannical in nature
i. “We may as well assert that because a child has thrived upon milk, that it is never to have meat.” (Tomas Paine, “Thoughts on the present state of American affairs)
ii. “ She [Britain] did not protect us from our enemies on our account, but from her enemies on her account” (Tomas Paine, “Thoughts on the present state of American affairs)
B. We are strong enough to hold our own( stable enough to be a world power)
Thursday, November 6, 2008
justification
Justifications,
Bacon
Bacon was a wealthy Englishman who believed that Native Americans were dangerous enemies, not peaceful friends He beleived that they must be killed to protect the colony
and the violent acts by the Native Americans before the rebellion
The Indians, however, became exceedingly more hostile after Bacon started attacking.
The Indians retaliated by killing colonists, setting traps, and even capturing the colonists
Government
Bacon’s Rebellion was caused by corruption in the Virginian government and mistrust between the native tribes.
However, William Berkeley, the governor of the colony, had a different view towards the Native Americans.
Natives
Native Americans wanted peace with the colonists most of the time.
Eventually, most of the settlers hated keeping the peace with, what they saw as. the savage people, and were not given the respect or shown respect from the government they thought they had deserved as the established people of Jamestown.
Bacon
Bacon was a wealthy Englishman who believed that Native Americans were dangerous enemies, not peaceful friends He beleived that they must be killed to protect the colony
and the violent acts by the Native Americans before the rebellion
The Indians, however, became exceedingly more hostile after Bacon started attacking.
The Indians retaliated by killing colonists, setting traps, and even capturing the colonists
Government
Bacon’s Rebellion was caused by corruption in the Virginian government and mistrust between the native tribes.
However, William Berkeley, the governor of the colony, had a different view towards the Native Americans.
Natives
Native Americans wanted peace with the colonists most of the time.
Eventually, most of the settlers hated keeping the peace with, what they saw as. the savage people, and were not given the respect or shown respect from the government they thought they had deserved as the established people of Jamestown.
Monday, November 3, 2008
11/3 homework
As Craig has already pointed out, the Psec Advisory Council mirrors the First Continental Congress. Psec is similar to Early America with its diversity (especially the middle colonies like New York and New Jersey, thank you Ben) and the strength of its community. In the upcoming elections, we face a different problem that the one Early Colonists did. I think if Psec was severely flawed, the situations would be more similar. Psec (in my view) is under no imminent threat, so I don’t quite see the connection there. But if it was, the power we hold as students, as members of a widely varied community is exactly the same. The leaders of the advisory council would speak for the mass, the people, the individual voice, which is exactly what the first Continental Congress did. They did not act of their own accord, they themselves deciding what was best for the masses, how could they? They would not be any better than the tyrannical English.
I think that Psec is great the way it is. If I saw some gaping defect, I would no doubt bring it up to someone. But I, in the synonym of the continental congress, am a happy citizen. I’m in no hurry to change the way things are run here, just because it’s possible. Students of Psec should not take for granted the fact that they can change things, and I don’t think they do.
I think that Psec is great the way it is. If I saw some gaping defect, I would no doubt bring it up to someone. But I, in the synonym of the continental congress, am a happy citizen. I’m in no hurry to change the way things are run here, just because it’s possible. Students of Psec should not take for granted the fact that they can change things, and I don’t think they do.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Stamp Act Synthesis
These documents are the beginning discussions of freedom and independence. The colonists have been given rights to govern themselves for so long, almost being ignored (governmentally) by England. They would grow accustomed to that way of life, being spoiled by English protection, the English asking little of them in return. When the stamp act was inducted, this challenged their entire former system of government. A country taxing them from afar, to pay for things they would never see? Colonists, with their newfound unity and patriotic spirit, would find this move insulting. Taxation without representation reinforced their “lower class citizen” status. They argued that they were just as much English citizens as anyone living in there at the time, and that taxing them without consultation brought them equal to any lower class minority. Were they to be “tamed like slaves?” This is when the ideals of independence first took wing in the colonies. Sending out an act of resolves to the Crown was a huge step in American history, because this was them fighting back against what they thought was unjust. The significance of this event was not the repeal of the stamp act; but a change in the attitudes, a change of heart, and a shift in power. For the first time in the colonies history, they were strong and confident enough to defy those who inflicted those injustices.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Essay Semi Final
How do you tell the difference between heroes and villains? Some would say the difference is actions, others say about perspectives. Since history is an art of interpretation, it gives us different versions of the same people or events. For example, take Nathanial Bacon of Bacon’s Rebellion. In some reports, he seems to be the picture of heroism, a man who led the poor and underprivileged to revolt against their malign government. Other articles aren't so willing to paint him as the hero... I believe he wasn’t a hero at all.
Bacon: A Hero
The desperately poor farmers, the indentured servants, exploited slaves of multiple races, and the lower class settlers all saw Nathanial Bacon as hope for a brighter, freer future. The people had multiple reasons for their unrest; their poverty, the growing distinctions between classes, promises of wealth and land that wouldn't be fulfilled, the growing anger at the government for lack of protection, and the racial tension; all of this was simmering below the surface of the shining new world the settlers had tried to hard to create. It seems implied that the poor white Englishmen had no one else to turn to for reform and protection from the government. Bacon did have his reasons for leading this sordid group of people who were robbed of their promised wealth.
First, Bacon claimed in his Declaration that Governor Berkeley, “…raised great unjust taxes”, “advancing [advanced] to places of judicature… scandalous and ignorant favorites”, and “…assuming [assumed] monopoly of the beaver trade” among other crimes. The government was also unwilling to help protect outlying settlers from Indian attacks, on the grounds that a war with the natives would damage the fur trade. Second, they would see him a person of his word because he fought along side them in the battles he led. He sacrificed his social status and favor with The Virginian government to execute this plan. Modern day scholars might say that his actions were noble because there were multiple races in the band of rebels he lead. He was the first to (briefly) unite blacks and whites in any major political cause. Historymatters.edu agreed, “Virginia’s planters long remembered the spectacle of black and white acting together to challenge authority”. Finally, they would see him as virtuous because the colonists already had prejudice against the Indians. The natives were not innocent, and the people jumped at the chance to retaliate in force. But it must be said that he wasn’t the settler’s choice, he was their only chance to improve their situation. In his wife’s letter to her sister, she tells a story of how he is doing good for the community, risking life and limb to protect the colonists from the “troublesome Indians”.
Bacon: A Martyr
There are other accounts of Bacon being less than noble. First, in his declaration, he believes himself a tragic hero, a defender of the poor and unprotected, a champion of justice. He said himself, "Judge therefore all wise and unprejudiced men...the aspersion of Traitor or Rebell", playing the long suffering martyr in his own documents. (Note: I'm using the definition of martyr, “A person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.”) Second, it is true that he had reasons to be angry, but what I don’t understand is why he choose to act in the way that he did. In his list of Gov. Berkeley’s crimes, he listed “prevention of civil disobedience” as one of the governor’s faults. Raiding the elite’s estates and destroying nearby villages does not constitute civil disobedience. Thirdly, he was not “one of the people”, as some sources imply. He was wealthy, and far from experiencing the suffering of the people he represented. Now if he was not in the masses shivering in worn boots and worrying about his family’s next meal, what were his motivations for rebelling? Was he simply an angry colonist searching for justice? Or was he a malicious leader, killing whenever or whoever he deemed fit?
It also must be said that the people on whom he focused the settler’s guns were innocent. True, not all Indians were guiltless at this time, but the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes that he lead attacks on were peaceful. Indeed, the tribes were so reluctant to offend the settlers that they did not raise a hand to defend themselves. His attack ruined trust with those and other Native American tribes. The government had placed peace treaties upon their land, which he ignored completely.
Zinn and Steffof emphasize Bacon being merely a leader in their book. They reiterate that the colonists concern was not either the Indians or Government, but a combination of both. They also observe the overall stress inflicted on the colonies by the over-zealous taxation by England. The book acknowledges, “He probably cared more about fighting Indians than about helping the poor."[Pg 36].
Michael Puglisi elucidates in his article,” Whether they be Friends or foes”, "He [Bacon] claimed that he was providing a release for the colonist’s frustrations." [Pg 77]. Puglisi forgot to mention that killing and plundering innocent Indian villages is hardly a hobby. Both these documents imply that Bacon had no reason to attack the Indians; that the attacks against the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes were merely retaliation against Gov. Berkley's crimes.
Bacon: What I think
If the sources are to be taken as truth, I believe there were no heroes in Bacon's Rebellion. Each side of the conflict had their own faults and wrongdoings. Each side had reasoning for their anger; reasoning that may have been misguided, but was present nonetheless.
The Indians played a major role in this conflict, but I believe they were the most innocent our all the parties involved. For example, in, “A True Narrative of the Late Rebellion in Virginia” by the Royal commissioners, they show the example the following Indian conflict. “…Indians… stealing some hoggs… were pursued by the English on a boate… whereupon the Indians complained to their superiors that they had been… abused and cheated… so they took the hoggs for their own satisfaction” This emphasizes that the Indians did not steal for their own gain, they acted in revenge, which may have been part of their culture, “a eye for and eye” situation. The Indians stole property, attacked, killed, and even tortured settlers. But their actions, though far from being justified, had at least motivation based in a logical place.
The government’s crimes also contributed to the revolution. If we interpret Nathanial Bacon’s Declaration as truth, Governor Berkley was largely at fault. But I am wary of classifying had Declaration as a truism. There are fewer sources stating that the government was at fault for the rebellion, (the higher taxes, the favoring of friends in political positions of power, monopoly of the fur trade ect…). The document that stated Governor Berkeley was guilty of these crimes was a highly official document; signed by many colonists, so it does have credentials. Then again, it was signed by people who were against him and his actions, they were not exactly bipartisan. In any case, the Government was obviously a factor in causing public unrest, and the people were champing at the bit to receive the equality and protection they deserved.
And finally, Nathanial Bacon. I believe his actions were equal to little more than a colonial-age stress ball. I concede that he brought change, and did indeed act as the liberator of the settler’s anger, but I maintain that his actions were little more than cowardice. In anger at the authority, he attacked an uninvolved 3rd party? I see no heroism there. Any man who endorses the destruction of the innocent should not be awarded medals of honor. His lack of personal suffering implies that his motivations were more of prejudice and anger than for justice and economic equality. That brings up the question, was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation? I believe a little of both. He was a leader, but he was a man who could rally a crowd, assign guilt, acts as arbiter, aim a gun. That, I believe, is the extent of his leadership capabilities. And that extent is also the extent of his authority.
In conclusion, as I stated before, Nathanial Bacon was not a hero to the early Virginian colonists. The argument that state his intentions were noble is quelled by the fact that his actions were motivated by racism and were completely irrational. There is no denying that he did bring revolutionary ideas, but the long term significance out shadows his reasoning. His revolution foreshadowed the American Revolution, and therein lies Nathanial Bacons heroism in history.
Bibliography
“Bacons Rebellion: The declaration (1676) by Nathanial Bacon” (online) available at http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5800
“Nathanial Bacon Declaration, 1676” Reading the American past, pg 55
Puglisi, Michael “Whether they be friends or foes: The roles and reactions of tributary native groups caught in colonial conflicts” Marian College, pg 77
Zinn, Howard and Steffoff, Rebecca. A Young People’s History of the United States. Pg 35-51.
fvfv
Bacon: A Hero
The desperately poor farmers, the indentured servants, exploited slaves of multiple races, and the lower class settlers all saw Nathanial Bacon as hope for a brighter, freer future. The people had multiple reasons for their unrest; their poverty, the growing distinctions between classes, promises of wealth and land that wouldn't be fulfilled, the growing anger at the government for lack of protection, and the racial tension; all of this was simmering below the surface of the shining new world the settlers had tried to hard to create. It seems implied that the poor white Englishmen had no one else to turn to for reform and protection from the government. Bacon did have his reasons for leading this sordid group of people who were robbed of their promised wealth.
First, Bacon claimed in his Declaration that Governor Berkeley, “…raised great unjust taxes”, “advancing [advanced] to places of judicature… scandalous and ignorant favorites”, and “…assuming [assumed] monopoly of the beaver trade” among other crimes. The government was also unwilling to help protect outlying settlers from Indian attacks, on the grounds that a war with the natives would damage the fur trade. Second, they would see him a person of his word because he fought along side them in the battles he led. He sacrificed his social status and favor with The Virginian government to execute this plan. Modern day scholars might say that his actions were noble because there were multiple races in the band of rebels he lead. He was the first to (briefly) unite blacks and whites in any major political cause. Historymatters.edu agreed, “Virginia’s planters long remembered the spectacle of black and white acting together to challenge authority”. Finally, they would see him as virtuous because the colonists already had prejudice against the Indians. The natives were not innocent, and the people jumped at the chance to retaliate in force. But it must be said that he wasn’t the settler’s choice, he was their only chance to improve their situation. In his wife’s letter to her sister, she tells a story of how he is doing good for the community, risking life and limb to protect the colonists from the “troublesome Indians”.
Bacon: A Martyr
There are other accounts of Bacon being less than noble. First, in his declaration, he believes himself a tragic hero, a defender of the poor and unprotected, a champion of justice. He said himself, "Judge therefore all wise and unprejudiced men...the aspersion of Traitor or Rebell", playing the long suffering martyr in his own documents. (Note: I'm using the definition of martyr, “A person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.”) Second, it is true that he had reasons to be angry, but what I don’t understand is why he choose to act in the way that he did. In his list of Gov. Berkeley’s crimes, he listed “prevention of civil disobedience” as one of the governor’s faults. Raiding the elite’s estates and destroying nearby villages does not constitute civil disobedience. Thirdly, he was not “one of the people”, as some sources imply. He was wealthy, and far from experiencing the suffering of the people he represented. Now if he was not in the masses shivering in worn boots and worrying about his family’s next meal, what were his motivations for rebelling? Was he simply an angry colonist searching for justice? Or was he a malicious leader, killing whenever or whoever he deemed fit?
It also must be said that the people on whom he focused the settler’s guns were innocent. True, not all Indians were guiltless at this time, but the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes that he lead attacks on were peaceful. Indeed, the tribes were so reluctant to offend the settlers that they did not raise a hand to defend themselves. His attack ruined trust with those and other Native American tribes. The government had placed peace treaties upon their land, which he ignored completely.
Zinn and Steffof emphasize Bacon being merely a leader in their book. They reiterate that the colonists concern was not either the Indians or Government, but a combination of both. They also observe the overall stress inflicted on the colonies by the over-zealous taxation by England. The book acknowledges, “He probably cared more about fighting Indians than about helping the poor."[Pg 36].
Michael Puglisi elucidates in his article,” Whether they be Friends or foes”, "He [Bacon] claimed that he was providing a release for the colonist’s frustrations." [Pg 77]. Puglisi forgot to mention that killing and plundering innocent Indian villages is hardly a hobby. Both these documents imply that Bacon had no reason to attack the Indians; that the attacks against the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes were merely retaliation against Gov. Berkley's crimes.
Bacon: What I think
If the sources are to be taken as truth, I believe there were no heroes in Bacon's Rebellion. Each side of the conflict had their own faults and wrongdoings. Each side had reasoning for their anger; reasoning that may have been misguided, but was present nonetheless.
The Indians played a major role in this conflict, but I believe they were the most innocent our all the parties involved. For example, in, “A True Narrative of the Late Rebellion in Virginia” by the Royal commissioners, they show the example the following Indian conflict. “…Indians… stealing some hoggs… were pursued by the English on a boate… whereupon the Indians complained to their superiors that they had been… abused and cheated… so they took the hoggs for their own satisfaction” This emphasizes that the Indians did not steal for their own gain, they acted in revenge, which may have been part of their culture, “a eye for and eye” situation. The Indians stole property, attacked, killed, and even tortured settlers. But their actions, though far from being justified, had at least motivation based in a logical place.
The government’s crimes also contributed to the revolution. If we interpret Nathanial Bacon’s Declaration as truth, Governor Berkley was largely at fault. But I am wary of classifying had Declaration as a truism. There are fewer sources stating that the government was at fault for the rebellion, (the higher taxes, the favoring of friends in political positions of power, monopoly of the fur trade ect…). The document that stated Governor Berkeley was guilty of these crimes was a highly official document; signed by many colonists, so it does have credentials. Then again, it was signed by people who were against him and his actions, they were not exactly bipartisan. In any case, the Government was obviously a factor in causing public unrest, and the people were champing at the bit to receive the equality and protection they deserved.
And finally, Nathanial Bacon. I believe his actions were equal to little more than a colonial-age stress ball. I concede that he brought change, and did indeed act as the liberator of the settler’s anger, but I maintain that his actions were little more than cowardice. In anger at the authority, he attacked an uninvolved 3rd party? I see no heroism there. Any man who endorses the destruction of the innocent should not be awarded medals of honor. His lack of personal suffering implies that his motivations were more of prejudice and anger than for justice and economic equality. That brings up the question, was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation? I believe a little of both. He was a leader, but he was a man who could rally a crowd, assign guilt, acts as arbiter, aim a gun. That, I believe, is the extent of his leadership capabilities. And that extent is also the extent of his authority.
In conclusion, as I stated before, Nathanial Bacon was not a hero to the early Virginian colonists. The argument that state his intentions were noble is quelled by the fact that his actions were motivated by racism and were completely irrational. There is no denying that he did bring revolutionary ideas, but the long term significance out shadows his reasoning. His revolution foreshadowed the American Revolution, and therein lies Nathanial Bacons heroism in history.
Bibliography
“Bacons Rebellion: The declaration (1676) by Nathanial Bacon” (online) available at http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5800
“Nathanial Bacon Declaration, 1676” Reading the American past, pg 55
Puglisi, Michael “Whether they be friends or foes: The roles and reactions of tributary native groups caught in colonial conflicts” Marian College, pg 77
Zinn, Howard and Steffoff, Rebecca. A Young People’s History of the United States. Pg 35-51.
fvfv
Essay #1 Reflection
I thought this essay was very successful in almost every way. The entire thing came together very easily for me. There were a few aspects that I did not find particularly helpful, but I wouldn’t call them negatives. The peer review was pretty dry, I cant glean much from someone saying, “Yours is really good! But you should make it more organized”. Also, the outline was an interesting part of this assignment for me, at first I resisted it, but towards the middle of the assignment, I found that it was essential to my organization of the essay. The amount of time was perfect, there wasn’t too much where I got lulled into a false sense of security, but I did not feel rushed. I found myself with lots of writing to play around with and change. I worked in it a little everyday, and before I knew it, I had a full essay done by the middle of the second week, so I had that much time to edit and re read. I also enjoyed making a thesis, this was my first time with that, and I liked the fact we could choose what we wrote about, so we couldn’t complain about our topic. And I liked the control of being able to choose, personally, I found my topic interesting and easy to write about. I also liked the mount of resources we had. It was a little overwhelming at times, but the amount of sources was a factor in being successful, I have never had an essay where I had that much information at hand before.
This essay has not affected my writing philosophy in any way, I still believe in it. The qualities I sketched out in my philosophy are goals, and I hope I lived up to those standards I set for myself.
This essay has not affected my writing philosophy in any way, I still believe in it. The qualities I sketched out in my philosophy are goals, and I hope I lived up to those standards I set for myself.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Essay Update
How do you tell the difference between heroes and villains? Some would say the difference is actions, others say about perspectives. Since history is an art of interpretation, it gives us different versions of the same people or events. For example, take Nathanial Bacon of Bacon’s Rebellion. In some reports, he seems to be the picture of heroism, a man who led the poor and underprivileged to revolt against their malign government. Other articles aren't so willing to paint him as the hero... I believe he wasn’t a hero at all.
Bacon: A Hero
The desperately poor farmers, the indentured servants, exploited slaves of multiple races, and the lower class settlers all saw Nathanial Bacon as hope for a brighter, freer future. The people had multiple reasons for their unrest; their poverty, the growing distinctions between classes, promises of wealth and land that wouldn't be fulfilled, the growing anger at the government for lack of protection, and the racial tension; all of this was simmering below the surface of the shining new world the settlers had tried to hard to create. It seems implied that the poor white Englishmen had no one else to turn to for reform and protection from the government. Bacon did have his reasons for leading this sordid group of people who were robbed of their promised wealth.
First, Bacon claimed in his Declaration that Governor Berkeley, “…raised great unjust taxes”, “advancing [advanced] to places of judicature… scandalous and ignorant favorites”, and “…assuming [assumed] monopoly of the beaver trade” among other crimes. The government was also unwilling to help protect outlying settlers from Indian attacks, on the grounds that a war with the natives would damage the fur trade. Second, they would see him a person of his word because he fought along side them in the battles he led. He sacrificed his social status and favor with The Virginian government to execute this plan. Modern day scholars might say that his actions were noble because there were multiple races in the band of rebels he lead. He was the first to (briefly) unite blacks and whites in any major political cause. Historymatters.edu agreed,“Virginia’s planters long remembered the spectacle of black and white acting together to challenge authority”. Finally, they would see him as virtuous because the colonists already had a prejudice against the Indians. The natives were not innocent, and the people jumped at the chance to retaliate in force. But it must be said that he wasn’t the settler’s choice, he was their only chance to improve their situation. In his wife’s letter to her sister, she tells a story of how he is doing good for the community, risking life and limb to protect the colonists from the “troublesome Indians”.
Bacon: A Martyr
There are other accounts of Bacon being less than noble. First, in his declaration, he believes himself a tragic hero, a defender of the poor and unprotected, a champion of justice. He said himself, "Judge therefore all wise and unprejudiced men...the aspersion of Traitor or Rebell", playing the long suffering martyr in his own documents. (Note: I'm using the definition of martyr, “A person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.”) Second, it is true that he had reasons to be angry, but what I don’t understand is why he choose to act in the way that he did. In his list of Gov. Berkeley’s crimes, he listed “prevention of civil disobedience” as one of the governor’s faults. Raiding the elite’s estates and destroying nearby villages does not constitute civil disobedience. Thirdly, he was not “one of the people” as some sources imply. He was wealthy, and far from experiencing the suffering of the people he represented. Now if he was not in the masses shivering in worn boots and worrying about his family’s next meal, what were his motivations for rebelling? Was he simply an angry colonist searching for justice? Or was he a malicious leader, killing whenever or whoever he deemed fit?
It also must be said that the people on whom he focused the settler’s guns were innocent. True, not all Indians were guiltless at this time, but the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes that he lead attacks on were peaceful. Indeed, the tribes were so reluctant to offend the settlers that they did not raise a hand to defend themselves. His attack ruined trust with those and other Native American tribes. The government had placed peace treaties upon their land, which he ignored completely.
Zinn and Steffof emphasize Bacon being merely a leader in their book. They reiterate that the colonists concern was not either the Indians or Government, but a combination of both. They also observe the overall stress inflicted on the colonies by the over-zealous taxation by England. The book acknowledges, “He probably cared more about fighting Indians than about helping the poor."[Pg 36].
Michael Puglisi stated in his article,” Whether they be Friends or foes”, "He [Bacon] claimed that he was providing a release for the colonist’s frustrations." [Pg 77]. Puglisi forgot to mention that killing and plundering innocent Indian villages is hardly a hobby. Both these documents imply that Bacon had no reason to attack the Indians; that the attacks against the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes were merely retaliation against Gov. Berkley's crimes.
Bacon: What I think
If the sources are to be taken as truth, I believe there were no heroes in Bacon's Rebellion. Each side of the conflict had their own faults and wrongdoings. Each side had reasoning for their anger; reasoning that may have been misguided, but was present nonetheless.
The Indians played a major role in this conflict, but I believe they were the most innocent our all the parties involved. For example, in, “A True Narrative of the Late Rebellion in Virginia” by the Royal commissioners, they show the example the following Indian conflict. “…Indians… stealing some hoggs… were pursued by the English on a boate… whereupon the Indians complained to their superiors that they had been… abused and cheated… so they took the hoggs for their own satisfaction” This emphasizes that the Indians did not steal for their own gain, they acted in revenge, which may have been part of their culture, “a eye for and eye” situation. The Indians stole property, attacked, killed, and even tortured settlers. But their actions, though far from being justified, had at least motivation based in a logical place.
The government’s faults also contributed to the revolution. If we interpret Nathanial Bacon’s Declaration as truth, Governor Berkley was largely at fault. But I am wary of classifying had Declaration as a truism. There are fewer sources stating that the government was at fault for the rebellion, (the higher taxes, the favoring of friends in political positions of power, monopoly of the fur trade ect…). The document that stated Governor Berkeley was guilty of these crimes was a highly official document; signed by many colonists, so it does have credentials. Then again, it was signed by people who were against him and his actions, they were not exactly bipartisan. In any case, the Government was obviously a factor in causing public unrest, and the people were champing at the bit to receive the equality and protection they deserved.
And finally, Nathanial Bacon. I believe his actions were equal to little more than a colonial-age stress ball. I concede that he brought change, and did indeed act as the liberator of the settler’s anger, but I maintain that his actions were little more than cowardice. In anger at the authority, he attacked an uninvolved 3rd party? I see no heroism there. Any man who endorses the destruction of the innocent should not be awarded medals of honor. His lack of personal suffering implies that his motivations were more of prejudice and anger than for justice and economic equality. That brings up the question, was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation? I believe a little of both. He was a leader, but he was a man who could rally a crowd, assign guilt, acts as arbiter, aim a gun. That, I believe, is the extent of his leadership capabilities. And that extent is also the extent of his authority.
In conclusion, as I stated before, Nathanial Bacon was not a hero to the early Virginian colonists. The argument that state his intentions were noble is quelled by the fact that his actions were motivated by racism and were completely irrational. There is no denying that he did bring revolutionary ideas, but the long term significance out shadows his reasoning. His revolution foreshadowed the American Revolution, and therein lies Nathanial Bacons heroism in history.
Bacon: A Hero
The desperately poor farmers, the indentured servants, exploited slaves of multiple races, and the lower class settlers all saw Nathanial Bacon as hope for a brighter, freer future. The people had multiple reasons for their unrest; their poverty, the growing distinctions between classes, promises of wealth and land that wouldn't be fulfilled, the growing anger at the government for lack of protection, and the racial tension; all of this was simmering below the surface of the shining new world the settlers had tried to hard to create. It seems implied that the poor white Englishmen had no one else to turn to for reform and protection from the government. Bacon did have his reasons for leading this sordid group of people who were robbed of their promised wealth.
First, Bacon claimed in his Declaration that Governor Berkeley, “…raised great unjust taxes”, “advancing [advanced] to places of judicature… scandalous and ignorant favorites”, and “…assuming [assumed] monopoly of the beaver trade” among other crimes. The government was also unwilling to help protect outlying settlers from Indian attacks, on the grounds that a war with the natives would damage the fur trade. Second, they would see him a person of his word because he fought along side them in the battles he led. He sacrificed his social status and favor with The Virginian government to execute this plan. Modern day scholars might say that his actions were noble because there were multiple races in the band of rebels he lead. He was the first to (briefly) unite blacks and whites in any major political cause. Historymatters.edu agreed,“Virginia’s planters long remembered the spectacle of black and white acting together to challenge authority”. Finally, they would see him as virtuous because the colonists already had a prejudice against the Indians. The natives were not innocent, and the people jumped at the chance to retaliate in force. But it must be said that he wasn’t the settler’s choice, he was their only chance to improve their situation. In his wife’s letter to her sister, she tells a story of how he is doing good for the community, risking life and limb to protect the colonists from the “troublesome Indians”.
Bacon: A Martyr
There are other accounts of Bacon being less than noble. First, in his declaration, he believes himself a tragic hero, a defender of the poor and unprotected, a champion of justice. He said himself, "Judge therefore all wise and unprejudiced men...the aspersion of Traitor or Rebell", playing the long suffering martyr in his own documents. (Note: I'm using the definition of martyr, “A person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.”) Second, it is true that he had reasons to be angry, but what I don’t understand is why he choose to act in the way that he did. In his list of Gov. Berkeley’s crimes, he listed “prevention of civil disobedience” as one of the governor’s faults. Raiding the elite’s estates and destroying nearby villages does not constitute civil disobedience. Thirdly, he was not “one of the people” as some sources imply. He was wealthy, and far from experiencing the suffering of the people he represented. Now if he was not in the masses shivering in worn boots and worrying about his family’s next meal, what were his motivations for rebelling? Was he simply an angry colonist searching for justice? Or was he a malicious leader, killing whenever or whoever he deemed fit?
It also must be said that the people on whom he focused the settler’s guns were innocent. True, not all Indians were guiltless at this time, but the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes that he lead attacks on were peaceful. Indeed, the tribes were so reluctant to offend the settlers that they did not raise a hand to defend themselves. His attack ruined trust with those and other Native American tribes. The government had placed peace treaties upon their land, which he ignored completely.
Zinn and Steffof emphasize Bacon being merely a leader in their book. They reiterate that the colonists concern was not either the Indians or Government, but a combination of both. They also observe the overall stress inflicted on the colonies by the over-zealous taxation by England. The book acknowledges, “He probably cared more about fighting Indians than about helping the poor."[Pg 36].
Michael Puglisi stated in his article,” Whether they be Friends or foes”, "He [Bacon] claimed that he was providing a release for the colonist’s frustrations." [Pg 77]. Puglisi forgot to mention that killing and plundering innocent Indian villages is hardly a hobby. Both these documents imply that Bacon had no reason to attack the Indians; that the attacks against the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes were merely retaliation against Gov. Berkley's crimes.
Bacon: What I think
If the sources are to be taken as truth, I believe there were no heroes in Bacon's Rebellion. Each side of the conflict had their own faults and wrongdoings. Each side had reasoning for their anger; reasoning that may have been misguided, but was present nonetheless.
The Indians played a major role in this conflict, but I believe they were the most innocent our all the parties involved. For example, in, “A True Narrative of the Late Rebellion in Virginia” by the Royal commissioners, they show the example the following Indian conflict. “…Indians… stealing some hoggs… were pursued by the English on a boate… whereupon the Indians complained to their superiors that they had been… abused and cheated… so they took the hoggs for their own satisfaction” This emphasizes that the Indians did not steal for their own gain, they acted in revenge, which may have been part of their culture, “a eye for and eye” situation. The Indians stole property, attacked, killed, and even tortured settlers. But their actions, though far from being justified, had at least motivation based in a logical place.
The government’s faults also contributed to the revolution. If we interpret Nathanial Bacon’s Declaration as truth, Governor Berkley was largely at fault. But I am wary of classifying had Declaration as a truism. There are fewer sources stating that the government was at fault for the rebellion, (the higher taxes, the favoring of friends in political positions of power, monopoly of the fur trade ect…). The document that stated Governor Berkeley was guilty of these crimes was a highly official document; signed by many colonists, so it does have credentials. Then again, it was signed by people who were against him and his actions, they were not exactly bipartisan. In any case, the Government was obviously a factor in causing public unrest, and the people were champing at the bit to receive the equality and protection they deserved.
And finally, Nathanial Bacon. I believe his actions were equal to little more than a colonial-age stress ball. I concede that he brought change, and did indeed act as the liberator of the settler’s anger, but I maintain that his actions were little more than cowardice. In anger at the authority, he attacked an uninvolved 3rd party? I see no heroism there. Any man who endorses the destruction of the innocent should not be awarded medals of honor. His lack of personal suffering implies that his motivations were more of prejudice and anger than for justice and economic equality. That brings up the question, was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation? I believe a little of both. He was a leader, but he was a man who could rally a crowd, assign guilt, acts as arbiter, aim a gun. That, I believe, is the extent of his leadership capabilities. And that extent is also the extent of his authority.
In conclusion, as I stated before, Nathanial Bacon was not a hero to the early Virginian colonists. The argument that state his intentions were noble is quelled by the fact that his actions were motivated by racism and were completely irrational. There is no denying that he did bring revolutionary ideas, but the long term significance out shadows his reasoning. His revolution foreshadowed the American Revolution, and therein lies Nathanial Bacons heroism in history.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Essay update
History can give us different versions of the same people or events. For example, take Nathanial Bacon of Bacon’s Rebellion. In some reports, he seems to be the picture of heroism, a man who led to poor and underprivileged settlers, servants and slaves to revolt against the malign government. Other articles aren't so willing to paint him as the hero.
Bacon: A Hero
The desperately poor farmers, the indentured servants, exploited slaves of multiple races, and the lower class settlers all saw Nathanial Bacon as hope for a brighter, freer future. They were being taxed into poverty; and then neglected by the same government. Bacon did have his reasons for leading this sordid group of people. First, He claimed that Governor Berkeley, “…raised great unjust taxes”, “advancing [advanced] to places of judicature… scandalous and ignorant favorites”, and “…assuming [assumed] monopoly of the beaver trade” among other crimes. The government was also unwilling to help protect outlying settlers from Indian attacks, on the grounds that a war with the natives would damage the fur trade. Second, they would see him a person of his word because he fought along side them in the battles he lead, and sacrificed his social status and favor with The Virginian government to do this. Thirdly, Modern day scholars might say that his actions were noble because there were multiple races in the band of rebels he lead. Historymatters.edu agreed, “Virginia’s planters long remembered the spectacle of black and white acting together to challenge authority”. Finally, they would see him as virtuous because the colonists already had a prejudice against the Indians. The natives were not innocent, and the people jumped at the chance to retaliate in force. But it must be said that there wasn’t the settler’s choice, he was their only chance to improve their situation. In his wife’s letter to her sister, she tells a story of how he is doing good for the community, risking life and limb to protect the colonists from the “troublesome Indians”.
Bacon: a Martyr
There are other accounts of Bacon being less than noble. First, in his declaration, he believes himself a tragic hero, a defender of the poor and unprotected, a champion of justice. He said himself, "Judge therefore all wise and unprejudiced men...the aspersion of Traitor or Rebell", playing the long suffering martyr in his own documents. (Note: I'm using the definition of martyr, “A person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.”) Second, it is true that he had reasons to be angry, but what I don’t understand is why he choose to act in the way that he did. In his list of Gov. Berkeley’s crimes, he listed “prevention of civil disobedience” as one of the governor’s faults. Raiding the elite’s estates and destroying nearby villages does not constitute “civil disobedience”. Thirdly, he was not “one of the people” as some sources seem to imply. He was wealthy, and far from experiencing the suffering of the people he represented. Now if he was not in the masses shivering in worn boots and worrying about his family’s next meal, what were his motivations for rebelling? Was he simply an angry colonist searching for justice? Or was he a malicious leader, killing whenever or whoever he deemed fit?
It also must be said that the people on whom he focused the settler’s guns were innocent. True, not all Indians were guiltless at this time, but the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes that he lead attacks on were peaceful. Indeed, the tribes were so reluctant to offend the settlers that they did not raise a hand to defend themselves. Why would they launch an attack on these villages? And once they say that
The Zinn and Stefoff excerpt seem to view him as a misguided leader. The chapter is quoted saying, “He probably cared more about fighting Indians than about helping the poor."[Pg 36] It seems implied that these poor white Englishmen had no one else to turn to for reform and protection from the government. That brings up the question, was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation? The people had multiple reasons for their unrest; their poverty, the growing distinctions between classes, promises of wealth and land that wouldn't be fulfilled, the lack of a middle class, the growing anger at the government for lack of protection, and the racial tension, all of this was simmering below the surface of the shining new world the settlers had tried to hard to create. As Puglisi stated in his article, "He [Bacon] claimed that he was providing a release for the colonist’s frustrations." Puglisi forgot to mention that killing and plundering innocent Indian villages is hardly a hobby. The documents imply that Bacon had no reason to attack the Indians, and that the attacks against the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes were merely retaliation against Gov. Berkley's crimes.
If the sources are to be taken as truth, there would be no Heroes in Bacons Rebellion. Each side of the conflict had their own faults and wrongdoings. But each side also had reasoning for their anger; reasoning that may have been misguided, but was present nonetheless. The Indians played a major role in this conflict. But I personally believe they were the most innocent our all the parties involved.
who were robbed of their promised wealth
I think his lack of personal suffering implies that his motivations were more of prejudice and anger than for justice and economic equality.
Bacon: A Hero
The desperately poor farmers, the indentured servants, exploited slaves of multiple races, and the lower class settlers all saw Nathanial Bacon as hope for a brighter, freer future. They were being taxed into poverty; and then neglected by the same government. Bacon did have his reasons for leading this sordid group of people. First, He claimed that Governor Berkeley, “…raised great unjust taxes”, “advancing [advanced] to places of judicature… scandalous and ignorant favorites”, and “…assuming [assumed] monopoly of the beaver trade” among other crimes. The government was also unwilling to help protect outlying settlers from Indian attacks, on the grounds that a war with the natives would damage the fur trade. Second, they would see him a person of his word because he fought along side them in the battles he lead, and sacrificed his social status and favor with The Virginian government to do this. Thirdly, Modern day scholars might say that his actions were noble because there were multiple races in the band of rebels he lead. Historymatters.edu agreed, “Virginia’s planters long remembered the spectacle of black and white acting together to challenge authority”. Finally, they would see him as virtuous because the colonists already had a prejudice against the Indians. The natives were not innocent, and the people jumped at the chance to retaliate in force. But it must be said that there wasn’t the settler’s choice, he was their only chance to improve their situation. In his wife’s letter to her sister, she tells a story of how he is doing good for the community, risking life and limb to protect the colonists from the “troublesome Indians”.
Bacon: a Martyr
There are other accounts of Bacon being less than noble. First, in his declaration, he believes himself a tragic hero, a defender of the poor and unprotected, a champion of justice. He said himself, "Judge therefore all wise and unprejudiced men...the aspersion of Traitor or Rebell", playing the long suffering martyr in his own documents. (Note: I'm using the definition of martyr, “A person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.”) Second, it is true that he had reasons to be angry, but what I don’t understand is why he choose to act in the way that he did. In his list of Gov. Berkeley’s crimes, he listed “prevention of civil disobedience” as one of the governor’s faults. Raiding the elite’s estates and destroying nearby villages does not constitute “civil disobedience”. Thirdly, he was not “one of the people” as some sources seem to imply. He was wealthy, and far from experiencing the suffering of the people he represented. Now if he was not in the masses shivering in worn boots and worrying about his family’s next meal, what were his motivations for rebelling? Was he simply an angry colonist searching for justice? Or was he a malicious leader, killing whenever or whoever he deemed fit?
It also must be said that the people on whom he focused the settler’s guns were innocent. True, not all Indians were guiltless at this time, but the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes that he lead attacks on were peaceful. Indeed, the tribes were so reluctant to offend the settlers that they did not raise a hand to defend themselves. Why would they launch an attack on these villages? And once they say that
The Zinn and Stefoff excerpt seem to view him as a misguided leader. The chapter is quoted saying, “He probably cared more about fighting Indians than about helping the poor."[Pg 36] It seems implied that these poor white Englishmen had no one else to turn to for reform and protection from the government. That brings up the question, was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation? The people had multiple reasons for their unrest; their poverty, the growing distinctions between classes, promises of wealth and land that wouldn't be fulfilled, the lack of a middle class, the growing anger at the government for lack of protection, and the racial tension, all of this was simmering below the surface of the shining new world the settlers had tried to hard to create. As Puglisi stated in his article, "He [Bacon] claimed that he was providing a release for the colonist’s frustrations." Puglisi forgot to mention that killing and plundering innocent Indian villages is hardly a hobby. The documents imply that Bacon had no reason to attack the Indians, and that the attacks against the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes were merely retaliation against Gov. Berkley's crimes.
If the sources are to be taken as truth, there would be no Heroes in Bacons Rebellion. Each side of the conflict had their own faults and wrongdoings. But each side also had reasoning for their anger; reasoning that may have been misguided, but was present nonetheless. The Indians played a major role in this conflict. But I personally believe they were the most innocent our all the parties involved.
who were robbed of their promised wealth
I think his lack of personal suffering implies that his motivations were more of prejudice and anger than for justice and economic equality.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Equiano Account Response
The way he writes about his account seems disconnected, like it wasn’t exceedingly painful for him to recall and relate his story. I think that’s is because that he would want his story told, because the story is not just his. He shares it with every slave that was on that boat with him, and the boat that left before theirs, and the one that left after. The pictures were also a wonderful resource; it makes me wonder who the artist was, if he was really there. I think he might have been because they look very realistic, sharing the misery of these ships. The authors writing concurs with the images, and paints a picture of one of the greatest tragedies that mankind has ever inflicted on other men. The Englishmen’s treatment of other men was truly inconceivable, but luckily the author survived to tell us this, his, story.
Liberty of the Press Text Analysis
Who is writing?
- The author was not specified on the actual document, but if we take the intro to be true, I would guess the author would be John Peter Zenger, who was an editor of the New York Weekly Journal.
“This letter is a November 1733 issue of The New York Weekly Journal”
“While in jail, Zenger continued to publish the Journal.”
“…everything Zenger had written was the truth.”
Who is the audience?
- The audience was the readers of the New York Weekly Journal, since it was published there.
Who do the writer(s) represent?
- The writer might represent the New York Weekly Journal, since often newspapers print articles that share their views. He would also represent the people, because he was embodiment of their problems. They might not have been allowed to have freedom of the press, but he was the first one to be recognized as innocent.
What is being said, argued or requested?
- The author is saying that Freedom of the Press is necessary because it is constitutional, or even that it should be a part of the constitution. Even further than that, he says that freedom of the press is also a form of justice, that the truth can be known by everyone, and so that criminals “let the glaring truths… awaken his conscience… and cover him with shame”
How is it being said, argued or requested?
- It is being said very passionately. You can tell the author cares about what he says, and truly believes in it. He used strong statements, and was not wishy-washy. He didn’t say, “I think liberty of the press is of great importance” he said “Liberty of the press is of the greatest importance”
What proof or justification is being used to legitimize the request?
- He posted it in a newspaper, which is usually a very reputable source. Also, I think the language that he used gave him some authority as well, I think the settlers would be more compelled to read and agree with his work because he his confident in what he is arguing.
- The author was not specified on the actual document, but if we take the intro to be true, I would guess the author would be John Peter Zenger, who was an editor of the New York Weekly Journal.
“This letter is a November 1733 issue of The New York Weekly Journal”
“While in jail, Zenger continued to publish the Journal.”
“…everything Zenger had written was the truth.”
Who is the audience?
- The audience was the readers of the New York Weekly Journal, since it was published there.
Who do the writer(s) represent?
- The writer might represent the New York Weekly Journal, since often newspapers print articles that share their views. He would also represent the people, because he was embodiment of their problems. They might not have been allowed to have freedom of the press, but he was the first one to be recognized as innocent.
What is being said, argued or requested?
- The author is saying that Freedom of the Press is necessary because it is constitutional, or even that it should be a part of the constitution. Even further than that, he says that freedom of the press is also a form of justice, that the truth can be known by everyone, and so that criminals “let the glaring truths… awaken his conscience… and cover him with shame”
How is it being said, argued or requested?
- It is being said very passionately. You can tell the author cares about what he says, and truly believes in it. He used strong statements, and was not wishy-washy. He didn’t say, “I think liberty of the press is of great importance” he said “Liberty of the press is of the greatest importance”
What proof or justification is being used to legitimize the request?
- He posted it in a newspaper, which is usually a very reputable source. Also, I think the language that he used gave him some authority as well, I think the settlers would be more compelled to read and agree with his work because he his confident in what he is arguing.
Essay update
History can give us different versions of the same people or events. For example, take Nathanial Bacon of Bacon’s Rebellion. In some reports, he seems to be the picture of heroism, a man who led to poor and underprivileged settlers, servants and slaves to revolt against the malign government. Other articles aren't so willing to paint him as the hero.
Bacon: A Hero
In his declaration, he beleives himself a tragic hero, a defender of the poor and unprotected, a champion of justice. The poor farmers, the indentured servants, slaves of multiple races, the lower class saw him as hope for a brighter, freer future. And Bacon had his reasons for leading this group of people. First, He claimed that Governor Berkeley, “…raised great unjust taxes”, “advancing [advanced] to places of judicature… scandalous and ignorant favorites”, and “…assuming [assumed] monopoly of the beaver trade” among other crimes. Also, the government was unwilling to help protect outlying settlers from Indian attacks, on the grounds that a war with them would damage the fur trade. Second, they would see him a person of his word because he fought along side them in the battles he lead, and sacrificed his social status and favor with The Virginian government to do this. Thirdly, Modern day scholars might say that his actions were noble because there were multiple races in the bad of rebels he lead. As the into in _______ agreed, “Virginias planters long remembered the spectacle of black and white acting together to challenge authority” And finally, they would see him as virtuous because they already had a prejudice against the Indians. The natives were not innocent, and colonists jumped at the chance to retaliate in force.
He said himself, "Judge therefore all wise and unprejudiced men...the aspersion of Traitor or Rebell", playing the long suffering martyr in his own documents. In his wife’s letter to her sister, she tells a story of how he is doing good for the community, risking life and limb to protect the colonists from the “troublesome Indians”.
The poor people, the indentured servants, the slaves both black and white were desperate for change. They urgently needed protection; fearing for their lives, hiding in their houses or abandoning them altogether in fear of Indian attacks. Then Bacon comes along with his message of fighting back, it would inspire them, giving them an outlet for their frustrations. The issue was, the outlet was not the correct one, neither was his intention noble at all.
But he would seem so to the people, and why not? They had no other option, who else would fight for their rights? Certainly not the wealthy; and their own government was treating them with indifference. (All sources do agree that Berkley's interest in protecting the Indians, or at least showing a refusal to offend or attack them, was not a product of compassion. He was simply protecting a source of valuable income, which made the poor settlers even angrier. Their government was neglecting them in order to make money. It was hardly any wonder they revolted.)
He was also willing to break social rank to fight the Indians, which was also a attractive quality for the settlers. He would not be a hypocrite, sitting behind his desk, cheering them on while accepting handouts from the government. He fought alongside his followers in many battles with the Natives.
Next, it should be said that the Indians were not as innocent as they are portrayed. They attacks, stole, murdered, kidnapped and even tortured settlers. The inland settlers were in constant danger of attack.
Bacon: a Martyr
Forenote: I'm using the definition of martyr, “A person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.” The Zinn and Stefoff excerpt seem to view him as a misguided leader. The chapter is quoted saying, “He probably cared more about fighting Indians than about helping the poor."[Pg 36] It seems implied that these poor white Englishmen had no one else to turn to for reform and protection from the government. That brings up the question, was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation? The people had multiple reasons for their unrest; their poverty, the growing distinctions between classes, promises of wealth and land that wouldn't be fulfilled, the lack of a middle class, the growing anger at the government for lack of protection, and the racial tension, all of this was simmering below the surface of the shining new world the settlers had tried to hard to create. As Puglisi stated in his article, "He [Bacon] claimed that he was providing a release for the colonist’s frustrations." Puglisi forgot to mention that killing and plundering innocent Indian villages is hardly a hobby. The documents imply that Bacon had no reason to attack the Indians, and that the attacks against the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes were merely retaliation against Gov. Berkley's crimes.
So who was Bacon? Was he simply an angry colonist searching for justice? Or was he a malicious leader, killing whenever or whoever he deemed fit?
If the sources are to be taken as truth, there would be no Heroes in Bacons Rebellion. Each side of the conflict had their own faults and wrongdoings. But each side also had reasoning for their anger; reasoning that may have been misguided, but was present nonetheless. The Indians played a major role in this conflict. But I personally believe they were the most innocent our all the parties involved.
who were robbed of their promised wealth
Bacon: A Hero
In his declaration, he beleives himself a tragic hero, a defender of the poor and unprotected, a champion of justice. The poor farmers, the indentured servants, slaves of multiple races, the lower class saw him as hope for a brighter, freer future. And Bacon had his reasons for leading this group of people. First, He claimed that Governor Berkeley, “…raised great unjust taxes”, “advancing [advanced] to places of judicature… scandalous and ignorant favorites”, and “…assuming [assumed] monopoly of the beaver trade” among other crimes. Also, the government was unwilling to help protect outlying settlers from Indian attacks, on the grounds that a war with them would damage the fur trade. Second, they would see him a person of his word because he fought along side them in the battles he lead, and sacrificed his social status and favor with The Virginian government to do this. Thirdly, Modern day scholars might say that his actions were noble because there were multiple races in the bad of rebels he lead. As the into in _______ agreed, “Virginias planters long remembered the spectacle of black and white acting together to challenge authority” And finally, they would see him as virtuous because they already had a prejudice against the Indians. The natives were not innocent, and colonists jumped at the chance to retaliate in force.
He said himself, "Judge therefore all wise and unprejudiced men...the aspersion of Traitor or Rebell", playing the long suffering martyr in his own documents. In his wife’s letter to her sister, she tells a story of how he is doing good for the community, risking life and limb to protect the colonists from the “troublesome Indians”.
The poor people, the indentured servants, the slaves both black and white were desperate for change. They urgently needed protection; fearing for their lives, hiding in their houses or abandoning them altogether in fear of Indian attacks. Then Bacon comes along with his message of fighting back, it would inspire them, giving them an outlet for their frustrations. The issue was, the outlet was not the correct one, neither was his intention noble at all.
But he would seem so to the people, and why not? They had no other option, who else would fight for their rights? Certainly not the wealthy; and their own government was treating them with indifference. (All sources do agree that Berkley's interest in protecting the Indians, or at least showing a refusal to offend or attack them, was not a product of compassion. He was simply protecting a source of valuable income, which made the poor settlers even angrier. Their government was neglecting them in order to make money. It was hardly any wonder they revolted.)
He was also willing to break social rank to fight the Indians, which was also a attractive quality for the settlers. He would not be a hypocrite, sitting behind his desk, cheering them on while accepting handouts from the government. He fought alongside his followers in many battles with the Natives.
Next, it should be said that the Indians were not as innocent as they are portrayed. They attacks, stole, murdered, kidnapped and even tortured settlers. The inland settlers were in constant danger of attack.
Bacon: a Martyr
Forenote: I'm using the definition of martyr, “A person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.” The Zinn and Stefoff excerpt seem to view him as a misguided leader. The chapter is quoted saying, “He probably cared more about fighting Indians than about helping the poor."[Pg 36] It seems implied that these poor white Englishmen had no one else to turn to for reform and protection from the government. That brings up the question, was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation? The people had multiple reasons for their unrest; their poverty, the growing distinctions between classes, promises of wealth and land that wouldn't be fulfilled, the lack of a middle class, the growing anger at the government for lack of protection, and the racial tension, all of this was simmering below the surface of the shining new world the settlers had tried to hard to create. As Puglisi stated in his article, "He [Bacon] claimed that he was providing a release for the colonist’s frustrations." Puglisi forgot to mention that killing and plundering innocent Indian villages is hardly a hobby. The documents imply that Bacon had no reason to attack the Indians, and that the attacks against the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes were merely retaliation against Gov. Berkley's crimes.
So who was Bacon? Was he simply an angry colonist searching for justice? Or was he a malicious leader, killing whenever or whoever he deemed fit?
If the sources are to be taken as truth, there would be no Heroes in Bacons Rebellion. Each side of the conflict had their own faults and wrongdoings. But each side also had reasoning for their anger; reasoning that may have been misguided, but was present nonetheless. The Indians played a major role in this conflict. But I personally believe they were the most innocent our all the parties involved.
who were robbed of their promised wealth
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Thesis/ Outline Redo
Intro
-----A. Thesis – Nathanial Bacon was not a hero in his rebellion
-----B. Background
II. Bacon was a hero (They say)
-----A. Who was he a hero to?
1. The poor people, indentured servants, slaves of multiple races, lower class, farmers ect.
-----B. Why did they see him like that?
---------- 1. He was fighting against the same government that was neglecting them.
---------- ---------- a. Yellow handout, Bacons declaration
---------- ---------- ---------- i. “Raised great unjust taxes”
---------- ---------- ---------- ii. “By advancing to places of judicature scandalous and ignorant favorites”
---------- ---------- ---------- iii. “For having wronged his Majesty’s prerogative… by assuming monopoly of the beaver trade”
---------2. He fought alongside them
---------- 3. Sacrificed social status and favor with Berkeley
---------- 4. United (briefly) blacks and whites
---------- ---------- a. “But Virginias planters long remembered the spectacle of black and white acting together to challenge authority”
---------- 5. Indians did attack and kill settlers, they were not innocent.
---------- ---------- a. Letter from his wife to her sister
-----C. Did they have any other choice?
---------- 1. No, there was no one else to look to.
---------- 2. They found a leader in one of their own people, not one who was already intricately tied in the government.
-----D. Who agrees with this position?
---------- 1. Bacon
---------- ---------- a. Bacons declaration
---------- 2. Bacons Wife
---------- ---------- a. Letter to sister
Evidence - (paraphrasing quotes templates summary)
III. Bacon was not a hero (They say)
-----A. Definition of martyr-
---------- 1. A person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.
-----B. How he was a martyr
---------- 1. In his declaration he plays the victim
---------- ---------- a. “Judge therefore all wise and unprejudiced men… the aspersion of Traitor or Rebell”
---------- 2. He was never in the right, nor did he not have a reason for his anger
---------- 3. Was never in any grave poverty such as the people he “represented”
-----C. Attacked innocent people
---------- 2. Ignored existing peace treaties with Indians
---------- ---------- a. That jeopardized the economy from trade
---------- ---------- b. Ruined trust with surrounding Indian villages
---------- 3. Attacked Indian villages that were peaceful
---------- ---------- a. Doeg tribes ect...
---------- ---------- b. They were innocent, did not fight back even in fear they would offent the settlers.
-----D. Question, "Was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation?"
---------- 1. He was a leader, but was he created. He was a man who could rally a crowd, assign guilt, act as arbiter.
Evidence - (paraphrasing quotes templates summary)
IV. My thoughts (I say)
-----A. Was anyone justified?
---------- 1. Indians
---------- ---------- a. They were attacked, stolen from, killed
---------- ---------- b. They did the same, usually in retaliation.
---------- 2. Settlers
---------- ---------- a. Took land that was given to them that was not really theirs
---------- ---------- b. Attacked innocent and unrelated Indian tribes
---------- 3. Government
---------- ---------- a. Refused to help outlying Settlers to protect Indian trade
---------- ---------- b. Bacon thought Berkeley was corrupt
-----B. He was not a hero (use both agree and disagree templates)
---------- 1. Agree- change was needed and he brought it.
---------- 2. Disagree- brought out colonists anger and frustrations on Indians
V. References
-----A. Thesis – Nathanial Bacon was not a hero in his rebellion
-----B. Background
II. Bacon was a hero (They say)
-----A. Who was he a hero to?
1. The poor people, indentured servants, slaves of multiple races, lower class, farmers ect.
-----B. Why did they see him like that?
---------- 1. He was fighting against the same government that was neglecting them.
---------- ---------- a. Yellow handout, Bacons declaration
---------- ---------- ---------- i. “Raised great unjust taxes”
---------- ---------- ---------- ii. “By advancing to places of judicature scandalous and ignorant favorites”
---------- ---------- ---------- iii. “For having wronged his Majesty’s prerogative… by assuming monopoly of the beaver trade”
---------2. He fought alongside them
---------- 3. Sacrificed social status and favor with Berkeley
---------- 4. United (briefly) blacks and whites
---------- ---------- a. “But Virginias planters long remembered the spectacle of black and white acting together to challenge authority”
---------- 5. Indians did attack and kill settlers, they were not innocent.
---------- ---------- a. Letter from his wife to her sister
-----C. Did they have any other choice?
---------- 1. No, there was no one else to look to.
---------- 2. They found a leader in one of their own people, not one who was already intricately tied in the government.
-----D. Who agrees with this position?
---------- 1. Bacon
---------- ---------- a. Bacons declaration
---------- 2. Bacons Wife
---------- ---------- a. Letter to sister
Evidence - (paraphrasing quotes templates summary)
III. Bacon was not a hero (They say)
-----A. Definition of martyr-
---------- 1. A person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.
-----B. How he was a martyr
---------- 1. In his declaration he plays the victim
---------- ---------- a. “Judge therefore all wise and unprejudiced men… the aspersion of Traitor or Rebell”
---------- 2. He was never in the right, nor did he not have a reason for his anger
---------- 3. Was never in any grave poverty such as the people he “represented”
-----C. Attacked innocent people
---------- 2. Ignored existing peace treaties with Indians
---------- ---------- a. That jeopardized the economy from trade
---------- ---------- b. Ruined trust with surrounding Indian villages
---------- 3. Attacked Indian villages that were peaceful
---------- ---------- a. Doeg tribes ect...
---------- ---------- b. They were innocent, did not fight back even in fear they would offent the settlers.
-----D. Question, "Was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation?"
---------- 1. He was a leader, but was he created. He was a man who could rally a crowd, assign guilt, act as arbiter.
Evidence - (paraphrasing quotes templates summary)
IV. My thoughts (I say)
-----A. Was anyone justified?
---------- 1. Indians
---------- ---------- a. They were attacked, stolen from, killed
---------- ---------- b. They did the same, usually in retaliation.
---------- 2. Settlers
---------- ---------- a. Took land that was given to them that was not really theirs
---------- ---------- b. Attacked innocent and unrelated Indian tribes
---------- 3. Government
---------- ---------- a. Refused to help outlying Settlers to protect Indian trade
---------- ---------- b. Bacon thought Berkeley was corrupt
-----B. He was not a hero (use both agree and disagree templates)
---------- 1. Agree- change was needed and he brought it.
---------- 2. Disagree- brought out colonists anger and frustrations on Indians
V. References
Monday, October 13, 2008
Thesis Statement
Nathanial Bacon was not a hero in his rebellion because his actions were misguided.
I. Intro
A. Thesis
II. Bacon was a hero
a. Who was he a hero to?
b. Why did they see him like that?
c. Did they have any other choice?
d. Who agrees with this position?
e. Evidence - (paraphrasing quotes templates summary)
III. Bacon was not a hero
a. Definition of martyr-
b. why he was a martyr
c. question, "Was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation?"
d. answer
e. Evidence - (paraphrasing quotes templates summary)
IV. My thoughts
A. Was anyone justified?
b. He was not a hero (use both agree and disagree templates)
c. Agree- change was needed and he brought it.
d. Disagree- brought out colonists anger and frustrations on Indians
e. Evidence - (paraphrasing quotes templates summary)
I. Intro
A. Thesis
II. Bacon was a hero
a. Who was he a hero to?
b. Why did they see him like that?
c. Did they have any other choice?
d. Who agrees with this position?
e. Evidence - (paraphrasing quotes templates summary)
III. Bacon was not a hero
a. Definition of martyr-
b. why he was a martyr
c. question, "Was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation?"
d. answer
e. Evidence - (paraphrasing quotes templates summary)
IV. My thoughts
A. Was anyone justified?
b. He was not a hero (use both agree and disagree templates)
c. Agree- change was needed and he brought it.
d. Disagree- brought out colonists anger and frustrations on Indians
e. Evidence - (paraphrasing quotes templates summary)
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Essay Update
History can give us different versions of the same people or events. For example, take Nathanial Bacon of Bacon’s Rebellion. In some reports, he seems to be the picture of heroism, a man who led to poor and underprivileged settlers, servants and slaves to revolt against the malign government. Other articles aren't so willing to paint him as the hero.
Bacon: A Hero
In his declaration, he believes himself a tragic hero, a defender of the poor and unprotected, a champion of justice. He said himself, "Judge therefore all wise and unprejudiced men...the aspersion of Traitor or Rebell", playing the long suffering martyr in his own documents. In his wife’s letter to her sister, she tells a story of how he is doing good for the community, risking life and limb to protect the colonists from the “troublesome Indians”.
The poor people, the indentured servants, the slaves both black and white were desperate for change. They urgently needed protection; fearing for their lives, hiding in their houses or abandoning them altogether in fear of Indian attacks. Then Bacon comes along with his message of fighting back, it would inspire them, giving them an outlet for their frustrations. The issue was, the outlet was not the correct one, neither was his intention noble at all.
But he would seem so to the people, and why not? They had no other option, who else would fight for their rights? Certainly not the wealthy; and their own government was treating them with indifference. (All sources do agree that Berkley's interest in protecting the Indians, or at least showing a refusal to offend or attack them, was not a product of compassion. He was simply protecting a source of valuable income, which made the poor settlers even angrier. Their government was neglecting them in order to make money. It was hardly any wonder they revolted.)
He was also willing to break social rank to fight the Indians, which was also a attractive quality for the settlers. He would not be a hypocrite, sitting behind his desk, cheering them on while accepting handouts from the government. He fought alongside his followers in many battles with the Natives.
Next, it should be said that the Indians were not as innocent as they are portrayed. They attacks, stole, murdered, kidnapped and even tortured settlers. The inland sett;ers were in constant danger of attck.
Bacon: a Martyr
Forenote: I'm using the definition of martyr, “A person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.” The Zinn and Stefoff excerpt seem to view him as a misguided leader. The chapter is quoted saying, “He probably cared more about fighting Indians than about helping the poor."[Pg 36] It seems implied that these poor white Englishmen had no one else to turn to for reform and protection from the government. That brings up the question, was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation? The people had multiple reasons for their unrest; their poverty, the growing distinctions between classes, promises of wealth and land that wouldn't be fulfilled, the lack of a middle class, the growing anger at the government for lack of protection, and the racial tension, all of this was simmering below the surface of the shining new world the settlers had tried to hard to create. As Puglisi stated in his article, "He [Bacon] claimed that he was providing a release for the colonist’s frustrations." Puglisi forgot to mention that killing and plundering innocent Indian villages is hardly a hobby. The documents imply that Bacon had no reason to attack the Indians, and that the attacks against the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes were merely retaliation against Gov. Berkley's crimes.
So who was Bacon? Was he simply an angry colonist searching for justice? Or was he a malicious leader, killing whenever or whoever he deemed fit?
If the sources are to be taken as truth, there would be no Heroes in Bacons Rebellion. Each side of the conflict had their own faults and wrongdoings. But each side also had reasoning for their anger; reasoning that may have been misguided, but was present nonetheless. The Indians played a major role in this conflict. But I personally believe they were the most innocent our all the parties involved.
Bacon: A Hero
In his declaration, he believes himself a tragic hero, a defender of the poor and unprotected, a champion of justice. He said himself, "Judge therefore all wise and unprejudiced men...the aspersion of Traitor or Rebell", playing the long suffering martyr in his own documents. In his wife’s letter to her sister, she tells a story of how he is doing good for the community, risking life and limb to protect the colonists from the “troublesome Indians”.
The poor people, the indentured servants, the slaves both black and white were desperate for change. They urgently needed protection; fearing for their lives, hiding in their houses or abandoning them altogether in fear of Indian attacks. Then Bacon comes along with his message of fighting back, it would inspire them, giving them an outlet for their frustrations. The issue was, the outlet was not the correct one, neither was his intention noble at all.
But he would seem so to the people, and why not? They had no other option, who else would fight for their rights? Certainly not the wealthy; and their own government was treating them with indifference. (All sources do agree that Berkley's interest in protecting the Indians, or at least showing a refusal to offend or attack them, was not a product of compassion. He was simply protecting a source of valuable income, which made the poor settlers even angrier. Their government was neglecting them in order to make money. It was hardly any wonder they revolted.)
He was also willing to break social rank to fight the Indians, which was also a attractive quality for the settlers. He would not be a hypocrite, sitting behind his desk, cheering them on while accepting handouts from the government. He fought alongside his followers in many battles with the Natives.
Next, it should be said that the Indians were not as innocent as they are portrayed. They attacks, stole, murdered, kidnapped and even tortured settlers. The inland sett;ers were in constant danger of attck.
Bacon: a Martyr
Forenote: I'm using the definition of martyr, “A person who seeks sympathy or attention by feigning or exaggerating pain, deprivation, etc.” The Zinn and Stefoff excerpt seem to view him as a misguided leader. The chapter is quoted saying, “He probably cared more about fighting Indians than about helping the poor."[Pg 36] It seems implied that these poor white Englishmen had no one else to turn to for reform and protection from the government. That brings up the question, was he a leader, or more a character created out of desperation? The people had multiple reasons for their unrest; their poverty, the growing distinctions between classes, promises of wealth and land that wouldn't be fulfilled, the lack of a middle class, the growing anger at the government for lack of protection, and the racial tension, all of this was simmering below the surface of the shining new world the settlers had tried to hard to create. As Puglisi stated in his article, "He [Bacon] claimed that he was providing a release for the colonist’s frustrations." Puglisi forgot to mention that killing and plundering innocent Indian villages is hardly a hobby. The documents imply that Bacon had no reason to attack the Indians, and that the attacks against the Doeg and Pamunkey tribes were merely retaliation against Gov. Berkley's crimes.
So who was Bacon? Was he simply an angry colonist searching for justice? Or was he a malicious leader, killing whenever or whoever he deemed fit?
If the sources are to be taken as truth, there would be no Heroes in Bacons Rebellion. Each side of the conflict had their own faults and wrongdoings. But each side also had reasoning for their anger; reasoning that may have been misguided, but was present nonetheless. The Indians played a major role in this conflict. But I personally believe they were the most innocent our all the parties involved.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
JSTOR Search reveiw
I did not find the JSTORE site very helpful, although it is a recourse I could see being very useful in the future. I tried many combinations of words and there was only one of any real value, which was the first one from William and Mary college. I believe it was a primary document, which was useful.
But the other things it brought up were generally unhelpful, bringing up articles about Francis Bacon and Leisler's Rebellion.
There were things I appreciated about the site though, the best being the ability to email the citation to your personal address, that was a very useful feature. (Although I tried this, and the attachments were broken)
I also liked that you could view a list of pages with the search terms, and that you could click on links to just those pages, instead of having to read through all of them trying to find what you need. It was like an instant index, witch I found really impressive, since most of the articles were in PDF format.
So even though I did not find anything really profound on the site, I will try it again, because there is so much potential to be an amazing recourse in the future.
But the other things it brought up were generally unhelpful, bringing up articles about Francis Bacon and Leisler's Rebellion.
There were things I appreciated about the site though, the best being the ability to email the citation to your personal address, that was a very useful feature. (Although I tried this, and the attachments were broken)
I also liked that you could view a list of pages with the search terms, and that you could click on links to just those pages, instead of having to read through all of them trying to find what you need. It was like an instant index, witch I found really impressive, since most of the articles were in PDF format.
So even though I did not find anything really profound on the site, I will try it again, because there is so much potential to be an amazing recourse in the future.
Response to John Winthrop Quotes
Quote 1
- This quote is saying that the political body is the same as the spiritual or Christian body. The metaphor is effective because it is one the settlers have heard before, to describe the Church. So when he applies it to politics or a government, they can easily translate. It also is stating that unless they work together as one, they will not be able to survive or flourish. The body only works when all the parts work together, so it would give a sense of "collective individuality", that their actions will in some way affect other people.
Quote 2
- This quote is saying that there was one a good England, and that should be resurrected. "What they have ought to have done" means they used hindsight, they looked into the past, saw what they did not like or what needed to be changed, and take these matters into their own hands to create a new, better England, with roots in what it used to be. They were simply creating a new country, nearly like the one from where they came, except they had the chance to make it exactly as they wanted it.
Quote 3
- The quote is saying that the mission they have, to make a new more pure colony, was directly a mission from god. That is was their duty on earth to make a new state in where God could be glorified in the way that they thought most true to Christianity. They would see the land that they would take over as a gift from God, and that he would expect them to use it accordingly, not to ruin it becoming corrupt like the Old England.
Quote 4
- This quote means that they would make a settlement, a religion, a colony so pure that it would be looked upon as the ideal for all the other colonies in America. The word would spread how they and they alone are doing the will of God, and others would strive to be like them.
- This quote is saying that the political body is the same as the spiritual or Christian body. The metaphor is effective because it is one the settlers have heard before, to describe the Church. So when he applies it to politics or a government, they can easily translate. It also is stating that unless they work together as one, they will not be able to survive or flourish. The body only works when all the parts work together, so it would give a sense of "collective individuality", that their actions will in some way affect other people.
Quote 2
- This quote is saying that there was one a good England, and that should be resurrected. "What they have ought to have done" means they used hindsight, they looked into the past, saw what they did not like or what needed to be changed, and take these matters into their own hands to create a new, better England, with roots in what it used to be. They were simply creating a new country, nearly like the one from where they came, except they had the chance to make it exactly as they wanted it.
Quote 3
- The quote is saying that the mission they have, to make a new more pure colony, was directly a mission from god. That is was their duty on earth to make a new state in where God could be glorified in the way that they thought most true to Christianity. They would see the land that they would take over as a gift from God, and that he would expect them to use it accordingly, not to ruin it becoming corrupt like the Old England.
Quote 4
- This quote means that they would make a settlement, a religion, a colony so pure that it would be looked upon as the ideal for all the other colonies in America. The word would spread how they and they alone are doing the will of God, and others would strive to be like them.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Coll 101 Assignment, Part 4
4. Write a personal evaluation of the college fair experience.
The college fair was a complete success for me, but only because I was prepared in advance. If I had just shown up there, the experience would have been completely chaotic and nearly worthless. The fact I came prepared with what was important to me, the questions I wanted to ask, was invaluable.
The information I received that was the most important was probably when I asked the rep from NWCA how I could impress the admissions officers most with my portfolio or application. He told me that my portfolio was extremely important, that showing examples that you could grow and had talent was consequential. “But even more that that”, he said “you can impress us by showing a desire to learn, a desire to attend, a passion for your art.” That’s something you won’t get offline.
I don’t think I have any unanswered questions that I didn’t ask at the fair. Now my question is will my credits be transferred? But that will be part of the next step, which is starting communication with these colleges now. I should start thinking about my portfolio, and how it will affect me in the admissions process.
The fair was a great experience for me, I had fun, and I learned more in a few hours that I could have online. I met people, I shook the hands that might hold my admissions essay, I got numbers for the people Ill be talking to throughout the next three years, with all luck.
The college fair was a complete success for me, but only because I was prepared in advance. If I had just shown up there, the experience would have been completely chaotic and nearly worthless. The fact I came prepared with what was important to me, the questions I wanted to ask, was invaluable.
The information I received that was the most important was probably when I asked the rep from NWCA how I could impress the admissions officers most with my portfolio or application. He told me that my portfolio was extremely important, that showing examples that you could grow and had talent was consequential. “But even more that that”, he said “you can impress us by showing a desire to learn, a desire to attend, a passion for your art.” That’s something you won’t get offline.
I don’t think I have any unanswered questions that I didn’t ask at the fair. Now my question is will my credits be transferred? But that will be part of the next step, which is starting communication with these colleges now. I should start thinking about my portfolio, and how it will affect me in the admissions process.
The fair was a great experience for me, I had fun, and I learned more in a few hours that I could have online. I met people, I shook the hands that might hold my admissions essay, I got numbers for the people Ill be talking to throughout the next three years, with all luck.
Coll 101 Assignment, Part 3
3. After attending a seminar at the college fair, describe its content and evaluate the information received.
The workshop I attended was “How to Write a Better College Essay.” I found the information very useful. She had been a dean of admissions, and she has read literally thousands of essays. The speaker told us the importance of a few main items, the first one being something as simple as follow the directions. Her next points stressed the importance of personal voice in your essay. She said be real, be yourself, use whatever talents you have. One of the best pieces of advice she gave me was to play to your strengths. If you are good at creative writing, then write it like a story. I didn’t know you could do that, I thought it had to follow the traditional essay format, that’s something I will be using when I write my own college entrance essays. She said there have been many cases where she could see talent, but the student’s refusal to brag about their own qualities in their essay may have cost them admission. She was entertaining, and what I learned in that seminar I will be able to use in other essays as well, so that was 30 minutes of my time very well spent.
The workshop I attended was “How to Write a Better College Essay.” I found the information very useful. She had been a dean of admissions, and she has read literally thousands of essays. The speaker told us the importance of a few main items, the first one being something as simple as follow the directions. Her next points stressed the importance of personal voice in your essay. She said be real, be yourself, use whatever talents you have. One of the best pieces of advice she gave me was to play to your strengths. If you are good at creative writing, then write it like a story. I didn’t know you could do that, I thought it had to follow the traditional essay format, that’s something I will be using when I write my own college entrance essays. She said there have been many cases where she could see talent, but the student’s refusal to brag about their own qualities in their essay may have cost them admission. She was entertaining, and what I learned in that seminar I will be able to use in other essays as well, so that was 30 minutes of my time very well spent.
Coll 101 Assignment, Part 2
2. Select a college major; describe three colleges with quality degree programs in that major.
My most desired major is a fine arts degree in photography. At the college fair I saw 4-5 prospective colleges with quality degrees in that field.
One of them was California College of the arts. CCA did not impress me much in person, the tuition is very expensive, and the first year you do not get to choose the classes you take. Their brochure was much more informative and inviting. I was impressed, however, with the representative of CCA. She was knowledgeable in my degree program, and her advice even helped me that day during the college fair. She addressed the high tuition costs and told me that a lot of it could be waived they had more scholarship opportunities than most. Considering the price of tuition, and the face that I would need to move out of state upon acceptance, I would probably not apply to this college. But if it was in state, I would be interested I attending.
The second college I explored was Alberta College of Art and Design. I was also favorably impressed by the rep there, she was friendly and knowledgeable. I did not discover anything too profound about this college, I think the only thing that really sets it apart in my eyes would be its location, I wouldn’t have considered a college that was out of country before the fair. I would like to attend this college, but I think the transition would be one of the hardest; I do not want to be that far away from my family and friends. I don’t see the educational experience being that terribly different than anything I had already seen; they are a small college, with relatively low student to teacher ratios, low tuition and an urban campus.
The last and final college I explored for their photography degree was Northwest College of the Arts. I was by far the most impressed with this college. They have almost obscenely small class sizes and teacher-student ratios. They are a private college, and I would appreciate the challenge of getting accepted there. I love the low tuition and the spacious natural campus. They have modern, state of the art facilities as they have recently moved due to expansion. They I could double major in both my fields of choice, and actually graduate faster than if I was enrolled in another dual major program. If they accepted my transfer credit, I may save a truly incredible about of money and time in college, the experience would be completely different here than any other college.
My most desired major is a fine arts degree in photography. At the college fair I saw 4-5 prospective colleges with quality degrees in that field.
One of them was California College of the arts. CCA did not impress me much in person, the tuition is very expensive, and the first year you do not get to choose the classes you take. Their brochure was much more informative and inviting. I was impressed, however, with the representative of CCA. She was knowledgeable in my degree program, and her advice even helped me that day during the college fair. She addressed the high tuition costs and told me that a lot of it could be waived they had more scholarship opportunities than most. Considering the price of tuition, and the face that I would need to move out of state upon acceptance, I would probably not apply to this college. But if it was in state, I would be interested I attending.
The second college I explored was Alberta College of Art and Design. I was also favorably impressed by the rep there, she was friendly and knowledgeable. I did not discover anything too profound about this college, I think the only thing that really sets it apart in my eyes would be its location, I wouldn’t have considered a college that was out of country before the fair. I would like to attend this college, but I think the transition would be one of the hardest; I do not want to be that far away from my family and friends. I don’t see the educational experience being that terribly different than anything I had already seen; they are a small college, with relatively low student to teacher ratios, low tuition and an urban campus.
The last and final college I explored for their photography degree was Northwest College of the Arts. I was by far the most impressed with this college. They have almost obscenely small class sizes and teacher-student ratios. They are a private college, and I would appreciate the challenge of getting accepted there. I love the low tuition and the spacious natural campus. They have modern, state of the art facilities as they have recently moved due to expansion. They I could double major in both my fields of choice, and actually graduate faster than if I was enrolled in another dual major program. If they accepted my transfer credit, I may save a truly incredible about of money and time in college, the experience would be completely different here than any other college.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
