Difference between revisions of "Week 5 Questions/Comments-327 09"
From McClurken Wiki
(→Mary Jemison Views the Revolution) |
|||
| Line 90: | Line 90: | ||
'''For as much as Mary Jemison’s appearance of aligning herself with the Iroquois through her speech such as “our Indians”, it almost seems tenuous and superficial as she also interchangeably uses distancing words such as “the Indians” or just “they”. This fragile state of association is also shown by the fact that at first sign of food shortage, she quickly took her children and left the Iroquois. This paragraph (third from the bottom) says nothing about her husband, friends, or the connections she had formed with the people in the Iroquois village and her concern about how they would have fared, and also the fact that she never went back.''' I think this article was interesting to see how the Iroquois women viewed the American Revolution and part the Iroquois played, but just as much, '''''I think, maybe, that this article also should warn us about overstating her emotional connection to the Iroquois themselves?''''' – Elyse Lawrence | '''For as much as Mary Jemison’s appearance of aligning herself with the Iroquois through her speech such as “our Indians”, it almost seems tenuous and superficial as she also interchangeably uses distancing words such as “the Indians” or just “they”. This fragile state of association is also shown by the fact that at first sign of food shortage, she quickly took her children and left the Iroquois. This paragraph (third from the bottom) says nothing about her husband, friends, or the connections she had formed with the people in the Iroquois village and her concern about how they would have fared, and also the fact that she never went back.''' I think this article was interesting to see how the Iroquois women viewed the American Revolution and part the Iroquois played, but just as much, '''''I think, maybe, that this article also should warn us about overstating her emotional connection to the Iroquois themselves?''''' – Elyse Lawrence | ||
| + | |||
| + | While reading this article, it seemed to me that the Seneca Indians were pawns in the conflict between colonists and the British. Mary Jemison makes references that, not only was neutrality not an option, but that aligning with either side was a warrant for death. This source also allows us to read into the cultural differences between the war tactics of natives and colonists. While the ceremonial torture of Boyd which "took out an intestine ... and drove him round it [the sapling] till he had drawn out the whole of his intestines" may perpetuate the stereotypical image of the savage native, the colonists were "burning and destroying the huts and corn-fields; killing the cattle, hogs and horses, and cutting down the fruit trees belonging to the Indians throughout the country ... [which left] not a mouthful of any kind of sustenance left." In my opinion, the strategic military tactic of starving every man, woman, and child of a village is no more barbaric, if not more, than the torture of a soldier who would kill you if given the chance. -Seth Mintzer | ||
== Thomas Paine in 1775, from Major Problems in the Era of the American Revolution, 288-289 == | == Thomas Paine in 1775, from Major Problems in the Era of the American Revolution, 288-289 == | ||
