Difference between revisions of "328--Week 3 Questions/Comments"
From McClurken Wiki
(New page: The one thing that immediately struck me while I began reading the Castaneda piece was the classification between "Spanish" and "Mexican" and how, to me, that distinction seems to still be...) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The one thing that immediately struck me while I began reading the Castaneda piece was the classification between "Spanish" and "Mexican" and how, to me, that distinction seems to still be true, on a certain level, today. Castaneda points out how Spanish women were always purer and more mysterious; romanticized in a sense. The Mexican women on the other hand were impure on pretty much every count. Does anyone else feel that this stereotype between the two ethnicities still holds up today or is that just me? Based on general opinion, I feel as though this major difference still sticks out in people's minds (not saying that this distinction is right in any sense.) - Kelly Wuyscik | The one thing that immediately struck me while I began reading the Castaneda piece was the classification between "Spanish" and "Mexican" and how, to me, that distinction seems to still be true, on a certain level, today. Castaneda points out how Spanish women were always purer and more mysterious; romanticized in a sense. The Mexican women on the other hand were impure on pretty much every count. Does anyone else feel that this stereotype between the two ethnicities still holds up today or is that just me? Based on general opinion, I feel as though this major difference still sticks out in people's minds (not saying that this distinction is right in any sense.) - Kelly Wuyscik | ||
| + | |||
| + | I was extremely impressed by the scale of the Cherokee Seminary school. For it's time, it seemed like an impressive operation for a people so tremendously discriminated against in America, excepting the multiple burnings down of the building! I was, however, struck by the authors constant use of the word "progressive", which to me is usually a positive word, meaning moving toward improved living/way of life and education for the public. The author used it so negatively though, as a way to describe the discriminating, racially-mixed Cherokee girls and their families usually. Looking at her writings from a historians perspective I see how the word might have been used by the people themselves as a justifier of their own belief of superiority, but the author should not have used it herself because it makes it seem as though she is drawing the line herself between the status of tradition verse progression and pure-blood verse mixed-blood.~Jackie Reed | ||
