100%(13)13 out of 13 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 22 - 24 out of 42 pages.
assisting white settlers, and the Natives present it with so much apathy that it’s hard to accept that they ultimately fail in their persuading.Prompt 3.510/22/18Write a response to Zinn's chapter. Try to avoid in writing "in my opinion" or using a sentimentalor romantic tone. Instead, write a short assessment in which you respond thoughtfully, analytically to the chapter.Zinn’s chapter is interesting because at its surface there’s nothing inherently wrong with what it’s saying. In Zinn’s chapter, Zinn presents many statements that seem likely and many of which I agree with due to their historical validity. However, he doesn’t present a focused look at indian removal so much as the gist of the argument. I think, much like Zinn presents it in his chapter, that indian removal was a necessary evil that got us where we are now. I also agree with the chapters almost cynical realism it puts itself into. The chapter shows our relation to native tribes and how that dynamic has changed drastically over the years.Due to the fact that it’s discussing such a horrible series of events like indian removal and the trail of tears, it puts our view of our ancestors into question. The proper way of
HIS 315Kaddressing this question of ancestry is to provide factual reasons for their doing so while maintaining its truthfulness. It’s difficult to come to terms with the horrid nature of most historyand due to this many people try to avoid including their relatives in those stories. However, what this does to me specifically when reading is puts me in a place where I don’t know the basis for the actions presented, so I avoid relating to those actions and by doing so avoid having proper discussion on its validity. I think everything in history should contain an emotional or reasoned basis for the argument in order to help identify those challenges in a useful way. However, Zinn’s reading doesn’t work by this logic. Zinn’s reading takes such a cold look at the events that the reader isn’t able to internalize the events which I feel is a cornerstone of how to portray history. Zinn's way of thinking about this problem seems to be to avoid the problem of historical proximity entirely. I think Zinn’s piece is a worthwhile resource to use, but I feel Zinn fails when he tries to provide reasoning that we, as readers, can empathize with.In conclusion, the reading “Chapter 7: As Long As Grass Grows or Water Runs” talks about our efforts to remove, influence, and migrate Native Americans and their culture. It’s an interesting chapter due to small implications like that Jefferson and other founding fathers didn’t entirely think of Natives as savages, and instead saw them as the original owners of the land they were now inhabiting. However, I feel that Zinn’s writing is great as a factual interpretation of the events, but, in order to truly connect with the reader, possible causes needed to be discussed that allow the reader to empathize with the people presented. This way