Rhetoric and Ideology Studies: An Overview
The study of ideology and rhetoric in our 11th grade humanities class began with the idea of "deconstructing" America. To put this in a more comprehensible terms, I like to think of this phrase as the breaking of the ideas within America down in order to build our own ideologies and perspectives on the world. This scope which we use to look at the world is very important, and learning about this subject early into my junior year was beneficial to me as a student and as a pre-adult. Interacting with my own ideas as well as the ideas of my peers was an easy way to practice real world skills, and gave me the ability to critically think as an independent and involved student in this class. Through seminars and assignments based on rhetorical devices and Aristotelian Appeals, I was able to learn more about the world that I live in, and practice these skills in multiple seminars and reflections throughout the semester. These reflections are posted below.
Crash (2004) Seminar Reflection
Racism is an incredibly complex and ever changing dynamic that is hard for many of us to put our finger on. This is why I believe that our seminar was so intriguing and evoked so much input, because each student had a very unique background that allowed them to provide their own opinions and beliefs. Looking at the examples of institutional racism and stereotypes in Crash opened my eyes for this seminar, showing me how racial tension can thrive in a place as large and diverse as Los Angeles. As Jean Cabot (played by Sandra Bullock) exclaimed in Crash, “Oh really? And he's not gonna go sell our key to one of his gang banger friends the moment he is out our door? (Crash, 1998)” Speaking of the hispanic man fixing the locks of their home, this line opened my eyes to the harsh stereotypes people can create based on years of fear and ignorance in large cities where crime is common. Being exposed to harsh stereotypes like this and many others in Crash, my perspective was changed and I was forced to think about stereotypes that exist in my mind and how they had developed over my lifetime.
Another theory of how stereotypes can be created was brought up by Lawson in yesterday's seminar. Lawson commented about how stereotypes can stem from tribes or small groups, and how these can set the precedent for a larger population or race. Having lived as the minority in Hawaii, I think that Lawson brought a very unique perspective to the seminar, and his thoughts on the introduction of stereotypes gave me a lot to ponder while I sat on the outer ring of the circle. When discussing race, we often think that stereotypes are assigned on a more social scale, but I was very intrigued how Lawson offered that they may instead be things that we are born with or our part of our genetic makeup. For example, some tribes or groups of people might be raised doing more tasks oriented around hard work/strength and therefore it could become part of their identity and genetic makeup doing these things. It must be mentioned though, that if this theory were to be true, people of the same race would have to marry and reproduce within the same cultural/racial group to keep these “born” stereotypes alive.
A big question we've centering our conversation around this week is: what is racism, and how can it end? Te be frank, I really have no idea how to answer this question, and I highly doubt that I will be able to answer it by the end of this year. But to focus on a smaller area of racial tension, I'd like to talk about police brutality and how it could relate to aiding in the deconstruction of racism. In the TED talk we watched today by Brian Stevenson, he talked about how we could reach “justice” by establishing a clean moral slate for every individual, despite their skin color or cultural background. In the US justice system, the ideas of institutional racism and discrimination are not often misplaced. As we've seen in the Michael Brown shooting and many other instances like it, police often take over-measures to ensure the “safety” of citizens and themselves. More often than not, it's shoot first ask later.
In an article on police brutality we read this week, a video linked at the bottom shifted my previous ideas of how police should handle observably aggressive behavior by citizens involved in police stops. The video showed approximately 30 UK police officers in a standoff against an observably angry man storming the suburbia streets with a huge machete. I mean, this thing was big. To any American police officer, this would be an easily solvable situation; shoot him where he stands. But even after tentatively making efforts to suppress the threat without using extreme force, meanwhile being chased by the angry man up and down the street swinging his machete, not a single cop fired. While the man gained control of his temper, the UK force waited patiently until making their move to arrest the man. In this extreme potential threat, I was amazed to see how the police handled the situation calmly.
After all this, it made me wonder if this entirely achievable model of police force could be replicated in our own country. If police handled each situation with no stereotyping and treated every citizen with a “clean slate”, (which, to add, could be entirely impossible), I think that there could be a huge improvement in the area of institutional and regular racism. As Natasha Bach says in her article on HuffPost Politics, “Others are calling for a new law that would require law enforcement to wear cameras to avoid police misconduct and maintain a higher level of accountability. (“Police Violence Has Been Going On Forever. No Wonder People Are Fed Up With It.”, 2014)” But, maybe, if we could implement a system of cooperative police action instead of forcing officers to wear body cameras and take other harsh precautionary measures, we could possibly learn to interact with each other and respond adequately to illegal action, instead of being put against each other and forced to wait while underlying racial tension boils to the surface.
Another theory of how stereotypes can be created was brought up by Lawson in yesterday's seminar. Lawson commented about how stereotypes can stem from tribes or small groups, and how these can set the precedent for a larger population or race. Having lived as the minority in Hawaii, I think that Lawson brought a very unique perspective to the seminar, and his thoughts on the introduction of stereotypes gave me a lot to ponder while I sat on the outer ring of the circle. When discussing race, we often think that stereotypes are assigned on a more social scale, but I was very intrigued how Lawson offered that they may instead be things that we are born with or our part of our genetic makeup. For example, some tribes or groups of people might be raised doing more tasks oriented around hard work/strength and therefore it could become part of their identity and genetic makeup doing these things. It must be mentioned though, that if this theory were to be true, people of the same race would have to marry and reproduce within the same cultural/racial group to keep these “born” stereotypes alive.
A big question we've centering our conversation around this week is: what is racism, and how can it end? Te be frank, I really have no idea how to answer this question, and I highly doubt that I will be able to answer it by the end of this year. But to focus on a smaller area of racial tension, I'd like to talk about police brutality and how it could relate to aiding in the deconstruction of racism. In the TED talk we watched today by Brian Stevenson, he talked about how we could reach “justice” by establishing a clean moral slate for every individual, despite their skin color or cultural background. In the US justice system, the ideas of institutional racism and discrimination are not often misplaced. As we've seen in the Michael Brown shooting and many other instances like it, police often take over-measures to ensure the “safety” of citizens and themselves. More often than not, it's shoot first ask later.
In an article on police brutality we read this week, a video linked at the bottom shifted my previous ideas of how police should handle observably aggressive behavior by citizens involved in police stops. The video showed approximately 30 UK police officers in a standoff against an observably angry man storming the suburbia streets with a huge machete. I mean, this thing was big. To any American police officer, this would be an easily solvable situation; shoot him where he stands. But even after tentatively making efforts to suppress the threat without using extreme force, meanwhile being chased by the angry man up and down the street swinging his machete, not a single cop fired. While the man gained control of his temper, the UK force waited patiently until making their move to arrest the man. In this extreme potential threat, I was amazed to see how the police handled the situation calmly.
After all this, it made me wonder if this entirely achievable model of police force could be replicated in our own country. If police handled each situation with no stereotyping and treated every citizen with a “clean slate”, (which, to add, could be entirely impossible), I think that there could be a huge improvement in the area of institutional and regular racism. As Natasha Bach says in her article on HuffPost Politics, “Others are calling for a new law that would require law enforcement to wear cameras to avoid police misconduct and maintain a higher level of accountability. (“Police Violence Has Been Going On Forever. No Wonder People Are Fed Up With It.”, 2014)” But, maybe, if we could implement a system of cooperative police action instead of forcing officers to wear body cameras and take other harsh precautionary measures, we could possibly learn to interact with each other and respond adequately to illegal action, instead of being put against each other and forced to wait while underlying racial tension boils to the surface.
Civil Disobedience and Non-violent Direct Action Seminar Reflection
Since the conception of the United States, a fundamental value of American progress has been to create change through the people, for the people. Well, in theory at least. From the times of Martin Luther King Jr., to the more recent protests of Occupy Wall Street, civil disobedience and non-violent direct action have become methods often practiced by citizens of the United States when they feel need for change. When it is decided by a majority that a minority is being oppressed, history has shown groups taking to the streets with protests against an unequal system. Although cases like Occupy Wall St. have ended with little or no achievement of original goals, a majority of civil disobedience cases have been a powerful way for citizens of a democracy to get their voices heard.
In this day and age, it is no longer enough to be passively active about social and structural issues. As Henry David Thoreau voices in Civil Disobedience, “They hesitate, and they regret, and sometimes they petition; but they do nothing with earnest and with effect” (Thoreau 3). This may have been the biggest downfall of the Occupy Wall St. protest. As Thoreau claims in this passage, the voice of many may be lost without the demonstration of direct action. Although protesters rallied in the streets of New York, and tried to make their voices heard, was this really enough? “They will wait, well disposed, for others to remedy the evil, that they may no longer have it to regret” (Thoreau 3). Because the Occupy Wall Street protest was often downplayed by social media sources, in combination with the absence of direct action, this protest did not leave as long of a lasting effect as those that have come before it.
When the very flow of the system becomes stopped up by the discontent of the people, what happens? As Thoreau claims in Civil Disobedience, “All machines have their friction; and possibly this does enough good to counterbalance the evil. At any rate, it is a great evil to make a stir about it. But when the friction comes to have its machine, and oppression and robbery are organized, I say, let us not have such a machine any longer” (Thoreau 3). In times of extreme tension, it seems to be the course of history that change is a natural occurrence. As we see Thoreau claim in this passage, each machine has its “friction,” and it’s just a matter of time before these flaws rise to the surface. “Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue,” claims Martin Luther King Jr. in “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” (Dr. King 2). This quote is a great example of how tension can be used as a justification for civil disobedience, and how the climate of a nation can boil to a point where change is inevitable. Chris stated in the seminar, “If we’re in a democracy, why doesn’t the government listen to us?”
Lastly, when the exigency of a situation becomes too important to be ignored any longer, there becomes a rally and push motion that can spread like a wildfire across a nation. As MLK Jr. pronounces in “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”, “This ‘Wait’ has almost always meant ‘Never.’ We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that ‘justice too long delayed is justice denied’” (Dr. King 2). There comes a time when citizens must realize that enough is enough. This concept is explained very eloquently in the passage from MLK Jr. When a minority has been oppressed over any period of time, it is justifiable (and almost expected) for an individual of that minority to speak out against the crimes of the oppressing majority. The only remaining factor is time. So when should a revolution occur? As Martin Luther King Jr. voices in “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”, “Then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair” (Dr. King 2).
So while some cases of civil disobedience in U.S. History have ended with an anti-climactic result, the majority of non-violent direct actions have been effective in bringing about positive change. As both Thoreau and MLK Jr. believe, it is the citizens’ job to participate actively in their society and not turn a blind eye on the happenings of their government. As Chris questioned in the seminar, “If we’re in a democracy, then why doesn’t the government listen to us?” Well, maybe they won’t. But if enough people can no longer live in discontent, and people are no longer ok with ignoring pressing issues, then it is inevitable that a flame of change will burn across the nation.
In this day and age, it is no longer enough to be passively active about social and structural issues. As Henry David Thoreau voices in Civil Disobedience, “They hesitate, and they regret, and sometimes they petition; but they do nothing with earnest and with effect” (Thoreau 3). This may have been the biggest downfall of the Occupy Wall St. protest. As Thoreau claims in this passage, the voice of many may be lost without the demonstration of direct action. Although protesters rallied in the streets of New York, and tried to make their voices heard, was this really enough? “They will wait, well disposed, for others to remedy the evil, that they may no longer have it to regret” (Thoreau 3). Because the Occupy Wall Street protest was often downplayed by social media sources, in combination with the absence of direct action, this protest did not leave as long of a lasting effect as those that have come before it.
When the very flow of the system becomes stopped up by the discontent of the people, what happens? As Thoreau claims in Civil Disobedience, “All machines have their friction; and possibly this does enough good to counterbalance the evil. At any rate, it is a great evil to make a stir about it. But when the friction comes to have its machine, and oppression and robbery are organized, I say, let us not have such a machine any longer” (Thoreau 3). In times of extreme tension, it seems to be the course of history that change is a natural occurrence. As we see Thoreau claim in this passage, each machine has its “friction,” and it’s just a matter of time before these flaws rise to the surface. “Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue,” claims Martin Luther King Jr. in “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” (Dr. King 2). This quote is a great example of how tension can be used as a justification for civil disobedience, and how the climate of a nation can boil to a point where change is inevitable. Chris stated in the seminar, “If we’re in a democracy, why doesn’t the government listen to us?”
Lastly, when the exigency of a situation becomes too important to be ignored any longer, there becomes a rally and push motion that can spread like a wildfire across a nation. As MLK Jr. pronounces in “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”, “This ‘Wait’ has almost always meant ‘Never.’ We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that ‘justice too long delayed is justice denied’” (Dr. King 2). There comes a time when citizens must realize that enough is enough. This concept is explained very eloquently in the passage from MLK Jr. When a minority has been oppressed over any period of time, it is justifiable (and almost expected) for an individual of that minority to speak out against the crimes of the oppressing majority. The only remaining factor is time. So when should a revolution occur? As Martin Luther King Jr. voices in “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”, “Then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair” (Dr. King 2).
So while some cases of civil disobedience in U.S. History have ended with an anti-climactic result, the majority of non-violent direct actions have been effective in bringing about positive change. As both Thoreau and MLK Jr. believe, it is the citizens’ job to participate actively in their society and not turn a blind eye on the happenings of their government. As Chris questioned in the seminar, “If we’re in a democracy, then why doesn’t the government listen to us?” Well, maybe they won’t. But if enough people can no longer live in discontent, and people are no longer ok with ignoring pressing issues, then it is inevitable that a flame of change will burn across the nation.
Income Inequality and the Ideology of Wealth Seminar Reflection
One of the questions posed in our Edmodo seminar was: “Is there a possible way to create a just economic system?” In all honesty, I recognize that I’ve only scraped the tip of the economic iceberg in my high school education. This being said, in the following response I’d like to offer my opinion on eco-boosting ideas. These ideas could work in smoothing out the rough edges of the U.S. economy system, or they could at least be a step in the right direction. These ideas have potentioally been discussed in text/videos that we’ve consumed in class, or are a hybrid version of my own.
There are three solutions that I think could be put in place to benefit the current U.S. economy: citizens playing an active role in their government, the majority (lower/middle) working with the minority (upper), and evening the education field for al Americans.
Firstly, it has become apparent to me over our studies of income distribution that not a whole lot is going to change if someone doesn’t want to take the steps to change it (duh). For example, although the Occupy Wall Street movement set in motion a large conversation about corporate wealth and greed in the U.S., it lacked a sole objective and lost steam simply due to he lack of perseverance and focus of those protesting. Robert Reich and Larry McDonald echoed critiques of the Occupy movement in a CNN Article speculating the event two years later: Its lack of focus on a singular mission, its disorganization, its reliance on getting 95% of Occupiers to agree on what the group should do (Reich, McDonald 1). As Reich and McDonald offered in this article, the Occupy Wall Street could have failed simply by the way it was set up. When you have the 99% fighting the 1%, there is a great possibility that within the 99% there is going to be disagreement, and every person is going to fight for their own economic agenda. This won’t work. Well, at least not if we’re aiming for a truly just economic system.
Secondly, cooperation is key to a fluidly functioning capitalism/democracy. Before I go into this next thought, I’d like to state that I believe that there are genuinely crooked and disgusting individuals that work within the framework of corporate America; but not all wealthy people are inherently evil. The U.S. has gained the track record of an industrial giant since it’s very beginnings, and wealthy individuals have also gained the reputation of being “fat cats” and symbols of greed in our society. But in life, I have found that there are always exceptions. Example A: Bill and Melinda Gates, through the appropriately named Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, have donated $28 billion to global and national development programs as of May 16, 2013 (Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation). Example B: As of June 23, 2006, Warren Buffet pledged approximately 83% of his wealth (approximately $30.7 billion dollars) to the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, making Buffet the largest charitable donor in history (Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation). To me this demonstrates that there are people at the top who care about humanity and equality, and I think that there are ways for the rich to contribute to closing the income gap by re-circulating their wealth into social programs. Easier said than done, but this is still hypothetical.
Lastly, I believe that education could be one of the largest factors in creating a just economic society. For me, the benefits of an equal education system outweigh the negatives greatly. As Eric Hanushek and Ludger Wößmann state in their article on the impacts of education on economy, “The simple answers in the discussion of economic implications of education are that educational quality, measured by cognitive skills, has a strong impact on individual earnings. More than that, however, educational quality has a strong and robust influence on economic growth” (Hanushek, Wößmann 2). Many companies have begun outsourcing jobs to other countries that have a higher percentage of graduates from higher education (universities). If more funding were to go into schools, I think that we could see the effects of this come back and benefit our economy by creating more jobs.
So in my opinion, to create a just economic system, we should all play an active role in our government and the policies being passed, the rich should re-circulate their wealth, and policies should be passed to ensure equal education opportunities for the children of America. Through these systems, I believe that we could begin moving towards a (more) just economic system, one individual at a time.
There are three solutions that I think could be put in place to benefit the current U.S. economy: citizens playing an active role in their government, the majority (lower/middle) working with the minority (upper), and evening the education field for al Americans.
Firstly, it has become apparent to me over our studies of income distribution that not a whole lot is going to change if someone doesn’t want to take the steps to change it (duh). For example, although the Occupy Wall Street movement set in motion a large conversation about corporate wealth and greed in the U.S., it lacked a sole objective and lost steam simply due to he lack of perseverance and focus of those protesting. Robert Reich and Larry McDonald echoed critiques of the Occupy movement in a CNN Article speculating the event two years later: Its lack of focus on a singular mission, its disorganization, its reliance on getting 95% of Occupiers to agree on what the group should do (Reich, McDonald 1). As Reich and McDonald offered in this article, the Occupy Wall Street could have failed simply by the way it was set up. When you have the 99% fighting the 1%, there is a great possibility that within the 99% there is going to be disagreement, and every person is going to fight for their own economic agenda. This won’t work. Well, at least not if we’re aiming for a truly just economic system.
Secondly, cooperation is key to a fluidly functioning capitalism/democracy. Before I go into this next thought, I’d like to state that I believe that there are genuinely crooked and disgusting individuals that work within the framework of corporate America; but not all wealthy people are inherently evil. The U.S. has gained the track record of an industrial giant since it’s very beginnings, and wealthy individuals have also gained the reputation of being “fat cats” and symbols of greed in our society. But in life, I have found that there are always exceptions. Example A: Bill and Melinda Gates, through the appropriately named Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, have donated $28 billion to global and national development programs as of May 16, 2013 (Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation). Example B: As of June 23, 2006, Warren Buffet pledged approximately 83% of his wealth (approximately $30.7 billion dollars) to the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, making Buffet the largest charitable donor in history (Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation). To me this demonstrates that there are people at the top who care about humanity and equality, and I think that there are ways for the rich to contribute to closing the income gap by re-circulating their wealth into social programs. Easier said than done, but this is still hypothetical.
Lastly, I believe that education could be one of the largest factors in creating a just economic society. For me, the benefits of an equal education system outweigh the negatives greatly. As Eric Hanushek and Ludger Wößmann state in their article on the impacts of education on economy, “The simple answers in the discussion of economic implications of education are that educational quality, measured by cognitive skills, has a strong impact on individual earnings. More than that, however, educational quality has a strong and robust influence on economic growth” (Hanushek, Wößmann 2). Many companies have begun outsourcing jobs to other countries that have a higher percentage of graduates from higher education (universities). If more funding were to go into schools, I think that we could see the effects of this come back and benefit our economy by creating more jobs.
So in my opinion, to create a just economic system, we should all play an active role in our government and the policies being passed, the rich should re-circulate their wealth, and policies should be passed to ensure equal education opportunities for the children of America. Through these systems, I believe that we could begin moving towards a (more) just economic system, one individual at a time.
Rhetoric & Ideology Project Reflection
The rhetoric project invited students to dive into a topic that they are passionate about, and develop a well-rounded perspective on this subject throughout the course of the semester. This year we have been exploring the realms of social ergonomics while diving into the national characteristics and experiences of the United States. Throughout these studies, we’ve participated in multiple seminars in class and online, and have contributed to our own perspectives and the perspectives of our peers. This has allowed students to pursue their own ideologies in the framework of our humanities class, and voice their concerns as growing and evolving citizens of the U.S.
The rhetoric of my project aimed to explore the good and bad sides of the United States education system in comparison to systems from other nations. By comparing our system to that of Finland and beyond, I was able to give the audience concrete examples of learning strategies that could be implemented into our own system. The idea of “21st Century Learning Skills” was a very key part of my presentation, and expanding this idea to the bigger picture gave my talk the ability to contribute to the bigger talk on education. Presenting this project in the form of a TED Talk gave me the freedom to take on a conversational tone with the audience, and I think that this benefited my delivery of rhetoric greatly. When I relayed facts and stats throughout my presentation, I was able to infuse them with my own perspective as a U.S. student and citizen, and this made this project very rhetorically polished.
As a student and a lover of learning, I was able to connect to this project and topic very easily. I was very intrigued when I watched a documentary called the Finland Phenomenon. This film helped me gain insight into the every day schooling of students in another country, and provided me with valuable information about the systems of education that are providing great results internationally. As a citizen and student of the 21st century, I would like nothing more than to see the U.S. education system gain momentum again, and I think that we can all do this together.
The most difficult part of this project for me was making it “emotional” and appealing to the audience. When you think of education you don’t really think of a super controversial subject, so I had trouble making this topic interesting and adding something that people might not already know. I think that this benefited my project in the end, because I was able to take a very even tone with my presentation. This being said, however, I wish that I had been able to incorporate a little bit more pathos and draw my audience in by talking about how this issue affects our youth and us.
From this project, I’ve learned that each individual takes away their own personal biases and opinions based on the rhetoric they are surrounded by and contribute to. My peers and I each have individual backgrounds and experiences, and I think this made this project very interesting to watch. While it was commented that this exhibition was more cynical than not, I think that there was a fairly equal representation of values and beliefs. This shows the idea of the American experience very clearly. As Americans, it is our job to contribute to society in any way possible, and this can only be done if we push for our beliefs and take a stand for what is importance to us. This is what I learned from this project.
The rhetoric of my project aimed to explore the good and bad sides of the United States education system in comparison to systems from other nations. By comparing our system to that of Finland and beyond, I was able to give the audience concrete examples of learning strategies that could be implemented into our own system. The idea of “21st Century Learning Skills” was a very key part of my presentation, and expanding this idea to the bigger picture gave my talk the ability to contribute to the bigger talk on education. Presenting this project in the form of a TED Talk gave me the freedom to take on a conversational tone with the audience, and I think that this benefited my delivery of rhetoric greatly. When I relayed facts and stats throughout my presentation, I was able to infuse them with my own perspective as a U.S. student and citizen, and this made this project very rhetorically polished.
As a student and a lover of learning, I was able to connect to this project and topic very easily. I was very intrigued when I watched a documentary called the Finland Phenomenon. This film helped me gain insight into the every day schooling of students in another country, and provided me with valuable information about the systems of education that are providing great results internationally. As a citizen and student of the 21st century, I would like nothing more than to see the U.S. education system gain momentum again, and I think that we can all do this together.
The most difficult part of this project for me was making it “emotional” and appealing to the audience. When you think of education you don’t really think of a super controversial subject, so I had trouble making this topic interesting and adding something that people might not already know. I think that this benefited my project in the end, because I was able to take a very even tone with my presentation. This being said, however, I wish that I had been able to incorporate a little bit more pathos and draw my audience in by talking about how this issue affects our youth and us.
From this project, I’ve learned that each individual takes away their own personal biases and opinions based on the rhetoric they are surrounded by and contribute to. My peers and I each have individual backgrounds and experiences, and I think this made this project very interesting to watch. While it was commented that this exhibition was more cynical than not, I think that there was a fairly equal representation of values and beliefs. This shows the idea of the American experience very clearly. As Americans, it is our job to contribute to society in any way possible, and this can only be done if we push for our beliefs and take a stand for what is importance to us. This is what I learned from this project.
Video Credit: Sonya McGuire
Wounded Knee
For the Wounded Knee project, each student was assigned the task of writing a "mock" textbook passage that portrayed a viewpoint of the events leading up to and following the incident at Wounded Knee on December 29, 1890. To prepare for this assignment, students were given a set number of primary sources, as well as a viewing of the film Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, to prepare for the project. Using the knowledge obtained from these sources, students were able to craft assignments similar to the textbook passage and film analysis essay below.
The Massacre at Wounded Knee Creek, December 29, 1890
1890 marked a year in which cultural tension and ideological conflict continued their ascent to new heights in much of the United States. On one hand, the U.S. Government was dealing with the rush of white settlers hitting the trails in search of an enriched and mysterious land to the West. On the other hand, the expansion of Western civilization left the United States with the problem of displaced native tribes, which were forced to abandon their homes in lieu of resources taken by new settlers. Many native tribes and peoples of this time had become restless, and chose to deal with settlers in aggressive and unreliable ways. To quell these behaviors, the United States government made many treaties and contracts with the tribes of regions disrupted by white settlement. Unfortunately, the U.S. government failed to fulfill many of the promises held in these treaties, which only heightened the uneasy social climate of this time. During this period, there were many incidents involving U.S. forces pitted against the force of tribes trying to fight for survival during a time of confusion and loss.
One of these incidents was the U.S. confrontation of Chief Sitting Bull at Grand River. When U.S. policemen fatally shot Sitting Bull after his refusal to surrender, Sioux Chief Big Foot led a group of nearly four hundred natives (some belonging to Sitting Bulls tribe) into hiding to recuperate from this event. Wanting to control the situation between the possibly hostile warriors in Big Foot’s band, the U.S. military 7th Cavalry intercepted the group of natives and led them to Wounded Knee Creek in South Dakota. On the December 29, 1890, the remaining Sioux in Big Foot’s band were asked to forfeit their firearms in hopes of eliminating the potential for any fighting or radical behavior. During the collection of these weapons, some young tribe members fired upon a United States officers, killing some instantly. In the period that followed, the United States soldiers opened fire on the assailant and the group of surrounding natives. Although some men amongst the tribe still possessed firearms, the majority of men, women, and children were killed in their efforts to escape the scene of ignition without any form of retaliation. The U.S. 7th Cavalry pursued the natives until a majority of these members were slain. That evening a storm came in, disabling any collection of bodies, both U.S. and native.
The aftermath was quite the scene. When volunteers were sent to recover bodies the following day, witnesses found that every living and nonliving specimen had been covered in two or more inches of snow, permanently embedding the scene in a white grave. The time following this incident provided a heightened sense of awareness amongst all U.S. officials and Indians alike. Despite the efforts the U.S. had put in place to maintain peace and conformity with the displaced natives, fire had broken out amongst the inner workings of this social bond. This incident marked a sad day in the history of white and native relations. To some the incident at Wounded Knee marked a small victory in the white’s fight for control of native lands and peoples. For others, this massacre would send a clear ring through the centuries as a fateful error on the part of U.S. officials diplomacy and military.
One of these incidents was the U.S. confrontation of Chief Sitting Bull at Grand River. When U.S. policemen fatally shot Sitting Bull after his refusal to surrender, Sioux Chief Big Foot led a group of nearly four hundred natives (some belonging to Sitting Bulls tribe) into hiding to recuperate from this event. Wanting to control the situation between the possibly hostile warriors in Big Foot’s band, the U.S. military 7th Cavalry intercepted the group of natives and led them to Wounded Knee Creek in South Dakota. On the December 29, 1890, the remaining Sioux in Big Foot’s band were asked to forfeit their firearms in hopes of eliminating the potential for any fighting or radical behavior. During the collection of these weapons, some young tribe members fired upon a United States officers, killing some instantly. In the period that followed, the United States soldiers opened fire on the assailant and the group of surrounding natives. Although some men amongst the tribe still possessed firearms, the majority of men, women, and children were killed in their efforts to escape the scene of ignition without any form of retaliation. The U.S. 7th Cavalry pursued the natives until a majority of these members were slain. That evening a storm came in, disabling any collection of bodies, both U.S. and native.
The aftermath was quite the scene. When volunteers were sent to recover bodies the following day, witnesses found that every living and nonliving specimen had been covered in two or more inches of snow, permanently embedding the scene in a white grave. The time following this incident provided a heightened sense of awareness amongst all U.S. officials and Indians alike. Despite the efforts the U.S. had put in place to maintain peace and conformity with the displaced natives, fire had broken out amongst the inner workings of this social bond. This incident marked a sad day in the history of white and native relations. To some the incident at Wounded Knee marked a small victory in the white’s fight for control of native lands and peoples. For others, this massacre would send a clear ring through the centuries as a fateful error on the part of U.S. officials diplomacy and military.
Wounded Knee Textbook Passage Reflection
I can admit that this assignment was not as engaging for me as I would’ve liked it to be. I think that this is a reflection on my personal level of interest in this period of time, and also reflects my disengagement with the structure of this assignment. For me, I found that my analysis became repetitive and dry in some parts of the historical research notes, and at points I found that I wasn't fully engaging with the text and taking in the bias/perspective as much as I could have. Although I still retained much of the information and was able to construct the textbook passage fairly easily, I think that the personal impact of this massacre was slightly lost on me. One thing that did impact me, however, was looking at images from the incident at Wounded Knee Creek and seeing the actual damage caused. This helped me put the incident into a more tangible realm, and I was able to react to the information in a more emotional manner.
I see bias in my passage where I describe the events that took place on the actual day of the Wounded Knee massacre. In this passage I think I used words that created an image of U.S. soldiers in a “killer” light, and created more of a massacre sense than that of the battle. I think that I also presented bias in the very end of the passage, when I offer two different perspectives or takeaways that could be made after the event but seem to have a foreshadowing effect. None of these reflect my personal agenda or motives, but I think that they still offer a bias on the event that I obtained from the readings and particular other variables that have shaped my perspective on this event.
This historical inquiry informed my opinion on the incident at Wounded Knee Creek by showing me how perspectives and biases can vary greatly on one event. Also, this inquiry expanded my understanding of how interpretations can change certain facts within the timeframe of history. I really enjoyed reading interpretations from both white and native perspectives. It seemed that many authors from this time were pretty distinct in their viewpoint on current events, but it was intellectually pleasing when I read documents that had seemingly paradox perspectives. For instance, I liked reading documents in which U.S. officials were arguing against the injustice and mistreatment placed upon the native tribes of this time, and alternatively where natives argued for the ideals of the U.S. government and military. This showed me that nothing is truly black and white, and historians must examine grey areas in order to construct a semi-accurate account of history.
I see bias in my passage where I describe the events that took place on the actual day of the Wounded Knee massacre. In this passage I think I used words that created an image of U.S. soldiers in a “killer” light, and created more of a massacre sense than that of the battle. I think that I also presented bias in the very end of the passage, when I offer two different perspectives or takeaways that could be made after the event but seem to have a foreshadowing effect. None of these reflect my personal agenda or motives, but I think that they still offer a bias on the event that I obtained from the readings and particular other variables that have shaped my perspective on this event.
This historical inquiry informed my opinion on the incident at Wounded Knee Creek by showing me how perspectives and biases can vary greatly on one event. Also, this inquiry expanded my understanding of how interpretations can change certain facts within the timeframe of history. I really enjoyed reading interpretations from both white and native perspectives. It seemed that many authors from this time were pretty distinct in their viewpoint on current events, but it was intellectually pleasing when I read documents that had seemingly paradox perspectives. For instance, I liked reading documents in which U.S. officials were arguing against the injustice and mistreatment placed upon the native tribes of this time, and alternatively where natives argued for the ideals of the U.S. government and military. This showed me that nothing is truly black and white, and historians must examine grey areas in order to construct a semi-accurate account of history.
Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee Film Analysis Essay
The way that the filmmakers taint appeals to emotions and ideology through specific cinematic devices can drastically affect the way that viewers interpret historical facts and messages. The use of scene, tone, and sound can change how we decipher rhetoric in many ways, and directors of movies can capitalize on this effect to impact the audience in favor of a certain bias/viewpoint. By doing this, some fear that historical accuracy and reliability of a movie will degrade from the learning experience and benefits that a historical medium should provide. Although artistic freedom is sometimes viewed as a risky and inaccurate form of relaying information, cinematic devices are crucial to establishing an emotional and impactful presentation of events that are accessible to the minds of a wider audience.
The elemental effects that the director of Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee chose to convey his message impacted the tone of the movie greatly. In the scene where Chief Sitting Bull and the remaining Lakota were forced to leave Canada due to the extreme winter conditions, you could feel the pain and the regret in the way the author formed this scene. The combination of the snow, the withering flames of fire, and the huddled figures gave this specific scene a sense of sadness. This tone of resignation that tails at the end is impactful to comparing important information from this time. This account also is accurate to the general condition of native men, women, and children of this time. As Black Elk recites in his account of the events leading up to the Wounded Knee Massacre, “They were all starving and freezing, and Big Foot was so sick that they had to bring him along in a pony drag (Black Elk, 1890).” This shows us that while the two events from these time periods weren’t exactly the same, they match in the sense of weakness and sadness associated with the population of natives at this time.
The contrast between American lifestyle and Sioux lifestyle were also very clearly represented in the filmmaker’s choice of scene. When Charles Eastman (Ohiyesa) and Senator Dawes would gather to meet with other political officials in spotless marble rooms with crystal chandeliers, which created a sense of grandeur and luxury, you could feel the American dream at play. But then, as a form of contrast, the scene would switch to the dreary and impoverished agencies/camps of natives, which lets the audience grasp the concepts of inequality and injustice being issued by the hypocrisy of U.S. Government. This internal struggle became very clear to Charles when he began to work as a doctor in the camps, and he began to struggle with his traditional values and his Christian values. “All this was a severe ordeal for one who had so lately put all his faith in the Christian love and lofty ideals of the white man (Eastman, 1890).” This passage does not show the grieving that we see on account of Ohiyesa in the film version of this event, but both represent the culture shock that is associated with the shift of worlds and worldviews.
Lastly, the implementation of specific elements such as sound and effects added to the impact of specific moments and moods in this cinematic account of Wounded Knee. In the final scene of the movie, when Ohiyesa returns to the creek as a symbolism of letting his past go, the solemn accompaniment of strings and the bubbling of the creek enhance the mood/tone of grieving. This scene, which represents a crucial turning point in the life of Ohiyesa, shows us the mingling of “Christian” ideals and the feather representing Sioux traditions. Although the historical accuracy of this scene could come into question, it is still a very important scene to represent the cultural fallout and subordination that followed this period of time. We can see the internal battle that each native represented in this scene, and this would not have been possible without the use of audio/musical elements.
Although historical accuracy and representation can be tainted with the interference of “Hollywood” mediums, the addition of cinematic elements in portrayals of historic events can create an impactful and lasting connection to the audience. In Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, this aspect appeared in the deployment of specific elemental scenes, the contrast between “U.S dominant” sets and “Sioux dominant” sets, and the implementation of sound and effects to establish mood. These elements provided for a more impactful viewing experience, and leave the audience with an emotional timeline when it comes to an event. This emotional timeline gives the audience a general scope of the events that unfolded during a certain period of time, without boring them with details and dates regarding this time. Our memory is directly connected to our emotions, and for better or worse, directors should address this in order to give accessible information to the general public.
The elemental effects that the director of Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee chose to convey his message impacted the tone of the movie greatly. In the scene where Chief Sitting Bull and the remaining Lakota were forced to leave Canada due to the extreme winter conditions, you could feel the pain and the regret in the way the author formed this scene. The combination of the snow, the withering flames of fire, and the huddled figures gave this specific scene a sense of sadness. This tone of resignation that tails at the end is impactful to comparing important information from this time. This account also is accurate to the general condition of native men, women, and children of this time. As Black Elk recites in his account of the events leading up to the Wounded Knee Massacre, “They were all starving and freezing, and Big Foot was so sick that they had to bring him along in a pony drag (Black Elk, 1890).” This shows us that while the two events from these time periods weren’t exactly the same, they match in the sense of weakness and sadness associated with the population of natives at this time.
The contrast between American lifestyle and Sioux lifestyle were also very clearly represented in the filmmaker’s choice of scene. When Charles Eastman (Ohiyesa) and Senator Dawes would gather to meet with other political officials in spotless marble rooms with crystal chandeliers, which created a sense of grandeur and luxury, you could feel the American dream at play. But then, as a form of contrast, the scene would switch to the dreary and impoverished agencies/camps of natives, which lets the audience grasp the concepts of inequality and injustice being issued by the hypocrisy of U.S. Government. This internal struggle became very clear to Charles when he began to work as a doctor in the camps, and he began to struggle with his traditional values and his Christian values. “All this was a severe ordeal for one who had so lately put all his faith in the Christian love and lofty ideals of the white man (Eastman, 1890).” This passage does not show the grieving that we see on account of Ohiyesa in the film version of this event, but both represent the culture shock that is associated with the shift of worlds and worldviews.
Lastly, the implementation of specific elements such as sound and effects added to the impact of specific moments and moods in this cinematic account of Wounded Knee. In the final scene of the movie, when Ohiyesa returns to the creek as a symbolism of letting his past go, the solemn accompaniment of strings and the bubbling of the creek enhance the mood/tone of grieving. This scene, which represents a crucial turning point in the life of Ohiyesa, shows us the mingling of “Christian” ideals and the feather representing Sioux traditions. Although the historical accuracy of this scene could come into question, it is still a very important scene to represent the cultural fallout and subordination that followed this period of time. We can see the internal battle that each native represented in this scene, and this would not have been possible without the use of audio/musical elements.
Although historical accuracy and representation can be tainted with the interference of “Hollywood” mediums, the addition of cinematic elements in portrayals of historic events can create an impactful and lasting connection to the audience. In Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, this aspect appeared in the deployment of specific elemental scenes, the contrast between “U.S dominant” sets and “Sioux dominant” sets, and the implementation of sound and effects to establish mood. These elements provided for a more impactful viewing experience, and leave the audience with an emotional timeline when it comes to an event. This emotional timeline gives the audience a general scope of the events that unfolded during a certain period of time, without boring them with details and dates regarding this time. Our memory is directly connected to our emotions, and for better or worse, directors should address this in order to give accessible information to the general public.