Summary indians textualism morality and problem history

From this standpoint, we can see that Vaughan, who thought that the Puritans were superior to the Indians, and Jennings, who thought the reverse, are both, like Hudson, using Eurocentric criteria of description and evaluation.

To compare the difference and asymmetry among the secondary sources, Tompkins went on with more researches on primary sources. Instead of making a commitment in relativism and finding out the truth about the history to help Indians, they just talk about their ideas and wait for the truth to come out by itself.

Scratch Sides "Scratch Sides" by Kristin Prevallet is a collection of poetry, prose, and image-text projects that explain the sides to creating written text.

Consequently, due to the lack of moral decisions and judgments, Native Americans are still going through what they used to go through in the past.

The Indians, consequently, believed that their compact with the animals had been broken and that the keepers of the game, the tutelary spirits of each animal species whom they had been so careful to propitiate, had betrayed them.

By isolating the individual from others, the supervisor maintains power.

Summary of “‘Indians’: Textualism, Morality, and the Problem of History” Essay Sample

In my opinoin, Prevallet needs to come back down to earth if she wants to reach anyone other than those in the academia. Prevallet shows how expressive poetry can stem from a bland, historical account and how a mind can create a humorous piece through the stringing together of current advertisements.

Captivity narratives seemed a good place to begin, since it was logical to suppose that the records left by whites who had been captured by Indians would furnish the sort of first-hand information I wanted. Alden Vaughan referred Indians as inferior human compared to the Puritans because of their cultural backwardness.

Hence, history still repeats in the world of Indians. I understand his relating the disciplinary structure in a prison to that of a classroom, but I do not feel that the only reason they are similar is due to disassociating the individual to add power to the observer.

I believe that people tend to build their opinions based on their cultural backgrounds and their society. It would be unreasonable to expect that such societies could live side by side indefinitely with no penetration of the more fragmented and passive by the more consolidated and active.

Tompkins decided to go from secondary to primary researches with a hope of finding more reliable sources of information about European — Indian relation. While all three critics Vaughan, Jennings, and Hudson acknowledge that Indians and Europeans behave differently from one another, the behavior differs, as it were, within the order of the same: His preface seethes with a hatred of the merely physical and mechanical, and this hatred, which is really a form of moral outrage, explains not only the contempt with which he mentions the stoves and bathtubs but also the nature of his experience in Africa and its relationship to the "massive narrative" -- he will write.

When one reads this and then turns over the page and sees a reproduction of the Bay Colony seal, which depicts an Indian from whose mouth issue the words "Come over and help us," the effect is shattering.

I think every person in this world is curious about their origin. If there is no history to learn, there is no better future for later generations to build from it.

For a while, I remained at this impasse. From what standpoint can one say that American Indians were neither disciplined nor visionary, when both these characteristics loom so large in the ethnographies? In a sense, my encounter with Indians as an adult doing "research" replicates the childhood one, for while I started out to learn about Indians, I ended up preoccupied with a problem of my own.

In diverting attention from the original problem and placing it where Miller did, on "the mind of man," it once again ignores what happened and still is happening to American Indians.

This difference at the level of explanation calls into question the possibility of obtaining any theory-independent account of interaction between Indians and Europeans. The hunt, according to Martin, was conceived not primarily as a physical activity but as a spiritual quest, in which the spirit of the hunter must overmaster the spirit of the game animal before the kill can take place.

My story stands for the relationship most non-Indians have to the people who first populated this continent, a relationship characterized by narcissistic fantasies of freedom and adventure, of a life lived closer to nature and to spirit than the life we lead now.

To Miller, "the mind of man is the basic factor in human history," and he will plead, all unaccommodated as he is among the fuel drums, for the intellect--the intellect for which his fellow historians, with their chapters on "stoves or bathtubs, or tax laws," "the Wilmot Proviso" and "the chain store," "have so little respect" p.

As a consequence, the writers of these primary sources also record the history of Indians based on their own cultural aspects.

She was proud to be living on a land that these adventurous native people used to live. Why did I conclude that none of the accounts was accurate because they were all produced from some particular angle of vision? Their potential, unwritten history of the conflict could bear only a marginal resemblance to Eurocentric views.

The hunter prepared himself through rituals of fasting, sweating, or dreaming which revealed the identity of his prey and where he can find it. In my opinion, if historians cannot see the facts behind history, how can later generation students find out those facts and make an ethical judgment about our history itself.

It came as no surprise, therefore, that ten years later there appeared a study of European-Indian relations which reflected the new awareness of social issues the sixties had engendered. The root of the misunderstanding [about Puritans and Indians].

As a group of young minds just beginning to learn to think for ourselves, who should we believe? All I had, or could have, was a series of different perspectives, and so nothing that would count as an authoritative source on which moral judgments could be based."Indians": Textualism, Morality, and the Problem of History Jane Tompkins When I was growing up in New York City, my parents used to take me to an event in Inwood Park at which Indians--real American Indians dressed in feathers and blankets--could be seen and touched by children like me.

Summary Response: Tompkins In her essay, "'Indians': Textualism, Morality, and the Problem of History", Jane Tompkins explains how history of the Native Americans and the European settlers is skewed by European views.

Mar 16,  · Tompkins, Jane. "'Indians': Textualism, Morality, and the Problem of History." Critical Inquiry (): In this essay, Tompkins reviews the many historiographical accounts of European-Indian relations, mostly in the Northeast, coming to the realization that each of them differs in their account because of the perspective.

View Notes - Indians Textualism, Morality, and the Problem of History Summary Analysis from ENC at University of Florida. Zacharias 1 Justin Zacharias ENC Word Count: 1, Indians%(3). Summary of "'Indians': Textualism, Morality, and the Problem of History" In the essay "'Indians': Textualism, Morality, and the Problem of History" written by Jane Tompkins, an English professor at Duke University, the author criticized the history writers and described the issue of problems that are often created by different perspectives from the history on the topic, European -Indian.

In the essay "'Indians': Textualism, Morality, and the Problem of History" written by Jane Tompkins, an English professor at Duke University, the author.

Summary indians textualism morality and problem history
Rated 3/5 based on 11 review