Describe the voice.
He refers to the “red man” as a “savage.” What does he mean? Why does he say it?
What is the tone of this piece?
What is the center?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(10)
-
▼
October
(10)
- “Between the sexes: The Great Divide” 254
- “Letter to President Pierce” 611
- “What is a Homosexual” 256
- “Looking at Women,” 244
- “College Pressures” 442
- “Mommy, what does Nigger mean?” 485
- “Thinking as a Hobby,” 217
- “Who Shot Johnny?” 383
- “Beauty: When the Other Dancer is the Self” 68
- “The Mystery of Zen” 1191
-
▼
October
(10)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteChief Seattle's letter to President Pierce in 1855 is extremely short but its message encompasses so many things that modern editors find it important enough to include it in this Norton Reader. The voice of Chief Seattle does not plead with America's white leader to spare him and his people more pain and oppression. Instead, his voice is scornful of America's white culture and its ignorance toward the Native American race and the land they took from them. Seattle through experience has come to accept that the white race will fully dominate the country once he is gone and that the takeover is unstoppable. However, he knows that even though the odds are up against him and his people, they are the ones that through their differences from the white race are wiser and will prevail in spite of them. Chief Seattle describes Native Americans as "savages" to show that the white Americans see their way of living as the only one that is proper while everyone else's is flawed and inferior. He points to the fact that the oppressors fail to see the error in their ways or look beyond their day-to-day lives to see what the future will be like due to their current actions. He knows that his warning will go unheeded, but he says it anyway to show that he and his people are not lesser people. The tone of this piece fluctuates from scorn, to disgust, to contempt to a dignified sense of "forseeing the future". I believe the center is Chief Seattle's sense that the Native American race would prevail (despite the trials it had faced and would continue to face in the future) and the white race would lead to its own destruction using the oppression of Native Americans as just one more stepping stone to their fate.
ReplyDeleteI was surprised when I saw that this essay didn't even cover a full page, but that didn't prevent the message from coming across clearly. I liked this structure because it was straight to the point, whereas other essays I have read go on forever and just dance around the main point.
ReplyDeleteThe voice of Chief Seattle in this essay shows feelings of hostility and disgust towards the white race. Seattle explains that the white men just take whatever they desire, by any means, without placing much thought towards the consequences of their actions. Seattle basically believes that the white men will eventually lead to the downfall of their own race, and will wipe out others on their way to destruction.
In the last sentence of the first paragraph, Seattle refers to the red man as a "savage". He does this because "savage" is the term that the white men have often associated with Native Americans because they believe that they are a more primitive and inferior culture to that of their own. Seattle uses this in a sarcastic tone because he knows that his people actually have the intelligence to understand the advancements of the white people (ex. cities), despite what the white men think. In this way, he is almost mocking the white men and their ignorance towards Native Americans, which I find to be quite humorous.
The tone of this piece is the same feeling that is projected in the voice of the speaker; disgust. And more specifically disgust towards the ignorance of the white race towards others. The center of this piece is not about the hatred of Native Americans toward the white man's actions, but rather it is a warning that the white men are on a path to destruction, both of their own race, and the others that they oppress along the way.
The tone of this piece was very blunt and logical. The author was to the point on everything he wrote. The first sentence, "We know that the white man does not understand our ways," shows that the author is down to earth and isn't going to add things to the piece just to make it seem more intelligent sounding. He seems to want to just get his point across. The referring to his people as "savages" is used to make a point of how the white men think of them and how they are made to seem inferior to that of white men. I think that by considering themselves "savages" the author is creating a contrast to show what the white men think of them and how they really are. I think that this piece is more monotonal than anything. Even while he sys "you will one night suffocate in your own waste," there seems to be this monotonal quality of it, hiding the anger of the words. I think that the center of this piece is that of respecting nature. Chief Seattle makes constant references to how the white man is laying waste to his land. He also states that without this land, that man cannot live on the earth. This problem really started with the Industrial Revolution and even today we can't seem to give the respect nature deserves.
ReplyDeleteAll that you both said is right. I did love when Travis said it was focused and "...whereas other essays I have read go on forever and just dance around the main point." Also it does have humor but in the tone you both identify.
ReplyDeleteThis piece was very powerful, the shortness portrays this well. It's concise, right to the point. The man writing the letter refers to him as a savage to be ironic, sarcastic. This is what the white men have called Indians, he calls himself that not really meaning it, but mocking them. The white men call them savages because they love their land and the things inhabiting it? They live with the other beings, animals and plants, not live to conquer them. The author shows that the Indians see the beauty in life, don't try to transform it to what it "should be". The tone of this piece was sad for me ... the Indians and their land is getting taken over. It is inevitable to the author it will continue to be...he seeks to understand why the "white men" would do this...what their motive is.
ReplyDeleteJosh tied this well to the Industrial revolution and Sam saw the sadness as opposed to the anger. Good job.
ReplyDeleteI loved this piece! It had a lot of wisdom and depth with a hint of sarcasm. It displayed the wisdom in a less complicated and more spiritual life. The sad and wise voice showed how the American passion for development is pointless and empty, whereas living a more spiitual oriented life is the less "savage" life. The voice is a very somber deep voice, full of passion, but not hate. The voice doesn't despise but it certainly reprimands and looks down upon Pierce and his culture, But he does it in a way that forces the reader to listen. The way he reprimands Pierce shows the author's wisdom. He insults Pierce through insulting himself. By using this method he forces the reader to listen, no matter how reluctant they are to hear the message. The center of this piece is the ambition for more, to be a truly savage trait that man has called "civilized" to justify themselves. In this piece you can feel the sadness and some weakness, and yet there's a significant amount of strength and self security.
ReplyDeleteI really liked this piece because it was short and to the point. It did what it had to do to get its message across and didnt go on forever. When he refers to the "red man" as "savages" he is calling them what the white people refer to them as. He is trying to show that they really aren't the savages because they appreciate nature, while the white men are destroying it and turning it into cities. It "pains the eyes of the red man" but he says perhaps it is because the red man is savage. He is almost mocking him out by using his own words against him. I think that the tone of this piece was anger that was masked by sarcasm. I belive that the center of this piece was to show that the white people didnt understand what was best, and that they werent doing the right thing by destroying nature to build cities. He wants to show that even though they dont think the same way as white people it doesnt mean that they are wrong, or "savages."
ReplyDeleteThe voice of this piece is that of a native american(aka "The Red Man") with a higher status in his society. The piece really shows the difference in the way the "Red Man" values things and the way the "White Man" values things. The native americans care about the land and they respect it where as us the white people dont really care about the land and we just invade and take over the land while leaving the natives "Hanging out to dry" and criticize them for not thinking and acting like us. The white people are so ethnocentric that they dont respect the land or other people. The author refers to the native american people as "Red Men" because they are physically different from the white man and they dont speak the same language or practice the same things. Due to this difference the "White Man" classifies the natives by the color of their skin and deems them that of a lower intelligence than the white men and treat them like they are worthless "Savages". Because of the culture and language difference the white men call the red men savages just because they do not act in the same way as the white men. So because of the cultural difference the native americans are called savages and treated horrible. this piece has a very serious tone and talks about a very serious matter, and this piece really shows the knowledge that the red men have and that they truely arent savages and they can comprehend just the same as the white man they just have different values and beliefs.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what sam said in the fact that this is a sad piece and the author realizes the fact that his people are being ridiculed and mistreated just because they are different and value the things that the white man so oftenly takes for grantite and destroys. Also the author questions himself as to why the white men act the way they do. I would agree with josh and say that the center of this piece is not only the repecting of respecting nature but the way in which the native americans value the land and how the whites dont
ReplyDeleteI liked this essay because it was short and to the point, it was only one page long and it didnt drag out the same idea over and over again. I think he refers to the red man as a savage because that is how they are referred to by the white people. I believe this piece shows the stupidity in some of the things that the white people do with cities and nature.I think the center is the carelessness of the white people and how much the native americans value nature.
ReplyDeleteYou all are really showing your chops...this is the best overall anaylsis you all have done to date.
ReplyDeleteI liked the perspective on this piece as well as the cool writing it uses such as in the last paragraph: "the end of living and the beginning of survival" which is somewhat oxymoronic. The length I found appropriate for the content of the piece, it was short and to the point. I found it convenient to see that the hypothesis came to be almost to the period, the insightfulness is refreshing. "the buffalo all slaughtered, the wild horses all tamed..."
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the style of this piece a lot. The length really makes the impact more effective. I like the social commentary of the author by calling them "savages," and he seems like he's mocking the white people who call them that. I appraciate the fact that he seems to represent the "Red Man" and "White Man" as two lifestyles that can coexist. It points out the uselessness of thinking someone is dumber than another simply because of the amount of melanin in their skin.
ReplyDeleteI liked how Dillon pointed out the physical difference between the "red man" and "white men". The color of their skin is the actual start to the problems, and differences between the red and white men.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Emma...even though this man writing this piece seems defeated, you can sense the strength pushing through. I believe he feels superior as well- that is where his strength derives from.
I love what Emma said about Chief Seattle insulting Pierce and the white race by insulting himself. It shows the reader how ridiculous the logic of the white man is just on paper. I never really took the actual race difference into consideration, just the cultural difference, and I'm glad people like King Irby and Jon pointed this out because it is a root of the oppression against the Native Americans. I also like to see the differing opinions on tone-some sad angry, some sad sad, and Josh even said monotone. I think it is interesting how Seattle can come off as almost exasperated at having to point out the error of the white man's ways since it is not obvious to him at the time. This essay definitely contains a POV not highlighted in your average history book and it's insightful to read an essay that doesn't depict America's history through rose colored glasses.
ReplyDeleteI like john's comment about the author calling the red man a savage and that he is mocking the white people who call them that. That is exactly how i interpreted it.
ReplyDeleteThe voice in this piece is angry to some degree. This is a very short piece but so powerful. He means that the red man has tooken so much away from the white settlers. The tone of this piece is very suttle.
ReplyDelete