Bone, the Innocent vs. Anney, the Ignorant

After reading chapters 1-10 of “Bastard Out Of Carolina” by Dorothy Allison, I have accumulated much sympathy for Bone. She is an innocent child and from what it seems thus far, she just wants some positive attention and some love from her mother and the people around her. I think that because of the fact that she observes everything and keeps everything internalized to herself, that this causes her to be vulnerable to others. I feel that this is why she is more easily picked on at school, why she stands out from her family and tells evil stories, and even is the reasoning why Glen sexually assaults her rather than her sister Reese. Not that Bone is asking to be raped, because she certainly is not, however I feel that Reese is described to be stronger and more ladylike similar to a southern belle in these first chapters, and is therefore less vulnerable to others.

I do not feel any sympathy for Anney and almost feel ashamed of her when I am reading. I feel that her situation is a no-brainer, one in which should not take much thought or any hesitation. If my own daughter was getting beaten by my husband, I would leave him. It does not matter that she does not know or is not certain about the sexual assaults, it still is wrong of Anney to stay with Glen. She is putting her daughter’s life in danger. As a mother, she is not fulfilling her position or duty in Bone’s life. Regardless of whether or not she loves Glen, Anney should put her daughter’s happiness and life before her own, as any good mother would. As an older sister to two boys, I know that I would give up my life for either of them because they are the world to me. I do not understand how Anney can just sit back and watch someone hurt her “baby” who she claims to love so dearly. It just does not make sense to me.

Even after finding out that Bone’s collarbone was broken, along with her coccyx, Anney still does nothing to confront Glen or to leave him. She just stays at Alma’s house for a while and then returns back home after two weeks, after she feels that he has learned his lesson. When reading about this event I couldn’t help but thinking over and over again in my head: “Is she stupid?!?” For I can not imagine going back to a man like that, let alone marrying one. I also feel that Anney’s family is partially to blame for Bone’s situation. They see what is going on, yet they do not step up and say anything to Anney. Although Ruth has a talk with Anney, I feel that this was not at all productive for she just beat around the bush a lot rather than being straightforward and telling Anney that she believes that Bone is being raped by Glen. I believe that Anney is very close to her family and if they all stepped up and said something to her about the situation, then she would not be able to keep on making herself believe that they are one happy family. Instead, she would leave Glen and the problem would be fixed. I hope dearly that Anney will soon leave Glen so that Bone will have a chance to lead a somewhat normal life.

Summer is Right Around The Corner..and Sun Burns as Well

Since we started discussing some of the Dickey poems in class, I decided to give another one a shot, and to try to interpret it on my own once again. Though my interpretations of my poems thus far have not been completely correct, I figure that practice makes perfect. So here goes nothing…

After I read the poem “Sun” by James Dickey, I almost felt the pain of getting sun burnt in the summer. When reading about this couple going out sun tanning (and I am assuming on a beach) and getting badly burnt to the point where it hurt, I felt a lot of sympathy for them. Being that I am very pale skinned and often have experienced becoming white as a ghost as it is said that the “winter had caught her and whipped her,” I have experienced the wrath of a brutal sun burn at least once a summer. I also laughed because they obviously were not smart enough to put very much sun screen on. The woman’s nose is described as “still clownish” meaning that she only placed sun block on her nose, which caused it to be the only place on her body, except for where her bathing suit had covered her, that was white.

I also found it comical that the man was described as being “red as iron glowing blazing up anew with each bad breath from the bellowing curtains.” I recalled summers where my dad had looked like a lobster because he did not protect himself from the sun. He had such heat radiating off of him, even hours after he was exposed to the sun, that the sun burn would hurt even more any time the wind blew or something touched him. Although it was complete agony for him, as kids my brother and I used to draw things on his back or arms and watch it slowly fade away, back into the redness. I also can relate to seeing whiteness all over and having your eyesight slightly altered after being in the bright sun all day, as described in the passage: “And in the mirror saw whiteness run from my eyes like tears…”

I enjoyed reading this poem, because it not only was easy to understand (at least I think it was, if I got the meaning of it) but it also was simple enough to relate to. At the end of the day when I spent the entire day at the beach, and I can not move for I am burnt to a crisp, the first thing I want to do is lie down and go to sleep as this couple did. “Sun” was a very slow-moving poem, where you just take in all of the senses described, and just the love that the couple has for one another. They just comfort each other as they help their spouse get ready for bed. I really took pleasure in reading about the sweet and tender aspect of this poem, plus the thought of summer soon coming and the days at the beach soon to come. J

James Dickey, A Spiritual Writer

After reading a couple of the James Dickey poems, I feel that he writes a lot about death, Heaven, and God. For example, the poem called “Walking on Water” which appealed most to me thus far seemed to have a deeper meaning. There is a very large connection to spiritual images throughout the poem which lead me to think of some higher being or God. I feel as though he was writing about Jesus walking on water, while others watched in awe.

When Dickey references “the shining topsoil” I believe that he means the Earth and that Jesus is the “miracle” that he speaks about, who was put on Earth. I also feel that the poem implies that no one is perfect and that even Jesus made mistakes or had a “wrong step of sliding.” Dickey makes references to the Earth and Heaven by utilizing language such as “two open blue worlds”. In addition, James Dickey talks about a “shark pursuing” as well, which I strongly believe is symbolic of the Devil. In the poem, the shark threatens the very life of the “miracle” person and therefore is symbolic of the great threat in which the Devil is to Christianity.

Throughout the poem, I believe that Dickey is sharing the story of Jesus Christ and how he came to Earth, and will come again on the “Great Judgment Day” as it is known to many who believe in him. For me, Jesus is the only individual that I can think of who would not leave footprints behind, yet “the shimmering place of an infinite step upon water.” This is as if saying that although there is no hard proof or evidence that Jesus did in fact exist, there is evidence in those who believe in him. Jesus is also often described as “shining” or “sparkling” images which are words used to describe the person in the poem. The return of Jesus I feel, is indicated in the passage “until I return in my ghost.” Jesus’ return is then followed by the talk about Judgment Day by phrases such as “balancing child”, “amazed”, and “led by the nose into heaven.” The “balancing child” is Jesus, who has to decide whether or not we go to Heaven or Hell and who leads us into Heaven if we are worthy of going there. The people on Earth are the ones that will be “tight-lipped” and “amazed” when he comes, for they will be like a deer caught in the headlights. No one truly is able to understand what you are supposed to do, or how you must act when he does indeed come again and thus is responsible for why they are going to act this way out of awe for him. From reading this poem “Walking on Water” in particular, as well as a few others, they lead me to believe that James Dickey is a very religious, spiritual man who likes to express his beliefs through his poems.

Movie vs. Script - "A Streetcar Named Desire"

The movie “A Streetcar Named Desire” really brought the script to life and made the viewer able to really relate to the characters involved. For example, Blanche seemed so much more emotionally unstable because of her past experiences in the movie, than I imagined she was just from reading it. Watching the movie, I felt much sorrier for her. Stanley, I felt, was really exaggerated and played the antagonist much more strongly in the movie. He was the muscular, cocky, no good “Polack” who took advantage of Blanche and broke her unstable state of mind so that Blanche was no longer able to see any of reality.

In the film, there were many alterations made to the story line. For example, it begins with Blanche going to the bowling alley to first meet Stella rather than meeting her in her home as was described in the play. I feel that this is done in order to show the loving connection between the two sisters before Stanley is brought into the picture. Another change that was made was that they showed Mitch and Blanche in some room after dancing, rather than back at Stella and Stanley’s house as it had been set up in the script. I feel that this was changed in order to be sensitive to the time that it was made in. if the film had been set in Stella’s house and Mitch tried to put his hands on Blanche, it would have been much more scandalous and not accepted by the viewers. In the film, Mitch and Stanley were also shown in the factory when Mitch is informed all about Blanche’s bad ways. This was added to the film I believe, in order to portray how shocked Mitch was and how much it killed him to hear this new information because he was in love with her. This caused viewers to feel sorry for him and for Blanche because they would no longer be getting married and living “happily ever after together” as most people want stories to end.

I feel that many of the changes made to the film, were done for dramatic effect. The film was created so that it would be accepted for that time, yet also so that it upheld general assumptions and gender stereotypes. For example, at the end of the play, Stella comes running outside with her baby and says that she will never go back to Stanley, whereas in the script she let Stanley comfort her and she stayed with him. In the film, I believe that the change was made in order for the audience to sympathize more with Stella “the innocent Southern belle” rather than Stanley who did not uphold any of the old southern ideals. The film put a much more feminist tilt on the script and caused the audience or at least me personally, to relate more to (and therefore side with) Blanche and Stella.

Blanche DuBois...Friend or Foe?

Throughout "A Streetcar Named Desire" by Tennessee Williams, I could not seem to figure where I stood. Although she was extremely irritating to the point where I wanted to kill her, she was also so pathetic at times that I felt like I just wanted to help her and straighten her out. Blanche was a very confused individual. She often mixed up the truth and her fantasies so much that I even became unsure of where the truth ended and where the lies began. It is unclear to me of whether or not she even knew that she was mixing up the truth with fallacies. When confronted by Mitch, it does seem that she pulls herself together and finally talks sensibly but it could just be a coincidence that she finally sees reality, or is simply snapped into it by force.

Thinking back over the story, I feel that an institution might be the right place for Blanche after all. She seems too unstable for the “real world” and she shows signs of some type of mental illness. At times, Blanche seemed to know exactly what she was doing and was just a very manipulative, conniving individual, yet at others, she was a lost little girl. For example, in the scene where she is trying to be a “proper” Southern belle around Mitch and she rolls her eyes, this shows her scheming, no good ways. A contradictory scene however, is when she is confronted by Stanley about losing Belle Reve. In this scene, Blanche seems completely helpless and just crumbles and falls to pieces (much like the loss of Belle Reve) under the pressure of Stanley’s accusations. In this way, Blanche just seems to need some tender guidance.

Although Blanche rubbed me the wrong way in entirety in this piece of writing, I also feel like she should be given a chance, and a benefit of the doubt. She could suffer from some kind of split personality disorder that could cause her to act in such bizarre ways. In this case, she should be given special care and attention, for it is not her fault that she acted so poorly in relation to her sister’s new way of life. She is not responsible for acting so arrogant and condescending towards Stanley. The question, however, still remains: Is Blanche mentally stable, or not? Is she a friend or foe?

Janie Finds Her Voice

The ending of “Their Eyes Were Watching God” by Zora Neale Hurston was definitely a twist. Here I thought the author was setting up the story so that Janie would never find love or her “horizon”. To my surprise however, she did find it, yet had to choose between love and independence. After all this searching, it is odd that Janie is the one to end her own search for love. Even though Hurston’s piece of writing had many different contradictory aspects to it, I would argue that it is a primarily feminist novel. In the end, for example, Janie chooses to kill her husband. Even though it was in order to survive, this shows her strength and independence shinning through. It was not that she did not love Tea Cake, as she did show true remorse for her husband’s death this time around, but it was that it was no longer the most important thing in the world to her. Her curiosity had now been quenched. The fact that Janie also walked all the way back to her hometown in the same day that her husband died showed enormous willpower to carry on.

After the death of Tea Cake, Janie did not break down along her journey back home, nor cry over the loss of her love. This shows that women do not need a high social status, nor a husband or loved one around in order to be themselves and to be strong. Janie was able to carry on, a content woman, after having accomplished and acquiring both of these things. She was happy with her simple way of life, and she no longer cared about what the people around her thought or gossiped about. Janie did not need the financial backing or protection of some prestigious man (like Logan), as her grandmother had told her and she was glad to prove Nanny wrong. Janie is finally an independent, satisfied woman at the end, who is free of restrictions (such as Joey), and who is left with happy memories of the type of love that she always searched for (of Tea Cake).

I feel that this novel, although it does seem to show woman’s inferiority to men at times, such as to Jody when he yells at Janie and Tea Cake when he beats her, is a feminist novel. It tells the adventures of a woman who is finding herself, and who strikes out on her own in the end. It portrays the types of hardships that she has to face and go through, in order to find her own way in the world. The main concentration of the book is on Janie who breaks gender roles such as playing checkers with her husband and learning how to shoot. Janie also, in a very vibrant way, breaks free of all inferiority to men, by killing her husband, and in doing so, finds her voice so to speak and finally is able to remove all the shackles in which the community has placed on her.

Did Janie Ever Find True Love?

In “Their Eyes Were Watching God” by Zora Neale Hurston, Janie’s strong character and search for love really stood out to me. I enjoyed how Hurston begins with the quote “Now, women forget all those things they don’t want to remember, and remember everything they don’t want to forget. The dream is the truth. Then they act and do things accordingly.” I feel that this sets up the novel for the type of individual which Janie is. Janie is a strong-willed, stunning young woman, who is searching for love. Love however; that she does not really think exists. This quote shows that she is living in her own little world, secluded from all reality in her own wishes and dreams.

Janie, though she dreams about love, knows nothing about it. I feel that Janie knows nothing about it because of the fact that she has no role models in her life that can show her what true love is. I find this sort of tragic for everyone should know what true love is, in some sort of form. Most children have parents or members of their family that are in love, however Janie does not. Even the only family member that she has, Nanny, does not believe in love, and only wants to make sure that Janie is “provided for”, not loved. Nanny even tells Janie that she will simply grow to love Logan Killicks. I feel that Janie almost shuts out the rest of the world, along with the huge issue of segregation that was present during her time, because she believes that true love does not exist. She feels that it is unobtainable and almost impossible to find, yet because of her persistent personality, she keeps searching for the answer to her dreams, love.

Even at the beginning of the novel, when Janie comes walking back into her old town, I question whether or not she ever found love. The townspeople claim that she was always looking for a better life or a higher-classed type of life and Joe could have just been the answer to that. I also question whether Janie just went off with Joe in order to escape the cruel and harsh life that she had with Logan. The question that lingers in my mind after these first five chapters is: Did Janie ever fall in love with Joe or was he just someone that swept her off her feet because of the type of lifestyle he led and she wanted?

Intolerance...Caused by Parents or Time in History?

In “The Old Order” by Katherine Anne Porter, the past is a huge theme that is prevalent, especially in reference to the Grandmother and Nannie. Their entire lives and worlds revolve around talking about the past. Porter writes, “They talked about the past, really-always about the past. Even the future seemed more like something gone and done with when they spoke of it.” Their pasts, although described as bitter in this short story, were something of importance to them because the past is what was familiar to them. It was a time that defined them and shaped them into who they are now. It was what they were used to and comfortable with.

I feel that it was because of the fact that they were so comfortable with the past that they were so judgmental of the younger generations. Their children and grandchildren were looked down upon by them because they were not following the same standards that they were used to. For example, when Grandmother’s son married a “new” woman, it was unacceptable and unbearable to the grandmother even though the woman was very much like herself. I feel that the Grandmother was so disapproving of this because she was used to the ways of the past where woman were submissive and did not speak out. They did not have the right to vote, nor did they earn their own living. This was not acceptable. I feel that even though she herself was such a strong woman, it was only because she had to be in order to provide for her family after her husband died. It was not a fate that she chose for herself, it was simply one that was set before her and she had to accept for her children.

I believe that this theme of past versus present also goes along with Grandmother and Nannies’ views on slavery. They both know their place within society, as they were taught when they were younger and as a result they fulfill their roles even after slavery has ended. Not that they feel that the freedom of slaves is wrong, it is just that they are not accustomed to it. Even when they argued, it was said that they “fought on almost equal terms.” It was still for them, even when they were the closest of friends, that they were ALMOST equal, not ENTIRELY equal. This is simply because it was ingrained in them since they were born. It is along the same lines of being told that you are ugly all your life until one day you are told that you are good looking. Would you believe it? Of course not, because you have become so brainwashed since you were young that it just controls the way that you act and do things and probably even has affected who you are as a person. The way in which you are raised, along with the time in which you grow up defines you as a person and an individual and it can affect you in ways that are impossible to understand. This is why Grandmother and Nannie were so set in their ways, intolerant to new things, reminiscent about the past and stubborn as all hell not to change.

I leave you with a few questions to think about on this manner: Are your very own grandparents as tolerant to other races as you are? What causes them to be intolerant? Are they just ignorant or do they not know any better? Was this intolerance caused by what their very own parents taught them or by the types of attitudes that surrounded them during this time in history?

Faulkner's September Gone Bad

A few distinct points stood out to me when we discussed “Dry September” by William Faulkner in class. For example, the two scenes where Miss Minnie Cooper was described in left me feeling as though Faulkner was trying to send a subtle message to his readers. I felt that she in fact did make up the story of the "Negro” named Will Mayes startling her or maybe even raping her. Faulkner was trying to drive the point home that she could have easily made it up in order to gain social recognition once again. He was trying to show that there was enough considerable doubt to show that no one in town knew for certain what actually happened, and yet they were still peer pressured into going on this “witch hunt” of sorts to find Will and kill him. All of the men in the barber shop just got caught up in the moment and became angry about a common cause. They took out their aggressions on an innocent man without even getting the facts. Even in the end of “Dry September” when Minnie’s “friends” were asking her to tell them what really happened, it is certain that no one actually knows what took place that night, or even what Minnie’s actual claims were.

In Part Two of Faulkner’s short story, Minnie was described as a woman “of comfortable people” who “was still on the slender side of ordinary looking”. Right away Faulkner gives you the feeling as though she is not the best looking woman and probably does not have many true friends. Minnie came off to me as a sort of loner, the kind that longs to be in that upper social class or society but who can never truly get there because she does not fit in. She seemed to be always putting on new summer dresses and shopping, yet could never impress anyone. This probably got to Minnie, for everyone wants to be noticed by someone, whether they choose to admit it or not. Minnie, as Faulkner made quite clear however, was never acknowledged. It was said that even when se walked by store fronts that “men did not even follow her with their eyes any more.” I feel that this section alone just shows that Minnie is desperately in need of attention and probably would do anything to get it.

The second section that stood out to me was Part Five. In this section, Minnie goes out to the movies with her “friends” after Will had been killed. I interpreted this scene a little differently however than we had discussed in class. I thought that Faulkner put this section in his piece to show that Minnie did in fact make up the story (or at least could have) and was now enjoying the “fruits of her labor” so to speak. I also felt that she was a little feverish because of the fact that she knew deep down that she had done something wrong, that a man had died in order for her to be noticed and feel good about herself. For example, the mixture of feelings that she was experiencing was described in the passage: “…and soon life began to unfold, beautiful and passionate and sad.” I thought that this was a representation for her being happy, yet disappointed with her own actions at the same time. I also felt that her uncontrollable laugh and trembling was caused by this internal confusion that she now had, along with the weight of the guilt that she has to carry around with her. The guilt of course, for the life that was taken one night because of her lies.

I felt that William Faulkner put these two sections into “Dry September” to highlight the fact that an innocent black man died just for a white woman to feel good about herself. He wanted to show the cruel and inhumane events that took place just because of the intense racism and hatred that was present in the South at this time.

What if?

While reading the short story "Desiree's Baby" by Kate Chopin, many different thoughts came flooding to mind. I found it to be a very unique sort of story that threw me for a loop at the end. I love that Kate Chopin incorporates her thoughts and ideas about racism into her work, yet does not even state a thing about it at the same time. She shows with this twist, that people should not be judged based on the color of their skin and it is not always easy to tell or as "black and white" to tell when someone is of African American descent as those of the early American South would have liked to have thought. It was very difficult to even pick out and distinguish when the "one drop rule" was present, as in the baby in this story.

In the end, after putting the book down and just taking the whole story and letting it soak in, I found many "what ifs?" coming to mind. For example: 1) Had Desiree known that Armand Aubigny was half black, would she have disowned him as he did her, since she had a similar elitist upbringing to him in regards to the separation of classes by race? 2) Based on her own reaction of killing herself when she thought that she was black, does this show how she truly viewed people of a race different than her own, even though she enjoyed it when her husband was softer and less harsh on his slaves? 3) Was Armand less harsh suddenly on his slaves because he was happy that his son was born or was it because he saw that his very own son was of similar race?

I am still personally pondering these questions and am not quite sure what would have happened especially if Desiree had stuck around for the discovery of the letter in the very end. It is so mind-boggling that one little note could change your whole perspective of a situation and your opinion of a character. For me, this letter really made me re-evaluate things and even the sort of person that Armand was for banishing his own wife and child, meanwhile he was the reason that their baby was a quarter black. As i despised his character from the moment that he shunned them, the letter from his mother to his father only made the feelings of disbelief and almost disappointment with him as a person grow deeper. "Desiree's Baby" left me hanging on a cliff, similar to "The Storm", yet wanting to scold Armand for being so arrogant and blind.

As discussed in class, Frederick Douglas never concretely states his feelings towards different people that he knew, or different situations that he was put in. It was even stated in class, for example, that fight scenes are not clearly described, nor are there any emotions connected to them. I feel however, that Douglas does this for a reason. Frederick Douglas, although he does not come right out and share his opinions and feelings, I believe that he slips them very subtly into his writing. For example, when Douglas describes his first overseer named Mr. Plummer, he describes him as "a miserable drunkard, a profane swearer, and a savage monster." From this description alone, we know that Douglas clearly does not care for the man. He does not have to come right out and say that he despises the overseer. He just implies it.

I believe that this lack of feeling is due in part to two factors. The first of which is that Douglas is now older, and trying to recall and write about things that took place in the past. Therefore, his memory of such events and people must be a little foggy. The second however, is that I do believe that Douglas wanted to see how others would react to his writing. I think that no matter how uneducated he was said to be, that he could still want to get a reaction or response from those who read his writing. I feel that no matter who you are, you are always looking for others' approval in some way, shape, or form. I believe that by not putting his own thoughts into his writing, Frederick Douglas was trying not to put a bias on the story. I feel that by then seeing others' reactions to reading his story, he would then receive the readers' approval of his life and his escape from the harsh life of slavery that he was looking for. Douglas wanted to have the satisfaction of knowing that readers would give their own honest viewpoints of his life's story, without being influenced. In this way, they would also come to the conclusion that slavery was wrong and unjust, but only on their own. I feel that Douglas left his writing this way, so that it would leave a much stronger impression on its readers.

Fitzhugh: Coward or Genius?

I personally found George Fitzhugh's piece of writing to be both really frustrating, yet very well substantiated at the same time. It was so frustrating because I constantly wanted to argue with his oppinions and point of views, yet found that I could not. Every time that he made some outlandish or out of the ordinary statement, he would back it up and support it. I felt that he was constantly three steps ahead, while I was two steps behind.

Fitzhugh’s writing irritated me because I feel that he only makes some of the statements in his piece in order to cover his behind. He says things that he does not believe, nor support himself, in order to manipulate others into supporting slavery. For example, when he says that he supports slavery, yet he does not support racism, I do not thoroughly believe him. Especially after reading the background on him and the fact that he defends slavery in all of his writings, I personally feel that he made this statement in order to be politically correct. I believe that he also made this statement knowing that whites would never be enslaved in America because we were the majority. In the same way, I feel that he does not truly believe that women should be educated. The way that it came across as I was reading this passage, was that Fitzhugh simply did not want women to go to the North and become educated, for he did not women to take on or adopt those thoughts or views. I feel that Fitzhugh knew that women would become educated, just like he knew that the civil war was coming. As a result, he pretended to support women becoming educated by stating that “it is the mother who first affects opinions.” By doing so, people could not argue with his writing, and therefore start to agree with Fitzhugh’s claims about slavery helping all Americans, as well as the economy.

Although I feel that Fitzhugh was an extremely strong argumentative writer, I feel that he was too cowardly to just come out and stand up for what he believed in. He was too ashamed and tried too hard to be politically correct, to take the wrath for his own viewpoints. Instead of causing a stir with his writings, Fitzhugh just tried to please everyone and raise the moral of Southerners by submissively supporting their way of life and slavery. The only thing that stood out to me as I was reading his piece, and still does now as I am writing this, is the question that I will leave you with to answer: Is Fitzhugh a coward that just hides behind his writing or an extremely smart man to remain both neutral and politically correct?

Just testing the waters and trying to express my response to John Smith as a person

Well having never posted a blog before in my life, I am a little nervous about this type of writing style. Being that I am used to formal essays normally for english classes and occassionally journal entries, I am going to approach this as if it were a journal and hope that I can truly express my feelings about the readings through it.

Even though I did not contribute much during class on Friday, I found the two readings to be very intriguing considering we do not truly know what John Smith was like as a person, and that the only thing we have to judge him by now are these types of writings which he created. This fact alone leads me to question many different aspects regarding him and when he first started out in Virginia. For example: "Was John Smith truly as self-centered or as egotistical as he portrayed himself to be in his writings?" or "Did John Smith try to be something that he wasn't in order to get more people to colonize this new-found world?" or lastly "Did John Smith write his works of literature as if he were truly the person of his dreams or the type of person that he had always wanted to become?". These questions seemed to jump out at me after reading his works, especially after trying to compare him to the "John Smith" that the Disney movie Pocahontas portays him as. Who is to say that the real John Smith was not similar in some ways to this character? I am sure that he is romanticized quite a bit in order to grab the publics attention and that Pocahontas was clearly not as mature in real life as in the movie, however he could have just been a man who was struggling to start out a new life in a place that was foreign to him. He could have just been finding his way.

I feel that the type of experience that John Smith had gone through is not really and truly comprehendibe to us unless we all of a sudden were thrown into an uncivilized environment that was unfamiliar to us all. How would we react to this situation? Would we try to harden ourselves a bit in order to toughen up and make it through the cold hard winters and different new situations which they were faced with here? When reading the passages, I could not help to notice the types of words that John Smith used to describe the African Americans. For example, he called them salvages and barbarians. I feel that this could have just been due to the fact that they were different from him and that he knew nothing about them. I paralleled this to our discussion in class about the South. For those who knew very little about the South, their impressions were very different from those who knew a lot about it, or had even lived there. Many stereotypes that we often hear came to light and were proven to be false, but only by those who were familiar with the South themselves. I find this to be similar to John Smith's situation, only no one was familiar with the African Americans or their types of lifestyle and therefore no one was able to prove his stereotypes of them to be false. Overall, I feel that judging John Smith on his two pieces of writing alone is just unfair and not completely reliable.