I feel that the tone of the document was neither humble nor aggressive. I do, however, believe that the petition was sincere and clear. It was sincere in a sense that John Dickinson was expressing their loyalty to the king and that they wanted to remain loyal to him. He was clear in laying out the facts of what was causing the strife among the colonists and what he felt the king could do to alleviate the situation. I found the document in its entirety to be just full of the same thing over and over again but yet reading it as many times as I had to in order to truly understand it, it was almost like poetry.
They also did not know God the way the settlers did, as a result they were a misunderstood people in their ways of life. Along with that the early Europeans thought of themselves as being far more advanced in terms of culture and possessed arrogance in how they viewed the Indians. It is clear to me that Ben Franklin recognized their social behavior in which they understood proper etiquette such as (“the Indian rules of politeness and not to answer a public proposition the same day that it is made”)
No one true resource can be used without doubt coming from it because of the greed of the Spaniards or the sympathy of scholars for the Mayans that might have been used in the sources. The “confusion of tongues” then can not only come from the actual misinterpretation of the languages, but from the classes, genders and religion aspects as well. This book was a really interesting read from a historian point of view even with the author sometimes making it clear she favors one side over the other. Even with that in mind, she does bring across to the reader the problems from the beginning the Spaniards had with this particular area to conquer, unlike Mexico, Peru and other places in the Caribbean. It all eventually became the same, disease killing off the natives, Spaniards using slaves and mixing of castes with them taking native wives, and how the indigenous people tried to cling onto their beliefs and ways even knowing the harsh punishments that would come to them if found out.
Going to Hispaniola himself in 1502 as a member of new royal governor’s party, Casas soon was participating eagerly in the exploitation of the natives”(35). In his writing History of the Indies he states, “went about his concerns like the others, sending his share of Indians to work fields and gold mines, taking advantage of them as much as he could”. Around 1515 after becoming a priest, Casas writes about his moral blindness in this period
All of these phrases illustrate Nick being unsure, which makes him a non omniscient narrator. Nick knows nothing more than we do in this novel, if not less. We cannot take what Nick says to be literal due to his indecrepancies as a narrator. He is not credible and since there are moments in the novel where Nick cannot be seen as credible, it makes the whole novel questionable because if he lies and alters his perception at certain moment, what’s to say he’s not that way all along. Nick sees Gatsby as a wonderful man who can do no wrong in his eyes.
(‘Keep your brats away from my sidewalk!’)” (Rodriguez 149). It can be very difficult to understand that kind of racism and even more difficult to believe it even exists because we were not there to witness it; but because our author is providing us with his personal experience we can believe that it must be accurate. The details that he supplies us with will provide the foundation of that proof and will allow us to form a trust that what he says is true. Rodriguez also provides us with a very large biographical sketch which is
This leaves them unable to detect their own bias, and unable to be objective. In “Learning to Read” by Malcolm X and “Idiot Nation” by Michael Moore, the authors’ writings demonstrate that they are indeed knowledgeable, but are also subjective on the topics that they discuss. When reading the essays of Malcolm X and Michael Moore, a perceptive reader can easily identify their biases which are illustrated throughout their work in the forms of inflammatory remarks, contradictory statements, and or, one-sided evidence. Inflammatory remarks are inimical and signal an author’s bias. By utilizing demeaning language, such as racial epithets, in an effort to draw support and substantiate beliefs, a writer alienates his audience and draws attention to whom or what his biases are against.
The novel is told from Nick Caraway’s point of view. Nick glorifies Gatsby as he is telling the story, and that makes us believe that Gatsby is truly great. But no matter how great Gatsby is, he can’t control what happens. In The Great Gatsby the characters each react to things in different ways. There are many times when circumstances are out of control,
This journey helps Santiago learn new things about himself and other people. His destiny was right in front of him, but life had to have him go through the entire journey by crossing the dessert to overcoming impossible difficulties to find his treasure. We are absolutely not prisoners of fate; we are not in control of our fate we are innocent of what has been decided among us. Franklin D. Roosevelt had once stated, “Men are not prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds.” This quote clearly meant that we aren’t in control of fate, but we are in control of our actions and decisions. Catcher in the Rye and The Alchemist relates to this quote.
He clearly lays out for the reader the events that occurred and the people involved. He does his best to describe the differences and similarities between the various organizations such as the SCLC, CORE, and SNCC. While also broaching the subject that these organizations often suffered by not working together. Sitkoff writes at length, rightfully so, on the pivotal role of Martin Luther King Jr. and the dream of living in a world without racism. Describing ways in which he motivated a nation to rise up peacefully and without violence when possible.