Montana, Who Should Be Blamed?

601 Words3 Pages
Blaming Montana for the events of one cataclysmic summer would just remove responsibility and imply that such events were acceptable in that environment. In the novel Montana 1948 there is much controversy on who or what can be blamed for such major events. The town of Montana cannot be blamed for events such as Frank Hayden’s rape of Indian girls, his murder of Marie Little Soldier or his suicide at the end of the novel with the constant decision of whether Frank should or shouldn’t be locked up for his actions. It can be argued that the characters of Montana are solely to blame but it can also be said that the town and the insane environment of Montana is at fault. The isolated and barren town of Montana cannot be blamed for such catastrophic events. A town with few laws and no implementation of rules can be thought to have some impact on how the people behave but ultimately it is down to the characters and how they choose to live. David Hayden realised from the time he was young what it meant to be a Hayden saying “I was a Hayden. I knew from the time I was very young and without having been told that that meant having something in Bentrock. Here it is evident that being a Hayden meant having a certain amount of power or authority and therefore the characters play a major role in the events of 1948 and Montana cannot be blamed. It can be argued that Julian Hayden can be blamed for the catastrophic events in Montana during 1948; he abused power and used his authority and the Hayden name to his advantage. Julian was racist and had never acknowledged the severity of Frank’s crimes saying, “Screwing an Indian. Or feeling her up or whatever. You don’t lock up a man for that. You don’t lock up your brother. A respected man. A war hero.” Julian is constantly defending Frank and he never comes to realise what inhumane things Frank has done, he only sees what he
Open Document