Slavery and Freedom

Edmund S. Morgan's conclusion in The Challenge of the American Revolution states "It was slavery, I suggest, more than any other single factor, that had made the difference, slavery that enabled Virginia to nourish representative government in a plantation society". This conclusion is important because it suggests that slavery was essential to the establishment of America as a country. At first, this proposal seems absolutely crazy, or at least I thought so. Isn't American slavery a giant contradiction? Edmund Morgan argues that although it is hypocritical, that America could not be a free country if it weren't for slavery. Slavery solved the problem of an excess of freemen without work. The aristocrats of the early New World were threatened by the growing number of liberated men (previously indentured servants) because they were hungry and had weapons. Enslaving Africans united the white men, the plantation owner and yeoman farmer, and allowed for the upper-class men to create an organized government. It is important to clarify that the men who enslaved the blacks were not racists, but they had no other population to enslave as it would have been impossible to enslave English-born laborers. I think that slavery expanded in a way that the first slave owners were unable to predict and would not have wanted. The origins of American slavery were not based on cruelty and racism, but on the necessity to calm the increase of free men without work.

Slavery in America

I learned many new things about slavery in America while reading "Afro-American Housing in Virginia's Landscape of Slavery". I did not realize that there was a common custom of "allowing slaves ground of their own". I have always been taught that the slaves of early America lived in absolutely horrible conditions, that they were not allowed any privileges and were forced to work until death. Obviously, the living conditions of the slaves were not desirable, but apparently poor white men were also forced to live in  comparable circumstances. Furthermore, this article suggests that prominent slaveowners encouraged their slaves to develop a culture of their own by giving them their own land to work and gardens to keep. The slave dwellings were built in the same place, surrounding the slave gardens and land. I do not approve of slavery by any means, but think that perhaps the average conditions in which early slaves lived are exaggerated just a little.

Architecture

"The upward reach of truth and beauty and the deep seated striving of the human mind and heart for an ideal lying far above things common place and material". This quote from "New Norman Gothic 'Mount St. Olaf'" is particularly significant. It is significant in that it juxtaposes traditional Gothic architecture with modern and contemporary styles. This quote suggests that tall buildings parallel an institution's strive for greatness and ultimate truth. St. Olaf does not have many tall buildings. Hoyme Hall only has four floors, yet is expansive in length. The lack of height of the buildings at St. Olaf does not mean that St. Olaf College and its students are in search of truth. In fact, I would suggest that Oles are more interested in ideals than many comparable college students. I think that the elaborate architecture of Olaf's buildings speak to this point. The meticulous Gothic architecture seen across campus symbolizes the traditional virtues instilled in Oles. Modern houses and buildings in America are sometimes tall and sometimes short, but have in common a type of simple and straightforward architecture. I will go so far to suggest that the people living in these houses are simple-minded, in terms of not pursuing a higher knowledge and sticking to what they know. In conclusion, I think that the architecture of a building is more important than size or height and that the style of the buildings at St. Olaf complements the beliefs of this wonderful school.

Thanking the Tea Party

After our conversation in class yesterday regarding the Tea Party and it's defects, I feel compelled to reiterate my consensus about the Tea Party. I think that the purpose of the Tea Party is simply to encourage middle-class Americans to become politically active and that the Tea Party will slowly dissolve after it's goal has been accomplished. And because the Tea Party riles people, I think it is a good thing. Who knows if we would be writing a political editorial for AmCon if the modern Tea Party movement wasn't so prevalent in the media. Many AmCon students, myself included, are ignorant when it comes to politics. I have a faint sense of what the different parties stand for and how the government exerts its power, but I have never taken the time to really analyze modern American politics. In taking the time to research the Tea Party, I have learned a lot about politics in general and become a better citizen for it. With that, I would like to thank the Tea Party movement for riling American citizens and encouraging us to stand up for our beliefs.

African Americans and the Revolution

In reading Woody Holton's "Unruly Americans in the Revolution", I was particularly intrigued by the effect of the Revolution on the slaves of early America. Holton describes that "for African Americans the outcome of the Revolutionary War was more complex" (pg. 4). Some of the slaves were freed because they agreed to fight for the British. On the other hand, many new slaves were shipped to America as the cotton gin allowed for the vast expansion of slavery. I think that on thing can be clearly established about early African Americans - they were not in control of their own lives. Whether they were promised freedom by the Loyalists or forced to work on plantations or even used as bargaining chips, African Americans were not free. Moreover, the slaves who were freed upon the ending of the Revolutionary War were lost. They literally had nowhere to go. Some returned to Africa, others emigrated to Australia. Indeed the Revolutionary War had a complicated effect on the lives of African Americans.

American Things

In reading the Butler piece, I couldn't help but notice a conflict between local and imported goods. The early colonists struggled between using local products and shipping in more elaborate things from England.   For example, "wealthy colonists bought fancy English furniture in an effort to affect English taste in reception rooms dining rooms, hallways, and bedrooms" (pg. 155). Similarly, wealthy Americans today purchase Italian sports cars or Persian rugs or French art. It is hard to understand why foreign products are so desired. American things are also reliable, elegant, and beautiful. It almost seems as if Americans are not proud of their own goods. Perhaps this is because Americans are so busy and do not take the time to put forth their best effort. Perhaps Americans assume that foreign merchandise is produced with more care. I'm not sure if this assumption is correct, but I don't think it's completely far fetched.

Inventory

In making a list of everything in my dorm room, I realized that I have way more things than I thought. A few big items on the list included a couch, a stereo system and record player, a carpet that fits the entire room and an additional rug, a television with a several gaming consoles, a mini-fridge, a window seat and an ottoman. I also found out that I have 68 t-shirts, 14 sweatshirts, 15 ties, and 11 pairs of jeans. I still can't believe that I own so many shirts! Moreover, my roommate and I discovered that we have 2 bottles of Febreeze, 2 wall mirrors, 10 frisbees, 18 posters and 4 boxes of Kleenex. Additionally, I have 8 pillows. It's hard to draw the line where consumerism becomes too excessive, but I think we have too much in my room. It's also interesting that all of the things in my room are somewhat comforting. Hopefully we can find the will power to stop shopping, because I honestly think that our room can't handle any more stuff!

Bambi

My friends and I watched Bambi yesterday afternoon, and I couldn't help but link it to AmCon and the topics we've been discussing lately. We have placed a large emphasis on the natural landscape and how it has impacted us as Americans. We have also analyzed how the country is important to our nation. The scenery in Bambi is absolutely beautiful and stirs in its viewers a desire to take a walk in the woods. The idea of simplicity and relaxation is so attractive to American citizens. It is not uncommon to wish to live in the countryside, without a worry, like Bambi. Still, we understand that there are jobs to do, people to help, and progress to make. I think that we should take more time to appreciate the natural landscape at St. Olaf and elsewhere and remember that is has greatly impacted the formation of the United States and the people who here.

American Mothers

It is true that women have represented America for many years. "Liberty" and "Freedom" and Pocahontas are some examples. Still, I have to wonder if the type of women that represented America still exist today. Obviously there are many different types of people and there are surely women that fit the traditional characteristics, but I think that motherhood and what that entails has changed dramatically in the United States. Rayna Green mentions in the Pocahontas Perplex that "the Indian woman began her symbolic, many-faceted life as a Mother figure - exotic, powerful, dangerous, and beautiful - and as a representative of American liberty and European classical virtue translated into New World terms" (pg. 19). These are admirable characteristics, but, in my opinion, fail to accurately describe American mothers. In general, there are two types of moms - the loving stay-at-home housewife, and the busy professional. Housewives tend to be nurturing and caring, not powerful and dangerous. Perhaps businesswomen are powerful, but only in a professional sense. I think that the women that once represented America are no longer accurate symbols.

Indian Americans

The Indian has always been a symbol of American freedom. Indians have been portrayed as savage, noble, nude and decorated. Therefore, most Americans have found some aspect of Indian culture with which they can identify. The national figure 'America' "was a nude woman warrior decorated with feathers and usually accompanied by an exotic-looking animal, a bow and arrow, and the odd severed limb nearby" (pg. 62 Democratic Models). This symbol was sophisticated with it's exotic animal, elegant bow and arrow, and ostentatious feathers. Yet, 'America' was also uncivilized, nude, and potentially a cannibal. Americans were  in the process of recreating themselves, so their representations were constantly changing. But one thing was constant, the importance of Indians. "As England became a them for colonists, Indians became an us." (pg. 22 Playing Indian) Indians have always and will forever represent America.

Plazas and Classrooms

The readings for the weekend were both very interesting. First, one idea that I had after reading Pueblo Style and Regional Architecture was why did the Puritans not build a plaza in their towns. The article explains that in European architecture, plazas are used to keep out unwanted sources. It seems clear to me that the Puritans were parochial and were not interested in adopting outside opinions. Why would their towns be more open, as opposed to fenced off? On a lighter note, after reading Understanding Ordinary Landscapes, I feel inclined to declare that I enjoy learning indoors. Not that the outdoors are not nice and beautiful, I just think think that the classroom aids in education. There many distractions outside (i.e. bugs), while the indoors allow students to focus and more efficiently and effectively master a subject matter. Even though AmCon is a course based largely on conversation, the classroom is the best place to have class, so that we can all hear each other. In summary, I think the Puritans should have had closed off plazas and I think that classrooms are great!

Historia de una Maestra

We are reading a book called "Historia de una Maestra" in my Spanish 250 class. The novel is essentially the life story of a teacher who lived during the reign of Francisco Franco. In the opening chapters of the text, Gabriela (the teacher) describes an isolated town in which she taught. The town reminded me of the Puritan communities that we have been studying in AmCon. This little "pueblo" is completely isolated (in this case by mountains), is run and organized by a few stern men, and is not supportive of the education of women. We discussed in class that Gabriela tries to change how the town looks upon education and tries to teach the children in new and innovative ways. Perhaps she can be paralleled to Anne Hutchinson, although she is not quite as smart and confident. I am looking forward to reading more!

Center of America

In tonight's readings, landscape was a common theme. Many of them talked about landscape as design and as a symbol of a community's priorities. For example, the New England Puritan communities normally place the town meeting hall at the center of the development. The "preferred layout of the New England town radiated out cocentrically from the meeting house as its center" (pg. 138, The Puritan Reading). Moreover, in traditional homes, a fireplace was build at the center to disperse heat throughout the entire house. It is clear that American landscapes and architecture our designed with purpose. So, I started thinking about the United States as a nation. What is at the center of our national landscape? What represents us? Now, this item or symbol need not be physically in the middle of the country, but rather represent the entirety of America. Some obvious choices might be the Statue of Liberty, the Constitution, or perhaps New York City, or Crazy Horse national monument. Or would it be something in nature, such as the Mississippi river? As of right now, I would probably choose the Constitution (and its amendments), as it contains our freedoms that are essential to being an American. Still, I wonder if those rights represent our country to other nations. Perhaps there is no center of America.

Glee #2 :(

I am watching Glee right now (it's on commercials). This really isn't about AmCon, but I feel like this episode merits a blog. I am pissed! This episode is the worst episode I have ever seen. It's essentially a bunch a music videos played back to back. There is no plot whatsoever. By the way, Enich completely agrees! I hope that the producers of Glee never decided to air an episode as pointless as the current one. I suppose that there is a slight chance that this episode can recover. I will keep everyone updated!

Traditional America

I found the article about Henry James returning to America especially invigorating. There were so many good points and excellent proposals. A few lines that especially stuck me are " New York resembled a pincushion, he noted after his return from New England, studded with skyscrapers 'grossly tall and grossly ugly' that overpowered church spires" (pg. 340) and " A typical suburban house lot recreates in miniature the farm of the past" (pg. 342). First of all, I think it important to recognize that traditionally, great churches have been a vital part of American towns. They are normally the tallest, and most elaborate buildings and symbolize the community as a whole. This is especially true of small New England villages. Furthermore, I found the comparison of the traditional American farm to the typical suburban lot very stimulating. I think this symbolizes what the American Dream means to many Americans - living in the suburbs, mowing the lawn, building a garage, playing catch with the yellow labrador. This article does a good job of portraying how Americans still admire the past. I doubt that Americans will ever stop appreciating the countryside, the privacy that comes with that, and the values that it represents.

Honest Hutchinson

I found Marilyn J Westekamp's article about Anne Hutchinson very interesting. I do not know much about Hutchinson, just that she was a rebellious Puritan woman. The article clarifies that Hutchinson was not a radical, but an inspired member of the Puritan community. I especially liked the fact that Hutchinson "never did acknowledge any error in her opinions" (pg. 486). She spoke what she believed to be the truth, even though it worsened her condemnation. She could have easily not mentioned her Divine revelation, potentially making a bigger change, but she did anyways. I find this really admirable, as I think it is important to do what's "right", to speak the truth, as opposed to taking the easy way out. Westekamp reveals that Hutchinson was a not a rebel, but rather a strong, independent woman, not afraid to speak her mind.

GLEE!

Like Enich, I love Glee! I reserved my spot in the lounge over an hour before the program started. Anyways, also like Enich, I wasn't exactly sure how to connect Glee to American Conversations. Luckily, I got some mail from my parents today, which included a StarTribune article titled "How joining the 'Glee club' might just save the world". I really enjoyed the article and I was able to correlate it with our American Conversations discussions. Glee is about a diverse group of teenagers, generally considered "misfits", who all have a passion for music. I think this can be paralleled with Americans feeling spirited about freedom. The Glee members all have different musical tastes, but are able to coexist in a way that essentially fits everybody's needs. Similarly, freedom means different things to different people, but Americans are able to work together to bring the greatest amount of good to the greatest amount of people. We fight for our freedom, just as the teenagers fight keep the Glee club alive. I encourage everyone to watch Glee. Tuesday nights at 7:00pm. Meet Enich and me in the Hoyme lounge!

True Affection

I particularly enjoyed the reading for class tomorrow. I think John Winthrop does a great job elaboration on the necessity to support our fellow Americans and our fellow human beings. Still, some of the lines from his essay were a bit unclear and provoked some interesting thoughts. Winthrop suggests that "we must entertain each other in brotherly affection" (pg. 9). I have to wonder though, if everybody is encouraged to support each other. Yes, the rich are always asked, and many times required, to support the poor. I am not suggesting that this is a bad thing. But it is rare to hear of the poor being thankful for gifts they have been given and even rarer to hear of the poor giving back to their supporters. Perhaps this is because private donations are becoming more and more rare. For us as Americans to be able to truly support each other, according to Winthrop, the affection must go both ways. Also, Winthrop explains that if "thou pour out the soul to the hungry" (pg. 4), then God will forever guide us. Pouring out one's soul is very different from writing a check. I think that private donations and charities are very important, because they mean so much more. Perhaps instead of forcing wealthy Americans to give away their money, we can encourage them to give it away by choice.

ORC 9/22/2010

Our ORC group summarized that Puritans' idea of surrendering yourself to God as a means to true freedom is definitely not an American idea. We talked about how Americans tend to think of freedom as having no restraints. We also discussed Takaki's proposal that many American citizens don't consider Asian, African, or Latin Americans as true members of our society. Takaki describes that we consider non-European Americans to be foreigners, even though European Americans are not the majority of our population. He gives a great example of a European American cab driver being surprised when a fellow Asian American speaks fluent English. Our ORC group also talked about Zinn's clear biases in his introduction. We concluded that it is important to identify what we agree and disagree with while reading a text. Every text has some sort of valuable message.

Learning to Love St. Olaf

because I am required to be here

because I sit on top of the Hill
because the wind whips through the campus
because the leaves change color

because we say ask rather than tell

because I eat fresh Malt-o-Meal
and locally baked cookies
in February and March

because my age has caught up with me

because I have broken my bank account with books
because the books give my knowledge
because the ultimate goal is a diploma
because nobody can tell me why

because to have an education is to have opportunity
because I will do great things
because we are and always will be Oles

because it is late and I still have homework to do
because it is time

-Dan and Wendy

Puritan Compromise

In reading chapter one of Jim Cullen's The American Dream, I realized that the Puritans of early America were not as bad as many make them out to be. Specifically, I found it remarkable that the Puritans were not unfamiliar to compromise, as Puritans are normally portrayed as stubborn and vindictive. Many Puritans disagreed on the church membership of children. Some believed that children should be incorporated into the congregation upon birth, while others felt it was appropriate for the children to grow up first and then make a spiritual testimony. The Puritans compromised by allowing the children to be members of the church, but requiring them to make a spiritual testimony (confirmation of faith) as adults. It is important to note, that Puritanism did not fall apart upon making a change. Change is an essential part of the American Dream. Compromise does not necessarily make us weaker. The Puritans can be seen as a symbol of the American Dream, as they continued to thrive through change and adjustment.

Simple Country

In Barbara Ras's A Wife Explains Why She Likes Country, the Wife essentially describes that she likes country because it is simple. However, the poem does not clarify whether the word "country" is used as a synonym of nation or as the antonym of city. I believe that it mostly refers to the countryside. The Wife indicates that she likes simple pleasures, such as cows, rodeos, or whiskey. She likes black and white, easy colors to understand. Yet, America is based on shades of grey. Americans fight for the right to be individuals and are proud that they can voice their diverse opinions. I consider the Wife to be naive, because she fails to understand that her preferred lifestyle does not improve the American society. Still, because she is an American, she is free to live as she chooses and I applaud her for living in a way that makes her happy. Our country is not simple, nor should it be.

Jumping to Conclusions

Yesterday afternoon, Brady, Shelby and I continued our conversation from class. We focused mostly on the Textbook Wars, specifically on the incorporation of Christian stories into a book of fables. Shelby commented that Bible stories essentially are fables and that it is appropriate to read them as such. However, I objected that most people link fables with falsehood. I think that putting Christian stories in a common book of tall tales is offensive because it is inappropriate to question the validity of religious beliefs in public schools. Furthermore, we discussed the teaching of Intelligent Design in the public school system. Intelligent Design is not an alternative way to say that God created the universe, but rather a theory that a higher being, whatever that may be, initiated life on Earth. Intelligent Design cannot be taught in schools because most Americans assume that it is a religious view. It is hypocritical to jump to conclusions, while insisting that others do not.