I thought the piece was refreshingly honest and blunt, only portraying facts and events to the reader. Often throughout my history classes, teachers have occasionally mentioned how textbooks and media removes information that does not benefit their intent, but I have never searched for direct proof of this. However, it was astounding how history films such as “Lincoln” kept such important events out of the story line without even a mention. The purpose of movies such as these are to be first, historically accurate so the watcher can learn about said topic in a different form. Additionally, within the articles I have read, I can often spot instances where the writer unknowingly or possibly knowingly insert their own ideas into the writing, in turn slowly changing the article from nonfiction to persuasive. This was absent both in the writing and particularly, in the tone it was read. Overall, this add an effect of seriousness that the text needed to show the severity of the injustices done towards the Dakota people.
The phrase “everything is in the language we use” means that when conveying a thought, it is important to use grammar and words that suit it. This is shown in the article where at the start of the article, she included some rules of grammar. These rules were explained to show the effect of punctuation used throughout the article such as “.”. Often times, the purpose of such grammar is forgotten when reading, where a pause emphasizes a particularly powerful idea and is instead read without emotion, losing the effect. Here Long Solider is trying to show how such a minor but destructive event as the Sioux Uprising can be overlooked just as a “.” in a sentence.
Well said Justin. I like how you expanded upon the idea of authors purposely leaving out information in order to portray someone in a higher regard. It is not morally right to leave important facts out of non-fiction because it hinders the reader’s overall knowledge on the topic. I also like how you picked up on the way the author uses grammar. When things are emphasized and there are pauses, it gives the reader a better perception of the text. Finally, I would like to ask, why do you think the author included the statement, “real poems do not really require words”?
I liked the connection you made with the poem and the movie “Lincoln” and how it does not include the massacre of the Dakota 38. I think this is a great example, because like you said, many textbooks exclude information that may not be historically significant to their purpose in the textbook and this movie is another great example of this. That just further demonstrates how unjust the massacre against the natives were and also the actions that lead to it and how easily things like this can be overlooked. Great response!
“Everything is in the language we use.” That is something to consider whenever there is a news report or something that is going viral. I’ve always noticed how they would use big words to catch attention and draw more clicks. Certain words tend to have some kind of negative emotions that whenever someone reads it they think “this might be bad.” Words are super powerful as any words that involve Lincoln and his representation always felt like it was on the positive side. He was a good president, he freed the slaves, etc. It was always filled with positives that we never considered that his presidency was during the times that the Natives were being kicked off of their land. This poem wants us to be mindful of the words we read whenever we hear news or talking to people. We should be thinking about how do they want us to feel and if they’re language is trying to change what your actual feelings would be towards it.