----I came into school at the beginning of the quarter thinking to myself “I always stink at history, so I’m going to have to try extra hard at that. The good news is, I have writing with it, and writing is always easy.” I don’t think I could have been any more wrong without thinking both classes were going to be easy. The writing class really threw me off; I expected it to be easy because I’ve been writing for years. Throughout the quarter I realized I had much to learn about writing and now I realize that, while I’m not done learning, I am much improved. This class gave me a bit more perspective on, not just my strengths and weaknesses as a writer and how to improve on them, but on writing in general too.
----I have improved my writing from this course, but I still have my weaknesses. At the beginning of the course, the first essay, I didn’t clearly “signpost.” One example from this is “The original and most apparent cause for the revolution was the violence that erupted between the Indians and the colonists but was preventable by Berkeley” from my first essay; this was both grammatically confusing and horrible at controlling that paragraph. However, I improved upon it in my second essay with most of my topic sentences doing a fair job of controlling the paragraphs. Another thing I am bad at is grammar and conventions, however, I have not improved much on that so I cannot give any specific examples, other than that I’m still not always clear when I need to use semi-colons, and I have only a vague idea how to use colons. My paragraph structure has improved over the course, if not my sentence structure.
----I believe that one of my strengths could be my use of vocabulary. I believe that I mainly use big words, such as extrapolate, when they fit perfectly. However, I do not simply pepper my paper with difficult words simply for the sake of doing so. This lends voice to my papers, and was perhaps helped by thinking of Craig saying “quit making more work for yourself”. Another thing I think I did well with is my argument development. In both papers I stated my argument, then state the reasons, then stated the supporting details for each of these reasons. While I will say that in my first one I had to stick with an argument that I would have abandoned if I had had time to research another argument, I believe that I managed to argue that well. I also thought that I argued my second essay, creating a respectable persona, and then finding reasons and a thought development pattern that would fit said persona, including details that would be seen by such a figure. I believe the course book helped a small amount with this.
----I used to think of writing as simply a form of communication, limited in some ways, but excelling in others. Now I think of it as much more than that, it is a way of graphically organizing your thoughts. You can set them down on a piece of paper, and in doing so, you have to figure exactly what your argument is, analyze it, and refine it. This is useful because it always you to create a cohesive argument, and helps you find flaws in it. It is important for writing to have an ulterior motive for me because essays are something that I would rarely write if it weren’t for school.
---- Essentially, it has been a productive quarter. I have learned much more about what skills I do and don’t have as a writer. Once I learned these skills and deficiencies, I worked to improve them. While I was doing these things, I also managed to gain more a more holistic view of writing. However, I have only managed to do these things with a large amount of work and an even larger amount of stress.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Portfolio: Exam #1: Thoughts on Bacon's Rebellion
----In 1676, Virginia went into a violent revolution against a dictator that abused his power and his citizens. There were two main factions in Bacon’s Rebellion of Virginia. One faction was those who wished to remain loyal to the governor, William Berkeley; these men were almost exclusively grandees, or rich plantation owners whose name is used to denote their lavish lifestyle. The other faction was the rebels, practically only poor farmers and recently released indentured servants struggling to make a living on the harsh frontier. At one point Indians were attacking the colonists on the frontier, Berkeley refused to allow the colonists to kill the Indians. When people were struggling to harvest a living from the land, Berkeley heaped upon them taxes with no apparent cause for the public good. When Berkeley became Governor he was meant to protect, nourish, and help the people. Instead, he abused them and used the power for the betterment of himself and his friends. Berkeley’s misuse of his control over the colonists’ relationships with the Indians and the economy and his blatant accumulation of power were the factors that caused Bacon and his followers to rebel.
----The overt cause for the revolution was the violence that erupted between the Indians and the colonists that was preventable by Berkeley. According to a report by the Royal Commissioners (Document 2), the violence between the Indians and the Colonists started with a misunderstanding over proper payment and escalated from there into full scale raids. During this time, the Susquehannahs murdered “no less than 60 innocent people” over a short period of time, or so the author of one notable manuscript wrote (Document 5). In response to this, Berkeley gathered a force of men in order to retaliate (Document 5). However, Berkeley decided against the military offensive and instead dispersed the force at the last minute for no stated reason (Document 4). Afterwards, according to Mrs. William Bird, messages were sent daily to Governor Berkeley. He continued to do nothing, so Nathaniel Bacon and many frontiersmen took matters into their own hands (Document 14). Because of growing protest, Governor Berkeley decided to create forts at the mouths of each river on the frontier in order to stop the Indians (Document 15). According to The History of Bacon’s and Ingram’s Rebellion, 1676, the forts were intended to stop the Indians, but after a large amount of time and money, they did not live up to their purpose (Document 6). Also, the citizens of the Isle of Wight County stated that they were burdened by even greater taxes to obtain forts that not only didn’t help, but ruined their country (Document 10). Due to that, Bacon stated in his Declaration “Another main article of our giult is our open and manifest aversion of all, not onely the Foreign but the protected and Darling Indians.” He then proceeded to call the Indians robbers, thieves, invaders, barbarous outlaws, and Bacon then moved on to claim that Berkeley supplied them with firearms and ammunition and that Berkeley protected them in order to maintain that lucrative market (Bacon’s Declaration). This shows that Bacon and the frontiersmen have decided to make this a matter, not of colony versus tribe, but of colony versus race, forcing Berkeley to choose a side. He chose, in the frontiersmen’s eyes, the Indians.
----Berkeley blatantly abused his power of the colonists relationships of the Indians and the colonists. The colonists were killing and engaging in guerilla warfare with the Indians, and being killed in alarming numbers. He completely ignored his responsibilities of properly and equally protecting all in his domain at times, as Mrs. William Bird attested. Then, when he did finally decide upon a plan, he decided to build forts at the mouths of the river, and idea that was poorly thought out ended up hurting those it was intended to protect. This misuse of power rightfully angered the frontiersmen and roused them against Berkeley’s cause.
----Another area of Government in which Berkeley misapplied his power was in the economy. One source is Bacon’s Declaration which at one point says “[L]et us also consider wither any Publick work for our safety and defense or for the Advancement and propagation of Trade, liberall Arts or sciences is here Extant in any way adaquate to our vast chardg.” This, in conjunction with a few of his other points, is stated for the purpose of allowing the reader to see how the taxes are spent, not for the public, but for the elite and the Governor’s “cronies.” Robert Beverly opined that one of the four main causes of Bacon’s Rebellion was extreme taxes (Document 1). Not only were the citizens of Virginia overtaxed, but as the citizens of Isle of Wight County stated, their taxation problem was only worsened by Berkeley’s misinformed fort plan (Document 10). Over taxation was not the only economic grievance forced upon the citizens of Virginia by Berkeley. As Nathaniel Bacon put it, “[O]ur present Governor monopolized a trade with the Indians and granted licenses to others to trade with them, for which he had every 3rd skin [beaver or fox pelt]” (Document 12). This shows that Berkeley abused his powers of appropriation of public funds, limitation of taxation, and his hold over the economy.
----It can be seen from these examples that the Governor’s economic policies were not considered beneficial to the general population. Under his plans, the rich were becoming richer, and the poor were either getting poorer or dying. He did create concoct one plan to try and further the good of the general population. Not only did it not work, but it required even more taxes and weren’t paid for by the vast sums of wealth previously accumulated by the years of taxation without return. The monopoly upon fur trade only served to add further insult upon the injury of over taxation. This economic injustice provided yet another reason for the entire colony to rise up and overthrow their current Governor.
----A cause for the leader of the Rebellion, Nathaniel Bacon, to rise up and take a stand was the raw social, political, and economic power that Berkeley so obviously wielded. One obvious case of that power resides in the letter of apology from the citizens of Isle of Wight, where they apologized for their previous letter demeaning the Governor (The William and Mary Quarterly). This shows that he was such a respected figure that, even though they were extremely angry at him, they still feared his wrath. Another point that highlights his power is that he would not have been able to abuse the economy and the Indian/colonist relationships if he did not have large amounts of power under his control. While some might say that Nathaniel Bacon might have had more pure interests at mind, I believe that this testimony that a colonist made after Nathaniel had taken Governor Berkeley’s power, “We were then as unable to resist his will and commands… as his Honor had been in granting his commission…. And for fear of death were all of us forced to do what we did in opposing Sir Wm. Berkeley” (Document 35), suggests otherwise. Also, at one point, Bacon, while in power, supposedly even suggested a recession from England in order to maintain his power, almost definitely knowing that Virginia would be crushed in the attempt (Document 39). These two statements, along with the human allure of power inevitably lead me to the assumption that Nathaniel Bacon did not, after all, have the colonists’ best interests at heart.
----This knowledge has many applications. It can be seen that the rebellion sent many ripples of effect through time. One thing that the colonists complained of was that they were not able to protect themselves because they were not able to own firearms. From then till now, Virginia has remained a very pro-gun culture (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2008/10/will_guns_sink_obama_in_va.html and their pro-gun culture effects the ways people in that state vote. Bacon’s Rebellion, which happened over 300 years ago, might very well have an affect upon who is chosen for the President of the United States this year, and has had affects on who was chosen for the President and, to an even greater extent Governors and Mayors inside of Virginia in past elections. One might argue that without Bacon’s Rebellion, the culture and voting patterns of Virginia, and possibly the entire United States would be noticeably different on this, and many other related matters.
----Bacon’s Rebellion was brought about by Berkeley’s blatant abuse of the power vested in him by the people (through the king). He misused his powers in all areas he could. He misused his military might and his economy, and then was not able to hold his power from those who craved it. It is my opinion that if he had been able to do any of these correctly, the rebellion would have been put down quickly, and possibly would have never occurred at all.
Citations
Isle of Wight County: Papers Relating to Bacon's Rebellion
Lyon G. Tyler
The William and Mary Quarterly, Vol. 4, No. 2 (Oct., 1895), pp. 111-115
Published by: Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2008/10/will_guns_sink_obama_in_va.html
----The overt cause for the revolution was the violence that erupted between the Indians and the colonists that was preventable by Berkeley. According to a report by the Royal Commissioners (Document 2), the violence between the Indians and the Colonists started with a misunderstanding over proper payment and escalated from there into full scale raids. During this time, the Susquehannahs murdered “no less than 60 innocent people” over a short period of time, or so the author of one notable manuscript wrote (Document 5). In response to this, Berkeley gathered a force of men in order to retaliate (Document 5). However, Berkeley decided against the military offensive and instead dispersed the force at the last minute for no stated reason (Document 4). Afterwards, according to Mrs. William Bird, messages were sent daily to Governor Berkeley. He continued to do nothing, so Nathaniel Bacon and many frontiersmen took matters into their own hands (Document 14). Because of growing protest, Governor Berkeley decided to create forts at the mouths of each river on the frontier in order to stop the Indians (Document 15). According to The History of Bacon’s and Ingram’s Rebellion, 1676, the forts were intended to stop the Indians, but after a large amount of time and money, they did not live up to their purpose (Document 6). Also, the citizens of the Isle of Wight County stated that they were burdened by even greater taxes to obtain forts that not only didn’t help, but ruined their country (Document 10). Due to that, Bacon stated in his Declaration “Another main article of our giult is our open and manifest aversion of all, not onely the Foreign but the protected and Darling Indians.” He then proceeded to call the Indians robbers, thieves, invaders, barbarous outlaws, and Bacon then moved on to claim that Berkeley supplied them with firearms and ammunition and that Berkeley protected them in order to maintain that lucrative market (Bacon’s Declaration). This shows that Bacon and the frontiersmen have decided to make this a matter, not of colony versus tribe, but of colony versus race, forcing Berkeley to choose a side. He chose, in the frontiersmen’s eyes, the Indians.
----Berkeley blatantly abused his power of the colonists relationships of the Indians and the colonists. The colonists were killing and engaging in guerilla warfare with the Indians, and being killed in alarming numbers. He completely ignored his responsibilities of properly and equally protecting all in his domain at times, as Mrs. William Bird attested. Then, when he did finally decide upon a plan, he decided to build forts at the mouths of the river, and idea that was poorly thought out ended up hurting those it was intended to protect. This misuse of power rightfully angered the frontiersmen and roused them against Berkeley’s cause.
----Another area of Government in which Berkeley misapplied his power was in the economy. One source is Bacon’s Declaration which at one point says “[L]et us also consider wither any Publick work for our safety and defense or for the Advancement and propagation of Trade, liberall Arts or sciences is here Extant in any way adaquate to our vast chardg.” This, in conjunction with a few of his other points, is stated for the purpose of allowing the reader to see how the taxes are spent, not for the public, but for the elite and the Governor’s “cronies.” Robert Beverly opined that one of the four main causes of Bacon’s Rebellion was extreme taxes (Document 1). Not only were the citizens of Virginia overtaxed, but as the citizens of Isle of Wight County stated, their taxation problem was only worsened by Berkeley’s misinformed fort plan (Document 10). Over taxation was not the only economic grievance forced upon the citizens of Virginia by Berkeley. As Nathaniel Bacon put it, “[O]ur present Governor monopolized a trade with the Indians and granted licenses to others to trade with them, for which he had every 3rd skin [beaver or fox pelt]” (Document 12). This shows that Berkeley abused his powers of appropriation of public funds, limitation of taxation, and his hold over the economy.
----It can be seen from these examples that the Governor’s economic policies were not considered beneficial to the general population. Under his plans, the rich were becoming richer, and the poor were either getting poorer or dying. He did create concoct one plan to try and further the good of the general population. Not only did it not work, but it required even more taxes and weren’t paid for by the vast sums of wealth previously accumulated by the years of taxation without return. The monopoly upon fur trade only served to add further insult upon the injury of over taxation. This economic injustice provided yet another reason for the entire colony to rise up and overthrow their current Governor.
----A cause for the leader of the Rebellion, Nathaniel Bacon, to rise up and take a stand was the raw social, political, and economic power that Berkeley so obviously wielded. One obvious case of that power resides in the letter of apology from the citizens of Isle of Wight, where they apologized for their previous letter demeaning the Governor (The William and Mary Quarterly). This shows that he was such a respected figure that, even though they were extremely angry at him, they still feared his wrath. Another point that highlights his power is that he would not have been able to abuse the economy and the Indian/colonist relationships if he did not have large amounts of power under his control. While some might say that Nathaniel Bacon might have had more pure interests at mind, I believe that this testimony that a colonist made after Nathaniel had taken Governor Berkeley’s power, “We were then as unable to resist his will and commands… as his Honor had been in granting his commission…. And for fear of death were all of us forced to do what we did in opposing Sir Wm. Berkeley” (Document 35), suggests otherwise. Also, at one point, Bacon, while in power, supposedly even suggested a recession from England in order to maintain his power, almost definitely knowing that Virginia would be crushed in the attempt (Document 39). These two statements, along with the human allure of power inevitably lead me to the assumption that Nathaniel Bacon did not, after all, have the colonists’ best interests at heart.
----This knowledge has many applications. It can be seen that the rebellion sent many ripples of effect through time. One thing that the colonists complained of was that they were not able to protect themselves because they were not able to own firearms. From then till now, Virginia has remained a very pro-gun culture (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2008/10/will_guns_sink_obama_in_va.html and their pro-gun culture effects the ways people in that state vote. Bacon’s Rebellion, which happened over 300 years ago, might very well have an affect upon who is chosen for the President of the United States this year, and has had affects on who was chosen for the President and, to an even greater extent Governors and Mayors inside of Virginia in past elections. One might argue that without Bacon’s Rebellion, the culture and voting patterns of Virginia, and possibly the entire United States would be noticeably different on this, and many other related matters.
----Bacon’s Rebellion was brought about by Berkeley’s blatant abuse of the power vested in him by the people (through the king). He misused his powers in all areas he could. He misused his military might and his economy, and then was not able to hold his power from those who craved it. It is my opinion that if he had been able to do any of these correctly, the rebellion would have been put down quickly, and possibly would have never occurred at all.
Citations
Isle of Wight County: Papers Relating to Bacon's Rebellion
Lyon G. Tyler
The William and Mary Quarterly, Vol. 4, No. 2 (Oct., 1895), pp. 111-115
Published by: Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/virginiapolitics/2008/10/will_guns_sink_obama_in_va.html
Portfolio: Exam #2: Extrapolations of a Simple Mayor
----As the town mayor I’ve been asked by many of my undecided fellow Marylanders to extrapolate upon my reasons for supporting the patriot cause of independence for America. For some time before the war I was siding with the loyalists, but could see the patriots’ problems with economics. Later, I was reconsidering my views by looking at the political side of the argument. When I reviewed the injustices of the war, it cemented my views against the English right to control our colonies. Because of the continual over taxation, neglect of our British rights, and attacks upon our soil, I have decided to plant myself firmly as a patriot.
----For a while, I couldn’t conjecture why one would be a patriot, so I decided to look first into our economy. I agreed with Thomas Paine when he said “Britain, with an army to enforce her tyranny, has declared that she has the right (not only to tax) but “to bind us in all cases whatsoever” (Paine Writings 68). As Marylanders, this means Britain could not only tax our planters’ land and their sales, but could also, at any point, demand that any of us give up our land or anything else that they wish. This alone was not enough to satisfy me that we should separate from Britain’s wonderful economy. However, looking at the taxes and acts parliament levied before this declaration, one can only decide that Britain was trying to elicit every last drop of wealth from the colonies. ("A Declaration by the Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, Now Met in Congress at Philadelphia, Setting Forth the Causes and Necessity of Their Taking Up Arms"). Also, this goes against the very foundations of our colony, in that the original charter for Maryland declared that the ruler, even though he was almost a “Constitutional King”, still had to consult the freemen of the colony before raising a tax (West 42). I believe that these enforced and powerful taxes should not have been able to be levied by a group that is not answerable to any of the taxed (Constitution of Maryland 5).
----After I understood the foundation of the patriots’ economic points, I learned about political arguments Patriots used to justify separation from England. I found that, according to several patriots, the government of England is corrupt for Americans because we have no choice in the representation, because they do not hold the elections in the colony. Also, there is little representation of anyone in the English governmental system to begin with, due to the fact that their government has two hereditary bodies, the King and the House of Lords, which do not have to be elected by the people, and a third party, the House of Commons, which, while it is elected, can be held in check by either of the first two (Paine Writings 71). The government of England is also corrupt because its organization is to complex and nonsensical. It has three bodies, which scrutinize each other. This means, the King can check up on the House of Commons, which assumes that the King is the more intelligent; conversely, the House of Commons can check on the King, which assumes the King is more intelligent(Paine Writings 72-73). According to Maryland’s very own constitution, “The parliament of Great Britain, by a declaratory act, having assumed a right to make laws to bind the Colonies in all cases whatsoever, to subjugate the United Colonies to an unconditional submission to their will and power” (Constitution of Maryland 3). These points helped me empathize with the patriots and would even make me go as far as to say that the government of the Colonies by England—like the nurturing of a pride of lions—was necessary at their conception but is no longer advantageous or justified for the Colonies. I have come to realize that perhaps we will have to learn from the habits of a male lion, and fight our way out of the pride as a way of proving our adulthood. However, as we go we should expound upon the traditions of our pride (Britain) in a new territory.
----The last thing I looked at was the issue of the war with Britain. First there was the blockade of Boston harbor, to which one contemporary intellectual wrote “Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation” (Henry). I will answer his rhetorical question to say that no, they are not needed; they are in fact, acts of war which cannot, in good conscious, be brushed off. They are a slap to the face of America and this challenge should not be ignored. After this act of war, Britain provoked us into fighting them in many battles, but our unseasoned soldiers have conducted themselves as best as could be expected of men not trained for war (Paine Writings 173). One would not expect a man to allow himself to be beat for no reason without implementing self defense. In that same sense, Britain has provoked us into a war, so we should not allow ourselves to be beaten into submission.
----To look at this metaphorically, Britain has been driving us like oxen. They decided that we were owned by them as one owns a slave and they could do with us what they want through the Declaratory Acts. They strapped us with a plow comprised of the taxes they’ve laid upon us. Now that we’re not plowing the fields as they wish, they are trying to beat us into submission with a war. Now is the time to show them what we are truly made up of. Are we beasts, or are we men? I, for one, say that we are men and as such should fight for our right to life, liberty, and property. Great Britain has slighted our fair colonies in 3 different ways, and, being slighted, I am forced to conclude that our recourse should be, not one of submission and reconciliation, but one of recession and rebellion.
Citations:
Maryland, Constitutions of Maryland. 1776, 1851, 1864, and 1867. Maryland: 1905.
Paine, Thomas. The Writings of Thomas Paine. 1. G.P. Putnam's sons, 1894.
Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, "A Declaration by the Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, Now Met in Congress at Philadelphia, Setting Forth the Causes and Necessity of Their Taking Up Arms." Yale.edu. Yale. 14 Nov 2008 .
Henry, Patrick. "Patrick Henry - Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death ." Yale.edu. Yale. 14 Nov 2008 .
West, Willis. The Story of American Democracy, Political and Industrial. Allyn and Bacon, 1922.
----For a while, I couldn’t conjecture why one would be a patriot, so I decided to look first into our economy. I agreed with Thomas Paine when he said “Britain, with an army to enforce her tyranny, has declared that she has the right (not only to tax) but “to bind us in all cases whatsoever” (Paine Writings 68). As Marylanders, this means Britain could not only tax our planters’ land and their sales, but could also, at any point, demand that any of us give up our land or anything else that they wish. This alone was not enough to satisfy me that we should separate from Britain’s wonderful economy. However, looking at the taxes and acts parliament levied before this declaration, one can only decide that Britain was trying to elicit every last drop of wealth from the colonies. ("A Declaration by the Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, Now Met in Congress at Philadelphia, Setting Forth the Causes and Necessity of Their Taking Up Arms"). Also, this goes against the very foundations of our colony, in that the original charter for Maryland declared that the ruler, even though he was almost a “Constitutional King”, still had to consult the freemen of the colony before raising a tax (West 42). I believe that these enforced and powerful taxes should not have been able to be levied by a group that is not answerable to any of the taxed (Constitution of Maryland 5).
----After I understood the foundation of the patriots’ economic points, I learned about political arguments Patriots used to justify separation from England. I found that, according to several patriots, the government of England is corrupt for Americans because we have no choice in the representation, because they do not hold the elections in the colony. Also, there is little representation of anyone in the English governmental system to begin with, due to the fact that their government has two hereditary bodies, the King and the House of Lords, which do not have to be elected by the people, and a third party, the House of Commons, which, while it is elected, can be held in check by either of the first two (Paine Writings 71). The government of England is also corrupt because its organization is to complex and nonsensical. It has three bodies, which scrutinize each other. This means, the King can check up on the House of Commons, which assumes that the King is the more intelligent; conversely, the House of Commons can check on the King, which assumes the King is more intelligent(Paine Writings 72-73). According to Maryland’s very own constitution, “The parliament of Great Britain, by a declaratory act, having assumed a right to make laws to bind the Colonies in all cases whatsoever, to subjugate the United Colonies to an unconditional submission to their will and power” (Constitution of Maryland 3). These points helped me empathize with the patriots and would even make me go as far as to say that the government of the Colonies by England—like the nurturing of a pride of lions—was necessary at their conception but is no longer advantageous or justified for the Colonies. I have come to realize that perhaps we will have to learn from the habits of a male lion, and fight our way out of the pride as a way of proving our adulthood. However, as we go we should expound upon the traditions of our pride (Britain) in a new territory.
----The last thing I looked at was the issue of the war with Britain. First there was the blockade of Boston harbor, to which one contemporary intellectual wrote “Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation” (Henry). I will answer his rhetorical question to say that no, they are not needed; they are in fact, acts of war which cannot, in good conscious, be brushed off. They are a slap to the face of America and this challenge should not be ignored. After this act of war, Britain provoked us into fighting them in many battles, but our unseasoned soldiers have conducted themselves as best as could be expected of men not trained for war (Paine Writings 173). One would not expect a man to allow himself to be beat for no reason without implementing self defense. In that same sense, Britain has provoked us into a war, so we should not allow ourselves to be beaten into submission.
----To look at this metaphorically, Britain has been driving us like oxen. They decided that we were owned by them as one owns a slave and they could do with us what they want through the Declaratory Acts. They strapped us with a plow comprised of the taxes they’ve laid upon us. Now that we’re not plowing the fields as they wish, they are trying to beat us into submission with a war. Now is the time to show them what we are truly made up of. Are we beasts, or are we men? I, for one, say that we are men and as such should fight for our right to life, liberty, and property. Great Britain has slighted our fair colonies in 3 different ways, and, being slighted, I am forced to conclude that our recourse should be, not one of submission and reconciliation, but one of recession and rebellion.
Citations:
Maryland, Constitutions of Maryland. 1776, 1851, 1864, and 1867. Maryland: 1905.
Paine, Thomas. The Writings of Thomas Paine. 1. G.P. Putnam's sons, 1894.
Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, "A Declaration by the Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, Now Met in Congress at Philadelphia, Setting Forth the Causes and Necessity of Their Taking Up Arms." Yale.edu. Yale. 14 Nov 2008 .
Henry, Patrick. "Patrick Henry - Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death ." Yale.edu. Yale. 14 Nov 2008 .
West, Willis. The Story of American Democracy, Political and Industrial. Allyn and Bacon, 1922.
Portfolio: Final Exam Frame #1
Writing comprehension might be becoming less necessary. This is a part of a point made by Geoffrey Meredith in “The Demise of Writing.” To surmise her ideas, writing comprehension is at an all time high, but is still less than one would think necessary and could be at the top of a graphical hill. I have seen some of this problem in my own personal experience. This could have many impacts on society. The passage I read in Geoffrey Meredith’s “The Demise of Writing” is a valuable read because it relates to something I have noticed in my life, and that could have many consequences and a small amount of ways to stop.
The snippet I read in Geoffrey’s book contained 2 main points. Her first thesis was that “one fifth of the population is functionally illiterate” she explains this by saying that a small percentage of those illiterates are older people who weren’t educated, but a large amount of them are people who have gone through school, but didn’t receive or retain their writing skills. Her second point was that the baby boomer generation was “likely the best educated [generation] that ever will be.” She supports that it was the best ever because of all known literacy rates, it is the highest. She then supports her theory that writing comprehension is at the best that it ever will be by explaining the features of Microsoft Word, saying that they nullify the need for functional literacy.
The main place I have seen this illiteracy is in instant messaging. That seems a strange place to find a lack of writing comprehension, because it is assumed you know how to read and write in order to do it. However, most of the rules of grammar and conventions are often broken by users of instant messaging. Even correct spelling is often ignored, by people opting for shorter or more phonic spellings. Most people wouldn’t be able to tell you the difference between there, their, and they’re without a dictionary or word autocorrecting it. While I assume that most of the people I am talking with know most of the rules of writing, I’m not sure how long that will last or be needed.
This can have many consequences, but has few fixes. One of the ramifications would be the obvious, lack of an ability to write without a machine to help. Another problem this could cause is less obvious, the inability of people to articulate their message in a coherent and well thought out manner; this would happen because complex ideas are often hard to keep in your memory, so we put them into a more permanent media to organize our train of thought. Without writing, we can’t do that. The only fix I can think of for our lack of writing skills is to bring back the need for them. Take off the complex algorithms that check tense, fragmentation, spelling etc on our word processors. This would force everyone to relearn all the rules we haven’t used since our last class on them. However, the question becomes if any would go through the trouble to do so.
I think the small view I got of Geoffrey Meredith’s book, “The Demise of Writing” was an interesting read. It presented an interesting thesis and a disconcerting problem in the literacy rates. This problem is all the more disconcerting from my own experience with it. The problem has powerful ramifications and there are few foolproof ways to fix it. It will be interesting to see in the future if her predictions become reality.
The snippet I read in Geoffrey’s book contained 2 main points. Her first thesis was that “one fifth of the population is functionally illiterate” she explains this by saying that a small percentage of those illiterates are older people who weren’t educated, but a large amount of them are people who have gone through school, but didn’t receive or retain their writing skills. Her second point was that the baby boomer generation was “likely the best educated [generation] that ever will be.” She supports that it was the best ever because of all known literacy rates, it is the highest. She then supports her theory that writing comprehension is at the best that it ever will be by explaining the features of Microsoft Word, saying that they nullify the need for functional literacy.
The main place I have seen this illiteracy is in instant messaging. That seems a strange place to find a lack of writing comprehension, because it is assumed you know how to read and write in order to do it. However, most of the rules of grammar and conventions are often broken by users of instant messaging. Even correct spelling is often ignored, by people opting for shorter or more phonic spellings. Most people wouldn’t be able to tell you the difference between there, their, and they’re without a dictionary or word autocorrecting it. While I assume that most of the people I am talking with know most of the rules of writing, I’m not sure how long that will last or be needed.
This can have many consequences, but has few fixes. One of the ramifications would be the obvious, lack of an ability to write without a machine to help. Another problem this could cause is less obvious, the inability of people to articulate their message in a coherent and well thought out manner; this would happen because complex ideas are often hard to keep in your memory, so we put them into a more permanent media to organize our train of thought. Without writing, we can’t do that. The only fix I can think of for our lack of writing skills is to bring back the need for them. Take off the complex algorithms that check tense, fragmentation, spelling etc on our word processors. This would force everyone to relearn all the rules we haven’t used since our last class on them. However, the question becomes if any would go through the trouble to do so.
I think the small view I got of Geoffrey Meredith’s book, “The Demise of Writing” was an interesting read. It presented an interesting thesis and a disconcerting problem in the literacy rates. This problem is all the more disconcerting from my own experience with it. The problem has powerful ramifications and there are few foolproof ways to fix it. It will be interesting to see in the future if her predictions become reality.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Reflective letter rough draft 1
----I came into school at the beginning of the year thinking to myself “I always stink at history, so I’m going to have to try extra hard at that. The good news is, I have writing with it, so that should be easy.” I don’t think I could have been any more wrong, unless I thought both classes were going to be easy. The writing class really threw me off; I expected it to be easy because I’ve been writing for years. This was horribly wrong, in that throughout the quarter I realized I had much to learn about writing and now I realize that, while I’m not done learning, I am much improved. This class gave me a bit more perspective on, not just my strengths and weaknesses as a writer and how to improve on them, but on writing in general too.
----I used to think of writing as simply a form of communication, limited in some ways, but excelling in others. Now I think of it as much more than that, it is a way of graphically organizing your thoughts. You can set them down on a piece of paper, and in doing so, you have to figure exactly what your argument is, analyze it, and refine it. This is useful because it always you to create a cohesive argument, and helps you find flaws in it. It is important for writing to have an ulterior motive for me because essays are something that I would rarely write if it weren’t for school.
----I have improved my writing from this course, but I still have my weaknesses. At the beginning of the course, the first essay, I didn’t clearly “signpost.” One example from this is “The original and most apparent cause for the revolution was the violence that erupted between the Indians and the colonists but was preventable by Berkeley” from my first essay; this was both grammatically confusing and horrible at controlling that paragraph. However, I improved upon it in my second essay with most of my topic sentences doing a fair job of controlling the paragraphs. Another thing I am bad at is grammar and conventions, however, I have not improved much on that so I cannot give any specific examples, other than that I’m still not always clear when I need to use semi-colons, and I have only a vague idea how to use colons. My paragraph structure has improved over the course, if not my sentence structure.
----I believe that one of my strengths could be my use of vocabulary. I believe that I mainly use big words, such as extrapolate, when they fit perfectly. However, I do not simply pepper my paper with difficult words simply for the sake of doing so. This lends voice to my papers, and was perhaps helped by thinking of Craig saying “quit making more work for yourself”. Another thing I think I did well with is my argument development. In both papers I stated my argument, then state the reasons, then stated the supporting details for each of these reasons. While I will say that in my first one I had to stick with an argument that I would have abandoned if I had had time to research another argument, I believe that I managed to argue that well. I also thought that I argued my second essay, creating a respectable persona, and then finding reasons and a thought development pattern that would fit said persona, including details that would be seen by such a figure. I believe the course book helped a small amount with this.
----I used to think of writing as simply a form of communication, limited in some ways, but excelling in others. Now I think of it as much more than that, it is a way of graphically organizing your thoughts. You can set them down on a piece of paper, and in doing so, you have to figure exactly what your argument is, analyze it, and refine it. This is useful because it always you to create a cohesive argument, and helps you find flaws in it. It is important for writing to have an ulterior motive for me because essays are something that I would rarely write if it weren’t for school.
----I have improved my writing from this course, but I still have my weaknesses. At the beginning of the course, the first essay, I didn’t clearly “signpost.” One example from this is “The original and most apparent cause for the revolution was the violence that erupted between the Indians and the colonists but was preventable by Berkeley” from my first essay; this was both grammatically confusing and horrible at controlling that paragraph. However, I improved upon it in my second essay with most of my topic sentences doing a fair job of controlling the paragraphs. Another thing I am bad at is grammar and conventions, however, I have not improved much on that so I cannot give any specific examples, other than that I’m still not always clear when I need to use semi-colons, and I have only a vague idea how to use colons. My paragraph structure has improved over the course, if not my sentence structure.
----I believe that one of my strengths could be my use of vocabulary. I believe that I mainly use big words, such as extrapolate, when they fit perfectly. However, I do not simply pepper my paper with difficult words simply for the sake of doing so. This lends voice to my papers, and was perhaps helped by thinking of Craig saying “quit making more work for yourself”. Another thing I think I did well with is my argument development. In both papers I stated my argument, then state the reasons, then stated the supporting details for each of these reasons. While I will say that in my first one I had to stick with an argument that I would have abandoned if I had had time to research another argument, I believe that I managed to argue that well. I also thought that I argued my second essay, creating a respectable persona, and then finding reasons and a thought development pattern that would fit said persona, including details that would be seen by such a figure. I believe the course book helped a small amount with this.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Essay #2 reflection
I recently finished essay #2. This essay I thought I did a large amount better. I kept a fair amount of the process the same, the process was what Craig wanted. However, I put far more effort into the entire thing. The research was probably the hardest part, although I'm starting to realize that I need to use my resources such as the Research Librarians, and that I need to be more selective in my sources. This means not using things like reviews, which I had used in the first essay. Also, I used JSTOR less, and Google books more. Another thing I did better with this essay was telling my audience what each part was about. In the first essay, I had taken out most of these pieces because I had interpreted one of Craig's comments to say that I should stop using those. This time, I realized that wasn't what he meant, so I clearly labeled all the pieces. One thing I would do differently if I could redo this essay would be to research more in the early stages, but be building all that research into one cohesive idea. By this I mean pointing my research towards a thesis, to either prove or disprove it. However, I believe the final product was immensely improved over the first essay.
Friday, November 21, 2008
Extrapolations of a Simple Mayor
As the town mayor I’ve been asked by many of my undecided fellow Marylanders to extrapolate upon my reasons for supporting the patriot cause of independence for America. For awhile before the war I was siding with the loyalists, but could see the patriots’ problems with economics. Later, I was reconsidering my views by looking at the political side of the argument. When I reviewed the injustices of the war, it cemented my views against the English right to control our colonies. Because of the continual over taxation, overlooking of our British rights, and attacks upon our soil, I have decided to plant myself firmly as a patriot.
For awhile, I could not conjecture why one would be a patriot, so I decided to look first into our economy. One line of reasoning I agreed with was that, as Thomas Paine put it, “Britain, with an army to enforce her tyranny, has declared that she has the right (not only to tax) but “to bind us in all cases whatsoever” (Paine Writings 68). As Marylanders, this means Britain could not only tax our planters’ land and their sales, but could also, at any point, demand that any of us give up our land or anything else that they wish. This alone was not enough to satisfy me that we should separate from Britain’s wonderful economy. However, looking at the taxes and acts parliament levied before this declaration, one can only decide that Britain was trying to elicit every last drop of wealth from the colonies. ("A Declaration by the Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, Now Met in Congress at Philadelphia, Setting Forth the Causes and Necessity of Their Taking Up Arms"). Also, this goes against the very foundations of our colony, in that the original charter for Maryland declared that the ruler, even though he was almost a “Constitutional King”, still had to consult the freemen of the colony before raising a tax (West 42). I believe that these enforced and powerful taxes should not have been able to be levied by a group that is not answerable to any of the taxed (Constitution of Maryland 5).
After I was confident I understood the foundation of the patriots’ economic points, I went on to learn about their political arguments as to why we should separate from England. I found that, according to several patriots, the government of England is corrupt for Americans because we have no choice in the representation, because they do not hold the elections in the colony. Also, there is little representation of anyone in the English governmental system to begin with, due to the fact that their government has two hereditary bodies which do not have to be elected by the people, and a third party which, while it is elected, can be held in check by either of the first two (Paine Writings 71). The government of England is also corrupt because its organization is to complex and nonsensical. It has three bodies, which scrutinize each other. This means, first that the one which checks up on another group is more intelligent than the second, then that the second is more intelligent than the first because it to can check the first (Paine Writings 72-73). According to Maryland’s very own constitution, “The parliament of Great Britain, by a declaratory act, having assumed a right to make laws to bind the Colonies in all cases whatsoever, to subjugate the United Colonies to an unconditional submission to their will and power” (Constitution of Maryland 3). These points helped me empathize with the patriots and would even make me go as far as to say that the government of the Colonies by England—like the nurturing of a pride of lions—was necessary at their conception but is no longer advantageous or justified for the Colonies. I have come to realize that perhaps we will have to learn from the habits of a male lion, and fight our way out of the pride as a way of proving our adulthood. However, as we go we should expound upon the traditions of our pride in a new territory.
The last thing I looked at was the issue of the war with Britain, for I believed one should first have a proper grounding in the other two parts. First there was the blockade of Boston harbor, to which one contemporary thinker wrote “Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation” (Henry). I will answer his rhetorical question to say that no, they are not needed; they are in fact, works of war which cannot, in good conscious, be ignored. They are a slap to the face of America and this challenge should not be ignored. After this act of war, they provoked us into fighting them in many battles, but our unseasoned soldiers have conducted themselves as best as could be expected of men not trained for war (Paine Writings 173). Britain has provoked us into a war and, as one would not expect a man to allow himself to be beat for no reason without implementing self defense, so we as a colony should not allow ourselves to be beaten into submission fighting for our rights.
To look at this metaphorically, Britain has been driving us like oxen. They decided that we were their own and they could do with us what they want through the Declaratory Acts. They strapped us with a plow comprised of the taxes they’ve laid upon us. Now that we’re not plowing the fields as they wish, they are trying to beat us into submission with a war. Now is the time to show them what we are truly made up of. Are we beasts, or are we men? I, for one, say that we are men and as such should fight for our right to life, liberty, and property. Great Britain has slighted our fair colonies in 3 different ways, and, being thusly slighted, I am forced to conclude that our recourse should be, not one of submission and reconciliation, but one of recession and rebellion.
Citations:
Maryland, Constitutions of Maryland. 1776, 1851, 1864, and 1867. Maryland: 1905.
Paine, Thomas. The Writings of Thomas Paine. 1. G.P. Putnam's sons, 1894.
Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, "A Declaration by the Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, Now Met in Congress at Philadelphia, Setting Forth the Causes and Necessity of Their Taking Up Arms." Yale.edu. Yale. 14 Nov 2008 .
Henry, Patrick. "Patrick Henry - Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death ." Yale.edu. Yale. 14 Nov 2008 .
West, Willis. The Story of American Democracy, Political and Industrial. Allyn and Bacon, 1922.
For awhile, I could not conjecture why one would be a patriot, so I decided to look first into our economy. One line of reasoning I agreed with was that, as Thomas Paine put it, “Britain, with an army to enforce her tyranny, has declared that she has the right (not only to tax) but “to bind us in all cases whatsoever” (Paine Writings 68). As Marylanders, this means Britain could not only tax our planters’ land and their sales, but could also, at any point, demand that any of us give up our land or anything else that they wish. This alone was not enough to satisfy me that we should separate from Britain’s wonderful economy. However, looking at the taxes and acts parliament levied before this declaration, one can only decide that Britain was trying to elicit every last drop of wealth from the colonies. ("A Declaration by the Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, Now Met in Congress at Philadelphia, Setting Forth the Causes and Necessity of Their Taking Up Arms"). Also, this goes against the very foundations of our colony, in that the original charter for Maryland declared that the ruler, even though he was almost a “Constitutional King”, still had to consult the freemen of the colony before raising a tax (West 42). I believe that these enforced and powerful taxes should not have been able to be levied by a group that is not answerable to any of the taxed (Constitution of Maryland 5).
After I was confident I understood the foundation of the patriots’ economic points, I went on to learn about their political arguments as to why we should separate from England. I found that, according to several patriots, the government of England is corrupt for Americans because we have no choice in the representation, because they do not hold the elections in the colony. Also, there is little representation of anyone in the English governmental system to begin with, due to the fact that their government has two hereditary bodies which do not have to be elected by the people, and a third party which, while it is elected, can be held in check by either of the first two (Paine Writings 71). The government of England is also corrupt because its organization is to complex and nonsensical. It has three bodies, which scrutinize each other. This means, first that the one which checks up on another group is more intelligent than the second, then that the second is more intelligent than the first because it to can check the first (Paine Writings 72-73). According to Maryland’s very own constitution, “The parliament of Great Britain, by a declaratory act, having assumed a right to make laws to bind the Colonies in all cases whatsoever, to subjugate the United Colonies to an unconditional submission to their will and power” (Constitution of Maryland 3). These points helped me empathize with the patriots and would even make me go as far as to say that the government of the Colonies by England—like the nurturing of a pride of lions—was necessary at their conception but is no longer advantageous or justified for the Colonies. I have come to realize that perhaps we will have to learn from the habits of a male lion, and fight our way out of the pride as a way of proving our adulthood. However, as we go we should expound upon the traditions of our pride in a new territory.
The last thing I looked at was the issue of the war with Britain, for I believed one should first have a proper grounding in the other two parts. First there was the blockade of Boston harbor, to which one contemporary thinker wrote “Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation” (Henry). I will answer his rhetorical question to say that no, they are not needed; they are in fact, works of war which cannot, in good conscious, be ignored. They are a slap to the face of America and this challenge should not be ignored. After this act of war, they provoked us into fighting them in many battles, but our unseasoned soldiers have conducted themselves as best as could be expected of men not trained for war (Paine Writings 173). Britain has provoked us into a war and, as one would not expect a man to allow himself to be beat for no reason without implementing self defense, so we as a colony should not allow ourselves to be beaten into submission fighting for our rights.
To look at this metaphorically, Britain has been driving us like oxen. They decided that we were their own and they could do with us what they want through the Declaratory Acts. They strapped us with a plow comprised of the taxes they’ve laid upon us. Now that we’re not plowing the fields as they wish, they are trying to beat us into submission with a war. Now is the time to show them what we are truly made up of. Are we beasts, or are we men? I, for one, say that we are men and as such should fight for our right to life, liberty, and property. Great Britain has slighted our fair colonies in 3 different ways, and, being thusly slighted, I am forced to conclude that our recourse should be, not one of submission and reconciliation, but one of recession and rebellion.
Citations:
Maryland, Constitutions of Maryland. 1776, 1851, 1864, and 1867. Maryland: 1905.
Paine, Thomas. The Writings of Thomas Paine. 1. G.P. Putnam's sons, 1894.
Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, "A Declaration by the Representatives of the United Colonies of North-America, Now Met in Congress at Philadelphia, Setting Forth the Causes and Necessity of Their Taking Up Arms." Yale.edu. Yale. 14 Nov 2008 .
Henry, Patrick. "Patrick Henry - Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death ." Yale.edu. Yale. 14 Nov 2008 .
West, Willis. The Story of American Democracy, Political and Industrial. Allyn and Bacon, 1922.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
