Why are we "here"?

I really enjoyed Gregory Coniff's piece called "Landscape is a Point of View".  He says nature is the "...shaper of the soul".  The natural world really is a way to see the world, it gives you your unique point of view and how you see things.  In my high school (affiliated with the oh-so-awesome Minnesota Zoo in Apple Valley, MN) we talked about the natural world pretty much every day.  We studied how it physically works, how humans have changed and adapted to it, and how humans use it to fulfill both basic needs and unnecessary desires.

I am so excited that we got to talk about this idea of environment/landscape/place, because it's something that ordinary history classes often overlook.  Our physical surroundings play a huge part in our lives.

For example, one reason I chose to come to St Olaf was to live on a beautiful campus that offered lots of ways to study the natural lands.  College life would feel very different if I was on the sandy beaches of Hawaii or the mountains and valleys of Colorado.  Minnesota truly fits my personality, with the seasonal changes offering lots of beauty and ways to enjoy the outdoors.  I'm glad that St Olaf is located in a good-sized town, but is not simply plopped in the middle of an urban area.  Our community is set apart, almost like our own "City on a Hill" that the Puritans aspired to have.  I too have started calling this place "Home", because my dorm is my new norm and this is where my second family is.  I am part of this landscape.

John Winthrop

Overall, I can see why John Winthrop fought against Anne Hutchinson.  He was looking after the colony and wanted stability that took a while to form there in the new land.  In one my articles "The Case Against Anne Hutchinson", it mentions how he told his fellow immigrants that "'the care of the publique must oversway all private respects'" (Morgan 643).  If anybody could have direct relationships and communication with God, then there would be no need for a religious state.  That threatens Winthrop's position as Governor.

His actions are understandable, but the way he goes about it hurts his credibility.  Even though he is said to have had deep personal faith and religious affiliations, "...he could not recognize in Anne Hutchinson's teachings the outlines of another religious and political philosophy with its own right to exist" (Morgan 635).  Although Puritans sought out religious purification and fled from England because of their disgust at King Charles, many were open to other interpretations of faith.  Anne Hutchinson's interpretation was about having a personal relationship with God, and many Puritans accepted herr views and attended her meetings.  Winthrop did not accept her, and her gender only added to his dislike of her because she was a successful, outspoken woman who taught her own views without consent of those in higher power.  During the trial the prosecution attacks her for not being able to conseive any more children, and for showing menopausal symptoms.  Neither have anything to do with the religious issue, but were used to back up their claims.  By attacking her gender, Winthrop sank pretty low and lost some credibility as a governor who's just trying to protect his people from change.

Equality in Plymouth Plantation Society

William Bradford writes about the Plymouth Plantation, a community of people whose high hopes and faith in God began to falter as life got harder and harder in their new home.  Fall turned into winter.  Food surplus turned into food shortage.  Life became fragile and everyone had to adjust to this new home with the primary motivator being survival, not community.

Starting out, this society wanted to be equal.  The Governor "...assigned to every family member a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number" (Bradford 132).  This makes sense because then everyone gets the same amount of land, no matter what position of power they have.

Then equality for all started to do more harm than good.  Bradford explains that strong men "...had no more in division of victuals and clothes than he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice" (133).  Women were also subject to this kind of injustice.  They would "...be commanded to do service for other men, as dressing their meat, washing their clothes., they deemed it a kind of slavery" (Bradford 134).  Equality became defined not as everyone getting or giving the same amount of something, but everyone getting what they need and giving what they were able.

It became every man and woman for themselves, trying to survive.  Although community was still an important part of life, basic needs and faith in God were more prevalent.

Mixed Feelings about Puritans

I have very mixed feelings towards the Puritan people.  I both admire and dislike them.  To leave England and to travel across the Atlantic Ocean in hope of a new life is incredibly brave of any immigrant.  The Puritans' moral and spiritual values lead them to leave the Catholic Church and exercise their own freedom of giving their life to God, as they see fit.

They started out with huge hopes and idealism.  To be a "City on a Hill" (Cullen 24) is to be a beacon, a shining example of what is right and good for the rest of society.  They hoped people would look up to them and want to live by their ways.  Because they were a religious group, their community wasn't based only on making a living and becoming prosperous.  It was based on spiritual and emotional bonds between people (Cullen 22).  As a Calvinistic society, they knew that their fate had been pre-determined by God, whether they would go to Heaven or Hell after this life.  Because they didn't know the verdict, they did everything they could to live a good life, just incase it was a factor in God's decision.  This is still confusing to me about how their actions may not matter anyway but that they are willing to make a difference.

All of the purity seems to disappear as Puritans started forcing their view on others.  In the 17th century an English clergyman wrote about the them, "'We call you Puritans... not because you are purer than other men...but because you think yourselves to be purer'" (Cullen 12).  The high standards they gave themselves made them appear snobbish, strict, and unpleasant (Cullen 11).  Part of settlement involved massacring Indians for the sake of securing land.  I think of murder as the most impure thing a person could do.  From the Puritans' perspective, how could killing another one of God's children be okay?

The picture below is from the play "The Crucible" which is about the Salem Witch Trials of 1692.  The Puritans in the play are criticized for extreme views on justice.  With a lack of factual evidence for a trial, the people have to go off of what people say and believe.  It's a really interesting story, and the movie version is amazing!

kaylal.wordpress.com

"A History of the American People" by Paul Johnson

Last night's reading was tough for me.  My choice/optional book is "A History of the American People" by Paul Johnson.  Johnson is a well-versed and highly intelligent writer, so his book represents him well.  Packed in with lots of anecdotes, dates, figures, and analysis, it took some time to digest it all.  After reading a shorter, more concise, and introductory chapter in Cullen, I felt prepared to dive into a more thorough text.  I hope to give an overview of what this chapter was all about, especially for those of you who read different books for your optional book.

Colonialism in North America was part of a bigger and broader era of expansion.  The Portuguese got into slave trade in the mid 15th century and made it even more horrific.  Spain had a harder time of it and ended up treating the Indians pretty "ruthlessly" (Johnson 6).  Colonizers brought with them disease, non-native plants and animals, and money to establish plantation-style slavery.  The French were overall more peaceful with the Indians, hoping to trade goods with them.  A man named Richard Hakluyt encouraged the Queen to establish colonies, and he was part of a group to settle in Roanoke, VA.  Later more colonies like Chesapeake Bay started up.

There are some common themes for the various colonies.  For each group there were tremendous difficulties in getting used to a new land and making the best of the opportunity.  Despite abundant natural resources, the Jamestown colony collapsed partly because they didn't grow enough food to sustain themselves and were more focused on producing tobacco.  Relations with the Indians were often confrontational, like when the Roanoke people disappeared, possibly because of an ambush.  It's thought that they could have been "...absorbed into the tribe" (Johnson 18) afterwards.  Because many settlers settled because of want of religious freedom, there was a struggle about "where does freedom end and authority begin?" (Johnson 45).  Settlers came from different backgrounds but experienced common struggles.

St. Olaf Poem

"Flying/Driving/Biking to St. Olaf"

The clothes had been boxed up, ready to ship

While my little sister stares wide-eyed

And I step into the taxi

Driving away, I see the ferry to Vashon Island

Leaving the dock, headed out into the fog

After many red lights, we arrive at the airport

Dashing to the terminal, we almost miss the flight

But make it on just in time

As my parents quickly find their seats

Their excitement engulfs the place

And we're off

After what seemed like forever, we're here

It is a crazy Tetris game of minivans

I am at camp, bunkbeds and all

The Awkward Dance lived up to its title

And it would take me a long time before

I'd ever remember what my own bed felt like

As I head out to dinner with my advisor

My mom calls "goodbye!" out of the crowd

-by Karin Lubanovic & Kate Chrisinger

"Two Kinds of Freedom"

Today's discussion in class was abstract in our attempts to define "freedom" and to distinguish it from a "right".  Freedom is a very loose term and has been applied to all kinds of media and political agendas.  In the article about positive and negative freedom, there is an example of how one can be free in one way but totally unfree in another.  It talks about a person who smokes who is trying to drive somewhere.  He/she has negative freedom because there are no "obstacles, barriers, or constraints" that prevent the person from getting to where they want to go.  He/she does not have positive freedom, as in the "presence of...control".  The nicotine in the tobacco makes the person's body feel the need for that drug.  When the smoker drives to the tobacconist, they are free in that nobody forced him/her to go there, but "unfree" because they can't control their physical need for the substance.  While these definitions are still a bit blurry to me, this example helps to clarify what constitutes a positive or negative freedom, according to the article.

Having freedom doesn't guarantee happiness, just the range or options for how to live one's life.  One's decisions and actions will determine the overall worth or value of life. 

At the end of class the idea of freedom verses a right was brought up.  Sometimes the ideas are used interchangeably, but they are very different.  One First Amendment Right is the "Freedom of Speech".  You have the right to express yourself as you wish.  You also have the freedom to choose whether or not to express yourself.  Along with that is the freedom to listen or not.  To speak one needs a listener, or the words are nothing but noise.  To decide to not listen seems to discredit the freedom of speech.

The Flaming Lips

So I'm reading about Freedom and choices and all kinds of nifty things when this song pops up on my ipod.  It's called "The Yeah Yeah Yeah Song" by the Flaming Lips:

Lyrics to The Yeah Yeah Yeah Song :
If you could blow up the world with the flick of a switch
Would you do it?
If you could make everyobody poor just so you could be rich
Would you do it?
If you could watch everybody work while you just lay on your back
Would you do it?
If you could take all the love without fiving any back
Would you do it?
And so we cannot know ourselves or what we'd really do...

With all your power
With all your power
With all your power
What would you do?

If you could make your own money and then give it to everybody
Would you do it?
If you knew all the answers and could give it to the masses
Would you do it?
No no no no no no are you crazy?
It's a very dangerous thing to do exactly what you want
Because you cannot know yourself or what you'd really do

With all your power
With all your power
With all your power
What would you do?

(http://www.lyricsmania.com/the_yeah_yeah_yeah_song_lyrics_flaming_lips_the.html)


Coincidence???  I think not.  "With all your power", you can do amazing things.  You can also do terrible and stupid things.  Being American is a priviledge, but also an enormous responsibility because having freedom to do and say things without intervention or obstacle can make us feel entitled.  I know I often feel I should be able to do things or have things, without thinking about the "why".  Being grateful and cautious of our freedom can help us bring out the best in ourselves.

What Freedom Means to Me

Walking across that stage last spring at the Minnesota Zoo was one of the coolest experiences of my life.  My dense fact is a high school diploma.  As an object, it is merely a piece of paper that declares that you, like so many other students, went to high school and deserve to graduate.  But in today's highly competetive job market, a high school diploma is crucial.  Going to college, travelling, working, and volunteering will help me be successful, however I decide to define that word.  I believe that the pay-off from service to other people will far out-weigh any paycheck.  When I read about people in other countries, especially girls who don't have access to education because of money or social restraints, I'm humbled.  It's a freedom that, at times, can feel like anything but freedom.  But it's the first step to getting to do what you've always dreamed of.

First Post

This is just a practice post, nothing special!