Response to Amanda Hightower's Journal #15

     Amanda had some very agreeable thoughts on Silko's "Border Patrol State".  I, myself, do not believe to have any Native American blood, but I could be wrong.  Amanda brought up a very obvious realization that most Americans are descendants of Native Americans.  How then is it possible that so many Americans are acting this way towards their own brothers and sisters?  It is completely inhumane and so hypocritical to act this way here since in our Constitution it states that we are all free.
     With that being said, I also found it very disturbing from the reading and Amanda's opinions that Border Patrol roams from state to state in America, a FREE country that is supposed to have ample opportunities for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  Why are cars being stopped in the states?  I was so saddened when I read that Silko and her friend were stopped and the officers (obviously) had no reason to search their car except for the fact that they were Native Americans.  I really didn't think our country was like this, and apparently from reading Amanda's blog, she didn't either.  Through the readings that we've completed so far in this class, I can honestly say that sometimes I feel embarrassed to be an American.  No wonder Hispanics have these drug wars in Mexico and close to the border...they are full of anger at how our country is so prejudice still after hundreds of years!
     I agree with Amanda as well at how sad it was to read about the dog part of the story.  It is amazing that this dog could just almost read Silko's mind and know that she was a good person who was simply just trying to get to her destination.  It was incredible that the dog didn't sniff her at all.  Through this, it made the Border Patrol look more idiotic than they already were because the dog even knew that Silko wasn't trying to get away with anything.  This reading taught me a lot about the way we currently treat immigrants in America.  I don't like it one bit.

Bonus Blog #3

     From Mary Antin’s story, “The Promised Land” and Sui Sin Far’s “In the Land of the Free”, there is a similar feel that, as immigrants, the characters in the story were not warmly welcomed by the Americans.  W.E.B. DuBois calls this the “double-consciousness”, where these immigrants see themselves as how the Americans see them.  It is almost as if they are the American, looking at an immigrant, or themselves.  In this time, it was an unfair depiction of immigrants.  Only one culture could be superior in this time period, and that was the Americans.  Far and Antin do a wonderful job illustrating what this prejudice was like for the characters in their stories.

     When Far’s characters arrived in America, the officers looked at the little boy like he was a criminal.  Lae Choo and Hom Hing could see the unfairness in the officer’s eyes when he stated, “Seeing that the boy has no certificate entitiling him to admission to this country you will have to leave him with us” (299).  The parents knew that they had done nothing wrong.  Their child was not a criminal.  He had just lived only about a year!  Unfortunately, Far’s description of the officer correctly portrayed the view many American’s had about Asian immigrants.

     In Antin’s story, we see a young girl recall her first memories of coming to America.  She was so excited about starting this new life, but little did she know that she would face a huge amount of discrimination.  She writes a wonderful paragraph about this “double-consciousness”.  She might not have seen it clearly as a child, but looking back, she can see it fully now.  She writes, “Dozens of these men pass under your eyes every day...too absorbed in their honest affairs to notice the looks of suspicion which you cast at them, the repugnance...” (488).  This statement is almost a slap in the face to any American who ever thought a bad thing about an immigrant.  The narrator is simply saying that immigrants just wanted a new life.  They meant no harm when they arrived to this new country.  They were struggling just like many others and they wished, as did everyone else, to succeed in embarking on the American Dream.  

Journal #14: What I Would Carry

     Reading O’Brien’s story inspired my thinking on the question, “What would I carry?”  And the answer is: a list of my dad’s instructions on survival skills, my Bible, wasp repellant, photographs and my favorite snacks.  It was so heartbreaking to hear the objects men carried and how much value they thought that they had.  These things to me would be a necessity and a comfort, but I know that just having them would not make a difference.  I would rather have the comfort of my father and my friends in the photographs around me than to be stuck in a war zone where all I had was the memory.

     Most of these items are self explanatory, however two are not.  The first is my father’s instructions.  My dad is a walking encyclopedia on many topics.  His father was in the Navy, so he learned much from him.  It is always so amazing to hear what comes out of my dad’s mouth sometimes and to see how much he knows about our world.  He would give me strict guidelines on what to eat, how to sleep, how to hide and what to look out for.  Without this list, I know I wouldn’t survive.  Therefore, it is one thing I couldn’t live without if I were in the war.

     Secondly, I would bring wasp repellant as one of my weapons.  Although a gun or a knife is much more powerful, I could never see myself operating that.  With the repellant, I could shoot it towards an enemy who was fairly close to me and damage their sense of sight.  Being a woman in a war, it is possible that I could get raped.  I would need this repellant to ward off predators and predict myself and others around me.  It is important to take these precautions because protecting myself and my troop is so important.

Journal #13: Zitkala's Loss of Freedom

In this class, I have learned a lot about how the Americans treated the Native Americans so unfairly.  However, through Zitkala-Sa’s story, “The School Days of An Indian Girl”, I now can see and resent the Americans living at that time for treating these natives as they did.  Zitkala’s memoir does not reflect the ideal American Dream to me.  She was imprisoned in a culture that was not her’s and was prohibited from being herself.  I have fully realized her sorrow and hurt from chapter two, the last paragraph when she states, “...and [I] heard them gnaw off one of my thick braids.  Then I lost my spirit.”  This reaffirms my belief that Zitkala-Sa did not experience the American Dream.

     Anyone that moves to America and desires the American life usually does not “lose their spirit” like Zitkala claims she did.  Anyone living in America should and can be free to be themselves.  However, Zitkala was not.  When she was in school, they cut off her long beautiful hair to be conformed to every other student in the school.  She was not free to be of her culture or herself.  That day, they took a part of Zitkala and officially ripped her sense of freedom out of her soul.  I am deeply disappointed in America for the way they treated people “different” from themselves.  I am glad I read this story to learn about our past and to sympathize with the Indians.

Bonus Blog #2

  I have always been told about imperialism in school, but its actual definition never really made sense to me.  I did not understand the definition nor its background.  However, I definitely understand it now by being in this class.  Just last week, we read a remarkable story about the Queen of Hawai’i, and how she was overthrown by the United States so they could annex the state.  “Why haven’t I heard of this before,” is what I thought, and then the next day when we were discussing in class, I realized that I was not the only one who had never heard of this story.  The United States’s history of imperialism disturbs me and, what disturbs me more is that they kept the real history of the annexation of Hawai’i a secret from many people, especially its own citizens. 

     I believe the element of imperialism in the United States towards Hawai’i that disturbs me the most is that the United States believed Queen Liliuokalani was imprisoning her people in a ruthless empire.  However, that could not have been more false.  The people of Hawai’i loved their queen and, as she states in her story, “My people constitute four-fifths of the legally qualified voters of Hawaii,” (Chapter LV) furthermore proving that she valued their opinion and valued Hawai’i making decisions together.  She was not an overruling monarch that made all the decisions.  She did not oppress her people; her people loved her and valued her.  Unfortunately, her rule did not last her whole life.

     The United States came to Hawai’i and removed Queen Liliuokalani from her throne.  What disappoints me about the United States even more is that she states in Chapter LV, “I yielded my authority to the forces of the United States in order to avoid bloodshed, and because I recognized the futility of a conflict with so formidable a power.”  The Queen was scared of the United States and did not want to put up a fight.  Even though one would think you would fight for your country’s well-being, she saw the United States so intimidating and threatening that she simply complied with their orders.  Hawai’i’s people were devastated and the country they had had for many years was no longer its own.  It was the United States’s.  

     I understand that imperialism occurs all over this world.  I don’t believe it is an act that can be abolished.  However, I do believe it should be abolished in the United States.  Being a country that practices imperialism seems hypocritical to me because imperialism goes against our belief of freedom and the pursuit of happiness.  The people of Hawai’i were completely content with their Queen.  We took that happiness away.  I am so glad I read this story so that I can be aware of our country’s past and hopefully look for change from this in our country’s future. 

Journal #12: Hawaii's Queen

"I used to climb up on the knees of Paki, put my arms around his neck, kiss him, and he caressed me as a father would his child; while on the contrary, when I met my own parents, it was with perhaps more of interest, yet always with the demeanor I would have shown to any strangers who noticed me." -Chapter 1, Paragraph 4

I really enjoy reading that she put her arms around Paki's neck because it exemplifies her love that she has for him and the love that he reciprocates back to her.  She is more than satisfied with her adopted parents because they love her so much and care for her.  The fact that Paki caresses her as his own child is so beautifully pictured and, since I want to adopt one day, is how I will hopefully act around my adopted child.

Journal #11: "They said what?!?!"

     None has done quite so well than McKay and Hopkins in portraying white people as evil.  Through Hopkins’ short story and McKay’s poem “If We Must Die”, it is obvious that these authors were not afraid of speaking up about the horrific, unjust time of our nation.  So, did McKay and Hopkins receive prolific persecution and criticism for speaking the explicit truth about their treatment as African Americans?

     In Hopkins’ story, Jones, an honest and good man, dies at the end to save a train full of white people.  Furthermore, the police find the real murderer and realize that it was never Jones, although they were in search of this man for quite some while, believing he was ruthless and evil.  The people at his funeral were repentful, knowing that they had made a mistake in judging him for something he never did.  Jones is portrayed almost as a Christ-like figure at the end of this story, dying for many guilty, racist and unclean people so they could live and be saved through this train wreck.  It is completely possible that there was harsh criticism towards this story, since a black man was portrayed to be like Christ.  Many people back then were not even keen on having black people know about Christ and especially not having a black person portrayed as Christ.  

     In McKay’s poem, he tells his fellow members of his race that “round [them] bark the mad and hungry dogs” (line 3) who are obviously the white persecutors.  He also calls them “the monsters” and “the common foe”, which I am sure stirred up anger among the white population.  Whites were so used to being in control and the dominating race.  It was uncommon to be called something so cruel when these were the words that whites thought of about blacks.  I can only imagine what was said to McKay for encouraging his race to stand up to these “monsters”.  

     Through these authors, it is obvious that they were not afraid to speak their mind or get criticized for doing so.  It is wonderful that they wrote these works, so that we may look back upon them today and realize just how cruel parts of society were to people who never deserved that behavior at all.