I found Welch's "Killing Custer" to be an enlightening novel with a very clear message about the untold story of the Plains Indians, as well as the influence that society has on the written documentation of history. While there were obviously mixed feelings in our class discussion about bias in Welch's presentation of this period of history, I believe that there inevitably was. I also believe that to fully understand the ongoing conflict between the Americans and the Indians, one must first understand the context from which both sides were coming at that time.
Because Welch was himself a descendent of American Plains Indians, I think that his intentions for writing this novel were different than other historical authors. He was writing not only to expose history that he felt was under-recognized, but also to rightfully inform his readers about the suffering and hardships that his ancestors were subjected to as a direct result of the imposing white settlers. This in itself is cause for some sort of bias in terms of his own personal emotions fueling his argument. However, as we also discussed in class, I think that Welch emphasized this bias in order to make a point about the bias that exists is all recorded history.
I agree with Welch's underlying point that the history of The Battle of Little Bighorn was recorded as the American's saw it during this time, which left out all accounts of Indian suffering. While this most definitely concerns me, I also believe that it is important to understand the intentions of Americans at that time as they saw them, not as how we see them today by reviewing history. While it does not justify the Americans actions by any means, I believe that they viewed their own behavior as a means of fulfilling the inevitable expansion west--not as merely killing to kill. Welch does not discuss this side of his argument, however I believe he does a great job of describing the untold side of Native American history. Overall, it was an enjoyable read!
No comments:
Post a Comment