Reflection

I really enjoyed taking this class this semester.  This is the first time that I have taken a humanities course at the University of Michigan, so I was a little bit out of my comfort zone, as most of the classes I have taken have been math or science.  Because I do not have a strong background in history, much of the content of our readings was somewhat new to me.  I really enjoyed learning about history strictly from an American culture perspective.  I consider myself very American and very patriotic, so it is great to now know much more about how exactly our rich history was constructed.  I also liked that this course allowed for debate and discussion of the ethics of America's historical decisions and that the reading for the course was not straight out of a textbook, but that it was from a variety of texts, sources, and viewpoints.

I now feel much more confident in my knowledge and more capable of engaging in academic discussions about American culture.  America truly is a "melting pot" of various ethnicities and I thoroughly enjoyed learning how our narrative has not just been constructed by the agenda of early white settlers, but that groups such as Native Americans, African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Japanese Americans, have made (and are still making) America the great nation that it is today.

The Montgomery Bus Boycott

I found this article to be very interesting.  In history classes in elementary school and high school, students always read about and learn about the roles important historical figures such as Martin Luther King, Jr. and Rosa Parks played in paving the way to the end of segregation.  It was very interesting to learn about a woman who clearly played a very significant role in the fight against segregated seating on public buses, but does not have as much notoriety as Rosa Parks.  Gibson Robinson is a very likable character, in that she is very humble and unbiased as she recounts events, making sure that readers understood that there were some white bus drivers who were very nice and courteous toward African-American riders.  In fact, she even acknowledges that most of them were "just doing their jobs."

I was very impressed by how tirelessly Gibson Robinson worked.  She successfully lead a boycott against public transportation and still came fully prepared to every single one of her classes.  Her story is very remarkable and inspiring and it clearly indicates that there are surely many uncovered stories of under-appreciated African-American citizens who worked endlessly to help end segregation in the United States, and these citizens should be commended for their efforts.

Final Reflection

Now that the class is over and I am studying for the final, I can see how much material we have covered and how much I have gained from it. In our last class, we were asked to share one thing that we learned in the class, and I said that I thought the first-hand accounts we read were the most valuable part of the course. I was able to see American History through the eyes of the people that lived it, and it made our country's history - which we have all learned about since elementary school - come alive. 

Reflecting now, I see how each time period and the events that took place helped to shape the culture of the America that we live in today. Before this class started I wasn't really sure what "American culture" even was. Hot dogs and hamburgers? Red, white and blue? Being loud and fat? Now I see the history that we all share and I recognize parts of our culture and our rituals, and I see that while we have come a long way, we still have a ways to go. Perhaps we still struggle with defining ourselves as a nation.

As we continue forward, we all must keep in mind what we have learned in this class. The United States will continue to strive for a more concrete national identity, but we cannot let this struggle exclude people as it has in the past. In defining "American," we have previously left out various groups of people - from Native Americans to Japanese immigrants - that deserved to be a part of this nation as much as anyone else. I just hope that the future is one of acceptance and peace within our country as we continue seeking our identity.

A Consumer's Republic

I found the subject of "A Consumer's Republic" to be very interesting, as the book made many valid points that are often forgotten today.  I liked that she used many examples throughout her writing to illustrate her various points, including many from the Depression and World War II.  She shows how being a citizen in the United States of America in the post-war era has been drastically redefined by consumerism.  I also enjoyed the arguments she made and examples she gave about women and minorities during this time period, and how the effect they had on consumerism was later redeemed through Civil Rights movements of the 50s and 60s.

After reading this thought-provoking book, I feel much more educated about the United States twentieth century economic history.  Although I thought the book to be very interesting, I also found it difficult to follow at times because of the many long, winding sentences that are a part of her writing style.  I found myself having to re-read sections quite often in order to fully understand her argument.  However, I would definitely recommend this book to others, as it does a great job of depicting and analyzing consumerism.

Epic Encounters: King Tut Article

Epic Encounters was a very enlightening article. It really showed race and political relations between America and Egypt, and White America and African Americans. The King Tut phenomena in the 70’s was more than a simple exhibit in the MET, but a catalyst for talks about middle eastern oil and ancient civilizations. On an international scale the King Tut exhibit was a sign of good relations between America and the Middle East. It showed that we valued their culture, and this opened a door for us to secure oil. On a national scale the King Tut exhibit touched on thoughts about race and white cultural supremacy. Many believed that Egypt became such a dominant civilization because of the migration of Europeans and Asians into that region. This thought was displayed in the way the exhibit was laid out and the through reviews that scholars gave about the exhibit. The African American community did not accept this thought about Egypt and its formation as a great ancient civilization. King Tut represented a role model and a connection to a culturally rich past for African Americans.
This article is really well written and showed the Western European mentality about imperialism and race. America only seemed to acknowledge certain people and cultures when it is convenient for them. Without the riches of Egypt and its accessibility to oil would America have been so inclined to improve relations with this country? If Egypt did not have had such an amazing past would white America have been so ready to put their ancestors in an African country? I think that the answer to both of these questions are, no.

Crawford Response

I did not like Crawford's article very much but I did find it very interesting. I think the mood that is taken away from Crawford is very representative of most Americans feelings for the Iraq war. We discussed in class the discrepancy of how the soldier is viewed. Although there was a great deal of controversy surrounding Vietnam, there was a much larger gap of desire to fight that war. People either protested or went to war to show their strong emotion.political stance; however, most Americans today either don't have an opinion on the Iraq war or are strongly opposed to it.

The soldiers fighting in Vietnam had a stronger sense of "our boys" because of the perception that they wanted to be there for the country. Crawford's constant questioning of their purpose in Iraq is extremely symbolic of the lack of a national passion to continue in this war. I thought it was kind of funny that he complains about the "disorganization" of the war, considering that war usually is chaos. He describes an environment of every man for himself which seems to be very contrary to Vietnam. Even though I didn't particularly love his writing, I respect his honesty because even soldiers get scared and he acknowledges this.

Japanese Internment....

It is funny how growing up, in history classes that we take from grade school through high school,
we are taught certain things about life in America and what it means to be American. A reason I am writing this response is to analyze Okihiro's article on the Japanese Internment camps. I can say for myself, from grade school and high school, I was NEVER taught about these camps. I was taught about how evil the Nazi's were and how wrong the Japanese were for attacking us at Pearl Harbor. The Axis of Evil, Germany, Japan and Italy. Those were the real EVIL...It is so incredible how we leave this information out of the general information we are taught as young adolescents about World War II history. It is rather sad and deceiving that during this war, we are taught that we were the victim, Pearl Harbor, and that we were the good guy and did nothing wrong but in reality we forced 120.000 Japanese Americans into camps very similar to what that of Jews were put in during World War II. I think that whatever committe decides what should be taught to young adolescents, especially those that are in high school, should give some detail and facts from both sides, of the horrors that were committed.

King Tut....

The King Tut reading that we discussed in classed was really somewhat kind of intriguing. I had some prior knowledge of King Tut, but I never realized how much a socio-political marker this remain was. The main point of view that came across in this article seemed to be the Middle East vs. the United States. The disagreements about TUT was that was it used for Art purposes or for economic growth. I feel that it should be used as art, but many argued in class that it was used as an economic symbol, more so orientated with us trying to gain a stranglehold on the Oil of the middle east. King Tut was used as a money maker and that is what the US wanted to get out of it.
You can argue either way but that is what I seemed to get out of the readings and out of the discussion. It seems that The upper echelon of the US government feels that the oil in the middle east is somewhat more ours than theres, due to the fact that WE found it using our technology and we helped the people of the Middle East maintain their "product."
It is unfortunate that a great discovery as in King Tut was exploited due to situations like this.

"Amos 'n' Andy" Response

Amos 'n' Andy was a radio comedy in the 1920's to 1950's in America. It exploited the racial stereotypes of African Americas in America in a disgusting manner. The main characters were purposely drawn as stereotypically to African Americans as possible. They had overly full lips and were made to seem extremely lazy. These are two things that are huge stereotypes of Blacks in America today and seemingly have been very big racial stereotypes of that race for sometime.



The creators Gosden and Correll were two people who were very familiar with the minstral traditions of early times. I found this very interesting that they were familiar with minstral traditions and chose to make their show using the stereotypes of African Americans. The minstral shows were also based in theory on the "happy go lucky darky on the plantation"- a seeming stereotype of the timeperiod of the minstral shows.

Amos 'n' Andy had some absolutely ridiculous aspects however there were some interesting things. The things I found most interesting were the creators prior knowledge of the minstral traditions as well as the fact that they blatantly displayed African Americans in a racist manner even in a time where African American civil rights were starting to gain steam in an American culture.

Memorials and Monuments...

In class we had looked over many pictures of the great monuments that are on display in our nations capital. This subject and presentation of material was something that heightened me inside over the past few weeks in the class. The significance of War Memorials in this country I believe to be very important to myself and the rest of the people in our nation. The names on on the Vietnam Memorial symbolize men that have lost their lives to serve our nation. Granted, we went to Vietnam for many wrong reasons and many men died on the battle field due to the ignorance of our men in office making very moronic discussions I believe. However, it is important to never forget those who have given their lives for us.
Yes, some of these memorials were built to not so much "remember" the fallen but instill some form of patriotism for those viewing them, I feel they serve. Having great uncles and great grandfathers that had fought in both World War's as well as Korean and Vietnam, I find it great to have them remembered for what the fought for and died. I have never fought in a war and the present wars that are country has partaken in are questionable to say the least, but I honestly can think the memorials are an honorable way to recognize our fallen in battle.

Gone with the Wind...

In class, we had jumped around from scene to scene with the movie "Gone with the Wind."
What seemed very odd to me was the way professor Hass wanted us to view the scenes of Scarlett with her three different love interests. I found that kind of random because the only relevance I got out of this was the different lifestyle and personalities were all different with all three men. And the another scene where she returns home and her father is schizophrenic and senile due to the loss of his wife.
I mean I guess you can look at the scene on when she is on the field and totally helpless. She yelled up to God and said she would lie cheat or steal to never be poor again and feel as helpless as she was there. This would symbolize significance I guess due to the fact this all took place in the South amongst a girl who was aristocratic and lost it all during the Civil War. I understand this movie is an all-time classic, but I had a really hard time actually sitting thought it. It is more so a chic flick I felt and it didn't exactly keep me tuned in. The movie we had watched about Little Big Horn and Custard seemed way more appealing to me.

I am Joaquin Poem: Reflection Post 4

Rodolfo Corky Gonzales' Poem: "I am Joaquin"
Rodolfo Corky Gonzales was a great figure of the Chicano rights movement in the 1960's in the United States of America. He was a predominant American boxer who decided to start writing poetry and eventually became a key figure in the Chicano rights movement. He started the first ever Chicano youth conference in March of 1969.

His poem, I am Joaquin (Yo Soy Joaquin) is a great embodyment (or what Gonzales thought to be) of the way many Chicanos felt to be in America. He speaks of being neither American nor Mexican, neither Indian nor European. He speaks of the great confusion many Chicanos felt with their identities in the 1960's. He speaks of the combination of identities that many Chicanos felt they truly were. They did not feel that they were specifically confined to one "raza," or "race" in English.

The way Rodolfo "Corky" Gonzales uses the voice of Joaquin in his poem to embody and empower the voice of many Chicano Americans was done greatly. The way he does this is very impactful to the reader and the importance of this poem to the Chicano rights movement in the late 1960's is undoubtable. This poem is the basis, or starting point for a great outlet for the Chicano rights. It is the start for Chicano Americans to express themselves through poetry and literature in the 1960's and is a great outlet for the Chicano rights movement.

Gary Okihio's Impounded Reflection

Prior to this reading and our discussion in class I had no idea about the treatment of Japanese Americans before their internment. Pearl Harbor was attacked on December 7, 1941 by Japan. The subsequent events following that bombing divided the United States from some of its own citizens. The government became suspicious of spies being within the United States borders and focused primarily on those with Japanese descent. The article quoted an approximate 120,000 Japanese-Americans that were sent to internment camps until the war with Japan was finished.

The blatant discrimination and racism that this act shows is simply unconscionable. National security is definitely an important issue that the U.S. government has to deal with, but this takes it a bit too far. Benjamin Franklin said that he who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither. Japanese Americans fell into this category except they had this sacrifice delegated to them by the government. Our country was founded upon the ideal of freedom, and therefor I think that this ideal should be afforded to all individuals regardless of their race, ethnicity, religion, etc. This action was certainly a mistake and I hope that the government has learned a lesson from it. To be American is to be free, and if we take that away from an entire group of Americans, what is it to be American?

Martin Luther King Jr. Speech: "Beyond Vietnam"

In Martun Luther King Jr.'s speech, on April 4, 1977, he has a much different tone than in many of his other famous speeches. It also happened to be exactly one year prior to his death in 1968. His "I have a Dream" speech was much more national oriented rather than directed at a international audience.

In King's "Beyond Vietnam" he spoke outrightly against the United States of America's involvement in the war in Vietnam. His speach showed the great task he was taking on as being more than just a leader in the "Civil rights movement." King speaking out about Vietnam- and against it no less- showed that he accepted his role as someone of great predominance in the United States of America.

Although Martin Luther King Jr. greatly displays his disagreement with the war in Vietnam, he also ties in United States African American civil rights into his arguments against the war. He points out the sheer absurdity of sending sons, brothers, fathers, and husbands of lower class African American families over to risk their lives in a war for freedoms of those in Southeast Asia- freedoms that had not even been granted to them.

Martin Luther King Jr.'s speech on April 4, 1967 at New York City's riverside Church was a very impactful speech and in hindsight it shows how many of his political views were extending beyond just the United States of America and, had he not been assassinated, he may have gone on to even great predominance than he already was.

A Chance to Make Good Reflection

This article had many different subjects but I think the main theme was the tough journey that blacks went through in the face of mistreatment by whites. Before the Civil War the Ohio river and the Mason-Dixon line was the line between slavery and freedom. After the Civil War this line had still served as a divider in racial equality. Blacks had many more opportunities in the North and were treated with a little more respect. This is not to say that there was equality in the North, but it was a much more favorable environment than in the South. The Dred Scott v. Sanford case highlighted the issues on a national level when it ruled that blacks "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect." This ruling was dealt with the issue of newly freed slaves in the South, but became applicable to the nation at large. 

This ruling, along with many of the policies that were carried out after that war, show that racism was still very prevalent. Even in the North, were Blacks could migrate for a chance at a better life they were faced with discrimination and unnecessarily difficult circumstances. Blacks were forced to develop public institutions within their own communities in order to ensure they had some equality in education, community centers, etc. Through adversity many leaders emerged that helped the black community pull itself up from its' bootstraps and develop a community in which people could rely on each other. It is unfortunate that blacks had to go through extra adversity in the decades after their emancipation. It is a testament to their resolve that blacks have created an environment in which they can be seen on the most part, as equals. 

Reflection Post 2: Montgomery Bus Boycott and the Women Who Started It- Jo Ann Gibson Robinson

In Jo Ann Gibson Robinson's memoirs of "The Montgomery Bus Boycott and the Women Who Started It" she does a great job telling an unbiased account of the chain of events that led up to the boycotts. It is about a time in Montgomery, Alabama when African Americans were not allowed to ride in the front half of buses, and what steps were taken in order to abolish this foolish rule.

It is easy to see that Mrs. Gibson Robinson is a soft spoken, modest person. She does not claim to be the sole person involved in making such a huge part of American history happen. She also is completely unbiased and acknowledges the fact that not all white bus drivers were absurdly corrupt and vulgur towards their African American bus riders. She acknowledges that most bus drivers were just doing as they were told and abiding by the law.

Jo Ann Gibson Robinson kept her job at Alabama State, accepted the leadership position of the main chapter of the Women's Political Council, and still was able to organize such a huge and effective boycott on her free time. She was able to never miss class and always came to class prepared. Her stories are truly impactful and the part she played in the African American civil rights movement should, by no means, be overlooked.

Zoot Suit Reflection

The youth of Malcolm X contrasts greatly with his adulthood. It contrasted so greatly that Malcolm himself diminished the importance of his youth in the development of the man he had become. I think there are a couple of reasons for this and I would like to discuss which reason is more viable. The concept of a double-v was used during Malcolm's youth to describe the current situation blacks found themselves in. A victory abroad without a victory over racism at home would be a failure. This sentiment manifested itself into many protests against the white establishment and the black involvement in it, for example, the zoot suit. 

Zoot suiters, Malcolm included, wore flashy suits that used up a lot of material. They were protesting efforts to conserve resources for the war while also rebelling against the dominion whites held over society. Malcolm later diminished the importance of his actions during this zoot suit era. Why would he do such a thing? Robin Kelley argues that this time was a very important influence on the man Malcolm X would become. I think that there are two possible explanations for the disregard of his past. The first would be the respect and prestige that he had garnered from becoming a Civil Right leader. His methods were at time radical, but everything that he did as an adult was towards the goal of racial equality. It is possible that Malcolm felt that the activities of his youth were not aimed at any greater goal, just actions to satisfy his youthful urges. The second explanation would be his religion. As an adult Malcolm converted to Islam and along with this comes many rules and guidelines to live by. The actions of his youth were in direct contrast with the teachings of Islam and I think that in order to legitimize himself in the eyes of his Islamic peers, Malcolm had to distance himself from anything in his past that was unsavory. This is indeed my interpretation and I am interested to hear other people's opinion on the matter. 

Gone With the Wind Reflection Post

It said that we could do reflection posts on movies I hope that is okay.  I just feel like we never got a chance to talk about them in length.

Although immensely long Gone With The Wind, was very interesting.  Scarlet O'Hara I thought was an iconoclastic women during the time period.  Not only did she rebuild Terra from ruins after the Civil War, but she also operated a multitude of businesses.  It seemed weird for women to have that much power during that time.  

Scarlet and Jo (Little Women)  seem to be very much a like.  They both break the mold of the ideal women.  The cult of domesticity was meant to conform women and keep them working in the domestic sphere.  However Scarlet building up Terra and managing business did not conform to the cult of domesticity.  And in the first half of Little Women Jo did not conform to the structured ideals either.  Jo instead wanted to become a published writer.  

Gone With the Wind not only made Scarlet an iconoclast, but made Rhett a rebel who did not support the south in the Civil War.  It was weird that Rhett did not go and fight for the south, but it was meant to prove a point.  The point was that a man that can still feel masculine without fighting can handle a women that is feminine but does not work in the domestic sphere.  Both Rhett and Scarlet were iconoclastic in their roles which created a different way to live instead of the American norms.  

Amos and Andy

This cartoon clearly relates back to the radicalization of African Americans.  The lips on the people in the cartoon are over exaggerated, along with and ape like appearance the fighting trainer gives off.  Also, Amos and Andy are seen as dead beats or guys that are lazy and cannot do much which goes along with the white hierarchy instilled in America.  The cartoon reminded me of two examples that Professor Hass showed in class, one was of a cartoon Jim Crow and the other was the African-American men in Birth of a Nation.  The similarity between all three images proves that the Jim Crow cartoon, Amos and Andy, and Birth of a Nation was developed by white people to instill this ape/moose like sentimentality of African Americans.  It is very clear that Amos and Andy was not intended for African-Americans to see, because it is extremely offensive.  

Reflection on Martin Luther King Jr. and Vietnam

Before reading the material for Prosperity and its Discontents, I had a pre-conceived notion of who Martin Luther King Jr. was. In my mind he has always been a champion of the Civil Rights movement and more specifically a voice for black people in America. Reading his speech about the war in Vietnam literally blew me away. Not only did this man care about people of his own color, he cared about all people. In his speech he spoke out against the misuse and poor treatment of soldiers, black and white, and also of the many Vietnamese citizens that were being displaced by the war. 

What I found to be most interesting is that MLK Jr. emphasized his role as a preacher many times in his speech. It was clear that he wanted his devotion to Jesus Christ to be known to all who were listening to him. This is a sentiment that I had never heard of regarding MLK. As I stated before he has always been a Civil Rights leader in my mind, rarely a preacher preaching the message of God. I believe that in light of this emphasis, all of his achievements and efforts towards peace seem even more admirable. MLK Jr. was doing what he believed the 'living God' had called him to do, preaching his methods and words to the masses. Again I just find it interesting the contrast of who I thought MLK to be and who he actually was. In either thought he was an admirable individual, but it is nice to know what exactly was compelling him to do what he did. 

A Consumer's Republic - Reflection

Lizabeth Cohen's "A Consumer's Republic" was in my opinion the most intriguing reading of the year. She literally focuses on one aspect of American Culture (consumerism), and analyzes how it has helped shape American history. She touches on topics from the government's role in regulating the market over time to how racial inequality was perpetuated by consumer trends.

One of the constants throughout history in relation to consumers has been the discrepancy between the purchaser consumer and the citizen consumer. Purchaser consumers were not beneficial to the market, as they simply bought things impulsively. Citizen consumers, however, Cohen argues were essential in history. They had the tendency to be much more lobbyist, and look out for the rights of consumers in general. I think the difference between these two types of consumers shows where the power is in terms of American capitalism and the free market. There are much more purchaser consumers than citizen consumers, and except for when the government needed an economic boost, purchaser consumers are really hurting their own cause. If 75-80% of consumers were citizen-consumers, then those would be the people who would be able to regulate trends in the free market. However, as it stands, (and it probably won't change anytime soon) corporations and the private sector in general has all of the power when it comes to marketing and consumer practices.

Overall, Cohen's writing was a very persuasive argument. She had a plethora of sources from which she compiled her information, and it was very effective. If people underestimated the power of consumerism, after reading this book, perhaps they will think twice before the next time they go shopping. It is truly amazing how an everyday, sometimes mindless task could have such a profound effect on the entire construct of the United States.

The Fog of War Reflection Post

This is the third class I have had in which we have watched Fog of War.  I personally find the movie very interesting.  Robert McNamara was one of the highest ranked officials in the Kennedey and Johnson administration that is still alive.  The first question I had was how did Robert McNamara become Secretary of Defense?  In the move it claimed that he was working for GM and then got asked to be Secretary of Defense.  Now I am not saying he did a bad job, because in the movie it seemed he was always true to the American people.  I just did not understand how a GM worker correlates with America's Defense policy.

I think he was true to the American people when he resigned from his position in 1968.  The movie claimed that he started to disagree with Johnson Administration's handling of the Vietnam War.  Even though his resignation was controversial, it seemed that he was more in tune with what the people wanted instead of what the President wanted.  

I have been trying to figure out the reason why three of my classes have now shown this movie.  I come back to this ideal, that it gives a factual portrayal of the Vietnam War that seems less bias than other movies on Vietnam.  Robert McNamara it seemed told the story how it was and was not trying to persuade the viewers that Vietnam was the right thing, because at the end of his term he too did not agree with the actions of the Johnson Administration.  

Crawford Reflection

Crawford's writing gives a first hand account of some of the war in Iraq. Considering himself an "Accidental soldier," he simply joined the national guard in order to get his tuition at college paid for. He had no idea that he would end up in Iraq, but did not question his duties when he was ordered to go there.

Crawford uses a few detailed experiences to represent the life of a soldier in Iraq. The experience of shooting the unarmed civilian was particularly shocking, especially when he nonchalantly states that he was unsure whether he realized before or after he shot him that the "enemy's" gun was broken. Probably the most interesting aspect of his writing, however, is not necessarily the text, but the style. There is a point in his writing when he simply tells an elaborate lie, something that did not really happen. Undoubtedly, this touches on the theme of what is true and not true. For the life a soldier, Crawford's writing seems to insinuate that the difference can become easily blurred.

As far as his claims of being an accidental soldier are concerned, I personally don't buy into it. Yes, he might not have predicted that he would end up in Iraq, as no one can truly predict when wars are going to break out. But, anytime someone signs up for the armed forces, they need to be aware of the potential duties and tasks that go along with that type of commitment. Just because he does not agree with his purpose in Iraq or expect to be there, it does not mean he is an accidental soldier. Instead, I would define him as an instrumental soldier, as his reasons for fighting are outside the realm of war. However, overall, I found Crawford's writing entertaining and intriguing. It was nice to read a war story that kept its reader on the edge.

Reflecting on Malcom X's Younger Years

The Kelley reading on Malcolm X's teen years and the environment in which he lived during this time shed light on the factions both between and within ethnic groups. I found this fascinating because it stood in contrast to other readings and course material that focused more on the color lines between racial groups (i.e. Black and White, Asian and White, Latino and White). Instead, Kelley's reading addressed the tumultuous relationship between the Black middle class and the lower class and the resentment each group felt for the other during the time period of World War II.

This tension between the socio-economic classes within the Black community makes sense to me, since each group seemed to be trying to achieve different goals. While the lower class fought to try to assimilate into "American" culture by applying the "Protestant work ethic" celebrated in America, much of the lower class rebelled against this way of life and chased less than legitimate pursuits. In my opinion, it is this sort of dynamic (e.g. tension within a downtrodden group) that made it so difficult to overcome the unjust societal makeup of the time.

Jo Ann Gibson Robinson Reflection

Jo Ann Gibson Robinson's account of the Montgomery Bus Boycott and the events that led up to it really opened my eyes to the recency of such unjust treatment towards an entire racial group. The latent racism that exists within America today seems so antiquated and intolerable, yet it is nothing compared with the disrespectful public policies that abounded in this country within the last 60 years. That these policies still existed in Montgomery and other places over a year after the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka decision came down displays an atrocious set of societal values for having let this remain the status quo.

When Gibson Robinson discusses the cases of mistreatment towards Blacks on the Montgomery city buses, especially Black women, it seems amazing that this sort of behavior was ever accepted. When I consider the fact that the seating arrangements of the city buses appear to have existed simply to keep Black people "in their place" behind Whites, I cannot believe that a majority of the city's population never came together to expose this race-relations travesty before the WPC finally organized an all-out boycott. It is embarrassing that it took such severe action before anyone did anything about this situation that denigrated all Black people.

Crawford Response

The Crawford reading was an eye-opener for me. I realize that the course has come full circle now that we are talking about the Iraq war. It’s saddening how much things have changed in America since World War II and Vietnam. We used to really value our soldiers. They were true heroes and many felt there was nothing more important they could do with their lives than fight for their country. Today, it seems like we almost ignore the individuals that are risking their lives. I know that it’s a controversial war, but any person brave enough to join the military and be shipped away deserves our unconditional support. It is a reality that soldiers fight for causes that they don’t necessarily understand or support, but that in the grand scheme we are all Americans and we might be fighting for something larger than we realize. Maybe it’s because many people these days don’t seem to know very many soldiers personally that are going to war (and dying), so it makes everything seem so far-removed. Regardless, I don’t know how I personally feel about Iraq, but I do know that every soldier over there has my 100% support.

King Tut Reflection/Question

In The King Tut piece by Melani McAllister, King Tut and Middle Eastern culture are commodified and made into something that can be bought or sold. Simultaneously, the same thing is happening middle eastern oil. In my presentation on this reading, I acknowledged this fact but also (perhaps without realizing it) focused on the corruption that our government seemed to be exhibiting through the exchanges described by McAllister. I couldn't believe the way that the government seemed to feign interest in King Tut in order to gain political and economic influence in the Middle East and its oil. However, I noticed that in class and in discussion we barely focused on that aspect of the King Tut phenomenon and I don't know why that was. Was it just understood that that happened? Did it not pertain to the class enough? Or am I making a big deal about something that just wasn't that important? Any ideas are appreciated. 

Ernie's War Reflection

Ernie Pyle's war correspondence from World War II paints a clear picture of the American soldiers' experiences during the war. His description of the storming of Omaha Beach reminded me of the intense battle scene in "Saving Private Ryan." The way in which Pyle talks about the destruction and dead bodies on the beach allows the reader to empathize with the soldiers in Europe, and it is kind of amazing that he was able to capture with written words the same scene that "Saving Private Ryan" was able to via visual images. I think it was his writing style and the details he chose to include that made him such an incredibly effective wartime correspondent.

Additionally, the way in which he was able to convey the humanity of the soldiers and their devotion to the ideals of America allows his readers to understand why Tom Brokaw would call this group of people the "Greatest Generation." This generation had to deal with growing up during the Great Depression, and I think it shows in their steadfast belief that they were fighting the "Good War." Although a lot has happened in America since then, I believe that dealing with the hard times of the Great Depression shaped that generation into one united in their support for America.

King Tut Reflection

I was very surprised and intrigued after reading the King Tut reading. The connection that was made between universal artifacts, oil and race were all very interesting. The fact that the government can twist cultural artifacts into making them universal and then later on using the same explanation to justify the need for cheap oil is impressive and astonishing. I personally believe that the government operates for economical reasons. Its main motive is how to enrich the nation’s economy even if it means by exploiting other countries. I feel that the argument that the government presented that the artifacts discovered in King Tut’s tomb were universal for cultural purposes was in actuality meant for economic reasons. The reading gave numerous examples on how people were able to gain economic benefits by selling King Tut memorials and relics after the exhibit was brought to the United States.

In addition, the government was in desperate need of cheaper oil. They were able to disguise the cultural argument about why oil was universal to satisfy their economic needs. I believe that this is an accurate image about the government. I personally believe the real motives for the government’s actions are all for economical purposes. There have been numerous events in history where this claim has been proven. Overall, I enjoyed the King Tut reading and the numerous connections it had made.

The Story of Stuff: Reflection

Annie Leonard presents an intriguing argument about America’s consumers and producers. She states how the nation over consumes products and that 99% of these products become trash in a few months. This concept is interesting to connect with the first wave of consumerism in the mid-twentieth and the today’s wave of consumerism. During the first wave, the government strongly advocated the public to consume at large amounts. This was the government’s method of stimulating the economy back to its original state before the Great Depression. However, Obama’s stimulus plan does not exactly take on this same approach of mass consumerism. Obama plans on stimulating the economy in other forms. For instance, Obama plans on engaging in vast government spending to help stimulate the economy.

The government plans to spend $32 billion on making energy more efficient. Conserving energy and resources was one of Annie Leonard’s main concerns. In addition, Obama plans on spending billions in repairing infrastructure, education, health care and science/technology. The responsibility of stimulating the economy is not put on the consumers like it was in the 1950’s rather it is put on the government.

Annie Leonard tries to emphasize the huge effects that consumerism has had on all aspects of our lives and environments. The public as well as the government are starting to see and acknowledge the negative effects of mass consumerism. Mass consumerism was a trend that was starting over fifty years ago and the practice continues to be present in today’s society. However, individuals such as Annie Leonard are realizing the negative effects it has had and are advocating an urgency to change these spending tactics.

Crawford Reading

I truly enjoyed Crawford’s reading on the Iraq war. It is difficult to portray the war in its true light due to many of the censoring laws on the media. During the Vietnam War the media was able to present the public with firsthand accounts about the war. This was a time when the government did not censor the media as it does today. Therefore, the soldiers today are the only ones that can provide truthful accounts on the war.

I believe that Crawford’s reading was very important for our generation to read. The Iraq War is focused on our generation’s men and women. Many people do not realize the severe impact it is having these soldiers. The consistent question of why we are in Iraq is not being answered either. Even Crawford who was stationed in Iraq for multiple months did not know the reason for this war. Once this war is over, it should be interesting to see the effects it has on the government, history, and our generation.

After reading Herr’s reading on the Vietnam War and after reading Crawford’s I personally saw many similarities between the two, which is alarming and thought provoking. Both wars seemed to be unorganized and questionable. Soldiers from both wars have to endure horrid conditions such as minimal amounts of foods, inadequate military equipment and lifelong psychological effects. It is sad to think that all of the time and effort that this country has put into the Iraq War will be put to waste and the public will forever view this war as a the shadowing war of Vietnam.

Crawford Reflection

I liked the Crawford piece on the Iraq war, but I did think it was hard to follow. It was difficult to keep track of what was real and what was fiction, but I guess that this was the point. Fiction is used to emphasize the truth. Telling fictional stories of having to shoot at children makes the war seem worse. Telling stories of the idealized return home from war makes his own true story of returning home from war seem worse as well. All along when he was in the war he imagined coming home to all these wonderful things, like his friends and his wife, so he wrote a story about he imagined that would play out, but the true story of his homecoming was much more sad. I can see both sides of the idea of "accidental soldier". It was accidental in the sense of that he was not expecting it, and it was like a car accident in his life, changing everything and wruining everything. On the other hand, he did sign up to join the National Guard so he should have known that the possibility of having to fight was there, making it not truly accidental. I do think that he got the point across that war is bad and wrecks lives.

Confederates in the Attic

Despite the great length of this reading, it was by far my favorite reading of the semester. Not only was it very interesting reading about the differing views of the Civil War between the North and South, it also served as a wake up call for me. After reading this book, I no longer view the United States as a perfect nation in harmony with each other. I now tend to view the nation as separated and split in two by differing beliefs about the national identity.

Until reading "Confederates in the Attic", I was ignorant to the fact that people in the United States still obsessed over the Civil War and it's results. I was unaware that Southerners still reenacted the Civil War as close to the real thing as possible. I found it shocking and intriguing how they followed every detail, including the food they ate, how they slept, and what they wore. This shows how much importance the South places on the Civil War and that they still do not want to accept the fact that its over. This book portrays the South as still being very racist and still believing is pre-Civil War national beliefs.

This reading shows the stark contrast between the North and the South and how they view the Civil War and the nation in general. The North has far fewer reenactments groups and far fewer extremists who do not believe the Civil War should be over. For all these reasons and more, this reading was by far the most interesting to me.

A Consumer’s Republic – Lizabeth Cohen

Though I found this reading to be particularly long, I felt as though the information given was in an incredibly logical and organized fashion.  Cohen takes us through the development of America as a nation of citizen consumers and purchaser consumers after World War Two, as part of the recovery of the nation and return to normalcy.

 

Cohen points to the role of women and the role of African-Americans as key to making challenges and shaping the politics of mass consumption as part of their own individual movements for equality.  While I thought that this was interesting, and it was from these marginalized groups that consumers gained their most strength and organization, mass consumption seemed to win out with the creation of suburbs, strip malls, and the hollowing out of cities.

 

I particularly thought that the reading connected well in the later chapters about suburbia to the lecture that we had about blockbusting and redlining in predominantly poor, African-American communities.  These effects are still very much with us today, as part of the greater institution of racism, and I think it will be difficult and interesting to see how these legacies are dealt with in the future, as our country faces issues not only of poverty and race relations, but also energy crises and human rights at home and around the globe. 

Beyond Vietnam : A Time To Break The Silence – MLK Jr.

I was very happy that Professor Hass gave us this reading instead of the Letter From Birmingham Jail as she said in lecture, because I thought that this reading spoke very well to King’s commitment to more than just civil rights.  I have always thought that King’s struggle to end poverty was an important piece of his push for civil rights, and in some ways more problematic than working for racial equality.

 

He speaks of the war as not just the enemy of our nation’s poor, not just as a manipulator of their communities and families, but also of the conflict in Vietnam as a destroyer or hope all over the world.  His stance, in calling for profound policy and life changes for America in order to save the soul of the nation, is bold and unwavering.  He speaks from his heart as a brother to those all around the globe, as a world citizen, calling upon our nation to do no less than lead a revolution against oppression. 

 

Though these themes are ones we are all familiar with, I think the anti-poverty stance is asking so much of people, not just to change their mindset towards others, but also to change their actions, to change their view of the world completely.  It may be an idealistic and even unrealistic goal in the long run, but it makes it seem like ending the war in the Vietnam is an even more necessary first step.   Overall, I appreciated the reading and the discussion we had about it. 

“Go After The Women” – Americanization and the Mexican Immigrant Woman – George Sanchez

This reading was interesting to me because it looked at Mexican immigration and the associated forced assimilation efforts in the context of Los Angeles, though I imagine similar efforts took place in many cities that of the South that received such a large influx of Mexicans during this time.  In these cities, Mexicans were viewed as a problem, an “other” group that needed to be mixed into broader society appropriately, which meant in menial jobs for little money.

 

The economic advantage that businesses saw in Mexicans as cheap labor was no less racist than those that opposed the immigration all together, thinking that the race as a whole was weaker and inferior to whites, but could be taught to be obedient.  This was in contrast the Americanists, who sought, still in a racist manner, that American society had the duty to make Mexicans fully American, and they were going to do this through assimilating the women of the family.

 

This approach failed for the most part, due not only to the tight families of immigrant groups as they come to a new place, but also because so many of the customs and loyalties to Mexico remained.  Just because they were taught men were taught to work and the women were taught the importance of doing laundry and having less children in the Americanization programs, did not mean they were going to stick.  I thought that this failure was quite severe, but no worse than the failure of the nation to Americanize Indians or other groups, which happened with significantly greater resources.  

Okihiro reading- The American Story

Summary and Thoughts
This “American Story” was a very detailed account of the World War Two period during which the Japanese Americans were being discriminated against. Okihiro gave a historical time line and details of the occurrences that led to the internment of the majority of the Japanese population on the West Coast of the United States. In this excerpt he gives a voice to the Japanese people that were mistreated by the government, by allowing survivors of the internment to recall their stories.
From this article the reader really is allowed to feel the alienation that the Japanese population felt from their own country. The government systematically rounded up and broke up families and shipped them to different states to be a part of internment camps. Further than the break up of the Japanese family, the government also helped to break up the Japanese community. The neighbors of people, who suffered from the internment of a member of their family, were not even visited because of fear of bringing attention to themselves.
The most important quote (at least the most important that I felt) from this excerpt spoke on the undemocratic and unjust practices of the American government to the Japanese people. “More than a violation of civil liberties, the government’s actions sought to deny Japanese Americans their dignity and essential humanity.” This was an important quote because it expresses the hypocritical stand that America took in fighting for the rights of others but not their own citizens. This excerpt really taught me about a historical period that I knew little about. I feel like this, “American Story” really helps to capture the treatment of not only the Japanese Americans felt during World War II but also, reflects the trails that other minorities experienced at one time in American history.

Dr. King and Veitnam

This speech that Dr. Martin Luther King gave was one of the most dynamic speeches that I've ever read from him. He called for America to rethink their position in the Vietnam War, and to bring our troops home. Through this speech Dr. King gave a view of America that most have never dared to look at. He showed America on an international scale and showed how our "arrogance" might be perceived by the rest of the world. Dr. King put America on a pedestal for its citizens to scrutinize.
The most obvious point of scrutiny that seemed fill Dr. King's speech was America's thoughts and politics of democracy. He showed the parallels between the poor in America and in Vietnam. Also, he showed the inequality of the treatment of African American soldiers. At home they did not have equal right, but they could still be used to fight a war for America. Black and white men could not go to school together in America but they could kill together. "We were taking black young black men who had been crippled by our society and sending them eight thousand miles away to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they had not found in southwest Georgia and East Harlem".
I think that this speech showed the frustration of the American people at the time, and also the true colors of the American government. The lack of democracy that the American and Vietnamese people received from the American government was horrible. The most significant line out of this entire speech is "A time comes when silence is a betrayal". This line rang true in a time when so many anti-war protests, and civil rights movements were going on. People needed to speak out against injustice and Dr. King was an individual that could speak for the masses.

Discussion Questions for Last True Story I'll Ever Tell

What do you think of the title of the book, The Last True Story I’ll Ever Tell?  What does it refer to specifically? How does the author contextualize the title choice in the reading?  How did you react to the reading overall?

 

The conditions of the Iraqi desert and the streets of Baghdad are described in detail throughout the reading.  How do the author’s descriptions explain the fighting and tactics of the war in Iraq?  How is this similar or different to what we have read about the war in Vietnam and World War Two?

 

Crawford spends time in the final chapter detailing his return to his hometown and his experience with friends at the Blue Crab festival.  What image of America does this encapsulate, and how does it contrast with your image of America today?

 

Why do you think Crawford chooses to split the images of his honeymoon, time with his wife, and dreams of his post-college life with the “brown-out” on his birthday?  What about the smaller details of his childhood memories with the war’s conditions and combat? What does this context does this provide to the war?

 

What are Crawford’s beliefs on the war?  How does he view the army’s tactics, equipment, organization, and leadership?  Do these opinions shift over time, especially after he has returned to the US?

 

Several times over the course of the reading, Crawford’s unit is charged with moving positions and joining new units, always with the explanation that it is temporary and they will be going home soon.  How does he react and explain these moves to the reader?  How do the units react to his unit?

 

On page 213 Crawford says, “Things hadn’t gotten particularly bad at that point, and it’s not like I was depressed or consciously worried.  Still the rumblings of discontent had begun to boil.  The phone was picked up just a little less often at home.  I found myself looking with greater disdain on the Iraqis we had come to liberate.  I lived for any excuse to deliver violence on them.  This isn’t a confession; this is life.” How is this similar/different to the image you have of the war in Iraq?  How about the media’s portrayal?  

King Tut

I thought the King Tut reading was very interesting. As I was reading it, I did not realize how much of an affect a piece of art could have on the United States and on the Middle East. After I was done reading it, I definitely thought that the United States had the economy on its mind. I do believe that the United States wanted the appreciation of art to increase greatly, but I do not buy that as the reason for the King Tut tour. With the Oil embargo that was placed upon the United States, they knew they had to find a way to get back into the oil mix.  The article even said that United States wanted to use King Tut as a peace symbol between the Middle East and the U.S. I firmly believe that the economy of the United States is always on the mind of our government. While the United States might not admit it, I am sure that the U.S. use things such as King Tut for economy purposes. I see King Tut as a bridge between the Middle East and the United States, and I think oil was the main focus of the U.S.

Born in the USA

I found yesterday's lecture to be one of the most interesting lectures of the year. Not only was the Vietnam War memorial interesting to learn about, I found the most interesting part of lecture was learning about the true meaning of Bruce Springstein's classic hit, "Born in the USA". This song has been one of my favorite songs since I first heard it. I have listented to it hundreds of times and never once really paid attention to what the lyrics were actually saying. I always thought it was a patriotic song about how great it is to be American and how proud he was to be born in America.

Finding out the song was not intented to be a patriotic ballad caught me really off guard. The song was actually written describing the hardships faced by Vietnam veterans upon returning home from the war. This is a stark contrast to the message I thought the song portrayed. "Come back home to the refineryHiring man said son if it was up to meWent down to see my v.a. manHe said son, dont you understand". This quote describes how hard it was for veterans to find jobs upon arriving home.

After lecture yesterday, I looked up the lyrics to the song and just read them over a few times. It is very easy to see after reading the lyrics that the song is not a patriotic song in the least. It has been one of my favorite songs for years and I never realized the true meaning. That's what made lecture so interesting for me yesterday. I was ignorant to the real meaning unitl yesterday's lecture.

Discussion Questions-Epic Encounters: Culture, Media,and U.S. Interests in the Middle East, 1945-2000

Discussion Questions

1.) How did American perceptions of the Middle East change before and after the King Tut phenomenon?

2.) Do you agree that the Tut artifacts are “universal” art and therefore cannot belong to any one person or nation (or do they belong to the person that found them or the nation they were found in)?

3.) Of oil and art, which do you think is a more “universal” resource and why?

4.) How did the Tut tour change ideas about art, art collecting, and art appreciation both in the United States and around the world?

5.) Do you think the King Tut phenomenon was created by a United States government interested in Middle-Eastern art, Middle-Eastern oil, or a combination of the two?
(Things to consider: the Met, Exxon’s donation, the OPEC oil embargo)

6.) Why was Egypt so important to the African American Community? Why was King Tutankhamun? What was King Tut's importance to the black youth?

7.) Why was George Morton’s Crania Aegyptiaca so important to the idea of race and slavery? Also, how was this book relevant to thoughts about Egypt and its formation as a civilization?


8.) When McAllister described Steve Martin's Tut skit she said, "If Tut was white, he seemed to be approachable primarily through music and language coded as black. If he was black, he was not "naturally" so but had to be "blackened up." How does this quote speak on racial views of the time? How is being black seen at this time?

9.) Why did mainstream society gravitate so much to black culture during this time? What is a "White Negro"?

10.) Steve Martin gained peak success at this time due to his "race conscious" material. Do you think the King Tut song would have been received so well if a black comedian sung the song?

Herr Response

"Dispatches" by Michael Herr is a piece that I have mixed feelings about. I like the raw uncensored way in which he tells the story of the conditions in Vietnam. He doesn't leave out any of the horrible things that he sees around him. Dead bodies aren't downplayed, but talked about in a human-reaction sort of way. I had trouble following this article in respect to his overzealous, rambling descriptions. I understand that this is what many people enjoyed about the writing but it kind of made the story get lost in all the words for me. When his writing was clear and coherent I enjoyed it, but I was left wondering if he hadn't been on drugs when he was writing some it. I commend him for sticking it out in Vietnam. He brought true stories of death and destruction to light for many Americans at home who couldn't possibly imagine the horror of actually being there and experiencing it. Herr writes a compelling piece without any hesitance to include all the details, making raw and real, though I would have preffered more story and less rambling description.

Reaction to Dispatches

Although I knew I was about to read a Vietnam War piece, "Dispatches" by Michael Herr really caught me off guard. The heart wrenching story from the first hand perspective of a reporter in Vietnam was graphic, moving, and inspirational. It really caused me to put my "problems" in perspective, looking at the utter chaos that went on in Vietnam. The way that Herr described being around dead bodies of soldiers and friends, hearing of his friends deaths, and the overall psychological experience of Vietnam was outrageous. I cannot imagine fearing for my life in the way that Herr and the other people in Vietnam did. It was enlightening and so real. Throughout my childhood, I have read about the Vietnam war and the post traumatic stress disorder, but this was the first experience I have had with a first-hand narrative of written by someone that was really there. He was able to describe what went on inside the minds of the soldiers and the every day occurrences really helps me to understand why the war was protested to the extent that it was. Herr is an exceptional writer, and his use of foul language really helped the development of his voice as a narrator. He used elongated sentences that often sounded like rambling thoughts. It is clear that he wants every aspect of this piece of writing to be 100% real. He doesn't cover anything up, and doesn't fabricate the truth.

Discussion Questions for 4/2/09

1. What was the major tactic used by the Vietnamese and how did the Americans counter that according to Herr?

2. What affect did the war have on young soldiers, especially teenagers?

3. Describe Herr’s vision/emotions towards helicopters at the beginning of the article. Also, What does Herr say about the photographs he looked at in Life  magazine as a child? What were his feelings? 

4. What do you think Herr meant when he said “I went to cover the war and the war covered me”? How did this have an affect on his writing?

5. How does Herr describe his first Vietnam scene? How did the Americans ensure that the Vietnamese were dead? What did Herr notice about the emotions of the soldiers afterwords? What were your reactions towards this?

6. Why did the “Grunts” accept Herr more than other groups? What specific things did the Grunts do for him to make him feel more comfortable?

7. How does Herr describe life in the city of Saigon? 

8. What does Herr say about Fatigue and how does it affect the soldiers and the war as a whole? Herr also describes some of the conditions of the Jungle that can negatively affect the soldiers. What were some of those conditions?

9. Herr mentions that many of the soldiers believed in superstitions. What were some of the superstitions?

10. Herr makes the Vietnam war sound very unorganized compared to what it is “supposed” to be like. In what ways was the Vietnam war unorganized?

11. Why do you think Herr decided to write as much about his personal experiences as he did about the soldiers’ experiences? Do you think it made his article more interesting to read?

US Consumerism pre and post WWII

Thinking about consumerism now and the way we have been exposed to its explosion after WWII is considerably different than the reality of the case. First and foremost, I didn't know women had such a high rate of involvement in the cause. When I think of consumerism, I think of women going out to stores buying appliances, groceries, and some luxuries while the husbands are out to work making money . However, women were the ones fueling the movement for price regulation and government involvement in FDA regulations. kaaa
I think during this period most of the US population underestimated the roles of women in the political and consumerism sphere of the nation. For example, the many businesses that had to eventually close down due to poor business because their prices were too high for consumers or their quality of product too poor. Women demanded equality in the consumer world and if they didn't receive it, the business men and women had to pay the price. During this period, women broke out of their domestic sphere and began demanding attention from the government and businesses which was a huge change in not only their roles, but their power and influence over the nation in general.
What I found particularly interesting was the shift from during the war and after the war in women's influence and power in the U.S. Women went from organizing movements in the consumer world and working, basically playing part of the male role to going back to their domestic sphere of playing housewife. They easily let their powerful image become deceased when their men came home after the war and took years after to regain their power in the Women's Movement.