The expansion of the American frontier played a large part in the history and making of the United States, but how big was that role? I guess what Fredrick Jackson Turner wants to point out here is that the American West is the most important feature of American history, and of the development of its society. In the second paragraph of chapter one he says, “ The true point of view in the history of this nation is not the Atlantic coast, it is the Great West”.
A definition he gives of the frontier is, “it lies at the hither edge of free land”, meaning that he considers the Indian territory to be free land. According to him the frontier is the “meeting point between savagery and civilization”, “the most rapid and effective Americanization”.
A definition he gives of the frontier is, “it lies at the hither edge of free land”, meaning that he considers the Indian territory to be free land. According to him the frontier is the “meeting point between savagery and civilization”, “the most rapid and effective Americanization”.
For the most part I do agree that the frontier expansion of America was the leading cause of what shaped the “American way”, but maybe he could have included more about things such as the influence the Native Americans had on our thinking, and way of life. In many of the stories in history we hear about the conflict between us and the Indians. Even in frontierland, the place in Disney Land that Limerick writes about, it seems that it only portrays the violent aspect. Even the tourists can play “cowboys and Indians” pretending to shoot at each other. But actually we learned a lot from the Nat
ive Americans, they were there before us and I believe also played a large role Americanization.
In the piece by Patricia Nelson Limerick she talks about the comparison of the frontier to Velcro. She says, “No normal reader if one defines a “normal reader” as a person who is not a Western American historian, would even notice the peculiar implication of the analogy.” Well I guess that makes me extremely normal, because I didn’t even fully understand it. So I guess one of the questions I have would be what that’s all about.
Before now when I pictured a frontier I always just thought of a big piece territory and lots of cowboys and Indians running around. Ok, so obviously I’m not much of a historian at all, and both the Turner and Limerick papers were pretty hard to follow and make complete sense of. I often found myself after a few minutes drifting away in thought. I started to wonder what else a frontier could be compared to, an ocean…a jungle… places of exploration. I couldn’t think of anything like Velcro, but reading these two pieces definetly got me thinking about the different meanings of the word frontier.
In the piece by Patricia Nelson Limerick she talks about the comparison of the frontier to Velcro. She says, “No normal reader if one defines a “normal reader” as a person who is not a Western American historian, would even notice the peculiar implication of the analogy.” Well I guess that makes me extremely normal, because I didn’t even fully understand it. So I guess one of the questions I have would be what that’s all about.
Before now when I pictured a frontier I always just thought of a big piece territory and lots of cowboys and Indians running around. Ok, so obviously I’m not much of a historian at all, and both the Turner and Limerick papers were pretty hard to follow and make complete sense of. I often found myself after a few minutes drifting away in thought. I started to wonder what else a frontier could be compared to, an ocean…a jungle… places of exploration. I couldn’t think of anything like Velcro, but reading these two pieces definetly got me thinking about the different meanings of the word frontier.
I definitely agree with your statement that Turner and many other publicist of the distant past painted this horrible image of how the Indian tribes of the western frontier were a violent and intimidating culture. But if we were to view this event from the Indian’s perspective, what would the American or “European” be seen as. It was pretty obvious that during the westward expansion the American publicists were masters of the “pointing of the finger” technique which was used to hide our own flaws that would give us a negative image and potentially damage our reputation. At the same time it seems as though the Americans had some since of pride when it came to displaying portraits of Indian and American conflict. For instance, the picture that is displayed on you first blog posting which displays the cowboys shooting at surrounding Indians while barricading themselves behind their dead horses was a great example of the extreme amount of pride that the Americans had around this time period. Limerick’s decision to oppose Turner’s view of the relationship between the Americans and Indians was in my opinion one of the most necessary and politically correct steps that had to be taken to help clean up the view of the Indians inhabiting the western frontier. I also agree that the reading was tough to follow, but it seems to me if you were to compare the two stories Limerick’s was the most understandable and logical. Great job on your blog post
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that the readings were difficult, but I really enjoyed Limerick's writing about "frontier". You hit on a lot of the same points that I noticed about her writing and about Turner's piece. While I understand that Turner wrote in a different period in time, I do not agree with many of his points, and it sounds like you also had some questions/doubts about his blanket statements about the frontier. I agree with Ray's comment on your blog about Limerick having the courage to openly oppose what has previously been pretty standard acceptance of our early-Western expansion. It is always difficult to “re-write” history, but I certainly believe that our past history (especially when it comes to the Western frontier) could stand a little revision.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with you that the expansion to the West is a large part of how we Americans see ourselves, and how the rest of the world sees us. Do you think that is a good thing? I’m not so sure. If we base our view of ourselves on the real history of the West’s expansion, we might not be so quick to call ourselves “leaders of the free world”. Just a point to ponder…
I really like the way your blog explains how the readings sort of opened your eyes with regard to the expansion into the West. It is good to know that these pieces of writing caused you to really think about what you were reading! I know they certainly have caused me a couple of weeks of thought...
I precisely agree with your comment on how the Indians were extremely influencial in helping drive Americanization. I think that the view Turner displays in his article of how the Amercian West is the most important feature of Amercian history is influeced by the region and time era he lived in when he wrote his article. I think that his view was clear a product of his belief that America should distance itself from European influece which is where he stumbled on the conclusion that the West represents the greatest part of Amercian history.
ReplyDeleteAnother aspect of your post that I relate to is how Limericks view of the frontier provoked thoughts of the differentways in which the term can be applied. Prior to reading the articles I had also pictured the frontier as being the boundary where cowboys meet the Indians and battled for territory. After reading the article I can completedly agree on how the term frontier can be applied to various scenerios not just the violent boundary between Indians and cowboys. I think that overall Limerick described the frotier in a more analitical way as opposed to Turner. I noticed that Turner had an extremely vague description of the frotier in his article where he stated that it is the place where two or more people live per square mile indicating in the closing that the frotier is gone. Limerick on the otherhand indicates that the frotier is the boundary where the industrialized culture meets the underdeveloped culture that is in poverty which clearly suggest that the frontier still exists.
Christina, I have to say I like what you said about this past week’s readings. I have to agree with you when you say that Turner was trying to say that the west is the most important part of American history. When reading what turner said he obviously felt passionate about what he was writing also leading me to believe that he felt that the west was such a key role in America or else he would have not wrote what he did. Also I feel that the readings were a little too much to make senses of. I feel limerick did a better job on elaborating on Turners original Thoughts. Also I agree that “The frontier expansion of America was the leading cause of what shaped the “American way”. Just the idea of expansion and manifest destiny, is what us Americans is all about. The British already expanded and had their colonies all over the world, this was essentially the same thing only we didn’t have to go everywhere, and we could just expand in our own back yard. Your post was a post defiantly brought up many points I wouldn’t have thought about. Again I have never thought about how the Native Americans shaped the American way or the role they played in shaping the frontier. Great job on this weeks post I look forward to reading more on what you make of these writings and how you feel on them.
ReplyDelete