I find this scenery to be an accurate representation of America in that this picture clearly dipicts the deep roots from which the American seed has sprung. While this picture is far from a correct depiction of modern America, it certainly does exemplify where we came from and to what we can cling to as a nation: hard-work.

At first, I came up with this idea as being funny and very ironic, but then the sad reality hit me. America really seems to be defined by its commercial interests rather that its value systems or. And here is a prime example of the famous American marketing and I find it to be an accurate, if not disturbing, representation of America today.

Question 15

15. One reviewer of Mayflower asserted that Nathaniel Philbrick “avoid[ed] the overarching moral issues [of his subject] and [took] no sides.” Do you find this to be true? Are there moral lessons Philbrick wants us to learn? If so, what are they?

For some reason, I feel like he really tried to keep morals out of this text and relay just facts, but I think that morals, if only in a dark, and obscure fashion, do appear in the Mayflower. One of these morals is a rather simple one: the past is as full of details, color, and life as any moment we experience in the present world. People tend to picture the past as a far away place with limits on every sense that we possess. To me, it seemed as if Philbrick was trying to convey this message with his vast reservoir of details about how and why things happened. It also seemed as if he was trying to impress the infinite amount of knowledge we will never possess, point to the moral in question. Whenever trying to tell something as effectively as possible, he will often say that a particular detail is lost to history. These statements impress upon me the sheer weight of the past. The other moral that I think is detectable in this book is this: our decisions greatly effect the future, no matter how big or small. This may be a result of the set of facts Philbrick meant to relay, but I still think that we can learn this life lesson from his book. So as for the critic who made that quote, I think that they need to remain more open minded while reading next time.

Question 12

12. Philbrick shows that the English, as well as the American Indians, engaged in barbaric practices like torturing and mutilating their captives, as well as taking body parts as souvenirs. Could either side in King Philip’s War make any legitimate claim to moral superiority? Why or why not?

Neither side can truly make a claim to moral superiority, at least not in my eyes. But then again, I have been tainted by many different modern philosphies and lifestyles that making a moral judgement call on these people would be a farcry from being fair. So, with that said, if forced to make any judgement at all, I would say the Native Americans because they act out of tradition (a tradition that does not depend on the adversary) while the Europeans act in each and every way that they seem to see fit. I find it totally appalling that English settlers would just totally massacre defenseless Indians asking for safety or to enslave them without good reason. I would absoltuely side with the Native Americans if prompted to make a decision.

Question 11

11. During King Philip’s War, significant numbers of Native Americans sided with the English. How do you regard those who took up arms against their fellow natives? Do you see them as treacherous, opportunistic, or merely sensible? If you had been a native, which side would you have taken, and why?

As explained in the previous comment, the Native Americans that were trying to remain neutral had been placed into a very awkward position between two murderous opponents. In this case, I would say that I can only judge the groups as a whole and, as a whole (a community resembling an organism in my mind), I would expect them to survive in the best way possible. With that said, I see them being intelligent and sensible even if that means arming against fellow natives. And besides, they never really had any connection as a Native American community, so it's not as if each tribesman were turning on his brother. As for the side I would choose, my choice would lay with Phillip because, though he set it up to happen, I see Phillip and his people (and ultimately mine) having alot more to lose than just land. I would go on the offense for my way of life.

Question 10

10. As Mayflower shows, the American Indian tribes of New England were not a monolith, either culturally or politically. However, the English were not consistently able to think of them as separate tribes with different loyalties and desires. How did misconceptions of racial identity complicate the politics of King Philip’s War?

These misconceptions led many a Native tribe away from the Plymouth. The major mistake of grouping the Native Americans into one ethnic group provide Phillip with the necessary warriors to keep up his war even as his forces were wearing thin. These misconceptions also led to terrible atrocities being committed by both sides. The English would attack any Indian on sight, friend of foe, and enslave the others that remained helpless in other fashions. The Indians would, in response, behead, scalp, and otherwise mutilate the English, but with much more digression. Anyhow, these misconceptions complicated King Phillip's War by forcing many neutral Indians into an ever tightening vice between the murdering English and the vengeful Native Americans. Not a good situation.

Question 9

9. In the chaotic, atrocity-filled conflict known as King Philip’s War, does anyone emerge as heroic? If so, what are the actions and qualities that identify him or her as a hero?

Benjamin Church is considered to be heroic due to his tracking down and killing of Phillip. Though this brought him glory, it was his true devotion to what he belief and sense of duty that made him the hero of the war. These attributes made people think highly of him not only as a military leader but also as a good, honest man in terrible times.