A People's History I
I've been reading Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States . I wasn't planning on on blogging about it until I was done, but the book is so full of interesting information that I can't help myself! Right now I am to start chapter 7.
The first four chapters were largely what I expected. They tell the tale of the colonization period which is a lot of things but not romantic. Zinn goes into great detail while describing the atrocities committed by the colonizers onto the natives and presents a view of Columbus that is very different from the "mighty explorer and visionary who discovered the new world" one.
The fifth chapter, however, shook my beliefs a bit. I had always naively imagined the American Revolution against the British Crown to be widely supported in America in a somewhat homogeneous way -- one of those events that rarely happens. Not so according to Zinn. He presents documentation that shows that there was quite a bit of unrest, disagreement and perhaps even difference of ideology across the social and economical classes during the revolution and that there were several stages at which the armies staged mutinies and other forms or rebellion. Furthermore, certain groups of Americans even seemed to be professing loyalty to the crown.
Chapter six is devoted to the status of women in the new nation and the beginnings of the feminist movement. Again, I was surprised (in a good way) to find that the earliest feminists were also supporters of the abolition of slavery. This happening around the 1830s and 40s. The chapter, as expected, is very critical of the role women were forced to play in the 18th and 19th centuries -- as it should be!
All in all, the view expressed in the fifth and sixth chapters seems very realistic. It is very critical of the founding fathers and the social structure that was being setup in America. It could be summed up by saying that one was entitled to life, liberty and the pursue of happiness were rights as long as one was a white male who owned land. I know that I am to read a book as controversial as this one with a grain of salt -- specially since Zinn is very explicit about his "bias" -- but most of the time I can't help but to believe the book's arguments as they are very reasonable and seem to be grounded in facts and evidence.
The first four chapters were largely what I expected. They tell the tale of the colonization period which is a lot of things but not romantic. Zinn goes into great detail while describing the atrocities committed by the colonizers onto the natives and presents a view of Columbus that is very different from the "mighty explorer and visionary who discovered the new world" one.
The fifth chapter, however, shook my beliefs a bit. I had always naively imagined the American Revolution against the British Crown to be widely supported in America in a somewhat homogeneous way -- one of those events that rarely happens. Not so according to Zinn. He presents documentation that shows that there was quite a bit of unrest, disagreement and perhaps even difference of ideology across the social and economical classes during the revolution and that there were several stages at which the armies staged mutinies and other forms or rebellion. Furthermore, certain groups of Americans even seemed to be professing loyalty to the crown.
Chapter six is devoted to the status of women in the new nation and the beginnings of the feminist movement. Again, I was surprised (in a good way) to find that the earliest feminists were also supporters of the abolition of slavery. This happening around the 1830s and 40s. The chapter, as expected, is very critical of the role women were forced to play in the 18th and 19th centuries -- as it should be!
All in all, the view expressed in the fifth and sixth chapters seems very realistic. It is very critical of the founding fathers and the social structure that was being setup in America. It could be summed up by saying that one was entitled to life, liberty and the pursue of happiness were rights as long as one was a white male who owned land. I know that I am to read a book as controversial as this one with a grain of salt -- specially since Zinn is very explicit about his "bias" -- but most of the time I can't help but to believe the book's arguments as they are very reasonable and seem to be grounded in facts and evidence.
posted by rz at 7:36 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home