Fenimore Cooper’s Literary Offences Summary 1.It does not seem right that Professors of English should give opinions without reading the book. INsteadm they should read Cooper’s literature first, then comment. It would be better to be quiet and let others who have read it tralk about it. 2.Cooper’s book does have problems. In fact, he mad onnhuendred adn forteen misteakes in two thirds of a page. It breads the reacord. In the ninetine rules for romantidc lituarture. Cooper brokoe eitghteen tou of ninetien.\ 3.TZhe first rule is there should be a reason for a stor, it should do soemthing adn rarive somewhere. Deerslayer doesn’t do this. THe second rule was that the events in a story should bre sued to developthe story. Deerslayer as …show more content…
in the ifrst rule, accomplished nothing,a adn because of the at the uthore can’t develop anything, because there nwas notehing to develop. 4.Thrid rule” the characters should be alive, unless they are deatd. This does’t happne in Deerslayer. Fourth rule: The characters should have a purpose. This was overlooked in Deerslayer. 5. Fith RUle: Characters should have a prupose, b e revelent, staty aon topic, ibe interesting, develop the story, and end. This has not veen followed at all in Deerslayer. 6.Rule six: THe characters will be described by talk adn the conduct of the characters. Natty Bumppo proves that this did not happen. Rule seven” A character should not change their speacking style mid paragraph. This rrsule was not followed. Rule eight: Stupid things that the characters do should not be protrayed as “the craft of othe woodsman” byu the author or ther characters. trhis is broken several times. 7.Rule nine: Characheters sould live thier life, and if their oare miracles it should seem plausable. This was not followed in Deer slayer. Rule 10: The audience should be suceked into the story, they shoudl liek the good guys, and hate the bad guhys. But the e audience dislikes the good guys is dindefferent to the bad, adn wants them to all drown. RUle eleven” The reader should be albe to dpredict wh how the characters would act in an emergency. R=THis rule is ignored. 8. The smaller rles are these 12. Do what he said he will do. 13. Use correct woradge. 14 Be direct 15 Stick to the chase 16 :Use good form 17 Use good grammer 18 GBe simple and straight foward. 9.Cooper used stage Props such as a moccassinedc person walking in the ootspring t of antoher moccasined person. Another was the broken twig. If a person is in extreme danger they always step on a dry twig, no other object will satisfy. 10.Cooper has several inconsistancies in “the delicate art of the rorest”, such as a crewman who miraculsy saves the ship, despite outside eveidence of the undercurrent theat he finds that save them. Another example is of a cannonball roling to the feet of women, which tells Bumppo where teh fort is. ALso, following the tracks of a moccasin into the stream, without the stream ruingin ght etrack. 11.I like Brander Mathews judgement, but his thingking that Cooper’s work hsowsinvenitn is incorrect.
It would be hard to find a clever situation in his book. There are several esxmaples of this. 12.Cooper’s books would be etter if he was an observer. His situationts lack the observers eye. An example of this is a stream tthat gets smaller for no reason. If he had paid attention, he would have noticed that his math on the bends were incorrect. 13.Somehow, this sam stream holds aboat,, which isn’t described thouoly, that shouldn’tgabe benn able to trave l down the stream. It would have been tooo wide adn too long. Also, there are trees bent over to hide some Indian’s in a small bend. Who’s to say the Indians wouldn’t be sumushhed? They could have just stepped aboard the slow moving ship, but they didn’t. 14.The ship would take about two minutes and a half to pass under trhe tree. Howeer, the indians that were tryng to jump onto it waited too long, adn missed the house on the boat and got knocked out. Any other true Indian would ganve gotten it. Not Cooper Indians. 15.The boat is no wpassed out of reach of he Indians. But since the boat had left, the Indians missed it. However, they did more hatn missed it, one by one they fell into the water. A cooper Indian and a wooden advertisment Indian are similiar in intelllect. This shows Cooper’s inadequincy as an
observer.
Additionally, In “The Last of the Mohicans”, Cooper discusses stories of founding fathers. An Indian and a white man are discussing the stories of their founding fathers. The white man accuses the Indian of attacking the original inhabitants
The Essay, I have chosen to read from is ReReading America was An Indian Story by Roger Jack. The topic of this narrative explores the life of an Indian boy who grows up away from his father in the Pacific Northwest. Roger Jack describes the growing up of a young Indian boy to a man, who lives away from his father. Roger demonstrates values of the Indian culture and their morals through exploration of family ties and change in these specific ties. He also demonstrates that growing up away from one’s father doesn’t mean one can’t be successful in life, it only takes a proper role model, such as the author provides for the young boy.
The authors go on to give an outstanding appreciation of his work as he states” Ellis clear prose, succinct expositions, and poignant observations make reading Founding Brothers highly rewarding...” ( Koschnik 274). The review as well goes on expanding to expand how Ellis writes about the characters in this book and their views on the topics. In the review he does discuss some cons that Ellis presents as he does state “Ellis cannot fully acknowledge the cultural imperatives that compelled these men to act as they did” ( Koschnik) 275). As a result, the review ends with the book is flawed, but it does offer great
Cronon raises the question of the belief or disbelief of the Indian’s rights to the land. The Europeans believed the way Indians used the land was unacceptable seeing as how the Indians wasted the natural resources the land had. However, Indians didn’t waste the natural resources and wealth of the land but instead used it differently, which the Europeans failed to see. The political and economical life of the Indians needed to be known to grasp the use of the land, “Personal good could be replaced, and their accumulation made little sense for ecological reasons of mobility,” (Cronon, 62).
In Thomas King’s novel, The Inconvenient Indian, the story of North America’s history is discussed from his original viewpoint and perspective. In his first chapter, “Forgetting Columbus,” he voices his opinion about how he feel towards the way white people have told America’s history and portraying it as an adventurous tale of triumph, strength and freedom. King hunts down the evidence needed to reveal more facts on the controversial relationship between the whites and natives and how it has affected the culture of Americans. Mainly untangling the confusion between the idea of Native Americans being savages and whites constantly reigning in glory. He exposes the truth about how Native Americans were treated and how their actual stories were
Mann’s biggest point, I believe, is that the Indian settlements he studied were much more civilized than grade school textbooks make them out to be. For instance, in the introduction, ‘Holmberg’s Mistake,’ Mann tells his readers about how Holmberg misinformed the world about the Sirionó being a tribe without history or common sense when they were, in fact, a highly populated tribe that flourished before diseases wiped them out.
They further saw the Indians as lazy people since they would not settle down at a place and develop the land they inhabited, there by missing out on profit opportunities and life improvement. On the other way round, the setllers cherished the natural resources because of the market value it possessed and not because of it immediate need. This made the settlers depict the Indians as poor and incompetent to maximize the transformation of these natural resources into economic gains and wealth.
I used the criticism/formalism lens on the chapter Speaking of courage, you can find the deeper meaning of the text using this lens. When analyzing this chapter we can see the irony of him not actually speaking. Also when we analyze this chapter we can identify the symbolism of Norman almost winning the silver star and we can recognize the symbolism of Normans ex-girlfriend and friend. After reviewing Speaking of Courage we have now found the deeper meaning that Tim O’Brien had focused on in the chapter that we would not have noticed without analyzing using the criticism/formalism lens.
According to Deloria, there are many misconceptions pertaining to the Indians. He amusingly tells of the common White practice of ...
Smith, Paul Chaat. 2009. Everything You Know about Indian Is Wrong. Minneapolis: Unviersity of Minnesota Press. Print.
Some of the captain?s crew began to regret their situation and even the captain had some anxious thoughts. They realized that it could be a dead end. They were uncertain where to go and of their situation. Suddenly, they noticed something was passing by them at a distance of half a mile. ? We perceived a low carriage, fixed on a sledge and drawn by dogs, passing towards the north.?
The new US Government was careful not to antagonize the Indians and sought to treat them with mutual respect. This is evidenced in early treaties where the term “Red Brothers” was used to convey this sentiment of equality. By 1800 interaction between the Indian and white settlers had become quite common through trade. Many Indians traded for household goods, traps and tools. The US became concerned about the cultural differences and sought to improve the Indian station in life by providi...
The first thing to see, looking away over the water, was a kind of dull line - that was the woods on t'other side; you couldn't make nothing else out; then a pale place in the sky; then more paleness spreading around; then the river softened up away off, and warn't black any more, but gray; you could see little dark spots drifting along ever so far away-trading-scows, and such things; and long black streaks-rafts ... and by and by you could see a streak on the water which you know by the look of the streak that there's a snag there in a swift current which breaks on it and makes that streak look that way; and you see the mist curl up off of the water, and the east reddens up.
Brooks attempts to disprove the formalist critics and makes good points among the way in anticipating and devaluing their criticisms. Yet, he fails to prove that formalist criticism should be the only way in approaching literature, especially when contradicting himself.
Literature is an intricate art form. In order to attempt to understand the meanings and ideas within literary work, there are many forms of criticism that propose different approaches to its interpretation. Each criticism is crucial to the understanding of how individuals interpret literary works. Since each criticism has a different approach to enrich the understanding literary works, the question is raised whether one criticism should be used over others, whether a certain combination of criticisms should be used, or whether all criticisms should be taken into account. This may all be dependent on the reader’s individual preference or opinion, but each criticism presented builds on the others to create a well-rounded and unique understanding