Sarah Vowell's Trail Of Tears Analysis

694 Words2 Pages

Sarah Vowell's empathetic feelings for the Cherokee is very touching. You definitely sense her high degree of care and interest about this topic. I felt that Vowell's main concerns revolved heavily around the unjust treatment toward the Cherokee, Andrew Jackson's Indian removal policy that ultimately led to Trail of Tears, and how modern Americans (in general) thoughtlessly neglect this piece of history. I intend to expand on her concerns, while properly expressing my perspective on these issues, as well. Vowell writes how the Cherokees adopted the religious, cultural, and political ideals of the United states saying, "in one decade, the Cherokees created a written language, started a free press, ratified a constitution, and founded a capital city." They were hoping that they would be able to coexist with this new nation. However, their good intentions to adapt proved to be a lost cause. I can see how this would bother Vowell. She sees the Cherokee yielding away from their culture and into this new innovative culture in hopes to work beside the United States. Only to later be denied. Not only that, but they are eventually forced to remove themselves from …show more content…

She even goes on to mention that "she wouldn't mind dancing on his grave." She also describes Jackson as "the first riffraff president." In 1830, the Indian removal act was authorized into law by Jackson. Ultimately, this is what allowed the Trail of tears to occur. From Vowell's perspective, and according to history, I can see why she attributes the Trail of Tears so heavily to Jackson. She made a statement that must've been bittersweet saying "I disapprove of what Jackson did to our people, but the fact is, Jackson is our people too." I can see how this would be hard to admit, considering the intense feelings she has for her native ancestors; but I noticed that she began to view this issue more objectively, rather than

Open Document