If i had to o a essay about the revolutionary war and to choose between ‘The Patriots’ or a history book? I would pick the history book. It’s not that it’s not accurate, it’s just that all of it is not true. Some of the details given in the movie really happened. Then again, Some of those details either didn’t happen or didn’t tell the whole truth. I’m going to give three examples of why i believe the movie ‘The Patriot’ isn’t the best choose for an essay or any school/business papers. My First example is the character Benjamin Martin. For one, Benjamin martin isn’t even a real person. Well not in this case anyway. Benjamin Martin is a character in the movie that it based off of different participants in the historical event. Benjamin
Martin was based off of Elijah Clarke. Elijah Clark was a militia fighter.He was also based off of Francis Marlon, Which was the leader of the war.Another person Benjamin Martin was based off of is Daniel Morgan.He was the Continental officer but in the movie it made him seem like he was a religious person but Daniel Morgan is not the religious person that Martin is made out to be.Also MArtin’s character is based on Andrew Pickens. He is another militia fighter who operated in the Carolina region.Thomas Sumter was also a person Benjamin was based on . He was an independent character that really didn’t like to follow the rules given by the Continental officer. Benjamin Martin is made up of all these people to appear in the movie as “ the hero” of the revolutionary war. My second example is The battle of Cowpens. When this battle was going in the movie Colonel Burwell were waiting in reserve behind the rise. What really happened was he was retreating to his position. They made it like that so The “hero” could play his part. Also in the movie, Benjamin Martin had to grab a flag and rally the Patriots. In the actual historical event, the British had broken discipline in anticipation of a rout. When they came over the rise they saw that they had been set up (close to what happened in the movie). LT. Colonel Banastre Tarleton was now retreating and fighting to escape. My third and final example is The Surrender of General Cornwallis. In the movie he as made out to be at least 50 years of age. In real life he was actually about in his early 40s at the time of the war. The movie made General Cornwallis seem like a very vain person, but really he wasn’t. He was not present at the surrender and occupation. He also found his efforts to move into North Carolina frustrated because of the various militia bands that continually harassed his supply lines and outposts. As you can see, this is the reason why i would rather use a history book then The actual movie. The movie doesn’t really give you all the information you need. It would give you some of the truth. Also they give their own little twist in the movie. So, if you were given and essay assignment or a business paper to write about the revolutionary war, go with a history book. If not your teacher/boss would look at you as though you didn’t know what you were talking about.
1776 by David McCullough is a non-fiction historical book that historically accounts an in depth view of The American Revolution. The book starts from late 1775 and spans to the end of 1776. The book includes the Battle of New York, the Battle of Brooklyn, the Battle of Boston, the Battle of Fort Washington, the Battle of Bunker Hill, and the ending Battle of Trenton in 1776. David McCullough adds a sense of emotion and color to this book where it 's more than a history book that lists facts. Not only does he add a sense of enjoyment to read, 1776 provides detailed accounts of the military life during the end of 1775 to the end of 1776 and detailed accounts of the battles. The author, David McCullough, is trying to make a point that 1776 is
I discussed the differences between Captain Thomas Preston’s Account of the Boston Massacre (1770) and Paul Revere, Image of The Bloody Massacre (1770). I then explained both men’s story beginning with Captain Thomas Preston’s vision of the event. I then explained Paul Revere version of the event. I then included my opinion which account I believed was most accurate and explained why.
Howard goes on to share that the story needs to be told from the standpoint of people from the war that’s not told in schoolbooks, “But to tell the story of the American Revolution, not from the standpoint of the schoolbooks, but from the standpoint of war as a complex
Benjamin Franklin, one of the Founding Fathers to the United States, was not a patriot but a mere loyalist to England before the dissolution between England and the colonies occurred. Sheila L. Skemp's The Making of a Patriot explores how Benjamin Franklin tried to stay loyal to the crown while taking interest in the colonies perception and their own representation in Parliament. While Ms. Skemp alludes to Franklin's loyalty, her main illustration is how the attack by Alexander Wedderburn during the Privy Council led to Franklin's disillusionment with the British crown and the greater interest in making the Thirteen Colonies their own nation. Her analysis of Franklin's history in Parliament and what occurred on the night that the council convened proves the change behind Franklin's beliefs and what lead to his involvement in the Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution.
The Revolutionary war, sparked by the colonist’s anger towards taxation without representation, was a conflict between the United States and its mother country Great Britain. This event had been considered the most significant event in the American history. It separated the thirteen colonies from the tyrannical ruling of King George. The revolutionary war was not a big war, “The military conflict was, by the standards of later wars, a relatively modest one. Battle deaths on the American side totaled fewer than 5,000”1. However, the war proved that the thirteen colonies were capable of defeating the powerful Great Britain. Over the years there were many Hollywood films made based on the revolutionary war, 1776, Revolution, Johnny Tremain, and The Patriot. But, no movie has stirred up as much controversy as the Mel Gibbson movie The Patriot. The patriot is very entertaining but it is historically inaccurate. Too much Hollywood “spices” was added to the movie for viewing pleasures.
In marked contrast to his famous father, who worked diligently on his autobiography until declining health would no longer allow it , William Franklin spent the years following the Revolutionary War wandering without purpose, the quintessential man without a country. Like many prominent loyalists to the Crown of England, William had suffered the confiscation of his property and the loss of his good name. William Franklin spent the first years of his English exile arguing in front of British Parliament for recompense on behalf of his fellow loyalists, with varying success, and for himself with none whatsoever. This endeavor having proven unfulfilling, William attempted to reconcile with his father and his son, Benjamin Franklin and William Temple Franklin, who had replaced William as Benjamin’s heir. For his efforts, William was rebuffed and made to suffer the indignity of virtual disinheritance. In defending his disownment of William, Benjamin bitterly noted, “the part he acted against me in the late war, which is of public notoriety, will account for my leaving him no more of an estate he endeavoured [sic] to deprive me of.”
The two movies I have chosen are, “Saving Private Ryan” and “A League of Their Own.” Both of these movies are related to World War 2 and they both show what life was like, whether it be at war or at home in America. I have chosen these two movies to write about because they give the audience an exceptional idea of what the war was really like.
... Bobrick, Benson. Fight for Freedom: The American Revolutionary War. New York: Atheneum, 2004. Print.
Simon Keller argues in his essay "Patriotism as Bad Faith" that patriotism is not a virtue but it is actually a vice. Keller begins by splitting the views on this philosophical debate into three different representations. The first being the "communitarian patriot", where patriotism is not only a valued virtue to someone's self but that it is actually an essential virtue. The second representation is a radical contradiction of the first, known as the "hard universalist. The hard Universalist sees patriotism as a vice instead of being any type of positive virtue. They think that everyone should be valued the same, and that there should be no favoritism. The third representation is the idea of the first two combined, to form what is called the "soft universalist." This view is understood as patriotism is allowed, and is not seen as a vice, but also that one has an obligation to the rest of the world, almost to try and treat them as a loyalty that you would have towards your own country. (p.112).
Although Band of Brothers is similar to many other non-fiction war novels, what makes this novel standout is the authors ability to prove to the reader that the Revolutionary war wasn’t just about lining up and killing as many people as possible, but rather the strategic approach that was needed for the Americans to even stand a chance against the powerhouse British army. What the braves soldiers went through in a time where they didn’t even have shoes to cover their feet was astonishing. Kelley’s main focus is to prove to the audience that the Revolutionary War was a demoralizing event in history. Kelly does a wonderful job capturing this by displaying in graphic detail, which in some instances, was hard to fathom. Kelly provides the reader with detailed mapping throughout the book providing the reader a better opportunity to visualize the battles as the occurred. In addition, Kelly’s tops it off by displaying detailed background about each “Giant” before their time in the spot light giving the reader the opportunity to build a relationship with each
"The Pamphlet War and the Boston Massacre." The American Revolution -. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Mar. 2014.
The movie for the most part is accurate, even though most commentators have a different standpoint. Many of us are aware of the revolution and other important historical events. But, what we have to put into perspective is they the way all of these historical events have been perceived.
Throughout history freedom has had many different meanings and definitions; based on race, gender, and ethnicity. According to the dictionary freedom means the state of being free or at liberty rather than in confinement or under physical restraint (“freedom” def. 1). Freedom may seem like something given to everyone however it was something workers had to fight for. Not everyone believed that workers’ rights needed to be changed, which led to a long battle between workers, employers and the government. To the working class people freedom meant making higher wages, having regulated hours, workable conditions and the right to free speech.
Was Brutus’ actions really an act of patriotism? In Julius Caesar, the play, he conspired with many other people to kill Caesar, so he wouldn’t become king. Brutus was a traitor because Caesar was his friend and he didn't stay loyal to him. Even though his action was dreadful towards his friend, the question is whether it was patriotic or not. Brutus was a patriot for he didn't want the people that lived in Rome to suffer from Caesar's dictatorship.
American Heritage ranks number one out of high schools in Florida for the 7th straight year and number nine out of 22,000 high schools throughout the nation. In simpler terms, American Heritage creates a tough academic environment. Through my fourteen years of education, school remains a challenge. The intense curriculum challenges students, the abundant clubs provide many opportunities, and the teachers demand dedication and focus. American Heritage represents the terrifying dragon I must slay as Beowulf defeated his own.