When words from respected figures in history are taken and used in an argument, it creates difficulty for anyone who tries to undermine that argument. If one opposes an argument in which a great figure would have accepted, he/she would also feel as though he /she is opposing that figure. “Just as the prophets of the eighth century B.C. left their villages and carried their ‘thus saith the Lord’...so am I compelled to carry the gospel of freedom-” (King 3) is one example in which King mentions respected figures in religion to further his argument. King is using the prophets to compare their work to his, creating a great appeal to ethos by describing the credibility of his choices.
I think its crucial that we remember peoples’ stories because I believe in the quote, “Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it”. I think things written from the actual family and friends of soldiers would evoke even more of the reality and sympathy from readers. People could see how war reaches people in a ripple effect. Lastly, the veterans who are alive should be helped too.
While Confederate generals and leaders were certainly guilty of at least aiding the cause of oppression in the United States, plenty of statues of long since dead figures exist despite the horrible atrocities they had committed based on modern standards. Statues of Vlad the Impaler, the Romanian warlord who inspired the modern day Dracula, are a prime example. Though he mercilessly killed many Ottoman invaders with his infamous use of impalement, he is still regarded as a patriotic hero-figure by the people, not to mention his role as a tourist
Overall, the authors make a correct point, because it is easy to fabricate a story, but it’s harder to hide the factual information. The people who care enough to delve into the factual books will gain the benefits of it. I agree with Katz and Vishny that those factual books need to be put in the education system, because they serve a vital purpose to the students. History cannot be taught correctly when everything isn’t shared from the
Another example is Ida B. Wells-Barnett who wrote "Lynch Law", which used data to support her anti lynching movement. It showed how from 1882 the lynching was at 52 and has increased to 169 in one year by 1891 (Arnove & Zinn, pg. 233). These two are both example so how this time should not be forgotten and should have a monument to how people what happen in the past and to give respect to the people who died from lynching by having their names on the monument. I think this was a great idea because it shows history and I feel history should be shown in monuments and exhibits so people can learn more and having a better understand of what happen during the lynching period. I think it was a good thing to do and they should come up with more monuments for things that happen in
If they are meant for the young, to make the text easier to understand, or if the author simply says that the text is not historically accurate, then indeed we do possess the right to do such things. However, assuming that the text does not meet these requirements, then the author is lying to those who choose to read it. He is also dishonoring the memory of the people present in the story (assuming they are deceased) by either taking the collective glory of multiple people and pushing it solely onto one person, or by making a person do some heroic act that never happened. Finally, the longer a lie circulates, the more people see it as the truth. Many people believe that Revere completed the ride alone in a matter of a couple of hours, when in fact that is impossible.
The United States has a history of holding its leaders in high honor. Since the birth of the country, statues have been instituted, monuments built, and names of locations dedicated—all in an effort to display the reverence associated with such important individuals. No leader is without their flaws, however, and this becomes a pertinent issue when taking into account the brutal history of the nation. The debate over whether we should honor our flawed leaders or not is fundamental as the U.S. wrestles with its past. Given the atrocities that many committed, no, we should not honor our flawed leaders—however, it is inevitable to do so as each leader throughout history has their flaws.
In this Informative nonfiction,Mary Kate Frank, Do Mummies Belong In Museums ? We read about reasons that mummies belong and do not belong on display. I think mummies should not be displayed in museums because it's disrespectful,there are other ways to learn about Egypt, and Egyptians went to great lengths to hide the pharaohs . One reason why mummies should not be displayed is that it's very disrespectful. I know this because on pg 19 it says “After all, those shrouded bodies were once living people with families and friends, just like us.”
It is true that most monuments honor historical moments, however, the way that these memorials are placed can affect certain groups of people. For instance, in an article from The New York Times titled “Waiting for Crazy Horse,” Lawrence Downes rises the issues regarding location, not only with the Crazy Horse memorial, but also with Mount Rushmore. Downs first explains his position on the placement of Mount Rushmore: “I have to admit: Mount Rushmore bothers me. It was bad enough that white men drove the Sioux from the hills they still hold sacred; did they have to crave faces all over them too?” Most people can agree that the treatment of Native Americans in this country is certainly not the best, but Downes does make a good point that not only is it disrespectful that a group of people were forced off land that held important to them, but that the faces that represent the people who caused them an immense amount of suffering are “graffitied” on their land.
For example of a good rendering of one of the characters would’ve been Odysseus as he had played his role brilliantly straight from the text in the book, in the way he had acted, with the way he had thought, talked, and felt in his act. Another example would’ve been Telemachus, but had he acted exactly like his character it would’ve also been perfect except for that the characters from the story are written to act the way they act, and talk they way they talk, while the actors, and actresses have to simulate those characters to way that they become them which is difficult, but is given credit for how close they had gotten. A final example would be Penelope as she had done fine, until the end of the film in which instead of taking a while to find out that Odysseus was as Odysseus said he was, but instead just instantly found out that it was him and ran straight for him, which left this scene kinda lacking. This shows the way that the Director takes on the quality and appropriateness of the Actors and Actresses rendering of the characters of the
Therefore, these stories must be truthful and well thought out for the past to guide our future actions. If first hand accounts don’t push a true moral viewpoint, then future generations that pass these stories down won’t be taught the important lessons that come from history. Elizabeth argues this in her interpretation of the past when she says that the past shapes how we act in the future and whether we make “penance or reparation,” so to ignore the implications behind a skewed, disproven, and outdated view on a past event would screw up the moral progression of history, and make our present and future reality less informed, less well-taught, and less ethical. Once again, in a practical sense, there is nothing wrong with understanding the differing views around past events. It wouldn’t be smart or practical to simply ignore why Hitler chose to persecute the victims of the Holocaust, it would actually be better to do so.
Cheerleading and Gymnastics is a display of discipline, practice, and dedication, determination, and athleticism. Many people say that cheerleading and gymnastics are the same thing. I say that they’re not the same thing. They both have some similarities, but they have differences too. Cheerleading and gymnastics have many traits in common, both are very athletic.
Another example would be on pg. 39 in the article “About Beowulf”, he was described as a young warrior of great strength and courage” fighting off Grendel, a “bloodthirsty foe”. This representation gives a vivid characterization of Beowulf which also is a common stereotype in other heroes in modern films such Batman, Spiderman, Superman etc.… In addition, they are usually described as strong and full of courage (Simon, par 2-10, Giles par 2). Also this representation shows how the hero in medieval romantic literature takes on an enormous challenge just to help other people which is also a common stereotype of heroes in modern film because they take it upon themselves to save the world.
If you had a statue in your town, Why would you want a statue representing your town that isn’t a hero? The text states, “Instead of honoring the officers, it honored the killers. That kind of “honor” has no place in an American city.” What do you think? From the other side, this statue and other statues are memories to some.
Sometimes while writing a historical fiction, events become more factual than fictional. A perfect example of this happening in a historical fiction, is the book Pompeii by Robert Harris. Pompeii takes place in 79 AD during the days prior to the destructive eruption of Mount Vesuvius which destroyed all of the Roman town Pompeii. The location of the book are the cities or towns that surround the Aqua Augusta, such as Misenum and Pompeii. Harris’s exceptionally descriptive anecdote of the events leading to the volcanic eruptions implores readers to wonder if some of the events in this fictional story could have actually happened.
