Rancid Myth Of Columbus Analysis

As promised during our first meeting of this course, we have received a copious amount of handouts. Papers detailing everything from Frederick Jackson Turner’s 1893 frontier thesis to the cast of Stagecoach have graced my desk. Consequently, with each week yielding more enthralling and informative packets than the last, it has grown increasingly difficult to select my favorite. Originally, the piece that resonated with me the most, was by far the packet detailing “The Rancid Myth of Columbus”. This was largely due to the fact that it was distributed during the first week of the class, and really set the tone. Specifically, it suggested that everything I had learned previously during my education was wrong and was more aligned with the mythic depiction of the west. The title alone, “The Rancid Myth of Columbus”, was jarring, and shocked me because I was used to hearing Columbus praised. However, the article written by Rodolfo Acuña, insists that this celebration is wildly “offensive” (Acuña 1). Reading Acuña’s sardonic and brutally honest remarks left me immediately smitten with both the the article and our ‘American West’ course itself. This is because I finally felt like I was being educated with the truth, which is something that no textbook or teacher prior to this course would have to dared to convey. Consequently, “The Rancid Myth

Furthermore, White elaborates on the connotation of the term ‘genocide’ itself. As an English major, I absolutely loved this inclusion since I place an exorbitant amount of emphasis on words myself. Therefore, I found it interesting to read that White believes that genocide’s “impact has been diminished through overuse”. While I typically agree that incessant use of dramatic language can lead to the weakening of powerful terms, I do not find that to be the case with ‘genocide’, which is still as terrifying as