Being naive isn’t an option we can afford

Most people would say that Mary Rowland’s narrative complicates the widely known assumption that the English has no Most people would say that Mary Rowland’s narrative complicated the known intolerance that the English colonization had because we get to see that even they were being attacked by the natives of this land. That is a side of the story that I’ve personally never been introduced to until this class. At first I thought that I should sympathize with her story because after all, we all are humans and nobody should be treated so harshly. But I can’t be naive and allow myself to think that way, because if we take into consideration the ratio of the English victims versus the Native victims, we know which side had the most victims. Aside from that, when I was talking to my partner about whether we should sympathize or not, his response was “no, I sympathize with the natives because they had to go to those extremes–remember these were real peaceful people!” Which is true. I forgot to look at the intentions of the English versus the Natives when they would attack each other. Technically speaking, the Natives were practicing self-defense by any means necessary, and Im sure they didn’t intend to hurt babies and families, but they were trying to protect their families and their land.


-Luz Palacios


5 thoughts on “Being naive isn’t an option we can afford

  1. Although I agree with you, there is a passage in Rowlandson’s narrative in the fourth remove. In this section she talks about some Native Americans burning a woman and her child alive because she asked to go home. So everyone has their bad side too.


  2. I agree that the intention of war matters and war is wrong in general, but I believe the real question that should be posed is, is Anne a victim of war or a perpetuator of it? She can be viewed as a victim due to her status during the times, but also, she must have had an inkling of what her people were doing was wrong. She must have been following what her people wanted, but she should have also been aware of the atrocity that was surrounding her and that what they were doing was wrong.


  3. In Rowlandon’s narrative, the fourth narrative, she talks about how when two captives tried to leave they were stripped naked and burned alive as an example to the other captives. How does this play into protecting their family and land?


  4. I understand that in your post you are trying to justify the Natives for what they had to do on political grounds, its like a “they had to do what they had to” situation but I refuse to believe that torturing women and kids was the right way to do it. Before they got into defending their land the Natives should’ve established a boundary on how they can win this war without turning into the “barbarous monsters” that the colonists see them as.


  5. Refraining from sympathizing with a human being who has suffered the loss of a child due to the intentions of others is something I disagree with. Also, remember that Rowland’s husband was trying to establish peace with the natives. I offer the idea to challenge you to judge the individual bu their own actions rather than the collective.

    -Maya Gonzalws


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s