2) What do you think of Satank's idea that "the Great Father seem not to be able to govern his braves"?
6 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Tony B. Santanks entire speech is humble and respectful in tone. He speaks of past days when Indians and whites got along peacefully and there seemed enough land to placate all. These are obviously fond memories of a time he wishes would return. He also talks of the many recent injustices suffered at the hands of white men. However, Santank does not place blame on their leaders, or more specifically the "Great Father". Santank seems to understand the diffuculty in ruling over such a vast and populace land. He even recognizes genuine disdain from the Great Father as it pertains to the treatment of the Indians. Primarily, Santank's speech is an appeal for better delegation and managment from white leaders, not an angry finger-pointing rant one might expect from the leader of a mistreated people. He trusts the Great Father's agenda and nature, deservedly or not, and positions himself as a respectful subservant. Santank's speech was eloquent and intellegent. Remaining humble in the face of a more powerful people, he still effectively communicated the problems and needs of his own people.
There were no other posts for me to respond to when I posted this.
Tony, I agree with you about the objectiveness and humility Satank showed when delivering his speech. I think it is really admirable that he trusts the Great Father so fully. To me it shows that his religion and sprituality were very real to him--moreso than many of us may be able to imagine when we may think of modern spirituality.
I too agree with Tony, Satank gave a great speech that really looked into how much some of the tribes respected their new religions. He also did not give his speech in an angry way but a more subdued way, which in some cases can help get a point across much better than coming off angry. The speech also acknowledges that they do still trust the great father and believe the wrongs will be made right for them.
rachel c. yes Santanks uses a respectful tone, hes still admonishing the great white father for not controlling his people. The indians were trying to show there patience. no matter how many times the white man failed them, they still believed it would be made right.
Brian, I agree with Tony that Satank's speech was both eloquent and intellegent. He also effectively communictated his position to the white commisioners without further perpetuating an existing and continually degrading situation.
Satank realizes that his people are in a situation that forces them to comply with the white delegation. In doing so he recognizes the power of the U.S. Army and its ability to anilate the Indian population if so necessary. At the same time Satank wastes no time in condemning the past relationships between their two peoples by pointing out how their relationship has changed over the years ending with the hope that these wrongs have stopped and that the future situation will be made right. But just as Satank addresses that the Great White Father can't control his braves. The Kiowas and Commanches that make peace on this day are again dealt with another failed effort on the side of the whites. The failure of Congress to appropriate funds again provides evidnece that the Great White Father does not have control because either the commissioners were wrong to make promises or the Congress was wrong to follow through on them. Either way the people of Satank were again left with false and unfilled promises.
I also agree that the faithfulness Santanks had was impressive. And that his belief in the "great father" showed that spirituality was very important to him.
6 comments:
Tony B.
Santanks entire speech is humble and respectful in tone. He speaks of past days when Indians and whites got along peacefully and there seemed enough land to placate all. These are obviously fond memories of a time he wishes would return.
He also talks of the many recent injustices suffered at the hands of white men. However, Santank does not place blame on their leaders, or more specifically the "Great Father". Santank seems to understand the diffuculty in ruling over such a vast and populace land. He even recognizes genuine disdain from the Great Father as it pertains to the treatment of the Indians.
Primarily, Santank's speech is an appeal for better delegation and managment from white leaders, not an angry finger-pointing rant one might expect from the leader of a mistreated people. He trusts the Great Father's agenda and nature, deservedly or not, and positions himself as a respectful subservant.
Santank's speech was eloquent and intellegent. Remaining humble in the face of a more powerful people, he still effectively communicated the problems and needs of his own people.
There were no other posts for me to respond to when I posted this.
Stephanie C.:
Tony, I agree with you about the objectiveness and humility Satank showed when delivering his speech. I think it is really admirable that he trusts the Great Father so fully. To me it shows that his religion and sprituality were very real to him--moreso than many of us may be able to imagine when we may think of modern spirituality.
Kristin d.K.
I too agree with Tony, Satank gave a great speech that really looked into how much some of the tribes respected their new religions. He also did not give his speech in an angry way but a more subdued way, which in some cases can help get a point across much better than coming off angry. The speech also acknowledges that they do still trust the great father and believe the wrongs will be made right for them.
rachel c.
yes Santanks uses a respectful tone, hes still admonishing the great white father for not controlling his people. The indians were trying to show there patience. no matter how many times the white man failed them, they still believed it would be made right.
Brian,
I agree with Tony that Satank's speech was both eloquent and intellegent. He also effectively communictated his position to the white commisioners without further perpetuating an existing and continually degrading situation.
Satank realizes that his people are in a situation that forces them to comply with the white delegation. In doing so he recognizes the power of the U.S. Army and its ability to anilate the Indian population if so necessary. At the same time Satank wastes no time in condemning the past relationships between their two peoples by pointing out how their relationship has changed over the years ending with the hope that these wrongs have stopped and that the future situation will be made right. But just as Satank addresses that the Great White Father can't control his braves. The Kiowas and Commanches that make peace on this day are again dealt with another failed effort on the side of the whites. The failure of Congress to appropriate funds again provides evidnece that the Great White Father does not have control because either the commissioners were wrong to make promises or the Congress was wrong to follow through on them. Either way the people of Satank were again left with false and unfilled promises.
Cassie H.
I also agree that the faithfulness Santanks had was impressive. And that his belief in the "great father" showed that spirituality was very important to him.
Post a Comment