Monday, April 13, 2009
Mary Rowland's life with the Indians
The preface in this excerpt from Mary Rowland was really saddening because we see how the Indians came to attack many English men and they raided certain houses. Mary Rowland was one of the many women who had her house raided by Indians and the killings that were performed by the Indians were described as being extremely gruesome. For example, one of the descriptions was, "...but they would not hearken to him but knockt him in head, and stript him naked, and split open his Bowels." (pg. 467) Not only this but Mary Rowland's home was also set on fire, and many people who lived in her home were gruesomely harmed, and caught off guard with no way for them to defend themselves. As she goes through her different "removes" and tells the tales of her journey with the Indians as a captive and slave, we see her try to obtain pity from the reader, and then instantly she changes her tune to feelings of optimism and uplifted spirits because she finds God in herself who gives her the strenghth to carry on from day to day in her miserable life with the Indians. We see this portrayed on pg. 470 when Rowland writes, "God was with me, in a wonderfull manner, carrying me along, and bearing up my spirit, that it did not quite fail." This clearly demonstrates how Rowland depended on God during her journey to get her through whatever she was going to endure. I thought it was interesting how the Indians were treating many of these English people so horribly but yet they too believed in God and had a Bible with them. It boggles my mind how people who follow the holy word of God could kill be such horrible people by killing others in cold blood. It also intrigued me how Mary Rowland was treated so horribly, yet she confided in the scriptures of the Bible to give her strength to keep her motivated to survive. Towards the end of the excerpt we see how Rowland felt that it was her destiny from God to be put through that horrible journey with the savage Indians and she claims that if God is willing to put a person through something like that, then he is more than willing to save them and keep them safe during their journey. She also feels that because she was rich and had everything that she could desire in her life, God took all of that away from her and left her almost near death in order for her to understand what it was like to have nothing. I thought this excerpt was extremely detailed and Rowland really did a good job on making the reader feel like you are actually with her on this journey and witnessing all of these sickening actions taking place.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The first thing I notice when reading the preface to this piece is when it is written "Methinks this dispensation doth bear some resemblance to those of Joseph, David, and Daniel" (p.441, in my book, different version). What I found odd about this is, even though Job is quoted directly before, Mrs. Rowlandson's narrative is not likened to the story of Job. I agree with Lauren that Mary felt it was her God-given destiny to have everything be taken away and suffer while all the while being protected by God and eventually saved. At first she has her doubts and then confides in God. This is almost exactly like the story of Job. I found it odd that while Job is quoted, Mary Rowlandson is not directly compared to Job. I see a very clear and distinct comparison of the two. Anyone else?
ReplyDeleteI don't believe that the Native Americans who were cruel were said to also be Christians. The one's who were were distinguished as such but Rowlandson refers to them mostly as Pagans. I would say that Rowlandson's experience make her a true model for Puritan belief. Many weaker people would have lost her faith but the Puritan resolve within her which believed that God made her to suffer for a reason, while this idea is foreign to us today, helped her along. As for the literary merit of the piece that Lauren points out I do agree that whether it was intended or not Rowlandson depicts the scenes in vivid imagery.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Joe I agree there is a very clear comparison between Rowlandson and Job. I'm not sure Rowlandson would be the type to compare herself to such a biblical figure, that's more for people like us to do, but I would say there are great parallels. This is particularly emphasized at the end of the piece in which Rowlandson comments on how she had everything and through the taking away of it her faith in God did not waiver and in fact grew stronger.
I wonder exactly what Mary would have said had she heard of the victories of the English over the Indians before her capture. I know she condemns the Indians for their rejoicing in the defeat of the English and admonishes them for their mourning of their own losses. I don't think she realizes that what they are feeling is a natural response for any group who considers themselves to be "the good guys."
ReplyDeleteI am impressed with the way she is able to describe the conditions she faced, and the vividness of the attacks in the first place. This really is pretty shocking,and would seem graphic even in today's age. To consider that this comes from not only a Puritan but also a woman is pretty interesting. I am impressed with the constitution of Mary Rowlandson. She went through a hell that most people in America wouldn't be able to imagine, much less survive. She not only lived through this, but thanked God for placing her in the trials and for giving her the strength to survive.
I also find this interesting as the first captivity narrative. This really has become a common theme in much of popular culture. There seems to be a few twists on the themes, with love stories between captive and abductor, revenge stories with someone trying to save the captive, and escape stories of the captive, but all can credit the captivity narrative of Mary Rowlandson for their roots. The fact that this was a best selling narrative for so long shows that Americans are fascinated by the gory, and also relate to the fortitude of a fellow American. I think this is the real appeal of her narrative.
Justin, this kind of goes along with what you’re saying. I also found the capture narrative interesting. I think I read the narrative in a similar fashion to how you read it, as a piece of literature and not as a series of facts. I’m not saying that non-fiction isn’t literature, but I did not read this under the genre of non-fiction. I think this is based on a true story to the same level as, say, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is based on a true story. I’m sure most of the events happened, but I think she embellished a lot, too.
ReplyDeleteAs I read the work, I kept questioning how accurate her narrative was. From what I gather, she would not be able to keep a diary for a couple reasons: 1. it’s near impossible to buy parchment and ink out in the woods, 2. if she were able to get her hands on paper and ink the Indians barely let her have a bible, I don’t think they would allow her to keep a journal. This would mean that this narrative would be written long after the events occurred. The human memory is easily manipulated. If someone has a grudge and they’re telling a story of how they’ve been wronged the events they recap are going to be embellished so they seem as if they’re the victim. I think that most Puritans didn’t look to the Indians as equals, so this bias would also increase after being turned into a slave.
At certain points I did find myself wondering how much of this story was embelished upon. For the reasons that Dan mentions (where would she keep the ink/parchment, how would she keep it hidden from the Indians), it seems obvious that she wrote this after the whole ordeal was over, not during. Whether this affects your own interpretation of the authenticity or not is purely up to you; I don't necessarily think the specific events in the story should take away from Rowlandson's overall message to her readers. That message being, as stated in the Preface, to "read, peruse, ponder and from hence lay up something from the experience of another, against thine own turn comes: that so thou also through patience and consolation of the Scripture mayest have hope." (Heath 467) This captivity narrative should be used to judge our own actions, not Rowlandson's.
ReplyDeleteThe scenes portrayed in Mary Rowlandson's "Narrative" reminds me a lot of things my roommate talks about in regards to colony/ Native American relations. He was telling me the other day that the English repeatedly attacked this one village. Finally the indians came in and grabbed the guy who kept calling for the raids and just basically tortured him until he died. They did absolutely gruesome things such as filling the guys stomach with gun powder, burning him, and finally scalping him. His last few moments on Earth were pretty horrendous. This story makes me wonder... did the English settlements have it coming? I mean there has to be some anger over displacement. If I've learned nothing in most of my classes, it's that the relations between the colonists and tribes were strained at best. I always find it particularly interesting when people take numerous hardships and try to justify their faith on them. I would have a hard time with that. More power to them I suppose.
ReplyDeleteI too, questioned the authenticity of certain parts of Rowlandson's narrative. However, like Joey, I feel that we are supposed to take more away from the message behind the work than to scrutinize the validity of certain events it depicts. The bottom line is that Rowlandson’s Puritanism is what helped her through her captivity and she shows this to her audience via her narrative.
ReplyDeleteAs Justin points out, captivity narratives have become quite popular. I think people are interested in them because they depict people in dire situations. This is not to say that we like to see people suffer, but more that we, as humans, like to see how other humans find the strength to persevere through seemingly hopeless situations –we are fascinated by the human condition. For Rowlandson, her unyielding faith in God is what she relied on during her captivity. I feel that today captivity narratives are told in a new way, mainly through movies and television programs. Instead of relying on descriptions and imagery, like that used by Rowlandson, film makers rely on the audience’s sense of sight. To me, the goals of both writers and directors should be to evoke emotions and audiences must use these emotions to interpret the overall message and importance of the work on their own. The fact that Rowlandson’s narrative was so popular, despite being written by a woman, indicates that her consistent faith in God was valued and serves as an example for all Puritans.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI kept thinking while i was reading this that Mary had an amazing memory because she obviously hadn't been writing this as it was happening. As Dan was saying, she must have embellished some of the stories. I find it hard to believe that she could have remembered all of the specific details included in the work. However, i have never been held captive so maybe it is possible.
ReplyDeleteI felt that the one of the most important parts was when Mary talks about God taking away everything so she may value life and realize how lucky she had been. She was an amazing person to be able to find the will to live through this, it probably would have depressed me greatly to think that the god who controlled my life was capable of desroying everything i knew.
Everytime Mary talked about the savage barbarians, i wanted to fight back with you are the savages to them. The indians werent the aggressors; they were responding to an occupying force. At certains times in the narrative Mary hints that she may realize this as well.
As far as Mary's work becoming popular, i don't believe her gender hindered the popularity but increased it. People were probably drawn more into a story about a defenseless woman in captivity than a man. She was more of a victim because her gender made her less able to defend herself. Also, people were very scared of Indian attacks, and people love to be scared when they are safe in their homes.
As I read the narrative I focused on the accuracy of the events, the validity of the narration, and the relationship between the Native Americans and the Puritans. She portrays her captors as savages that eat human flesh and wear necklaces of thumbs. That’s pretty hard for me to get over. But if I do accept everything at face value and assume that the puritans as a whole are victims of atrocities committed by the Native Americans, I do feel pity for her. At the same time, it’s impressive that she is able to keep her faith in such a horrible situation. Which I suppose is more important than accuracy.
ReplyDeleteJustin you make a good point about this being very one sided. Through Rowlandson's eyes we can see the Native Americans as being somewhat cruel in their boasting of their victories but we never see the other side. The English army had its share of victories and probably its share of Native American prisoners. We can only wonder on what sort of celebrations the English army had upon their victories and on how they treated their prisoners, which I'm sure wasn't kind. Without that information all we have is Rowlandson's depiction and it leaves us with a negative view of the natives and we have to be careful to recognize that this is only a one sided story.
ReplyDeleteI think it is important to look at the intended audience when reading this. I think Joey is right, it’s more a way to learn from her actions, and this piece was directed at her children. In response to Joe’s question about Job, I think that if this entire piece had been written by Increase Mather, I think you would see a lot more of the Job comparisons, and this could then be considered an example of typology. However, the fact that the introduction does make this comparison, and the way that many have pointed out it seems this could be embellished throughout makes me wonder if the original publishers could have possibly added to the narrative.
ReplyDeleteI am also interested in the captivity narrative aspect of this piece because we still see its affect on modern American society. In the introduction to Mary Rowlandson, Sharon Harris states that this “one woman’s trauma-ridden experience of captivity became an icon of a national ideology” (462). I think it’s interesting that national ideology still seems to be as strong today as it was at the time of King Philip’s war. Even in the past week, the news has been dominated by the captivity of an American captain by pirates off the coast of Somalia.
I agree with what you said about her thinking it was a test from God. It was interesting to hear the part about how she was given the oppurtunity to try to escape from the camp with two other Indians but chose not to because she wanted to leave it in the hands of God. This to me was more powerful than anything else we have read. All the other people we have read talk about giving themselves to God, and trusting in him. But she did it under more horror and pressure than any of those other people could imagine. In alot of the other readings the people came off to me as eccentrics who would rationalize their surroundings with God, but i feel like if Mary had not have done this she would have died.
ReplyDeleteWhen I say that I don’t necessarily trust her accuracy I don’t mean that I respect her any less for it. She obviously went through an awful time, lost friends and family, but it is something to keep in mind. Her religious faith is also enviable. I couldn’t imagine being able to rely on faith because I do not have what she did. Also I think Eric’s reference to the Somali captivity last week, and the sixty taken today, is a good connection. The fact that human life is still used as a war tactic is saddening; no matter what side of the battle the person may be on.
ReplyDeleteMary Rowlandson endures a great amount of pain throughout the whole story. She had many reasons to be angry, hurt, and depressed as she lost everything in her life. Towards the end of the story she admits, "Oh! The wonderful power of God that mine eyes have seen, affording matter enough for my thoughts to run in, that when others are sleeping mine eyes are weeping"(491). We can see the repression she experiences at the end when she can't even sleep because of all the sufferings she had experience. There she basically admits that she was not truly happy. This could have been the crucial point in the narrative where her feelings of being angry, hurt, and depressed throughout the whole journey could have led her to a nervous break down. As Mary is faced daily with a new set of challenges, we see her regularly ask the lord for guidance on how to continue her life as she is abused by the Indians. She also expressed her emotions though citations from the Bible. The passages made her believe that the captivity she had to go through was because it had a meaning and it would strengthen her faith in God. She realized that God consistently test his people to see if they will believe on him.
ReplyDeleteBased on her writing Mrs. Mary Rowlandson seems to be a very strong woman. We hear stories of great people all of the time going through horrific events but staying strong to survive and have the mind set to write about it and face it. Embellished or not this is a narrative about her experiences. The bottom line is that she had gone through horrible circumstances. This was written as some sort of a diary and is left for us to read. With that, it is our job to understand the Indians perspectives as well. It is a difficult thing to do because we are not able to reach many accurate documents about Native Americans true experiences. Some of the things we do know is that they do not receive the respect and understanding that they deserve. In addition, there have been many brutal victories over the Indians by the English. However, I disagree with discrediting the authenticity of Mrs. Rowlandson. It is true, we do not know for sure the events that took place, but that does not allow us to discredit any of the writing Mrs. Rowlandson has provided for us. One thing I can agree with is that we must also search for the Indians perspective in this situation. Until then we must respect what we are given and attempt to understand the situation as a whole.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Bryan and Justin about this being very one-sided. But, I really wouldn't expect Rowlandson to show both sides considering what had happened to her. Then one must consider though, if she really were a true child of God, would she not give some sort of forgiveness to the Native Americans?
ReplyDeleteBack to it being one-sided, we've all been taught since Elementary School that Native Americans were savage and cruel. Hell, I even remember seing Last of the Mohicans in school at a very young age and those gruesome images really stick with you. As we get older we learn to question what we read in text books and actually consider the fact that our ancestors came here, took the land from the Native Americans, and enslaved them. So, while they did do some disgusting things to the English, our ancestors did some pretty bad things as well.
Just to comment on the pirate issue; I'm sure this story barely broke news in any other countries, just like we tend not to care too much when we see "Suicide bomber kills 13 on Gaza Strip." It's sad, really, too bad we couldn't think of the world as a whole rather than succumbing to extreme nationalism.
Mary to me has more character than anyone we have read yet. You not only get more about her from her writings, but it gave me the clearest example of their religion in action. I know that might sound wierd, but i strongly beleive that. The other writers we have read had tremendous hardships, but were mostly surrounded by other people like them. Mary is by herself, and you see how strongly she clings to her religion. Not only that but i found her writing to be exciting, a word that should never be associated with the Puritans. There are parts of the story that are a whole new genre of writing. One part that i found very powerful was when she wrote,"I could not bear to be in the room where any dead person was, but now the case is changed; I must and could ly down by my dead babe, side by side all the night after." As the reader, you see Mary change over the course of her events, and even if you dont agree with her spiritual views, you understand why.
ReplyDeleteMary Rowlandson was indeed a strong woman. She endured a lot of pain, both physical and emotional. Throughout the history of the world there are numerous cases to the killings and hostage holding of different people based on race, religious belief, etc. The fact that she documented the removals reminded me of the Jews during the holocaust. Of course Rowlandsons situation had a few different details and was many generations before the holocaust occurred, nonetheless she, like many of the Jews during the holocaust documented her sufferings. Despite this though (and I'm not trying to make a comparison between what happened during the holocaust and what happened here but I think there is a brief similarity) Rowlandson seemed to be optimistic that she would persevere, and she did. Throughout this narrative I pictured a very strong and wise woman who looked out for others. Rowlandson felt chosen by God to go through this, so that she could feel what it was like to have nothing, but also to help those around her. She never gave up caring for her child, she worried about the man who was shot, and she constantly thought of her family and their well-being. She put a lot of her suffering beside her and didn't worsen the situation she was in, instead she just accepted that this was happening to her.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Caitlin. There is no doubt in my mind that Rowlandson was a strong woman, and I cannot even begin to imagine what she went through. Rowlandson is, as many of us have said, one of the most interesting characters we've encountered so far in this course, and
ReplyDeleteher ability to find strength through her religion is admirable.
I enjoyed reading Mary's passage and I also enjoyed reading what others thought of certain things. I agree with many who said that she was a strong woman to keep such great faith and hope in God during such horrible times. I do however feel that the story like many stories were embellished somewhat as others have mentioned in their posts. It is the stereotypical view to picture Indians as mean, with feathers and so forth. We have to keep into consideration all the bad things that happened to the Indians. We are hearing one side of this horrible story. Yes, no matter what happened to the Indians they should have never retaliated in that manner. I also think that she was extremely strong to think about others instead of herself while this was happening. It takes a very strong individual to do this. Her memories are what makes her and all of us who we are today. It is a great source that she decided to record these events and feelings down.
ReplyDelete