What are some of the comments that Pollock makes on ourcontemporary society? Why does she veil it in the discussion of Fort Walsh and the situation surrounding Sitting Bull rather than a contemprary play?
17 comments:
Anonymous
said...
The injustice that Gall speaks of is quite similar to ones existing in our contemporary society. The situation of being allies at one point and expecting some sort of compensation and then not getting it could very well happen in society today. By expressing it in the situation surrounding Sitting Bull, Pollock provides the audience with an excellent example- especially as it is a recorded historical event.
Pollock uses Gall to portray a situation similar to one that is occuring now in our own contemporary society. Gall's ancestors helped Canada and Gall is now looking for some compensation for their efforts, but he is rejected. This is happening in Canada now to a lesser extent with the First Nation people of Canada, and how the gouvernemnt is trying to fufill its treaty with them. Pollock uses a historical event, rather than a contemporary sitaution, like fort Walsh, so that she can teach people from Canada to not make the same mistake twice.
Gall is speaking of injustice quite similar to that in our contemporary society in both interactions between the government of Canada and the First Nations People, and also those who lose out on an agreement. There are still issues between the Candian government and the First Nations people. For example, the Lubicon Cree have been involved in a struggle with the government over treaty land being used for oil and gas developement for the past 20ish years. Also, there are countless situations in life where people make agreements, or have expectations of peopele, which are broken. Pollock uses the situation surrounding Sitting Bull because it is a well established event that doesn't directly apply to contemporary society, but has similar underlying ideas, and allows her to comment of things that may be going on now without too much contraversy.
Gall's description of discrimination that his people, the Sioux who are Native peoples, have to endure is to a large extent how our contemporary society is today. Gall mentions the dreadful conditions that his people have to live in such as their houses getting destroyed, the women and their children crying immensly, and the famine endured. Our society today is similar to what Gall is menitoning but at a smaller degree. For many years and even today the the relationship between the government and the Native Peoples have been filled with downs due to the Aboriginals enduring povery and famine much like the Sioux. Gall and Sitting Bull are attempting to talk to Walsh in order to prevent their distress and to find a way that Canada can help them, which many aboriginals are doing in Canada as we speak. Although the governemnt have written treaties with the Native peoples, the poverty experienced is still going on in our society. Also, the use of Fort Walsh displays a more historical event that puts the audience more in the play and provide them with more understanding of what went on in that time period and to understand that is still occurring.
Pollock makes the statement that our contemporary society is still very prejudice whether it is agianst race, religion, social class ect. She also makes a comment that many people are torn between this prejudice, they may not want to discriminate in this way yet are pressure by society or are expected to act in this way. The reason Pollock uses "Walsh" to explain this because this way she has something specific to refrence to that many people are familiar with. She also uses this event because of the time when it occured to prove just how far we havent come even though this occured over 100 years ago.
Pollock comments on our society, as one with many injustices. At this time in history we can already see some of the problems with the power of the negotiated treaties. In the play the situation that Gall is in with the queens unfulfilled obligations to his peaople for helping them fight of the americans. He expects the Queen to keep the word of her grandfather and look after his people, however the government feels that this happened along time ago and that they have little obligations to these people. This is a comment on our society, because this is simalar to the problems we have today, over interpretations of treaties negotiated over 100 years ago. The times are changing, yet we are still bound to promises made in the past under different circumstances.
Pollack makes it aware, that discrimination and prejudices-although common in the 1800's- are still occuring in today's contemporary society. She did this through the conversations between Gall and Walsh. Pollack had written the play in the early 1970s, and since then the discrimination and intolerance has significantly decreased, but she was very much aware that discrimination would not completely diminish-even in the future (such as in present society). Gall felt he should have been compensated for his ancestors services as promised. He was not compensated, but instead victimized and sterotyped because of his skin colour and race.
Pollack makes it aware, that discrimination and prejudices-although common in the 1800's- are still occuring in today's contemporary society. She did this through the conversations between Gall and Walsh. Pollack had written the play in the early 1970s, and since then the discrimination and intolerance has significantly decreased, but she was very much aware that discrimination would not completely diminish-even in the future (such as in present society). Gall felt he should have been compensated for his ancestors services as promised. He was not compensated, but instead victimized and sterotyped because of his skin colour and race.
Pollock used the historical event in Fort Walsh to represent the discrimination happening in modern day contemporary society. Gall's ancestor has fought for Britain against the Americans but in return was denied the right of refugee. Predujice to different ehtnic groups are still happening today. Pollock uses Fort Walsh to indicate that people in Canada has never changed their attitude toward different races.
Pollock uses Sitting Bull and the Sioux nation in order to portray the significance of racial discrimination and abandonment that is occurring everyday in the contemporary life. The story depicting the Sioux nation being driven out of their homeland, and the Canadian Government betraying the Sioux nation all resembles to what audiences reading this play may experiences in real life. From a person being kicked out of a store to wars between countries. The racial differences between people can cause severe conflicts that can be avoided if the feeling of one being inferior to the other is somehow altered to that of toleration instead. Within the play, the character of Walsh can be described as the character that tolerates the Sioux Nation rather seeing them as a minor race. As a result, Walsh was able to keep peace with Sitting Bull, unlike the Americans and their relationship with the natives. The play also demonstrated the feeling of abandonment, specifically how the Canadian Government betraying the Sioux Nation for all the work they did helping them fight the Americans earlier in history. It makes sense for Pollock to write the play about the Historical Event at Fort Walsh rather than events happened contemporarily. The reason is that many events that happened with in the 10 years span before now is still being debated and there are still many different viewpoints towards these events. Therefore, it is much easier to write about historical events because there are fewer opinions about events that happened 100 years before, as a result, the audience is on the same page as the author so it is easier make the point across.
It is basically a reflection of modern society. In our society, the relationship between the Canadian government and the Natives has been in conflict, whereas fundings and reserves and special laws are made to supposedly favor them, to compensate them is what that's portrayed in the book. However they are not exactly getting what they want.
Pollock uses Gall as an example of how in our contempory society the aboriginal peoples are being rejected the rights and priveledges which they were expecting to have gotten. I believe she uses the past as her setting because it gives the reader a very clear example of how even though Gall had that medal, he isn't being treated the way in which he expected. By giving the reader such a strong example of how they are being mistreated, it is hard to then argue the point that the aboriginals have been treated fairly.
In this situation Gall has told Walsh that the Sioux helped fight for the British in 1776. Gall now believes that because of his people's prior actions, it is now turn for Walsh and his people to return the favor in their time of need, but circumstances do not permit Walsh to help. This relationship still continues in society today. There are many instances in which one person may help somebody else with one thing or another and will expect something in return. However when it comes time to repay the debt, the other person will be unable to or feel obligated or bitter about doing so. This specific relationship between the Canadians and the aboriginals also still exists today in respects to government grants, native reserves, etc.. There are a few groups of these people who have been promised many things from the Canadian government and ending up not receiving what they were told they would get. This connection between the government and the aboriginals was present in Walsh's time and has never fully been settled which is why the problem still exists today.
Pollock implies that whether it be near the time of Canada's confederation, or now in comtemporary society, our society neglects the "minorities". This can be supported by the fact that in the play, as Gall hands Walsh the George III Medal, Gall pleads with Walsh "asking for that protection that [Canada] promised" since his people are rapidly dying at the cost of war. After Gall has his time to speak with Walsh, Sitting Bull then takes Gall's place and where Sitting Bull can be seen asking for supplies and the support of Canada. In both situations (with Gall and Sitting Bull), Walsh does very little to cement or confirm that he can offer them any aid or support at all. This in a sense reflects the way our society "works" in Canada, as it displays how our government (majority) does very little to help out the native peoples of Canada (minority). Pollock specifically has the discussion in Fort Walsh because it emulates what would most likely happen if the Native people spoke face to face with the representatives of Canada; the Natives would ask that Canada fulfill their promises (ex. treaty deals etc.), but Canada would find reasoning not to help them out. Whether it be early in Canada's history or in contemporary society, the minorities in Canada have very little power.
"Walsh" was a story based and surrounding historical events. Even back then, there were racial habits and discrimination. It is only emphasized more, due to the traditions of the Sioux, and the obviousness of the different races' reactions and how differentiated they were in the past. It is almost as if the Sioux were completely unacknowledged, during times like discussion important events where the natives were part of. Clarence completely forgot that the Injuns had participated in the event at the Little Big Horn. He had completely forgotten about them, and even when it was brought up they were there, Clarence only got angry at Harry. (Page 24) Also due to the fact that the indians have different traditions, this was also a reason to call them as the odd man out. Had the Sioux known about caucasian ways of trading/buying, they wouldn't have had to go through the whole ordeal with the theft of Mrs. Anderson's tub. (page 33) And if Crow Eagle had been a skin of another color, he would've perhaps been treated differently, and with a different respect from Mrs. Anderson. Even of same race, readers can tell that the Americans and Canadian "white" men were different due to their choices in how to deal with the indians. We get many perspectives on the different races, and it is more emphasized and "out there" as a historical play.
The comment that Pollock is making about contemporary society is that discrimination, particularly racial discrimination, is still present in our society. Pollock is making this statement particularly about native affairs, however, this could be argued because there are many other situations that have brought this kind of discrimination to our attention. I believe that she chooses not to set this play in contemporary society because she wants to show us how little has changed from the events that have happened in the past. The natives are still discriminated against, as well as the "white man" is still the main persecutor.
17 comments:
The injustice that Gall speaks of is quite similar to ones existing in our contemporary society. The situation of being allies at one point and expecting some sort of compensation and then not getting it could very well happen in society today. By expressing it in the situation surrounding Sitting Bull, Pollock provides the audience with an excellent example- especially as it is a recorded historical event.
Pollock uses Gall to portray a situation similar to one that is occuring now in our own contemporary society. Gall's ancestors helped Canada and Gall is now looking for some compensation for their efforts, but he is rejected. This is happening in Canada now to a lesser extent with the First Nation people of Canada, and how the gouvernemnt is trying to fufill its treaty with them. Pollock uses a historical event, rather than a contemporary sitaution, like fort Walsh, so that she can teach people from Canada to not make the same mistake twice.
Gall is speaking of injustice quite similar to that in our contemporary society in both interactions between the government of Canada and the First Nations People, and also those who lose out on an agreement. There are still issues between the Candian government and the First Nations people. For example, the Lubicon Cree have been involved in a struggle with the government over treaty land being used for oil and gas developement for the past 20ish years. Also, there are countless situations in life where people make agreements, or have expectations of peopele, which are broken. Pollock uses the situation surrounding Sitting Bull because it is a well established event that doesn't directly apply to contemporary society, but has similar underlying ideas, and allows her to comment of things that may be going on now without too much contraversy.
Gall's description of discrimination that his people, the Sioux who are Native peoples, have to endure is to a large extent how our contemporary society is today. Gall mentions the dreadful conditions that his people have to live in such as their houses getting destroyed, the women and their children crying immensly, and the famine endured. Our society today is similar to what Gall is menitoning but at a smaller degree. For many years and even today the the relationship between the government and the Native Peoples have been filled with downs due to the Aboriginals enduring povery and famine much like the Sioux. Gall and Sitting Bull are attempting to talk to Walsh in order to prevent their distress and to find a way that Canada can help them, which many aboriginals are doing in Canada as we speak. Although the governemnt have written treaties with the Native peoples, the poverty experienced is still going on in our society. Also, the use of Fort Walsh displays a more historical event that puts the audience more in the play and provide them with more understanding of what went on in that time period and to understand that is still occurring.
I accidently referred Gall's people to hte Sioux so please don't misinterpret that.
Pollock makes the statement that our contemporary society is still very prejudice whether it is agianst race, religion, social class ect. She also makes a comment that many people are torn between this prejudice, they may not want to discriminate in this way yet are pressure by society or are expected to act in this way. The reason Pollock uses "Walsh" to explain this because this way she has something specific to refrence to that many people are familiar with. She also uses this event because of the time when it occured to prove just how far we havent come even though this occured over 100 years ago.
Pollock comments on our society, as one with many injustices. At this time in history we can already see some of the problems with the power of the negotiated treaties. In the play the situation that Gall is in with the queens unfulfilled obligations to his peaople for helping them fight of the americans. He expects the Queen to keep the word of her grandfather and look after his people, however the government feels that this happened along time ago and that they have little obligations to these people. This is a comment on our society, because this is simalar to the problems we have today, over interpretations of treaties negotiated over 100 years ago. The times are changing, yet we are still bound to promises made in the past under different circumstances.
Pollack makes it aware, that discrimination and prejudices-although common in the 1800's- are still occuring in today's contemporary society. She did this through the conversations between Gall and Walsh. Pollack had written the play in the early 1970s, and since then the discrimination and intolerance has significantly decreased, but she was very much aware that discrimination would not completely diminish-even in the future (such as in present society).
Gall felt he should have been compensated for his ancestors services as promised. He was not compensated, but instead victimized and sterotyped because of his skin colour and race.
Pollack makes it aware, that discrimination and prejudices-although common in the 1800's- are still occuring in today's contemporary society. She did this through the conversations between Gall and Walsh. Pollack had written the play in the early 1970s, and since then the discrimination and intolerance has significantly decreased, but she was very much aware that discrimination would not completely diminish-even in the future (such as in present society).
Gall felt he should have been compensated for his ancestors services as promised. He was not compensated, but instead victimized and sterotyped because of his skin colour and race.
Pollock used the historical event in Fort Walsh to represent the discrimination happening in modern day contemporary society. Gall's ancestor has fought for Britain against the Americans but in return was denied the right of refugee. Predujice to different ehtnic groups are still happening today. Pollock uses Fort Walsh to indicate that people in Canada has never changed their attitude toward different races.
Pollock uses Sitting Bull and the Sioux nation in order to portray the significance of racial discrimination and abandonment that is occurring everyday in the contemporary life. The story depicting the Sioux nation being driven out of their homeland, and the Canadian Government betraying the Sioux nation all resembles to what audiences reading this play may experiences in real life. From a person being kicked out of a store to wars between countries. The racial differences between people can cause severe conflicts that can be avoided if the feeling of one being inferior to the other is somehow altered to that of toleration instead. Within the play, the character of Walsh can be described as the character that tolerates the Sioux Nation rather seeing them as a minor race. As a result, Walsh was able to keep peace with Sitting Bull, unlike the Americans and their relationship with the natives. The play also demonstrated the feeling of abandonment, specifically how the Canadian Government betraying the Sioux Nation for all the work they did helping them fight the Americans earlier in history. It makes sense for Pollock to write the play about the Historical Event at Fort Walsh rather than events happened contemporarily. The reason is that many events that happened with in the 10 years span before now is still being debated and there are still many different viewpoints towards these events. Therefore, it is much easier to write about historical events because there are fewer opinions about events that happened 100 years before, as a result, the audience is on the same page as the author so it is easier make the point across.
It is basically a reflection of modern society. In our society, the relationship between the Canadian government and the Natives has been in conflict, whereas fundings and reserves and special laws are made to supposedly favor them, to compensate them is what that's portrayed in the book. However they are not exactly getting what they want.
Pollock uses Gall as an example of how in our contempory society the aboriginal peoples are being rejected the rights and priveledges which they were expecting to have gotten. I believe she uses the past as her setting because it gives the reader a very clear example of how even though Gall had that medal, he isn't being treated the way in which he expected. By giving the reader such a strong example of how they are being mistreated, it is hard to then argue the point that the aboriginals have been treated fairly.
In this situation Gall has told Walsh that the Sioux helped fight for the British in 1776. Gall now believes that because of his people's prior actions, it is now turn for Walsh and his people to return the favor in their time of need, but circumstances do not permit Walsh to help. This relationship still continues in society today. There are many instances in which one person may help somebody else with one thing or another and will expect something in return. However when it comes time to repay the debt, the other person will be unable to or feel obligated or bitter about doing so. This specific relationship between the Canadians and the aboriginals also still exists today in respects to government grants, native reserves, etc.. There are a few groups of these people who have been promised many things from the Canadian government and ending up not receiving what they were told they would get. This connection between the government and the aboriginals was present in Walsh's time and has never fully been settled which is why the problem still exists today.
Pollock implies that whether it be near the time of Canada's confederation, or now in comtemporary society, our society neglects the "minorities". This can be supported by the fact that in the play, as Gall hands Walsh the George III Medal, Gall pleads with Walsh "asking for that protection that [Canada] promised" since his people are rapidly dying at the cost of war. After Gall has his time to speak with Walsh, Sitting Bull then takes Gall's place and where Sitting Bull can be seen asking for supplies and the support of Canada. In both situations (with Gall and Sitting Bull), Walsh does very little to cement or confirm that he can offer them any aid or support at all. This in a sense reflects the way our society "works" in Canada, as it displays how our government (majority) does very little to help out the native peoples of Canada (minority). Pollock specifically has the discussion in Fort Walsh because it emulates what would most likely happen if the Native people spoke face to face with the representatives of Canada; the Natives would ask that Canada fulfill their promises (ex. treaty deals etc.), but Canada would find reasoning not to help them out. Whether it be early in Canada's history or in contemporary society, the minorities in Canada have very little power.
"Walsh" was a story based and surrounding historical events. Even back then, there were racial habits and discrimination. It is only emphasized more, due to the traditions of the Sioux, and the obviousness of the different races' reactions and how differentiated they were in the past. It is almost as if the Sioux were completely unacknowledged, during times like discussion important events where the natives were part of. Clarence completely forgot that the Injuns had participated in the event at the Little Big Horn. He had completely forgotten about them, and even when it was brought up they were there, Clarence only got angry at Harry. (Page 24) Also due to the fact that the indians have different traditions, this was also a reason to call them as the odd man out. Had the Sioux known about caucasian ways of trading/buying, they wouldn't have had to go through the whole ordeal with the theft of Mrs. Anderson's tub. (page 33) And if Crow Eagle had been a skin of another color, he would've perhaps been treated differently, and with a different respect from Mrs. Anderson. Even of same race, readers can tell that the Americans and Canadian "white" men were different due to their choices in how to deal with the indians. We get many perspectives on the different races, and it is more emphasized and "out there" as a historical play.
The comment that Pollock is making about contemporary society is that discrimination, particularly racial discrimination, is still present in our society. Pollock is making this statement particularly about native affairs, however, this could be argued because there are many other situations that have brought this kind of discrimination to our attention. I believe that she chooses not to set this play in contemporary society because she wants to show us how little has changed from the events that have happened in the past. The natives are still discriminated against, as well as the "white man" is still the main persecutor.
Post a Comment