J. Hector St. John De Crevecouer

Whew! With a name like that, you know the man's got something to say.

As I was reading Crevecouer, I was struck by his contrasting views in his first letter, "What is an American." In this piece, he works to show how vastly different Americans are, yet each person is still considered an American. He compares people based on their physical location, ethnicity, and religion. Each of these factors is used to break the overarching title of "American" into specifics that complicate the nation.

Throughout the beginning of this first letter, it appeared that Crevecouer was going to write about how all of these different peoples were coming together to build the nation of America and create a definition of who an American is. He writes, "Some few towns excepted, we are all tillers of the earth, from Nova Scotia to West Florida...We are all animated with the spirit of an industry which is unfettered and unrestrained, because each person works for himself." The naïve view that begins this piece believes that each person who has come to America is there to create a better nation than the one they left, and to do better in terms of personal gain, which appeared similar for many of the inhabitants.

As one reads on through the letter (and other writings), it is quickly established that not all the people in America are there for the reasons Crevecouer thought, and things may not turn out as well as he imagined. He quickly turns to examples that distinguish and segregate the inhabitants, using terms such as "they," contrasted with the "we" used early on. He writes of times were disagreements were had between the people, and how there is no way to define what an American is, due to the many different cultures found in the land. Crevecouer intended to show that Americans are a new and unified people, but instead, displayed the fact that America was a melting pot from the beginning, and how this diversity may lead to issues.

Hawthorne

Nathaniel Hawthorne's view of events was much different than those of Bradford, Morton, and Winthrop. In the case of Merrymount, Hawthorne had a much more positive view of the Maypole than any of the other authors. Although his position against the Puritans may have stemmed from other issues, it is interesting that his perspective is present in stories that will contradict what has been accepted as true.
The words that Hawthorne uses to describe not only the Maypole, but Merrymount as well, are much more positive than any of the other recollections given by authors. He writes, "This venerated emblem was a pine tree, which had preserved the slender grace of youth, while it equaled the loftiest height of the old wood monarchs." He also includes, "'Votaries of the May-Pole,' cried the flower-decked priest, 'merrily, all day long, have the woods echoed to your mirth. But be this your merriest hour, my hearts!'" The way the people of Merrymount conducted themselves was one that appeared chaotic and extreme, but it was their joy seemingly reinforced by nature, and Hawthorne conveys this more clearly than any of the other authors.
Hawthorne also takes a much more negative view of the Puritans, due to personal issues with the group, and this attitude is pervasive in all his writing, including this piece. He writes, "But a band of Puritans, who watched the scene, invisible themselves, compared the masques to those devils and ruined souls, with whom their superstition people the black wilderness." Again, he explains, "Unfortunately, there were men in the new world, of a sterner faith than these May-Pole worshippers. Not far from Merry Mount was a settlement of Puritans, most dismal wretches, who said their prayers before  daylight, and then wrought in the forest or the cornfield, till evening made it prayer time again." It appears that nothing the Puritans believe or do could even appear to be good or right in the eyes of Nathaniel Hawthorne, and this sets his writing apart from the other authors.

Bradford v. Morton

William Bradford and Thomas Morton lived during the same years, both traveled to the New World, and encountered many of the same triumphs and trials while in the New World. You would think these similarities would lead their accounts of their experiences to sound alike. But no. Bradford and Morton share their interpretations of the same events in much different ways, allowing us to see into their motive for writing the piece.
Bradford writes of his experiences with Thomas Morton in a negative and condescending manner, leading the reader to see Morton as a trouble-maker who needs to be sent back to England. Regarding the maypole, Bradford writes, "They also set up a maypole, drinking and dancing about it many days together, inviting the Indian women, for their consorts, dancing and frisking together, like so many fairies, or furies rather, and worse practices." Bradford not only sees the maypole as a problem, but Morton, for suggesting and allowing the maypole to be built. Morton's view on the maypole is different, as he expresses, "And upon May Day they brought the Maypole to the place appointed, with drums, guns, pistols, and other fitting instruments for that purpose, and there erected it with the help of savages that came thither of purpose to see the manner of our revels." He also says, "And this the whole company of the revelers at Ma-re Mount knew to be the true sense and exposition of the riddle that was fixed to the Maypole which the Separatists were at defiance with." For Morton, the maypole is not a bad thing, but a place for celebration, as well as something that was misinterpreted by the Separatists.
So while Bradford and Morton went through many of the same experiences, their interpretations of those situations allow us to see more into their character and beliefs.

The Value of a Human

When the Spaniards arrived in the New World, there were vast amounts of natural resources for them to explore and use. For these newcomers, the indigenous people were not seen as people, but as resources for maximizing the profit from the New World, at the expense of the natives. The movie, “Even the Rain,” displays the same exploitation of natives from the filmmakers as that which they are trying to replicate in their film. The belief that natives are lesser humans, and can be manipulated for one’s own needs and desires, is shared by both Spaniard explorers and the filmmakers in the movie.

De las Casas makes notice of the abuse of the natives in his letters, which share the saddening and gruesome realities of the indigenous once the Spaniards have arrived. The work and gifts that the natives present are not good enough, and often result in punishment or more work. The skills and knowledge of the locals is exploited, depleting the people of their humanity and showing how these natives are seen not as people, but as a natural resource for the newcomers.

In the movie, the Bolivian natives are similar to the natives during the Conquests. Costa desires to make the film with as little money as possible, so he decides to pay the extras only two dollars a day. He views this as enough, and as even more than what they could make on their own. Costa also tries to manipulate Daniel and others with money, believing that whatever they desire is less than their need for money. Throughout much of the movie, Costa sees the natives only as a resource to achieving personal success.

Although quite a large amount of time has passed between the arrival of the Spaniards in the New World and the time period of the movie, their view of indigenous people remains the same: natural resources which can be exploited for one’s own needs and desires. Both Costa and de las Casas struggle with their treatment of human lives as time passes, leaving the audience challenged to think before they act.