Compare these two historical perspectives in terms of each author's tone and objectives. In other words, must consider what these historians want the reader, to take away from their "true story" about this crucial part of American history.
After carefully reading each narrative, please address the following issues:
It is critical that you back up your answers with specific examples or quotes from the sources. Please follow APA guidelines for in-text citation and references cited page.
To be clear, you do not need to include any sources other than the two that I have provided you. In fact, I would prefer that you refrain from including an extraneous sources in this short paper.
Your essay should be at least 1200 words in length. As always, feel free to email me with any questions or concerns. Good luck!
What kinds of primary sources does each author rely on (individual quotations, newspaper accounts, statistics, material culture, etc.)?
What individuals or groups are portrayed sympathetically or unsympathetically in each account? In other words, who is make to look "good" or "bad"?
How do language and word choice reinforce the author's tone and purpose? In other words, how are particular words meant to sway the reader in one direction or the other?
What kinds of unstated assumptions underlie the perspectives in each of these accounts?
If you think of each narrative as an argument, what would the central claim of each be?