Plot summary[ edit ] Absalom, Absalom! The story is told entirely in flashbacks narrated mostly by Quentin Compson to his roommate at Harvard UniversityShreve, who frequently contributes his own suggestions and surmises. The narration of Rosa Coldfield, and Quentin's father and grandfather, are also included and re-interpreted by Shreve and Quentin, with the total events of the story unfolding in nonchronological order and often with differing details. This results in a peeling-back-the-onion revelation of the true story of the Sutpens.
He makes valuable observations about the political position of the Comanche, and attempts to take on the Native American perspective which happens far too seldom. I believe, however, that we should recognize the significance of the Treaty of Fredericksburg.
The Meusebach-Comanche Treaty of Accordingly, Meusebach launched his expedition without consent of the government Neighbors and the Delaware followed himarranged for his own Mexican translator and designated a German Indian agent who remained with the Comanche. The effect was interesting.
A Houston newspaper of May reads: As a German freethinker, Meusebach brought a very exceptional view to Texas.
None of his letters indicate he wanted a military solution. Meusebach suggested a treaty of integration, not of separation. Engraved in the treaty was the spirit of the idealistic European revolutions of During a speech delivered at the negotiations, Meusebach exhibited racial sensibilities that differed radically from his contemporaries.
He suggested intermarriage between Germans and the Comanche, spoke of the unimportance of skin color and mused about young Germans learning the Comanche language.
Among the group was a doctor named Ferdinand Herff who successfully performed cataract surgery on a Comanche chief. Evidence that Germans were viewed favorably for a few years also comes from a travel account by Friedrich Schlecht from Whether the treaty remains unbroken is a different question.
As Roemer predicted, violence erupted as early as I appreciate his insight into the role of the Indian Agent, R. Neighbors was sent by the governor of Texas specifically to stop the treaty, if possible, and to mitigate any negative effects that might have occurred if the treaty could not be stopped.
Government, which was precisely why Meusebach needed to make a treaty with the Comanche. The reliability of information on his speech is difficult to determine. Most accounts that I know of awere either written by German-Texan boosters or were written almost fifty years later, when relations with Native Americans were profoundly different, and the rhetoric of removal had changed.
That being said, Meusebach likely mused about the possibilities of Comanche and German co-existence. In this he was not alone. Inthere were still people throughout the nation who believed that Native Americans and Europeans could and would live side by side.
What is so interesting about this treaty, and what drew me to it in the first place, was precisely the ways in which it exists outside typical Anglo-Comanche relations. The presence of Americans, Mexicans, Germans, Comanche, and Delaware makes for a fascinating mixture of people, cultures, and political goals.
As a result, when looking at this treaty, we must try and imagine an immensely complex world, in which the two of the three biggest political and military actors were at war, and the German-Texans were trying to protect their future access to certain lands. In this context, Meusebach could only work within prevailing geopolitical systems.
On one side were the Comanche, who were undoubtedly feared by both Native Americans and Europeans in the region. On the other, were the U. Government and the German Emigration Company, who despite conflicts with each other, agreed on what determined legal ownership of land.
The German Emigration Company, which Muesebach represented, had been given a grant of land from the former Republic of Texas, which if they failed to settle, they would lose. As a result, despite the language in the treaty, Meusebach must have been aware that settling the land would, in the eyes of western law, guarantee German-Texan access to it in the future.
He would also have been aware, that by German and Anglo reasoning, the company already had rights to own land that was already promised by the U. Government to the Comanche.William Faulkner Booklist William Faulkner Message Board Detailed plot synopsis reviews of Intruder in the Dust When Lucas Beauchamp, a dignified elderly black man, is wrongly accused of murdering a white man, he refuses to defend himself from what he sees as a malicious and racist society and it is up to year-old Chick Mallison to find some.
William Faulkner’s incisive observation is invoked so frequently when talking about the American South that it now induces a groan. But Faulkner’s conjoined observation takes us past cliché closer to a reckoning, and elicits a nod: “It’s not even past.”.
"The past is never dead," William Faulkner wrote in his novel-play "Requiem for a Nun." "It's not even past." That line has become the stuff of know-your-history benisons.
But Faulkner's intentions were always a bit darker than that: As John Jeremiah Sullivan recently wrote, the driving force. William Faulkner once said, “Given a choice between grief and nothing, I'd choose grief” (Brainyquote). He further explains why he’d do this in “A Rose for Emily”; although the story is.
Apr 25, · 'The past is never dead," William Faulkner wrote. "It's not even past." Faulkner wasn't writing about Hillary Clinton, but he might as well have been. The former first lady, senator and secretary.
A Rose For Emily Analysis Of The Story. The brilliantly written story “A Rose For Emily” by William Faulkner holds various themes and symbols that can be interpreted in several ways. This short story is about Emily Grierson’s life through the eyes of the townspeople in a small, old southern town.