Author: WyattPitts

Would I have voted for the income tax amendment in 1912, based on the arguments in “Philip Dru”? Philip Dru was a book written by a man named Edward M. House. According to Wikipedia, “Edward Mandell House was an American diplomat, and an adviser to President Woodrow Wilson. He was known as Colonel House, although his title was honorary and he had performed no military service.” According to Goodreads, “The story is about a man, Philip Dru, who leads a revolt against the United States government because it had become too corrupt. After the revolution, he scraps the Constitution and makes himself “Administrator.” He then changes every concept of national and state governments to reflect his view of governance.” Here is an extremely quick summary of the book. Philip Dru joined the military and he was a military genius, but while in the desert he went blind. He won a military competition against other military people, while he was still in his twenties. He was asked to rejoin the military, but refused and went into politics. In the end, he leads a revolt against the government, because it becomes too corrupt. 

What was the income tax of 1912? It was the sixteenth amendment of the constitution and was ratified on February 3, 1913. It gave the congress authority to issue an income tax, but not based on the population. 

Would I have voted for the income tax amendment in 1912, based on the arguments in “Philip Dru”? Before this book I would have never voted for any tax laws, but after this book I still wouldn’t vote for any tax laws. The message of this book is progressivism. According to Wikipedia, “Progressivism is a political philosophy and movement that seeks to advance the human condition through social reform – primarily based on purported advancements in social organization, science, and technology.” There are also many things in this book that are implausible that made me not want to vote for income tax. A guy in his twenties has better military skills than all the commanders and officers. In one week, he raises enough funds for his massive army in just one week. His army of 500,000 untrained men beats an army of 600,000 trained men. He goes on to rule the world as a dictator. None of this could have ever happened. 

Which of these three authors, O. Henry, Jack London, Ambrose Bierce, would you prefer to read on your own time? 

O. Henry was just the pen name of a well known American author named William Sydney Porter. He was born in September 11, 1862 and died in June 5, 1910. He wrote many short stories, poems, and non-fiction stories. He is most known for his short stories. Some of these are The Gift of the Maji, The Duplicity of Hargraves, and The Ransom of Red Chief. His most popular short story was The Gift of the Maji. 

Jack Griffith Chaney was an American novelist, journalist, and activist. He was better known as Jack London. He was one of the first authors to become an international celebrity. Just from writing, he made a very large fortune. In the year 1913, he was making over ten-thousand dollars in a month. That much is a third of a million dollars today. He was born in January 12, 1876 and died in November 22, 1916. Many of his works are still famous today. Some examples are  White Fang (1906), Call of the Wild (1903), The Sea Wolf (1904). These are some of the better known works of Jack London. 

According to Wikipedia, “Ambrose Gwinnett Bierce was an American short story writer, journalist, poet, and American Civil War veteran. His book The Devil’s Dictionary was named one of ‘The 100 Greatest Masterpieces of American Literature’ by the American Revolution Bicentennial Administration.” He was born on June 24, 1842 and lived until the year of 1914. In the year 1906, his most famous work was published. This is called The Devils Dictionary. According to Wikipedia, “Described as “howlingly funny”, it consists of satirical definitions of English words which lampoon cant and political double-talk.”

Which of these three authors, O. Henry, Jack London, Ambrose Bierce, would you prefer to read on your own time? I would read Jack London’s books on my own time. O. Henry wrote good short stories, but I don’t really like short stories. I like a good long story. Ambrose Bierce’s book The Devils Dictionary was an actually dictionary, but with humorous definitions. I wouldn’t necessarily read this, but I would define some things to my friends with it. 

Would you read more of Mark Twain’s writings even if they were not assigned in a course? I love reading. I read anytime that I get a chance. I only knew of two of Mark Twain’s books before I took this course; ‘The Adventures of Tom Sawyer’ and ‘The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn’. He has many famous pieces of literature read around the world. He is most known for these two books. The stories I was assigned to read this week were funny and entertaining. According to Poetry Foundation, “Samuel Langhorne Clemens, better known as Mark Twain, was born in Florida, Missouri, in 1835. A distinguished novelist, fiction writer, essayist, journalist, and literary critic, he ranks among the great figures of American literature. His novel The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (1885) is generally considered his masterpiece. His novels A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court (1889) and The Adventures of Tom Sawyer (1876), and The Innocents Abroad (1869), a travelogue and cultural critique, are also highly regarded. Twain’s travelogues Life on the Mississippi (1883) and Roughing It (1872) are prized for their humorous insights into American life in the late 19th century. Many would agree with H.L. Mencken, who wrote of Twain in A Mencken Chrestomathy, ‘I believe that he was the true father of our national literature.’” According to Biography, “Mark Twain, whose real name was Samuel Clemens, was the celebrated author of several novels, including two major classics of American literature: The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. He was also a riverboat pilot, journalist, lecturer, entrepreneur and inventor.”

Would you read more of Mark Twain’s writings even if they were not assigned in a course? I read some of his books when I was much younger than I am now. Then, I did not find those books very interesting, but I hated reading then. Now, I love reading. I am sure I would find those same books much more interesting if I read them today. there are some of his books which I would not read for fun. There are others which I would be glad to read for fun. It really depends on what book it is. If I know people who like it, then I will read it. If they didn’t like it, then I wouldn’t read it. 

Did the Gettysburg Address use Christian language and imagery to support the Union cause? This speech was spoken on November 19, 1863. It was spoken by Abraham Lincoln, the president of the United States. It was spoken directly to the citizens of Gettysburg. The speech was spoken at the dedication of the Soldiers’ National Cemetery during the American Civil War. Today, the Soldiers’ National Cemetery is known as the Gettysburg National Soldier Cemetery in Pennsylvania. What was the Gettysburg Address’s main point? According to study.com, “The main message of the Gettysburg Address is that ideals are worth dying for and that it is up to the living to carry on the work of those who died to protect ideals. The ideals of equality and freedom are the bedrock of the United States as a nation.” Now why was it written? What was its purpose for being created? According to gettysburgbattlefieldtours.com, “As the Battle of Gettysburg was a Union victory often cited as a turning point in the Civil War, the 17 acres of land was purchased to dedicate to the Union soldiers who lost their lives in the battle. The speech was to memorialize dead Union soldiers and emphasize the importance of maintaining united states.” 

The American Civil war is pretty well known. It was a war between the north and the south of the United States. The war was on whether the South could have slaves, or to just release them. The North side was known as the Union , and the South side was known as the Confederacy. Lincoln was on the side of the Union. He wanted to free the slaves, but not let them in America. He believed that They were too stupid to live in America and thought that they should be shipped back to Africa. Lincoln wanted to reunite the north and the south under one nation. Not to disregard the south completely. 

Did the Gettysburg Address use Christian language and imagery to support the Union cause? Here’s an example for why it did. In first Corinthians, Paul wanted to recognize his fellow Christ-followers who were doing very important work to unite everyone under one God. He also wants them to know that their work is not in vain. In Lincoln’s speech, he talks about the soldiers who were were trying to unite America under one nation and that their work is not in vain. Another example is when in the Bible, Jesus was saying that everyone was equal in His eyes and everyone was worth as much to Him as much as another. In Lincolns speech, he states the they are not fighting the civil war for the Union, but for human equality. 

How fair was Twain’s critique of Cooper’s literary style? Mark Twain wrote a critique on James Fenimore Cooper’s writing technique. Twain’s critiques were usually known as a legendary attack. This one was different. It was slightly comical. Twain listed eighteen rules of romantic fiction that Cooper violate. His strong point was rule eighteen, “Employ a simple and straightforward style”. Twain ridiculed Coopers writing style and technique. Twain was fair in his critique. The books were that bad. Here’s a quick overview of one called Deerslayer.

The book begins with two lost men walking through the woods, Deerslayer and Hurry Harry. Deerslayer is a great hunter and Hurry Harry is not. Harry is very hard to understand, because he speaks in two different dialects at the same time. Soon Deerslayer finds the place that they’re hiking to, but Harry doesn’t recognize it even though he picked that spot out. After a while, they talk about a man named Tom Hutter who lives on the land they’re hunting in, but doesn’t own it. Why is he living there?! Later there is a long discussion about Indians that can shoot a target of a fly from five hundred yards away. That’s not possible. No one’s eye can see something like that from such a distance, much less shoot it. Tom lives on a floating house called the Ark. The Ark is huge, basically a fortress. It was even bullet proof! Deerslayer doesn’t recognize the lake that the boats on. Tom says that no pale-face has named it yet, but Deerslayer’s tribe calls the lake Glimmerglass. If he didn’t know the name, then why did he call it Glimmerglass? Later in the book, Deerslayer and Harry are looking for Tom downstream in their canoe. there are many places in the river that the canoe could barely get through. Soon they find tom on the shore without his Ark. He says it is hidden in the brush. It is. How did the Ark get there if the canoe could barely fit in parts of the river? How was such a big boat hidden in the brush? there is more to the book, but I have said enough for you to agree with me the Twain’s critique was fair. 

Were the detailed descriptions of the people around the two main characters equally important in the two stories Washington Irving wrote? The two stories that Irving wrote were The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, and Rip Van Winkle. These two books are well known throughout America. Let’s begin with an overview of these two books. 

The Legend of Sleepy Hollow: The Legend of Sleepy Hollow is about a schoolmaster of a small town names Sleepy Hollow. His name was Ichabod Crane. Ichabod Crane is very interested in the towns ghost stories and was very superstitious. One of these stories was about the headless horseman. It is said that during the Revolutionary was, a man lost his head. Now, every night a headless horseman searches the forest of sleepy hollow searching for his head at the church. Very soon after Ichabod Crane became the schoolmaster, he met a young woman named Katrina Van Tassel. She was the only child of a very rich man named Baltus Van Tassel. Ever since Ichabod met Katrina, he tried to win her heart. It was difficult though, because Katrina had many suitors. One of them being a man named Brom van Brunt. He was the prank master of the town and  an expert horse rider. Brom tries to get rid of Ichabod and humiliate him, but none of his pranks work. One day, Katrina invites Ichabod to a party and he accepts. For the entire party, he dances with Katrina while Brom just sits in jealousy. As Ichabod goes home, he passed the supposedly haunted church. He sees a rider on a horse and calls to him to identify himself. Instead, the rider starts to chase Ichabod through the forest. Ichabod notices that the rider has no head and there is a sack on the horse, that he supposed is the riders head. Ichabod turns his horse to the bridge, because it is supposed that the horseman cannot cross the bridge. Ichabod crosses the bridge and the horseman stops. Ichabod believes he is safe, but instead the horseman throws his head at Ichabod and knocks him off his horse. The next morning, Ichabod’s horse shows up at the Van Ripper house, but Ichabod was never found. 

Rip Van Winkle: Rip van winkle is about a man named Rip van winkle. One day, Rip van winkle went for a walk in the Catskill mountains. He sees a man carrying a barrel of liquor and follows him. Winkle is led to a group of men playing ninepins who don’t say anything. Winkle drinks some of the liquor and falls asleep. When he wakes up the men are gone and he is old. He walks back to town, but doesn’t recognize anyone. He talks to them, but none of them know what happened. Soon he meets his daughter, but much older. Winkle realizes that he was asleep for twenty years. the story is confirmed by an old villager. 

Were the detailed descriptions of the people around the two main characters equally important in the two stories Washington Irving wrote? Yes. The stories were much better because of the descriptions of the main characters. 

How believable is Weems’ book on Washington? Mason Locke Weems wrote a biography on George Washington called “The Life of Washington”. Weems was also an American minister, as well as an evangelical bookseller and author. According to Google Books, “The effect of this “single, immortal, and dubious anecdote,” and others like it, has made this book one of the most influential in the history of American folklore. Originally published as an eighty-page pamphlet entitled The Life and Memorable Actions of George Washington, it quickly attained immense popularity.” So one reason that this book gained popularity so quickly was because the book was about George Washington. 

This book has many of Washingtons accomplishments in his life including times from his childhood and private life. Some of these stories are true, but there are many that aren’t, because we don’t know much about Washington. Weems probably just filled in the gaps in Washingtons life with stories to make Washington sound like a great person. How believable is Weems’ book on Washington? I don’t think that it’s very believable, but I’ll tell you some of the stories and let you decide for yourself. One of the stories is that when George Washington was just a kid, he threw a stone across the Rappahannock river. This is not believable because the Rappahannock river is over 300 Yards in length. There are some people that can do this like professional baseball players, but it is very unlikely for Washington to do this. Like I said, Many of these stories are meant to make Washington sound like a great person. Weems kept stating how Washington won every race he ran, because he was very fast. This might have been possible, but not likely. He says that the angels in Heaven love Washington and will bear him up into Heaven. This is also not true. He also tells the famous story about Washington cutting down a cherry tree, but this is just a story to teach kids about lying. 

This book is not very believable, because Weems makes Washington sound like the greatest person ever, but this isn’t true. You may have a different opinion, but this is mine.