Judy Ortiz

05/31/2013

 

 

One of the most significant paragraphs that I read in It Can’t Happen Here was the conversation between Frank and Doremus in the pages 16 and 17.  “Wait till Buzz takes charge of us. Areal Fascist dictatorship ‘Nonsense! Nosense!’ snorted Tasbrough. “That couldn’t happen here in America, not possibly! We’re a country of freemen” (Lewis 17, 18).  This passage was significant for me because it was the prediction of the future in Doremus’ life. Jessup Doremus was an editor and proprietor of the Daily Informer. He expressed his disagreement about the fascism government throughout his publications. Sadly, when Buzz took the power, Doremus’ predictions came true “It happened in America”. The dictator took the power and created his own army to against the democracy. Doremus and the entire country were victims of a fascist’s dictator.  As many others Doremus was victim of the enormous control that Buzz had over the country. Buzz used the most common tactic that uses all dictators VIOLENCE.  Doremus was arrested by Buzz’s army and he was tortured and outrage just because he had an opposite view about Buzz. Violence was the most powerful weapons that are used to silence the voiceS of the oppressed men.

The smart and dominant Buzz created an army with the ideology of the any person who against his

principles deserved to be tortured and death. Buzz as many men in the history took the weak-mind

men and gave them the weapons to intimidate the strong-mind men. Doremus’ case was one of

thousands of cases that HAPPENED AND COULD CONTINUE HAPPENING

Judy Ortiz

Museum Assignment 2

 My impression about the New York Historical Museum was very confusing. Despite of that the exposition was organized and well designed. I felt that the message was in certain level ironic. The first artifact that caught my attention and made me felt confused was Objects of Liberty 1942 because the representations of liberty were handcuffs. However, as soon as, I started walking around the museum, my impression was that the museum was designed for tourists and for specific part of Americans because the story of the exposition missed important fragments of history. I do not want to be misunderstood or hurt some feelings but I do not think that the museum is designed for all Americans. Although I want to give some credits to the exposition. The exposition was very organized and used technology in different ways to catch the public’s attention. The recreation of New York City in the 40s was interesting and romantic. My perception about the museum’s message was to promote war and describe how positive and productive the WWII was in those days. The artifacts described how technology play important role in the war’s victory, for example, The Manhattan Project, that was designed between Columbia University scientists and Albert Einstein collaboration. Some of those scientists were refugees from Nazism and Fascism. This project product was the world’s first atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. Additionally, with the technologic advances, the exposition described how proud were New Yorkers and how they enjoyed parades and gave soldiers emotional support. “In 1942 Macys canceled its thanksgiving day parade donating its balloons…2,500.000 people lined Fifth Avenue”. I think this manifestation was very humble from Macys, but I do not know what kind of impression tried to give the museum because it showed only children in the parade with poster of “Down with the Japs Rats”. I thought “this is kind of ironic”, but I did not want to judge and I continued with my trip. I saw more striking artifacts as Latin Quarter free for men in uniform, George Jone) 1923 U.S. Army, and Jacob Lawrence U.S. Coast Guard (Africans Americans soldiers). These artifacts expressed the benefits of the WWII. Jacob Lawrence said “Very fortunate all through that war period” because he was segregate but thanks to the war he was considered equal. Additionally, with the benefits of free sex for solders and desegregation, the war gave the job equally for black men and women, and also the opportunity of gays to be around men without  social’s prejudices “There’s a closeness and an understanding I think only being together that away constantly at the very abyss of your life, can create that”.  The exposition’s message to viewers was “WWII was the unification of the nation”, and many of them felt proud of the war and his results. They wrote beautiful comments at the end of the exposition in a book “Write to Us” that is designed for those who have beautiful thoughts about the museum message.

I do not want to point those who designed the exposition or hurt feelings. I am very respectful about others point of view, but I think that the museum was not designed for me.  My intention is not underestimate the “productivity and the benefits” of the war, but I am not agree with the exposition and the way that it was designed.  I do not feel that the Manhattan project was an important technologic advance because it was the product of 90.000 to 166.000 deaths in Hiroshima and 60.000 to 80.000 in Nagasaki. Most of them were civilians that died through burns, radiation, and sickness.  I understand that people died in a war, but a soldier is not same than a civilian. Most of women, children and men that died in Japan were not involve in the war.  They were just the victims of the system. On the other hand, I am agree that African Americans, women and homosexuals have the right of being part of the society because we are equal not only in this country, we are equal universally, but I am not sure if the WWII gave them all of those benefits that the exposition described because it is contradictory that African American were able to donate blood, but it had to be processed apart. Also African Americans and women were able to vote in 1964 and the civil rights act was signed in 1957. Civil rights act and voting rights were not product of the war, they were achieved as a result of civil rights movement. Moreover, the gay community is still fighting for their rights.

Judy Ortiz

05/17/2013

Fascism

 

Sinclair Lewis describes how fascism was physical violence for those who against capitalism. Lewis points out two examples in the pages 95 and 96 in the book,  It Can’t Happen Her: an old man and a young Jewish girl were brutally beaten and arrested by soldiers.  The old man and the young girl were a threat to the bureaucracy because their ideas and their passion had power in the minds of those who believe that a change was needed. Notwithstanding, their protest was nonviolent. They just wanted to generate awareness and spread democratic ideas in those who were in the middle of a system that was taking their rights and was giving them just rules. They just wanted to generate an intellectual awakening in the minds of those who remained and silence and gave the power to the government. The man and the girl’s ideas were strong enough to produce an effect, but government was afraid. Despite that the government had the control with an oppressive system that was support for some men. Government was afraid of the others who were not sympathetic with the system. The government’s fears were product of the oppressed men’s nonconformity and the thirst of change and democracy.  Ironically, government had the power of convince a group of people who gave him the position through votes, but the same government did not have intellectual power to convince the unhappy men. Government display fascism through physical violence because he wanted to kill any idea that against his system. Through violence he wanted to produce silence and a general fear and submission to his system.

Judy Ortiz

ENN 195

Museum Assignment

 

 

My impression as soon as I saw the exposition was “How amazing is this exposition”. The history was condensing into small fragments of objects and pictures in from my eyes. I saw many pictures of soldiers and President Lincoln. In the first ten minutes everything was new and amazing for me, but when I started to understand deeply the complexity of the war I felt a rush of emotions that clouded my objectivity. I could not put aside my feelings and be just critical. It was impossible for me, I figure out myself in different positions. The first one was the photographers.  I imagined Mathew B. Brady and Alexander Gardner feelings, how they could be just spectators? I imagine myself taking pictures in those situations, and I felt powerless for those who were living their homes and giving their lives.

The second position and the most significantly for me was African American Soldiers. I felt mad and sad at the same time when I saw. What Do I Want, John Henry? 1862 Alexander Gardner. . How they could be part of the war and be different from the white soldiers? The most shocking impression for me was the “difference” how black soldiers were different from white soldiers and how both could be fighting for the same country? I imagined myself as a black soldier. I could not believe why the skin color was the barrier between common sense of fellowship and solidarity in a war. Why if white and black were part of the same country and were died in the same war. Why we were different? Why black soldiers did not have boots as white soldiers, if both were in the same camp? Why black soldiers had to be servants, cooks, and guides? I had many questions in my head that made me felt helpless. Why if President Lincoln against slavery, black soldiers were segregated in the camps? Why if they wanted to offer their services in the Army, they were called “Contraband”? At that point I did not want to see more about the exposition, but something changed my mind. I saw a photo called Mathew, Frederick and Alice. “The children of the Battlefield” 1863. And this photo changed my perception about white solders. I saw them as a victims too. They segregated black soldiers, but they were suffered in the same war. They left wives and children that were waiting for them.  Those children like thousands were suffering for their fathers. My opposition was about that soldier misery, he died and the only identification that he had was the ambrotype of his children. My point of view at that moment was more objective. I did not want to judge them, who am I? I did not live in those days. When I saw those children, I understand that no matter the skin color both white and black soldiers were dying. Also I saw how slavery in 1863 was not only a skin color problem. I understand that white children were slaves too. Slave Children from New Orleans 1863. That photo was a visual proof that not only black children were slaves.

In conclusion, my visit to the museum was a deeply understanding of human history. In my case the visit was not an academic class, it was a realistic understanding of history and how each of those lives built the world where I am living. Were they right or wrong? I do not care because I am learning from them. I am learning that I have to feel grateful for the medical advances because part of them died due to lack of medical technology, I feel grateful because I am leaving in a country where segregation is over in a certain way, and I can study and work in this country do not matter that I am an immigrant. Today I can say that I have rights because years before many African Americans, immigrants and White Americans fought for me and for you.