Webblog

This past summer I had the opportunity to attend my hometown's 100 anniversary July 10-15. Boss Cowman days in Lemmon, SD is an annual event that consists of a three day rodeo, parade, lip sync, Colgate Country Showdown, car show, Boss Cowman honoree supper, street dances under the tent on main street, along with many other events. Every year a couple from an agriculture background is chosen as honorees for that year. This award is such an honor, just four years ago my grandparents were elected as Boss Cowman honorees. They were grand marshall's for the rodeo and parade. At the supper my grandparents, their children and grandchildren were the honorary guests. A story is told about the couple, their history, the family and other interesting facts. Boss Cowman is celebrated every year during the second week of July in honor of the original Boss Cowman and founder of Lemmon, G.E. Lemmon himself.

Lots of folks are working toward their soft points with movie reviews. I would encourage you guys to get your movie reviews in as soon as you can. Film reviews are pretty easy, and a good way to earn those soft points.

If you have had a movie out for a while, please get it in so others can watch them.

Nice work!

My Life on the Plains is a narrative from George Armstrong Custer about his activities on the plains from 1867-1869. Custer begins by giving a short background of the plains. This is quite interesting, because when Custer gives an overview on the Indians, he sounds like he sympathizes and respects them. This strikes me as very interesting because he is probably the best known Indian fighter. Although Custer may sympathize with the Indians, he has no trouble ambushing and fighting them, like at the Battle of the Washita, and no trouble threatening to hang a few chiefs to force compliance from the Indians. I have no doubt he would have hung them if they did not comply. He also goes into great detail to describe a few other incidents with Indians where he was not present, like the defense of Beecher's Island by General Forsyth. Custer spends quite a bit of words on the Indian policy of the time, and its follies. The book ends with a dramatic story of Custer and his men forcing several tribes to go to the reservations, and the rescue of two white women captives. That story was so dramatic that it would have been fit for a movie.
Custer's book is a good read, but I can tell why it has been called "My Lie on the Plains". His tales seem to be grounded in truth, but so much drama is added that the reader has to wonder if these events actually happened at all like Custer describes them. I think that it does provide a good source to view attitudes of the time on Indians. His book seems to have had two purposes. One was to influence a change of the Indian policy by appealing to the masses, and the other was to just garner more attention.

The Last Picture Show tells the story of a small town in Texas. It contains a few lovely roadside shots of the open plains and a few more explicit shots that took me a bit by surprise. The movie's main characters Buddy, Duane, and Jacy lead very interesting sexual lives at the end of their senior year in high school. Duane loves Jacy, the prettiest girl in school, and is heartbroken when she leaves him for another man. Jacy turns from one man to another, and briefly snares each of them with her beauty and winsome ways. Buddy is a good kid who breaks up with his longtime girlfriend at the beginning of the movie and starts sleeping with the coach's wife. Jacy tempts Buddy away from the older woman and Duane and Buddy fight because of Jacy.

Not having lived in a small town all my life, I cannot verify the accuracy of this movie's depiction of kids in a small town, but it seems to show their antics in a serious manner in keeping with how seriously kids view themselves and their loves. The movie appears to center on Buddy, but as it progresses it shows how Jacy manipulates Duane then Buddy. Even when she goes away to college, it seems all Duane and Buddy can talk about is her. These teenagers continue with their lives even though it seems their town is dying. After Sam the Lion dies, Buddy struggles to keep the pool hall open, and Miss Mosey is unable to keep the movie theater open. A trucker runs over Billy, a slightly retarded boy, and one wonders why Buddy stays in the town after so many of his friends die or move away. The plains aspect of this movie is not focused on, but it is everpresent in the wind that blows and the intensity of the teenagers' emotions.

O Pioneers! by Willa Cather is the story of Alexandra Bergson, her family, and her community in Nebraska in the late 1800s. Their relationships to each other is tempered by the environment of the Great Plains. Hard times in the beginning of the book cause many to leave the community to try elsewhere, including Alexandra’s good friend Carl Linstrum. Alexandra's relationship to or with Carl provides much of the dramatic interplay of the story. Carl returns to Nebraska several years later when Alexandra is about forty years old to find that she has prospered on the plains, where he has not done so well elsewhere. Their friendship remains strong and there is talk about them marrying. Alexandra's brothers did not like the idea of a man taking advantage of Alexandra and taking the land out of the family. I find it interesting that in the society portrayed, a woman is allowed to prosper and make important decisions for a family; but when all is said and done, the land divided equally, the men still lay claim to what she has built over the years simply because they are men. The brothers convince Carl to leave and life on the plains continues. People in the community are married (Amedee) and buried (Emil, Alexandra's younger brother). It is this last that Carl reads in a newspaper and comes to see Alexandra. Estranged from her brothers and after many years of struggling to learn the land, Alexandra feels free to marry Carl and rest. O Pioneers! is a love story interwoven with the complexities and hardships of life on the Great Plains.

At first glance, the Great Plains were of little value to any of the initial explorers. The Spanish, who approached from the southwest, only saw the area to be a good security buffer. This kind of surprised me considering the environment the Spanish had moved north from. The French had a different idea for the plains. Seeking fur trade opportunities with the Indians, the French entered the plains from the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River valley. The Americans probably had the greatest interest of any nation in exploring the plains. To grow they needed to expand; expansion meant moving west, onto the plains. Despite many explores impressions of the plains as being a vast dessert, they had to have seen that there were very fertile river valleys throughout the plains where agriculture could prosper. I really like thinking about what Lewis and Clark went through in their expeditions. It seems almost impossible to imagine what they saw as they crossed the nation, just the vast, untouched, plains. No buildings, no roads, just wide open fields of prairie grass and the animals that roamed them. It also makes me wonder about the great amount of knowledge that these explorers must have held. I don't consider my self an idiot, but to travel that great of a distance with little to no nature shelter seems like it'd be the death of me.

I would be lying if i were to profess a great and undying passion concerning the Lewis and Clark Expedition; my greatest exposure to it comes from my time in Elementary and High School, a period marked by a great disdain for American history, which I felt was too short and 'boring'. Later, while teaching in Alaska and rooming with a fellow teacher who was raised in Montana, I was exposed to a great many impromtue lectures upon the subject; the expedition was one of his favorite topics and something she taught almost yearly, for personal and selfish reasons (I often wonder if she felt the same way about my long winded diatribes about Wisconsin History and the Germanic invasions of Rome)
However, that isn't to say that the tales of these explorers never exercized a certain spell over me. The thought of this small cadre of men (and a dog) treking across, what was to them, a vast virgin wilderness in appealing to that great romantic part of my own soul. Who wouldn't want to be some of the first white men to see the Plaines, and describe their contents?
While listening to this lecture, I found this old thought returning; I spent a good deal of time fantisizing about what the region would have looked like, smelled like, felt like to these early explorers. What wonder and awe they must have felt, as they crossed the rugged land and recorded it in their journals.
I've apparently come a long way since I snuck books into my High School history class and tried to read them, while not paying any attention to the teacher (Note to Dr. Isern; I quit this practice years ago!)
Hearing these tales of the early explorers was certainly interesting. I was expecially drawn to the store of Pike and his, possible, connection to the Aaron Burr conspiricy. In American history, at least that taught in our public schools, we have a tendency of glorifying out heros and white washing them in the process; there was certainly some satisfaction in learning that this 'hero' might well have been a traitor to the country he had sworn to protect.
More interesting, however, was the discussion on the Great American Desert and its perception in the American collective concious. Considering that this very same region would eventually go on to become the bread basket of the nation, it was interesting to hear that, not only was the opposite long held to be the true, but that this older notion might have had more to it than we could currently believe.
Taking into account the odler definition of 'desert', to be a place that was void of 'civilization', one can see how this view first came to be formed. The Great Plaines certainly was sparcely populated during this period and, of course, very few of the people who were there would have been Anglo-Americans. However, as Webb would point out, the definition of the plaines, is a region that is semi-arid, flat and treeless; all of these same criteria would apply to deserts as well (although, admittingly, the Saharah is certainly more than 'semi' arid).
One thing that I would be interesting in learning more about would be how people began to see the Plaines as valuable farm land and began to till the soil. So many of the early exploreres remarked on how it was useless for agriculture; how exactly did this change? Were their advances in the science of farming, or did people begin to move to the land and realize that these earlier writers who know knoweldge of what they were talking about (how many of these exploreres, after all, were farmers? For that matter, did either Lewis or Clark have any experience in Agriculture; it would see that with Jefferson's passionate idealism realted to yeoman farmers, he'd have chosen people who have some knowledge of the practice to scout out his new land).

I watched the movie In Cold Blood that was created fromt the book written in 1967 by Truman Capote. This movie was based on a horrible murder of the Clutter family of four in Holcomb, Kansas that happened in 1959. The family was the picture of normalcy...they didn't exhibit one sign of why someone would want to kill them. Mr. Clutter runs the farm that the family lives on and he takes care of his wife Mrs. Clutter along with their children Nancy and Kent. Nancy and Kent seem like they have a great life ahead of them. The two murderers are Dick Hickock and Perry Smith. Dick is an ex convict who met a man in prison who used to work with Mr. Clutter; this man informed him that Mr. Clutter kept a great amount of money in his house on the farm. After Dick hears this information he decides to rob the clutter family. Dick then calls his old friend Perry and invites him to help him with robbing the Clutters and for doing this would give him half the money. Hearing this news, Perry, who is addicted to asprin and thinks he is a great guitar player, decides to accept. Part of Dick and Perry's plan is to murder the family and leave no witnesses. They go through with this crime of murdering and robbing the family but each one seems to have their doubts.
The movie was very intersting to watch. I wonder if this could happen to any family these days; i guess after watching this I asked myself who would give information out about my family--I know it sounds far fetched but no one thought that it would happen to the Clutter family either. I think that I would like to read the book and see how it compares to the movie.

This lecture talked about people who explored the Great Plains. The Spanish, French, and Americans all explored different areas of the Plains. The Spanish came and searched the southern part of the Great Plains in hopes of finding a great amount of wealth. However, when they didn't find gold they saw nothing that made the Plains a place where they cared to be. It wasn't promising enough. The French wanted to come to the Plains to trade goods. Some French such as the people involved in the Verendrye expedition traveled from Canada to the Dakotas and just like the Spanish found nothing that they thought was worth anything. The Americans didn't think that the Plains were anything to value. However, they used it to travel and becuase of that towns developed. These people thought of the Great Plains as nothing more than just a dry desert with no value. Louis and Clark's goal to discover the Northwest Passage was one of the most famous travels in history. This goal was never reached...it was just a myth. Louis and Clark actually tried to explore for more things and again didn't succeed. I think that the part about Louis and Clark was definately the most interesting to listen to. I learned about Louis and Clark in high school but this was so much better and more in depth. However the one thing that I still question is how people found "nothing" on this land and how it has developed into so much today. Personally, I think that the Plains are very intersting in terms of regions and cultures in them.

In lecture 3, "The Great American Desert", looked at the first European expeditions throughout the Great Plains. The Spanish were the first to explore the Southern Plains. Coronado explored the Southern Plains, in the Spanish quest for the Seven Cities of Cibola. Coronado's party stumbled upon the flat lands, while wandering aimlessly searching for the Seven Cities of Gold. The Spanish did not see any monetary value in the Great Plains, and decided to not to settle in the area. The French were the first to explore the Northern Plains. The French were more interested in the Fur Trade. French Explorers explored further north into present day Canada. The Verendrye expedition are the earliest known French expedition into the present day Dakotas. American Explorers consist of Lewis and Clark and Zebulon Pike. Lewis and Clark would be the first to explore the newly acquired American Northwest, traveling first through the Northern Plains. Pike would carefully explore and attempt to settle in the Southern Plains, by spying for both American and Spanish governments. The British Canadians did not really explore the Great Plains, but rather analyzed them for their agricultural purposes. Canadians like Hind's "fertile belt" proclaimed there was good agricultural land on the Canadian Plains; whereas Palliser's Triangle defined the arid plains below the "fertile belt".

Lecture Three, The Great American Desert, took us through the first Europeans encounters on the Great Plains. We looked at the Spanish conquistadors and their search for wealth, the French, such as the Verendryes, and their search for trade, and finally the Americans, such as Lewis and Clark. The Spanish were the first Europeans to reach the plains but when they found no riches they thought there was no reason to stay on the plains. While they searched for the Seven Cities of Cibola the Turk led the Spanish party astray and they never found anything. The French also saw no place for development on the plains. The Verendryes travelled from Canada as far as the Mandan villages but found little value. Americans saw the plains as nothing more than land that would connect the east with the west. Because they used the plains to travel, eventually towns and trade posts sprang up. The most famous American exploration was the Corps of Discovery led by Meriwether Lewis and William Clark. Their goal was to find the Northwest passage and various other myths of the plains. A couple of these myths were of salt mountain and Welsh indians.
I thought this was an interesting lecture to listen to. It was interesting because the conquistadoes tie into another class that I have and it was nice to hear a different perspective about them. I was also glad that Prof. Isern stressed that these men were the first Europeans to cross the plains not the first men. Many people forget that the indians were here long before any of us.

Lecture 3, The Great American Desert, covered the ‘conquering’ and first adventures onto the Great Plains. The Spanish, The French, The Americans, and The Canadians all had their share of journeys and discoveries of the Great Plains. The reports that they brought back, however, didn’t do much justice for the Great Plains. The Spanish enjoyed the land that they saw, resembling slightly of their home, the French liked the profit they could make out of fur, Lewis and Clark declared the land basically worthless, and the great Canadian’s discovering the Plains extend more North than once thought. However, in the end, many declared in uninhabitable. Each group had their own experience, and each left their own mark on the land, like Verendrye leaving his plates for the curious to find.
I found the parts about Lewis and Clark to be interesting. Listening to the ways that they moved up stream, their lack of intelligence about bears, and that darn dog Seaman, I was interested at the adventure they made. Also the story about the Verendrye plate intrigued me very much, especially the story in the epilogue.
I was left confused on why the explorers declared the land basically unlivable most of the time. I know that from first sight there isn’t much to see, but when you look into the land I feel that there is so much to offer that living on the Plains could bring you more life than living anywhere else. I think that they missed all the great points about the Plains, it might be a harsh living environment, but in the end it is rich with life and animals. Oh well, at least we know how great it is now.

Lecture 3 was all about the explorers and their view of the Great Plains. These early explorers described the area as a desert. This idea later turned into the term "The Great American Desert." These explorers all had missions and were not just out there to explore. The first ones we talked about were the Spanish. They were called Conquistadors. Their mission was to find wealthy Indian civilizations. One of these expeditions was under the leadership of Coronado. They were supposed to find the Seven Cities of Cibola. They were not able to find them but were told about a place called Quivira by an Indian that looked like a Turk. The Spanish were led in circles by the Turk and eventually killed him. They then found some new guides which brought them to Quivira only to find it was a city of grass lodges of the Wichita Indians. This was a total failure for the Spanish because they were supposed to find gold. The expedition was the first on the plains for the Spanish and they decided it was not a good place for settlement but it reminded them of home so they did like the landscape. Next we talked about the French. Their mission was to make trade relationships with the Indians. They did not seem to like the landscape as much as the Spanish. Then came the Americans after the purchase of the Louisiana Territory. This is the part of the lecture that really interested me. I really enjoy learning about Lewis and Clark because they explored some of the area I'm from and I like to read about how the land was 200 years ago.

Toward the beginning of this lecture, "The Great American Desert," Dr. Isern spoke of William Gilpin and how he did not want the people of America to think of the plains as the Great American Desert. The expeditions of the plains did nothing to improve on the name given to the plains; the Spanish, the American, the French, and the Canadian approaches only helped to prove the name. The Spanish sent explorers, what we now call conquistadors, to explore the plains of North America in search of gold. When the Spanish had no luck they decided that even though the country was just like theirs back home, they did not want to stay any longer. The Americans sent two men to explore the new Louisiana Purchase and maybe to find the famed Northwest Passage; Meriwether Lewis and William Clark. Their group was called the Corps of Discovery and included more than 45 men, one slave, one woman, and one child. They reached the Pacific Ocean by November 1805, but never did find the Northwest Passage. The French approach to the plains included Pierre and Paul Mallet, some of the greatest travelers. The French explorers mostly just wanted to explore the plains to set up trading posts were they could then trade with the Indians. Finally we made our way up into the very northern part of the plains, located in Canada, where we talked of Henry Hind and John Palliser. John Palliser had the theory of the triangle shaped fertile area and Henry Hind just spoke of a "Fertile Belt" located in Canada. They crossed each other in their travels and never actually met each other.
I really enjoyed this lecture because I love learning about what people thought about the plains and how it still affects us to this day, like the name "The Great American Desert."

Lecture Three was titled "The Great American Desert" and focused on the explorers and their impressions of the Great Plains region. Dr. Isern looked at four different groups of explorers of the Great Plains and their reports to explain how these explorers viewed this new land. First, Spanish explorers came to the Plains looking for gold like they had found to the south in Mexico and South America. However their search was fruitless and inspite of the fact they thought the land was beautiful they decided it was entirely useless for settlement. Next, the French explorers from the north who came to the area in hopes of expanding their trading empire. The french although more successful in their mission showed less reguard for the land. Third, Dr. Isern described the American experience on the plains. Starting with the Corps of Discovery who were searching for a route to the Pacific Ocean in hopes of trading with the East and also looking at the likes of Zebulon Pike who was searching for the source of the Mississippi River among other things and Stephen Long who described the plains as totally worthless. Finally, Dr. Isern took a look at the Canadian side of things through the eyes of explorers Hind & Palliser. These men came to a slightly different view of the plains with Hind describing the "Fertile Belt" that would link Canada and Palliser finding his triangle of desert.
This lecture was interesting to me because even though I have heard of many of these explorers I was unfamiliar with their individual takes on the plains and how negative most of them were. Ive always heard the journey west as a triumphant trek to the sea where rugged mountain men battled the elements on a harrowing journey west. I thought it was interesting that even the American explorers who eventually settled the area found it useless and now it is described by the entire nation as the breadbasket of the world.

The lecture from the past week was very interesting in the fact that it shed some great details on the Great American Desert. In particular i found the discussion on the early explorers to the region very thought provoking. I guess the thing I found most interesting about this is the fact that the spanish were mainly exploring the southwest while the french were mainly exploring the northern part of the continent, and the thing is that those early explorations have an effect today in the sense of the cultures in each of the regions. In the southwest you still see a more spanish influence while up north in the area of canada you see a large french influence. Also I largely enjoyed the study of the lousiana purchase in the fact of how it came about being aquired by the US.

Matt Liese

The third lecture is primarily about the Plains as this huge place for explorers to find new places to claim for their countries. Dr. Isern talked a lot about the different people from Europe came to the Plains and explored this vast land.
Herbert Eugene Bolton thought that these conquistadors came to this country because there was a chance to get rich and famous. Anyone who explores anywhere has to have a reason to do so. Why not for fame and fortune? That is what anyone seeks in life.
Coronado was one of the conquistadors who really made an impact on the plains because of his expedition. For one, he was the first European to explore the plains. He inspired countless others to follow in his footsteps and try to find their own little treasures.
There were various other explorers that came into the plains. I think the people that everyone remembers the most were Lewis and Clark. They came into the lands that America just purchased and wanted to tell everyone that lived in this area who was the new owner of the land. This was not the only reason that they came into his land, however, they also wanted to find the "Northwest Passage." this was the belief that there was a water way that passed right through North America. Of course, there is no passage and this expedition proved once and for all that it simply doesn't exist.
The Great American Desert does not exist in the North American Plains. The saying spawned from a couple people who were misinformed and I think that people should look at it as the Plains and not a Desert.

This lecture was about the numerous explorers that tried to find fortune and land for their respective countries. The French, Spanish, Canadian and American explorers each set out on the plains to claim the land and see what was out here. It depends on what part of the plains that you are on to explain what which country's explorers discovered that part of North American continent for their leaders. With my experience living here on the Upper Plains, the biggest explorers up here are the members of the Lewis and Clark expedition. Lewis and Clark spent three years traveling from the eastern coast to the western coast of the United States. Lewis and Clark and the rest of the expedition traveled this land to not only explorer it and see what was out their, but to tell anyone who lived in the Louisiana Purchase who was in charge of this land. They did this though peaceful means, unlike their Spanish neighbors to the south. I think that this has been hyped up during the last couple of years for the pursuit of profit in the tourism industry.

I think the biggest thing that we talked about for a little bit was the amount of euro-centrism that is experienced during the time of the explorers and still even now. In lecture, we talked about how some historians labeled Alexander MacKenzie the first person to cross Canada. This is absolutely not true, because native peoples have been living in Canada for hundreds of years. I would want to know is this a rampant problem in history books about the explorers "Great American Desert" or has our politically correct society taken care of this problem?

The Great American Desert was a lecture that started out by questioning those that called the plains a desert and if they were in fact questioning "God's Will" as William Gilpin stated. We discussed what settlers found and first thought of the plains. Some explored just plains amazing landscape, but others were driven to explore for their country and even more were discovering just for their individual benefit. Among the first to explore the plains were the Spanish. Coronado began his expedition in 1541, and though he and his fellow countrymen had to ambition to settle on this land, they felt as though they needed to claim it for their country's sake of safety. Meanwhile the French also came upon the plains with the motivation for exploration and trade. They were successful with this as they encountered many natives. After the Louisiana Purchase, the Americans also felt the need to settle the plains land area. Because of Thomas Jefferson's view on the importance of farming as an occupation, many moved west in search of good agricultural land. We briefly mentioned on how the British and Canadian explorers hoped to reach land in which they could extend their country. After reviewing this lecture and thinking about why some called it a desert, it makes me wonder what the actual landscape of the plains looked like then compared to now. I wish there were some way we could look at them back then in order to grasp the whole feel of why they may have been interpreted as The Great American Desert.

The Wild Land was a lecture about the early exploration, discovery, and description of the vast land of the Plains. Local Hero's such as Coronado and his conquistadors, Zebulon Pike (of which is a hero to me just for being named Zebulon), Alexander McKenzie, and of course North Dakotas Favorite, Lewis and Clark and friends were explained not necessarily of their paths but of their experiences and what preconceptions it gave others when they reported back. One specific preconception that I thought was most interesting was that of Lewis and Clark and the bears. When the explorers reported back of 10 foot bears on the prairie it perked the years of dudes and thrill seekers of the east looking for adventure. There path was more than likely one of the only places on the Plains you would find bears but that is the consequence of trying to describe such a huge land by only exploring one great river.
Another that I enjoyed was the Coronado Crew and there experiences on the Plains. Despite the extreme lack of Gold and trees the Spaniards to a liking to the land space partly because it was reminiscent to home and I think partly in awe of its great vastness that could be found in no parts of Europe. I thought it was interesting that they decided that the land was useless but though it necessary to protect it from the French by establishing San Antonio in response to New Orleans. I also find it amazing how these two cities now have such close economic and social connections despite the fact that they were first established as apposing forces.
As for Alexander McKenzie. It is amazing that we can go through elementary school with hearing so little about such a great explorer. I was taken back when I was in Canada a few years ago and a man gave a lecture on how Lewis and Clark were a bunch of wusses compared to Alexander McKenzie and how it is McKenzie deserves the glory that Americans give to Lewis and Clark. If anything "The Wild Land" reassured me that McKenzie was the real deal.
Despite the much exploration of the Plains it was a reoccurring theme in reports that the land was useless. I don't think any land can be useless. I think the problem was that the explorers had something in mind for the land that they were exploring and when they saw that the land did not fit their particular agenda they deemed it useless. If they would have gone in with the attitude of 'well we have all this land, what can it be best used for' Riches still could have been found. But Leave it to the Canadians to find a creative use for things.
Being the Skeptic I am, I am unsure we have yet discovered the BEST use of the plains. I read a thesis by a pompous English writer that most plains people were offended by. He suggested the depopulation of the plains and allow it to become again a Wild Land, and after this lecture strikes me as intriguing. Does this British mans idea have any merit?

Lame Deer, Montana, an impoverished tribe of Cheyenne are in the midst of an age old battle with the American government for mineral rights on the sacred lands of their ancestors. But hot-headed Buddy Red Bow is tired of the unfair treatment of his people and fights for the Cheyenne tribe. Meanwhile Philbert Bono buys an old jalopy 64 Buick (Pony) in his quest to become Whirlwind Dreamer, his warrior name.
In Santa Fe, New Mexico lives Bonnie Red Bow, the runaway sister of Buddy and now single mother of two girls. When Bonnie is framed for drug charges she calls Buddy for help. Unfortunately, like the other members of the tribe Buddy has no money to leave the reservation much less pay the bail for his long forgotten sister. One day by chance, Philbert rides up on his new pony (64 Buick) and being dim witted as he is, is convinced to drive Buddy the thousands of miles from Lame Deer to Santa Fe, NM.
It was an in and out plan, deadhead it to Santa Fe, get Bonnie out of prison and get back to Lame Deer so everyone can continue their deprived lives. But when Philbert overhears on the CB radio that Bear Butte in South Dakota is one of the most spiritually enlightening places in the world He makes a last second turn towards Rapid City and then the spiritual adventure begins.

What is interesting about Philbert and Buddy is that they are both very proud of there people but look at them in two very different ways. Buddy is concerned only with the future of his people and wish to see them get out the impoverished and underrepresented state they are in. he cares not about the past and feels that carrying on about their history is foolish and shameful. Philbert also cares about his people but believes that looking into the past and connecting with their roots by means of traditional fables and ceremony is their path to success.
Through their adventure to different spiritual sites and Pow Wows they both are reassured what it means to be Native American and lessons they can learn from there ancestors.
The movie did a great job capturing the Landscape of the plains and even if one is not interested in the plot there are a few scenes that are worth the while. When Philbert Climbs to the top of Bear Butte and looks over the vast plains it is an inspiring and glories view. The acting was amazing for the most part but had some lapses from time to time. Between Philbert and Buddy's old kooked up Vietnam friend the acting is second to none. The plot was bearable but was really just a dry excuse to be able to cover a wide array of sacred sites and festivals. In the end I enjoyed the movie and would recommend it to anyone in the class.

The Great American Desert covered explorers who approached the Great Plains from both directions, North and South. The French Verendryes from the North and the Spanish Conquistadors out of the South. Neither group ever actually found what they were looking for, riches. Then there were the Americans, who were interested in crossing the country and reporting back to the excited populace what is out there. Some explorers like Zebulon Pike had specific missions, like finding the source of the Mississippi. Because of reports from explorers like Stephen Long, the image of the Great American Desert became entrenched. Travelers of the plains were of all types, naturalists, pathfinders, and geologists. The first half of the 19th century seemed to be the hay day for investigating the plains. The Great American Desert image stuck with the plains for decades, which also played a major part of its development, especially culturally. We mentioned how football and sports played such a big role in town identity. The Canadians had the fertile belt right above the border, which contrasts with the American desert view. The lecture finished with people coming to embrace the harsh Great American Desert.

I thought some of the settlers ideas of the frontier sounded like X-Files episodes, Welsh Indians with wild sex, mountains of salt, and Meriwether Lewis’s children. The most interesting was the Chavez monument and how one guy had created such a respectable image which others would go so far out of their way to honor him.

How come you don’t hear of football or sports being such a big part of plains history? Is there this sort of identity amongst Eastern or Western American towns? Or is this a Great Plains phenomenon?

Every explorer who came to the Great Plains was never looking for what it possessed. The Great Plains may have been interesting to them or it may have not, but one thing was understood and that is that the plain were desert. It may have its desert like qualities, such as the blowing sand hills, but the travelers were describing the emptiness and endless that they encountered. This “newly discovered” place that was deserted of life did not have what the French or Spanish explorers were in search of. The only people who saw interest in this place were the people who looked to expand civilization and their country. This is where the Americans and Canadians succeed they looked to obtain the fruits of the plains and to conquer the new life that it would offer.

I think it is still interesting how people still view the great plains are bare and worthless, more like a true desert. The plain have a lot to offer, but what really gets me is that people still are not taking away all that the Great Plains offer. Many people are falling into a common way of doing things and are influence by cultures outside of the plains. Trends and technology seem to lead people thoughts away from what is around them and to the easy or common way of doing things. Why can’t people take the time and effort to stop and look around? The Great Plains can be explored at a deeper level to solve the problems at hand; in doing so we would become more in-turned with the given environment and be closer to a sustainable life within the Great Plains.

This lecture was based on defining what the great plains actually are. As soon as we understand can understand what the plains are composed of, we can then define its location and boundaries. The Great Plains must be described by its physical as being level, treeless, and semi-arid. The plains can not simply be defined by its physical characteristics it must also be described though its culture.

It was interesting to see how diverse the Great Plains actually are. Being a Minnesota boy, one who was raised to think poorly of the infertile land, fell victim to the interstate syndrome. They only time I was ever on the plains was to get through it as fast as possible to greater places. I now am intrigued at its beauty and sculpture nature that can be seen in the ruggedness of the badlands or simply the tones and textures of the grasses.

I simply wonder why nobody can design a watering device that waters squares, or from another perspective, why do farmers buy square pieces of land? It is kind of random, but it really does not make sense to me.

Lecture 3: The Great American Desert

This lecture is all about the exploration of our GP's, and it first focused on Coronado the conquistador. He basically came searching for riches. This really got me laughing. Cibola and The 7 Cities of Gold? I really want to know where he got this information. I can't even imagine 1 city let alone 7. I think this "prize in his eyes" came from a sense of "having to find something worth going exploring for." Despite not breaking the bank, the Spanish enjoyed our landscape, as it mirrored Spains. They weren't without hardship though. The Turk surely had caused some trouble, leading the men in circles. Coronado wasn't the last from Spain to come exploring. Many other exploration missions took place from 1601 to 1720.

Most of the Spainish exploration missions generally traveled south to north. In the opposite fashion, French explorers came from Canada, and traveled south. The explorers, the Verendryes, got as far as Mandan, ND and stayed in the Villages that are still there. Here we got to hear a great story about the shrine in SD that proudly pronounced who had been there and when.

Not to be one-upped by foreign exploration, two US men set out on an epic journey- Bartholomew Hunt (Chris Farley) and Leslie Edwards (Matthew Perry)! (Actually that was Almost Heroes) It was, of course, Lewis and Clark. They were the first Americans to brave to GP's and reach the Pacific, which they did, and solidified their clame to fame. A lot of their success came from the stories they told about the animals, treasures, and fierce weather. They weren't above "treasure hunting" either. They heard rumor of a salt mountain, welsh indians, and 10ft tall bears. Again, rumors.

The close of the lecture talked about exploration in the southern US moving east to west. Again it was a hard journey, but most of these explorers were trading goods and doing business, so their minds were aimed at speed. Here is where the title, Great American Desert, comes into play. It's wasn't the landscape. It was the poplution density. Imagine being in NYC and being the only one around for miles. You might get the same feeling. Although the term 'desert' has certain connotations, it wasn't the Sahara. It was the beautiful landscape that we live in today.

This lecture focuses on the theme of The Great American Desert, and the focus of the explorers of the region. The Spanish, French, Americans, and the Canadians were the main groups who explored the area to see what possibilities the region could have. The main explorer was Coronado, who explored in 1540-41. With his expedition, the Spanish lacked the motivation to settle here, as he believed that the area was not worth anything, and that it was a desert. France's goal in exploring the region was based commercially, especially to trade with the Indians. They started exploring the region around 1719. One of the main explorers was actually were French Canadians, the Verendryes. They set off for their exploration in 1727 and went as far as the Mandan villages. For the Americans, the leaders of the explorations were Lewis and Clark. After their travel, they concluded that the plains were a public fascination, but not a good place for development. The British Canadian explorers included Hind and Palliser, who traveled separately. They never met, but their paths crossed each other. They concluded that there is still a great desert, but it is mostly in the United States. What I found interesting in this lecture was when we talked about how in the plains region, there is a great fascination with antiques, and that it is mostly men who collect. I have always grown up thinking that it is just the women who collected antiques, but now that I think about it, my grandpa kept a lot of his old machinery and liked going to go sales to see what kind of goodies he could find. In a sense, I have come to acquire the thirst to collect antiques, especially when I can find out the story behind the item. Before this lecture, I really did not know a lot about the other countries who explored the area after the Louisiana Purchase. I think that it would be interesting to talk more about the antiques of the prairie, and especially what the explorers left behind, as these are pieces of history, and I know that I can really identify with something that I can actually see.

Lecture three addressed European exploration of the plains. Starting with Spanish explorers, moving to French and American exploration, and finally British-Canadian explorers on the plains. Each nationality had a different reaction to the plains. The Spanish felt at home on a land that so much like Spain’s, but the plains didn’t hold what they were looking for (mineral wealth). The fur trading French wanted to cross the plains, but had no desire to settle in the Great American Desert.

Lecture three also covered the ever popular Corps of Discovery, exploration by Americans into what had once been French land. Each explorer or group of explorers had different reactions to the land. Zebulon Pike described it as “like the Sahara of Africa,” and it was, supposedly, the explorer Stephen Long who coined the phrase “the Great American Desert”. Little attention was paid to the plains, other than by traders just passing through, until the Canadian discovery of fertile land in the northern plains.

The other day at work, I was asked to help our office’s German intern think of a better word than “wilderness” to describe North Dakota. One of the GRHC’s employees had argued with him that North Dakota was not a wilderness, but he insisted that while duck hunting the weekend before he had been in the wilds of this state. In the heat of the argument he shouted, “North Dakota is a desert!” Which everyone laughed at, but got me thinking.

At the end of lecture three, we were introduced to the idea that maybe when the plains were called the Great American Desert, it was referring to how “deserted” it was not physical features. And maybe this is what my German intern friend was thinking when he called North Dakota a wild desert. While hunting, he had most likely walked a long distance seeing little other than grass, fields, ducks, and the others he was hunting with. He saw North Dakota as deserted, similar to what early explorers had also seen.

When I started watching the Alamo, General Sam Huston was the first person to speak and the first words that came out of his mouth were about Texas. I think him and Walter P. Webb would have gotten along fantastic. The Alamo, which is one of many movies about this historic site, is a movie about the legendary establishment in Texas which faced several battles during the 1830s in search for the territory’s independence from Mexico. I could tell that this movie did not want to be a simple war movie; they tried their best to add in as much historical influence as they could. That is why the movie is slow moving in my opinion. If there is one person this movie chooses to glorify it would be Davy Crockett. The explorer, pioneer, congressman, bear killer and everything in between, is looked up to and revered by everyone in the film. The Texans wish he would lead, the Mexicans are aware and fear him, and the U.S citizens respect and admire him. He not only is a rugged man’s man but he is also educated and well versed in things such as diplomacy and music. A quote which sums up the Alamo to me and one I believe most Texans hold dear to their heart today is, “one crowded hour of glorious life is worth an age without a name.” Though I don’t believe most men fighting for the Alamo believed it at the time, it holds true as those men go down today in history as brave warriors who fought hard for independence and freedom. Two ideas that are the very fabric of this country, two Ideas that these men were willing to die for with or without the help of the U.S.

Capote.

So after reading the book, which I'm glad I did first, I thought I would rent this movie. This movie is all about Truman Capote reading about the Clutter murders, and going to Kansas to write his last novel, In Cold Blood.

This movie took on another perspective than the book, and I enjoyed this different viewpoint. You got to see the author digging and finding his story. You got to see a little of the backstory of the chain of events leading up to the murder, but most of this took place after the fact. Phillip Seymour Hoffman portrayed Capote and earned an Oscar for his amazing work. I really loved his work here as it was nothing short of brilliant. This movie gave great insight to his struggles and life. Also, as this was a period piece, everything was revelant to the time period, the late 1950's and early 60's. More importantly, we got to see Perry and Dick.

The relationship between Perry and Capote was amazing. Capote was quite two-faced in his investigation. He made Perry believe that he really cared about him, when in truth, he did not. This was something I didn't really pick up from the book. I found it creey how Capote was only after his story, and not their welfare. We got to view their meetings from the trial, up until Perry took his final drop.

There were some very interesting struggles also. Capote and Dewey, and Capote's novel and the final outcome. First, Dewey's heart sided with the Clutters, while Capote was more interested in his book. Capote kept trying to find new lawyers to keep their case alive in order to write his book, while Dewey wanted the killers dead for their crimes. Dewey had a great line in saying, "If they get off, I'll personally come to New York and hunt you down." Indeed, a conflict of interest. Also, Capote was struggling with his final part to the book. He couldn't write the ending unless Perry gave him the details of the killings. Once Capote had this, he finished his book, but realized that he could do nothing to save Perry, even if he had wanted to.

All in all, this was a great movie. It helped give image to the book and flush out other story lines not covered there. My opinion, read the book first, as in most cases, the book is better.

Lecture number 3 entitled "The Great American Desert" was about all the expeditions that took place on this land throughout the last few centuries, more specifically since 1541 when the Spanish Conquistador Coronado set out to find the 7 cities of Cibola. In class Dr. Isern discussed the Spanish, French, American, and finally British reasons for dispersing across and exploring the vast land called "The Great Plains". Each people(s) had their own specific reasons to why they wanted to explore this land: The Spanish for the possibility of gold and later a claim for security, French for the possibility of fur trading with Native Americans among others, Americans to see the land they have recently purchased (Louisiana Purchase), and finally British for an eye on possible development (including the Great Plains now extending to the 49th parallel). Along with others in the class, I too, found the exploration of Lewis & Clark the most interesting. I enjoyed the story Dr. Isern told the class on how Lewis & Clark actually were able to move upstream in the spring of the year. I found it very fascinating that they would often have to use ropes around trees upstream to pull themselves forward against the strong currents of the mighty Missouri. This is something I have never really thought about but I could only imagine how frustrating this would have been to the many of men that were on the expedition. One item of information that I would have liked to go into more detail about was the interactions between the Natives and the explorers. We learned a little bit about Lewis & Clark's stay with the Mandan tribe but it would have also been kind of interesting to know about how other explorers interacted with the Natives.

This lecture dealt with the view people had and some still have about the Great Plains being a desert like region. The lecture focused on what the Spanish, French, British Canadian, and American explorers thought about the region and what impact their expeditions had on the Great Plains itself.

Spanish Explorers felt this connection with the plains because it reminded them of their homeland back in Spain. Even though they liked the Great Plains they would later report back to their king that they thought the land had little value to their country. The French did find the land a bit more important in the value of fur trading but there isn't any evidence that explorers had any affinity for the land. However, when the British Canadians explored the land they found something nobody had found before and that was a fertile belt of land that had economic value. Which surprised me because the Americans explored the plains extensively and pretty much came away with the opinion that land had little value and that it was an uninhabitable place.

After hearing about all the expeditions into the Great Plains it came to no surprise that the region got the reputation of being a desert. Not many placed a whole lot of value on the land. In some ways I can see why they would come to that conclusion but in others ways it makes me wonder if they knew what they were looking for. The Great Plains has so much wildlife and natural beauty that I find it hard to give it that kind of label. It makes me wonder if this new and very different landscape they saw made it hard for them to grasp the potential it had.

In 1967, Truman Capote wrote the classic In Cold Blood. In 2005 the book was updated to a black and white film. This movie interprets a murder based in 1959 in Holcomb, Kansas. I found this movie upsetting and irritating. The normalness of the Clutter family of four that is killed makes the film horrific. If this could happen to a simple innocent family such as theirs, it seems as though it could happen to anyone. Before their death we are able to see that the family lives on a nice farm that Mr. Clutter runs. We also see that Mrs. Clutter is tended to by her husband and kids, Nancy and Kent, both of who seem to have a great future.
Dick Hickock, whose dominant performance is played by Scott Wilson, is an ex-con and cultivates a plan after meeting a former employee of Mr. Clutter’s in prison. After having the suspicion that the Clutter family has a considerable amount of cash on their farm, Dick plans to rob the family. Dick invites an old friend, Perry Smith, whose aspirin-addicted character is played by Robert Blake, to take part in this crime. Perry, burdened by a damaged childhood, decides to accept the invitation.
After going through with their plan to “leave no witnesses” you come to wonder if either of the men would have committed the crime if they would have been alone. Or if the only reason they had done it was because of both of them together created some sort of monster. This movie was very engaging and I now want to read the book to see if their’s is even more details I am able to catch.

As I'm sure most of you are aware I am from Minnesota. Well this weekend I went home to celebrate my grandpa's 82nd birthday. It was a great time and something happened that proved my point I made earlier in class about the fact that most Minnesotans believe they are part of the great plains. We were talking to my grand father about his childhood growing up in Iowa before moving to Minnesota at the age of 8. One of my cousins (who is from the Twin Cities) stated "So you never left the great plains then, you just moved further north." I then said to him,
"are you sure about Minnesota being on the plains." He then replied
"Yea Minnesota is a great plains state." I did not reply to him, all I did was smile and thought to myself how we Minnesotans simply want to be part of everything. We want to be a major metropolis by inventing the "upper Midwest", we want to be considered a northern state, lake country and of course part of the Great Plains.

After listening to lecture three some major questions were answered for me. Such as why is it called the great American Desert? Also, if it is a desert what is the point of trying to conquer it? Today the Great Plains is no desert but back in the 1800s or early 1900s it’s easy to see why they thought that way. I enjoyed how Dr. Isern went over how each group went about conquering the desert and their reasons for doing so. It always comes back to economics. The Spanish wanted gold, but when it became too much work to find they simply left. The French came in an effort to trade fur with the natives and others. Both the Americans and Canadians sought to develop their country through exploration which in the end would help their commerce. While we called this place a desert the Native Americans called this place home. That is why I wish we would have talked more about early Native American culture on the plains. We went into some with the story of Coronado expedition but nothing much else. I also enjoyed the history surrounding the Great American Desert that centered with the people who tried to conquer it, no one more than Zebulon Pike. Growing up I heard little about him but he was considered a hero. After the lecture I realized that he is not quite the hero which the old history classes portray him to be. The Great American Desert is an ignorant term to describe a some what harsh place. Through out history this land has taken a bad rap and it is up to those who are interested and care about the Great Plains to rid the land of this name and all the questions that go with it.

This lecture, titled The Great American Desert, focused on several expeditions by explorers to this area and what kind of impact it had on the plains region. In this lecture, several of the men who wrote about the plains associated it with romantic glory, much like Herbert Eugene Bolton and his idea that the Conquistador felt his mission was one that was enveloped in romanticism. Dr. Isern Discussed the Coronado Expedition and his obsession with finding the 7 cities of Cibola. The significance of Coronado's expedition was the fact that it was the 1st European exploration of the Plains, and the Spanish really loved the picturesque look of the plains. The French also had pioneers cross through the plains region, as Pierre and Paul Mallet, Etienne Veniard de Bourgmond, among others crossed this area. However, it wasn't until Pierre Gaultier de Varennes and Sieur de la Verendrye expedition when the French saw what would become the northern plains of North and South Dakota. After hearing about all of these explorers, I began to wonder about how many diverse people were on the Great Plains and it surprises me that not too many of these explorers maintained a presence here, besides the French and British forts that dotted the plains region. The Corps of Discovery was also very important, as Lewis and Clark made the first ever U.S. expedition to the West Coast. What makes me question why this region was called the Great American Desert was all of the stories that explorers brought with them that told of a vibrant landscape, teeming with wildlife and beautiful scenery. Even today, I believe that the Great Plains is one of the most beautiful regions in the country. As I mentioned in class, I feel that if you live in mountaineous territory, it seems like you are boxed in and there is nothing else but mountains everywhere. On the plains, you can see all around you and I guess, in my opinion, you have a more intuitive sense of your surroundings.

In Walter Prescott Webb's book, The Great Plains, he talks about the environment of the Great Plains and the adaptation that is needed to survive in the plains. He centers his book around the plains in Texas and bases most of his information off those features.Webb begins his book by introducing what characteristics define the plains. The three characteristics are whether or not the area is level, semi-arid, and treeless. These three characteristics define the landscape and the area must meet at least 2 of these conditions in order to be included in the plains. Webb repeatedly comes back to these three ideas throughout the book and stresses the importance of our adaptation to environment. He talks about some to the many things that the new settlers much adapt to when coming to the plains, such as new guns suited for the plains, building techniques, barb-wire fences, and some new farming techniques, such as using the Ogallala Aquifer to irrigate their land. Webb often has a biased opinion about the plains mainly because he never traveled too far north of Texas. Although Webb was very repetitive on his thesis and his ways throughout the book, over all the book was quiet interesting to me since I am an agriculture major and have been very involved with agriculture for as long as I can remember.

Picnic is a story of an old party boy, football star, army vet, and womanizer finally coming to age and realizing he wants more out of his life. The entire film takes hold in a small Kansas town in the nineteen-fifties where grain is king. On Labor Day a shirtless Hal Carter, the tragic hero of the story, wonders into town with no money and no where to stay. He only has the pants around his waist, his determination to change his ways, and the name of an old college friend, Alan Benson. While Hal has been unable to find himself after college Alan has worked his way up into a well paid office position at the local grain elevator. Hal admits his envy for Alan and in turn is offered a job as a laborer at the elevator. Meanwhile two sisters, Madge and Millie Flo, are having a falling apart as Madge is dim and beautiful and Millie is a bright tomboy.
As the plot unfolds Madge is a damsel in distress being pressured by her single mother to marry Alan, not for love but for upward economic mobility. Like the small town stereotype this Kansas town holds a great picnic every Labor day where everyone in town can be found. I found this to be the most interesting scene in the movie. The movie was able to capture the spirit of the fair in such activities as watermelon eating contests, three-legged racing, etc. All the different kinds of people in the town are on display, the young laborers, the golfers, and of course, the town drunk. With little actual dialog this scene was able to capture the energy of small town events, display the wide array of people that make up that town, and most importantly set the scene for one of the steamiest moments in Hollywood up to that time.
Just the story in itself I feel shows the age of this film. Focused around a man that wants to settle down with a pretty lady and start a career is not something you will find coming out of Hollywood these days. This just shows the willingness at the time to be assimilated into culture and live by its ways. Today it seems that most movies are of an opposite note highlighting the midlife crisis of men and woman that realize that being settled is not what they want and they search for the youth within them self. Overall I enjoyed this movie and feel that it is relevant to the class because it provides a lens to see into the dynamic culture of the prairie during the golden age of small town, USA.

Dale Bentley, executive director of Preservation North Dakota, sends this flyer about the work at the Hutmacher site.

Lecture #3 was titled "The Great American Desert". The lecture began by describing the impressions of the plains through the eyes of various historians such as William Gilpin and Ralph C. Morris, both of whom thought the Plains had a purpose, whether it be divine or man made. Next the lecture discussed the explorers of the Plains and pointed out the purposes of those explorers; whether it was to promote religion, like the Spanish, or mainly economic endeavors, like the French and English, or just to discover the country they had inherited, like the Americans. The lecture also listed specific expeditions and explorers such as Cortez, Coronado, the Verendryes, the Corps of Discovery, and Stephen Long among others.
One point of interest for me was the discussion of the Corps of Discovery’s expedition led by Lewis and Clark. Not being from North Dakota I have not heard a whole lot about this expedition and it was nice to hear some of the more intricate details such as Lewis’ state of mind on the return trip. Another point of interest for me was finding out how the explorers left pieces of mettle with inscriptions on them to show they had been to through that area. I had never thought of this previously and find it quite intelligent; however wonder how they carried all those pieces around with them on their quests.
One item that I wish the lecture had gone into more detail about was the exploration of the Canadian side of the Plains. Besides the mentioning of Alexander Mackenzie I did not feel like the lecture included much about the discovering process and views of the Canadians towards the Canadian Plains.

Lecture 3 was all about the Great American Desert. This term is used commonly when talking about exploration of th great plains. They call it a "desert" simply because many of the explores found it more or less desolate. The main reason that the explorers before Lewis and Clark did not appretiate the plains is because they were not looking for the resources that are found in the plains. Both the Spanish and the French were only interested in the plains because they wanted its resources for money. The Spanish were only looking for silver and gold which the plains lacks. Because the plains does not have any gold or silver it was desolate like a desert to them. The French like the Spanish were only interested in money but instead of gold or silver they were fur traders. The French had a better opinion of the plains than the Spanish was but they did not find what they wanted in the plains. To them it may as well have been a desert. These common ideas thoughout history are what probably make the "Great American Desert" phrase to be so widely accepted after it was coined. It wasn't until Lewis and Clark came to explore the plains that a positive view of the plains was found. Lewis and Clark were not looking for money they were solely looking for exploration and to promote the plains to new settlers.

Justin

Walter Prescott Webb's book about the Great Plains is if nothing else, interesting reading material. It like many other books does have it's flaws. Webb was from Texas and therefore many of his views and opinions are based on his opinions from Texas. If the plains were constructed in the exact way that Webb describes much of the plains would be raising cattle, and wearing spurs. Not all of his views are Texan based however, despite his small amount of personal experience he does do a pretty fair job at giving information about the entire plains.

One of my favorite parts about this book is that it does a good job at characterizing different aspects of the Great Plains. A lot of other papers on the plains that I have seen before talked many from feelings and thoughts, not structured like I found in this book. For instance when Webb goes to describe the three factors that a region needs to be a part of the Great Plains. Being a treeless landscape, flat terrain, and being semi-arid. Before I had not found any text that had defined these factors so clearly let alone stating the requirements as an area needing at least two out of the three factors to be a part of the plains.

Webb later goes to describe some of the inivations that were redefined after settlers crossed the "fault" into the Great Plains. This fault is what Webb uses to describe the transition from an area where the settlers were capable of farming and living comfortable. This section reminded me of the rough nature that I have grown to love about plains people. When coming to the plains settlers had to mind new ways to grow crops, build houses, and many other aspects of everyday life.

Justin

Walter Webb's "Great American Plains" is a timeless interpretation of the nature of the Great Plains and how they have mercilessly whipped European settlers into a condition to thrive on its wild frontier. But as Webb explains it has been a been years of trial and error and disregarding "traditional" practices to get to a point where we can come to terms with the landscape and live within it. The plains being "treeless, semi-arid, and flat" presented many problems for the early settlers. When settlers first entered the Great Plains they naively planted eastern variety of plants that flourish only in easterly conditions. They also ran into the issue of lack of recognizable building material as lumber and stone was not readily available in the vast stretches of land. Even the mere task of dividing land via fences became an a real issue for the inexperienced plains people. A lack of navigableness rivers and developed railroads greatly hindered people ability to develop an economy as great as that found out east or on the west coast.
But as Webb would claim, the people of the plains began to adapt to the land making a fruitful life on the plains possible. People began to recognize that till farming and using eastern variates of plants would not work and botanists and eastern Europeans introduced drought hardy plants that would grow on the plains. Sod houses designs were developed and barbed wire was introduced to compensate for the lack of timber and railroads were developed to stretch the long distances between markets. The people flourished not by practices developed in the East, but by there own practices. A new culture had been developed. One that was suitable for the Plains.
It may have developed a bias from reading other blogs but I feel that a gaping hole in the thesis is that lack of a cross comparison of the development between the American and Canadian Plains. This may have brought to light how culture and accidental discover did indeed help shape our living on the Plains.
Regardless, I have enjoyed Webb's interpretation of how we have adapted to the land but fear that we are now in a process of stepping backwards. We are now thriving on the Plains not by living within them but by overpowering them with technology. We are putting ourselves above the planet forgetting vernacular practices that helped us grow and exchanging them for generic practices that are the same in the Plains, Rocky Mountains, and the Forests of the East. How long do have until we must revert back to our roots and develop our built environment and lives within the Plains rather that over them?

May concepts were covered in lecture 3, the theme seemed to be the land and how we relate to the land. At the time it seems that natural life and natives had struck a balance with each other. the coming of the Europeans would bring much change to the land. during the lecture great use of music was used to relate the European relation to the land. The first song was meant to make the listener feel uneasy. The second was home on the range. Despite the Simpson's pointing out how it misrepresents the plains its says so much more than just the reality of living on the plains. The song is done in a 3/4 tempo of "the rolling hills." I never had a profession sing in class (this is my 7th year at NDSU!). At times claims on the plains just get outrageous. such as the "Hilton of the outback" or the number of prairie dogs on the plains. These I noticed are motivated by economic concerns or really just people who want more money. I do not have this predilection but I know there is an obsession with artifacts found on the plains. I do however constantly remind my self that this is a recently settled area. I know there is a struggle to connect with he past. that is a struggle the natives to this land (at the time of European domination) do not have to deal with. I would like to hear how they relate to their past.

Suda.

Lecture was called The Great American Desert. The first documented exploration of the Plains was by the Spanish, and was done so by the famous Coronado expedition. Coronado failed to find anything significant to justify settling the land, so no major attempts were made to colonize or even tame the plains. Coronado was followed by many other Spanish explorers into the region, but they too failed to find riches enough to settle the land. From the north the French explored the plains, and they were less picky in what they were looking for. They wanted to trade with the Indians, so the set up trading posts and has a semi-permanent association with the plains. The La Verendryes made one of the most famous expeditions through what is now North and South Dakota. For the Americans, who were late in the game of exploring, came Lewis and Clark to explore to the Pacific, and Zebulon Pike. All of these men were looking to see what the land could provide for their respective countries. In the case of Canada, explorers Hind and Palliser were not looking for gold or furs, but a decent place for farmers to settle. Thus they discovered Palliser's Triangle, an arid area not suitable for farming, and the plains around it which had agricultural potential.
The part of this lecture where we discussed the artifacts of the Coronado expedition in Kansas really interested me. These explorers are cultural beings, but what does that really mean? Do we have some psychological need to know that white explorers have been here before? Is it the adventurous spirit that has been tacked onto these groups that makes us revere them? We touched base a little on this in class, but I am still uncertain why we treat explorers like we do. Perhaps it's the sense of adventure, which draws us to them.

In Cold Blood by Truman Capote


In Cold Blood is a story centered around 4 murders that occured in Holcomb, Kansas in 1959. The murders were committed without apparent motive and literally no clues. This book follows the backstory from the murderer's young lives, the families triumphs, the fateful night, the investigation, the trial, jail life, and justice. This book was reconstructed by Truman Capote, and a movie was based off his writing this novel in 2005.


The book looks at many aspects of the crime, both from the murderer's and victim's perspective. It starts with the victims, and this is where he are painted a vivid picture of a farming and ranching lifestyle in Western Kansas. It talks about the struggle that farmers go through, and ties in a lot of concepts that are quite easy to realte to. We see the relationships between people, and this is the best part of the book. This beginning section of description really gives us all the aspects of this family. The hard-working father, the invalid and sick mother, the ideal daughter, and the son who is searching for his path. Thrown in this mix are all the characters involved in small town life: workers, cafe owners, teachers, investigators, lawyers, other farmers, gas station attendants, and also an array of people from many different areas of the country including Alaska, Mexico, Florida, Las Vegas, and Japan. I think the "small town" atmosphere plays a huge role in this book.


Capote really wrote an amazing book. In the back pages, Norman Mailer states, "Truman Capote is the most perfect writer of my generation. He writes the best sentences word for word, rhythm upon rhythm." I have to agree 100% with this. His style of writing is so unique and interesting, that you really can't put the book down. Even in parts where topics seemed irrelevant, Capote kept my interest from cover to cover. Each sentence is so juciy that you are constantly thirsty. His development of character really surpised me, espically with the killers. I know a lot of this was based on interviews and fact, but I know there were some things he made up. I think that is why this is so interesting. Capote made me feel like this was his made up story, rather than based on large amounts of facts.


I'm not sure how he wanted readers to view the killers, but I felt both pity and hatred towards them. The killers relationship is amazing. Their pasts really enhance everything that happens, and it is truly interesting. Some things in their lives I could relate to, others I could not, and I think this added to the mystique.


This was a great book and it really higlights country living and small town happenings. I would recommend this to anyone who likes a great crime drama/mystery.

Jeff Armstrong

The major theme of this lecture, the Great American Desert, is the exploration and interpretation of the plains by its prospective colonizers, from the Spanish conquistadors and the French fur traders to Lewis and Clark. Although the Spanish appreciated the plains environment as similar to their own, the sole purpose of their mission was to locate gold and silver to meet the dictates of a mercantilist economy. As Webb observed, the Spanish never found adequate economic incentive for settlement and were severely hampered by the hostility of tribes such as the Commanche and Apache. Historians like Herbert Bolton glamorized the conquistadors, rather than sympathizing with indigenous groups such as the Pueblos, who rose up to drive the Spaniards from their land in 1680.

The French found an economic basis for settlement in the fur trade, but they never built up a large enough population or military force to impose their will on Native peoples in the region. They were instead forced to develop a complex system of alliances fortified by gift-giving and intermarriage. Early historians treated Indians as ignorant pawns of the traders, while post-1960s analysis tended to portray them as equally helpless victims. As the notion of indigenous agency has gained currency in recent years, a more sophisticated interpretation of the fur trade has emerged in which Indians have their own agendas and a shared responsibility for the depletion of wildlife.

I find the issue of Indian agency versus victimhood a fascinating one. I have to say I agree more with the quote from Dee Brown about Indian policy as an attempt to eradicate all traces of Indians from American life than with that of Elliot West. I haven’t read it for some time, but I don’t think Bury my Heart at Wounded Knee reduces the Natives to passive victims. Despite its faults, it was a powerful catalogue of war crimes which served as a necessary prelude to a more sophisticated analysis of indigenous resistance and accommodation. To make an analogy, it took a great deal of literature on the horrors of the holocaust before writers like Hannah Arendt could discuss the role of German Jews in collaborating with the program. I should reread Contested Plains before commenting, but I think West’s book sort of mystifies Cheyenne thinking and implies a type of collective consciousness and decision-making among them which would be very rare indeed.

Good Points – Most people liked the fact that they could identify with much of what Webb wrote, or learned something new.

Comments:

The book is filled with historical facts and although you get the feeling that some of his ideas/theories are biased, he do