Khanifa
Imelda Fauziyanti
Writing
4
PBI-B
Howard Zinn: Columbus in His Perspective
“This book changed my life.” So, yes, I think books
can do that. And if a book changes somebody’s life by changing somebody’s
consciousness, it is going to have an effect on the world, in one way or
the other, sooner or later, in ways that you probably cannot trace. -- Howard
Zinn
Introduction
This text is focused on Howad Zinn perspective, in his article
entitle “Speaking Truth to Power with Books”, told about the books that can
change the readers mind and also change the people consciousness. That is why
Howard Zinn takes the examples; one of them is about Christopher Columbus. He
is an inventor of the America continent, and he is a hero for American people.
But, in Zinn’s perspective, Columbus is not hero at all. He is murdered, a
torturer, a kidnapper, a mutilator of native people, a hypocrite, a greedy man
looking for gold, willing to kill people and mutilate people. It is very
disgusting for many people actually the reader that has background knowledge
about America, because America usually known as the new world is claimed to
have been discovered by Columbus. And also, it is very dissimilar when
perspective of zinn is compare with a little viewed by Samuel Elliet Morison.
Here, I am as the writer will compare a little bite both of them and straighten
out why Howard Zinn wrote like in his article.
Summary
There are
several points that Zinn wrote in his article “Speaking Truth to Power with
Books.” First, Zinn told that “Books operate in
many ways to change people’s consciousness.” It means that book is power for us
to know everything that can changes our consciousness to be better. In Zinn’s
article, there are many examples that he wrote. But, I just focus on
Columbus. Zinn told that Columbus is not hero at all. It seems like my writing
that has wrote in the first paragraph.
Second,
Zinn’s perspective has big differences with Samuel Elliot Morison. Morison,
with calmly, said that true if there is abattoir in Arawaks tribe, but the fact
is not comparable with the heroism of Columbus. Actually, when talk about the
history, history is never neutral (Al-Wasilah: 2011). It can be politic,
economy, rational or irrational. This is one of the fact in Zinn’s writing, he
buries in hundreds other pages seamen. He decides to tell a heroism that occurs
in Arawaks is pure ideology chosen.
Critiques
There are three points on Columbus that are neglected by Zinn in
his article. First, He told that
Columbus is not a hero at all because actually the first motivation of Columbus
sailed is to find out the gold. Actually, before Columbus
went sailing, he
was a villain.
On 1491, He had raped a queen named Isabella
while her age is still thirteen years old. But the courthouse didn’t give
decision that he will get the punishment. The Catholic priest, Perez, plead for
donating Columbus to search the new continent. If Columbus success to find out
the continent, he will convert inhabitants of Christian. Then, Queen of
Isabella agrees that request, and she hopes Columbus will not come back again.
So, if before Columbus sailing is a villain, moreover if he
becomes discoverer. It’s natural if Columbus slaughtered. Even, in 20 years
period of time, Columbus slaughtered 90% Arawaks tribe, which in the first time
the number is 8 million peoples. On the other hand, Kickpatrick Sale (1991)
said that this is more than just ordinary slaughtering, but this is one of
slaying on a large scale which is finish off more than 90% inhabitants, and
annihilation of one generation.
Second, in Zinn’s article, he didn’t explain who the first
discoverers are because I think if he wrote about the badness of Columbus, of
course he knows who the discoverer of America is. As qualified reader, we
cannot take that text as a granted. I am as the reader of Zinn’s article at
that time has background knowledge that the discoverer of America is just
Columbus, from Elementary School until Senior High School is also similar. Just
now, I know that Columbus is not hero at all. So, I think all of readers also
will prosecute for Zinn about the real discoverer. And in his book also, Zinn
didn’t provide the references. So, it makes not clear completely with his
article title is speaking truth.
Third, Zinn wrote in his article just the bad thing of Columbus.
He didn’t provide the good thing of Columbus itself. That’s because of make the
reader didn’t belief at all on the story of Columbus that written by Zinn.
Probably, they will think “so what?” and if the people have known about the bad
thing Columbus, what they can do? Will they change this story? Will they
prosecute Columbus in his grave? That is impossible. History in the past that
has well-known by many people and has spread in all levels of schools, we
cannot change it easily. If they will change it, they will face with
developers. And also, it becomes deliberation of many people in the world. It
can be as same as the story of Zinn, that he is a communist.
Conclusion
There are two basic points that
can be concluded from Zinn’s article. First, Zinn didn’t write the discoverer
because he just wants change people consciousness. Like his opinion in his
article “This book changed my life. So,
yes, I think books can do that. And if a book changes somebody’s life by
changing somebody’s consciousness, it is going to have an effect on the
world, in one way or the other, sooner or later, in ways that you probably
cannot trace.” It means that the purpose of Zinn
wrote the article is change people consciousness. According to
Zinn just giving people certain information about one situation may lead them
to look for what else has been concealed from them. And also, he hopes that in the world, there isn’t colonizer and
colonized. However, our country has free, but the essence of colonize still in
use in many people. Talk about discoverer, I am as not inhabitant of America.
It’s my view that Laksamana Cheng Ho is the discoverer of America. He came 500
years ago before Columbus.
Second, to straighten out the
opinion of Columbus and Morison, I have to objective. Actually, I say yes if
Columbus ever slaughtered the American people, but he is also has good thing.
If Columbus didn’t find America at the time, the condition of Europe will in
disorder because Constantinople was closed, so the people should find the new
route. And if Columbus found other continent, the condition of country is
struggle with each other. Fortunately, Columbus found the America because it is
the new world.
Third, Zinn didn’t provide the
references because of at the time, the era is old school. It means that using
references in the books is not like now, with the references completely. At the
time also, not only Zinn’s book but also there are another book as same as Zinn
that there is not references in the book itself.
Therefore, we know that Zinn
perspective is not objective because he wrote with the defeated points of view.
That’s why Zinn use the book as the object study for his students because he
didn’t want the student opinion have high moral value in the next future so
that Zinn want to bury the history, and build respectable for new generation,
in order to change the people
consciousness and there is not colonizer and colonized in this world.
“My point is not
that we must, in telling history, accuse, judge, condemn Columbus in
absentia. It is too late for that; it would be a useless scholarly
exercise in morality. But the easy acceptance of atrocities as a
deplorable but necessary price to pay for progress (Hiroshima and Vietnam, to
save Western civilization; Kronstadt and Hungary, to save socialism; nuclear
proliferation, to save us all)-that is still with us. One reason these
atrocities are still with us is that we have learned to bury them in a
mass of other facts, as radioactive wastes are buried in containers in the
earth. We have learned to give them exactly the same proportion of attention
that teachers and writers often give them in the most respectable of classrooms
and textbooks. This learned sense of moral proportion, coming from
the apparent objectivity of the scholar, is accepted more easily than when it
comes from politicians at press conferences. It is therefore more deadly.”
And also, here Zinn
said in this article, statement about book changed the life and have an effect
on the world.
“This book changed
my life.” So, yes, I think books can do that. And if a book changes somebody’s
life by changing somebody’s consciousness, it is going to have an effect on
the world, in one way or the other, sooner or later, in ways that you
probably cannot trace.”
References:
Alisse, Waterston and Maria D. Vesperi.
2009. Anthropology off the shelf. United Kingdom: Mc Claurin.
An honest history of Howard Zinn by Gabriel Schoenfeld. http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/honest-history-howard-zinn-article-1.1410091 taken on 20 March 2014
Noa Comsky quotes. http://noam-chomsky.tumblr.com/post/18948456828/of-course-it-is-not-quite-accurate-to-say taken on 19 March 2014
Sejarah amerika serikat. http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sejarah_Amerika_Serikat taken on 19 March 2014
Zinn, Howard. A People’s History of the
United States. 1999.
0 comments:
Post a Comment