The Ghost Ship Fire Incident

       

       The Oakland Ghost Ship fire was a devastating fire incident that occurred at a warehouse called the Ghost Ship in Oakland, California. On December 2, a warehouse in Oakland, CA known as the Ghost Ship burst into flames during an electronic music concert taking the lives of 36 people. 

Many factors reduced the number of survivors, one being that there was no direct route from the stairs to the exit. The front stairway, which was built by the residence, lead into an open space with no direct root. After making it downstairs people then had make their way on the circuitous path to the doorway around pianos and furniture in a very enclosed space. According to resident Carmen Brito the Ghost Ship would have been very hard to navigate for people who did not live there. The Ghost Ship was not safe, and did not mean structural standards. There were propane tanks used to heat water near piles of flammable debris as well as an old electrical system that did not work, and constantly sparked. Rats also posed a problem, but were most likely not the cause of the fire. It has been determined that the fire was mostly caused by the buildings faulty power grid.
       This Ghost Ship fire has many similarities to the Triangle Factory Fire that happened in New York in 1911. On March 25, 1911 a fire consumed the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory taking the lives of 146 people. This incident was largely the result of poor working conditions and inadequate fire safety precautions that were taken during the time. The owners of the factory locked the exit doors believing that their business would suffer if their workers tried to steal from the factory. The only other exit was the fire escape which could not bear the weight of all the workers, and was not a viable escape route. Which is similar to the lack of escape routes in the Ghost Ship incident, and raises the question: are the proper fire safety precautions being taken with buildings today?

Sources:

1. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/12/us/oakland-warehouse-ghost-ship-fire.html
2. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/08/us/the-oakland-fire-delving-into-what-happened-and-why.html
3. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/11/us/the-oakland-fire-what-we-know-about-the-warehouse-owner.html
4. https://trianglefire.ilr.cornell.edu/story/sweatshopsStrikes.html

The Assimilation of Other Cultures in America

America has a long history of assimilating foreign cultures into society, and the 1800s the US government began the the process of assimilating Native Americans into America. They did this through the use of the education system, and by giving the Native Americans land to begin anew and become a part of society. In 1879, Congress created boarding schools for Native Americans, and started forcing the children of Native Americans into these schools where they were unable to practice their Native American traditions. While it was optional, most Native Americans did it because those living on reservations were denied rations otherwise, which essentially forced them to send away their children. The government hoped to rid the Native Americans children of their  culture by forcing them into an environment where their beliefs and culture were shunned. The govenrments given explanation was that it was a better alternative to "shooting indians".

https://americanhistory.abc-clio.com/Search/Display/1700117?terms=assimilation+of+native+americans&sType=quick

https://americanhistory.abc-clio.com/Search/Display/1699303?terms=assimilation+of+native+americans&sType=quick

https://americanhistory.abc-clio.com/Search/Display/1690402?terms=assimilation+of+native+americans&sType=quick

USH In Class Assignment

https://archive.org/stream/conciseschoolhis02camp#page/n21/mode/2up

1.

2. Today we looked at a history textbook from 1887, and read a selection of pages talking about Native Americans during the 1600s. We did this to see what conclusions someone in school might have drawn from these textbooks in the late 1800s, and how it might have shaped their views of Native Americans.

3. If I were a student reading this textbook in the late 1800s I think this textbook would definitely have changed my view of Native Americans. The textbook calls them vengeful and states that they considered war to be "the most honorable employment,"  and that, "the one who could show the greatest number of scalps, torn from his foes, was considered the bravest warrior." These quotes make it seem like the Native Americans were warmongers, when in reality they were no more aggressive than the Europeans who colonized their land. The textbook even goes as far as to use the word "savage" interchangeably with Indian as if the terms are synonymous with each other dehumanizing them. So it would probably give me a bad impression about Native Americans.

Letters from the West

http://postalmuseum.si.edu/exhibits/current/binding-the-nation/moving-west/your-letters-are-read-with-eagerness/waterman-ormsbys-letter.html 1) What was this letter(s) about? The letter was about a man who had recently purchased land in the West, and was writing for his wife and child. He sent this to his wife to inform her about his ventures in the West, and what he expected them to do in the following year. He told her that he had selected 160 acres of land as well to other plots in case that one didn’t pan out. The man told his wife that while the land is beautiful it does have its fair share of issues, but that they will be able to start a life, and live in a house made of sod that is as just as good as any other house. He later finds out that the land he had procured had been taken up by some others, but that he intended to get it back. 2) What stood out to you in the letter? The letter didn’t really pay much attention to grammar, and was mostly just a man telling his wife about his initial feelings of the West. 3) How important was the act of letter writing at this point in time to people migrating West? What did it mean to them or their loved ones? The act of writing a letter while migrating to the West was very important because it allowed settlers to communicate with those they left at home. It was the only means of communication with those in the West, so maintaining a correspondence with loved ones was important because it offered settlers a connection to those in the East.

Learning History Through Film

While Glory and Twelve Years a Slave are not completely accurate they still provide a great platform for learning about history because of their visual medium. Film being the visual medium that it is, allows the audience to see and experience what the main character or characters are experiencing by not just telling, but showing. Film can also give audiences more context about the setting not just through visuals, but through sound and music. Watching 12 Years a Slave provides a far different experience than reading it because we have to watch Solomon struggle. Seeing the  While both Glory and Twelve Years a Slave may alter the source material, it does not alter it to the point where it is unrecognizable. Both films add a little fiction to make the stories more appealing or engaging for film audiences, but while some of the material may be false, it is ultimately overshadowed by what the films get right.

Glory is a Civil War movie that tells the story of Robert Shaw and how he leads the first African American regiments. It is based on letters written by Shaw, and many of the characters in the movie are real people like his best friends Thomas and Ford. The movie does add in fictional characters like those played by Denzel Washington and Morgan Freeman, but they are there to pose questions to the audience, and help further the story. In Glory we get a glimpse of what it is like for a character like Thomas, a free African American, to interact with others in the regiment who have fled from slavery. Denzel’s character Tripp constantly gets into fights with Thomas because he believes Thomas is delusional for thinking he can “be like the white man.” Films like Glory can show us not only the dynamic within the troops, but also between a Colonel and his soldiers. Brodericks scene with Washington’s helps illustrate the racial dynamics at play. When Shaw asks Tripp why he refuses to carry the flag, Tripp responds saying when the war is over Shaw gets to go home, but where does he go? Movies can show the audience different perspectives through the eyes of characters from all walks of life. The film also uses music from the time, proper weapons, and period accurate uniforms. Glory adds in fictional characters, but depicts both the setting and strategies of the Civil War extremely well. Films like Glory teach more than any textbook ever could because of all the different ways it immerses the audience.

Twelve Years a Slave takes place in the Old South, and showcases what slavery was like in the 1800s. The film gives an interesting perspective on slavery by showing it to us through the eyes of Solomon Northup a freeman turned slave. It shows what his life was like both before to humanize him, so that when he is captured we experience the jarring shift with him.  The audience is not  just told about Solomon’s suffering, they are forced to watch every experience from the whipping to the hanging. A fairly accurate recreation of a slave market is also shown when Solomon is sold off. The film does not take sides, and shows how slavery was not one dimensional. Ford clearly tries to keep families together, and recognizes the cruelty of slavery, but he also has to pay off his debts and slave labor is his cheapest way of doing it. Epps is a far crueler owner, and obviously has no problems with slavery. While some of the scenes like the boat scene, and the scene in which Patsey asks Solomon to kill her are not completely factual, they do not detract from the vast amount of information the film gets right. Twelve Years a Slave is one of the few films that actually focuses on slavery, and it paints a realistic picture of what slavery is like.

While filmmakers tend to take some creative liberties with historical films, they still are one of the few mediums where you can get to see what was happening. Photographs can give can give you an idea, but films put you in the moment. No other form of media employs more elements than film, and  it is for that reason that it is a great platform for learning about history.

Works Cited

The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, n.d. Web. 27 Sept. 2016.

Canby, Vincent. "Review/Film; Black Combat Bravery in the Civil War." The New York Times. The New York Times, 13 Dec. 1989. Web. 27 Sept. 2016.

Dargis, Manohla. "The Blood and Tears, Not the Magnolias." The New York Times. The New York Times, 17 Oct. 2013. Web. 27 Sept. 2016.

Ebert, Roger. "Glory Movie Review & Film Summary (1989) | Roger Ebert." All Content. Freddie Fields, 12 Jan. 1990. Web. 27 Sept. 2016.

Paraphasing 12 Years a Slave Review

Of course the language and violence in 12 Years a Slave makes you wince, but the brutality here is as sleek as a knitting needle, and slips between your ribs to get at you somewhere deep, beyond simple expressions of disgust or disbelief. McQueen has no intention of turning his film into a Western liberal guilt-trip — he doesn’t have to. What we see speaks for itself. The entire nation, south and north alike, is in the grip of communal insanity. Original Article

This review of 12 Years a Slave written by Robbie Collin states that the film paints a gritty realistic picture of what African American slavery was like in the South. The film does this not only through dialogue, but also through some of its over the top scenes. Director Stevie McQueen gives weight to scenes by forcing the viewer to watch each brutal scene for just a little longer than they're comfortable with. It showcases that both the North and the South in states of chaos, and that it is rough all over.