Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- 329:question:329--week_3_questions_comments-2026 [2026/09/10 06:56] – 104.131.24.154
+++ 329:question:329--week_3_questions_comments-2026 [2026/09/12 18:43] (current) – 104.131.24.154
@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 The //Last of the Mohicans// provides a general sense of the French and Indian War, though the role of Native Americans and the war itself is mostly background to the love story between Cora and Hawkeye. Several aspects of the movie are historically correct. The French siege of Fort William Henry is mostly realistic. For example, the French did use thousands of Native Americans to bolster its forces. British Colonel Munro commanded the fort, used colonial militia to help defend the fort, and had to surrender because General Webb refused to send reinforcements. French General Montcalm allowed Munro to depart the fort with honor. Though the movie does correctly portray Native Americans as playing a crucial role in the French and Indian War, it does not fully explore the motivations of certain tribes for allying with either the French or the British. - Charles S.
-In contrast to the recently previewed film, Pocahontas (year), The Last of the Mohicans is a significantly more reputable secondary source, depicting a series of historical events—such as the famed surrender of Fort William Henry—pertaining to the French and Indian War. Most notably, beyond the film's romantic subplot between the fictional Hawkeye and Cora Munro, it displays multiple instances of relatively civil diplomatic relations between the French and the Mohicans. A scene is similarly depicted through correspondence between Christian Frederick Post and Shingas, Tamaquea, and other Delawares, dubbed the Response to the Moravian Ambassador (1758): “It is told to us that you and the French contrived the war, to waste the Indians between you; and that you and the French intend to divide the land between you…Brother, I suppose you know something about it; or has the Governor stopped your mouth, that you cannot tell us?” - Bailee E.
+In contrast to the recently previewed film, Pocahontas (year), The Last of the Mohicans is a significantly more reputable secondary source, depicting a series of historical events—such as the famed surrender of Fort William Henry—pertaining to the French and Indian War. Most notably, beyond the film's romantic subplot between the fictional Hawkeye and Cora Munro, it displays multiple instances of relatively civil diplomatic relations between the French, British colonialists, and the Mohicans. A scene is similarly depicted through correspondence between Christian Frederick Post and Shingas, Tamaquea, and other Delawares, dubbed the Response to the Moravian Ambassador (1758): “It is told to us that you and the French contrived the war, to waste the Indians between you; and that you and the French intend to divide the land between you…Brother, I suppose you know something about it; or has the Governor stopped your mouth, that you cannot tell us?” - Bailee E.
 The Last of the Mohicans depicts the social dynamics between the British military, British colonists, and Native Americans that existed at this point in colonial history. Early on into the movie there's a scene where the colonists are being asked by British military officials to form a militia and/or fight on behalf of the British army, but some of the colonists refuse, voicing that they're concerned for themselves and their families if the French were to attack them, which falls in line with was we learned in class about how at this point colonists were still yes loyal to the British crown, but now they had much more identity as self-interest in their respective colony. I think the depictions Native Americans in this film were much more nuanced compared to Pocahontas (shocker there) and having never seen this film before or knowing much about it, I was surprised to see that they showed the conflicts between the different tribes/groups, the Huron and Mohicans, and their different points of view when it came to the war. -- Grayson D.
@@ Line 53: / Line 53: @@
 During the meeting when it's being discussed where to send Duncan, the comment is made about the British being "American subjects", at the time, the people hadn't been called that, they still saw themselves as British citizens. It also depicts the alliances as something that was just a quick and easy decision but in reality, then were much more in depth and complicated than first appeared. -- Shelby Hawley
+Throughout the film, Magua is deliberately depicted as the “savage” in stark contrast to Hawkeye’s “noble” characterization. Although I do appreciate the centering of Native American (specifically Mohican and Heron) power dynamics in this narrative, it is obvious that the film’s central and compelling conflict relied heavily on the concept of there being a “good native” versus a “bad native.” Truthfully, Magua’s alliance with the French isn't inherently "bad," nor is Chingachgook, Uncas, and Hawkeye’s alignment with the British inherently "good." In reality, both nations (along with numerous others) were choosing their paths strategically to maintain their respective interests and hold leverage against the growing existential threats before them. — Izabella M
 ======How does the film’s overall interpretation(s) deviate from scholarly historical sources (as presented in class)?======
@@ Line 75: / Line 77: @@
 The Last of the Mohicans works as a primary source because it shows what people in the early 1990s wanted history to feel like—dramatic, emotional, and centered on a rugged, individual hero. The movie reflects the era’s interest in big romantic storylines and “authentic” Native representation, even though it still leans on familiar stereotypes. In that way, it tells you a lot about 1990s attitudes toward identity, heroism, and nostalgia, more than it tells you about the actual 1750s. -Alyssa Gomez
-To me, the film reflects the post-Cold War interest in the romanticization of the “American spirit.” The film’s high-production value, cinematography, and dramatic storytelling places a romantic “love against all odds” story right at the forefront and rolls out a film centered around classic American unity and resilience. While the film’s portrayal of Native American tensions and alliances during the French and Indian war is no doubt lacking, particularly in its reliance on the “noble savage” trope as a storytelling device for the political motivations of an entire group of peoples, there was obviously a conscious effort to shift towards more nuanced portrayals of Indigenous characters and their involvement in history. -- Izabella M
+To me, the film reflects the post-Cold War interest in the romanticization of the “American spirit.” The film’s high-production value, cinematography, and dramatic storytelling places a romantic “love against all odds” story right at the forefront and rolls out a film centered around classic American unity and resilience. While the film’s portrayal of Native American tensions and alliances during the French and Indian war is no doubt lacking, particularly in its reliance on the “noble savage” trope as a storytelling device for the political motivations of an entire group of peoples, there was obviously a conscious effort to shift towards more nuanced portrayals of Indigenous characters and their involvement in history. Although, I think there is something to be said about the characterization of Hawkeye, being a fully white man played by a young Daniel Day-Lewis, and how that narrative decision came off as a bit "white savior-esque" to me, even though he's obviously not being played as such. -- Izabella M
 ======The "So What" Question -- Why should we care about the movie and its version of history?======