Outcasts Of Poker Flat And Banishment

When Banishment is Morally Defensible          The banishment acts in The Soft-hearted Sioux and in The Outcasts of Poker jejune ar very complex and trim down different causal agencyings on wherefore the certain characters were exiled from their homes. In one and completely(a) and merely(a) story the character is banished because of his difference in religious beliefs, and in the opposite a throng of citizens ar exiled because of the actions of a townshipsfolk against the afoot(predicate) crook activities inside of it. The stories both focus on the characters that be exiled and how all of the characters come to a sad shutting.         In The Soft-hearted Sioux a adolescent military personnel is faced with the dilemma of necessitate in the white religion instead of his traditional Indian beliefs. He goes back to his tribe to try and convert others to his little discovered religion and disputes with the practice of me dicine firearm. This is his major mistake, non only has he gone against his own traditional roots and upbringing, hitherto is also trying to influence others of his race that what they believe in is non appropriate. Because of his actions him and his family are exiled a expression from the tribe in the baseless of winter, forcing the homosexual to try and hunt for his father raze though he does not contain the knowledge of how. In deserting his background signal toward some other bent of beliefs he ends up betraying his father and his self. In this story the basis of the exile was that the teenaged man went against the medicine man that represented what the young man had abandoned. In the end this abandonment is what causes his fathers, and his own final stage.         In The Outcasts of Poker flavourless the main(prenominal)(prenominal) exile is named Mr. Oakhurst, yet he is not alone in his separation. He is companioned with other jolly small-seeded members of a town that intend! s to rid itself of bulk who are of the criminal association. Mr. Oakhurst and his assemblage manoeuver into a couple that are exiled from another town because of their eff for each other with bulge the fathers consent. both(prenominal) of these groups are forced into a cabin and remain in this dwelling with dwindling forage supplies, and harsh winter atmospheric condition outside. In the end Mr. Oakhurst and his friends are finally met to a tragic end, because of their banishment into the harsh environment.         In The Soft-hearted Sioux the banishment was more infallible and morally justified than in The Outcasts of Poker Flat. This is because the young man was posing a serious threat to the aliveness and well being of his Indian tribe. The medicine man knew that the young man was trying to convince others that his religion was the only current one and knew that this was damaging not just to the individual, but to the traditions and market-g ardening of the tribe alto ragher. The medicine man was not exiling the young man to kill him, but was banishing him for the asylum of the Indian values and beliefs that the boy was threatening to diminish. The outcasts from Poker Flat however, were mostly banished for their life style, not because of anything specifically criminal that they had done. A gambler, two prostitutes, and a mending drunk of the town are thrown out for the r level offge of a major pillager from the towns welfare. The other two outcasts who erupt in the story that are exiled from another town go forth in line of battle to be together tied(p) though the girls father did not approve. The way a group of people chooses to live is a miserable and unsubstantial reason to force that group of people out into the harsh wilderness. none of the outcasts from Poker Flat were ever proven or mentioned to be thieves themselves, yet they suffer the punishment as if they had themselves committed that abomin ation.

Uncle billy who was one of the members of the exiled group from Poker planar was suspected sluice-robber, and in the middle of the story he steals supplies and the animals forth from the others, which leads to their disaster. But it is the other outcasts that are genuinely banished without good reasoning. They were virtue abiding even though the choices that they made to earn their income were somewhat morally shaded. This group of outcasts was exiled merely for political reasons in order to give the main heads of the town a good watch from the general universe. This is a poor reason to sentence a group of people to the cold frontier and threatening them to death if they choose to return, for they truly had not committed a unstable enough crime to provoke such a crocked punishment.         The stories The Soft-hearted Sioux and The Outcasts of Poker Flat both contained destruction for the people that their public turned away, but the reasoning into why they were abandoned are completely different and complex. While one banishment rear end be said to have been for the best of a culture and modus vivendi that had been traditional for centuries, another was simply cruel towards a highlighted set of people who led their lives more differently than their friend neighbors. evening though the stories end alike, it is the crucial factor of why the characters were banished that sets the stories apart. Bibliography American Indian Stories by Zitkala-Sa. Washington: Hayworth Publishing House, 1921. pp. 109-125 Fischer, Dexter. Zitkala-Sa The maturation of a Writer. American Indian Quarterly 5 (1979): 2 29-238 If ! you lack to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper