A Conflicted History
The Oklahoma Land Rush of 1889 was certainly a significant event for the future state, as it was for all of the groups and individuals that it affected. As is the case with so many defining events in America’s history though, the Land Rush can be seen as another proud and memorable moment in the nation’s adventurous narrative of wild and unbridled expansion, further fulfillment of a divinely inspired destiny. Or, as yet another breech of contract, an unlawful and unethical encroachment on the already established and reestablished cultures of the region. Events such as the Land Rush of 1889 are complicated phenomenons which are comprised of many contributing factors and consequences. Many times histories will avoid such motivations and consequences, attempting to take a less effected and direct viewpoint, what we might call, the Historical Perspective.
But this perspective is limited and often no less influenced by the "objective" writer/compiler of history than the perspective of one experienced in the historical event. Scholar Mark Wolf, in his piece "Subjunctive Documentary: Computer Imaging and Simulation," explains that all forms of documentation "are subjective and incomplete, reconstructing events to varying degrees through existing objects, documents, and personal recollections"(274). Bias is unavoidable, but this site seeks to explore some of the many sides of the event so that students may learn about an important event in Oklahoma history, and also to see such events, not as spontaneous and random occurrences, but as resulting from the actions and motivations of some, which in turn often have wide ranging consequences for many.
By exploring the event from multiple perspectives this site will not rid its history of subjectivity, but it will allow for each viewpoint to have a voice, for each to tell its narrative in terms that allow students to apply their own personal narrative fidelity, or as Timothy Borchers describes it in his book, Rhetorical Theory: An Introduction, the students can "evaluate the degree to which the individual components of the story "ring true""(161). Students will then be motivated to see how such big and encompassing events can transcend the black and white, right or wrong, designations often attributed to them intentionally or unintentionally during the traditional documentation process.
But this perspective is limited and often no less influenced by the "objective" writer/compiler of history than the perspective of one experienced in the historical event. Scholar Mark Wolf, in his piece "Subjunctive Documentary: Computer Imaging and Simulation," explains that all forms of documentation "are subjective and incomplete, reconstructing events to varying degrees through existing objects, documents, and personal recollections"(274). Bias is unavoidable, but this site seeks to explore some of the many sides of the event so that students may learn about an important event in Oklahoma history, and also to see such events, not as spontaneous and random occurrences, but as resulting from the actions and motivations of some, which in turn often have wide ranging consequences for many.
By exploring the event from multiple perspectives this site will not rid its history of subjectivity, but it will allow for each viewpoint to have a voice, for each to tell its narrative in terms that allow students to apply their own personal narrative fidelity, or as Timothy Borchers describes it in his book, Rhetorical Theory: An Introduction, the students can "evaluate the degree to which the individual components of the story "ring true""(161). Students will then be motivated to see how such big and encompassing events can transcend the black and white, right or wrong, designations often attributed to them intentionally or unintentionally during the traditional documentation process.