After Thursday’s video and lecture, I decided to look more into the dramatization of the Boston Massacre.
In class, we talked about the different elements of the sketch that was included in the newspapers and how it was then used for propaganda.
After the event, Preston and his soldiers were incarcerated and wrote down details about the conflict from his perspective while sitting in a jail cell.
He intended for his documentation to be published because he wanted to pacify the rebels, but the Sons of Liberty wanted to keep the revolution going.
From my interpretation, I believe that they wanted to keep the spark alive and wanted the colonists to continue to fight against the British and therefore decided not to publicize the point of view expressed by Preston.
This event contributed to the British retreating from Boston to Fort William.
As we talked about in class, Paul Revere also contributed to the forming of negative views of the British after the Boston Massacre.
His sketch portrayed a very distinct difference in character between the British soldiers and the colonists.
The goal was achieved and led many to think that the British did not have good intentions.
However, a major piece to this was the dramatization of the Boston Massacre and the neglect to share the viewpoints of the British publicize to the colonists.
I think it was really interesting how you chose to show not only the importance of the etching of the Boston Massacre that the American Rebels used as propaganda but also how they managed to silence the other side to ensure that the people never got to read the other point of view of what happened. I think this is really important because with the other side of the argument, people in america would have been more divided on who to believe and history often leaves out the what was left unwritten and focuses on what was written though they can be of equal importance in propaganda.
ReplyDeleteI like the point you made about how Revere's sketch showed a difference between the Americans and the British, especially because the realization of this difference was one of the main causes of the American Revolution. By seeing the British as a different group of people with different "character", as you pointed out, the Americans gave up the thought that they were still part of the British empire, and began their war of independence.
ReplyDeleteI find it really interesting that Preston and his soldiers were able to write their account and wanted to have it published, but the Sons of Liberty wanted their propaganda and story to be the focus of the "massacre" rather than an account from the soldier themselves. That fact truly shows the intentions of the propaganda, to show the British as dangerous ruthless killers, and reveals how much the Sons of Liberty and other patriots knew about the false information, but chose not to show to give them an advantage.
ReplyDeleteI find it very interesting how Paul Revere used exaggeration as a propaganda tool to kindle the early hatred toward the British. Through his usage of the sketch to over dramatize the "massacre" he made many people in New England see the British occupation in a new light.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYour point about the effectiveness of dramatizing this situation is very accurate. To add on a bit, I believe that they never even considered showing the British side, for the riot in the first place was begun for the purpose of increasing colonial opposition and was purposely tempting British reaction. The end result was always to be the same- regardless of how significant British damage would be.
ReplyDelete