Question

Compare the written description of the Boston Massacre to the image depicting this historical event. Which details are emphasized in both mediums? How do the different depictions of the event affect the meaning? Your response should be at least two complete paragraphs.

Answer:

Answer 1

https://historytech.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/bostonmassacre.jpg

Answer 2

@Vocaloid

Answer 3

Would need to see the written description but here's how to start: make a venn diagram or chart listing the details described in the writing, the details depicted in the picture, and details that are common to both

Answer 4

ok

Answer 5

Main point about the art: it greatly exaggerates how serious the event was, making the British soldiers seem mean and vicious and exaggerating how many people were killed (only 5 people were actually killed during the "massacre")

Answer 6

Read the passage and examine the the image that follows. Then answer the question.

excerpt from The Siege of Boston by Allen French

This passage describes the Boston Massacre, events that followed a verbal fight begun by a Boston rope maker against an English soldier.

But the affray was of small proportions, and soon over. The actual outbreak originated in a quarrel between a barber's boy and a sentry, stationed in King Street below the east end of the Town House. Boys and men gathered, the sentry called out the guard, fire-bells were rung, and the crowd increased. The captain of the guard was not the man for the emergency. Said Henry Knox, afterward general and Secretary of War, "I took Captain Preston by the coat and told him for God's sake to take his men back again, for if they fired his life must answer for the consequence; he replied he was sensible of it, or knew what he was about, or words to that purpose; and seemed in great haste and much agitated." The gathering still increased, there was crowding and jostling, snowballs and possibly sticks were thrown; the soldiers grew angry and the officer uncertain what to do. "The soldiers," testified John Hickling, "assumed different postures, shoving their bayonets frequently at the people, one in particular pushing against my side swore he would run me through; I laid hold of his bayonet and told him that nobody was going to meddle with them. Not more than ten seconds after this I saw something white, resembling a piece of snow or ice, fall among the soldiers, which knocked the end of a firelock to the ground. At that instant the word 'Fire!' was given, but by whom I know not; but concluded it did not come from the officer aforesaid, as I was within a yard of him and must have heard him had he spoken it, but am satisfied said Preston did not forbid them to fire; I instantly leaped within the soldier's bayonet as I heard him wingspan his gun, which that moment went off.... I, thinking there was nothing but powder fired, stood still, till ... I saw another gun fired, and the man since called Attucks, fall. I then withdrew about two or three yards.... During this the rest of the guns were fired, one after another, when I saw two more fall.... I further declare that I heard no other affront given them than the huzzaing and whistling of boys in the street." After the firing, other soldiers were summoned to the spot, and more townspeople appeared. The soldiers, says the official narrative, "were drawn up between the State House and main guard, their lines extended across the street and facing down King Street, where the town people were assembled. The first line kneeled, and the whole of the first platoon presented their guns ready to fire, as soon as the word should be given.... For some time the appearance of things were dismal. The soldiers outrageous on the one hand, and the inhabitants justly incensed against them on the other: both parties seemed disposed to come to action."

Answer 7

couple of takeaways from the writing:

1. unlike the art, the writing talks about how the citizens harassed the soldiers before the incident occured
2. the writing makes it seem more like an accident or mishap than a purposeful execution like the art depicts

Answer 8

so that's what i write down ?

Answer 9

these are just hints to get you started, you will have to write complete sentences in your own words

Answer 10

could you help ?

Answer 11

Think about what I have said so far, then think about how to put your thoughts into paragraph form.

Answer 12

ok can i tell you in my words ?

Answer 13

sure

Answer 14

how about this

1st paragraph

In this story, it talks about how the citizens harassed the soldiers before the incident occured. And during this story, this was making the British soldiers seem mean and vicious and exaggerating how many people were killed (only 5 people were actually killed during the "massacre"). All through this story was about how serious this event was and crowd of jeering Bostonians slinging snowballs gathered around a small group of British soldiers guarding the Boston Customs House. The event in Boston has helped to unite the colonies against Britain because the British government had been trying to increase control over the colonies and raise taxes at the same time.

Answer 15

what you think so far ?

Answer 16

you have to make sure it makes sense instead of mashing things together

Answer 17

the answer asks for two paragraphs, so I would use the first paragraph to talk about the details of the art vs. the details of the writing, and then use the second paragraph to talk about how these influence the meaning

Answer 18

~do not copy word for word~

The passage describes the event from the beginning to the end, emphasizing the fact that the citizens harassed the soldiers before they fired, and the initiation of the firing might have been accidental rather than deliberate, since the source of the command was unclear. It portrays the citizens as active aggressors who were prepared to fight back instead of passively running away as the art depicts. The art, on the other hand, highlights the shooting itself and makes the British soldiers seem more deliberate and aggressive, and makes it seem like they purposefully killed many people, even though only five people actually died in the incident.

something like this for paragraph 1

Answer 19

and then for paragraph 2 basically just talk about how the meaning of the event is changed through its depiction: the art makes it seem like an act of aggression on the British soldier's part, the writing is a bit more objective and makes it seem like an accident, etc.

Answer 20

1st paragraph.

In this story, it talks about how the citizens harassed the soldiers before the incident occured. This was mainly about In this story was that The colonists were concerned that the British were trying to control them. so The Proclamation of 1763 restricted the colonists from moving to the new lands that the British had gained from France in the French and Indian War. So therefore The British also had to required the colonists to provide housing for the British troops that were enforcing this unpopular law.

Answer 21

what you think ?

Answer 22

you should focus on what is going on in the story and the drawing instead of bringing in general information about the revolutionary war (the assignment wants you to talk about the passage and the art, specifically)

Answer 23

"Compare the written description of the Boston Massacre to the image depicting this historical event."

Answer 24

In this story, it talks about how the citizens harassed the soldiers before the incident occured. This was mainly about In this story was that the colonists were concerned that the British were trying to control them and they had to take a stand for that. So this image exemplifies to make the British soldiers seem mean and vicious and exaggerating how many people were killed and there was only 5 people were actually killed during the "massacre". The colonists were justified in fighting the British and their fighting occurred in both sides suffering casualties. So then After this event and this image, this shows many colonists believed it was only a matter of time before they would declare their independence from Great Britain and this would lead to the Revolutionary War.

Answer 25

1st paragraph

Answer 26

probably want to get rid of this part "The colonists were justified in fighting the British and their fighting occurred in both sides suffering casualties. So then After this event and this image, this shows many colonists believed it was only a matter of time before they would declare their independence from Great Britain and this would lead to the Revolutionary War."

remember, the question is only asking about the boston massacre and how it is depicted in the art/writing

but other than that it's probably fine for paragraph 1

Answer 27

"The colonists were justified in fighting the British and their fighting occurred in both sides suffering casualties. So then After this event and this image, this shows many colonists believed it was only a matter of time before they would declare their independence from Great Britain and this would lead to the Revolutionary War." get rid of it or let it go with it ?

Answer 28

get rid of it

Answer 29

it's a bit off topic

Answer 30

and add what to replace it ?

Answer 31

In this story, it talks about how the citizens harassed the soldiers before the incident occured. This was mainly about In this story was that the colonists were concerned that the British were trying to control them and they had to take a stand for that. So this image exemplifies to make the British soldiers seem mean and vicious and exaggerating how many people were killed and there was only 5 people were actually killed during the "massacre".

Answer 32

like that ?

Answer 33

good (you should probably proofread that to make the grammar better)

Answer 34

leave like that, that's good for paragraph 1 vocaloid ?

Answer 35

you need to do some revising on the grammar (look at sentence 2 especially)

Answer 36

re-read every sentence to make sure it makes sense and has no unnecessary phrases or words

Answer 37

In this story, it talks about how the citizens harassed the soldiers before the incident occured. This was mainly about in this story was that the colonists were concerned that the British were trying to control them so then they had to take a stand for that. So this image exemplifies to make the British soldiers seem mean and vicious and exaggerating how many people were killed so during the war there was only 5 people were actually killed during the "massacre".

Answer 38

what you think, i just revised it ?

Answer 39

"This was mainly about in this story" does not make sense, you can either say "this was mainly about" or "in this story" but not both

Answer 40

"So this image exemplifies to make the British" does not make sense either

Answer 41

the last sentence is also a run-on sentence

Answer 42

In this story, it talks about how the citizens harassed the soldiers before the incident occured. In the story, so what was mainly about in this story was that the colonists were concerned that the British were trying to control them so then they had to take a stand for that. So this image shows to make the British soldiers seem mean and vicious and exaggerating how many people were killed so during the war there was only 5 people were actually killed during the "massacre".

Answer 43

now ?

Answer 44

keep revising, you still have grammatical errors.

Answer 45

In this story, it talks about how the citizens harassed the soldiers before the incident occured. In this story, this talked about how the colonists were concerned that the British were trying to control them so then they had to take a stand for that. So this image shows to make the British soldiers seem mean and vicious and exaggerating how many people were killed so during the war there was only 5 people were actually killed during the "massacre".

Answer 46

ok

Answer 47

so that's it ?

Answer 48

re-read it slowly and carefully and make sure all the sentences have a subject and predicate, and that there are no run-on sentences

Answer 49

it has to make sense grammatically

Answer 50

please make all the suggested changes

for example, I changed "exaggerating" to "exaggerates" and started a new sentence after "during the war"

Answer 51

In this story, it talks about how the citizens harassed the soldiers before the incident occured. The story was mainly about how this story was that the colonists were concerned that the British were trying to control them so then they had to take a stand for that. So this image to make the British soldiers seem mean and vicious and exaggerates how many people were killed there only 5 people were actually killed during the"massacre".

Answer 52

that's it ?

Answer 53

The story talks about how the citizens harassed the soldiers before the incident occurred. The story was mainly about how this story was that the colonists were concerned that the British were trying to control them so then they had to take a stand for that. So this image makes the British soldiers seem vicious and exaggerates how many people were killed when in reality there only 5 people were actually killed during the massacre.

^ there, I've made the changes

Answer 54

oh so mine wasn't quite right ?

Answer 55

it's fine, let's just work on paragraph 2

Answer 56

\(\color{#0cbb34}{\text{Originally Posted by}}\) @Vocaloid
and then for paragraph 2 basically just talk about how the meaning of the event is changed through its depiction: the art makes it seem like an act of aggression on the British soldier's part, the writing is a bit more objective and makes it seem like an accident, etc.
\(\color{#0cbb34}{\text{End of Quote}}\)

^ read this slowly and carefully, then think about how you can take some of these ideas and put them into a paragraph that makes grammatical sense (not just copy-pasting)

Answer 57

The story shows the difference in both ways with depiction and event. the depiction shows the act of aggression and destruction that was going in the massacre and then showing it as a violent, chaotic, and destructive battle between the British and Colonists. Now the writing has shown to seem more like an accident more than it showed on the depiction and the writing sounded like it wasn't offensive. So the difference between these two is that one shows the destructive side and the more it showed that i didn't sound like a battle.

Answer 58

what do you think ?

Answer 59

looks ok, let me just make a few adjustments

Answer 60

The art depicts the event as act of aggression and destruction on the soldier's part and shows it as a violent, chaotic, and destructive battle between the British and Colonists. On the other hand the writing has shown to seem more like an unplanned incident more than it showed on the art. The writing is meant to be an honest recount of the event from a bystander's perspective while the art was meant to cause controversy and rile the citizens up against Britain.

^ should be ok

Answer 61

ok like that ?

Answer 62

yeah it's fine

Answer 63

ok thank you for all your help same for next week ?

Answer 64

have a wonderful Thanksgiving

Answer 65

if i'm available then sure

Answer 66

you too