Edgar Lee Master's Richard Bone: Deceitful Writings

Name
Professor
Honors American Literature
4 November, 2012
Richard Bone: Deceitful Writings Edgar Lee Master’s “Richard Bone” was beautifully written. The first half of the poem was mostly descriptive while the second half was insightful. Every line reinforced and added to the depth of the poem. The last stanza was more or less perfect. It was written in such a way that it leaves the readers with many rich thoughts. The theme of the poem was “what is written is not always true.” Richard Bone chiseled whatever people told him to. He worked “in ignorance of its truth”: he never questioned it. As students, we are made to comply with whatever people tell us. We learn about how George Washington was such a brave and remarkable individual.
We cannot question his strong character. However, we can never find out ourselves what kind of a person he was, what he believed in, or what kind of personality he had. We simply have to take what was given to us by historians, without any objections. Masters wrote, “Even as the historian does who writes / Without knowing the truth, / Or because he is influenced to hide it.” History is determined by what people write, and these writings are passed down through generations. We can never be sure that what we read in these writings is the complete truth. A fairly well-known quotation is, “War doesn’t show who is right—just who is left.” With minor adjustments, it can be changed to say, “History is written by who is left, not who is right.” This really makes me wonder, as an individual who is made to believe these historical writings, how much of what we know about history is actually true. Whenever I read a historical piece that is not well supported by many other pieces, I cannot help but question it. Yet I have never asked a teacher about the validity of a piece. It almost seems too foolish, but it’s not: why do I need to learn something that might be completely misleading? All that one can know for certain is what one experiences. People believe things that other “knowledgeable” people tell them. For example, the big bang is something the average human beings cannot completely be sure it occurred, and we have no way to prove it. Yet many people blindly believe in this concept simply because other “knowledgeable” people approve of it. We are not made to comply.
We are made to question. However, many times, we forget to question. In many circumstances, we simply conform to what people tell us. How often do people rally against historical books? How often do people rally against scientific theories? We simply accept it and move on. Through the same concept, epitaphs can be deceitful as well. On everyone’s tombstone, something positive is written. Surely not every man on the planet was a good person. Yet people have always insisted on writing something “nice.” Why? Upon the death of one, their loved ones want the deceased to be remembered in a positive light. These loved ones want whoever sees the tombstone to feel reverence for the loss of their loved one even though this reverence would be achieved from partial, if not complete, dishonesty. Death also changes the perception of the deceased. During the healthy days of a man, society strives to find any shortcomings of his, weighing the faults against the accomplishments, while focusing more on the negatives. When that individual passes away, however, people socially don’t want to be negative, so they come up with positive things to say, talking only about the accomplishments, steering away from their earlier views. Why do people have to suffer through harsh social criticism in order to be part of society? Why should the death of someone bring positivity? Why can’t people weigh the faults and accomplishments as equals and truly judge whether a person is
righteous or evil? Why should epitaphs create a positive response? If someone was truly an immoral being, why shouldn’t their epitaph truly display their character? I am neither asking people to be disrespectful, nor asking them to be joyful at the loss of someone, I am simply asking for honesty. If a man is truly good, his deeds should be recognized during his lifetime. Vice versa, if a man lived unethically, his memory should not be one of false admiration, but of an honest consideration. If a man decides to live immorally, he doesn’t deserve to have his name be remembered positively.