How Is Free State Of Jones Historically Accurate

Many slaves fought for their freedom, not just by running away, but also in the court system. For example Dred Scott was taken to a free state by his master and then later returned against his will to a slave state. He fought his master in the court system on the basis that he was a free man since he was in a free state. This court case was taken

According to the American Historical Association, “When asked about their intense reaction to the film, some described feeling as though they had just experienced slavery. The movie felt believable, they reported, due not only to the caption indicating its basis in fact, but because the setting and characters looked authentic” (Toplin, 1). That just goes to show how historically accurate the makers of the film were going for to show just how bad slavery really was, even if it repulses people. There are historians out there who on the record confirmed the historical accuracy of 12 Years a Slave. “At least two historians, Sue Eakin, and Joseph Logsdon, have confirmed that Northup presented a remarkably accurate picture of antebellum slavery and plantation society near the Red River in Louisiana” (Toplin, 1). For historians to say that the film is “remarkably accurate” shows the seriousness those involved went to, to ensure the historical accuracy

Certainly, freedom was supposed to be “freer”” for those slaves that had fought for their rights after years of submissionn, but, unfortunately, many white Southern people continued to ignore the law by not showing any respect for Africans-Americans. Because of the radical reconstruction in the south, the African-Americans were a step closer from the same political

The Free State of Jones is a movie that tells the true story of a man named Newton King, a deserter from the south who along with several other men like himself and runaway slaves who during the civil war held a rebellion against the south. Which include annexed three county which they managed to hold until the end of the war. This story gives us a portrait of a man who surprisely would not be called a typical southerner by some. He didn't believe in slavery and was a medic when he served with the confederacy instead of defending the south through fighting. Another thing that also figure into why he did what he did when it came to deserting and rebellion is a law called the Twenty Slave:

She has always been neglected by her parents because they pay more attention to her brother. She ran a lot but didn’t eat anything and passed out. She also weighed herself for fun.

While the movie’s interpretations aren’t perfect and parts of it are works of fiction, the core story and beyond are accurate. The representation of reasoning for desertion, the way that they achieved the Free State of Jones, and how even black members were put down after the war by the state government leads this film to being a true

The slaves have been free and some go to try and work in the government with they do with __ in the senate. Others try to get the land that there masters owned. Saying they farmed the land so they deserve the land. The slaves children where able to go to school. Are the slaves really free though? If they have to rely on the white man to be able to survive is this freedom. To me it is slavery with a different title and no more punishment. As Zinn says in his book the slave understood the fact that they may be called free but they really weren’t. Like Zinn put it “Many Negroes understood that their status after the war, whatever their situation legally, would depend on whether they owned the land they worked on or would be forced to be semis laves for others”(ch9,196) They knew what could happen to them but they took the leap of faith anyway. One of the slaves said “Lincoln got the the praise for freeing us, but did he do it? He gave us freedom without giving us any chance to live to ourselves and we still had to depend on the southern white manor work, food, and clothing , and he held us out of necessity and want in a state of servitude but little better then slavery.”(ch9,197-198) The slaves begged Lincoln to give them land to let them survive on there own. Lincoln responded by sending them away from the world to California. There they at least didn't have to worry about the white

In the first chapter it shows the side of the southern Confederate armies. They start to compare the Civil War to the Revolutionary War. Their enemies, known as Northern Yankees, were nothing more than just dictators trying to destroy the south. It’s the same technique the British did to the colonists almost a century ago. This is what gave them their southern freedom, by walking in the shoes of their forefathers and fight for their liberties and constitutional rights. He then starts to talk about the Confederates lives by the letters and journals that they wrote during the Civil War. Each letter talks about different things; how the Southern soldiers felt about the war, talks about their enemies the Yanks, slaves,

At first glance, the book “my bondage and my freedom by Frederick Douglass appeared to be extremely dull and frustrating to read. After rereading the book for a second time and paying closer attention to the little details I have realized this is one of the most impressive autobiographies I have read recently. This book possesses one of the most touching stories that I have ever read, and what astonishes me the most about the whole subject is that it's a true story of Douglass' life. “ Douglass does a masterful job of using his own experience to expose the injustice of slavery to the world. As the protagonist he is able to keep the reader interested in himself, and tell the true story of his life. As a narrator he is able to link those

This movie shows all of the horrible things that are incorporated with war, in excruciating detail. At one point in the movie Scarlet has to witness a man get his leg amputated with no anesthesia, or anything for pain at all due to lack of funds, and lack of ability to get the medicines that were necessary. The accuracy of the film though is somewhat biased. The book was written by a southern woman, and frankly I’m sure had some resentment towards the North, she wrote this book glamorizing the South and making the North look horrendous. They were fighting to free slaves, whereas the South wanted to keep their slaves. The movie for the most part only seems to portray slaves with kind master and the truth of the matter is, no matter how good and kind the master was, the black people were slaves. They were considered property and as such, could be bought, sold, used and abused, and treated like cattle, not people. The slaves were not free. They had no legal rights, because they were not a person under the law. Their "owners" had complete control of their lives. They were not free to go anywhere or do anything without their master’s approval. The master had the right to separate husband and wife, parents and children. It was very rare that an entire slave family would remain intact. There was always the fear of being sold. Because of death or bankruptcy, families were separated and sold to fulfill

Historic movies are often produced with the premise that they will tell an honest tale about the past, but how accurate are they really? The Patriot is a historical movie the shows the life of an ex-war hero, Benjamin Martin, and his life continuing on through the American Revolution. This includes his interaction with the soldiers and generals, his political stance, and his involvement through the towns. Because the Benjamin Martin is fictional The Patriot cannot be called 100% accurate, but that doesn't mean that other aspects shown were inaccurate. The Patriot demonstrates authentic knowledge of history militarily, socially, and politically.

The accuracy of the film was spot on. It depicted all the horrors and history of slavery very well. In fact “Dr. Emily West, an associate professor of history at the University of Reading” supports my statement when she states “I have never seen a film represent slavery so accurately.” It portrayed the difference of the masters by showing how one was kind to Northup and how the other was a “Nigger Breaker.” Also just as History says, slave owners justified their actions with the bible, and their “Christian Duties.” However, it did over emphasize Northup’s social

Hollywood is certainly known for many of its historical movies about slavery. Amistad, one of tens of movies, documentaries, and miniseries based on slavery, gives us a partially historically accurate insight of the abolitionists and slave experience at the time, making it a somewhat worthy historical secondary source.

Direct quote: Jones argues, “This novel reflects that freedom must be paid for and we must question the cost” (180). People have a different perception about the cost because for some of them it can represent time and effort, however, for others is the exposition to physical attacks or racist comments.

One of my reaction to the movie was about the role of Sam Waterson as David Dickson where even though he was given an unlikable role as a slave owner, he was seen as a sympathetic character even after he died. Slave owners Georgia are known to be cruel, brutal and they see their slaves as a property. They would treat their slaves inhumanely; however, David Dickson was seen as a loving father, even though he knows that her daughter is a mixed race, he listens to Julia (a black slave, mother of Amanda) to give rewards to slaves whoever works hard and eventually reward them with a small plot of land for them to grow crops for their own family and entrust her. After