Son of the Morning Star

give-and-take of the Morning Star Analysis Evan S. Connell has a unique writing expressive ardour. date most stories ar told from beginning to end, Son of the Morning Star Custer and The humble Bighorn (North Point Press, 1984) begins with the aftermath of The Battle of the fine Bighorn. It is then followed by numerous chargets which led up to this conflict. Connell chose this non-linear writing style in pose to distrisolelye the details he finds most fascinating and interesting to fortune with his audience. Using the conclusion of the encounter as the introduction of the narrative creates a suspenseful tone.In the beginning of the story, the setting is the battle field which The Battle of the micro Bighorn had interpreted place a few days earlier. deputy James Bradley has led his pro workforceade to the land where they discover the corpses of which they believe are General George Armstrong Custers troops. Custer himself was nowhere in sight. Even after a reward was offer ed upon his retrieval he could non be found. The deserted battle field raised questions and the custody began to imagine what had happened days prior to their arrival.The power writes, While discussing the days events around a campfire most infantry custody predicted more(prenominal) unpleasant news (pg. 3) The troops discovered a woman who was position during the battle and described to them what she had witnessed. The womans recollection of her experience opens up the story to a chronicle of the events which happened during the battle. The proofreader is assumption details regarding to Custers entrance and likewise each opponents fighting style Instead, Renos manpower dismounted and formed a skirmish line. Then they began to retreat. They ran truly fast, she said, dropping guns and cartridges.She was disgusted by the conduct of these whites, saying they must pay off been seized with panic worse than that which seized her own people. (pg. 7) As the plot approaches its c onclusion, the reader is taken back to the aftermath of the battle and receives a tale told by a Cheyenne woman named Kate Bighead. She delivered a short story more or less the corpses she maxim laying on the battlefield, one in particular she identified as General Custer She said two S protrudehern Cheyenne women were at the petty Bighorn and when the fighting stop they went to the battlefield.They saw Custer. They knew him wellthey recognized him even though his hair was short and face was dirty. (pg. 422) Although the plot of this story does non have a chronological structure, it develops a more personal affiliation because the characters in the story are directly speaking to the audience as they give their personal accounts on the battle. For example, it had already been said that Reno was dead however, an flare-up do by Reno himself is mentioned shortly after. The major was swigging at a flaskful when DeRudio splashed by. What are you trying to do? Reno asked. Drown me before I am killed? (pg. 50) Evan S. Connells work, Son of the Morning Star is an extraordinary and absorbing narrative. He has an acquiring mind and was non afraid to step protrudeside(a) from the traditional form of writing. Behind the chaos there is meaning. The writing style presented in this story is untraditional which could possibly lose the attention of the reader however, this was a valid decision. ? Based on its cover the reader capacity think that the entire story is about General Custer and his troops.Despite expectations, the audience truly catches a glimpse of both the lives of Custer as well as his opponents. The origin gives the reader a little information on the background of idle Horse, formerly known as Curly. Curly did not reveal this face to anybody until he was sixteen and ready to become a warriorExcept for moccasins and breechclout he rode naked. (pg. 67) The author too gives the reader the opportunity to read a few journal entries about Crazy Ho rse. These entries come from the diary of Jesse Lee, Saturday, Sept. th, 1877. Everything is softened and I think will remain so. Crazy Horses body was brought to this agency and put on a little platform, Indian fashion, on the hill overlooking the post, not half a burl away. (pg. 75) He also includes a background on Chief bile as well, providing facts about his birthplace and family. For example, he writes, He was not a hereditary hirer. The family seems to have been undistinguished, and because his father died at an early age the male child was regarded more with sympathy than respect.So it appears that not through any legacy did he become a chieftain (pg. 376) Throughout the story, the audience develops an persuasion of the motives of the indigenous Americans during the battle. The reader becomes aware of what Sitting cop was thinking If Sitting Bull did indeed c altogether off the attack it was not because of any ticker for whites, who, he hated with abiding and impene trable rancor, but because he dumb how vindictive they could be. If all the soldiers were slaughtered the whites would insist upon other battle (pg. 6) The audience was not exactly given an idea of what they were thinking before the battle. The author also makes a point to include a song that the Indians wrote after they had thwarted General Custer and his men, At that time the Indians did not realized they had fought Custerwhen they found out, they render about him. David Humphreys Miller transcribed one such kill-song (pg. 54) With the erudition given in the story, the reader give overs that the autochthonous American leading were fully develop human beings. Connell includes information regarding Chief Crazy Horses brilliant battle technique.For example, there are quotations given from a journalist At critical moments Crazy Horse would dismount before shooting He is the only Indian I ever knew who did that oftenhe didnt like to start a battle unless he had it all be aft er out in his head and knew he was going to win. (pg. 63) Chief saddle sore was compared to other great leaders and his leading skills are described by his people including Lieutenant Godfrey, He perceived Gall as a man of tremendous character natural ability, and great common sense, a chief whose massive physiognomy reminded him of Daniel Webster. (pg. 375) The comments made about these two leaders in particular demonstrate their equality of humanity compared to Custers men. not only does he give details about the lives of the Native Americans but Connell also gives insight on the lives of those who fought with General Custer. The reader is given an idea of the reputation and trial of Benteen. For example, In this, that Major Frederick W. Benteen, Ninth Calvary when in command of the Post of Fort Du Chesne, Utah, was found drunkSpecifications 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and sixth were identical, only the dates changed. (pg. 34) The reader also gathers information about Major Marcus Reno r egarding his leadership and his behavior thus similar to that of Benteens. Reno got demerits easily, almost deliberately (pg. 40) He also writes, At least it failed to mollify the exasperated colonel because Reno found himself saddled with another charge (pg. 45) Although a great deal of this piece is devoted to the lives and motives of the Native Americans, the author also takes time to write about Custers men as well.Including battle experience as well as family history, Connell captures the magnificence of The Battle of the Little Bighorn. Throughout the non-linear story, the reader is taken back and out between stories about Custers challengers and his troops. The authors objectivity is seeming(a) because the reader is given the opportunity to capture the battle from both perspectives. ? forward The Battle of the Little Bighorn, General Custer had celebrated many victories however, this battle ended in tragedy.Unaware of what caused the downfall at Little Bighorn, many have speculated achievable causes of Custers surpass. These possibilities include Custers sanity, his sanction and other stereotypes. In the story, Connells collection of stories told by Sioux woman and other survivors give the reader ideas of what magnate have been the cause of this inglorious downfall. When looking back on the battle a discussion between an Indian and General H. L. Scott reveals a viable cause of this defeat.For example, Connell writes During subsequent conversations Feather Earring emphasized that if Custer had approached diplomatically the Indians would have done for(p) back to the reservationsGeneral Scott observed that such a method of dealings with the hostiles had not occurred to anybody. (pg. 414) Shortly after this discussion more information about Custers skewed communication with the Indians is unveiled. If this miscommunication had never occurred the battle would have been avoided altogether.A Sioux chief gives his recollection on the events occurring prior to the battle He asked Custer to auspicate that he would not fight the Sioux. Custer promisedAfter we got through talking, he soon odd the agency, and we soon heard that he was fighting the Indians and that he and all his men were killed. If Custer had given us time we would have gone out fore of him, but he did not give us time. If we had gone out ahead of Custer he would not have lost himself not would his men have been killed. (pg. 415) The attack had been approved by his officers, however, there had been some objections.Some of his troops did not believe the plan was logical but Custers confidence does appear to take over his mentality. He ignores a suggestion made by Gibbon, Custer, instead of proceeding at once into the valley of the Little Big Horn, even should the trail lead there, should continue on up the Rosebud, get closer to the mountains (pg. 255-256) Losing touch with reality Custer continues to explain his plan to attack, the unite forces would count coup o n Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse, Galland all the rest (pg. 56) Custers plan includes a victory rather than an election in case of any misfortune, he left no board for the unexpected. Although Custers plan seemed a little unrealistic his stubbornness was not the only thing to lead to the downfall at Little Bighorn. legion(predicate) troops give their comments regarding Major Renos choice of leadership, several multitude analysts believe Reno should have stayed there instead of doing what he did. They point out that his battalion so near the village would have engaged a great many warriors, thus allowing Custers plan to unfold. (pg. ) It is also mentioned that Reno had an disturbance with one of the Indians which he encountered, Reno misunderstood a figure of speech, taking I as an insult, and threatened to shoot High Bear-who responded by drawing a knife. Another scout, invoking Custers name, jumped between them and managed to prevent a bloody settlement. (pg. 10) non only was Re nos lack of intuition a cause of defeat but it is also possible that his belligerent temperament lead to Custers labefaction. After analyzing the attitudes and actions of Custer and his troops, the reader can infer many causes that led to this disastrous defeat.Based on the strategic analysts comments, Reno could have used better instincts when leading his men into battle. It is possible that if the major would have had stronger intuition Custers men would not have suffered as much as they did. The reader can conclude that there was a sense of overconfidence made not only by Major Reno but Custer as well however, if Custer had kept his promise to Sioux the entire battle could have been avoided. Custer and his five companies certainly underestimated their Native American opponents.