Honors Summer Read 2018: Rules of Engagement

"St. Jerome Reading" (1648-1650) by Georges de La Tour

Welcome to the ECU Honors Program's Enduring Questions website!  If you are enrolled in an Enduring Questions class for the fall semester of 2018 at ECU (EQ1 or EQ3), this website is for you.  Read on!

Responses to questions on this website are designed to generate "virtual conversation." By virtual, we do not mean something that looks like conversation but isn't. Instead, we mean REAL conversation in a virtual environment--this website.  And this fall, incoming first- and second-year Honors students will be engaged in the same discussion. Ten percent of each student's grade in both EQ1 and EQ3 will be based on your responses to the questions raised here.

The sort of conversation we're looking for is academic in character. Thus, your responses should consist of clear, concise statements of your ideas crafted in standard English (not text-speak--some of us are old!). They should be long enough to convey your thoughts, but short enough for other readers to read and respond to fairly quickly. In short, you don't want your responses to be so long that you monopolize (or kill) the conversation by going on, and on, and on.....(we all know how irritating that can be!).

Obviously, responses should not use profanity. They should be civil and respectful. People do not always agree. Responses can be critical; however, all communication is expected to be courteous and professional. Contributor's positions may be questioned; their character should not.

The object here is to reflect on some of the issues raised by the text, to connect the reading to your personal experience, and to help first- and second-year Honors students get to know each other better.

When should I begin posting my responses?
As soon as you have read the opening pages of Killers of the Flower Moon: The Osage Murders and the Birth of the FBI.

When is this assignment due?
This writing assignment is designed to be completed before classes begin.  Details about where and how to account for and submit your word count total will be provided in class when the semester starts.

How many questions should I respond to?

We do not expect you to respond to each question, but you should respond to several representing different sections of the book.

How much should I write?

Your responses should add up to a sum total of not less than 750 words.  Don't try to load up all 750 words into one or two comments.  You should also respond to comments left by other readers. And pose questions to other readers. (Check back later to see if anyone has responded to your comments-and respond to their responses.)  All of this writing will count toward your word total.  Students are responsible for keeping track of their word total (you can cut and paste your responses into a Microsoft Word document, which has a word count feature).  This is not just a writing assignment, though; it's a reading assignment, too.  Every student is responsible for reading every word of the assigned text.

Where do I post my responses?
At the bottom of each question post, you will find a "comment" link. If it has a "0" beside it, that means no one has commented yet; as more people comment, the number will go up. When you're ready to weigh in, click on the "comments" button, read any previous comments, and start writing. Please sign your posts. And use your real name--not a nickname--so we can get to know each other).

More questions?
E-mail us at sbenton@ecok.edu!

Engaging Killers of the Flower Moon

In this post, you will find links to several questions about David Grann's Killers of the Flower Moon: The Osage Murders and the Birth of the FBI. These questions are identified by their page numbers and are listed in the order in which the issues they address are raised by the text.

There's also a sandbox where you can raise your own questions about the text that are not covered elsewhere (and answer those posed by others).

Once you've started reading the chapters listed below, click on the links, read the corresponding questions and comments other readers may have left (click on the "comment" button beneath each post to see them), and then join the discussion (or initiate it).

SPOILER ALERT:  Don't read questions before you've reached the page number associated with them.

There is only one question that every student is required to answer.  That's the last one, referred to here as "The Takeaway." Don't answer it until you've finished reading the book.

Before You Begin

Page #5

Chronicle One: The Marked Woman

Page 11A :What happens in Vegas...
11B: Strange looks
18: Thin Blue Lines
20: Expertise Schmexpertise
23: Gimme that Old Time Religion
24: Can I Interest You in a Pink Razor?
28: Can't Buy Me Love?
34: When Actions Speak Louder
43: Where the wind comes sweepin' down the plain
51: The Thought that Counts
63: When Those Who Have the Gold Make the Rules
83: The Enduring Appeal of the Racial Stereotype
106: The Boy Next Door

Chronicle Two: The Evidence Man

123: Understand Me, Become Me?
153: Chill Out or Wake Up?
182: Home Cookin'
207: Say My Name
213: Literary Rubbernecking
214: Playing by the Rules
227: Mental Toughness
233: A Band of Brothers
237: No Justice, No Peace

Chronicle Three: The Reporter
273: Sleeping Dogs

313: My Bad

The Sandbox

The Takeaway
Digging Deeper

5: Before You Begin

If you and your family have any connections to the Osage Nation or to Osage County that you're willing to share, feel free to share them. 

Have you visited the area? 

Did you know anything about the Osage Murders before you started reading this book?

11A: What happens in Vegas

Grann quotes an official U.S. government report on the town of Whizbang, Oklahoma which says: "All the forces of dissipation and evil are here found" and goes on to enumerate them:  "Gambling, drinking, adultery, lying, thieving, murdering" (11).

I suspect that most of us would agree that thieving, murdering, and adultery are immoral, but there may be some differences among us on the morality of gambling and drinking. A national constitutional ban on the production, importation, transportation, and sale of alcoholic beverages was in place in the United States from from 1920 to 1933, yet is difficult to imagine such a ban on alcohol being implemented in the United States today. And in 2015, 30 tribes in Oklahoma operated 128 gambling facilities and state lottery sales totaled $186 million.

What do you make of changes like these--from a time when a U.S. government official includes gambling and drinking in a list alongside thieving, murdering, and adultery to today when these practices are commonplace in the state and in the nation? Do you conclude that morals naturally change over time as society changes and evolves? Or do you see this as evidence of the way morals have declined over time as our society has become more lax?  Or do you interpret these differences in a different way?

11B: Strange looks

Grann mentions that "Ernest's aunt was muttering loud enough for all to hear, about how mortified she was that her nephew had married a redskin" (11). Interracial marriage has certainly increased in the United States over the past century.

Do you think opposition to interracial marriage is largely restricted to older generations of Oklahomans or do you think such views are still commonplace among teens and twenty-somethings in Oklahoma?

Is there less opposition for some kinds of interracial relationships than there are for other kinds?

Click here for a movie recommendation on the history of this subject.

18: Thin Blue Lines

"Police" (1932) by Norman Rockwell.

According to Grann, "For years after the American Revolution, the public opposed the creation of police departments, fearing that they would become forces of repression . . . Only in the mid-nineteenth century, after the growth of industrial cities and a rash of urban riots--after dread of the so-called dangerous classes surpassed dread of the state--did police departments emerge in the United States" (18).

Why do you think the author uses the term "so-called" when he refers to the "dangerous classes"? Is he implying that they might not have actually been as dangerous as the public perceived them to be? 

Do you believe there is something about the industrial cities that correlates with higher crime rates? Are people living in cities more likely to commit crimes that people living in rural areas?  Do you think it likely that immigration played a role in the "dread" the public felt for the "dangerous classes" Grann refers to?  In Oklahoma today, what kind of people are most likely to have dread of police officers?

20: Expertise Schmexpertise

Dr. Watson (Martin Freeman) and Sherlock Holmes (Benedict Cumberbatch)

According to Grann, at the beginning of the 20th century in the United States, lawmen "were still largely amateurs. They rarely attended training academies or steeped themselves in the emerging scientific methods of detection, such as the analysis of fingerprints and blood patterns" (20-21).

Today, we assume that professional detectives will have this kind of training and expertise. Do you believe that it is fair to say that in today's society expertise and training in all fields is highly valued? Or are there some fields in which expertise and training are viewed with skepticism?  When do Americans today trust "experts" and when do they not trust them?

23: Gimme that Old Time Religion

"Osage Treaties" (1932) by Olive Rush at the Pawhuska Post Office

Grann describes Wah'Kon-Tah as a "mysterious life-force that pervades the sun and the moon and the earth and the stars, the force around which the Osage had structured their lives for centuries, hoping to bring some order out of the chaos and confusion on earth; the force that was there but was not there--invisible, remote, giving, awesome, unanswering" (23). He then goes on to describe how "Many Osage had given up on their traditional beliefs, but Lizzie had held on to them" (23), and quotes a U.S. government official who complains that women like Lizzie "keep up the old superstitions and laugh down modern ideas and customs").

When should the abandonment of traditional belief and customs be regarded as progress and when should it be regarded as a loss?  When is it fair to dismiss a belief as a superstition? When are traditions and beliefs passed on from generation to generation worth defending and when should they be discarded?

24: Can I Interest You in a Pink Razor?

Grann reports that "undertakers charged the Osage exorbitant rates for a funeral, trying to gouge them" by charging $1,450 for a casket. But some might argue that in a free market, sellers can charge whatever they wish. If the buyer doesn't want to pay the price, he or she is free not to buy the product or pay for the service.

To what extent is a seller duty-bound to offer products and services to all customers at the same price and to what extent is the buyer responsible for negotiating the best price possible?  Is it "price gouging" if pink razors marketed to women have a higher price than blue razors that are marketed to men?  Is it "price gouging" if a car dealer offers a car at a higher price to one customer than he or she does to the next? Is there anything wrong with raising the price of hotel reservations, water bottles or gas in the aftermath of a tornado, say, when demand is higher?

When, if ever, should the government attempt to rein in a free market in which the law of supply and demand is dominant?

28: Can't Buy Me Love?

Still from There Will Be Blood (2007)

Grann reports that for some "Osage, especially elders . . . oil was a cursed blessing. 'Some day this oil will go and there will be no more fat checks every few months from the Great White Father. . . There'll be no fine motorcars and new clothes. Then I know my people will be happier" (28).

It is easy to say that money can't buy happiness. But how can anyone say what too much wealth is, what kind of motorcar is "too fine," and when it is too soon to buy more new clothes? Are people doomed to want more more than they have and to resent those who have much more than they do?

34: When Actions Speak Louder

"Triumph of Bacchus" (1628) by Diego Velazquez

Grann reports that "The passage of Prohibition had only compounded the territory's feeling of lawlessness by encouraging organized crime and creating, in the words of one historian, 'the greatest criminal bonanza in American history'" (34-35).

One could say that the root cause of the criminal bonanza was the great gap between what Americans loudly proclaimed in public--an opposition to selling and consuming alcohol--and how Americans actually behaved--going to great lengths, including breaking the law, in order to sell and consume alcohol.

Can you think of any comparable gaps in American society today between public discourse and actual behavior?

43: Where the wind comes sweepin' down the plain

According to Grann, squatters took land from the Indians by force: "In 1870, the Osage--expelled from their lodges, their graves plundered--agreed to sell their Kansas lands to settlers for $1.25 an acre. Nevertheless, impatient settlers massacred several of the Osage, mutilating their bodies and scalping them" (43).

When Oklahoma history is taught in public schools, does a story like this get told? Were you taught that Indians in Oklahoma were treated more fairly and humanely?

51: The Thought that Counts

According to Grann, Mollie and other Osage children were forcibly taken from their families and placed in boarding schools where "each hour of the day was regimented, and students were lined up and marched from point to point" (51).  They were not allowed to speak their native language and they were given Bibles to read.  As Grann explains, the instruction Mollie received "was intended to assimilate [her] into white society and transform her into what the authorities conceived of as the ideal woman" (51).

In today's society, this kind of "education" might be described as kidnapping and indoctrination. One of the results of practices like these is that Native American languages stopped being used and in some cases disappeared.  In other words, these education requirements not only severed relationships between families, they helped erase Native American cultures.

Some would argue, however, that this education plan was implemented in order to benefit Native Americans, to acculturate them into dominant society and give them the tools they needed to succeed in that society. If the motives of the educators and the lawmakers were pure, then we cannot condemn their actions.

Do you think it makes more sense to judge these educators on the basis of their motives or on the results of their actions?

And if they are to be judged on the results of their actions, would you say their plan was harsh but not fundamentally destructive, since it effectively accelerated cultural changes that were inevitable?  Or would you say that their plan was closer to cultural genocide?

63: When Those Who Have the Gold Make the Rules

Sullivan Market in Bigheart (now Barnsdall), Oklahoma (1918)

Grann explains how the U.S. government "required the Office of Indian Affairs to determine which members of the tribe it considered capable of managing their trust funds. Over the tribe's vehement objections, many Osage . . . were deemed 'incompetent' and were forced to have a local white guardian overseeing and authorizing all of their spending, down to the toothpaste they purchased at the corner store" (63).

Do you think U.S. lawmakers truly believed many Native Americans were incapable of managing their funds or was this a lie they invented in order to control the Native Americans?

In a broader sense, do you think that people in our society who abuse power are more likely to be delusional (believing they are in the right, no matter what) or manipulative (not caring whether or not they are right)?

83: The Enduring Appeal of the Racial Stereotype

Grann reports that journalists depicted the Osage as improvident spendthrifts even though white oil barons were equally capable of extravagant expenditures.

Do today's mainstream journalists avoid racial stereotypes, by and large, or are racial stereotypes something we still have to contend with as a society?

Can you provide any specific examples to support your claim?

106: The Boy Next Door

Charles Manson

John Palmer told U.S. Senator Charles Curtis that the people behind the "most foul series of crimes ever committed in this country" were "Demons" (106).

When you think about people who commit foul crimes, do you think of them as demons, who are inhuman in their lack of empathy for others?

Or do you think that they are much more like everyone else than we might like to believe?

Is there a danger in thinking of them one way or the other?

123: Understand Me, Become Me?

Harpo Marx and Lucille Ball

Grann reports that FBI investigators "were taught to see the world through the eyes of others" (123), so that they could understand both the motives and the choices of victims, witnesses and criminals, and thereby determine guilt and capture "the bad guys."

Do you think it is possible to see the world through the eyes of someone else without developing a sense of empathy for how that person might feel about the world?

And do you think there is ever a danger in developing a deeper understanding or empathy for someone whose values are profoundly different from your own? Is there a danger that in the process of understanding someone else's viewpoint and even sharing their feelings, even if experimentally, you might become more like that person?

153: Chill out or Wake Up?

"Las dos Fridas" (1932) by Frida Kahlo

Tom White "feared that the system could doom an innocent man" and "grew to oppose what was then sometimes called 'judicial homocide,'" or capital punishment. As White saw it, the law was "a struggle to subdue the violent passions not only in others but also in oneself" (153).

What do you make of White's commitment to subduing violent passions?

Do you think that our society is troubled more by violent passions, as they express themselves in fights, arguments, and attacks? Or is our society troubled more by the absence of violent passions, in apathy, indifference, and complacency?

If balance is the goal, in which direction does our society need to be headed today?  Are we too hot or too cool?

182: Home Cookin'

David Grann visits area near Gray Horse, Oklahoma with journalist Lee Cowan
(Still from CBS Morning News broadcast April 30, 2017)

According to Grann, J. Edgar Hoover believed that a qualified FBI Agent could be effective in different sections of the country, but Tom White believed that an agent familiar with one particular region and its people would be more effective in that region than an outsider would be.

In a similar vein, one might argue that a teacher familiar with one particular region and its people would be more effective teaching in that region than an outsider would be.

You might also argue that a writer who grew up in a particular region and among its people would be more effective writing about that region than an outsider would be.

Do you see any potential problems with this kind of thinking about outsiders and familiar faces?  What if the "region" is simply a town?  Are there any situations in which an outsider might better qualified than someone who is familiar with a region?

207: Say My Name

Henry Roan

According to Grann, Ramsey kept saying "the Indian" instead of Roan's name.

Presumably, the label served to dehumanize him and helped Ramsey think of Roan as a thing instead of as a person with inherent dignity.

Do you think the power of words in cases like this is overrated or underrated?

How much do the names we use for people affect the way we feel about them or the way others feel about them?

213: Literary Rubbernecking

"War News from Mexico" (1848) by Richard Caton Woodville

According to Grann, "despite the brutality of the crimes, many whites did not mask their enthusiasm for the lurid story" (213).

It may be tempting to look down on those who derived some perverse pleasure from reading about the suffering of the victims of the Osage killings, but one might argue that those who enjoyed reading about the murders in newspapers back in the 1920s are not far removed from those who enjoy Grann's book.

Some might say that much that counts as entertainment in our world--from violent sporting events to thrilling dramas or comedies--trafficks in the suffering of others. Do you think there is anything inappropriate about being entertained by stories about the suffering of other people?  Does it matter if they are real?  Does it matter if they are innocent?  When do such forms of entertainment evoke empathy and when do they harden our sensitivities?

214: Playing by the Rules

Still from Schindler's List (1993)

According to Grann, Clarence Darrow, the "great defender of the downtrodden," argued that sometimes it is foolish to obey the rules if everyone around you is breaking them: "When you're up against a bunch of crooks, you will have to play their game. Why shouldn't I?" (214).

Do you agree with Darrow that if you're trying to help someone, and your motives are pure, it is OK to break the rules, if that's the only way to achieve your goal?

Do you think our society today is threatened more by rule breakers who believe the ends justify the means OR by rule followers who blindly observe regulations that help replicate the current power structure?

  

227: Mental Toughness

Grann reports that Ernest Burkhart cracked under the pressure of the lies he had been telling:  "He had deep circles under his eyes, as if he hadn't slept for days. 'I'm through lying, judge,' Burkhart said, the words rushing out of him. 'I don't want to go on with this trial any longer.' . . . . The death of his daughter, the haunting face of his wife each day at the trial, the realization that the evidence against him was piling up--it was too much to withstand" (227).

Do you think Burkhart's confession reveals the weakness of his character or is it an indicator that he has character, because he was willing to go off script and do the right thing?

Can you think of other cases in which weakness of character and strength of character might be confused for each other?

233: A Band of Brothers

"Syndics of the Drapers' Guild" (1662) by Rembrandt 

Grann reports that one of the most difficult questions of the case was whether "a jury of twelve white men would ever punish another white man for killing an American Indian" (233).

One way to account for why white men would avoid punishing another white man for committing such a crime is that they felt loyalty for "one of their own."

When, if ever, is it appropriate to attribute a higher importance to demonstrating loyalty to the members of your own subgroup than it is to behave as an impartial judge?

Is it ever acceptable to show favoritism to family members over strangers, for example? Or to fellow countrymen over citizens of other countries?

237: No Justice, No Peace

Still from "Twelve Angry Men" (1957)

In Hale's trial, the judge warned the jury that "There has never been a country on this earth that has fallen except when that point was reached . . . where the citizens would say, 'We cannot get justice in our courts'" (237).

The judge's point may be overstated, but do you think there has ever been a time when citizens of the United States might have claimed that they could not get justice in our courts?  What exactly can a government do to combat that notion?

273: Sleeping Dogs

"Freedom of Speech" (1943) by Norman Rockwell

Grann reports that the Osage were "able to retrieve at least a portion of the oil funds mismanaged over decades by the U.S. government. In 2011, after an eleven-year legal battle, the government agreed to settle a lawsuit brought by the Osage for $380 million" (273).

Some might argue that this portion is not enough; others might argue that it is too much. Some might say that the government owes an apology to the Osage Nation; others might argue that such an apology would just open the door to an endless series of lawsuits and grievances in which anyone associated with any group that has suffered in U. S. history would demand an apology. These lawsuits would just create conflict, the argument goes, and consequently, it would be better to just let bygones be bygones.

Do you believe a national or state government should provide an apology and/or some form of reparation to victims of past wrongdoings sponsored by the national or state government?

313: My Bad

Grann explains that "Many of the cases seemed bound by a web of silent conspirators" including court-appointed guardians, private eyes, doctors, attorneys, bankers, the mayor, countless lawmen and prosecutors and judges--a high percentage of the county's leading citizens. As Grann puts it, "virtually every element of society was complicit in the murderous system" (316).

Do you think it is fair to say that the family members and descendants of those implicated in this conspiracy as well as the businesses that the conspirators worked for owe something--either money or an apology--to the descendants and family members of those who were victims of that conspiracy?

Killers of the Flower Moon Sandbox

"The Beach at Palavas" (1854) by Gustave Courbet

Have a question or comment about Killers of the Flower Moon that had not been addressed elsewhere on this website?

Bring it to the comment box below.

Killers of the Flower Moon Take-away

So you've read Killers of the Flower Moon now. In 100 words or less, identify the part of the book that is most likely to stick with you the longest.

What's your take away?

Don't answer this question until you've finished reading the entire book.

Digging deeper

"Two Peasant Women Digging in Field with Snow" (1890) by Vincent Van Gogh 

Click here to see an 8.5-minute clip about Killers of the Flower Moon that ran on CBS Sunday Morning (April 17, 2017).