Compares two critiques of Mary White Rowlandson’s A Narrative of the Captivity and Restauration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson.
This paper compares Parley Ann Boswell’s critique of “A Narrative of the Captivity and Restauration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson” with Deborah Dietrich’s critique. The paper looks at how Boswell emphasizes the mother narrative aspect of the story, whereas Dietrich chooses to show where Rowlandson and the Puritan agenda conflict. The paper concludes with the author’s opinion of the story and the critiques of the story.
“Parley Ann Boswell’s critique of A Narrative of the Captivity and Restauration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson focuses on the mother narrative (Boswell 2). According to the Puritan hierarchy, all of creation is ranked according to their value and Rowlandson’s children’s worth is less than her own worth. Therefore, she has to deemphasize her relationship with her children in order to retain her Puritan philosophy (Boswell 4). Boswell states that although Rowlandson has to diminish her relationship with her children it is an actual personal story of the struggles that she and her children encountered. Boswell states that Rowlandson’s will to live is based upon the fact that she is trying to protect her children (Boswell 4). She bases this argument on the events that take place when she is first captured and her will to survive. Rowlandson had previously stated that if she was in this situation hypothetically that she would rather die, yet when faced with the circumstances she cannot make any other choice except to live. Rowlandson states her reason for choosing to live is because of the fearful weapons the Indians have, however Boswell says that is just a Puritanical cover up (Boswell 4).”