Rhetoric 1315 Questions

I found it interesting on the part where they talked about "the lake." People from different states have asked me questions about that and why we always say "the lake" when talking about what we did this weekend or what we are going to do.

I also thought it was interesting that Minnesota has more than 1,000 lakes, I never knew the closest estimate until I read the article.

I knew that Minnesota had a lot of forests, but I never knew that after glaciers 70% of the statae was forest. It's weird to think that our generation will never have the ability to see land like that again.

Another thing is I don't understand why it took so long to find the source of the Mississippi?

I too have had the same experience as Alicia. I actually had a professor who was from out of state and moved to a place in MN where there were no lakes in sight. He heard of this "lake" that everyone was talking about spending there weekends at. He told us that he thought it must have been a big lake because everyone he knew was always going to "the lake".

I also found it interesting that the meaning of Minnesota went from "whiteish water" to "somewhat clouded water" then finally to "sky tinted water". Was there really a need to keep changing the meaning?

I liked how the author explained the extreme climate of Minnesota in the context of other states.

The author wrote that larger predators were overhunted by Paleo-Indians... I thought that most of the indians lived in harmony with thier surroundings>

I really found the readings interesting especially the details about the importance of the Mississippi.

I got to thinking during the reading though, with the extreme weather and all, what makes Minnesota an attractive place to live or raise a family?

Secondly, what do you think the state of Minnesota and especially the Twin Cities, would be like today if it wasn't for the mighty Mississippi? I certainly believe we wouldn't have the industry we do have.

Who decided what Indians were given what name and why did their names continually change?

Why is Minnesota thought of the state with a ridiculous amount of lakes when Wisconsin has more?

I really like this reading. In the first sectin, as they go from area to area in Minnesota it brought up so many memories for me. I have been to most regions of Minnesota, except the boundary waters, at one point or another during my childhood and it was easy for me to visualize again the flatness of the Red River Valley,the beautiful pines around Itasca, the acres of farmland in southern Minnesota, the strip mines in the northeast... you get the point.

I loved all of the name translations that were included in the reading. My favorite was the translation of Winnibigoshish to the Ojibwe meaning of "miserable, bad, filthy water" I had always liked that name, but now I can't help but laugh whenever I hear it.

The source of the Mississippi was si hard to find because it starts essentially as a small creek in the woods. It also goes through several lakes in the north. So it was kind of difficult to tell where it came out on the other side.

At one point they thought it started somewhere in Canada. This is why the northwest angle is part of Minnesota. Thy thought that was where the river went and they were going to use it as a natural border.

It was amazing to read about all the economic advantages of St. Anthony Falls. The falls and the Mississippi River opened Minnesota up to the rest of the world. As a result of the falls and the large amount of fertile Minnesotan land, Minnesota was, at one point was the largest producer of flour. Pillsbury's milling plant in Minneapolis was the largest in the world. This would have been possible without the electricity created by St. Anthony Falls.

Another interesting thing I noticed in the reading was that the first settlers cut down the Hardwood forest for farming instead of farming the praire land. Coming from a farm in southern Minnesota, it just didn't make sense to me. The grasslands on Minnesota is one of the most fertile soil in the entire world. Luckly, the settlers caught on fast.

I also found it ineresting that there was a lot of steamboats running on the Red River. That's a part of state history you don't hear much about.

In the reading, the author refers to there being only one lake in Minnesota, "the lake." This is, in a sense, exactly how we Minnesotans think and talk. How many times has one of us said "Oh ya, my family and I are goin up to the lake there this weekend!" I was very excited to read this!

When the author talks writes, "the theater of seasons--the verdant growth of spring, the water sports of summer, the brilliantly colored autumn leaves, and teh diverse winter sports." I am proud to live here! We sure do have a lot to offer in this state.

In the reading, the author refers to there being only one lake in Minnesota, "the lake." This is, in a sense, exactly how we Minnesotans think and talk. How many times has one of us said "Oh ya, my family and I are goin up to the lake there this weekend!" I was very excited to read this!

When the author talks writes, "the theater of seasons--the verdant growth of spring, the water sports of summer, the brilliantly colored autumn leaves, and teh diverse winter sports." I am proud to live here! We sure do have a lot to offer in this state.

One of the things that i didn't get is that during World War II, people got affended when the newscaster compared the Russian Front with the climate of Minnesota. To me that doesn't really seem like much of an insult, if anything they are giving us credit for being able to stand the winters.

I like the point about calling it the cities, because I can't really remember a time that i refered to it as "going to St. Paul", or something, i just always say "going to the cites".

It is interesting how the river systems were so important to Minnesota for fur trade, exploration, and lumber.

With Lake Itasca state park starting in 1891, how many state parks have been added since and how many does Minnesota have today? Its great that we are preserving these places, because before we know it there may not be places like these to go and enjoy.

I found it interesting that at one point in the article, the author speaks of how there was talk of "improving the river", in order to make it more accessable for shipping. This caught my eye because we have seen that idea of "improving the land" before, and now see it again here with the river.

Another thing that intriqued me was that the more I read this article the more I realized just how similar northern Wisonsin and Minnesota are. Every one in the Northern half of Wisconsin grows up understanding "the Lake" phrase, and "up north" to mean any cabin on any lake just like in Minnesota. Also, the great lakes are a huge part of Wisconsin as well. It was just interesting to see the similarities (much more than some Minnesotans would like to think, lol).