Paper #1

	Revision Makes Perfection

      Hofstader’s revision of Turner’s thesis is a more direct, less complicated way to stress the importance of the frontier on American history.  The simplifications of Turner’s longer explanations of the effects of the frontier are easier to read and more to the point than the way he states them in his thesis.  Hofstader’s revision brings out the strong points Turner makes and also calls attention to some of his weaknesses.  Hofstader gives more accurate definitions for terms Turner uses in his thesis.  By correcting the errors in Turner’s thesis and making the reading easier to understand, Hofstader’s revision becomes not only more enjoyable but more informative as well.
      Hofstader’s revision of Turner’s thesis gives the reader more to think about than the thesis would on its own.  Although Turner has great ideas of how important the frontier is to American history, by adding Hofstader’s opinions of his thesis, more ideas can be generated.  He gives a more accurate definition of “free land,” a term Turner uses repeatedly throughout his thesis, to give the reader a better understanding of what Turner actually meant.  With a better knowledge of the term itself the reader is better prepared to think more about the point Turner was trying to make, how free land effected our nation, rather than trying to decipher what the term means. Hofstader’s also points out some of the weaknesses in Turner’s thesis.  Turner is said to have “performed a service for historical writing by directly calling attention to it” (Hofstader 528).  But Hofstader’s revision, because it is more accurate, direct, and has a more modern style of writing, is intellectually more interesting.
      
      Valid reasons of why America developed as it did can be found in both Turner’s thesis and Hofstader’s revision.  Both authors are stressing the importance of the frontier on American history.  The most important effect of the frontier on our society today was that it advanced the ideas of democracy and individualism.  Both writers agree with this idea, but they disagree in their explanations of how democracy and individualism were promoted.  When Turner defines the frontier he says, “the term is an elastic one” and uses it too literally as a “line” several times (519).  The West is described as uncivilized wilderness which creates an image of America during this time that is too black and white.  The so called “line” that is sweeping across the country is moving in ripples, populating the wilderness, and taking the people all the way back to primitive times before they can move forward.  Hofstader explains that it was not as chaotic as Turner’s thesis makes it out to be.  When Hofstader points out that Turner “failed to see the full importance for his thesis” he also says that “the United States not only had a frontier but was a frontier” (530).  America was more a combination of different people coming together to develop land and establish a society than a line crossing our nation.
      
      Overall Hofstader’s revision is more satisfying than Turner’s thesis.  The organization of Hofstader’s thoughts was more efficient than Turner’s.  Hodstafer’s revision was shorter and used less descriptive words and hidden meanings, so while some might find it less interesting, it was more informative.  Turner used section headers to block off his different ideas from each other.  Hofstader’s ideas flowed from each idea to the next.  The definitions Hofstader used and the way he expressed not only his own but Turner’s ideas of the importance of the frontier on American history were easy to relate to.  Hodstafer mentioned that the accuracy with which Turner described the frontier is not clear.  This is somewhat obvious in his thesis with the dramatization he uses.  Hodstafer’s revision, being easier to read, was not only more enjoyable but more interesting as well.
      




















	Works Cited

Hofstader, Richard.  “The Thesis Disputed.”  Creating America: Reading and Writing Arguments.  Third Edition.  Joyce Moser and Ann Waters.  Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.  Prentice Hall, 2002. 527-31.

Turner, Fredrick Jackson.  “The Significance fo the Frotier in American History.”  Creating America: Reading and Writing Arguments.  Third Edition.  Joyce Moser and Ann Waters.  Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.  Prentice Hall, 2002. 518-26.