Bien écrit, ce roman relate la vie d'une communauté puritaine basée à la frontière nord américaine, ses combats contre certaines communautés indiennes. Basée sur des faits et des personnages réels, cette histoire est passionnante et instructive de bout en bout. ( )

Flight of the Sparrow is a biographical novel about the experiences of Mary Rowlandson who lived in 17th century Massachusetts at a time when conflict with Native Americans was at its pinnacle. After her village is attacked and burned, Mary and three of her children survive, but are taken captive by a local tribe. She is separated from her children, except for her youngest daughter Sarah, who is severely injured. Wounded herself, Mary carries Sarah as far as she can, desperate to try to save her. They are taken to the Indian village where she struggles to survive. She is befriended by a Praying Indian named James Printer, who helps guide her in this strange new culture that has been forced upon her. When she is sold back to the English, and her minister husband, she realizes that she has more in common with the ways of the Indians than her Puritan world. She questions her husband, her community, and her God, and is torn between a life she wants and a life she is forced to lead.

When I originally selected this book, I didn't realize it was based on an actual person. The author did a wonderful job of bringing to life the personal side of Mary 's story including the reactions of her family, friends, and other contacts. We experience not only Mary's suffering, but also that of the Puritans and the tumult faced by the native Americans. This was a very compelling and well researched story and I highly recommend it to anyone who has an interest in early US history, Puritans, and the Native American culture of that time period. ( )

This is the first book I've read outside of my usual genre (southern fiction/upmarket commercial) in quite some time, and I really enjoyed it! I especially appreciated the Author's Note at the end which explained that quite a bit of what took place was based on the true accounts/records kept. I had no idea when I started out this actually happened. It reminded me of another story I read years and years ago, RIDE THE WIND, which was also about a white woman captured by Indians, although the time frame was different, about two hundred years later than this story.

I loved that Belding Brown included many details about the MC's life led while held in captivity - although...the MC, Mary, really began to appreciate certain freedoms, (the clothing, being able to walk around, noting that woman were held in high regard, children weren't whipped, and were allowed to play freely, etc.) and eventually came to the conclusion that in many ways, her captors way of life was better than that which she came from.

( )

The Flight of the Sparrow is set in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1676. The book tells of the Puritan ways of the settlers and of the Indian massacres of the people living in the small villages of the colony. Also related are accounts of English settlers being taken captive by the Indians.

This historical fiction is loosely based on the life of Mary Rowlandson who lives in Lancaster with her husband, a Puritan minister, and their children. When the Indians raid and pillage their village, she and her children are taken as captives. After several months, she and her children are eventually ransomed back to their family.

During her short time in captivity, Mary learns the Indian ways and feels freer and more comfortable with their lifestyle than she had ever felt living as a Puritan wife and mother. Unfortunately, after she is ransomed and she returns home, Mary longs to return to the Indian way of life so she learns to be dilligent in her efforts to regain her place in the English world.

One must realize that the author of this book took many liberties in telling Mary’s story while exposing the reader to a time in early American history when religious beliefs were of great consequence, and when Indian tribes were struggling to hold onto their lands and their way of life.
( )

(Contains spoilers)

This is a well written, nicely paced, fictionalized account of a real person, Mary Rowlandson, an English-born Puritan who was brought to the Massachusetts Bay Colony as a young child. Rowlandson wrote an account of her captivity among the Indians during King Philip's War (1675-1678). Her book "The Sovereignty and Goodness of God" became America's first 'best seller,' and began a genre of captivity narratives.

The novel rests on a framework of historical reality. In February, 1676, Mary Rowlandson was living in the frontier town of Lancaster, in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. She was in her late thirties, was married to the town minister, and had several living children. While her husband was away in Boston, trying to get troops to defend Lancaster, a large (~1500) force of Indian warriors attacked Lancaster, burned the entire town, killed most of the inhabitants, and returned to the woods with plunder and captives. Mary and her children were among the captives. Her youngest child, Sarah, had been shot through the intestines with a musket ball (the same ball inflicted a lesser wound on Mary as well), and Mary carried her as she and the other captives were marched to an Indian encampment. There she was sold to a female sachem, Weewatoo, a person of considerable power and importance among the Nipmuc.

Sarah died within days, and the grieving Mary began her duties as a slave. Her life was precariously poised on a tight rope above disaster, but she was fed as generously as her captors fed themselves. She was not raped or seriously mistreated. Mary was unable to spend any time with her two older children, and wasn't even sure of their fate, which must have been agonizing for her.

The Indians moved camp frequently, engaged as they were in a war with the English colonists. As the winter turned to spring, the Indians and their captives began to starve. Their leader Metacomet, also known as King Philip, began negotiating with the English. In May, 1676, Mary was redeemed to the English for 20 pounds. Her son was redeemed later, and her daughter managed to escape on her own.

The historical events alone make a pretty good story. Much of the novel consists of a fictional story about Mary's growing respect and appreciation for the Indians and their ways. There is also a romance novel sort of plot about Mary's growing attraction to a handsome, kind, English-speaking Nipmuc named James Printer, also known as Wowaus. James Printer was a real person, though I'm not clear if his paths ever crossed with Mary's in real life.

The latter part of the novel tells of Mary's life after her return to the English. Historical figures such as Increase Mather and John Eliot play roles in the fictional plot, which deals in part with the difficulties that arise between Mary and her husband Joseph, as well as her challenges readjusting to Puritan life and society. Mary's marriage is severely affected by the fact that her captivity changed her in many ways, among them that she is no longer content being submissive to Joseph. To complicate things, everyone, including her husband, assumes that Mary was raped by the Indians, so her social reputation is compromised, and her husband won't touch her.

For Mary, the thorniest problem is that she is in love with James Printer. This is the other part of the post-captivity plot.

The book includes one additional reference to historical people, stitched into the start of the book. In the author's fictionalization, Mary's neighbor's daughter, Bess Parker, gives birth to a a child out of wedlock, whose father, Silvanus, is an African-American slave. (Bess and Silvanus were real people). The baby is claimed as property by Silvanus's master, and Bess is packed off to Salem, where she is bound into service, and where she later drowns herself.

The purpose of this separate little story, not directly related to anything else in the novel, appears to be to help establish that the fictional version of Mary Rowlandson not only becomes an admirer of the Indians, but also becomes a firm opponent of slavery, no matter who the slave owner is.

A question or two arises from reading this book. Did the novelization of Mary Rowlandson's narrative improve on the original? Since I haven't read the original account, I'm not prepared to answer that. I intend to read it soon.

Is the novel accurate and fair in its depiction of both the English Puritan colonists and their American Indian adversaries in King Philip's War? I raise this question, because historical fiction dealing with early America often follows a simplistic formula, which can be summarized as "Native American = Noble and Good, White = Deceiving and Bad." Real life is never that neat and simple. Gross historical injustice toward Native Americans is undeniable and a lasting shame to the USA. That doesn't mean that they were all as individuals better than all whites, or that their cultures were superior in all respects. Real people are much more interesting than that.

I'm happy to discover that this book seems fair in its depiction of both American Indians and Puritan colonists in seventeenth-century New England. The two cultures are treated as quite different to one another, to the extent that they have trouble understanding one another, even when language is not a barrier. But I don't think the book leans toward treating one culture or the other as superior.

Both cultures are portrayed as being wont to engage in cruel behavior. Interestingly, in these respects they seem rather like mirror images of one another. The Indians and the Puritans are both ruthless in war, sparing no one and enthusiastically committing what we today would call serious war crimes. Both societies practice slavery, including trading slaves for profit.

In other areas of culture, the Indians and Puritans are nothing alike, and it is in these differences that Mary appears to find the Indian way more attractive. We today are also likely to see the Indian way, as depicted, as more attractive, because it is in closer harmony with our own 21st century values. The hard core Calvinism of the Puritans, practiced in an intolerant theocracy, where everyone is watching everyone else for back sliding and missteps, (and God help you if you are suspected of witchcraft), sounds to a modern person like, well, hell.

The Puritans live in a strict social hierarchy, with enforced conformity in all aspects of life. The Indians appear to value freedom very highly, and though they have a hierarchy as well, it seems to leave more room for individuals to live the way they want to.

The Puritans practice stern corporal punishment of their children, and consider it wrong to show them affection. The Indians dote on their children, let them run around as much as they like, and don't appear to punish them physically.

The Puritans codify the subjection of women to the inescapable authority of men, and women are relegated to hard lives of de facto slavery. The Indian women can hold positions of genuine authority, including over men. They are generally free to act on their own behalf.

The Puritans treat idleness as a serious sin. The Indians seem to relish their down time, and accord some idle time even to their slaves.

When dealing with individuals, the novel depicts neither Indians nor Puritans as stereotypes, noble or otherwise. The sachem Weewatoo's husband Quinappin is a pretty nice guy. Weewatoo, on the other hand is a piece of work. Monoco, who wants to take Mary as a wife because he likes her red hair, but is told by Weewatoo to take a hike, feels a little dodgy. Mary's fellow slave Alawa is kind, and considers Weewatoo an acceptable mistress, which implies that if the mercurial and violent Weewatoo is a good slave owner, you wouldn't want to meet a bad one.

As for the Puritans, Mary's husband Joseph is the second most orthodox Puritan in the book, exceeded only by Increase Mather, with whom he likes to pal around. So, at first, he might appear to be something of a stereotype. As you read further into the story, though, it becomes clear that he is unable to live up to the stern and inhuman code of behavior he preaches (literally, preaches, since he is a minister). The way the author depicts him, I feel that these weaknesses humanize him, while not making him seem overly hypocritical. Increase Mather, on the other hand, is a manipulative old reptile.

John Eliot as portrayed is genuinely benevolent and kind, and a strong advocate for the Indians, even at a time when the survival of the colony seems threatened. (According to Wikipedia, the Indians attacked half the towns in the colony, and destroyed 12 of them). On the other hand, Eliot is trying to convert them, which has its own ethical problems.

Whichever culture and people you find more attractive in this story, you do have to acknowledge that the historical events in the book end in a sad and disturbing way. The Indians lose King Philip's war. The English settlers are not magnanimous in victory. They kill many of the Indians, even after surrender. They enslave many others, transporting them to the West Indies (and making a tidy profit, no doubt). A few of the Praying Indians (converts to Christianity), are sequestered in prototypical reservations, where they languish and starve. The English, of course, take the Indians' land.

Would the Indians have been more generous in victory, if they had won? Or would they have driven the English into the sea? It's a counterfactual, and we will never know. What did happen is nothing to be proud of, especially for those of us who had Puritan ancestors in New England. ( )