What Karen does bring, however, is a real personalization to the story of Roanoke. Being able to take a historic event, and create a story that brings to life the events and tragedies of this colony, enables readers to empathize on a certain level with what may have happened. Kupperman was able to add just enough historical information throughout her book, so that it’s not just a work of fiction based off a true event. She offers knowledgeable explanations as to why she thinks/writes the way she does in her …show more content…
However, I am also confident the reason behind the colony to begin with is a good indicator of whether a colony will do well. So when it comes to the purpose of Roanoke, I side with Kupperman. She thought Raleigh cared little for the development of a legitimate colony of English people, but rather, Raleigh simply focused on privateering and making money. This seemed to be the problem, at least one of, with many colonies in early American history. Regardless of the location, from Central America and the Spanish, to Northern America and the English, too many times we see greed as a primary motivator behind colonialization. Kupperman stressed that when a potential colony is geared this way, towards privateering, then it is not meant for long turn success, but rather a short-term/quick profit. This point is well thought out and discussed by Kupperman, and her use of historic information as a backup gives credible support. Continuing on the pioneering point, Karen has a rather negative view of this side of the colony, giving it a very militaristic feel. This may not be too far from the