The Freedman's Story is an interesting piece of literature capturing the chaos of the reconstruction period. The reconstruction period was a new beginning for the U.S after the civil war, and its not surprising to hear of the wide spread violence that still persisted because of pre and current slave holders and Ku Klux Klan. The stories of such violence are vastly known, but what is not known are the stories written by groups of people such as "The Secret Special Committee." The bravery shown by those honest men portrayed in the Freedman's Story is something America was build upon, and its always the differentiating factor when trying to interpret a good or bad outcome to some phenomenon! My question looms though as to why these types of stories are not as common as the stories touching purely upon the negatives of phenomenons happening all around the world! In the case of this story alone that type of thinking does not apply, but this is but one story of success when facing great indignity, why are there not countless others? The number of negative stories originating from that time are very high, and we all know what was wrong at the time, but why isn't there just as many stories glorifying the other end of the stick? There are definitely many accounts of acts of government pushing for things such as equal right, but that is on a grand level compared to the daily battles fought and won during those times by people and groups of people who are just the average day individual! Why is the small story overlooked and the big story over glorified?