Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ApiMain::$mCommit is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/api/ApiMain.php on line 195
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::current() should either be compatible with Iterator::current(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 571
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::next() should either be compatible with Iterator::next(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 585
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::key() should either be compatible with Iterator::key(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 578
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::valid() should either be compatible with Iterator::valid(): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 603
Deprecated: Return type of ExplodeIterator::rewind() should either be compatible with Iterator::rewind(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/StringUtils.php on line 553
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property LoadBalancer::$mWriteIndex is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/LoadBalancer.php on line 59
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::current() should either be compatible with Iterator::current(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 186
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::next() should either be compatible with Iterator::next(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 203
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::key() should either be compatible with Iterator::key(): mixed, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 196
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::valid() should either be compatible with Iterator::valid(): bool, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 212
Deprecated: Return type of ResultWrapper::rewind() should either be compatible with Iterator::rewind(): void, or the #[\ReturnTypeWillChange] attribute should be used to temporarily suppress the notice in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/DatabaseUtility.php on line 175
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property MessageCache::$mMemc is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/cache/MessageCache.php on line 135
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property LoadBalancer::$mWriteIndex is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/db/LoadBalancer.php on line 59
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Parser::$mPreprocessorClass is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/parser/Parser.php on line 234
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property RequestContext::$recursion is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/context/RequestContext.php on line 292
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property PPDStack::$accum is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/parser/Preprocessor_DOM.php on line 755
Warning: preg_match(): Compilation failed: subpattern name must start with a non-digit at offset 8 in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/MagicWord.php on line 907
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$contribs is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 627
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$tagFilter is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 629
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$nsInvert is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 630
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$associated is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 631
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$deletedOnly is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 633
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property ContribsPager::$topOnly is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/specials/SpecialContributions.php on line 634
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContentHandler::$mModelName is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/ContentHandler.php on line 402
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mTextId is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 505
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property Revision::$mUnpatrolled is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Revision.php on line 661
Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property WikitextContent::$mText is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/content/TextContent.php on line 51
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($response_code) of type int is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/WebResponse.php on line 38
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($response_code) of type int is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/WebResponse.php on line 38
Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($response_code) of type int is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/WebResponse.php on line 38 https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=AbratchiMcClurken Wiki - User contributions [en]2026-09-18T19:11:13ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.22.0https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_14_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 14 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-04-21T02:17:13Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>Bob McDonnell was criticized a lot on the blogs about his interpretation of Virginia's "shared history". Some said that he was leaving out those who were not Confederates, those that left to form West Virginia, and slaves. Others argued that Governor McDonnell was just issuing a proclamation about Virginia Confederate History month in April and his proclamations should not scrutinized. What are your opinions? -avanness <br />
<br />
I think it would be neat to have an event that related to the memory of the Civil War either in a more state-run commemoration or at the University. Maybe something like an open forum or discussion, that could include academic scholars, where the average public could comment on the way they have remembered the Civil War or their opinions on its memory. It could even be something like a survey that people would fill out just to get an idea about how historians, history teachers, Civil War buffs, or people who may not be so interested in the Civil War think about it today. -avanness<br />
<br />
I noticed that the proclamation left out West Virginia leaving Virginia during the Civil War. Do you think that this is an important event that should be included in the Civil War History Month of Virginia? Or do you think that it does not fit into the larger aspect of Civil War history of Virginia? -MK<br />
<br />
I think that it would be really neat to interview people all of ages to see how people today think about, understand, and commemorate the Civil War. I think it would be really interesting to see how many people are Civil War "buffs" and how other people think about or understand the Civil War. Maybe turning these interviews into some kind of documentary would be the best format to present it. -MK<br />
<br />
Something that really struck me from McDonnell's proclamation was when he stated that after the Confederacy surrendered, they returned home to their families in peace. He definitely glosses over some of the major issues of the war (and reconstruction) and presents a simplistic version, as many of the CW blogs criticized him for. Also, while reading through some of the reactions to the proclamation, there were a lot of great points raised, especially in the comments. On Robert Moore's blog, (http://cenantua.wordpress.com), he makes the distinction between heritage over history and how passion can sometimes get the best of people. Do you think that this issue of heritage and history is going to impact the way in which states approach the sesquicentennial? Is there anyway to present a more complicated, rather than simplistic view of the war without raising concerns from groups like the NAACP who had issues in 2000 with Gov. Gilmore's proclamation? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
I like things that are more interactive and get people involved. I think if there was some way to create some Civil War 'thing' (Im hesitant to use the word "event") that was both educational and interactive, people may be attracted to it. I think its important to get people of all ages involved which is why I really like MK's idea because I think it is good to get an idea of what all types of people think about the war. -ABratchie<br />
<br />
On the Old Virginia blog, as well as in the comments sections of a couple other ones, people complained that historians wanted McDonnell to be "PC." But political correctness often protects the memory of the Confederacy, either by portraying Southerners as innocents oblivious to the evils of slavery and as having been mobilized mostly in response to a Northern invasion, or by implying that the cause of the war is still an open debate. So what are people talking about when they complain about political correctness? What version of political correctness do they mean, and why do they phrase it that way? -GStan.<br />
<br />
Finding a "good" way to commemorate the Civil War may not be the way to attract people to an event. If you hold a conference, very few will come or care. If the state financed some kind of elaborate reenactment, it would probably be inaccurate or offensive or both, but there would be a better chance of attracting people who would pay for tickets, hotels, etc. -GStan.</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_14_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 14 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-04-20T19:01:47Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>Bob McDonnell was criticized a lot on the blogs about his interpretation of Virginia's "shared history". Some said that he was leaving out those who were not Confederates, those that left to form West Virginia, and slaves. Others argued that Governor McDonnell was just issuing a proclamation about Virginia Confederate History month in April and his proclamations should not scrutinized. What are your opinions? -avanness <br />
<br />
I think it would be neat to have an event that related to the memory of the Civil War either in a more state-run commemoration or at the University. Maybe something like an open forum or discussion, that could include academic scholars, where the average public could comment on the way they have remembered the Civil War or their opinions on its memory. It could even be something like a survey that people would fill out just to get an idea about how historians, history teachers, Civil War buffs, or people who may not be so interested in the Civil War think about it today. -avanness<br />
<br />
I noticed that the proclamation left out West Virginia leaving Virginia during the Civil War. Do you think that this is an important event that should be included in the Civil War History Month of Virginia? Or do you think that it does not fit into the larger aspect of Civil War history of Virginia? -MK<br />
<br />
I think that it would be really neat to interview people all of ages to see how people today think about, understand, and commemorate the Civil War. I think it would be really interesting to see how many people are Civil War "buffs" and how other people think about or understand the Civil War. Maybe turning these interviews into some kind of documentary would be the best format to present it. -MK<br />
<br />
Something that really struck me from McDonnell's proclamation was when he stated that after the Confederacy surrendered, they returned home to their families in peace. He definitely glosses over some of the major issues of the war (and reconstruction) and presents a simplistic version, as many of the CW blogs criticized him for. Also, while reading through some of the reactions to the proclamation, there were a lot of great points raised, especially in the comments. On Robert Moore's blog, (http://cenantua.wordpress.com), he makes the distinction between heritage over history and how passion can sometimes get the best of people. Do you think that this issue of heritage and history is going to impact the way in which states approach the sesquicentennial? Is there anyway to present a more complicated, rather than simplistic view of the war without raising concerns from groups like the NAACP who had issues in 2000 with Gov. Gilmore's proclamation? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_14_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 14 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-04-19T02:24:44Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>The McConnell article was interesting - even if his whole geography metaphor was kind of a stretch. The most interesting idea in terms of this class is the function of historical memory as a subject and also its evolution out of the democratized history of the 1960s. Do you agree that the study of historical memory serves in part to assign sort of a "watchdog" role to the trained historian over the proliferation of individual perceptions and stories? Do you see it as a clear evolution of the "bottom-up" history from the 1960s? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
What is the importance and influence of monuments and other physical objects in the League of the South and the Southern Party? -avanness <br />
<br />
Women were barred from the "ranks of academic historians" yet they could write sentimental fiction that many men were incapable or unable to write. What impact do you think sentimental fiction about the Civil War that was written by women had on people and the process of remembering the war? -avanness<br />
<br />
Is there a suggestion for a commemoration that Gilmore could have made that would have made everyone happy? What function does making anything like a "Confederate History Month" or a "Proclamation Honoring all Virginians..." serve? Does it serve any real function other than answering the requests of a certain group? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
What does McConnell mean by saying that Memory has geography? How was the geography of memory pertaining to the Civil War developed over the last 150 years? -Nick J<br />
<br />
I thought the Shackel piece was interesting, namely his discussion of the neo-confederate movement. He precedes this by talking about how African Americans tried to preserve their heritage which was an interesting contrast between the way the South tries to remember their heritage. Do you think that either African Americans or proponents of the Confederacy are successfully able to preserve their 'hertiage' and how far should a group of go to do so (like the League of the South)? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
Shackel starts off his piece by saying that the Lost Cause and the many monuments and other commemoration materials stemmed partly from their being no political outlet for southerners to express their views in. After the Civil War, Southerners were not pushing for the restoration of their cultural heritage and values on a political field, so they turned to commemoration. If neo-confederates are coming into existence, are monuments and commemoration still needed in the South? Why are there neo-confederate politics if the Lost Cause has been such a popular movement, was that movement not enough? - Angie<br />
<br />
McConnell's piece had a lot of interesting points that we have sort of touched on throughout the semester. Towards the end of the chapter, he discusses historical memory and briefly touches on its origins. How much trust and credibility should be placed on historical memory of the Civil War? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_14_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 14 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-04-19T02:15:57Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>The McConnell article was interesting - even if his whole geography metaphor was kind of a stretch. The most interesting idea in terms of this class is the function of historical memory as a subject and also its evolution out of the democratized history of the 1960s. Do you agree that the study of historical memory serves in part to assign sort of a "watchdog" role to the trained historian over the proliferation of individual perceptions and stories? Do you see it as a clear evolution of the "bottom-up" history from the 1960s? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
What is the importance and influence of monuments and other physical objects in the League of the South and the Southern Party? -avanness <br />
<br />
Women were barred from the "ranks of academic historians" yet they could write sentimental fiction that many men were incapable or unable to write. What impact do you think sentimental fiction about the Civil War that was written by women had on people and the process of remembering the war? -avanness<br />
<br />
Is there a suggestion for a commemoration that Gilmore could have made that would have made everyone happy? What function does making anything like a "Confederate History Month" or a "Proclamation Honoring all Virginians..." serve? Does it serve any real function other than answering the requests of a certain group? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
What does McConnell mean by saying that Memory has geography? How was the geography of memory pertaining to the Civil War developed over the last 150 years? -Nick J<br />
<br />
I thought the Shackel piece was interesting, namely his discussion of the neo-confederate movement. He precedes this by talking about how African Americans tried to preserve their heritage which was an interesting contrast between the way the South tries to remember their heritage. Do you think that either African Americans or proponents of the Confederacy are successfully able to preserve their 'hertiage' and how far should a group of go to do so (like the League of the South)? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_13_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 13 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-04-13T20:20:17Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''NOTE: Please include name and link to Blogs you're discussing.'''<br />
<br />
<br />
I thought this blog was interesting. I liked how it was a more of an “average joe's” perspective of the Civil War and the Sesquicentennial as opposed to a scholarly or academic viewpoint. He included a lot of various topics that revolve around the Civil War in his posts. He included, for example, a mentioning of an interview with the great great grandson of Grant, information on a sculptor who died who created the “Lone Sailor”. He also includes other topics in his posts such as baseball and and since he is also a volunteer in the Interpretation Division at Ellis Island National Monument, he does include some information about this place. What do you think about a blog that is structured in this way? If he titles the site Sesquicentennial site, is it okay that he includes posts about subjects that do not relate to the Civil War? -avanness<br />
<br />
One of the sites I looked at was the President Lincoln's Cottage blog. This was a pretty simple, informative site about Lincoln's cottage and other topics that pertain to the president. I liked how the site contained news, updates, information about the cottage and the soldiers’ home. It also included information about visiting the cottage. I noticed that a few of the posts actually contained footnotes with the posts being written by various employees who work at the cottage. It seemed to be a very formal and accurate site. Do you think the general public would be more interested in a site like this, one that is more informative and accurate or in a blog such as the one from "Strawfoot"; one from an average person who is maybe just a Civil War buff? What can you possibly take away from either? -avanness<br />
<br />
I like The Strawfoot Blog (http://thestrawfoot.wordpress.com/). It was interesting to read a northern perspective on the Civil War and how New York state is preparing for the sesquicentennial. In a lot of his posts, he mainly talks about his travels to various Civil War sites and his experiences. He doesn't seem to any apparent slant or take on the meaning of the war, which I thought was interesting. How much emphasis and credibility should be placed on Blogs such as this one, a guy who has no real professional Civil War training? What can be learned from blogs like this? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
Reading through the blog Crossroads (http://cwcrossroads.wordpress.com/) I found a lot of Professor Simpson's (ASU) posts interesting. In one of his more recent posts about the sesquicentennial, he remarks "I view the sesquicentennial as one large educational opportunity." Would you agree that the sesquicentennial is an educational opportunity or is it simply just another 'event'? Do you think that by focusing on education rather than entertainment (and possibly even commemoration) for the sesquicentennial people will less inclined to particpate? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_13_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 13 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-04-13T19:27:14Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''NOTE: Please include name and link to Blogs you're discussing.'''<br />
<br />
<br />
I thought this blog was interesting. I liked how it was a more of an “average joe's” perspective of the Civil War and the Sesquicentennial as opposed to a scholarly or academic viewpoint. He included a lot of various topics that revolve around the Civil War in his posts. He included, for example, a mentioning of an interview with the great great grandson of Grant, information on a sculptor who died who created the “Lone Sailor”. He also includes other topics in his posts such as baseball and and since he is also a volunteer in the Interpretation Division at Ellis Island National Monument, he does include some information about this place. What do you think about a blog that is structured in this way? If he titles the site Sesquicentennial site, is it okay that he includes posts about subjects that do not relate to the Civil War? -avanness<br />
<br />
One of the sites I looked at was the President Lincoln's Cottage blog. This was a pretty simple, informative site about Lincoln's cottage and other topics that pertain to the president. I liked how the site contained news, updates, information about the cottage and the soldiers’ home. It also included information about visiting the cottage. I noticed that a few of the posts actually contained footnotes with the posts being written by various employees who work at the cottage. It seemed to be a very formal and accurate site. Do you think the general public would be more interested in a site like this, one that is more informative and accurate or in a blog such as the one from "Strawfoot"; one from an average person who is maybe just a Civil War buff? What can you possibly take away from either? -avanness<br />
<br />
I like The Strawfoot Blog (http://thestrawfoot.wordpress.com/). It was interesting to read a northern perspective on the Civil War and how New York state is preparing for the sesquicentennial. In a lot of his posts, he mainly talks about his travels to various Civil War sites and his experiences. He doesn't seem to any apparent slant or take on the meaning of the war, which I thought was interesting. How much emphasis and credibility should be placed on Blogs such as this one, a guy who has no real professional Civil War training? What can be learned from blogs like this? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_13_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 13 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-04-12T02:23:38Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>One of the posts I came across from the cwmemory.com/archives website was from the "Teaching" category. The author of the site basically talked about one of his students who is creating a historical fiction story and wanted to use some primary sources. A comment was made about the post that argued how historical fiction novels can be such good teaching tools; they allow students to relate to the character and also teaches them facts. Do you see any negative aspects of using historical fiction to teach in school or to teach children about the past (e.g. the Civil War)? -avanness<br />
<br />
Another post from the cwmemory.com/archives section under "Slavery" was interesting. The post was about a black Confederate general, Randall Lee Gibson. He, however, did not support his African American heritage, nor did he even know about it until someone brought it to his attention. He definitely seemed like he was a racist; in that he basically supported lynching and said that the African American race was the most degrading race. I think Gibson's story does make it a little questionable as to whether or not he was anhttp://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_13_Questions/Comments--Tuesday&action=edit actual black general or not since he didn't see himself as black nor did the town. Do you think someone who does not define themselves as African American and even is discriminatory against the race should be seen as a black Confederate general or should the he only be given the title "Confederate general"? -avanness<br />
<br />
This site (http://npsfrsp.wordpress.com/) was pretty interesting. I read a piece on Salem Church and the pictures were cool to see since now today the area looks nothing like it did in the early 20th century. The area is currently surrounded by a residential area and plenty of business. What does these new, modern landscapes take away from the memory of the Civil War? Is it okay to have battlefields and such surrounded by modernity? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
I read a piece on cwmemory.com about Lincoln and the mythology that comes with him. In his post, he talks about an interview with Thomas DiLorenzo and Thomas Woods (and has the video, too) where they list various arguments against Lincoln. He criticizes them for not being aware of the scholarship. This seems to be a reoccurring problem that comes with popular histories (and opinions). How important is it that people are aware of the scholarly literature on a topic (even if they are not a historian nor have the training)? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_11_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 11 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-03-30T20:52:20Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>The movie Glory came out during a time (1989) when more of the social aspects of the Civil War were beginning to become more prevalent throughout the scholarly literature about the war. The movie focuses on the African Americans who made up the 54th Massachusetts regiment and told the story of their contributions of Union soldiers. Do you think there is a reason that not too many other films were created that solely focused on African Americans' contributions during the war? Is this film a sufficient-enough source to sum up their experiences during the war? -avanness <br />
<br />
Ken Burns created the series ''The Civil War'' which propelled much criticism. Some of the reasons given in the article for the criticism were his unbalanced focus on the eastern and western fronts during the war, the lack of depth on the discussion of generals (he basically only focused on Lee, Grant, and Sherman), and, like so many Lost Cause authors, he contributed the Confederates' defeat with the enemy's material strength. Why do you think Ken Burns chose to create the series in the way he did? Why did he limit many of his sources to mere memoirs that were full of inaccuracies rather than additionally researching the expansive amount of scholarly literature written on the subject? -avanness<br />
<br />
I found it interesting how ''Glory'' seemed to gloss-over some important aspects about Shaw, such as his decision to take charge of the unit in the first place. Do you think this downplaying of certain historical aspects was crucial for a film like ''Glory''? Do you think the movie would have been less successful if it did not do this? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
I too, like Amy, wondered why Burns would not research using the academic sources that were readily available to him. I think that if he had done that, though, the series may not have received the praise it did from non-academic magazines (and the public, of course). I do question, however, what important aspects of the Civil War were lost since he did not consult a large variety of scholarly sources? How would this have possibly changed the results of the series and critique from academics? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_11_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 11 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-03-30T20:52:08Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>The movie Glory came out during a time (1989) when more of the social aspects of the Civil War were beginning to become more prevalent throughout the scholarly literature about the war. The movie focuses on the African Americans who made up the 54th Massachusetts regiment and told the story of their contributions of Union soldiers. Do you think there is a reason that not too many other films were created that solely focused on African Americans' contributions during the war? Is this film a sufficient-enough source to sum up their experiences during the war? -avanness <br />
<br />
Ken Burns created the series ''The Civil War'' which propelled much criticism. Some of the reasons given in the article for the criticism were his unbalanced focus on the eastern and western fronts during the war, the lack of depth on the discussion of generals (he basically only focused on Lee, Grant, and Sherman), and, like so many Lost Cause authors, he contributed the Confederates' defeat with the enemy's material strength. Why do you think Ken Burns chose to create the series in the way he did? Why did he limit many of his sources to mere memoirs that were full of inaccuracies rather than additionally researching the expansive amount of scholarly literature written on the subject? -avanness<br />
<br />
I found it interesting how ''Glory'' seemed to gloss-over some important aspects about Shaw, such as his decision to take charge of the unit in the first place. Do you think this downplaying of certain historical aspects was crucial for a film like ''Glory''? Do you think the movie would have been less successful if it did not do this? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
I too, like Amy, wondered why Burns would not research using the academic sources that were readily available to him. I think that if he had done that, though, the series may not have received the praise it did from non-academic magazines (and the public, of course). I do question, however, what important aspects of the Civil War were lost since he did not consult a large variety of scholarly sources? How would this have possibly changed the results of the film and critique from academics? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_11_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 11 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-03-30T20:51:46Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>The movie Glory came out during a time (1989) when more of the social aspects of the Civil War were beginning to become more prevalent throughout the scholarly literature about the war. The movie focuses on the African Americans who made up the 54th Massachusetts regiment and told the story of their contributions of Union soldiers. Do you think there is a reason that not too many other films were created that solely focused on African Americans' contributions during the war? Is this film a sufficient-enough source to sum up their experiences during the war? -avanness <br />
<br />
Ken Burns created the series ''The Civil War'' which propelled much criticism. Some of the reasons given in the article for the criticism were his unbalanced focus on the eastern and western fronts during the war, the lack of depth on the discussion of generals (he basically only focused on Lee, Grant, and Sherman), and, like so many Lost Cause authors, he contributed the Confederates' defeat with the enemy's material strength. Why do you think Ken Burns chose to create the series in the way he did? Why did he limit many of his sources to mere memoirs that were full of inaccuracies rather than additionally researching the expansive amount of scholarly literature written on the subject? -avanness<br />
<br />
I found it interesting how ''Glory'' seemed to gloss-over some important aspects about Shaw, such as his decision to take charge of the unit in the first place. Do you think this downplaying of certain historical aspects was crucial for a film like ''Glory''? Do you think the movie would have been less successful if it did not do this? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
I too, like Amy, wondered why Burns would not research using the academic sources that were readily available to him. I think that if he had done that, though, the series may not have received the praise it did from non-academic magazines (and the public, of course). I do question, however, what important aspects of the Civil War were lost since he did not consult a large variety of scholarly sources? How would this have possibly changed the result and critique from academics? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_11_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 11 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-03-30T20:44:30Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>The movie Glory came out during a time (1989) when more of the social aspects of the Civil War were beginning to become more prevalent throughout the scholarly literature about the war. The movie focuses on the African Americans who made up the 54th Massachusetts regiment and told the story of their contributions of Union soldiers. Do you think there is a reason that not too many other films were created that solely focused on African Americans' contributions during the war? Is this film a sufficient-enough source to sum up their experiences during the war? -avanness <br />
<br />
Ken Burns created the series ''The Civil War'' which propelled much criticism. Some of the reasons given in the article for the criticism were his unbalanced focus on the eastern and western fronts during the war, the lack of depth on the discussion of generals (he basically only focused on Lee, Grant, and Sherman), and, like so many Lost Cause authors, he contributed the Confederates' defeat with the enemy's material strength. Why do you think Ken Burns chose to create the series in the way he did? Why did he limit many of his sources to mere memoirs that were full of inaccuracies rather than additionally researching the expansive amount of scholarly literature written on the subject? -avanness<br />
<br />
I found it interesting how ''Glory'' seemed to gloss-over some important aspects about Shaw, such as his decision to take charge of the unit in the first place. Do you think this downplaying of certain historical aspects was crucial for a film like ''Glory''? Do you think the movie would have been less successful if it did not do this? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_11_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 11 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-03-30T20:41:42Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>The movie Glory came out during a time (1989) when more of the social aspects of the Civil War were beginning to become more prevalent throughout the scholarly literature about the war. The movie focuses on the African Americans who made up the 54th Massachusetts regiment and told the story of their contributions of Union soldiers. Do you think there is a reason that not too many other films were created that solely focused on African Americans' contributions during the war? Is this film a sufficient-enough source to sum up their experiences during the war? -avanness <br />
<br />
Ken Burns created the series ''The Civil War'' which propelled much criticism. Some of the reasons given in the article for the criticism were his unbalanced focus on the eastern and western fronts during the war, the lack of depth on the discussion of generals (he basically only focused on Lee, Grant, and Sherman), and, like so many Lost Cause authors, he contributed the Confederates' defeat with the enemy's material strength. Why do you think Ken Burns chose to create the series in the way he did? Why did he limit many of his sources to mere memoirs that were full of inaccuracies rather than additionally researching the expansive amount of scholarly literature written on the subject? -avanness<br />
<br />
I found it interesting how "Glory" seemed to gloss-over some important aspects about Shaw, such as his decision to take charge of the unit in the first place. Do you think this downplaying of certain historical aspects was crucial for a film like "Glory"? Do you think the movie would have been less successful if it did not do this? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_11_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 11 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-03-29T04:17:49Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>In Chadwick's article, he mentions that Griffith never truly understood the impact of ''Birth of a Nation.'' Do you believe that? -MK <br />
<br />
In Gallagher's article- he says that it yet to be seen whether or not the Lost Cause will be vanquished in modern-day films about the Civil War. Do you think that the Lost Cause rhetoric still plays a big role in people's memory and understanding of the Civil War or has it pretty much faded out? -MK<br />
<br />
<br />
On page 134, Bruce Chadwick explains how many critics and ministers believed Birth of a Nation to be a true story. Many argued for a mandatory showing of the movie in schools and parents should also take their children to see this film; "any parent who neglects this advice is committing an educational offense." How do you think making this a mandatory showing could influence children's and others' thoughts about the Civil War and reconstruction? Keep in mind how Margaret Mitchell was influenced by the movie. -avanness<br />
<br />
What problems or issues can arise when adapting a novel to a film? For example, Margaret Mitchell wrote her novel geared more towards a Southern white audience. Filmmakers thought this "confederate view" could interfere with the romance of the film so changes were made. The most prevalent being the subject of race. -avanness<br />
<br />
Chadwick says that many critics of "Birth of a Nation" argued that it completely (and obviously) ignored the real history of the war. He then goes on to say that this did not matter, because audiences were more concerned with the romantic portrayal of the war anyways. Why do you think audiences cared more about the romanticism? Why didn't they want or care about having more accurate information? - Angie<br />
<br />
In Gallagher's article, I found the difference between the portrayal of slaves in the lost cause films and anti-lost cause films incredible. I always assumed that the portrayal and perception of their role in the war had changed gradually, but it actually did not. In fact, in 1959, there was a film put out about loyal slaves and in 1965 there was a film about anti-slave southerners. The change seems to be abrupt and dramatic. Gallagher attributes it to the Civil Rights movement and Act of 1964, which makes complete sense. - Angie<br />
<br />
How did Griffith combine the numerous Civil War memory themes into one movie? What radical steps did Birth of a Nation take that separated the film from other films that were produced during the early 20th century?- Nick<br />
<br />
Chadwick describes Thomas Dixon's book as being "wholly fictional", do you think Dixon viewed it that way? - R. King<br />
<br />
Why did D.W. Griffith change the name of his film from "The Clansman" to "Birth of a Nation", was it as Chadwick states the idea of Thomas Dixon after viewing the film or was it simply that the the original title was seen as the cause of the protests? R.King<br />
<br />
Chadwick notes on page 128 that Griffith "made history fit his vision" rather than the other way around. How far is too far when stretching or recreating history to make a movie or "fitting a vision" like Griffith? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
Cullen spends a good amount of time talking about race and class in ''Gone With the Wind.'' He also mentions how Marshall wrote primarily for a white, southern audience. How much of an impact did this have on her work? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_11_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 11 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-03-29T03:52:48Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>In Chadwick's article, he mentions that Griffith never truly understood the impact of ''Birth of a Nation.'' Do you believe that? -MK <br />
<br />
In Gallagher's article- he says that it yet to be seen whether or not the Lost Cause will be vanquished in modern-day films about the Civil War. Do you think that the Lost Cause rhetoric still plays a big role in people's memory and understanding of the Civil War or has it pretty much faded out? -MK<br />
<br />
<br />
On page 134, Bruce Chadwick explains how many critics and ministers believed Birth of a Nation to be a true story. Many argued for a mandatory showing of the movie in schools and parents should also take their children to see this film; "any parent who neglects this advice is committing an educational offense." How do you think making this a mandatory showing could influence children's and others' thoughts about the Civil War and reconstruction? Keep in mind how Margaret Mitchell was influenced by the movie. -avanness<br />
<br />
What problems or issues can arise when adapting a novel to a film? For example, Margaret Mitchell wrote her novel geared more towards a Southern white audience. Filmmakers thought this "confederate view" could interfere with the romance of the film so changes were made. The most prevalent being the subject of race. -avanness<br />
<br />
Chadwick says that many critics of "Birth of a Nation" argued that it completely (and obviously) ignored the real history of the war. He then goes on to say that this did not matter, because audiences were more concerned with the romantic portrayal of the war anyways. Why do you think audiences cared more about the romanticism? Why didn't they want or care about having more accurate information? - Angie<br />
<br />
In Gallagher's article, I found the difference between the portrayal of slaves in the lost cause films and anti-lost cause films incredible. I always assumed that the portrayal and perception of their role in the war had changed gradually, but it actually did not. In fact, in 1959, there was a film put out about loyal slaves and in 1965 there was a film about anti-slave southerners. The change seems to be abrupt and dramatic. Gallagher attributes it to the Civil Rights movement and Act of 1964, which makes complete sense. - Angie<br />
<br />
How did Griffith combine the numerous Civil War memory themes into one movie? What radical steps did Birth of a Nation take that separated the film from other films that were produced during the early 20th century?- Nick<br />
<br />
Chadwick describes Thomas Dixon's book as being "wholly fictional", do you think Dixon viewed it that way? - R. King<br />
<br />
Why did D.W. Griffith change the name of his film from "The Clansman" to "Birth of a Nation", was it as Chadwick states the idea of Thomas Dixon after viewing the film or was it simply that the the original title was seen as the cause of the protests? R.King<br />
<br />
Chadwick notes on page 128 that Griffith "made history fit his vision" rather than the other way around. How far is too far when stretching or recreating history to make a movie or "fitting a vision" like Griffith? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_10_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 10 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-03-22T03:02:25Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>In every chapter, Desjardin refers back to this idea of the "mythology" of the Civil War and how it has been shaped by the reinterpretations of the public memory of the war. Do you think that Gettysburg is the perfect symbolism for the "mythology" of the Civil War? -MK <br />
<br />
I too, noticed that Desjardin mentioned the myths behind Gettysburg. Do you think this mythology comes from a lack of fully understanding exactly what the battle and battlefield meant to those soldiers who were actually there? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
Do you think that National Parks and Civil War battlefields should explain more of the history behind how and why a particular marker or monument came to be placed at specific sites? Does there need to be more historical justification for these memorials? -MK<br />
<br />
If Farley wanted to reshape the memory of Little Round Top so much why didn't he try to talk himself up like all the men who supposedly shot Reynolds? -Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Had anyone else not heard of Sickles before? Maybe it's because I have not read enough Civil War things but I don't remember hearing about him before and he seems like a pretty memorable guy. It seems to me like his attempts to get his story to stick did not work too well in the long run. - Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
On page 45, Desjardin refers to a collective "historical inferiority" complex suffered by Americans. This is an idea that I feel, represents a lot of the popular understanding of the Civil War, especially in terms of the themes we have studied in this class. Americans were eager, soon after the war, to begin celebrating the big History, with a capital H, and Gettysburg seemed to be the closest thing. Do you think, for example, that Southerners may have been compensating for something with all of those statues? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
The story about Bachelder's attempt to record the complete account of the battle is extremely interesting. While he was definitely misled and confused by the numerous differing and contradictory accounts from veterans, he seemed to have his own motivation to manipulate some of the facts and to redirect emphasis. Was this strictly a money-making/legacy-building endeavor, or is it more likely that he was looking at his project as an artist and not an historian? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
Desjardin talks about how the battle of Gettysburg is full of legend and folklore that stems from the first-hand accounts of the people who actually experienced the war. Do you think it's a problematic that a major battle in the Civil War has created many contradictions and myths even in the literature? What are the effects of this creation? -avanness<br />
<br />
How can we as historians make sense out of the veterans' accounts of their experiences in battle when Desjardin claims the memories are full of "confusion, embellishment, [and] deception..." on page 47? -avanness<br />
<br />
How can we as historians write ANY history of the battle at Gettysburg if all accounts are suspect? R.King<br />
<br />
This theme of chroniclers writing the story that they wanted to has been evident throughout our readings this semester. How can anyone write a "true" history of the Civil War if the truth doesn't exist? -R.King<br />
<br />
Why do you think Gettysburg has elicited so many different interpretations and meanings that are more flawed than accurate (according toe Dejardin? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_10_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 10 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-03-22T00:23:40Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>In every chapter, Desjardin refers back to this idea of the "mythology" of the Civil War and how it has been shaped by the reinterpretations of the public memory of the war. Do you think that Gettysburg is the perfect symbolism for the "mythology" of the Civil War? -MK <br />
<br />
I too, noticed that Desjardin mentioned the myths behind Gettysburg. Do you think this mythology comes from a lack of fully understanding exactly what the battle and battlefield meant to those soldiers who were actually there? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
Do you think that National Parks and Civil War battlefields should explain more of the history behind how and why a particular marker or monument came to be placed at specific sites? Does there need to be more historical justification for these memorials? -MK<br />
<br />
If Farley wanted to reshape the memory of Little Round Top so much why didn't he try to talk himself up like all the men who supposedly shot Reynolds? -Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Had anyone else not heard of Sickles before? Maybe it's because I have not read enough Civil War things but I don't remember hearing about him before and he seems like a pretty memorable guy. It seems to me like his attempts to get his story to stick did not work too well in the long run. - Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
On page 45, Desjardin refers to a collective "historical inferiority" complex suffered by Americans. This is an idea that I feel, represents a lot of the popular understanding of the Civil War, especially in terms of the themes we have studied in this class. Americans were eager, soon after the war, to begin celebrating the big History, with a capital H, and Gettysburg seemed to be the closest thing. Do you think, for example, that Southerners may have been compensating for something with all of those statues? --Erin B.</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_9_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 9 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-03-17T01:50:14Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>Did the Civil War bring the US economy into the industrial age or did the war slow down economic growth and development? This question has proven to be quite controversial over the last 150 years, and historians like other Civil War topics have not comer to a consensus about this question. Overall what was the Civil Wars' impact on the US economy?- Nick J.<br />
<br />
Faust states that "nearly a century has failed to resolve debate about the war's impact on women, but the centrality of this question to the concerns of contemporary feminism suggest that it is unlikely to be abandoned as a framework for viewing women's experiences between 1861 and 1865." (239). What types historiography do you think will appear in the future surrounding women's roles during the Civil War? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
In the introduction, McPherson and Cooper point out that there are still gaps in the historiography and that some issues need to be further studied, such as the role of religion in the Union and Confederacy. Do you think that historians will be successful in addressing these gaps? Why do you think that these topics have not had sufficient treatment? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_9_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 9 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-03-17T00:28:41Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>Did the Civil War bring the US economy into the industrial age or did the war slow down economic growth and development? This question has proven to be quite controversial over the last 150 years, and historians like other Civil War topics have not comer to a consensus about this question. Overall what was the Civil Wars' impact on the US economy?- Nick J.<br />
<br />
Faust states that "nearly a century has failed to resolve debate about the war's impact on women, but the centrality of this question to the concerns of contemporary feminism suggest that it is unlikely to be abandoned as a framework for viewing women's experiences between 1861 and 1865." (239). What types historiography do you think will appear in the future surrounding women's roles during the Civil War? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_9_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 9 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-03-15T00:50:21Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>In the Shackel piece, the author talks about African Americans experiences during the war and after. In particular, he mentions a variety of ways in which African Americans began to be recognized especially in the mid-twentieth century. What were some of these ways? How do you think this group of people would have responded to finally being included in the "national consciousness?" -Avanness<br />
<br />
A lot of the readings we have read have talked about how the memorial organizations, monuments, ceremonies etc. have at least partially been created because of the desire to transmit stories to younger generations. Do you think this remains one of the main factors as to why individuals or groups of people wish to commemorate or memorialize events or figures in history today? -Avanness<br />
<br />
Le Anne White concludes her essay with a pondering about what memorialization will look like the further we get from the Civil War. Do you think we as a people will ever put enough distance between us and the Civil War to look at it with a less jaundiced eye? -R.King<br />
<br />
To me the Ayers piece was the most interesting of the three readings. Do you think that a new revisionist look at the Civil War would "place more distance between nineteenth century Americans and ourselves,"? -R.King<br />
<br />
I was a bit disturbed by Shackel's statement that the National Park Service's "interpretation" of the Manassas battle field purposely eliminates any discussion of the causes of the Civil War. Don't you think they should embrace that aspect of the history and at the very least put the battle fought there in some kind of context? -R.King<br />
<br />
In Memory in Black and White Shackle discusses how the construction of public memory has changed since World War II. Author Michael Kammen states that since World War II, commemoration activities in the United States have became increasingly decentralized as the federal government has played a decreasing role in the construction of public memory (Shakle pg. 13). The lack of commemoration activities has played a significant role in the construction of public memory, but what other factors contribute to public memory? Also is the decentralization of commemoration a depoliticized process, or a highly politicized process? -Nick. J<br />
<br />
I also really liked the Ayers article, and reading it made me realize how deeply ingrained the Ken Burns Civil War narrative is in me. Do you think that that narrative is still serving a purpose in American memory? What purpose is that and what would change that narrative's usefulness in defining us as a nation? --Erin B<br />
<br />
Ayers brought up several important points regarding the way narratives on the Civil War have transformed. Is there one or more interpretations that hold more weight than the others? Also, he notes that "slavery and freedom remain the keys to understanding the war- but they are the place to begin our questions, not end them." Do you agree with this assessment? -ABratchie <br />
<br />
Do you think that the partnership between African Americans and white women at the University of Mississippi to change and "take aim at the very aspects of Southern culture that the UDC had labored so diligently to promote" was an isolated case (226)? How much of the Civil War memory do you think really prompted this type of action on the part of the students? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_9_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 9 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-03-15T00:42:37Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>In the Shackel piece, the author talks about African Americans experiences during the war and after. In particular, he mentions a variety of ways in which African Americans began to be recognized especially in the mid-twentieth century. What were some of these ways? How do you think this group of people would have responded to finally being included in the "national consciousness?" -Avanness<br />
<br />
A lot of the readings we have read have talked about how the memorial organizations, monuments, ceremonies etc. have at least partially been created because of the desire to transmit stories to younger generations. Do you think this remains one of the main factors as to why individuals or groups of people wish to commemorate or memorialize events or figures in history today? -Avanness<br />
<br />
Le Anne White concludes her essay with a pondering about what memorialization will look like the further we get from the Civil War. Do you think we as a people will ever put enough distance between us and the Civil War to look at it with a less jaundiced eye? -R.King<br />
<br />
To me the Ayers piece was the most interesting of the three readings. Do you think that a new revisionist look at the Civil War would "place more distance between nineteenth century Americans and ourselves,"? -R.King<br />
<br />
I was a bit disturbed by Shackel's statement that the National Park Service's "interpretation" of the Manassas battle field purposely eliminates any discussion of the causes of the Civil War. Don't you think they should embrace that aspect of the history and at the very least put the battle fought there in some kind of context? -R.King<br />
<br />
In Memory in Black and White Shackle discusses how the construction of public memory has changed since World War II. Author Michael Kammen states that since World War II, commemoration activities in the United States have became increasingly decentralized as the federal government has played a decreasing role in the construction of public memory (Shakle pg. 13). The lack of commemoration activities has played a significant role in the construction of public memory, but what other factors contribute to public memory? Also is the decentralization of commemoration a depoliticized process, or a highly politicized process? -Nick. J<br />
<br />
I also really liked the Ayers article, and reading it made me realize how deeply ingrained the Ken Burns Civil War narrative is in me. Do you think that that narrative is still serving a purpose in American memory? What purpose is that and what would change that narrative's usefulness in defining us as a nation? --Erin B<br />
<br />
<br />
Do you think that the partnership between African Americans and white women at the University of Mississippi to change and "take aim at the very aspects of Southern culture that the UDC had labored so diligently to promote" was an isolated case (226)? How much of the Civil War memory do you think really prompted this type of action on the part of the students? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_8_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 8 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-03-09T21:27:34Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>Coski describes numerous compromises in the South regarding the Confederate flag. With a symbol as emotionally charged as the Confederate flag, is compromise acceptable?- aaskins<br />
<br />
If public display of the confederate flag was to be banned, which of the following two reactions would be most likely: <br />
1. support for the flag would surge and incite greater conflict OR<br />
2. people would move past the issue, and learn to forget.<br />
-aaskins<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting how people began to cite different hypocrisies in school systems that tried to ban the Confederate Flag. Do you think school systems were right in trying to ban the flag or do you think it just caused more problems? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
We talked about this a little on Tuesday, but Coski discusses the meaning of the Confederate Flag overseas in Europe. He states "the Europeans have grasped something that Americans take for granted: the Confederate flag is fundamentally an American Flag" (293). Do you agree with his statement in that American's take the Confederate Flag for granted as an American Flag? Do you think it is an American Flag? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_8_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 8 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-03-09T21:21:45Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>Coski describes numerous compromises in the South regarding the Confederate flag. With a symbol as emotionally charged as the Confederate flag, is compromise acceptable?- aaskins<br />
<br />
If public display of the confederate flag was to be banned, which of the following two reactions would be most likely: <br />
1. support for the flag would surge and incite greater conflict OR<br />
2. people would move past the issue, and learn to forget.<br />
-aaskins<br />
<br />
<br />
We talked about this a little on Tuesday, but Coski discusses the meaning of the Confederate Flag overseas in Europe. He states "the Europeans have grasped something that Americans take for granted: the Confederate flag is fundamentally an American Flag" (293). Do you agree with his statement in that American's take the Confederate Flag for granted as an American Flag? Do you think it is an American Flag? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_8_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 8 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-03-08T01:34:24Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>On page 123 Coski states that in 1948, presumably following the surge in flag-bearing during the Dixiecrat campaign while anticipating the flag fad in the early 50s, "the UDC sought to prevent political groups from appropriating the flag and to prevent misuse of the flag by souvenir manufacturers and overzealous youths." What do you think would have constituted "misuse" in the eyes of the UDC and what meaning were they trying to protect? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
Some flag defenders resented the conflation of the Confederate battle flag with racism as it was taken up by segregationist groups during the era of Civil Rights and massive resistance. What was the tradition that they sought protect by keeping certain southern attitudes separate from an historical symbol? Even when divorced of the more recent violent implications of the Confederate flag (like use by the KKK), Senator Mosely-Braun points on page 197 that the historical importance of the flag is equally as capable of serving as a painful reminder of ongoing racial inequality and prejudice, so how do you think heritage organizations and flag 'purists' would have responded to that? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
Do you think Coski has succeeded in presenting the subject in and objective manner? R. King<br />
<br />
Did the flag become "the flag" because of it's association with the Army of Northern Virginia and there for R. E. Lee? -R.King<br />
<br />
Why has the flag become the most contentious symbol of the American Civil War and in particular to the Confederacy? - R.King<br />
<br />
How much of the "flag fad" of the late 40's, early 50's do you think contributed to the the way the flag is marketed and commercialized today? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
On page 145 Coski states, "The collection and interpretation of evidence for the Confederate flag's racist use present significant challenges. They depend upon eyewitnesses or photographers troubling to notice and document the flag's presence as a symbol of segregation or white supremacy." Do you think proponents of Civil Rights were able to successfully argue that the Confederate Flag embodied racism despite the idea by many that the flag represented states rights, while keeping in mind the difficulty in proving its racist links with evidence? -ABratchie <br />
<br />
Discussion topics for tomorrow. The Confederate battle flag as a military implement. Why was the Confederate battle flag created? What did the battle flag mean to soldiers that fought in the war? The different types of battle flags that were used. Logan T<br />
<br />
How was the Confederate battle flag used during reconstruction? Why was the Confederate battle flag used by American military units in other wars? What was the flag fad in the 1950s about? How have racist groups used the Confederate battle flag? Logan T</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_8_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 8 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-03-08T01:33:48Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>On page 123 Coski states that in 1948, presumably following the surge in flag-bearing during the Dixiecrat campaign while anticipating the flag fad in the early 50s, "the UDC sought to prevent political groups from appropriating the flag and to prevent misuse of the flag by souvenir manufacturers and overzealous youths." What do you think would have constituted "misuse" in the eyes of the UDC and what meaning were they trying to protect? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
Some flag defenders resented the conflation of the Confederate battle flag with racism as it was taken up by segregationist groups during the era of Civil Rights and massive resistance. What was the tradition that they sought protect by keeping certain southern attitudes separate from an historical symbol? Even when divorced of the more recent violent implications of the Confederate flag (like use by the KKK), Senator Mosely-Braun points on page 197 that the historical importance of the flag is equally as capable of serving as a painful reminder of ongoing racial inequality and prejudice, so how do you think heritage organizations and flag 'purists' would have responded to that? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
Do you think Coski has succeeded in presenting the subject in and objective manner? R. King<br />
<br />
Did the flag become "the flag" because of it's association with the Army of Northern Virginia and there for R. E. Lee? -R.King<br />
<br />
Why has the flag become the most contentious symbol of the American Civil War and in particular to the Confederacy? - R.King<br />
<br />
How much of the "flag fad" of the late 40's, early 50's do you think contributed to the the way the flag is marketed and commercialized today? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
On page 145 Coski states, "The collection and interpretation of evidence for the Confederate flag's racist use present significant challenges. They depend upon eyewitnesses or photographers troubling to notice and document the flag's presence as a symbol of segregation or racial supremacy." Do you think proponents of Civil Rights were able to successfully argue that the Confederate Flag embodied racism despite the idea by many that the flag represented states rights, while keeping in mind the difficulty in proving its racist links with evidence? -ABratchie <br />
<br />
Discussion topics for tomorrow. The Confederate battle flag as a military implement. Why was the Confederate battle flag created? What did the battle flag mean to soldiers that fought in the war? The different types of battle flags that were used. Logan T<br />
<br />
How was the Confederate battle flag used during reconstruction? Why was the Confederate battle flag used by American military units in other wars? What was the flag fad in the 1950s about? How have racist groups used the Confederate battle flag? Logan T</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_8_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 8 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-03-08T01:33:34Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>On page 123 Coski states that in 1948, presumably following the surge in flag-bearing during the Dixiecrat campaign while anticipating the flag fad in the early 50s, "the UDC sought to prevent political groups from appropriating the flag and to prevent misuse of the flag by souvenir manufacturers and overzealous youths." What do you think would have constituted "misuse" in the eyes of the UDC and what meaning were they trying to protect? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
Some flag defenders resented the conflation of the Confederate battle flag with racism as it was taken up by segregationist groups during the era of Civil Rights and massive resistance. What was the tradition that they sought protect by keeping certain southern attitudes separate from an historical symbol? Even when divorced of the more recent violent implications of the Confederate flag (like use by the KKK), Senator Mosely-Braun points on page 197 that the historical importance of the flag is equally as capable of serving as a painful reminder of ongoing racial inequality and prejudice, so how do you think heritage organizations and flag 'purists' would have responded to that? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
Do you think Coski has succeeded in presenting the subject in and objective manner? R. King<br />
<br />
Did the flag become "the flag" because of it's association with the Army of Northern Virginia and there for R. E. Lee? -R.King<br />
<br />
Why has the flag become the most contentious symbol of the American Civil War and in particular to the Confederacy? - R.King<br />
<br />
How much of the "flag fad" of the late 40's, early 50's do you think contributed to the the way the flag is marketed and commercialized today? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
On page 145 Coski states, "The collection and interpretation of evidence for the Confederate flag's racist use present significant challenges. They depend upon eyewitnesses or photographers troubling to notice and document the flag's presence as a symbol of segregation or racial supremacy." Do you think proponents of Civil Rights were able to successfully argue that the Confederate Flag embodied racism despite the idea by many that the flag represented states rights, while keeping in mind the difficulty in proving its racist links with evidence? -ABratchie <br />
<br />
Discussion topics for tomorrow. The Confederate battle flag as a military implement. Why was the Confederate battle flag created? What did the battle flag mean to soldiers that fought in the war? The different types of battle flags that were used. Logan T<br />
<br />
How was the Confederate battle flag used during reconstruction? Why was the Confederate battle flag used by American military units in other wars? What was the flag fad in the 1950s about? How have racist groups used the Confederate battle flag? Logan T</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_8_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 8 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-03-08T01:21:36Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>On page 123 Coski states that in 1948, presumably following the surge in flag-bearing during the Dixiecrat campaign while anticipating the flag fad in the early 50s, "the UDC sought to prevent political groups from appropriating the flag and to prevent misuse of the flag by souvenir manufacturers and overzealous youths." What do you think would have constituted "misuse" in the eyes of the UDC and what meaning were they trying to protect? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
Some flag defenders resented the conflation of the Confederate battle flag with racism as it was taken up by segregationist groups during the era of Civil Rights and massive resistance. What was the tradition that they sought protect by keeping certain southern attitudes separate from an historical symbol? Even when divorced of the more recent violent implications of the Confederate flag (like use by the KKK), Senator Mosely-Braun points on page 197 that the historical importance of the flag is equally as capable of serving as a painful reminder of ongoing racial inequality and prejudice, so how do you think heritage organizations and flag 'purists' would have responded to that? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
Do you think Coski has succeeded in presenting the subject in and objective manner? R. King<br />
<br />
Did the flag become "the flag" because of it's association with the Army of Northern Virginia and there for R. E. Lee? -R.King<br />
<br />
Why has the flag become the most contentious symbol of the American Civil War and in particular to the Confederacy? - R.King<br />
<br />
How much of the "flag fad" of the late 40's, early 50's do you think contributed to the the way the flag is marketed and commercialized today? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_7_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 7 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-02-24T03:32:42Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>I thought the conversation Ferguson had with the man, Robert, at the conference was interesting. In particular, "Southerners accepted Jim Crow only with the greatest reluctance, he told me. Segregation was a response to demands from the Northern businessmen following the Civil War," was an idea I have not heard of. I wonder, do you think this is a more modern argument on the side of the South to defend their reasons as to why they created such strict segregation laws or was this what "Lost Causers" and Southerners would have claimed even in the late 1800s? -avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
How do you think the smaller Lincoln memorial in Richmond and the grand statue of Abe Lincoln in Washington, D.C. differ in their effectiveness and meaning for people? What was the purpose behind creating one so large and one that sat among the people? -avanness<br />
<br />
On page 65 Ferguson discusses how William Petersen wrote ''''Lincoln-Douglas: The Weather as Destiny'''', which tied Lincoln's behavior to the weather. I found this to be very interesting and was wondering what do you think Lincoln's mood/ behavior would be in certain kinds of weather? Also does weather actually have any effect on our mood? -Nick J<br />
<br />
This book immediately, and throughout, reminded me of Confederates in the Attic. I know it has not been assigned yet, but for those of us who have already ready it, I think it bears mentioning that the authors write very similarly. They even describe how they were obsessed with the Civil War when they were little (different sides though!) and how it faded away when they were teens. Furthermore, they both spend their book on a quest to find out the real meaning behind America’s obsession with these Civil War figures. I feel like they are practically the same book, just dealing with different sides. – Angie<br />
<br />
I found it interesting, but not surprising, that it was elites who wanted to put the statue of Abe and Tad in Richmond. They were even southern elites who defended the honor of the Confederacy, like the Dabney fellow. Why does this socioeconomic class tend to be more reconciliationist than others? They were ones who essentially owned the South during the Civil War anyways. Why aren’t they as offended by a Northern statue in the Confederate capitol? – Angie<br />
<br />
I was surprised that Ferguson opened with the controversy over the Lincoln statue. I was expecting a brief history or a run down of his presidency to get the readers aquainted with the topic especially since this isn't an academic work. Does this reinforce the idea the everyone is expected to know who Lincoln was and what he did? And do you think this was the best way to jump into the story? I agree with Angie too, this book really reminds me of "Confederates in the Attic". - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
We talked a little bit about this on Tuesday, but I still find it striking that people molded Lincoln in whatever they saw fit to their needs and how there are so many differing views on who Lincoln was and what he stood for. Why do you think Lincoln's image (opposed to other historical figures and Civil War figures) was (and still is) molded and shaped into so many different meanings? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
Throughout the work, Ferguson highlights how Lincoln is now a commodity in a sense (museums, trails, etc). For example, Ferguson quotes Antigoni, "Put Lincoln's name on it, and you can sell anything." (198) Do you think the comodification of Lincoln's image and memory is important? Does this affect the way he is viewed in relation to the Civil War, and what is lost in this comodification of Lincoln? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_7_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 7 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-02-24T03:32:24Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>I thought the conversation Ferguson had with the man, Robert, at the conference was interesting. In particular, "Southerners accepted Jim Crow only with the greatest reluctance, he told me. Segregation was a response to demands from the Northern businessmen following the Civil War," was an idea I have not heard of. I wonder, do you think this is a more modern argument on the side of the South to defend their reasons as to why they created such strict segregation laws or was this what "Lost Causers" and Southerners would have claimed even in the late 1800s? -avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
How do you think the smaller Lincoln memorial in Richmond and the grand statue of Abe Lincoln in Washington, D.C. differ in their effectiveness and meaning for people? What was the purpose behind creating one so large and one that sat among the people? -avanness<br />
<br />
On page 65 Ferguson discusses how William Petersen wrote ''''Lincoln-Douglas: The Weather as Destiny'''', which tied Lincoln's behavior to the weather. I found this to be very interesting and was wondering what do you think Lincoln's mood/ behavior would be in certain kinds of weather? Also does weather actually have any effect on our mood? -Nick J<br />
<br />
This book immediately, and throughout, reminded me of Confederates in the Attic. I know it has not been assigned yet, but for those of us who have already ready it, I think it bears mentioning that the authors write very similarly. They even describe how they were obsessed with the Civil War when they were little (different sides though!) and how it faded away when they were teens. Furthermore, they both spend their book on a quest to find out the real meaning behind America’s obsession with these Civil War figures. I feel like they are practically the same book, just dealing with different sides. – Angie<br />
<br />
I found it interesting, but not surprising, that it was elites who wanted to put the statue of Abe and Tad in Richmond. They were even southern elites who defended the honor of the Confederacy, like the Dabney fellow. Why does this socioeconomic class tend to be more reconciliationist than others? They were ones who essentially owned the South during the Civil War anyways. Why aren’t they as offended by a Northern statue in the Confederate capitol? – Angie<br />
<br />
I was surprised that Ferguson opened with the controversy over the Lincoln statue. I was expecting a brief history or a run down of his presidency to get the readers aquainted with the topic especially since this isn't an academic work. Does this reinforce the idea the everyone is expected to know who Lincoln was and what he did? And do you think this was the best way to jump into the story? I agree with Angie too, this book really reminds me of "Confederates in the Attic". - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
We talked a little bit about this on Tuesday, but I still find it striking that people molded Lincoln in whatever they saw fit to their needs and how there are so many differing views on who Lincoln was and what he stood for. Why do you think Lincoln's image (opposed to other historical figures and Civil War figures) was (and still is) molded and shaped into so many different meanings? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
Throughout the work, Ferguson highlights how Lincoln is now a commodity in a sense (museums, trails, etc). For example, Ferguson quotes Antigoni, "Put Liconln's name on it, and you can sell anything." (198) Do you think the comodification of Lincoln's image and memory is important? Does this affect the way he is viewed in relation to the Civil War, and what is lost in this comodification of Lincoln? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_7_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 7 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-02-24T03:01:20Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>I thought the conversation Ferguson had with the man, Robert, at the conference was interesting. In particular, "Southerners accepted Jim Crow only with the greatest reluctance, he told me. Segregation was a response to demands from the Northern businessmen following the Civil War," was an idea I have not heard of. I wonder, do you think this is a more modern argument on the side of the South to defend their reasons as to why they created such strict segregation laws or was this what "Lost Causers" and Southerners would have claimed even in the late 1800s? -avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
How do you think the smaller Lincoln memorial in Richmond and the grand statue of Abe Lincoln in Washington, D.C. differ in their effectiveness and meaning for people? What was the purpose behind creating one so large and one that sat among the people? -avanness<br />
<br />
On page 65 Ferguson discusses how William Petersen wrote ''''Lincoln-Douglas: The Weather as Destiny'''', which tied Lincoln's behavior to the weather. I found this to be very interesting and was wondering what do you think Lincoln's mood/ behavior would be in certain kinds of weather? Also does weather actually have any effect on our mood? -Nick J<br />
<br />
This book immediately, and throughout, reminded me of Confederates in the Attic. I know it has not been assigned yet, but for those of us who have already ready it, I think it bears mentioning that the authors write very similarly. They even describe how they were obsessed with the Civil War when they were little (different sides though!) and how it faded away when they were teens. Furthermore, they both spend their book on a quest to find out the real meaning behind America’s obsession with these Civil War figures. I feel like they are practically the same book, just dealing with different sides. – Angie<br />
<br />
I found it interesting, but not surprising, that it was elites who wanted to put the statue of Abe and Tad in Richmond. They were even southern elites who defended the honor of the Confederacy, like the Dabney fellow. Why does this socioeconomic class tend to be more reconciliationist than others? They were ones who essentially owned the South during the Civil War anyways. Why aren’t they as offended by a Northern statue in the Confederate capitol? – Angie<br />
<br />
I was surprised that Ferguson opened with the controversy over the Lincoln statue. I was expecting a brief history or a run down of his presidency to get the readers aquainted with the topic especially since this isn't an academic work. Does this reinforce the idea the everyone is expected to know who Lincoln was and what he did? And do you think this was the best way to jump into the story? I agree with Angie too, this book really reminds me of "Confederates in the Attic". - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
We talked a little bit about this on Tuesday, but I still find it striking that people molded Lincoln in whatever they saw fit to their needs and how there are so many differing views on who Lincoln was and what he stood for. Why do you think Lincoln's image (opposed to other historical figures and Civil War figures) was (and still is) molded and shaped into so many different meanings? -ABratchi</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_7_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 7 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-02-22T03:23:27Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>I think the way in which the author of the essay in Fahs and Waugh tries to explain the highly romanticized Lee by Jubal Early and Douglass Southall Freeman is interesting. The author basically says that the Lost Cause ideology has remained because most of its components are based on truths. This includes the number of Union soldiers that exceeded the amount of soldiers the Confederacy had. Do you think the Lost Cause is something that could eventually die out because of the fact that certain historians and scholars have exposed its myths or do you think it is too much a part of Southerner's memory and Civil War memory in general? -avanness <br />
<br />
Going off of Amy's question, do you think that the Lost Cause views of Lee that emerged in society should be taken as truths? Also, I found it interesting how some Northerners (both during and immediately after the war) seemed to like the interpretations of Lee that were favorable. What do you think accounted to this and who would have fit into this category (clearly not all Northerners had similar opinions). -ABratchie<br />
<br />
In "A Tree is Best Measured When It's Down," the author discusses the way in which FDR uses Lincoln to get through the Depression. How do you think he accomplishes this and do you think political leaders might still use Lincoln and his presidency to think about political matters today or was this only something that might have been beneficial during the 1930s because of its close proximity to the Civil War and the time of Lincoln's presidency? -avanness<br />
<br />
The piece "Shaping Public Memory of the Civil War" written by Gary W. Gallagher raises numerous important questions about the ways Confederate general Jubal A. Early and historian Douglass Freeman influenced the way Americans have understood the Confederacy and the Civil War. Why did Early and Freeman write about Lee so frequently? Also how did Early and Freeman shape the literature about the Confederacy and public understanding of Lee? -Nick J<br />
<br />
<br />
In the Cullen article, Sandburg is described as writing during the “golden age of Lincoln Culture.” (p.42) Earlier though, it discussed how portraits and anecdotal stories were being published as early as the 1880s. It also discusses how Lincoln was used by Roosevelt and others to help deal with the depression. But why do you think interest in Lincoln remained so strong for so long? How many biographies were really necessary for the country to get their fill of the Union President? - Angie<br />
<br />
<br />
Its interesting, especially in the case of Mercie’s Lee Monument, how controversial the distinction between “art” and “truth” could be. Of course a sculptor or artists of other materials would want to put their own artistic spin on their projects but the people commissioning the project wanted their hero to be portrayed their way. In the end, the people with the money won out, but I wonder how often an artist’s interpretation differed from what the commissioner wanted. - Angie<br />
<br />
During the Great Depression President Roosevelt talked about Lincoln quite frequently to the American public. Why did Roosevelt bring up Lincoln often during his speeches to the American public. Do you think this would be well received by the South?- Nick J<br />
<br />
I found it really interesting how people were judging Lee's looks compared to Lincoln's and how Lee's own body was sometimes regarded as "already a work of art." (132). Do you think this is why there was such controversy over the Lee monument and how it looked? Also, do you think that Lee's looks helped him embody the idea of "canonical whiteness and moral virtue" among whites in both the South and the North? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_7_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 7 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-02-21T22:37:02Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>I think the way in which the author of the essay in Fahs and Waugh tries to explain the highly romanticized Lee by Jubal Early and Douglass Southall Freeman is interesting. The author basically says that the Lost Cause ideology has remained because most of its components are based on truths. This includes the number of Union soldiers that exceeded the amount of soldiers the Confederacy had. Do you think the Lost Cause is something that could eventually die out because of the fact that certain historians and scholars have exposed its myths or do you think it is too much a part of Southerner's memory and Civil War memory in general? -avanness <br />
<br />
Going off of Amy's question, do you think that the Lost Cause views of Lee that emerged in society should be taken as truths? Also, I found it interesting how some Northerners (both during and immediately after the war) seemed to like the interpretations of Lee that were favorable. What do you think accounted to this and who would have fit into this category (clearly not all Northerners had similar opinions). -ABratchie<br />
<br />
In "A Tree is Best Measured When It's Down," the author discusses the way in which FDR uses Lincoln to get through the Depression. How do you think he accomplishes this and do you think political leaders might still use Lincoln and his presidency to think about political matters today or was this only something that might have been beneficial during the 1930s because of its close proximity to the Civil War and the time of Lincoln's presidency? -avanness</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_5_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 5 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-02-10T04:02:37Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>The textbook war waged by the UCV and the UDC had the interesting outcome of causing Northern publishers to pander to Southern narratives out of fear of a boycott of their products. This is a good illustration of the issues of the Civil War simply meaning more to the South than it did to the North. I wonder, though, if these discrepancies were ever noted by Northern schoolchildren in any way nearly approaching that of Southern school children. – Erin B.<br />
<br />
Do you read the trends in juvenile Civil War fiction in the 1880s as an attempt to instill the ideals they supported (white supremacy, white reconciliation, etc.) or were the writers simply responding to the market? – Erin B.<br />
<br />
The issue over the "truthful" history of the Civil has been a common link between all the various readings this week, especially in McPherson's essay concerning textbooks. He mentions how Rutherford created her own "facts" surrounding the Civil War which were completely false. How do you think this push by the South to embody the Lost Cause rhetoric in textbooks has affected the memory of the war today? Also, do you think these "facts" presented by Rutherford should be considered as historical interpretations of the war despite their untruthfulness? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
<br />
I have never learned about some of the beliefs that Grant had about the Civil War that he wrote in "Report to Congress." In particular, Grant said that South's advantages offset Northern superiority and that Northern soldiers fought just as well and under more difficult circumstances to that of the South. Do you agree with these statements? Do you think the South really did have more advantages in the war or was this just a ploy by Grant to get people to believe the North had to work harder in order to win? -Avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
To add to our conversation from Tuesday, the essay in Fahs and Waugh on textbooks talked about how veterans wanted to keep the "Confederate heritage alive through children of veterans." Do you think these textbooks and the push to get the "correct" history of the war written down from the South's perspective are two reasons as to why the Lost Cause view is still around today and just as popular especially in the South? Were the ex-Confederates trying to create a legacy they knew would continue to be alive more than 100 years later because of their children and future relatives? -Avanness<br />
<br />
Waugh talks about Grant's ability to write "clear and forceful battle reports" and how this was the same for when he was writing his memoirs. Do you think that his ability to make himself look successful makes his autobiography more of a work of fiction? -MK<br />
<br />
In the trends of the children's books, Fahs argues that both Optic and Page used notions of white supremacy and white reconciliation and how because of this African Americans were typically left out. Do you think that the only way for the Union to reconcile was through the ideology of white supremacy? -MK<br />
<br />
Why do you think many of the Southern monuments allude to the Romans and Greeks? -Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Are there any other Civil War Memorials/Monuments dedicated to noncombatants. Is John Calhoun's in Charleston the only one? What might have prevented the creation of other memorials like his? -Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Why was Grant afraid of leaving the legacy of the war in politicians' hands? How would/could they have altered the legacy? Is his fear unfounded?- Aaskins<br />
<br />
"Truth was derived from facts but not dependent upon them." (pp. 21) Both Waugh and McPherson touch upon this theme of revealing the "true" history. But Waugh emphasizes that Grant's memoir was perceived (at least by his fans) as the correct version of the Civil War. Is he presenting the truth (as he claims is his purpose) or is this merely another example of derived-truth?- Aaskins<br />
<br />
McPherson and Fahs discuss the relationship between Civil War memory and children through memorial services and literature. One thing that wasn't mentioned is the trend of naming children (and grandchildren) after Civil War figures. Has this been effective in creating "living monuments" as McPherson discusses? Is the name-legacy still prevalent (and if so, is it more for southern memory or northern)? Is it an effective method of instilling Civil War appreciation in descendants of veterans?- Aaskins<br />
<br />
In Waugh’s article about Grant’s memoirs, she discusses how Grant was aiming to set the record straight and tell the world the “truth” about why the war was fought. Similarly, the South was attempting to do the same thing, but their “truth” was quite different. Why did Grant and his truth fall to the wayside when up against the South and their truth? - Angie<br />
<br />
I found it interesting in Fahs article how the themes in children’s civil war stories changed from during the war to after the war. For example, during the war, wealth was portrayed as a negative characteristic, but afterwards it was a good characteristic. It’s not surprising that people’s priorities change as the country changes, but I do find it surprising that stories from the same author and about the same event can have such different themes in them. - Angie<br />
<br />
The Confederacy's statesmen and military leaders were all forced into retirement, while the Republicans held the reigns of power and placed their greatest war hero in the highest seat of government. Did this negatively affect the legacies of the northern combatants? Or did the south's revisionist predilections make that inevitable? -GStan.<br />
<br />
Waugh discusses how proponents of the Lost Cause attempted to discredit Grant by destroying his reputation and enhancing Lee's. Do you think they were successful in their attempts? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_5_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 5 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-02-09T21:14:55Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>The textbook war waged by the UCV and the UDC had the interesting outcome of causing Northern publishers to pander to Southern narratives out of fear of a boycott of their products. This is a good illustration of the issues of the Civil War simply meaning more to the South than it did to the North. I wonder, though, if these discrepancies were ever noted by Northern schoolchildren in any way nearly approaching that of Southern school children. – Erin B.<br />
<br />
Do you read the trends in juvenile Civil War fiction in the 1880s as an attempt to instill the ideals they supported (white supremacy, white reconciliation, etc.) or were the writers simply responding to the market? – Erin B.<br />
<br />
The issue over the "truthful" history of the Civil has been a common link between all the various readings this week, especially in McPherson's essay concerning textbooks. He mentions how Rutherford created her own "facts" surrounding the Civil War which were completely false. How do you think this push by the South to embody the Lost Cause rhetoric in textbooks has affected the memory of the war today? Also, do you think these "facts" presented by Rutherford should be considered as historical interpretations of the war despite their untruthfulness? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_5_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 5 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-02-08T01:36:38Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>The soldiers who wrote pieces for magazines such as the ''Confederate Veteran'' included a lot of stories or war memories that related to or tied into reconciliation. Blight even stated that reconciliation and fraternalism dominated a lot of the ex-soldiers memories. Since these stories and memories were all written down, I was wondering if you think the idea for reconciliation, at least among the soldiers, would have come as quickly if the veterans had never received the opportunity to write for the magazines? -Avanness<br />
<br />
I was a little surprised to read repeatedly how proponents of the Lost Cause believed and stated that slavery was not the cause of the Civil War. They argued that secession from the Union was the main cause for the South's participation in the war. People who believed in the Lost Cause even ended up rejecting people like John Mosby who was against reunion and was adamant about claiming slavery was the cause of the war. Why do you think this was? Do you think the South was really just trying to save their image or were they really ready for reconciliation with the North? -Avanness<br />
<br />
I was also surprised to see how persistent Lost Causers advocated that the war had been about secession, not slavery. Blight talks about how the Lost Cause idea itself transformed, and race was the most commonly left out. What advantages did this have for Southerners and reconciliation? How do you think memory would have changed if race and slavery had been incorporated into the Lost Cause? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
In Chapter 6, most of the veterans’ recollections and assessments of battle and the war in general became popular about twenty years after the war. Blight mentions that for many of the soldiers, dwelling on some of the raw memories in the years just following the war was simply too painful, but then later in the chapter suggests some other reasons that celebrating the valor of the soldiers gained common appreciation across sections. What caused the nationwide decline in race relations in the last decades of the century? – Erin B.<br />
<br />
Blight quotes Robert S. Dabney on pg 263 as having written that "Yankees would ultimately meet their just fate...'in the day of their calamity, in pages of impartial history, and in the Day of Judgment.'" Harsh words. Do you think that religion played a larger role in understanding the effects of the war in South than in the North? What kind of a role did it play in South? -- Erin B.<br />
<br />
Blight talks extensively about soldiers memories in ''Century'' Magazine. Most of those memories, however, came from famous generals, not "many ordinary voices" (179). What do you think the impact of those memories was on society and what do you think was lost from the recollections that were omitted from the issues? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_5_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 5 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-02-08T01:29:15Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>The soldiers who wrote pieces for magazines such as the ''Confederate Veteran'' included a lot of stories or war memories that related to or tied into reconciliation. Blight even stated that reconciliation and fraternalism dominated a lot of the ex-soldiers memories. Since these stories and memories were all written down, I was wondering if you think the idea for reconciliation, at least among the soldiers, would have come as quickly if the veterans had never received the opportunity to write for the magazines? -Avanness<br />
<br />
I was a little surprised to read repeatedly how proponents of the Lost Cause believed and stated that slavery was not the cause of the Civil War. They argued that secession from the Union was the main cause for the South's participation in the war. People who believed in the Lost Cause even ended up rejecting people like John Mosby who was against reunion and was adamant about claiming slavery was the cause of the war. Why do you think this was? Do you think the South was really just trying to save their image or were they really ready for reconciliation with the North? -Avanness<br />
<br />
In Chapter 6, most of the veterans’ recollections and assessments of battle and the war in general became popular about twenty years after the war. Blight mentions that for many of the soldiers, dwelling on some of the raw memories in the years just following the war was simply too painful, but then later in the chapter suggests some other reasons that celebrating the valor of the soldiers gained common appreciation across sections. What caused the nationwide decline in race relations in the last decades of the century? – Erin B.<br />
<br />
Blight quotes Robert S. Dabney on pg 263 as having written that "Yankees would ultimately meet their just fate...'in the day of their calamity, in pages of impartial history, and in the Day of Judgment.'" Harsh words. Do you think that religion played a larger role in understanding the effects of the war in South than in the North? What kind of a role did it play in South? -- Erin B.<br />
<br />
Blight talks extensively about soldiers memories in ''Century'' Magazine. Most of those memories, however, came from famous generals, not "many ordinary voices" (179). What do you think the impact of those memories was on society and what do you think was lost from the recollections that were omitted from the issues? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_4_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 4 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-02-03T02:52:00Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>The memories of John Brown and Heyward Shepherd have been co-opted by different groups over the years, serving purposes that helped promote those different ideals according to the social climate of the times. All in all, though, it seems that a large part of these ideals haven’t changed as much as one might think. In particular, I was extremely surprised to hear that the UDC would still embrace the myths of the faithful slave and mammy as recently as the 1990s. How would these interpretations of an outlawed society still serve these groups 150 years later? –Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
Do you think a symbol such as the John Brown Fort has a rightful place among the memorialization of the Civil War? Do you think that since white people had thier own monuments African Americans were entitled to also have something that could be viewed as a "symbol of their abolitionist struggle?" (pg. 65) -Avanness<br />
<br />
How do you think ex African American Union soldiers, newly freed black people, and black people in general during the late 1800s felt about the Shaw Memorial? Especially since it was supposed to be honoring a group of black soldiers yet was named only after their white leader and hardly even featured the black soldiers? Why do you think people didn't question it sooner? Do you think they were happy just to be included at all? -Avanness<br />
<br />
Is it the location or the building that is revered by visitors? The John Brown Fort was dismantled and rebuilt in several different places. Each time bricks would be stolen by scavengers so that the Fort is now made up of mostly new bricks rather than the ones in the fort at the time of John Brown’s raid. I feel as if the specialness is kind of ruined if the historic building is simply a reproduction or even moved to a different location. –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
The Heyward Shepherd memorial became a symbol of the Lost Cause and the embodiment of the former southern class system, ie. slaves subordinate to the Southern whites. Why do you think groups like the UDC and SCV were motivated and persistent in commemorating/displaying a monument of this particular moment in Civil War history? How do you think confederate veterans would have felt about this monument? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
John Brown's Fort exchanged many hands during its movement from West Virginia, to Chicago and back to West Virginia. What role do you think this movement and reassembling of the fort did to the memory of the event? Also, the fort was symbolic for African Americans as a symbol of their struggle for freedom and equality. Do think this was lost at all during its various moves and rebuilding? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_4_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 4 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-02-03T02:48:30Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>The memories of John Brown and Heyward Shepherd have been co-opted by different groups over the years, serving purposes that helped promote those different ideals according to the social climate of the times. All in all, though, it seems that a large part of these ideals haven’t changed as much as one might think. In particular, I was extremely surprised to hear that the UDC would still embrace the myths of the faithful slave and mammy as recently as the 1990s. How would these interpretations of an outlawed society still serve these groups 150 years later? –Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
Do you think a symbol such as the John Brown Fort has a rightful place among the memorialization of the Civil War? Do you think that since white people had thier own monuments African Americans were entitled to also have something that could be viewed as a "symbol of their abolitionist struggle?" (pg. 65) -Avanness<br />
<br />
How do you think ex African American Union soldiers, newly freed black people, and black people in general during the late 1800s felt about the Shaw Memorial? Especially since it was supposed to be honoring a group of black soldiers yet was named only after their white leader and hardly even featured the black soldiers? Why do you think people didn't question it sooner? Do you think they were happy just to be included at all? -Avanness<br />
<br />
Is it the location or the building that is revered by visitors? The John Brown Fort was dismantled and rebuilt in several different places. Each time bricks would be stolen by scavengers so that the Fort is now made up of mostly new bricks rather than the ones in the fort at the time of John Brown’s raid. I feel as if the specialness is kind of ruined if the historic building is simply a reproduction or even moved to a different location. –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
The Heyward Shepherd memorial became a symbol of the Lost Cause and the embodiment of the former southern class system, ie. slaves subordinate to the Southern whites. Why do you think groups like the UDC and SCV were motivated and persistent in commemorating/displaying a monument of this particular moment in Civil War history? How do you think confederate veterans would have felt about this monument? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_4_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 4 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-01-31T23:22:05Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>Although I'm hesitant to say that the women in Augusta gained power through the memorial ceremonies and rituals, it certainly seems true that they gained potency and presence. Were these women, and others around the former Confederacy, simply made symbols, or was this part of a greater process by which women gained political and social power? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
How did the "divorce" of the Confederate cause from the Confederate dead result in the new understanding of both? Did this assist in a new, Christianized understanding of the Confederate dead? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
Throughout the reading I noticed that there was a huge focus on domesticity and ex-Confederate soldiers regaining the role of protecting their dependents and trying to become heads of households again. The end of the reading even said that the Southern Confederate men even had their own victory because they were chivalrous and maintained these kinds of values throughout the war even when dealing with the Union and Northern women. I'd never really heard of this type of rhetoric after the war among the South and ex-Confederates. Did many people believe the South had some type of victory in the end and during reconstruction even outside of the memorial associations or was this specifically regarding the Ladies' Memorial Association, the Confederate Survivor's Association and others like it? -Avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
I think it is interesting that even though a lot of memorial associations were started by women people, typically men, every so often had issues with women running organizations like this in the public sphere. Even Tillet, a professor, proclaimed that he liked that women were no longer helpless like before but he still did not want to see them involved in wage labor. Did many men continue to be unhappy about women and their work in these organizations because they set them outside the domestic sphere? -Avanness<br />
<br />
Was the role of women in the memorializing of the Confederate dead an empowering one? Or was it an affirmation of their role as a domestic caretaker in a time when there was a high degree of anxiety about the maintenence of pre-war social norms? -GStan.<br />
<br />
Although women seemed to play a large role in the memorializaion of the Confederate dead, they still tried to remain subordinate to men. And in some cases, they even allowed men to play a role in the organization itself (discussed on page 189). How do you think this affected the advancement of women in the postwar society and did this limit their public role? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
The Confederate Survivors Association tried to preserve their memory, and in doing so, their histories of the Civil War "were based on a selective remembering of wartime events" (213). How do you think this "selective remembering" affected the memory of the war in the South? Also, in their reconstruction of certain events, like Sherman's march, memories shifted to make the North seem less "manly." What role do these memories play in the history of the memory of the war? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_4_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 4 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-01-31T23:21:24Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>Although I'm hesitant to say that the women in Augusta gained power through the memorial ceremonies and rituals, it certainly seems true that they gained potency and presence. Were these women, and others around the former Confederacy, simply made symbols, or was this part of a greater process by which women gained political and social power? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
How did the "divorce" of the Confederate cause from the Confederate dead result in the new understanding of both? Did this assist in a new, Christianized understanding of the Confederate dead? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
Throughout the reading I noticed that there was a huge focus on domesticity and ex-Confederate soldiers regaining the role of protecting their dependents and trying to become heads of households again. The end of the reading even said that the Southern Confederate men even had their own victory because they were chivalrous and maintained these kinds of values throughout the war even when dealing with the Union and Northern women. I'd never really heard of this type of rhetoric after the war among the South and ex-Confederates. Did many people believe the South had some type of victory in the end and during reconstruction even outside of the memorial associations or was this specifically regarding the Ladies' Memorial Association, the Confederate Survivor's Association and others like it? -Avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
I think it is interesting that even though a lot of memorial associations were started by women people, typically men, every so often had issues with women running organizations like this in the public sphere. Even Tillet, a professor, proclaimed that he liked that women were no longer helpless like before but he still did not want to see them involved in wage labor. Did many men continue to be unhappy about women and their work in these organizations because they set them outside the domestic sphere? -Avanness<br />
<br />
Was the role of women in the memorializing of the Confederate dead an empowering one? Or was it an affirmation of their role as a domestic caretaker in a time when there was a high degree of anxiety about the maintenence of pre-war social norms? -GStan.<br />
<br />
Although women seemed to play a large role in the memorializaion of the Confederate dead, they still tried to remain subordinate to men. And in some cases, they even allowed men to play a role in the organization itself (discussed on page 189). How do you think this affected the advancement of women in the postwar society and did this limit their public role? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
The Confederate Survivors Association tried to preserve their memory, and in doing so, their histories of the Civil War "was based on a selective remembering of wartime events." How do you think this "selective remembering" affected the memory of the war in the South? Also, in their reconstruction of certain events, like Sherman's march, memories shifted to make the North seem less "manly." What role do these memories play in the history of the memory of the war? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_4_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 4 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-01-31T23:13:52Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>Although I'm hesitant to say that the women in Augusta gained power through the memorial ceremonies and rituals, it certainly seems true that they gained potency and presence. Were these women, and others around the former Confederacy, simply made symbols, or was this part of a greater process by which women gained political and social power? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
How did the "divorce" of the Confederate cause from the Confederate dead result in the new understanding of both? Did this assist in a new, Christianized understanding of the Confederate dead? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
Throughout the reading I noticed that there was a huge focus on domesticity and ex-Confederate soldiers regaining the role of protecting their dependents and trying to become heads of households again. The end of the reading even said that the Southern Confederate men even had their own victory because they were chivalrous and maintained these kinds of values throughout the war even when dealing with the Union and Northern women. I'd never really heard of this type of rhetoric after the war among the South and ex-Confederates. Did many people believe the South had some type of victory in the end and during reconstruction even outside of the memorial associations or was this specifically regarding the Ladies' Memorial Association, the Confederate Survivor's Association and others like it? -Avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
I think it is interesting that even though a lot of memorial associations were started by women people, typically men, every so often had issues with women running organizations like this in the public sphere. Even Tillet, a professor, proclaimed that he liked that women were no longer helpless like before but he still did not want to see them involved in wage labor. Did many men continue to be unhappy about women and their work in these organizations because they set them outside the domestic sphere? -Avanness<br />
<br />
Was the role of women in the memorializing of the Confederate dead an empowering one? Or was it an affirmation of their role as a domestic caretaker in a time when there was a high degree of anxiety about the maintenence of pre-war social norms? -GStan.<br />
<br />
Although women seemed to play a large role in the memorializaion of the Confederate dead, they still tried to remain subordinate to men. And in some cases, they even allowed men to play a role in the organization itself (discussed on page 189). How do you think this affected the advancement of women in the postwar society and did this limit their public role? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_3_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 3 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-26T21:17:33Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>Memorial Day was founded by African Americans in Charleston. However, as the holiday became national, African Americans were usually left out of the rhetoric used in speeches on Memorial Day, which usually spoke to reconciliation. What do you think was the reason? --MK<br />
<br />
Writing served as an outlet and an avenue of memorialization of the war for veteran soldiers. Do you think the soldiers' memories of the War that were published tainted the meaning or significance of their memories? --MK<br />
<br />
How do you think veterans reacted to the publishing of ''Miss Ravenal's Conversion from Secession to Loyalty''? Blight notes that the piece did not sell well, but I wonder what reactions people had towards it. -ABratchie<br />
<br />
On page 73 Blight says that “Americans now had a defining past of mythic battles.” Why was the Revolutionary War pretty much ignored as a source of “mythic battles” for the United States and the Civil War so popularized? –Megan Mc<br />
<br />
Blight quotes the ''New York Herald'' on page 87, "The man whose memory dates back over a month is voted a bore, and accused of being interested in ancient history." This was the tone the paper wished for the Memorial Day set to happen May 30, 1877 in New York City. How do you think veterans of the war felt after reading this type of statement? Was it that easy to forget personal memories of the Civil War? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_3_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 3 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-26T21:12:50Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>Memorial Day was founded by African Americans in Charleston. However, as the holiday became national, African Americans were usually left out of the rhetoric used in speeches on Memorial Day, which usually spoke to reconciliation. What do you think was the reason? --MK<br />
<br />
Writing served as an outlet and an avenue of memorialization of the war for veteran soldiers. Do you think the soldiers' memories of the War that were published tainted the meaning or significance of their memories? --MK<br />
<br />
On page 73 Blight says that “Americans now had a defining past of mythic battles.” Why was the Revolutionary War pretty much ignored as a source of “mythic battles” for the United States and the Civil War so popularized? –Megan Mc<br />
<br />
Blight quotes the ''New York Herald'' on page 87, "The man whose memory dates back over a month is voted a bore, and accused of being interested in ancient history." This was the tone the paper wished for the Memorial Day set to happen May 30, 1877 in New York City. How do you think veterans of the war felt after reading this type of statement? Was it that easy to forget personal memories of the Civil War? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_3_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 3 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-01-25T01:08:48Z<p>Abratchi: /* Fahs/Waugh, "Anna Dickinson" */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Overarching questions/Debate topics ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Trelease ==<br />
<br />
Were any of the Senators/Representatives in the KKK Hearings from the South? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
<br />
“Heretofore such men had served their masters only in the fields; now they would do not less faithful service at the polls.” As Trelease points out, “Nowhere did white underestimation of negro intelligence show itself more clearly.” While this opinion was not held the majority of white Southerners, it does demonstrate the paternalistic impulse left over from slavery. What were some of the ways in which vigilantism like the KKK was rationalized alongside a belief in a childlike dependence by the former slaves? – Erin B.<br />
<br />
== Fahs/Waugh, "Anna Dickinson" ==<br />
<br />
Many men believed that women belonged in the home and not in politics, yet here was Dickinson giving political lectures and being asked by candidates to support them in her speeches (shown in Fahs and Wah’s reading when Greeley and Wilson were trying to “lure her into the campaign. Pg167) Dickinson might not have been lecturing for women’s suffrage by why wasn’t she used as an example that women did have the mind to understand politics and be allowed to vote? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
<br />
Really a bummer of an ending. When reading about the political atmosphere/discussion from this period, you almost have to expect high levels of partisan and sectional loyalties that frame all arguments and contribute to the legacy of bitterness one associates with Reconstruction – which makes reading about Dickinson and the nomination of Greeley by the Democrats all the more interesting and complicating. What could have made Dickinson hesitant to align herself more with the biggest names in women’s suffrage? –Erin B.<br />
<br />
"Dickinson, like Grant, was a veteran of the Civil War." Do you think that because the so much of the population considered themselves to be veterans, regardless if they actually fought in the war itself, helped Dickinson use Civil War memory to her advantage through her speeches? - MK<br />
<br />
Dickinson seemed to be well received by her audiences. How often did women, like Dickinson, give speeches of this caliber, and did they usually receive the same attention (whether positive or negative)? Also, both parties were persistent in getting Dickinson to work for their campaigns. Why do you think they chose to solicit her specifically? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
== Blight ==<br />
<br />
Blight talks about the healing process of the nation was on the South's terms. Do you think he is fair in his assessment? -MK<br />
<br />
On page 117 Blight states "Klan violence against blacks in the Reconstruction South succeeded especially in its uses of fear." What role do you think fear plays in the recollection of black memory from this period? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_3_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 3 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-01-25T00:56:06Z<p>Abratchi: /* Blight */</p>
<hr />
<div>== Overarching questions/Debate topics ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== Trelease ==<br />
<br />
Were any of the Senators/Representatives in the KKK Hearings from the South? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
<br />
“Heretofore such men had served their masters only in the fields; now they would do not less faithful service at the polls.” As Trelease points out, “Nowhere did white underestimation of negro intelligence show itself more clearly.” While this opinion was not held the majority of white Southerners, it does demonstrate the paternalistic impulse left over from slavery. What were some of the ways in which vigilantism like the KKK was rationalized alongside a belief in a childlike dependence by the former slaves? – Erin B.<br />
<br />
== Fahs/Waugh, "Anna Dickinson" ==<br />
<br />
Many men believed that women belonged in the home and not in politics, yet here was Dickinson giving political lectures and being asked by candidates to support them in her speeches (shown in Fahs and Wah’s reading when Greeley and Wilson were trying to “lure her into the campaign. Pg167) Dickinson might not have been lecturing for women’s suffrage by why wasn’t she used as an example that women did have the mind to understand politics and be allowed to vote? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
<br />
Really a bummer of an ending. When reading about the political atmosphere/discussion from this period, you almost have to expect high levels of partisan and sectional loyalties that frame all arguments and contribute to the legacy of bitterness one associates with Reconstruction – which makes reading about Dickinson and the nomination of Greeley by the Democrats all the more interesting and complicating. What could have made Dickinson hesitant to align herself more with the biggest names in women’s suffrage? –Erin B.<br />
<br />
"Dickinson, like Grant, was a veteran of the Civil War." Do you think that because the so much of the population considered themselves to be veterans, regardless if they actually fought in the war itself, helped Dickinson use Civil War memory to her advantage through her speeches? - MK<br />
<br />
== Blight ==<br />
<br />
Blight talks about the healing process of the nation was on the South's terms. Do you think he is fair in his assessment? -MK<br />
<br />
On page 117 Blight states "Klan violence against blacks in the Reconstruction South succeeded especially in its uses of fear." What role do you think fear plays in the recollection of black memory from this period? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_2_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 2 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-19T21:56:42Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>As mentioned in class, the people at this time did not have the ability to figure out who was who based on DNA when trying to bury them and report to their families. In Faust's reading, somehow James Moore was able to identify 12,912 of the 13,363 bodies of Union soldiers from Andersonville. This just seems remarkable. How long did it take him to figure the identifications of so many men? And how? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Faust talks about how the national reburial program led to the redefining of the nation. How did the treatment of the dead jeopardize the redefinition of the nation? --MK <br />
<br />
Do you think that the use of songs in the slaves' memory of the Civil War and Emancipation impact or influence the memory for those who were relatively young at the time? --MK<br />
<br />
Faust discusses the role of blacks in the burials of Union soldiers across the South (192-193) and how impartial blacks were to helping the bury the Union dead. Why do you think this was, and what kind of fears do you think the slaves encountered from whites in the south who were hostile to the burying of Union soldiers in the south? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
<br />
The issue of a proper and honorable burial for soldiers, especially Union soldiers in the South was a problem after the war. How much do you think this process of creating a national cemetery system contributed to reconciliation? -Avanness<br />
<br />
A couple times in Blight's book, African Americans' sentiments towards the war and slavery were mentioned. A good amount of the time it seemed like they wanted to look past the fact that they were enslaved and oppressed for hundreds of years. Was forgetting slavery something that most African Americans wanted to do in an attempt for reconciliation? This seems like a reaction that immediately followed the war but did not last long. -Avanness<br />
<br />
Blight briefly talks about how women in the South initially remembered the war after the Confederacy's defeat. A theme of gloom seems overwhelming for many women in the south and how they remembered the war. How often did women in the south feel this "gloomy" emotion after the conclusion of the Civil War and how did it affect their memory of it? Also, what about Northern Women? What were their perceptions on the conclusion of the war and their memories? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_2_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 2 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-19T20:26:01Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>As mentioned in class, the people at this time did not have the ability to figure out who was who based on DNA when trying to bury them and report to their families. In Faust's reading, somehow James Moore was able to identify 12,912 of the 13,363 bodies of Union soldiers from Andersonville. This just seems remarkable. How long did it take him to figure the identifications of so many men? And how? –Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Faust talks about how the national reburial program led to the redefining of the nation. How did the treatment of the dead jeopardize the redefinition of the nation? --MK <br />
<br />
Do you think that the use of songs in the slaves' memory of the Civil War and Emancipation impact or influence the memory for those who were relatively young at the time? --MK<br />
<br />
Faust discusses the role of blacks in the burials of Union soldiers across the South (192-193) and how impartial blacks were to helping the bury the Union dead. Why do you think this was, and what kind of fears do you think the slaves encountered from whites in the south who were hostile to the burying of Union soldiers in the south? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_2_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 2 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-01-17T20:20:32Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>In ''Race and Reunion'' Blight talks about themes of rebirth, reunion, and reconciliation of the nation at the end of the Civil War. Do you think that the southern memory of the Civil War (in particular the Lost Cause, Jim Crow Laws, etc.) were an attempt to stop the "rebirth" of the nation? --MK Napier <br />
<br />
In McPherson's "What They Fought For," the issue of slavery was left out in the majority of the letters on both the Union and Confederate sides (pg. 49). However, many soldiers understood the War as fundamentally about slavery instead of reunion after the Emancipation Proclamation. Do you think the absence of slavery in the letters affected the soldiers' memories? --MK Napier<br />
<br />
<br />
McPherson discusses the both the North and the South's reasons for fighting and through his sampling of letters, he was able to draw some parallels between the two. Both sides seemed to connect one of their reasons for fighting to the American Revolution and upholding a sense of liberty. Do you think this connection to the American Revolution and the Civil War is important? Did many soldiers experience similar sentiments, not just the ones from McPherson's sampling? -ABratchie<br />
<br />
In ''Remembering Slavery'', many of the slaves mention that did not understand the meaning of 'freedom'. For example, on page 215, a salve girl remarks, "I didn't know what 'free' meant, and I askes Mrs. Harris if I was free." I'd imagine that many slaves did not understand this concept as well, but my question is, how many of them asked their slaveholder what the meaning of free was and got a truthful answer? Were the slaveholders able to exploit their slaves further even after the Civil War ended simply because many did not understand what it meant to be free? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_2_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 2 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-01-17T20:14:56Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>In ''Race and Reunion'' Blight talks about themes of rebirth, reunion, and reconciliation of the nation at the end of the Civil War. Do you think that the southern memory of the Civil War (in particular the Lost Cause, Jim Crow Laws, etc.) were an attempt to stop the "rebirth" of the nation? --MK Napier <br />
<br />
In McPherson's "What They Fought For," the issue of slavery was left out in the majority of the letters on both the Union and Confederate sides (pg. 49). However, many soldiers understood the War as fundamentally about slavery instead of reunion after the Emancipation Proclamation. Do you think the absence of slavery in the letters affected the soldiers' memories? --MK Napier<br />
<br />
<br />
McPherson discusses the both the North and the South's reasons for fighting and through his sampling of letters, he was able to draw some parallels between the two. Both sides seemed to connect one of their reasons for fighting to the American Revolution and upholding a sense of liberty. Do you think this connection to the American Revolution and the Civil War is important? Did many soldiers experience similar sentiments, not just the ones from McPherson's sampling? -ABratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_1_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 1 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-13T02:58:47Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>If the Race problem was so deeply ingrained in the reasoning behind the civil war, and both sides believed they were fighting for the right causes, how did the Yankee and Confederate soldiers reconcile their differences while the race problem itself continued to grow bigger and bigger?- AJ L.<br />
<br />
What methods of shaping people's memory of the civil war seemed to be most effective? The monuments that were erected, the books that told the varying history of the war (printed by both north and south), the politics of the time etc... AJ L.<br />
<br />
How does the collective memory of the Civil War from both the northern and southern perspectives influence the "American Memory" and history of the Civil War? --MK Napier <br />
<br />
Other than the Lost Cause, what might be some reasons for why the South seems to have heavily dominated the memorializing through monuments, books, movies, etc., the Civil War? --MK Napier<br />
<br />
Do you agree that it is more important the way a memory is constructed (what influences the narrator, how a person utilizes others' memories/ideas to explain about an event or detail, his or her mood/biases etc.) rather than the accuracy of the memory itself? -avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Why do you think women had such a desire to create commemorative groups, especially in the south, after the Civil War? The reading by Thomas Brown said that these groups had wanted to honor those who had died, sponsor mourning ceremonies, and engage in everyday social activities. What would they have inevitably gotten out of engaging in these types of activities? -avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
In Blight’s prologue, specifically on page 4, he writes that American’s chose romance over reality in their remembrance of the Civil War. It is easy to understand that the South might not have wanted to face the hard reality of their loss, but why did the North choose romance as well? Was it just as hard for the North to deal with the realities of the end of the War as it was for the South? – Angie<br />
<br />
<br />
On page 1123 of David Thelen’s article, he writes that “people together searched for common memories to meet present needs.” Later, on page 1126, he asks the question, “Why did some southern whites energize their resistance to Reconstruction with memories of a Lost Cause?” Did the need for southern whites to stand apart from Reconstruction initiate a common memory of some sort of “Lost Cause” even though perhaps the “cause” was a little bit different for each of them as individuals? If southern whites did not feel so strongly against the emancipation and equality of African Americans would they have all still united under such a memory as the “Lost Cause”? – Angie<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Debate topic:''' Reconciliation undermining racial equality- Askins<br />
<br />
How does Civil War memory allow for the denial of national membership to "others" (as claimed in the introduction to ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'')? - Askins<br />
<br />
How have race relations been affected by the reconciliationist ideals of the late nineteenth and much of the twentieth centuries? Were relations affected so much that these consequences reach into the modern era?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
What are the driving forces behind the creation of the Lost Cause- or, more broadly, the creation of a uniquely Southern memory of the Civil War? Thomas Brown argues that the aforementioned mode of memory evolved from more than a hope for vindication of the Confederacy. The north, he says, came to admire the South as a "place of respite from the economic and social pressures of life in the north" (page 8). In other words, old enemies were able to reconcile, not over issues of race, but over differences in economy and everyday life. Do you agree with this assertion? -D. Radtke<br />
<br />
The introduction to ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'' describes how the memory of the Civil War was often invoked for political purposes. To what extent is remembrance of the war actual cultural nostalgia, as opposed to a political tool? -GStan.<br />
<br />
Something that was interesting to me while reading the introduction to ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'' was how one of the articles discusses school textbooks in the North and the South. How common was the Civil War disputed in school textbooks and also, why did the North offer so little opposition to the southern textbooks? Was it political reasons or something else? - A. Bratchie<br />
<br />
In David Thelen's piece, he discusses this idea between reconstruction vs. reproduction in terms of memories. How valid are the claims made that memory is in fact a reconstruction rather than a reproduction of past events? Also, how does this play into the validity of a person's memory of an event in history? Should it be trusted, and if so, to what extent? - A. Bratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_1_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 1 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-13T02:58:32Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>If the Race problem was so deeply ingrained in the reasoning behind the civil war, and both sides believed they were fighting for the right causes, how did the Yankee and Confederate soldiers reconcile their differences while the race problem itself continued to grow bigger and bigger?- AJ L.<br />
<br />
What methods of shaping people's memory of the civil war seemed to be most effective? The monuments that were erected, the books that told the varying history of the war (printed by both north and south), the politics of the time etc... AJ L.<br />
<br />
How does the collective memory of the Civil War from both the northern and southern perspectives influence the "American Memory" and history of the Civil War? --MK Napier <br />
<br />
Other than the Lost Cause, what might be some reasons for why the South seems to have heavily dominated the memorializing through monuments, books, movies, etc., the Civil War? --MK Napier<br />
<br />
Do you agree that it is more important the way a memory is constructed (what influences the narrator, how a person utilizes others' memories/ideas to explain about an event or detail, his or her mood/biases etc.) rather than the accuracy of the memory itself? -avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Why do you think women had such a desire to create commemorative groups, especially in the south, after the Civil War? The reading by Thomas Brown said that these groups had wanted to honor those who had died, sponsor mourning ceremonies, and engage in everyday social activities. What would they have inevitably gotten out of engaging in these types of activities? -avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
In Blight’s prologue, specifically on page 4, he writes that American’s chose romance over reality in their remembrance of the Civil War. It is easy to understand that the South might not have wanted to face the hard reality of their loss, but why did the North choose romance as well? Was it just as hard for the North to deal with the realities of the end of the War as it was for the South? – Angie<br />
<br />
<br />
On page 1123 of David Thelen’s article, he writes that “people together searched for common memories to meet present needs.” Later, on page 1126, he asks the question, “Why did some southern whites energize their resistance to Reconstruction with memories of a Lost Cause?” Did the need for southern whites to stand apart from Reconstruction initiate a common memory of some sort of “Lost Cause” even though perhaps the “cause” was a little bit different for each of them as individuals? If southern whites did not feel so strongly against the emancipation and equality of African Americans would they have all still united under such a memory as the “Lost Cause”? – Angie<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Debate topic:''' Reconciliation undermining racial equality- Askins<br />
<br />
How does Civil War memory allow for the denial of national membership to "others" (as claimed in the introduction to ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'')? - Askins<br />
<br />
How have race relations been affected by the reconciliationist ideals of the late nineteenth and much of the twentieth centuries? Were relations affected so much that these consequences reach into the modern era?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
What are the driving forces behind the creation of the Lost Cause- or, more broadly, the creation of a uniquely Southern memory of the Civil War? Thomas Brown argues that the aforementioned mode of memory evolved from more than a hope for vindication of the Confederacy. The north, he says, came to admire the South as a "place of respite from the economic and social pressures of life in the north" (page 8). In other words, old enemies were able to reconcile, not over issues of race, but over differences in economy and everyday life. Do you agree with this assertion? -D. Radtke<br />
<br />
The introduction to ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'' describes how the memory of the Civil War was often invoked for political purposes. To what extent is remembrance of the war actual cultural nostalgia, as opposed to a political tool? -GStan.<br />
<br />
Something that was interesting to me while reading the introduction to ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'' was how one of the articles discusses school textbooks in the North and the South. How common was the Civil War disputed in school textbooks and also, why did the North offer so little opposition to the southern textbooks? Was it political reasons or something else? - A. Bratchi<br />
<br />
In David Thelen's piece, he discusses this idea between reconstruction vs. reproduction in terms of memories. How valid are the claims made that memory is in fact a reconstruction rather than a reproduction of past events? Also, how does this play into the validity of a person's memory of an event in history? Should it be trusted, and if so, to what extent? - A. Bratchie</div>Abratchihttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_1_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 1 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-13T02:54:53Z<p>Abratchi: </p>
<hr />
<div>If the Race problem was so deeply ingrained in the reasoning behind the civil war, and both sides believed they were fighting for the right causes, how did the Yankee and Confederate soldiers reconcile their differences while the race problem itself continued to grow bigger and bigger?- AJ L.<br />
<br />
What methods of shaping people's memory of the civil war seemed to be most effective? The monuments that were erected, the books that told the varying history of the war (printed by both north and south), the politics of the time etc... AJ L.<br />
<br />
How does the collective memory of the Civil War from both the northern and southern perspectives influence the "American Memory" and history of the Civil War? --MK Napier <br />
<br />
Other than the Lost Cause, what might be some reasons for why the South seems to have heavily dominated the memorializing through monuments, books, movies, etc., the Civil War? --MK Napier<br />
<br />
Do you agree that it is more important the way a memory is constructed (what influences the narrator, how a person utilizes others' memories/ideas to explain about an event or detail, his or her mood/biases etc.) rather than the accuracy of the memory itself? -avanness<br />
<br />
Why do you think women had such a desire to create commemorative groups, especially in the south, after the Civil War? The reading by Thomas Brown said that these groups had wanted to honor those who had died, sponsor mourning ceremonies, and engage in everyday social activities. What would they have inevitably gotten out of engaging in these types of activities? -avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
In Blight’s prologue, specifically on page 4, he writes that American’s chose romance over reality in their remembrance of the Civil War. It is easy to understand that the South might not have wanted to face the hard reality of their loss, but why did the North choose romance as well? Was it just as hard for the North to deal with the realities of the end of the War as it was for the South? – Angie<br />
<br />
<br />
On page 1123 of David Thelen’s article, he writes that “people together searched for common memories to meet present needs.” Later, on page 1126, he asks the question, “Why did some southern whites energize their resistance to Reconstruction with memories of a Lost Cause?” Did the need for southern whites to stand apart from Reconstruction initiate a common memory of some sort of “Lost Cause” even though perhaps the “cause” was a little bit different for each of them as individuals? If southern whites did not feel so strongly against the emancipation and equality of African Americans would they have all still united under such a memory as the “Lost Cause”? – Angie<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Debate topic:''' Reconciliation undermining racial equality- Askins<br />
<br />
How does Civil War memory allow for the denial of national membership to "others" (as claimed in the introduction to ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'')? - Askins<br />
<br />
How have race relations been affected by the reconciliationist ideals of the late nineteenth and much of the twentieth centuries? Were relations affected so much that these consequences reach into the modern era?- D. Radtke<br />
<br />
What are the driving forces behind the creation of the Lost Cause- or, more broadly, the creation of a uniquely Southern memory of the Civil War? Thomas Brown argues that the aforementioned mode of memory evolved from more than a hope for vindication of the Confederacy. The north, he says, came to admire the South as a "place of respite from the economic and social pressures of life in the north" (page 8). In other words, old enemies were able to reconcile, not over issues of race, but over differences in economy and everyday life. Do you agree with this assertion? -D. Radtke<br />
<br />
The introduction to ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture'' describes how the memory of the Civil War was often invoked for political purposes. To what extent is remembrance of the war actual cultural nostalgia, as opposed to a political tool? -GStan.<br />
<br />
Something that was interesting to me while reading the introduction to ''The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture''was how one of the articles discusses school textbooks in the North and the South. How common was the Civil War disputed in school textbooks and also, why did the North offer so little opposition to the southern textbooks? Was it political reasons or something else? - A. Bratchi</div>Abratchi Deprecated: header(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($response_code) of type int is deprecated in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/WebResponse.php on line 38