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: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in /home/umwhisto/public_html/mcclurken/wiki/includes/Pager.php on line 908
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: 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=GstanfieMcClurken Wiki - User contributions [en]2026-09-18T23:16:05ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.22.0https://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_14_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 14 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-04-20T22:21:30Z<p>Gstanfie: </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 />
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>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_14_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 14 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-04-19T03:35:54Z<p>Gstanfie: </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<br />
<br />
I really liked how McConnell discussed public space and how what goes into that public space is reflective of who is in power. If we are to look at public spaces over time and see what has changed or been placed in them (such as monuments, buildings, or even plaques) it seems as though we could make a judgement of who was in power at the time. When confederate memorials were built, it seems safe to say that Confederate sympathizers were in charge. But when a confederate flag is brought down, does that say that they are no longer in that position? In the end, public spaces seem really important to how we understand society. - Angie<br />
<br />
Do you think that historians today should make an effort to try to recognize and establish monuments for people today who were left out by those in power at the time? Or is that part of our history? -MK<br />
<br />
Why do you think there was so much resentment from Southerns to the erection of an Arthur Ash on Monument Avenue in Richmond Virginia, where Ash was from. Was the only reason they were against it was because they felt that the monument did no belong there since this famous avenue only contained monuments of Confederate Generals. Do you think if the Ash monument was put somewhere besides monument avenue that there would have been no resentment against the monument from neo-Confederates.- Nick J<br />
<br />
Why haven't as many African Americans protested the absence of the Robinson family at the Manassas Battlefield? -Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Shackel talks about the struggle to control public memory. What power struggles for the control over the collective public memory have been or will be at play for the 150th Anniversary of the Civil War? -MK<br />
<br />
The McConnell article talks about how alternate, public histories have become accepted as valid. Is this really the case? History as a field seems quite concerned with getting the public to accept more accurate ideas about why the war started and what its implications were. Most historians seem openly hostile to theories on the cause of the war that neglect to include slavery. -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_13_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 13 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-04-14T01:02:31Z<p>Gstanfie: </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<br />
<br />
One of the blogs I looked at, "Civil Warriors," (http://civilwarriors.net/wordpress/) contained a lot of random but interesting posts. The blog writers Mark Grimsley and Ethan Rafuse are currently writing books on the civil war and are using this site to interact with their potential readers and exchange information. Most of the posts have to do with current events that deal with Civil War memory, such as how Thomas P. Lowry is currently being accused of altering a Lincoln document.- aaskins<br />
<br />
I also looked at "My Old Confederate Home" (http://myoldconfederatehome.blogspot.com/), a blog kept by Rusty Williams who wrote the book ''My Old Confederate Home: a respectable place for Civil War veterans''. He posts information on the sources he used to write this book, and includes a lot of interesting anecdotes about some of the vets. My favorite story was about a vet who on his 100th birthday bought an oldsmobile and hired someone to teach him to drive. This blog is quite interesting because it focuses on the vets' everyday lives after the war, and more importantly, how they adjusted to living in veteran homes.- aaskin<br />
<br />
One of the blogs I looked at was Victoria Bynum's blog, "Renegade South" (http://renegadesouth.wordpress.com/), which goes into great detail about personal stories of various Southerners involved in the war. It is interesting to see such a level of detail for so many unknown stories. It adds depth to a lot of the stuff we've been talking about. As an added plus, ahe is currently mired in controversy with John Stauffer and Sally Jenkins, and dedicates some of her posts to insulting them or responding to their put downs, which can be found by searching for either of their names. -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_13_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 13 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-04-12T04:07:55Z<p>Gstanfie: </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<br />
<br />
On cwmemory.com, I read the post about the governor's confederate history month proclamation. I thought he made an interesting point in that the proclamation encourages people to view Virginia's Civil War history from a national perspective, instead of a Virginia-centered perspective. This would mean that slavery was a national problem, not just a Virginian one and that African Americans from VA who fought in the war defeated slavery with the help of the federal government. I disagreed with the proclamation when it was issued, but the author does make some interesting points about its wording. - Angie<br />
<br />
For today's blog post I read an interesting blog concerning Union Black soldiers. Numerous books written about Union soldiers neglects to mention black Union soldiers that participated in the Union war effort, despite them contributing greatly after 1863. Why do you think the contributions by African Americans are also ignored in the commemoration of Union soldiers? -Nick<br />
<br />
I really liked the graffiti section of the npsfrsp blog site mostly because we tend to think of graffiti as a modern sort of delinquency. These soldiers in Falmouth actually tagged different buildings where they were staying by either carving or making a stencil. It seems weird to compare Civil War soldiers with today's graffiti artists but I guess for both of them, its their way of being remembered or leaving something behind. - Angie<br />
<br />
I decided to look at the category "Civil war memory class" on cwmemory.com. In this section, Kevin Levin discusses his thoughts regarding his class form, content, and the general reactions of the students in his high school civil war memory class. In several posts, Levin seems to be trying to demonstrate that the classroom setting is less polemic than he expected. The comments to nearly all his posts reflect this, and it seemed to be a friendly environment to discuss civil war memory. That was my perception until I arrived at his post, <br />
"States Rights v. Slavery: No discernible difference." In the post, he discusses the backgrounds of his students and how their origins do not seem to reflect a bias in civil war education. In that, he has students from the North that were taught a secessionist point of view, and students from the south who were taught that the war was about slavery. He concludes that the difference of approach is based on the teacher and not the area. Someone reacted to his post in the most ridiculous manner. He had apparently misinterpreted this post to be a defense of the secessionist argument and went on a rant about slavery as the cause. What was fascinating about his posts, was that I had never heard such an extreme and ludicrous take on the slavery argument. This guy kept saying that it's time the truth was taught, and I'm sorry for including such a long quote of this comment but it is so ridiculous that I have to include it here:<br />
"I have watched my kid’s history books over the years (four kids, years apart) and noticed how pathetically poliltically correct they all are. Some even claim the South was trying to free the slaves, in time. None, not one, tell the basic truth that the war camem about because the South’s insane demands for the spread of slavery AGAINST the will of the people. Its not only not mentioned in your text books, various bits of BS are there instead. If you can’t teach the truth — because it’s too awful — don’t teach anything. Don’t teach utter nonsense. I don’t expect grade school children, many who are students at schools named after Robert E Lee, to learn that Lee tortured 13 year old children, and sold their infants, and kept a Hunting List of slave girls, in his own handwriting. I don’t expect them to learn in grade school that Lee was obsessed with the capture of one young girl, and paid six times the normal bounty for her, and then had her tortured, and then sold her baby.<br />
You could wait till high school to teach them these awful truths. But at some point, they should learn. Learn that the Southern leaders insisted God ordained not only slavery, but the torture to DEATH of slave women, and that God ordained even the sexual obedience of slave women to their master." Apparently this guy was blocked from posting to the site after more crazy comments following this one. - aaskins<br />
<br />
There are quite a few articles on Levin's site about the black Confederate soldier myth. It is quite prevalent, and there are a suprisingly large number of groups propagating it. As is pointed out by at least one of the articles, and as can be attested to by some of what we have read this semester, this version of the myth is somewhat recent. It used to be that Lost Causers would talk about the faithful slave attending his master before or after battle; it is only more recently that it became about the brave black soldier going into battle alongside his fellow Southerners. Why the change? And is it progress that blacks have risen within this myth at all? -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_11_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 11 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-03-31T07:02:24Z<p>Gstanfie: </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 have to say yes, I think. Gettysburg paints Joshua Chamberlain as WAY more of an altruistic hero than he really was. --Cash<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<br />
<br />
Was "Glory" a good movie because it "reshaped the parameters of the Vietnam conventions and reinvented a notably absent moral worldview" or was it successful because it was simply a good movie? R.King<br />
<br />
Can't it be both? --Cash<br />
<br />
Who was Burn's target audience? Did the "The Civil War" meet the expectations of that audience? R.King<br />
<br />
Cullen chooses an interesting quote to lead into his discussion of pro and anti-war sentiment in film. "America is to thee, thou boasted land of liberty, it is to thee I raise my song, thou land of blood, of crime and wrong" (James Whitfield). I know it is hard to generalize Civil War movies, but do you feel that as a genre they portray the "land of liberty," or the "land of blood, of crime and wrong"?- aaskins<br />
<br />
In the article on Burn's ''The Civil War'', the author mentions that any documentary that did not place the military event at center stage could be charged with distortion (pp 247). However, isn't there the most potential for distortion in the depiction of the military event? Or do you feel that by shifting the focus on other things, the portrayal can be better warped?- aaskins<br />
<br />
The article of Burn's ''The Civil War'' mentions that Burns displayed simplistic interpretations of key figures, especially the generals. Do you think this truly had an effect on how people understand the Civil War? -MK<br />
<br />
Where is the line drawn between historically accurate films and entertainment? Can a line be drawn? -MK<br />
<br />
Cullen brings up that in ''Glory'' African-Americans who became soldiers are portrayed as becoming men as well. Previously, African-Americans had been portrayed as childlike and dependent. The movie portrays this as a positive thing, while many other Civil War movies portray this as a negative aspect of becoming a soldier because it can also be seen as a loss of innocence. Why do you think the "Glory" filmmakers thought it was important to show a different perspective on what it meant to become a soldier? -angie<br />
<br />
I think that Gallagher's article about Burns' documentary was a little harsh. I understand that maybe he over-simplified things or did not give enough time to other important military campaigns and spent too much time on Gettysburg, but maybe he was more concerned about making a documentary that people would be interested in than one that was intricately detailed. His was already incredibly long, so it would probably take forever to watch a documentary that included every small detail. Furthermore, I think if any of the film reflected Lost Cause opinions (Gallagher claims this of his description of Lee), then Burns (who is from the North) probably did that on purpose. He wants the largest audience possible, so of course he would try to appeal to the South. - angie<br />
<br />
The "Glory" article talks about how the film is a little patronizing at times, with white benevolence serving as the vehicle for black agency. How could a Civil War movie avoid that? What would be the best way to present black empowerment in a movie set during a war over black subjugation? -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_11_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 11 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-03-29T04:55:51Z<p>Gstanfie: </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<br />
<br />
These articles are great reading companions for our recent movie assignment. Chadwick rightly discusses in his article how film presents radically distorted views of the Civil War, perhaps more so than any other gateway of popular memory. Putting ''Birth of a Nation'' aside, which films do you consider to present the most distorted views of the Civil War?- aaskins<br />
<br />
Is the Lost Cause or is the North more glorified in Civil War cinema?- aaskins<br />
<br />
Cullen describes the South as having been tainted for generations by Uncle Tom's Cabin. Most of what we have read for this class has implied the opposite; the image most of the country had of the antebellum South was rather romantic. Did GWTW really change people's ideas about the South? Or was it a reflection of them? -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_10_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 10 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-03-22T06:44:40Z<p>Gstanfie: </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 />
I was going to make some joke about just trusting Michael Shaara, but I wasn't sure if deadpan would work well over the internet. All that can be done, I think, is to wade through the hundreds (and hundreds and hundreds) of books, movies, articles and miscellanea regarding the battle of Gettysburg and write a history of the battle that is objective ENOUGH. --Cash<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<br />
<br />
Last class we mentioned several "what if" scenarios and what one historian claimed could have been done with all the money spent on the Civil War. In our reading, the author discusses how Congress appropriated $50,000 for one written history on the battle of Gettysburg. This sum is shocking to me for several reasons: 1. that the government would commission the written history (this is problematic in terms of objectivity), 2. that they would propose such a large amount (especially after such a costly war), and 3. that it would be entirely on Gettysburg (rather than on the Civil War as a whole). What was your reaction? - aaskins<br />
<br />
Desjardin mentions the National Park Service's role in representing U.S. history. In a particular incident, he quotes the Sons of Confederate Veterans who said that the NPS should "return to its unaligned and apolitical policies of the past, presenting history, not opinions." In my research for my paper, I obtained an official NPS booklet from the 1970s on Andersonville prison camp. I found it odd that the NPS plays such a prominent role in the standardization of Civil War memory. I was also surprised that (at least in my source) there did not seem to be a particular slant. Is this generally true of NPS's role in Civil War memory?- aaskins<br />
<br />
We have always been taught that historians use primary sources for evidence. They use them to prove that their thesis is true. So what happens, like in the case of personal accounts of Gettysburg, if the primary sources themselves are suspect? I think that it would lead to a thesis not being so simple. Scholars would definitely have to undertake the question of why the sources were embellished in the first place. - Angie<br />
<br />
I thought it was interesting how the media influenced what people remembered and celebrated, just like it does today. Desjardin gives the example of Pickett’s charge and how it’s remembered as a Virginian affair because he and his men were from the area around Richmond, which was a media capital. Obviously, the stories that the media chose to report are those that the people heard of and therefore became famous. - Angie<br />
<br />
I read an article not long ago that talked about the four different monuments dedicated to the first shot fired at Gettysburg. They are scattered all across the battlefield. Are monuments like these more important to the troops that fought in the battle than people that visit them? Does it really matter were the first shot was fired? Logan T<br />
<br />
I really liked on page 44 where he talked about a football game and people’s interest in it. I have often wanted to bring up this point in class in explaining my feelings towards the war. How much of the Lost Cause and our emotional interest in the Civil War can be explained in same way that many people love their football teams? There is no important reason why you love your football team but you defend your team when they lose and praise them when they win. Are people’s interest in the Civil War the same as people’s interest in sports? Is it a similar attraction? Logan T<br />
<br />
These are all questions I've been battling with as I finish up my paper. Is it possible to write a version of history that remains objective, or, if not objective, gives a view of a battle (or a person, or other event) that goes against the grain of common history while still remaining realistic and credible? I think the biggest issue we have is popular culture's effect on a battle as well-known as Gettysburg. Once you add Martin Sheen and Tom Berenger, you're basically set with national perception, I think. --Cash<br />
<br />
How has the film industry influenced popular perceptions of the war? Has the visceral presentation of film versus literature done something new to the way Americans think about the war? Would children who care little about a battle's history put up memorials on battlefields without characters to relate to on a screen? -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_9_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 9 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-03-17T05:34:37Z<p>Gstanfie: </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<br />
<br />
<br />
I think the social history aspect of the Civil War is interesting. McPherson and Cooper mention it in the introduction. This focus of the civil war includes gender, race, and class. Why do you think these aspects of the war take so long to get discussed especially by historians and authors? -avanness<br />
<br />
Gary Gallagher discusses the Northern military strategy in his piece. He says that a historian named T. Harry Williams believes that the Northern generals were not "that great" because they were into more of the maneuvering rather than fighting. Do you agree? -avanness<br />
<br />
The Roark essay made it pretty clear that the main downfall of the confederacy was the lack of a cohesive economic plan. Was it inevitable that the confederacy would fail because of their reliance on States rights over a strong centralized government? R. King<br />
<br />
I was struck by the lack of historiography on the trials and tribulations of lower class women, even though they made up the majority of those affected by the war. Does the difficulty lie in illiteracy; that these women didn’t or couldn’t write about their troubles? Or is it simply that the upper classes are more interesting to write about? R. King<br />
<br />
Why do academics use words like “tendentious”? R.King<br />
<br />
In Reid Mitchell's article "Not the General" But the General: The studying of Civil War Generals and on the first page Reid states that despite the status the status of Lee, Grant and Sherman among American generals, the war was not won by strategic brilliance. Both sides displayed roughly the same level of competence, and both thought about the matter militarily in the same way. What do you think of Mitchell's statement? Did the North and the South think about military matters the same way as Mitchell suggests or did the think about militarily affairs differently? Personally I think they thought about it differently and I believe that this is an important topic to bring up in class on Thursday. Nick J<br />
<br />
Mitchell talks about the culture of Northern and Southern culture. He talks about sometimes it was a shared cultural but that they were still fundamentally different. We've talked about the various cultures of the North and South but not focused directly on the soldiers. What did yall make of this? -MK<br />
<br />
Gallagher and Kolchin both mention the self-liberation of the slaves during the civil war. Who did yall think actually freed the slaves? Can it be attributed to one group or person? -MK<br />
<br />
Really, how much of the gaps in the historiography can be filled? I feel like there are not that many more primary documents to be found. I'm not saying that everything that was saved by veterans/family members of soldiers were found, but the likelihood of finding new documents 150 years later seems, unfortunately, low. -Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Why is there so little mention of Female Soldiers in Faust's article? He says that two of the authors left out the topic because they did not see the women as 'real' women but why did Faust? I know there have been books written solely on the subject. -Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
<br />
Perhaps a literature review of the Civil War would be a good thing? What is out there, and how it is presented, may help us to examine the War in a different way. -DR<br />
<br />
In a similar vein, have we stagnated in our approach to interpretation of the Civil War? Are we so over-saturated with information that finding anything new would prove next to impossible?- DR<br />
<br />
It seems like a bit of a stretch to call the Civil War the first "Total War." Whether or not it was a total war, it little resembled the World Wars, and worse things had been done to civilians and infrastructure in past conflicts. What is it about the way we remember it that so often leads us to label it as the very first of its kind, one that set a precedent for all the wars to come? -GStan.<br />
<br />
Why was there such a strong feeling of nationhood among so many confederate soldiers, after only a very short period of independence? Had Southerners always felt so independent, or was there sense of separateness a more recent development? -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_9_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 9 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-03-17T05:24:53Z<p>Gstanfie: </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<br />
<br />
<br />
I think the social history aspect of the Civil War is interesting. McPherson and Cooper mention it in the introduction. This focus of the civil war includes gender, race, and class. Why do you think these aspects of the war take so long to get discussed especially by historians and authors? -avanness<br />
<br />
Gary Gallagher discusses the Northern military strategy in his piece. He says that a historian named T. Harry Williams believes that the Northern generals were not "that great" because they were into more of the maneuvering rather than fighting. Do you agree? -avanness<br />
<br />
The Roark essay made it pretty clear that the main downfall of the confederacy was the lack of a cohesive economic plan. Was it inevitable that the confederacy would fail because of their reliance on States rights over a strong centralized government? R. King<br />
<br />
I was struck by the lack of historiography on the trials and tribulations of lower class women, even though they made up the majority of those affected by the war. Does the difficulty lie in illiteracy; that these women didn’t or couldn’t write about their troubles? Or is it simply that the upper classes are more interesting to write about? R. King<br />
<br />
Why do academics use words like “tendentious”? R.King<br />
<br />
In Reid Mitchell's article "Not the General" But the General: The studying of Civil War Generals and on the first page Reid states that despite the status the status of Lee, Grant and Sherman among American generals, the war was not won by strategic brilliance. Both sides displayed roughly the same level of competence, and both thought about the matter militarily in the same way. What do you think of Mitchell's statement? Did the North and the South think about military matters the same way as Mitchell suggests or did the think about militarily affairs differently? Personally I think they thought about it differently and I believe that this is an important topic to bring up in class on Thursday. Nick J<br />
<br />
Mitchell talks about the culture of Northern and Southern culture. He talks about sometimes it was a shared cultural but that they were still fundamentally different. We've talked about the various cultures of the North and South but not focused directly on the soldiers. What did yall make of this? -MK<br />
<br />
Gallagher and Kolchin both mention the self-liberation of the slaves during the civil war. Who did yall think actually freed the slaves? Can it be attributed to one group or person? -MK<br />
<br />
Really, how much of the gaps in the historiography can be filled? I feel like there are not that many more primary documents to be found. I'm not saying that everything that was saved by veterans/family members of soldiers were found, but the likelihood of finding new documents 150 years later seems, unfortunately, low. -Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Why is there so little mention of Female Soldiers in Faust's article? He says that two of the authors left out the topic because they did not see the women as 'real' women but why did Faust? I know there have been books written solely on the subject. -Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
<br />
Perhaps a literature review of the Civil War would be a good thing? What is out there, and how it is presented, may help us to examine the War in a different way. -DR<br />
<br />
In a similar vein, have we stagnated in our approach to interpretation of the Civil War? Are we so over-saturated with information that finding anything new would prove next to impossible?- DR<br />
<br />
It seems like a bit of a stretch to call the Civil War the first "Total War." It little resembled the World Wars, and worse things had been done to civilians and infrastructure in past conflicts. What is it about the way we remember it that so often leads us to call it that? -GStan.<br />
<br />
Why was there such a strong feeling of nationhood among so many confederate soldiers, after only a very short period of independence? Had Southerners always felt so independent, or was there sense of separateness a more recent development? -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_8_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 8 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-03-09T21:51:41Z<p>Gstanfie: </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<br />
<br />
The Battle Flag has been compared to many other symbols that have been perceived as intolerant, like the swastika or even symbols of black power. Are some of these more apt than others? Is there an absolute line that can be drawn between what it is comporable to and what it isn't, one rooted in history? Or is it all relative? -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_8_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 8 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-03-09T21:51:12Z<p>Gstanfie: </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<br />
<br />
The Battle Flag has been compared to many other symbols that have been perceived as intolerant, like the swastika or even symbols of black power. Are some of these more apt than others? Is there an absolute line that can be drawn between what it is comporable to and what it isn't, one rooted in history> Or is it all relative? -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_8_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 8 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-03-08T02:45:56Z<p>Gstanfie: </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<br />
<br />
Do you think that the commercialization of the Confederate Flag (being printed on bikinis and beach towels) lead to the flag representing more of a rebel image than a symbol of Southern heritage? -MK <br />
<br />
Coski's objective with this book is to make both defenders and opponents of the Confederate Flag to in a sense try to logically understand one another. Do you think that this is a realistic goal, when there is still so much debate over the causes of the Civil War? -MK<br />
<br />
Since the end of the war until today, the flag's popular usage has been suppressed again and again. Have Northern distaste for the flag and occaisional laws banning its use encouraged its supporters? Does it hurt more to let it fly or to open oneself to charges of "cultural genocide"? What would be a practical middle ground? -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_7_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 7 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-02-24T05:29:01Z<p>Gstanfie: </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<br />
<br />
Ferguson's assessment of Lincoln being identified as "Mussolini, on the one hand, Mr. Rogers on the other," (39) struck me as sort of hilarious and true. The way in which Lincoln is presented to elementary school kids basically illustrates him as the ultimate goody-goody, albeit the goody-goody who freed the slaves. What about the classic narrative of Lincoln’s early or political life makes this the case? Based on this book's telling of Herndon's collection of memories of him, did it seem like he was destined to have this image projected on him by his acquaintances that mourned his death? -- Erin B<br />
<br />
Chapter 5, about collecting, was particularly interesting to me. How did Louise’s motivation for collecting differ from the Chief’s? What kinds of artifacts was Louise looking for and why? -- Erin B<br />
<br />
Why are people really passionate about collecting Lincoln artifacts? Why has the fascination and allure of Lincoln seemed to continue to increase since his death 146 years ago? Nick J<br />
<br />
Why is Lincoln so universally applicable? What is is about him that makes him usable for merchandise, corporate workshops, and elementary school morality lessons? And how is it that, in the face of all this, there is such a vocal opposition to his reverence? -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_6_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 6 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-02-17T07:54:20Z<p>Gstanfie: </p>
<hr />
<div>In Woodrow Wilson’s speech, he repeatedly talks about how the 50 years since the Civil War have been “peaceful” and have been “without class or difference of kind or race or origin.” It seems like he is talking about a completely different country considering violence against African Americans was at its height in the 50 years after the war. Its not surprising, as Blight points out, that African Americans were opposed to reunions such as these. I wouldn’t want to listen to an idealized memory that was fundamentally false either. - Angie<br />
<br />
<br />
I found it interesting that while the general theme in the North after the war was to move on, McKinley’s campaign actually brought up the war in order to win. They compared the masses that were marching for federal aid to those rebellious Southerners of the Civil War. Basically, if someone was disturbing the peacefulness of union, then they were akin to a Confederate. I guess this shows that the North really hadn’t forgotten the war and were willing to use it for their convenience. - Angie<br />
<br />
Kelly begins his article stating that the GOP's slogan for the 1896 election was "Vote as you shot." But after reading the rest of the article, it did not seem to me that this was an appropriate quote to describe the issues at play during this election. If the true concern was to avoid class conflict and sectionalism as the Republican party claims Bryan was going to cause, then why would they say to vote as shot?- Aaskins<br />
<br />
Topic for discussion: the role of blacks in raising historical awareness. How did people such as Grimké ad Du Bois use memorial and patriotic rhetoric to raise the issue of emancipation memory? Is their own patriotic discourse a distortion of memory?- Aaskins<br />
<br />
Why would President Wilson say "In their presence it were an impertinence to discourse upon how the battle went, how it ended, what it signified!"? Wasn't it the purpose of the reunion to "to talk over the events of the battle here as man to man" as stated by Governor Mann? -- R.King<br />
<br />
In 1896 the GOP platform for the first time since the end of the Civil War omitted any demand that the federal government use it's military power to guarantee black suffrage in the South. (Fahs,Waugh 181) The New York Times approved of this move stating that it indicated McKinley's "sagacity...appealing to a common patriotism to protect the Nation's honor." Were the Jim Crow laws honorable? --R.King<br />
<br />
Earlier in our reading about the Shaw memorial a question was raised about whether the memorial degraded the African/American soldier by moving him to the background, in today's reading we heard from W.E.B DuBois regarding the Shaw memorial, "How extraordinary, and what a tribute to ignorance and religious hypocrisy, is the fact that in the minds of the people...only murder makes men. The slave pleaded; he was humble; he protected the women of the South, and the world ignored him. The slave killed white men; and behold, he was a man!"Does this quote prove that the memorial was in fact a monument to the African/American fighting man? --R.King<br />
<br />
I brought this question up in an earlier wiki post but it seems extremely relevant now, especially regarding Angie's comment about the violence towards African Americans during the 50 years after the Civil War. Do you think that the white supremacy ideology was the basis of the reconciliation of the Union? -MK<br />
<br />
Fahs and Waugh spend a great deal of time talking about the impact and influence veterans had on the election. Why do you think that is not so much the case today? -MK<br />
<br />
How did veteran's groups become so influential in the politics of the late 19th century? Why did people like Dani Sickles and Franz Sigel find success in their campaigns against Bryan? Was it simply their status as generals, or were other factors at play?- DRadtke<br />
<br />
What do the nominations of Bryan and McKinley tell us about the state of the memory of the Civil War in the mid-1890's?- DR<br />
<br />
The Patriotic Heroes' Battalion who were a group of Civil War veterans campaigned heavily for McKinley, and brought with them several important messages relating back to Civil War memory. The most important of the message being 1896 is as vitally important to our country as 1861. What do you think the veterans meant by this statement? Nick<br />
<br />
I totally agree with Angie, Wilsons speech was thoroughly whitewashing the country's attitude towards race relations. Was this just another attempt to "move on" and just reconcile? We discussed in class the issue of moving on and how some feared this was a negative thing, to forget what caused the war. Seems like that is exactly what Wilson wanted. - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
Blight opens this chapter with the discussion of Saint-Gaudens's Shaw memorial. We've discussed in class how moving this memorial is, but do you think there would have been a different response if it hadn't be revealed when it had (1897)? This was in the middle of the peak of lynching, could that have added significance to it? What if it had been revealed 20 years later, when race relations seems to have been a taboo subject? How did the timing influence the reaction? - Victoria Y.<br />
<br />
In Fahs and Waugh's piece it mentions how Jefferson Davis did not show support for any of the candidates in the 1896 election. What might've happened if he had voiced his opinions about the candidates?- Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
Baker, a postmaster in South Carolina was lynched as the United States neared the Spanish-American War. Due to the fact that he was a federal employee some blacks thought that the national government would pay more attention to it. However, the US was more concerned about the impending war. Do you think that if the country was not so close to war that the US government would have done something about Baker?- Megan MC.<br />
<br />
Black men proved themselves by killing white men. According to Washington's speech, it was white men who led them into battle and white abolitionists who were responsible for their liberation. Why were the contributions of blacks to the war only ever looked at in the context of the whites associated with them? What does this say about the racial attitude of the country at the time?-GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_6_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 6 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-02-15T05:33:14Z<p>Gstanfie: </p>
<hr />
<div>On page 229, Blight discusses Joel Chandler Harris' story "The Comedy of War" he describes an impending battle on Squire Farnborogh's farm. Apparently the Squire has a son fighting in each army. Although the story is fiction is there truth to the fact that brother faced brother, and how common place was this? --R. King<br />
<br />
Blight seems to be saying that the Underground Railroad is a myth, is this true? -- R. King<br />
<br />
Is DuBois' address an attempt to refute the Lost Cause ideology? -- R. King<br />
<br />
We had discussed to a limited extent in class the ways in which classical ideals played into a creation of the memory of the Confederacy. DuBois seems to strike at the heart of this when he says, "we seek in vain the Teutonic deification of Self, and Roman brute force." Why else would he feel it necessary to base his speech around the glories of the Teutonic or the Roman Empires, unless he saw the Lost Cause becoming institutionalized?- DRadtke<br />
mell sought<br />
DuBois argues that the nation that Jefferson Davis represented was getting in the way of civilization of the United States. How might Southern Lost Causers counter this argument? -MK<br />
<br />
The rhetoric that Frederick Douglass uses in his Decoration Day speech is similar to the rhetoric of the Lost Cause- especially when speaking about how the future generations would "study the deeds of fathers.." Are their motivations similar? -MK<br />
<br />
On page 214, Blight discusses that the Lost Cause was born at Appomattox in the dignified manner of Robert E. Lee's surrender and in his attribution of defeat to "superior numbers of resources," surely the spirit of reunion was, in part, born there as well. Do you agree with this statement that the Lost cause was created when the Civil War ended due to Grant's lenient terms to Robert E. Lee? Nick<br />
<br />
Alexander Crummell and Fredrick Douglass had differing interpretations concerning the remembrance of slavery and emancipation. Both Douglass and Crummel sought racial uplight, but one would take the risk of sustaining a sense of historic grievance against America as the means of making the nation fulfill its promises. For example Crummell sought to redeem Africa, and to inspire moral values in the freedpeople by the example of an elite black leadership while Douglass embraced the same values but sought to redeem the civil and political rights established by the verdicts of Fort Wagner and Appomattox. Which view became the chief perspective of African American remembrance? Nick<br />
<br />
The story of "Meh Lady" presents a rather utopian view of life in the South. Not only are the slaves happy there, but so too is a Yankee soldier, who marries Meh Lady. The characters view the events after the fall of Richmond as a collapse of a civilization. However, the end provides the hope that a new country could rise from the metaphorical ashes. What was it about Southern society that made it so infallible? It is telling, in my opinion, that the faithful slave narrative developed, clearly as an attempt to reconcile a vision of the South as a utopia, even with an institution like slavery at its core.- DRadtke<br />
<br />
Albion Tourgee wanted people to remember "only the causes that underlay the struggle and the results that followed from it." But would most Americans have agreed with Tourgee about what the causes were? -GStan.<br />
<br />
It's interesting that Du Bois would call for the strong to submit in order for all to advance. I wonder if he only meant that in a racial sense; he was known for being elitist. He believed the advancement of his people lay with its "Talented Tenth." I'm not sure where this speech fits into that message. -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_6_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 6 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-02-15T05:15:17Z<p>Gstanfie: </p>
<hr />
<div>On page 229, Blight discusses Joel Chandler Harris' story "The Comedy of War" he describes an impending battle on Squire Farnborogh's farm. Apparently the Squire has a son fighting in each army. Although the story is fiction is there truth to the fact that brother faced brother, and how common place was this? --R. King<br />
<br />
Blight seems to be saying that the Underground Railroad is a myth, is this true? -- R. King<br />
<br />
Is DuBois' address an attempt to refute the Lost Cause ideology? -- R. King<br />
<br />
We had discussed to a limited extent in class the ways in which classical ideals played into a creation of the memory of the Confederacy. DuBois seems to strike at the heart of this when he says, "we seek in vain the Teutonic deification of Self, and Roman brute force." Why else would he feel it necessary to base his speech around the glories of the Teutonic or the Roman Empires, unless he saw the Lost Cause becoming institutionalized?- DRadtke<br />
mell sought<br />
DuBois argues that the nation that Jefferson Davis represented was getting in the way of civilization of the United States. How might Southern Lost Causers counter this argument? -MK<br />
<br />
The rhetoric that Frederick Douglass uses in his Decoration Day speech is similar to the rhetoric of the Lost Cause- especially when speaking about how the future generations would "study the deeds of fathers.." Are their motivations similar? -MK<br />
<br />
On page 214, Blight discusses that the Lost Cause was born at Appomattox in the dignified manner of Robert E. Lee's surrender and in his attribution of defeat to "superior numbers of resources," surely the spirit of reunion was, in part, born there as well. Do you agree with this statement that the Lost cause was created when the Civil War ended due to Grant's lenient terms to Robert E. Lee? Nick<br />
<br />
Alexander Crummell and Fredrick Douglass had differing interpretations concerning the remembrance of slavery and emancipation. Both Douglass and Crummel sought racial uplight, but one would take the risk of sustaining a sense of historic grievance against America as the means of making the nation fulfill its promises. For example Crummell sought to redeem Africa, and to inspire moral values in the freedpeople by the example of an elite black leadership while Douglass embraced the same values but sought to redeem the civil and political rights established by the verdicts of Fort Wagner and Appomattox. Which view became the chief perspective of African American remembrance? Nick<br />
<br />
The story of "Meh Lady" presents a rather utopian view of life in the South. Not only are the slaves happy there, but so too is a Yankee soldier, who marries Meh Lady. The characters view the events after the fall of Richmond as a collapse of a civilization. However, the end provides the hope that a new country could rise from the metaphorical ashes. What was it about Southern society that made it so infallible? It is telling, in my opinion, that the faithful slave narrative developed, clearly as an attempt to reconcile a vision of the South as a utopia, even with an institution like slavery at its core.- DRadtke<br />
<br />
Albion Tourgee wanted people to remember "only the causes that underlay the struggle and the results that followed from it." But would most Americans have agreed with Tourgee about what the causes were? -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_5_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 5 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-02-10T03:52:46Z<p>Gstanfie: </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.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_5_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 5 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-02-08T06:59:57Z<p>Gstanfie: </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<br />
<br />
Blight talked how Civil War veterans wanted to pass along the virtues of the soldiers down to the next generation. Do you think this motivated more veterans to write about their war experience and join memorialization organizations? - MK<br />
<br />
I found Blight's description of Civil War memory as a national pastime very interesting. What were other people's reaction to this statement? -MK<br />
<br />
MK, I agree with it for sure. I own a few Civil War movies, and have seen them all more than a few times (although APPARENTLY, not enough for Glory...) and can recite a few scenes by heart. Jeff Shaara's Civil War books are phenomenal reads, and I'll confess to spending a day on and around the Antietam battlefield just for the hell of it. Even us...would we be in this class if we weren't at least a little interested in the subject matter? --Cash <br />
<br />
"The former soldiers were the living reminders that the current society, however drab and materialistic, had evolved out of a more heroic time." This quote says very clearly something that we have discussed a great deal, and it also gives us an idea of how quickly the times changed from the heroic romanticized era to a more common time. How often did these events involving the civil war veterans occur? AJ L.<br />
<br />
Why were magazines like ''Century'' so opposed to publishing the real horror stories from the war? Blight discusses how it opposed the reconciliation theme, but why weren’t people interested in knowing what really happened to the soldiers who were imprisoned in war camps and the like? - Angie<br />
<br />
Even further than reconciliation, Angie, I think it was more a matter of just wanting to move on for a while. I used an analogy in another class re: 1970 America as the hangover after the party. I think by 1865, much of the nation felt exactly the same way. Everyone just wanted to figuratively go outside, smoke a cigarette, take a few deep breaths, and just move on from there. No one wanted to remember that soon how awful it was to be in war with each other. --Cash<br />
<br />
On page 275, Blight tells us how a southerner named Albert Morton attended both a UCV and a GAR parade. Morton says that the Confederate parade was fun and lively while the Union memorial parade was “wooden” and almost apathetic. While the observation is presumably biased since he was a southerner, it still seems ironic that the Northern parade (the victors) would be less celebratory than the southerners (the losers). Did the North really care so little about memorializing their victory? - Angie<br />
<br />
Along with MK's first question. How did the idea being paid for their Civil War memories shape the writing of them by Civil War veterans? -Megan Mc.<br />
<br />
"Never had memory possessed such commercial value in America." What do you think of this quote? Is remembrance of the civil war the most commercial American memory?- Aaskins<br />
<br />
The theme of the 1880s-90s is soldierly reconciliation, but black veterans are either excluded or segregated. Why would the Union veteran groups become increasingly exclusive to blacks?- Aaskins<br />
<br />
Is the Lee monument in Richmond inappropriate? As Blight points out, it is hard to interpret African American reaction to the monument, so does that make the monument acceptable or even more inappropriate?- Aaskins<br />
<br />
Why were Civil War soldiers more willing to talk about their war experiences than veteran of more recent war like World War I and II, Vietnam, and the Gulf Wars? Not only were they willing but enthusiastic about the prospect. Do you think that they would be more willing to talk about the horrors of the war if the thought people wanted to here about it? Logan T<br />
<br />
Veterans concern with the passing on of "soldiers' virtues" and the promoting of manly sports that accompanied that concern in Henry Lee Higginson's dedication of the "soldiers field" to Harvard was an interesting topic in this chapter. It represents again the belief that the U.S. was slipping away from the Romantic golden days of noble society and the virtues that went along with it but also showed the respect and desire to retain those virtues that people still held. - AJ L.<br />
<br />
The stories of the prison camps were approached very carefully, but did become part of the national memory. Why did people feel it was so important to include these, despite the challenge they often posed to attempts at reconciliation and the glorification of the war? -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_4_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 4 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-02-03T04:53:13Z<p>Gstanfie: </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 />
<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<br />
<br />
Some members of the African American committee who discussed updating the Shaw memorial were against the addition of the names of the individual members of the regiment, saying that their absence would serve as a "reminder of the racial prejudice that had characterized the late 19th century" (137), something that apparently was not suggested concerning the recently ongoing controversy surrounding the Shepherd memorial. Is there anything different about these two circumstances or monuments? --Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
The introduction of African American troops troops into the Civil War was influential in changing the tide of the war onto the Union possessing the advantage but despite this there is a lack of Civil War monuments dedicated to African Americans. Why were there so few Civil War monuments dedicated to African Americans erected?- Nick<br />
<br />
What did Shaw mean to northerners? Why would a memorial be built for him, and why would he be so celebrated even during a time when north and south were focused on rreconciliation instead of the war's moral cause, when any emancipationist motivation for the war was being downplayed? -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_4_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 4 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-01-31T22:36:20Z<p>Gstanfie: </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 qas a high degree of anxiety about the maintenence of pre-war social norms? -GStan.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_2_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 2 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-20T00:58:43Z<p>Gstanfie: </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<br />
<br />
Faust’s piece contrasts the reinterment process taken on by the federal government for Union soldiers with that taken on by families and women’s organizations for Confederates. The disparity really demonstrates some of the unique awkwardness of the Civil War and Reconstruction. How does this particular aspect of the aftermath of the war help to explain some of the long-held, sectional bad feelings? -Erin B.<br />
<br />
A theme I have noticed throughout our readings, often in Blight, and especially now in Faust, is that of a lost opportunity. There were seemingly small but important mistakes made in message (reconciliation) and administration (the failure to treat Confederate dead the same as Union dead) that were major factors in the formation of Lost Cause ideology. Is this the case? Or were these kinds of ideas inevitable? -GStan.<br />
<br />
Why did some slaves "stick to (their)masters"? Was it because they were "too soft" as Felix Haywood stated or was it a relic of the oppression they lived with their entire lives? -- R.King<br />
<br />
Why do we still embrace Blight's "blood feud"? Why haven't we,after one hundred and fifty years,reconciled the Civil War? -- R.King<br />
<br />
On page 191, Faust writes that during Whitman’s long task to find and record Union graves throughout the South, he often came upon graves or graveyards that were terribly unkempt. Even worse, it seemed obvious that the Southerners were destroying the graveyards on purpose. On page 191, he writes that the Southerners had built roads and walkways over the graves that had all but destroyed them while nearby there were Confederate graves that were very well kept. Why did Southerners purposefully destroy Union graves when they themselves knew the feeling of not knowing where their deceased loved ones were? - Angie<br />
<br />
On page 271 of Remembering Slavery, the story of Robert Glenn begins. Glenn’s story is interesting because even after he knew he was free, he decided to stay with his master for a year and even considered staying longer. How many freed slaves continued to stay on and live and work for their ex-masters? Why did they decide to continue to work for the people who had enslaved them even though they were now free? - Angie</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_2_Questions/Comments--Tuesday471A3--Week 2 Questions/Comments--Tuesday2011-01-18T03:14:25Z<p>Gstanfie: </p>
<hr />
<div>== McPherson, What They Fought For, ==<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 />
<br />
McPherson sampling techniques are to say the least "interesting" and at worst suspect. He has taken a very unbalanced approach when it comes to confederate letters and diaries yet takes a more balanced approach with the northern articles. Is he taking Telsen's approach of constructing a history to fit his needs or is it something more benign? -- R.King<br />
<br />
McPherson repeated over and over again about how the Confederate soldiers expected to win, that it would be better to die for the cause, and he even used the term "subjugated" to refer to losing the war to be a fate worse than death. Later on in the reading he also used the term "glorious cause." I wonder how words like this that are written in soldiers' diaries and read throughout primary sources shape the way in which people think of the Confederacy, their passion, and their reasons for their involvement in the war? -Avanness<br />
<br />
McPherson suggests that, based on his sample of journal entries, Confederate soldiers seemed largely oblivious to the irony of their references to slavery and freedom when referring to the "tyranny" of the Yankees, while suggesting that their Revolution-era counterparts were typically appreciative of this “paradox” (50-51). Is this demonstrative of a shift in culture in the South since the American Revolution or is it just an example of how patriotism is written about in war-time journal entries? -Erin B.<br />
<br />
<br />
McPherson throughout the section on "Holy Cause of Liberty and Independence" describes the Confederacy's motivation in fighting and discusses that the defense of their homeland was one of their chief motivations. Defending their homeland from the Union seemed to greatly inspire the Confederacy and in response to their fighting spirit a sergeant from Illinois wrote that the Confederates " fight Devils in Tophet because the were fighting to keep an enemy out of their own neighborhood and their own property" (19). An officer also from Illinois summarized the Confederacy's war motivation fairly well by stating " they are fighting from different motives than us. We are fighting for the Union... a high and noble sentiment but after all only a sentiment. They are fighting for independence and are animated by passion and hatred against invaders ... it makes no reason whether their cause is just or not. Do you agree with this statement that it made no difference if the Confederacy's cause was just or not?- Nick J.<br />
<br />
McPherson's article outlines the various motives for fighting, and the particular confederate and union attitudes regarding each other. One chapter outlined the "confederate bloodlust" at seeing dead yankees, a particularly striking chapter, but there was no parallel description of Yankee point-of-view as particularly morbid. Why would the south be more inclined to emphasize in correspondence home this morbid satisfaction? Or is this a result of historiographical error or bias?- A. Askins<br />
<br />
"What They Fought For" posits that civil war soldiers were far more idealistic than previously assumed. However, a letter does not describe a soldier's thoughts, but what they put down on paper. In any war the two may not be the same thing, though they certainly could be. Is there a difference in the two, or are the views in these letters, as McPherson suggests, largely accurate portraits of soldiers' opinions on the war? Also, it should be noted that the view in general society was that war in general was honorable and glorious, which cannot be said for the first world war or those after it. Could this have affected how a soldier chose to describe the war? -GStan.<br />
<br />
== Remembering Slavery ==<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<br />
<br />
== Blight, ''Race and Reunion'' ==<br />
<br />
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 />
Why did the promoters of the 1913 Gettysburg reunion discourage discussion of the causes of the war? Was it because it would have shown the war to be a Union failure in light of the countries acceptance of Jim Crow? -- R.King<br />
<br />
<br />
In Blight's reading and throughout "Remembering Slavery," the idea of a Black Civil War memory is mentioned. I wonder how important you think their memories about Civil War are in the way we have shaped the Civil War in our memory today? Do you think they are more important than Union or Confederate soldiers' memories or that many of their memories have been lost over time due to their slave status? -Avanness<br />
<br />
<br />
In Race and Reunion, Blight discusses Walt Whitman’s writing about his experiences in Civil War hospitals and the ways in which witnessing the brutality of war inspired his later writing, especially the themes of death and destruction as a means to national rebirth, and redefinition. But the issues of abolition and race are absent from Whitman’s poetry and prose concerning his experiences with the “Secession War.” How does this reflect the larger, national understanding of the meaning of the end of the war for white Americans? - Erin B.<br />
<br />
== General questions ==<br />
<br />
<br />
== debate topics ==<br />
<br />
McPherson talks about northern women extolling their husbands to return home, that family was more important then fighting for their country. Did southern women fell the same way or did they feel as there husbands did. -- R.King<br />
<br />
In ''Remembering Slavery'': the importance of song and folk lyrics as their own battlefield: how did the southern blacks use song to demonstrate and spread their own current events knowledge, and what examples in this article struck you most?- A. Askins<br />
<br />
As mentioned before in McPherson’s piece both the Union soldiers and the Confederates compared themselves to the men who fought in the Revolutionary War. In your opinion, did one side have a stronger argument in comparing themselves to their forefathers? –Megan Mc.</div>Gstanfiehttps://mcclurken.umwhistory.org/wiki/index.php?title=471A3--Week_1_Questions/Comments--Thursday471A3--Week 1 Questions/Comments--Thursday2011-01-13T01:56:52Z<p>Gstanfie: </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.</div>Gstanfie 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