Difference between revisions of "Week 13-14 Questions/Comments-327 11"
From McClurken Wiki
(→Eva Jones to Mary Jones, her mother-in-law, 1865) |
(→Eva Jones to Mary Jones, her mother-in-law, 1865) |
||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
The imagery Eva employed to discuss the experiences of the Confederacy in the postwar period seem to me to be quite liberally applied; her portrayal of the South's struggles in the wake of the war as "little feeble sickly attempts of virtue... [where] we [are] the chained witnesses" (266) by the "robbery and...unwise policy" (266) of the abolishment of slavery. It seems far-fetched to me that someone could actually conceptualize themselves as the victims in such a clearly false way, but it speaks to the culture and history of the South that it really was seen as the North coming in and robbing the good, hardworking whites of the South of their "property." It's amazing that that a cultural divide could be so wide that this sort of worldview could actually be an honestly-held one. -- Nicole | The imagery Eva employed to discuss the experiences of the Confederacy in the postwar period seem to me to be quite liberally applied; her portrayal of the South's struggles in the wake of the war as "little feeble sickly attempts of virtue... [where] we [are] the chained witnesses" (266) by the "robbery and...unwise policy" (266) of the abolishment of slavery. It seems far-fetched to me that someone could actually conceptualize themselves as the victims in such a clearly false way, but it speaks to the culture and history of the South that it really was seen as the North coming in and robbing the good, hardworking whites of the South of their "property." It's amazing that that a cultural divide could be so wide that this sort of worldview could actually be an honestly-held one. -- Nicole | ||
| − | These letters were very interesting. Eva expresses her annoyance with the loss of the South to the Union. Her narrative keys in on the emotions that many Southern women must have felt at that time. She is frustrated that her previous way of life has disintegrated. I think the most poignant section of her letters is when she is describing how her confederate money is of no value. She states, "strange to say, the Yankees won't take our Confederate money!" Her poverty is almost enforced because the Union government refuses to recognize her money. If the Union had recognized the (valueless) Confederate money would the South have been able to avoid extreme poverty? In addition, how could the Union have given value to the Confederate money in order to maintain classes and status? Would it have been beneficial to maintain these class boundaries to an extent? Or, was it best to completely erase all class and money from the South in order to start over? | + | These letters were very interesting. Eva expresses her annoyance with the loss of the South to the Union. Her narrative keys in on the emotions that many Southern women must have felt at that time. She is frustrated that her previous way of life has disintegrated. I think the most poignant section of her letters is when she is describing how her confederate money is of no value. She states, "strange to say, the Yankees won't take our Confederate money!" Her poverty is almost enforced because the Union government refuses to recognize her money. If the Union had recognized the (valueless) Confederate money would the South have been able to avoid extreme poverty? In addition, how could the Union have given value to the Confederate money in order to maintain classes and status? Would it have been beneficial to maintain these class boundaries to an extent? Or, was it best to completely erase all class and money from the South in order to start over? -- Hannah W. |
== Accounts of former slaves, 1865-1937 == | == Accounts of former slaves, 1865-1937 == | ||
