Posted on 08/21/2017 4:46:48 PM PDT by euram
In the ongoing debate about Confederate monuments, Slate has republished a 2011 article by professor James M. Lundberg attacking Ken Burns’ monumental “Civil War” documentary. Although he concludes with an appreciation of Burns’ achievement, he disapprovingly notes the series’ sentimental tone and points to problems such as its “tidy vision of national consensus,” being “deeply misleading and reductive,” and its “careful 15 minute portrait of slavery’s role in the coming of the war” being nearly negated by Shelby Foote’s 15-second anecdote about a “ragged Confederate who obviously didn’t own any slaves” telling his inquiring Union captors that he’s fighting “because you’re down here.”
Lundberg’s complaints, like many currently raised against Confederate statues, strike me as misleading and reductive. We might start by considering the documentary’s sentimental tone. Now, sentimental appeal as a tool of rhetoric is not the same as cogent argument, and one should immediately admit the obvious: the documentary is manipulative.
(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...
There is one in KY that was dedicated and still in it’s original location. Dedication was held on May 27, 1869. There a a number before the turn of the century and the bulk between 1901 and 1911. Raising money was the largest issue in getting them up. They tapered off around the time of the depression.
The woman I’m thinking of didn’t read anybody else’s stuff. Just periodically in the episodes, just like Shelby Foote and others did, this Barbara somebody, a black woman, would give some point of historical interest. Not a biggie. Just trying to remember that point in time.
Actually it was Buchanan’s position. Lincoln simply said that if it were passed and ratified he would accept it - for the sake of the union. It was the slavocracy that went to war over slavery.
If the South was fighting for slavery, who was fighting against slavery?
Okay, I see. I will look some more. You have my curiosity up. Lol.
I’m going to watch the whole thing again.
“But let’s not be blind to what the very politicians who made the decisions wrote down!”
If Lincoln was planning to fight over the issue of slavery, we should be able to read Lincoln’s first inaugural address and confirm it.
I can’t find the language. Can you?
I hope this comes through. Her name is Barbara Fields.
YES! I’ve got to find a photo of her. There was nothing fancy about her at all, but I appreciated the things she said. As I recall, I noticed that she appeared to have some level of excess tears in her eyes. Maybe she wore contacts, or maybe had a medical issue, but I noticed her wet eyes. Thanks for the name.
Logical fallacy - and a really stupid meme.
Another logical fallacy - you’re zero for two.
It’s hard to beat “Ashokan Farewell” though.
I think the photo I sent got through.
I remember her and like her a lot, too.
Burns is making “the same documentary today” on Vietnam. Premiers next month and from serious Vietnam veterans/historians/researchers, we’ve been told that it is a maudling attempt to enforce a “moral equivalency” between the US military and Hanoi’s murderous invaders.
Burns doesn’t know anything about Vietnam. Nor does his assistant Novick. They were either no born back then or too young to have watched it/read about it in real time.
I spent almost an hour yesterday talking to a real Viet Vet (Mobile Riverine Force) - Mekong Delta, from CaMau out and up the western side of the Delta, Mekong River, and a few other places I’ve never heard of. I travelled to visit a 7th ARVN 105 battery on the Ham Leuong River higher up in the Delta but the views were the same.
My associates in Vietnam Veterans For Factual History.org know more about Vietnam then Burns will ever know in this life and the next, yet they were not interviewed for this series. Given the fact that our members have written over or edited/contributed to over 75-100 books minimis (including several national award winners - Lewis Sorley and Mark Moyar), and have combat tours from ground pounders to Special Forces, SwiftBoaters, POWS, Provincial Advisors (RFs, PFs, PSDF’s, Kit Carson Scouts), handled Hoi Chans, worked the Ho Chi Minh Trail, and briefed President Thieu, you would think the Burns would jump at interviewing people whose experiences in S. VN, Cambodia, and Laos, mirrored the war throughout its existence.
In fact, our oldest member is 88 years old and when he starts to talk about his earliest experiences in Vietnam, it was about his being with So. Vietnamese leaders fighting the Viet Minh in the early 1950’s.
Burns’ work will be compared to Stanley Karnow’s large book on Vietnam (which had good and bad materials in it), but neither have understood the whole “context” of what was going on there, and apparently didn’t try hard enough, if at all, to talk to people who could explain some of a very complex historical event.
I don’t hear anything about the Union Army now, it is all about the evil Confederacy. If they wipe out all traces of the Confederacy, the Union Army will become invisible. Not sure that will be different, not a lot said about them for a long time.
What we hear is that all whites are racist, all whites had slaves, all about the Confederacy. I did my family genealogy, my dad’s family was in Ohio and many fought for the Union, none fought for the Confederacy. One was an officer that even got a little fame before he died at Shiloh. None owned slaves.
If we don’t defend the history of the South in the Civil War we will lose the history of the North. It will be as if the Civil War never happened.
Those that don’t agree with the statues should use them as a teachable moment. I did that with my daughters, if I didn’t agree with a monument, or statue, book, things being taught in school,what have you I told them what the claim was and then discussed my feelings about it. Wiping it all away is not the answer.
My mother had family in the Trail of Tears, when I grew up the feelings toward Native Americans were not always the best. When I encountered something that did not please me or I did not agree with I did my best to educate people about the other side of issue. Wiping it all away would have simply left people ignorant of both sides.
Yes, that’s her, alright. NOW! What’s the best way to be able to watch ROOTS again? Subscribe to Youtube, or how?
Thanks, I’ll look for it.
Because of all the recent troubles I watched it to see Burns take on it.
Burns had high praise for Foote, he also kind of stole one of Foote most profound statements about that war. I recall as if it was yesterday when Foote said, prior to the Civil War the United States "are", after the Civil War it became The United Sates "is".
In the infomercial Burns did not crediting Foote, repeated his words almost exactly.
“Logical fallacy - and a really stupid meme.”
If the South was fighting for slavery, who was fighting against slavery?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
