Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'Gods and Generals' ... and an angry Mayor Dow
Mobile Register ^ | 10/13/03 | Jim Van Anglen

Posted on 10/13/2003 7:07:18 AM PDT by stainlessbanner

When George Ewert , director of the Museum of Mobile, wrote a stinging movie review of the Civil War film "Gods and Generals," he likely did not expect an equally harsh critique from Mayor Mike Dow .

Ewert's review, "Whitewashing the Confederacy (SPLC link)," was not kind to the Ted Turner film.

"'Gods and Generals' is part of a growing movement that seeks to rewrite the history of the American South, downplaying slavery and the economic system that it sustained. In museums, schools and city council chambers, white neo-Confederates are hard at work in an effort to have popular memory trump historical accuracy," the city employee wrote.

And this: "It is cloying and melo dramatic, and its still characters give an endless series of ponderous, stilted speeches about God, man and war."

In turn, Dow was not kind to Ewert, reprimanding the city employee in a Friday letter. The mayor called Ewert's review unnecessarily strongly worded, inflammatory and counterproductive.

"Why, in your very public position with all the local 'Southern Heritage' controversy that city leaders have had to manage and after several years of a hard-fought political calming of this issue, would you inject yourself so strongly and carelessly into this topic in this manner?" the mayor wrote.

"I need for you to use your better judgment and please cease and desist publishing potentially inflammatory articles of this nature without your board chairman's or my awareness and approval. Leave that to others who have less to do."

The city, particularly Dow, has come under fire in the past from Southern heritage groups claiming unfair treatment.

Ewert's review was printed in the Southern Poverty Law Center's Intelligence Report. The Montgomery-based organization's Intelligence Project monitors hate groups and extremist activities.

At the end of the movie review, there is a line that notes Ewert's position with the city.

Mobile City Council President Reggie Copeland also scolded Ewert, saying at last week's council meeting that he "would accept nothing less than a public apology. ... I am very displeased with that gentleman, and I want some action taken."

Copeland made the comments after hearing about the review but before reading it. He later told the Mobile Register that the review was "not as strong as I thought it would have been. ... I just wish he would have kept his mouth shut."

Ewert, contacted last week, declined comment except to say that he would be preparing a statement for Dow. In a letter to Dow dated Oct. 9 -- one day before Dow's letter -- Ewert said the review was written in his capacity as a historian and private individual.

"I regret that anyone may have taken my comments in a 'personal' matter," Ewert wrote. "My intent was not to offend but to offer a legitimate criticism and context for the movie in question, a privilege that should by rights be open to anyone. If, again, there were those who were offended by the movie review, I offer my apologies."

Don't shoot ...:

Area veterinarian Ben George , a Confederate Battle Flag and Confederate-heritage advocate, praised Dow for his response to the review. But George said Ewert did not apologize and should resign or be fired.

"He (Ewert) shot somebody; he said he's going to shoot somebody again," George said.

George in the past has made himself something of a thorn in Dow's side, organizing demonstrations in front of Dow's house, plastering posters criticizing the mayor during the last city election and using other tactics to push his Confederate heritage agenda.

George complained to Dow after reading Ewert's article. "My staff and I have had to deal with an unnecessary and increased fallout as a result of your article," Dow stated in his letter to Ewert.

George compared the situation to the firing of a Mobile police officer, accused of using the n-word and expressing a lack of interest in helping evacuate public housing residents in case of flooding.

Ewert, like the police officer, George said, has proven himself intolerant toward part of Mobile's population, namely Confederate heritage proponents like himself.

George said he and several others planned to speak at Tuesday's City Council meeting about Ewert's comments, along with concerns that Dow has not kept his word on settling previous disputes. But, he said, the speakers may reconsider.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; US: Alabama
KEYWORDS: alabama; dixie; generals; gods; godsandgenerals; moviereview; museum; splc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-257 next last

1 posted on 10/13/2003 7:07:19 AM PDT by stainlessbanner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
"'Gods and Generals' is part of a growing movement that seeks to rewrite the history of the American South, downplaying slavery and the economic system that it sustained. In museums, schools and city council chambers, white neo-Confederates are hard at work in an effort to have popular memory trump historical accuracy," the city employee wrote.

An accounting of why and for what some people chose to fight the consolidated government of Washington D.C. is rewriting history?

The movie does a fine job of explaining why many fought, and even how the war turned to the question of slavery. The people trying to act like the war wasn't about more than just slavery are guilty of rewriting history, but the victor has that perogative...

2 posted on 10/13/2003 7:21:18 AM PDT by Gunslingr3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
LOOK! Another Freeper Just Gave To The Cause! WAY TO GO!
We Salute Free Republic's Donors! Be one! Donate Here By Secure Server
Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
or you can use
PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!

3 posted on 10/13/2003 7:23:00 AM PDT by Support Free Republic (Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gunslingr3
I'd be curious to know where the movie reviewers right to free speech went in all of this.
4 posted on 10/13/2003 7:31:53 AM PDT by Sunshine Sister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
Anything less than tail-tucking, head-hanging, eyes averted shame from the South is unacceptable.

If history must be re-written, if socialism needs to be heralded; whatever is required.....all must be educated to hate the South.

If only the South had first freed their slaves, the North would not have had any problem with secession. (/sarcasm)

5 posted on 10/13/2003 7:40:48 AM PDT by laotzu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gunslingr3
The last organised effort to restore the Constitution was led by the Confederacy...but of course, that was all about slavery right? Lincoln marked the half-way post on the road to the sewers [in presidents]. Andrew Johnson and Ulysses S. Grant took us the rest of the way.
6 posted on 10/13/2003 7:44:54 AM PDT by Lee Heggy ("the basic delusion that men may be governed and yet be free."H L Menken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lee Heggy
The last organised effort to restore the Constitution was led by the Confederacy...

In what way?

7 posted on 10/13/2003 7:48:25 AM PDT by PaulJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
"downplaying slavery and the economic system that it sustained"

Who, but the federal government of the North, could have nurtured, grown, defended, bankrolled, and built an entire empire on the selling/trading of slaves?

Slavery was introduced to the South by the North. The North had slaves before the South, and kept slaves after those in the South were freed.

Who's downplaying an economic system of slavery here?
(but, that's different though)

8 posted on 10/13/2003 7:48:38 AM PDT by laotzu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gunslingr3; A. Pole; dennisw; stainlessbanner; Sunshine Sister; laotzu; Lee Heggy
Imagine if because America refused to license gay marriage, the U.N.--as leader of some future One-World Government--were to invade the United States.

What would patriotic Americans then be fighting for: gay rights or nations' rights?

9 posted on 10/13/2003 7:52:51 AM PDT by Age of Reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: laotzu
The first african slaves were brought to virginia long before independence, in fact just a few years after jamestown was founded, and were brought by a Dutch trader. Your statement that slavery was introduced by the north is a damned lie.

That you have to lie shows the weakness of your argument.
10 posted on 10/13/2003 7:54:40 AM PDT by donmeaker (Bigamy is one wife too many. So is monogamy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: stainlessbanner
And this: "It is cloying and melo dramatic, and its still characters give an endless series of ponderous, stilted speeches about God, man and war."

Did religious people at war in the 1800's speak like MTV hosts?

An interesting question is how people spoke in various times in the past, e.g., what degree of formality did they use in daily speech, did they speak in "paragraphs". There are letters, and speeches available, but no one transcribes daily conversation.

Today's communication style of camera cuts, product placement, what's-on-the-other-channel and got-a-3 o'clock biases the modern perspective.

Gods and Generals is a fascinating movie, for the speech and the battle scenes (the only movie civil war battle scenes that smack of realism).

11 posted on 10/13/2003 7:59:57 AM PDT by monkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PaulJ
10th Amendment US Constitution.

" The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The Federal Government beginning with the institution of the Income Tax has since continued to whittle away at this. The Staes which formed the Confederacy saw this beginning to happen in the 1840s.

12 posted on 10/13/2003 8:06:42 AM PDT by Lee Heggy ("the basic delusion that men may be governed and yet be free."H L Menken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: donmeaker
The slave trade was most firmly established in New York, by the Dutch. Those crazy Knickerbockers.

Slavery was firmly established in the Union before the South even existed.

Why should the South be ashamed, but not the North? Why did the North keep slaves after those in the South were freed?

Perhaps if you called my a liar again we could both dodge, & avoid, these questions.

13 posted on 10/13/2003 8:10:54 AM PDT by laotzu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: monkey
Gods and Generals is a fascinating movie...

Haven't seen the movie, but read the book by Jeff Shaara (who recently did the 3 hr Booknotes interview on C-SPAN). He did not delve into the politics of the war , in his book(s). He merely described the events through the eyes of the major players; Lee, "Stonewall" Jackson, Grant,etc. He did it in novel form, though he tried to remain as historically acurate as he could.And whether you love or hate the South and their cause, you can't deny that the men of the Confederacy fought bravely and fought well.

I'd like to see the movie,but Shaara implied it was not true to the book.

14 posted on 10/13/2003 8:13:05 AM PDT by PaulJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: donmeaker
"The pretense that the "abolition of slavery" was either a motive or justification for the war, is a fraud of the same character with that of "maintaining the national honor." Who, but such usurpers, robbers, and murderers as they, ever established slavery? Or what government, except one resting upon the sword, like the one we now have, was ever capable of maintaining slavery? And why did these men abolish slavery? Not from any love of liberty in general--not as an act of justice to the black man himself, but only "as a war measure," and because they wanted his assistance, and that of his friends, in carrying on the war they had undertaken for maintaining and intensifying that political, commercial, and industrial slavery, to which they have subjected the great body of the people, both white and black. And yet these impostors now cry out that they have abolished the chattel slavery of the black man--although that was not the motive of the war--as if they thought they could thereby conceal, atone for, or justify that other slavery which they were fighting to perpetuate, and to render more rigorous and inexorable than it ever was before. There was no difference of principle--but only of degree--between the slavery they boast they have abolished, and the slavery they were fighting to preserve; for all restraints upon men's natural liberty, not necessary for the simple maintenance of justice, are of the nature of slavery, and differ from each other only in degree.

If their object had really been to abolish slavery, or maintain liberty or justice generally, they had only to say: All, whether white or black, who want the protection of this government, shall have it; and all who do not want it, will be left in peace, so long as they leave us in peace. Had they said this, slavery would necessarily have been abolished at once; the war would have been saved; and a thousand times nobler union than we have ever had would have been the result. It would have been a voluntary union of free men; such a union as will one day exist among all men, the world over, if the several nations, so called, shall ever get rid of the usurpers, robbers, and murderers, called governments, that now plunder, enslave, and destroy them.

Still another of the frauds of these men is, that they are now establishing, and that the war was designed to establish, "a government of consent." The only idea they have ever manifested as to what is a government of consent, is this--that it is one to which everybody must consent, or be shot. This idea was the dominant one on which the war was carried on; and it is the dominant one, now that we have got what is called "peace."

Their pretenses that they have "Saved the Country," and "Preserved our Glorious Union," are frauds like all the rest of their pretenses. By them they mean simply that they have subjugated, and maintained their power over, an unwilling people. This they call "Saving the Country"; as if an enslaved and subjugated people--or as if any people kept in subjection by the sword (as it is intended that all of us shall be hereafter)--could be said to have any country. This, too, they call "Preserving our Glorious Union"; as if there could be said to be any Union, glorious or inglorious, that was not voluntary. Or as if there could be said to be any union between masters and slaves; between those who conquer, and those who are subjugated.

All these cries of having "abolished slavery," of having "saved the country," of having "preserved the union," of establishing "a government of consent," and of "maintaining the national honor," are all gross, shameless, transparent cheats--so transparent that they ought to deceive no one--when uttered as justifications for the war, or for the government that has succeeded the war, or for now compelling the people to pay the cost of the war, or for compelling anybody to support a government that he does not want." - Lysander Spooner, "No Treason" 1870

15 posted on 10/13/2003 8:18:54 AM PDT by laotzu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Sunshine Sister
I'd be curious to know where the movie reviewers right to free speech went in all of this.

He has them and exercised them. He's not in jail, which is more than can be said for newspaper editors who did not agree with Lincoln's effort to conquer the Confederacy.

16 posted on 10/13/2003 8:26:27 AM PDT by Gunslingr3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Gunslingr3
As a "Damnedyankee" now living in Virginia, I am fed up with the liberals and their slaves in the NAALCP trying to misdirect history with the goal of providing anyone with Negro heritage with a permanent victinhood status and anyone with Caucasian Heritage with permanent guilt.

Slavery was one of many factors in this war. States' Rights and an encroaching Federal Government were, in my opinion, much greater contributors. Now, the liberals are trying to reopen old wounds and further split this country apart. I personally resent their activities as unAmerican and treasonous.

17 posted on 10/13/2003 8:28:58 AM PDT by Redleg Duke (Stir the pot...don't let anything settle to the bottom where the lawyers can feed off of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Redleg Duke
Other then the right to own slaves, what other States Rights was the South fighting for?
18 posted on 10/13/2003 8:32:33 AM PDT by PaulJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Gunslingr3
Any movie that does not depict the Confederates as a group of chicken fried Nazis will be viewed negatively by the media elite, as well as liberals and neo-conservatives.
19 posted on 10/13/2003 8:32:49 AM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: donmeaker
"first african slaves were brought to virginia(sic) long before independence"

Are you suggesting that Virginia was a confederate state at that time? Even after independence was won, Virginia was a Union state.

The Union invested heavily, and received a healthy return on their slave trading.

But, let's blame the Dutch, or the Canadians, or the South, or anybody convenient. Just not the friends of big government, the North.

20 posted on 10/13/2003 8:45:39 AM PDT by laotzu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 241-257 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson