Gods and Generals (Vanity)

[billbears]

Saw the movie again when it came out and what really struck me this time for some reason was the complete difference in how faith in God was addressed on both sides.

[billbears]

Sorry hit post before thought finished. And how even today I can see that difference in where faith is placed in daily lives between the latest invasion force and Southerners

[CatoRenasci]

Ahhh, memories! When I was a Rat, long before VCRs and videos, and when Ronald Reagan was newly elected as governor of California, they showed Brother Rat at the State every year just before Christmas Furlough. We were all dutifully herded up by our dykes to see it. I think they showed Mardi Gras sometimes, too, but I never saw it. (That's the one where the Reg. staff and Band Co. went to Mardi Gras in New Orleans, Pat Boone was in it, I think).

[LS]

You are a specialist in this stuff: a few years ago, in "Military History," I noted a book on Chamberlain that was billed as challenging the "Gettysburg" view of Chamberlain. Do you know what book this was, or what this thesis is?

[cubreporter]

You're absolutely correct. If there are no rules then one can't break them.

If there is no GOD...then one doesn't have to worry about doing anything to offend him and threfore not have to pay the price for it either.

Kinda like the Ostrich when they bury their heads in the sand. If they can't see it it's not there. Lo don't they have a rude awakening coming to them one of these days? Better them than me/us. :)

[CatoRenasci]

Sorry, I'm not aware of it, or in what way it challenged the essentially heroic view of Chamberlain. IIRC, he had a distinguished career after the War.

[cubreporter]

Can't think of the actor's name who played Chamberlain but he was so credible and sooooooo good. Hard to see him in those dufus comedies that he does. :)

[cubreporter]

Nah, I misread it I think. Thanks. :) But...got your point anyway.

[CatoRenasci]

A little research on Amazon suggests the book you're thinking of is Edward Longacre's Joshua Chamberlain: The Soldier and the Man. The reviews suggest the book relies primarily on a disgruntled former colleague and that Longacre's other Civil War work is less than top notch. The Pullen biography seems more generally recommended.

[CatoRenasci]

Also the recent Alice Trulock In the Hands of Providence: Joshua L. Chamberlain and the American Civil War.

[LS]

About all I've ever heard that could be negative about Chamberlain was that he didn't actually ORDER the bayonet charge (although typically an officer usually had to order "bayonets" to affix bayonets); and that Chamberlian took more than proper credit for the defense of Little RT. But other sources that I have seen said that C's recollections were pretty good, that he did order the line refused, and that an order came from some officer to affix.

[LS]

Gov. of Maine, and he was one of the few to live long enough for the 50th anniversary of G-burg. He died a few weeks after that reunion. Odd, huh?

[irish guard]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't remember any black characters in the book, nor do I recall any speculations on Stonewall's feelings on slavery. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

You don't remember that passage in the book, because it wasn't there. Hollywood decided to toss in some of its own slop about slaves......I noticed it right away as a deviation from the book.

[irish guard]

>>>>>>>>>>>>Its kind of funny, regarding recents events, to note to Robert E. Lee belonged to the Episcopal church. I wonder what he would think of it now.<<<<<<<<<<<

Lee, like others of that era was a deeply religious person. I believe there are far fewer people today who can recognize quotes from the bible, able to cite from which book it was recited.

As for the election of an openly homosexual bishop, I am certain he would be very upset. Obviously the members of the present day Episcopal Church do not care about this election, or they would have fought harder to keep him from assuming his post.

[mass55th]

"You don't remember that passage in the book, because it wasn't there."

Thanks...I didn't think I had missed any slave reference in the book. I remember when the reviews of the movie first came out, there were complaints that it was all about the south and that there wasn't any mention of slavery. My first reaction was that there wasn't any reference in the book to slavery so why should there be any reference to it in the movie. Then when I saw the movie and saw that there were blacks appearing and that there were references to slavery, I was surprised and disappointed that Hollywood once again felt the need to include their political correctness crap in a film.

[irish guard]

>>>>>>>>>Then when I saw the movie and saw that there were blacks appearing and that there were references to slavery, I was surprised and disappointed that Hollywood once again felt the need to include their political correctness crap in a film.<<<<<<<<

It was truly the only part of the movie where I cringed at the insistence of Hollywood to emphatically alter the tone and text of the book. Lang's portrayal of Jackson clearly bent the movie toward his character, ....the book had great passages about General Hancock that were left out of the movie....I can only guess that Ted Turner's influence and the director's love for the south kept some of that from the film.

[Squantos]

I'll take your advice and purchase the book also. I too enjoyed the movie. Awesome.

Stay Safe Ya'll !