RE: [civilwarwest] Re:Civil War Week on the History Channel
- Glory was a fine movie. But recall that with the white section of the
army there was limited acceptance of the newly minted black troops. That
was shown in what I thought to be a fair portrayal of the period. Then,
upon the attack (ill advised in my opinion) you saw respect from the
soldiers. I think that is a fair portrayal of the period. So, I think
what Rick wrote regarding Sherman's racial attitude was probably
accurate of Sherman and most other Northern soldiers of that period.
Many of which had never even seen a person of color other the occasional
Native American. That is not to say that Sherman or these soldiers were
racist as the History Channel incorrectly states. They just were
ignorant of that culture and really had to be amazed at the reaction
they received from the newly freed slaves in the Deep South. These White
Union soldiers were seen as saviors. While the soldiers had generally
little idea of this concept as it related to them. A Hoosier from
Princeton, IN. may have had no concept of slave culture and thus no idea
what he was walking into while marching through Dawsonville, GA. or
Can you imagine what it must have felt like to have people coming
running up to you, thanking you with tears in there eyes? I guess some
in WW II felt something like this but it is a rare occurrence. I guess
we should be thankful for its being rare.
But Sherman was not a racist in the pure hate filled meaning of the word
and that was unfair of the History Channel to say that.
I don't want to go deep in this subject here since I know it can get
pushed in undesirable directions. But I think an understanding of the
mental and socially educational thinking of the time is important. We
must view it in relation to the time frame and social/educational
thought system of the 1860's.
I don't think the History Channel was fair in that process. Sherman
viewed his job as to win the war. Changing the social structure of his
country came with that victory but it was not something that he viewed
as one of his responsibilities. It was a by product of his victories.
Dealing with social issues was not in his job description. And the freed
slaves who tagged along with his army became an impediment to his effort
to execute military actions to win that war. It was not something he
understood nor was prepared to deal with at the time.
That did not make him a bad man.
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
On Behalf Of Rick Moody
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 4:25 PM
Subject: Re: [civilwarwest] Re:Civil War Week on the History Channel
--- CAMPAIGN62@... wrote:
>Yes, many times. It is one of the best civil war
> Have you seen the movie "Glory"?
movies ever, however, it also has many historical
My point was that Sherman was portrayed as a racist
and by 186- standards he was not. Neither was he an
abolitionist, which in my opinion puts him in the
middle of the road politically for that time period.
"Spend no time mourning the failures of the past. Tears make a bitter
throat. Look ahead, there is more work to do."
-- Ely S. Parker: last Grand Sachem of the Iroquois and General Grant's
"Courage is resistance to fear, master of fear, not absence of fear.
Except a creature be part coward, it is not a compliment to say it is
-- Mark Twain
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
Yahoo! Groups Links