Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [civilwarwest] Review of "Triumph Over Adversity"

Expand Messages
  • LWhite64@aol.com
    Folks, Just to chime in on this briefly, David Long worked here at Chickamauga as a seasonal last summer, so if this is him, then it wasnt Mr. Rose as some
    Message 1 of 23 , Sep 30, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Folks,
             Just to chime in on this briefly, David Long worked here at Chickamauga as a seasonal last summer, so if this is him, then it wasnt Mr. Rose as some have said.  Mr. Long was quite anti Grant as well.

      Lee
    • brooksdsimpson@yahoo.com
      ... wasnt Mr. ... I d like to make a few points. Mr. Long s character or bias need not be a topic of conversation here (especially as he is not present to
      Message 2 of 23 , Oct 1, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In civilwarwest@y..., LWhite64@a... wrote:
        > Folks,
        > Just to chime in on this briefly, David Long worked here at
        > Chickamauga as a seasonal last summer, so if this is him, then it
        wasnt Mr.
        > Rose as some have said. Mr. Long was quite anti Grant as well.

        I'd like to make a few points.

        Mr. Long's character or bias need not be a topic of conversation here
        (especially as he is not present to defend himself). Two other
        posters, including the original poster, brought those topics up, and
        only then did I feel compelled to respond. Does Mr. Long have an axe
        to grind? Is his purposeful misrepresentation of my book the act of
        a gentleman? That's up to each of you to decide.

        Mr. Long's review questioned my integrity, much as Mr. Rose has
        questioned my integrity. I hope that in the past and in the flurry
        aroused by this discussion that we now understand whose integrity is
        properly at issue. Had Mr. Rose wanted to survey the scholarly
        reception to my book, he might have pointed to reviews by James
        McPherson, Peter Parish, and Robert Remini to set Mr. Long's review
        in context. I've already pointed to a section of Mr. Long's review
        that should raise questions about his scholarship.

        Finally, I thought that whatever the merits of previous exchanges, a
        good number of members of this newsgroup have tired of this
        discussion. I post only because I have come under criticism yet
        again from a familiar source, and I do have the right of self-defense
        (and if I don't, the moderators can remove me immediately). If that
        leads to a new chorus of "a plague on both your houses," I'll simply
        submit that I can't wait until you come under attack here; let's see
        how you respond. Mr. Rose has taken his road show elsewhere on the
        net, repeating the same sort of things debated to death here as if
        nothing has changed his mind in the slightest; other people have
        notified me that he nags them with posts and messages. Thus it seems
        useless to debate him except insofar as it might be important not to
        allow his assertions, when mistaken or flawed, to go unchallenged;
        we've seen how that process degenerates. I look forward to his
        promised essays.
      • josepharose@yahoo.com
        ... here (especially as he is not present to defend himself).... It appears that Dr. David E. Long is a history professor and has a doctorate. As he is not
        Message 3 of 23 , Oct 1, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In civilwarwest@y..., brooksdsimpson@y... wrote:
          >
          > Mr. Long's character or bias need not be a topic of conversation
          here (especially as he is not present to defend himself)....

          It appears that Dr. David E. Long is a history professor and has a
          doctorate. As he is not present and if his character or bias need
          *not* be topics, I see no reason to accuse him of "purposeful
          misrepresentation" or question his status as a gentleman.

          Joseph Rose



          --- In civilwarwest@y..., brooksdsimpson@y... wrote:
          > --- In civilwarwest@y..., LWhite64@a... wrote:
          > > Folks,
          > > Just to chime in on this briefly, David Long worked here
          at
          > > Chickamauga as a seasonal last summer, so if this is him, then it
          > wasnt Mr.
          > > Rose as some have said. Mr. Long was quite anti Grant as well.
          >
          > I'd like to make a few points.
          >
          > Mr. Long's character or bias need not be a topic of conversation
          here
          > (especially as he is not present to defend himself). Two other
          > posters, including the original poster, brought those topics up,
          and
          > only then did I feel compelled to respond. Does Mr. Long have an
          axe
          > to grind? Is his purposeful misrepresentation of my book the act
          of
          > a gentleman? That's up to each of you to decide.
          >
          > Mr. Long's review questioned my integrity, much as Mr. Rose has
          > questioned my integrity. I hope that in the past and in the flurry
          > aroused by this discussion that we now understand whose integrity
          is
          > properly at issue. Had Mr. Rose wanted to survey the scholarly
          > reception to my book, he might have pointed to reviews by James
          > McPherson, Peter Parish, and Robert Remini to set Mr. Long's review
          > in context. I've already pointed to a section of Mr. Long's review
          > that should raise questions about his scholarship.
          >
          > Finally, I thought that whatever the merits of previous exchanges,
          a
          > good number of members of this newsgroup have tired of this
          > discussion. I post only because I have come under criticism yet
          > again from a familiar source, and I do have the right of self-
          defense
          > (and if I don't, the moderators can remove me immediately). If
          that
          > leads to a new chorus of "a plague on both your houses," I'll
          simply
          > submit that I can't wait until you come under attack here; let's
          see
          > how you respond. Mr. Rose has taken his road show elsewhere on the
          > net, repeating the same sort of things debated to death here as if
          > nothing has changed his mind in the slightest; other people have
          > notified me that he nags them with posts and messages. Thus it
          seems
          > useless to debate him except insofar as it might be important not
          to
          > allow his assertions, when mistaken or flawed, to go unchallenged;
          > we've seen how that process degenerates. I look forward to his
          > promised essays.
        • brooksdsimpson@yahoo.com
          ... Mr. Rose first raised the issue of motivation and bias, if readers will recall his initial post. Mr. Rose has also remained silent on Mr. Long s
          Message 4 of 23 , Oct 1, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In civilwarwest@y..., josepharose@y... wrote:
            > --- In civilwarwest@y..., brooksdsimpson@y... wrote:
            > >
            > > Mr. Long's character or bias need not be a topic of conversation
            > here (especially as he is not present to defend himself)....
            >
            > It appears that Dr. David E. Long is a history professor and has a
            > doctorate. As he is not present and if his character or bias need
            > *not* be topics, I see no reason to accuse him of "purposeful
            > misrepresentation" or question his status as a gentleman.

            Mr. Rose first raised the issue of motivation and bias, if readers
            will recall his initial post.

            Mr. Rose has also remained silent on Mr. Long's misrepresentation of
            what I had to say about Cold Harbor.
          • brooksdsimpson@yahoo.com
            ... So is Joan Waugh. But you trashed her. And, unlike Long, she had no problem gaining tenure. She s also very knowledgeable about Grant. It s so
            Message 5 of 23 , Oct 1, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In civilwarwest@y..., josepharose@y... wrote:
              > --- In civilwarwest@y..., brooksdsimpson@y... wrote:
              > >
              > > Mr. Long's character or bias need not be a topic of conversation
              > here (especially as he is not present to defend himself)....
              >
              > It appears that Dr. David E. Long is a history professor and has a
              > doctorate.

              So is Joan Waugh. But you trashed her. And, unlike Long, she had no
              problem gaining tenure. She's also very knowledgeable about Grant.

              It's so unfortunate when people confuse disagreement with being
              disagreeable.
            • Bob Huddleston
              To look specifically at the review, 1. Depression is a difficult and, even today, hard to treat disorder. Some people can bloom quickly and overcome it --as
              Message 6 of 23 , Oct 1, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                To look specifically at the review,

                1. Depression is a difficult and, even today, hard to treat disorder.
                Some people can bloom quickly and overcome it --as Lincoln did. Others
                may take longer, as Grant did.

                But there is no question that if USG did suffer from depression, he rose
                above it.

                2. As for the second paragraph, any person who would manumit a slave, at
                a moment when the erstwhile owner is in deep financial trouble (remember
                that he ended up hocking his watch for Christmas presents), *does*
                suggest that USG had problems with slavery. His one slave was worth
                $800-1,000.

                To place that in perspective, the initial 1863 income tax exempted
                salaries under $800, which was considered to be the average blue collar
                salary. As a captain of Infantry, Grant had been making $194/month,
                $2228 per year.

                That "most successful lawyer in Illinois history" averaged, in the
                1850s, averaged about $3,500-5,000 per year.

                I suspect that USG's income at Hardscabble was a whole lot less than he
                had made in the Army.

                How many of us would give away a year's salary (former Captain Grant),
                or 1/2 (for Captain Grant) or 1/3 (for Lincoln) of our salary when we
                would quickly turned that commodity into ready cash?

                If the details in a review are wrong, then why should the opinion be
                entitled to any respect?

                Take care,

                Bob

                Judy and Bob Huddleston
                10643 Sperry Street
                Northglenn, CO 80234-3612
                303.451.6276 Adco@...

                " Simpson
                tells us that young Grant frequently suffered from what 19th-century
                writers referred to as "melancholy," or what today would be diagnosed
                as depression. It is a rationalization that hardly explains his
                antebellum failures. Abraham Lincoln waged a lifelong battle
                against "melancholia," and yet became one of the most successful
                lawyers in Illinois history and eventually one of the nation's
                greatest presidents.

                ....

                "Simpson's rosy interpretations often are a quantum leap beyond the
                evidence used to support them. For example, Simpson informs us that
                during the war Grant wholeheartedly supported Lincoln's racial
                policies. Yet there is little in the early life of Grant to suggest
                that the institution of slavery deeply offended him. Grant's
                emergence as a racial egalitarian seems to have been the product of
                political expediency and a recognition of the shifting sands of
                social and cultural change during the Civil War.
              • josepharose@yahoo.com
                Dr. Simpson: You accuse me of trashing Professor Waugh. That is a gross mischaracterization; I did nothing of the sort. I wrote: Professor Waugh also
                Message 7 of 23 , Oct 1, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  Dr. Simpson:

                  You accuse me of "trashing" Professor Waugh. That is a gross
                  mischaracterization; I did nothing of the sort. I wrote: "Professor
                  Waugh also wrote a remarkably similar review of "Grant," by Jean
                  Edward Smith. In the two reviews, there is little or no criticism of
                  the authors' work and hardly any more of Grant as either a general or
                  president."

                  As soon as I learned you had a doctorate, I dropped my use of Mr.
                  when referring to you. Is there any reason we should not extend to
                  Dr. David Long the same courtesy?

                  Joseph Rose



                  From: brooksdsimpson@y...
                  Date: Mon Oct 1, 2001 8:38 pm

                  Subject: Re: Review of "Triumph Over Adversity"

                  --- In civilwarwest@y..., josepharose@y... wrote:
                  > --- In civilwarwest@y..., brooksdsimpson@y... wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Mr. Long's character or bias need not be a topic of conversation
                  > here (especially as he is not present to defend himself)....
                  >
                  > It appears that Dr. David E. Long is a history professor and has a
                  > doctorate.

                  So is Joan Waugh. But you trashed her. And, unlike Long, she had no
                  problem gaining tenure. She's also very knowledgeable about Grant.

                  It's so unfortunate when people confuse disagreement with being
                  disagreeable.
                • Dave Smith
                  ... Completely different question. Is Joan Waugh related to Jack Waugh, author of Class of 1846 and Reelecting Lincoln? Jack lives in Texas, and Joan is
                  Message 8 of 23 , Oct 2, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In civilwarwest@y..., brooksdsimpson@y... wrote:

                    > So is Joan Waugh. But you trashed her. And, unlike Long, she had
                    > no problem gaining tenure. She's also very knowledgeable about
                    > Grant.

                    Completely different question. Is Joan Waugh related to Jack Waugh,
                    author of Class of 1846 and Reelecting Lincoln?

                    Jack lives in Texas, and Joan is obviously on the West Coast.

                    Just curious.

                    Dave
                  • FLYNSWEDE@AOL.COM
                    In a message dated 10/2/01 2:29:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time, josepharose@yahoo.com writes:
                    Message 9 of 23 , Oct 2, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      In a message dated 10/2/01 2:29:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
                      josepharose@... writes:

                      << Dr. Simpson:

                      You accuse me of "trashing" Professor Waugh. That is a gross
                      mischaracterization; I did nothing of the sort. I wrote: "Professor
                      Waugh also wrote a remarkably similar review of "Grant," by Jean
                      Edward Smith. In the two reviews, there is little or no criticism of
                      the authors' work and hardly any more of Grant as either a general or
                      president."

                      As soon as I learned you had a doctorate, I dropped my use of Mr.
                      when referring to you. Is there any reason we should not extend to
                      Dr. David Long the same courtesy?

                      Joseph Rose
                      >>
                      Mr Rose,
                      It would be greatly appreciated if you would confine your continued arguments
                      with Dr. Simpson via personal email. I personally do not think that this
                      forum is the place for such discussions, and I am quite sure that the
                      majority of the members of this forum would concur with this request.

                      Respectfully,

                      Wayne C. Bengston
                    • ecm777@aol.com
                      Gentlemen, when is this going to stop? Would you please take all this bantering back and forth to private email. I personally don t have time to sort through
                      Message 10 of 23 , Oct 2, 2001
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Gentlemen, when is this going to stop?  Would you please take all this bantering back and forth to private email.  I personally don't have time to sort through it all!

                        Regards
                        Colleen aka CWgal
                      • Dick Weeks
                        I agree Wayne. I do not want to see another critique of Dr. Simpson s book, good or bad posted on this board. I think we all know how each person that has
                        Message 11 of 23 , Oct 2, 2001
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I agree Wayne. I do not want to see another critique of Dr. Simpson's
                          book, good or bad posted on this board. I think we all know how each
                          person that has posted on this subject feels and it needs no further
                          amplification. I have already let this go on a little longer than I
                          should have.

                          I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
                          Dick (a.k.a. Shotgun)
                          http://www.civilwarhome.com

                          FLYNSWEDE@... wrote:

                          > In a message dated 10/2/01 2:29:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
                          > josepharose@... writes:
                          >
                          > << Dr. Simpson:
                          >
                          > You accuse me of "trashing" Professor Waugh. That is a gross
                          > mischaracterization; I did nothing of the sort. I wrote: "Professor
                          > Waugh also wrote a remarkably similar review of "Grant," by Jean
                          > Edward Smith. In the two reviews, there is little or no criticism of
                          > the authors' work and hardly any more of Grant as either a general or
                          > president."
                          >
                          > As soon as I learned you had a doctorate, I dropped my use of Mr.
                          > when referring to you. Is there any reason we should not extend to
                          > Dr. David Long the same courtesy?
                          >
                          > Joseph Rose
                          > >>
                          > Mr Rose,
                          > It would be greatly appreciated if you would confine your continued arguments
                          > with Dr. Simpson via personal email. I personally do not think that this
                          > forum is the place for such discussions, and I am quite sure that the
                          > majority of the members of this forum would concur with this request.
                          >
                          > Respectfully,
                          >
                          > Wayne C. Bengston
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                        • brooksdsimpson@yahoo.com
                          ... Waugh, ... No relation of which I m aware. Both are very pleasant, intelligent people.
                          Message 12 of 23 , Oct 2, 2001
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In civilwarwest@y..., "Dave Smith" <dmsmith001@y...> wrote:

                            > Completely different question. Is Joan Waugh related to Jack
                            Waugh,
                            > author of Class of 1846 and Reelecting Lincoln?
                            >
                            > Jack lives in Texas, and Joan is obviously on the West Coast.

                            No relation of which I'm aware. Both are very pleasant, intelligent
                            people.
                          • sdwakefield@prodigy.net
                            Colleen- I agree I really think we need to get back to the donut debate. Please, ackowledge publicly that you were all wrong in the Krispy Kreme v. Donut
                            Message 13 of 23 , Oct 2, 2001
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Colleen-
                              I agree I really think we need to get back to the donut debate.
                              Please, ackowledge publicly that you were all wrong in the Krispy
                              Kreme v. Donut Palace Debate of last summer!
                              VBG
                              Regards-
                              Wakefield


                              -- In civilwarwest@y..., ecm777@a... wrote:
                              > Gentlemen, when is this going to stop? Would you please take all
                              this
                              > bantering back and forth to private email. I personally don't have
                              time to
                              > sort through it all!
                              >
                              > Regards
                              > Colleen aka CWgal
                            • brooksdsimpson@yahoo.com
                              ... this ... time to ... That s why it s so useful to access this group through the web page. :)
                              Message 14 of 23 , Oct 2, 2001
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In civilwarwest@y..., ecm777@a... wrote:
                                > Gentlemen, when is this going to stop? Would you please take all
                                this
                                > bantering back and forth to private email. I personally don't have
                                time to
                                > sort through it all!

                                That's why it's so useful to access this group through the web
                                page. :)
                              • brooksdsimpson@yahoo.com
                                ... this ... Colleen-- Once attacked in public, I believe I have the right to self-defense.
                                Message 15 of 23 , Oct 2, 2001
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  --- In civilwarwest@y..., ecm777@a... wrote:
                                  > Gentlemen, when is this going to stop? Would you please take all
                                  this
                                  > bantering back and forth to private email.

                                  Colleen--

                                  Once attacked in public, I believe I have the right to self-defense.
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.