Personally, I don't find a parade much more than cold comfort, but I've always been a bit ticky over all those memorials to Confederate generals myself. For me it's more of a Union thing, but Stonewall Jackson was a freaking psycho.
And I have to ask Mr. Jarrett, do you believe that slavery is a thing of the past? Something that could never happen again/isn't happening now?
It isn't just some black/white thing Mr. Jarrett; that's just the most obvious thing here in front of us, but it is far bigger and it effects us all in some way (because if we turn our backs on such things, we really become no better than those who are actively for it...and they are out there still).
As I stated, I find a parade to be a frilly nothingburger, and sadly could see it being given as some sort of convenient sop, but that feeling comes about because I'm afraid that we have entirely forgotten just how close we are at any time to falling in line with such an evil thing -- we are doing it right now to some extent unfortunately.
Your Jackson is a Jackson of myth Mr. Jarrett. Formed at a time when the Confederacy had a need for heroes, and then later when the South had need for idols. R.L. Dabney wrote the original authoritative bibliography on Jackson; Dabney was his chaplain and a complete sympathizer with the Southern cause -- including the notion that black folks were supposed to be slaves for their own good, and that this was on biblical authority (the same thing Jackson believed by the way). It is doubtful that he would have been...completely objective in his handling of a personal hero.
Jackson had some moments of brilliance, such as at Chancellorsville. He also was incredibly erratic, could be horribly inept (the Seven Days Battle), and he was well known for treating his own men like dogs (its probably a good thing for them that he died when he did). To say nothing of his personal views, as well as his ideas concerning total war (which is also probably a good reason to be happy he died when he did, and that Lee had at least enough integrity and foresight to rein him in -- people carry on about Sherman...it's probably a good thing we never got to discover what Jackson would have been like).
Oh, and his nickname (given by Gen. Bee...actually to his men as much as him) is not an historical definite as to its complimentary nature.
Ironically, the best general the Confederacy had was probably Longstreet (the man understood defense) -- but he did not quite fit what the Lost Cause wanted, now did he? So somebody had to be smeared in order to elevate Lee and Jackson.
We teach people history so poorly in this country.
Oh, and I'm very aware that he is "still taught at West Point" -- however, only a fool would teach him as some perfected god of war; he was not (the flanking maneuver at Chancellorsville excepting -- that was good, but he wasn't spotless by a long shot, his mistakes are also covered if the instructor is wise).
Ok Cody, why don't you consult history books that aren't written by people who have invested themselves in preserving the myth of Stonewall Jackson. These are rampant and one could write pages about the attempts of people (largely successful) to create these myths and mainstream them.
The book "Donnybrook" by David Detzer (I believe that is his name) does a pretty good job of portraying him as a human being rather than some god of the Confederacy. At least he provides a balanced account. Most people read Tanner, and he is (at least admittedly) biased towards Jackson. For Longstreet, there is a book "Lee's Tarnished Lieutenant" that covers him very well (and what happened to his reputation).
It does no one well, including the people lionized, to create myths about them. I'll spend the day finding links and book reviews for you, if you would like.
Except the Generals are all dead. According to you and others the slaves are all still with us--so we don't need a memorial to remember them.
ReplyDeleteThere's no danger in forgetting them, after all, if none of you will shut up about it.
Personally, I don't find a parade much more than cold comfort, but I've always been a bit ticky over all those memorials to Confederate generals myself.
ReplyDeleteFor me it's more of a Union thing, but Stonewall Jackson was a freaking psycho.
PW
Jackson is considered one of the most brilliant tacticians in US history. His battles are still taught at West Point.
ReplyDeleteAnd I have to ask Mr. Jarrett, do you believe that slavery is a thing of the past? Something that could never happen again/isn't happening now?
ReplyDeleteIt isn't just some black/white thing Mr. Jarrett; that's just the most obvious thing here in front of us, but it is far bigger and it effects us all in some way (because if we turn our backs on such things, we really become no better than those who are actively for it...and they are out there still).
As I stated, I find a parade to be a frilly nothingburger, and sadly could see it being given as some sort of convenient sop, but that feeling comes about because I'm afraid that we have entirely forgotten just how close we are at any time to falling in line with such an evil thing -- we are doing it right now to some extent unfortunately.
PW
Your Jackson is a Jackson of myth Mr. Jarrett. Formed at a time when the Confederacy had a need for heroes, and then later when the South had need for idols. R.L. Dabney wrote the original authoritative bibliography on Jackson; Dabney was his chaplain and a complete sympathizer with the Southern cause -- including the notion that black folks were supposed to be slaves for their own good, and that this was on biblical authority (the same thing Jackson believed by the way). It is doubtful that he would have been...completely objective in his handling of a personal hero.
ReplyDeleteJackson had some moments of brilliance, such as at Chancellorsville. He also was incredibly erratic, could be horribly inept (the Seven Days Battle), and he was well known for treating his own men like dogs (its probably a good thing for them that he died when he did). To say nothing of his personal views, as well as his ideas concerning total war (which is also probably a good reason to be happy he died when he did, and that Lee had at least enough integrity and foresight to rein him in -- people carry on about Sherman...it's probably a good thing we never got to discover what Jackson would have been like).
Oh, and his nickname (given by Gen. Bee...actually to his men as much as him) is not an historical definite as to its complimentary nature.
Ironically, the best general the Confederacy had was probably Longstreet (the man understood defense) -- but he did not quite fit what the Lost Cause wanted, now did he? So somebody had to be smeared in order to elevate Lee and Jackson.
We teach people history so poorly in this country.
PW
Oh, and I'm very aware that he is "still taught at West Point" -- however, only a fool would teach him as some perfected god of war; he was not (the flanking maneuver at Chancellorsville excepting -- that was good, but he wasn't spotless by a long shot, his mistakes are also covered if the instructor is wise).
ReplyDeletePW
You're quite right; whoever taught you history did a very poor job.
ReplyDeleteOk Cody, why don't you consult history books that aren't written by people who have invested themselves in preserving the myth of Stonewall Jackson. These are rampant and one could write pages about the attempts of people (largely successful) to create these myths and mainstream them.
ReplyDeleteThe book "Donnybrook" by David Detzer (I believe that is his name) does a pretty good job of portraying him as a human being rather than some god of the Confederacy. At least he provides a balanced account. Most people read Tanner, and he is (at least admittedly) biased towards Jackson.
For Longstreet, there is a book "Lee's Tarnished Lieutenant" that covers him very well (and what happened to his reputation).
It does no one well, including the people lionized, to create myths about them.
I'll spend the day finding links and book reviews for you, if you would like.
PW