Civil War History - Secession and PoliticsWas it Slavery, or was it States Rights? Perhaps it was the election of Lincoln? What were the real reasons for Southern Secession and what were the political issues in this time of war? Find your answers here in the Secession and Politics Disussion.
I believe Mrs. Stowe made Simon Legree a Northerner to portray that not only are the Southerners who legalize slavery morally inferior but what Northerners are involved in slavery are corrupt, also. This, of course, leaves the remaining Northerners morally superior.
This fiction may have been based on facts, but told in the best interests of the novel and the Northern people considered this work as an accurate and average description of slavery.
Regards,
Rose
Rose,
What would you contend was not accurate in Stowe's novel?
best,
marc
__________________ "It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues." - Abraham Lincoln
As others have said, Stow wanted to show that the system of slavery degraded everyone involved, not that northerners were morally superior. In Tom's journey he is sold by a admirable family in Kentucky, forced by economic circumstances to sell their industrious and contented slave. Tom's next owners, in New Orleans, the father is another attractive character, but his naturally good and strong character has been weakened by slavery.
What's interesting is the visiting New England aunt, who makes a project of the black child Topsy. Topsy utterly rejects her well intentioned efforts to teach her, because the child accurately senses that the New England lady loathes Topsy because she is black, an instinctive aversion the white Southerners don't share.
Finally Tom arrives at Legree's plantation, the worse place in the world. The satanic Legree(another New Englander), with his junior devils to assist him not only wants to make money, he wants to corrupt and degrade everyone in his power. Tom engages in a battle of wills with Legree, in the end morally and psychologically breaks Legree and ends his unholy influence. Legree mortally wounds the Christ-like Tom, but as Tom says, Legree can only own his body, his soul is his own.
Nearly the last scene is a tearful reunion between the dying Tom and (wait for it), the son of the original slaveowning family, come to rescue Tom from Legree's clutches.
UTC is well researched in that the myraid of incidents Tom observes on his journey to his own Calvary are all based on actual incidents. It's an entertaining, melodramatic sentimental potboiler that only occasionally seems
to have real insight(the evil Legree, and the smug New England aunt). Stow unrealistically thought that by just pointing out what was wrong with slavery would cause a change of heart in those who practiced it. But by painting a vivid portrait of an present evil, she helped keep slavery on the national and set the terms of the struggle between North and South.
As others have said, Stow wanted to show that the system of slavery degraded everyone involved, not that northerners were morally superior. In Tom's journey he is sold by a admirable family in Kentucky, forced by economic circumstances to sell their industrious and contented slave. Tom's next owners, in New Orleans, the father is another attractive character, but his naturally good and strong character has been weakened by slavery.
What's interesting is the visiting New England aunt, who makes a project of the black child Topsy. Topsy utterly rejects her well intentioned efforts to teach her, because the child accurately senses that the New England lady loathes Topsy because she is black, an instinctive aversion the white Southerners don't share.
Finally Tom arrives at Legree's plantation, the worse place in the world. The satanic Legree(another New Englander), with his junior devils to assist him not only wants to make money, he wants to corrupt and degrade everyone in his power. Tom engages in a battle of wills with Legree, in the end morally and psychologically breaks Legree and ends his unholy influence. Legree mortally wounds the Christ-like Tom, but as Tom says, Legree can only own his body, his soul is his own.
Nearly the last scene is a tearful reunion between the dying Tom and (wait for it), the son of the original slaveowning family, come to rescue Tom from Legree's clutches.
UTC is well researched in that the myraid of incidents Tom observes on his journey to his own Calvary are all based on actual incidents. It's an entertaining, melodramatic sentimental potboiler that only occasionally seems to have real insight(the evil Legree, and the smug New England aunt). Stow unrealistically thought that by just pointing out what was wrong with slavery would cause a change of heart in those who practiced it. But by painting a vivid portrait of an present evil, she helped keep slavery on the national and set the terms of the struggle between North and South.
Matthew,
This is a fair characterization of the novel, in my opinion. And, of course, everyone knew that it was fiction.
best,
marc
__________________ "It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues." - Abraham Lincoln
Allow me to clarify my remarks. I do concentrate on the hows of the war. The whys, for me, is a seperate issue that keeps coming up on more threads. I for one, like to debate on the many issues around what caused the war, but only as a civilized discourse, not an emotional rabble. This is the amatuer historian in me talking. I know I keep saying this, but even as a Texan and a Southerner, I feel the issue was decided in April 1865. This may not sit well with some of our Southern posters, but I will take the example of General Lee when he urged his departing soldiers to go home and be good citizens.
__________________ F. S. Powers
Union Ancersor: Pvt Arnuah Norton, 60th Ohio. (G-G-G Grandfather) Died at Salisbury NC, November 3, 1864
Confederate Ancestors: Captain Thomas A. Morrow, 29th Texas Cavalry (G-G-G- Uncle) and 2LT George W. Morrow, 31st Texas Cavalry (G-G-G Grandfather). Both survived the war
Thank you for your clarification and I do understand your underlying point.
It would be marvolus to simply discuss the courageous acts of the men on both sides of that long-ago conflict. The bravery of ordinary men in extraordinary times is of endless fascination for me.
And I also agree with you the issue was settled in April of 1865.
But it is the attempt to dishonor the memory of the brave men both you and I have come to respect that troubles me, to minimize their sacrifice and their sufferings, to twist their very reasons for placing themselves in such great danger for the ideals they thought important enough to fight and die for.
It is my own personal flaw, and one that gives me no rest, as it seems it is almost an automatic trigger response when some try to ignore or twist history for their own, modern-day agenda. I apologize if I have become tiring on the subject, for it is not my wish to be so, it was not even my original intent when I first came to this wonderful board.
I thank you for your message and your compliments. They are much appreciated.
Sincerely,
Unionblue
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
Rose,
What would you contend was not accurate in Stowe's novel?
best,
marc
Marc, It's been many, many years since I read "Uncle Tom's Cabin", but I contend that none of it is accurate, because none of it happened. It is fiction written from the perspective of an Abolitionist woman. There is nothing in the novel that is out of the realm of possibility, but that would be the extreme possibility, not the norm. In reality there were few "Simon Legrees". When you come across a man that was cruel to his slaves, usually you have found a man that was simply mean natured. He treats not only slaves but family, animals and others badly. There was no inherent hatred for blacks in the South.
Family splitting as depicted in Mrs. Stowe's book was rare. Mainly it happened on huge plantations that owned dozens of slaves which were rarities and house servants were almost never sold, unless they were problematic, ie. stealing, insolent, unhappy, etc.. There are more instances of owners buying his slave's spouse from another owner than there are of selling one to split up the couple.
Mrs. Stowe knew she was inflaming her Northern audience and that was her intent. Slavery was abolished in every other country, except one, without war. I believe it could have been peacefully abolished in the U.S., too.
Regards,
Rose
__________________ "Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names".--J.F.K.
The War Between the States established... This principle that the Federal Government is, through its courts, this final judge of its own powers.
-- Woodrow Wilson
Nearly all the incidents in UT's Cabin were based on actual incidents that Stow had researched. It wasn't realistic that they were all going to happen to one person. Uncle Tom becomes like a soap opera star, one week this crisis, next week its another.
Lincoln was making a joke of course. There would have been a civil war if Stow had never put pen to paper. But the picture of slavery the world got was through Stow. She thought slavery was a horror, which it certainly was, and wrote a book about it.
How much whipping, rape, selling off of family members were there? Too much, if you had to live with the possibility your whole life.
As far as how masters behaved, the saying "power corrupts" applies to them as well as anyone else.
Mrs. Stowe knew she was inflaming her Northern audience and that was her intent. Slavery was abolished in every other country, except one, without war. I believe it could have been peacefully abolished in the U.S., too.
"Inflaming" is, perhaps, a bit too strong a word for her intentions. "Abolitionist" is an emotion-stirring word. We forget that the term applies to a wide range of thought -- from the abolitionist who only prayed daily that people held in lifetime bondage would one day realize the same freedoms that were granted whites, to the slavering radical who daily prayed for the painful death of every slaveowner.
Ms. Stowe belongs in the less radical camp -- those who hoped to persuade slaveowners to free their charges. She was more than amazed at the book's response. Inflaming was not her intention.
Your last sentence-- I believe it could have been peacefully abolished in the U.S., too. -- highlights the center of my interest in the period. That is, why wasn't it?
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
Slavery was abolished in every other country, except one, without war.
Would that this were true. Tragically, there are countless individuals living out their lives in slavery today. National Geographic has an excellent article on this subject at http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0309/feature1/
They state: "There are more slaves today than were seized from Africa in four centuries of the trans-Atlantic slave trade. The modern commerce in humans rivals illegal drug trafficking in its global reach—and in the destruction of lives."
__________________ Chaplain Rob Stroud, USAF Son of SgtMaj Chuck Stroud, USMC Grandson of Private Charles Stroud, USA Great-Grandson of Corporal Chauncey Stroud, Fifth Iowa Volunteer Cavalry
It should go without saying that although I am a proud member of the military, my posts in no way reflect the official policies of the USAF or the United States government.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
