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.
You know, for the life of me, I can't remember where or when I heard or read that. Doesn't matter, I guess. It's a striking comparison. Though, I confess, probably not a very good one when you get down to the details. Still, the point stands that the Civil War has all the elements of a masterful piece of dramatic literature.
Welcome to Civil War Talk. That was a very thoughtful post. I first heard of the Civil War being refered to as the American Iliad in the Ken Burns series. I'm afraid I don't remember if Burns was quoting someone else.
I think that we often shape events into a narrative, a story, sometimes to the detriment of the facts. Its human nature.
The "American Illiad" was the title of a book by Eisenshml or something like that.
Must join in on that, Yeade. Exceptionally excellent post.
Now. For a dumb question: Does "First generation" mean that you immigrated with your parents or you were born here of immigrant parents? Never have gotten a determination on the fine points of that designation.
Your English is particularly excellent, so I'll assume you are a relatively new arrival. We who were born here get really sloppy. Or, you've been here a long time and listened and read and figured it all out.
But it was a refreshing view. Thank you. And welcome.
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
Thank you for this excellent thread, and welcome to Yeade.
IMHO, the War Between the States (one of about 20 names for the CW) was the point that the US lost its innocence. This was not a sudden thing. Again, IMHO, the road to Fort Sumter started in Indepandence Hall in 1776 with the removal of the anti-Slavery clause in the Declaration of Independence.
What fascinates most of us is that there was a time that some people just felt too strongly about certain issues to remain in the American family. We also look at the battles, tactics, weapons, politics, and personalities of this period. We also tend to look at the reprocussions of the CW which still affect us today.
I'm fascinated by it because I have three ancestors from that period.
__________________ 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
ole, I immigrated with my parents at an early age of five. I forgot how ambiguous the term "first-generation immigrant" is. Technically, I'm what would be called a "1.5-generation immigrant." I was born in China, but I grew up and was schooled here in America. It's a sometimes uncomfortable dichotomy, as I'm considered Chinese by Americans and American by native Chinese. I wasn't old enough to attend anything but preschool in China and never received formal instruction on the language. So, English is essentially my first language. Sorry for the confusion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by matthew mckeon
I think that we often shape events into a narrative, a story, sometimes to the detriment of the facts.
Well, I think there's something to be said for the narrative quality of Civil War history: It's a large part of what makes the period so endlessly fascinating to popular audiences, IMO. The best fiction, I feel, is a fine distillation of reality--based in fact but elevating certain elements to the mythic level. It is so easy to do this with the Civil War.
I don't think doing so is necessarily wrong because, indeed, the ACW has more than its share of epic events and people. However, this view is incomplete. The Civil War actually happened; these were real folks doing and being done unto. The human factor gives the war a depth and complexity lacking in all but the most meticulously written stories. Personally, I think the narrative of the Civil War is only improved by acknowledging the living, breathing people who took part; it does not diminish the scope of the achievements or failures but rather highlights these.
Of course, I'm sort of treating this topic from the viewpoint of a historian, professional or amateur, trying to remain unbiased. If the one shaping history has an agenda--and I suppose it's naive to think otherwise--then, yes, the high drama of the Civil War can easily obscure the whole truth.
matthew mckeon, you're right. I probably did hear the Civil War termed "the American Iliad" in the Ken Burns series. I first watched it many, many years ago and catch it on TV during reruns, so my memory's all blurred together.
Speaking of the Ken Burns series, that's a good example of a work about the Civil War that isn't always accurate but maintains a cohesive and interesting narrative. For me, it's a question of whether something like the Ken Burns series is worth enough in its strengths of conveying emotion and letting modern audiences experience a bit of what it was like to live then to offset its historical faults. In addition, the series is a fantastic bit of publicity.
...am I making any sense? I've got something in mind, but I can't seem to get the idea out in writing. Also, I feel like I'm totally misinterpreting your statement, matthew mckeon. If so, I apologize.
More like curiosity, Yeade. My Great Grandfather came over some time ago. My question was more like: Was he first generation American? Or was my grandfather, who was born here. Just an insignificant technicality, but a loose end nevertheless.
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
As I understand the matter, ole, your great-grandfather was a first-generation immigrant. Your grandfather was a first-generation American or of the first generation born here in the U.S. but would be considered a second-generation immigrant.
Thank you, Yeade, for roiling the stream even more.
In the "science" of listing such things--the Mormons are probably the last word on this--there is a specific meaning for "first generation." So. Was my greatgrandfather a first? Or was my grandfather?
My Dear One's mother was an immigrant. Was her mother a first? Or Dear One? (I won't bring in her father, who was born here and went back to the old country, only to come back. That just complicates things.)
I'm simply nitpicking the technical meaning of "first generation." It is of no import whatsoever to anyone but me and a handful of others who become obsessed with such detail.
Let's forget I ever brought it up and move on to subjects that are truly important: Like, was taking Brittany's children away a good idea?
Just an aside to the aside. Loved the comment of a talking head when he or she said something like: The definitition of an unfit parent gets a new meaning when the kids can be considered better off with K-Fed.
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
As I understand the matter, ole, your great-grandfather was a first-generation immigrant. Your grandfather was a first-generation American or of the first generation born here in the U.S. but would be considered a second-generation immigrant.
Just to pick at Ole, I must ask: Wouldn't one only be an immigrant once? A third generation American would hence be a descendant of the immigrant in the fourth generation succeding the immigrant? I think you're right. Brittany's kids may be marginally more important.
__________________ Ancestors in US Army: 13th TN Cav; 10th TN Cav; 3rd NC Inf
Ancestors in CSA Army: 48th VA; 63rd VA, 5th NC Cav; 37th NC
Wife and Grandson's CSA: 15th AL, 51st GA, 41st TN; 36th TN; GA Mil 1197 Dist
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
