Documentary: 'Southern Discomfort'

[Dedej]

The scars of suffering, discrimination, ****, and ideology are seen throughout the South. Southern Discomfort tells the story of Americans still grappling with the legacy of slavery, the Civil War, and national pride, as told by dozens of Civil War battle re-enactors, politicians, historians, Civil Rights activists, and southern secessionists. The primary footage was shot at the southern-most battle of the Civil War at Olustee, Florida—and the site of a battle victory for the Confederacy—a location still rife with controversy.

 

[Canadian]

"Every person of goodwill, white or black, ought to say no to this," says an African American man at the end of the film.

The battle being reenacted in this film was one notable for a massacre of African American Union soldiers at the end. Even General G.P.T. Beauregard was disgusted that the Confederate troops lost the opportunity to pursue the enemy, and instead took time to kill the Black soldiers.

The story as portrayed by the reenactment was very different, one of Confederate heroism and victory, very different from the historical record.

Prominent in the film are some members of the African American community, who are dismayed at the historical distortion, and the fact that tax money is spent to support it. Although they make up about a third of the population they are not consulted about this. They feel intimidated about complaining and state that there will be negative repercussions, such as losing their jobs, if they complain.

 

[BillO]

4 minutes in, hilarious.
I did watch the entire thing. The most interesting statement in this was that the black men were shocked upon learning of the USCT. Most folks don't know much of history and after watching this I'd include the producers of this mess.

 

[ForeverFree]

Too much potential for getting into modern politics to make a statement. I would just note that some reenactors have this goal of honoring and glorifying their ancestors, which can be at odds with the goal of properly interpreting the history. They don't understand how this goal they have of maintaining a particular historical memory can affect their objectivity.

I have come to realize that in part, history is the story of good people doing bad things. I don't know if history can be properly told if the storytellers have a discomfort with saying anything negative about their ancestors. That goes for everybody, North, South, East, West, whatever.

- Alan

 

[captaindrew]

Ridiculous attempt to make Civil War reenactors look like a bunch of dumb southern white bigots and try to connect a couple of nuts from some kind of hate group to what goes on at that event is B.S.. The Olustee reenactment is a great event (I go every year) depicting both sides attended by thousands of people of all walks of life. According to this guy reenactments are Confederate festivals held in the south, more BS. What about reenactments held all over the rest of the country? A bunch of **** not worthy of any more comment.

 

[chucksr]

Watched the video and agree with the conclusion--confronting "the problem" is both necessary and difficult to resolve, especially for those that celebrate Southern history. Having said that, I am left where I always am left--challenged to find an answer to the problem with race in America. Having confronted that question for most of my 75 years, I am no closer to a personal idea about how to "solve" the problem today than I was in the 1950's when schools and Little Rock forced me to pay my first attention to a situation that has and continues to exist.
There is nothing wrong with putting up such themes here, most of us come here to think about, study, and discuss issues about a time in our past that has never been totally resolved in any of our minds, if we are honest--that inability to resolve those questions does not and should not make us want to avoid the conundrums of our past and THAT I can speak to. So long as you and I can choose to select what discussions we involve ourselves in, say "No, not going to engage that argument today!" and move on, we are fine. If the thought becomes "I don't want to hear this again, shut 'er down!" then you are wrong. As long as the argument is presented in an open manner, respectfully discussed, I hope the moderators let the postings stand--let the information provoke thought, self enlightenment, discussion, disagreement, none of us has the right to decide what our fellow posters should or should not read.
I wish I had an answer but ....!

 

[Dedej]

"Every person of goodwill, white or black, ought to say no to this," says an African American man at the end of the film.

The battle being reenacted in this film was one notable for a massacre of African American Union soldiers at the end. Even General G.P.T. Beauregard was disgusted that the Confederate troops lost the opportunity to pursue the enemy, and instead took time to kill the Black soldiers.

The story as portrayed by the reenactment was very different, one of Confederate heroism and victory, very different from the historical record.

Prominent in the film are some members of the African American community, who are dismayed at the historical distortion, and the fact that tax money is spent to support it. Although they make up about a third of the population they are not consulted about this. They feel intimidated about complaining and state that there will be negative repercussions, such as losing their jobs, if they complain.

Great overview! This popped up in my YouTube recommendations over the weekend and wanted to share.

I had never heard about the Battle of Olustee or the yearly reenactment - so it was all new for me to learn about. After viewing, I did some Googling and found a couple more links about the event.

Is This Group Ready to Reenact Olustee?
What Happens When Your USCT Unit Disbands?
150 Years Later: The Battle of Olustee

 

[GS]

Too much potential for getting into modern politics to make a statement. I would just note that some reenactors have this goal of honoring and glorifying their ancestors, which can be at odds with the goal of properly interpreting the history. They don't understand how this goal they have of maintaining a particular historical memory can affect their objectivity.

I have come to realize that in part, history is the story of good people doing bad things. I don't know if history can be properly told if the storytellers have a discomfort with saying anything negative about their ancestors. That goes for everybody, North, South, East, West, whatever.

- Alan

I had planned to NOT TOUCH this negative post, but the above quote gave an opportunity to dispel the frequent generalizations, painting every scene with dark motives, and every person as evil. History CAN be the telling of imperfect people doing good things.

For example, as told in my Civil War book Trapped in the Crossfire, an event coming after Atlanta fell to the Union, when General Hood ordered the Army of Tennessee to Dalton, where they captured a black regiment 1000 strong. Hood gave the order "No quarter!", and the men refused to shoot down unarmed prisoners, forcing him to change his orders. This event is revealed in the diaries of the men in the 35th Alabama Regiment who, at that time, served in the Consolidated Regiment.

In addition, to answer a question in the above last paragraph, history can be told revealing the negative of ancestors... if they are honest writers and historians. Again, in my book Trapped in the Crossfire, based upon my ancestors' CW experiences, I reveal as much truth as I can glean, and that which I don't know for certain, I speculate. All humans of all color, class or creed are flawed in character. To believe, or portray, otherwise is not being honest.

 

[ForeverFree]

I had planned to NOT TOUCH this negative post, but the above quote gave an opportunity to dispel the frequent generalizations, painting every scene with dark motives, and every person as evil. History CAN be the telling of imperfect people doing good things.

For example, as told in my Civil War book Trapped in the Crossfire, an event coming after Atlanta fell to the Union, when General Hood ordered the Army of Tennessee to Dalton, where they captured a black regiment 1000 strong. Hood gave the order "No quarter!", and the men refused to shoot down unarmed prisoners, forcing him to change his orders. This event is revealed in the diaries of the men in the 35th Alabama Regiment who, at that time, served in the Consolidated Regiment.

In addition, to answer a question in the above last paragraph, history can be told revealing the negative of ancestors... if they are honest writers and historians. Again, in my book Trapped in the Crossfire, based upon my ancestors' CW experiences, I reveal as much truth as I can glean, and that which I don't know for certain, I speculate. All humans of all color, class or creed are flawed in character. To believe, or portray, otherwise is not being honest.

I agree with you wholeheartedly.

Many reenactors have a genuine respect and appreciation for their ancestors, and I do not begrudge them of that. They come to the subject honestly, to use an expression. But I don't know that there is a realization of how this can affect their objectivity. In fact, some will say, "this is the Southern way, this is my heritage, I am proud to show it"... they wear their subjectivity like a flag, without realizing it could be a problem.

And maybe this is not a correct observation, but it seems to me that Southern reenactors see their activities more as way to project "Southern" heritage (actually white Confederate heritage) than Northern reenactors see their activities as a way to project "Northern" heritage or "Union" heritage. I know many reenactors, but I am not part of the reenactor community; maybe somebody can comment.

- Alan

 

[ForeverFree]

Watched the video and agree with the conclusion--confronting "the problem" is both necessary and difficult to resolve, especially for those that celebrate Southern history. Having said that, I am left where I always am left--challenged to find an answer to the problem with race in America. Having confronted that question for most of my 75 years, I am no closer to a personal idea about how to "solve" the problem today than I was in the 1950's when schools and Little Rock forced me to pay my first attention to a situation that has and continues to exist.
There is nothing wrong with putting up such themes here, most of us come here to think about, study, and discuss issues about a time in our past that has never been totally resolved in any of our minds, if we are honest--that inability to resolve those questions does not and should not make us want to avoid the conundrums of our past and THAT I can speak to. So long as you and I can choose to select what discussions we involve ourselves in, say "No, not going to engage that argument today!" and move on, we are fine. If the thought becomes "I don't want to hear this again, shut 'er down!" then you are wrong. As long as the argument is presented in an open manner, respectfully discussed, I hope the moderators let the postings stand--let the information provoke thought, self enlightenment, discussion, disagreement, none of us has the right to decide what our fellow posters should or should not read.
I wish I had an answer but ....!

I think the thing that many people are going to react to is, that the people interviewed and shown in the documentary are not representative of the entire white southern reenactor community, or the entire white Southern community (or communities) that view reenactments. I take for granted that the small sample size of people in the film is not enough to generalize about the whole, but it does make me curious about what the broad scope of reenactors feel about the many points that were raised, or about their fellow reenactors who made those comments.

The single most gripping thing to me is that they tried to interview members of the African American community about the event, and many people just didn't want to talk about it. What does it mean when 37% of a city is afraid doesn't want to even talk about what is perhaps the biggest event happening in their city during the year?

- Alan

 

[Dedej]

Watched the video and agree with the conclusion--confronting "the problem" is both necessary and difficult to resolve, especially for those that celebrate Southern history. Having said that, I am left where I always am left--challenged to find an answer to the problem with race in America. Having confronted that question for most of my 75 years, I am no closer to a personal idea about how to "solve" the problem today than I was in the 1950's when schools and Little Rock forced me to pay my first attention to a situation that has and continues to exist.
There is nothing wrong with putting up such themes here, most of us come here to think about, study, and discuss issues about a time in our past that has never been totally resolved in any of our minds, if we are honest--that inability to resolve those questions does not and should not make us want to avoid the conundrums of our past and THAT I can speak to. So long as you and I can choose to select what discussions we involve ourselves in, say "No, not going to engage that argument today!" and move on, we are fine. If the thought becomes "I don't want to hear this again, shut 'er down!" then you are wrong. As long as the argument is presented in an open manner, respectfully discussed, I hope the moderators let the postings stand--let the information provoke thought, self enlightenment, discussion, disagreement, none of us has the right to decide what our fellow posters should or should not read.
I wish I had an answer but ....!

I actually really like your comment.

What I found interesting (and the main issue) was not the issue of race - but the issue of not being mindful and/or the lack of empathy/caring about what events like these --- and an significant portion of like-minded individuals who attend events like this might present or make others feel.

I have always supported honoring one's ancestors - but in the documentary - I did find it disappointing that the Black residents felt they had to sit back in silence and uncomfortableness due to the yearly event. I personally wouldn't take that route -- and as taxpayers -- I hope in the future those residents will take the risk to speak up for themselves.

Whether one wants to admit it or not - heritage groups and lost cause rhetoric seem to be very prevalent at most of these events. I truly think real balanced historians should be on hand to help educate participants and attendees about the actual history of these events. Also, the barring of heritage groups that preach and teach bigotry. Especially, if children are going to be present.

Has there been any steps to change this? If so, what are they? Is this even something the reenactment community wants to change? It would be interesting to find out.

Either way, it's their right and can choose to continue in anyway they feel comfortable with. But, understand and be able to take/hear about how others might view and feel about it.

As they too - have every right to feel the way they do as well.

 

[Canadian]

Great overview! This popped up in my YouTube recommendations over the weekend and wanted to share.

I have never heard about the Battle of Olustee or the yearly reenactment - so it was all new for me to learn about. After viewing, I did some Googling and found a couple more links about the event.

Is This Group Ready to Reenact Olustee?
What Happens When Your USCT Unit Disbands?
150 Years Later: The Battle of Olustee

I had never heard of the battle of Olustee either until I watched the documentary. I looked it up.

There are a number of articles online that confirm the targeting of African American soldiers in the aftermath of the battle.

To cover the retreat, [Union Commander General Truman Seymour] threw his reserves into the battle. These reserves consisted of soldiers from the Massachusetts 54th and the 35th United States Colored Troops. One white soldier later noted: "The colored troops went in grandly, and they fought like devils." The black soldiers held their ground until past dark, enabling their comrades to get safely out of range, before they received orders to move back toward Jacksonville.

The black soldiers at Olustee paid dearly for their heroism. The casualties at the battle were high on both sides: the Federals lost more than 1800 men, nearly one out of every three men, while the Confederacy lost 950, or about one out of every five. But black Union soldiers bore a special burden. The Union troops knew that Confederates furious at the idea of emancipation would give no quarter to black soldiers, and white and black soldiers both tried valiantly to make sure no one was left behind. But they didn't save everyone. Confederate soldiers shot and clubbed to death as many as fifty wounded black soldiers before the men could be rescued.
​

Source: http://werehistory.org/olustee-and-black-freedom/

Other websites with essentially the same information come up as well.

https://www.civilwar.org/learn/civil-war/battles/olustee
http://www.floridamemory.com/blog/2014/02/20/battle-of-olustee-february-20-1864/

Posting a documentary that points out untruths that are passed down along the generations is not a negative thing to do. I believe that anyone interested in the Civil War would be interested in knowing the all the complexities of the war.

 

[Burning Billy]

That some of the reenactors interviewed in the documentary are echoing the Lost Cause version of the Civil War does indicate that there is a problem with at least a portion of the reenacting community. There are some who are more interested it seems in peddling a romantic myth of a version of the Confederacy that never existed than playing a role in educating the public attending these events on the actual history they are purporting to portray.

 

[Eleanor Rose]

Several years ago, Civil War Institute director Peter Carmichael was quoted in a Wall Street Journal article, which stated: he "calls re-enactments an 'unfortunate distraction' from a deeper understanding of the Civil War, including the motivations of those who fought and its legacy. He said he favored living history encampments, where people can hold a musket or eat hardtack, giving them a tangible experience of the past. But people can learn the most from National Park Service historians who rove the battlefield, he said: 'All you need to do is stay in the National Park and you'll come away with a very deep understanding of what happened here.'"

I am not opposed to re-enactments and have enjoyed visiting and learning from encampments, etc. I don't have any statistics to quote, but as Jared Fredrick pointed out in his blog, History Matters, I'd guess that "more people pay to attend the Gettysburg battle reenactment than who go on free ranger programs on the actual field." That in itself is probably worth thinking about.

Great post @Dedej! Great comments from others too.

 

[Southern Unionist]

I don't see these activities as competing or conflicting with each other, but as contributing one more thing to the overall story. It's not like we are being forced to choose between them, and they often overlap. Remember the reenactment at Appomattox? One of our favorite parts was visiting both camps and listening to what they had to say. We had already heard everything the NPS rangers had to say, on previous visits, and we had already covered every square inch of the ground and read every printed word and studied every item in the onsite museum. Add that to everything that we've read online and in print about Appomattox, and it seems to add up to a reasonably complete understanding. I would not be in favor of any part of it being removed from what is available to future visitors.

On the other hand, if somebody gets so deep into reenacting that he doesn't have time to do anything else that is related to learning about the CW, I think that's too much. That person is getting an unbalanced picture.

Jared Fredrick pointed out in his blog, History Matters, I'd guess that "more people pay to attend the Gettysburg battle reenactment than who go on free ranger programs on the actual field."

Hopefully, most of them spend time with the rangers at some other time, if not on that visit, when they might be swamped. If any actual statistics exist on that subject, I'd be curious.

We still haven't been to a large-scale reenactment, and I'd like to see one. It's one thing to have a vivid imagination and visualize a large historical event take place, but it isn't the same thing as seeing with your own eyes. So, there will always be value in acting things out.

 

[chucksr]

Certainly one of the best observations in the video, not the only good one, but one that strikes me as legitimate is the question about how public tax money is being spent to both underwrite and facilitate these reenactments. I think it is quite legitimate to point out that using my tax money or your tax money to perpetuate a perceived racially insensitive set of events and holidays needs to be addressed.
All in all, the creators did create the right questions for us to ask ourselves and rarely are such efforts as provocative as this one in doing so. I wouldn't rate the effort as "sensitive" in any manner but the bluntness of what they wanted us, the audience, to understand about current attitudes was well done.
I think the creators did well in identifying and reinforcing the problems that attach to these sorts of events. They don't suggest a solution but they sure do lay out the various conflicting attitudes and beliefs in a fair and open manner. Kudos from me, the video sure did roil my normally comfortable acceptance of this sort of thing and it is good when a filmmaker challenges my "business as usual" attitude about the Civil War, blacks and whites, the Lost Cause, and modern education and general smug understanding in an hour and a half.

 

[Southern Unionist]

using my tax money or your tax money to perpetuate a perceived racially insensitive set of events

It's called history. You don't get to change it to suit yourself.

Why do politically correct people seem to forget that 50% of all reenactors are representing the other side? In what way were Union soldiers and the US government at that time racially insensitive?

 

[mofederal]

I would say more education is needed for the public about black soldiers in the Civil War. Especially about the USCT and it's role in the war, leading to their post war role in the US Army. Yes unfortunately some reenactors could use a real history lesson themselves. You can't change history no matter what you do, but we can at least let people see the truth.

 

[captaindrew]

Certainly one of the best observations in the video, not the only good one, but one that strikes me as legitimate is the question about how public tax money is being spent to both underwrite and facilitate these reenactments. I think it is quite legitimate to point out that using my tax money or your tax money to perpetuate a perceived racially insensitive set of events and holidays needs to be addressed.
All in all, the creators did create the right questions for us to ask ourselves and rarely are such efforts as provocative as this one in doing so. I wouldn't rate the effort as "sensitive" in any manner but the bluntness of what they wanted us, the audience, to understand about current attitudes was well done.
I think the creators did well in identifying and reinforcing the problems that attach to these sorts of events. They don't suggest a solution but they sure do lay out the various conflicting attitudes and beliefs in a fair and open manner. Kudos from me, the video sure did roil my normally comfortable acceptance of this sort of thing and it is good when a filmmaker challenges my "business as usual" attitude about the Civil War, blacks and whites, the Lost Cause, and modern education and general smug understanding in an hour and a half.

This one of the things the video isn't telling the whole truth. Most reenactments are held on private property such as the annual event at Gettysburg, no public money involved. In the case of Olustee the festival in Lake City which from what I understand is a typical fair held on the same weekend as the reenactment. I've never been able to make it to the festival so I can't comment for sure what goes on over there and it's quite a distance away from the battlefield. The only connection between the two events is they ask reenactors (blue and grey) to volunteer to march in their parade Saturday morning. The battle reenactment is put on by the state park service, nothing to do with the city of Lake City. The state charges admission to this event and by the numbers of people that come out I'm quite sure they at least break even or make money or I don't think they would have it. Also the battlefield is a long ways out of town so in no way is this in people's face with maybe the exception of the festival parade which again is not part of the reenactment. As far as what some of the reenactors say when put on the spot with a camera in your face just waiting to say the wrong thing I think most of them gave pretty good answers. We aren't there to make some kind of political or social stand. As a whole we are there because it's a fun hobby and have a passion for history and like to spend our weekends with like minded folks. We enjoy learning from each other and get a small look into the life of a Civil War soldier. People come watch because it's entertaining and hopefully we can share some of what we learned with them. I've been reenacting on and off when time and funds have allowed since the mid 80s and have never been asked by a spectator at an event my thoughts on social or political issues. That's just not what these events are about.

 

[Dedej]

It's called history. You don't get to change it to suit yourself.

Why do politically correct people seem to forget that 50% of all reenactors are representing the other side? In what way were Union soldiers and the US government at that time racially insensitive?

Apparently, that appears to be a major issue at some of these events.

Also, would the AA residents in Oulstee be defined as "politically correct people" (and fellow taxpayers) -- because they have another viewpoint of the event?