Grant Why (even today) is Grant such a Polarizing Figure?

But you are not dubbed "butcher" for nothing. And if you think he was not polarizing then it must have been the "Big Boss" behind him, who never considered peace treaties... and that might be equally true.
Very good point, Andrea. People always forget that it was Lincoln who authorized and approved everything Grant and Sherman did, including Sherman's March to the Sea. Lincoln shared with Grant and Sherman the conviction that only total defeat of the rebellion, and the unconditional surrender of the Confederacy, would save the Union.
 
Military men are not easy to live with. They know it. That's why they pick smart, strong women! Sherman and Ellen Ewing - fought like hyenas and sometimes he'd take a more or less lengthy hike, or she would, but it's hard to imagine either of them married to anybody else - Sherman almost sank into the grave with her, he was so heartbroken.
They also had a whole passel of kids, since a new baby was on the way after every visit back home. Just sayin'.
 
It would be interesting if that which irritated him later is actually what initially attracted him to her.
Before my husband and I got married, we had three pre-marital counseling sessions with a counselor. He had us do this little exercise. He asked each of us to think for a moment and name the one thing that we most liked about the other. Then he told us, "Now remember that -- because, one of these days, that will be the very thing that drives you crazy!"
 
I need to end all my posts in this thread with variations of the original theme so I can say I'm (sorta) still on topic:

<blah blah, handkerchiefs, men in uniform, varina davis, yadda yadda> posts here, and then...

"Grant. Yes. Quite polarizing."
"He does elicit emotion, that Grant"
"Grant won, and that makes people mad."

and perhaps end one post with just...

"Grant"

:D
I'll grant you that.
 
There is also the possibility that he was one of those individuals who just naturally responded with a "fix" (a solution) whenever someone presented him with a problem. In other words, he couldn't just listen and/or sympathize. Action was required. And if it wasn't fixed, that likely frustrated him on a couple of levels...she wasn't happy, and he failed in some way.

I know and love a few people like that. I didn't like it at first ~ it's easy to feel like you're being talked down to or ordered around. But once I figured out where it was coming from and understood, "This person thinks I'm stuck and wants to help," the irritation factor decreased.

This doesn't apply to everyone, of course. There are some boneheads out there who mentally pat you on the head and basically say, "Silly person with the squirrel brain, how have you managed to exist this long?" :cautious: It just screams something about them, doesn't it?
In general (many, many exceptions, but speaking very broadly), what women want most is someone to listen and understand -- that validation of someone saying "I hear you!" Whereas men (again, speaking very generally), want to fix a problem, not talk about it. They have a hard time realizing that when you tell them about a problem you're having, you really just want some sympathy and understanding. Instead, they think you're hoping for them to help you fix it.
 
We've (given some seasoning) all known a McClellan type. Nothing wrong with being a McClellan type. That the types occasionally clash is also normal.

What's a McClellan type? The poor sod that "gets it" right away but can't convince his pointy haired boss? I've known a fair few of them.
 
Really? Did not know that.
Hannah loved her children very much, but for some reason she was exceptionally reserved and undemonstrative. She didn't mean to be cruel, but her kids just didn't get the kind of hugging, kissing, and praising most of us probably give our kids. She had some kind of a religious obsession with avoiding the sin of pride, and consequently, she even refused herself the pleasure of being proud of her children's accomplishments. (The complete opposite of Jesse Grant, Ulysses's dad, who boasted about his oldest son incessantly!) As I understand it, when Grant was inaugurated as president, Hannah was afraid that seeing her son as president would make her too prideful, so she stayed away. Same reason she never came to visit him the whole time he was in the White House.

I've always thought that was one reason Ulys's attraction to Julia was so overwhelming. She was everything his mother was not: physically and emotionally affectionate, proud of him, his greatest cheerleader, no matter how down-on-their-luck they were at any given time; plucky, talkative, demonstrative.
 
In all honesty he was the epitome of an ego maniac. Who for gods sakes leaves the president of the united states sitting in his parlor and doesn't have the decency to tell the man he is tired and going to bed. Lincoln tolerance is amazing. It shows how despite Lincoln was for a man like Grant.

Yeah. The only problem is that its a single source story (Hay) not corroborated by any of the principles present. Also, if you read etiquette manuals of the period it would be Lincoln being rude, not McClellan.

As I've pointed out elsewhere, Hay's story* indicates McClellan probably never even knew Lincoln was there - Hay says McClellan rushed past his servant paying him no attention and thus probably never knew Lincoln was there. My personal theory would be McClellan was rushing upstairs to urinate, having been drinking at a party and then riding a horse back home.

Anyway:

"
But the supreme insult, and what John Hay called the “unparalleled insolence of epaulettes,” was the reported snub McClellan delivered the president on November 13, 1861. It is the one story that finds its way into virtually every biography of Lincoln or McClellan. According to Hay, he, along with Lincoln and Seward, went to visit the general’s home on Jackson Square to confer with McClellan. When they arrived, the porter informed them that McClellan was out attending the wedding of an officer. Electing to wait, they sat until they heard McClellan arrive home. Then, according to Hay, the general brushed past the parlor, paying no attention to the porter’s announcement of visitors, and went straight upstairs. After a half hour passed, Lincoln reminded the porter they were still waiting to see the general; he received the response that McClellan had already gone to bed. 4 Even the most neutral observer would be forced to think very poorly of McClellan.

Although it may be recorded as but another item in the record of McClellan’s insolence, Hay’s recollection deserves a closer look. The fact that it appears as an incident worth citing in any review of the Lincoln-McClellan relationship points to its significance in the literature. A number of McClellan supporters have tried to mitigate the callous aspects of the event by impugning Hay’s truthfulness or by making excuses for the general’s behavior. 5 In part, these objections are valid, but they have usually been ignored or dismissed. 6 Still, there are many unsettling matters with respect to the use of this story. Most importantly, historians have accepted at face value the integrity of the story, both in its explicit content and in the value Hay placed upon the incident. No one prefaces any narration of the story by relating that this is the “way Hay saw it,” or “according to Hay,” or even “Hay reported.” The story is repeated as is, presumably for its full impact.

The strange thing about that incident is that not one of the principals involved corroborated it in any way. Beyond Hay’s assertion that Lincoln made light of the matter, there is no mention of it in anything Lincoln wrote or said, and the same may be said for Seward. McClellan, who is on record for sharing most of his contempt for the president with his wife, made no mention of it, even though he wrote her the very next day. Such a snub would surely have been worthy of sharing with Ellen. Lincoln did not use the incident, as some have maintained, to stop visiting McClellan’s home and begin summoning the general to the White House. He visited the general on the very next evening, and at least one more time, on the evening of November 18. Shortly after that, McClellan’s wife, with her infant daughter in tow, came to live with the general, and that may have been a factor in the switch in meeting places. Consequently, it seems plausible that the incident, assuming it did occur, came off very differently than described and that it carried none of the general’s insolence or the president’s humiliation that Hay perceived. 7"

Rowland, Thomas J (2008-07-01). George B. McClellan and Civil War History:In the Shadow of Grant and Sherman (Kindle Locations 1036-1060). Kent State University Press. Kindle Edition.


*
"Nov. 13. I wish here to record what I consider a portent of evil to come. The President, Governor S_____ and I went over to McC______'s house to-night. The servant at the door said the General was at the wedding of Col. W_____ at Gen'l B_____'s and would soon return. We went in, and after we had waited about an hour, McC______ came in, and without paying any particular attention to the porter who told him the President was waiting to see him, went up-stairs, passing the door of the room where the President and Secretary of State were seated. They waited about half an hour, and sent once more a servant to tell the General they were there; and the answer came that the General had gone to bed.

I merely record this unparalleled insolence of epaulettes without comment. It is the first indication I have yet seen of the threatened supremacy of the military authorities.

Coming home I spoke to the President about the matter, but he seemed not to have noticed it, specially, saying it was better, at this time, not to be making points of etiquette and personal dignity."
 
Hannah loved her children very much, but for some reason she was exceptionally reserved and undemonstrative. She didn't mean to be cruel, but her kids just didn't get the kind of hugging, kissing, and praising most of us probably give our kids. She had some kind of a religious obsession with avoiding the sin of pride, and consequently, she even refused herself the pleasure of being proud of her children's accomplishments. (The complete opposite of Jesse Grant, Ulysses's dad, who boasted about his oldest son incessantly!) As I understand it, when Grant was inaugurated as president, Hannah was afraid that seeing her son as president would make her too prideful, so she stayed away. Same reason she never came to visit him the whole time he was in the White House.

I've always thought that was one reason Ulys's attraction to Julia was so overwhelming. She was everything his mother was not: physically and emotionally affectionate, proud of him, his greatest cheerleader, no matter how down-on-their-luck they were at any given time; plucky, talkative, demonstrative.
We should all be so lucky. It makes a huge difference.
 
Yeah. The only problem is that its a single source story (Hay) not corroborated by any of the principles present. Also, if you read etiquette manuals of the period it would be Lincoln being rude, not McClellan.

As I've pointed out elsewhere, Hay's story* indicates McClellan probably never even knew Lincoln was there - Hay says McClellan rushed past his servant paying him no attention and thus probably never knew Lincoln was there. My personal theory would be McClellan was rushing upstairs to urinate, having been drinking at a party and then riding a horse back home.

Anyway:

"
But the supreme insult, and what John Hay called the “unparalleled insolence of epaulettes,” was the reported snub McClellan delivered the president on November 13, 1861. It is the one story that finds its way into virtually every biography of Lincoln or McClellan. According to Hay, he, along with Lincoln and Seward, went to visit the general’s home on Jackson Square to confer with McClellan. When they arrived, the porter informed them that McClellan was out attending the wedding of an officer. Electing to wait, they sat until they heard McClellan arrive home. Then, according to Hay, the general brushed past the parlor, paying no attention to the porter’s announcement of visitors, and went straight upstairs. After a half hour passed, Lincoln reminded the porter they were still waiting to see the general; he received the response that McClellan had already gone to bed. 4 Even the most neutral observer would be forced to think very poorly of McClellan.

Although it may be recorded as but another item in the record of McClellan’s insolence, Hay’s recollection deserves a closer look. The fact that it appears as an incident worth citing in any review of the Lincoln-McClellan relationship points to its significance in the literature. A number of McClellan supporters have tried to mitigate the callous aspects of the event by impugning Hay’s truthfulness or by making excuses for the general’s behavior. 5 In part, these objections are valid, but they have usually been ignored or dismissed. 6 Still, there are many unsettling matters with respect to the use of this story. Most importantly, historians have accepted at face value the integrity of the story, both in its explicit content and in the value Hay placed upon the incident. No one prefaces any narration of the story by relating that this is the “way Hay saw it,” or “according to Hay,” or even “Hay reported.” The story is repeated as is, presumably for its full impact.

The strange thing about that incident is that not one of the principals involved corroborated it in any way. Beyond Hay’s assertion that Lincoln made light of the matter, there is no mention of it in anything Lincoln wrote or said, and the same may be said for Seward. McClellan, who is on record for sharing most of his contempt for the president with his wife, made no mention of it, even though he wrote her the very next day. Such a snub would surely have been worthy of sharing with Ellen. Lincoln did not use the incident, as some have maintained, to stop visiting McClellan’s home and begin summoning the general to the White House. He visited the general on the very next evening, and at least one more time, on the evening of November 18. Shortly after that, McClellan’s wife, with her infant daughter in tow, came to live with the general, and that may have been a factor in the switch in meeting places. Consequently, it seems plausible that the incident, assuming it did occur, came off very differently than described and that it carried none of the general’s insolence or the president’s humiliation that Hay perceived. 7"

Rowland, Thomas J (2008-07-01). George B. McClellan and Civil War History:In the Shadow of Grant and Sherman (Kindle Locations 1036-1060). Kent State University Press. Kindle Edition.


*
"Nov. 13. I wish here to record what I consider a portent of evil to come. The President, Governor S_____ and I went over to McC______'s house to-night. The servant at the door said the General was at the wedding of Col. W_____ at Gen'l B_____'s and would soon return. We went in, and after we had waited about an hour, McC______ came in, and without paying any particular attention to the porter who told him the President was waiting to see him, went up-stairs, passing the door of the room where the President and Secretary of State were seated. They waited about half an hour, and sent once more a servant to tell the General they were there; and the answer came that the General had gone to bed.

I merely record this unparalleled insolence of epaulettes without comment. It is the first indication I have yet seen of the threatened supremacy of the military authorities.

Coming home I spoke to the President about the matter, but he seemed not to have noticed it, specially, saying it was better, at this time, not to be making points of etiquette and personal dignity."
That is very interesting. I have read the account in several books. I've never check the footnote. Perhaps they are all the same source. The things you learn here. Thank you I'm off to check this out.
 
Grant was very possessive of his daughter Nellie, the only one he had. When she married he was much against it - but it turned out he was perfectly right. The guy was a bum but had the decency to leave Nellie a rich young widow!
Actually, they divorced. The husband, Algernon Sartoris, didn't die until 1907.
 
Actually, they divorced. The husband, Algernon Sartoris, didn't die until 1907.

Thanks! Well, at least she got something out of it. Grant so often didn't seem to have good judgement about his own associates, but he sure knew his daughter had picked a jerk! (Actually, I think Grant's problem wasn't so much his associates - which seemed decent enough except for some of his family - as the people who came around him as president.)
 
Thanks! Well, at least she got something out of it. Grant so often didn't seem to have good judgement about his own associates, but he sure knew his daughter had picked a jerk! (Actually, I think Grant's problem wasn't so much his associates - which seemed decent enough except for some of his family - as the people who came around him as president.)

It was actually learning that he cried when he gave her away (or so the legend goes) on a random fact site that sparked my interest. What sort of rough-and-tumble, nicknamed "the Butcher" and "Unconditional Surrender" Grant, famous for having no emotion, general, cries giving away his daughter? And I mean that in the nicest way possible- even if it wasn't 100% true.
 
I've read more than a few books in the last 50 years and I know which books are of value and which aren't. I strongly suspect I am not alone there.

"You haven't read the book" is a vapid argument.

Vapid? Not at all. You can claim interest/disinterest about a book without reading it, but passing judgement on the contents without having read any of said contents is intellectually dishonest. I have no interest in a wide variety of books, but I wouldn't render strong opinions about the quality of any of them.
 
There's a nice statue of him on Pennsylvania Avenue.
I had to look it up. Checked a few sites, but I like Wiki's description the best:

"Meade is depicted in his military uniform and standing at the front of the sculpture. A male, winged figure representing War is on the rear side of the sculpture and is flanked by two memorial tablets.

Six allegorical figures representing qualities the artist believed necessary in a great military leader are on the sides of the sculpture: Chivalry, Energy, Fame, Loyalty, Military Courage, and Progress.

The male figure of Loyalty, on the proper right, and female figure of Chivalry, on the proper left, are removing Meade's military cloak, representing the "cloak of battle" that Meade leaves behind. The figure representing Loyalty holds a wreath and garlands behind Meade representing his accomplishments. The female figure representing Fame is behind Loyalty and is supported by the male figure of Energy. Behind Chivalry is the male figure of Progress and male figure of Military Courage. The latter is locking arms with War. A gold finial of the state seal of Pennsylvania is at the top of the memorial."


Wikipedia.org


Very intense ~ I kinda dig it.

Thank you for :grant: "granting" :grant: me this opportunity to learn something new. :smug:
 
Back
Top