471A3--Week 1 Questions/Comments--Thursday

'''Be sure to include your name with each comment. -- JM''' David Thelen, “Memory and American History,” Journal of American History, 75 (March 1989): 1117-29 Jason Ellington: A few statements made by Thelen were useful to me as i they deal with the inaccuracies inherent in memory. '''1) "For our purposes the social dimensions of memory are more important than the need to verify accuracy." (p. 1122) 2) "What is important is that they memory be authentic for the person at the moment of construction, not that it be an accurate depiction of a past moment." (p. 1123) and 3) "In a study of memory the important question is not how accurately a recollection fitted some piece of a past reality, but why historical actors constructed their memories in a particular way at a particular time." (p. 1125)''' My natural instinct is to want to know the facts and to possibly be judgmental of someone whose memory is not in line with the historical record.

First off, I had never heard of real “truth drugs” until this article, so I looked it up. In hopes that I’m not the only late person to the party, here’s a link to what they are all about --&gt; [n]. I think Dr. McClurken was the professor I’m remembering now (though my memory may be trying to meet the needs of the present… okay that may be getting too meta) who once said to my class that even though a generation may try to return to a “traditional” lifestyle, they were not returning to a real past lifestyle, but more of a romanticized memory--one, according to Thelen, that was changing associations to meet the social needs of the present. How does this apply to our class? How can we look at the memories of the different social and political groups during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century and determine their social needs? How and why did so many people forget about one of the reasons behind the Civil War even though there were so many reminders of the reason all around them? -- Brooke

'''I am really interested in the idea of memory as a construction rather than a reproduction. However, the term construction seems limited--I think it sometimes destructs, too. Memories become damaged over time, with conflicting recollections, etc; it constructs a new one, but it does more than that.''' --Carly B.

Blight, Race and Reunion, Title page through 5; Jason Ellington: Blight makes the observation that there are three visions of Civil War memory that have collided and combined over time; the reconciliationist vision, the white supremacist vision, and the emancipationist vision. (p. 2). Is it possible that the reconciliationist vision and white supremacist vision (in the North) fueled a shift in Northern remembrance to one of reunion based on guilt over the perception of the North as invaders and occupiers of their fellow white Americans land? Focusing on race as a central problem in how Americans made choices in what to remember and forget from the Civil War, seems to be a larger aspect of Civil War memory than many may understand. What is the reason why certain memories are kept from being retold throughout history, especially when race issues have been prominent throughout the 20th century? “The People made their recollection fit in with their sufferings” – Thucydides. (The epigraph) I thought this quote was accurate. People’s memory of an event or time is different depending on how they were involved in the event and how they were effected before, during and after the event. This can be seen with Blight talking about the three different visions, each having a different memory because they each were affected differently. The visions that Blight mention show different sides of the war but also how people remember the war and pass on those memories. –Kayle P '''Blight says that one of the conflicts in remembering the Civil War that his book will focus on is the conflict between healing and justice (pg. 3). ''' The nation needed to heal in the aftermath of such a bloody struggle, but justice for newly free African-Americans also needed to be assured. The shifting priorities in the country between healing and justice is what determined which aspects of the Civil War people chose to remember. -Sean R
 * Why do you think that Blight believes American culture romance has triumphed over ideological memory (pg.4)? What examples might be used to illustrate his conclusion?

How can we look at "healing" and "justice" with public memory? Why does the public memory look at the "right" things from the war and not the "wrong" things? What roles do "race" and "reunion" play in public memory? - Hannah

Blight seems to talk a lot about how we do not face the “deeper meanings of the Civil War.” I expect he will answer this question in his book, but I must ask how do we face it? How do we repair the public memory of the Civil War? Why was it more important during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century to remember the war in such a way to bring the two sides back together? '''Why is it still important to remember the war in this way? Or rather why do we still today often focus on the two sides rather than what they were fighting for?''' -- Brooke Blight focuses alot on the differences between sentiments felt by the North and South, but what made me curious was if there would be any similarities, or examples of Confederate and Union soldiers or families coming together at all. --Cameron

Fahs and Waugh, The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture, 1-4 '''Fahs and Waugh mention physical and symbolic spaces as a large contributor in Civil War memory. (p. 2) They also say that the past is continually enlivened and renewed by the creativity of the present. (p.4) If what is American is redefined by evoking selective memories from the war by social groups and individuals, then could it be possible that a majority of the physical and symbolic spaces are glorified versions of the truth?''' I think that it could be possible. These monuments and parades that are mentioned in the reading often convey one side of the story. Even seeing a “historical” film, visiting a historical place, details are left out and things are interpreted in different ways. Having monuments is great but I think that it is possible that these symbols only show one side of whatever it is representing. ~Kayle P What meanings has the Confederate flag been used for since the war and what is it's place in politics? '''Why do political agendas and the memory of the Civil War cross paths? What kind of memory and identity do public commemorations form?''' - Hannah Thomas Brown, The Public Art of Civil War Commemoration, 1-14 '''Brown brings up an interesting point when he uses the term "usable past" in regards to how the North and South both sought out ways to mobilize support of the war. Leaders for both sides chose significant images from history that would trigger memories of nationalism within society. After reading this article I became more aware of what "usable past" actually meant and realized that it is still being used today.''' All over Facebook numerous people are posting photos of George Washington or Adolf Hitler with quotes from either historical figure in regards to their personal stand or view on the current arms issue. --Mary O. &#160; Brown raises several interesting points on how the memory of the Civil War and its effects on the war's commemoration. However, '''what struck me as most interesting was the end of the introduction (pages 12-13), where he briefly mentions the removal of Confederate memorials and the renaming of streets, schools, etc., because they were originally named/placed in commemoration to a person or event that is (at the time of the removal/renaming) remembered/viewed as being negative to the overall memory of the American Civil War. For example, Brown cites New Orleans renaming P.G.T. Beauregard Middle School. With that being said, my overall question is: is the removal/renaming of commemorations that do not necessarily fit in with the "collective memory" of the Civil War or those memorializing aspects of the Confederacy beneficial or detrimental to the memory of the Civil War as it passed on to future generations?''' --Carly Winfield The concept that Brown introduces about commemoration in the US is very apt, I think. This passive-aggressive approach to public history and remembrance is curious, particularly in light of other well-known traditions of memory-revisions, such as the Egyptians smashing the faces off of reliefs and images of previous, disliked rulers.--Carly B.  Debate topics Matt Allen: political motives (states rights, civil rights...) ideas of honor versus pursuit of justice in memory of reconstruction Sean Redmiles: The role of military history in the culture of remembering the war. Race Issues: Politics of race in America versus the politics of Civil War memory? - Donald Phelps General questions Matt Allen: '''To bring together the arguments being introduced by Blight and the ideas of memory brought forward by Thelen: 1) what different audiences are fighting over the memory of the Civil war according to the Visions mention in 'Race and Reunion'? 2)What potential role could moods, biases, or motives play in the debate between these visions?''' 'Both Blight and Brown&#160;use Robert Penn Warren's quote, "The Civil War is our felt'' history - history lived in the national imagination." What exactly does "felt history" mean and how does it apply to people today? --Mary O. Fahs and Waugh mention Stuart McConnell's "geography of Civil War memory" as being "both literal and physical dimensions involving physical and symbolic spaces"(2). Could we have clarification on what is meant by the geography of Civil War memory?"'''--Carly Winfield After the Civil War ended, according to Waugh and Fahs "each new generation has actively reinterpreted the Civil War to support its own ideological agenda"(4) Besides racist agendas, with the definite outcome of the War, why hasn't there been a single interpretation of the Civil War, especially in the South?  - Donald Phelps

'''Whose war is the Civil War to remember? Do southerners today feel more of a connection to the war because of all the memorials/battlefields that are around us all the time?''' -- Brooke '''Can we rule out certain types of commemoration as inappropriate or wrong? Can we endorse certain types of remembrance as better than others? What makes a good remembrance or memory and what makes a bad one? Does this change if it's on a personal level versus on the level of public history?''' -- Carly B.

I think it’s really interesting to see that each generation has reinterpreted the Civil War to support its own agenda, either political or other. This point was reiterated in several of the readings. The Memory of the Civil War in American Culture discussed this pretty generally and the Introduction: American Commemoration and the Civil War gave more specific examples. In that article Brown describes the push for the image of a reunified country when it was necessary to come together as a way of resisting the integration and acceptance of immigrants into society. How have we learned about certain aspects of the War and reconstruction, and can we see any ulterior reasoning behind why it was learned that way? -- Kelly F.