« July 2007 »
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31




You are not logged in. Log in
Pinstripe Press Blog: Author and Historian Michael Aubrecht
July 25, 2007
"G&G" not so wrong afterall?

Now before you feel the need to chastise me, PLEASE let me begin by saying that I totally understand why many historians and enthusiasts do not like the movie “Gods and Generals.”

I know that it is filed under 'historical-fiction', and I get it. Really. Obviously many of the scenes in “G&G” are based on facts, while others are works of historical-interpretation, speculation, and artistic license. However, for a bible thumping, Jackson idolizing, buff like me, there isn’t a more enjoyable 4+ hours of film that I am aware of. You combine scripture, my town (Fredericksburg), and a bunch of guys in gray uniforms and my attention span belongs to you. And let’s be honest here folks, regardless of one's feelings over the script, Stephen Lang and Robert Duvall are spectacular actors.

Simply put, it’s a good looking-movie that features my hero. Nothing more, and nothing less. In all reality, are any of these war films, including "Gettysburg," 100% spot-on definitive documentaries of the events that they portray? No, but neither was "Glory" or "Saving Private Ryan," which are both IMO tremendously entertaining. Personally, I find Jeff Shaara’s books to be quite enjoyable reads, and I would love to see Ron Maxwell have an opportunity to make “The Last Full Measure,” in order to finish the trilogy.

That said, I was watching CSPAN’s Book-TV this weekend and caught several interesting panel discussions at the 2007 Harlem Book Fair: A History of America. My favorite was a discussion between Walter Mosley and Howard Zinn. Walter Mosley is the author of 28 books, which include mysteries, science fiction, young adult fiction, and political and social commentary. Howard Zinn is a historian, author, and activist who has taught at Spelman College and Boston University. He is also the author of numerous books including, "A People's History of the United States, 1492 – Present."

Each of these gentlemen offered their own perspectives (as differing races) and there were a lot of historical references that supported their points of view. From what I understand, both of these guys are liberals, and I don’t think that we would have much in common politically. Still, I couldn’t agree more with their take(s) on the state of our country’s government, and the realization that the United States is ultimately run by corporations. This has been made painfully apparent in recent years by the influx of illegal immigrants (I mean cheap labor), the decline of the middle class (I mean you and me), and the war in Iraq, (which is lining the pockets of the rich on the blood, sweat and tears of our soldiers.) 

This appears to be one of those startling revelations that everyone is aware of in the back of their minds, yet nobody really takes the time to stop and think about it. How can we, as we are all too busy running to Wal-Mart and standing at the gas pumps filling our SUVs? It is as if we have allowed the integrity of our nation to be sold right out from under us.

My father, who is far more politically and socially aware than I, said that America is ‘de-evolving’ from a Democracy to an Aristocracy. And that is what brings me back to “Gods and Generals"…

One of my favorite scenes in the film depicts the introductory meeting between the then Colonel Thomas Jackson, and Lieutenant Colonel JEB Stuart. As a biographer of both of these men, it was a real thrill to watch them come face-to-face for the very first time, even though the conversation was based on pure speculation and obviously written for drama. Still, one particular line of Jackson's dialogue comes across as almost prophetic.

In it he states that a northern victory by the Republicans will result in "anarchy, infidelity and the ultimate loss of free and responsible government on this continent" as well as "the triumph of commerce, banks and the factory." Hmmm… perhaps "Stonewall" and the founding fathers of the Confederacy predicted the "future America" as being a sacred cow, corrupted by corporate scandal, foreign business monopolies, and the abuse of big government?

Hollywood-dialogue? Sure, but the foundation behind it is historically accurate in the sense that the vision for America by the industrialized North contrasted greatly with that of the South. Many secessionists probably felt threatened by big business' impact on their culture.

Unfortunately, as I look at the shape of the United States in the 21st-Century, it appears that they were right. Corporations DO run this country – ALL of it – North and South. In fact, they run the world. I can’t even remember the last time that I saw a “free and responsible government” on this continent. Perhaps never in my lifetime (I'm 35).

So you see, for all of its historical faults and/or embellishments, “Gods and Generals” wasn’t all wrong. Maybe it should have been titled “Big Business Will Be The Death Of Us.” That would have made it more believable among the masses.


Posted by ny5/pinstripepress at 1:54 PM EDT
Updated: July 25, 2007 2:11 PM EDT
Post Comment | View Comments (2) | Permalink | Share This Post

July 25, 2007 - 4:17 PM EDT

Name: "Kevin"
Home Page: http://www.civilwarmemory.typepad.com

You said: "Hollywood-dialogue? Sure, but the foundation behind it is historically accurate in the sense that the vision for America by the industrialized North contrasted greatly with that of the South. Many secessionists probably felt threatened by big business' impact on their culture."

Unfortunately the dialog is not consistent with the historical record.  This idea that there was a sharp contrast between an industrialized North and agricultural South is based in myth.  You should consult two books: Frank Towers, _The Urban South and the Coming of the Civil War_ (University of Virginia Press, 2004) and Peter S. Carmichael's _The Last Generation: Young Virginians in Peace, War, and Reunion_ (University of North Carolina Press, 2005).  Towers demonstrates that between 1840 and 1860 the South actually experienced greater growth in its cities than in its rural sectors.  Slavery was also adapting to urban settings in Richmond, Petersburg, Atlanta, and New Orleans.  Carmichael shows that young Virginians in the 1850s were calling for a more progressive economic agenda to counter the lack of progress in the Commonwealth.  Of course they wanted all of this within a slave society, but these two books as well as countless others suggest that your distinction (or the movie dialog to which you refer) is problematic if not downright inaccurate.

July 25, 2007 - 4:39 PM EDT

Name: "Michael Aubrecht"
Home Page: http://www.pinstripepress.net

Thank you for your insights Kevin and thanks for the book info. I will certainly look them up. Your points taken in retrospect, I still believe that an urban-industrialized region would be fairly and inevitably viewed as a potential threat to a rural-agricultural one. Living in the South for so many years, I have watched countless family-owned small businesses crushed by the arrival of corporate franchises and the sprawl that they ignite. The North, in my opinion represented (and still represents) this mindset of big business knowing what's good for the people. Big business is ultimately what drives our current government. In my opinion, we (me included) handed the controls over to stockholders and oilmen, and now we have to reap what we sowed. I have read accounts in which those who were on the fence over secession finally agreed after envisioning the affects on their own economy, and I cite what happened to the South following the war when the infamous ‘carpetbaggers’ wreaked havoc on the region as a form of both personal gain and retribution. Plus, this piece was a bit 'tongue in cheek' wouldn’t you say? I thought you’d at least be happy that I finally admitted that “G&G” wasn’t a documentary. J

View Latest Entries