Any updates on "The last full measure"? (2 Viewers)

[Spitfrnd]

Are you picking a fight on the internet? Sad. GOOD Day sir!

Noting that absolute statements that attempt to be condescending are simply the result of an opinion that appears based on solely one's own view can hardly be called picking a fight. Chill indeed.

 

[UKReb]

Oh! Dear guys

Why is it that only on this forum does an interesting subject such as slavery/Lincoln/the war between the States always turn into a cat-fight.

I have no intention of deliberately adding to this particular cauldron and if my comments fuels the fire then I wont wait for Brad I'll delete this post myself.

I think we have all agreed that G&G as a whole was a pretty dreadful movie especially after the fine effort of Gettysburg and the script did indeed fail miserably in dealing or not with the thorny issue of slavery. However, if we examine the facts that started to be discussed before the melee broke out, I (and forgive me if others do not share this) find it very interesting why Hollywood has to continually fudge the issue.

What we know historically is that the Confederate government did not officially recruit slaves as combat soldiers until April 1865 when they issued General Orders 14 but by then the enemy was at the gates. We all know that Patrick Cleburne an Irishman without any Southern dogma had suggested enlisting blacks into the army months before and had pushed it all the way up to the Davis Cabinet. Some historians believing it was this action that halted an able field general in becoming a much needed Corps Commander in the Western theater. His suggestion was met with virulent opposition from Southern politicians and placing weapons in the hands of blacks was severly restricted by Confederate Army policy.

I know of one recorded Confederate black regiment thrown together during the closing days of the war that were captured at Saylor's Creek. There is to my knowledge no others borne out by the simple premise that Grant during the war captured three Confederate Armies and when all three were processed through Federal documentation not a single black combat soldier was recorded. There were indeed over a thousand black soldiers assigned to the Confederate Armies but all were providing a yeoman type service such as litter bearers, grave diggers, cooks, teamsters and road/bridge builders.

On the flip side to this coin there are hundreds of recorded documents such as diaries and letters where Southern black slaves willingly stayed on plantations/homesteads/farms and maintained them whilst white fathers and sons fought for the South. The vast majority of them were not manacled picking cotton they were skilled craftsmen/carpenters/blacksmiths and passed these skills onto their kith and kin-if not for their efforts the Southern home front would have completely collapsed years before it finally did.

Was Cleburne's idea late '63 a foolish one and did the Confederacy miss a trick? Well consider the estimated number of black and free slaves in the states that seceded was close to 4 million which could roughly translate conservatively into 400,000 black males of military age and maybe Cleburne was too far ahead of his time.

They are the facts and I suppose we could argue the issue until kingdom come which is not my intention of this post-but rather why Hollywood doesn't portray the subject more with a truth bone rather than a wish-bone.

Reb

 

[Scott]

I said "Good Day Sir."

 

[jazzeum]

Why is it that only on this forum does an interesting subject such as slavery/Lincoln/the war between the States always turn into a cat-fight.

Bob,

Ours not to reason why, ours but to do and die (where have I heard that before?)

 

[Spitfrnd]

Oh! Dear guys

Why is it that only on this forum does an interesting subject such as slavery/Lincoln/the war between the States always turn into a cat-fight.

I have no intention of deliberately adding to this particular cauldron and if my comments fuels the fire then I wont wait for Brad I'll delete this post myself.

I think we have all agreed that G&G as a whole was a pretty dreadful movie especially after the fine effort of Gettysburg and the script did indeed fail miserably in dealing or not with the thorny issue of slavery. However, if we examine the facts that started to be discussed before the melee broke out, I (and forgive me if others do not share this) find it very interesting why Hollywood has to continually fudge the issue.

What we know historically is that the Confederate government did not officially recruit slaves as combat soldiers until April 1865 when they issued General Orders 14 but by then the enemy was at the gates. We all know that Patrick Cleburne an Irishman without any Southern dogma had suggested enlisting blacks into the army months before and had pushed it all the way up to the Davis Cabinet. Some historians believing it was this action that halted an able field general in becoming a much needed Corps Commander in the Western theater. His suggestion was met with virulent opposition from Southern politicians and placing weapons in the hands of blacks was severely restricted by Confederate Army policy.

I know of one recorded Confederate black regiment thrown together during the closing days of the war that were captured at Saylor's Creek. There is to my knowledge no others borne out by the simple premise that Grant during the war captured three Confederate Armies and when all three were processed through Federal documentation not a single black combat soldier was recorded. There were indeed over a thousand black soldiers assigned to the Confederate Armies but all were providing a yeoman type service such as litter bearers, grave diggers, cooks, teamsters and road/bridge builders.

On the flip side to this coin there are hundreds of recorded documents such as diaries and letters where Southern black slaves willingly stayed on plantations/homesteads/farms and maintained them whilst white fathers and sons fought for the South. The vast majority of them were not manacled picking cotton they were skilled craftsmen/carpenters/blacksmiths and passed these skills onto their kith and kin-if not for their efforts the Southern home front would have completely collapsed years before it finally did.

Was Cleburne's idea late '63 a foolish one and did the Confederacy miss a trick? Well consider the estimated number of black and free slaves in the states that seceded was close to 4 million which could roughly translate conservatively into 400,000 black males of military age and maybe Cleburne was too far ahead of his time.

They are the facts and I suppose we could argue the issue until kingdom come which is not my intention of this post-but rather why Hollywood doesn't portray the subject more with a truth bone rather than a wish-bone.

Reb

I think Cleburne was quite correct. The problem is that many Southerners, as well as obviously Northerners, then and now, think too little and cling to popular opinions too much.

As to the cat fight, well the simple answer is that it is one thing to note an opinion and reason and something quite different to express an insulting absolute statement. The first encourages discussion, the second invites a different response. I see no fight here, cat or otherwise. My observation was simply to note that those absolute statements are insulting and should be accepted as opinion, not as fact. I stand by the old axiom that "if you can't stand the heat, don't start the bloody fire."

As to Hollywood, what can we expect; wishing entertains and sells, truth not so much. Just ask any contemporary journalist.

 

[Scott]

We could discuss slavery at length here with sources and links. I'm too d@mn tired of this from the Civil War forum I'm on and living through the 60s. Geeeze this is a toy soldier forum with space for comment on military related films.

My comment on the gag factor of G&G's portrayal of slavery, in depth, is that the general audience of a movie is not going to do their own research, but tend to be comforted by a fictionalized story shown as history. Plus it's a really bad movie, except for Mrs. Jackson, Kali Rocha.

 

[Spitfrnd]

The thing is, when you say it is fictionalized, you open that discussion. As Reb suggests, there are many accounts of respect and emotional ties between Southern slaves and owners; just as there are accounts of brutal treatment of slaves by their Northern and Southern owners. It is fine not to have a discussion about this if you like but making a sweeping and dismissive comment suggesting that such an episode could never have occurred encourages a debate. I am fine to agree that it was a bad movie and that its view of slavery was unbalanced; unrealistic is another matter.