|
Author
|
Topic: Symbols of an Open Wound (May 2001)
|
Dave Thomer
Guardian of Peace and Justice in the Galaxy
|
posted 05-09-2001 04:53 PM
   
This month's Special Order Speeches update is now online. |
slgorman
One of the Regulars
|
posted 05-14-2001 03:25 PM
First off, great piece. Now on to the questions you raised at the end of it.
quote:
Is there some way to respect them for their loyalty and courage in what they viewed as the defense of their homes without defending the cause for which they fought?
I think you can do that. My family arrived on this continent back on the Mayflower. I admire their courage to flee persecution and to try to make a new life for themselves here in this country. I do not, for one second, defend the way they treated the native people's of this country. Their views and arguements for their treatment of the Native Americans was flawed and just plain wrong. Same type of thing goes for your example. They had every right to protect themselves and their families, I believe some of their arguements (especially surrounding slavery) to be wrong.
quote:
Can I criticize their decision without attacking their character?
Why is it that we can't seem to respect our ancestors without having to defend stupid, evil, wrong or otherwise ridiculous stands that they made? Yes, they most likely were fine people acting, to the best of their knowledge, within their own belief systems. Perhaps, their belief systems were not so "enlightened" as ours are now. It doesn't mean that they weren't worthy of respect. We, as a society, have moved past those beliefs, with good cause.
quote:
At what point do I go from understanding their point of view to ignoring their culpability for their actions?
Is it really so wrong to say that these people were culpable? It doesn't mean they were the only ones, or that their point of view isn't historically correct, or that their current-day ancestors are to blame. Those people, in that time, are responsible. I think the bigger lesson is to learn from these incidents and not to let them happen again (I'm specifically thinking of the Relocation Camps for Japanese-Americans during WWII). Our government, and vicariously its citizens, were responsible for the interment of American citizens during WWII. I am happy to admit it was wrong. I'm embarrassed to admit that my family members did nothing to stop this treatment of fellow Americans. I would like to think if the government tried this today, I would be willing to stand up and scream about how wrong it would be. I have learned from my ancestors errors in judgement, what ever may have caused these errors.Feel free to attack me now. |
Dave Thomer
Guardian of Peace and Justice in the Galaxy
|
posted 05-15-2001 10:32 PM
I'm certainly not going to attack you; I think what you've said makes a lot of sense. It seems so simple, honestly, but we seem to have such trouble with it. Although, I guess it makes sense -- it takes a while to develop a thick enough skin to handle criticism from the ones we love and are closest too, so maybe this is a case where fear of hurting people's feelings has had a negative effect.Is there a way to teach critical detachment? Or is it just a knack some people have and others don't? |
slgorman
One of the Regulars
|
posted 05-16-2001 03:13 PM
Teaching critical detachment. That was the exact phrase I was looking for the other day. I teach soon-to-be health care professionals, and I haven't found a way to do it. And even if you can "teach" it, the student's have to actually go out in the world and practice it. It's relatively easy for me to discuss in the safety of a classroom how not to get too involved with a patient and their situation while at the same time remaining emphathetic and caring. It's a totally different thing to walk into a patient's room, know they are dying, and try to render a treatment to them and not feel upset/useless/hopeless/etc. |
Pattie Gillett
True Believer
|
posted 05-18-2001 10:07 PM
Here's the thing I find most interesting about having this discussion with someone like the woman in Dave's class who got irked at the "rebellion" remark:Many people like to say "Hey, I never owned slaves, don't blame me for what my ancestors did to your ancestors. Just get over it" or something to that effect. Yet, these same people will fight you tooth and nail for besmirching "their heritage" if you try to point out the details of what their ancestors did and why they did it. Here's my thing, I can acknowledge that someone fought bravely for a cause they believed in and in many cases, died for that cause but that doesn't automatically make the cause honorable or moral. The fact is, whitewashing history to make people seem more or less noble than they actually were just lessens our ability to recognize truth. One hundred years from now, many of our ideas will probably look barbaric but I'll haunt my great-grandchildren from the grave if they try to hide them. [This message has been edited by Pattie Gillett (edited 05-18-2001).] |
Dave Thomer
Guardian of Peace and Justice in the Galaxy
|
posted 05-18-2001 11:17 PM
Way to point out the flawed logic there, Pattie. I mean, how many people say "my parents/grandparents/ancestors built this country and made it what it is today"? Clearly those people believe they are drawing some benefit from the things their ancestors did. Well, by extension, if those ancestors did bad things in making the country the way it is, and you're profiting from the good of the country -- you're benefitting from those bad things. And more importantly, someone else is getting screwed over by them.Now, as my mom was fond of saying, life's not fair. True enough. Doesn't mean we can't try and make it more fair. And step one of doing that is being able to look at the world as it is, not as we want it to be. |
Ray Bossert
One of the Regulars
|
posted 07-29-2001 05:59 PM
I'd like to make a pincer movement on this topic, with my left flank approaching from the angle of critical detachment and the right from good ol' American marketing. As far as critical detachment goes, I think there is something of an inherent paradox in the notion that to appreciate a historical figure as a full human being, we have to somehow remain aloof from our own human inclinations. I realize that Mr. Thomer isn't calling for us to be robots, but it seems to me that there is a dangerous balance between realizing that there are few true villains in history and opening the door to moral pluralism. And the problem is far more universal than just history. Such burning questions as what to Wagner's music once you find out he is an anti-semite, or how to read Henry James when scholars say he was a closeted homosexual challenge the notions of how to approach aesthetic endeavours given particulars of the originator's beliefs. I suppose I am suggesting we approach the art of war as we do the art of music and the art of literature. We can applaud the valor and talent of genius or heroicism without applauding the actual beliefs motivating them. But I think it requires not so much a critical detachment as a negative capability, to borrow a phrase from Keats. It's not objectivity we need to appreciate the merits of those we'd consider our enemies -- it's the ability to imagine ourselves AS our enemies. Now for my second point. Gettysburg. It might have been site of the high point of the Civil War, but it was also the site of the last Bossert family vacation. Yes, I said "vacation." For better or for worse, Gettysburg is a huge tourist trap, and being the dark and brooding high school student that I was, I couldn't help but see gore dripping everywhere, and feel that every piece of green was blood money being spent to commemorate what has basically become a Roman Colleseum of the historical imagination. If you want to talk about picking at scabs, what is going on with all the Civil War re-enactors? What perverse fascination leads a parent to think it's adorable to arm their child with a plastic saber and buy them a felt cap in blue or grey? I've never been to Pearl Harbor, but somehow I don't think you see little children running around dressed like Japanese Bomber Pilots. Maybe this provides part of an answer to our fist problem...I have heard few reports of re-enactors going on rampages and actually killing each other...or of children being assaulted for wearing the wrong color cap in certain sections of town (which is more than I can say for kids living in tough cities). My point is that as much tension as there may be still left between North and South, there is also an element of civility in the hatred. Granted, there are exceptional cases to be had everywhere, but considering it was only 140 years ago that Americans were seething to destroy each other, I'd say we are in fact managing pretty well.
Far better than say the Yugoslavians. And part of the solution boils down to that which unites all Americans together -- our weakness for market economy and souveneirs. We can survive the rift of the Civil War because we can reduce the bloodbath to plastic toys with heroes and villains with smashingly color coded uniforms. Lee, Grant, Sherman (and my particular favorite, General Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain) are not just historic figures, they are characters in a Shakespearean drama. It is the story of the War, and the retelling, that brings out the multi-faceted nature of human beings, which can make the same individual both awe-inspiring as well as personally detestable. Of course, I still think there's something a bit perverse about selling War, especially on the site of it -- something of a moneylenders in the Temple phenomenon.
But, I suppose if it sparks a further curiosity, and helps us see ourselves in alternative roles, then there is some redemption to be had even in that. |
Dave Thomer
Guardian of Peace and Justice in the Galaxy
|
posted 08-29-2001 01:20 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Ray Bossert:As far as critical detachment goes, I think there is something of an inherent paradox in the notion that to appreciate a historical figure as a full human being, we have to somehow remain aloof from our own human inclinations.
Not sure I get what you mean here. Are you suggesting that, for example, taking time to cool down rather than acting in anger is a bad idea because it causes us to act against our inclinations? And more importantly -- I think we have an inclination to want to make fair and fairly accurate accurate conclusions, yet some of our other inclinations interfere with this one . . . so at some point, learning to take a step back is probably necessary for us to fulfill our goals. quote:
I realize that Mr. Thomer isn't calling for us to be robots,
You know, half of my students don't even call me Mr. Thomer . . . quote:
but it seems to me that there is a dangerous balance between realizing that there are few true villains in history and opening the door to moral pluralism.
Not that there's anything wrong with pluralism.  quote:
And the problem is far more universal than just history. Such burning questions as what to Wagner's music once you find out he is an anti-semite, or how to read Henry James when scholars say he was a closeted homosexual challenge the notions of how to approach aesthetic endeavours given particulars of the originator's beliefs.
Can we hold off on a discussion of the intentionalist fallacy until later? quote:
I suppose I am suggesting we approach the art of war as we do the art of music and the art of literature. We can applaud the valor and talent of genius or heroicism without applauding the actual beliefs motivating them.
I think this sidesteps the problem without answering it. In the case of many of our historical idols, we don't just want to say they were talented people, we want to say they were good people. Once can cite Machiavelli's strength as a politician or Napolean's strength as a general without making either a figure of reverence. That's clearly not how many folks treat Lee -- he wasn't just a great warrior, he was a great man. And at that point, moral claims come into play. quote:
For better or for worse, Gettysburg is a huge tourist trap, and being the dark and brooding high school student that I was, I couldn't help but see gore dripping everywhere, and feel that every piece of green was blood money being spent to commemorate what has basically become a Roman Colleseum of the historical imagination.
While I would not go quite this far, it really is surreal to see the regiment markers on, say, a hotel's front lawn. If you want to talk about picking at scabs, what is going on with all the Civil War re-enactors? What perverse fascination leads a parent to think it's adorable to arm their child with a plastic saber and buy them a felt cap in blue or grey? quote:
I've never been to Pearl Harbor, but somehow I don't think you see little children running around dressed like Japanese Bomber Pilots.
Japanese bomber pilots? No. Americans? Yes. Immersing oneself in one's history via role play or renactment isn't confined to the Civil War, but the Civil War is convenient in that Americans can role play either side without ceasing to be Americans. It's just one more sign of the peculiar way in which the divisions of our civil war healed, versus those of other societies. quote:
My point is that as much tension as there may be still left between North and South, there is also an element of civility in the hatred. Granted, there are exceptional cases to be had everywhere, but considering it was only 140 years ago that Americans were seething to destroy each other, I'd say we are in fact managing pretty well.
Far better than say the Yugoslavians.
This is a major part of my instructor's theory that the South was never fully committed to secession in the way the former Yugoslav republics are -- that the Confederacy still had a loyalty to the idea of the United States which made the end of the Confederacy easier to handle. quote:
And part of the solution boils down to that which unites all Americans together -- our weakness for market economy and souveneirs. We can survive the rift of the Civil War because we can reduce the bloodbath to plastic toys with heroes and villains with smashingly color coded uniforms.
I think that's far too simplistic and dismissive a conclusion, and ignores the ties that formed between Civil War vets on both sides before history became a tourist attraction.
|
rngr1081
Just Got Here
|
posted 02-04-2002 10:25 PM
"Though the South lost the battles, for more than a century it attained its goal. Namely, that the role of slavery in America’s history be thoroughly diminished, even somehow removed as a cause of the Civil War. The reconciliation of North and South required a national repudiation of ‘Reconstruction’ as a ‘disastrous mistake’; a wide-ranging white acceptance of ‘ Negro inferiority’ and of white supremacy; a distorted view of slavery as an unfortunate but benign institution that was damaging for whites morally, but helped civilise and Christianise African savages… After decades of research, historians are only now beginning to grasp the complex interdependencies of a society enmeshed in slavery. European and West African sellers and buyers, European investors in the slave trade, who ranged from small-town merchants to well known figures like the philosophers John Locke and Voltaire, wealthy Virgininian and Brazilian middlemen who purchased large numbers of Africans off the slave ships to sell to planters; New Englanders who shipped foodstuffs, timber, shoes and clothing as supplies for slaves in the South and the West Indies; and finally, the European and American consumers of slave produced sugar, rum, rice, cotton, tobacco, indigo (for dyes) hemp [or marijuana] for rope making and other goods." - David Brion Davis"The history of hunting will always glorify the hunter, so long as lions have no historians of their own." – African Proverb "The first step in liquidating a people is to erase its memory. Destroy its books, its culture, its history. Then have somebody write new books, manufacture a new culture, invent a new history. Before long the nation will begin to forget what it is and what it was." -- Milan Kundera. "The past, it has been said, is another country. The way its stories are told and the way they are heard change as the years go by. The spotlight gyrates, exposing old lies and illuminating new truths. As a fuller picture emerges, a new piece of the jigsaw puzzle of our past settles into place." – Bishop Desmond Tutu. 'Nuff said [This message has been edited by rngr1081 (edited 02-04-2002).] |
Dave Thomer
Guardian of Peace and Justice in the Galaxy
|
posted 02-04-2002 11:44 PM
Welcome aboard, rngr1081. That's a nice selection of quotes -- what texts or speeches did they come from? I may want to take a deeper look at some of them. Thanks. (And feel free to stop by the Introductions thread in the Site Comments forum!) | |
This Is Not News Forums
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
