The American Civil War discussion
General Discussion
>
Team of Rivals group read and discussion
Discussion questions April:Pre-read questions:
1. What was it about this book that made you want to read it?
2. Have you checked out any of the resources listed above?
Did you find any that will be useful to you ?
Cast of main characters:
Abraham Lincoln
William H. Seward
Salmon P. Chase
Edward Bates
Mary Lincoln
Thaddeus Stevens
Simon Cameron
Edwin M. Stanton
Robert Lincoln
Ulysses S. Grant
3. At the beginning of our read, are you drawn to any of the cast more than others?
Why ?
*********************************************************
Discussion questions for Team of Rivals
What are your general thoughts on this week's chapters?
What most surprised you in your reading?
Who were your most & least favorite characters introduced/highlighted? Why?
Were there any new concepts/issues/information that intrigued you?
I was very surprised the other nite (tho the rest of you may not be) by an unexpected opportunity to whet our appetites for upcoming read. Was reading a chapter [in aforementioned Thad Stevens bio - very good btw] about passage of the 13th amendment and started getting familiar vibes re a Lincoln movie I'd watched some time ago. I finished the chapter & pulled out the movie and gave it a rewatch. It was almost entirely about the 13th amendment - a complex story with a plethora of interesting characters that most definitely left you wanting to know a lot more about a lot :) It was a very good movie (especially for Speilberg - not a fan) that would've had you leaving the theatre with your head spinning I'm sure (not sure if you can sit and watch a movie again these daze) ...Anyway, they start rolling the ending credits and I notice the movie is based on Team of Rivals - I got all excited! A bonus doc on the making of the movie included interviews with Speilberg & Doris who appeared to have a good collaborative spirit going on - Doris said she thought movie did a good job presenting her material (not in front of Steven :) ...
I'm not necessarily suggesting to watch the movie [if you haven't already] .. tho it certainly presents a fun little aside to see how Doris got hollywooded :) I will say there were at least a dozen occasions in the movie where I thought - I'd love to know more about that event or person or derivation of quote .. and apparently will have just the opportunity I'd hoped for :)
I wanna say the book will encompass much more than the 13th amendment story - think that's just the part SS wanted to use .. tho I could be wrong (haven't looked at our book yet :) And one last fun film fact - SS bought the movie rights to Doris's book before she had finished it - hmmm :)
Hope everyone is as anxious as I am to meet this incredible diverse group of characters to be paraded before us!
Magooz, I am wanting to include good movies on our resourse list as well, what is the name of the movie? They are not required material, but fun resources
Pre-read questions:1. What was it about this book that made you want to read it?
The main reason I bought the book were the glowing reviews and comments in various places. I am also a people driven reader more than a fact gathering reader and three of my favorite people are in it !
2. Have you checked out any of the resources listed above?
Did you find any that will be useful to you ? I checked them all out. I probably won't ask any of the questions in them but they will help me pay attention.
3. At the beginning of our read, are you drawn to any of the cast more than others? yes
Abraham Lincoln
Mary Lincoln
Ulysses S. Grant
Why ?
Abraham has been my favorite historic person since I started reading history. Mary is an unique female and I am curious about her inclusion in this list. Ulysses was a great general and an interesting persona. I know little about the others and look forward to learning more about them.
MaryAnn (EmilyD1037) wrote: "Discussion questions April:Pre-read questions:
1. What was it about this book that made you want to read it?
2. Have you checked out any of the resources listed above?
Did you find any that will..."
(1) I'm finding after a 2 year plunge into TCW I could probably use the battles to give a month-by-month timeline of what was happening in the trenches from 1861-1865. Other than occasional '64 election speculations, the oft replacements of union generals and a last charge from jubal early; I have precious little idea of what went on in Washington during that entire timeframe .. tho I might suspect it was a rather lively place at the time. Our book seems just what the doctor ordered :)
(2) Very little to this point. Looked at link from publisher that had a list of questions that hinted as to what we'd be reading about (sounded great :) and a Q&A session with Doris that had some interesting tidbits (including a few on the movie)
(3) My 'whys' will mostly be based on conceptions formulated til now from other sources. Lincoln - I think I need to give the man a lot more respect than I have .. Chase - keep seeing his name as having major influence in & out of politics for a long period .. Bates - presumed legal advisory/authority behind Lincoln's war time powers & proclamations .. Stevens - highly opinionated & influential [for better or worse] head of congress who supposedly had little contact with Lincoln, but must have weighed on his thoughts constantly .. Stanton - ill-tempered Sec of War who I heard may have been complicit in Lincoln's assassination.
What made me get this book? It was by Doris Kearns Goodwin, author of one of my faves - Wait Till Next Year about her love/hate affair with the Brooklyn Dodgers. A statement that was often repeated by the Chicago Cubs fans. I get most of her books - my sister borrow her one on TR and forgot that she already had it. Still waiting for her to return it.No, I haven't looked at those resources. I do have Walter Stahr's books - Seward: Lincoln's Indispensable Man and Stanton: Lincoln's War Secretary.
I'm originally from Illinois, "Land of Lincoln", so it is force-fed from the get-go. Everyone takes the proverbially obligatory trip to Springfield by the age of 10-12. On my trip we got caught up in a Nixon rally and witnessed the governor making a shady deal at Lincoln's Tomb - that's not unusual although they don't always take place at Lincoln's Tomb. But we've had more crooked governors than most states. At least 4 in my lifetime.
Still reading Grant's Memoirs, also recall reading a biography of Mary when I was young.
I am now finishing "They Have Killed Papa Dead!": The Road to Ford's Theatre, Abraham Lincoln's Murder, and the Rage for Vengeance. Once I got going on this one it has been reading fairly quickly.
Ok, completed 1st chapter (& intro) of ToR. Will defer to MaryAnn's discussion direction before offering detailed comments; but am happy to say Doris exhibits a fine writing style that is very readable :) I'll also add that in just 20 brief pages I was surprised on many occasions, educated almost constantly . and left wanting for more :) Had a thought MaryAnn that perhaps you could hit us with a group of questions as YOU complete each chapter ??Good to see you Jan .. I'm gonna avoid temptation to stray from our subject at hand - and I'm sure this book will provide many temptations to do so ... but, as a long time (now very jaded) sports fan having to some degree replaced sports with history; the story of the Brooklyn Dodgers through the 50s would be a great read. The NY 'environment', breaking of the color barrier with Jackie Robinson & the ultimate move to LA would make wonderful materials to interweave with the emblematic story of a sports franchise that could never quite get to the top . annually evoking the book's title echoed by millions the world over every year :)
Somebody knock on Richard's door and make sure he's awake.
Good to hear from most everyone (knock knock, Richard, come out to play ;-) )My first thoughts on the questions were to post some questions like your instructor did. I am not sure that will be enough to generate the discussion I know everyone is wanting. I would like to try it but if you guys are too quiet I will post from the study guide. ;-) I have not started the book yet, so you are way ahead of me already, which I expected to be the case.
My thoughts were to shoot for two chapters per week approximately. I would post the discussion questions at the beginning of each week (Sunday) and the discussion on the next 2 chapters can commence. This weeks questions have been posted because I knew we needed to get started talking. ;-)
So if you all want to have study guide questions let me know soon. Otherwise, I will post on Sunday for Intro, 1st, and 2nd chapters.
We may go over the "schedule" by a week to allow for us to incorporate the 2 extra chapters without feeling rushed.
MaryAnn (EmilyD1037) wrote: "Magooz, I am wanting to include good movies on our resourse list as well, what is the name of the movie? They are not required material, but fun resources"The movie was simply called - Lincoln ...
A somewhat misleading title - maybe shuda/cudda been called Team of Rivals :) - it was 90% about the 13th amendment with a few side diversions to Lincoln's family, a few other relationships (primarily Seward) & The War. I think it came out in 2012 and I would be curious how it did since it would NOT have been a good movie theatre movie - heck, wouldn't have even benefitted from the big screen - how big do you need to see Lincoln's face for 2 hours :) ...
That being said, it was a very good movie that is definitely one you appreciate more with each viewing - especially as you become more familiar with the characters! .. And I'm going to have a hard time getting the actor's faces out of my head as we meet them in the book :)
Another movie tidbit - was watching a movie called Cheyenne Autumn (1964 John Ford) the other night - a sad story about the mistreatment of this tribe in 1878. A guy by the name of Carl Schurz is the Sec of the Interior [and actually does some good things for the tribe fwiw]. A guy by the name of Carl Schurz (who Doris calls 'a young Republican') is referenced and quoted on multiple occasions in the 1st chapter of our book (1860) .. hmmm. There just can't be 2 Carl Schulzs :)
One last aside .. I watch a LOT of movies; including many westerns. You would be hard pressed to find a western that did not include a civil war reference, amazing how many have it as a major reason for a plot or subplot.
I hope you guys like this. I like Dorris Kearns Goodwins writings. I've read every book she's written (except the baseball one).
Porter, thanks and feel free to jump in since you have already read the book.What are your general thoughts on this week's chapters?
Unfortunately, I haven't read any books by Goodwin before this, but I will probably seek out her Roosevelt and Kennedy ones later. I love her easy to read, logical, precise style. Such a refreshing change from what they are putting out in the general reads. I probably won't read the Yankees book, living as I do in the "maybe next year" Broncos territory. I like the Chiefs ;-)
I made it thru the Intro and 1st chapter today. I loved how she treated each individual by sharing their personal physical characteristics, family members and life, prior accomplishments, hopes and dreams, and the activities of the day, May 18.
When I finished the chapter, I felt that I knew the people. Not deep knowledge, but a familiarity that made me comfortable "being" with them. I especially enjoyed the DITL, outlining how they went about their everyday activities.
It was interesting to me how many were from the South. Lincoln with his Kentucky birthright, Mary's family and Bates supporter Blairs' Southern roots with slave holding history, and Bates actually living in a slave state. What made them take a stand for stopping the spread of slavery? Maybe we will hear more later into the book.
As a personal aside, my maternal gg grandfather was run out of Dade county Missouri because of his views on slavery. It is actually recorded in 2 history books, one in MO and one in Kansas where he ended up on Pottawattamie Creek in Eastern Kansas (after John Brown's raid.) He served in the Mexican War, wonder if he served under any of TCW generals from West Point ?
Wow MaryAnn - maybe your gg granddad gave Lee or Grant some advice one day ;)Ok, a few first ToR impressions .. Certainly very readable which bodes well for a chunkster mission :) Like you, I loved the character descriptions (including physical traits) that immediately gave them a wonderful vividness to build upon! I also found the contrasting of the 4 cities they were 'holed up in' awaiting results to be enlightening (2 state capitals with only 10K populations). And the continued referencing of 'electors' kept me curious as to how the whole process went/goes down ...
And Doris did such a good job of leading our horses to May 18 that I snuck a peak ahead .. and I may be wrong .. but appears we will not be picking up where we left off :( Seems we will be going back in time a bit and rejoining this election maybe mid-book again (tho we'll see our 1st chapter characters along the way). I do hope this election will be expounded upon some because it was such an exciting & interesting start to a book :)
Also looked in the index and was a bit disappointed to see Thad Stevens will show up on only 4 pages. I'm curious as to the how/why we may gloss over a character that I thought had some fair amount of influential input to many issues we'll visit.
Magooz, from my research, it appears he had no difficulty telling others how he felt. He lived in McLean county IL or Pope county Arkansas when he served. I will have to dig out his military pension file to see where his unit was. I believe Grant was from IL as well.I would wonder if Stevens would be less reported because of all the other major cast of characters, a lengthy list for one book. Perhaps you will fill us in on any important facts she might have left for others to expound upon. ;-0
Because of the recent election debacle, I too, was interested in how the election was handled in the days before modern communications. How were the votes cast and counted? How did the results travel so fast? Telegraph perhaps? The voting pool would have been much smaller (no blacks, women, and few poor uneducated whites I would imagine.)
Sorry got my COVID shot and had unpleasant last couple of days. I finished the first chapter and already the book has filled in some holes for me in understanding the players in Lincoln’s cabinet. I like Goodwin’s writing style and think this will be a fun read...
Welcome back Richard, you were missed.I got my shot last Monday and have been "sick" since last Thursday.
I am hoping it gets better before the next one is due.
Richard wrote: "Sorry got my COVID shot and had unpleasant last couple of days. I finished the first chapter and already the book has filled in some holes for me in understanding the players in Lincoln’s cabinet. ..."Hi Richard - glad you're doing better & are going to join us! Btw, while I was leaning against it already, you & MaryAnn have definitely convinced me to pass on a virus shot :) ...
A few side comments. You said you were completing a masters in military history - I was curious as to where you plan on going from there? Also found your 'paper' topic choice interesting as I find myself having less & less respect for Grant as I learn more - to the point where I'd have no problem taking him off the $50 bill .. Somebody described him as a failure at everything except being a general .. and I might argue he wasn't all that good of a general (just had overwhelming forces most times & could siege with the best of em). As such, I'd say you had fertile grounds with which to work - and I might be a good test case for your persuasion abilities :) ...
I have Battle Cry but haven't read it because it is too heavy to hold in my arms .. interesting choice for a class 'textbook' :) Fwiw, I have a few civil war dvds where McPherson is main historical contributor - he seems to like the camera :)
I started a thread a month or so ago called '155 Years Later'. The intent was to discuss anything civil war era [with emphasis on how it might relate to today]. Please feel free to join our lively varied discussion there - seems perhaps a good place to throw some things from your class before a different group and get some further perspectives :)
I'm not 100% sure about post-masters, but perhaps 95% sure :-) that I am going to pursue a PhD. I'm getting near retirement from my primary career in high tech and want to practice history as a second career. Battle Cry may be very popular, but it is an academic work in the traditional sense, from Oxford University Press with complete footnotes and bibliography, as well as primary and secondary source usage. We also used the South vs. the South as a textbook, and of course probably a hundred other works are mentioned as "go read in your spare time". I wrote a book report earlier on A Stillness at Appomattox (well, I read the whole series) and I also read Tried by War from McPherson as well. Next is The Sable Arm, as well as the two part series from Freehling on The Road to Disunion.
I read about 98% of my books on kindle because of my tendency to read very large volumes, and I got tired of having a small suitcase of books accompanying me on business trips. :-)
My paper on Grant will not be any attempt to judge him per se, it's a paper on how the historiography has changed over time. So I'm basically looking at a selected set of books since roughly the 1960s and seeing how the academic attitudes about Grant have changed over time. There is plenty of material to work with when it comes to Grant!
-R
Magooz wrote: "Also found your 'paper' topic choice interesting as I find myself having less & less respect for Grant as I learn more - to the point where I'd have no problem taking him off the $50 bill .. Somebody described him as a failure at everything except being a general .. and I might argue he wasn't all that good of a general (just had overwhelming forces most times & could siege with the best of em"Magooz, actually I believe the saying was a failure at all but marriage and war ? (Ken Burns series) ;-) he was a pretty good husband and father I guess, haven't read that much on him yet. McClellan was a great troop trainer but had problems using them which was a real problem for a general and his timing was worse, slow and slower. Generals are kinda like politicians, you have to be content with the best you can get ;-)
I didn't want to get the vaccine either, but my doctor was adamant, he said he would prefer that I didn't die... good reasoning ;) I am worried about the second one as it is supposed to be even worse, but I plan to call him about it. My husband has had similar problems, more gastrointestinal mine is more chest and head. Everyone I know has had a different reaction. We both have underlying chronic health issues, which also bodes poorly for catching the actual virus. From what I have seen, it probably is worth the inconvenience of the reaction. The upside is when you have the reaction, you know it is doing what it is supposed to do.
I have really enjoyed going through all the group members' book lists. Found a lot of good priced and relevant material. I also tend to use my kindle for the massive tomes, my arthritic hands do not like the heavy ones and my bookcases are happy not to hold them as well.
Richard, I agree, share anything you like. We like knowledge in this group.
Hope Jan isn't sick as well...
Some good commentary on generals MaryAnn! I'm very hopeful that ToR will go into some detail on the many challenges Lincoln faced with the need to replace generalS in the eastern (Virginiaesque) theater - I think Bobby Lee faced 7 different commanding generals. An argument could be made that the war could've been ended MANY times if not for the hesitancy of union generals [that had overwhelming forces in their favor]. Kind of ironic the day that Lee maybe needed to be a little hesitant that he was overly (too) aggressive. The Lincoln-McClellan 'relationship' appears to be an intriguing one on & off & beyond the battlefield . and again, one I hope Doris gives good attention to :)As stated, not a battlefield guy per se, but it seems the tactical errors made in many battles in TCW were so egregious as to make a novice scratch their head. And I've never understood the idea of fulfilling an order that is going to send you to certain death.
Maybe Richard can share some thoughts? Seems like a military historian might be able to shed a little light on what makes a good general :)
Reading Recollections of Frontier and Army Life by Matthew H Jamison. Interesting tidbit: On November 17, 1864, as they started through Georgia, Sherman ordered his troops to kill all bloodhounds they encountered.
I've not been sick. I was able to get the J&J in March - "one and done". It may have upset my stomach a little and a low-grade fever. Good excuse to sleep in. I would encourage anyone to get their COVID shot. The shot may cause a few days of discomfort but will save you from death and, most likely, even a trip to the hospital. I came across the Goodwin baseball book on my dad's bookshelf years ago, started it and picked it up when I went home. Not a history of the Dodgers, but a young fan's view and how it broke her heart when they moved.
Only 1 Carl Schurz.
Boo hoo. My White Sox just lost.
Ted wrote: "Reading Recollections of Frontier and Army Life by Matthew H Jamison. Interesting tidbit: On November 17, 1864, as they started through Georgia, Sherman ordered his troops to kill all bloodhounds t..."Hi Ted! .. Sounds like yet another reason for me to stay away from battlefield reading :( Might need a little help in formulating the qualification on our job description for generals ...
No problem killing bloodhounds?
No problem killing dogs?
No problem killing domesticated animals?
Of course, it's a given that all of these [animals] would be considered enemies, traitors and/or secessionists .. and might sadly in all too many cases be considered a 'good' military tactic to eliminate them :(
Lee was too aggressive at Malvern Hill and day 3 of Gettysburg. Burnside in Fredericksburg and Grant at Cold Harbor. CH was the last of sending men to certain death on a large scale and it would have been worse except that the union soldiers simply refused to continue obeying orders.
Agree up to a point, but Trench Warfare was something new, with dramatically improved rifles. A preview of World War 1, it was something I think was new and revolutionary, and the generals, including Grant, were not quick to learn the lessons at Cold Harbor and Petersburg. Give the soldiers credit for realizing that infantry charges against entrenched troops is an extremely difficult task that they were not well prepared nor trained for, and too many lives were thrown away. I give Grant credit for realizing that he needed to force Lee's armies out of those trenches to defeat them.
Seems it would've taken about 15 minutes to realize the bullets were travelling 5 times as far as they used to [and more accurately] & that charging across an open field against an entrenched & covered defense wasn't such a good idea ... not sure I understand what 4 years of doing such was all about ... don't believe I would've made a very good soldier
As a former medic in the US Army, I can say after a period of several weeks of an intense following orders regime, you don't question much. You are deeply convicted to follow what you are told by people you learn to respect. It is, of course a form of indoctrination and/or brainwashing, but it is effective.... and then there is the UCMJ,,, Universal Code of Military Justice. Once you see an inductee marched thru the camp and summarily shot or hung for desertion, you tend to not question orders. (no I never saw this, I also never saw combat.) I think in modern warfare under ordinary circumstances, you just go to prison at Fort Leavenworth. ;-)On the other hand, thinking of carrying a beat up rifle from the war of 1812 or Mexican War and knowing how well they do not work, knowing full well the other guy has cannon and you are walking and sometimes running straight away into them full body showing, it would take immense courage to enter that battle.
What most surprised you in your reading?I have finished the 2nd chapter, still impressed with the writing and getting more and more into the further contrast and comparison of the various parties, I am surprised by how different and how the same they all are to each other. Although there is a great disparity between the social class, formal education level, and familial background, they are surprisingly similar in mental, physical, and motivational characteristics.
Who were your most & least favorite characters introduced/highlighted? Why?
Of course, Lincoln being my favorite, he is obviously number 1. I am finding Bates to be a good second. He comes from the same county in VA as my father's great grandparents and moved to Missouri, which is close to my home territory of Kansas. I find him the most accessible in his temperament and his behavior.
Mr. Chase is probably my least favorite, mostly because of his formidable, rigorously strict persona. Not my favorite behavior.
Were there any new concepts/issues/information that intrigued you?
I am intrigued by their devotion and persistent dedication to self-education and knowledge, and slightly lesser so, their determination to better their place in society. I suspect that most people without that social standing strive to improve their lot in life.
I am also intrigued by their reaction and personality after suffering early loss (death). Because of the circumstances in my own ancestors' lives, also survivors of early loss of parents, I have attempted a study of how their coping abilities are different than those that don't have early losses. I find it fascinating how they become both stronger in matters of regular coping with hard times and circumstances but less able to cope with relationships.
Magooz wrote: "Ted wrote: "Reading Recollections of Frontier and Army Life by Matthew H Jamison. Interesting tidbit: On November 17, 1864, as they started through Georgia, Sherman ordered his troops to kill all b..."Magooz wrote: "Ted wrote: "Reading Recollections of Frontier and Army Life by Matthew H Jamison. Interesting tidbit: On November 17, 1864, as they started through Georgia, Sherman ordered his troops to kill all b..."
Yes, killing dogs seems dastardly, but of course Sherman was engaged in impoverishing the South because no amount of killing (humans) seemed to offer any promise of ending the war. (And he was right. The South quit only when exhausted.) Killing the bloodhounds contributed to leaving the populace with hardly any food (ie, harder to hunt) and was probably an effective way to prevent the capture of runaway slaves. And most of the wealth of the South was in slaves (worth more than the industries of the North). Investing their wealth that way (as well as the resulting aristocratic regime created) may be one reason that the South never regained its position as supposedly the wealthiest section of the country.
Another interesting non-battle observation as they proceeded through Georgia. If it was true that the Andersonville guards got little more food than the union prisoners there, it didn't have to be that way. They found huge amounts of stored food in abandoned plantations, destroying more than they consumed (nearly 100,000 soldiers). The South had switched from growing mainly cotton to 3/4 of acreage in corn. That said, the governors of Georgia and South Carolina seemed particularly unwilling to do their share in contributing to the Confederacy.
Finished Chapter 3, need to read The Sable Arm for homework this week so not sure I will get back to this shortly. But I was left to agree strongly with MaryAnn on Mr. Chase. I highlighted this passage from chapter 3:"Chase acknowledged that "poor old Van Zandt" was never able to recover from the loss and the damages inflicted upon him."
Chase was a crappy lawyer, who took up the case to present his cause, never intended to advocate on behalf of his client, and fought all the way to the supreme court while not caring at all about the fines and fees paid by his client. He's the anti-hero in this story so far.
Also, I have never been one to believe that historians can "know" the feelings of people who lived 100+ years ago, and find that their casting back interpretations often says more about the historian than about the historic figure being studied. Just my 2 cents, I enjoy a good story as much as anyone but think it comes darn close to crossing the line from nonfiction to fiction when, for example, DKG acknowledges she has no evidence and then proceeds to describe Abraham and Mary Todd's feelings for each other.
-R
Ok, 2 chapters in as well .. and they're getting longer MaryAnn :) :( I'm joking there, but do find the 15 pagish chapter to my liking for some reason ...Surprises
Odds: Seems the odds should've been a gazillion to 1 against Lincoln surviving; let alone go on to become president. The story that most sticks with me there was Lincoln's father leaving 12 year old Abe & his younger sister ALONE in the backwoods of Kentucky [for a year] while he went a state or 2 over to fetch their new stepmother - and that both stepmom & dear ol confident/lucky dad had some singular influences on Abe that would serve him his life over (dad with the storytelling for sure :)
Size: The size of the men - other than Abe, had no idea as to the physical attributes of anybody else (other than a few hollywood efforts :) .. The size of the cities - state capitols Springfield & Columbus with pops of 10K while St. Louis had 140K and Springfield growing from 1500 (1830) to 10K (1860) ,. The size of the families - in general some incredibly large family numbers being rattled off - think topped by Bates whopping 17 (yowzer)
Death: How many ways there were for [almost] 'sudden' death and many of the aforementioned large families weren't large for long. The effect death/s had on the 4 main characters and how their resiliency [or lack thereof] from it had long lasting impact. Especially 'liked' how Doris contrasted the 4 guys thoughts/beliefs in an afterlife.
Ann Rutledge: Had heard she was a major influence on Abe and was surprised both that she was glossed over . and that there is NO surviving correspondence between her and Abe.
Characters - Most
Kate Chase: This poor girl apparently had her entire life usurped [arguably for the best] so as to become a surrogate wife for her grief stricken father. She apparently took this role (including all the political & personal responsibilities involved) like a fish to water and arguably got dad to the point he was - I hope she resurfaces later in the book in more detail!
Carl Schurz: Don't know who or what he is, but was glad to see a comment of his in Chap 2 again - find his comments insightful & refreshing and hope he remains a quotable source.
Characters - Least
Salmon Chase: Don't dislike him per se, but Doris paints a picture of a guy that seems to feel like the country owes him something [on many occasions] . and I'm finding this a distasteful trait.
Other Thoughts & Observations
Found myself wanting to know much more about the whole [presidential] election process after Chap 1- I've seen some absolutely crazy stories & numbers regarding elections and results from the years immediately succeeding 1860 . and apparently the craziness goes back before then - hope the 1860 election is gone into in much greater detail later in the book!
Continue to feel that education was an important factor in these very diverse & changing times and read a few things in 1st 2 chapters that almost argued with each other and made me wonder. On a couple of occasions Doris noted the high cost of a college education and that most families might have to choose only 1 sibling for the honor - hmmm. By that same token, was amazing & surprising how often the women in the book were being portrayed with having the better educations (sometimes to the point of teaching their husbands or sons :) - and not necessarily through college (i.e. Abe's stepmother). How education weaves its way through society is an important subtext imo & will be interesting to see how/if Doris continues to allude to it.
Also found it extremely interesting how all 4 guys (Bates maybe to a lesser degree) felt at an early age that they were destined for great things - and felt compelled to persist in that direction. I feel very few people have a good idea of their own abilities (worsened by the persistent 'its all about me' culture & 'epic' social media :( and would tend to overrate themselves. I think its important to find your limits [or just beyond] and set realistic aspirations accordingly (and if circumstances carry you beyond that all the better :) I know there's an old cliché about having 'greatness thrust upon you', but seems our 4 boys wanted to thrust themselves upon greatness [and knew they should!]
Ok, enough for me for now - hopefully we'll all get our comments in and then we can all joust a little :)
I have added the links of some additional books some may be interested in reading. There are more expensive options for those of you who wish to pursue them.Lincoln election. Kate Bates, and Carl Schurz
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sc...
Carl Schurz
Former United States Senator
Carl Christian Schurz was a German revolutionary and an American statesman, journalist, and reformer. He immigrated to the United States after the German revolutions of 1848–49 and became a prominent member of the new Republican Party. After serving as a Union general in the American Civil War, he helped found the short-lived Liberal Republican Party and became a prominent advocate of civil service reform. Schurz represented Missouri in the United States Senate and was the 13th United States Secretary of the Interior.
MaryAnn (EmilyD1037) wrote: "I have added the links of some additional books some may be interested in reading. There are more expensive options for those of you who wish to pursue them.Lincoln election. Kate Bates, and Carl..."
Thx MaryAnn - maybe we will continue to hear from him. In a movie I referenced he was played by Edward G. Robinson [as the 1878 Sec of Int] and was trying to help Cheyenne Indians ...
Can shake EGR's image re Carl; but having trouble with a few from Lincoln [for better or worse]. Daniel Day Lewis plays Lincoln & does a great job [imo . and even Doris agrees]. He supposedly studied Abe for over a year before filming to get him down pat - his portrayal really syncs with the Lincoln Doris is bringing to life in the book & provides a nice visual xtra! David Straithern plays Seward and also does a fine job with portrayal. I think Chase may have a line/scene in the movie & don't believe Bates appears at all [although he is referenced [once] which triggers off a rather important speech from Lincoln [to his cabinet . 1865] .. ooops, getting ahead of ourselves :)
Carl Schurz was a complex character, with his fingers in a lot of different pots. Although not a wildly successful general, he did command during several major battles, such as Gettysburg. Lincoln had sent him to Spain as an ambassador after his help getting him elected, but he returned soon and sought out an officer post, which Lincoln gave him.He started out in Germany, became a revolutionary for a while, managed to escape from capture and then go after his mentor and help him escape as well. While there, he met fellow Union generals Franz Sigel and Alexander Schimmelfennig. https://www.thoughtco.com/carl-schurz...
Tommy Lee Jones will be a hard one for me to shake. ;-) I need to find the movie
I will stop reading for now, but I did finish chapter 8. Chapter 8 was amazing - Goodwin's telling of the convention was page turning action thriller. I must say I NEVER would have thought I would get that experience for a political convention.... yet another reminder that despite the taint Goodwin has for plagiarism her writing style is excellent.
Richard wrote: "I will stop reading for now, but I did finish chapter 8. Chapter 8 was amazing - Goodwin's telling of the convention was page turning action thriller. I must say I NEVER would have thought I would ..."Whoa Richard - please hold your horse at your current post and wait for the rest of the troop to catch up .. think you went flyin by about 5 chapters I ain't even close to yet :) Though your zeal for the material & mini spoiler that the convention will resurface [in detail] are nice to hear ...
You mentioned 2 things in last 2 posts that have much broader implications than our particular book & are not specific to our materials per se, but worthy of comment [and potential 'alertness' going forward] ...
I strongly agree with your assertion that historians are great 'interpreters' of what would often in a court of law be called hearsay :) Even non-fiction books [such as ours] will inevitably need some details 'filled in' when going back in time. I would say most historically set novels are fiction, based in fact . tho the onus may be on the reader to determine just how much fact :) To DKG's credit she fessed up in the intro that the majority of book was going to be based upon 'correspondence' she reviewed - as such, I'm willing to give her a lot of rope in interpreting people's 'feelings' [and she certainly seems thorough]. I have not gotten to the point you referenced about the Abe/Mary relationship/feelings; but will look for and read in general with some attention to your point there ...
In your last comment you used the big P word - "the taint Goodwin has for plagiarism" .. As an aside, you made me look up 'taint' because I thought you meant tendency - perhaps you indeed meant taint, which seems quite a bit stronger than tendency (an intent thing). To me, plagiarism is claiming someone else's work as your own . and would tend to apply to an entire book . and is a pretty serious accusation! This book was critically acclaimed & had a movie based on it . and had no P issues I'm aware of. I'd appreciate you offering up some more detailed evidence for your claim? (I would think somebody as far advanced in academia as yourself would have a very enhanced understanding of how serious the P word is)
I'm very much looking forward to your ongoing input - we are lucky to have someone of your history education level join us and I hope you can find time to leave some extensive comments!
Didn’t use it lightly, sadly...https://www.theguardian.com/world/200...
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/20...
https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/23/us...
Richard wrote: "Didn’t use it lightly, sadly...https://www.theguardian.com/world/200...
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/20......"
My kinda guy Richard - like somebody who does, and can, put sources and/or actual evidence to support a point .. tho not completely happy with you. Disclaimer: I don't support plagiarism of any type & have no feelings one way or the other towards DKG; but will make a few comments after reading the 3 articles ...
1. Would certainly call what DKG did 'plagiarism ultra lite' - I'd probably change taint for plagiarism to some sloppy crediting of sources [apparently unintentional . tho that could be argued]. And I know we're talking a strong principle here, but I can appreciate a practical viewpoint [and reaction] to what DKG [and apparently other historians - Stephen Ambrose] may be apt to do (liked Ambrose's quote/defense that he was 'retelling a story' :) The particular examples cited by the 3 articles are so meaningless to the whole writing (they'd be called 'filler' in writer's vernacular) that nobody should be getting their panties in a wad imo
2) DKG has apparently repented many ways, many times over. She admitted her mistakes, with apparently some remorse, and offered to rectify things[did settle with one author] and assure they didn't occur going forward. It sounded like the personal & professional rebukes & losses she suffered at the time more than made up for the 'crimes' she committed.
3) DKG has apparently discovered the 21st century. Much of her issues appear to have been the result of too much material not organized well for source checking. Not sure what took ol DKG [and her team] so long to discover the computer, but apparently they had as of 2002 . I think it would do wonders for them going forward :)
4) We should be in the clear. Our book was written in 2005 and apparently DKG had well learned her lesson at that point. And I'm sure Speilberg wouldn't have come within a 39 1/2 ft pole of anything he thought was gonna come back and bite him. I actually want to chastise you a little for your inappropriate connection - you gave a pretty strong indication we were dealing with a debatable plagiarized work; when in reality the issues involved other book/s and were presumably corrected 30 years ago :(
5) One last argument on the side of the practical again. Our current book screams of the type of writing that got DKG in trouble earlier. There are generally 1000s of these 'nothin muffin' references (who crossed a room to get to the other side) in most historical texts. They are generally well annotated [and should be]. My question is - Who besides the original author or a family member would EVER go to the bibliography to check these type of references further?
Aside: I was a member of a writer's group a few years back. We had many semi-renowned authors present to the group and we had an annual [3 day] event with over 50 authors attending. I found these people to be, almost without exception, finicky, self-centered and believing their writings were the most profound thing since the bible. And you could not get a word of encouragement out of them for budding writers if you got down on your knees and begged for it (to a man they said impossible to get published [and I was the most hopeless as a short story writer fwiw]). The [harsh] lesson learned was that most books are first & foremost, an extension of the author - their subject matter can be so secondary as to sometimes be no more than a means to an end .. and an astute reader should always add this to the context of their readings!
I agree with both Richard and Magooz.There is a taint of plagerism... it happened and it will always taint her legacy.
that being said, it was 26 years ago that she wore the book in question. She's gone on to have a successful respected career since then.
Her record as a historian/author since 2002 is highly respectable.
Well, I see you guys have been jousting while I was away. :-) Can't leave you all alone for a minute ;-)Is the read moving too slowly for you all? We can pick it up by a chapter or two a week? Don't want the natives to get restless. ;-P It is Thursday night, perhaps by Sun read chap. 3 and see how it goes??
The questions are posted, so all we need are comments and opinions !
I completed Chap 3 earlier today so guess I could be ready to attack our discussion questions . and entertain thought of discussion after each chapter [while still fresh in our minds] .. might also consider 2 chaps per week (tho we'd hurt my 3 movie a day habit :) ...The good news is ToR is very readable and flies right along . tho many instances where I pull away from page to ponder further :) MUST get a copy I can hilite as well because the stray sentence or comments pile up quickly that make GREAT discussion fodder :)
Aside: There was a stretch mid chapter - from Lincoln's politics being "an old womans dance" to comments on his parenting skills (15 pgs in my copy) where I read mesmerized - with the notable exceptions of spectre of death & need for a glorified legacy; I was stunned at how much the views, attitudes, ambitions and character traits of Lincoln were that of my own! If somebody wants to know who I am as a person, I'm gonna refer them to those 15 pgs and tell them to put my name in place of Abe's :) Also felt like I owed DKG a psychiatrist's fee after that stretch - tho was relieved to learn neither Abe nor I were/are actually crazy . and that diet wasn't the cure for our melancholy :)
Again, countless other juicy tidbits in this rather long chapter - I vote we forge ahead with a separate chap 3 discussion [questions] and be reading chap 4 at the same time :) Hopefully we'll be catching Jan shortly (I'm past pg 100 :) and we'll squeeze a little more out of man of few words Richard before he gets too removed from 3 :)
Since only one person responded about reading more than 2 chapters per week, I am going to say we will stick to our 2 chapter a week schedule. As commented, they are getting longer and meatier. I want to remind everyone that we are all friends now, please be respectful in our jousting.
Here are the questions from the study guide (111pg) Mauldin, Alex. Team of Rivals Study Guide . Alex L. Mauldin. Kindle Edition.
Chapter 3: THE LURE OF POLITICS
1. What does Bates’ diary reveal about what was most important to him?
2. What role did Thurlow Weed play in Seward’s political life?
3. How, according to Seward, could ambition be a “demon”?
4. What effect did touring the South have on Seward? What did that trip make him realize?
5. As governor of New York, what stand did Seward take against the state of Virginia and slavery?
6. At a young age, what were some of Lincoln’s attributes that made him “always the centre of the circle where ever he was”?
7. Why did Lincoln believe so much in improving the nation’s infrastructure?
8. What did Lincoln and Mary Todd have in common?
9. Lincoln was considered an intensely melancholy man. What might have been the source of his nature?
10. What effect did the Matilda case have on Chase’s career?
Chapter 3 Essay Prompt: 1. How did each of these four men rely upon others as they rose in political prominence? Explain how while each was a great man in his own right, none of them could have achieved so much success alone.
Chapter 4: “PLUNDER & CONQUEST”
1. What was the basis of Lincoln’s first attempts at distinction as a congressman?
2. What effect did the war against Mexico have on the issue of slavery?
3. After his time in Congress, what did Lincoln do for a living?
4. In contrast to Lincoln, what were Seward’s position on slavery and the plight of blacks?
Chapter 4 Essay Prompt: 1. At this point in the book, the four main figures each have differing positions on the issue of slavery. Explain how each man’s views differed from the other three.
Ok, somebody gotta jumpstart .. this feels like a partial chap 3 (4 days removed) commentary because it's off the top of my head .. and good news is I've got my own copy on the way (along with Ted's suggestion of Point Royal Experiment & Kenneth Stampp's 'Era of Reconstruction' - had to spend $15 for free shipping :)Surprises
Again, how much I share with Lincoln - from attitudes towards slavery, economics & govt to concerns about marriage/career blending, empathy, melancholy to loose reign parenting to on & on :)
Continue to be surprised & amazed at the most scenic route Abe is taking to the White House.
Characters
One stickin with me is Thurgood Weed - Seward's 'man behind the man'. I define friendship by 3 characteristics - support, encouragement & 1 + 1 > 2 ... I feel it is borderline impossible to achieve your potential without the aid of one or more good friends . and that one s/b your spouse :) Both Weed & Speed appear to be exceptional 'friends' - I'll be interested to see how these friendships continue to contribute to ascendencies.
Like the roller coaster of Bates and how things keep finding him no matter how much he tries to avoid them .. Sure spends an awful lot of time away from home for the guy who can't bear to be away from home :)
Starting to feel sorry for Chase. Can't relate to him, but seems he has some version of the greater good in mind generally. Guess there's a happy trajectory here with him ultimately a cabinet member.
Observations & Such (the one I need to revisit . with a hiliter :(
I'm having a case of the 'tions' .. population [densities & demographics], communication (means, speed & reach), information (types & availability), transportation (types, availability & speed) - these are things that almost need separate [reference] charts/pictures . and while by its very nature the use of correspondence as a primary source lends itself to description; I still find myself [big picture] wanting a more visual landscape on occasion.
The custom of dueling . which apparently was still alive & kicking into the 40s. Unfortunately gonna paraphrase for now, but loved the comment from the guy forlorning the outlawing of dueling because he thought it was good to get rid of a politician now & then :))
More to follow - wake up peoples!
Sorry MaryAnn - didn't see all your fine work re questions & essay thingees .. at a quick glance was making me recall some of what I read :) ... Will visit them a little later
Magooz, actually we are right on schedule. This week we are reading/commenting/discussing chapter 3 and 4. Anyone can read ahead, and it looks like most are, present commenter is an exception. I did post more questions for additional discussion material, but they don't have to be used.
Glad you are getting a book to hilite. I usually don't except for textbooks, but I am in this book. I was able to pick up Lincoln's Last Trial today on BookBub for $1.99. Love adding to my CW bookcase cheaply. ;-)
As for dueling, it would certainly come in handy right now. There are quite a few I would slap with a glove (or a fist).
Magooz... one of your points literally had me lol. I'm not going to say which one because it's a spoiler... but I did chuckle.As for the 'tion' issue---I'd recommend the book What God Hath Wrought. The book is Pulitzer that looks at the period between the War of 1812 and the Civil War through the lense of communication.
Great Read---but a door stop.
Guess we have a new book going in the group. Richard, it is your "textbook" for your group. Check it out. That was fast !
Ok will do... my backlog of books to read just continues to grow... and grow. Happily only 2 weeks left in my class. Lecture for this week was interesting- https://www.c-span.org/video/?197864-... following up on memories and their recollection affects history. I recently read Chamberlain’s book, and beyond the flowery language some of the work has already been shown to be embellished. The professor in the video makes the point that some of this is just normal memory and not a deliberate attempt at falsehood... but does mean we should take works like this with a healthy dose of skepticism. I suppose fact checking and cross-referencing sources is perhaps one of the most important things historians do...
The American Civil War
Books mentioned in this topic
The Oxford History of the American People 1 (other topics)Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945 (other topics)
Report on the Condition of the South (other topics)
Kate Chase, Dominant Daughter: The Life Story of a Brilliant Woman and Her Famous Father (other topics)
How We Elected Lincoln: Personal Recollections Of Lincoln And Men Of His Time (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Samuel Eliot Morison (other topics)David M. Kennedy (other topics)
Doris Kearns Goodwin (other topics)
Walter Stahr (other topics)
Resources you might be interested in
Publisher site discussion questions:
https://www.simonandschuster.com/book...
Team of Rivals Study Guide book 111 pg.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...
Movie/s:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443272/
Books:
Spur Up Your Pegasus: Family Letters of Salmon, Kate, and Nettie Chase, 1844-1873
How We Elected Lincoln: Personal Recollections Of Lincoln And Men Of His Time
Kate Chase, Dominant Daughter: The Life Story of a Brilliant Woman and Her Famous Father
Report on the Condition of the South
Note revised schedule
April: Chapters 1-8
May: Chapters 9-17
June: Chapters 18-24
July: Chapters 25 and 26