gwynhefar: (Default)
[personal profile] gwynhefar
So in part because of the book I read yesterday, I've been thinking a lot lately about the dichotomy of being a Northerner who has now spent more of my life in the South than I have in the North. I whine and complain about the heat, and the conservatism. But you can't live down here this long and not have some of the culture and mindset rub off on you.

The thing is, there's a reverance for history and heritage and the past down here that I fully admire. And truth be told, I *understand* the Confederate position, and why it's still such a touchy subject down here.

In school up North you learn that the Civil War was about slavery -- the South wanted to keep it and the North were the good guys wanting to free everyone. But that's a vast oversimplication. The Confderates weren't fighting because they loved slavery. They were fighting to protect their homes and families from people they saw as invaders who wanted to destroy their way of life -- a way of life that just happened to be supported by slavery. Without slavery, the South had no hope of competing with the industrialised Northern states.

So yeah, not quite so black and white. It's hard to hate people who were just defending their homes and families. And it's pretty easy to sympathise with those today who feel that those ancestors who fought are worth remembering and honouring.

Welcome to the world of grey. Gods I hate no-win situations.

Date: 2005-11-09 06:02 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] silme.livejournal.com
Hey, up in the North I learned that the US Civil War was financial... :)

Date: 2005-11-09 06:04 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gwynraven.livejournal.com
Really? I got the old slavery line. Of course I knew there was more to it, but I couldn't see the other side clearly until I started living down here.

Date: 2005-11-09 06:10 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] silme.livejournal.com
You didn't take AP US History, didja? ;)

It's amazing how many wars are based on economies, to be honest.

Date: 2005-11-09 06:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gwynraven.livejournal.com
No, my school didn't offer it :-(

Date: 2005-11-09 06:17 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] silme.livejournal.com
Eek -- and you went to high school later than I did. My brother, who is 13 years my senior, took AP US History. :(

Date: 2005-11-09 06:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] auryn29a.livejournal.com
I grew up in New York, and I'm currently living in North Carolina. I was certainly told the slavery excuse, but I also remember hearing about other issues, just that slavery was the main one.

Sure, I can see they just wanted to maintain their way of life. But it's hard for me to support a way of life that would include me being in chains.

Similarly, I was reading some web page and learned that slavery was outlawed in England in 1772. And suddenly in 1776 America decided to be independent because they didn't like the laws that England was passing without their input. Interesting, no?

Date: 2005-11-09 06:33 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gwynraven.livejournal.com
Oh don't get me wrong, I am totally completely against slavery. I'm just saying that it's not fair to say that the South was solely responsible for the problem. They were pretty much backed into the corner. And most of the people who fought didn't care one way or another about slavery itself, they were just protecting their homes and families. It really needn't have come to war at all. The North could have helped the South develop an economy that wasn't dependent on slavery, but to do so would have jeopardised their position as the economic power in the country.

Date: 2005-11-09 06:37 pm (UTC)
yendi: (Default)
From: [personal profile] yendi
We definitely were taught the full gamut of reasons, not just slavery.

That said, we were also taught that it happened 130 years (at the time) ago. That's a fact that seems to be lost on a lot of folks in the South.

Date: 2005-11-09 06:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gwynraven.livejournal.com
That's certainly true, but playing devil's advocate for a moment -- that's easy to say for the winners. I can understand a kind of cultural pride that includes bitterness over an instance of perceived injustice that happened a very long time ago.

Date: 2005-11-09 07:12 pm (UTC)
ext_34769: (Default)
From: [identity profile] gothwalk.livejournal.com
I understand it all too well; it's very much present in Ireland. That doesn't make it good, though, and I have difficulty in finding any respect for it. I like Ireland's modern independence, but the fact remains that the men credited with that - particularly in 1916 - were stupid, irresponsible, and eventually, failures. I haven't much respect for them, and I have far less for anyone who holds to the ideals of that conflict.

I know very little about the American Civil War, but I can't see my attitude being very different. Fighting for one's home and family may be honourable, but that doesn't make it right.

Date: 2005-11-09 07:16 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gwynraven.livejournal.com
No, it doesn't make it right, but it does make it *understandable*. Which is really my point. I was raised basically to believe that the North was the good guys and the South was the bad guys and I've since realised that I now agree with neither but sympathise with both.

I think the South's attitude toward the Civil War and the attitude in Ireland (particularly Northern Ireland) with reference to Irish independence are probably *very* similar.

Date: 2005-11-09 07:36 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ellyssian.livejournal.com
That's the point where you can get in trouble - where an interest in history becomes an over-inflated point of pride.

It's an us vs. them situation - first, you have pride in what you are and think that's okay; second, you decide the others are wrong; third, you try to convince them. It seems to easy for it to blow out of all proportion and become something much nastier.

Date: 2005-11-09 07:37 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gwynraven.livejournal.com
I think the trick is to have respect for the past, without losing sight of the present. Probably easier said than done.

Date: 2005-11-09 08:03 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ellyssian.livejournal.com
Yes, that's exactly it.

It seems impossible for most people, probably because it's often an encouraged behavior. And if it isn't, someone will come along and stir up trouble...

I'm thinking, in particular, about a song from Savatage's Dead Winter Dead album (about Sarajevo) called I Am, and if you'll forgive me for breaking out in song:


I see a little man sitting and he's wondering
If over his little plot he might be king
And he finds his present world a little boring

There's no land that is so small that it cannot divide
So come, I'll draw the line and you just pick your side
Ignoring anyone who gives a warning

For I am the answer you seek, the dream in your sleep
You never wanted to awaken
I have the plan that won't fail, a crime without trail
And all I really need right now is you!

I see a little man, thinking that he might need more
And so his eyes are drifting to the house next door
He wonders if his neighbors might be leaving

So he makes a little offer that they'll understand
There is no point in letting things get out of hand
For no one wants to see their widows grieving

For I am the answer you seek, the dream in your sleep
You never wanted to awaken
I have the plan that won't fail, a crime without trail
And all I really need is you!

I am the word without deeds, the lie that exceeds
For lies are always most impatient
I am the guide for the lost, who never counts cost
And all I really need right now is you!
All I really need right now is you!
All I really need right now is you!
All I really need right now is you!

I see a little man sitting and he's wondering
All I really need right now is you!
I see a little man sitting and he's wondering
All I really need right now is you!
I see a little man sitting and he's wondering
All I really need right now is you!
I see a little man sitting and he's wondering
All I really need right now is you!
I see a little man sitting and he's wondering
All I really need right now is you!
I see a little man sitting and he's wondering
All I really need right now is you!
You! You! You! You! You!

Date: 2005-11-09 08:09 pm (UTC)
yendi: (Default)
From: [personal profile] yendi
I've heard that as the response, but there's a point after which that really doesn't fly. We're talking multiple generations here. It's not just carrying grudge -- it's carrying a grudge It also strikes me as fundamentally against what America stands for -- the whole situation in Frnace is supposed to be a prime example of how American (melting pot) is different from Europe (non-melded cultured), but what we end up with is simply a bigger pot in which to not melt.

Date: 2005-11-09 08:21 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gwynraven.livejournal.com
I think the idea of the melting pot is unrealistic. America will never melt because to do so would require that everyone who comes here give up their cultural background in favour of a uniquely American culture, and I don't see that happening. I think that cultural identity (and by that I mean identifying as part of a larger cultural group, be it Scandinavian, French, Italian, Japanese, Irish, Cherokee, African American, whathaveyou) fulfills a basic human need, and I don't see America (as a single entity) stepping up with anything to fill the hole left when an imigrant gives that up.

The problem comes when part of that cultural identity is tied up in feelings against another cultural identity. That's when you get Irish vs. English, North vs. South, Black vs. White, etc. etc. etc. Ideally America should be a country in which everyone is able to maintain the sense of cultural identity passed down to them through their ancestors, while at the same time realising that cultural feuds belong in the past. I'm not sure such a society is possible, but I'm optimistic.

Date: 2005-11-10 01:35 am (UTC)
phantom_wolfboy: (observations)
From: [personal profile] phantom_wolfboy
I understand that y'all have some view of the War of 1812 that makes y'all the heroes, and not the heartless bastards who were invading Canada to rescue us from our chosen government.

Interestingly enough, lotsa the American Invaders were from guess which (relevant to your post) section of the U.S.?

Date: 2005-11-10 04:15 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gwynraven.livejournal.com
Louisiana? I know a lot of Canadians relocated here around the same time. Apparently that's where the word "Cajun" comes from.

Truth be told, they didn't teach much about the War of 1812 at my school. I'll have to look into it.

Date: 2005-11-10 04:30 am (UTC)
phantom_wolfboy: picture of me (Default)
From: [personal profile] phantom_wolfboy
Not Louisiana specifically, but your general south. Unlike, say, the Pennsylvanians and Upstate New Yorkers, many of whom had ties across the border, the southerners were . . . I can't think of the right term just now. More dangerous, maybe?

Your Cajuns come from Les Acadiens (the Acadians), about whom some info here. And some info about the dispersal here.

Date: 2005-11-10 01:53 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gwynraven.livejournal.com
One of the main roads in Baton Rouge is Acadian Hwy. I was wondering where that name came from. Now I know :)

Profile

gwynhefar: (Default)
gwynhefar

August 2014

S M T W T F S
     12
3 456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 6th, 2025 08:47 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios