frumiousb

The Man Who Killed Slavery, Sparked the Civil War, and Seeded Civil Rights

Complicating Brown's legacy even further is the terrorism of recent times. The historian David W. Blight asks, “Can John Brown remain an authentic American hero in an age of Timothy McVeigh, Usama Bin Laden, and the bombers of abortion clinics?”
pg. 500

With the recent murder of George Tiller, bleeding Kansas takes on a whole new meaning. That may seem like an off-topic remark, but it is the notion of the "good terrorist" that is at the heart of the John Brown story, and the legacy that he left is not at all uncomplicated.

One of the things that I like best about this biography by Reynolds is that he does not attempt to sidestep the nature of Brown's life and deeds. Instead, he looks openly at the questions of criminal violence, morality, puritanism and madness that drove the man and his sons. While I feel that Reynolds has a difficult time not admiring Brown, he rarely stoops to excuse him. There is one important exception to this-- at the end of the book while Reynolds is discussing the legacy, he glosses over the question of other kinds of American moral terrorists. He tries to make the point that slavery was fundamentally different than taxes or abortion as an issue to be addressed-- that there was something so unique about the social problem slavery presented that nearly no option except violence was open. I found that too easy. The problem at the heart of Harpers Ferry is that while the modern reader can sympathize with the frustration and rage that lay behind the actions of that day, I think that it is very difficult to find what Brown did legitimate without allowing other would-be good terrorists recourse to the same methods.

It is an interesting problem. To be frank, I do not know where I stand on its points. But it adds depth to what would otherwise be another exhaustive civil war biography, and makes the book something really special.

I did not go into reading John Brown Abolitionist with much knowledge of its subject. In fact, I would hazard a guess that having sung "John Brown's Baby" as a child was as close as I got to ever really thinking about the man. All the same, I did not find the history confusing or the text too exhaustive. It is a long book, but I got value from the whole length.

I have to also say that normally I have very little patience for history as written by literature professors, but in this case Reynold's background suits the subject well. John Brown, phenomenon, is as much about the symbol as the man himself and it is in literature that the symbol was so powerfully created. One of my favorite aspects of the book was considering how writers like Alcott, Emerson and Thoreau picked up Brown as an icon.

Highly recommended. I'm still thinking about it, even several weeks after I closed the covers.

( more )

John Brown's body lies a-mouldering in the grave, /|
John Brown's body lies a-mouldering in the grave,
But his soul goes marching on.
Chorus:
Glory, glory, hallelujah, /|
Glory, glory, hallelujah,
His soul goes marching on.

He's gone to be a soldier in the Army of the Lord, /|
He's gone to be a soldier in the Army of the Lord,
His soul goes marching on.
Chorus:

John Brown's knapsack is strapped upon his back, /
John Brown's knapsack is strapped upon his back,
His soul goes marching on.
Chorus:

John Brown died that the slaves might be free, /
John Brown died that the slaves might be free,
His soul goes marching on.
Chorus:

The stars above in Heaven now are looking kindly down, /
The stars above in Heaven now are looking kindly down,
His soul goes marching on.
Chorus:

Couldn't find a recording of this one...

Historians and economists who presumably understand money castigate presidents who do not. They should not be astonished by the presidents' failure; the problem lies in the language. The mechanism of the economy can be learned-- if this goes up, that goes down-- but it all becomes something other than a machine when ethical words like “value” and “trustworthy” or emotionally weighted terms like “soft” and “hard” are introduced. A man like Ulysses Grant, who knew what it was to have a business fail, to lack money to pay bills, to be out of work, could not evaluate machines built for him by contending economists and others who claimed to know. The “more money” machine seemed to work when it was demonstrated, but the “less money” machine looked just as good when its mechanic turned it on. The problem, which Grant could never fully articulate but which is evident in his grapplings with the subject in his state papers, is that he could not connect metaphor to reality.
pg. 395-396

Grant is a figure who has snaked in and out of my consciousness of Civil War history without ever becoming more than an icon. My father had a picture of him at home-- a great admirer. Before reading this book, if I thought about him at all, then it was the image of a quiet ordinary man with slouched shoulders around the campfire. A general much more than a president.

McFeely's 1982 biography of Grant won both the Pulitzer Prize for Biography and the Francis Parkman Prize (for the best non-fiction book on an American theme). It is still one of the most admired of the Grant biographies, although it also has (apparently inevitably in history) many detractors. Most of the levied criticism seems to boil down to McFeely's lack of admiration for his subject and an ongoing argument amongst historians about how far to rehabilitate Grant's image as a President. I suppose that this kind of discussion is inevitable, if you consider the number of troubling issues over which is administration provided: Native American affairs, the reconstruction of the south and the rights of the newly freed African Americans, the panic of 1873. There were plenty of difficult decisions to be navigated and many associated political axes to grind, and that hasn't changed to this day.

Happily, this reader is not well enough versed in any of the historical bunfights to have a horse in that particular race. I found the McFeely biography balanced and quite human. Grant is a fascinating character-- a life-long failure until the war gave him a chance to shine; an ordinary man who was never quite comfortable or at home in what he perceived as the halls of the great. McFeely is unsparing of Grant's mistakes, but quite generous as to Grant's intentions. I found myself with a great deal of affection for the President, and a sense of deep regret for opportunities missed during the post-war period. It illuminated a period of history for me of which I knew very little, and opened up a world of subjects for further reading.

Very glad that I read the biography. Really interesting and well-written. I appreciated the Selected Bibliography, and only wish that it had been annotated or categorized.

( added to my wish list )