Prof. McClurken’s HIST 329 — Fall 2008
Posted by eweaver November 18, 2008 at 12:41 am · Filed under Uncategorized
Just aside note before I get rolling on the Long Walk Home - I didn’t post on The Best Years of Our Lives because of the fact that I was freaking out about my thesis and our projects. In a nutshell - I LOVED it. Probably because it was fictional characters with somewhat reasonable predicaments caused by coming home from WWII, but mainly because there was romance EVERYWHERE! My only beef with the film is that it really stunk in terms of gender roles - every woman had a male counterpart and wasn’t complete without that man. GUH gag me. That’s all.
The Long Walk Home was a powerful movie which I enjoyed very much. I felt that in the grand picture of the Montgomery Bus Boycott, it was right on the money. It also had subtle details that were dead on as well. I felt that the use of fictional characters as opposed to portraying already big named civil rights activists was a good choice by the film makers. It allowed them to have more artistic freedom, but also wasn’t contrived or corny in portraying the well known story of Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr., whom most people know exactly what they look like - it would just be strange to portray them as persons other than themselves. I know it happens all the time in movies - the one I think of first is Patton, and I feel that this is a good example for my point - we don’t want people to remember these amazing individuals by the actor that portrayed them (as most people do for Patton, heck, I don’t know what the real General looks like but I can picture the movie poster). I felt that in addition to grasping the race relations well, A Long Walk Home also portrayed gender relations well. White women were somewhat obsolete in this time - they had maids to do the majority of their work at home and mothering, and they didn’t work outside of the home, so they listened and obeyed their husbands. On the black side of things there was a good portrayal of how crucial black women were to both white and black families. Everyone was dependent on Odessa (Whoopi). Finally, I personally felt that the most intriguing part of this story is the dissension in the groups - not all whites felt the same about the boycotts, and not all blacks agreed with each other either. The black daughter doesn’t understand the importance of the boycott until her little brother is beat up in defense of her. There is an evolution (and good depiction of the passage of time btw) of how each character felt about the situation. It was very moving.
Overall, two thumbs up. Hey, if McClurken liked it - that says something.
Posted by daflo05 November 15, 2008 at 8:55 pm · Filed under Uncategorized
By far the most poignant film we have seen this semester. We covered a lot in our class discussion, from differences/similarities in gender roles between blacks and whites, the specifics about the bus boycotts, and the difficulties of being a black or white person during this time period.
One thing I was hoping we would go into more detail, though, was the choice to have the film narrated by the Sissy Spacek’s daughter. Roger Ebert said on his website that the narration was pointless and it didn’t add anything to the plot or the emotional aspects of the film. I disagree with this. I don’t think you can get a more objective point of view, considering the time period. The daughter has no concept of race or discrimination. She only sees the love and care of her family and Odessa (Whoopi Goldberg). I find the daughter as a narrator effective because it allows us to be immersed into the shoes of Odessa and the mother, while also giving us the opportunity to step back and analyze the struggles from both sides.
The Long Walk Home was beautifully made, and did well with incorporating fictional characters into a specific historical event. Instead of telling the story of the main historical civil rights leaders (MLK, Rosa Parks), we got to see what life was like during the bus boycotts from one of the 40,000 people who protested it, as well as the whites who were caught between supporting and opposing the boycotts.
Posted by Lauren November 15, 2008 at 7:17 pm · Filed under Uncategorized
Dr. McClurken likes A Long Walk Home because it has a sense of the period that it depicts, the early Civil Rights movement with the Montgomery bus boycott. It shows the lives of a middle-class white housewife and her black maid. He agrees with me that Miriam’s part in the carpool troubling because although some women drove their maids to and from home, most would not involve themselves in the carpool. My question to Dr. McClurken is what is his reasoning? (I don’t have any reasoning in my notes)
As for his view on believing that whites reevaluated their views on race, I believe that it’s likely that it was more of the younger people that changed their views on race. I see some white women changing their views to spite their husbands and families because they saw that they had little power outside the house and they believe that they know blacks better through their interactions with black domestic workers. White men didn’t need to view the blacks positively since they were the powerful group, ruling over everybody else. Even the younger men didn’t need to, as shown in the scene where Selma got on the bus during the boycott and was harassed; however the younger a person is, the more likely their views can change, so even men could’ve change their minds if they went through some sort of experience or revelation.
Posted by nickn87 November 12, 2008 at 10:34 am · Filed under Uncategorized
I struggled with how to frame my blog about this movie. I have plenty to say, I just have no idea how to say it. My biggest fear, in summarizing The Long Walk Home was not an issue of finding something profound to say. Any profundity was found, and made, in the midst of this movie’s hour-forty runtime. I just wanted to make sure I wasn’t being trite.
In discussing this movie (through the sobs) to multiple people, I heard many insightful things from many people. The one statement that stuck with me, however, was a friend telling me that “it’s good that you can’t fathom this happening. It means we’re changing. It means we’re maturing.” 52 years later, I do believe we’re maturing but I will hesitate to say that we’ve matureD. I think great steps have been made in thte fact that this movie can induce tears. The violence, racial epithets, and near-Klan meetings are all deplorable to us, and thank goodness this is the case.
I’m not sure what my point is here, and I do fear that I have essentially been rambling for the past couple paragraphs. As I said in the wiki, this is a hard movie to discuss, because it’s a period that is hard to admit is part of our history. But what made this movie so effective, what made it so AFFECTING, is that it was right. As much as it was a historical document, it was also a cautionary tale, much along the lines of Schindler’s List or, in a non-historical sense, Requiem For a Dream. (Anyone brave enough to sit through either knows how I can make the emotional connection.) These all work as a reminder of how dangerous human nature can be. I just hope enough people are wise enough to pay attention.
Posted by jasonward November 11, 2008 at 11:11 pm · Filed under Uncategorized
Wow! What a great movie, what an emotional movie, and what a pertinent movie. With it being exactly one week after the election of our nation’s first black president, I could not stop thinking about how monumentous that election really was as I watched The Long Walk Home. I was born in 1987 and grew up with blacks, I went to school with them, played with them, and interacted with them in myriad ways everyday. For many of this generation Obama’s candidacy was definitely different, but it was far from unthinkable or unbelievable. We, and in fact most Americans, did not consider his race to be a deciding factor either way. That can be attributed to Obama’s personal choice to not be a “race candidate”, but it is also a testement to how far many Americans have come in accepting non- whites in positions of power and prestige. I have heard pundits in the press say things to the effect of “it’s about time” or “it took long enough”. I too am glad this day has finally come for America, but watching a film that depicted the very painful reality of segregation that existed only fifty years ago really put things into perspective. In the 1950s blacks were “a different species” and frankly I think we have come a long way. My parents were born in 1953 and 1954, my grandparents were raising their families when the repugnance of racism was at its most raw. Although racism is still visible in very real and heartbreaking forms, for those leaders of the civil rights movement who are still around, what was at one time inconceivable is now a reality.
Posted by areed November 11, 2008 at 5:14 pm · Filed under Uncategorized
Again… really liked the movie and enjoyed the side movie debate.
But I thought I would share this. Link.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story…
It is about Reagan and the air-traffic controllers’ strike in 1981. Fairly new in office, Reagan was seen as an American cowboy, because of his Hollywood persona. This intimidation worked not only with foreign diplomats who sometimes didn’t separate the image of Reagan in his movies and in real life, but it also proved to be true domestically when a showdown took place with the strikers. All the air-traffic strikers’ jobs were terminated. Reagan the villain or this story? Unions certainly thought so.
I bring up the Cowboy Showdown Allegory because someone had pointed out that Matewan had sort of the Western Movie archetype. In terms of the time, Matewan certainly would be suggesting a comparison between Reagan and the ruthless Detectives against the poor, hard-laboring workers.–Jackie Reed
Posted by jnewcomb November 11, 2008 at 2:56 am · Filed under Uncategorized
I hereby declare upon my word of honor that I have neigther given nor received any unauthorized help on this work. - JT Newcomb
The Confederate Army was arguably winning two years into the American Civil War. A long sequence of Southern victories in major battles corresponded to a long sequence of command changes in the Northern army. General Robert E. Lee’s Confederate army was especially strong in the early summer of 1863, following decisive victories at Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville. Pulitzer Prize-winning historian James McPherson describes the state of the Union Army as being at a “low ebb” at that time.[i] Federal efforts in the Western theater were characterized by a continuing and costly lack of success at Vicksburg in addition to the major defeats in the east.
General Lee seized the opportunity in 1863 to take the fight into enemy territory. He saw that summer as a good time to gather resources on Northern soil, taking the war out of Virginia. He believed more importantly that a major victory in the North could provide a basis for peace talks with the United States. Peace Democrats, commonly referred to as “Copperheads”, were gaining strength in the United States government and might soon be in a position to end the war on terms favorable to the Confederacy, namely allowing for the independence of Southern states. A stunning victory on Union ground might also draw the recognition of European powers sought by the Confederacy.[ii] Foreign assistance would be incredibly helpful in breaking the naval blockade that had been restricting the resources of the Southern war effort, but even simple foreign recognition would effectively justify the existence of the Confederacy as an independent nation.
Confederate President Jefferson Davis had favored a generally defensive strategy until this point in the war. A course of attrition seemed most reliable for wearing down Northern resolve to continue fighting. A stalemate or truce would have been as good as outright victory for the South, since all it sought was independence. Lee was, however, able to convince Davis to approve his plan to campaign north of the Potomac River.[iii]
Lee then marched approximately 75,000 men north along the Shenandoah Valley out of Virginia. He endeavored to use the Blue Ridge Mountains as a screen to mask his troop movements. Military intelligence was primarily acquired at that time by means of cavalry patrols. An army might have been able to gain information from enemy newspapers, civilians, or prisoners, but cavalry reconnaissance was the reliable, “professional” means of gaining intelligence.[iv] Lee would therefore avoid detection moving behind the mountains, where it was much harder for federal cavalry to get to his army.
Lee’s own cavalry was separated from the main army during this movement. The cavalry, under the command of J.E.B. Stuart, moved behind the Federal army to conduct raids. Stuart sought Lee’s permission to do so after his recent embarrassment at the Battle of Brandy Station, where Federal cavalry surprised him and nearly defeated his own.[v] Stuart became cut off behind enemy lines on his raid and lost contact with Lee for nearly two weeks during the campaign northward.
The Confederate army was therefore operating with an incredible lack of information when it collided with Union troops outside of Gettysburg on July 1 of that summer. It was by pure chance that Confederate infantry and Union cavalry found each other on that day. The Union detachment was one of many send in every direction away from the main body of the army on its own information gathering mission.
Lee found himself in an unfamiliar position as the fighting took shape at the Battle of Gettysburg. The Southerners had been advantaged until that time by fighting in their own territory. They had known the roads and terrain better, civilians had been much more cooperative with them, their spies were much more effective near home, and their cavalry had been far more helpful.[vi] All of these details reversed when the Confederate army marched into Pennsylvania. Lee faced completely new disadvantages.
Please see “pages” to the right for additional information on the battle and film.
[i] James M. McPherson, “Commentary Track,” Gettysburg, DVD, directed by Ronald F. Maxwell (Warner Bros. Pictures, 1993).
[ii]Terry L. Jones, Cemetery Hill: The Struggle for the High Ground (Cambridge, MA: Da Capro Press, 2003), 9-14.
[iii] G. Moxley Sorrel, Recollections of a Confederate Staff Officer (Jackson, TN: McCowat-Mercer Press, 1958), 150-156.
[iv] Craig Symonds, “Commentary Track,” Gettysburg, DVD, directed by Ronald F. Maxwell (Warner Bros. Pictures, 1993).
Posted by mcrui2mq November 9, 2008 at 1:12 pm · Filed under Uncategorized
Best Years of Our Lives is a great movie with a lot of truth to it. I noticed on one of the countdowns on AOL it is #7 on the greatest inspirational movies list which I found pretty neat. It is a very historically accurate movie, almost on the same lines as Glory. It accurately depicts the arrival of WWII veterans back home and the hardships they faced trying to acclimate back into their hometowns. It was a very trying time for soldiers and it was not an easy task for them to return to civilian life. This movie shows the struggles they faced trying to leave their war life behind. It was a very entertaining movie and definitely one of the best movies we’ve watched so far.
Posted by mcrui2mq November 9, 2008 at 12:58 pm · Filed under Uncategorized
Although slow at times, Matewan is one of the more historically accurate films we’ve watched this semester. The movie accurately portrayed the company stores and poor conditions in which the miners worked and lived. The movie also depicted the harsh brutality between the workers and the bosses (bosses holding guns as workers walked out of the mine) and also between the workers themselves. A great example of this brutal competition is when the train first arrives in Matewan and a group of men ambush those who are coming off the train. The characters in the film are fictional but the skepticism concerning joining the union was real. For the most part Matewan was pretty boring but it gave great insight into a very interesting part of history.
Posted by awilkins November 6, 2008 at 2:57 pm · Filed under 2008hist329
In the end, I decided to go ahead and post my project today. I was leaving for the weekend and wont have much of a chance to work on this project after today. I have spent many days writing up the history of the event and then coparing the movie to that history. Every day I added something new and took away other stuff. I’ve grown very tired and decided that enough is enough, I will go ahead and publish the project. Besides, now Booger (my kitty) and I can take a snooze together. 
I feel I put a lot of good hard work into the project, and even though I’m not all that creative I tried to spice it up to the best of my ability. Hopefully I’m not in error in posting the project already, but I feel it is the best I will be able to do for now.
Its Been Fun and Stressful,
Ashley Wilkins
Next entries »
