Guns of the South?

[aktarian]

To drag this thread back to original question....

I didn't like it. Turtledove's second worst book (worst being The Two Georges). I bought it because shop owner recomended it. Told her few strong words after reading it though . I prefer realistic PODs, not ASB stuff, but that's just me.

 

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Yeah. It's a fun read.

 

[zoomar]

Back to the original question, GOTS is easily the best thing Harry Turtledove has ever written. It's well crafted with a powerful narrative driven by good "period" dialog and characterization. It is only occasionally marred by HT's persistant tendency to tell the story through uninteresting minor characters. It is a fascinating WI, but remember, it is Time Travel SF not a pure AH. It is the ONLY Turtledove I've ever recommended to normal people (non-AH geeks like myself).

 

[Amerigo Vespucci]

I liked Guns of the South and I'm from Indiana. I was thinking it would be a good movie.

HT mentioned in one of his discussions that a movie studio had bought the option for the book. Doesn't mean that they'll make it, just that they liked the idea enough to keep others from getting it.

 

[robertp6165]

If he wasn't a coward, why'd he surrender? His army wasn't defeated. All he had to do was let the Yankees have Richmond.

If he were truly fighting for his country and not just fighting for slavery, he'd have led the Army of Northern Virginia into the Blue Ridge Mts and fought a guerrilla war.

Lee surrendered at Appomattox because he believed that it would lead to the complete devastation of the South (and much devastation to the North as well) and would not lead to a Confederate victory. At the time of the surrender, he had about 25,000 men left in his army. Given the options he had, surrender was the best of them. We should thank God that he chose as he did.

"A guerrilla war made no sense to Lee because the slaves would be freed by the Yankee occupation, regardless." .

Wrong again. Slavery did not figure into that decision at all. Lee never bought a slave in his life, and freed those he inherited from his father-in-law before the war. Furthermore, the Confederacy had just passed, with Lee's support, the black recruitment law of 1865 which it was generally understood meant the end of slavery in the Confederacy within a short time after the war, regardless of the outcome of the war. Lee's decision was made solely on military and humanitarian grounds. He didn't think that the chance of victory in a guerilla war justified the cost in death and devastation of civilian areas which would have resulted. And he was right.

 

[robertp6165]

However, he [Lincoln] did NOT think that blacks were necessarily inferior, just that they couldn't live side by side with whites.

I'm sorry, but Lincoln actually did think they were inferior. He said, in one of his Lincoln-Douglas speeches, "I will say, then, that I AM NOT NOR HAVE EVER BEEN in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the black and white races---that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with White people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the White and black races which will ever FORBID the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together, there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the White race." And in case you think this was just speecifying in front of the racists in the crowd, he said the following virtually identical statement to a delegation of BLACK LEADERS who had come to the White House to discuss the issue of possible colonization...""Why should the people of your race be colonized, and where? Why should they leave this country? This is, perhaps, the first question for proper consideration. You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word, we suffer on each side. If this be admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated. It is better for both, therefore, to be separated." So it seems clear that he did consider that, because of the PHYSICAL DIFFERENCES (i.e. skin color) of the black race, that they were inferior.

"He wanted to free them and send them back to Africa at first... eventually, he settled for simply wanting to free them....His hope was that it would die off on its own and the blacks could be shipped back to Africa. The ACW forced him to change a lot of his views...."

What forced him to change his views regarding sending blacks back to Africa was the fact that the blacks themselves refused to go along with it. Lincoln never abandoned his own belief in colonization.

 

[Chris]

Guns of the South is one of the 3 best Turtledove books, no arguement there.

On Lee, I feel sorry for him. Despite being a noble man, he took up arms in the defence of one of the most unworthy causes in the history of the world. Rommel and Clive tend to fit into the same pattern.

So I personally, no matter how much I admire those men, class him as a villen.

 

[Grimm Reaper]

Lee a coward? Wasn't the whole problem that he quickly became the shining knight of the south, he didn't dare put himself at risk. I recall one point in 1864 when the issue was in doubt and he thought to lead a charge himself. Eyewitnesses, including his personal aide, reported the response as being a massive effort to stop him. One colonel suggesting that had Lee continued, he AND his horse might have been carried to rear.

As to world where the US is smaller and more equal, somehow I must wonder how bright the world is looking after the US(including the northern states, alias 'Canada') and it's German ally won both world wars, colonial empires lasted longer and might still exist, and the French intervention in 1863 went unchallenged, leading to another fun century of Latin America wondering when they might become colonies again. Oh, and slavery persisting another generation along with Australia and the Americas getting to enjoy trench warfare, poison gas, etc.

 

[zoomar]

I reiterate: GOTS is one of HT's best.

Now about Lee. It all boils down to whether or not you are an American nationalist or not. By all accounts, R.E. Lee was an outstanding military officer and a decent, compassionate, Christian man. He deserves veneration for his many admirable personal characteristics, but none for his adherence to a cause which was treason to the United States of America. For an American nationalist like me, that has to make him a traitor - an admirable one, certainly- but a traitor nonethless. Like all Conferedate leaders, he got off amazingly easily - and for the sake of national unity it's probably a good thing they did. In most other countries of the time the political and military leaders of a secessionist movement like the CSA would have been strung up.

 

[robertp6165]

I reiterate: GOTS is one of HT's best..

I too agree that GOTS was probably Turtledove's best, although (and I am probably in a minority here) I have to confess that I have yet to read anything by Turtledove that I didn't like.

Now about Lee. It all boils down to whether or not you are an American nationalist or not. By all accounts, R.E. Lee was an outstanding military officer and a decent, compassionate, Christian man. He deserves veneration for his many admirable personal characteristics, but none for his adherence to a cause which was treason to the United States of America. For an American nationalist like me, that has to make him a traitor - an admirable one, certainly- but a traitor nonethless...In most other countries of the time the political and military leaders of a secessionist movement like the CSA would have been strung up.

There is a reason why they were not strung up...because the government could not prove a case of treason against them. The Radical Republicans wanted to try and hang Lee, Jeff Davis, and other Confederate leaders, and indeed, Jeff Davis practically BEGGED to be put on trial. But Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase nixed that idea when he informed the Radical leadership that if the Confederates were brought to trial, the question of the legality of secession would have to be decided, and the government would almost certainly lose it's case. So you are entitled to your feelings that the Confederates were traitors, but it does not accord with historical reality.

 

[DuQuense]

As to the Question of Treason to the Nation-- Many people today don't realize that the people in US 1860- WERE NOT- US Citizens.. Lee Was a Citizen of Virginia IN the United States, Like Lincoln was a Citizen of Illinios IN the US. It was only after the ACW that the Idea of being a US Citizen first gained mass aceptance, and was ratified by the S-A war in 1898, when the Army of the US- became the US Army.

 

[zoomar]

Robert and Duquesne,

I appreciate your thoughtful responses to my post and have to agree that, from my early 21st century perspective, I ignored the 19th century context of Lee's...poor decision (my opinion).... as a citizen of Virginia within the United States. I stand corrected, I suppose, although I am still unfomfortable with the notion that one could be a citizen of a state within the US and not also a citizen on the United States.

But Virginia had better not try this stuff again! This time they'll all be sitting next to Abdul Hassan in cages in Guantanamo bay once we're done with 'em!

 

[masteroftheveiledthreat]

Since you are calling him a cowardly racist in this thread I can't think of a better place for it. At the time of the war he was the most beloved character on EITHER side, according to Sharra, I believe, and is still generally listed among the 10 most beloved/admired people in American history

hmm....troll, troll, troll your boat.....

I have seen books that propose the thesis that he wasn't really that good a general.

Goldberg, Napoleon is right, you got something, give.

 

[Tim Thomason]

Goldberg, Napoleon is right, you got something, give.

Both Hymie Goldberg and NapoleonXIV have apparently been banned long, long, long ago, and I doubt they're following this almost 9-year-old thread you just bumped. Interesting read, though.