Thursday, September 30, 2010

Crisis and Commemoration

We had a great conversation this week about the essay by Kurt O. Berends called "Confederate Sacrifice and the 'Redemption' of the South.  His claim centered around the give-and-take, push-and-pull between religious interpretation and war rhetoric.  Most scholars (he identifies three different camps) discuss the effects of Christianity on the war (did it undermine the Confederacy, support it, etc.).  Berends suggests, though, that there was a lot happening the other way around, too--that the rhetoric surrounding the Confederacy: patriotism, notions of a "holy war," sacrifice, etc., influenced the way that people understood their faith.

Then we meandered over to the front of the Amelia Gayle Gorgas library and looked at the commemorative rock erected outside on the quad to memorialize those soldiers from UA who fought for the Confederate forces.  Here are two pictures, one I filched from google images and one I took while we stood there reading it Monday:



Hope you can read it...  Let me know if not, and I'll type it out and post.  The choices made with the language used is fascinating.  I'll give you the meaty bit: "The University of Alabama gave to the Confederacy-- [this many colonels, majors, officers, etc.].  Recognizing obedience to state, they loyally and uncomplainingly met the call of duty, in numberless instances sealing their devotion by their life blood.  And on April 3, 1865, the cadet corps, composed wholly of boys, went bravely forth to repel a veteran federal invading foe, of many times their number, in a vain effort to save their alma mater, from destruction by fire, which it met at the hands of the enemy on the day following"...

We talked about Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, who thought that religion should be subservient to the state...  The memorial notes the "obedience to state" which was what ostensibly led the veterans to fight (loyally and uncomplainingly, no less!)--the distinction that began to be drawn between social/political/state matters and internal religious convictions is part of what allowed "the government to lay claim to citizens' ultimate allegiance and to demand the paramount sacrifice: their lives" (Berends 103).  What do do with words/phrases like: "boys," "life blood," "veteran federal invading foe," "enemy," devotion," "call of duty"...?  

Commemoration/Memorializing is obviously an involved process...




6 comments:

  1. It is an involved process, and as a rule if you don't win the battle/war, glorify the hell out of the loss.
    I am reminded of the discussion on the Trail Maids. When I see the rock I don't think of slavery, or the atrocities that went along with it, I think of young boys trying to save campus from being burned to the ground.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It amazes me the amount of rhetoric that can exist on one rock. And the fact that if you think about the images placed in the minds of people that view the monument. My favorite is the image of the "boys" going out to fight the outnumbering "veterans", which in my head is kinda setting them up for defeat. Its like they were never meant to succeed when fighting against so many veterans that were better than the boys they were.

    Words really are the most powerful thing and when they are permanent like this is here, they will last forever and the images used with the words paint a picture of the times, maybe, but moreso the mentality of the individual jotting them down.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think the descriptions of this group composed "wholly of boys" and their actions on this rock are what make it so interesting. They are glorified in almost a God-like fashion and seem to be immortalized in the center most area of our school.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think these boys fought for something that was very important to everyone during their time and lost their lives for it, and out of respect for these boys and their families their efforts are celebrated by these strong words on this rock. I think we do that with everything in America, when people (not just boys anytmore, woman too) go out to fight for a cause that effects us all and lose their life, we celebrate them.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ryan, I'm wondering if we can separate the two...? Think Morrison's fishbowl metaphor...?

    ReplyDelete
  6. I don't think we can separate the two, but it all goes back to our own bias. Does it not? We were all raised in certain environments to believe in certain ideals. I'm not saying that overlooking it is good, but most people don't even consider it. Southerners are all about "honor." No matter what they will defend it, fight for it and die for it. It's not something you see all over the country. It's been that way since Early America. So when people look at this they'll only think of how brave and honorable these boys were. Granted, much f that has to do with the diction. I'm not saying that it's a good thing. In fact, I think the opposite. The two are inseparable, but we have o teach people to see everything and not what they want.

    ReplyDelete