Yeah, that post bordered on bizarre.
Even if we accept this as true, the TNS wasn’t just about the South where slavery was practiced. It was also about the North where ex-slaves were free and politically active. Free blacks were also servants in rich white families. Like, why wouldn’t they have stories alongside the white characters?
Roots should have put to pasture the myth that slavery reduced black people to automatons lacking in depth and ambition. “Slavery diminishes people”. That is the understatement of the year, but it’s besides the point.
LOL!
Most blacks were illiterate and played no interesting role in history in America in the 19th century. Chattel aren’t interesting, and you can only talk about Frederick Douglass so much. Most of the romanticized depictions of slaves we’ve seen in recent media actually add a lot more complexity than would have existed in humans who were treated as beasts of burden from birth, regularly physically abused, and given no education.
People subjected to things like being long term POWs/hostages usually need significant psychological rehabilitation to be functioning persons on an intellectual level. People born into that lifestyle who never left it almost certainly aren’t that interesting to write stories about, anymore than stories about cave men are interesting.
See, I figure the Confederacy is among the most shameful chapters in our nation’s history. A bunch of folks liked keeping other Americans as slaves more than they liked being part of our country, so they turned traitor and attacked fellow Americans, killing hundreds of thousands before their treachery was stopped. Anyone who’s proud of that heritage is a terrible, terrible person, and any symbol they want to adopt comes pre-tarnished.
The agency of pre-war black Americans is definitely something I didn’t learn about in school, but of course they had agency, and historians are now working on correcting that record. A historiography that focuses on Great Men will of course miss this agency, because the entire country’s structure was bent toward preventing black Americans from entering traditional paths toward greatness. But a more modern historiography that focuses on how everyday people lived can see this agency.
A few years ago we went to Charleston. THeir history museum is much better than it was even a decade earlier, devoting significant time to talking about the lives of slaves. And we took a walking tour of Charleston, the slave tour, that focused on specific slaves and how they exercised agency under terrible conditions; it was fascinating.
Are you kidding me? Most 19th century whites were illiterate and not exactly blazing trails in history either. What does this trivia have to do with fictional storytelling? A black character’s storyline need not be on the grandiose level of Frederick Douglass to be fleshed out no more than a white character needs to be on Abraham Lincoln’s level to have a name.
Of course now the Godwin post comes out. Was there a time in recent history when the swastika was used on a popular North American TV show by the heroes? Flown above an American state capitol building?
As the OP notes, the rebel flag had a different or alternative meaning just 30 years ago. Why should that 19 year old automatically pick the bad one? Because Al Sharpton tells him to think that?
So what is an acceptable period of time? 10 years from now will it be OK for you?
Except that it didn’t, as has been pointed out. It’s always had racist connotations. More people dislike and acknowledge these connotations than they did in the past, but the connotations themselves were there from day 1.
Why beat around the bush? Just say “uppity nigger” like you’re insinuating.
John McCain and many others disprove this.
Go read Twelve Years a Slave and Clan of the Cave Bear.
So, you’re saying that you’ve never heard anyone offered an articulated reason or you’re just pretending you haven’t until someone offers one in this thread?
That the confederate flag had been used this way is actually a symbol of the racism and white supremacism inherent to American culture that is only just being rooted out.
WTF are you talking about? Do the storylines you suggested exist in the books that North and South are based on? Yes or no. It’s a simple question.
What? Why does anyone need a flag, at all, for anything, ever? If someone chooses to display something that they know is, rightly or wrongly, seen as racist, they’re either a racist or don’t mind being mistaken for one. Either way, they’ve marked themselves off my Christmas card list.
Just…no.
This is an incredibly ahistorical way of looking at human nature through 21st-century, liberal-democratic-capitalist eyes. As difficult as it may be for some people to believe, most people throughout history were illiterate and uneducated, and many are today. Many weren’t ‘free’, either. I assure you that illiterate, uneducated and unfree people can have ‘interesting’ lives full of personal drama, and illustrative of the human condition, as much as you or I could. An uneducated slave might not be able to do calculus or debate about the Magna Carta, but there really is more to human nature than that.
zoid. You shouldn’t have. Let’s see if jtgain pulls the trigger (queue Jeopardy theme music).
The whites that were interesting are precisely those that were covered in the books / miniseries, thus demonstrating my point, I believe. Someone can choose to make historical fiction that changes the role of minorities to make modern day blacks happy, or they can do it accurately. It’s an artistic/marketing decision but there is no intrinsic right/wrong to the decision, certainly you can’t reasonably criticize the artistic decision to lean more toward history in some areas.
Let me know when you pitch a book about the peasants of the middle ages or a movie about the same. They may sometimes have minor roles or even star in things that have been done, but overwhelmingly period/fantasy (often from fictional versions of that period) works focus on nobility, knights etc. They had the interesting lives as judged by people willing to read about them.
I’ve known anthropologists who find it interesting to dig through early 20th/late 19th century trash heaps to learn about the type of canned beans people were cooking with back then and that deeply fascinated them. But the collective vote of people’s interest shows that is a niche perspective.
It’s funny the first time I heard the term “Daisy Duke’s” meaning short, tight denim shorts, was from a black woman.
In a way, wouldnt the abolitionists today be the anti-abortion crowd?
I mean, think about it. Most extreme pro-life people are religiously motivated to a major extreme about the cause to the point of even violence.
Remember the last line of “Battle Hymn of the Republic” goes “as he died to make men holy let us die to make men free”.
I think this is why if you get really deep into the causes and motivations for the civil war it can lead to some other arguements.