Comments on: The 54th Massachusetts Regiment in Myth, Memory, and History http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/ Where History, Heritage, and Education Intersect Sat, 11 Feb 2012 19:35:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: toby http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-159 toby Fri, 24 Oct 2008 18:32:47 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-159 <p>Kevin, we share a favourite movie and a favourite scene.</p> <p>Clearly, the movie did err on the side of "worthiness"... I thought the contrast between the 54th and the child-like, looting and burning black troops, under a paternalistic and corrupt white officer, was a bit too pointed, and with a bit too much of forced resonance for our own time. The white officer was Simon Legree in a blue uniform ... but I would guess most Simon Legrees wore grey.</p> <p>Also, the film dropped the incident where Shaw's father requested the return of his son's remains, and was told "He's buried with his ni**ers". The film avoided any depiction of Confederate racism, except the woman from the burning house who screamed "Ni**er soldiers!" at the regiment, perhaps understandably.</p> <p>Overall, still my favourite. I like Shaw's answer to Tripp's "What do we get?" - "You'll get even less if we lose".</p> Kevin, we share a favourite movie and a favourite scene.

Clearly, the movie did err on the side of “worthiness”… I thought the contrast between the 54th and the child-like, looting and burning black troops, under a paternalistic and corrupt white officer, was a bit too pointed, and with a bit too much of forced resonance for our own time. The white officer was Simon Legree in a blue uniform … but I would guess most Simon Legrees wore grey.

Also, the film dropped the incident where Shaw’s father requested the return of his son’s remains, and was told “He’s buried with his ni**ers”. The film avoided any depiction of Confederate racism, except the woman from the burning house who screamed “Ni**er soldiers!” at the regiment, perhaps understandably.

Overall, still my favourite. I like Shaw’s answer to Tripp’s “What do we get?” – “You’ll get even less if we lose”.

]]> By: Kevin Levin http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-158 Kevin Levin Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:05:07 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-158 <p>Ken, -- The story about Broderick came up last summer in a series of interviews I conducted with reenactors from the movie. Some of my students were quite moved by the whipping scene, but felt manipulated when I clarified that the practice was already banned in the military.</p> Ken, — The story about Broderick came up last summer in a series of interviews I conducted with reenactors from the movie. Some of my students were quite moved by the whipping scene, but felt manipulated when I clarified that the practice was already banned in the military.

]]> By: Ken Noe http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-157 Ken Noe Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:12:15 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-157 <p>John and Matthew: </p> <p>Re: the whipping scene, Denzel Washington later said that the director did not tell him that he was going to be whipped, and that the anguish and anger in his filmed response was genuine. I tend to cringe when I watch it now. He added that he found the re-enactors kinda scary. No wonder; one of them later told me that when Matthew Broderick first appeared on the set, some of them vocally ragged "Ferris" about his recent fatal traffic accident in Ireland, to the point that he walked off the set and tried to quit. I sometimes wonder how much manipulation overall went into the performances we saw.</p> <p>Ken</p> John and Matthew:

Re: the whipping scene, Denzel Washington later said that the director did not tell him that he was going to be whipped, and that the anguish and anger in his filmed response was genuine. I tend to cringe when I watch it now. He added that he found the re-enactors kinda scary. No wonder; one of them later told me that when Matthew Broderick first appeared on the set, some of them vocally ragged “Ferris” about his recent fatal traffic accident in Ireland, to the point that he walked off the set and tried to quit. I sometimes wonder how much manipulation overall went into the performances we saw.

Ken

]]> By: matthew mckeon http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-156 matthew mckeon Wed, 22 Oct 2008 22:31:19 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-156 <p>I've got to disagree with Mr. Cummings about the "stereotypical" and "comic" black characters. I thought the characters were well rounded, not necessarily because of the script, but because the skill of the actors(with the exception of Thomas). The contrast between the "contraband regiment" and the 54th was, if anything, too extreme, IMO. </p> <p>The 54th was atypical of black regiments in some ways, and the film makers chose to dramatize common forms of discrimination more generally experienced. Not a bad call.</p> <p>Also, I would disagree about "every convention" of slavery being shown. None of the men really talk about their experiences as slaves. It's an experience that affects them in different ways, but its unspoken. Tripp's scars are shown, involuntarily by him,<br /> but they are mute. Slaves were whipped, after all.(the Union army of course, did not use flogging).</p> I’ve got to disagree with Mr. Cummings about the “stereotypical” and “comic” black characters. I thought the characters were well rounded, not necessarily because of the script, but because the skill of the actors(with the exception of Thomas). The contrast between the “contraband regiment” and the 54th was, if anything, too extreme, IMO.

The 54th was atypical of black regiments in some ways, and the film makers chose to dramatize common forms of discrimination more generally experienced. Not a bad call.

Also, I would disagree about “every convention” of slavery being shown. None of the men really talk about their experiences as slaves. It’s an experience that affects them in different ways, but its unspoken. Tripp’s scars are shown, involuntarily by him,
but they are mute. Slaves were whipped, after all.(the Union army of course, did not use flogging).

]]> By: Kevin Levin http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-155 Kevin Levin Wed, 22 Oct 2008 20:46:41 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-155 <p>Thanks for the comment Michael. The McPherson article which you refer to is in _Drawn With the Sword_.</p> Thanks for the comment Michael. The McPherson article which you refer to is in _Drawn With the Sword_.

]]> By: Michael Lynch http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-154 Michael Lynch Wed, 22 Oct 2008 20:33:52 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-154 <p>It's a small world--my mom is shwoing "The Patriot" in one of her high school classes, which prompted me to do a post last night on the issue of dramatic license in historical films. I'd just published it today when I ran across your piece on "Glory." </p> <p>James McPherson has a very thoughtful essay on the historicity of that move in one of his collections, in which he suggests that the film's inaccuracies actually increase its general historical value.</p> <p>Michael Lynch</p> It’s a small world–my mom is shwoing “The Patriot” in one of her high school classes, which prompted me to do a post last night on the issue of dramatic license in historical films. I’d just published it today when I ran across your piece on “Glory.”

James McPherson has a very thoughtful essay on the historicity of that move in one of his collections, in which he suggests that the film’s inaccuracies actually increase its general historical value.

Michael Lynch

]]> By: Kevin Levin http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-153 Kevin Levin Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:44:13 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-153 <p>John, -- Great points. I wonder, however, that given the place of black Union soldiers within the national narrative prior to Glory, whether the fact that the movie was made at all outweighs its shortcomings. What do you think?</p> John, — Great points. I wonder, however, that given the place of black Union soldiers within the national narrative prior to Glory, whether the fact that the movie was made at all outweighs its shortcomings. What do you think?

]]> By: John Cummings http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-152 John Cummings Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:29:31 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-152 <p>The real shame about the film Glory is that it had to resort to historical distortion of the regiment’s membership as being just as oppressed and uneducated in majority as the rest of the black troops portrayed. Far more could have been gained if the men of the 54th were presented in their true character which would have provided a much starker contrast when compared to the “contraband” men of Colonel James Montgomery.<br /> Making Thomas the stand alone “intellectual” thrown in with a cast of stereotypical portrayals of comic blacks practically screamed minstrel show. Furthermore, every convention of the atrocities of slavery was thrown into the mix, right down to the bearing of horrific scars from lashing. This in itself is a shameful Hollywood distortion since flogging had been banned in the Union Army since March of 1861. Private Tripp would not have been dealt with in this manner but alas, someone’s unfortunate “infinite wisdom” insisted that it be included for a “dramatic” effect.<br /> What would have made the film all the more fulfilling would have been an accurate portrayal of the Sergeant character played by Morgan Freeman. Had it been presented historically, the real Sergeant William H. Carney would have been shown having saved the regimental flag for which he was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. Items such as these are far more important than the failure to mention Shaw’s marriage.<br /> </p> The real shame about the film Glory is that it had to resort to historical distortion of the regiment’s membership as being just as oppressed and uneducated in majority as the rest of the black troops portrayed. Far more could have been gained if the men of the 54th were presented in their true character which would have provided a much starker contrast when compared to the “contraband” men of Colonel James Montgomery.
Making Thomas the stand alone “intellectual” thrown in with a cast of stereotypical portrayals of comic blacks practically screamed minstrel show. Furthermore, every convention of the atrocities of slavery was thrown into the mix, right down to the bearing of horrific scars from lashing. This in itself is a shameful Hollywood distortion since flogging had been banned in the Union Army since March of 1861. Private Tripp would not have been dealt with in this manner but alas, someone’s unfortunate “infinite wisdom” insisted that it be included for a “dramatic” effect.
What would have made the film all the more fulfilling would have been an accurate portrayal of the Sergeant character played by Morgan Freeman. Had it been presented historically, the real Sergeant William H. Carney would have been shown having saved the regimental flag for which he was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. Items such as these are far more important than the failure to mention Shaw’s marriage.

]]> By: Kevin Levin http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-151 Kevin Levin Wed, 22 Oct 2008 13:20:37 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-151 <p>Thanks for the comment Matthew. I also read that in Gallagher's book, but my response is that emphasizing the attitutdes of white Southerners and treatment on the battlefield would have been a distraction from the main theme of the movie, which was centered on discrimination in Northern ranks and identification with the Union cause. I agree that Thomas is a poorly-developed character.</p> Thanks for the comment Matthew. I also read that in Gallagher’s book, but my response is that emphasizing the attitutdes of white Southerners and treatment on the battlefield would have been a distraction from the main theme of the movie, which was centered on discrimination in Northern ranks and identification with the Union cause. I agree that Thomas is a poorly-developed character.

]]> By: matthew mckeon http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-150 matthew mckeon Wed, 22 Oct 2008 04:33:02 +0000 http://cwmemory.com/2008/10/21/the-54th-massachusetts-regiment-in-myth-memory-and-history/#comment-150 <p>Glory is a great movie. When using it in my class, I do make the point that while the 54th did not struggle with some of the forms of discrimination shown in the movie; lack of uniforms, and weapons initially or shoes, other, more typical black regiments did. The free blacks of the 54th had similar literacy rates to white regiments, but many regiments recruited from escaped slaves had no education. Susie King Taylor, in her memoir of the war, describes teaching black soldiers. Thomas Wentworth Higginson, also notes his black troops eagerness to learn.</p> <p>Gary Gallenger in his recent book about civil war movies makes an interesting point: all the racism the 54th experiences(in the film), comes from the Union Army. The Confederates fight fiercely, but they are really a faceless enemy. The exception is the white troops cheering the 54th as it marches to make their fatal assault.</p> <p>The most disappointing character to me was Thomas("get it? THOMAS"). Andre Braugher, who played the brillant, cool detective in "Homicide." plays Thomas as weak and geeky, the worse soldier, the only soldier in glasses, who talks in an impossibly over formal voice, his reading a sign of his prissiness. Stay in school kids! Of course at the end he gets in some good killing, redeeming himself.</p> Glory is a great movie. When using it in my class, I do make the point that while the 54th did not struggle with some of the forms of discrimination shown in the movie; lack of uniforms, and weapons initially or shoes, other, more typical black regiments did. The free blacks of the 54th had similar literacy rates to white regiments, but many regiments recruited from escaped slaves had no education. Susie King Taylor, in her memoir of the war, describes teaching black soldiers. Thomas Wentworth Higginson, also notes his black troops eagerness to learn.

Gary Gallenger in his recent book about civil war movies makes an interesting point: all the racism the 54th experiences(in the film), comes from the Union Army. The Confederates fight fiercely, but they are really a faceless enemy. The exception is the white troops cheering the 54th as it marches to make their fatal assault.

The most disappointing character to me was Thomas(“get it? THOMAS”). Andre Braugher, who played the brillant, cool detective in “Homicide.” plays Thomas as weak and geeky, the worse soldier, the only soldier in glasses, who talks in an impossibly over formal voice, his reading a sign of his prissiness. Stay in school kids! Of course at the end he gets in some good killing, redeeming himself.

]]>