Battlefield Preservation, WalMart, and Me

I think all of you are well aware that I greatly appreciate the time you take out of your day to comment on my posts.  In many cases you spend a significant amount of time to insure that your comments are clear and to the point.  By far my favorite comments are those that challenge me to rethink specific issues or to work harder to clarify my position.  In response to yesterday’s post on the Wilderness and WalMart, however, I can’t tell whether my readers are having difficulty following my thinking on this issue over time or my commitment to battlefield preservation itself.  I am getting the sense that it more of the latter.

It’s difficult to know what more I could say to satisfy some of you.  If I woke up yesterday morning and had posted a simple condemnation of WalMart, like everyone else in the Civil War blogosphere, all would be fine, but because I fail to toe the party line there is a lingering doubt.  Dimitri Rotov’s recent post also deviates from the standard line of thought, but I don’t doubt for a minute his commitment to preserving our Civil War battlefields.

Let me remind all of you of a few things that have apparently been so easily forgotten.  From the beginning of the life of this blog I have maintained a strong commitment to the mission of the National Park Service.  While others condemned Gettysburg Superintendent, John Latschar for every problem under the sun, I made it a point to remind my readers of his commitment to restoring some of the battlefield’s most important view sheds.  In addition, I can’t think of anyone else in the blogosphere or elsewhere for that matter who has gone further in supporting the NPS’s commitment to properly interpreting Civil War battlefields.  This past December I was asked by Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania Superintendent, John Hennessy, to deliver the keynote address for the 146th anniversary of the battle.  In my talk I discussed the importance of these battlefields to our civic life as well as their importance as educational tools.  Every year I bring students to one of Virginia’s battlefields.  All of them walk away with a unique and invaluable perspective and a few of them are truly moved by what they experienced.  Finally, I signed the CWPT’s petition that was sent to WalMart back in October.  What more can I say about my position on battlefield preservation?

May I be so bold as to suggest that compared to many of you who are having difficulty with my position, I’ve done much more to insure the continued life of these important historic sites.

 

Walmart Wins

smileyI can’t say that I am surprised by the decision to give Walmart permission to build a store just off of the Wilderness battlefield along Rt. 3 in Orange County.  As I’ve said before, this is a preservation battle that was lost a long time ago.  It was a decision to be made by the residents of Orange County and they made it.  Nothing was rushed, all sides were heard, and it looks like the decision of the board of supervisors reflected the will of the people living in the community.  Let’s hope that organizations such as the Civil War Preservation Trust have learned some valuable lessons and move on.

 

John Stauffer Responds

Thanks to Prof. Stauffer for taking the time to write up such a thorough response to the recent criticisms of The State of Jones that can be found here and elsewhere.  I would much rather move on from this controversy, but given the circumstances outlined at the beginning of his response I thought it was only fair to post it.

I rarely read blogs, and this summer I’ve had difficulty keeping up with the Internet:  my wife gave birth to a boy, we’ve been without shower and kitchen owing to a house addition, and I’ve had to finish two 10,000 word essays on deadline.  Sally Jenkins and I welcome debate, as we emphasized, and the fact that I was unaware of your tacit expectation that I should read and post responses on your blog should not be interpreted as a refusal to engage in public and scholarly conversation.

You may be right in suggesting that “the blogosphere is now shaping” academic debates and historiography.  After all, the past forty years have witnessed an extraordinary democratization in academia, with scholars of the highest order having richly diverse institutional affiliations, from high schools, newspapers, and magazines to museums, educational institutes, the film industry, and colleges and universities of all ranks.  The Internet, which has revolutionized access to archives and other repositories of knowledge, has accelerated the democratization.  My hunch is that blogs will contribute to this process. In any event, let me try to address the major criticisms of “The State of Jones”

Continue reading

 

Jing and Voting America

I am playing around with a new social media tool called Jing, which allows you to take screen shots and videos of your desktop.  It’s free and seems to be easy to use.  I’m not quite sure how I might use this in class, but I did take a few minutes to introduce you to the Voting America website, which was developed out of the University of Richmond’s Digital Scholarship Lab.  If you teach American history than this is a site that you will want to bookmark.  Hope you enjoy it and let me know what you think.  Now that I think about it, I could use this to explore aspects of Civil War memory on various websites.  Hmmm…where should I go first?

I had to reduce the image to fit the screen so the text will be difficult to read.  You can view a full-screen version here if interested.

 

Rape in the Civil War, Memory, and the Problem of Gender Bias

Yesterday’s post about sexual violence and rape in the Civil War led to a spirited exchange.  As always, I appreciate your comments even when the topics are emotionally divisive.  My wife, Michaela, read through the entire exchange and, as a result, formulated some strong opinions which she wrote up as a comment.  After reading it I convinced her to write it up as a guest post – her first one here at Civil War Memory.

First, I propose to define rape. Rape is defined as penile or non-penile vaginal penetration or sexual assault w/o penetration in some countries. So choosing that definition would increase the numbers compared to exclusively vaginal penetration rape. Thus the women being “surprised” in their bedroom might imply rape depending on what actually happened. Secondly, I am not sure whether rapists are more prevalent among one nationality compared to another. Thirdly  whether an army is “just” ordered to rape or whether the extreme psychological conditions lead to rapist behavior might give us different leads as to the actual numbers of rape. And lastly, this is a “Memory” blog. So going back to the idea of memory I don’t think that the rapist Union or Confederate soldier is a) a well documented picture and b) a wildly interesting subject to the community of CW historians (and the latter is not a judgmental comment). My uneducated guess is it would be rather analyzed in the comparative history of warfare.

Continue reading