Prompt #2: Response to "Picturing the Civil War 3: African American Soldiers" by Prof. Fahs

While reading through "Picturing the Civil War 3: African American Soldiers," one could see that Professor Fahs' purpose in writing this blog post was to show how the representations of African Americans changed throughout the course of the Civil War; more specifically, the recruitment of African American soldiers changed how African Americans in general were perceived by the mainstream media. Prof. Fahs illustrates how mainstream media before the civil war portrayed African Americans as either stereotypical jokes of themselves or as helpless slaves.

The post proceeds in chronological order  from the beginning of the Civil War to the end, separated by images and Fahs' reflections on them. The recruitment posters and her rhetorical questions are especially intriguing as the rhetorical questions give a new light into how the posters may be perceived. While the ordinary onlooker may see the posters as purely informative, Prof. Fahs' rhetorical questions show how the posters appeal to the emotions and agency of African Americans to recruit into the army. From the posters, Prof. Fahs proceeds to talk about a piece in which an African American soldier is being trained by a white general, the Northern white fascination with the lives of slaves becoming soldiers, daguerrotypes of African American soldiers, and finally, the lingering racism that still existed in America despite the improvement of the general public's perception of black people. Not only does Prof. Fahs use rhetorical questions when referring to the posters, but they are also employed in the very last paragraph so that the reader may come to his or her own conclusions about how the images used in the Civil War were effective in changing perceptions and to what extent.

The questions/comments I have for Prof. Fahs are as follows:
Was having African American soldiers pose in a certain way in the daguerrotypes was intended to create meaning or did it just happen to have an impact on those who viewed it? If the latter, how do you know that the any, if at all, impact was created?
Your thesis is very compelling and putting it in a chronological order is helpful to the reader as one can follow along with your argument easily and effectively.
By pointing out how there was still racism underlying all the progress that had been made in changing the negative perception of African Americans, you successfully create an accurate insight into the societal values of the time.

Prompt #1 Reflections on the Civil War

My APUSH and IB History teacher, Mr. Ludlam with a smorgasbord of desserts.

The majority of my Civil War knowledge was imbued upon me by my junior AP US History teacher Mr. Ludlam. Mr. Ludlam was famous on campus and off for being very impassioned, strict, and a shouter (he would shout for almost every lecture, I kid you not). The Civil War was a topic of great interest to Mr. Ludlam for many reasons, most of which I cannot remember. But I do remember the main reason which was that it was an event that centered around one of his idols: Abraham Lincoln. When it came to learning the Civil War in APUSH my junior year, Mr. Ludlam made sure to make us think about and focus on the causes of the war. Everything from literature, politics, sociology, and economics, was discussed in class and expanded upon in essays.

Mr. Ludlam pounded into our heads the fact that Abraham Lincoln was never for the freedom of slaves from the very beginning of his presidency, but rather a proponent of keeping slavery from expanding; by doing so, Mr. Ludlam got the misconception that the Civil War was fought purely for the freedom of slaves out of our heads. Due to Mr. Ludlam's thoroughness in teaching the many reasons for the start of the Civil War, he was able to teach us to form and prove our own opinions regarding the causes of the Civil War.

Professor Fahs' lectures of the Civil War are a lot more quiet and calm than the Civil War lectures I remember, but they are also filled with detail and insight. Though we went over Frederick Douglass and William Lloyd Garrison's impact in the 19th century, it was not the main focus of the APUSH curriculum and therefore not focused on in detail. Focusing on Frederick Douglass and the abolitionist movement showed me new ideas and theories around the causes of the Civil War. Therefore I can supplement my own theories regarding the cause of the Civil War by using Frederick Douglass' actions and African American involvement's contingency as proof that the war was not purely about slavery but a big factor and major driving force.

Prompt #6: Reflection on the Quarter

This quarter, we have read and analyzed many books with a focus on the aspect of war. From The Iliad to The Art of War, we have been exposed to war from many perspectives. We have learned the importance of the point of view that a war is seen from, how the subtle nuances in literary devices can change the meaning of war, and how using intertextuality can help broaden one's viewpoint of war. The most important concept that I learned, however, is that war is not just a mechanism for killing people, affecting individual families, but that it can create a huge societal, historical, economic, and political impact on the world.

What I have learned may sound obvious, but it has never occurred to me the extent of the impact that war can have on humanity. I have learned about western wars in high school, such as the wars of the United States in AP US History or 20th Century wars of the western world in IB 20th Century History, but to me, the political, social, economic, military, and historical impact that the wars caused seemed to stay within the parameters of the countries involved. This quarter in Humanities Core, I have learned that one perspective of war, real or fake, can have a global and everlasting impact on how others can form an opinion. For example, The Iliad has shown that even an ancient war that may seem to not have anything in common with modern issues relates to the contemporary world more than what is seen at first sight.

War, to me, used to be just a singular event that only affected families and the overlay of the immediate country. However, being in Humanities Core has taught me that war is not a singular, ineffective event. Rather, war has a large impact in terms of area that has been effected, as well as the length of time that it still holds an impact.

Prompt #5: Machiavelli in the Modern World

In chapter 14 of The Prince, Machiavelli asserts that a Prince should never "lift his thought from the exercise of war (85)." For a prince to be successful, he must be fluent in the art of war, which will lead to acquiring a principality. Not only must the prince study the art of war, but he also must take initiative and be active in the principality by being in it directly and gaining knowledge and familiarity of the area.

This assertion, to me, sounds a lot like the basis for the United States foreign policy as almost every political debate regarding foreign affairs is lead by a discussion on military action. In the interview with Noam Chomsky on truth-out.org, Chomsky points out a cliché analogy of how the US uses its power: "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." However, the actions of the US do no necessarily follow with the Machiavellian assertion as the US tends to use military power for everything as it has been the strongest military power in the world since the First World War. Machiavelli points out that a successful prince must not only have strong military knowledge, but also an understanding of his surroundings, of which the US has little to none.

The idea that a successful prince will arise from a strong grasp of military knowledge and practice has worked before in the past, as seen in Machiavelli's example of Francesco Sforza. However, it does not ring true anymore as the United States' military advances in the past ten years or so have proved to be more disastrous than successful due to an over-dependence on military power and a lack of familiarity with the other countries.

Prompt #4: Analyzing Genre and Medium

Mother Courage and her Children, by Bertolt Brecht, depicts a Mother trying to pave her way through a war-torn country to try and build her business in order to keep her family. The text itself depicts Mother Courage as an adamant, harsh, yet thoughtful person. On the other hand, we have Theater of War, directed by John Walter, which is a documentary that shows the making of the recreation of the play Mother Courage in New York wherein Mother Courage is played by Meryl Streep. A scene that is written out in the playbook and the acted out in the documentary is when Kattrin finds a baby and Mother Courage scorns her for taking the baby and tells her to put it back because she has to "spend hours pulling it away (Brecht, 60)." The same scene in the documentary and playbook are comprehended differently both because of the medium and the execution of the scene's delivery.
In the playbook the scene is moved along with stage directions in the text so that the reader will know how Kattrin got the baby as she "emerges from the rubble, carrying an infant (Brecht 60)." In Theater of War, the scene starts from Kattrin calming a baby down by making soothing facial expressions. The dramatic nature of the scene in the playbook as opposed to the beginning of the scene in the documentary shows how the stage directions change the mood of the scene as Brecht wanted Kattrin to emerge from a dead space, holding a new life whereas the director begins this scene in a relaxing manner wherein Kattrin is trying to soothe the baby.
The playbook does not do this scene justice as I believe the documentary portrays Mother Courage's dilemma in action much better than in text. When Meryl Streep delivers the line "You give it back to its mother one-two-three before you get attached and I have to spend hours pulling it away, you hear me?", I believe it is executed much better as you hear the distraught and frustration in her voice as she tries to deal with everything else that is also going on. To me, the text only shows the line as a foil to Kattrin's compassionate nature as opposed to the emotional weight that comes with hearing the line with an actor's interpretation of the voice.

Prompt #3: A Bronze Cast and a Wooden Stamp

Achilles Shield: https://beamingnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/AchillesShieldFlaxmann.png

Simplicius' Tree: http://www.childsgallery.com/gallery/94-19-04-18.jpg



When it comes to mediums, the material used is very important; not only because of how the piece will look in the end, but also because it will affect the meaning of the piece as a whole. I used to think that mediums were exclusive to art and art history, but reading the texts The Iliad and The Adventures of Simplicius Simplicissimus has made me realize that there is more to the medium of the work than just its aesthetic value. The shield of Achilles and Simplicius' tree could not be more different, yet similar in what they symbolize. The meaning of the works not only come from the text itself, but it also comes from the materials in which the pieces are made.

Achilles' shield, in the text, is made by the god, Hephaestus. Already, the shield could not be any more divine having been made by a god himself: "the god creates a world of gorgeous immortal work (The Iliad, 483)". Not only is the shield a functional piece of armor for Achilles, but it is also a symbol of Achilles' power and glory as a strong, charismatic, and forever honored member of society. The fact that the shield in real life is made out of metal reflects Achilles' immortal glory as metal is one of the most permanent mediums that something can be made out of. Metal often has a connotation of being labor-intensive, strong, long-lasting, and expensive; all of which are perfect for a demi god such as Achilles.

Simplicius' tree, in the text, is described to us by Simplicius himself from a dream that he has while thinking about each person's role in society and how they are affected by it. The fact that the vision of the tree was conceived in a dream rather than given to him by some higher being represents how Simplicius' glory as an antihero comes from himself and his own cleverness rather than being bestowed upon him like the shield to Achilles. The woodblock print as a medium has much more humble connotations than that of the metal shield as the work that goes into making a woodblock print is much less labor intensive and the print becomes more accessible to the general public as opposed to the shield which may be the only one in the world. This is important because it shows that the glory of Simplicius as an intelligent person can be obtained by anyone and everyone whereas Achilles' glory as a strong fighter and demigod can only be obtained by himself.

The mediums that each work is made from has importance in the connotations of the material as well as the work that went into it. Whereas Achilles is known for being an elite person of divine glory that no one else can achieve, like the shield, Simplicius had a mere dream and the vision was represented by something that can be achieved by anyone, the print.

Prompt #2: Engaging with the Iliad

A gun store in Kingston, Tennessee is offering a discount on new guns if you say you are a Christian. The owner, Bryant Williams, has said, "If Christians are going to be targeted we need to protect ourselves...The best way to protect yourself is with the best weapon available, and that happens to be a handgun." To summarize his reasoning in giving Christians a discount on guns in his store, Williams has said that he believes that people are being targeted for their beliefs and that he does not want to hide his faith.

Just as violence in the Iliad was the most effective and profound method of solving problems, some people in today's society tend to believe the same thing. In order to get what you want in the time period of Homer, you would display power and authority to convince others to fight for you as violence was seen as the solution to most problems. This can be seen in Book II, lines 522-524: "Agamemnon the lord of men did not resist. He commanded heralds to cry out loud and clear and summon the long-haired Achaean troops to battle. The cries rang out. The battalions gathered quickly." Agamemnon's overbearing and assertive personality was strong enough to have his army abandon thoughts of retreat and fight instead. Although today's society does not necessarily promote this kind of leadership that praises violence as the only means to the end, there are those who believe that preparing for a violent situation will be the safest method of solving problems, and maybe even preventing the problem from happening in the first place. Bryant Williams is similar to Agamemnon in that they both believe that violence is a very real occurrence and want to prepare for it.

The fact that religious people are being persecuted today is very real, controversial, and violent. However, does this justify the need to arm oneself if he or she is living in a society in which a majority of people share the same beliefs in the first place as Bryant Williams does? Is Bryant Williams justified in his beliefs to arm himself and other Christians for being "targeted" even though he lives in a majority Christian part of the country? If one were to ask Agamemnon in Homer's time, the answer would be yes. However, we do not live in the times of Homer.