|
Post by Tricia on Feb 5, 2006 10:51:28 GMT -6
All-- Over the past month or so, I've managed to accumulate several of the LBH-Custer novels so many have recommended at this board, and I have a question regarding the use of Custer's name. Now this may be a narrative style or point of view issue, but in one of the books, the author continually refers to GAC as "George Custer." The point of view of this story appears to be omniscient (which I am not a fan of), though it bounces around even within paragraphs (!) ... I've always believed GAC, although his first name was George, went by Armstrong formally, and by Autie informally ... or am I wrong? I certainly have been so before! But the use of "George Custer" makes me kind of stop the read. Regards, Leyton McLean
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Feb 5, 2006 11:51:37 GMT -6
Leyton,
I share your curiosity about the name issue. A year or two ago, I posed a "Custeriana Query" in the LBHA Newsletter, asking what Custer's friends called him. The only answer I received was "Jack," for his initials GAC. I'm still not satisfied that the officers close to him called him that.
We have a letter he wrote to his brother Tom that is signed, "Your affectionate brother, Armstrong."
Does anyone remember seeing a first-person account in which someone referred to Custer as Armstrong or Jack?
Diane
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Feb 5, 2006 12:09:26 GMT -6
Can't cite anything for sure, but I thought I remembered that Tom's and Boston's letters tend to say "Armstrong"?
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Feb 5, 2006 12:43:39 GMT -6
Elisabeth--
As do Libbie's, when referring to him in a more formal manner. With close relatives, I believe she used Autie or Aut ... I am also thinking that in his final talk to her--instructing her that her husband was a born soldier and don't you try to change him, or something to that effect--Daniel Bacon might have used "Armstrong," though that scene can probably be more construed as hearsay than anything strictly historical.
Funny, I've never heard the "Jack" before--very interesting. I've heard of Fanny, Curly, and The General, Boy General, and of course, Hard Ass--as well as other less splendid terms ...
But "George Custer" does tend to rattle me. Leyton McLean
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Feb 5, 2006 12:49:39 GMT -6
True. It certainly implies a writer who doesn't have an "ear".
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Feb 6, 2006 8:59:52 GMT -6
Elisabeth--
You've got that right. Anything that causes you to be jolted out of the narrative is something I'd avoid, writing-wise. Now of course, there's this tendency at the battlefield for some of the interpreters to regard to GAC as "George Custer ..." arrrrgggh!
Regards, Leyton McLean
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Feb 6, 2006 9:15:52 GMT -6
I can understand their problem, though ... They can't just say "Custer", as there were three of that name on the field; yet "George Armstrong Custer" is too much of a mouthful to repeat 15 times per minute! Fewer excuses for it in writing, however. (Indeed, none!)
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Feb 13, 2006 16:29:54 GMT -6
Diane--
Found this tidbit in Jeffry Wert's article in the March/April edition of Civil War Times: "'George was a wide awake boy,' recalled a schoolmate ..." It makes me even more uncertain of what GAC went by, unless it was just easier for him not to correct the teacher's rollcall ...
Regards, Leyton McLean
|
|
|
Post by Treasuredude on Feb 13, 2006 18:50:52 GMT -6
Informally, I don't know. But I would expect most subordinates would have just called him General.
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Feb 13, 2006 20:06:21 GMT -6
TD--
I think you've got it right. But this thread seems to be more involved with what peers/associates might have called GAC; at least that was my initial concern. Of course, the "name issue" covers waaay more than strictly novels and/or short stories. I think in fiction, however, the name GAC goes by/is represented by depends upon whose point of view is being presented in a specific scene/chapter: family members and intimates would probably go with Autie or Armstrong, whilst others would--and rightly so--call him by his rank, breveted or not. But there does come a time when an author's personal intrusion into the subject can make a reader's muck of it, therefore causing one to step out of the greater narrative--at least that is how I would counsel the writers I mentor.
Regards, Leyton McLean
|
|
|
Post by Chappie on Jan 30, 2008 20:56:19 GMT -6
I believe General Sheridan started calling Custer "Jack" because of his initials GAC during the Civil War. I'll see if I can find the book that mentions it. Normally it was just close family who called him Autie.
Chappie
|
|
|
Post by Melani on Jan 31, 2008 17:13:15 GMT -6
My first realization of "Jack" was a book of CBHMA trivia quizzes titled "You Don't Know GAC."
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Feb 7, 2008 12:09:40 GMT -6
And there is a recent book about Custer et al. called You Don't Know GAC about the LBH (or some such)
It's a Q&A booklet with lots of good info.
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Feb 9, 2008 0:28:05 GMT -6
That's the same one Melani just mentioned, Crazy. . . . More ouzo?
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Feb 9, 2008 2:08:09 GMT -6
Crazed One ... uhh ... you mention the same as above. I know it can be mighty tiring keeping up with what them post here and there .... that said, I never "got" that title. The altitude in Montana must've truly messed up the simplest thought.
On the Friday before the LBH anniversary, I decided to drive to the snow that normally exists in Bear Paw Pass--it's something like 11,000 ft. The weather in lower MT was ridiculous--near 100 at even the battlefield! For some reason, this year's drive was marked by extreme dizziness and fright; whilst I attempted to return to "ground" level, I continuously told My Sweet Phillip that although I missed him, I was not about to join him!
Damn lupus. --t.
|
|