|
Post by wild on Nov 17, 2006 14:57:47 GMT -6
His physical deterioration may have been matched by a mental deterioration. DC is a great advocate of the Custer hor de combat scenario to explain the mess on LSH.I'm inclined to think he cracked up.That the sudden realisation that he was up s**** creek without a paddle added to the stress of having made a fool of himself back in Washington was too much for the ego and he just froze.
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Nov 18, 2006 5:17:54 GMT -6
It's an attractive idea, and would explain a lot. The worst of all possible worlds for the rest of them: a Custer dithering and making bad decisions, but no-one able to overrule him short of outright mutiny. Intriguing thought.
|
|
|
Post by rch on Nov 18, 2006 9:23:42 GMT -6
I don't think you can glean aspects of a person's mental state or character from photos. I'm on risky enough ground suggesting a change in physical condition, which may not even have been detrimental to Custer's overall health.
rch
|
|
|
Post by wild on Nov 18, 2006 11:20:34 GMT -6
I don't think you can glean aspects of a person's mental state or character from photos. Check out photo of Stg Frederick Wyllyams in Red Sabbath.
|
|
|
Post by rch on Nov 18, 2006 23:33:11 GMT -6
If the photo is the one I'm thinking of, I think it can be said that at the time it was taken Sgt. Wyllyams' appearance exhibited a lack of character and an absence of intellect, however it is his physical condition that is most striking and which may have had a significant effect on those aspects lacking in his pesonality.
rch
|
|
|
Post by wild on Nov 19, 2006 4:25:28 GMT -6
Well said rch ;D
|
|
|
Post by custeralwaysstands on Dec 7, 2006 10:15:19 GMT -6
His physical deterioration may have been matched by a mental deterioration. DC is a great advocate of the Custer hor de combat scenario to explain the mess on LSH.I'm inclined to think he cracked up.That the sudden realisation that he was up s**** creek without a paddle added to the stress of having made a fool of himself back in Washington was too much for the ego and he just froze. Custer is not Reno.
|
|
|
Post by Melani on Dec 19, 2006 21:56:01 GMT -6
\ It was Connell who somehow managed to see "Mephistophelian sexuality" in Keogh's photos. Actually, if you look at the one where Keogh is standing behind Libbie's chair on the 1875 picnic, I can kind of see where Connell got that. Of course, Keogh was certainly posing for the camera, hat cocked to one side and looking tough. There are a couple of others where he is striking a "martial pose" and looking downright silly. Strangely enough, the one Connell used to illustrate his book is the one where Keogh is looking fairly normal and not quite smiling--looking pleasant and friendly. I guess people look different at different times and places, too. The one of Keogh with Buford's Boys has him looking downright underweight, which certainly might be the case in the middle of a war, with the possibility of illness, lousy rations, and constant violent physical activity. The first picture I ever saw of Custer, many years ago, surprised me. I has always heard of him as the handsome golden-haired general. I didn't think he looked that great, and in fact thought he had mean eyes. I have since seen other pictures where he looked much better.
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Dec 20, 2006 0:41:07 GMT -6
My edition of SOTMS doesn't have any illustrations, so I'd assumed he was basing his verdict on that very dashing early (1861?) photo -- the one where Keogh looks like the young Pierce Brosnan. (It's not in the Langellier/Cox/Pohanka book, alas, but does appear in Pohanka's article on the "Wild Geese Today" website.) But yes, I suppose at a stretch his rather looming pose in the picnic photo could be interpreted that way ...
You're so right about people looking different at different times. Have you seen the "new" photo that Brust discovered? The one without the beard? (1870-ish.) He looks positively chubby in that. The thing that startles me about Connell's description, though, is that almost all the photos -- including the half-smiling one you say Connell used -- show him with a look of wide-eyed innocence. One of his obituaries mentions his "open frank manner which readily prepossessed persons in his favour", and that's what seems (to me) to come across in the photos. The exact reverse of what Connell sees in them. But maybe we all make our minds up about a person first, and then interpret his or her picture accordingly ...?
Agree re Custer. I had exactly the same reaction!
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Dec 20, 2006 7:35:16 GMT -6
Connell didn't choose the photos, and didn't want them or an index. He was into story telling, was good at it, and that's why his book has sold more than all the others combined.
Second, people had to hold a pose for a long time and chose that which they could maintain.
Third, my ease with a Custer being hurt and a felt 7th need for temporary respite explains the movements north of MTC without violating the Custer of history or the general outline of the markers or demands improbably complicated military manuever by Sioux and Cheyenne and soldiers. It's simple, is all.
|
|
|
Post by Melani on Dec 20, 2006 12:18:01 GMT -6
Elisabeth--which very dashing photo? I've just been through the whole Wild Geese article, and didn't see one that's not also in the symposium book. I'm guessing you mean the one that begins the article. To me, it looks boyish and innocent. I think you may be right about Connell forming his own conclusions first and then seeing what he wanted to see.
dc--you're right, I'm fantasizing. I just found my copy of SOTM and it has no illustrations. I'm now trying to figure out what on earth book I'm thinking of--whatever it was, it was the first time I saw that particular picture of Keogh. I'd probably have to go through my entire library to find it, but I don't have that kind of time right now.
I think Custer looks pretty good in his wedding picture.
But pictures don't really tell us that much. Apparently Weir was very attractive to the ladies when sober enough, but I personally wouldn't give his picture a second glance.
|
|
|
Post by harpskiddie on Dec 20, 2006 13:10:19 GMT -6
Melani:
You are a hard taskmistress, indeed!!!!! It's all in the eye of the beholder, after all.
Gordie
|
|
|
Post by wild on Dec 20, 2006 15:14:58 GMT -6
An easy guide to picking out Custer in group photographs--just check out the guy lying stretched out on the ground.It seems he made the prone position his own.
|
|
|
Post by Tricia on Dec 20, 2006 17:53:51 GMT -6
Melani--
Another thing that might have made Weir more attractive was that university education. Life on the Plains--at least to me--seemed so rough, so hard-edged, a whiff of intelligence must have come as some relief to Libbie ... and perhaps, to other women.
wILD--you're right. What is up with that ... did GAC, perhaps, overestimate his height? Or was he a study of blase'?
Happy holidays, all ... LMC
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Dec 20, 2006 19:41:37 GMT -6
Melani, I was thinking of the photo that opens section 2 of the article: www.thewildgeese.com/pages/plains2.html(Maybe it is in the book, but I couldn't find it today when I looked.) Leyton, I'm sure you're right. Things like Annie Yates' diary and Katie Gibson's memoirs suggest that the sum total of most officers' conversation with the ladies was "Do you shoot? Do you ride?" -- so anyone who could talk about books or music or ideas must have been manna from heaven!
|
|