Post by Dark Cloud on Sept 13, 2009 9:17:50 GMT -6
Started to put this in clw's thread, then thought it resonated way wrong.
Her thread is here. lbha.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=books&action=display&thread=3623
Just wanted to take advantage of her topic of what folks were reading, but I'd be knowingly running the risk of being seen to lecture from no superior level. Yet, I think it would be truly beneficial and interesting if the reading lists were expanded beyond LBH and the Indian Wars for the following reasons:
1. reading the predominant literature of the time - including poetry and novels - assists imagining the mental world Custer and everyone inhabited. This was a world that did not end till World War One did, when a whole set of literary genres vanished or were greatly reduced in popularity. We think today of Twain and Tennyson, perhaps, but there were immensely popular authors totally forgotten that, really, were a big influence on how the cavalry officers viewed their world or wanted to. Most influential literature in America was European, primarily English.
2. reading the far older works like the Song of Roland, King Arthur's various authors, and getting a sense of how the tale of the Last Stand was rather totally lifted and applied, rather than evidenced and documented. The term 'greater truth' had deep meaning and responsibility imparted to governments run by those with heavy ingrainings of noblesse oblige of various sorts. It was important to install myths, and England ran the world on her self image more than her power. Also, it's real important to understand Britain was King then, and we weren't accorded the regard that attends today, and we feared Britain as well, which affected our Indian policy because of Canada concerns.
3. reading about previous and actual Last Stands to see the cues in how they were represented in the media, like Islawanda, Sedan, and the Alamo, really the only actual Last Stand since Masada, itself likely fiction.
4. The naval battle of Jutland, I've concluded, is the closest comparison to many of the issues at the LBH.
Britain had weapons hastily designed and poorly trained in by the crews and poorly understood by many of the captains, who still thought battleships with 15" guns were to be fought much as Nelson had at Trafalgar. This is why Admiral Beatty, a Custer type and referenced as contemporary cavalry in outlook, ignored the greater range of his guns, ignored the weaker armor of his ships, negated his superior speed, and attacked the German fleet near head on, losing big time.
But because he was seen by the media to have done all the fighting (because of his huge casualty list, like Custer), he became a hero and the more reticent but better Admiral Jellicoe, who won the battle with virtually no loss, got called for 'nervous timidity' like Reno and worse, like Benteen, for not acting like Beatty, who got clobbered because of his incompetencies, among which his ships were poor, laughably poor shots, and his personal communications with subordinate officers and other ships was beyond pathetic, chronic, and got a lot of men killed. This was because he chose yes-men who worshipped him and kept them near.
During the battle, Beatty was assigned the four biggest battleships in the world, and it's argued he deliberately allowed them to wander away because he thought his battlecruisers could win the day alone for their and his glory. This, in 1916. Custer refused additional men and arms as well.
Like Custer, Beatty was way young for his rank, been promoted above many others older (some better), had married wealth and prestige, was dynamic and undeniably brave. Jellicoe was mousy but really sharp and a great commander in battle, like several folks in Army command.
Many of the arguments about the battle of Jutland reflect that of LBH, although it was actually hugely important and far larger.
In any case, how the public and history treats entirely similar-at-base events as the LBH is truly eye opening, and I think gives a more realistic and edifying basis for contemplation with the books specific to the Indian Wars and/or Custer. Also, it reduces the conclusions that there is something unique about the LBH, and the conspiracy theories die when you realize people are playing roles written before them long ago that the public expects for its mourning and rituals.
Social templates lasted for centuries, then decades as communications and media improved. Now, we joke about 15 minutes of fame for anyone, and it may be true. But in 1876, the values expressed in the novels of the Napoleon Wars and the poetry of iffy types in England made men, including officers, as well as women weep in public for the century and beyond. The Etonian glurge was real, pervasive, and totally forgotten today. ALL the templates that surround the Little Bighorn survived till WWI, when Hemingway and The Waste Land suddenly appealed to those who'd seen modern combat like The Somme, the four battles around Ypres, and four years in the god awful trenches.
America, because it didn't participate in WWI till the end, clings to a cultural exceptionalism that really is false. The need to make LBH heroic beyond the norm (or believability, in some cases) stems from that, I think.
Her thread is here. lbha.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=books&action=display&thread=3623
Just wanted to take advantage of her topic of what folks were reading, but I'd be knowingly running the risk of being seen to lecture from no superior level. Yet, I think it would be truly beneficial and interesting if the reading lists were expanded beyond LBH and the Indian Wars for the following reasons:
1. reading the predominant literature of the time - including poetry and novels - assists imagining the mental world Custer and everyone inhabited. This was a world that did not end till World War One did, when a whole set of literary genres vanished or were greatly reduced in popularity. We think today of Twain and Tennyson, perhaps, but there were immensely popular authors totally forgotten that, really, were a big influence on how the cavalry officers viewed their world or wanted to. Most influential literature in America was European, primarily English.
2. reading the far older works like the Song of Roland, King Arthur's various authors, and getting a sense of how the tale of the Last Stand was rather totally lifted and applied, rather than evidenced and documented. The term 'greater truth' had deep meaning and responsibility imparted to governments run by those with heavy ingrainings of noblesse oblige of various sorts. It was important to install myths, and England ran the world on her self image more than her power. Also, it's real important to understand Britain was King then, and we weren't accorded the regard that attends today, and we feared Britain as well, which affected our Indian policy because of Canada concerns.
3. reading about previous and actual Last Stands to see the cues in how they were represented in the media, like Islawanda, Sedan, and the Alamo, really the only actual Last Stand since Masada, itself likely fiction.
4. The naval battle of Jutland, I've concluded, is the closest comparison to many of the issues at the LBH.
Britain had weapons hastily designed and poorly trained in by the crews and poorly understood by many of the captains, who still thought battleships with 15" guns were to be fought much as Nelson had at Trafalgar. This is why Admiral Beatty, a Custer type and referenced as contemporary cavalry in outlook, ignored the greater range of his guns, ignored the weaker armor of his ships, negated his superior speed, and attacked the German fleet near head on, losing big time.
But because he was seen by the media to have done all the fighting (because of his huge casualty list, like Custer), he became a hero and the more reticent but better Admiral Jellicoe, who won the battle with virtually no loss, got called for 'nervous timidity' like Reno and worse, like Benteen, for not acting like Beatty, who got clobbered because of his incompetencies, among which his ships were poor, laughably poor shots, and his personal communications with subordinate officers and other ships was beyond pathetic, chronic, and got a lot of men killed. This was because he chose yes-men who worshipped him and kept them near.
During the battle, Beatty was assigned the four biggest battleships in the world, and it's argued he deliberately allowed them to wander away because he thought his battlecruisers could win the day alone for their and his glory. This, in 1916. Custer refused additional men and arms as well.
Like Custer, Beatty was way young for his rank, been promoted above many others older (some better), had married wealth and prestige, was dynamic and undeniably brave. Jellicoe was mousy but really sharp and a great commander in battle, like several folks in Army command.
Many of the arguments about the battle of Jutland reflect that of LBH, although it was actually hugely important and far larger.
In any case, how the public and history treats entirely similar-at-base events as the LBH is truly eye opening, and I think gives a more realistic and edifying basis for contemplation with the books specific to the Indian Wars and/or Custer. Also, it reduces the conclusions that there is something unique about the LBH, and the conspiracy theories die when you realize people are playing roles written before them long ago that the public expects for its mourning and rituals.
Social templates lasted for centuries, then decades as communications and media improved. Now, we joke about 15 minutes of fame for anyone, and it may be true. But in 1876, the values expressed in the novels of the Napoleon Wars and the poetry of iffy types in England made men, including officers, as well as women weep in public for the century and beyond. The Etonian glurge was real, pervasive, and totally forgotten today. ALL the templates that surround the Little Bighorn survived till WWI, when Hemingway and The Waste Land suddenly appealed to those who'd seen modern combat like The Somme, the four battles around Ypres, and four years in the god awful trenches.
America, because it didn't participate in WWI till the end, clings to a cultural exceptionalism that really is false. The need to make LBH heroic beyond the norm (or believability, in some cases) stems from that, I think.
