good idea gone wrong ~

[lookingland]

for the 50bookchallenge:

no. 10 ~ Sharpshooter by david madden. yes, mr. madden, you did your research. yes, mr. madden, it's all very interesting. here again another example of all enthusiasm and the maladroit writing skills of a novice. the story is interesting enough (if not a wee bit convoluted): young willis joins the confeds, becomes a sharpshooter, may or may not have shot general sanders, solves the mystery of sullivan and gardner schlepping bodies around at gettysburg, and then wanders into some tangential remorse about shooting a man at andersonville. the story has the makings of something worthwhile, but the telling is painfully dry like a textbook of civil war minutiae and the central mystery or dramatic question is ultimately not all that engaging. oh well.

if you don't know anything about the "body schlepping" at gettysburg, you might find this analysis by james groves interesting (it's long-winded, but worth a gander if you can get through it). i think some of groves's rationale is spurious, but nevertheless interesting ~ i always find this level of obsession quite fascinating.



"Home of a Rebel Sharpshooter, Gettysburg"
from Gardner's Photographic Sketchbook of the War, 1865
Often called "the most famous photograph made during the war"
and the source of endless controversy thereafter.

Comments

[java-fiend.livejournal.com]

Civil War photos always fascinate me. Actually, the entire Civil War fascinates me. But the pictures are always so haunting. And Gettysburg... yeah... Lee's biggest and most fatal mistakes. Bad, bloody day.

[lookingland.livejournal.com]

though i am not much of a tactician nerd, i find the anaylsis of the gettysburg (the pet obsession of many a civil war geek) to be really interesting.

ultimately, my own thoughts on the matter are that lee was sort of between scylla and charybdis. i think he knew they would fail, but the alternative was to either run like the dickens (which would have gotten them crushed from behind), or surrender then and there.

to me, the question comes down to: was the rest of the war really justified after that blow or should they have just conceded defeat? they could have saved a lot of lives by giving up, but i think the point is that they didn't want to give up. and lee knew that.

so actually, i don't think he really made a mistake at gettysburg. i think some of his generals just didn't have the same long-range view of it all.

they could have won the battle with a wee bit more faith, but i doubt they would have ever won the war.

[java-fiend.livejournal.com]

i think some of his generals just didn't have the same long-range view of it all.

That could very well be true. Plus, after losing Stonewall, I think that took a lot out of both Lee and the Confederacy altogether. I think that Jackson was the best tactician and probably most inspiring figure they had. But Lee absolutely made some serious tactical blunders at Gettysburg. Was that the ultimate death blow to the Confederacy. Arguably, yeah. I think so. At the very least, it put the Confederacy on life support. But you're right, even after that beating, they didn't want to give up. After Pickett's Charge, I don't think there was any way they could have won that battle, faith or not. That essentially sealed the deal. Could they have ever won the war? I wouldn't say never. They had plenty of opportunities to make a strong push at it before Grant took over. It's just such an interesting period. All of the coulda, shoulda, woulda's.

[lookingland.livejournal.com]

Well a lot of people focus on Pickett's charge, but the truth is, the charge would have succeeded if Longstreet had pressed the hilltops (which he could have taken). had he done so, the Union army would have been flanked and Pickett's charge would have had the support it needed to demolish the yankee line. but Longstreet got cold feet and there was a slaughter instead.

etc. etc. etc. ~ i s'pose we could endlessly conjecture the could haves and should haves.

hahahaha ~

: D

i think losing stonewall was a big blow indeed. even if i do think he was a bit of a creep. hahahaha ~

[java-fiend.livejournal.com]

etc. etc. etc. ~ i s'pose we could endlessly conjecture the could haves and should haves.

LOL... that we could, that we could. We just need to settle this with a good old fashioned duel. Whaddya think? ;-)

Stonewall was a bit creepy. LOL... Talk about a religious fanatic. Brilliant tactical mind though.

[lookingland.livejournal.com]

pistols or swords?

hahahahahaha ~

: D

[java-fiend.livejournal.com]

Oh, I think swords would be more sporting, don't you? Plus it would look a lot cooler. :-)

[lookingland.livejournal.com]

en garde ~ !

: D

[java-fiend.livejournal.com]

Hai! I keeeeeeel you!

[lookingland.livejournal.com]

you know the line....

hahahahaha ~

[java-fiend.livejournal.com]

LOL.... Of course I do.

But my sword is bigger. I win. :-p