A while back, I did a movie review of Denzel Washington’s “The Great Debaters.”
In my review, I discussed how terribly this movie portrayed Southerners, and Southern culture. In fact, I was outraged, (although I knew going into the theater that the movie would upset me.)
See my review here:
http://shotgunwildatheart.wordpress.com/2008/06/23/movie-review-the-great-debators/
A Christian friend of mine was visibly upset when she replied to my review.
She wondered how I could be so ignorant and bigoted.
There was a scene in the movie, when two white hog farmers, forced Forrest Whittaker to pay for a hog that he accidentally ran over with his car. Whittaker had to swallow his pride, and humble himself before these two men (in front of his wife and son.)
I claimed that such a scene was highly unbelievable and misrepresented Southern folk, and Southern culture. (Indeed the movie was one big piece of anti-Southern propaganda.)
My friend claimed, “something like that probably DID happen in the South…“
The problem with my Christian friend, (and with many other Southerners out there today) is that they are completely ignorant of their own heritage and culture.
In this day n’ age of Google, Yahoo, and Dogpile, people are more “knowledgeable” of the facts than ever. The problem is, they are more ignorant of how to string these facts together, or form one big coherent picture than at any other time in America’s history!
When I said above that many Southerners today are ignorant of their heritage and culture; I mean simply that they have accepted an entirely different outlook on the facts of history than that of their Southern ancestors. A different philosophy of history; a different worldview.
This paradigm shift has been purposefully carried out on all levels; from Satan, to Lincoln, down to the common American who chooses to watch TV instead of read books.
Professor Clyde Wilson, in his book “Defending Dixie: Essays in Southern History and Culture” hits the nail on the head in the first essay of the book, “American Historians and Their History.”
I highly recommend buying this book, and keeping it next to your Bible on the ol’ nightstand.
http://www.amazon.com/Defending-Dixie-Southern-History-Culture/dp/0962384224/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1216594893&sr=8-1
Wilson highlights the more abstract aspects of history, showing how the historian’s job as a “myth-maker” has become increasingly important in this new era of American intellectualism.
In other words, he’s simply saying: All historians have to approach the facts from SOME sort of view. However, after the “Civil War” historiographical objectivity has become less and less accepted in favor of historians who literally already have a view of the past (I.E. a “myth”) and attempt to make the facts support their myth. (1.)
Wilson provides enough examples to make a pragmatic case on this point, (although he doesn’t get into a strict philosophical defense of this.) (2) One of the more interesting examples he gives, is of the way George Washington is portrayed in many of todays history text books, as well as the way this understanding prevails in the minds of many Americans. To quote Wilson:
Take a tour through Mount Vernon or Monticello and listen to the questions and comments of the typically garrulous visitors. You will see how disingenuously the subject of slavery is skirted around. In the Americans’ minds, Mount Vernon is not an eighteenth-century plantation, it is a mid-west farm that happens to be situated in Virginia. Or get down your child’s encyclopedia, turn to the table of Presidents, and look under “Occupation.” George Washington is a “surveyor,” Thomas Jefferson is a “lawyer,” Andrew Jackson is a “soldier.”
The American consciousness is unable to admit to itself that eight of our first twelve Presidents were Southern plantation owners, not only as their chief occupation but in their primary social identity. (3)
So you see, Wilson realizes that the conflict between North and South, was a conflict arising from two different “views” of American history; a history that is today unbelievable to many and causes inconsistencies in their history. The South was highly suspicious of centralized government, believing man was essentially depraved (evil) and in need of many proper checks and balances to stave off tyranny. The South believed that this was what America was founded on.
The North however, didn’t share the Souths view of history.
Wilson observes:
The very point of the “Civil War” was to decide between two alternative ways of understanding the meaning of America. Otherwise, there would have been no point to the war. But the nature of the war as a contest of alternative social symbolizations (myths) meant that history would have to be orchestrated to support the winning side. The losers must not only be conquered on the field of battle and disenfranchised in the body politic, but they must be discredited. The competitive legitimacy of their alternative view must be suppressed. (4)
So, how do Southerners, (and ultimately Americans) regain our history? How do we resurrect our “myth” of history?
Wilson suggests that a new “myth” of history is currently being constructed over and against the one foisted on America during the Reconstruction period. This new myth surrounds the “diversity” of Americas ethnic past. The onslaught of this new paradigm, is causing many historians to go back to the books so to speak.
If the South is to “rise again” it will happen in the history classes…or perhaps in some form of massive home school movement?
God speed my reconciliation with this legendary friend; a friend I’ve only become aquainted with through nostalgic stories from my grandfather. A friend I was assured is all but dead. A friend who’s decomposing corpse is put on display by Hollywood for all to see. A friend that is spit on by the modern farce of “Southern Culture” (Larry the Cable guy, and CMT, etc.)
Maybe…just maybe, she’s still out there; hiding in the remote recesses of some deep southern town, waiting to carry me away into the wild embrace of freedom.
(1). Every particular instant of past time (history) becomes jumbled into one big mass of memories or circumstances. We couldn’t ever record or recount every single thing! The night I had my first kiss, the crickets were chirping, and the night sky was brilliant! I don’t remember the specific crickets though, nor the moon, nor much of anything for that matter. But you see, my “bias” in this situation causes me to record the kiss over and above the crickets. A guy that studies crickets for a living may have recounted the crickets instead of the boy and girl kissing over in his neighbors yard. So, you see the use of the term “myth” here simply means the historians reconstruction of the events from a particular point of view. It doesn’t mean a “myth” as in Aesops fables or anything.
(2.) See R.J. Rushdoony’s book “The Philosophy of History” for a great introduction to this concept. Also, read Van Til’s book, “Defense of the Faith” to see how we can only draw conclusions about all the particular things that we experience if we start by presupposing the Christian God. I also link to some great articles on this subject in my movie review of the “Great Debaters” (linked to above.)
(3.) Clyde Wilson “Defending Dixie” chapter 1, page 9.
(4.) IBID page 6.
Posted by shotgunwildatheart 
