GDG- GDG - A Movable Feast
CWMHTours at aol.com
CWMHTours at aol.com
Mon Jan 23 14:20:21 CST 2012
When I take friends or tourists to a Civil War battlefield or do the John
Wilkes Booth Escape Route tour I have to explain the motivations for the
actions of either side- ie. the strategies. Tactics, as we know, is a
subset of strategies, which is the efforts undertaken to achieve long term
goals,ie (Again) to win the war.
I about never refer to the "Lost Cause". Not that there is not something
to it but for an understanding of the Civil War it is almost irrelevent .
It is a post-war perspective.
In the post-war period, 1870s to 1900s (?) it was referred to often in the
South but you can pick up a hint of lack of culpability in undertaking the
war. "It is not our fault that we lost. It was a Lost Cause."
In one way I think that the resort to the phrase is full of pathos.
But part of the "usefulness", what have you, is the "comfort" it provided
to Southernors after the war. If you were some 70 yr old veteran sitting
on the front porch with your CW fellow vets and you were remembering
comrades killed in the war you could say that it was a Lost Cause, you could never
win anyway, which would kinda lift the onus of failure. I suppose to those
vets sitting on the front porch unable to forget being in the middle of
combat in, say, 2nd Man., it would provide some comfort "We tried our best,,,
but it was a Lost Cause".
If you were a family in the 1870s/1880s and there was an empty chair at
the dinner table and grandfather or father or brother were missing and their
honored spot at the table vacant and still the family could sigh and say
yes it was a Lost Cause...
I think it was a way for Southernors to explain the shock and pain of
losing the war and provide emotional comfort and restoration of pride to an
already prideful people.
"Just the facts, ma'am."
Your Most Obediant Servant
In a message dated 1/23/2012 2:18:01 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
cameron2 at optimum.net writes:
Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
<< However, we always have to return to our roots, which is Gettysburg.
Which, of late, happens less and less.
In the spirit of things, however, I do agree with your earlier post about
never having heard "Lost Causer" defined as one who believes that
Confederate defeat was inevitable as long as the Union retained the will to fight.
Although I suppose that could be an element of what the term implies. I've
always thought of it more along the lines of a "moonlight and magnolias"
romanticised view of brave yoemen and bold cavaliers defending a doomed way
of life, tinged with a lingering sadness that such a graceful way of life
To me, a true "Lost Causer" is also, like a true Confederate, someone of
the period. What we have now I'd call a "neo-Lost Causer", much the same as
we now have "neo-Confederates." But I still hate these "causes"
outbreaks, because they always seem to turn ugly as everyone defends their own
particular piece of the moral high ground.
http://arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg_arthes.com/ for Archives
More information about the Gettysburg