mitchell_vacant_chair
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision | |||
| mitchell_vacant_chair [2026/02/27 16:01] – [The South as a Disobedient Child] smilton | mitchell_vacant_chair [2026/02/27 16:20] (current) – 199.111.65.11 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
| Masculinity being changed in the Union Army was through the belief that only Northern men were able to reach manhood while Southern men were seen as childish and effeminate. Mitchell also uses specific Union soldiers as examples of how they viewed manhood and masculinity, | Masculinity being changed in the Union Army was through the belief that only Northern men were able to reach manhood while Southern men were seen as childish and effeminate. Mitchell also uses specific Union soldiers as examples of how they viewed manhood and masculinity, | ||
| + | |||
| ===== War and the Shift in Authority: Fathers to Sons ===== | ===== War and the Shift in Authority: Fathers to Sons ===== | ||
| Line 31: | Line 32: | ||
| Discussing the concept of authority in the Civil War North, Mitchell emphasizes a certain shift in the evaluation of the Founding Fathers during and after the Civil War. He argues that Thomas Jefferson was excluded from the canon of respected founders due to his political legacy - particularly his association with states’ rights, his status as a slaveholder, | Discussing the concept of authority in the Civil War North, Mitchell emphasizes a certain shift in the evaluation of the Founding Fathers during and after the Civil War. He argues that Thomas Jefferson was excluded from the canon of respected founders due to his political legacy - particularly his association with states’ rights, his status as a slaveholder, | ||
| + | |||
| + | During the Civil War, the language of paternalism was often assigned to the Union. This ideology reflects ideals of masculinity on both sides of the war, as well as changed the view that one side had of the other. Union soldiers valued their masculine discipline and self control, and Confederate soldiers valued strength and virility in their model of masculinity. This then affected the view Union soldiers had of Southerners, | ||
| ===== Race in the Union Army ===== | ===== Race in the Union Army ===== | ||
| Line 57: | Line 60: | ||
| A significant amount of post-war media characterized the reunification of the Union as one similar to marriage. This was generally done in the favor of the North, who was portrayed as the husband. This trope appeared in fiction, often with a Union soldier marrying a Southern woman, who was, through her feminine loyalty, converted to understand the world in the " | A significant amount of post-war media characterized the reunification of the Union as one similar to marriage. This was generally done in the favor of the North, who was portrayed as the husband. This trope appeared in fiction, often with a Union soldier marrying a Southern woman, who was, through her feminine loyalty, converted to understand the world in the " | ||
| + | |||
| + | In the wake of the Civil War, the process of Reunion was seen as a marriage of the North and South. This marriage is seen in the romance novels of the time, in which it became cliche for northern men to court the southern women from the dastardly hands of inappropriately masculine men. The anthropomorphization of the North and South often has a way of characterizing the South as female and the North as male. This likely helped in the cause of reunion in the North, as women are seen as inherently apolitical beings, and makes them overly loyal to their husbands. (Tanner Gillikin) | ||
| + | |||
mitchell_vacant_chair.1772208115.txt.gz · Last modified: by smilton
