One of the things I try to do as a history teacher is to give you both sides of the issue and not just present it from one side only. I believe that does a disservice to you and to the subject matter, and by examining both sides can push you to think more critically about that subject.
As if you haven’t figured out, our central theme this semester is Abraham Lincoln. He’s been called Honest Abe, the Great Emancipator, and the Rail Splitter (in reference to his frontier days of chopping wood). As Dr. Henry Louis Gates mentioned in the Today broadcast we watched yesterday, Lincoln’s picture was in almost every black American’s household along with a picture of Jesus.
In this six minute interview, Dr. Gates gives a more human (and complex) side of Lincoln that few of us may know. Lincoln did not argue, initially, for full and equal rights for black Americans. During the Lincoln-Douglas debates in 1858, Senator Douglas was race-baiting his opponent by calling him a “black Republican” and asking the audience (knowing full well what the answer would be) if the men in the audience would like their daughters and wives to ride in a carriage with Frederick Douglas.
So Lincoln had to respond to these charges and distance himself; otherwise he’d lose the race. He said soon after this charge that he’d rather no sooner take a black woman for his wife than consider black people his equals. Sounds racist to 21st Century ears, right? Well, it is, no doubt. But within the context of what was going on, America was a very white, racist nation at that time. Dr. Gates even mentioned the Illinois law that disallowed any black people from settling in that state. 
Betcha didn’t know he was a punk rocker!
Here’s Dr. Gates’ website for his documentary, Looking for Lincoln. http://www.pbs.org/wnet/lookingforlincoln/ Also, take the Myths and Misconceptions quiz and see if you can beat my score – 12/15.
The fact that there even is a Republican Party, a group created after the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act which allowed for slavery to be voted on in the territories, founded on anti-slavery principles, was, in some ways, amazing. And by 1858, the year of the debates, the anger over slavery had intensified even more after the Dred Scott decision (1857) by the Supreme Court that allowed slavery to spread from coast to coast. Yet, still in Illinois, there was a sizable Democratic majority to elect a state senate that favored sending Stephen Douglas back to the U.S. Senate for another 6 years.
My question is: when you learn new information about the person from history (like we are with Lincoln), warts and all, does this lessen your image of that person or does this new info give you a better picture of that historic icon? Even if the picture isn’t a pretty one, taken within the context of the time period, the person can be better understood as to why he/she felt that way or said what they said.
Here, visiting General McClellan in the field after the battle of Antietam, you can really get an idea of how tall he is.
150 words minimum – Due Monday, March 16th – before class begins.
