PBS "American Experience" Series: Post-Civil-War Reconstruction

[On the Road]

Posted this last night and it dropped like a rock. Has anyone else seen these?

I was very impressed and moved. I have never delved into the post-Civil-War period, but now I want to learn more about it. Note that you can view the episodes online.

===============================================
Anyone Watching the PBS Shows on "Reconstruction"?

"Reconstruction: The Second Civil War: Revolution" Episode #1602.
Congress imposes military rule in the South after the Civil War in response to whites' resistance to former slaves' establishing communities, churches and schools.

"Reconstruction: The Second Civil War: Retreat" Episode #1603.
Reconstruction after the Civil War lays the groundwork for the civil-rights movement of the 1950s and '60s.

The portion of the first show I saw was fantastic. The second is just beginning.

What I hadn't realized was how far Andrew Johnson and, to a lesser extent Grant, was willing to concede to former slaveholders. In order to maintain cotton production, former slaves were virtually forced back into working into the cotton fields by various legal means. Emapancipation became a farce. Blacks were returned to slavery in everthing but name before a wave of actions by Congress.

It was only a grass-roots movement in the North that gave the radical Republicans the ability to pass the 15th amendment and other measures meant to give teeth to emancipation.

There's way too much to go into. Here's a link where you can watch the video:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/reconstruction/players/p2_14_tr_qry.html

The second episode seems to deal largely with Southern resistance and racial terror. Amazing stuff. PBS is still a gem.

[RoyGBiv]

1. I've seen it before ...

I assume it's the same thing, anyway since I haven't been watching it this time around.

It's pretty good as I recall.

I have pedantic issues with things like this, mostly due to instances of sensationalizing the mundane and downplaying the spectacular, so I tend not to comment in public forums for fear of annoying people with it. Your note, "It was only a grass-roots movement in the North that gave the radical Republicans the ability to pass the 15th amendment and other measures meant to give teeth to emancipation," is an example. "Grass roots" is not the proper description of the process, but I do seem to recall that's how the documentary portrayed it.

I also don't like the phrase "Second Civil War" applied to the era because, if anything, it was a continuation of the Civil War, the "occupation" part, and was horribly mismanaged. I further dislike the use of this term because it allows us conveniently never even to consider that force of arms does not necessarily win wars. I believe a point the documentary makes -- and most modern histories of the period make -- is that the United States won the war but lost the peace, but the actual causes of that loss are not explored in enough detail in documentaries or popular histories, and the whole thing is simply lumped at the feet of so-called unreconstructed rebels and left to rot. This is somewhat similar to our blaming "insurgents" in Iraq for all the problems there, although I certainly do not intend that as a direct comparison.

Anyway, I thought I would offer a word of encouragement here since no one else had replied. It's really hard to bring people to understand just how fundamentally Reconstruction and its eventual end shaped America in ways that resonate very strongly today.

If in the future you'd like to flesh out your knowledge of the so-called process of reconciliation and how it was intentionally effected by Northern and Southern financial and political interests at the expense of freedmen, I highly recommend David Blight's _Race and Reunion_. It is essentially a study of Reconstruction viewed through a specific lens focusing on the invention of historical memory and the shaping of political attitudes among whites in all regions of the country to pretty much ignore the underlying social causes of the war so that the nation could "move forward."

Eric Foner's _Reconstruction_ is of course the standard on the subject, but it's very dry.

_White Terror: The Ku Klux Klan Conspiracy and Southern Reconstruction_ by Allen Trelease might interest you as it is an exhaustive account of post-war quasi-guerrilla, terrorist organizations bent on maintaining white supremacy, mostly focused on the original KKK. It is also dry, but the story it tells is compelling enough -- and much of it unknown enough popularly -- that it is worth it.

[On the Road]

2. Thanks for the Long Reply,

the suggestions and corrections. Sorry to be so long in replying.

I will keep my eyes out for the David Bright book. I became interested in Reconstruction from Zinn's and Loewen's books, which are good but popular and broad. Some of the specifics on the PBS show were really striking. I am sure there's a lot more there.

It's too bad that American History classes don't teach this stuff in any meaningful way. What's embarrassing and "left out" are usually the best parts.

[TaleWgnDg]

3. Yes, I've seen PBS "Reconstruction" . . . and thought it well

done. Very well done. It's excellent for those unfamiliar w/ the subject. However, if someone is a history buff or is well read in this area of history the program (2-part series) was rather light. That's not meant as a caveat because it is, after all, a television series not meant as formal education!

I highly recommend the series to those who are curious.

[YankeyMCC]

4. Only saw the first half hour

it looked promising.

If you're interested in the subject I can recomend "Race and Reunion" by David W. Blight (who incidently I noticed was one of the historian commentators in the PBS show)