Letters To The Editor

Originally published July 2016 · p. 3

‘Seething Hell’ Book Review Comments ‘Farby’ People Costume TO THE EDITOR: I found Professor Allen Guelzo’s review of Thomas R. Pero’s Gettysburg 1863—Seething Hell: The epic battle of the Civil War in the soldier’s own words in your May issue way off the mark, beginning with a startlingly dismissive introduction panning Pero as a “travel journalist” and publisher of “photograph books.” Even a cursory examination would have revealed Pero as a nationally acclaimed, award-winning author and editor. The point of a review is to review the material submitted rather than dissing the author by sly innuendo. I was also struck by the disconnects between Guelzo’s criticisms and what Pero actually wrote. For example, Pero cites 120+ different sources—not the 30 that Guelzo asserts. If Guelzo had read the entire book, he would have seen that in total the long excerpts are fairly evenly divided between Confederate and Union participants. Of the 30 citations that Guelzo checked, eight (27 percent) were original, not previously published in full-length and 40 percent had either never been in print unedited, or were available in obscure locations not widely known to the general public. I am quite certain few recent Civil War anthologies, including the reviewer’s own Gettysburg: The Last Invasion, contain a similarly high proportion of never previously published material as Pero’s 27% —a remarkable feat of sleuthing 150+ years after the fact. Guelzo then goes on to complain about Pero’s reliance on contemporaneous compositions as unreliable historical guides. While Guelzo correctly notes that a combat soldier’s horizons are limited to their immediate vicinity in the heat of battle, with this criticism he reveals that he missed entirely the express purpose of Seething Hell—that is to report on the experience of the ordinary soldiery in that terrifying environment. Further, much of the material Pero presents reveals soldiers’ emotions leading up to the actual battle or in its aftermath when the writers are not under the intense and immediate strain of combat. The point here is that Pero neither suggested nor offered his soldiers’ narrative of the great battle as an examination of the historical significance of the battle itself, but rather an illumination of the emotions and observations of its actual combatants. Guelzo’s myopia carries forward to his dismissal of Pero’s graphic depictions of the horror of the combat as battlefield “pornography.” Again, Guelzo misses the mark widely here as these depictions are not posted to titillate, but rather as testaments to the bravery and determination of ordinary soldiers to do their duty to cause and comrades, no matter the personal risk. It is clear from these contemporaneous Civil War letters and diaries that “gray backs” and “blue bellies” alike understood fully what lay before them and the horror that they had passed through. I am a combat veteran and survivor of searing, close-quarter combat during my tour with River Assault Squadron Nine and U.S. Ninth Infantry Division in the Mekong Delta during the Vietnam War. I have witnessed firsthand, as a direct participant, the carnage as well as the courage of young Americans under fire—awarding more Purple Hearts than men assigned during my one-year combat tour. It is well for the rest of us to remember and appreciate the courage and determination our countrymen, past and present, to do their duty IN SPITE of what they know lies ahead. Finally, by caustically dismissing the author’s choice of title, Seething Hell, from a quotation by Walt Whitman because, Guelzo says, Whitman was not personally in battle strikes me as both puzzling and pointless. The poet had nursed and sat at the deathbeds of hundreds of maimed soldiers, listening to their horrible experiences. When the heartbreaking stories and the never-ending parade of carnage became too much for him to bear, he went home to Brooklyn. Who among us today interested in this important history would not envy Whitman what he heard? If Guelzo wishes to lob criticism at titles of Civil War books, he need look no further than his own 2013 Last Invasion. What were Confederate Generals Hood’s and Early’s post-Gettysburg armed entry into Union territory if not invasions? Ironies of ironies, only thirty miles from Gettysburg College, in August 1864, rebel artillery shelled Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, and then burned more than 500 homes and buildings to the ground. One imagines the residents of Chambersburg most certainly considered themselves invaded. Peter W. Soverel Captain, USN Ret. DR. GUELZO’S RESPONSE: I can appreciate Capt. Soverel’s prompt rally-round his neighbor and co-founder of the Wild Salmon Center in Portland. But that does nothing to erase the fact that Mr. Pero’s status as a “nationally acclaimed, award-winning author and editor” rests entirely on travel journalism and photography books, something anyone can see just by checking Wild River Press’s website (www.wildriverpress.com). I am sure Mr. Pero knows a great deal more about salmon than I do, but when he self-publishes a book on Gettysburg which he announces as “stunning” beyond “many thousands of books about the Civil War,” then a question about credentials is hardly out of order. On Mr. Pero’s sources, Capt. Soverel concedes that only “eight (27 percent) were original,” but he is certain that “few recent Civil War anthologies, including the reviewer’s own Gettysburg: The Last Invasion, contain a similarly high proportion of never previously published material.” Perhaps. But then, originality is what was supposed to distinguish Mr. Pero’s book. As his own description of the book says, “Thousands of pages of original letters, journals and diaries were combed from dozens of historic collections to create a remarkable eyewitness narrative.” Now, as Capt. Soverel concedes, we have whittled that down to eight. Capt. Soverel objects that Mr. Pero’s dramatically-staged photographs of exploding heads and blood-soaked faces serve “as testaments to the bravery and determination of ordinary soldiers to do their duty to cause and comrades.” Capt. Soverel is too modest in describing his own combat achievements, which include a Silver Star. But the photography featured in Mr. Pero’s book did not contain photographs of “ordinary soldiers.” As the son of a career U.S. Army officer and the father of a serving Army officer who did two tours in Iraq, I am repelled by images of fake carnage. The real version is bad enough. I do not understand what Capt. Soverel is referring to by “Confederate Generals Hood’s and Early’s post-Gettysburg armed entry into Union territory.” Hood, of course, departed for the western theatre after Gettysburg and never got closer to “Union territory” than Nashville. Early’s raids into Maryland and Pennsylvania in 1864 were never intended to do more than draw Union troops from the Petersburg siege, and had no design for occupying (or supplying his division) from “Union territory,” which Lee certainly did in 1863. Allen C. Guelzo, Ph.D. Gettysburg, Pa.

Special Thanks TO THE EDITOR: What a wonderful addition to Civil War News! My friends and I are ecstatic that Stepahanie Hagiwara is on your staff. The last two articles she wrote on ‘Quaker Guns’ and ‘CSS Teaser’ have broadened my knowledge of the Civil War. My Civil War buff buddies had no idea the CSS Teaser was no only the first ship to carry and lay mines but also our nations first aircraft carrier by lauching a balloon. Needless to say we cannot wait for another ‘Through The Lens’ column by Ms. Hagiwara who is, in our opinion, the best columnist of all Civil War magazines and periodicals on the market. Tom Yockey Jr. Florissant, MO

TO THE EDITOR: Sometimes your event photographs, make that often, are of the most ‘Farby’ people on the field. That just encourages the ‘Farbs’. I can count on at least one such photo per issue. There are too many photos of buys with ‘bay windows’ and women poorly disguised as men. The column, ‘Ask The Appraiser’, is great. Joe Bilby’s articles are alway very informative. Your book reviews are good because your reviewers, like Allen Guelzo, are eminently qualified and are not afraid to ‘ding’ a book that deserves it. Capt. D.A. Sulin Rockport, Maine

Undeclared War TO THE EDITOR: I was reading my June issue of Civil War News, and it’s a terrific issue as usual. The item that got my attention was the series of Confederate monuments that faithfully serve as a reminder to the great loss of life by the young men of the South who fought bravely to defend their states from Union armies. I am a bit envious of the spirit of the South in remembering their family heroes. There’s a different sentiment here in the North, where you really have to look hard to find a Civil War monument, and I know no body that decorates Civil War sites, except for certain national holidays, it’s hard to find anyone decorating gravesites of WWII veterans. In the North there has been a tendency to forget the Civil War and all references. My wife is a retired history teacher and she told me that Civil War history has long been removed from text books. I am aware that an undeclared war has been launched to destroy anything that has historical Civil War references in the South, but stand fast and don’t allow it to happen. You might be surprised to hear that there is great sentiment and support for the South in the Northern states and it is not uncommon to see a Confederate flag flying alongside the USA flag, especially during July 4th holiday. Last year, while on vacation, we noted numerous Confederate flags being flown from front porches, on SUVs, fishing boats, just about everywhere. We also met some Vietnam vets who displayed Confederate flag pins on their hats in support to their Southern friends who served with them in battle. Continue to stand fast to defend your flag and Southern traditions. The handful of anti-South agitators who are seeking to destroy your heritage should be opposed, they do not represent but a small handful. I served in the Vietnam War, and we had plenty of men from the South in our ranks, and it was routine to see some of them with a rebel flag patch on their combat clothes, no one cared or complained. Earl Shadd Dover, NJ

Campers? TO THE EDITOR: To comment on your editorial in the June issue, on the future of reenacting; I say to you, really? The diminishing numbers, (due to the aging out of so many participants), your answer is to overlook quality, for quantity? OMG, is this what the future of the hobby is to be? The people that want to do it correctly, and emulate their ancestors as best as possible are to now lower their standards to help fill the ranks? Well, it will make it a whole lot easier on the pocketbook to do. Participants can wear their Foster Grants instead of purchasing a proper pair of period frames for glasses. Levis are a whole lot less itchy than real wool pants, and who really likes those suspenders anyway. We all knows that Brogans are slippery on rocks and wet grass, so the hiking boot is a better choice. Then there is that big heavy old fashioned musket, why a single shot 12 gauge is a whole lot lighter, and cheaper, and it will look good beyond 10 feet. Oh, don’t forget the camps, cooking over wood fires is considered a hazard to both the air quality and the participants. A good old fashioned Coleman stove is perfectly acceptable in this case. Then there is the displaying of that pesky old Confederate Battle flag, that has to go, it needs to be in a museum only, since now we are all trying to be sensitive to everyone’s feelings and political views. Let’s also not force the “Newbie” into a leaky canvas tent, if he/she has a nylon one, let them use it, remember it is all about the numbers! Yes, sounds very ridiculous, and stupid, but lowering standards for the numbers is a very slippery slope. Just look at what has happened to the quality of education due to the lowering of admitting standards in the name of “Diversity”. Do we really want to be known as “Costume Campers”, rather than Living Historians, and reenactors? Gerald Drake Winchester, Va. Reenactor since 1991 Member of 8th Va.