Rice University logo
 
Top blue bar image The Podcast Group
A student-led group project from HIST 246
 

Archive for March, 2011

Podcasting…It’s what all the cool kids are doing

Thursday, March 31st, 2011

For our group project, I have been looking into podcasts; that is, what their capabilities are and how they been used to serve historical purposes. Unlike streamed webcasting, one of the defining characteristics of podcasts is that they can be downloaded and listened to on mp3 players. This fact gives us the unique ability to broadcast to people out and about in Houston and Sabine Pass who may visiting historical sites about Dick Dowling. In terms of audio podcasts, the only limit to what audio you can put on the podcast is the amount of memory on the listener’s mp3 player and the recording equipment we have available. Unlike most podcasts, ours will not be released episodically; however, we can record multiple different podcasts based on the location or interest of the listener. The easiest way to publish our podcast will be to record it in mp3 format and make it available for download on the Dowling website. That way, listeners can hear it on their laptops as they peruse the site, or they can synch the file to their mp3 player and listen to it later. Overall, the potential for audio podcasts is almost limitless.

However, that is not to say that all audio podcasts are engaging. As I researched the use of podcasts, I stumbled across many historical groups’ and museum productions that were just hard to listen to. Oftentimes with long and historically driven podcasts, there is just a single narrator (usually male). As many podcasts move past the first couple minutes, even the most energetic narrators fall victim to slipping into a dull and dreary monologue. Therefore, these historically driven podcasts generally take the form of textbooks on tape.  Many podcasters fail to use the capability of their media to captivate their listeners. However, even podcasts who simply change narrators every once in a while (like this one about Abraham Lincoln) are tremendously more engaging than those who do not. Additionally, when podcasts use dialogue between different people, like interviews or co-hosting, it becomes much easier for the listener to stay focused on the topic at hand (like this podcast discussion called “O Say Can You See). When it is clear that the narrator on the podcast is reading directly from an un-memorized script, there are often unnatural breaks in speech and it becomes apparent when the narrator gets tired, as his or her voice becomes wearisome (In this example about the Farragut and Vicksburg Campaign, you can even hear the narrator turning the pages). However, just like in listening to a speech, when the podcast narrator expresses confidence in the information he or she is presenting, and the narrator speaks in an upbeat and engaging tone, it becomes much more pleasurable to listen to (check out this walking tour of the Battle of Cedar Creek). Furthermore, musical introductions or musical interludes, like in this podcast from Civil War Traveler, provide much needed breaks from the flow of information that is being thrown at the listener. Additionally, these musical interludes serve the purpose of signifiers to the listener that they need to be at another location or the content of the podcast is taking a change of pace. Despite how successful musical interludes are at breaking up the monotony of narration, many podcasts do not utilize them and none that I came across use any additional kind of audio, like cannon fire, shouts, or soldier impersonation.

After reviewing a handful of historically oriented podcasts, I have come to a number of conclusions about the direction our podcast should take.

1. Spatially driven walking tours are more engaging than strait retellings, even if you are not on the battle field itself. Giving the listener the tools to spatially picture a battle, place, or event is a great way to engage the listener while providing them with accurate information.

2. Podcasts with a single narrator are dull; there needs to be multiple (perhaps interacting) voices on the podcast

3. Although memorizing a script might not be feasible in our time frame, the finished podcast should be free from any unnatural pauses, page turning, or lackluster readings.

4. Introductory music is a great way to segue into the spoken part of the podcast. Additionally, musical interludes can be used to help queue the listener that they are entering a different part of the podcast.

5. I could not find any examples of cannon fire, gun shots, shouting, or soldier impersonation in any Civil War podcasts. Experimenting with these effects could greatly increase the level of engagement in our podcast.

6. Civil War podcasts on the whole are excruciatingly boring to those who are not Civil War fanatics. Let’s use creativity to pander to an audience that might not have actively sought Civil War media in the past.

 

Mollie Evelyn Moore Davis

Wednesday, March 30th, 2011

Mollie Evelyn Moore Davis.  Under Six Flags: The Story of Texas. (Boston: Ginn & Company, 1897)

M.E.M. Davis’  Under Six Flags: The Story of Texas covers Texas history from its colonization through the late nineteenth century.  Davis wrote an entire chapter about Texas’ participation in the Civil War and devotes almost three pages of text to the tale of Dick Dowling and his defense of Sabine Pass.  However, the passage barely talks about Dowling himself, but gives an almost romanticized telling of the battle.  The description is full of flowery language and descriptions that captivate its audience.  She uses descriptors such as guns “vomiting huge shells which tore the earthwork of the fort and filled the air with dust”  (Davis 164).  Davis mentions most details of the battle, from the entrance of the Sachem, Clifton and Arizona into the Sabine Pass to the surrender of the Union soldiers on the disable Clifton and Sachem.  She even mentions that the Union attempted another failed attack on Sabine Pass eight months later.  The book provides a decent description of the events of the Battle of Sabine Pass.

Under Six Flags covers the Civil War in Texas in great detail.  Since it was published only 30+ years after the Civil War, Davis’ tone is one of pride for Texas’ survival against the Federal forces, but definitely reflects the hardships suffered during the war.  She describes the early months of 1861 as “like one long holiday” (154).  While the soldiers showed pride to be fighting for their country, they would learn how a true soldier lived.  Her coverage of the war began with the surrender of Federal troops from the military outpost in San Antonio.  From there she describes the anguish of the loss of Galveston to Union forces.  “A mournful cry echoed throughout Texas: ‘Galveston has fallen!'” (157). Of any battle fought in Texas during the Civil War, Davis spends the most time on our friend Dowling’s Battle at Sabine Pass.

I could only find one edition of the book at Fondren library and when I perused Amazon to see if other editions existed, the only result I found was a version typed from the legible scans of the 1897 edition.  Under Six Flags appears to have been a history book, intended for the average reader who wanted to learn more about Texas history.  However, the book’s target audience appears to have been women.  The type of language used by Davis does not provide a bloody or violent account of the battle, but a highly romanticized one with vivid descriptions and similes.  It seems highly unlikely men at the turn of the twentieth century would have been reading books that described the surrendering Union officer as “the gallant Federal in his handsome uniform” (165).  The book was published in 1897, just before the turn of the twentieth century.

Transcription from pg. 163-165 from Under Six Flags: The Story of Texas:

“A small earthwork called Fort Griffin had been built by the Confederates on the Texas side of the Sabine Pass at the mouth of the Sabine River.  It was protected by five light guns and garrisoned by the Davis Guards, a company from Houston commanded by Captain Odlum.  The first lieutenant was Dick Dowling, an Irishman but twenty years of age.

Fort Griffin, though small, was a place of much importance.  Sabine Pass was a sort of outlet for the pent-up Confederacy.  Blockade-runners, in spite of the Federal ships stationed in the Gulf, were always slipping out of the Sabine River, loaded with cotton for Cuba or Europe, and stealing in with arms and supplies from Mexico.

Soon after the battle of Galveston, Major Oscar Watkins, Confederate States navy, was sent by General Magruder with two cotton-clad steamboats, the Josiah Bell and the Uncle Ben, to annoy the blockading fleet at Sabine Pass.  After a skirmish and an exciting chase, he succeeded in capturing two United States ships, the Velocity and the Morning Light (January 21, 1863)

The United States then determined to take Fort Griffin and land at Sabine Pass with a force large enough to overawe that part of the country.  Twenty-two transport carried the land troops, about fifteen thousand in number, to the Pass.  Four gunboats, the Sachem, the Clifton, the Arizona, and the Granite City, accompanied them, to bombard the fort and cover the landing of the soldiers.  The expedition was under the command of General Franklin.

When this formidable fleet appeared at Sabine Pass, Captain Odlum was absent and Lieutenant Dowling was in command of Fort Griffin.  His whole force consisted of forty-two men.  He ordered the “Davys,” as they were called, to stay in the bomb-proofs until he himself should fire the first gun.  Then, hidden in the earthwork, he watched the approach of the gunboats.

The Clifton steamed in and opened the attack from her pivot gun, throwing a number of shells which dropped into the fort and exploded.  The Sachem and the Arizona followed, pouring in broadsides from their thirty-two pound cannon.

No reply came from the fort, which seemed to be deserted.  The gunboats came nearer and nearer.  Suddenly a shot from the fort clove the air and felling hissing into the water beyond the Arizona.  The fight at once became furious.  The Clifton and the Arizona moved backward and forward, vomiting huge shells which tore the earthwork of the fort and filled the air with dust.  Ships and fort seemed wrapped in flame.  The Sachem meanwhile was stealing into the Pass toward the unprotected rear of the fort.  But a well-aimed shot from Dowling’s battery struck her, crushing her iron plating and causing her to rise on end a quiver like a leaf in the wind.  She was at the mercy of the fort, and her flag was instantly lowered.  The Clifton kept up the fight with great skill and bravery.  But she soon ran aground in the shallows, where she continued to fire until a shot passed through her boiler, completely wreaking her.  A white flag was run up at her bow, and the battle was over.  The Arizona and the Granite City steamed out to the transports, whose men had watched the fight with breathless interest.

The fleet at once retired, leaving the Sachem and the Clifton to the “Davys.”

Three hundred Union soldiers were taken prisoners.  Captain Crocker of the Clifton came ashore with a boat’s crew, and, mounting the parapet, asked for the commanding officer.  Lieutenant Dowling, covered with the dust of the fort, presented himself as the person sought.

The gallant Federal in his handsome uniform could hardly believe that this dirty little boy was his conqueror, or that the handful of men before him comprised the force which had so calmly awaited a hostile fleet and defeated it.

Eight months afterward the United States gunboats, the Granite Cit and the Wave, were captured at Sabine Pass.”

 

 

A trip to the DMC

Wednesday, March 30th, 2011

This morning, I met with Jane Zhao (Lisa Spiro was unavailable) at the DMC and talked about what we could do for our podcast. She said that there were three types of podcasting we could do:

  1. audio only (an mp3 file)
  2. enhanced podcasting (an m4v or mp4 file with audio track and a picture slideshow, kind of like a PowerPoint)
  3. video podcast (another m4v or mp4 file with a video and audio track)

I have a feeling we will either want to do an audio only podcast or an enhanced podcast, since the video podcast would probably be stepping on the movie group’s toes a little bit. Audio podcasts are the most compatible, since an mp3 file can be played on just about any device, whereas the enhanced or video podcasts will require a device that can handle video (so it wouldn’t work on an iPod shuffle, for example). Since one of the things we’re considering is a walking or driving tour of Dowling spots around Houston, it seems like we would probably want to use the most compatible medium possible. Another thought I had was that, time permitting, we could do both an audio only and an enhanced podcast. That way, people who just wanted an audio file could download that, but people with a device that can play video (because the world is slowly being overrun with video-capable smart phones and mp3 players anyway) can have that option.

There is a fair amount of equipment at the DMC available for us to either check out or use on site. There is a tiny recording booth at the DMC that could maybe fit 2 small people. It’s not sound proof, but it’s pretty quiet if you’re there at a time that the DMC is not busy, and it has a microphone and a computer. There are also small audio recorders available for 3-day check out that record to either mp3 or wav files. There is also a free editing software called Audacity, which is available for PC, Mac, and Linux. If we decided to do an enhanced podcast, we would need to edit in GarageBand or any video-editing software. There are 7 audio & video editing stations with Audacity, and 5 stations with Audacity and video-editing software at the DMC which we can either reserve or just show up and use. (Jane said the mornings were generally pretty quiet at the DMC.)

Once our podcast is ready for publishing, we have to find a site to host it before we publish it to iTunes. (Apparently, iTunes doesn’t host any of the podcasts in the iTunes store, instead it links to another website and downloads the podcasts from there.) We can either put it on our Rice personal webpage called the U-Drive or we can use a free podcasting hosting website like PodOmatic.  It offers 500 MB of free space with a free membership, and more if you pay for it. Jane said 3-5 minutes of audio podcast generally take about 3-4 MB of space, so 500 MB should be plenty big enough for our podcast.

The last thing I asked Jane was about how much time she estimated recording and editing our podcast would take. She said that the recording generally did not take too long, but she did strongly suggest we be picky about the quality of our initial recording instead of relying on the editing process to fix any mistakes. In terms of editing after we recorded the podcast, she estimated it would take about 2-3 hours for a 20 minute podcast. She also noted that most podcasts were a series of shorter 5-10 minute episodes, so, instead of one long podcast, we could also make a series of shorter ones. Finally, she suggested we add a jingle at the beginning and end of the podcast, which I personally think would be a great opportunity to mash up Irish & Confederate music.

On the technological side, it seems like recording and editing the podcast should be fairly simple and not too time consuming. Now all we have to do is figure out what we want to record…

Anna J. H. Pennybacker

Monday, March 28th, 2011

Pennybacker, Anna. A new history of Texas for schools, also for general reading and for teachers preparing themselves for examination. Tyler, TX: A. Pennybacker. 1888.

In her presentations of the Civil War in Texas and Dowling, Pennybacker includes accounts of the capture and recapture of Galveston as well as a section on the Battle at Sabine Pass. She places the Battle of Sabine Pass in the context of the larger Civil War effort by noting both the Battle of Galveston that preceded it and the conditions of Texas during the war. The section on the battle itself is fairly short in all three editions; Pennybacker presents the highlights without dwelling on any of the controversies we explored in class. In keeping with her stated goal in the introduction to foster the patriotism of the young Texans studying history from the book, she takes every opportunity in the account to note the heroism and cleverness of the men at Sabine Pass. She does so, however, in a way that does not majorly exaggerate what took place in the battle. According to Pennybacker, the Battle of Sabine Pass was one in which a small group of 40-50 Confederate soldiers, supported by a well-made fort, defeated a much larger Union force of approximately 4,000 men. Although we have seen how this depiction of Sabine Pass has its limitations, it is far from the most sensationalist account of the battle in existence.

In the first edition, Pennybacker provided a very brief account of what happened at Galveston, as well as the Battle of Sabine Pass. This first edition’s account most closely fits the quintessential narrative of the Battle of Sabine Pass as the Confederacy’s Thermopylae, with a “little garrison” of “only forty-one men” bravely fighting away a “Union fleet of twenty vessels.” Dowling is not even mentioned by name. The second edition goes into much greater detail, particularly about the Battle of Galveston and the recapture of Galveston. It is clear Pennybacker is intent on demonstrating the heroism of Texas’s brave soldiers. The passage on Sabine Pass has also been somewhat enlarged, although not nearly to the extent of the battle at Galveston. This depiction gives more information about the fortifications at Sabine Pass, describing it as “a strong fort, defended by eight heavy guns.” Pennybacker also explains the military advantages to the Union should they capture Sabine Pass, namely the railroad that would facilitate a Union takeover of Texas. She gives precise numbers for the number of men on both sides—42 for the Confederacy and 4,000 for the Union—and notes Richard Dowling as the commander of the fort. Pennybacker explains Dowling’s strategy of waiting until the enemy came close, and adds that the Union commander lost two vessels and had 100 killed or wounded, as well as 250 prisoners. Pennybacker finishes the section by saying that President Jefferson Davis presented the garrison with a silver medal in honor of their victory. The third edition’s depiction of Sabine Pass is fairly similar to that of the second edition; Pennybacker again notes the “strong fort, defended by heavy guns,” the importance of the railroad, the number of Union soldiers and artillery lost in the effort, and Davis’s silver medal to the garrison. The only major change is in the number of men defending Sabine Pass, which has been steadily creeping up over the course of the three editions; now, “not more than fifty Confederates took place in the battle.”

According to the Handbook of Texas, Pennybacker herself was a highly educated and very progressive (she was a proud suffragette and a member of the Democratic National Committee) woman born in Petersburg, Virginia. She attended teachers’ school in Huntsville, Texas before continuing her education in Europe, showing she was both somewhat wealthy and well rounded. She taught high school and grammar for 14 years, and her teaching experience is evident in the way in which A new history of Texas for schools, also for general reading and for teachers preparing themselves for examination—a “staple of Texas classrooms for forty years” according to the Handbook of Texas—was written and revised. In all three editions, Pennybacker discusses theories of education, the way in which her textbook can best be used in classrooms, and the needs and status of the Texas public school system, showing that this book was written by a teacher for teachers with the goal of imparting knowledge to students in as fascinating a way as possible. As she says in her introductions to both the second and third editions, “every effort has been made to render the subject fascinating to the child mind.” Pennybacker also wrote the book with an awareness that this book would frequently be used in one-room school houses, and makes pains that her book is both accessible to a third-grader beginning to learn history and interesting to a much older student by writing the basic narrative at a low level but including higher level documents in appendixes at the end of each section. Pennybacker is also very concerned with ensuring her textbook inspires patriotism in young Texans, and urges teachers to ensure that no student forgets the importance of March 2nd (Independence Day) and April 21st (San Jacinto Day) in Texas history. Finally, Pennybacker expresses a great deal of concern with accuracy in her introductions. She sought to write as unbiased a textbook as possible, and collaborated with professors at the University of Texas and other members of the Texas community to ensure this accuracy. She largely succeeded in this endeavor; throughout the textbook the information is succinct and thorough, and she even refers to the Civil War as the Civil War, and not “The War Between the States” or “The War of Northern Aggression.”

Passages on Galveston & Sabine Pass in A new history of Texas for schools, also for general reading and for teachers preparing themselves for examination:

From the 1888 edition, pages 136-138:

Galveston Captured. – In October, 1862, Galveston was taken by the Northern troops. In December, General Magruder, by a well-planned attack, retook the city, captured several Federal vessels, and frightened away all blockading ships. For a few days, Galveston was once more an open port. In a short time, however, the blockade was renewed.

Battle at Sabine Pass.- Texas was free from further conflicts till September 6, 1863. A fort had been built to defend Sabine Pass. The garrison numbered only forty-one men. On the above-mentioned date, a Union fleet of twenty vessels appeared off the coast, and several of the ships commenced a bombardment. The little garrison at once fired away with all their guns, and so bravely did they keep up the fight, that soon two of the ships were wrecked, while the rest hastily sailed away.

 

From the 1895 edition, pages 267-270:

Galveston Captured.—October 4, 1862, Commander Renshaw, with four war-vessels* and a well-disciplined land force, captured Galveston Island, meeting with little resistance from Confederate troops. About the same time Corpus Christi and the defenses of Sabine City were captured by the Federals.

*These vessels were the Harriet Lane, Owasco, Westfield and Clifton.

Galveston Retaken.—One of the most brilliant exploits of the Texans was the recapture of Galveston. In November, General Magruder was placed in command of the Southern forces on the Texas coast. He determined to expel the Northern forces from Galveston Island. His preparations were made with the greatest care and secrecy. As the unfortunate Sibley expedition had just returned, General Magruder found them eager to be led against the enemy; 5000 Texans who had been called out to protect the coast, were also at the General’s disposal. He changed four river steamers into gunboats by piling up compressed cotton bales for bulwarks and manning them with suitable men and cannon. The gunboats were to sail to the head of the Bay and open fire on the Federals just as the moon sank below the horizon on the morning of January 1st, while at the same moment Magruder was to attack the land forces. The Massachusetts regiment that was encamped on one of the wharves of the city, and the six Union war-vessels that lay in the harbor or toward the pass, knew nothing of the battle that threatened them. With the opening of the fourth hour of the New Year, Magruder led his men to the attack. The Northern soldiers fought bravely, but were soon forced to surrender. The gunboats, being delayed, were unable to open battle at the appointed hour, but when the conflict did begin, the scene was most exciting. The Harriet Lane was first attacked; the Confederate boat Bayou City came so near that the rigging of the two crafts became entangled. Leaping on the enemy’s deck, the Texans waged a deadly hand-to-hand fight; great heroism was shown on both sides; Commander Wainwright and his second officer being killed,* the Harriet Lane struck her colors. The Neptune received a fatal shot and sank. The Westfield, being in great danger of capture, was blown up by the Federals, but, unfortunately, the commander and fifteen men were killed by the explosion. The other vessels escaped. For a few days, Galveston was once more an open port, but the blockade was soon replaced. Galveston Island remained in possession of the Confederates till the close of the war.

*These officers were respected and admired by the Confederates, who buried them with all the honors of war.

Battle of Sabine Pass.—Texas was free from any other important military actions till September, 1863. The Confederates, early in the year, drove the Federals from Sabine Pass, and built a strong fort, defended by eight heavy guns. From Sabine Pass, a railroad extended into the interior of the State. General Banks, the Northern commander, felt that if he could capture the Pass, it would be an easy matter to seize the road, push on to Houston, take possession of all other railways, and thus conquer Texas. With all this in view, he ordered 4,000 troops to embark for Sabine Pass, where he hoped to take the garrison by surprise. Captain Richard Dowling was in command of the fort; forty-two Confederates took part in the battle. The commands of General Banks were not well carried out, for when the Union vessels reached the Pass, Captain Dowling and his men were ready to receive them. When, on September 6th, the Union fleet commenced a bombardment, the guns in the fort were silent till the enemy came within close range; then there burst forth so furious a fire that two of the Federal vessels were wrecked and the others sailed hastily away. The Union commander lost two vessels, 100 killed and wounded, and 250 prisoners. President Jefferson Davis presented the garrison with a silver medal, in honor of the victory.

From 1907 edition, pages 239-241:

Galveston Captured.—October 4, 1862, Commander Renshaw, with four war-vessels12 and a well-disciplined land force, captured Galveston Island, meeting with little resistance from the Confederate troops. About the same time Corpus Christi and the defense of Sabine City were captured by the Federals.

12. These vessels were the Harriet Lane, Owasco, Westfield, and Clifton.

Galveston Retaken.—One of the most brilliant exploits of the Texans was the recapture of Galveston. In November, General Magruder was placed in command of the Southern forces on the Texas coast. He determined to expel the Northern forces from Galveston Island. His preparations were made with the greatest care and secrecy. As the Sibley expedition had just returned, General Magruder found them eager to be led against the enemy. He changed four river steamers into gunboats by piling up compressed cotton bales for bulwarks and manning them with suitable men and cannon. The gunboats were to sail to the head of the bay and open fire on the Federals just as the moon sank below the horizon on the morning of January 1st, while at the same moment Magruder was to attack the land forces. The Massachusetts regiment that was encamped on one of the wharves of the city, and the Union war vessels that lay in the harbor or toward the pass, knew nothing of the danger that threatened them. With the opening of the fourth hour of the New Year, Magruder led his men to attack. The Northern soldiers fought bravely, but were forced to surrender. The gunboats, being delayed, were unable to open battle at the appointed hour, but when the conflict did begin, the scene was most exciting. The Harriet Lane was first attacked; the Confederate boat Bayou City ranged alongside and the rigging of the two ships became entangled. Leaping on the enemy’s deck, the Texans waged a deadly hand-to-hand fight; great heroism was shown on both sides; Commander Wainwright and his second officer being killed, the Harriet Lane struck her colors. The Neptune received a fatal shot and sank. The Westfield, being in great danger of capture, was blown up by the Federals, and unfortunately, the commander and some of his men were killed by the explosion. The other vessels escaped. For a few days Galveston was once more an open port, but the blockade was soon replaced, Galveston Island remained in possession of the Confederates till the close of the war.

Battle of Sabine Pass.—(241) The Confederates, early in 1863, had driven the Federals from Sabine Pass, and built a strong fort, defended by heavy guns. From Sabine Pass, a railroad extended into the interior of the state. General Banks, the Northern commander, felt that if he could capture the Pass, it would be an easy matter to seize the road, push on to Houston, take possession of all other railways, and thus conquer Texas. With all this in view, he ordered some four thousand troops to embark for Sabine Pass, where he hoped to take the garrison by surprise. Captain Richard Dowling was in command of the fort. The orders of General Banks were not well carried out, for when the Union vessels reached the Pas, Captain Dowling and his men were ready to receive them. When, on September 8, the Union fleet commenced a bombardment, the guns in the fort were silent till the enemy came within close range; then there burst forth so furious a fire that two of the Federal vessels were wrecked and the others sailed hastily away. The Union commander lost two vessels, one hundred killed and wounded, and two hundred and fifty prisoners: these results are remarkable since not more than fifty Confederates took part in the battle. President Jefferson Davis presented the garrison with a silver medal, in honor of the victory.

 

 

John Henry Brown

Saturday, March 26th, 2011

John Henry Brown, History of Texas From 1685 to 1892 (St. Louis: L.E. Daniell, 1893), Vol. 2, 422.

John Henry Brown’s 175 word passage about the Battle of Sabine Pass begins with a matter-of-fact style retelling of the events of September 6, 1863. In the latter half of the passage , he qualifies the battle as one of utmost importance to Texas history by arguing that “no achievement was of better service to Texas.” His recounting of the battle involves 42 Confederate soldiers, under the command of Dick Dowling and Patrick Hennessey, 23 Union vessels and “several gunboats.” He describes the events of the battle simplistically, chronicling the Confederate garrison as “skillfully…and bravely” firing upon and capturing two Union gunboats, forcing the retreat of the remaining 23 Union vessels. Later, Brown goes on to explain that there was almost no time for planning or execution; however, he does not mention Dowling’s role in the battle beyond his rank.  Brown makes the bold claim that the brave Confederates managed to stave off the entrance of, what he estimates to be, “23,000 Federal soldiers.” He finishes by claiming that Dowling has come to be saluted as one of the “grandest heroes of modern times.”

In all, Brown’s account of the Battle of Sabine Pass comprises a total of 175 words. Although Brown does relay important information about the battle and makes some bold claims about its significance, it is important to address the terseness of this section. With both volumes of History of Texas From 1685 to 1892 included, Brown’s massive documentation of Texas history is over twelve-hundred pages long. However, for a battle in which “no achievement was of better service to Texas,” and for a military figure who is considered one of the “grandest heroes of modern times,” it seems illogical that the Battle of Sabine Pass and Dowling constitute less than one two-thousandths of Brown’s work. An explanation for this odd occurrence could be that Brown was less interested about the Civil War than he was with earlier or alternative Texas history. Of the three works he lists on the inside jacket cover of this book***, none of them pertain to the Civil War, while two are heavily focuses on interactions with Native Americans. Additionally, it is possible that Brown had an overall negative view of the war and its outcome, in terms of Texas history. His biography states that shortly after the war he and his family, along with other disaffected Southerners, emigrated to Mexico (Texas Historical Association). Although there is no apparent explanation for why his passage on Dowling is so relatively short, it is possible that Brown thought of the Civil War as a blemish for America and Texas.

In addition, Brown does make two rather bold claims about the battle. First, he claims that the Confederate victory was critical for keeping “23,000 Federal soldiers” out of a vulnerable point in Texas. While most sources limit their estimates to the 5,000 Union troops present at the battle of Sabine Pass, Brown quickly jumps to the conclusion that a loss a Sabine Pass would have caused Texas to be overrun by 20,000 plus troops. Secondly, Brown emphasizes the idea that Dowling was saluted as one of the “grandest heroes of modern times,” without qualifying by saying … of the Civil war, or even… of Texas history. It is interesting that Brown regards Dowling as being seen as one of the greatest modern heroes, yet recounts very little about him. It brings up the important question of whether Brown esteemed Dowling as highly as he believed others did.

John Henry Brown, History of Texas From 1685 to 1892 Vol 2, Page 422

“The fort at Sabine Pass had a garrison of about forty men under command of Captain Richard Dowling from Houston and Patrick Hennessey as lieutenant. On the 6th of September, 1863, a Federal fleet of 23 vessels and several gunboats anchored off the coast. A number of vessels with two gunboats entered the harbor and opened fire upon the fort. The garrison withheld their fire until the vessels were in good range of their guns, when they opened upon them. They soon disabled the two gunboats, which they captured with all on board. The other vessels left the harbor. It was a skillfully planned and bravely executed achievement. There was but little time for planning and but a few minutes for executing it, yet no achievement was of better service to Texas. This company of forty-two men defeated the entrance of 23,000 Federal soldiers, through a vulnerable point into Texas. The Federal fleet returned to New Orleans and Texas. From mountain to sea-board saluted Dick Dowling as one of the grandest heroes of modern times.”

 

 

 

The Podcast Project

Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011

Hello Podcast Group! We’ve reached that part of the course where it’s time to start working on your small group projects for the Dick Dowling archive. In this post I’m going to talk a little bit about the project you’ve been assigned–making a podcast related to Dowling’s statue and memory. Please take time to read this post carefully so that you can begin to talk amongst yourselves about what you plan to do.

In the course of this semester, you’ve learned a lot about Dowling and the Battle of Sabine Pass that you probably didn’t know when we first tramped out to the statue during the first week of classes. Even if you had gone out to the statue yourself, you could have learned something about it from the historical marker. But as we’ve seen, even the marker and the rededication ceremony that accompanied it has a particular history that might not be apparent to a viewer of the marker, and there are things about the battle that the marker emphasizes while leaving other things out altogether.

In this project, your challenge will be to communicate some of what you’ve learned to a wider audience and interpret it by producing an audio podcast file about Dowling and his memory.

Conceivably, your podcast could be of any length and talk about anything related to the Dowling statue. But in deciding what to put in your podcast, think about the specific virtues of the medium you’re working with. One advantage of a podcast file is its portability–the fact that people can download an mp3 file to mobile devices and listen to them anywhere. So, for example, it would be possible to make a “walking tour” podcast that people could download and listen to as they walked to the Dowling statue or stood looking at it. You could make your podcast a sort of virtual tour guide, modeling it on the self-guided Audio Walking Tours of Downtown Houston. Of course, that’s not the only potential application of podcasts: some people like podcasts because they can listen to a brief radio show like NPR News while driving in their car, and perhaps you’d prefer to produce a podcast that sounds more like a radio show. Still, you want to think about what the particular advantages of your medium are: what makes a radio program interesting? How could you take advantage of the ability to include sound effects or music in your program? These are important questions, but even they pale before the bigger question: what do you want to talk about in your podcast? How will you fill the silence? And that “how” question actually contains two parts–how will you make the podcast (technologically speaking) and how will you fill up the podcast (content wise)?

The Technical Dimension

To complete this project, you’ll need to learn about how to use audio recording equipment, and how to edit audio files. Fortunately, the Digital Media Center includes the equipment you need to do these things. And the staff in the Media Center, including director Lisa Spiro, are available to help you. One of the first things you should so is meet as a group with Lisa (she knows you’re coming) to figure out the kinds of things that are technically possible when making a podcast, and the kinds of things that aren’t.

As you work on your podcast, you may discover other technical tasks that you’ll need to figure out, like how to record or sample music for your podcast (if you choose to include it), or how to strip sound effects off of other sources (like, to give an example, the sound of cannon firing in this video of the recent Dick Dowling Days at Sabine Pass).

To determine what technical skills you’ll need to be make your podcast, you’ll first need to decide what you want your podcast to be. But it will be crucial for you to make early contact with the technical experts in the Digital Media Center so you’ll know the technical parameters you have to work in.

The Interpretive Dimension

The primary challenge for you will be to determine what to include in your podcast. Before you ever record or edit audio, that means you’ll need to script out what will be in the podcast (narration from one of you? clips from other sources? music or sound effects? spoken interviews with experts? etc.) and how long do you want the podcast to be (as long as it takes to walk to the statue and back from Rice? some other length of time?).

As you script your podcast, the biggest question will be about what you want the podcast to be about and what point you want it to make. To answer that question, you’ll need to think first about audience. Imagine your audience as someone who, like you on the first day of class, doesn’t know about Dowling and the statue. What basic information does that listener need, in your view?

And more than information, what interpretation do you want the listener to take away from your podcast? Virtually any attempt to talk about Dowling carries with it an interpretation. When Jefferson Davis gave his speech about the battle of Sabine Pass (DD0001), which might have been podcasted if the technology had existed, he had a clear message he wanted to get across. And later writers about Dowling have, at various moments in time, presented him in particular ways as a “hero” or otherwise. How will you present him to your audience?

The potential subjects you could cover are conceivably very numerous: (a) the differences between the facts of the battle and the way it has been represented; (b) the changes in the attention given to Dowling over time in Houston’s history, as signified by the placement of stories about him in past newspapers or the fact that a man once feted by governors and mayors and city councilmen later depended on small groups of descendants to promote his memory; (c) the contexts in which Dowling’s memory should be placed and the subjects (slavery? Irish immigration? etc.) that should be included to make sense of the battle or the man, and so on. The choice is ultimately yours to decide what would best make a coherent podcast that takes advantage of the medium and speaks to a wider audience. Given all that you could say about Dowling on the basis of what we’ve learned, the hardest task will probably be deciding what to say and what to leave unsaid, a decision that should be guided partially by your other decisions about how long a podcast your audience can stand and the purpose of your podcast (walking tour? radio program? etc.)

What Next?

It could be that not everything you would like to do with your podcast will be feasible within the time frame you have to work on this project. That introduces another level of choices you will have to make about what to prioritize, what your main objectives are, and how you will pool your collective skills and divide the labor among you. For now, think broadly about what–in an ideal world–your podcast would be able to do. Begin to talk with each other and make an appointment to meet with Lisa Spiro in the Digital Media Center.

By the time that Blog Post #9 is due next Thursday, you should have done at least enough groundwork and discussion on this project to be able to give a progress report and share ideas you have for the podcast. The following week, you will meet with me to draft a contract for your project. That meeting won’t be useful to you, however, if you’ve done no thinking or learning about the project before then.

So you should think of these as your next two steps and strive to complete them sometime in the next two weeks: (a) meet with the Digital Media Center staff to get a quick feel for the technology you’ll need to record and edit your podcast; (b) talk with each other about the project, paying special attention to sharing information about particular skills and interests you have; (c) begin to discuss with each other what the objective and format of your podcast will be, since so many of your decisions will hinge on that.

And as always, if you have questions, let me know!

Emancipation: An Act of Desperation

Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011

In his book Confederate Emancipation, Bruce Levine debates whether Southerners actually supported the emancipation of slaves to fight for the Confederacy.  The Richmond Enquirer wrote, “the people of these States believe slavery right, permitted and sanctioned in the word of God, proper for the white man, good for the black, economical as a system of labor, and necessary to the proper cultivation of the great staples of this country” (Levine 2).  No matter how much Confederacy leadership denied it after the war, it is clear that one of the principles the Confederate States of America was founded on was slavery.  The fact that that leadership would even consider freeing slaves to fight for the Confederacy demonstrated how desperate the South was during the latter part of the Civil War.

At the beginning of the Civil War, the South had a mandatory enlistment of all fighting age white males in the Confederate military.  While this initially provided the Confederacy with a large amount of manpower, it could not afford devastating defeats like those suffered at Gettysburg and Vicksburg.  It was those staggering losses that made the Confederate government reconsider its military policies towards slaves.  Slaves made up forty percent of the Southern population, and many were of fighting age and capable of following orders.  Colored regiments had been proposed by the Confederate officers, but the challenge of distinguishing between creoles and blacks prevented this from occurring.   But as the need for manpower became dire, Major-General Patrick Cleburne said, “as between the loss of independence and the loss of slavery, we assume that every patriot will freely give up the latter– give up the negro slave rather than become a slave himself” (27).  By November 1864, Confederate President Jefferson Davis agreed on the idea of “manumission as a war measure” (32).

When describing the late war policies regarding slavery, I am not sure the word “emancipation” is the proper word.  While the policy eventually agreed to free the slaves who fought for the Confederacy, that was not its intention.  “Confederate desperation” is probably a better term.  The fact that the Confederate government would even consider emancipating and arming slaves demonstrates just how close they were to defeat.  Many Southerners disagreed with the mere suggestion of using slaves as soldiers in the Confederate military.  Catherine Edmondston said of this policy, “[we would] destroy at one blow the highest jewel in the Crown…Our country is ruined if [we] adopt [Lee’s] suggestions” (53).  An Arkansas soldier wrote, “It is virtually giving up the principle on which we went to war” (56).  Neither the people nor the common soldiers were behind this idea.  What that shows is that the slaves who fought for the Confederacy were not truly considered free by their white counterparts.

Emancipation in this sense was not universal like it was in the Union’s “Emancipation Proclamation.”  It was more like the Confiscation Acts, which were enacted as a result of the war.  The Confiscation Acts called for the seizure of property used by the Confederate in the war effort against the Union.  Similarly, the Confederate policy of emancipation took the property of slave owners to fight in their military  However, I cannot liken the usage of slaves by the Confederacy as soldier to the freeing of slaves by the North.  The fact that the Confederacy would even consider freeing and arming slaves demonstrates a major sense of desperation within the Confederate government.  It was too contradictory of their principles to be anything but desperation.

Confederate Emancipation: Have Your Cake And…

Tuesday, March 22nd, 2011

Question 1:

In his book, Confederate Emancipation, Bruce Levine attempts to identify the major points of support and contention regarding the Confederate attempt to enlist slave soldiers. Documenting the history of the debate from the beginning of the war, to the slave enlistment legislation of 1865, and through the resulting subjugation of free blacks in the post-bellum South, Levine gives an explanation for both the causal mechanism of “Confederate Emancipation” and its meaning for Confederate leadership and Southern society. As he demonstrates, as early as 1863, Confederate officials, like Major-General Patrick Cleburne, were proposing the bold argument that the enlistment of slave soldiers was not only prudent, but necessary to overcome the larger and increasingly advancing Union army (Levine 2). Despite these efforts, Jefferson Davis and other high-ranking Confederate officials dismissed this idea as unnecessarily traumatic to the Southern economy and society (Levine 2). However, by 1865, the need for more troops, the decreasing morale of enlisted soldiers, the growing antagonism toward the planter class, and the mounting successes of the Union forces, caused important Confederate officials, like General Robert E. Lee, to declare the enlistment of slave soldiers as “not only expedient, but necessary” (Levine 5). In his work, Levine explains the how the steadfast views of white supremacy, the shifting political atmosphere of Richmond, and the ever plummeting trajectory of Confederate victory (Levine 29) aligned to cause “Confederate Emancipation” when, why, and how it did.

As slave enlistment became an apparent necessity for most informed Southerners, Confederate officials had to decide if they were willing to “sacrifice the central war aim for the sake of military success” by enlisting and freeing slaves (Levine 9). Levine argues that that Jefferson Davis and other Confederate officials realized that slavery and black enlistment were mutually exclusive. In order to get slaves to fight loyally for the Confederacy, the South “would have to offer them freedom in return,” this, Levine argues, was recognized as an “ineluctable fact” by Confederate officials (Levine 154). However, slavery still remained a critical economic and social part of the South. Levine points out that most Southerners believed that freeing the slaves would “defy god and topple society” (Levine 50). Additionally, he explains that freeing the slaves, the South’s “crucial agricultural workforce,” would endanger the populace, as well as the army, by limiting the available supply of food. It is apparent that the complex issue of enlisting slave soldiers presents critical logistical, social, and moral problems for the South. It is for this very reason that early calls for slave enlistment fell upon deaf ears (Levine 2). However, after the devastating battle of Chattanooga as well as the destructive march of Sherman along Georgia’s coast, the rational for slave enlistment became more apparent (Levine 21), and cries for slave black involvement no longer came from only outside traditional government organs.

Although “Confederate Emancipation” was the only route left for Southern victory, the ultimate decision to enlist the slaves, and therefore free them, was not pre-destined by the events of the war. By the time of black enlistment was seriously considered, there was less of a question of whether black soldiers were necessary and more of a question of whether it is worth sacrificing the most defining Confederate value for independence. According to the accounts of soldiers, many Southerners would have rather seen Confederate defeat than to have to fight alongside a slave (Levine 44). One soldier stated that his entire unit was unanimous in agreeing that “they would rather desert than serve with [a black soldier]” (Levine 44). Because black enlistment provided both an ideological problem for most Southerners and a practical problem for military victory, it is not surprising that Confederate officials waited until there was no other possible avenue for military victory other than slave soldiers. However, besides addressing the question of why “Confederate Emancipation” occurred when it did, Levine also addresses why black enlistment was even considered at all. His main argument is that Confederate officials, most notably Davis, saw achieving independence as the “sin qua non of continued social and economic supremacy” (Levine 153). When Davis realized that traditional chattel slavery and independence were not both possible, he made the decision to create black enlistment because it gave the Confederacy the best possible chance of achieving independence. However, the considerable delay and ultimate ineffectiveness of the 1865 program can be attributed to the intensely unpopular view of black enlistment (Levine 48) and the restrictiveness of Article 9, Section 4 of the Confederate constitution on government action regarding slavery (Levine 46).

Levine’s argument about the causes of black enlistment and its timing are valid given the social and practical problems he outlines regarding black enlistment and the necessity of black soldiers for independence. However, one important question that Levine leaves ambiguous is why there was such a large gap between popular opposition to enlisting slaves and the Confederate official’s steadfast commitment to independence (which at the end of the war were two competing ideologies). What Levine does point out is that toward the end of the war, deeply socialized beliefs about white supremacy still blinded many Southerners from seeing the long term Confederate goal of independence (Levine 56). All the while, Confederate officials began downplaying the necessity of slavery (Levine 154) and placed a greater importance in achieving self-determination. To account for this gap, I believe one has to address the personal motivations of each Confederate official involved. It is clear from accounts of average Southerners that slavery was perceived to be more influential for their way of life than self-determination. In contrast, for Confederate officials, independence would have a drastic effect on the trajectory of each of their lives. For example, being the new leaders of an independent state would have greatly increased Confederate officials access to economic resources and power. Furthermore, Confederate officials would not have to face the negative consequence of being convicted rebel leaders, such as imprisonment and public resentment, if they had actually achieved independence. Therefore, it is also important to look at the personal reasons Confederate officials had over the general population for supporting “Confederate Emancipation.”

 

Lincoln the Politician

Thursday, March 10th, 2011

When I was in elementary and middle school, I learned that Abraham Lincoln was a defender of racial equality, fighting the “evil South” and their backwards institution of slavery.  However, primary documents from Lincoln affirmed that he was not the white knight of Emancipation, but a flawed man who held many of the racist views of his era.  One must remember that Lincoln was a politician first, and preserving the Union was his first goal.  If the Union could have been saved without Emancipation, Lincoln would never have freed the slaves.

In his speeches during the Senate Election of 1858, Lincoln stated that he WAS NOT in support of freeing slaves in places where slavery already existed.  He said, “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so” (Document 1).  In fact, he believed that whites were inherently superior to blacks.  The races were so entirely different that he could not see them peacefully existing together.  The power to emancipate slaves lied with the state government, not with Congress or the Presidency.  And as a member of the state legislature, Lincoln stated, “I give him the most solemn pledge that I will to the very last stand by the law of this State, which forbids the marrying of white people with negroes” (Document 2).  It is hard to think that the man remembered by young children for freeing slaves held such vehemently racist views just five years before issuing the Emancipation Proclamation.

What Lincoln supported was the Republican platform that slavery should not expand into new territories acquired by the United States.  The fact that the United States was a country founded on the principles of civil liberties, yet allowed the spread of a system that denied humans their basic rights to exist was hypocritical.  The United States could not be the leading democratic power, yet allow the institution of slavery to enter new states.  However, the South misunderstood Lincoln’s antagonism towards the spread of slavery as a move to end the system entirely.  Lincoln tried to assuage that fear, “You think slavery is right and ought to be extended; while we think it is wrong and ought to be restricted. That I suppose is the rub. It certainly is the only substantial difference between us” (Document 5).  Lincoln could not convince the South that he was only against the expansion of slavery, and the South seceded from the Union.

Even during the early years of the Civil War, slavery was not a key cause of the war and the thought of emancipation was not even entertained.  Once Lincoln considered the idea of freeing the slaves, he believed they could not peacefully remain in the United States.  He initially proposed that they return to Liberia, their “homeland,” where they would be free with others of their race.  When that proved to be too expensive, he suggested they form a colony in Central America.  If Lincoln could have reunited the Union without resorting to emaciating the slaves, he would have done so.  But as it became clear that the North and the South would not resolve their issues, he entertained the idea of freeing the slaves.  While he did not believe that the Federal government necessarily had the power to demand emancipation, the main role of the government was to preserve the Union.  And when that required the freeing of slaves, the Federal government issued the Emancipation Proclamation.

While Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves in 1863, he did not do it because he was the great humanitarian who opposed slavery.  It was merely the only option to reunite the waring states.  Lincoln wrote in 1862, “My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union” (Document 8).  Lincoln was simply a politician, trying to save his country from any more bloodshed.  To claim he was a great humanitarian is a lie, to state he was a great politician is a truthful statement.

Lincoln the Racist

Thursday, March 10th, 2011

The stance that Abraham Lincoln takes on the issue of slavery is one that when viewed in its own right, makes ethical and logical sense. He intends to gradual free the slaves, stating, “It saves
them from the vagrant destitution which must largely attend immediate emancipation in
localities where their numbers are very great; and it gives the inspiring assurance that
their posterity shall be free forever.” He also talks of compensation in one of his articles in his address, believing it to be fair and just. However, when one looks at his views on race, a very different picture is portrayed. He says that, “There is a
physical difference between the two, which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid
their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a
necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position. I have never said anything to the
contrary…” His plans even include possibly sending the black population back to Africa. A great example is when he holds a conference with a black group, telling them he planned to colonize Central America with them, using at least twenty five “tolerantly intelligent men.” Clearly, he did not have a view of equality. These two different views are incredibly different it seems, though Lincoln seems to have more pity than respect for the slave population. He even says himself that although the African population is inferior in his eyes, “I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied every thing.”
This is an interesting position to take, especially when a large portion of the American population thought of Lincoln as someone who was against racism. In reality, he was against slavery specifically; not the equality of the races themselves. This must have been a popular or respected view of slavery from many people at that time. It was not yet close enough to the Civil Rights Movement to have a decent majority of the population advocating for total equality, but there must have been some against slavery like Lincoln was. Lincoln specifically addresses at least three times that he has been viewed as someone who loves black people and would marry them, but he wholeheartedly refuses this view. He still views them as inferior, he reassures. It brings to question the exact motives of abolitionists in general. Exactly how many were there, and even more interestingly, how many were advocates for total equality; not just in the removal of slavery, but also in the equality of race? If the president had this view, then there must have been a substantial amount of followers to this point of view. One must wonder when racial equality started to really take off as a majority, not just anti-slavery. However, despite Lincoln’s obvious racism, he did mark himself in history as taking one of the first and most important steps to equality: by abolishing slavery.