It looks like you all have done some great initial investigation about the options in front of you. I wanted to chime in with just a couple of suggestions:

First, several of you have mentioned coordinating with the Map Group. Keep in mind that you are able to comment on their blog, and they are able to comment on yours. An easy way to see what they are up to, and to let them know what you are up to, is to read their posts and comment.

Second, as you move forward, I think it would be worth talking some more as a group about what your mission as a group is. Unless you have a clear consensus about what you want to communicate to the listener, you will run the risk of (a) simply allowing the existing knowledge about Dowling, or the existing narrative that they will find on the markers they see, to stand unchallenged, without any new context or insight that they couldn’t already get from the marker; and/or (b) simply making your decisions on the basis of what’s most entertaining or least boring. Ideally, you will be able to come to a collective decision about what you most want to communicate to the listener, or what you most want them to get out of your walking/driving tour. Then you can decide how to meet that objective in an engaging way. If you decide what’s interesting or colorful first, before deciding on your objective, you may end up putting the cart before the horse.

I believe that some consultation with the Map group is in order but after looking through the newspaper articles that we transcribed a few weeks ago, I have figured out some important sites around the Houston area where we could potentially have stops for a podcast.

Houston Market Square–  This area is now a part of Main Street Square off of the light rail and probably gets quite a bit of foot traffic.  The statue was originally found in front of the Old City Hall on the corner of Travis and Preston.  We could potentially have a podcast here providing some background about the Battle of Sabine Pass and how this was the site of the original statue of Dick Dowling.  We could discuss the thought process that went into the making of the statue by the various groups that worked on the monument.  We could also encourage people to see the statue at its current location, in Hermann Park.

St. Vincents Cemetery– At the site of his grave, we could have podcast that details the life and heroic story of Dick Dowling.  We could talk about how he immigrated from Ireland to New Orleans and how he was a popular figure in the city of Houston.  Of course, we would speak about his participation in the Civil War, especially with regards to his exploits at the Battle of Sabine Pass.  We could also mention how the site of Dowling’s grave was practically unmarked until 1935.

Sam Houston Park–  The statue of Dick Dowling was moved from in front of the Old City Hall to Sam Houston Park.  I’m not sure what we could say about the monument here, maybe about how the statue has moved several times since 1905.

Hermann Park–  There is the potential for two podcasts for this site.  The first is a detailed history of the Battle of Sabine Pass and Dowling himself.  Seeing the statue in its full glory is the perfect setting to detail the story of Dick Dowling to the casual walker in Hermann Park.  The second podcast would be about the movement of the statue and how it fell into obscurity until its second dedication in 1997.

Sabine Pass–  I am not sure if there is any sort of memorial at the site of Sabine Pass but if there is, this would be another place to have a podcast.  You could almost repeat some of the podcasts mentioned above, such as the one providing details about the battle.  This would be less about Dowling and more about the battle itself.  However, I’ve driven past the area where Sabine Pass is and I don’t recall signs marking that there was a historic battlefield nearby.

Having listed some potential locations, my only question is how will we make this accessible to the casual walker?  Should we make the podcasts easily available by like some sort of phone number or will they have to download the podcast before or after visiting the sites?  Because it would best suit our mission if they could have almost immediate access to this information.  Just my two cents.

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.

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…

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!

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.

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.”

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.

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.

Throughout his entire political career, Abraham Lincoln has held many progressive as well as many cautiously conservative views regarding the issues of race and slavery. Lincoln’s political stance on slavery, prior to first shots at Fort Sumter, was that slavery should be permitted to exist, but should not be allowed to expand from its current areas of existence. He stated in the Lincoln-Douglas debates in 1858 he has “no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists.” Although he claimed to have no inclination to eliminate the institution of slavery, Lincoln clearly was opposed to the institution, publicly declaring it a “monstrous injustice.” Accordingly, Lincoln had many different reasons for being opposed to slavery, as outlined in his various speeches and letters. One of the main arguments Lincoln makes is that all people, regardless of race or status, are entitled to the “natural rights” outlined by the Declaration of Independence, namely: “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Logically, his moral-political belief about equal access to natural rights stands in stark contrast with the institution of slavery. Additionally, Lincoln criticizes slavery because “it deprives our republican example of its influence on the world.” As was discussed by Chandra Manning, like many other Unionists, Lincoln saw slavery as a glaring point of hypocrisy that blemished America’s shining example of democracy. Lastly, Lincoln opposed slavery because, as an institution, it causes men to place “self interest” over the ideal of “civil liberty.”

Although Lincoln sees slavery as an impediment to his political and social ideal, he does not see continual black subjugation as an issue standing against his beliefs in natural rights. Although he wishes to see everyone with the right to life, liberty, and happiness, he is not for promoting civil rights for African Americans. As he states in the Lincoln-Douglas debate, Lincoln is “not in favor of negro citizenship” and he stands by the law that “forbids the marrying of white people with negroes.” The bulk of his opinion regarding race can be summed up by his speech at Charleston, Illinois where he stated that “there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.” It is clear that Lincoln does not believe that the black and white races are, can, or ever should be, equal. It is this sentiment that distinguishes Lincoln from radical abolitionists.

It is apparent then that Lincoln’s view of slavery was influenced by his inferior view of the black race. He initially did not promote the outright end of slavery because he believed that free blacks and whites could not exist on equal footing due to innate “physical” differences between the two. While pondering the question of what to do with the large enslaved population, Lincoln asks “ what next? free them, and make them politically and socially, our equals?,” replying, “my own feelings will not admit of this; and if mine would, we well know that those of the great mass of white people will not.” The fear of creating a black social class that could potentially gain equality with the white race was a fear that most whites, including Lincoln himself, were greatly disturbed by. Additionally, the issue of slavery, an issue inextricably tied with race, was tearing the county apart and causing untold hardship. In meeting with a group of black men, Lincoln outright admitted to the group that “our[s] [race] suffers greatly from your presence.” He even goes further to tell them that to reject the creation of a black state and to choose to live among whites would be “extremely selfish.” It was this segregationist sentiment that drove Lincoln, and many of his supporters, to look for a viable way to deal with slavery by creating a free black country outside of United States. In contrast, Lincoln holds that “emancipation, even without deportation, would probably enhance the wages of white labor, and, very surely, would not reduce them.” Whether he actually believes this, or made this statement for pure political effect, Lincoln does not believe that the infusion of millions of African American workers into the job market would have any negative economic impacts for whites. This positive economic view regarding race relations influenced Lincoln’s push to end slavery. In essence, having the institution of slavery presented the political-moral issue of denying human beings natural rights, rights which Lincoln believed that people of all races should have. It was this belief, coinciding with the belief that slavery further perpetuating the conflict between the north and the south, that drove Lincoln’s ideology regarding slavery. In contrast, Lincoln’s doubts about the capabilities of the black race  also brought up painful questions about coexistence and equality. Lincoln’s prejudice of African Americans and concerns about coexistence also worked to delay emancipation until Lincoln felt it was absolutely necessary for victory.