INTRO- Often the darkest times in history provide an aura of excitement not soon forgotten. Studs Terkel’s The “Good War” shocks its audience with the grotesque reality of World War II battles as well as the exhilaration of being in the midst of SOME TYPE OF WORD FOR WAR. Oppositely Michael T. Bertrand’s Race, Rock, and Elvis looks into the arguments of Rock’n’Rolls impact on changing postwar race relations in the United States. KICKASS THESIS. One of the more subtle comparisons between Terkel’s and Bertrand’s books is who actually perpetrated the racism in both situations. One of the reoccuring themes of Terkel’s book was the fact that minorities were discriminated againt, but individuals realized they were human too. On more than one occasion
…show more content…
Often referred to the “Second Reconstruction” (Bertrand 93) It was not an immediate correction of social and racial prejudice, but progression in the right direction due to the regions outdated structure. “ As the the South’s traditional economic base shifted from agriculture to industry and its natives migrated from rural to urban settings, the region’s long- established social structure began to crumble” (Bertrand 94) After the beginning of the South’s social collapse, the Government was able to turn its focus to issues on the home front after dealing with uncertain foreign relations the previous decade. During this time, popular culture pushed the boundaries with its new genre of rock and roll. However, some “Cultural Guardians” (Bertrand 127) it chose to disagree citing that it was a mere coincidence of the times or argued that there is a distinct difference between kitsch and …show more content…
They were written about different subjects, in different times, for different reasons. Terkel looks to expose the raw emotions felt by soldiers on the front lines as opposed to Bertrand’s more tame, academic discussion of race relations in the United States in the 1950’s. FINISH SENTENCE. The “Good War” has a more personal touch because Terkel is oral interviewing survivors. However in Bertrand’s book, the subject matter is discussed from a more removed perspective. While both spread light on controversial times in history, Terkel’s interview with E.B Sledge sums up a common view on history “ In all my reading about the Civil War, I never read about how the troops felt and what it was like from day to day. We knew how the generals felt and what they ate” (Terkel 65) A true historical narrative such as Terkel’s may not all be factually correct, but is the Government’s STORY completely correct? Both tragedies and victories of mankind are indirectly caused by the acknowledgement and the discounting of emotions. Terkel’s way of illustrating the violence and aftermath of World War II shows a more raw side of history.Another point to be made about historical narratives is that a person’s background, personal opinions, and shapes their perspective of events and how they happened. Not to mention, reminiscing often differs greatly from the emotions felt in the moment. Because plainly
Often referred to the “Second Reconstruction” (Bertrand 93) It was not an immediate correction of social and racial prejudice, but progression in the right direction due to the regions outdated structure. “ As the the South’s traditional economic base shifted from agriculture to industry and its natives migrated from rural to urban settings, the region’s long- established social structure began to crumble” (Bertrand 94) After the beginning of the South’s social collapse, the Government was able to turn its focus to issues on the home front after dealing with uncertain foreign relations the previous decade. During this time, popular culture pushed the boundaries with its new genre of rock and roll. However, some “Cultural Guardians” (Bertrand 127) it chose to disagree citing that it was a mere coincidence of the times or argued that there is a distinct difference between kitsch and …show more content…
They were written about different subjects, in different times, for different reasons. Terkel looks to expose the raw emotions felt by soldiers on the front lines as opposed to Bertrand’s more tame, academic discussion of race relations in the United States in the 1950’s. FINISH SENTENCE. The “Good War” has a more personal touch because Terkel is oral interviewing survivors. However in Bertrand’s book, the subject matter is discussed from a more removed perspective. While both spread light on controversial times in history, Terkel’s interview with E.B Sledge sums up a common view on history “ In all my reading about the Civil War, I never read about how the troops felt and what it was like from day to day. We knew how the generals felt and what they ate” (Terkel 65) A true historical narrative such as Terkel’s may not all be factually correct, but is the Government’s STORY completely correct? Both tragedies and victories of mankind are indirectly caused by the acknowledgement and the discounting of emotions. Terkel’s way of illustrating the violence and aftermath of World War II shows a more raw side of history.Another point to be made about historical narratives is that a person’s background, personal opinions, and shapes their perspective of events and how they happened. Not to mention, reminiscing often differs greatly from the emotions felt in the moment. Because plainly