Chelstan's US History Blog

Post #11 Top 10 lists of the 1970s

When looking at the top 10 songs and top 10 movies in 1970, there is a general feel good theme to them. Songs such as, I want you back, by The Jackson 5, and the number one movie in 1970, Love Story, are basically movies and songs that can bring a smile to your face and maybe make you shed a happy tear or two. When comparing the songs to the movies in 1970 you have to look at their genre/type, the evident differences and similarities in the songs and films, and the disperate events that each of them portrayed or publicized.
The number one song in 1970 was B.J. Thomas, Raindrops Keep Fallin' on My Head, the corresponding number one film of 1970 was Love Story, starring Ali McGraw and Ryan O'Neal. When you look at the theme of the song and the movie they both have the basic theme of overcoming difficulty. In the song, B.J. Thomas expresses how the rain (hard times) keeps falling on his head, but he is still going to be ok and he is still making it. The tagline from the film Love Story was Love means never having to say you're sorry [1]. The movie is what the title says it is, it's a love story. It is a story about a couple who overcomes trouble with the help of love. You can really classify mostly all of the songs as feel good songs. Songs like Let it be, by the Beatles, ABC, by the Jackson 5, and Every thing is Beautiful, by Ray Stevens, all give share an overall happy theme. The actual list of top 10 songs is as follows: Raindrops keep fallin' on my head - B. J. Thomas (Scepter), I'll be there - Jackson 5 (Motown), Bridge over troubled water - Simon & Garfunkel (Columbia), I think I love you - Partridge Family (Bell), (They Long To Be) Close to you - Carpenters (A & M), I want you back - Jackson 5 (Motown), The tears of a clown - Smokey Robinson & The Miracles (Tamla), We've only just begun - Carpenters (A & M), Let it be - Beatles (Apple), and War - Edwin Starr (Gordy). [5] For the most part this is also true with the movies. Looking at the total U.S. gross the films brought in, the
top 10 movies of 1970 starting with the number one were: Love Story, Airport, MASH, Patton, The Aristocats, Woodstock, Little Big Man, Ryan's Daughter, Tora Tora Tora, and at number 10- Catch 22 [2].
For the most part the themes of the top 10 songs and movies in 1970 are very similar. When you watch these movies or listen to the songs, you don't go away with a sad, depressed, violent, or angry mood. These movies and songs were made not to upset people but to give them a feeling of everything is going to be good. Even the movie Woodstock had a tagline that read �3 days of peace, music...and love [3]. Catch 22 is a comedy/war movie that makes you laugh but also provides a serious anti-war message that was to go along with the time period, with Vietnam going on and all.
You can really account for the themes of the songs and movies being as they were because of what was going on at that time. A lot of protesting and anti-war groups were pushing towards peace and love. That's why there is peace and love innuendos present in the songs and films in 1970. One major event that happened in 1970 that could have caused the peace and love theme to be more evident in the songs and films was the Kent State Incident [4]. In 1970 the National Guard open fired on a group of anti-war protesters at Kent State University in Ohio. Four students were killed and 8 students were injured. When President Nixon described the incident by saying, when dissent turns to violence, it invites tragedy [4]. The students had actually started the incident when they began to throw rocks and empty tear gas containers at the guardsmen, but that in no way excuses what happened after that.
After the Kent State incident, America's films and songs really focused on a safer, more peaceful society. With the issues at hand involving U.S. presence in other countries, it was hard to achieve the peaceful and loving society that some pictured in their minds. And even today the peaceful society that most want is very difficult to have. But thanks to some of the artist and filmmakers of 70's, it gave people hope that maybe one day they could experience the happiness that the songs and films depicted.

[1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066011/

[2] http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/index1970.html

[3] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066580/

[4] http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/vietnam/timeline/tl3.html#b

[5] http://www.goldenoldies-records.com/topsongs1970s.htm

#9: Comments AGAIN ?!?

This time around I commented:

James Kim  Post #7: Photo Essay

Vernon Eppard Post #8: Group Blog

Tri Tran   Post #7: Photo Essay

#8: "We the Jury, The State v. Rehberg"

The State vs. Rehberg case of 1885 was a very controversial one. The decision reached in the nineteenth century was not solely based on evidence. Many other factors such as social class, cultural beliefs about childhood, pre-conceived ideas about men and women, as well as religious beliefs also played a major role in the decision. While a nineteenth century jury may have declared Edward Rehberg guilty of murder, a twentieth century jury may believe that he was innocent based on many pieces of evidence found in the State vs. Rehberg.

Many factors went into play when deciding a nineteenth century verdict. In the nineteenth century, many things were based on social class and wealth. In the State vs. Rehberg case, the Rehberg family was a lower class family. Nineteenth century men were thought of to be the aggressors and disciplinarians of the family. In lower class families, men were "looked down upon" because they had a low social status. Lower class men also made their daughter’s work and the daughters often wore overalls which would never happen in wealthy families. The women of the nineteenth century were often seen as the caregivers. They took care of the family and were often viewed as passive. They were said to be physically weaker than men but had good moral judgment. In nineteenth century trials, a man’s word was often more important than a woman’s.

Nineteenth century juries also took other factors into consideration. Since the nation was a primarily Christian nation at the time, they accepted deathbed statements because almost everyone believed in an afterlife. "She whipped me (my step-mother) with a stick of wood and with a stove lifter, and then went to the corral and got a strap, and whipped me with that on the face and legs and all over." [1] In this quote from her deathbed statement, Clara confessed that is was actually her stepmother who abused her and caused her injuries which led to her death. This factor could have helped Edward Rehberg but didn’t. Clara Rehberg was quizzed to test her values to see if she would make a good witness but she had many factors against her. "When we dressed her wounds and would hurt her a little she would swear at us." [2] This statement given by Dr. Steele shows that Clara swore which was viewed as morally wrong. Clara also came from a lower class family which was a second strike against her. When Clara gave her deathbed statement, she was in a lot of pain and "she could not see so well." [3] She also had "a strong fever." [4] This fever could have made her delusional and makes the jury believe she could not think straight. These factors would lead one to believe that the jury threw away her deathbed statement. Due to these factors, it would be safe to assume that the jury comes in with pre-conceived ideas about the trial and the people involved. Since Edward Rehberg was a low class male and since Clara’s statement was thrown probably thrown out, they most likely found Edward guilty.

Twentieth century juries would have looked at the case differently. They would have probably found Edward Rehberg innocent. There is a lot of evidence saying that he was innocent. Social status still played a role in twentieth century trials. People also came in with pre-conceived ideas even though they were supposed to be neutral. One of the main differences was that twentieth century juries took more evidence into consideration. Clara’s statement would have been examined more closely. She had no reason to lie about who abused her. Throughout the case one can also find many statements saying that Edward and Clara didn’t have much contact with each other during the day of the abuse. One of these statements includes one made by Bertha Rehberg. "I would have known it if my father had beaten the child Sunday forenoon. Father and the hired man left the house to go to work right after dinner about one o’clock that afternoon. Clara was in the kitchen." [5] This statement would have been accepted in the twentieth century whereas in the nineteenth century it wouldn’t have been as important because a woman said it. Another statement which is of importance was that of Joe Tiebow. "He did not leave me at all…" [6] Tiebow’s statement is important because he was not in the family so he had no reason to lie. He states that Edward was with him all day so there is no way he could have abused Clara.

Nineteenth and twentieth century juries would have declared different verdicts. The nineteenth century jury would have probably said guilty while the twentieth century jury would have probably said not guilty. This case was very controversial and different because children don’t often come up in history. Much of the evidence in the State vs. Rehberg can be interpreted differently, which makes the case even more difficult to solve.

http://www.archiva.net/hist150ay01/hist150rehberg1.html - homepage

http://www.courts.state.va.us/courts/courts.html - about different types of court cases in VA, including juvenile cases

[1] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 32.

[2] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 31.

[3] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 31.

[4] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 22.

[5] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 21.

[6] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 27.

The State vs. Rehberg case of 1885 was a very controversial one. The decision reached in the nineteenth century was not solely based on evidence. Many other factors such as social class, cultural beliefs about childhood, pre-conceived ideas about men and women, as well as religious beliefs also played a major role in the decision. While a nineteenth century jury may have declared Edward Rehberg guilty of murder, a twentieth century jury may believe that he was innocent based on many pieces of evidence found in the State vs. Rehberg.

Many factors went into play when deciding a nineteenth century verdict. In the nineteenth century, many things were based on social class and wealth. In the State vs. Rehberg case, the Rehberg family was a lower class family. Nineteenth century men were thought of to be the aggressors and disciplinarians of the family. In lower class families, men were "looked down upon" because they had a low social status. Lower class men also made their daughter’s work and the daughters often wore overalls which would never happen in wealthy families. The women of the nineteenth century were often seen as the caregivers. They took care of the family and were often viewed as passive. They were said to be physically weaker than men but had good moral judgment. In nineteenth century trials, a man’s word was often more important than a woman’s.

Nineteenth century juries also took other factors into consideration. Since the nation was a primarily Christian nation at the time, they accepted deathbed statements because almost everyone believed in an afterlife. "She whipped me (my step-mother) with a stick of wood and with a stove lifter, and then went to the corral and got a strap, and whipped me with that on the face and legs and all over." [1] In this quote from her deathbed statement, Clara confessed that is was actually her stepmother who abused her and caused her injuries which led to her death. This factor could have helped Edward Rehberg but didn’t. Clara Rehberg was quizzed to test her values to see if she would make a good witness but she had many factors against her. "When we dressed her wounds and would hurt her a little she would swear at us." [2] This statement given by Dr. Steele shows that Clara swore which was viewed as morally wrong. Clara also came from a lower class family which was a second strike against her. When Clara gave her deathbed statement, she was in a lot of pain and "she could not see so well." [3] She also had "a strong fever." [4] This fever could have made her delusional and makes the jury believe she could not think straight. These factors would lead one to believe that the jury threw away her deathbed statement. Due to these factors, it would be safe to assume that the jury comes in with pre-conceived ideas about the trial and the people involved. Since Edward Rehberg was a low class male and since Clara’s statement was thrown probably thrown out, they most likely found Edward guilty.

Twentieth century juries would have looked at the case differently. They would have probably found Edward Rehberg innocent. There is a lot of evidence saying that he was innocent. Social status still played a role in twentieth century trials. People also came in with pre-conceived ideas even though they were supposed to be neutral. One of the main differences was that twentieth century juries took more evidence into consideration. Clara’s statement would have been examined more closely. She had no reason to lie about who abused her. Throughout the case one can also find many statements saying that Edward and Clara didn’t have much contact with each other during the day of the abuse. One of these statements includes one made by Bertha Rehberg. "I would have known it if my father had beaten the child Sunday forenoon. Father and the hired man left the house to go to work right after dinner about one o’clock that afternoon. Clara was in the kitchen." [5] This statement would have been accepted in the twentieth century whereas in the nineteenth century it wouldn’t have been as important because a woman said it. Another statement which is of importance was that of Joe Tiebow. "He did not leave me at all…" [6] Tiebow’s statement is important because he was not in the family so he had no reason to lie. He states that Edward was with him all day so there is no way he could have abused Clara.

Nineteenth and twentieth century juries would have declared different verdicts. The nineteenth century jury would have probably said guilty while the twentieth century jury would have probably said not guilty. This case was very controversial and different because children don’t often come up in history. Much of the evidence in the State vs. Rehberg can be interpreted differently, which makes the case even more difficult to solve.

http://www.archiva.net/hist150ay01/hist150rehberg1.html - homepage

http://www.courts.state.va.us/courts/courts.html - about different types of court cases in VA, including juvenile cases

[1] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 32.

[2] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 31.

[3] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 31.

[4] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 22.

[5] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 21.

[6] State vs. Rehberg, Reader, 27.

Cheers to General John Bell Hood.

Photo Essay - The Escapades of Lt. Gen. John Bell Hood

On this post I was worked with Mark Sythammavong, from Group 4.

Comments Round 2

I commented on:

 Tri Tran , group post 5

Bounthaya Sythammavong , individual post 4

James Kim , individual post 4

Post #5: SimUtopia

    From the early 19th century, there was a multitude of new ideologies that arose in terms of the way that society should be run. One among many was the thought of Utopia or a perfect civilization. “One radical way of reforming the world was by withdrawing from it, to form a utopian community that would demonstrate the possibilities of perfection.” (1) The thought behind this type of living was that rather than being uber-competitive like the rest of the thriving Americans, the small gated community would be able to self-preserve and not have to deal with too much drama and incident. “Such communities looked to replace the competitive individualism of American society with a purer spiritual unity and group cooperation.” (1) It is evident that the following was moderately successful by looking at the small population of Azeroth, which achieved this by having a logical geographical structure, strong economical organization, and most importantly analogous beliefs.
    The small town of Azeroth was another in the long list of Shaker movements. It is well known that the main staple of the Shaker diet was Church. Therefore it only makes sense that a large church is the centerpiece in the community of Azeroth. While the community itself wasn’t large, there was a very high population density. Their homes were built very close in proximity and all right around the central church. All of the homes were built identically because there was no difference in class in the town of Azeroth, everyone was created and seen as equals. There is no class system, no difference in wealth, no theory that men were greater than women, and most definitely there was no slavery. Off to the North and Northeast were the local shops and farm lands respectively. The town was built near a river for easy access to water and water related trade but only if that was absolutely necessary, because for the most part they were a closed gate community. To the West of the Great Church are the two school buildings. The cemetery is located to the far North, bordered by the thick forest.
    In terms of the economy of Azeroth, they are self serving. There is practically zero trade because everything that the town needs is made within its own vicinity. The farms are able to grow enough produce to sustain the civilization, along with ample numbers of tradesmen to supply the community with anything they need. The children of Azeroth are all schooled right to the left of the Great Church. And once they reach the age of 15 they begin to go to learn at some of the shops so that they may eventually become skilled craftsmen or women.
    However the most important issue is most likely that all of the community has bought into the same beliefs. The simple town of Azeroth was just like the other Shaker developments, even with some of their odd faiths. “Convinced that the end of the world was at hand and that there was no need to perpetuate the human race, Shakers practiced celibacy, separating the sexes as far as practical. Men and women normally worked apart, ate at separate tables, and had separate living quarters.” (1) That accounted for separating the men and women on everyday daily activities; it also explained the separation of daily duties. “Community tasks were generally assigned along gender lines, with women performing household chores and men laboring in the fields.” (1) It is due to this that the communities of Shakers were successful because everyone knew what they were supposed to be doing; however the population did slowly decline. One of the most important and prominent issues was that in terms of decision making and important roles, men and women were looked at equally. “Leadership of the church, however, was split equally between men and women.” (1) The town of Azeroth can be looked at as a very prosperous civilization. And it may be due to this simple quote on the lifestyle of most Shaker populations. “The sect’s members worked hard, lived simply, and impressed outsiders with their cleanliness and order.” (1)

(1) Davidson, Gienapp, Heyrman, Lytle, & Stoff. (2006). Nation of Nations. Boston: McGraw-Hill. pg. 324-326.

For additional information in regards to the Shakers and their way of life we have provided the following links:

Hancock Shaker Village

Shakers

Group Report-

In this week’s group assignment, Chelstan was the draft writer and image researcher. Morgan was the text editor and proofreader. Neal (me) was the link researcher and group reporter. Morgan, Neal, and Chelstan took care of researching in the textbook. Julie was sick this week but she contributed her thoughts via email and telephone. Jeremi helped in the text researching. We all keep in contact via email and over the phone so that we all were on top of the assignment. Also Neal, Morgan, and Chelstan met after class on Wednesday the 12th and discussed the blog.

Post #4: A big ouchie for the natives!

The mid 1800's  was a time in which America would start its great migration into converting the Native Ameicans into a natural resource. In one of George Catlins’ paintings, Pigeons Egg Head, inspired by the invasion of the Native Americans by white America, it is plain to see that Catlin thought that the Native Americans in some cases were so captivated by the white Americans and their way of life, and that the Americans turned around and trashed upon the once strong and proud culture of the Native Americans.

It is evident in the painting that the Native American has come back from a different civilization much changed from what he once was.  The left showing the classic Native American clothing while the right is in the Americanized military uniform.  His clothing is very intricate with beads and beautiful patterns made out of animal skin and fur.  Overall his style of dress shows how traditional his Indian culture is.  This is in contrast to the gentelman on the right who now wears a formal military costume with shoulder boardsand a top hat for a headress.  These transformations show the Native Americans' loss of identity because of the Jacksonians' orders for the Indians to move out of their territory.  They can't help but show their new traits and that things are much more different now.

This comparison in the painting shows that Catlin viewed the Native Americans as being easily influenced by the white Americans. This is first shown by the fact that the Native American is walking toward the US Capitol, recognized as the nation capitol, the use of this building helps the viewer take in that the US government was responsible for all these drastic changes. The amount of improper attire worn by the out of place Native American, which include the fan and umbrella that he carried was generally carried by women of the elite class and the fact that his boots had a heel on them. This illustrates that Catlin believes that the Native Americans became confused, they conformed to the white American ways but didn’t know exactly how to act as the white Americans acted. Catlin summed it up by showing the feathery top hat which still symbolized a somewhat resemblance to the top feather that the Native American once wore so proudly.

Post #3: Comments

I commented on:

  Tri Tran , Group Post #2

Mark Sythammavong  , Individual Post #1

Brittany Patonetz , Individual Post #1

Post #2: British View of the Patriots Activism

      The British's overall view towards the increasing activism in Americans was anything but accepting. The British did not take the new found activism seriously whatsoever. "An ironic fate overtook that generation of Americans who loved being English, boasted of their rights as Britons, and celebrated their membership in the all-conquering empire. That very pride drove colonials into rebellion, for the men who ran the British empire after 1763 would not allow Americans to be English." This quote from Nation of Nations (p.122), shows how the Americans activism is seen in the picture "Society of Patriotic Women at Edenton, North Carolina (1774)." In this picture you can see how the British view the patriotic women as responsible, loose, and not really serious or in charge, the picture is a good example of the British's displeasure with the activism of the patriots.
       The basic idea of the picture is showing the women of Edenton meeting in response to the "Coercive Acts", called by the patriots, the "Intolerable Acts." The women are meeting to discuss the refusal to buy British products, especially tea. The picture, which is done by the British is basically mocking the attempts of the women to be "involved." The British don't take the activism seriously at all and they want to portray the patriots as having a similar non-serious attitude toward their overall goal to be liberated. You can see that they view the women as irresponsible if you look at certain places in the picture. Underneath the table is a small child, left unattended to, eating scraps off the floor and having its face licked by a dog who is at the same time urinating on the floor. The women also seem unfocused, several women are off on different sides of the picture talking in small groups or talking to a man. The women are also viewed as being loose and only being allowed to have this much involvement because of their "loose" nature. In the middle of the picture you can see a woman being groped by a man. The British view teh women's activism a joke, and that the men of the colonies are letting the women "think" that they are contributing but in all actuality they are not doing anything of any importance.
       Another thing seen in the picture is the apparrent change in the role of the women. Instead of having the women being at home doing what were know as "womanly duties" back then, they were trying to take an active role in politics because of the struggle with the British's policies. But obviously the British are mocking the women's newfound determination.
       The basic attitude of the picture and the British is a mocking attitude. The men view the women as irresponsible and loose and the view of the men is as if the women are now politically in charge over the men. For the most part the picture is biased in that if was drawn by the British to show that they do not have to worry about the coloines and the patriots making any advances in society and will stay controlled by the British government and policies.

For additional information you can visit the following links:

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/awhhtml/aw05e/d12.html (Society of Patriotic Women at Edenton, North Carolina 1774)

http://www.picturehistory.com/find/c/295/p/15/mcms.html (more images from the time period)

http://www.gpschools.org/ci/ce/elem/fifth/ss5/research/op.htm (tarr and feather, join or die images)

Group Report:

    In class last week Wednesday, we assigned roles for the group blog report. Morgan Hall and Neal Wobbe worked together to formulate the post as the first draft writer and editer/proofreader respectively. Julie Montgomery did the textbook research, while Jerami Rinaldi worked with the link and image researching. Chelstan Char did the group reporting. The group met the night of Tuesday the 20th at 8:00pm at the Information Desk in the Johnson Center. Our main goal was to get everything together and organized and to make sure that the blog was up to everyone's standard. For the first group assignment, everything ran very smoothly and the group feels confident in being able to operate well together on the rest of our posts.

Post #1: Native American Creation Stories and What They Mean to Us

A black and white definition of history is that history is measured by the presence or absence of change over a period of time. A simple investigation into the three creation stories of The Indians of New Netherlands Account for Creation, The Origins of Ottawa Society Recalled by Nicholas Perrot¸ and Remaking the World: A Sioux Story, show considerable change that is directly correlated to the location of the tribes as well as the significant amount of influence put upon them by the Europeans that were in the process of colonizing them. From 1650 to 1910 an obvious impact can be seen in the beliefs of the Indians of New Netherlands, the Ottawa Society, and the Sioux due to the religious and philosophical pressures placed upon them by the impending Europeans.

All three of the stories had many similarities, including the use of animals, natural states, and an overall more powerful higher being that is noted as most responsible for the actual creation of the earth. The first story attributes the actual creation to a "… before mentioned beautiful woman or goddess gradually descended from heaven, even into the water, gross or corpulent like a woman who apparently would bring forth more than one child…" (reader page 3), while the second story lays the power in the hands of "the Great Hare" who raised man from the corpses of the once fruitful animals who are strewn all across "… the places which each kind found most suitable for obtaining therein their pasture…" (reader page 4). The third story has the "Creating Power" as the overall most powerful being in comparison to the Great Hare and the goddess from the first story. A primary difference that shows the European influence is that in the first two stories the greater being is a woman and in the third story the Creating Power is a male which illustrates the belief that men being greater than women.

In the first and the third stories the indigenous people believed that the world started off predominately as water or the planet was flooded by the higher power. The second story however states that the world was a solid mass of land which similarly goes along with the European trend of dominating the land. However the most evidence comes from the change in religious input within all the stories. In the first story one of the natives was quoted as saying "the world was not created as described in the first and second chapters of the book of Genesis…" alluding to the point that the indigenous people had no interactions or connections with the bible or Christianity. However by the time one gets to the third story, there are noticeable allusions to biblical stories, such as the days and nights of rain which would end in a rainbow just like the story of Noah’s Ark. When all the facts are added up, it is evident that without the heavy European influence, these various stories would be much more nature involved and more spiritual rather than full of stereotypical standards.