I think it’s safe to say that Chamberlin is not the average colonel. He is overly thoughtful and at times even poetic, the novel continuously bounces between Chamberlin the college professor and Chamberlin the soldier, giving him a unique and rich background. However, Shaara still uses Chamberlin as the main voice for the union. While this seems strange, I understand why the novel is set up this way. Ultimately, Shaara wants to show the differences between Chamberlin, Lee, and Longstreet, who each represent a different ranking and value system. Most importantly, I think it’s important to identify Chamberlin as a successful yet different colonel in the Civil War.
In class, we looked over the passage where Chamberlin starts to think about giving his own brother a doomed fate. At this moment, the novel switches from Chamberlin the colonel to Chamberlin the thinker. He begins to think about the war in terms of both sides, questioning the lives lost. He even starts to imagine how he would tell his own mother about his brother Tom. However, Chamberlin does not allow his thoughtfulness to get in the way of the task at hand, surviving, and he decides he will think about things later. In this short passage, the reader sees Chamberlin’s emotional depth and his thoughtfulness behind each of his actions. Through this, we can see that rather than take things lightly; he ponders every situation, revealing an inability to simply act out of impulse. Through this description, we would assume he would be a terrible soldier, however, he proves himself to be one of the best.
At the fight for Little Round Top, Chamberlin is commanded to take the farthest left point for the Union army. Because of this, he and his men were not allowed to retreat because doing so would result with the South taking over from behind the Union forces. Fending off the confederates for hours, Chamberlin realizes that his men are out of ammunition. In an act of desperation, he commands his men to charge down the hill with bayonets and swords to try to get the Confederates to flee. Leading by example and shouting at the top of his lungs, Chamberlin’s risk is rewarded, creating on of the most powerful moments in the battle. As a leader, this action tells a lot about Chamberlin. Had he not have thought about saving his own men without retreating, he would have never thought of a bayonet charge. It seems that, ultimately, his thoughtfulness saves the Union army during the fight for Little Round Top. Perhaps it is the thoughtful leaders that are the most successful. In the end, the thinkers are the ones who weigh out decisions, trying to find the best situation available. In Killer Angels, I think Shaara tries to show the differences between Lee and Chamberlin, showing a leader who simply acts and then showing one who over-thinks everything. Maybe it pays off to think about risk and reward even in times of something as impulsive and sudden as war.
8 comments:
Lee and Chamberlain are very different characters. Chamberlain does give thought to his men, while Lee acts on impulse and empirical beliefs. I think you're right--Chamberlain has the advantage because he gives thought to his tactics.It may be better under many circumstances for leaders to weigh the risks involved in a battle. Lee could certainly learn from Chamberlain as a leader. But, Lee could also learn from a thoughtful, tactful leader on his own side, Longstreet. His failure to recognize this leads to the downfall of the Confederate army.
I think that Longstreet would be the "middle" figure between these two commanders. Longstreet thinks things through to almost the same depth as Chamberlain in almost every aspect of the battle. Longstreet also has a little side of Lee in him where he knows that over thinking something can cause you to become less effective and freeze when you are most needed. I think Shaara is ultimately trying to show that Longstreet is the perfect combination of these two commanders mindsets.
I agree with you when you say Shaara clearly tries to show the differences between the thinker, Chamberlain, and the instinctual, Lee. Also, I think that Longstreet can be thrown into that equation as well, as an intermediary. His tactics, defensive in nature, are evidence of his thoughtfulness. However, unlike Chamberlain, he does not have the courage to do something decisive. He initially objects to Lee's plan but, as we discussed in class, doesn't press the issue. This can be credited to his respect of the chain-of-command, which shows that, although he is a thinker, not to the extent that Chamberlain is.
As a response to Will's comment I'd care to disagree. I think Chamberlin is the median between the way Longstreet and Lee think. Longstreet seems to overly defensive, and for good reason, while Lee is overly aggressive and keeps pushing when he should stop. Chamberlin seemed to care alot for his men and only pushed on when it seemed like his men would have the advantage.
Great post. I think you hit Chamberlain as a character head on. As you said his ability to play out every situation in his head and make the right decision make him so much different that Lee or Longstreet. But also his ability to make the right decisions in situations that call for a quick answer. The best example is when he must put his brother in the spot to hold the lines. Fortunately it worked out and his brother did not die. But since he was able to make a quick decision that worked it puts him on a different page than both Lee and Longstreet
I agree with the post. I think it is absolutely essential a general thinks everything through before committing to an action. On the same note, to say that Lee is entirely impulsive and fails to think things through, is unfair. He defied odds by leading the Confederates for as long as he did, he would never have been able to achieve the success he did without carefully planning each attack, when he didnt, the result was catastrophic
I agree that thinkers are good, but to be honest, i doubt chamerlain was thinking in the bayonet charge. he was probably just reacting to impending doom and decided to risk everything. and it worked. maybe the best soldiers are the ones who aren't afraid to act on a moment's notice, but can think too
I agree, you do want smart leaders when you are in battle. I also believe that Chamberlin got a bit luckey on this particular occasion.
Post a Comment