Exploring Lewis and Clark : Reflections on Men and Wilderness (Lewis & Clark Expedition)

Rating:
Summary: A Niche Product
Review: "Exploring Lewis and Clark" makes some interesting points about Lewis & Clark, somewhat in the spirit of being the devil's advocate.

Slaughter is clearly trying to draw a contrast between the worshipful view of L&C popularized by Stephen Ambrose and Ken Burns and what Slaughter views as the reality. Slaughter notes, for instance, that L&C hunted excessively, repeatedly stole from Indians, and generally exaggerated their historical importance. Slaughter also has a very interesting discussion of the life of Sacajawea and the possibility she lived longer than is conventionally acknowledged.

All this said, this is very much a niche product. One has to know a great deal about the L&C journey prior to reading this book. I would also suggest that it's a relatively thin book. I think Slaughter's interesting points probably could have been presented in 30 or 40 pages, but he has puffed it up to somewhat get to a book length.

Rating:
Summary: How many trees were killed for this book?
Review: Anyone expecting to learn about Lewis and Clark from Professor Slaughter's book will be sorely disappointed. This tome on the supposed "sins" committed by the leaders of the Corps of Discovery has more in common with a fictional account of the 28-month expedition than that which actually occurred. The following episode will serve to illustrate the level of distortion and disingenuous and unsupported interpretation of the original journals to which the author sinks.

In Chapter 1 titled, Dreams, Professor Slaughter describes a hiking side trip to a location called Spirit Hill, a site that the local Indians believe is the "residence of Deavels". The entries in the Clark's journal on August 24th and 25th, 1804 also describe this hike. According to Professor Slaughter "...there is also a certain whistling-in-the dark quality to the entries, suggesting that the journal writers boyishly tried to hide how spooked they could sometime be in a place feared only by "savages"...as Clark explained, the force of the prairie wind was enough to make the hill; there was no cause to jump to superstitious conclusions based on this thoroughly explicable outcropping. We might suspect Lewis's voice in the explanation. We should also suspect that the confidence came only in retrospect, after they left this eerie place." Then following a direct quotation of a portion of the actual Journal on August 25th, we find the following from Professor Slaughter, "As they climbed, Lewis's dog "gave out" and returned to camp. A small detail, but worth reporting for some reason. Perhaps it was an omen; animals often sense trouble before humans can see it. In the context of Clarks's feelings during the ascent this detail took on meaning that it otherwise would have lacked."

What is described in the journals is a far cry from the description and interpretation of the author. The August 24th Journal entry is a totally factual, no non-sense description of the Indians feelings about the "mound" on the prairie. There is no sense of foreboding, no sense of the superstition on the explorers part, just a straightforward enumeration of the fact that the local tribes, "Maha, Soues, Ottoes and other neighboring nations believe this fable, that no consideration is Sufficient to induce them to approach the hill." (The last quote from the Journal.) More than likely the entry in the journal was made after the return to the river since the journey was over night but on the other hand there is no evidence that it wasn't made in "real time". There is absolutely no reading of the journal, not a solitary word that can support the use of the word "eerie" or that they were "whistling-in-the dark", a concern that the superstitions held by the Indians would turn out to be real demons and devils.

The description of why Lewis's dog "gave out" on the hike to Spirit Hill is totally absent and his ruminations on the reasons would appear to be completely fabricated. Clarks's August 25th entry in its entirety regarding Lewis's dog reads, "...at 4 miles we Crossed the Creek 23 yard wide in an extensive Valley and Continued on at two miles further our dog was so Heeted and fatigued we was obliged (to) Send him back to the Creek, at 12 o'Clock we arrived at the Hill Capt. Lewis much fatigued from heat the day it being verry hot & he being in a debilitated State...Several of the men complaining of Great thirst, determined us to make for the first water...". No special omen, no special animal intuition that trouble was just over the next hill or around the next bend. Clearly it was a very hot day and all, humans and animals, were suffering. The dog, a large Newfoundland named Seman, had the good fortune to be sent back while the humans struggled forward to accomplish their mission.

Near the end of the book, the author disparages their map making and navigation despite the fact that modern geographers denote that after a journey of 4140 miles, Clark's estimates using dead reckoning and the navigation tools of the day had errors that totaled to less than 40 miles. They had in fact filled in the great gap in the pre 1806 maps of North America. And finally in his summary, Slaughter argues that Lewis failed Jefferson, his country, and himself. One only has to read Jefferson's instructions to Lewis and then to render this argument utterly false and nothing the author presents in 231 pages supports his conclusion.

One could go on for 231 pages pointing out the silly errors and 21st Century judgments on 18th Century explorers but it would ruin a good day. Some books on the Lewis & Clark journey have amounted to some level of heroic cheerleading but this book goes off the cliff in the opposite direction. It adds nothing to the history of the era, the men, and several women, involved in the enterprise. If you feel compelled to purchase and read this book, do yourself a favor, first read Undaunted Courage by Stephen Ambrose. Then obtain a copy of the Journals of the Corps of Discovery so you can "deconstruct" the ramblings of Professor Slaughter. If you are a Lewis & Clark scholar, go to the library and pursue this book before you buy. Most likely you will reach the conclusion that investing in some other volume will be a better and more fulfilling course of action.

Rating:
Summary: A Fictitious Lewis & Clark
Review: Anyone expecting to learn about Lewis and Clark from Professor Slaughter's book will be sorely disappointed. This tome on the supposed "sins" committed by the leaders of the Corps of Discovery has more in common with a fictional account of the 28-month expedition than that which actually occurred. The following episode will serve to illustrate the level of distortion and disingenuous and unsupported interpretation of the original journals to which the author sinks.

In Chapter 1 titled, Dreams, Professor Slaughter describes a hiking side trip to a location called Spirit Hill, a site that the local Indians believe is the "residence of Deavels". The entries in the Clark's journal on August 24th and 25th, 1804 also describe this hike. According to Professor Slaughter "...there is also a certain whistling-in-the dark quality to the entries, suggesting that the journal writers boyishly tried to hide how spooked they could sometime be in a place feared only by "savages"...as Clark explained, the force of the prairie wind was enough to make the hill; there was no cause to jump to superstitious conclusions based on this thoroughly explicable outcropping. We might suspect Lewis's voice in the explanation. We should also suspect that the confidence came only in retrospect, after they left this eerie place." Then following a direct quotation of a portion of the actual Journal on August 25th, we find the following from Professor Slaughter, "As they climbed, Lewis's dog "gave out" and returned to camp. A small detail, but worth reporting for some reason. Perhaps it was an omen; animals often sense trouble before humans can see it. In the context of Clarks's feelings during the ascent this detail took on meaning that it otherwise would have lacked."

What is described in the journals is a far cry from the description and interpretation of the author. The August 24th Journal entry is a totally factual, no non-sense description of the Indians feelings about the "mound" on the prairie. There is no sense of foreboding, no sense of the superstition on the explorers part, just a straightforward enumeration of the fact that the local tribes, "Maha, Soues, Ottoes and other neighboring nations believe this fable, that no consideration is Sufficient to induce them to approach the hill." (The last quote from the Journal.) More than likely the entry in the journal was made after the return to the river since the journey was over night but on the other hand there is no evidence that it wasn't made in "real time". There is absolutely no reading of the journal, not a solitary word that can support the use of the word "eerie" or that they were "whistling-in-the dark", a concern that the superstitions held by the Indians would turn out to be real demons and devils.

The description of why Lewis's dog "gave out" on the hike to Spirit Hill is totally absent and his ruminations on the reasons would appear to be completely fabricated. Clarks's August 25th entry in its entirety regarding Lewis's dog reads, "...at 4 miles we Crossed the Creek 23 yard wide in an extensive Valley and Continued on at two miles further our dog was so Heeted and fatigued we was obliged (to) Send him back to the Creek, at 12 o'Clock we arrived at the Hill Capt. Lewis much fatigued from heat the day it being verry hot & he being in a debilitated State...Several of the men complaining of Great thirst, determined us to make for the first water...". No special omen, no special animal intuition that trouble was just over the next hill or around the next bend. Clearly it was a very hot day and all, humans and animals, were suffering. The dog, a large Newfoundland named Seman, had the good fortune to be sent back while the humans struggled forward to accomplish their mission.

Near the end of the book, the author disparages their map making and navigation despite the fact that modern geographers denote that after a journey of 4140 miles, Clark's estimates using dead reckoning and the navigation tools of the day had errors that totaled to less than 40 miles. They had in fact filled in the great gap in the pre 1806 maps of North America. And finally in his summary, Slaughter argues that Lewis failed Jefferson, his country, and himself. One only has to read Jefferson's instructions to Lewis and then to render this argument utterly false and nothing the author presents in 231 pages supports his conclusion.

One could go on for 231 pages pointing out the silly errors and 21st Century judgments on 18th Century explorers but it would ruin a good day. Some books on the Lewis & Clark journey have amounted to some level of heroic cheerleading but this book goes off the cliff in the opposite direction. It adds nothing to the history of the era, the men, and several women, involved in the enterprise. If you feel compelled to purchase and read this book, do yourself a favor, first read Undaunted Courage by Stephen Ambrose. Then obtain a copy of the Journals of the Corps of Discovery so you can "deconstruct" the ramblings of Professor Slaughter. If you are a Lewis & Clark scholar, go to the library and pursue this book before you buy. Most likely you will reach the conclusion that investing in some other volume will be a better and more fulfilling course of action.

Rating:
Summary: Read after Journals and Ambrose
Review: Exploring Lewis and Clark constitues Corps of Discovery #202. First complete course#101 by reading Undaunted Courage by Stephen Ambrose or the Lewis and Clark Journals and then you are ready to delve into the incisive and provocative critique of the Corps of Discovery by this author. As a Native American and the author of Yazoo Mingo - The Journeys of Moncacht-Ap? Across North America 1687-1700, I appreciated slaughter's informative and thoughtful chapter on Porvio, also known as Sacagawea. The(rest of the) story regarding York was also of great interest.

Whether or not you agree with all of the author's conclusions this book will increase your knowledge and understanding of the Courageous Captains and their Corps of Discovery.

Rating:
Summary: PC on the Missouri
Review: I can hardly think of a book that has been more disappointing than this one. Expecting to read a scholarly analysis of the Lewis and Clark expedition, I read instead a nit-picking critique of words used in the explorers' journals. One chapter entitled "Hunting" barely recognized that these men had to shoot animals to live in its fevered attack on the fact that the explorers and their men actually shot animals. The reek of political correctness overwhelms this book. Certainly Lewis and Clark were human and not saints as they traversed the continent, but the conclusion one would draw from Slaughter's book is that Lewis and Clark (and Columbus and James Cook along the way) never did anything right. A sadly deficient work.

Rating:
Summary: How many trees were killed for this book?
Review: This book is just bizzare. I hesitate to label it a revisionist history, because this book is far more radical than that. The book is a series of essays where Slaughter's re-interprets events to a point where they have no basis in historical fact or in scholarship and takes cheaps shots at those who disagree with him. For example, in Chapter 5, Slaughter discusses the fate of Sacagawea, specifically whether she died in 1812 or lived until 1884. Slaughter believes that she lived until 1884, while most scholars believe that she died in 1812. God forbid if you are a historian that doesn't agree with Slaughter, because he appears to be incapable of making a reasoned academic argument and frequently resorts to invective and name calling. He refers to historians as "reliable" white men (his quotes, not mine)and implies that "cultural cleaning" was responsible for the creation of the 1812 death story. He takes several cheap shots at Gary Moulton (a well-respected Lewis and Clasrk historian), accusing him of making "a bold mistatment of fact" and attempting "to shut down the debate" on the subject. What exactly did Moulton do to receive this abuse? He wrote an essay expressing his opinion on the issue. I am not kidding! By the way, since Moulton spent the last 20 years of his life editing the definitive edition of the complete Lewis and Clark journals, I think he deserves to be treated better than this. I could go on and on, but why bother. I spent $24 for this nonsense. I would have been just as well off flushing my money down the drain.

Rating:
Summary: Read after Journals and Ambrose
Review: This may be a good book to read after you've read the Journals and Ambrose's book Undaunted Courage.

The title Exploring Lewis and Clark: Reflections on Men and Wilderness is apt. This books reads more like eight long essay with footnotes.

Slaughter compares Lewis and Clark values and views with that of the Indians they encountered. He considers the difference between dream states (natives) and rational scientific explanations (L&C) for the phenomena they experienced.

One chapter looks at the role of Sacajawea and deeply explores the two versions of her death. Another chapter looks at York and his role in the expedition and what happened between York and Clark afterwards.

This book is essentially an interpretation of the journals, as 90 % of his citations are from the journals themselves.

The tone is often sarcastic and critical and even tries to be cute. I found myself challenging and disagreeing with many of Slaughter's assertions.

The chapter on hunting was fascinating. It describes the Native view of hunting versus Lewis and Clark's view of killing.

Here and there I found things to think about in this book and different ways of looking at episodes of the expedition already much documented. If you are a fan of the expedition, you should find some provocative ideas here, and it is worth wading through the mire to reach them.

Rating:
Summary: Required Reading
Review: To me, this book ranks near the top of the list with Abert Furtwangler's "Acts of Discovery" (ISBN 0252063066) and Lavender's "The Way To The Western Sea" (ISBN 0803280033), though more iconoclastic than either of those. (And to be clear, my list is of books on Lewis and Clark that are worth reading.)

Slaughter's book, particularly, can give one a much needed perspective on the expedition. All too often, historical events like this are treated with a overabundance of hero-worship and, even worse, sentimentality. It's not that we don't need heros, but that we should remember that they are also human.

"Exploring.." deals with several touchy issues: slavery; indian relationships; hunting in the form of indiscrimimant killing, etc. Many, if not most, treatments of Lewis and Clark (Lewisandclark, Lewis N. Clark, etc) either gloss over or dismiss these. Such events as the vote on where to place Fort Clatsop are given a more realistic lighting in Slaughter book.

Writing on these kind of topics can often, these days, take on a rather annoying smell of the PC, but "Exploring.." never has that odor. It may harm a few of your more cherished and warmly held myths about the Corps of Discovery, but this is history about real people. The event deserves more than a comic book or movie version simplistic approach, an antidote well supplied by "Exploring..".

I suspect that some who read this book may find it too harsh on the exedition members. I hope not. We can still be impressed with their ability to survive and complete their mission, one that few of us today would be tough enough to handle. But we can also acquire a feeling that in a lot of respects, they were no better than most of us.

I don't know if that's good or bad, but it's at least real.