Clansman: An Historical Romance of the Ku Klux Klan (The Novel As American Social History)

Rating:
Summary: Every Southerner NEEDS to Read this Book
Review: I do not agree with Mr. Dixons glorification of Lincoln, thus I found the first several sections of the book difficult to stomach. However, once the book reached the Reconstruction of South I gave it my undivided attention. You'll find no P.C. revisionism here. Mr. Dixons novel reads more like fact than fiction, yet no one these days has the courage to tell the truth for fear of being called a racist. President Woodrow Wilson said of the book (and the film "Birth of a Nation") that it was "All Too True" and he should know as he lived in the South during Reconstruction. As an A.P. History teacher I only wish I could get away with having my students read this book.

Rating:
Summary: Hatred Masked as Literature
Review: This book's history is all too well known. It indeed was the inspiration for D.W. Griffith's "Birth of a Nation." Griffith's film was a masterpiece of cinematic brilliance, and at the same time, a disgusting excuse for the most virulent kind of racism. The latter can be said of Dixon's book. But the book does not have Griffith's artistic merits.

This book should be read as an historical artifact, to give the reader a sense how powerful people in the South thought when they turned Reconstruction on its ear. There were many things wrong with how the South was treated after the war (more so due to Lincoln's assassination). Its attempt to bring some sense of dignity and equality to the ex-slaves was not wrong. With the advent of Jim Crow laws, the South proved beyond a doubt that slavery played a major role in the Civil War, despite what some apologists of today say.

I think it is especially sad when I read reviews that equate this book with history. It is not history, it is not fact. It is an example of the type of thinking that went on when the South decided that once again African Americans were not to be considered equal. Separate But Equal always was a lie. And so is so much of what Dixon espoused in this book. As evidenced from some of the four and five star reviews for this book, racism is not dead.

Rating:
Summary: Woodrow Wilson and white supremacy
Review: Thomas Dixon, Jr.'s "The Clansman" is best known as the prime source for D. W. Griffith's "Birth of a Nation." A bestseller in its own right, "The Clansman" presents a vision of a South overrun with lascivious black men out to rape white women unless the KKK can intercede. As a novel it is maudlin, melodramatic, and unconvincing; as a history textbook, it is damnable.

Some reviewers for the hardcover edition of this book would have you believe that, because Woodrow Wilson approved of both Dixon's novel and Griffith's film, his affirmation validates Dixon's depiction of the poor maligned white man and his sexually threatened wife and daughter. Hardly the case--in spite of history textbooks' portrayal of Wilson, he was himself a virulent racist, outmatched only, perhaps, by his wife. As James W. Loewen indicates in his review of history textbooks, "Lies My Teacher Told Me," the "filmmaker David W. Griffith quoted Wilson's two-volume history of the United States, now notorious for its racist view of Reconstruction, in his infamous masterpiece 'The Clansman' [later retitled Birth of a Nation], a paean to the Ku Klux Klan for its role in putting down 'black-dominated' Republican state governments during Reconstruction" (18). Loewen notes later that "Wilson was not only antiblack; he was also far and away our most nativist president, repeatedly questioning the loyalty of those he called 'hyphenated Americans.' 'Any man who carries a hyphen about with him,' said Wilson, 'carries a dagger that he is ready to plunge into the vitals of this Republic whenever he gets ready' " (19).

If you read "The Clansman," read it because it was a bestseller, was recommended by an American President, and spawned a movie which at the time was a landmark in cinematic technical achievement--facts which should shock you. It may be racist tripe, but its historical significance remains relevant--as does the continued dangerous potential for people to buy into versions of reality that bear little congruence with truth. If we've learned anything over the past few years, just because a President of the United States says something doesn't make it true, nor does it excuse you from the need to think critically for yourself.