Customer Reviews

Bright Starry Banner: A Novel of the Civil War

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I was skeptical because of the cover: Modern Neo-Confederate art work and the title: Bright Starry Banner But I was wrong. I've read a quite a few Civil War fictions in my life as a history teacher, librarian and Civil War reenactor. This one will go on the shelf with the keepers to be read a second and third time: Killer Angels (Sharra), Shiloh (Foote), The Black Flower (Bahr) and a few others.
I have visited Stones River National Battlefield Park and had a fair understanding of the battle. Alden recreates it accurrately. The other strengths of this novel is the characterizations of the privates to the generals. I never would have put on my list of people to find out more about: Bragg, Rosecrans, Hardee, Polk, Thomas et al. Now they all move to the top of the list. Fortunately, 'Soldiering in the Army of Tennesse' (Daniels) showed up on a sale table and I picked it up and started it as soon as I ended Bright Starry Banner.
The Bright Starry Banner of the title is both flags, not just the one on the cover. The grit of the battle lines and reactions of soldiers on the front rings true, from my reading of diaries and my experience as a reenactor. The generals are not gods; they are very human in Alden's novel.
What makes this book better than most CW fiction are the ideas in it. It's not all fighting; God, faith, slavery, honor, and sex are on the minds of these characters and these ideas are not the modern notions of them but are placed in the context of mid-19th century America but not constrained by it.
This is my nomination for the 2004 Michael Shaara Award for Civil War Fiction, sponsored by the Civil War Center at LSU.
I am hoping for a pre/sequel by Alden. My current copy of Bright Starry Banner will be come the loan copy to my friends and I'll have to get a new copy for my shelf.

The end of 1862 ushered in a bleak New Year in which over eighty thousand men from the Union and Confederacy faced each other across battle lines outside Murfreesboro, Tennessee, sang "Home Sweet Home" in unison, and then loosed their guns and cannons at each other. Pitting Maj. Gen. William Rosecrans of the Army of the Cumberland against the infamous Gen. Braxton Bragg of the Army of Tennessee, this devastating battle, in which both sides eventually claimed victory, cost the lives of 25,000 men in just three days.

Author Carter uses primary sources to recreate the minutiae of this horrendous battle, and he is precise in his discussion of troop movements, the order of events, and the real actions of real people. Classified as a "novel" because the author recreates conversations which were not recorded and provides insights into what the participants may have been thinking and feeling, the book feels more like a comprehensive re-enactment than fiction. There are no imagined subplots, no love story, and no great or fully developed hero (though Gen. Rosecrans comes closest). Real events become the plot, and real battle movements and counter-movements become the "rising action," with "suspense" depending on the reader's unfamiliarity with these events and the characters' destinies.

By including as much personal background and information as is known about each real character, Carter humanizes the many generals on both sides who had often been classmates and friends from West Point, showing their soul-searching and personal relationships. Lower ranking officers and soldiers reveal the extent to which this was a "generals' war," with one soldier suggesting that all the soldiers on both sides "just go on home...leaving you officers to settle things among yourselves." The inclusion of Ambrose Bierce, a Union map-maker who later used his war-time experience in his writing, serves as a fascinating motif throughout, as Carter shows the particular events which appear in Bierce's work.

By the time the novel is finished, the reader is emotionally spent. Friendly fire accidents, the carnage of death by cannon, the misfires of ordnance, and the need to fire shells over the heads of their own men reflect the bloody reality of this war, while the moments of kindness which soldiers often extended to each other put a human face upon it. The descriptions are so precise, the devastation so total, the accidents so disastrous, and the role of chance so all-encompassing that the horrors of this war linger. Carter's novel is a huge achievement which should provide Civil War buffs with hours of serious study. Mary Whipple

A good historical novel can make you forget that it is, in fact, a novel -- a dramatization of real events. This novel certainly does that. It also does a good job of mentioning most, if not all, of the regiments that fought at Stones River, so you can say, "Hey, so that's what it was like for my great-great grandpa."

A couple of episodes are jarringly out of place...descriptions of the rape of a young Confederate soldier by a squadmate and the subsequent murder of the rapist by other members of the squad, and the rape of the young Leonidas Polk by French sailors both left me wondering what the author was trying to do -- interest Hollywood, perhaps? The book would have been just as good without these.

I highly recommend this book. Carter does a nice job of describing the action and creating the characters. The style is effective throughout and this is the type of novel that rewards the reader for his efforts.

With `Bright Starry Banner', Alden R. Carter has accomplished a rather remarkable feat - he has written a historical novel about a major battle of the American Civil War that has all the detail and accuracy of a first rate campaign history, yet all the drama, suspense, and human emotion of a compelling novel. With his painstaking attention to maneuvers, tactics, regimental names, casualties - all the details great and small of a major military engagement - `Bright Starry Banner' contains all the elements of a top notch battle history, save for the maps. Yet by showing us the progress of the battle through the multiple perspectives of many of the men who fought on both sides; from the commanders of the army, down through division and brigade commanders, junior officers, and the fighting men, he humanized and personalized the conflict; making it a real swirling drama of ambition, terror, honor, bravery, cowardice, foolishness and farce.
The Battle of Stones River was fought between the Union Army of the Cumberland and the Confederate Army of Tennessee over three days - December 31, 1862 through January 2, 1863, near Murfreesboro, Tennessee. It was one of the great, bloody battles of the Civil War, but like most of the battles fought in the western theater of that war, is not nearly as well known as those that happened in the east. This is largely because the conventions of Civil War writing were originally created by Southerners in tribute to the cult of the Lost Cause. The great Southern victories and the Southern hero-saints like Lee and Jackson were all in the east, so naturally this is where they focused their literary attention. By the time Northerners began writing of the Civil War in earnest, they just fell in step with this established trend; this despite the fact that the Civil War was won (or lost, depending on your perspective) in the west. That Carter has written a novel of this great but neglected battle rather than serving up a version of one of the endlessly rehashed eastern battles between The Army of Northern Virginia and the Union's Army of the Potomac is a testament to the power of his historical insight, and the freshness of his creative ability.
The officers that Carter uses in his novel are historical rather than fictional constructs. Generals Rosecrans, Thomas, Sheridan, Bragg, Hardee, Polk, and Cleburne, as well as Ambrose Bierce are all names familiar to me through my reading of histories, and I was amazed at how well Carter projected out from the available facts of the historical record to bring these men vividly to life as characters in his novel. Only with General Polk did I feel that he struck a false note. Though history leaves us little to admire about Polk, a man whose incompetence as a general was match only by his disloyalty and ambition - Carter goes far over the top, and I felt out of bounds, in his portrayal of him. Carter creates in Polk a Machiavellian monster of a man, false not only to his commander, but also to his God (Polk was a bishop in the Episcopal Church), and a ghoul who derived a perverse spiritual and sexual elation from the carnage of battle. Unlike even the most unlikable of the rest of his characters, Carter allowed no human element into this gross caricature of General Polk. Yet this character stands out as the one sour note in an otherwise brilliantly drawn cast.
`Bright Starry Banner' is a book of the horror of war, and the multitude of ways that humans respond to it. It does not attempt to be anything else; there are no sub plots of romance, nothing to soften the story and give a wider appeal. It is a book for those who would see terrible history brought vividly to life and presented with all of its human emotion and drama restored to the cold facts and casualty figures of the history books.

Theo Logos

The reviews already submitted say it all -- For me, suffice it to say: I look forward to my students' impressions when they read Carter's fine historical novel in my fall Civil War class -- Any other military history profs out there would do well to adopt this work; it's a compelling and entertaining, not to mention very accurate, read!

I found the book entertaining and engaging and I believe historically accurate. The battle scenes are well drawn, stark and riveting. The background stories are likewise well put together.

However, I take exception to some of the author's characterizations of the Southern officers and men. It seems all the perverts, gaseous generals, and hypocrites are on the Southern side, while all the heroic, devoted, and noble warriors are on the Northern side.

Perhaps if the book possessed a more balanced view of the attributes of the characters both Northern and Southern, it would rank as one of the better Civil War novels I have read.

Barry Yelton
Author of Scarecrow in Gray, a Civil War Novel

No one could have prepared me for the impact of this writers depiction of how it was to be there. I had read reviews and excerpts, and yet had no idea how real it would all become in less than an hour. Alden Carter writes masterfully; his accuracy is unimpeachable, his research complete, his prose detail terrifying and evocative. This history in novel form leaves indelible images and demands a second and perhaps a third reading. Bright Starry Banner has a place beside Shelby Foote in my library.

This is a really random book to be my favorite, but it is. I bought it when I was fourteen, a couple weeks after it was released. It's one of the only books that I've read twice. Now, seven years later, I bring it with me to college and keep it in a prominent place on my shelf. Sometimes, I read random parts of it. Yes, that is kind of weird. I'm also extremely irritated that the title is dumb. Gen. Thomas's quote, "No Better Place to Die," is such a better title, but the nonfiction book that Carter got much of his information from is named this.

I have been a civil war buff since I was 10. I used to be really into the Shaara books, but I found Carter's style to be far more engaging. Before I read this novel, I still had a somewhat romantic belief in war. I saw the generals as heroes. This book brings war right into your mind. Generals are just people who happen to be in charge of thousands of other people and often have no idea how to be competent. War is simply insane.

Carter layers his book with numerous themes. For one, he picks the most obscure major battle: Stones River. It was an extremely bloody battle with the highest percentage of casualties for any major battle in the war. And it was extremely indecisive. Simply picking this battle sets him apart.

Next, Carter has an enormous cast. Most of the main characters are high-ranking generals (Rosecrans, Thomas, Hardee, Bragg) but there's hundreds of supporting players representing every aspect of an army. The author Ambrose Bierce is a main character, as he was a topographical officer in the battle. Rosecrans' chief of staff, Julius Garesche, is another key player, giving us a rarely seen perspective. Nearly every division and brigade commander has at least a minor role. On top of that, dozens of field and junior officers, artillery men, sergeants, privates, troopers, wagon drivers, surgeons, orderlies, and others are featured.

The book frequently reads like its nonfiction. Carter goes through the battle step by step, featuring a regiment during it's trial by fire, then moving on. Carter definitely went all out in his research of the battle and the hundreds of people he brought to life. So the novel has much educational value.

The characters are very human. Their thoughts expand beyond honor, strategy, survival, and fear. Generals think about sex on the eve of battle. Characters despise each other so much they sacrifice lives just to strike at their fellow officers (in the same army.) Some commanders are so afraid they resort to drinking or hiding. Others risk their own safety and reputation to save lives.

There are some things people may not like. The dialogue is more modernized. The characters still think as 19th century men (destiny, god, and honor were far more important then than now,) but Carter does not use the long-winded speech patterns of the time. There is almost no discussion of slavery and women are absent. I think Carter chose to write dialogue as he did to make the book more accessible. He chose to forget about the big picture of the war, because that is not the point of the book. Bright Starry Banner is about Stones River and the men who fought it. Once it comes time to kill or be killed, no one is thinking about state's rights and slaves.

Also, Carter makes some parts of his story up. There are a couple fictional characters, he takes extreme liberties with a few real ones, and there are some parts of the battle where there's simply no accurate record of what happens. He uses his own military knowledge to postulate the events.

Most importantly, there are three rape scenes. Two of them are homosexual. I read one review where the reader had to take a week long break after reading one of them. As a fourteen year old, I was disturbed for about one minute before I resumed intently.

To me, the most compelling aspects of the book are the surreal elements. Carter explores the human psyche during extreme stress. Most humans are not designed to handle carnage, and the mind does weird things. One generals believes he eats the souls of the dead, decapitated heads talk, horses eat flesh, one general is a ravenous werewolf, the wounded dance. Carter is no doubt influenced by Bierce.

Anyone interested in the civil war should read this novel. It's violent, disturbing, and profane, but that's what war is. Beneath all the politics, maneuverings, and "honor," war is people destroying each other senselessly and generals are the same species are privates.