Customer Reviews

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

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

 

 

This novel is important reading--not as a lesson in historical fact, but rather to understand and envision the power (and inherent violence) of a white supremacist worldview in American history. Dixon is careful to detail many facts about historical figures, particularly President Lincoln and Republican Congressman Thad Stevens, including many actual quotes and near-quotes of these men in their dialogue; he is meticulous and masterful with so many aspects of this novel. The Clansman (and Dixon's later novel, The Traitor) are virtually the only works of popular American literature to render a sympathetic, insider view of the Ku Klux Klan. Dixon includes so many rich and rare details of history that it's no wonder readers have been persuaded (and still are, apparently) that this is a complete and accurate picture of what is perhaps the single most tumultuous period of American history.

But it would be a gross error to assume that Dixon's portrayal of race relations is at all accurate. Dixon makes it appear that southern whites were made vulnerable (by the federal government, by military rule, and by the ravages of war) to the attacks of an animalistic race of out-of-control freedmen, but nothing can be further than the truth. White southerners inflicted violence upon blacks to maintain their brutal control over social relations and labor--and then generated a powerful, lasting mythology of black criminality and brutality to perpetuate this violence and justify it.

Any reading of first-hand accounts of black freedmen during Reconstruction is alternately chilling and saddening--particularly the Congressional testimonies of freedmen about the race riots of Memphis and New Orleans in 1866. Throughout the South freedmen were coerced into slavery-like labor; they were prevented from migrating elsewhere by vigilante groups (in many cases, the KKK); often the Freedmen's Bureau and military officials sided with the unjust practices of white planters; and Republicans in Congress seemed to manipulate freedmen's vote only to benefit themselves and turn a blind eye to the interests of freedmen. White men and women in the South had it hard after the Civil War--but black men and women, by and large, had it far harder.

Any scholarly history of Reconstruction written after 1950 (after Americans got over a long period of racist and xenophobic hysteria) will elaborate on the above details... particularly the work of Eric Foner, or the excellent account of The Trouble They Seen. Pick up one of these books as a reading companion to The Clansman!

Dixon may not accurately represent the FACTS of history, but he does accurately represent the EMOTIONS of history--the many emotions of southern whites about a newly freed population of black men and women, particularly their fears and their psychological/sociological need to keep ex-slaves in a subordinate social position--to separate black and white in a society that coexisted a little too close for comfort.

It's a fascinating book. I recommend it to every American who seeks to make sense of our complex, tragic, and gradually evolving history of race relations.

As a novel, The Clansman has many faults, but as a popular exposition of the Dunning interpretation of Reconstruction (pro-Southern, anti-radical republican), it is excellent. First published in 1905 (my copy has pictures from 'The Birth of a Nation' so it's post-1915), it was written by the descendent of a Klansman in the glow of the reconciliation of North and South that was finally symbolically completed in the Spanish-American War - when two former Confederate generals (Joe Wheeler and Fitzhugh Lee) returned to the National colors to serve against the Spanish.

The novel's historical significance is enhanced beause it was the basis for D.W. Griffith's Birth of a Nation, one of the dozen or so greatest American films.

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.

Dixon was no historian, either in the traditional or the modern sense.

History is dull, complicated, and nuanced and does not lend itself to narrative. Humans are natural story tellers and so we want history that fits that form of thinking. Which is why so many popular histories are so terrible; historians cannot know what was going on in the minds of historical figures anymore than we can know what is going on in the minds of neighbors. We might think we know, but we don't. Nonetheless, this innate need to impose a narrative upon history, with well defined characters (including villains and heroes), and a recognizable story arc that fits with our preconceived notions. Moreover, we love anecdotes and we naturally tend to generalize about whole populations based on isolated stories.

What I call 'actual history' requires data, large amounts of primary source mining, rigorous analytical thought, and above all else, emotional detachment with no political agenda. This kind of history is never popular, because it isn't fun or exciting or simple. Hence it does not capture the popular imagination, nor does it influence the thinking of large numbers of people.

So if a person wants to manipulate the masses (and earn some serious cash in the processes), writing History is not the way to go. Rather, a budding manipulator should write a novel and get a movie of it made, which is what Dixon did.

'The Clansman' was written as a response to what Dixon saw as the demonetization of white southerners in the popular consciousness. It was a deliberate act of propaganda which was created to counter other propaganda, and it has to be read as such. Believing this book to be capital-H History, is just wrong. It should be placed alongside any other agenda driven popular work.

Dixon's agenda is pretty obvious: racial superiority, racial purity, and the veneration of the south despite the venality of the North and criminality of the southern blacks. And gaging by the increase in Klan membership after this book and the film adaptation were released, it was very successful propaganda.

So if you're going to pick this up in hopes getting some capital-H History, you will be disappointed. Dixon should be put alongside other propagandists such as Joseph Goebbels, Al Gore, Rush Limbaugh, and anyone in PR. This book is suitable only for those looking for examples of propaganda from the past.

As noted, this book was the basis for D.W Griffith's controversial "Birth Of A Nation". I found the book useful as an historical reference only. Dixon's writing is at its best when he discuss the political currents and controversy of the Reconstruction period from a "Southern" viewpoint and some of his criticisms are worth reading.

As fictional writing it is maudlin, predictable and strewn with racism. His characters appear as cardboard cutouts, all good or all bad, depending on the function he uses them for. The only character with any depth is the Radical Republican Speaker of the House, Stoneman.

Granting the maudlin style was popular at the time, it still becomes tiring and/or alternately amusing to read phrases such as "the epitome of the Southern woman, rendolent with grace and the suppleness of beauty", contrasted with "jungle brutality shone from his eyes, set in an apelike frame"etc.,etc....

As a typical example of the plot, the bad black rapist who leads two "pure" Southern women to suicide from the shame, is discovered and convicted by the heroes of the Klan, based on a doctor's testimony that he saw the image of the "brute" burned in the retina of the dying mother. That's a far fetch even for 1904, and typical of the mechanics of Dixon's plot development.

He shows no compassion whatsoever for any of his black characters, even the one faithful one, who the plot leaves dangling in a prison. Another black is cheated of his money and is made an object of mockery for being so duped.

Lincoln becomes, by some curious inversion of Dixon's mind, a hero who would have prevented all the evils of the Reconstruction period, including black sufferage. He is graciously forgiven for the carnage of the war, leaving one grasping for Dixon's rationale for it all.

It is in this political commentary that the modern reader will find of most interest, particulary the events of the impeachment of Andrew Johnson.

I had considered reading some of Dixon's works, but it is clear they will all be of equal or less value that this one, which is to say very little. Some of the work is available on line, search on the author's name, and then buy a copy of DuBois "Black Reconstruction In America" instead.

Dispite my negative feelings about this book, I do feel it should be freely available to those interested, as it does retain a kernel of historical interest. If not for that, it would rate only as an example of hack literature.

I picked this book up out of curiosity. Although it has a slow start it soon has you hooked. I appreciated the author's use of historical fact to provide the backdrop for the story. Having watched numerous documentries on the whole reconstruction era as well as reading about it, I don't think the author took many liberties with documented facts. Having read all the other reviews, I am amused by the righteous indignation displayed by those who have had their warped view of history challenged.

This book was written 40 years after the war and even less time had passed since the end of reconstruction, so the accounts of this period were still fresh in peoples minds who had lived through this era, and I seriously doubt that it would have become as popular as it did had it been lies. The southerners were and still are a proud bunch and they would not have endorsed a fantasy as fact.

I have far more faith in the record of events as told in the novel than I do in revisionist ramblings of modern liberal historians who are bent on recreating history, 150 years removed from the events. The comments I have read prove how the modern American mind has been brainwashed into believing the dilusional revision of American history. Anyone who has any doubt about the behavior of the "freedmen" in this book need only look at Africa in 2007, and they will realise that if anything the author downplayed their behavior and actions.

The biggest problem that most of the reviewers have with this book, is that it wasn't written in a world ruled by the PC police, and it gets under their skin that there is nothing they can do about it.

The book is definately an uncommon one, namely one that lionizes the post-Civil War KKK. As a novel, it is a fair adventure yarn and only dips into childishness when it deals with romance. As history, it is very controversial. Some things in the book are obviously made up but others cannot be so neatly dismissed. Anyone who would do this out of hand and condemn everything in the book as a lie should remember the comments made by President Woodrow Wilson after screening, The Birth of a Nation, the 1915 movie based on The Clansman: "It is like writing history with lightning. I regret that it was all too true."

This novel was the inspiration for D.W. Griffith's film The Birth of a Nation. I got insights into American history which never could have been had by any standard high school textbook. Today, it would probably be rated as the epitome of a politically incorrect story. In a society where all views are supposed to get a fair hearing, this novel tests the principle

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.

This is the first of a trilogy showcasing the malicious intent of a diabolical propagandist and radical racist, a member of the Southern elite and fervent [...], born of generations of slaveowners and Klansmen, who adulterated history to promote hatred, fear and murder because of the anger he felt when he saw Uncle Tom's Cabin and vowed to romanticize the Klan - his father and grandfather both being members. [...]

The Clansmen is a documentation of the American South as it provides the ruthless voice of racism, justifying racial segregation, disenfranchisement and brutal murder, much the same as Benjamin Tillman, U.S. Senator for South Carolina who served 1895 - 1918: "We of the South have never recognized the right of the [...] to govern white men, and we never will. We have never believed him to be the equal of the white man, and we will not submit to his gratifying his lust on our wives and daughters without lynching him." Such is the America at the turn of the last century.

The Clansman is a malignancy that pervades our mindset even today, illustrated by the violent, terrorist tactics of right wing militia types as the response of choice to policy with which they disagree such as the recent murder of Dr. George Tillman.

Absorbed as truth and history by a majority, The Clansman's heroic portrayal of the KKK as a special-ops-unit-4-righteousness led to its 1915 rebirth and on October 16, the men who lynched Leo Frank (a Jew) climbed Stone Mountain and burned a giant cross that was visible throughout the city. The imagery of the fiery cross, which had not existed in the original Klan, had been introduced via Dixon's The Clansman.

At the 1915 opening of The Clansman (later retitled The Birth of a Nation) in New York, Dixon, author of The Clansman, told the theater audience that he would have allowed no one but David Wark Griffith, son of a Confederate officer (and slaveowner), to direct the screenplay of his book.

In 3 years, the KKK grew from 3,000 members to 3 million. At its peak in the mid-1920s, the KKK included about 15% of the nation's eligible population - 4-5 million white men.

The film had a one year run in New York and was re-released in 1924, 1931, and 1938, so the image of Mr. Dixon's Clansman remained in the public psyche for decades. The sheer power of media immortalizing wrong as right is what Jews, Catholics, blacks and whites of good will had to overcome to achieve true religious and economic freedom, civil rights and voting rights. Many at the cost of their livelihoods or lives. The struggle continues even today because most of our failing systems were set up by people roped into Dixon's mindset.

Dixon himself describes how important Griffith's role was in the spreading of his venom to a culture already predisposed to hatred and vengeance. Griffith brought Dixon's flawed Aryan dream for white supremacists, to a larger audience (50+ million in its 1st 5 years) to create a collective memory that has exacerbated much of the misunderstanding, prejudice, fear, hate, political machinations (the Republican Party's Southern Strategy), pain, torture, death and sheer barbarism of our nation's racial history.

The Clansman's denial of political and social equality is a denial of the U.S. Constitution, America's democratic ideal and very reason for existence. A denial of the law. So don't buy it - read the digital copy if you're interested. But better yet read the works of one of our greatest historians, John Hope Franklin, who died on March 25 2009. His work is much more interesting and it's accurate.

Quoting an article by By CRAIG D'OOGE: Dr. John Hope Franklin (2 January 1915 - 25 March 2009) told an audience at the Mumford Room of the Library of Congress in April 1994, that as a young man working on his Ph.D. dissertation 65 years ago in Raleigh, N.C., that he would regularly pass a courtly gentleman outside the courthouse. The gentleman always greeted Franklin with a warm smile.

The young graduate student was forced to reevaluate the significance of the man's cordial expression, however, when he found out his identity. It was Thomas Dixon, author of The Clansman. Far from offering a smile of welcome, Franklin concluded, Dixon's smile probably was more a reflection of his secret delight at keeping "the likes of me" out of any governmental office more influential than "a Jim Crow cubbyhole in the State Archives."

But Dixon's smile would have changed to a frown had he known that a cubbyhole was all Franklin needed. It was the start of a distinguished career that would enable him, among many other accomplishments, to marshall the facts to contradict Dixon's fabrications.

"The long reach of [The Clansman] 'The Birth of a Nation' is nowhere seen and felt so much as in the picture of Reconstruction that continues today to dominate the thinking and even the writing of most lay persons and indeed too many professional historians who labor apparently under the spell of Thomas Dixon and 'Birth of a Nation,' professor Franklin said. "It is as if a certain picture of Reconstruction must be perpetrated in order to bar permanently African Americans from positions of public trust in the United States."

John Hope Franklin was a United States historian and past president of Phi Beta Kappa, the Organization of American Historians, the American Historical Association, and the Southern Historical Association. He received his doctorate in history in 1941 from Harvard University. In 1976, the National Endowment for the Humanities selected Franklin for the Jefferson Lecture, the U.S. federal government's highest honor for achievement in the humanities. He was named the James B. Duke Professor Emeritus of History at Duke University (1983) (where many of his historical papers are housed). The John Matthews Manly Distinguished Service Professor Emeritus at The University of Chicago, Franklin is best known for his work From Slavery to Freedom, first published in 1947, and continually updated. In 1995, he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian honor and in 2006 the John W. Kluge Prize in the Human Sciences for lifetime achievement in the humanistic and social sciences to celebrate the importance of the Intellectual Arts for the public interest. He is one of the world's most celebrated historians, garnering over 130 honorary degrees. In 2008, Franklin endorsed presidential candidate Barack Obama. He lived to see him become President.