In his book, Lincoln at Gettysburg, Garry Wills sets about debunking the myths, legends, and rumors concerning Lincoln's "Gettysburg Address." Wills seeks to show that because of the Gettysburg Address " . . . the Civil War is what Lincoln wanted it to mean." (pg. 38) Wills helps the reader understand what events, speeches, and speakers had impacted Lincoln in the past, which ultimately influenced Lincoln's selection of words for the speech itself. Wills notes that the speech had influences from such diverse sources as Daniel Webster, Thomas Jefferson, as well as Greek figures such as Pericles. The book also describes the rural cemetery movement that was beginning to rise at the time of the speech, which was influential in the design of the Gettysburg Cemetery. The book also answers many of the critics of Lincoln, who argue the speech and the Emancipation Proclamation were weak, and illustrate Lincoln's propensity of clever evasions and key silences concerning key issues. Willis also notes how the style of the address was the forerunner of a new way of communicating, a way fit for the machine age.
One of the first topics Wills addresses is the myth that the man who spoke before Lincoln, Edward Everett, impositioned the audience with a two-hour long speech that bored the listeners. Wills notes long speeches were common, and expected for the day. He gives reference to the Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858, which illustrate that Lincoln himself was capable and comfortable speaking at length before groups of people. Willis also emphasizes that Everett was the invited speaker for the dedication, and Lincoln had been asked simply to give some remarks. Wills also demystifies the story that Lincoln wrote the address on a napkin, or while sitting on the stand during Everett's speech. Wills notes Lincoln composed he speeches thoughtfully, to simply jot one down quickly would be out of character. (pg. 28)
Wills notes the Greek revival that was occurring in America at this time, and the influence it had on Everett and Lincoln. Everett had been a leading proponent of the Greek Style, influencing many through his speeches, as well as the time he spent teaching at Harvard. Wills notes Everett had inspired many of the Transcendentalists, including Ralph Waldo Emerson. Emerson stated that the Gettysburg Address would not " . . . easily be surpassed by words on nay recorded occasion." (pg. 47) Wills notes that Everett could be given credit, as much as anyone else, in creating the conditions for Lincoln's address, and his classicism was as much a forerunner to Lincoln as his foil. (pg. 47)
Understanding exactly what Lincoln meant in the speech is one of Wills' primary goals. To help the reader understand, Wills dissects many of the passages from the address, and then gives the reader insight into Lincoln's personality. One of the key phrases of the speech concerns the fathers of the country. Wills notes that Lincoln never seems to have been interested in George Washington. To Lincoln, the founding fathers were those who were the authors of the Declaration of Independence, particularly Thomas Jefferson, whom Lincoln considered the most distinguished politician in America's history.
Wills shows how Lincoln used the Gettysburg Address to refresh the memories of Americans the ideals the founding fathers placed in the Declaration of Independence, and the self-evident truth that `all men are created equal.' Wills notes how Lincoln's earlier speeches illustrate his ideas on slavery, which was the complete opposite of equality. Lincoln also used the Declaration to stress that the nation was founded in unity, and should stay unified. Wills states, "For him, the fathers are always the begetters of the national idea. The founders of the nation founded it on that." (pg. 86) Wills also notes how Lincoln and Daniel Webster felt the Declaration of Independence was closer to being the founding document of the United States than was the Constitution. (pg. 130) The ideals stated in the Declaration were more pure than the Constitution, which was based on compromises. Wills adds excerpts from Lincoln's speeches, which illustrate how the Constitution was to make a more `perfect union,' but not define the union itself.
To most Americans, the consensus opinion of the Gettysburg Address is to place it among the greatest speeches ever given, if not the greatest. Wills shows how Lincoln derived much of the address from his accumulated experiences. Some historians, particularly Richard Hofstadter, see the address as another instance where Lincoln avoided the issues and sought to placate the nation with weak rhetoric. Hofstadter does not criticize the address in the book, however it is noted that Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation issued earlier that year was completely neglected in the address. Hofstadter says the Emancipation Proclamation " . . . had all the moral grandeur of a bill of lading. It contained no indictment of slavery, but simply based emancipation on `military necessity'. " (pg. 137)
Hofstadter further accuses Lincoln of being of two minds, which changed depending on the demographic of his audience. Hofstadter illustrates this by contrasting Lincoln's speeches he gave in Southern Illinois, versus speeches he gave in Northern Illinois. Hofstadter said Lincoln possibly believed whatever he uttered at the time he delivered it. He states, " Possibly his mind too was a house divided against itself." (pg. 92) Wills contends Hofstadter is pursuing false issues regarding Lincoln's speeches. Wills argues that it was not a matter of his position on the issues, but rather Lincoln chose when to "tickle the racism of his audience" (pg. 93)
One of the more interesting issues Wills concentrates on is the style of the address itself. Lincoln was noted to prefer succinctness and brevity to long overdrawn prose. Wills illustrates this in Lincoln's dispatches with General Grant. Grant was known for his dispatches that related the facts in the fewest words possible. Lincoln learned to be brief as well because of his telegraphs to Grant and other generals. Lincoln developed a reluctance to waste words and omitting coupling words. Lincoln also arranged the address so key words were repeated, so that each paragraph was bound to the preceding and following paragraphs. Wills states, "He was a Transcendentalist without the fuzziness. He spoke a modern language because he was dealing with a scientific age for which abstract words are appropriate." (pg. 174) Wills believes Lincoln was not addressing an agrarian future, but a mechanical future, in which economical speech that meshed like the gears of a machine was needed.
Willis tackles a subject that many Americans learned at an early age, but likely never thought about the deep meanings behind the short speech. Wills includes criticism of recent leaders and politicians such as Ronald Reagan, Robert Bork, and Ed Meese. Whatever his opinions regarding these men and their ideas, it seemed out of place with the rest of the book, and unfortunately dates what could be a timeless analysis of the Gettysburg Address. Despite the minor flaws, the book offers great insight and reflection upon an event in history that to many has lost its significance.
