The depiction of Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee by Bruce Catton (1956, p. 225) is one the author maintains represents ôàcomplete contrast, representing two diametrically opposed elements in American life.ö Lee, the landed tidewater aristocrat represented old world forms and traditions that maintained the establishment of a privileged class was good for all society. Grant, the up-from-the-bootstraps son of a tanner from the Allegheny mountains, represented the rising tendency toward democracy, equality, and the rise of industry and urban landscapes. Nevertheless, both men had much in common that, ultimately, during their meeting at Appomattox, paved the way for the healing and evolution of a new and united nation.
The descriptions of Lee and Grant are revealing in many ways. Catton (1956) describes each according to the values and principles that characterized both them and their regions. Lee, a landed aristocrat, characterized the European elements of American society. This included country squires, knighthood, chivalry, and the belief that the land should be the chief source of wealth and power. As Catton (1956, p. 224) writes, ôLee embodied the noblest elements of the aristocratic ideal.ö In his view, the landed class of society would powerfully take care of the community due very much to the obligation of being ôprivilegedö (Catton, 1956, p. 224). In contrast, Grant stood for democracy, equality, and the freedom for any man of any class to have the ability to compete and succeed. As Catton (1956, p. 224) forms and traditions meant little to nothing to this kind of man and the men of his region, and certainly not privileged classes, ôNo man was born to anything, except perhaps to a chance to show how far he could rise.ö
I thought I would find myself siding with the depiction of Grant, being as I believed he supported equality and democracy. However, the portrayal of Lee is fairly cra
...