(2890,56,'2012-11-05 13:42:58','2012-11-05 19:42:58','Historically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  They surrounded themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero)  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a country\'s head of state.\r\n\r\n<!--more-->\r\n\r\nAbraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\nInteresting Reading - http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.html - “All the ladies like whiskers” shows the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-8','','','2012-11-05 13:42:58','2012-11-05 19:42:58','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2890',0,'revision','',0),(2891,56,'2012-11-05 13:43:14','2012-11-05 19:43:14','Historically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  They surrounded themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero)  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a country\'s head of state.\r\n\r\n<!--more-->\r\n\r\nAbraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\nInteresting Reading - http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.html - “All the ladies like whiskers” shows the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-9','','','2012-11-05 13:43:14','2012-11-05 19:43:14','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2891',0,'revision','',0),(2892,56,'2012-11-05 13:43:17','2012-11-05 19:43:17','Historically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  They surrounded themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero)  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a country\'s head of state.\r\n\r\n<!--more-->\r\n\r\nAbraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\nInteresting Reading - http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.html - “All the ladies like whiskers” shows the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-10','','','2012-11-05 13:43:17','2012-11-05 19:43:17','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2892',0,'revision','',0),(2907,56,'2012-11-05 14:12:40','2012-11-05 20:12:40','[caption id=\"attachment_2893\" align=\"alignnone\" width=\"300\"]<a href=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam.jpg\" target=\"_blank\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-2893 \" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam-300x247.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"247\" /></a> This copy of the image includes Brady\'s handwritten recording of those in the photograph.[/caption]\r\n\r\nHistorically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  They surrounded themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero)  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a country\'s head of state.\r\n\r\n<!--more-->\r\n\r\nAbraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Interesting Reading</p>\r\nhttp://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.html - “All the ladies like whiskers” shows the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-15','','','2012-11-05 14:12:40','2012-11-05 20:12:40','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2907',0,'revision','',0),(2902,1,'2012-11-05 13:20:26','2012-11-05 19:20:26','<p style=\"text-align: center\"> </p>\r\n&nbsp;\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">  <a href=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Utopia_Moro.jpg\"><img class=\"alignnone size-full wp-image-2884\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Utopia_Moro.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"200\" height=\"282\" /></a></p>\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> <a href=\"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopia_(book\">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopia_(book</a>)</p>\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\nSir Thomas More was born in 1478, in the city of London.  After his earlier education at St. Anthony’s School, he was placed, as a boy, in the household of Cardinal John Morton. Cardinal Morton had been in earlier days that Bishop of Ely whom Richard III sent to the Tower and was a chief adviser of Henry VII, who in 1486 made him Archbishop of Canterbury, and nine months afterwards Lord Chancellor. In his late teens, Thomas More was sent to Canterbury College, Oxford, where he learned Greek from the first men who brought Greek studies from Italy to England—William Grocyn and Thomas Linacre (“Introduction” 3). At the age of twenty-one he entered Parliament, and soon after he was made Under-Sheriff of London.<!--more-->  In 1503 he opposed Henry VII’s proposal for a subsidy on account of the marriage portion of his daughter Margaret (“Introduction” 4). During the last years of Henry VII, More had drawn the ire of the king, and had begun to have thoughts of leaving the country. Henry VII died in 1509, when More was around the age of thirty.  In the first years of the reign of Henry VIII, he rose to large practice in the law courts, where it is said he refused to plead in cases which he thought unjust, and took no fees from widows, orphans, or the poor. In 1513 Thomas More, still Under-Sheriff of London, is said to have written his “History of the Life and Death of King Edward V, and of the Usurpation of Richard III”, the book, which seems to contain the knowledge and opinions of More’s mentor, Morton. In the year 1515 Wolsey, Archbishop of York, was made Cardinal by Leo X, Henry VIII made him Lord Chancellor, and from that year until 1523 the King and the Cardinal ruled England with absolute authority, calling no parliament.  In May of the year 1515, Thomas More was joined in a commission to the Low Countries with Cuthbert Tunstal and others to confer with the ambassadors of Charles V, then Archduke of Austria, upon a renewal of alliance.  On that embassy More was absent from England for six months, and while at Antwerp he established friendship with Peter Giles who was secretary to the municipality of Antwerp (“Inrtoduction” 5). While away from home, More was inspired by long and thought provoking conversations with friends and acquaintances. The product of these thoughts was possibly his best known work, <span style=\"text-decoration: underline\">Utopia</span>. More’s <span style=\"text-decoration: underline\">Utopia</span> was written in Latin, and is in two parts. The second, which describes the place Nusquama, as he called it sometimes in his letters—“Nowhere”, was probably written towards the end of 1515. The first part was most likely written in early in 1516.  The book was first printed at Louvain, in late 1516, under the editorship of Erasmus, Peter Giles, and other of More’s friends (“Introduction” 6).\r\n\r\n            Utopia is a work of fiction by Thomas More published in 1516. The work reflects More’s political philosophies through the description of a fictional society’s social and political customs. The Renaissance brought forth many new concepts and ideas. In much of Europe where there had once been the strict control of Medieval monarchs and the constraining grip of the Roman Catholic church, innovations such as the printing press were making the the proliferation of new ways of thinking much harder to suppress. These innovations also brought old texts to newly literate masses whom prior to that time had been dependent upon religious leaders and government officials to bestow knowledge upon them. The masses now had access to prints of public records, the Bible, and other literature. This allowed them to take in what they read and form their own ideas about what was happening around them and what was in their best interest.\r\n\r\n            That time was also marked by the fact that most learned men (women were largely unable to participate in government or clergy) were of a religious background and men of the clergy in many cases were responsible for shaping legislation and counseling the rulers of respective nations. More was part of this reality and used it as best he could to change the status quo for the better of the nation he served. He was unpopular with the authority due to his propensity to be very outspoken and demonstrative about his displeasure with how certain aspects of the governing of England. He did not believe that even a king’s power should go unchecked, especially since the king has the future of his subjects to protect. In 1505 he opposed Henry VII’s proposal for a subsidy on account on the marriage portion of his daughter Margaret (‘Introduction” 4). More’s argument in the House of Commons was so persuasive that it is believed that the proposal were likely to have gone through if not for his vehement opposition. When the news of this reached the king, More life was made to be somewhat more difficult. So much so that he considered leaving England (More 4). Our county in particular based our foundation on principles similar to those of Sir Thomas More. For that reason I nominate that this important work should be preserved in our time capsule.\r\n\r\n            <span style=\"text-decoration: underline\">Utopia</span> begins with his being assigned by Henry VIII to confer with the ambassadors of a foreign nation in Antwerp to renew an alliance. While there he meets with friends to keep himself occupied and lift his spirits while away from his family. This is unique in that it mirrors his real life so closely. Up to this point of the story, these events closely resemble things that took place around this time in his real life. One of his close friends, Peter Giles, eventually introduces him to a man named Raphael Hythloday who is a well traveled man and considers himself a philosopher. Raphael is obliged to discuss with Peter and Thomas, his travels to distant lands and the governance of those places he has visited. Raphael speaks of an island by the name of Utopia, which he considers the greatest commonwealth he has ever seen. So much in fact that he comes to the conclusion that it may be the only place that deserves to be called a commonwealth.\r\n\r\n            In the next eight chapters, Raphael relates the specifics of Utopia’s constitution and culture. The composition of their governing bodies, the make up of their economy, their justice system, military, and religious beliefs are disseminated well if not in great detail. Generally, one could perceive the government of Utopia as communist, but upon closer analysis, the Utopian government would be closer to what we know as socialist. Quentin Skinner writes, “More is fiercely insistent, however, that the rich are usually the least rather than the most deserving of our respect, since their anxiety to protect and add to their possessions generally means that they worry only about their own self-interest, not about the interest of society as a whole.”\r\n\r\nMore’s idea of a perfect society appears to be one in which the citizens are concerned by the success of the society as a whole as opposed to being preoccupied with their personal well being. More writes:\r\n<blockquote>[...] in which all things if a sort are laid by themselves; and thither every father goes, and takes whatsoever he or his family stand in need of, without paying for it or leaving anything in exchange. There is no reason for giving a denial to any person, since there is such plenty of everything among them; and there is no danger of a man’s asking for more than he needs; they have no inducements to do this, since they are sure they shall always be supplied: it is the fear of want that makes any of the whole race of animals either greedy or ravenous; but, besides the fear, there is in man a pride that makes him fancy it a particular glory to excel others in pomp and excess; but by the laws of the Utopians. there is no room for this.</blockquote>\r\nThe ideal of operating as a collective and admonishing greed and materialism is reinforced throughout the work. This aspect of the book is important for our society to keep in mind. While I do subscribe to the idea of capitalism, there is something to be said for having a system that holds everyone that reaps the benefits of our society, accountable for contributing selflessly to ensure the future prosperity of our nation.\r\n\r\n            Raphael states, “There are several sorts of religions, not only in different parts of the island, but even in every town.” In Utopia, religious freedom is paramount just as it is in our society. With recent outbreaks of violence in the Middle East, which are largely charged by the interpretation of religion, Utopia hold a particular belief that would ensure that the same would not like occur within their domain. Raphael speaks of taking some of the teachings of Christianity to Utopia, and those principles being well received by many of the locals. So much so that one man had so much zeal about his newfound faith that he began to condemn the beliefs of others with a violent tone. Though one of their most ancient laws prohibits a man from being punished for his religion, the man was sentenced to banishment because his inflammatory behavior could potentially incite sedition within the society (More 127). He was removed from the society, not because of the religion he practiced, but because the way he practiced it could have endangered someone within the society.\r\n\r\n            More and Desiderius Erasmus among colleagues created the Republic of letters, an imagined community that held at its center the ideal of humanism. “As we have seen, More’s Latin text functioned as part of the infrastructure of an imaginary Republic of Letter, and the book’s content represented, in some ways, a version of that ideal Republic. The extensive paratext that surrounds <span style=\"text-decoration: underline\">Utopia</span> helped to bind that community together and also to signal that Thomas More belonged there, as a citizen of that Republic,” wrote Joshua Phillips, a Literary and Cultural Studies Professor at the University of Memphis.\r\n\r\n            In 1535, More was removed from the world for standing on the same principles that he is praised for now. His conscientiousness and integrity would not allow him to recognize Henry VIII’s divorce from his wife, Catherine of Aragon, and his marriage to his new wife, Anne Boleyn. This was viewed as a crime by the authority. He was then called to recognized Henry VIII as the head of the Church rather than the Pope, and would not. He was then accused of high treason and eventually beheaded (Stephanie Forward). Though he died more than four centuries ago, his legacy lives on in the many thinkers that he inspired. In hopes that we can help his legacy live on, I suggest that we include his work in our time capsule, so that it may inspire the great thinkers of the future.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Works Cited</p>\r\n  Forward, Stephanie. “A Taste of Paradise: Thomas More’s Utopia.” <em>The English Review</em> Apr. 2001; 24. <em>Literature Resource Center</em>. Web. 8 Sep. 2012.\r\n\r\n “Introduction” . <span style=\"text-decoration: underline\">Utopia</span>. More, Thomas. Project Gutenberg, 2005.\r\n\r\n More, Thomas. Utopia. Project Gutenberg, 2005.\r\n\r\n Phillips, Joshua. \"Staking Claims to <em>Utopia</em>: Thomas More, Fiction, and Intellectual         Property.\" <em>Material Culture and Cultural Materialisms in the Middle Ages and             Renaissance</em>. Ed. Curtis Perry. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2001. 111-138. Rpt.       in         <em>Literature Criticism from 1400 to 1800</em>. Ed. Thomas J. Schoenberg. Vol. 140.             Detroit: Gale, 2008. <em>Literature Resource Center</em>. Web. 4 Sep. 2012.\r\n\r\n Skinner, Quentin. \"The Lesson of Thomas More.\" <em>New York Review</em>. 12 10 1978: n. page. Web. 4 Sep. 2012. &lt;<a href=\"http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1978/oct/12/the-lesson-of-thomas-more/\">http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1978/oct/12/the-lesson-of-thomas-more/</a>&gt;.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;','Thomas More\'s Utopia','','inherit','open','open','','2451-revision-10','','','2012-11-05 13:20:26','2012-11-05 19:20:26','',2451,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2902',0,'revision','',0),(2894,56,'2012-11-05 17:01:30','2012-11-05 23:01:30','[caption id=\"attachment_2911\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"300\"]<a href=\"http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ShowFullRecord?%24searchId=3&amp;%24showFullDescriptionTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.pageSize=10&amp;%24partitionIndex=0&amp;%24digiSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24submitId=1&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.search=true&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.resultPageModel=true&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24showArchivalDescriptionsTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.pageSize=1&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24sort=RELEVANCE_ASC&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.search=true&amp;%24highlight=false\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-2911\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam-300x247.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"247\" /></a> This copy, from The National Archives includes Brady\'s handwritten notes recording the names of those in the photograph.[/caption]\n\nHistorically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  In them, they surround themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero).  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (\"Winterthur Portfolio\").  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a sitting head of state.\n\n<!--more-->Abraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\n\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\n\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\n\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\n\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\n\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\n\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\n\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\n\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\n\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\n\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\n\n[caption id=\"attachment_2914\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"294\"]<a href=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\"><img class=\"size-full wp-image-2914\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"294\" height=\"240\" /></a> A Harvest of Death[/caption]\n\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\n\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\n\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\n\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\n\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\n\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\n\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\n\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Image Sources</p>\n\"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\"  The National Archives only allows links to the main page.  - http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/ - Search for ARC Identifier 527118\n\n\"A Harvest of Death\" - http://www.getty.edu/art/gettyguide/artObjectDetails?artobj=64592\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\n\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.  This is an example of the confusion surrounding Brady, O\'Sullivan and Gardner\'s work.\n\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 Oct 1997: n. p. Web. 3 Nov. 2012. http://www.unz.org/Pub/Slate-1997oct-00126.\n\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\n\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/1862/10/20/news/brady-s-photographs-pictures-of-the-dead-at-antietam.html.\n\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\n\nFiero, Gloria K.. Trans. Array The Humanistic Tradition. 6th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2011. Print.\n\nThis is the humanities text for this course. It provides a good general overview of general history.  I used it to get information about King Louis XIV state portrait.\n\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012. https://www.nytimes.com/1992/08/16/arts/photography-view-a-deliberate-unflinching-witness-to-history.html?src=pm.\n\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.  It also talked about how Gardner viewed photography as a medium.\n\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\n\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"Reporting the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\n\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\n\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.  It gave general background about Lincoln and his use of photography.\n\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\n\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\n\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\n\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\n\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\n\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\n\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\n\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\n\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\n\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\n\nRev. of Mathew Brady and the Image of History, by Mary Panzer; Jeana K. Foley.  Winterthur Portfolio, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Spring 1999): 83-84. JSTOR. Web. 5 Nov. 2012.\n\nThis is a review of the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\n\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\n\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.  I used this source to verify Gardner\'s description of \"A Harvest of War\".\n\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\n\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Further Reading</p>\n <a title=\"&quot;All the Ladies Like Whiskers&quot;\" href=\"http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.htm\" target=\"_blank\">“All the ladies like whiskers”</a> shows a copy of the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.  I always thought this story was a myth, but it turns out to be true.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-autosave','','','2012-11-05 17:01:30','2012-11-05 23:01:30','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2894',0,'revision','',0),(2908,56,'2012-11-05 14:17:50','2012-11-05 20:17:50','&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\nThesis - Should be preserved because it was the first time that photography shaped public opinion about a leader. “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting.” (Panzer, Foley and et. al)\r\n\r\n-----------------\r\n\r\nAbraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\nInteresting Reading - http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.html - “All the ladies like whiskers” shows the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-16','','','2012-11-05 14:17:50','2012-11-05 20:17:50','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2908',0,'revision','',0),(2895,1,'2012-11-05 12:56:53','2012-11-05 18:56:53','<img class=\"alignnone\" src=\"http://img.ezinemark.com/imagemanager2/files/2010_re/2010-08-28-19-16-27-10-statue-of-liberty.jpeg\" alt=\"\" width=\"450\" height=\"299\" />The Statue of Liberty is one of the greatest sculpture monuments of its time. One of the most popular tourist attractions in the world and is one of the most progressive and innovative statues of its time, its design and architecture surpass all feats in its construction and how it was built. Gustave Eiffel was the genius behind the design of the Statue of Liberty, who was a world renowned known engineer best known for his famous Eiffel tower that is still to this day one of the most captivating towers in the world. Eiffel introduced a new form of design that was innovative, structurally sound and at the same time possessed an amazing unique brilliance to his work. Eiffel changed the world of design and architecture. The Statue of Liberty is a timeless masterpiece and is a representation of technology and innovation in a progressive era, for these reasons the Statue of Liberty should be preserved for the future.\r\nThe Statue of Liberty was completed in 1886, in the New York harbor, from the site of the viewer the monument is 300 feet high in feet, it is an amazing sight to witness. The Statue is not just amazing for its looks but it is amazing for the way in which it was built. The Statue of Liberty is an example and a product of its innovative and progressive timeframe. Technology was on the rise in the late 1800’s and steel and iron were being used in innovative ways that no one thought could ever be used. The United States Navy was producing and constructing warships that were made of iron and steel in huge quantities. In the 1870’s the prototype telephone was invented by Alexander Gram Bell. Thomas Edison just invented the light bulb as well as the phonograph. This innovative and progressive timeframe crossed into Architecture and design and was being utilized throughout the country. During the time in which the Statue of liberty was built the scheme on how it was built was a progressive scheme and was being used in many different ways during that period according to Marvin Trachtenburg. He goes on to say that in that progressive time frame there was a combination of new and traditional structures that were also built with the same unit masonry shell and a visible internal structure entirely or partly iron. This mode was employed in a variety of new building types, including early factories, commercial buildings, markets, galleries, and stores, the railway stations were the most widespread example of such combinations. (Marvin 446)\r\nThe Statue of Liberty was definitely typical of its time. The statue was given as a gift from France and was to represent a token of friendship between France and America as they fought together for independence from Brittan in the American Revolutionary war. The statue carries a torch of light in her right hand which is a beacon of light and holds a tablet in her left hand with the inscription July 4, 1776 which was to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the United States as a nation the day the declaration of independence was signed. The sculptor Fredric Auguste Bartholdi choose to sculpt after the roman goddess Libertas, who was the roman goddess of freedom. (History ch.) The Statue of Liberty as a symbol had huge significance not just on France and America but to the world as well. The Statue of Liberty is not just a symbol of friendship it is a symbol of modern technology being conveyed thru the art of architecture and sculpture on the highest stage. The French choose to honor the United States in the highest way and form and the Statue of Liberty had to be flawless, in terms of design and construction to commemorate the friendship between the two countries. The Statue of Liberty was also typical of its time in terms of technology and innovation on initial construction and design of the statue. The boom and wave of technology had just hit the United States and was being seen in through newer inventions and innovative ways of thinking, from Edison’s invention of the light bulb to Alexander Gram Bell’s invention of the telephone, these newer technical ways of thinking were being transformed into the arts like the Statue of Liberty. Marvin describes the masterpiece as a “granite pedestal surmounted by a Neo classical colossus fabricated of hammered copper. Completely hidden within is the extraordinary structural program that supports the visible forms. The foundation block constitutes the largest concrete mass of its day. The concrete core of the pedestal walls is reinforced by ferrous elements that are run along the inner surface in the form of heavy iron straps bolted to massive cross yokes of steel girders anchored in the masonry at the top and bottom. But the armature of the statue itself-connected by huge bolts of the above mentioned cross girders-is the most remarkable of the monuments supports. The core of his wrought-iron structure is a tapering pylon of massive angle grinders cross-laced into a rigid unit, from which secondary, much lighter trust work reaches toward the interior skin of the statue. The actual connection of the skin is effected by a system of flexible, springlike iron bars (that allow for thermal expansion of the statue), while a powerful, cantilevered beam rises to carry the asymmetrical load of the torch arm. The copper shell of Frederic Auguste Bartholdi’s statue is entirely hung from his multilayered skeleton, like a modern curtain wall, being nowhere self supporting at only 2.5 mm in thickness.”(Marvin 446) The genius behind the design of Statue of Liberty is by far an intricate systematic new way of design that was progressive in its design and was only seen in other works that were also designed by Gusave Eiffel that were as well typical of the progressive timeframe. One of the most famous towers in the world today, the Eiffel Tower, this was also built around same time frame in 1887, one year after the Statue of Liberty, and was very similar in design to the Statue of Liberty. Both the Eiffel tower and the Statue of Liberty had a systematic intricate design to them, the Eiffel tower had 18,000 pieces to its construction that all served a detailed constructive and aesthetic purpose which was also known for its grandeur, not just for its design but size as well. The Eiffel Tower is almost 1,000 feet tall and is also constructed of iron, and can with stand the worst nautical winds based on the way it was designed, both the Eiffel tower and the Statue of Liberty were progressive monumental feats in how they were constructed and were both considered High-Technology architecture that made them typical of its progressive and technical timeframe. The Statue of Liberty sets itself apart from most of the architecture in the modern world because before the construction of the Statue of Liberty, the modern world of architecture had a Victorian gothic theme that was considered the traditional norm. This was seen in the Houses of Parliament in London constructed in the mid 1800s by Sir Charles Barry, most churches and houses had the same style and theme around Europe of the time. With the help of technology the Statue of Liberty broke away from those traditional norms and in its style and design progressed forward and elevated a shift towards a high technology based architectural movement that was seen in the late 1800’s. The Statue of Liberty also contrasted with the Eiffel tower in many ways, the most noticeable examples is the Eiffel tower is built of iron with iron as its exterior, the iron is puddled iron and is arched that serves a design and supporting purpose. The ornamental arches at the bottom of the base of Eiffel tower serve more of an aesthetic purpose and do not serve a structural purpose at all. The base at the bottom of the Statue of Liberty is a foundation piece that supports the weight of the Statue which is 450,000 pounds. The Statue of Liberty was built of hammered sheets of copper and has an iron interior that is used for support. The Statue of Liberty received a lot of acclaim from the time it was built to commemorate the 100 years of the United States as a Nation and represent the relations between two nations and serve as a symbol that resembled freedom and rebellion today it still receives high acclaim.\r\nThe Statue of Liberty has been seen on stamps that have been minted, the 15 cent, the 3 cent, 8 cent and 11 cent stamp all have the Statue of Liberty on them also the New York quarter was minted with Lady Liberty’s picture on it. The Statue of Liberty receives millions of tourist each year all captivated by its beauty and design it is one of the most popular places to visit in America. The Statue of Liberty has been seen in television ads and was also seen in the movie “The Planet of The Apes” and has also been in the popular television show “fringe”. Every fourth of July, the United States day of independence hundreds of people flock to the Statue of Liberty to see a firework show that is on display with Lady Liberty there standing tall and proud representing freedom and hope for a country. People today are very captivated by the Statue and it has become not just a national landmark but a symbol of the spirit of freedom. The Statue of Liberty is an icon to the United States and is a national landmark but it is more than that, It has become a symbol that is American, the Statue of Liberty was the first sight immigrants saw while coming to America, it was not just a symbol of freedom to Americans back then till now but to other nations as well who were fleeing a country or wanting to flee a country.\r\nMy personal reactions to the work of the Statue of Liberty were good on discovering the actual architecture of the statue, it is hard to get past all the popularity, build up and hype that the Statue of Liberty is surrounded in. The Statue is designed very intricately and has a unique hidden design that goes unnoticed, I didn’t know it was such a breakthrough in architecture in terms of High Technology architecture and had such an amazing hidden interior. I think that is what I like about the Statue the most is most people including me do not know of the hidden science or genius underneath the surface, if they can get past through all the glamour and hype they can find an amazingly sound systematic engineering marvel that goes unnoticed for its engineering and actual design. In closing I think the Statue of Liberty should be preserved for its architecture and its design not its story and hype behind the statue of liberty. The Statue of Liberty created a wave of Technology and science integrated through architecture, the world we live in today we are faced with technology growing in extremely fast measures. The Statue of Liberty was a statue that made the leap and changed architecture based on its systematic design, interior and exterior. Its design catapulted a new wave and style that was high tech architecture in an innovative time period. The Statue of Liberty was a statue that shifted with times and changed the world as we know it, for these reason the Statue of Liberty should be preserved for future generations.\r\n\r\nWorks Cited\r\n\r\nMarvin Trachtenburg, Architecture. From pre history to post modernity, N.Y. 2006.\r\nWebsite, http://statueofliberty.org/Statue_History.html\r\nWebsite: http://www.history.com/topics/statue-of-liberty','The Statue of Liberty should be preserved because it transformed Architecture ','','inherit','open','open','','2694-revision-5','','','2012-11-05 12:56:53','2012-11-05 18:56:53','',2694,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2895',0,'revision','',0),(2896,1,'2012-11-05 14:02:52','2012-11-05 20:02:52','<img class=\"aligncenter\" src=\"http://img.ezinemark.com/imagemanager2/files/2010_re/2010-08-28-19-16-27-10-statue-of-liberty.jpeg\" alt=\"\" width=\"402\" height=\"267\" />\r\nThe Statue of Liberty is one of the greatest sculpture monuments of its time. One of the most popular tourist attractions in the world and is one of the most progressive and innovative statues of its time, its design and architecture surpass all feats in its construction and how it was built. Gustave Eiffel was the genius behind the design of the Statue of Liberty, who was a world renowned known engineer best known for his famous Eiffel tower that is still to this day one of the most captivating towers in the world. Eiffel introduced a new form of design that was innovative, structurally sound and at the same time possessed an amazing unique brilliance to his work. Eiffel changed the world of design and architecture. The Statue of Liberty is a timeless masterpiece and is a representation of technology and innovation in a progressive era, for these reasons the Statue of Liberty should be preserved for the future.\r\n\r\nThe Statue of Liberty was completed in 1886, in the New York harbor, from the site of the viewer the monument is 300 feet high in feet, it is an amazing sight to witness. The Statue is not just amazing for its looks but it is amazing for the way in which it was built. The Statue of Liberty is an example and a product of its innovative and progressive timeframe. Technology was on the rise in the late 1800’s and steel and iron were being used in innovative ways that no one thought could ever be used. The United States Navy was producing and constructing warships that were made of iron and steel in huge quantities. In the 1870’s the prototype telephone was invented by Alexander Gram Bell. Thomas Edison just invented the light bulb as well as the phonograph. This innovative and progressive timeframe crossed into Architecture and design and was being utilized throughout the country. During the time in which the Statue of liberty was built the scheme on how it was built was a progressive scheme and was being used in many different ways during that period according to Marvin Trachtenburg. He goes on to say that in that progressive time frame there was a combination of new and traditional structures that were also built with the same unit masonry shell and a visible internal structure entirely or partly iron. This mode was employed in a variety of new building types, including early factories, commercial buildings, markets, galleries, and stores, the railway stations were the most widespread example of such combinations. (Marvin 446)\r\n\r\nThe Statue of Liberty was definitely typical of its time. The statue was given as a gift from France and was to represent a token of friendship between France and America as they fought together for independence from Brittan in the American Revolutionary war. The statue carries a torch of light in her right hand which is a beacon of light and holds a tablet in her left hand with the inscription July 4, 1776 which was to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the United States as a nation the day the declaration of independence was signed. The sculptor Fredric Auguste Bartholdi choose to sculpt after the roman goddess Libertas, who was the roman goddess of freedom. (History ch.) The Statue of Liberty as a symbol had huge significance not just on France and America but to the world as well. The Statue of Liberty is not just a symbol of friendship it is a symbol of modern technology being conveyed thru the art of architecture and sculpture on the highest stage. The French choose to honor the United States in the highest way and form and the Statue of Liberty had to be flawless, in terms of design and construction to commemorate the friendship between the two countries. The Statue of Liberty was also typical of its time in terms of technology and innovation on initial construction and design of the statue. The boom and wave of technology had just hit the United States and was being seen in through newer inventions and innovative ways of thinking, from Edison’s invention of the light bulb to Alexander Gram Bell’s invention of the telephone, these newer technical ways of thinking were being transformed into the arts like the Statue of Liberty. Marvin describes the masterpiece as a “granite pedestal surmounted by a Neo classical colossus fabricated of hammered copper. Completely hidden within is the extraordinary structural program that supports the visible forms. The foundation block constitutes the largest concrete mass of its day. The concrete core of the pedestal walls is reinforced by ferrous elements that are run along the inner surface in the form of heavy iron straps bolted to massive cross yokes of steel girders anchored in the masonry at the top and bottom. But the armature of the statue itself-connected by huge bolts of the above mentioned cross girders-is the most remarkable of the monuments supports. The core of his wrought-iron structure is a tapering pylon of massive angle grinders cross-laced into a rigid unit, from which secondary, much lighter trust work reaches toward the interior skin of the statue. The actual connection of the skin is effected by a system of flexible, springlike iron bars (that allow for thermal expansion of the statue), while a powerful, cantilevered beam rises to carry the asymmetrical load of the torch arm.\r\n\r\nThe copper shell of Frederic Auguste Bartholdi’s statue is entirely hung from his multilayered skeleton, like a modern curtain wall, being nowhere self supporting at only 2.5 mm in thickness.”(Marvin 446) The genius behind the design of Statue of Liberty is by far an intricate systematic new way of design that was progressive in its design and was only seen in other works that were also designed by Gusave Eiffel that were as well typical of the progressive timeframe. One of the most famous towers in the world today, the Eiffel Tower, this was also built around same time frame in 1887, one year after the Statue of Liberty, and was very similar in design to the Statue of Liberty. Both the Eiffel tower and the Statue of Liberty had a systematic intricate design to them, the Eiffel tower had 18,000 pieces to its construction that all served a detailed constructive and aesthetic purpose which was also known for its grandeur, not just for its design but size as well. The Eiffel Tower is almost 1,000 feet tall and is also constructed of iron, and can with stand the worst nautical winds based on the way it was designed, both the Eiffel tower and the Statue of Liberty were progressive monumental feats in how they were constructed and were both considered High-Technology architecture that made them typical of its progressive and technical timeframe. The Statue of Liberty sets itself apart from most of the architecture in the modern world because before the construction of the Statue of Liberty, the modern world of architecture had a Victorian gothic theme that was considered the traditional norm. This was seen in the Houses of Parliament in London constructed in the mid 1800s by Sir Charles Barry, most churches and houses had the same style and theme around Europe of the time. With the help of technology the Statue of Liberty broke away from those traditional norms and in its style and design progressed forward and elevated a shift towards a high technology based architectural movement that was seen in the late 1800’s.\r\n\r\nThe Statue of Liberty also contrasted with the Eiffel tower in many ways, the most noticeable examples is the Eiffel tower is built of iron with iron as its exterior, the iron is puddled iron and is arched that serves a design and supporting purpose. The ornamental arches at the bottom of the base of Eiffel tower serve more of an aesthetic purpose and do not serve a structural purpose at all. The base at the bottom of the Statue of Liberty is a foundation piece that supports the weight of the Statue which is 450,000 pounds. The Statue of Liberty was built of hammered sheets of copper and has an iron interior that is used for support. The Statue of Liberty received a lot of acclaim from the time it was built to commemorate the 100 years of the United States as a Nation and represent the relations between two nations and serve as a symbol that resembled freedom and rebellion today it still receives high acclaim.\r\n\r\nThe Statue of Liberty has been seen on stamps that have been minted, the 15 cent, the 3 cent, 8 cent and 11 cent stamp all have the Statue of Liberty on them also the New York quarter was minted with Lady Liberty’s picture on it. The Statue of Liberty receives millions of tourist each year all captivated by its beauty and design it is one of the most popular places to visit in America. The Statue of Liberty has been seen in television ads and was also seen in the movie “The Planet of The Apes” and has also been in the popular television show “fringe”. Every fourth of July, the United States day of independence hundreds of people flock to the Statue of Liberty to see a firework show that is on display with Lady Liberty there standing tall and proud representing freedom and hope for a country. People today are very captivated by the Statue and it has become not just a national landmark but a symbol of the spirit of freedom. The Statue of Liberty is an icon to the United States and is a national landmark but it is more than that, It has become a symbol that is American, the Statue of Liberty was the first sight immigrants saw while coming to America, it was not just a symbol of freedom to Americans back then till now but to other nations as well who were fleeing a country or wanting to flee a country.\r\n\r\nMy personal reactions to the work of the Statue of Liberty were good on discovering the actual architecture of the statue, it is hard to get past all the popularity, build up and hype that the Statue of Liberty is surrounded in. The Statue is designed very intricately and has a unique hidden design that goes unnoticed, I didn’t know it was such a breakthrough in architecture in terms of High Technology architecture and had such an amazing hidden interior. I think that is what I like about the Statue the most is most people including me do not know of the hidden science or genius underneath the surface, if they can get past through all the glamour and hype they can find an amazingly sound systematic engineering marvel that goes unnoticed for its engineering and actual design. In closing I think the Statue of Liberty should be preserved for its architecture and its design not its story and hype behind the statue of liberty. The Statue of Liberty created a wave of Technology and science integrated through architecture, the world we live in today we are faced with technology growing in extremely fast measures. The Statue of Liberty was a statue that made the leap and changed architecture based on its systematic design, interior and exterior. Its design catapulted a new wave and style that was high tech architecture in an innovative time period. The Statue of Liberty was a statue that shifted with times and changed the world as we know it, for these reason the Statue of Liberty should be preserved for future generations.\r\n\r\nWorks Cited\r\n\r\nMarvin Trachtenburg, Architecture. From pre history to post modernity, N.Y. 2006.\r\nWebsite, http://statueofliberty.org/Statue_History.html\r\nWebsite: http://www.history.com/topics/statue-of-liberty\r\n\r\nImage:http://img.ezinemark.com/imagemanager2/files/2010_re/2010-08-28-19-16-27-10-statue-of-liberty.jpeg','The Statue of Liberty should be preserved because it transformed Architecture ','','inherit','open','open','','2694-revision-6','','','2012-11-05 14:02:52','2012-11-05 20:02:52','',2694,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2896',0,'revision','',0),(2897,1,'2012-11-05 14:03:14','2012-11-05 20:03:14','<img class=\"aligncenter\" src=\"http://img.ezinemark.com/imagemanager2/files/2010_re/2010-08-28-19-16-27-10-statue-of-liberty.jpeg\" alt=\"\" width=\"402\" height=\"267\" />\r\nThe Statue of Liberty is one of the greatest sculpture monuments of its time. One of the most popular tourist attractions in the world and is one of the most progressive and innovative statues of its time, its design and architecture surpass all feats in its construction and how it was built. Gustave Eiffel was the genius behind the design of the Statue of Liberty, who was a world renowned known engineer best known for his famous Eiffel tower that is still to this day one of the most captivating towers in the world. Eiffel introduced a new form of design that was innovative, structurally sound and at the same time possessed an amazing unique brilliance to his work. Eiffel changed the world of design and architecture. The Statue of Liberty is a timeless masterpiece and is a representation of technology and innovation in a progressive era, for these reasons the Statue of Liberty should be preserved for the future.\r\n\r\nThe Statue of Liberty was completed in 1886, in the New York harbor, from the site of the viewer the monument is 300 feet high in feet, it is an amazing sight to witness. The Statue is not just amazing for its looks but it is amazing for the way in which it was built. The Statue of Liberty is an example and a product of its innovative and progressive timeframe. Technology was on the rise in the late 1800’s and steel and iron were being used in innovative ways that no one thought could ever be used. The United States Navy was producing and constructing warships that were made of iron and steel in huge quantities. In the 1870’s the prototype telephone was invented by Alexander Gram Bell. Thomas Edison just invented the light bulb as well as the phonograph. This innovative and progressive timeframe crossed into Architecture and design and was being utilized throughout the country. During the time in which the Statue of liberty was built the scheme on how it was built was a progressive scheme and was being used in many different ways during that period according to Marvin Trachtenburg. He goes on to say that in that progressive time frame there was a combination of new and traditional structures that were also built with the same unit masonry shell and a visible internal structure entirely or partly iron. This mode was employed in a variety of new building types, including early factories, commercial buildings, markets, galleries, and stores, the railway stations were the most widespread example of such combinations. (Marvin 446)\r\n\r\nThe Statue of Liberty was definitely typical of its time. The statue was given as a gift from France and was to represent a token of friendship between France and America as they fought together for independence from Brittan in the American Revolutionary war. The statue carries a torch of light in her right hand which is a beacon of light and holds a tablet in her left hand with the inscription July 4, 1776 which was to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the United States as a nation the day the declaration of independence was signed. The sculptor Fredric Auguste Bartholdi choose to sculpt after the roman goddess Libertas, who was the roman goddess of freedom. (History ch.) The Statue of Liberty as a symbol had huge significance not just on France and America but to the world as well. The Statue of Liberty is not just a symbol of friendship it is a symbol of modern technology being conveyed thru the art of architecture and sculpture on the highest stage. The French choose to honor the United States in the highest way and form and the Statue of Liberty had to be flawless, in terms of design and construction to commemorate the friendship between the two countries. The Statue of Liberty was also typical of its time in terms of technology and innovation on initial construction and design of the statue. The boom and wave of technology had just hit the United States and was being seen in through newer inventions and innovative ways of thinking, from Edison’s invention of the light bulb to Alexander Gram Bell’s invention of the telephone, these newer technical ways of thinking were being transformed into the arts like the Statue of Liberty. Marvin describes the masterpiece as a “granite pedestal surmounted by a Neo classical colossus fabricated of hammered copper. Completely hidden within is the extraordinary structural program that supports the visible forms. The foundation block constitutes the largest concrete mass of its day. The concrete core of the pedestal walls is reinforced by ferrous elements that are run along the inner surface in the form of heavy iron straps bolted to massive cross yokes of steel girders anchored in the masonry at the top and bottom. But the armature of the statue itself-connected by huge bolts of the above mentioned cross girders-is the most remarkable of the monuments supports. The core of his wrought-iron structure is a tapering pylon of massive angle grinders cross-laced into a rigid unit, from which secondary, much lighter trust work reaches toward the interior skin of the statue. The actual connection of the skin is effected by a system of flexible, springlike iron bars (that allow for thermal expansion of the statue), while a powerful, cantilevered beam rises to carry the asymmetrical load of the torch arm.\r\n\r\nThe copper shell of Frederic Auguste Bartholdi’s statue is entirely hung from his multilayered skeleton, like a modern curtain wall, being nowhere self supporting at only 2.5 mm in thickness.”(Marvin 446) The genius behind the design of Statue of Liberty is by far an intricate systematic new way of design that was progressive in its design and was only seen in other works that were also designed by Gusave Eiffel that were as well typical of the progressive timeframe. One of the most famous towers in the world today, the Eiffel Tower, this was also built around same time frame in 1887, one year after the Statue of Liberty, and was very similar in design to the Statue of Liberty. Both the Eiffel tower and the Statue of Liberty had a systematic intricate design to them, the Eiffel tower had 18,000 pieces to its construction that all served a detailed constructive and aesthetic purpose which was also known for its grandeur, not just for its design but size as well. The Eiffel Tower is almost 1,000 feet tall and is also constructed of iron, and can with stand the worst nautical winds based on the way it was designed, both the Eiffel tower and the Statue of Liberty were progressive monumental feats in how they were constructed and were both considered High-Technology architecture that made them typical of its progressive and technical timeframe. The Statue of Liberty sets itself apart from most of the architecture in the modern world because before the construction of the Statue of Liberty, the modern world of architecture had a Victorian gothic theme that was considered the traditional norm. This was seen in the Houses of Parliament in London constructed in the mid 1800s by Sir Charles Barry, most churches and houses had the same style and theme around Europe of the time. With the help of technology the Statue of Liberty broke away from those traditional norms and in its style and design progressed forward and elevated a shift towards a high technology based architectural movement that was seen in the late 1800’s.\r\n\r\nThe Statue of Liberty also contrasted with the Eiffel tower in many ways, the most noticeable examples is the Eiffel tower is built of iron with iron as its exterior, the iron is puddled iron and is arched that serves a design and supporting purpose. The ornamental arches at the bottom of the base of Eiffel tower serve more of an aesthetic purpose and do not serve a structural purpose at all. The base at the bottom of the Statue of Liberty is a foundation piece that supports the weight of the Statue which is 450,000 pounds. The Statue of Liberty was built of hammered sheets of copper and has an iron interior that is used for support. The Statue of Liberty received a lot of acclaim from the time it was built to commemorate the 100 years of the United States as a Nation and represent the relations between two nations and serve as a symbol that resembled freedom and rebellion today it still receives high acclaim.\r\n\r\nThe Statue of Liberty has been seen on stamps that have been minted, the 15 cent, the 3 cent, 8 cent and 11 cent stamp all have the Statue of Liberty on them also the New York quarter was minted with Lady Liberty’s picture on it. The Statue of Liberty receives millions of tourist each year all captivated by its beauty and design it is one of the most popular places to visit in America. The Statue of Liberty has been seen in television ads and was also seen in the movie “The Planet of The Apes” and has also been in the popular television show “fringe”. Every fourth of July, the United States day of independence hundreds of people flock to the Statue of Liberty to see a firework show that is on display with Lady Liberty there standing tall and proud representing freedom and hope for a country. People today are very captivated by the Statue and it has become not just a national landmark but a symbol of the spirit of freedom. The Statue of Liberty is an icon to the United States and is a national landmark but it is more than that, It has become a symbol that is American, the Statue of Liberty was the first sight immigrants saw while coming to America, it was not just a symbol of freedom to Americans back then till now but to other nations as well who were fleeing a country or wanting to flee a country.\r\n\r\nMy personal reactions to the work of the Statue of Liberty were good on discovering the actual architecture of the statue, it is hard to get past all the popularity, build up and hype that the Statue of Liberty is surrounded in. The Statue is designed very intricately and has a unique hidden design that goes unnoticed, I didn’t know it was such a breakthrough in architecture in terms of High Technology architecture and had such an amazing hidden interior. I think that is what I like about the Statue the most is most people including me do not know of the hidden science or genius underneath the surface, if they can get past through all the glamour and hype they can find an amazingly sound systematic engineering marvel that goes unnoticed for its engineering and actual design. In closing I think the Statue of Liberty should be preserved for its architecture and its design not its story and hype behind the statue of liberty. The Statue of Liberty created a wave of Technology and science integrated through architecture, the world we live in today we are faced with technology growing in extremely fast measures. The Statue of Liberty was a statue that made the leap and changed architecture based on its systematic design, interior and exterior. Its design catapulted a new wave and style that was high tech architecture in an innovative time period. The Statue of Liberty was a statue that shifted with times and changed the world as we know it, for these reason the Statue of Liberty should be preserved for future generations.\r\n\r\nWorks Cited\r\n\r\nMarvin Trachtenburg, Architecture. From pre history to post modernity, N.Y. 2006.\r\nWebsite, http://statueofliberty.org/Statue_History.html\r\nWebsite: http://www.history.com/topics/statue-of-liberty\r\n\r\nImage: http://img.ezinemark.com/imagemanager2/files/2010_re/2010-08-28-19-16-27-10-statue-of-liberty.jpeg','The Statue of Liberty should be preserved because it transformed Architecture ','','inherit','open','open','','2694-revision-7','','','2012-11-05 14:03:14','2012-11-05 20:03:14','',2694,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2897',0,'revision','',0),(2898,1,'2012-11-05 13:09:54','2012-11-05 19:09:54','<p align=\"center\"><img src=\"http://pixhost.me/avaxhome/e3/43/001843e3_medium.jpeg\" alt=\"\" width=\"330\" height=\"300\" /></p>\r\n<p align=\"center\"><a href=\"http://pixhost.me/avaxhome/e3/43/001843e3_medium.jpeg\">http://pixhost.me/avaxhome/e3/43/001843e3_medium.jpeg</a></p>\r\n<p align=\"center\">Der Ring der Nibelungen</p>\r\n            <em>Der Ring des Nibelungen</em> (<em>The Ring of the Nibelung</em>) is a cycle of four brobdingnagian operas (one being a prelude) written by the German composer Richard Wagner. Wagner wrote the opera over the course of about twenty-six years, from 1848 to 1874. Wagner’s <em>Ring</em> tells a concupiscent story about the conflict in a human’s soul.  The Ring primarily portrays humanity’s lust and greed for money and power: the root of all humanity’s evil (Fisher29). Wagner was outraged by society’s political, social, and economic values and <em>The Ring</em> represented his sapient solution for the world’s ills, a vision in which the world of evil would become redeemed through love (Fisher “Ring of the Nibelung” 9). This opera should be preserved in the time capsule because the opera art form is the sum of many artistic expressions; this opera is a sublime fusion of words and music that is integrated with all the theatrical arts that can reach into the depths of the human soul.<!--more-->\r\n\r\n<em>The Ring</em> is a well thought out, intricately detailed, emotional rollercoaster ride through the human psyche. It takes us through all of man’s major emotions.  Love…lust…betrayal…greed….desire… etc. etc. Wagner based this opera off of German and Norse myths that ultimately represented universal human themes. <em>The Ring</em> starts off with a wasteland that is dominated by water. This portrays the beginning of creation with the water being the primal element from which life evolved (Fisher “Ring of the Nibelung” 35).This tetralogy revolves around a ring that wields ultimate power and wealth. Fisher states that “In the sagas, three villainous forces, Gods, Giants, and Dwarfs, are locked in eternal combat, rivals striving for mastery over the others and ultimately world domination. The Gods, Giants, and Dwarfs are decadent and corrupt, and in <em>The Ring</em>, they are symbolic representation of classes within Wagner’s 19th century contemporary society.”\r\n\r\n            Around the time Wagner wrote this opera, Europe’s industrial revolution and the political unrest following the French revolution helped nurture a viciously competitive struggle for the political and economic power of the region. The old way of obtaining power through inherited title and property came up against new forces that allowed people to benefit from the industrial-capitalist system. In the industrial-capitalist system, an individual could become quite wealthy from their investments or owning’s and through that obtains a political position. Through these means, persons of power and influence came to be that otherwise would not have received the chance.  It was the beginning and end of era, the beginning of an era where anyone could obtain power and prestige, and the end of an era where one obtained power and prestige through their birthright (Fisher6).\r\n\r\nDuring this time Wagner became consumed with the concept of nationalism as well the utopian dreams for social and political progress. Unfortunately, the new political powers of these times were just as corrupt as the old ones. Making promises of freedom, only to take those same freedoms away. Wagner became skeptical of the democratic process, of the unfulfilled promises and disappointed with the new political powers, that he reacted with much skepticism and despair, ultimately leading him to become and active and impetuous revolutionary. The final nail in the coffin that pushed Wagner over the edge into outright revolt against the political powers happened in 1851 while he in exile in Zurich.  Louis Napoleon (nephew to Napoleon Bonaparte) became the elected President of France.  Who came to power on the promises of liberty and democracy, only to turn around and create a dictatorship; He became Napoleon III, the totalitarian dictator of the Second Empire (Fisher4).\r\n\r\nWagner’s pessimism and skepticism coincided with the same ideas of the Romantic Movement in art, literature, and music. Romanticism represented a pessimistic backlash against the optimistic 18th century Enlightenment and the Age of Reason (Fisher8). Romanticists had a wistful yearning for the past and sought ways to represent the vanished glories; writers such as Sir Walter Scott, and Victor Hugo provided tributes to values of heroism and virtue that seemed to have vanished in their own industrial age. Wagner expressed his synonymous ideas through each act of <em>The Ring</em>. Wagner’s opera appealed to the masses by ultimately making people realize that the spiritual path to God and salvation was achieved through human love and freedom.\r\n\r\nWagner used leitmotifs in his opera. Leitmotifs are fairly simple musical phrases that describe certain ideologies, characters, objects or thoughts in that piece of work. Using the tempo of the music helped listeners to create a combined emotional response to relay a particular psychological insight (Fisher21). Operas at the time were commonplace for the masses, because of the added leisure time gained from the Industrial Revolution. Some of the other popular composers of this time were: Carl Maria von Webe, Giuseppe Verdi, and Gaetano Donizetti (Opera).  Wagner kept with the same style and composition of German composers of the 19th century which used classical music and the less sophisticated romanticisms.  All the while, he included an underlining tone to his works expressing his passions, views, and hatred which mirrored the majority of the peoples.\r\n\r\nWhile Wagner was creating operatic works that dramatize the legends and mythology of Nordic and Germanic culture (Opera), others such as: Franz Shubert and Hugo Wolf’s works were firmly rooted in the Classical opera form. Franz Shubert and Hugo Wolf’s pieces were somewhat the same as Wagner’s because their motivic accompaniments contrapuntally interacted with the vocal parts (Fisher22). The Ring is different from Shubert and Wolf’s work because Wagner was striving for a new music drama style with the ideal of “sung drama”. He wanted his opera to be a perfect expression of “speech-song” or Sprechgesang that would become balanced with the orchestral accompaniment. Wagner’s fusion and skillful harmonic interweaving and variation of leitmotifs convey powerful emotions; he ingeniously achieved the full embodiment of the leitmotif technique in <em>The Ring</em> (Fisher 22).\r\n\r\nThere were very many important political figures of the time at the very first public performance of <em>The Ring of the Nibelung. </em> Those present included: The Emperor of Germany; Emperor of Brazil; the people of France, England, and America had sent musicians and litterateurs to view this opera; these were some major figures to impress. The auditorium was filled with an audience that was more representative and critical than had ever been brought together before. With sixteen or seventeen hundred attendees to the first performance, the ONLY complaint they had was about the heat and lack of ventilation in the auditorium. The persons that portrayed the characters were thought to have somewhat lackluster voices but had outstanding acting skills. The orchestra was thought to be beautifully written and magnificent (New York Times, 1876).\r\n\r\nAlthough Richard Wagner\'s Ring is undoubtedly the peak of musical romanticism, and by many praised as the greatest work of art ever produced, many critics today do not have the same thoughts of people in the 19<sup>th</sup> century concerning <em>The Ring</em>. The modern takes on <em>The </em><em>Ring </em>are not adding up to the original version. For Will Robert Lepage’s version, which is the most recent version of the opera,<em> </em>Alex Ross went on to declare that “pound for pound, ton for ton, it is the most witless and wasteful production in modern operatic history.” Anthony Tommasini, in the Times, called it “the most frustrating opera production I have ever had to grapple with” (Ross). There are many other bad reviews such as these. I account for any differences on how <em>The Ring</em> was viewed today and then by believing it to be the production of the work. Nobody can seem to live up to Richard Wagner’s genius.\r\n\r\nNot having seen <em>The Ring of the Nibelung</em>, I can’t really say what I think about the production. However, I can tell how I feel about the story behind the production. I would love to see Robert Lepage’s version of <em>The Ring</em>.  Not knowing anything about music or operas, I’m sure I would enjoy it because of the story. The story sounds intriguing because of the moral lesson it is conveying and because of the use of mythology. I like how Wagner’s mythological creatures portray the people’s values of the 19<sup>th</sup> century. I believe Wagner hit the nail on the head when speaking of people’s values and beliefs. The majority of people of the 19<sup>th</sup> century, and throughout time, seemed to be very narcissistic. Wagner’s production, I believe was trying to get people to understand that their frame of thought was biased and unfair. People need to think of everyone, not only themselves.\r\n\r\n<em>Star Wars</em> is a very well-known production that can be compared to<em> The Ring</em>. The similarities between the two are not only the characters but of the music as well. Richard Wagner perfected leitmotivs used in <em>The Ring</em>; they can be heard all throughout the opera, <em>Star Wars</em> creators, George Lucas and John Williams, use leitmotivs as well.  The leitmotivs are used to identify the person, place, things, and ideas of the productions. Both pieces of work also had similar timelines; both were times of past with characters that represented new and old conflicts, societies and environment, and new and old hopes (Evenson). There is conflict between power and love and familial conflict between father and son which is the conflict of life and death, and there is also the conflict between father and daughter which is a conflict of will.  The works have a central symbol of power. <em>Star Wars</em> symbol is the “death star” and <em>The Ring’s </em>being “the ring forged out of the Rhinegold” both wielding the ultimate power (Evenson).\r\n\r\n Being as there are many similarities between <em>Star Wars </em>and <em>The Ring</em>, there are actually not that many differences other than the obvious. Those being the difference of both being set in completely different locations and epochs and completely different characters, but, the characters seem to have the same attributes. In <em>Star Wars</em>, the power seems to come from within oneself, and in <em>The Ring</em>, the power source comes from an outside force. <em>Star Wars</em> was close to being the same length of time as <em>The Ring</em>, while <em>The Ring </em>rang in at fifteen hours and had to been seen in four nights, <em>Star Wars</em> was only 13 hours long. The time in creating the productions was different as well. It took Wagner twenty-six years to complete his work and it took Lucas twenty-eight years for his work to be complete. Even though the music was similar in both works, it was also different. Wagner had a symphonic opera background whereas Lucas had more of a symphonic film. As said before, there are more similarities between the two pieces of work than differences (Evenson).\r\n\r\nFuture generations should be aware that egotistical beliefs are still prevalent today. The main point of <em>The Ring</em> was to reprimand the people of the 19<sup>th</sup> century for their vain ways. People need to be made aware of their thoughtlessness and vainglorious actions. Future generations should be aware that regardless of the era this piece of work was written so well that even one hundred and so many years later, the story still rings true of our current people’s self-absorption and will ring true for many generations to come. This opera is one that every child should be aware of to prevent future egotistical ways. To forget the past is to repeat the past.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n<p align=\"center\">Works cited:</p>\r\nFisher, Burton D. Exploring Wagner\'s The Ring Of The Nibelung : Der Ring Des Nibelungen. n.p.: Opera Journeys, 2002. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 2 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nhttp://ehis.ebscohost.com.lsproxy.austincc.edu/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/nlebk_72589_AN?sid=299cd252-708e-4562-87f1-ecc012f94bb1@sessionmgr12&amp;vid=1.\r\n\r\n“This eBook was the main book I went to for information about <em>The Ring</em>. It has information about the music in the opera, the story development of the opera, the historical references, and information about Wagner.”\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\nWagner, Richard, and Burton D. Fisher. Wagner\'s The Ring Of The Nibelung. n.p.: Opera Journeys, 2002. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 2 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\n“This eBook was an additional book I used for information about <em>The Ring.</em> It is a simplified format of the opera.”\r\n\r\nhttp://ehis.ebscohost.com.lsproxy.austincc.edu/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/nlebk_65926_AN?sid=7e6ba862-a2d3-4f7b-8255-50d7bad29bf7@sessionmgr13&amp;vid=1&amp;lpid=lp_7.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\nSpecial, Correspondent. “PROLOGUE TO THE TRILOGY.” Editorial. PROLOGUE TO THE TRILOGY [Bayreuth] 1876: 1-2. PROLOGUE TO THE TRILOGY. The Wagnerian, 06 Oct. 2012. Web. 02 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\n&lt;http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archivefree/pdf?res=9502E3DB123AE63BBC4F51DFBE66838D669FDE&gt;.\r\n\r\n“This is a copy of an old letter written to NY Times about the first night <em>The Ring</em> opened in Bayreuth, Bavaria. I used this letter to see what the reaction to <em>The Ring</em> was in the 19<sup>th</sup> century.”\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n\"Introduction to Opera.\" Introduction to Opera. OPERA America, n.d. Web. 03 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\n&lt;http://www.operaamerica.org/content/education/learningCenter/intro.aspx&gt;.\r\n\r\n“This website has a brief history of composers. I used it to learn about some of the composers.”\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\nEvenson, Kristian. \"The Star Wars Series and Wagner\'s RingStructural, Thematic and Musical Connections.\" Star Wars and Wagner\'s Ring. Richard Wagner Website, 11 Sept. 2004. Web. 04 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\n&lt;http://www.trell.org/wagner/starwars.html&gt;.\r\n\r\n“I used this website to compare <em>The Ring</em> and <em>Star Wars</em>. This website has a large amount of info. about both.”\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\nRoss, Alex. \"Encircling the \"Ring\"\" The New Yorker. Conde Nast, 7 May 2012. Web. 03 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\n&lt;http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2012/05/the-met-ring-cycle-critics.html&gt;.\r\n\r\n“This is a website I found that has critics opinions of Wagner’s work. I used it to tell how the opera is being perceived in our time.”','Der Ring der Nibelungen','','inherit','open','open','','2846-revision-7','','','2012-11-05 13:09:54','2012-11-05 19:09:54','',2846,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2898',0,'revision','',0),(2900,1,'2012-11-05 13:44:27','2012-11-05 19:44:27','Historically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  They surrounded themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero)  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a country\'s head of state.\r\n\r\n<!--more-->\r\n\r\nAbraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Interesting Reading</p>\r\nhttp://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.html - “All the ladies like whiskers” shows the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-11','','','2012-11-05 13:44:27','2012-11-05 19:44:27','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2900',0,'revision','',0),(2901,1,'2012-11-05 14:05:23','2012-11-05 20:05:23','[caption id=\"attachment_2893\" align=\"alignnone\" width=\"300\"]<a href=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam.jpg\" target=\"_blank\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-2893 \" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam-300x247.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"247\" /></a> This copy of the image includes Brady\'s handwritten recording of those in the photograph.[/caption]\r\n\r\nHistorically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  They surrounded themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero)  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a country\'s head of state.\r\n\r\n<!--more-->\r\n\r\nAbraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Interesting Reading</p>\r\nhttp://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.html - “All the ladies like whiskers” shows the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-12','','','2012-11-05 14:05:23','2012-11-05 20:05:23','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2901',0,'revision','',0),(2904,1,'2012-11-05 14:07:08','2012-11-05 20:07:08','<p style=\"text-align: center;\"></p>\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\">  <a href=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Utopia_Moro.jpg\"><img class=\"alignnone size-full wp-image-2884\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Utopia_Moro.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"200\" height=\"282\" /></a></p>\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"> <a href=\"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopia_(book\">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopia_(book</a>)</p>\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\nSir Thomas More was born in 1478, in the city of London.  After his earlier education at St. Anthony’s School, he was placed, as a boy, in the household of Cardinal John Morton. Cardinal Morton had been in earlier days that Bishop of Ely whom Richard III sent to the Tower and was a chief adviser of Henry VII, who in 1486 made him Archbishop of Canterbury, and nine months afterwards Lord Chancellor. In his late teens, Thomas More was sent to Canterbury College, Oxford, where he learned Greek from the first men who brought Greek studies from Italy to England—William Grocyn and Thomas Linacre (“Introduction” 3). At the age of twenty-one he entered Parliament, and soon after he was made Under-Sheriff of London.<!--more-->  In 1503 he opposed Henry VII’s proposal for a subsidy on account of the marriage portion of his daughter Margaret (“Introduction” 4). During the last years of Henry VII, More had drawn the ire of the king, and had begun to have thoughts of leaving the country. Henry VII died in 1509, when More was around the age of thirty.  In the first years of the reign of Henry VIII, he rose to large practice in the law courts, where it is said he refused to plead in cases which he thought unjust, and took no fees from widows, orphans, or the poor. In 1513 Thomas More, still Under-Sheriff of London, is said to have written his “History of the Life and Death of King Edward V, and of the Usurpation of Richard III”, the book, which seems to contain the knowledge and opinions of More’s mentor, Morton. In the year 1515 Wolsey, Archbishop of York, was made Cardinal by Leo X, Henry VIII made him Lord Chancellor, and from that year until 1523 the King and the Cardinal ruled England with absolute authority, calling no parliament.  In May of the year 1515, Thomas More was joined in a commission to the Low Countries with Cuthbert Tunstal and others to confer with the ambassadors of Charles V, then Archduke of Austria, upon a renewal of alliance.  On that embassy More was absent from England for six months, and while at Antwerp he established friendship with Peter Giles who was secretary to the municipality of Antwerp (“Inrtoduction” 5). While away from home, More was inspired by long and thought provoking conversations with friends and acquaintances. The product of these thoughts was possibly his best known work, <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Utopia</span>. More’s <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Utopia</span> was written in Latin, and is in two parts. The second, which describes the place Nusquama, as he called it sometimes in his letters—“Nowhere”, was probably written towards the end of 1515. The first part was most likely written in early in 1516.  The book was first printed at Louvain, in late 1516, under the editorship of Erasmus, Peter Giles, and other of More’s friends (“Introduction” 6).\r\n\r\nUtopia is a work of fiction by Thomas More published in 1516. The work reflects More’s political philosophies through the description of a fictional society’s social and political customs. The Renaissance brought forth many new concepts and ideas. In much of Europe where there had once been the strict control of Medieval monarchs and the constraining grip of the Roman Catholic church, innovations such as the printing press were making the the proliferation of new ways of thinking much harder to suppress. These innovations also brought old texts to newly literate masses whom prior to that time had been dependent upon religious leaders and government officials to bestow knowledge upon them. The masses now had access to prints of public records, the Bible, and other literature. This allowed them to take in what they read and form their own ideas about what was happening around them and what was in their best interest.\r\n\r\nThat time was also marked by the fact that most learned men (women were largely unable to participate in government or clergy) were of a religious background and men of the clergy in many cases were responsible for shaping legislation and counseling the rulers of respective nations. More was part of this reality and used it as best he could to change the status quo for the better of the nation he served. He was unpopular with the authority due to his propensity to be very outspoken and demonstrative about his displeasure with how certain aspects of the governing of England. He did not believe that even a king’s power should go unchecked, especially since the king has the future of his subjects to protect. In 1505 he opposed Henry VII’s proposal for a subsidy on account on the marriage portion of his daughter Margaret (‘Introduction” 4). More’s argument in the House of Commons was so persuasive that it is believed that the proposal were likely to have gone through if not for his vehement opposition. When the news of this reached the king, More life was made to be somewhat more difficult. So much so that he considered leaving England (More 4). Our county in particular based our foundation on principles similar to those of Sir Thomas More. For that reason I nominate that this important work should be preserved in our time capsule.\r\n\r\n<span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Utopia</span> begins with his being assigned by Henry VIII to confer with the ambassadors of a foreign nation in Antwerp to renew an alliance. While there he meets with friends to keep himself occupied and lift his spirits while away from his family. This is unique in that it mirrors his real life so closely. Up to this point of the story, these events closely resemble things that took place around this time in his real life. One of his close friends, Peter Giles, eventually introduces him to a man named Raphael Hythloday who is a well traveled man and considers himself a philosopher. Raphael is obliged to discuss with Peter and Thomas, his travels to distant lands and the governance of those places he has visited. Raphael speaks of an island by the name of Utopia, which he considers the greatest commonwealth he has ever seen. So much in fact that he comes to the conclusion that it may be the only place that deserves to be called a commonwealth.\r\n\r\nIn the next eight chapters, Raphael relates the specifics of Utopia’s constitution and culture. The composition of their governing bodies, the make up of their economy, their justice system, military, and religious beliefs are disseminated well if not in great detail. Generally, one could perceive the government of Utopia as communist, but upon closer analysis, the Utopian government would be closer to what we know as socialist. Quentin Skinner writes, “More is fiercely insistent, however, that the rich are usually the least rather than the most deserving of our respect, since their anxiety to protect and add to their possessions generally means that they worry only about their own self-interest, not about the interest of society as a whole.”\r\n\r\nMore’s idea of a perfect society appears to be one in which the citizens are concerned by the success of the society as a whole as opposed to being preoccupied with their personal well being. More writes:\r\n<blockquote>[...] in which all things if a sort are laid by themselves; and thither every father goes, and takes whatsoever he or his family stand in need of, without paying for it or leaving anything in exchange. There is no reason for giving a denial to any person, since there is such plenty of everything among them; and there is no danger of a man’s asking for more than he needs; they have no inducements to do this, since they are sure they shall always be supplied: it is the fear of want that makes any of the whole race of animals either greedy or ravenous; but, besides the fear, there is in man a pride that makes him fancy it a particular glory to excel others in pomp and excess; but by the laws of the Utopians. there is no room for this.</blockquote>\r\nThe ideal of operating as a collective and admonishing greed and materialism is reinforced throughout the work. This aspect of the book is important for our society to keep in mind. While I do subscribe to the idea of capitalism, there is something to be said for having a system that holds everyone that reaps the benefits of our society, accountable for contributing selflessly to ensure the future prosperity of our nation.\r\n\r\nRaphael states, “There are several sorts of religions, not only in different parts of the island, but even in every town.” In Utopia, religious freedom is paramount just as it is in our society. With recent outbreaks of violence in the Middle East, which are largely charged by the interpretation of religion, Utopia hold a particular belief that would ensure that the same would not like occur within their domain. Raphael speaks of taking some of the teachings of Christianity to Utopia, and those principles being well received by many of the locals. So much so that one man had so much zeal about his newfound faith that he began to condemn the beliefs of others with a violent tone. Though one of their most ancient laws prohibits a man from being punished for his religion, the man was sentenced to banishment because his inflammatory behavior could potentially incite sedition within the society (More 127). He was removed from the society, not because of the religion he practiced, but because the way he practiced it could have endangered someone within the society.\r\n\r\nMore and Desiderius Erasmus among colleagues created the Republic of letters, an imagined community that held at its center the ideal of humanism. “As we have seen, More’s Latin text functioned as part of the infrastructure of an imaginary Republic of Letter, and the book’s content represented, in some ways, a version of that ideal Republic. The extensive paratext that surrounds <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Utopia</span> helped to bind that community together and also to signal that Thomas More belonged there, as a citizen of that Republic,” wrote Joshua Phillips, a Literary and Cultural Studies Professor at the University of Memphis.\r\n\r\nIn 1535, More was removed from the world for standing on the same principles that he is praised for now. His conscientiousness and integrity would not allow him to recognize Henry VIII’s divorce from his wife, Catherine of Aragon, and his marriage to his new wife, Anne Boleyn. This was viewed as a crime by the authority. He was then called to recognized Henry VIII as the head of the Church rather than the Pope, and would not. He was then accused of high treason and eventually beheaded (Stephanie Forward). Though he died more than four centuries ago, his legacy lives on in the many thinkers that he inspired. In hopes that we can help his legacy live on, I suggest that we include his work in our time capsule, so that it may inspire the great thinkers of the future.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\">Works Cited</p>\r\n  Forward, Stephanie. “A Taste of Paradise: Thomas More’s Utopia.” <em>The English Review</em> Apr. 2001; 24. <em>Literature Resource Center</em>. Web. 8 Sep. 2012.\r\n\r\n“Introduction” . <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">Utopia</span>. More, Thomas. Project Gutenberg, 2005.\r\n\r\nMore, Thomas. Utopia. Project Gutenberg, 2005.\r\n\r\nPhillips, Joshua. \"Staking Claims to <em>Utopia</em>: Thomas More, Fiction, and Intellectual         Property.\" <em>Material Culture and Cultural Materialisms in the Middle Ages and             Renaissance</em>. Ed. Curtis Perry. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2001. 111-138. Rpt.       in         <em>Literature Criticism from 1400 to 1800</em>. Ed. Thomas J. Schoenberg. Vol. 140.             Detroit: Gale, 2008. <em>Literature Resource Center</em>. Web. 4 Sep. 2012.\r\n\r\nSkinner, Quentin. \"The Lesson of Thomas More.\" <em>New York Review</em>. 12 10 1978: n. page. Web. 4 Sep. 2012. &lt;<a href=\"http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1978/oct/12/the-lesson-of-thomas-more/\">http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1978/oct/12/the-lesson-of-thomas-more/</a>&gt;.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;','Thomas More\'s Utopia','','inherit','open','open','','2451-revision-11','','','2012-11-05 14:07:08','2012-11-05 20:07:08','',2451,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2904',0,'revision','',0),(2906,56,'2012-11-05 14:07:21','2012-11-05 20:07:21','[caption id=\"attachment_2893\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"300\"]<a href=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam.jpg\" target=\"_blank\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-2893 \" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam-300x247.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"247\" /></a> This copy of the image includes Brady\'s handwritten recording of those in the photograph.[/caption]\r\n\r\nHistorically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  They surrounded themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero).  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a country\'s head of state.\r\n\r\n<!--more-->\r\n\r\nAbraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Interesting Reading</p>\r\nhttp://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.html - “All the ladies like whiskers” shows the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-14','','','2012-11-05 14:07:21','2012-11-05 20:07:21','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2906',0,'revision','',0),(2909,56,'2012-11-05 14:18:39','2012-11-05 20:18:39','Historically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  They surrounded themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero)  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a country\'s head of state.\n\nAbraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\n\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\n\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\n\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\n\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\n\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\n\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\n\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\n\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\n\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\n\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\n\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\n\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\n\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\n\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\n\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\n\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\n\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\n\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\n\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\n\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\n\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\n\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\n\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\n\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\n\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\n\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\n\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\n\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\n\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\n\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\n\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\n\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\n\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\n\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\n\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\n\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\n\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\n\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\n\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\n\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\n\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\n\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\n\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\n\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\n\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\n\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\n\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\nInteresting Reading - http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.html - “All the ladies like whiskers” shows the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-17','','','2012-11-05 14:18:39','2012-11-05 20:18:39','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2909',0,'revision','',0),(2910,56,'2012-11-05 14:19:45','2012-11-05 20:19:45','Historically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  They surrounded themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero)  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a country\'s head of state.\r\n\r\nAbraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\nInteresting Reading - http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.html - “All the ladies like whiskers” shows the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-18','','','2012-11-05 14:19:45','2012-11-05 20:19:45','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2910',0,'revision','',0),(2911,56,'2012-11-05 14:22:37','2012-11-05 20:22:37','','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','This copy, from The National Archives includes Brady\'s handwritten notes recording the names of those in the photograph.','inherit','open','open','','landscape','','','2012-11-05 14:22:37','2012-11-05 20:22:37','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam.jpg',0,'attachment','image/jpeg',0),(2912,56,'2012-11-05 14:21:42','2012-11-05 20:21:42','Historically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  They surrounded themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero)  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a country\'s head of state.\n\n<!--more-->\n\nAbraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\n\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\n\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\n\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\n\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\n\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\n\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\n\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\n\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\n\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\n\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\n\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\n\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\n\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\n\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\n\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\n\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\n\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\n\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\n\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\n\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\n\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\n\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\n\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\n\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\n\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\n\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\n\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\n\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\n\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\n\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\n\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\n\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\n\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\n\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\n\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\n\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\n\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\n\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\n\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\n\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\n\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\n\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\n\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\n\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\n\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\n\n&nbsp;\n\n&nbsp;\n\nInteresting Reading - http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.html - “All the ladies like whiskers” shows the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-19','','','2012-11-05 14:21:42','2012-11-05 20:21:42','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2912',0,'revision','',0),(2914,56,'2012-11-05 14:34:14','2012-11-05 20:34:14','','A Harvest of Death','','inherit','open','open','','a-harvest-of-death','','','2012-11-05 14:34:14','2012-11-05 20:34:14','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg',0,'attachment','image/jpeg',0),(2915,56,'2012-11-05 14:26:43','2012-11-05 20:26:43','[caption id=\"attachment_2911\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"300\"]<a href=\"http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ShowFullRecord?%24searchId=3&amp;%24showFullDescriptionTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.pageSize=10&amp;%24partitionIndex=0&amp;%24digiSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24submitId=1&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.search=true&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.resultPageModel=true&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24showArchivalDescriptionsTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.pageSize=1&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24sort=RELEVANCE_ASC&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.search=true&amp;%24highlight=false\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-2911\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam-300x247.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"247\" /></a> This copy, from The National Archives includes Brady\'s handwritten notes recording the names of those in the photograph.[/caption]\r\n\r\nHistorically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  They surrounded themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero)  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a country\'s head of state.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n<!--more-->\r\n\r\nAbraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\nInteresting Reading - http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.html - “All the ladies like whiskers” shows the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-20','','','2012-11-05 14:26:43','2012-11-05 20:26:43','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2915',0,'revision','',0),(2916,56,'2012-11-05 14:47:10','2012-11-05 20:47:10','[caption id=\"attachment_2911\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"300\"]<a href=\"http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ShowFullRecord?%24searchId=3&amp;%24showFullDescriptionTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.pageSize=10&amp;%24partitionIndex=0&amp;%24digiSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24submitId=1&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.search=true&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.resultPageModel=true&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24showArchivalDescriptionsTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.pageSize=1&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24sort=RELEVANCE_ASC&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.search=true&amp;%24highlight=false\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-2911\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam-300x247.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"247\" /></a> This copy, from The National Archives includes Brady\'s handwritten notes recording the names of those in the photograph.[/caption]\r\n\r\nHistorically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  They surrounded themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero)  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a country\'s head of state.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n<!--more-->\r\n\r\nAbraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_2914\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"294\"]<a href=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\"><img class=\"size-full wp-image-2914\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"294\" height=\"240\" /></a> A Harvest of Death[/caption]\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Image Sources</p>\r\n\"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\"  The National Archives only allows links to the main page.  - http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/ - Search for ARC Identifier 527118\r\n\r\n\"A Harvest of Death\" - http://www.getty.edu/art/gettyguide/artObjectDetails?artobj=64592\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Further Reading</p>\r\nhttp://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.html - “All the ladies like whiskers” shows the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-21','','','2012-11-05 14:47:10','2012-11-05 20:47:10','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2916',0,'revision','',0),(2917,56,'2012-11-05 14:49:29','2012-11-05 20:49:29','[caption id=\"attachment_2911\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"300\"]<a href=\"http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ShowFullRecord?%24searchId=3&amp;%24showFullDescriptionTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.pageSize=10&amp;%24partitionIndex=0&amp;%24digiSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24submitId=1&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.search=true&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.resultPageModel=true&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24showArchivalDescriptionsTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.pageSize=1&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24sort=RELEVANCE_ASC&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.search=true&amp;%24highlight=false\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-2911\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam-300x247.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"247\" /></a> This copy, from The National Archives includes Brady\'s handwritten notes recording the names of those in the photograph.[/caption]\r\n\r\nHistorically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  They surrounded themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero)  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a country\'s head of state.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n<!--more-->\r\n\r\nAbraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_2914\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"294\"]<a href=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\"><img class=\"size-full wp-image-2914\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"294\" height=\"240\" /></a> A Harvest of Death[/caption]\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Image Sources</p>\r\n\"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\"  The National Archives only allows links to the main page.  - http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/ - Search for ARC Identifier 527118\r\n\r\n\"A Harvest of Death\" - http://www.getty.edu/art/gettyguide/artObjectDetails?artobj=64592\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Further Reading</p>\r\n <a title=\"&quot;All the Ladies Like Whiskers&quot;\" href=\"http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.htm\" target=\"_blank\">“All the ladies like whiskers”</a> shows a copy of the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.  I always thought this story was a myth, but it turns out to be true.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-22','','','2012-11-05 14:49:29','2012-11-05 20:49:29','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2917',0,'revision','',0),(2919,56,'2012-11-05 14:52:09','2012-11-05 20:52:09','[caption id=\"attachment_2911\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"300\"]<a href=\"http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ShowFullRecord?%24searchId=3&amp;%24showFullDescriptionTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.pageSize=10&amp;%24partitionIndex=0&amp;%24digiSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24submitId=1&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.search=true&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.resultPageModel=true&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24showArchivalDescriptionsTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.pageSize=1&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24sort=RELEVANCE_ASC&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.search=true&amp;%24highlight=false\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-2911\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam-300x247.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"247\" /></a> This copy, from The National Archives includes Brady\'s handwritten notes recording the names of those in the photograph.[/caption]\r\n\r\nHistorically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  In them, they surround themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero).  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a sitting head of state.\r\n\r\n<!--more-->Abraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_2914\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"294\"]<a href=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\"><img class=\"size-full wp-image-2914\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"294\" height=\"240\" /></a> A Harvest of Death[/caption]\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Image Sources</p>\r\n\"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\"  The National Archives only allows links to the main page.  - http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/ - Search for ARC Identifier 527118\r\n\r\n\"A Harvest of Death\" - http://www.getty.edu/art/gettyguide/artObjectDetails?artobj=64592\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Further Reading</p>\r\n <a title=\"&quot;All the Ladies Like Whiskers&quot;\" href=\"http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.htm\" target=\"_blank\">“All the ladies like whiskers”</a> shows a copy of the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.  I always thought this story was a myth, but it turns out to be true.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-24','','','2012-11-05 14:52:09','2012-11-05 20:52:09','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2919',0,'revision','',0),(2918,56,'2012-11-05 14:50:13','2012-11-05 20:50:13','[caption id=\"attachment_2911\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"300\"]<a href=\"http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ShowFullRecord?%24searchId=3&amp;%24showFullDescriptionTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.pageSize=10&amp;%24partitionIndex=0&amp;%24digiSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24submitId=1&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.search=true&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.resultPageModel=true&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24showArchivalDescriptionsTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.pageSize=1&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24sort=RELEVANCE_ASC&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.search=true&amp;%24highlight=false\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-2911\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam-300x247.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"247\" /></a> This copy, from The National Archives includes Brady\'s handwritten notes recording the names of those in the photograph.[/caption]\r\n\r\nHistorically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  In them, they surround themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero).  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a country\'s head of state.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n<!--more-->\r\n\r\nAbraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_2914\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"294\"]<a href=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\"><img class=\"size-full wp-image-2914\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"294\" height=\"240\" /></a> A Harvest of Death[/caption]\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Image Sources</p>\r\n\"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\"  The National Archives only allows links to the main page.  - http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/ - Search for ARC Identifier 527118\r\n\r\n\"A Harvest of Death\" - http://www.getty.edu/art/gettyguide/artObjectDetails?artobj=64592\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. page. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Further Reading</p>\r\n <a title=\"&quot;All the Ladies Like Whiskers&quot;\" href=\"http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.htm\" target=\"_blank\">“All the ladies like whiskers”</a> shows a copy of the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.  I always thought this story was a myth, but it turns out to be true.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-23','','','2012-11-05 14:50:13','2012-11-05 20:50:13','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2918',0,'revision','',0),(2920,56,'2012-11-05 14:56:32','2012-11-05 20:56:32','[caption id=\"attachment_2911\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"300\"]<a href=\"http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ShowFullRecord?%24searchId=3&amp;%24showFullDescriptionTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.pageSize=10&amp;%24partitionIndex=0&amp;%24digiSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24submitId=1&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.search=true&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.resultPageModel=true&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24showArchivalDescriptionsTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.pageSize=1&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24sort=RELEVANCE_ASC&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.search=true&amp;%24highlight=false\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-2911\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam-300x247.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"247\" /></a> This copy, from The National Archives includes Brady\'s handwritten notes recording the names of those in the photograph.[/caption]\r\n\r\nHistorically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  In them, they surround themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero).  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a sitting head of state.\r\n\r\n<!--more-->Abraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_2914\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"294\"]<a href=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\"><img class=\"size-full wp-image-2914\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"294\" height=\"240\" /></a> A Harvest of Death[/caption]\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Image Sources</p>\r\n\"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\"  The National Archives only allows links to the main page.  - http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/ - Search for ARC Identifier 527118\r\n\r\n\"A Harvest of Death\" - http://www.getty.edu/art/gettyguide/artObjectDetails?artobj=64592\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.  This is an example of the confusion surrounding Brady, O\'Sullivan and Gardner\'s work.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 1997: n. p. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Further Reading</p>\r\n <a title=\"&quot;All the Ladies Like Whiskers&quot;\" href=\"http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.htm\" target=\"_blank\">“All the ladies like whiskers”</a> shows a copy of the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.  I always thought this story was a myth, but it turns out to be true.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-25','','','2012-11-05 14:56:32','2012-11-05 20:56:32','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2920',0,'revision','',0),(2921,57,'2012-11-05 16:18:06','2012-11-05 22:18:06','[caption id=\"\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"441\"]<img class=\" \" src=\"http://www.funzine.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/madamaButterfly.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"441\" height=\"241\" /> A poster used at the Opera<br /><a id=\"internal-source-marker_0.44043070777809645\" href=\"http://www.funzine.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/madamaButterfly.jpg\">http://www.funzine.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/madamaButterfly.jpg</a>[/caption]\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\"> On March 31, 1854 the Treaty of Kanagawa was signed, and Japan was now open to the Western World. Their music, culture, clothing, and other things made Westerners curious. “A new craze for all things Japanese soon invaded the West, especially Britain, France, and the Netherlands (Gerbino).”, this statement comes from Gerbino’s exploration of Orientalism as it refers to Puccini’s opera Madama Butterfly.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\"><!--more--></p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">Giacomo Puccini’s opera Madama Butterfly is based on a narrative written by American John Luther Long called “Madam Butterfly”, and the theatre presentation by American David Belasco. In Summer of 1900 Puccini saw the play adaptation of Long’s work in London, and immediately began construction on an Opera (Jenkins). Puccini’s opera opened in February of 1904, and still runs today. According to PBS Madama Butterfly is, “Ranked as number one in Opera America’s list of the 20 most performed operas in North America...(PBS).” The narrative was connected to a story of many Japanese women, now that Japan was open to foreign influence. Madama Butterfly by Giacomo Puccini should be preserved because on top of being one of the most famous operas, it showcases the relationship between the east meeting the west.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">The story of “Madam Butterfly” is about a Japanese woman and an American soldier who get married before he goes back to America. When he leaves, the Japanese woman realizes that she is pregnant and eagerly awaits her husband returning to her in Japan. At the end it is realized that her husband married an American woman. This was a common phenomenon, with a given name of “temporary wives (Gerbino)”. In the end, the husband returns to Japan with his American wife. When Madam Butterfly realizes this and that her husband intends to take their child back to America, she attempts suicide. In the original narrative she didn’t die, but in both the play and Puccini’s opera she dies in the end (Green).</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">Because of the world’s fascination with Japan, Long was not the first to write a story like this. Gerbino says, “As Americans decorated their houses with japanese-inspired furniture and objects, a whole new sub-genre of Japanese fiction flourished in the American literary markets of the last two decades of the 19th century (Gerbino).” Gerbino goes on to mention with “Madam Butterfly”, “The Mikado Empire” and “Things Japanese”. The most notable proof of why Long’s story was typical is Pierre Loti’s Madame Chrysantheme. In Madame Chrysantheme, Loti tells a story with close resemblance to Long’s and it predates Long by about a decade. Loti wrote his work as a series of journal entries explaining a summer in Japan, which were combined for his book. Loti and Long share the story of a “temporary bride”, but Loti tells a tale of a summer marriage that ends when the soldier leaves to go back to America. Another key difference is that the Japanese wife didn’t love Loti’s male character, and in “Madam Butterfly” she did. A big comparison between the two stories is that both have been made into operas. Puccini wrote “Madama Butterfly”, and Messager and Hartmann wrote the opera edition of “Madame Chrysantheme” (Miskow).</p>\r\nWhat made Madama Butterfly so unique was two things; the story itself and Puccini. The story was unique because it pulled peoples interest in. What starts as a love story ends in tragedy, and that is why people are so enamored by the story. Long was able to take a trend for the time, and make it timeless by including the story of many Japanese women. Once Puccini got ahold of the story the rest is history. Puccini wrote a score that would set his Opera apart from all of the other Japanese-esque stories. He received help from the Japanese ambassador to Rome’s wife, who sang traditional Japanese songs for him. “According to scholar Kimiyo Powlis-Okano, at least ten authentic melodies can be identified in Puccini’s score (Gerbino).” Other than the Japanese music, Puccini also used typical “Western” sounds and music like “The Star Spangled Banner” throughout the Opera to point out the merging of the two sides of the Earth (Gerbino).\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">When released the play wasn’t very popular; PBS explains it as, “...Madama Butterfly wasn’t well-received when it opened initially in February 1904. Puccini revised the opera, and several months late, it opened to much success (PBS).” Today, Madama Butterfly is still regularly performed by the Metropolitan Opera in New York. According to PBS Madama Butterfly is,”Ranked as number one in Opera America’s list of the 20 most performed operas in North America... (PBS)” In 2009 Madama Butterfly was highlighted on the PBS series, Great Performances which plays musicals and operas on PBS for people at home to enjoy.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">Personally, I believe this opera is extremely fascinating. Long was able to write a story that a lot of people could relate to, and Puccini upped it and made it into one of the most popular operas. It’s really interesting how interested in Japanese culture the western world was, and that is most likely the sole reason that the opera was as successful as it was. Long and Puccini were able to capture the relationship between the Japanese woman and the American soldier in a metaphorical way also showing the relationship between the east and west. The tragedy of “temporary wives” was a phenomenon that happened even after the opera in Vietnam, Korea, and Europe.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">This work is important for future generations because it is so representative of the time period, it shows the Japanese and their vulnerability to the West while the West was so struck by the East. It also is a lesson though, of the consequences of taking advantage of people. Madama Butterfly should be preserved because it is one of the most successful operas, and it is representative of a time period.</p>\r\nWorks Cited:\r\nGreen, Aaron. \"Madama Butterfly Synopsis.\" About.com. N.p.. Web. 5 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nGerbino, Giuseppe. \"Orientalism in Madama Butterfly.\" New York City Opera Project: Madama Butterfly. columbia.edu. Web. 5 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nJenkins, Chadwick. \"The Original Story: John Luther Long and David Belasco.\" New York City Opera Project: Madama Butterfly. columbia.edu. Web. 5 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nMiskow, Catherine. \"The Chrysanthemum and the Butterfly: What, if Anything, Remains of Pierre Loti in the Madame Butterfly Narrative.\" epubs.utah.edu. N.p.. Web. 5 Nov 2012.','Puccini\'s \"Madama Butterfly\"','','publish','open','open','','puccinis-madama-butterfly','','','2012-11-05 19:54:02','2012-11-06 01:54:02','',0,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2921',0,'post','',10),(2924,56,'2012-11-05 15:11:02','2012-11-05 21:11:02','[caption id=\"attachment_2911\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"300\"]<a href=\"http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ShowFullRecord?%24searchId=3&amp;%24showFullDescriptionTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.pageSize=10&amp;%24partitionIndex=0&amp;%24digiSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24submitId=1&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.search=true&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.resultPageModel=true&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24showArchivalDescriptionsTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.pageSize=1&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24sort=RELEVANCE_ASC&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.search=true&amp;%24highlight=false\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-2911\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam-300x247.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"247\" /></a> This copy, from The National Archives includes Brady\'s handwritten notes recording the names of those in the photograph.[/caption]\r\n\r\nHistorically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  In them, they surround themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero).  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (Panzer, Foley and et. al).  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a sitting head of state.\r\n\r\n<!--more-->Abraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_2914\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"294\"]<a href=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\"><img class=\"size-full wp-image-2914\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"294\" height=\"240\" /></a> A Harvest of Death[/caption]\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Image Sources</p>\r\n\"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\"  The National Archives only allows links to the main page.  - http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/ - Search for ARC Identifier 527118\r\n\r\n\"A Harvest of Death\" - http://www.getty.edu/art/gettyguide/artObjectDetails?artobj=64592\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.  This is an example of the confusion surrounding Brady, O\'Sullivan and Gardner\'s work.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 Oct 1997: n. p. Web. 3 Nov. 2012. http://www.unz.org/Pub/Slate-1997oct-00126.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/1862/10/20/news/brady-s-photographs-pictures-of-the-dead-at-antietam.html.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012. https://www.nytimes.com/1992/08/16/arts/photography-view-a-deliberate-unflinching-witness-to-history.html?src=pm.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.  It also talked about how Gardner viewed photography as a medium.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"REPORTING the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\nPanzer, M. and Foley, Jeana and et al. Mathew Brady and the Image of History. Smithsonian Institution Press for the National Portrait Gallery, 1997. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Further Reading</p>\r\n <a title=\"&quot;All the Ladies Like Whiskers&quot;\" href=\"http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.htm\" target=\"_blank\">“All the ladies like whiskers”</a> shows a copy of the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.  I always thought this story was a myth, but it turns out to be true.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-26','','','2012-11-05 15:11:02','2012-11-05 21:11:02','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2924',0,'revision','',0),(2922,57,'2012-11-05 16:17:28','2012-11-05 22:17:28','[caption id=\"\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"639\"]<img src=\"http://www.funzine.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/madamaButterfly.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"639\" height=\"350\" /> A poster used at the Opera <a id=\"internal-source-marker_0.44043070777809645\" href=\"http://www.funzine.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/madamaButterfly.jpg\">http://www.funzine.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/madamaButterfly.jpg</a>[/caption]\n\n&nbsp;\n<p dir=\"ltr\">On March 31, 1854 the Treaty of Kanagawa was signed, and Japan was now open to the Western World. Their music, culture, clothing, and other things made Westerners curious. “A new craze for all things Japanese soon invaded the West, especially Britain, France, and the Netherlands (Gerbino).”, this statement comes from Gerbino’s exploration of Orientalism as it refers to Puccini’s opera Madama Butterfly.</p>\n<p dir=\"ltr\"><!--more--></p>\n<p dir=\"ltr\">Giacomo Puccini’s opera Madama Butterfly is based on a narrative written by American John Luther Long called “Madam Butterfly”, and the theatre presentation by American David Belasco. In Summer of 1900 Puccini saw the play adaptation of Long’s work in London, and immediately began construction on an Opera (Jenkins). Puccini’s opera opened in February of 1904, and still runs today. According to PBS Madama Butterfly is, “Ranked as number one in Opera America’s list of the 20 most performed operas in North America...(PBS).” The narrative was connected to a story of many Japanese women, now that Japan was open to foreign influence. Madama Butterfly by Giacomo Puccini should be preserved because on top of being one of the most famous operas, it showcases the relationship between the east meeting the west.</p>\n<p dir=\"ltr\">The story of “Madam Butterfly” is about a Japanese woman and an American soldier who get married before he goes back to America. When he leaves, the Japanese woman realizes that she is pregnant and eagerly awaits her husband returning to her in Japan. At the end it is realized that her husband married an American woman. This was a common phenomenon, with a given name of “temporary wives (Gerbino)”. In the end, the husband returns to Japan with his American wife. When Madam Butterfly realizes this and that her husband intends to take their child back to America, she attempts suicide. In the original narrative she didn’t die, but in both the play and Puccini’s opera she dies in the end (Green).</p>\n<p dir=\"ltr\">Because of the world’s fascination with Japan, Long was not the first to write a story like this. Gerbino says, “As Americans decorated their houses with japanese-inspired furniture and objects, a whole new sub-genre of Japanese fiction flourished in the American literary markets of the last two decades of the 19th century (Gerbino).” Gerbino goes on to mention with “Madam Butterfly”, “The Mikado Empire” and “Things Japanese”. The most notable proof of why Long’s story was typical is Pierre Loti’s Madame Chrysantheme. In Madame Chrysantheme, Loti tells a story with close resemblance to Long’s and it predates Long by about a decade. Loti wrote his work as a series of journal entries explaining a summer in Japan, which were combined for his book. Loti and Long share the story of a “temporary bride”, but Loti tells a tale of a summer marriage that ends when the soldier leaves to go back to America. Another key difference is that the Japanese wife didn’t love Loti’s male character, and in “Madam Butterfly” she did. A big comparison between the two stories is that both have been made into operas. Puccini wrote “Madama Butterfly”, and Messager and Hartmann wrote the opera edition of “Madame Chrysantheme” (Miskow).</p>\nWhat made Madama Butterfly so unique was two things; the story itself and Puccini. The story was unique because it pulled peoples interest in. What starts as a love story ends in tragedy, and that is why people are so enamored by the story. Long was able to take a trend for the time, and make it timeless by including the story of many Japanese women. Once Puccini got ahold of the story the rest is history. Puccini wrote a score that would set his Opera apart from all of the other Japanese-esque stories. He received help from the Japanese ambassador to Rome’s wife, who sang traditional Japanese songs for him. “According to scholar Kimiyo Powlis-Okano, at least ten authentic melodies can be identified in Puccini’s score (Gerbino).” Other than the Japanese music, Puccini also used typical “Western” sounds and music like “The Star Spangled Banner” throughout the Opera to point out the merging of the two sides of the Earth (Gerbino).\n<p dir=\"ltr\">When released the play wasn’t very popular; PBS explains it as, “...Madama Butterfly wasn’t well-received when it opened initially in February 1904. Puccini revised the opera, and several months late, it opened to much success (PBS).” Today, Madama Butterfly is still regularly performed by the Metropolitan Opera in New York. According to PBS Madama Butterfly is,”Ranked as number one in Opera America’s list of the 20 most performed operas in North America... (PBS)” In 2009 Madama Butterfly was highlighted on the PBS series, Great Performances which plays musicals and operas on PBS for people at home to enjoy.</p>\n<p dir=\"ltr\">Personally, I believe this opera is extremely fascinating. Long was able to write a story that a lot of people could relate to, and Puccini upped it and made it into one of the most popular operas. It’s really interesting how interested in Japanese culture the western world was, and that is most likely the sole reason that the opera was as successful as it was. Long and Puccini were able to capture the relationship between the Japanese woman and the American soldier in a metaphorical way also showing the relationship between the east and west. The tragedy of “temporary wives” was a phenomenon that happened even after the opera in Vietnam, Korea, and Europe.</p>\n<p dir=\"ltr\">This work is important for future generations because it is so representative of the time period, it shows the Japanese and their vulnerability to the West while the West was so struck by the East. It also is a lesson though, of the consequences of taking advantage of people. Madama Butterfly should be preserved because it is one of the most successful operas, and it is representative of a time period.</p>\n\n\n\nWorks Cited:\nGreen, Aaron. \"Madama Butterfly Synopsis.\" About.com. N.p.. Web. 5 Nov 2012.\n\nGerbino, Giuseppe. \"Orientalism in Madama Butterfly.\" New York City Opera Project: Madama Butterfly. columbia.edu. Web. 5 Nov 2012.\n\nJenkins, Chadwick. \"The Original Story: John Luther Long and David Belasco.\" New York City Opera Project: Madama Butterfly. columbia.edu. Web. 5 Nov 2012.\n\nMiskow, Catherine. \"The Chrysanthemum and the Butterfly: What, if Anything, Remains of Pierre Loti in the Madame Butterfly Narrative.\" epubs.utah.edu. N.p.. Web. 5 Nov 2012.','Puccini\'s \"Madama Butterfly\"','','inherit','open','open','','2921-revision','','','2012-11-05 16:17:28','2012-11-05 22:17:28','',2921,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2922',0,'revision','',0),(2923,57,'2012-11-05 16:17:41','2012-11-05 22:17:41','[caption id=\"\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"639\"]<img src=\"http://www.funzine.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/madamaButterfly.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"639\" height=\"350\" /> A poster used at the Opera <a id=\"internal-source-marker_0.44043070777809645\" href=\"http://www.funzine.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/madamaButterfly.jpg\">http://www.funzine.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/madamaButterfly.jpg</a>[/caption]\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">On March 31, 1854 the Treaty of Kanagawa was signed, and Japan was now open to the Western World. Their music, culture, clothing, and other things made Westerners curious. “A new craze for all things Japanese soon invaded the West, especially Britain, France, and the Netherlands (Gerbino).”, this statement comes from Gerbino’s exploration of Orientalism as it refers to Puccini’s opera Madama Butterfly.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\"><!--more--></p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">Giacomo Puccini’s opera Madama Butterfly is based on a narrative written by American John Luther Long called “Madam Butterfly”, and the theatre presentation by American David Belasco. In Summer of 1900 Puccini saw the play adaptation of Long’s work in London, and immediately began construction on an Opera (Jenkins). Puccini’s opera opened in February of 1904, and still runs today. According to PBS Madama Butterfly is, “Ranked as number one in Opera America’s list of the 20 most performed operas in North America...(PBS).” The narrative was connected to a story of many Japanese women, now that Japan was open to foreign influence. Madama Butterfly by Giacomo Puccini should be preserved because on top of being one of the most famous operas, it showcases the relationship between the east meeting the west.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">The story of “Madam Butterfly” is about a Japanese woman and an American soldier who get married before he goes back to America. When he leaves, the Japanese woman realizes that she is pregnant and eagerly awaits her husband returning to her in Japan. At the end it is realized that her husband married an American woman. This was a common phenomenon, with a given name of “temporary wives (Gerbino)”. In the end, the husband returns to Japan with his American wife. When Madam Butterfly realizes this and that her husband intends to take their child back to America, she attempts suicide. In the original narrative she didn’t die, but in both the play and Puccini’s opera she dies in the end (Green).</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">Because of the world’s fascination with Japan, Long was not the first to write a story like this. Gerbino says, “As Americans decorated their houses with japanese-inspired furniture and objects, a whole new sub-genre of Japanese fiction flourished in the American literary markets of the last two decades of the 19th century (Gerbino).” Gerbino goes on to mention with “Madam Butterfly”, “The Mikado Empire” and “Things Japanese”. The most notable proof of why Long’s story was typical is Pierre Loti’s Madame Chrysantheme. In Madame Chrysantheme, Loti tells a story with close resemblance to Long’s and it predates Long by about a decade. Loti wrote his work as a series of journal entries explaining a summer in Japan, which were combined for his book. Loti and Long share the story of a “temporary bride”, but Loti tells a tale of a summer marriage that ends when the soldier leaves to go back to America. Another key difference is that the Japanese wife didn’t love Loti’s male character, and in “Madam Butterfly” she did. A big comparison between the two stories is that both have been made into operas. Puccini wrote “Madama Butterfly”, and Messager and Hartmann wrote the opera edition of “Madame Chrysantheme” (Miskow).</p>\r\nWhat made Madama Butterfly so unique was two things; the story itself and Puccini. The story was unique because it pulled peoples interest in. What starts as a love story ends in tragedy, and that is why people are so enamored by the story. Long was able to take a trend for the time, and make it timeless by including the story of many Japanese women. Once Puccini got ahold of the story the rest is history. Puccini wrote a score that would set his Opera apart from all of the other Japanese-esque stories. He received help from the Japanese ambassador to Rome’s wife, who sang traditional Japanese songs for him. “According to scholar Kimiyo Powlis-Okano, at least ten authentic melodies can be identified in Puccini’s score (Gerbino).” Other than the Japanese music, Puccini also used typical “Western” sounds and music like “The Star Spangled Banner” throughout the Opera to point out the merging of the two sides of the Earth (Gerbino).\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">When released the play wasn’t very popular; PBS explains it as, “...Madama Butterfly wasn’t well-received when it opened initially in February 1904. Puccini revised the opera, and several months late, it opened to much success (PBS).” Today, Madama Butterfly is still regularly performed by the Metropolitan Opera in New York. According to PBS Madama Butterfly is,”Ranked as number one in Opera America’s list of the 20 most performed operas in North America... (PBS)” In 2009 Madama Butterfly was highlighted on the PBS series, Great Performances which plays musicals and operas on PBS for people at home to enjoy.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">Personally, I believe this opera is extremely fascinating. Long was able to write a story that a lot of people could relate to, and Puccini upped it and made it into one of the most popular operas. It’s really interesting how interested in Japanese culture the western world was, and that is most likely the sole reason that the opera was as successful as it was. Long and Puccini were able to capture the relationship between the Japanese woman and the American soldier in a metaphorical way also showing the relationship between the east and west. The tragedy of “temporary wives” was a phenomenon that happened even after the opera in Vietnam, Korea, and Europe.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">This work is important for future generations because it is so representative of the time period, it shows the Japanese and their vulnerability to the West while the West was so struck by the East. It also is a lesson though, of the consequences of taking advantage of people. Madama Butterfly should be preserved because it is one of the most successful operas, and it is representative of a time period.</p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nWorks Cited:\r\nGreen, Aaron. \"Madama Butterfly Synopsis.\" About.com. N.p.. Web. 5 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nGerbino, Giuseppe. \"Orientalism in Madama Butterfly.\" New York City Opera Project: Madama Butterfly. columbia.edu. Web. 5 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nJenkins, Chadwick. \"The Original Story: John Luther Long and David Belasco.\" New York City Opera Project: Madama Butterfly. columbia.edu. Web. 5 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nMiskow, Catherine. \"The Chrysanthemum and the Butterfly: What, if Anything, Remains of Pierre Loti in the Madame Butterfly Narrative.\" epubs.utah.edu. N.p.. Web. 5 Nov 2012.','Puccini\'s \"Madama Butterfly\"','','inherit','open','open','','2921-revision-2','','','2012-11-05 16:17:41','2012-11-05 22:17:41','',2921,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2923',0,'revision','',0),(2925,56,'2012-11-05 16:29:13','2012-11-05 22:29:13','[caption id=\"attachment_2911\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"300\"]<a href=\"http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ShowFullRecord?%24searchId=3&amp;%24showFullDescriptionTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.pageSize=10&amp;%24partitionIndex=0&amp;%24digiSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24submitId=1&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.search=true&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.resultPageModel=true&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24showArchivalDescriptionsTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.pageSize=1&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24sort=RELEVANCE_ASC&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.search=true&amp;%24highlight=false\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-2911\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam-300x247.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"247\" /></a> This copy, from The National Archives includes Brady\'s handwritten notes recording the names of those in the photograph.[/caption]\r\n\r\nHistorically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  In them, they surround themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero).  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (\"Winterthur Portfolio\").  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a sitting head of state.\r\n\r\n<!--more-->Abraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_2914\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"294\"]<a href=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\"><img class=\"size-full wp-image-2914\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"294\" height=\"240\" /></a> A Harvest of Death[/caption]\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Image Sources</p>\r\n\"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\"  The National Archives only allows links to the main page.  - http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/ - Search for ARC Identifier 527118\r\n\r\n\"A Harvest of Death\" - http://www.getty.edu/art/gettyguide/artObjectDetails?artobj=64592\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.  This is an example of the confusion surrounding Brady, O\'Sullivan and Gardner\'s work.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 Oct 1997: n. p. Web. 3 Nov. 2012. http://www.unz.org/Pub/Slate-1997oct-00126.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/1862/10/20/news/brady-s-photographs-pictures-of-the-dead-at-antietam.html.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012. https://www.nytimes.com/1992/08/16/arts/photography-view-a-deliberate-unflinching-witness-to-history.html?src=pm.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.  It also talked about how Gardner viewed photography as a medium.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"Reporting the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.  It gave general background about Lincoln and his use of photography.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\nRev. of Mathew Brady and the Image of History, by Mary Panzer; Jeana K. Foley.  Winterthur Portfolio, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Spring 1999): 83-84. JSTOR. Web. 5 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is a review of the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.  I used this source to verify Gardner\'s description of \"A Harvest of War\".\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Further Reading</p>\r\n <a title=\"&quot;All the Ladies Like Whiskers&quot;\" href=\"http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.htm\" target=\"_blank\">“All the ladies like whiskers”</a> shows a copy of the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.  I always thought this story was a myth, but it turns out to be true.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-27','','','2012-11-05 16:29:13','2012-11-05 22:29:13','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2925',0,'revision','',0),(2926,56,'2012-11-05 16:30:16','2012-11-05 22:30:16','[caption id=\"attachment_2911\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"300\"]<a href=\"http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ShowFullRecord?%24searchId=3&amp;%24showFullDescriptionTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.pageSize=10&amp;%24partitionIndex=0&amp;%24digiSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24submitId=1&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.search=true&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.resultPageModel=true&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24showArchivalDescriptionsTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.pageSize=1&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24sort=RELEVANCE_ASC&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.search=true&amp;%24highlight=false\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-2911\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam-300x247.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"247\" /></a> This copy, from The National Archives includes Brady\'s handwritten notes recording the names of those in the photograph.[/caption]\r\n\r\nHistorically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  In them, they surround themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero).  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (\"Winterthur Portfolio\").  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a sitting head of state.\r\n\r\n<!--more-->Abraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_2914\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"294\"]<a href=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\"><img class=\"size-full wp-image-2914\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"294\" height=\"240\" /></a> A Harvest of Death[/caption]\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Image Sources</p>\r\n\"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\"  The National Archives only allows links to the main page.  - http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/ - Search for ARC Identifier 527118\r\n\r\n\"A Harvest of Death\" - http://www.getty.edu/art/gettyguide/artObjectDetails?artobj=64592\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.  This is an example of the confusion surrounding Brady, O\'Sullivan and Gardner\'s work.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 Oct 1997: n. p. Web. 3 Nov. 2012. http://www.unz.org/Pub/Slate-1997oct-00126.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/1862/10/20/news/brady-s-photographs-pictures-of-the-dead-at-antietam.html.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012. https://www.nytimes.com/1992/08/16/arts/photography-view-a-deliberate-unflinching-witness-to-history.html?src=pm.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.  It also talked about how Gardner viewed photography as a medium.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"Reporting the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.  It gave general background about Lincoln and his use of photography.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\nRev. of Mathew Brady and the Image of History, by Mary Panzer; Jeana K. Foley.  Winterthur Portfolio, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Spring 1999): 83-84. JSTOR. Web. 5 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is a review of the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.  I used this source to verify Gardner\'s description of \"A Harvest of War\".\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Further Reading</p>\r\n <a title=\"&quot;All the Ladies Like Whiskers&quot;\" href=\"http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.htm\" target=\"_blank\">“All the ladies like whiskers”</a> shows a copy of the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.  I always thought this story was a myth, but it turns out to be true.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-28','','','2012-11-05 16:30:16','2012-11-05 22:30:16','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2926',0,'revision','',0),(2927,56,'2012-11-05 17:00:27','2012-11-05 23:00:27','[caption id=\"attachment_2911\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"300\"]<a href=\"http://arcweb.archives.gov/arc/action/ShowFullRecord?%24searchId=3&amp;%24showFullDescriptionTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.pageSize=10&amp;%24partitionIndex=0&amp;%24digiSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24submitId=1&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.search=true&amp;%24digiDetailPageModel.resultPageModel=true&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.currentPage=0&amp;%24showArchivalDescriptionsTabs.selectedPaneId=&amp;%24resultsDetailPageModel.pageSize=1&amp;%24resultsSummaryPageModel.targetModel=true&amp;%24sort=RELEVANCE_ASC&amp;%24resultsPartitionPageModel.search=true&amp;%24highlight=false\"><img class=\"size-medium wp-image-2911\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Photograph-of-President-Abraham-Lincoln-and-His-Generals-After-Antietam-300x247.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"247\" /></a> This copy, from The National Archives includes Brady\'s handwritten notes recording the names of those in the photograph.[/caption]\r\n\r\nHistorically, leaders have used painted portraits of themselves to emphasize their authority over their people.  In them, they surround themselves with emblems of their power.  For example, Hyacinthe Rigaud placed props around Louis XIV that personified his position as the absolute monarch of France; a column signifying fortitude, the fleur-de-lis (the traditional symbol of the French Monarchy) and scepters indicating his position as \"the hand of justice\" (Fiero).  Over one hundred years later, a new technology emerged that would eventually replace the painted portrait in this role.  “Brady used the documentary medium of photography to portray a stable, purposeful, patriotic republic during the decades when the national identity was fragmenting” (\"Winterthur Portfolio\").  The \"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\" should be preserved because it was the first time in history that a photograph shaped public opinion about a sitting head of state.\r\n\r\n<!--more-->Abraham Lincoln became President of the United States in 1861. A mere six weeks later, the Civil War officially began when Confederate soldiers fired upon the Union garrison located in Fort Sumter. Early in the war, President Lincoln deferred to his general’s experience and advice because he was inexperienced in matters of war and he knew it. He was a quick learner though, and by September 1862, he was urging General McClellan to be more aggressive toward the Confederacy. On September 17, 1862, Confederate General Robert E. Lee crossed the Potomac River, intending to advance toward Washington DC (McPherson).\r\n\r\nUnion troops engaged General Lee’s army at Antietam and turned the Confederates back to Virginia. It was a bloody battle with over 23,000 casualties. Technically the Union won, but General McClellan failed to pursue the retreating army and instead remained at Antietam. A disappointed Lincoln visited Antietam to confer with McClellan. Mathew Brady took the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” to commemorate the meeting.\r\n\r\nThe first permanent photographic image was produced in 1826 by Nicéphore Niépce, but the process was long and tedious; the subject had to be still for up to several minutes which limited its usefulness. In 1851, Frederick Scott Archer invented the “wet plate negative” which created a more stable negative than paper and also required a considerably shorter exposure time; from minutes down to seconds and it was easy to produce several prints from one negative.\r\n\r\nThe wet collodion photographic process, as the wet plate negative was commonly known, revolutionized photography. Even though the equipment was expensive, bulky and the glass negatives were delicate and cracked easily either destroying the picture completely or creating a flawed image, the relative simplicity and reliable process made photography more popular and set the standard until about 1880 as the technology continued to evolve (“J. Paul Getty Museum”).\r\n\r\nSince the rapid technological developments in photography were coming to fruition when the Civil War began, it was only logical for photographers to venture out of their studios and into the battlefield. “Accounts and images of the Crimean War and the American Civil War in the 1850\'s and 60\'s reached a large public within months or weeks or sometimes even within days of battle. In the 1870\'s, a writer remarked: \"No record of previous wars can surpass those of the years between 1861 and ’71” (Goldberg).\r\n\r\n“Physically [Lincoln] was a cartoonist’s dream; critics might have called him a living caricature” and political cartoonists exploited that image as much as possible. Photographers did nothing to counter this image and actually backed up the unflattering caricatures (Thompson). On February 27, 1860, Mathew Brady took a photograph that “transformed a country lawyer into a national icon” (Holzer). Brady decided to emphasize, rather than hide Lincoln’s height. He adjusted Lincoln’s clothes; opening his coat to make him look broader and pulling up his collar to, as Lincoln observed, “shorten my neck.” Brady chose background props so that “Lincoln would be surrounded by symbols of learning and public service. Abraham Lincoln later said that the Cooper Union Portrait made him “into a man of human aspect and dignified bearing” which ultimately made him president. As a result, Mathew Brady became Lincoln’s favorite photographer.\r\n\r\nBrady built on that success after the Battle at Antietam. Even though the Cooper Union Portrait dispelled many misconceptions about Lincoln’s failings, “Northern civilians had for three long years been inundated with popular prints - pictures made to be displayed in family homes - that suggested in the strongest graphic terms that Abraham Lincoln was in fact the quintessential civilian” not someone capable of leading a country during a war” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\n“[In] a society anxious about its very survival, portraits of statesmen and generals provided reassuring testimony of steadfast character; Lincoln used photography to assert his leadership over a fractious polity” (Goodyear). Lincoln was shrewdly aware of that fact and capitalized on photography as a medium. In spite of his untimely death in 1865, Lincoln was the most photographed man in the Nineteenth Century.\r\n\r\nJust as the “Cooper Union Portrait” changed the public’s perception of Lincoln as unelectable because of his “hideous” looks, the carefully composed “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” reassured and began to cultivate his image as Commander-in-Chief. In the photo, Lincoln stands facing his generals. His height, enhanced by his iconic top hat, shows him towering over his generals which emphasized his position as the head of state and served as “a reminder of the dominance of civilian authority” (Holzer and Hubbard 51).\r\n\r\nBy composing the photograph in this manner, Brady also focused attention on “Lincoln’s presence among his troops... [which comforted] during the darker days of the Union war effort - not only to the troops he visited, but to those on the home front who saw the pictorial reports” (Holzer and Hubbard 50). In stark contrast to the propagandic and encouraging purpose of the “Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam”, Brady’s assistants were assiduously documenting the macabre carnage of the battlefield. Photos of skulls, rotting corpses and mass graves fascinated the public and they flocked to Brady’s New York gallery to see them. The images shocked the public out of their complacency by bringing “home to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the war” (“New York Times”).\r\n\r\nThe aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg, a battle that cost over 50,000 men their lives, was immortalized by two of Brady’s assistants in “A Harvest of Death”. Timothy O’Sullivan and Alexander Gardner arrived a day or so after the battle to photograph the grisly scene. While O’Sullivan was credited with the photo, it was Gardner who published it in his “Gardner’s Photographic Sketch Book of the War” in 1865. Gardner named the photo and part of his caption reads, “Such a picture conveys a useful moral: It shows the blank horror and reality of war, in opposition to its pageantry. Here are the dreadful details! Let them aid in preventing such another calamity falling upon the nation” (\"Civil War in Art: Teaching &amp; Learning Through Chicago Collections”).\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_2914\" align=\"alignleft\" width=\"294\"]<a href=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\"><img class=\"size-full wp-image-2914\" src=\"http://jeanatacc.com/2011/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/A-Harvest-of-Death.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"294\" height=\"240\" /></a> A Harvest of Death[/caption]\r\n\r\nGardner believed that photographs would serve as a true and accurate witness in history and “be accepted by posterity with an undoubting faith” (Goldberg A.2). The caption for “A Harvest of Death” was full of poetic imagery, lamenting the terrific loss of life and a “deliberate and unflinching” look at the cost of war.\r\n\r\nIn spite of his belief that photography was a medium of truth, Gardner was not immune to propagandizing. For example, the bodies in “A Harvest of War” were likely Union soldiers, but he memorialized them as a part of the defeated army; presumably to spare the northern audiences from the stark reality that most of the dead were left exposed to the elements (“American Memory from the Library of Congress”).\r\n\r\nIn the mid twentieth century, scholars began to seriously pay attention to the fact that Brady did not take most of the photographs attributed to him. “Brady was put off by corpses. The stunning images of the Antietam dead, lying in ditches where they fell are the work (published under Brady’s name) of his brilliant assistants Alexander Gardner and Timothy O’Sullivan... [Brady] preferred to visit the battlefield after the corpses had been cleared” (Benfey). All of his assistants’ photos were stamped with “Photo by Brady” (LaGesse).\r\n\r\nIn fact, that practice has contributed to confusion as to who took what picture and when. There are some historians who believe there is a chance that Brady never took any of the photographs traditionally attributed to him. Most scholars believe that Brady is the man who captured the image, “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals at Antietam,” yet The Smithsonian Institute erroneously attributes the photograph to Alexander Gardner. (“Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections”)\r\n\r\nI recognize the universal presence of propaganda ~ all those commercials we are surrounded by is a form of propaganda, after all. We are surrounded by images telling us how we should look, what our houses should have in them (think Ikea) what we should eat and more. Most people will tell a story about themselves that casts them in the most positive light possible; it’s typical human behavior. Studying this photograph uncomfortably drove home how easily our perceptions can be swayed by what is put in front of us.\r\n\r\nIn addition to being an historical record, this work was designed to influence public opinion. Since I believe it is a good thing that the Union won the war, I am tempted to gloss over that fact, but it is something that I need remain aware of. Promoting one’s views is not a bad thing though, so I am forced to consider when advocacy goes too far and becomes harmful.\r\n\r\nTechnological developments in photography changed the way the world looked. In this case, it brought war into the day to day lives of those who were normally sheltered from that type of savagery. “The continuing search for the facts of human history is the basic responsibility of every true scholar, every teacher, and every image-maker as well. The attention currently focused on the visual record of the Civil War should stimulate thinking about how the image of our own times will be projected to people living 100 years hence” (Wagner).\r\n\r\nThis image should be preserved because it can serve two important purposes for future generations. The first is simple; it is a social document providing a visual record of an important meeting during the American Civil War; a conflict that bears witness to the unfortunate fact that human beings are sometimes barbaric creatures who fight wars rather than find peaceful solutions to problems (Fiero). Second, it is a cautionary tale; be aware of propaganda, but also recognize its inevitable presence. By maintaining a conscious respect for the dangers posed by propaganda, they will be able to guard against its potential for abuse.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Image Sources</p>\r\n\"Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam\"  The National Archives only allows links to the main page.  - http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/ - Search for ARC Identifier 527118\r\n\r\n\"A Harvest of Death\" - http://www.getty.edu/art/gettyguide/artObjectDetails?artobj=64592\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\"> Works Cited</p>\r\n\"Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam.\" The Smithsonian Institution, Civil War@Smithsonian Collections. National Portrait Gallery. Web. 4 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nA web page that shows an image of “President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam” that incorrectly titles it, “Abraham Lincoln and George McClellan at Antietam” and also credits Alexander Gardner as the photographer.  This is an example of the confusion surrounding Brady, O\'Sullivan and Gardner\'s work.\r\n\r\nBenfey, Christopher. \"Theater of War: The real story behind Mathew Brady’s Civil War photographs.\" Slate. 30 Oct 1997: n. p. Web. 3 Nov. 2012. http://www.unz.org/Pub/Slate-1997oct-00126.\r\n\r\nAn online review of a museum exhibit titled, “Mathew Brady’s Portraits: Images as History, Photography as Art.” It discussed how many of the images attributed to Brady were not actually taken by him. Many of them, especially the gruesome ones, were taken by his assistants. He was able to take credit for them because the assistants worked for him.\r\n\r\n\"BRADY\'S PHOTOGRAPHS: Pictures of the Dead at Antietam.\" New York Times 20 Oct 1862, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/1862/10/20/news/brady-s-photographs-pictures-of-the-dead-at-antietam.html.\r\n\r\nA review written in 1862 about Brady’s exhibit in his New York gallery. It talked about how interested in the photographs people were and reports that “crowds of people are constantly going up the stairs”. Even as the author accurately describes the gruesomeness of the photos, he also waxes poetic about the “poetry in the scene that no green holds or smiling landscapes can posses. Here lie men who have not hesitated to seal and lamp their convictions with their blood\".\r\n\r\nFiero, Gloria K.. Trans. Array The Humanistic Tradition. 6th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2011. Print.\r\n\r\nThis is the humanities text for this course. It provides a good general overview of general history.  I used it to get information about King Louis XIV state portrait.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; A Deliberate, Unflinching Witness to History.\" New York Times 16 Aug 1992, A.2. Web. 4 Nov. 2012. https://www.nytimes.com/1992/08/16/arts/photography-view-a-deliberate-unflinching-witness-to-history.html?src=pm.\r\n\r\nThis article compared the difficulties photographers faced at various points in history, from the Civil War to the present.  It also talked about how Gardner viewed photography as a medium.\r\n\r\nGoldberg, Vicki. \"PHOTOGRAPHY VIEW; Setting the Standards For War Pictures:.\" New York Times 05 Jun 1994, n. pag. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article reviews a museum exhibit entitled \"Reporting the War: The Journalistic Coverage of World War II\" at the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC. Although the exhibit was about a war almost a hundred years after the Civil War, it still had some useful background information about the history of war photography.\r\n\r\nGoodyear, Frank H. \"Photography and War.\" The Atlantic Feb. 2012. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 22 Oct. 2012.\r\n\r\nA brief article introducing a series of writings from “The Atlantic” and photographs from the National Portrait Gallery in Washington DC.  It gave general background about Lincoln and his use of photography.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. “That Attractive Rainbow: The Image of Abraham Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief” Lincoln and His Contemporaries. Ed. Charles Hubbard. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1999. 39-67. Google Books. Web 3 November, 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is an essay in an anthology that discussed how the Brady’s photographs changed Lincoln’s public image from weak and ineffective into a capable leader.\r\n\r\nHolzer, Harold. \"THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT MADE LINCOLN PRESIDENT. (Cover Story).\" Civil War Times 45.9 (2006): 24-33. Academic Search Complete. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis article recounts the first time Lincoln and Brady met on the day Brady took the “Cooper Union Portrait”. It detailed the staging of the photo and how Brady groomed Lincoln, by brushing his hair and adjusting his collar to “shorten his neck”.\r\n\r\nMcPherson, James M. \"Commander In Chief.\" Smithsonian 39.10 (2009): 38. Middle Search Plus. Web. 4 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nAn article providing a brief history of President Lincoln’s progression from a leader uneducated in military strategy to one who shaped the strategy of the war.\r\n\r\nO’Connor, Edward. “History of Photography”. Online Museum Educators. Web. 3 Nov, 2012.\r\n\r\nA website for students that concentrated on teaching motion photography to high school students, but also had some background on the history of photography.\r\n\r\n\"Photography: The Wet Collodion Process.\" The J. Paul Getty Museum. n.p.. Web. 3 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nThis page contains a six minute video that explains and demonstrates the wet collodion process; from the educational portion of the web site for The J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, CA.\r\n\r\nRev. of Mathew Brady and the Image of History, by Mary Panzer; Jeana K. Foley.  Winterthur Portfolio, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Spring 1999): 83-84. JSTOR. Web. 5 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nThis is a review of the catalog for an exhibit of Brady’s photography at the National Portrait Gallery and discussed some of the technical aspects of his work and his motivations.\r\n\r\n\"The Case of Confused Identity.\" American Memory from the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress. Web. 2 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nText for Plate 36 also known as “A Harvest of Death” from Alexander Gardner’s “Gardner\'s Photographic Sketch Book of the War”.  I used this source to verify Gardner\'s description of \"A Harvest of War\".\r\n\r\nWagner, Robert W. \"Media: The Image of the Civil War.” Audio Visual Communication Review. 9.1 (1961): 56-59. Web. 3 Nov. 2012.\r\n\r\nA journal article that discussed how the modern views of war have changed over time starting with the photographic record of Brady and his assistants. It explains one of the ways photography changed the view of war - the fact that the images were not only of leaders and statesmen, but also of the uncelebrated fighters who fought in that conflict.\r\n<p style=\"text-align: center\">Further Reading</p>\r\n <a title=\"&quot;All the Ladies Like Whiskers&quot;\" href=\"http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/12/all-ladies-like-whiskers.htm\" target=\"_blank\">“All the ladies like whiskers”</a> shows a copy of the letter written by 11 year old Grace Bedell advising the presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, to grow a beard.  I always thought this story was a myth, but it turns out to be true.','Photograph of President Abraham Lincoln and His Generals After Antietam','','inherit','open','open','','2855-revision-29','','','2012-11-05 17:00:27','2012-11-05 23:00:27','',2855,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2927',0,'revision','',0),(2928,1,'2012-11-05 16:18:06','2012-11-05 22:18:06','[caption id=\"\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"639\"]<img src=\"http://www.funzine.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/madamaButterfly.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"639\" height=\"350\" /> A poster used at the Opera <a id=\"internal-source-marker_0.44043070777809645\" href=\"http://www.funzine.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/madamaButterfly.jpg\">http://www.funzine.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/madamaButterfly.jpg</a>[/caption]\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">On March 31, 1854 the Treaty of Kanagawa was signed, and Japan was now open to the Western World. Their music, culture, clothing, and other things made Westerners curious. “A new craze for all things Japanese soon invaded the West, especially Britain, France, and the Netherlands (Gerbino).”, this statement comes from Gerbino’s exploration of Orientalism as it refers to Puccini’s opera Madama Butterfly.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\"><!--more--></p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">Giacomo Puccini’s opera Madama Butterfly is based on a narrative written by American John Luther Long called “Madam Butterfly”, and the theatre presentation by American David Belasco. In Summer of 1900 Puccini saw the play adaptation of Long’s work in London, and immediately began construction on an Opera (Jenkins). Puccini’s opera opened in February of 1904, and still runs today. According to PBS Madama Butterfly is, “Ranked as number one in Opera America’s list of the 20 most performed operas in North America...(PBS).” The narrative was connected to a story of many Japanese women, now that Japan was open to foreign influence. Madama Butterfly by Giacomo Puccini should be preserved because on top of being one of the most famous operas, it showcases the relationship between the east meeting the west.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">The story of “Madam Butterfly” is about a Japanese woman and an American soldier who get married before he goes back to America. When he leaves, the Japanese woman realizes that she is pregnant and eagerly awaits her husband returning to her in Japan. At the end it is realized that her husband married an American woman. This was a common phenomenon, with a given name of “temporary wives (Gerbino)”. In the end, the husband returns to Japan with his American wife. When Madam Butterfly realizes this and that her husband intends to take their child back to America, she attempts suicide. In the original narrative she didn’t die, but in both the play and Puccini’s opera she dies in the end (Green).</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">Because of the world’s fascination with Japan, Long was not the first to write a story like this. Gerbino says, “As Americans decorated their houses with japanese-inspired furniture and objects, a whole new sub-genre of Japanese fiction flourished in the American literary markets of the last two decades of the 19th century (Gerbino).” Gerbino goes on to mention with “Madam Butterfly”, “The Mikado Empire” and “Things Japanese”. The most notable proof of why Long’s story was typical is Pierre Loti’s Madame Chrysantheme. In Madame Chrysantheme, Loti tells a story with close resemblance to Long’s and it predates Long by about a decade. Loti wrote his work as a series of journal entries explaining a summer in Japan, which were combined for his book. Loti and Long share the story of a “temporary bride”, but Loti tells a tale of a summer marriage that ends when the soldier leaves to go back to America. Another key difference is that the Japanese wife didn’t love Loti’s male character, and in “Madam Butterfly” she did. A big comparison between the two stories is that both have been made into operas. Puccini wrote “Madama Butterfly”, and Messager and Hartmann wrote the opera edition of “Madame Chrysantheme” (Miskow).</p>\r\nWhat made Madama Butterfly so unique was two things; the story itself and Puccini. The story was unique because it pulled peoples interest in. What starts as a love story ends in tragedy, and that is why people are so enamored by the story. Long was able to take a trend for the time, and make it timeless by including the story of many Japanese women. Once Puccini got ahold of the story the rest is history. Puccini wrote a score that would set his Opera apart from all of the other Japanese-esque stories. He received help from the Japanese ambassador to Rome’s wife, who sang traditional Japanese songs for him. “According to scholar Kimiyo Powlis-Okano, at least ten authentic melodies can be identified in Puccini’s score (Gerbino).” Other than the Japanese music, Puccini also used typical “Western” sounds and music like “The Star Spangled Banner” throughout the Opera to point out the merging of the two sides of the Earth (Gerbino).\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">When released the play wasn’t very popular; PBS explains it as, “...Madama Butterfly wasn’t well-received when it opened initially in February 1904. Puccini revised the opera, and several months late, it opened to much success (PBS).” Today, Madama Butterfly is still regularly performed by the Metropolitan Opera in New York. According to PBS Madama Butterfly is,”Ranked as number one in Opera America’s list of the 20 most performed operas in North America... (PBS)” In 2009 Madama Butterfly was highlighted on the PBS series, Great Performances which plays musicals and operas on PBS for people at home to enjoy.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">Personally, I believe this opera is extremely fascinating. Long was able to write a story that a lot of people could relate to, and Puccini upped it and made it into one of the most popular operas. It’s really interesting how interested in Japanese culture the western world was, and that is most likely the sole reason that the opera was as successful as it was. Long and Puccini were able to capture the relationship between the Japanese woman and the American soldier in a metaphorical way also showing the relationship between the east and west. The tragedy of “temporary wives” was a phenomenon that happened even after the opera in Vietnam, Korea, and Europe.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">This work is important for future generations because it is so representative of the time period, it shows the Japanese and their vulnerability to the West while the West was so struck by the East. It also is a lesson though, of the consequences of taking advantage of people. Madama Butterfly should be preserved because it is one of the most successful operas, and it is representative of a time period.</p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nWorks Cited:\r\nGreen, Aaron. \"Madama Butterfly Synopsis.\" About.com. N.p.. Web. 5 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nGerbino, Giuseppe. \"Orientalism in Madama Butterfly.\" New York City Opera Project: Madama Butterfly. columbia.edu. Web. 5 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nJenkins, Chadwick. \"The Original Story: John Luther Long and David Belasco.\" New York City Opera Project: Madama Butterfly. columbia.edu. Web. 5 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nMiskow, Catherine. \"The Chrysanthemum and the Butterfly: What, if Anything, Remains of Pierre Loti in the Madame Butterfly Narrative.\" epubs.utah.edu. N.p.. Web. 5 Nov 2012.','Puccini\'s \"Madama Butterfly\"','','inherit','open','open','','2921-revision-3','','','2012-11-05 16:18:06','2012-11-05 22:18:06','',2921,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2928',0,'revision','',0),(2929,1,'2012-11-05 19:53:27','2012-11-06 01:53:27','[caption id=\"\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"504\"]<img class=\" \" src=\"http://www.funzine.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/madamaButterfly.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"504\" height=\"276\" /> A poster used at the Opera<br /><a id=\"internal-source-marker_0.44043070777809645\" href=\"http://www.funzine.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/madamaButterfly.jpg\">http://www.funzine.hu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/madamaButterfly.jpg</a>[/caption]\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">On March 31, 1854 the Treaty of Kanagawa was signed, and Japan was now open to the Western World. Their music, culture, clothing, and other things made Westerners curious. “A new craze for all things Japanese soon invaded the West, especially Britain, France, and the Netherlands (Gerbino).”, this statement comes from Gerbino’s exploration of Orientalism as it refers to Puccini’s opera Madama Butterfly.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\"><!--more--></p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">Giacomo Puccini’s opera Madama Butterfly is based on a narrative written by American John Luther Long called “Madam Butterfly”, and the theatre presentation by American David Belasco. In Summer of 1900 Puccini saw the play adaptation of Long’s work in London, and immediately began construction on an Opera (Jenkins). Puccini’s opera opened in February of 1904, and still runs today. According to PBS Madama Butterfly is, “Ranked as number one in Opera America’s list of the 20 most performed operas in North America...(PBS).” The narrative was connected to a story of many Japanese women, now that Japan was open to foreign influence. Madama Butterfly by Giacomo Puccini should be preserved because on top of being one of the most famous operas, it showcases the relationship between the east meeting the west.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">The story of “Madam Butterfly” is about a Japanese woman and an American soldier who get married before he goes back to America. When he leaves, the Japanese woman realizes that she is pregnant and eagerly awaits her husband returning to her in Japan. At the end it is realized that her husband married an American woman. This was a common phenomenon, with a given name of “temporary wives (Gerbino)”. In the end, the husband returns to Japan with his American wife. When Madam Butterfly realizes this and that her husband intends to take their child back to America, she attempts suicide. In the original narrative she didn’t die, but in both the play and Puccini’s opera she dies in the end (Green).</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">Because of the world’s fascination with Japan, Long was not the first to write a story like this. Gerbino says, “As Americans decorated their houses with japanese-inspired furniture and objects, a whole new sub-genre of Japanese fiction flourished in the American literary markets of the last two decades of the 19th century (Gerbino).” Gerbino goes on to mention with “Madam Butterfly”, “The Mikado Empire” and “Things Japanese”. The most notable proof of why Long’s story was typical is Pierre Loti’s Madame Chrysantheme. In Madame Chrysantheme, Loti tells a story with close resemblance to Long’s and it predates Long by about a decade. Loti wrote his work as a series of journal entries explaining a summer in Japan, which were combined for his book. Loti and Long share the story of a “temporary bride”, but Loti tells a tale of a summer marriage that ends when the soldier leaves to go back to America. Another key difference is that the Japanese wife didn’t love Loti’s male character, and in “Madam Butterfly” she did. A big comparison between the two stories is that both have been made into operas. Puccini wrote “Madama Butterfly”, and Messager and Hartmann wrote the opera edition of “Madame Chrysantheme” (Miskow).</p>\r\nWhat made Madama Butterfly so unique was two things; the story itself and Puccini. The story was unique because it pulled peoples interest in. What starts as a love story ends in tragedy, and that is why people are so enamored by the story. Long was able to take a trend for the time, and make it timeless by including the story of many Japanese women. Once Puccini got ahold of the story the rest is history. Puccini wrote a score that would set his Opera apart from all of the other Japanese-esque stories. He received help from the Japanese ambassador to Rome’s wife, who sang traditional Japanese songs for him. “According to scholar Kimiyo Powlis-Okano, at least ten authentic melodies can be identified in Puccini’s score (Gerbino).” Other than the Japanese music, Puccini also used typical “Western” sounds and music like “The Star Spangled Banner” throughout the Opera to point out the merging of the two sides of the Earth (Gerbino).\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">When released the play wasn’t very popular; PBS explains it as, “...Madama Butterfly wasn’t well-received when it opened initially in February 1904. Puccini revised the opera, and several months late, it opened to much success (PBS).” Today, Madama Butterfly is still regularly performed by the Metropolitan Opera in New York. According to PBS Madama Butterfly is,”Ranked as number one in Opera America’s list of the 20 most performed operas in North America... (PBS)” In 2009 Madama Butterfly was highlighted on the PBS series, Great Performances which plays musicals and operas on PBS for people at home to enjoy.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">Personally, I believe this opera is extremely fascinating. Long was able to write a story that a lot of people could relate to, and Puccini upped it and made it into one of the most popular operas. It’s really interesting how interested in Japanese culture the western world was, and that is most likely the sole reason that the opera was as successful as it was. Long and Puccini were able to capture the relationship between the Japanese woman and the American soldier in a metaphorical way also showing the relationship between the east and west. The tragedy of “temporary wives” was a phenomenon that happened even after the opera in Vietnam, Korea, and Europe.</p>\r\n<p dir=\"ltr\">This work is important for future generations because it is so representative of the time period, it shows the Japanese and their vulnerability to the West while the West was so struck by the East. It also is a lesson though, of the consequences of taking advantage of people. Madama Butterfly should be preserved because it is one of the most successful operas, and it is representative of a time period.</p>\r\nWorks Cited:\r\nGreen, Aaron. \"Madama Butterfly Synopsis.\" About.com. N.p.. Web. 5 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nGerbino, Giuseppe. \"Orientalism in Madama Butterfly.\" New York City Opera Project: Madama Butterfly. columbia.edu. Web. 5 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nJenkins, Chadwick. \"The Original Story: John Luther Long and David Belasco.\" New York City Opera Project: Madama Butterfly. columbia.edu. Web. 5 Nov 2012.\r\n\r\nMiskow, Catherine. \"The Chrysanthemum and the Butterfly: What, if Anything, Remains of Pierre Loti in the Madame Butterfly Narrative.\" epubs.utah.edu. N.p.. Web. 5 Nov 2012.','Puccini\'s \"Madama Butterfly\"','','inherit','open','open','','2921-revision-4','','','2012-11-05 19:53:27','2012-11-06 01:53:27','',2921,'http://jeanatacc.com/2011/?p=2929',0,'revision','',0);
