Here’s an interesting piece from the Nat’l Endowment for the Humanities’ magazine Humanities on General Lew Wallace and his greatest known work Ben Hur: A Tale of the Christ. Here’s a taste, read the whole thing here:
Since its first publication, Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ has never been out of print. It outsold every book except the Bible until Gone With the Wind came out in 1936, and resurged to the top of the list again in the 1960s. By 1900 it had been printed in thirty-six English-language editions and translated into twenty others, including Indonesian and Braille.
The novel intertwines the life of Jesus with that of a fictional protagonist, the young Jewish prince named Judah Ben-Hur, who suffers betrayal, injustice, and brutality, and longs for a Jewish king to vanquish Rome. It has the appeal of a rollicking historical adventure combined with a sincere Christian message of redemption.
Victorians who swore off novels because of their immoral influence eagerly picked up Ben-Hur—were even encouraged to by their pastors. It became required reading in grade schools across the United States. For those who considered theater sinful, the spectacle of the Broadway version lured them in for twenty-one years, not to mention the touring show that required four entire trains to transport all the scenery and livestock. More than twenty million people saw Ben-Hur on stage between 1899 and 1920, complete with live horses running on hidden treadmills to recreate the chariot race. One reverend from San Francisco, who had never attended a play, was finally tempted into seeing the much-hyped production. He described the experience as both “delightful and disappointing,” noting the clunky stagecraft and stilted acting. Yet he was won over enough to declare that he would return to the theater again.
The book made Lew Wallace a celebrity, sought out for speaking engagements, political endorsements, and newspaper interviews. “I would not give a tuppence for the American who has not at least tried to do one of three things,” Wallace told a New York Times reporter in 1893. “That person lacks the true American spirit who has not tried to paint a picture, write a book, or get out a patent on something.” Or, he added, “tried to play some musical instrument. There you have the genius of the true American in those four—art, literature, invention, music.”
I read Ben Hur when I was a teenager — drawn by the movie and I remember liking it a lot though any specifics are tainted by my gajillion viewings of the movie I’m sure. Wallace was surely a man who sought and knew redemption.
I would be remiss in not also mentioning Ripples of Battle by Victor Davis Hanson. In it Davis has a chapter on the Battle of Shiloh and how the scapegoating of Wallace and his subsequent quest for redemption resulted in Ben Hur and its affects on American culture — just one of many ripples from the Battle of Shiloh.
Yeah, Wallace remains controversial. Later in life he was military governor of New Mexico, and made an botched attempt to do a plea bargain with Billy the Kid. A lot of Billy apologists still blame him for that. Personally I don’t know. Billy wasn’t exactly a reliable citizen.
Floyd,have you ever read “The Soul of Battle” by VDH?
It’s the story of 3 generals and 3 armies who tore the hearts out of 3 tyrannies..Sparta,the Confederacy,and Nazi Germany.
@ Scott: I’m not sure the Confederacy counts as a tyranny. They had a written constitution, a democratically elected government, an independent court system, and the military and police forces were separate. It wasn’t any more a tyranny than the Republic of Texas was prior to joining the US.
@ whomever: Everyone always notes that The Bible is the best selling book of all time, for good reason. Everyone always fails to correctly note the second-best-selling book of all time, though, it’s not “Gone with the Wind” or whatever, it’s The Koran.
“…There you have the genius of the true American in those four—art, literature, invention, music.”Nonsense – the real American genius is for finding new and fascinating ways to tax these parasites on society. Isn’t that what MSNBC keeps telling us…?
It should be noted that Wallace also slowed down Jubal Early’s raiders in 1864 just long enough for Horatio Wright’s VI Corps to make it to the DC defenses and keep Early from raising hell in the capitol. Redemption indeed.
Well,Republibot,so did Nazi Germany…Adolf Hitler took power legally.VDH’s point in the book was the vanquishing of involuntary servitude by armies of liberation…three armies of liberation
Yeah Scott… and it would’ve been interesting the basically involuntary servitude of the poor white-crackers as well. Eventually the slave-mentality would’ve transcended race to class and poor whites would’ve suffered (which they did anyway since slavery took a lot of jobs out of the economy) as well I believe. (who knows now of course)
I agree… if a significant portion of the population is enslaved — that’s tyrannical.
We was fightin’ fer ar rats.
Soooooooo then by that logic, the United States itself was a Tyranny until 1863? Obviously, I disagree: the definition you’re using is overly meticulous. The Nazis suspended free elections after they took power, the Confederates never did. Ergo, the Nazis – regardless of their being voted in to power – *BECAME* Tyrants specifically because they put an end to democracy more or less as their first act.
Now, if you wanted to accuse the Confederacy of being a One Party Democracy (Which it has in common with Nazi Germany, the PRC, the Soviet Union, and many others), yeah, that’s totally true, and most of the time that seems to be a bad thing.
What’s your thinking on Singapore? Is it a Tyranny, or owing to it’s generally ‘up with people’ nature, is it not?