Post by strange on May 17, 2010 10:21:34 GMT -5
); ‘where someone throws paint at the wall to see if it sticks and impresses someone.’ This can take many forms and shapes, and not all are true representations, for one reason or another, but usually, hidden deep in there, in a blotch or a corner, or a small crease or crevice - there is truth to those who can see it. And finally we get to the real artist, those who perhaps more than anything contribute to this works of art, to this subject, that no man has ever considered; What looks right with that portrait, instead of what looks wrong! Indeed, it takes a fine eye to distinguish a great work of art and appraise it as such. And we, all, are, in our own small way, painters and perhaps more, appraisers of what is worth more, or we wouldn’t be here. Indeed Cutter, indeed, there is a truth to Red Horse’s painting that no one realizes, and it isn’t Victorian in nature, its more Picasso, yet throws it right at you and doesn’t hide it. And every Indian did this, not just in his works of art, but also in their words as well. Its getting at the impressionistic meaning that brings value. Most today don’t buy into the “romantic version” of this battle. And for most who don’t, that means, while they appreciate looking at the ’fine art’ of the Victorian age, they’d much prefer the truthful representations Picasso could have created and match that to something original in ’nature’; that comes closer to the truth of the 1001 participants who did know. Indeed the pompous Victorian view that Custer did this or that in valorous offensive splendor, for this or that assumed reason, other than the full purpose of subduing the thousands of Indians before him and moments later; “like they were on a stage somewhere playing Macbeth or Hamlet, than actually caught up in the awful reality of being scared S---less- that they were about to die”; speaks volumes of their vain theories. Theories that in the final stages, they can not explain to the satisfaction of all. Yet there were warriors who did state that ’moment in time’ when Custer and his men knew that, “they were about to die.” It is in reality, these ‘small fragments’ of reality that when all brought together on one huge canvas, makes the painting complete.
In our minds eye, we all tend to take small insignificant untruths and rely upon them as being solid fact. To complete the tapestries in our thoughts, what was in the hidden parts of the battle, what was thought to be concealed or hidden, was indeed more observable and seen than what most would believe.
Rarely does anyone accept the truth of what happened at the LBH. Rarely is anything seen in the reality of what really took place. On some forums, it seems one has to be someone of ’privilege’ or ’renown’ to be accepted and passed into the ’sorority’ there. And one must ascribe themselves to the ’master’ view of events, or be chastised or criticized for not conforming to ’their view’, a right of passage, one supposes, like any sorority requires. What they don’t realize is that we are all ’artist in our own right’, we all are ’appraisers in our own right’, and while they don’t appreciate the fine horrible truth of what happened at the LBH from the perspective of each individual artist, here we do.
What needs to be brought out here, is what others have missed. To present to the forum things that they may not want to be confronted with, like the awful truth about the MTF - Nye Cartwright/Calhoun Ridge episodes, and/or in association with this, Custer’s trail and speed down the right bank. To force the issue of ’truth or fiction’, to bring to the fore, those things that were said by Custer’s own men, ’that quite simply are not believed‘! And to test them against the pompous Victorian view, that they were and still are wrong. Quite naturally, when I attempted this on other forums, I was chastised and criticized for my view. But I wanted so much more for other people, just like me, who held opposing views, not to have to pass a ’sorority test’ in order to express themselves on a forum, and thus you see before you, what now was that result. Here, I don’t want anyone to feel alienated by their convictions, nor fooled by those who think and claim themselves ’superior’. And most of all, we must remember that Custer and his men lived in a different era, spoke differently than what we do today, had different ideas about battle, and how it was to be pursued. We cannot possibly ever compare that to ’anything’ modern, nor I believe, should we ever try.
Unfortunately, what can’t be done is to say things on any forum in one line or in just a couple of lines and make it sound sane. One liners are for ’stand up comics’ and ’show people’. And they who try that are perhaps the worst impressionist when it comes to this battle. And so, I’m not to be classified among them.
Today we seem to factionalize ourselves into groups of people who either see ’villains or hero’s’ in those who participated at the battle of the LBH. And one supposes this is a natural tendency to do. Some love the crassness and silliness of Benteen, others admire the bravery of Custer and the list goes on and on, with Keogh, or this one or that one. But in reality, it paints one’s view into a corner. It’s like starting Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel all over again, and trying to emulate it, and in the end getting caught in the wet paint in one corner of the room while the wet paint dries. It’s a perfect rendition in every way, you’ll be lauded for centuries as someone who emulated to perfection Michelangelo. The worst part about it is, you have an appointment with Donald Trump at the Trump Plaza in 20 minutes that’s worth millions to you. What do you do? Indeed most of us do this. We paint ourselves into a canted view of what happened at the Lbh by choosing someone to ’like’ or ’love’ over another, and ultimately miss out on the value of truth.
And finally, ’cherry picking’. While some may claim that I do this, I do not. In fact most of what I present is well rounded in most ways. Sure, I do have to, as most do, say that someone ’lied’ or ‘misrepresented the facts’, that’s just the nature of this beast for all of us, and I do mean, for all of us. But I do think, that in the end, when or if the truth ever comes out, it will be the person who didn’t put a lot of spin to “most” of what they all had to say. I think the trick is to listen carefully to the “participants” and what those today are trying to say about them. If they say that Curley lied, that Martin lied, that Kanipe lied, that Goldin lied, that Thompson lied (IN ANY WAY) in total, what are they really saying? I in fact, make no such claim. And in fact, believe each and every one of them, and - state it! While I may not believe Walter Mason Camp did the right thing, I believe what they had to say, as opposed to what he misrepresented. Which was right, which was wrong?
There's nothing actually wrong with depicting a heroic or gallant Custer standing up to swarms of indians. The only real beef I can note against the various depictions of the battle is that they often get wardrobe, landscapes, posture, and weapons wrong.
