Re "I don’t think I’ve ever seen more interest in the Civil War, even if much of it is framed around the ongoing controversy surrounding Confederate symbols":
I'll bet that you're right, but I wonder if you couldn't widen it beyond symbol-and-monument battles. You probably actually mean it this way, or in something like this way, and maybe I'm going a little bit off the topic. But those battles are part of the history wars in general, which are raging these days because--or so it seems to me--of the race resentments now pervading politics.
I'm thinking of contention over history curricula and of the anger I encounter reglularly over the 1619 Project (which I swear comes often from people who haven't even read Nikole Hannah-Jones's introductory overview essay, and who have no idea that what she says links to something she emphasizes: the gradual evolution of her understanding of her dad's reverence for Old Glory).
I'm also thinking of the current simplistic propaganda fad wherein one party claims that
* it's completely identical to the original party of Lincoln and that
* the other party is completely identical to the original party of slavery and Jim Crow.
You see that all the time in online discussions at the Wall Street Journal and elsewhere. That too is all about race both in national memory and in current politics--and is connected to the Civil War.
I agree, though I think it is important that it is a much more specialized publication that is intended to support the work of the broader organization.
Always sad to hear when someone loses their job like this. But I guess they have good company with most of the former staff of Sports Illustrated, who were also fired last month.
Anyway, to your point that "we still have one very good Civil War magazine in publication-" there's actually more than one: North & South Magazine is back in publication, and has been going again for some time. It's still published and edited by Keith Poulter, and it's produced on good quality, glossy paper and can be purchased at Books-a-Million (not sure about Barnes & Noble). I'm looking right now at my copy of "Series II, Volume II, Number 4" which has on the cover illustration a slave auction, for the issue's main story of the Franklin & Armfield slave traders, who were the biggest traders in that business. But I noticed that this new edition of N&S does not have any ads at all. I have no idea how Poulter finances his magazine other than subscriptions and newsstand sales, but at least his magazine doesn't feature ads for neo-Confederate, Lost Cause-based books and merchandise as so many Civil War mags have done for decades. Even Civil War Monitor stepped into this- in their Winter 2022 issue, they ran an ad from Gregory Newsome, an African-American man who sells nonsensical paintings and books glorifying the Confederacy. And of course, he totally supports the Black Confederate myth. I love Civil War Monitor, but I was incredibly disappointed when they chose to print this man's stupid crap.
I was disappointed about that ad as well, Bryan, but I am willing to look beyond it given the financial challenges faced in producing a magazine as well as its track record.
I'll be honest, I am not at all a fan of Keith Poulter. I got screwed over by him before the magazine folded years ago and after contributing a string of book reviews. I've heard the same from other authors as well. I don't trust him and I don't recommend subscribing to his magazine. Thanks for the comment.
I understand your position, Kevin. I believe I can separate the who from the do in this case, but I won't be surprised if North & South Series II suffers the same fate as its predecessor. That said, I'll just buy his magazine from the bookstore.
I love that Keith Poulter does not support the Lost Cause at all, but I'll never forget his interview with Gerry Prokopowicz on Civil War Talk Radio, during his publihing the original N&S. He said he went into business for himself because he "absolutely, positively cannot stand being told what to do." Fast forward to his magazine going belly-up. I was not surprised at all when that happened.
By the way, I saw Mr. Newsome on sutler row at the Olustee reenactment last weekend. He also comes to Cedar Creek. Disgusting anybody even bothers with him.
I ran the magazine section for a large Borders Books in Rockville, MD in 1997, when the first issue of N&S arrived. I was blown away by the quality of the articles and Keith's commitment to maintaining a high level of scholarship for a popular magazine.
Of course, I now know that a lot of that had to do with Terry Johnston's involvement, who, of course, now oversees the Civil War Monitor magazine.
Re "I don’t think I’ve ever seen more interest in the Civil War, even if much of it is framed around the ongoing controversy surrounding Confederate symbols":
I'll bet that you're right, but I wonder if you couldn't widen it beyond symbol-and-monument battles. You probably actually mean it this way, or in something like this way, and maybe I'm going a little bit off the topic. But those battles are part of the history wars in general, which are raging these days because--or so it seems to me--of the race resentments now pervading politics.
I'm thinking of contention over history curricula and of the anger I encounter reglularly over the 1619 Project (which I swear comes often from people who haven't even read Nikole Hannah-Jones's introductory overview essay, and who have no idea that what she says links to something she emphasizes: the gradual evolution of her understanding of her dad's reverence for Old Glory).
I'm also thinking of the current simplistic propaganda fad wherein one party claims that
* it's completely identical to the original party of Lincoln and that
* the other party is completely identical to the original party of slavery and Jim Crow.
You see that all the time in online discussions at the Wall Street Journal and elsewhere. That too is all about race both in national memory and in current politics--and is connected to the Civil War.
Apologies if this is a bit off topic. Thanks.
You are not off topic at all. I should have framed that specific point more broadly. Thanks.
I’d also suggest adding to the list of really good magazines currently in print is the American Battlefield Trust’s magazine “Hallowed Grounds.”
I agree, though I think it is important that it is a much more specialized publication that is intended to support the work of the broader organization.
Always sad to hear when someone loses their job like this. But I guess they have good company with most of the former staff of Sports Illustrated, who were also fired last month.
Anyway, to your point that "we still have one very good Civil War magazine in publication-" there's actually more than one: North & South Magazine is back in publication, and has been going again for some time. It's still published and edited by Keith Poulter, and it's produced on good quality, glossy paper and can be purchased at Books-a-Million (not sure about Barnes & Noble). I'm looking right now at my copy of "Series II, Volume II, Number 4" which has on the cover illustration a slave auction, for the issue's main story of the Franklin & Armfield slave traders, who were the biggest traders in that business. But I noticed that this new edition of N&S does not have any ads at all. I have no idea how Poulter finances his magazine other than subscriptions and newsstand sales, but at least his magazine doesn't feature ads for neo-Confederate, Lost Cause-based books and merchandise as so many Civil War mags have done for decades. Even Civil War Monitor stepped into this- in their Winter 2022 issue, they ran an ad from Gregory Newsome, an African-American man who sells nonsensical paintings and books glorifying the Confederacy. And of course, he totally supports the Black Confederate myth. I love Civil War Monitor, but I was incredibly disappointed when they chose to print this man's stupid crap.
Hi Bryan,
I was disappointed about that ad as well, Bryan, but I am willing to look beyond it given the financial challenges faced in producing a magazine as well as its track record.
I'll be honest, I am not at all a fan of Keith Poulter. I got screwed over by him before the magazine folded years ago and after contributing a string of book reviews. I've heard the same from other authors as well. I don't trust him and I don't recommend subscribing to his magazine. Thanks for the comment.
I understand your position, Kevin. I believe I can separate the who from the do in this case, but I won't be surprised if North & South Series II suffers the same fate as its predecessor. That said, I'll just buy his magazine from the bookstore.
I love that Keith Poulter does not support the Lost Cause at all, but I'll never forget his interview with Gerry Prokopowicz on Civil War Talk Radio, during his publihing the original N&S. He said he went into business for himself because he "absolutely, positively cannot stand being told what to do." Fast forward to his magazine going belly-up. I was not surprised at all when that happened.
By the way, I saw Mr. Newsome on sutler row at the Olustee reenactment last weekend. He also comes to Cedar Creek. Disgusting anybody even bothers with him.
I ran the magazine section for a large Borders Books in Rockville, MD in 1997, when the first issue of N&S arrived. I was blown away by the quality of the articles and Keith's commitment to maintaining a high level of scholarship for a popular magazine.
Of course, I now know that a lot of that had to do with Terry Johnston's involvement, who, of course, now oversees the Civil War Monitor magazine.