mikefisher.org

The other week Michelle and I celebrated our fifth anniversary with a short overnight stay in Virginia, where I was going for a business trip. Besides visiting every thrift store we could find (don’t laugh; that’s what we did on our honeymoon), we toured the New Market battlefield of the Civil War. I did not remember ever even hearing of the Battle of New Market so the visit there was interesting in a number of ways.

I was interested and somewhat amused by the presentation of the general events of the Civil War, which the museum did by means of a large cyclorama made of panels, each of which detailed an important battle or series of battles in the war. Separating each panel was a more narrow, recessed panel which might have a work of art or photo, and a small strip of floor space which was used to display lists of what were apparently less significant details.

The first five panels all covered in detailed fashion the major failed attempts of the Union (which I noticed was mostly called the Federal) Army to take Richmond. The way the information about the war was being presented struck me when I discovered the reference to the Battle of Gettysburg. It was tucked away as a brief item in a bulleted list, on the floor below one of the recessed panels. Also there was a table with a few artifacts on display placed on that floor space, so that you had to bend down in order to read it. I began to realize that I was in a Civil War museum in the South! Having been at the Gettysburg battlefield and being used to thinking of Gettysburg as one of the most important battles of the conflict, it struck me as odd that a presentation of the important events of the Civil War would only mention the battle as a sort of postscript. But then again I was born in the North. And after all New Market was a Confederate victory.

I have no doubt that the same information about the same battle would be presented in a different light if the museum were in one of the northern states. It all just goes to show that the presentation of history is never a disinterested, objective business. The viewpoint of the writer (or in this case the curators of the museum) shines through. The details one chooses to emphasize, the tone of the presentation, the organization – such things betray a viewpoint and a larger worldview.

How different, for example, is the presentation of history if one holds to the idea that the universe is a closed system operating apart from divine intervention.

I also thought about the fact that the eventual victory of the North had nothing to do with the victor having a superior moral cause. Many like to think so; but when things come to blows, might for all practical purposes makes right as far as the kingdoms of this world are concerned.

Yes, we finally went fishing again as a family. The only other time I took the boys fishing was several years ago at a state park and hardly qualifies as a fishing trip because we only caught one, single, tiny fish. Which by the way cost me twenty-some bucks because it was the only fish I caught on my license that year.

A neighbor of ours, who has a nice large pond, kindly allowed us to fish there. To be honest it didn’t seem like a well-maintained pond so I was not expecting anything too exciting. As it turns out the ratio of catches to casts was probably the highest I have ever seen. There were only possibly three casts when we didn’t drag in at least a small sunfish. I took two rods along but I never once got a chance to use the spare. I wanted the boys to have the chance to catch fish all by themselves but mostly by the time I cast and handed the rod to one of the boys there was something biting.

So here are the pictures.

Read the rest of this entry »