A great novel of the Cibil War was not written until long after the war ended because..?

Question

Choices:

1) The proper vehicle for such strong meterial, the realistic novel, had not yet been fully developed in the U.S.

2) It was necessary for the intensity of the countries emotions to subside before such a realistic novel would be accepted by the american public

3) The writers who viewed the war firsthand lacked the skill to adequately describe what was really happening on the battlefields

4) No american writers of the period were willing to risk visiting the battle sites during the war

This is a question on an english assignment. I wrote it exactly how it is on the sheet. Please have some proof of the answer! Thanks so much!

Answer 1

I ca not really answer this question but give you some help:

1) Was there any realistic novel published before 1865 ? I know one book which has a tremendous effect before the civil war on the public: Uncle Tom's cabin (I would describe it as a realitsic novel)

3.) I doubt this. The civil war was not a "secret war", newspapers reported in detail about the war and the battles and the war took place all over the country. You did not have to be a soldier in the war to describe it and write a book about it. And you did not have to be writer before the war (in WW II some soldiers started to write during the war and wrote great novels !)

4.) During the first battle of Manassas (only some miles south of Washington) people from the city drove to the battlefield in coaches and saw the battle. Why should a writer be scared to go to the battlefield ???

3.) I opt for this answer: the emotions in the country were really high (you still can find them in a weaker form today, e.g. some southern states had flags of the confederation on there state capitols and it created huge discussions). Imagine the impact: some states formed a confederation and left the Union (imagine this today !), in some families soldiers were fighting on both sides, Lee (the military leader of the south) has been offered the leadership of the Union by Lincoln and he refused - he decided for his state Virginia, the afro american were freed by Lincoln - this was a huge change in the economic basis in the south, cities were destroyed e.g. Atlanta, the "March of Sherman to the sea" left a wide area of devastated land. For this generation the war had to be a disaster of unimaginable dimensions - it ws brother against brother. And the fact, that the Union "won" did not end the rift in the society.

I would go for answer three.

(I think your teacher intends that you think about the options and come up with good arguments).

Answer 2

the techniques are no longer all coherent. B sounds solid because of the fact it particularly is obvious, yet i don't understand how one would practice it. It relies upon upon a hypothetical. How can one understand what the rustic would have been waiting to settle for? you would be able to no longer. you would be able to purely understand what it did settle for. So I say C, whether it is not clean. i think of what it particularly is attaining for is the concept that people who experienced the conflict weren't sufficiently proficient to jot down approximately it. as a effect, the question is a sequence-up for Stephen Crane's _The purple Badge of braveness,_ the only novel of authentic huge difference concerning the yank Civil conflict. It exchange into composed by somebody who had the mind's eye and grace to make the Civil conflict authentic, even however he had no first hand conflict journey. A does not make any experience and D is patent nonsense.

Answer 3

I would go with 2, but the real reason is that the person who wrote the novel (Red Badge of Courage-Stephen Crane) was born after the Civil War ended