Catton / Grant and Lee: A Study in Contrasts

Ernest Ventura

Professor Freedman

English 101

8 July 2004

Catton / Grant and Lee: A Study in Contrasts

Questions on Meaning:

1. What is Bruce Catton’s PURPOSE in writing: to describe the meetings of two generals at a famous moment in history; to explain how the two men stood for opposing social forces in America; or to show how the two differed in personality?
2. SUMMARIZE the background and the way of life that produced Robert E. Lee; then do the same for Ulysses S. Grant. According to Catton, what ideals did each man represent?
3. In the historians view, what essential traits did the two have in common? Which traits does Catton think most important of all?
4. How does this essay help you understand why Grant and Lee were such determined fighters?

Answers to Questions on Meaning:

1. Paragraphs 1-2 and the concluding sentence describe the meeting of two generals at a famous moment in history.

Paragraphs 3-9 show how the two differed in personality.

Paragraphs 10-12 explain how the two men stood for opposing social forces in America.

In a history class that talks about what happened, to describe the meetings of two generals at a famous moment in history would be the closest answer. In an English class that talks about comparison and contrast, to show how the two differed in personality would be the best answer since most part of the essay shows contrast between the characters, not only in personality, but also in background as well as aspirations. Furthermore, the title itself makes the author’s main purpose clear, that is to show differences. To explain how the two men stood for opposing social forces in America can also be considered a good choice for an answer.

2. Lee was tidewater Virginia, and in his background were family, culture, and tradition. He embodied the way of life that had come down through the age of knighthood and the English country squire. Lee stood for the feeling that it was somehow of advantage to human society to have a pronounced inequality in the social structure.

Grant, the son of a tanner on the Western frontier, was everything Lee was not. He was one of a body of men who owed reverence and obeisance to no one, who were self-reliant to a fault, who cared hardly anything for the past but who had a sharp eye for the future. He stood for democracy, not from any reasoned conclusion about the proper ordering of human society, but simply because they had grown up in the middle of democracy and knew how it worked. He saw his fate in terms of the nation’s own destiny.

According to Catton, Lee embodied the noblest elements of an aristocratic ideal while Grant illustrated the democratic ideal.

3. They were marvelous fighters. Furthermore, their fighting abilities were really very much alike. Each man had the great virtue of utter tenacity and fidelity. In each man there was an indomitable quality… the born fighter’s refusal to give up as long as he can still remain in his two feet and his two fists. Daring and resourcefulness they had, too; the ability to think faster and move faster than the enemy. These are the words the author used to express the fighters’ traits in common. Catton believed that the most important of all these common characteristics that Grant and Lee possess, was the ability, at the end, to turn quickly from war to peace once the fighting was over. This great ability that they share made it possible for the divided union to stand united again. And this is probably the author’s reason why he selected that common trait to be the greatest.

4. The way Bruce Catton organized his essay made understanding why Grant and Lee were such determined fighters uncomplicated to me. The way he elaborated facts, not so brief yet not so worded, makes every single sentence effective, that helped me absorb crucial details. In other words, the format of this essay helped me understood the whole content of the story.