GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

historical parallel and such like

POSTED BY: HUMBLE
UPDATED: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 13:14
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2069
PAGE 1 of 1

Monday, December 22, 2003 7:36 AM

HUMBLE


just wondering if firefly kinda parallels ante-bellum and post civil war america in some respects, would the alliance be considered the "south" and the independents the "north"? in jaynes world and train job they speak of indentured servants. also, in shindig the magistrate spoke of owning slaves. if there is a historical parallel, wouldn't that mean the yankees of 500 years from now lost the civil war? even the alliance uniforms are gray. also, in ariel, mal uses the word "scruth". anyone know what this means? lastly, why is jayne so quotable an' such?

well now, i guess it's time for some thrillin' heroics!-jayne cobb.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 22, 2003 7:59 AM

BROWNCOAT1

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.


Joss had said that there were similarities between Firefly & post Civil War America, but I believe the intent was for the Independants to bear semblance to the South, and the Alliance the North.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 22, 2003 8:00 AM

TEELABROWN


It's more Reconstruction (post-bellum) than ante-bellum. The browncoats are like the beaten Confederates, and the North is the Alliance.

............................................................................................
"Freedom is the Freedom to say that 2+2 makes 4. If that is granted, all else follws"-Winston, 1984
Keep flyin', and remember, THEY can't take the sky from US!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, December 22, 2003 8:24 AM

CARDIE


Joss wanted to do a post-Civil War type western about people who resisted centralized "federal" government, so the Browncoats are clearly the South in the historical parallel. But he did not want the problem of those who fought to be independent of such a government to have done so in part because of a desire to preserve slavery. Nor did he want their ability to carve out a new life on the frontier to come at the expense of indigenous peoples already there. So he set his postbellum Southern/Western in outer space five hundred years in the future in a 'verse where humans had not encountered any aliens.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 23, 2003 2:37 AM

DRAKON


Quote:

Originally posted by humble:
just wondering if firefly kinda parallels ante-bellum and post civil war america in some respects, would the alliance be considered the "south" and the independents the "north"? in jaynes world and train job they speak of indentured servants. also, in shindig the magistrate spoke of owning slaves. if there is a historical parallel, wouldn't that mean the yankees of 500 years from now lost the civil war? even the alliance uniforms are gray. also, in ariel, mal uses the word "scruth". anyone know what this means? lastly, why is jayne so quotable an' such?

well now, i guess it's time for some thrillin' heroics!-jayne cobb.



Word has it that Joss is paralleling the American civil war, or rather the aftermath, the years from about 1870 onward, which is essentially the "golden age" of the west. But don't take the parallels too much to heart.

The alliance's heavy industry, compared to the independence's more agrarian base is more a parallel of the North. But its allowance of slavery, (and I am still not sure if it is legal, or illegal but ignored by the alliance) makes the alliance closer to the South. Either way, it don't matter.

There was a big war, one side lost, the other won, and a lot of folk lit out for the hinterlands.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 23, 2003 6:46 AM

HERO


There are alot of obvious parallels to the 1870's. But it also reminds me of the 1500-1700 era of piracy and colonization. I wonder if the recent success of a certain pirate movie might allow Joss to repackage Firefly in that new light.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 23, 2003 7:07 AM

GUNSLINGER


The American Civil War is one of the most misunderstood conflicts in history. The main cause of the war was the infringement of States Rights by the federal government, but the main right that was being infringed was slavery. At that time there were several new states joining the Union and territories soon to join. The fear that they would tip the balance was one of the major issues. So the guy saying the main issue was State's Rights and the guy saying slavery as the major issue are both right. JW has been a bit ambiguous on the legality of slavery in the Alliance. Near as I can figure it is legal, but they prefer to refer to it as indenture, a less loaded term. My ancestors in Scottland were slaves, though the English never used that term.

In some ways the Firefly universe is like the days of European colonialism. They want colonies, but they do not want them to be self sufficient. The Alliance seems to use passive oppression to keep them down. It is easier to govern a far-flung empire if the outermost provinces are provincial. I guess that is why you still see horses. The Alliance would not want there to be heavy industry in the colonies. They exist to provide raw materials and a market for manufactured goods.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 23, 2003 7:45 AM

HUMBLE


Quote:

Originally posted by Gunslinger:
The American Civil War is one of the most misunderstood conflicts in history. The main cause of the war was the infringement of States Rights by the federal government, but the main right that was being infringed was slavery. At that time there were several new states joining the Union and territories soon to join. The fear that they would tip the balance was one of the major issues. So the guy saying the main issue was State's Rights and the guy saying slavery as the major issue are both right. JW has been a bit ambiguous on the legality of slavery in the Alliance. Near as I can figure it is legal, but they prefer to refer to it as indenture, a less loaded term. My ancestors in Scottland were slaves, though the English never used that term.

In some ways the Firefly universe is like the days of European colonialism. They want colonies, but they do not want them to be self sufficient. The Alliance seems to use passive oppression to keep them down. It is easier to govern a far-flung empire if the outermost provinces are provincial. I guess that is why you still see horses. The Alliance would not want there to be heavy industry in the colonies. They exist to provide raw materials and a market for manufactured goods.



my original intent in this thread was to illustrate the historical irony(?) of the show as compared to america's own history ante-bellum as well as post civil war (i hate saying post-bellum). yes, in our civil war the north won and slavery was abolished, but in firefly, slavery and indentured servants seem to propagate! if this is true then the alliance must advocate the institution of slavery (equivalent to our confederacy). also in regards to slavery seeming to be prevalent in the "rim", i think the outer worlds are the third world nations of the future, with the elitist aristocracy inhabiting the core planets. i think that all these colony worlds kind of parallel the thirteen colonies and the alliance portrays the british under king george. it's inevitable that the colonies will stage another revolt to win their freedom from an oppressive, totalitarian regime! oh, incidentally, i don't think it was a question of proportion of slave states vs. free states that caused the civil war inasmuch as it was the LOWER south's fear of lincoln as president freeing the slaves/slave revolts. the UPPER south for the most part, did not want to secede from the union. merry x-mas, happy new year!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 23, 2003 8:03 AM

TEELABROWN


But Firefly is more post-bellum than ante-bellum. More reconstruction. Well, I don't think I'll convince you, so I'll back out for now.

............................................................................................
"Freedom is the Freedom to say that 2+2 makes 4. If that is granted, all else follws"-Winston, 1984
Keep flyin', and remember, THEY can't take the sky from US!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 23, 2003 3:03 PM

GUNSLINGER


It was an issue bacause if new states became slave or free states it would effect who moved there, and what kind of representation they got in congress. The slave and free states were pretty well balanced. John Browns first attacks were in the Missouri and Kansas areas. His intent was to destroy the pro-slave movement.

Personally, I would have had a hard time chosing sides. I am pro-states rights, but I would never take a side that allowed slavery.

By the way, I think it was Kentucky that was the slave state that sided with the Union, but I would have to look it up.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 24, 2003 4:25 AM

TEELABROWN


I don't know about Kentucy, but I'm pretty sure Maryland tried to be South, so Lincoln moved the capital right in the middle of Maryland. And then the people of Maryland put crosses (I think) on top of the flagpoles, so that Confederates would know that the people were friendly to them. And the crosses are still there for historical content and such.

Also, you could just not chose sides and go to Canada and be a fur trader or whatever.
............................................................................................
"Freedom is the Freedom to say that 2+2 makes 4. If that is granted, all else follws"-Winston, 1984
Keep flyin', and remember, THEY can't take the sky from US!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 24, 2003 8:17 AM

GUNSLINGER


No, I think I would go West. Of course I may well have been in the Union Army before the war started.

They never covered what happened to the leaders of the Independents. Did you know that the Union was unable to get a conviction for treason on Jefferson Davis? The Supreme Court ruled (after the war was over)that the South had the right to seccede.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 24, 2003 8:45 AM

TEELABROWN


Very interesting. I'm not big on the Civil War. I like to study WWI, WWII, and the 20s-50s. And whatever I feel like. Like in my world conflict class, I'm researching Napolean, then Stalin. I didn't spell Napolean right, did I? Oh, well.

............................................................................................
"Freedom is the Freedom to say that 2+2 makes 4. If that is granted, all else follws"-Winston, 1984
Keep flyin', and remember, THEY can't take the sky from US!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 24, 2003 9:29 AM

GUNSLINGER


You raise an even more interesting question than what side of the Civil War one would take. Would you side with Hitler or Stalin? I know we were technically on Stalin's side in WWII, but that is a case of strange bedfellows. Both were evil incarnate.

The advantage of a free country is that you do not get that kind of despot.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 24, 2003 12:34 PM

TEELABROWN


Very good piont. Despots can be annoying. I would have to say: If I was German, most likely Hitler. But most likely anyone else, I'd choose Stalin. Still, either would be a bad choice.

............................................................................................
"Freedom is the Freedom to say that 2+2 makes 4. If that is granted, all else follws"-Winston, 1984
Keep flyin', and remember, THEY can't take the sky from US!

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, December 24, 2003 1:14 PM

GUNSLINGER


I think I would go the same way if for no other reason, the Germans invaded first. There is a lot of speculation that it was a preemptive attack. The Soviets were planning to invade Romania, but only to prevent Germany from invading into the Causcus.

On the list of genocidal dictators Hitler was tied for the bronze. Stalin gets the gold medal.

I guess it does not matter which country I was living in, since in either case I would have made it my life's mission to depose the tyrant.

Getting back to the original subject, I am interested in knowing what the political situation was before the war? Where did the idea of "Unification" come from? If they had been unified in the first place and broke apart I think it would have been refered to as "Re-unification". I think more likely there were several systems with assorted colonies with various ties to a "Home-world". At some point the decision was made to consolidate everything.

They have made it clear that the Alliance has limited resources and interest in the proper development of the outer systems.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL