The first photo is of him being escorted to class by federal marshals at Ole Miss in 1962. The second photo, which won a Pulitzer in 1967, is of him being shot by a sniper on a civil rights march in 1966.
And a separate question: What do you think of there being no photographs besides the one of the sheriffs in the whole book? Assuming the author meant that singularity to support the notion that the book is a meditation on one monumental image, did you like that strategy or did you wish to see more photos — other images from the time, images from the present? Would it have weakened or strengthened the book to have photos of each sheriff — and of Meredith — showing him as a kid, a husband, a father, a grandpa, etc.?
5 comments:
James Meredith was brave partly because he was crazy. His craziness made him less afraid.
I wanted to see more pictures in the book, but I understand why he didn't include any. I think it was the right choice. It made it much easier to focus deeply on the photograph.
He was crazy. The braveness came from that, I think, as Ben said. He was driven to do these things for his own crazy reasons. People try to put him in the box of a Movement champion, but he really doesn't fit in that box.
I wanted more pictures, too. And I'm not sure it strengthened the book that much to leave them out. The book was about legacies -- why couldn't we have pictures of the sheriffs through their lives and with their sons? The author described a lot of photos, so why couldn't he show them? It seemed a little contrived to me.
Throughout the part about the standoff over James Meredith, the author has referenced at least two photographs I stopped to look for: One was the description of a man bringing a club down on a woman trying to cover herself with a purse. The second is the description of Martin Luther King Jr. bent over the police counter during an arrest with his wife looking on.
I flipped through the pages, expecting to see those images, and was disappointed not to find them.
It's odd that it's a book based on a picture and some of these visual elements aren't there. Perhaps he couldn't get permission.
Since that cover photo was central to James Meredith's story, do you find it odd that the author began with Emmett Till instead? Or would it have been too hard to wade through Meredith before going on to the sheriffs? I can't decide, although now it's interesting to learn how much of the Meredith situation was just-for-show between Bobby Kennedy and Mississippi's governor. In retrospect it makes the sheriffs seem foolish. Would it have enhanced their individual biographies to have known that going into the stories?
I find all of this fascinating, and it goes beyond what I know (or, more likely, remember) from learning about the Civil Rights Era. So far I admire how the author has figured out how to weave all of these disparate elements into a story.
I didn't answer the question. I think Ben said it best: "James Meredith was brave partly because he was crazy. His craziness made him less afraid."
I did think it was strange to begin with Emmett Till, and to include so much in the book about the Emmett Till case. On the whole I was glad, though, because I found that stuff really fascinating. And Cothran's role in the case was really telling.
Post a Comment