Lincoln at Gettysburg: First Hand Accounts

 We have read and heard many times over of President Abraham Lincoln giving his Gettysburg Address on November 19,  1863 in the new National Soldiers Cemetery in the small town of Gettysburg.  But many have not heard of the excitement that occurred the night before and the morning of the famous speech;  of how the folks in town reacted and celebrated such an occasion as having a Presidential visit.  Especially after the horror that took place just a few months before.
The following comes directly from the book,  "Gettysburg Remembers President Lincoln:  Eyewitness Accounts of November 1863"  by Linda Giberson Black. 

The train depot on Carlisle Street

At about dusk on Wednesday,  November 18,  1862,  President Abraham Lincoln's festively decorated train arrived at the railroad depot on Carlisle Street.  From there he moved to the home of David Wills.
Gettysburg was a lively place that evening.  Many of the visitors who thronged the streets were still seeking lodging.  Military bands played patriotic music by torchlight,  stirring the crowds.  Numerous people openly enjoyed alcoholic refreshments.  A large crowd gathered outside the Wills home.
"Thousands of persons were in the square anxious to see and hear the Chief Executive of the nation,"  Michael Colver wrote.
Many in the crowd began to call for Lincoln to come out and make a speech.  At last,  Lincoln decided that he could no longer ignore the pleas to appear.  When he went to the window to wave,  the crowd cheered.  Not satisfied with this brief glimpse,  the people continued to call for a speech.  "When he did appear,  never did mortal have a more enthusiastic greeting,"  J. Howard Wert noted.
"Hurrah for Old Abe!"  shouted some as their hats were flung in the air.  "We are coming Father Abraham,"  was the chorus of other enthusiasts.  "God Bless our President!  God save our President!" 
Lincoln began to speak in the high-pitched voice that always carried so well to the audience.
"I appear before you fellow citizens merely to thank you for this compliment.  The inference is a very fair one that you would hear me for a little while at least, were I to commence to make a speech.  I do not appear before you for the purpose of doing so,  and for several substantial reasons.  The most substantial of these is that I have no speech to make,"  he declared,  drawing laughter.  "In my position it is somewhat important that I should not say any foolish things,"  he added.
"If you can help it!"  someone in the crowd shouted.
"It very often happens that the only way to help it is to say nothing at all,"  the good-natured Lincoln replied,  making the people laugh again.  "Believing that is my present condition this evening,  I must beg of you to excuse me from addressing you further."  And back he went into the Wills house. 

The David Wills Home - Lincoln's stayed in the room marked with the bunting

 Many of the home owners in  Gettysburg had unexpected company that night due to the overwhelming throngs of out of towners clamoring to hear the President's speech.  Kate McCreary said,  "They slept on the floor of the parlor;  had comforters and pillows for beds.  The family slept on the third floor that night."
On the momentous Thursday morning morning of November 19,  1863,  Gettysburg sprang to life early.   Much to the relief of everyone,  the weather was good.
"It was one of those very few November days in our climate that are adapted for open-air audiences and open-air speakers,"  wrote eyewitness Henry Eyster Jacobs.  "The sun shone brightly:  the air was almost balmy."
Gettysburg was bursting at the seems.  Visitors poured into town..  The local newspaper,  The Compiler,  noted:  "The streets swarmed with people from all sections of the Union,  the number variously estimated at from twenty to forty thousand.  Every available spot on the principal streets was occupied.  The throng of ladies and gentlemen,  the large turnout of military in their best trim,  the flags floating in the breeze at innumerable points - all contributed to the making up of a picture of rare and exciting interest."
W.C. Storrick walked to town with his father that morning:  "The streets were rife with people.  The bands were playing and I was delighted with the music which was the best I had ever heard."
At ten o'clock,  the scheduled starting time for the procession,  President Lincoln,  wearing a black suit,  stovepipe hat with mourning band,  and white gauntlets,  stood in the doorway of the Wills house.
Storrick remembered,  "I was surprised and I might say awed by his great height,  his black hair and beard,  his dark complexion,  his head covered with a tall silk hat.  I thought he was the tallest man I had ever seen and I fancy I can still see him as he appeared to me on that day."
Lincoln was greeted by cheers as he walked between to lines of soldiers to the reddish-brown horse that had been selected to be his mount.  However,  the steed was too small for him.  Henry Holloway recalled,  "After he had mounted the animal,  Mr.  Lincoln's feet were near the ground.  The spectacle was humorous,  and no one seemed more conscious of it than himself.  If there had been an accident,  he certainly would not have had far to fall."
At about eleven o'clock,  the procession to the Soldiers'  National Cemetery was finally ready to start.  "The band began to play and Mr. Lincoln's horse became excited and pranced around quite lively.  It seemed to amuse the President,  and then that sober,  sad-faced man actually smiled,"  remembered Liberty Holloway.

The Shriver home on Baltimore Street as it looked in 1863

The proud color guard led the way down Baltimore Street.  Next came the Marine Band,  playing a stirring march.  The rest of the military participants followed in their best attire,  presenting an impressive sight. 
Accompanied by numerous dignitaries such as Secretary of State William H. Seward,  Postmaster General Montgomery Blair,  and others,  Lincoln appeared next in the procession.  Despite the solemn purpose of the parade,  many of the spectators who lined Baltimore Street greeted the President with cheers.  Lincoln's face became illuminated with smiles and he bowed continually to acknowledge the cheers.
Annie Skelly was only seven at the time.  "I remember vividly of a man who lifted me up to see Lincoln.  He would turn from side to side looking at the people on either side when he passed.  He looked rather odd on such a small horse."

This painting gives the reader a fine impression of what Gettysburg's Baltimore Street may have looked like on the morning of November 19, 1863

To the new cemetery Lincoln and the parade participants went,  along with over twenty thousand cheering supporters,  to hear what is perhaps the most famous speech given by a President in American history. 

    Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
    Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
    But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate—we can not consecrate—we can not hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

—Abraham Lincoln

 

I hope this little post helped to give you more of a  'you are there'  understanding of what it was like during the evening of November 18 and the morning of November 19,  1863,  for the population of the town of Gettysburg.







.

Reenacting Frustrations

My wife, Patty, and our good friend, Jean Cook, are on the cover of the latest issue of "Citizens' Companion" magazine - 'The Voice of Civilian Reenacting.'
It is an honor and a thrill for the two lovely ladies to be on the cover of such a respected magazine, and for me as well, for I was the man behind the camera last year at Waterloo Farm Museum during our Christmas at the Farm presentation. The back cover photograph is also one that I took, though this was at Daggett Farm in Greenfield Village - a scene around 100 years earlier than what's on the front.
Seeing the picture on the cover got me to thinking about that weekend last December and the presentation we did. It was an amazing weekend.

The photo used for the back cover of Citizens' Companion

There were eight of us there and we did our best to give the visitors an immersion experience - to help them feel as if they stepped into Christmas past. We all had an opportunity to interact with the public as well as to demonstrate everyday life. As Mrs. Cook (the woman on the left of the cover photo) said, "It was like being in a Christmas card."
Bringing the past to life is no easy task, mind you, for all participants must be on the same level with the same mindset; nothing would be worse than providing a 1st person atmosphere to a patron only to have one of your own be caught with a cell phone in their hand or to hear their cell ringtone. This not only ruins the moment for everyone else - including the patrons - but pretty much the rest of the day. Yes, this has happened and, unfortunately, probably will happen again. You see, for me it's the cell phone that is the bane of a living historian's existence. Too often I see period dress folk not even try to make an attempt to hide their phones. And when they do make the attempt it's still pretty obvious. But, everyone seems to have a cell - me, too - and too often we will whip it out without a care as soon as we hear a sound coming from it.
Fortunately, I have prepared myself to hopefully prevent this situation from occurring again: before the event begins I will ask, "Are your cells off or on vibrate? Do you know what to do should you feel the need to answer your phone?"
Yep - these'll be my words to the participants for I will no longer tolerate any more of this crap at events where I am the main coordinator.

This is a man portraying President Lincoln. How do you think the public perceives this? Whether you are in a modern parking lot or in authentic surroundings, while in period clothing the living historian should always present themselves as best and as authentic as they can.

No, this is NOT Michigan's very own Lincoln, Mr.Fred Priebe!

Oh wait - how about those plastic water bottles? They are as bad as the blasted cell phones! I actually see reenactors walking around with these obscenities more than cell phones! Oh, that's right - it's inconvenient to pour water into a glass, and the water may spill as you walk around.
Do I sound anal? Like a stitch nazi? To be honest, I really don't care.
When something like this occurs it's a reflection on me and/or anyone else who is "in charge."
So, what to do if your phone begins to vibrate (for I am assuming that you were courteous enough to put it on silence)? Quietly and unobtrusively excuse yourself and move off to another room in the house or, if you happen to be outside, out of public viewing (like maybe behind or inside of a tent) and then answer it. If the caller already had hung up or left a message, you can then phone them back should the call be of utmost importance.
It's simple! And no one will be the wiser.

Do you think the good folks that come and see us notice this sort of farby behavior?
You bet they do, and they are making no bones about their feelings. In this latest issue of Citizens' Companion of which I am so proud, editor Connie Payne writes an angry editorial - very unlike Connie to do so, by the way - about this very subject. She speaks of one particular reenactment (she does not state where it took place) and the extreme farb some visitors witnessed, backing their claims with photographic evidence. By the way, what happened in the following snippets from Mrs. Payne's editorial did not take place after hours, but during the event itself:
In a letter she received from a non-reenacting visitor there were complaints of seeing a few young women who were attempting to portray men in uniform; "One had a lip pierced. They laughed, giggled, chatted about how their soccer team had finished the season and made absolutely no attempt at any 1st person impression for the spectators."
In a second scenario she tells of a spectator's husband that wandered off to the military camp  where she found him "sharing a Bud Light Lime with a soldier. Having taken off his kepi and exchanging it for a Cubs ball cap, he had cracked open 2 beers, offering one to (the) husband while giving his very best recruiting speech: 'This is what it's all about man! Killing rebs, sleeping under the stars, and enjoying a cold one with the guys!'"
And in a third 'presentation' - this time in civilian camp - "they were greeted with a family of reenactors sitting under their fly eating Subway" with modern chat and slang, modern kitchen ware, and "a bubbling pot of delicious smelling meat of some sort. When our writer asked the owner of the camp what was cooking, she replied, 'Taco meat!'"
Connie's final line in her editorial was "Friends, tighten it up a little. Please? You are being watched, you are THERE to be watched. Show them, and each other, the 19th century as it was, not as we have distorted it to be."

A woman stands in front of her very patriotic parlor

As for my own personal experiences I have witnessed a portable television set brought to a reenactment, plenty of (ugghhh!) cell phone usage (went over this already), and even laptop computers.
Did I mention that these were all under flys?
I suppose one could say, "I had an emergency. I had to use my cell!"
Well, there certainly are a lot of emergencies, for this is a very common occurrence.
I suppose one could say, "The Red Wings are in the play offs against Colorado. I don't want to miss that!"

Then go home or to a local sports bar. A reenactment is NOT the time or place for you to watch (or listen to) a sporting event on an electronic device.
I suppose one could say, "I had to get work done on my computer!"
Then go inside your tent, not under the fly!!
I suppose one could say, "I have pictures on my phone that I wanted to show him/her because I don't see these people outside of reenactments!"
Then post the dang things on Facebook!
I suppose one could say, "We didn't bring any/enough food for us to eat this weekend. We had to eat something!"
Then stay at the restaurant and eat it there! Don't look foolish by eating Subway or Burger King or whatever under your fly for all to see! My family and I have had hotdogs and burgers at times during reenactments. We do not bring them back to our camp, however, but instead will eat it in the area where it was purchased. Even patrons will understand that you are in a "time-free" zone.

A very realistic scene at Smith's Creek Depot with the Michigan Soldiers Aid Society. This took quite a bit of preparation but we pulled it off!

With so many opportunities to almost literally time travel, it gets pretty frustrating for those of us who put our all into this hobby only to have it ruined by inconsiderate boobs who think of no one but themselves.
I suppose my solace is that I can say truthfully that both units that I am a part of - the Michigan Soldiers Aid Society and the 21st Michigan Volunteer Infantry Civilian Contingency are moving in the farb-free direction, due to some policing by our own membership. That's what it's going to take to cure the living history community of these ills: for us to police our own, for captains, presidents, and organizers to say NO to the farb and to begin pushing for the events to become more progressive. 
Whew! That felt good. Thanks for allowing me to get it out.

A happier more upbeat post next time - - -



.

My Dept. 56 Dickens Village Display for 2011

I purchased my very 1st Dept. 56 lighted house in 1989. It was the original Scrooge house from Dickens "A Christmas Carol" story and, being such a fan of that novel, I just had to have it. And there it sat proudly that Christmas, as a center piece on our kitchen table.
"Every year I'll add to it!" I told my wife, "And eventually I'll have a pretty cool collection."
And I kept my word. The following year I paid closer attention and noticed that not only were there houses in this collection, but figurines, too. So I would get another house and a figurine or two. Within a few years I had a small but growing village. One year I kinda went over board: I was at our local (but now defunct) Hudson's Department Store and saw that they had this massive amount of additions to the Dickens Village. So, I did something that wasn't very smart - I opened a Hudson's charge account and bought a few pieces with it. Well, more than a few pieces...enough to get my wife pretty ticked at me. For quite a while...
I cut up the card and went back to getting one or two additions a year again. And, except for one or two accessories, it was always from the Dept. 56 Dickens Village.
Over the ensuing years I bought something like 36 houses and countless figurines and other accessories; enough to fill three or four 6 foot tables. Every November 1st I would take the day off work and spend the early morning til late at night setting up my village. And it would spill over another day or two, depending on how elaborate I wanted to get. Why early November instead of after Thanksgiving? Because it took so long and so much work went into it that I didn't want to have it up for only a few weeks and then take it down after all this work.
Anyhow, I really don't go nuts in adding to this collection anymore only because the pieces are priced out of my affordability. I might buy an accessory or two if they are cheap enough, but that's about it.
Now, it's been since around 2007 or 2008 since I've put up my entire village, so this year, now that we've cleaned up the basement a bit, I decided, "what the heck!" and pulled out the entire collection.
My whole family was thrilled!
I didn't go very elaborate - you can see a few things like wires here and there, though I've used cottonballs to try to hide most of it.
So I thought I would post a few photos...okay, more than just a few photos.
I hope you enjoy it:


The rich side of town. This is where Charles Dickens and Mr. Brownlow live.



The rich side of town. This is where Charles Dickens and Mr. Brownlow live. In fact, I see Mr. Dickens in his green coat - it looks like he is giving a reading of his new novel, "A Christmas Carol."



Heading into the city we see Scrooge's nephew Fred's home. And there is the beautiful stone church with the pastor giving bread to the poor.
And, wait? Is that Florence Nightengale?


 
Note the graveyard and the ghost of Christmas Yet To Come with Scrooge. Since they are invisible, the others have no idea that they are even there and go on their merry Christmas way!



I see Scrooge's house - and a hearse going by...
If you look just in front of the horse you can see the Ghost of Jacob Marley right outside Scrooge's door.
I bet that must be Marley's body in the hearse!
"SCROOOOGE!"



Getting closer to the business section of town we pass a bakery and a place to get lamps and oil.



Without the camera flash.



Now we're into the heart of my own little London town. Do you see the Scrooge & Marley Counting House? Yep, it's Christmas Eve and he's still in there working!



"Business?? Mankind was my Business!"
Here is where so much of London's business takes place.
Oh and I know Big Ben was not around in 1843. It's just a really cool piece and Miles insisted that I put it up.



A very busy and exciting city during Christmas!



And there's the pub!
Whoa! That lamp post is leaning. One is supposed to lean on a lamp post, not the other way around!!

"Chestnuts! Get yer hot chestnuts 'ere!!"
I also see the vendor who has the Big Prize Turkey off in the distance.

 
A maltings and gristmill are on the edge of town.



Oohh...the seedier side of town. This is where Fagin lives, and where the dirtier businesses such as the blacksmith and the coal factory are located.

The same scene without the camera flash:
See the young pick-pocket run off with his stolen goods? And, of course, another pub.



And there is Scrooge with the Ghost of Christmas Past ("Long past?"
"No, YOUR past") looking inside old Fezziwig's warehouse window, eying a Christmas party from his youth. I believe they danced the Virginia Reel!
It's old Fezziwig alive again!!



"Wassail wassail all over the town,
our bread it is white and our ale it is brown!"
I see wassailers celebrating and making a lot of noise as they stroll and dance down the cobblestone lane.

 Ahhh...I see the Ghost of Christmas Present showing Scrooge the Christmas celebration at the Cratchit home. In fact, I see Bob and Tiny Tim!

Looking down the lane where the Cratchit's live. If you look close enough you can see a woman dipping candles.
I see the road labourer should fix the road!

 
I believe this just might be the Cratchit children bringing home the Yule Log!



A bird's eye view of the entire village.


Well, I hope you enjoyed the photos of my village. I do enjoy setting it up - it gets me in the spirit of Christmas a little earlier. We don't bother much the whole shopping aspect that has become the Holiday, and this is one of the little thrills we all get that simply adds to the season.

~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~

A side note here: Since writing this post about my Dept. 56 Dickens collection, I have begun to collect the Dept. 56 Colonial Williamsburg series as well. If you are interested in seeing what I have, please click HERE. I do plan to update the post as I purchase more from the series.





.
.

"A Christmas Carol" Film Reviews Updated - Here's a Guide to Help You Choose

Hopefully in this posting you can find which Christmas Carol is the most suitable to you so you can have plenty of time to get your favorite version of this wonderful movie.
The links provided for each movie are for the DVD or Blu-Ray.
And, just so you are aware I have recently located two silent versions of which I plan to purchase. When I do I will add my review to this post.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

'A Christmas Carol.' Is there any other story that epitomizes what the modern day Christmas celebration is all about? And who would have thought this very English fable written over 150 years ago would be every bit as alive today here in the 21st century United States as it was in 1843 England when first published? Gerald Charles Dickens, great great grandson of THE Charles Dickens, was quoted as saying,  
"The 'Carol' is 10 times more popular in America than it is in England. In England, the 'Carol' is just a story. In America the 'Carol' IS Christmas."
Because many of my friends know I am such a fan of this wonderful Christmas tale, every year I receive numerous inquiries asking about my favorite filmed version. So a few years ago I posted here on 'Passion for the Past' my reviews that I had originally written on Amazon.com - I put them altogether in one posting. Well, I'm repeating the post again this year, only with the addition of the latest filmed version of the story and some changes in my other reviews. Not that my opinion means squat - it's just my opinion. But, I do hope that it helps you decide which version you may want to watch this year - hopefully, you'll get a chance to see at least one of 'em (besides the Muppet version, which too many feel is the only one they need to see).
Or better yet, read the original book!
Are you ready then? Here we go - - - - - ............

The one with Seymour Hicks as Scrooge - 1935:
This is better than one might think for 1935.
However, I feel that they could have come up with better spirits than a light, a shadow, and a voice. I also feel that Scrooge's reformation comes on a bit too fast. He was clearly already a changed man before the Ghost of Christmas Past was finished with its job. And, I have to say that Scrooge's former love, Belle, seemed to be quite the motherly type - we counted at least 14 children from her post-Scrooge marriage!
Now for the pluses: the sets were terrific! Very authentic - I wonder if they were actually filmed in original period structures? The Cratchit's home is perfect for their status, as was the home of nephew Fred. And the showing of Tiny Tim's body lying in state in the Cratchit home gives realism that a few of the other more popular filmed versions haven't touched. Also, seeing Mrs. Cratchit pull out the pudding from the laundry tub gave this that extra bit of authenticity rarely seen anywhere else.
The addition of Queen Victoria celebrating Christmas was unique.
Unfortunately, the quality of the print is not as good as it should be. It's not horrid but not what one is used to from a remastered disc. I am guessing that the original print is long gone. But, it's much much better than the VHS version.
All in all, not bad for its age. Mr. Hicks gives a fine rendition of Ebenezer Scrooge that is nearly as good as the others.
A worthy DVD, especially if you are a collector.

The one with Reginald Owen as Scrooge - 1938:
A nice, short, light-hearted family version of the Dickens classic. Good for the kiddies to introduce them to this great story. But for the purist, it has its shortcomings. First of all, it deviates frequently from Dickens original story - right from the opening scene in fact. And there is little "spirit" here. For instance, Marley just speaks his part instead of wailing it as one would think a tortured specter would. Bob Cratchit is a bit too portly to be believably poor in my opinion. And, I'm sorry to say, Kathleen

The grave of old Ebenezer Scrooge

Lockhart over-acts. Watch her as she sets the pudding down on the table. Also, Reginald Owen becomes converted just too darn quick to believe that he is supposed to be this mean, crusty old sinner as he's supposed to have been. He's been reformed before the second spirit completes his task.
Another complaint is there is more telling of the story here than actually portrayed. Sort of like a Reader's Digest condensed version. Too bad the script writers wrote so many of their own scenes and changed Dickens' own 'staves,' too (this does happen to an extent through virtually all of the filmed versions, unfortunately, but none as much as this).
I will say this, though, until the one made by Disney in 2009, this was the only version I had seen that explains about the Cratchit's goose being cooked at the bakery, to be picked up at an appointed time on Christmas Day. Many poor people in Victorian England did just that since their homes had too small of an oven or no ovens at all.
All in all, this is probably my least favorite. For the purest, this is not a God awful version. Rather, it's a mediocre one that has its moments.
By the way, Scrooge's sister's name was FAN not Fran.

Mistah Scrooge!

The one with Alastair Sim as Scrooge - 1951:
This is the one that many consider to be the definitive Christmas Carol. It really is an excellent version. Alastair Sim plays Ebenezer Scrooge like no one else can. The believability factor here for both, the 'old mean Scrooge' and the 'newly transformed Scrooge' is very high, with the transformation itself coming about slowly. And that's what I like about this one. Scrooge doesn't suddenly become happy and giddy from the first of the three spirits, as in the Seymour Hicks and Reginald Owen versions. It takes Sim's old Ebenezer fully until the last spirit to convince him that he truly was a "squeezing, wrenching, grasping, scraping, clutching, covetous old sinner!"
Victorian London is well represented here, its sinister darkness, dreariness, and hopelessness surrounding the viewer in glorious black and white to further the mood of the dirty old town.
Jacob Marley is excellent here (listen to the way he mourns and moans. Sends chills!). And Mrs. Dilber is hilarious when she meets up with Scrooge on Christmas morning. All three of the Christmas Eve ghosts are as Mr. Dickens described. Considering how little movie magic was used, that's no small feat! But, most important, Scrooge is well played here by Sim and his portrayal is a fine one indeed.
Yes, this is definitely an annual watch for us - my wife's most favorite depiction.

The one with George C. Scott as Scrooge - 1984:
This version is, to me, probably the best of 'em all, though I go back and forth with the Alistair Sim version.
Yes, it's that good.
The opening scene literally grabs you and pulls you into the gray, wintry Dickens London on Christmas Eve day 1843.

Marley's ghostly hearse

The viewer will feel as if they were walking down the cobblestone streets of Merry Olde England, passing the street vendors hawking their wares, and hearing the carolers and street musicians singing and playing that wonderful Victorian Holiday music. Top hats and bonnets abound as the crowd of people - rich and poor alike - rush to celebrate this most Holy of Christian nights. That is, all but one. And the first image of old Ebenezer Scrooge, played here to perfection by the late great George C. Scott, will send chills down the back of even the most ardent skeptic.
Just think...if the opening scene is this good, you can just imagine how great the rest of this movie is! Of all the different "Carols" that have been filmed, this is one of the best and most realistic I have yet to witness.
Now what puts this version of Charles Dickens' classic tale above the one with Alistair Sim? First and foremost is the feel. There is a certain ambiance here - a sort of realism - that is not present in the others. As stated previously, you, as the viewer, are drawn into the movie as a willing participant to the events happening about you. Given that this movie was filmed not on a stage set in Hollywood, but in and around actual buildings that were standing during the period in which this story takes place alone gives this version an edge the others can't touch. And the authentic costumes are as accurate as I have seen.
Another major plus here is that Dickens' original story is followed very close; it makes me wonder why they hired script writers, for most of the lines were lifted right from the book! And the casting was pert near perfect as well. In fact, the only character I felt that could have been better - ever-so-slightly - was the actor (who's name escapes me) that played the role of Scrooge's nephew, Fred. Not toward the beginning of the film when he's inviting his uncle to dine with him, but toward the end when Uncle Ebenezer is dining with him on Christmas Day itself. He just kind of rubs me the wrong way here. A small opinionated blip ever so minor that, because of just how wonderful the rest of the movie is, one would hardly notice. Not enough to lower any part of the score!

Jacob Marley is one scary dude in the George C. Scott version - as he should be!

The Ghost of Jacob Marley tears at your heart, for the believability factor here is high that this specter is truly in tortuous pain and sorrow for his life's (mis)deeds. Watch as he says ""It is required of every man that the spirit within him should walk abroad among his fellowmen, and travel far and wide; and if that spirit goes not forth in life, it is condemned to do so after death.  It is doomed to wander through the world -- oh, woe is me! -- and witness what it cannot share, but might have shared on earth, and turned to happiness!" My gosh! Your heart just wrenches for this poor lost soul.
The heartiness of the Ghost of Christmas Present, with his sarcastic wit, easily puts Scrooge in his place simply by using Scrooge's own lack of common sense and lack of courtesy against him.
The Cratchit family is also top notch (I must say, my favorite Cratchit's are in the 1999 version) and believably poor. And just look at poor Tiny Tim! Wow - excellent!
The poor homeless are represented well, and not as an afterthought but as real people.
I could go on and on about how great this one is, but instead I'll just say in my opinion, virtually everything about this version of 'A Christmas Carol' surpasses its predecessors. All the 'Carols,' before this have been average to very good. But it's this one with George C. Scott that ranks above them all.

The one with Patrick Stewart as Scrooge - 1999:
This Patrick Stewart version of 'A Christmas Carol' is one that, judging by others reviews, you'll either love or hate. I believe, however, in a middle ground (or upper middle ground in this case). What makes this one so unique is that it actually shows many scenes that were in the original book but never put on the various filmed versions available for viewing. A few examples: the Ghost of Christmas Present showing Scrooge the many different types of people in greater detail than in the others - miners, lighthouse keepers, sailors out at sea - all celebrating this special day; the Ghost of Christmas Yet To Come showing the lifeless body of Tiny Tim laid out in the Cratchit home (the Jim Carrey version is the only other one I have seen do this); the lower jaw of the ghost of Jacob Marley dropping "down upon its breast" when the bandage around his head was removed. Even the items that once belonged to Scrooge being sold at "Old Joe's" pawn shop, such as the sugar tongs, were listed in the original book.
This one also has the best Cratchit family put to film. Their physical appearance (even their teeth), their manner of speech, their clothing, all were as you would expect a poor 19th century London family to look, sound, and be like.

The best Cratchit family put to film yet comes from the Patrick Stewart version

The costuming and the acting are very well done, but the sets leave a bit to be desired for, at times, one can tell it was filmed on a stage rather than in period buildings. For what I just wrote, I would put this particular version slightly above average - maybe a B on a grading scale.
However, it does have its minuses that brings it down a couple of notches. First and foremost is Patrick Stewart. He actually does a fair job in his role as Ebenezer Scrooge. But I truly do have a problem with the 'look' of this particular Scrooge. Instead of a mean appearance, Stewart is almost sinister...murderous...like he could snap at any moment. Also, Mr. Stewart's choking out a laugh toward the end of the film is obviously (too obviously) forced.
Other small but noticeable errors: (1) Mrs. Fezziwig telling her husband that she is on a diet, and, (2) toward the end of the story, when Scrooge is asking the young lad to go and get the poulterer, the young boy answers with "you're joshing." I'm fairly certain that 'joshing' and being on a diet were not terms yet used in 1843. One must wonder why they put in such contemporary slang terminology.
One must also wonder why they call Scrooge's sister Fran instead of what she was called in the book - Fan. The 1938 version with Reginald Owen also makes this same mistake. Fan/Fanny was a popular name in the Victorian era.
And, yes, I must agree with many other reviews I have read that they could have done a better job on the phantom. Again, with all of the computer tricks available, why go with a battery operated child-type toy figure?
It also leaves one with an empty feeling, for it truly doesn't capture the essence of Dickens' novel. Not much spirit here.
All in all, even with the inaccuracies and lack of passion, it is worth adding to your collection. It is a fair version  - above Reginald Owen's, that's for sure - that, because of pluses it has included in contrast to its deficiencies, will, I believe, stand the test of time.

The one with Jim Carrey as Scrooge - 2009:
This is the adaption which is right up there in my top three. Now, being a traditionalist, this may come as a surprise to you, considering the computerized / live-action approach Disney has taken with it. But, right up to the third of the three spirits it is extremely close to Dickens' original story; like the George C. Scott version, most of the dialogue comes straight from the author's own words, and the depiction of old London is simply outstanding! Now, don't let yourself be fooled...just because it is somewhat animated doesn't mean a fig.

The details of old London are shown as realistic as if one were there - 

To build such accurate details from the past would be much too costly to have been built as a set, so the quality of this animation really does a fine job. And there are plenty of poor street urchins - I believe more than any other version of this film - which gives it that extra flavor missing in many others. They actually look poor rather than just neighborhood kids.  And, except for George C. Scott's version, the homes are as authentic as I have seen yet - the viewer is pulled right into the scene.
No easy task!
This is a downright very dark and very scary 'reading', just as Dickens originally wrote. The characters seemingly jump off the screen right into your room - no, I'm not even speaking of the 3-D version here, by the way.

Old Marley's ghost is as real a depiction of an apparition as anything I have yet to see.

Just watch his eyes...very eerie.
And Mr. Carrey as Scrooge is as good as any out there!
Whether you like Jim Carrey as an actor or not shouldn't make a difference here, for one cannot even tell it's him! In fact, Carrey also plays the role of Ghost of Christmas Past, Present, and Yet-To-Come, as well as Scrooge in the various stages of his life, and he excels as each. The general feel is what I suspect one would imagine while reading the book, and there have been very few movies that have ever done that for me.
Now, as wonderful a depiction of this tale this one is, there are a few complaints I do have (possible spoiler alert):
1) Ghost of Christmas Past - I don't mind too much that a candle flame head represents the ghost...it adds just a bit of unique flavor without taking away from the story. But, what I didn't care for was when Scrooge snuffed out the candle with its hat, he is suddenly shot miles into the air, gliding in front of the moon along the lines of E.T., then falls back to earth, landing on his bedroom floor. I believe they only wanted to show the magic of 3-D here. It doesn't take away from the story, but it doesn't add anything either There were outtakes that should have been included instead of this wasted minute or two..
2) I don't particularly care for Scrooge witnessing the action of the 'present time' through a hole in the floor, though the scenes themselves are done very well.
3) Ghost of Christmas Yet-To-Come - There is a scene where Scrooge is being chased by a phantom horse and hearse during this portion of the movie that I feel takes away from what this chapter was originally supposed to mean. Then, to further take 'artistic license' (if you want to call it that), Scrooge suddenly shrinks to the size of a rat while being chased, and slides through gutters, etc., while trying to get away.
(Maybe, in this way, they can promote this bit as 'for the children.')
4) There is too much "thrills and chills" in that they're trying to show off the technology of 3-D. As I said, there are outtakes that should have been left in rather than all of the chase and flying scenes that occur.
Aside from the above diversions (and just a couple others that matter little, really), the rest is done very well and easily overtakes the blips.
I would love to see a "director's cut" to show more of what was in the original book, such as seeing Belle's family, Jacob Marley while he was alive as Scrooge's partner, and more of Scrooge's future. In fact, on the DVD there are deleted scenes, and one in particular shows the horse-drawn hearse being driven up the stairs inside of Scrooge's house, just like in the original novel:
"You may talk vaguely about driving a coach-and-six up a good old flight of stairs, or through a bad young Act of Parliament; but I mean to say you might have got a hearse up that staircase, and taken it broadwise, with the splinter-bar towards the wall and the door towards the balustrades: and done it easy. There was plenty of width for that, and room to spare; which is perhaps the reason why Scrooge thought he saw a locomotive hearse going on before him in the gloom. Half a dozen gas-lamps out of the street wouldn't have lighted the entry too well, so you may suppose that it was pretty dark with Scrooge's dip".

It would be great if they completed this scene and inserted it into the Jim Carry version, for, as you just read, this is how Dickens originally wrote seeing the hearse - actually going up the stairs in his house. It would be a first!

I wish they would complete and include that scene in a future release!
Now, as I stated earlier, this is quite the scary version and may not be suitable for the younger set. Heck! Even a couple of older folks had to close their eyes upon a recent showing during a Christmas Carol party I had!

The home of Bob Cratchit

Aside from the blips taken to show off the modern 3-D magic in movie making and the chase and the overdone flying scenes, this one is great fun to watch with the actual scenes following the book closely.
Coming from me, that's saying a lot!

------------------------------------------------

Now, I know there are a few I missed (Muppet version, the various hand-drawn cartoon versions, the musical version, the silent versions). I just wanted to cover the major film adaptions (and I haven't seen the silent ones yet).
And though I do enjoy them,  I must say that I really do prefer what I have listed here up and above.
Now, to answer the question I get most asked this time of year, my favorite version - the one that I feel Charles Dickens himself would think was closest to his own words (though all have their own take to an extent)  is.... The 1984 George C. Scott version!
So...which is your favorite?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

This is how Charles Dickens looked at the 
time of his writing "A Christmas Carol" 
in 1843.

By the way, at the beginning of this post I commented about reading the original Dickens novel of "A Christmas Carol." It always amazes me how many people have actually never read this story the way Mr. Dickens wrote it in 1843. My wife did for the first time in February of '11 and thoroughly enjoyed it. She got so much more out of it than the filmed adaptions, which is usually the case for books turned into films, isn't it? I read it every year, beginning right around the 1st of November, and my favorite is the "Annotated Christmas Carol: A Christmas Carol in Prose"  with Michael Patrick Hearn adding annotations to Dickens' original. I wrote a review of this book on Amazon (with slight updated modification):
'Simply amazing! That is the best description I can give of this version of Dickens' "A Christmas Carol."
How many times have you ever read this wonderful novel, but overlooked many parts because it may have seemed long-winded, or maybe you just didn't quite understand the Victorian language that Dickens used (and why wouldn't he?)? Being a student of Dickensian England, editor Mr. Michael Patrick Hearn, in this book, thoroughly explains every minute detail of the time period in which this story takes place (1843) through the story itself. So much so that after completing this encyclopedia (for it truly is an encyclopedia), I felt as if I understood completely what the readers of the time of Dickens must have felt after reading the first edition nearly 170 years ago. Words, sentences, phrases - all explained descriptively so as one now knows what Dickens actually meant when writing them. It opened my eyes much wider to the WHOLE story, not just the fluff we've all come to know. And you get the complete original novel as well as the 'reading to the public' version that Dickens used while he toured, along with a very informative introduction.
Dickens "A Christmas Carol" is "A Christmas Carol" no matter which book version you read. But this particular one, however simply put, takes the cake!'

~ ~ ~

I hope you enjoyed my little take on what is perhaps my favorite story and, in nearly all the differing adaptions, my favorite movie of all time. I realize it's still early November as I write this but this may help you to decide which one is best for you. Or, you may be a nut case like me and get them all - - !
Whichever route you take you can not go wrong with this Christmas story.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

"Scrooge was better than his word. He did it all, and infinitely more; and to Tiny Tim, who did not die, he was a second father. He became as good a friend, as good a master, and as good a man, as the good old city knew, or any other good old city, town, or borough, in the good old world. Some people laughed to see the alteration in him, but he let them laugh, and little heeded them; for he was wise enough to know that nothing ever happened on this globe, for good, at which some people did not have their fill of laughter in the outset; and knowing that such as these would be blind anyway, he thought it quite as well that they should wrinkle up their eyes in grins, as have the malady in less attractive forms. His own heart laughed: and that was quite enough for him.
He had no further intercourse with Spirits, but lived upon the Total Abstinence Principle, ever afterwards; and it was always said of him, that he knew how to keep Christmas well, if any man alive possessed the knowledge. May that be truly said of us, and all of us! And so, as Tiny Tim observed, God Bless Us, Every One!"

~   ~   ~

Meetings Don't Have to be Boring, Especially For A Reenacting Unit

We recently had our annual period dress fall meeting of the 21st Michigan Civil War reenacting unit members. It used to be strictly a civilian meeting but some in our military began to attend as well, and now it's become an opportunity for both contingencies to learn. While our spring meeting is held in or near my home, we hold our autumn meeting out in the country on the farm of one of the families in our unit, the Schroeders. Since the greater majority of us live in the city this gives us the chance to get away from the hustle and bustle for a day. And how beautiful it is to have the scent and sights of autumn surrounding - no, engulfing us.



Since becoming the Civilian Coordinator of the 21st Michigan back in '06 I have coordinated these period dress meetings to, at first, a hesitant membership ("Really? Dressing up in our Civil War clothing for a meeting? I don't know..."). But now it has grown into something that is nearly an event in itself, and our membership even looks forward to attending them. Part of the charm is that it's just us - no public is allowed. Therefore we can dive in and immerse ourselves into the 1860's in a more relaxed manner. Our hosts really went all out this year in the attempt to give it a more authentic feel by removing as many modern necessities as possible, including their TV set and other appliances, and they are to be commended for this wonderful gesture.
As you may or may not know, one of our consistent projects in the 21st Michigan is to continue improving our 1st person presentation, so we decided to try something a little different: we created a sort of time-travel workshop; upon arrival we seemingly stepped through a portal that took us a century and a half into the past. As soon as we stepped out of our modern motorized vehicles and shut the doors they suddenly turned into carriages, buggies, wagons, and buckboards. How this happened, I don't know. But it was very strange.

Mr. Schroeder makes sure the ladies have all they need before he joined the men

And so the day commenced with visiting opportunities: in this way we would be able to socialize with our friends, albeit in 1861, before the actual meeting itself.
As would have happened in most homes back then, the ladies gathered together in the parlor for sewing, quilting, and other 'craft-filled' necessities. I was not privy to their conversations - nor, as a male, should I have been - so I cannot comment on what they spoke on, but Mrs. Schroeder assured me before-hand it would be period-correct. 

The men ventured out to the yard where we kept our conversations to discussing what we may have spoken about in this fall of 150 years ago: the war at hand and how long it might last, harvest time, health matters, and other similar topics. One adventure that I particularly enjoyed telling of was about my travels to ensure I would arrive there on time that morning. You see, we live clear over in Erin Township, which is north of Detroit, and the farm for our meeting is in Hillsdale; it took us nearly a week to get there in our carriage, so I was able to regale everyone with tales of our traveling experiences, including spending nights in taverns.
While the adults conversed, the children went to the barn and milked the cows.


My daughter had never milked a cow before and picked up on it very quickly.  (I hadn't milked a cow before either and, believe it or not, I did it correctly right from the beginning. It helps to read "how to" beforehand!).

There were one or two of our membership that did not feel comfortable in 1st person, therefore they didn't really try. And that's fine - I don't expect everyone to join in on this part of living history. It's my hope, however, that once they see how easy it is to do and how pleasing the outcome can be when everyone joins in that they'll eventually make the attempt as well.
We ate a wonderful harvest dinner of turkey, stuffing, and many types of vegetables. So good!! Once dinner was over it was announced that we were now back in 2011, and our fall meeting commenced. 
I won't bore you of the details of our meeting except to say we covered a bit about this past year's reenacting season (and the rights and wrongs of it) as well as our plans for next year. There was lots of input from our membership and some "pro-active against farb" discussions ensued.

A very fine meeting indeed.
As I have said before, I believe the period dress meetings truly serve to get membership into the right mode - the right mindset - to help any unit progress to the next level up as living historians. And it amazes me that, as far as I have seen, the 21st Michigan is the only group that does this, at least here in Michigan.

.

The Harvest Ball

 We had a ball the other day...literally!

A large group of us went to the Harvest Ball in Lansing, Michigan on the 22 of October. It's held in an old church, which gives it a very period feel. What's nice about this ball is that, first of all it's limited to 100 people (tickets are sold ahead of time). The other thing is that it does not follow a reenactment. Yes, you heard me - it's a ball for a ball's sake and attendees are refreshed and raring to dance without having a full day of reenacting behind them.
The ladies literally spend nearly half of the day dolling themselves up to be as pretty as can be. My wife says the hair takes the longest. 

The finest band in the land - Glen Morningstar's Michigan Ruff Water String Band - are our musicians, and Glenn will announce at the beginning of the evening that because most of us there are "seasoned" dancers he likes to try new old-time dances on us. But he will also have the favorites such as the Virginia Reel and the Spanish Waltz.







One of the nicest traditions for a few of us is to meet for dinner beforehand, and we always head to the Okemos (a tiny town near Lansing) Cracker Barrel restaurant. What a sight we are to the waitresses and patrons alike! At times we may get multiple waitresses just so they can have a chance to speak with us.
This year we made quite a splash, for there were eighteen of us in attendance! We made sure we took plenty of photographs to commemorate the day, including sitting in the rockers outside the restaurant.
Two of the gentlemen enjoyed a friendly game of checkers.

Ball day has become a special part of our reenacting year, and because wintertime is just around the bend many of us may not see each other until next spring (just like in the old days!) and that makes this day even more of a grand affair.

(Click any of the photos in this - or any other - post to get a larger image)


.











.