Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How about some people with Revolutionary War ancestors for a change? That war was even more important than the Civil War, although we don't hear that much about it because it was so long ago. There wouldn't be a USA in the first place if it hadn't been for the Revolutionary War. There was a famous black regiment here in MA too--and there is a famous statue commemorating them in Boston.
I agree, I wish the scope of this program with expand a bit to include other parts of the country, other wars, even other countries. But even though that's what I wish for, I still enjoy the program a lot.
Henry Louis Gates himself is a descendant of Revolutionary War servicemen and he has discussed this before on other programs, not this show specifically but his roots are very long in the country.
He also usually does show Revolutionary War stories when they are available on the show and immigrant stories.
It seems many of you don't like him in general and aren't focusing on the show itself. I have watched almost every episode of this show and it isn't overly showing anything in regards to the Civil War or slavery. And FWIW, I have also watched quite a few episodes of Who Do You Think You Are and they have also featured the Civil War and slavery prominently. Lionel Ritchie was featured on the show and his slave ancestors were brought up and how he was of mixed ancestry (like most black Americans). Matthew Broderick was on one of the first episodes that I remember because one of his ancestors fought in the Civil War and was buried in GA near a cemetery I used to live near and his ancestor turned out to be one of the few unknown soldiers buried there. The show was an integral part of them identifying the unidentified soldier. He had been originally buried in Atlanta around the corner from my house, which was a Civil War burial ground prior to the soldiers being moved to Cobb County and placed in a memorial cemetery. There is a marker about the war at that location and Sherman's march to the sea and the burning of Atlanta. Though I am not southern, in the south, the Civil War is a huge, important topic.
I saw part of a recent episode with Ken Burns. The show highlighted an ancestor of his being loyal to the British during the Revolutionary War. I enjoyed that story.
I love Ken Burns work, but was a bit dissapointed in him being unhappy he had a tory in the family line. When those who opposed the revolution were being burned out and displaced and in some instances killed, then it took a great deal of courage to be a tory. At any one point up until the end, there was never more than a third who were active 'patriots'. And a third of the population supported the Brits. The other third went with the wind.
If your ancestor was out there with the musket at the onset, yeah, they were a partiot. If they were out there when the patriots controlled a state/territory and the wind blew their way, they just as much might have decided it was better to fight than say now. Many of the Hessians stayed and they didn't even come from either side.
I think sometimes if one has an agenda in regards to the ancestors, it may be better to not look so deep.
Henry Louis Gates himself is a descendant of Revolutionary War servicemen and he has discussed this before on other programs, not this show specifically but his roots are very long in the country.
He also usually does show Revolutionary War stories when they are available on the show and immigrant stories.
It seems many of you don't like him in general and aren't focusing on the show itself. I have watched almost every episode of this show and it isn't overly showing anything in regards to the Civil War or slavery. And FWIW, I have also watched quite a few episodes of Who Do You Think You Are and they have also featured the Civil War and slavery prominently. Lionel Ritchie was featured on the show and his slave ancestors were brought up and how he was of mixed ancestry (like most black Americans). Matthew Broderick was on one of the first episodes that I remember because one of his ancestors fought in the Civil War and was buried in GA near a cemetery I used to live near and his ancestor turned out to be one of the few unknown soldiers buried there. The show was an integral part of them identifying the unidentified soldier. He had been originally buried in Atlanta around the corner from my house, which was a Civil War burial ground prior to the soldiers being moved to Cobb County and placed in a memorial cemetery. There is a marker about the war at that location and Sherman's march to the sea and the burning of Atlanta. Though I am not southern, in the south, the Civil War is a huge, important topic.
It isn't that I don't think he's a good geneologist. But he does have this stuck agenda. They pick the lines to follow, and its *always* leading the the preachy part. I don't want anyone preaching at me about history. Establish the personal facts, but no "wiseman" lecture. If the non black heritage is traced as joe smith came from Bristol and settled in some location and was a laborer, then his son moved onto Kentucky, then give all sides the same.
I like Who do you think you are because they don't claim to trace the whole linage but tell one story. They even take the guest to the grave site which is much more moving then Gates lecturing.
I would just like him to stop featuring *race* as his chief focus. Those guests who are 'mixed' have dna from a lot of places. Why not just make the 'black' a part of the rest? If there are details make them just that, not lessons.
The south is a special case since mostly it was fought there, but that does not mean it has to always be the focus of one's ancestry.
But he doesn't use race as his main focus on the entire program. I mentioned the episode with Martha Stewart, Sanjay Gupta, and Maragaret Cho. There was no mention of blackness at all in that program.
And I agree that WDYTYA follows one person more in depth, which is why I feel HLGs show is more in depth. He covers more genealogical aspects than WDYTYA and actually traces whole lines in most cases.
But I get that people don't like him. He is pretty controversial since the whole arrested at his house and beer with the president thing, so he is seen as more political than whoever hosts WDYTYA.
Like I said, his subject matter in particular are slave narratives so if that subject comes up, he will lecture a bit. But he doesn't do that in all the shows or with all the guests.
But he doesn't use race as his main focus on the entire program. I mentioned the episode with Martha Stewart, Sanjay Gupta, and Maragaret Cho. There was no mention of blackness at all in that program.
And I agree that WDYTYA follows one person more in depth, which is why I feel HLGs show is more in depth. He covers more genealogical aspects than WDYTYA and actually traces whole lines in most cases.
But I get that people don't like him. He is pretty controversial since the whole arrested at his house and beer with the president thing, so he is seen as more political than whoever hosts WDYTYA.
Like I said, his subject matter in particular are slave narratives so if that subject comes up, he will lecture a bit. But he doesn't do that in all the shows or with all the guests.
True, he doesn't with all guests. But I think he should maintain equality with all of them. The level of detachment he uses with guests without slaves should be maintained with those who do have them. Point is pretty much everyone who came to these shores came as a refugee from something. Povery was the main one. If one origion gets a lecture then ALL should. If he wants to educate, tell about the world the poor who came under other kinds of duress too. And with the same passion. Stand for humanity not just his subset. Gates is one of the people who will make sure that race is never allowed to die as a hot point.
Maybe he should only have guests who follow his agenda and call it Finding your Black roots.
If there is to be no lecture for someone who came early on after being displaced in early an early Irish forced migration, then shut up about the rest. Make the slave stiff just as even and rushed.
And I'm a pbs supporter and I don't care HOW much he thinks that waxing judgemental about certain acts in past history is okay, since a portion of my money goes to put on his show, it should be about fairness. Nor do I care that his is 'controversial'. He has an agenda which does not belong in a show about *peoples* (not black people's) roots.
Residinghere2007, but many, like me, just discovered this show this season. I never saw season one, so never saw the Martha Stewart, Sanjay Gupta, or Margaret Cho portrayed. I've been watching religiously this season, and so far, every episode emphasizes, strongly emphasizes, slavery, the Civil War, and the person's race. Maybe last season it wasn't that way, but this season it is.
This is the first season my husband and I have watched this show. Since we are history and geneology buffs, we are enjoying it immensely. I do think it would be easier to follow if they would do each person separately, and have 3 segments on 3 different people. We hope to watch it tonight -- but a World Series game might take precedence !!
Residinghere2007, but many, like me, just discovered this show this season. I never saw season one, so never saw the Martha Stewart, Sanjay Gupta, or Margaret Cho portrayed. I've been watching religiously this season, and so far, every episode emphasizes, strongly emphasizes, slavery, the Civil War, and the person's race. Maybe last season it wasn't that way, but this season it is.
Same here -- I'd love to see season 1.
Tonight's ep might be more varied -- 3 chefs that I've never heard of: Tom Colicchio, Ming Tsai, and Aaron Sanchez.
I just finished watching it and I enjoyed it very much--even though I missed the first 20 minutes.
They traced the people back to their country of origin, which made it more interesting. You got to see why they may have left and come to the USA in the first place. The Chinese guy's lineage was amazing, something like 90 generations. It wasn't about the Civil War and slavery this time but it looks like it will be again next time.
I, too, wish they would follow one person right through, then the next one, then the next one. Just when you get interested, they switch to another person and you have to remember where they left off. Maybe we should write to them and tell them.
I really enjoyed last night's episode. A nice break from the slavery and race theme. Though, I think next week's episode will make up for that, since all three guests are African American.
I'm usually bored by stories of early 20th century immigration (yawn, Ellis Island again, etc) because all my ancestors came to the US before that, most of them long before that. But I did enjoy last night because it wasn't the same old immigrant stories. The Italian guy who went back and forth several times from Italy--I'd never heard a story like that before. And to have that really interesting story of the guy from China was awesome. I think the Asian immigration stories aren't told enough. Plus Aron Sanchez's ancestors who went from Spain to Mexico, then back and forth between the US and Mexico for years. Very interesting stories. I wish they could have spent more time on all of them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
