"I should have taken the blue pill," someone once said to Neo. Custer, et. al., the aftermath.

 It would be wrong to end my story of Custer and co. at the end of the battle, without mentioning how iconic this battle became, in the context of American western history.  

In the wake of the battle, our perception of Custer mirrored our cultural memory.  In other words, how Americans remembered the history of the Plains Indian Wars, and more particularly, the story of our war with the entire Sioux nation, in the late nineteenth century.  

With the Custer's death, came a most interesting development.  At first, Custer was viewed through a messianic lens--"Custer died for your sins", etc.  He was, at first, thought of as a sacrifice on the altar of Manifest Destiny.  

You've got to be kidding me.

Remember in part one, Errol Flynn and "They Died with their Boots On"?  Hey, can we take a minute to appreciate that particular title?  Suuuuuuper.

This was how America chose to view Custer in the 1940s, but this was understandable, because it was a period where we had to promote American values--remember, that this is around the time of world war.  Here, Custer's demise was portrayed almost as the death of a martyr--a necessary price to be paid, perhaps, if the West was to be won.  In a nutshell:  we wanted to see him as a fallen, virtuous hero, who was killed by the 'bad guys.'

This perception was held by many in this country, and I think it reflected in a clear manner, social attitudes of each decade in the twentieth century.  It was inevitable, that this conception of Custer would change, as a more realistic history of the west was understood and written, by subsequent historians.  If you go from ole Erroll, to "Little Big Man," you can see what I mean:

Here, Custer is portrayed as a psycho, whose death is rather ignominious, to say the least.

  I think that the evolution in filmic impressions of Custer end up combining the negative and positive perceptions, as an attempt to view him in a more complex, and therefore "realistic" way, if such a thing is possible.  One film that attempted to do this (with some success, I think) was a made for tv movie "Son of the Morning Star."

Actually, this film in my opinion, comes as close as anything I've read or seen, to a more balanced perspective of this controversial man.

If you are interested in seeing this, you can watch it for free at:  Son of the Morning Star, complete miniseries.

I suppose it's not so weird that it took Americans so long to finally confront their past, but I think that we are slowly attempting a more honest perception.  But I could be wrong.

It seems that historically speaking, we have followed a similar path, from one extreme view to the other, finally coming to rest somewhere in between.  I like to think this is at least a sign that in some small sense, America is slowly coming to a fuller realization of our history.

Before I close, take a look at this:

.    if you were to take a closer look at this painting, you'd see some of the indian warriors holding shields, which were in fact modelled on those held by an African tribe.  Wow, there's accuracy for you.

This is a quite different interpretation of the event.  The blue coats are impersonally shown in the background. while our warrior dominates the entire piece.

Both views are kinda different, yes?

Until next time, dear reader....

.