Killer Angels Book

¶ … Killer Angels: A Novel by Michael Shaara. Specifically it will contain a summary and analysis of the book. "The Killer Angels" is a work of fiction that won the Pulitzer Prize in 1975. It tells the story of the Battle of Gettysburg from the viewpoints of two of the generals fighting there -- Robert E. Lee and James Longstreet. Shaara says he wrote the book because he wanted people to know what it was like to be there in the middle of battle.

He writes, "He wanted to know what it was like to be there, what the weather was like, what men's faces looked like. In order to live it he had to write it. This book was written for much the same reason" (Shaara vii). This is the thesis for writing the book, and why the book exists. Critics have called it one of the best historical novels ever written, which may be one reason it won the Pulitzer.

It was also made into the epic film "Gettysburg" in 1993, which received critical and popular acclaim after its release. The book covers four days, June 30, 1863 through July 3, 1863, when the Battle of Gettysburg was fought. The Killer Angels of the title are the men from both sides who died on the battlefield. They were intent on killing, and became angels as a result.

Shaara writes, "He did not understand it: a mile of men flowing slowly, steadily, inevitably up the long green ground, dying all the while, coming to kill you, and the shell bursts appearing above them like instant white flowers" (Shaara 362). There were Killer Angels on both sides of course, because Gettysburg was one of the battles with the heaviest casualties of the Civil War. The confederates succeeded from the Union and began the Civil War mainly over slavery.

The Union wanted to outlaw slavery, and the South felt it was not only a way of life, it was necessary for their way of life. The South's economy depended largely on agriculture, and most of the crops they grew were labor intensive, like tobacco, cotton, and sugar cane. They relied on slaves to work the fields and harvest the crops, and felt they would lose their way of life if the slaves were freed. Shaara continues, "Thing I cannot understand. Thing I never will understand.

How can they fight so hard, them Johnnies, and all for slavery?'" (Shaara 364). The South would never admit they were in the war because of slavery. General Longstreet thinks, "After a while they were mounted, still chatting about what a shame it was that so many people seemed to think it was slavery that brought on the war, when all it was really was a question of the Constitution" (Shaara 71). On the other hand, the North fought because they were provoked.

The Union forces were fired on at Fort Sumter in April 1861, and that is when the war actually started. The South drew the Union into the war; the Union had to ask for volunteers at first to help beef up the army. In hindsight, it is easy to say that General Longstreet was correct about his idea to position Confederate forces between Washington DC and the Union forces. However, General Lee chose not to follow Longstreet's advice, and many feel that is why he eventually lost the Battle of Gettysburg.

However, Longstreet had been wrong on previous occasions, and Lee had seen some magnificent victories, so there were reasons Lee did not go with Longstreet's plan. Longstreet tells Lee, "Now all we have to do is swing round between him and Washington and get astride some nice thick rocks and make him come to us, and we've got him in the open" (Shaara 89). Lee disagrees however, and never takes Longstreet's advice. The author certainly proves his main thesis throughout the book.

He writes a book that does make the reader feel as if they were there in the battle, and especially in the behind-the-scenes decision making that went into the planning on both sides. Today, with all our technology, it is hard to believe that they two sides did not even know the others were in the area at first, or how big their battalions were. It shows that both sides were fighting at a disadvantage, and that they could plan all this effectively was even more amazing.

The book really looks deep inside the characters and what motivated them, and gives very deep and interesting portrayals of all the main characters. That is one of the things that makes it so interesting, because most war histories center on the battles themselves, and not the people behind the scenes. It was interesting too, to see how each General interacted with his staff, and how many different personalities there were on both sides. Yes, this book was extremely effective.

Because it is told as fiction, with a lot of dialogue, it makes it much more interesting to the reader. You get a feeling that you know these men and their backgrounds, and that makes what they decide much more interesting. It also.