Book Review - Banning’s Sacred Fire of Liberty

Lance Banning. The Sacred Fire of Liberty: James Madison and the Founding of the Federal Republic. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 1995. Pp. x, 543. $35.00

In The Sacred Fire of Liberty, Lance Banning presents the unassuming yet capable James Madison as a uniting figure presiding over the Congressional delegation wrought in debate over ratification of a proposed Constitution penned for the United States and continues with an analysis of Madison’s subsequent political career after his landmark contribution. The author primarily argues that Madison's position for establishing a sense of national security rested upon the laurels of the Revolution yet hinged between success and failure due to the weakened nature of the Articles of Confederation following the rise of discord during the era of the Early Republic. Banning’s main point appears to attempt to shed light on the politician’s often misunderstood rationale subsisting of his view on the proper role of government and how the essence of liberty intertwines.

The Sacred Fire of Liberty masterfully chronicles Madison’s efforts and vocational progression, however, most impressively, Banning articulately surveys Madison’s belief in a compound form of republican government which he expected to preserve individual liberties while enabling a strong federal system that would function within its appropriate realm. Banning ought to have delved deeper into the reasons for Madison’s assumptions toward this end, however assurances issuing from his proposed idea of a tripartite limitation of national power may give recourse for his assumptive stance on how future statesmen would function. Yet in the same vein, Cathy Matson notes how Madison "clung to classical republican beliefs in the need for a virtuous citizenry and reputable political leadership...[consecrated on the] ideal of self-government grounded on republican dignity and virtue,"[1] forces which may indeed explain Madison’s frequently misinterpreted political vantage point in light of clamoring for a more distinctive form of democratic republicanism.

 Appreciatively, Robert A. Becker provides insight into a slight flaw of Banning's throughout his publication, that being repetitiveness and the potential glorification of Madison in lieu of his reputation's tarnishing at the hands of modern historiography. Yet the redeeming virtue of Sacred Fire is Banning’s insistence on respectfully illuminating the error within a majority of scholarly reviews of the man. Banning suggests that "numerous interpretative difficulties" over Madison's concern of potential authoritative overreach while yet desiring an effective centralized government "can produce an image bearing little resemblance to Madison himself."[2] Complimentary to the author’s thesis, Becker's persuasive observation of Banning's intention to project Madison as a "revolutionary republican and a kind of states' rights nationalist [instead of the politician who has been] persistently misread in order to force Madison into the mold of an anti-republican nationalist"[3] is thoroughly agreeable.

Additionally, as suggested by Vincent McGuire, Banning aims to reveal that, however contradictory, Madison's "overriding concern was maintaining the Spirit of Revolution"[4] in its purest form. Similarly, with Matson’s aforementioned discernment of Madison’s ethical stance, Banning utilizes Madison's "own words woven unobtrusively into the narrative"[5] to feature how Madison poses not as a fickle public servant but rather one of principled character and consistency in his approach to sociopolitical theory and revivalist change.

Through approaching the realm of America’s hallowed pantheon to dissect one of its members in an honest and justifiable manner, Banning provides an insightful and fair analysis of the humble man bearing the weighty mantle as the Father of the Constitution. Though refraining from considering himself a nationalist, Banning skillfully indicates through his work how Madison emerged from a defender of state rights’ to jointly favoring federal policy, namely through the institution of implied Congressional powers due to the necessity of reform he recognized the budding nation required if the idealized vision for the “grand American experiment” could be sustained.

Bibliography:

Lance Banning, A Sacred Fire of Liberty: James Madison and the Founding of the Federal Republic (1995).

Scholarly Reviews Consulted:

Becker, Robert A. The American Historical Review 102, no. 5 (1997): 1562-563.

Matson, Cathy. The Journal of Southern History 63, no. 1 (1997): 151-53.

McGuire, Vincent. The American Political Science Review 90, no. 4 (1996): 884.

---

[1] Cathy Matson, The Journal of Southern History 63, no. 1 (1997): 152.

[2] Lance Banning, The Sacred Fire of Liberty: James Madison and the Founding of the Federal Republic (1995): 165.

[3] Robert A. Becker, The American Historical Review 102, no. 5 (1997): 1563.

[4] Vincent McGuire, The American Political Science Review 90, no. 4 (1996): 884.

[5] Cathy Matson, 151.

Fury - Film Critique

Set within the onslaught of WWII, Fury provides a practical and raw depiction of warfare and the cruelty of mankind. Highly inappropriate in terms of language and realistic carnage, Fury succeeds as an emotionally striking film designed for the audience to be overwhelmed by shock along with the experience of the characters surviving in a chaotic swirl of savagery, abuse and forgotten morals.

Appreciatively, the historical accuracy of military units and weaponry were utilized as a main element, examples of WWII era trademarks such as grenades, smoke bombs, mortars, rapid fire and a mass of US tanks proceeding 

Allied fire appears as red lasers to assist the audience's sight

in converging columns through a series of hedgerows weeks after the commencement of D-Day. A prominent example of US firepower was displayed through a glimpse of the air force which passed by overhead while a battalion of Sherman tanks led by tank Fury confronted a German Tiger and an SS brigade as the Allied forces strove to conclude the war by subduing town after town as the unit continued to press on into Germany.

Norman's introduction to Don & tank unit: Fury

However, the direction of the plot intended not to glorify the military but to expose trampled virtue. This theme is emphasized through the demoralization of Norman Ellison, a youth who’s loss of innocence is continually stressed throughout the course of the film. Introduced as a bumbling clerk-typist disgusted by injustice, he is swiftly taught a lesson by his commander, Don "Wardaddy" Collier, who physically forces him to murder a captured German POW, an act signifying the first tainting of his character with his first shedding of blood.

Don orders Norman to finish the POW, arguing that war is "to kill or be killed."

From this point, he is further instructed to engage in improper relations with a German girl, the diminishing of their purity, and finally through the manner in which he strikes down his enemies with artillery fire while chanting curses at the oncoming barrage of Nazi forces before his tank. During the finale, his companions entitled him “machine” as that is what he has become, a machine of war devoid of compassion; the young soldier no longer seeing his enemy as a human being but rather as a target to be extinguished for the sole purpose of an end goal swamped with vengeance.

Norman stands atop his gunner hatch

Surprisingly, Fury highlights that it is but a German soldier who is to be merciful upon Norman. Ironically, the soldier appears to be roughly the same age, a fact that not all Germans are monsters and that many are caught up within the throes of war, similarly sharing Norman’s fate. The German’s compassionate gesture harkens the trace of what Norman has lost; that noble former self he had intended to maintain. His inner commitment to displaying justice regardless of the immorality around him is expounded by how Norman’s terrified eyes stare up in desperation at the German soldier who kindly smiles and deliberately chooses to spare the life of the young boy covered in mud and the blood of his fallen comrades.

An impactful theme laced throughout Fury is the portrayal of tarnished morality. This motif is visible in Norman and through the example of a character Boyd Snicknamed “Bible,” a Christian who poses as the moral compass of the tank. Although Bible displays grace and is a channel pointing towards salvation, he additionally serves as an overpowering presence in certain instances, specifically in the scene where he aloofly sits on the tank, refraining from looting while soldiers plunder the captured town and while at the dinner table in the German home. His presence reminds his platoon leader that they have a duty to respond to, one of which does not allow a pretense of peace while at war.



Boyd "Bible" Swan receives orders that Fury is to proceed further into the Rhine

However, Bible’s consequential nature also falters in the face of moral indignity, wherein he remained silent when there were appropriate times in which he should have stood resolutely for an actual execution of ethics instead of standing disapprovingly by as his company devalue and humiliate the German ladies and in another instance when they cuss, jeer and erupt into praise over the massacre of Nazis with the desire to extend their suffering. Ultimately, Bible’s character offered the dim light of salvation and a purpose beyond the harsh reality experienced in Europe, 1945. His unexpected demise could even be argued as a pardon from God, concealing Bible within Himself in order for the Christian to not experience as much pain in his instant death compared to the lingering doom awaiting those remaining within Fury.

I heard the voice of the Lord calling, "Who will go for Us?" And I said, "Send me."

While this film does not receive a high recommendation, as the characters were difficult to find endearing, I appreciated the director’s attempt to portray a realistic account. Despite the artistic intention, I found myself hardly caring whether they survived for I had become disenchanted by their adverse behavior, deplorable logic, inhumane treatment of women and thoroughly disgusted at the militant culture that subjected its own soldiers to promote such brutality to simply prove the point that its either your death or your enemy’s in war, regardless of how practical and base that notion is.

Conclusively, Fury presents a harsh exposé of American soldiers during WWII – showing how a fierce, typically drunk and foul-mouthed, mismatched band of soldiers were able to loosely unify around the tank that they were willing to sweat, bleed and die within in order to protect one another and preserve the pursuit championed by the Allied forces. The film climaxes with Norman being heralded as a hero yet such praise starkly resonates with the fact that they are indeed heroes, but heroes that compromised their morality for the sake of unrealized ideals accomplished through anything but just means due to succumbing to animalistic tendencies and debase ethics justified by war. Their sacrifice, no matter how gallant a demise, does not justify previous brutality and the battalion’s blatant disregard of righteousness.