Review: Blood and
Daring: How Canada Fought the American Civil War and Forged a Nation. By
John Boyko. Toronto: Knopf Canada, 2013. Pp. 355.
The story of how the American Civil War brought the British North
American colonies to form the Dominion of Canada is well known. Every Canadian history textbook covers the
issue, as do previous specialist works by Robin Winks in 1960 and Greg
Marquis fifteen years ago. With the 150th
anniversaries of both the end of the Civil War and of Confederation soon approaching,
the need for a new work on Canada during this turbulent period would help both fields. John Boyko, a school administrator and author
of five previous books, produced this book for that purpose. The result, however, is a major
disappointment. The author contributes
nothing new to the scholarship. Even if
he intended it for the popular market, flaws in research, analysis and writing
reduce its value considerably.
My first thought after reading this book is “where’s the blood and
where’s the daring”? Neither exists in
this book. Instead, he attempts to use
the stories of six contemporary figures to prove a tenuous thesis about how the
conflict mobilized the British North Americans to set aside their differences
and form a new identity in the Dominion of Canada in 1867. Poor research prevents him from achieving
this goal. Boyko uses the first case, escaped
slave John Anderson to prove that Canadians opposed pressure from Britain and
the United states by freeing him. He
neglected to mention the increasing resistance in the northern states to the
institution after the Compromise of 1850, such as the Christiana Riots and
Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Boyko aimed
to show William Henry Seward as a rabid expansionist whom Canadians stopped in
the Trent Affair, but the supposed villain barely appears in the
chapter. Sarah Edmonds stands in for the
forty thousand or so colonists who served in the Civil War, but perhaps due to
the spotty nature of the evidence, little is learned about their experiences.
Research problems mar the remaining three chapters in ways that
undermine Boyko’s thesis. He based the
book on a shallow base of including handful of Canadian archives and only U.S.
printed sources. The section on spies,
as represented by Jacob Thompson of Mississippi, shows how Canadians escalated
wartime tensions by aiding the rebellion, instead of being a victim. George Brown, the Horace Greeley of Canada, portends
to show how the Confederation process began amid the war’s tense last two
years. Boyko concludes with John A. MacDonald,
who guided the new nation towards its new status amid Fenian Raids and
annexationist fears. He quotes Canadian
leaders at length about the American threat, but contradicts himself by saying
how U.S. officials rounded up the Irish invaders after the raid (p. 273) and
demobilized the mighty Union Army after the war (p. 290). These inconsistencies not only disprove his thesis,
but distract the reader. There is not
much blood or daring in this book.
Writing issues compound throughout this mess. The Civil War appears mostly as narrative in
each chapter, save for the first which has no context at all. Boyko skips over the major events of the four
year conflict with celerity. One
suspects that he knew little about the subject before he started. His handling of Confederation is likewise
thin. This book ends on a low note, with
Boyko citing how Confederation yielded a “unique centralized parliamentary democracy
governing a bilingual, multicultural, tolerant country with too much democracy
and too few people, was underway” (p. 304).
The partisan nature of this statement needs no further commentary. Amateurishly researched and weakly written, Blood and Daring offers nothing to
scholars and little to the general public.
Its sole purpose is to capitalize on the sesquicentennials of the Civil
War and Confederation.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comment is awaiting moderator's approval.