Compare And Contrast Grand And Lee By Bruce Catton

In Bruce Catton's essay "Grand and Lee: A study in Contrasts," the author uses compare and contrast to highlight each general's different strengths, upbringing, and values. In addition to compare and contrast, describing aspects of their life provides better insight into each general's envision for the country. Both armies in the Civil War fought to preserve their way of life, and their purpose reflected the values of their leaders. But despite their differences, the two generals were able to meet together in Appomattox, bring peace, and reunify the country during a major turning point in our nation's history. Robert E. Lee believed in aristocratic ideals such as "family, culture, and tradition," and adopted the chivalry from "the age of Knighthood" in England. His main purpose for fighting was to preserve the polarizing social classes found in the Southern American states. The advantage of having unequal social classes he argued was that the higher class would breed a group of privileged men instilled with "a strong sense of obligation to the community." This would supply the country with adequate leaders that would …show more content…
Grant was born in the West and had a hard upbringing. Unlike Lee, he did not have any privileges and any privileges someone would have where he grew up, "each man had won for himself." Nothing was given to him and he was forced to work for anything he desired. The attitude of many Westerners at the time was that any frontiers needed to explored, and that the nation's boundaries needed to be expanded. Grant looked first to the entire country as his community and wanted everyone to prosper. He directly associated his success with that of the entire country as a whole and was only content with "the continuous growth and development of his country." With this strong sense of nationality, he could not allow the union of the country to be broken. If he allowed the South to secede, he would view it as a setback to the country's