begin        practices        products        resources        questions        mail list

Whose Truth?
The West Virginia Coal Mine Wars


Questions, Responses, and Writings Posted 10/17/00


 

 

 

Name: David Shepherd

Question_Response

If i was in west virginia at the time of the mine wars i would find it most interesting to be a miner. This is the only group that seems to make any move towards a goal that has value to it. The coal operators, from what i have read, seem to be static in their decision to crush the miners' insurrection and deny justice in 'their' area. I would not mind being in this position because it would benifit other humans (i would try to run a fair, unionized coal mine), but that is what most just people would do in that situation. i would not want to be a west virginian who is not a miner, but just a bystander that is caught up in the action, because my purpose in fighting or not fighting would not be a fire that burns within me, as the labor wars would not have effected me. I am, however, particularly interested in the plight of the native coal miner, as well as the men who were unwittingly shipped in to be scabs. As a native coal miner, i would be in quite a situation. All of my knowledge would mainly reside in that business, and, because of the way that coal mines payed (script), i would have little ability to flee towards another state in which i could live in. I think that i would probably join the union, however, there are several situations that would make this a difficult choice. If i had a family the difficulty of the choice would increase tenfold, but i would most likely still side with the union. If there was any way possible to flee to a different life anywhere else in the country, doing any other possible job, i would take it. I would not want to be involved with the coal wars, for at that point in history they seemed rather futile. I have always wondered, why didn't more men quitely pack up their families and leave the area. There are 2 factors which i could imagine that could make this course of action not a possibility: the miners could not have the money, seeing as they weren't payed with money, although it seems that the family could buy goods from the company store for the trip. i guess i will finish later. . . .


Name: Hannah Watkins

Question_Response

I imagine that I would be the daughter, sister, wife of a miner torn by my selfish love for him and my realistic recognition of the dire need to stand up against "the man." I resonate most with the wife of the main Italian miner who gave so much quiet strength and solace to those around her. I would do all in my power to advance the cause to be treated decently. Self-sacrifice is called for in the fight for large, progressive ideas. I can relate to this scenario this very second as I write.


Name: Daniel Lupton

Question_Response

Men came 'round looking for boys to go dynamite the number four hole this evening. I laid low, stared straight ahead, and tried not to seem too much of anything, and they walked right by me again. Sometimes the ability to become little more than a face is useful. Sure, I want the union more than any man, I know we ain't been treated right be these coal operators, but what is my life going to give to the movement if I ain't living it?

I hear a cowbell ring past my front porch. "Food for the miners, accepting donations of food for the miners!" I hear a knock on my door and scramble to the door, sack of potatoes in hand. I sat for quite a while earlier trying to gauge the right amount to donate. Too little, and they'd want to toughen me up and drag me along on a mission, too many and they'd appoint me their damn leader. Four potatoes, a hearty thank you, and hopefully I haven't made myself any more visible than need be.

People are getting killed out there, some of them my friends. People were getting killed in mines, too. I 'spose if a gun were shoved in my hand I'd raise it as high above my head as the rest of the fellas, no higher, and march into battle, right in the middle of the pack. I'm no leader, no martyr, but I'm no coward either. I pick my battles and this ain't it. I don't want to ride to the promised land on anyone's coat-tails, but I'm not Jesus, and I ain't Sid Hatfield neither.


Name: T. Harris

Question_Response

I don't mind sharing my thoughts so I will go ahead and post them. It sounds like lots of people are doing the same.

If I lived in a coal town in West VA, I assume I would be a coal miner's wife or daughter. Being 21 I more than likely would be a wife to someone. In my heart I would support the miner's cause. All my life I have supported the underdog. I think all aspects of life should be fair no matter what (wages, food, living conditions, you name it) Since this is in my spirit, in my soul, I find it hard to believe the time I live in would change it. Honestly, though,and I am ashamed in a way to say it, I do not know how much I would act on it. I don't know to what degree I would demonstrate these feelings. I don't know in what kind of arena I would be able to demonstrate these feelings if I lived then. Today I could say I would write about it, but how respected would the opinion of a 21 year old coal miner's daughter/wife be? I would move to a tent camp with my family. I would do all I could to help the greatest number of people, but I have limits set by my values and morals. I could not hurt someone. I could not steal from someone. I could not burn anything down. Those sorts of actions go against the very ideals that support equality of life for everyone. It would be very challenging to have to make these decisions. This was effectively demonstrated by Elma in the movie. At first she did not want to support the cause of the miners. But, bit by bit, she did and finally killed for it. Who knows, maybe it would have escalated to that point for myself too.


Name: Sarah Skeen

Question_Response

If I were living in Matewan at the time that the miners were striking, and just prior to the Matewan Massacre, I have no doubt that I would find myself a member of a miner's family (and in fact, I am the descendant of West Virginia miners). I also have no doubt that I would support the strikes by any means possible to me--- verbally and bodily. Perhaps the miners' legacy has been passed down to me anyway; I am always on the side of the working poor, and there always seems to be someone or some corporation trying to oppress them.


Name: Julia Imholt

Question_Response

I just wanted to ask if Thunder In The Mountains is completly true or did the author embelish some of the events? It seemed to be a very good book even if tedious at points. The one thing that I did particularly like about it was that it seemed to present less of a biased opinion about the events. It seemed more like a cut and dry telling. The book also gave a much more rounded acount of the occurences. I.E. not everything occured with in the same two week period. I appreciated the book very much.


Name: T. Harris

Question_Response

I think one of the questions evolving from our discussions about the movie Matewan and Thunder in the Mountains revolves around Sid. How involved was he? How much of a hero was he to everyone? Everyone portrays his character in a different way.


Name: T. Harris

Question_Response

Plus, in times of need, people tend to ban together. If there is no real trouble for everyone, people are less likely to have similar hardships and be willing to work with one another


Name: Tamara Harris

Question_Response

I agree with Hannah in that Sid was able to have such an effect because he was in a position of power as well as a popular guy, in it for the cause.


Name: Hannah Watkins

Question_Response

In response to Laura's comments, I got the impression from Thunder in the Mountains that Sid Hatfield was deified to a sort of folk hero position by people who really needed support from the powers-that-be, the law so to speak. Perhaps Sid Hatfield's interesting role as both a police officer and a rebel elevated him to this position.


Name: Hannah Watkins

Question_Response

In response to Theresa's comments, I think the reason that the mines were successfully unionized in the 30's during the Depression rather than 10 years earlier was because of huge government intervention to equalize and spread the wealth in the struggling nation. All sorts of new policies and organizations were instituted during the Depression to immediately meet the needs of thousands of struggling Americans. Up until this point, I think the U.S. government was wary of exercising so much all-encompassing control over its citizens and their livelihoods. In summary, I think the unions were successful ten years too late for West Virginia because the need was finally so great that it couldn't be ignored. Any other ideas?


Name: Martha O'Dell

Question_Response

Thunder in the Mountains really brought out the chaos involved in the whole mine wars and everything associated with it. It is easier to understand why the government took measures that seemed so drastic. The situation in Mingo County was so completely out of control. I guess I realized that the reason there was no comprimise made was because there were no impartial participants in any of the events. The judges, the juries the police, everyone had an alliance of some sort. I was also surprised by how involved Sid Hatfield was in the actual events of the miners and the union. In the movie he was portrayed as protecting his town and his people, but in the book he was very involved in the activities of the union and the miners. I am assuming that the book is more accurate because it takes a much more historic approach to the telling of the story.


Name: David Shepherd

Question_Response

Sid Hatfield's characterization in this book ("Thunder in the Mountains") has become an important consideration for me when taking a look at the miner's position. It seems that Sid is used in this book to give the reader some insite into the outlook that the people of the time would have towards the events that occured. Sid is a contradictory character, and a fitting symbol for the groups of miners that took part in the rebellion. He is admired by the men around him, yet he is portrayed often as a violent man, outside of any law, and a vengful man. The qualities that Sid posseses that allow him to stand up to the coal operators and the coal miners are the same qualities that would brand him as an unsavory personality in many other cultures and time periods. Therefor, I assume that Sid, and the qualities that he embodied, namely his militant undermining of an unjust authority, his vengful nature, and his unquestionable loyalty to his friends are some of the qualities that the West Virginia culture at that time admired. These values are indicative of the overall situation, in which there was no clear cut good and evil, only a less corrupt, more populous force against a smaller, more powerful, decidely corrupt force. However, in this way the two sides differed, the miners seemed to have some sense of a code of what was right and what was wrong, while the coal operators functioned as if there was no such code.


Name: Daniel Lupton

Question_Response

I think it is really interesting to look at Thunder In the Mountains together with Matewan to show how much focusing on one set of events rather than another can change our conceptions of things. Whereas the leadup to and battle of Matewan were the subject of Matewan, Thunder In the Mountains flanked those stories with a great deal of other information. I think the end result is quite different. At the end of Matewan, we see the miners as an enraged, almost bloodthirsty bunch whose sobering experience may lead to reform. However, by the end of Thunder In the Mountains they all seem weary and ready to give up that they may live their lives. I can't say that I fault them, either. At any rate, though the characterizations could sometimes be different in the two works (especially in the cases of Sid Hatfield and Charles Lively), I think the biggest reason for their individual tones is their difference in focus.


Name: Theresa Young

Question_Response

After reading "Thunder in the Mountains," I wonder what the strike really accomplished. There was violence, murder, confusion, loss of jobs and revenue for the coal companies, plus the UMWA District 17 went bankrupt. In the end, the strike was called off. It wasn't until the 1930's that the West Virginia mines were unionized. Why were they successful then (during the Depression)and not ten years earlier?


Name: Laura Parrish

Question_Response

The book we've been reading for this week puts enormous emphasis on Sid Hatfield's life and position in the coal wars. Is he merely a primary focus of this book, or was he really as well-known as it suggests? The book suggests that the march was primarily to avenge Sid's murder and that all the miners felt joined by this vengence. Were there any other personas who were as influencial or as much an icon of the union as Sid?


Name: Rachael Taft

Question_Response

In the book the author mentions reporters from national newspapers coming to cover the stories. Weren't national newspapers the largest form of media of the times. So if the incidents were being covered by the media why was is not a big issue? In the book reporters are forever photographing Sid, until he forbids them. Did the people of this time period have other greater more relative concerns? s2rrtaft@titan.vcu.edu


Name: Michael Keller

Question_Response

I am deeply struck, every time I read Savage's book, by the introductory comments that John Williams makes regarding the proposed(and failed) use of Federal airpower against a civilian population. If you did not read the introduction to Savage's book, be certain to do so not only for this commentary, but for information regarding the economics of coal at the time of the mine wars.


Tamara L. Harris 
In response to Theresa's question, I think Sid wanted to believe in people and his country. That is why he did not want to carry a gun. He trusted people and thought he would be protected. It is unfortunate. It is like he wanted to set a standard of how things should be dealt with, similar to Joe in the movie I think.


Tamara L. Harris 
In class last Tuesday, Michael Keller raised the question as to why it was considered a war. War tactics were definitely used and the state and federal armies were called in. I think it was definitely on a wartime scale. I thought the book was great in demonstrating how the strike escalated into something bigger than any of the miners could have ever imagined. I think it is very honorable that the miners refused to fight the Federal Army. The recognized the greatness of our country at the time and did not want to loose the few rights they did have. They may not have gained everything they were fighting for, but they did gain the recognition and the awareness of people. They were so successful we are studying their sacrifice now.


Tamara L. Harris 
Does anyone else think that the book was centered too much around Sid Hatfield? I just get the feeling that many of the people were in the fight for themselves and a better life, not just to avenge Sid's death.


Theresa Young 
I have not finished Savage's book, but I was wondering why Sid Hatfield was so trusting of C.E. Lively even though he knew he was a spy for the Brown-Felts Agency. By trusting, I mean why he left his gun in the hotel room or why he didn't carry a concealed weapon when going to testify in Welch? He must have known that someone would be waiting for the right moment to take revenge.


 

 

.