OK - here's what I found on Sock Hops - A bit before my time; but then I also remember American Bandstand (vaguely as I was about 5-6 years old), Chubby Checkers, The Peppermint Twist and Elvis Presley!

The Beatles were more MY era!!

"The sock hop was an informal sponsored dance at American high schools, typically held in the high school's own gym or cafeteria. The term sock hop came about because dancers were required to remove their hard-soled shoes to protect the varnished floor of the gymnasium. These hops were a cultural feature of the 1950s and early rock and roll. The music was usually records, sometimes presented by a disc jockey. Occasionally there were also live bands. Danny and the Juniors sang "At the Hop" in 1957 which named many popular dances and otherwise documented what happened at a hop. The term record hop is generally synonymous with sock hop.

In subsequent decades, with the widespread popularity of sneakers and other types of indoors-only shoes, the practice of removing shoes was dropped and the term began to be applied more generally to any informal high school dance." - This is from Wiki

(01-26-2013 10:38 AM)BettyO Wrote:  OK - here's what I found on Sock Hops - A bit before my time; but then I also remember American Bandstand (vaguely as I was about 5-6 years old), Chubby Checkers, The Peppermint Twist and Elvis Presley!

The Beatles were more MY era!!

"The sock hop was an informal sponsored dance at American high schools, typically held in the high school's own gym or cafeteria. The term sock hop came about because dancers were required to remove their hard-soled shoes to protect the varnished floor of the gymnasium. These hops were a cultural feature of the 1950s and early rock and roll. The music was usually records, sometimes presented by a disc jockey. Occasionally there were also live bands. Danny and the Juniors sang "At the Hop" in 1957 which named many popular dances and otherwise documented what happened at a hop. The term record hop is generally synonymous with sock hop.

In subsequent decades, with the widespread popularity of sneakers and other types of indoors-only shoes, the practice of removing shoes was dropped and the term began to be applied more generally to any informal high school dance." - This is from Wiki

How quaint

Wiki got this one absolutely correct. When they first got started at my small, country high school, the sixth period of one Friday each month was devoted to a sock hop. Later on, teen clubs were "invented," and the sock hop was either a Friday or Saturday night entertainment - if we could beg our parents into dropping us off. I should add that there were always 4-5 parent or teacher chaperones at the night events.

During the late-1960s, I actually moonlighted from being a teacher to running a teen club every Friday night. I met my first fiance there - he was a Rent-a-Cop. My students were very upset that I was dating a policeman. When I ended up marrying a vice principal, they were even more upset!

Oddly enough, the teen clubs were financially supported by The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission, the same government agency that I work for today as director of Surratt House. I guess it was fate.

Babysitting my grandson is also a revelation of new thinking. In my parenting days we used to powder the kid's butt and give him water. No more. Talcum is a no-no, (which helped contribute to that new baby smell), Water is also taboo - all liquid comes from formula. I find this a problem when the kid has the hiccups. I hate having to scare the kid or force him to hold his breath to cure him.

I knew that baby powder was out the window by the time my grandson was born, but I hadn't heard the No Water Rule. Someone enlighten us as to why that liquid refreshment is taboo, please.

I just discovered this thread!

There are lots of good posts being made and much to think about. Some of the things being said, I can't agree with, like saying that, at least in some cases, a person should forever be labeled and defined by their worst moment or worst action. Granted, that is probably how history will label some people, as in the case of Powell, but he paid the ultimate price for his sin. He said he was sorry, he seemed to be sorry, his actions lent credence to his being sorry, so does anyone really have the right to say that his remorse wasn't genuine? Isn't that between him and his Maker?

Maybe he did understand fully in an intellectual way, what he was getting into and what the consequences would be if he were caught. But he may have learned to think more or less like a robot after four years of war. Then, when he was in Seward's home, in a family setting, with a young woman (who may have reminded him of his sisters) screaming bloody murder, his forgotten religious upbringing and his emotions kicked in, and it finally dawned on him in full force, what he was doing.

Or, it could be that he was just a cold-blooded killer. If so, he got what he deserved. In any case, he paid the price for the crime he committed. And if there is an afterlife, he hasn't even paid the worst price that is in store for him and all the suffering he caused the Seward family and his own family. But I don't know why anyone would wish that on someone. I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt and leave the rest to the law and God. History will always remember him first and foremost for his crime.

Quote:Or, it could be that he was just a cold-blooded killer. If so, he got what he deserved. In any case, he paid the price for the crime he committed. And if there is an afterlife, he hasn't even paid the worst price that is in store for him and all the suffering he caused the Seward family and his own family. But I don't know why anyone would wish that on someone. I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt and leave the rest to the law and God. History will always remember him first and foremost for his crime.

Powell was not a cold-blooded killer. I think it's time that we look at people for WHO they were and not WHAT they supposedly were. We're looking at the reasoning behind what transpired to make a soldier and others perform in a certain way. Certainly NOT an admirable way, but what was the reasoning behind this transformation of a personable young man to commit such a deed. We're not here to condemn or praise. We're looking at what possibly transpired and why.

Anyone who is about to die has a right to seek clergy and repent if they so desire. What transpires is between that person and God.

What has the afterlife to do with history?

(01-28-2013 09:37 PM)My Name Is Kate Wrote:  I just discovered this thread!

There are lots of good posts being made and much to think about. Some of the things being said, I can't agree with, like saying that, at least in some cases, a person should forever be labeled and defined by their worst moment or worst action. Granted, that is probably how history will label some people, as in the case of Powell, but he paid the ultimate price for his sin. He said he was sorry, he seemed to be sorry, his actions lent credence to his being sorry, so does anyone really have the right to say that his remorse wasn't genuine? Isn't that between him and his Maker?

Maybe he did understand fully in an intellectual way, what he was getting into and what the consequences would be if he were caught. But he may have learned to think more or less like a robot after four years of war. Then, when he was in Seward's home, in a family setting, with a young woman (who may have reminded him of his sisters) screaming bloody murder, his forgotten religious upbringing and his emotions kicked in, and it finally dawned on him in full force, what he was doing.

Or, it could be that he was just a cold-blooded killer. If so, he got what he deserved. In any case, he paid the price for the crime he committed. And if there is an afterlife, he hasn't even paid the worst price that is in store for him and all the suffering he caused the Seward family and his own family. But I don't know why anyone would wish that on someone. I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt and leave the rest to the law and God. History will always remember him first and foremost for his crime.

It seems that even Powell could not fathom his own actions that night. Cold blooded killer? I definitely don't think so. I don't even think JWB was that.

Too, I think that the more our historians dig into the past, the more comes to light that banishes untruths and hyperbole written at the time. And we do know for certain that some events recorded by the press at that time were just not true. Such is the nature of the media.

The afterlife? Hell is right here on earth.

(01-29-2013 07:01 AM)MaddieM Wrote:  The afterlife? Hell is right here on earth.

If you believe what Jesus says about eternal rewards and punishment then , For some people, this life on earth will be as close to heaven as they ever get, and for others it's as close to hell as they ever get. (I prefer to be in the latter group)

(01-29-2013 07:01 AM)MaddieM Wrote:  Too, I think that the more our historians dig into the past, the more comes to light that banishes untruths and hyperbole written at the time. And we do know for certain that some events recorded by the press at that time were just not true. Such is the nature of the media.

Good point. The prejudices presented by 'the first draft of history' are difficult to overcome since many facts were twisted or ignored to fit the narrative. Once the narrative is complete the 'don't rock the boat' crowd will defend its conclusions. Such is the nature of the media.

Or the evidence continues to point in the original direction.

Best
Rob

Then that statement would prove the points of Come Retribution and April '65. The original evidence to the Union leaders and prosecutors was that the Confederate hierarchy was behind the Lincoln conspiracies.

(01-29-2013 06:31 AM)BettyO Wrote:  What has the afterlife to do with history?

That was exactly my point. Some of the comments in this thread are for God to decide, not historians or anyone else (such as if Powell's remorse was genuine). And I do not think that he was a cold-blooded killer, BUT if he was, then it is for God to decide what to ultimately do with him and if that label should stick with him for all eternity.

My only reason for being interested in knowing more about what went on between Lewis and Dr. Gillette in the cell on July 6, is that a few years ago I had a pretty bad scare and thought my time here on earth was about up, and ever since, I've had a consuming interest in how other people face death.

When I said that history will always remember Powell first and foremost for his crime, I meant that that should be sufficient vengeance for whoever does believe he was a cold-blooded killer (and I don't).

I grew up in Canada and as a child, we had dances in the school gym called "sock hops" - in the 1990's!!! After that, in high school, they were just referred to as "dances".
I never understood the relevance of the name "sock hop" until now. I always figured my school had made up the word!
Haha.
Thanks guys.

While we're on the subject of dances -

It is probable that Booth, Powell, Herold and Atzerodt attended the Canterbury Music Hall. It sounds like a risque place, according to testimony given by one Lt.. Vanderpoel at the John Surratt Trial in 1867. He claimed to see the foursome seated at a table in the dance hall, drinking and talking earnestly while on stage a woman "flashed her legs around...."

However, according to Art Loux, the place must not have been that rowdy at times, as Lincoln took his son Tad there on occasion.