Across Five Aprils: Chapter 2 Summary & Analysis

Thus far in the book, Jethro has seen war as a straightforward conflict between the North (on the side of good) and the South (on the side of evil). But the conversation at the dinner table with Wilse reminds him (and readers) that the conflict has many more nuances. This seems to suggest that the better path forward is to pursue compromise, working together to resolve issues rather than fighting for dominance. But attempted compromises on the issue of slavery have only served to increase division, since little middle ground exists between accepting and denying the right of some people to own and exploit others.

Matt suggests that compromise is a better path forward for the country But neither Wilse nor John seem interested in subtlety, nuance, or compromise; both insist on the rightness of their own viewpoint and refuse to engage with each other’s arguments. Wilse provides a rationale for Southern secession based in the quintessentially American right of self-determination. To a certain extent, Wilse seems to recognize the contradiction between his passionate desire for Southern sovereignty and his explicit denial of the right of enslaved people to life free lives of self-determination. His willingness to leave that question to God suggests that he )and other Southerners like him) truly believes in self-determination only for white people like themselves. Insofar as the state’s rights argument that Wilse ignores the issue of slavery, it can and has been used to absolve slaveholding states from the moral responsibility for slavery. But, as Wilse rightfully points out, the issue of abolition—which can end an institution like slavery far more easily than it can address complex issues like racism and prejudice—proves to be far more complicated than many Northerners would like to admit.