Throughout the scope of the class, we've discussed certain aspects of the Old South vs. the New South. When I walked into Dr.Hoefer's ENG1102 class and found out we were going to be studying the South for the entire semester, I wondered how that could ever be possible. Now I realize that one semester is certainly not enough. At the beginning, he emphasized the distinction between the two South's--plantations vs. skyscrapers, slavery vs. freedom. As the class progressed, each person began to develop his/her own opinion of the South. Are the stereotypes accurate, or are they complete fallacies? Most importantly, was there ever a transition from the Old South to the New South?
In my personal opinion, most of the negative Southern stereotypes are a little overrated--yes, people do drive pick-up trucks, and yes there are plantations; but there are Sedans, and buildings, and civilized people. Regarding the transition, I'm not too sure there ever was one... Up until we read Bastard out of Carolina, the transition seemed blatant. Before white trash was looked down upon, violence was prevalent, and discrimination was obvious. However, after reading this book, the so-called "New South" seems to have the same problems, though at a reduced scale. Perhaps the magnitude of the problem is still the same, but the attention and publicity it receives is kept at an optimal "low."