Customer Reviews
From a Yankee Teacher 
2008-10-06
This is 1 Yankee who really knows her history! I am teacher in NY state and when I took a look at this book in the library, I wasn't too pleased. Rhode Island had more slaves than any other state! Next, the South did not want to secede b/c they wanted to keep slaves, but because they thought they were being taxed unfairly. Northerners didn't give a damn about slaves, and some Northerners kept slaves as well.
Lincoln even used the issue of enslavement to gain popularity for the Union to make the Confederate states look bad. "If I could save the nation by freeing all the slaves I would do it, and if I could save the nation without freeing any slave I would do it" ~ Abraham Lincoln
Bigoted, Biased Ballyhoo! 2006-07-24
I would really like to know if Ms. Moore actually believes what she wrote, or simply did it for the money. Either way, the book is shameful and filled with inaccuracies, inuendo, half-truths and fabrications. If You Lived at the Time of the Civil War is a shining example of Political Correctness at its finest. Don't waste your money.
Don't Waste Your Money 2006-05-01
on this book, unless you wish to follow the mindless politically correct rewritten version of history that you find pretty much everywhere these days. I am a teacher, a historian, and a woman whose ancestors fought proudly for the Union Army. That said, I recognize this book for what it is. If you're really looking for something historically accurate, then you would better spend your money on books which detail - even for this age group - the War Between the States in much more realistic and honest terms. They are out there. Though I'm not quite as passionate as some of the reviewers below, I agree with their sentiment entirely. This book is simply fluff with almost no historical value - actually, it's worse than that, because it does perpetuate false stereotypes. It's especially bad because it's done in the guise of educational fiction. Shame on Scholastic.
Unrealistic book 2005-06-19
While I will concede that the book is an easy read, it does talk down to the child and the book constantly contradicts itself.
One example from the book:
Women and children in the South were not use to doing things for themselves. Then showing children with barefoot.
If a child is rich enough to not "do" for himself he would not be barefoot as only poor people were barefooted in those days.
Secondly very few people in the South actually owned slaves, something the book doesn't make clear.
The issue for many Southerners wasn't slavery as much as taxes.
Like a pervious reviewer I wish the book covered Sherman's march to Sea which an effort by the Union Army to just target the Southern Civilian population.
I also wish the book was be more accurate and stated that the Northern Army didn't treat former slaves well either.
The sad part that the book didn't bring out was the fact that during reconstruction there was little to no schooling allowed for children whose fathers served in the Rebel Army.
Shameful 2005-06-12
This book IF YOU does not give the actual facts of why the Civil War was fought, such as the South was tired of paying unfair taxes, coastal water monopolies (by the North) and tariffs.
The IF You book goes with the party line of the South fought to keep slaves. Slavery while an issue of the Civil War wasn't a major issue; in fact some of the largest slave holders in the South were against secession as they felt slavery would be held safer in the Union then outside the Union [Even Lincoln wrote that Slavery would be held safer in the Union then outside the Union where the states who seceded would lose all constitutional guarantees).
Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation in hopes of starting slave revolts in the South (interesting note the Emancipation Proclamation was only for those slaves in the Confederate states it did not apply to the four Northern states that had slaves or to Southern states that were under Northern control).
The book makes the Southerners look like murdering thieves while the Union come across as the fighters for justice, it totally overlooks W.T.Sherman's march to the sea which was a war against the unarmed civilian population of the South particularly women and children who were thrown out of their houses in the dead of winter without their clothes on by the Northern troops, in many cases ganged raped and left without food to starve.
The justification of such treatment towards noncombantants was that the South started the war however, it leaves out the fact that women and children in that time era had no rights and were without a voice. Women couldn't vote, weren't allowed to work, could not serve on jury duty etc.
I found this book very uninformative and full of misleading information.
Great kids book with nice illustrations. 
2004-01-07
Describes conditions for the civilians in both North and South during and immediately after the war.
Excellent Book for Young Readers 2002-06-30
I highly recommend this book for young readers who are first learning about the Civil War, and for parents/adults who want to refresh their knowledge about the Civil War. It uses an easy-to-follow Question/Answer approach. It explains which states seceded, who fought for the northern and southern armies, how the war affected the daily lives of northerners and southerners, who were the famous people from the north, and who were the famous people from the south. I really like the approach of the entire "If You" Series by Scholastic for introducing history to young readers. I highly recommend it for classrooms, home schooling, or pleasure.
Shameful Bigotry 2002-05-10
I generally have a high regard for Scholastic publications, but I am amazed that such narrow-minded bigotry and prejudice actually made it through to publication. I am so glad I previewed this book before sharing it with my children. I would no sooner read this to them than I would read them a book about "nice little Pilgrims and mean old Indians."
Current historians generally have a more enlightened interpretation of South's position in the Civil War, but Moore chooses to perpetuate the old stereotype of the evil slave owners versus the knights in shining armor of the north. Any cursory reading of the facts will tell you that this is wrong.
Though slavery was, no doubt, an issue in the war, it was not foremost, initially, and it was highlighted by the federal administration only when it became politically and strategically advantageous to highlight it. Any current reading of a Lincoln biography will tell you why he signed the Emancipation Proclamation, and why he waited so long to do it.
Comments such as, "[During the war] Southern women and children had to provide for themselves, something they were not used to doing," are littered throughout the pages of this book. Besides being grossly insulting, they are blatant misrepresentations of history, and of truth.
Most Southerners, in fact, did NOT own slaves. Many were very much against slavery. And yet on every page devoted to "explaining" the Southern perspective, the story of the South is told exclusively through their position as a slave-owning population. Southerners are portrayed as uneducated hillbillies. Even the pictures perpetuate this....illustrations of northern children look like modern day preppies; the white southern children are illustrated as ragged and dirty.
Moore does mention at the end that, "The South was treated like a hated enemy." Apparently, in some corners, they still are.
It was pretty neat. 1998-03-29
IT is a really cool book. It is pretty interesting book. It explains some pretty cool stuff.
