March: Books 2 & 3

Lewis embraced the reputation of being a radical, taking pride in his refusal to compromise his principles. Does the narrative vindicate Lewis’s approach, or are there moments where a more moderate approach could have earned him greater success?

Stokely Carmichael and some others regarded nonviolence as a tactic, to be used and abandoned according to its practicality, rather than as an intrinsically worthwhile approach. Is violence ever justified in pursuit of political change, or was Lewis correct in his absolute commitment to nonviolence whatever the cost?

Compare Lewis’s delivered speech at the March on Washington with his original draft included as an appendix in the back of the book. Why did he have to change those specific passages, and do you think the changes seriously affected his message? How might the changes have appealed to or deterred Lewis’s major audiences (e.g., protesters, the white public, and the federal government)?

The Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party (MFDP) failed to win seats at the convention, and this failure had a demoralizing effect on the movement at the time. Do you see any evidence that the MFDP’s effort succeeded in the long term, or was it a tactical mistake?

What does the book say about the power of ordinary people to make profound changes? Why do you believe that Lewis and his fellow activists were ultimately successful?

How does the framing device of Obama’s inauguration shape the narrative? Do you notice any particular points of connection between scenes of the inauguration with the events preceding and following them? Consider what might be lost in terms of tone and context if this framing device were not used.

The popular imagination tends to regard Malcolm X as, at best, a rival to Martin Luther King, and at worst as a villain in the civil rights story. How do Lewis’s feelings about Malcolm X change over time, and how do his feelings relate to that common perception?

Some have called for the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma to be renamed in honor of Lewis. Others object, not necessarily because they want to preserve the memory of Pettus himself, but because that name (and especially the lettering on the bridge) has become an essential part of civil rights history. Should the name be changed or preserved? How would your decision best honor the sacrifices of the protesters?