Jay W.
Yelp
The structure itself is fascinating and certainly unusual. The issue I have with this place is the tour guide and the whitewashing of slavery. We all know that the owner had slaves, about 800 to be precise, but rather than acknowledge that and accept it for what it was the guide decided to spend a good portion of the tour trying to make the owner out to be a good guy, and filling us with misleading half truths about Robert E. Lee (who, as far as I know was never even in Natchez, and certainly had nothing to do with this land and structure). It began somewhat early on, when the guide mentioned that one of the young male slaves frequently played with one of the owner's children and they became friends. Later in life the slave became a house servant, and even had his portrait painted. "One of only two slaves to have his portrait painted" he told us. In the summers, to escape malaria, the family would go to Canada, and they took this one slave with them. It seemed very obvious that he was punctuating the treatment of this one particular slave as a way of painting the family in a better light. I couldn't help but think of course that despite this the family still kept this person in slavery for their own benefit, and enslaved another 799 people who didn't get to go to Canada and had to stick it out in the malaria ravaged summers of Mississippi. That story didn't get told, but hey they did paint a picture of one of the hundreds that they kept in indentured servitude, so who's complaining, right? Luckily that subject died within the first 15 minutes and we continued with the tour. As the tour ended the guide decided to mislead everyone with a half-truth about Robert E. Lee. Again, Robert E. Lee has nothing to do with this plantation, but you can't go anywhere in Mississippi without someone trying to convince you that the civil war wasn't about slavery, and the people who owned slaves weren't bad people. Anyhow, his statement was this. U.S. Grant owned slaves and Robert E. Lee didn't. Absolutely true that Grant did, but the Lee statement (which still has no context related to Longmont) isn't correct. He never bought a slave, but he inherited somewhere close to 200. In fact, he was supposed to set 180 of them free 5 years after the inheritance, but broke sued to keep them enslaved. Not to mention, he also led an armed rebellion against the United States for "state's rights." The main one being the right to keep slaves. During which 3/4 of a million Americans were killed. Whitewashing bullshit. If you want to tell me Lee was a brilliant general, I get that. Don't feed me full of bullshit about him not owning slaves. It's a cop out and a con. I don't give money to conmen, and that's what this douchebag tour guide was.