24, 1814, british forces injured washington, d.c. and burnaby capitol building, the president's house, and most of the federal buildings. vogel, author of "through the perilous fight -- six weeks that saved the nation" .akes us on a river tour the troops move down pennsylvania avenue down to the white house. dolly and james madison had to earlier.mber of hours the british along the way stopped and talked to some madisons, asking where was, and were somewhat disappointed to learn he had left the city. they passed a tavern on the

corner, near the treasury wenting, and they actually in to order dinner. the woman proprietor tried to send them off to another establishment, but that didn't work. they ordered some chicken and then continued down pennsylvania avenue and entered the white house, which they found unlocked . it of course had been abandoned in the previous hours. the servants at all left. entering it in the dining room, they found the great feast dolly madison had ordered for the evening. needless to say, they did not hesitate to health themselves to it. this is one of those remarkable stories that is actually quite true. wined and dined at the white house, and they set

the place of fire. fire. they went through with gunpowder paste and rubbed that on the doorframes and around the windows. chairsthered a number of and flammable material and created little bonfires. they set drapes a fire. pretty soon the entire building was up in flames. some of the british soldiers actually felt a sense of regret about it. this was such a beautiful building. hard not to feel some regret at seeing such a place go up in flames. antipathythe british toward madison were so great

that any regret was overshadowed by the hope that this would force the united states to make a quick piece. , who had been locked in this incredible struggle with transport two decades at this point, the u.s. declaration of war in 1812 against ray britton was just an act of enormous treachery. they felt they were trying to world, save civilization from napoleon. for the united states to stab them in the back was an unforgivable act. for the first two years of the war, they were tied up with the fight with napoleon, but when theywar seemed to be over, had more forces to send over. there was certainly an element that flowed through the mind of many of the soldiers and sailors that marched into washington 200 years ago. anybody who listens to

the star-spangled banner or that it has to understand this first verse that we all sing at baseball games, you listen to during the super bowl -- you always have to remember that that verse ends in a quest ion mark, because he really did not know what the future was going to hold for the united states at that moment. >> each week american history tv sits in on a lecture with one of the nation's college professors. you can watch the classes every saturday at 8:00 p.m. and midnight eastern. next, indiana university history professor michael mcgerr talked

about women and feminism in 1960-1970's popular music. this 75 minute class was from his course titled "rock, hip hop and revolution: popular music in the making of modern america, 1940 to the present." please note this program contains language and images that some viewers may find offensive. >> good afternoon. here we go. hope you are doing well. this is almost too nice a day for education. i have a staggering number of powerpoint slides for this. get your bets down now on whether i can get through them or not. i'll omit my customary professor humor, about the ncaa tournament, for example. that's how serious this is. let's think for a minute, though, about where we're situated, what we're working on here. in this last third of the course that we started last week, we're dealing with the post-revolutionary era. we've built this idea that

something radical and transformative happened to music in the 1960's. we've worked hard over the course of several weeks to establish those ideas. and we can't leave it, though, just as a kind of baby boomer nostalgia for the days that were. what we've been trying to deal with is this sense of pervasive disappointment, that the revolution somehow ended in the early 1970's. the popular music became a disappointment, aesthetically, politically. that's the cliche. we saw plenty of evidence for it. what we've been trying to do is to say ok. maybe if we shift perspective, maybe if we don't simply buy the assumptions that went into the age of countercultural music, if we do that, we may well see music engaged in a different way. and the way i suggested, the way we've started out is by saying isn't it the case that popular music in the u.s. in the 1970's was doing what popular music typically had done well before the 1960's?

which is to mediate relationships between men and women, to mediate notions of gender, to rethink sexuality. and that's where we started last time, with ideas about masculinity. and the way in which there's a radical transformation of ideas about masculinity tied up with the emergence of the gay liberation movement, bound up in music such as glam rock, david bowie, lou reed, bound up in disco. as we said, in a sense, that music was inherently political. something that the really vicious anti-disco campaign drove home. so it seems to me we've started building the idea that post-'60s, american music still is politicized, still is engaged but in a different way, a way that rejected, as we saw with david bowie or we saw with mott the hoople, that rejected countercultural rock.