Hofstadter On The Progressive Historians

I've ofttimes found Richard Hofstadter to hold upwards a peculiarly compelling historian of American politics together with ideas...

I've ofttimes found Richard Hofstadter to hold upwards a peculiarly compelling historian of American politics together with ideas. He is 1 of the writers from the 1950s together with 1960s who notwithstanding withdraw maintain insights that repay a unopen reading equally nosotros essay to brand feel of the swirling complexities of culture, politics, together with ideas. His earliest mass is The American Political Tradition: And the Men Who Made it, together with at that spot were many to a greater extent than to come upwards inwards his brusk career. (Hofstadter died at 54 inwards 1970.) 

In 1969 Hofstadter published a mass on American historical writing alongside the intriguing title, Progressive Historians. The mass is a written report of 3 of import American historians from the kickoff few decades of the twentieth century, Frederick Jackson Turner (The Frontier inwards American History), Charles Beard (An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States), together with Vernon Parrington (Main Currents inwards American Thought: Volume 1 - The Colonial Mind, 1620-1800).

The championship itself raises interesting questions of historiography: what is a "progressive" historian? Does this phrase build an unacceptable grade of normative commitment into Hofstadter's agreement of historical writing? The large inquiry hither is this: how should a historian recollect close the 2 axes of "what happened?" together with "was it share of a skillful affair or a bad thing?" inwards constructing a plan of research inwards a historical topic. Are the 2 questions inseparable, or is a dispassionate together with objective uncovering of the events together with causes of the history inwards inquiry possible, without an endeavor to theorize how that narrative fits into a laid upwards of political values?

Here is a quick précis of progressive issues at the plough of the century inwards his line organisation human relationship of Charles Beard's evolution equally a historian:

Beard's years at Columbia coincided alongside the Progressive era inwards national politics. He had come upwards dorsum to a scene of political together with social reform that compared inwards the intensity of its intellectual ferment alongside the scene he had left inwards England. The kickoff flare-up of muckraking came during the years of his doctoral work, together with past times the fourth dimension his mass on the Constitution appeared, the national mood had grown together with so suspicious, that, equally Walter Lippmann set it, Blue Planet had a distinct prejudice inwards favor of those who made the accusations. The political machines together with the bosses were nether constant burn downwards from political reformers together with muckrakers, together with all the problems of pop regime were beingness re-examined. Though it had no clear thought what to produce close them, the terra firma was inwards total proper substantive against the cracking industrialists together with the large monopolies. It had larn aware also of the deplorable status of many of the working course of didactics -- peculiarly women together with children -- inwards the factories, mines, together with sweatshops, together with was making halting experiments at the legal command of industrial exploitation. Almost every expression of American life, from sex, religion, together with race relations to unusual policy, the rule of business, together with the role of the Courts, was beingness reconsidered.... There was no improve minute than the zenith of the Progressive motility for a mass dealing alongside the Constitution equally the production of a course of didactics conflict, domicile at cracking length upon the economical interests together with objectives of its framers together with advocates, together with stressing their opposition to majoritarian democracy. (181-182)

Here is what Hofstadter has to say close the commonality across these 3 historians:

In grouping these 3 equally Progressive historians I produce no to a greater extent than than follow the precedent of other recent writers on American historiography. Not 1 of them was, to hold upwards sure, an easily classifiable partisan inwards the day-to-day national politics of their time, but all of them took their cues from the intellectual ferment of the flow from 1890 to 1915, from the demands for reform raised past times the Populists together with Progressives, together with from the novel burst of political together with intellectual activity that came alongside these demands. They were directed to their major concerns past times the political fighting of their time; they inwards plough contributed to it past times giving reform politics a historical rationale. It was these men to a higher house all others who explained the American liberal heed to itself inwards historical terms. Progressive historical writing did for history what pragmatism did for philosophy, sociological jurisprudence for law, the muckraking spirit for journalism, together with what Parrington called “critical realism” for letters. If pragmatism, equally someone has said, provided American liberalism alongside its philosophical nerve, Progressive historiography gave it retentiveness together with myth, together with naturalized it inside the whole framework of American historical experience. (xii)

So their status equally "progressive" thinkers does non derive straight from their political views, or at to the lowest degree the political views expressed inwards their historical writings; but rather from the background assumptions on the footing of which they proceeded. They were historians inside the idiom together with mental frameworks of the Progressive era. They were oriented past times the conflicts of involvement that existed inwards the U.S.A. -- inwards politics, inwards universities, inwards letters -- together with they believed that ideas together with interests unavoidably intersected. And they sought to sympathise of import elements of political civilization inwards price of those conflicts.

So what close the other share of the phrase, "history"? Hofstadter recognizes that at that spot are several dissimilar purposes served past times historical writing. But 1 crucial role is the establishment of world retentiveness equally a foundation for civic identity.

MEMORY is the thread of personal identity, history of world identity. Men who withdraw maintain achieved whatever civic existence at all must, to sustain it, withdraw maintain some sort of history, though it may hold upwards history that is partly mythological or precisely untrue. That the line organisation of history e'er involves a subtle transaction alongside civic identity has long been understood, fifty-fifty inwards America where the feel of fourth dimension is shallow. One of our early on nineteenth-century promoters of canals together with world plant was also a promoter of historical collections because he understood alongside perfect clarity that at that spot was some relation betwixt the two. “To see a people who withdraw maintain no history,” he wrote, “is similar going into a wilderness where at that spot are no roads to direct a traveller. The people withdraw maintain naught to which they tin await back; the wisdom together with acts of their forefathers are forgotten; the experience of 1 generation is lost to the succeeding one; together with the result is, that people withdraw maintain piddling attachment to their state, their policy has no system, together with their legislature no decided character.” (3)

This is a persuasion of history that emphasizes the committed nature of the genre -- the require to tell a storey that inspires identity together with admiration. But what close objectivity together with facticity? Hofstadter refers to "scientific" history, but he doubts that this genre succeeds inwards excluding a normative opinion from the interpretation of a people's history.

Most of these writers were affected to some extent past times the thought of "scientific" or critical history: at that spot would hold upwards no to a greater extent than bowdlerization similar that of Sparks, no to a greater extent than historical orations or rearranged quotations equally inwards Bancroft. But they did non relinquish the thought of history equally a forum for moral judgments: they were deeply concerned alongside such questions equally Who was right? or Which principles were correct? when they dealt alongside the background of the Revolution, the adoption of the Constitution, the struggles betwixt Jeffersonians together with Hamiltonians, or Jackson together with the Whigs.... In short, what the conservative nationalist historians did was to was forge a persuasion of the past times that needed solely to hold upwards inverted dot past times dot past times the Progressive historians to yield a historical rationale for social reform. (26-27)

Several key ideas are found inwards all 3 historians: the ability of large propertied interests inwards nineteenth- together with twentieth-century America (robber barons, exploitation, nutrient adulteration, corruption); the role of individualism inwards the American political identity; together with the role that majoritarian institutions should play inwards a modern society. In his give-and-take of Turner's interpretation of America's western frontier Hofstadter teases out iv dissimilar meanings of "individualism" that withdraw maintain real dissimilar implications for political philosophy:

There are at to the lowest degree iv senses inwards which [individualism] tin hold upwards used. First, a civilization may hold upwards called individualistic if it offers favorable weather for the evolution of personal assertiveness together with ambition, encourages textile aspiration, self-confidence, together with aggressive morale, offers multiple opportunities for advancement together with encourages the volition to seize them. Second, it may betoken the absence of mutuality or of mutual together with collective effort, inwards a social club that supposedly functions almost equally a conglomerate of private atoms. Third, it may designate a to a greater extent than or less formal creed inwards which private activeness is at a premium together with governmental activeness is condemned -- equally a synonym, inwards short, for laissez faire. Finally -- together with I believe this usage tin hold upwards quite misleading -- it may hold upwards used equally though it were synonymous alongside individuality, that is alongside a high tolerance for deviance, eccentricity, nonconformity, privacy, together with dissent. (141-142)

Since individualism is together with so fundamental to the American political identity that Turner addresses, these distinctions are critical.

I regain several aspects of the mass peculiarly interesting. One is the remarkable flat of exceptional together with context that Hofstadter is able to render for the positions together with interpretive orientations of the 3 main historians whom he discusses. This is a flat of scholarship that seems remarkably deep past times contemporary standards. Second, Hofstadter spends a skillful bargain of travail towards making feel of each historian's career inwards price of his social together with geographical origins. The fact that each of these men were born inwards the "West" -- actually the Midwest -- is an of import share of their intellectual evolution together with the ways inwards which their thought unfolded. Finally, Hofstadter takes each historian seriously but critically; he gives rigorous efforts to the piece of job of tracing out the ways inwards which their views go wrong, equally good equally the valid insights that they express.

Another interesting expression of Hofstadter's approach is the emphasis he gives to "modernity" equally a theme for these early on twentieth-century historians.

What was happening, inwards effect, was that a modern critical intelligentsia was emerging inwards the United States. Modernism, inwards thought equally inwards art, was dawning upon the American mind. Beard's mass on the Constitution fittingly appeared inwards the same yr equally the New York Armory demo -- an lawsuit that was far to a greater extent than shocking to the reason of fine art than Beard's mass was to scholars....The rebels against formalism were trying to assert, to a higher house everything else, that all things are related, that all things change, together with that all things should thus hold upwards explained historically rather than deductively. And for the most part, they were concerned alongside noesis equally a rationale for social action, non for passivity. (185)

Of the 3 historians I regain Hofstadter's give-and-take of Charles Beard the most interesting. Beard's approach to the framing together with adoption of the Constitution is inwards price real consistent alongside Marx's economical interpretation of politics together with the province -- maybe fifty-fifty to a greater extent than mechanistic than Marx himself, who leaves room for substantial nuance betwixt involvement together with political ideas inwards The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte. Beard traces the workings of fiscal interests on the positions of diverse of the Founding Fathers of the constitutional process, together with gives the clear implication that involvement prevails. Here again, the dot is that interests together with ideas cannot hold upwards fully separated. Hofstadter writes:

In 1913 Beard found naught inwards the ideas of the Founding Fathers that made him experience equally some basic realities equally the old Treasury Department records he had enterprising lay turned up. For all the aAmplitude together with moral intensity of political thought inwards the Revolutionary era, he seems to withdraw maintain believed it's balance was non fundamentally of import for the Constitution. (246-247)

The theme of scientific objectivity mentioned to a higher house comes upwards equally good inwards Hofstadter's give-and-take of Beard's early on struggles alongside this issue:

Historical scientific discipline demanded that the historian, whatever his role equally a citizen, should hold upwards a detached investigator, seeking the truth for truth's sake. Beard was rationalist plenty to response to this scientific Federal Reserve notation inwards Powell, together with fifty-fifty inwards his Oxford days nosotros tin encounter inwards him an uncomfortable duality that was e'er to haunt him -- a duality betwixt the aseptic ideal of scientific research together with his social passions. (179)

Beard's ain passions were clear:

Beard had sworn inwards 1900 that he would never halt agitating "till the workers who send upon their shoulders the burden of the reason should realize the identity of their ain interests together with rising to bring possession of the agency of life". (179)

The mass warrants unopen reading. This is some other of the books published a one-half century agone that notwithstanding withdraw maintain lite to shed on our electrical flow predicaments inwards agreement our ain unfolding history -- non antiquarian but real contemporary.

(Here is a skillful slice past times David Greenberg from the Atlantic on Hofstadter's piece of job (link).)