Latest Reading

I’ve mentioned before that I’m reading a lot of the books on my list this semester. The latest reading is one of the most famous books in the history profession. Hardly a sweeping history book is mentioned without thought to Frederick Jackson Turner’s The Frontier in American History. I’ve read myriads of books that quote it or extend the argument, with which I’m very familiar and truly admire. But I hadn’t actually read the text. All that has officially changed. Now I have that much more authority when I speak, and I suppose that is the point of graduate school… maybe.

Frederick Jackson Turner’s The Frontier in American History is a classic work that still gets quoted in contemporary studies though it was first published in 1920. Indeed, entire schools of historical thought base themselves on his ideas. The book is not a complete narrative but rather a collection of addresses and papers that begins with “The Significance of the Frontier in American History,” one of the most important works of the American historical profession. This version of the book contains thirteen essays which cover the expansive history of the American West and the implications for the rest of the country.

Frederick Jackson Turner maintains that the concept of the frontier, which he defines as “the meeting point between savagery and civilization,” is the most important aspect of American history. The wilderness, continually shifting westward, shaped those who continued to move into it, each successive generation of pioneers combining their Eastern traditions with the autonomous character the frontier demanded. The frontier persistently shaped the independent American character and America was continually reborn in more and more democratic forms. First, independence was valued; but with the closing of the West and the concentration of wealth that was the result of unbridled democracy, Americans craved a system that protected the voices of all its citizens.

The Frontier in American History is a combination of historical theory and narrative, though the narrative is naturally less structured in a collection of papers. Though it is brilliant, it gets repetitive and dry at times. Much more could be added to the equation, such as the mistreatment of Native Americans and Mexico that made possible Manifest Destiny. Still, the importance of Frederick Jackson Turner cannot be denied. Though the work is hardly required reading for average readers, it is vital to the education of American historians who seek to understand the history of history.

Historical Inaccuracies

Obama has been criticized lately in Republican circles for his willingness to hold talks with leaders of supposed rogue nations. I personally think his point of view makes sense – as long as you’re talking, you aren’t shooting – but that’s not the point of this blog. What I find objectionable, as a historian, is the characterization of Obama as similar to the allied leaders before World War II with their appeasement of Hitler. Let me point out the major difference, since some very powerful people apparently don’t see it. The allied powers stood by while Hitler gobbled up country after country, doing nothing while he rewrote Europe’s map. Obama’s plan to converse with alleged rogue regimes, with no stipulations, is hardly tantamount to capitulation. I just thought I’d point out the mistake since no one in the major news outlets was willing to do so.

Latest Reading

I’ve said before that I have a list of books I mean to read. Slowly, I’ve been chipping into it this semester away from class. A few years ago, I decided to read, the classics. Many of them, I read in whole or in part in high school or my undergraduate years; Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, for example, was assigned in high school though we were only required to read a story or two. I started my quest a few years ago with The Iliad and The Odyssey and Bulfinch’s Mythology. The latest classic was Milton’s Paradise Lost and Paradise Regained.

Paradise Lost and Paradise Regained is a poetic retelling of the Biblical story of man’s fall and redemption. The poems mix mythology, speculation, and theology. Milton invents a story where there is little and a few things don’t seem to add up to my knowledge of Christianity. For example, Eve is painted as the primary sinner and Adam only joined her because he loved her so much and would rather die with her than live without. It was written to “justify the ways of God to man.” On that level, Milton doesn’t succeed. There are deep gaps in theology that depend on speculative fiction to bridge. On the level of literature, it does succeed. Surprisingly easy to read for a work of the daunting era, Milton tells an entertaining and enlightening story that is rightfully a classic.

Here are a few interesting quotes:

“The mind is its own place, and in itself / Can make a Heav’n of Hell, a Hell of Heav’n…”

“But what will not Ambition and Revenge / Descend to? who aspires must down as low / As high he soar’d, obnoxious first or last / To basest things. Revenge, at first though sweet / Bitter erelong back on itself recoils…”

“Judge not what is best / By pleasure, though to nature seeming meet, / Created, as though art, to nobler end / Holy and pure, conformity divine…”

Latest Reading

I finished Cormac McCarthy’s All the Pretty Horses. I said I would read another of his books even though I wasn’t wild about No Country for Old Men. I wasn’t wild about this one either. It was extremely well-written, though I don’t see the point of some of his eccentricities. The story was mildly compelling, definitely better than the first. But he just didn’t create a world in which I wanted to engulf myself. I could put it down in the middle of the action and not wonder what was going to happen next. It wasn’t a waste of time but wasn’t something I’d necessarily choose to read knowing what I now know. I’ll read one more Cormac McCarthy book, The Road. The story just looks like my type of tale. But we’ll see how it actually is.

Latest Reading

I wrote a review of a Lyndon Johnson biography a few months ago. I recently read another book by the same author, this one on Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt. A friend of mine at work gave it to me and I am grateful. Here are my thoughts:

Doris Kearns Goodwin’s No Ordinary Time is the story Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt during World War II. The book begins with the Nazi invasion of the Benelux countries and ends with the aftermath of FDR’s death. It is the story of how the Roosevelts mobilized America and its allies, militarily and economically, to win the war. It is also the story of how the reality of the war and the Roosevelts’ will shaped America into a broader democracy, one in which the rights of women and minorities were now at least considered. Lastly, the book is something of a biography in flashbacks, with key background elements given at their proper points.

Perhaps the most valuable part of the book is the relationship between Franklin and Eleanor, an odd arrangement of husband and wife that functioned more as a working relationship than a personal one. Indeed, it is an intensely personal look into their lives which includes many alleged affairs. At times the book can feel like a soap opera with all the odd residents of the White House (perhaps 1600 Penn?).

The book is impeccably written and easily draws the reader into the world of the Roosevelts. It is immaculately researched and brimming with every imaginable detail, though this causes it to bog down in places. Because so many themes are tackled, the plot can feel nonlinear, seemingly wandering at times. The most glaring omission, however, is a thesis. Rather than proving a point or adding to the historical debate, the book simply tells a story, providing a snapshot of a unique couple at a critical juncture of history. This makes No Ordinary Time excellent for casual readers of history but will ultimately leave scholars wanting more.