Saturday, February 14, 2015

The American Political Tradition and the Men Who Made It

Richard Hofstadter The American Political Tradition and the Men Who Made It. New York: Vintage Books, 1989, 1973, 1948

Hofstadter's book is justly regarded as a classic, and nearly 70 years after its initial publication it remains a compelling and readable interpretation of American political culture. The twelve chapters each focus on a particular figure, except for the first chapter on the Founders (which serves to establish the basis for the political culture which Hofstadter believes has a certain continuity through American history) and Chapter 7, "The Spoilsmen: An Age of Cynicism" which focuses on the politics of the Gilded Age (it culminates in a somewhat damning but not unsympathetic portrait of Grover Cleveland).

This edition is a 1989 reprint of the 1973 edition, which includes a forward by Christopher Lasch. In it, Lasch addresses the characterization of this book as an example of the "consensus" school of historiography to task, by pointing out that Hofstadter was no conservative; that he came to his conclusions from a left-wing perspective and that his understanding of the American political tradition of one of consensus was hardly without implied criticism or fault.

Indeed, it is hard to see how Hofstadter could have been understood as someone celebrating this aspect of American political culture (to the degree which one accepts that his conclusions are valid) given the degree to which his portraits pull these mostly venerated figures down to earth. Even the most sympathetic portrait--that of Lincoln--is moderated with a closing touch of tragedy; Lincoln's belief in the myth of the "self-made man", Hofstadter argues, ultimately let him down--the pressures of being President during a time of war, death, and sacrifice was too high a price for a man of such keen moral sensitivity. The prize he worked towards was a bitter one, and it would kill him.

Perhaps the arguments over whether Hofstadter is "really" a consensus historian are now dated; perhaps his book is now best approached as an important development in American historiography than as a vital interpretation. But perhaps not--Hofstadter's reader-friendly prose can still find audiences today, and surely there are many young readers who are hungry to dig beneath the cynical and tired hagiography surrounding so much of America's political history without succumbing to cheap radicalism and glib revisionism. There is criticism here, but also humanity--Hofstadter pulls these "great men" back down to Earth, but he doesn't thrown them down into the mud. By stripping away myth, he allows the actual people to stand before us.