An exhausting theme

[Rob Wick]

Roger's post on Sidney Blumenthal got me thinking about something which I've pondered for quite a while.

In 1934, James G. Randall presented a paper at a joint meeting of the American Historical Association and what was then known as the Mississippi Valley Historical Association. His paper was titled "Has the Lincoln Theme Been Exhausted?" As you can read, Randall answered a resounding "no" spurred mainly by his distaste for amateur historians and popularizers.

In the inaugural issue of the Journal of the Abraham Lincoln Association, Mark E. Neely Jr., answered Randall's call with his "The Lincoln Theme Since Randall's Call."

I will let those interested read both articles, but what I want to explore is this. Are we getting to the point of saturation where Lincoln books are concerned? Is a three-volume (at 500 pages each!) history of Lincoln and politics necessary? Of course, each generation has to interpret Lincoln based on its own experience and intellectual underpinnings, but at what point is one more book one too many?

In the field of history there are two general tracks. The first is popular history, written generally by journalists, although some academic historians fall into that category due to their accessible writing style and past sales. Obviously, Blumenthal would fall into the popular category. Historically speaking, Carl Sandburg and Ida Tarbell would also fit into that genre. Most of the time, popular historians write general biographies, although sometimes writers such as Harold Holzer will write what would be best described as a monograph, like his book on Lincoln as president-elect or on the Cooper Union speech. I say best described, because generally the definition of a monograph is a book on a single subject written by an academic historian.

The second track is academic. More likely you will find these authors writing monographs, although general biography is usually written by an academic historian who doesn't have to worry about getting tenure. That's why David Herbert Donald or Michael Burlingame could write full-scale biographies. Most academic historians hold general biography in disdain, as do tenure committees.

I dip my toes in both waters when it comes to buying books on Lincoln. Most people buy the more popular books, as it fits closer to their own interests. Someone interested in the Lincoln-Douglas debates in passing will likely get Allen Guelzo's history and bypass Harry Jaffa's, although Guelzo, by his own admission, owes much to Jaffa. There's nothing wrong with that given that most people's interest in Lincoln is more along the lines of a "buff" rather than in scholarly works.

I use this only to make a point. In academic writing, there will always be fresh interpretations whether it's based on new evidence or a reevaluation of the old. No work can ever be said to be above revision. Every so often an academic will synthesize the current work on Lincoln to bring out another biography. It seems to me it's in the popular sphere where the glut is truly felt. Do we really need three volumes on Lincoln's politics?

Best
Rob

[L Verge]

Since I am not a student of general Lincoln studies, may I ask if a politician or political insider by profession has ever written a book on Lincoln from that perspective? Am I correct in assuming that Sidney's may be a first? I think it might be refreshing to hear what a politician has to say about one of the most complex politicians in American history. Historians' analyses turned me off years ago. David Herbert Donald's book is the only one that I even made a dent in -- and still didn't finish.

I had lunch with Mr. Blumenthal and Dr. Terry Alford over a year ago. Sidney is right in saying that no one except his wife and dog knows what's in his book -- and now, maybe a publisher. We had interesting conversations, but nothing clear cut as to what his views consist of. The only thing concrete was his acceptance of the fact that I can't stand Bill Clinton. He assured me that I would like him if I ever met him. He also has definite views on the assassination of Lincoln - but he never divulged what they are.

[Rob Wick]

I'm not aware of any politician that's written a study of Lincoln as politician.* Certainly, both popular and academic biographies have a great deal about it, as it was such a great factor in Lincoln's life. I'm just not really sure what special insight he will bring to it, and three volumes seems excessive. Time will tell.

Best
Rob

*Just thought of one. Albert J. Beveridge's biography of Lincoln.

[L Verge]

What was Beveridge's political background?

[Rob Wick]

United States Senator from Indiana from 1899 to 1911. He also wanted to be president.

Best
Rob

[L Verge]

Aside from the fact that he shifted to the Progressive Party until it died, I might have liked Beveridge for his views on big government - as cited in Wikipedia: "In the twilight of his life, he came to repudiate some of the earlier expansion of governmental power that he had championed in his earlier career. In one notable address, delivered before the Sons of the Revolution's annual dinner in June 1923, Beveridge decried the growth of the regulatory state and the proliferation of regulatory bodies, bureaus and commissions. 'America would be better off as a country and Americans happier and more prosperous as a people,' he suggested, 'if half of our Government boards, bureaus and commissions were abolished, hundreds of thousands of our Government officials, agents and employees were discharged and two-thirds of our Government regulations, restrictions and inhibitions were removed.'" That was said by Beveridge nearly 100 years ago; boy, think what he would have to say about the state of our central government now!

I also read that his two-volume bio of Lincoln was incomplete at the time of his death, and the remainder of his research was turned over to Carl Sandburg. The article implied that there was enough there for one or two more volumes. I guess Sidney is not stretching it by doing three volumes...

[Rob Wick]

The part about Sandburg is incorrect. Sandburg and Beveridge had a hearty dislike of each other, and Beveridge would have never allowed Sandburg access to his material.

Plus, Beveridge's book was an overall biography. It didn't just focus on Lincoln as politician.

Best
Rob

[L Verge]

The article specifically stated that Beveridge's widow turned the material over to Sandburg. I am also not sure that Sidney's book will focus on just Lincoln the politician. I inserted my thoughts that it would be interesting to have a politician writing about a supreme politician.

[Rob Wick]

Beveridge would have never wanted his wife to do such a thing, and given that after his death she created a cottage industry of remembrance where he was concerned, she would have known that. Plus, there are no letters in either Sandburg's papers or hers between the pair. Worthington C. Ford completed Beveridge's work and would have likely been the one she would have entrusted to complete the other volumes.

Best
Rob

[L Verge]

Since I previously knew Albert J. Beveridge's name only as a Lincoln biographer, I decided to do a little research on my own. I found this a very interesting site: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jala/2629860...w=fulltext and hope that it opens correctly for you.

It's lengthy, but I came to the conclusion that I probably would have admired Mr. Beveridge -- not enough to read his two volumes (full work never finished) on Lincoln, however, and certainly not his four volumes on John Marshall.

[Joe Di Cola]

(11-21-2013 09:44 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  United States Senator from Indiana from 1899 to 1911. He also wanted to be president.

Best
Rob

Rob,

The only fly in the ointment in DKG's new book so far is Beveridge being identified as a senator from Illinois. How that was missed I don't know.

Joe

[Rob Wick]

Interesting Joe. In his book on John Hay, John Taliaferro had Beveridge as Roosevelt's vice-president.

John Braeman wrote a very good biography on Beveridge.

Best
Rob

[LincolnMan]

Interesting thread Rob. Love your avatar!

[Rob Wick]

Thanks, Bill. I appreciate it.

Best
Rob

[Mike B.]

(12-02-2013 09:33 AM)Rob Wick Wrote:  Thanks, Bill. I appreciate it.

Best
Rob

I actually think the first volume of Beveridge's work (remember he had access to Herndon/Weik material before others did) is a tremendous work as far as writing goes. You really get the feel of living in a cabin and so forth. And his analysis is well thought out.

The second volume, I think he goes a little off the track because he takes the focus off Lincoln for large parts of it.

Had he lived I think his chapters on Lincoln's Presidency would have been very well done.