9 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
The Lincoln Interpreters, February 19, 2004
This review is from: The Historian's Lincoln: Pseudohistory, Psychohistory, and History (Paperback)
"The Historian's Lincoln" is a collection of essays coming out of a Lincoln Symposium at the 175th anniversary of his birth. It offers a great deal of insight about Lincoln and about the Historical consciousness of the mid 1980s.
One of the things I like about this volume is the commentary and criticism about almost every individual article, sometimes including counter reactions. The reader benefits from the debate and critical analysis of the each essay.
The book has five parts. The First, "The Common People's Lincoln", is about Abraham Lincoln as seen in public. A Collection of photos from 'The Face of Lincoln' prefaces a discussion of the Public perception of "Honest Abe". For instance, Lincoln's growing a beard following his victory in the 1860 election kept photographers interested in his appearance.
Also in this section, "Abe Lincoln Laughing" by P.M.Zall argues that Lincoln used his sense of humor and the funny stories to win over his audience and get his message across. The critique, by Mark E. Neely, is that the humor was part of Lincoln's character, not an instrument for appeasing crowds. "His humor was a political liability with large segments of the populace... [the] fallacy that underlies much of Zall's paper - ... the "instrumental" view of Lincoln's humor" (p.29).
The second part of the book is titled "Ideology and Politics" and discusses some main issues of Lincoln's policies and presidency. In "Lincoln and the Economics of the American Dream", Editor Gabor S. Boritt argues that the American Dream "the prosperity and liberties of the people" in Lincoln's words, were the goals Lincoln cared most about, and he defended the Union as the vehicle for it (p. 100).
The Critiques of this interesting essay are not very convincing. M. E. Bradford elaborates on how unfairly he has been treated by critics. His claims: Lincoln did prefer Freedom over slavery, constitutional rights over Tyranny and peace over war, "other things being equal" ,but he stuck by his ideals only so long as they "fed fuel into that little engine that knew no rest, his political ambition" (p.110). His argument consists of a few lawsuits Lincoln filed which were related to Slavery, his anti-Black sayings, and lots of Latin words supposed to impress the reader.
Phillip S. Paludan's critique is somewhat more substantial, but it amounts to, essentially, stating his dislike for the industrial revolution.
The second essay, Glen E. Thurow's "Abraham Lincoln and American Political Religion" deals with a contradiction between Lincoln's Gettysburg address and his second inaugural. In the Gettysburg address, Lincoln says the Civil War is a test: whether democracy can survive. It is a problem of Free Will - Americans must prove their ability to defend the Jeffersonian values of equality. The second inaugural deals with predestination - God's justice in making Americans pay for their sin of slavery, even if "every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn by the sword" (Lincoln, p. 128). Thus the inaugural, claiming that the Civil War is the unraveling of God's justice, undermines Lincoln's claim that it as a test. Thurow's solution - the second inaugural "transcends" the Gettysburg address. One is from the point of view of the nation, the other from that of God. Thurow argues that "These perspectives do not abolish each other; neither expresses the whole truth" (p. 140). You may find this more convincing then I do - it seems to me that this is merely one of the inherent contradictions in postulations about God - if the Lord is righteous, free will could not exist.
David A. Nichols's "Lincoln and the Indians" discusses the relations between the Sixteenth president and Native Americans. Essentially, Lincoln was well meaning but too busy with the Civil War to help American Indians, and his racist views affected him.
The weakest of the essay in this section is Lawanda Cox's "Lincoln and Black Freedom" arguing that Lincoln, though racist, was a great friend of the blacks.
The third section, titled "The Psychohistorian's Lincoln", is about Psychohistory, a historical method that was briefly popular in the 1980s. It attempts to use the insights of psychoanalysis in History. Psychohistory seems to have gone away with the eighties, and if these essays are any indication, that is no great loss for scholarship.
The psychohistorians make claims which are sometimes surprising, but usually merely silly. Charles B. Strozier argues that "after 1854 [Lincoln] found his private concerns with intimacy and a troubled union [his marriage] reflected in the country" (p. 405). Dwight G. Anderson argues that the dead President Lincoln saw in his dream in April 1865 was George Washington, and that Lincoln was his "ghostly assassin" (p. 254). In a slightly saner mold, George B. Forgie argues that Lincoln believed that the real threat to the Union was not the South, but a few evil conspirators in the leadership of the Democratic party, and that when the young Lincoln argued that the threat for the republic was in talented, over ambitious men who would turn into Tyrants, " [It] seems obvious enough: Lincoln had himself in mind when he composed the entire speech."(p.296).
The section titled "Assassinations" deals with Lincoln's murder in history and historiography, and particularly with the conspiracy theories that grew after the Death, believing everyone from secretary of war Stanton the Freemasons to be behind the assassination.
The Final section, "The Lincoln Biographies" contains book reviews by Richard N. Current and Don E. Fehernbacher. Current is enthusiastic about Stephen Oates's "With Malice Towards None", but argues that Oates makes Lincoln more of a radical then he really was. Feherenbacher's discussion of Gore Vidal's Lincoln is sadly all too brief, but it is a fascinating if inconclusive discussion about the criteria upon which historical works of fiction should be evaluated.
'The Historian's Lincoln' is a fascinating read, and even the essays about Psychohistory, which are hardly illuminating about Lincoln, tell us much about the Historian of the title.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
