Your Unbiased Academy at Work
It is fitting, perhaps, that Barack Obama has been compared time and again to Lincoln. Obama does not face the breakup of the United States, but he does face rogue states (i.e. Arizona and its immigration law), racial ideologues (Google the name "Tom Tancredo," a former representative from Colorado), and incipient secessionists (Gov. Rick Perry has suggested that Texas could secede). Tea Party enthusiasts denounce Obama with nearly the same fervor that secessionists denounced Lincoln; like the secessionists, they, too, are supported by a small but vocal and affluent group of predominantly white, middle-aged men.
Writes Louis P. Masur, chair of American studies at Trinity College in Connecticut and author of The Civil War: A Concise History, forthcoming from Oxford University Press, in the Chronicle of Higher Education.
I hope that's a leaden joke, but I see no sign of that.
I'm not one who thinks someone's personal politics are indicative of the quality of scholarship they produce, any more than they are the ability to tune up a car or write a novel. That said, this kind of facile, goofball analogy does make me less likely to investigate his Concise History further. As does his praise of a book by Eric Foner without mentioning how it fits into Foner's general historiography of America, which is heavily laden with left-wing baggage. Again, not that Foner might not have written the great intellectual biography of Lincoln, but for a guy who's freighted most of his books with radical politics, it'd be nice to know if his sympathy for Lincoln is out of a perceived radicalism or if he's taken a holiday from polemic and simply immersed himself in the man and his times. I certainly know the way I'd bet.
- Comment (9)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
May '10
Re: Your Unbiased Academy at Work
By "compared to Lincoln time and again" I assume he means twice.
Certainly wouldn't decline to read a Stephen King novel due to political disagreements; the man is a gifted storyteller. But in judging historians, I think consideration of their biases is warranted.
Aug '10
Re: Your Unbiased Academy at Work
One can't help but laugh with the metaphors of the past running into the fantasizing of the MSM . They sound like a group of ectomorphic noncheerleaders with cell phones (albeit old ones).
This is too easy! Fish in the barrel.
Jul '10
Re: Your Unbiased Academy at Work
If I recall, and please correct me if I'm wrong Bill, states actually seceded upon Lincoln's election. Somebody suggesting that a state could secede doesn't quite carry the same weight.
But, seeing that the current President's critics are also "predominantly white, middle-aged men," I suppose it's a fair comparison.
Hey, do we have demographic beakdowns for leftist history departments?
http://internet2.trincoll.edu/facProfiles/Default.aspx?fid=1239401
Re: Your Unbiased Academy at Work
Foner's a great historian, whatever his ideological biases, and so obviously an important one that I'm not sure it's incumbent upon all reviewers to qualify references to him with that kind of caveat. Foner entered the annals of historians who deserve to have their scholarship mentioned well before their baggage with the publication of Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men--and in fact it was Foner who destroyed crude Marxist analyses of the antebellum Republican Party with that book. The Obama-Lincoln comparison is ridiculous, but taking Foner seriously isn't.
Jul '10
Re: Your Unbiased Academy at Work
Here in Marin County, our Tea Party marches with the Stars and Bars and whistles "Dixie".
We were planning on bombarding the Presidio at Monterey, but it turns out you can't tow heavy artillery with a Prius.
Re: Your Unbiased Academy at Work
Fair enough, Claire, though I'd still consider at least mentioning how his well-known politics do or do not appear in the book. Would you consider the same principle to apply to, say, Hobsbawm?
Re: Your Unbiased Academy at Work
Depends on the context--when I referred to him in TINA I did think that had to be explained. I'd probably mention it in a review, but I don't think it's an egregious example of bias to fail to mention it.
Re: Your Unbiased Academy at Work
I discussed an even more egregious passage from the Masur review yesterday. There is, by the way, a fine, highly critical review of Foner’s latest book by Allan Guelzo in a recent issue of The Wall Street Journal.
May '10
Re: Your Unbiased Academy at Work
For what it's worth, most of what he says is nuts, but he hits uncomfortably close to home on Tancredo.