The Incorporation of Sacrifice
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE INCORPORATION OF SACRIFICE: THE AMERICAN AMBULANCE FIELD SERVICE AND THE AMERICAN VOLUNTEER MOTOR-AMBULANCE CORPS, 1914-1917 AXEL JANSEN University of Oregon Eugene, OR, June 1995 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author expresses sincere appreciation to Professor James Mohr for his help in preparation of this manuscript. I also thank Alan Albright for his advice and insights on a subject which has fascinated him for a long time. Furthermore, special thanks are due to William L. Foley and Joseph Brinton III., who provided feedback on my ideas as they evolved during the last year. Andrew Gray has shared his private collection of papers and manuscripts with me, for which I am thankful. I am obliged to the staff of the Service Historique de l’Armeè de Terre in Vincennes, France, as I was granted permission to ac- cess their archives even though the institution was officially closed during that month. I am very grateful to Tania Jastrzembski, who aided me in my research in France. Thanks are due to Sylvie d’Oncieu of the American Hospital of Paris, as well as Nicole Fouché and the staff of the AFS Archives, all of whom advanced my investigation. Finally, I want to express my sincere appreciation to the many individuals who have hosted me on my research trips in France and the Unites States, including Betsy Hansel and Susan Rizwani, both in New York City, Ward Breeze in Stanford, California, Mr. and Mrs. Bicknell in Lexington, Massachusetts, and Isabelle Henin in Paris. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION. .. 1 II. “BETTER THAN PEACE” . 7 “The Price That Has to Be” . 7 The “Ready Lifter, Helper, Healer”. 13 Progressive Conservatism. 26 Perceptions of Ambulancing . 40 III. CONSERVATIVES IN AN ERA OF PATRIOTISM . 43 Great Expectations. 43 Transport Problems . 48 Norton, Harjes, And the Coming of Kean . 56 Of Danger and Duty . 63 “Hook, Bait, and Sinker” . 65 “The End of Our Freedom” . 70 IV. EPILOGUE. 73 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY . 81 LIST OF FIGURES Figures Page 1. Richard Norton . 9 2. A. Piatt Andrew Receives the French Legion of Honor . 9 . 3. Chart of Ambulance Work at the Front . 17 4. AAFS Volunteers Help Loading a Wounded . 18 5. The Winning Edge of Technology . 18 6. Young and Innocent Faces . 19 7. Section 4. 20 8. In the ”Business of Saving Wounded Soldiers“ . 31 9. A. Piatt Andrew and his Aide Stephen Galatti . 32 10. Richard Norton and Section 7. 32 11. “The Ambulance Driver” 38 12. A New Assignment: Work in the AFS Camion Sections . 52 13. AFS Section 30 . 53 14. Musket In Hand: University of California Volunteers Ready for the Front in May 1917 . 53 15. Herman H. Harjes . 57 16. Lieutenant Colonel A. Piatt Andrew. 76 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION "There must be some to find no consolation whatever and some to sneer at those who buy the cheap emotion of sacrifice," Randolph Bourne wrote with a sense of des- peration while his countrymen hastily mobilized for their entry into the blood bath of the European War.1 In June 1917, however, Bourne’s plea had little effect. Not many Ameri- cans sneered at "sacrifice" and instead cherished the ideals of individual honor to be had on the battlefields of France. But just as Bourne argued, in a society which produced pro- gressive ideas of efficiency and experienced unprecedented urbanization and rationaliza- tion, knightly rhetoric seemed out of step with reality. Bitterly, Bourne pointed his finger at the way in which an Eastern elite tied these antiquated ideals to their own ideological program, in an effort to preserve leadership in a new national unity. Indeed, amidst an imagery of chivalry, heroism, crusading adventures, and battling knights, the country in the summer of 1917 displayed an archaic idealism which today seems both distant and alien. As many scholars have observed, the Great War itself would come to separate our own times from the images Randolph Bourne wished his countrymen to abjure. Among the scholars who have portrayed this change most convincingly is Henry F. May.2 The disillusionment of the twenties, May argued, had its roots in the prewar years when Americans held to a sense of cultural stability, a belief in unalterable pro- gress, and the validity of their moral ideals. As cultural and social tensions associated with urbanization and immigration within America rose in the years before 1917, an Eastern elite tied its nineteenth-century values to the Allied cause abroad and propagated preparedness and intervention at home. When many of Bourne’s intellectual companions followed President Woodrow Wilson into the war camp, and thus left Bourne and his in- tellectual opposition essentially to himself, a self-defeating ideological situation had been set up. Intellectuals such as John Dewey rallied around Wilson’s war program to "make the world safe for democracy," thus tying to the Great War their hope for certain success of progressive liberal ideas. With the "lost peace" and the bitter end of the Wilsonian vi- sion at the end of the war, however, this mixture catalyzed the pre-war idealism into the harsher atmosphere of disillusionment characteristic of the twenties. Other historians have taken up May‘s ideas and illustrated their diverse and implicit facets. Michael Pearlman focused his discussion of prewar America on some of those whom May called the "custodians of culture."3 While remaining within the basic frame- work May had provided earlier, Pearlman detailed its key components of class ideology. 1Randolph Bourne, “The War and the Intellectuals,” The Seven Arts 2 (June 1917), in Randolph Bourne, War and the Intellectuals: Essays by Randolph Bourne, 1915-1919, ed. Carl Resek (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1964), 14. 2Henry F. May, The End of American Innocence (New York: Quadrangle Books, 1959). 3Michael Pearlman, To Make America Safe for Democracy Patricians and Preparedness in the Pro- gressive Era (Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1984). 2 East-coast patricians, he argued, advocated military training camps, Universal Military Training, and other preparedness measures as integrative social tools aimed at stabilizing their own guiding role. Pearlman focused his discussion on these conservative forces and charted their path into the twenties and thirties where he found their patriotism stale, rig- idly conservative, and disillusioned with their own country. As both scholars agree, knightly rhetoric had no place in post-war America. Yet while the Great War can be taken as the metaphoric conclusion of nineteenth- century ideals, the war also amplified and installed new ideas in American society, some of which clearly stretch into our own time. One of the sources for these ideas was mobili- zation itself which conferred upon the federal government unprecedented powers. Indeed, war mobilization, despite its frequently improvisational character, bequeathed the Ameri- can people an era more collective in character and national in scope. In the twenties, stan- dardization and large-scale production, as well as an emerging mass culture, would rely on operational skills and ideals used by a recent generation of professionals trained in the war. These managers carried into the twenties a new understanding of the value of mar- keting, large-scale production for national and international markets, and standardization as the motto of industrial efficiency and maximizing profit. As David Kennedy has observed, managers of war mobilization as well as many others of their generation were acutely aware that they negotiated between individual and collective eras.4 Robert Wiebe, furthermore, has pointed to the bureaucratic war appara- tus as the symbolic initiator of a new mode of control which sounded the theme for new ideological tools, surpassing their predecessors in size and efficiency.5 As Wiebe pointed out, the continuity of war policies into the twenties must be attributed to such World War I managers as Bernard Baruch and Herbert Hoover. Thus, while May pointed to the end of an innocent idealism as American troops boarded the steamers for France, Wiebe stressed that while the war stripped the twenties of the earlier idealism, it provided American society with a staff of professional administrators, cherishing efficiency as a tool to achieve corporate growth, and cooperating with the government to achieve their aims. Yet while May, Kennedy, and Wiebe discuss different aspects of the war, they all acknowledge that World War I represented a significant watershed in American social life. While many changes were implicit in prewar events, the Great War itself, at least metaphorically, separated the nineteenth century from our own days. In this thesis, I introduce two patrician characters who, at the beginning of the war in Europe, took their nineteenth-century ideals from a proper and studious environment of New England across the Atlantic to the mud of war-torn France three thousand miles away. Two and a half years before their own country would enter the "European War," Abram Piatt Andrew and Richard Norton already organized volunteer ambulance sec- tions along the Western front. From 1914 until 1917, they attracted more than 2,500 American volunteers, many of whom were lured to France by prospects of danger and the kind of sacrifice Bourne despised. The front and the firing line provided them with a 4David Kennedy, Over Here: The First World War and American Society (Oxford: Oxford Univer- sity Press, 1980), 153-54. 5Robert Wiebe, The Search for Order, 1877-1920 (New York: Hill & Wang, 1967). 3 modern "frontier," challenging and, supposedly, baptizing the individual volunteer as he steered his ambulance through heavy shelling. In their understanding of what their ambu- lance service meant, both Andrew and Norton represented many ideas which where then characteristic of a conservative Eastern elite. Their traditional liberal individualism, which was one of these conservative char- acteristics, was best depicted by their voluntary work behind the trenches.