Centre for the Study of the United States Undergraduate Journal of American Studies Vol

Centre for the Study of the United States Undergraduate Journal of American Studies Vol. VI 2010-2011 Centre for the Study of the United States Undergraduate Journal of American Studies Vol. VI 2010-2011 Co-Editors in Chief Emily Debono Adam Rogers-Green Associate Editors Aubrey Abaya Matthew Kim Emily McNally Maia Muttoo Design Editors Matthew Kim Nigel Soederhuysen Copy Editor Stella Kyriakakis Printed By The Printing House. Toronto, 2011. 1 Undergraduate Journal of American Studies The University of Toronto Undergraduate Journal of American Studies is published annually by the Centre for the Study of the United States at the Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto. The opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of the editorial masthead. Undergraduate Journal of American Studiess 2 Table of Contents Page Essay Author CFI’s Industrial Bulletin: Creating Company Spirit, or 7 Allegra Fryxell Constructing American Culture? 23 Poker, Chainsaws, and Drugs: Snapshots of America in the 1960s Jonathan Boerger 29 Thomas Hobbes and Benjamin Franklin: Man the Machine Miriam Helmers 39 Bayard Rustin: “The Oneness of the Human Family” Dora Chan 47 “PBSUCCESS” and the Bay of Pigs: The Dangers of Precedent Conor Doyle Psychiatric Therapy and Digital Space an Analysis of the 63 Douglas Robb Architectural Implications of Virtual Iraq Sinners in the Hands of an Angry Gore: Jonathan Edwards’ 69 Emily Estelle Belanger Legacy Today The Influence of the U.S. Armed Service on Two Presidential 73 Ariel Garneau Assassins Black Female Entrepreneurs vs. The Masculine Structure of 87 Kaitlyn Majesky Black Business in the 1920s Racy Hygiene: How Eugenics Shaped the Everyday World of 95 Lauren Kilgour Sanitary Napkins A Sea of Change: Water and the Transformation of the American 107 Sara Farb Man 113 The Godfather: A Case Study of the Businessman Svebor Pavic 117 Assassination and the American Judicial System Alex Treiber 3 Undergraduate Journal of American Studies John Atherton Downtown Kodiak, 1965 Film Scan, 1532 x 980 www.flickr.com Editor’s Note and Acknowledgments American Studies is a diverse and dynamic academic discipline, and this is both an asset and an obstacle in the production of an undergraduate journal. Our effort to display the best of this discipline was a collaboration which many individuals helped bring to fruition. Firstly, we would like to thank everyone who contributed to this year’s edition of the Journal. We believe our final selection represents a cross-section of outstanding American Studies students writing from the diversity of methodological perspectives that are required to better understand the American experience. We received an unprecedented number of submissions this year, and to choose papers that complement one another from a pool of excellent submissions, we relied on an outstanding group of undergraduate students. We are endlessly grateful to our editorial board—Arielle, Maia, Emily, Aubrey, and Matt—for their enthusiasm and willingness to put their significant talents to use on the Journal. We would like to thank Matt, in particular, for designing the final product. A very big thank you also goes to Nigel Soederhuysen who helped out tremendously with the final stages of the production process. Without his hard work this year’s journal would not look anything like what you have in front of you. To Emily and Maia—we are confident that you will make wonderful co-Editors in Chief next year, and we are thrilled to be able to leave next year’s edition in your extremely capable hands. All of our work would be for naught without the enduring support of the Centre for the Study of the United States and the U.S. Consulate General in Toronto. Our sincerest thanks go to Stella Kyriakakis, for her copy editing and constant willingness to help, and to Elspeth Brown, for her guidance and encouragement. We are especially grateful to the U.S. Consulate General in Toronto, and in particular, Joan Sumner, for their continuing support of the Journal. Without their contribution, the Journal’s production would not be possible, and we feel privileged to have been able to work with them. And finally, we would like to give a special mention to Arielle Arnold-Levene. If the fates had conspired differently, it would be her writing this acknowledgment. Set to be the Editor-in-Chief for this year, she, unfortunately, had to scale back her responsibilities for personal reasons. We endeavoured to fill her shoes as faithfully as possible, and hope that this edition of the Journal lives up to her expectations. 5 Undergraduate Journal of American Studies Nick Sarebi Bodie, California, 2010 Digital, 3264 x 2448 www.flickr.com CFI’s Industrial Bulletin: Creating Company Spirit, or Constructing American Culture? Allegra Fryxell “A square deal for each and all,” proclaimed the logo of the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company (CFI) beneath an inventive re-interpretation of CFI’s acronym as “Co-operation, Friendship and Industry.” However, CFI’s effusive optimism about corporate relations was complicated by the competing interests of stockholders, directors, officers, and employees included under the umbrella of “cooperation.” The workforce of Colorado Fuel & Iron Company was certainly small in size compared to that employed by U.S. Steel, General Motors, or Ford, but CFI was nonetheless pioneering the field of industrial relations in the 1920s. CFI’s circular logo was printed in every issue of the company magazine, Industrial Bulletin, which was created in response to the highly publicized Ludlow Massacre of 1914 at CFI’s coal mine in Ludlow, Colorado. From 1919 to 1929, the company strove to improve labour-management relations using the Industrial Bulletin. While the Bulletin functioned as a mouthpiece for management, it also formulated an “American” identity that privileged certain ways of life at the expense of others—often the traditions and identifications of Mexican and European immigrants, who made up a significant portion of CFI’s workforce. Through language and skill development classes, photographs of architectural improvements, and articles relating to citizenship rights, white Protestant traditions, landscape identification, and personal improvement, CFI engaged in a managerial project that sought to discipline the cultural practices of workers in order to inculcate a form of “Americanism” that made these workers amenable to the aims and interests of CFI’s owners and managers. The Colorado Fuel and Iron Company was formed through the 1892 merger of the Colorado Coal Company and the Colorado Fuel Company. It became the first large steelmaker in the Midwest, employing fifteen thousand people (ten percent of the state workforce) and producing thirty percent of all coal mined in Colorado. Its sister company, Minnequa Steel Works at Pueblo, Colorado, produced two percent of all American steel. In 1903, CFI came under the direction of the Rockefeller family. John D. Rockefeller 7 Undergraduate Journal of American Studies Jr. served on the Board of Directors, leading CFI against the United Mine Workers of America in 1913 to 1914.1 As the majority shareholder, Rockefeller responded to the bloody aftermath of the Ludlow strike by enforcing an “Employee Representation Plan” (ERP) designed to encourage cooperation between labour and management.2 The ERP, alternatively known as the “Industrial Representation” or “Rockefeller Plan, ” was designed as a “union-avoidance strategy” to increase publicity for CFI whilst ensuring minimal interference in their conditions of employment.3 Rockefeller hoped the ERP would improve industrial relations (and hence CFI’s productivity) by introducing new channels of communication, while simultaneously reifying the labour/management distinction.4 Workers did gain significant benefits through negotiation between their elected representatives, each of whom represented one hundred and fifty employees, and management. Each “joint meeting,” called by the company president at least once every four months, was divided into four committees—Safety and Accidents; Recreation and Education; Sanitation, Health, and Housing; and Industrial Cooperation and Conciliation. Employee representatives also had the power to initiate joint meetings to discuss complaints.5 CFI’s first foray into employee publications, Camp & Plant (1901-1905), was superseded by Industrial Bulletin in 1915, as part of Rockefeller’s master plan to improve industrial relations.6 Under the supervision of Dr. R. W. Corwin from the Sociological Department, Camp & Plant promoted assimilation through social activities at Colorado mining camps and Minnequa Steelworks.7 It educated employees about cultures within CFI’s workforce, and published articles in German, Spanish, and Italian to ensure effective communication. In this way, Camp & Plant overtly focused on different ethnicities within CFI’s “community” and specifically labeled workers as American, Southern European, Eastern European, or Mexican based upon their language of choice.8 In contrast, by the 1920s, CFI’s management used Industrial Bulletin to disseminate the company’s labour policies. There was no discussion of ethnic “primitivism” or recognition of alternate languages; all articles were printed in English, and individuals were rarely identified by their country of origin (“German,” “Spanish,” etc.). In tandem with its welfare programs and the ERP, the magazine ostensibly served to demonstrate that the dispersed corporation was personally concerned about its employees. However, this

Load more