DOCSLIB.ORG

The Consensus Constitution

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Consensus Constitution University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Journal Articles Faculty Scholarship 2011 The Consensus Constitution Justin Driver Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/journal_articles Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Justin Driver, "The Consensus Constitution," 89 Texas Law Review 755 (2011). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE CONSENSUS CONSTITUTION Justin Driver* An ascendant view within constitutional law contends that the Supreme Court almost inevitably interprets the Constitution in a manner that reflects the "consensus" beliefs of the American public. Given that many of the Constitution's key provisions contain indeterminate language, this view claims that Supreme Court Justices imbue those phrases with the prevailing sentiments of the times. This increasingly influential approach-one that is articulated by some of the most prominent voices within modern legal academia-aims to correct what it deems a romantic myth regarding the Court's ability to protect minority rights. This Article challenges the ascendant view by identifying and critiquing the defining features of what it labels "consensus constitutionalism." De- spite being grounded in history, consensus constitutionalism reveals no familiaritywith a defining debate thatflourished among American historians that stretches back to the 1950s-a debate that resulted in conflict-based history supplanting its consensus-based counterpart. Consensus constitu- tionalism offers an unsatisfying understandingof history, as it obscures the deep cleavages that often divide Americans regarding constitutional questions. Consensus constitutionalism also offers an unsatisfying understanding of law, as it invites a foreordained conception of constitu- tional decisionmaking and an anemic notion of the Court's countermajoritarian capabilities. Reexamining Brown v. Board of Education and Loving v. Virginia, this Article provides an alternate approach to exploring legal history-contested constitutionalism-which honors the significance of both ideological conflict and the Court's counter- majoritariancapacities. * Assistant Professor, The University of Texas School of Law. I received particularly helpful comments on earlier drafts from Katharine Bartlett, Stuart Banner, Mitchell Berman, Alan Brinkley, Alfred Brophy, Josh Chafetz, Sherry Colb, Karen Engle, Laura Ferry, Cary Franklin, Joseph Fishkin, William Forbath, David Garrow, Jacob Gersen, Julius Getman, Jamal Greene, Ariela Gross, Lani Guinier, Pratheepan Gulasekaram, Pamela Harris, Bert Huang, Amy Kapczynski, Sanford Levinson, Jennifer Laurin, Richard Markovits, David Oshinsky, James T. Patterson, Lucas A. Powe, Jr., David Pozen, John Robertson, David Rabban, Lawrence Sager, Suzanna Sherry, Reva Siegel, Kevin Stack, Jordan Steiker, Gerald Torres, and Mark Tushnet. I also received useful feedback from faculty workshop participants at the University of Chicago, the University of Texas, and Vanderbilt University. Charles Mackel, Michael Raupp, Christine Tamer, and Mark Wiles provided excellent research assistance. 756 Texas Law Review [Vol. 89:755 Introduction Fifteen years ago, Professor Michael Klarman issued a clarion call urging his fellow law professors to examine the Supreme Court's twentieth- century constitutional decisions from an external vantage point.1 In contrast to scholarship that analyzes doctrinal developments in hermetic isolation, the "external perspective" places judicial decisions within their larger social and political context.2 Although externalists long ago succeeded in illuminating some nineteenth-century constitutional decisions,3 Klarman lamented what he perceived as the method's near abandonment regarding constitutional de- cisions of more recent vintage.4 In Klarman's assessment, legal academics- besotted by the Warren Court's landmark decisions-rejected externalism because they were dedicated to advancing the wrongheaded notion that the Court possessed a robust capacity for issuing decisions that protect margin- alized groups. "It is my belief that the myth of the Court as countermajoritarian savior is largely responsible for this gap in the literature," Klarman contended.5 "It is time for constitutional historians to explode that myth, to identify and describe the parameters within which judi- cial review actually operates, and to create a richer and more credible account of the twentieth century's civil rights and civil liberties revolutions." 6 In many respects, it would appear that legal academia has heeded Klarman's call. External examinations of twentieth-century constitutional law, though never as neglected as Klarman suggested, now constitute nothing less than a dominant mode of understanding Supreme Court decisionmaking. Indeed, many of the most distinguished professors writing today view modern constitutional law through the external lens. 1. Michael J. Klarman, Rethinking the Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Revolutions, 82 VA. L. REV. 1, 67 (1996). 2. Id. at 66-67. 3. See id. at 66 (citing DON E. FEHRENBACHER, THE DRED ScoTr CASE: ITS SIGNIFICANCE IN AMERICAN LAW AND POLITICS (1978); STANLEY I. KUTLER, PRIVILEGE AND CREATIVE DESTRUCTION: THE CHARLES RIVER BRIDGE CASE (1971)). 4. Id at 66. 5. Id at 67. 6. Id 7. The Court's shifting response to New Deal legislation-perhaps the most closely examined period of twentieth-century constitutional law-has often been attributed to external forces. Many scholars have suggested that President Franklin D. Roosevelt's outside political pressure played a role in Justice Owen Roberts's "switch in time." See, e.g., William E. Leuchtenburg, Franklin D. Roosevelt's Supreme Court "Packing" Plan, in ESSAYS ON THE NEW DEAL 69, 69-95 (Harold M. Hollingsworth & William F. Holmes eds., 1969). Professor Barry Cushman's account of this period is revisionist precisely because it seeks to understand the Court's response to the New Deal from an internal, law-based perspective rather than an external, politics-based perspective. See Barry Cushman, Rethinking the New Deal Court, 80 VA. L. REV. 201, 206-07, 257-61 (1994). 8. See infra notes 79-83 and accompanying text. 2011] THE CONSENSUS CONSTITUTION 757 In other respects, though, the clarion call has not yet been answered-or even fully heard. Though Klarman sought "a richer and more credible account" of constitutional decisions from the last century,9 the leading scholarship employing externalism is notable for neither its richness nor its credibility. Today's external legal history is marred by what this Article labels "consensus constitutionalism," the claim that the Supreme Court interprets the Constitution in a manner that reflects the "consensus" views of the American public. This view is exemplified in recent major works by prominent legal academics including Klarman,'0 Barry Friedman," Jeffrey Rosen,'12 and Cass Sunstein.13 Those scholars-with their fixations on societal "consensus"-paint American legal history with a disfiguringly broad brush, obscuring the deep divisions that typify public response to con- stitutional questions. This consensus school of constitutional interpretation results in scholarship with two primary deficiencies. First, it makes for bad history. Second, it makes for worse law. The flight to consensus among law professors during the last decade eerily echoes a movement to consensus among history professors that began in the wake of World War II. In reaction to what they asserted was an over- emphasis on the role that conflict played in prior examinations of the past, a group of scholars led by Richard Hofstadter contended that historical inquiries should instead focus upon American commonality.14 The search among historians for unity rather than division burned incandescent during the 1950s, but its heyday proved brief. In 1959, historian John Higham wrote a devastating article deriding the "consensus school" of American history for its homogeneous conception of the past, a conception that elided the profound disagreements that have shaped the nation's history. 5 Higham's article succeeded in restoring conflict to its central place in histori- cal interpretation, ultimately convincing even the founder of consensus-based history of the school's severe methodological limitations.16 9. Klarman, supra note 1, at 67. 10. MICHAEL J. KLARMAN, FROM JIM CROW TO CIVIL RIGHTS: THE SUPREME COURT AND THE STRUGGLE FOR RACIAL EQUALITY (2004). 11. BARRY FRIEDMAN, THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE: How PUBLIC OPINION HAS INFLUENCED THE SUPREME COURT AND SHAPED THE MEANING OF THE CONSTITUTION (2009). 12. JEFFREY ROSEN, THE MOST DEMOCRATIC BRANCH: How THE COURTS SERVE AMERICA (2006). 13. CASS R. SUNSTEIN, A CONSTITUTION OF MANY MINDS: WHY THE FOUNDING DOCUMENT DOESN'T MEAN WHAT IT MEANT BEFORE (2009). 14. See infra text accompanying notes 27-30. 15. See John Higham, The Cult of the "American Consensus": Homogenizing Our History, 27 COMMENT. 93, 94 (1959) ("[C]urrent scholarship is carrying out a massive grading operation to smooth over America's social convulsions."). 16. See infra text accompanying notes 60-72. 758 Texas Law Review [Vol. 89:755 Although consensus constitutionalists (to varying extents) ground their scholarship in historical matters, their work bears no trace of the central de- bate that roiled history departments for
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Human Condition
    Winter 2008-09 The Human Condition and Our Time Here on Earth Winter 2008-09 Volume 7, Issue 2 The College of Liberal Arts at The University of Texas at Austin publishes Life and Letters for its community of scholars, alumni and friends. Editor Christian Clarke Cásarez Life&Letters Associate Editor Jennifer McAndrew Art Director 2 Dave Holston Message from the Dean Children and Family Psychology and Pro Bene Meritis Mental Health Donna Coffelt Evolution and Ancestry 13 29 Bringing Up Baby: 21 Song of Solomon: Designers 3 Researchers Delve into The Aging of America A Life Full of Joy Anne-Charlotte Patterson the Psychological World and Philosophy Michele Myette TB Today: Anthropologist of Children Discovers Oldest Case of In Treatment: The Birth of Re-emerging Disease Psychotherapy in America 31 Sociologist Investigates David Oshinsky’s America Staff Writers United States’ Hight Infant Psychology as Commodity Tracy Mueller ‘Beautiful’ Bones: Lucy Mortality Rate the Famous Fossil Why It’s Time for Scientists Should the Mississippi Jessica Sinn to Market for the Masses Files Have Been Reopened? Salem: Scientists Unearth Love and Relationships Intern Earliest Child Skeleton Humanities 16 33 Scott Fulford 5 The Language of Love: 23 Dr. Denton Cooley Deep Roots? New DNA From Diaries to Online English Takes the Stage Takes Innovation Contributing Writers Tests May Reveal Your Chats, Writing about Your as Presidential Priority to Heart Vive Griffith Ancestry, But Researchers Relationship May Help it Last Pam Losefsky Urge Caution When Behind
    [Show full text]
  • A Measure of Detachment: Richard Hofstadter and the Progressive Historians
    A MEASURE OF DETACHMENT: RICHARD HOFSTADTER AND THE PROGRESSIVE HISTORIANS A Thesis Submitted to the Temple University Graduate Board In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF ARTS By Wiliiam McGeehan May 2018 Thesis Approvals: Harvey Neptune, Department of History Andrew Isenberg, Department of History ABSTRACT This thesis argues that Richard Hofstadter's innovations in historical method arose as a critical response to the Progressive historians, particularly to Charles Beard. Hofstadter's first two books were demonstrations of the inadequacy of Progressive methodology, while his third book (the Age of Reform) showed the potential of his new way of writing history. i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................................i CHAPTER 1. A MEASURE OF DETACHMENT..........................................................................1 2. SOCIAL DARWINISM IN AMERICAN THOUGHT………………………………………………26 3. THE AMERICAN POLITICAL TRADITION…………………………………………………………..52 4. THE AGE OF REFORM…………………………………………………………………………………….100 5. CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………………………………………………139 BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..144 CHAPTER ONE A MEASURE OF DETACHMENT Great thinkers often spend their early years in rebellion against the teachers from whom they have learned the most. Freud would say they live out a form of the Oedipal archetype, that son must murder his father at least a little bit if he is ever to become his own man.
    [Show full text]
  • Raymond Ostby Arsenault
    RAYMOND OSTBY ARSENAULT 200 Snell House 767 36th Ave., N. Florida Studies Program St. Petersburg, Fl. 33704 University of South Florida Tel.:(727)526-9784 (home) St. Petersburg, Fl. 33701 E-Mail:[email protected] Office:(727)873-4555 FAX (727) 873-4878 PERSONAL INFORMATION Born January 6, 1948; Hyannis, Massachusetts Married to Kathleen Hardee Arsenault (retired University library dean) Two daughters: Amelia (34), Anne (30) EDUCATION B.A. Princeton University 1969 (History)(Magna Cum Laude) M.A. Brandeis University 1974 (American History) Ph.D. Brandeis University 1981 (American History) TEACHING AND PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES Princeton University, Undergraduate Research Assistant (1967-69) Chatham (MA.) High School, Mathematics Teacher (1970-71) Brandeis University, Department of History, Instructor (1974- 75), Teaching Fellow (1975-76) University of Minnesota, Departments of History and American Studies, Instructor (1976-79), Assistant Professor (1979-1980); Associate Director of the Fulbright Commission Summer Institute in American Studies (1980-1987) University of South Florida, Department of History, Assistant Professor (1980-83), Associate Professor (1983-90), Professor (1990-99), John Hope Franklin Professor of Southern History (1999- ); Director of the University Honors Program USF, St. Petersburg (1995-2005), Associate Director (2005- 06);Florida Studies Graduate Program, Co-Director(2003-07), Director of Graduate Studies, (2007-11) University of Chicago, Visiting Professor of History (Winter 2007, Spring 2007) Florida State
    [Show full text]
  • The Department of Justice and the Limits of the New Deal State, 1933-1945
    THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND THE LIMITS OF THE NEW DEAL STATE, 1933-1945 A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY AND THE COMMITTEE ON GRADUATE STUDIES OF STANFORD UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Maria Ponomarenko December 2010 © 2011 by Maria Ponomarenko. All Rights Reserved. Re-distributed by Stanford University under license with the author. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- Noncommercial 3.0 United States License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/us/ This dissertation is online at: http://purl.stanford.edu/ms252by4094 ii I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. David Kennedy, Primary Adviser I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Richard White, Co-Adviser I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Mariano-Florentino Cuellar Approved for the Stanford University Committee on Graduate Studies. Patricia J. Gumport, Vice Provost Graduate Education This signature page was generated electronically upon submission of this dissertation in electronic format. An original signed hard copy of the signature page is on file in University Archives. iii Acknowledgements My principal thanks go to my adviser, David M.
    [Show full text]
  • Under the Direction of Professor David A
    ABSTRACT MEDLIN, ERIC PATRICK. The Historian and the Liberal Intellectual: Power and Postwar American Historians, 1948-1975. (Under the direction of Professor David A. Zonderman.) Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., Richard Hofstadter, and Daniel Boorstin were three of the most influential American historians of the post-World War II period. They sold millions of books, influenced historiographic debates, and filled prominent positions in society and government. Schlesinger spent two years as a special adviser to President Kennedy, Hofstadter served on the board of the forerunner to PBS, and Boorstin became the first historian to be appointed Librarian of Congress. Over the past five decades, historians have characterized these writers as conservative academics who focused on consensus and agreement in American history. My work challenges that notion. In this thesis, I analyze the writings, speeches, and personal correspondence of Schlesinger, Hofstadter, and Boorstin between 1945 and 1975. My study focuses on both their political ideas and their roles in society. I look at how their work articulated different arguments for and ideas about liberalism during this period. I argue that their positions and roles in society changed in response to their ideas about what society needed from intellectuals. I also argue that the experiences and successes of these figures a provide a template for contemporary public intellectuals who desire both academic and public relevance. © Copyright 2017 by Eric Patrick Medlin All Rights Reserved The Historian and the Liberal Intellectual: Power and Postwar American Historians, 1948-1975 by Eric Patrick Medlin A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of North Carolina State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts History Raleigh, North Carolina 2017 APPROVED BY: ____________________________ ____________________________ Julia E.
    [Show full text]
  • Doherty, Thomas, Cold War, Cool Medium: Television, Mccarthyism
    doherty_FM 8/21/03 3:20 PM Page i COLD WAR, COOL MEDIUM TELEVISION, McCARTHYISM, AND AMERICAN CULTURE doherty_FM 8/21/03 3:20 PM Page ii Film and Culture A series of Columbia University Press Edited by John Belton What Made Pistachio Nuts? Early Sound Comedy and the Vaudeville Aesthetic Henry Jenkins Showstoppers: Busby Berkeley and the Tradition of Spectacle Martin Rubin Projections of War: Hollywood, American Culture, and World War II Thomas Doherty Laughing Screaming: Modern Hollywood Horror and Comedy William Paul Laughing Hysterically: American Screen Comedy of the 1950s Ed Sikov Primitive Passions: Visuality, Sexuality, Ethnography, and Contemporary Chinese Cinema Rey Chow The Cinema of Max Ophuls: Magisterial Vision and the Figure of Woman Susan M. White Black Women as Cultural Readers Jacqueline Bobo Picturing Japaneseness: Monumental Style, National Identity, Japanese Film Darrell William Davis Attack of the Leading Ladies: Gender, Sexuality, and Spectatorship in Classic Horror Cinema Rhona J. Berenstein This Mad Masquerade: Stardom and Masculinity in the Jazz Age Gaylyn Studlar Sexual Politics and Narrative Film: Hollywood and Beyond Robin Wood The Sounds of Commerce: Marketing Popular Film Music Jeff Smith Orson Welles, Shakespeare, and Popular Culture Michael Anderegg Pre-Code Hollywood: Sex, Immorality, and Insurrection in American Cinema, ‒ Thomas Doherty Sound Technology and the American Cinema: Perception, Representation, Modernity James Lastra Melodrama and Modernity: Early Sensational Cinema and Its Contexts Ben Singer
    [Show full text]
  • Medicalizing Edutainment: Enforcing Disability in the Teen Body, 1970-2000
    MEDICALIZING EDUTAINMENT: ENFORCING DISABILITY IN THE TEEN BODY, 1970-2000 by Julie Passanante Elman B.A. English Literature and Hispanic Languages and Literatures, May 2001, Stony Brook University A Dissertation submitted to The Faculty of The Columbian College of Arts and Sciences of The George Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. January 31, 2009 Dissertation directed by Melani McAlister Associate Professor of American Studies and of International Affairs Robert McRuer Associate Professor of English The Columbian College of Arts and Sciences of The George Washington University certifies that Julie Passanante Elman has passed the Final Examination for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy as of August 18, 2008. This is the final and approved form of the dissertation. MEDICALIZING EDUTAINMENT: ENFORCING DISABILITY IN THE TEEN BODY, 1970-2000 Julie Passanante Elman Dissertation Research Committee: Melani McAlister, Associate Professor of American Studies and of International Affairs, Dissertation Co-Director Robert McRuer, Associate Professor of English, Dissertation Co-Director Gayle Freda Wald, Associate Professor of English, Committee Member Abby L. Wilkerson, Assistant Professor of Writing, Committee Member ii © Copyright 2008 by Julie Passanante Elman All rights reserved iii Dedication I dedicate this dissertation to my mother, Kathleen, whose unique hands taught mine to grasp stars; to my grandfather, Joseph, who taught me the value of hard work; and to David, whose gentleness, support and unfailing love continue to teach me. iv Acknowledgments Adequately expressing gratitude for all of the intellectual and personal support I have received is a daunting task, and brevity has never been my strongest suit, especially when it comes to giving thanks.
    [Show full text]
  • The Conservatism of Richard Hofstadter 45
    The Conservatism of Richard Hofstadter 45 The Conservatism of Richard Hofstadter Ryan Coates Third Year Undergraduate, Durham University ‘We have all been taught to regard it as more or less “natural” for young dissenters to become conservatives as they grow older.’ Richard Hofstadter So proved to be the case for the author of this statement, the outstanding American historian of the twentieth century, Richard Hofstadter (1916-70). This assertion challenges the dominant orthodox portrayal of Hofstadter as the iconic public intellectual of post-war American liberalism. The orthodox interpretation, supported by biographer David Brown and historians Arthur Schlesinger and Sean Wilentz, demonstrates Hofstadter’s ideological progression from thirties radical, briefly a member of the Communist Party, to fifties liberal credited as the founder of consensus history.1 This interpretation draws upon Hofstadter’s most political works, includingThe American Political Tradition and the Men Who Made It (1948), The Age of Reform (1955) and most prominently, the essays collected in The Paranoid Style in American Politics (1964), to reveal an apparent all-encompassing hostility toward conservatism. The revisionist interpretation, advanced by Hofstadter’s fellow New York intellectual Alfred Kazin and historians Robert Collins, Daniel Walker Howe and Peter Elliott Finn, challenges this one-dimensional portrayal of Hofstadter’s complex relationship to conservatism.2 Rather than flourishing into the iconic historian of American liberalism, the revisionists contend, Hofstadter’s intellectual development represented a gradual transition that had, by the end of his shortened life, culminated in a conversion to Burkean conservatism. Indeed, Kazin’s description of Hofstadter as a ‘secret conservative in a radical period’ encourages parallels 1 David S.
    [Show full text]
  • Deposit and Copying Declaration Form
    The Life of the Mind: An Intellectual Biography of Richard Hofstadter Andrew Ronald Snodgrass Jesus College This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy November 2018 Abstract The Life of the Mind: An Intellectual Biography of Richard Hofstadter Andrew Ronald Snodgrass Despite his death in 1970, Richard Hofstadter’s work continues to have an enduring influence in American political culture. Yet despite the continued and frequent use of his interpretations in public discourse, his reputation within historical scholarship remains, to a large degree, shaped by perceptions that were formed towards the end of his career. The narrative pervades of Hofstadter as the archetypal New York intellectual who rejected his youthful radicalism for political conservatism which, in turn, shaped his consensus vision of the past. These assessments reflect the biographical tendency to read a life and career backwards. From such a vantage point, Hofstadter’s work is viewed through the prism of his perceived final position. My dissertation challenges the accepted narrative by considering his writing in the context of the period of time in which it was written. In doing so, it is evident that his work belies attempts to reduce his scholarship to reflections of a shifting political standpoint. Whilst it is undoubted that Hofstadter’s historical and political view changed through time, there was a remarkable consistency to his thought. Throughout his career, his writing and lectures were suffused with a sense of the contingency of truth. It was the search for new uncertainties rather than the capture of truth which was central to his work.
    [Show full text]
  • Why American History Is Not What They Say
    WHY AMERICAN HISTORY IS NOT WHAT THEY SAY: AN INTRODUCTION TO REVISIONISM also by jeff riggenbach In Praise of Decadence WHY AMERICAN HISTORY IS NOT WHAT THEY SAY: AN INTRODUCTION TO REVISIONISM Jeff Riggenbach Ludwig von Mises Institute, 518 West Magnolia Avenue, Auburn, Alabama 36832; mises.org. Copyright 2009 © by Jeff Riggenbach Published under Creative Commons attribution license 3.0 ISBN: 978-1-933550-49-7 History, n. An account mostly false, of events mostly unimportant, which are brought about by rulers mostly knaves, and soldiers mostly fools. —ambrose bierce The Devil’s Dictionary (1906) This book is for Suzanne, who made it possible. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Portions of Chapter Three and Chapter Five appeared earlier, in somewhat different form, in Liberty magazine, on RationalReview. com, and on Antiwar.com. David J. Theroux of the Independent Institute, Andrea Millen Rich of the Center for Independent Thought, and Alexia Gilmore of the Randolph Bourne Institute were generous with their assistance during the researching and writing stages of this project. Ellen Stuttle was her usual indispensable self. And, of course, responsibility for any errors of fact, usage, or judgment in these pages is entirely my own. CONTENTS preface 15 one The Art of History 19 i. Objectivity in History 19 ii. History and Fiction 25 iii. Th e Historical Fiction of Kenneth Roberts 36 iv. Th e Historical Fiction of John Dos Passos 41 two The Historical Fiction of Gore Vidal: The “American Chronicle” Novels 49 i. Burr and Lincoln 49 ii. 1876, Empire, and Hollywood 59 iii. Hollywood and Th e Golden Age 65 three The Story of American Revisionism 71 i.
    [Show full text]
  • 19 CHAPTER NINE AMERICAN HISTORY American History Has Not
    CHAPTER NINE AMERICAN HISTORY American history has not been subject to the same influences as British history being rather less in chronological extent and without the need to justify the lineage of the various English dynasties of monarchs. Nevertheless it has been subject to its own myths and ideologies dating from the first English settlement and given force with the American Revolution. They can be grouped as various varieties of what is known as “American exceptionalism. “ In the Puritan John Winthrop's 1630 sermon, “A Model of Christian Charity", preached on board the ship Arbella. Winthrop told the future Massachusetts Bay colonists that their new community would be "as a city upon a hill", watched by the world and this became the ideal the New England colonists placed upon their hilly capital city, Boston Winthrop's sermon gave rise to the widespread belief in American folklore that the United States of America is "God's country" because metaphorically it is a "Shining City upon a Hill". This sentiment was echoed just before the Revolution by Thomas Paine in his influential 1776 pamphlet “Common Sense”. He argued that the American Revolution provided an opportunity to create a new, better society: “We have it in our power to begin the world over again. A situation, similar to the present, hath not happened since the days of Noah until now. The birthday of a new world is at hand....” Many Americans agreed with Paine, and came to believe that the United States' virtue was a result of its special experiment in freedom and democracy.
    [Show full text]
  • Synthesis…Comparing Sources… Woodrow Wilson
    Unit 6, Period 7 Part 1 Name:_______________________________________________________________ Class Period:____ Synthesis…comparing sources… Woodrow Wilson Skill 9: Synthesis Historical thinking involves the ability to develop meaningful and persuasive new understandings of the past by applying all of the other historical thinking skills, by drawing appropriately on ideas and methods from different fields of inquiry or disciplines, and by creatively fusing disparate, relevant, and sometimes contradictory evidence from primary sources and secondary works. Additionally, synthesis may involve applying insights about the past to other historical contexts or circumstances, including the present. Proficient students should be able to … Combine disparate, sometimes contradictory evidence from primary sources and secondary works in order to create a persuasive understanding of the past. Apply insights about the past to other historical contexts or circumstances, including the present. One important way to practice this historical thinking skill is to analyze two different sources or viewpoints on one event or era. Just as historians pull information from a plethora of different sources, we must also consider more than one source when analyzing history. In an essay, this skill will enable complex conclusions. On short answer questions, you may be presented with two sources then have to analyze them. AT LEAST ONE OF YOUR SAQs ON THE AP EXAM WILL BE SYNTHESIS! Such a task, when analyzing secondary sources, also requires an appreciation of historiography and realizing that history isn’t necessarily what happened in the past. It is our perception of what happened in the past. The story changes as perspectives change, but the goal is the same: to better understand the past.
    [Show full text]