Charles F. Howlett, Audrey Cohan. John Dewey, America's -Minded Educator. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2016. 328 pp. $45.00, paper, ISBN 978-0-8093-3504-6.

Reviewed by Andrew McNally

Published on H-SHGAPE (April, 2017)

Commissioned by Jay W. Driskell

At worst, intellectual biographies transform a scholarly output of Deweyana surely rivals that of human being into a shelf of books written by the most other American intellectuals. It’s difcult, subject. Or, they admire their subject so much therefore, to imagine what freshness one could they rollick in oversharing their subject’s banali‐ uncover. Nevertheless, Audrey Cohan and Charles ties. (Imagine three chapters on the benevolent in‐ Howlett’s John Dewey: America’s Peace-Minded fuence of a mathematician’s paternal uncle dur‐ Educator manages to uncover more. The book un‐ ing late adolescence, or an exegesis of a literary snarls his prose and says something fresh about critic’s passion for kiting in Wales--okay, I exag‐ Dewey’s commitment to peace and international‐ gerate, but we can all point to our favorite exam‐ ist movements. By doing so, the book illuminates ples of this type of excess). The best, however, do new reasons for the popularization of the peace both--reveal the spirit of a person’s contributions movement during the interwar years. The authors precisely through her least conspicuous moments. do not answer all of the questions they raise, but (Nick Salvatore’s biography of Eugene Debs, or they do open a conversation about Dewey’s role in Linda Gordon’s biography of Dorothea Lange the making of American internationalism. come to mind for me). Howlett and Cohan overstate their case in Anyone would fnd this trick hard to master saying that “researchers have not previously ad‐ in the case of John Dewey. Dewey is too often re‐ dressed his [Dewey’s] idea of education as an in‐ garded with a degree of mysticism: hard to read, strument of reform and democratic fairness” (p. hard to miss, and hard to question, so great is the xvi). Yet, with the exception of Howlett’s earlier reverence for his infuence, and so pungent is his Troubled Philosopher (1977), few have asked reputation for tangled prose. At least a half-dozen questions about Dewey’s sense of international academic monographs exclusively about Dewey justice. As a result, the authors seem eager to have been published since 2000 alone, and the make up for lost ground. In the opening section, H-Net Reviews they outline an ambitious agenda for their book. Dewey’s pragmatist, “democracy-as-a-way-of-life” They aim to show changes in Dewey’s views on philosophy emblematized the emergence of a po‐ peace, in particular his transformation “from a litical philosophy more like modern pacifsm. progressive idealist supporting America’s Howlett and Cohan--borrowing Martin Ceadel’s aims” during the First World War to, after, “one term--call this “pacifcism,” a belief which views who would only condone a permissible war as a peace more as a means than a principled end. For matter of conscience” (p. xv), and to explore the the authors, Dewey’s conversion to pacifsm helps connections between changes in Dewey’s views explain these broader transformations in the with the broader secularization and populariza‐ . tion of the peace movement during the interwar Their most persuasive writing is not that years. They furthermore attempt to elaborate his which defends the inconsistency of Dewey’s views contributions to early twentieth-century interna‐ on war and peace. Neither does their strongest tionalist thinking, and to explore the ways that writing foist, as they are sometimes liable to do, a Dewey induced “grassroots participation to infu‐ procrustean narrative onto the development of ence and direct the afairs of society” (p. xvii). Un‐ his views. The most successful of their chapters der this umbrella of goals, the book covers a lot of rather keep the book’s many goals in view as they bibliographic territory. It surveys much of chart Dewey's halting acceptance of the peace Dewey’s substantial written legacy in the philoso‐ movement. For example, one chapter explores phy of social action. The book weaves together his Dewey’s struggle to reconcile his pragmatist be‐ 1880s writings like Outlines of a Critical Theory of liefs with his support for the First World War. Ethics with much later works like his 1939 work, Howlett and Cohan how Dewey struggled to Freedom and Culture. square his stated support for the war with some Howlett and Cohan situate their work within of the war's more antidemocratic outcomes. He the standard historiography of the peace move‐ experienced ferce criticism from former devotees ment. For historians like Charles Chatfeld, David like Randolph Bourne. I was not convinced when Patterson, Lawrence Wittner, and Merle Curti, Howlett and Cohan take Dewey at his word that prior to the First World War, American pacifsm “advancing the social foundations of democracy” was elitist and dogmatic, and consisted largely of lay at the heart of his support (p. 71). But merely members of Christian ",” which re‐ discussing the debates in which Dewey engaged jected personal contributions to war in all forms. does much to illuminate the issues at stake in his [1] From these parochial roots, pacifsm became decision to support the war. secularized and popularized in the twentieth cen‐ Cohan and Howlett are quite persuasive in ar‐ tury, spanning a broader set of concerns. Since guing that Dewey’s guiding concern (for better or the 1920s, pacifsm has adopted mass movement worse) lay with the outcomes of social policy. techniques while qualifying its insistence on abso‐ Dewey’s shift away from Wilsonian international‐ lute nonparticipation in war eforts. Rather than ism thus came only after he had seen the mili‐ opposition to war in principle, pacifsts were taristic efects of the war. The most successful more likely opposed to particularly unjust . chapter, for example, examines Dewey’s opposi‐ Howlett and Cohan describe this change as the tion to military training in schools during and af‐ “allure of grassroots protest on behalf of peace to ter the war. Dewey’s creative, individualistic ped‐ generate concrete political and social reform” (p. agogies led him to oppose such training, marking xvi). According to them, the new pacifsm “repre‐ his shift toward more pacifst views. The third sented an extension of Dewey’s belief in democra‐ chapter explores actions Dewey took to advance cy as a force for societal improvement” (p. xvi).

2 H-Net Reviews the Outlawry of War movement during the 1920s. to see more evidence that others shared Dewey’s By this time, the underpinning of Dewey’s support motivations. Were pragmatist underpinnings be‐ for the First World War had unraveled. He no hind others’ acceptance of the First World War? longer believed in coercive “force” as an instru‐ Were they also behind others’ embrace of a quali‐ ment for difusing democracy. Dewey’s newfound fed pacifsm after it? Outlawry may have meant preference for moral suasion led Dewey to sup‐ one thing for Dewey. But for others, embracing port the Outlawry campaign. The pacifst move‐ new forms of pacifsm may have meant some‐ ment expanded, Howlett and Cohan lead us to be‐ thing diferent. This would be true particularly lieve, because of a growing faith in peace as a for the “grassroots” that Howlett and Cohan sug‐ means to achieve the end of democracy, and skep‐ gest was so important for Dewey. For example, ticism about the League of Nations’ vision for col‐ many women's organizations played a central role lective security. Although the chapter showed in interwar peace movements. Did they also share Dewey’s close relationship with Outlawry founder Dewey’s beliefs about pragmatism? What about Salmon Levinson, I wondered how many others Quaker pacifsts, who as Charles Chatfeld shows in the Outlawry campaign shared Dewey's moti‐ in his fascinating work, embraced a social justice- vations. focused pacifsm after the war?[2] What role did Indeed, that question--the extent to which, in the WWI-era expansion of state power play in the words of Cohan and Howlett, “Dewey’s activi‐ Dewey's thinking about pacifst nonresistance ties coincided with the appearance of the ‘mod‐ strategies? None of these explanations, of course, ern’ American peace movement” (p. xv)--repre‐ exclude the explanation that Howlett and Cohan sents the strand of argumentation about which I ofer. But I fnished the book wondering how most wanted clarifcation. It is clear from the Dewey was situated within the complexities of a book that Dewey’s views on pacifsm and interna‐ broad, grassroots peace movement. Which tail, so tionalism changed over the years. Without ques‐ to speak, was wagging which dog? Was a shared tion, Dewey played an underappreciated role in commitment to views similar to Dewey’s driving a the making of this important movement. Howlett more general shift in the pacifst movement from and Cohan demonstrate that. Dewey wrote regu‐ viewing peace as an end to a means? Or were larly on the subject in national periodicals. He broader political changes pushing Dewey to also acted as interlocutor to many important change the intellectual justifcations for his movement fgures and used his celebrity to help views? internationalists like Salmon Levinson popularize Intentionally or not, the image of Dewey that their views in The Atlantic and other periodicals. emerges from the book is one of an intellectual What is less clear from the book is how cen‐ surprisingly engaged in the diplomatic context of tral Dewey’s role was in the development of his time, but one also removed from the class, American pacifsm and internationalism, or how race, and gender discourses of his era. These are representative the motivating factors in the shifts discourses which recent scholars have shown of his thinking were. Dewey’s views on war and played crucial roles in structuring his contempo‐ peace may indeed have been the product of (as raries’ thinking about a wide range of subjects, in‐ Cohan and Howlett contend) his instrumentalist cluding empire, war, and peace. Certainly, approach to democracy. Howlett and Cohan establish Dewey’s civil liber‐ tarian credentials. For instance, although he sup‐ But, if less because it is central to Cohan and ported the First World War, Dewey opposed the Howlett’s contentions and more because it would fring of academics who criticized the war, and clarify the signifcance of their project, I wanted lobbied to oppose the incarceration of Japanese-

3 H-Net Reviews

Americans during the Second World War. And no still shed new light even on people as opaque as one would question the fact that Dewey consis‐ John Dewey. tently invoked the value of democracy. Notes But “democracy” is a term with contested [1]. Charles Chatfeld, For Peace and Justice: meanings, and to suggest that Dewey’s support for Pacifcism in America, 1914-1941 (Knoxville: Uni‐ or opposition to war depends on his valuing of versity of Tennessee Press, 1971); David S. Patter‐ democracy--in his time period more than any-- son, Toward a Warless World: The Travail of the should require a more critical engagement with American Peace Movement, 1887-1914 (Blooming‐ what, specifcally, Dewey meant by democracy. ton: Indiana University Press, 1976); Lawrence S. Howlett and Cohan suggest Dewey’s beliefs re‐ Wittner, Rebels Against War: The American Peace fected a democratization of the peace movement. Movement, 1933-1983 (Philadelphia: Temple Uni‐ Yet they do not note that the evangelization of versity Press, 1984); and Merle Eugene Curti, democracy provided a crucial justifcation for Peace or War: The American Struggle, 1636-1936 American militarism during and after Dewey’s (New York, Norton, 1936). lifetime. I wonder how Howlett and Cohan’s nar‐ [2]. Charles Chatfeld, For Peace and Justice: rative might have been diferent had they en‐ Pacifcism in America, 1914-1941 (Knoxville: Uni‐ gaged with the cultural dimensions of internation‐ versity of Tennessee Press, 1971), 54. alist and pacifst beliefs. Why, for instance, do they explore Dewey’s support for the First World War in the context of his suspicion of German ide‐ alism, but not also in the context of Dewey’s mem‐ bership in the Anti-Imperialist League, or his views on the US war in the Philippines, or the his‐ torically racialized and gendered dynamics of mil‐ itarism and pacifsm in the United States? An ex‐ ploration of these subtextual aspects of his beliefs might have meant that the book possessed broad‐ er explanatory power. No less importantly, I won‐ der why Howlett and Cohan unironically use the term “the Orient” (more than once in their chap‐ ter “Democracy’s Ambassador to the Orient”) without critiquing the term. Such matters are nothing minor: critical attention to the politics and historicity of such terms (democracy, “the Ori‐ ent,” peace, war) might have meant that Cohan and Howlett would address the complexities of race, empire, gender, and capital that underlay Dewey’s intellectual and cultural milieu. Yet at least in the types of questions they ask, Cohan and Howlett’s book reminds us of the ne‐ cessity of exploring the dimensions of pacifst and internationalist thought amongst progressive in‐ tellectuals. And it reminds us that historians can

4 H-Net Reviews

If there is additional discussion of this review, you may access it through the network, at https://networks.h-net.org/h-shgape

Citation: Andrew McNally. Review of Howlett, Charles F.; Cohan, Audrey. John Dewey, America's Peace- Minded Educator. H-SHGAPE, H-Net Reviews. April, 2017.

URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=47756

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

5