The Small Community in Mass Society, 1940-1960 Philip Jeffrey Nelson Iowa State University
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 1996 An elusive balance: the small community in mass society, 1940-1960 Philip Jeffrey Nelson Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd Part of the American Studies Commons, Sociology of Culture Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Nelson, Philip Jeffrey, "An elusive balance: the small community in mass society, 1940-1960 " (1996). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 11389. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/11389 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfihn master. UMI fihns the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with smaU overiaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI A T3a11 J?r XTati^aII 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Aibor MI 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 An elusive balance: The small community in mass society, 1940-1960 by Philip Jeffrey Nelson A dissertation submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department: History Major: Agricultural History and Rural Studies Major Professor: Hamilton Cravens Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 1996 Copyright © Philip Jeffrey Nelson, 1996. All rights reserved. UMI Number; 9635339 Copyright 1996 by Nelson, Philip Jeffrey All rights reserved. UMI Microform 9635339 Copyright 1996, by UMI Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 M Graduate College Iowa State University this is to certify that the Doctoral dissertation of Philip Jeffrey Nelson has met the dissertation requirements of iowa State Universit}' Signature was redacted for privacy. Major Professor Signature was redacted for privacy. For toe Major Depmment Signature was redacted for privacy. For the Graduate College iii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER L INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER 2. THE SMALL COMMUNITY IN THE 1920S AND 1930S 12 CHAPTER 3. REGIONALISM AND THE SMALL COMMUNITY 74 CHAPTER 4. THE SVLALL COMMUNITY AND SOCIAL SCIENTISTS 141 CHAPTER 5. THE UTOPIAN SMALL COMMUTs'ITY 203 CHAPTER 6. THE AGRARIAN SMALL COMMUNITY 266 CHAPTER 7. INDIVIDUAL APPROACHES TO THE SMALL COMMUNITY 3 ] 9 CHAPTERS. CONCLUSION 355 BIBL10GR.APHY 358 1 1 CHAPTHR 1 INTRODUCTION "The movement for rural survival has the combined force of a great collection of institutions, agencies, and organizations. Some have been working since the back-to-the- farm espousals of bygone years. Others are very new." So wrote small community enthusiast Earle Hitch in 1950, in his compilation of community examples entitled Rebuilding Rural America. He described a definite reform movement which had scattered beginnings in the 1920s and 1930s, but took on a recognizable shape by the 1940s. More than a organization of professionals or writers, it appealed to and involved average people on the grass-roots level, although their numbers like those of the reformers, were small. By and large, their efforts went unreported by "mainstream" media, but their contributions to community improvement were real even though their influence often remained local. Most advocates of the small community placed it in a rural setting and viewed it as the antidote to the "disease" of an increasingly urban and industrial American society. They claimed that a way of life was being lost, and that this loss was part of a larger crisis of democracy. They believed that the balance of cultural life had been upset and tilted in favor of the large metropolis and the culture it supported. Hitch and the other small communitarians, like educator Baker Brovmell, former TVA director Arthur Morgan, and decentralist Ralph Borsodi to name a few, repeatedly cited the urgency of the problem. For example. Hitch exclaimed, "The alarm needs to be rung.... The people at large have yet to learn how much their personal futures are concerned. The problems are not exclusively farmers' problems or country-town problems. They are national problems!"^ People from many walks of life including agrarians, social scientists, educators, Utopians, writers, government workers, and social critics of assorted doctrinal leanings contributed to the thought, literature, and discourse about the place of the small community in modem mass society. Their goal was not to necessarily foment a cultural revolution in order to bring down mass society, but to create a new role for the small town and its variations within mass society'. By doing this, they hoped to influence the direction of mass society and ameliorate what they believed were its shortcom.ings. They carved out a small, but visible cultural place in opposition to the forces of centralization, corporatism, specialization, and urbanization. This is the story of the discourse surrounding the concept and doctrine of the small community in the years between 1940 and 1960, and the personalities who gave life to the small community cause. Communities and their significance to American culture have been at the heart of the American experience since the time of the Puritans, if not before. Not only has the community as group been celebrated, but without an institutionalized aristocracy and rigid class system, so also did the individual assume greater importance early on in American society. In a manner of speaking, America can thus be viewed as an uniquely created "battleground" designed for a "tug of war" between the pull of the collective and the soaring aspirations for freedom of the individual. That explains in part why historians can honestly differ as to the relative role of the group and the individual in y^imerican historical development. For example, historian Page Smith identified the centrality of the small town from colonial times onward, and in particular, the covenanted community typical of Puritan settlement. "Colonization by congregations and kinship groups, fiercely exclusive in many instances, refutes the argument that the pioneers were champions of'individualism."' Yet, historian of literature R. W. B. Lewis focused on the powerful myth of the "American Adam," the ingenious, strong, determined, and resilient individual who met reality on its own terms without the constraining cultural baggage of an ossified European society . Both forces J existed in American history, and perhaps, had to if America were to fulfill its material, physical, national, and democratic destinies as many nineteenth-century pundits proclaimed. "The American myth saw life and history as just beginning. It described the world as starting up again under fresh initiative, in a divinely granted second chance for the human race, after the first chance had been so disastrously fumbled in the darkening Old World."" By the middle of the nineteenth century, American had found a workable and stable cultural synthesis (exclusive of the slaveiy problem), a balance between individual and group, between the locale and the national territory. That society was full of compromises and contradictions: boosters backed an ever-expanding commercial society, while stand patters emphasized the virtues of traditional close-knit communities; extreme prejudice and bigotry mingled with tolerance and pluralism; gossip and conformity dominated the towns and cities, as a surly irreverence and cynicism for authority continued ft^om colonial times; and the cult of the immediately practical and useful was celebrated from coast to coast, while reason and education were just as valued when people took time to reflect on those ideals in which they really believed. Americans filled their society with a variety of settlements: open-country neighborhoods, hamlets, villages, towns, and small cities, and they all tended to fulfill those functions of which we usually think when we talk about the small town. They honored the agrarian nature of society, engaged in self-promotion, manifested neighborliness and social