Benjamin Franklin: the Self-Made Man As an American Hero

Benjamin Franklin: The Self-Made Man as an American Hero

Toshio Watanabe

George Washington and Benjamin Franklin have held an indisput-

able place in the minds of Americans as a national hero. But these two great heroes of the American Revolution are quite different in career, character and the way they become a hero, and their differences, it seems to me, suggest the two facets of the American hero.

Washington's reputation as a hero is based primarily on his leadership and moral excellence in public life, which are believed to be his birthright, not a quality developed by years of his exertions for self- discipline and self-improvement. He is more or less a•gborn•hhero in

European traditions, and his dignified figure with idealized features characterizes him as a man too great for ordinary Americans to under- stand or imitate. This aristocratic austerity, moreover, indicates the

American people's subconscious aspirations for the nobility in Europe, a privileged class they have officially repudiated in the Revolutionary

War. Washington is, in short, their formal•gfront•hto present to Euro- pean kings and noblemen to assert themselves on equal terms. On the contrary, Franklin is a hero of a totally different order.

He is the first hero we can describe as truly American. Franklin, a poor boy born into an obscure family, worked his way up to a position of the most beloved of all American heroes, but his achievement, though publicly acknowledged, is not the result of his public activities, but of his sayings and doings in everyday life, a life shared with the majority of common people. Franklin's image as a hero, therefore, depends on his middle-class virtues, such as prudence, patience and sense of balance-virtues, indeed, directly opposed to those of the aristocratic hero whose life is filled with deeds of daring and prodigality. Franklin

―219― represents the dream and reality of the average Americans, who in turn worship him as the patron saint of their class.

In the historical context, Franklin's career is related with the rise of the self-made man in the United States. Americans have traditionally prided themselves on the American dream of success and the self-made man as its realizer, and Franklin, a typical proponent and exemplar of this uniquely American phenomenon, succeeded in making himself a national hero in accordance with this popular image. An old say- ing has it that•gheroes are not born but made,•hbut with reference to Franklin we can say that they are sometimesself-made,•hin the sense that he owes much of his fame to the public figure he created in his later years by writing the Autobiography.

The self-made man has been shaped in America by at least four strands of basic ideas and beliefs. First, the traditional middle-class virtues of industry, frugality, honesty and piety are emphasized as the surest means to success in life, and it is mainly on these, as he insists in his writings, that he achieved his reputation as a hero, though his conduct was not always above suspicion. Second, the self-made man is known for his efforts and plan for his moral and intellectual growth, the best example of which is, of course, Franklin's famous experiment with the thirteen virtues. These two characteristics present Franklin the self-made man in his most laudable aspects.

However, the self-made man is not always faultless in his moral conduct, and in 19th-century America such secular qualities as initiative, smartness and competitiveness were regarded as more important, and were actually more dominant. The self-made men known popularly as•gupstarts•hor•ggo-getters•hwere men of such energy, initiative, confidence and will power that they attracted many Americans who, dis- satisfied with the sterile precepts of middle-class morality, sought more reliable assurance for their success in life. Unlike his popular image,

Franklin was shrewd, enterprising and even unscrupulous in carrying out his objects. So, for instance, to find a market for his newly published almanac, Franklin even liquidated his fellow almanac publisher named

Titan Leeds by predicting his death in his first year's Poor Richard's

―220― Almanack.

On the other hand, it is not always through this spirit of•ggo- ahead•hthat the self-made man succeeds, but by assuming conformity to the established society. Franklin, who knew how to swim with the current, also availed himself of this strategy. He is outspoken enough to admit that his success was in part due to his ability to pretend virtue.

He placed more emphasis on•gappearance•hthan he did on•greality.•h

These two aspects of the self-made man-aggressiveness and conformity -are his least attractive characteristics, but they are undoubtedly his, and proved to be no less effective than the more laudable in achieving success. Franklin, the first and the most typical of all self-made men, shares all these traits and enjoys his place as a national hero in the minds of the majority of Americans who are self-made men, if not in actual fact, but in mind.

Andrew Jackson

Torao Tomita

To be a brave Indian fighter-that is, to kill Indians or dispossess them of their native land, and consequently to throw open their vast country to white settlers and speculators-was one of the most important requirements for a popular hero in the second half of the 18th and the first half of 19th centuries, when westward expansion was imperative to the rising American empire. In this sense, Andrew Jackson has a claim to fame as a popular hero, as he was the most gallant Indian fighter of the time.

Examining Jackson's justifications for and his attitude towards the wars against the Cherokees in the 1790's and the Creeks and the

Seminoles in the 1810's in comparison with the Federal Government's justifications and attitude, I define Jackson's reasoning of engaging in battles with the Indians as•gthe logic of deception.•hThe reason is that

―221― he justified it by•gthe logic of vengeance,•hblaming the Indians of committing•gdepravities and murders,•halthough the first offenses were, as he knew well, always committed by white men. The Federal

Government's logic may be defined as•gthe logic of hypocrisy,•hbecause, while pursuing the•gCivilization•hpolicy, it refused to admit white- men's unlawful invasions into the Indian country in violation of the treaties between the United States and the Indian nations.

In my opinion, these two logics, although conflicting in some points, were mutually complementary. While the Creek War and the Seminole

War were fought, these two logics interacted in such a way as to even- tually fuse into a new national Indian policy, namely, the•gRemoval•h policy. Thus Jackson's•glogic of deception•hwas ultimately confirmed by Congress in February 8th, 1819, when the House overwhelmingly endorsed his conducts during the Seminole War by voting down the report of the Military Affairs Committee and defeating Cobb's resolu- tions. It was the day on which Andrew Jackson was legitimatized as a national hero.

Andrew Carnegie

Jiro Ozawa

Andrew Carnegie made a phenomenal rise as a captain of industry in the second half of the 19th century. A child of poor immigrants from Scotland, Carnegie came to Allegheny, Pennsylvania, in 1848. He was only thirteen years old then. In that year his first job earned him two dollars a week. In 1853 he began his investment activities in companies affiliated with railroads, petroleum and iron industries. Already in 1868 he could earn more than 50 thousand dollars. He organized Carnegie Kloman Co. to concentrate on iron production. Between 1868 and 1872, his bridge companies helped him get acquainted with railroad industry as a market for his iron company. He learned how to gather money,

―222― especially in Europe through railroad finance. From 1873 on he developed the newest and most effective steel producing system in America, and with handsome profit, could organize Carnegie Brothers Co. in 1881 with the capital of 25 million dollars, which included the Connellsville coal field and coke furnaces, Homestead Works and Duquesne Works.

During these active years, he was the most advanced enterpreneur in steel industry.

Carnegie became a kind of national hero because he contributed to the fulfilment of the economic goal of American nationalism. Creation of a national economy independent from the English economy had been a historical goal of American nationalism. This goal was fully achieved only after the Civil War, which was in a sense a war over the problems of the national economy. The emergence of a powerful national economy was exemplified in the post-bellum development of iron and steel industry. Thus Carnegie could become a national hero in the 1880's.

His rise from a humble origin and his abstention from dirty financial maneuvering also helped him become a popular hero.

In the 1890's, however, Carnegie, like other captains of industry, became a•erobber baron•fin the popular image. His reputation deterio- rated after the Homestead Strike of 1892. This deterioration reflected

a change in the historical meaning of his business conduct—from a champion of economic nationalism to a leading monopolistic capitalist.

Horatio Alger's Heroes

Motoshi Karita

According to Daniel G. Hoffman's Form and Fable in American

Fiction, there have been two types of the hero in the imagination of

the Americans: the Backwoodsman and the Yankee.•gMetamorphosis,

adaptability, and indomitable self-mastery•hare the qualities they

share. It was Horatio Alger who, in the novels, gave the personal

―223― existence to the second Yankee type.

As is evident from a manufacturer's explanation to Mr. Homo in

Howells' A Traveler from Altruria, the millionaire was the American

ideal just after the Civil War, when Horatio Alger set to write his

novels with a purpose of encouraging the orphans flocking to New York.

It was natural that he should have taken up the romance of the busi-

ness rather than of that of the West which had been popular until then.

His novels are in the tradition of the dime novels. The short history

of that literary genre, which has never been much read or discussed in

Japan, is given. Quoting the analytical list of their themes in Philip Durham's Dime Novels, the present author shows how Alger made the

best of the tradition of the western romance in his romance of the

business.

There are four biographies of Horatio Alger. Given in the chrono-

logical order, they are Herbert R. Mayes, Alger (1928); Frank Gruber,

Horatio Alger, Jr. (1961); John Tebbel, From Rags to Riches (1963);

and Ralph D. Gardner, Horatio Alger (1964). The second and the

fourth are quite favorable to Alger and make a diligent, humanistic and

respectable novelist of him, while the first and the third scathingly

criticise him, denouncing Una Garth affairs. The present author insists

that the truth lies midway between them.

Tebbel says that Alger cast his stories into a single pattern of•gfrom

rags to riches.•hBut the closer examination of the two of his most

popular novels; Julius; or, the Street Boy Out West (1874) and The Store Boy; or, Fortunes of Ben Barclay (1887) shows that there are

slight variations. The name of Horatio Alger has taken on a legendary

meaning and become a symbol of the American dream, mainly because

of the four of his favorite topics; success, individualism, open society

and a great city. They are to be examined one by one.

Benjamin Franklin is the prototype of the success myth. In•gThe

Way to Wealth•hhe preaches that the shortest way to success is•gyour

own industry and frugality and prudence,•hbut that they may all be

blasted without virtues and the blessing of the Heaven. It was the

same with the Alger heroes. They gave generations of young Americans

―224― a conviction that wealth and honor were attainable only through honesty, thrift and clean-living. This moralism is still valid, and can be found in the writings of the innumerable American leaders of today.

As may be inferred from the fact that nearly half of the titles of his novels are the names of their heroes, he believed in individualism rooted in puritanism, the frontier spirit, activism and Emersonian self- independence. It was supported by the doctrine of stewardship in Car- negie's The Gospel of Wealth, the theory of laissez faire preached by

Adam Smith and the belief in the law of the survival of the fittest.

In those days it was believed that the United States was a place where anyone, no matter what his origin, no matter how poor and obscure he might be, could rise to fame and fortune. Alger's novels confirmed this belief.

To the American youth of the 1880's and 90's living in the country,

a great city had a strong fascination. Alger gave them the details of the life in New York, its sordidness as well as its charm. Many novels of his such as Adrift in New York (1889), Adrift in the City (1895) and

Struggling Upward (1890) had something of a guidebook to the life in a great city. Horatio Alger was a part of his own era. His novels, with his

unfailing success formula, in which the righteous invariably triumphed

while the wicked was defeated, are closely connected with the•gprotest-

ant ethics.•hThough no one can claim for him superior quality of writ-

ing, his many stories were read and enjoyed by millions of Americans.

The idea his books represent refuses to die out. It has strong survival

power because it is deeply rooted in the character of the nation. The spirit of Horatio Alger will remain a part of the American folklore.

―225― Charles A. Lindbergh—The Last Hero

Shimpei Tokiwa

Charles A. Lindbergh instantly became a great American hero when he succeeded in a non-stop solo flight from New York to Paris in 1927. Weary of seeing news headlines about crimes and scandals, Americans of the 1920's had been longing for something romantic and chivalrous. Therefore, they were greatly excited by his adventure. To them, Lindbergh seemed to embody the traditional virtues of an American hero-such as courage, determination, patience and self-discipline. His adventure was especially heroic because it was a solo flight. He planned and financed this flight all by himself; he piloted his Spirit of St. Louis single-handedly all the way across the Atlantic. He was on his own throughout the adventure. His brave loneliness resembled to that of a pioneer who had struggled with the wilderness in the American West. In the complex age of the 20th century, it has become increasingly difficult for a lone individual to play a heroic role. In the 1920's, it was still possible for Lindbergh to achieve a heroic adventure all on his own. Because of his success, it was still possible for the people of the day to indulge in an optimistic belief that a brave, tough and patient man could achieve almost anything. The 1920's were the last of such optimistic ages. It may be said that Lindbergh was the last true hero in Ame- rica. Many American heroes were political leaders. In an age when the people became disillusioned with corruption in politics, political heroes tended to lose their former prestige. The 1920's were such an age. De- bunking of former national heroes, including George Washington, became fashionable. Lindbergh was one of the new heroes-the most magnificent of them—who took the place of debunked heroes. Unlike other heroes of his age, Lindbergh did not actively seek

―226― fame or money, although his success inevitably brought him both of them. It was mass media which made him a hero. But he himself did not try to make use of mass media. On the contrary, he tried to refuse the role of a hero and to keep a distance from the age. It may be said, however, that this attitude actually helped him become a hero and contributed to making his fame as a hero a lasting one.

Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.-Hero of Nonviolent Direct Action

Yoriko Nakajima

The author believes that the uniqueness of M. L. King, Jr., the

famous black Baptist minister, lies not only in his prominent achieve-

ments and dedication to the improvement of racial situation in the

United States, but also in his prophecy of a nonviolent manner of social

change and of bringing world peace-the philosophy the world today

desperately needs and looks forward to learning from the U. S.

In the first chapter, the difference in cultural response to•enonvio-

lent direct action•fbetween the two races is examined. The tradition of

the pioneer spirit and the citizen's right to carry guns made it difficult

for the majority of the whites to accept•enonviolence•fas a way of resist-

ance. In contrast, •enonviolence•fwas not new to the Southern black

community where the people had been forced to be disarmed for years.

Since the habit of obedience and submission made them unaccustomed to take•edirect action•fagainst social injustice, they were reticent in

adopting nonviolent direct action. In addition, their personal experi- ences with•enonviolence,•fwhich had given no benefit to them in the past, impeded their understanding that nonviolence is the only and most effective way to achieve racial equality in the U. S. These difficulties, however, were soon overcome when the effectiveness of nonviolence was proved by heroic black intellectuals, such as ministers and students,

―227― who conducted sit-ins and freedom rides in the very early 1960's. What is more significant in connection with the black response is that there are two apparatus-mental and social-in the black community which played a positive role in spreading understanding and mobilizing the mass of blacks to nonviolent protest in the South. They are the tradition of black religious culture and the church-centered structure of the black community. In the second chapter, Rev. King as the symbol of nonvoilent protest is discussed. In addition to his charismatic character and eloquent oratory which attracted the attention of the mass media, four other points are emphasized. First, the social condition of Montgomery at the time when King proposed nonviolent resistance in 1955 was a decisive factor that made him the symbol of nonviolence. James Farmer was the first leader who adopted nonviolent direct action in the black protest movement in Chicago in 1942. But its impact was limited. In the case of Montgomery, the whole black community had already risen up for bus boycott when King proposed the nonviolent manner of resistance. Therefore, his call immediately penetrated into the community just as the small flame of a match may ignite a sea of oil. Its impact soon spread throughout the South. Second, his serious effort during 1957-60 to help organize two civil rights organizations (SCLC and SNCC) made his role unique as a main linkage figure and a symbol of the unity of civil rights groups in the movement. Third, his strong and symbolic leadership succeeded in carrying an interdependent two- dimensional structure of nonviolent struggles: direct action on the street, on the hand, and political negotiation and manipulation of mass media, on the other. Fourth, his vocation as a Christian minister furnished him with another qualification as a leader of nonviolent protest movement. Christianity is not only a common cultural base between the two races but also a shield against communist and other radical influences on the black movement. In fact, his involvement in mass protest legitimized that action in the eyes of the whites. On the other hand, he was anticipated as a Savior—more than a symbol—in the tradition of black religion in which Nat Turner and Denmark Vesey,

―228― both black preachers, were regarded as Christ and Moses reincarnate.

In the third chapter, King's philosophy, a combination of Christian love and Gandhian nonviolence, is compared in its effect on the movement with the theory of R. F. Williams, an advocate of the Constitu- tional right of self-defense of the blacks in 1960 and with that of

Black Power in 1966.

The last chapter deals with his tremendous progress in the theory and practice of nonviolent resistance which was , during the last two years of his life, expanded beyond the limit of race and national bound- aries. These achievements are summarized as follows. First of all, by training gangsters and their leaders in Chicago, he was successful in proving that a nonviolent manner is feasible even for a man of violent character in Northern cities. Secondly, his opposition to war became real when he saw it as a main obstacle to the elimination of poverty in the nation. In his last book, Trumpet of Conscience, he wrote that he began to look upon the Federal Government and its war policy as an enemy of the poor. Thirdly, his politics changed as he abandoned

his role of adviser and mediator for the government and instead placed

himself in the position of political representative of the poor of the

nation. He no longer expected a good will from the government but

contrived the new powerful form of nonviolet resistance, in order to

force an unwilling government to take action to eliminate war and

poverty. Lastly, his view was broadened as he included the poor, the disadvantaged and the segregated in developing countries into his

long-term project of internationalizing the nonviolent movement for

social change throughout the world.

At the time of his assassination in 1968, he was engaged in a rally

of the poor of all races to make a vigorous Poor People's Campaign in

Washington, D. C. Thus, the•gResurrection City,•hwhich was realized

a month after his assassination and lasted forty-three days was the first

application of the new form of nonviolent direct action.

One might detect a tone of despair in his•gChristmas Sermon on

Peace•hin 1967. If he had such a feeling, it was not because of his loss

of confidence in the effectiveness of nonviolent direct action. His con-

―229― fidence in it was really firm. It was rather because of his awareness of the dilemma of blacks who ceased to listen to him and despaired of his movement without realizing that their defeatist attitude was promoted by the FBI's disruptive tactics.

The Hero-Image in the Women's Movement

Ikuko Atsumi

Since the concept of hero is male-oriented and contrary to the spirit of modern Women's Liberation movement, the hero-image in the Women's Movement can intelligibly be discussed only in terms of a gradual change in the quality of man-hero-image. The first Women's Liberation Movement began in the 1840's and ended in 1920. Because it was the time when the basis of a capitalist society was being established, we can characterize the Movement as a struggle against the authoritative heroism strengthened in the process of capitalist development. Susan Anthony, by denying Social Darwin- ism and the assumptions of free industrial competition, rejected the heroes of monopolistic capitalism. The feminists in this period may, however, be called heroic in Carlyle's language, for they were reformers whose goal was to attain woman's suffrage. Susan Anthony herself had most of the elements of the male-hero syndrome in the sense that she had an unyielding sense of mission and commanded many worship- pers. The second Women's Movement started in the biginning of the 1960's when the spirit of the age turned against the conventional heroism. It took the direction of a gradual breakdown of the myth of manliness versus femininity. The breakdown took place because, as Erich Neumann pointed out, the patriarchy had developed so one- sidedly that it could no longer keep balance with the matriarchal psyche. First, the revolt by the youth took place. They turned ―230― their back on the elements of male-mythology and found the positive

values in what had been regarded as feminine. The Women's Movement

took place on the bases of this sensitivity. Betty Friedan first put

an end to the myth of femininity (1963), while Kate Millet struck at

the myth of manliness or patriarchy , the male-oriented communication system (1970). Millet revealed that the authoritative heroism, after all,

depends on the biological fact that the male has a penis and is backed

up by class authority in a patriarchy.

Turning our eyes to the man-hero image reflected in women's

poetical works, we see that Sylvia Plath was the first poet who smashed against the male-centered society and committed suicide. In•gDaddy•h

in Ariel written in the early 1960's, she•eplays•fthe murder of•eDaddy,•f

the Puritan-Father-God image. But she was actually defeated, being torn

between its•eterror•fand its•echarm.•fIn contrast to her, Dianne Wakoski,

five years later, was able to break, with her strong imagination, the

mask of the American hero in her book George Washington Poems. The

difference was that she created her personal mythology with her woman-

experience as a core, which became a base firm enough to confront all the pervasive male-mythologies.

In the 70's the signs of a women's cultural revolution are becom- ing clearer, in which women try to search for the prototype of woman- hood. Adrienne Rich defined her attitude as early as at the end of the

50's. She focussed upon the outcome of the unbalanced demand of the male and the female element that the present society makes on each person. She struggled to restore her good balance and gradually as- sumed those elements valuable to all human beings. In•gDiving Into the Wrech•h(1973), she dives alone into the patriarchal culture lying down as a wreck. After difficult investigations, she recovers an andro- synous sense. It is the very treasure that each woman can find, through the travel for her own identification rooted in criticism. When woman creates her own mythology in this way, she can be for the first time a ‘woman -hero .’ Rich's poetry shows the direction of dissolving the existence of the two polarities, which is the feature not only of present Women's Movement but the present society. The hero-image cannot

―231― be considered without confronting with this direction.

Heroes of American Children

Tadao Okamura

Although Americans have emphasized the importance of the•gcom- mon man,•hthe United States might be one of the countries in which the heroes have been worshipped most. Many heroes have had a great influence upon the process of socialization of the youth. However, as of today, it seems rather difficult to talk about the existence of heroes in the minds of the American youth. As is well known, the Vietnam

War,•gthe revolt of the youth•hand the Watergate Scandal have dete- riorated the image of reliable leaders to a great extent.

Despite the incidents mentioned above, formal institutions have not been totally destroyed. The bicentennial celebration of the United

States was observed by most Americans. The basic value system does not seem to have changed. The same heroes are presented in formal education as they were before the unheavals of the 1960's. First of all, this article examines the characteristics of the heroes respected in formal education. They are persons of courage and good will, and they can overcome difficulties and achieve brilliant goals. Furthermore, these goals must be related to the value system of•gAmerican Democrary•hin some way. Great men per se can not be heroes in the United States. For example, neither Mao Tse-tung nor Napoleon have been regarded as heroes.

A comparison between American heroes and Japanese great men is interesting. In the United States, scholars of pure science, novelists, poets, philosophers are generally excluded from the ranks of heroes, while these persons are regarded as great men in Japan.

Children may have heroes other than those given to them in formal education. This is the second subject of this article. According

―232― to a survey carried among American high school students, heroes today are dominantly•gnon-serious entertainers,•hsuch as football players, tennis players, singers, actors, actresses and so on. As American scholars have long suspected, the development of mass communication may be one reason for this tendency. We also find that there is a wide range of heroes today, and because of such diversity, no one can be a super-star.

This fact may reveal two tendencies: (1) a diversification of values in the American social system; (2) a fact that•gAmerican Democracy•h is no longer developing through•glinear progress.•hI dare say that the goals to be achieved by heroes are not clear today. An American journalist says that heroes are not in demand today in the United States. This does not necessarily mean that the American system is facing a crisis. Greenstein, for instance, has demonstrated that

American children respected the President of the United States in the late 60's, although differently from the way British children respected their Queen or French children respected their President. American

society is changing; so is the image of its heroes. Perhaps, the traditional

type of heroes will be found in Lassie, a good dog; but Snoopy, a dog

which is neither wise nor brave, but beloved by many, may symbolize

the type of personality popular in contemporary America.

Hero in the Presidential Election: Image and Reality Produced by Electronics

Ichiro Iwano

In July 1976 when the United States started to stride into her third century, a correspondent of a Japanese newspaper reported from Washington that heroes had disappeared from America. Why?He pointed out, among others, that American society had been so highly organized and institutionalized that no individual could exert his personal capacity which might have made him a hero; expansion of the

―233― right-to-know, democratization and equalization in society also contributed to the disappearance of heroes; Sputnik shock, Vietnam and

Watergate spurred a loss of confidence among Americans, which also drove out heroes from the American scene. Behind these factors which do not allow the birth of heroes in America, we can find one common element which connects them. It is the development of electronic technology, and we may safely say that heroes disappeared since Amer- ica entered the so-called thechnetronic era.

Presidential elections are no exception from being influenced by the technology of electronics, i. e., television. Since 1952 television has become one of the major weapons for presidential elections. Eisen- hower's•gimage•hof an affectionate father was created and sold through TV by the staffs of Batten, Barton, Durstein & Osborn advertizing agency. Whistle-stop campaign ended up with nostalgia. In

1960 the•gGreat TV Debate•hwas waged between Kennedy and Nixon, and a fresh•gimage•hof Kennedy on the TV screen helped his way to the White House.

With the development of using TV as a campaign technique, the emphasis was put on packaging and selling a favorable•gimage•hof candidates under the highly calculated and controlled situation. Since

1950's it has been discussed among journalists, authors and scholars whether the•gNeo-Owellian Revolution•hhas taken place in America.

At any rate, in order to win the race it is highly important to organize a campaign team which is composed of journalists, advertizing agency

PR men and computer technicians, and the so-called advance men.

They are highly capable of manipulating electronic media to package candidates. We can find a typical•gmodern•helection team in the case of Nixon campaign in 1968.

Indeed, those campaign specialists have contributed greatly to selling the•gimage•hof a candidate, but the•gimage•hcannot be a•greality•hand the more they try to hard-sell the•gimage•hof a candidate, the less the real issue and the personality of the candidate penetrate among the electrate. Under such circumstances, it is difficult to discuss a•ghero•hin the election campaign who should be a real man of•gdis-

―234― tinguished courage or ability, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities.•hIt is reported that spot commercials of all the candidates in the 1968 elections were on air more than 5 million times. Messages carried by commercials of only 30 seconds or less are nothing but one- sided and partial, to say nothing of constructive. It is also reported that commercials tend to become more and more•gnegative•hin style.

When we talk about•gheroes,•hit is necessary to have an enthusiastic mood among the people who expect the appearance of•gheroes.•h

Unfortunately the people, or to be more specific, the electorate are not enthusiastic. The so-called•ginstitutionalized presidency•hcontributed to give an effect that even a President is one of the organization men in the executive branch of the government. A long-term trend of the

electorate demonstrates that their party affiliations, voting turn-outs

and political interests are on the decline.

Considering all the factors discussed above, it is highly unlikely

that a•ghero•hwill be born in the process of presidential elections. It

seems that those who manipulate electronic gadgets and produce presi-

dential elections might be a new type of•gheroes.•hBut they are mani-

pulators behind the curtain and their skill has not been closely associated with the ability to govern in a democracy like that of America. How-

ever, America is changing and Americans are trying hard to get rid of traumatic events of Vietnam and Watergate. Will a national•ghero•h be born in America in her third century?America is now under an ordeal and endeavoring hard to find the way for self-renewal.

The Magdalena Bay Episode, 1911-1912 The Monroe Doctrine and Japan

Iyo Kunimoto

Magdalena Bay is located on the Western coast of Baja California and has long been isolated from the mainstream of Mexican history.

―235― The bay was, however, recognized as one of the best natural harbors on the Pacific coast of North America; and in the late nineteenth century it became useful to the United States Navy as a coaling station and target practice area. A large tract of land along the Pacific coast of

Baja California, including the Magdalena Bay area, was sold to an

American corporation, Flores & Hale Co., in 1884.

The bay had attracted a great deal of attention from defense- minded Americans as a strategic point on the last and therefore the most important defense line of the United States. Consequently matters were blown out of proportion when it was rumored that the Japanese military was contemplating to establish a foothold in the bay. The rumor had been periodically abroad between 1910 and 1919.

The Magdalena Bay episode of 1911-1912 was one of the distaste- ful episodes relating to Japan which had been stirred up by American journalism in the early twentieth century. The incident started when California newspapermen in 1911 uncovered evidence of Japanese interests in the Magdalena Bay area; and the resulting concern over the threat of the establishment of a Japanese military foothold in

Mexican territory was widely publicized in the United States. As a result the United States Senate investigated the reports and finally adopted a resolution, declaring that•gwhen any harbor or other place in the American continents is so situated that the occupation thereof for naval or military purposes might threaten the communications or the safety of the United States, the Government of the United States could not see without grave concern the possession of such harbor or place by any corporation or association which has such a relation to another Government, not America, as to give that Government practical power of control for naval or military purposes.•hThis resolution, although it contained no reference to the Monroe Doctrine, has been called the Lodge Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, and was in sub- stance a declaration aimed at the exclusion of Japanese influence from the Western Hemisphere.

There is no doubt that the sensationalism relating to the episode was largely unfounded. In particular, it is very difficult to believe that

―236― Japan was trying to establish military interests in any part of the Western Hemisphere. The point is, however, that the action of the U. S. Senate in the summer of 1912 undoubtedly represented the mood of the American people at that time. The Lodge Corollary indicated American national sentiment toward Japan, and it was illustrative of the fashion in which the United States claimed control of the Western Hemisphere. In this paper the background of the Magdalena Bay episode, particularly from the viewpoint of Japanese economic activities in the concerned Mexican territory, will be clarified, and then the reaction of the U. S., Japanese, and Mexican governments will be examined. This paper focuses on the nature of the responses that the U. S. State Depart- ment made in the light of the sensationalism that had been created by American journalism in regard to Magdalena Bay as well as on the attitude that the State Department took toward Japan and Mexico.

“National Policy”in Canadian Historiography

and the Evolution of Canadian Nationalism

Yuko Ohara

In Canadian historical writings, the term•gnational policy•hhas

often meant specific governmental policies: that is, the policies of

protective tariffs, railway development and western settlement. Origi- nally, the term•gNational Policy•hin capitalized form indicated a policy

of protective tariffs adopted by the Conservative party under John A.

Macdonald in 1879. This study investigates the process by which the

concept of•gnational policy•hevolved and the meaning of that process

interpreted in Canadian historical scholarship. “National Policy”historiography can be divided into three parts .

Earliest historians tended to define•gNational Policy•hjust as a

policy of protective tariffs. A significant exception, however, was J. C.

―237― Hopkins who, in defending the•gNational Policy•hfrom its critics during the Liberal era, argued that it should be judged as including not only tariff but other policies such as the construction of a communication system and the encouragement of settlement in the Northwest.

Hopkins' broader definition of the term did not become popular until the 1930's when W. S. Mackintosh and other scholars writing for the Rowell-Sirois Commission outlined a tripartite•gnational policy•h as a central theme in Canadian economic development.

After the Second World War, the nationalist historians succeeded in combining•gNational Policy•hof Sir John A. Macdonald with the tripartite•gnational policies•hand emphasized the intertwined nature of the three pillars. Donald Creighton was perhaps the first who employed the capitalized term in describing these policies and associating their origin with his hero, John A. Macdonald. His colleague, J. M. S. Care- less, followed him and commended it for promoting not only economic but political development of Canada. R. C. Brown used the term in the broadest sense and united the•gspirit•hof the•gNational Policy•hwith

Canadian nationalism. Even the severest critics of•gNational Policy,•h such as J. H. Dales, who questioned its ultimate benefit for Canadian development, accepted the existence and importance of a tripartite “National Policy .” It is now exceptional, indeed, to find historians like

Peter Waite, treating the concept only in the sense used by the con- temporaries of 1879. At last,•gNational Policy•his identified with

Canadian nationalism by most of the Canadian historians regarding it as a great blue-print for nation-building.

In determining the meaning of•gNational Policy,•hCanadian historians' viewpoints seem to have been more influential than historial facts. O. D. Skelton's evaluation of the role of the•gNational Policy•h in attaining economic independence reflected his preoccupation with autonomy in the post-World War I period. H. A. Innis gave a geo- graphically deterministic interpretation of Canadian history which easily leant itself to an emphasis on•gNational Policy•has completing the line of east-west communication which originated in the St. Laurence river system. Historians such as Creighton, Careless, W. L. Morton and

―238― Brown have been happy to express their patriotism in economic terms while playing down the problem of cultural differences between English and French Canadians which have become more apparent to English

Canadians since the•gquiet revolution.•hDales' criticism of the•gNational

Policy•hin the 1960's was suggestive both of the affluence of the period

and a growing disillusionment with the•gbranch plant•heconomy

developed by massive American investiment after the war. After all,

the main theme which Canadian historians seem to have pursued in

common in their historical writings was a belief in the necessity of

nation-building on the North American Continent; and they tried to

demonstrate the validity of Canadian nationalism which they sought

to express through the question-begging term•gNational Policy•h

It is important that when using the term•gNational Policy•hthe

scholar makes its meaning clear in the context in which it is used, thus

avoiding implying a conscious overall policy among statements which

may not have expressed it. Moreover, in Canada, by emphasizing a

termwhich was originally connected with economic development, histo-

rians have tended to explain the evolution of a political nation within an

economic framework. Isn't it time for the scholars of Canadian history

to find a cultural framework for Canadian development?

‘Frontier’Studies in Europe

Masaharu Watanabe

The purpose of this essay is to review the situation of American

Studies in European countries with a focus on the•eFrontier•fstudies

researches on Turner and the Frontier thesis. As I already introduced

the situation in Canada and Australia in another place, this paper is

the second step of my research on the acceptance of and criticism on

Turner and his thesis in the world. In this second step, I have collected

about 115books, pamphlets and articles published by European authors.

―239― Of these European works, this essay mainly deals with the following:

(a) the Frontier thesis in general, (b) the safety-valve theory, and (c) comparative frontier studies.

G. Pfeifer, J. L. M. Gulley, H. C. Allen, R. H. Beck, P. S. Anderson,

C. Fohlen and N. N. Bolkhovitinov and some others published general studies of the Frontier thesis. They are, roughly speaking, influenced by the trends in research in the United States. During the 1930's and '40's , there were severe criticisms on Turner and his thesis in the United States. Until about 1955 books and articles published in Europe had the same tendency, and after that they have been influenced again by the American tendency of favorable reexamination of the thesis. How- ever, the articles by Bolkhovitinov are a little different from those produced in Western Europe. He emphasizes that the Frontier thesis is deeply related to the imperialistic expansionism of the United States and that Turner's wrong interpretation of American capitalism needs to be criticized from the viewpoint of social-econimic history.

Although most of scholars interested in the Frontier thesis in general have dealt with the safety-valve theory, only a few of them have discussed it analytically. W. Sombart, like Hegel and some others, paid attention to the role of free land in the United States from the viewpoint of a kind of•esafety valve•ftheory. N. N. Bolkhovitinov published an article devoted to a critical discussion of this theory. Ac- cording to his interpretation, it is better to use the term•edynamic frontier•finstead of the•esafety-valve•f. Then he stressed the mechanism of this•edynamic frontier•fin American history as the basic factor in

American history. Although he recognized the role of the West and frontier for the development the United States, he denied the operation of the•esafety-valve•f, using the works critical to the •esafety-valve•f theory by F. A. Shannon, C. Danhof and P. W. Gates.

There are rather many works of comparative frontier studies. In understanding those works, we have to take into accout the fact that the term•efrontier•fin European languages has several meanings different from Turner's frontier. Even in English this word has many times been used differently from Turner's usage. Representative comparative

―240― studies of frontiers by European scholars are those by H. C. Allen and G. Shepperson of England, D. Gerhard of West Germany, A. N. J. Den Hollander of Holland, and E. I. Druzhinina of Russia.

(Most of these English summaries are written by respective authors. How- ever, the Chairman of the Editorial Board takes full responsibility for the edited version of all the summaries.-Tadashi Aruga)

―241―