The Worlds of American Intellectual History EDITED BY Joel Isaac Junes T Kloppenberg 1Hichael 013rien Jennifer Rntncr-Rosenhayen OXFORD U~IVERSITY PRESS OXFORD LT~IVERSITY PRESS Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and certain other countries. Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America. © Oxford University Press 2017 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction - rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above. You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Isaac,Joel, 1978- editor, author. I Kloppenberg,James T., editor, author. I O'Brien, Michael, 1948 April 13- editor, author. I Ramer-Rosenhagen,Jennifer, editor, author. Title: The worlds of American intellectual history/ edited by Joel Isaac,James T. Kloppenberg, Michael O'Brien,Jennifer Ratner-Rosenhagen. Description: New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2017. j In memory ofM ichael O'Brien Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 20160282381 ISBN 9780190459468 (hardcover) I April 13, 1948-May 6, 2015 ISBN 9780190459475 (pbk.) I ISBN 9780190646110 (online resource) I ISBN 9780190459482 (Ebook updf) I ISBN 9780190459499 (Ebook epub) Subjects: LCSH: United States-Intellectual life. Classification: LCC £169.1.W782016 I DDC 973-dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016028238 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Printed by Sheridan Books, Inc., United States of America tble Story of the Telegraph and the 1998). e Neto: Thinking about Electric rk: Oxford University Press, 1988), me Industry Discovers Sociability," 3,' . .rs, the Telephone, and Action at a ::; (2006), 715-41. See, for example, ires (1907). in the United States, ISS0-I9So acles of Leisure in Edith Wharton's 17 n Democracy (Lawrence: University New Directions, Then and Now Publicity ( Cambridge: Cambridge Angus Burgin .ugust 13, 1899. categorized two diverging sensibili- ld the "party of exposure." Howe~er, LS realist literature and sex reform) r1, Ihe Repeal ofR eticence: A History IN DECEMBER 1977, John Higham and Paul Conkin convened a gathering to discuss Obscenity, Sexual Liberation, and the state of American intellectual history at Wingspread, a Frank Lloyd Wright house near the shores of Lake Michigan.1 As Daniel Wickberg recently observed, the confer- .s' s approach as "part of a broader ence was held in the midst of a "wave of self-reflection" that "swept the discipline" in the :heir reputations from the masses" late 1970s and early 1980s. 2 Many of the participants shared a sense that the field was in nondisclosure from duties in rela- crisis, and the tenor of their conversations was fraught. For decades, the resulting vol- e Richards and Solove, "Prosser's ume, New Directions in American Intellectual History, received less attention than might .~ was being elevated above "char- have been expected based on its distinguish roster of contributors, but in recent years Lg of Twentieth-Century Culture," its name has resurfaced with increasing frequency. 3 The reason for this renewed interest l Society in the Twentieth Century is clear: as intellectual historians enter into a new generational wave of self-reflection, New Directions offers a unique point of comparison for assessments of methodological ·iew 126 (2013): 1906. Cohen's larger continuity and change. To what extent do the "worlds" of intellectual historians today ilitical theory, "has conceptualized resemble those encountered by our predecessors nearly four decades ago? The contributors to The Worlds of American Intellectual History have self- of Fingerprinttng and Criminal consciously eschewed this line of questioning, avoiding invocations of the Wingspread . 001). conference as either a model or a source of critical inquiry. With few exceptions, the >jeer to Requirement in New Law," ssion in The Soft Cage: Surveillance editors have steered these essays toward the exemplary rather than the theoretical, sic Books, 2003), 43-60. and the programmatic rather than the retrospective. There is much to commend in ·, October 7, 1922 • such an approach: it appeals to the practice-oriented sensibility shared by most his- torians, and caters to a widespread desire to move beyond the disciplinary quarrels of prior generations. Cumulatively, these essays imply that the future of the field will 343 344 Method New! emerge through a set of shared questions and problems, rather than through a critical many assessments of the state of th dialogue with its pasts. in the American Historical Revieu: c This sensibility, however, is made possible by our own distinctive moment in the University of Wisconsin. At the rii history of the profession. Those who return to New Directions will discover a very dif- titioners were still viewed as innov ferent set of assumptions about the role that a collection of essays on the state of the May recalls, his decision to teach , field should play. That conference, Higham and Conkin wrote in their initial grant felt "satisfyingly radical."6 Due in application, was intended for scholars who felt "beleaguered and defensive about their number of courses offered in the fie specialty."4 As one reviewer observed, many at the time shared an impression chat of senior professors that its methc American intellectual history had become "unbuttoned" and methodologically thin; ing figures were among the most c in Thomas Bender's more dire recollection, scholars were forced either to find alter- ofA merican Thought, which was p natives to scholarship on such reductive topics as the "American mind" or "prepare mentor at Wisconsin, Merle Curri the field for death."5 In such a moment, the contributors felt the need to dwell more early 1950s at their "most preferred extensively on the approaches they would avoid than on the problems and practices V. L. Parrington's Main Currents i they would adopt. They shared a belief that their visions for the future of the field earlier period, and books by Joseph could only emerge through a reckoning with the practices of prior generations. The received high rankings as well," Im vivid contrast between those assumptions and our own is indicative of a transformed by many as pioneering even as its rr social and institutional context, which has shaped intellectual historians' perceptions Higham' s initial treatment of tb of their current practices and projected futures. Understanding the trajectory of the ity in its status, intermittently rep1 field since Wingspread requires, however uneasily, historicizing ourselves. was "still seeking coherence, still At the time of the Wingspread conference, the field's practitioners were besieged accolades as the profession's "our st and questioned on all sides, and therefore eager to identify a positive research pro- mulated a "very extensive" monOgJ gram that would absolve them of the practices for which their predecessors had been a grand scale. Higham's agenda fo roundly criticized. Their posture was chastened, and their views were presented in oughly the incidence and inrensi deliberate contradistinction to those of their mentors and more senior colleagues. in its extensive ramifications rhro But such a defensive standpoint was unlikely to survive in a field that no longer found transitions," including "democrac its legitimacy under constant assault. In more recent years, as American intellectual race prejudice, anti-intellectualism historians have grown both in numbers and influence, they have begun again to established an ambitious program t embrace the ambitions of their midcentury predecessors. The methodological param- Land, could serve as an exemplar. eters articulated by the participants in the Wingspread conference have long since would help scholars along the jou begun to erode. Many of the field's leading practitioners today are again eschewing "American mind."? Emerging fron the archive, tracing concept blocs across vast expanses of time and space, seeking to defining itself, Higharn's essay glin articulate the spirit of an "age," engaging topics of contemporary political signifi- ods might address. cance, and embracing the many challenges of grand synthesis. Intellectual history, His subsequent writings provi for better and for worse, is once again a hubristic discipline, and its practitioners' the field. In a 1954 essay in the JG enthusiasm at the field's brightening future should be tempered by caution at the and Its Neighbors," he continued prospect of re-enacting the methodological excesses of its past. lingering methodological uncerra "the blessings of effervescence am confident in tone and ambitious NEW DIRECTIONS IN CONTEXT to serve as an "interdisciplinary e Shortly after American intellectual history came of age in the postwar era, John that drew on materials "from the Higham emerged as its most attentive internal chronicler.