“History is the best antidote to delusions of omnipotence and omniscience, ” he said, forcing us “to a recognition of the fact, so often and so sadly displayed, that the future outwits all our certitudes.”
"All this, though, was a mere prelude to Mr. Schlesinger’s own brief reflections, as he put it, on the “relevance of history. ” His first point was that historians themselves are prisoners of their own experience, committed “to a doomed enterprise — the quest for an unattainable objectivity.” It was a disarming way of acknowledging the critics who had suggested that he, at times, had shaped history to fit his own liberal agenda. It was also a summons to other historians to be willing to concede error and revisit the past." ROBERT B. SEMPLE JR.
-from the NYT editorial on the continuation below.
“Problems will always torment us,” he wrote, “because all important problems are insoluble: that is why they are important. The good comes from the continuing struggle to try and solve them, not from the vain hope of their solution.”***
Mr. Schlesinger saw life as a walk through history. He wrote that he could not stroll down Fifth Avenue without wondering how the street and the people on it would have looked a hundred years ago.
“He is willing to argue that the search for an understanding of the past is not simply an aesthetic exercise but a path to the understanding of our own time,” Alan Brinkley, the historian, wrote.
***
The NYT editorial:
March 2, 2007
Appreciations
A Historian’s Valedictory
By ROBERT B. SEMPLE Jr.
Arthur Schlesinger Jr. could be blunt. The worst he would say about George W. Bush in the early going was that he was “an amiable mediocrity.” But it did not take long for President Bush to fall close to the very bottom of Mr. Schlesinger’s not inconsiderable list of bad presidents — in large part because he had committed the one mistake that a great historian could not abide, which was to wantonly ignore the experience of history.
Mr. Schlesinger died on Wednesday night at the age of 89. He had managed an active social life until the end — he suffered his heart attack in a Manhattan restaurant — and every morning he rose and did some serious writing.
But he had grown frail and bent, so in December a lunch in New York was organized in his honor. The room was thick with tributes to his monumental works on the New Deal, his Bancroft and Pulitzer Prizes (one, for “The Age of Jackson,” awarded at the ripe old age of 27), and his service in the Kennedy administration.
All this, though, was a mere prelude to Mr. Schlesinger’s own brief reflections, as he put it, on the “relevance of history. ” His first point was that historians themselves are prisoners of their own experience, committed “to a doomed enterprise — the quest for an unattainable objectivity.” It was a disarming way of acknowledging the critics who had suggested that he, at times, had shaped history to fit his own liberal agenda. It was also a summons to other historians to be willing to concede error and revisit the past.
But a far more grievous failing, he said, is to ignore history altogether, especially in a nation that has so often demonstrated imperial appetites. “History is the best antidote to delusions of omnipotence and omniscience, ” he said, forcing us “to a recognition of the fact, so often and so sadly displayed, that the future outwits all our certitudes.”
Is there a better description of the arrogance that has led to our current predicament? Mr. Schlesinger did not mention anyone by name, partly because it was unnecessary, but also because Mr. Bush was hardly alone in his indifference to the ironies of history. ROBERT B. SEMPLE JR.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company
***
The NYT obituary:
Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., a Partisan Historian of Power, Is Dead at 89
Share
By DOUGLAS MARTIN
Published: March 2, 2007
Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., the historian whose more than 20 books shaped discussions for two generations about America’s past and who himself was a provocative, unabashedly liberal partisan, most notably while serving in the Kennedy White House, died Wednesday night in Manhattan. He was 89.
Enlarge This Image
Jack Manning/The New York Times
Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. in his office at the City University of New York.
Reviews From the Archives
'The Age of Jackson' (1945)
'The Crisis of the Old Order, 1919-1933: Vol. I of "The Age of Roosevelt"' (1957)
'The Coming of the New Deal: Vol. II of "The Age of Roosevelt"' (1959)
'The Politics of Upheaval: Vol. III of "The Age of Roosevelt"' (1960)
'A Thousand Days: John F. Kennedy in the White House' (1965)
'The Imperial Presidency' (1973)
'Robert Kennedy and His Times' (1978)
More Reviews and Articles: Featured Author Page
His death, at New York Downtown Hospital, was caused by a heart attack he suffered earlier during a family dinner at Bobby Van’s Steakhouse in Lower Manhattan, his son Stephen said.
Twice awarded the Pulitzer Prize and the National Book Award, Mr. Schlesinger exhaustively examined the administrations of two prominent presidents, Andrew Jackson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, against a vast background of regional and economic rivalries. He argued that strong individuals like Jackson and Roosevelt could bend history.
The notes he took for President John F. Kennedy, for the president’s use in writing his history, became, after Mr. Kennedy’s assassination, grist for Mr. Schlesinger’s own account, “A Thousand Days: John F. Kennedy in the White House.” It won both the Pulitzer and a National Book Award in 1966.
His 1978 book on the president’s brother, “Robert Kennedy and His Times,” lauded the subject as the most politically creative man of his time. But he acknowledged that Robert had played a larger role in trying to overthrow President Fidel Castro of Cuba than Mr. Schlesinger had acknowledged in “A Thousand Days.”
Mr. Schlesinger worked on both brothers’ presidential campaigns, and some critics suggested he had trouble separating history from sentiment. Gore Vidal called “A Thousand Days” a political novel, and many noted that the book ignored the president’s sexual wanderings. Others were unhappy that he told so much, particularly in asserting that the president had been unhappy with his secretary of state, Dean Rusk.
Mr. Schlesinger saw life as a walk through history. He wrote that he could not stroll down Fifth Avenue without wondering how the street and the people on it would have looked a hundred years ago.
“He is willing to argue that the search for an understanding of the past is not simply an aesthetic exercise but a path to the understanding of our own time,” Alan Brinkley, the historian, wrote.
Mr. Schlesinger wore a trademark dotted bowtie, showed an acid wit and had a magnificent bounce to his step. He was a lifelong aficionado of perfectly blended martinis. Between marathons of writing as much as 5,000 words a day, he was a fixture at Georgetown salons when Washington was clubbier and more elitist. In New York, he was a man about town, whether at Truman Capote’s famous parties or escorting Jacqueline Kennedy to the movies.
In the McCarthy era and beyond, he was a leader of anti-Communist liberals and a fierce partisan. He called for the impeachment of Richard M. Nixon, which never happened, and just as passionately denounced that of President Bill Clinton, when it did.
In his last book, “War and the American Presidency,” published in 2004, Mr. Schlesinger challenged the foundations of the foreign policy of President Bush, calling the invasion of Iraq and its aftermath “a ghastly mess.” He said the president’s curbs on civil liberties would have the same result as similar actions throughout American history.
“We hate ourselves in the morning,” he wrote.
A Family Penchant for History
However liberal, he was no slave to what came to be called political correctness. He spiritedly defended the old-fashioned American melting pot against proponents of multiculturalism, the idea that ethnicities should retain separate identities and even celebrate them. He elicited tides of criticism by comparing Afrocentrism to the Ku Klux Klan.
History and its telling, quite literally, ran in Mr. Schlesinger’s blood. One of his reputed ancestors was George Bancroft, who over 40 years starting in 1834 wrote the monumental 12-volume “History of the United States from the Discovery of the Continent.” His father, Arthur M. Schlesinger, was an immensely influential historian who led the way in making social history a genuine discipline.
In his early teens, the son changed his middle name from Bancroft to Meier, his father’s middle name, and began calling himself junior. He would later adopt and develop many of his father’s ideas about history, including the theory that history moves in cycles from liberal to conservative periods. His father gave him the idea for his Harvard honors thesis.
But the younger Mr. Schlesinger, for all the tradition he embodied, had a refreshing streak of informality. While working in the Kennedy White House, he found time to review movies for Show magazine. He also admitted his mistakes. One, he said, was neglecting to mention President Jackson’s brutal treatment of the Indians in his Pulitzer Prize-winning “Age of Jackson.” It was published when he was 27, and is still standard reading.
The book rejected earlier interpretations linking the rise of Jacksonian democracy with westward expansion. Instead, it gave greater importance to a coalition of intellectuals and workers in the Northeast who were determined to check the growing power of business.
The book sold more than 90,000 copies in its first year and won the 1946 Pulitzer Prize for history.
His multivolume history of the New Deal, “The Age of Roosevelt,” began in 1957 with “The Crisis of the Old Order, 1919-1933,” continued in 1959 with “The Coming of the New Deal” and culminated in 1960 with “The Politics of Upheaval.” The first volume won two prestigious awards for history-writing, the Francis Parkman Prize from the Society of American Historians and the Frederic Bancroft Prize from Columbia University. The book was praised as capturing the interplay between ideas and action, emphasizing tensions similar to those Mr. Schlesinger had described in the Jackson era.
“This book clearly launches one of the important historical enterprises of our time,” the historian C. Vann Woodward wrote in The Saturday Review.
Mr. Schlesinger never stopped seeming like the brightest student in class, “the eternal Quiz Kid,” in Time magazine’s phrase. He had no advanced degrees, but his scholarly output, not to mention reams of articles for popular publications like TV Guide and Ladies’ Home Journal, dwarfed those who did. Even as a child he felt a duty to manage conversations, not to say monopolize them.
An article in The New York Times Magazine in 1965 told of his mother asking him to be quiet so she could make her point.
“Mother, how can I be quiet if you insist upon making statements that are not factually accurate,” the boy, then 11 or 12, replied.
Arthur Bancroft Schlesinger was born in Columbus, Ohio, on Oct. 15, 1917, the elder of the two sons of Arthur Meier Schlesinger and the former Elizabeth Bancroft. The younger Mr. Schlesinger wrote approvingly that Bancroft the historian, who may have been a distant cousin, was a presidential ghostwriter and bon vivant in addition to being called the father of American history.
It was his father whom “young Arthur,” as he was known, idolized. His argument that urban labor was behind much of the upheaval in Jackson’s time was taken up and brilliantly expanded by his son.
The younger Schlesinger, in the first volume of his memoirs, “A Life in the Twentieth Century: Innocent Beginnings, 1917-1950” (2000), called his childhood “sunny.” He spent his earliest years in Iowa City, where his father was on the faculty of the University of Iowa. The family moved to Cambridge, Mass., in 1924, when his father was appointed to the Harvard faculty. Arthur Sr. later became chairman of the Harvard history department.
Young Arthur first attended public schools in Cambridge, but his parents lost faith in public education in his sophomore year after a civics teacher informed Arthur’s class that inhabitants of Albania were called Albinos and had white hair and pink eyes. He was shipped to the Phillips Exeter Academy in New Hampshire.
He graduated at 15, but the family felt he was too young to go to Harvard. So, while his father was on sabbatical, the whole family took a long trip around the world. Mr. Schlesinger then went on to Harvard and graduated summa cum laude in 1938.
Beginning in boyhood he socialized with his father’s intellectually powerful friends, from the humorist James Thurber to the novelist John Dos Passos. When he was 14, he met H. L. Mencken, and later corresponded with him. At Harvard, he knew such leading intellectual lights as the historian Samuel Eliot Morison.
Well-Connected Friends
Mr. Schlesinger later became part of the powerful circle surrounding the journalist Joseph Alsop, a group that included Philip Graham, publisher of The Washington Post, W. Averell Harriman, former governor of New York, and the lawyer Clark Clifford. Mr. Schlesinger met Mr. Kennedy, then a senator, at an Alsop soiree. His impression: “Kennedy seemed very sincere and not unintelligent, but kind of on the conservative side.”
Mr. Schlesinger, partly through his appreciation of history, fully realized his good fortune. “I have lived through interesting times and had the luck of knowing some interesting people,” he wrote.
A huge part of his luck was his father, who guided much of his early research, and even suggested the topic for his senior honors: Orestes A. Brownson, a 19th-century journalist, novelist and theologian. It was published by Little, Brown in 1938 as “Orestes A. Brownson: A Pilgrim’s Progress.” Henry Steele Commager in The New York Times Book Review said the book introduced “a new and distinguished talent in the field of historical portraiture.”
Mr. Schlesinger spent a year in England on a fellowship at Peterhouse College of Cambridge University, then returned to Harvard, where he had been selected to be one of the first crop of junior fellows. Their research was supported for three years, but they were not allowed to pursue Ph.D.’s, a requirement intended to keep them off the standard academic treadmill.
While a fellow, Mr. Schlesinger married Marian Cannon, whom he had met during his junior year at Harvard. Her sister was married to John King Fairbank, the eminent sinologist. The Schlesingers had twins, Stephen and Katharine, and two more children, Christina and Andrew. They were divorced in 1970. Katharine died in 2004.
Mr. Schlesinger married Alexandra Emmet in 1971. They had a boy, Robert, named for Robert F. Kennedy. She had a son from a previous marriage, Peter Allan. Mr. Schlesinger is survived by all three, in addition to his former wife and their three surviving children. Stephen and Andrew Schlesinger are editing their father’s journals from 1952 to 1998, and plan to publish them in the fall, through Penguin Press.
As a Harvard fellow, Mr. Schlesinger managed to pound out 4,000 to 5,000 words a day on the Jackson work as his year-old twins frolicked around his desk. His work on the book was interrupted by World War II. Bad eyesight precluded his serving in the military, so he got a job as a writer for the Office of War Information. One assignment was writing a message from President Roosevelt to the Daughters of the American Revolution. Mr. Schlesinger doubted that the president saw such masterpieces.
He next served in the Office of Strategic Services, forerunner of the Central Intelligence Agency, in Washington, London and Paris. Immediately after the war, Mr. Schlesinger went to Washington as a freelance journalist for Fortune and other magazines. After 15 months, in 1946, he accepted an associate professorship at Harvard. He said he was so nervous teaching that he vomited before each class; eventually, his presentation became so deft that his History 169 course was the department’s most popular offering.
He began to carve out a political identity, one committed to the social goals of the New Deal and staunchly anti-Communist. In 1947, he was a founder of the Americans for Democratic Action, the best-known liberal pressure group.
In 1949, Mr. Schlesinger solidified his position as the spokesman for postwar liberalism with his book “The Vital Center: The Politics of Freedom.” Inspired by the Protestant theologian Reinhold Niebuhr, he argued that pragmatic, reform-minded liberalism, limited in scope, was the best that man could hope for politically.
“Problems will always torment us,” he wrote, “because all important problems are insoluble: that is why they are important. The good comes from the continuing struggle to try and solve them, not from the vain hope of their solution.”
Starting with writing speeches for Adlai Stevenson in both his presidential campaigns, Mr. Schlesinger was a player in big-time Democratic politics. Even though Senator Barry Goldwater tried to have him fired from the Kennedy White House because of his liberal bias, one of Goldwater’s colleagues paid Mr. Schlesinger something of a compliment.
As quoted anonymously in “The Making of the President, 1964” by Theodore H. White, the Goldwater associate said: “At least you got to say this for a liberal s.o.b. like Schlesinger — when his candidates go into action, he’s there writing speeches for them.”
And books. One of his major contributions to the Kennedy campaign was a book, “Kennedy or Nixon: Does It Make Any Difference?” Under Nixon, the book concluded, the country would “sink into mediocrity and cant and payola and boredom.” Kennedy meant rising to “the splendor of our ideals.”
On Jan. 9, 1961, a gray, chilly, afternoon, President-elect Kennedy dropped by Mr. Schlesinger’s house on Irving Street in Cambridge. He asked the professor to be a special assistant in the White House. Mr. Schlesinger answered, “If you think I can help, I would like to come.”
In “Johnny, We Hardly Knew Ye,” (1970) Kenneth P. O’Donnell and David F. Powers suggest that the new president saw some political risk in hiring such an unabashed liberal. He decided to keep the appointment quiet until another liberal, Chester Bowles, became under secretary of state.
The authors, both Kennedy aides, said they asked Kennedy if he took Mr. Schlesinger on to write the official history of the administration. Kennedy said he would write it himself.
“But Arthur will probably write his own,” the president said, “and it will be better for us if he’s in the White House, seeing what goes on, instead of reading about it in The New York Times and Time magazine.”
Time later described Mr. Schlesinger’s role in the Kennedy administration as a bridge to the intelligentsia as well as to the Adlai Stevenson-Eleanor Roosevelt wing of the Democratic Party. If the president wanted to meet the intellectual Isaiah Berlin or the composer Gian Carlo Menotti, Mr. Schlesinger arranged it. The president was said to enjoy Mr. Schlesinger’s gossip during weekly lunches, although he rarely attended the brainy seminars Robert Kennedy asked Mr. Schlesinger to organize at Robert’s home in Hickory Hill, Va.
Mr. Schlesinger distinguished himself early in the administration by being one of the few in the White House to question the invasion of Cuba planned by the Eisenhower administration. But he then became a loyal soldier, telling reporters a misleading story that the Cuban exiles landing at the Bay of Pigs were no greater than 400 when in fact they numbered 1,400.
In a discussion of that ill-fated attack afterward, McGeorge Bundy, the national security adviser, reminded the president that Mr. Schlesinger had written a memorandum opposing the invasion. “That will look pretty good when he gets around to writing his book about my administration,” Kennedy said. “Only he better not publish that memorandum while I’m still alive.”
After Kennedy was assassinated, President Lyndon B. Johnson kept Mr. Schlesinger on but gave him virtually nothing to do. He resigned in January 1964. Mr. Schlesinger soon wrote an article saying that John Kennedy had not really wanted Johnson as his vice-presidential candidate, but had picked him for political reasons.
Mr. Schlesinger, who resigned from Harvard when his leave of absence expired in 1962, worked on his Kennedy book and for the first few months of 1966 was at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J. He then joined the faculty of the City University of New York as Albert Schweitzer professor of the humanities.
He settled in Manhattan, where he remained until his death. His visibility was high — from the society pages to the column he wrote for the op-ed page of The Wall Street Journal to television appearances. He continued to protect the Kennedy image despite steady disclosures that smudged it. In 1996, he angered conservatives by selecting historians for a poll that found Presidents Kennedy and Johnson had been “high average” presidents and President Ronald Reagan “low average.”
His writing was ceaseless, including the book and articles criticizing the Iraq war. In “The Imperial Presidency” (1973), he argued that President Richard M. Nixon had so magnified the powers of the president that he must be impeached. In a review, Jeane Kirkpatrick, the ambassador to the United Nations under Reagan, retorted that Mr. Schlesinger had applied different standards to Democratic presidents.
Comparing the Kennedys
In 1978, Mr. Schlesinger scored a literary and commercial triumph with “Robert Kennedy and His Times.” In The New York Times Book Review, Garry Wills, who had once called Mr. Schlesinger “a Kennedy courtier,” rated the work “learned and thorough.” It won a National Book Award.
In the book, Mr. Schlesinger compared the brothers: “John Kennedy was a realist brilliantly disguised as a romantic, Robert Kennedy, a romantic stubbornly disguised as a realist.”
Mr. Schlesinger had hoped that Robert would ignite a new spirit of liberalism but grew disappointed when Jimmy Carter rose to lead the Democratic Party in 1976. He considered Mr. Carter woefully conservative and did not vote for him in either of his campaigns. He worked for Senator Edward M. Kennedy in his unsuccessful presidential campaign in 1980.
In 1991, Mr. Schlesinger provoked a backlash with “The Disuniting of America,” an attack on the emergent “multicultural society” in which he said Afrocentrists claimed superiority and demanded that their separate identity be honored by schools and other institutions.
The novelist Ishmael Reed denounced Mr. Schlesinger as a “follower of David Duke,” the former Ku Klux Klan leader. The Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. caricatured Mr. Schlesinger’s arguments as a demand for “cultural white-face.”
Mr. Schlesinger was unfazed. He frequently described himself as an unreconstructed New Dealer whose basic thinking had changed little in a half-century.
“What the hell,” he answered when questioned by The Washington Post about his attack on multiculturalism. “You have to call them as you see them. This too shall pass.”
Mr. Schlesinger continued to write articles and sign petitions, and last year he received an award from the National Portrait Gallery for his presidential service. His failing health prevented him from attending the funeral of his good friend John Kenneth Galbraith last May.
Mr. Schlesinger’s son Stephen read some words he had written about Mr. Galbraith: “Underneath his joy in combat, he was a do-gooder in the dark of night.”
Reprinted from yesterday’s late editions.
Back to Top
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company
Privacy Policy
I liked this post very much as it has helped me a lot in my research and is quite interesting as well. Thank you for sharing this information with us.
Posted by: Assignment Writing | November 08, 2010 at 03:52 AM
I am a 1L and I did poorly my first semester. I have been reading, briefing, outlinging,praying younameit I've done it. I can't seem to grasp exam writing. I never know where to begin, what the I'm looking for- or should be looking for, and I dont trust my self. I have con law practice exam that I have been staring at for the past day and a half. I dont know what I am doing. I am to meet my professor so we can review it but I dont want to look like an unprepared sloppy jerk. Help me!!!
Posted by: Drowning in failed attempts | March 18, 2007 at 09:30 AM