View
8
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
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 leader-
ship 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 con-
duct 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 initia-
tive, 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, con-
fidence 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 actualfact, 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 im-
portant 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 industryin the second half of the 19th century. A child of poor immigrants from
Scotland, Carnegie came to Allegheny, Pennsylvania, in 1848. He wasonly 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 develop-
ed 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 whenhe 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 onhis 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 optimis-
tic 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 heroestended to lose their former prestige. The 1920's were such an age. De-
bunking of former national heroes, including George Washington, be-
came fashionable. Lindbergh was one of the new heroes-the mostmagnificent 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 com-
munity which played a positive role in spreading understanding andmobilizing 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 pro-test 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 atthe 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 com-
munity 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 pro-
test movement. Christianity is not only a common cultural base be-
tween 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 move-
ment 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 educa-
tion. 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 for-
mal 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 highlyorganized and institutionalized that no individual could exert his per-
sonal capacity which might have made him a hero; expansion of the
―233―
right-to-know, democratization and equalization in society also con-
tributed 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 adver-
tizing 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•greal-
ity•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 enthusias-
tic 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 theWestern 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 theconcerned 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 byAmerican 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 communica-
tion 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 histo-
rians' 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 pro-
duced 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 pub-
lished 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 differ-
ent 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. DenHollander 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―
Recommended