Okay, I just finished one of the lighter bits (more on that one in a bit, it really deserves treatment all of its own), and finally started buckling down on Albion's Seed. It's one of those that's been sitting partly read for ages, and really needed finishing.
I may have said this before, but even if I have it bears repeating. If I had to recommend one single book for explaining "who we are and how got here" - this is the one. Now fair warning, it's a monster of 900-odd pages, but it traces the path of the major social groups of British North America into the New World. Where they came from (and why), where they went, and the rudiments of their cultures post-arrival. Necessarily a summary treatment in all cases, but even so - if you ever found yourself asking why do obnoxious meddling Yankees/cantankerous violent hillbillies/snotty Southern socialites do that???... this is the book for you. :)
Anyhow, I'd finished the backcountry Ulster Scot part ages ago, but this time picked the thing up again to start at the beginning, and just finished the Puritan New England section. Let's see, the high points....
1. The Puritans of New England came from the most urbane area of England (southeast), and it's probably fair to call them the middle-class yuppies of their era. That is - not generally of the peerage, but likewise hardly poor. Lots of skilled craftsman, and atypically highly educated for their time and place.
2. The motives of migration were generally (for the Bay colonies) Utopian. They picked and chose who could come, and often migrated as complete families.
3. The elite of the colony came from a limited number of families, which intermarried with some frequency. The religious leaders, while forbidden direct public office, seem nonetheless the de facto community leaders. "I am the parson who rules here." (p. 11)
4. Both by nature (rockier, colder soils), and deliberate intent the communities tended towards small townships of yeoman freeholders. Wealth disparities were deliberately flattened both through law (wage and price controls on and off, export restrictions in short times, etc), as well as heavy religious pressure on what constituted a decent and proper profit. Likewise inheritance laws changed from England, particularly by ending primogeniture, but also a number of smaller tweaks, done with the intention of leveling social inequality (de Tocqueville mentions this as well, and that it was done very deliberately.)
5. While the Puritans were not quite as dour as modern conceptions would paint them, they were still decidedly hard by modern standards. Very big on education, work, thrift, etc.
(a minor side note on the difference between "book history" and "living history."
The author mentions with a little incredulity the Puritan settlers in the early days being so grateful for their rye bread and bean soup while living on a bay full of lobster, all manner of shellfish and game about - why on earth would they go for beans??
The answer is plain to anyone who's gone out and lived anything even close - what's appealing at the fine restaurant with central heating and a leisurely lifestyle is not at all what's appealing when you're living in a drafty cottage in a cold wet climate and have been outside all day. Thick sticky carby goodness becomes heaven in a way the best shellfish can't match. :) )
5. Yes, the early Puritans really did wear those steeply hats and capes, Wikipedia's misconceptions page notwithstanding. Not so much in black though.. that was too presumptuous. :) (originals mentioned are Constance Hopkin's hat and Richard Smith's cloak.. though neither quite constitute the Thanksgiving "uniform" it's true. )
6. By the time of the Revolution, we're no longer talking a Puritan community per se, as a century of other immigration has softened the edges. Nonetheless, the general sensibility is still there after a century or so. Think modern Salt Lake City. You don't have to be a Mormon... but the culture's nonetheless still fairly pervasive, if not as rigidly doctrinal as it was at the time of the founding.
7. Order order order. Everything and everyone in their place, but not quite like back in England.They did intentionally reject the old English distinction of peerage and commoners, to the point of refusing to honor class privileges to a group of Puritan peers inquiring about relocating to the Bay Colony... so said peers stayed home (good riddance, says I).
That said, modern notions of liberty don't really apply. Lawmaking was local, but seemed pretty unrestrained in what it compel - to the point of citizens of Concord, Sudbury, and Dedham were not allowed to move away at one point as their numbers dwindled.
So yeah. Early New England. Homey, communal, orderly .... and very much with the town muckety mucks all up in your business.
The more things change, eh?
(oh, just wait till we work back around to the hillbillies. *heh* Bunch of frickin' loud mouthed savages. )
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I take it you haven't lived in Salt Lake City. 'Sensibility' isn't a word that comes to mind. It was more like 'Well darn, I've shot myself in the foot. Better shoot the other one to balance things out.' type of mindset out there.
Okay, so I haven't read that particular book. Mea culpa. Easily remedied, methinks.
That said, good report - and being descended from those "frickin' loud mouthed" hillbillies, I look forward to the next installment.
Well done.
M- "sensibility" as in "the sense of the place." :)
Never lived in SLC, but did live in a fairly Mormon-dense area of neighboring Idaho once upon a time. Truth be told, I really like the Mormons. I mean - I couldn't live like that, but the ones I met back that way are about the sweetest people I ever did meet.
Rev - depending on your interests it might seem dry now and again, and it's a *big* ol' book... but very very much worth it. :)
... though I'm afraid when it comes to reports, you're gonna have to suffer through "snooty tidewater aristocrats" and "loopy Quakers" first. :)
Nope, no sense in the place. They're nice people but aren't trained in thinking. They remind me of Catholics. When I was there, the church sold off their Coke stock and banned the drinking of soft drinks with caffeine. One day the Mormon were drinking Coke, the next not. No questioning of the doctrine change.
The best example was of a town near a ski canyon. This was a few years before the Olympics. A developer wanted to build a micro brewery/restaurant and bed and breakfast.
I saw the council meeting on TV. Every member said something positive about the project. New jobs, more money for the schools and roads. So they get to the last council member, and he say "it's a win-win, lets vote." The council voted unanimously against the project. They then went on to discuss how to prevent the coming bankruptcy of the town.
Michael, the LDS Church has never banned caffeinated beverages beyond tea and coffee. Individual Church members vary on their interpretation of that rule (and their insistence that others think as they do).
That said, I wouldn't want to live in SLC. I disagree strongly that "Mormons aren't trained in thinking" - on the contrary, it's one of the most studious and thoughtful of the major Christian faiths and one in which education and activity are positively correlated - but that isn't always evident in places where they have a strong cultural majority, because they don't have anything to prove. The Mormons I live amongst in Minnesota are among the most thoughtful and logical thinkers I've ever met.
FWIW, the same seeming lack of sense is evident in Catholicism in Italy (where this ex-Catholic Mormon elder served his mission), despite Catholicism's well-deserved reputation for scholarly achievement.
Just finished up The Forgotten Man, thanks, now I have a new one to snag me away from sleep. Sounds like a good book and anybody that doesn't like rye in all of it's forms is an odd duck anyway ;-)
I used to like to partake of and sometimes make rye whiskey as much as breads. It was a comfort food in both solid and liquid forms. Funny aside, one time I did a loaf of barley/rye bread and let it sit out a day or two when I was distracted after it'd been baked and the yeast went back to work. Didn't mold or spoil, but it turned itself into barley/rye-wine bread??? Was a very much comfort food that week. Was a neat mistake. Figured you might be amused.
That bookster is now officially in the "cue".
That said, good report - and being descended from those "frickin' loud mouthed" hillbillies, I look forward to the next installment.
That's why we dug the Ohio river.
I know you can't pigeon hole any religion. SLC was a big surprise for me coming from Cincinnati. I couldn't believe the number of women under 30 that had gone trough 2 marriages and either were looking for a third or on their third.
And then we had a few women at work that would host retreats to teach high school girls about cooking and keeping house.
From an outside view, it didn't look like LDS had a high regard for women. But it's hard to say what exactly was going on in SLC at that time. A large number of companies were moving in to the city from other states and could have changed the social dynamics of the younger Mormons.
Overall, Mormons were very friendly and great neighbors.
Tom, Amity Shlaes' The Forgotten Man is great. Just don't take it with you to NYC.
Tom bought this fine tome at the Joburg airport, forgetting he was connecting through Atlanta to get back to Texas. I got to meet an air marshall and there were a few tense moments but the captain of the plane came back and sorted things out and bought me a beer and didn't divert the aircraft as one of the stews had requested. Couldn't be any worse than that, right? She actually stated she was "afraid of me" because of the title of my book and trying to explain the book wasn't an "insult to her people" sorta dug me in a further hole until the pilot came back to sort things.
Post a Comment