by John Fritch Classical Antiquity and the Politics of America: From George Washington to George W. Bush. Edited by Michael Meckler. Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2006; pp. x + 231. $29.95 paper. American politics, education, and culture are greatly indebted to the ancient Greeks and Romans, who inspired many of the nation's greatest institutions, buildings, thinkers, and works of art. For centuries, schoolchildren were taught the speeches of Cicero, the governance of Plato, and the logic of Aristotle. Over time, the role of the classics in the educational system seemingly has waned. Yet, vestiges remain. Classical Antiquity and the Politics of America: From George Washington to George W. Bush offers a glimpse of the role that classical thought has played, and continues to play, in the United States. Its editor, Michael Meckler, expresses the volume's ambitious goal: "Yet once the intellectual landscape of American politics is stripped to its basic topography, the importance of the ancient Greeks and Romans becomes readily apparent. The essays in this volume attempt to reveal that importance, and how it has developed and changed from the Founders to the present day" (12). The book then examines the role of classical thought in a variety of social institutions, politicians, political ideologies, and American thinkers. As with any collection, some chapters contribute more directly to this stated goal than others. Overall, however, the quality of the book is quite high. The essays are interesting and readable, and remind us of the impact of Greek and Roman thought on American history. Scholars of argumentation and public address will find the first five chapters to be especially valuable. These chapters often discuss the importance of classical thought in the development of the American educational system. Each of the contributors argues that this system relied initially on a classical model of education. They also note the decreasing influence of classical models of education over time. Several themes here should interest scholars in argumentation and public address. First, many of the authors discuss the importance of rhetoric and public speaking in the classically-inspired curriculum of American education. They often point to rhetoric's place in the trivium of classical liberal arts and also stress the pragmatic importance of training in public speaking. For example, in "Classical Education in Colonial America," Ziobro writes: "One of the primary goals of a college education in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries was the attainment of skill in public speaking, useful to both the minister in the pulpit and the politician in the assembly" (25). As Ziobro notes, the primary aim of the early colonial colleges was to train ministers and citizen-statesmen, for whom oratory was an essential skill. It is particularly refreshing to see scholars from other disciplines--classicists, historians, and medievalists--recognize the importance of rhetoric and public address in colonial education. Second, several authors discuss departures from a classical system of education in the United States, shifts that took place over an extended period of time. The contributors do not romanticize the role of rhetoric, nor do they demand a return to classical ideals. Rather, they explore the debates and policy decisions that prompted profound changes. Politicians and academic leaders participated in these debates, which often focused on the relevance of classical education for different groups of students. One of the most interesting treatments is Ronnick's "William Sanders Scarborough and the Politics of Classical Education for African Americans." Ronnick examines the debate over the purpose of education for African Americans from the early 1830s through the 1920s. She focuses on a dispute between Scarborough and Booker T. Washington, in which Scarborough advocated a classical education while Washington advocated a more practical education that focused on agriculture. America's historically black colleges and universities reveal the outcome of this debate. Ronnick quotes Scarborough's autobiography: "I see now, as the controversy grows concerning the classics, no young colored men of the immediate present who are even meditating on special classical study. It is a great mistake, as the race will find out, to leave this field to others with the breadth and culture obtainable in it" (67). Other authors observe that classical studies were abandoned in other institutions as well. Winterer's essay, "Classical Oratory and Fears of Demagoguery in the Antebellum Era," argues that national expansion and increased suffrage, together with de-emphasis of classical education, altered the nature of leadership in the U.S.: To connect with this passionate and largely unschooled citizenry attracted by the populism of the Democrats and Antimasons, a more direct style of public speaking emerged. Political oratory began to deviate sharply from the ornate, highly formal, Ciceronian 'periodic' style so prized in the revolutionary era. The new breed of political orator not only spoke in an unadorned, straightforward style, but he might also openly mock the classically imbued styles of an earlier era. (45) Meckler, in "The Rise of Populism, the Decline of Classical Education, and the Seventeenth Amendment," argues that the founding of land grant universities contributed to the decline of classical education. The rise of populism and the Seventeenth Amendment, providing for the direct election of senators, fostered establishment of land grant institutions that emphasized agriculture and engineering. Meckler notes that the number of college educated senators dropped dramatically following adoption of the amendment, making the Senate more willing to fund forms of education deemed to be more practical. One difficulty with these chapters is that they tend to focus on limited disputes within a larger context of change in education and American political thought. The individual cases tend to be treated as causes, or at least highly determinative, of sweeping changes in higher education and politics. Such an interpretation of history is problematic. The volume's concluding chapters also should be of interest to scholars in argumentation and rhetoric. The final three chapters examine the influence of classical thought on contemporary political debates. One examines how contemporary understandings of Thucydides shaped U.S. policy during the Cold War; another explores Robert Byrd's references to Roman emperors in arguing against the line item veto; the third compares the Bush administration to the philosophy of classicist Leo Strauss. Although their approaches differ, each seeks to identify how our understanding of Greek and Roman history and political thought shape contemporary issues. Interestingly, two authors argue that misunderstanding led to undesirable policy outcomes. In his chapter on Thucydides and the Cold War, Tritle contends: "Because history does not necessarily always teach lessons, the use of Thucydides in an exemplary sense is surely misleading.... That such comparisons were popular during the period does not make them valid" (140). More importantly, he notes, a fuller appreciation of Thucydides would have predicted that the U.S. would lose the Cold War. These final essays, while interesting and insightful, also illustrate some obvious dangers of applying classical studies to contemporary issues. I doubt that this book meets its ambitious goal, but it is interesting reading for those concerned about the classics and their relevance to American educational and political life. JOHN FRITCH University of Northern Iowa |
Publication Information: Article Title: Classical Antiquity and the Politics of America: From George Washington to George W. Bush. Contributors: John Fritch - author. Journal Title: Argumentation and Advocacy. Volume: 42. Issue: 4. Publication Year: 2006. Page Number: 227+. COPYRIGHT 2006 American Forensic Association; COPYRIGHT 2007 Gale Group
No comments:
Post a Comment