Ballyhoo!: Posters as Portraiture

Image
Annotation

Ballyhoo! presents a concise history of advertising posters and their use of celebrity in the United States, as well as the export of U.S. celebrity to other countries. The website was initially created as an accompaniment to a National Portrait Gallery exhibit which ran in 2008 through 2009.

The site is broken down into an introduction and eight short explanatory sections, each with a two-paragraph essay and four to eight related posters to view.

Intertwined Development: Railroads and Political Parties

field_image
Question

How did railroads affect the political systems in 1870-1914?

Answer

Railroads and the political system have been intertwined since the first rail systems in the 1830s and 1840s when in the name of “internal improvements” the Whig Party supported government funding for start-up railroad companies. It was, however, during its rapid expansion in the post-Civil War era that the industry’s ties to the political system became controversial.

The federal government gave railroad companies thousands of acres of land on which to run their tracks. Men like Jay Gould, Cornelius Vanderbilt, E. A. Harriman, James J. Hill, and J.P. Morgan controlled a powerful industry. They wielded political power, too, by demanding the federal government send troops in to break up railroad strikes in 1877 and 1894. Meanwhile farmers began to protest the railroad’s monopoly over transportation rates. Congress responded with the Interstate Commerce Act (1887), which sought to prevent “pools” of interests from dominating industries. But given that both Republican and Democratic leaders benefited from gifts given by the railroad companies, real reform, it seemed, was going to have to come from outside the two-party system.

The People’s Party, or the Populists, emerged in the 1890s calling for strict regulation to rein in railroad companies’ power. By the early 1900s, self-styled “progressives” in both parties had picked up on the Populists’ and organized labor’s attacks on the railroads. During Theodore Roosevelt’s presidency, progressive Republicans and Democrats joined forces to pass the Elkins Act (1903), the Hepburn Act (1906) and, during William Howard Taft’s term as president, the Elkins-Mann Act (1910) and the Railroad Valuation Act (1913) all of which regulated the industry. Conservative Republicans pushed back by denying Roosevelt the nomination in 1912, thus causing a rift in the party and guaranteeing Woodrow Wilson’s election.

For more information

Central Pacific Railroad Photographic Museum Connolly, Michael J. Capitalism, Politics, and Railroads in Jacksonian New England (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2003). Martin, Albro. Railroads Triumphant (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992). Stover, John F. American Railroads (Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, second edition, 1997). Summers, Mark W. Railroads, Reconstruction, and the Gospel of Prosperity (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1984.

Bibliography

Martin, Albro. Railroads Triumphant (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992).

The National Atlas of the United States of America. "Presidential Elections 1908-1920." Last modified August 03 2010.

Mystery Strategy for Elementary Students

Image
Article Body
What Is It?

Using the premise of a mystery to solve, elementary students act as history detectives as they explore a historical question and analyze carefully chosen clues to formulate and test hypotheses.

Rationale

This strategy depends on our need to solve mysteries. Students are given an opportunity to be active learners as they solve a historical mystery. This strategy relates to what historians do and the process of historical inquiry. Students must work with evidence, form hypotheses, test those hypotheses, and report their findings.

Goals

The goals of the mystery strategy are to learn to: 1. gather, organize, and process information; 2. formulate and test hypotheses; 3. think creatively and analytically to solve problems; and 4. develop, defend, and present solutions to problems.

Teacher Preparation

1. Choose an topic that contains a mystery such as “Why did the American beaver almost become extinct in the 1840s?” Other examples of appropriate historical mysteries include: “How did flooding in Mississippi in 1931 hinder the Civil Rights Movement?”; “Who really invented the cotton gin?”; and “Was the Boston Massacre really a massacre?”

Data should tease the student without revealing too much.

2. Gather primary and secondary sources that will serve as clues for students such as letters, diary entries, maps, statistical tables, political cartoons, images, artifacts for students to touch (in this case beaver fur or felt), and web articles. These sources should pique students’ interest and provide them with clues that will help them generate theories. For example, if students are given a clue regarding the habitat and species characteristics of the beaver and then also told John Jacob Astor was the wealthiest man in America in 1848 it is hoped they conclude that Astor’s wealth had something to do with the beaver. Maps indicating trade routes should confirm this conclusion. Though they may be encountering names in the clues for the first time, making educated guesses is an essential ingredient to the mystery strategy. Students should not be afraid of making guesses or presenting ideas to the larger group. The learning goal is about what it takes to arrive at a hypothesis rather than ending up with a right answer. 3. Decide student grouping. If using small groups, keep individual needs in mind such as reading levels, ability to work with others, and Individual Education Plans (IEPs). 4. Decide how to present the clues to students (strips of paper within envelopes at stations, single sheets of paper for them to cut apart, etc.). See examples of clues for additional clues. Teachers should read through materials to pull clues that fit students’ needs and abilities.

In the Classroom

1. Students read through clues and sort them according to common elements. Once the clues are sorted, students begin to work on their hypothesis. 2. As students analyze the clues and arrive at a hypothesis, use guiding questions such as, “Tell me how the two things relate” and “What’s your reason for thinking that?” to keep students focused on solving the mystery. Avoid guiding them in a direction. The goal is for students to work with the clues and arrive at their own hypothesis. Students can use the Mystery Writing Guide Worksheet to record ideas. 3. In a whole group, have small groups share their hypotheses and evaluate them. Are they logical based on the clues? Do they make sense? Write group responses on the board so students can track their findings as they move through the evidence. The goal is to test each group hypothesis and arrive at the best conclusion. For example, if one group understands there is a connection between the mountain men and the beaver yet they also think the railroads had a role in the problem, do the clues support or refute these ideas? Remind students they are like historians looking at information to form a hypothesis, test it, and arrive at a conclusion.

Students are asked to think about the process of historical inquiry and how it relates to the steps they followed to arrive at a hypothesis

4. Assign each student a written reflection piece on the content learned and the process used to uncover the mystery. This is the most important part of the mystery strategy and should go beyond merely reporting content. Prompt students with questions such as: What happened in the activity? What things did you do well? Most importantly, ask, Which hypothesis best answers the mystery question? Why?

Common Pitfalls
  • Data should tease the student without revealing too much.
  • Data should hone inference skills.
  • Clues should provide information not an explanation (see Mystery Strategy Clues Worksheet).
Example

Students are presented with the following problem: Why did the American beaver almost become extinct in 1840? Write the question on the board so it is visible throughout the activity. Anticipatory Set: Begin by employing a student’s knowledge of science and ecosystems learned earlier. Give a short presentation about the American Beaver. This would include the fact that beavers maintain dams that create ponds. The water level in these ponds is constant, encouraging the growth of vegetation that supports many other types of animals. The dams also keep summer rains and resulting erosion in check. The presentation could end with figures about the number of beavers estimated to be in North America from European settlement to today (see links below). Students would see a significant decline in the population during exploration and settlement. This decline leads students to the essential question and they can begin working with the clues to make hypotheses. Clues: Clues can be obtained from….

  • images from fashion catalogs from the mid-1800s;
  • real beaver pelt and/or beaver trap, scraps of commercial felt, or images of    beaver fur and hats;
  • short biographical sketches of mountain men such as Kit Carson, John    Liver-Eating Johnston, and William Sublette;
  • Advertisements for beaver products such as top hats and ads from trading    companies seeking hunters. Scroll down through each page for the    aforementioned images.
  • newspaper accounts regarding skirmishes/battles between the Iroquois    Confederation/other tribes in the Great Lakes region in the Beaver Wars;
  • Quotes from all parties involved in the fur trade (Native American chiefs,    trading company owners such as Manuel Lisa, mountain men, etc.)
  • Pictures of people wearing beaver hats;
  • John Jacob Astor.

Be sure to use some visuals! Reflection: Students reflect on the original question by presenting their hypotheses in written form. Along with their response about the disappearance of the beaver, students are asked to think about the process of historical inquiry and how it relates to the steps they followed to arrive at a hypothesis.

Bibliography

American Beavers. Silver, Harvey.F., et. al. Teaching styles & strategies. Trenton, NJ: The Thoughtful Education Press, 1996.

Fine Line Between Thief and Entrepreneur

field_image
Question

Why is Donald Trump considered a “Captain of Industry” instead of a “Robber Baron”?

Answer

This provocative question contains at least four historical sub-questions: what’s a captain of industry? what’s a robber baron? what’s the difference? and is Mr. Trump either one? Clearly, there is also a judgmental tone to these terms – the first speaks of admiration, the second of condemnation – though by whom?

In time the two categories can blend

In America’s manufacturing age (c.1870-1970), “Captains of Industry” were men (always men, in my experience) who built and dominated an important section of the expanding US economy, then reached beyond their business interests to underwrite significant educational, cultural, medical or humanitarian projects. These individuals were our business statesmen, with Andrew Carnegie the classic example (libraries, an endowment for peace, an early fund for teachers’ pensions). Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are perhaps contemporary successors to the steel industry giant, both likewise making extensive philanthropic contributions. Robber barons, by contrast, achieved vast wealth by what many regarded as dubious means, even in the laissez-faire 19th century.

A “pure” robber baron would laugh off the disdain (and the envy) the title conveys, enjoying his pirate status.

Tricky stock maneuvers, shady contracts, credit squeezes, and at times outright fraud defeated competitors and paved the way to monopoly power (or to oligopolistic power-sharing among barons). As well, they used spies, lockouts, and force to crush their workers’ efforts to increase safety, job security, and earnings. Jay Gould, the high-energy railway consolidator, and John D. Rockefeller, the oil magnate, may stand out from the historical crowd, whereas in our financial age, Enron’s top leaders and Bernard Madoff might qualify. Robber barons may be seen as successful entrepreneurs who value money and power above all else. However, in time the two categories can blend. For example, although Rockefeller schemed mightily to create Standard Oil, his later charitable foundations, carried on by heirs, profoundly rehabilitated a spotty reputation. A “pure” robber baron would laugh off the disdain (and the envy) the title conveys, enjoying his pirate status. Now, on to Mr. Trump. My online research suggests that those describing him as a captain of industry tend to be journalists generally unaware of the term’s historical roots. Now it stands as a rough synonym for “big businessman.” Trump clearly did not build a major industry – his family had long been involved in real estate development, a long-established field to which he apprenticed and in which he prospered, twice weathering sharp reverses, in the 90s and after the 2008 economic smash. Though he managed dozens of deals, he has won without fraud and has often lost. One observer notes wisely that the term “captain of industry” represents “primarily a perception of the selflessness of the industrialist in question.” Though Mr. Trump has made many charitable donations, his successful self-promotion has made him a celebrity, so much so that condo developers have licensed his name, providing him an 8-15% royalty on gross sales. Thus, my sense is that Mr. Trump is neither a captain of industry nor a robber baron, but instead an extraordinarily-gifted entrepreneur who has transformed himself into a global brand.

For more information

Blair, Gwenda. The Trumps: Three Generations That Built an Empire, New York: Touchstone, 2001.

Chernow, Ron. Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller, New York: Random House, 1998.

Klein, Maury. The Life and Legend of Jay Gould, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986.

Nasaw, David. Andrew Carnegie, New York: Penguin, 2006.

Tarbell, Ida. The History of the Standard Oil Company, New York: Cosimo Books, 2009 (reprint of 1904 edition).

Bibliography

Chandler, Alfred D.Jr. The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1977.

Colihan, Christine and Amy Vitcusky. The Great Industrialists: Captains of Industry or Robber Barons. Industrialization. August 2006. (for an 11th grade lesson plan on captains of industry vs. robber barons)

Fitch, Stephane. "What is Trump Worth?" America's Richest. 21 September 2006. (on licensing his name)

Josephson, Matthew. The Robber Barons: The Great American Capitalists, 1861-1901, New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1962.

NYPhilanthropist. "Donald Trump." 2010.

Pollick, Michael. "What Is A Captain of Industry?" wiseGeek 08 September 2010. (for ‘selflessness’)