Democracy’s Muse Book Review

DEMOCRACY’S MUSE BOOK REVIEW

Erika Penner

HIST 300

Dr. Snead

October 1, 2016

        Thomas Jefferson is arguably one of the most diversely interpreted people in American history. By some, he was praised, and by others, criticized. Jefferson has been labeled as many different things, including racist, revolutionary, and Atheist. In his book, “Democracy’s Muse”, Andrew Burstein evaluates the different aspects of Thomas Jefferson’s life. Burstein divides the book into two sections. The first section explains how Jefferson has been interpreted, and in some aspects skewed, by politicians, and the second section is a modern look at how Jefferson fits into the culture war going on today. Overall, “Democracy’s Muse” is a great read that, while it is not perfect, does an excellent job evaluating Thomas Jefferson and how he has been interpreted throughout history.

        Burstein begins “Democracy’s Muse” by evaluating Jefferson’s reputation both during his life, and after his death. Thomas Jefferson died in 1826. Burstein argues that Jefferson hit peak popularity during the time of FDR. This is just shy of 100 years between Jefferson’s death, and the height of his popularity. This is unusual that a politician would gain more popularity over such an extended period of time. Burstein believes that this phenomenon is due, in large part, to the rivalry between Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton. Jefferson stood for limited government, rights of individuals, and longed to see the world be governed like the American republic. Alexander Hamilton did not stand for these things, and thus, a rivalry ensued. In the 1920’s, Roosevelt wrote a book review on a work written by Claude G. Bowers, titled “Jefferson and Hamilton: The Struggle for Democracy in America.” FDR made contact with the author, and after a series of meetings, was given the opportunity to deliver the keynote address in 1928 at the Democratic National Convention. The book Bowers had written left a lasting impact on the Democrats at that time. While Jefferson was never specifically labeled as a democrat during his life, Burstein argues, “it was, most assuredly, Democrats who owned him”^[1] 

        Democrats saw Jefferson as a wholesome American, who believed in the foundation of a wholesome family. Liberals, in turn wanted to claim Jefferson as their own. Democrats did not agree to ‘loan’ him to them. All of this led up to the 1920’s with the release of FDR’s book review. Suddenly, FDR began to sound more like Jefferson in many ways.  Burstein uses the comparison of Jefferson’s 1801 inauguration speech when he says “we can no longer say there is nothing new under the sun. For this whole chapter in the history of man is new.”^[2] This is then immediately compared to FDR, when in 1932, said, “America is new. It is in the process of change and development.”^[3]  While Thomas Jefferson never declared himself as a Democrat in the modern sense, FDR and other politicians in that time claimed Jefferson as ‘theirs’. In doing so, Jefferson has now become a historical figure who can be left up to interpretation by almost anyone. Jefferson became the topic of discussion again in the 1980’s when Ronald Reagan was serving as President.

After FDR, the presidents who served did not pay Jefferson very much regard. Democrats still claimed and revere him as their own, while others labeled him as a “quotable New Deal humanist.”^[4] In the 1960’s, John F. Kennedy compared himself to Jefferson during a speech at the White House, but this was as far has his discussion on the founding father would go. 20 years later, in the 1980’s, Ronald Reagan was President. He was an old school liberal, and a Republican. In being such, one of the big things he pushed for as president was tolerance. This was similar to Jefferson, who, “in the 1960’s, had his script translated into the dominant liberal concepts of tolerance for difference, a free and eager pursuit of knowledge, and heightened awareness of individualism.”^[5] Reagan relied heavily on Jefferson’s legacy, as well as his image. Burstein ends this section by arguing “Reagan returned Jefferson to the inflexible Old Republican that the Virginian was in his own time, the guardian of unobtrusive government.”^[6] Burstein’s writings in the first half of “Democracy’s Muse” gave historical insight to the reputation that Jefferson had in the 20th century, and how he was interpreted different among different political groups. The words of Jefferson were sometime skewed in order to fit with the arguments of some groups, and it was not until the presidency of Ronald Reagan in the 1980’s that Jefferson’s reputation was restored to what he stood for during his life.

...