I see that Susan Jacoby’s forthcoming book bears the modest title of Alger Hiss and the Battle for History. No doubt she’ll definitively put that controversy to bed the same way she dispatched American anti-intellectualism once-and-for-all in The Age of American Unreason.
Mike
3 Thoughts on this Post
S-USIH Comment Policy
We ask that those who participate in the discussions generated in the Comments section do so with the same decorum as they would in any other academic setting or context. Since the USIH bloggers write under our real names, we would prefer that our commenters also identify themselves by their real name. As our primary goal is to stimulate and engage in fruitful and productive discussion, ad hominem attacks (personal or professional), unnecessary insults, and/or mean-spiritedness have no place in the USIH Blog’s Comments section. Therefore, we reserve the right to remove any comments that contain any of the above and/or are not intended to further the discussion of the topic of the post. We welcome suggestions for corrections to any of our posts. As the official blog of the Society of US Intellectual History, we hope to foster a diverse community of scholars and readers who engage with one another in discussions of US intellectual history, broadly understood.
Yes, the breezy “battle for history” subtitle comes off as a bit, um, ambitious. It sounds like a solid topic and approach, however, from the description. The devil will be in the execution—no pun intended. – TL
I am quite sure I know the thesis already, based on how her previous work raises the vital center from the dead: both communists and reactionaries, racketeers all, deserved one another. And anyone who disagrees is a dupe. Very sophisticated stuff.
And much like vital center apologists, she tends to make these non-points in a very aggressive, inflammatory way. I’ve noticed how the full-page ads simultaneously emphasize her lack of an ideological viewpoint and the explosive nature of her analysis, while failing to note the content of her conclusions.
Mike