Monday, April 14

Discussed in class on Monday, April 14 was a continuation of the Great Depression.  This time I want to focus on the material aspect of the Great Depression, because all throughout the 1920's Americans, who could afford it were buying products, thus fueling the consumer durables revolution.  In other words before the decade of the 1920's Americans paid for products in full with cash, generally, rarely, though it did exist, did Americans put things on credit.  Credit was kind of a shameful thing, it meant that you weren't making enough money and therefore could not afford basic products like food.  However during the 1920's people couldn't afford luxuries like washing machines, dishwashers, air conditioning and believe me if air conditioning was invented at this time I would get a credit card and put this on credit and not suffer another sweltering Illinois summer.

During the 1920's all the fancy items that were bought and coveted were worthless by the start of the Great Depression.  China and crystal were some of these items, for example depression glass, "clear or colored translucent glassware that was distributed free, or at low cost, in the United States  around the time of the Great Depression. The Quaker Oats Company and other food manufacturers and distributors, put a piece of glassware in boxes of food, as an incentive to purchase. Movie theaters and businesses would hand out a piece simply for coming in the door."  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depression_glass

Seen as cheap novelties at the time in today's market these rare pieces of colored glass can sell for up to hundred of dollars.

Wed., April 9

Discussed in class on Wednesday, April 9 was the Great Depression.  The class discussion focused mostly on the economic theories at the time.  Hoover's goals for his administration, economic wise was to balance the budget, raise taxes for the wealthy, keep the gold standard, and integrate the Hawley-Smoot tariff for over-seas trade.

John Maynard Keynes was a British economist whose ideas fundamentally affected the theory and practice of modern macroeconomics, and formed the economic policies of many governments in the world.  Keynes was instrumental in forming his Keynesian economic theory which is a theory of, "total spending in the economy (called aggregate demand) and its effects on output and  inflation. Although the term has been used (and abused) to describe many things over the years, six principal tenets seem central to Keynesianism." http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bios/Keynes.html 

Keynes' A Treatise on Money was published in 1930 the theory of this work being that if the amount of money being saved exceeds the the amount being invested unemployment will rise.  In other words if money earned is not spent and stimulating the economy but is instead being saved people will lose their jobs.  The problem during the Great Depression was that people were spending money they did not have as credit and credit cards were introduced into the economy and there was a consumer limit, for example what do companies do if everyone in America has a dishwasher or washing machine?

In 1933, Keynes published The Means to Prosperity, "which contained specific policy recommendations for tackling unemployment in a global recession, chiefly counter public spending. A copy was sent to the newly elected President Roosevelt and other world leaders. The work was taken seriously by both the American and British governments, and helped pave the way for the later acceptance of Keynesian ideas, though it had little immediate practical influence during the Great Depression that affected the world. In the 1933 London Economic Conference opinions remained too diverse for a unified course of action to be agreed upon." Skidelsky, Robert (2003). John Maynard Keynes: 1883–1946: Economist, Philosopher, Statesman. Pan MacMillan Ltd. pp. 494–500, 504, 509–510. 

Overall the theories that Keynes wrote about were beneficial to understanding how the economy can function and how unemployment can be avoided but whether they were relevant to the time when he wrote remains debatable.  

Monday, April 7

Discussed in class on Monday, April 7 was Herbert Hoover's response to the Great Depression.  Hoover entered the presidency in the year 1929.  Though this was the year the stock market fell Hoover did not know this at the time of entering office for I'm sure he wouldn't have taken on the task of the presidency had he known.  Hoover just had the unfortunate bad luck and timing to take on the highest publicly viewed politician job at a time of great turmoil.  His job was to either rise above the occasion and take immediate action and embody the policies of Lincoln's presidency, but instead Hoover was reluctant to take drastic measures.  There have however been men of action who have been president and there have been some less than stellar men as president.  For Hoover I think he should have never taken the job.  Not to say that he wasn't eminently qualified he did have an extensive record involving the U.S. Food Administration, his work for the food relief in Belgium, and he was Secretary of Commerce.  He was too much like his predecessors who favored limited government intervention and a balanced budget.  When the Great Depression did hit the economy and its effects were felt all throughout the United States and across every income level Hoover emphasized no government handouts and a lassiez fair approach.  He did this to focus on balancing the budget which was a goal of his administration.  Hoover did eventually help out the economy through the federal farm board and agricultural adjustment act, but it was too late by than to do much good.  The economy and the people had soured and any good will felt toward Hoover had since been tossed out the window.  Hoover continued to bumble his way through his administration never getting equal footing and never again would he get back a good reputation.  He eventually raised taxes for the wealthy, increased the tariff, and dressed and ate as if life would be back to normal any day.

Wed., April 2

Discussed in class Wednesday, April 2 was the history of American Sexuality, part 2 or the sexual revolution.  For me I feel that this is a difficult topic to talk about.  For one thing the homosexual history of American is not something that is discussed in most high school history classes.  It is hard to separate what is historically correct to talk about and what is just down right wrong to talk about.  It is, however, a fact of history that homosexual men and women existed.  For as much as the church and conservative historians have tried to dispel their existence the "painted queens" and "street fairies" existed.  Of course the reading points out that these men and women largely co-habit ed in large cities and that it would have been impossible for the more flamboyant to live their lifestyle choice in small towns and in the country.  It was a sad point in history that nice men and women were discriminated against simply because of their biological makeup or for many their temporary lifestyle choice.  Sometimes this was a time of experiment because some men and women decided to like the same sex but never had any intention of making this their lifestyle.  As pointed out in the document on lesbian African-American women, these ladies would throw together rent parties or when someone got sick they would bring over dinner and many of them at some point in time would have girlfriends but maybe later in life they would get married so that they might have children.  A historical example of this "temporary gayness" would be Philippe I, Duke of Orleans, younger brother to France's Sun King Louis XIV.  As a young man, "Philippe would dress up and attend balls and parties in female attire, for example, dressed as a shepherdess. His inclination toward homosexuality was not discouraged in the hope of reducing any threat he may have posed to his older brother. Reportedly, Cardinal Mazarin even arranged for Philippe's first homosexual contacts with his own nephew,  Philip Julian Mancini.  Even once married, he reportedly carried on open romantic affairs with German nobles, with no regard to either of his two wives,"(P. Salazar in Who's who in Gay and Lesbian History, London, 1990 (Ed Wotherspoon and Aldrich).  Although he was gay his whole life Philippe was still pressured to marry and beget heirs a source of deep contention his whole life.  Just as in America whether rich or poor the choice to be gay, permanent or temporary was a difficult decision, it meant hiding their identity, keeping secrets from their families, and ultimately hiding in limbo.

Philippe, Duke d'Orleans

Monday, March 31

Discussed in class on Monday, March 31 was the sexual revolution part 1.  This particular chapter for the reading due for this day mainly focused on women and the immediate needs for women's birth control.  The lecture, however for that day went into great depth about men's birth control needs.  Condoms, a good form if not a popular form of birth control was something that was available to men during the late 19th-20th century, but it was not widely used, why because well for one if its not on your grocery store's shelves where they can easily walk by and grab a pack men won't get them.  One stigma that was also attached at this time was that condoms were used on prostitutes not your wife.  But honestly this was a rough time.  Women were essentially popping out babies at an alarming rate and when women have this many children it takes a toll on their mental and physical health why else would they write to Margaret Sanger, a leader in the fight for birth control. 
Sanger was very influential during the crusade for birth control she personally say what too many children will do to the health of the mother as she saw her own mother go through multiple births only to die of TB or some other disease of the time.  As a trained nurse Sanger went to the slums of the city and saw first-hand the helpless mothers of so many children.  A need was going on in America and it was a need to have greater understanding and through historical narrative we now understand that Margaret Sanger sought to give help to the thousands of under-educated women by opening clinics, handing out pamphlets, distributing information that was vitally needed.
Many lower-class immigrant women were scared to rebel but they knew that they could not afford most if not all of their children.  They were stuck in a rock and a hard place because they could not leave their husband because he provided financially for his wife and family.  Also she did not have much time for leisure so maybe she did not have the time for friendships or the comfort of women to talk to and listen to.  But at least women were asking these all important questions at least they demanded information.  They could no longer afford to let poverty and ignorance keep them in the dark coroners of the tenements.

The Immigrant

Wednesday, March 26

Discussed in class on Wednesday, March 28 was the New Woman.  The new woman was an idea or social construct that society used to describe the emerging new women.  Education was very important to distinguishing the new woman.  As we know in the past woman, men of color, and people depending on their religious affiliation did not always receive the best education.  By the turn of the twentieth century women in large numbers were earning the right to go to college, although lets be clear women of affluent means were able to attend and study in universities.  Even some were able earn degrees in medicine, law, and education though these numbers were small and were limited to women only working with women.
The new women also strove for greater understanding in the private sphere, namely understanding their role as wife and mother.  Many questioned whether it was right to get married so young and thrown into bed that first night at the mercy of a licentious, sex-starved husband whom you hoped would be gentle.  Many women wanted to discuss the female anatomy in greater depth.  It was discussed in a later reader that a girl when she got her period thought that she was dying because no one had told her of the changes that occur in her body. 
 Divorce law also changed during the late nineteenth, early twentieth century and gave rise to a new woman who could survive a divorce with her economic independence intact, and an increasing number of divorced women were also allowed to remarry without incurring the discrimination that might have previously been attached to the women in question and they could maintain social respectability while exercising legal rights, some of the time but not always.
Does this term, the new women suddenly mean that women as a whole were free of the restraints that men had worked hard place on them?  By all means no, the new women was biased in that it really only applied to women of means with liberal minded ideals.  And as there was not a really good defined middle class at this time I would argue that women of the lower classes were wholly ignorant of the growing ideals of this new idea of women-hood.  Mostly because they didn't have time, money, or energy to confront the bias of the male dominated colleges, to demand that their mother's explain more to them in terms of the expectations of marriage and mother-hood, or to go against the very husband's that support them financially because they lack the skills to support themselves.