Rochester – Popular Politics in Early America

October 10, 2013

A non-thinker having rethought

Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126

Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127

As many in this class can attest, I possess borderline ignorant qualities regarding my stubbornness and argumentativeness (that’s a word). I like to be right. And I like to argue…just to argue. When in the course of human events, however, it becomes necessary for one to readjust his thinking for truthiness and justice. This I have done.
In class Tuesday, I defended the point that Rochester, New York was a relatively appropriate location for Paul Johnson’s book, but I would have preferred a comparative model with another city going through similar changes. Maybe Pittsburgh, PA? Or Wheeling, VA (West Virginia after the Civil War)? Or a southern city like Nashville, TN? I change my mind. I now believe, along with many of my esteemed colleagues, that Mr. Johnson nailed it. While I cannot bring myself to proclaim Rochester as “The Heart and Soul of the United States”, I will acknowledge its “melting pot” atmosphere that supposedly makes America, America. Rochester was an American microcosm. Although the city grew rapidly, Johnson alludes his readers to a strong and dignified (albeit brief) history of the area by describing the first land owners, their prominence, and the reform of government. Additionally, as we stated in class, Rochester was a sufficient blend of country folk and city dwellers. The farmers and shopkeepers combined to give Rochester the beliefs and interests of both kinds of people. Furthermore, “Clinton’s Big Ditch”, enabled the city to stay connected with major sea ports and the areas west of the Appalachian Mountains. Rochester was a byproduct of the Erie Canal (Since Ian gets to talk about hometowns, my hometown’s creation and usefulness is similar to that of Rochester. The Virginia and Tennessee railroads linked at Roanoke, and the “Star City” was born). Charles Finney accrued a mass following to believe his teachings of revised Christianity. The white collar increase amongst grocers, lawyers, and boatsmen is an incredible jump from the number of religious men in these professions merely seven years earlier. I also like Johnson’s claim that wealthier men went to church as a political move. I imagine that these men saw a rising interest in religion and wanted to show their constituents that they were part of this good behavior as well. Furthermore, women were given unintentional rights as they were allowed to pray with the men. Finney does mention some of the more traditional church goers were against this practice of intermingling men and women, but as they came to find out, men and women can pray together without satan breathing a fiery wrath upon them. Yet, this step allowed women to gain more respect and “helped to transform [their husbands] into nineteenth century husbands.” (108) The nineteenth century husband swore off alcohol, did not abuse his family members, and continued to work hard. Most of these husbandry social norms continue to this day. his, I have done.

My disagreement with Johnson is that he rarely mentions blacks. He mentions them briefly when describing the barrel making process, a violent encounter with a police officer over gambling, and the African Methodist Church. Johnson does not make a claim (unless I missed it) about an increase or decrease in black religion revival. Maybe this is due to a lack of surviving sources. I think to truly capture an American city, Johnson should have studied the reaction of blacks if possible. This would have been especially interesting because all slaves were freed in New York in 1827 with a majority of them having been freed with the gradual abolition Act of 1817 in the wake of the War of 1812. This new emancipation was an experiment in and of itself, much like Charles Finney’s sermons on initially radical religious teachings.

October 9, 2013

Contemplating Religious Revival Ruling Rochester

I found Johnson’s A Shopkeeper’s Millennium to be an extremely revealing work of social history about the religious revival in Rochester in the early 1830s. Johnson does an effective job of demonstrating the “Shopkeeper’s Millennium” as a period in which middle class merchants held enormous economic and social power in Rochester as a result of millenarian religious revival. Johnson’s argument that Charles Finney’s religious revival was the basis for a redefinition of politics, labor, and social life is convincing because of his ability to demonstrate that the conversions of the 1830s produced societal reforms that were unlike those of the 1820s that pitted working men against their employers. Rather, this movement underscored a “war on sin” that removed any explicit attacks between the bourgeoisie and the working class and instead focused on the “evils” that plague all men (115). I believe Johnson only augments this claim when he adds that the communal nature of revivals “shattered old divisions” of class and established new communities (101). This creates a clear distinction in Johnson’s writing between what appears to be a struggle identified by Marxist theories in the 1820s and one of religious sentiments in the succeeding decade.

In Johnson’s final chapter, however, I felt his argument began to unravel. While he previously focused on the tenets and religious effects of Finney’s revival, Johnson proceeds to discuss revival and conversion in Rochester as an economic agent to provoke change in the city. For example, he writes “the most powerful source of the working man’s revival was the simple, coercive fact that wage earners worked for men who insisted on seeing them in church” (121). Statements like these imply that conversion by laborers could have been a mere means to acquire a job or steady income, as opposed to a change in fundamental values and beliefs. This is in direct contrast with Johnson’s previous claims about the revival’s legitimacy because it calls into question the true effect religion had in reshaping nineteenth century Rochester. Rather, it emphasizes manipulations of religion to receive desirable economic results. In his afterword, Johnson tries to cover up this implication when he states “the revival was not a capitalist plot” (141). However, when writing this, Johnson is referring to only those men who dictated social change in Rochester, the middle class businessmen, and continues to ignore exploration of any significant depth behind motivations of those experiencing the change, the working class wage laborers. While those participating in revivals could have thoroughly believed what they publicly professed, the working class laborers very easily could have accepted those same beliefs as merely a small price to pay to insure stable living.

With respect to my colleagues, I agree with most of what has been argued. Specifically, I agree with Ben that many of the inferences made by Johnson were plausible and his ample evidence behind these claims – particularly in examples like those of the extended families that helped to precipitate early business in Rochester – only helped to push his thesis. With that being said I also understand Price’s remarks about Johnson’s sweeping generalizations. One example that struck me occurred at the end of the book where Johnson writes “workmen no longer listened when proprietors spoke” (140). However, we were already told that the dissonance between employer and employee emerged from the increased privatization of their lives, not from a lack of listening (57). While these statements are likely dramatized and used more to provoke an image than used as fact, they did make me wary to trust all the claims advanced by Johnson in A Shopkeeper’s Millennium.

October 9, 2013

White Collar Awakening

In A Shopkeeper’s Millennium, Paul E. Johnson depicts the rapid growth of Rochester, using its development to represent major themes occurring around the United States. Notably, he depicts the significance of the Second Great Awakening in Rochester, largely led by Charles Finney. Here, the Second Great Awakening was a white-collar led movement, much like many popular movements in the past and today in which privileged members of society are able to influence the lower classes into following their desired course of action. Through such activism, however, communities such as Rochester could become more socially unified.

The example of Rochester during the Second Great Awakening provides a perfect example for the ability of religion to act as a uniting factor, as I discussed in my post last week. I also noted the potential for religion to be a diversifying issue on a larger scale, some of which was portrayed in the masonic movements in Rochester. In large, however, Charles Finney and the Great Awakening provided a means for the Rochester community to come together, as the revivals became widely attended, extremely public, and the subject of much conversation in the town. Although its existence could be credited to moral movements sparked by the white-collar members of society such as temperance, these religious revivals were able to unite people of all classes as they were placed in equal playing ground in the eyes of God.

Price notes in his post that Rochester was made up of a diverse group of inhabitants, all of which notably have a similar characteristic: to either start anew or “make it big.” Although Finney was invited to Rochester, one cannot help but question his true motives in his revivals. Orators in the Great Awakenings are often critiqued in order to determine whether they truly had a desire to speak God’s word, or if they were simply skilled speakers looking to become famous. It is apparent that Finney made a name for himself in Rochester, and significant how Johnson made sure to clearly note that his revivals were extremely public. He did, however, also note that Finney had a moral influence on the community that led to general improvement. It is an interesting argument, however, and one that would be difficult to prove outright.

Whether his intentions were for morality or “to make it big”, there is no doubt that Finney’s revivals in Rochester unified the community and lad a lasting moral effect. In this sense, Rochester was a microcosm, also mentioned by Price, as religious revivals throughout the United States during the Second Great Awakening had a similar effect. Rochester, however, is interesting due to the expedited nature of its development economically, socially, and mora

October 9, 2013

The Heart and Soul of The United States States: Rochester, New York

In Paul E. Johnson’s “A Shopkeeper’s Millenium,” he tries to make a case for the connections between politics, religion, and the market in relation to the religious revival that occurred in Rochester, New York in the late 1820s to early 1830s. At times, the connection is brought to light, like when he states “The political dividing line was not social class but family jealousies compounded by religion and geographic origins” (65). This quote relates back to his discussion regarding the feud between the Rochesters and the Bucktails in both a political and religious sphere. Yet, statements such as these are actually the only places the connections are made clear. Most of the piece is a dense narrative that mentions a series of people, their origins, their work, who they were associated with, and so on. It is easy to find yourself five pages into a chapter and be completely unaware as to what Johnson is arguing at that moment. Without the occasional sentence declaring a connection between one of the three ideas, it is easy to not see the association at all, which I believe hurts Johnson’s argument in the piece as a whole.

Though Johnson’s piece does suffer from this flaw, it is nice to see my hometown gaining some recognition for once. An interesting piece that I noticed in “A Shopkeeper’s Millennium” that has continued to this day is the business associations amongst relatives. Johnson mentions how most of the first men to settle and cultivate business in Rochester did so through family connections (25). This idea is continued further, as Johnson asserts that businesses were also brought into existence through in-law connections or close personal friendships (27). In today’s Rochester, this same idea has continued. A number of law firms are family run between brothers. Even more so than this, the biggest business to come out of Rochester, Wegmans, is completely family run through relatives and in-laws. For instance, Danny Wegman’s step-son-in-law is head of Wegmans’ liquor department throughout all of its stores. It’s somewhat nice to see how the connections that spurred Rochester’s growth in the early 19^th century is the thing that is still keeping the city a profitable place to live.

In response to Ben’s post on Johnson’s choice to use Rochester for this type of study, I completely agree. As Ben describes in his post, “Rochester was also a blend of so much of the rest of the country” (Benjamin Hartshorn, Philadelphia, PA). This statement could not be more accurate to describe Rochester during the early 19^th century. Being an inland city, it featured many of the characteristics that city would that was distant from the ocean, like focusing on agriculture. Yet, by having the Erie Canal, it connected Rochesterians to major cities like New York through the Hudson River, and the rest of the country and world from there. This city also featured a visible diversity in the classes of people that resided within the city’s bounds. From the wealthy land owners down to the unskilled laborers, Rochester had it all (still does too). Being a blend of the rest of the United States, Rochester was a great choice by Johnson to study regarding the effects of the Second Great Awakening. Though, as I said before, his study features some flaws because of the lack of clear connections between his central ideas.

October 9, 2013

Rochester Was the Right Choice

I believe that Paul Johnson’s decision to use Rochester, New York as his focus case study was an excellent decision for many reasons. First, as Dr. Shrout mentioned in class, it is illogical and inconvenient to do a detailed and lengthy study like this with multiple communities. The records that Johnson uses are specific to the locality, and therefore he would have had to travel often to do a study with multiple communities. I like that Johnson admits that Rochester may not be the most representative community for the subject of the great awakening. Rochester is not the typical revival story, but it is such an extraordinary one that we can learn so much from studying it.

Another reason Rochester is a smart place to study is because Charles Finney spent so much time there. The Second Great Awakening took place all over the United States, but what I remember about the revivals from high school history textbooks is the burned-over region in New York and Charles Finney. Using a place that Finney preached at for so long makes sense to me because I view him as the most famous and accomplished Second Great Awakening minister.

Rochester was also a blend of so much of the rest of the country. It was the first major inland city. Yet, the canal kept it connected to the powerful cities like New York, Boston, Philadelphia, and even London. At the same time it was connected with the country side. There was also a large amount of diversity in wealth and professions. You had the wealthy land owning farmers who gave Rochester its name and beginnings and there was the growing intercity community that consisted of master workers and shopkeepers along with a fluid and ever-changing group of journeyman craftsmen. Johnson gives us insight into all the different types of people living in Rochester so that we are able to see the diversity and how each class of people made their religious decisions.

Paul Johnson also did a good job balancing specifics with generalizations. He gives individual stories of families that began the city (like Colonel Rochester’s family) and of poor, orphaned men who became the extremely wealthy in Rochester (like Thomas Kempshall and Abelard Reynolds). He balanced this with good statistics and charts that allowed him to make broader generalizations. On the religious side, he gave specific examples of converts with charts of profession and percent change (of church membership). This allowed him to make inferences about why groups of merchants, master shoemakers, doctors, or lawyers did or did not convert with Finney. I found that most of the inferences that he made, I bought. For example, Johnson wrote about the reasons that so many master workmen converted, yet these reasons did not explain why lawyers also had a high conversion rate. Johnson explained this high conversion rate with details about Finney’s past as a lawyer and how most lawyers were politicians that could not resist the church. Overall, I thought that Johnson did a good job using specific details from his research in Rochester to make generalizations and explain some of the reasons for the huge revival in the city.

Price makes several great comments in his blog this week. The only part I disagree with is his criticism of Johnson’s generalizations and simplifications. While I do agree that some of Johnson’s statements may have oversimplified things, I think that it is alright to do that in a historical paper. It is impossible to study every single person in the town. Johnson studied a few specific people and statistics, and then this allowed him to make broader generalizations. The nature of historical studies will not account for every example. Price argues that Johnson didn’t take into account all of the nuances of the town. I see his point, but I believe that the nature of this topic and history itself doesn’t allow for Johnson to view all the nuances.

October 8, 2013

Rochester: American Microcosm

The Shopkeeper’s Millennium is my second trip up the Genesee River Valley with Paul E. Johnson, my first being Sam Patch, the Famous Jumper, an assigned reading from last year. Much like Sam Patch, Johnson uses Rochester as a grand specimen for larger American phenomena during the Industrial Revolution, with Patch focusing on the strains of labor and Millennium on social and religious evolution. While Sam Patch provides the chronicle of a wage labor driven into alcoholism, depression, a fall-diving career, and a tragic death (in Rochester, no less), The Shopkeeper’s Millennium presents an exposé of a sinful, depraved mill town transforming into an (on-the-surface) orderly, God-fearing church town thanks to the Second Great Awakening. Johnson argues that the religious and moral revival in 1830-31 amongst the town’s entrepreneurial class led to heightened labor discipline, increased calls for temperance, and, eventually, a need for a new party system to address their concerns and desires for reform. However, he occasionally makes sweeping generalizations that oversimplify his subject and weaken his argument.

Rochester was a logical choice for Johnson to base his research. It was a blend of all worlds: east and west, agricultural and industrial, urban and rural. Also, its location square in the middle of New York’s “Burned-Over” district made it a hotbed for religious, political, and social turmoil. It had all sorts of characters and classes: migrants hoping to start anew, settlers hoping to make it to the frontier, and entrepreneurs and businessmen hoping to make it big. Make no mistake- Rochester was still a town thoroughly divided by class, beginning with the powerful families who settled the area around 1815 (including Nathaniel Rochester himself). As a result, the consequences of industrialization follow the patterns seen elsewhere. Business owners became less and less a part of the productive process until they were merely salesmen. The workers were pushed back from the eye of the consumer and the owner. They lived in separate neighborhoods and social spheres. Before the religious revival of 1830, the relationship was impersonal and strictly businesslike.

Johnson then makes a noteworthy argument that more factors than just wealth and profit played into American social interaction. While Alex’s post on the “Hydra” argues that “it’s all about class” when it comes to labor relations, Johnson stresses that the reinvigoration of religion, especially amongst the business classes, had a redefining role in labor, politics, and social life. While the businessman of the 1820s would “dominate his wife and children, work irregular hours, consume enormous amounts of alcohol, and seldom vote or go to church”, the businessman of the 1830s was sober, religious, and intent on instilling moral values in his community (8). They would prevent drunkenness amongst their workers on the job and crusade for temperance off the job, while campaigning for “moral” political candidates and movements. By 1830, temperance would become “a middle-class obsession”, signifying the self-given responsibility of the bourgeoisie class to govern the morality of the lower classes. The fiasco created by the Anti-Masonic Party in 1826 displayed the great power of the middle-class in obtaining political power from the “elite families”, and it assisted in undermining the already unstable party system of the mid-1820s.

Overall, Johnson uses the Rochester model well as a microcosm of America, and he backs up his points with comments from residents, newspaper columns, advertisements, economic data, and even city geography. His maps provide great insight into how the inhabitants divided the city into business and residential spheres as well as how the classes separated themselves. However, some of his more sweeping claims concerning the divisions between the business and working classes are questionable and unsubstantiated. For example, he declares “the fifth-ward neighborhood known as Dublin spent Sundays drunk and Mondays visiting their friends” (42). It seems unlikely that no members of this working-class group would have a church affiliation, or could even stand being sober on a Sunday. While these businessmen and working class groups are largely homogenous and consistent amongst themselves, I believe they are still more nuanced and sophisticated than Johnson portrays them to be.