E S S AY american dreamers - Encyclopedia...
6
ESSAY 32 BOSTON REVIEW american dreamers Pete Seeger, William F. Buckley, Jr., and public history William Hogeland T he eighty-nine-year-old musician and activist Pete Seeger, who is largely responsible for connecting folk music to the American left, joined the Communist Party in his twenties. Seeger has been candid, if at times self-serving, about his early support for Stalin, but the recent PBS “American Masters” doc- umentary on Seeger is so disingenuous, when it comes to his and the Party’s activi- ties, that it gives an impression of 1930s communism as a program for nothing more than peace, equality, and down-home music. The young Seeger comes across as a cheerleader not for Stalin’s Russia, but only for the sorts of social reforms any progressive might advance today. Equally misleading in its portrayal of an unsettling early position has been press coverage of the career of William F. Buck- ley, Jr., who died in February. Buckley made his name by providing intellectual leadership to those who did much, in the 1940s and ’50s, to punish Seeger, other former Party members, fellow-traveling liberals, and certain bystanders.Apprecia- tions of Buckley’s contribution to conser- vatism blur not his embrace of McCarthy- ism—some of his admirers remain fairly proud of that—but his support for white Southern efforts to prevent black citizens from voting. Buckley and Seeger share, along with fake-sounding accents and preppie back- grounds, a problem that inspires forget- fulness, falsification, and denial in their supporters. Fired by opposed and equally fervent political passions, both men once took actions that their cultural progeny find untenable. But these two men—their careers strangely linked in the hunt for com- munists, the struggle for equal rights, and the emerging “culture wars” of the postwar era—are worthy of consider- ation without air-brushed reminiscence. Their names alone may evoke, for those who lived through it, the anxiety and turmoil that marked American cultural and political life during the Cold War. Mutual hostility between Seeger types and Buckley types devolved on fears of imminent, world-ending invasions; plans for preventing evil from ever recurring on a mass scale; and stark disagreements over what is legitimatelyAmerican. When the Soviet Union was annexing its neigh- bors, filling gulags, and making swagger- ing predictions of world dominance, and the United States was toppling elected leaders in favor of authoritarians and hounding domestic dissenters, all amid the stockpiling of nuclear weapons, the division among Americans could feel, to those on both sides, like the last battle for humanity’s soul. What Seeger and Buckley’s youthful actions meant in their time, deliberately obscured by today’s lionizers, continues to mean something crucial now. P ete Seeger inherited communism from his father, a decisive event in the his- tory of American vernacular music that has no place in the “American Masters” doc- umentary. Charles Seeger, an arch-WASP bohemian born in 1886, taught musicology at Harvard and Berkeley. During his time in California, he formed an alliance with the International Workers of the World, or Wobblies, an especially lively labor- organizing effort, which planned global working-class takeover through one, vast, general strike. Soon, like many others, he was connecting his radicalism to the more tangible success of the Marxist revolution in Russia. He joined the Communist Party and started a radical group called, in the exciting new lingo, the Composers Col- lective, which encouraged pieces by left composers like Aaron Copeland and Marc Blitzstein and published a magazine called Musical Vanguard. American leftists like Charles Seeger did not interpret the expression “interna- tional communism” to mean “Soviet dic- tatorship and expansion.” They saw the young Soviet state as the first in a series of concerted revolutions through which workers would take ownership of the means of production and humankind would ad- vance toward a future without the awful poverty that was destroying the lives of so many laborers, blacks, and poor people in America and elsewhere.American commu- nists wanted to build a homegrown move- ment that would bring together factory laborers, dirt farmers, mineworkers, fruit pickers, and sharecroppers.They hoped to shatter elite privilege, end race discrimina- tion, and distribute fairly the wealth of the United States and the world. Charles Seeger also wanted to connect Marx-Leninism to his own discipline. The Wobblies were famous for singing on picket lines, but Seeger was trained in the high classical tradition and called for modernist concert pieces—in a Soviet of- ficial-culture vein—celebrating the work- ers’ collective virtue. He wrote articles on music theory for The Daily Worker, the paper through which the Party up- dated communists and sympathizers on Communist International, or Comintern, policy. By the late 1920s, and especially in partnership with his second wife, the composer and musicologist Ruth Craw- ford Seeger, he began seeing in traditional American music an art form already owned by the masses. Folk music, Seeger thought, existed outside the corruption and alien- ation of bourgeois culture; it needed only integration with Party ideology to become a means of worker empowerment. By the late 1930s—when his son Pete was be- coming a politically passionate Harvard student, and the Great Depression was deepening American leftists’ desire for change—the elder Seeger was discovering much of value in old ballads, work songs, blues, and traditional dance music, still thriving mainly in the south. The American folk revival was not, however, the exclusive province of the left. In Europe, folk collecting and the promo- tion of traditional arts had long been em- blematic of nationalist patriotism. In the United States, an early promoter of folk music was the inveterate reactionary Henry Ford, who saw the music as unsullied by the immigrant and urban cultures he despised and the salaciousness he associated with jazz and vaudeville. American folk music and dance, which Ford believed, fancifully, to be essentially Anglo-Saxon, would be the musical component of the hygienic culture he wanted to promote among workers in factory towns—places where, for the sup- posed good of the workers and company efficiency, everything from labor to edu- cation to recreation was to be controlled and supported by the owner.To that end, Ford invested in the first fiddlers’ contests, community sings, and square dances from which an important strain of the American folk revival emerged. For leftists, too, folk music was free of corruption, but that meant free of Ford- style mass production, which was, in their view, oppressive in a way that Soviet mass production was not. Old songs and tunes—which some of today’s folkies still imagine being handed down from time immemorial in backcountry communi- ties—seemed to embody the inherently cooperative spirit of the people, a natu- ral sense of union. To them, radio pop seemed aesthetically vapid and socially regressive. Yet most of the music heard in homes in the southern backcountry actually had roots in commercial pop—the medicine and minstrel shows, Tin Pan Alley,Victo- rian parlor sheet music, ragtime and jazz, and, by the 1930s, downmarket “race” and “hillbilly” seventy-eight-rpm recordings and clear-channel broadcasts of “barn dance” radio shows. The genius of people living in neglected parts of country often lay in adapting pop music to cheap, some- times handmade instruments and whoop- ing it up. One can only wonder what the bottleneck-guitar-picking sharecropper or the fiddling miner, steeped in a fecund mixture of tradition and commercialism old and new, might make of the arrival of a left-wing academic, complete with note- pad and giant tape recorder, eager to pre- serve southern music’s supposed purity. That strange relationship between homemade music and left politics was fur- ther complicated in the 1930s by changes in both the U.S. government and the Co- mintern. In 1935 Stalin announced “The Popular Front”—a worldwide coalition of communism with liberal politics that the LUIGI ANZIVINO
Transcript of E S S AY american dreamers - Encyclopedia...
E S S AY
32 B O S T O N R E V I E W
a m e r i ca n d r e a m e r sPeteSeeger,WilliamF.Buckley,Jr.,andpublichistory
William Hogeland
Theeighty-nine-year-oldmusicianandactivistPeteSeeger,whoislargelyresponsibleforconnecting
folkmusictotheAmericanleft,joinedtheCommunistPartyinhistwenties.Seegerhasbeencandid,ifattimesself-serving,abouthisearlysupport forStalin,buttherecentPBS“AmericanMasters”doc-umentaryonSeegerissodisingenuous,whenitcomestohisandtheParty’sactivi-ties,thatitgivesanimpressionof1930scommunismasaprogramfornothingmorethanpeace,equality,anddown-homemusic.TheyoungSeegercomesacrossasacheerleadernotforStalin’sRussia,butonlyforthesortsofsocialreformsanyprogressivemightadvancetoday.
EquallymisleadinginitsportrayalofanunsettlingearlypositionhasbeenpresscoverageofthecareerofWilliamF.Buck-ley,Jr.,whodied inFebruary.Buckleymadehisnamebyprovidingintellectualleadershiptothosewhodidmuch,inthe1940sand’50s,topunishSeeger,otherformerPartymembers,fellow-travelingliberals,andcertainbystanders.Apprecia-tionsofBuckley’scontributiontoconser-vatismblurnothisembraceofMcCarthy-ism—someofhisadmirersremainfairlyproudofthat—buthissupportforwhiteSoutherneffortstopreventblackcitizensfromvoting.
BuckleyandSeegershare,alongwithfake-soundingaccentsandpreppieback-grounds,aproblemthatinspiresforget-fulness,falsification,anddenial intheirsupporters.Firedbyopposedandequallyferventpoliticalpassions,bothmenoncetookactionsthattheirculturalprogenyfinduntenable.
But these twomen—their careersstrangely linked in thehunt forcom-munists, thestruggle forequal rights,andtheemerging“culturewars”ofthepostwarera—areworthyofconsider-ationwithoutair-brushedreminiscence.Theirnamesalonemayevoke,forthosewho lived through it, theanxietyandturmoil thatmarkedAmericanculturalandpolitical lifeduringtheColdWar.MutualhostilitybetweenSeegertypesandBuckleytypesdevolvedonfearsofimminent,world-endinginvasions;plansforpreventingevilfromeverrecurringonamassscale;andstarkdisagreementsoverwhatislegitimatelyAmerican.WhentheSovietUnionwasannexingitsneigh-bors,fillinggulags,andmakingswagger-ingpredictionsofworlddominance,andtheUnitedStateswastopplingelectedleaders in favorof authoritariansandhoundingdomesticdissenters,allamidthestockpilingofnuclearweapons,thedivisionamongAmericanscouldfeel,tothoseonbothsides, likethe lastbattleforhumanity’ssoul.WhatSeegerandBuckley’syouthfulactionsmeantintheir
time,deliberatelyobscuredby today’slionizers,continuestomeansomethingcrucialnow.
PeteSeegerinheritedcommunismfromhisfather,adecisiveeventinthehis-
toryofAmericanvernacularmusicthathasnoplaceinthe“AmericanMasters”doc-umentary.CharlesSeeger,anarch-WASPbohemianbornin1886,taughtmusicologyatHarvardandBerkeley.DuringhistimeinCalifornia,heformedanalliancewiththeInternationalWorkersoftheWorld,orWobblies,anespecially lively labor-organizingeffort,whichplannedglobalworking-classtakeoverthroughone,vast,generalstrike.Soon,likemanyothers,hewasconnectinghisradicalismtothemoretangiblesuccessoftheMarxistrevolutioninRussia.HejoinedtheCommunistPartyandstartedaradicalgroupcalled,intheexcitingnewlingo,theComposersCol-lective,whichencouragedpiecesbyleftcomposerslikeAaronCopelandandMarcBlitzsteinandpublishedamagazinecalledMusical Vanguard.
AmericanleftistslikeCharlesSeegerdidnotinterprettheexpression“interna-tionalcommunism”tomean“Sovietdic-tatorshipandexpansion.”TheysawtheyoungSovietstateasthefirstinaseriesofconcertedrevolutionsthroughwhichworkerswouldtakeownershipofthemeansofproductionandhumankindwouldad-vancetowardafuturewithouttheawfulpovertythatwasdestroyingthelivesofso
manylaborers,blacks,andpoorpeopleinAmericaandelsewhere.Americancommu-nistswantedtobuildahomegrownmove-mentthatwouldbringtogetherfactorylaborers,dirtfarmers,mineworkers,fruitpickers,andsharecroppers.Theyhopedtoshattereliteprivilege,endracediscrimina-tion,anddistributefairlythewealthoftheUnitedStatesandtheworld.
CharlesSeegeralsowantedtoconnectMarx-Leninismtohisowndiscipline.TheWobblieswerefamousforsingingonpicketlines,butSeegerwastrainedinthehighclassicaltraditionandcalledformodernistconcertpieces—inaSovietof-ficial-culturevein—celebratingthework-ers’collectivevirtue.HewrotearticlesonmusictheoryforThe Daily Worker,thepaperthroughwhichthePartyup-datedcommunistsandsympathizersonCommunistInternational,orComintern,policy.Bythelate1920s,andespeciallyinpartnershipwithhissecondwife,thecomposerandmusicologistRuthCraw-fordSeeger,hebeganseeingintraditionalAmericanmusicanartformalreadyownedbythemasses.Folkmusic,Seegerthought,existedoutsidethecorruptionandalien-ationofbourgeoisculture;itneededonlyintegrationwithPartyideologytobecomeameansofworkerempowerment.Bythelate1930s—whenhissonPetewasbe-comingapoliticallypassionateHarvardstudent,andtheGreatDepressionwasdeepeningAmericanleftists’desireforchange—theelderSeegerwasdiscovering
muchofvalueinoldballads,worksongs,blues,andtraditionaldancemusic,stillthrivingmainlyinthesouth.
TheAmericanfolkrevivalwasnot,however,theexclusiveprovinceoftheleft.InEurope,folkcollectingandthepromo-tionoftraditionalartshadlongbeenem-blematicofnationalistpatriotism.IntheUnitedStates,anearlypromoteroffolkmusicwastheinveteratereactionaryHenryFord,whosawthemusicasunsulliedbytheimmigrantandurbancultureshedespisedandthesalaciousnessheassociatedwithjazzandvaudeville.Americanfolkmusicanddance,whichFordbelieved,fancifully,tobeessentiallyAnglo-Saxon,wouldbethemusicalcomponentofthehygienicculturehewantedtopromoteamongworkersinfactorytowns—placeswhere,forthesup-posedgoodoftheworkersandcompanyefficiency,everythingfromlabortoedu-cationtorecreationwastobecontrolledandsupportedbytheowner.Tothatend,Fordinvestedinthefirstfiddlers’contests,communitysings,andsquaredancesfromwhichanimportantstrainoftheAmericanfolkrevivalemerged.
Forleftists,too,folkmusicwasfreeofcorruption,butthatmeantfreeofFord-stylemassproduction,whichwas, intheirview,oppressiveinawaythatSovietmassproductionwasnot.Oldsongsandtunes—whichsomeoftoday’sfolkiesstillimaginebeinghandeddownfromtimeimmemorial inbackcountrycommuni-ties—seemedtoembodytheinherentlycooperativespiritofthepeople,anatu-ralsenseofunion.Tothem,radiopopseemedaestheticallyvapidandsociallyregressive.
Yetmostofthemusicheardinhomesinthesouthernbackcountryactuallyhadrootsincommercialpop—themedicineandminstrelshows,TinPanAlley,Victo-rianparlorsheetmusic,ragtimeandjazz,and,bythe1930s,downmarket“race”and“hillbilly”seventy-eight-rpmrecordingsandclear-channelbroadcastsof“barndance”radioshows.Thegeniusofpeoplelivinginneglectedpartsofcountryoftenlayinadaptingpopmusictocheap,some-timeshandmadeinstrumentsandwhoop-ingitup.Onecanonlywonderwhatthebottleneck-guitar-pickingsharecropperorthefiddlingminer,steepedinafecundmixtureoftraditionandcommercialismoldandnew,mightmakeofthearrivalofaleft-wingacademic,completewithnote-padandgianttaperecorder,eagertopre-servesouthernmusic’ssupposedpurity.
That strangerelationshipbetweenhomemademusicandleftpoliticswasfur-thercomplicatedinthe1930sbychangesinboththeU.S.governmentandtheCo-mintern.In1935Stalinannounced“ThePopularFront”—aworldwidecoalitionofcommunismwithliberalpoliticsthatthe
LU
IGI
AN
ZIV
INO
33
Partyhadformerlyexcoriated.AgoalwastorestraintheriseofNazi-alliedfascismatanycost.The Daily Workerstartedencour-agingcommuniststocollaboratewithlib-erals.Manyleftists—someofwhomweredisaffectedbyStalin’snationalismanddictatorshipinRussia—foundaplaceintheNewDealgovernment.AmongthemwereCharlesSeegerandAlanLomax,aleft-wingfolkloristwhogavePeteSeegerajobattheLibraryofCongress.
Butthecoalitionofcommunistsandliberalsdidnotlast.In1939StalinmadeanonaggressionpactwithHitlerandre-pealedthePopularFront,leadingmanytofleethePartyindisgustatthealliancewithfascism.Inthisnewideologicalenvi-ronment,PeteSeeger’scareerblossomed.HavingtraveledintheSouthandbecomeadeptatfive-stringbanjo, theyoungerSeegerputhismusic to theserviceofthenewPartyline,whichnowopposedbothNewDealliberalismandU.S.waragainstGermany.In1940and’41,withtheapprovalandguidanceofPartyelders(againstwhosedictatesSeegersometimeschafed), thegroupthatwouldbecomeknownastheAlmanacSingers,mostno-tablyfeaturingSeegeronbanjoandWoodyGuthrieonguitar,yoked“people’ssongs”tothePartyagendainawaythatneitherthephilosophyofCharlesSeeger,northemusiciansoftheSouthernbackcountry,evercould.AsstarsofParty-inspiredor-ganizing,playingforstrikersandatNewYorkrentparties, theAlmanacSingersinventedthemusicthatleftistshadfailedtofindamongtheactualfolk.
TheAlmanacsgave theold songsnewlyrics,celebratingunionsandmock-ingFDRasawarmonger.(InhisbookWhere Have All the Flowers Gone,Seegerisrefreshinglyself-deprecatingabouthis“peace”verses’doggerelandthinsatire.)Theybeganthevogueforwearingworkclothes—overalls,jeans,denimshirts—todenotemembershipinthepeople.Accord-ingtoJoeKlein,inhisdefinitivebiogra-phyofWoodyGuthrie,theyadoptedfakeSouthernaccentsandconcoctedbiogra-phiesofhardtravel.MostimportantlyforAmericanmusic,TheAlmanacsinvestedtheirsound,whichwasfarsmootherthantherealthing,withamoodofauthenticitythattherealfolkneveraspiredto.Headsthrownback andmouthswideopen,strummingand“singingout”withrous-ing,clean-cutintensity,theyconjuredacommunistAmericanfuturethatwasafantasyoftheruralAmericanpast.
SeegerwasplayingarentpartyinJuneof1941whensomebodyrushedinwiththenews:GermanyhadinvadedRussia.Thepactwasbroken.Anotherreversalof theParty line immediatelyensued.TothereliefandbemusementoftheAl-manacs,theywerenowrequiredtosingagainstHitler.Inhisbook,SeegerrecallshishilariouslyrushedconversationwithGuthrieabouthowtoadjusttosupportingChurchill.“‘Why,Churchillsaid“Allsup-porttothegallantSovietallies!”’‘Isthisthesameguywhosaidtwentyyearsago,“WemuststrangletheBolshevikinfantinitscradle!”?’‘Yep.Curchill'schanged.Wegotto!’”Seeger,Guthrie,andtheAlma-nacsstartedwritingandsingingpro-warsongsfullofglibjingoismthatmayhavesurpassed,forsheerdumbness,theiranti-warditties:“RoundandroundHitler’sgrave/RoundandroundIgo.”
Forsixmonths,thegroupralliedtheU.S.toenterthewar,perthePartyline.Then,withthebombingofPearlHarborinDecemberandthedeclarationofwar,theybegansingingrah-rahsongsforvictory.SoonSeegerwasintheArmyandGuthriewasamerchantmarinerandthepre-warphaseofSeeger’scareer,andoftheAmeri-canfolkrevival,cametoanend.
Themajor themeof thedocumen-taryisthe lifelongconnectionbetweenSeeger’smusicandhissocialactivism.Yetiterasesthatconnection’sformativemoment—formativenotonlyforSeeger,butalsoforleftistpoliticsandAmericanmusic.EvenapassingreferencetoCharlesSeeger’sradicalismwouldseempertinenttoPeteSeeger’searlydevelopmentasbothartistandactivist.Trulydisastrous,though,arethefewmomentsthatpurporttodealwithPeteSeeger’scommunism.WeseefootageofHitler,andthenseeSeeger,inarecentinterview,recallingcollegiateargumentsoverwhattodoaboutNazism.Somearguedforpacifism,Seegersays,but“communistssaidthewholeworldshouldquarantinetheaggressor.AndIthoughttheywereright.”SnippetsofSeeger'sin-terviewsthengetstitchedintoahastyandvacuoussummaryofhisPartyactivities.Overastillofan“InternationalofYouth”pamphlet,whichgiveswaytoashotofHarvard’sgates,Seeger’svoiceoverruns:“IendedupjoiningtheYoungCommu-nistLeague,andletmymarksslip,andIlostmyscholarshiptoHarvard.Fewyearslater,”—nowoverastillofyoungSeegerplayingforadance,withagroupsinging“SolidarityForever”inthebackground—“justbeforeWorldWarTwo,IthinkI—”cuttingbacktoSeegerbeinginterviewed“—actually joinedandbecameacard-carryingmember.”Overfootageofcom-munistpicketers,hesays:“Iwasagainstracediscrimination,andCommunistswereagainstracediscrimination.Iwasinfavorofunions,andCommunistswereinfavorofunions.”
That’sprettymuchallthefilmhastosayabouttheroleofcommunismandglobalpoliticsinSeeger’searlymusicandcareer.TheAlmanacSingersareintroducedoverstillsofhandbillsfortheirperformances(onereads“leadingAmericanBalladeersinaprogramofsongsforpeace”),followedbyastillofthegroupitself,withSeegersayinginchoppyvoiceover:“ThegoaloftheAlmanacs—ifanybodyasksus—‘wewanttobuildasinginglabormovement.’Butwe’dbarelygotstartedonthat jobbeforeWorldWarTwobrokeout.”Then,overastillofpeoplereadingaboutthePearlHarborattackinnewspapers,andafaint,cracklingvoiceoversaying“Re-memberPearlHarbor,”Seegersays,“Alltheideaofstrikesandeverything[acutoramumble],‘afterthewariswon,thenwecanthinkaboutthat.’”
Intheedit,thereisnomentionoftheParty’sdecisiverole,whichhadSeegersingingagainstthewar,thenhadhimsing-inginfavorofit,wellbeforePearlHarbor.Lostwithallsalientfactisanyfeelingforthehighpoliticalemotionoftheperiod.NoristhereanymentionofStalinorthepact,althoughSeegerhimselfhasnotbeenafraidtodiscusstheseissuesbefore.Whenhesays,forexample,thatthecommunistswantedtoquarantineHitler,heisprob-ablyrevivinganargumenthemadeinhisbook:thegreatpowerswereactuallyhoping
Harvard Review publishes poetry, fiction, essays, drama,
graphics, and reviews. It is published twice yearly, in
spring and autumn, and is available by subscription and
from select bookstores.
Visit us online at hcl.harvard.edu/harvardreview
Harvard Review
Lamont Library, Level 5
Harvard University,
Cambridge, MA 02138
Ph: 617-495-9775
Fax: 617-496-3692
SUMMER 2006FALL 2006
FICTION
ALICE HOFFMAN &ALAN HEATHCOCK
ESSAYS
LYDIA DAVIS &TONY HORWITZ
POEMS
MARILYN CHIN &BRENDAN GALVIN
FICTION
KATHERINE VAZ &ANTHONYVARALLO
ESSAYS
BLAKE BAILEY &MELVIN BUKIET
POEMS
TOMAZ SALAMUN& GEORGE SEFERIS
SPRING 2006
FICTION
GORE VIDAL &KAREN BENDER
DRAMA
THERESA REBECK
POEMS
DENISE DUHAMEL, COLE SWENSEN &LAURIE SHECK
University of Massachusetts Amherst
P O E T R YF I C T I ONM EMO I R
JAMES TATELYDIA DAVISMARK DOTY
CHARLES D’AMBROSIODARAWIER
NOY HOLLANDNICK FLYNN
PAUL LISICKYMATTHEW ZAPRUDER
CHRIS BACHELDERTHOMAS SAYERS ELLIS
PAUL FATTARUSOLISA OLSTEINLENI ZUMAS
ALEX PHILLIPS
SUMMERWRITINGINSTITUTE
JUNE 22∫28, 2008
SCHOLARSHIPS AVAILABLEwww.umass.edu/[email protected]
T E L (413) 545-5510
And announcing the 3rd annualINSTITUTE FOR YOUNG WRITERS
see website for details
I N I T I AT I V E
Workshops � Craft SessionsManuscript Consultations
Readings � Q &As
M AY / J U N E 2 0 0 8
A M E R i C A N D R E A M E R S
E SS AY
3� B O S T O N R E V I E W
HitlerwouldknockoutcommunistRussia;whenambassadorLitvinovasked,inthelate1930s,foraplantobottleHitlerup,theliberaldemocraciesturnedtheirbacks.WhilesomemighttakeamorecriticalviewofStalin’shopeforquarantine,inthebookSeegerismakingapointwithabasisinfact.AnauthorizedbiographybyDavidKingDunaway(whoappearsasatalkingheadinthefilm)presentstheyoungSeegerasunhappyaboutthepactbuttakinga“wait-and-seeattitude.”Asrecentlyaslastyear,inawidelypublishedlettertotheconservativeRonaldRadosh,Seegerdiscussedhisdelu-sionsaboutStalin.
In the filmSeeger’scommentsbe-comemeaningless.Hisdeclarationthatstrikeswouldhavetowaituntilafterthewaronlymakessenseinacontextthatthefilmcannotgive,asdoingsowouldrevealSeeger’stailoringhismusictoCommu-nistPartyinstructions.WhenFDRaskedU.S.laborunionsforawartimeno-strikepledge,thenon-communistpartoforga-nizedlaborgaveit.SignificantforSeeger’scareeristhattheCominternsentwordtotheradicalendofthelabormovementtosupporttheno-strikepledgetoo.SeegermighthavehadsomethinginterestingtosayaboutambiguitiesinPartylaborpolicy.Dunaway’sbiographysuggests thathefoundtheParty’ssupportfortheno-strikepledgefrustrating:strikerswereakeyAl-manacsaudience.
WhatSeegerhassaidbeforeabouttheAlmanacs’anti-warstance,theknee-jerkrelationshiptoPartyprescriptions,andhisownsupportofStalinareallabsent.Cleansingthestoryofanythingpossiblyupsettingorevennuanced,thefilmmak-ersmustbehopingtocertifySeeger,de-spite formerSovietattachments,asanunimpeachablygreatAmericanculturalfigureof thekindoftencelebratedonPBS“AmericanMasters.”Gainedatthecostoffalsehood,certificationnotonlydoesnogood,itweakensourgrasponthetruth.Thereprobablywillnotbeanotherwell-funded,closelyresearched,carefullyedited,widelybroadcastdocumentaryonPeteSeeger,completewith interviews.Thisonehasfailedeachoftheastonishingthingsitpurportstocelebrate:thefolkre-vival,Americanactivists’passions,thepastcentury’sidealisms,andthelong,strangecareerofPeteSeeger.Thefilmdegradesourunderstandingoftheman,hisideas,andhisera.
WilliamF.Buckley, Jr.,whodiedthisyearateighty-two,enjoyeda
busyandinfluentialcareerasthemostfamousgalvanizerofAmericanconserva-tivethought.BuckleymadeThe National Review—themagazinehefounded,edited,andpublished—akindofthinktankforpostwarconservativeideology.Initspages,heandhisideologicalcompatriotschampi-onedstrictlylimitedgovernment,assertivelawenforcement,rollbackofthewelfarestate,freemarkets,andceaselesswaroncommunismathomeandabroad.Asare-sult,friendsandfoesalikehavecreditedhimlatelywithendingliberalism’sintel-lectualhegemony,whichprevailedintheU.S.politicalestablishmentfromFDR’saccessionin1932until1968,thebitterendoftheJohnsonadministration.
TheyoungBuckley’shopeslaypartlyinknockingoutthethen-vibrantliberalwingoftheRepublicanParty.AsGeorge
Will,oneofthemanyleadingconservativewriterswhoonceworkedatThe National Review,eulogizedhiminThe Washington Post:“BeforetherecouldbeRonaldRea-gan’spresidency,therehadtobeBarryGoldwater’scandidacy.Itmadeconser-vatismconfidentandplacedtheRepub-licanPartyinthehandsofitsadherents.BeforetherecouldbeGoldwater’sinsur-gency,therehadtobeNational Reviewmagazine.”
Theaccelerationofconservatismin-volvesanirony:inthemagazine’swidelyquotedinauguralessay,Buckleydescribedthepublicationstanding“athwarthistory,yellingStop.”Hewantedtostopthemod-erntendencyofgovernmenttoengageinwhathecalled“radicalsocialexperimen-tation”intheformofsuchthingsastheNewDealandtheUnitedNations,whichhesawasproductsofamoralrelativismthathadbecomemonolithicinthehallsofAmericanpower.Whathemostwantedto
stopwastoleranceforwhatheconsideredmodernerror’sextremeform,theMarx-Leninistviewofhumanity’sadvancement,throughphilosophicallydiscerniblestages,towardaconditionofperfectequalityfosteredbyanall-powerfulstate.LikeCharlesandPeteSeeger,BuckleylookedtotheSovietUnionasthefulfillmentofanidea—onethathecalledsatanic.
BuckleyoftenreferredtotheSovietempirebyasingleword,“gulag.”OnTVinthe1960sand’70she’dpurrthesec-ondsyllable,eyebrowsshootingpasthishairlinetoshow-stoppingeffect.Bythen,almosteverybodywaslookingattheSo-vietUnioninmoodsrangingfromconcerntofearandloathing.PeteSeegerquittheCommunistPartyinthelate1940s.Evenheandmuchofhisprewarcohorthadgrownpainfullyawareoftheawfulop-pressionimposedonRussiansandmoreandmoreEuropeans.TheIronCurtain,asChurchilldubbedit,hadfallen; the
nuclearbuilduphadbegun;Soviettankshadrolled.Internationalcommunismnowmeant,flagrantly,Soviettakeoveroftheworld,including,inthefamouswordsofPresidentKhrushchev,thegrandchildrenofAmericans.Today,Khrushchev’swordsmayseemdefensivebraggadocio.Fewtookthemthatwayatthetime.
ToBuckleyandlikemindedothers,thesocialistthreattoAmericanlibertylaynotonlyinmassiveprogramslikeSocialSe-curity,butalsointheNewDealpracticeofgivinggovernmentjobstosemi-secretcommunistsandmoreopen“fellowtrav-elers”—theAlanLomaxesandCharlesandPeteSeegersand,moreseriously,theircounterpartsinsectorsinvolvingnationalsecurity.Afterthewar,communistswereofficiallyincludedamongsubversivesseek-ingtobring,inthewordsoftheMcCarranActof1950,“totalitariandictatorship”totheUnitedStates.Partymembersandoth-ershadlongbeeneagerlyacceptinginstruc-tionsfordomesticrevolutionfromapolicestatewithwhichtheU.S.nowvergedonwhatseemedawarforthefutureofhuman-ity.HavingquitthePartywasnodefense,hencethefamousquestion“areyounoworhaveyoueverbeen...?”
DespitehisavowedreservationsaboutSenator JosephMcCarthy, theyoungBuckleygavestrongsupport,asdidmuchoftheliberalestablishment(inBuckley’sviewweaklyandperhapsinsincerely),forwhatMcCarthyandtheHouseUn-Ameri-canActivitiesCommitteedefinedasahuntforRussianspies,Partymembers,andcommunistsympathizersingovernment,entertainment,thearts,andbusiness.
Buckley’s inaugural essay forThe National Reviewascribedsuchgreatandentrenchedpowertoliberalism,andsuchfrailtytonascentconservativism,thatevensmall successescouldbegreetedwithshoutsofastonishedjoy.Andfewwouldnowdeemconservativesuccessessmall.WhilewelfareandentitlementprogramsthatBuckleyitesattackedappearlikelytosurvive,theambitiousyoungBuckleyofthe1950sturnedouttobeon,andtoplayapartindetermining,whatsomeconsiderthewinningsideofhistory.
Butinonearea—thecivilrightsmove-ment—Buckleyconservativesweredeci-sivelynotonthewinningside.“WhytheSouthMustPrevail”isthetitleofa1957editorialbyBuckleyaddressingeffortstoenforcefederallawsensuringblackstheabilitytovote.Thepiecearguedinpart:
TheNAACPandothers insistthattheNegroesasaunitwantintegratedschools.Othersdisagree,contendingthatmostNegroesapprovethesocialseparationoftheraces.WhatiftheNAACPiscorrect,andthemattercomestoavoteinacom-munityinwhichNegroespredominate?TheNegroeswould,accordingtodemo-craticprocesses,wintheelection;butthatisthekindofsituationtheWhitecom-munitywillnotpermit.TheWhitecom-munitywillnotcountthemarginalNegrovote.Themanwhodidn’tcountitwillbehauledupbeforeajury,hewillpleadnotguilty,andthejury,upondeliberation,willfindhimnotguilty.Afederaljudge,inasimilarsituation,mightfindthedefendantguilty,ajudgmentwhichwouldaffirmthelawandconformwiththerelevantpoliti-calabstractions,butwhoseconsequencesmightbeviolentandanarchistic.
Thecentralquestionthatemerges—anditisnotaparliamentaryquestionora
WhenthemoonComesup
DearSufficiency,perhapsyou’llloseyourbestfriend,partner,apartmentMaybethepowergridfails—plant,quadruped,bird,sea,earth,air,soundAndunderpain,pleasure.MaybejuicedrippingfromaveinwillnotoccurInjured,alone,onceyouwereafraid,nowyouknow:withinpresence
Epiclies.Saltandbasalt,treeandlichen,ape,sea-lion,bird,reptileFifteenmillionpurchasedLouisianainthefulltideofsuccessfulexperimentNowcapableofunlimitedexpansionfromCanada’sbordertothemouthOftheMississippi,fromtheGreatRivertoShiningMountainsalmost
Oregon,fromMissouritostatesnowcalledAbandoned,overnightWedoubled,airportsclosed.Toscythe,regret,abolish,refuseTherighttosleep,yourwhitesadnesstothingsindifferentseemsAbominableornecessary,beingneither,astreesorsheeptonight-walkers
Haveunpropershape.Tumultsre-electJefferson.Master,I’llbeplain.Mypoemscanbefoundinrecentorforthcomingeditionsofthe15,000VolumesloadedatMonticello,thelargestinAmerica,hand-collectedWithammunition.Whatfarmer,whatmechanic,whatlaborereversees
Atax-gatherer?MostcitizensknoworangessqueezedthroughmesharebestGrowninclay,lime,gravel,orgranite,deceptivelyfairweathergivenThedevastatingrumors,partmoonlittreachery,partgracecallssalineIntotheWest.DearCaptainLewis,dearLieutenantClark,evenathreat
BadlymaderusheslikeacometintothePacificaswhentherearisesAnew,irregularmeter.Althoughyoucoulddonothingtowardsitsbegetting.WhenIconsiderhowmuchofyourlifecanfallIfindelegies,continualTempestswhereonefoothathovertakenanother,everydeclension
Accompaniedbyleaks.Thusarrivesthesnow,theopal-coloreddaysAs,irritatedbynoliteraryaltercation,Iread:“HereliestheRepublicWhoseschemeofrepresentationopensadifferentprospect,promisesAcure.”JohnAdams.ImaginenothavingtoapologizefortheUnitedStates.Lethistorydecidewhichmattersmost,theweedsortheearth.
—Barbara Claire Freeman
35
questionthatisansweredbymerelycon-sultingacatalogueoftherightsofAmeri-cancitizens,bornEqual—iswhethertheWhitecommunityintheSouthisentitledtotakesuchmeasuresasarenecessarytoprevail,politicallyandculturally,inareasinwhichitdoesnotpredominatenumeri-cally?Thesoberinganswer isYes—theWhitecommunityissoentitledbecause,forthetimebeing,itistheadvancedrace.
Atthetime,BuckleyhadbeeneditingThe National Reviewforonlytwoyears,havingfoundedhismagazineattwenty-nine.Thoughtheeditorial isunsigned,therecanbelittledoubtthatitishiswork:editorialpolicywashisdomain;moretell-ingly,itsidiosyncraticblendofeleganceandprovocationwasalreadybecomingaBuckleytrademark.
TheNational Reviewwouldrejecttheveryterm“civilrightsmovement”as“ludi-crous,”insistinginsteadon“theNegrore-volt”aslateas1964.Notonlydidtheefforttokeepblacksfromvotingfail,Buckley’scarefullyarticulatedjustificationforille-gallydenyingthemthevotefailedtoo,soutterlythattoday’sBuckleyites,celebratingthegreatsweepoftheman’spervasiveinflu-ence,can’tseemtorecallathingaboutit.
TheNew York Times obituarydidmention,briefly,thatBuckleysupportedthesegregationistSouthonthegroundsofwhiteculturalsuperiority.Moretypicalofmainstreamassessmentwasthelongsum-mationofBuckley’scareerinNewsweek,whichsaidonlythatBuckley“tolerated”segregationandsupportedwhitesouth-erners’“protesting.”Thatcharacteriza-tion,misleadinginitsvagueness,softenstheconservativepositiononintegration—thedefiningissueoftheday,alongwiththeColdWar.ReadersofrecentarticlesonBuckley’scareercouldbeforgivenforhavingnoideathatThe National ReviewdescribedMartinLutherKingJr.asa“rabble-rousingdemagogue”whotaught“anarchyandchaos”andidentifiedinte-grationwithSovietcommunism.
Themore textured, less temperatediscussionofBuckley’spoliticsdevel-opedonline,wheresomebloggersandcommentersloudlycelebratedBuckley’sdeathastheendofanevilphony,whomsomecalled,amongotherthings,aracist,citingpartofthe’57editorial.Buckleyfansrespondedthatthecivil-rightsposi-tionwasaglaringexceptiontoatough,notbigotedprogram;thatthepositionamountedtostates-rightsadvocacy,notracism;thatBuckleylatertookamoreen-lightenedview(Newsweeksaidthattoo);andthathe’dacknowledgedandtakenre-sponsibilityforhiserror.ManydefenderscitedBuckley’sanswertoaquestionina2004Timeinterview:“Haveyoutakenanypositionsyounowregret?”Buckley’san-swer:“Yes.IoncebelievedwecouldevolveourwayupfromJimCrow.Iwaswrong:federalinterventionwasnecessary.”
ThereBuckleyadmitstohavingbeenwrongaboutapositionfardifferentfromtheonehetookin"WhytheSouthMustPrevail,"quotedabove,whichassertsaright—evenaduty—ofsouthernwhitestopreserveJimCrow,onthebasisofthewhiterace'ssupposedlygreateradvance-ment.WhileBuckley'sessaymaythere-forestrikereaderstodayastypicalof1950sracistobjectionstocivil-rightslegislation,itsimpactlayinhowsharplyitdeparted
fromthetypical,whichcanberevisitedinastatementbyRobertByrd,todayaU.S.Senatorandin1945atwenty-eight-year-oldmemberoftheKuKluxKlan:"RatherIshoulddieathousandtimes,"youngByrdsaid,inthecadencesthathavelatelymadehimadarlingofanti–IraqWarliberals,"andseeOldGlorytrampledinthedirtnevertoriseagain,thantoseethisbelovedlandofoursbecomedegradedbyracemongrels,athrowbacktotheblackestspecimenfromthewilds."ThatcommentappearedinalettertothesegregationistSenatorandformerGovernorofMississippiTheodoreBilbo,alsoaKlansman,whowroteabookentitledTakeYour Choice, Separation or Mongrelization,andfilibusteredananti-lynchingbillbyinvokingthe“bloodoftherapedandoutrageddaughtersofDixie.”(AperioddittysungbyPeteSeegerwascalled“Listen,Mr.Bilbo”—“Well,youdon't likeNegroes,youdon't likeJews,/Ifthereisanyoneyoudolike,itsureisnews.”)WearingwhitesheetsandfollowingExaltedCyclopsesandGrandWizards,theKlandidnotmakesustainedargumentsinpolishedprose.Asanti-intellectualastheywereanti-black,JimCrowsupporterscouldbereadilydismissedbyeducatedliberalsandmadeunappealingalliesforeducatedconservatives.
UntilthearrivalofBuckley.His1957essay,amasterpieceofintellectualagilityandverbalconfidence,soundedlikeThe New Republic,notThe Fiery Cross.Theessay'soccasionwastherecentsuccessofSenateconservativesinpreventingpassageoflegislationthatwouldhaverequiredfed-eraljudges,notjuries,torenderverdictsinprosecutionsofpoliticaloperativeswhofailedtocountblackvotes.Thelawwasmeanttohamperwhite juries' tenden-ciestofreesuchdefendantsregardlessofevidence.AstrikingfeatureoftheessayisBuckley'soutrightsupportforjurynulli-fication.Evenmoredaringlyheidentifiesarightforwhitesoutherners,whenintheminority,to“takesuchmeasuresasarenecessarytoprevail.” Hepresentsthatrightasbeyondthelaw,whichheassociateswith“politicalabstractions,”andbeyondeventheConstitution,whichhecallsnotadequatetocopewithissuesraisedbyJimCrowandthestruggleagainstit.
Buckleyismakingthekindof“natu-rallaw”argumentforrightstranscendingcharterandlegislationthatlate-18th-cen-turyAmericansmadeagainsttheBritishParliament'sincursionsontheirliberties.ItwasacasethatBilboandByrd,sunkinhysteriaandignorance,neededaYalemantomakeforthem.Insteadofdenyingorglossingovertheconsequenceofthebill'sdefeat,Buckleyannouncesit:“Theeffectofitis—andletusspeakaboutitbluntly—topermitajurytomodifyorwaivethelaw.”Buckleycallsthesupposedfactthatwhitesaremorallyentitledtoprevailbyanymeansnecessarya“sobering”one,admitsthatitis“unpleasanttoadducestatistics”provingthewhiteracesuperior(anddoesnotactu-allydoso),andappealstothebetterangelsofsouthernnature,closingwithaveiledthreatthat,iftheSouthdoesnotbehaveasBuckleyexpectsitto,hissupportmayhavetobewithdrawn:
[TheSouth]mustnotexploit the factofNegrobackwardnesstopreservetheNegroasaservileclass. It istemptingandconvenienttoblocktheprogressof
A M E R i C A N D R E A M E R S
M AY / J U N E 2 0 0 8
E SS AY
3� B O S T O N R E V I E W
aminoritywhoseservices,asmenials,areeconomicallyuseful.LettheSouthneverpermititselftodothis. Solongasit ismerelyassertingtherighttoimposesupe-riormoresforwhateverperiodittakestoeffectagenuineculturalequalitybetweentheraces,andsolongasitdoessobyhu-maneandcharitablemeans,theSouthisinstepwithcivilization,asistheCongressthatpermitsittofunction.
ThatistheevolutionBuckleywascall-ingforin1957:notthat"wecouldevolveourwayupfromJimCrow,"ashesaidin2004,butthat"theNegro"might,duringsomeperioddeterminedandoverseenbythesuperiorrace,evolveupwardfromthebackwardnessthathadmadeJimCrownotonlypermissiblebutnecessary.
WhilethisearlyentryischaracteristicofBuckley’s lifelongapproachtoargu-ment,hisfansandprotégéscannotclaimandcelebrateit,becauseitsmostimpor-tanttheme—aboutwhichBuckleyisalsoblunt,andwhichbearsonhisconservatismasawhole—comesdowntothethree-partstatementthatundergirdstheessayandthatfewconservativestodaywouldwanttoaffirm:
Theclaimsofcivilizationsupersedethoseofuniversalsuffrage . . . If themajor-itywillswhatissociallyatavistic,thentothwartthemajoritymaybe,thoughun-democratic,enlightened. . .sometimesthenumericalminoritycannotprevailex-ceptbyviolence:thenitmustdeterminewhethertheprevalenceofitswillisworththeterriblepriceofviolence.
Civilizationoverdemocracy,evenatthecalculated,possibly tragicpriceofviolence,takenupmoreinsorrowthaninangerandthenfoughttothefinish.ThatisthestancewithwhichBuckleybegancreatingapersonathatmaybeuniqueinourculturalhistory.Buckleyordainedhimself the leisure-classwarrior-phi-losopher,rousedtomilitancybyubiqui-tousbarbarism,defendingonbehalfofconservatismnotmereintellectbutthehighestculturalsophisticationandre-finement.Thatpersonawouldmakehimnotonlyaconservativeleaderbutalsoahouseholdname.OnhisTVshow“Fir-ingLine,”whichranfrom1966to1999,hedidtheeasternestablishmentonebet-ter,atonceaparodyandepitomeofup-per-crustmanner,withanover-the-tophot-potatodrawlthatmadeFDRsoundsalt-of-the-earth.Buckley’sperfectlyphrasedinsultsandlanguorouspolysyl-laberymadehimthepop-culturemodelof intellectual,cultural,andverbalad-vancement,anunflappableconnoisseur,guardianof thebestever thoughtandsaidbyman.Delightinginthejoysofra-tionality,beauty,hierarchy,imagination,humor,andawe,asexpressedespeciallyinthemusicofBach,heseemedcalledfromhisfigtreebyanAtheniansenseofcitizenship,battlingtopushbackboththemobandtheweak-willedmob-enablerswhowereruiningthecivilizationthathadproducedhisowngorgeousness.
Henceacontradiction,whichseemstohavebecomeevidenttoBuckleyearlyon:Southernworkingmenouttoprevent“mongrelization”madepoorexemplarsofadvancedculture.Soonhewaslettinggoofhishopesforthewhitesouth.
Atafamous1965OxfordUnionDe-
batewithJamesBaldwin, forexample,fightingwhatwasalreadya rearguardactiononcivilrights,BuckleytooktheopportunitytoargueagainstwholesalecondemnationofAmericancivilizationforfailingtoliveuptowhatBuckleynowcalleditshighestideals.Heaverredthateverybodyagreedthatraceprejudiceisevil;accusedthecivil-rightsmovementofnolongerseekingequalitybutthere-gressionofthewhiterace(thoughhealsocontinuedtocallslowprogressonequalrightsnecessary);announcedthatiftheissuemustcometoracewar,hewaspre-pared(echoingChurchillforhisOxonianaudience)tofightitonthebeaches,inthehills, inthemountains;andsuggested,foralaugh,thatwhathereallyobjectedtowasanyuneducatedsoutherner,blackorwhite,beingallowedtovote.Thatjokedistilledanunusualmixofstates-rightspopulismandupper-classprerogativeputforthatlength,thatsameyear,byJamesJ.KilpatrickinThe National Review:fed-eralismwillbedestroyedunlessstatesarefreetoimposevotingqualifications,butthosequalificationsmustdiscriminateequally,notonthebasisofrace.
It is not clear what requirementsBuckleythoughtpoorblacksandpoorwhites below the Mason-Dixon lineshouldfulfill,orbedeniedaccesstothefranchise.WhatisclearisthatBuckley’slaterthinkingonintegrationwasnot,ashisdefendersclaim,aturnaboutonracebutaretreattoamorelogicallyconsistentsnobbism.The National Review lost itsall-outfightsagainstschoolintegrationandtheVotingRightsandCivilRightsActs,butracelongremainedadefiningconservative issue.Amongmanyexam-
plesisa1969columninwhichBuckleyhymnedtheresearchofArthurJensenonraceandIQ ,whichshowedblackstest-inglowerthanwhitesonabstractreason-ingskills,afindingfromwhichBuckleydeducedaracialimperviousnesstoim-provementbyeducation.Inthe1970sThe National ReviewpersistentlydefendedapartheidSouthAfricaonthesamebasisthatithadoncedefendedJimCrow.
AlegacyofBuckley’sdevelopmentonraceistoday’sconservativeoppositiontoprogramslikeaffirmativeaction.Nobodytodaybasesthatoppositiononadutytopreservewhiteprivilegeandpreventan-archy;opponentsjumpthroughhoopstoshowdedicationtoequalityanddemoc-racy.Yetcriticismofaffirmativeaction,howeveraltereditstone,isadirectinheri-toroftheideologicalcontributionsBuck-leymadetoconservatisminthe1950s.Today'spositionrepresentsafallback,notabreak,fromBuckley'searlyideas,whichwerenever renounced,onlydefeated.Theimportantissueisnotthepossiblepersistenceofracist ideas inBuckley’sownthinkingbutmodernconservatives’huge—andhugelyconvenient—erasure,whenitcomestorace,oftheintellectualoriginsofmodernconservatism.
Seeger and Buckley were roman-tics.When theywereyoung, and
without regard forconsequence, theybroughtcharisma,energy,andcreativitytodreamingupworlds theywanted—possiblyneeded—to live in.Becausetheymadethoseworldsseemsorealandbeautifulthatotherpeoplewantedtoliveinthemtoo,theybecamelarger-than-lifecharacters,instantlyrecognizablealong
Hover,Coo
Thisdreamofabirdstrange,tangledup.Ahybrid:abuntingandanowlwiththosesadweteyes,clackingbill,moony
face,featheredwithalltheshadesofindigo,lichen,gray,lazulirainbowofoilasifdippedin,iridescent,paintedlikesusans
andpredatory,ofsongandcoyness,perch,aflit,hover,barkacooacry,warble,anundulatingsigh.Thisbirdtangled,netted,
istrappedagainstthescreenclinging,panting,canflybutwithoutjoy,cansee,butthroughacloud,afog
ofitsownbreathing.Carnivore,youwanttoputitinyourmouth.Justaslipof,apocketof,anenvelopeofskin,feather,bone.
Hypnotizewithsmoothingthewild,thefussingandgnashing.Itsfeetunperchanditsleeps,unblinkingother,uncanny
whentheunrealbecomesreal.Pluckthesuffocationout.Laythebirddowninascatteringofdun-coloredleaves
whichthenbecomebird,likeanimationbutmoreadreambroughttolife,thefrighteningofwhatisknownandlongfamiliar.
—Frances Justine Post
wayoff,notquiterealcloseup,andneverquitegrownupevenwhenold.Hence,perhaps,theirdecisiveinfluence.SeegergaveAmerican folkmusicapurisminnowayessentialtoit,afunctionofNewEnglandabstemiousnessinSeeger’sownmakeup,whichalsoconnectedhimtoSovietcommunism.TheSovietUnionisgone,butourmusicwillnevershakethepurism.Seegeroncesaid,withwitandaccuracy,“I’mmoreconservativethanGoldwater.Hejustwantedtoturntheclockbacktowhentherewasnoin-cometax.Iwanttoturntheclockbacktowhenpeoplelivedinsmallvillagesandtookcareofeachother.”Thoseyearn-ingsbeganinhisfather’sdreamsforthefuture,butitwasadreamaboutthepastthatmadehimPeteSeeger.InBuckley’sdream,somebodyisgoingtoliveinthecastleabovethevillage—betterforevery-bodythatitbehe.Thateachinhisownwaydreamedsouthward,withfatefulre-sults,madethemromanticsinaspecialAmericantradition.
An importantdifferencebetweenSeegerandBuckleyisthatSeegersufferedforhisbeliefs.Thefilm’sinnocenceabouthisStalinistprovocationsaside,hebravelyriskedjailbyrefusingtoanswersomeofHUAC’squestions;hewasblacklisted,hiscareerruinedforalongtime.ThefilmshowshisconcertsbeingangrilypicketedbyYoungAmericansforFreedom—Buck-ley’sorganization.YeteveninSeeger’spersecutionliesatellingreminderofwhatthetwomenshared:asensethattherearecertainrightsofwhichonlythequestingindividualhimselfcanbearbiter.WhenrefusingtogivenamestoHUAC,SeegerchosenottorelyonhisFifthAmendmentrightagainstself-incrimination,claiminginsteadatranscendentliberty,thatofas-sociation,whichhecouldnotprovebutbelievedwasnatural,pre-existinganyclaimsmadebyacommitteeoffederalgovernment.
LiberalsmayconcurincallingSeeger’sStalinismromantic, ifunfortunate(al-though“AmericanExperience”viewersarenotsupposedto;theStalinismisnotsupposedtoexist).Butliberalsmayalsofeelthat“romantic”softensthevirulenceofBuckley’sraceideas,lettinghimofftooeasily.Buckleyites,fortheirpart,cannotcallsegregationismromantic,sincetheyhave left itscentral importanceoutoftheirstory—andtheyarelikelytofeelthattheadjectiveunderstatestheevildonebySeeger’sSovietloyalties.Eachsideinthisstoryhasbecomeadeptnotonlyatfalsi-fyingitsownnarrativebutalsoatpickingaparttheother’sfallaciestoexposevenalmotives.Itisunfortunatethateachside,inaccusingtheotherofbadfaith,sooftenseemstoberight.
Buckley’s andSeeger’s sharedat-tractiontoextremesdidhavetheeffectofcondoningawfulcrimes:lynchingofblacksandmurderofcivil-rightsworkersontheonehand,Stalin’smassmurderontheother.Sortingoutkindsanddegreesofawfulnessisasproblematicasdetermin-ingwhethercondoningthosecrimesalsocontributedtothem.(Thementhemselvesremainedprofessionallyinnocent.)Moreimportantisthatthetwowerefarfromalone.Foriftheirdreamswerenotourdreamstoo,wewouldneverhaveheardthenamesPeteSeegerandWilliamF.Buckley,Jr.©
