The History Book Club discussion

Hello Everyone,

For the week of November 2nd through November 8th, we are reading approximately the next 24 pages of No Ordinary Time by Doris Kearns Goodwin.

The third week's assignment is:

November 2nd – November 8th ~~ Chapter 4 (81- 105)
Chapter Four – “Living Here is Very Oppressive” – page 81

We will open up a thread for each week's reading. Please make sure to post in the particular thread dedicated to those specific chapters and page numbers to avoid spoilers. We will also open up supplemental threads as we did for other spotlighted books.

This thread should only deal with these chapters, pages, guide questions, and the like..etc. No spoilers, please.

Discussion on these sections will begin on November 2nd.

Welcome,

Bentley

TO SEE ALL PREVIOUS WEEKS' THREADS SELECT VIEW ALL







Doris Kearns Goodwin

Please make sure that you post in the appropriate week's thread. These are non spoiler threads.

Here are two reading guide questions (publisher) to kick things off:

"Goodwin characterizes FDR as a brilliant, energetic, cheerful man who rarely folded under pressure or displayed his innermost feelings. How might the elements of FDR's character and of his time have blended to create a man so successful in marshaling America's forces to defeat the Axis powers? Compare FDR to other wartime presidents such as Lincoln and Nixon. Why is FDR's place in history so secure?


With deft ability, Goodwin brings Eleanor Roosevelt to life. Who was she and what were her concerns? How did she alter America's conception of the role of First Lady? What innovative and lasting contributions did she make to the civil rights movement and to women? Why was she called, during her last years, "the greatest woman in the world"? Compare Eleanor to other prominent First Ladies, such as Jacqueline Kennedy and Hillary Clinton."

I will try my hand at the second question from the reading guide for the book.

Eleanor Roosevelt, probably was the original First Lady who really had a pivotal role in affairs outside of the White House herself and became a person of public affairs in her own right. Part of this ability to perform in this role was the result of FDR's own bigger than life personality despite his paralysis; he allowed it to happen and fostered it. The second part dealt with Eleanor herself and her remarkable personality and charisma; everybody wanted to know where Eleanor was off to next. America was interested in her not only as a First Lady but as an influential and beloved American who they were proud of. She promoted women's rights outside of the home front and dared women's abilities to venture into a man's world and compete in some ways head to head. This is just MHO but Jacqueline Kennedy's role was more a step back into the more domestic role even though she did a fabulous job in the White House and its restoration process as did Lady Bird Johnson who followed her. JK was a fashion icon, beautiful, classy and full of grace. Eleanor, herself, was not really a fashion icon and was an attractive woman even though she felt she was not; but could not be considered pretty or beautiful. Hillary Clinton is an accomplished lawyer who had all of the scholarly credentials of her husband and could have been a good president herself. I see her as being probably the first lady who was a wife of a president who truly has had personal aspirations for herself and she should be proud of her accomplishments for they have been many. The American media at the time was not as kind to Hillary Clinton as they were to Eleanor or Jackie Kennedy. Could it be that she dared to step out of the wife's role as a background supporter. Eleanor Roosevelt surely had but her personality was different; more unassuming and maybe more soft. What do others feel were the differences in these roles? Why was Eleanor able to pull it off?

Interesting ideas, Bentley. Without getting too political, but Hillary often is faulted for being "too ambitious." I wonder if part of what made Eleanor Roosevelt so popular and successful was the fact that she clearly had no aspirations to a political career apart from her role as a very active and involved spouse. I think today, Eleanor might have been more able to imagine a separate role or even life for herself, apart from her husband.

Andrea..that could be..ambition in a man is tolerated as a great quality; but not so much in a woman. Yes, Eleanor would have been able to separate herself from Franklin and her role as his public wife; even though everyone obviously knew she was not his private one.

Very good response to your question, Bentley.

Andrea, I totally agree. Hillary is very ambitious, and somehow it's in a bad way. I can't really explain it. It's not about her being a woman either. For some reason, she simply isn't likeable. And Eleanor was just out there helping people, with connections to the most powerful man in the world as her #1 resource to help her get stuff done. How could you not love someone like that? Obviously, Hillary's job is much more difficult to pull off than Eleanor's was.

I think it's impossible to compare Hillary and Eleanor if, for no other reason than difference in people's perceptions in 1940 versus now.

For whatever reason, Eleanor was seen as being driven by her values and beliefs whereas Hillary is/was seen as being driven by her ambition even though she took on Health care and ran for President because of what she hoped to accomplish.

Interestingly Eleanor was followed by Bess Truman and Mamie Eisenhower both of whom did not like being First Lady and both of whom stayed out of the limelight and nobody appeared to complain.

I believe Eleanor was a truly unique individual with a unique husband, for the time, who was more than happy to have her pursue her interests as long as they didn't screw up his situation.

BTW and appropriate of nothing in the book, I think Hillary is much more likable as Sec'y of State than she ever has been.

So true Ed. There is no comparison. And also your comment about her likability as Sec'y of State, I agree with as well.

I own Blanche Wiesen Cook's two volume biography about Eleanor Roosevelt. I have yet to read them, but which other first lady deserves such a tribute?

Joe wrote: "So true Ed. There is no comparison. And also your comment about her likability as Sec'y of State, I agree with as well.

I own Blanche Wiesen Cook's two volume biography about Eleanor Roosevelt. I ..."

None that I can think of, Joe. Eleanor truly stands on her own in this regard.

I have to wonder about the author's assertion that Eleanor's depression was a result of childhood trauma. While she certainly had an unhappy childhood, don't most experts feel that some people have an inherited or physical tendency to become depressed, although great stress can trigger it? I really admire the way Eleanor overcomes her depression, but then I'm reminded that we are so often warned not to praise or blame people with depression, that it's not really within their control.

Andrea wrote: "I have to wonder about the author's assertion that Eleanor's depression was a result of childhood trauma. While she certainly had an unhappy childhood, don't most experts feel that some people hav..."

I believe Eleanor was a workaholic and managed her "downers" by working. As is stated so many times in the book, she wore people out.

Her childhood may have contributed to her getting depressed from time to time. I think her biggest problem was a lack of self-confidence which she never quite got over.

I'm having trouble finding the place where the author states that Eleanor's depression was "caused" by her childhood. Maybe I'm just not seeing it.

Re first question, I was struck during my reading how FDR's background with a very supportive mother seemed to shape a character notable for his optimism; that kind of attitude enabled his charisma to shine and convince people to support the war effort even despite their earlier most hearty opposition. The comments by the opposition so far remind me very much of the "socialism" attacks being levied against Obama.

FDR's communications with Churchill remind me of true politicians planning their strategy before they get approval from the government or the people. I'm not condemning; it just seems for so many issues, it's the norm. Depleting our own resources in such a huge fashion was very, very risky business. Reminds me of our present state re Aghanistan after we have poured so much men, women and resources into Iraq.

Eleanor, on the other hand, was a true "helping" partner. I was surprised by her rather devastating background filled with insecurity and her own ability to forge a character filled with self-confidence and "can do" mentality. She had a defnite need to be needed, and thank goodness charm to go with that which endeared her to all she encountered.

Another interesting point made with subtlety is the influence of the Communist party in America long, long before the Joe McCarthy era. Note the turning of the Youth Movement from Eleanor toward a more "socialist" agenda, etc.

DKG is one heck of a great storyteller!

Viviane wrote: "DKG is one heck of a great storyteller! "

Aint that the truth!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I cannot put the darn book down for more than a couple hours.

Liz wrote: "Ed wrote: "I think her biggest problem was a lack of self-confidence which she never quite got over."

Her lack of self-confidence is evident in her own philosophy. On page 95 Eleanor is quoted as..."

Thank you for citing the pages in our reading. It helps keeps the dialogue within the framework of the thread's contents.

I have added a link to the author Blanche Wiesen Cook.

Blanche Wiesen Cook

I'll try to find the reference to causes of her depression tonight. It was only a sentence, and I might have given it too much emphasis.


I have been thinking, too about Franklin's relationship with his mother. There's the old saying that if a woman wants to know how a man will treat his wife, he should look at how well he treats his mother. Sarah seems to have been something of smotherer, but I do think his confidence and optimism are an interesting contrast to Eleanor's self-doubts. Her dad loved her, but constantly "abandoned" her.

I think that FDR had a partnership of sorts with his mother; possibly similar to the one he later developed with his wife..who knows maybe Eleanor had a similar relationship with her father which influenced how she was around men and whether she trusted them or not.

Yes, I was thinking along those lines.

Andrea wrote: "I'll try to find the reference to causes of her depression tonight. It was only a sentence, and I might have given it too much emphasis.


I have been thinking, too about Franklin's relationshi..."

Andrea,

Perhaps it's the line on page 91: "The story of Eleanor's recurring depressions must begin with her alcoholic father, Elliott Roosevelt."

I couldn't find anything in which JKG ascribes her early family experience as a cause. Perhaps I'm being a bit of a nit-picker.

No question these depressive episodes happened from time to time. I believe almost everyone has them to some greater or lesser extent.

Here are two additional reading guide questions (publisher developed). One of them is an extremely emotionally charged question; so keep your responses to a minimum and if need be; take side bar or expansive discussions to the Second World War thread which is not non spoiler, etc.

Here we go..here are the two questions:

"In an effort to help European Jews, Roosevelt requested a new war-powers bill that would have given him power to suspend laws that were hampering "the free movement of persons, property, and information." Had it passed, it might have helped open the gates of immigration to Jewish refugees. "Once this was made clear, the bill had no chance," Goodwin writes. "The powerful conservative coalition strengthened immeasurably by the by-elections crushed it." Newsweek observed, "The ugly truth is that anti-Semitism was a definite factor in the bitter opposition to the president's request." Do you think FDR could have done more for the Jews? How as a nation do we reconcile such a horrible fact?"


"At the end of No Ordinary Time, Goodwin recaps Franklin's presidential career, underscoring his successes as well as his failures. For example, Roosevelt's success in mobilizing the nation was extraordinary. However, his forcible relocation of Japanese-Americans during the war was certainly a failure of vision. What are FDR's other successes and failures?"

I will start with the emotionally charged one.

First, the words used by Kearns were "might have helped open the gates of immigration to Jewish refugees"; it does not mean that this legislation (which I admit I am not familiar with) would have done anything quickly enough. Because it never passed it is all conjecture.

Second, was the powerful conservative coalition anti semitic or were they against opening the flood gates and changing the immigration laws which might have burdened the American people even further; the country was already having a very hard time. Is this an excuse for not helping out; no it isn't.

Third, there are a lot of ugly truths about bias and prejudice in our country's history and other countries for that matter. Prejudice seems to always wag its ugly head.

Fourth, I think that all of the world's churches and religions should have spoken out about the horrendous way the Jews were treated; very ungodlike no matter which God one worships. From what I have read, not enough was done by any of them. Corporations should have refused doing business with Nazi Germany until the humanity situation was rectified, from what I have read that did not happen either. Every country should have spoken up for human rights; I do not see this simply as an American issue.

Plain and simple, countries, world leaders, churches, peoples, corporations all knew that Nazi Germany was not treating certain peoples humanely. Some of these entities could not even defend themselves adequately against them; so it is difficult to see how some of them could have done more. I guess collectively the world could have done more at that time and didn't for a variety of reasons: they couldn't, they weren't strong enough, they were afraid of repercussions, they were afraid of death themselves, they were afraid of losing business and profits, they were afraid of unsettling their apple cart of power and their own fiefdom and there were those who did not care (sad as that is). The Holocaust was an ugly situation; there is no doubt about it; but I do not feel that this issue belongs to the United States and not others.

I am not sure what others feel about this very sensitive subject.

Re the first question, we don't reconcile anything. The public at that time were busy denying the snippets of information re the Holocaust. So why didn't FDR push more for refugee immigration? Answer must be speculative - larger agenda of supporting war and not wanting to lose that wave of growing approval? Silent acceptance of anti-Semitism and anti-Communist feeling very popular at that time?

Re second, sometimes I think that people really didn't appreciate the magnitude of FDR's domestic work program reforms - providing jobs for thousands of homeless and unemployed people. Tendency was, and I might add is in our time, to ignore the good reform because there are still other unemployed or homeless; but WPA and other programs were huge successes at the time.

Excellent ideas and comments Vivianne.

BTW..everyone..the second question is one that we can revisit during different parts of the book; not just at the end. Discussing it periodically as we read along may help us remember more of FDR's successes and failures; rather than just keeping these "discussion questions" until the very end.

These questions give us something to ponder as we read so that we can come to our own personal conclusions.

I don't know if anyone else has seen the movie and or read the book "Nowhere in Africa." It deals with a Jewish family, part of which immigrated to Kenya to escape the Nazis and part of whom didn't make it. In that family even, there was a lot of denial about what was happening and belief that it "couldn't get worse" so they could tough it out. Maybe some in Americans thought these people who were trying to get out were exaggerating their danger, wanting to take advantage of the situation. The U.S. still had something like 17 percent unemployment, so they may have felt an influx of new refugees would depress the economy. Obviously, it was wrong and probably racist and cowardly. But one thing I'm constantly reminded of as I read history is that people "in the thick" don't know what we do.

Andrea, with 17 per cent unemployment you can see why some would be against letting in more people. It was all those things you said it was; but sometimes people simply stick their heads in the sand and ignore the issues.

Are you familiar with the add book/author feature at the top of the comment box. It is a great way for folks to link to your suggestions.



Nowhere in Africa An Autobiographical Novel



Stefanie Zweig

Viviane wrote: "Re the first question, we don't reconcile anything. The public at that time were busy denying the snippets of information re the Holocaust. So why didn't FDR push more for refugee immigration? An..."

There is, of course, more on the "Jewish Question" later in the book as well as the forced internment of the Japanese. I don't want to "spoil" anything so I'll reserve commenting on these two issues until we get back to them later.

As far as anti-semitism is concerned, I have the benefit of being 72 years of age and remembering, very well the almost. virulent anti-semitism of my parents and many of their friends, usually, though, expressed behind closed doors and supposedly softened by beginning their rant with, "Some of my best friends are Jewish, but...."

The irony was many of our neighbors were Jewish and over half my High School classmates were Jewish. So what happened does not surprise me. As I said there's more to be discussed later.

Ed, when one has lived through anti-semitism, it is certainly more unsettling than simply reading about it as something that happened long ago or in some other part of the world. The discussion question will obviously become more relevant as we move on; although it is very relevant to you already. Thank you for sharing.

There was certainly racist throughout the country as there is today. However, it seems to me that what prevented a lot of refugees from getting in was the work of one man, Breckenridge Long. On page 100 Kern describes his views .."Long was adamantly opposed to the admission of refugees under any circumstances. In a diary filled with invectives againist Jews, Catholics, New Yorkers, liberals, and in fact everybody who was not of his own particular background.."

When you read about people such as Eleanor and FDR who have accomplished so much good on an individual basis .. it is depressing to see one person placed in a position of power who was able to influence decisions based on a personal bias.

Yes Sarah that is so true. It really is sadder that folks around him allowed him to be even a little successful

Sarah wrote: "There was certainly racist throughout the country as there is today. However, it seems to me that what prevented a lot of refugees from getting in was the work of one man, Breckenridge Long. On p..."

I don't agree that it was the work of one man. He had many supporters in government and without.

FDR could have fired him. I don't accept the rationalization that FDR just didn't want to face that kind of decision. I think FDR thought it would be politically disadvantageous to fire him. I also think he really believed the solution to the Jewish Refugee problem was to win the war as quickly as possible.

I also am convinced situations like this exist today. There are always people in government with their own agenda and they work that agenda with the help of others who agree with them, regardless of public opinion or even official frowning.

So I am commenting later and would like to address several points


A comment to Viviane about the depletion of American goods to the British -
i do beleive tht Eleanor suffered from depression - losing ones parents at an early age and having had an imperfect relationship with ones parents before their deaths would have been difficult.


Eleanor had build for herself a life and the threat of being under limitations at the white House was reasonable - it was illustrated by the refusal to let her go to Europe.

I also think that judging her relationships with the public in 1940 ignores that she began as first lady in 1933 ö with 25% unemplyment and folks needing someone to help them achieve more and improove their lot. by 1940 I think that unemployment was down to 17% not great but pretty good for the 8% that got jobs and all the folks benefiting from the various alphabet agencies (CCC ö WPA and others9 that her husband had put in place.

FDRs turning away from her and her causes was not necessarily his being a politician ag DKG says but maybe being an executive, a leader ö reacting to a possible external threat.

Anyway so that makes a big difference between Eleanor and hillary Clinton - Hillary was personifiing such needed and wanted reforms as FDR was making - Bill Clinton did not, thankfully, have the opprotunity.

I agree that Hillary seems very effective and capable as Secretary of State but no more so, just a different stage, than she was a senator form new york i think. She had to get out from being the user of her husbands power to being the user of her own.

Interesting comments Vince..as Secretary of State and as Senator..I think folks can finally see how capable she really is. And I might add there seem to be a lot of people who have set higher expectations for her than they have men in the same roles. A sad commentary when intolerances and bias are mentioned.

And it certainly was a conscious decision on someone's part to refuse to let Eleanor go to Europe (certainly a limitation on her horizon and her ability to really have free rein of her own agenda). But oddly enough I don't think this bothered Eleanor that much.

Little comment on my judgement of DKGs accessment that FDR was focused on politics. I must say that if she was not right about the international aspects she would certainly have been correct on the election front. FDR was during 1940 planning his unprescended attempt at being elected for a third term as pres and certainly he was aware of the potential resistance to his breaking the tradition follwed by every president since Washington set it.

I am going to valiantly try to catch up with you all.

Chapter 4 delves into Eleanor Roosevelt and some of her upbringing.

I would like to recommend a terrific book. I gave it a top rating when I read it back in 2008. The photographs are great.

Our Eleanor A Scrapbook Look at Eleanor Roosevelt's Remarkable Life - Candace Fleming

Alias Reader...what is nice about our group is that you can always catch up and find someone to converse with. It is never too late for any book.

In the case of the spotlighted read...I think you will find it a quick study...it is well written, entertaining and it goes by fast.

Thank you for your recommendation..it looks quite interesting.