preview

Essay about Richard Hofstadter's The Age of Reform

Better Essays

Richard Hofstadter's The Age of Reform

In 1955, Richard Hofstadter wrote his Pulitzer Prize winning book The Age of Reform, about the Gilded Age. Hofstadter’s arguments about the Populist and Progressive movements and their origins started debate and renewed scholarship on the Populist and Progressive movements. Many historians did not agree with Hofstadter’s arguments and published their own papers stating their conclusions based on their own research. This scenario occurs all the time in the history field. One historian writes a book or paper and other historians accept or reject his arguments by doing their own research and making their own conclusions. Many historians wrote about the Progressive era after Hofstadter did. …show more content…

He argues that for the early part of the history of the United States the culture of the nation centered on the farmer and the agrarian myth. The agrarian myth is that the independent family farmer was what drove the nation. Hofstadter states that framers enjoyed a certain privileged status in society. He argues that by the late 1870s this image or status was in decline and that farmers began to resent this loss of status. He asserts that the Populist movement was born out of this resentment. He explains that this resentment towards city-dwellers—those whose opinion of farming was declining—was why many Populists described the city as crime infested and disliked immigrants. He viewed populists as being hysterical, raving, and very nativist. He says that the ideas expressed by the Populists made their way to the cities where professionals latched on to them. These professionals he argued felt the pinch from immigrants and crime. These professionals became the members of the Progressive movement. He viewed progressives as more practical, less hysterical, and more patronizing. To Hofstadter the Populist and Progressive movements were borne out of a status revolution in the United States. Hofstadter presents an interesting argument to explain Populism and Progressivism. At the root of his argument is that people are more likely to feel resentment when their status is at stake rather then when their income or jobs are. This is an interesting

Get Access