let you play the political ponies and win. Unfortunately, it allows Schlesinger to indulge all his weaknesses. His 26-page summary of all of American history allows him to divide political eras neatly between the good guys and the bad guys (and explain why voters occasionally elect a wrong ’un). But, in detail, these “cycles” obscure more than they reveal. A conservative era may have more in common with its contemporary liberalism than it does with the conservative wave that preceded it by half a century. Schlesinger’s schema forces him into the odd assertions that President Reagan is both a supporter of tariffs and an isolationist when it comes to foreign policy.
If there are cycles in history, then presumably the historian should try to rise above them, so that he can see the past fully. Instead, Arthur Schlesinger binds himself more and more tightly to his progressive cause, and, as this book demonstrates, that obscures his view. Late in the book, he cites Oscar Wilde: “The duty we owe history is to rewrite it.” That was meant as a witticism, as a statement about men’s failures in the face of accuracy and honesty. Schlesinger seems to take it as a maxim. □
Comments