首页 | 学科·学界 | 社会现象 | 文章·争鸣 | 读书 | 学者家园 | 文献服务 | 数据服务 | 中心网刊 | Blog | WIKI | 网上调查 | 社会论坛
  当前位置:首页 >> 读书 >> From Savage to Negro:Anthropology and the Construction of Race, 1896–1954 >> 正文
Chapter 3 Anthropology in American Popular Culture

图书名称:From Savage to Negro:Anthropology and the Construction of Race, 1896–1954
图书作者:Lee D. Baker    ISBN:
出版社:Berkeley: University of California Press    出版日期:1998年

Here physical type, heredity, blood, culture, nation, personality, intelligence, and achievement are all stirred together to make the omelet which is the popular conception of "race."
M. F. Ashley Montagu, 1962

Chapter 2 has demonstrated how the anthropology produced by the first ethnologists reproduced ideas of race and culture consistent with Social Darwinism, racial segregation, and global expansion. I want to emphasize that I am focusing on the intersections between the formation of anthropology and processes of racial formation by exploring how the "fathers of anthropology" established the discipline in part by reproducing and reinforcing popular ideas about racial inferiority. In return, ethnologists received both tacit and direct institutional support. For example, the way Brinton shifted his research focus from linguistics to the evolution of the races, the way Powell supported explicitly racist scholars, and the way Putnam popularized anthropology each, in a sense, "paid off" and contributed to the institutional foundations of the field.

Turn-of-the-century anthropological science not only responded to but also intensified the signification of U.S. racial categories.[1] In this chapter, I attempt to identify the historically specific roles anthropology played in the complex social processes that foster racial inequality by demonstrating how politicians, world's fair organizers, and media magnates inserted the ethnological sciences into legislation, popular culture, and foreign and domestic policies.

When anthropology became an academic discipline, there were two areas of popular culture in which its scientific authority became particularly important: world's fairs and widely circulated magazines. Both were suffused with images and narratives that affirmed ideas about the racial inferiority of people of color.

The World's Columbian Exposition, Chicago—1893

The 1893 World's Columbian Exposition was framed by prosperity for the rich and violence against the poor. During that year New England alone produced more manufactured goods per capita than any other country in the world. The United States had surpassed every country in steel manufacturing, oil refinement, meatpacking, and the extraction of gold, silver, coal, and iron. The country led the world in the number of telephones and incandescent lights, as well as in miles of telegraph wire. There was not, however, peace and prosperity for all. In May 1893 the National Cordage Company failed, and the ensuing financial panic created thousands of business insolvencies, hundreds of bank closures, scores of railroad bankruptcies, and record high unemployment with record low reserves of gold in the national treasury. The year also brought a realignment of political power. With Grover Cleveland winning the bid for the presidency, Democrats seized control of the executive and legislative branches of the government for the first time since before the Civil War. The November elections that ushered the Democrats to Washington was a miscarriage of a participatory democracy because the measures for enforcing the Fifteenth Amendment had been repealed. African Americans in the South witnessed wholesale disfranchisement accompanied by routine lynchings. During the year proceeding the fair, 1892, fifteen election-related murders took place during state elections in Georgia, and riots erupted at polls in Virginia and North Carolina. In the North, conflicts between striking union members and Pinkerton sheriffs resulted in deaths at Homestead and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

In a brilliant and pointed analysis, Robert Rydell has documented how U.S. world's fairs trumpeted the ideals of political and financial leaders between the end of Reconstruction and the United States' entry into World War I. Large corporations, as well as state, federal, and foreign governments, underwrote the many commissions and delegations that promoted and organized the events. Fair organizers presented to more than a million visitors an optimistic view of the world in the wake of financial depressions and outbursts of class and race warfare.[2]

The 1893 fair depicted the ascendancy of the United States among the world powers and the self-confidence and optimism of the country, which its White citizens believed to be the most advanced in history.[3] Ideas of racial and cultural superiority and inferiority were reified by the architecture and physical layout of the expansive exposition. The exteriors of the large beaux-arts edifices were painted ivory. The White City, as the fair was designated, was the crowning achievement of this civilization. The latest in architectural styles and military hardware was exhibited, along with the newest mining and agricultural technologies, to demonstrate American cultural and industrial progress. The emphasis on hard science, high art, and exacting technology evidenced the material progress of American civilization and the progress of the civilized mind.

Across the river from the White City and segregated from the practical exhibits were the entertainments along the Midway Plaisance, where visitors could experience the thrills and chills of the Ferris wheel, the hootchy-kootchy, Dr. Welch's tangy grape juice, and the villages of the savage. Under the direction of Frederic W. Putnam, the Midway was a lattice of exotic, erotic, and wondrous excitement. Putnam sanctioned a blend of familiar forms of entertainment with ethnology in an attempt to popularize anthropology. The end result was a mile-long midway that fused the honky-tonk bar with the freak, minstrel, and Wild West show to form a "practical study of ethnography." Segregating the living ethnological exhibits into a dark ghetto away from the White City was symbolically important. The accomplishments of the civilized mind—art, architecture, and technology—were counterposed to ignorance, dirt, smells, and brown bodies. As Rydell points out, the White City and the Midway were not antithetical constructs. The depiction of the non-White world as savage and the White world as civilized were "two sides of the same coin—a coin minted in the tradition of American racism, in which the forbidden desires of whites were projected onto dark-skinned peoples, who consequently had to be degraded so white purity could be maintained."[4]

The 1893 exposition is generally recognized for its contributions to urban planning and innovative technology. But equally important, the fair introduced the American public to a new anthropology and its old evolutionary ideas about race. The popularity of the Midway transformed the ethnological exhibits along its course—and in the Anthropological Building—into vehicles of popular culture that shaped concepts of racial inferiority by framing them in an evolutionary hierarchy. The Smithsonian's William H. Dall reported to The Nation that the Midway constituted an "anthropological collection hitherto unequaled and hereafter not likely to be surpassed."[5] Curators displayed skulls and measurements of all races in the laboratory housed in the Anthropological Building. But visitors who questioned what constituted the epitome of the civilized race were directed to "the well-known statues of the Harvard boy and [Radcliffe] girl." As Dall explained, "these [statues] attract a constant stream of visitors, and are generally acknowledged to form one of the most instructive exhibits in the [Anthropological] building."[6]

The living ethnological exhibits were arranged in an obvious evolutionary hierarchy that resonated with many White Americans' seemingly intuitive understanding of racial inferiority. The darker races were at the bottom of the midway and the lighter races at the top—closer to the White City. As Otis T. Mason reported to the Smithsonian Institution, "from the rude human habitations about the Anthropological Building to the results of co-operative architectural dreams which constituted the White City, was a long way on the road of evolution."[7]

Julian Hawthorne, writing for a special Columbian Exposition edition of Cosmopolitan , detailed how the Department of Ethnology dehumanized people of color by providing him a conveyance to frolic up and down the evolutionary ladder while "playing" with "the elements" from which the civilized races developed: "The catalogue calls [it] 'Department M.—Ethnology. Isolated Exhibits—Midway Plaisance. Group 176,' this I say, I call the 'World as Plaything.' Here are the elements out of which the human part of the planet has been developed; it is all within the compass of a day's stroll; … Roughly speaking, you have before you the civilized, the half-civilized and the savage worlds to choose from—or rather, to take one after the other."[8] Hawthorne gleefully guided Cosmopolitan readers through a wild trek down the evolutionary ladder, quipping, "[L]et us have done with Europe and try a cycle of Cathay. Beyond the great wheel, as to spatial distance, and who can tell how many thousands years away from us to appearance, modes of life and traditions, is the [African] Dahomey village."[9]

Fair organizers presented the racial plank of Social Darwinism in an entertaining and simple framework. The ethnological exhibits provided easy answers for many Americans who were groping for ways to explain the violent chaos that erupted at the massacre at Wounded Knee in 1890, race and labor riots in 1892, terrorizing lynch mobs, and reports that African Americans composed the most criminal element in society.

There was "no doubt that the Dahomans [were] more closely allied with the cruel and superstitious practices of savagery than any other country represented in [the] Midway."[10] John Eastman issued a stern warning to all visitors that these Africans were dangerous. He forewarned them that "the women are as fierce if not fiercer than the men and all of them have to be watched day and night for fear they may use their spears for other purposes than a barbaric embellishment of their dances."[11] The stern warning reinforced many Americans' fears that African Americans could not be trusted and were naturally predisposed to immoral and criminal behavior and thus kept away from White people through segregation. Edward B. McDowell, writing for Frank Leslie's Popular Monthly , made the connection explicit:

Sixty-nine of them are here in all their barbaric ugliness, blacker than buried midnight and as degraded as the animals which prowl the jungles of their dark land. It is impossible to conceive of a notch lower in the human scale than the Amazon, or female Dahomey warrior, represents…. Dancing around a pole on which is perched a human skull, or images of reptiles, lizards and other crawling things, their incantations make the night hideous. … In these wild people we can easily detect many characteristics of the American negro.[12]

While the evolutionary scheme of the Midway supported the belief that physical and moral characteristics were one and the same, it also reinforced the belief that slavery created a thin veneer of civilized characteristics for American Negroes. Lurking behind the veneer was the savage from Africa, incapable of morality and civilized behavior and predisposed to crime. The Italian criminologist Cesare Lombroso explained this as "the greatest obstacle to the negro's progress": "For notwithstanding that garb and the habits of the white man may have given him a veneer of modern civilization, he is still to often indifferent to and careless of the lives of others; and he betrays that lack of the sentiment of pity, commonly observed among savage races, which causes them to regard homicide as a mere incident, and as glorious in case it is the outcome of revenge."[13]

Frederick Starr, a new assistant professor of anthropology at the University of Chicago, echoed Lombroso by linking criminal behavior and morality to the evolution of the savage mind.[14] In Starr's view, Negroes were only half a step ahead of their savage brethren, and because American Negroes possessed the same morals as their savage brethren, they were naturally predisposed to criminal activity. Starr was adamant that "Race characteristics are physical, mental, [and] moral."[15] As a University of Chicago professor, Starr patiently explained to the readers of Dial magazine the "facts" of African American criminality. "Study of criminality in the two races gives astonishing results. Of the total prisoners in the United States in 1890, nearly 30 per cent were colored; the negro, however forms but 11 per cent of the population…. Conditions of life and bad social opportunities cannot be urged in excuse. In Chicago the conditions of life for Italians, Poles, and Russians are fully as bad as for the blacks, but their criminality is much less. The difference is racial ."[16]

Although anthropology gave scientific justification for old ideas of racial inferiority, it was a new science for many visitors to the fair. The term anthropology was in many respects first introduced to the American public during this exposition.[17] Fair organizers drew on the growing authority and prestige of anthropological theories about natural and social progress to make ideas of America's progress more persuasive.[18] The budding discipline of anthropology also drew on the popular exposure and prestige associated with the fair. According to Dall, because of "the active exploration instituted by the Directors of the Exposition into matters connected with American anthropology, it is probable that this department of science will permanently profit by the anniversary thus celebrated to a greater extent than any other line of research."[19]

While anthropology bathed in the public prestige at the fair, Putnam attracted controversy and adversaries. Several Native American associations took issue with his vision. In the early planning stages of the exposition an amiable agreement had been struck between the U.S. Department of the Interior and Department M of exposition. It was agreed that Department M would erect "strictly scientific" representations of the primitive conditions of indigenous life. The Indian Bureau of the Department of the Interior would display the education and citizenship of modern Indians. However, Emma Sickles, chair of the Indian Committee of the Universal Peace Union, protested against the ethnological displays and tried to derail Putnam's efforts.

Sickles played a key role in passing a federal appropriations bill for the fair; in return, she was given a political appointment in Department M, over objections levied by Putnam. She attempted to persuade the staff of Department M that it should represent the process of civilization among Native Americans. As a result, Putnam fired her for insubordination. She immediately sent officials at the fair a resolution drafted by the Indian Committee of the Universal Peace Union which stated: "In the interests of the preservation of the peace and the progress of civilization I do hereby protest against the presentation of low and degrading phases of Indian Life."[20] She would not quit and relentlessly attacked Putnam and the fair in the press. For example, on October 8, 1893, the New York Times published one of her scathing editorials:

[E]very effort has been put forth to make the Indian exhibit mislead the American people. It has been used to work up sentiment against the Indian by showing that he is either savage or can be educated only by government agencies. This would strengthen the power of everything that has been "working" against the Indians for years. Every means was used to keep the self-civilized Indians out of the Fair. The Indian agents and their backers knew well that if the civilized Indians got a representation in the Fair the public would wake up to the capabilities of the Indians for self-government and realize that all they needed was to be left alone.

Native Americans were not the only Americans who were denied access to demonstrating their "progress." African American leaders demanded fair and equitable representation, but they too were rebuffed.

No Progress—No Negroes

Although the fair was dubbed the White City, the African American press dubbed it "the great American white elephant," or "the white American's World's Fair."[21] To ensure equitable representation of Negroes' "progress," Black leaders repeatedly asked for administrative appointments. To stem their pressure, fair organizers appointed a number of token African American commissioners with no real power.

Frederick Douglass, the dean of African American affairs, and Ida B. Wells-Barnett, the prolific antilynching crusader, were compelled to explain to international visitors why African Americans were "studiously kept out of representation in any official capacity and [only] given menial places." They envisioned printing a pamphlet written in German, Spanish, and French to explain their position. They secured enough funds to publish The Reason Why the Colored American Is Not in the World's Columbian Exposition in English, but they did not have enough money to print the foreign-language editions. They did, however, manage to print the introduction to the pamphlet in several different languages.[22] The lack of African American representation and the degrading image of Africans left Frederick Douglass to conclude that exposition managers evidently wanted the Negro American to be represented only by the "barbaric rites" of Africans "brought there to act the monkey."[23]

As a concession for jettisoning plans for Negro exhibits, the fair organizers suggested that one day in August be set aside as Colored Jubilee Day. Many African Americans were already infuriated by the discrimination, and the idea of a "Nigger day" was not tolerable. Douglass seized the opportunity at the Jubilee Day to deliver a major address to vindicate the progress made by African Americans despite injustice, violence, and persecution. He also lambasted fair organizers who fostered the belief "that our small participation in the World's Columbian Exposition is due either to our ignorance or to our want of public spirit." "Why in Heaven's name," he appealed, do you "crush down the race that grasped the saber and helped make the nation one and the exposition possible?"[24]

Fair organizers drew a particular social blueprint for the throngs of visitors. This blueprint becomes unmistakable if one juxtaposes Frederick Douglass and Emma Sickle's appeals for the recognition of progress among people of color with the Department of Anthropology's evolutionary scheme. The fair organizers eclipsed the progress of African Americans and Native Americans while Frederick Ward Putnam attempted to reveal how thin the veneer of progress actually was by showcasing the Negroes' savage brethren in a exotic, immoral, and ghettoized Midway Plaisance.

Two years later, the representation of African Americans in Atlanta at the 1895 Cotton States and International Exposition gave rise to a new form of African American leadership. At the Atlanta exposition Booker T. Washington gave a speech that initiated his meteoric rise to power. As with Putnam and anthropology, Washington used the Cotton States Exposition as a platform to popularize his agenda—industrial education and accommodating White supremacy as a means to "uplift" the race. Washington framed his agenda for African Americans with concepts of cultural and racial progress that were also consistent with ideas of Social Darwinism.[25] As a result, he won the praise of both Democrat and Republican interests and helped articulate these notions across racial lines.

Booker T. Washington and the Cotton States and International Exposition — 1895

In 1881 Washington founded and built Tuskegee Institute, a training school for African Americans that emphasized the virtues of hard work, thrift, and industry (Figure 6). In 1895 he was asked to deliver the opening address at the Cotton States Exposition. The address catapulted him to international prominence, and for the next twenty years, until his death in 1915, no other African American commanded comparable power and influence.[26]

The largely White exposition audience was concerned with finding sources of inexpensive labor and new markets for industrial and agricultural products; Washington, however, was concerned with finding more philanthropic support for Tuskegee Institute.[27] In his speech he suggested that Negroes could help the United States progress if they "learned to dignify and glorify common labor and put brains and skill into the common occupations of life."[28] He also warned Negroes not to migrate North because in the South "the Negro is given a man's chance in the commercial world."[29] Members of the White race could help U.S. progress, Washington surmised, if they utilized Negro labor instead of immigrant workers "of foreign birth and strange tongue and habits … [because the Negro, after all, has] without strikes and labor wars, tilled your fields, cleared your forests, builded your railroads and cities, and brought forth treasures from the bowels of the earth."[30] Washington did not challenge segregation statutes and disfranchisement, and he even suggested "in all things that are purely social we can be as separate as the fingers, yet one as the hand in all things essential to mutual progress."[31]

Washington's so-called Atlanta compromise provided important African American support for racial segregation and disfranchisement.[32] Without compunction, he couched his arguments in ways consistent with Social Darwinist ideas. Typical of Washington's many public statements was his allegation that "a race, like an individual, must pay for everything it gets—the price of beginning at the bottom of the social scale and gradually working up by natural processes to the highest civilization."[33] He continued for years along these same rhetorical lines, knowing that it was an effective way to gain support for his vision of Negro uplift.

Figure 6.
Booker T. Washington at the Tuskegee Institute, ca. 1897.
(Courtesy of the Library of Congress)

A number of ethnological and anthropological exhibits were displayed at the Atlanta Cotton States and International Exposition (1895), the Tennessee Centennial Exposition in Nashville (1897), the Trans-Mississippi and International Exposition in Omaha (1898), and the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo (1901), but none matched the Midway of Chicago. Not until a decade after the Columbian Exposition was the scale and centrality of living ethnological exhibits surpassed.

The Louisiana Purchase Exposition, St. Louis — 1904

The St. Louis fair was pitched as the largest the world had ever seen — nearly double that of Chicago. After a decade of constricting monopolies, the Spanish-American War, and periodic depressions, the overarching theme the fair organizers promoted was still unbridled American progress — but not for the Negro. African Americans were systematically erased from the representation of American industrial and cultural progress. Every effort to represent African American achievements at the fair was thwarted, save for one or two exhibits by Black colleges. Emmett J. Scott noted this in the Voice of the Negro , "as at Chicago where the African Dahomey Village, with its exquisite inhabitants, was the sole representation of the Negro people, so at St. Louis, … 'A Southern Plantation,' showing Negro life before the War of the Rebellion, is all there is to let the world know we are in existence."[34]

St. Louis, Missouri, was the Jim Crow South. The cosmopolitan tenor of the fair did nothing to stem the provincial customs and laws of segregation. Negroes were constantly "being turned away by concessionaires, sometimes courteously, sometimes with the brutal statement, 'we do not serve "niggers" here.'"[35]

W. S. Scarborough noted that Jim Crow statutes at the St. Louis fair applied only to African Americans: "There will be Indians, Chinese, Japanese, Mexicans, Hindoos, Italians, Cubans, Hawaiians, Filipinos, even down to the Negritos of the islands in the Pacific, in whom some wiseacres have thought to have discovered the missing link — all these will be received officially and entertained as others, no notice being taken of their presence in cars, on grounds, in cafes — in fact, anywhere, unless suspicion arises in the mind of some that they belong to the wonderfully mixed race that we call the American Negro."[36] Scarborough sardonically concluded, "Such is the irony of the American situation."[37]

Like the Chicago exposition, the St. Louis fair used anthropology to depict the inferiority of people of color and demonstrate American ascendancy. Explicitly, the directors wanted to develop "a comprehensive anthropological exhibition" to depict "the barbarous and semi-barbarous peoples of the world, as nearly as possible in their ordinary and native environments." These were to contrast the Departments of Education, Art, Liberal Arts, and Applied Sciences. The juxtaposition was planned not only to exhibit how far Americans had progressed in industry and culture but also, and more important, to demonstrate the need to rescue America's newly acquired vassals from the vestiges of savagery.[38] As a result, the Department of Anthropology emerged as a keystone in the most grandiose world's fair to date.

Defining Nationalism, Defending Imperialism

By 1904 Brinton and Powell had died and Putnam was spending his final years between Berkeley and Cambridge. There were four prominent ethnologists who had experience as world's fair organizers and could have assumed the job of organizing the Anthropology Department in St. Louis: Otis T. Mason and WJ McGee (Figure 7) at the BAE, Frederick Starr at the University of Chicago, and Franz Boas at Columbia University. Each of these leading ethnologists gained experience and most of their national notoriety by working as exhibit organizers at the expositions. The fair directors selected McGee. Not surprisingly, his elaborate vision of human progress was consistent with the organizers' optimism of a new century and view that foreign intervention would help to advance the "lesser races." While Americans witnessed the devastation, poverty, and unrest brought on by the so-called civilized races, McGee proposed that Americans were now at the cusp of the final culture grade: Enlightenment. This was the precise message the fair directors wanted to deliver.

McGee was not an anthropologist but a self-taught glacial geologist at the USGS. In less than a decade he emerged as an influential professional in anthropology. His entrée into anthropology came in 1893, when Powell resigned from the USGS under congressional pressure initiated by mining and timber lobbyists. McGee was Powell's protégé at the survey and resigned too. Powell did not, however, resign from his directorship at the BAE, and he hired McGee as his heir apparent.[39] As BAE ethnologist-in-charge, McGee rose to power within Washington's scientific societies during the following decade, but his fiscal mismanagement and opportunistic style led to his downfall at the Smithsonian. In 1903 he was forced out of government science because of public controversy and an indictment leveled by a Smithsonian investigation. When the fair organizers gave McGee the nod, he welcomed the opportunity to maintain his stature in the field and, perhaps more important, the opportunity to fashion a national identity out of his idea of racial progress.

McGee's ideas regarding progress were detailed in two 1899 addresses. The first, "National Growth and National Character," was delivered to the National Geographic Society; the other, "The Trend of Human Progress," was delivered to the Washington Academy of

Figure 7.
WJ McGee conducting fieldwork among the Seri in Sonora, Mexico,
for the Bureau of American Ethnology, ca. 1890.
(Courtesy of the National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution)

Sciences. The latter was selected for publication in the inaugural volume of the new series of the American Anthropologist , the journal "representative of the science of Anthropology, and especially of Anthropology in America."[40] Quite explicitly, McGee's theory of racial progress advanced in "The Trend of Human Progress" represented the anthropological discourse on race. Five years later this discourse was literally brought to life for millions of people at the 1904 St. Louis world's fair by exhibiting people as if they were in a zoo.

In "The Trend of Human Progress," McGee tried to develop the argument that

there has been somatic development from race to race, from antiquity to modernity, and from generation to generation…. [T]he skull has risen from the simian type, the skeleton has become more upright and better adjusted to brain-led activities, the muscles have gained and are still gaining in efficiency if not in absolute strength, the faculty for work (or for normal exercise of function) is multiplied, the constitution is improved in vigor, life has grown longer and easier, and perfected man is overspreading the world.[41]

McGee asserted that the entire human race was progressing to the "culture grade" of "enlightenment," which he conveniently tacked onto the familiar savage-barbarian-civilized evolutionary scheme. Whites in the United States, he mused, had only achieved enlightenment "during recent decades," whereas Whites in Britain were beginning to experience "budded enlightenment." White Americans were on the "high road to human progress" and were the only ones to experience "full-blown enlightenment." Unfortunately, he remitted, the darker races were much farther behind and on a much slower trek.

McGee hung his argument regarding the converging evolution of all races on an analogy of tributaries that flow into one great stream. He argued that "if the racial lines towards progress were projected futureward, they [would] converge in consanguineal union transcending tribal and racist distinctions; projected backward, they divaricate to a indefinite number of confluent currents coming up from proto-human sources to successively merge in the great stream of living humanity."[42] He was quick to note that

interracial union is often apparently injurious, generally of doubtful effect, only rarely of unquestionable benefit … [although the] mixture of white and black has produced a Frederick Douglass, a Booker T. Washington, a Blanche K. Bruce, a Paul Lawrence Dunbar, and other makers of progress in the most progressive nation. By far the greater part of the interracial matings have been illicit, and between the lower specimens of one or both lines of blood, so that the evil of miscegenation may well have been intensified.[43]

The system of racial classification that McGee proposed was confusing. To begin with, he did not clearly state whether he attempted to assign culture grades to races, tribes, or nations. Nor was it clear whether individuals, regardless of race, could advance to a higher culture grade. He was clear that "human activities form the best basis for the classification of human kind."[44] He believed that the more complex the technology, the higher the culture grade. Racial classification, he insisted, was indexed by what he termed "activital products," or technological innovations, and these "products" were predetermined by innate and/or acquired coordination. The evidence McGee chose to support this argument included his observation that

the yellow or red or black artisan draws his cutting tool toward his body, the white artisan pushes knife and saw and plane outward; … the less cultured scribe writes from the right, the more cultured toward the right; the plodding coolie plants his feet in the line of his path, the high-bred mandarin turns his toes outward at right angles to his front; the clumsy cook wipes the dish toward her and often drops the crockery, the deft dishwasher wipes outward and can be trusted with costly china.[45]

McGee explained that two different evolutionary processes determined one's coordination: cephalization and cheirization. He believed that cephalization was quite obvious and drew his evidence for it from the way in which the "human cranium has increased in capacity and changed in form from that of Pithecanthropus erectus to that of enlightened man; that arms and hands have shortened and acquired greatly increased amplitude of movement; that the jaws have condensed from prognathic type to the human form; [and] that the pelvis and leg bones have become better adapted to the erect attitude."[46] From this process of cephalization he concluded that cranial capacity has increased among all peoples and nations and decreased among none. But, he quickly retorted, "the records show that cranial capacity is correlated with culture-grade so closely that the relative status of the peoples and nations of the earth may be stated as justly in terms of brain-size as in any another way."[47]

The amount of coordination was not contingent solely on cranial capacity. In McGee's view it was correlated with and augmented by cheirization, which McGee explained in one rather lengthy sentence:

It is the process involved in manual training, both subconscious and purposive; its mechanism appears in the wide range of action in the human hand as compared with the paw of the animal, and no less strikingly in the increasing range in manual capacity found in ascending the scale of human development from savagery to enlightenment; its effects are displayed in the better development of the forearm among white men than among yellow or black men; and its prevalence is shown in the hundred manifestations of manual dexterity among cultivated men to each half-dozen found among primitive men.[48]

Although the logic and examples that McGee used to make his arguments were somewhat confusing, he came dangerously close to posing ideas that could have challenged the racial plank of Social Darwinism. For instance, he delinked race from culture, or he classified people "in terms of what they do rather than by what they merely are ."[49] By the nature of his argument, he also implicitly supported certain interracial unions. The way he circumvented these apparent contradictions enabled anthropology to champion American imperialism in the Pacific and defend Jim Crow in the South. McGee fashioned an anthropological version of the White man's burden.

The logical extension of McGee's idea of convergent human progress was racial equality; however, he mollified any question, even of its potential. He assured the readers of the American Anthropologist that "the progenitors of the white man must have been well past the critical point before the progenitors of the red and the black arose from the plane of bestiality to that of humanity."[50] The White man, he argued, had a special responsibility to these lesser races of the world because they were the only people to experience "full-blown enlightenment." White Americans had to shoulder the White man's burden and therefore were obligated to uplift the lesser races in the Pacific.

Considered as races, the peoples are evidently approaching community, partly through blending of blood, partly through the more rapid extinction of the lower races who lack the strong constitution (developed through generations of exercise) enjoyed by the higher races; so that the races of the continents are gradually uniting in lighter blend, and the burden of humanity is already in large measure the white man's burden — for, viewing the human world as it is, white and strong are synonymous terms.[51]

The themes of the White man's burden, America's leadership into the new culture grade, and evolution as a product of technological advancement were consistent with the sense of nationalism and defense of imperialism that the organizers of the 1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition wanted to help foster.

McGee turned his theory into practice at the fair when he began to deploy various agents to bring savages and barbarians to St. Louis. He secured pygmies from Zaire, Patagonian giants from Argentina, primitive Ainu from Japan, and an assortment of Indians. These ethnological specimens complemented the U.S. government exhibit with more than 1,200 Filipinos. To carefully measure the ethnological specimens, McGee fashioned psychometric and anthropometric laboratories to calibrate the racial inferiority of people of color in terms of strength, endurance, sensitivity to temperature, touch, taste, and vision.[52] Franz Boas and Clark Wissler from Columbia University, Aleš Hrdli imageka, the newly appointed director of physical anthropology at the USNM, and Frederick Starr from the University of Chicago all gave their approval and advice to the laboratories and exhibits.

Starr actually arranged for students to receive course credit at the University of Chicago for attending the fair. His class, appropriately titled "The Louisiana Purchase Exposition Class in Ethnology," was composed of talks, lectures and "direct work with material, living and not."[53] During the decade between the Chicago fair and the St. Louis fair, the focus of the discipline moved from museum collections to university instruction.[54] Not only did anthropology have scientific merit, it also had value as education.[55]

Party politics quickly engulfed the didactic value of the discipline. Both expansionist Republicans and protectionist Democrats used anthropological research to bolster their agendas.[56] Their respective agendas were framed by a simple question: Does the Constitution follow the flag? Or, are the rights of people in U.S. territories protected under the Constitution? The protectionist Democrats argued that the Constitution must follow the flag. They looked at the nearly 1,200 Filipinos on the forty-seven-acre reservation on the fairgrounds as proof that they were naturally unfit to shoulder the responsibilities of citizenship and that, therefore, the United States should have protective tariffs and no interest in overseas expansion. Senator G. G. Vest summed up this popular position: "The idea of conferring American citizenship upon the half-civilized, piratical, muck-running inhabitants of two thousand islands, seven thousand miles distant, in another hemisphere … is so absurd and indefensible that the expansionists are driven to the necessity of advocating the colonial system of Europe."[57] Even though the Supreme Court ruled in some fourteen cases called the Insular Cases (1901– 1904) that the Constitution does not follow the flag, the American people had to judge for themselves. President Theodore Roosevelt stepped in to help.[58]

In 1904 Roosevelt, who had assumed office after McKinley was assassinated, was waging his first presidential campaign. He had to convince the electorate that the United States should stay in the Philippines to help civilize the islands. His Democrat opponent was Alton B. Parker, a conservative federal judge from New York. The protectionist Democrats were about to insert a plank into the party's platform suggesting that Filipinos were "inherently unfit to be members of the American body politic," and the 1,200 Filipinos wearing native loincloths reinforced this plank.[59]

Roosevelt became embroiled in a controversy between anthropologists and the fair organizers that was extensively covered by the press. The president demanded that short trunks replace the native loincloths worn by the Igorots and the Negritos. The anthropologists protested the president's attempt at "over night civilization." Starr warned that forcing the savages to don western attire would compromise the scientific authenticity of the exhibit and might kill the natives. By forcing the Filipinos to wear traditional garb, the visitors would have perceived these savages as unable to progress toward civilization, which buttressed the Democrats' opposition to the occupation of the islands.

Rydell has suggested that the Philippine Exposition Board evaded party politics by driving an ethnological wedge between the Igorots and the Negritos. The board arbitrarily placed the lighter-skinned Igorots on a rung above the dark-skinned Negritos. According to various official descriptions, the Negritos were "extremely low in intellect" and were on the way to extinction. To reinforce this notion, one of the Negritos was named "Missing Link." The Igorots were depicted as capable of attaining a state of civilized culture. Scientists, according to an official souvenir guide, "have declared that with the proper training they are susceptible of high stage of development, and, unlike the American Indian, will accept rather than defy the advancement of American Civilization."[60]

This ethnological wedge was not new. For a 1898 cover story, the Scientific American included a front-page montage of Filipinos in various states of civilization. Subtitles on the pictures ranged from "Savages of North Luzon, with Their Arms" to "Civilized Indians Pounding and Cleaning Rice, Luzon."[61]

Although the Negritos were remanded to a lower stage, the Pygmies from Zaire were relegated to the lowest form of savagery. One of McGee's special agents was the missionary and explorer S. P. Verner. McGee charged Verner with collecting and returning an ethnological exhibit of Pygmies from Zaire. He executed this order and brought several Mbuti to the fair. The Pygmy exhibit was one of the most popular in the ethnological menagerie. After the fair, Verner befriended one of his wards, Ota Benga, on the journey back to Zaire. Benga, who had lost his family to ivory pillagers, convinced Verner not to leave him in Africa but to bring him back to the United States. Verner agreed, but he was in financial ruin and could not support Benga. When the two returned to the United States with no means, Verner decided to sell his "African collectibles — artifacts, beetles, monkeys, and implicitly his pygmy to the American Museum of Natural History in New York."[62] Ota Benga actually lived in the museum as more or less a visitor. He roamed freely and unobtrusively throughout the museum but was eventually transported to the Bronx Zoological Gardens after a series of mishaps. Initially he was just a live-in domestic worker at the zoo. Then, in a scheme to increase revenue, the director of the zoo displayed the thirty-seven-year-old Ota Benga in a cage with an orangutan. The sign above the cage read:


Thousands of people saw Ota Benga in the Bronx Zoo in September 1905. The New York Times ran articles posing questions like "Is it a man or monkey?"[63] New York City's African American community vehemently protested and eventually ensured Ota Benga's release.

In 1905 a fine line was drawn between the zoological construction of animal and the ethnological construction of other. The line was thin because of the immense popularity and entertainment value of the ethnological exhibits at consecutive world's fairs. It was stretched even thinner by the authoritative anthropologists who consistently depicted a close affinity between African savages and their "primate brethren." The administrators at the Bronx Zoo crossed the line with impunity and without reservation.

The ethnological exhibits at the world's fairs of 1893 and 1904 provided "living proof" of racial inferiority by explicitly exhibiting a Social Darwinian evolutionary ladder for literally millions of fairgoers. The public's adoration of anthropology was due in part to the way its scientific authority resonated, converged, and reproduced popular ideas about race.

Images and Experts in the Illustrated Monthlies

Ideas of racial inferiority sustained saliency within the proliferating mass media. During the mid-to-late 1890s, there was an explosion of printed material of all kinds. It was driven by new technology, increased literacy, concern with market share, and the efficacy of advertising. Americans consumed muckraking and sensationalism along with social commentary and international affairs by buying record numbers of newspapers and new low-priced books. Of the vehicles of popular information, none experienced a more spectacular increase in sales and circulation than magazines.[64] Prior to the 1890s, most magazines were literary, and all were marketed to affluent and well-educated audiences. The price of thirty-five cents assured that even middle-class Americans would not be privy to the cultured insights and literary digests of the moneyed elite. These magazines maintained a certain aloofness, unlike newspapers, which fostered a sense of urgency.

The entire genre changed during the 1890s. The price of the most popular magazines dropped to fifteen or even ten cents a copy, and circulations soared. Coverage of current events and social issues increased as the circulation grew. The North American Review, Century Magazine, and Forum were so-called high-brow magazines that had always addressed current events. The new middle-class readership demanded more timely topics from Harper's, the Atlantic Monthly, and Dial, which continued its focus on literature but increased its coverage of current events. During the 1890s, Popular Science Monthly 's editors even included articles on current events—tackling social problems with science. Fifteen-cent monthlies, like the world's fairs, emerged as fin-desiècle vehicles of popular culture that cemented the ideas and values of the nation's political, financial, and intellectual elite to the middle and working classes.

The inexpensive and newsworthy illustrated monthlies came into direct competition with newspapers. The low newsstand price and even lower mail-order price (made more attractive by the special premium offers that accompanied subscriptions) forced newspapers to retaliate. They did so by publishing Sunday literary supplements or Sunday magazines, which were included in most metropolitan newspapers by 1894.[65] The magazines were able to carve out a niche in the popular-information market because they offered detailed lithographs and erudite and expert authors, and they managed to keep the prestige associated with the medium.

African Americans were routinely portrayed in these magazines by such epithets as nigger, darky, coon, pickaninny, mammy, buck, and yaller hussy . African Americans were also made out to be buffoons and conferred preposterous titles such as Apollo Belvedere, Abraham Lincum, and Prince Orang Outan, let alone Henri Ritter Demi Ritter Emmi Ritter Sweet-potato Cream Tarter Caroline Bostwick.[66] Derisive literature, images, and folklore have all had a long history in the United States, but consistent and pervasive stereotypes were contingent on mass media. The degree to which the format can replicate and duplicate ideas, sounds, and images created a shared experience and produced widespread stereotypes. The circulation, authority, and prestige of the magazines lent themselves to the appearance of truth. The better the copy, the greater the sense of truth and the more convincing the stereotype.[67]

The sense of truth was not based solely on the copy quality. The fifteen-cent illustrated monthly relied on expert and authoritative sources, as opposed to a journalist's rendition, to analyze current issues. The degrading cartoons, contemptuous literature, and racial epithets were complemented by experts who discussed such issues as Negro suffrage, education, and criminality, as well as the new South and imperialism.[68] The experts often recast the stereotypes that were being perpetuated within the literary genres and grounded them in science or expertise.

Anthropology, at the turn of the century, was not distributed to the American public in magazines by anthropologists. It was appropriated and then rearticulated by policy pundits and legislators. Senators and House representatives were perhaps the most powerful people to use ideas generated by anthropologists in these magazines. They used ethnology to sway public opinion in the North and fuel race antipathy in the South. In this respect, legislators contributed to the anthropological discourse on race while making it even more valid.

Senator John T. Morgan from Alabama warned the audience of Arena "that there is extreme danger, under existing conditions, in confiding to negro voters the representation of white families in the ballot box."[69] He wanted to make it clear that the tactics of disfranchisement were not born of southern prejudice but were implemented because "the inferiority of the negro race, as compared with the White race, is so essentially true, and so obvious, that, … [it] cannot be justly attributed to prejudice."[70] Morgan illustrated how obvious this inferiority was by using rhetoric similar to that of Brinton and McGee:

The mental differences and differing traits, including the faculty of governing, forecast, enterprise, and the wide field of achievement in the arts and sciences, are accurately measured by the contrast of the civilization of the United States, with the barbarism of Central Africa…. The negro race, in their native land, have never made a voluntary and concerted effort to rise above the plain of slavery; they have not contributed a thought, or a labor, except by compulsion, to the progress of civilization. Nothing has emanated from the negroes of Africa, in art, science, or enterprise that has been of the least service to mankind. Their own history, at home, demonstrates their inferiority when compared with that of other peoples…. Their social development has never risen so high as to repress human sacrifices and cannibalism; while their religion is a witchcraft that is attended with every brutal crime.[71]

John Sharp Williams, the freshman senator from Mississippi and former Speaker of the House, used anthropological ideas of race in an article entitled "The Negro and the South," published in the 1907 volume of the Metropolitan Magazine . Williams wanted "to endorse the repeal of the fifteenth amendment" and was clear that anthropology offered a simple rationale: "The reason seems plain to me. No race ever succeeded in reaching civilization by the superposition of the civilization of another race unless that superposition were by force. Then only a veneering of the civilization is put on, and it comes off when the veneered race is left to itself."[72]

Although Williams understood the need for Negro labor in the South, he favored sending "the negro somewhere where he could develop undisturbed along his own racial lines of evolution."[73] Williams's good friend from the state of South Carolina, Senator Benjamin Tillman, echoed the same thoughts in the 1907 volume of Van Norden's Magazine . In his article entitled "The Race Question" Tillman suggested that "The negroes were changed from barbarians to a degree of civilization under the coercive power of slavery."[74] He even suggested that "Those who have read Booker Washington's book, 'Climbing up from Slavery' [sic ] ought to consider the title of a book which has not yet been written, 'Climbing up from Barbarism through Slavery.'"[75] He concluded his discussion of the race question with the statement that "Negroes are great imitators and many of the mixed blood have shown great aptitude and capacity."[76] He quickly jettisoned any idea of race mixing because "Ethnologists warn us against the degeneracy, physical and mental, which comes from the mixture of different races."[77] This line of thought was echoed by another notable author, Marion L. Dawson,[78] the former judge-advocate-general of Virginia, who wrote "The South and the Negro" for the North American Review .

For the readers of Arena, Congressman William C. P. Breckinridge of Kentucky attempted to explain the reason why northerners were less likely to harbor "race prejudice" than were southerners. Breckinridge believed that it was not a question of prejudice, but that the North had different Negroes. Based on the tenets of neo-Lamarckism, he explained that Negroes in the North acquired better race traits and tendencies than did Negroes in the South because of their contact with Whites. Breckinridge suggested that "where the negro was less numerous he was a much better man."[79] The better race traits of northern slaves, he speculated, were acquired by more contact with Whites, because slavery in the border slave states consisted "almost entirely of domestic slavery; that is, the slaves were comparatively few, and lived in the family and in daily association with the family of their owners…. And the daily contact with the white families to whom they belonged was an education. In the planting States there were domestic slaves; but there were also very large numbers of plantation slaves who lived at 'quarters,' isolated from the whites and the influence of daily contact with them."[80] He even assessed that "ethnologically it is perhaps true that there were differences between the early importations which settled in Virginia, and from which largely came the negroes of the border slave states, and the late importations from which the majority of the 'plantation' slaves in the cotton and sugar growing states came."[81]

Educational reform was another issue that received a considerable amount of press. Booker T. Washington's plan for Negro uplift through industrial education was scattered throughout popular magazines.[82] The central question posed was: Could Negroes uplift themselves or progress by education? During the Democrat backlash of the 1890s, Negro education received little money or public support. Although Negro education in the South was contingent on northern philanthropy, southerners still controlled how the money was allocated.

Jabez L. M. Curry was the general agent for both the Peabody Education Fund and the John F. Slater Education Fund.[83] In 1899 he also had the distinction of being one of the two surviving organizers of the Confederate government.[84] Curry was an influential leader in the South and an expert on Negro education, and he shaped the philanthropic policies for Negro education.[85] In 1899 he shared his expertise on the Negro with the audience of Popular Science Monthly by writing a timely article on "The Negro Question." The article was intended to explain the differences between "the Caucasian and the negro" in an effort to marshal evidence to support African American disfranchisement. The differences, Curry explained, were born of "irreconcilable racial characteristics and diverse historical antecedents."[86] Curry introduced the article with a short historical description of what he called the Negro menace from colonial times through Reconstruction. He asserted that Negroes were racially inferior and did not possess the moral and intellectual fortitude to participate in the political process. To support this assertion, he turned to anthropological notions of race:

Ethnologically they are nearly polar opposites. With the Caucasian progress has been upward. Whatever is great in art, invention, literature, science, civilization, religion, has characterized him. In his native land the negro has made little or no advancement for nearly four hundred years. Surrounded by and in contact with a higher civilization, he has not invented a machine, nor painted a picture, nor written a book, nor organized a stable government, nor constructed a code of laws…. For thousands of years there lies behind the race one dreary, unrelieved, monotonous chapter of ignorance, nakedness, superstition, savagery. All efforts to reclaim, civilize, Christianize, have been disastrous failures.[87]

The policy experts and legislators who wrote for the illustrated magazines also used anthropology to defend Native American policies. For example, Henry L. Dawes, author of the 1887 Dawes Severalty Act, wrote "Have We Failed the Indians?" for the North American Review,[88] in which he defended the preceding twenty-five years of Native American policies set forth by the federal government. He then outlined the rationale for the current administration's Native American policies:

It was plain that if he were left alone he must of necessity become a tramp and beggar with all the evil passions of a savge, a homeless and lawless poacher upon civilization, and a terror to the peaceful citizen…. Inasmuch as the Indian refused to fade out, but multiplied under the sheltering care of reservation life … there was but one alternative: either he must be endured as a lawless savage, a constant menace to civilized life, or he must be fitted to become a part of that life and be absorbed into it. To permit him to be a roving savage was unendurable, and therefore the task of fitting him for civilized life was undertaken.

This is the present Indian policy of the nation,—to fit the Indian for civilization and absorb him into it.[89]

Theodore Roosevelt also chimed in with a review of Benjamin Kidd's Social Evolution (1894) for the 1895 volume of the North American Review, which revealed his theoretical views on progress and evolution. His main criticism of Kidd's argument was the way he connected the struggle for existence with racial progress. Roosevelt explained that the "great prizes are battled for among the men who wage no war whatever for mere subsistence, while the fight for mere subsistence is keenest among precisely the classes which contribute very little indeed to the progress of the race."[90] Roosevelt was consistent with Brinton, Powell, Starr, Putnam, and McGee, because he was optimistic about the progress for most races but saw no hope for African Americans. He believed that "a perfectly stupid race can never rise to a very high plain; the negro, for instance has been kept down as much by lack of intellectual development as by anything else."[91]

The racial discourse articulated in the fifteen-cent illustrated monthlies was not limited to politicians, public-policy moguls, and budding presidents. It was also forcefully levied by scientists-cum-popular theorists who were generally outside the general purview of anthropological fields. The role of Nathaniel Southgate Shaler has already been addressed, but other scientists took to the monthlies and used their own renditions of theories on race to transform the popular medium into a bully pulpit to champion American progress and racial inferiority.[92]

To assert that early anthropology dominated racist science and theory in the popular arena would be misleading. Early anthropology should be viewed as an integral and significant participant in the veritable cottage industry of racist theory and science at the turn of the century. The anthropological discourse on race is distinguished from other leading Social Darwinist texts because ethnologists linked anthropometric measurements and cranial capacities to language, social institutions, kinship, morality, and technology and then positioned people into grades of race and culture. Ethnologists attempted to distinguish racial variations, say, between Great Basin "root diggers" and the Mississippi "mound builders" and then place them accordingly into an evolutionary hierarchy. This differed from other scientists who did not consider so-called activital activities and kinship systems. Notwithstanding this slight distinction, anthropology was influenced by, consistent with, and contributed to the larger public discourse on race.

In Race Traits and Tendencies of the American Negro (1896), Frederick L. Hoffman presented a scientific view of racial inferiority that did not draw directly from anthropological ideas.[93] Hoffman was a statistician for the Prudential Life Insurance Company and was convinced that the seemingly high incidence of tuberculosis, syphilis, gonorrhea, illegitimacy, and criminal activity among inner-city Negro populations was caused by abject morality, which, he asserted, was a heritable race trait. The statistics Hoffman used led him to conclude that "the colored race is shown to be on the downward grade."[94] The American Economic Association published his work in three consecutive issues of its journal, giving Hoffman a badge of authority. Hoffman proposed that no public expenditures be allocated for better access to medicine, fair housing, or education because they would only provide a temporary stay for the imminent extinction of the Negro race. Although Du Bois pointed out that Hoffman's conclusions were "of doubtful value" because of "the unscientific use of the statistical method," writers for the monthlies routinely cited Hoffman's call to abandon the "modern attempt of superior races to lift inferior races to their own elevated position."[95]

Like Hoffman's Race Traits and Tendencies, influential Social Darwinian books on race were cited, abridged, and serialized in the popular monthlies. Such books included Charles W. Carroll's "The Negro a Beast"; or, "In the Image of God" (1900), William Patrick Calhoun's The Caucasian and the Negro in the United States (1902), William Benjamin Smith's The Color Line: A Brief in Behalf of the Unborn (1905), and Robert Wilson Shufeldt's The Negro: A Menace to American Civilization (1907).

The fifteen-cent illustrated monthlies were sent to millions of middle-class American homes, and they were one of the first vehicles of popular culture to create a shared experience—each and every month. These magazines became useful outlets for politicians, scientists, satirists, muckrakers, and, through letters to the editors, everyday folk, to provide insight, shape opinions, and garner support for various agendas. The editors and publishers were always conscious of their bottom line and their advertisers. The content was largely confined to perpetuating the values of the nation's political, financial, and corporate interests. Sometimes, however, the editors included opposing views on the race question. Although editors consistently ran articles supporting ideas of racial inferiority, they occasionally ran articles supporting notions of racial equality.[96]

The specific lines of thought generated within the discipline by a relatively small and innocuous group of ethnologists had an important impact on the social construction of race. Politicians, fair directors, and magazine editors effectively appropriated and reproduced anthropological ideas for public consumption. Thus they used anthropology to promote and reify the ideas of racial inferiority that were so integral to the construction of race at the turn of the twentieth century.


1. See W. E. B. Du Bois, "Dusk of Dawn: An Essay toward an Autobiography of a Race Concept," in Du Bois Writings, ed. Nathan Huggins (New York: Literary Classics of the United States, 1986 [1940]), 593-793; Winant, Racial Conditions; Cornel West, Race Matters (Boston: Beacon Press, 1993); Hazel V. Carby, "The Multicultural Wars," Radical History Review 54 (1992): 12.

2. Robert W. Rydell, All the World's a Fair: Visions of Empire at American International Expositions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), 3.

3. Elliott M. Rudwick and August Meier, "Black Man in the 'White City': Negroes and the Columbian Exposition, 1893," Phylon 26, no. 4 (1965): 354; Sidney M. Willhelm, "Black-White Equality," Journal of Black Studies 12, no. 2 (1981): 157.

4. Rydell, All the World's a Fair, 67.

5. William H. Dall, "The Columbian Exposition — IX: Anthropology," Nation 57, no. 1474 (1893): 226.

6. Ibid.

7. Otis T. Mason, "Summary of Progress in Anthropology," in Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution for the Year Ending July 1893 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1893), 606. Denton J. Snider, a contemporary literary critic, suggested that the Midway consisted of a "sliding scale of humanity." Nearest to the White City were the Teutonic and Celtic races, as represented by two German and two Irish villages. The center of the Midway contained the Muhammadan world, West Asia, and East Asia. Then, "we descend to the savage races, the African of Dahomey and the North American Indian" (Rydell, All the World's a Fair, 65).

8. Julian Hawthorne, "Foreign Folk at the Fair," Cosmopolitan 15 (1893): 568-570.

9. Ibid., 572.

10. John C. Eastman, "Village Life at the World's Fair," Chautauquan 17 (1893): 603.

11. Ibid., 604.

12. Edward B. McDowell, "The World's Fair Cosmopolis," Frank Leslie's Popular Monthly 36 (1893): 415.

13. Cesare Lombroso, "Why Homicide Has Increased in the United States," North American Review 165 (1897): 647-648. For an excellent discussion of Lombroso, see Gould, Mismeasure of Man, 113-146.

14. Starr viewed the ethnological exhibits as a great "object lesson" in anthropology (Frederick Starr, "Anthropology at the World's Fair," Popular Science Monthly 43, no. 5 [1893]: 621). Linking crime and morality to a naturalized inferiority of African Americans was also being put forth by sociologists. See Monroe N. Work, "Crime among the Negroes of Chicago," American Journal of Sociology 6 (1900): 204-223.

15. Frederick Starr, "The Degeneracy of the American Negro," 22 (1897): 17.

16. Ibid., 18.

17. Dexter, "Putnam's Problems," 323; Tozzer, Frederic Ward Putnam, 132.

18. Rydell, All the World's a Fair, 5. The idea that the representation of people of color in a primitive state would make American progress more persuasive was even articulated to children. For example, George Dorsey, in the Youth's Companion, explained that "This illustration of primitive life will make more apparent the material progress made in America during the past four hundred years." See George A. Dorsey, "Man and His Works," Youth's Companion, World's Fair no. (1893): 27.

19. Dall, "Columbian Exposition," 226.

20. Dexter, "Putnam's Problems," 327.

21. Rudwick and Meier, "Black Man in the 'White City,'" 354.

22. Ibid., 356.

23. Ibid., 359.

24. Ibid., 361.

25. August Meier, "Negro Class Structure and Ideology in the Age of Booker T. Washington," Phylon 23 (1962): 266.

26. August Meier and Elliott Rudwick, Black Protest Thought in the Twentieth Century (New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1971), 3; Kluger, Simple Justice, 71.

27. Rydell, All the World's a Fair, 72-76; Kluger, Simple Justice, 69.

28. Booker T. Washington, Up from Slavery (New York: Doubleday, 1902 [1901]), 220.

29. Ibid.

30. Ibid., 220-221.

31. Ibid., 222.

32. Rydell, All the World's a Fair, 72-76; W. E. B. Du Bois, "The Souls of Black Folk," in Du Bois Writings, ed. Nathan Huggins (New York: Literary Classics of the United States, 1986 [1903]), 393; David J. Calista, "Booker T. Washington: Another Look," Journal of Negro History 49 (1964): 255.

33. Booker T. Washington, "Education Will Solve the Race Problem, A Reply," North American Review 171 (1900): 222. Washington's seemingly compromised agenda should be qualified. Given that African Americans were being brutally repressed in the South, Washington's agenda became an effective way to ensure that African Americans could eat, work, and obtain an education. It stressed independence and autonomy. In many respects, one can view the agenda as a strategy for resisting the overwhelming consolidation of power by Democrat interests in the South during the second Cleveland administration. Booker T. Washington placed more emphasis on access to jobs and a livelihood than on access to voting and White-only bathrooms. On the other hand, he dominated the Negro agenda and crushed any voice of protest against his strategy of accommodation. Although many writers have criticized Washington's strategy for accommodating White supremacy, there is, perhaps, another characterization. One could argue that during the processes of southern redemption the most innocuous African American strategy became validated, championed, coopted, or otherwise appropriated. See Meier and Rudwick, Black Protest Thought, 3; Manning Marable, W. E. B. Du Bois, Black Radical Democrat (Boston: Twayne, 1986), 40; Nathan Irvin Huggins, Harlem Renaissance (New York: Oxford University Press, 1971), 50; Ross, Origins of American Social Science, 360; Paul Rich, "'The Baptism of a New Era': The 1911 Universal Races Congress and the Liberal Ideology of Race," Ethnic and Racial Studies 7, no. 4 (1984): 539; Du Bois, "Souls of Black Folk," 393; Daniel S. Green and Edwin D. Driver, W. E. B. Du Bois on Sociology and the Black Community (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978), 18.

Logan (Betrayal of the Negro) alludes to this argument. He suggests that President Harrison's appeal for Negro suffrage and education was an attempt to alleviate "the prejudices and paralysis of slavery [that] continue to hang upon the skirts of progress" (p. 63). Employing this type of rhetorical strategy, Harrison argued that concessions should be given to Negroes. If they were not given, Harrison feared, Negroes would fall prey to the Farmers Alliance or the Socialists. Logan argues that Harrison's views were precursors of the overwhelming acceptance of Washington.

34. Emmett J. Scott, "The Louisiana Purchase Exposition," Voice of the Negro 1, no. 8 (1904): 310.

35. Ibid., 311. Scott actually advised African Americans who wanted to visit the fair to "carry [their] knapsack and canteen" because they might not be able to purchase food.

36. W. S. Scarborough, "The Negro and the Louisiana Purchase Exposition," Voice of the Negro 1, no. 8 (1904): 314.

37. Ibid., 314.

38. Rydell, All the World's a Fair, 155-160.

39. Hinsley, Savages and Scientists, 236.

40. American Anthropologist, n.s., 1 (1899): 400.

41. WJ McGee, "The Trend of Human Progress," American Anthropologist 1 (1899): 415.

42. Ibid., 424.

43. Ibid., 419.

44. Ibid., 408.

45. Ibid., 412.

46. Ibid., 410.

47. Ibid.

48. Ibid., 411.

49. Ibid., 446.

50. Ibid.

51. Ibid.

52. Phillips Verner Bradford and Harvey Blume, Ota Benga: The Pygmy in the Zoo (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1992), 114.

53. Rydell, All the World's a Fair, 166.

54. Richard Handler, "Boasian Anthropology and the Critique of Culture," American Quarterly 42, no. 2 (1990): 252.

55. Flagg, "Anthropology," 512.

56. For example, see Daniel G. Brinton, "Professor Blumentritt's Studies of the Philippines," American Anthropologist 1 (1899): 122-125; Ferdinand Blumentritt, "The Race Question in the Philippine Islands," Popular Science Monthly 54, no. 4 (1899): 472-479.

57. G. G. Vest, "Objections to Annexing the Philippines," North American Review 168 (1899): 112.

58. See James E. Kerr, The Insular Cases: The Role of the Judiciary in American Expansionism (Port Washington, N.Y.: Kennikat Press, 1982).

59. Rydell, All the World's a Fair, 172.

60. Ibid., 175-176.

61. J. B. Steere, "The Civilized Indian of the Philippines," Scientific American 79, no. 12 (1898): 184-185.

62. Lee D. Baker, "Ota Benga, Story of a Tragic Travesty," Teaching Anthropology Newsletter 22-23 (1993): 5.

63. Bradford and Blume, Ota Benga, 155-188.

64. Frank Luther Mott, A History of American Magazines, 1885-1905 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1957), 2.

65. Ibid.

66. Logan, Betrayal of the Negro, 243-244.

67. Gary Gumpert and Robert Cathcart, Inter/Media: Interpersonal Communications in a Media World (New York: Oxford University Press, 1982), 351.

68. Logan, Betrayal of the Negro, 265.

69. Morgan, "Race Question," 397. Morgan served as a U.S. senator for thirty-one years as a staunch segregationist and an advocate for states' rights. A longtime member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he shaped many of the policies for the Pacific and the Caribbean and aggressively pursued a scheme to colonize the Philippine Islands with African Americans (Joseph O. Baylen and John Hammond Moore, "Senator John Tyler Morgan and Negro Colonization in the Philippines, 1901 to 1902," Phylon 29 [1968]: 66).

70. Morgan, "Race Question," 390.

71. Ibid., 387-389.

72. Williams, "Negro and the South," 138, 148.

73. Ibid., 146.

74. Tillman, "Race Question," 28.

75. Ibid.

76. Ibid.

77. Ibid.

78. Marion L. Dawson, "The South and the Negro," North American Review 172 (1901): 279-284.

79. Breckinridge, "Race Question," 45.

80. Ibid.

81. Ibid.

82. For example, see Booker T. Washington, "The Awakening of the Negro," Atlantic Monthly 77 (1896): 322-328; Booker T. Washington, "Signs of Progress among the Negroes," Century Magazine 59 (1899): 472-478; Booker T. Washington, "The Race Problem in the United States," Popular Science Monthly 55, no. 3 (1899): 317-325; Washington, "Education," 221-232; Booker T. Washington, "Heroes in Black Skins," Century Magazine 66 (1903): 724-729; "Wise Leader," Century Magazine 66 (1903): 796-797.

83. Between the end of the Civil War and the beginning of World War I, several large educational foundations were established in order to advance education for African Americans in the South. They included the Peabody Education Fund, the John F. Slater Fund, the General Education Board, the Anna T. Jeanes Fund, the Julius Rosenwald Fund, and the Phelps-Stokes Fund. George F. Peabody, who had endowed the Peabody Museums at Harvard, Yale, and Salem, established an education fund in 1867 "for the promotion and encouragement of intellectual, moral, or industrial education among the young people of the more destitute portions of the Southern and Southwestern States." In two separate grants Peabody gave almost $2.5 million to the fund. Franklin, From Slavery to Freedom, 278.

84. Albion W. Smith, "Civil History of the Confederate States, by J. L. M. Curry, LL.D.," American Journal of Sociology 7 (1901): 847.

85. Harvey Wish, "Negro Education and the Progressive Movement," Journal of Negro History 49 (1964): 185.

86. Jabez L. M. Curry, "The Negro Question," Popular Science Monthly 55, no. 1 (1899): 178.

87. Ibid., 179.

88. The Dawes Severalty Act, passed by the U.S. Congress in 1887, stipulated that Native Americans give up their tribal lands in return for individual land grants. It was sponsored by Senator Henry L. Dawes and was intended to advance the "progress" of Native Americans toward civilization by forcing them into a homesteading way of life. The main effect of the law was the opening up of the Indian Territory—Oklahoma, Nebraska, Kansas, and the Dakotas—to White settlers.

89. Henry L. Dawes, "Have We Failed the Indians?" Atlantic Monthly 84 (1989): 281.

90. Roosevelt, "Kidd's 'Social Evolution,'" 95.

91. Ibid., 109.

92. For examples, see Edward W. Blyden, "The African Problem," North American Review 161 (1895): 327-339; Hilton Scribner, "Brain Development as Related to Evolution," Popular Science Monthly 46, no. 4 (1895): 525-538; Anna Tolman Smith, "A Study in Race Psychology," Popular Science Monthly 50, no. 3 (1897): 354-360; E. P. Evans, "The Ethics of Tribal Society," Popular Science Monthly 44, no. 3 (1894): 289-307; E. P. Evans, "Semon's Scientific Researches in Australia," Popular Science Monthly 52, no. 1 (1897): 17-37; Charles Morris, "War as a Factor in Civilization," Popular Science Monthly 47, no. 6 (1895): 823-834; Lewis R. Harley, "Race Mixture and National Character," Popular Science Monthly 47, no. 1 (1895): 86-92; Alfred H. Stone, "The Mulatto Factor in the Race Problem," Atlantic Monthly 91 (1903): 658-662; James Weir Jr., "The Pygmy in the United States," Popular Science Monthly 49, no. 1 (1896): 47-56; Robert B. Bean, "The Negro Brain," Century Magazine 72 (1906): 778-784; Robert B. Bean, "The Training of the Negro," Century Magazine 72 (1906): 947-953; Gustave Michaud, "The Brain of the Nation," Century Magazine 49 (1904): 40-46; Cesare Lombroso, "The Savage Origin of Tattooing," Popular Science Monthly 58, no. 6 (1896): 793-803; Lombroso, "Homicide," 641-648.

93. Hoffman employed George M. Gould's Anthropological Statistics as evidence of Negro inferiority. The lines between what was anthropological Social Darwinism and what was not were blurred. There was a great deal of cross-fertilization of ideas and data between the budding disciplines.

94. Frederick L. Hoffman, Race Traits and Tendencies of the American Negro (Publications of the American Economic Association, 11 [1-3]; New York: Macmillan, 1896), 312.

95. W. E. B. Du Bois, "Race Traits of the American Negro, by Frederick L. Hoffman," Annals of the American Academy of Political Science 9 (1897): 133; B. S. Coler, "Reform of Public Charity," Popular Science Monthly 55 (1899): 750-755; Hoffman, Race Traits, 312.

96. For example, see Oswald G. Villard, "The Negro in the Regular Army," Atlantic Monthly 91 (1903): 721-728; W. S. Scarborough, "The Race Problem," Arena 2 (1890): 560-567; W. E. B. Du Bois, "The Southerner's Problem," Dial 38 (1905): 315-318; Franz Boas, "The Anthropological Position of the Negro," Van Norden's Magazine, April 1907, 42-47.

【字体: 】【打印】【关闭

附 件:

| 中心简介 | 网站介绍 | 版权声明 | 服务条款 | 站点导航 | 请您留言 | 网站地图 | RSS聚合资讯