Franklin D. Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln: Competing Perspectives on Two Great Presidencies.

Robertson, David Brian

Franklin D. Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln: Competing Perspectives on Two Great Presidencies. Edited by William D. Pederson and Frank J. Williams. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, Inc., 2003. 287 pp.

If you are interested in a systematic analysis of the two most highly regarded American presidents, one that carefully examines the ideals they pursued, the politics they built, and the policy they left behind, this is not the book for you. The fifth volume in the M. E. Sharpe Library of Franklin D. Roosevelt Studies offers an eccentric set of reflections on Lincoln, Roosevelt, and a number of other historical figures, including some who are entirely out of place here. The editors of this very uneven collection are an American Studies professor who directs the International Lincoln Center at Louisiana State University (Pederson), and the Chief Justice of the Rhode Island Supreme Court, a founder of the Lincoln Forum (Williams).

In the introduction, the editors state that the volume aims to compare the Lincoln and Roosevelt leadership styles and the preservation of their legacies. Together, the chapters include a respectable bibliography of historians' work on the two presidents. None of the chapters, though, draws on basic works by political scientists such as Richard Neustadt, James David Barber, Stephen Skowronek, or others whom many historians routinely cite when they explore presidential leadership.

Some of the chapters offer interesting observations about these two presidents' legacies. Historian Robert D. Reitveld provides an engaging piece that details the way Franklin Roosevelt employed Lincoln's lessons and memory throughout his presidency. While volumes of Carl Sandburg's monumental biography of Abraham Lincoln appeared in print, for example, the poet enthusiastically urged FDR to draw lessons about American wartime leadership from his predecessor. In a chapter comparing the development of the Lincoln and Roosevelt Memorials in Washington, DC, C. Todd Stephenson shows that political and even family conflicts lie behind the monuments that solidify these two presidents' enduring reputations. In a pair of poignant chapters late in the book, three education professors (Sherry L. Field, O. L. Davis, Jr., and Matthew Davis) discuss the thin coverage FDR receives in today's elementary and high school American history textbooks. Houghton Mifflin's fifth-grade text, for example, does not mention FDR, the Depression, or the New Deal at all. FDR is a one-dimensional character in contemporary high school texts, and his trademark cigarette holder has disappeared without a trace.

Too many chapters, however, are downright peculiar. Political scientist James Chowning Davies contributes a pair of chapters (79 pages in all) most noteworthy for their sweeping psychological impressions and judgments. The first explores the personal histories and speculates about the unconscious minds of Abraham and Mary Todd Lincoln and Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt. Davies' other chapter is the stunningly weird "Jesus, Lincoln and Beethoven: Three Notes on the Same Grand Chord." This entry has a lot to say about Beethoven's deafness. Historian David E. Long devotes most of a potentially interesting chapter on the wartime elections of 1864 and 1944 to the selection of vice-presidential candidates, completely ignoring such topics as electoral votes. Coeditor Williams argues that Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Winston Churchill represent modern versions of an ancient Mayan ideal of leadership. In two very short chapters, historian Glen Jeansonne evaluates FDR's "journey to self-understanding" (p. 173) and concludes that Roosevelt's leadership skills compared favorably to those of Louisiana's Huey E Long. Matthew Ware Coulter ends the book with suggestions for using primary documents to teach students more about Franklin Roosevelt.

Although the editors have added some useful touches (for example, a chronology is appended at the end), they ultimately bear responsibility for the indiscriminant selection of the chapters included in the book. And, when large chunks of text are repeated word for word on the same page (p. 134), the copyeditors simply have not done their job.

So much more can be done with these two presidents. Both Lincoln and Roosevelt were master politicians, who worked with the tools they were given and built enduring political coalitions. Which one used the political tools of the office more effectively? Who was the more inventive politician? How can we compare their impact on economic development, or gender, race, and class in the United States? Did Lincoln's presidency place severe constraints on that of Roosevelt, or did it give him more opportunities than constraints? It would be very helpful to have a collection of carefully researched essays skillfully edited together in a volume that addresses such questions. This is not that book.

David Brian Robertson

University of Missouri-St. Louis