Transcripts For CSPAN2 In Depth Jill Lepore 20240712

[laughter] guest i think we have so little perspective on this moment that it is quite impossible to say. I think the perception that many people in the United States and, of course, also around the world have that this is an extraordinary uni shall time is something that we are in a time out of time will be a curiosity in the future. People will look back and wonder about that very sense i think it is kind of an interesting phenomenon. I think that will be studied. Host when you think about today, do you compare it to any other period in history . Guest no, you know, as a historian, im interested in analogies. I think we have a cognitive tendency to enjoy analogies to find one thing to be like another, all the time, just in the same way, you know, im the kind of person that sees likenesses in family members. I look at a new baby and say oh that looks just like great grandma so and so. But at the same time, even as i say that, i recognize that a lot of that is my need for familiarity. I think there has been for most of my career as a historian the question that journalists always ask historians is what time is this like . Thats a journalistic tick i understand where it comes from. For journalists it is an easy story to write. This reminds me of fdr. I think theres a whole crop of president ial biographers who go out on talk shows and offer up those kinds of analogies. I generally find them to be not especially useful. I certainly think in this era it is actually a way to kind of contain the chaos that isnt helpful because it is a way to avoid confronting what is truly strange about this moment in time. Host two years ago, during a talk you gave on your book these truths, you said what do we mean when we talk about American History . How are we to reckon with the fact that our present day is so polarized that we believe that the past is two different paths, we cant even imagine sharing a common ancestry as a people, and that seems to me a fairly peril state of affairs. Guest i still stand by that statement. We do have our account of nations past is just as polarized as our sense of whats going on in the present. If anything, the past hasnt changed, but our perception of it has become more and more divided and more inflected by partisan passion, you know, real passion. Thats been obvious to me as a historian for a really long time. I think its maybe more obvious to the public than its ever been before. Maybe got to the floor by the recent conversation about monuments which, you know, whether the confederate monuments should stand. Those conversations have been going on for a very very long time but they havent occupied the attention of the media and a broad part of the public until really the last year. We can think about other controversies in the past. You know, the history wars of the 90s or there are moments in 19s and 20s that are somewhat similar in terms of the public fight over the history of a particular era. But i im sorry, go ahead. Host no, go ahead, finish. Guest i think we have kind of a daily sense that, you know, remember the crazy goofy internet meme about the blue dress. Some people thought it was blue. Some people thought it was gold. I never looked at it, but that is the world in which we live now, that everything every piece of information that is available can be seen either as a blue dress or gold dress. That same kind of fractured lens is now the spectacles with which we look upon the past as well. It becomes really i think i say history because im deeply fascinated by things that happened in the olden times. Im really interested in how we got here and im interested in how people struggled in the past and what we can learn from frankly the fortitude in face of suffering which is humanity. I think it is distressing people look to the past that they try to justify their politics. Host i was going to close with this but i think it is pertinent. You write the american experiment is not ended. A nation born in revolution will forever struggle against chaos. Guest yeah, i think in the course of this conversation youre likely to throw something at me that ive written and i would not stand by, and i change my mind all the time. Thats just a truism. A nation is an artifice; right . Nations dont exist in nature. Bees live in hives. Cows live in herds. And those are natural communities. Humans dont naturally live in nations, right . It is a thing that humans have invented as a category of Political Community that in our era has proven extremely important because the liberal nation state is the only Human Institution that can guarantee rights to people. It is really important. The United States has a particular place in the history of the rise of the liberal nation state, an organization of a government through the consent of the people that can actually deliver to the people goods and services and the guarantee of rights. So nations are really really important. To say theres an artifice doesnt mean that theyre you know, that they are something trivial, but a nation is a fundamentally unstable thing, like we have to in some way, especially the United States, which is a nation based on an idea, not the shared heritage and really not on a shared history, not even really on a shared language or shared religion. The United States is based on an idea. If you dont believe in the idea, the nation kind of ceases to exist. I think thats, you know, some of the daily anguish of people wondering whats going to happen in the United States. People from here and looking at the country from abroad, people are like do people not believe in the idea anymore . Thats the constant edginess of that chaos. Professor jill lepore at what point did you say to yourself yeah i think i want to write a history of the United States in 800 some pages . I have been asked to write like u. S. History textbooks throughout my career. You know, viewers may know that most textbooks are written in a team of scholars, an approach. It usually puts a team of scholars to put together a textbook that covers the whole story of the United States. Ive never been attracted to that as a project. I like to work collaborative. I dont know, a textbook as a genre has a particular tone, thats extremely unappealing to me as a writer. I think of myself as a writer. I happen to write history, but i would write anything. But a few years ago i was asked for the first time to write history in the United States, just me, and i said well, like, as a college textbook, and i said well, id be very interested in doing that, but i want i think theres actually a need for history in the United States thats not for students, but thats just for the public as a whole. There used to be these books. There used to be at a certain point in every american historians career this was always men would write the account of the nations past. None of them are the last of their kind. They are to offer up at this moment in time heres how this historian sees this story. That tradition had fallen away and been really quite violently repudiated but it means there hasnt been a book like my history of the United States for quite a long time. It seemed to me like something of a dare. Like i dare you, can you resurrect this lost tradition and just do this . I worked with an editor and a publisher that i really admire, and they let me write the book that i wanted to write that offered the account that i thought needed to be written that reflected my decades of teaching American History and writing essays about American History and books about American History. So yeah, so i said okay, you know, i will do it. For me it was important that i write it quickly. I get really [inaudible] really fast. I did write the book actually pretty quickly, but i also had this idea, and, you know, viewers that have read the book can say if this worked. I thought if i wrote it fast, it would read fast that it would have a kind headlong page turnery momentum to it. I took on the project with the idea that i would spend x number of months on this project and no more and then i would move on. If it had been will you write the history of the United States in a thousand pages and you could spend ten years on that, i never would have done that. That would have driven me nuts. Do you start chronologically when you start a project like that . Yeah, i mean, the book is quite strictly chronological. It is a history. Each chapter makes an argument. It has a theme. Its not an encyclopedia, but it aims to be, you know, significant in its ability to comprehend large swaths of events, so yeah, i had a very particular method. The book has four parts. Each part has four chapters. Theres a lot of symmetry to the organization, and, you know, i made my outline, and then i went to the library and i checked out the 50 books i thought i would need to write the first chapter. I put them in a stack in my office, and i put a yellow sticky on top and said chapter one. Then i walked over and got the 50 books for chapters 3 and 4 and made stacks. Every time i got to the bottom of the stack, i would write that chapter, return those books and go get the stack for the next pile so i would have them all ready at hand. Yeah, just day by day, i worked my way through it, year by year. It was actually really fun to i teach at harvard and the library my office is not too far from the library building, or i else i wouldnt be able to trek the books out all the time. After you check out the books at the desk, you go to the security desk they look at the books to make sure they have been properly checked out and you could leave the building with them. I knew the security guards pretty well because i spend a lot of time coming in and out of the library. They came to know what i was doing, so everybody would be paying attention to oh, you have the new deal. I cant wait till you get to truman. I want to ask you some questions. All the security guards were following my progress, and often would recommend books. You know, people read a lot of history. So it was really it was just a fun they were the people i checked up with most while i was writing. What got left out . Oh, tons got left out. I mean, one of the reasons that it became so difficult and really untenable for an academic historian to write the history of the United States single volume history of the United States is that the revolution and the historical scholarship, the last half century and more, has involved putting back in all the people who were stripped out of the story of the United States for a century and a half, in a tradition of scholars who were just really quite provencial. They all belonged to a single, you know, Demographic Group, and they were interested in the history of that Demographic Group and no other. So it meant that we had you know, we had a very narrow understanding of even what politics is, but beginning in the 60s, women and people of color entered the academy and founded a women Study Programs and black history programs and what became lgbtq or sex and gender studies, history and science, this incredible expansion of the scope of what people and groups and topics were the proper object of American History and subject of american historical books, really changed. All those people who kind of exploded the profession thought well, no one could write given now that we have such a broad understanding of the diversity of the american experience, how could you cram all that into a single volume . It would involve a kind of rhetorical act of violence, an act of exclusion of certain groups. If in any case, you would be kind of beaten up for what you left out, what you emphasized or what you failed to emphasize. Academic scholarship in any field is pretty punishing. Theres a lot of disincentives to do this kind of work, right . There was also the idea that you would be promoting a kind of fiction that the country was just one thing, that could be reduced to one story. You know, these are the years of, you know, not only intellectual ferment and the growth of the academy and increasing diversity within the academy, but a political sensibility around multiculturalism and the storiedness of the american past. So the thing it just seemed like an untenable project and also a thankless project which is why i think it didnt get done for a very long time. So i found that difficult. There were many nights that i lay awake in bed making lists in all the things that belonged in the chapter that i was writing that i knew i wasnt going to be able to attend to, but i wasnt writing an encyclopedia and a reader needs to know why information is in a chapter. It needs to be supportive of some theme or set of claims. You know, you come up with rules for what needs to be there and what doesnt need to be there which is not to say that they cant all be second guessed but i guess the way i eventually got myself to sleep instead of making those lists was to remember this is not the last definitive account of the history of the United States. I was trying to rekindle tradition of attempting to make sense of the nations past, and my hope would be that other people would come along and write similar books, and they would challenge and even subvert challenge my account and even subvert my book, and thats the nature thats how historical scholarship works, so its not really meant to be the end. It is meant to be the beginning so what motivated your followup book this america . Yeah, both of these were books that i was asked to write. I dont think on my own i would have actually pursued either of these projects. So i was asked to write an essay for Foreign Affairs on the history of american nationalism. There was a time in 2018, viewers might remember, trump gave a speech im trying to remember where. Maybe he was in texas. I think he was at a campaign rally, and he said he was explaining he said im a nationalist, and he said Something Like yeah, i guess im not supposed to use that word, but im a nationalist. I may be misremembering the details. Subsequently, in an interview, someone asked him about nationalism and the history of the word and its meaning and its implications. He kind of just said he didnt care, you know, the point was that he considered himself to be a nationalist and he could define the word the way he wanted to define it. And so there was in 2018 a lot of discussion of the rise of a kind of american nationalism, and so i was asked to write some kind of an account of the history of american nationalism, either in the context of nationalist movement or the idea of america as a nation. I wrote an essay that was about that but also about what a National History does and what the absence of National History can do by way of closing a problem to liberalism. Then i was asked to turn that essay into a short book. I think i say in a preface to the book that i wanted to explain what a nation is and why nation states matter and what liberal nationalism is and why it matters and how it is that in the absence of the dissent of liberalism, the only kind of nationalism that comes to the floor is illiberal and that poses a danger. So the book is in defense of liberal nationalism we will get into those definitions in just a minute. We happen to have that video of President Trump in october of 2018 in houston. [inaudible]. A globalist is a person that wants the globe to do well, frankly not caring about our country so much. You know what . We cant have that. You know they have a word that sort of became old fashioned, its called a nationalist, and i say really, were not supposed to use that word. You know what i am . Im a nationalist. Okay . [cheers and applause] nationalist. Use that word. Use that word. So professor jill lepore, when you hear the president say im a nationalist, what does that say to you . I think in the context as a whole, its so interesting to hear that, and i dont have video in this exchange. Im not looking at what the viewers are looking at, and i think the video is probably significantly richer in terms of the spirit of the occasion, because theres something about calling out and celebrating nationalism before an adoring crowd that i think for a lot of people who have watched nationalists rise to power in order to secure the unflinching fidelity of the people for the purpose of acts of aggression, its a very unsettling, if not terrifying thing to bear witness to. Im really struck and i had forgotten how he begins by defining a globalist, which is really interesting because historically the rhetoric about globalism and globalists in particular is often fundamentally antisemitic. In the history of the formation of nation states, jews were often people without a nation; right . The nation state emerges, you know, in the 18th and 19th century, and nationalism, the fidelity to a nation, to a nation state as a core commitment of many people around the world tends to really set to one side people who are stateless. So that includes, you know, the jews, and a lot of conspiracy theorys in the 18th and 19th century are fundamentally antisemitic in the sense they are based on the idea that theres a secret group of jewish people who are bankers, who control all the money, and that these people have no National Attachment have global ties that undermining national borders, and so, you know, when the rhetoric about globalists come back, you know, in our day, it really harkens back to the long tradition of invocation of the International Conspiracy of jewish bankers. So theres something, you know, really interesting about that. Not to say that there are very strenuous and i think important critiques of globalization to be made. I think one of the chief criticisms of liberals, so called progressives is that 1990s, kind of the bill clinton era forward, even into the late 80s, but through obama, is the kind of thinking of varies of globalism, in a sense that certain people will be left behind by globalization, but thats okay, you know, it is for the best. And it does enrich an enormous number of financiers. Theres a real critique of globalization that i think people watching trump and who admire trump and who feel recognized and seen by him when he says that, as far as thinking about in all the ways in which globalization has been really responsible for a great in the widening of income inequality around the world. It is an interesting mix that there are people who are really angry about what began in the 90s really of kind of fantasy globalization. But for trump to invoke nationalism in the way he does and very much applaud what he is absolutely presenting as an illiberal nationalism is kind of the classic work of the illiberal nationalists right . One of the important things that people do make that move do, define globalists, this antisemitic history as demonic, they are bad people, people who love the nation, this nation best are the good people. And their love is simply another form of patriotism. So the conflation of nationalism and patriotism is like a central move its an essential step in urging people to be willing to make sacrifices for the nation that can only be asked in the interest of an authoritarian. Theres a whole theres a messy history behind that. One of the things i tried to do by writing this short book this america was to just kind of pause and look at what is the difference between patriotism and nationalism . Offer something up, when people say nationalism now, they generally only every mean illiberal nationalism not the liberal kind. Liberals wont defend nationalism anymore. I think it is important to love your country. I think it is important to be willing to in fact be willing to think about your obligations to your country and the civic duty that we owe to one another, like, thats a thing that i believe that i think is central to the project of any liberal nation state, and i think its its a vanishingly small space to occupy with everybody talking about nationalism is talking about hating other people, rather than loving the people of your own country. Whats the difference between a nationalist and a populist . I mean, i dont want to be semantic about this, like im not sure that its really that interesting. People use these terms in all different kinds of ways. I mean, in its most simple definition, a populist is a politician who makes appeals directly to the people, rather than to policies, say, or to fellow elected officials. Like a populist isnt going to appeal to congress for support before appealing first to the people and suggesting that everything that he or she is doing is in the peoples interest, which, you know, seems like we live in a democracy. We have a majority that governs. Elected officials would certainly be appealing to the people, but it is a way it has a whole negative connotation around and i think the way that many scholars who study the history of populism use the term is to think about thwarting institutions and enlisting the emotional support of the people for the sake of a political agenda that generally doesnt represent in a meaningful way the peoples own interests. So theres a sense when people use the word populism, they are talking about somebody who is engaged in kind of a swindle, slight of hand, you know, listing the support of the people while actually not delivering real things to the people, which may or may not be a fair definition because you can certainly say as progressives of the clinton era, that progressives did a lot of things that they said were in the interest of the people but they never delivered those things too. Yet they were not populists because their appeals were not generally of a populist nature, in terms of the tenor and you know, the particular pitch. Good afternoon. Thank you for spending time with us on book tv. This is our in depth program, a Monthly Program with one author and his or her body of work. This month were pleased to have join us from cambridge, harvard professor jill lepore, the author of many books. She received her phd in american studies at yale in 1995, and her first book came out in 1998. It was the name of war King Phillips war and the origins of american identity. Her second book 2002 is a is for america, letters and other characters in the newly United States. New york burning came out in 2005, the whites of their eyes, the Tea Party Revolution and battle of American History in 2010. The history of life and death in 2012. Essays on origins also came out in 2012. The book of ages, the life and opinions of Jane Franklin sister of Benjamin Franklin came out in 2013. Believe it won the National Book award. The secret history of wonder woman 2014. Another came out in 2016, which we will ask about later. These truths which we have talked about, a history of the u. S. , 2018. And this america, the case for the nation, last year, and her most recent book is if then, how the corporation invented the future. Thats a brand new book. We will talk about that in an in a minute. We want to involve you in this conversation as well. If you have a question or comment you would like to make, call in, or contact us social media. East and central time zone 202 hp 7488200 the number to dial. Those of you in the mountain and pacific time zone 2027488201. If you want to send a text message, include your first name and city, that can go to 2027488903. Again the text message number 2027488903. Now, were also going to scroll three our social media accountings, facebook you can make a comment. You can send an email. Well scroll through those. Just remember book tv. So jill lepore, if then, what was the corporation and im hoping im saying that correctly. this kind of this company of behavioral scientists and computer scientists. They were some of the, what david wouldve called the bus and the brightest in an ironic way. They had the idea with the early mainframe computer computers, that were available on the 19th 50s, the ibm mainframes like the 704, using a new computer like which they could program a computer from the simulation of u. S. President ial election. They could use that simulation shoe provide Campaign Advice to have the democratic nominee would be. This is a 1959 when they thought it was stevenson and most guys who work for him had worked in 1956 against Dwight Eisenhower the incumbent. In 1960 everyone expected expected nixon to run. People thought he would be a formidable candidate. Nixon was an extremely fermentable candidate and also a vulnerable one. The democrats are really bold or bold because of their position on civil rights. And greenfield and his colleagues built this machine they call the people up machine. As a computer simulation of the election in order to improve to the democrats the importance of engaging black voters in the north. In taking a position on civil rights. Thats in the company was founded at work in the dmc in 1959. Back to john f. Kennedy. When they went on to do pioneering work in a hold onto other. As kind of the analytic of the cold war. For how it really, significantly served, it is kind of the back story to facebook. Her much that goes on in social media today. The data mining and such. That the company did is very much the great granddaddy of so many data mining and social Media Companies today. Host were to define story . Guest i found this story in 2015. I am her editor for the new yorker magazine and have been for a long time part am often asked to do pieces that provide the history of an institution that people think they know all about. But in fact just dumps. I was asked to write a history of the Polling Industry which was very much in the news for all kinds of reasons. We can go into but its a long story. It became basically clear to me that the Polling Industry was very much in decline in crisis. And largely in any case being supplied by data sites. Poach a call 3000 people on the phone and ask them a bunch of questions and higher staff to do that. If you could just follow them online and extract their data in figure with their political preferences are without ever having to do that. The data science is replacing and making obsolete the Polling Industry. So one thing that was clear to me that i got really interested in figuring out when that happens and how that happens. When i came across in a journal article, the story about the corporation providing advice doing election simulation for the Kennedy Campaign in the 1960. So i read the article. Meanwhile he got very interested in this company, how did i never know about this outcome no ones ever heard of this company . What happened to this company. What are the archives to try to find the corporate records. The corporate records dont exist. The companys records are nonexistent. But i did find a large swaths of material related to the history of the company was at mit in the papers will be chairman of the research portion of the committee, the political scientist at mit. So into the mit library and started going through these boxes, mostly un catalogued papers. Its an incredibly rich story about a whole lot of Different Things that this company had done. They had a hand in all different kinds of books thats done now. And that i never thought about having in the cold war. And explained a lot to me. I did not by any stretch set out to write. Its a really compelling story and its fantastic. So i wrote the book. Speak. Host so the corporate records do not exist, that nefarious . Guest known the company went bankrupt in 1970. Have been headquartered in new york. The new york office was run by greenfield, the admin who is president of the company. He had fallen into considerable dissolution after 1958 when his estranged wife died in terribly tragic circumstances. The company had unraveled of the work he done and vietnam. He took to drinking very heavil heavily. Basically sleeping on peoples couches. I lost track of, im sure he did not pay the rent and things just got shredded. Mightve been stored in the white house for a while. Greenville wouldve failed to pay the bill. Companies lose a records all the time. Theres a lot of obscure companies. But people were still interested in what the company had done. Even in 1970 71. People write to this mit guy was a quite brilliant political scientist and say i am looking for the following materials relating to the corporation but can you tell me where the archives are . And he would say they are in a warehouse in new york. You should write to the following address. And people start asking him and hes like i dont know. They just got trashed. In fact the novel was written about them corporation 480. They are actually two different articles about the company. For 1964, one was in your times bestseller for a long time. Everyone expected it will be made into a film. And then it wasnt for complicated reasons. The other was a Science Fiction novel, it disappeared into obscurity. Although it made into a film by a german filmmaker in the 1970s. And then was basically remade into the matrix. The matrix, which is about a world we are all living in a simulation rather than actual world with the story from 19 since he bore novel was about the corporation. So in a way, we all know the story, we know the fictional version because that is what the matrix is. But in some ways a more sophisticated story that was written and published in 1964 was called the 480. The title is because there companies sort of the americas electric and 480 possible voter types. The 480 is a novel about the 1964 president ial election in which a very admirable president ial candidates. Really admirable young guy, with the best of intentions is recruited to run for president. And expected to lose in a way that will help the party prevail in 68. And his campaign is conducted by a computer simulation of the election. Everything he supposed to do is been told to do by a computer. It is written by this guy, eugene verdict. Who i just love. He was like a california surfer beach boy who went to the navy, served in the navy was a navy war hero. And then was a writer, one a lot of writing prices for his fiction. Wrote a short stories, got a phd in the got political Theory University berkeley. And wrote novels. These are all the magazine pieces as well. Here the ugly american with an astonishing publishing success. It got made into films that phil came out and 62 during the cuban missile much i miss in unshed missile crisis. It was a great, great movie. They work for ed greenfield in 1956 on at least evensons campaign. Trying to help stevenson with the california primary against his democratic competitors. And then when greenfield formed it in 1959 he asked burdick to join. In verdict said no. He was incredibly world famous celebrity. [laughter] s is not something he was going to take on. He was fascinated by and thought it was indefensible and would destroy american politics. So we got all of his former colleagues to send him all these topsecret documents about the company. How did it work, the reports for the Kennedy Campaign. Even punchcards and stuff like in prisons for it he used all of that stuff to write a really distracting novel about the company in 1964 in much of the companys dismay. Yes. Burdick dies tragically, really on the next year. He has a terrible heart condition. So people dont know about verdict anymore. He was a kind of public intellectual that does not exist anymore. And probably shouldnt and that he was a celebrity spokesperson. For a beer. He was on all booktv ads, the it was a manlier brew, he was the most manly on America Political science literary figures. Spent well party may pay lets hear from her viewers. Lets begin with eduardo and arlington, virginia. Eduardo you are on with harvard to jill lepore. Student im a big fan of cspan book tv, thank you. I know your talk about nationalism and our country is a country of immigrants. We excepted the statue of liberty, we have a near city and we love it. The first was an american idea whole book on the u. S. History. I am asking, how do you think in view of being a country of all things, how is the belief or practice, is it about the same . Slanting up . Slanting down . My only example is also at thanksgiving 1789, president washington one of the day of thanks giving to god pertinent president lincoln and 1863 also made a proclamation of saying so thank you. So when in qo. Guest thank you ed bardo. I the question about religious and American History, but just to think a little bit about the way you describe the country as a nation of immigrants and the importance of the melting pot. Each of those expressions with john f. Kennedy, play written, each of those expressions and conceptions of the United States is a people and nation state has a history. They emerged from political battles of their own day. We carry them forward and use them in her own political battles as if they have no history. The same way we use the expression Founding Fathers which is not used before 1916 when it was used to defend an original interpretation and then progress interpretation of the constitution. Wes Founding Fathers of the time because people of said is a political invention. So as it is a melting pot of immigrants. Not that these are not traditional terms that we all need to know the caboose that follows in the wake of for those things come from. But american self perception around in particular what americas sea with Ethnic Diversity has a really interesting and long history. In each term in American History where there is a crisis over immigration, and the constitution of the people. It tends to emerge pretty and so do practices with things like thanksgiving. So, the thing that is really interesting to me about american religious choral is him is that we are thinking about in a deep historical way, in order to gain a better perspective on her current battles with freedom of religion. And even battles over secular religion. I spent time with this argument in these cues. Ive also written about it elsewhere. Its a beat of a call that our commitment to political toleration. That is our commitment to living in a party what we have more than one Political Party. The people can speak against the government freely. The political dissent is accepted and in fact called for. Comes from the establishment of religious toleration. Which comes to say that what comes versus tolerant people with different religious views. That makes historically possible tolerating people of different political views. That is a dissent from the 17th century and the english revolution and english civil war of the 17th century. So, toleration of the political philosophies toleration emerges from people coming to see in the years after the protestant reformation, that its actually okay for people to have different ideas about religion. And for someone like locke or someone like john milton, its okay because the truth will out. That is always the idea. People can believe whatever they want, but if you believe there is a truth in eight divine cents, then it will prevail. What is the worry . White help of bull what to believe . Its no way for them, they wont believe, cannot tell people what to believe. If its true. Its a really in some ways a beautiful idea. And it makes possible and what are the english colonies, a tremendous growth in religious sect. Many of the parties were founded in the first place they peel the defenseless collie, marilyn is a colony. Many of these colonies were founded because they could not find people who could express their religious views. To practice their religion before 1641. In that calm and practice their religious views and worship the way they please in these colonies where there is distant from the church of england. In many cases it looks like that eases up over the course of the 17th century. And by the 17 was the first great awakening. Theres up liberation of religious sect. And there is also an emergence of a whole enlightenment era of skepticism. She have thomas paine by 1776 and into the 1770s and 17 az 80s within an age of region. That he has no church. That acceptance that people can believe, they can worship the god they want, is a fundamental to what emerges in a colony which is a commitment to political toleration. There on the same path. People can believe whatever they want to believe. They can vote for who they are going to vote for pray they can even organize as a Political Party disagree with the people who are in power. This is what freedom of the press is for. Benjamin franklin writes his apology 1731, is my job as a printers to print everybodys view. Because in the end the truth will win. In a fairfield when truth and error have a fight, truth always wins. This is the fundamental idea of a jury trial. In eight fairfield people have the argument and 12 reasonable people will be able to decide which one is right. As a printer franklin says i will print the diversity of views that my readers will be able to tell just like the jury trial. That is how our whole side of ideas about expression both political expression of emerges. The bills of rights from the states 1791 it doesnt, that is a long two century born tradition that there be no religious test in our First Amendment protection of expressions its the case that there was, beginning in 1979 with the moral majority the nation had always been a christian nation because all this path of American History and people but washington said thanksgiving or lincolns tradition, those are practices those are port part of American History. Deeper and foundational commitment all of these things seem completely fragile among the tragedies of the 21st century. Stu melissa from ken atlanta georgia. Caller thank you. How are you jill . I appreciate it very much. I work with the state legislature of georgia. We just finished at 50 60 year project in civics. And it is going to be rolled out beginning this year. And they are going to do it with the recreational traveling to every state capital. And it has to do with what i heard you say when you first started talking today. About it would be good if the americans knew more and got more involved and so forth. Well, this is designed to get one 100 of the people to address the number one problem which is illiteracy of all of us. We are practicing democracy. And we do the pledge of allegiance. And we are supposed to be using a republic or the republican form. And this is such a serious matter that many years ago, a guy name Thurgood Marshall was on the supreme court. And i cant think of his name right now, he was a chief justice. Oh, warren burger. He told us, he said illiteracy is so encased or pronounced, the problem isnt that we dont know, the problem is we do not know that we do not know. See what he can be our going to leave it there and have professor lepore respond to the idea of literacy. Gas thanks ken. Is going to ask and but a guess is not on the line any longer, what he thanks is responsible for this. I agree, theres a huge lack of Civics Education. I concur. There are a number of programs going on all over the country which are incredibly exciting. Theres that National Project my colleague, daniel allen at harvard called democratic knowledge project. Its for people doing Civics Education all the time ive written the book as much in American History is old fashion civics textbook. I wholly support the idea that we need more and better Civics Education. Im always curious if people think there is a reason we dont have it. Im curious as always a narrative that we used to have it used to be so great. We didnt really used to have it didnt used to be so great. It was urgently needed. In our political environment sadly a source of clandestine paired when we say what we need . The president called in a speech earlier this year about patriotic there been many such suggestions over times with a single Political Party citizen is not partisan it cant be partisan but americans dont really know the word of the meaning nonpartisan anymore but what is that mean today . I would say, i see a lot of evidence the long tail of on Stem Education and k12. Back to the cold war of federal funding very interest of the cold war that has the effect of impoverishing every other field. The trickle down to k12. Trickle down Stem Education. Of our political culture in complete disarray. Where it is not the fault of teachers, Public School teacher teachers. They are not asked to teach these subjects. There and asked to research these subjects for their School Boards do not make the priority. Its not the fault of kids. The reason for this change over time arent a very different place brace back a question this is a text. My dear mind if you do send a text please include your first name and your city. It is a question for jill lepore. What you think about the recent white house sponsored conference on examining liberal bias in teaching American History . Guest was there an actual conference of thought is a speech . Host i think there was a meeting. Guest went there was, we dont have a collar on the line to query, that there was a call for a National Commission that will be called the 1776 project projects. That was meant as a proposed to the New York Times 1619 project. I dont think the commission, could be wrong. Its too exhausting to follow all of the media stunts. A people taking positions soon as i get cameras on them. So i dont know. What i think of it . It reminds me a lot, i know my answers are very long. I am a storyteller, i like to tell stories. In 1965 i believe, Lyndon Johnson administration set up a bicentennial commission. Without the resistance in 1776. Johnson wanted to do some work to prepare for what would be the nations 200th anniversary in 1776. And there would be a buildup of events between 65 and 76. Because there is a lot come back along that way. In 1970 we had the boston massacre what would you do it the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party paired what would you do in 1775 anniversary. In 1965 there is the Voting Rights act. It was the heyday telling the story the struggle for civil rights in this you the kind of things to look squarely at the history, slavery the atrocity of jim crow. Based on race. In the digital peoples mood the American Indian movement was very much wood and preach the interest of the Mainstream Press by then. Her custard died for your sins. Where very much at the height of the early years, so johnsons bicentennial commission was interested in telling this big story. This kind of new big story. You know, johnson decides and 68 not to run to nixon. Nixon inaugurated in 1969 looks at johnsons commission and says basically, what trump said about we things of the conspiracy of liberals to indoctrinate american schoolchildren and college students. Whatever he said braid that is what Lyndon Johnsons commission was. This is all for memory. Viewers are going to say thats not exactly right, but nixon basically kicks a lot of johnsons appointees often establishes his own commission. I would imagine the one that trump is calling for from the 7076 projects. Nixon puts all these people on. Actual historians who are scholars. Okay thats a joke. That is not, this is not actually have happened. You can do that, president nixon. But youre not going to get scholars to be part of that. Your history is like a comic book. So this leads to a series of incredibly intense protests at the commemoration of the bicentennial. Its march 5 covid 1970. Its anniversary of the boston massacre. But the may 5 is a at kent stat state. Which there is a whole generation of American College students who have on the wall of their storm room room a poster of the boston massacre was like a motto about kent states. That is the revolution. The revolution is students protesting war in vietnam. The inheritor of the American Revolution. And not nixon. Horton nixons department of defense. The civil rights activist, antiwar activists. So there is a huge battle in the 70s about which version we began this conversation, peter, that theres two versions. That divide really has its origins at that moment. In 1973 in boston, there is a big celebration in boston, with the 200th anniversary of the dumping of the t. These have businessmen and they get this old phone and they get up so its like an 18th century vote and they sail over from england. Was going to be a ceremonial dumping of the team. Theres thousands of people there. The whole thing is protesting. People are in a mask wearing nixon rubber mask critic like watergate. There were in their nixon heads during the not a correct thing. This a bunch of Indigenous People from new england who show up to protest the actors toward dressup and mohawks which the sons of liberties does dressup is mohawks to dump the t. Then there is a flotilla of yea pride for taylor. Then there is a very big march on Vietnam Veterans while veterans against the war. That are the militarization of the protest. So if you want to wonder when did some kind of unitary notion of the american past shatter, it did not happen two weeks ago when trump said there is a liberal conspiracy to change america. It did not happen in 1619. This is been going on for a very, very long time. But in fact, lack of knowledge of history means we do not even have any history of the history problem. Sue and jill lepore, when do you find time to synthesize all this information . Guest , i teach every day. So we are asked to do you teach us come up with the explanations and answers on ways to help people think about problems. To help figures to know how to investigate. Mainly it is the gift of being able to be in the company of young people. Their questions and ask you to think about things. Sue mixes a texan a question for the little offtopic perhaps. But was privileged to hear david blythe discussed Fredrick Douglas britton noting his admissions of his wife anna and his autobiographies, it reminded me of Ben Franklins omission of references to jane than any of his public writings. So i wondered if this is perhaps typical of the times. And not as much of a slight as it seems . Sue neck that is it interesting question. For those have not read david blythes wonderful biography, you absolutely should. This is actually an opportunity for me to it correct a fact. You said my book about ben franklin won the National Book award, it didnt, is in the finals for the National Book award for it i will correct that here. Yes. So here its worthwhile remembering that Frederick Douglas who wrote three autobiographies the first was published in 1845, the life of Frederick Douglass, was very much influenced by Benjamin Franklins autobiography. Which was published first in 1790 right after franklin died. In english shortly thereafter. Not in franklins lifetime. And so really is every american autobiography influenced by Benjamin Franklins autobiography. His acacia franklin established the idea, the story of the autobiography or will be an allegory of a much bigger struggle for the whole country. So franklin told the story of his wife. Which was a new thing to do, right . They were by agar fees of famous. He wants was to write the stories was new that frank was helping to invent. He was a self made man expression was not quite current then. Its not current tilt and rejections time. He says having been born into poverty, this is rough paraphrase. I write this book in order the people who are interested in making it to rise could not emulate me, how to go from insecurity to reputation how to go from angular institute knowledge how to go from rags to riches, from poverty to prosperity. So franklin had also written acacia on the way to wealth. Her advice to a tradesman. His work is about how to become free. Kind of left out about how to be good. [laughter] s over franklin your tongue the story of your life. How to start with nothing and become somebody. The story is about you do it all on your own. That is crucial to franklins tail, right . You should not have to meet other peoples help. In franklins or because he talks to people who do not have any help. I may not be able to get any. His advice is heres how you can do this yourself. We can think about that historically and realize this is an agent of a lot of idleness, emotional drunkenness. Franklin singh pick yourself up that work hard and things work out. Which is not true, its almost unheard of in his day. Franklin is an unusual, extremely unusual exception. But for that story to work to give the advice eucalyptus for by your bootstraps as expression comes to be, you cant need anyones help. So the fact there is an extraordinary amount of help in that journey, in that rise. He deliberately leaves out of the story that includes his sister. Also theres a thousand other reasons. Its as close as correspondent in many ways his closest friend. Stomach i dont think its mere convention. As a plot device but its necessary to provide the story. For douglass stories about the journey from to freedom, franklin was born from poverty to wealth. Douglas goes from slavery to freedom. I has not that same exact circumstance. Because they did in fact need a lot of help. But he cant, for very different reasons, douglas cant say who helped him. In 1845 when Frederick Douglass comes out, he is a fugitive. To get caught or anyone who helps them get caught, he would be returned to slavery. And those who book of face charges especially after 1850. He cant say what help he got. He can intimate he was helped. I was like a legal reason he cant say, cannot talk about all the help they got. But he talks about the other white woman who taught him to read. I also them teaches himself the way franklin teaches himself to read. So a lot of us have story from illiteracy to knowledge. I can now not recall but the explanation is for why douglass wife is not part of the story as he tells it. Some of it is a 19th century convention. But thats absolutely not all of it. Yes thats quite a long answer to think about the invisibility in mens success. But i would not say to the degree its a convention of the time that it somehow ends. You see that all the time. And for every Silicon Valley entrepreneur is about inventing himself. Its a big peace i was watching boy skate, fusing the movie boy state . No it is on my list. Boy state is a documentary when a grand jury prize. At sundance last year. Its about every state has a summer camp for kind of political geek kids. Theres a girls one and boys will. Boy stayed in texas is the documentary film. Where the characters is in it which is in the feeling character he is a person speaking. Its a Texas High School boys who want to go into politics. He keeps talking and gives the Campaign Speech with the running for office about how he is a selfmade man, how he came from nothing and is now gone to this. Im between shots on the cell phone talking to his mother. [laughter] its like, youre incredibly appealing young man. And you succeed in everywhere. Your mother really help make you. I wont put in the film he says that. Its about american individualism we do not acknowledge people who help us out. In particular we do not acknowledge women. Its unbelievably maddening. I sought 19th century comments on 18th century. There is an cast to it over tim time. But is very much still with us. Simon that gave the chancellor to talk about the National Book award finalist. Book of ages. The life and opinions of jane wren that joe published in 2013. Lentils intern leonard california please go have their question for professor jill lepore. Caller yes, thank you professor lepore. Im a little bit nervous, this is the first of november called into a television show. I really want to thank you because i noticed all of your books are on audio. For persons like myself with very severe dyslexia it makes it more accessible. Even for my friends who are blind. When you got back to harvard, could you ask the other professors to put their books on audiobooks with more accessible for people like myself . Hopes im so sorry. Thought you were finished, professor lepore . Yes thanks for that. Im actually a person who i guess listen to a lot of books. I listen to audiobooks alltime bird i love audiobooks and live audio storytelling. Most of my books, since the secret of wonder woman ive been the narrator of all audiobooks. I love reading them. And i would say, not all writers should be doing their audio. Some people are not good at it. But i really like doing it. I love hearing from listeners who listen to the book. And who will only was his two books that are written by the writer. Because its a commitment. Its a cool thing. You might be interested i have a podcast that you can listen to for free anyway listen to a podcast thats my exploration of truth in the 20th century tends to follow the mystery through radio drama to answer the question who told truth. I wish i could tie that my colleagues at harvard would do something to that. But, i do not wield that kind of influence. With a followup text from somebody. What is joels typical typical work schedule for writing a book . Sweet it most of my work have a state when i was a kid. We, be in my family had to work a lot of jobs it was understood be would work a lot. So things are ben franklin asked for those who have read Ben Franklins autobiography. Outside of dodges were i could get some reading done were supposed to be working. So i do a lot of things that are frantic pace in order to earn back time of reading i want to do. So its nice to may end up having a job its basically reading. But for me, how i handle, i have a lot of different demands on my time. Because mainly im a teacher. As most professors are afraid its not i was clear thats the case. Its most important thing we do. I generally come at the beginning of the month they get out a calendar, in the olden days it was a peace of paper. I mark up everything i have to do this that semester. All the Committee Meetings i have to go to, the lectures i have to give, department meetings, times that im teaching. And i tried to the degree i can to move stuff into particular days. And every day that i am not teaching or in a meeting, i just put a big w over the day. That is a writing day. And then those are sacrosanct. If summary was to meet on tuesday go for lunch i want to go to for a run can you run . No wednesday morning . I can say im sorry, im completely tied up. I think the problem for a lot of academics is having control of their own time, if you do not schedule writing time, and all the other things you have to do will inevitably take it up. My big priority is to be available to meet with students. Before time zone is oncampus. Im a chemist you have to find time to meet with me while preserving my time. The main thing i do is protect my writing times from other kinds of things. Think a lot of people say yes to a lot of things like this. Spending two hours doing this is not a thing i would not ordinarily do. Because i tend to spend my time with family if i am not writing. Guess we have been trying to get you on as you well know from indepth for quite a while. We do appreciate your time today. [laughter] s to make there is, how to write a paper for this class. That professor lepore put out. One of the opening sentences is quote, to write history is to make an argument by telling a story about dead people. You will be dead when they too, so please play fair. And remember, never condescend its probably bad enough being dead without some smart alec using your life and times to make a specious claim. Guest i stand by it. [laughter] i stand by it. Host you still have it out to students . Guest i have it up on my webpage because people teachers escort all the time for people write and say how you teach people about writing . It seems, he read thank you think its angry. Its not angry. But i have found, this is one is teaching course in the American Revolution is on the road this documentary. I defined an actual person is left behind favorite letters or diary somebody work that can be investigated tell the story of their life and make an argument about the American Revolution. And the answer, whats ahead for a long time then is the big question about the American Revolution which whether or not is truly radical conservative. Offended the political order. And so it to do this work and draft their papers, and they will be writing about someone like Jane Franklin or Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and whoever. Theyd treat these people as if they were not human beings. They were like puppets on a stage. They could be brought on the say their lines and then go behind the curtain. And the student would say whatever. They would quote them and then kind of beat them up about what they had them say. They would bring the puppet aligned to say some minds i was baffled by this. They were not real people. Theyre not just the subject of your paper. Its not like math we do a proof unused variables and integers. These were people. They had children. They had, they had childbirth pains, whatever they are human beings. [laughter] thats where the line comes fro from. Its brilliant and determined and hardworking and creative. Its interesting to see we do this to each other in the world all the time. We make fun of other people, im not unsocial me for my senses its a great deal of what social media is as making use of people and saying things are unfair of them. That is my longwinded explanation. We went lets hear from martha in charleston, south carolina. Thanks for holding martha, you are on with professor joe lepore. Hi peter. He think this is the longest hole that ever had at cspan. Because jill really does answer thoroughly, thank you jill. [laughter] i am sorry, thanks for your tim time. Caller im an active teacher and thank goodness students have you as a teacher. Your writing has been wonderful. I have to tell you these truths was recommended to me by one of my second grade students from 30 years ago who writes me about his reading all of the time. He was in new zealand doing graduate work. He wrote to me, have you read these truths . And of course i could write back directly to him that i had read book of ages, and i had read wonder woman. But i had not gotten to these truths yet. So talk about writing. I think letter writing it with your old students from 30 years ago it is a real gift, jill, to know my students found you before i even told him about yo you. Guest that is so sweet, thats so nice are still in touch like that. How wonderful. Caller the book of ages is i think the reason why i went on to wonder woman. Because the subject of the book of ages of course fascinated was franklins sister and the bifocals and the glasses and all of that. Im still adjusting to my bifocals. But wonder woman, i never wouldve picked up, up unless you had been the author. Tell me why you wrote about wonder woman . [laughter] guest thanks so much martha. And hello to your student out there. Wonder woman is like the something i stumbled across an archive and felt compelled to write about. I would not have thought out writing a book about wonder woman. I was not a wonder woman fan as a kid. As an adult i am not a superhero fan. I had watched like all of those lousy superhero movies because of my kids. So thats my experience with the culture of a superhero. Sometime back, oh, when would this have been. 2011, castor my back to 2011 there large number of republicans, gingrich and term, Michele Bachmann rand paul, big field, think there is herman cain maybe here, the compete against obama which was going for reelection. In planned parenthood had been in the news a lot. And had big, under the conservatives come under the republican party. And each of these candidates had pledged would fund planned parenthood. I had her assignment from the new yorker to write a history find why is planned parenthood suddenly an issue so i started researching that story. And the papers of planned parenthood, the organization Smith College and a Wonderful Library there. So are the papers of Margaret Sangers they founded in 1916. But meanwhile i was writing an acacia at law school in a history workshop. And i am in ancient history truths. I decided that i wanted to write an acacia about the lie detector which was invented at harvard bite undergraduate writer around the time planned parenthood was founded. Theres a guy name wilton larson. As excited to write an acacia about him i went into wikipedia to begin to find out about him. He invented the Lie Detector Test in 1950s and undergraduate and here at the comic books of the real wonder woman. Says like the best wikipedia entry ever. There is nothing else. There is no mean for scholarship, and no explanation of how these two things connected to one another. Soy set about doing research for the paper i was writing. When once the planned parenthood papers, i kept coming across letters to the sky. It turned out sangers sister a ethel myrna had founded planned parenthood with her and them and kicked him of the organization for very complicated reasons. But the ethel burns daughter olive was the mother of two of the children and murdered him and his wife in a threeway marriage. So that is like to interesting to not read about. Cited research and research and research. Until i came to a conclusion that was too important to not write a book about. Also pretty early on wrote to a wonderful, wonderful generous and brilliant man who retired obstetrician. And asked him about looking for the family papers were and whether he would speak to me. The family had not shared its incredible trove of letters, especially photographs and diaries with anybody. Because of very unconventional family story. Which was a scandal in their lifetime is a very well hidden secret. But i had this really powerful moment when i was at smith. Id done all this research. Id written the article for the new yorker about planned parenthood is called birthright. And they went back to do some more looking once i decided i wanted to do this thing about wonder woman. And i met in the office of one of the curators of the library, to ask some questions about looking through i think it was that ms. Magazine collection bricktown material there in the collection. And you cant figure out what box stuff is in pay but usually the curators know. So i sat down this wonderful woman. She said mortgage is here working on planned parenthood . And i said yeah, yeah, yeah im looking for Something Else for him look in this collection what if you tell me what box i can find that has its own list of things. Getting there be any papers in this box about William Moulton larson . Maxie sehgal box 257. How about is there a file or docs about wonder woman . We went through all of this. And shes telling these things off her mind like a lebron and she looks at me and pauses. Likert literal things like her jaw, she nearly jumped out of her chair. She said oh my god, oh my god, wonder woman is margaret. And i looked at her and said she shh. This is the thing thats hidden mother complicated family history. In the emergence of wonder woman as an icon in 1940 own day. Just an exciting thing to find in the archives. Thats why wrote the book. Im sorry martha, he said to give long answers, given the longest one yet. Someone isnt Margaret Sanger being exercise from planned parenthood at this point . Yes. Sue and i was a short answer. Guest that the short answer we are moving on. I know that is true. Alright. Lets hear from bill in kansas city, missouri, hi bill thanks for holding. Caller peter this is great. Thank you so much for you look like you are enjoying it as much as the viewers are. Jill, i was a champion of your work going all the way back to the name of war at a little bookstore in vermont. Im still a champion of your work in my capacity as an elderly librarian here in kansas city. Ive always wanted to ask either you or some other academic historian the extent to which you rely on the talents, the curiosity, of your students to assist you in the mechanics of fact checking, finding documents, et cetera, et cetera. You have talked several times this morning, i think you even use the phrase, that gift of connecting with curious, interesting, young folks. And as a geezer, i am so excited when i see a sparkle in some Young Persons when my hand the book of ages. Or i tell them about name of wa war. Or, lets read about new york city in 1741. So, a long winded question, but long winded seems to be the calling card today at. [laughter] sue and bill, how long have you been a librarian . Caller ive only been eight librarian for about three years. I was a bookseller for 28. And i used to joke to anyone who would listen, that the three women i wanted to date before death were bonnie raitt, merrill street, and jill lepore. Whatever that is worth, peter. Host alright believe that they are. Jill lepore what is your answer . ways. I know there are plenty of historians who have large teams of students doing Research Work for them. I generally dont. There are some really notable exceptions. Where i just cant do the thing that needs to be done. I would say i actually rely to a huge degree on librarians and archivists. Since the time of digitizing of collection and collections digitize a bull, i often have the experience of fred if then i wanted to look at the stevenson papers, which are printed, i did not have time, given my teaching schedule and parenting obligations to take a trip to princeton. Especially because i thought, Natalie Stevenson papers are extensive but really carefully indexed. I could see there was a folder about greenfield and company, the founders. It was a big folder, i think it was 400 pages, libraries that have resources now you can write and say i would like to see that folder and they will scan every item in it for you. It actually works well for the libraries because you pay for the scanning and now the folder is scanned for anybody whoever wants it. Its a way that actually libraries get resources rather than drained the resources its a clever thing. Not every library can do that, it still takes staffs resources, you have to have the resources to do it. I rely on that kindness all the time and especially aband i need something really fast and obscured, may be hard to find in the collection, people will help you find it. They are incredibly generous. They also like to see it next week in the new yorker. Something like when i wrote this book abi found at nyu, maybe a dozen notebooks that look like models calf, cow, there was a diary, handwritten diary. Very expensive. I went down and took one full day, they didnt have the resources to do this, i photographed with my iphone every page of this notebook. Then i did research in the city but i didnt have time to transcribe all that tough handwriting. Then i hired a graduate student to do that work. But the first time ab occasionally i will hire somebody abif there is no way i can find the time to do the transcription work. Last year i was a fellow at the abon sabbatical and they will hire for you and pay the salary of up to four Research Assistants to help you on whatever project at the Radcliffe Institute to do. I was working on the last archive and i hired abits the first time i had a team to do these things. Totally Different Things. That is a case where i benefited because they were brilliant and incredible and resourceful. Fun and creative, super energetic. They brought so much energy to the project. Thats where its also really good for students to wean every week to talk about research agenda, people report what they found. They share story ideas. That was super fun. We are doing the Second Season of the last archive right now, i dont have a team anymore. I dont have the budget to hire people, only extraordinary circumstances or some sort of specific thing. I really like doing the archival work myself. Im sad if i cant do it and have help, id much rather be in the archives and program the archives. Im a little too controlling probably to have other people do that kind of stuff for me in any routine way. Thats why you have kids. [laughter] incorporate them into our work. Did joe gold history of his life exist . Jill lepore gould, who was a deranged homeless man, he was born in maybe 1890s died in 1957. Beginning in the 19 teens claimed to be writing history a book called history of our time he proposed would be the longest book ever written, a oral history of everybody he met he would write down every word he ever heard he carried them all around. It was said to be incredible and then said to be merely affection of his. Thats a project my investigation took at joel gould story because i was teaching a class on how to write a biography. It was an object lesson on how to not write a biography. Goulds a subject of two different essays by the new york or writer incredibly wonderful vivid writer Joseph Mitchell who wrote abthis is so long ago i dont really remember, maybe in 45, 42, maybe professor siegel, in the middle of the dark days of the war. There was a quirky story how there will always be in new york, theres this crazy guy in Greenwich Village who proposes hes writing this book. In 1964 mitchell published basically a retraction called joel gould secret he discovered in the course of interviewing and writing the profile of gould in 1942 that the book didnt exist. It was a figment of deranged imagination. That mitchell confesses he didnt reveal that at the time because abalways imagine we write a book we never finished, the story of our lives. And isnt ever really going to be a book, we are always hoping to do something we can never quite achieved. Joel gould was therefore historic aband the elusiveness of great art. I signed this to my undergraduates, when i was getting ready to go to class in the class about geography i noticed i had completely forgotten that in the original story mitchell says that gould has a will in the pocket of his jacket, this baggy overcoat this homeless guy is wearing, he pulls out the will all the time and says when i die a third of my manuscript is going to the smithsonian but two thirds to harvard. He graduated from harvard a literally prepping for class and i thought, my students are going to say, did he check at harvard . If mitchells whole thing is the book never existed because he couldnt find it. Gould died in 1957 maybe it ended up at harvard and just miscategorized. So i went to the library to look for it and found all this other stuff that proves that everything mitchell said was wrong and i fell down the rabbit hole of needing to find out whether the book existed and mitchell was lying the first time or whether the book didnt exist and mitchell was lying the second time. Wrong, not necessarily lying. So i went on this crazy ab supposedly it was never written, i did find the volume in the New York Public Library and mitchells papers which had only been given to the library. Was incredibly thrilling. It was funny because a host jill lepore, if i could ask you to get more in the middle of the camera. We dont want to lose you. We hear from ariel in portsmouth new hampshire, arielle, these go ahead. Thank you for taking the call, i appreciate you for keeping this program for so many years. abi wonder why so few if any academic historians spend any time dealing with the genocide committed against American Indians, native incompetents of north america. Specifically when you are talking about civics and the 1593 project and the conservative project, you talk about restitution for slavery, but no one ever talks about restitution for native americans, the return to their lands were at least something to it. What is it that academic historians documented the violence and address this issue that is the foundational thank you. Thank you so much. I guess i would dispute the question that we are engaged in kind of aec moral examination of the genocide. I think the richest period of scholarship on that team at the time of the 500th anniversary, that was in 1992. But upho throughout the 1990s in the late 1980s, were extraordinarily proliferation of research per unit whole world of books that are published. The conquest was in. Extraordinary research into the ecological and the nature of the world the series. Military explanations for an extraordinary amount of Research Done during that time period is also the case of indigenous studies programs are incredibly vibrant art of academic life. And i do see what you mean about the public discourse. For slavery, it has kind of a prominencers that in the kind of monument kind of world. Whereas we dont see the sick insane discourse in regards of what should be done with the climate reckoning with not only with of course, that genocide and the possessions of it. But the betrayals of the ongoing injustice. The denial of the nation hud. In the abuses of the native land. Lease brutality against Indigenous People isus greater than what is reported to the population. And theres a whole lot to say. A whole people doing that work. So its not being done. Was different analytically between the call for examining slavery in the new jim crow is kind of one thats rolled into a big bundle of things. In the study of the genocide and atrocities. And the just possessions and locations. And of course the simulations. The civil rights generally fits, whilee my colleagues probably with similar struggle. This was in a larger american era. And speaking from dual citizenship. So for any native people, what is sought is not right as american citizens. The remedy sought is the and did not sit so well with larger narrative. And they were seeking rights as citizens and equal participants of the law. And that analytically, now if you view far more you probably need to have. Will the followup email on that, are the initials will u. S. History Going Forward the exclusively about racial injustice, marginalization or other narratives which define is only in terms of victimhood. Jill no. I dont recognize that is the world in which that is how our history has been taught. I was no working on a book about the tea party movement. His our lives hundred and wash a lot of the History Education on fox news. When the show started in 2009, like the green chalkboard and any lectures on the American Revolution. In this the indoctrination of the schoolchildren into the idea that this the United States have committed that things. In the story of america was racial injustice. In a sort of bag, thing that was being taught in american schools. In the book, i happen to tell my kids i think they were at third grade in the time. And very liberal city. I watch the kids doing the things that had a signal of events. And the thing is that i wrote about it. Because these kids are doing these conventional things like one of the objections. [inaudible]. Was the achaemenid they want to have something different. When they change their minds. This is. Much what goes on. To me is largely what is happening. That there were issues with people at the assembly that were asking if you believe in the natural rights. Like that is part of that story. The problem is not making that be part of the story. The problem is the generations that the historians a rep that out of the story. In a pretended date it never happened. Idaho, with author jill. Go ahead. Hi jill and thank you so much for what you do. I appreciate it. Seeing that youre doing stuff like this. Im sure it is noti easy. Im in the pacific northwest. And what i can tell you i am in idaho, and it is the wild west right now. Its. Interesting. Where in these movements right now brandnew female Lieutenant Governor so she was elected this year. We didnt know much about her. And idaho will have these women now. Then when the pandemic switched, she went far right. And created a little civil war here. And a lot of people have been listening to her. We have collected jordan in the democrats, and native American Woman who is real popular. So what we have been seeing here, this region never really has been having slavery issue. During the civil war we were just not having the protest of everything going on. Its. Exciting. What i can tell you is that women are really taken over. And theyre lively around here. Thats what i can tell you. My new doctor is a woman. The women have like our judicial around here. The jailers,. Okay i think we have the idea. Thank you for calling. It sounds its captured your attention. And a lot of people i think and think differently. One of the things that the women is just how long it was that the male politicians expected women to vote. As of the big reasons why the gets about right. In the way people their family neighborhoods with vote. It and that makes this so the women gained the right to vote. As it turns out over the past few elections, these were never part of the agenda for women. Since 1980 the gender gap is going to talk about. The female voters general lack of enthusiasm. And that kind of a gap in any elections since, of course is the moment, it is the black female bunker that is captured i think the united nations. The political press. The new version to watch. And i myself am less convinced that these categories are all that defines us. It is a whole another story. And part of it is told in these truths. In the report on campaign inc. Which is founded in the 30s and was the First Political Consulting Firm ever created in the u. S. And linda in Melbourne Beach florida. Go ahead with your question. Hi. I have a question. Linda you will have to turn on your tv okay. In this just talk into your telephone and dont listen anything else. Thank you very much. Okay hi. I have a question. And i have a comment. I am 70 years old. And back in the 70s i asked my grandmother a lot of questions about my family history. Then her grandfather and her great grandfather both fought in the civil war. And she talked about the things that they talked about and one was gettysburg and one was the other battle and everything liks that. What ive learned from what she said, that they were of people that had a sense of honor. There were certain rules and when a man was and what a man did. And i think itit is wrong to jue history based on the way we think today. Think we should celebrate howle far we have come and go even further. It about my grandfather went out to fight the indians in the west. C and he came back because he could not live with himself to put them on reservations. Because my indian friends michael would never forgive. And the questionnd is, in my grandmothers writings she said that the family motto was never forget frenchmans bay. And unfortunately, it got lost. I do know we were here. We came over on the mayflower. And anil the french say that i call the main historical society. Go ahead with a research that. I would really love to find out what happened that day. All right, thank you for the comments about judging previous history. Jill yes, j thank you. I love the enthusiasm for a family history. I wish you luck with the history of frenchman bay. I think go to your local library does the library there. There are Research Tools at the public libraries. If popular partnership with the university. And that would have more tools u. Help you resolve this. I think you will get there. Dont hurry. Otght in the introduction to that is not the job to be a moralist. That. Believe it is our instinct both in the present and thinking about the past to judge one another closely. Like thats one of the chief problems in our politics. Everybody is concerned with who to blame for what is going on o and had wrong in the country right now. And thinking about how they are responsible for it. Andgh i think that personally, spending a lot of time, me litigating the past has a real limit. I once had a long conversation with someone who was outraged with some things, they wanted to know why i wasnt enraged about it. I said what he think the Carbon Footprint is today. Like that was provided to you. Oil and gas for the car. So, back to the point that this message is that they had done more damage to the planet than the date that the person that they were indicting. Like, we would be judged by future generations having destroyed the earth. So theres very little that we have done in our lifetime. My generation especially. And it makes it i think a very extraordinary hard thing to condemn people not to say that were not involved in thinking about right and wrongs. And how to remedy the wrongs. That is our obligation. That is part of our duty to one another. That is a good reason to study the past. The people are not actually in the present premium institutions and do a better job of protecting one another from her work. We have right. We have constitutions that enforce the rule of law. We have things that make it much better to be a human being. A florida creature today in any previous centuries for sure. And we need to protect those institutions. People themselves are not there. Out in 2005, one in four new yorkers at one point was an enslaved person. He also learned about how wall street was built and founded read neil, ohio. Please go ahead. Guest hi, i have two related questions. Commentary from the professor recently about corporate influence in the first question is do you believe that harvard is a warning in 2017 an honorary doctor of law to mark zuckerberg, that was justifiable. Given that facebook has a reputation for being the greatest transmitter and disseminate her disinformation in the world. In the mr. Zuckerberg himself has a tensions for neil, im good have to cut you off, what is your second question. Guest he believes it entered believe it is wise for the president to sit in the corporate boards. Thank you so there. Corporate influence in politics jill the colors referring to an interview that i did for the chronicle of Higher Education which i did recently and i made remarks about corporate influence on universities. I can practically, publicly disagree with them. And very vocal about it. And i realize there are people involved with the service. By the way facebook, i think theyre tremendously people that work facebook. They have every good intention. They would like to not be destroying several communities and institutions. But infected is. I think the companies probably going to need to be dismantled to find a way forward piece. So quite strong views about that. We have a minute left. And keep you can answer this question on time in florida. Read you regularly in the new yorker. Never disappointed. And reminded me somehow if something that you wrote over a year ago. Rl the lingering applause. Start moving beautiful depth. For that. I just started these truths, my first stab at long nonfiction. Longform. Temporary fiction writers do you appreciate. You have about 30 seconds. Jill yes thanks. That is safe lingering, to personal essays november published. Really happy the people mentioned them. And be able to tell that story. So unusual thing for me to do. Good for you. I dont read a ton of contemporary literary fiction read not as much as i used to. Because now i am writing more. I read a lot of older stuff. Im kind of exhausted with the nonfiction right now. So i tended to read other things which i really love and enjoy. Her most recent book is called if then, the history of semiautomatics corporation. And we appreciate yours and your families time today on book tv. This leaves all the rest of us in a more vulnerable state. So, im concerned that policymakers really should look at the whole picture when they are making this choice. Mit Research Scientist Daniel Weitzner tonight at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on the communicators on cspan2. Weeknights this month we are featuring but to be programs as a preview of what is available every weekend on cspan2 and tonight it is a look at president ial history. First, Susan Eisenhower examines her grandfather Dwight Eisenhowers leadership style and the important decisions he made during his presidency. Former sec. Lady lynn cheney chronicles the leadership of four of the first five president s who hailed from the state of virginia washington, jefferson, madison and monroe. Later historian ajay boehm recounts the 1948 president ial election, watch tonight beginning at 830 p. M. Eastern and enjoy booktv and every weekend on cspan2. You are watching booktv on cspan2 every weekend with the latest nonfiction books and authors. Cspan2, created by americas Cable Television complaining is a Public Service and brought to today by your television provider. This week on the camino gators we want to introduce you to Daniel Weitzner with the Massachusetts Institute of technology and founding director of the Internet Policy Research initiative and is a Research Scientist with the Artificial Intelligence lab there. Professor weitzner, what exactly do you do . Guest excellent question, peter. What i do is so, to begin with i should say im trained as a lawyer originally and ive been at mit for more than 20 years and ive always worked with