Revisiting the History of the 1920s: An Analysis of Historiographical Articles

Summaries

In 2007, David J. Goldberg, a white professor of history at Cleveland State University,  provided an overview of the evolving way in which historians have analyzed the 1920s in his historiographical work entitled “Rethinking the 1920s: Historians and Changing Perspectives.” He highlights the manner in which there has been a shift from a focus on political history to a more holistic image of the divisions of American society during that decade.¹ 

A little over 10 years later, white Progressive Era historian at the University of Massachusetts Amherst Jennifer Fronc published “The 1920s – A Historiographical Survey” in 2018. Fronc takes an even more aggressive historiographical approach, as she criticizes previous historical analyses that viewed it as a distinct historical unit and focuses on the lavishness typically associated with those years. She then details the manner in which a more intersectional analysis of the 1920s, using the lenses of race, class, gender and sexuality, is necessary to properly understand the 1920s. Fronc supports Rebecca Edwards’ “long Progressive Era model” when discussing the new turn 1920s history is taking.² 

Comparing & Contrasting

The key similarity between Goldlberg’s and Fronc’s historiographical analysis of the 1920s is that they note a recent change in which historians are shifting from a surface-level perspective of the decade, whether it be politics or excessiveness, to a holistic consideration of how different social groups were impacted by and shaped events in the 1920s. Specifically, Goldberg demonstrates how historians have analyzed 1920s politics, business, prohibition, white supremacy, immigration, African-Americans, women, gay communities, and media.⁴ Similarly, Fronc focuses on the manner in which recent historians have supported a more diverse perspective on prohibition, women’s suffrage, African-American movements outside of the Harlem Renaissance, and immigration.⁵ 

Despite there only being a decade-long gap between the two articles’ publication, there are some notable differences. For example, Goldberg did not capture the importance of intersectionality, or the manner in which multiple identities intersect to create unique situations, in historical considerations of the 1920s. However this can be attributed to the fact that this only emerged as an analytical category in the 1990s. Goldberg further viewed the decade as a distinctive era, while Fronc preferred to view it as a part of an extended Progressive Era. Additionally, Fronc mainly discussed works published in the 1980s onward, while Goldberg’s historiographical examination included works that were published as early as the 1930s. This may be because she wished to go more in depth on recent scholarship that have not received as much historiographical attention.

Historiographical Changes

When comparing the types of sources referred to by Fronc and Goldberg in their historiographical examination of the 1920s, it becomes clear that different themes come in and out of focus in different decades. For example, with consideration to Goldberg’s sources, from the 1960s-1970s, most historians were focused on the politics of the 1920s. By the 1980s, historians seemed to take a particular interest in African-American history of the 1920s, and this swell occurred again in the 2000s. In between those two decades, historical analysis of women in the 1920s gained popularity in the 1990s. Fronc’s sources are a bit more limited due to the fewer thematic focuses and the fact that she did not use sources from before the 1980s, so it is a bit less representative of historiographical development. With that said, for all of Fronc’s sources from the 1980s-2010s, histories on African-Americans outnumbered all other themes, with the exception of the 2000s, when there was an equal number of sources on women and African-Americans. However, this is without considering the intersectionality of many of these historical works, as many used multiple different lenses. 

Due to the fact that both of these articles are more recent, the reader is able to see how more diverse historical research is pursued with regard to the 1920s, particularly in the 1980s and beyond. With that said, research on immigration is woefully underrepresented, despite the important developments that occurred in the 1920s for immigrant communities. This may be because immigration became a more important issue in society by 2017, making it so there are not as many historical analyses that focus on it. In the timeline of both Fronc’s and Goldberg’s historiographical surveys, immigration-focused works sparsely appear in historical pieces starting in the 1980s. One may anticipate an increase in immigration-focused historical works about the 1920s in the future, considering how pertinent that subject is today. 

Learning about how past history has been written is essential to understanding history now, as different subjects will be emphasized over others depending on new developments in the field and the importance of such history to contemporary events. In analyzing what has been studied, one can also better determine what areas need further development, and thus improve historical knowledge of that era. 

Bibliography

African American boy selling The Washington Daily News – sign on his hat reads, “Have you read The News? One cent” – headline reads “Millionaire tax rends G.O.P.” November 8, 1921. Wikimedia Commons. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:African_American_boy_selling_The_Washington_Daily_News.png. 

Cheney Johnston, Alfred. Muriel Finley (aka Murrel Finely). 1927. Wikimedia Commons . https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Muriel_Finley_(aka_Murrel_Finely)_-_1920s_-_by_Alfred_Cheney_Johnston.jpg. 

Fronc, Jennifer. “The 1920s–A Historiographical Survey.” Routledge History of the United States, 2018, 15–24. 

Goldberg, David J. “Rethinking the 1920S: Historians and Changing Perspectives.” OAH Magazine of History 21, no. 3 (2007): 7–10. https://doi.org/https://www.jstor.org/stable/25162122. 

1.  David J. Goldberg, “Rethinking the 1920s: Historians and Changing Perspectives,” OAH Magazine of History 21, no. 3 (2007): 7–10, https://www.jstor.org/stable/25162122. ↩︎
2.  Jennifer Fronc, “The 1920s–A Historiographical Survey,” Routledge History of the United States, 2018, 15–24. ↩︎
3. Alfred Cheney Johnston, Muriel Finley (Aka Murrel Finely), 1927, Wikimedia Commons, 1927, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Muriel_Finley_(aka_Murrel_Finely)_-_1920s_-_by_Alfred_Cheney_Johnston.jpg. ↩︎
4.  Goldberg, “Rethinking the 1920s,” 7–10. ↩︎
5.  Fronc, “The 1920s,” 15–24. ↩︎
6.  African American Boy Selling The Washington Daily News – Sign on His Hat Reads, “Have You Read The News? One Cent” – Headline Reads “Millionaire Tax Rends G.O.P.,” November 8, 1921, Wikimedia Commons, November 8, 1921, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:African_American_boy_selling_The_Washington_Daily_News.png. ↩︎