------------ EH.NET BOOK REVIEW --------------
Published by EH.NET (August 2008)

Amity Shlaes, _The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great 
Depression_. New York: HarperCollins, 2007. x + 464 pp. $27 (cloth), 
ISBN: 978-0-06-621170-1.

Reviewed for EH.NET by Michael V. Namorato, Department of History, 
University of Mississippi.


Amity Shlaes? _The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression_ 
is, in many respects, a unique book. The author has written a rather 
lengthy account of what she believes the Great Depression was all about. 
She offers her own views on what caused this economic crisis, how badly 
it was handled by those in government, and why the economic downturn 
lasted so long. And, she does this by her so-called approach of looking 
at ?the forgotten man.? Who was this forgotten man? He or she is the one 
who paid the bills for the New Deal programs, who was out of work 
throughout the economic catastrophe, and who put faith in what those in 
power said. Or, at least that is what the reader is led to believe about 
the identity of ?the forgotten man.?

Shlaes begins by identifying a group of individuals that are followed 
throughout the study. All of them went to the Soviet Union on ?The 
Junket? and all were associated with liberal causes and ideas. These 
individuals included people like Stuart Chase, Rexford Tugwell, John 
Brophy, Paul Douglas, and Roger Baldwin. For whatever reason they had, 
the visit to Russia and actually talking to Joseph Stalin would have a 
definite impact on them. There are others, however, whom Shlaes also 
examines very closely ? individuals such as Andrew Mellon, Herbert 
Hoover, Wendell Wilkie, Father Divine, and Samuel Insull. Through these 
specific individuals and a few others, Shlaes examines the American 
economy, the Hoover presidency, and the Rooseveltian New Deal.

Shlaes goes into much detail on the programs that Calvin Coolidge and 
Herbert Hoover supported during their presidencies. The same is done for 
Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal. The study begins in January 1927 
and ends in January 1940. Each chapter of fifteen chapters begins with a 
specific date and an indication of the Dow Jones Industrial Average, the 
unemployment rate, or other indexes showing how the economy was doing. 
Of course, since this was the period of the Depression, the statistics 
typically showed that the American economy was not doing well nor 
recovering very quickly. Shlaes is particularly ?microscopic? when it 
comes to examining the New Deal. Whether it was the National Recovery 
Administration (NRA), the relief programs, the Wagner Act, court 
packing, the recession of 1937-38, the 1936 election, or Roosevelt?s 
anti-trust attack on business, she explains what happened and/or why 
things did not work out as the president had expected. She is very 
impressed, moreover, with individuals like Tugwell whom she thinks was 
?too radical? for the New Deal. By the same token, she spends an 
inordinate amount of time on the attacks on Andrew Mellon for tax 
issues, Mellon?s commitment to opening the National Gallery of Art 
(showing that private enterprise could match government actions), or 
Wendell Wilkie and David Lilienthal?s fight to the finish over the TVA 
and the private utility industry. In short, the author gives a very 
detailed account of the Depression and how the government dealt with it.

Throughout all of this, she also traces those who had gone on the Soviet 
junket to see what happened to them over time and as the Depression 
deepened. In the end, Shlaes concludes that the 1920s was really a good 
time, a prosperous one. In her view, the stock market crash was 
inevitable and the subsequent depression was a breakdown of capitalism. 
Both Hoover and Roosevelt misjudged the crash and the depression, both 
mistrusted the stock market, and both overestimated what the government 
could accomplish. Shlaes argues that Roosevelt was more inspired by 
?socialist and fascist? models, but that he lacked faith in the 
marketplace. The depression lasted so long and was considered the Great 
Depression because government intervention in the economy made it so. 
The struggle between private and public was continuous throughout the 
1930s. And, the main reason why Roosevelt kept winning his elections was 
the possibility of war which loomed continuously on the horizon. In the 
end, the forgotten man was remembered by Wendell Willkie who understood 
and believed in the individual and liberalism as it should have been. If 
there is a hero for Shlaes, it is indeed Willkie.

In assessing this book, one point should be made clear from the very 
beginning. There is no doubt that the author is anti-Roosevelt and 
anti-New Deal. At first, the fact is subtle, but, as the book 
progresses, it becomes clearer that she dislikes FDR and what he did. 
Once the reader understands this, everything falls into place. Just as 
important are some specific weaknesses in the book itself. The author 
gets lost in ?details,? especially with the individuals that she is 
supposedly examining. A good case in point is Father Divine. While he is 
mentioned in the book from the beginning, it is not until almost the end 
of the study that the author even talks about him and then it is in 
terms of his purchasing property near the Roosevelt estate in Hyde Park. 
  Another problem is the author?s insistence on identifying the 
motivation of people. Offering little or no evidence, she consistently 
tells the reader what and why something was being done by a particular 
person. Her discussion of Mellon makes one wonder whether he is a saint 
or a devil in disguise.  Shlaes has a tendency to pick out what she 
wants from the evidence she has examined. This is true in the case of 
Tugwell. Whenever she quotes or discusses him, it is always in the 
context of Tugwell the radical reformer. The truth of the matter is that 
Tugwell can only be understood in terms of his ever-evolving and 
developing economic philosophy. Tugwell often ?thought out loud.?  You 
simply cannot take what he said in 1934 and argue that this was his 
thinking all along. Finally, the author seems to have her own definition 
of what is liberal in the twentieth century. It would have helped 
immeasurably if she had shared her thinking with the reader from the 
very start.

In the end, Amity Shlaes? book is a formidable work. Whether scholars of 
this period agree with her or not, this study should and needs to be 
confronted. Perhaps, by approaching the Depression through the eyes of 
the so-called forgotten man, scholars may see the period in a different 
and more interesting way. Shlaes should be commended for her effort, 
whether or not one thinks that she has succeeded or failed in her work.


Michael V. Namorato is a Professor of History at the University of 
Mississippi. His publications include _Rexford Tugwell: A Biography_ 
(Praeger, 1988) and (as editor) _The Diary of Rexford G. Tugwell: The 
New Deal, 1932-1935_ (Greenwood, 1992).

Copyright (c) 2008 by EH.Net. All rights reserved. This work may be 
copied for non-profit educational uses if proper credit is given to the 
author and the list. For other permission, please contact the EH.Net 
Administrator ([log in to unmask]; Telephone: 513-529-2229). Published 
by EH.Net (August 2008). All EH.Net reviews are archived at 
http://www.eh.net/BookReview.


-------------- FOOTER TO EH.NET BOOK REVIEW  --------------
EH.Net-Review mailing list
[log in to unmask]
http://eh.net/mailman/listinfo/eh.net-review