Shenanigans

1.5 hours writing, 3 hours reading, 0.5 hours emailing / administrivia, page count = 140

Sometimes, writing is editing, so today, I took another pass through the 19th century chapter, cleaned a few things up, and added a few things. There's still a lot more work to do, but the basic structure is definitely there. I think it's pretty close to being a viable draft. Hooray!

In terms of reading, I finished up the Malcolm Deas collection that I started yesterday, with two great articles about the history of local bosses, and the dynamics of local-national connection in the 19th century. There really are some interesting parallels with the United States in the same period, which if I were going to be an academic, I would probably explore in an article. The way that the two parties operated, the presence of a vast internal frontier, the dynamics of industrialization - good stuff there.

Culture note: a great documentary on New York in the 40s and 50s that I saw at the Tribeca Film Festival last year has been put out in limited theatrical release. Definitely worth checking out. It's called Toots, and it's about the culture of celebrity at a time when Joe DiMaggio would eat in a restaurant, like the one that Toots Shor ran in Midtown, next to the sportswriters who covered him (there were 11 daily papers!), next to the fans who watched him at the stadium. Money quote: "It was a simpler time, not a more innocent one." That's exactly what's going on in the 19th century stuff that I'm studying. Fewer gadgets, less money, but people are basically the same. No wonder "hanging chads" reminded me so much of electoral-fraud shenanigans from 19th-century Latin America. They used to say in Colombia, "quien escruta, elige": the one who counts the votes decides the election. These are less simple times; why should they be more innocent?

Thanks to Christa Roth for monitoring this week! Next up is Matt Sumner, in Oakland. Have a great weekend!