The Cambridge Companion to Theodore Dreiser (Cambridge Companions to Literature)

made a lasting impact. Looking back on the Exposition in the autobiograph-

ical Newspaper Days (1991), he contrasts the “dingy city” (Chicago) with the “vast and harmonious collection of perfectly constructed and snowy

buildings,” in which “nothing of either intellectual or artistic import [is]

forgotten.” If anything, his recollections of the White City elevate it even

beyond his opinions in 1893, and he notes that: “Now, here and now, was

heaven – beauty – a paradise for the soul. Here and now were color, light,

the ultimate significance of sound and charm” ( Newspaper Days, 308, 310).

Dreiser’s understanding of the gap between the nation represented at the

Exposition and the realities of daily life for most Americans is unsurprising,

given the traditional equation of self-making and financial success in the

United States during the nineteenth century. It is not, however, an entirely

accurate summary of the White City, since his emphasis on the buildings’

facades, which were made of a plaster of Paris type substance called “staff”

placed over iron and steel structures, largely overlooks the details of what

the buildings contained. As he recalled later, “the general exterior effect

of the buildings far outrival[ed] in appeal, for me at least, anything which

the interior had to offer . . . Mathematics, mechanics, physics, except in

their larger sweeps and conclusions, have always been able to do but one

161

c h r i s to p h e r g a i r

thing for me – that is, give me a profound headache.”2 For Dreiser, the

White City’s true significance resides in its external design’s ability to bring a genuinely high culture to the American people, and to suggest forms of

national and individual identity that go beyond the commercial, and open

up the possibility of an aesthetic excellence to match or even surpass the best the old world could offer.

Dreiser is alert to the differences between the White City and what he sees

on the Midway Plaisance. For him, there appears to be a distinction between

the ideals (if not the realities) of modern American identity and the otherness on display outside the gates of the official Exposition, and in one passage he

manages to mark this gap to startling effect:

Some amusing comments on the party [the schoolteachers] are heard. In the

Turkish Bazaar in the Midway Plaisance a Turkish Jew stood with his hand to

his chin watching the approaching crowd, just outside his stand.

“Zee, zee,” he remarked to a neighboring salesman, “at muzzy be a charge

party. Hi! Hi! not? Some religious,” and then he did his very utmost to attract the attention of the members and have them “come buy.”3

The man’s otherness as Turk, Jew, aggressive seller, and speaker of barely

understandable vernacular marks him as very different from the restrained

Christian Americans he is trying to attract, and enables Dreiser to utilize

the foreigner to entertain his readers, and reassure them about their own

civilized state. As such, Dreiser’s account is little different from many other journalistic commentaries, overlooking the fact that the man’s commercial

activities mirror American emphasis on business over culture.

As this example makes clear, Dreiser’s reports capture the ways in which

the ideology of the Exposition mirrored wider assumptions about racial dif-

ference, and about the emergence of the United States as a world power.

Despite anxieties expressed by intellectuals such as Henry Adams, the dom-

inant view at the time pictured a White City representing the near-perfected

state of (white) American society contrasted with the “primitive” cultures

that preceded it, and which were displayed outside its gates in a kind of evo-

lutionary progression acted out in the present. Thus, the New York Times, reporting the opening ceremony, moved from a brief account of the Presiden-tial procession up the Midway Plaisance, during which “Arabs, Egyptians,

Javanese, Nubians, Cingalese, Soudanese, Moors, Chinese, and the inhabi-

tants of every quarter of the globe were grouped on either side of the road-

way, ready to do obedience to the ruler of the great American Nation,” to

observe that the White City “was Athens and Venice and Naples in one, and

all around on every pathway and road, swarming over the bridges, throng-

ing the plazas and colonnades and terraces, 500,000 people were waiting

162

Sister Carrie and race

breathlessly for the signal to shout the praises of Columbus, discoverer of

the ‘land of the free and the home of the brave.’”4

The evolutionary spacing of the Exposition reflected popular philosophy of

the 1890s, and offered a way to resolve the apparent contradictions between

the utopian ideals of the White City and the discontents that pervaded in the

American nation at a time when immigration, industrialization, economic

crisis, and race and class divisions dominated popular and political discus-

sion. Following the writings of the British social Darwinist Herbert Spencer,

many “universe-of-force” philosophers affirmed, as Ronald E. Martin has

summarized, that “according to the best and most up-to-date science and

philosophy, man and society were automatically good and evolving toward

perfection.”5 The model was particularly convenient and reassuring for de-

fenders of American industrialization and capitalism, since it suggested that

current difficulties were merely local blips in an unerringly upward spiral.

As the Exposition illustrates, the model had a strong racial dimension, and

for many thinkers including the philosopher John Fiske and the novelists

Edith Wharton and Jack London, was deployed to assert Anglo-Saxon cul-

tural and imperial domination, and moral superiority. For Wharton and

London, who both claimed lengthy American ancestry, evolutionary racism

provided a way to differentiate between themselves and the “new” Ameri-

cans arriving from Southern and Eastern Europe at the end of the nineteenth

century.

Dreiser’s position as the descendant of more recently arrived German

Catholic migrants meant that his attitude was somewhat different, although

the writings of Spencer also made a huge impact upon him. In his autobiog-

raphy, A Book About Myself (1922), he notes how Spencer’s First Principles

“quite blew me, intellectually, to bits,” and how (in marked contrast to

the general optimism of American universe-of-force philosophy) his reading

“left me numb, my gravest fears as to the unsolvable disorder and bru-

tality of life eternally verified.”6 It is not hard to identify the presence of such pessimistic determinism in Dreiser’s fiction, and Sister Carrie (1900) is packed with examples of the controlling effects of powerful external forces

on insignificant individuals. But whereas London and Wharton, for example,

deploy evolutionary racism to differentiate not only between “white” and

“black,” but also to establish an unbridgeable gap between Anglo-Saxon

and “other,” Dreiser is eager to accommodate a model in which individuals

are able to climb the evolutionary scale. Thus, as my reading of Sister Carrie will demonstrate, most readers of the novel have been able to spot Dreiser’s

“fears” about existence, but have been less responsive to the possibilities for cultural redemption that the novel proposes – possibilities, I will argue, that echo the impact the Exposition made on the author in 1893.

163

c h r i s to p h e r g a i r

Before we turn to Sister Carrie, however, there is one final aspect of

Dreiser’s response to the Fair that must be noted. Although Dreiser accepts

the implicit evolutionary ladder on display at the Exposition – with White

City approached via the ethnic exhibits on the Plaisance – he does not com-

ment upon the exclusion of the African American from the possibilities of

modern selfhood. At a moment in American history when mass emigration

from Europe was coupled with the internal migration of huge numbers of

African Americans from the South to the North, Dreiser’s narrative manages

to link ancient Greece, Buffalo Bill’s Wild West circus, and the miracles of

contemporary science, suggesting that mobility between these cultural mark-

ers is possible. In contrast, it highlights the sidelining of African Americans from the Fair’s implicit narrative – a move condemned by Frederick Douglass

as an “intentional slight” to the “eight millions of men of African descent

in this country”7 – with a joke about “the only authorized edition of offi-

cial World’s Fair watermelons,” ( Journalism, 134) through which the seller’s attempts at Americanization are ridiculed by an oxymoronic coupling that

highlights his otherness. The near total absence of African Americans in

Sister Carrie has also, until recently, attracted little comment. Indeed, Jude Davies has observed the extent to which the almost universal whiteness of

the novel’s characters has been “unmarked and unremarked.”8 Thus, while

deploying the Columbian Exposition, and specifically the Ferris wheel, as

a starting point, Philip Fisher reads the novel as quintessentially American

in its narrative of the rise of Carrie and the fall of Hurstwood in a society

without fixed class boundaries. Like other critics of the 1980s, such as June

Howard, Rachel Bowlby, and Walter Benn Michaels, whose imaginative re-

readings did so much to recuperate Dreiser and, more generally, American

literary naturalism, Fisher seems uninterested in this apparent anomaly.9

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71

Leave a Reply 0

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *