The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln
Posted by Joshua Claybourn on 15 January 2005 | 3 responses
I haven’t been following the big debate closely that’s been raging over The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln, a new book by C.A. Tripp that argues President Lincoln was “predominantly homosexual”. However I did read a few reviews and out of all of them Slate’s David Greenberg seems to have written the most compelling review.
3 Responses to “The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln”
Even though I haven’t read it . . .
I wouldn’t go so far as to call this another example of “‘recruiting’ of historical figures to the homosexualist cause,” as Derb puts it. But I would say that tenuous assertions like Tripps, something one could also observe in recent biographies of Alexander Hamilton, are akin to Afro-centrism. George Will rightly said that making such conclusions without sufficient proof is patronizing. There have been plenty of influential and important historical figures who were or may have been bi- or homo-sexual without work like Tripp’s.
Yet the point still stands, sexuality often is merely an insight into personal psychology rather than “political opinions or actions.” Making a big deal out of it only reinforces the confoundment of sexuality with identity.
But I think the only real scandal here is that Tripp may be playing fast and loose with logic and evidence only to make some money and a name for himself.
I think Lincoln’s sexual orientation is less important than an honest look at his presidency.
Abe Lincoln presided over a conflict where war crimes (specifically Sherman’s “March to the Sea”) were rampant on the Northern side. He presided over a massacre of American Indians. He expanded government to a degree unheard of before the “Civil War”, suspending civil liberties and jailing political opponents in the process.
Lincoln is revered, partly because he was on the winning side, but also because he was assasinated. Had Lincoln served out his term as President, I think history would view him in a much harsher light than it does now.
Nevermind the fact that those who opposed Lincoln presided over and supported a system of slavery where families were destroyed, people de-humanized, and economic opportunity squelched – the sad effects of which are still felt today.
But as long as the Feds don’t intervine, well, it’s states’ rights.