Canada and the United States
opportunity to hasten it. But millennialism is not an
aspect of the subject Hart chooses to address.
Hart is quite right that much contemporary commentary on the state of American Protestantism is
superficial, and he renders the discussion .more subtle
and complex by reminding us about the confessional
Christians. As dean of a theological seminary, he is
entitled to take a position on the merits of different
Christian theologies, and to defend, as he does, the
confessional, as opposed to the pietist, orientation. He
points out that the confessional sects, although "intolerant" in the sense of interpreting their dogmas
strictly, are actually "tolerant" in not trying to impose
their morality on others. He therefore finds them more
compatible with the currently fashionable pluralist,
rather than assimilationist, vision of American society.
Ironically, he thus ends up making an argument in
favor of confessionalism that is based on its practical
social utility.
Like all good books, this one raises more questions
than it answers. Jonathan Edwards espoused a strict
understanding of both Calvinist theology and the
administration of the sacraments, but at the same time
he preached revivals. Horace Bushnell was probably
the greatest critic of revivalism in his age, yet he
preferred the theology of the heart to that of the head.
Are we to label them confessional or pietistic? However we come down, we can thank Hart for opening up
a stimulating discussion.
DANIEL WALKER HOWE
University of Oxford
and University of California, Los Angeles
TONA J. HANGEN. Redeeming the Dial: Radio, Religion,
and Popular Culture in America. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. 2002. Pp. ix, 220. Cloth
$39.95, paper $18.95.
Tona J. Hangen explores conservative Protestants' use
of radio during that medium's golden age and focuses
on three exemplary practitioners: Paul Rader, Aimee
Semple McPherson, and Charles Fuller. Carl McIntire,
an often overlooked but important figure in religious
radio and right-wing politics, also garners attention. In
her most original chapter, Hangen examines the tensions between conservative and liberal Protestants
over the regulation of radio in the 1940s and the
emergence of the National Religious Broadcasters.
The approach is interdisciplinary, but the popular
culture perspective prevails. Hangen makes good use
of listeners' correspondence.
Revivalist radio is an important subject. From the
1920s to the 1950s American households with radios
jumped from about five percent to about ninety-five
percent. In 1948, over 1,600 fundamentalist radio
programs aired each week. Hangen concludes that by
looking closely at this dimension of evangelicalism,
one can better understand the resilience of that movement in America, especially its access to cultural
authority, and also how revivalists helped to shape
AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW
203
radio itself, one element of the American cultural
mosaic. Religious radio also clarifies how America
resisted the western trend of modernization leading to
secularization. Sacred and secular programing coexisted in the same medium.
This book also contributes to a reassessment of
American fundamentalism. Despite the fact that the
Scopes Trial was carried live on radio, which the
author mentions briefly, that episode has little relevance to her point, which is that conservative Protestantism gained strength in subsequent decades, and
the effective use of radio is one important reason for
that success. Her emphasis is congruent with Joel
Carpenter's point about fundamentalist vitality after
the 1920s and Edward Larson's conclusion that the
Scopes Trial's significance was a myth perpetuated by
Frederick Lewis Allen and later historians. A more
important fundamentalist-modernist controversy began rather than ended in the 1920s: the battle for the
airwaves. In this battle, the liberal Protestants were on
the defensive, and their numbers would steadily decline. The conservative Protestant dynamic, which
offered the gospel promise of eternal life along with
moral certitude, not only attracted a wide audience but
also generated significant financial support, goals more
difficult to achieve for more genteel liberal Protestants. Rather than evolution and liquor, conservative
Protestants wrangled with opponents over free or paid
time for programing, use of radio networks or syndication of their own programs, policies of the Federal
Radio Commission (changed in 1934 to the Federal
Communications Commission), and adapting to FM
radio technology.
On a different level, Hangen's work dovetails nicely
with Leigh Eric Schmidt's recent work on the connections between "hearing" and spirituality. She concludes "that Protestant religion is a religion of the
heard word" (p. 5). Her discussions about the dynamics of radio preaching, the preacher and the listener,
help readers to understand more about aurality and
orality in history. Listening to preaching, although a
modern invention, harks back to the premodern era,
before the written text became more important. Fuller's Old Fashioned Revival Hour utilized very modern
technology. Paul the Apostle declared that "faith
cometh by hearing" (Romans 10:17) and he talked
about the effectiveness of the "foolishness of preaching" (I Corinthians 1:21). This book helps explain that
special role of the "heard word" in spirituality.
The only shortcoming of the book is its lack of
precision in places. While Hangen clearly states she is
examining conservative Protestants, she still uses the
label "fundamentalist" carelessly to describe McPherson, Walter Maier, and Harold Ockenga. Ockenga in
particular made a point after World War II of being a
"new" evangelical, not a fundamentalist. McIntire was
defrocked not for apostasy but for working with an
independent mission board. Consulting Michael Kammen's work on American popular and mass culture,
particularly radio, would have strengthened Hangen's
FEBRUARY 2004
204
Reviews of Books and Films
arguments about radio's importance in American life.
Americans embraced a public medium that they enjoyed in the privacy of their homes. Did the medium
soften the fundamentalist message?
For those interested in American religious history,
popular culture, and communications, I recommend
this work for its fresh insights into religion and how it
is shared. In addition, Hangen gives excellent background for understanding the electronic church and
evangelical interaction with American culture and
politics from the 1970s to the present.
DOUGLAS CARL ABRAMS
Bob Jones University
JAMES L. HUNT. Marion Butler and American Populism.
Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. 2003.
Pp. xiii, 338. $49.95.
This is an exceptionally well-grounded study of probably the most historically neglected figure in American
Populism. James L. Hunt's biography of Marion Butler
is based on research from a dozen archival and manuscript sites as well as a comprehensive survey of the
agrarian press and the relevant pamphlet literature.
The endnotes alone are worth the price of admission.
Hunt takes a clearly defined historiographical position-the rejection of cultural studies for what he
terms "core-level political analysis" (p. 295, n. 5)and, in place of the celebratory writings of Populist
scholars over the past three decades, he adopts a
stance of detachment. He questions the depth of
research, basic themes, and interpretation found in
Lawrence Goodwyn's Democratic Promise: The Populist Moment in America (1976) and the subsequent
historical literature influenced by its premises of authentic and ersatz Populism. He exorcises the demonological school of Populist scholarship, and puts in its
place the discussion of a complex reality in which
political circumstances at the state and local levels
often shaped the particular strategies for implementing the movement's ideas and goals. His emphasis is on
the Populists' effort to translate reform principles into
law; he sees, particularly in Butler's case, a sharpened
focus on economic issues and the structure and organization necessary to programatic achievements.
Hunt demonstrates the multifaceted nature of Butler's motivation, character, and interests. He carefully
delineates Butler's step-by-step ascent (which was nevertheless amazingly rapid) through both agricultural
and political channels of power. Butler, from a comfortable background and educated at Chapel Hill,
demonstrated oratorical powers and political skills
from the start of his reform career. At twenty-five, in
1888, he served as an Alliance lecturer, at twenty-seven
as an Alliance-Democratic state senator, thence a
county and state chairman of the fledgling People's
Party, the state and national president of the Farmers'
Alliance, United States senator in 1895, and, at thirtythree, the People's Party national chairman. The bare
listing, for the vital period of Populism, indicates a
AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW
stature within, and importance to, the movement that
few others, and none in the South (including Tom
Watson), could match. Hunt recognizes Butler's desire
for power and control, his fascination with strategy and
organization, his urge to speak and, above all, educate
the populace: in sum, his role as the consummate
political animal. But equally important, he credits him
with holding ideas, beginning with the Alliance demands in the 1889 St. Louis Platform, and culminating
in the Omaha Platform of 1892, that, however unpopular at the time, he consistently articulated and defended, not only through the presidential campaign of
1896 but in the Senate (1895-1901) and, indeed,
through the remainder of his life. Considering the
many disappointments he faced, not to say the ostracism and intimidation, Butler's persistence takes on
the proportions of high moral courage.
Hunt states clearly the elements of Butler's political
economy. That he had a coherent vision of a reformoriented economic system itself acts to differentiate
him from many of the Populist leaders (and renders
him more than a politician). But that he made governmental activism central to this political economy identified him as more than an ordinary reformer; he
pressed to the edges of permissible (i. e. nonsocialist)
discourse and action. Butler called for the public
ownership of all natural monopolies; the public issuance of currency, including greenbacks; the regulation,
under the commerce clause, of transportation and the
transmission of intelligence, which meant, specifically,
the public ownership of railroads and telegraphs; and
the investiture of government as an agent of the people
in areas that affect the public interest. He sought this
framework of political economy not to advance socialism but to liberalize economic arrangements (via antimonopolism) so that competition would obtain and
the lesser capitalist and rural and urban producer
would benefit. Butler advocated additional demands
aimed at substantive and procedural changes, which
tended to have in common the curbing of private
economic power and the creation of responsive political institutions. He was as, if not more, active on the
state level, where he worked for the expansion of
public education, the regulation of railroads, lower
interest rates, and the establishment of farm credits.
Even after 1900, when he supported the Republican
Party, until his death in 1938, Butler did not abandon
the Omaha Platform.
Finally, there is the matter of Butler's position on
race. Hunt rightly points out that Butler believed in
white supremacy; this is undeniable and has to be the
starting place in any further evaluation. However, he
makes a categorical judgment about Butler's racism
(invariably alluding to a deeper vein of racism when
the context may suggest otherwise) that admits of no
shadings and omits any analysis of the objective consequences of Butler's statements and actions. It is
possible that Butler, like a small number of southerners in the twentieth century, made a pro forma argument for white supremacy as he simultaneously
FEBRUARY 2004