The publication of C.A. Tripp's book The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln, while not igniting the proverbial firestorm of controversy -- since no one reads books anymore -- has at least generated the usual hoo-ha amongst historians of both factions; that is, hagiographers and revisionists.
Gore Vidal has an interesting essay on the book, as well as the various speculations about Lincoln's sex life. Of course, the initial response of any rational person is, "who cares?". But the hagiographers have something of a vested interest in not allowing the iconoclasts to tear down their hero, as it were, with what they protest to be scurrilous and unsupported claims. And indeed, Tripp's case appears entirely circumstantial, one would say desirously so. Vidal tends to support Tripp's claim as best he can, but of course that too comes off as something of a conflict of interest.
In the end, it's easy to understand why the revisionists want to legitimize their sexual politics, and why the fetishists want their precious icons preserved intact, but unless Lincoln's sexuality actually informed his decision-making process -- a claim I doubt even Tripp or Vidal would make -- it shouldn't matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment