Appearance
Excerpt
Excerpt from Abraham Lincoln, by James Russell Lowell
The Republicans had carried the country upon an issue in which
ethics were more directly and visibly mingled with politics than
usual. Their leaders were trained to a method of oratory which
relied for its effect rather on the moral sense than the
understanding. Their arguments were drawn, not so much from
experience as from general principles of right and wrong. When the
war came, their system continued to be applicable and effective, for
here again the reason of the people was to be reached and kindled
through their sentiments. It was one of those periods of
excitement, gathering, contagious, universal, which, while they last,
exalt and clarify the minds of men, giving to the mere words
country, human rights, democracy, a meaning and a force beyond
that of sober and logical argument. They were convictions,
maintained and defended by the supreme logic of passion. That
penetrating fire ran in and roused those primary instincts that make
their lair in the dens and caverns of the mind. What is called the
great popular heart was awakened, that indefinable something
which may be, according to circumstances, the highest reason or
the most brutish unreason. But enthusiasm, once cold, can never be
warmed over into anything better than cant,--and phrases, when
once the inspiration that filled them with beneficent power has
ebbed away, retain only that semblance of meaning which enables
them to supplant reason in hasty minds. Among the lessons taught
by the French Revolution there is none sadder or more striking than
this, that you may make everything else out of the passions of men
except a political system that will work, and that there is nothing so
pitilessly and unconsciously cruel as sincerity formulated into
dogma. It is always demoralizing to extend the domain of sentiment
over questions where it has no legitimate jurisdiction; and perhaps
the severest strain upon Mr. Lincoln was in resisting a tendency of
his own supporters which chimed with his own private desires,
while wholly opposed to his convictions of what would be wise
policy.
The change which three years have brought about is too remarkable
to be passed over without comment, too weighty in its lesson not to
be laid to heart. Never did a President enter upon office with less
means at his command, outside his own strength of heart and
steadiness of understanding, for inspiring confidence in the people,
and so winning it for himself, than Mr. Lincoln. All that was known
of him was that he was a good stump-speaker, nominated for his
availability,--that is, because he had no history,--and chosen by a
party with whose more extreme opinions he was not in sympathy.
It might well be feared that a man past fifty, against whom the
ingenuity of hostile partisans could rake up no accusation, must be
lacking in manliness of character, in decision of principle, in
strength of will; that a man who was at best only the representative
of a party, and who yet did not fairly represent even that, would fail
of political, much more of popular, support. And certainly no one
ever entered upon office with so few resources of power in the
past, and so many materials of weakness in the present, as Mr.
Lincoln. Even in that half of the Union which acknowledged him as
President, there was a large, and at that time dangerous, minority,
that hardly admitted his claim to the office, and even in the party
that elected him there was also a large minority that suspected him
of being secretly a communicant with the church of Laodicea.(1)
All he did was sure to be virulently attacked as ultra by one side; all
that he left undone, to be stigmatized as proof of lukewarmness and
backsliding by the other. Meanwhile he was to carry on a truly
colossal war by means of both; he was to disengage the country
from diplomatic entanglements of unprecedented peril undisturbed
by the help or the hindrance of either, and to win from the crowning
dangers of his administration, in the confidence of the people, the
means of his safety and their own. He has contrived to do it, and
perhaps none of our Presidents since Washington has stood so firm
in the confidence of the people as he does after three years of
stormy administration.
(1) See Revelation, chapter 3, verse 15.
Explanation
James Russell Lowell’s 1864 essay "Abraham Lincoln" (published in The North American Review) is a reflective and analytical tribute to Lincoln’s leadership during the Civil War. Written at a time when Lincoln’s presidency was still unfolding, Lowell’s piece blends political commentary, moral philosophy, and character study to assess Lincoln’s unique approach to governance in a moment of national crisis. Below is a detailed breakdown of the excerpt, focusing on its themes, literary devices, historical context, and the significance of its arguments.
Context of the Excerpt
Lowell, a prominent poet, critic, and abolitionist, wrote this essay as the Civil War raged on (1861–1865). The Republican Party, to which Lincoln belonged, had risen to power on an anti-slavery platform, framing the conflict as a moral crusade for union and emancipation. The excerpt contrasts the idealistic fervor of the war’s early years with the pragmatic challenges Lincoln faced in leading a divided nation. Lowell’s perspective is that of a Northern intellectual sympathetic to Lincoln but wary of the dangers of unchecked passion in politics.
Key Themes in the Excerpt
The Power and Peril of Moral Passion in Politics
- Lowell begins by noting that the Republicans (Lincoln’s party) won power by appealing to ethics over pure logic, relying on "general principles of right and wrong" rather than cold experience. This moral framing was effective in rallying support for the war, as abstract ideals like "country, human rights, democracy" took on an almost sacred urgency.
- However, Lowell warns that such passion is double-edged: it can inspire noble action but also devolve into dogmatism or cant (hollow rhetoric). He references the French Revolution as a cautionary tale—when sincerity hardens into ideology, it becomes "pitilessly and unconsciously cruel."
- The "great popular heart"—the collective emotional impulse of the people—can be either "the highest reason or the most brutish unreason." Lincoln’s challenge was to harness this energy without letting it dictate policy.
Lincoln’s Pragmatism vs. Ideological Pressure
- Lowell highlights Lincoln’s struggle to resist the sentimental excesses of his own supporters, who demanded radical measures (e.g., immediate emancipation, harsh treatment of the South). While Lincoln personally may have sympathized with these desires, his "convictions of what would be wise policy" led him to act cautiously.
- This tension reflects Lincoln’s pragmatic leadership: he balanced moral imperatives (e.g., ending slavery) with political realities (e.g., maintaining Union loyalty, avoiding foreign intervention). Lowell admires this restraint, seeing it as a rare virtue in a time of extremism.
Lincoln’s Unlikely Rise and Political Isolation
- Lowell emphasizes Lincoln’s humble origins and lack of traditional qualifications. He was elected not for his résumé but for his "availability"—a compromise candidate with no controversial history. Many doubted his manliness, decisiveness, and principles, assuming his moderation signaled weakness.
- Yet, Lincoln’s strength lay in his steadiness and moral clarity. Despite being attacked from all sides (by radicals for being too slow, by conservatives for being too bold), he unified the country through confidence, not coercion.
- The essay contrasts Lincoln’s initial vulnerability (a president "with no history") with his growing authority after three years of war. Lowell suggests that Lincoln’s authenticity and resilience earned him a place alongside Washington in the public’s trust.
The Limits of Sentiment in Governance
- Lowell critiques the danger of extending "sentiment" into areas requiring cold calculation (e.g., war strategy, diplomacy). While moral passion can motivate, it cannot sustain a political system—a lesson he draws from the French Revolution’s descent into violence.
- Lincoln’s genius, in Lowell’s view, was his ability to channel moral energy without being consumed by it. He resisted the "supreme logic of passion" in favor of practical wisdom.
Literary Devices and Stylistic Features
Metaphor and Imagery
- "Penetrating fire" and "dens and caverns of the mind": Passion is depicted as a primal, almost subterranean force that awakens deep instincts.
- "Great popular heart": The collective emotion of the people is personified as a living, unpredictable entity.
- "Cant" and "semblance of meaning": Hollow rhetoric is compared to reheated food—once the original inspiration fades, only empty words remain.
Paradox and Contrast
- Lowell juxtaposes idealism and pragmatism, passion and reason, strength and vulnerability in Lincoln’s leadership.
- The essay opens with the power of moral argument but quickly pivots to its dangers, creating a tension that mirrors Lincoln’s own balancing act.
Historical Allusion
- French Revolution: Invoked as a warning about the perils of ideological purity.
- Biblical reference (Revelation 3:15): The "church of Laodicea" (lukewarm Christians) is used to criticize Lincoln’s skeptics who saw him as indecisive. Ironically, Lowell argues that Lincoln’s moderation was a strength, not a weakness.
Rhetorical Questions and Irony
- "It might well be feared that a man... must be lacking in manliness": Lowell uses irony to highlight how Lincoln’s critics misjudged him.
- "He has contrived to do it": Understated phrasing underscores the magnitude of Lincoln’s achievement.
Tone
- Analytical yet admiring: Lowell’s prose is measured, but his respect for Lincoln’s restraint and moral courage is clear.
- Cautious optimism: While celebrating Lincoln’s success, he warns against the fragility of public enthusiasm.
Significance of the Excerpt
A Defense of Pragmatic Leadership Lowell’s essay is a defense of Lincoln’s moderation in an era of extremes. He argues that Lincoln’s ability to resist the pull of dogma—even from his own party—was key to preserving the Union.
A Critique of Political Idealism The passage serves as a warning about the limits of moral absolutism in governance. Lowell suggests that while principles like "human rights" can inspire, they must be tempered by practical wisdom to avoid chaos.
Lincoln as a Unifier Unlike many contemporaries who saw Lincoln as either a radical or a conservative, Lowell portrays him as a bridge between factions—a leader who earned trust through steadiness, not spectacle.
Relevance to Democracy The essay grapples with a timeless question: How can a democracy balance passion and reason? Lowell’s answer—embodied by Lincoln—is that leadership requires moral clarity without ideological rigidity.
Historical Irony Written in 1864, the essay predates Lincoln’s assassination (1865) and the full legacy of Reconstruction. Lowell’s praise for Lincoln’s restraint foreshadows the challenges of post-war reconciliation, where passion often overrode pragmatism.
Close Reading of Key Passages
"That penetrating fire ran in and roused those primary instincts that make their lair in the dens and caverns of the mind."
- Analysis: Lowell describes moral passion as a primal force, almost animalistic in its intensity. The imagery of "dens and caverns" suggests that these instincts are deep-seated but also unpredictable and potentially dangerous if unleashed without control.
- Connection to Lincoln: Lincoln had to harness this fire without letting it burn out of control (e.g., by gradually moving toward emancipation rather than declaring it immediately).
"Enthusiasm, once cold, can never be warmed over into anything better than cant."
- Analysis: Lowell warns that revolutionary fervor cannot be artificially sustained. Once the initial passion fades, what remains is empty rhetoric ("cant") that replaces genuine conviction.
- Modern Parallel: This could apply to movements that lose momentum when their emotional appeal wanes (e.g., social justice causes that struggle to translate passion into policy).
"He was to carry on a truly colossal war by means of both [sides]; he was to disengage the country from diplomatic entanglements... undisturbed by the help or the hindrance of either."
- Analysis: Lincoln’s task was Herculean—he had to fight a war while navigating extreme factions (abolitionists vs. Copperheads) and foreign threats (e.g., British/French recognition of the Confederacy).
- Significance: Lowell highlights Lincoln’s political tightrope walk, where he had to appease neither side fully but instead forge his own path.
"Perhaps none of our Presidents since Washington has stood so firm in the confidence of the people."
- Analysis: By comparing Lincoln to Washington, Lowell elevates him to the pantheon of American leadership. Both presidents unified a fractured nation through moral authority rather than force.
- Irony: Washington was revered for his stoicism; Lincoln, for his humility and adaptability—two very different but equally effective forms of leadership.
Why This Excerpt Matters Today
Lowell’s essay remains relevant because it explores timeless tensions in democracy:
- Moral urgency vs. political realism: How do leaders balance idealism with practical constraints?
- The role of emotion in politics: Can passion sustain a movement, or does it risk becoming performative or destructive?
- Leadership in crisis: Lincoln’s example—leading with humility, resisting extremism, and earning trust through consistency—offers a model for modern leaders facing polarization.
In an era where political rhetoric often prioritizes sentiment over substance, Lowell’s caution about the "domain of sentiment" feels prescient. His portrait of Lincoln as a leader who tempered passion with wisdom is a reminder that greatness in governance lies not in ideological purity, but in the ability to navigate complexity with integrity.