November 21, 2006
The 100 Most Influential Americans IV Posted by Alexander Burns at 04:00 PM EST I’m very grateful to John Steele Gordon, both for linking to The Atlantic’s list of the “most influential figures in American history” and for posting his own list. As I think is probably true of a lot of history students and obsessive personalities, I am an absolute nut for list-making. The Atlantic’s article is the kind of thing that can keep my attention for hours. That being the case, I have to say I’m a bit disappointed in the magazine’s choices. Many of them are either painfully obvious or painfully contrived. It’s awfully easy to make a list of Presidents—and a good number of the people on this list are Presidents. Half of the top 20 occupied the Oval Office. I think these lists tend to be a good deal more interesting when they exclude political officeholders in general, thus forcing the list-maker to think a little more creatively about what it means to be influential. The Atlantic list also seems flawed in its preference for well-remembered historical figures. It seems to privilege those who remain influential in American memory, rather than those who were most influential in their own day. For example, placing William Randolph Hearst at No. 80 is a bit of a stretch if you’re not going to include Charles Coughlin at all. The former occupies a more prominent place in the twenty-first century imagination, remaining the very model of a modern media baron, but the latter may have been just as influential in his own time as one of the first activists to use the radio effectively. There’s a similar problem with including William Lloyd Garrison in the top 50, while leaving other abolitionists, like Wendell Phillips, off the list entirely. Obviously it’s much easier to poke holes in someone else’s list than to make one of your own. But John Steele Gordon presents a pretty compelling alternative. I’m not sure I’d agree with every one of his choices, but the criteria he seems to be using represent a much more interesting conception of influence than those of The Atlantic’s list. Mr. Gordon’s list also corrects a number of major oversights in the other list, which includes few musical and theatrical figures and seems to overlook most of the Cold War. The omission of George Kennan, or someone like him, is particularly surprising.
| 
