Franklin is often looked to as the archetype of the 'American dream.' However, some would say that Franklin depended heavily upon an exclusive nexus and a fortunate pedigree to win his success. The following is part of a paper I did a while ago on Franklin (page numbers from The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin):
And yes, it's true that connections, a rigid honor code, the ipso facto reputations of a hypocritical, young class of gentlemen, domestic obligations, and money all hamstrung Franklin’s life. But republicanism shattered the idea of a hereditary basis for exclusion or inclusion into upper society. In Franklin’s stories, he revealed the “discovery that the thing [my emphasis] is in many a man’s private power.” Franklin’s ‘thing’ - inherent ability - allowed him to rise from low to high, and his connections to all facets of society show this.
In the opening pages of The Autobiography, Franklin explains how he “emerg’d from the Poverty & Obscurity in which [he] was born & bred, to a State of Affluence & some Degree of Reputation in the World…” (p. 27). However, his family was not exactly of the groveling, unlearned multitude. Franklin related that his uncle Thomas became a “Scrivener…a considerable Man in the County Affairs…” (p. 30). His mother was also of distinguished pedigree. Nevertheless, any fortunes in the colonies in general were paltry compared to those overseas. Even John Hancock’s inheritance and estate, one of the largest in New England, was laughable in London. Additionally, Franklin noted that the family and particularly his father seemed aware of “Decent Plainness & manly Freedom” (p. 32). Josiah Franklin, Benjamin’s father, moved to America in 1682. He was recognized for his outstanding virtues of prudence, and his “Judgment and Advice” (p. 34). Franklin had to prove his mettle before he was even allowed to consider the risky prospect of the newspaper industry. He was first hesitantly ushered into theological studies, but found his gift for argumentation and writing trumped what would have been a mostly self-centered religious education. In fact, Franklin shared a trait among countrymen that - if not entirely regional - was fittingly of the emerging American character. Booming, somewhat nomadic, populations poured in and out of urban centers seeking change, in what Tocqueville referred to as the Americans’ view of the volatile ‘State of Nature,’ broadly understood. Mobility was surely an impetus to equality as it disallowed long-enduring alliances and coalitions to develop.
Despite this adventure seeking and dynamic environment, family members such as Franklin’s older brother drew upon time-honored customs, often treating his smaller sibling as a servant. Their relationship suffered when Benjamin rose up and ‘threatened’ his brother’s success by finding his own (p. 44). The prospect of Benjamin’s success was a pill his brother simply could not swallow. The advent of Franklin's new success as a writer along with his edification in public services showed humility in word and deed. Franklin spurred new projects by printing journals and publications; but before this happened, Franklin ran these new ideas by some of his trusted colleagues, and projects had to first go through the gauntlet in his Junto’s deliberations, which tested the viability of such endeavors. However, Franklin did not advance self-aggrandizement, nor did the success or failure of the projects rely on his own name. He always cited the greater public good. For example, he insisted that a new education system was the work of “publick-spirited Gentlemen” (p. 125). His proposals did not carry a tone of condescension, as if they were the alms from an overseer to his pawn. Rather, Franklin appealed to fraternity and friendship. He made his own investment in the project seem modest and unimportant, or at least on an equal plane to everyone else. Through their own donation and efforts, it was up to individuals to collectively play a role in the internal improvements of the city.
Summing up Franklin’s ideas on improvements, it is appropriate to say that he understood the individual’s self-sufficiency and utility - even if ostensibly trivial - was better than gratuitous bestowals of material wealth. “Thus if you teach a poor young Man to shave himself and keep his Razor in order, you may contribute more to the Happiness of his Life than in giving him 1,000 Guineas. The money may soon be spent…But in the other case…he shaves when most convenient to him” (p. 134). Self-sufficiency would be widely understood as a vital element of the emerging nation. It would afford the common man freedom; but it is important to note that teaching is a required part of this process of liberation - one does not attain 'freedom' alone.
As for Franklin’s business affairs, he certainly was aided by the help of affluent and charitable men. Franklin could hardly fund passage to Pennsylvania, much less set up there, but not all those that Franklin encountered were generous or even honest. Printers generally had little education. Andrew Bradford and Keimer were described as such, the latter being “a good deal of a Knave in his composition” (p. 50). Besides having unsharpened faculties, these men lacked the integrity Franklin found important to business. While he worked slowly at finding a share in the market, he says:
“My old Competitor’s Newspaper declin’d proportionably…Thus He suffer’d greatly from his Neglect in due Accounting; and I mention it as a Lesson to those young Men who may be employ’d in managing Affairs for others that they should always render Accounts & make Remittances, with great Clearness and Punctuality.—The Character of observing Such a Conduct is the most powerful of all Recommendations to new Employments & Increase of Business” (p. 112).
In his Democracy in America, Tocqueville would later note that money was, notoriously, the American’s main ambition. It is interesting to see how money affected Franklin’s relationships, as it often strained them when one party fell on hard times. After Keimer rehired Franklin to help train new employees, the two had a falling out when the former, “being in the Street look’d up & saw [Franklin], called out to [him] in a loud and angry Tone to mind [his] Business…” (p. 71). This was not an isolated incident – it was the physical result of an extended period in which Keimer exerted undue psychological cruelty over Franklin. Immediately after this episode, Franklin quit.
In Franklin's relationships, there was surely an element of benevolence, pure charity, and camaraderie, but it cannot be denied that money soured even Franklin’s experience. Yet these occurrences should serve to verify Franklin’s credibility. In each case, the other party imploded as the result of their own abuse, fettering Franklin by threatening his finances and networking. These threats were made when Ralph and Keimer were pressured by repercussions of their own actions (namely, their pandering), having nothing to do with Franklin. Ironically, it did not take Franklin long to realize these tyrants were more dependent than Franklin himself. Of bullies, this is always true. Thus he overcame dubious business arrangements and friction in personal relationships by keeping his honor and scruples intact.
Franklin never supposed himself to be inherently better than Ralph or Keimer, or in fact anyone. By expressing himself in a meek fashion he entered the realm of high politics and found success—he was seen moderate and just. Franklin relates how shedding light on a political enemy’s self-worth helped his own cause after he asked him for help in some task: “He that has once done you a Kindness will be more ready to do you another, than he whom you yourself have obliged” (p. 112). Paternalism was ill received. It supposed that one party was superior and granted the other favors they could not accomplish alone. Status in society depended on the trust and fondness of others toward oneself bred by union - not authority. In his talk of Mr. Morris, the new governor from England, he says:
“He had some Reason for loving to dispute, being eloquent, an acute Sophister, and therefore generally successful in argumentative Conversation…But I think the Practice was not wise, for in the Course of my Observation, these disputing, contradicting & confuting People are generally unfortunate in their Affairs. They get victory sometimes, but they never get Good Will, which would be of more use to them” (p. 137).
From these relationships, and by Franklin’s reflection upon them, one can see that his success largely hinged on how others perceived him, but this does not mean that he was not self-made. His life was always open to civic audit, and as such, rested on the qualities of accountability, integrity, and diligence. The fragility of reputation in the colonies may have dictated some of Franklin’s actions and made him dependent on others, but it was not dependence in its old sense. This dependence was reciprocal and fraternal — not unrequited and feudal. To clarify, ‘rich’ men who are not self-made do not deserve their wealth. They are bred into it; it belongs to them only because of who they are, and not because of what they can do. To be sure, hereditary wealth does furnish cultured men with a bearing for literature, science and the arts. But this wisdom has an egocentric purpose, as if grasping the nuances of Athenian Greek tragedies, skilled discussion of Baroque influence on architecture, or naming Michelangelo’s works chronologically is in itself virtue. In quite the reverse, the self-made man’s knowledge is only important insofar as it advances his judgment, insight, and will to beautify and illuminate others — just as his education, and thus his virtue, has done for him. It may be true that Franklin had some vanity, but far more importantly, he shared his acumen when the Spanish grandees, English aristocracy, French lords, Chinese literati or Russian landowners would not have.
No comments:
Post a Comment