What do you think?
Rate this book
The Making of America
The Search for Order, 1877-1920
At the end of Reconstruction, the lives of most Americans were still controlled by the values of the village, the conventional 19th-century beliefs in individualism, laissez-faire, progress, and a divinely ordained social system. But in the last decades of the century, the spread of science and technology, industrialism, urbanization, immigration, and economic depressions eroded this world-view.
In The Search for Order, Robert Wiebe depicts the Progressive Era of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson as a search for organizing principles around which a new viable social order could be constructed in the new, modern, largely impersonal world. This subtle and sophisticated study combines the virtues of historical narrative, sociological analysis, and social criticism.
In The Search for Order, Robert Wiebe depicts the Progressive Era of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson as a search for organizing principles around which a new viable social order could be constructed in the new, modern, largely impersonal world. This subtle and sophisticated study combines the virtues of historical narrative, sociological analysis, and social criticism.
352 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1967
23 people are currently reading
438 people want to read
About the author
Robert H. Wiebe
13 books4 followersA specialist in American business history, Robert Huddleston Wiebe taught at Michigan State University, Columbia University and Northwestern University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 37 reviews
June 2, 2009
An elegant synthesis deserving of its reputation as a classic.
Wiebe argues that the "age of reform" between the end of Reconstruction and the start of the 1920s represented a collective search for order in American social life. Different groups of American writers and politicians presented different visions of social order, but all had to respond to the erosion of the locality, the basic problem of the age. What emerged was a bureaucratic consensus of Progressives and corporate business leaders, who proposed efficient public administration as the means to restore coherence to American life.
Before the Civil War, Wiebe writes, the United States had comprised a collection of autonomous "island communities" that looked after their own affairs. The war disrupted this system but did not replace it. In the 1870s, American politics was marked by federal passivity (congressional deadlock and presidential lethargy) and local corruption, while American business was dominated by growing corporations that still lacked internal coherence or effective management. In the 1880s and 1890s, however, titans of corporate manufacturing and commerce united with national financiers to produce mammoth consolidations of wealth. (Within two decades, the fortune of an Andrew Carnegie, a John D. Rockefeller, or a J.P. Morgan dwarfed that of a Jay Gould or a Cornelius Vanderbilt.) Perception of this fact led to agrarian revolt by essentially communitarian defenders of the old, local order; this was the origin of the Populist insurgency. The alarmed elite combined to defeat the Populist candidacy of William Jennings Bryan in 1896. For the moment, business and complacent politics seemed to have restored peace to the American system. But in fact, the contest of 1896 marked a reawakening of national politics and of presidential centrality in national affairs.
The same concentration of urban wealth and power that so alarmed the Populists was creating a new middle class -- a class of skilled professionals and specialists with their own concerns about social order. Between roughly 1895 and 1905, the members in this class grew in professional self-consciousness and in determination to restore harmony and hygiene to their communities. Professional reformers such as the economist Richard Ely and the statistician Washington Gladden abandoned the classic American emphasis on the individual in order to study groups instead, effecting a "revolution in values" that placed the skilled organizer in a position of social power. This class brought moral suasion and popular pressure to bear on American politicians, beginning with the industrial cities of the East and Midwest. This was the birth of Progressivism.
Until 1900, the emerging Progressive movement focused on local administration. After 1900, however -- thanks to concerns about conservation and railroad regulation, and thanks paradoxically to big business's success in creating super-trusts through the use of holding companies (beginning with Standard Oil in 1899) -- Progressives turned to national politics. They found a presidential champion in Theodore Roosevelt -- but so did big business. Between 1901 and 1919, presidential leadership cemented the power of a national administrative elite with one foot in the corporation and the other in the university. When World War I required the mobilization of all aspects of American industry and journalism, therefore, the necessary administrative elements "seemed to appear by magic." The public was ready for them. They were the logical culmination of the campaign for national order; "a bureaucratic orientation," Wiebe writes, "now defined a basic part of the nation's discourse."
Wiebe argues that the "age of reform" between the end of Reconstruction and the start of the 1920s represented a collective search for order in American social life. Different groups of American writers and politicians presented different visions of social order, but all had to respond to the erosion of the locality, the basic problem of the age. What emerged was a bureaucratic consensus of Progressives and corporate business leaders, who proposed efficient public administration as the means to restore coherence to American life.
Before the Civil War, Wiebe writes, the United States had comprised a collection of autonomous "island communities" that looked after their own affairs. The war disrupted this system but did not replace it. In the 1870s, American politics was marked by federal passivity (congressional deadlock and presidential lethargy) and local corruption, while American business was dominated by growing corporations that still lacked internal coherence or effective management. In the 1880s and 1890s, however, titans of corporate manufacturing and commerce united with national financiers to produce mammoth consolidations of wealth. (Within two decades, the fortune of an Andrew Carnegie, a John D. Rockefeller, or a J.P. Morgan dwarfed that of a Jay Gould or a Cornelius Vanderbilt.) Perception of this fact led to agrarian revolt by essentially communitarian defenders of the old, local order; this was the origin of the Populist insurgency. The alarmed elite combined to defeat the Populist candidacy of William Jennings Bryan in 1896. For the moment, business and complacent politics seemed to have restored peace to the American system. But in fact, the contest of 1896 marked a reawakening of national politics and of presidential centrality in national affairs.
The same concentration of urban wealth and power that so alarmed the Populists was creating a new middle class -- a class of skilled professionals and specialists with their own concerns about social order. Between roughly 1895 and 1905, the members in this class grew in professional self-consciousness and in determination to restore harmony and hygiene to their communities. Professional reformers such as the economist Richard Ely and the statistician Washington Gladden abandoned the classic American emphasis on the individual in order to study groups instead, effecting a "revolution in values" that placed the skilled organizer in a position of social power. This class brought moral suasion and popular pressure to bear on American politicians, beginning with the industrial cities of the East and Midwest. This was the birth of Progressivism.
Until 1900, the emerging Progressive movement focused on local administration. After 1900, however -- thanks to concerns about conservation and railroad regulation, and thanks paradoxically to big business's success in creating super-trusts through the use of holding companies (beginning with Standard Oil in 1899) -- Progressives turned to national politics. They found a presidential champion in Theodore Roosevelt -- but so did big business. Between 1901 and 1919, presidential leadership cemented the power of a national administrative elite with one foot in the corporation and the other in the university. When World War I required the mobilization of all aspects of American industry and journalism, therefore, the necessary administrative elements "seemed to appear by magic." The public was ready for them. They were the logical culmination of the campaign for national order; "a bureaucratic orientation," Wiebe writes, "now defined a basic part of the nation's discourse."
April 9, 2025
Some nuggets of wisdom in here but horrifically boring, general overview type stuff.
May 27, 2015
Standardization, bureaucratization, systematization, professionalism, middle class rationality. Wait, don't leave! These boring yet vital topics are the subjects of this boring yet vital book (for historians). Wiebe charts the seismic, structural shift in how American society organized itself from the 1870's to the 1920's. Starting off as a nation that defined and judged itself on a small-town basis from a small town-persepctive, the US wound up by the 1920's as a society run by and defined by the values of an educated, rationalistic, professional middle class. This new MC sought to reorganize society along more rational, orderly, and practical lines. They drove Progressivism, which Wiebe sees as an attempt to impose order on the lowly and exalted in American society. They professionalized occupations like the law, medicine, journalism, and, of course, business management. Wiebe interestingly argues that Wilson's ideals were in many ways attempts to spread the middle class order to the rest of the world. Although he is vague on what the previous order was and how it collapsed, Wiebe convincingly shows how a vital, energetic, and powerful new class of people arose in this period to redefine the nation.
I must say that I do not find the history of politics, economics, and social issues in this time period particularly interesting. WThis is partially a result of not knowing enough, as I probably would have enjoyed Wiebe more if I had more info on the era. Still, this book makes for slow and dull reading, with all due respect for the late Mr. Wiebe. He tends to be vague about what group of people or set of ideas he's talking about, which makes the book extra hard to follow. This is one of those books that pretty much only historians should bother reading, although they should teach its main ideas.
I must say that I do not find the history of politics, economics, and social issues in this time period particularly interesting. WThis is partially a result of not knowing enough, as I probably would have enjoyed Wiebe more if I had more info on the era. Still, this book makes for slow and dull reading, with all due respect for the late Mr. Wiebe. He tends to be vague about what group of people or set of ideas he's talking about, which makes the book extra hard to follow. This is one of those books that pretty much only historians should bother reading, although they should teach its main ideas.
March 19, 2012
"The Search for Order" has a well-deserved reputation as a classic. I didn't always agree with Wiebe's analysis but certainly of great value to the general reader interested in America's transition into a modern state and society at the turn of the last century.
I also loved Wiebe's bitchy put downs of TR: "A man of unlovely traits who relished killing human beings, nursed harsh personal prejudices, and juggled facts to enhance his fame...." (for example, p. 189).
Highly recommended.
I also loved Wiebe's bitchy put downs of TR: "A man of unlovely traits who relished killing human beings, nursed harsh personal prejudices, and juggled facts to enhance his fame...." (for example, p. 189).
Highly recommended.
November 4, 2017
Robert Wiebe’s foundational work contributed to and greatly shifted the focus of the debate surrounding the progressive movement at a time in which the field was in a state of crisis (see Kennedy and Rogers). Wiebe argued that the period between the late 1870s and the end of WWI saw a fundamental shift in American society, driven be bureaucratization, professionalization, and centralization. Prior to the progressive era Wiebe argues that American society was a system of isolated islands, self-contained and insular in nature. Individualism continued to very much drive the American psyche and the fear of big government was a hallmark of political thought across the country. Still very agrarian, the country was able to function like this for a long time.
However the waves of immigration, the rapid industrialization and the equally seismic wave of urbanization seen in the last decades of the 19th century meant that the balance of American society fundamentally shifted. Suddenly the isolated islands were losing their power and the cities became the economic and social hubs of the new America. The self-contained agrarian models were no longer sustainable and the country needed to change in order to cope. Thus with the progressives movement came a wave of fundamental change. The urbanization and industrialization of society saw a shift in the class structure, and the emergence of a strong, increasingly powerful middle class (Marx’s traditional bourgeoisie if you will, which Wiebe seems to suggest had previously been absent from American society). This new middle class sought to consolidate their own position in society through bureaucratization and further centralization, and by the strengthening of federal government. This, in Wiebe’s opinion, was the crux of the Progressive movement. It saw government grow and the emergence of the middle class as the urban elite who now run American society. Their reforms, therefore, were not as socially progressive or benevolent as previous scholars had suggested, and in fact sought primarily to establish an ‘order’ in the new urban America which would be ruled by the middle class.
However the waves of immigration, the rapid industrialization and the equally seismic wave of urbanization seen in the last decades of the 19th century meant that the balance of American society fundamentally shifted. Suddenly the isolated islands were losing their power and the cities became the economic and social hubs of the new America. The self-contained agrarian models were no longer sustainable and the country needed to change in order to cope. Thus with the progressives movement came a wave of fundamental change. The urbanization and industrialization of society saw a shift in the class structure, and the emergence of a strong, increasingly powerful middle class (Marx’s traditional bourgeoisie if you will, which Wiebe seems to suggest had previously been absent from American society). This new middle class sought to consolidate their own position in society through bureaucratization and further centralization, and by the strengthening of federal government. This, in Wiebe’s opinion, was the crux of the Progressive movement. It saw government grow and the emergence of the middle class as the urban elite who now run American society. Their reforms, therefore, were not as socially progressive or benevolent as previous scholars had suggested, and in fact sought primarily to establish an ‘order’ in the new urban America which would be ruled by the middle class.
December 13, 2014
A general overview of its period for a popular audience. I found that its excessive generality and lack of footnotes limited its usefulness for someone who wanted to understand the period in greater detail. The author's rather snide style, and his penchant for summing up historical figures with a single adjective became annoying as the book wore on. Still, a somewhat useful overview of the period, with a fairly extensive bibliographical essay at the end.
April 13, 2016
This was a really difficult read. I was warned it was dated, but the challenge was that alot of contextual information was difficult to understand and the book wasn't cited at all (except for a bibliographical essay)
Unless you're really doing a deep dive into the subject matter, I would avoid this one.
Unless you're really doing a deep dive into the subject matter, I would avoid this one.
March 6, 2014
I struggled through this important book twice. Its just not well written. The sentences are clunky and hard to follow. There is a lot of important information in it about that era but you'll find yourself re-reading pages because they made no sense the first time.
Read
September 29, 2015Classic, if somewhat dated study of the "bureaucratization" of American Life.
February 10, 2025
Wiebe's Search for Order adds to and eventually supplants Hofstedter's major work of the period between 1877 to 1920. In some ways, Wiebe agrees with some interpertatins, such as the agrarian myth, but mostly challenges Hofstadter's negative view of the progressives. Wiebe paints (though not prettily or narratively) the story of how the U.S. went from "isolated islands" to a "modern" and urban society. He argues that it is a mix of the efforts of the "New Middle Class" (A steep departure from Hofstadter who argues that the old middle class waged a status revolution to keep their power) and the "destiny" of the Nation.
In the 1950s and 1960s, the modernization theory emerged as liberal social scientists argued that nations naturally evolve from "community" or localized, isolated settlements, to a secular, urban, and enlightened "society." This theory clearly runs through Wiebe's interpretation of the Progressive era. He begins with the story of the isolated islands where local autony is at the heart of democracy. Then, as the Civil War, immigration, urbanization, and industrialization upheaves the traditional values, a new middle class, (made of of urban professionals such as managers, traders, doctors, lawyers, teachers, social workers) took charge of searching for order out of the chaos.
In the 1950s and 1960s, the modernization theory emerged as liberal social scientists argued that nations naturally evolve from "community" or localized, isolated settlements, to a secular, urban, and enlightened "society." This theory clearly runs through Wiebe's interpretation of the Progressive era. He begins with the story of the isolated islands where local autony is at the heart of democracy. Then, as the Civil War, immigration, urbanization, and industrialization upheaves the traditional values, a new middle class, (made of of urban professionals such as managers, traders, doctors, lawyers, teachers, social workers) took charge of searching for order out of the chaos.
January 3, 2023
In The Search for Order, Robert Wiebe argues that between the 1880s and 1920 America values shifted from those of “a nation of loosely connected islands” to those of a bureaucratic middle class. Wiebe claims that nineteenth century America did not have the ability to cope with the challenges of urbanization, industrialization, and immigration, and that it was the new middle class who developed the necessary values to deal with modernity. An intrinsic value of this new middle class was the need for government involvement, leading to the Progressive movement. Wiebe also proposes the concept of a “hidden America” that includes marginalized groups such as Chinese and European immigrants as well as freedmen who lived in the slums shanty towns and worked in industry and agriculture. Climaxing in 1896, communities began to fear that an end to their local power and way of life was near, and they wished to retain the power of “community self-determination.” As the fragmented society of rural America was replaced with bureaucratic values, Americans increasingly became interested in foreign policy, and American imperialism was born.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 17, 2023
This should not be the first book to read about 1877-1920 American history. It is a sophisticated study that combines historical narrative, sociological analysis, and social criticism. It is a very “dense” book that requires short reading sessions. If you read too long, the words and concepts blur.
My biggest objection to this book is the lack of specific references or citations. A “Bibliographical Essay” is provided that offers annotations on sources concerning movements, politics, economics, theories and ideas, society, the Constitution and the courts, foreign relations, and World War I. The reader does not know the specific source(s) the author used in the book.
The writing style is excellent, despite the need to understand complex ideas and concepts.
I wish I could say I enjoyed reading this book, but I didn’t.
My biggest objection to this book is the lack of specific references or citations. A “Bibliographical Essay” is provided that offers annotations on sources concerning movements, politics, economics, theories and ideas, society, the Constitution and the courts, foreign relations, and World War I. The reader does not know the specific source(s) the author used in the book.
The writing style is excellent, despite the need to understand complex ideas and concepts.
I wish I could say I enjoyed reading this book, but I didn’t.
November 16, 2017
While not surprised, I was startled by the tremendous similarities between the “echoes” of today’s current events reverberating back in 1877-1920.
Seem familiar? — “...larger and larger numbers came to believe that people they could neither trust nor understand were pressing upon them...Ignorance and intolerance now mattered a great deal...and once incidents carried their own meaning, communication between opponents effectively ceased; the rhetoric of antithetical absolutes denied even the desirability of any interchange...”
I guess I feel a little more hope after reading this book...it provided an opportunity to keep in perspective how the current history unfolding in our midst has “been there and done that”...and “life” continued.
Thoroughly enjoyable, readable, and engaging...this book is a great read!
Seem familiar? — “...larger and larger numbers came to believe that people they could neither trust nor understand were pressing upon them...Ignorance and intolerance now mattered a great deal...and once incidents carried their own meaning, communication between opponents effectively ceased; the rhetoric of antithetical absolutes denied even the desirability of any interchange...”
I guess I feel a little more hope after reading this book...it provided an opportunity to keep in perspective how the current history unfolding in our midst has “been there and done that”...and “life” continued.
Thoroughly enjoyable, readable, and engaging...this book is a great read!
February 28, 2025
Well written, thoughtfully argued, and easy to follow. Like listening to a world class lawyer make his case. I found a lot of similarities between this period, particularly the 1880s, with 2025 USA. And this has nothing to do with the two presidents who managed to get themselves elected in non-consecutive terms. A restive electorate, angst over immigration, hysteria over suspected subversive activities. I hope we survive as successfully as our great grandparents did.
October 6, 2017
To put it simply, this book makes you question American democracy. The Progressive era gave birth to a new middle class that had to fit within a new bureaucratic America. The rise of government control suggests that Americans were forced to sacrifice their democracy for government control. Overall, arguably one of the best history books I have ever read.
September 9, 2018
3.5 stars rounded up because holy crap is this book relevant today. Seriously change the dates and at times this book is about today!!! Mind blown.
March 12, 2019
If you want a thorough, albeit unintentional, examination of what make America tick today you would be hard pressed to do better than this book.
January 21, 2020
I LIKE THIS BOOK.
February 21, 2024
Fantastic! A gem of a book!
August 7, 2024
Kaleidoscopic, sweeping, also savvy- a truly great history of the progressive period and its tensions, contradictions, and discontents
August 31, 2014
A. Synopsis: There was a major transformation in the United States during this period--settling of the remaining territories, closing the frontier, admitting new states, shift in political power from the farm to city, rise of giant monopolies and the decline of the small businessman, reform movements from Populism through Progressivism, or in foreign policy the drift from self-containment and isolation to a world power. Wiebe contends that beneath these surface ripples there is a deep flowing current that gave unity and meaning to this period. Wiebe’s thesis is that there was a fundamental shift in American values, from those of a small town (island communities, weak communication, local autonomy) to a new bureaucratic-minded, middle-class (centralization of authority, urban, people separated by skill and occupation rather than community) by 1920. Bureaucratization is the force that propels the transition from community to society (Gemeinschaft (folk culture) and Gesellschaft (urban culture)). It was the “new middle class” (urban professional men and women) who were able to cope with 20th century problems by developing new values of “continuity and regularity, functionality and rationality, and administration and management.” This new value system led the new middle class to “see the need for a government of continuous involvement” and to emphasize executive administration. The Progressive movement was a triumph of this new middle class with its bureaucratic mentality.
B. The “distended” society: In the 1880s the railroads stretched across the continent. The nations land was conquered. But the nation itself lacked a core, or a national center of authority and information. American institutions were still oriented toward a community life (church, education, government, family, were all defined by how they fit into the small town). The men who built the new cities tried to impose these same values in the new urban environment, but they failed. As the network of relations that affected peoples lives became more distended, Americans no longer knew who or where they were.
C. Crisis in the communities: The island-community, what the nation was founded upon was dying in the mid-1880s. There was a belief that the great corporations were stifling opportunity. The local entrepreneur was lousing economic opportunity, and the worker was loosing control over his life. There was a great desire to reform the corrupt monopolies and return to the communal, self-determination. Examples of this reform included the Knights of Labor, Edward Bellamy’s Nationalism, and farmers alliances. These reforms sought to preserve individualism by protecting the American communities. They did not want to return to a bucolic paradise. They simply believed that there was no conflict between popular community and modern technology. But, their revolution to destroy industrialization, political power lost at every turn.
D. The fate of the nation: By the early 1890s the movements of community protest had generated their own nationwide crisis. Americans, already shaken by an incomprehensible world, responded to any new upheaval as an immediate threat. The Populist party expressed its commitment to local authority.
E. A new middle class: As these island communities began to disintegrate, certain Americans began to transcend rather than preserve them. This was the new middle class. Two categories: (1) Those with professional aspirations in such fields as medicine, law, economics, social work, and architecture. (2) Specialists in business, labor, and in agriculture who were bonded together by their occupation. Specialized skills were required in the new urban environment.
F. Revolution in values: The rise of the new bureaucratic values. Science was a key word for the new value system. Science made its way into psychology, statistics, social work, scientific management.
G. Progressivism arrives: The “heart of progressivism was the ambition of the new middle class to fulfill its destiny through bureaucratic means.” (166)
B. The “distended” society: In the 1880s the railroads stretched across the continent. The nations land was conquered. But the nation itself lacked a core, or a national center of authority and information. American institutions were still oriented toward a community life (church, education, government, family, were all defined by how they fit into the small town). The men who built the new cities tried to impose these same values in the new urban environment, but they failed. As the network of relations that affected peoples lives became more distended, Americans no longer knew who or where they were.
C. Crisis in the communities: The island-community, what the nation was founded upon was dying in the mid-1880s. There was a belief that the great corporations were stifling opportunity. The local entrepreneur was lousing economic opportunity, and the worker was loosing control over his life. There was a great desire to reform the corrupt monopolies and return to the communal, self-determination. Examples of this reform included the Knights of Labor, Edward Bellamy’s Nationalism, and farmers alliances. These reforms sought to preserve individualism by protecting the American communities. They did not want to return to a bucolic paradise. They simply believed that there was no conflict between popular community and modern technology. But, their revolution to destroy industrialization, political power lost at every turn.
D. The fate of the nation: By the early 1890s the movements of community protest had generated their own nationwide crisis. Americans, already shaken by an incomprehensible world, responded to any new upheaval as an immediate threat. The Populist party expressed its commitment to local authority.
E. A new middle class: As these island communities began to disintegrate, certain Americans began to transcend rather than preserve them. This was the new middle class. Two categories: (1) Those with professional aspirations in such fields as medicine, law, economics, social work, and architecture. (2) Specialists in business, labor, and in agriculture who were bonded together by their occupation. Specialized skills were required in the new urban environment.
F. Revolution in values: The rise of the new bureaucratic values. Science was a key word for the new value system. Science made its way into psychology, statistics, social work, scientific management.
G. Progressivism arrives: The “heart of progressivism was the ambition of the new middle class to fulfill its destiny through bureaucratic means.” (166)
October 24, 2013
Excellent analysis. Creation of the modern nation state. The transition from a government that does nothing, 1890s. The problems with passing laws without a supporting bureaucracy. The fear of people who lived through extraordinary change. The small town farmer surrounded by people of the same race and religion, found himself living in an overcrowded industrial city. This fear led to the populist revolt that fundamentally changed the nature and purpose of our government.
June 23, 2010
Excellent study of the period. Basically shows the establishment of control of the US by corporations. Even through the Progressive Era and the first "regulation" of the economy the fact of control did not change, but in fact, stayed with the business elite.
Not for the faint hearted. This is a serious historical study and may be a bit tough on history 'buffs.'
Not for the faint hearted. This is a serious historical study and may be a bit tough on history 'buffs.'
January 16, 2014
interesting argument that focuses on the rise of a new middle class and ideas of an administrative/rational society; however, the dense and sometimes "flowery" language can make it a bit difficult to get through, especially for those who do not have a background in the history of the era as Wiebe assumes his audience knows the basics (people, places, events, laws) that occurred during the period
August 26, 2014
Not really a review, but I wanted to say that after reading this book, the Progressive era has become my favorite historical period to study. Wiebe does a great job outlining the important developments in this complex and fascinating period. It's no wonder that it remains an essential work nearly sixty years after its first publishing.
September 8, 2014
History was different back then. This oft-cited far-reaching survey does not have too many citations. It does not have footnotes or endnotes. It does have a bibliography that is especially focused on other bibliographies.
But the author's perspective is somewhat contrary to received wisdom without appearing wrong. Not necessarily right. But different.
But the author's perspective is somewhat contrary to received wisdom without appearing wrong. Not necessarily right. But different.
June 29, 2009
I'm pretty sure that this guy hates America.
Wiebe, on the other hand, also writes well and presents information at a comfortable pace. The chapter on the growth of the middle class, for example, was very informative and interesting.
Wiebe, on the other hand, also writes well and presents information at a comfortable pace. The chapter on the growth of the middle class, for example, was very informative and interesting.
December 3, 2011
this book has been around for over fourty years and non historian has been really able to put something together that is so concise and explores all the different aspect of the gilded age and progressive era. a tough but good read.
October 23, 2012
I was suppose to read this book for my history 497 class and write a book review. I must say that this really isnt my type of book to read but it was rather informative about the years following the Civil War and how the United States rebuilt itself and moved forward.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 37 reviews