ELIZABETH FULTON WRIGHT'S SURVIVING LETTERS to family members and friends begin while she was attending boarding school in Washington, D.C. Her father, William Savin Fulton, was then serving as one of Arkansas's first pair of U.S. senators. The correspondence shows young Elizabeth Fulton regulating her behavior-and having her behavior regulated-in accordance with prevailing notions of domesticity. Later in life, she distinguished herself as a well-respected and prominent member of Little Rock society. But even as she assumed less traditional roles as a property manager and author in the wake of her husband's death and the abolition of slavery, the activities by which she made a public imprint remained firmly rooted within the sphere of the home. Born in an era in which white women in America were expected to embody what Barbara Welter has termed the four cardinal virtues of piety, purity, domesticity, and submissiveness, Elizabeth Fulton Wright matured during a turbulent period of Arkansas history. Over the course of her life, civil war, new realities associated with domestic work, a shift away from the slave economy, unsettled political activity, expanding educational opportunities, and changing self-images altered the established roles of women in the United States and Arkansas. Her experience reflected that of many in the state who maintained their role as "true women" and, at the same time, reconciled their actions, beliefs, and economic lives to a changing nineteenth-century America.1 In describing Elizabeth Fulton Wright in 1877 as an "elegant and most accomplished lady, who devotedly loves the memory and fame of her honored father," a biographical dictionary noted also that "she became at an early age thoroughly conversant with the exciting politics of Arkansas."2 Elizabeth Fulton was born in Florence, Alabama, in 1824, and grew up surrounded by a large circle of family, including her mother Matilda and several unmarried aunts. Her playmates were her younger sisters, Mary Jane and Sophy Caroline, as well as one brother, David Peregrine. Five more siblings (four sisters and one brother) were to follow after 1831. When she was five, Fulton migrated with her family to Arkansas. Her father had been appointed secretary to the territory of Arkansas by a family friend and political patron, President Andrew Jackson. In June 1829, a crowd of local citizens greeted William Fulton, "his lady[,] and Children" on their arrival in Little Rock. The children watched as Judge Benjamin Johnson of the Arkansas Superior Court administered the oath of office to their father. From this point on, Fulton's father would spend a great deal of time away from his growing family while looking after the official and commercial concerns of the territory of Arkansas. He frequently journeyed to Washington, D.C., to appear before the U.S. Supreme Court as a counselor arguing cases on behalf of Arkansas and served as acting governor in the absence of John Pope. As a result,
{"title":"Elizabeth Fulton Wright: A Capital Woman","authors":"L. Baker","doi":"10.2307/40038294","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40038294","url":null,"abstract":"ELIZABETH FULTON WRIGHT'S SURVIVING LETTERS to family members and friends begin while she was attending boarding school in Washington, D.C. Her father, William Savin Fulton, was then serving as one of Arkansas's first pair of U.S. senators. The correspondence shows young Elizabeth Fulton regulating her behavior-and having her behavior regulated-in accordance with prevailing notions of domesticity. Later in life, she distinguished herself as a well-respected and prominent member of Little Rock society. But even as she assumed less traditional roles as a property manager and author in the wake of her husband's death and the abolition of slavery, the activities by which she made a public imprint remained firmly rooted within the sphere of the home. Born in an era in which white women in America were expected to embody what Barbara Welter has termed the four cardinal virtues of piety, purity, domesticity, and submissiveness, Elizabeth Fulton Wright matured during a turbulent period of Arkansas history. Over the course of her life, civil war, new realities associated with domestic work, a shift away from the slave economy, unsettled political activity, expanding educational opportunities, and changing self-images altered the established roles of women in the United States and Arkansas. Her experience reflected that of many in the state who maintained their role as \"true women\" and, at the same time, reconciled their actions, beliefs, and economic lives to a changing nineteenth-century America.1 In describing Elizabeth Fulton Wright in 1877 as an \"elegant and most accomplished lady, who devotedly loves the memory and fame of her honored father,\" a biographical dictionary noted also that \"she became at an early age thoroughly conversant with the exciting politics of Arkansas.\"2 Elizabeth Fulton was born in Florence, Alabama, in 1824, and grew up surrounded by a large circle of family, including her mother Matilda and several unmarried aunts. Her playmates were her younger sisters, Mary Jane and Sophy Caroline, as well as one brother, David Peregrine. Five more siblings (four sisters and one brother) were to follow after 1831. When she was five, Fulton migrated with her family to Arkansas. Her father had been appointed secretary to the territory of Arkansas by a family friend and political patron, President Andrew Jackson. In June 1829, a crowd of local citizens greeted William Fulton, \"his lady[,] and Children\" on their arrival in Little Rock. The children watched as Judge Benjamin Johnson of the Arkansas Superior Court administered the oath of office to their father. From this point on, Fulton's father would spend a great deal of time away from his growing family while looking after the official and commercial concerns of the territory of Arkansas. He frequently journeyed to Washington, D.C., to appear before the U.S. Supreme Court as a counselor arguing cases on behalf of Arkansas and served as acting governor in the absence of John Pope. As a result,","PeriodicalId":51953,"journal":{"name":"ARKANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY","volume":"55 1","pages":"138"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40038294","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68755195","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Cherokee Nation is one of the largest and most important of all the American Indian tribes. The first history of the Cherokees to appear in over four decades, this is also the first to be endorsed by the tribe and the first to be written by a Cherokee. Robert Conley begins his survey with Cherokee origin myths and legends. He then explores their relations with neighboring Indian groups and European missionaries and settlers. He traces their forced migrations west, relates their participations on both sides of the Civil War and the wars of the twentieth century, and concludes with an examination of Cherokee life today. Conley provides analyses for general readers of all ages to learn the significance of tribal lore and Cherokee tribal law. Following the history is a listing of the Principal Chiefs of the Cherokees with a brief biography of each and separate listings of the chiefs of the Eastern Cherokees and the Western Cherokees. For those who want to know more about Cherokee heritage and history, Conley offers additional reading lists at the end of each chapter.
{"title":"The Cherokee Nation : a history","authors":"R. Conley","doi":"10.2307/27649239","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/27649239","url":null,"abstract":"The Cherokee Nation is one of the largest and most important of all the American Indian tribes. The first history of the Cherokees to appear in over four decades, this is also the first to be endorsed by the tribe and the first to be written by a Cherokee. Robert Conley begins his survey with Cherokee origin myths and legends. He then explores their relations with neighboring Indian groups and European missionaries and settlers. He traces their forced migrations west, relates their participations on both sides of the Civil War and the wars of the twentieth century, and concludes with an examination of Cherokee life today. Conley provides analyses for general readers of all ages to learn the significance of tribal lore and Cherokee tribal law. Following the history is a listing of the Principal Chiefs of the Cherokees with a brief biography of each and separate listings of the chiefs of the Eastern Cherokees and the Western Cherokees. For those who want to know more about Cherokee heritage and history, Conley offers additional reading lists at the end of each chapter.","PeriodicalId":51953,"journal":{"name":"ARKANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY","volume":"65 1","pages":"175"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/27649239","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68440446","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
THE INTERVIEW EXCERPTED HERE took place in October 2002 under bizarre circumstances. The interviewee, cancer in his pancreas, was assumed near death by himself, by his doctors, and by the archivists in Fayetteville who dispatched the interviewer to his digs in Canada. Ronnie Hawkins had been a prominent and flamboyant figure for a very long time. In on rock and roll's turbulent rockabilly beginnings in the 1950s and, as the '60s dawned, first boss of the combo that would become famous as the Band, he was still living large in the century's final decade, gracing Bill Clinton's 1993 inaugural with his august and raunchy presence. It was important, before the final bell, to record his impressions. Things turned out differently, however-humbling, once again and not for the last time, all who claim to know the shape of tomorrow. It's 2006 now, May 7 as this is written, more than three years have passed, and just yesterday, cancer mysteriously, miraculously gone, the man was holding forth at a Hawkins family reunion on the old family homeplace outside St. Paul in Madison County, Arkansas. Enthroned on a wooden bench under a hillside pavilion next to his cousin and fellow musician Dale Hawkins, the lovely Ozark Mountains looming preternaturally green in a light rain, he spun out once again his fabulous, ribald tale, cracking up the men and charming the women. And it was there, beneath the water's gentle patter, that the essential element in rock and roll fame suddenly flashed out again. He s over seventy now, but Hawkins still has a firm hold on what he knew before he was twenty-that one thing above all is expected of the leader of a rock and roll band: the incarnation of Dionysos, master of revels. Country songwriter Harlan Howard is credited with that genre s most succinct characterization-country music is three chords and the truth. Then Bono added the red guitar in U2's version of Bob Dylan's "All Along the Watchtower": "All I've got is a red guitar, three chords, and the truth." But for Hawkins, as for Sonny Burgess, Billy Lee Riley, Jerry Lee Lewis, and the other rockabilly wild men, the red guitar (or piano) was often mostly a prop, and truth was nowhere to be seen, a notion of little interest. Hawkins called it "that monkey act," did backflips on the stage, and moonwalked decades before Michael Jackson. Women charged the stage, so many that when he first hired a teenaged Robbie Robertson, Hawkins told him he couldn't pay much but promised he would get more girls than Frank Sinatra. As the decades passed, the outrages shifted their focus, even as the underlying persona remained unchanged. Where he once violated behavioral conventions, running whiskey and carousing with underage daughters of community pillars ("they said it was an orgy but I called it eight or ten people in love "), he turned in later years to the flaunting of conversational standards. In 2005, at an elegant party celebrating his honorary doctorate at Laurentian University in Onta
{"title":"Long on Nerve: An Interview with Ronnie Hawkins","authors":"Robert W. Cochran, Ronnie Hawkins","doi":"10.2307/40038292","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40038292","url":null,"abstract":"THE INTERVIEW EXCERPTED HERE took place in October 2002 under bizarre circumstances. The interviewee, cancer in his pancreas, was assumed near death by himself, by his doctors, and by the archivists in Fayetteville who dispatched the interviewer to his digs in Canada. Ronnie Hawkins had been a prominent and flamboyant figure for a very long time. In on rock and roll's turbulent rockabilly beginnings in the 1950s and, as the '60s dawned, first boss of the combo that would become famous as the Band, he was still living large in the century's final decade, gracing Bill Clinton's 1993 inaugural with his august and raunchy presence. It was important, before the final bell, to record his impressions. Things turned out differently, however-humbling, once again and not for the last time, all who claim to know the shape of tomorrow. It's 2006 now, May 7 as this is written, more than three years have passed, and just yesterday, cancer mysteriously, miraculously gone, the man was holding forth at a Hawkins family reunion on the old family homeplace outside St. Paul in Madison County, Arkansas. Enthroned on a wooden bench under a hillside pavilion next to his cousin and fellow musician Dale Hawkins, the lovely Ozark Mountains looming preternaturally green in a light rain, he spun out once again his fabulous, ribald tale, cracking up the men and charming the women. And it was there, beneath the water's gentle patter, that the essential element in rock and roll fame suddenly flashed out again. He s over seventy now, but Hawkins still has a firm hold on what he knew before he was twenty-that one thing above all is expected of the leader of a rock and roll band: the incarnation of Dionysos, master of revels. Country songwriter Harlan Howard is credited with that genre s most succinct characterization-country music is three chords and the truth. Then Bono added the red guitar in U2's version of Bob Dylan's \"All Along the Watchtower\": \"All I've got is a red guitar, three chords, and the truth.\" But for Hawkins, as for Sonny Burgess, Billy Lee Riley, Jerry Lee Lewis, and the other rockabilly wild men, the red guitar (or piano) was often mostly a prop, and truth was nowhere to be seen, a notion of little interest. Hawkins called it \"that monkey act,\" did backflips on the stage, and moonwalked decades before Michael Jackson. Women charged the stage, so many that when he first hired a teenaged Robbie Robertson, Hawkins told him he couldn't pay much but promised he would get more girls than Frank Sinatra. As the decades passed, the outrages shifted their focus, even as the underlying persona remained unchanged. Where he once violated behavioral conventions, running whiskey and carousing with underage daughters of community pillars (\"they said it was an orgy but I called it eight or ten people in love \"), he turned in later years to the flaunting of conversational standards. In 2005, at an elegant party celebrating his honorary doctorate at Laurentian University in Onta","PeriodicalId":51953,"journal":{"name":"ARKANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY","volume":"65 1","pages":"99"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40038292","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68754944","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
D. Bruce, Patrick G. Williams, S. Charles Bolton, J. Whayne
This volume is a collection of essays originally presented at the Louisiana Purchase Conference, which marked the purchase's bicentinnial. The authors, experts in their fields, offer a revisionist take on many historically underrepresented aspects of the purchase.
{"title":"A whole country in commotion : the Louisiana Purchase and the American Southwest","authors":"D. Bruce, Patrick G. Williams, S. Charles Bolton, J. Whayne","doi":"10.2307/27649171","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/27649171","url":null,"abstract":"This volume is a collection of essays originally presented at the Louisiana Purchase Conference, which marked the purchase's bicentinnial. The authors, experts in their fields, offer a revisionist take on many historically underrepresented aspects of the purchase.","PeriodicalId":51953,"journal":{"name":"ARKANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY","volume":"65 1","pages":"70"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/27649171","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68440360","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
THE FOLLOWING ARTICLES PRESENT important new perspectives on the Little Rock school desegregation crisis. When Arkansas governor Orval E. Faubus, in the name of preserving order, directed the Arkansas National Guard to prevent nine black young people from entering Little Rock Central High School on September 2, 1957, he precipitated a constitutional crisis. Blocking a federal court order upholding the Little Rock School Board's attempted compliance with the U.S. Supreme Court's decisions of 1954 and 1955 in Brown v. Board of Education, Faubus placed the governor's police powers at odds with city authorities, President Dwight D. Eisenhower, and the Supreme Court itself. Yet the constitutional issues engendered by Faubus's actions remained abstract to most people except for legal experts. At the time and ever since, it was the practical consequences that garnered public attention: the consequences for the school board's good-faith effort to implement the token desegregation of a single city school in the face of growing hostility on the part of the white community, for Faubus's purported political ambitions, for the Eisenhower administration's inconsistent stance on the Brown decision even as it wrestled with a Cold War propaganda battle over the same issue, for the authority of the Supreme Court as it confronted mounting opposition from southern segregationists and their northern conservative sympathizers, and, above all, for the courageous Little Rock Nine, bearing the painful assaults of racial animosity. The three essays that follow suggest how the litigation culminating in Cooper v. Aaron shaped these consequences and their ramifications for decades to come. The Cooper v. Aaron litigation went through several stages. The Supreme Court's Brown decision of 1954, holding that racially segregated public schools were inherently unequal and therefore violated the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause, precipitated the Little Rock School Board's efforts to comply. Shortly before the Court handed down the 1955 Brown II order, which required desegregation plans to proceed "with all deliberate speed" but left their formulation to community school boards-subject to local federal court oversight-Little Rock school officials published a plan that opened only Little Rock Central High to token desegregation, maintained racial segregation at all other schools, and left unstated when those schools might be desegregated. Once the limited scope of desegregation became apparent, the Little Rock branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) rethought its earlier trust in the school board's good faith effort, and, in the name of black parents and children, initiated suit in 1956. Styled Aaron v. Cooper, the case was tried and decided during August 1956. The black litigants lost at trial and upon appeal in April 1957. As the summer unfolded and the nine black students prepared to enter Central, Faubus and city school offic
{"title":"Cooper V. Aaron: Incident and Consequence","authors":"T. Freyer","doi":"10.2307/40028067","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40028067","url":null,"abstract":"THE FOLLOWING ARTICLES PRESENT important new perspectives on the Little Rock school desegregation crisis. When Arkansas governor Orval E. Faubus, in the name of preserving order, directed the Arkansas National Guard to prevent nine black young people from entering Little Rock Central High School on September 2, 1957, he precipitated a constitutional crisis. Blocking a federal court order upholding the Little Rock School Board's attempted compliance with the U.S. Supreme Court's decisions of 1954 and 1955 in Brown v. Board of Education, Faubus placed the governor's police powers at odds with city authorities, President Dwight D. Eisenhower, and the Supreme Court itself. Yet the constitutional issues engendered by Faubus's actions remained abstract to most people except for legal experts. At the time and ever since, it was the practical consequences that garnered public attention: the consequences for the school board's good-faith effort to implement the token desegregation of a single city school in the face of growing hostility on the part of the white community, for Faubus's purported political ambitions, for the Eisenhower administration's inconsistent stance on the Brown decision even as it wrestled with a Cold War propaganda battle over the same issue, for the authority of the Supreme Court as it confronted mounting opposition from southern segregationists and their northern conservative sympathizers, and, above all, for the courageous Little Rock Nine, bearing the painful assaults of racial animosity. The three essays that follow suggest how the litigation culminating in Cooper v. Aaron shaped these consequences and their ramifications for decades to come. The Cooper v. Aaron litigation went through several stages. The Supreme Court's Brown decision of 1954, holding that racially segregated public schools were inherently unequal and therefore violated the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause, precipitated the Little Rock School Board's efforts to comply. Shortly before the Court handed down the 1955 Brown II order, which required desegregation plans to proceed \"with all deliberate speed\" but left their formulation to community school boards-subject to local federal court oversight-Little Rock school officials published a plan that opened only Little Rock Central High to token desegregation, maintained racial segregation at all other schools, and left unstated when those schools might be desegregated. Once the limited scope of desegregation became apparent, the Little Rock branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) rethought its earlier trust in the school board's good faith effort, and, in the name of black parents and children, initiated suit in 1956. Styled Aaron v. Cooper, the case was tried and decided during August 1956. The black litigants lost at trial and upon appeal in April 1957. As the summer unfolded and the nine black students prepared to enter Central, Faubus and city school offic","PeriodicalId":51953,"journal":{"name":"ARKANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY","volume":"261 1","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40028067","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68724801","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
IN MAY 1954, just a few days after the announcement of the Brown decision demanding the abolition of segregation in public education, the Little Rock School Board publicly declared its intention to comply. One year later, a week before the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its guidelines for enforcement in Brown II, Little Rock school superintendent Virgil T. Blossom unveiled his voluntary Phase Program for school desegregation, calling for a gradual approach to integration beginning at the high school level. As actually implemented, the Blossom Plan became a minimal as well as a gradual program that was designed to preserve "educational quality" while it accommodated the demands of the new court directive.1 As one member of the Little Rock School Board recalled years later, "We didn't set out to integrate the schools, we set out to continue education during the integration process, and we were much more interested in the education process than we were in integration."2 As Blossom explained in his memoir, "Our purpose was to comply with the law in a manner that would be accepted locally, not to wreck the school system."3 The Little Rock chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) had developed a growing distrust of Virgil Blossom in the year between the announcements of Brown I and Brown II. The superintendent had indicated in the fall of 1954 that integration would be complete, and that it would be carried out in a timely manner involving children at all grade levels. But after months of meetings with alarmed white parents, Blossom revised his plan in May 1955, calling for integration at Central High School only. He then proposed to extend desegregation down into the lower grades according to a vague, nonspecific timetable. Finally despairing of receiving fair treatment, the local branch of the NAACP eschewed the advice of its national organization and in February of 1956 filed suit in federal district court against the Little Rock School Board in a case styled Aaron v. Cooper. At that point, the superintendent engaged five attorneys to defend his plan. Richard C. Butler, one of the city's social and civic leaders and a great admirer of Virgil Blossom, acceded to the superintendent's urgent request that he join the legal "brain trust." Over the next two years, Butler worked closely with Blossom in deciding how to respond to the growing opposition to desegregation in Little Rock.4 Joining longtime school board attorney Archie House, Butler and the others argued successfully before federal judge John Miller, a former United States senator from Arkansas, that their clients had made a "prompt and reasonable start" toward desegregation and that they should be allowed to proceed along the deliberate course they had charted. Although he ruled in the school board's favor, Judge Miller nonetheless retained jurisdiction in the case as well as setting a deadline of September 1957 for implementation of the Blossom Plan.5 A
1954年5月，就在要求在公共教育中废除种族隔离的布朗案判决宣布几天后，小石城学校董事会公开宣布将遵守判决。一年后，在美国最高法院公布布朗二案执行指导方针的前一周，小石城学校负责人维吉尔·t·布洛森(Virgil T. Blossom)公布了他自愿提出的学校废除种族隔离阶段计划，呼吁从高中阶段开始逐步实现种族融合。在实际实施过程中，“开花计划”成为一个最小的、渐进的项目，旨在保持“教育质量”，同时适应新的法院指令的要求正如小石城学校董事会的一名成员多年后回忆的那样，“我们并没有开始整合学校，我们开始在整合过程中继续教育，我们对教育过程比对整合更感兴趣。”正如布洛森在他的回忆录中所解释的那样:“我们的目的是以当地可以接受的方式遵守法律，而不是破坏学校制度。”全国有色人种协进会(NAACP)小石城分会在布朗一案和布朗二案宣布之间的一年里，对维吉尔·布洛森的不信任与日俱增。校长曾在1954年秋表示，整合工作将完成，并将及时进行，涉及所有年级的儿童。但是，在与惊恐的白人家长会面了几个月之后，布罗森在1955年5月修改了他的计划，呼吁只在中央高中实行种族融合。然后，他提议根据一个模糊的、不具体的时间表，将废除种族隔离的范围扩大到较低的年级。最终，NAACP的地方分会对得到公平待遇感到绝望，因此不听从全国组织的建议，于1956年2月向联邦地区法院提起诉讼，控告小石城学校董事会，该案名为“亚伦诉库珀”。当时，校长聘请了五名律师为他的计划辩护。理查德·c·巴特勒(Richard C. Butler)是该市的社会和公民领袖之一，也是维吉尔·布洛森(Virgil Blossom)的忠实崇拜者，他同意了局长的紧急请求，加入了法律“智囊团”。在接下来的两年里，巴特勒和布洛森密切合作，决定如何应对小石城日益高涨的反对废除种族隔离的呼声。4巴特勒和其他律师加入了长期担任学校董事会律师的阿奇·豪斯的队伍，在联邦法官、前阿肯色州参议员约翰·米勒面前成功地进行了辩护，认为他们的委托人已经为废除种族隔离迈出了“迅速而合理的一步”，应该允许他们沿着自己精心规划的道路继续前进。尽管米勒法官做出了有利于学校董事会的裁决，但他仍然保留了对此案的管辖权，并规定了1957年9月为实施“开花计划”的最后期限。众所周知，那个9月给小石城带来了一场严重的危机。随着走廊上的士兵和街道上的种族隔离暴徒，所有有效教育过程的希望都落空了。这一学年，中央高中的9名黑人学生每天都受到骚扰，对学校董事会成员、学校工作人员和试图支持废除种族隔离努力的学生的恐吓也在不断升级。经过几个月种族隔离主义者的骚扰和社区动荡，1958年2月，小石城学校董事会不情愿地屈服于城市商业领导的奉承，向联邦地区法院提起诉讼，要求给予“喘息期”或“冷静期”。在阿肯色州霍普市(Hope)的哈里·莱姆利(Harry Lemley)法官面前，学校董事会的律师辩称，该学区为自己设定的教育标准在这样的环境下无法维持，而且这肯定不是最高法院的本意。…
{"title":"Richard C. Butler and the Little Rock School Board: The Quest to Maintain \"Educational Quality\"","authors":"Elizabeth Jacoway","doi":"10.2307/40028069","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40028069","url":null,"abstract":"IN MAY 1954, just a few days after the announcement of the Brown decision demanding the abolition of segregation in public education, the Little Rock School Board publicly declared its intention to comply. One year later, a week before the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its guidelines for enforcement in Brown II, Little Rock school superintendent Virgil T. Blossom unveiled his voluntary Phase Program for school desegregation, calling for a gradual approach to integration beginning at the high school level. As actually implemented, the Blossom Plan became a minimal as well as a gradual program that was designed to preserve \"educational quality\" while it accommodated the demands of the new court directive.1 As one member of the Little Rock School Board recalled years later, \"We didn't set out to integrate the schools, we set out to continue education during the integration process, and we were much more interested in the education process than we were in integration.\"2 As Blossom explained in his memoir, \"Our purpose was to comply with the law in a manner that would be accepted locally, not to wreck the school system.\"3 The Little Rock chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) had developed a growing distrust of Virgil Blossom in the year between the announcements of Brown I and Brown II. The superintendent had indicated in the fall of 1954 that integration would be complete, and that it would be carried out in a timely manner involving children at all grade levels. But after months of meetings with alarmed white parents, Blossom revised his plan in May 1955, calling for integration at Central High School only. He then proposed to extend desegregation down into the lower grades according to a vague, nonspecific timetable. Finally despairing of receiving fair treatment, the local branch of the NAACP eschewed the advice of its national organization and in February of 1956 filed suit in federal district court against the Little Rock School Board in a case styled Aaron v. Cooper. At that point, the superintendent engaged five attorneys to defend his plan. Richard C. Butler, one of the city's social and civic leaders and a great admirer of Virgil Blossom, acceded to the superintendent's urgent request that he join the legal \"brain trust.\" Over the next two years, Butler worked closely with Blossom in deciding how to respond to the growing opposition to desegregation in Little Rock.4 Joining longtime school board attorney Archie House, Butler and the others argued successfully before federal judge John Miller, a former United States senator from Arkansas, that their clients had made a \"prompt and reasonable start\" toward desegregation and that they should be allowed to proceed along the deliberate course they had charted. Although he ruled in the school board's favor, Judge Miller nonetheless retained jurisdiction in the case as well as setting a deadline of September 1957 for implementation of the Blossom Plan.5 A","PeriodicalId":51953,"journal":{"name":"ARKANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY","volume":"65 1","pages":"23"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40028069","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68725207","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
IN SEPTEMBER 1958, I was poised to enter my senior year at Hall High School in Little Rock. My sophomore year of 1956-57 had been spent at the famous Central High School. That was the year before the Little Rock Nine were admitted to Central High and federal troops were deployed to enforce the Brown decisions.1 During the year of the Little Rock Nine, which was the 1957-58 school year, I attended Hall, the new all-white high school in Little Rock. Hall had been built in the affluent part of the city. There were no black students enrolled that year as there were in Central. This, in itself, was a significant bone of contention with some Central High parents. Nor were there white students enrolled at the newly constructed all-black high school, Horace Mann. As I waited into the second week of September 1958 for the school year to begin, it dawned on my parents that the three Little Rock high schools would not open that school year. On August 28, 1958, the Little Rock School Board had argued in favor of a two-and-a-half-year delay in implementing the Brown decisions before the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Cooper v. Aaron. Judith Kilpatrick and Elizabeth Jacoway have discussed this case in more depth. Suffice it to say that the Supreme Court refused to delay desegregation in Little Rock and ordered it to proceed forthwith.2 Arkansas's governor, Orval Faubus, had called the General Assembly into special session to enact a package of legislation to thwart integration. One bill authorized the governor to close any school where integration had been ordered.3 After the court's decision in Cooper v. Aaron was announced, Faubus signed the act authorizing him to close public schools affected by integration, and he shut down the Little Rock high schools by proclamation on September 12, 1958. A special election of the voters of the Little Rock School District subsequently affirmed his actions. As a result, a generation of Little Rock students was put "at sea," struggling to determine how and where we could pursue our secondary education. My class became known as the "Lost Class of '59." It was not until the spring of 1959 that certain leaders of the Little Rock business community moved into high gear. Little Rock had received an international black eye because of the crisis, and business development and city growth were at a standstill. These business leaders and a group of extraordinarily brave women known as the Women's Emergency Committee to Open Our Schools worked diligently to reopen schools and correct the situation. They were successful in ousting segregationist members of the school board and retaining moderate school board members.4 The result was that the high schools reopened in August 1959, with both Hall and Central admitting black students. The crisis at Central and the crisis of the "lost year" had passed. But were the crises over? In 1965, black parents of the Little Rock School District filed suit in federal district court contending that
1958年9月，我准备在小石城的霍尔高中读高三。1956年至1957年，我在著名的中央高中(Central High School)度过了大二。那一年，小石城九年级学生被中央高中录取，联邦军队被部署执行布朗案的判决在小石城九年级，也就是1957-58学年，我在小石城新建的全白人高中霍尔中学上学。霍尔大厦建在城市的富裕地区。那一年没有黑人学生入学，就像在中部那样。这本身就成为了一些中央高中家长争论的焦点。新建的霍勒斯·曼(Horace Mann)黑人高中也没有白人学生。1958年9月的第二个星期，我一直在等待新学年的开始，我的父母突然意识到，小石城的三所高中在新学年不会开学。1958年8月28日，小石城学校董事会在库珀诉亚伦案中向美国最高法院提出，赞成将布朗案的判决推迟两年半执行。Judith Kilpatrick和Elizabeth Jacoway更深入地讨论了这个案例。最高法院拒绝推迟在小石城废除种族隔离，并下令立即进行，这一点就足够说明了阿肯色州州长奥瓦尔·福伯斯(Orval Faubus)曾召集大会召开特别会议，制定一揽子立法来阻止种族融合。一项法案授权州长关闭任何下令实行种族融合的学校在法院宣布库珀诉亚伦案的判决后，福伯斯签署了一项法案，授权他关闭受种族融合影响的公立学校，并于1958年9月12日宣布关闭小石城的高中。随后，小石城学区选民的一次特别选举肯定了他的行为。结果，小石城的一代学生陷入了“不知所措”的境地，难以决定如何以及在哪里接受中学教育。我们班被称为“迷失的59届”。直到1959年春天，小石城商界的某些领导人才开始高调行动。由于这场危机，小石城在国际上声名狼藉，商业发展和城市增长陷入停滞。这些商界领袖和一群非常勇敢的妇女，即“开放学校妇女紧急委员会”，努力工作，重新开放学校，纠正现状。他们成功地驱逐了学校董事会中主张种族隔离的成员，并保留了温和的学校董事会成员结果，高中在1959年8月重新开放，霍尔高中和中央高中都招收黑人学生。中环的危机和“失落的一年”的危机已经过去。但危机结束了吗?1965年，小石城学区的黑人家长向联邦地区法院提起诉讼，称他们的孩子被白人学校拒之门外，而被送到黑人社区学校就读从那时起，众所周知的克拉克诉讼案以各种形式继续进行，其中包括联邦法院审查学区和其他利益相关方提出的各种计划是否符合宪法。这些计划包括根据地理出勤区分配学生作业，根据年级将学生轮流送到白人社区和黑人社区的学校，以及包括四所全黑人学校在内的小学计划，以便在其余学校中实现更好的黑人/白人比例。在大多数情况下，这些计划都得到了美国第八巡回上诉法院的批准，但做了一些修改因此，在许多方面，小石城的第一场危机继续对我所在城市的公共教育以及阿肯色州中部的总体经济产生连锁反应。…
{"title":"The Third Little Rock Crisis","authors":"Robert L Brown","doi":"10.2307/40028070","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40028070","url":null,"abstract":"IN SEPTEMBER 1958, I was poised to enter my senior year at Hall High School in Little Rock. My sophomore year of 1956-57 had been spent at the famous Central High School. That was the year before the Little Rock Nine were admitted to Central High and federal troops were deployed to enforce the Brown decisions.1 During the year of the Little Rock Nine, which was the 1957-58 school year, I attended Hall, the new all-white high school in Little Rock. Hall had been built in the affluent part of the city. There were no black students enrolled that year as there were in Central. This, in itself, was a significant bone of contention with some Central High parents. Nor were there white students enrolled at the newly constructed all-black high school, Horace Mann. As I waited into the second week of September 1958 for the school year to begin, it dawned on my parents that the three Little Rock high schools would not open that school year. On August 28, 1958, the Little Rock School Board had argued in favor of a two-and-a-half-year delay in implementing the Brown decisions before the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Cooper v. Aaron. Judith Kilpatrick and Elizabeth Jacoway have discussed this case in more depth. Suffice it to say that the Supreme Court refused to delay desegregation in Little Rock and ordered it to proceed forthwith.2 Arkansas's governor, Orval Faubus, had called the General Assembly into special session to enact a package of legislation to thwart integration. One bill authorized the governor to close any school where integration had been ordered.3 After the court's decision in Cooper v. Aaron was announced, Faubus signed the act authorizing him to close public schools affected by integration, and he shut down the Little Rock high schools by proclamation on September 12, 1958. A special election of the voters of the Little Rock School District subsequently affirmed his actions. As a result, a generation of Little Rock students was put \"at sea,\" struggling to determine how and where we could pursue our secondary education. My class became known as the \"Lost Class of '59.\" It was not until the spring of 1959 that certain leaders of the Little Rock business community moved into high gear. Little Rock had received an international black eye because of the crisis, and business development and city growth were at a standstill. These business leaders and a group of extraordinarily brave women known as the Women's Emergency Committee to Open Our Schools worked diligently to reopen schools and correct the situation. They were successful in ousting segregationist members of the school board and retaining moderate school board members.4 The result was that the high schools reopened in August 1959, with both Hall and Central admitting black students. The crisis at Central and the crisis of the \"lost year\" had passed. But were the crises over? In 1965, black parents of the Little Rock School District filed suit in federal district court contending that","PeriodicalId":51953,"journal":{"name":"ARKANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY","volume":"65 1","pages":"39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40028070","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68724829","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"African-American Legislators in the Arkansas General Assembly, 1868-1893","authors":"Blake Wintory","doi":"10.2307/40028092","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40028092","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51953,"journal":{"name":"ARKANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY","volume":"65 1","pages":"385"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40028092","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68725240","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
FORCED CONSOLIDATION OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS has often been looked upon as the third rail of Arkansas politics: one approaches the subject with considerable caution so as to avoid political electrocution. This issue was again placed on the public agenda, at least indirectly, by an Arkansas Supreme Court decision in November 2002, which held that the state's funding of public schools did not provide children with the "general, suitable, and efficient" educational system mandated by the Arkansas Constitution. Although the Lake View opinion did not require school consolidation, this method had been proposed in the past to help the state achieve a suitable and efficient system.1 The Lake View decision's broad scope seemed to require major changes in policy, utilizing a variety of innovative plans and techniques. Gov. Mike Huckabee in a "state of the state" address to the Arkansas General Assembly on January 14, 2003, offered a bold plan to help satisfy the requirements of Lake View. Huckabee proposed that Arkansas school districts with less than 1,500 students merge with bigger districts. He especially stressed that larger high schools could offer a richer curriculum.2 This proposal aroused great controversy, which remained at fever pitch for the next year. After heated discussions, many downward revisions of the threshold for consolidation, and frequent compromises that often unraveled, the General Assembly passed a bill that required consolidation of districts with fewer than 350 students rather than 1,500. Under the measure, the number of school districts in the state was expected to drop from 310 to 254. A companion bill changed the state's school funding formula and increased expenditures for public education.3 While Huckabee's effort accomplished limited consolidation, a similar attempt in 1966 had been completely annihilated. The trigger for consolidation proposed then was 400 students, and voters rejected the measure by a landslide vote of 115,452 (26.41 percent) in favor and 321,733 (73.59 percent) against.4 Orval Faubus, governor of Arkansas at the time, opposed the measure as did the two major gubernatorial candidates in that year's general election, Jim Johnson and Winthrop Rockefeller. Despite endorsement by the Arkansas Gazette, the proposed consolidation legislation was even defeated in Pulaski County, where 61 percent of the voters opposed the measure.5 Given the automatically hostile response to any attempt at consolidation in Arkansas, it might seem astonishing that the state's voters in 1948 passed a comprehensive school consolidation act requiring the dissolution of all school districts with fewer than 350 students. Initiated Act 1 was approved in the absence of any court order and with virtually no newspaper advertising, the main method by which campaigns were conducted at that time. And it passed despite the defeat of a very similar proposal just two years earlier. What relevance, if any, does this episode hold for the present? Scho
{"title":"The Fight for School Consolidation in Arkansas, 1946-1948","authors":"Calvin R. Ledbetter","doi":"10.2307/40028071","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40028071","url":null,"abstract":"FORCED CONSOLIDATION OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS has often been looked upon as the third rail of Arkansas politics: one approaches the subject with considerable caution so as to avoid political electrocution. This issue was again placed on the public agenda, at least indirectly, by an Arkansas Supreme Court decision in November 2002, which held that the state's funding of public schools did not provide children with the \"general, suitable, and efficient\" educational system mandated by the Arkansas Constitution. Although the Lake View opinion did not require school consolidation, this method had been proposed in the past to help the state achieve a suitable and efficient system.1 The Lake View decision's broad scope seemed to require major changes in policy, utilizing a variety of innovative plans and techniques. Gov. Mike Huckabee in a \"state of the state\" address to the Arkansas General Assembly on January 14, 2003, offered a bold plan to help satisfy the requirements of Lake View. Huckabee proposed that Arkansas school districts with less than 1,500 students merge with bigger districts. He especially stressed that larger high schools could offer a richer curriculum.2 This proposal aroused great controversy, which remained at fever pitch for the next year. After heated discussions, many downward revisions of the threshold for consolidation, and frequent compromises that often unraveled, the General Assembly passed a bill that required consolidation of districts with fewer than 350 students rather than 1,500. Under the measure, the number of school districts in the state was expected to drop from 310 to 254. A companion bill changed the state's school funding formula and increased expenditures for public education.3 While Huckabee's effort accomplished limited consolidation, a similar attempt in 1966 had been completely annihilated. The trigger for consolidation proposed then was 400 students, and voters rejected the measure by a landslide vote of 115,452 (26.41 percent) in favor and 321,733 (73.59 percent) against.4 Orval Faubus, governor of Arkansas at the time, opposed the measure as did the two major gubernatorial candidates in that year's general election, Jim Johnson and Winthrop Rockefeller. Despite endorsement by the Arkansas Gazette, the proposed consolidation legislation was even defeated in Pulaski County, where 61 percent of the voters opposed the measure.5 Given the automatically hostile response to any attempt at consolidation in Arkansas, it might seem astonishing that the state's voters in 1948 passed a comprehensive school consolidation act requiring the dissolution of all school districts with fewer than 350 students. Initiated Act 1 was approved in the absence of any court order and with virtually no newspaper advertising, the main method by which campaigns were conducted at that time. And it passed despite the defeat of a very similar proposal just two years earlier. What relevance, if any, does this episode hold for the present? Scho","PeriodicalId":51953,"journal":{"name":"ARKANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY","volume":"65 1","pages":"45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40028071","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68724996","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Edward Durrell Stone Buildings IN 1916, A FAYETTEVILLE LUMBER COMPANY challenged local boys to design birdhouses. The prestigious competition had the president of the University of Arkansas as one of its judges. Fourteen-year-old Edward Durrell Stone won first prize: $2.50. To create a bluebird house, he sheeted a wooden box in sassafras branches cut in half to look like logs. In his autobiography, he described the small cash prize and local recognition as his "undoing," immediately hooking him on a career in design. He followed in the footsteps of his older brother, Hicks, a practicing architect in Boston. Today, Edward Durrell Stone is widely regarded as one of the greatest American architects of the mid-twentieth century. He left Arkansas early in his career but returned intermittently and even had a satellite office in northwest Arkansas from 1955 to 1959 to help him execute commissions in the state. Stone attended the art school at the University of Arkansas from 1920 until 1923 before heading to Boston to join his brother and begin his formal training in architecture. He started at the Boston Architectural Club, then went to Harvard after winning a 1926 competition that awarded him a year's tuition. He later transferred to Massachusetts Institute of Technology because a professor there, Jacques Carlu, was experimenting with modern designs that interested Stone. In 1927, Stone won a prestigious Rotch award to travel to Europe for two years. In the course of his travels, he became more enamored of modern design after having seen and studied the works of modernist innovators Ee Corbusier and Eudwig Mies van der Rohe. Returning to the United States in 1929, Stone began his professional career. He did his earliest work as a paid architect in the employ of larger architectural firms. He worked on the Waldorf-Astoria hotel and Radio City Music Hall in New York but did not fully display his talents until receiving and designing his first private commission, the Mandel House in Westchester County, New York, in 1933. With the Mandel House, Stone made a name for himself for having designed and built one of the earliest International-style residences in the United States. While the work of Rudolf Schindler and Richard Neutra had appeared in the Los Angeles area as early as 1928, the Mandel House helped introduce the style to the East Coast, where it became increasingly popular in the 1930s. Stone's work in the International style was well received, and he built many houses in the northeast. However, as public opinion became more favorable toward the style in the late 1940s, Stone began to pull himself away from it. Edward Durrell Stone visited Frank Eloyd Wright's Taliesin in Wisconsin in the 1940s. His encounters with Wright's work began to alter his design philosophies. He began to feel that buildings executed in the International style left something to be desired. They were "too sparse, too arid, too cold." Wright had found something that the Inter
1916年，费耶特维尔的一家木材公司向当地男孩挑战设计鸟屋。这项久负盛名的比赛有阿肯色大学校长作为评委之一。14岁的爱德华·杜雷尔·斯通赢得了第一名:2.5美元。为了建造一座蓝鸟屋，他在一个木箱上铺上了黄樟树枝，这些树枝被切成两半，看起来像原木。在他的自传中，他把小额现金奖和当地的认可描述为他的“毁灭”，这让他立即投身于设计事业。他追随哥哥希克斯的脚步，希克斯是波士顿的一名执业建筑师。今天，爱德华·杜雷尔·斯通被广泛认为是二十世纪中叶最伟大的美国建筑师之一。他在职业生涯的早期就离开了阿肯色州，但断断续续地回来，甚至从1955年到1959年在阿肯色州西北部有一个卫星办公室，帮助他在该州执行任务。从1920年到1923年，斯通就读于阿肯色大学的艺术学院，然后前往波士顿与他的兄弟一起开始他的正式建筑训练。他从波士顿建筑俱乐部(Boston Architectural Club)开始，在1926年的一次竞赛中获胜，获得了一年的学费，然后去了哈佛大学(Harvard)。后来，他转到麻省理工学院(Massachusetts Institute of Technology)，因为那里的一位教授雅克·卡尔卢(Jacques Carlu)正在试验他感兴趣的现代设计。1927年，斯通获得了久负盛名的罗契奖，前往欧洲旅行了两年。在旅行过程中，他看到并研究了现代主义创新者柯布西耶(Ee Corbusier)和密斯·凡·德罗(Eudwig Mies van der Rohe)的作品后，对现代设计更加着迷。1929年，斯通回到美国，开始了他的职业生涯。他最早的工作是在大型建筑公司担任付费建筑师。他在纽约的华尔道夫-阿斯托利亚酒店和无线电城音乐厅工作，但直到1933年接受并设计了他的第一个私人委托，即纽约韦斯特切斯特县的曼德尔之家，他才充分展示了自己的才能。凭借曼德尔之家，斯通因设计和建造了美国最早的国际风格住宅之一而声名鹊起。鲁道夫·辛德勒(Rudolf Schindler)和理查德·纽特拉(Richard Neutra)的作品早在1928年就出现在洛杉矶地区，曼德尔之家帮助将这种风格引入了东海岸，并在20世纪30年代变得越来越流行。斯通的国际风格的作品很受欢迎，他在东北建造了许多房子。然而，随着公众舆论在20世纪40年代后期对这种风格越来越青睐，斯通开始远离这种风格。20世纪40年代，爱德华·达雷尔·斯通参观了弗兰克·劳埃德·赖特在威斯康星州的塔利耶森。他与赖特作品的接触开始改变他的设计理念。他开始觉得以国际风格建造的建筑还有不足之处。它们“太稀疏、太干旱、太寒冷”。赖特发现了一些国际风格设计师错过的东西。斯通非常欣赏赖特将自然融入他的设计和他对本土材料的使用。在帮助领导美国的国际风格运动20年后，斯通重塑了自己，并在弗兰克·劳埃德·赖特(Frank lloyd Wright)的作品基础上发展了一种个人风格。正是在他职业生涯的后半段，斯通设计了阿肯色州的大部分建筑，这些建筑都是他的功劳。斯通在阿肯色州完成的五个私人住宅中的两个，费耶特维尔的威利斯·诺尔住宅(1950年)和麦吉的杰伊·伊维斯住宅(1955年)，以及他的松树崖公民中心(1963-1968年)都被列入国家名录。这三座建筑是斯通这一阶段思想的完美表达。费耶特维尔的威利斯·诺尔故居很好地说明了赖特的影响所造成的变化。20世纪40年代末，斯通正在阿肯色州西北部从事几个不同的项目，当时当地的杂货商威利斯·诺尔(Willis Noll)找到他，让他在塞科亚山(Mount Sequoyah)设计一座住宅。…
{"title":"Arkansas Listings in the National Register of Historic Places","authors":"E. A. James","doi":"10.2307/40031081","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2307/40031081","url":null,"abstract":"Edward Durrell Stone Buildings IN 1916, A FAYETTEVILLE LUMBER COMPANY challenged local boys to design birdhouses. The prestigious competition had the president of the University of Arkansas as one of its judges. Fourteen-year-old Edward Durrell Stone won first prize: $2.50. To create a bluebird house, he sheeted a wooden box in sassafras branches cut in half to look like logs. In his autobiography, he described the small cash prize and local recognition as his \"undoing,\" immediately hooking him on a career in design. He followed in the footsteps of his older brother, Hicks, a practicing architect in Boston. Today, Edward Durrell Stone is widely regarded as one of the greatest American architects of the mid-twentieth century. He left Arkansas early in his career but returned intermittently and even had a satellite office in northwest Arkansas from 1955 to 1959 to help him execute commissions in the state. Stone attended the art school at the University of Arkansas from 1920 until 1923 before heading to Boston to join his brother and begin his formal training in architecture. He started at the Boston Architectural Club, then went to Harvard after winning a 1926 competition that awarded him a year's tuition. He later transferred to Massachusetts Institute of Technology because a professor there, Jacques Carlu, was experimenting with modern designs that interested Stone. In 1927, Stone won a prestigious Rotch award to travel to Europe for two years. In the course of his travels, he became more enamored of modern design after having seen and studied the works of modernist innovators Ee Corbusier and Eudwig Mies van der Rohe. Returning to the United States in 1929, Stone began his professional career. He did his earliest work as a paid architect in the employ of larger architectural firms. He worked on the Waldorf-Astoria hotel and Radio City Music Hall in New York but did not fully display his talents until receiving and designing his first private commission, the Mandel House in Westchester County, New York, in 1933. With the Mandel House, Stone made a name for himself for having designed and built one of the earliest International-style residences in the United States. While the work of Rudolf Schindler and Richard Neutra had appeared in the Los Angeles area as early as 1928, the Mandel House helped introduce the style to the East Coast, where it became increasingly popular in the 1930s. Stone's work in the International style was well received, and he built many houses in the northeast. However, as public opinion became more favorable toward the style in the late 1940s, Stone began to pull himself away from it. Edward Durrell Stone visited Frank Eloyd Wright's Taliesin in Wisconsin in the 1940s. His encounters with Wright's work began to alter his design philosophies. He began to feel that buildings executed in the International style left something to be desired. They were \"too sparse, too arid, too cold.\" Wright had found something that the Inter","PeriodicalId":51953,"journal":{"name":"ARKANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY","volume":"65 1","pages":"294"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/40031081","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68735437","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：