In The Refinement of America: Persons, Houses, Cities, Richard L. Bushman “narrates the story of the changes [in refinement] in American society beginning around 1690 and continuing until gentility was thoroughly entrenched in the middle classes in the middle of the nineteenth century” (pg. xiii). He uses the methods of object epistemology to examine various artifacts of material culture in order to draw conclusions about his subjects’ lifestyles and the larger patters they demonstrate. Additionally, he draws upon the work of cultural historians such as Karen Halttunen and John Kasson. Bushman concludes, “Gentility heightened self-consciousness, not in any deep philosophical sense, but in the common meaning of becoming aware of how one looked in the eyes of others. Self-aware performance came about naturally as a result of adopting genteel standards of behavior to elevate human life” (pg. xiv). Further, Bushman writes, “The division between rude and refined only roughly corresponded to wealth, education, family, work, or any other measure of social class. Genteel culture became an independent variable, cutting across society, and leading, [he argues], to the confusion about class that has long been characteristic of American society” (pg. xv). Finally, Bushman writes, “The refinement of America involved the capture of aristocratic culture for use in republican society. Refinement held out the hope of elevation from ordinary existence into an exalted society of superior beings” (pg. xix).
Bushman argues, “The culmination of the genteel lifestyle was the genteel person, disciplined, deferential, spirited, polite, knowledgeable, forceful, graceful. The long list of desired traits, when integrated into a single character, created a magnetism and power that was the ideal of the age” (pg. 19). Turning to courtesy-books, Bushman writes, “These books speak for the enduring connection of New World culture with Europe and for the surprising adaptability of centuries-old values to life carried on under vastly different social circumstances from those where the books originated. Through the books’ rules, the cultural practices of an aristocratic European society, quite removed from anything known on these shores, flowed into Britain’s raw and unfinished American colonies” (pg. 33). Examining architecture, Bushman writes, “A grand house, properly laid out and decorated, anchored a person’s standing in the community and even sustained political power. Gentility was interwoven with the totality of gentry culture. By the Revolution, those who lacked taste generally lacked power” (pg. 97). In this way, “by the eighteenth century, the meaning of gentry houses so far exceeded the practical functions they performed as sheltered warm places for sleeping, eating, and work that houses became a form of literature. The houses were stage sets for dramas, and like the characters themselves, could be envisioned within the frame of a story” (pg. 132).
Bushman writes, “The realm of the middling people was the family rather than town or county. Propriety, rather than the need for public dignity, sustained this simpler variant of gentility. The desired goal was respectability rather than eminence” (pg. 208). He continues, “Of all the forms of print pouring from the presses, sentimental fiction played the most critical part in the extension of refinement to the middle class. The influence of sentimental fiction was not a new development in the propagation of refinement; in the eighteenth century, novels had joined forces with courtesy books to spread information about genteel behavior” (pg. 281). In this way, “The domestication of gentility had the effect of putting women at the center of genteel performances” (pg. 281). Addressing the principal dichotomy in gentility of the period, Bushman writes, “‘City’ and ‘country’ were the words used to designate the broadest cultural regions. The terms divided the world in half, implying refinement and polish in the city and coarseness in the country. The usage was inaccurate if taken as an actual description of the two places. In reality polished and coarse culture could be found in both city and country” (pg. 353). He further writes, “For one large group, gentility stabilized identity amid the social confusion of the early nineteenth century” (pg. 404). Additionally, “Gentility was particularly useful in securing one’s identity along the lower boundary of the middle class, where people were emerging from a cruder traditional culture and were uneasy about the validity of their refinement” (pg. 404). Bushman concludes, “Gentility was also an independent variable in the class equation. Poor refined people distanced themselves from the vulgar poor and elicited different treatment” (pg. 446-447). In this way, “The promise of respectability contained in simple genteel objects and gestures lured ever more Americans into the toils of consumer culture, hopelessly blurring the boundaries of class” (pg. 447). ( )

This is a book that was assigned in an Urban History class I took several years ago. I wasn't sure what to think of it at first, it read like a catalog of the linen closet of a stranger. But the chapters were short - the length of a comfortable sitdown, and slowly I found that the lists and catalogs did hold the kind of meaning that Bushman discussed. He did an enormous amount of research, but more importantly, he paid attention to the research and the items and provided a meaningful and valid context for their analysis.

This book would be of interest to anyone studying the details and detritus of gentrification and the gentrified classes. It is not a very quick read, but it is a very possible read, not terribly dense, detailed enough to feel like you've accomplished something at the end of every chapter. You will never look at forks the same way again. ( )

Bushman is supreme! I love his absurdly meticulous research and detail. Right up my alley.