cc
>> You may or may not know this,
but I actually was the number
one bestselling author in the
United States for almost 75
years.
Only the bible sold more books
than I did, and no fiction
writer sold like I did from the
late 1860s even into the 1920s.
And that's why in your time if
you go to book sales and so on,
you can often run into a copy of
one of my books.
There were so many millions
sold.
So I was a very important or
influential figure in this
sense, in that I dominated, so
to speak, the youth, at least
the male youth, reading market.
And of course for me comes the
idea of the Horatio Alger story,
and Horatio Alger is still being
used in ordinary parlance.
People speak of it as rags to
riches.
The fact that I didn't quite
have that approach to life is
irrelevant now, in terms of the
use of the term, but very
relevant in terms of my
presenting my views in life.
Now, I brought along a few of my
books.
It happens that the person that
you may know, believe it or not,
collects these things.
So I just thought I'd pass a few
around, and you can pass them
back and then around.
I'm sure you want to see them.
What is special about them today
often is the very beautiful
cover art that existed.
My critics, even in my own time,
complained that every story was
the same.
That's a bit of an exaggeration,
but I did have certain points I
wanted to make and I made them
over and over again.
Now let me tell you a little bit
about my story so you have a
sense of what I was like and
what my life was like.
My first book was called
Frank's Campaign.
It came out in the 1860s, so
that's about when I got started.
And my most famous one, we'll
talk about it a little later in
some detail, was Ragged Dick.
Now, why don't you show the
books.
No, not Ragged Dick.
Right, there we are.
That's some examples but we're
giving a living...
They were very attractively
packaged very frequently.
Packaging is not something
that's just done for books in
your time but in mine as well.
Now, I wrote over 103, about 103
Horatio Alger books.
And they proved to be my niche.
The niche which I was
successful at.
I tried writing poetry, essays,
novels.
I tried a lot of other things,
but I wasn't very successful.
So once I started writing my
Horatio Alger books, why I
became this very, very big
figure and associated with many
of the literary giants of the
time even though I was, so to
speak, writing books for
adolescents, for young people.
Now, I made my career in
New York City, like a great many
other literary figures then and
in your time.
I actually came from New England
originally, but I established my
career in New York, and I
enjoyed it thoroughly.
And in that career, besides my
writing, I was deeply involved
in working with boys.
I was very much involved in the
newsboys home.
As a you know, a tremendous
number of people, young boys,
sold newspapers and often were
destitute.
I worked with them.
I worked with several different
agencies, we might call them
today, trying to help boys.
I actually became a guardian for
two boys and essentially raised
them.
And I spent a lot of time trying
to provide education for
tutoring, we might say, for
people, especially people who
were going to my alma mater of
Harvard.
One of them, for example, became
a Supreme Court justice,
Cardozo.
But anyone who wanted help from
me in terms of tutoring, any
young man, I was available.
I was dedicated.
My career was not only about
writing about boys and how then
should they live, how the should
we live, but it was also a very
substantial commitment to
helping them concretely.
Now, I only slipped once in my
career.
Moreover, I also tried to
explore a whole range of boys in
my work, social work, and in my
writing.
So I don't only write about, so
to speak, white boys.
I couldn't really if I'm going
to talk about, in many cases,
boys of the street.
So I was something of a pioneer
in talking about American Indian
boys, Chinese American boys, and
so on.
The bulk of my writing, of
course, was about whites and
white boys, but it was by no
means exclusive.
Nor, by the way, were girls
totally avoided by me.
I did write several of my books
about girls trying to get ahead
and trying to find.
But in general, they are not a
major theme in my work.
Boys were my niche, and that's
what I focused on.
Now, any questions about my
background, my experience
growing up?
Well, I might add that I too,
like Emerson, began as a
minister, but I did not continue
in that role.
And that turns around not a
matter of really just belief,
for unlike Carlyle and Emerson,
I was a perfectly orthodox
protestant Christian, but turned
around my ability to discipline
myself in my life.
Well, all right.
Let me talk about my books,
which had so much influence and
millions of people read them,
because I'm proud of them and
I'm proud of what I feel I
accomplished with my books.
Of course, as you know or may
not know, my efforts were
devoted not to people getting
rich, that's the great
misunderstanding about my work,
but for people leading a
successful life, which of course
involved moving out of poverty
to what you all might call a
middle class life, economically
speaking, but very much also
leading what I considered to be
a moral or, I often put it,
manly life.
Now, my focus was on the poor
kids.
There's no doubt about that.
That's who I really cared about.
That's who I felt needed help,
and I tended to focus on them in
the urban setting.
And this is, of course, the
United States in the Industrial
Revolution with the vast slums
emerging in the big cities.
You know the scene.
And I saw loads and loads of
boys who were really in very bad
situations.
Newsboys I've mentioned, but
people who were engaged in
begging, bootblacks was another
very popular activity for boys,
and it often led to very
difficult times for these
people.
So my focus was on poor boys
mostly in the city, but not just
in the city.
I also considered boys who were
trapped at sea, very much we
might say, in your times,
exploited, serving on ships.
Boys in agricultural situations
where they were trapped and
where they needed, I felt, help.
Always trying to reach out to
boys wherever they are.
And what could I do?
So I wrote all these books.
Millions of them were published.
It was widely read.
And so we have the ethic.
The ethic isn't how to get rich,
right?
The ethic is how to move out of
poverty and lead a decent life
economically and, if you will,
morally.
So if we can turn to the next
slide and we already have, you
can see.
I'm famous for pluck, luck, and
the protestant ethic.
This is often said to be my
position, okay?
A very famous position and, of
course, my critics were
to say how to become a dull,
boring, middle class American.
But I didn't see it that way.
I was committed to the idea that
we're going to help these
people, and I felt I knew how to
do it.
What better way than to speak to
them directly, of course.
These books are not written with
any complex English, and in
general the people I wrote to
were literate.
Literacy very, very widespread.
But let's talk about pluck,
luck, and the protestant ethic.
Well, that's a lot of what I am
telling people they need in life
because, of course, you
understand I'm not just speaking
in the end to boys, poor boys.
I'm speaking to people in
general.
I'm an intense moralist, and
it's a morality for everybody.
Let's start with pluck.
Pluck is in fact part of my
ethic.
Not necessarily my word but it's
very important.
If you wish to succeed in life,
however modest your goals may
be, there is absolutely no
substitute for energy and for
ambition.
And I'm convinced that everybody
knows this, whether they will
admit it or not.
You simply have to get out there
and work at it, you have to have
the desire to do this, or it's
not going to happen.
And you really have to be
prepared to be something of a
risk taker because that's what's
also implied with the concept of
pluck.
You have to be able to take up
opportunities, to reach for what
may come your way, and that
involves a kind of, again,
energy and ambition and
alertness.
And again, who can question
that?
So pluck is absolutely
essential, and I make no bones
about it.
And people who do not have it,
well, as I made clear in my
books, they're not going to move
out of their situation.
Now, I'm not engaged in
predicting that someone can move
out.
I am in the business of setting
the conditions that would be
necessary for it.
So first we have pluck.
Yes, it's absolutely essential.
And then, well then we also have
the famous, as it was put,
protestant ethic.
Now, what was meant by this, and
this again is not my term, you
understand, but this is just the
term that's applied to me, what
was meant by this was a certain
type of personal character.
And the kind of character we're
talking about has several
different dimensions.
You have to be an honest person.
Honesty is essential in life, I
argue, and that is implied by a
religious commitment.
You also have to be
self-disciplined.
And one of the problems that I
continually encountered in many
of my younger boys that I dealt
with and wrote about is that
they were not self-disciplined.
And not surprisingly given the
time, I was especially concerned
with people who were not
self-disciplined regarding
drinking.
This was a major, it was so easy
to turn to drinking, to turn to
partying, and with what results?
So it was not that I was a
crusading prohibitionist, but my
point was that people who do not
have a considerable
self-discipline in life are
simply not going anywhere, at
least anywhere that I think they
basically want to go and that
they should go.
So a character that's honest,
that's disciplined, and a
character that shows a
considerable amount of
self-reliance.
In order to survive on the
streets, it was my view, and to
move beyond them, that you had
to be able to deal with streets
and be able to operate in that
kind of environment.
And that required considerable
self-reliance.
People who lack self-reliance,
well, they're not going
anywhere.
And so that, too, in my view was
what people meant when they said
the protestant ethic.
A certain individualism we might
call it, but a special kind of
individualism.
This is no, I'm not interested
in sweeping philosophical
affirmations, and I hope you
notice I'm not some big
philosopher because I'm dealing
with, this is the way I see it,
real people in a real
environment or environments
where they have tremendous
challenge.
We don't have time to talk about
grand philosophical concepts
about the individual or freedom
or anything else, but people
need to have a certain
considerable self-reliance.
And, of course, this is
something you develop.
You need to develop through life
experience.
Again, what I'm interested in is
character.
The development of human
character is crucial.
And I'm not a psychologist or
anything like that, but I am
very much about the kind of
individual person that's
necessary to move ahead in life.
And the irony is that much of
the moving ahead I want for my
young boys is a moving ahead in
terms of a moral character.
And the beauty is, and I think
you understand, that the
development of this character
and the moving ahead
economically, or moving away
from poverty, they go together.
They're intertwined.
And no analysis that focuses on
one kind of development alone is
acceptable.
Now, part of the protestant
ethic for me was, of course, the
Christian religion.
And you might say, well,
clearly.
That's part of the package.
Well, okay, but what does the
Christian religion mean for me?
Well, I hope you realize I'm no
theologian, right?
I don't care about theology.
You understand?
Couldn't care less.
Theology is another form of
philosophy, and I'm not
interested.
And by the way, I'm not
interested in getting into big
arguments about the doctrines of
Christianity either.
You understand what I mean?
Creeds and all of that, I don't
care about that.
What's that got to do with
anything in terms of people's
lives?
So, for me, Christianity is
fundamentally about a set of
moral values.
And the ones we've mentioned I
feel are crucial, but I would
add a couple of others.
For one thing, you should not be
mean.
Yeah, you shouldn't be mean.
Now, that doesn't mean you
should be nice.
I want to make sure you
understand.
Because if you're one of those
weak street boys and sort of
nice, you're going to get run
way over, right?
That won't work.
You're not being self-reliant.
But there's no call for
meanness.
Now, again, consider the people
I'm trying to help.
I'm not going to tell you that
Christianity is about a doctrine
of love and so on.
This is completely irrelevant to
the life situation my boys are
in.
I'm not saying they don't need
love, but I'm saying that it's
just not practical for them to
focus that way.
There again there's certainly no
basis for being mean to other
people, and indeed, and we'll
talk more about this, there is
a, so to speak, protestant ethic
commitment to looking out for
others.
We'll talk some more about it,
but self-reliance does not mean
not showing concern for others.
No.
That's very important.
And, for me, it's part of what
religion is.
So to a large extent, protestant
is not theology, it's not
doctrines, it's a certain ethic
of honesty, a certain caring, a
certain self-reliance, a certain
avoidance of meanness, and,
crucially, this self-discipline.
Got to have it.
Now, when classic European
theorists try to argue that
these values in fact encourage
individuals economically, my
thought was, where have you
been?
Of course.
Of course it does.
These things work together and
that's great.
It's not a discovery.
You'll notice, for example, here
that when I talk about these
things I rarely explicitly,
despite what was said, I rarely
explicitly affirmed the
protestant religion.
Now, there are a couple reasons
for this.
One is my background.
When I was a minister like
Emerson, I was Unitarian, so I
wasn't really into a lot of
doctrine anyway.
But there's no doubt that my
thinking was protestant
oriented, but then so was the
country on the whole.
Now, by this time we have,
certainly, after 1900 we have a
very substantial Catholic
population, Jewish population
and so on.
Jewish Americans do not come up
in my work.
Catholics, well, let's just say
I was a bit more interested in
protestants.
I'll phrase it to you that way.
And I didn't launch any tirades.
But I have to tell you that a
lot of these immigrants, a lot
of these immigrant boys are not
showing the energy and ambition
that I think they should.
And I understand that a lot of
them by your time have, and
that's wonderful.
All for it.
But in my time I was a bit
suspicious of them.
So protestant, well, a set of
values that I connect with the
protestant Christian tradition
perhaps, but I really wasn't
interested in drawing
denominational lines, do you
understand?
Because I didn't care about
things like that.
I cared about a certain ethic in
life.
Well, then we have luck.
Luck.
Now, luck is an interesting one.
And I didn't like it when people
emphasized luck as being
important.
Now, we might say, well, of
course we know it is.
Even if some people had all of
the pluck in the world and they
weren't mean and so on, if they
didn't have luck, they're not
going to move ahead, at least
economically.
Yeah, I know that.
I'm not saying you'd all say
this, but I suspect many of you
would be inclined to emphasize
luck.
You know they've done studies in
your own time of people who
don't do so well economically
tend to emphasize the tremendous
importance of luck and then not
succeed.
And people who are very
successful tend to
underemphasize luck.
I think we can understand the
humanness of that.
But luck floats around out
there, and I know it does, and I
don't like it.
Okay?
I don't like it.
And I don't believe there is
luck.
Yeah.
I don't believe there is luck.
I suspect you all do, but I
disagree with you very strongly.
First, let me explain why I have
to disagree with you and if you
think luck is important,
success, however you define it.
I have to dismiss luck, and I
know this.
This is not something that later
on we see, but I realize that I
must beat down those who
emphasize luck because, of
course, the more luck is
admitted to my system, if you
will, the more that luck matters
in terms of how poor boys do,
even if they have pluck and the
protestant ethic, then the more
success may not be based on
merit but on luck.
And my system, and we'll discuss
it's larger implications for
capitalism, but my system is a
merit moral system all the way.
Those who have pluck, those who
live the protestant ethic, okay,
they are going to move ahead.
Now, of course there are
vagaries that come up, health
issues and so on.
We're not questioning that.
But the more people emphasize
that luck plays a role, the more
they are saying that the
successful, even in my very
middle class and moral terms,
don't necessarily deserve what
they got.
And similarly, the more one
finds poor who live the ethic
and don't succeed, they don't
deserve that either.
So it's very important that I
cut out luck.
Does everyone understand?
Because it's crucial that I do
as much as I can to get rid of
it.
Otherwise, why, and always,
always they want to say pluck,
luck, and the protestant ethic,
but I don't want luck there, and
I don't think it is there.
Other than, you know, as I say,
health issues and such as that.
My morality then, my ethic,
depends on controlling luck.
And here I'm actually, though
it's never said in a formal
philosophical way, I'm at my
most philosophical.
I know this is my major
challenge because my argument is
if you follow my ethic, you will
become a more moral person and
you will move ahead
economically.
Nothing about riches.
I'm not about riches.
But you'll move from rags.
Putting luck in the equation
really messes it up, and I don't
think it's very important, and I
don't like the emphasis people
place on it.
The more they put luck in, the
more it doesn't matter whether
you have pluck or the protestant
ethic or anything else.
So luck, no.
I don't think so.
We can talk about it in a
second.
So we have pluck, the protestant
ethic, and luck, but that's not
quite all we need as we try to
figure out how we should live
and, thus, live better morally
and economically.
We have to have a deep, we also
have to have, if you will, a
fourth issue.
We have to have a deep
commitment to learning and to
education.
I just felt it was terribly
important.
Now, part of this education is
the education of the streets.
The street smarts that you've
got to have if you're poor.
And, of course, people who are
in that circumstance in any
time, in any civilization, have
to develop it if they're going
to make it at all.
I mean, just make it, never mind
moving ahead.
But I also was very committed to
education that went beyond that.
Education in terms of reading,
writing, basic arithmetic and
math.
What we don't need, though, and
what I had to put up with at
Harvard was a lot of focus on
Latin and Greek.
Okay?
Now, as you may know, Thoreau is
another one who went to Harvard
and was sick of it.
It was worse then.
We don't need Latin and Greek.
How in the world does that help
anyone get ahead?
Latin and Greek is for some very
special people perhaps, but it's
not the kind of education we
really need to move ahead in
life.
Now, you might say to me, well,
at least, would you be willing
to read some great books or
things like that?
Wouldn't that be fine?
Well, sure it'd be fine once
I've developed, but how really
does that help one?
We need basic education.
But we also need an attitude
toward education on the street
or out of the street that
involves openness to learning.
You've got to keep doing it.
And you see that ties back to
pluck.
You've got to be aware of
things.
You've got to be able to take up
opportunities.
And so education very, very
important.
In my boys, in the book, in
myself, in my working with them,
over and over again, education
is emphasized.
It's crucial.
And so whether formal or
informal, an openness to
education, vital.
Well, there's one other aspect,
a fifth feature, that we have to
consider in terms of
development, in terms of moving
ahead morally and economically.
Getting away from rags, if not
to riches.
And that is we have to have, and
I've referred briefly to it, we
have to have what we might call
a certain community concern.
And for my boys and in my
working with them in life the
same, what that meant is we need
sponsors.
We need people who will reach
out and help, and one is called
upon to do the same.
This has nothing to do with the
celebration of selfishness.
I'm very much committed to the
idea we have to help people.
And I'll tell you, success over
and over again in my stories
comes when somebody sees the
earnest, the hardworking, the
moral boy on the streets and
reaches out to help.
And it makes all the difference
because, realistically, how is
the typical poor kid, often with
no family or just one parent,
oh, yeah, that's all in my
books, how, in fact, are they
going to break out unless they
have some help here?
It's just a recognition on my
part of the realities of what we
might call poverty, or being
poor, as I put it.
So help is vital, and it is of
course part of what is expected
when one has the position to
help.
That's part of the, if you will,
protestant or Christian ethic.
But for the boys in the stories,
they go ahead almost always only
when their pluck and protestant
ethic is observed and a helper
emerges.
Now, I'm sure you all understand
what kind of helper we're going
to have here, right?
We can't have a helper that says
you're ready for easy street.
We have to have a helper who is
going to honor these values and
honor the boy who is expressing
them and then help provide the
opportunities that are
essential.
And the number one opportunity,
generally speaking, in my books
and in my experience in working
with boys is providing
opportunities for education.
For me, that's a crucial way in
which boys can acquire some of
the practical skills that they
need to supplement their pluck
and their sort of livingness of
the protestant ethic.
So there must be a helper.
This is not the lonely
individual struggling up.
That isn't how it happens,
generally, I argue.
And it isn't how, morally
speaking, it should happen.
So there is a certain communal
ethic, do you understand, that
goes along with my emphasis on
self-reliance.
So when Emerson says go alone,
that's not practical advice for
some poor kid.
That just isn't.
No.
You can't go alone, and you
shouldn't go alone when you have
the opportunity to help others.
In certain sense, you might say
I'm nearer to Carlyle because I
see the absolute essential role
of leadership.
Of course, I don't speak about
it in Carlyle's inflated terms.
I'm not talking about the fancy
world historical leaders that he
was.
But I am saying that in day to
day life, in concrete human
experience in dealing with these
people, they need mentors, they
need people willing to help.
It is, as Carlyle understood, a
two-way street.
Mentors cannot help those who
are not prepared either here or
to move in the direction I'm
proposing.
And that's something that was
very important in a number of my
books because at time mentors
tried to help those who simply
weren't interested in the end.
And while I saw that as sad, I
didn't see it as surprising
because why in the world should
we think that every poor boy
wants to move in the direction
that I'm talking about.
They don't, and that's the way
it is.
You must help others, as I am,
when you can.
Now, one last point on how then
should we live in this regard.
Of course, there's always what
should you avoid because you
know there are things that must
be avoided.
Dangers that are out there.
And I've suggested some of them,
but let me suggest, let me put
it, the way I did it, again,
wasn't let me give you a big
moral rulebook.
The way I did it was talking
about the kind of boys you want
to avoid.
Okay?
You understand?
Number one, you want to avoid
those bratty, rich boys.
They are very, very bad news.
They're rich but they didn't do
anything to get there.
And so they couldn't possibly
understand your situation.
And you know the way they act?
Well, that's the bratty thing.
They're so superior.
They think they know best.
They look down on poor boys.
They're not going to help you.
Their fathers, they may help you
because they have a different
experience.
But these overeducated,
overdressed, bratty, rich kids,
no.
Stay away from them.
Okay, number two, who do you
want to avoid?
Well, you might say, wait a
minute, how do they encounter
these rich kids?
Well, out on the streets they
come up, they want their shoes
shined or a number of other
settings where they can try to
lord it over.
I can't tell you how much I
loathe them, and I make that
clear.
This is no celebration of the
offspring of the rich.
Uh-uh.
Number two, you've got to watch
out for the inevitable wild
kids.
A lot of wild kids on the
streets.
They spend a lot of time
drinking.
They spend a lot of time smoking
cigars.
They don't spend much time
working.
They don't have any respect for
anything.
I'm sorry to say that, as I've
already suggested, very often
these seem to be immigrant kids.
Kind of second generation kids.
Really wild.
You got to stay away from them,
and they're all over the place.
You just have to make up your
mind you're not going to get
into that.
Their influence is substantial.
In a way, the influence of the
fancy brats, well, that's not
day to day, but the wild kids,
yes, it is day to day and it's a
serious, serious problem.
And, of course, as you might
expect, we're going to avoid the
lazy kids, and there are lots of
them.
Let's not kid ourselves.
One of the things I want to
emphasize is let's be realistic.
That's my complaint about a lot
of people who approach the
question of, so to speak, how
then should we live?
They're not realistic about
people.
They're not rooted in actual
concrete life situations.
They like to pine and
pontificate about these things.
But I operated from knowledge of
the streets.
You see, my books aren't just
based on my imaginations, but I
had all this experience with
these kids.
And I have a lot of impatience,
as you can tell, with people who
want to offer grand theories
about how to deal with it.
The fact is they're spoiled
brats.
They're lazy kids.
They're wild kids.
These kids aren't going
anywhere, and one has to
acknowledge that.
Now, you might say, well, wait a
minute, don't you want to help
them?
Sure, we can try that, but the
poor boy doesn't have time to
help them.
And what help can he offer if
they're not really interested?
Now let me say that I want to go
on to be even more concrete and
give you a case study, but do
you have any questions about my
ethic?
Do you understand it?
Yeah?
>> Where did this spring from in
your past, in your boyhood?
>> What do you mean?
>> Well, you say you experience
on the street.
Did that come from your social
work or from your youth?
>> She's asking where did my
ethic come from in terms of my
life experience, and I had a
conventional middle class
background.
So it came, the knowledge of the
streets came from my life in
social work in New York, I would
say.
Yeah.
Definitely.
Yeah?
>> Is is fair to call you
Utilitarian?
>> Very much so.
Very much so.
I'm a practical guy, and if
you're not, people aren't, I
mean, that's a luxury of the
spoiled rich.
But poor boys don't have time
for anything else but very
practical Utilitarian movements
But remember, the Utilitarian is
not just schemes of how to get
ahead financially.
It's very much a moral ethic
which constrains, do you
understand, and directs economic
endeavor.
In other words, thinking of your
own time more or less, there's
not a drop of Ayn Rand in me, do
you understand?
Not a drop of it.
So that's an ethic, but it has
nothing to do with my ethic.
Because, of course, the
so-called protestant values are
very important for me.
And I think they are actually
very important in terms of
getting ahead.
It happens often in my books
that people who don't adhere to
them fall by the wayside, and
I'll illustrate that in a
moment.
Anything else about my ethic?
Yeah?
>> Is it that the idea that when
talking about the boys who were
observed being hardworking and
being moral and then someone
steps in to help.
>> Right.
>> Is there where the luck kind
of came on or would luck be that
help?
Is that kind of how that
evolved?
>> No.
She's trying to slip luck back
in.
>> Is that how it got back in?
>> It didn't get back in.
No, it didn't get in.
I'm sorry, you think it's just
got to be there.
Look, I am, let's give me an
example, I am an oppressed boy
sailor, okay?
And my captain sees me and sees
how hard I'm working, how clean
I'm living.
Okay, got the picture?
And helps me.
Is that luck?
Oh, no, it's not.
I deserve to be seen.
He sees me because of the way
I'm living.
There's no luck about it.
It isn't a happenstance.
It isn't a luck that these
people are picked.
Their behavior, their character,
this is why they're picked.
And anybody who thinks
differently is a sad cynic.
And I will say more than that, I
suspect, don't take this
personally please...
[LAUGHTER]
I suspect is a person who hasn't
has as much success as they'd
like, and they're blaming it
on luck.
No.
The deserving are observed.
And if you don't like it, you're
cynical.
You're sad.
But I'll tell you, if you're a
poor boy, you don't have time
for observations like that.
You've got to work hard, and the
chances are...
there's no 100% to anything,
I'll give you that, but the
chances are that you will be
seen and you will be observed
and you will move ahead.
And I'm sorry if anybody thinks
differently.
Yeah?
>> How much public education was
available to children back then?
>> Quite a bit.
For elementary education, yes.
It wouldn't be high school.
By, say, 1900 the vast majority
of students had elementary
education but almost no high
school.
Very low.
>> Does impoverishment of
children exacerbated by the
Civil War.
In other words, where there a
lot more kids on the street
after the war?
>> There were.
And he was very alert to that
fact.
But there were even more after
the huge wave of eastern and
southern European immigration
began after 1890.
So, in terms of the urban
phenomenon, it...
We think often in your time of,
well, there's so many cases of
kids who don't have parents or
are fatherless.
I'm sorry, but there was plenty
of it in my time.
And it was a very, very sad
situation, and something
concrete has to be done about
it.
Let me give you a case study,
and we can talk a little bit
more.
But a case study is, and let's
turn to Ragged Dick here.
By the way, this is my assistant
here.
You've seen him before.
His name is Joe, and he's a
great assistant.
He's graduating in May, and his
major is German and he's going
to be on a Fulbright in Austria
next year, which is quite
an honor.
And he's, as you can tell, quite
skilled at shifting a few of
these things for me.
But I appreciate his service.
Well anyway, Ragged Dick.
This is the book.
And it is reprinted, by the way,
I'm sorry to say that very few
of my 102 works are reprinted
today, but Ragged Dick is.
There's a number of paperback
editions, and it's taught widely
in colleges, universities.
This is a very early edition of
Ragged Dick.
I thought I'd talk a little bit
about it and give you an example
of what it looks like so you can
have an even more concrete feel
because that's what I care
about.
Well, who was Ragged Dick?
Rags to riches, Ragged Dick.
Well, Ragged Dick boot-blacked.
You have to realize that in
those days men wore boots and
very frequently wished to have
them shiny.
And in that process, of course,
as a poor boy, Ragged Dick came
in contact with a lot of other
boys, obviously, who are
struggling to get by, but also
because he was a bootblack, that
was the way in which he, of
course, came in contact with
possible helpers.
Now, poor Ragged Dick had no
education and, really, the
family background was, to say
the least, limited.
So it was a pretty difficult
situation.
And in Ragged Dick's life, he
comes into contact with a number
of characters.
This is how I make my case, do
you understand?
No books of discourse.
For example, he comes into
contact with one fellow by the
name of Johnny Nolan.
Now, Johnny is another poor boy,
but Johnny's not going anywhere,
and you know why?
Because Johnny is lazy.
Johnny really doesn't want to
work very hard, and he doesn't
work very hard and therefore
Johnny doesn't go anywhere.
Ragged Dick is sympathetic to
Johnny, he's a friend of
Johnny's, but Johnny's just not
going anywhere.
He doesn't seem to be able to
get going and doesn't want to.
Well then Ragged Dick also knows
Mickey Maguire.
I love these names that he comes
up with.
Mickey Maguire, as you might
guess, is an Irish immigrant.
Well, I'm sorry, but Mickey is,
again, a person who's part of
Ragged Dick's world, but
Mickey's not going anywhere
either.
It's made very explicit that
he's Irish, his Catholicism
isn't mentioned but it's made
very explicit he is, and it's
made crystal clear that he's a
loser, to put it directly.
Then we have Roswell.
We're just going to run through
a few characters there, give you
a few.
Roswell is the spoiled brat.
He's rich.
He's obnoxious.
And you might the raise the
question of me, well, okay, but
he's situated now.
Is he going to go down in life?
Well, sure he is.
Now, it may be relative.
His position may be so well
established through the efforts
of his father.
But relatively speaking, yes
he's going to go down because it
doesn't matter where you are, if
you don't follow the ethic, bad
things are going to happen to
you.
And you must understand that
from my point of view he must go
down.
Now, I don't mean become a poor
boy.
That isn't realistic.
But he must relatively decline,
economically speaking, or else
it isn't a merit system again.
Understand?
So I'm confident he will.
I'm not worried about it.
And then there's Johnny Muller.
Johnny is a really sweet guy.
A really nice guy.
And you know what happens to
poor Johnny?
Johnny gets injured.
And so, what are we going to do
about that?
He's injured.
Well, you know what we're going
to do.
We're poor but we're going to do
all we can to help Johnny
because that's part of our
ethic.
We're not just going to say,
well, you're injured, you're out
of it, goodbye.
No.
Ragged Dick, he tries to help
Johnny, and it's really very,
very important.
Okay?
And then there's Jim Travis.
As you can see, my books are
filled with characters
representing different ethics.
But the stories are all about
action.
There are no little summary
paragraphs about do you get it.
The assumption is that these
kids get it.
And if you can't get it, then
there's a serious problem.
Well, what about Mr. Travis?
Well, here's what the story is
with him.
He's a street boy who's a
criminal.
And you know what he does to my
Ragged Dick?
He steals from him.
He's not honest.
But you know what I do?
I work with him, and I convince
him that he needs to go, and I
go with him, to the cops.
Because he's got to take this
step if he's going to become
honest down the road.
But they're all out there.
And they're all very central to
Ragged Dick.
Now, what hasn't been mentioned
but was very present in Ragged
Dick, as in so many other
stories, are who is the helper
or helpers because of course
there have to be for Ragged
Dick.
And there are several who emerge
in different ways.
Ironically, it's perhaps
Mr. Roswell, the father of the
brat, who helps most in Ragged
Dick in helping Ragged Dick get
a decent education, which we
know is absolutely essential.
And when he does, it's
incredible.
And so, how does he help him?
Well, the way I help people.
That is, he got him a tutor.
We got to start at the very
bottom.
And then work up educationally.
And education, but what isn't
needed with Ragged Dick, do you
understand, what isn't needed is
moral education because Ragged
Dick already has the ethic.
And that's why he's a good bet.
And that's why he's going to
succeed.
Does Ragged Dick become, so to
speak, an Andrew Carnegie,
starting from poverty and
becoming a zillionaire?
No, of course not.
He doesn't obtain riches.
But what he does obtain is a
decent economic life to match
his already existent decent
moral life.
And, in that sense, his
situation is transformed.
So, when we look at Ragged Dick
or any of the others, they're
all about transformation and the
need for transformation but,
again, in what we might call
distinctly individual terms.
Okay?
So if you ever decide you want
to read one of my books, and of
course I recommend them
strongly, Ragged Dick is
available everywhere.
Now sometimes people said to me
in my own time, well, let's talk
a little bit about the broader
social and structural
implications of your argument.
Well, one thing you will notice
right away about me is has
anyone mentioned government?
Government is not at all part of
the scene as far as I'm
concerned.
Now, in part, we can say that it
wasn't because in my time
America had a relatively weak
government.
Relatively inactive state.
But let me just throw this out
to you for a second, why else do
you think I wouldn't emphasize
government?
The situation was one where you
wouldn't immediately think of
government given the times.
Okay?
But why else do you think I
wouldn't emphasize government?
Yeah?
>> Because you believe in
self-reliance.
Getting ahead on your own...
With a little help.
[LAUGHTER]
>> Okay, that's it.
That's it.
I love that.
Yeah, getting ahead on your own
with a little help.
That's beautiful.
That's it.
I hate to have it reduced to a
sentence, but yeah, you've got
it right.
Exactly.
Yes.
Yeah.
I don't want government involved
because, in a sense, it's not
just that we don't necessarily
need it, it's that it might deny
the ethic.
It might deny the ethic.
And so government just doesn't
figure in the picture.
And government occupations don't
figure as possible roots, such
as, say, the military or
whatever, a government
bureaucrat.
So there's a deep suspicion of
government that is very similar
to Emerson's views and
dramatically different from
Carlyle of course.
Now, sometimes people say, well,
I think there's a lot to this.
We all know that certain
character traits are crucial.
We may get into some dispute
about priorities of them.
We certainly know that energy
and ambition and a certain
amount of risk taking, all these
things are central.
Anyone who has a job knows these
things.
But my critics said, well, but
wait a minute.
How do we deal with the lazy?
The wild?
That whole category of people
who are not going to make it?
To put it another way, my
critics said there's a certain
social Darwinist aspect to your
thought.
Not in a sense that you accept
that there are losers, that some
people won't make it.
And there are two concerns about
that, critics said.
One is, what about them?
They're people too, and that's
not your main concern because in
a sense your system depends on
people not making it as well as
making it.
Do you understand?
Because you, I attach moral
worth to those who are morally
and economically successful.
And I'm very critical of people
and their morality who do not
have it.
That's obvious.
And so, in a sense, there's a
view that that's too bad, and do
you care?
I'm a practical man.
Okay?
Now, you can go on and whine
about this group and that person
all you want.
I'm in the business of helping
those who are prepared, with a
little help from others, to help
themselves.
And why in the world we should
not devote our energies to that
I have no idea.
There's no point in wasting time
for those who are not prepared
to move ahead.
Of course one should reach out
to them, I'm not saying he
shouldn't, but there are a lot
of people who simply will not
accept the realities of street
life.
Or to put it another way, the
realities of life as it is in
this world.
And I'm sorry, but some people
have what it takes, some poor
boys have what it takes and some
don't, and there's not a thing
that can be done about it,
though you can spend a lot of
time on it.
People don't like that, but
that's the way it is.
That is absolutely the way it
is.
Now, sometimes people say, well,
what's this got to do with
capitalism?
Well, of course I'm sympathetic
to capitalism, but I'm not
interested in capitalism.
And I certainly don't believe in
unrestricted behavior, nor am I
a celebrate of the rich.
Like Tocqueville when he came to
America in the 1830s, I
recognize that American
individualism is vital for the
development of the individual
person and for the society, but
only if it is encased in a set
of values that prevent it from
turning into rampant
uncontrolled individualism.
And that's what I propose.
Now, you might say, well,
they're not still reading you
anymore, when did it happen?
Well, I'll let you guess, if
you've got a second.
What decade do you think I went
out of favor?
Thud.
It's a comment on, you
understand that's not a comment
on me, but yeah, you got a
decade?
>> [INAUDIBLE]
>> I'm sorry to say that, yes,
the Great Depression.
The 1930s.
That was the end for my sales.
They just disappeared.
Now, did poor boys disappear?
Have they disappeared, my
friends?
No.
But it got so bad, the economic
situation was so bad and somehow
my critics said, well, I'm sorry
but this just won't do it
anymore.
The whole economic system has
collapsed more or less.
So I can have as much pluck as I
want or I can be a good little
boy, but that's not going to
help us when we have 25% of the
population unemployed and so on.
Yes, well, these things do
happen.
Okay?
But I'll tell you this, from my
perspective, what did they do?
They tried to substitute
government in the end, and they
still are, for building
character.
And it won't work.
And it doesn't work.
We still have loads and loads
and loads and loads and loads of
poor boys.
And I don't care how many
government programs you have,
unless you build a certain
character and develop a certain
ambitious pluck oriented
personality, they're going
nowhere.
But Ragged Dick, he listened to
me, and he did just fine in
life.
[APPLAUSE]