It's also important to see who is not on the central platform.

June 5, 2021 2:11 PM

Conner Ewing discusses the cover art of the 1961 edition of The Federalist Papers, and the work it is based on. (SL twitter thread, and one very brief video and accompanying text summary.)
posted by eotvos (10 comments total)

That is an excellent distillation of how American history gets reworked and reframed (literally, in this case). I feel like I remember that version of The Federalist Papers, maybe as a high school text.
posted by chavenet at 2:25 PM on June 5, 2021 [2 favorites]

Wow, this is all fascinating. (I have only read the Twitter thread so far, but I am really looking forward to reading the linked article.

And now I am very interested to find out more about Connor Ewing, Richard Caton Woodville, and Smarthistory.

Thank you so much for posting this, eotvos!
posted by kristi at 2:37 PM on June 5, 2021

Among other things in the linked article, the contemporaneous map of Mexico is fantastic!
posted by riverlife at 2:44 PM on June 5, 2021

Another interesting change that wasn't flagged: the Black man in the original is drinking (water?) from a tin cup held in his palm, the way a thirsty worker might hold it between draughts. There's a leather canteen next to him, half covered by a straw hat. I think we're meant to understand that it's his hat, therefore his canteen. He's sitting outside a hotel, but he had to bring his own beverage and his own cup. The liquid he's drinking is probably water, too, which sends another message - the people at the hotel were presumably served beer or liquor, but he wasn't even given water.

These significations have been removed from the Mentor Book illustration: The canteen has been cropped out and the straw hat has been removed from the ground, transformed into a tricorn, and placed on his head. This is clearly an editorial change, not mere cropping: note that all the visible hats in the original illustration are distinctly different, but now he and the central figure have the same headgear. His hand is also held differently: instead of it being palm-upwards, holding a cup, it's palm-downwards and, if he's holding a cup (we can't actually tell) it could only be by the handle. It seems more likely that he's drinking a beverage supplied by the hotel, and is therefore implicitly part of the group above him.

As Ewing points out, the young girl on the lower right has been cropped out. I don't know whether she's meant to represent the Black man's daughter, although her features do resemble his. I think it makes sense to think she isn't, because his working attire is clean and whole, albeit worn, and he's wearing boots; while she's barefoot and in a ragged shift. She's standing next to a bucket: I think the implication is that she's enslaved, while the man next to her is a free Person of Colour. So there are two levels of significance there, not just one: the admission of Slave States has implications for both free and enslaved Black Americans.
posted by Joe in Australia at 6:42 PM on June 5, 2021 [3 favorites]

Another thing about the young black girl that struck me is that her face and head looks exactly like a grown black man's. It's as if the artist just had the one model and adjusted his head for hers, figuring that they would do about the same. Disturbing.

I really appreciate this thread; I had not seen this cover, or this painting. My copy of the papers just had a portrait of Madison on a red background.
posted by Countess Elena at 7:10 PM on June 5, 2021 [1 favorite]

This is really amazing, thanks for posting.
posted by mollweide at 7:13 PM on June 5, 2021

I don't think anyone holds a newspaper like that...
posted by zompist at 10:52 PM on June 5, 2021

Another thing about the young black girl that struck me is that her face and head looks exactly like a grown black man's.

Could the child be a boy? I have seen other depictions of small boys in dresses.
posted by JanetLand at 9:37 AM on June 6, 2021 [1 favorite]

That's a good point. Boys did wear dresses. Still doesn't look like a child's face, though, although maybe this is subjective.
posted by Countess Elena at 7:20 PM on June 6, 2021 [1 favorite]

I have seen other depictions of small boys in dresses.

Very plausible! But it wouldn't necessarily be a dress. Look at the excessively wide neck hole and the absence of any waist. I think it's more likely a piece of adult clothing, like an undershirt, repurposed.
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:50 PM on June 6, 2021 [2 favorites]