Class & Community
Running head: CLASS AND COMMUNITY
CLASS AND COMMUNITY: THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION IN LYNN
BY
ALAN DAWLEY
Topic Details: Dawley argues that John Common's history of the shoemaking industry and its trade unions was correct in some way, but ultimately distorted the history of the shoemakers union during the period 1830 to 1900. In a detailed essay desribe what Common's managed to get right, according to Dawley, about the development of the shoe industry and its unions, and what he misrepresented. Conclude the essay by explaining whether you agree with Commons or Dawley and why.
Abstract
During the 1800s, an industrial revolution came into play.
John Commons, an American economist and dean of labor studies played a major part in noting down the issues during that time and dominated in the field for almost half a century. (Dawley, pg 6)
Alan Dawley, re-researched the incidences during that era and thus discusses what Commons’ reported incorrectly therefore distorting the history of the shoe industry unions during the 1830s to 1900s.
CLASS AND COMMUNTITY:
THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION IN FLYNN
No matter how many times we delve into the past, each time something new and something different comes up if the right types of questions are asked; throwing our old ideas and concepts in a whole new light. This is exactly what Alan Dawley does. He goes back into the past and researches about the major shoe industry revolution in the 1800s and discovers some unexpected answers. John Commons, a notable figure during those times wrote about it in detail, many of his followers followed in his footsteps. Those who dared to write different were ignored till Alan Dawley brought them to light. The first thing Alan Dawley noticed was the fact that the shoemakers strike was the biggest ever to hit the United States which was totally ignored in Commons and several of his followers works. Going deeper, he discusses that what Commons wrote at that time was not
CLASS AND COMMUNITY: THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION IN LYNN
BY
ALAN DAWLEY
Topic Details: Dawley argues that John Common's history of the shoemaking industry and its trade unions was correct in some way, but ultimately distorted the history of the shoemakers union during the period 1830 to 1900. In a detailed essay desribe what Common's managed to get right, according to Dawley, about the development of the shoe industry and its unions, and what he misrepresented. Conclude the essay by explaining whether you agree with Commons or Dawley and why.
Abstract
During the 1800s, an industrial revolution came into play.
John Commons, an American economist and dean of labor studies played a major part in noting down the issues during that time and dominated in the field for almost half a century. (Dawley, pg 6)
Alan Dawley, re-researched the incidences during that era and thus discusses what Commons’ reported incorrectly therefore distorting the history of the shoe industry unions during the 1830s to 1900s.
CLASS AND COMMUNTITY:
THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION IN FLYNN
No matter how many times we delve into the past, each time something new and something different comes up if the right types of questions are asked; throwing our old ideas and concepts in a whole new light. This is exactly what Alan Dawley does. He goes back into the past and researches about the major shoe industry revolution in the 1800s and discovers some unexpected answers. John Commons, a notable figure during those times wrote about it in detail, many of his followers followed in his footsteps. Those who dared to write different were ignored till Alan Dawley brought them to light. The first thing Alan Dawley noticed was the fact that the shoemakers strike was the biggest ever to hit the United States which was totally ignored in Commons and several of his followers works. Going deeper, he discusses that what Commons wrote at that time was not
References: Dawley, Alan. Class and community: the industrial revolution in lynn. Harvard University Press.