Country People in the New South: Tennessee's Upper Cumberland. Studies in Rural Culture

Using the Tennessee antievolution 'Monkey Law,' authored by a local legislator, as a measure of how conservatives successfully resisted, co-opted, or ignored reform efforts, Jeanette Keith explores conflicts over the meaning and cost of progress in Tennessee's hill country from 1890 to 1925.Until the 1890s, the Upper Cumberland was dominated by small farmers who favored limited government and firm local control of churches and schools. Farm men controlled their families' labor and opposed economic risk taking; farm women married young, had large families, and produced much of the family's sustenance. But the arrival of the railroad in 1890 transformed the local economy. Farmers battled town dwellers for control of community institutions, while Progressives called for cultural, political, and economic modernization. Keith demonstrates how these conflicts affected the region's mobilization for World War I, and she argues that by the 1920s shifting gender roles and employment patterns threatened traditionalists' cultural hegemony. According to Keith, religion played a major role in the adjustment to modernity, and local people united to support the 'Monkey Law' as a way of confirming their traditional religious values. In the summer of 1925, national attention focused on Dayton, Tennessee, where John T. Scopes was on trial for teaching evolution in violation of state law. The Tennessee "monkey trial" symbolized the confrontation of modern, secular, urban America with conservative, religious, rural America. Although urban journalists and social critics scorned on the latter, this book presents the perspective of country people in Tennessee's Upper Cumberland region. Traditionally these people favored low taxes, minimal government services, and local control of institutions such as churches and schools. During the early 20th century, farmers and town folk fought repeated political battles over the meaning and costs of progress and over control of local institutions. These battles frequently centered on the schools, as the state mandated compulsory education, construction of county high schools (to be paid for by county levies), and modern educational practices. Support for the Tennessee Monkey Law allowed the region to unite in affirmation of religious values at a time when it was increasingly divided by politics, economics, school reforms, and changing social mores. The old ways offered security and survival in an uncertain world. Chapters cover Upper Cumberland farm economics in the 1890s; family characteristics, family life (both reality and religious ideals), and community life; religion and churches; Jeffersonian government in action (politics and social order); arrival of the cash economy with the railroads; struggles over road construction; conflict over school reform and local control; reactions to World War I and the draft; persistence, poverty, and politics; and the family, religion, and politics in the 1920s. The chapter on education (chapter 7) includes information on county enrollments, elementary school graduates, educational practices, and literacy. The book contains references in notes, an extensive bibliography, and an index. (SV) Using the Tennessee antievolution'Monkey Law,'authored by a local legislator, as a measure of how conservatives successfully resisted, co-opted, or ignored reform efforts, Jeanette Keith explores conflicts over the meaning and cost of progress in Tennessee's hill country from 1890 to 1925. Until the 1890s, the Upper Cumberland was dominated by small farmers who favored limited government and firm local control of churches and schools. Farm men controlled their families'labor and opposed economic risk taking; farm women married young, had large families, and produced much of the family's sustenance. But the arrival of the railroad in 1890 transformed the local economy. Farmers battled town dwellers for control of community institutions, while Progressives called for cultural, political, and economic modernization. Keith demonstrates how these conflicts affected the region's mobilization for World War I, and she argues that by the 1920s shifting gender roles and employment patterns threatened traditionalists'cultural hegemony. According to Keith, religion played a major role in the adjustment to modernity, and local people united to support the'Monkey Law'as a way of confirming their traditional religious values. Using the Tennessee antievolution "Monkey Law," authored by a local legislator, as a measure of how conservatives successfully resisted, co-opted, or ignored reform efforts, this study explores conflicts over the meaning and cost of progress in Tennessee's hill country from 1890 to 1925.