Gibson, Alan 1961–

views updated

Gibson, Alan 1961–

(Alan Ray Gibson)

PERSONAL:

Born 1961. Ethnicity: "Caucasian." Education: Western Kentucky University, B.A., 1984; University of Notre Dame, M.A., 1987, Ph.D.

ADDRESSES:

Office—California State University, Chico, Department of Political Science, Butte Hall, Rm. 741, 400 W. 1st St., Chico, CA 95929-0455. E-mail—agibson@csuchico.edu.

CAREER:

Writer, political scientist, historian, and educator. California State University, Chico, professor of political science, 2001—.

WRITINGS:

Interpreting the Founding: Guide to the Enduring Debates over the Origins and Foundations of the American Republic, University Press of Kansas (Lawrence, KS), 2006.

Understanding the Founding: The Crucial Questions, University Press of Kansas (Lawrence, KS), 2007.

SIDELIGHTS:

Writer, historian, and political scientist Alan Gibson is an educator at California State University, Chico, where he is an associate professor of political science. As both academic researcher and active educator in the classroom, Gibson focuses on the field of political theory and related areas, noted a biographer on the California State University, Chico, Political Science Department Web site.

Gibson is the author of two books that examine and analyze the founding of the United States of America and assess the many reasons underlying the nation's origins. The first of these works is Interpreting the Founding: Guide to the Enduring Debates over the Origins and Foundations of the American Republic. "It should be no surprise that later generations of Americans would seek to understand the reasons that animated the nation's founding," observed reviewer Jethro K. Lieberman in the Political Science Quarterly. It should also not be surprising, Lieberman suggested, that many different interpretations and conclusions should arise from the work of scholars, researchers, and historians who study the early days of America. These differences in conclusion and opinion have led to substantial debate—anyone who "wishes to understand these debates would be well advised to travel with a guide, and Alan Gibson's short work is admirably suited to the purpose," Lieberman stated. "Gibson's study is not, in the first instance, about the founding itself, but about the way in which these writers have understood it. His book is not a history, but a history of histories," and the ways in which scholars have approached, assessed, and interpreted the founding of the United States, noted James W. Ceaser in the Claremont Review of Books. Gibson sets out to "encourage a better understanding of the event itself (the founding) by way of considering what others have said about it; and to learn about the interpretation of the founding, on the assumption that this subject is a significant object of study in its own right," Ceaser commented.

In his assessment, Gibson looks carefully at the historiography of the founding, and "has very ably surveyed the sweep of scholarship since the beginning of the twentieth century, making every effort to present the different approaches in an impartial manner," Ceaser remarked. "One of the merits of this book is its economy. It covers a great deal of material in a small amount of space, and will be cheered by beginning students of the founding who may wish to know what books they should read and by more advanced scholars who want to know what books they can avoid. In both respects, Interpreting the Founding is a highly useful volume," Ceaser continued. Gibson identifies six schools of scholarly thought that have appeared and evolved over the last century, Lieberman reported: the progressives, who assert the nation's founding based on the founders' economic interests, rather than their political beliefs. Second are the liberals, who suggest that the founding occurred because of a belief in men's inalienable rights and that all are created equal, and that they desired a government that provides security, stability, and access to prosperity. The third school of thought is republican synthesis, which sees the spread of classical civic humanism as a stronger force than either economics or ideals. Fourth, the Scottish Conversation believes that ideas derived from the eighteenth-century Scottish enlightenment drove the founders' motivations. The fifth approach posits a multiple traditions approach, combining elements of the previous four possibilities. And the sixth suggests that the founding was the work not only of the elite group of men who were identified throughout history, but was also influenced by women, native Americans, and slaves. Ceaser concluded that Gibson's book is a "worthy introduction for studying real history."

Gibson's second book on the historiography of the nation's founding is Understanding the Founding: The Crucial Questions. In this book, "Gibson provides readers with apt descriptions of the major interpretive debates in the field over the last century and more. In addition, he assays to point the way for future research," noted Kevin R.C. Gutzman on the H-Net Reviews Web site. In five chapters, Gibson covers topics such as the Beard Thesis, Charles Beard's economic interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, and the effect it has had on American historiography. Further, Gibson analyzes the democratic elements of the Constitution, addresses the argument over whether the founding should be interpreted in the context of the time or if it addressed fundamental questions that can still be considered within modern concepts and methods, it explores the nature of the founders' political thought and the basis for this, and endorses the application of historiography in determining the nature and significance of the founding and its long-term effect on political thought. This volume "features lucid and pleasant prose, straightforward organization, and a tone neither too high nor too low," Gutzman commented. Samuel B. Hoff, writing in the Law & Politics Book Review, concluded that "Gibson's book contributes to a genre of studies that go beyond recitation into the realm of analysis and criticism. Though his research is most appropriate for a sophisticated audience, its premise remains simple: we still have much to learn about the influences on, content of, and legacy of the American Founding."

BIOGRAPHICAL AND CRITICAL SOURCES:

PERIODICALS

Choice, October, 2007, D. Schultz, review of Understanding the Founding: The Crucial Questions, p. 356.

Claremont Review of Books, winter, 2006, James W. Ceaser, review of Interpreting the Founding: Guide to the Enduring Debates over the Origins and Foundations of the American Republic.

Law & Politics Book Review, August, 2007, Samuel B. Hoff, review of Understanding the Founding, p. 655.

Perspectives on Politics, May, 2008, review of Understanding the Founding, p. 716.

Political Science Quarterly, winter, 2006, Jethro K. Lieberman, review of Interpreting the Founding, p. 716.