"Recovery of Lost Options"

In his introduction, Dawley cites that one of his goals is the “recovery of lost options in the past” (6 & 9). He hoped by doing this it would give agency to the historical actors who might have been forgotten otherwise. This approach is quite different from most that I have encountered in history books and it makes me think that there could be so much more to every story that what is presented. Unfortunately, much like the others who have posted about this book, there is a sense of disappointment and questioning at certain times. Perhaps it is in some ways the fault of this goal since it makes the conclusions quite subjective. Using just one example that irked me, Dawley has a large discussion of architecture to make his point about isolationists and the opposition from both imperialists and internationalists (27). He said:

“the dueling architectural styles of Burnham and Wright, Union Station and Taliesin, represented the opposition between an imperial mentality and a more republican, yet cosmopolitan frame of mind.”

Dawley is assuming that these were politically motivated designs, and they could truly have been, but more proof is needed. Could there be other reasons that these men designed the way that they did? How about taste or cultural preferences? It might depend a great deal on how the sources are interpreted. Moments like this threaten to undermine the overall arguments that the author is trying to make.