political

I spend hours nerdily reading antique newspapers on microfilm at the Fargo public library — because, as they say, “Library, library, more than a book!” and, as I have already admitted, I am a nerd. And it’s a good thing for you that I do such things, or you probably wouldn’t know about this gem from the November 4, 1907 edition of The Fargo Forum and Daily Republican.

The article, “A Mighty Rare Autograph,” is simply attributed to ‘Collector’ — which is far more information than newspapers at that time often felt compelled to provide, really. But in this case, anyway, I don’t think such poor attribution should cast doubt, for the advice published over one hundred years ago was probably as true when it was written as it is today.

A Mighty Rare Autograph

There are an unlimited number and variety of the genus autograph collector. Some have the grewsome fad of collecting all autographic matter relating to the assassins of our presidents. To be successful even in this limited range requires much careful research and great patience. The more inconspicuous and unknown the subjects chosen the more difficult the task of collecting. It may be said that it is an easier task to secure an authentic autograph of Napoleon Bonaparte or Cromwell than one of the practically unknown murderer of President McKinley. The very obscurity from which the perpetrator temporarily emerged is hard to penetrate and therefore makes the securing of his autograph a difficult task.

A Mighty Rare Autograph, 1907

I find it rather odd that Bonaparte and Cromwell are named, but the ‘obscurity’ of the ‘temporarily emerged’ McKinley assassin is cemented via the omission of his name. Never one to really follow trends — and much liking the spirit of yesteryear’s intrepid ‘girl reporters’ — I’ll dare to name McKinley’s assassin: Leon Frank Czolgosz.

Anywho… According to the May 2009 issue of Autograph Magazine, collector/dealer A. Lovell Elliott has the rare Czolgosz’s autograph:

I have Leon Czolgosz’s signature on a note sheet. Czolgosz was the man who shot President McKinley at the 1901 Pan-American Exposition. Deputy Sheriff Otto Welker accompanied Czolgosz on the trip to his execution in Auburn, New York. And Welker had the presence of mind to ask him to sign a page in his notebook. I bought it from his niece. Aside from Czolgosz’s signed confession, which was auctioned at Christie’s for $110,500, this is the only known signature in private hands. It’s featured in Charles Hamilton’s American Autographs, Volume 2, p. 511.

Since Czolgosz’s signature is so rare, it likely has a very high value; but that value is equally dependent upon the number of interested parties. If far more collectors know of Napoleon and therefore desire his John Hancock as opposed to the obscure Czolgosz, well, that lowers the demand and the value. But by naming Leon Czolgosz, I (along with Sarah Vowell in Assassination Vacation), have likely just increased awareness of him and therefore the value of his signature. You are welcome, Mr. Elliott.

I don’t like to make a lot of specific predictions regarding what will be the next collectible trend, but…

1970's ERA Yes Pinback

On July 21, 2009, Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) reintroduced the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the 111th Congress, and I believe that this current push to give 50% of our nation’s population equal rights & protections under constitutional law will generate not only a renewed conversation about tree equality for women, but a renewed interest in ERA memorabilia and related political items.

Though an equal rights amendment was first proposed in 1928, the fight for the ERA as most of us know (or remember) it began in the 70’s and is closely associated with feminism in general. While the amendment passed in Congress in 1972, it was three states shy of being ratified before the deadline in 1982.

Resisting the urge to give a long rant on the seeming incomprehensible nature of the denial of what should be a commonsense amendment, I believe this renewed battle leaves the collector with increased incentive & opportunities to look for retro ERA pins, political literature, photos and other ephemera as well as the opportunity to collect similar items being made now, in the moment, documenting the current struggle.

Retro Stop ERA Pinback

The original ERA items are not as plentiful as one would imagine; perhaps it’s their ephemeral nature combined with their relative “newness” (as compared to, say, suffrage items) which has resulted in slim offerings. Or maybe it’s the fact that those embittered by a battle lost have held onto their items, so they are not for sale (and it does seem as if the anti-ERA items are more plentiful). But whatever the case, collectors who eschew the easy-to-find for the thrill-of-the-hunt will find themselves challenged.

Don’t only look for the simple (obvious) pins & papers with “ERA” printed on them; the ERA’s battle was backed by two First Ladies who may seem (in your recollection) unlikely candidates: First Lady Pat Nixon was a firm believer in the Equal Rights Amendment, and First Lady Betty Ford was so outspoken in favor of it that she was quite controversial. So your collecting/hunting should include looking for their names along with the usual feminist suspects and publications.

Betty Ford Campaign Pinback, 1976

Don’t overlook such wearable things as jewelry, iron-ons, and t-shirts too.

Retro ERA Bracelet

And what is currently available, old or new, is priced to sell — making ERA memorabilia affordable, even in today’s market. Authentic 1970s ERA pinbacks in lovely conditions can be purchased for just a few dollars; new pinbacks in support of the amendment are just $1.50.

So I’m flipping through an issue of the National Enquirer from 1979, as I’m wont to do — don’t look at me like that, you’d do it too if you had some.

Women Born From 1905 to 1909 Had The Fewest Children

Anyway, I find this snippet (buried on page 63 of the issue dated February 20, 1979), titled “Women Born From 1905 to 1909 Had The Fewest Children.” And it fascinates me.

You know how I love to read about that feminist stuff — or, as some might say, turn everything into feminist stuff. But there’s just the three scant paragraphs. And it’s the National Enquirer for gosh-sake.

So, being in ‘the library’ (yes, that’s a euphemism for the bathroom) and, still pondering the subject of childless women who were born in the early 1900’s, I reach for whatever other reading material might be laying in the magazine rack.

Through what, again, can only be described as the Serendipity Of The Collecting Gods, my hand finds a back issue of The Keynoter, the Journal of the American Political Items Conservators published by the American Political Items Collectors.

On page 42 of that Winter, 2007, issue is an article titled “I Am For Playgrounds” by Steve Baxley. It describes the story behind the William Howard Taft celluloid button bearing the same slogan.

Taft: I Am For Playgrounds

You, like political memorabilia collector Steve Mihaly, might wonder why this would be a political slogan — after all, who could possibly not be for playgrounds?

Baxley explains how back in the 1890’s urban areas were opening play lots where children could play within urban areas. Baxley writes:

Many women involved in the women’s suffrage movement also became involved in the Mother’s and Children’s Movement, which tried to influence state and local legislators to pass legislation protecting women and child laborers and create schools, kindergartens, and playgrounds to keep children off the street. Though these women could not vote, they were very successful in influencing stare and local government officials in achieving these goals. By 1905, many of the larger cities were providing appropriations for the maintenance of playgrounds.

In 1906 the Playground Association of America was founded. President Taft supported the group’s work as well as appropriations for playgrounds; this is where the button comes from.

What’s all this got to do with the low birthrate among women born between 1905 and 1909 — the very girls who would have played on those playgrounds?

I don’t know. Not really.

But the historian in me must make (educated) guesses.

The women born between 1905 and 1909 were the same young girls who grew up during the years of the women’s suffrage movement in the US. They would have seen the struggle, heard the talk, and knew they could have greater freedom of choice in living their lives. They too would see, if not quite be, part of the flapper movement. Activism and parenting being almost completely at odds with one another, some may have opted not to have children — and at this time, birth control, thanks to Margaret Sanger, was becoming a realistic option.

And, just as these young women were perhaps thinking of starting a family…

Along comes The Great Depression — the one of that started about 1929, not the one some say we are approaching now — and the birthrate fell about one-tenth globally from the rate during the “prosperous” 1920’s. In America, the birth rate dropped below the replacement level for the first time in history.

Pretty good guesses, huh.

But then I have all my ephemera to thank for that.  And my ‘library’ time.

In my last blog, I referenced a ‘vintage’ book I found in our home library called “Encyclopedia of Political Buttons United States 1896-1972.” It has numerous pictures of political buttons and gives a little history on the Presidential candidates, winners and losers. The values in this book have most likely changed quite dramatically and we understand there are a lot of reproductions out there.

It is quite a fascinating and a great way to view our country’s history. My last blog ended with FDR being elected in 1944, for a fourth term. While candidate Wendell Willkie did not win in 1940, his buttons were a hoot! I found one with an elephant ‘blowing away” the competition (a Democrat/donkey.) This was rather unique!

Another theme in his buttons was in reference to not being capable of serving a third term. One example is “Confucius say…man who stand up twice, no good third time” and “No Man is Any Good the Third Time.”

I would not have thought any message this ’suggestive’ would have been acceptable way back then. Willkie’s button with a critter in a barrel, denoting poverty under FDR’s administration did not work either.

In 1944 the candidate against FDR was Thomas E. Dewey. FDR beat him by a substantial margin. In February, FDR met with Stalin and Churchill to lay plans for peace. Upon his return, it was evident that he was tired and ill and on April 12, 1945, he died. Harry S. Truman then became President.

Truman was not very popular and had to work very hard. He was determined not to lose the election in 1948 and made numerous campaign trips throughout the country and presented himself as “the plain people’s President against the privileged people’s Congress.” His plan worked and he beat out Thomas E. Dewey.

The 1952 election had Dwight D. Eisenhower vs. Adlai Stevenson. Ike won in ‘52 and then again in ‘56. It sure looks like the pinbacks became more fun – smiling faces , nicknames of Ike and Dick, sounds more warm and fuzzy than Adlai and Estes, don’t you think?

Then came the JFK election, 1960. You cannot help but think that folks wanted to wear his buttons just for the smiling, handsome face on their lapels.

Kennedy won the election (vs. Richard Nixon) but sadly, was assassinated and did not get to finish the term. Lyndon B. Johnson became President. He ran again in 1964 and won, with Hubert Humphrey as Vice President. He ran against Barry Goldwater. Goldwater’s slogan was “In your Heart, you Know He’s Right..” LBJ had another take on this philosophy with “In Your Guts You Know He’s Nuts.” We imagine that this button is a hard one to find!

I am sure you political button collectors are always on the look-out. You will know which ones are real, or ‘fantasy’, or reproductions. It is helpful if you know the early makers of celluloid buttons such as Whitehead & Hoag, American Art Works, Bastian Bros., St. Louis Button Company and Torsh & Franz. Lithographed buttons were heavily produced starting in the 1920’s and the Green Duck Co. of Chicago, Illinois has been the largest manufacturer. I actually got a ‘lot’ of buttons at an auction once and was fooled until I carefully read the side of one. They had been reproduced by Kleenex in the 1970s. As is true with any collectible, do your homework, know the source you are buying from and enjoy!

This country is awash in revered institutions with four-letter abbreviations. NASA. NCAA. AARP. The list goes on.

Here’s a new one for you: APIC.

Never heard of it? It’s short for the American Political Items Collectors—and “new” is perhaps misleading, since the organization has been around since the end of World War II. According to its website, http://apic.us, through the years the APIC has counted among its ranks “educators; students; archivists; historians; elected officials, including members of Congress; political junkies; political animals; campaign staffers; journalists from print, broadcast, and cable; museum curators; and even a couple of past presidents.”

That’s a distinguished crowd.

At present the APIC has several thousand members, and chatting with a sampling of its current-day faithful—a few of whom have themselves been around since the end of World War II—made for an entertaining afternoon at the Chelsea Jewish Community Center in Manhattan on Sunday, February 3^rd.

The occasion was the APIC’s New York City Political Collectors Show, an annual affair where vendors buy, sell, and swap political memorabilia from all eras: from the days of the original George W (the Founding Father, that is) to that of our present-day, unpompadoured George.

Tony Lee, president of the Big Apple chapter of the APIC and the ringleader of the event, said it has been held annually for the last twenty-seven years. He noted that although this NYC gathering is “probably the smallest show of the hobby” in terms of the amount of paraphernalia on display, it’s also one of the most popular, since it’s within striking distance for so many aficionados.

Those who came from near or far found a treasure trove of lovingly preserved political artifacts. A cigar box promoting James G. Blaine, the Republican presidential nominee who lost to Grover Cleveland in 1884, was stickered at $45. A ballot used to elect James Buchanan in 1856, which APIC old-timer Charles McSorley bought for the bargain rate of forty cents two years ago, was now more properly selling for $100. McSorley was also peddling a well-preserved photo of a youthful Abraham Lincoln, his hero, for $750 (“Nobody ever lost money with Lincoln,” he asserted). An autographed copy of Hillary Clinton’s bestseller Living History was going for $129. A pair of license plates, one reading “I’m for Dewey” and its twin proclaiming “I’m for Truman,” were among the higher priced items of the show; the asking price for the two: $2250.

And, last but not least, scattered across tabletops throughout the room was a spectacular assortment of political buttons.

Ah, the buttons. Every year they’re the centerpiece of the show, and rightfully so: the APIC website explains that the campaign button is “the most recognized and widely collected of all campaign objects.” APIC member Mark Evans, whose business card says that he specializes in “The Stuff Your Mother Made You Throw Out,” provided a quickie tutorial on the storied history of the campaign button—which, as it turns out, is as old as the Union itself.

“Washington didn’t have any opposition, so there wasn’t really a race,” Evans explained—Hillary and Barack, eat your hearts out—“but they had commemorative metal buttons that you would sew onto your vest or coat.” In the mid-1800s, Evans said, with the advent of photography, the campaign button of choice was a little metal badge sporting a photo of, say, John Fremont, or Stephen Douglas, or Charlie McSorley’s beloved Lincoln. Then came 1896, the year that blew the roof off the button business: that’s when the celluloid button was invented, using pretty much the same technique that’s used today, and clearing the way for the barrage of buttons touting—or taunting—every candidate worth his or her salt in the century-plus since.

Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of these buttons were on display at Sunday’s event: buttons the size of your hand and buttons the size of your thumb; garish buttons and more tasteful ones; buttons designed to buoy a favorite candidate, knock down a competitor, or merely entertain the politically savvy or the public at large.

Evans’ wares included a caseful of George McGovern buttons—none of which could prevent McGovern from being steamrolled by Nixon in ‘72. Others spotted around the room: a Bush button—the future Bush 43, that is—from the 1998 Republican State convention in Forth Worth, Texas; a button reading “The Country Needs Fixin’, Elect Nixon;” another urging you to “Soar to New Heights with Barack Obama” and picturing a buff, cartoonish Obama dressed like the superhero; and an oversized button that gloated, inexplicably, “I Told You So.”

But no discussion of the political-button universe is complete without a mention of the king of the mass-produced political zinger, Mort Berkowitz. With a clipped mustache, an accent that screams New Yorker, and a sense of humor drier than the Sahara Desert, Berkowitz is one character you can’t miss—and wouldn’t want to.

The buttons he and his company, Bold Concepts, have churned out are legion and legendary. Consider that he is the brains behind such classics as “Hillary Rodman Clinton: As Bad As She Wants to Be,” which pictured the then-First Lady with a wildly colorful hairdo akin to that of the Pistons’ former free spirit Dennis Rodman; a button that tweaked Ronald Reagan as “The Flaw in the Theory of Evolution;” a ’70s button celebrating the fact that “Nixon Has a Staff Infection;” and the modern-day classic “Obama, You Barack My World.” Berkowitz claims to have created eighty buttons on the subject of Watergate alone, and to have produced five hundred so far for the current presidential contest.

Which party does he skewer more? Berkowitz calls himself “an equal opportunity offender.” When asked about his own political leanings, he would only say, his expression deadpan except for the twinkle in his eye, “I lean. I lean.” It wasn’t so much deliberate secrecy as the active enjoyment he so obviously derived from not providing a satisfactory answer. He was droll, a charming curmudgeon, a “piece o’ work,” as they say. Another question posed to him was, If there were a button promoting you, what would it say? Alas, he sidestepped the query.

Make sure you take a look at some of the interesting finds at the APIC Convention right here in our community section.