Reading Studs Terkel for Answers

I woke up and looked at the clock: 1:47 in the morning.

Studs Terkel had awakened me. Not a dream about the legendary oral historian, rather, I was jolted awake by a big idea related to my writing about the New American Diaspora: read some of Terkel's classics, including Hard Times, about the Great Depression. I'd read a lot of Terkel in college during my study of American history, but hardly remembered any of it.

Why Terkel now? Was his oral history format the best one to tell the story I was writing and wondering how to write? I didn't really know. I did know that if you wake up with a writer on your mind you better read the writer. I also knew that this was the first time in my life I had ever woken up with a writer on my mind.

I bought and read three Studs Terkel books: Hard Times: An Oral History of the Great Depression (1970), Working: People Talk About What They Do All Day and How They Feel About What They Do (1974) and American Dreams: Lost and Found (1983).

Below are my notes, impressions, opinions and questions generated by the reading. They are subject to change, as is all my thinking on this issue.

It is far too early for an oral history of the current homeless crisis. The great strength of Terkel's books is that many of his subjects had decades to reflect upon experiences and we learn how they struggled, survived, dug in, adapted, moved on, or if they lived in contrast or accordance to their experience. There are virtually no stories of quitting in these books, because if they had, they wouldn't have been around to talk to Terkel. Quitting means something different today than in did in 1937. So does the American dream of 1983.

I have read many excellent feature stories about homeless people and the various causes that led them to the streets or willows and keeps them there. But a feature story is not the same as an oral history. The latter looks far and wide into the past in hope of establishing/resurrecting interest and/or unearthing/generating fresh perspective about a momentous historical event. A feature story is for the present and typically doesn't have a large scope.

The contemporary notion of the American dream is contested, as it should be. As for what many workers told Terkel in 1974 about how they feel about their jobs—I hate my job—that's largely unchanged. What has changed is that a terrible job back then at least earned them enough so they didn't have to live out of tent, van or RV if they were working.

Interviewees in Hard Times recounted seeing people living in shacks made from orange crates, a piano box and rusted out car bodies. I have seen someone living in a shelter made from encyclopedias. An extraordinary number of people are living out of vehicles and they go almost totally uncounted when the experts estimate homeless populations in various locales and across the nation.

The current homeless crisis is rooted in much, much more than merely housing, mental health and addiction issues. That's way too convenient an explanation, but a trio of favorites for many politicians. There is something insidious in contemporary American life that has shattered many people and we see the shards all around us. Can these people be put back together? Can they put themselves back together? I have seen successes. I have also seen people too far gone to even try.

A long time ago, men fought for jobs. They don't now. Men often stole to eat during the Great Depression.

There were virtually no such entities as non profits as we understand those organizations today to assist struggling people in the Great Depression. There were churches to help.

Governments razed encampments during the Great Depression, even though those people were looking for work. There was no work. Today, there are people living in encampments who aren't working or looking for work, there are all manner of jobs available, and governments are still razing encampments, but ostensibly for different reasons.

During the New Deal, the federal government tried everything to alleviate a crisis! They employed writers, photographers, playwrights, actors, circus performers and Vaudeville acts! They hired men to plant trees, build trails, lodges and dams! It almost feels were more creative in the crisis. In recent years, as the crisis worsened, I have seen zero creativity to solve the homeless issue in Oregon and I have been looking. Maybe it's out there.

The federal government had to step in because the cities and states simply couldn't address the catastrophe. It feels like we are there now. It feels like we now need a massive federal effort, and just more than spending billions of dollars, but that seems highly unlikely in today's fractured political climate.

People enrolled in New Deal programs told Terkel that the programs generally worked or at least led to positive transitions. Today, I read mixed reports from the homeless about the success of programs, but is that because these struggling people are doing enough to help themselves like struggling people did during the Great Depression?

Many millions of Americans were bitterly opposed to the New Deal. They believed relief programs undermined the essential American character. No one destitute deserves a handout. Work! Pull yourself up by your bootstraps! Don't be dependent on government!

If you ask homeless people what the American dream is (or was), what would they answer? Would they mock it? Or would some answer: “I am living the American dream. I am doing absolutely nothing.”

Almost every homeless person I have met once had a trade or jobs in the service economy. Some have talked proudly of former careers in construction, maritime-related industries or trucking. Then, somehow, the careers ended and they wound up homeless. Whether this occurred suddenly or gradually, I didn't discover.

Did homeless people once invest in America and nothing came in return, or practically nothing? Good question. Maybe I should ask some of them.

There is not a generation gap in the current homeless crisis like there has been in many other American social/political problems.

Harsh economic conditions can cause personal trauma as deeply as physical and mental abuse. Living in homeless squalor obviously exacerbates personal trauma so why would anyone advocate that traumatized homeless people should live in prolonged (or permanent) squalor so they won't be further traumatized? It makes no sense.

Many interviewees in Hard Times declared an embarrassment, humiliation and internal loathing because they could not find work and support their families. Is there anything similar to that with some of today's homeless people? I've never heard any of the ones I've interact with ever express such a sentiment.

World War II ended the Great Depression and American went to work. There's no war coming to save us this time. In fact, a war is going on within American society and the casualties and refugees are everywhere. I seem them every morning on my walks. One of them has now amassed seven dining room sets near his trailer.

The homeless crisis presents the greatest challenge to state and local governing in my lifetime and I live in a city and state that believes in the power of progressive governing, but so far has failed spectacularly on this issue and the result has been death and the buck never stopping.

Can Oregon's various governments do it? Can we do it?