TVA has been acknowledged as a powerful symbol of New Deal era since its official beginning in 1933. Especially in the Asian countries afflicted with the sad history of cold war and forced modernization, it has had more powerful symbolic meaning. But from 1980s, we could witness the emergence of new studies with a critical approach. The new scholars have different social, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds. More recently, in some valuable researches, the impact of the TVA over the world development (especially after 1945) was debated. This paper wants to adopt that new perspective. The author, who has tried to find the continuity of American technological discourse between Progressive and New Deal era domestic intellectual development and Cold War Era modernization theory and overseas policy, chose TVA as his first starting point. And the author says that this paper constitutes only the beginning of that long study. First, the author tries to trace historical and intellectual roots of TVA. Especially , Tennessee Valley region, before 1933, had been a place of grave concern to many people interested in its development. It had been a battlefield of many conflicting groups. Above all, the coming of electricity in late 19th century gave a turning point in its development history. And, after the Great War, the Southern Farmers attracted by fertilizer saw their dream come true there. The auto industry magnate Henry Ford made the poor Southern states a nation-wide focus. But, we could also see the persistent and consistent Progressives like Pinchot and the senator Norris struggle to protect the region from many voracious appetite of private utilities and other dangers. In the twenties, the Republican government tried to lease the Muscle Shoals and its facilities to private sector. But, at the same time, there appeared a consensus that Tennessee Valley should be controlled by a public institution. Secondly, the author deals with the New Deal era. The inauguration of FDR strengthened the Progressives' position. Furthermore, the Democratic government facing economic emergency took that area development as a big government priority. For that purpose, the new president hired three famous figures as the directors of newly launched TVA. The author analyzes their(actually two of them) intellectual background and belief. They had some points in common-they lived in a secular reform age and had a driven personality. They had their own convictions. And there were differences between them. A. E. Morgan was a man of ideal and tried to use TVA as one of his social experiments, while D. E. Lilienthal saw it as a battlefield against the public utilities. Their clash left an indelible imprint on the history of TVA. With this historical understanding in mind, we can approach the context of the cold war diffusion of TVA projects and try to understand the historical implication of TVA in analysing the mutation of the American liberalism and reform tradition in the early 20th century.
목차
머리말 Ⅰ. 1933년이전의 TVA 1. 1920년이전 2. 혁신주의 시대의 테네시 개발-사기업과의 투쟁과 개발 문제. 3. 1차 세계대전과 머쓸 숄. 4. 전쟁 이후.-포드의 제안과 ‘머쓸 숄 논쟁’ 5. 1920년대 노리스의 노력과 좌절-입법투쟁. 6. 루스벨트(FDR)와 TVA Ⅱ. 모건과 릴리엔탈-이상과 갈등 1. 모건 2. 릴리엔탈 3. 모건과 릴리엔탈의 갈등 맺음말 참고문헌 Abstract
한국중앙사학회 [Korean Association of Joong-Ang Historical Studies]
설립연도
2000
분야
인문학>역사학
소개
중앙사학연구회를 중앙사학회로 명칭을 변경함. 중앙사학연구회는 중앙대학교 사학과를 모체로 출발한 연구회였다. 주로 중앙대학교 사학과와 연관을 가진 사람들로 회원이 구성되었으며, 또한 그들의 연구활동의 무대가 되어 온 셈이다. 그러나 이러한 성격의 연구회는 자연히 그 활동과 연구의 지평이 제한을 받을 수 밖애 없다는 것을 지적하는 회원들이 많았다. 뿐만 아니라, 최근 한국학계에서 제기된 학술지 평가문제에 적극적으로 대처해야한다는 공감대가 형성되었다. 어느 곳에 게재된 것이 중요한 것이 아니라 그 글의 내용을 가지고 평가해야 한다는 고전적인 의견에 회의를 품는 분위기가 팽창하고 있다. 이러한 과정을 거쳐서 중앙사학연구회의 명칭을 발전적으로 고쳐보고 조직도 전국적인 규모로 만들자는 데 합의하게 되었다. 그러나 명칭을 무엇으로 하느냐 하는 문제를 놓고 또 다시 1년여를 보냈다. 그 결과, 2000년 겨울 동계 정기 워크숍에서 회원들의 투표를 거쳐서 중앙사학회로 결정하였다.
간행물
간행물명
중앙사론 [JOONGANG SARON ; Journal of Joong-Ang Historical Studies]