• Features
  • Books
  • Teaching
  • Digital & Film
  • Blog
  • IHS
  • Texas
  • Spotlight
  • About

The past is never dead. It's not even past

Not Even Past

The Gunning of America: Business and the Making of American Gun Culture, by Pamela Haag (2016)

By Isaac McQuistion

Guns and America enjoy a symbiotic relationship, the one constantly evoked when you refer to the other. A Congressional Research Service report estimated that, in 2009, the number of firearms in the United States surpassed the number of people, 310 million compared to 306.8 million. That gap has continued to widen, and as of 2015, guns outnumbered people by 40 million. These aren’t exact figures; more concrete numbers are hard to come by. Still, they show that the number of firearms in the US, by an reasonable estimate, dwarfs that in any other country in the world. In the list of gun-loving nations, the United States has nearly twice the number of guns per capita as the next country, Serbia.

How do we explain this? How did the US become such an outlier? Many point to the Constitution and the second amendment, the right to bear arms folded into the fabric of our nation almost from its inception. Guns were what fueled westward expansion, and the citizen militia is what beat back the British. Therefore, the gun holds a spot of preeminence in the national lore of America.

Samuel Colt (via Wikimedia Commons).

Pamela Haag’s book The Gunning of America: Business and the Making of American Gun Culture, offers a meticulously researched and beautifully written corrective to this mytho-poetic view of the gun. Haag, who received a PhD in history from Yale, takes the old journalistic maxim of “follow the money” and applies it to the American gun industry. As she writes, “We hear a great deal about gun owners, but what do we know of their makers?” This is the guiding light of her book: to trace the development of the gun industry and the loose constellation of entrepreneurs who laid the foundation for what we have today. These were men like Oliver Winchester, Samuel Colt, and Eli Whitney (yes, that one).

Haag’s overall argument is that it was the gun industry itself that turned the United States into a gun-loving nation. To begin her book, she points out what many gun enthusiasts themselves have been saying for years, albeit selectively and ahistorically: that guns were tools, used and marketed as such. They were unremarkable objects, with as much emotional resonance as a claw hammer or a bow saw.

Coupled with this reputation as ordinary and functional was a style of production that limited the number of guns that could find their way to the market. Guns were originally made by blacksmiths, few of whom specialized in manufacturing firearms, and were therefore often clunky items, prone to breaking and difficult to repair.

Two Pennsylvania rifles. Rifles like this were used by militiamen and snipers during the American Revolutionary War (via Wikimedia Commons).

Eli Whitney was among the first to propose a solution to this problem. In 1801, he made a presentation before President John Adams, demonstrating the merits of constructing guns out of interchangeable parts. This approach would enable him to quickly produce a large number of reliable firearms that could be easily repaired.

This development is what made the modern gun industry viable and other manufacturers soon followed Whitney’s lead. It was not a very stable market, though. The gun business was largely tethered to the boom and bust cycle of war, with the United States government serving as its largest client. In times of peace, manufacturers turned to the overseas market, selling weapons to whichever foreign government happened to be in need of them.

But in order to expand their business, the gun manufacturers knew that they had to increase the domestic demand for their product. Through a close look at advertisements and items like dime-store Westerns, Haag brilliantly demonstrates how savvy marketing transformed the gun from a tool to an emotionally-charged emblem of masculinity, individualism, and the nation. As she writes, “what was once needed now had to be loved.”

An 1876 gun advertisement (via Wikimedia Commons).

In the earliest examples that Haag chooses, guns are listed as just one of many items that your local smithy could make and repair. Later ads would grow more sophisticated, but they would still focus on mechanical virtues and overall utility.

This began to change in the early 1900s, as the gun manufacturers switched from their previous text-heavy ads to more emotive, visual ads, rendered in full color and often regarded as works of art in themselves. They depicted excitement, romance, and nostalgia, drawing heavily on images of cowboys and hunters in the Wild West, their trusty firearm at their side as they faced down a vicious bear or band of Native Americans.

A 1898 Winchester ad (via Wikimedia Commons).

The manufacturers didn’t stop at wannabe woodsmen. They sought to make their market as wide as possible, and in doing so made the gun seem an integral part of American life and history. A key part of this process was to make owning a rifle synonymous with manhood, targeting the father-son relationship in particular. “You know [your son] wants a gun,” one ad reads,” but you don’t know how much he wants it. It’s beyond words.” Another tells fathers that a boy’s “yearning for a gun demands your attention. He will get hold of one sooner or later. It is his natural instinct.”

But guns weren’t the sole province of men. An ad for Smith and Wesson read, “Any woman can learn how to use a Smith & Wesson in a few hours, and . . . she will no longer feel a sense of helplessness when male members of the family are absent.” A Winchester ad from 1921 proclaimed that “Every man, woman or child has an inherent desire to own a gun.” Advertisements like these, alongside their countless depictions in popular culture, are what created America’s gun culture.

A 1914 Remington ad targeting women (via Wikimedia Commons).

Juxtaposed with the account of these early arms manufacturers is that of the women associated with them, and in particular Sarah Winchester, who married Oliver Winchester’s only son. Sarah led a singularly unhappy life. She lost her first daughter, Annie, when the child was only 40 days old. She’s believed to have suffered one or two more miscarriages, and she lost her husband to tuberculosis, and, shortly after, her mother also died.

At this point, Haag’s account drifts into speculation. She theorizes that Sarah thought herself cursed, haunted by the victims of all the guns that her husband and father-in-law brought into the world and thanks to whose money she lived in splendor. In a possible attempt to ward off the spirits she built the Winchester mystery house in San Jose, California, a vast mansion that she was perpetually making additions to, with stairs that lead to nowhere and rooms, fully furnished and decorated, that are completely walled off. Now a tourist attraction, it stands as an architectural depiction of madness.

The Winchester Mystery House (via Wikimedia Commons).

This is fascinating stuff and it’s readily apparent why Haag thought it necessary to counterpose her depiction of the gun manufacturers, who have all the humanity of adding machines and clearly distanced themselves and their capitalist aims from the visceral reality of the violence of the arms they made, with the almost unbearable humanity of Sarah Winchester. The one drawback is that because it is so highly speculative, this part of the book runs the risk of detracting from the brilliant research that Haag deploys elsewhere.

And the research really is quite brilliant. Haag gained access to the company archives of Winchester, Colt, and other gun manufacturers, and she makes excellent use of the privilege. Haag is a beautiful writer, able to weave together a compelling narrative studded with memorable lines and anecdotes, like the gun salesman in Turkey who, upon realizing during a demonstration that his gun was clogged with sand, solved the problem by urinating on the offending component.

Puck cartoon from 1881 satirizing gun culture in America (via Wikimedia Commons).

In the end, Haag strips away the mythology of guns in America to reveal a truth that’s both more ordinary and more profound than what existed before. It was the ineluctable logic of capitalism that drove the original gun manufacturers to seek out as wide a market as possible for their product, and it was the story that they told their customers that has lived on until today.

Pamela Haag. The Gunning of America: Business and the Making of American Gun Culture. New York: Basic Books, 2016.


Also by Isaac McQuistion on Not Even Past:
Examining Race in Appleton, WI.

You may also like:
Kalashnikov’s Lawn Mower: The Man behind the Most Feared Gun in the World.

Kalashnikov’s Lawn Mower: The Man behind the Most Feared Gun in the World

by Stephen Panico

It is a curious device. Standing on a pedestal surrounded by a crude plaster diorama of a workshop is a medley of parts fashioned into a strange upright apparatus. There is a small collection of wooden poles and netting at the back, connected to a base of long spindled metal that seems it would collapse with even the most rudimentary use. This, in turn is welded to a cylindrical front piece that appears to have rake tines jutting forth from it. The entire contraption is connected to a set of wheels that look borrowed from a child’s bicycle. Indeed, it looks like a child’s idea of a lawn mower, improved in ways that altered its appearance but with dubious affect on its function. This device, according to the placard that accompanies it in the museum near Izhevsk, Russia, is a lawn mower. Surrounding it are hundreds of AK-47 assault rifles. The museum is devoted to the inventor of both, Mikhail Kalashnikov, who died on December 23, 2013 at age 94.   The primary feature of the museum is most certainly the myriad variations of Kalashnikov’s rifle. Wood and stamped steel along with individual placards describe how this or that minor feature offered diversity to a weapon that, in the modern world, is just about the most diverse around. There are of course many images of Kalashnikov himself. Holding the weapon. Personally presenting variants to front-line soldiers and guards who have performed admirably. Wearing full general regalia and beaming. The juxtaposition of this man, the expert weaponsmith, alongside some of his dramatically lesser known inventions is stark. The man who built the rifle that has been used to take more human lives than any other in history was a tinkerer who liked to improve things, even if it made them appear rough or rudimentary to an outside observer.

mikhail-kalashnikov-young

Mikhail Kalashnikov as a young man

Basic research into the origins of the design of the Kalashnikov rifle yields a popular story, oft-retold in Russian press releases when describing the most well-known name in military small arms worldwide. Young Mikhail, facing the Germans as a tank commander in WWII, caught shrapnel to his head in a one-sided battle with the Wehrmacht. When he woke up in the hospital he questioned why, when he and his comrades were competing for the use of one tired Mosin-Nagant bolt action rifle, his German foes were each armed with automatic weapons? His mind immediately began to work out a way to arm the Red Army with a weapon that would serve as a force-multiplier, making it much more difficult for a foreign body to invade with the ease of the initial Nazi blitzkrieg.

He built his weapon relatively quickly, but it was tested in the sour battles of the Cold War Era rather than in the crucible of the Second World War. Mikhail was still pleased. His weapon, he felt, would be a deterrent that would allow the Soviet Union to protect its basic infantrymen, allowing them to be the best armed fighting force in the world. The proxy battles of the Cold War would eliminate this dream in short order. Though there was initial reluctance to share the design, Soviet satellite states and, shortly thereafter, Communist allies were all armed with the AK-47. More importantly, they were armed with the ability to mass-produce the weapon, often funded directly by the USSR and supplied with the factory materials necessary for initial production. As those relationships also began to break down, Kalashnikov had to watch as his rifle, designed as a means of shielding Russian soldiers from harm, was used against them time and again.

ak47chinese reps

A Colombian police officer guards Chinese-made AK-47 replicas seized on Nov. 18, 2009 (Image courtesy of NPR)

This was not the only way in which Kalashnikov’s beloved motherland slighted the inventor of its primary weapons platform. Though Kalashnikov designed and built the AK-47 largely on his own he never held any rights to the weapon. This was not a particularly large issue at the time of invention as he was given a relatively generous stipend and housing near his arms factory. As time went on, and particularly with the dissolution of the USSR, such support became much less substantial. Kalashnikov was able to weather this as well, though not without some feelings of resentment. The situation came to a head when the Yeltsin government, in a token show of praise, sent Kalashnikov a rusted pistol as a means of recognition. It was a slight that would color his view of the new Russian Federation for the rest of his life, as a regime that spawned little but economic corruption and hooliganism among Russia’s youth.

In 2003, Kalashnikov partnered with a British firm to lend his name to a collection of “manly” products ranging from umbrellas to pen knives. Of course, there was also a Kalashnikov vodka. It bore both his name and his image, and advertisements featured the proud general in full military regalia encouraging the buzz-seeking masses to drink up. These marketing contracts supplemented his stipend enough to allow him to continue living out the rest of his days in his modest housing near Izhevsk.

mikhail-kalashnikov-has-died-618x412

Kalashnikov posing with his invention, the AK-47 (Image courtesy of Recoil)

In his latter years Kalashnikov still very much liked to tinker, and to reflect on his most popular invention. Though he denied any responsibility for what he described as the misuse of his weapon, he did come to express some regret for what it had become: a symbol and weapon of choice for terrorists and revolutionary groups the world over. In a popular interview with The Guardian, Kalashnikov stated, “I would prefer to have invented a machine that people could use and that would help farmers with their work – for example a lawnmower.” His death deprived the world of the production of the Kalashnikov lawn mower. The inventor with an equal passion for his homeland and for mechanical tinkering will be forever inextricably linked with the rifle that bears his name.

Photo Credits:

Mikhail Kalashnikov as a young man (Image courtesy of Recoil)

A Colombian police officer guards Chinese-made AK-47 replicas seized on Nov. 18, 2009 (Image courtesy of NPR)

Kalashnikov posing with his invention, the AK-47 (Image courtesy of Recoil)

Images used under Fair Use Guidelines

***

Stephen Panico is a December 2011 graduate of The University of Texas at Austin with a degree Plan II Honors and History. He is currently Marketing Specialist at Austin tech company Apptive and plans to pursue his MBA in the near future.

Further Reading:

Mikhail Kalashnikov obituary

Kalashnikov lends name to “manly” products

Tour of the Kalashnikov Museum

Recent Posts

  • IHS Workshop: “Whose Decolonization? The Collection of Andean Ancestors and the Silences of American History” by Christopher Heaney, Pennsylvania State University
  • Converting “Latinos” during Salem’s Witch Trials: A Review of Cotton Mather’s Spanish Lessons: A Story of Language, Race, and Belonging in the Early Americas (2022) by Kirsten Silva Gruesz
  • Breaking ChatGPT: Good Teaching Still Beats the Best AI
  • Remembering Rio Speedway
  • Fear Not the Bot: ChatGPT as Just One More Screwdriver in the Tool Kit
NOT EVEN PAST is produced by

The Department of History

The University of Texas at Austin

We are supported by the College of Liberal Arts
And our Readers

Donate
Contact

All content © 2010-present NOT EVEN PAST and the authors, unless otherwise noted

Sign up to receive our MONTHLY NEWSLETTER

  • Features
  • Books
  • Teaching
  • Digital & Film
  • Blog
  • IHS
  • Texas
  • Spotlight
  • About