Joy Simmons

Dr. Rick Van Noy

English 680

November 13, 2000

Buffet: A Critical Review of Kevin Starr’s Inventing

the Dream: California Through the Progressive Era

Kevin Starr’s Inventing the Dream is a somewhat tedious attempt to tell the story of Southern California’s rise into modern society. He does this by focusing on such aspects as politics, business, banking, and agriculture during the period from 1850-1920. Starr deals with numerous facets of Californian society by describing the geography, the anthropology, the agrarian methodology, and briefly, its literary history. He spends ample time describing Los Angeles: its early “rough” history of gamblers and desperadoes, the still-apparent Spanish influence, and other aspects of the city pertaining to art and progress. His attempt to reiterate the dream of Southern California is at best highly ambitious, and at worst, disappointingly impossible.

According to Starr, we must look to “the borderlands between history and literary criticism” if we are to understand the rise of California, as a regional entity, in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries (vii). What this means is that while Starr relies on both history and criticism to establish a foundation for this study, he endeavors to move beyond this into areas that are not as commonly plundered. He can still rely on history to provide a firm foundation for his study, or literary criticism to help us understand the fine line between imagination and experience, but he strives, with apparent passion, to move beyond this into another realm; a realm where we learn as much about literature and architecture as we do about the trivialities of a Californian existence, such as the quality of fruit and how it is transported.

Southern California—a mixture of Protestantism, tradition, conformity, rebellion, reform—all among “the American middle classes as they settled into a unique, semi-arid landscape fronting a spectacular seashore”, developed into a regional culture by which “national standards of American identity” were set (viii). This process largely occurred through the development of the film industry in Hollywood, thus making it possible for all of America to buy into the myth of the California dream. Starr strives to tell us this story of how Southern Californians shaped, and were shaped by, the unique attributes of the region. Naturally, geography played a large part in this role. Starr points out that Southern California is not your typical tropical paradise with white pristine beaches and sunny skies. In fact, a very important part of the geography of this region is its desert and mountains. Within this, we see the age-old struggle between man and nature, with, of course, man prevailing in the end. And yet, we are not satisfied with such superficial treatment.

Starr’s purpose is merely to give a historical account of the rise of Southern California, specifically focusing on the events that occurred at the turn of the century. He achieves this purpose, but only to a certain point. I think that this endeavor is simply unfeasible. Due to the breadth of its scope, such a feat is simply impossible to achieve, although his efforts are certainly valiant. If Starr had picked one facet of Californian identity to explore, then we may have come away from this book with the knowledge that we gained a deeper understanding of at least one aspect of Californian history. Starr strives to force-feed us, not too much of one thing, but too little of many things, so that we become lost in the process. We lose our appetite for it all—literature, architecture, geography, history, identity.

Starr organizes his book in a semi-chronological order. The flow of the chapters starts with the period around 1850 when Southern California was still a frontier and ranges to the propagation of the “Californian Dream” in the early 1920s. So, what’s in the middle? Why, everything from pioneering frontiers, railway giants, progress, proliferation of a regional identity, reform, and the film industry. However, in spite of the sheer diversity of this information, we are blessed with one fact. Starr, surprisingly enough, sprinkles his own verbiage with voices from the past. When he tells us about how rough it was to live in Southern California in the 1850s, we also hear the story of a minister who wrote in his diary that he couldn’t stand the lawlessness of the region, the fights, the murders. He eventually became so scared for his wife and family that he leaves town for another locale. When he speaks of the beauty of the architecture, inspired by Spanish, French, and Italian artistry, he paints us a picture in our minds. We really can see the Gamble House as a “poem of wood, texture, and light” (103). He provides us with the information, but he also allows us to incorporate that information into our minds by providing us with vivid examples. This is his strength.

However, in terms of this course, little can be taken from this historical endeavor to focus on every feasible aspect of Californian culture in a specific time period. From an ecocritical standpoint, we must try to remember that Starr’s account does deal with nature in a superficial way. We see early on, but only in a very minimal way, how the geography of the region, shaped the lives of its inhabitants. However, this is California we are speaking of. Where are the earthquakes? Where are the fires? When do we get to the part where we feel like we are in California? And yet, as conscientious readers, perhaps we could try harder. Starr does give a brief examination of such authors as Grace Channing, Charlotte Perkins Gilman and Helen Hunt Jackson, but doesn’t explore the further implications of how their writing may or may not portray the identity of the region.

Starr shines most brightly when he speaks of the film industry and the growth of Hollywood, which developed as many other towns did in California. Orchards were replaced with neighborhoods. Schools, banks, and churches appeared. And then came the movies. With the advent of the film industry, the dream was born. In fact, Hollywood specifically, and California generally, became the land of dreams, realized in the success of the motion picture industry. Co-founded by D.W. Griffith whose genius is still recognized even today, the motion picture industry seemed to symbolize all that we Americans were and were not. It opened up previously shut doors, widened our eyes to different realities. It gave us hope, a goal to strive toward. And this glorious revolution occurred in Hollywood, so is it odd that the entire region should assume some of that glamour for itself, simply by proximity and association? Of course not. Have we not all bought into that dream?

I admire Starr’s attempt to relate the entirety of Southern Californian history in one book. His account is worthy of recognition and praise, but only if we are prepared for what we ultimately get out of the book. Think of this account as a buffet. You may sample everything on the table, but only if you take a little bit of each. If you take too much of one thing, then you may not be able to sample the dessert. You’ll be too full. So, just try a little of everything and be happy with what you get. If you really like the salmon quiche, then cook one for dinner tomorrow night. And if you are really interested in the rich literary history of Southern California, then read a book that deals with that specific aspect of Californian history. Be prepared to view Starr’s book as a starting point to provoke thought. As an overview, it works well in delivering a little bit of everything and a whole lot of nothing substantial.

Works Cited

Starr, Kevin. Inventing the Dream: California through the Progressive Era. New York:

Oxford UP, 1985.