The process of developing my project around the theme of Prohibition bootlegging on the Michigan-Ontario border has proved a challenging one. The wealth of primary and secondary sources which I have found has made it increasingly difficult to find a satisfactory focus for my research. At this point my primary concern is identifying an argument or question in order to construct a line of inquiry along which to direct my research over the coming weeks.
Having been inspired by our readings and discussions, I am keen to incorporate the microhistorical approach into my analysis. A potentially fruitful way of doing this would be to focus on a cross-border comparison between communities on the two sides of the Detroit River. The experiences of these border communities during Prohibition offer a fascinating lens on wider the wider political and social processes of the era. Starting at this local level should also allow me to keep bootlegging and bootleggers at the centre of my analysis.
However, the need to construct an argument remains. Ideally I will be able to identify some aspect of the relationship between the border communities which was initiated or altered by bootlegging or Prohibition more broadly, and use this as my line of argument. This could focus on ties between the communities, or instead on their parallel developments, which would perhaps highlight some surprising similarities or differences. My research thus far has hinted at a number of ways in which Prohibition was influential at the community level. These include the small-scale production of alcohol, the local involvement in smuggling activities, the influence of criminal gangs, and the public opinions towards bootleggers and law enforcers. The last of these has particularly caught my interest, as studies by Moore and others highlight the ways in which public opinion served to both reflect and influence the respective successes of bootlegging and enforcement. Tracking the shifts in public opinion is an interesting option, but it remains to be seen if this is valid and achievable at the local level.
My research on this topic so far has been extremely interesting, and I look forward to the challenge of constructing a narrower argument over the coming weeks. This process will hopefully include a trip to the National Library of Scotland to access some of the most detailed studies on prohibition in Michigan and Ontario. Any responses to the thoughts laid out in this blog would be most welcome, as would any questions or alternative suggestions.
Engelmann, Larry, Intemperance: the lost war against liquor (New York & London, 1979)
Mason, Philip, P., Rum Running and the Roaring Twenties (Detroit, 1995)
Moore, S. T. Bootlegging and Borders: The Paradox of Prohibition on a Canada-U.S. Borderland (Lincoln & London, 2014)
I like this reflection on problems encountered while doing and practicing research and transnationally inspired research in particular. The question of borders comes in here into your project on prohibition and bootlegging. Stick with it. At the same time there is the reflection on scales and levels: micro and macro. I would suggest to read further into this.
On borders, try to locate the brief article by Lucien Febvre (the founding father with Marc Bloch of the Annales) on the meaning of borders and his study on “The Rhine” (with the geographer Demangeon). In there you find the dual notion of border: as “coupure” (dividing) and “couture” (as shared, entangled).
On the process of making and using borders see Peter Sahlins, Boundaries. The making of France and Spain in the Pyrenees (1989). A different setting in time and space but a classic that redefined the notion of what a border is.