Jefferson: Careless Whispers

As the author primarily responsible for some of the most important words ever written, Thomas Jefferson has had a major impact upon political thought.

But how far does the responsibility of an author reach?

In the critical appraisal of texts, two schools of thought have dominated. The study of plain text itself alone and the study of the reader-response have large bodies of work, each heavily invested in understanding the systems contained within, and the effects of, artistic works. Authorial Intent, by contrast has seemed a much more difficult concept to pin down.

From 'delimiting' the scope of reader interpretation, to being the channel through which historical context shapes communication, the theories focus upon how much or how little influence an author has - with further investigation at risk of raising questions around the ethical responsibility of the author.

For Jefferson, embroiled in what he named 'hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man', it is a question of some relevance. While engaged in political contest with his Federalist opponents, the primary author of the Declaration of Independence also produced infamous works.

Jefferson opposed the efforts of John Adams & Alexander Hamilton to centralise the governance of the United States, by preparing the Kentucky Resolution (along with influencing its Virginia counterpart), against the Alien and Sedition Acts.

Those resolutions sought to counter what Jefferson saw as a Federalist attempt at an 'unconstitutional' expansion of central government authority. In his fight against the tyrannies he perceived, Jefferson laid the groundwork to enable what Washington described as 'coercion' by states acting in concord (Chernow, 2004).

And further, those mechanisms put in place by Jefferson's resolves were later put to work in support of other tyrannies over the individual - being used as leverage in maintaining slavery, which lead to constitutional crisis and played an integral role in secession & the civil war (Knott, 2002).

Jeffersonian Democracy has also developed into the basis for oppositionist stances against centralised government. From Whig disputes with Jacksonian Democrats over 'internal improvement', to the modern day Tea Party anti-government movement, Thomas Jefferson's works have generated inconsistent, or at least competing, narratives. Different factions struggling as claimants to a perceived Libertarian legacy - struggles that have mirrored Jefferson's personal complexity; as Temperley (1997) puts it:

'Jefferson's words continue to resonate in the appeals of oppressed peoples the world over. Whether, however, they accord with the private beliefs of their author is quite another matter.'

The struggles and inconsistencies of Thomas Jefferson highlight the difficulties of understanding works of intellectual property in terms of their author. How far is an author's intent culpable for what has been done with their work?

In a piece written at the BBC's behest, Alan Moore (2012) talked about the role he & David Lloyd's creation, V, has had in the recent protest activities:

'Today's response to similar oppressions seems to be one that is intelligent, constantly evolving and considerably more humane, and yet our character's borrowed Catholic revolutionary visage and his incongruously Puritan apparel are perhaps a reminder that unjust institutions may always be haunted by volatile 17th century spectres, even if today's uprisings are fuelled more by social networks than by gunpowder. Some ghosts never go away.'

Those ideas developed and disseminated, created in response to, in reaction or to resolve, the issues of the day; those ideas founded in the dynamics of their day; those ideas will all see those situations change and those principles applied to new struggles - history progresses and so to do those things we convey as language itself evolves.

As such the capacity of an author to manage the effect of their words is limited - but within those limits work must be done to help clarity where possible. But Rousseau's appeal is a fitting reminder - that with words 'the essential thing  is to know how to recognise them when they are used in their precise sense'.

==========
References:
==========
+ Ron Chernow's 'Alexander Hamilton'; Penguin, 2004.

+ Stephen F Knott's 'Alexander Hamilton and the persistence of myth'; University Press of Kansas, 2002.

+ Howard Temperley's 'Jefferson and Slavery: A Study in Moral Perplexity'; in Gary L McDowell & Sharon L Noble (eds.) 'Reason and Republicanism: Thomas Jefferson's Legacy of Liberty'; Rowman & Littlefield, 1997.

+ Alan Moore's 'Viewpoint: V for Vendetta and the rise of Anonymous'; BBC, 10 February 2012.

+ Jean-Jacques Rousseau's 'The Social Contract'; 1762.