Let’s Bring Back is simultaneously inspiring and offensive. The text consists of a number of alphabetized topics that are uncommon or lost in the current age, beginning with the term “Acquaintance” and concluding with Zinc Bars. Some topics are suggested seriously, like Heirlooms and Town Squares; others in jest, such as Roman and Greek Gods (“They were always up to something naughty” is the entire description); and others still are miniature biographies of historical figures.
Some of these entries are entirely benign; I found the recipes for foods and drinks that have fallen out of fashion to be enjoyable, especially. That said, the text includes some content that is at best irritating, and at worst disgusting. Because the author, Mrs. Lesley M. M. Bloom, listed “Poison-Penned Theater Critics” as an institution worth restoring, I feel somewhat encouraged to express my revulsion.
Consider for example the topics Patron Saints and Russian Icons. Mrs. Bloom treats these topics as mere provincial curiosities or fun superstitions that one may play with. However, such a view is certainly deeply offensive to the world’s Catholic and Orthodox Christians, who, despite being outnumbered by Protestants here in America, make up the largest and second-largest Christian bodies in the globe. (Icons, also, are not only Russian. They’re commonly found in churches east of the Rhine and anywhere in the Orthodox tradition.) On a stranger note, she addresses the as-of-yet-unfinished La Sagrada Familia Cathedral in Barcelona in the topic “Unfinished Castles by Eccentric Geniuses”, though I am confident she knows the distinction between a cathedral and a castle.
Perhaps the most thoroughly revolting topic the author mentions is, oddly enough, Punch Bowls! Under this innocuous heading, Mrs. Bloom has decided to use the language of pedophilia to describe their appeal. “Punch bowls,” she says, “are the Lolitas of serving ware: filled with pink party punch, they look dainty and sweet and innocent but portend all sorts of naughty behavior.” In the interest of charity, I will assume that the author is unaware of the book Lolita beyond a cursory knowledge that a young woman becomes intimately involved with an older man, and that she does not realize that young woman is prepubescent.
On a lighter note, some topics suggest Mrs. Bloom’s conception of bringing things back is merely anglophilia; her discussion of “Tea Time” suggests she might not be aware that such a practice is far from unheard of overseas. Furthermore, she refers to the term “holiday”, rather than “vacation”, as being a historic term, rather than a part of the British dialects.
Many items discussed suggest a subtle classism in the work. Constantly, she betrays an admiration for the elite of America’s Gilded Age, such as William Randolph Hearst’s unfinished compound, the hiring of wet nurses, and the Grand Tour without mention of the circumstances creating the wealth required for these things. This in itself is not necessarily a problem, but it left a bad taste in my mouth. This is perhaps also reflected in her seemingly feminist views, but her admiration for the term “harlot” as an insult (in the topic “Slattern”), which feels contradictory to me.
That said, these are relatively small issues. Other topics addressed were entirely agreeable, such as “The WPA” (FDR’s Works Progress Administration), “Formality” (in protest against the casual nature of modern American society), and “Latin” (though I am biased, as a Classics major), among others. However, the aforementioned flies in the ointment make the book as a whole less palatable.