Remembering Grace?

The questions “who was Grace Coolidge” and “how do we remember her” beg to be reconsidered. I am often struck by how little most Americans know about their first ladies, especially those serving before Eleanor Roosevelt (who was first lady from 1933-1945). Sadly, the lives of the spouses of our presidents are generally overlooked by presidential scholars, the media, and students of American history alike. ⁽¹⁾ Yet, many have made significant contributions to their husband’s careers, the White House, and nation. ⁽²⁾ Perhaps nowhere is the matter of our failure to honor the memory of capable first ladies more apparent than with Grace Coolidge.

Indeed, who was Grace Coolidge? The wife of our thirtieth president has been largely forgotten by historians. Aside from a few Coolidge aficionados, Grace Anna Goodhue Coolidge remains obscure: Grace possessed a pleasant smile hinting at a first-rate disposition. The First Lady’s 5'4" frame was topped with thick, curly black hair, and most remember her gray-green eyes radiating warmth. That much we know. By all accounts she was a talented and outgoing woman who enjoyed the theater, piano, singing, as well as such physical pursuits as skating and hiking, and a general interest in the outdoors. When reading her surviving letters, it is clear that Grace Coolidge had a passion for animals and baseball, the latter of which she described matter-of-factly as “my very life.” ⁽³⁾

But, such dry descriptions do not really tell us who she was. The First Lady was eminently more capable and talented than the person remembered in most history books. It is true that Grace’s real gift was a warm personality, which leant itself well to her real passion people (“People are my books,” she remarked). This is key to understanding her and seeking her true legacy, and it is typical of what has been written about her. But Grace was far more complex than she has been portrayed. She was, at the same time, a passively devoted wife to her husband and adventurous by nature. As a girl she preferred trains and toys to cooking and homemaking; yet as an adult she would become one of the country’s most celebrated hostesses. There exists in her character a mix of the old-fashioned and the liberated. That said, how is she remembered?

Rating the First Ladies: The Case of Mrs. Coolidge

For better or for worse, rating and ranking the presidents has become a popular pursuit.⁽⁴⁾ There have also been three rankings of first ladies, which are worth considering as we attempt to answer the aforementioned question. It appears the first attempt at this was done by Good Housekeeping magazine in 1980. ⁽⁵⁾ Although it is not considered by scholars to be a serious, scholarly assessment, Good Housekeeping ranked the then-fifteen most recent first ladies. The magazine used 12 measures to arrive at their ranking: hostess; campaigner; leader in causes; interest in politics; feminist; traditionalist; improving the White House; influence on the president; helpfulness to the president; outspokenness; charisma; and inspiration to women.

Table 1. Good Housekeeping Ranking of First Ladies (1980)

RANK	FIRST LADY	SCORE
1	Lady Bird Johnson	92
2	Eleanor Roosevelt	89
3	Rosalynn Carter	88
4	Lou Hoover	83
5	Jackie Kennedy	79
6	Betty Ford	73
7	Helen Taft	69
8	Pat Nixon	63
9	Bess Truman	60
10	Florence Harding	60
11	Edith Roosevelt	54
12	Edith Wilson	53
13	Grace Coolidge	52
14	Mamie Eisenhower	52
15	Ellen Wilson	48

Note: Higher scores are better scores.

Grace Coolidge does not do well in this ranking. Only Ellen Wilson is rated lower. Where Mrs. Coolidge does do well is in such criteria as “hostess,” where she scored a perfect “10.” In such categories as “charisma,” “campaigner,” and “helpfulness to the president” she scored a respectable “8” out of a possible “10” points. There is much wrong with this poll, including the criteria used to arrive at the rankings and the rankings themselves. I believe Grace deserves to be rated much higher, although a case can be made against granting her a score of “8” on some of the criteria. For instance, although Grace enjoyed campaigning and was popular, she did not participate actively in her husband’s campaigns. Her own charm and popularity could only help but aid his image and popularity, but Grace did not help her husband with the details or mechanics of governing and campaigning.

Of course, the criteria used bias the poll. In fact, it must be admitted that most any attempt to rank the first ladies is doomed to fail. ⁽⁶⁾ The Constitution is silent on even the existence of the presidential spouse, so it is an “extra-constitutional” office. It is technically not even an office, per se, as it is unpaid, unelected, and unappointed. So, one is left to ponder what criteria to use to rate a first lady. Would “political activism” be one? Barbara Bush was not overtly political, yet she was very popular; while Hillary Rodham Clinton demonstrated not only an interest in politics, but many political accomplishments, yet she was polarizing and controversial when doing as much. Both were valued advisers to their husbands, albeit in different ways. Would “policy influence” be a criterion? Eleanor Roosevelt, at times, had little influence on her husband, yet crusaded for important social issues throughout her first ladyship and life. What about “charisma?” Rosalynn Carter was not “charismatic,” yet was bright, hard working, and headed her husband’s mental health reform task force, testified before Congress, and served as his envoy to Latin America.

Admirers of Grace Coolidge can take some comfort in the inherent shortcomings of such rankings. But, the results remain consistently discouraging. There are two scholarly polls that attempt to rank the first ladies. The Siena Research Institute (SRI) poll was released in 1993 and the Watson poll was completed in 1997. ⁽⁷⁾ Both SRI and Watson polled presidential scholars. Grace fared poorly in both. In addition to ranking first ladies, the Watson Poll also asked scholars to list the 10 most successful and 10 least successful first ladies. Grace Coolidge was eighth from bottom in the latter category of “least successful.”

Table 2. Scholarly Rankings of First Ladies

	Watson Poll (1997)	SRI Poll (1993)
1	Eleanor Roosevelt	Eleanor Roosevelt
2	Abigail Adams	Hillary Clinton
3	Dolley Madison	Abigail Adams
4	Martha Washington	Dolley Madison
5	Betty Ford	Rosalynn Carter
6	Sarah Polk	Lady Bird Johnson
7	Julia Grant	Jackie Kennedy
8	Harriet Lane (Buchanan)	Barbara Bush
9	Frances Cleveland	Betty Ford
10	Ellen Wilson	Edith Wilson
11	Jackie Kennedy	Bess Truman
12	Lucretia Garfield	Martha Washington
13	Abigail Fillmore	Lou Hoover
14	Eliza Johnson	Edith Roosevelt
15	Edith Roosevelt	Lucy Hayes
16	Hillary Clinton	Louisa Adams
17	Lady Bird Johnson	Mamie Eisenhower
18	Bess Truman	Pat Nixon
19	Barbara Bush	Grace Coolidge
20	Rosalynn Carter	Sarah Polk
21	Louisa Adams	Ellen Wilson
22	Lucy Hayes	Frances Cleveland
23	Pat Nixon	Elizabeth Monroe
24	Elizabeth Monroe	Eliza Johnson
25	Caroline Harrison	Helen Taft
26	Grace Coolidge	Julia Grant
27	Lou Hoover	Julia Tyler
28	Julia Tyler	Lucretia Garfield
29	Edith Wilson	Caroline Harrison
30	Letitia Tyler	Letitia Tyler
31	Margaret Taylor	Abigail Fillmore
32	. Ida McKinley	. Ida McKinley
33	Mamie Eisenhower	Margaret Taylor
34	Nancy Reagan	Jane Pierce
35	Helen Taft	Florence Harding
36	Florence Harding	Nancy Reagan
37	Jane Pierce	Mary Lincoln
38	Mary Lincoln
39	Anna Harrison

Note: The Watson Poll included (bachelor) President James Buchanan’s niece and first ladies such as Lucretia Garfield and Anna Harrison, who might not be included because of their husband’s short tenures in office.

Comparing Grace to Other First Ladies

Although presidential scholars have not seen fit to rank Grace highly, how does the former First Lady compare to presidential spouses in other facets of the job? In several attributes devoid of scholarly bias or perception, Grace Coolidge’s case is worth noting. It is worth noting for two reasons, one being that she is somewhat atypical of her predecessors and successors in the office. The second is that, despite these noteworthy traits, none are notable: Grace Coolidge is not associated with notable “firsts” or accomplishments in the office. For instance, she was one of the first college educated first ladies, having graduated from the University of Vermont in 1902. But the distinction of being the first presidential spouse to hold a college degree goes to Lucy Hayes, who was a graduate of Ohio Wesleyan University in 1850. Frances Cleveland also graduated from college (1885), having studied at Wells College. Three other first ladies serving prior to Grace also attended college, but did not complete their studies: Lucretia Garfield, Ellen Wilson, and Helen Taft.

Grace Coolidge was 26 years, 274 days old when marrying Calvin Coolidge, making her somewhat older than most first ladies at the time of marriage. In fact, only 10 were older than Grace when marrying, and a few of them such as Florence Harding, who was 30, were on their second marriage. Bess Wallace was 34 when she married Harry Truman. Grace Coolidge was 44 years, 212 days old upon entering the White House as first lady. This makes her one of the younger first ladies to serve, as only nine were younger during their first ladyships. The three youngest were Frances Cleveland, Julia Tyler, and Jacqueline Kennedy, at 21, 24, and 31, respectively. On the other hand, Anna Harrison was 65 and Barbara Bush 64 when their husbands served as president.

Grace Coolidge lived 78 years, 186 days, making her one of the longest living first ladies. Only 10 first ladies lived longer, led by Bess Truman who lived to be 97. Moreover, Grace survived Calvin Coolidge by 24 years, 184 days. Only eight first ladies outlived their husbands for a longer period of time, and some of them such as Julia Tyler and Jacqueline Kennedy were young when their husband’s died.

A Reassessment of Grace Coolidge’s Rating

Irrespective of the three first lady rankings (and one of them was conducted by me), a compelling argument exists to revisit Grace Coolidge’s standing as a first lady. Specifically, there are five points to be considered in questioning her generally low standing among historians and scholars.

1. Inaccuracy of the rankings

Admittedly, there are problems with attempting to rank presidents, much less first ladies. The polls are susceptible to bias and scholars have yet to agree on how to rate them and even whether or not we should be rating them. ⁽⁸⁾ Several of the respondents (presidential historians and scholars) to my poll (Watson Poll) indicated their limited knowledge of first ladies. Indeed, the great variation between the two scholarly polls listed in Table 2 highlights the lack of consensus among scholars about the standing of first ladies. I am convinced this is a byproduct of the lack of standards by which we use to rank first ladies and lack of knowledge about first ladies by even presidential scholars.

Although Grace Coolidge is rated rather poorly, it is likely she would do much better if criteria such as talents for hostess, popularity, and commitment to social causes were employed. I also have a suspicion she would do better if scholars knew more about her. Interestingly, one component present in all first ladyships is nearly absent in the case of Grace Coolidge. In addition to being married to the president, the one other thing that all first ladies have in common is that they have been harshly criticized. Thick-skinnedness is a necessity in the White House. At times the criticism of first ladies has been excessive, unfair, unfounded, and politically inspired. ⁽⁹⁾ Yet, remarkably, almost everyone who met Grace Coolidge liked her, including her husband’s enemies and critics. She remains easily ­ among her contemporaries ­ one of the most admired first ladies ever to serve.

2. Bias toward activism by pollsters

Scholars polled in the rankings of presidents and first ladies have been criticized by their peers for having a bias toward activism. ⁽¹⁰⁾ They rate those presidents and first ladies who, whether rightly or wrongly, were activists with aggressive policy agendas higher. As such, presidents and first ladies who left well alone, who showed restraint, and who by inclination, opportunity, or political necessity were less active in office tend to be rated poorly. The old Chinese blessing of having the good fortune of serving in interesting times, might have been a curse for Calvin and Grace Coolidge insofar as they served during a time of peace and prosperity, with a public looking for a “return to normalcy.” Accordingly, their “caretaker” approach to their offices would not gain for them the favor of the raters.

3. The period of Grace’s first ladyship

Those presidents and first ladies serving from 1837-1933, on average, rated lower than the presidents and first ladies who served before and after them. The polls of both presidents and first ladies show a preference for rating early and modern occupants of the offices higher than those in the “middle” years of the nation’s history, with the rare exception of an Abraham Lincoln or Theodore Roosevelt. Whether it is because of the romanticized views of the founding first families, the popularity of recent first ladies, the notable failures of presidents such as Buchanan, Grant, Harding, and others serving in the “middle” years, Grace Coolidge clearly does not benefit from the time in which she served.

4. Poor standing of Calvin Coolidge

Some first ladies appear to be ranked poorly in large measure because of the low standing of their husbands. ⁽¹¹⁾ It is probable that, should your husband be defeated after one term, be linked to a major scandal, or be remembered as a failed president, you will forever in the minds of the public (and the raters) be linked to his fate. No one remembers Millard Fillmore, so it is not surprising that no one remembers Abigail Fillmore. Even if we know little about her, we hold Martha Washington in high esteem.

Calvin Coolidge is not a favorite of presidential scholars. He is ranked 36th of 41 in the SRI poll, 30th of 36 in the Murray and Blessing poll, and “Below Average” in both the famous Schlesinger polls of 1948 and 1962 (which started the rankings game) as well as the in the 1996 Schlesinger, Jr. poll. ⁽¹²⁾ As Calvin Coolidge’s wife, Grace would appear to be doomed to, at best, mediocrity in the polls.

5. No means for measuring popularity

Few would bemoan the fact that public opinion polling had not yet become a staple of American politics back when Grace Coolidge presided as First Lady. However, had this been the case, it might have benefited her standing among historians today. I am reasonably confident that such polls would have indicated that Grace was enormously popular. Additionally, in the 1920s the press did not cover first ladies with the great interest that marks contemporary media coverage of the office. This would not occur until Eleanor Roosevelt changed the office. But, such media coverage would surely have stood as witness to Mrs. Coolidge’s talents, charm, and popularity.

Legacy

Grace Coolidge’s legacy stands in stark contrast to her ranking by scholars and the amount of attention paid to her by the writers of history. In an attempt to answer the questions posed at the outset of this essay, I see seven admirable accomplishments that define Grace Coolidge’s legacy.

1. Popular first lady

By all accounts, Grace Coolidge was an extremely popular first lady. Even the hyper-critical Alice Roosevelt, daughter of Theodore Roosevelt, referred to Grace as “sunshine,” and former chief usher of the White House, Ike Hoover, quipped that Grace was “90 percent of the Coolidge administration.”

2. Beloved, capable hostess

Grace Coolidge was welcomed with open arms by a capital city eager to enjoy the full social calendar which they had come to expect but had been limited during previous White Houses. And the new first lady did not disappoint. Helen Taft’s health had seriously limited her ability to serve as national hostess, Ellen Wilson, the first wife of President Woodrow Wilson, passed away shortly into the first term in office, and World War I further limited the Wilson administration’s social offering. Florence Harding’s polarizing style encountered a cool reception from many and both the ugly scandals surrounding the Harding administration and the president’s death in 1923 dampened the mood in the White House and capital city. It was into this environment that Grace Coolidge arrived. The capable, vivacious hostess quickly charmed all who encountered her and earned a reputation for her warmth, genuine love of people, and ability to remember everyone’s name. The Coolidge White House also hosted celebrities such as Will Rogers, Tom Mix, John Barrymore, Mary Pickford, Douglas Fairbanks, and Charles Lindbergh.

3. Supportive spouse

It is a challenge for any political spouse to endure the demands and pressures of public life. Calvin Coolidge’s campaigns frequently interfered with their home life, and even brought their honeymoon to an abrupt end. He was often away from home for long hours, leaving Grace to raise their two children, and money was at times tight for the couple. While a career in politics is difficult for any political spouse, it must have especially been the case for the spouse of Calvin Coolidge, who could be controlling, meticulous, and glum. Still, Grace not only endured, but she showed herself to be resilient and remarkably enthusiastic in her support of her husband throughout his long public career.

4. Fashion trendsetter

Grace Coolidge is to an extent an early Jackie Kennedy insofar as her choice of clothing and hairstyle launched fashion trends, and the public and press paid ample attention to the first lady’s tastes, style, and appearance.

5. White House preservationist

As first lady, Grace Coolidge enlisted the assistance of curators to help restore the White House, which had been somewhat neglected by the previous four first ladies. She replaced some of the building’s European decor with a sense of Americana, installed a sunroom, had a pond constructed on the grounds, and expanded the gardens, planting many of her favorite trees and flowers from Vermont. Much is made ­ and rightfully so ­ of the efforts by Mrs. Kennedy and other first ladies to preserve and manage the White House. But Grace Coolidge also deserves recognition in this area.

6. Advocate for the deaf

As a young girl, Grace lived with the John Lyman Yale family, where she befriended June Yale, whose aunt founded the Clarke School for the Deaf in Northampton, Massachusetts. From these connections to the school, Grace developed a lifelong passion for promoting deaf education as a teacher of oralism (lipreading) at the Clarke School, an admirer and supporter of Helen Keller, and later member of the School’s board.

7. Social advocate

Grace Coolidge remarked that the White House was “a great opportunity for service.” Through her notoriety as first lady, Grace was able to bring attention to a variety important social causes, and was active in the Red Cross, American Legion, American Lung Association, the Campfire Girls, and children’s hospitals.

Conclusion

Who was Grace Coolidge? The real answer may be found in how she lived her latter years. Although the Coolidge marriage was solid, after Calvin Coolidge’s passing Grace seems to have come into her own. During these years, the former first lady traveled to Europe, vacationed in North Carolina, finally took Charles Lindbergh up on his encouragement to fly in an airplane (Cal had disapproved), learned to drive a car, spoke on behalf of the U.S. effort in World War II, raised money for war refugees, wrote articles in such magazines as American Magazine and Good Housekeeping, received honorary degrees from Smith, Boston University, and her alma mater, and was recognized by the National Institute of Social Sciences and the Women’s National Press Club for her achievements. Of course, her passion for baseball remained, spending many an hour listening to the game on radio. Grace Coolidge was a free spirited, adventurous woman who, in spite of her personal growth during her widowed years, remained grounded, loyal to her close friends, and warm to all those she encountered.

As this essay has suggested, the time is long overdue for us to reconsider Grace Coolidge’s legacy as one worthy of acclaim. Circumstances largely beyond her control are responsible for the faded memory of her first ladyship and career of public service. The extent of Grace’s complicity in her relatively poor standing by scholars and students of American history might be summed up in one word: humility. In a day and age where women were rarely given credit for their deeds, and their accomplishments were even less likely to be recorded publicly, Grace’s humble demeanor appears to have prevented others from learning more about her. The first lady who remembered that “I was a human being before I was the wife of a president,” also stated that “It has been my experience that those who are truly great are the most simple people at heart, the most considerate and understanding, with a dedicated aversion to talking about themselves.” I agree, and there is your answer.

NOTES

1. Most scholarship on the presidents and U.S. politics has failed to consider the roles and actions of first ladies. This is documented in Lewis L. Gould, ed., American First Ladies: Their Lives and Their Legacy (New York: Garland, 1996) and Robert P. Watson, The Presidents’ Wives: Reassessing the Office of First Lady (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2000).

2. For good sources documenting the many deeds and accomplishments of first ladies, see: Carl Sferrazza Anthony, First Ladies: The Saga of the Presidents’ Wives and Their Power (New York: Quill, 1990 & 1991); Betty Boyd Caroli, First Ladies (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987); Robert P. Watson, First Ladies of the United States: A Biographical Dictionary (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2001).

3. For a good account of Grace Coolidge’s life and views, in her own words, see Ishbel Ross, Grace Coolidge and Her Era: The Story of a President’s Wife (available through the CCMF); Lawrence E. Wikander and Robert H. Ferrell, eds., Grace Coolidge: An Autobiography (also available through CCMF).

4. The presidential ratings/rankings polls have become something of a cottage industry. The first was by Arthur M. Schlesinger, which appeared in 1948 in Life magazine. This was followed by another Schlesinger poll in 1962 for the New York Times Magazine. Numerous rankings have been done and they generate a lot of interest and criticism by scholars.

5. The Good Housekeeping magazine ranking appeared in the July 1980 issue, see p. 120.

6. Among the general shortcomings of rankings are the inability of scholars to agree on whether or not to use criteria or a holistic evaluation, which criteria to use, how to limit the bias of raters, and whether the performance of a president can be reduced to a ranking. These concerns are even more prevalent when attempting to rank first ladies.

7. The SRI poll and Watson poll are discussed in Watson, The Presidents’ Wives, pp. 172-190.

8. See note 6 above. The rankings always invite considerable criticism. See, in particular, the criticisms of Alvin S. Felzenberg, which can be found in: Partisan Biases in Presidential Ratings: Ulysses, Woodrow, and Calvin, “We Hardly Knew Ye” White House Studies, vol. 3, no. 1, 2003; “Letter to the Editor,” New York Times Magazine (Jan. 12, 1997); “Rating the Presidents” Can Historians Transcend Their Biases?” Detroit News (Dec. 29, 1996).

9. For a discussion of the extensiveness and prevalence of criticism directed at first ladies, see Watson, The Presidents’ Wives, pp. 30-40.

10. Felzenberg (see note 8) and many other scholars have noted the possible bias by raters toward activism in office, whereby active presidents are rated higher. The same appears to be true of first ladies. See, for instance, Robert P. Watson, “Rating the Presidential Spouses,” The Social Science Journal, vol. 36, no. 1, 1999, pp. 117-136.

11. First ladies might be ranked low if their husbands are ranked low. See Watson, “Rating the Presidential Spouses,” 1999 and Watson, The Presidents’ Wives, 2000.

12. The major polls of presidents include Schlesinger (1948), Schlesinger (1962), Murray and Blessing (1982), and Schlesinger, Jr., (1996).