Richard Cerasani’s book, “Love Letters from Mount Rushmore,” provides an antidote to cancel culture in its depiction of the monumental sculpture not as an intrusion defacing nature, but a means of restoring the souls of spiritless and restless Americans.

Love Letters from Mount Rushmore: The Story of a Marriage, a Monument, and a Moment in History, by Richard Cerasani (Pierre: South Dakota Historical Society Press, 2014).

Mount Rushmore, with its granite carvings of four giants among American presidents, has sparked controversy of late. Last summer the cancel culture mob threatened to dynamite it. This spring, South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem sought to reverse a Department of the Interior decision to cancel a Fourth of July celebration at Mount Rushmore. Governor Noem was backed by more than a dozen attorneys general in friend-of-the-court briefs, calling for a fireworks celebration as much of the country opens up following the COVID quarantines of the past 15 months. U.S. District Court of South Dakota judge Robert Lange sided with the Biden Administration on June 2, citing the National Park Service’s multiple reasons for prohibiting a large fireworks display in the Black Hills and the Cheyenne River Sioux tribe’s concerns over the impact of pyrotechnics on the ecology of the area, considered sacred to them. Such controversies swirling around Mount Rushmore have been part of its history since South Dakota state historian Doane Robinson first proposed the idea in 1924 for a giant mountain sculpture as a way to bring tourists to the Black Hills. Robinson’s grand idea certainly worked, as some three million tourists annually visit the shrine to America’s governing ideals. For those of you who have already made the trip to the Black Hills, or those who plan to do so this summer, a behind-the-scenes look at the creation of the sculpted presidential heads will provide a rare personal insight into the often dramatic events that gave shape (quite literally) to the carved mountain face.

Richard Cerasani’s book, Love Letters from Mount Rushmore: The Story of a Marriage, a Monument, and a Moment in History, provides an up-close and personal perspective on the day-to-day creation of Mount Rushmore and a glimpse in to the character of its main sculptor, Gutzon Borglum, in the almost daily letters that flew back and forth between Mary and Arthur Cerasani in 1940. The book is a memoir by their son, Richard, constructed around the treasure trove of letters and photos he found in an old trunk after his mother’s death in 2004. The resulting book takes the reader into the heart of the operation at Mount Rushmore as well as the heartbreak of the Cerasani family as they dealt with a 2000-mile separation for six months.

Arthur Cerasani, artist and musician in Rochester, New York, met Mount Rushmore lead artist Gutzon Borglum in January 1940. To Cerasani’s great surprise, Borglum knocked on his door, in search of help with casting a bust of Frank Gannett, founder of the Gannett newspaper chain. The Rochester Memorial Art Gallery had recommended Cerasani to Borglum. Within two days, Borglum asked Cerasani to work with him in South Dakota. A little over two months later, Cerasani boarded the train for Rapid City. The Great Depression hit artists particularly hard, so the promise of fascinating work on a monumental project at decent pay gave Arthur Cerasani much hope for the future, despite the looming separation from his wife and two young sons.

Alas, disappointment after disappointment met Arthur in the Black Hills. He found Borglum to be temperamental and often absent as he traveled to beg Congress for more funding to finish the project. With war looming on the horizon, the Mount Rushmore team feared they would not be granted the necessary funding. This fear weighed heavily on them all. In addition, Arthur’s fear of heights made his initial assignment to create a scale model of the entire Mount Rushmore zone challenging. Before long, however, he was climbing the 800 steps to the presidential heads and riding up in the bucket.

Letters from Arthur were full of his loneliness and frustrations, as well as details about his work and his co-workers on the mountain. Mary’s responses, in turn, were rife with questions as well as advice on how to make the most of his time and how to deal with Borglum. When an unexpected ride from western New York to Rockford, Illinois suddenly became available, Mary decided to visit Arthur, arriving in Rapid City on June 6 and staying for almost a month. During her visit, Mary made it a point to become well acquainted with everyone who worked on the mountain, especially the Borglums. She also found a way to add to the family income by giving tours to tourists, charging 25 cents per person and taking each group up all 800 steps to the presidential heads. The purpose for her visit was to see if there was a way for herself and the boys to join Arthur in the Black Hills. On her way home, she wrote to Borglum. First, she praised his vision: “The great and everlasting tribute to democracy which you so ingeniously have planned and so skillfully are working out leaves me still breathless and full of admiration.” Continuing in this vein, Mary struck a patriotic chord that must have resonated with Borglum: “It is my sincere wish and prayer that this great work may continue and that your plans, so beautifully conceived, may be realized. We Americans need something tangible to lift us from our spiritless, restless, mad hankering after a soulless life. The Rushmore Memorial Project has already accomplished this for thousands. I take off my hat to the continuation of such a project.” (p. 130) Mary’s letter ended with a polite request for information about Borglum’s immediate and future plans for Arthur so that she and the children could end their separation from him.

Mary’s desire to reunite her family did become a reality, but not in the way she had suggested to Borglum. The Mount Rushmore project did not possess the funding to continue. Borglum shut down the work at the end of July 1940 and headed to Washington, D.C. to ask Congress for money. With war on the horizon, the sculptors feared that Congress would curtail all non-military expenses. Arthur stayed on another two months, continuing work on the Hall of Records. He arrived in New York on September 23, 1940. Six months later, on March 6, 1941, the Cerasani family received word that Gutzon Borglum had died. His son Lincoln would have to finish the Mount Rushmore project on his father’s behalf.

In many ways, Arthur Cerasani’s involvement with Mount Rushmore and Gutzon Borglum changed his life. Richard Cerasani’s tribute to his parents and their deep and abiding love for one another provides a new perspective on Mount Rushmore, giving its creation a personal aspect and its looming presence a grounding in the daily lives of the people who made Doane Robinson’s dream a reality. Love Letters from Mount Rushmore itself is gorgeous, with its glossy photos of letters, diaries, and Black Hills vistas. But the Cerasanis’ story is even more beautiful. It’s a love story that makes for perfect summer reading, especially for Mount Rushmore fans. Love Letters from Mount Rushmore provides an antidote to cancel culture in its depiction of the monumental sculpture not as an intrusion defacing nature, but to paraphrase Mary Cerasani, a means of restoring the souls of spiritless and restless Americans.

The Imaginative Conservative applies the principle of appreciation to the discussion of culture and politics as we approach dialogue with magnanimity rather than with mere civility. Will you help us remain a refreshing oasis in the increasingly contentious arena of modern discourse? Please consider donating now.

All comments are moderated and must be civil, concise, and constructive to the conversation. Comments that are critical of an essay may be approved, but comments containing ad hominem criticism of the author will not be published. Also, comments containing web links or block quotations are unlikely to be approved. Keep in mind that essays represent the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Imaginative Conservative or its editor or publisher.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email