Printed on the book leaf of his first novel, F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote, “My whole theory of writing I can sum up in one sentence: an author ought to write for the youth of his own generation, the critics of the next and the schoolmasters of ever afterward” (Fitzgerald leaf). Fitzgerald seems to do just that in his short story, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, which offers a cultural snapshot of his life and times. This is a crucial element in the literary school of New Historicism, which is concerned with how a literary work is influenced by the era in which it was produced. Based on this notion, within the first section of Benjamin Button, the reader can see the potential social, economic, and cultural forces that may have influenced Fitzgerald as he wrote this story.

Fitzgerald begins his story with a cultural proclamation about the changing obstetrical practices surrounding the birth of Benjamin Button. Fitzgerald writes, “As long ago as 1860 it was the proper thing to be born at home. At present, I am told, the high gods of medicine have decreed that the first cries of the young shall be uttered upon the anesthetic air of a hospital preferably a fashionable one” (Fitzgerald 1). This passage offers much to the reader in regards to understanding the “proper” medical norms of Fitzgerald’s time. Whereas in the past (at the time of Benjamin Button’s infancy), it was appropriate for birthings to take place in a personal environment, in Fitzgerald’s “present” time, deliveries had moved to a more institutional location. Thus, Button’s hospital birth is called an “anachronism,” allowing the reader to get a critical glimpse of the future transformation of the health field. Additionally, Fitzgerald’s reference to the doctors as “high gods of medicine” offering decrees, suggests another cultural shift for physicians in mainstream society from one of marginalization to centralization.

Social dominance is also touched upon in Benjamin Button—another factor New Historicists are keen to study. Fitzgerald writes,

The Roger Buttons held an enviable position, both social and financial, in ante-bellum Baltimore. They were related to the This Family and the That Family, which, as every Southerner knew, entitled them to membership in that enormous peerage which largely populated the Confederacy (Fitzgerald 1).

Readers can take note of several references in this passage that speak of social prestige and honor. Apparently, family connections were considered “enviable” and gave to the Buttons “membership” in the important social cliques of the South. Interestingly, this status in not in Fitzgerald’s “present” time based on the reference to “ante-bellum Baltimore.” Benjamin Button was written after the Civil War, so the social circles had changed and the Buttons’ community elitism was no more.

Despite some social transformation, some aspects of society seemed persistent. Fitzgerald brings into the story issues of ethnicity and political correctedness when he writes, “And then the old man would gather his blanket around him and they would plod on, past the bustling stores, the slave market—for a dark instant Mr. Button wished passionately that his son was black—past the luxurious houses of the residential district, past the home for the aged” (Fitzgerald 5). The shame of Roger Button concerning the physical condition of his son is so great that he “wished passionately” that his son was black instead of being in this absurd “aged” condition. The reader can further infer from Fitzgerald’s reference to “the slave market” that Roger would not be opposed to selling off his bizarre son if he were black. Such references point to a historical presence of slavery not far removed from Fitzgerald’s time and a current social marginalization separating blacks from “the luxurious houses of the residential district.” Fitzgerald even touches upon more bigotry when he mentions, “past the home for the aged…”

One of the more subtle social presentations in Benjamin Button focuses on appropriate emotional responses. Speaking of Roger Button, Fitzgerald writes, “On the September morning consecrated to the enormous event he arose nervously at six o’clock” (Fitzgerald 1). Thus, the birth of his child is of monumental importance, bordering on the religious considering the use of the term, “consecrated.” Most would consider this a normal response of a soon-to-be father; however, when Roger encounters the doctor, typically a position believed to be exercised with compassion, Roger instead gets snubbed and dismissed by the physician. Fitzgerald writes,

“What’s the matter?” demanded Mr. Button appalled. “Triplets?” “No, Not triplets!” answered the doctor cuttingly. “What’s more, you can go and see for yourself. And get another doctor. I brought you into the world, young man, and I’ve been physician to your family for forty years, but I’m through with you! I don’t want to see you or any of your relatives ever again! Good-bye!” (Fitzgerald 2).

Such a display runs counter to the social expectation of a doctor upholding the Hippocratic oath and who has been part of the family for years. Yet, this display is nothing compared to Roger Button’s response to his son. Fitzgerald writes, ‘“Am I mad?” Thundered Mr. Button, his terror resolving into rage. “Is this some ghastly hospital joke?”’ (Fitzgerald 3). Parents are supposed to love their newborn infants regardless of their appearance, but Roger does not. New Historicists might believe that this is Fitzgerald’s subtle criticism of the coldness of the Victorian Era or the indifference of his own age. Either way, Fitzgerald’s presentation of “proper” emotional response in Benjamin Button is a poignant statement on social emotionalism.

The critical approach of New Historicism, as applied to F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, highlights the various social and cultural elements of the milieu surrounding Fitzgerald and his writing, providing depth of understanding and social emphasis. Yet, a New Historicism approach may overlook or underplay literary elements more important than the contextual descriptions. The scientific oddity of a newborn baby emerging from the mother’s womb as a seventy-year old man might be the crucial aspect upon which Fitzgerald wanted his readers to focus. Instead of aiding literary analysis, New Historicism might only confuse the reading and make it harder to see the individual tree within the forest, so to speak.