![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Haven't been reading anything recent and really, really great of late. Read Kellior's most recent Lake Wobegon novel, and it was some distance below the others I've read. Read the bulk of screenwriter William Goldman's most recent view-from-the-inside work, and found it interesting, although he comes across as caustic and a bit hypocritical at times. (He really, really doesn't like Hollywood as it is now, and yet he's never written anything but Hollywood films. That seems odd.) Found a recently discovered Mark Twain short story disguised as a book, and liked the story but not the pages and pages of commentary surrounding it. But now i'm re-reading Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn for the first time in years.
Now, the main event of the month, David McCullough's prize-winning biography of John Adams. I'm a long-time fan of McCullough's works, and I can say I eagerly awaited this book's arrival for two years, and then eagerly awaited its publication in paperback. McCullough's works on Truman, the young Teddy Roosevelt, and the building of the Brooklyn Bridge are all gripping page-turners.
Alas, while there is nothing wrong with John Adams, it is not a page-turner. It is a bit dry in many spots, and works perhaps a bit too hard to correct the record about this brlliant, sometimes difficult Founding Father and unsuccessful president. In fact, McCullough tries to argue that Adams was not that unsuccessful as he didn't let war fever drive the young Unites States in a war with revolutionary France. I don't quite buy it, as Adams was also the man who signed the unconstitutional Alien and Sedition Acts. (Note: odd how little things have changed after all, as we find the US infected with war fever, disliking the French, and creating oppressive laws in the name of the national interest. The current government is far from the first to be there.) There is no excuse for a man as dedicated to civil liberties as Adams - enemy of slavery, and early champion of religious freedom for all in Massachusetts - to have signed such a law.
Beyond this bit of revisionism, the book focuses more on Adams' career as a diplomat than on his contributions to American independence in 1776, with the author assuming we already know all there is to know. There is a sense of imbalance due to this, one reinforced by the surprisingly large amount of biographical information presented about Thomas Jefferson. It's still interesting information, but I think it's extraneous.
The final result is a slow read, enlivened somewhat by McCullough's skill as a writer, and by the lively letters and essays written by Adams, her remarkable wife Abigail, and their contemporaries. The Founding Fathers possessed a rare talent as a group for getting the point across, especially given how turgid the works of the great writers of that ear feel to me. A book of Adams' letter to Abigail now seems worth reading. (I think such a thing already exsits.)
I have long been a "fan" of many of the Founding Fathers, despite their flaws, and have felt that Adams never quite got his due. Well, at last, he has, and I can't help but feel that he still comes up short compared to Jefferson, Washington and Franklin. He was brilliant, tolerant, honest, and unambitious, yet feels small next to those men who come across as being better leaders, or more visionary, or just more interesting.
Or maybe McCullough just didn't do Adams the justice that he did Roosevelt and Truman. Alas, there are few other books on John Adams that one can read for other opinions. Unlike most modern presidents and most of the more regarded old ones, Adams never got this kind of treatment till now. Hopefully, other scholars will do their own works on Adams and provide a broader picture still. For now, this book will do as an overview.
Now, the main event of the month, David McCullough's prize-winning biography of John Adams. I'm a long-time fan of McCullough's works, and I can say I eagerly awaited this book's arrival for two years, and then eagerly awaited its publication in paperback. McCullough's works on Truman, the young Teddy Roosevelt, and the building of the Brooklyn Bridge are all gripping page-turners.
Alas, while there is nothing wrong with John Adams, it is not a page-turner. It is a bit dry in many spots, and works perhaps a bit too hard to correct the record about this brlliant, sometimes difficult Founding Father and unsuccessful president. In fact, McCullough tries to argue that Adams was not that unsuccessful as he didn't let war fever drive the young Unites States in a war with revolutionary France. I don't quite buy it, as Adams was also the man who signed the unconstitutional Alien and Sedition Acts. (Note: odd how little things have changed after all, as we find the US infected with war fever, disliking the French, and creating oppressive laws in the name of the national interest. The current government is far from the first to be there.) There is no excuse for a man as dedicated to civil liberties as Adams - enemy of slavery, and early champion of religious freedom for all in Massachusetts - to have signed such a law.
Beyond this bit of revisionism, the book focuses more on Adams' career as a diplomat than on his contributions to American independence in 1776, with the author assuming we already know all there is to know. There is a sense of imbalance due to this, one reinforced by the surprisingly large amount of biographical information presented about Thomas Jefferson. It's still interesting information, but I think it's extraneous.
The final result is a slow read, enlivened somewhat by McCullough's skill as a writer, and by the lively letters and essays written by Adams, her remarkable wife Abigail, and their contemporaries. The Founding Fathers possessed a rare talent as a group for getting the point across, especially given how turgid the works of the great writers of that ear feel to me. A book of Adams' letter to Abigail now seems worth reading. (I think such a thing already exsits.)
I have long been a "fan" of many of the Founding Fathers, despite their flaws, and have felt that Adams never quite got his due. Well, at last, he has, and I can't help but feel that he still comes up short compared to Jefferson, Washington and Franklin. He was brilliant, tolerant, honest, and unambitious, yet feels small next to those men who come across as being better leaders, or more visionary, or just more interesting.
Or maybe McCullough just didn't do Adams the justice that he did Roosevelt and Truman. Alas, there are few other books on John Adams that one can read for other opinions. Unlike most modern presidents and most of the more regarded old ones, Adams never got this kind of treatment till now. Hopefully, other scholars will do their own works on Adams and provide a broader picture still. For now, this book will do as an overview.
