THE AMERICAN STORY: CONVERSATIONS with MASTER HISTORIANS (audiobook) by David M. Rubinstein

 

Published in 2019 by Simon and Schuster Audio.
Voice work by various historians hosted by David M. Rubinstein.
Duration: 9 hours, 52 minutes.
Unabridged.

David M. Rubinstein is an avid amateur historian and financial supporter of history-related projects. He organized a series of 16 interviews of historians by the Library of Congress with the intended audience to be actual members of Congress with invited guests. 

He picked historians who have written popular and professionally respected histories and biographies of famous Americans such as Ron Chernow (Alexander Hamilton), David McCullough (Adams and Truman), Cokie Roberts (Abigail Adams) and Doris Kearns Goodwin (Lincoln) and just let them discuss the person they studied.

Doris Kearns Goodwin

The audiobook consists of the actual audio of these interviews with a little introduction

The interviews were all solid, but could have been better if Rubinstein had not insisted on inserting himself in the middle of them so often. So many times the historian would be discussing an interesting topic and Rubinstein would interrupt to ask a question that totally changed the trajectory of the conversation. I noted to my wife that Cokie Roberts and Doris Kearns Goodwin were best at fielding his questions and then going right back to the topic they were pursuing. Perhaps they have a lot more experience with men interrupting to say something that was not relevant. 

This is still a good listen and I do recommend it. I did remove 1 star for the interruptions. Yes, I found the interruptions to be that annoying.

I rate this book 4 stars out of 5. This book can be found on Amazon.com here: THE AMERICAN STORY: CONVERSATIONS with MASTER HISTORIANS by David M. Rubinstein.

OUR FIRST CIVIL WAR: PATRIOTS and LOYALISTS in the AMERICAN REVOLUTION (audiobook) by H.W. Brand

 

Published by Random House Audio in November of 2021.
Read by Steve Hendrickson.
Duration: 16 hours, 31 minutes.
Unabridged.

When I read the title of this audiobook, OUR FIRST CIVIL WAR: PATRIOTS and LOYALISTS in the AMERICAN REVOLUTION, I was sure that I was going to be listening to an in-depth look at how the population of the young United States dealt with its neighbors and family that disagreed about the question of independence. The most famous example is Benjamin Franklin and his son William Franklin. William Franklin was the last royal governor of New Jersey and their relationship never recovered from the shock of the Revolutionary War. 

This book deals with more of these issues than most histories of the Revolutionary War era, but that is not particularly hard to do - most of them mention the Franklin family situation and use it as a stand-in for all families. But, it does not go in-depth into this concept of Loyalists vs. Patriots. For example, I learned more about this topic from this Wikipedia page than I did from this book. I should not learn more about the topic from 11 pages of text on a Wikipedia page then I did in a 16+ hour audiobook.

So what is this book, if not an in-depth study of how the American Revolution fractured families, cities and populations?

Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790) and William Franklin (1730-1813)

It's a very good political history of the Revolutionary Era that focuses especially on Benjamin Franklin, George Washington and, to a lesser extent, John Adams. The text hums right along and it was a very good listen. This is one of the few Revolutionary War histories that I've read that actually discusses the dilemma that slaves faced in the war and the offer of freedom that the British military offered for males slaves that were willing to leave their families and volunteer. He looked at the stories of two slaves - one who fought for the British and one who ending up fighting for both sides.

All of that being said, I am going to deduct one point from what would have been a 5 star review. This book does not adequately address what the title promises.

This book can be found on Amazon.com here: OUR FIRST CIVIL WAR: PATRIOTS and LOYALISTS in the AMERICAN REVOLUTION (audiobook) by H.W. Brand.

ON FASCISM: 12 LESSONS from AMERICAN HISTORY (audiobook) by Matthew C. MacWilliams

Published in September of 2020 by Macmillan Audio.

Read by Kevin Stillwell.
Duration: 4 hours, 18 minutes.
Unabridged.

MacWilliams is a sociologist who studies authoritarianism. He has done a number of surveys over American attitudes towards the Constitution and the freedoms of their fellow citizens and there are areas of concern that he outlines in On Fascism.

For example, "31% of Americans agree that having a strong leader who does not have to bother with Congress and elections is a good way of governing the United States" and "30% of Americans agree with the statement 'I often find myself fearful of other people of other races.'"

Other stats of concern are:

"44% of Americans agree that increasing racial, religious and ethnic diversity represents a threat to the security of the United States"

When you break down the numbers about "18 percent of Americans are highly disposed to authoritarianism. Another 23 percent or so are attitudinally just one step below them on the authoritarian scale." He goes on to explain that people who are disposed to authoritarianism value "authority, obedience and uniformity over freedom, independence  and diversity" and when they grow fearful or are manipulated by an autocrat they will not defend the freedoms of the minority - the freedoms enshrined in the Constitution. 

MacWilliams argues that this is not a new phenomenon. There are some old surveys he can access but there is also the historical record, which is spotty. He didn't have to look very deep - most of these items are in every school child's American history book. For example, the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, the Trail of Tears, The Dred Scott decision, the Japanese Internment camps and the McCarthy hearings. 

Lesson 1: American Enlightened or Authoritarian?
Lesson 2: Fomenting Fear
Lesson 3: All Lies Matter
Lesson 4: Gagging the press, Quashing Dissent
Lesson 5: Taking What is Rightfully Ours
Lesson 6: Using Fear and Violence to Control and Subordinate Others
Lesson 7: The Driving Out
Lesson 8: Fear as a Path to Power
Lesson 9: Galvanizing Group Identity
Lesson 10: Silence of the Law
Lesson 11: Fear Breeds Repression; Repression Breeds Hate; Hate Menaces Stable Government
Lesson 12: The Surveillance Society and the Big Lie

I found this short audiobook to be engaging and thought-provoking. I just kept wondering what MacWilliams would have thought about everything from Election Day up to January 6.

Highly recommended.

I rate this audiobook 5 stars out of 5. It can be found on Amazon.com here: On Fascism: 12 Lessons from American History.

FOR LIBERTY and GLORY: WASHINGTON, LAFAYETTE, and THEIR REVOLUTIONS by James R. Gaines

Published in 2007 by W.W. Norton and Company.

First a bit of traditional blogging. I was going through some old receipts because I had plenty of time on my hands thanks to the Coronavirus lockdowns. This pile of receipts was 12 years old. It included some golden oldies like a Blockbuster receipt. I also found a receipt for this book. I had gotten a great deal on For Liberty and Glory - and it sat in my To-Be-Read pile for 12 years.

I had no idea it was in that pile for that long. If you had asked me before I found the receipt, I would guess it had been 4 or 5 years at most. At that moment, this book moved to the top of my To-Be-Read pile. I should have read it long before now - it was an excellent read.

Originally, I picked up this book because I simply didn't know much about Lafayette. I've read plenty of biographies of Washington and histories of the American Revolution. Lafayette always comes into the story somewhere in the middle. There's always a build up, with the Stamp Act, the Boston Massacre, Paul Revere and Patrick Henry and so on and then this kid from France comes over. He and Washington bond, Lafayette makes a good showing and he helps bring the French military in to help fight the English. And, at some point Lafayette goes away and doesn't come back until 1824.

I knew Lafayette was involved with the French Revolution, but my interest in the French Revolution is not strong (to me, it's a story that starts out well and then, all of a sudden, mobs are carrying heads and body parts around screaming for more blood and ends with a dictator that attacks every country in Europe, parts of Africa and even Haiti). So, I simply lost track of him. I asked someone who was a French Revolution buff what happened to Lafayette and the short answer was: "It didn't go well for him" with no elaboration.

So, this book looked like it would answer that question. It is a double biography of Washington and Lafayette as well as a double history of the American Revolution and the French Revolution. It is certainly not the definitive biography of either man or the definitive history of either revolution. But, it is immensely readable. I enjoyed it.

Turns out that I learned a lot about Lafayette. For example, his first name is Gilbert. Yeah, that seems trivial, but I've never heard him referred to as anything but Lafayette or the Marquis de Lafayette (almost like "Marquis" was his first name).

Lafayette was in love with the concept of the American Revolution from the

moment he heard of it. This teenager was so excited by the prospect of assisting in the war that he came here against the orders of the King's advisors - they had ordered all of the potential volunteers to stay in France. But, Lafayette and a few others crossed the border to Spain. Lafayette bought his own ship, sailed to South Carolina and eventually became an American hero - a Founding Father of sorts with more than 400 towns named after him. In my own state (Indiana) we have two cities and one county named after him.

Lafayette returned to France and was caught up in the French Revolution. The phrase "caught up" makes it sound like he was passive. Hardly. He co-wrote the most famous document of the French Revolution - the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. He created the modern French flag by combining the flag of Paris with the flag of the King of France. He helped save Louis XVI's life at one point and ended up languishing in a foreign prison for five years because of his role in the Revolution. He was offered the chance to be dictator at one point, and like his friend and hero George Washington, he turned it down. Bonaparte would not turn it down when he was offered that chance. But, Lafayette had a hand in Bonaparte's political demise in 1815 (after Waterloo). The luster of his name helped to carry the day.

Speaking of Bonaparte, Lafayette knew him personally. He knew so many big names in his life - George Washington, Victor Hugo, Marie Antoinette, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Victor Hugo, Louis XVI, Andrew Jackson, Alexis de Tocqueville, James Monroe, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and more.

I rate this book 5 stars out of 5. A must read if you are a student of the American Revolution and the early years of America's independence. Gaines has made this very approachable and writes in a lively manner.

It can be found on Amazon.com here: FOR LIBERTY and GLORY: WASHINGTON, LAFAYETTE, and THEIR REVOLUTIONS by James R. Gaines.

"I LOVE PAUL REVERE, WHETHER HE RODE or NOT" by Richard Shenkman

Originally published by HarperPerennial in 1991.

Richard Shenkman has written several books that show that many of the commonly-held beliefs about history are not quite true and some are absolutely false. The title comes from a quote from President Warren G. Harding when he was asked about a popular newspaper article that asserted that Paul Revere did not actually make his famous ride. Ironically, Paul Revere only gets two mentions: once on page 10 and the other on page 192. The mention on page 192 is simply the complete quote from Harding that inspired the title of the book. So, if you were thinking this was going to be a book about Paul Revere, you will be disappointed. 

Instead, Shenkman's I Love Paul Revere, Whether He Rode or Not is a reminder that there are always multiple views on history. Anybody that tells you that a certain group all believed a certain thing or they all did something for one reason is simplifying things and losing some of the nuance of how it really happened. 

The Boston Tea Party

Shenkman explores several different areas in 12 chapters including patriotism, religion, business, alcohol/drugs, and women. Typically, he brings up a "fact" that people commonly believe, such as the Puritans living in a theocracy, and then demonstrates that they the common belief is, at best, an exaggeration (government often told the ministers to mind their own business and ministers told the government to do the same -even early on. He cites an example from 1639 - just 19 years after Plymouth colony was founded).

But, sometimes he takes things too far in order to make a point. For example, on page 66-67 he discusses the common belief that the Civil War laid the foundation for a post-war explosion of growth. He looks at railroad expansion and notes that "Before the war, railroad track increased at a rate of about 200 percent a decade. In the decade afterward, the rate barely reached 75 percent." Comparing rate of growth to actual growth is a game people play with statistics but does not deal in absolute growth.

His discussion of the Boston Tea Party is similar in that it is completely factual, but does not include all of the facts in order to make a point about the men who led it. It's a valid point, but it is certainly not the only point.

This is an extremely readable book that makes the valuable point, as I've already noted, that history is seldom as simple as we tell one another. It's not always as simple as Shenkman makes it out to be, either. I do recommend this book, however. It teaches that the reader needs to do his or her own research and provides plenty of places to get started.

I rate this book 4 stars out of 5. It can be found on Amazon.com here: "I LOVE PAUL REVERE, WHETHER HE RODE or NOT" by Richard Shenkman.

WHY LIBERALS WIN the CULTURE WARS (EVEN WHEN THEY LOSE ELECTIONS): THE BATTLES THAT DEFINE AMERICA from JEFFERSON'S HERESIES to GAY MARRIAGE by Stephen Prothero

Published in January of 2016 by HarperAudio.

Read by Tristan Morris.

Duration: 10 hours, 42 minutes.

Unabridged.

Stephen Prothero takes a look at American history in Why Liberals Win the Culture Wars. Culture wars, for Prothero, are more than the typical left-right discussion  - they are a left-right discussion with serious religious overtones.

Prothero's thesis is that the major debates in American history have been those types of debates.

He looks at 5 areas:

1) The fight over who would run the country after George Washington - the

John Adams (1735-1826)

inheritors of the Calvinistic Puritans (John Adams) or those with a vaguely defined faith (Thomas Jefferson);

2) Catholics vs. Protestants;

3) Everyone vs. Mormons;

4) Fundamentalism vs. Modernism as commonly typified by the Scopes Monkey Trial (which only gets a passing mention in this book);

5) Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority types vs. abortion, gay marriage, the Equal Rights Amendment and more.

While his discussions were interesting and make a lot of good points, I don't think they live up to the thesis named in the title. These 5 points are really more like 2 points. The first 3 are basically the same point - mainline Protestants (even as that definition evolves) vs. other takes on Christianity. The last two are also basically the same point as well, a point made in the book as it easily moves from point 4 to point 5.

And, defining America as mainline Protestantism vs other religions and cultural traditionalists vs variations on the traditional family (women working outside of the home, gay marriage, etc.) limits a lot of discussion. For example, where does slavery fit into this mix? How about Native Americans? Or, how about the social safety net? Defense policy? States' Rights vs. Federal power? Internal improvements? Rights vs. safety in the post 9/11 world?

So, in short, this is an interesting book and a good discussion, but it does not live up to what it promises.

I rate this audiobook 3 stars out of 5. It can be found on Amazon.com here: WHY LIBERALS WIN the CULTURE WARS (EVEN WHEN THEY LOSE ELECTIONS): THE BATTLES THAT DEFINE AMERICA from JEFFERSON'S HERESIES to GAY MARRIAGE by Stephen Prothero.

DECLARATION: THE NINE TUMULTUOUS WEEKS WHEN AMERICA BECAME INDEPENDENT, MAY 1 - JULY 4, 1776 by William Hogeland

Published in 2010 by Simon and Schuster

When you read the history books, it seems obvious that the colonies steadily worked their way up to declaring their independence without much of a hitch.

The beauty of William Hogeland's Declaration is that he shows that it was a lot closer than the history books usually portray. Samuel Adams and his cousin John Adams maneuvered many of the representatives to the Continental Congress into voting for independence and certainly manipulated the government of Pennsylvania. In fact, you could make the case that they toppled the government of Pennsylvania through a powerful media campaign combined with timely advice and political pressure and installed a pro-independence government just in time for the fateful vote.

But, this new (to me) information was marred by a difficult to read text. The book just bounced around - the writing style just never got into a flow. I found it hard to read more than a page or two at a time.

Samuel Adams (1722-1803)

On top of that, there are 56 pages of end notes with commentary. If this book were published back in the "bad old days" when typesetting was labor intensive, I would understand why it was done as end notes - it was a pain to work out all of the foot notes. But, in today's world, almost all of the complicated work of footnotes is done by a computer. If it is worth the author's time to make 56 pages of commentary in your end notes, it is worth turning them in to foot notes so that people will actually read them.

I rate this book 3 stars out of 5 - interesting information, poorly presented.

This book can be found on Amazon.com here: Declaration: The Nine Tumultuous Weeks When America Became Independent, May 1 - July 4, 1776.

THE AMERICAN SPIRIT: WHO WE ARE and WHAT WE STAND FOR (audiobook) by David McCullough

Published in April of 2017 by Simon and Schuster
Read by the author, David McCullough
Duration: 4 hours, 13 minutes
Unabridged

The American Spirit is a collection of speeches delivered by the two time Pulitzer Prize winning author. The topics vary in length and topic but are all bound by two common themes: American history and the importance of knowing that history.

I listened to this collection as an audiobook over a period of about a week and found it to be quite enjoyable as I walked the dog every evening. The speeches are usually not too long and not too short, informative, interesting.

McCullough has re-recorded these speeches for this audiobook and his voice does show a little age, but it is still a wonderful voice to listen to and his delivery, combined with his words help make this an enjoyable audiobook. 

I rate this audiobook 5 stars out of 5.

This book can be found on Amazon.com here: The American Spirit.

BUNKER HILL: A CITY, A SIEGE, A REVOLUTION (audiobook) by Nathaniel Philbrick

Published in 2013 by Penguin Audio
Read by Chris Sorensen
Duration: 12 hours, 58 minutes
Unabridged

Nathaniel Philbrick's Bunker Hill: A City, A Siege, A Revolution is misnamed. While the battle is in the book, it is only a part of the story. In reality, this book is a history of Boston from the 1750s and 1760s right up to the Declaration of Independence.

In a lot of ways this book is much more of a biography of Dr. Joseph Warren, one of the leaders of the Sons of Liberty movement, along with Samuel Adams, John Adams and John Hancock. Warren is often overlooked nowadays because he died at Bunker Hill (which was really mostly fought on Breed's Hill). The excessive focus on Warren was, in my mind, one of the great weaknesses of the book. Philbrick spent too much time worrying over Warren's alleged personal failures and not enough time getting on with the story. It just bogged things down.

Philbrick does not gloss over the warts of our Founding Fathers, noting that some had mixed motives and some profited from the independence movement. There is plenty of emphasis on the British side of things, something I admire about the book.  

The arrival of Washington in Boston, sent by the Continental Congress to take command and in effect nationalize the militias that surrounded the British troops in Boston, is not explained well. Philbrick does not go much into the goings on of the Continental Congress besides noting that certain people left Boston to attend. Because of this, Washington's arrival comes with very little explanation (much like it may have seemed to some of the militiamen). As the narrative continues, Philbrick does not give Washington much credit for anything around Boston but bad ideas, impatience, a negative attitude and lucky timing.

Chris Sorenson's reading of the audiobook was excellent. 

In short, while there are things to admire about this book, there are problems as well - not problems with the research but problems with choices about what was included (excessive focus on Warren's personal life) and what was left out (the Continental Congress).

I rate this audiobook 3 stars out of 5.

This audiobook can be found on Amazon.com here: Bunker Hill: A City, A Siege, A Revolution.

TAINTED by SUSPICION: THE SECRET DEALS and ELECTORAL CHAOS of DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS by Fred Lucas

Published in May of 2016.

The 2016 Presidential election cycle has been wild, to say the least. A rookie politician with an unstoppable mouth and a veteran politician with a long, checkered past are an unlikely pairing. Throw in a couple of strong third party candidates and the fact that these are the two most hated candidates in a generation and you may very well have an election in which no one wins a majority of the votes in the electoral college.

What would happen in no one actually wins, or if it is too close to call?

Aaron Burr (1756-1836)

In Tainted by Suspicion, veteran White House correspondent Fred Lucas gives us some insight as he tells the story of six troubled Presidential elections: 1800, 1824, 1876, 1888, 1960 and 2000.

With each election Lucas describes the political environment of the time, the major players in the election and the reasons why it became a disputed election. He details how it finally worked out and then offers informed speculation as to what would have happened if the other guy had won.

Most of the stories are quite interesting. Even the "what-ifs" are pretty good, with the exception of the "what-if" for Aaron Burr because it just went on for too long. Political junkies will note the definite lean to the right for the discussion of the JFK/Nixon and Bush/Gore elections. It is there, but it is also not inaccurate, in my opinion.

For fans of Presidential politics, this is a must-read. For those that are just curious about what how convoluted American politics can get, this is a worthy introduction.

I rate this book 4 stars out of 5.

This book can be found on Amazon.com here: Tainted by Suspicion.

THE JEFFERSON RULE: WHY WE THINK the FOUNDING FATHERS HAVE ALL the ANSWERS (audiobook) by David Sehat

Published by Tantor Audio in May of 2015
Read by Tom Perkins
Duration: 8 hours, 16 minutes

If you are a person that likes to debate on the internet than you have undoubtedly experienced Godwin's Law. Godwin's Law states that if you debate long enough on the internet, someone will inevitably make a comparison to Nazism, Hitler, the Holocaust ("You don't like Donald Trump's hair? What are you? The hairdo Nazi?!?"). 

A similar rule exists when discussing American politics - eventually someone will refer back to the Founding Fathers. It is especially easy to quote Thomas Jefferson - he was so prolific and well-written that it is easy to break out a quote to support your point of view. In the case of Jefferson, it is often too easy because he was extremely inconsistent in his political views. To start easy, he did write "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." And, he also owned a whole lot of people and certainly did not allow them liberty or the pursuit of happiness. He was also advocated strictly following the letter of the Constitution...until it suited him not to when he became President, like with the Louisiana Purchase.

So, Jefferson is quoted all of the time because, likely as not, he has written or uttered a very lofty-sounding quote that supports your point of view, no matter what it is. In short, the man was so inconsistent that he was, at one point or another, on your side and and at a different point he was also against it.

Sehat uses this as a jumping off point in The Jefferson Rule to look at two general phenomena. The first is the traditional big activist government vs. small strict constructionist government argument. In the Washington Administration this was personified with Alexander/Washington on one side and Jefferson on the other.

But, the argument continues throughout American history and Sehat looks at some of the high points in his study, including the debate on slavery, the two crises with secession, The New Deal, the Civil Rights movement, The Reagan Revolution, The War on Terror, Obamacare and the Tea Party movement. 

In his second point, he notes that politicians have always referred back to the Founders and referred to them as if they were a united front, despite the ugly split in the Washington Administration itself. Also, the image of the Founders is changed as needed by current politicians.

I found the whole book to be fascinating and a well-told tour of American history. There were times when I thought Sehat was surprisingly harsh on the liberal side of things than I found him to be equally harsh on the conservative side. To be fair, I think Sehat is harsh on politicians in general and finds them all, no matter their political stripe, guilty of the same sin when it comes to referring to the Founding Fathers.

I rate this book 5 stars out of 5.

This book can be found on Amazon here: 
The Jefferson Rule: Why We Think the Founding Fathers Have All the Answers

AN EMPIRE on the EDGE: HOW BRITAIN CAME to FIGHT AMERICA by Nick Bunker

Published by Alfred A. Knopf in September of 2014

I have read many histories of the Revolutionary War and most only tell the story of the build-up to the war from the American side and only describe Britain's political scene as it was interpreted by the colonists. To be fair, the British political scene was often misinterpreted by the colonists.

But, in reality, there were two sides to this fight and it was not just the colonists that were misinterpreting the political signals of their brethren across the Atlantic. The British government had no idea how far their colonial governments had evolved along democratic lines (compared to a modern democracy they were all quite restrictive but when compared to Britain they were quite open). 

The Boston Tea Party, December 16, 1773. Nick Bunker picks this
moment to be the point of no return between Britain and the colonists.

In fact, it seemed that often Britain was barely aware of the colonies because it had too many other crises to deal with, including a  severe drought, a crisis in India brought on by the East India Company, a disastrous drop in the price of tea and a run on several British banks. On top of all of this, Britain's social order was changing in response to its infant Industrial Revolution.

Each of these was a major crisis that consumed the time of Lord North, the Prime Minister. North and his cabinet careened from one crisis to another and were still able to maintain their majorities and the control of the government - so in that respect they were very successive. But, as author Nick Bunker notes: "As they tried to govern their own complicated country, Lord North and his friends allowed America to slip away." (p. 71)

Bunker's text is well-written and his points are clear and often quite sympathetic to America's pre-war complaints. He clearly demonstrates that Lord North was a masterful politician that failed to deal with Britain's larger, more long-term issues. Clearly, the colonists were not in a mood to compromise, but a bold stroke (such as the briefly considered idea of turning the Continental Congress into a some sort of colonial parliament led by a governor appointed by the British) was never taken.

I was struck by the absolute lack of information Lord North and his cabinet had. The 4-8 week time span that it took to send correspondence across the Atlantic did not help with this failure of proper intelligence,  but even worse were the governors who filed reports that completely misinterpreted the mood of the colonies. Some never filed reports at all. This was no way to run an empire.

Bunker's text inspires the reader to make comparisons with modern politics - the bank failures, the investment bubbles, the foreign policy surprises, the constant political posturing and an embarrassing lack of actual intelligence about the intentions of two potential enemies (the colonies and France) and an unwillingness to look at the big picture until it was too late.

Note: I received a pre-publication galley of this book for free from the publisher in exchange for an honest review.

I rate this book 5 out of 5 stars. It can be found on Amazon.com here: AN EMPIRE on the EDGE: HOW BRITAIN CAME to FIGHT AMERICA.

Reviewed on August 16, 2014.

THE GREAT UPHEAVAL: AMERICA and the BIRTH of the MODERN WORLD (audiobook) by Jay Winik

Disappointing

Published by HarperAudio in 2007
Read by Sam Tsoutsouvas
Duration: 12 hours, 56 minutes
Abridged.

Jay Winik's April 1865 is one of my favorite Civil War histories - it holds a very safe place on a shelf that has to be purged on a regular basis to make room for new books because it is a brilliant history. 

Before I go on with this review I must note that I listened to the abridged audiobook version The Great Upheaval. Despite the abridgment, this book still clocks in at nearly 13 hours. Some of my criticisms are undoubtedly due to the abridgment.

Winik's thesis in this book is that the time period from 1788 to 1800 was a time of revolutionary ardor and that most of the great European powers were affected. Victor Hugo wrote: “One can resist the invasion of armies; one cannot resist the invasion of ideas.” Winik looks at how the ideas of America's Founding Fathers and the French philosophes affected three countries: The United States, France and Russia.

In 1788, those three countries had almost nothing in common. The United States was small, almost inconsequential to European politics and in the middle of implementing a new Constitution. Mostly, it was a curiosity. France was the most powerful, most important country in Europe and quite possibly the world. Russia was a massive, largely mysterious backwater that hovered on the fringe of the European political scene.

The execution of Louis XVI (1754-1793) on January 21, 1793

Winik presents three different models of how various countries dealt with the new "invasion of ideas." Russia, in the person of Catherine the Great, entertained them on a philosophical level, but on a practical level she smashed them and dug them out by the root. The French King Louis XVI attempted to compromise with them but, in the end, he could not compromise enough to please Revolutionary France and it cost him his life. Worse, the country spun out of control and began to consume itself. The United States institutionalized the conflict between change and tradition by creating political parties and a system of government that allowed give and take without permitting everything to spin out of control (although the Whiskey Rebellion came close to doing just that - Winik discusses the Rebellion in detail but never says why the Western farmers were so upset about the tax on Whiskey. The answer - they had to convert their corn into whiskey to transport it out to sell. It taxed them but not farmers in the East who could sell regular corn).

John Paul Jones (1745-1792)

For me, the greatest weakness of this book is the inclusion of Russia. The discussion about the Russo-Turkish War (1787-1792) was not particularly interesting (I had to turn it off while I was driving because I found myself so bored with the topic that I began to nod off), with the exception of the brief mention of John Paul Jones.  Catherine the Great's reaction to the implementation of the revolutionary ideas of the time was no different than that of almost all dictators of almost all times and all places - she perceived a threat and she destroyed it as thoroughly as she could. In this book she serves as the opposite example of what happened to Louis XVI. As such, she really was superfluous - she was the norm and could have been described in just a few paragraphs or even sentences (for example, "While Catherine the Great loved to read and discuss these new revolutionary ideas, she never tried to negotiate with those who would take away her power as absolute monarch in the name of those new ideas like Louis XVI did. Instead, she engaged those revolutionaries with military power and hunted them down until they were utterly destroyed, much like successful tyrants like Augustus Caesar, Stalin and Kim Jong Il have done throughout history.")

On the other hand, I found the descriptions of the French Revolution to be fascinating. Winik included the grim details, a decision I agree with because those details demonstrate the degree to which the crowds were moved to act. For example, the simple fact that the crowds taunted the Marie Antoinette with the severed head of one of her friends (after they had its hair made up nice) shows that the French Revolution was out of control. Fortunately, the largest portion of the abridged audiobook deals with the French Revolution. The American Revolution section is also very strong.

The narrator of this audiobook was Sam Tsoutsouvas. He is an experienced audiobook reader and his command of French came in very handy when he read the occasional French word or phrase that pops up in this book. On top of that, when the crowd yelled, he would actually yell too which makes the descriptions even more powerful. His greatest strength, though, is the sense of gravitas he gives to everything he reads. If he read my grocery list it would sound as though the security of the nation depended on the purchase of a 2 liter bottle of Coke Zero and a box of Cheerios.

However, when coupled with Winik's often overwritten text this sense of gravitas becomes overwhelming. Winik has invested in a thesaurus and truly loves using it. He repeats himself in long strings of sentences. He loves to restate things with very similar words. He is verbose, wordy, repetitious and long-winded (yes, I did that on purpose). Winik invests a lot into injecting false drama into the story by asking dramatic questions such as, "What would happen next?" and listing a series of adjectives and using this kind format (sorry, I could not write one down - I listen while I drive and it did not seem prudent): "Coca-Cola. Is it brown? Is it fizzy? Is it wet? It is all of that - and more!"

He also likes to describe things and then use this ending to the description to inject doubt: "If - and it was a big if..." and "Yet - and it was a big yet..." and my favorite "But - and it was a big but..." Yes, he actually made the audiobook reader read the phrase "it was a big butt."

So, match this dramatic reader with an overly dramatic writing style and this book approaches parody in its audiobook form. Maybe this sentence is the epitome of the problem: "A bodyguard, a mere boy, was ruthlessly murdered and dragged into the courtyard half dead, becoming little more than a bleeding trophy." Indeed, the murdered boy was half dead.

Once again, I must point out that I did listen to the audiobook and it was abridged so some of the problems may have occurred because the abridgment. 

I rate this audiobook 3 out of 5 stars. It can be found on Amazon.com here: The Great Upheaval: America and the Birth of the Modern World.

Reviewed on May 24, 2014. 

Updated on January 4, 2025.

What Would the Founders Do?: Our Questions, Their Answers by Richard Brookhiser

A fun read. Not real deep, but fun. Good vacation read for history buffs.

Published in 2006.

Richard Brookhiser got the idea for What Would the Founders Do?: Our Questions, Their Answers from the questions from his audiences when he would give a public lecture on the founders. "Richard, what would the founding fathers have said about...(illegal immigration, marijuana, the war in Iraq, etc.)? So, he collected a number of those questions, did a little research and wrote this fun little book.

Richard Brookhiser is the writer of the best overall biography of George Washington that I have read, Founding Father: Rediscovering George Washington. This one is not the same quality, although I am giving them both the same score: 4 stars.

Why? A book of this sort is just different creature than a biography. By its very nature it is a series of starts and stops (the question and answer format). This inhibits the flow of the book in many ways, but does make it good for the so-called bathroom reader. Brookhiser's sense of humor shines through, as does his genuine respect and affection for these men (the exceptionally successful ladies man Gouverneur Morris, in particular).

Gouverneur Morris

Just for fun, at the end he makes up several descriptions of the sorts of blogs the founders might have written, including 3 for that unstoppable writer Benjamin Franklin. Washington bows out but promises to read them all in a snail mail letter (if you know about him you are not surprised). My favorites, though, are Sam Adams with his blog "BeerandLiberty.com" (conspiracy theories and drinking tips) and John Adams with "TheLifeCareerOpinionsandWritingsofJohnAdamsExaminedandDefendedwithCommentsonhisContemporaries.com" which features long posts, flame wars in the comments and the warning that John makes frequent appearances as a troll on other blogs. Sounds about right to me.

I rate this book 4 stars out of 5.

This book can be found on Amazon.com here: What Would the Founders Do?

Reviewed on June 19, 2008.

What Price Freedom: The Adventures of Early American Heroes By Theron Nelsen and Doug Wead

A look at the Revolutionary War generation

Originally published in 1983.

Theron Nelsen and co-author Doug Wead's What Price Freedom: The Adventures of Early American Heroes is a series of short biographies of 9 men and 1 woman of the Revolutionary War generation. None of the biographies is too detailed (vary from 7-17 pages) and none focus on the more controversial parts of their lives (like Jefferson and Sally Hemmings, for example).

Nevertheless, the book is pretty well done and chock full of good quotes.

The biographies included are:

John Paul Jones
(1747-1792)

Benjamin Franklin,
Nathaniel Greene
Alexander Hamilton,
John Hancock,
Patrick Henry,
Thomas Jefferson,
John Paul Jones,
Francis Marion,
Deborah Sampson,
George Washington.

John Adams is left out, but then again, when this book was written, Adams was not as popular as he is today. If you are an Adams fan, he is quoted extensively in the book, which is one of the reasons I was surprised he was left out.

I give this book a 4 stars out of 5. Solid introduction to many of the players in the Revolutionary War. It can be found on Amazon.com here: What Price Freedom: The Adventures of Early American Heroes. 

Reviewed on June 21, 2006.

Samuel Adams: A Life by Ira Stoll

The "Forgotten" Founding Father

Published in 2008.

George Washington. Thomas Jefferson. Benjamin Franklin. John Adams. All there at the founding of our country. All recognized for their unique contributions to the revolution. Author Gary Wills noted that Adams was "the most influential man at the first two Congresses." He was on the committees of correspondence that tied the colonies together in the first place and no one was on more committees in the Continental Congress. It is easily argued that Samuel Adams had as great a role, if not greater than any other member of the Congress. He had such an integral part to play that a local newspaper noted in his obituary that "to give his history at full length, would be to to give an history of the American Revolution."

In Samuel Adams: A Life, Ira Stoll tells the story of Samuel Adams. Called by some the Last of the Puritans for his strong religious faith and willingness to express it openly, Adams was certainly one of the strongest defenders of liberty from the outset. In fact, a general amnesty was offered to everyone in the Massachusetts colony by the British government, except for Samuel Adams and John Hancock. At other times, the British government approached him with clumsy attempts to bribe him with high office or favors, which he rejected with flair ("tell Governor Gage it is the advice of Samuel Adams to him no longer insult the feelings of an exasperated people.") Stoll correctly labels Adams a "religious revolutionary" - those two themes dominate his life until the very end.

Samuel Adams (1722-1803)

Politically, he was closer to Thomas Jefferson than his Federalist cousin John Adams. But, unlike Jefferson, he decried slavery and acted upon it (his wife received a slave as a gift and he freed her that day). He also advocated education for women. He wrote page after page for newspapers supporting the idea of independence and would not compromise on that point. He could whip up a crowd with his voice as well, and he often did during the years when Boston led the protests against taxes, leading up to the Boston Tea Party.

Stoll's prose is not necessarily the most exciting of reading, but Adams words and life are inspiring enough that I rate this book 4 stars out of 5.

This book can be found on Amazon.com here: Samuel Adams: A Life.

Reviewed on July 13, 2011.

The Invention of Air: A Story Of Science, Faith, Revolution, And The Birth Of America by Steven Johnson

Meandering book felt more like an expanded magazine article 

Published in 2008. 

I am a history teacher and thought The Invention of Air: A Story Of Science, Faith, Revolution, And The Birth Of America might be an interesting new perspective on the Enlightenment and the American Revolution from the perspective of English theologian, philosopher and scientist Joseph Priestley.

We get a hefty dose of scientific history which is appropriate but not my area of interest. We don't get a lot of detail on his theological writings that caused him to flee England for America and later made him unpopular with some politicians in America as well.

We also get a lot of off-topic meanderings such as his pages full of information on the Carboniferous era (millions of year ago) that form a rhetorical touchstone for the rest of the book but mostly seemed to fill the book with extra pages.

Joseph Priestley
(1733-1804)

In fact, the large-type print, off-topic musings and small number of pages (204 in the uncorrected manuscript that I read) left me more informed than I already was on Priestley but also feeling more like I'd been on a general tour of late 18th century Enlightenment science rather than having read a biography.

I rate this biography 3 stars out of 5.

This book can be found here on Amazon.com: The Invention of Air: A Story Of Science, Faith, Revolution, And The Birth Of America.

Reviewed on January 31, 2009.