Rating: 
Summary: A Worthwhile Read
Review: This book is not of the same quality as "John Adams" by David McCullough. In fact, while it is a much shorter book than "Adams", it took me much longer to read. That is because Mr. McCullough is a much more fluid writer than Mr. Ellis. If I had to choose between "John Adams" and "Founding Brothers", I would go with "John Adams". Having said that, "Founding Brothers" is a worthwhile book and illuminates the personal relationships among the "Founders".
Rating: 
Summary: Digestable History
Review: This book proves a historical work does not need to be 700 pages to be noteworthy. The author has written several previous books on the subject, by this version is geared to a wider audience beyond historians. I enjoyed how Ellis stated that the founding fathers were aware they were making history and to varying degrees working to ensure their image was correctly portrayed by history. The book reads quickly and never gets bogged down. There are no radical theories and more in-depth books have been written on the subject, but that in no way reduces the quality of the work. While the author has been proven a liar about his own life, I believe he is honest about his historical work
Rating:
Summary: Nothing to Rave about
Review: The book starts well enough. I thought the discussion on the duel between Hamilton and Burr was excellent. The book delved into the events that actually led to the duel. The book also had an interesting discussion on the slavery issue. Some of the things that were discussed I really liked. I have never been all that enthused with Franklin, I think he is rather over rated. In this book, the author seems somewhat cool towards him as well. He raised some interesting points on Franklin that kind of point to his having feet of clay. For all that I have read to date on the American Revolution, I still don't get this hero worship of Washington either. He just doesn't seem all that great to me and this book only seems to confirm this feeling. It may just be me, but from what this book says, I still don't know why this man is so glorified. The book spends a lot of time talking about the entire Adams and Jefferson thing. Well, that subject has been done to death. I can do without reading a heck of a lot more on that one. If you're interested in that subject you should definitely read this book. All in all, I would recommend reading this book, but I wouldn't tell you that you have to rush out and get it. I certainly don't feel that it was worth a Pulitzer. Then again I don't know what the competition was like.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting but a tad too dramatic
Review: Mr. Ellis has a fantastic way of delivering history. I find this book to be well organized and although I'm not a historian it appears to be well researched. There were a lot of historical points that I was unaware of such as the way our founding fathers disliked: political parties, campaigning, the aristocracy of Europe, and organized religion. There seems a little too much embellishment in the delivery of the story but overall this is a wonderful book.
Rating: 
Summary: Let the buyer beware
Review: Earlier this year, Joseph Ellis was suspended from his teaching position for one year without pay for blatantly lying to his students and the press about his accomplishments. While teaching a class on the Vietnam War era at Mt. Holyoke, Ellis claimed he was a hero in the war, when he actually saw no miltary involvement due to his academic appointment, and he falsely stated that he was a leader of the civil rights and anti-war movmements. You can read all about Ellis' lies by reviewing the story on the Washington Post website, or any number of other recent articles about the controversy. It should go without saying that a history professor shouldn't be so flagrantly dishonest, but Ellis' lies are even graver because they're not confined to his personal life or even the recent past of this nation. Take "Founding Brothers," the book listed here, and the recipient of a Pulitzer Prize earlier in the year. In this book, Ellis states that DNA evidence has proven once and for all that Thomas Jefferson fathered one or more children of Sally Heming, a black slave on his plantation. This is not true. Ellis severely distorted the conclusions about the DNA research published in the scientific journal. Rather than unmitakably identifying Jefferson as the father of Sally Hemings' children, the genetic evidence actually supported only the conclusion that one of twenty possible Jefferson males could have been the father. That is, there are 19 other Jefferson males besides Thomas who could have sired the Hemings children. But Ellis distorts the truth, giving readers the impression that this centuries-old controversy has been conclusively solved. Those aren't the only points in this book where Ellis fails to give responsible historical explanations. His technique of describing the inner thoughts of founding fathers such as John Adams and Thomas Jefferson often goes far beyoond the primary documents and into the shadowy, dubious realm of psychoanalysis. In an odd way, Ellis' attempts to "read" hidden psychological motives out of his characters words and actions is a throwback to the middle part of last century, when a bevy of writers came up with psychological descriptions of Abraham Lincoln's hidden desire to be a dictator....to cite a more famous example. Ellis portays Jefferson, for instance, as a man with two natures, neither one of which knew what the other is doing. This contradicts a mountain of other historical analyses by more responsible scholars such as Merrill Peterson showing that Jefferson was, in fact, consciously motivated by a consistent set of principles, and even if he sometimes failed to live by them. And Adams, far from being the disjointed and rambling speaker and thinker that Ellis portays him to be, was actually Jefferson's equal in elegance and depth of thought. Ellis has reinvented these men for his own dramatic and largely fictional purposes, and has failed to honor the principles of responsible history. So, caveat emptor: Despite his lucid prose, Ellis frequently distorts and outrightly contradicts the facts. Spend your money on books by authors who understand the meaning of the word "truth."
Rating:
Summary: Mr. Ellis should have been a novelist!
Review: In my opinion, FOUNDING BROTHERS is more of a historical novel than a history book. There is much supposition, inuendo, and fanciful detailing (even to the point of reading people's thoughts!) which makes one think that the author was actully attempting to write a screen play rather than an accurate account of history. This book is filled with drama, pathos, action, etc. a GONE WITH THE WIND in the making but should not be relied upon as the only basis for judging the times or participants described in his book. A sad indication of this author's unprofessional bias against Thomas Jefferson, were Mr. Ellis' words in the last paragraph of the book: "On the evening of July 3, 1826, Jefferson fell in a coma. His last discernible words, uttered to the physician and family gathered around the bedside, indicated he was hoping to TIME HIS EXIT IN DRAMATIC FASHION: 'Is it the Fourth?' It was not, but he lingered in a semiconscious condition until shortly after noon on the magic day." (caps mine) Mr. Ellis with this statement and many others crosses the line from historian to novelist, he enters into the mind of a dying man and describes his motives. For certain what is revealed is the dislike Mr. Ellis has for Thomas Jefferson. In the newspaper business it is customary for editorial opinions to be relegated to the Editorial pages as opposed to the front page news reporting, FOUNDING BROTHERS is an example of editorial opinion masquerading as front page history. The revelation last summer that Mr. Ellis had lied to his students, by describing in detail his Vietnam War experiences though he never served there, and other lies concerning his active involvement in social reform after the war etc., led to his 1 year dismissal without pay from Holyoke College. Ironically, Mr. Ellis must come to terms with his own lack of honesty regarding "history", his own history! As for his determined efforts to expose any and all flaws in Jefferson's character, I believe the saying: "People who live in glass houses should not throw stones" well applies.
Rating:
Summary: Very interesting review of ideas from the early US
Review: I read both this book and "John Adams" this year, and would recommend reading this one if you only plan to read one of them. Each chapter of this book delves into certain themes and ideas that were key discussion points and debates in the early days of the US, and that fundamentally shaped the perspectives that we take for granted today. Some examples: I did not know that even abolitionists of the time thought that slaves would be sent to a new territory out west or back to Africa but it never occurred to anyone that a society could become racially mixed. While we hear about the debates on federal government vs. state government rights, this book really illustrates just how precarious the balance was and how amazing it is that a nation was actually formed. I thought this was a fascinating book and it really opened my eyes as to the challenges that were faced in establishing the US as a nation, and how far we've come on issues that we take for granted today.
Rating:
Summary: A Look at the One of the Most Important Decades - 1790's
Review: Joseph J. Ellis' richly (and deservedly) rewarded book, Founding Brothers (The Revolutionary Generation), looks at six important events that helped form the stable government of the United States after the war for independence and the intellectual wars over the creation of the constitution had ended and before a new generation took up the mantle of state. The period was primarily the 1790's, one of the richest decades in American history from which to mine and the author does a great job of finding and presenting some prime historical nuggets. It is fascinating to see this band of brothers who fought a war divide themselves slowly into ideological camps that then transformed over the decade into parties while still preserving the precarious union that they all created without the shedding of blood, the Burr-Hamilton duel notwithstanding. Adams comes out the best and Jefferson the worst in the narrative as many historians are swinging that direction lately but this will change again, showing that the debates raging in the 1790's are still raging in the history books today. The reconciliation of these two friends is the most touching and noble section of the the book. This is a lively and enlightening read.
Rating:
Summary: Engrossing history lesson
Review: In this life, there are leaders and there are followers. In Founding Brothers, Mr. Ellis tells the saga of six leaders whose contributions influenced the original shape and form of the US government: John Adams, Aaron Burr, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Washington. As told by Mr. Ellis in extremely accessible prose, their personal and working relationships were sometimes harmonious, sometimes discordant, sometimes, as in the case of Burr and Hamilton, lethal. In six chapters, with intriguing titles such as The Dinner, The Friendship, and The Silence, Mr. Ellis touches on the major issues facing the "founding brothers", including federal versus state authority, the banking system, the location of the new capitol, and the slavery question. But, don't be put off by the apparently dry subject matter. Mr. Ellis's writing style and clear organization make this fascinating reading. (Should you get to a bumpy part, slog on through, it is necessary background for the next captivating bit.) After the first read, this is one for the permanent library, to have close at hand for reference and re-reading.
Rating:
Summary: Brief but informative
Review: Ellis puts a different spin on a familiar subject, not so much focussing on any one revolutionary figure but rather on the relationships between the characters. Although he states his intention to discuss eight of the founding fathers (or in the case of Abigail Adams, founding mother), the principals in this work are really Jefferson, Adams and Washington. Franklin and Madison, in particular, are much more in the background. Not unique to this book is the premise that Adams is the underrated member of this pantheon, especially due to Jefferson, who comes off, if not villainous, certainly unpleasant. It is interesting that alone among these revolutionary figures (discounting the traitorious Burr), Adams is not acknowledged on our most ubiquitous monuments, our coins and cash (of course, Madison, also rather underrated, is limited to the $5,000 bill). In the end, however, this book loses a star because it really doesn't cover any new ground, just explores it in a different manner.
| 
