Rating: 
Summary: Good points, yet it bored me to tears...
Review: on average, i read about 12 pages per hour...which isnt very good for me because i am normally a very fast reader. the preface was a very horrile opening to the book because it wasnt interesting enough to excite the reader, even if they are very interested in this subject, like myself. once i got to the main chapters, i was a little more hopeful to read about some of the events that may have went on during our countries early beginning. i found that the author made very interesting points, yet his writing style was very tedious and extrememly hard to follow. he used run on sentences, repeated phrases,and got off topic. i must have read over the same sentences at least 4 times. in addition, i thought he over-analyzed some things. yet, if you are a historian who is very interested in this topic, then i would recommend it, otherwise, spare your self the time and effort that it takes to read this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Horrible Book
Review: I had to read this book for high school (Economics, Legal Systems and Politics class), and let me tell you, this is the first book I've ever tried to read that I haven't been able to. It is impossible to read, and you'll find yourself falling asleep after every three sentences. After finally getting through the 1st chapter (Whoops, my bad, I meant after finishing the preface), I finally gave up and decided I would rather get an 'F' on the test than read this horribly tedious book...
Rating: 
Summary: The Meaning of Things...
Review: The following is a review of the Recorded Books unabridged CD edition of "Founding Brothers."The intellectual fulcrum of "Founding Brothers" lies in the meaning of the "American Revolution." To wit: whether the meaning of the Revolution lies in the "Spirit of '76" and is embodied in the language of the Declaration of Independence or whether the meaning of the Revolution lies with the drafing of the Constitution. This is the fracture point for the characters in "Founding Brothers" and remains as a fracture point in American society to this date. In his writing, Ellis reveals certain biases that require reporting. First, as many cite and quote to, his stance was that there was nothing inevitable about the events of the American Revolution and the infacy of the United States. Second, Ellis also takes a stand in his introduction on the raging historiographical battle on the nature and importance of preeminent historical actors. Ellis favors the preeminent historical actor and argues that those who argue for history made by common and anonymous men must concede that the American Revolutionary period is not such a period in which common and anonymous men made history. Third, Ellis comes out on the side of the Federalists. Finally, Ellis treats more favorably (most times, at least), those (male) characters who were veterans of the War for Independence and repeatedly uses the epithet "who did not fire a shot in anger" as a scarlet letter for those actors (i.e. Jefferson, Madison and Franklin) who did not fight in the War for Independence. Even with those biases, Ellis attempts to give a balanced portrayal of the "Founding Brothers." His most excellent achievement in the book has to be, in my opinion, the treatment he gives to Washington. Ellis unpacks the mystification of the legend and in return, gives us the man. Ellis' worst injustice appears to be his inconsistency. One particularly sharp example of this was that Ellis spent an entire chapter devoted to Alexander Hamilton (and Aaron Burr) in which he wishes to convince the reader that Hamilton did not go to the "Interview" with Burr in order to commit suicide. Okay, that's a laudable goal. But towards the end of the book, Ellis paranthetically refers to how Hamilton committed suicide on the plains of Weehauken in an effort to support another plot line. This was downright infuriating. Ellis' work requires an extensive grasp of history as it refers to numerous historical occurences (some obscure). His prose, however, does not suggest a prosaic treatment. Instead, Ellis wishes to give the reader a "brotherhood" and endeavors to do so with (at times) intimate language. Reading the text propbably would have given me the impression that Ellis was rambling and straying off topic. However, the narration by Nelson Runger cured that. Instead, what you get with Runger's voice is the intimate intentions of Ellis. Runger does justice to the work at large. His only flaw lies in his use of "characterization" of the different characters in the work. Runger gives them voices. While that is fine, what is unfortunate is that the voices for Madison and Adams change depending to whom they are "speaking." "Founding Brothers" is recommended in that it is not afraid to cast historical actors into roles and give them characters as if they are in a play. As a book, it would deserve 4 stars. The Recorded Books edition is highly recommended based upon the excellent production of recorded Recorded Books and, in particular, the outstanding narration by Nelson Runger. As an informative side note, the Recorded Books edition features an interview with the author, Joseph Ellis.
Rating:
Summary: it just keeps going.....
Review: I had to read this book for summer reading but i was still some what excited to read it. I was extremely disappointed. Ellis is an awful writer. He uses the same words and phrases over and over making the book even more tedious and boring. He never stays on topic adn manages to take every interesting point in the book and drag it out to the point that any interest he manages to spark is gone. Although the book does cover the "founding brothers" well it's just written poorly. Honestly i did learn things but im sure if I picked up another book out there covering similiar material, it would be presented in a more interesting and less rambling way. Anything would be better than this book. It took me an entire weekend just to get through one of the chapters, the book is that tedious. I dont suggest this book at all unless you are extremely interested in the topic and can manage to get over the horrible way it is written.
Rating:
Summary: Grammar? Coherency?
Review: I'd been looking forward to reading this book for a long time and now that it is required for summer reading, I had gotten the chance. Not 30 pages in, I fell asleep. That same pattern kept repeating and on almost every page you could hear me exclaim, "How did that get in?" The grammar is absolutely atrocious and Mr. Ellis seems to float around with his topics. Yes, each chapter focuses on one subject, but the "narrative", if you could call it that, bounces around. Also, you need to have a very deep knowledge of European history. Mr. Ellis constantly references the Thermidorian Reaction that took place in France, which I wouldn't have known about except that my Social Studies teacher last year took the time to explain it to us. Many adults I know have no clue what the Thermiodrian Reaction was, let alone how it relates to the American Revolution. How this book could have ever even been nominated for the Pulitzer, I'll never know. Maybe if Mr. Ellis had used a program like Microsoft Word, which would have fixed his millions of grammatical errors, the book might have been better. Or maybe it just lacked the coherency of other books on the subject. Or it could be that it's just too darn hard to understand for the average Joe who picks it up on the bookshelf. Maybe next time, Mr. Ellis, maybe next time.
Rating: 
Summary: A Verbose Picture of Reality
Review: Founding Brothers cuts through the romanticized view that many Americans have about those who founded our nation to provide a glimpse of who these men were and how truly miraculous it is that our nation still survived. Ellis is quick to point to inconsistencies between character and conduct and seems to prod through the character of men such as Aaron Burr, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson (to name a short few). For a person growing in a love for history (such as myself), this is a great book to get your feet wet in. If there is one word that would best describe Founding Brothers, it would be conflict. What is shown throughout the pages of this work is the sincerity and veracity that even after the revolutionary war, we were a nation of conflict. While practicing isolationism, politicians warred against each other in trying to understand and implement foreign policy. While debating the moral and social grounds of slavery, Americans regarded fellow humans as property. Friendships were torn and the moral fabric of a new nation was being built upon the insight and wisdom of a few men. The organization of this work is well constructed to create a fluid and artful masterpiece. Ellis takes liberty to paint a picture through the use of vocabulary and description (if you're looking for sole facts, then look somewhere else). As a reader, one is able to interpret Ellis as being very educated and well versed in the subject of our Nation's history. Ellis looks much to the original writings of the "Founding Brothers" to provide insight into what they were thinking, feeling, and saying throughout the birth pangs of the United States of America. He highlights victories and defeats and provides a different perspective than what most who are even somewhat acquainted with American history are given. If you are interested in the personalities of those who helped to create our nation, then read this book. I do agree somewhat with a previous review that John Adams is somewhat aggrandized, but I think it just puts into view how oft Jefferson himself is looked upon as the major agent of change in this tale of a nation. Overall, I think that Ellis is in fact working towards the deconstruction of the founding fathers as colossal heroes of a nation and portraying them as normal men with normal dispositions who just happened to be at the right place in the right time. One word of warning, it is helpful to have a fairly high level of reading comprehension unto reading this book, it can be thick. But if you can understand it, then it is well worth the read and the quotes you'll find are like gems pulled from a deep mine - beautiful and richly constructed.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Coverage
Review: Joseph Ellis has done an excellent job of covering a tremendously important era in just under 250 pages. In otherwords, short enough to read in a few days yet comprehensive enough to enable the reader understand that the founding of this country was nothing short of miraculous. I came away with and understanding of three enduring themes from the times. First, George Washington was truely outstanding and without his leadership there would likely be not be a United States today. Second, Thomas Jefferson was the first great politician that understood (although he would deny it) how to win elections (and that it is not always pretty). Finally, that slavery was so devisive that, without the "founding brothers" decision to sweep the issue under the rug it would have made the union of states impossible from the beginning. Joe
Rating:
Summary: Worst book ever
Review: most boring book of all time. Text book X2 without the pictures or graphs. Restates ideas X5. Takes for ever to read
Rating:
Summary: A difficult read, but rewarding if you can manage through it
Review: Ellis's book Founding Brothers is by no means an easy read. The language is sophisticated and his style of writing is very unique, almost poetic. If you're looking for a deeper understanding of the well known revolutionaries, this book is amazing. The author elaborately describes a few key events in the U.S.'s history to thoroughly explain the whole era. If you can get through the long strings of difficult vocabulary and sometimes confusing metaphors, I would highly recommend this book for a greater account of the events that made our country what it is today.
Rating:
Summary: Very informative, badly in need of editing
Review: What I like best about this book is that it shows the founders of the American republic in their role as politicians. It allows the reader to relate to them as people. For all their high principles they were willing to sacrifice their friendships for political gain. This is not to accuse them of demagoguery, far from it. The differences between the founders was not so much based on personal grudges as differences in vision. Ellis shows how the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution symbolized two different aspects of the Revolutionary ideals - freedom of the individual on the one hand and political unity on the other. I found it quite telling that Adams candidly stated his belief that an elite few must be entrusted with leadership. Although Ellis never says so explicitly, I think that this was at the heart of the differences between Adams and Jefferson. I also enjoyed the way that the issues were shown in the context of the times. The issue of slavery is particularly inteteresting. The book makes clear that although everyone was aware that slavery was an explosive issue that would have to be dealt with it is also clear that the attitudes toward race by both sides precluded a diplomatic solution to the problem. On the negative side, this book does too much rambling. I did not feel that I needed to know in such overstated detail all the particulars of the duel between Burr and Hamilton. Although Ellis has several points to make, nowhere in the book does he concisely state them. The book is also too uneven in the amount of time alloted to the major people in it. I would have liked to have known more about the personal life and viewpoints of Hamilton and Madison. Although the book shows Abigail Adams to have been a major influence on her husband John it would have been interesting to learn more from her personal perspective. Still the positives far outweigh the negatives for this book. It does a good job of showing that America after the Revolution was still a work in progress and that the interplay of the differences between the founders is responsible for this country's greatness.
| 
