Rating: 
Summary: Great read with a few minor faults:
Review: Joseph J Ellis's novel, Founding Brothers poses a series of intriguing viewpoints on our country's past. Yet, some of these conclusions are slightly distorted. First of all, George Washington is elevated to a position of basically a demigod in our country's history. Ellis writes, "If there was a Mount Olympus in the new American republic, all the lesser gods were gathered farther down the slope." (120) There is no questioning the fact that George Washington was a major player in our country's revolutionary period and the time after. But even though he was a head above his peers in stature, was he a head above them in the political arena? He was the all-important strategist during the Revolutionary War, but I believe that after that his impact greatly diminished. Throughout his terms as president he fell more and more into the shadow of his political advisers. One instance of this is Alexander Hamilton. Ellis feels that for the duration of the republican experiment "Washington had stood at the helm of the ship of state" (122). Ellis writes this even though Alexander Hamilton was actually the major political figure in the late 1700's. Washington fell more and more into the background as Alexander Hamilton took control of the agenda. It was Hamilton who created the entire economic plan, which in effect, still guides our country today. Washington did very little during his presidency, while Hamilton took control of the ship of state and guided it the way he desired. Washington was the most important man of the Revolutionary War. But after, he quickly became less and less involved in politics. Another example of this is the Constitutional Convention. Washington said next to nothing at the most important meeting in the history of this Country. Ellis elevates Washington to be more of a hero than he really was. Another area where I feel Ellis's interpretation of historical events is a little awry is where he writes, "At the core of the revolutionary legacy, however, was a virulent hatred of monarchy and an inveterate suspicion of any consolidated version of political authority." (127) Ellis's viewpoint encounters trouble when you consider the Federalist "party" and changes taking place during the 1790's. One of the main goals of the Federalist Party was to consolidate political authority into the national government. Madison felt this way when he wrote about political power encompassing a large amount of factions, far from the people, so that it would be less susceptible to corruption. How could the main political thinkers of their time have these two conflicting viewpoints? They could obviously not have an inveterate suspicion of consolidated political authority if the main change they were vying for was an increase in centralized political authority in the national government and the executive branch. Although they did have suspicion in monarchy it was dwarfed by their desire for a strong central government with a powerful executive to guide it. The changes in the state governments' constitutions reveal the strong feelings for increased political power in the hands of the executive governor of the state. This shows that even though they might have been somewhat wary about increasing the executive's power they were not altogether afraid of doing it. Ellis's conclusions are all somewhat correct yet some of his points are exaggerated to an extent that distorts an accurate interpretation of our history. Those few minor problems aside and after all things considered, this book is entertaining to read for any purpose what-so-ever. Ellis's style of writing keeps you reading on and on. I would recomend this book to anyone interested in reading a good, quality, entertaining, historical book. I hope this helped!
Rating: 
Summary: Good Drama / Good Read
Review: This book read like a fine wine compared to many history books out there. Too much time has been spent in the past 10 years bashing the founding fathers, and this book provides a far more balanced approach to the time period, and their accomplishments. The analysis of the the brains, and hearts of these founding brothers is done with skill by Ellis, and that is what history is about, figuring out what happened with whatever evidence is available at the time. For those who would dwell on the controversy surrounding Ellis, I would say, the work is still good regardless of the man and his ethics. The book talks about the fact truth can be relative depending on perspective, and that is history. So this book gets three stars, and is worth reading. Joseph Dworak
Rating: 
Summary: Great Book on the Early American Revolution
Review: Ellis does an excellent job of introducing his readers to the main characters of the American Revolution. His treatment of the characters and how they related to each other is a fresh approach at the history of America. Ellis has an excellent way of writing and is easy to read. A great book for anyone interested in just how this country got started.
Rating:
Summary: Good read, but a bit unbalanced
Review: This book offers unique insights into the personalities of a few of the men who codified the principles upon which the American system of government was founded. Ellis describes their characters, aspirations and motives in the context of the events of the post-revolutionary era in a very compelling manner. His decriptions of how the ratification of the U.S. constitution contributed to the Civil War 80 years later were particularly enlightening. However, the book's title is a bit misleading. While it's clear Ellis's purpose was not to provide a detailed examination of all the key figures and their actions, personalities, etc., from this period, his focus is a bit too narrow to qualify the title. In the last two chapters, he focuses almost exlusively on John Adams and Thomas Jefferson.
Rating:
Summary: Actors on a Most Conspicuous Theatre
Review: As they corresponded in their old age, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson expended much paper and ink in discussing how posterity would look back upon them and their accomplishments. They anticipated the approaching day when, in the afterlife, they and their fellow Founders would reunite and together look down upon the country they had created:
[Adams and Jefferson] referred to life in the hereafter, not as a chance to see God so much as an opportunity to converse with each other and the other "band of brothers." As Jefferson put it, "May we meet there again...with our antient Colleagues, and receive with them the seal of approbation." (243-244) In his book, Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation, historian Joseph J. Ellis captures the angst and anxiety that America's Fathers encountered as they undertook the task of building the United States. Through six carefully selected incidents from the Revolutionary era, Ellis examines the personal struggles of these individuals who invested their lives in the uncertain endeavor of establishing a new nation.
Readers will appreciate the freshness which Ellis brings to the subject of the Founders. Amidst the plethora of contemporary literature on the likes of Washington, Adams, and Jefferson, Ellis's portrayal of these men strikes an admirable balance between typically competing representations. He recognizes, yet manages to avoid, the traditional "iconography" of the Fathers as "a gallery of well-dressed personalities in classical poses" (16). But at the same time, he refrains from the modern scholar's politically correct, character-bashing tendencies. To Ellis, the Founder is not a marble statue, nor a cultural celebrity, but a fellow human being. His treatment is both honest and compassionate, producing a touching and ultimately inspiring portrait of America's Fathers.
The section in Ellis's work that best represents this quality is chapter six, The Friendship, addressing the relationship and correspondence between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. As he explores the colorful conversations between these two veteran politicians, Ellis poignantly captures a lesser-known side of the Founders, revealing the doubts and uncertainties they experienced concerning their accomplishments. Ellis, who seems to feel a special kinship with John Adams, describes the painful identity crisis of an old sage, worried that the memory of his deeds will pass away with him: "His focus, indeed his obsession, was the interior architecture of his own remembrances, the construction of an Adams version of American history, a spacious room of his own within the American pantheon" (213).
Adams's struggle serves as a representation for the broader theme of Ellis's work: though they appear bold and fearless to our eyes, as fathers usually do to their children, the Founders were, in fact, just as susceptible to uncertainty and failure as are we. "[T]he conclusions that look so foregone to us" writes Ellis, "had yet to congeal for them.... Men make history, and the leading members of the revolutionary generation realized they were doing so, but they can never know the history they were making" (4). It was this quality of uncertainty that bonded together the revolutionary generation as brothers. Ellis's familial analogy achieves the double-edged purpose of presenting the Founders, to the reader, as both personal and elite, within their own unique and remarkable class of men:
[T]he shape and character of [America's] political institutions were determined by a relatively small number of leaders who knew each other, who collaborated and collided with one another...at the level of personality and ideology.... (13) Ellis carries his analogy too far only in one place, but it is an important one. In his introduction, he is so careful to emphasize the uncertain tenor of the revolutionary era that he begins to see the momentous events of that time as mere coincidences. "What in retrospect has the look of a foreordained unfolding of God's will" he writes, "was in reality an improvisational affair in which sheer chance...and specific decisions made in the crucible of specific military and political crises determined the outcome" (5). Ellis's rejection of the role of providence in the success of the revolution contradicts the very spirit of the characters he portrays. Only a number of paragraphs after this claim, he praises the "continental vision" of none other than George Washington, who saw the American people as specially anointed for a specific purpose: "They are, from this period, to be considered as Actors on a most conspicuous Theatre, which seems to be peculiarly designed by Providence for the display of human greatness and felicity" (7).
However, this lapse does not taint the bulk of Ellis's work, which is a fine example of scholarship in its forthright and refreshingly compassionate rendering of America's Founding Fathers.
Rating:
Summary: A typical reader
Review: I am not a person who typically reads books about politics or government. I do like to read about history and found this book a good read.
Rating:
Summary: Wonderful history lesson
Review: This is a wonderful book about the American Revolutionary period - especially for those who are not interested in every (dry) scholarly detail. Unlike many historical volumes, the information is accessible to the more casual reader. Perhaps the best part of this book is that the historical figures are shown to be real people. The effects of personality, personal values and relationships are made evident. Because of Ellis' chosen point of view, a fuller view of the events and people of that era is presented. Highly recommended. A fast read.
Rating:
Summary: Hooked on Phonics-Collegiate style
Review: What "Founding Brothers" is - an engrossing glimpse into selected incidents and topics during the early years of America with little rhyme or reason as to what Ellis chooses as his focus. What "Founding Brothers" is not - a concise and complete tome on the early history of America in regards to its politics, diplomacy, military campaigns or economy. Although Ellis tells the reader on the first page of his "Acknowledgments" section that he only wanted to write a "modest-sized account," on early American history, I feel he narrowed his focus too tightly. Although he covers the few subjects he opts for masterly, when I finished the book I found myself asking for more and considering it's only 250 pages long, it definitely could have been a bit longer to fill in the gaps. A perfect analogy on this book is included in the beginning, where Ellis quotes Lytton Strachey about rowing over a great ocean of material and lowering down into it, here and there, a little bucket and bringing up a characteristic speciman to be examined with a careful curiousity. What Ellis does examine (Burr-Hamilton feud, Adams-Jefferson relationship, the 18th century compromise on slavery, Madison as Jefferson's understudy, etc.) is written in such an unrivaled scholarly style that it still is well worth reading. And it's a pretty easy read for the average non-fiction reader, though I recommend to keep a dictionary handy as you're bound to stumble across a few intellectual words you won't know but can later drop in conversation to impress colleagues. - For interested readers, there is a program based on this book (Ellis does some commentary work) that airs about twice a year on the History Channel so keep an eye out for it.
Rating:
Summary: Written for All
Review: Those who haven't read a lot of American history will find this book fascinating as will those who are already familiar with the early days of the American Republic. Founding Brothers tells how the various personalities, clashes, and friendships of the founding members set the precident for American politics and policies. Ellis uses the well known accomplishments of these men as the backdrop for the melodrama of their various characters. Each character is well portrayed through intimate details. The storytelling is well researched and clear.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting, informational and an easy read.
Review: Interesting, informational and an easy read! I recommend it.
|
