Customer Reviews

The Ascent of George Washington: The Hidden Political Genius of an American Icon

5 star:		(11)
4 star:		(16)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

The thesis of this volume is straightforward (Page xix): "This book, however, takes issue with [many historians'] portrayal of Washington as nonpolitical and steadfastly seeking to stay above politics." The author, John Ferling, also notes Washington's vaulting ambition and his willingness to use a variety of tactics to achieve his goals. Thus, this book can be deemed a political biography of George Washington.

The basic approach is laid out early. Washington did not have much of an education and was acutely aware of this shortcoming. Using his older brother from their father's first marriage as a model (Lawrence Washington), he set out to create a military success and use that as a steppingstone to wealth and success. To his advantage, Washington had a number of powerful patrons, who helped him in his ascent.

The book chronicles his up and down military career during the 1750s, his inveterate lobbying for military advancement, his "fights" with governors and military personnel to get the recognition that he desired. And, indeed, this represents one of my questions about the book. Ferling notes that others see Washington as "disinterested," but Ellis, in his excellent biography called "His Excellency," makes some of the same points, although in more nuanced terms. In that, it sometimes seems to me that Ferling is understating points made in other biographies to make his appear the more unique.

His ambitions were also supported by a marriage into wealth and an eminent family. From there, the arc of his well know life is traced--from the state legislature and his plantation to his role in the Revolutionary War to his accession to the presidency. Through all these stages of his life, Ferling notes his ambition. He also contends that, as President, Washington was far from the nonpartisan president described by many. Ellis, for instance, speaks of Washington often "levitating" above the partisan factionalism of his cabinet and of the emerging first party system. Ferling has none of that.

All in all, an interesting "take" on the life of George Washington. My own sense is that Ferling may take his thesis a bit further than warranted; he also sets up some straw men (like Ellis) to distinguish himself from their views of Washington. Nonetheless, his political biography makes Washington more human as a person than some volumes do, and that is to the good. The work also emphasizes the political side of Washington in a manner that has some credibility. All in all, I would recommend this book for its political orientation on George Washington.

John Ferling has a well deserved reputation for writing history books that breathe life into mere facts. His book A Leap in the Dark remains for many the finest account of the American republic's formation yet written. What lifted that book above stiff competition from the likes of Bernard Bailyn and Gordon S. Wood was its cinematic sweep and its riveting narrative. Here was a widescreen presentation of history that shone a light on the flesh and blood characters whose lives and purpose (we were constantly reminded) were under the invariable threat of the hangman's noose. It was the stark contingency of those revolutionary events and the ever present possibility of a tragic outcome for all of the founding fathers that Ferling made palpably real for the reader. It was history with a pulse.

Ferling has managed the same feat with his new study of Washington the political thinker. It is a subject that has rarely been presented before. Washington has always seemed to have risen above politics. Historians have presented him as a great arbiter, a kind-of referee between the left-wing Jefferson and the right-wing Hamilton. The struggle between those two titans continues to resonate today. But Washington was more than a passive bystander. He was an extremely gifted political infighter, masterfully capable of persuasion, manipulation and 'plausible deniability': a tactic widely used by presidents forced to make unpopular decisions. Although Washington possessed a burning ambition to succeed as president, considering it the inevitable capstone to his brilliant career, his genius is proven by his ability to screen his ambitions behind a mask of republican virtue and to successfully hide his political adroitness until he was no longer thought of as a politician at all.

Ferling discusses all of Washington's prismatic talents. He presents this great leader as a full-blown, three-dimensional titan of American history without encasing him in marble. More than merely a feather on the breeze, Washington frequently exhibited an uncanny ability to manipulate the flow of events. His oft discussed Christmas farewell to the troops is a prime example of a nascent master politician taking advantage of an opportunity by astutely reading the symbolic power of a particular course of action. Closing the book on his military career he opened a new one as the young nation cast its eyes about for a peace time leader.

What history has often portrayed as Washington's disinterestedness in political events, of his strict impartiality, freedom from self-interest or selfish bias is really a product of his talent for appearing above the fray. The frequent political skirmishes that roiled his cabinet were a means for Washington to determine a course of action and were never allowed to capsize his administration. It is emblematic of his political mastery that despite the noisy quarrels between factions splitting his cabinet, he is viewed as having sided with neither and silencing neither.

This is living history, masterfully written. If you find American history even mildly interesting, you'll relish this book for its unflinching ability to uncover the real man behind the great Washington myth. Strongly recommended.

Mike Birman

My disclaimer;
I am not a history scholar in any sense of the word. I thought "The Ascent of George Washington , The hidden Political Genius of an American Icon" would be an interesting read and I might glean some insight from this American Hero to help me in my life.


I went to school in the late `60s through the mid `70s, so I had my share of disaffected "Hippy" teachers who had their share of anti-establishment views about government and venerated leaders of the past, so the information in this political biography about George Washington didn't come as a complete surprise. What did come as a surprise was the depth and breadth of "humanizing" the icon that is known as the "Father of our Country".


The author John Ferling is a well written scholar on the time period, so I assume he knows the veracity of what he states, but sourcing so many enemies of Washington as the fount of information on the character flaws of Washington as well as other "Founding Fathers" such as Thomas Jefferson as self interested profiteers made me a bit uncomfortable.

If the author is to be believed, Washington was an ambitious and foolish narcissist, who lacked any military skills and only led men to their foolish deaths. A man who's vanity and political machinations ruined the careers and reputations of more able and responsible military officers, and nearly scuttled the revolutionary war through his bungling of tactics, and only through luck and "Divine Providence" did America prevail.


I didn't care much for the majority of the book, which at least to me, defamed great men "with new insight" gleaned over 200 years after the fact. What I did enjoy however, was the covering of the early years of the new republic during Washington's "Presidential Years". The political infighting between Hamilton and Jefferson was very fascinating.


So if there was an overall thesis to this book for me, it is that if the media gets behind an ambitious fool he can become a leader and a symbol, as long as he can put his self interest above the interest of those around him, and with a lot of luck, it might work out okay in the end. At least the book made me want to read more on the time period to get a more uplifting view. I guess that might make me a foolish Pollyanna, (which really isn't me) but I for one am grateful for the sacrifice of our "Founding Fathers" , and though I know every man has a plethora of faults, pointing them out should have some useful purpose, and I'm not sure I got one from this volume.

When I recently checked, Amazon offers more than 96, 000 books in the "George Washington" category and about 3,500 in the "George Washington biography" category. Why another one? Hasn't everything already been said about the man who led thirteen colonies to victory during the War for Independence and then served two terms as the new nation's first president? According to John Ferling, Washington possessed a "hidden political genius" that "heretofore has escaped penetrating scrutiny." Ferling challenges any portrayal of Washington that suggests he was nonpolitical and steadfastly seeking to stay above politics. On the contrary, he was highly political. Indeed, he "was so good at politics that he alone of all American officials in the past two centuries succeeded in convincing others that he was not a politician." In other words, he knew how to let others have it his way. This book is not a biography. Rather, Ferling focuses specifically and almost entirely "on matters that somehow or other involved Washington in political activities." He also helps his reader to understand "what shaped and drove Washington and how his character influenced his political choices." With regard to the book's title, it refers to the process by which achieved his position in his nation's "pantheon of heroes."

Others have their reasons for holding Ferling's book in such high regard. Here are two of mine. First, he brilliantly coordinates his analysis of various stages of Washington's career with the process by which the thirteen colonies approached, declared, and won their independence, then established a representative government that remains intact 220 years later. Contrary to what sanitized school textbooks have suggested for decades, "from an early age, George Washington wanted more. He wanted to stand apart from others. He wanted to be seen as a man of substance." With regard to his military service, "Washington was mad for glory. He was eager to prove his courage both to his officers and to powerful figures in Virginia, and zealous for the combat that would bring renown for which he hungered." Moreover, as indicated earlier, "nothing about Washington has attracted less attention than his political activities."

I also appreciate Ferling's brilliant analysis of how Washington's leadership style changed in response to the aforementioned process in which thirteen separate colonies became a new nation. In his own biography of Washington (written with Susan Dunn), James MacGregor Burns cites Stanley Elkins and Eric McKitrick's comment that, "he had in a certain sense been acting as the President of the United States since 1775," and then observes, "In orchestrating the affairs of the executive branch, President Washington was a [begin italics] transactional [end italics] leader - managing supervising, delegating, compromising, mastering the centrifugal forces in the government. But he was more than that, too, for leading in the creation of an entirely new political structure. Indeed, to provide strength, coherence, purpose, and personality to the executive branch, he became a [begin italics] transformational [end italics] leader - for he was giving strong institutional shape to an enhanced philosophy of executive leadership as well as inspiring and cementing citizens' commitment to the federal government."

With all due respect to Burns, Elkins, McKitrick and other eminent scholars, however, none explains as thoroughly as Ferling does how Washington's "hidden political genius" enabled him to ascend to "the peak of power and the very heights of adulation...Merely by being there, as Jefferson and Hamilton told him, Washington enabled the new nation to hang together and survive its terribly difficult infancy. But he did far more than merely be there. He was a hands-on president. With the hidden skills of an illusionist, Washington combined discerning statesmanship with the partisanship of a chief executive with a political agenda." Bravo!

Historians enjoy trying to knock icons off their pedestals.
Sometimes they try too hard. This book is surprisingly bad and demands rebuttal.
Professor Ferling is correct in saying that Washington was political and ambitious and that he was not a military genius. Unfortunately, in his effort to prove that Washington was politically astute, Professor Ferling tries to demonstrate that Washington was a military dunce who spent the Revolutionary War trying to find scapegoats for his failures. To do so, he view everything that Washington did on the battlefield in the worst possible light, damning with left-handed compliments everything that Washington did right and attributing every failure or partial success to Washington's ineptitude and character flaws.
Suddenly, every military absurdity that Washington opposed, such as a mid-winter invasion of Canada without a supply line or hard money to pay the Canadians, become a far-sighted opportunity that Washington squandered to avoid giving alleged rivals a chance to shine. Suddenly, every officer that Washington let go, from Charles Lee for his feeble and half-hearted performance at Monmouth to Adam Stephens for his drunken folly at Germantown, becomes a misunderstood military genius that Washington scapegoated. Even Horatio Gates's utterly contemptible mismanagement of the Camden campaign receives a short but vigorous whitewashing simply to denigrate Washington's military reputation. Washington kept a poorly fed, poorly clad, poorly shod, unpaid army full of quarrelsome officers in the field for years and dreamed of coordinating with the French Navy to trap and destroy a British army as he had nearly been trapped and destroyed on Long Island. When Washington finally achieved his ambition at Yorktown, Professor Ferling chooses to characterize his participation in the campaign as "nominal."
Washington was idolized in his lifetime for a reason and deserves far more credit than he receives here. Professor Ferling has written better books. So have other people. Read "To Starve the Army at Pleasure" and give this book a pass.

I must admit to being disappointed in this book, it is a worthy effort but really adds little to our overall knowledge of George Washington. However, I allow 4-stars for the book because it is the first one I have encountered in 40-plus years to continually re-enforce the fact that George Washington was consciously upwardly mobile in behavior and desire from early age. It continued to guide his actions up through his presidency. The book offers many primary writings from Washington as aid in that attempt.

Most of the other political people of that time we've come to know acted very similar, with Washington being only one among many opportunists. Anyone reading much on Washington will be aware of this fact, but Professor Ferling is one of few to devote an entire book to that element in Washington's personality. Not a biography at all the book does offer elements of Washington's military and political life. I still prefer my four volumes by Flexner and a single volume by Richard Norton Smith for in depth coverage of George Washington and his era.

While still allowing 4-stars for Ferling's tenacity and attempt his is in many ways only a restating of facts that can be culled from the above mentioned volumes, among several others including one by Willard Sterne Randall. For anyone not having read a great deal Ferling's book on Washington might suffice, however, too much of Washington falls through the cracks for this book to ever become a standard work.

Semper Fi.

There he sits astride a marble horse. There he is symbolized by the 555 feet high Washington monument. In countless ways we Americans honor the memory, accomplishments and courage of the first President of the United States. From towns to a state to our currency we remember this giant among men. As Light Horse Harry Lee said of him, "Washington is first in war, first in peace and first in the hearts of his countrymen."
All of this is known and has been told in song and story.With such notable biographers as Douglas Southall Freeman in his seven volume life of Washington and newer historians recounting the many exploits of Washington our bookshelves strain to hold all the tons of books on George Washington and his stirring times.
What John Ferling, the eminent historian of such works as "Almost a Miracle"his gripping account of the Revolutionary War, does in this new work is look at the skills employed by young George on his ascent up the slippery slope leading to wealth, fame and glory.
Like a young Terry Malloy in "On the Waterfront" Washington was a tough counterpuncher who demanded a KO of his opponents who were vocal and doughty in combat!
Washington idolized his half-brother Lawrence taking him as his model. He served in the French and Indian War, experienced Braddock's bloody defeat and did poorly in defense of Fort Necessity. Yet Washington was great at public relations becoming well known in Virginia for his warlike skills. He served over 16 years in the Virginia House of Burgesses; invested heavily in Western land acquisiton and became a wealthy planter of tobacco and wheat. Washington married Mary Custis the wealthiest widow in all of Virginia. He was aloof, formal, cold and aristocratic in demeanor. Washington loved to dance, play cards, chase the fox and attend the theatre. He owned hundreds of slaves at Mt. Vernon freeing many of them in his will. He was a man of his time and place. Washington was poorly educated but constantly sought self-improvement through reading, study and a careful husbanding of his time and managerial skills.
Washington played politics to become known as a military star in the first Continental Congress in Philadelphia. He became the top commander in the valiant struggle for freedom against Great Britain. During eight years of incredible hardship he kept an American army in the field.
Ferling shows us that Washington was a relatively mediocre combat commander doing poorly in the battles for New York, Germantown and Monmonth while such worthies as his rival Horatio Gates won a great victory over Burgoyne at Saratoga in 1777. Washington was militarily inactive from 1778 to the victory over Cornwallis in 1781 in a victory based largely on the plans of the French general working in league with the Americans.
Washington often made scapegoats of military commanders while he himself refused to take the blames for battlefield setbacks and tactical blunders. He did triumph at Trenton and Princeton keeping the American army intact against the British Army which was the best in the world. He was a strong defender of the army's rights forcing a reluctant Congress to provide adequate provisions and weaponry for the beleagured troops under his command.
Washington served two terms as the nation's first president. He was strongly influenced by the financial policies of Alexander Hamilton. His old friends Madison and Jefferson turned against the Federalists to chief executive's utter disgust. He kept America from fighting a war against England in 1793. Washington saw to the defeat of farmers in Western Pa. upset over the whiskey tax in the Whiskey Rebellion. He also stayed clear of war or involvement with the French during the cataclysmic events of the French Revolution. Washington died in retirement at Mt. Vernon in December, 1799.
I have read countless books on George Washington but have never persued a work focusing on his political skills. Washington was a human being who made mistakes, got mad, make poor judgments and had personality flaws. Dr. Ferling points these out to us but also makes clear that we are fortunate such a great and good man as Washington led our nation in perilous times to win our independence.

I am not generally a big fan of biographies. And to be honest Washington had never really been a compelling guy for me to read about. But John Ferling's effort here may change my mind about reading future biographies. His writing style is easy on the eyes, holds your interest page after page and does a remarkable job of conveying the facts with just the right amount of speculation and wonder about the "hidden" Washington. And by "hidden", I refer to the Washington that Ferling's skillful prose reveals to the reader. We all know the Washington of the history books, of the dollar bill and of American myth. But it's what we don't know that makes Washington such an interesting and yes...amazing man.

This book succeeds on so many levels. It provides exhaustive and solid history of the time and events that are both shaping Washington and shaped by him. Washington moves across the stage with purpose and Ferling does a great job of delving into Washington's motivations for the actions that he took. It's absolutely fascinating. We see Washington as a real person, who despite the adversity he faces, manages through luck and skill to manage his way to remarkable sucess. And to Ferling's credit, he never engages in myth making or hero worship. In fact, I found this book to be very matter of fact and in truth, this book tells a broader story than just that of Washington rise to power. Honestly, I feel smarter for having read it. Hamilton, Madison, Rochambeau all come to life in this book with nearly the same intensity as Washington himself.

And finally after wrapping up this outstanding read, it hits me as it will you, that this book isn't a biography, nor does it intend to be. It simply is a book that tells the story of America's Founding Father in a way that reveals a complex man who is every bit as human as the next man.

And I must say that the greatest pleasure I took from reading this book, was in finding the "real" Washington, a man for whom my admiration has only been increased.

After reading about some particularly shameful scandals in our nation's history, I commented to a friend that I needed something about a more heroic and upstanding character, like maybe George Washington. This book soon came to my attention, although it doesn't portray him in an especially positive light.

This is not a biography, but rather a study of Washington's politics. Professor Ferling says Washington was "madly ambitious and obsessed with recognition and renown." He explains that although he was a poor general and military tactician he carefully cultivated an image of a wise and impartial leader. He was also a master at playing the game of politics - squeezing out rivals and using others to further his reputation and standing. He was so successful at this, Ferling argues, that he was seen as bipartisan and above politics - a perception that continues today. But not everything Ferling says is negative: he also explains that Washington was the right person at the right time, the one leader able to steer a fledgling nation in the right direction and ensure that it succeeded.

But as compelling as his argument is, I occasionally found it difficult to follow his connections. He argues that Washington was a poor general and yet parlayed this into a tremendous reputation that was almost universally believed. I also found it a bit of a stretch that "no one was better at self-promotion... though he did it in such a quiet, understated manner that few were aware of what he was up to." He also seems to harp on some issues that really seemed pretty ordinary.

In spite of that it's a very good look at Washington the Politician, although probably not the best introduction to the first President. I think I might have appreciated it more if I had already read a straightforward biography such as Joseph Ellis' highly recommended "His Excellency."

I have really enjoyed reading Ferling's account of the life of George Washington. Ferling focuses his research efforts on primary source materials of the writings of those involved in this man's life including himself. He takes away the mask of the Super Hero, and gives us the very human life of a man who faced challenges as a youth and used all of his wit to gain a name from his early twenties.

What I like about the book is that we do not get a sugar coated picture, neither do we get a revisionist ragging on the man who developed to become the first president of the US. There are minor irritating opinions where he attempts to guess at what he thought, but tended to contradict that thought later, so, we do get a rather balanced view of Washington.

What I learned was that he was a rather shrewed planner who had some very clear goals for himself early on in life. He never seemed to think he would lead a nation, but he did connive at times to remain in charge of the rather rag tag bunch that was the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War. We see him seeming to be rather indecisive and somewhat narrow minded as he bided his time in New Jersey awaiting the opportunity to attack NY and rid it of the British occupiers. Interestingly to me, he did bottle them up in NY where they did rather little damage in the Northern campaign after the battle of Monmouth.

We get to see real men at work. It seems from their own words, men have not changed much at all, backbiting and taking credit for others work, while blaming those who had done well. One wonders if the likes of Benedict Arnold, who apparently was a hero in the battle of Saratoga, would have become turncoats.

Yet and all, we see the interaction of men who would come to found a very strong nation. Men who really did make plans to create a working system of government. Underlying you learn what challenges the Continental Congress faced with little power, and how that taught them lessons for when they created an independent nation made of up very strong states.

Although a long read, I actually wish it were somewhat longer. We have gaps of years, but maybe that is because there is nothing that would lend itself to the story. Washington was a very pragmatic, quiet figure. He was what would seem to be an introvert. He was involved with men who were much more educated and apt to argue great points than he. Yet Washington, as human as he was, was a man for his time.