Customer Reviews

Democracy: An American Novel (Modern Library Classics)

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

"Democracy" is what "Primary Colors" would have been if the latter had been well-written. Like Joe Klein, Adams published his book anonymously and skewered a number of contemporary politicians (including President Rutherford B. Hayes). But Adams goes two steps further: his novel is a scathing commentary more on the American political system in general than on one administration in particular, and his characters are iconic and recognizable in any era.

In "Democracy," the nation's capital "swarms with simple-minded exhibitions of human nature; men and women curiously out of place, whom it would be cruel to ridicule and ridiculous to weep over." But Adams is not hesitant about being cruel in his portrayal of Washington's residents, and he saves his weeping for the true victims in his novel: the American people. The typical American senator combines "the utmost pragmatical self-assurance and overbearing temper with the narrowest education and meanest personal experience that ever existed in any considerable government." (Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose!)

The story concerns Madeleine Lee, an intelligent and well-meaning (if somewhat naive) New York widow, who, bored with her cosmopolitan lifestyle, travels to Washington to learn what makes the nation tick. She and her sister are quickly surrounded by a diverse group of politicians, lobbyists, and foreign diplomats, and she finds herself courted by Silas Ratcliffe, a senator with presidential aspirations whose talent "consisted in the skill with which he evaded questions of principle." During one heated (and humorous) argument about George Washington's merits, Ratcliffe sums up his view of politics: "If virtue won't answer our purpose, then we must use vice, or our opponents will put us out of office."

Adams's prose is almost Jamesian in its measured pacing (and this may simply bore some readers); the initial chapters are unhurried as he weaves the web of the plot and sketches his all-too-believable characters. Along the way he tosses barbed zingers at every target. The climactic passages are among the most comically riveting, emotionally intense, and morally satisfying finales I've read in a satire: as you might expect, nobody gets exactly what they want, but everyone gets what they deserve.

This book read very well 118 years after it was published. I suppose there are "guides" which would tie the characters to actual people--maybe I should check Ernest Samuels' 3-volume bio, which I read in March of 1985, and see what he says. Apparently the president was Hayes--it certainly fits him in some ways, tho it is rather hard on him. The problems the book does not solve--campaign finance and its relation to political action--are not yet solved.

Anyone wishing to understand democracy in America might skip that more famous book by that name and take up this novel by Henry Adams instead. Here the reader learns how politics really works and it is not pretty. In this work, Adams shows the dark underside of democracy. Adams was critical of the politics of his age and with reason. It was until now the most openly corrupt era in American history. There is a memorable scene in which the hopes and dreams of the American Revolution and founding fathers, as personified by the ruins of Mt Vernon are constrasted by the book's various characters on the make. It is no wonder that the word "democracy" is used rather ironically throughout this book.

This book had an interesting history. It is a roman a clef and certain people, notably James Blaine (one time corrupt congressman, corrupt senator and corrupt presidential contender) were reportedly outraged by the rather unflattering portrayal. To prevent libel suits, as well as the more damaging social slights, Adams did not disclose he had written it. As one of the leading historians of the day, he probably did not wish to be associated with something as frivilous as a novel. He and his friends did have fun, baiting a curious reading public by periodically throwing out all sorts of red herrings to divert suspicion from Adams.

When I first started it after an excruciatingly long intro it appeared to be a good read. What would be cool would be a companion read-along, a brief summary describing who were the high-steppers in politics, some of the ongoing partisan infighting, the then Perle Mesta, backbiting of the moment, that sort of thing. Then we readers would have a better background to feel what was driving a book written almost 120 years ago. Something like I've heard attributed to Alice Roosevelt Longworth, "If you have nothing good to say about X, then please come sit down beside me and let's talk." Henry Aiken's long-winded Foreword gave some useful background but it didn't really tell us enough about the actual people other than the Henry and Clover Adams' network. I found Democracy a kind of fun book to read. A little bit like a soap opera, but then, isn't 1997 Washington a little bit like a soap opera? At one point I was waiting to see if Carrington's stepped up heart rate about Sylvia, catches her into his arms? And how 'bout Sylvia playing at Cupid with her big sister? Or rather, Cupid in reverse, trying to disengage her sister from the clutches of the dirty Rat-cliffe from Peoria, er, Peonia? The party for the Brits sounded a bit make believe, and so convoluted that I felt it must have been like some of the high school mixers that I used to attend, and have fun at! What's boggling my mind is that the story line feels as if it would be a good fit in the current environment! Could this book be a hoax and in fact be a recent release rather than 1880? During the reading I was once at the point where Ratcliffe seems to have met his match in Mrs. Lee, and is baffled by his hormones. Next thing you know they'll be in the Tidal Basin after a touch of the grape. Finally, finished reading it, after some tough slogging. It was a moral ending, and I applaud Mrs. Lee for showing Secretary Ratcliffe the door. Her self discovery was a plus on her part, for she saw that her intentions were not honorable, and that she was getting perilously close to becoming truly an empty person. As to the politics of that day, how different from today! Now, any hint of selling a vote would capture the front pages of all the papers, all the TV and radio shows would be burning white hot, and trial by media would move into high gear. None of this 'don't show this letter unless absolutely necessary'. What amazed me even more about the book itself was that after reading the first 90% just to remain in good standing as a member of a local reading group, I discovered that I truly enjoyed the last 10%. I truly hope that Adams' other books weren't such tough 'reads'. Cheers.

To act with entire honesty and self-respect, one should always live in a pure atmosphere, and the atmosphere of politics is impure. -Senator Silas Ratcliffe, Democracy

In his own lifetime, Henry Adams was famous first for being the grandson of John Quincy Adams, thus the great grandson of John Adams; second for his epic History of the United States During the Jefferson and Madison Administrations. It was only upon his death, in 1918, that his third person autobiography, The Education of Henry Adams, was published and that his publisher revealed that Adams had written the previously anonymous novel Democracy. It is The Education which has sustained his reputation, having been named the number one book on the Modern Library list of the Top 100 Nonfiction Books of the 20th Century, but Democracy is still considered one of the better novels of American politics, though surprisingly it is currently out of print.

The novel is both a fairly typical 19th Century comedy of manners--with the widow Madeleine Lee decamping from New York to Washington DC, where she instantly becomes one of the Capital's most desirable catches--and a more serious meditation on the nature and pursuit of power in the American democracy. The widow Lee is specifically interested in Washington because it is the seat of power :

...she was bent upon getting to the heart of the great American mystery of democracy and government.

. . .

What she wished to see, she thought, was the clash of interests, the interests of forty millions of people and a whole continent, centering at Washington; guided, restrained, controlled, or unrestrained and uncontrollable, by men of ordinary mould; the tremendous forces of government, and the machinery of society at work. What she wanted was POWER.

Mrs. Lee's most likely pursuer is Senator Silas Ratcliffe of Illinois, widely considered a likely future President : he sees her as a perfect First Lady and she sees him as her path to power. Through an elaborate courtship ritual and several set piece scenes (in the Senate, at the White House, at Mount Vernon, at Arlington Cemetery and at a dress ball) Adams puts his characters through their paces and affords the reader an intimate look at the rather tawdry political milieu of the 1870's. The theme that runs throughout the story is that access to power comes only through compromising one's principles, but Adams is sufficiently ambivalent about the point that we're uncertain whether he's more contemptuous of those who make the necessary deals or those who, by staying "pure," sacrifice the opportunity to influence affairs of state. Suffice it to say that the novel ends with Mrs. Lee, assumed by most critics to represent Adams himself, fleeing to Egypt, telling her sister : "Democracy has shaken my nerves to pieces."

Like his presidential forebears, Henry Adams had a realistic and therefore jaundiced view of politics, even as practiced in a democracy. The Adams's did not subscribe to the starry eyed idealism of the Jeffersonians. But they were all drawn to politics, even realizing that it was a moral quagmire. This is the fundamental dilemma of the conservative democrat, we recognize that we have to govern ourselves because we know we can't trust unelected rulers, but we also understand that our elected representatives are unlikely to be any more honest than the tyrants we threw out. This attitude is famously captured in Winston Churchill's (alleged) aphorism : "Democracy: the worst of all possible systems, but there is no other which would be better." And the unfortunate corollary is that unless relatively honorable men like the Adamses and the Churchills pursue careers in politics, the field will be left to the real scoundrels. Henry Adams doesn't offer any solutions to the dilemma, but he offers an amusing take on it.

GRADE : B

"Democracy - An American Novel" was published anonymously in 1880, and it was not to be revealed until after his death in 1918 that Henry Adams was the author. Henry Adams was son of Charles Francis Adams Sr., who served in the House of Representatives for one term, and then as the U.S. Ambassador to Great Britain under Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson. He was also the grandson of John Quincy Adams and the great grandson of John Adams both of whom held the highest office for one term, so it is hardly surprising that he was familiar with politics. Henry Adams himself was a journalist, acting as the anonymous correspondent for the New York Times while he was there during the time his father was Ambassador. Adams continued as a Journalist after returning to the U.S. switched to being an historian for a while, before continuing to work in both fields after moving to Washington D. C. "Democracy" is one of two novels that he wrote, the rest of his works were non-fiction, including his autobiographical work "The Education of Henry Adams" for which he is most well known.

The main focus of the novel is Madeleine Lee, a young widower who moves from New York society to Washington looking for a political gem. The time is shortly after the election of a new President. There are no years given, but based on comments by characters in the novel it would take place around the time it was published, but the characters are fictional even though they reference real politicians from the past. The President is referred to by a nickname of "Old Granite" that the President had, which clearly reveals both Andrew Jackson ("Old Hickory") and Ulysses Grant as two of the people on which he was based. The President is mostly a side-character in this novel though, as the key character to represent the problems with politics is Senator Silas P. Ratcliffe, a man whose political ambition leads to the White House, and he sees Madeline as an asset to help him achieve that goal.

Ratcliffe is the kind of man who goes to church because he needs the church votes, and who can excuse any action by pointing to politicians being a reflection of their society and thus one must first purify society before one can purify politics. Ratcliffe's political nemesis is the new President, though they are of the same party. The President aims to bring Ratcliffe into his cabinet and frustrate him by thwarting his every move, before letting him go. Ratcliffe's moral opponent is John Carrington, a Southern politician from Virginia who fought on the side of the Confederacy. Ratcliffe is extremely powerful, and he artfully works his way to foil both the President and Carrington, but Carrington proves he has a few tricks left as he out maneuvers Ratcliffe in the end.

The discussions in the novel often concern the politics of the time, so it is worthwhile to read up on the history of that period to fully appreciate the novel. Some sections though don't require that, such as the visit to Mount Vernon where the characters are obliged to tear-down the memory of Washington to bring him down to their level. Adams turns the story about the cherry tree on its head as one character describes him as cutting down all his father's fruit-trees in a fit of passion, and then threatening his father with the hatchet. One might think that Henry Adams had become very cynical about politics when reading this novel, but the fact that Carrington is able to influence Madeleine Lee at the end, shows that he had at least some hope left for Democracy.

Overall I think this is an enjoyable satire, but I was a bit disappointed in the lack of accompanying material in the Penguin Classics edition. Earl N. Harbert's introduction is very good, but there are no notes for the text, and no historical timeline. The lack of notes is the thing I missed the most, as I think the reading experience would have been enhanced with references discussing the political and social issues of the time to which Adams referred. Thus I give this book three stars, but it could easily have been four if the supporting material were better.

Henry Adams' trenchant observations on politics in the 19th century is every bit as relevant today. Fatuous, self-important senators apparently have some shared genetic code that has survived through the ages.

Unfortunately, I bought a soft copy from Cosimo Classics <www.cosimobooks.com>. It is the worst published book I have ever owned. There was at least one typo per page, and the typesetter placed a hard carriage return after "Mrs." most of the time so that a new paragraph started with the name "Lee". The publishing errors were so bad and distracting that I had a hard time finishing the story and I just threw the book away when finished because it wasn't even worth giving away. I'll never make a purchase from these publishers again, but I would recommend the story to anyone.

Henry Adams was a scion of the famous Adams family which produced two American Preisdents in John and his son John Quincy. Henry Adams (1838-1918) is best known as the author of "Mont Saint Michel", "Chartes" and his influential autobiography, "The Education of Henry Adams.' Adams wrote "Democracy" in 1880 publishing it anonymously. It is his only novel charming us with its wit, elegance and backstage look at corruption in high places in the national capital.
The plot concerns Madeline Lee a wealthy New York socialite. Madeline has lost her husband and her son to diptheria. As a widow she is engrossed in good and philanthropic charities. She is approaching thirty thirsting for a sip from the cup of political power. She and her younger sister the lovely Sybil journey to DC.
Madeline is soon being courted by the corrupt Senator (and later Secretary of the Treasury) the corruptible Silas P. Ratcliff from Illinois. He has presidential aspirations but after his past dirty dealinig is revealed to Madeline she dumps him for a jaunt to Europe. Another man Mr. Carrington a Virginian and Civil War veteran also is in love with her. Their romance is not resolved as the short novel reaches its final page.
One who reads this work will realize that corruption, nepotism and stupidity are not new to American politics! Minor characters such as the humorous Victoria Dare and the British diplomat Lord Skye add humor to the social swirl. Adams charms us with his discussion of the characters visits to the homes of George Washington at Mount Vernon and Robert Edward Lee in Arlington House.
This is one of the best novels ever written dealing with national politics. Henry Adams wrote it with years of experience and knowledge of poltics. It is well worth a close read and is a little gem of a book!

Henry Adams, the direct descendent of two presidents, published his novel, Democracy, anonymously in 1880. About one hundred years had passed since the launching of the great American political experiment and through his novel Adams takes stock of its results.

The novel also seems to be a catharsis for Adams, an internal monologue explaining to himself why, burdened by society's considerable expectations and helped by powerful family connections, he eschews a career in elective politics.

Adams speaks through the novel's protagonist, Mrs. Lightfoot Lee, and sometimes through Mr. Nathan Gore, a literary man. Other personages are caricatures, representing types of people, such as the obvious Mr. Hartbeest Schneidekoupon, a rich, amateur politician, whose German last name means "coupon clipper," a nineteenth-century term for the idle rich. Old World diplomats, duty-bound officials, skirt chasers, sanctimonious reformers and down-in-the-dirt politicians are Mrs. Lee's and Mr. Gore's foils as they visit Washington to examine the engine room of democracy.

Corruption, the role of money in politics and the ignorance of powerful politicians give Adams concern for the health of the American political system. These concerns are woven throughout the novel's action. "Surely something can be done to check corruption. Are we for ever to be at the mercy of thieves and ruffians? Is respectable government impossible in a democracy?" asks Adams through Mrs. Lee. In light of these obvious defects, Adams wonders if America's great experiment is right or wrong.

Adams' picture of 1880 Washington politics contrasts starkly with the noble principles debated by the country's founders and enshrined in its founding documents. Today's politicians, according to Adams, only give lip service to principles. Lofty ideas are only useful when they help you get what you want. Politics has become a bazaar, where money reigns. As Senator Ratcliffe, a corrupt Washington power broker, states: "Public men ... cannot be dressing themselves to-day in Washington's old clothes. If Washington were President now, he would have to learn our ways or lose his next election."

While a foreign diplomat who claims intimate knowledge with world corruption predicts that Washington will in one-hundred years become the world's most corrupt city, Adams doesn't despair for democracy. As Nathan Gore states: "I grant it is an experiment, but it is the only direction society can take that is worth its taking; .... Every other possible step is backward, and I do not care to repeat the past." Adams concludes, however, that as a man for whom principles are important, he's not suited for a career in elective politics.

While Adams' novel was written about one hundred years after the United States' founding, another hundred years has passed. Adams was a knowledgeable and perceptive political observer of his time. A reader might pause to ask: What's changed? Are Adams' observations still relevant? Is his somewhat subdued enthusiasm for democracy still grounds for optimism? Is every other possible step backward?

...Which pave the road to mediocrity, a writer's hell. Though it isn't terrible, "Democracy" is little more than a could-have-been in all respects. It has interesting ideas and competent writing, so the potential was there. The problem, as is so often the case, is in the novel's execution.

The idea that power corrupts is an old one, and it is obviously the main point of Henry Adams' novel. His intention seems to be to portray the lengths to which those in power will go to acquire more power, and how the lust for power is certain to deaden one's sense of morality. Unfortunately, Adams would have done better to write an essay on the subject rather than attempt to weave it into a fictional novel, for the author waxes too moralistic on his theme, rather than stepping back and allowing the characters to make his point for him. This does more harm than simply annoying the reader with value judgments; the story itself becomes so transparent and predictable, that it seems a mere vehicle for what soon becomes a tiresome refrain.

Perhaps this is why the characters are so lamentably flat. The descriptions Adams writes for each character seem to foreshadow complexity and development, but this soon is proven to be a false impression. Interesting as the characters might have been from their descriptions, when push comes to shove and the story continues, they remain utterly devoid of personality. Ironically, the main characters, Madeleine and Ratcliffe, are probably the most thinly developed of the entire bunch; the supporting cast is slightly more interesting, but not by much.

Another annoyance is the implausible thinking and actions of so many of the characters; for Madeleine to contemplate marrying Ratcliffe for her sister's sake is simply ridiculous. The fact that she considers her life at an end at age thirty is equally implausible, as is Sybil's attitude of careless youth at age twenty-five: in the nineteenth century, any woman of that age who was yet unmarried would have been considered an old maid, yet that is never even hinted at.

Perhaps the worst of it all was the pacing: this 300+ page book could have EASILY been half its size. It drags along without character development and without even any plot development. Worse yet, the book is centered entirely around politics, yet Adams seems hazy as to the details of those politics. Perhaps Madeleine learned a lot about American politics from her stay in Washington, but very little of this is shared with the reader. As such, the book does not even have an interesting setting to recommend itself.

In the end, it is obvious what Adams was trying to say, but by making Madeleine so careless with regard to Ratcliffe, the author fails utterly. With no temptation, there can be no sacrifice. It is unclear why the reader is expected to admire Madeleine, yet this expectation is clear enough.

To sum up...for a book about government corruption, look elsewhere. There must be something out there better than this. Anything.