A cultural biography of John Brown, the controversial abolitionist who used violent tactics against slavery and single-handedly changed the course of American history. Reynolds brings to life the Puritan warrior who gripped slavery by the throat and triggered the Civil War. Reynolds demonstrates that Brown’s most violent acts—including his killing of proslavery settlers in Kansas and his historic raid on Harpers Ferry, Virginia--were inspired by the slave revolts, guerilla warfare, and revolutionary Christianity of the day. He shows how Brown seized public attention, polarizing the nation and fueling the tensions that led to the Civil War. Reynolds recounts how Brown permeated American culture during the Civil War and beyond, and how he planted the seeds of the civil rights movement by making a pioneering demand for complete social and political equality for America’s ethnic minorities.
John Brown, Abolitionist
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Browse the best books of summer including blockbusters, beach reads, and editors' picks in our Summer Reading Store. |
Book Description
Frequently Bought Together
Editorial Reviews
From Publishers Weekly
In the very first paragraphs of this biography, Bancroft Prize-winner Reynolds (Walt Whitman's America) steps back a bit from the grandiose claims of his subtitle. Nevertheless, his book as a whole paints a positive portrait of the Calvinist terrorist Brown (1800-1859)--contrary to virtually all recent scholarship (by Stephen B. Oates and Robert Boyer, among others), which tends to depict Brown as a bloodthirsty zealot and madman who briefly stepped into history but did little to influence it. Reynolds's approach harks back to the hero-worship apparent in earlier books by W.E.B. Du Bois and Brown's surviving associates. John Brown waged a campaign so bloody during the Kansas Civil War--in 1856 he chased men and elder sons from their beds in cabins along the Pottawatomie Creek, and then lopped off their heads with broadswords as sobbing wives and younger children looked on--that fellow Kansas antislavery settlers rebuked him. Even the abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison condemned Brown and his methods. After taking the federal armory and arsenal at Harpers Ferry in October 1859, Brown intended (had he not been swatted like a fly within hours) to raise and arm a large force of blacks capable of wreaking a terrible vengeance across Virginia. Yet Reynolds insists that "it is misleading to identify Brown with modern terrorists." Really? 25 b&w illus. (Apr. 21)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.
From Bookmarks Magazine
The claims of Reynolds’s subtitle strike many as inflated; while John Brown certainly grew into a towering folkloric figure after his death, the historians who review the book note that his actions were less a direct cause than an important symbolic precursor to the Civil War. Some critics believe Reynolds, winner of the Bancroft Prize for Walt Whitman’s America, is overly sympathetic to Brown’s use of violence. Though other reviewers counter that the author never turns full-scale apologist, the question of whether violence is an acceptable response to injustice—even one as grave as slavery—hangs over the text, especially as Reynolds examines the parallels between Brown’s actions and our current understanding of terrorism. One thing is certain: John Brown’s legacy is as unstable a part of our national history as ever.
Copyright © 2004 Phillips & Nelson Media, Inc. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
More About the Author
David S. Reynolds, a Distinguished Professor at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, is the author or editor of 15 books, including "Mightier than the Sword: Uncle Tom's Cabin and the Battle for America," "Walt Whitman's America," "John Brown, Abolitionist," "Waking Giant: America in the Age of Jackson," "George Lippard," "Faith in Fiction," and "Beneath the American Renaissance." He is the winner of the Bancroft Prize, the Christian Gauss Award, the Ambassador Book Award, the Gustavus Myers Outstanding Book Award, and finalist for the National Book Critics Circle Award. He has been interviewed some 80 times on radio and TV, on shows including NPR's "Fresh Air," "Weekend Edition," and "The Diane Rehm Show," ABC's "The John Batchelor Show," and C-SPAN's "After Words," Brian Lamb's "Book Notes," and "Book TV." He is a regular contributor to "The New York Times Book Review" and is included in "Who's Who in America," "Who's Who in American Education," and "Who's Who in the World." David Reynolds was born in Providence, Rhode Island. For much of his childhood he lived in West Barrington, Rhode Island in a home attached to the Nayatt Point Lighthouse (built in 1828). His father, Paul Reynolds, sold life insurance and later became an artist. His mother, Adelaide Koch Reynolds, was an artist, art teacher, and sometime illustrator who designed newspapers ads and Hallmark greeting cards. David Reynolds attended the Providence Country Day School, where he later taught for a year after his graduation from college. He received the B.A. magna cum laude from Amherst College and the Ph.D. from the University of California, Berkeley. He has taught American literature and American Studies at Northwestern University, Barnard College, New York University, Rutgers University, Baruch College, and the Sorbonne-Paris III. Since 2006, he has been at the CUNY Graduate Center. Besides writing and teaching, he enjoys songwriting and tennis as hobbies.
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
66 of 75 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
"I have only one death to die, & I will die fighting for this cause"
July 20, 2005
By Theo Logos
Format:Hardcover
John Brown is an American enigma. His life presents a serious challenge to a simple black and white interpretation of ethics, history, and by extrapolation, even current events. He was a man a hundred years ahead of his time in racial ethics - not only opposed to slavery, but unlike almost all other abolitionist of his time, actually a believer in the equality of the races. He was praised honestly by Ralph Waldo Emerson, who wrote of him that he "believed in two articles - the golden rule and the Declaration of Independence." Another contemporary, the black reformer Charles H. Langston praised him saying, "he was a lover of mankind - not of any particular class or color, but of all men...he fully, really and actively believed in the equality and brotherhood of man. ...He is the only American citizen who has lived fully up to the Declaration of Independence." Yet this man who was so dedicated to racial justice was able to direct the cold blooded murders of five pro-slavery men in Kansas who he had ripped from their families in the middle of the night and hacked to death with broadswords without any qualms or regrets. He chillingly stated that "it is better that a whole generation of men, women, and children should be swept away than that this crime of slavery should exist one day longer." Brown's life presents an open question on what if any limits should stand in the way of those attempting to right great societal wrongs and bring about justice. David Reynolds biography may not fully answer that question, but it goes a long way toward putting it into a proper perspective.
Reynolds' biography of Brown is both detailed and fascinating, and is sympathetic without attempting to hide the dark and troubling aspects of Brown's actions. He delves deeply into Brown's Puritan heritage and just what that meant to his life and actions. He makes clear what a unique individual Brown was. While most of the famous abolitionist who were his contemporaries never questioned the basic racism of their time despite their opposition to slavery, Brown believed firmly in racial equality. Black men and women dined with his family, and he worked intimately with them, giving them real positions of authority in the endeavors that he organized - actions unique for his time. Reynolds also explores the fact that Brown was in favor of equal rights for women and humane treatment of American Indians. He notes that while he was a fervently committed Calvinist Christian, he worked closely with others who did not share his faith, including Jews and agnostics. He shows us a man who was not a typical fanatic, but a man who believed fanatically in one basic principle - the literal interpretation of the Declaration of Independence and the Golden Rule. Reynolds also puts Brown's most troubling violence, the murders at Pottawatomie, Kansas, back into the historical context in which they happened. He writes, "Pottawatomie, gruesome and vile as it was, was John Brown's impulsive response to equally vile crimes committed by the proslavery side."
Beyond all of this, Reynolds explores in some depth the importance that the Transcendentalists had in securing John Brown's place in American history. He points out that had not Thoreau and afterwards Emerson come to Brown's public defense, Brown very well could have been forgotten by history - viewed as just one more aberrant crank with misguided and wild schemes. He spends more than one hundred pages exploring the effect Browns actions, capture, and death had on both his contemporaries and on posterity, showing the immediate impact Brown's life and death had on the country in helping to spark the Civil War, and the way it impacted future generations who have both lauded and reviled him.
John Brown's life is a testimony to one man's uncompromising commitment to his ideals, and to the ethical morass that can result from an unrelenting pursuit of those ideals. It makes us question how far one can justifiably go in an attempt to right societal wrongs, and if violence can ever be considered a righteous answer to entrenched evil. Reynolds' book may not answer all of these questions, but it most effectively poses them for our consideration. It is an outstanding biography of a crucially important figure in American history. I highly recommend it, both to those interested in American history, and for anyone who wishes to examine a practical study of the consequence of principled violent action against authority.
Theo Logos
Reynolds' biography of Brown is both detailed and fascinating, and is sympathetic without attempting to hide the dark and troubling aspects of Brown's actions. He delves deeply into Brown's Puritan heritage and just what that meant to his life and actions. He makes clear what a unique individual Brown was. While most of the famous abolitionist who were his contemporaries never questioned the basic racism of their time despite their opposition to slavery, Brown believed firmly in racial equality. Black men and women dined with his family, and he worked intimately with them, giving them real positions of authority in the endeavors that he organized - actions unique for his time. Reynolds also explores the fact that Brown was in favor of equal rights for women and humane treatment of American Indians. He notes that while he was a fervently committed Calvinist Christian, he worked closely with others who did not share his faith, including Jews and agnostics. He shows us a man who was not a typical fanatic, but a man who believed fanatically in one basic principle - the literal interpretation of the Declaration of Independence and the Golden Rule. Reynolds also puts Brown's most troubling violence, the murders at Pottawatomie, Kansas, back into the historical context in which they happened. He writes, "Pottawatomie, gruesome and vile as it was, was John Brown's impulsive response to equally vile crimes committed by the proslavery side."
Beyond all of this, Reynolds explores in some depth the importance that the Transcendentalists had in securing John Brown's place in American history. He points out that had not Thoreau and afterwards Emerson come to Brown's public defense, Brown very well could have been forgotten by history - viewed as just one more aberrant crank with misguided and wild schemes. He spends more than one hundred pages exploring the effect Browns actions, capture, and death had on both his contemporaries and on posterity, showing the immediate impact Brown's life and death had on the country in helping to spark the Civil War, and the way it impacted future generations who have both lauded and reviled him.
John Brown's life is a testimony to one man's uncompromising commitment to his ideals, and to the ethical morass that can result from an unrelenting pursuit of those ideals. It makes us question how far one can justifiably go in an attempt to right societal wrongs, and if violence can ever be considered a righteous answer to entrenched evil. Reynolds' book may not answer all of these questions, but it most effectively poses them for our consideration. It is an outstanding biography of a crucially important figure in American history. I highly recommend it, both to those interested in American history, and for anyone who wishes to examine a practical study of the consequence of principled violent action against authority.
Theo Logos
53 of 63 people found the following review helpful
Format:Hardcover
When I was a child the name of John Brown was a grotesquerie. We sang about his body a moulderin' in the grave, but it was generally understood that he was some kind of crazy man who killed some people over slavery, had something to do with the Civil War, and we just shouldn't talk about it. And I am from Michigan rather than the South so this avoidance wasn't based on region.
In the sixties I was about as removed in time from the Civil War as today's young people are from the First World War. That is, the people who were alive during the war were all but past and the children born to those who had lived through the war were now old. Still, some of the received knowledge of the war came from tradition of those who had life experience rather than from books and scholarship. However, with the Great War in our Grandparent's lives, the Second World War in our parent's lives and the echoes of Korea all around us and Vietnam getting under its bloody way, the Civil War just seemed too long ago to worry about in real life.
I took extra time with this book because I wanted to wrestle with the idea of when a cause is important enough to justify personally initiated violence. In our present state of affairs, it is hard to conceive a wrong so great that righting it would involve action outside the political and judicial processes. At bottom, no matter how certain of the rightness and goodness of our cause, there is still some possibility that there is more to the issue than we understand and that those whom we would kill or murder might actually, in the cosmic view of things, not merit the death we would inflict on them. We have doubts enough with the state rendering a judgment of death, how much more would we doubt the rightness of a private judgment that concluded in the death of a human being.
The author, David Reynolds, does a solid job in telling the story of John Brown. We see Brown as a human being within his time. We see his faith in God, his Puritan sense of destiny, and his fury at the injustice of slavery. As we follow him through his life we understand why he acted as he did and the enslavement and misery of four million souls makes his actions in Kansas and at Harpers Ferry make some sort of awful sense. The last two chapters make clear that this author agrees with W.E.B. DuBois that "Brown was right". Reynolds does take on the modern terrorism of the left and the right. He takes on abortion, the environment, the Islamofacists, and more. He argues that Brown was different and exceptional. He notes the power Brown's words and how his cause was taken on by so many leading into, during, and after the Civil War.
Yet, in my own mind, if I grant that Brown is an exception I have to ask what was he exceptional with? And I note it was his eloquence in words. I still cannot help but disqualify his violence as just. His cause in freeing the slaves was certainly just, but if we allow his violence under what premise do we make that allowance? Abortion has taken millions of lives, environmentalism claims they are saving the whole planet, animal rights claims they are sparing billions of animals, and on and on the fever goes until it reaches into insanity. Whose conscience do we grant the privileged position of spilling everyone's blood?
There is also a difference between the events in Kansas where the anti-slavery people were the victims of pro-slavery aggressors. Many of these murders were committed by Missourians and other non-Kansans to impose their agenda of Salvery Everywhere. While the Kansas events cannot be called self-defense per se, they were at least direct retaliation with self-preservation in mind. Harpers Ferry was an aggressive act by Brown as a complete outsider with the view of starting a national slave rebellion.
Brown had the passion, conscience, and eloquence that he could have used to make a powerful case against slavery as he did after his trial. He would have had, I believe, an even greater impact against slavery with his preaching than with his sword. Remember, every other country in the world abandoned slavery without the violence of our Civil War. And even if we grant that the War freed the slaves in 1865 while a nonviolent approach would have taken decades longer, we also have to admit it was another century of work and too often bloodshed before the descendants of those slaves got close to the civil rights promised them. And don't forget that the man who did the most to move society to accepting those rights was Martin Luther King, Jr. who preached nonviolence. Thurgood Marshall won Brown v. Board of Education with his mind and a briefcase rather than a gun.
Yes, there is more to do. Certainly, there is cruelty and injustice almost more than we can bear in the world. But bear it we must as we work towards a better world. Our methods in that work do matter and we must not become deluded that our personal sense of righteousness actually grants us a special position from which we can deal injustice in the name of a higher cause.
This is a thoughtful book and deserves to be read. You will gain a lot from it and wrestling with these awful events will help you clarify what exactly it is you do believe.
In the sixties I was about as removed in time from the Civil War as today's young people are from the First World War. That is, the people who were alive during the war were all but past and the children born to those who had lived through the war were now old. Still, some of the received knowledge of the war came from tradition of those who had life experience rather than from books and scholarship. However, with the Great War in our Grandparent's lives, the Second World War in our parent's lives and the echoes of Korea all around us and Vietnam getting under its bloody way, the Civil War just seemed too long ago to worry about in real life.
I took extra time with this book because I wanted to wrestle with the idea of when a cause is important enough to justify personally initiated violence. In our present state of affairs, it is hard to conceive a wrong so great that righting it would involve action outside the political and judicial processes. At bottom, no matter how certain of the rightness and goodness of our cause, there is still some possibility that there is more to the issue than we understand and that those whom we would kill or murder might actually, in the cosmic view of things, not merit the death we would inflict on them. We have doubts enough with the state rendering a judgment of death, how much more would we doubt the rightness of a private judgment that concluded in the death of a human being.
The author, David Reynolds, does a solid job in telling the story of John Brown. We see Brown as a human being within his time. We see his faith in God, his Puritan sense of destiny, and his fury at the injustice of slavery. As we follow him through his life we understand why he acted as he did and the enslavement and misery of four million souls makes his actions in Kansas and at Harpers Ferry make some sort of awful sense. The last two chapters make clear that this author agrees with W.E.B. DuBois that "Brown was right". Reynolds does take on the modern terrorism of the left and the right. He takes on abortion, the environment, the Islamofacists, and more. He argues that Brown was different and exceptional. He notes the power Brown's words and how his cause was taken on by so many leading into, during, and after the Civil War.
Yet, in my own mind, if I grant that Brown is an exception I have to ask what was he exceptional with? And I note it was his eloquence in words. I still cannot help but disqualify his violence as just. His cause in freeing the slaves was certainly just, but if we allow his violence under what premise do we make that allowance? Abortion has taken millions of lives, environmentalism claims they are saving the whole planet, animal rights claims they are sparing billions of animals, and on and on the fever goes until it reaches into insanity. Whose conscience do we grant the privileged position of spilling everyone's blood?
There is also a difference between the events in Kansas where the anti-slavery people were the victims of pro-slavery aggressors. Many of these murders were committed by Missourians and other non-Kansans to impose their agenda of Salvery Everywhere. While the Kansas events cannot be called self-defense per se, they were at least direct retaliation with self-preservation in mind. Harpers Ferry was an aggressive act by Brown as a complete outsider with the view of starting a national slave rebellion.
Brown had the passion, conscience, and eloquence that he could have used to make a powerful case against slavery as he did after his trial. He would have had, I believe, an even greater impact against slavery with his preaching than with his sword. Remember, every other country in the world abandoned slavery without the violence of our Civil War. And even if we grant that the War freed the slaves in 1865 while a nonviolent approach would have taken decades longer, we also have to admit it was another century of work and too often bloodshed before the descendants of those slaves got close to the civil rights promised them. And don't forget that the man who did the most to move society to accepting those rights was Martin Luther King, Jr. who preached nonviolence. Thurgood Marshall won Brown v. Board of Education with his mind and a briefcase rather than a gun.
Yes, there is more to do. Certainly, there is cruelty and injustice almost more than we can bear in the world. But bear it we must as we work towards a better world. Our methods in that work do matter and we must not become deluded that our personal sense of righteousness actually grants us a special position from which we can deal injustice in the name of a higher cause.
This is a thoughtful book and deserves to be read. You will gain a lot from it and wrestling with these awful events will help you clarify what exactly it is you do believe.
13 of 14 people found the following review helpful
By KAG
Format:Hardcover
In his book, David S. Reynolds addresses the historical problem of why John Brown had an impact on the course of national events in America even well after his death. Reynolds weaves an intricate analysis of his historical problem by incorporating cultural, social, political and economic history of antebellum America. Reynolds makes a strong case for his argument, and instructs the reader how the social and cultural climate of antebellum America offered the prime conditions under which Brown became infamous.
Reynolds' work is set apart from his contemporaries in that he presents a positive portrait of Brown in contrast to other scholarship that tends to depict Brown as an insane madman who briefly stepped into history but did little to influence it. Reynolds' positive representation of Brown may seem contradictory considering his position that Brown was a terrorist. However, as Reynolds states, Brown was not a terrorist by the same definition that we use today. Reynolds defines terrorism as "violence that avoids combat, is used against the defenseless (often civilians), and is intended to shock and horrify, with the aim of bringing about social change." Brown committed what Reynolds classifies as "good terrorism" by carefully selecting his victims (pro-slavery white males) which sets Brown apart from modern day terrorists whose violent activity is intended to kill anyone. Reynolds' interpretation of Brown is presented in such a way that the ends justify the means; and while Brown's tactics were horrific and brutal, it was for the common good of society and to uphold divine law.
Reynolds offers a very in depth analysis of the life and events surrounding John Brown. He offers detailed accounts of how the lives of well-known antebellum figures such as William Lloyd Garrison, Frederick Douglass, and Ralph Waldo Emerson intersected with John Brown. However, I found this book to be challenging in places because Reynolds often digresses on other characters and events of the antebellum period. While informative and interesting, the digressions were a little overwhelming to the overall story of John Brown. What I appreciated most about Reynolds' book was that it made me question how far one can justifiably go in an attempt to right societal wrongs, and if violence can ever be considered a righteous solution to correct those wrongs. To take it one step further, can the use of violence be justifiable in upholding the Constitution. When one considers this question, it is easier to identify with Reynolds' portrayal of John Brown.
Reynolds' work is set apart from his contemporaries in that he presents a positive portrait of Brown in contrast to other scholarship that tends to depict Brown as an insane madman who briefly stepped into history but did little to influence it. Reynolds' positive representation of Brown may seem contradictory considering his position that Brown was a terrorist. However, as Reynolds states, Brown was not a terrorist by the same definition that we use today. Reynolds defines terrorism as "violence that avoids combat, is used against the defenseless (often civilians), and is intended to shock and horrify, with the aim of bringing about social change." Brown committed what Reynolds classifies as "good terrorism" by carefully selecting his victims (pro-slavery white males) which sets Brown apart from modern day terrorists whose violent activity is intended to kill anyone. Reynolds' interpretation of Brown is presented in such a way that the ends justify the means; and while Brown's tactics were horrific and brutal, it was for the common good of society and to uphold divine law.
Reynolds offers a very in depth analysis of the life and events surrounding John Brown. He offers detailed accounts of how the lives of well-known antebellum figures such as William Lloyd Garrison, Frederick Douglass, and Ralph Waldo Emerson intersected with John Brown. However, I found this book to be challenging in places because Reynolds often digresses on other characters and events of the antebellum period. While informative and interesting, the digressions were a little overwhelming to the overall story of John Brown. What I appreciated most about Reynolds' book was that it made me question how far one can justifiably go in an attempt to right societal wrongs, and if violence can ever be considered a righteous solution to correct those wrongs. To take it one step further, can the use of violence be justifiable in upholding the Constitution. When one considers this question, it is easier to identify with Reynolds' portrayal of John Brown.
Most Recent Customer Reviews
3.0 out of 5 stars
needed an editor
I actually picked up this book at the Salvation Army. I am no expert on John Brown (which is why I bought the book) so I cannot comment on the accuracy of the text. Read more
Published 3 months ago by Emilio D. Gironda Jr.
3.0 out of 5 stars
OMG It's So PC!
Ridiculous, in short. I loved Reynolds' "Walt Whitman's America" and looked forward to his views on Brown. I'd read Tony Horwitz' slim volume and thought it shallow. Read more
Published 4 months ago by Sylvia Weiser Wendel
4.0 out of 5 stars
Insightful
The book certainly broadened my understanding of the abolitionist movement and Brown's pivotal role as a role model for the Union's prosecution of the war, and the... Read more
Published 6 months ago by Charles Bihun
5.0 out of 5 stars
An Evil Path, Well Intentioned
David S. Reynolds' biography of "John Brown, Abolitionist," is also an encyclopedia of American History and Culture in the first half of the nineteenth century, a time that... Read more
Published 9 months ago by Jim Duggins, Ph.D.
5.0 out of 5 stars
John Brown, Abolitionist
If you are interested in the Civil War (or any 'just' war) and beg to go deeper than battle highlights and Lincoln/Grant/Lee in high school, then this may be your book. Read more
Published 12 months ago by Abe Landau
5.0 out of 5 stars
john brown, aolitionist
"instead of hunting for a solution, the politicians had worked for a crisis. this they would presently get, and when they got it they would find it a catastrophe. Read more
Published 13 months ago by George Skinner
5.0 out of 5 stars
An essential de-mythologization of John Brown
With the recent release of Tony Horwitz's Midnight Rising: John Brown and the Raid That Sparked the Civil War my thoughts immediately turned back to this book as both Horwitz and... Read more
Published 18 months ago by Todd Bartholomew
5.0 out of 5 stars
Free State Forever
As a Mayflower Society Kansan whose mother grew up in the Southeastern corner of Kansas near the Missouri border, as a Calvinist Christian, and as a student of the Civil War, this... Read more
Published 22 months ago by James D. Parker
3.0 out of 5 stars
an over-praised book
This is a book that is marked by exhaustive research and repetitive and fairly obtuse interpretation. Read more
Published 23 months ago by Arnold Krupat
5.0 out of 5 stars
True History
A truly great book. If you want to learn beyond the dolled up and sugar coated "history" they teach us in highschools and universities. Read more
Published on May 12, 2011 by John Brown
