Customer Reviews

Young Patriots: The Remarkable Story of Two Men, Their Impossible Plan and the Revolution That Created the Constitution

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

 

 

With the recent spate of published books on the era of the American Revolution (see "1776" for starters), Mr. Cerami fills a void in his tale of the creation and the subsequent ratification of the US Constitution in 1787-1788. "Young Patriots" tells the story of what kind of nation should the United States be -- a loose collection of sovereign states or a strong sovereign nation with centralized powers.

Most Americans are unaware of the little-known political brawl over the ratification process that nearly failed to pass the Constitution -- i.e. New York approved it by a nail-biting vote of 30-27 while Virginia had a narrow 89-79 margin. Alexander Hamilton of New York and James Madison of Virginia were the winning "floor managers" for the Federalists of their respective states.

"Young Patriots" is a readable, lively account of the birth of American politics. Mr. Cerami wrote a political sequel of sorts with "Jefferson's Great Gamble" (2003), his rendition of the Louisiana Purchase. Other tales of this fascinating era includes Catherine Drinker Bowen's "Miracle At Philadelphia" (1966), another perspective on the Constitutional Convention, and Joel Achenbach's "The Grand Idea" (2004), the story of the deals made for the founding of our nation's capital.

Alexander Hamilton and James Madison truly formed a great combination as they helped to develop the constitution. The book follows the paths of two prodigies from vastly different backgrounds and describes how they were able to become the two primary sources for the development and eventual passage of the greatest document to govern the activities of government.

Rather than try to compose two biographies within one book, Charles Cerami lightly touches upon the personal lives of Hamilton and Madison, yet provides sufficient information for the reader to understand the formative years of the two brilliant political theorists. The majority of the material then passes onto the Constitutional Convention and the other founders who were influential in the composition of the governmental framework.

Cerami's work concludes with the difficulty the founders faced in persuading Anti-Federalists and a skeptical public that the complete reconstruction of the government was a significant necessity. This is where we find Hamilton and Madison at their finest. The exceptional pair collaborated to produce one of the greatest works of political theory in what became known as The Federalist Papers, in order to encourage passage of the constitution. Unfortunately, once they witnessed the approval of this famous document and assumed leading roles in the new government, differences began to surface between the two which led to political opposition.

Cerami was successful in exposing these differences, yet maintaining a positive theme throughout the book. His admiration for both gentlemen and his pride in their accomplishments are evident through his writing. He avoided the personality flaws of each man that have already been sufficiently written about and refused to dwell upon their personal lives. It was refreshing to read about Hamilton without being subjected to the incident that many people associate him with-the duel with Aaron Burr. Additionally, it was good to see that Madison truly was his own man, rather than some sycophant to Thomas Jefferson as some authors have categorized him.

The reader is provided a unique view of the events surrounding that famous period in American history. You will walk away with a greater appreciation of the talents of Hamilton and Madison and realize how instrumental they were to promoting the idea of a constitutional convention, producing the ideas behind the constitution, and ensuring its passage during the comfirmation process.

Overall, I enjoyed reading the book (please keep this in mind as you read what I am about to say), but I often found myself questioning if some of the information Cerami includes is necessary given the subject of the book. For example, in the chapter entitled "Jefferson Reacts," he spend most of the chapter talking about what Jefferson was writing about during his time in Paris, and only at the end shares Jefferson's reaction to the proposed Constitution. In dealing with Washington, he talks a great deal about his love of farming and his relationship with the Society of the Cincinnati, which while important for background and mindset is way overdone at the expense of more pertinent information.

Yet, while there is excess in those areas, information on other people and subjects are lacking. While the title and cover implies a major role for Hamilton that is not the case for significant periods in the book. I yearned for more pertinent info on Washington and other supposedly key figures such as Franklin and Read. I felt areas like the later stages of the convention, the actual signing, the mindset of general population, were rushed and only touched the surface.

If you delete the unnecessary content, I felt this 320 page book (paperback) could easily be cut of 75 to 100 pages. Yet, if some of the giant historical figures in the book, key supporting characters, and aforementioned breezed over areas where discussed more in-depth and in a focused manner, the book could easily double in size. In short, I learned a lot and enjoyed the book, but would have liked more focus.

I noticed that other reviewers are very critical of the book, claiming it to be inaccurate. It would be better if the reviewers could point out where their information comes from, and from what authority they speak. I am in the midst of reading the book and am thoroughly enjoying it. I am new to reading about history and was hoping my foray into this area would be this fun! The author's style is engaging and I am flying through the book, anxious to read what is on the next page. I feel like I am really getting to know both Madison and Hamilton, and to better understand how conflicted the 13 colonies were over becoming a union. My interest in this area has truly been piqued and I am certain I'll be reading more history books, thanks to the "good read" provided here.

When we think of the Founding Fathers, we think of wealthy older gentlemen such as Washington and Franklin. And rightly so -- the Revolution would never have succeeded without the active support of the American establishment.

But Cerami's book approaches the Founding from a fascinating new perspective -- the brashness of two brilliant young men, Madison and Hamilton. They were both in their 30s, and brought a fresh and aggressive approach to America's difficulties after the war. The Articles of Confederation were fundamentally flawed; a completely new government was required. Hamilton and Madison saw this with crystal clarity. They were anxious to move the process forward, as quickly as possible.

Cerami focuses on this providential nexus between national need and youthful genius. Had Madison and Hamilton been in their 50s, there would have been no new Constitution. The Convention would have simply amended the Articles. The states would have continued in their autonomy and weakness. And the American experiment would likely have failed.

As an avid student of the Founding and a huge James Madison fan, I naturally picked up this workmanlike study. It was pretty disappointing. The focus on Hamilton and Madison was pretty much absent until the chapters on ratification. There was a wealth of attention paid to George Washington, the Pinckneys, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman, and others, but the majority of the book was focused elsewhere, when the cover and subtitle promised Hamilton and Madison front and center.

When the author did get around to delivering what was promised, the focus on Madison was laudatory and almost hagiographic, and Hamilton, despite receiving deserved credit for designing the country's financial system, came off as little more than an also-ran.

The author also appeared to have a lot of information and anecdotes at the ready that he should have discarded but included, perhaps to justify the time spent researching? The discussion of Jefferson's time in Paris and his interests there was interestingly presented, if well known, but didn't add much to the flow of the book's purpose. Likewise, Washington (who is treated as a near-deity) received far more attention for his farming acumen than a work of political history would justify.

Catherine Drinker Bowen's "Miracle at Philadelphia" set an impressively high standard for histories of the Constitutional Convention, and Carol Berkin's "A Brilliant Solution" achieved the near impossible, that of a succinct book bringing an all-too-familiar story to fresh vibrancy. For the basics, Charles Cerami does a serviceable job, but there are better studies aplenty. Chernow's biography of Hamilton is one of the best newer titles to address the Convention and its attendees. That and a good biography of Madison will better serve the interests of readers with more than a passing interest in the founding.

This book would best be read with some skepticism.

Mr. Cerami makes some assumptions and statements that are not validated or justified. One example is his statement that Alexander Hamilton, "(apparently to guard against an accusation of monarchism)"..."did not favor a permanent president, but suggested an executive who would rule for no more than three years."

This is exactly the opposite of what Hamilton proposed. He favored an executive to serve for "good behavior," which meant for life, unless removed from office. The author says one thing, when reality was the opposite. I found this most frequently happened regarding Hamilton, leading me to believe the author wanted to put across a certain perspective about the man.

There are other places in which a blanket statement is made that isn't necessarily true, or at least subject to question. This account of the Convention relies on speculation and inferences. Some assertions are made based on what the author perceived the speaker's tone of voice and inflection were. How could this approach be more accurate than simply believing what the actual words were?

This is an ok book, but the reader can't assume it is completely accurate and should not solely rely on it as a source of information on the Convention.

Bob Byrne

A great opportunity lost, to take a crucial moment in our history and show the contribution of two intellectual giants with very different philosophical positions. It would have been interesting to show the different perspectives and insights they both brought to the process. Instead, this book is really about Madison with grudging reference to any contribution by Hamilton. The title and jacket cover are highly deceptive and dishonest, why not title the book "Young Patriot" and truly reflect the author's beliefs.

In addition to the shortcomings pointed out in other reviews, I am disturbed by Mr. Cerami's use of 21st century values and perspectives to describe the motivations of 18th century people. For example, Mr Cerami describes Patrick Henry as a "religious zealot" for favoring the establishment of an official church in Virginia. Yet Henry's views were not particularly zealous for his time. Many in 18th century America favored established churches. Mr. Cerami also describes Patrick Henry as having become "ultraconservative" because he opposed the establishment of a strong federal government. In fact, Henry's views did not change over the years. He started out opposing a strong central government in England and ended up opposing a strong central government in Philadelphia or New York.

Mr.Cerami also describes New York Governor George Clinton's opposition to a strong federal government as solely based on Clinton's desire to maintain his position as governor of a major state. Yet Mr. Cerami immediately goes on to suggest that it was reasonable for Governor Clinton to believe that New York could prosper on its own without a federal government.

Mr. Cerami also makes inaccurate statements. For example, in discussing Article I, Section 7, clause 1, of the Constitution, which states that "all bills for raising revenue shall orginate in the House of Represenatives," Mr. Cerami mistakenly asserts that this provision requires appropriations bills to also originate in the House. He uses as an example the Louisiana Purchase, and states that the bill to provide $15 million to pay France "had to originate in the House of Representatives." An appropriation bill is not a bill "for raising revenue" and therefore does not have to originate in the House.

Further, in speaking of the Judicial Branch of the federal government, Mr. Cerami states that "[t]he almost supreme power of the judiciary branch" was one of the features of the Constitution that was most admired by foreign observers. However, there is nothing in Article III of the Constitution that even suggests that the judiciary is the "supreme" branch. Nor does the Constitution grant to the judiciary the power to determine the constitutionality of laws enacted by the Congress. Only later did the courts attain the powers they have now.

I felt like I was along side for the ride. You won't want to put it down, neither did my Friend whom I lent it to. It's fascinating, awe inspiriing, engaging etc. I undoubtedly recommend this book. I'm actually going to read it again!!!!