![]({"https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51tWneARwwL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg":[225,346],"https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51tWneARwwL._SX322_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg":[324,499]})
I've only read to page 63 but I'm ready to put the book down. I have kept reading up until now because I've been waiting for it to get better. I want it to get better. I want Ellis to be done with putting George Washington down and looking at him through such a negative lens. I want him to prove that he really believes what he states on pg. 39: "Though he was still developing...the outline of Washington's mature personality was already assuming a discernible shape." I know some biographers either over-appreciate their subjects and others under-appreciate them. This author definitely is under appreciating his. After more than 20 pages I've seen no sign of Ellis viewing Washington's weaknesses and mistakes as indicators of a learning and growing process. Instead he seems to be openly judging him from a fixed mindset. By page 63, the picture of George Washington that is emerging from Ellis's pen is a selfish, two-faced, conniving man. He's shown as a fanatic who sees conspiracy where there is none. He weaves a plot that convicts Washington of developing into a conspirator. The author's word choices and assumptions of Washington's motivation seem to be revealing the author's own motives and character, rather than Washington's. Repeatedly, he draws unsupported conclusions about Washington's motivation. If I hadn't read another biography by William Roscoe Thayler, before this one, I would be of the opinion after reading Ellis's book that George Washington was a bad guy.
Examples of this author's wording and conclusions:
"In addition to his familiar themes--petitions were worse than worthless, abstract arguments must be accompanied by economic pressures--now he detected a full-blooded conspiracy against American liberty." pg. 62 Is conspiracy (a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful) not a good understanding of the entire relationship between America and Great Britain during this time period? There were secret plots on both sides because both had different goals and motives regarding the future of America. Why does Ellis mock Washington for seeing this conspiracy as if he were a fanatic?
"(A Lukewarm Episcopalian, he never took Communion, tended to talk about 'Providence' or 'Destiny' rather than God, and--was this a statement?--preferred to stand rather than kneel when praying.)" pg 45 "was this a statement?" This is the author's insertion. Why lead the reader by the nose with the author's personal biases and conclusions?
"...but nothing he ever did had a greater influence on the shape of his own life than the decision to marry Martha Dandridge Custis." pg 40 I was expecting to hear how her faith and goodness helped him develop his own. But the author proceeds to talk about all of her money.
Ellis speaks of rumors about Washington's fidelity to his wife and then says they were never verified. pg 44 But in my opinion, even speaking about unfounded rumors and gossip is totally disrespectful to anyone, let alone to someone whom we Americans owe so much.
"For the rest of his life, all arguments based on the principle of mutual trust devoid of mutual interest struck him as sentimental nonsense." pg. 39 I totally disagree. Looking at his life as a whole, he sacrificed much more for his country than he ever received from them or from us, who are his beneficiaries, who enjoy the resultant freedom and order of this country.
"Two features of the emerging Washington personality come into focus here: first, a thin-skinned aversion to criticism, especially when the criticism questioned his personal motive, which he insisted were beyond reproach; second, a capacity to play politics effectively while claiming total disinterest in the game." pg. 29 "which he insisted" and "while claiming" Insinuating that Washington was deliberately dishonest and two-faced. Could Ellis not say instead, "It is evident that Washington was still struggling with his ability to take criticism. In all of his actions he strove to do what he believed and understood at that time to be right but he still was learning and growing. His efforts to make a difference in the political arena were motivated by a sincere belief that he knew what was best. As a Virginian land owner, he empathized with others land owners like him and in so doing learned over time to see his own needs and conflicts as similar to others'."
"Finally, this is the kind of man who will regard any failure to meet his exacting standards as a personal affront and persistent failure as evidence of a conspiracy to deprive him of what is rightfully his. Pity the London merchant who has to deal with him." pg. 47
"But while most outspoken opponents of the Stamp Act, those whom Washington called 'the Speculative part,' emphasized the constitutional argument, his response more directly reflected his personal experience with Cary & Company." pg 52 AND "Once again there was a personal edge to that conviction." pg. 58 These and other similar statements attribute Washington's motives for revolution as purely mercenary. Ellis doesn't choose to write with empathy: making a living and building security for posterity was and still is a large part of the American dream.
"HIs singular triumph, in fact the result of multiple efforts over thirteen years of complex negotiations, was largely a product of his status as a veteran of the French and Indian War." pg. 56 This is just one of many instances where Ellis attributes the cause of a result for us. He says Washington's singular triumph was largely a product of his status.
"Washington was relentless in pressing his claims..." pg 56 Ellis chooses the word "relentless" which, combined with the portrait he continues to paint of this man, makes us believe that he was not only selfish, but relentlessly and heartlessly selfish. Where is the growth mindset he promised us on page 39? It is only to be found in one or two sentences but the rest is negative, critical, and disrespectful. I don't recommend this book.
I know people aren't perfect, especially those we revere. In fact I love them all the more when I see they weren't and then learn from their mistakes. I have no problem seeing weaknesses and mistakes in George Washington but this author is choosing not only to focus in with a high power microscope on all them but to attribute a bunch more that are based on his personal speculation. He does not allow the reader to make those attributions and assessments herself. He leads her by the nose to see things in the negative light that he sees them. He presents evidence with a slanted, biased view that prevents us from seeing the true character of George Washington.
- Paperback: 352 pages
- Publisher: Vintage; Reprint edition (November 8, 2005)
- Language: English
- ISBN-10: 9781400032532
- ISBN-13: 978-1400032532
- ASIN: 1400032539
- Product Dimensions: 5.2 x 0.7 x 8 inches
- Shipping Weight: 12 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
- Customer Reviews: 510 customer reviews
- Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #49,416 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
Would you like to tell us about a lower price?
If you are a seller for this product, would you like to suggest updates through seller support?
If you are a seller for this product, would you like to suggest updates through seller support?
