I finished my 4th book in the From the Stacks challenge: Young Patriots: The Remarkable Story of Two Men, Their Impossible Plan and the Revolution That Created the Constitution
I guess I would say that if you want to know about that convention, then you really can’t do any better than Miracle At Philadelphia: The Story of the Constitutional Convention May – September 1787
Nothing new here. I did appreciate the entire chapter on Rhode Island’s role (or lack thereof) in the 1787 convention – and what was going on there – this is all well-trodden ground for me, naturally, it’s my home state – so it was kind of nice to read an in-depth explanation of the situation in RI at that time.
But still. I’d say: Best book about that convention is Miracle at Philadelphia. That’s the one. Detailed descriptions of Hamilton’s personal journey with all of it … you can get in biographies, and it will be a much more satisfying read than Young Patriots.
I think, as a whole, what I got from this book is that the whole Revolutionary War topic is so hot right now – books are sellin’ like hot cakes, I tell ya – the American President series, new books come out almost every week now! – and you need to have a “gimmick” if you want your book to stand out.
The History of Dental Surgery at the time of the American Revolution.
Dolley Madison: Muse or Metaphor? Gender Roles in Colonial America
John Adams: A Farmer’s Perspective.
Luther Martin: Unsung Hero of 1787
May 14 – May 17, 1782: 4 Days That Changed Human History
Books focus on one battle. Or one year. They hone in on a specific aspect rather than do an overview.
A flat out history of the convention won’t do now, because it’s already been done. And better. So you have to say that by focusing on Madison and Hamilton you will be giving the reader something they can’t get elsewhere.
Not so.
Still. I enjoyed it because I would enjoy reading anything about that convention – there’s always a nugget or two that I have not yet encountered, and that’s always fun.
Maybe this is the new trend – like the old joke about adding “in bed” to the end of every sentence. Just add “the American Revolution” to the end of every title and it’s a best-seller!
“The Secret Life of Bees – in the American Revolution”
“Little Orphan Annie – in the American Revolution”
“The Complete Sports Encyclopedia – of the American Revolution”
“Rudolph’s Shiny New Year – in the American Revolution” (actually, that DID happen in Rudolph’s Shiny New Year, didn’t it?)
heh heh
I guess it would be like choosing to do your dissertation on James Joyce. Or TS Eliot. or Shakespeare. The field is so CLOGGED already … you need a ‘way in’, you need to try to break new ground – which leads to some of the more ridiculous thesis paper titles on the planet. (Silk worms, Stock market bubbles, and ethno-societal-psychosexual-cultural issues in Shakespeare’s ‘Midsummer Night’s Dream’ – you know. Worthless – except to the person who wrote it).
Sometimes the books that zero in on one or two aspects of a much larger work are fascinating, and very worthwhile to read. You know, zeroing in on Shakespeare’s attitude towards religion, for example, or monarchy, or women … It’s all part of the larger scope, and a lot of times, throughout history, the male point of view has been seen as the DEFAULT point of view – which is sad, because – there’s so much else going on, so much else to be discussed … There IS no default. Women’s points of view have been ignored or … just not even considered to be important … for centuries, I mean, forever – so I’m always interested in a writer who, without a huge chip on his/her shoulder – can look at these issues and write about them. Make me see things in a new way.
For example, Camille Paglia’s essay on Rosalind in “As You Like It” was one of the most insightful vigorous pieces I’ve ever read on Shakespeare – I love that play so I was eager to read Paglia’s thoughts on it and to go into it from Paglia’s admittedly off-center perspective, as a lesbian, a feminist, a libertarian, an open sexpot, a foe of prudes everywhere – all that stuff … and she had no chip on her shoulder about it … she’s not a man-hater, none of that – She’s my kindred spirit in many ways. Her essay made me see Rosalind anew. It actually seemed to break new ground … and that’s so rare!
I’m kinda that way with early American history as well, I guess.
Sometimes when a book hones in on a specific moment, or year – it really works. Like 1776 works, in my opinion. It reads like a really good story – with awesome characters, struggles, triumphs … It’s good. But then I read a book called 1812 and it sucked. I even resented the time I wasted reading that dern thing. You might as well just read a larger history of the time, or of James Madison’s presidency, or whatever – because the book that tried to zero in on a month to month breakdown of what happened in 1812 was just not BIG enough, not good enough.