BLACKNISSANZ
Presidential Biography Reviews
CURRENTLY READING: President James Buchanan: A Biography (1962) by Phillip Klein
14. Franklin Pierce (2010) by Michael Holt
I had no idea what to expect going in here, as Franklin Pierce is another unknown. That said, I enjoyed this read. It follows the same format and pacing of the last three American Presidents books I have reviewed, and it works where those work and falters where those do, for the most part. This is again a very short book, at only 133 pages, making it a very quick read. I have read each of these in a day, or a day and a half depending on how busy I am.
There is one issue that I will point out, and that is there is one blatant inaccuracy that I found, and not that there always is fire with smoke, but, it does discredit you when it is something so easy to fact check. Holt at one point calls Pierce the youngest man ever elected to the Senate, at 32, but that is just not true, as in 1818 John Henry Eaton was elected at the age of 28, even below the minimum age requirement of 30. Perhaps this is why, but no other source on the internet confirmed Pierce as the youngest, so it did bother me.
Pierce was an interesting president, by no means the worst, but far from a good one. His pursuing of the Fugitive Slave Act, just like his predecessor, being one of his downfalls. The biggest however, was his role in the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska act, which allowed for a myriad of problems to open up, and gave way for many more slave states. This and his other actions led to the crumbling of the Whigs, and fractured the Democratic Party, but on the bright side, without his actions we may not have seen the emergence of the Republican Party, which would lead the crusade against slavery, and eventually the Confederacy under Lincoln. I would try to praise Pierce, but even his triumphs are not much to be praised, as they are too overshadowed by his administrations pushing of slavery.
When a close friend asked him years later why he chose to marry such a frail woman as his wife Jane, Pierce replied that, “I could take better care of her than anyone else” which is the sweetest thing I have heard a president say since Andrew Jackson spoke of his wife, Rachel. That -- is the greatest asset I can speak to of Franklin Pierce, is that if you took his politics aside, he seemed like a very good man, who truly suffered unbearable losses. In January 1853, Pierce’s train would crash, killing his third son, Benjamin. This was their third dead son, and none had made it past age 11. Throughout this book, Holt constantly gives Pierce credit for trying to help his friends, such as being there for Nathaniel Hawthorne when he was dying, trying to help defend Jefferson Davis, and the many quotes from others quantifying his friendly nature and amicableness.
7/10. Reviewed on 6/9/2024.
There is one issue that I will point out, and that is there is one blatant inaccuracy that I found, and not that there always is fire with smoke, but, it does discredit you when it is something so easy to fact check. Holt at one point calls Pierce the youngest man ever elected to the Senate, at 32, but that is just not true, as in 1818 John Henry Eaton was elected at the age of 28, even below the minimum age requirement of 30. Perhaps this is why, but no other source on the internet confirmed Pierce as the youngest, so it did bother me.
Pierce was an interesting president, by no means the worst, but far from a good one. His pursuing of the Fugitive Slave Act, just like his predecessor, being one of his downfalls. The biggest however, was his role in the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska act, which allowed for a myriad of problems to open up, and gave way for many more slave states. This and his other actions led to the crumbling of the Whigs, and fractured the Democratic Party, but on the bright side, without his actions we may not have seen the emergence of the Republican Party, which would lead the crusade against slavery, and eventually the Confederacy under Lincoln. I would try to praise Pierce, but even his triumphs are not much to be praised, as they are too overshadowed by his administrations pushing of slavery.
When a close friend asked him years later why he chose to marry such a frail woman as his wife Jane, Pierce replied that, “I could take better care of her than anyone else” which is the sweetest thing I have heard a president say since Andrew Jackson spoke of his wife, Rachel. That -- is the greatest asset I can speak to of Franklin Pierce, is that if you took his politics aside, he seemed like a very good man, who truly suffered unbearable losses. In January 1853, Pierce’s train would crash, killing his third son, Benjamin. This was their third dead son, and none had made it past age 11. Throughout this book, Holt constantly gives Pierce credit for trying to help his friends, such as being there for Nathaniel Hawthorne when he was dying, trying to help defend Jefferson Davis, and the many quotes from others quantifying his friendly nature and amicableness.
7/10. Reviewed on 6/9/2024.
13. Millard Fillmore (2011) by Paul Finkelman
Millard Fillmore was the man I was least looking forward to read about. John Tyler may be an unknown, but this one, this guy really is someone that nobody outside of 10 people from Buffalo New York, where he is from, may know. Paul Finkelman does a great job with this short biography, at only 137 pages, it does not waste any time. We do not spend much time on his early life, or his early political career, as it is far from impressive. We get some time on his short year as vice president, but there is little to say there. Most of the book is focused on his presidency, which the Paul is not a fan of to say the least.
I have to agree. Obviously, this is one author's perspective, but he interjects his rationale for Fillmore's decisions, and how he thought often. Even if you choose to ignore those things, as he will often refer to other sources, and then call them out for being wrong on account of protecting Fillmore's legacy, the events show the true picture. Fillmore's presidency was a sham, and the man was just as pathetic. Take away the hatred the author has for Fillmore, which I feel many many share after a read of his life, and read the events. The events are non negotiable, they show his presidency for what it was, and his attempts to keep it going during, and after as well reflect that. Had John Tyler not betrayed the Union, Millard Fillmore would take the cake for the worst president up until this point. I would like to point out a few of my favorite Millard Fillmore blunders, to illustrate the level of incompetence that the Whig Party was operating at, when they managed to nominate this man to the vice presidency. They did not learn their lesson with John Tyler at all.
His first act of foolishness, was when now dead former president Zachary Taylor’s cabinet tendered their resignations, as a formality, expecting to be kept on, out of spite from being left out of the meetings as vice president, Fillmore fired them all. He then asked them to stay on a month longer while he filled their posts, to which of course, they refused. During Fillmore's handling of the Texas boundary dispute, Fillmore would tell Congress that it was not his job to assert what the national boundaries, and that Texas should have veto power over the executive branch and Congress regarding the boundary. (Fillmore was in fear that Texas could raise an army that could rival the United States and start a civil war. More than 750 miles of desert separated Austin from Santa Fe, and Texas had few people and much debt.) The last one I will mention, is Fillmore and his administrations adamant pursing of cases for the Fugitive Slave Act, such as the cases of Shadrach Minkins, and William Parker, which were horribly botched, and if you are interested you should read about them. Fillmore despite claiming slavery was evil personally, was desperate to appease the South, and so sought to prove his love of the South by retrieving their slaves for them, at any cost. That cost could even be using United States Marines to assist slave catchers in Philadelphia.
Millard Fillmore was saved by being just a copperhead, someone sympathetic to the Confederacy, rather than an outright traitor like his predecessor, former vice president after the death of a military president who barely sat in office, John Tyler. Despite all this, I almost dislike him more, due to John Tyler still being a more decisive and effective leader. Either way, it is a bad comparison to make. I enjoyed this read, and now it is time to pursue Franklin Pierce.
8/10. Reviewed on 6/9/2024.
I have to agree. Obviously, this is one author's perspective, but he interjects his rationale for Fillmore's decisions, and how he thought often. Even if you choose to ignore those things, as he will often refer to other sources, and then call them out for being wrong on account of protecting Fillmore's legacy, the events show the true picture. Fillmore's presidency was a sham, and the man was just as pathetic. Take away the hatred the author has for Fillmore, which I feel many many share after a read of his life, and read the events. The events are non negotiable, they show his presidency for what it was, and his attempts to keep it going during, and after as well reflect that. Had John Tyler not betrayed the Union, Millard Fillmore would take the cake for the worst president up until this point. I would like to point out a few of my favorite Millard Fillmore blunders, to illustrate the level of incompetence that the Whig Party was operating at, when they managed to nominate this man to the vice presidency. They did not learn their lesson with John Tyler at all.
His first act of foolishness, was when now dead former president Zachary Taylor’s cabinet tendered their resignations, as a formality, expecting to be kept on, out of spite from being left out of the meetings as vice president, Fillmore fired them all. He then asked them to stay on a month longer while he filled their posts, to which of course, they refused. During Fillmore's handling of the Texas boundary dispute, Fillmore would tell Congress that it was not his job to assert what the national boundaries, and that Texas should have veto power over the executive branch and Congress regarding the boundary. (Fillmore was in fear that Texas could raise an army that could rival the United States and start a civil war. More than 750 miles of desert separated Austin from Santa Fe, and Texas had few people and much debt.) The last one I will mention, is Fillmore and his administrations adamant pursing of cases for the Fugitive Slave Act, such as the cases of Shadrach Minkins, and William Parker, which were horribly botched, and if you are interested you should read about them. Fillmore despite claiming slavery was evil personally, was desperate to appease the South, and so sought to prove his love of the South by retrieving their slaves for them, at any cost. That cost could even be using United States Marines to assist slave catchers in Philadelphia.
Millard Fillmore was saved by being just a copperhead, someone sympathetic to the Confederacy, rather than an outright traitor like his predecessor, former vice president after the death of a military president who barely sat in office, John Tyler. Despite all this, I almost dislike him more, due to John Tyler still being a more decisive and effective leader. Either way, it is a bad comparison to make. I enjoyed this read, and now it is time to pursue Franklin Pierce.
8/10. Reviewed on 6/9/2024.
12. Zachary Taylor (2008) by John S. D. Eisenhower
Zachary Taylor is written by John S. D. Eisenhower, who, interestingly enough, is the son of former president Dwight D. Eisenhower, and a former Brigadier General himself! I think that due to this, Mr. Eisenhower does an excellent job with Taylor's military background. As one of the few military presidents, Taylor spent most of his life in the military, and it was not until the end of the Mexican American War that he was plucked due to his war record to be posted for the executive office, similarly to William Henry Harrison, and just like WHH, he did not live long in office.
This I think is the shortest biography I have read, at only 138 pages, but it did not need to cover much. It spends awhile getting to know Taylor, and then a while on the Mexican American War, which is what he is most known for. After this we spend a fair amount of time on the topics of the time, and his presidency. The López affair, has to be the most interesting topic, though it concluded after Taylor had died. There were many aspects of Taylor that I did not expect to like, or find so fascinating. For example, when I am reading these biographies, I am silently, and as I write these reviews, literally to some extent judging these men from their grave. For some, it is easy, Van Buren and Jackson, flawed men of course, became instant icons to me. Others like John Tyler, became flawed villain in my eyes. Whereas Zach Taylor, he is quite the complicated figure.
On one hand, Taylor was a slave holder, and one who was not giving up his slaves. He was also opposed to the institution of slavery, however, which makes him an interesting man to observe. For example, in Ohio, Taylor met with a group of Free-Soilers and assured them that “the people of the North need have no apprehension of the further expansion of Slavery”. He would not disrupt the Union by trying to abolish slavery where it already existed, though that did not mean he would allow its expansion into the new territories, either, which was another hot topic. Taylor was also a staunch Unionist, one of my favorite quotes is when very early in their entrance to the Union, Texas is already threatening to secede, and to this, Taylor replied, “if it becomes necessary, I’ll take command of the army myself and if you are taken in rebellion against the Union, I will hang you with less reluctance than I hanged deserters and spies in Mexico.”
Chapter 12 was a highlight as it explains why the debate around admitting California as a free state, something that seemed obvious even to southerners, was so longwinded. It explores many different appeals and compromises that all have their merit, but like the other crises that preceded this one, any solution that would come was just a band aid. I think that had Taylor been able to handle these issues, it would not have gone much better, but who knows. This is a sentiment the author shares, “The Compromise of 1850 would probably never have become law if Zachary Taylor had lived, for it is generally conceded that he would have vetoed some of its provisions, particularly the Fugitive Slave Act.” and I think that it is important to note for the next point and final thing I would like to say about Zachary Taylor, and if I think he was a good president, as it relates to the final few lines of the book: “Sometimes mediocre men are given undeserved status because significant events transpired during their presidencies, whereas capable men are often overlooked because no great events happened during their terms in office. Taylor fell into that second category and therefore has been generally underrated as a president.” While the sentiment is sweet, and I agree to a point, I think earlier Eisenhower hits it hard. Most of Taylor's early military career he says, was very unexceptional. It was not until the Mexican American War that he had his fame, and that does not warrant his merit as a president. I do not think calling Taylor underrated as a president because he was a successful military man, is a fair assessment. He is what is was: a president who served for 16 months, a staunch Unionist, a slaveholder, and one of the five U.S “military” presidents the book mentions, Washington, Jackson, Taylor, Grant, and Eisenhower, though I am curious why he left out Teddy Roosevelt. The book was a good read, if a bit short.
7/10. Reviewed on 6/8/2024.
This I think is the shortest biography I have read, at only 138 pages, but it did not need to cover much. It spends awhile getting to know Taylor, and then a while on the Mexican American War, which is what he is most known for. After this we spend a fair amount of time on the topics of the time, and his presidency. The López affair, has to be the most interesting topic, though it concluded after Taylor had died. There were many aspects of Taylor that I did not expect to like, or find so fascinating. For example, when I am reading these biographies, I am silently, and as I write these reviews, literally to some extent judging these men from their grave. For some, it is easy, Van Buren and Jackson, flawed men of course, became instant icons to me. Others like John Tyler, became flawed villain in my eyes. Whereas Zach Taylor, he is quite the complicated figure.
On one hand, Taylor was a slave holder, and one who was not giving up his slaves. He was also opposed to the institution of slavery, however, which makes him an interesting man to observe. For example, in Ohio, Taylor met with a group of Free-Soilers and assured them that “the people of the North need have no apprehension of the further expansion of Slavery”. He would not disrupt the Union by trying to abolish slavery where it already existed, though that did not mean he would allow its expansion into the new territories, either, which was another hot topic. Taylor was also a staunch Unionist, one of my favorite quotes is when very early in their entrance to the Union, Texas is already threatening to secede, and to this, Taylor replied, “if it becomes necessary, I’ll take command of the army myself and if you are taken in rebellion against the Union, I will hang you with less reluctance than I hanged deserters and spies in Mexico.”
Chapter 12 was a highlight as it explains why the debate around admitting California as a free state, something that seemed obvious even to southerners, was so longwinded. It explores many different appeals and compromises that all have their merit, but like the other crises that preceded this one, any solution that would come was just a band aid. I think that had Taylor been able to handle these issues, it would not have gone much better, but who knows. This is a sentiment the author shares, “The Compromise of 1850 would probably never have become law if Zachary Taylor had lived, for it is generally conceded that he would have vetoed some of its provisions, particularly the Fugitive Slave Act.” and I think that it is important to note for the next point and final thing I would like to say about Zachary Taylor, and if I think he was a good president, as it relates to the final few lines of the book: “Sometimes mediocre men are given undeserved status because significant events transpired during their presidencies, whereas capable men are often overlooked because no great events happened during their terms in office. Taylor fell into that second category and therefore has been generally underrated as a president.” While the sentiment is sweet, and I agree to a point, I think earlier Eisenhower hits it hard. Most of Taylor's early military career he says, was very unexceptional. It was not until the Mexican American War that he had his fame, and that does not warrant his merit as a president. I do not think calling Taylor underrated as a president because he was a successful military man, is a fair assessment. He is what is was: a president who served for 16 months, a staunch Unionist, a slaveholder, and one of the five U.S “military” presidents the book mentions, Washington, Jackson, Taylor, Grant, and Eisenhower, though I am curious why he left out Teddy Roosevelt. The book was a good read, if a bit short.
7/10. Reviewed on 6/8/2024.
11. James K. Polk and the Expansionist Impulse (1997) by Sam W. Haynes
James K. Polk and the Expansionist Impulse was a good look at the life of the man who, directly at least, brought us into the Mexican-American War, and consequently, got us California, New Mexico, and Oregon separately. The man did quite a bit, and that was one thing I knew going in: that he was a continuation and the biggest proponent of manifest destiny, and the Monroe Doctrine other than James Monroe or Thomas Jefferson.
This book was very short, only two hundred pages, which was great for brevity's sake, and also it helped clarify several other topics the longer books I have read left me confused on. For example, Chapter 2 of this book helped me understand Jackson’s fight against the bank, honestly, much better than either the Van Buren book I read, or the Jackson biography. Perhaps that is on me, but it was simplified in such a way that connected many of the dots from those books. Chapter 5 was another highlight, where we see a lot of Polk as the executive he was in office. It presents him as a stoic figure, and that led me to think of a Tywin Lannister type from Game of Thrones, which made it even more interesting during the Mexican American War, where surprisingly Polk took center stage.
James K. Polk was the second American president to declare war, which I had not known. I take it George Washington did not count, given he was not president, and the Crown did not really declare war. Unlike James Madison, Polk determined strategy, chose, and replaced officers, and even took a role in logistical matters, which is not something you expect of a United States president with no background in the military, that is what your Secretary of War is for, unless of course you are General Andrew Jackson. The book spends around three chapters on the Mexican-American War, which was a good amount of time for a two-hundred-page book to allocate, and I enjoyed reading about it a lot.
There is one large looming topic in this book that has been left undiscussed, and that is of course, slavery. Now, we do see how slavery plays into territorial discussions, and it is often brought up, of course our favorite player John Calhoun is often mentioned hand in hand with it, but the more glaring issue is that of Polk, who was a slave holder himself. What of his own slaves, his treatment of them, his view of slavery morally, politically, and how it plays into his policy? These are all front and center in the last book I read on John Tyler, and being a fellow slave owner, I did expect similar things from Polk. As far as I read outside, he did not free his slaves unsurprisingly, and there is little to suggest he struggled with it morally. While I wish this was explored more, it is not a huge detractor, and this biography was a great way to learn about Polk’s presidency, and who he was, pretty quickly, with some well put in detail. Polk was the strongest President since Andrew Jackson and remained so until Abraham Lincoln. He added 1.2 million square miles to the United States, more than 60 percent of the United States’ landmass.
8/10. Reviewed on 6/4/2024.
This book was very short, only two hundred pages, which was great for brevity's sake, and also it helped clarify several other topics the longer books I have read left me confused on. For example, Chapter 2 of this book helped me understand Jackson’s fight against the bank, honestly, much better than either the Van Buren book I read, or the Jackson biography. Perhaps that is on me, but it was simplified in such a way that connected many of the dots from those books. Chapter 5 was another highlight, where we see a lot of Polk as the executive he was in office. It presents him as a stoic figure, and that led me to think of a Tywin Lannister type from Game of Thrones, which made it even more interesting during the Mexican American War, where surprisingly Polk took center stage.
James K. Polk was the second American president to declare war, which I had not known. I take it George Washington did not count, given he was not president, and the Crown did not really declare war. Unlike James Madison, Polk determined strategy, chose, and replaced officers, and even took a role in logistical matters, which is not something you expect of a United States president with no background in the military, that is what your Secretary of War is for, unless of course you are General Andrew Jackson. The book spends around three chapters on the Mexican-American War, which was a good amount of time for a two-hundred-page book to allocate, and I enjoyed reading about it a lot.
There is one large looming topic in this book that has been left undiscussed, and that is of course, slavery. Now, we do see how slavery plays into territorial discussions, and it is often brought up, of course our favorite player John Calhoun is often mentioned hand in hand with it, but the more glaring issue is that of Polk, who was a slave holder himself. What of his own slaves, his treatment of them, his view of slavery morally, politically, and how it plays into his policy? These are all front and center in the last book I read on John Tyler, and being a fellow slave owner, I did expect similar things from Polk. As far as I read outside, he did not free his slaves unsurprisingly, and there is little to suggest he struggled with it morally. While I wish this was explored more, it is not a huge detractor, and this biography was a great way to learn about Polk’s presidency, and who he was, pretty quickly, with some well put in detail. Polk was the strongest President since Andrew Jackson and remained so until Abraham Lincoln. He added 1.2 million square miles to the United States, more than 60 percent of the United States’ landmass.
8/10. Reviewed on 6/4/2024.
10. John Tyler: The Accidental President (2006) by Edward P Crapol
John Tyler: The Accidental President by Edward P. Crapol, who is a retired Professor at the College of William and Mary which John Tyler himself graduated in 1807, and it covers the story of the only traitor president in American history, the first vice-president to president successor, and the man who brought Texas into the Union. I knew none of these things going in, like most any America. John Tyler is quite an unknown, and yet he did quite a lot in his presidency. Aside from what I stated earlier, the book explores John Tyler's support of an independent Hawaii, the United States first trade treaties with China, and the biggest, and most prominent issue throughout this novel: the role of slavery, and how it plays into the United States. Can a republic, founded on principles of freedom, democracy, and justice, coexist with the institution of slavery? John Tyler sure thought so, despite some early signs of the disgust for the institution.
John Tyler is portrayed in full throughout this book, as the statesmen who made quick decisions and was hated by almost everyone, his own party, the opposition, and even was left by his own cabinet at points, and that also of an aristocratic slave owning racist, which he never ceased to be, up until the end. I always give these men their chance, history's morals shift and change with time, and if you read my review of American Lion, you will see I had a softness for Andrew Jackson. John Tyler ignited none of these sympathies, as this man was a constant hypocrite. One great example the author displays early on, and refers to occasionally, was Tyler's disgust at seeing slaves traded in the nations capitol, and his subsequent flirtation with the abolition movement. It did not last long of course, but this hypocrisy was ever present in this novel, and I think the author did a very good job of not just presenting that hypocrisy, but explaining how a man such as Tyler could at the same time justify such a radical turnaround, as he returns to his plantation in Virginia of 90 slaves.
Tyler's turn as a traitor makes sense, as the man could never commit to anything. After being ousted from the Whig part, he tried to make his own party, but remained a political pariah for much of his life, trying to salvage his reputation, which was not horrible, but was also quite bad. The nail in the coffin, was joining the Confederacy. In Washington, his death was ignored, as was befitting. The author uses the word tragic often, and I could see that in some sense. This was a fantastic work, in just under 300 pages we get a very complete picture of the life of one of the lease known American presidents, and one that should be more known. He is a symbol for everything that a leader should not be; indecisive, uncompromising, and cowardly. To some degree, John Tyler was also, all of those things at the same time. However, a man who spent his whole life fighting for the Union, fighting for compromise between free and slave states, gave up, just a year before he would die, and join a losing cause, that he would never live to see fail. He was a coward praising the victories of Confederate men over the American people he represented, and that is truly the ultimate sin he committed in my eyes. Until we reach the modern presidents, I fear John Tyler shall be the worst man to hold the office in my eyes. The only real issue I have held with the book is that it is thematic rather than chronological, which leads it to be all over the place when it comes to events. Despite this, it works mostly, and does head in a direction most of the time, just with detours and setbacks.
9/10. Reviewed on 5/31/2024.
John Tyler is portrayed in full throughout this book, as the statesmen who made quick decisions and was hated by almost everyone, his own party, the opposition, and even was left by his own cabinet at points, and that also of an aristocratic slave owning racist, which he never ceased to be, up until the end. I always give these men their chance, history's morals shift and change with time, and if you read my review of American Lion, you will see I had a softness for Andrew Jackson. John Tyler ignited none of these sympathies, as this man was a constant hypocrite. One great example the author displays early on, and refers to occasionally, was Tyler's disgust at seeing slaves traded in the nations capitol, and his subsequent flirtation with the abolition movement. It did not last long of course, but this hypocrisy was ever present in this novel, and I think the author did a very good job of not just presenting that hypocrisy, but explaining how a man such as Tyler could at the same time justify such a radical turnaround, as he returns to his plantation in Virginia of 90 slaves.
Tyler's turn as a traitor makes sense, as the man could never commit to anything. After being ousted from the Whig part, he tried to make his own party, but remained a political pariah for much of his life, trying to salvage his reputation, which was not horrible, but was also quite bad. The nail in the coffin, was joining the Confederacy. In Washington, his death was ignored, as was befitting. The author uses the word tragic often, and I could see that in some sense. This was a fantastic work, in just under 300 pages we get a very complete picture of the life of one of the lease known American presidents, and one that should be more known. He is a symbol for everything that a leader should not be; indecisive, uncompromising, and cowardly. To some degree, John Tyler was also, all of those things at the same time. However, a man who spent his whole life fighting for the Union, fighting for compromise between free and slave states, gave up, just a year before he would die, and join a losing cause, that he would never live to see fail. He was a coward praising the victories of Confederate men over the American people he represented, and that is truly the ultimate sin he committed in my eyes. Until we reach the modern presidents, I fear John Tyler shall be the worst man to hold the office in my eyes. The only real issue I have held with the book is that it is thematic rather than chronological, which leads it to be all over the place when it comes to events. Despite this, it works mostly, and does head in a direction most of the time, just with detours and setbacks.
9/10. Reviewed on 5/31/2024.
9. William Henry Harrison (2012) by Gail Collins
William Henry Harrison by Gail Collins is part of the American Presidents series of books, which I imagine I will have to pull from again in the future. Though it is short, only 125 pages, that is reflective of the length of his presidency itself. Jackson and Van Buren, my last two Presidents in my quest to read a biography of each US president, both a much more substantial impact on history, and so I wanted to spend more time with them. I purposefully chose this book over Mr. Jefferson's Hammer: William Henry Harrison and the Origins of American Indian Policy or Old Tippecanoe because I really did not want to spend too much time on a man, I already had a decent grasp on via the end of The Romantic Age of Politics and my own personal research. That being said, I still wanted to get a grasp on who he was, his foundation as a soldier, man, and politician, and also his little time in office.
This book is perfect for someone trying to get through the presidents without wanting to be stuck on details of those who did little. Collins does a good job getting through the basics of his life, and I enjoyed hearing most of all about his time as a soldier, and right before he entered the White House. Harrison surprising Calhoun was a funny moment, and there are plenty of moments like that in here. It also features a good amount of information on other statesmen, such as Daniel Webster, Henry Clay, and Richard Mentor Johnson that I found to be interesting and relevant to the man himself. I found Harrison as a man to be vastly different, and quite the contradiction. He seemed to be a man that wanted to appeal to everyone, and that is where many of the contradictions came from. The way he treated and talked of Indians and blacks was often polarizing, one moment being brutal and lording and the next benevolent and fatherly. Not in a Jacksonian way however, as Jackson had a moral system that while not exactly perfect, was understandable, and he subscribed to beliefs that he always upheld. Whereas Harrison was always a middle of the road, contradictory statesmen.
I enjoyed this short read, and I would gladly check out more from this series. I know there are some more presidents I will want to skip, so when I do, instead of skipping I will just grab one of this short biographies and power through.
8/10. Reviewed on 5/26/2024.
This book is perfect for someone trying to get through the presidents without wanting to be stuck on details of those who did little. Collins does a good job getting through the basics of his life, and I enjoyed hearing most of all about his time as a soldier, and right before he entered the White House. Harrison surprising Calhoun was a funny moment, and there are plenty of moments like that in here. It also features a good amount of information on other statesmen, such as Daniel Webster, Henry Clay, and Richard Mentor Johnson that I found to be interesting and relevant to the man himself. I found Harrison as a man to be vastly different, and quite the contradiction. He seemed to be a man that wanted to appeal to everyone, and that is where many of the contradictions came from. The way he treated and talked of Indians and blacks was often polarizing, one moment being brutal and lording and the next benevolent and fatherly. Not in a Jacksonian way however, as Jackson had a moral system that while not exactly perfect, was understandable, and he subscribed to beliefs that he always upheld. Whereas Harrison was always a middle of the road, contradictory statesmen.
I enjoyed this short read, and I would gladly check out more from this series. I know there are some more presidents I will want to skip, so when I do, instead of skipping I will just grab one of this short biographies and power through.
8/10. Reviewed on 5/26/2024.
8. Martin Van Buren: The Romantic Age of American Politics (1983) by John Niven
Martin Van Buren: The Romantic Age of Politics is the second book in my quest to read every President’s biography. I started with Jackson, by accident, because I just wanted to read about him, and then when I decided on this quest, I figured I would continue forward, and then loop back around to the first six presidents after I am done. Another reason being, that beginning with Jackson, we really start to see the groundwork for the Civil War being laid, and while that of course was truly laid at the foundation of the country, the nullification crisis was one of the first acts of rebellion the nation faced.
Martin Van Buren is not a President you hear a lot about, and because of that, there are few books written of the man. My choices were between this, and another, Martin Van Buren and the American Political System. I had already bought this, so I stuck it out, despite finding this website: https://bestpresidentialbios.com/ which has been my go-to source from here on out. After I had begun reading The Romantic Age of Politics, I was struggling quite a bit to get through. Then I read this man's review, and found I was not alone in my thoughts, because this book, while not awful, is a play by play of his career, sparring little detail. The book is very dull, especially when it dives into precarious details that have no impact on future political concerns. I lost track of all the various people and factions quite often. I also lost track of Van Buren quite often. The author very often introduces a term, with no explanation, or will refer to an event, with no explanation while using it as context for another event (i.e., the duel between Hamilton and Burr). I wish, like American Lion, there was a character Index at the beginning that gave background for all the larger named people, and the ones that are close associates of Van Buren.
Throughout this book, due to the issues I have mentioned, I decided I would be more intense with my note taking, and I ended up with around 28 pages of notes, a fair bit of it direct quotes, copy and paste, and things of that nature. It did help me better understand things, but at times I found myself skimming sections because I would lose interest or have no clue what was going on due to the lack of being clued in on the situation properly. The book shines when it is more focused, and gives hard events and Van Buren’s thoughts on those events rather than jumping around all over the place as it often does, and leaving you to piece together the politics yourself. Almost all references to policy have no explanation, such as The Tariff of Abominations, The Alien and Sedition Acts, The Missouri Compromise, or the Kansas-Nebraska Act to name a few. The same can be said of factions, such as the lack of establishment of the Barnburners or the Hunkers. They may have had an offhanded remark or two, as say the Know-Nothing movement gets towards the end, but unlike the Know-Nothing, those two factions are very important to the politics of the book.
I do really enjoy reading about Martin and his family, his interactions with other politicians, and how he rose to the position he achieved. It is remarkably impressive, and he is very underrated as Presidents go, a lot of his decision making, and policy had a large impact on our nation, and especially the leaders we elected. Our nation would look very different without Van Buren, which I would have never known without such a thorough investigation of his political maneuvering. I just wish it was a more enjoyable read, at 600 pages, with some very nice pictures, it is too long, too dull, and just too full of information that could be trimmed out.
5/10. Reviewed on 5/25/2024.
Martin Van Buren is not a President you hear a lot about, and because of that, there are few books written of the man. My choices were between this, and another, Martin Van Buren and the American Political System. I had already bought this, so I stuck it out, despite finding this website: https://bestpresidentialbios.com/ which has been my go-to source from here on out. After I had begun reading The Romantic Age of Politics, I was struggling quite a bit to get through. Then I read this man's review, and found I was not alone in my thoughts, because this book, while not awful, is a play by play of his career, sparring little detail. The book is very dull, especially when it dives into precarious details that have no impact on future political concerns. I lost track of all the various people and factions quite often. I also lost track of Van Buren quite often. The author very often introduces a term, with no explanation, or will refer to an event, with no explanation while using it as context for another event (i.e., the duel between Hamilton and Burr). I wish, like American Lion, there was a character Index at the beginning that gave background for all the larger named people, and the ones that are close associates of Van Buren.
Throughout this book, due to the issues I have mentioned, I decided I would be more intense with my note taking, and I ended up with around 28 pages of notes, a fair bit of it direct quotes, copy and paste, and things of that nature. It did help me better understand things, but at times I found myself skimming sections because I would lose interest or have no clue what was going on due to the lack of being clued in on the situation properly. The book shines when it is more focused, and gives hard events and Van Buren’s thoughts on those events rather than jumping around all over the place as it often does, and leaving you to piece together the politics yourself. Almost all references to policy have no explanation, such as The Tariff of Abominations, The Alien and Sedition Acts, The Missouri Compromise, or the Kansas-Nebraska Act to name a few. The same can be said of factions, such as the lack of establishment of the Barnburners or the Hunkers. They may have had an offhanded remark or two, as say the Know-Nothing movement gets towards the end, but unlike the Know-Nothing, those two factions are very important to the politics of the book.
I do really enjoy reading about Martin and his family, his interactions with other politicians, and how he rose to the position he achieved. It is remarkably impressive, and he is very underrated as Presidents go, a lot of his decision making, and policy had a large impact on our nation, and especially the leaders we elected. Our nation would look very different without Van Buren, which I would have never known without such a thorough investigation of his political maneuvering. I just wish it was a more enjoyable read, at 600 pages, with some very nice pictures, it is too long, too dull, and just too full of information that could be trimmed out.
5/10. Reviewed on 5/25/2024.
7. American Lion (2008) by Jon Meacham
American Lion, is the first biography I have read to my knowledge. The House of the Dead, is a semi-autobiographical book by Dostoevsky, and The Gulag Archipelago can be considered a biography in a sense, but I have not actually finished that, I am only 3/4 through it. Nevertheless, this is to be the first in my journey through the American presidents, as I decided halfway through reading this. Odd place to start, at number seven, but it is I found to be the most interesting presidency that no one talks about, unless it is in a negative fashion. Andrew Jackson has to be one of the most influential presidents of all time, and I had no idea about half of these things, I was interested because I knew the man was wild, and wild he was.
Jon Meacham does a fantastic job telling the narrative of Jacksons life, and I loved the pictures that were included in my copy. From his brutal upbringing, all the way to his presidency. I would say the only part I wish we spent more time on was the battle of New Orleans, and the War of 1812 in general. The book is based on his years in the white house, but I do wish for some more time on that subject. The subject that was most fascinating to me was that of the nullification crisis, and that of how Jackson handled it. Similar to Abraham Lincoln, or Grant, it is hard to imagine what the world would look like without Andrew Jacksons role in the nullification crisis. How would John Quincy Adams, handled succession? It is of course impossible to tell, and JQA was a very anti-slavery man, but he also did not have the fire in him that Jackson did, and that fire was what kept South Carolina from succeeding, and breaking up the Union twenty years earlier than the Civil War.
Of course the are so many other foundational things that Jackson had a hand in, such as the Democratic Party, which of course remains a force of immense power today, and the fact that Jackson was the first outsider to win the Presidency. He changed the game in many ways, and without his reshaping of the Presidency we likely would have a more aristocratic government, similar to Great Britain. Many Jacksonian ideas influenced later cataclysmic American changes, like the 17th amendment.
There is one very crucial item, or perhaps two, when talking about Andrew Jackson, and that is of slavery and of native Americans. To the latter, I address a bit in the note below. As to slaves, at the end, Jackson said, “Do not cry; I hope to meet you all in Heaven -- yes, all in Heaven, white and black”. Not that this makes up for the evil that Jackson did in all his years, -- that of owning slaves in itself, and all that comes with owning a human being -- but this goes to the greatest idea when discussing great men of history, and their morals; Great men are imperfect, especially the farther you look back, they have their moments of darkness, but at the end, the light shined through for Andrew Jackson even on this matter. “Christ has no respect to color” Jackson said, as if it was some revelation that he needed to say before it was too late, almost like confession. Older than the nation, Andrew Jackson died on June 8th 1845.
There is a lot more to say on the topic of this man, and I perhaps will return to this and revise or add. I have a lot of notes from my reading. I also cannot put a number on a story like this, but I loved it very much.
Note: I included these articles, as I read them originally back when it was news in 2016, when I also knew nothing about Andrew Jackson save some basic trivia. I think it is very important to remember the people who write these nonsensical articles, and at the same time recognize that Harriet Tubman on the $20 and Old Hickory on the back is fine, and welcome. Now I have not read The Long, Bitter Trail: Andrew Jackson and the Indians, nor any of the other books mentioned throughout the second article, but the article itself presented quite a lot of conflicting information with this biography, and from what I have read of this biography, it is quite credible. Make of that what you will, at the end of the day, the truth is Andrew Jackson was not moral in the modern sense, most no man today could hold the same values as Jackson, but that does not make him any less a great man. Great men can do terrible things, and the two terms of the Jackson administration had such an impact on American history, that to deny him his place as one of our great leaders is not just foolish but a denial of history, and while we have moved past most of this drivel in the year 2024, it still happens. Andrew Jackson existed, he did awful things, but he also led the country through some of the most important affairs of the nations history, and without his leadership, our country would look much different, perhaps not exist at all.
Reviewed May 2024.
https://www.vox.com/2016/4/20/11469442/harriet-tubman-andrew-jackson-20-dollar-bill
https://www.vox.com/2016/4/20/11469514/andrew-jackson-indian-removal
Jon Meacham does a fantastic job telling the narrative of Jacksons life, and I loved the pictures that were included in my copy. From his brutal upbringing, all the way to his presidency. I would say the only part I wish we spent more time on was the battle of New Orleans, and the War of 1812 in general. The book is based on his years in the white house, but I do wish for some more time on that subject. The subject that was most fascinating to me was that of the nullification crisis, and that of how Jackson handled it. Similar to Abraham Lincoln, or Grant, it is hard to imagine what the world would look like without Andrew Jacksons role in the nullification crisis. How would John Quincy Adams, handled succession? It is of course impossible to tell, and JQA was a very anti-slavery man, but he also did not have the fire in him that Jackson did, and that fire was what kept South Carolina from succeeding, and breaking up the Union twenty years earlier than the Civil War.
Of course the are so many other foundational things that Jackson had a hand in, such as the Democratic Party, which of course remains a force of immense power today, and the fact that Jackson was the first outsider to win the Presidency. He changed the game in many ways, and without his reshaping of the Presidency we likely would have a more aristocratic government, similar to Great Britain. Many Jacksonian ideas influenced later cataclysmic American changes, like the 17th amendment.
There is one very crucial item, or perhaps two, when talking about Andrew Jackson, and that is of slavery and of native Americans. To the latter, I address a bit in the note below. As to slaves, at the end, Jackson said, “Do not cry; I hope to meet you all in Heaven -- yes, all in Heaven, white and black”. Not that this makes up for the evil that Jackson did in all his years, -- that of owning slaves in itself, and all that comes with owning a human being -- but this goes to the greatest idea when discussing great men of history, and their morals; Great men are imperfect, especially the farther you look back, they have their moments of darkness, but at the end, the light shined through for Andrew Jackson even on this matter. “Christ has no respect to color” Jackson said, as if it was some revelation that he needed to say before it was too late, almost like confession. Older than the nation, Andrew Jackson died on June 8th 1845.
There is a lot more to say on the topic of this man, and I perhaps will return to this and revise or add. I have a lot of notes from my reading. I also cannot put a number on a story like this, but I loved it very much.
Note: I included these articles, as I read them originally back when it was news in 2016, when I also knew nothing about Andrew Jackson save some basic trivia. I think it is very important to remember the people who write these nonsensical articles, and at the same time recognize that Harriet Tubman on the $20 and Old Hickory on the back is fine, and welcome. Now I have not read The Long, Bitter Trail: Andrew Jackson and the Indians, nor any of the other books mentioned throughout the second article, but the article itself presented quite a lot of conflicting information with this biography, and from what I have read of this biography, it is quite credible. Make of that what you will, at the end of the day, the truth is Andrew Jackson was not moral in the modern sense, most no man today could hold the same values as Jackson, but that does not make him any less a great man. Great men can do terrible things, and the two terms of the Jackson administration had such an impact on American history, that to deny him his place as one of our great leaders is not just foolish but a denial of history, and while we have moved past most of this drivel in the year 2024, it still happens. Andrew Jackson existed, he did awful things, but he also led the country through some of the most important affairs of the nations history, and without his leadership, our country would look much different, perhaps not exist at all.
Reviewed May 2024.
https://www.vox.com/2016/4/20/11469442/harriet-tubman-andrew-jackson-20-dollar-bill
https://www.vox.com/2016/4/20/11469514/andrew-jackson-indian-removal