You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
74 reviews for:
The Last Founding Father: James Monroe and a Nation's Call to Greatness
Harlow Giles Unger
3.52 AVERAGE
74 reviews for:
The Last Founding Father: James Monroe and a Nation's Call to Greatness
Harlow Giles Unger
3.52 AVERAGE
informative
medium-paced
Really, really solid biography. It isn't just a recitation of Monroe's life, rather it looks at the influences on him, his influences and the world within which he lived. The changes in the US between 1770 and 1830 were so astounding that it is hard to grasp that world and how much of an out of place Monroe was by the time he dies.
Lots of hero worship going on in this book, but I delighted in the political drama detailed in the earlier parts of the book. Like a revolutionary Desperate Housewives!
If I were judging this book just on writing style, I would have rated it more highly. Unfortunately where it succeeds as an engaging read, it fails in providing a broader history. At least the author is upfront about the first flaw, which is glorifying its subject; in the prologue he calls “John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison ... mere caretaker presidents.”
This book really falls down in addressing Monroe’s role with regard to slavery and the displacement of Native Americans. For example, although it spends many paragraphs outlining outlining Monroe’s efforts to build his farm, there’s only one throwaway line about putting his “25 slaves to work,” not even acknowledging his farm was only possible through the use of stolen labor. In biographies I’ve read of other Virginia presidents (Washington, Jefferson, and Madison), all of them explored in much more detail how these founding fathers tried to reconcile (or didn’t) the ideals of the American revolution with the fact that they enslaved people. This has one line on Monroe’s thoughts on the matter.
It’s even worse when it comes to perpetuating the myth of glorious western expansion with no acknowledgment at all on how this was done only through displacement of Native peoples: “the land rush added six states and scores of towns and villages to the Union and produced the largest redistribution of wealth in the annals of man. Never before had a sovereign state transferred ownership of so much land—and so much political power—to so many people not of noble rank.” Yay! Monroe enabled so much opportunity ... just ignore the cost to Native peoples.
So if you want the basics of Madison and his life without being bored, go ahead. But you may want to read some other books about this era in history to get a fuller picture.
This book really falls down in addressing Monroe’s role with regard to slavery and the displacement of Native Americans. For example, although it spends many paragraphs outlining outlining Monroe’s efforts to build his farm, there’s only one throwaway line about putting his “25 slaves to work,” not even acknowledging his farm was only possible through the use of stolen labor. In biographies I’ve read of other Virginia presidents (Washington, Jefferson, and Madison), all of them explored in much more detail how these founding fathers tried to reconcile (or didn’t) the ideals of the American revolution with the fact that they enslaved people. This has one line on Monroe’s thoughts on the matter.
It’s even worse when it comes to perpetuating the myth of glorious western expansion with no acknowledgment at all on how this was done only through displacement of Native peoples: “the land rush added six states and scores of towns and villages to the Union and produced the largest redistribution of wealth in the annals of man. Never before had a sovereign state transferred ownership of so much land—and so much political power—to so many people not of noble rank.” Yay! Monroe enabled so much opportunity ... just ignore the cost to Native peoples.
So if you want the basics of Madison and his life without being bored, go ahead. But you may want to read some other books about this era in history to get a fuller picture.
Unger is so far up James Monroe's ass he cannot write in a straight line. This book was rife with factual inaccuracies and liberally sprinkled with "artistic license." Don't read this book, it is the worst kind of trash - the trash masquerading as academic work.
informative
fast-paced
I am torn between rating this a 1 and a 2. I am a sucker for good American history and reading a well-written biography is my idea of a good time. This book was neither. If this had been written as a contemporary biography of a political candidate, I would have figured that the author was trying to score some sort of ambassadorial posting to an island in paradise. So effusive is Unger's praise of Monroe. From Unger's pen, Monroe emerges as the man who can do NO wrong. His dismissiveness, even out-right dislike of Madison was completely disrespectful (referring to him as inept and as a Lilliputian - I realize he was quite short, but... really?!). In fact, I began hiking my eyebrows as early as the introduction and I really wish I had stopped right then to read more reviews. For now, I plan to never again read anything by Harlow Giles Unger.
informative
medium-paced
I disliked James Monroe (POTUS 1817-1825) when I met him while researching the Reynolds Affair (http://diannedurantewriter.com/archives/3285). But I've decided to read a biography of each of the United States presidents in order, and I resolved to try to look at Monroe objectively. Unger's description of him as "the last Founding Father" made me hopeful. Unfortunately, I quickly came to dislike Unger even more than I disliked Monroe. For example: Unger's prologue states that "Washington's three successors - John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison - were mere caretaker presidents" (p. 2). Biographers do get attached to their subjects, but such statements made it a struggle to read Unger. My takeaways from the bio:
1) Monroe, like Madison, was a politician rather than an executive: he appointed people because of the party they belonged to rather than because they could to the job superlatively well.
2) Monroe didn't stick to his principles. In September 1814, soon after British troops burned the Capitol and the White House, Monroe was named Madison's secretary of War pro tem. "Monroe scrapped the republican principles of his youth and drew up a plan to draft a standing army of 100,000 men, raise their rates of pay, and exempt those who found recruits to serve as substitutes. Even as a young man, Monroe had never clung obstinately to any political position if he recognized it to be contrary to the nation's interests." (p. 249). What's the point of winning the war if you don't preserve the individual liberties that the country stands for?
3) Monroe deserves credit for helping to open more of the future continental U.S. to American settlers. In 1819, by the Adams-Onís Treaty, Spain ceded Florida and all claims to the Pacific Northwest, in exchange for a promise that the U.S. would not settle Texas and the Southwest. The Treaty of 1818 fixed the northern border between the U.S. and Canada as far west as the Rockies: British and Americans were no longer fighting in the Midwest (p. 294). During Monroe's administration, some 40 treaties were signed with the Indians, so settlers west of the Appalachians were no longer in danger from Indian attacks. The Russo-American Treaty of 1824 kept the Russians out of the Pacific Northwest (p. 312). The Monroe Doctrine (1824) was the natural outgrowth of Monroe's push to clear the present continental U.S. for settlement: "The American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers." (p. 350)
4. Monroe was financially irresponsible. Without a profitable plantation or an established law practice to bring in steady revenue, he was continually in debt ... yet he continued to buy expensive homes (in Virginia, Paris, and Washington), expensive furnishings, and expensive gowns for his wife. When he left office he was $75,000 in debt - a huge amount at the time.
I still don't like the man.
On to John Quincy Adams!
1) Monroe, like Madison, was a politician rather than an executive: he appointed people because of the party they belonged to rather than because they could to the job superlatively well.
2) Monroe didn't stick to his principles. In September 1814, soon after British troops burned the Capitol and the White House, Monroe was named Madison's secretary of War pro tem. "Monroe scrapped the republican principles of his youth and drew up a plan to draft a standing army of 100,000 men, raise their rates of pay, and exempt those who found recruits to serve as substitutes. Even as a young man, Monroe had never clung obstinately to any political position if he recognized it to be contrary to the nation's interests." (p. 249). What's the point of winning the war if you don't preserve the individual liberties that the country stands for?
3) Monroe deserves credit for helping to open more of the future continental U.S. to American settlers. In 1819, by the Adams-Onís Treaty, Spain ceded Florida and all claims to the Pacific Northwest, in exchange for a promise that the U.S. would not settle Texas and the Southwest. The Treaty of 1818 fixed the northern border between the U.S. and Canada as far west as the Rockies: British and Americans were no longer fighting in the Midwest (p. 294). During Monroe's administration, some 40 treaties were signed with the Indians, so settlers west of the Appalachians were no longer in danger from Indian attacks. The Russo-American Treaty of 1824 kept the Russians out of the Pacific Northwest (p. 312). The Monroe Doctrine (1824) was the natural outgrowth of Monroe's push to clear the present continental U.S. for settlement: "The American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers." (p. 350)
4. Monroe was financially irresponsible. Without a profitable plantation or an established law practice to bring in steady revenue, he was continually in debt ... yet he continued to buy expensive homes (in Virginia, Paris, and Washington), expensive furnishings, and expensive gowns for his wife. When he left office he was $75,000 in debt - a huge amount at the time.
I still don't like the man.
On to John Quincy Adams!
adventurous
emotional
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective