Scan barcode
codyisreading's review against another edition
4.0
I realized at 25 years of age that I'd never read the U.S. Constitution or the Declaration of Independence. So it was nice to find an edition of The Federalist Papers with both included. It blows my mind that so many Americans will go their entire lives without having at least read the Constitution once. And I definitely won't pretend to understand all of it, but I felt it incumbent upon myself to at least familiarize myself with the text.
The Federalist Papers are why I hesitate to give this a full five-star rating. Because while I recognize their impact and the place they hold in the pantheon of classic American political texts, it's important to read TFP with some precaution. The men that wrote the essays certainly knew what they were talking about, but we have to remember that their letters to New York amount to today's equivalent of an op-ed column. The Papers absolutely provide a framework and ancillary means to understand the writings of the Constitution. However, these are essays of opinion; I cannot stress that enough. The Federalist Papers are a great insider look at what a couple of framers were thinking, but they cannot and should not be regarded as holding the same weight as the actual Constitution.
The Federalist Papers should also be read through at least once. Some of them are a little more extraneous than others, but I committed myself to finishing all 85 articles. While I would recommend everyone read the Constitution and Declaration of Independence, I can understand why someone would selectively read the Papers. All in all they're a fantastic snapshot of an opinion held by three men at the time the Constitution was in need of ratification. Treat them as opinion and recognize their worth, and it will provide an excellent means to understanding the document that formed our nation.
The Federalist Papers are why I hesitate to give this a full five-star rating. Because while I recognize their impact and the place they hold in the pantheon of classic American political texts, it's important to read TFP with some precaution. The men that wrote the essays certainly knew what they were talking about, but we have to remember that their letters to New York amount to today's equivalent of an op-ed column. The Papers absolutely provide a framework and ancillary means to understand the writings of the Constitution. However, these are essays of opinion; I cannot stress that enough. The Federalist Papers are a great insider look at what a couple of framers were thinking, but they cannot and should not be regarded as holding the same weight as the actual Constitution.
The Federalist Papers should also be read through at least once. Some of them are a little more extraneous than others, but I committed myself to finishing all 85 articles. While I would recommend everyone read the Constitution and Declaration of Independence, I can understand why someone would selectively read the Papers. All in all they're a fantastic snapshot of an opinion held by three men at the time the Constitution was in need of ratification. Treat them as opinion and recognize their worth, and it will provide an excellent means to understanding the document that formed our nation.
jhitch's review against another edition
2.0
This is an important read. I think it’s very informative. But I have read microwave instruction manuals that are more interesting then this boring ass dry book.
bluestjuice's review against another edition
4.0
This is the sort of book you read (or I read, anyway) because you think it'll be good for you, not because you expect it to be fun. Your literary lima beans, to better inform your understanding of American civics and provide insight into the motivations and thoughts of the much-referred-to-and-presumed-upon founding fathers. It's propaganda from the Federalist side of the movement, which is important to keep in mind, because although they won (we got this constitution ratified, yay!), and thereby established the government we have kept more or less intact to this day, their purpose in writing these was to justify the constitution and persuade others to join them in arguing for its adoption. Sometimes their arguments seem sketchy, or at least seem to glide over what might be legitimate complaints or counterarguments. However, in most cases, from a perspective 200+ years on, the things that seem to have been glaringly ill-conceived or missed are things that were either unthought-of at that period of time, or very difficult to conceive of when writing from the perspective of a nation that had just collectively risked everything in order to obtain liberty and franchise for its citizens. I feel certain that Alexander Hamilton and his contemporaries would have gaped in complete bewilderment at the prospect of a nation where only 1/3 of the citizens exercise their right to vote. Having just put their lives on the line, it would be literally unthinkable to them.
To lightly touch on my actual reading experience, it's a dense, difficult read, in part because of the subject matter and in part because of the tone. Certain papers, particularly the ones that give elaborate and detailed lessons in ancient political systems of government (I'm looking at you, Madison) were particularly grueling. Many of the papers in the later half of the collection, however, proved insightful and very interesting, as they delved into the significance and arguments in favor of the particular structure of the various offices of the federal government. I treated this like a study assignment and demanded 4 papers a day from myself, allowing myself to read something fluffier with my remaining daily time, and that worked pretty well, although a few ultra-long papers still threw me off kilter.
To lightly touch on my actual reading experience, it's a dense, difficult read, in part because of the subject matter and in part because of the tone. Certain papers, particularly the ones that give elaborate and detailed lessons in ancient political systems of government (I'm looking at you, Madison) were particularly grueling. Many of the papers in the later half of the collection, however, proved insightful and very interesting, as they delved into the significance and arguments in favor of the particular structure of the various offices of the federal government. I treated this like a study assignment and demanded 4 papers a day from myself, allowing myself to read something fluffier with my remaining daily time, and that worked pretty well, although a few ultra-long papers still threw me off kilter.
jdferron's review against another edition
4.0
Read some of the book. Will need to revisit later as well as use as a reference.
solaana's review against another edition
I think taking a look at the bookshelves it's on will explain how I feel about this book.
spencer_wright's review against another edition
4.0
Interesting to hear about the reasons and thoughts behind the constitution, it was quite dull but who am I to rate geniuses like them
author_d_r_oestreicher's review against another edition
5.0
I imagine authors expected most (New York state) voters to be able to read Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton. These eighty-five essays in favor of the U.S. Constitution were published in various newspapers between 8/27/1787 and 5/28/1788. The authors assumed the readers were familiar with European, Greek and Roman history and could follow legal arguments.
...
Closing caveat: Do not put these documents on a pedestal. They close with strong statements against term-limits, the bill of rights, and specific protection for freedom of the press. All of these things happened and most agree they were important.
For more see: http://1book42day.blogspot.com/2017/05/federalist-papers-by-alexander-hamilton.html
...
Closing caveat: Do not put these documents on a pedestal. They close with strong statements against term-limits, the bill of rights, and specific protection for freedom of the press. All of these things happened and most agree they were important.
For more see: http://1book42day.blogspot.com/2017/05/federalist-papers-by-alexander-hamilton.html
judyward's review against another edition
4.0
Given the current political climate I decided that I needed to go back to these essays published in New York after the Constitutional Convention defending and explaining the system of government that would be established by the proposed constitution that would replace the ineffectual Articles of Confederation. I've read before but they are always worth my time. Thank you Mr. Madison, Mr. Hamilton, and Mr. Jay.