Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.51 AVERAGE
3.51 AVERAGE
challenging
informative
slow-paced
informative
inspiring
medium-paced
challenging
informative
slow-paced
Although one of the more comprehensive bios of Samuel Adams, I found the content dry and not to my liking. I need my history books to enrapture me, so that I am turning the pages and losing track of time. This book just did not do that for me. History can be fun and exciting, but the author needs to weave the story that way.
Adams was a lesser known Patriot, and I always wondered why this was. Schiff does explain this and I am now quite satisfied to know why. Schiff's accounts of the 3 important Patriot acts (The Battle of Lexington, The Boston Massacre and The Tea Party) picked up the pace a bit. As in all history, there were somethings I did not know and those were also appreciated.
I am impressed by Schiff's research, but her writing style is not for me. I doubt I will read another book by her.
Adams was a lesser known Patriot, and I always wondered why this was. Schiff does explain this and I am now quite satisfied to know why. Schiff's accounts of the 3 important Patriot acts (The Battle of Lexington, The Boston Massacre and The Tea Party) picked up the pace a bit. As in all history, there were somethings I did not know and those were also appreciated.
I am impressed by Schiff's research, but her writing style is not for me. I doubt I will read another book by her.
informative
slow-paced
A thorough and dense yet very readable biography of an important Colonial figure that most of us only know as the namesake for a beer company. Overshadowed by his more famous cousin in most of the historical accounts of the Colonial and Revolutionary eras, Samuel Adams is perhaps more important than John, as he was more responsible than almost anyone for the change in attitudes of the Colonial settlers against the Crown and British rule. If you enjoy early American history you will enjoy this book.
challenging
informative
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
Smithsonian's excerpts from the introduction caught my eye, and having read other Schiff, had to get this. It's solidly informative, while Schiff also notes that we just don't know a lot about Adams because he preserved little correspondence he received and told others to burn his to them — if it wasn't unsigned.
Schiff's bio is generally sympathetic without cutting blank checks. She notes the financial straits he was in much of his life weren't entirely his fault, but they were in part, including his indolence as a city tax collector and other things.
As for his place in the revolutionary pantheon? She notes that he and the increasingly erratic Otis were the leading lights in Boston. We don't know if Adams was set on independence before the "Massacre," but she gives enough of what is known to take that as a reasonable conjecture. And, while noting that he didn't incite the early Stamp Act mobbery, she shows repeatedly how Adams could be "economical" with the truth, including the account of the so-called "Massacre."
She also shows why, other than the "burn this letter," he fell out of the limelight despite Jefferson, among others, touting him to the skies. One is that during the Second Continental Congress, his lack of skills as a political organizer — not an organizer of movements, but a creator of organizations — left him outside the center. It's interesting that cousin John, not him, was part of the Declaration of Independence committee of five. And, tho not discussed by Schiff, it's interesting that cousin John, not him, was tapped to write Massachusetts' post-independence constitution, tho Sam was part of the three-member committee tapped to draft the constitution. It's almost as if his writing skills, which were good, simply deserted him on government organization.
His star further faded when Hancock, back on the outs with him after not being nominated to command the Continental Army, bought into the rumor that he was part of the Conway Cabal. Schiff claims he knew little, but yet, doesn't show a lot of homework on that statement.
He was also arguably a hypocrite on an issue after the war that surely damaged his standing with what would become the anti-Federalists and it's a surprise Jefferson didn't pick up on this. He thought the ringleaders of Shay's Rebellion should be hung. (Hancock, as governor, pardoned them.) It would have been nice to see more of Adams' attempt to defend himself, whether in his own letters, copies of letters others sent to him, or recorded public speeches.
Some other reviewers have commented on "lack of spark," as in Schiff not making Adams come more alive. To me, that is part of it; she gets his biography clear, but the writing style is kind of "here it is." There's also the issue in that she doesn't at engage in the reasoned conjecture that can be part of good history. For example, does SHE think that Adams was plumping for independence pre-Massacre?
And, on the "burn this" angle, that wasn't in play after the Treaty of Paris in 1783 and news of it arriving in the United States. So, why don't we have hardly any letters from this time on? Part of it, perhaps was the palsy or tremor that Adams had. But, was part of it a deliberate design to consider the mystery?
Schiff's bio is generally sympathetic without cutting blank checks. She notes the financial straits he was in much of his life weren't entirely his fault, but they were in part, including his indolence as a city tax collector and other things.
As for his place in the revolutionary pantheon? She notes that he and the increasingly erratic Otis were the leading lights in Boston. We don't know if Adams was set on independence before the "Massacre," but she gives enough of what is known to take that as a reasonable conjecture. And, while noting that he didn't incite the early Stamp Act mobbery, she shows repeatedly how Adams could be "economical" with the truth, including the account of the so-called "Massacre."
She also shows why, other than the "burn this letter," he fell out of the limelight despite Jefferson, among others, touting him to the skies. One is that during the Second Continental Congress, his lack of skills as a political organizer — not an organizer of movements, but a creator of organizations — left him outside the center. It's interesting that cousin John, not him, was part of the Declaration of Independence committee of five. And, tho not discussed by Schiff, it's interesting that cousin John, not him, was tapped to write Massachusetts' post-independence constitution, tho Sam was part of the three-member committee tapped to draft the constitution. It's almost as if his writing skills, which were good, simply deserted him on government organization.
His star further faded when Hancock, back on the outs with him after not being nominated to command the Continental Army, bought into the rumor that he was part of the Conway Cabal. Schiff claims he knew little, but yet, doesn't show a lot of homework on that statement.
He was also arguably a hypocrite on an issue after the war that surely damaged his standing with what would become the anti-Federalists and it's a surprise Jefferson didn't pick up on this. He thought the ringleaders of Shay's Rebellion should be hung. (Hancock, as governor, pardoned them.) It would have been nice to see more of Adams' attempt to defend himself, whether in his own letters, copies of letters others sent to him, or recorded public speeches.
Some other reviewers have commented on "lack of spark," as in Schiff not making Adams come more alive. To me, that is part of it; she gets his biography clear, but the writing style is kind of "here it is." There's also the issue in that she doesn't at engage in the reasoned conjecture that can be part of good history. For example, does SHE think that Adams was plumping for independence pre-Massacre?
And, on the "burn this" angle, that wasn't in play after the Treaty of Paris in 1783 and news of it arriving in the United States. So, why don't we have hardly any letters from this time on? Part of it, perhaps was the palsy or tremor that Adams had. But, was part of it a deliberate design to consider the mystery?
A readable, accessible account of the most enigmatic of the U.S. Founding Fathers.
This biography examines Samuel Adams's life, family relationships, and general personality as well as his thoughts on and role in the Revolution and the creation of the United States. Through Adams's story we also gain a fresh perspective on the late colonial era and the lead up to the Revolution.
Some things I learned: Adams was an outlier compared to the other famous Founders: he was poorer, more careful about hiding his tracks, happy to let others take credit for his ideas, and well-known at the time for being a skilled orator and agitator.
Although contemporary history books and popular culture focus on the likes of Hamilton, John Adams (a younger second cousin), Jefferson, and Washington, Schiff informs us that Samuel Adams (never Sam), was one of, if not *the*, principal force behind the idea of independence. He knew how to elevate events in the public mind (using the term "the Boston Massacre"; demonizing the Stamp Act) and to quietly orchestrate acts of rebellion (the Boston Tea Party).
As is expected with Schiff, the biography is based on as much as possible on contemporary and firsthand accounts. The text is interesting and engaging.
The audiobook was read by Jason Culp, who subtly distinguished among the individuals and nicely signaled the difference between quotations and narrative text. His delivery is expressive and holds our attention.
Thanks to the publishers for review copies in various formats.
This biography examines Samuel Adams's life, family relationships, and general personality as well as his thoughts on and role in the Revolution and the creation of the United States. Through Adams's story we also gain a fresh perspective on the late colonial era and the lead up to the Revolution.
Some things I learned: Adams was an outlier compared to the other famous Founders: he was poorer, more careful about hiding his tracks, happy to let others take credit for his ideas, and well-known at the time for being a skilled orator and agitator.
Although contemporary history books and popular culture focus on the likes of Hamilton, John Adams (a younger second cousin), Jefferson, and Washington, Schiff informs us that Samuel Adams (never Sam), was one of, if not *the*, principal force behind the idea of independence. He knew how to elevate events in the public mind (using the term "the Boston Massacre"; demonizing the Stamp Act) and to quietly orchestrate acts of rebellion (the Boston Tea Party).
As is expected with Schiff, the biography is based on as much as possible on contemporary and firsthand accounts. The text is interesting and engaging.
The audiobook was read by Jason Culp, who subtly distinguished among the individuals and nicely signaled the difference between quotations and narrative text. His delivery is expressive and holds our attention.
Thanks to the publishers for review copies in various formats.
challenging
emotional
informative
reflective
medium-paced
As someone who loves her Am-Rev books, it's such a pleasure to finally get a great biography of so important and little understood a figure.
Content Warnings
Minor: Child death, Death, Gun violence, Slavery, Violence, Grief, Religious bigotry, Death of parent, Fire/Fire injury, War