Customer Reviews: Read 8 more reviews...
 5 stars for the first nine chapers, 1 star for the last two. December 28, 2007
2 out of 4 found this review helpful
Therefore, I'll average it out at 3. I greatly enjoyed this book up until the last two chapters. The language was excellent, the characterizations vivid, the stories engrossing, and the information pertinent. The personalities of great American political minds jumped out of the page and were revealed in their genius and human fallibility. The chapters on Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt I thought were particularly good.
What a shame then that the last two chapters interjected so much socialist bias. I will say at the outset that I am politically conservative, and thus will not hide my own interpretive lens. However, I would like to believe that even the most staunch liberal would find the biased charges leveled at Hoover, and the unmitigated praise heaped on New Deal politics, to be distracting. Indeed, to the less disciplined reader it may ruin the book. Luckily it didn't for me, but it came close.
I understand that during the writing of this book Hofstadter was very sympathetic with socialist doctrine and a member of the Communist Party. His political leanings are evident in his interpretation of modern events. For example, in reference to Hoover he asks: "Could he have seriously believed that free enterprise might be restored to the post-war world?" (p. 308). Hofstadter betrays his historical determinism and love for the notion of a planned economy in arguments such as: "That there was anything natural, not to say inevitable, about this trend toward managed economies was a conclusion Hoover could never acknowledge..." (p. 309).
I agree with the previous reviewer that it would have been interesting to see Hofstadter's reaction to the rise of Goldwater economics and the Reagan era. It also would have been interesting to see his explanation for the recent elections of economically conservative administrations in Germany, France, and Scandinavia. Unfortunately he died before he could witness this reversion to more unfettered economic policies. Would he have referred to these events as the most "heroic setting-back of the clock" in world history, as he did somewhat sarcastically in regards to Hoover? (p. 308). I would like to believe that he would have realized the fallacy of the planned economy and the potential for prosperity in a free-market system, but there's no way to know for sure.
I would recommend the first 9 chapters of this book to those interested in American history. They are truly excellent. After chapter 9 I would stop, unless you're prepared to read with a several (large) grains of salt. I would also recommend "The Age of Reform" as a relatively more insightful and less biased Hofstadter work, although it only covers the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
 GREAT MEN OF AMERICA AS HUMANS September 29, 2007
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
I WON'T WASTE THE READER'S TIME PRAISING HOFFSTADTER--HE WAS ONE OF THE GREATS. THIS IS NOT A BOOK YOU WILL CUDDLE UP WITH ON A RAINY DAY. IT IS THOUGHT PROVOKING AND THOUGHTFUL. IT DELVES INTO STATESMEN OF ALL STRIPES AND DOESN'T MINCE WORDS FOR POLITICAL CORRECTNESS. THIS AUTHOR GIVES US A FRESH INSIGHT TO OUR HEROES AND MAY DISTURB US BY EXPOSING CLAY FEET THAT ARE NORMAL FOR ALL HUMANS GREAT AND AVERAGE. IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN AMERICA'S PAST AND FUTURE READ THIS BOOK.
A Masterwork of its Genre April 14, 2005
14 out of 15 found this review helpful
The classic story of American History, as told by Richard Hofstadter, has rightly come to be thought of as a masterpiece of American history since its original publication in 1948. This well deserved reputation comes from the rich storytelling, attention to detail, and thoughtful and complete narrative Hofstadter puts forward in this book.
Hofstadter takes as his guide one figure from each generation starting from the beginning of the Republic, and through biographical sketch describes both the historical figure and the time period he is depicting. Beginning with Jefferson and including people such as Jackson, Lincoln, Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt, Hofstadter demonstrates how a combination of the great men and the times they lived in shaped what have come down to us as the leading tradition in American politics: the belief in American greatness, individualism, and compassion.
The most significant contribution of this book is to show how these men, who have come down to us as legendary and nearly mythological figures were very much political animals. Just like Bill Clinton and George Bush make decisions today based on political calculation, so to do Lincoln and Jefferson. That these men were not demigods but in fact mere humans makes their achievements that much more incredible.
A Political Milestone April 18, 2002
45 out of 52 found this review helpful
"American Political Tradition" became an immediate milestone in the field of American political study, propelling author Richard Hofstadter to the frontal ranks of historians at the age of 32 upon its publication in 1948. The history professor at Columbia University would ultimately win 2 Pulitzer Prizes before dying at the age of 54 in 1970.The point Hofstadter consistently made is how important pragmatic considerations were in the evolution of the great political shakers and movers of American political annals. He rejects the view of historian Charles Beard and others about the impact of economic determinism in the foundation and shaping of early America. Hofstadter does not discount its impact, but cites the pragmatic necessity of studious compromise involving the interests of important American sociological groups which were often disparate, such as the manufacturing interests of the north and the rural farming interests of the south, as well as slavery and anti-slavery interests. The need for compromise influenced Thomas Jefferson in constructing a U.S. Constitution, which relied on the separation powers doctrine of English philosopher John Locke and that of separation of powers advanced by French social scientist Montesquieu. The chapter on Franklin Delano Roosevelt is fascinating as a study in political pragmatism. Roosevelt ran on a Democratic Party platform for 1932 which rivals one of the most conservative doctrines ever put on paper by an American political party. He initially criticized incumbent President Herbert Hoover for spending too much money in dealing with the Depression and its related effects. Once in office he changed his mind and forged a government activist agenda embraced by progressive reformers. Abraham Lincoln is studied in detail as well within the framework of a very astute political figure with his eye squarely on success in that arena from the beginning, where the "railsplitter" image played well with voters. He purposely straddled the fence on the slavery issue since there was much controversy surrounding the issue even within the fledgling Republican Party which he joined after the Whig Party folded, despite its reputation for being an essentially anti-slavery party. Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson are evaluated as two important political figures who perpetually juggled conservative basic instincts against the need they believed existed for certain progressive systemic reforms. For Roosevelt this meant anti-trust legislation and conservation, while Wilson, whose traditional Virginia conservative roots left him unwilling to budge in the field of race relations, nonetheless undertook mighty electoral reforms embraced by William Jennings Bryan and the populist movement. Bryan is another figure covered in the book. The chapter of Herbert Hoover is also fascinating. Hofstadter envisioned him as the last of the laissez-faire American presidents. In the wake of the great upheavals occurring in America, particularly related to the Great Depression, a political pragmatism later advanced by Roosevelt to stem the tide of unrest was eschewed by Hoover.
Social history at it's best July 27, 2001
14 out of 16 found this review helpful
This wonderful book fills a hole in American history that's been open too long. Instead of treating great figures as saints or unapproachable geniuses Hofstadter gives a realistic picture of what they believed and what they stood for. More than that he points to the philosophic and cultural continuity that these figures embodied, struggled with, and sometimes redefined. It's as much about how the greater American view on work and indivdualism evolved from the founding as about the men who made it. Also, kind of inadvertantly, the author weaves in a history of the American liberal idea and how Jeffersonian liberalism stressing free markets, small business, and individualism, was transformed into New Deal liberalism. He argues that the transformation wasn't a betrayal but was instead a development based on necessary responses to an economically and socially changing world. Enjoy!
|
