John Roos’ Blog

This book deals with stories from American history, stories dealing with people and situations that often are overlooked or not adequately well known. Davis writes reasonably well. Yet, ultimately I was disappointed. I decided that there were three reasons for my reaction.

First, Davis makes frequent use of the “cut and paste” technique. For example, in his opening chapter, about Aaron Burr, Davis quotes, at length, from books by James and Christopher Collier, Andrew Burstein, Ron Chernow, Nancy Isenberg, and others. Dealing with Andrew Jackson, for example, Davis provides lengthy quotes Robert Remini, Jon Meacham, and others.

These frequent quotes gives this book a decidedly second-hand feel. What became clear was that Davis is seeking to write for the general public. In itself, there is nothing wrong about this goal. But the result just felt like pop history. In a way, that he was talking “down” to the audience” with his organization of selected facts. He seems too content to ride the shoulders of serious historians. Those who have taken the time to do solid research, and write serious books.

That brings me to my second objection: He seems to have a clear agenda. I agree with many of his ingoing premises. That American history is more complicated than the stereotypic images would suggest. That many of America’s heroes are highly flawed and not the saints that many think them to be. That many injustices have been done.

But, having discovered some unsavory information and questionable behavior, he seems just too delighted to want to talk about it. Too eager to burst bubbles, to deflate the reputation of people who might be considered heroes. Men like Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson, for example. In the process, his (perhaps not too subtle) goal is to deal with contemporary society. Even to shape thoughts about politics and politicians today.

I certainly would agree that all of our heroes were flawed, including our Founding Fathers. Davis just seemed to take too much joy out of pointing out these flaws.

Third, and last, I simply had hoped for more, and was disappointed. This is the kind of book that I enjoy. I’ve spent much time in recent weeks dealing with long, weighty books, dealing with fairly deep subjects. I picked up this book at Borders because of its promise and potential. It looked highly readable. In fact, it is. it looked like it dealt with subjects that were not well known and potential interesting. Yes, this is true, in a way.

Ultimately, I gained some insights from this book. Yes, in a way, I did enjoy it. Ultimately, it did tell some stories that will continue to linger in my mind. But I just expected something not as shallow. Something more.