Scan barcode
pattydsf's review against another edition
3.0
“Still, it strikes me that, taken together, they do make an argument, and it is this: the rise of American democracy is bound up with the history of reading and writing, which is one of the reasons the study of American history is inseparable from the study of American literature. In the early United States, literacy rates rose and the price of books and magazines and newspapers fell during the same decades that suffrage was being extended. With everything from constitutions and ballots to almanacs and novels, American wrote and read their way into a political culture inked and stamped and pressed in print.”
Lepore has written several books that have caught my attention. Back when I read book reviews more regularly, her books always had good reviews. However, as all readers know, there are lots of books and not as much time.
I can’t say why this was the first book of Lepore’s that I actually sat down and read, but I believe it was a good choice. I needed a refresher course on American history and this was a good way to be reminded of some of the highlights and low lights. Lepore starts with an essay on John Smith and ended with one on inaugural speeches. In between she recapped a variety of topics. I didn’t learn everything about American history, but that would take volumes. Lepore made me think about my country in new ways and that is very helpful.
I would recommend this collection of essays to anyone who only vaguely remembers their high school history classes.
Lepore has written several books that have caught my attention. Back when I read book reviews more regularly, her books always had good reviews. However, as all readers know, there are lots of books and not as much time.
I can’t say why this was the first book of Lepore’s that I actually sat down and read, but I believe it was a good choice. I needed a refresher course on American history and this was a good way to be reminded of some of the highlights and low lights. Lepore starts with an essay on John Smith and ended with one on inaugural speeches. In between she recapped a variety of topics. I didn’t learn everything about American history, but that would take volumes. Lepore made me think about my country in new ways and that is very helpful.
I would recommend this collection of essays to anyone who only vaguely remembers their high school history classes.
nonna7's review against another edition
5.0
'm on the waitlist for Jill Lepore's latest book, so I thought I would read this one after reading a review. It's really an interesting read. Unlike some historians, her style is accessible - probably a dirty word for some academics, but it works for me. The essays are on a variety of issues and people. The first one is about George Washington which makes a lot of sense. She talks about how so little is known about him and how much of his "history" has been simply made up. Personally I found her essay about the Constitution interesting. The indifference with which the original document was met was really interesting to me. It wasn't until 1924 that the original document which was found rolled up and all but discarded was transported to the Library of Congress and was placed there for public viewing. She explores Jefferson's relationship with Sally Hemmings and also talks about different books - both fictionalized and actual history that she says are not in the least factual. I would guess that a lot of conservatives would immediately assign her as a liberal and thereby ignore her. She writes for the New Yorker which instantly brands her. Still, she does back up her opinions with reality and is not afraid to go after some well known and even venerated names. She isn't afraid to puncture liberal balloons, but I doubt that most conservatives will be able to get beyond her analysis of the 2nd amendment and it's interpretation. I'll leave that for you to decide.
heyhawk's review against another edition
5.0
An excellent collection of narrative essays about American history that add up to a history of the way Americans have thought about their history over the years. Over a broad range of topics (excellent essays on the history of presidential biographies, on the history of murder, biographical sketches of Washington, Franklin and Poe, among others) she tells very good stories based on documentable records with great wit and prose. Like a story suite in fiction (say City of Saints and Madmen by Jeff Vandermeer or A Visit From the Goon Squad by Jennifer Egan) each essay stands on its own, yet contributes to an overall understanding of American history.
From this book, and from a couple of interviews with her I’ve heard or watched I get the sense that part of her project as an historian is to take narrative history back from journalists and/or bring narrative back to academic history. It’s easy to take the record and impose a narrative on it. As she says in her essay on the history of murder in America: “It’s hard to say, because Roth had wandered into a no-man’s land between the social sciences and the humanities. After a while, arguments made in that no-man’s land tend to devolve into meaninglessness: good government is good, bad government is bad, and everything’s better when everything’s better. Correlating murder with a lack of faith and hope may contain its horror, but only because, in a bar graph, atrocity yields to banality.” Into that no man’s land many biographers have strayed and overstated themselves. In her essay on Washington, she points out how little can be determined about him as a person based on the record, particularly about the state of his emotions or his relationship with his mother, and yet how biographers consistently make strong statements about both. She calls Ron Chernow to task for this (I’ve read his Washington with great enjoyment, but she’s right that he essentially made up what he put into his book about Washington’s emotions. He’s too thorough for me to not recommend his Washington, A Life, but if you do read it take those portions with a grain of salt). In her essay on Kit Carson and the West and dime western novels, she takes Hampton Sides similarly to task for inventing wholesale (with good motives) the internal monologue of the Native Americans in his story (I haven’t read Sides’ book and therefore can’t speak to it). The task she’s set herself is to construct narratives that can actually fit the historical record without excessive invention while maintaining the driving readability of the big popular narrative histories that populate the bestseller list. She accomplished that in these essays. The next book of hers I intend to read is her biography of Jane Franklin, sister of Ben. I will be paying attention to how well she rides that line in a longer form.
The essays on the history of presidential biographies and of presidential inaugural addresses are fantastic. She described the typical plot of the former: “Parties rise and fall. Wars begin and end. The world turns. But American campaign biographies have been following the same script for two centuries. East of piffle, west of hokum, the Boy from Hope always grows up to be the Man of the People.” She is witty and incisive. The book is made of great parts that add up to an even greater whole.
Highly Recommended.
From this book, and from a couple of interviews with her I’ve heard or watched I get the sense that part of her project as an historian is to take narrative history back from journalists and/or bring narrative back to academic history. It’s easy to take the record and impose a narrative on it. As she says in her essay on the history of murder in America: “It’s hard to say, because Roth had wandered into a no-man’s land between the social sciences and the humanities. After a while, arguments made in that no-man’s land tend to devolve into meaninglessness: good government is good, bad government is bad, and everything’s better when everything’s better. Correlating murder with a lack of faith and hope may contain its horror, but only because, in a bar graph, atrocity yields to banality.” Into that no man’s land many biographers have strayed and overstated themselves. In her essay on Washington, she points out how little can be determined about him as a person based on the record, particularly about the state of his emotions or his relationship with his mother, and yet how biographers consistently make strong statements about both. She calls Ron Chernow to task for this (I’ve read his Washington with great enjoyment, but she’s right that he essentially made up what he put into his book about Washington’s emotions. He’s too thorough for me to not recommend his Washington, A Life, but if you do read it take those portions with a grain of salt). In her essay on Kit Carson and the West and dime western novels, she takes Hampton Sides similarly to task for inventing wholesale (with good motives) the internal monologue of the Native Americans in his story (I haven’t read Sides’ book and therefore can’t speak to it). The task she’s set herself is to construct narratives that can actually fit the historical record without excessive invention while maintaining the driving readability of the big popular narrative histories that populate the bestseller list. She accomplished that in these essays. The next book of hers I intend to read is her biography of Jane Franklin, sister of Ben. I will be paying attention to how well she rides that line in a longer form.
The essays on the history of presidential biographies and of presidential inaugural addresses are fantastic. She described the typical plot of the former: “Parties rise and fall. Wars begin and end. The world turns. But American campaign biographies have been following the same script for two centuries. East of piffle, west of hokum, the Boy from Hope always grows up to be the Man of the People.” She is witty and incisive. The book is made of great parts that add up to an even greater whole.
Highly Recommended.
dennisdiehl's review against another edition
4.0
Most of the essays are illuminating and interesting but others not so much. I've come to expect more from Lepore.
graywacke's review
4.0
Lepore brings a lot into her essays. She is a professor of history and a staff writer on the New Yorker, where I believe all the essays here were originally published. She writes on a variety of subjects, including literature and history. And whatever she writes about, she leaves the impression of having some authority. When she writes a book review, it almost sounds like she knows the material better than the author.
The essays here seem to be ordered somewhat in chronological order of subject, beginning with an essay on the Mayflower, where she shreds [a:Nathaniel Philbrick|1641|Nathaniel Philbrick|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1227057661p2/1641.jpg]'s book of that title, and ending with a history of the generally uninspiring presidential addresses. The focus is always the United States, even for her essay on Charles Dickens. Essay evolve in different ways. Her essay on the history of the misrepresentation of the US constitution works toward originalism (the principle of interpretation that views the Constitution's meaning as fixed as of the time of enactment) and becomes something of critique of modern America conservatives, without ever saying so.
She would lose my interest sometimes, although some fault could go to the rapid pace of the reader, which, when I was less interested, sounded relentless. But when I was in the right frame of mind, these essays were all terrific. Highlights for me were here essays on Dickens in America, on Edgar Allen Poe's effort to find a market, and most of all, on Thomas Paine.
[a:Thomas Paine|57639|Thomas Paine|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1390497645p2/57639.jpg] arrived in the Americas destitute, nearly dead from sickness, with a piece of paper from from Benjamin Franklin recommending him. That would be enough to revive him. He wrote [b:Common Sense|161744|Common Sense|Thomas Paine|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1309209451s/161744.jpg|2548496], a key work of inspiration for the American revolt. Then, in Valley Forge, he wrote the American Crisis, which include his most famous line, "These are the times that try men's souls." More than anything else, Paine was devoted revolutionary, always against the power. He flowered briefly during the American Revolution, but afterward returned to England the write [b:Rights of Man|177523|Rights of Man|Thomas Paine|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1330098998s/177523.jpg|1667726], which was instantly banned. Paine fled to France during the French Revolution, and spent the reign of terror in prison writing [b:The Age of Reason|1031803|The Age of Reason|Thomas Paine|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1348970772s/1031803.jpg|1018077], which included a polemic against all organized religion (although he was not atheist). The now out-there thinker who maybe belonged in another time, or maybe just bristled against any time, somehow survived his imprisonment. When he finally returned to the newly formed United States, he found he was politically untouchable. One person (Jefferson?) wrote that while many read [b:The Age of Reason|1031803|The Age of Reason|Thomas Paine|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1348970772s/1031803.jpg|1018077], none could admit to it. Paine is considered a founding father of the US. He lived his remaining life in obscurity in America. There were six people at his funeral.
The essays here seem to be ordered somewhat in chronological order of subject, beginning with an essay on the Mayflower, where she shreds [a:Nathaniel Philbrick|1641|Nathaniel Philbrick|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1227057661p2/1641.jpg]'s book of that title, and ending with a history of the generally uninspiring presidential addresses. The focus is always the United States, even for her essay on Charles Dickens. Essay evolve in different ways. Her essay on the history of the misrepresentation of the US constitution works toward originalism (the principle of interpretation that views the Constitution's meaning as fixed as of the time of enactment) and becomes something of critique of modern America conservatives, without ever saying so.
She would lose my interest sometimes, although some fault could go to the rapid pace of the reader, which, when I was less interested, sounded relentless. But when I was in the right frame of mind, these essays were all terrific. Highlights for me were here essays on Dickens in America, on Edgar Allen Poe's effort to find a market, and most of all, on Thomas Paine.
[a:Thomas Paine|57639|Thomas Paine|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1390497645p2/57639.jpg] arrived in the Americas destitute, nearly dead from sickness, with a piece of paper from from Benjamin Franklin recommending him. That would be enough to revive him. He wrote [b:Common Sense|161744|Common Sense|Thomas Paine|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1309209451s/161744.jpg|2548496], a key work of inspiration for the American revolt. Then, in Valley Forge, he wrote the American Crisis, which include his most famous line, "These are the times that try men's souls." More than anything else, Paine was devoted revolutionary, always against the power. He flowered briefly during the American Revolution, but afterward returned to England the write [b:Rights of Man|177523|Rights of Man|Thomas Paine|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1330098998s/177523.jpg|1667726], which was instantly banned. Paine fled to France during the French Revolution, and spent the reign of terror in prison writing [b:The Age of Reason|1031803|The Age of Reason|Thomas Paine|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1348970772s/1031803.jpg|1018077], which included a polemic against all organized religion (although he was not atheist). The now out-there thinker who maybe belonged in another time, or maybe just bristled against any time, somehow survived his imprisonment. When he finally returned to the newly formed United States, he found he was politically untouchable. One person (Jefferson?) wrote that while many read [b:The Age of Reason|1031803|The Age of Reason|Thomas Paine|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1348970772s/1031803.jpg|1018077], none could admit to it. Paine is considered a founding father of the US. He lived his remaining life in obscurity in America. There were six people at his funeral.
alexandrahughes's review against another edition
4.0
This is probably one of the most well-written books I have ever read. I just enjoyed the way the author wrote. Even if you don't care much for history, you'll appreciate the writing style. The writing is what really earned the 4 stars.
The information given in the book was interesting. I found that I already knew a lot of it. But there were some small facts that I didn't know, which I really enjoyed.
The information given in the book was interesting. I found that I already knew a lot of it. But there were some small facts that I didn't know, which I really enjoyed.
italo_carlvino's review against another edition
3.0
I read the essay on Webster's dictionary and it was fun to learn about the controversy and drama surrounding it.
mlinsey's review against another edition
4.0
Jill Lepore's "In the Name of War" is one of my favorite books I was assigned in college, so I picked up this book of essays with high hopes. These were fantastically written--although I skipped the one that started rehashing a part of "The Warmth of Other Suns", which I read earlier this year.
This was great fun, and I could have read a whole book by Lepore about Poe. Anyways, I recommend this to my friends who don't read history regularly; it was interesting, accessible, and well-written.
This was great fun, and I could have read a whole book by Lepore about Poe. Anyways, I recommend this to my friends who don't read history regularly; it was interesting, accessible, and well-written.
numbuh12's review against another edition
4.0
This is my second Jill Lepore book (thank you, Coogan!) and I enjoyed it just as much as "The Whites of Their Eyes." I learned a lot about individuals I both did and didn't already know, and Lepore's entertaining writing style added an extra layer of enjoyment for me throughout the book. Anyone who wants to understand America just a little more and what it might mean to be American, read this book. It doesn't try to provide answers, only to provide some stories and possibilities.
More...