Scan barcode
reluctantheroine's review against another edition
3.0
I think this book captures the struggle between academic historians and public history.
While, Lepore focuses on the Tea Party's attempt to use the myth of the American revolution for their own political purposes during the early years of the Obama administration, she also discusses how the revolution has been used for political purposes throughout American history, from the revolutionary generation's own petty scrabbles over who did what to the New Left use of it during the Watergate scandal and impeachment of Nixon. I think it's also a useful book to read during an election season when people attempt to invoke the "Founding Fathers" (a term, Lepore notes, that was only coined a century ago by Warren G. Harding) to support their political opinions, despite the fact that the United States and the world are completely different from what they were 200 years ago.
One of my favourite parts is when she discusses how John Adams criticized for Mercy Otis Warren for only mentioning him in four pages of her book, which she responded to by updating the second edition to argue that he was entirely inconesquential to the revolution.
While, Lepore focuses on the Tea Party's attempt to use the myth of the American revolution for their own political purposes during the early years of the Obama administration, she also discusses how the revolution has been used for political purposes throughout American history, from the revolutionary generation's own petty scrabbles over who did what to the New Left use of it during the Watergate scandal and impeachment of Nixon. I think it's also a useful book to read during an election season when people attempt to invoke the "Founding Fathers" (a term, Lepore notes, that was only coined a century ago by Warren G. Harding) to support their political opinions, despite the fact that the United States and the world are completely different from what they were 200 years ago.
One of my favourite parts is when she discusses how John Adams criticized for Mercy Otis Warren for only mentioning him in four pages of her book, which she responded to by updating the second edition to argue that he was entirely inconesquential to the revolution.
juperez's review against another edition
3.0
Jill Lepore delves into the mis-use of history, specifically interpretations of the American Revolution by right-wing activists and politicians, in this one and does a pretty decent job synthesizing just how the Revolution has left a confusing legacy for those on the right and left alike. And though it’s well-written, the book is slim and tries to get at everything (i.e. the origins of the modern-day Tea Party, a concise history of the American Revolution, etc.) without analyzing in enough detail the ins and outs of what Lepore calls “Historical Fundamentalism.” This book intrigued me tremendously, though it’s only failing was in its length — perhaps it might work better as a piece of long-form journalism?
skbarks's review against another edition
5.0
Excellent liberal propaganda. Some select words of wisdom: "The founders were not prophets. Nor did they hope to be worshipped. They believed that to defer without examination to what your forefathers believed is to become a slave to the tyranny of the past."
gingerreader99's review against another edition
3.0
I think Jill Lepore makes some great arguments in this book about the Tea Party and about how people take and twist history to fit their own narrative. I wish it was longer and explored the Tea Party from a wider scope than mostly around Boston but nevertheless I was able to pick out some great notes for an essay I'm working on. Austin Hess and his quotes will be particularly useful in framing the Tea Party movement as not being a populist movement or if it is, a failed one.
taffy_sea's review against another edition
3.0
I highly recommend this book. Overall it only merited 3.5*, but in terms of how much it influenced how I think of the American Revolution and Founding Fathers and how Americans use history to justify whatever causes we believe in... I'd rate this 5/5.
It's really interesting to read this book now (2021, post-Trump). While the subject matter is narrow and and the Tea Party isn't especially relevant these days, this book is still worth reading. It was honestly refreshing to read about the non-Trumpian right, and more importantly, Lepore's central premise absolutely holds: Americans use bad history to prop up our political arguments, and it's not great.
Lepore does an excellent job of giving readers a clear, vibrant sense of what life was like in Revolutionary America. Her point is that doing things exactly the way our founders had them isn't actually all that appealing (think mental health care, medical care, slavery, women's education). Lepore seamlessly weaves the stories of women (Jane Mecom, Benjamin Franklin's sister, and Phyllis Wheatley, the poet born into slavery) into a narrative that is usually overwhelmingly dominated by white men. The other point Lepore successfully drives home is that the founders are definitely not "rolling in the graves" right now over whatever the right or the left is doing, because that is supernatural nonsense that collapses our idea of history in a bid to manipulate or justify whatever culture war is currently going on.
I had to laugh when Lepore called Cambridge, Massachusetts "arguably the most liberal city in the most liberal state in the nation." That's the first I'd heard of it; what an East Coast perspective. In fairness, this book is about the Boston Tea Party, so that excuses its Boston-centrism, but honestly, you could just about forget there's more to America than the Eastern Seaboard while reading this, it's that rah-rah around Boston and Cambridge.
I wonder what the woman who told Lepore that the government is for the military, voting, and the post office (I'm paraphrasing) would say today, now that the post office is a hot button issue. Lol.
The ending was weak, but I can excuse it because the rest of the book was great. Yes, there were a few small inaccuracies, and obviously there's a liberal bias given the book's intent, but overall this book was well-researched and well-written, by an author who knows her way around the historiography and is comfortable making her point clearly and concisely to a general audience.
I encourage anyone who's interested in the blurb to read this book. Though it was written in and about a very specific time (2010! those innocent days), the subject will never go out of style. We politicize history every day, and that history is rarely rigorously researched, but rather a nostalgia-tinged retconned free-for-all that backs up a particular vision of what society should look and act like.
It's really interesting to read this book now (2021, post-Trump). While the subject matter is narrow and and the Tea Party isn't especially relevant these days, this book is still worth reading. It was honestly refreshing to read about the non-Trumpian right, and more importantly, Lepore's central premise absolutely holds: Americans use bad history to prop up our political arguments, and it's not great.
Lepore does an excellent job of giving readers a clear, vibrant sense of what life was like in Revolutionary America. Her point is that doing things exactly the way our founders had them isn't actually all that appealing (think mental health care, medical care, slavery, women's education). Lepore seamlessly weaves the stories of women (Jane Mecom, Benjamin Franklin's sister, and Phyllis Wheatley, the poet born into slavery) into a narrative that is usually overwhelmingly dominated by white men. The other point Lepore successfully drives home is that the founders are definitely not "rolling in the graves" right now over whatever the right or the left is doing, because that is supernatural nonsense that collapses our idea of history in a bid to manipulate or justify whatever culture war is currently going on.
I had to laugh when Lepore called Cambridge, Massachusetts "arguably the most liberal city in the most liberal state in the nation." That's the first I'd heard of it; what an East Coast perspective. In fairness, this book is about the Boston Tea Party, so that excuses its Boston-centrism, but honestly, you could just about forget there's more to America than the Eastern Seaboard while reading this, it's that rah-rah around Boston and Cambridge.
I wonder what the woman who told Lepore that the government is for the military, voting, and the post office (I'm paraphrasing) would say today, now that the post office is a hot button issue. Lol.
The ending was weak, but I can excuse it because the rest of the book was great. Yes, there were a few small inaccuracies, and obviously there's a liberal bias given the book's intent, but overall this book was well-researched and well-written, by an author who knows her way around the historiography and is comfortable making her point clearly and concisely to a general audience.
I encourage anyone who's interested in the blurb to read this book. Though it was written in and about a very specific time (2010! those innocent days), the subject will never go out of style. We politicize history every day, and that history is rarely rigorously researched, but rather a nostalgia-tinged retconned free-for-all that backs up a particular vision of what society should look and act like.
bravelass85's review against another edition
5.0
This is a must-read for anyone interested in how the past (our founding fathers, our revolution, etc.) is constantly being co-opted by politicians and interest groups to manipulate people into supporting their cause. Lepore gently analyses the connections and disconnections inherent in how the right-wing of the conservative base thinks about and refers to our historical past. She focuses particularly on the Tea Party. I loved her analysis and it was a light burden to bear - only 200 pages. Read it.
vanessammc's review against another edition
3.0
A major plus for this book is that Lepore provides historical context to counter the Tea Party's arguments.This book does a nice job of exploring the party's themes from a historical perspective to counter those themes, which is a bonus if you are not familiar with American Revolution history. There is a little editorializing at some points, but it's kept to a minimum. The modern Tea Party is not discussed as much as I expected, but you do get a sense of what their ideas are (or were at the time she wrote the book).
jfl's review against another edition
4.0
Jill Lepore’s short monograph is a significant piece of analysis and research. It should be required reading for all of the well informed—for all people who are truly considered in their understanding of the world about them. For all people who want to understand the rise and growing dominance of the Tea Party movement and its anti-historical nature.
The work is short: a prologue, five chapters and an epilogue. A total of 165 pages plus notes. But it is carefully crafted. Each chapter touches on the rise of the new Tea Party; switches into selected moments of the American Revolution that unraveled in Boston; and concludes with reflections on the American Bi-centennial.
In the course of the book’s movements, Lepore provides fresh understanding of the Tea Party and its linkages to the historic events of the later part of the XVIII century. She also provides new insights into the American Revolution and the people who were part of that movement. But for me, even more importantly, she reminds us of the failure, starting in the 1960s, of the academic historians to engage the world outside of the academy. Historical fundamentalism, fed by hagiographers who emerged during the preparations for the Bi-centennial and in the vacuum created by the isolation of the professional historians, became the underpinnings of the new “rabble's” (my characterization and not Lepore’s) anti-historical view of the Founding Fathers and the American Revolution.
Greatly compacted, the work took a second reading on my part to begin to unpack its wealth. It is well worth the time.
The work is short: a prologue, five chapters and an epilogue. A total of 165 pages plus notes. But it is carefully crafted. Each chapter touches on the rise of the new Tea Party; switches into selected moments of the American Revolution that unraveled in Boston; and concludes with reflections on the American Bi-centennial.
In the course of the book’s movements, Lepore provides fresh understanding of the Tea Party and its linkages to the historic events of the later part of the XVIII century. She also provides new insights into the American Revolution and the people who were part of that movement. But for me, even more importantly, she reminds us of the failure, starting in the 1960s, of the academic historians to engage the world outside of the academy. Historical fundamentalism, fed by hagiographers who emerged during the preparations for the Bi-centennial and in the vacuum created by the isolation of the professional historians, became the underpinnings of the new “rabble's” (my characterization and not Lepore’s) anti-historical view of the Founding Fathers and the American Revolution.
Greatly compacted, the work took a second reading on my part to begin to unpack its wealth. It is well worth the time.
swmproblems's review against another edition
5.0
Jill Lepore is amazing and I love her. Her writing style comes across like poetry sometimes but her insights and ideas about history are why I enjoy her books so much. One of the most memorable digs she puts in the book is about how detrimental it is for historians to no longer write histories of the United States from the beginning until the present. She says not many historians want to take that on because of all the controversy and difficulty it would be to do. But....she says if historians don't continue to do that then people will start writing history books that are less than qualified, like Glenn Beck and Bill O'Riley. I've thought something similar to that as I'm browsing Barnes and Nobles and I see all the Fox News guys (and gals) with these new books about our founding and our founding fathers. I think how shitty that is since people believe what these people say as fact and I'm positive a lot of their book is just as bias as their television shows. Disgusting. I love you Jill Lepore