Harvard University Press
368 Pages
As I wind down the George Washington portion of my Presidential Reading Project, I find that some of the books that I’ve chosen did not actually fit into the parameters that I had initially set. I have been more than a little obsessive with this list. As a result books like A Revolutionary Friendship by Francis D. Cogliano made their way onto the list when they should have been saved for complementary reading. However, since I read it, I will review it as part of my project.
This book explores the relationship between George Washington and Thomas Jefferson from the birth of the American Revolution through the end of Washington’s life. As both were proud Virginians, one would suspect that they would have much in common despite their wide age gap. Despite similar life experiences, both men approached the new US governing style from different points of view. While Washington favored a strong federal government, Jefferson, wary of monarchical tyranny, favored a smaller federal government with limited powers. Despite their differences, they found instances where they could come together for the betterment of their new nation.
Frankly, of all the books I’ve read about Washington, this one ranks among my least favorite. Cogliano is insistent to remind the readers at every available moment that both Washington and Jefferson owned a multitude of slaves. He hammers home, again and again, that the Founding Fathers were not the unblemished heroes that they’ve become over the intervening two and a half centuries. This gets repetitive and monotonous, taking away from what could have been a terrific study on two colonial points of view on the building of a new government. The issues, while extremely important in the context of the men that they truly were, could have been addressed once, and left at that.
Instead, what we get is a hodge podge of cherry-picked ideals that the author wanted to use to set his narrative, rather than let the narrative speak for itself. Additionally, the reader is left with a timeline that is jumbled and sometimes confusing. Too often, Cogliano uses modern moralities to define the men from the 18th century. Time and time again, this has proven to detract from history. As historians and readers, we need to understand what these men and women were thinking in their times, not our own. We then should use the evolution of our societal thoughts over the centuries to teach us how to move forward. When authors and researchers do what Cogliano has done, they are directing the thought rather than investing in the dwindling art of critical thinking. Their job is to get us to think, not to tell us what to think.
I wanted to like A Revolutionary Friendship, but in the end I couldn’t get around his poor research, nor his insistence on revising this history to “fit” into a modern setting. In a true history, the author should be mostly unbiased and not insert himself into the conversation. The time for his ideas would be in the forward or afterward, but not in the meat of the history. Francis Cogliano wants to make sure the reader knows exactly where his politics fall, page after page. Because of this, frankly, he ruined an excellent opportunity to explore the differences between these men that helped to establish this country.
Craig Bacon is starting to get more and more like John Adams as he reads some of these books -- cranky. Thankfully, there are many good books coming soon.
NEXT UP: Washington’s Farewell by John Avlon