Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Summary of founding brothers by joseph ellis
Founding brothers summary
Founding brothers summary
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Summary of founding brothers by joseph ellis
The framework for this novel was placed by Ellis around the pivotal figures of the American Revolution, dubbed the revolutionary generation. He begins in the prologue by disclaiming to the reader that the events discussed in this novel should be interpreted in hindsight, as well as foresight, claiming that the topics discussed may be factual, but also misconstrued in different ways. It seems that the main idea of this novel is that, while being essentially accurate, the topics discussed may be representative of given individuals’ personal recollection. It will bring to light the different ideas of the founding brothers, as the novel calls them, and compare and contrast them in a non-biased manner. The novel begins with the recounting of the …show more content…
Ellis does provide information regarding the sourcing of his book. After the final chapter, a “Notes” section is included, detailing what he says is just some of the sources he has used over his course of researching early American history. He details in his explanation, that a full list comprised of all of his sources of information, would be nearly as long as the novel itself. The section of the book containing the sourcing is broken down by chapter. In each chapter, there are numbers for reference to the sourcing. Ellis uses a wide variety of sources. For the first half of the novel or so, the sources seem to be from different written works, composed throughout time, pertaining to specific traits of the individuals, as well as events, in the given time period. Towards the latter half of the book, the sourcing changes, more derived from letters written between influential members of this time period. I personally thought this book was written very well, so it is hard to say what I fell the weaknesses are, and it is hard to say many people would disagree, especially given that it won a Pulitzer Prize. Based off of peer reviews of the book, many people also feel that it a very strongly composed work. In conclusion, Founding Brothers by Joseph J. Ellis is a great composition of the events and individuals in the end and after the American Revolution. Ellis generates the point, that many of the stories recounted in this novel may have been slightly misconstrued by certain figures for personal benefit. He makes his point, again, by comparing and contrasting the different accounts, and attempts to piece together a whole
The author starts out with a lot of facts about both men in their younger years. Showing how they grew up and became adults with really very different upbringings. Then she tells how the two men worked together throughout most of their lives up until the Revolutionary War. She shows how the held similar government
In Woody Holton's Forced Founders, that most revered segment of the revolutionary generation, the elitist gentry class of Virginia, comes across very much as a group of self-serving reactionaries, rather then the idealized revolutionaries of the great patriotic myth of popular history. He sets about disassembling a central portion of the myth created by earlier generations of Consensus historians, by asserting that rather then gallantly leading the charge for independence, Virginia's elitist gentry resorted to independence as their last and only means of saving their elite ruling status, their economic futures, and even their very lives many feared. While this is very much an example of revisionist history, Holton has not so much rewritten history, as he has provided the back story of the complexity and diversity of the Virginia colony on the eve of the American Revolution. For while the book's title may insinuate otherwise, lowly groups like slaves and Indians discussed here are afforded only the status of “founders” by pressing those traditionally thought of in this role to take the plunge for independence. Still the papers and correspondence of the iconic figureheads of the revolutionary generation like Washington, Jefferson, and Madison make up the bulk of primary sources.
The compelling and infectious novel of Founding Brothers; The Revolutionary Generation written by Joseph J. Ellis combines our founding fathers weakness’ and strongest abilities in just six chapters. His six chapters tell the stories of: The duel between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr. This entertaining chapter describes how duels were undertaken and played out in that time, and helps the reader understand both men's motives. The dinner which Thomas Jefferson held for Alexander Hamilton and James
Gross takes a different perspective on the American Revolution explaining it’s effect on the everyday life of those in Concord, MA. Gross focuses on the social history of a community as it relates directly to the study American civilization. These things all contributed to the build up of the American revolution. The declining economy and intolerable tax brought about hatred for the British. The Continental Congress raised up an army in case just for self-defense. There then was a period of dead suspense upon the Concordia’s they knew British were up to invasion just not when.
Unfortunately, by choosing to focus on only a few events, Ellis's book fails in that it lacks somewhat of a scope. The book also focuses on some of the founding brothers in much greater detail than others. While I come away with a wealth of knowledge about both Adams and Jefferson, I have less knowledge of Ben Franklin and Aaron Burr, as Ellis's focus is significantly less on them.
Throughout the book, Gary B. Nash narrates the war in chronological order to recount the war as it happened and emphasize the events that allowed for people of different class, gender, and/or race to stand up and call for American Independence or to turn on their country and join the British forces. In short, Nash emphasizes that the revolution was a “people’s revolution” [Page XV] and as such divided each chapter with
Gordon S. Wood. The Radicalism of the American Revolution. Vintage; Reprint edition. March 2, 1993
The book starts out with a chapter called “Over the Mountains”, which in my opinion for this chapter the author wanted the reader to understand what it was like to live on the other side of the Appalachian Mountains. This is where he brings out one of the main characters in this book, which is Henry Brackenridge. Mr. Brackenridge is a cultivated man in Pittsburgh. He was wealthy and he was there to ratify the Constitution. He was a Realist. He was a college friend of James Madison at College of New Jersey. He was also in George Washington’s post as a chaplain for the Revolutionary War. He believed that Indians needed to be assimilated into the American culture. “… ever to be converted into civilized ways, their legal rights were to be protected” (Hogeland 19). He will become one of the leaders of the Whiskey Rebellion.
Gross takes a different perspective on the American Revolution explaining its effect on the everyday life of those in Concord, MA. Gross focuses on the social history of a community as it relates directly to the study American civilization. These things all contributed to the buildup of the American Revolution. The declining economy and intolerable tax brought about hatred for the British. The Continental Congress raised up an army in case just for self-defense. There then was a period of dead suspense upon the Concordia’s they knew British were up to invasion just not when.
As I began to research this paper I soon realized that the topic I was looking on would be difficult because of the aspect I was attempting to look at it from. I wanted to see everything from the eyes of those who remained undocumented by the history books. But if I’m looking for something that isn’t there, how on Earth can I find it? I turned to my paragraphs to show me the light. George Hewes was a lowly shoemaker in Boston in the pre-revolution years, and was written about by Alfred Young. But what did the author leave out, and why was he biased towards the young patriot.
One weakness is that much of the information included is not in chronological order. This makes it difficult for the reader to understand in which order these events had occurred. Flipping back and forth between pages is sometimes needed, as well as making a timeline of your own. While Kusmer did have a rhyme or reason as to why he had written the book how he did, a way to solve this issue would have been to simply write the book in chronological order. Another weakness is that sometimes the book is quite dry. It is an interesting read, however at times it is more like reading a history book:
The Founding Fathers were a revolutionary group, diverse in personalities and ideologies but shared the common goal of American liberty. They understood that the citizens should have a say in their government, and the government only obtains its power from the citizen’s consent. In order to avoid endless debates on issues that needed to be solved immediately, the revolutionary leaders compromised their beliefs. Joseph J. Ellis writes of the compromises that changed the constitutional debate into the creation of political parties in, The Founding Brothers. The 3 main chapters that show cased The Founding Brothers’ compromises are The Dinner, The Silence, and The Collaborators.
The defining weakness I found throughout the entire book, was Jessica Valenti’s insistence in talking in forced “teen speak” and the abundance of unnecessary profanity. It is hard to focus on important feminist issues when the author is complaining about her childhood enemies and how that one boy did not like her because of her nose. While it may work for some readers, it was so casual that it seemed more like a blog post then an educational book. There are many ways to keep a book fun and informal without losing credibility and failing to make readers think critically. It seemed as though she purposely dumbed-down her language in order to seem more accessible to young feminists, which in turn actually harmed the arguments that she was making. For example, in her most serious chapter, “The Blame (and Shame) Game”, she still uses made-up words like “fuck...
I feel that the movie has no weaknesses. This is because even though I had a few things I didn’t like such as the anonymity given, I realised that there was a reason for this which I explained in my strengths of the movie below.
Opinion:I thought that this was an interesting book right off the bat. Yet as i read further into the book, especially towards the end i began to get tired and felt like I was reading the same thing over and over. There was not a very good description of characters, I did not get to really know anybody in the book enough to really understand them much. Overall I would have to say this is a good book but definitely not Pulitzer prize material.