Scan barcode
bozickk's review against another edition
4.0
Interesting read. It made me rethink much of how I viewed Jackson’s Presidency.
murph_the_serf's review against another edition
2.0
The book spends too much time focusing on the players around Jackson ... but maybe that's a good thing after all since Jackson is kind of an asshole. If Jackson was likable enough I might try reading another bio to see if it might just be the author but at this point I'm happy to just put this on the shelf and move on to Van Buren.
novel_natasha's review against another edition
5.0
I will never look at ANY President of the United States the same way again. Wonderful, wonderful book.
sevenlefts's review against another edition
3.0
Although I found this book interesting, it took me a while to get through it. I thought it was well written, but I tended to get bogged down in some of the issues that Jackson dealt with during his presidency. I found the social issues and his personal life more compelling than some of the political issues surrounding him -- probably a sign that I should have read a more general biography rather than one subtitled "in the White House."
Most interesting of all was the drama surrounding the wife of Jackson's first Secretary of the Navy, Margaret O'Neill Timberlake Eaton (and later Buchignani). Amazing, the frenzy Washington high society worked itself into about this colorful character. It appears Martin VanBuren owed his presidency to the scandal surrounding her. I also thought the portrait of his immediate family was quite moving.
I was less interested in the issues of nullification and the national bank. I just couldn't get as worked about them as Jackson obviously was. Overall, I thought this was a good book, but I don't think I was the right reader for it.
Most interesting of all was the drama surrounding the wife of Jackson's first Secretary of the Navy, Margaret O'Neill Timberlake Eaton (and later Buchignani). Amazing, the frenzy Washington high society worked itself into about this colorful character. It appears Martin VanBuren owed his presidency to the scandal surrounding her. I also thought the portrait of his immediate family was quite moving.
I was less interested in the issues of nullification and the national bank. I just couldn't get as worked about them as Jackson obviously was. Overall, I thought this was a good book, but I don't think I was the right reader for it.
zebrakat's review against another edition
Not a biography just hero worship. I also don’t entirely understand why Meacham keeps referring to native Americans/indigenous people as Indians. It would make sense if it was just in quotes from contemporaries of Jackson but it isn’t confined to that.
jimbowen0306's review against another edition
5.0
Andrew Jackson was the 7th American President. He won the popular vote for President in 1824, 1828 and 1832, but only ended up getting the position in 1828 and 1832. This book looks at his presidential experience. It's important because during his presidency he created the first real political party (that we might recognise today) and was the president who pretty much forced the US into a structure we have today, with a strong executive president that leads the country and expects the states to fall in behind him.
The big issue I have with the book is that I'm not altogether sure I liked the guy. He effectively re-defined the presidency, and to do that you have to have a very clear vision and the stubbornness to see it through. The thing is, while he was a populist, and I can see why Americans like him, he (to me at least) epitomises all that I find wrong about America. He pushed through a number of reforms that created greater political involvement in the population, but at a cost that ensured that future presidents only mirror popular sentiment, rather than trying to lead it.
If you want to understand the American presidency, you really need to read this book, but if you do, expect to be as infuriated as you are educated.
The big issue I have with the book is that I'm not altogether sure I liked the guy. He effectively re-defined the presidency, and to do that you have to have a very clear vision and the stubbornness to see it through. The thing is, while he was a populist, and I can see why Americans like him, he (to me at least) epitomises all that I find wrong about America. He pushed through a number of reforms that created greater political involvement in the population, but at a cost that ensured that future presidents only mirror popular sentiment, rather than trying to lead it.
If you want to understand the American presidency, you really need to read this book, but if you do, expect to be as infuriated as you are educated.