nenobeano's review against another edition
5.0
What an incredible work of historical writing. One of the most well written, well researched, and most comprehensive biographies I’ve ever read.
gslife's review against another edition
2.0
Fredrick Douglass is a fascinating figure, but a heavier editorial hand and a culling of at least 150 pages would improve the quality of this work substantially. I have some guess that this biography is well-regarded not for its content but for its subject and the résumé of its author.
David Blight, Yale-educated and Yale-employed, often uses phrases such as “may have” or “perhaps thought” regarding his subject. Douglass’s initial meeting with his later wife Anna Murray is so littered with these suppositions it beggars belief that an experienced biographer would write such.
Another egregious passage concerns a woman with romantic interest in Douglass staying near their house. Blight admits we have no idea what Douglass’s wife Anna’s response to this was, and so turns to a modern poet. The next seven sentences concern this poet and conclude with “art provides the means to elusive truths, but not the truth itself”. This is true, but as much justification is provided for why this poetry is in a book of facts as there is for the basis of the poetry: none at all.
At this point my respect for Blight is so low I check how many pages remain in this ebook. I have only 150 left.
Another convention of Blight’s is a broad statement of fact as if it is generally accepted, but as the statement is often about the 19th century, I’m not aware of the context or historical circumstances. Presumably I’m reading this book to learn those. An example of this is his statement that Douglass devoted himself to the Republican Party postbellum, though it was in decline in the 1870s. What events mark its decline? Loss of the presidency? (In fact, the Republican Party held the presidency until the election of Cleveland in 1893.) Congressional infighting? Corruption and misguided policy? These last two seem to be the case, as Blight mentions them in passing, but not in direct relation to “decline”. Eventually these questions are answered, but this is biography, not a thriller.
Perhaps most troubling are the points at which Blight essentially dismisses Douglass’s writings about his own feelings. In his 1892 autobiography, Douglass states, essentially, that his life has ultimately been good and his friends have contributed more to his life than enemies took from him. Blight dismisses this out of hand, saying Douglass would rather publish positive sentiments than “bitter truths”. Is it inconceivable that Douglass actually believed this? We have no private writing to contradict his published word. For Blight to write to his readers that Douglass was wrong about his personal reflections is a disgusting act for a biographer. A few pages later, Douglass’s descriptions of visiting an old slave plantation leads him to muse that “war and slavery” were things of the past. Blight describes this as “odd”. Why Blight finds this odd is never greatly expounded on, beyond drawing a parallel between the civil war and the “memory war” of the historical events and the Lost Cause revision of the south. At this point I wonder if Blight understands metaphor and nuance.
Blight’s editorial voice carries an axe to grind in one hand. Why that is the case isn’t so obvious in the text, initially. At later points, however, Blight seeks to wield Douglass against the modern Republican Party. He also seems disappointed that Douglass never disavowed his Republican Party even as they withdrew from racial treatment as an issue. I find this disturbing. In many ways, modern politics are too separate from the past to draw clear parallels, and in other ways, to wield a historical figure as a weapon is to assume their beliefs wouldn’t change without the additional context of one hundred years. I say the same to modern Republicans seeking to use Douglass or Lincoln as a stamp of approval.
As a result, this biography often holds Douglass at arm’s length. It’s telling that the longest quotations in the book are remembrances of Douglass by other writers. Quotes from Douglass are often scattershot quotations of 3-5 words littered through a paragraph in an effort to convey the former slave’s ideas. Do I feel like I know the man Douglass now? Yes, but I wish I could shake the feeling that he has been filtered.
David Blight, Yale-educated and Yale-employed, often uses phrases such as “may have” or “perhaps thought” regarding his subject. Douglass’s initial meeting with his later wife Anna Murray is so littered with these suppositions it beggars belief that an experienced biographer would write such.
Another egregious passage concerns a woman with romantic interest in Douglass staying near their house. Blight admits we have no idea what Douglass’s wife Anna’s response to this was, and so turns to a modern poet. The next seven sentences concern this poet and conclude with “art provides the means to elusive truths, but not the truth itself”. This is true, but as much justification is provided for why this poetry is in a book of facts as there is for the basis of the poetry: none at all.
At this point my respect for Blight is so low I check how many pages remain in this ebook. I have only 150 left.
Another convention of Blight’s is a broad statement of fact as if it is generally accepted, but as the statement is often about the 19th century, I’m not aware of the context or historical circumstances. Presumably I’m reading this book to learn those. An example of this is his statement that Douglass devoted himself to the Republican Party postbellum, though it was in decline in the 1870s. What events mark its decline? Loss of the presidency? (In fact, the Republican Party held the presidency until the election of Cleveland in 1893.) Congressional infighting? Corruption and misguided policy? These last two seem to be the case, as Blight mentions them in passing, but not in direct relation to “decline”. Eventually these questions are answered, but this is biography, not a thriller.
Perhaps most troubling are the points at which Blight essentially dismisses Douglass’s writings about his own feelings. In his 1892 autobiography, Douglass states, essentially, that his life has ultimately been good and his friends have contributed more to his life than enemies took from him. Blight dismisses this out of hand, saying Douglass would rather publish positive sentiments than “bitter truths”. Is it inconceivable that Douglass actually believed this? We have no private writing to contradict his published word. For Blight to write to his readers that Douglass was wrong about his personal reflections is a disgusting act for a biographer. A few pages later, Douglass’s descriptions of visiting an old slave plantation leads him to muse that “war and slavery” were things of the past. Blight describes this as “odd”. Why Blight finds this odd is never greatly expounded on, beyond drawing a parallel between the civil war and the “memory war” of the historical events and the Lost Cause revision of the south. At this point I wonder if Blight understands metaphor and nuance.
Blight’s editorial voice carries an axe to grind in one hand. Why that is the case isn’t so obvious in the text, initially. At later points, however, Blight seeks to wield Douglass against the modern Republican Party. He also seems disappointed that Douglass never disavowed his Republican Party even as they withdrew from racial treatment as an issue. I find this disturbing. In many ways, modern politics are too separate from the past to draw clear parallels, and in other ways, to wield a historical figure as a weapon is to assume their beliefs wouldn’t change without the additional context of one hundred years. I say the same to modern Republicans seeking to use Douglass or Lincoln as a stamp of approval.
As a result, this biography often holds Douglass at arm’s length. It’s telling that the longest quotations in the book are remembrances of Douglass by other writers. Quotes from Douglass are often scattershot quotations of 3-5 words littered through a paragraph in an effort to convey the former slave’s ideas. Do I feel like I know the man Douglass now? Yes, but I wish I could shake the feeling that he has been filtered.
jasonfurman's review against another edition
5.0
Reading this book is like making an amazing journey together with Frederick Douglass, traversing an epic life that began in slavery, continued through his abolitionist career, and then came closer and closer to the center of power and the inevitable compromises that entailed. David Blight is a sympathetic biographer who leaves no aspect of the life uncovered and also does a decent job on the times. He provides a detailed literary reading of some of Douglass' major speeches and writings, situating him in the prophetic tradition as one who had the burden of savings others thrust on him and spoke in "jeremiads" about the fallen state of America and its possibility of renewal. Blight is willing to criticize Douglass, especially some of his patronage jobs and naïveté in Haiti in the later stages of his career, but does no sympathetically and in a way the brings Douglass back to the status of human, making his contributions that much more impressive.
gabehagstrom's review against another edition
5.0
Rich, reverent, while still appropriately critical. I really enjoyed this deep dive on the life of an "original American".
mcguffin's review against another edition
5.0
A good read that is well paced. A great book for anyone who knows of but wants to know more about America's most famous abolitionist.
lewismillholland's review against another edition
3.0
It's been a fortuitous reading pattern lately -- *Heirs of the Founders* got me up until the 1850s, and *Lincoln as a Writer* got me through the early 1860s, and that Bruce Canton history I read a few months ago gave me a baseline context for the war. *Lincoln in the Bardo*, even though it's fiction, gave me the emotional understanding of Lincoln. It also gave me the reason I like him so much -- his intelligence, his depression, his doubts, his concern for his legacy and constant questioning of *why* the Union has to exist. Lincoln wasn't perfect and despite the fact that he's become perfect in martyrdom he himself, according to that one biography and that one novel, knew he wasn't perfect.
*Douglass* sort of wraps up the impromptu tetralogy. He met Lincoln and proudly referenced this meeting between a wartime President of the United States of America and a black man, a former slave. My biggest qualm with this book was how basically good of a person Douglass was. He cheated, sure, albeit in long-term affairs rather than spur-of-the-moment couplings. He funded his adult children through their failures and worked his body hard on the lecture circuit to provide for those back in Rochester and D.C. For all his internecine quibbling he catalyzed real change in the nation.
The research is wonderful but I never fell in love with Douglass.
*Douglass* sort of wraps up the impromptu tetralogy. He met Lincoln and proudly referenced this meeting between a wartime President of the United States of America and a black man, a former slave. My biggest qualm with this book was how basically good of a person Douglass was. He cheated, sure, albeit in long-term affairs rather than spur-of-the-moment couplings. He funded his adult children through their failures and worked his body hard on the lecture circuit to provide for those back in Rochester and D.C. For all his internecine quibbling he catalyzed real change in the nation.
The research is wonderful but I never fell in love with Douglass.
kitchensensei's review against another edition
5.0
It took awhile for me to get into it, but this thoroughly researched biography was an amazing window into the life of Frederick Douglass and to his pivotal place in American History. It is hard to not be struck with his relevance today as he spoke clearly about White Supremacy and it's hold on American institutions. A super dense book, but a great read.
cainscr's review against another edition
dark
hopeful
informative
inspiring
sad
slow-paced
3.0
I read this going in basically blind with only minimal knowledge of Fredrick Douglas. I finish this book with an understanding of the man, his motivations, and his difficulties. The author takes his time guiding you through Mr. Douglas’s life and paints a clear picture of the political atmosphere of the time.