Rating: 
Summary: You could miss this book and still have a good life...
Review: Anyone sitting down to read this book should know that Gordon Wood is a socialist historian who views events through the lense of class conflict. With that orientation, he has written a revisionist history of the American Revolution that argues (against 200 years of American scholarship) that the revolution was not a political, but in fact, was a social revolution. Wood writes well but he is just mistaken on this point. The same elites that were in power before the revolution were in power afterward. Ours was not a social revolution on the order of the French or Russian Revolutions. Most historians view the American Revolution as a struggle for independence and a clash of political ideas - Wood brings a neo-Marxist interpretation to the events, interpreting them as class struggle and social conflict.
Rating: 
Summary: Use with Caution
Review: As a student (and now a professor) of the American Revolution and the Early Republic, I had read this book not long after it was published and, more recently, used it as the cornerstone for an upper division undergraduate course on the American Revolution. I believe this book has both strengths and weaknesses. Wood examines pre-Revolutionary society in stunning detail, but I believe that he also stretches some of his points, particularly the before-then-after conclusions that he makes. I used this book as the cornerstone for my course because it was highly controversial. I balanced Wood's analysis with works by scholars who did, or might, disagree with his premises. Therefore, I recommend this book, but I recommend that it be read cautiously, with skepticism, and that the reading is balanced by the words and works of other scholars of this era.
Rating: 
Summary: Powerful Historiography
Review: Gordon S. Wood - refuting earlier historiographies - argues that the American Revolution represented a truly radical movement. As previous historians had labeled the event as conservative in action and scope, Wood attempts to contest this interpretation. Over the course of his study, the author takes the reader chronologically through the events leading up to, during, and following the War for Independence in order to expose the reader to the development of intellectual thought during the time period. Following this line of intellectual thought and development, Wood contends that the American Revolution did more than facilitate the colonists' separation from the English monarchy, but also served to undermine the oppressive and outdated ancien regime characteristics of patronage, patriarchal dependence, and hierarchy. These social changes, paired with the break from the monarchial system, represented radical and empowering changes that directly affected to the unique course the young American nation would follow. In this current of intellectual thought, Wood believes that the radical nature of the American Revolution had far-reaching and amorphous consequences unforeseen by the revolutionary founding fathers. Gordon Wood organizes his argument into three main sections: Monarchy, Republicanism, and Democracy. By beginning his treatise with an explanation of the monarchial system, Wood not only dispels common misconceptions concerning the nature of the colonists' relationship with England, but also presents the subversive intellectual and social organizations of colonial society. Before the American Revolution and the proliferation of its inherent republican ideals, the conspicuous division between the aristocracy and the common people lent colonial society to the system of privilege and patronage represented by a monarchial system. However, as Enlightenment ideas spread via pamphlets, books, and political tracts, the American colonists looked towards republican ideals and began their questioning of societal and political divisions. This republicanism manifesting itself in popular colonial society led further to the eventual dissolution of not only bonds to the monarchy, but also the paternal and dependent relationships characteristic of the antiquated system. As Wood presents the republicanism of colonial society, he argues that such ideas achieved radical status by providing a viable challenge to the monarchial system even though it took a gradual course. Though the push for independence proceeded somewhat hesitantly, it represented the culmination of a new social idealism resonating throughout the colonial populace - most importantly with the revolutionary leaders themselves. Finally, Wood introduces the section labeled as Democracy, as he suggests such political organization existed in diametrical opposition to the monarchial system - serving as the culmination of the intermediary process of republicanism. Though democracy achieved many of the ideals set forth by the founding fathers, Wood believes its final form represented a degree of equality unforeseen by the revolutionary leaders. In making this argument, Wood carefully examines the restructuring of American society that had taken place since the War for Independence. The debates over the developing role of government and the participation of common men in governmental affairs represented a radical paradigm shift, as now the egalitarian society lacked any traditional structure which had previously dictated such aspects. The possibility of social mobility led directly to American individualism according to Wood, and the growth of commerce and dissolution of traditional relationships provide the evidence to substantiate this claim. Therefore, by presenting the evolution of the early American state, Wood claims that not only did the outcome of the American Revolution represent a radical break, but perhaps gained greater precedence in the development of the radical intellectual ideas of the time. In obtaining the data necessary to justify his conclusions, Wood employs a majority of primary source material. An intellectual historian, Wood turned to primary sources ranging from diaries, popular literature, political tracts, letter correspondence, and pamphlets, as he analyzed the development of intellectual themes throughout the material. The majority of the primary source material Wood analyzed stems directly from the upper classes of society, as they could afford the time to undertake leisurely activities such as intellectual pursuits and writing. However, this does not take into account the general thoughts and perceptions of the inarticulate members of colonial and post-colonial society. Though he employs economic and financial data, which indicate more change than continuity in the common tiers of society, he does not have the material to show that these people placed great value on the intellectual undercurrents that resulted in the American Revolution and subsequent democratic government. Wood consults a number of secondary sources in developing his argument; however, he generally backs most of his claims with original interpretation of primary sources. The immense volume of material consulted by Wood provides sufficient backing for his claims and his interpretations appear quite reasonable. Wood provides substantial primary source material to support his interpretation throughout the work, as exemplified by the large amount of textual notes. However, to further substantiate his claim concerning the radical nature of the American Revolution, Wood perhaps could have benefited by providing more direct examples whereby his research contradicted the earlier conservative interpretations. The value of the information presented in the book serves an important purpose as it allows the reader to understand the intellectual and social undercurrents present in society before, during, and after the War for Independence, as well as the development of the resulting democratic government. Wood's source material provided a detailed account of the revolution from the top down, but seemed to neglect to present the sentiments of lower societal divisions. Though he does mention the status of women, slaves, and Native Americans, the importance he places on the equality and societal leveling engendered by the intellectual developments of the Revolution only concerned white, male property holders - not the societal majority. Wood's lucidity with prose and insightful interpretive abilities not only provide a good scholarly treatise of the radical ideology of the American Revolution, but also entertain the reader throughout the text.
Rating:
Summary: A Refreshing Look at the American Revolution
Review: Gordon Wood attempts to show that despite the fairly recent historical trend by progressive and neo-progressive historians to label the American Revolution as merely a conservative movement, the American Revolution was indeed radical in many ways. The Colonists, unlike their British counterparts, rebuked the idea of wealth and social status being determined by one's birth or family relation. The aristocracy was completely unacceptable in the eyes of the vast majority of colonists. American's also transformed the perception of labor, changing it into a virtue and idleness into a vice. This was keenly observed by European visitors such as Alexis de Tocqueville. Ordinary labor brought a true sense of equality to the American people, though in terms of wealth it was truly unequal, but this idea was new and different from anywhere else in Europe or the rest of the world for that matter. Many of the founding fathers who believed that those in government should be enlightened figures who would completely abandon their own interests for the common good became a bit disillusioned as to the real results of who actually governed in our nation's government. But these personal interests from all sections of the population by citizens who did not have their (i.e. founding fathers or those shaped by the classical republican tradition)formal education and who were not influenced by the enlightenment thinkers were in actuality enhancing democracy in America. Of course this is just a brief glimpse of what Wood explains in his book. While the revolution did not end slavery and it did not immediately transform the role of women in society, it set the stage for the later movements that brought about the changes we are all familiar with today. Our revolution changed the world and we should all be greatful for what it did accomplish.
Rating: 
Summary: A Prudent Revolution
Review: Gordon Wood covers much the same ground as did Bernard Bailyn did in "The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution," but charts it in a more linear fashion. Wood illustrates how the American colonies emerged from a monarchical system into a Republic, and eventually into a Democratic society. The focus is on representation, beginning with the colonial assemblies. The American colonies had a legacy of representative institutions, which helped in forming the necessary consensus in order to achieve independence. Throughout its revolutionary history, Americans felt they had a moral imperative for self-determination, dramatized by such events as the Boston Tea Party. The colonies took great pride in their assemblies, and in many ways felt they were the ultimate authority. If the Americans were anwerable to anyone it was the King, not the parliament, which increasingly exercised more control over the colonies, especially in the form of taxes to pay for the various services it provided the colonies, such as protection. Wood notes how agents, such as Benjamin Franklin, petitioned for the rights of the colonies in the parliament. When these petitions were no longer heard, the colonies chose to rebel. What is intriguing about Wood's analysis, is the reluctance many Americans had about making a complete breach from England. Americans realized that their institutions were an outgrowth of English Republican ideas. It was a slow, evolving revolution, carrying these principles to their fullest realization. Never short of praise for themselves, the Americans thought they had succeeded where the British had failed in creating a truly representative government. Wood offers an especially fine analysis of the events which shaped the American Revolution, and how it was a natural outgrowth of an increasingly dynamic society. The book is copiously annotated and well indexed. It is a book that you will refer to again and again.
Rating:
Summary: A Prudent Revolution
Review: Gordon Wood covers much the same ground as did Bernard Bailyn did in "The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution," but charts it in a more linear fashion. Wood illustrates how the American colonies emerged from a monarchical system into a Republic, and eventually into a Democratic society. The focus is on representation, beginning with the colonial assemblies. The American colonies had a legacy of representative institutions, which helped in forming the necessary consensus in order to achieve independence. Throughout its revolutionary history, Americans felt they had a moral imperative for self-determination, dramatized by such events as the Boston Tea Party. The colonies took great pride in their assemblies, and in many ways felt they were the ultimate authority. If the Americans were anwerable to anyone it was the King, not the parliament, which increasingly exercised more control over the colonies, especially in the form of taxes to pay for the various services it provided the colonies, such as protection. Wood notes how agents, such as Benjamin Franklin, petitioned for the rights of the colonies in the parliament. When these petitions were no longer heard, the colonies chose to rebel. What is intriguing about Wood's analysis, is the reluctance many Americans had about making a complete breach from England. Americans realized that their institutions were an outgrowth of English Republican ideas. It was a slow, evolving revolution, carrying these principles to their fullest realization. Never short of praise for themselves, the Americans thought they had succeeded where the British had failed in creating a truly representative government. Wood offers an especially fine analysis of the events which shaped the American Revolution, and how it was a natural outgrowth of an increasingly dynamic society. The book is copiously annotated and well indexed. It is a book that you will refer to again and again.
Rating:
Summary: Gordon Wood tells a great story
Review: Gordon Wood has written a text that is a must read for anyone with an interest in how our democracy got its start. The use of the word radicalism is not something used to sell the book. Wood argues that our American Revolution was not conservative; moreover, the ideas and concepts which led to the uprising of American colonists was unprecedented in the history of the world. This is not just a scholarly text from a Harvard educated author; this is a page turner! The reader comes to know our founding fathers in ways in which most of us have never seen them. This is an absolute must read for the amateur or professional historian. Do yourself a favor; read it!
Rating:
Summary: The Same Book (Yet Again)
Review: Gordon Wood is perhaps the worst kind of historian: one that just hasn't had a new idea in some 30 years. He's been writing the same book under different headings and cute titles (i.e. "Radicalism"), yet there is nothing new here... except for a really shoddy (and wrong I might add) narrative of how the Revolution was so "radical." Yet when one reads this book you understand just about everything you need to know by a simple statement that, to paraphrase Wood, "What was so radical about the Revolution is that it made all white men equal." What is that exactly? Perhaps yet another old school historian, with the archaic, white male elitist view that tends to ignore say, African Americans, women, and Native Americans, and just about everyone BUT the white males. What you are left with is essentially an incorrect statement (i.e. The Revolution was radical), and a very, very, narrow look at what Wood thinks the Revolution was. I do think though that people should read this book to understand what the Rveolution was not, and go read someone else to understand what it was. The bottom line is that just because Wood's "Creation" some 30 years ago was a profound work and fresh at the time does not mean that they still "get it." Bernard Bailyn's work can attest to that...
Rating:
Summary: three cheers for the red, white and blue
Review: heck of a book, made me want to vote for something
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating
Review: I am no expert on the Revolution, but I found this book to be absolutely amazing. This and Rakove's "Original Meanings" are two must-have books that left me with a completely different outlook on the the Revolution, the Founders, and the millions of us who have followed in their footsteps. I read a book review by some political scientist who said that the mark of a good book is if, after reading it, you can't look at the same topic in the same way again. With Wood's "Radicalism," I will always look at the topics under discussion differently. So what does he say? Well, to put it briefly, the political world we live in was changed from pre-Revolution British colonial society by our Founders. They wanted to instill different values on how all Americans related to each other. No longer did monarchy, paternalism, etc. dictate our social relations; as of the Revolution, republicanism, virtue, and other values ruled. However, and this is a big "however," the changes didn't stop with the Founders. It is not so easy to begin a revolt of such radical and far-reaching measures - and then just shut it off when desired. Changes kept coming. By the 1820s or so, regular folk wanted in. In on government, financial independence, and respect. Democracy, equality, and the like became the important concepts - and they were treasured by the middle class, not just by the elite.
Well, it was worth the ride. The last third of the book is the best. I HIGHLY recommend this expansive view of early American society.
|
