Rating: 
Summary: Scholarly, but with holes-I like a good amount, not loads.
Review: Original Meanings is quite informative, but it is hard to read because of it's lofty words and drawn-out sentences and paragraphs. I have a feeling that Joyce Appleby, who wrote the comment "a model of lucid explanation" on the back cover, is "endowed by his Creator" with high reading skills. If you have the time and interest and are not too lazy, it is fascinating to relate the information of the book with later historical and current issues. I will note that I found a typo in the book, an uncapitalized "he."
As for bias, it is not especially good. Rakove seems unbiased towards the Federalists and Anti-Federalists. However, it is apparent that he "ignores America's Christian background," as another reader put it. I have read too much primary source material from this era of history to suggest he covers this aspect adequately. I would not be surprised if he is atheistic or agnostic, or his publisher made him omit some things.
I do not recommend this book to lazy high school students to read for AP U.S. History's book review. It is long, slow to read, and even slower to understand.
Rating: 
Summary: Real drama is the best drama
Review: I've recently begun to reread Professor Rakove's work 'Original Meanings' not because I'd forgotten everything he said (although I'd forgotten a lot), but because I love the subject of our infancy so much. If you have to strain a little to read this work, you'll build the necessary literary 'muscles' needed to adaquately study this precious subject. If you're lazy and unwilling, maybe the subject isn't right for you in the first place. I found Professor Rakove's writing well done, and second only to perhaps Bernard Baylin's 'Ideological Origins...'.We must remember that the subject deals with very serious times (the young nation was practically under emergency conditions during the late Articles), and brand-new political and psycological frontiers as yet unchartered. In other words the subject deals with human beings facing a life and death crisis. What is the most astounding to me is the level of willingness these men actually had to that kind of change. Today, due to our spoiled ways, the Constitution, in my judgement, could never occur. Surely if these men could endure the stress of birthing a new nation (especially those pangs of ratification), I can invest a little effort to understand their magnificent work. Professor Rakove's work is not that difficult if one really cares about the subject. Objectivity and depth is far more important to me than easy reading. If the subject is this involved, and it is, so will be the story of it. It is our culture that wants everything; that was not the culture of the Convention. Thank God for that.
Rating:
Summary: Original Meanings: Politics, Ideas and the Constitution
Review: Original Meanings: Politics and Ideas in the Making of the Constitution written by Jack N. Rakove is a book wonderfully appointed with documentation and source material about the issues that confronted and were in contention that spirited public debate about the Federal Convention of 1787. I must say this, that this book was an excellent read, but I believe that the intent of the author was that this should not be your first read into how the U. S. Constitution was framed. This book delves into the time of the framers, as classic issues such as representation, rights, federalism were being debated. Federalist and Anti-Federalist issues are both in representation in this book and are treated equally. This book gives some revealing looks into the men who participated in the framing process, such as George Washington, James Wilson, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman and James Madison. These men along with others hashed out an originalism, only after debate about concerns with the constitution itself. As the author works through the ongoing process of analyzing questions and finally resolving constitutional issues, we see that this process had to resolve many issues and later a compromise was worked out, as all issues were debated, some were not resolved to a resolute finality... salvery, women's voting rights and other issues were later resolved. The author makes a major contribution to the understanding of the Constitution even thought many may feel they know about how and why the Constitution was written, true understanding of the "Original Meanings" gives us an accessible path to the political problems embedded within our Constitution. This book is an outstandingly good read and well concieved by a talented and thoughtful historian. Those seeking the true meaning of the Constitution should NOT overlook this book as it is thoughtful and has careful scholarly analysis.
Rating:
Summary: Original Meanings: Politics, Ideas and the Constitution
Review: Original Meanings: Politics and Ideas in the Making of the Constitution written by Jack N. Rakove is a book wonderfully appointed with documentation and source material about the issues that confronted and were in contention that spirited public debate about the Federal Convention of 1787. I must say this, that this book was an excellent read, but I believe that the intent of the author was that this should not be your first read into how the U. S. Constitution was framed. This book delves into the time of the framers, as classic issues such as representation, rights, federalism were being debated. Federalist and Anti-Federalist issues are both in representation in this book and are treated equally. This book gives some revealing looks into the men who participated in the framing process, such as George Washington, James Wilson, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman and James Madison. These men along with others hashed out an originalism, only after debate about concerns with the constitution itself. As the author works through the ongoing process of analyzing questions and finally resolving constitutional issues, we see that this process had to resolve many issues and later a compromise was worked out, as all issues were debated, some were not resolved to a resolute finality... salvery, women's voting rights and other issues were later resolved. The author makes a major contribution to the understanding of the Constitution even thought many may feel they know about how and why the Constitution was written, true understanding of the "Original Meanings" gives us an accessible path to the political problems embedded within our Constitution. This book is an outstandingly good read and well concieved by a talented and thoughtful historian. Those seeking the true meaning of the Constitution should NOT overlook this book as it is thoughtful and has careful scholarly analysis.
Rating: 
Summary: Thorough, perspicaciuos, a joy to read
Review: Rakove's best work is not for all, as previous reviews attest. Fundemantal rather eminent understanding of the subject can erroniously lead the former to a situation that perplexes rather than decides; but under no circumstance could the adjective discursive apply. This situation is furthered by an anticipation of the florid perspicuity notable to Rakove's conduit of Constitutional integrity, namely Madison. Beyond the horizon of contemporary analysis in depth, and scholastic achievemnts, this effort shall have attained a position of acclaim. For myself there is a different conclusion than Rakove's Coda, and for that I am glad. His efforts clarify rather than cloud a point of decision previously left unresolved. I owe great thanks to his chapter on originalism and the four points he poses. In re-examining them at his request,drawing on the enormous research he offered in each chapter, I found Clarity where his Coda pointed to further questions. It may well be Bork is correct, thank you Mr. Rakove.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent scholarship, not perfect
Review: Rakove's work must be applauded. His chapter on Madison as the father of the Constitution is wonderful, and his phrase "The Madisonian Moment" is a clever turn on JGA Pockock's famous book. However, there are a few flaws. First off, as others have noted, Rakove is not an especially good writer. He sometimes takes a page to say what could have been said in just a few simpler words. Second, his conclusions about "original meanings" are not entirely persuasive. He has a point insofar as he argues that finding the original meaning of the Constitution is a difficult quest, because the Constitution was a document produced by compromises. However, it does not follow from this that any meaning can be imputed to the Constitution. There are some interpretations which are simply inconsistent with any reasonable reading of the time and the Philadelphia convention. Nonetheless, a worthwhile book, deserving of its Pulitzer, and a must-read for scholars of the Constitution.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent scholarship, not perfect
Review: Rakove's work must be applauded. His chapter on Madison as the father of the Constitution is wonderful, and his phrase "The Madisonian Moment" is a clever turn on JGA Pockock's famous book. However, there are a few flaws. First off, as others have noted, Rakove is not an especially good writer. He sometimes takes a page to say what could have been said in just a few simpler words. Second, his conclusions about "original meanings" are not entirely persuasive. He has a point insofar as he argues that finding the original meaning of the Constitution is a difficult quest, because the Constitution was a document produced by compromises. However, it does not follow from this that any meaning can be imputed to the Constitution. There are some interpretations which are simply inconsistent with any reasonable reading of the time and the Philadelphia convention. Nonetheless, a worthwhile book, deserving of its Pulitzer, and a must-read for scholars of the Constitution.
Rating:
Summary: Insightful and Careful
Review: Several prior reviewers are correct, this book is not intended for the general reading public. It was aimed primarily at scholars of American history and probably also at law professors. To enjoy this book, it is really necessary to know both the basic narrative history and to already have some grasp of 18th century political theory, particularly as it was discussed in British North America. Familiarity with the works of Bernard Bailyn and Gordon Wood are really necessary to really grasp the issues discussed in this book. That said, this is a really insightful and well written monograph. Rakove covers the basic problems that the initiators of the constitution hoped to solve, the debates in the Constitutional Convention, the campaign over ratification, the Bill of Rights controversy, over important issues like the nature of Presidential power, and even the beginnings of the controversies over interpretation in the early Republic. His emphasis throughout is on the thinking of the Federalists and their opponents. A number of themes emerge though a basic one can be said to be that of ambiguity. A product of differing motivations, political and ideological compromise, and a highly politically charged process of ratification, it is hardly surprising that it is hard to assign unambiguous 'intentions' to many aspects of the constitution. Even when contemporary supporting literature is consulted, like The Federalist Papers, it is not an infallible guide because it contains similar ambiguities. Indeed, without some ambiguity and liberty of interpretation, it is hard to see how the constitution would have succeeded in remaining a guiding document throughout all the changes of hte last 2 centuries. There is no question that some features of the consitution are unambiguous, but they are not always things to be proud of, such as the unequivocal recognition of the legitimacy of chattel slavery. Another basic theme is that the real meaning of the constitution emerges from the collision of what is originally thought and written with the actual processes of politics and government. Rakove's careful analysis and exposition makes it clear that any form of rigid interpretation based on efforts to recover precise understandings of original meanings is likely doomed to failure, and at worst, may be a vehicle for self-deception.
I have to respond to some of the prior comments about this book. It is rather unlikely that Rakove or his publisher have minimized the role of religion in the constitutional process. The best book on the political thinking of this period of American life, Gordon Wood's The Creation of the American Republic, assigns a relatively small role for explicitly religous thought in the political theorizing that drove the constitutional movement. No one has spent more time than Wood in analyzing the primary literature, including a large volume of sermons. Second, Rakove's work is not, as one reviewer wrote, an act of interpretive nihilism. Rakove argues against simple textual analysis as the source of the final answer. Implicit in Rakove's analysis is the idea that the constitutional experience, including traditions developed over the last 2 centuries, and not just a small number of documents, are legitimate data for interpretation. As Professor Wood wrote recently, it is the institutions and traditions we've created over the past 2 centuries that really make us a viable democracy.
Rating:
Summary: Informative, yet pernicious.
Review: This is an excellent book, the information and insight contained within is excellent. However, while it is apparent the author is an extremely intelligent historian, he is just as clearly not a great writer. Thus, the reading is slow going, but if you are interested in the founding of the US Constitution and the debates and desires of the founders, this book is a must read.
Rating:
Summary: Good book, great information, not well written
Review: This is an excellent book, the information and insight contained within is excellent. However, while it is apparent the author is an extremely intelligent historian, he is just as clearly not a great writer. Thus, the reading is slow going, but if you are interested in the founding of the US Constitution and the debates and desires of the founders, this book is a must read.
|
