 | |
 View Larger |
A Magnificent Catastrophe: The Tumultuous Election of 1800, America's First Presidential Campaign By Edward J. Larson ( Free Press )
Release Date: 2008-06-10
Average Customer Rating:
List Price: $15.00
Price: $10.95
Eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25.
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
|  Add to Cart |
|
|
Product Description
"They could write like angels and scheme like demons." So begins Pulitzer Prize-winner Edward Larson's masterful account of the wild ride that was the 1800 presidential election -- an election so convulsive and so momentous to the future of American democracy that Thomas Jefferson would later dub it "America's second revolution." This was America's first true presidential campaign, giving birth to our two-party system and indelibly etching the lines of partisanship that have so profoundly shaped American politics ever since. The contest featured two of our most beloved Founding Fathers, once warm friends, facing off as the heads of their two still-forming parties -- the hot-tempered but sharp-minded John Adams, and the eloquent yet enigmatic Thomas Jefferson -- flanked by the brilliant tacticians Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr, who later settled their own differences in a duel. The country was descending into turmoil, reeling from the terrors of the French Revolution, and on the brink of war with France. Blistering accusations flew as our young nation was torn apart along party lines: Adams and his elitist Federalists would squelch liberty and impose a British-style monarchy; Jefferson and his radically democratizing Republicans would throw the country into chaos and debase the role of religion in American life. The stakes could not have been higher. As the competition heated up, other founders joined the fray -- James Madison, John Jay, James Monroe, Gouverneur Morris, George Clinton, John Marshall, Horatio Gates, and even George Washington -- some of them emerging from retirement to respond to the political crisis gripping the nation and threatening its future. Drawing on unprecedented, meticulous research of the day-to-day unfolding drama, from diaries and letters of the principal players as well as accounts in the fast-evolving partisan press, Larson vividly re-creates the mounting tension as one state after another voted and the press had the lead passing back and forth. The outcome remained shrouded in doubt long after the voting ended, and as Inauguration Day approached, Congress met in closed session to resolve the crisis. In its first great electoral challenge, our fragile experiment in constitutional democracy hung in the balance.A Magnificent Catastrophe is history writing at its evocative best: the riveting story of the last great contest of the founding period.
|
|
 Nothing new under the sun: partisan politics, religious beliefs, fearmongering in 1800
It's amazing to me how commonly people today point to the "founding fathers" to support their own beliefs. Or how often people decry the methods and madness of modern elections. To them I say ... read this book.
The political "results" of the grand experiment of democracy instituted by the USofA basically began to form with the 1800 election. Two diametrically opposed parties with different beliefs about the role of government (and religion), but a common willingness to fabricate outright lies about the other side.
While the role of the electoral college and how the President and VP are elected were different (read the book) in 1800 than today, all the cunning involved by each side to win are essentially right out the playbook from the 21st century.
|
The more things change... ( sojournerbp )
...the more they haven't.
Politics have not just "recently" become bitterly partisan. Not in this past generation, or the one before, or the one before that. When you read Edward Larson's account of the election of 1800, you will find yourself amazaed at the similarities in issues from then to now.
There are questions of civil liberties vs. national security, economic regulation, and the place of religion in politics. You'll find that Karl Rove had nothing on Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton and you'll read how one of the faces of Mount Rushmore almost never came to be.
Larson does a masterful job at telling the story of the first election ever campaigned for
|
Good history of the Presidential election of 1800
Think that 2000 featured a strange presidential election? Then, you might be interested in this book. The election of 1800 is termed, in the book's title, "A Magnificent Catastrophe." Because of a mistaken in how the Constitution stated who would be elected president, Thomas Jefferson and his vice-presidential "partner," Aaron Burr, were tied after the electoral votes were counted. Burr being Burr, he did not withdraw and allowed Congressional voting to take place (a churl, as always).
On the other hand, the High Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton, so despised John Adams (the sitting Federalist President), that they worked to undermine his candidacy. In other words, what a story!
This book does a nice job of describing the dynamics of the election of 1800. It is not as detailed a work as one might have expected from the likes of Joseph Ellis or David McCullough. Nonetheless, it is a useful work and provides a solid examination of the subterranean plotting by partisan leaders in the election.
|
 OK Book about a fascinating topic ( priaptor )
Larson's in depth account of this time is a little too in depth and often repetitious in his ping-ponging accounts of "the issues" as seen by the Jacobins and the Federalists. It makes for an extremely slow read, no matter how interesting the material.
It would make a great textbook about the time, but given the the never ending boring details, I can't recommend it as a casual read about the period. There are more engaging books about the same.
As to the content of the book itself, it is very well done. I also think while so much emphasis is placed on the local political climate of the time, Larson's coverage of one of the most compelling topics of the time, namely Burr's incredible coup in NYC, is somewhat shallow.
My 3 stars for this book is not so much a poor recommendation as it a warning to anyone not interested in reading a book with such copious and more than necessary detail about an incredible time. I also do not like books filled with quote after quote, which Mr. Larsen does too much for my liking; a similar criticism I have for McCullough's later books. These are not my favorite types of books; and I must also add the proviso, that having read so much about this era, the "boring" presentation of this book to me may have augmented by my prior readings.
|
Vivid re-creation of 1800 election ( lb136 )
Edward J. Larson's magnificent look at America's first disputed election manages to remain very suspenseful (what will Pennsylvania finally do?) even though we all know how it turned out.
In brief, in the days before the 12th Amendment (and this election was precisely the reason why the 12th Amendment was enacted), electors cast their votes only for the president--the first runnerup would become vice president. This is why Jefferson, a Republican (i.e., the party that would evolve into the Democrats) was elected vice president to Federalist (what the conservatives were then called) John Adams in 1796.
By 1800, the Federalists had themselves factionalized: the High Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton (who actually would have preferred a president for life and a Senate whose members also served for life), were dissatisfied with the moderate John Adams, and considered Jefferson and his Republicans "Jacobins"--i.e., supporters of the French Revolution, which had just then come to a screeching halt with the advent of Napoleon. In return, the Republicans tarred the Federalists as "Monarchists." (Not inappropriate, at least in the case of Hamilton.)
The author describes here what happened when Jefferson, and his Republican running mate, Aaron Burr, deadlocked in the electoral vote (despite the brilliant campaigning of the Republicans, nobody had remembered to instruct one, any one, of the Republican electors to withhold a vote for Burr so that wouldn't happen), which meant the House of Representatives had to decide. Eventually, they would. But it was not easy, and it was not pretty.
Mr. Larson demonstrates convincingly that obsessive hatred of one's political opponent to the point of derangement is far from a new phenomenon. In his telling, John Adams and Jefferson fare well, the scheming Aaron Burr far less so, and Alexander Hamilton worst of all. He was his own worst enemy. After attempting constantly to replace and revile Adams, he then tried to persuade the bitter-ender Federalists, who hated Jefferson above all, not to cast their fate with Aaron Burr, which they actually attempted to do. (In the end not one would vote for Jefferson, preferring instead simply to abstain.) When you finish the book, you may want to petition the treasury to remove his portrait from the $10.
|
|
|
