Friday, December 23, 2016

Review of William Henry Harrison by Gail Collins



If you ask 100 average Americans who William Henry Harrison was, it is likely that 98 or 99 will have no idea.  Even among historically-minded Americans, most remember Harrison primarily (if not exclusively) as the only president whose inaugural address was almost as long as his entire presidency.

In William Henry Harrison, historian Gail Collins gives a brief yet solid overview of the life of our ninth president.  Collins’ biography of Harrison is part of the “American Presidents” series, a collection of very brief overviews of the lives of each of our chief executives. 
Given that the book only encompasses 125 pages, Collins obviously has had to pick and choose which parts of Harrison’s 68-year life to highlight.  She focuses on three main themes: Harrison’s dealing with the Indians, the ironies in Harrison’s life and career, and the theatrical, dramatic extravaganza that was the 1840 presidential campaign.  Rather than being distinct, these three themes constantly intersect with each other.

In a key passage on Harrison’s interactions with Indians, Collins points out that

Harrison is famous for things he didn’t actually do. He didn’t win a big military victory at Tippecanoe—it was a minor fight against an outnumbered village of Indians, and because Harrison screwed up the defense of the camp the white Americans suffered most of the casualties…but his real impact on history arguably came from the work he did in the Grouseland years—acquiring several states’ worth of territory from the Indians in deals that cost the federal government only pennies per acre (4).

Collins is perhaps a bit too critical in her assessment of Harrison’s dealing with the Indians.  By the standards of the time, Harrison was actually relatively kind to Indians—much more so that many other nineteenth-century military leaders.

In addition to her account of Harrison’s military career, Collins presents a relatively lengthy and entertaining account of the “Log Cabin and Hard Cider” campaign of 1840, a masterpiece of political “spin” that would make modern-day campaign managers like James Carville and Karl Rove proud.  Despite Harrison’s being the scion of Virginia gentry, complete with a father who signed the Declaration of Independence and served as Governor of Virginia, his publicists transformed him into a rustic “man of the people” who lived in a log cabin in the woods and preferred hard cider over the effeminate beverages of his opponent Martin Van Buren.  The campaign was one of the first in American history to have a circus-like atmosphere, with songs, rallies, copious amounts of hard cider, and the rolling of giant paper mache balls from town to town.  It was a masterpiece of political theatre, and it worked.


Collins’ work has only one major downside: her extremely casual writing style.  She often resorts to slang terms (such as “screwed up”) that are not proper for a formal historical work.  I especially found her constant use of contractions to be annoying.  If she had submitted this work to me as an assignment in one of my classes, she would have lost points for this.  Despite this, Collins has done an excellent job (in a very small number of pages) of presenting an overview of the life of “Old Tippecanoe.” Readers who want a good introduction to Harrison will be satisfied.

Monday, December 12, 2016

Review of Martin Van Buren and the Emergence of American Popular Politics by Joel Silbey


When he became president, Martin Van Buren had everything going for him.  Like Taft in 1908 and Bush in 1988, Van Buren was the hand-picked successor of a popular outgoing president at a time when the economy was strong.  And yet, Martin Van Buren is never ranked among our greatest presidents among the few who can even remember his name.  Why is this?

Van Buren’s failure as an American chief executive lies in a combination of lack of a presidential “skill set” and sheer bad luck. Shortly after Van Buren took office, the US economy collapsed into a depression known most commonly as the Panic of 1837.  As a faithful Jeffersonian, committed to small government, Van Buren had neither the inclination nor the precedent to take strong action to combat the Panic.  While large numbers of Americans struggled just to feed themselves and their families, Van Buren’s fondness for fine food and clothing made him seem like an aristocrat who neither understood nor cared about the needs of the common people.  This, together with Van Buren’s near total lack of charisma, sealed his fate as a one-term president.

In Martin Van Buren and the Emergence of American Popular Politics, historian Joel H. Silbey presents a sympathetic, if conventional overview of the life of American’s eighth president.  Silbey takes issue with the common stereotype of “Old Kinderhook” as little more than a master behind-the-scenes manipulator and a man unwilling to commit to any positions on the key issues of the day.  For Silbey, Van Buren’s alleged disdain for taking positions was more a result of caution and prudence than anything else.

Whereas the first generation of America’s political leaders condemned political parties as harmful to America (even as they nevertheless divided into them), Van Buren was more realistic.  Silbey argues that Van Buren understood that political factionalism was inevitable, and rather than condemning it or trying to deny its existence, he embraced it.  Unlike most American leaders before him, Van Buren saw political parties as good for America; accordingly, he spent most of his political career creating and strengthening the first modern political party, the Democratic Party.  Clearly, Van Buren’s work in this regard must be judged as a success, given the Democrats’ domination of American politics from 1829-1861.


Silbey’s portrait of Van Buren, like the man himself, is bland and uninspiring.  Van Buren lacked the charisma and/or the exciting life adventures that his predecessors all had.  To be sure, this is not Van Buren’s fault, but it does not make his story any less boring.  One would have hoped that Silbey would have told us more about Van Buren’s personal life, but he does not.  Silbey, however, like all Van Buren biographers, was limited by the fact that Van Buren burned nearly all of his personal correspondence late in his life.  Nevertheless, one walks away from this biography knowing much about Van Buren’s career, but little about the man himself.  Readers wanting to get to know Van Buren would do well to try another biography.