ALEXANDER HAMILTON, American

In two previous books Richard Brookhiser sought to explain, with considerable success, the most elusive of the Founders, George Washington. Here he seeks to reclaim the reputation of the most underrated and misunderstood, again successfully. Though he won a spot on the $10 bill, Alexander Hamilton--because he favored a strong federal government--has traditionally been portrayed as some kind of enemy of democracy. The fact that his main political opponent was Thomas Jefferson, the darling of the Left, has led to much ill treatment by historians. And his untimely demise at the hands of Aaron Burr has tended to link him in our minds with that least worthy of men. In this short but sufficient biography, Brookhiser demonstrates the surprising degree to which Hamilton was responsible for creating and shaping the American nation, both through the force of his ideas and, at the vital moment, by getting the United States financial house in order.

Like many of the Founders, Hamiltons own talents and the extraordinary events of the day allowed or required him to prove himself adept in a variety of endeavors. In addition to being perhaps the only leader of any influence to really understand economics, Hamilton was a successful lawyer and soldier. But the real revelation, and considering the Federalist Papers it should not be, is how influential he was as a writer. His sheer output was voluminous, and he both addressed all of the important issues of the day, and actually convinced people to change their minds--whether advocating that the Constitution be adopted, that the Federal government assume pre-existing debt, or that an industrial economy was better suited to improving the lot of most citizens than an agrarian economy (Report on Manufactures).

Because Madison is a co-author of the Federalists, and was the main author of the Constitution itself, he has tended to overshadow Hamilton. But Brookhiser makes a strong case for Hamilton being the more influential advocate. He also makes the case that Madison was something of a chameleon, taking on the coloration of those around him, and that the Constitutions delicate system of balances might have been much different had Hamilton not presented and argued for his more powerful and centralized federal plan. This would certainly explain why Hamilton became such an impassioned defender of the Constitution that Madison drafted, that it represented an even handed attempt to meet Hamiltons concerns.

The most heart breaking of Hamiltons writings is his explanation of his affair with Maria Reynolds. When Hamilton realized that she and her husband were running an elaborate badger game he ended the affair, but it was later publicized by his enemies. In a move of remarkable candor, Hamilton published a brutally frank pamphlet which laid bare his role in the whole sordid mess but defended himself from false charges of corruption. Though the romance is a black mark on his record, his handling of it redounds to his credit.

The Reynolds Affair is only one of several points where this two century old story intersects with or casts light on current affairs. Heres Brookhiser discussing Burr :

[A]n old man who had met an old Aaron Burr when he was young was asked about Burrs rare attraction, and said it came from his manner of listening. He seemed...to find so much more meaning in your words than you had intended; no flattery was more subtle. Listening is a virtue of the judicious and the compassionate. But narcissists also do it surpassingly well. We associate Narcissus with beauty and self-regard, but the key to his myth is that it is about surfaces. Narcissus was captivated by his reflection because that was all he had. Narcissists must live through their interactions, because there is no one home. Burrs charm, attentiveness, and promiscuity; his ability to get schemes going, and his failure to follow them through; his lack of principle--all flow from his character. He was like a new refrigerator--bright, cold, and empty.

It is frightening how easily Bill Clintons name can be substituted for Burrs in that savvy assessment.

In the end, Hamiltons greatest contribution may have been in the realm of financial affairs. His writings reveal him to be perhaps the only one of the Founders who anticipated the coming of the industrial world. He certainly had a clearer vision of the future than his more celebrated rival Thomas Jefferson, whose fetishistic love of the land led him to countenance slavery, which Hamilton opposed. Beyond theory, it was Hamiltons concrete achievements as the first Secretary of the Treasury--founding the first National Bank, accepting responsibility for Colonial debt, and installing tariffs to provide a steady source of Federal revenues--that put the young nation on a sturdy financial footing and make him one of the greatest Cabinet Secretaries of all time.

Hamiltons too short life was so event filled and Brookhiser is such a good writer that the book seems almost too brief. But wanting more is a pretty paltry criticism and the book is an invaluable corrective to our woefully inadequate understanding of Hamiltons service to the country and his character as a man. At one point Brookhiser sums up the reason why Hamilton is not as well regarded as some of his peers :

There are three modes of leadership. The highest is inspiration: rare, sometimes false, but impossible to live without. Next is demonstration--honestly sharing all your reasons with all comers; explaining where they come from, and where they lead. Lowest is flattery, which either fools both the leader and his followers, or fools no one, but is indulged because followers and leaders are too tired to think of anything else. Hamilton seldom rose to the highest level, and would not sink to the lowest. His greatest rivals, such as Jefferson, inhabited all three, especially the first and the third; hence their success.

This is nicely stated and is just one example of the authors really penetrating insight into his subject. Read the book and youll look at those $10s with a newfound appreciation for an American hero.

GRADE : A+

I should listen to my mother more often. "Never talk about religion or politics." Thats hard to do, however, in an election year! However, my mother is usually correct. (My Hamilton roots come from my mothers, mothers, mother, Molly Hamilton Summers. This Scots-Irish branch of my family is also the bookworm branch in the family. My mothers reading a book right now!)

I find it funny that most of Hamiltons modern day biographers hold predominantly republican sentiments. Richard Brookhiser is an editor of The National Review, a conservative publication with strong right leanings. My mother tells me too that its good that there are Republicans as well as Democrats, although Im still somewhat skeptical!

After calming down from my initial upset over Brookhisers estimation of Alexanders fathers character, (he states repeatedly that he was a bum), Ive carefully read every word of the book. Brookhisers analysis of Hamilton and other patriots is fair-minded for the most part. The book is only 200 plus pages, and so is not an in-depth analysis of Hamilton or his achievements as McDonalds is. Brookhisers book should be read before McDonalds; I think it would make McDonalds less cumbersome to read. Again, Forrest McDonalds book is incredibly well researched, no doubt about it.

Brookhiser includes some of my favorite quotes by or about Hamilton, although my favorite story about his life is not. Whatever you think about the duel, Princeton University, at one time, contained evidence of Alexanders markmanship on their walls. During the battle of Princeton, Alexander fired his cannon at a picture of King George III, the Hanoverian king of Britain, totally smashing it head on! The frame was saved and the portrait was switched to one of General George Washington! Alexander had decided against Princeton and enrolled at Columbia where he could study at his own fast speed.

I think Forrest McDonalds assessment of Burr is more thorough. It seems to me, the real issue between them was financial/political, not just a "character" issue on Burrs part. However, Brookhiser biography is probably more realistic and forgiving in his analysis of Jefferson, Adams, Madison and others who did not share Hamiltons views in the last years of his life.

What I liked most about this book was that Alexanders feats/defeats are told within the continental context through which they were unfolding. Its a good review of the basics in American colonial history.