Two Founding Fathers walk into an inn
I’ve finally gotten around to reading David McCullough’s biography of John Adams, a fascinating read as both biography and history. Adams hadn’t been much more than a name in the history books to me before this, and probably a lot of people would say the same. Ask people to name some great leaders of the American Revolution, and most will probably come up with Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, and even Samuel Adams (his reincarnation as a beer doesn’t hurt), but not John. This book shows why he’s worthy to stand in their company.
One of my favorite things about this biography is the little anecdotes (collected from the voluminous letters and diaries of Adams himself) that humanize the legendary figures. For example, one night in 1776 when Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Edward Rutledge were traveling from Philadelphia to Staten Island to meet with Lord Howe and discuss a possible negotiated end to the rebellion.
When they reached New Brunswick, New Jersey, the only available inn was so crowded that Adams and Franklin had to share a bed in a single small room. The going had been hard and slow, since the main highway was crowded with soldiers marching towards New York, not to mention gawkers eager to catch a glimpse of the famous members of Congress. One can imagine that the travelers would be eager to just get some sleep, but this couldn’t be accomplished without a debate between Adams and Franklin over whether the window should be left open or closed.
Franklin, the scientist and natural philosopher, firmly believed in the health benefits of fresh air at night. Adams, although younger and not scientifically inclined, was still far from uneducated and had famously strong opinions when he believed himself to be right. Possibly drawing on the experience of his New England upbringing, he held that the chill of the night air was more unhealthy than the stale air of a closed room.
Franklin was not to be dissuaded, though, and asked Adams if he was familiar with Franklin’s theories on germs and colds. Adams replied that he had indeed read the scientist’s papers, and although he disagreed with the theory, he was willing to listen to it again. So as the two men lay down, Franklin waxed didactic about fresh air and health, with which, Adams wrote, “I was so much amused that I soon fell asleep.”
[The above is paraphrasing McCullough, who was mainly paraphrasing Adams.]
I'm astonished anyone could post on John Adams and not even mention the Alien and Sedition Acts.
He was also a crap administrator, arrogant, apathetic and avoiding the capitol of Philadelphia for long periods. Then there were the "Midnight Judges." He was so unpopular, and for such good reason, that he couldn't get re-elected. Even though he was busily jailing newspaper editors for daring to be "seditious" enough to criticize him. Persecuting non-citizens, he was pretty much also the Tom Tancredo of his day.
One can go on like this at considerable length.
You might want to read more than a single hagiography, perhaps, Jymcat.
And, really, more people know of Sam Adams? Um, on what planet? At least most people could tell you John Adams was a President; ask the next 20 people you run into on a street what Sam Adams did, and see if you can find one with an answer.
I don't mean to be too strong here, but I'm astonished at the claim. I can't imagine what it's based on; it has no connection to reality as I know it in this country, I'm afraid. At least John Adams has major biographies and documentaries still coming out about him, was in 1776, is famous for his history with Thomas Jefferson, and so on and on. Sam Adams? Are you kidding?
Posted by Gary Farber on April 12 2006 09:25
Gary: I was writing about one anecdote in Adams' life, not recapitulating his entire biography. As you point out, other details have been written about for anyone who wants to read them.
As for people's awareness of Samuel as opposed to John Adams, I understand that knowledge among the people you know and talk to may be different from mine. It's a big country, and anyone's version of "reality as I know it in this country", including yours and mine, may not be the whole picture.
Posted by Jimcat on April 13 2006 03:11
No, I'd actually contend that it's objective fact that John Adams is far better known than Sam Adams. I'd measure it by number of biographies currently available, by number of mentions in history books, by number of mentions in popular literature, by number of available documentaries on them, by number of mentions of them in classrooms, and by popular survey, amongst other object measures.
I don't see subjective views of reality as changing any of these objective measures of fact.
But if I was rough on you, I apologize. I tend to sometimes be over-strong in putting forth my opinion. I feel really strongly about the evilness of the Alien and Sedition Acts in the history of our country, and that Adams was a fairly lousy President, though obviously crucially important to the Revolution and founding of the country, and a man with good as well as bad aspects. But I was probably over-vehement, so sorry about that. It's a bad tendency of mine when I don't catch it.
Posted by Gary Farber on April 13 2006 10:44