[.ca] John Quincy Adams: 1825-1829 The American Presidents (ISBN 0805069399)

an error about an error:
Referring to Marshall Newman's review. The Macaulay that JQA read and Remini mentions was Catherine Macaulay (1731-1791), an historian and a distant relative of T.B. Macaulay (1800-1859).

Too much Freud at the begining.:
Full disclosure. John Quincy Adams is one of my heroes. I eagerly grabbed this book but almost didn't finish it. The strong later chapters which effectively describe the Adams election, administration and later time in congress are paid for by a load of psycoanalisys of Abagail Adams, John Quincy to the point where the reader just wants to say ENOUGH! When the writer calls Adams is a poor father and follows it up with a description of him informing his sons they should work hard, avoid drinking, and follow religion I must conclude that he doesn't want me raising children either. When he lambasts Adams for wanting to raise his sone the way he was raised saying that he should know better, he ignores that the method used produced one of the greatest statemen in the history of this country. Later on it gets better the author rightly hits Adams as a poor pol but extols the virtues of his honesty and single minded devotion to what he believed was right. His chapters on Adams vision and his fight against the gag rule are great reading as are all chapters from the point that Adams serves in the Monroe administration. The author's bias' are plain and the lens that he sees Adams life is apparent to any reader, but that lens can't cloud the life of the man, it can only make reading this story an annoyance for a time. I suggest going right to 1816 and reading from there. The book is worth reading but it was enough to convince me that I would avoid this author in the future.

Not History's Favorite.:
This is one of the few, possibly the only, early American President I am aware of who is consistently treated poorly by historians. It is almost like there is some unspoken conspiracy to paint the man as some kind of slacker. The closest we can come to this kind of consensual disapproval is how the American press treated Gerald Ford's athleticism. In Ford's case, this former center for the University of Michigan football team, an excellent recreational skier and a man who consistently shot golf in the low 70's was treated as an uncoordinated clod, who could not put one foot in front of another. Something similar is going on with the depiction of JQA. Independent of his parents in Europe for 6 years, much of that time by his own choice, his biographers treat him as a mama's boy. That's right, the same man who undertook his first diplomatic mission for the United States at age 14! And it goes down hill from there. Incredible successes as Secretary of State under James Monroe are glossed over, a Presidential vision for America that was the equal of Washington, Adams (his father), Jefferson, Madison and Monroe's combined, formulator of the Monroe Doctrine, extender of the Continental limits of the United States from sea to sea, ardent abolitionist who fought the Gag Rule in the House of Representatives for 9 years (that's right, he defends our most fundamental of freedoms, freedom of speech, and during a 9 year Congressional battle, defeats those who would have suppressed this freedom within our own Congress), founder of the Smithsonian, the list of this man's unbelievable accomplishments goes on and on. Professor Remini should be embarrassed for this mediocre effort. Was JQA stiff, prickly and unyielding? Of course he was. Was he obstinate, arrogant and difficult? Again JQA is guilty. But after his outstanding works on Jackson, Webster, and Clay for Professor Remini to simply repeat Nagel's poor work and not take the time and opportunity to fairly and accurately report on this man's life accomplishments has got to be some form of academic bankruptcy. This book is only 155 pages long. And those pages are small. That should tell you something. Save your money.

Disappointing in places but still good:
I was rather disappointed by this book. While it is factually correct in most places (I address the factual errors below), I do not agree with some of the characterizations. These are somewhat disappointing as Professor Remini has generally adhered to a high standard of scholarship in his previous works. My main problem is what I believe to be sources that Professor Remini has used to write this book. These sources tend to be critial of the homelife of John Quincy Adams and fault the nagging and hectoring letters written by his mother Abigal as being one reason for his failure to develop fully as a emotionally well put together human being. The problem that I have with this line of thought is that no one in the 18th century aspired to that emotional state, certainly not in New England and not to the offspring of Puritan scions (both John and Abigal Adams fit this description). Had anyone suggested that a severe approach with one's offspring might not be the best approach, he or she would have been laughed at and taken for mad. No, it was a bit too early to hold parents responsible for not having read Dr. Spock. The fault with this ahistorical approach is in the source material, particularly the Nagal biography of John Quincy Adams. The goal of this book is to prove that the Adams family was particularly disfunctional because no one got enough love in childhood. This is kind of like taking John Adams to task for not taking an aircraft to Philadelphia. Such concepts of family did not exist in the 18th century and it is a mistake to try and impose our standards on the unwilling 18th century. Despite this harsh homelife Adams seemed to have had a good relationship with his parents and archivists are unlikely to discover a Mommie Dearest manuscript by the the sixth president of the United States. There is another bit of information that also is incorrect. Professor Remini has Adams reading the English Historian Macauley as a youth. While I am sure that someone of Adams education would have no trouble reading his essays as a very young person, Macauley was not born until 1800, he wrote no essays until the 1820s when Adams would have been in his 50s. As far as the public life of Adams, Remini is generally on target. Adams, while a successful diplomat, our most successful Secretary of State and an effective congressman, he was a political pigmy and disaster as a president. Here he draws on the definitive Bemis biography for this views.

A little dry, but still good:
Remini writes well but can be a little dry in places, so be warned. He does spend adequate time reflecting upon JQA's prodigious intellect. It's a matter of debate who was our most intelligent President: Lincoln, Madison and Jefferson would certainly garner their share of votes. But John Quincy Adams warrants serious consideration: he was an intellectual titan with an astounding breadth of intellect. He was impossibly well-read, sober, amazingly articulate with a rapier-like ability to demolish opponents or defend his position. It's debatable whether he was, in fact, America's most brilliant President, but this book goes a long way in making that case. Remini wisely delves into Adams' private side and quotes extensively from his own words. If you are looking for a glum recitation of Adams' political life, look elsewhere, this is a more human biography. There was a refreshing amount of material focusing on Adams' boyhood, and the chapters covering his Congressional years are especially interesting. His story reads like something from a novel: failed President transformed into one of the most influential Congressmen who ever serve in the House. My only minor criticism is that Remini does not sufficiently explore or explain Adams' brilliant son, Henry, who grew up to be a caustic and clever chronicler of the late 10th century. Otherwise, this is a solid book, well-written, thoroughly researched and illuminating.