John Adams

John Adams by David McCullough

Revolution. War. Independence. Republicanism. Democracy. Constitution. Federalism. Government. Freedom. Justice. Rights. Each of these words has been integral to our national dialogue ever since King George III decided that England was more entitled to wealth created in the American colonies than those who created the wealth. Anger and resentment in the colonies spawned this dialogue which eventually led to a war for independence in 1776. The decision to fight the King – an act of treason – was made by a group of men led by some of America’s, indeed, history’s, greatest thinkers. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin immediately come to mind but there was one more: John Adams, without whom the war for independence from England might have been lost before it began.

Of all the delegates to the Continental Congress in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, John Adams of Massachusetts was the most passionate about independence from Great Britain. Almost until the eve of war, the delegates were about equally divided on the question of declaring independence, with a few on the fence. Mr. Adams’ greatest accomplishment was obtaining a unanimous vote for going to war against England, hence the phrase “united we stand, divided we fall”. Of the 13 colonies, only Georgia did not send a delegation to the first congress because that colony depended on British soldiers to fight the Creek Indians who were preparing for a series of attacks. Fifty-five delegates of high social standing in the other twelve colonies journeyed to Philadelphia to convene the first Congress on September 5, 1774. A year earlier, Benjamin Franklin had tried unsuccessfully to call such a meeting; but it took the closing of Boston Harbor by the English in response to the Boston Tea Party to provoke a sense of urgency amongst the colonists.

The first session of Congress was aimed at gaining the respect of the Monarchy and Parliament which had recently established the “Coercive Acts”. These laws were intended to punish the Massachusetts Colony for dumping tea shipments into Boston Harbor, and were referred to in the colonies as “The Intolerable Acts”. England legitimized capital crimes in the name of the King, required colonists to provide quarters to English soldiers, intruded in the governance of Massachusetts, and closed the port at Boston to coerce payment for the dumped tea. Several colonies realized that King George’s treatment of Massachusetts was the beginning of a widespread crackdown on personal liberty and pursuit of wealth. “No taxation without representation” became a rallying cry in New England and beyond.

In order to get the attention of the King and Parliament, the First Continental Congress developed a “bill of rights” for the colonies defining what each citizen was entitled to by virtue of being alive. Additionally, this Declaration of Rights and Grievances explained specific objections to English laws infringing on the American colonies. Finally, the petition to the king stated that if the colonies’ demands for redress were not met, then there would be a boycott against all trade with Britain.

England responded by billeting solders in Boston and using punitive measures to quash the growing rebellion. As tensions escalated and Britain’s military became more aggressive, a Second Continental Congress convened on May 10, 1776. England was unquestionably determined to regain control of the colonies and considered the colonial militiamen to be traitors and therefore subject to execution. It took the better part of two months for the Congress to draft and unanimously adopt a Declaration of Independence, in which each delegate pledged his life, his fortune, and his sacred honor to the cause of liberty. Signing the Declaration was a deeply courageous act of faith and proof of the collective will necessary to move from winning liberty to creating a government reflecting the best of human ideals. Of all the signers, no one worked harder to build consensus than John Adams, and like all great statesmen he knew the value of compromise.

David McCullough, a Pulitzer Prize-winning author and biographer, recognized that John Adams was a new type of man: an original American. He was the son of a farmer, studied law at Harvard College, practiced law on the court circuits, and maintained a farm in Braintree, Massachusetts. Mr. Adams, in addition to possessing great intelligence and a thirst for knowledge, was a passionate man whose love for his wife, Abigail, survives in hundreds of letters that passed between them. Only in America, where hard work and leadership were worth more than good breeding, could a man like John Adams rise from his humble origins to become one of the world’s great political figures. And only in America could a woman be a true partner to such a man.

History books are often not much fun to read, but John Adams is written with the passion of the subject himself as if Mr. McCullough somehow channeled President Adams’ spirit while researching and writing this book. His appreciation for Mr. Adams and the other delegates to the Continental Congress who sweated for weeks in Philadelphia as they argued about questions of slavery versus abolition, patriotism versus treason, negotiation versus war, Federalism versus states’ rights – divisive issues, all – shows in every sentence of this book. The men who defined the new nation and unique form of government came to understand that by every state giving up some autonomy in exchange for a strong central government, the whole would be much greater than the sum of the parts.

What is most fascinating about John Adams is how our nation continues to debate some of the same issues which threatened its formation in the first place. Slavery was critical to the plantation economies of the southern states and arguments over banning the practice sparked a long-running argument over states’ rights and Federalism. Modern politicians and political party machines keep this argument alive with the simplistic term “big government”, as if government “of the people, by the people, and for the people” is a bad thing.

Unfortunately what has happened in the United States of America is that we have become mired in polarizing disputes and thus have no understanding of our core values. Is basic healthcare a human right? Should every child receive an education, and if so what do all children need to know? Are senior citizens entitled to Social Security and Medicare? Is every citizen entitled to housing? Food? Work? Should citizenship be granted to people who work hard and pay their taxes even if they were not born here? Do we deny food, medicine, education, sanitation to those who are not citizens? Do we strip Constitutionally-granted citizenship from children born here whose parents are in this country illegally? If we don’t support a war, should we be required to pay for it? Can government agencies commit murder in the name of national security? These are complicated questions requiring serious, thoughtful analysis. What we get instead are shallow soundbites , labels, and signs – “Conservative”, “Liberal”, “Country First”, “Change”, “Maverick”, “Tax and Spend”, “Peace Now”, “No New Taxes”, “Illegals Go Home”, “Learn English”, etc. – which serve only to keep the public angry and anxious.

If only the political parties and lobbyists would disappear so that citizens could come to a consensus about our values as a nation. By agreeing on values and where the federal government ends and the state governments begin, we might find direction and our congressmen and senators could legislate rather than playing political games in an effort to get re-elected. This is all wishful thinking, unfortunately. The political parties and lobbyists are stronger than ever now that corporations can “buy” elections by outspending the opposition. Even though we need those great minds now more than ever, it is probably a good thing that John Adams and his contemporaries are resting comfortably in their graves. I am afraid the ignorance and ugly partisan politics which keep us from taking care of our country would make the “founding brothers” wish they hadn’t bothered going to war against the English.

Copyright 2010, Teresa Friedlander, all rights reserved

Blandings Castle

Blandings Castle by P. G. Wodehouse

Book review by Teresa Friedlander, copyright 2010, all rights reserved

The only cure for the psychosis being caused by the looming mid-term election is a good laugh, and who better to supply this medicine than P. G. Wodehouse (1881-1975), best known for his Jeeves and Wooster stories. Blandings Castle is a loosely connected collection of short stories which reveals the last gasps of the British Empire, the generation that gave us Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth the second (whose progeny can be rather embarrassing at times). Mr. Wodehouse was a master of the short story form and possessed that understated and articulate humor only shared by classically educated Brits (of which he was not one due to economic hardship in the family business). He was, however, a keen observer of humanity with an excellent ear for dialog and, living as an expatriate for much of his life, developed a unique perspective on his mother country. Mr. Wodehouse particularly enjoyed the way generations of in-breeding in the upper echelons of society had eliminated any trace of higher intelligence in favor of the stiff upper lip and locked jaws characteristic of those with elite pedigrees. A true “blue blood” only has to utter a single word to let us know where he ranks on the social hierarchy.

Lord Emsworth of Blandings Castle, a lovingly rendered specimen, finds himself surrounded by annoyances the worst of which is his own son. Freddie Threepwood, the future Earl, has the intelligence of stick of gum, the self-control of a three-year-old, and the personality of a Jack Russell terrier. He was, wrote Mr. Wodehouse, “was one of those younger sons who rather invite the jaundiced eye.” The only skills Freddie possessed were racking up gambling debts in London and begging his father for money. Just the same he was harmless and innocent: an overgrown child who just wanted everyone including himself to be happy, even if it meant causing some very awkward situations. To the beleaguered 9th Earl of Emsworth, the only thing worse than having Freddie in London gambling away the family fortunes was having him at home, underfoot and creating havok.

When Lord Emsworth isn’t trying to avoid his son, he is troubled by his gardener, Angus McAllister, who wants to pave over the Earl’s favorite little patch of moss. Angus wields the real power on the estate and Lord Emsworth has no idea how to assert himself in order to save that moss. When Angus takes in a boarder, an unsuitable young girl to whom Freddie has taken a fancy, Lord Emsworth - in a rare moment of manhood - demands that the girl be sent away. Angus sends himself away instead, leaving Lord Emsworth to nurse Blandings’ best chance in years to bring a champion pumpkin to the local fair. When the pumpkin became depressed, yes depressed, Lord Emsworth realizes he has made a terrible mistake, and hat in hand, sets out to make it up to Angus.

These stories are pure entertainment and the characters are so human in their frailties that we can’t help loving them as they scheme against each other, and try to further their own agendas in the most inept and foolish ways. P. G. Wodehouse was not considered a great literary talent, his gift was in plot construction in that each of his best stories is perfectly set up, developed, and resolved in a way that satisfies a reader looking for a brief diversion from life. What makes Mr. Wodehouse’s stories so worthwhile is the humor woven into each situation. There are passages that are so funny you will laugh out loud and beg for mercy. (Hint: this is a book best enjoyed alone.)

If the sorry state of our political system – what with the dysfunctional Legislative Branch of government and the Tea Parties, Koran Burners, Birthers, Militant Vegans, Eco-Terrorists, and Pot Parties – is getting you down, just keep in mind that someone out there is watching and taking lots of notes. I predict that one day we will all laugh about these crazy days and wonder how we survived. In the interim Blandings Castle is a great diversion. Read it and take comfort in the fact that in the future there will be another crop of would-be politicians even less capable of running the nation than those we get to choose from today!

"Eats, Shoots & Leaves"

Eats, Shoots & Leaves by Lynne Truss

Book Review by Teresa Friedlander (copyright 2008)

A panda walks into a bar, sits down and orders a sandwich. He eats the sandwich, pulls out a gun and shoots the waiter dead. As the panda stands up to go, the bartender shouts, "Hey! Where are you going? You just shot my waiter and you didn't pay for your sandwich!" The panda tosses a dictionary to the bartender and yells, "Dude, I'm a PANDA! Look it up!" The bartender opens the dictionary and sees the following definition for panda: "A tree-dwelling marsupial of Asian origin, characterized by distinct black and white coloring. Eats, shoots and leaves."

If only the dictionary had left out the unnecessary comma, that waiter would be alive today and the panda would be happily munching on bamboo. Eats, Shoots & Leaves is a book about punctuation: commas, apostrophes, exclamation marks, colons, semi-colons, and dashes. As the panda joke illustrates, improperly used punctuation marks can alter the meaning of sentences in surprising, and sometimes unhappy, ways. Author, Lynne Truss, has made it her mission in life to prevent any more punctuation-related deaths, accidents, or misunderstandings.

English is the most useful language in the world because with it we can describe and explain almost anything, in precise detail and with great clarity. It developed as a result of a series of conquests of the island nation we now call England. The Romans conquered the Celts; the Germanic Angles, Saxons, and Jutes conquered the Romans; and the Normans conquered the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes. Each of these conquests resulted in the vanquished having to learn to communicate with the victors. Over the centuries, the various languages merged and evolved into Old and Middle English. During the 15th century, the printing press led to a more standardized form of written and, as a result, spoken English. But it was during the Elizabethan period that an early version of Modern English emerged when great value was placed on the proper use of speech in Court. With the works of William Shakespeare and the King James Bible, Modern English made its debut.

In the English language there are words, of course, paragraphs, and punctuation marks. Punctuation marks were invented to help readers know when to pause and take a breath, as well as to clear up ambiguities. Modern punctuation marks got their start following the invention of the printing press with movable type. Italian printers Aldus Manutius (1449-1515) and his grandson developed a system of punctuation marks which became standard for the literate people of Europe. Many of these conventions are in use today.

Linguists like to get depressed about how electronic mail and instant messaging are destroying what is left of the English language. Lynne Truss decided that rather than complaining, she was going to ignite a revolution: bad grammar and incorrect punctuation would no longer be tolerated! She envisioned an army of English language deputies armed with red pens and white-out, ridding the world of grammatical and typographical errors. Ms. Truss’ dream has not yet come true, but she did succeed in sparking discussions and debates about proper punctuation and the differences between American English and British English. Louis Menand wrote a review of Eats, Shoots & Leaves for The New Yorker in which he points out a punctuation error in the author’s dedication! Who knew English could be so fun?

Ms. Truss begins the book with a joke and never stops. Some of her examples of misunderstandings caused by improper punctuation are hilarious. She uses them to illustrate how the humble comma can make an ambiguous sentence clear:

- I know a man with a dog named Scotty. (Is the dog or the man named Scotty?)
- I know a man, with a dog, named Scotty.

Ms. Truss uses the following example to show how properly placed periods and semi-colons take a nonsense rhyme and make it sensible:

- Every lady in this land has twenty nails on each hand; five and twenty on hands and feet; and this is true without deceit.
- Every lady in this land has twenty nails. On each hand, five; and twenty on hands and feet.

Other examples in the book show tragic consequences of poorly written communications. An improperly punctuated telegram sparked a raid on British and other Transvaal settlers by the Boers. This raid, called the Jameson Raid, is referred to by historians as a “fiasco” because the settlers meant only to ask Mr. Jameson to come to their aid if they came under siege. The way the telegram was written, it sounded like the settlers were asking Jameson to defend them from a siege by the Boers.

Eats, Shoots & Leaves is a book for everyone who uses the English language. It is informative, thought-provoking and entertaining at the same time. Even if diagramming sentences in middle school gave you hives, you will love this book; likewise, if you were an English geek. Studying English was, for many of us, tedious and confusing, but that is the fault of the teaching, not the subject matter. English is the language of business, trade, and science, and it is becoming the global language for making connections. With more and more people learning English, the language continues to evolve. Our responsibility, therefore, is to care for it by using it properly. This doesn’t mean you have to stop using IMs, but it does mean that when you send out a written message, you think before you click “send”. We live in a time when failure to communicate is epidemic, so anything we can do to listen, speak, and write more effectively is all for the good.