What do you think?
Rate this book
Washington: The Indispensable Man
Vintage TV tie-in paperback
467 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 1974
1853 people are currently reading
4808 people want to read
About the author
James Thomas Flexner
73 books27 followersJames Thomas Flexner was an American historian and biographer best known for the four-volume biography of George Washington that earned him a National Book Award in Biography and a special Pulitzer Prize. A cum laude graduate of Harvard University, Flexner worked as a reporter for the New York Herald Tribune from 1929 until 1931, after which he worked as an executive secretary for the New York City Department of Health before leaving the job the following year in order to devote his full energies to writing.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 219 reviews
February 18, 2024
Washington looms over the life of the nation that he did so much to found. As general, as constitutionalist, as president, he set the tone and the standard for all others in American life to follow. Indeed, without George Washington it is impossible to imagine the United States of America growing, thriving, and prospering in a spirit of republican democracy the way it has for over 200 years. And therefore, it is quite appropriate that biographer James Thomas Flexner gave this 1974 biography of George Washington the title Washington: The Indispensable Man.
Biographer Flexner won the Pulitzer Prize and the National Book Award for his epic, four-volume biography George Washington. Not everyone, however, has time to read four weighty volumes of biography – even when the subject is George Washington. For that reason, it is fortunate that Flexner offered this concise, well-honed, one-volume distillation of his magnum opus.
Throughout The Indispensable Man, Flexner emphasizes the theme of George Washington as a man ahead of his time. Washington’s forward-thinking qualities emerge in the story of his 1777 response to learning that some citizens of New Jersey, during a period of British occupation, “had, under stress, sworn allegiance to the Crown”. Once these New Jerseyans were back under the Stars and Stripes, Washington as Commander in Chief ruled that these Patriots-turned-Tories “could be uncontaminated by the single act of swearing allegiance to the United States” (p. 100). Those who refused thus to demonstrate their American allegiance would simply be conveyed to the British lines and handed over to the British.
Washington’s moderate and gentle response to what other leaders might have regarded as treason reminded me of the mercy that the Spartan commander Brasidas showed to citizens of Athenian cities he had defeated during the Peloponnesian War. Yet Washington’s magnanimous solution to this problem was not universally popular: “That the cleansing oath Washington had designated was not to the sovereign state of New Jersey but to ‘the United States’ outraged many congressmen. The United States? That was no political entity, just an alliance” (p. 100).
Here, though, we see how very far ahead of his time George Washington was. In his own time, many Americans, including a number of members of Congress, thought about the United States of America the way Americans today might think of NATO: a valuable defensive alliance, but not the nation to which one owes allegiance. “State” meant “nation” for many people of that time; recall that the Declaration of Independence talks of “the united States of America” (with a small “u”) breaking away from “the State of Great Britain.” Yet Washington worked all his life to make Americans from New Hampshire to Georgia think and feel as Americans, not merely as citizens of their individual states – and his vision ultimately prevailed.
When the Revolutionary War was won, and Washington (who could have used his army to hold on to power) instead handed the Continental Army over to civilian control by Congress at Annapolis in 1783, he looked ahead to a peaceful retirement at his beloved Mount Vernon estate, and believed that his years of public service were over. Yet in fact, they were just beginning.
Because the Articles of Confederation, the first document providing a governmental structure for the U.S.A., created a weak central government and prompted endless quarreling among the states, many eminent Americans called for a revision of the Articles, and Washington was asked to preside at the resulting Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787.
This assignment made him most unhappy, and not just because his beloved wife Martha was miserable at losing him to public service yet again. The situation seemed a veritable Scylla and Charybdis of potential negative outcomes: “If (as still seemed very possible) the convention failed, the reputation for which he had so painfully labored would be grievously damaged….And if the convention did, under his leadership, establish a stronger government, he would be committed to doing everything in his power to help that government succeed” (p. 202).
Yet Washington did preside over the Constitutional Convention; and under his steady leadership, the Convention produced a United States Constitution that combined a strong central government with respect for the rights of the individual citizen. And that Constitution has served as the bedrock of American democracy for more than 233 years now.
With these successes behind him, it was inevitable that George Washington would be elected as the first American President. Throughout the Washington Administration, as at earlier points in Washington’s life, it seems to have been Washington’s character that so often made the crucial difference at various moments of crisis or contingency.
I was struck, for example, by Flexner’s recounting of how Washington responded to a yellow-fever epidemic in Philadelphia, then the nation’s capital, as his second term as President began in 1793. Little was known about the disease at the time (including the fact that it was spread by a particular species of mosquito); but it caused profound fear, and everyone who could leave Philadelphia did so. Washington’s response was characteristically calm and fearless, and his ride from nearby Germantown back into Philadelphia did much to calm the nerves of his frightened fellow-citizens:
Washington’s appearance again created a sensation. It was taken as a demonstration that the calamity had passed. His advisers feared that his “indifference about danger” might make him risk his own life, and those of the inhabitants who would “crowd” after him, by riding into the city while contagion still lurked. Washington was not to be dissuaded. The mosquitoes having been killed by the chilly weather, neither he nor the “multitudes” who followed his example were harmed. (p. 301)
Washington confronted the invisible terror of contagious disease with the same courage with which he had faced the bullets and shells of the British Army on the battlefields of the American Revolution. The prospect of death or injury seems to have meant little to him, when compared with his obligation to lead and protect those whom it was his duty to serve.
Flexner does not shy away from the topic of George Washington and slavery; the great Virginian was, after all, one of the wealthiest slaveholders of his time. Yet once again, Washington stands out, even among the eminent and accomplished Founders; while most of them became more conservative and more cautious regarding the slavery issue over the course of their lifetimes, Washington moved in the opposite direction – from casual acceptance of the “peculiar institution” during his youth, to increasing disquiet in his maturity, to an active determination, in his later years, to do all he could to end slavery on the Mount Vernon plantation.
Washington, Flexner suggests, “was temperamentally incapable of being indolent while others worked for him”, and his emotions regarding the people he held in slavery at Mount Vernon “were unhappy: frustration, pity, anxiety concerning the possibility of a slave revolt, and a deep personal sense of guilt” (pp. 391-92). Motivated by this complex set of emotional responses to slavery, Washington ultimately “proved to be the only Virginia founding father to free all his slaves” (p. 385).
The courage and equanimity that characterized all aspects of Washington’s life also marked the way in which the great man faced his own death. Having gone riding about his Mount Vernon estate on a cold and snowy December morning, Washington fell ill, and his doctors followed the customary medical practice of the time by “bleeding” Washington – believing, as had physicians since the time of the ancient Greeks, that the removal of blood with bad “humours” in it would help an ill patient to recover.
Yet Washington (unsurprisingly) continued to weaken, and his Mount Vernon secretary Tobias Lear later recalled how calmly Washington regarded his own impending demise:
He…asked, if I recollected anything which it was essential for him to do, as he had but a very short time to continue with us. I told him, that I could recollect nothing, but that I hoped he was not so near his end. He observed, smiling, that he certainly was, and that, as it was the debt which we must all pay, he looked at the event with perfect resignation. (p. 401)
Washington: The Indispensable Man takes its title from an observation that Flexner offers regarding the “Conway Cabal,” an unsuccessful 1777-78 attempt by a group of jealous and discontented officers to have Washington removed from the command of the Continental Army. The coup attempt failed, as Flexner explains, in part because Washington had done nothing wrong, and in part because the political and military leadership of the young U.S.A. asked themselves who could replace George Washington and found that “The answer was that there was no one else. Washington was recognized as the indispensable man.”
Living in Northern Virginia, I often have the opportunity to visit Mount Vernon, and indeed I bought my copy of Washington: The Indispensable Man at the Mount Vernon gift shop. Whenever I walk the grounds at Mount Vernon, I find that my impressions of George Washington as a man both great and good are strengthened. A reading of this book, like a visit to Mount Vernon, makes one thankful for the presence of George Washington at all the times in the early history of the United States of America when only his presence and his example held the young republic together. He was, and he remains, the indispensable man.
Biographer Flexner won the Pulitzer Prize and the National Book Award for his epic, four-volume biography George Washington. Not everyone, however, has time to read four weighty volumes of biography – even when the subject is George Washington. For that reason, it is fortunate that Flexner offered this concise, well-honed, one-volume distillation of his magnum opus.
Throughout The Indispensable Man, Flexner emphasizes the theme of George Washington as a man ahead of his time. Washington’s forward-thinking qualities emerge in the story of his 1777 response to learning that some citizens of New Jersey, during a period of British occupation, “had, under stress, sworn allegiance to the Crown”. Once these New Jerseyans were back under the Stars and Stripes, Washington as Commander in Chief ruled that these Patriots-turned-Tories “could be uncontaminated by the single act of swearing allegiance to the United States” (p. 100). Those who refused thus to demonstrate their American allegiance would simply be conveyed to the British lines and handed over to the British.
Washington’s moderate and gentle response to what other leaders might have regarded as treason reminded me of the mercy that the Spartan commander Brasidas showed to citizens of Athenian cities he had defeated during the Peloponnesian War. Yet Washington’s magnanimous solution to this problem was not universally popular: “That the cleansing oath Washington had designated was not to the sovereign state of New Jersey but to ‘the United States’ outraged many congressmen. The United States? That was no political entity, just an alliance” (p. 100).
Here, though, we see how very far ahead of his time George Washington was. In his own time, many Americans, including a number of members of Congress, thought about the United States of America the way Americans today might think of NATO: a valuable defensive alliance, but not the nation to which one owes allegiance. “State” meant “nation” for many people of that time; recall that the Declaration of Independence talks of “the united States of America” (with a small “u”) breaking away from “the State of Great Britain.” Yet Washington worked all his life to make Americans from New Hampshire to Georgia think and feel as Americans, not merely as citizens of their individual states – and his vision ultimately prevailed.
When the Revolutionary War was won, and Washington (who could have used his army to hold on to power) instead handed the Continental Army over to civilian control by Congress at Annapolis in 1783, he looked ahead to a peaceful retirement at his beloved Mount Vernon estate, and believed that his years of public service were over. Yet in fact, they were just beginning.
Because the Articles of Confederation, the first document providing a governmental structure for the U.S.A., created a weak central government and prompted endless quarreling among the states, many eminent Americans called for a revision of the Articles, and Washington was asked to preside at the resulting Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787.
This assignment made him most unhappy, and not just because his beloved wife Martha was miserable at losing him to public service yet again. The situation seemed a veritable Scylla and Charybdis of potential negative outcomes: “If (as still seemed very possible) the convention failed, the reputation for which he had so painfully labored would be grievously damaged….And if the convention did, under his leadership, establish a stronger government, he would be committed to doing everything in his power to help that government succeed” (p. 202).
Yet Washington did preside over the Constitutional Convention; and under his steady leadership, the Convention produced a United States Constitution that combined a strong central government with respect for the rights of the individual citizen. And that Constitution has served as the bedrock of American democracy for more than 233 years now.
With these successes behind him, it was inevitable that George Washington would be elected as the first American President. Throughout the Washington Administration, as at earlier points in Washington’s life, it seems to have been Washington’s character that so often made the crucial difference at various moments of crisis or contingency.
I was struck, for example, by Flexner’s recounting of how Washington responded to a yellow-fever epidemic in Philadelphia, then the nation’s capital, as his second term as President began in 1793. Little was known about the disease at the time (including the fact that it was spread by a particular species of mosquito); but it caused profound fear, and everyone who could leave Philadelphia did so. Washington’s response was characteristically calm and fearless, and his ride from nearby Germantown back into Philadelphia did much to calm the nerves of his frightened fellow-citizens:
Washington’s appearance again created a sensation. It was taken as a demonstration that the calamity had passed. His advisers feared that his “indifference about danger” might make him risk his own life, and those of the inhabitants who would “crowd” after him, by riding into the city while contagion still lurked. Washington was not to be dissuaded. The mosquitoes having been killed by the chilly weather, neither he nor the “multitudes” who followed his example were harmed. (p. 301)
Washington confronted the invisible terror of contagious disease with the same courage with which he had faced the bullets and shells of the British Army on the battlefields of the American Revolution. The prospect of death or injury seems to have meant little to him, when compared with his obligation to lead and protect those whom it was his duty to serve.
Flexner does not shy away from the topic of George Washington and slavery; the great Virginian was, after all, one of the wealthiest slaveholders of his time. Yet once again, Washington stands out, even among the eminent and accomplished Founders; while most of them became more conservative and more cautious regarding the slavery issue over the course of their lifetimes, Washington moved in the opposite direction – from casual acceptance of the “peculiar institution” during his youth, to increasing disquiet in his maturity, to an active determination, in his later years, to do all he could to end slavery on the Mount Vernon plantation.
Washington, Flexner suggests, “was temperamentally incapable of being indolent while others worked for him”, and his emotions regarding the people he held in slavery at Mount Vernon “were unhappy: frustration, pity, anxiety concerning the possibility of a slave revolt, and a deep personal sense of guilt” (pp. 391-92). Motivated by this complex set of emotional responses to slavery, Washington ultimately “proved to be the only Virginia founding father to free all his slaves” (p. 385).
The courage and equanimity that characterized all aspects of Washington’s life also marked the way in which the great man faced his own death. Having gone riding about his Mount Vernon estate on a cold and snowy December morning, Washington fell ill, and his doctors followed the customary medical practice of the time by “bleeding” Washington – believing, as had physicians since the time of the ancient Greeks, that the removal of blood with bad “humours” in it would help an ill patient to recover.
Yet Washington (unsurprisingly) continued to weaken, and his Mount Vernon secretary Tobias Lear later recalled how calmly Washington regarded his own impending demise:
He…asked, if I recollected anything which it was essential for him to do, as he had but a very short time to continue with us. I told him, that I could recollect nothing, but that I hoped he was not so near his end. He observed, smiling, that he certainly was, and that, as it was the debt which we must all pay, he looked at the event with perfect resignation. (p. 401)
Washington: The Indispensable Man takes its title from an observation that Flexner offers regarding the “Conway Cabal,” an unsuccessful 1777-78 attempt by a group of jealous and discontented officers to have Washington removed from the command of the Continental Army. The coup attempt failed, as Flexner explains, in part because Washington had done nothing wrong, and in part because the political and military leadership of the young U.S.A. asked themselves who could replace George Washington and found that “The answer was that there was no one else. Washington was recognized as the indispensable man.”
Living in Northern Virginia, I often have the opportunity to visit Mount Vernon, and indeed I bought my copy of Washington: The Indispensable Man at the Mount Vernon gift shop. Whenever I walk the grounds at Mount Vernon, I find that my impressions of George Washington as a man both great and good are strengthened. A reading of this book, like a visit to Mount Vernon, makes one thankful for the presence of George Washington at all the times in the early history of the United States of America when only his presence and his example held the young republic together. He was, and he remains, the indispensable man.
May 28, 2012
400 pages. 52 chapters. 8 pages per chapter, roughly.
The structure of Washington: The Indispensable Man was perfect for this reader. I read one or two chapters per sitting and never strayed from the path into a forest of detail.
I have longed to read about Washington for several years, but not got round to it. I went as far as going into four bookshops in London and St.Albans before going on holiday last year. Not one word on the man.
I was shocked that such a gigantic figure was absent from the shelves. In fact, I could not believe it. But it was true. The shop was full of celebrity cook books and diet books I noted on my way out - bookless.
I know Washington discomforted more than one important Britisher, in fact he founded his whole career on discomforting us. But it was a long time ago and he did ad value to the transplantation of Anglo-Saxon ways across the water and take the project on a little. He even wanted to join the British army.
I was in tears when I finished reading James Thomas Flexner's masterly biography. I cld see Tobias Lear, secretary and friend, ministering to the old boy. I cld sense his earlier concern at Washington sitting there in sodden clothing after riding his farms in vile weather. "Would you take a little something for that sore throat?" asks Lear. No, says Washington. And then Washington can hardly, breathe, is dying. It all happens swiflty. The prospect of the doctors bleeding the sick man time and time again was unbearable. "You idiots!" screams the modern reader, "No, no!" but that is how it was.
So, too, that is how it was over the slaves. They, Washington included, were all slave owners. They sought freedom from we British while keeping others as slaves. Except Washington was a little different. Unwilling to free his slaves during his lifetime for fear of provoking his peers and possibly prompting a split in his infant country, he deftly provided in his will that they were to be freed.
It seems he has his critics though. Perhaps I don't understand the politics of his time or of modern America to comprehend why, but for he remains an overwhelmingly inspiring man on many counts.
His hospitality, conviviality, and, once out of office, his desire for good company and conversation were strongly endearing traits.
His energy and enthusiasm for his beloved farms, his joy of riding out, his taste and creativity in designing his own home were also the marks of a fine spirit.
His leadership was masterly. He held things together against the odds. The farmers were not up to a pitched battle with the British regiments and so they mostly avoided them, allowing the British to blunder to defeat, with a little help from the cheese-easting surrender monkies.
I was astonished to learn that Washington cld if he had wished it probably become a king. But he did not wish it. Unlike Oliver Cromwell, he waled away from the army, to the astonisment of European aristocrats. He gave up power and thus won eternal fame and brought in a new form of government.
Yet he was no Napoleon. Things often seemed to not go right for him. But his genius was that he persisted in spite of this.
The army is cross with him. They have not been paid. They are rebellious. He speaks to them. Things could easily slide out of control. He fumbles to pull out a pair of spectacles. There is something about his demeanour, something about his vulnerability, something about him. He wins them over.
This happens time and time again. He wins people over. Jay goes off to London and comes back with a treaty which the Jefferssonains hate. Washington talks people round. He takes people with him.
Flexner did the same for me. He took me with him in the strength of his portrayal of Washington the man, which was on a par with his portrayal of Washington the titan of history. I felt as if I knew Washington as I read those 52 chapters. I did not feel as if I was reading about a remote figure. I was at Washington's side every step of the way. The issue of how to react when revolutionary France and Britain went to war felt acutely real. Washington must have been tormented by the frictions between Hamilton and Jefferson, with the French doing their best to stir things up.
And then he is president, and then he is president again. And then he finally gets a break, with the thunderous roars of a loving crowd ringing in his ears. But it doesn't last. He's called back yet again to organise and army to face a possible French invasion.
He just wants to stop. But they won't let him. His estate is in poor shape. All his managers have died or been inadequate. Those glasses, the humanity of the man. The new nation needs him, he is truely 'The Indispensible Man'.
He is also lucky. Another general closes his eyes as Washington is in the middle of a blue on blue firefight. He is sure to be killed. Bullets fly past him from both directions. He survives. He goes on. So, too, he survives the stresses of blue on blue politics. The nation is only a few years old and the seeds of future divisions are clear to see. All of which makes me make a mind mark to read about the American Civil War, in the hope that one excellent read will lead to another.
Yes, I enjoyed Washington: The Indispensable Man immensely and am greatful to a colleague from America for lending it to me. She tells me there are no films about Washington. This I find absolutely shocking.
Ron Askew
The structure of Washington: The Indispensable Man was perfect for this reader. I read one or two chapters per sitting and never strayed from the path into a forest of detail.
I have longed to read about Washington for several years, but not got round to it. I went as far as going into four bookshops in London and St.Albans before going on holiday last year. Not one word on the man.
I was shocked that such a gigantic figure was absent from the shelves. In fact, I could not believe it. But it was true. The shop was full of celebrity cook books and diet books I noted on my way out - bookless.
I know Washington discomforted more than one important Britisher, in fact he founded his whole career on discomforting us. But it was a long time ago and he did ad value to the transplantation of Anglo-Saxon ways across the water and take the project on a little. He even wanted to join the British army.
I was in tears when I finished reading James Thomas Flexner's masterly biography. I cld see Tobias Lear, secretary and friend, ministering to the old boy. I cld sense his earlier concern at Washington sitting there in sodden clothing after riding his farms in vile weather. "Would you take a little something for that sore throat?" asks Lear. No, says Washington. And then Washington can hardly, breathe, is dying. It all happens swiflty. The prospect of the doctors bleeding the sick man time and time again was unbearable. "You idiots!" screams the modern reader, "No, no!" but that is how it was.
So, too, that is how it was over the slaves. They, Washington included, were all slave owners. They sought freedom from we British while keeping others as slaves. Except Washington was a little different. Unwilling to free his slaves during his lifetime for fear of provoking his peers and possibly prompting a split in his infant country, he deftly provided in his will that they were to be freed.
It seems he has his critics though. Perhaps I don't understand the politics of his time or of modern America to comprehend why, but for he remains an overwhelmingly inspiring man on many counts.
His hospitality, conviviality, and, once out of office, his desire for good company and conversation were strongly endearing traits.
His energy and enthusiasm for his beloved farms, his joy of riding out, his taste and creativity in designing his own home were also the marks of a fine spirit.
His leadership was masterly. He held things together against the odds. The farmers were not up to a pitched battle with the British regiments and so they mostly avoided them, allowing the British to blunder to defeat, with a little help from the cheese-easting surrender monkies.
I was astonished to learn that Washington cld if he had wished it probably become a king. But he did not wish it. Unlike Oliver Cromwell, he waled away from the army, to the astonisment of European aristocrats. He gave up power and thus won eternal fame and brought in a new form of government.
Yet he was no Napoleon. Things often seemed to not go right for him. But his genius was that he persisted in spite of this.
The army is cross with him. They have not been paid. They are rebellious. He speaks to them. Things could easily slide out of control. He fumbles to pull out a pair of spectacles. There is something about his demeanour, something about his vulnerability, something about him. He wins them over.
This happens time and time again. He wins people over. Jay goes off to London and comes back with a treaty which the Jefferssonains hate. Washington talks people round. He takes people with him.
Flexner did the same for me. He took me with him in the strength of his portrayal of Washington the man, which was on a par with his portrayal of Washington the titan of history. I felt as if I knew Washington as I read those 52 chapters. I did not feel as if I was reading about a remote figure. I was at Washington's side every step of the way. The issue of how to react when revolutionary France and Britain went to war felt acutely real. Washington must have been tormented by the frictions between Hamilton and Jefferson, with the French doing their best to stir things up.
And then he is president, and then he is president again. And then he finally gets a break, with the thunderous roars of a loving crowd ringing in his ears. But it doesn't last. He's called back yet again to organise and army to face a possible French invasion.
He just wants to stop. But they won't let him. His estate is in poor shape. All his managers have died or been inadequate. Those glasses, the humanity of the man. The new nation needs him, he is truely 'The Indispensible Man'.
He is also lucky. Another general closes his eyes as Washington is in the middle of a blue on blue firefight. He is sure to be killed. Bullets fly past him from both directions. He survives. He goes on. So, too, he survives the stresses of blue on blue politics. The nation is only a few years old and the seeds of future divisions are clear to see. All of which makes me make a mind mark to read about the American Civil War, in the hope that one excellent read will lead to another.
Yes, I enjoyed Washington: The Indispensable Man immensely and am greatful to a colleague from America for lending it to me. She tells me there are no films about Washington. This I find absolutely shocking.
Ron Askew
July 25, 2020
If you were fortunate enough to work at Saudi Aramco in the 1980's you would have at almost every site, however remote--Dhahran, Udhaliya, Ras Tanura, Abqaiq, etc., at your disposal a modern American library. I was there a decade and was able to begin planned reading programs in such a library.
Time somehow stands still when you are isolated abroad. It was a nice way to relax, while staying cool in the hot Saudi weather, to ease into the quiet air-conditioned library among tall date palms to load up with several weeks' reading.
Having discovered Flexner's biography of George Washington one summer night, I realized that a good way to study American history would be through the biographies of its presidents. I was lucky to have discovered Flexner's series on our first president. This led me later to other presidential biographies which I have continued to do wherever I might be.
I had thought that American history was boring while in high school and at university, but when I realized over the years that I was participating in one of the most unique experiments and adventures in human history, U.S. history became a burning interest of mine. One of the best ways for young students to understand where their place is in history is to latch on to well written presidential biographies, of which this one certainly is.
Time somehow stands still when you are isolated abroad. It was a nice way to relax, while staying cool in the hot Saudi weather, to ease into the quiet air-conditioned library among tall date palms to load up with several weeks' reading.
Having discovered Flexner's biography of George Washington one summer night, I realized that a good way to study American history would be through the biographies of its presidents. I was lucky to have discovered Flexner's series on our first president. This led me later to other presidential biographies which I have continued to do wherever I might be.
I had thought that American history was boring while in high school and at university, but when I realized over the years that I was participating in one of the most unique experiments and adventures in human history, U.S. history became a burning interest of mine. One of the best ways for young students to understand where their place is in history is to latch on to well written presidential biographies, of which this one certainly is.
June 13, 2008
A classic Presidential biography, it brings George Washington to life. The author takes Washington off his marble pedestal wand puts on a horse, racing through a storm of bullets during the French and Indian War. And so the journey begins. This book explains why Washington was great, glorious and, above all, selfless. More than anyone else he kept the Revolution alive. This from a wealthy man who had more reasons to stay out of the fight than any other. Yet, despite treachery, betrayal and the incompetence of his political masters in Congress, Washington prevailed. And under his leadership a little band of colonies defeated the greatest superpower of its time. This story, and that of Washington's precedent-setting presidency are wonderfully related by a gifted historian. Read this and you'll never think of Washington as a marble statue again.
March 1, 2009
James Thomas Flexner wrote a very detailed 4 volume biography of Washington. Then, I beleive at a publishers request, he took the core parts of the four volumes and published a one volume biography.
It is very, very good. First, one long volume of almost 400 words is still more accessible to the general reader than a four voume biography. Second, by reducing the story to one volume, the author can focus on the high spots. Third, the reasearch is very well done.
If you really want to know more about Wahsington , the man, instead of Washington, the legend this is an excellent starting point. There are parts that are a bit difficult to read, but well worth the reader's effort.
It is very, very good. First, one long volume of almost 400 words is still more accessible to the general reader than a four voume biography. Second, by reducing the story to one volume, the author can focus on the high spots. Third, the reasearch is very well done.
If you really want to know more about Wahsington , the man, instead of Washington, the legend this is an excellent starting point. There are parts that are a bit difficult to read, but well worth the reader's effort.
June 14, 2025
Flexner famously wrote a four volume biography of Washington of which I have read the first three. This one volume abridged version was outstanding and I remembered why I loved Flexner and his writing. It is obvious to say that at times I feel like parts could have been expanded, but that is why he wrote the more comprehensive series. I think I have been spoiled with doorstopper sized biographies, but this is a great read if you love Washington.
December 6, 2013
http://bestpresidentialbios.com/2013/...
“Washington: The Indispensable Man” is the single-volume abridgment of James Thomas Flexner’s epic four-volume series on George Washington published between 1965 and 1972. Flexner wasted little time accommodating those who beseeched him to author a biography accessible to a wider audience, and as a result this single-volume work was published in 1974. It has been widely read and well-admired ever since.
In his effort to downsize the much longer series into a one-volume account of Washington’s life, Flexner succeeded admirably. “Washington: The Indispensable Man” is an engaging, articulate and clear rendition of Washington’s life from his humble beginning in Westmoreland County, Virginia to his death at Mount Vernon in the final days of 1799. Flexner’s style of writing in this book is more consistently contemporary than in his earlier, longer series and this book proves eminently readable throughout.
In contrast to his four-volume series, this biography contains dozens of helpful maps, charts and illustrations which serve to bring the words to life in a way the original volumes could not. And although it would surely have been tempting to have created this biography by assembling bits and pieces of his earlier works, the text (with few exceptions) seems to have been freshly drafted, and with a new pen.
Flexner did a remarkable job of distilling 1,800+ pages of text into a volume 80% less spacious. He had originally intended to write a single volume that would capture the essence of Washington but quickly concluded it could not be done well (and on that basis the original multi-volume series was born). To later take the opposite approach must have been daunting, but I cannot recall any meaningful historical event or relationship of Washington’s which did not survive the translation into the shorter book.
What was somewhat lost in Flexner’s condensation, however, is much of the vivid, colorful description of Washington’s life, his multi-dimensional personal relationships, and the psychology which drove many of his actions. Where the multi-volume series put the reader inside Washington’s head for much of the journey, this single-volume account feels more like watching the first president from across the room – close enough to be an eyewitness to momentous events, but not quite close enough to read his mind.
In addition, Flexner is still not quite the storyteller I encountered in Ron Chernow or (yes, I’m skipping ahead a bit) the masterful David McCullough. Flexner seems to make little attempt at times to smooth the segues or polish a paragraph which is a bit sterile due to its abbreviation from the original, longer and more descriptive concept. This book is less fanciful and elegant than many other biographies, and is more “matter-of-fact” than his earlier works, but unapologetically so. It is perhaps the most cleanly-structured and well-organized of the one volume biographies of Washington.
Overall, Flexner’s four-volume series on Washington remains, for me, the “Gold Standard” for biographies written about our first president. In hindsight, I’m not sure what Flexner could have penned in this “abbreviated” volume that would have left me as fully satisfied as I was with the original masterpiece. And having now re-lived Washington’s life for the sixth time in as many weeks, it might be a real miracle if I read a biography of Washington that left me as energized and excited as the first of those encounters.
For someone interested in learning about Washington’s life but who is uncommitted to embracing four volumes, “Washington: The Indispensable Man” is a very good choice. But be aware it represents a compromise from the groundbreaking series from which it was borne, and there are one or two other single-volume biographies which might offer a comparably exciting journey.
Overall rating: 4 stars
“Washington: The Indispensable Man” is the single-volume abridgment of James Thomas Flexner’s epic four-volume series on George Washington published between 1965 and 1972. Flexner wasted little time accommodating those who beseeched him to author a biography accessible to a wider audience, and as a result this single-volume work was published in 1974. It has been widely read and well-admired ever since.
In his effort to downsize the much longer series into a one-volume account of Washington’s life, Flexner succeeded admirably. “Washington: The Indispensable Man” is an engaging, articulate and clear rendition of Washington’s life from his humble beginning in Westmoreland County, Virginia to his death at Mount Vernon in the final days of 1799. Flexner’s style of writing in this book is more consistently contemporary than in his earlier, longer series and this book proves eminently readable throughout.
In contrast to his four-volume series, this biography contains dozens of helpful maps, charts and illustrations which serve to bring the words to life in a way the original volumes could not. And although it would surely have been tempting to have created this biography by assembling bits and pieces of his earlier works, the text (with few exceptions) seems to have been freshly drafted, and with a new pen.
Flexner did a remarkable job of distilling 1,800+ pages of text into a volume 80% less spacious. He had originally intended to write a single volume that would capture the essence of Washington but quickly concluded it could not be done well (and on that basis the original multi-volume series was born). To later take the opposite approach must have been daunting, but I cannot recall any meaningful historical event or relationship of Washington’s which did not survive the translation into the shorter book.
What was somewhat lost in Flexner’s condensation, however, is much of the vivid, colorful description of Washington’s life, his multi-dimensional personal relationships, and the psychology which drove many of his actions. Where the multi-volume series put the reader inside Washington’s head for much of the journey, this single-volume account feels more like watching the first president from across the room – close enough to be an eyewitness to momentous events, but not quite close enough to read his mind.
In addition, Flexner is still not quite the storyteller I encountered in Ron Chernow or (yes, I’m skipping ahead a bit) the masterful David McCullough. Flexner seems to make little attempt at times to smooth the segues or polish a paragraph which is a bit sterile due to its abbreviation from the original, longer and more descriptive concept. This book is less fanciful and elegant than many other biographies, and is more “matter-of-fact” than his earlier works, but unapologetically so. It is perhaps the most cleanly-structured and well-organized of the one volume biographies of Washington.
Overall, Flexner’s four-volume series on Washington remains, for me, the “Gold Standard” for biographies written about our first president. In hindsight, I’m not sure what Flexner could have penned in this “abbreviated” volume that would have left me as fully satisfied as I was with the original masterpiece. And having now re-lived Washington’s life for the sixth time in as many weeks, it might be a real miracle if I read a biography of Washington that left me as energized and excited as the first of those encounters.
For someone interested in learning about Washington’s life but who is uncommitted to embracing four volumes, “Washington: The Indispensable Man” is a very good choice. But be aware it represents a compromise from the groundbreaking series from which it was borne, and there are one or two other single-volume biographies which might offer a comparably exciting journey.
Overall rating: 4 stars
May 9, 2009
I'm embarrassed to admit the limited knowledge I had of George Washington prior to reading this book. The vision of a nostalgic, white haired man and the memory of my playing the part of Martha Washington in elementary school were about the extent of it. Thank goodness I chose this book to get to know him. Let's just say I cried upon finishing the last page. I felt extreme guilt over having thought of our 1st president as only a sweet looking, quiet old man, when in reality he was a man of great presence & strength. He had risked his life numerous times while dodging bullets in battle and had kept our country together psychologically during its most critical moments of formation. Many times he could have given up out of concern for his own safety, or due to lack of support in the way of supplies, or because he had already done enough; but he never did. He had tremendous tenacity and an overwhelming calmness about him which was just what was needed at the time. This book did an excellent job in conveying the depth of his character and the extent of what he did for our country.
September 18, 2007
This was required reading for a history course that I was enrolled in a few years back, but I ended up dropping the course and never sold the texts back. It is an interesting and relatively short biography on George Washington; at 400 pages, it is MUCH shorter than Flexner's FOUR VOLUME long version. The writing was very dry at points, and I really had to stay focused or I'd find myself "reading" pages without really reading them. Still, it is a thorough account of a fascinating man and a very important era in our country's history. I especially enjoyed the sections that highlighted Washington's childhood and early adult life as well as his post-Presidency years. In addition to that, the chapter describing his views on slavery was very enlightening. My only issue with this book is that Flexner seemed to have significant distaste for John Adams, which was evident whenever he was mentioned in the text.
March 20, 2022
This is a comprehensive look at the entirety of George Washington's life. Each chapter is fairly short and the chapter headings give the time period when the events occurred. I didn't know much about Washington going into this book so this was a good book for me. It covers the basics without going too deep into details. There are plenty of illustrations and maps. This book was written in the 1960's and it does contain some outdated views of Native Americans. I also got annoyed with the author in the later part of the book because he kept saying all elderly men become senile, not true. The author definitely didn't leave me with a very positive view of Jefferson and portrayed John Adams as being very jealous of Washington. My next read on my journey through presidential biographies is John Adams by McCullough. It will be interesting to see how he portrays Washington versus this book.
I read this in loving memory of Regina Lindsey and I am going to continue my presidential biography journey for her.
I read this in loving memory of Regina Lindsey and I am going to continue my presidential biography journey for her.
November 7, 2025
BOOK REVIEW – Washington, The Indispensable Man by James Thomas Flexner (2004)
This book was my first step in a serious study of the presidency and goal to read scholarly biographies of all the presidents. Flexner’s book remains one of the finest, most balanced, and most deeply human portraits ever written of George Washington. Distilling his monumental four-volume biography into a single, highly readable narrative, Flexner achieves something rare: he captures both the mythic stature and the private soul of the man who more than any other shaped the birth of the United States.
The title derives from Flexner’s own now-famous judgment that Washington alone, among the founding generation, was truly indispensable at every defining moment of the early republic. While Jefferson, Adams, Hamilton, and Madison each played crucial roles, Flexner concludes that the nation simply could not have survived without Washington’s unique combination of humility, discipline, authority, restraint, and moral character.
Washington was indispensable as:
• Commander in Chief, holding the Continental Army together through mutiny, starvation, and despair.
• Presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention, lending legitimacy and calm to a fragile and fractious gathering.
• The first President, establishing precedents—voluntarily limiting his own power—that became the backbone of American constitutional democracy.
The title reflects Flexner’s belief that Washington’s greatness lay not in flamboyant genius but in the steady moral gravity that anchored a trembling new nation. Flexner rejects the marble pedestal that many have placed Washington on, instead giving us a Washington who was at once towering and imperfect—capable of anger, ambition, humor, and even self-doubt. The portrait becomes richer for these humanizing details.
We see:
• Washington the young surveyor, tirelessly mapping the wilderness.
• Washington the bold (sometimes overconfident) officer in the French and Indian War. Who carried deep resentment from being snubbed by his British commanders for advancement due to not being born in England.
• Washington the commander whose patience and moral force carried the Revolution through its darkest winters.
• Washington the president who understood that his every gesture would define a nation not yet certain it would survive.
Flexner’s Washington is not just the father of his country; he is the nation’s moral and institutional blueprint What sets the book apart is its tone—admiring, yes, but always grounded. Flexner neither flatters nor excuses Washington. He simply shows that this singular leader possessed a rare fusion of dignity, moral courage, self-restraint, and inner steadiness that proved vital at every hinge point of American history. The biography is readable, beautifully paced, and filled with moments of quiet revelation.
One of the most moving scenes in American history—and one Flexner treats with reverence—occurred on March 15, 1783, at Newburgh, New York. The Continental Army was restless, unpaid, and tempted toward mutiny against a Congress that seemed indifferent to their suffering. Some officers whispered of replacing Congress altogether—perhaps even installing Washington as a military ruler.
Washington met the officers in a crowded room. The atmosphere was tense, electric, and dangerous. He rose to speak, but his prepared remarks—appealing to their honor and patriotism—were not enough. The men remained agitated. Then Washington paused. He reached into his pocket and took out a letter from a member of Congress. As he began to read, he struggled. His vision failed him.
He stopped, reached for his spectacles—something almost no officer had ever seen him wear—and quietly said: “Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray but almost blind in the service of my country.” In that instant, the room changed. The anger dissolved. Hardened officers wept openly. Men ashamed of their near-mutiny were reminded that their commander had sacrificed far more than any of them. His aging body, weakened eyes, and simple dignity restored order where force never could.
The Newburgh Conspiracy collapsed—not because of threats or punishments, but because of Washington’s unique moral authority and humility. It is one of the clearest examples of why Flexner called him “the indispensable man.”
Quotes
“America did not form Washington. Washington formed America. Others might argue more brilliantly, write more eloquently, or maneuver more cunningly, but none possessed the immense moral weight that Washington brought to every decision. His greatness was not in dramatic gestures but in the constancy of his character—the self-discipline, the refusal of tyranny, the insistence on principle—that made a republican government possible at a moment when the world believed such a thing could not endure.”
“If Washington was indispensable, it was because he mastered the most difficult of all leadership virtues: restraint. He moved a nation not by flamboyant personality or overpowering intellect, but by the steadiness of a man who understood power and refused to misuse it. He led an army without pay, governed without pride, laid down authority when others begged him to keep it, and created a pattern for the presidency that has become the very architecture of American liberty. In Washington, character became destiny—his own, and his country’s.”
This book was my first step in a serious study of the presidency and goal to read scholarly biographies of all the presidents. Flexner’s book remains one of the finest, most balanced, and most deeply human portraits ever written of George Washington. Distilling his monumental four-volume biography into a single, highly readable narrative, Flexner achieves something rare: he captures both the mythic stature and the private soul of the man who more than any other shaped the birth of the United States.
The title derives from Flexner’s own now-famous judgment that Washington alone, among the founding generation, was truly indispensable at every defining moment of the early republic. While Jefferson, Adams, Hamilton, and Madison each played crucial roles, Flexner concludes that the nation simply could not have survived without Washington’s unique combination of humility, discipline, authority, restraint, and moral character.
Washington was indispensable as:
• Commander in Chief, holding the Continental Army together through mutiny, starvation, and despair.
• Presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention, lending legitimacy and calm to a fragile and fractious gathering.
• The first President, establishing precedents—voluntarily limiting his own power—that became the backbone of American constitutional democracy.
The title reflects Flexner’s belief that Washington’s greatness lay not in flamboyant genius but in the steady moral gravity that anchored a trembling new nation. Flexner rejects the marble pedestal that many have placed Washington on, instead giving us a Washington who was at once towering and imperfect—capable of anger, ambition, humor, and even self-doubt. The portrait becomes richer for these humanizing details.
We see:
• Washington the young surveyor, tirelessly mapping the wilderness.
• Washington the bold (sometimes overconfident) officer in the French and Indian War. Who carried deep resentment from being snubbed by his British commanders for advancement due to not being born in England.
• Washington the commander whose patience and moral force carried the Revolution through its darkest winters.
• Washington the president who understood that his every gesture would define a nation not yet certain it would survive.
Flexner’s Washington is not just the father of his country; he is the nation’s moral and institutional blueprint What sets the book apart is its tone—admiring, yes, but always grounded. Flexner neither flatters nor excuses Washington. He simply shows that this singular leader possessed a rare fusion of dignity, moral courage, self-restraint, and inner steadiness that proved vital at every hinge point of American history. The biography is readable, beautifully paced, and filled with moments of quiet revelation.
One of the most moving scenes in American history—and one Flexner treats with reverence—occurred on March 15, 1783, at Newburgh, New York. The Continental Army was restless, unpaid, and tempted toward mutiny against a Congress that seemed indifferent to their suffering. Some officers whispered of replacing Congress altogether—perhaps even installing Washington as a military ruler.
Washington met the officers in a crowded room. The atmosphere was tense, electric, and dangerous. He rose to speak, but his prepared remarks—appealing to their honor and patriotism—were not enough. The men remained agitated. Then Washington paused. He reached into his pocket and took out a letter from a member of Congress. As he began to read, he struggled. His vision failed him.
He stopped, reached for his spectacles—something almost no officer had ever seen him wear—and quietly said: “Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray but almost blind in the service of my country.” In that instant, the room changed. The anger dissolved. Hardened officers wept openly. Men ashamed of their near-mutiny were reminded that their commander had sacrificed far more than any of them. His aging body, weakened eyes, and simple dignity restored order where force never could.
The Newburgh Conspiracy collapsed—not because of threats or punishments, but because of Washington’s unique moral authority and humility. It is one of the clearest examples of why Flexner called him “the indispensable man.”
Quotes
“America did not form Washington. Washington formed America. Others might argue more brilliantly, write more eloquently, or maneuver more cunningly, but none possessed the immense moral weight that Washington brought to every decision. His greatness was not in dramatic gestures but in the constancy of his character—the self-discipline, the refusal of tyranny, the insistence on principle—that made a republican government possible at a moment when the world believed such a thing could not endure.”
“If Washington was indispensable, it was because he mastered the most difficult of all leadership virtues: restraint. He moved a nation not by flamboyant personality or overpowering intellect, but by the steadiness of a man who understood power and refused to misuse it. He led an army without pay, governed without pride, laid down authority when others begged him to keep it, and created a pattern for the presidency that has become the very architecture of American liberty. In Washington, character became destiny—his own, and his country’s.”
April 4, 2010
Flexner's survey of the life of the United States' first President is a contracted version of his earlier four volume biography of Washington. The author faced a considerable challenge in distilling the content of the original work into a single book, and ultimately falls short. This history adopts a quasi-scholarly tone that denudes from narrative excitement, yet has very little historical context aside from an outline of the philosophical dispute between Hamilton and Jefferson. This unhappy compromise between scholarship and story-telling makes Flexner's book an unsatisfactory effort, but as compensation, there are some pleasant pictures of Washington's effects and Mount Vernon.
June 6, 2020
James Flexner points out that when Americans are pleased with our country, we tend to mythologize George Washington. When we are unhappy with our country, we tend to deride the mythology. We ought instead, he says, to look honestly at the real man and his legacy.
This book is an account of Washington’s long career, but it’s also a bit of an exercise in apologetics. The author is clearly responding to attempts by other historians to “demystify” history by making Washington look bad. Flexner admires Washington and wants us to admire him also. At the same time, though, he is no hagiographer. He presents Washington’s strengths and weaknesses in what appears to be a fair and balanced light.
I must confess that I’ve long found Washington and his era “difficult.” It’s easier for me to visualize daily life in the nineteenth-century. In contrast, the previous century just seems more. . . foreign, somehow. In my mind the 1700’s are a slightly out-of-focus mash-up of powdered wigs, log cabins, snobbery, poverty, and men in stockings. That’s why I very much appreciated the way this book brought Washington’s character to life. It helps that instead of merely focusing on the Revolution, the author gives us a complete look at Washington’s career and shows us how much he changed over time.
A few random things that struck me:
-Before writing this, Flexner published a scholarly, four-volume history of Washington. He explains that only after writing a long version of our first president’s life was he able to distill the story into a single book. I had to laugh at that, because it rings so true of the writing process.
-Thomas Jefferson does NOT come off very well in this volume. If Flexner is to be believed, Jefferson would misrepresent (or even lie about) his own political actions while serving in Washington’s government. I.e., Jefferson would vote with the majority and then decry the thing he voted for to all his friends, implying that it was the work of the other guys. He seems to have cared a great deal about party politics.
-It was interesting to read about Washington’s complicated plans for freeing all of his slaves. He wanted a system that would provide for the adults and educate the children so that they would not be thrust into the world without resources. In the end, he didn’t manage to put his plans into execution (he ended up simply ordering in his will that his slaves be freed upon the death of his wife), but the plans reveal quite a bit about his conscientious nature.
-It’s crazy that Washington did not die in battle. He really did have multiple horses shot out from under him, and really did come away from battles with bullet holes in his clothing. Once, he even rode between two bands of soldiers who were shooting at each other, using his sword to whack their muskets upward, because both bands were on the same side and hadn’t realized that yet. All this, and he survived to old age!
Overall, an entertaining, educational read. I would be happy to own this book. My husband also read it and gives it a thumbs-up.
This book is an account of Washington’s long career, but it’s also a bit of an exercise in apologetics. The author is clearly responding to attempts by other historians to “demystify” history by making Washington look bad. Flexner admires Washington and wants us to admire him also. At the same time, though, he is no hagiographer. He presents Washington’s strengths and weaknesses in what appears to be a fair and balanced light.
I must confess that I’ve long found Washington and his era “difficult.” It’s easier for me to visualize daily life in the nineteenth-century. In contrast, the previous century just seems more. . . foreign, somehow. In my mind the 1700’s are a slightly out-of-focus mash-up of powdered wigs, log cabins, snobbery, poverty, and men in stockings. That’s why I very much appreciated the way this book brought Washington’s character to life. It helps that instead of merely focusing on the Revolution, the author gives us a complete look at Washington’s career and shows us how much he changed over time.
A few random things that struck me:
-Before writing this, Flexner published a scholarly, four-volume history of Washington. He explains that only after writing a long version of our first president’s life was he able to distill the story into a single book. I had to laugh at that, because it rings so true of the writing process.
-Thomas Jefferson does NOT come off very well in this volume. If Flexner is to be believed, Jefferson would misrepresent (or even lie about) his own political actions while serving in Washington’s government. I.e., Jefferson would vote with the majority and then decry the thing he voted for to all his friends, implying that it was the work of the other guys. He seems to have cared a great deal about party politics.
-It was interesting to read about Washington’s complicated plans for freeing all of his slaves. He wanted a system that would provide for the adults and educate the children so that they would not be thrust into the world without resources. In the end, he didn’t manage to put his plans into execution (he ended up simply ordering in his will that his slaves be freed upon the death of his wife), but the plans reveal quite a bit about his conscientious nature.
-It’s crazy that Washington did not die in battle. He really did have multiple horses shot out from under him, and really did come away from battles with bullet holes in his clothing. Once, he even rode between two bands of soldiers who were shooting at each other, using his sword to whack their muskets upward, because both bands were on the same side and hadn’t realized that yet. All this, and he survived to old age!
Overall, an entertaining, educational read. I would be happy to own this book. My husband also read it and gives it a thumbs-up.
June 14, 2018
Flexner wrote a massive four volume biography of Washington, which he then condensed into this more approachable 400 page book. As the subtitle, The Indispensible Man indicates, Flexner places Washington in his keystone role in the history of America. Washington rose from the lower-ranks of the Virginia planter aristocracy through land speculation, and a minor military career in the French and Indian Wars. Snubbed by British officers, he focused on American independence in economic matters, and then when the Revolution occurred, became the leader of the Continental Army, and the first President, setting the traditions for the American republic.
Again and again, Washington's virtues are persistence and equanimity. At many points where others would have given up in despair, or resorted to personal attacks, Washington held firm to his course. He held the army together through desperate retreats and the bitter winter at Valley Forge. As President, he managed conflict between Hamilton's Federalists and Jefferson's Democratic-Republicans. Washington did not always choose wisely, and particularly in his old age, and following the break with Thomas Jefferson, he became more partisan, more paranoid, less able to unify the country and plot a wise course. In large part, he did what few others could, and well-earned his place in history.
Flexner deserves credit for earnestly engaging with the slavery issue at the end of the book, as I was waiting for it to come up. Washington was born into a slave society, but in Flexner's account, slowly turned against it. He wanted to end the slave system at Mount Vernor, but was constrained by the lack of alternatives. He freed what slaves he could, but many were property of Martha Washington (nee Custis), and would pass to the Custises. And while this is a good look at the man and the period, it lacks the vividness of a truly great biography.
Again and again, Washington's virtues are persistence and equanimity. At many points where others would have given up in despair, or resorted to personal attacks, Washington held firm to his course. He held the army together through desperate retreats and the bitter winter at Valley Forge. As President, he managed conflict between Hamilton's Federalists and Jefferson's Democratic-Republicans. Washington did not always choose wisely, and particularly in his old age, and following the break with Thomas Jefferson, he became more partisan, more paranoid, less able to unify the country and plot a wise course. In large part, he did what few others could, and well-earned his place in history.
Flexner deserves credit for earnestly engaging with the slavery issue at the end of the book, as I was waiting for it to come up. Washington was born into a slave society, but in Flexner's account, slowly turned against it. He wanted to end the slave system at Mount Vernor, but was constrained by the lack of alternatives. He freed what slaves he could, but many were property of Martha Washington (nee Custis), and would pass to the Custises. And while this is a good look at the man and the period, it lacks the vividness of a truly great biography.
October 27, 2020
This was a life-changing biography for me. While I knew the political theories and circumstances that set the American Revolution in motion, I confess I'd never read a biography of the first President. I knew Jefferson and Hamilton and the struggle they represented. I knew about the horticultural renaissance the British settlement of North America set in motion. I knew lots about the period and its material and intellectual culture. But nothing about George Washington. I think he must have seemed a bit---well, stodgy, perhaps. But I had this book on my shelves and curiosity led me to it.
It became a game changer for me and made a student of colonial and federal American history of me.
For George Washington is NOT stodgy. Far from it. Flexner's lively biography shows Washington to be a man of his time and place: a little insecure, a driven by social and economic ambition and also by a sense of honor akin to the kind we encounter in The Iliad, a man tested and made by the great revolution that established the United States.
Washington was descended from English gentry who had remained loyal to the Stuarts in the English Civil War and who consequently had lost a considerable part of their wealth. Charles II rewarded the younger sons of these families with land in Virginia and Maryland. And land meant the opportunity for wealth and prestige theretofore unavailable to anyone but first sons of landed gentry in England. Washington himself was the product of his father's second, late marriage, and because of his father's early death and reduced family circumstances, he did not get the education in English schools that his brothers and most upper-class Virginians had. He felt the lack of it all his life. In his years in the House of Burgesses, where men like Patrick Henry held forth eloquently, he spoke exactly one time.
He was largely self-educated, and he devoted himself diligently to reading, setting aside two hours each morning for most of his life for study. He borrowed books from the library of his oldest brother, Lawrence, who lived nearby at Mt Vernon, then but a shadow of the later mansion. Lawrence's marriage to the daughter of Lord Fairfax also introduced the young Washington to a sophisticated and politically influential circle. He taught himself the rudiments of his father's profession, surveying, a profession that inevitably led to the acquisition of land in that day, when the western lands of the colony remained unsurveyed. It introduced him to the land speculation that left nearly every Virginia gentleman indebted. It also established a connection to the militia and British army in the French and Indian War, which a loose shot by the young Washington set off.
So many things I didn't know. The young Washington, at 6'5", was regarded as somewhat freakish in a population where the average male stood 5'7". But he worked and paid for dancing lessons and ultimately became known as the finest dancer in that era of complicated minuets and line dances. To the end of his life, he was also known as the finest horseman. But neither accomplishment led to romantic success, despite his serious efforts. He wrote love poetry of the very worst kind to young women who seemed cold to both his poetry and him. All of that he recorded meticulously in his journals. Of course, status consisted in more than dance, and Washington had no fortune to recommend him to many of the women in his circle.
The Seven Years War (French and Indian War in America) made him. He emerged from that war a proven leader of men. And on his way home from that war, he spent the night with a friend whose houseguest was Martha Custis, the young and wealthiest widow in Virginia. Custis had come from a family similar to Washington's and had, over the early objections of her future father-in-law, married into one of the wealthiest families in Virginia and Maryland. She and Washington walked in the gardens, stayed up past mid-night talking before the fire, and when he rode out the next morning, they had an agreement. The marriage would put Washington on sounder economic footing and would prove personally sustaining to both him and his wife. It also thrust him into greater positions of responsibility.
Flexner shows a real human being in this biography. And that human being was not stodgy.
But what astonished me personally was the author's skill in the description of battles. In my school years and since, my brain seemed to exit my left ear when I came upon phrases like "flanking operation." I am not a stupid person, but battle descriptions just sent me into a reading panic. Thus I generally skipped over ---or didn't really comprehend---such descriptions and missed a lot in history reading. But Flexner made a changed woman of me. His descriptions were so lucid and well organized that I found myself following every step. For the first time in my life, really, I understood and appreciated the maneuvers of a battle. As a consequence, I've gone on to read deeply in the Revolutionary War battles, especially those in the Southern colonies, where, I was surprised to find, that war was mainly fought and certainly where it was won.
I recommend this biography of Washington without reservation. I've since read others, but not one I can recommend more highly than this one. In it Flexner shows us how George Washington became George Washington. He gives us the bright, ambitious boy who copied entire books of etiquette and behavior into his journals. Like that of the rising middle class in England, his private life with his widowed mother had not supplied all the experience needed to succeed in colonial and federal Virginia, a world to which he aspired. Flexner shows us the man who chafes at the way British limitations on colonial production kept colonials indebted to the English agents who were paid to pick up and then ship tobacco to warehouses, where they charged fees for holding it and where eventually they took a percentage for selling it. And then these same agents charged fees for shopping for the things colonials wanted but were forbidden to produce--- fabrics, clothing, candlesticks, and all the rest. Finally, they charged to ship those goods on their ships. Washington and his neighbor George Mason wrote endlessly about the costs of colonialism, of being a supplier of raw goods. And among those costs, the one they hated most was the slavery that made the whole system possible.
In a time when the winds of anarchy are blowing and questions about our national past are rife, this book will both enlighten and delight. Rarely have I encountered a book that has changed my views and my reading life more dramatically. I guarantee its being an interesting read, one that will introduce readers to a man they didn't know.
It became a game changer for me and made a student of colonial and federal American history of me.
For George Washington is NOT stodgy. Far from it. Flexner's lively biography shows Washington to be a man of his time and place: a little insecure, a driven by social and economic ambition and also by a sense of honor akin to the kind we encounter in The Iliad, a man tested and made by the great revolution that established the United States.
Washington was descended from English gentry who had remained loyal to the Stuarts in the English Civil War and who consequently had lost a considerable part of their wealth. Charles II rewarded the younger sons of these families with land in Virginia and Maryland. And land meant the opportunity for wealth and prestige theretofore unavailable to anyone but first sons of landed gentry in England. Washington himself was the product of his father's second, late marriage, and because of his father's early death and reduced family circumstances, he did not get the education in English schools that his brothers and most upper-class Virginians had. He felt the lack of it all his life. In his years in the House of Burgesses, where men like Patrick Henry held forth eloquently, he spoke exactly one time.
He was largely self-educated, and he devoted himself diligently to reading, setting aside two hours each morning for most of his life for study. He borrowed books from the library of his oldest brother, Lawrence, who lived nearby at Mt Vernon, then but a shadow of the later mansion. Lawrence's marriage to the daughter of Lord Fairfax also introduced the young Washington to a sophisticated and politically influential circle. He taught himself the rudiments of his father's profession, surveying, a profession that inevitably led to the acquisition of land in that day, when the western lands of the colony remained unsurveyed. It introduced him to the land speculation that left nearly every Virginia gentleman indebted. It also established a connection to the militia and British army in the French and Indian War, which a loose shot by the young Washington set off.
So many things I didn't know. The young Washington, at 6'5", was regarded as somewhat freakish in a population where the average male stood 5'7". But he worked and paid for dancing lessons and ultimately became known as the finest dancer in that era of complicated minuets and line dances. To the end of his life, he was also known as the finest horseman. But neither accomplishment led to romantic success, despite his serious efforts. He wrote love poetry of the very worst kind to young women who seemed cold to both his poetry and him. All of that he recorded meticulously in his journals. Of course, status consisted in more than dance, and Washington had no fortune to recommend him to many of the women in his circle.
The Seven Years War (French and Indian War in America) made him. He emerged from that war a proven leader of men. And on his way home from that war, he spent the night with a friend whose houseguest was Martha Custis, the young and wealthiest widow in Virginia. Custis had come from a family similar to Washington's and had, over the early objections of her future father-in-law, married into one of the wealthiest families in Virginia and Maryland. She and Washington walked in the gardens, stayed up past mid-night talking before the fire, and when he rode out the next morning, they had an agreement. The marriage would put Washington on sounder economic footing and would prove personally sustaining to both him and his wife. It also thrust him into greater positions of responsibility.
Flexner shows a real human being in this biography. And that human being was not stodgy.
But what astonished me personally was the author's skill in the description of battles. In my school years and since, my brain seemed to exit my left ear when I came upon phrases like "flanking operation." I am not a stupid person, but battle descriptions just sent me into a reading panic. Thus I generally skipped over ---or didn't really comprehend---such descriptions and missed a lot in history reading. But Flexner made a changed woman of me. His descriptions were so lucid and well organized that I found myself following every step. For the first time in my life, really, I understood and appreciated the maneuvers of a battle. As a consequence, I've gone on to read deeply in the Revolutionary War battles, especially those in the Southern colonies, where, I was surprised to find, that war was mainly fought and certainly where it was won.
I recommend this biography of Washington without reservation. I've since read others, but not one I can recommend more highly than this one. In it Flexner shows us how George Washington became George Washington. He gives us the bright, ambitious boy who copied entire books of etiquette and behavior into his journals. Like that of the rising middle class in England, his private life with his widowed mother had not supplied all the experience needed to succeed in colonial and federal Virginia, a world to which he aspired. Flexner shows us the man who chafes at the way British limitations on colonial production kept colonials indebted to the English agents who were paid to pick up and then ship tobacco to warehouses, where they charged fees for holding it and where eventually they took a percentage for selling it. And then these same agents charged fees for shopping for the things colonials wanted but were forbidden to produce--- fabrics, clothing, candlesticks, and all the rest. Finally, they charged to ship those goods on their ships. Washington and his neighbor George Mason wrote endlessly about the costs of colonialism, of being a supplier of raw goods. And among those costs, the one they hated most was the slavery that made the whole system possible.
In a time when the winds of anarchy are blowing and questions about our national past are rife, this book will both enlighten and delight. Rarely have I encountered a book that has changed my views and my reading life more dramatically. I guarantee its being an interesting read, one that will introduce readers to a man they didn't know.
February 7, 2022
This was a well-researched book. The chapters are broken down into different time periods of his life and show the home man as well as political Washington. It also includes people that came along and influenced his path in life and political adversaries. I enjoyed the illustrations throughout the book but I do have one complaint. I would have liked better maps of the areas. Some of them just pinpoint the direct area and a full picture of the whole territory would have been nice to see now and then.
----------------------------------
In Memory of
Regina Lindsey rated it four stars and her review.
This is a good broad view of the life of the MAN George Washington rather than the mythological figure with which most people are familiar. Beginning with life in England the reader has an opportunity to see what changes take place in his life as he develops the philosophy from which Washington will govern.
----------------------------------
In Memory of
Regina Lindsey rated it four stars and her review.
This is a good broad view of the life of the MAN George Washington rather than the mythological figure with which most people are familiar. Beginning with life in England the reader has an opportunity to see what changes take place in his life as he develops the philosophy from which Washington will govern.
July 6, 2017
I learned a lot about George Washington from this book - his character, integrity, dedication, kindness, challenges, as well as his just being human. I also learned things I didn't know about the Revolutionary War and Washington's struggles as he served two terms as president. My love and respect for him is even greater than it was before, and I believe he and Abraham Lincoln are the two greatest presidents we've ever had. I also firmly believe that he was led and directed by God, and that his life was preserved to help establish the United States of America. He really was indispensable!
February 13, 2021
Whew! I have many family members who enjoy biographies of American politicians, so reading this was an experiment to see if I, too, enjoy this genre. I don't.
This book was well written and presented Washington as accurately as possible, and I was comforted to read about figures whose actions and philosophies were as questionable as some modern notions (maybe times aren't so dire after all?). But alas, I do not rate objectively but based on my enjoyment of a book, so 2 stars it shall be.
This book was well written and presented Washington as accurately as possible, and I was comforted to read about figures whose actions and philosophies were as questionable as some modern notions (maybe times aren't so dire after all?). But alas, I do not rate objectively but based on my enjoyment of a book, so 2 stars it shall be.
March 30, 2020
Interesting and informative, but a bit long. The first half was more interesting, and easier to follow (for a history novice like me) than the last half. I think the politics were a little less complex in the first half. Also, it's the nature of life for the end of it to be a little depressing.... Worth the read just to discover that America has ALWAYS been divided and today isn't any worse than it was at the founding. Washington actually had to use the military to put down a civilian rebellion.
December 27, 2020
George Washington is much more awesome than all those stiff portraits of him make him appear.
And his biographer is thorough and honest, not one of those hacks who seeks to either exalt or vilify his subject for private reasons.
And his biographer is thorough and honest, not one of those hacks who seeks to either exalt or vilify his subject for private reasons.
January 8, 2019
I have set a goal of reading a single volume, well regarded biography of each US president in order. This was my first installment.
-1 and +1 for readability. This book was laid out like a text book, large format, multiple columns of text, and graphical and textual asides inserted into the text in boxes. I find this a frustrating format. The inserts are distracting and often do not fall into logical breaks in the text. The larger form factor is also a problem as I often read on the go, this book is sized like a coffee table picture book. On the other hand, a biography about Washington could have been erudite to the point of being unreadable; I found this book extremely readable.
The book walks through Washington's life chronologically. The way the book is written, however, describes events as though from the perspective of Washington making it feel as though his presence, his actions are to be inferred by the negative space he leaves behind. For example, during his presidency, a lot of time is dedicated to describing the political infighting between Hamilton and Jefferson with Washington being somewhere between a spectator and a referee.
I suspect that this phenomenon, of Washington being defined by the negative space at the center of this book, is an artifact of this book being a distillation of a larger, more extensive biography. My takeaway was the book was very good but may have served to whet my appetite for information about Washington as much as sate it.
-1 and +1 for readability. This book was laid out like a text book, large format, multiple columns of text, and graphical and textual asides inserted into the text in boxes. I find this a frustrating format. The inserts are distracting and often do not fall into logical breaks in the text. The larger form factor is also a problem as I often read on the go, this book is sized like a coffee table picture book. On the other hand, a biography about Washington could have been erudite to the point of being unreadable; I found this book extremely readable.
The book walks through Washington's life chronologically. The way the book is written, however, describes events as though from the perspective of Washington making it feel as though his presence, his actions are to be inferred by the negative space he leaves behind. For example, during his presidency, a lot of time is dedicated to describing the political infighting between Hamilton and Jefferson with Washington being somewhere between a spectator and a referee.
I suspect that this phenomenon, of Washington being defined by the negative space at the center of this book, is an artifact of this book being a distillation of a larger, more extensive biography. My takeaway was the book was very good but may have served to whet my appetite for information about Washington as much as sate it.
September 23, 2021
This is a DENSE book. Really good but reads almost like a textbook. An amazing depiction of the life of an amazing man.
November 26, 2021
Excellent book about a very interesting man. Easy reading - this author had written 4 volumes and condensed the best into this book.
September 19, 2017
Deeply interesting, if not entertaining, history of the man behind the myth. Full of his blunders and failures, strength, feeling, humility and even petty pride, Washington is portrayed ultimately as deeply human and often noble.
June 17, 2020
This bio has some interesting details about Washington that I haven't seen in other books.
August 27, 2012
In his bibliography in the back, Flexner divides published biographies of Washington into "three major categories--the historically sound, the goody-goody, and the debunking." Flexner's four volume biography of George Washington won a Pulitzer Prize citation and a National Book Award. This one volume version of that work seems to strike a good balance between the critical and admiring and, based on primary sources, from what I can tell, deserves to be put among those "historically sound." It's certainly well-written, fascinating and made me appreciate why Flexner subtitled this biography of Washington "The Indispensable Man" and why he claimed in his Introduction Washington was a "great and good man."
I thought I knew fairly well the basic outline of George Washington's life and of the Revolutionary and Federal period, but this book gave me a new appreciation of all that is owed to Washington--not just by Americans, but by all who support a republican form of government. I had known that people urged Washington to become America's king and he refused. I knew he had defused an officers' rebellion that could have "groomed and saddled the horses of fascism" and I knew his refusal to accept a third term of office meant he ensured an orderly transition and republican form of succession rather than dying in office and creating a kind of elective monarchy--and that ever after his example of staying only two terms in office was followed by every American president thereafter until breached by Franklin Roosevelt--and that the limitation was then grafted unto the US Constitution so Washington's precedent couldn't again be violated. Presented here again and again are traps Washington avoided that could have destroyed the embryo republic. Among the things I didn't know was just how turbulent were Washington's two terms of office as he set precedents that put flesh onto the skeleton of the Constitution. Certainly Flexner's account doesn't reflect well on either Alexander Hamilton or Thomas Jefferson, each of whom formed around him the first nascent political parties.
From time to time you can tell this book's origins as a more succinct account gathered from Flexner's expansive four-volume biography. For instance, Flexner calls Washington's stepson John Parke Custis a "monster" but doesn't really give us the details to justify that statement. Some of the chapters definitely feel sketchy. As he says in his introduction, in this one-volume work he just wanted to hit the highlights, although this book is far more than an outline, and Washington's character and personality does come through, especially in frequent quotes from letters and diaries and other first-hand accounts. Although admiring on the whole, Flexner doesn't pass over the man's flaws. There is an entire chapter dealing with "Washington and Slavery" and Flexner depicts both Washington's foolish youthful mistakes and sad mental decline in his old age. My next reads are biographies of John Adams and Thomas Jefferson and it will be interesting to see how those books complicate the picture.
I thought I knew fairly well the basic outline of George Washington's life and of the Revolutionary and Federal period, but this book gave me a new appreciation of all that is owed to Washington--not just by Americans, but by all who support a republican form of government. I had known that people urged Washington to become America's king and he refused. I knew he had defused an officers' rebellion that could have "groomed and saddled the horses of fascism" and I knew his refusal to accept a third term of office meant he ensured an orderly transition and republican form of succession rather than dying in office and creating a kind of elective monarchy--and that ever after his example of staying only two terms in office was followed by every American president thereafter until breached by Franklin Roosevelt--and that the limitation was then grafted unto the US Constitution so Washington's precedent couldn't again be violated. Presented here again and again are traps Washington avoided that could have destroyed the embryo republic. Among the things I didn't know was just how turbulent were Washington's two terms of office as he set precedents that put flesh onto the skeleton of the Constitution. Certainly Flexner's account doesn't reflect well on either Alexander Hamilton or Thomas Jefferson, each of whom formed around him the first nascent political parties.
From time to time you can tell this book's origins as a more succinct account gathered from Flexner's expansive four-volume biography. For instance, Flexner calls Washington's stepson John Parke Custis a "monster" but doesn't really give us the details to justify that statement. Some of the chapters definitely feel sketchy. As he says in his introduction, in this one-volume work he just wanted to hit the highlights, although this book is far more than an outline, and Washington's character and personality does come through, especially in frequent quotes from letters and diaries and other first-hand accounts. Although admiring on the whole, Flexner doesn't pass over the man's flaws. There is an entire chapter dealing with "Washington and Slavery" and Flexner depicts both Washington's foolish youthful mistakes and sad mental decline in his old age. My next reads are biographies of John Adams and Thomas Jefferson and it will be interesting to see how those books complicate the picture.
August 8, 2013
Well, well, well-researched. Flexner dedicated his professional career to creating an accurate and thorough biography of George Washington. He wrote four enormous volumes and then condensed them into one short text, which I read. What a beautiful tribute to an amazing man. I learned some pretty incredible things about our first president, like his mental deterioration in his old age, his secret freeing of his slaves, his possible flirtations with a married woman. Like all popular biographies today (although, granted, this text was written fifty years ago), the author sought to write about the man as though he weren't an icon, but an actual human being. Even with this perspective, I know George Washington to be an incredible, outstanding patriarch of a new country, with all the necessary intelligence, bravery, and strength to see the new country form. I quite enjoyed this glimpse into his challenges and decisions.
June 24, 2009
This is a relatively short biography of George Washington given that this author, James Flexner, wrote a 4 volume tome on the life of George Washington. It touches on the significant events of his life with sufficient detail. The book also illustrates the humility and strength of Washington’s character. It also narrates the strength of Washington’s belief in the new republic, his determination to see our representative form of government succeed, and his refusal of personal power for the greater good.
As an additional note, the ranger managing the history center at Valley Forge National Park, recommended this book as one of the best biographies of George Washington.
I gave it 4 stars in hopes of one day making it through the larger 4 volume biography.
As an additional note, the ranger managing the history center at Valley Forge National Park, recommended this book as one of the best biographies of George Washington.
I gave it 4 stars in hopes of one day making it through the larger 4 volume biography.
October 22, 2016
I loved getting to know the personality of the father of our country! He was disciplined, kind, generous, and loved living elegantly. This book was well written and intellectually stimulating -(I picked up many new vocabulary words.) I discovered President Washington was preserved by God on numerous occasions to lead our country. I learned that while he was remarkable, he was not perfect and yet he is someone that Americans can be proud of!
November 6, 2020
I have a tendency to think that if it's NF, it's true, accurate and informative. This book made me realize that while that all may be true - it doesn't mean it's interesting. This was BAF! Talked all about Washington's battle's, but not the man. I had to give up past the midway point 'cause I realized I could get better information if I just researched the best biography for Washington. I do NOT recommend!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 219 reviews