What do you think?
Rate this book
Morgan: American Financier
History has remembered J. Pierpont Morgan as a complex and contradictory figure, part robber baron and part patron saint. Now this magisterial biography, based extensively on new material, draws a definitive, full-scale portrait of Morgan's tumultuous life both in and out of the public eye.Morgan earned his reputation as "the Napoleon of Wall Street" by reorganizing the nation's railroads and creating some of its greatest industrial trusts, including General Electric and U.S. Steel. At a time when the United States had no Federal Reserve System, he appointed himself a one-man central bank. He had two wives, three yachts, four children, six houses, mistresses, and one of the finest art collections in America. In this extraordinary book, award-winning biographer Jean Strouse vividly portrays the financial colossus, the avid patron of the arts, and the entirely human character behind all the myths.
Brilliantly crafted, epic in scope, Morgan reveals a man we have never seen before, offering new insights on the culture, political struggles, and social conflicts of America's Gilded Age.
816 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1999
252 people are currently reading
5629 people want to read
About the author
Jean Strouse
16 books38 followersJean Strouse (born 1945) is an American biographer, cultural administrator, and critic. She is best known for her biographies of diarist Alice James and financier J. Pierpont Morgan.
Strouse was an editorial assistant at The New York Review of Books from 1967 to 1969. She was a book critic at Newsweek magazine from 1979 to 1983, and won a MacArthur Fellowship in September, 2001. She has also held fellowships from the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the National Endowment for the Arts. She has contributed reviews and essays on literary and other topics to the New York Times Book Review, The New York Review of Books, The New Yorker, and Vogue. In 2003 Strouse was appointed the Sue Ann and John Weinberg Director of the Dorothy and Lewis B. Cullman Center for Scholars and Writers at the New York Public Library.
(from Wikipedia)
Strouse was an editorial assistant at The New York Review of Books from 1967 to 1969. She was a book critic at Newsweek magazine from 1979 to 1983, and won a MacArthur Fellowship in September, 2001. She has also held fellowships from the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the National Endowment for the Arts. She has contributed reviews and essays on literary and other topics to the New York Times Book Review, The New York Review of Books, The New Yorker, and Vogue. In 2003 Strouse was appointed the Sue Ann and John Weinberg Director of the Dorothy and Lewis B. Cullman Center for Scholars and Writers at the New York Public Library.
(from Wikipedia)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 56 reviews
Read
February 7, 2019Sometimes history is written by the losers.
Strouse's thesis is that our perception of the period between the end of the American Civil War and the beginning of the first world war in the USA has been formed by the losers – those who argued against the trusts, the cartels, the plutocrats and as a result we can struggle to assess people like Pierpont Morgan fairly.
This book's judgement of Pierpont Morgan is summed up on pages xiv and xv of the forward, "convinced that he was guiding the country toward a spectacularly prosperous future, Morgan made no distinction between his own interests and the national interest, although he was not an objective arbiter in the long-standing struggle over America's identity but an active partisan representing people who had billions invested in the outcome" (pxiv) and ”Can central bankers effectively 'manage' the business cycle? In economic crisis, which tottering governments or banks ought to be bailed out, and which allowed to fail? What is the best way to control inflation? Does industrial competition naturally lead to consolidation? Are big corporations inherently bad? How can affluent societies offset economic inequality? How and when should government intervene in commercial markets?
At the end of the twentieth century, responsibility for sorting out answers to those questions rests with the Treasury and Justice departments, the federal reserve, the SEC, the Group of Seven, the IMF, and the World Bank. At the end of the nineteenth, with predictably mixed and controversial results, Morgan acted largely on his own” (pxv)
Ah, what a lot there is to say. At the beginning of the twenty-first century one might think that the results of the efforts of the designated bodies mentioned above have also been ' predictably mixed and controversial', and that given the complexities involved that this is to be expected. The role of these institutions have developed out of the politics of earlier eras, and the needs that Morgan & his contemporaries' activities highlighted.
This argument rises implicitly through Strouse's account of Pierpont Morgan's life. Awkwardly for an autobiography the deliberate destruction of letters and the privacy observed by the circle around Morgan mean that despite what she has to tell us about his health, depression, marriage, and affairs he always remains at arms length from us. Equally Morgan's thinking and responses to economic crises can only be assumed through the actions he took. The important business was all about character, which meant that long nights locked in libraries filled with the fug of Morgan's Cuban cigars were the moments of decision.
Strouse early on stresses how the idea of and value of 'character' came from his education, it was an idea to be even found in his childhood reading. My initial thought was that this was more a reflection of the requirements of the financial system of the beginning of the nineteenth century, yet his efforts only really bore fruit towards the end of the century.
In part because organisations like banks were clearly moving away from from being family enterprises, in part because this is a middle-aged book, it was only with the death of his father, Junius Morgan, when Pierpont was already in his fifties, that he formally took over the bank, although he was already beginning to get his way when he was in his forties. Pierpont Morgan's approach differed from his father's in that he felt that membership and ultimately control over company boards was a natural step to protect the investments made by their customers. In this effort the character of the men, and it was at that time a question of men, appointed to run companies was the only way in which Pierpont Morgan could be certain that they would be competently managed, and during the biography we see various people bumped off boards for lacking the necessary character - including Ambrose Burnside.
Since a large part of their business involved attracting in investment from Europe this naturally led to an interest in the stability and international acceptability of the US dollar as well as an interest in reducing business competition within the USA. Morgan's experience showed that one of the major problems of free market competition is that it is bad for business. I found the comparisons with the work of Andrew Carnegie (and Strouse's explanation of Carnegie's methods far clearer and more succinct than I recall from Nasaw's biography of Carnegie) and John D. Rockefeller interesting – but then again they were both attempting something quite different – to dominate a single industry, while Morgan was seeking to maintain a successful business environment for investment as a whole. The similarity was that both sets of efforts tended towards larger combinations either formally as a single company or more loosely in the forms of trusts, cartels, and overlapping board memberships and mutual ownership of stocks.
Here I suppose we get to the issue of 'the national interest' for Morgan and other east coast financiers or industrialists it was self-evident this interest required the building up and promotion of US businesses and industries. Their support of a strong currency was directly opposed to the other national interest which was particularly vocal in the south and west for a weaker currency in this case because there was a literal shortage of cash. These types of debate are still with us - even without the gold standard which acted to limit both the availability of cold hard money and of credit.
The National Interest as a thing in itself is an idea we can freely throw out the window, but as a part of the self-conception of individuals it is something worth considering. As Strouse points out, Morgan's conception of 'The National Interest', amazingly and entirely unpredictably, turned out to be completely concurrent with his own self-interest . There is an alternative and popular strand in US thinking - of the USA as a self-forged nation of free standing, pulled up by their own boot straps, small farmers and entrepreneurs , but as Jennings in The Ambiguous Iroquois Empire pointed out even the basic act of colonisation was from the first an exercise in land speculation.
Interestingly some of Morgan's creations like Westinghouse, General Electric, and the US Steel Corporation went on to have long lives, but probably not because they had been Built to Last but more prosaically because they were ecologically dominant and crowded out any chance of a competitor growing to any size , this is the era in which we see the business environment still typical of today in the wealthiest - the era of a small number of very big companies which employ most people and account for most economic activity.
There is a psychological strand to this story, we get the sense that Morgan devoted himself to business, and perhaps also to adultery, as a counterweight to his feelings of worthlessness. These were things he could devote himself to and for a time feel good about himself. The family had a long tradition of depression, which they nurtured across generations. Pierpont Morgan's parents managed a style of parenting which was a fine balance of neglect and criticism, in turn he managed to entirely intimidate his own son, whose childhood preference for taking cover behind his mother's skirts perhaps made him into a faithful husband to a woman described as 'cold, roast Boston' by Pierpont Morgan, but he wasn't the businessman that his father and grandfather had been.
Still Morgan's attempts to validate himself through overwork led to periodic breakdowns, as well as those of his business partners. Things improved slightly during his forties and fifties as he had more control over his business partnerships – working with bad characters as you might have noticed is injurious to your health – but he regularly seems to have spent up to half the year on leave, frequently in Europe , with only the telegraph and coded messages to communicate with the office.
Like many of the supremely wealthy men of his age he turned to collecting: paintings, sculptures, rare books and manuscripts. His pursuit was essentially the same as in his business dealings – find the experts of good character and employ them to curate and manage for him. His pleasures were not all self-serving - he also sponsored a lying in hospital for expectant mothers (whose chief obstetrician was also his personal physician - medical specialisms then being somewhat less restrictive than they might be today), the conferences of the episcopalian church, supported the revitalisation of his local church , and served on the board of the Metropolitan Museum.
The narrative follows Morgan strictly until his father's death. After which it expands and the biography risks trying to chase down to many other stories - the seduction of Morgan's youngest daughter by half of a Lesbian couple, his Librarian of mixed Dutch-Portuguese decent who was in fact a mixed race woman passing as a young white woman , the America's Cup, overweight American Presidents, the sinking of the Titanic, yachting with the Kaiser, Edison encouraging Henry Ford to develop a petrol powered combustion engine when the future looked secure for the electric car, the Wright Brothers, in short the whole panoply that springs out of Ragtime.
In this last stage I felt Strouse had overplayed her hand and filled the text with too many other stories that took us further and further away from Morgan . And rather like Morgan after six hundred pages I too was on the verge of nervous exhaustion, in need of seeing the Pope before popping off to Egypt to buy some antiquities, and then to Aix to avoid taking the waters but having, just a touch, of electricity to help me sleep at nights .
The timing of Strouse's biography seems apt coming out in the years after the debate on "Victorian Values" because Morgan seems to be the kind of character who in theory certain politicians would have lauded - public spirited, a philanthropist, exceptionally wealthy; yet in practice would probably have hated - a philander, a man with international perspectives seemingly more at home abroad than in his native country, and whose social, moral, and religious opinions were unpredictable.
Strouse's thesis is that our perception of the period between the end of the American Civil War and the beginning of the first world war in the USA has been formed by the losers – those who argued against the trusts, the cartels, the plutocrats and as a result we can struggle to assess people like Pierpont Morgan fairly.
This book's judgement of Pierpont Morgan is summed up on pages xiv and xv of the forward, "convinced that he was guiding the country toward a spectacularly prosperous future, Morgan made no distinction between his own interests and the national interest, although he was not an objective arbiter in the long-standing struggle over America's identity but an active partisan representing people who had billions invested in the outcome" (pxiv) and ”Can central bankers effectively 'manage' the business cycle? In economic crisis, which tottering governments or banks ought to be bailed out, and which allowed to fail? What is the best way to control inflation? Does industrial competition naturally lead to consolidation? Are big corporations inherently bad? How can affluent societies offset economic inequality? How and when should government intervene in commercial markets?
At the end of the twentieth century, responsibility for sorting out answers to those questions rests with the Treasury and Justice departments, the federal reserve, the SEC, the Group of Seven, the IMF, and the World Bank. At the end of the nineteenth, with predictably mixed and controversial results, Morgan acted largely on his own” (pxv)
Ah, what a lot there is to say. At the beginning of the twenty-first century one might think that the results of the efforts of the designated bodies mentioned above have also been ' predictably mixed and controversial', and that given the complexities involved that this is to be expected. The role of these institutions have developed out of the politics of earlier eras, and the needs that Morgan & his contemporaries' activities highlighted.
This argument rises implicitly through Strouse's account of Pierpont Morgan's life. Awkwardly for an autobiography the deliberate destruction of letters and the privacy observed by the circle around Morgan mean that despite what she has to tell us about his health, depression, marriage, and affairs he always remains at arms length from us. Equally Morgan's thinking and responses to economic crises can only be assumed through the actions he took. The important business was all about character, which meant that long nights locked in libraries filled with the fug of Morgan's Cuban cigars were the moments of decision.
Strouse early on stresses how the idea of and value of 'character' came from his education, it was an idea to be even found in his childhood reading. My initial thought was that this was more a reflection of the requirements of the financial system of the beginning of the nineteenth century, yet his efforts only really bore fruit towards the end of the century.
In part because organisations like banks were clearly moving away from from being family enterprises, in part because this is a middle-aged book, it was only with the death of his father, Junius Morgan, when Pierpont was already in his fifties, that he formally took over the bank, although he was already beginning to get his way when he was in his forties. Pierpont Morgan's approach differed from his father's in that he felt that membership and ultimately control over company boards was a natural step to protect the investments made by their customers. In this effort the character of the men, and it was at that time a question of men, appointed to run companies was the only way in which Pierpont Morgan could be certain that they would be competently managed, and during the biography we see various people bumped off boards for lacking the necessary character - including Ambrose Burnside.
Since a large part of their business involved attracting in investment from Europe this naturally led to an interest in the stability and international acceptability of the US dollar as well as an interest in reducing business competition within the USA. Morgan's experience showed that one of the major problems of free market competition is that it is bad for business. I found the comparisons with the work of Andrew Carnegie (and Strouse's explanation of Carnegie's methods far clearer and more succinct than I recall from Nasaw's biography of Carnegie) and John D. Rockefeller interesting – but then again they were both attempting something quite different – to dominate a single industry, while Morgan was seeking to maintain a successful business environment for investment as a whole. The similarity was that both sets of efforts tended towards larger combinations either formally as a single company or more loosely in the forms of trusts, cartels, and overlapping board memberships and mutual ownership of stocks.
Here I suppose we get to the issue of 'the national interest' for Morgan and other east coast financiers or industrialists it was self-evident this interest required the building up and promotion of US businesses and industries. Their support of a strong currency was directly opposed to the other national interest which was particularly vocal in the south and west for a weaker currency in this case because there was a literal shortage of cash. These types of debate are still with us - even without the gold standard which acted to limit both the availability of cold hard money and of credit.
The National Interest as a thing in itself is an idea we can freely throw out the window, but as a part of the self-conception of individuals it is something worth considering. As Strouse points out, Morgan's conception of 'The National Interest', amazingly and entirely unpredictably, turned out to be completely concurrent with his own self-interest . There is an alternative and popular strand in US thinking - of the USA as a self-forged nation of free standing, pulled up by their own boot straps, small farmers and entrepreneurs , but as Jennings in The Ambiguous Iroquois Empire pointed out even the basic act of colonisation was from the first an exercise in land speculation.
Interestingly some of Morgan's creations like Westinghouse, General Electric, and the US Steel Corporation went on to have long lives, but probably not because they had been Built to Last but more prosaically because they were ecologically dominant and crowded out any chance of a competitor growing to any size , this is the era in which we see the business environment still typical of today in the wealthiest - the era of a small number of very big companies which employ most people and account for most economic activity.
There is a psychological strand to this story, we get the sense that Morgan devoted himself to business, and perhaps also to adultery, as a counterweight to his feelings of worthlessness. These were things he could devote himself to and for a time feel good about himself. The family had a long tradition of depression, which they nurtured across generations. Pierpont Morgan's parents managed a style of parenting which was a fine balance of neglect and criticism, in turn he managed to entirely intimidate his own son, whose childhood preference for taking cover behind his mother's skirts perhaps made him into a faithful husband to a woman described as 'cold, roast Boston' by Pierpont Morgan, but he wasn't the businessman that his father and grandfather had been.
Still Morgan's attempts to validate himself through overwork led to periodic breakdowns, as well as those of his business partners. Things improved slightly during his forties and fifties as he had more control over his business partnerships – working with bad characters as you might have noticed is injurious to your health – but he regularly seems to have spent up to half the year on leave, frequently in Europe , with only the telegraph and coded messages to communicate with the office.
Like many of the supremely wealthy men of his age he turned to collecting: paintings, sculptures, rare books and manuscripts. His pursuit was essentially the same as in his business dealings – find the experts of good character and employ them to curate and manage for him. His pleasures were not all self-serving - he also sponsored a lying in hospital for expectant mothers (whose chief obstetrician was also his personal physician - medical specialisms then being somewhat less restrictive than they might be today), the conferences of the episcopalian church, supported the revitalisation of his local church , and served on the board of the Metropolitan Museum.
The narrative follows Morgan strictly until his father's death. After which it expands and the biography risks trying to chase down to many other stories - the seduction of Morgan's youngest daughter by half of a Lesbian couple, his Librarian of mixed Dutch-Portuguese decent who was in fact a mixed race woman passing as a young white woman , the America's Cup, overweight American Presidents, the sinking of the Titanic, yachting with the Kaiser, Edison encouraging Henry Ford to develop a petrol powered combustion engine when the future looked secure for the electric car, the Wright Brothers, in short the whole panoply that springs out of Ragtime.
In this last stage I felt Strouse had overplayed her hand and filled the text with too many other stories that took us further and further away from Morgan . And rather like Morgan after six hundred pages I too was on the verge of nervous exhaustion, in need of seeing the Pope before popping off to Egypt to buy some antiquities, and then to Aix to avoid taking the waters but having, just a touch, of electricity to help me sleep at nights .
The timing of Strouse's biography seems apt coming out in the years after the debate on "Victorian Values" because Morgan seems to be the kind of character who in theory certain politicians would have lauded - public spirited, a philanthropist, exceptionally wealthy; yet in practice would probably have hated - a philander, a man with international perspectives seemingly more at home abroad than in his native country, and whose social, moral, and religious opinions were unpredictable.
April 18, 2022
Morgan is a well written, but poorly edited biography. This 800+ page book would have been far stronger had some material been omitted. For instance, Strouse includes a lengthy--and completely unnecessary--chapter on others' impressions of Morgan. Similarly, the work provides a virtually encyclopedic catalogue of Morgan's artworks. While Pierpont's endeavors as a collector are certainly interesting, only a textbook requires this level of detail.
Anyone considering this work should also understand what it is and what it is not. First, and foremost, it is a comprehensive personal biography of Morgan. In other words, it is a chronicle of the various aspects of Pierpont's life--his work, his marriages and other romantic engagements, his relations with his children and friends, his art collecting and philanthropic pursuits, etc. The book is also very much about the times in which Pierpont lived, including short biographies of important figures and explanations of key world events. However, this work is not an in-depth account of Morgan's business activities. Many of his deals are certainly included, but these are not overly nuanced accounts.
As a final thought, Strouse does a remarkably poor job of exploring the notion that Morgan appears to have had a disorder that prevented him from being able to fully articulate his thoughts. Despite ample evidence of such an issue, she barely probes the point. In fact, she actually dismisses a letter where Pierpont expressly discusses this inability as a mere fabrication by him to avoid corresponding with his wife.
Anyone considering this work should also understand what it is and what it is not. First, and foremost, it is a comprehensive personal biography of Morgan. In other words, it is a chronicle of the various aspects of Pierpont's life--his work, his marriages and other romantic engagements, his relations with his children and friends, his art collecting and philanthropic pursuits, etc. The book is also very much about the times in which Pierpont lived, including short biographies of important figures and explanations of key world events. However, this work is not an in-depth account of Morgan's business activities. Many of his deals are certainly included, but these are not overly nuanced accounts.
As a final thought, Strouse does a remarkably poor job of exploring the notion that Morgan appears to have had a disorder that prevented him from being able to fully articulate his thoughts. Despite ample evidence of such an issue, she barely probes the point. In fact, she actually dismisses a letter where Pierpont expressly discusses this inability as a mere fabrication by him to avoid corresponding with his wife.
October 9, 2018
Have you heard the one about the rich man who, when asked how much it cost to maintain his yacht, replied that if you have to ask, you can't afford it? That was J. Pierpoint Morgan. This is a serious biography about that man, by a really smart biographer, Jean Strouse. She is a Bancroft Prize winner in American History and Diplomacy for another of her books, so she knows her stuff. I have to say that I read biography from a very female point of view, and that colors my opinion of the book. To Peirpoint Morgan, women were collectables, and that is always disappointing. Having said that, the man was an icon of the gilded age, and the words "colossal genius" are not too encompassing to describe him. He brought America safely through very chaotic financial times by his indomitable commitment to making the United States the premier world banking power. He lived above the common man all his life and was untouched by the way his machinations affected them. He was a guy who didn't need much sleep, had a huge capacity for work, and a father who set the stage and trained him perfectly for the task. He loved to manage ideas, things and people. He, Rockefeller, Carnegie, Gould, etc,ruthlessly remade America after the Civil War. Their excesses both built and preserved America, and at the same time set the stage for the the modern American sensibility of political correctness and the rights of the individual - a direct reaction to the huge monopolistic trusts of that age. I must also add that this book was a graduate class in finance. If you want to know how financial instruments work but were afraid to ask, bring your dictionary and get to reading. Not an easy read, but fascinating and important.
July 18, 2019
In my opinion, based on the information in this book 'Morgan: American Financier', J. Pierpont Morgan (1837 - 1913) is one of those people of history who can be judged more positively in hindsight than many other so-called wealthy 'robber-baron' men of America. Besides being a cultured and worldly intelligent man, 'born with a silver spoon' (into a wealthy and cultured family), he appears more emotionally well-rounded and interested in people than most of the other barons.
Since the book's blurb is very accurate, I copied it out:
"History has remembered J. Pierpont Morgan as a complex and contradictory figure, part robber baron and part patron saint. Now this magisterial biography, based extensively on new material, draws a definitive, full-scale portrait of Morgan's tumultuous life both in and out of the public eye.Morgan earned his reputation as ""the Napoleon of Wall Street"" by reorganizing the nation's railroads and creating some of its greatest industrial trusts, including General Electric and U.S. Steel. At a time when the United States had no Federal Reserve System, he appointed himself a one-man central bank. He had two wives, three yachts, four children, six houses, mistresses, and one of the finest art collections in America. In this extraordinary book, award-winning biographer Jean Strouse vividly portrays the financial colossus, the avid patron of the arts, and the entirely human character behind all the myths.
Brilliantly crafted, epic in scope, Morgan reveals a man we have never seen before, offering new insights on the culture, political struggles, and social conflicts of America's Gilded Age."
There is a lot of, to me, minuscule detail regarding contracts, sales and purchases of businesses, banking and brokerage financial negotiations on several continents, money duels between owners, stockholders, and political characters and government oversight agencies - but after all, Morgan's brilliance in the complex business of finding, legally packaging, and managing the dispersal of money was crucial in creating the current foundation for the strength of our American currency, the dollar.
It is clear to me after reading this book and a previous one recently about John D. Rockefeller, Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller, Sr., the American government was weak, disorganized and too new at governance during the first era of the American oligarches - the period beginning with the Civil War and through up to World War I. There was no Federal Reserve System until 1913, for f*kc's sake! No wonder there were terrible financial depressions every three to five years in 19th-century America due to the constant and devastating financial crashes of the either unregulated or irrationally regulated American banks and other businesses. There was either a shortage or an excess of printed money in circulation, causing enormous swings in the value or fluidity (availability) of money. Arguments over using gold or silver to back up paper money raged for decades. Financial legislation regulating business entities was passed, or not, often, by a Congress seesawing between unproven theories and ideas of controlling markets, in trying to attract European investors, and in the regulated creation of the correct amount of circulating money. Interstate banking was against the law, as was interstate corporations, when some talented and focused people began to make America an industrial monster in the world.
Tough mean-spirited oligarchs who crushed competitors and developed successful monopolies as a result of their financial ruthlessness actually helped stabilize America's financial system. It's true. Maybe railroads that ultimately stretched uniformly across the entire United States, or consistent dependable oil refining production, for example, might not have been built up so quickly without monopolies and oligarch ambition. Once these wealthy men became wealthy, they invested in and supported other poorer men like Thomas Edison, who was trying to create an electric light company, or Alexander Bell, inventor of the American telephone, or they put money into shipping, factories, and mines. They created jobs (and slave wages, 7-day workdays of eighteen hours each and child exploitation), European interest and more money to circulate among more people.
At a certain point, money began to accrue without much direction from the oligarch. The gap between social classes grew larger and larger (sounds familiar, right?). Some oligarchs tried to reluctantly appease the free press which hounded them by exposing their or their business employees' corruption with feigned philanthropic interests. Honest or ambitious politicians blackmailed them with deleterious legislation.
Some oligarchs were more genuinely concerned about the disparity of wealth creation. They all loved their money of course, but many loved the thrill of creating businesses more than sitting on their wealth, and some genuinely wanted to be Great Men of History, known for their honest philanthropy or in having decided the path of a country towards Greatness. Morgan seems like he was one of the latter types - he wanted to, truly and honestly, make America Great.
Morgan was one of those who put financial packages together - finding money which was available for vital business loans and investment, negotiating the types of financial instruments, like bonds or stocks or cash, bringing all involved investors into agreement on interest rates and other terms of repayment, settling down rapacious or cautious investors, investigating businesses and owners for soundness, reliability and risk. He was brilliant at it, apparently, charismatic and trustworthy. His contacts and knowledge eventually allowed him to pull together deals with investors and businesses from European countries joining American industrial oligarchs, helping them work together during an era when Europeans did not trust a youthful undeveloped country like America.
Along the way, he alone saved Wall Street and the American government from bankruptcy - twice - by personally arranging for availability and fluidity of investment money when the markets froze in fear and panicked customers destroyed banks by demanding their deposited cash. One business failure could begin the failure of other linked business partners, causing the following failures of many linked leveraged businesses, each one falling like pushed-over dominoes in a row in a matter of hours. Before the American government got its act together, dithering ineffectually in crisis after financial crisis, Morgan literally acted to save America's ass again and again. However, he felt hurt when Congress, and especially President Theodore Roosevelt, began to pass legislation to break up the oligarch Trusts, including his own, which were controlling vast swathes of personal American business kingdoms after fifty or sixty years of almost unimpeded financial machinations. Feeling perhaps very disgruntled about it (strangely, he rarely expressed personal feelings or comments in ANY written letters, notes or documents) he did not fight it too much. Instead, he went on a twenty-year- spree of buying European and Middle-eastern/Egyptian art, traveling personally to the houses and museums of European collectors.
Morgan was a 'frequent flyer' for his day since childhood anyway, traveling constantly, despite owning several mansions in America and England and Europe. He ended up investing in the shipping line which owned the Titanic. He owned three yachts and he loved traveling across the Atlantic everywhere. He was such an active guy, he wore younger people down who were with him daily when he was seventy years old. Needless to say, family members, friends, and acquaintances depended on him a great deal because of his energy and business acumen. Since he was generous as well, believing in spreading around his wealth liberally, well, I think more people liked him than hated him when they knew him personally. Omg, did he know EVERYONE important - artists, writers, aristocrats, scientists, archeologists, rich merchants and bankers, politicians. He wasn't shy about visiting, and dropping by, to anyone's party, wedding, meeting, family do (except for those of his whining wife Fanny). His mistresses were an open secret. He had a huge curiosity about people, places and art. Idk, I ended up kinda liking him.
This is a good book, but some readers will be massively bored by the thousands of intricately described and detailed business and financial deals. He really was in the thick of many many business events which literally led to the creation of the rules and regulations running the American economy by either stressing out business leaders and politicians or encouraging them to codify his invented business processes and procedures.
‘Morgan: American Financier’ is a great biography. Jean Strouse, the author, did an incredible job of bringing J. Pierpoint Morgan to life as a man, husband, and father. She used many library archives, academic collections, magazine, newspaper and memoir sources - including current living members of the Morgan family. The book has extensive Select Bibliography, Notes and Index sections - about a hundred pages. Excellent book, but I recommend it to only history/business buffs or those curious or admiring of Morgan himself.
Since the book's blurb is very accurate, I copied it out:
"History has remembered J. Pierpont Morgan as a complex and contradictory figure, part robber baron and part patron saint. Now this magisterial biography, based extensively on new material, draws a definitive, full-scale portrait of Morgan's tumultuous life both in and out of the public eye.Morgan earned his reputation as ""the Napoleon of Wall Street"" by reorganizing the nation's railroads and creating some of its greatest industrial trusts, including General Electric and U.S. Steel. At a time when the United States had no Federal Reserve System, he appointed himself a one-man central bank. He had two wives, three yachts, four children, six houses, mistresses, and one of the finest art collections in America. In this extraordinary book, award-winning biographer Jean Strouse vividly portrays the financial colossus, the avid patron of the arts, and the entirely human character behind all the myths.
Brilliantly crafted, epic in scope, Morgan reveals a man we have never seen before, offering new insights on the culture, political struggles, and social conflicts of America's Gilded Age."
There is a lot of, to me, minuscule detail regarding contracts, sales and purchases of businesses, banking and brokerage financial negotiations on several continents, money duels between owners, stockholders, and political characters and government oversight agencies - but after all, Morgan's brilliance in the complex business of finding, legally packaging, and managing the dispersal of money was crucial in creating the current foundation for the strength of our American currency, the dollar.
It is clear to me after reading this book and a previous one recently about John D. Rockefeller, Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller, Sr., the American government was weak, disorganized and too new at governance during the first era of the American oligarches - the period beginning with the Civil War and through up to World War I. There was no Federal Reserve System until 1913, for f*kc's sake! No wonder there were terrible financial depressions every three to five years in 19th-century America due to the constant and devastating financial crashes of the either unregulated or irrationally regulated American banks and other businesses. There was either a shortage or an excess of printed money in circulation, causing enormous swings in the value or fluidity (availability) of money. Arguments over using gold or silver to back up paper money raged for decades. Financial legislation regulating business entities was passed, or not, often, by a Congress seesawing between unproven theories and ideas of controlling markets, in trying to attract European investors, and in the regulated creation of the correct amount of circulating money. Interstate banking was against the law, as was interstate corporations, when some talented and focused people began to make America an industrial monster in the world.
Tough mean-spirited oligarchs who crushed competitors and developed successful monopolies as a result of their financial ruthlessness actually helped stabilize America's financial system. It's true. Maybe railroads that ultimately stretched uniformly across the entire United States, or consistent dependable oil refining production, for example, might not have been built up so quickly without monopolies and oligarch ambition. Once these wealthy men became wealthy, they invested in and supported other poorer men like Thomas Edison, who was trying to create an electric light company, or Alexander Bell, inventor of the American telephone, or they put money into shipping, factories, and mines. They created jobs (and slave wages, 7-day workdays of eighteen hours each and child exploitation), European interest and more money to circulate among more people.
At a certain point, money began to accrue without much direction from the oligarch. The gap between social classes grew larger and larger (sounds familiar, right?). Some oligarchs tried to reluctantly appease the free press which hounded them by exposing their or their business employees' corruption with feigned philanthropic interests. Honest or ambitious politicians blackmailed them with deleterious legislation.
Some oligarchs were more genuinely concerned about the disparity of wealth creation. They all loved their money of course, but many loved the thrill of creating businesses more than sitting on their wealth, and some genuinely wanted to be Great Men of History, known for their honest philanthropy or in having decided the path of a country towards Greatness. Morgan seems like he was one of the latter types - he wanted to, truly and honestly, make America Great.
Morgan was one of those who put financial packages together - finding money which was available for vital business loans and investment, negotiating the types of financial instruments, like bonds or stocks or cash, bringing all involved investors into agreement on interest rates and other terms of repayment, settling down rapacious or cautious investors, investigating businesses and owners for soundness, reliability and risk. He was brilliant at it, apparently, charismatic and trustworthy. His contacts and knowledge eventually allowed him to pull together deals with investors and businesses from European countries joining American industrial oligarchs, helping them work together during an era when Europeans did not trust a youthful undeveloped country like America.
Along the way, he alone saved Wall Street and the American government from bankruptcy - twice - by personally arranging for availability and fluidity of investment money when the markets froze in fear and panicked customers destroyed banks by demanding their deposited cash. One business failure could begin the failure of other linked business partners, causing the following failures of many linked leveraged businesses, each one falling like pushed-over dominoes in a row in a matter of hours. Before the American government got its act together, dithering ineffectually in crisis after financial crisis, Morgan literally acted to save America's ass again and again. However, he felt hurt when Congress, and especially President Theodore Roosevelt, began to pass legislation to break up the oligarch Trusts, including his own, which were controlling vast swathes of personal American business kingdoms after fifty or sixty years of almost unimpeded financial machinations. Feeling perhaps very disgruntled about it (strangely, he rarely expressed personal feelings or comments in ANY written letters, notes or documents) he did not fight it too much. Instead, he went on a twenty-year- spree of buying European and Middle-eastern/Egyptian art, traveling personally to the houses and museums of European collectors.
Morgan was a 'frequent flyer' for his day since childhood anyway, traveling constantly, despite owning several mansions in America and England and Europe. He ended up investing in the shipping line which owned the Titanic. He owned three yachts and he loved traveling across the Atlantic everywhere. He was such an active guy, he wore younger people down who were with him daily when he was seventy years old. Needless to say, family members, friends, and acquaintances depended on him a great deal because of his energy and business acumen. Since he was generous as well, believing in spreading around his wealth liberally, well, I think more people liked him than hated him when they knew him personally. Omg, did he know EVERYONE important - artists, writers, aristocrats, scientists, archeologists, rich merchants and bankers, politicians. He wasn't shy about visiting, and dropping by, to anyone's party, wedding, meeting, family do (except for those of his whining wife Fanny). His mistresses were an open secret. He had a huge curiosity about people, places and art. Idk, I ended up kinda liking him.
This is a good book, but some readers will be massively bored by the thousands of intricately described and detailed business and financial deals. He really was in the thick of many many business events which literally led to the creation of the rules and regulations running the American economy by either stressing out business leaders and politicians or encouraging them to codify his invented business processes and procedures.
‘Morgan: American Financier’ is a great biography. Jean Strouse, the author, did an incredible job of bringing J. Pierpoint Morgan to life as a man, husband, and father. She used many library archives, academic collections, magazine, newspaper and memoir sources - including current living members of the Morgan family. The book has extensive Select Bibliography, Notes and Index sections - about a hundred pages. Excellent book, but I recommend it to only history/business buffs or those curious or admiring of Morgan himself.
April 17, 2012
This is the best biography of a plutocrat ever. This was an important person, but a fascinating person, whose career literally shaped American business. This is better than "House of Morgan" - also a fine book- and was literally a page turner, obesity a long one!
March 25, 2020
https://wp.me/p4dW55-GO
When published in 1999, Jean Strouse's "Morgan: American Financier" was the first full-scale biography of J.P. Morgan in several decades. Strouse is also the author of "Alice James, A Biography" which won the Bancroft Prize in American History and Diplomacy. She is currently writing a book about John Singer Sargent's "Wertheimer portraits."
The best early biographies of J.P. Morgan include Frederick Lewis Allen's 1949 "The Great Pierpont Morgan" and the 1939 authorized biography "J. Pierpont Morgan, An Intimate Portrait" by Morgan's son-in-law Herbert Satterlee. Strouse's book, however, benefits enormously from her tenacious pursuit of new sources including documents found in the Pierpont Morgan Library and the Morgan Grenfell Archives.
During its early pages this book comes across as one of the most intriguing biographies I've ever read. The author describes her quest to uncover the real Morgan; her analysis of previous biographies (including their strengths and limitations), her hunt for new primary source materials and her efforts to separate fact from fiction are immediately entrancing.
Strouse's writing style is dense and impactful - always full of depth and force - but is rarely fluid or easy to read. Rather than leading readers on a captivating journey through Morgan's life, the narrative inculcates its audience with a steady barrage of facts while rarely slowing long enough to set a scene or add color to Morgan's surprisingly dull complexion.
At first glance J.P. Morgan seems an ideal biographical subject: he was an icon of the business world, helped save the U.S. economy on multiple occasions and led a seemingly fascinating life (including two marriages, numerous affairs and complicated relationships with his father and children). And yet Morgan never comes across as a particularly colorful or engaging character.
What is difficult to determine is whether the author is uninspiring as a storyteller...or that J.P. Morgan was far less interesting than one might suspect. But what is undeniable is that Strouse is unable to tease out and accentuate whatever bits of vivacity may have existed in Morgan's life.
This book's strengths are numerous and include insightful observations concerning the gold standard and monetary policy (including the role and limitations of central banks), Morgan's stewardship of the American economy, his influence over global corporate finance, his interest in Thomas Edison's new technologies, and his complex family dynamics. The biography is also filled with footnotes which are often more interesting than the narrative itself.
But the author fills the text with a blizzard of detail likely to appeal only to the most committed of readers, including the nuances of loan syndications, mundane intricacies of Morgan's life which add little texture to his portrait, inconsequential details of bond financings and an extraordinary degree of insight into his art collection. Even readers committed to fully understanding Morgan are likely to find this biography excessive in trivialities.
Even the book's "Afterword" - a section where many biographies redeem themselves with pithy but astute observations that were buried in the preceding narrative - fails to provide overarching revelations or compelling conclusions concerning Morgan's life or legacy.
Overall, Jean Strouse's biography succeeds at presenting J.P. Morgan as a far more complicated figure than his "Robber baron" caricature might suggest. This book earns extremely high marks for its historical value and it seems unlikely there will ever be a more detailed review of Morgan's life. What is not hard to imagine, however, is that there could be a far more interesting biography of the man...
Overall rating: 3 stars
When published in 1999, Jean Strouse's "Morgan: American Financier" was the first full-scale biography of J.P. Morgan in several decades. Strouse is also the author of "Alice James, A Biography" which won the Bancroft Prize in American History and Diplomacy. She is currently writing a book about John Singer Sargent's "Wertheimer portraits."
The best early biographies of J.P. Morgan include Frederick Lewis Allen's 1949 "The Great Pierpont Morgan" and the 1939 authorized biography "J. Pierpont Morgan, An Intimate Portrait" by Morgan's son-in-law Herbert Satterlee. Strouse's book, however, benefits enormously from her tenacious pursuit of new sources including documents found in the Pierpont Morgan Library and the Morgan Grenfell Archives.
During its early pages this book comes across as one of the most intriguing biographies I've ever read. The author describes her quest to uncover the real Morgan; her analysis of previous biographies (including their strengths and limitations), her hunt for new primary source materials and her efforts to separate fact from fiction are immediately entrancing.
Strouse's writing style is dense and impactful - always full of depth and force - but is rarely fluid or easy to read. Rather than leading readers on a captivating journey through Morgan's life, the narrative inculcates its audience with a steady barrage of facts while rarely slowing long enough to set a scene or add color to Morgan's surprisingly dull complexion.
At first glance J.P. Morgan seems an ideal biographical subject: he was an icon of the business world, helped save the U.S. economy on multiple occasions and led a seemingly fascinating life (including two marriages, numerous affairs and complicated relationships with his father and children). And yet Morgan never comes across as a particularly colorful or engaging character.
What is difficult to determine is whether the author is uninspiring as a storyteller...or that J.P. Morgan was far less interesting than one might suspect. But what is undeniable is that Strouse is unable to tease out and accentuate whatever bits of vivacity may have existed in Morgan's life.
This book's strengths are numerous and include insightful observations concerning the gold standard and monetary policy (including the role and limitations of central banks), Morgan's stewardship of the American economy, his influence over global corporate finance, his interest in Thomas Edison's new technologies, and his complex family dynamics. The biography is also filled with footnotes which are often more interesting than the narrative itself.
But the author fills the text with a blizzard of detail likely to appeal only to the most committed of readers, including the nuances of loan syndications, mundane intricacies of Morgan's life which add little texture to his portrait, inconsequential details of bond financings and an extraordinary degree of insight into his art collection. Even readers committed to fully understanding Morgan are likely to find this biography excessive in trivialities.
Even the book's "Afterword" - a section where many biographies redeem themselves with pithy but astute observations that were buried in the preceding narrative - fails to provide overarching revelations or compelling conclusions concerning Morgan's life or legacy.
Overall, Jean Strouse's biography succeeds at presenting J.P. Morgan as a far more complicated figure than his "Robber baron" caricature might suggest. This book earns extremely high marks for its historical value and it seems unlikely there will ever be a more detailed review of Morgan's life. What is not hard to imagine, however, is that there could be a far more interesting biography of the man...
Overall rating: 3 stars
September 28, 2017
Are you interested in Morgan as a human being? Or Morgan as metonym for 19th C American Finance?
Strouse' book is very much about Morgan the man --- what he felt like on a particular day, where he visited, whom he loved. If that's your sort of thing, great. But it's not what interests me. I found Ron Chernow's _The House of Morgan_ to be far superior because that is a book about what I AM interested in, namely American finance at the time and the role Morgan had in building up and directing American industry.
Strouse' book is very much about Morgan the man --- what he felt like on a particular day, where he visited, whom he loved. If that's your sort of thing, great. But it's not what interests me. I found Ron Chernow's _The House of Morgan_ to be far superior because that is a book about what I AM interested in, namely American finance at the time and the role Morgan had in building up and directing American industry.
June 5, 2011
I wasn't thrilled by this one. I much preferred Ron Chernow's The House of Morgan: An American Banking Dynasty and the Rise of Modern Finance which seemed much more detailed despite the fact that it covers Junius, Pierpont, Jack and beyond rather than Strouse's primary focus on Pierpont.
June 22, 2014
I only could get through half of this book. I like to read a biography to get a sense of who someone really is - I.e. how they got where they were and why they did things the way the did. I was never able to get that sense from this book. There was too much information about his art collecting and other non-business details that never seemed to get tied in to the overall narrative (or lack thereof).
June 23, 2020
Jean gave 15 years of her life to write this book and also received several grants. So before you give it a low score or say you liked the other authors version better consider the blood sweat tears and decade plus Journey she went on to bring this to print. I loved the book Morgan is a man's man who got the job done. He didn't let anything even a huge difformaty on his nose get in his way.
Takeaways my 👂 picked up on ⤵️
A man always has two reasons for things he does a good reason and the real reason
Money talks but Morgan doesn't
The questions his life raises
Urgedto clarify my point
The wish maybe what's father to the thought
Dealing in real estate
Only hang out with people of the right stamp
Study his rise to power
Quiet triumph
New york was settled by the Dutch
Informal credit checks
Be wide awake
Slow and sure should be the motto of every young man
I love her most truly
Differering perceptions of value are the basis of all free trade
san·guine
/ˈsaNGɡwən/
Learn to pronounce
See definitions in:
All
Heraldry
Art
adjective
1.
optimistic or positive, especially in an apparently bad or difficult situation.
"he is sanguine about prospects for the global economy"
I have to be a sharp as a cactus
I'm always afraid of things that work the first time
I had sinched the deal by seconds
Investable sorrow
Puffed his eternal cigar
I love her unquestioning adoration
Standing militant watch over the formation of his character
Longing for paternal notice
All shadow of reserve was swept aside
Turn real estate into art
Please see that you do
I know how much difficulty can lie between a good idea and a working result
You are surrounded by men with the least particle of honor
Call on me at any and all times
I'm simply triumphant
His since of sin is abstract
Dropping a riske hint
He's trying to swallow up the sun
Curtis in a characteristic hurry
Perfect madness
In a nice display of outrage
Hot with rage
I've talked my tongue nearly off
Love of acquisition
On account of the Ready money
I built on foundations established by others
I have nothing but money to intimidate you with
Get all the knowledge I can
If your mind is ready for your spark plugs to be adjusted see Sarah
Curtis is always loyal to his mistakes
It gave me the proper thrill
His egotism is something overwhelming
A good many of your questions
Glass pockets
Sense of high calling
Big head no brains
Big belly no guts
I have a Godzillion things to do
I've been trying all my life to overcome self-doubt
I'm not writing for prosperity
Well matched pair
Thin set title
Satisfied of their genuineness
That's what deprives me of my rest
Dreadful rich thing
I'm thourally annoyed and disgusted I'm going into a towering rage
This is the type of thing that makes me lose my high reverance for you
You make me lose temporarily all the respect I have for you
Nightmare's and distorted distorted business ideas interrupted my sleep
Takeaways my 👂 picked up on ⤵️
A man always has two reasons for things he does a good reason and the real reason
Money talks but Morgan doesn't
The questions his life raises
Urgedto clarify my point
The wish maybe what's father to the thought
Dealing in real estate
Only hang out with people of the right stamp
Study his rise to power
Quiet triumph
New york was settled by the Dutch
Informal credit checks
Be wide awake
Slow and sure should be the motto of every young man
I love her most truly
Differering perceptions of value are the basis of all free trade
san·guine
/ˈsaNGɡwən/
Learn to pronounce
See definitions in:
All
Heraldry
Art
adjective
1.
optimistic or positive, especially in an apparently bad or difficult situation.
"he is sanguine about prospects for the global economy"
I have to be a sharp as a cactus
I'm always afraid of things that work the first time
I had sinched the deal by seconds
Investable sorrow
Puffed his eternal cigar
I love her unquestioning adoration
Standing militant watch over the formation of his character
Longing for paternal notice
All shadow of reserve was swept aside
Turn real estate into art
Please see that you do
I know how much difficulty can lie between a good idea and a working result
You are surrounded by men with the least particle of honor
Call on me at any and all times
I'm simply triumphant
His since of sin is abstract
Dropping a riske hint
He's trying to swallow up the sun
Curtis in a characteristic hurry
Perfect madness
In a nice display of outrage
Hot with rage
I've talked my tongue nearly off
Love of acquisition
On account of the Ready money
I built on foundations established by others
I have nothing but money to intimidate you with
Get all the knowledge I can
If your mind is ready for your spark plugs to be adjusted see Sarah
Curtis is always loyal to his mistakes
It gave me the proper thrill
His egotism is something overwhelming
A good many of your questions
Glass pockets
Sense of high calling
Big head no brains
Big belly no guts
I have a Godzillion things to do
I've been trying all my life to overcome self-doubt
I'm not writing for prosperity
Well matched pair
Thin set title
Satisfied of their genuineness
That's what deprives me of my rest
Dreadful rich thing
I'm thourally annoyed and disgusted I'm going into a towering rage
This is the type of thing that makes me lose my high reverance for you
You make me lose temporarily all the respect I have for you
Nightmare's and distorted distorted business ideas interrupted my sleep
November 10, 2020
Pierpont Morgan was a fascinating person. Born in 1837 he lived through the period when the US exploded into a manufacturing giant, and more than living through it, he was an important part of it.
This book focuses on three aspects of Pierpont's life: His business life, his relations to women and his art collecting.
Sadly, the sources seems to be thin in all areas so those few sources that exist get a lot of focus in the book. This includes the diary of his second life and the letters of his gossipy library manager.
It could have been different. His closest confidant was his father and the father, Junius, saved all letters in several leather bound volumes. When Pierpont saw them, he burned them. He seems to have been reluctant to having anyone judge him all through his life.
But still, there is enough to say quite a bit as this 1000 page book shows.
Born as son to the banker Junius Morgan, Pierpont is a rare example of a very successful person being followed by an even more successful child.
From early years Pierpont was groomed for a life in international banking. His father sent him abroad to learn other languages and build connections but abroad he also picked up a love of anything cultural or old.
In all his life he combined working in New York or London, the financial centers of the world, with travels to Egypt, Italy, France or other cultural locations.
As so many other successful people, Pierpont combined an intense self-doubt, with a strong belief in his own ability. It is a combination that seems to make some people work really hard. In the case of Pierpont Morgan he also seems to have been able to get other to work hard. The stress caused a lot of people around him to have breakdowns. Personally he solved the stress problem for most of his life by being abroad for 4 months per year.
In his personal life, he seems to have been, since he was a young kid, strongly attracted to women. In surviving letters, he kept complimenting women around him. Unfortunately his love life hit a major disaster early on when his first wife, Memie, died in TBC just a couple of months after the wedding.
Three years later Pierpont married Fanny, a marriage that seems to have been an unqualified disaster. Pierpont being extremely social while Fanny "preferred a quieter, more domestic life". The logistical solution was that they were rarely at the same continent. While Pierpont worked in New York, Fanny was at spas in Europe or in the London house. As Fanny made her way back over the Atlantic, Pierpont went to Europe.
The book instead talks about his female travel companions, implying strongly that two or three of them were his mistresses for decades at a time. That was clearly true at an intellectual level though whether it was also carnal, the book leaves to the reader's imagination.
Despite Pierpont and Fanny rarely being near each other they had 4 children. The first, Lousia, Pierpont's favourite, became his travel companion for a long time, most of the time keeping quiet about Pierpont's other women. The second, Jack, was groomed as Pierponts successor as Pierpont himself had been groomed by his father Junius, but not nerely as successful. Pierpont was a better pupil than teacher.
But the big question is, what made Pierpont so special that people read about him 150 years later? Beyond accumulating massive amounts of money (though less than people thought), he was also a powerful personality that could unite the country's wealthy elite in times of trouble. Several times through his life, the US economy, lacking a central bank, lacking macroeconomic understanding, faced imminent collapse when Pierpont using his own fortune and connections stabilized the economy. Most of the time he came out richer than he started which added to his power as well as others respect, envy and fear.
In his later life he used almost all the money he had to build massive collections of art and old items, and to build beautiful buildings. Everything the European aristocracy had collected over centuries, he was willing to buy and there were plenty of sellers.
Some of what he bought ended up in his personal collections, some he donated to museums or the original owner. Sadly his massive collection disbursed after he died, but parts of it can be found at the Metropolitan Museum in New York.
During his last couple of years he was the target of a lot of public attacks on him and his business dealings. People in general were fed up with how certain people became ludicrously rich, especially if done through monopolies and trusts. Rockefeller, Carnegie, the Vanderbilts were the main drivers of that, but for all their empire building they needed money, and Pierpont Morgan was one of the few that could provide the necessary amounts when huge companies were created. This gave Pierpont Morgan power through direct ownership (the bank always takes a share when it funnels resources) but also by having bank representatives installed as directors in every important bank.
At the same time, people that knew him seems to have trusted him. American presidents, like Theodore Roosevelt, took his advice and relied on Pierpont when there was a crisis, while they at the same time attacked other "robber barons".
The summary in the book is that it was lucky Pierpont was a good man because that power would have been bad in anyone else's hands. And that no individual should ever have that much power again.
I find it a bit hard to grade books like this since it takes reading multiple biographies about the same person to understand what the book omits or emphasises. I will not do that, So instead I have to look at it as a literary work, and then this book is mostly easy to read but also includes chapters that could be removed, and lists so many names that it takes a notebook by the side to keep track of everyone. I am happy I read it and I learned a lot so I'm giving it four stars but I also feel like there are many pieces of the puzzle missing.
This book focuses on three aspects of Pierpont's life: His business life, his relations to women and his art collecting.
Sadly, the sources seems to be thin in all areas so those few sources that exist get a lot of focus in the book. This includes the diary of his second life and the letters of his gossipy library manager.
It could have been different. His closest confidant was his father and the father, Junius, saved all letters in several leather bound volumes. When Pierpont saw them, he burned them. He seems to have been reluctant to having anyone judge him all through his life.
But still, there is enough to say quite a bit as this 1000 page book shows.
Born as son to the banker Junius Morgan, Pierpont is a rare example of a very successful person being followed by an even more successful child.
From early years Pierpont was groomed for a life in international banking. His father sent him abroad to learn other languages and build connections but abroad he also picked up a love of anything cultural or old.
In all his life he combined working in New York or London, the financial centers of the world, with travels to Egypt, Italy, France or other cultural locations.
As so many other successful people, Pierpont combined an intense self-doubt, with a strong belief in his own ability. It is a combination that seems to make some people work really hard. In the case of Pierpont Morgan he also seems to have been able to get other to work hard. The stress caused a lot of people around him to have breakdowns. Personally he solved the stress problem for most of his life by being abroad for 4 months per year.
In his personal life, he seems to have been, since he was a young kid, strongly attracted to women. In surviving letters, he kept complimenting women around him. Unfortunately his love life hit a major disaster early on when his first wife, Memie, died in TBC just a couple of months after the wedding.
Three years later Pierpont married Fanny, a marriage that seems to have been an unqualified disaster. Pierpont being extremely social while Fanny "preferred a quieter, more domestic life". The logistical solution was that they were rarely at the same continent. While Pierpont worked in New York, Fanny was at spas in Europe or in the London house. As Fanny made her way back over the Atlantic, Pierpont went to Europe.
The book instead talks about his female travel companions, implying strongly that two or three of them were his mistresses for decades at a time. That was clearly true at an intellectual level though whether it was also carnal, the book leaves to the reader's imagination.
Despite Pierpont and Fanny rarely being near each other they had 4 children. The first, Lousia, Pierpont's favourite, became his travel companion for a long time, most of the time keeping quiet about Pierpont's other women. The second, Jack, was groomed as Pierponts successor as Pierpont himself had been groomed by his father Junius, but not nerely as successful. Pierpont was a better pupil than teacher.
But the big question is, what made Pierpont so special that people read about him 150 years later? Beyond accumulating massive amounts of money (though less than people thought), he was also a powerful personality that could unite the country's wealthy elite in times of trouble. Several times through his life, the US economy, lacking a central bank, lacking macroeconomic understanding, faced imminent collapse when Pierpont using his own fortune and connections stabilized the economy. Most of the time he came out richer than he started which added to his power as well as others respect, envy and fear.
In his later life he used almost all the money he had to build massive collections of art and old items, and to build beautiful buildings. Everything the European aristocracy had collected over centuries, he was willing to buy and there were plenty of sellers.
Some of what he bought ended up in his personal collections, some he donated to museums or the original owner. Sadly his massive collection disbursed after he died, but parts of it can be found at the Metropolitan Museum in New York.
During his last couple of years he was the target of a lot of public attacks on him and his business dealings. People in general were fed up with how certain people became ludicrously rich, especially if done through monopolies and trusts. Rockefeller, Carnegie, the Vanderbilts were the main drivers of that, but for all their empire building they needed money, and Pierpont Morgan was one of the few that could provide the necessary amounts when huge companies were created. This gave Pierpont Morgan power through direct ownership (the bank always takes a share when it funnels resources) but also by having bank representatives installed as directors in every important bank.
At the same time, people that knew him seems to have trusted him. American presidents, like Theodore Roosevelt, took his advice and relied on Pierpont when there was a crisis, while they at the same time attacked other "robber barons".
The summary in the book is that it was lucky Pierpont was a good man because that power would have been bad in anyone else's hands. And that no individual should ever have that much power again.
I find it a bit hard to grade books like this since it takes reading multiple biographies about the same person to understand what the book omits or emphasises. I will not do that, So instead I have to look at it as a literary work, and then this book is mostly easy to read but also includes chapters that could be removed, and lists so many names that it takes a notebook by the side to keep track of everyone. I am happy I read it and I learned a lot so I'm giving it four stars but I also feel like there are many pieces of the puzzle missing.
August 17, 2025
This is a very solid biography, very comprehensive and clearly written. However, Strouse spends more time on Morgan the Man than Morgan the Financier, and I am more interested in the latter, so I skimmed most of this book.
April 9, 2023
People do not fit in neat little boxes, JP Morgan least of all. The author shares pretty early (page 216) the fact that Pierpont straddled both worlds of the Old Guard elite and the new money makers getting fabulously wealthy as the country industrialized. He was the kind of filthy rich person that the muckrakers loved to go after, and yet he worked hand-in-hand with Teddy Roosevelt. I'm convinced now after reading this book that no one hates middle-class bourgeois virtues more than the wealthy, since Pierpont used his wealth to shuttle his wife back and forth to Europe so he could spend time undisturbed with his girlfriends.
I wonder even more at progressives' weird obsession with "tax the rich." Because even EARLIER in the book (page 108), Mrs. Strouse shares the real source of Pierpont's great wealth: the expansion of the federal government. "Between 1862 and 1865 Abraham Lincoln presided over a consolidation of federal power that would have delighted the ghost of Alexander Hamilton." This included borrowing millions by selling government bonds. "The Morgans would be among the primary beneficiaries of this profound transformation..." And how.
You see, the other thing to know about Pierpont was that he was his father's man. He was groomed from day one to be what he became - the most powerful financier in the US for several decades at least - and he was completely devoted to his father and could thank his father for what he finally became. Once Pierpont was old enough to get started in business, he became the head of the NY office while his father headed the London office of the company. Together they helped bring US bonds to the rest of the world. And when you're talking millions of dollars, you don't need much of a cut to become quite wealthy. As I recall, they made their reputation when they were able to refinance the federal government's Civil War debt at lower rates in the years after the war, selling many of the new bonds internationally.
So it must be quite troubling for progressives to realize that their dreams of bigger government making life fair and right for everyone go hand-and-hand with Big Business, the very thing that so many of them claim to hate. Put the "robber barons," well, JP Morgan at least, right at the top of the list.
One thing the book could have done without was the extensive lists of the artistic treasures that Pierpont purchased once he had made his fortune. Seems like the newly wealthy set out to make themselves cultural elites as well. They did it the way they did everything else: by buying it. After all, why spend a thousand years (or more) making yourself into a culturally elite society when it's all for sale over in Europe! Just buy a bunch of old paintings and other artwork and viola! you have arrived culturally as well as financially!
Anyway, the author spends a lot of time covering artwork that to me was obscure and uninteresting. Well, I was very interested to learn that he bought two Gutenberg Bibles, considered the most valuable books in the world. I'd like to see them. Summarizing everything else would have saved a lot of reading time.
So hopefully you can tell I enjoyed the book.
I wonder even more at progressives' weird obsession with "tax the rich." Because even EARLIER in the book (page 108), Mrs. Strouse shares the real source of Pierpont's great wealth: the expansion of the federal government. "Between 1862 and 1865 Abraham Lincoln presided over a consolidation of federal power that would have delighted the ghost of Alexander Hamilton." This included borrowing millions by selling government bonds. "The Morgans would be among the primary beneficiaries of this profound transformation..." And how.
You see, the other thing to know about Pierpont was that he was his father's man. He was groomed from day one to be what he became - the most powerful financier in the US for several decades at least - and he was completely devoted to his father and could thank his father for what he finally became. Once Pierpont was old enough to get started in business, he became the head of the NY office while his father headed the London office of the company. Together they helped bring US bonds to the rest of the world. And when you're talking millions of dollars, you don't need much of a cut to become quite wealthy. As I recall, they made their reputation when they were able to refinance the federal government's Civil War debt at lower rates in the years after the war, selling many of the new bonds internationally.
So it must be quite troubling for progressives to realize that their dreams of bigger government making life fair and right for everyone go hand-and-hand with Big Business, the very thing that so many of them claim to hate. Put the "robber barons," well, JP Morgan at least, right at the top of the list.
One thing the book could have done without was the extensive lists of the artistic treasures that Pierpont purchased once he had made his fortune. Seems like the newly wealthy set out to make themselves cultural elites as well. They did it the way they did everything else: by buying it. After all, why spend a thousand years (or more) making yourself into a culturally elite society when it's all for sale over in Europe! Just buy a bunch of old paintings and other artwork and viola! you have arrived culturally as well as financially!
Anyway, the author spends a lot of time covering artwork that to me was obscure and uninteresting. Well, I was very interested to learn that he bought two Gutenberg Bibles, considered the most valuable books in the world. I'd like to see them. Summarizing everything else would have saved a lot of reading time.
So hopefully you can tell I enjoyed the book.
June 3, 2020
Finished Morgan: American Financier by Jean Strouse, different than Ron Chernow’s The House of Morgan which dealt with the Morgan family and financial empire up through modern times, this was a full life biography on J.P. Morgan touching on his life, both business and personal.
It was over 800 pages of reading but was well organized largely chronologically but also topically. It covered his personal life, his first marriage cut short by the death of his wife and his second marriage which as time went on became largely distant and estranged. His relationship with his father, children and coworkers. It covers his religious philosophy which largely is summed up by faith in Jesus Christ not good works.
As a businessman Morgan can be seen as another greedy individual of the gilded age or a person who always worked for the public good. Strouse largely goes with the second interpretation as a banker who while rich always was looking for the betterment of the United States financial interest.
The book also covers his vast interest in a collection of a large variety of art works spanning everything from Ancient Egyptian Gutenberg bibles to renaissance art work.
A fascinating individual and I wholeheartedly endorse the reading of this.
It was over 800 pages of reading but was well organized largely chronologically but also topically. It covered his personal life, his first marriage cut short by the death of his wife and his second marriage which as time went on became largely distant and estranged. His relationship with his father, children and coworkers. It covers his religious philosophy which largely is summed up by faith in Jesus Christ not good works.
As a businessman Morgan can be seen as another greedy individual of the gilded age or a person who always worked for the public good. Strouse largely goes with the second interpretation as a banker who while rich always was looking for the betterment of the United States financial interest.
The book also covers his vast interest in a collection of a large variety of art works spanning everything from Ancient Egyptian Gutenberg bibles to renaissance art work.
A fascinating individual and I wholeheartedly endorse the reading of this.
March 30, 2023
I see some complaints that this book doesn't concentrate enough on finance and discusses Morgan the person too much. I wonder what a biography is supposed to do, if not discuss the person. My background is in finance and economics, but learning about the person shows me the why behind many of his decisions and statements.
Having said that, the economics and finance of the time were super interesting, and the financial world was obviously very different back then.
This book is a massive endeavor, and I found some parts more interesting than others (I confess the list of artworks, and how and why he bought them, didn't interest me as much). But overall it was an extremely informative look into the life of a man who, beyond being rich, was extremely influential during his time. Pretty much single-handedly reversing the financial panic of 1907 (we probably could've used someone like him in 1929, or 2008 for that matter).
Incredible to think it took 15 years to research/write this book. Although I can't help wondering how much the "House of Morgan" coming out in 1999 had to do with that.
Having said that, the economics and finance of the time were super interesting, and the financial world was obviously very different back then.
This book is a massive endeavor, and I found some parts more interesting than others (I confess the list of artworks, and how and why he bought them, didn't interest me as much). But overall it was an extremely informative look into the life of a man who, beyond being rich, was extremely influential during his time. Pretty much single-handedly reversing the financial panic of 1907 (we probably could've used someone like him in 1929, or 2008 for that matter).
Incredible to think it took 15 years to research/write this book. Although I can't help wondering how much the "House of Morgan" coming out in 1999 had to do with that.
September 26, 2020
I read this book when it first came out in the late 1990s. It piqued my interest in the power of banking to support nation building and technological advancement as Morgan's own life and career paralleled the Gilded Era of US economic development. He financed the railroads, the Titanic and even Nikola Tesla. Morgan also provided much needed cash to Old Europe in exchange for art and antiquities, many of which he used to support the founding of the Metropolitan Museum of Art as well as his own private collection and many other artistic endeavors. Morgan put his and his family's own safety on the line when he volunteered his house to be the first electrified in New York, and he suffered through the resulting fire. Morgan essentially bankrolled the US Government in times of crisis and it is quite telling that the Federal Reserve System was established the year after his death, in no small way to replace him. The book also sets Morgan apart from the robber barons of the day and portrays him as a true gentleman banker.
Read
March 17, 2021This is my fault for choosing this book, but I was interested in knowing more about the legacy and workings of a man who seemed to define Gilded Age finance, and to a large extent, the model of the central American financial system. This book, which I abandoned after 12 hours of a 42 hour audiobook (hence no rating) was so detailed and in many was focused on his personal life and dealings (did you know he went to Egypt once with his family? How about his many, many houses?) that I just couldn't make it to the part where he did stuff that mattered. Ultimately, I'm probably not the audience for this book, which in 1999 maybe was an interesting piece of historical escapism, but in 2021 made me more than ever sure that the lower classes will one day eat the rich.
April 14, 2022
An enjoyable read, but I'm glad I was already planning to tackle another Morgan biography next, as it feels like an incomplete picture. The author was very deliberately attempting to present a more "balanced" view of Morgan, but to me the result is that she ends up eliding a lot of the consequences for his more heavy-handed actions. She cleaves so closely to his opinions/thoughts/justifications that I often felt like I had no clear idea of what anyone outside the Morgan circle of influence felt about his actions.
Still, despite its length and level of detail I found it easy to read. Recommended for anyone curious about the lives of the robber barons or Gilded Age history.
Still, despite its length and level of detail I found it easy to read. Recommended for anyone curious about the lives of the robber barons or Gilded Age history.
July 8, 2023
Fascinating insight into one of the great collectors. Learning how he came to be such a connoisseur is fun. Strauss doesn’t vilify him, contextualizing all his decisions within the constraints of his world and the archives she had. This isn’t a hagiography, either. The man with the big red nose had no trouble finding affectionate company, often from among the wives of acquaintances. Morgan made money as a byproduct of his businesses, not as an objective. He could have been much richer, but he did his best to make the game work for everyone, as fairly as possible. It is a fine book, and I recommend it highly to anyone who might want to see how the fellow described herein did it.
Read
February 6, 2022Excellent book contextualizing the US transformation from agricultural society to industrial, led by the introduction of the railroads. Unfortunately, I did not come away knowing alot about JP Morgan himself. Either he didn't divulge much (apparently, his family was instructed to destroy his writings after his death), or more research would have been needed.
Conclusion: JP came along at the right time. By the 20th Century, the Federal Government would digest all in its sight.
Conclusion: JP came along at the right time. By the 20th Century, the Federal Government would digest all in its sight.
November 9, 2020
An exhaustive (and I mean exhaustive) biography on the man that held America together prior to the Fed. One would argue too much detail — Strouse goes into every nook and cranny of Morgan's life, even departing from it for streams of pages to discuss the secondary and tertiary characters of Morgan's time.
November 20, 2024
I have read other biographies of JPM and this was the best one. Rather remarkably, Strouse is able to balance Morgan's financial, art collecting and personal lives with aplomb. One might assume that an author who understands the art world would whiff on the financial details, but that is assuredly not the case.
October 7, 2022
Detailed and fact driven book about JP Morgan and his life
Worth the read although it is lengthy and historic in its telling. A great insight into a man who is often maligned in American history
Worth the read although it is lengthy and historic in its telling. A great insight into a man who is often maligned in American history
February 10, 2018
An outstanding example of the biographer's art. Highest recommendation.
November 19, 2019
I thought this painted a rather healthy portrait of J P Morgan. A rather long read, but one that leaves you satisfied in the end. Really good work.
October 6, 2020
An exceptional book about an exceptional man. 5 stars.
February 3, 2021
Informative but too longwinded of a book and the font too small. Got to page 476 and stopped.
February 19, 2021
Incredible detail and research on this man including his business deals and collecting which inspired me to read about him after a visit to the Morgan Library.
Read
May 20, 2023This book felt more about the man’s art collection life than the details of his financial dealings and schemes. I was looking for the latter.
August 10, 2023
Fascinating and even-handed biography of a man who greatly shaped America during the Gilded Age
Displaying 1 - 30 of 56 reviews