What do you think?
Rate this book
Mount Vernon
Describes Mount Vernon, the home of George and Martha Washington. Includes information on the farming and businesses run from Mount Vernon, and the slaves that worked there.
48 pages, Library Binding
First published August 1, 2004
4 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
February 16, 2013
I actually did like this book. I think it gave a good history of George Washington's Mt. Vernon and all the things he did to improve it. There are a lot of wonderful pictures, paintings, and maps. He also went over what happened to Mt. Vernon after Washington's death which is something you don't hear too much about.
I also did appreciate that the author gave due credit to the hard work of George Washington's slaves. The thing that I DID take issue with was that the author comes across as extremely judgmental of Washington in that he states "Washington considered himself a farmer, but it was Mount Vernon's field hands who did the hard work that made crops grow." What gives the author the right to say if George was "really" a farmer or not?! Washington took pride in farming and cared for his land responsibly. Just because a farmer has help doesn't make him any less a farmer. Washington was also a product of his time. Of course I disagree heartily with slavery, but we can hardly view him through today's lens any more than we can view ourselves through a 1700s lens. That is an unfair comparison.
The author goes on to say on the next page that a visitor from Poland was appalled by the conditions of the slaves' living quarters at Mount Vernon and pretty much leaves the opinion to stand without much argument. The point is that we don't know what the slaves quarters were like and letting a foreigner twice removed from us have the final say is ridiculous! At least he gives Washington the credit of an original quote saying that "there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do, to see a plan adopted for the abolition of [slavery]." He also does explain that Washington freed most of his slaves in his will and provided education for the younger freed slaves and care for his former slaves who were elderly.
From a historical standpoint I don't think this issue is that well handled in this book.
But overall, I give the benefit of the doubt to the author. The rest of the book is admirable and I do appreciate the wealth of pictures, many of which I've never seen.
I also did appreciate that the author gave due credit to the hard work of George Washington's slaves. The thing that I DID take issue with was that the author comes across as extremely judgmental of Washington in that he states "Washington considered himself a farmer, but it was Mount Vernon's field hands who did the hard work that made crops grow." What gives the author the right to say if George was "really" a farmer or not?! Washington took pride in farming and cared for his land responsibly. Just because a farmer has help doesn't make him any less a farmer. Washington was also a product of his time. Of course I disagree heartily with slavery, but we can hardly view him through today's lens any more than we can view ourselves through a 1700s lens. That is an unfair comparison.
The author goes on to say on the next page that a visitor from Poland was appalled by the conditions of the slaves' living quarters at Mount Vernon and pretty much leaves the opinion to stand without much argument. The point is that we don't know what the slaves quarters were like and letting a foreigner twice removed from us have the final say is ridiculous! At least he gives Washington the credit of an original quote saying that "there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do, to see a plan adopted for the abolition of [slavery]." He also does explain that Washington freed most of his slaves in his will and provided education for the younger freed slaves and care for his former slaves who were elderly.
From a historical standpoint I don't think this issue is that well handled in this book.
But overall, I give the benefit of the doubt to the author. The rest of the book is admirable and I do appreciate the wealth of pictures, many of which I've never seen.
Displaying 1 of 1 review