All Cloudless Glory

by E. Harrison Clark, Harrison Clark

In this first volume you'll meet a youthful Washington, one not transformed into the dignified figure we associate with our first president.

Genres: History

483 pages, Paperback

First published November 25, 1995

Reviews

[Julia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good history of Washington. Dry in parts, but a decent read.

[K · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book deserves credit for its attempt to cover the length of George Washington's extraordinary life and for quoting extensively from his own letters. But the writing is dull, the excerpts from Washington's letters often are too lengthy, and way too much time is wasted on saying what happened in war or politics, without saying what it meant. The book's analysis generally comes down to saying Washington had foresight about everything and that other exalted Founding Fathers were idiots and liars (Jefferson, Hamilton, Monroe, Sam Adams, and more).

f you are a Washington fanatic, this book is worth reading. But it's not balanced in any way. It's written by a military guy for one of the most awful, conservative publishing houses in the country. This book reeks of smugness about the uniqueness of America, the greatness of its cause, the glory men at arms, and the "one great man" theory of history. All of those ideas deserve a much more skeptical review than this author provides, so if you want better understanding of the forces at work during Washington's lifetime and his impact on them, look elsewhere.

The book is a hagiography more than a biography. The most prominent example of this is the discussion of slavery and Washington. Yes, it's well known that Washington provided for the release of his slaves at his death, as compared to Jefferson, who didn't. But Washington kept those men, women, and children in his compensation-less employ for his entire life, even though he privately wrote often that he didn't think slavery was a good idea or moral. But this book takes Washington's written sentiments as evidence way stronger than it actually was about what he would do, claiming multiple times that Washington "had a plan" to end slavery in America in the 1790s by selling land and using that to compensate all slaveholders for their "property." There is no evidence that Washington had this plan for the country, and only minimal evidence he attempted to do it even for people under his control. The book also contains howlers or deeply offensive comments (depending on your perspective) about Washington caring so much for his slaves that he gave them great food, warm shelter, and good healthcare. This was done (according to the author) out of moral concerns and because it would make them better workers.

Washington's conduct towards Indians is similarly given a gloss. Washington began his career fighting them, and he fought them through the Revolutionary War and through border wars during his 8-year presidency. Clearly, he saw them as enemies to be moved or exterminated. This book writes about those battles and atrocities as if they were incidental, rather than shattering an entire culture. And it focuses on treaties that Washington signed, which were not upheld by border settlers or the US Army. Basically, it says Washington did the best he could, and it wasn't his fault that nobody paid attention to the treaties and that later presidents were worse on this issue. This is giving Washington way too much of the benefit of the doubt.

Despite these awful perspectives, the book does give a good view of what Washington went through on a monthly, weekly, and sometimes daily basis. Washington was a voluminous writer, and this book mines those letters to huge benefit. They are about military matters, to Congress, to political foes and supporters, to his step-children and step-grandchildren, and more. The energy and industry of Washington shines through, as he was doing these letters as only part of actually doing the work, whether it was managing his huge land-holdings, running a war, seeking supplies for troops, assessing the potential for various European powers to attack or support the US, and so on. How he kept this straight in his mind without spreadsheets, Google, and a thousand aides is beyond me. The guy must have been a genius, as well as honest and brave.

In an era when our political leaders on the Right are scum and the Supreme Court ignores the Constitution and the will of the people, it's inspiring and also sad to read about a time of genuine outside crisis, when people rose to the challenge. It seems to me that President Obama had the same level of integrity, vision, and intellect as Washington, and yet we saw the lies of his opponents undermine him at every turn, whereas "the people" saw through it in the late 1700s. And you thought we had become smarter????

[Jim · Rating 1 out of 5]

Possibly the most poorly written book I have ever had the the misfortune to read. Why I even bothered to finish it I don't know. In both style and substance it is woefully deficient. Written from a conservative perspective this book has become a favorite among the "Washington was a fundamentalist" crowd. A far better, and more credible Washington treament from a conservative perspective is Richard Brookhiser's "Founding Father: Rediscovering George Washington"

No matter who you are, or what your prejudice is regarding Washington as a conservative icon...SKIP THIS BOOK!!!