The Revolutionary: Samuel Adams

by Stacy Schiff

Thomas Jefferson asserted that if there was any leader of the Revolution, “Samuel Adams was the man.” With high-minded ideals and bare-knuckle tactics, Adams led what could be called the greatest campaign of civil resistance in American history.

Stacy Schiff returns Adams to his seat of glory, introducing us to the shrewd and eloquent man who supplied the moral backbone of the American Revolution. A singular figure at a singular moment, Adams amplified the Boston Massacre. He helped to mastermind the Boston Tea Party. He employed every tool available to rally a town, a colony, and eventually a band of colonies behind him, creating the cause that created a country. For his efforts he became the most wanted man in America. When Paul Revere rode to Lexington in 1775, it was to warn Samuel Adams that he was about to be arrested for treason.

In The Samuel Adams, Schiff brings her masterful skills to Adams’s improbable life, illuminating his transformation from aimless son of a well-off family to tireless, beguiling radical who mobilized the colonies. Arresting, original, and deliriously dramatic, this is a long-overdue chapter in the history of our nation.

Genres: History, Biography, Nonfiction, American History, American Revolution, Politics, Audiobook

433 pages, Kindle Edition

First published October 25, 2022

About the author

Stacy Schiff is the author of Véra (Mrs. Vladimir Nabokov), winner of the Pulitzer Prize; Saint-Exupéry, a Pulitzer Prize finalist; and A Great Improvisation: Franklin, France, and the Birth of America, winner of the George Washington Book Prize, the Ambassador Award in American Studies, and the Gilbert Chinard Prize of the Institut Français d'Amérique. All three were New York Times Notable Books; the Los Angeles Times Book Review, the Chicago Tribune, and The Economist also named A Great Improvisation a Best Book of the Year. The biographies have been published in a host of foreign editions.

Schiff has received fellowships from the Guggenheim Foundation and the National Endowment for the Humanities and was a Director’s Fellow at the Cullman Center for Scholars and Writers at the New York Public Library. She was awarded a 2006 Academy Award in Literature from the American Academy of Arts and Letters. Schiff has written for The New Yorker, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the Boston Globe, among other publications. She lives in New York City.

Reviews

[Rick Riordan]

As with her biography on Cleopatra, I continue to be impressed by Schiff's ability to bring to life a historical figure who left behind so little documentation. Samuel Adams was careful to burn most of his correspondence to avoid having it used against him by the British. He also preferred to work behind the scenes and let others take the main stage. Despite this, Schiff offers us a reasonably full picture of this shadowy operative from the American Revolution.

Was he a rebel or a patriot? A terrorist or an activist? A guardian of liberty or a spreader of lies? Or maybe a mixture of all the above? We see Adams from many points of view, British and American, and much of the conversation around his actions and motives will feel familiar to anyone following politics today. It hits especially hard for me, living in Boston some 250 years after the Revolution, where the majority of the action took place.

Many have pointed out Adams' rhetoric against the British use of military forces to suppress sedition in American cities, and used it to apply to current events in the U.S. re. the use of the National Guard to "restore order" in urban areas.

For instance, Adams writes of the absurdity of stationing troops in Boston, "on pretense of preserving order in a town that was as orderly before their arrival as any one large town in the whole extent of His Majesty’s dominions.” He points out that the stated purpose of these troops is directly opposite to the effect they achieve, which is to actually increase the potential for violence: "No man can pretend to say that peace and good order of the community is so secure with soldiers quartered in the body of a city as without them.”

Still, we must be careful to take Adams' words at face value. He was a consummate agitator, who would gleefully take the smallest bits of hearsay and inflate them into lurid tales of British atrocities in order to scandalize the American colonists. His opponents in the loyalist camp were no better, and no more beholden to objective truth. Samuel Adams just played the game better. There is a strong argument to be made, as the British made in the 1770s, that Adams almost single-handedly created the American Revolution.

My biggest takeaway from this book was that the subjectivity of the news is nothing new. In colonial Boston, many newspapers thrived, and all were viciously partisan, relating only the news that served to reinforce their world view, and distorting that news as they saw fit to stir up their readers. This was "rage bait," long before that term was coined. Even after all these years reading and studying history, I am still amazed how much history is a shared illusion that people decide to believe, rather than any sort of factual account. In light of this, critical thinking skills are the most important tool we can give our students to decide for themselves which accounts are most credible, and which "facts" are most likely factual, by comparing sources and examining the biases at play. Unfortunately, we do a very poor job of this, perhaps because the purpose of education is too often to sell that shared illusory narrative, not to question it.

At any rate, if you are interested in the reasons for the American Revolution, or want a snapshot of life in colonial Boston to see how much has changed, and how much hasn't, this is a great book to try.

[E · Rating 2 out of 5]

Samuel (never "Sam" in his day) Adams was an amazing man. This book is not. Schiff is just not a very good prosaist. I kept asking what was wrong with myself that I couldn't catch the flow of her writing. But it wasn't me. She doesn't set a scene, she doesn't connect dots, she doesn't build one sentence upon the next, she doesn't do all the little things that makes for good prose.

It's a shame, because Adams deserves better. He is the person most to be credited with American independence. Period. No doubt. He led Massachusetts' vigor for liberty. And Massachusetts led the colonies. Adams was relentless in his insistence on the fundamentals of freedom. And he was a master at moving events in his preferred direction while managing to keep himself from receiving the blame if things went askew.

He was terrible with money and was much better at spurring a revolution than living in a new country, so the last decades of his life did not have the valedictory sense of most of the other Founding Fathers. But if it weren't for him, they would have had nothing in which to bask.

[A W · Rating 2 out of 5]

Good facts, poor writing. This book is nearly unreadable. Where was the editor? There is no flow, it was repeatedly difficult to keep track of which “he" the author was referring to in paragraphs full of pronouns. Reading the book was unsatisfying—like hacking through a jungle. And I failed to get a good sense of the man himself based on the book. As another reviewer put it, this book was written around the man, not about the man.

[Brendan (History Nerds United) · Rating 5 out of 5]

He's more than just a beer! Stacy Schiff resurrects the actual Samuel Adams from the scrap heap by writing a biography that will surprise most people because they don't even know "Sam Adams" beer is actually based on a real life person.

Schiff focuses on Adams' life leading up to the American Revolution. What I appreciated most about Schiff's book is her willingness to clearly point out the good and the bad throughout the book. Samuel Adams was not a selfless hero who flew above the fray. He was the fray. He caused the fray. He then reported on the fray and told everyone it was someone else's fault the fray even happened. Adams was a hero and a villain depending on which side you chose. Schiff never denies either side of him and it makes for a great read because you feel like you are reading an impartial documentary as opposed to a fawning treatment.

There is plenty to cover here. The revolutionary fathers did not always get along and for good reason. The egos were big and the stakes kept getting bigger. Schiff's book keeps laser focused on Adams and keeps the scope intimate. A great read and a must for any Revolutionary War nerd.

(This book was provided to me as an advance read copy by Netgalley and Little, Brown and Company. The full review will be posted to HistoryNerdsUnited.com on 10/25/2022.)

[Steven Z. · Rating 4 out of 5]

What criteria should be used to determine if a person can be labeled a “founding father?” We all know that John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, George Washington and a host of others qualify, however each has their own foibles and when examined they may detract from their reputations. Do other members of the American Revolutionary generation qualify? If so, whom? In Stacy Schiff’s latest work, THE REVOLUTIONARY SAMUEL ADAMS the author makes the case for the cousin of John Adams to join this elite company. Schiff, a Pulitzer Prize winner is also the author of THE WITCHES OF SALEM, 1692, A GREAT IMPROVISATION: FRANKLIN, FRANCE, AND THE BIRTH OF AMERICA, and biographies of Cleopatra, Mrs. Vladimir Nabokov, and Saint-Exupery. Schiff explores the birth of the American Revolution in Boston and the artful and elusive instigator and master of misinformation whose contributions made it all happen – Samuel Adams.

Adam Gopnik in his review of Schiff’s work in The New Yorker, October 31, 2022, characterizes Adams’ role in the revolution as almost invisible, “but his fingerprints are everywhere. He shaped every significant episode in the New England run up to war. Yet how he did it, or with what confederates, or even with what purpose – did he believe in American independence from the start, or was it forced on him by the wave of events, as it was on others? – is muddied by an absence of diaries or letters or even many firsthand accounts.” It is a credit to Schiff that lacking documentary evidence she constructs her book “from a pleasant tapestry of incident and inference. She has a fine eye for the significant detail and knows how to compose that lovely thing the comic-comprehensive catalogue.”

After reading Schiff’s narrative it is clear that Samuel Adams should be labeled the “instigator-in-chief” of the American Revolution. Adams was an opportunist, a purveyor of half-truths, but in the end truly idealistic. Schiff explores Adams’ role in the American political theater of the day as he “employed unreliable rumormongering, slanted news writing, misleading symbolism, even viral meme-sharing” – all of which was evident from the outset of his revolutionary role. He inaugurated the American tradition of show-business politics but was also a realist realizing that his goals could not be achieved without colonial unity.

Schiff’s focus centers on a few major events and significant personalities. The author does an exceptional job in these areas as she dissects the Land Bank Committee, the Stamp Act, the Boston Massacre, the Boston Tea Party, and the growth of the Committees of Correspondence, and what transpired at Lexington and Concord. As far as individuals, she sets Adams against Governor Thomas Hutchinson and General Thomas Gage who also served as Governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Other influential figures include Dr. James Warren, John Dickinson, Thomas Paine, James Otis, John Adams, Thomas Cushing, John Hancock, Paul Revere, and Benjamin Franklin.

Schiff’s approach is chronological as she follows Adams’ actions from 1751 through the onset of revolution. It is not a traditional biography as Schiff zeroes in on Adams’ “words” and his ability to rile the British and bring about an inclusive colonial network that pushed against Britain’s attempt to control the colonies and use them as a “monetary source” in order to pay for its large debt dating to the French and Indian War.

Adams’ radicalization stems from the 1751 Land Bank Committee whose currency policies and trade imbalance increased the debts of many Boston residents including Samuel Adams. Adams would develop the Boston Gazette in order to disseminate his views as a result, and ironically he was appointed a tax collector in 1758. In her discussion Schiff provides an excellent description of pre-revolutionary Boston and the Massachusetts Bay Colony in general.

Up until 1764 Adams personal situation consisted of debt, loss of family, the collapse of his malt business, fighting with creditors, etc. But 1764 would become a watershed year in his career as an agitator for less British control of the colonies because of the imposition of the Sugar Act as London sought increased revenues from colonies undergoing tremendous economic growth. That summer Schiff points out that Adams marriage to Elizabeth Wells was as significant as British actions as her ambitions and strengths mirrored those of her husband.

Schiff’s insightful commentary is on full display with the issuance of the Stamp Act in 1765 as Adams argued that London’s actions actually benefitted the colonies as it awoke in them their desire for the rights and privileges of Englishmen and helped unite the colonies. Further, it would spawn the creation of the Sons of Liberty.

Throughout, Schiff develops the back and forth between Adams and Hutchinson. The British governor believed that Adams was the devil and was responsible for everything that went wrong during his reign from the destruction of his house to the dumping of tea in Boston Harbor. The author provides the letters, articles, and speeches of each highlighting her extensive research. Schiff also does admirable job delving into personalities, viewpoints, and actions of members of the Massachusetts Legislature and their overall relationship with the crown. Governor Francis Bernard, who preceded Hutchinson in office, Otis, Adams, Cushing, Hancock, and the role of others are all stressed.

Schiff concentrates on Boston and all the major events that took place in the city, but also how these events affected Philadelphia and New York including their response. Adams’ most important creation may have been the Committees of Correspondence which can be considered an 18th century “twitter” which allowed the colonies to communicate with each other and be kept up to date with the latest news and movements or as one reviewer described as “a patriot espionage network.” Adam’s action helped unify the colonies, with major help from London whose imposition of the Townshend Acts which imposed new taxes on paper, paint, nails, and tea in 1767, the Quartering Act which stated colonists had to house British troops, British troops firing on Boston citizens in 1770, the Port Act, and blockading Boston after the Tea Party in 1773 made Adam’s task that much easier.

Periodically, Schiff shifts her focus to Adam’s writing style and strategy. Words came easily to Adams, who could “turn a small grievance into an unpardonable insult before others had arrived at the end of a sentence.” It was the golden age of the printed word with six newspapers in Boston alone. One of Adam’s most effective tools was the use of “pseudonyms” be it Vindex, Candius, A Chatterer, A Son of Liberty, over thirty in all which was quite successful and allowed Adams to seem as if he were everywhere. Other tools in the toolbox included lies, facts, imagery, comments by royalists, and of course his creativity, i.e.; exploiting vocabulary by applying words such as inalienable and unconstitutional.

Schiff’s research provides a roadmap into Adam’s thoughts. She dissects his arguments and admires his ability to create havoc and develop support for his cause throughout the colonies against London. In each instance she explains the actions and opinions of major events as they develop and how the important personalities coped with them. One of Schiff’s strengths is her ability to discuss the role of each player in any situation. A case in point is whether the Boston Tea Party would have occurred without his leadership.

It is clear from Schiff’s narrative that Samuel Adams was the prime mover in prodding the colonists from loyalty to rebelliousness against England in less than a decade. The text deals very little with Adam’s pre-revolutionary career and post-revolutionary life zeroing in on a 15 year period from 1764 on. As historian Amy Greenburg writes in her October 22, 2022, New York Times Review, arguing that lessening Adam’s role in the revolution was a mistake and “Stacy Schiff redresses this oversight by celebrating the man who “wired a continent for rebellion.” There is a lot to admire about this rabble-rouser. He was utterly incorruptible; colonial authorities tried to buy him off with public office (“the time-honored method”), but Adams could be neither bribed nor intimidated. He cared nothing for personal gain, and, in his own words, gloried “in being what the world calls a poor man.” He was deeply idealistic, had great personal equanimity and was a gifted orator. He promoted public education for women long before it was fashionable. He was a tender father to his two children and, although his financial mismanagement forced his wife into manual labor while he was at the Second Continental Congress, he was also a loving husband. Readers are reminded more than once that Adams abhorred slavery, and when offered the gift of an enslaved woman, he insisted that she be freed before joining his household. Schiff paints a vivid portrait of a demagogue who was also a decorous man of ideals, acknowledging Adams’s innovative, extralegal activities as well as his personal virtues.” After digesting Schiff’s arguments, It is clear that Samuel Adams deserves to be labeled as part of that august group of “founders.”

[Rita · Rating 2 out of 5]

I could not understand this book. Choppy, unintelligible paragraphs. I found myself rereading and looking back to understand the author’s references. Schiff writes about the “House” and “Council,” but doesn’t explain how the Massachusetts government is set up. Dangling modifiers!! Don’t get me started!!

[Sean Gibson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Schiff is both an insightful biographer and master stylist who makes a compelling case for Adams as THE prime mover behind the American Revolution. In Schiff’s adroit hands, Adams makes for a fascinating subject, a study in contrast as a man of high moral fiber impervious to wealth, power, and flattery who never met a truth he couldn’t stretch and reconfigure in whatever way best suited his purposes. In many ways, Adams prefigured and perfected techniques now widely deployed in the Disinformation Age.

The denouement feels a bit rushed, but it mirrors how precipitously Adams’ influence decreased once the nascent nation shifted gears from fomenting rebellion to building a system of government, an area he had little interest in or aptitude for.

Highly recommended for history buffs—just like everything Schiff writes.

[Dax · Rating 4 out of 5]

As Americans, just about all of us grow up learning about the Boston massacre, the Boston tea party, and Paul Revere's famous ride. We also learn about famous revolutionary figures such as Washington and John Adams. John's older cousin is slightly less remembered.

Stacy Schiff's new biography of the man is meticulously researched. The typical US History textbooks only quickly touch on subjects such as the Stamp Act and the aforementioned Boston massacre and Boston tea party. This is the first time I have read about the early rebellion years that pre-dated the actual revolution. And this is the first time I have read any detail about Samuel Adams role during those years.

Adams was a bit of a muckraker and was a pro at utilizing misinformation to stir the public. His tactics would rub most of us the wrong way today. In fact he would fit in nicely with the so called newsman and journalists that we see today on CNN or FoxNews. But he was also a man of principle, a firebrand, and a man who was ahead of his time in policy (see his proposal of a Bill of Rights in the constitution and his insistence on ending the slave trade). Schiff was correct to think that we were in need of a new biography of the man.

What stood out to me the most was the mob approach used by Bostonians during the rebellion years. Today we talk about the need to quell the mob mentality that leads to destruction of property, but Bostonians destroyed Thomas Hutchinson's home entirely because of his loyalty to the crown. No wonder US textbooks largely gloss over those years.

Schiff also gives us a lively account of other key contributors during the rebellion years such as John Hancock (bit of a dandy) and Thomas Hutchinson. An impressive work by Schiff. Low four stars.

[Joan Lionetti · Rating 1 out of 5]

Terrible book – I actually didn’t finish it, but I did get to page 163 and decided I had enough. I am not sure whether it was the topic or the writing style, but l found the narrative to be very confusing to follow. This book is about as exciting as reading a textbook.

I had heard such great things about it, and waited for it on a rather long, waiting list at the library so it was a real disappointment.

[Erin · Rating 4 out of 5]

First book of 2023!

I had intended to have this book finished by Christmas but that obviously didn't happen. It's through no fault of this book, because I enjoyed this book and discussed with people in my life. I was unable to finish it because life happens.

I picked up this book for 2 reasons:

1. I'm trying to learn more about the founding fathers

2. I read Stacy Schiff's book about Cleopatra and enjoyed it.

The thing I like most about Stacy Schiff's writing is how she brings these long dead people back to life. I read a lot of books about History and sometimes those books can read like textbooks. I feel like I'm ingesting information instead of getting to know the subjects. After reading 2 of her books I now know that I can trust Stacy Schiff to not bore me to death.

I will say that I wouldn't pick up this book if you're not interested in Samuel Adams or the Revolutionary War, because it might be a little dense. For everyone else I can wholeheartedly recommend this book. I now need to read this author's book The Witches because eventhough I'm not particularly interested in the Salem Witch Trials, I trust Stacy Schiff to get me interested.

[Jim · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you say the name "Samuel Adams" today, chances are people will think of beer. But for Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams (1722-1803) was "the man" of the Revolution. When John Adams arrived in France, the French mistook him at first for his cousin Samuel and were disappointed that it was John, not Samuel, Adams who had arrived on their shores. The Loyalist governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony saw him as "that Machiavelli of chaos," the most wanted man in America.
You can argue that it was the Boston-born Samuel Adams who engineered the American Revolution. Why isn't he better known--actually, almost forgotten? Stacy Schiff's excellent biography tries to redress the balance. Part of the problem is that Samuel Adams worked most effectively behind the scenes. Historian Joseph J. Ellis saw him as America's first covert agent. Adams also left very few papers behind. We don't have a lot of detail about all that Adams did in organizing "the Sons of Liberty" and "the Boston Tea Party" among other things. I think, most importantly, Adams was the man, who more than anyone else, led the movement to American independence and created a new nation but was much less involved in the running of the government. He was there to sign the Declaration of Independence, but he opposed the Constitution at first, demanding that it include a Bill of Rights. Adams was seen as not a firm Federalist in strongly Federalist Massachusetts. With his death, he became almost a forgotten figure.
If, in April 1775, Paul Revere had failed in his mission and Adams had not been warned in time of the approach of "the regulars," he could have been captured and executed as a traitor. As a martyr to the cause of independence, no doubt Samuel Adams would be much better remembered today.

[Kansas · Rating 3 out of 5]

While I learned a lot of interesting facts about Samuel Adams, the writing was all over the place and sometimes hard to understand. This book would have benefited from a strong editor to bring more structure to sentences - and sometimes entire paragraphs - that were difficult to follow.

[Alex · Rating 3 out of 5]

Take a brief scan of the top reviews of this book. You’ll see that there are some unhappy readers. Though I did not have such a strong adverse reaction, I think I understand the source of the discontent, so let me try to explain.

First, this is not a biography. It is narrative nonfiction. Think Larson or Millard, not Chernow or McCullough. If you reset expectations and go in knowing that you’ll get a narrative of events in Boston leading up to the Declaration of Independence rather than a biography proper of Samuel Adams, I suspect that will go a long way in relieving one well of frustration.

Second, many excoriate Schiff for her writing. But that’s a matter of taste. I actually think she is quite skilled. She has long flowing sentences followed by short ones, creating a musical rise and fall to the prose. She uses a full array of punctuation: colons, semicolons, commas, dashes, and parentheses. Her word choice is iridescent; vibrant and varied without ever coming across as pretentious. And she can really turn a phrase (“So much did apprehensions run high that tendrils of legend curled immediately around the morning...) That type of writing isn’t everyone’s cup of tea. I get it. Some prefer information plainly presented. I enjoy a dash of color. (Dash being the operative word. I have a limit.) Again, it’s subjective. But hopefully this gives some sense of what you’re in for.

Nonetheless, Schiff’s penchant for flourish has a problem. It’s not that she uses style to mask a lack of substance. It’s that it comes at the expense of clarity.

For example, in the section where she introduces Francis Bernard, she calls him Boston’s newest “chief executive.” He was Governor. Just say Governor.

In another instance, she refers to a literal earthquake in Boston when Samuel Adams was a young boy. Later in the book she writes, “…the ground shifted dramatically under the family’s feet. This earthquake went well recorded.” I assumed that she again was talking about a literal earthquake. I was therefore baffled when, in the very next sentence, she moved on to the topic of plummeting trade in Massachusetts. Wait—what about the earthquake? Turns out she was using earthquake as a metaphor for economic turbulence. Took me a while to sort out. Not something you want to put your readers through.

The other issue is chronology. It jumps around in fits and starts, often without warning, sometimes mid-paragraph. It’s not impossible to follow, but it’s not as easy as it should be for what is a completely linear storyline.

So I get where the criticism comes from. Is it overdone? Yeah, I think so. I’m not sure it merits such vitriol. Despite the structural and editorial flaws, the book held my attention, and even though it wasn’t a true biography, it was successful in portraying Samuel Adams’s pivotal role in the Revolution.

[Tyler · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interesting character…. Dreadful writing.

[Ira Smith · Rating 5 out of 5]

Samuel Adams was so entwined in the events leading up to the American Revolution, that reading his biography is like reading an historical account of those events. Author Stacy Schiff ably brings this history to life in this fascinating volume that richly details the life of the man many believe was the linchpin to the Revolution. Never dull, The Revolutionary Samuel Adams is a well documented and scholarly read, one that is never boring. The sections that deal with the Boston Tea Party and Lexington and Concord (that latter episode opens the book) are very detailed and interesting. Kudos to the author for bringing the man to life.

My thanks to the publisher and to Netgalley for providing an ARC of this book.

[Christopher · Rating 1 out of 5]

This biography missed the mark and disappointed. The author fails to provide a structured narrative of Adams’s contributions to the Revolution. Adams is admittedly a difficult man to source with a meticulous disguising of primary materials, and over 30 adopted pseudonyms. That caveat aside, the author provides no firm basis for her reader to come to understand Samuel, his motivations and machinations, or the trajectory of his revolutionary zeal.

We learn, for instance, of Samuel’s time as a tax collector. The author punts on whether his ineffectiveness amounted to wicked corruption or careless dysfunction, a key distinction considering his later appointment as Town Clerk. The author emphasizes Adams’s esteem and “street cred,” but reverts to painting John Adams as the Revolution’s fulcrum, particularly with extended coverage of “that horrid massacre” and J.Adams’s legal gymnastics thereafter. Excessive, unnecessary, and distracting use of footnotes. I was relieved to finish this one. I agree in particular with two other reviewers who analogized this book to “hacking through a jungle,” and another who wrote: “Schiff is just not a very good prosaist. I kept asking what was wrong with myself that I couldn’t catch the flow of her writing. But it wasn’t me. She doesn’t set a scene, she doesn’t connect dots, she doesn’t build one sentence upon the next, she doesn’t do all the little things that makes for good prose.” Spot on!

[Alan Tomkins · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5 to 5 Stars. Samuel Adams is my new hero. As other reviewers have noted, the writing in this book could have benefited from some good editing to clean up and tighten up the prose a bit, but overall Stacy Schiff does such a magnificent job telling the story of Samuel Adams and how he drove the rebellion that fueled the American revolution, that I really need to give this one pretty much a five. It is a story that needs to be shared, and I have been wonderfully inspired and fascinated by the time I spent eagerly reading these pages. Highest recommendation.

[Jennifer Kemp · Rating 3 out of 5]

Unfortunately this book was difficult for me to read, and so I didn't quite enjoy as I had hoped.

[Patrick Macke · Rating 3 out of 5]

I thought I had a decent grasp of the subject matter, turns out I did not ... We were all raised to believe that the Revolution happened because the mother country mistreated its citizens, that is, taxation without representation, et al ... this book (essentially covering Adams life from around 1760 to 1775) says that some of that happened but, mostly, it was the constant agitation of one Samuel Adams, a relentless, prolific propaganda generator; without him, the Revolution doesn't happen ... fascinating ... the author makes the short book a long read through a painful writing style and sentences that are hard to understand

[Anne · Rating 2 out of 5]

Plodding writing tortured by rhetorical questions, exclamation marks, and repeated generalizations like "there wasn't a dry eye in the house." I had to finish it so I could blame the "sunk-cost" fallacy and say it "wasn't my cup of tea," though.

[BAM doesn’t answer to her real name]

10/25/22

[Natalie · Rating 2 out of 5]

I would put this book at 2.5 stars, which was unexpected for me after seeing how many accolades it has received. First of all, it should be titled “Events leading up to the Revolution, including the actions of Samuel Adams.” For a book that seems to be a biography of Samuel Adams from its cover, I felt like I did not really understand Samuel Adams the man until the final chapter. He’s in the background as a “mastermind” or puppet master behind major pre-revolution conflicts, but it was very difficult to understand why people listened to him, were protective of him, why his friends stood by him, etc.

Second of all, the writing of this book was so difficult to read. I am an avid reader, am open to many different genres of books, and I had to force myself to slog through this book to meet a book club deadline. Without that deadline, I would not have finished this book at all. This book really needed editing. There are so many small details in every paragraph that it’s impossible to discern what’s important and what’s not. Each long paragraph would focus on a new topic in each sentence, with frequently unclear pronouns. I doubt I would read anything else by this Pulitzer Prize winning author if this book is representative of her typical writing style.

What’s good: I did learn new things from reading this book. Schiff does a great at conveying both sides of each conflict and demonstrating the often shady tactics of the sons of Liberty. History enthusiasts will likely enjoy this book if you are patient enough to stop and frequently reread to figure out what is happening. It did generate a good discussion as well.

I would not recommend it widely because it was not an enjoyable reading experience for me, but if you want specifics on this time period, you will learn something.

[Joy D · Rating 4 out of 5]

Biography of Samuel Adams, second cousin of John Adams, and one of the lesser-known leaders of the American Revolution. This book explains some reasons he is not as well- known as some of the other founding fathers. It gives the reader a good idea of his personality – determined, frugal, and occasionally abrasive. I particularly enjoyed the three major set pieces – the Battle of Lexington and Concord, Boston Massacre, and Boston Tea Party. This book contains some of the most detailed accounts I have read of the sequence of events. Regarding the latter it covers what is known of the planning, execution, and aftermath. It shatters the myth that the Bostonians intentionally blamed Indians. It was well-planned and meticulously executed, even locking up afterward. Samuel Adams was leading or involved in one form or another in all of them. It can be a little dry at times, but when discussing major events, I found it riveting.

[Donna Wallace · Rating 2 out of 5]

I WANTED to like this book; everything I’d read about it indicated it was a well-researched word portrait of an unheralded revolutionary in Colonial America. However, one chapter in, I had to go back and double check that it was not a self-published book. I don’t know that I’ve ever read one so desperately in need of a good editor. That first chapter reads like author’s notes for a first chapter, but she failed to devise a plan for putting those notes in any kind of order. As the chapters progress, the promised history is there, but the ping pong bounce back and forth among events grew confusing and tiresome. The author’s random use of pronouns in convoluted sentences meant I often had to reread to determine the referenced person. I finally gave up at the fifth chapter. When the author’s style requires more of my reading energy than the subject matter, and it’s not *required* reading, there is no point in continuing.

[Brittany · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a choice for Sharon McMahon’s book club, otherwise I would not have read it.
After reading presidential biographies the last few years, this seems pretty on par with those - some parts I found very interesting (like the background info on the Stamp Act and the Boston Tea Party), others I totally missed because I zoned out listening to the audiobook.
I do think this one focused more on the actual revolution than others I’ve read, maybe because so little remains of his personal writings? So I do feel like I learned more national history.
And I am coming away with good questions about the end justifying the means, and how I would feel if today people on “the other side” acted the way the “patriots” did back then.
So I appreciate it for what it was, but biographies are never going to be a favorite genre of mine. I do recommend it, though, if you’re interested in Revolutionary War history.

[Britta Böhler · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.5*

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

Stacy Schiff has always done a masterful job at writing about people whose lives shaped world history, but about whom little is concretely known by me. She returns with another great piece, this time about Samuel Adams, who is not just a name slapped on a beer label. Schiff explores the man and his importance to colonial America, outside of simply being one of those men bandied around when mention of Washington, Jefferson, and Revere enter the conversation. Great storytelling and a keenness to provide little known facts help Stacy Schiff stand out from others who seek to pen great biographies.

Samuel Adams lived his early years in Massachusetts, under the tutelage of parents who taught him right from wrong. His passion always appeared to lay with educating himself, though the mid-19th century did not permit too many options for a poor family. Still, Adams was able to secure a spot at Harvard College and excelled in his studies, ruminating over what his thesis ought to be, while others pondered more mundane topics. This passion to learn and express himself showed the early signs of the man he would become in the American colonies.

After marrying Elizabeth Checkley, Adams knew that he would have to make a name for himself, or at least find a way to provide for his family. Adams became a collector of debts, making sure those who were behind faced swift retribution. As Schiff mentions, the irony that Adams could get monies from others and yet fell deeply behind in his own debt repayment is not lost on historians. Adams did as well as he could, especially as his family continued to grow. However, tragedy did not pass him over, as Elizabeth died not long after one of her numerous stillbirths, an event that shook Adams to his core.

While Samuel Adams was once again a bachelor, he caught the eye of a second woman, someone who appeared to be the perfect match for the young Adams. Schiff pulls on some commentary by Samuel’s cousin, the famed John Adams, who cited that Elizabeth Wells was just the type of woman Samuel deserved and it appears that later letters between the two would show just how in love they were with one another. It was around this time that things in the Massachusetts colony began to get more intense, as Britain passed the Stamp Act and would soon expect not only stamped insignias of the Crown on all published documents, but a tax to be paid to the Crown. Calls of ‘no taxation without representation’ began to echo through the streets across the colonies, though Massachusetts appeared more willing to appease the Crown than others. Adams noticed the sentiment against the British growing and could feel that something was on the horizon, though it had yet to foment into full rebellion.

While Adams wanted to keep the calm, he knew that the British were upping the pressure and trying to press the colonies to become even more subservient. Schiff mentions around this time that Britain had not taxed the colonies before because of their ‘infancy’ but that the time was right to do so. One can only surmise that this lit a fuse under many, both within and outside Massachusetts, which starting creating added animosity and tension. British soldiers, the embodiment of the London Government, became the target of attacks, at which time they retaliated. There are numerous mentions in the text at this time about skirmishes and how Adams was there, even if he was not firing or tossing stones. Animosity was building and it was only so long before it would boil over completely.

Adams’ ability to write and communicate made him a precious commodity when the colonial leaders wanted to express themselves. As Schiff explores, Virginia was the centre of the colonial attempts at rallying to unite, but Massachusetts had strong-willed individuals who would be perfect for the cause, Samuel Adams being one of them. He was spoken of fondly by his cousin, but could also be said to possess his own character worthy of being remembered. Samuel Adams came to realise that the colonies were no longer being respected by Mother England or the Crown, but rather treated as a toddler and kept under thumb. There was talk of considering pushing away, especially when not given a chance to speak or participate in debate over issues that would regularly affect those in the colonies, as well as trying to etch out a set of rules by which colonial residents would live with their own governing body, albeit local and loosely enforced. When Britain scoffed at any independence or voice for the colonies, Adams and his compatriots knew something was in the air. Add to that, England was still pushing taxation and high fees on colonial residents while refusing to let them have a say at the bargaining table.

In an intense progression through the latter portion of the book, Schiff shows how the animosity between the British and colonies, with Adams in the middle of the fray. While colonial leaders knew they could not back down, they would have to play it safe or risk being crushed. Adams and some of the other leaders were able to create a tension amongst locals against the British, such that there was no question of relenting. As the narrative builds, Schiff shows how Adams grew into his “revolutionary” moniker honestly, as he rallied everyone to the need for British remove and the yoke of oppression to be cast off. While it would not be swift, it was necessary and proved to be one of Adams’ greatest moments, using great oratory and written documents to light a fire under those who had the ability to bring about change. From pushing the British to surround Boston for a massacre in 1770 through to the Tea Party in 1773, Adams is said to have been instrumental in building up animosity through is writings. While I could go into great detail, I prefer to let the reader delve into the detail Schiff provides here, which only adds to the moment. When the dust settled, a new republic, albeit still trying to find itself, could be said to have emerged; a united group of colonies who would call themselves states!

While the book proved to be an attempt to cram a significant amount of history into a single document, Stacy Schiff did so effectively and with great passion. Samuel Adams came to life and emerged as a hero, both for the colonies and for Massachusetts specifically. Throughout his life, Adams used his passion for expression and some key political connections to make his mark, staring down the oppression of the British and stopping only when the final result worked in his favour. Schiff builds each chapter on the last and provides a strong narrative to push the reader along. Great anecdotes pepper the tome, giving those with a basic understanding of American history better context, while educating those, such as myself, who are clueless to all but the most basic aspects. Easy to comprehend but still detailed enough to provide needed context for those who want something with depth, Schiff has done it again. She takes a great approach to the Boston Tea Party, something that I knew only about in passing, and puts it into a great context to better understand how this could be seen as one of the pivotal moments in the revolutionary movement. She builds on the clash between the Massachusetts colonists and the English, which was surely a microcosm to the larger colonial struggle. Adams found himself in the middle of it, at least as a spokesman for the colonial position on the matter. When protests turned violent, Adams may not have drawn up the specific plans, but he surely did not distance himself from the acts, feeling that there was a sense of justification in the destruction as a symbol of tossing off the yoke of English control. This proved to be one of the final acts of aggression that fuelled the move for independence by the colonies.

Kudos, Madam Schiff, for dazzling in this account and proving once more you are a historian who cares about educating the common reader.

Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/

[doug.whatzup · Rating 2 out of 5]

Stacy Schiff is a lovely writer of almost lyrical prose full of fulsome phrasing like “November 1, 1765, dawned blurry and gray.” Whether or not she's much of an historian, however, is debatable, at least based on this book which, Pulitzer Prize notwithstanding, doesn't deliver history so much as pretty words.

To be fair, Samuel Adams seems to be difficult subject. Much of his personal correspondence was lost, he used any number of pseudonyms rather that write in his own name, and his critical contributions to the nation's founding were done mostly behind the scenes and through other, more public figures.

Perhaps this is why the reader learns more about Thomas Hutchinson and Patrick Henry than he does about the actual subject of The Revolutionary: Samuel Adams.

But that's just the beginning of my frustrations with Ms Schiff's writing. Sentences like, “So much did apprehension of tension run high that tendrils of legend curled immediately around the morning,” annoyed me to no end. I mean, wtf? Just say what you mean without flowering it all up with tendrils. But this alleged biography is full of such imagery that says absolutely nothing about its intended subject.

I don’t claim to speak for everybody, but I, for one, read history for content, not for florid prose. Give me the facts, unembellished. Sure, describe to your heart’s content, but not to the point of obfuscation.

This is, without a doubt, the most overrated work on a founding father that I’ve ever read. That it has won a ton of prizes and is mentioned in so many "best books of 2022" lists absolutely mystifies me.

[Robert Intriago · Rating 4 out of 5]


Stacy Schiff does a wonderful job of describing the life of what some people consider the father of the rebellion which led to to revolution for the independence of this country. The author does a good job of tracing Samuel Adams life through the writing of others since Adams did not “preen for posterity”, and left no memoirs or assembled papers. This is a wonderful book about a man that has been in some ways relegated to the back pages of the American Revolution.

[Elizabeth (Alaska) · Rating 5 out of 5]

With the 250th Anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence coming in a few short months, I have decided to do some reading relating to the events both preceeding and following that event. I will continue to read my usual mysteries and novels, both historical and otherwise, while sprinkling in titles pertaining to this period of my country's history.

I have always believed Samuel Adams was the leader of what we Americans learned to call The Boston Tea Party. He may very well have been the brains behind the dumping of the tea in Boston Harbor from no less than 3 ships, but it is unlikely he was one of those doing the actual dumping. Samuel Adams was certainly the first to speak out about liberty. Eventually, Britain named Samuel Adams and John Hancock numbers one and two on their (fictional) list of Most Wanted. It was Samuel Adams who first recognized the colonies should cooperate with each other and then began corresponding with others to help make it happen.

Contemporary nonfiction is not the crabbed nonfiction of old when you were deluged with footnotes providing incomprehensible source references. However, it is also not historical fiction and one should not expect such. This volume *did* have footnotes. I almost didn't even open the first one. I was delighted to find, not sources, but sort of side comments.

Reminiscing at a post-Revolutionary dinner, a House representative turned to Hancock: “Ay, I remember we used to say that you found the money, and Sam Adams the brains.” The conversation screeched to a halt. The speaker was reprimanded afterwards. There should be no harm, he protested, in stating the truth.

We celebrate the signing on July 4, a date that is almost completely arbitrary. The Declaration was written on July 2 and it was later in August that Samuel Adams and his now more famous cousin, John Adams, signed that historic document. The Revolution had been underway for more than year by then.

There was history with which I was familiar and history that I vaguely remembered, but most of this filled in the huge gaps from my long ago classroom history lessons. With this as my first look back at this period of my beloved country's history, I am even more enthused about my journey. This crosses the 4-/5-star line.