What do you think?
Rate this book
George Washington: The Founding Father
By far the most important figure in the history of the United States, George Washington liberated the thirteen colonies from the superior forces of the British Empire against all military odds, and presided over the production and ratification of a constitution that (suitably amended) has lasted for more than two hundred years. Yet today Washington remains a distant figure to many Americans—a failing that acclaimed author Paul Johnson sets out to rectify with this brilliantly vivid, sharply etched portrait of the great hero as a young warrior, masterly commander in chief, patient lawmaker, and exceptionally wise president.
144 pages, Paperback
First published May 31, 2005
68 people are currently reading
766 people want to read
About the author
Paul Johnson
134 books831 followersPaul Johnson works as a historian, journalist and author. He was educated at Stonyhurst School in Clitheroe, Lancashire and Magdalen College, Oxford, and first came to prominence in the 1950s as a journalist writing for, and later editing, the New Statesman magazine. He has also written for leading newspapers and magazines in Britain, the US and Europe.
Paul Johnson has published over 40 books including A History of Christianity (1979), A History of the English People (1987), Intellectuals (1988), The Birth of the Modern: World Society, 1815—1830 (1991), Modern Times: A History of the World from the 1920s to the Year 2000 (1999), A History of the American People (2000), A History of the Jews (2001) and Art: A New History (2003) as well as biographies of Elizabeth I (1974), Napoleon (2002), George Washington (2005) and Pope John Paul II (1982).
Paul Johnson has published over 40 books including A History of Christianity (1979), A History of the English People (1987), Intellectuals (1988), The Birth of the Modern: World Society, 1815—1830 (1991), Modern Times: A History of the World from the 1920s to the Year 2000 (1999), A History of the American People (2000), A History of the Jews (2001) and Art: A New History (2003) as well as biographies of Elizabeth I (1974), Napoleon (2002), George Washington (2005) and Pope John Paul II (1982).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 94 reviews
July 1, 2016
"Washington remains a remote and mysterious figure. He puzzled those who knew and worked with him, and who often disagreed violently about his merits and abilities. He puzzles us. No man's mind is so hard to enter and dwell within."
― Paul Johnson, George Washington
Paul Johnson's micro-biography of George Washington is one of the first in HarperCollins’ “Eminent Lives” series of biographies "by distinguished authors on canonical figures." I first picked this book up with Christopher Hitchens' Eminent Lives biography of Thomas Jefferson. So, essentially I made my way to Mt Vernon because it was on the way to Monticello.
All in all the biography was a very good, very basic biography. I can only say (recognizing what it is, and the limits a book on Washington will face, from the beginning) I was only really seriously disappointed twice. Once when Johnson lectured about how Washington would have felt about the 1st amendment, and for a couple pages the book devolved into a polemic of how X interpretation would have "angered Washington". The second part was when again, later he argues that "an America without religion as the strongest voluntary source of morality was to him an impossibility" and goes on to soft peddle the idea that immigrants were tolerated by and enlightened Washington, but he adds "but new arrivals had to recognize that they were joining a community under God -- or Providence --- ... and the paramount mode of worship of this God was Christian." Here Paul Johnson has fully dropped any pretense of being an historian, and has completely abandoned his introductory statement about the difficulty of entering and dwelling in Washington's mysterious mind. It is here Johnson shows up as a public intellectual with an agenda to indelicately push. I felt a bit like I had fallen into a G.K. Chesterton biography of Washington, but without all the charming puns and paradoxes.
It is natural for those on the left and the right, for those of faith or those without faith, to want to adopt the image and the history of the founding fathers and to use their myths and histories together to support a current position or agenda (whether religious or political) or to argue against a current morality. THAT impulse is one of my biggest complaints against modern, popular history, and the main reason I didn't give this short biography even three stars.
― Paul Johnson, George Washington
Paul Johnson's micro-biography of George Washington is one of the first in HarperCollins’ “Eminent Lives” series of biographies "by distinguished authors on canonical figures." I first picked this book up with Christopher Hitchens' Eminent Lives biography of Thomas Jefferson. So, essentially I made my way to Mt Vernon because it was on the way to Monticello.
All in all the biography was a very good, very basic biography. I can only say (recognizing what it is, and the limits a book on Washington will face, from the beginning) I was only really seriously disappointed twice. Once when Johnson lectured about how Washington would have felt about the 1st amendment, and for a couple pages the book devolved into a polemic of how X interpretation would have "angered Washington". The second part was when again, later he argues that "an America without religion as the strongest voluntary source of morality was to him an impossibility" and goes on to soft peddle the idea that immigrants were tolerated by and enlightened Washington, but he adds "but new arrivals had to recognize that they were joining a community under God -- or Providence --- ... and the paramount mode of worship of this God was Christian." Here Paul Johnson has fully dropped any pretense of being an historian, and has completely abandoned his introductory statement about the difficulty of entering and dwelling in Washington's mysterious mind. It is here Johnson shows up as a public intellectual with an agenda to indelicately push. I felt a bit like I had fallen into a G.K. Chesterton biography of Washington, but without all the charming puns and paradoxes.
It is natural for those on the left and the right, for those of faith or those without faith, to want to adopt the image and the history of the founding fathers and to use their myths and histories together to support a current position or agenda (whether religious or political) or to argue against a current morality. THAT impulse is one of my biggest complaints against modern, popular history, and the main reason I didn't give this short biography even three stars.
February 18, 2011
This is a nice little book to get at the meat of Washington's life by an excellent historian.
George Washington's church attendance was 50% or less. He was impatient with long sermons and never read religious works. In twenty volumes of correspondence, there is not a single mention of Christ. In no surviving letter of his youth does the name Jesus appear, and only twice thereafter. "Providence" occurs more frequently than God. He was more inclined to freemasonry than to Christianity.
He was a secular president, the absolutely right man for the job of first president. His greatest failure was not being able to start efforts to eliminate slavery before cotton made it too late. He probably could never have gotten the South to ratify the constitution if slavery were eliminated.
George Washington's church attendance was 50% or less. He was impatient with long sermons and never read religious works. In twenty volumes of correspondence, there is not a single mention of Christ. In no surviving letter of his youth does the name Jesus appear, and only twice thereafter. "Providence" occurs more frequently than God. He was more inclined to freemasonry than to Christianity.
He was a secular president, the absolutely right man for the job of first president. His greatest failure was not being able to start efforts to eliminate slavery before cotton made it too late. He probably could never have gotten the South to ratify the constitution if slavery were eliminated.
March 7, 2015
I cannot imagine a better succinct overview of George Washington’s life and impact.
October 12, 2014
This is the 3rd book in the Eminent Lives series I’ve read and the first one that seems to suffer from its short format. Much of that is due to the author though. He made the case for certain things without supporting them with Washington’s own words, as in the interpretation of how the 1st amendment pertains to religion. Johnson spent 2 pages going over how Washington viewed America as a Christian nation beholden to a god without backing that up with any quotes. And that whole bit seemed to smack against earlier parts of the book which portrayed Washington as a very secular deist.
I noted a few other confusing bits. Johnson names George Washington’s father as “Augustus” or “Gus”, but everywhere else I’ve checked outside this book refers to him as “Augustine”. Johnson later listed some common interests between George Washington and King George, one of them being Baseball. I have no idea what Johnson is referring to with that. It’s certainly not baseball as we know it today. He has to know a line like that would confuse readers and he didn’t elaborate on it in any way, which is a failure on his part.
My biggest complaint is how Johnson wrote about slavery in this book. Explaining how Washington structured his slaves’ work days he wrote: “… his view was that decent treatment produced better results than severity. In this, as in many other fields, he had a keen sense of fairness and justice. He sold his slaves very occasionally but never in a way to break up families.” That’s a sickening line to exist in a book from 2005. I don’t know how any modern person can refer to how a slave master treated slaves as having,”… a keen sense of fairness and justice…” A few lines earlier stated that Washington only had his slaves whipped “in extreme cases”. Johnson also mentioned that Washington frequently voiced his opposition to slavery. He failed to include any of Washington’s quotes to that effect though. Later in the book when referring to Washington’s poor handling of an incident with his recently appointed secretary Edmund Randolph, Johnson states it was a, “…rare example of Washington behaving unjustly…” – rare if one overlooks the massive institution of slavery. Christopher Hitchens’ entry in the Eminent Lives series on Jefferson did a good job of keeping balance on these issues. He kept sight that Jefferson’s involvement in slavery was a major fault in his character, and his own criticism of the institution was evidence of hypocrisy and a weakness of resolve. And despite all of that Jefferson was still brilliant in so many other regards. Hitchens created a rich and complex portrait. Johnson’s portrait here is weak.
I did enjoy the stuff about Washington’s early career as a surveyor. I recently did some work as a surveyor and I still enjoy learning the history of the field. It’s a fascinating job. Washington’s experience as a surveyor helped in uniting and rebuilding America’s infrastructure after the war. That was probably the best part of the book, when Washington stepped down as Commander in Chief of the colonial armies to work for the Potomac Navigation Company, until he went on to serve as the first President. Some people were calling for him to be king of America, but he chose to go do survey work and help build transportation infrastructure. For that and many other things I can commend George Washington greatly. But this wasn’t really a good book.
I noted a few other confusing bits. Johnson names George Washington’s father as “Augustus” or “Gus”, but everywhere else I’ve checked outside this book refers to him as “Augustine”. Johnson later listed some common interests between George Washington and King George, one of them being Baseball. I have no idea what Johnson is referring to with that. It’s certainly not baseball as we know it today. He has to know a line like that would confuse readers and he didn’t elaborate on it in any way, which is a failure on his part.
My biggest complaint is how Johnson wrote about slavery in this book. Explaining how Washington structured his slaves’ work days he wrote: “… his view was that decent treatment produced better results than severity. In this, as in many other fields, he had a keen sense of fairness and justice. He sold his slaves very occasionally but never in a way to break up families.” That’s a sickening line to exist in a book from 2005. I don’t know how any modern person can refer to how a slave master treated slaves as having,”… a keen sense of fairness and justice…” A few lines earlier stated that Washington only had his slaves whipped “in extreme cases”. Johnson also mentioned that Washington frequently voiced his opposition to slavery. He failed to include any of Washington’s quotes to that effect though. Later in the book when referring to Washington’s poor handling of an incident with his recently appointed secretary Edmund Randolph, Johnson states it was a, “…rare example of Washington behaving unjustly…” – rare if one overlooks the massive institution of slavery. Christopher Hitchens’ entry in the Eminent Lives series on Jefferson did a good job of keeping balance on these issues. He kept sight that Jefferson’s involvement in slavery was a major fault in his character, and his own criticism of the institution was evidence of hypocrisy and a weakness of resolve. And despite all of that Jefferson was still brilliant in so many other regards. Hitchens created a rich and complex portrait. Johnson’s portrait here is weak.
I did enjoy the stuff about Washington’s early career as a surveyor. I recently did some work as a surveyor and I still enjoy learning the history of the field. It’s a fascinating job. Washington’s experience as a surveyor helped in uniting and rebuilding America’s infrastructure after the war. That was probably the best part of the book, when Washington stepped down as Commander in Chief of the colonial armies to work for the Potomac Navigation Company, until he went on to serve as the first President. Some people were calling for him to be king of America, but he chose to go do survey work and help build transportation infrastructure. For that and many other things I can commend George Washington greatly. But this wasn’t really a good book.
March 2, 2009
Over the years, I have read several volumes of Paul Johnson, and I have enjoyed his easy and readable style. He does not disappoint in his small volume on George Washington. The father of our country is revealed as a man of wisdom, great character and leadership. Johnson depicts Washington in a variety of roles—soldier, farmer, commander, leader of the Constitutional Convention, president, and entrepreneur.
Thanks to my education, I always had a better grasp on the intellectual founding of America. Figures such as Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams always stood out in my mind. The documents such as the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Federalist Papers had prominence. I never understood exactly what made Washington, in the words of some, “indispensable.” Thanks to Johnson, I understand.
Although Johnson does not neglect the negative, the author is not a dispassionate chronicler of facts. He has strong opinions, and he uses the narrative to make his points. Washington is clearly the hero of the story. Alexander Hamilton also shines. On the other hand, Thomas Jefferson appears much smaller than his soaring rhetoric. The book only fails when it lapses at occasional editorials. For example, when Johnson describes the modern problem of judicial activism, he writes, “If Washington had been aware of the possibilities of judge-made law he would have recoiled in horror” (pg 113). No matter the merit of Johnson's position, he is clearly putting thoughts into Washington's head. The volume would have been much better by avoiding such speculation.
Nonetheless, I heartily recommend the book.
Thanks to my education, I always had a better grasp on the intellectual founding of America. Figures such as Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams always stood out in my mind. The documents such as the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Federalist Papers had prominence. I never understood exactly what made Washington, in the words of some, “indispensable.” Thanks to Johnson, I understand.
Although Johnson does not neglect the negative, the author is not a dispassionate chronicler of facts. He has strong opinions, and he uses the narrative to make his points. Washington is clearly the hero of the story. Alexander Hamilton also shines. On the other hand, Thomas Jefferson appears much smaller than his soaring rhetoric. The book only fails when it lapses at occasional editorials. For example, when Johnson describes the modern problem of judicial activism, he writes, “If Washington had been aware of the possibilities of judge-made law he would have recoiled in horror” (pg 113). No matter the merit of Johnson's position, he is clearly putting thoughts into Washington's head. The volume would have been much better by avoiding such speculation.
Nonetheless, I heartily recommend the book.
January 15, 2015
جورج واشنطن ...كنت ولا أزال مفتونا بهذه الشخصية من شخصيات أيام الصبا والحقيقة منذ قرأت كتاب المئة الاوائل لمايكل هارت
حاولت "وطبعا لا أزال" ان اجد شخصا يمكن أن أتشبه به ووجدت أنه اذا استثنينا الأنبياء لأني لا أستطيع أن اكون نبيا فقد ختمت النبوة واستثنينا الذين حباهم الله بمقدرة استثنائية "معجزة الموهبة" والتي لم أجدها لدي إلى الان
:/
فكان جورج واشنطن مثالا جيدا فهو كسيرة حياه شخص عادي ولكنه متميز ...فضلا عن أنه مؤسس أمريكا وما أدراك ما أمريكا
للأسف كانت نسختي الالكترونية ناقصة ولكني تممت الاجزاء الناقصة من ألاف المواقع التي تروي سيرته ومن أكثر ما شدني: 1.أول من أرسى قواعد الانتقال السلمي للسلطة في وقت كان يمكن فيه بسهولة أن يتلاعب بها فقد كان في عز جبروته وسلطته وأنا من منطقة لا تفقه شيئاً عن هذا المبدأ!!! ما علينا ما بدنا نحكي بالسياسة 2.منذ سن 14 سنة أستشعر قدره وواظب على تدوين يومياته واحتفظ بكل قصاصة عن حياته ولاتزال محفوظة في مكتبة الكونجرس على رفوف بطول 49متر 3.شخص يؤمن بشدة بالمصلحة ولكن استطاع ان يكرس بوضوح مبدأ تماهي مصلحة الفرد مع مصلحة الوطن برضا ويقين كامل
عن واشنطن هناك الكثير مما يكتب وعن الكتاب فإن ما قرأته كان جيد وبترجمة جيدة ... هل نحتاج لمثله؟ ما رأيكم
حاولت "وطبعا لا أزال" ان اجد شخصا يمكن أن أتشبه به ووجدت أنه اذا استثنينا الأنبياء لأني لا أستطيع أن اكون نبيا فقد ختمت النبوة واستثنينا الذين حباهم الله بمقدرة استثنائية "معجزة الموهبة" والتي لم أجدها لدي إلى الان
:/
فكان جورج واشنطن مثالا جيدا فهو كسيرة حياه شخص عادي ولكنه متميز ...فضلا عن أنه مؤسس أمريكا وما أدراك ما أمريكا
للأسف كانت نسختي الالكترونية ناقصة ولكني تممت الاجزاء الناقصة من ألاف المواقع التي تروي سيرته ومن أكثر ما شدني: 1.أول من أرسى قواعد الانتقال السلمي للسلطة في وقت كان يمكن فيه بسهولة أن يتلاعب بها فقد كان في عز جبروته وسلطته وأنا من منطقة لا تفقه شيئاً عن هذا المبدأ!!! ما علينا ما بدنا نحكي بالسياسة 2.منذ سن 14 سنة أستشعر قدره وواظب على تدوين يومياته واحتفظ بكل قصاصة عن حياته ولاتزال محفوظة في مكتبة الكونجرس على رفوف بطول 49متر 3.شخص يؤمن بشدة بالمصلحة ولكن استطاع ان يكرس بوضوح مبدأ تماهي مصلحة الفرد مع مصلحة الوطن برضا ويقين كامل
عن واشنطن هناك الكثير مما يكتب وعن الكتاب فإن ما قرأته كان جيد وبترجمة جيدة ... هل نحتاج لمثله؟ ما رأيكم
April 16, 2020
A good easy-to-read introduction to George Washington's life and accomplishments. Probably not great for an American history buff, but it was a great for me!
October 23, 2020
A generally eminent view of an eminent life!
Overall I found this a very interesting book. I read it mainly to update my own book, “George Washington’s Liberty Key.” The things I enjoyed in Johnson’s work included: 1. his intriguing (and generally ameliorating for Washington) perspectives on slavery (to include how the cotton gin revived the previously declining profitability of slavery); 2. his quantifications of the time Washington spent on various activities; 3. his listings of events I had been curious about (eg, where Washington spent his winters during the war); 4. the effort Washington made to create and preserve excellent, detailed, and understandable records, even to the extent of carrying them around with him; 5. the importance of Washington's training as a surveyor (one interesting aspect: Washington laid out the town of Alexandria). Johnson also, I believe correctly, mentions Washington’s great-grandfather’s ship ran aground in the Potomac River [Mattox Creek tributary]. Others have him running aground on the Rappahannock River.
On the downside, however, are a number of items (and I list these only in the hopes that there might be a new edition coming out) I’d beg to differ with: 1. Johnson lists Washington’s height variously as 6 foot three and 6 foot two without reconciliation. 2. He lists Martha Washington as 9 months older than George; she was 8 months, 9 days older (usually one would say 8 months older) and 4 feet 11 inches tall. I could only find sources saying she was 5 (or about 5) feet tall. 3. He mentions grooved granite in the construction of the Mansion. On a quick survey, I could find no other source mentioning granite of any kind. 4. Johnson generally categorizes George III as stupid; however, many scholars rate him as showing signs of intelligence, albeit misguided as far as his American colonies. 5. For the most part, Johnson denigrates Washington’s capabilities as a battlefield tactician, whereas a number of military scholar-practitioners rate him highly in all aspects of military skill (battlefield commander, tactician, and strategist). 6. Johnson writes that George III said that, given Washington was to give up his military command, “If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world.” Actually, George III is reputed to say that Washington would be the "most distinguished of any man living"; and the “greatest character of the age.” 7. Finally, Johnson generates confusion with his mention on the final pages that Washington went out on horseback to inspect his farms, the last being 13 December. Actually, the last time he went out on horseback was 12 December, when he did return home wet and cold from snow. 8. No index to find all those interesting and correct facts Johnson includes in his book, but then again, this supposed to be a brief book.
Again, however and from the perspective of a fellow author, the book overall is very well done!
Overall I found this a very interesting book. I read it mainly to update my own book, “George Washington’s Liberty Key.” The things I enjoyed in Johnson’s work included: 1. his intriguing (and generally ameliorating for Washington) perspectives on slavery (to include how the cotton gin revived the previously declining profitability of slavery); 2. his quantifications of the time Washington spent on various activities; 3. his listings of events I had been curious about (eg, where Washington spent his winters during the war); 4. the effort Washington made to create and preserve excellent, detailed, and understandable records, even to the extent of carrying them around with him; 5. the importance of Washington's training as a surveyor (one interesting aspect: Washington laid out the town of Alexandria). Johnson also, I believe correctly, mentions Washington’s great-grandfather’s ship ran aground in the Potomac River [Mattox Creek tributary]. Others have him running aground on the Rappahannock River.
On the downside, however, are a number of items (and I list these only in the hopes that there might be a new edition coming out) I’d beg to differ with: 1. Johnson lists Washington’s height variously as 6 foot three and 6 foot two without reconciliation. 2. He lists Martha Washington as 9 months older than George; she was 8 months, 9 days older (usually one would say 8 months older) and 4 feet 11 inches tall. I could only find sources saying she was 5 (or about 5) feet tall. 3. He mentions grooved granite in the construction of the Mansion. On a quick survey, I could find no other source mentioning granite of any kind. 4. Johnson generally categorizes George III as stupid; however, many scholars rate him as showing signs of intelligence, albeit misguided as far as his American colonies. 5. For the most part, Johnson denigrates Washington’s capabilities as a battlefield tactician, whereas a number of military scholar-practitioners rate him highly in all aspects of military skill (battlefield commander, tactician, and strategist). 6. Johnson writes that George III said that, given Washington was to give up his military command, “If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world.” Actually, George III is reputed to say that Washington would be the "most distinguished of any man living"; and the “greatest character of the age.” 7. Finally, Johnson generates confusion with his mention on the final pages that Washington went out on horseback to inspect his farms, the last being 13 December. Actually, the last time he went out on horseback was 12 December, when he did return home wet and cold from snow. 8. No index to find all those interesting and correct facts Johnson includes in his book, but then again, this supposed to be a brief book.
Again, however and from the perspective of a fellow author, the book overall is very well done!
February 17, 2008
This book might seem like an odd choice, but I'm writing a paper on YouTube treatments of masculinity, paternity, and the Founding Fathers, so I had to get a good sense of the original biographical lore being parodied (And hey, tomorrow is President's Day, so the timing seemed especially good :) The basic thesis of the paper is that mash-ups and parodic treatments of these topics on the intenet can help us to move beyond stale scholarly debates about the Founding, providing an interesting, populist based take on the relationship between masculinity, violence, and the continuing role of the founders in contemporary politics.
Check out the hilarous short videos linked in below, which include a mash-up of The Shining that sends-up the way that paternity and violence are frequently camouflaged, in this case through the familiar mechanisms of the movie trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfout_...
For another creative video that takes on the founders, masculinity, and violence more directly, check out:
http://bobbyroope1.imeem.com/video/QV...
To view this one, you have to get past a 15 second ad before the video starts)
Back to the book: This book is a servicable, basic biography of Washington, condensed into 125 pages, written by a pretty famous public historian. It reflects basic lore about Washington, in remarkably exalting fashion, even for this genre. For example, we learn that “Washington had something uncommonly majestic and commanding in his walk, his address, his figure and his countenance," that "Washington impressed men and women almost equally,” and that his famously large hands allowed him to “hurl a stone a prodigious distance.” This material is parodied in the "Washington" video above.
Check out the hilarous short videos linked in below, which include a mash-up of The Shining that sends-up the way that paternity and violence are frequently camouflaged, in this case through the familiar mechanisms of the movie trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfout_...
For another creative video that takes on the founders, masculinity, and violence more directly, check out:
http://bobbyroope1.imeem.com/video/QV...
To view this one, you have to get past a 15 second ad before the video starts)
Back to the book: This book is a servicable, basic biography of Washington, condensed into 125 pages, written by a pretty famous public historian. It reflects basic lore about Washington, in remarkably exalting fashion, even for this genre. For example, we learn that “Washington had something uncommonly majestic and commanding in his walk, his address, his figure and his countenance," that "Washington impressed men and women almost equally,” and that his famously large hands allowed him to “hurl a stone a prodigious distance.” This material is parodied in the "Washington" video above.
Read
January 29, 2011What made me choose this book, was curiosity. Because during school I didn't really learn much on this president, so I wanted to learn more about him. I also chose this book, because I thought that it looked like a good read, not too long, not too short, and I in turn liked reading about this president.
One thing that I liked about this book, was that it didn't just talk about George Washington during his presidentcy, but it also talked about him before and after he was President. I liked that the author did this, because it gave me more insight, too the kind of person he was. That would have to be the main point that I liked about this book. What I didn't like about this book, was that it seemed too short. I thought that this book could of been longer, since so much happened with this president. But, thats how the author made it, so, I guess he wanted it like that.
Nothign really surprised me about this book, except learning more about him. Nothing I learned though really shocked me as much as I thought it would, which is kind of a down side to this book, which is just my opinion. What I would really change is the length of the book, that would be pretty much it, since their was so much that happened with this president.
One thing that I liked about this book, was that it didn't just talk about George Washington during his presidentcy, but it also talked about him before and after he was President. I liked that the author did this, because it gave me more insight, too the kind of person he was. That would have to be the main point that I liked about this book. What I didn't like about this book, was that it seemed too short. I thought that this book could of been longer, since so much happened with this president. But, thats how the author made it, so, I guess he wanted it like that.
Nothign really surprised me about this book, except learning more about him. Nothing I learned though really shocked me as much as I thought it would, which is kind of a down side to this book, which is just my opinion. What I would really change is the length of the book, that would be pretty much it, since their was so much that happened with this president.
October 18, 2017
Such a small book!! (An odd way to begin a review, I realize, but follow me here.) When you think of George Washington, the image tends to be of a giant among men (figuratively & literally) & books about Washington tend to be the same. You tend to either get these ginormous books about the man, that cover his entire life & analyze every single, little detail. Or you get these smaller books that look at sections - his marriage to Martha, the Revolution, the Presidency, etc.
I personally loved this book, in part due to the contrast it plays to the other books. It is not a huge book... It covers several things, but does so in a limited space. I thought that was kind of neat. It was also such a quick read... Yes, it was an easy read. (Get over it!) But I also found the book to be very engrossing, which is nice. The way that Paul Johnson wrote created these images that made the book so easy to follow along to, so easy to visualize everything, & that kept me into it. I also enjoyed the fact that this was a Brit writing about the first American president.
I personally loved this book, in part due to the contrast it plays to the other books. It is not a huge book... It covers several things, but does so in a limited space. I thought that was kind of neat. It was also such a quick read... Yes, it was an easy read. (Get over it!) But I also found the book to be very engrossing, which is nice. The way that Paul Johnson wrote created these images that made the book so easy to follow along to, so easy to visualize everything, & that kept me into it. I also enjoyed the fact that this was a Brit writing about the first American president.
February 11, 2016
This is a decent introduction of Washington covering most important events of his political life, while ignoring most of Washington's private life. Johnson's conservative and Tory ideology is fairly visible throughout this short introduction, which is not necessarily a bad thing, but one ought to keep it mind. (I don't really believe a historian can be truly unbiased since everyone is shaped by his education and life events). I also found his bias against Jefferson quite amusing; Johnson is constantly trying to bash Jefferson every time he gets to chance to do so.
Without any doubt, Washington is one of the most important figures in US history if not the world, which ought to be studied by anyone interested in history. I am just not convinced this is the right place to start from.
Without any doubt, Washington is one of the most important figures in US history if not the world, which ought to be studied by anyone interested in history. I am just not convinced this is the right place to start from.
May 20, 2008
Despite his godlike aura in American political mythology, George Washington was, in the opinion of the excellent historian Paul Johnson, a rather neglected figure. Though countless volumes have been written about this father of the country, no one reads them because they are COUNTLESS VOLUMES. Johnson decided to write a quick but still insightful biography of GW that might actually get read and would hopefully deepen our understanding of the man behind the myth. He accomplished that objective, but still I found his treatment rather dull. Maybe that's because I actually wanted less of the man and more of the myth. Go figure.
September 5, 2020
Gave this 5 stars as it delivered on it's intent to the reader. Great introduction not only into the life of the first U.S President but also gives a more personalized take on his relationships with various other persons of interest during the revolutionary war period in US history. I came away from this quick read with the perspective that,
No Washington was not a perfect man as some history books would lead you to believe, he at the very least strove for greatness while remaining true to himself and personal values through an intensely important and full lifetime.
Would highly recommend as a good introduction to this time period of History.
Zach Cole-Fitzpatrick
No Washington was not a perfect man as some history books would lead you to believe, he at the very least strove for greatness while remaining true to himself and personal values through an intensely important and full lifetime.
Would highly recommend as a good introduction to this time period of History.
Zach Cole-Fitzpatrick
July 31, 2017
Paul Johnson is the greatest living historian. With Mr. Johnson you get not only unparalleled knowledge, but wisdom rarely found outside of the bible. Mr. Johnson puts together a wonderful and short book, on an extraordinary man-George Washington. You will get to know him, in ways that I have not from other sources.
June 6, 2010
This generally complimentary biography of Washington is fairly brief but hits all the major points of his life. It's an interesting read for someone who doesn't want to go deep but get a general sense of Washington's life and the times he lived in.
January 3, 2018
I am glad I read it. It has been sometime since I had read anything about him. Most you hear now is political and half truth. He was a great man and destined to be the first leader of our Country.
November 15, 2017
This was assigned to me for to read for an American history class I'm taking this year. This is my first time actually reading a biography, and I really enjoyed it.
I can't rate this book like how I normally do because it is informational instead of a work of fiction. I will be trying a different format for this book.
INFORMATION: 9.5/10
-When you're reading biographies, you want to make sure there aren't too many opinions worked into the text! This book had 0 opinions, so that's good.
-There were a couple places where the author said something like, "Washington would have been angered to see this happening today..." or things similar to that. Although as I was reading, I thought about when the author speculated things like this and I think he was probably right for most of them.
-My favourite things to read in these books are the funny informational facts. This book didn't have much, but it was enough to keep my reading.
WRITING STYLE: 10/10
-I really, really liked this author's writing style.
-The only issue I had was that I felt like it could get a bit wordy at times, but that's fine honestly.
BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE: 10/10
-Obviously, this is just a biography about George Washington. There isnt't anything in here that is a major issue with the book.
-It does, however talk about religion (and Christianity) quite a bit.
OTHER THINGS THAT MADE ME GIVE IT 4 STARS INSTEAD OF 5:
-Honestly, the book was a little slow at times. I had an incredibly hard time focusing on the book for the first chapter.
-Also the font was small on small pages, so it took forever to read. I assumed I had time and procrastinated on reading this (it was for school) but ended up laboring through reading it. It probably took 4-5 hours in total. (The book was only 123 pages.) (That should have taken me 2 hours.)
In summary, I would recommend this to history nerds, or people looking for a good biography. (Actually I'd recommend it to most anyone, but I don't like putting that at the end of all of my reviews.) Also, if you're a fan of Hamilton, this is a good one. They talk about him in the last couple chapters, but honestly it's nice to know what Washington did. That way when people ask what the founding fathers did, you're able to talk about ones other than A. Ham.
Keep on reading!
I can't rate this book like how I normally do because it is informational instead of a work of fiction. I will be trying a different format for this book.
INFORMATION: 9.5/10
-When you're reading biographies, you want to make sure there aren't too many opinions worked into the text! This book had 0 opinions, so that's good.
-There were a couple places where the author said something like, "Washington would have been angered to see this happening today..." or things similar to that. Although as I was reading, I thought about when the author speculated things like this and I think he was probably right for most of them.
-My favourite things to read in these books are the funny informational facts. This book didn't have much, but it was enough to keep my reading.
WRITING STYLE: 10/10
-I really, really liked this author's writing style.
-The only issue I had was that I felt like it could get a bit wordy at times, but that's fine honestly.
BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE: 10/10
-Obviously, this is just a biography about George Washington. There isnt't anything in here that is a major issue with the book.
-It does, however talk about religion (and Christianity) quite a bit.
OTHER THINGS THAT MADE ME GIVE IT 4 STARS INSTEAD OF 5:
-Honestly, the book was a little slow at times. I had an incredibly hard time focusing on the book for the first chapter.
-Also the font was small on small pages, so it took forever to read. I assumed I had time and procrastinated on reading this (it was for school) but ended up laboring through reading it. It probably took 4-5 hours in total. (The book was only 123 pages.) (That should have taken me 2 hours.)
In summary, I would recommend this to history nerds, or people looking for a good biography. (Actually I'd recommend it to most anyone, but I don't like putting that at the end of all of my reviews.) Also, if you're a fan of Hamilton, this is a good one. They talk about him in the last couple chapters, but honestly it's nice to know what Washington did. That way when people ask what the founding fathers did, you're able to talk about ones other than A. Ham.
Keep on reading!
January 9, 2024
The late British historian Paul Johnson’s “George Washington” is a concise and readable biography that portrays the life and legacy of America’s first president. Johnson traces Washington's life from his early training as a surveyor in the wilds of Virginia, his later military apprenticeship during the Seven Years War, and his later service as a reluctant statesman, forced to depart his beloved Mt. Vernon when duty to the country commanded his attentiveness.
Washington's skills as a surveyor and a manager established him as a great landholder, his organizational abilities and perseverance led to his status as a credible military leader, and helped him establish a reputation as a competent and honorable general and executive. Johnson assiduously writes of Washington's moral conviction about the rightness of the war, and his strategic vision that helped him better his the obtuse British counterparts.
Johnson only briefly touches on Washington’s election to the presidency and the central concerns of his administration: the complex war debts that plagued the republic; Hamilton’s organization of American finance; geographical factionalism; the advent of party politics; the effort to remain neutral in the face of a general European war ; the opening of the Mississippi River; and the removal of the threat of Indians and British in the Northwest Territory. However, Washington’s gravitas is duly conveyed, and the reader is left with a deep appreciation of the man’s character and intellect.
Washington's skills as a surveyor and a manager established him as a great landholder, his organizational abilities and perseverance led to his status as a credible military leader, and helped him establish a reputation as a competent and honorable general and executive. Johnson assiduously writes of Washington's moral conviction about the rightness of the war, and his strategic vision that helped him better his the obtuse British counterparts.
Johnson only briefly touches on Washington’s election to the presidency and the central concerns of his administration: the complex war debts that plagued the republic; Hamilton’s organization of American finance; geographical factionalism; the advent of party politics; the effort to remain neutral in the face of a general European war ; the opening of the Mississippi River; and the removal of the threat of Indians and British in the Northwest Territory. However, Washington’s gravitas is duly conveyed, and the reader is left with a deep appreciation of the man’s character and intellect.
August 18, 2022
The British-born Writer Paul Johnson published an admiring short biography of George Washington entitled George Washington: The Founding Father in 2006. Johnson’s biography of George Washington on the Kindle is 124 pages long. The book does not have an index. Paul Johnson is a character in his biography of George Washington. Johnson’s opinions influence how he writes about Washington in a noticeably way (103). The most interesting part of Johnson’s biography is his discussion of why the British lost the American Revolution, along with Johnson’s discussion of why Washington joined the side of the Patriots. This is in the chapter entitled “Commander in Chief and Victor” (51-78). Paul Johnson’s brief discussion of the colonial situation of European colonies in the Americas was interesting (17-19). Johnson's view of Washington's support for his Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton’s plan to pay off all the debts of the states of the United States that the states gathered from the American Revolution was interesting (91-94). I thought when Johnson briefly compared the early United States and the Early Latin American Republics in terms of debt was a thought-provoking idea (92). Paul Johnson’s biography is good for a reader looking for a short admiring overview of the life of George Washington.
March 29, 2025
I'm very familiar with Paul Johnson and have several of his books, and this is a good, concise biography, much like his others of Napoleon, Mozart, etc. I listened to the audio book, and it was well read. I enjoyed Johnson's biographical details integrating Washington's life with the colonial society of Virginia, and how he was molded to become a natural leader when independence came. Johnson's prose is plain and I enjoyed his summations.
If Johnson does impose his political views (ie. the court system), this is speculation that the reader can examine on his own. As for critics attacking a "benign" view of slavery; it was a system, not everyone handled it in the same way, and I think certain readers need to get their brains out of modern ideology and see what the historical circumstances were. I think everyone should realize what a blessing Washington was, and Johnson's allusions that where Washington was an example to us in our governance and Napoleon was an example to Latin America (with dismal results) should be remembered and pondered. This is a very enjoyable read (or, in my case, listen). .
If Johnson does impose his political views (ie. the court system), this is speculation that the reader can examine on his own. As for critics attacking a "benign" view of slavery; it was a system, not everyone handled it in the same way, and I think certain readers need to get their brains out of modern ideology and see what the historical circumstances were. I think everyone should realize what a blessing Washington was, and Johnson's allusions that where Washington was an example to us in our governance and Napoleon was an example to Latin America (with dismal results) should be remembered and pondered. This is a very enjoyable read (or, in my case, listen). .
January 6, 2020
I appreciate that this is a concise volume written specifically for college courses. The problem is I am not sure that many college students would bother reading it. The niche somewhere between an encyclopedia article and a longer treatment makes it great for history "buff" types, but probably not enough to assign a class on the American Revolution or US Political History overall.
It's certainly good if you are looking for a quick-hitting biography that covers the basics of Washington's life. Perhaps it would be best for someone who is not familiar with US history and needs to know a bit more than the basics.
I enjoyed it overall, but it's important to understand that it is not meant to be an exhaustive look at Washington's life. The bibliography includes mention of several more appropriate volumes for that length.
It's certainly good if you are looking for a quick-hitting biography that covers the basics of Washington's life. Perhaps it would be best for someone who is not familiar with US history and needs to know a bit more than the basics.
I enjoyed it overall, but it's important to understand that it is not meant to be an exhaustive look at Washington's life. The bibliography includes mention of several more appropriate volumes for that length.
March 10, 2019
I read this book to get a feeling for Washington's life before reading longer biographies. However, this book seems more intersted in defending Washington from any hint of *modern* impropriety than a true quick read of his life. Washington was a great man, so including outright falsehoods about his wealth, his treatment of slaves, his interactions with members of his presidential cabinet (Men Washington CHOSE to surround himself with!) in this book was jarring.
Aside, although written in 2005 Johnson describes the children of French and Native Americans as "The French Priests encouraged intermarriage and there were large numbers of halfbreeds in French territories." Halfbreeds? So that was odd.
Aside, although written in 2005 Johnson describes the children of French and Native Americans as "The French Priests encouraged intermarriage and there were large numbers of halfbreeds in French territories." Halfbreeds? So that was odd.
April 23, 2019
I wanted to get more insight into Washington the man, rather than Washington the legend. This was as good as anything I've seen for that.
I found the anecdotes to be the most interesting part. Johnson is an excellent researcher, but isn't really telling a story anywhere here. That's fine, but it comes across as a bit clinical at times. There is a lot to glean about Washington's life and manner from the documentary tone shown here, but it can be a bit sterile. Then again, that could be as much a reflection of subject as author.
Having said that, it's a good start to a study on Washington and the age of the American Revolution. It piqued my interest in other areas that I look forward to chasing down.
I found the anecdotes to be the most interesting part. Johnson is an excellent researcher, but isn't really telling a story anywhere here. That's fine, but it comes across as a bit clinical at times. There is a lot to glean about Washington's life and manner from the documentary tone shown here, but it can be a bit sterile. Then again, that could be as much a reflection of subject as author.
Having said that, it's a good start to a study on Washington and the age of the American Revolution. It piqued my interest in other areas that I look forward to chasing down.
June 4, 2024
Surprisingly boring. I was hoping this brisk little read would be a good introduction for young teens, but the reading is probably too advanced for most ~13/14 year old readers. I could look past that and encourage my students to stretch themselves were it a compelling enough read, but it is too near a plain-Jane text book to make the juice worth the squeeze. And for all that, it's really not that elucidating about Washington. It tries to keep its distance from the man and be impartial, but might've created so much distance that it keeps Washington a stranger. I'm tracking that it's tough to deliver a comprehensive picture of such a giant of history as Washington in just ~150 pages, but I think there's gotta be an author out there that could do it better.
November 27, 2023
Typically modern authors are so desperate to be seen as Good People that they are inclined to denigrate those men who made their lives, even their nations, possible. I was pleased to read Paul Johnson was not one of them.
I did detect a contradiction however: Paul both says that the Southern states would not have joined the Union had slavery been placed on the course of extinction AND it was a failure of Washington for not doing so. Sorry, it's one or the other. If it could not have been done, it was not a failure. Here Johnson does fall into that modern trap of demanding the impossible of the dead.
I did detect a contradiction however: Paul both says that the Southern states would not have joined the Union had slavery been placed on the course of extinction AND it was a failure of Washington for not doing so. Sorry, it's one or the other. If it could not have been done, it was not a failure. Here Johnson does fall into that modern trap of demanding the impossible of the dead.
August 31, 2019
A short biography of our first President - his early life, work as a surveyor, life as a farmer, his military career and his life as president. Book short on his family life. Gives a better perspective of his life, his views (against slavery, lucky to win the Revolutionary War with lack of resources, served his country without looking for glory, ability to see need for better transportation system).
May 7, 2021
I was standing at my bookshelf looking at two biographies for George Washington. One was 900 pages and the other 100 pages. One I was pretty sure would've gained at least a four star rating and the other looked like a ho hum three star rating. Chernow's biography would have to wait. Johnson does a respectable job given the limitations of the micro-biography format. This was good if you have the right expectations.
January 22, 2023
This is the second of the Eminent Lives series I’ve read, and this one suffered primarily because it wasn’t written by Christopher Hitchens. Paul Johnson is a fine and well regarded writer/journalist/historian, but he has none of the wit and edge of Hitchens. With that mostly unfair criticism aside, I did enjoy this book. This is a great starting point for anyone interested in diving into George Washington.
July 23, 2023
حب الوطن لا يتجزأ، عامل أو موظف أو طالب أو حتى رئيس، الوطن ملك الجميع، وواجبُ على الجميع أن يحفظ مكانة الوطن ويحميها، ويحرص على رقي أرضه وتقدمها، جورج واشنطن الرئيس الأول للولايات المتحدة الأمريكية، فهم وأيقن أن الوطن ليس سلعة وأن الزعامة ليست لقب، لشك سعى جاهدًا أن يخدم وطنه، وأن يكون دعمًا قويّا له، ساهم باستقلاله، ووضع القوانين التي من شأنها أن تنظم دوامه، وتضعه على خارطة الأمم المتقدمة والصفوف الأولى، صورة مشرقة لقائد يحب وطنه فوق أي حب.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 94 reviews