Challenges discussion

Just thought I'd open this up for when we're ready to discuss. Let me know if everyone else is OK with breaking this up into discussion by section/part.

I think that is a smart idea to break things up- forgot to say 'aye'.

I'm to where Jefferson is now Secretary of State, so about 200 pages in I think.

As I said in the other thread, I am thoroughly absorbed in Meechum's style, something about it makes Jefferson come alive more than Chernov or McCullough. It really clicks with me. Also, this is the first book I've been reading and using an audiobook dually to read it- the other two didn't have an audiobook at my library. Something about an animated narrator helps too (Ed Hermann RIP).

My opinion of Jefferson has definitely changed too from my initial impression of him from Adam's biography. He is a more layered and nuanced- a man in love, torn from his family, duty-bound, that kind of thing.

*Forgive me- too much House of Cards- Meacham

What is it about the writing style that is grabbing you? It's funny but I was much more into McCullough's writing. So we're having pretty much opposite experiences!

Meg I totally agree with you that Jefferson came across as an ass in the Adams book. I read American Sphinx next and it continued to degrade my opinion of Jefferson. I had always liked the guy from when I toured Monticello as a teenager. I was impressed by all his interests and his home was amazing. I went ahead and got the Meacham book and I already like Jefferson again after just reading the prologue. Thank goodness. Although, I was totally creeped out to read that Sally Hemmings was his wife's enslaved half sister. It will be interesting to see where this book goes.

I think we're all touching on a challenge that comes with reading them in these order. I can't shake the negative feelings I have towards TJ after reading Chernow and McCullough. And I feel like Meacham avoids/overlooks a lot of his actions that left me with that negative impression. So I can't help but feeling like Meacham isn't giving us the whole story. But maybe it was Chernow and McCullough who skewed the story first. I can't tell, but it's hard to draw a line between them.

So I finished the book the other day and I have to say I was underwhelmed. I think it was more Meacham's writing than anything. I didn't buy his larger thesis about Jefferson being an expert user of power and I didn't care for his style as a whole. Knowing that Jefferson was such a complex individual, I was hoping to encounter a more engaging person, but that just never happened for me. I don't know if it was the inevitable comparison to the Jefferson we saw in our earlier books, but I just thought Jefferson would be more lively than he comes across in Meacham's presentation. What have the rest of you thought?

Jefferson's expertise is portrayed as smoke and mirrors: Having other people put their names on his ideas so he can avoid conflict. The apparently unwritten rule at Monticello that his relationship with Sally Hemmings was not to be mentioned is another example of power through denial or concealment. That he was an expert user of power is evident in his getting his way despite (in most cases) not proclaiming the power to do so. For me, the fact that he was so trusted and revered, despite not being a good public speaker or dressing the part, reveals his power. His, like Benjamin Franklin's and to some degree George Washington's, was a power built on the avoidance of conflict and unnecessary speech; listening, observing, and then shaping the opinions of others behind the scenes. I think Meacham did what he wanted, although I am finding the text less than fulfilling in other ways.