Mark Gilroy

Bringing Books to Life!

John Adams on America, Democracy, Morality, and More

John Adams brilliant insights on America, democracy, morality, and a wide range of issues and ideas deserve more attention than this almost forgotten – and recently rediscovered – Founding Father has sometimes received.

Our first vice president and second president was John Adams, who stepped out of the shadows of Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, and other Founding Fathers in the modern consciousness with the surprise bestselling biography by David McCullough and the HBO miniseries based on it.

Here are just a few quotes from the Massachusetts school teacher, lawyer, and politician – who went to Harvard to study for the ministry at his father’s encouragement – and the father of a political dynasty, including his son, John Quincy Adams, the 6th President of the United States. But just a warning. Of all the Founding Fathers, perhaps none was more of a curmudgeon than Adams.

I always consider the settlement of America with reverence and wonder, as the opening of a grand scene and design in providence, for the illumination of the ignorant and the emancipation of the slavish part of mankind all over the earth.

In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm, and three or more is a congress.

I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce, and agriculture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain.

No man who ever held the office of president would congratulate a friend on obtaining it.

We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other.

Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide.

There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.

Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud, is the only maxim which can ever preserve the liberties of any people.

Be not intimidated… nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your liberties by any pretense of politeness, delicacy, or decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for hypocrisy, chicanery and cowardice.

The jaws of power are always open to devour, and her arm is always stretched out, if possible, to destroy the freedom of thinking, speaking, and writing.

The Professor and the Madman – The Making of a Dictionary

The making of the Oxford English Dictionary.

Simon Winchester. Harper Collins. Published in 1998.

The prompt for writing a quick review of this book is that I just started a third title by the same author, Simon Winchester, The Crack at the Edge of the World, and couldn’t help but remember with fondness – yes, I used the word ‘fondness’ in regard to reading a book about how a dictionary was written – when I read The Professor and the Madman. Winchester is to my knowledge the developer and foremost practitioner of an immensely entertaining historical-narrative literary style whereby he lures us into turning page after page (rapidly) of a history book by telling a truth-is-stranger-than-fiction story that reads like pulp fiction, and yes, which is set within a larger historical context and moment.

Erik Larson followed the pattern in Devil in the White City , introducing us to the 1893 Chicago World’s Fair and how it changed the history of America through the lurid tale of a serial killer who was as big as Jack the Ripper before Jack found his first victim. In some parallel ways, Sebastian Junger employed this model, telling us about seemingly mundane things – the deep sea fishing industry, the physics of waves, the types of North Atlantic storms, and a little of the history of Gloucester, Massachusetts – through the sensational story of the crew of the Andrea Gail in his book The Perfect Storm, even better known for the George Clooney movie.

What is the historical setting and importance of the Professor and the Madman? The writing of the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), of course. Now, without making any claims of being an academic, I must admit that topic kind of, sort of interested me anyway. I like the history of words and their definitions. But enough to read a book? I’m not sure. Even if it’s less than 300 pages? Still not sure. It may never have reached the top of the stack. But even if you aren’t that interested in what made the OED the finest reference work of its day – and perhaps the greatest reference ever created – the story of Dr. Charles Minor, the man who contributed thousands of entries, all painstakingly researched and neatly written from his home in Crowthorne, England, just 50 miles from Oxford, just might hook you.

What tied Minor to the OED and made his role so remarkable? Was it that he was an American creating something so peculiarly British? Nope. There was no snobbery as a sub theme. That he was a veteran of the Civil War, where he was surgeon for the troops of the North? Interesting, but not interesting enough to bring a dictionary to life. Was it that he maintained a long distance relationship with Professor James Murray – strictly by correspondence – for decades, despite numerous invitations from Murray to attend fundraising dinners or just stop by the office to meet due to his prolific 10 thousand entries? Not even close. Was it that he thought Irishmen were … and that one night he went out and … and because of that he ended up living in … ? Yes. Yes. And yes.

Spoiler alert. If you don’t want to know what each “yes” represents, now is the time to stop! [Read more…]

Anatomy of an Apology

In his first apology he really didn’t apologize for what he said but rather defended himself and even took shots at the ones he was apologizing to for making a big deal out of a possibly inappropriate joke he told that was the reason he was apologizing in the first place. Make sense?

I may have to read that sentence again myself. Slowly. During this first apology, one of the things David Letterman explained was that the criticism he was receiving was based, at least in part, on a simple misunderstanding that could easily be cleared up. When he joked that Todd and Sarah Palin’s daughter was getting ‘knocked up’ by Alex Rodriguez during the 7th inning stretch at Yankee Stadium, he thought people would know he meant the Palin’s 18-year-old daughter, not the 14-year-old daughter who was actually at the game and who was therefore “erroneously” assumed to be the one he was referring to.

As a parent, I would have felt a whole lot better if he was referring to my 18-year-old and not my 14-year-old, wouldn’t you?

Letterman also explained he’s told other jokes that he’s not proud of. Again, just the kind of reasoning to help things simmer down in a hurry.

Surprisingly, this first apology wasn’t received well by the Palins and others. Even women’s groups not known as staunch Palin supporters expressed dissatisfaction.

So five days later Letterman apologized again, but this time he really meant it. Somber newscasters declared this second apology attempt as “heartfelt” and “sincere.” The first apology was an obvious mulligan. In a blame reversal that even Bill Clinton would envy, a number of commentators took the time to criticize Governor Palin for inflammatory words of her own in an interview with Matt Lauer on NBC’s Today Show when she said it would be wise to keep Willow away from Dave. Matt didn’t like that. Not at all. But as a hard nosed journalist that’s his job. And think about it. Palin did have her nerve picking on a helpless 62-year-old television icon, going so far as to make a statement that could be construed to indicate that she thinks he is a dirty old man, when expressing outrage over what was said about her 18-year-old daughter – though not the 14-year-old Willow as was previously mentioned.

Robert Schlesinger opined in his U.S. News and World Report blog that in her statement Palin had equaled Letterman for “cheap and classless jokes.” I might agree with Schlesinger but it’s still not clear she was joking and if it is determined she was, it was only one joke, not jokes.

So during the same week that protestors have taken to the streets in Tehran what does this compelling news episode teach us about apologizing? Just maybe, we ought to be straightforward, heartfelt, and sincere the first time out of the chute as opposed to a face-saving, self-serving, self-righteous, and sarcastic approach. Most of us know that’s easier said than done. So if we can’t pull off the contrite and clear method it seems that blaming the person we’ve wronged for putting us in a position to botch our apology is a good backup plan … it worked just fine for David Letterman after all.