This book has been a mixed bag for me.
On the plus side I accomplished my goal of learning about King George, the leader of the opposition in the American Revolution. What I learned surprised me: That he was a largely benevolent leader, a family man who was faithful to his wife and dedicated to his family, a rarity among English royalty. He felt a strong sense of duty to his country and dedicated his life to service. He awoke early, exercised, abstained from drinking and worked hard throughout the course of his life. He was a good man and king.
His biggest blight, at least from the American perspective, was that his sense of duty emphasized the all-importance of empire. The idea of losing British colonies was anathema and he would leverage the full resources of his office to keep the Empire intact.
George reigned at a time when monarchy was in the descendant. The Civil War and Glorious Revolution of the preceding century gave rise to the power of Parliament to the detriment of the king. George fully recognized this and was dedicated to the service of the Constitution.
But this loss of power also fed into his belligerence concerning the rebellion in American: He drew the line at such Colonial aggrandizement. He could suffer the loss of power to Parliament, but not to the Colonies. He would fight to the finish.
And we all know how that turned out.
On the negative side, the style of this biography was unhelpful, taxing and un-enjoyable. I've read scholarly histories before; that was not the issue here.
Biographies typically follow the subject's life in narrative format, pausing at intervals to interject hypotheses, ideas or summations about his or her life. This book followed the exact opposite course: Nearly every chapter, virtually every paragraph, begins with an hypothesis about George's life, followed by specific evidence in the form of examples and quotes.
The result is almost a complete lack of narrative and a hodge-podge of ideas about the man, albeit well-sourced. It's a series of ideas and observations about the man, not the story of his life.
Lastly, the book was extraordinarily political. A very large majority of the content of the book regards the politics of George's reign, the long sequence of ministries, struggles for power, political upheavals, and the ever changing universe of adversaries and allies. The book could more accurately be titled George III: A Political History of his Reign.
On the plus side, this last point did intrigue me enough to study up on the workings of the office of Prime Minister in Great Britain, a subject of which I find fascinating when contrasted with that of the President of the United States. They seem so similar, but vastly differ in actuality.
Despite the challenge of the writing I did get what I wanted from this book, some perspective on the king that faced the rebellion of the American colonies. That accomplished, I stopped reading somewhere in Chapter 18 (of 20 total). I don't like leaving books unfinished, but the labor of it became too distasteful to proceed further.
No comments:
Post a Comment