average federalists enjoyer

[McHenry to Hamilton 19 Novr. 1800)

The 18th century mean girls™

Tousard: let me tell you a secret but don't tell anyone-

(From Dairy and letters of Gouverneur Morris)

-Ron Chernow's Alexander Hamilton and John Ferling's Jefferson and Hamilton: the rivalry that forged a nation

TL;DR: I recommend reading these two biographies together to get a more comprehensive look on who Hamilton is. And if you want to know about Jefferson, better search somewhere else, as imo both biographies did a bad job at characterizing him(I'd do his biography recommendation later).

the problem with chernow:

What always irked me when reading Alexander Hamilton is how the author glossed over Hamilton's controversial actions, refusing to dig deeper or connect the dots. I often felt like if I went just one step further, tracing a connection and development of his views, policies, actions, I might uncover a deeper intention hiding beneath the surface. Yet the author rarely leads the reader to this conclusion, instead just remaining on the surface and too often, taking Hamilton's explanation(for his actions) at face value without probing further. In my opinion, this leads, not only to bias, but a failure to flesh out Hamilton's character. There is nothing more enjoyable, for a reader, to connect disparate elements together and witness how, with it, the complete portrait of a character emerges. Despite Chernow's excellent writing skill and psychological insights, to me, Hamilton's character never feels fully cohesive or alive. And the lack of a convincing thread to connect dots together is precisely the reason. What kind of vision did Hamilton have for this new-born nation? What does he care(not care) about? Where did he draw the line? Chernow did not provide me an answer that can link Hamilton's actions together. I'm not saying it should have 100% coherency: real people are complex and impossible to just be summarized into clean themes. However, Chernow assumes too much good faith, glossing over conflicting evidence even when doing so obscures the patterns emerging underneath. This flaw in characterization caused by glossing over the darker side is common in many biographies, including Jefferson and Hamilton: the rivalry that forged a nation.

Jefferson and Hamilton: the rivalry that forged a nation - its merits and its flaws

its merits

This time, the victim of such characterization flaw is Jefferson, as the author seems to excessively favor him. But before talking about this, I want to first acknowledge its merits, especially in the characterization of Hamilton.

Though far much less comprehensive than Chernow's work, Jefferson and Hamilton did a great job fleshing out Hamilton's character. Though the author criticized Hamilton way too harshly and sometimes downplay, or at least neglected to mention the importance of his accomplishment, it nevertheless provides an insightful perspective on what Hamilton is trying to achieve. I even favor this portrayal to Chernow's because it is not afraid to connect the dots: from his talk on constitutional convention to his economic policy that ties the rich to the country, to his admiration for British government and and his increasingly expansive foreign policy later in his life, it is clear that he wasn't so progressive of his time, and that he might be envisioning a sort of empire, and was willing to seize power and wealth in the hands of the few in order to achieve it. Its been a while since I read Jefferson and Hamilton, so this description comes from my vague impression, but what Im sure of is, though biased, through this book, I see a cohesive and 'alive' Hamilton.

Its flaws