Another biography, and it’s a founding father (again), by the author of a biography I read last year. Am I getting a little narrow of vision in my recreational reading? Perhaps. (For what it’s worth, I received my next book—via gift card—from my wife for Father’s Day, and it’s not a biography; it’s not even historical. What is it? Wait and see.)Perhaps I’m so interested in folks like Truman, Lincoln and Franklin because I’m so disappointed with our current crop of political leaders. This reminds me of the music played in our office cafeteria, where I’m forced to go when a lack of foresight and a time combine to deprive me of any other lunch option. The music blaring on the radio is abysmal, and I can’t wait to get back to my desk and choose a track—any track—from the 10 gigabytes or so of music on my iPod. I guess our situation could be worse as far as political prospects go. (Post-Civil War, anyone? How about 1929? Though even then, the Congress probably had an approval rating in excess of last week’s all-time low, as measure by Gallup, of 12%.)
But back to Franklin. Everyone who wasn’t completely catatonic through the U.S. school system knows the basics: runaway, printer, scientist, diplomat. Poor Richard and dozens of witticisms. I’d toss them out to Karla as I was reading: Fish and company stink after three days. The two certainties in life are death and taxes. Snug as a bug in a rug. (After a while, I’m sure she tired of this…) Over 84 years, the guy had an astonishing output of observations, maxims and generally neat writings and sayings. But his prodigious contributions live on in more significant ways as well, as the only Colonial figure to have a hand in the four great documents of the time: The Declaration of Independence, The treaties with Britain and France, and finally the Constitution. And he didn’t just sign his name, either: “We hold these truths to be self-evident” is a Franklinism, trumping earlier drafts of the same sentiment with a clear Enlightenment bias.
There have been dozens of serious studies of Franklin over the years (many of them cited by Isaacson in this book). Most of them reflect the academic fads of the times in which they were written: Franklin is variously portrayed as a libertine, conservative, atheist, believer, abolitionist, segregationist, royalist, revolutionary, egotistical, humble, and above all, fascinating historical figure. I think Isaacson’s treatment benefits from his journalistic approach. He lays out the facts as they can be ascertained, and admits when information to make a firm determination is lacking. In this way we see that Franklin, over his long life, had many conflicts. He changed his opinions and positions over the many decades of his life; partly as a reflection of the times, and partly as a result of personal growth. Had the conflict with Britain not occurred, Franklin would doubtlessly have died a happy subject of the Crown. But once convinced of the Colonies’ position, he was their most ardent supporter. His views on slavery evolved along with his own moral sense, to the point of being a strong abolitionist later in life. Even his religious convictions grew as he aged.
I think this examination of Franklin is a good biography. Isaacson’s work on Einstein was more personally compelling to me, but anyone looking for a balanced, accessible story about Franklin could do much worse than this.
