If you are only going to read 1 book about Adams ... this is not it! However, you are want to really understand Adams, this is a must read! I feel this book is the perfect addition to John Adams - where McCullough details a full biography and explains only some of the thought process, Passionate Sage, looking over many of the letters of Adam's long retirement, really describes his personality (but there is no biography - it's understood you already know the basic facts, like his rupture with Jefferson, his fights with the high Federalists etc.) It is clear how much Ellis likes Adams, and I often laughed out loud at his descriptions. It is truly like talking about your genius but irascible uncle, who you love but also astounds you with his temperament.

A lot has been written about our founding fathers, yet, I suspect to date we have not had such an insightful look at John Adams. Ellis who is an excellent writer and storyteller produced a compelling case for Adams status as "best of the best" founding fathers. It is obvious that Ellis is big fan of Adams, yet, he does balance his praise by acknowledging the attributes that have kept Adams in the shadows particularly in comparison to his protégé, Thomas Jefferson who is celebrated for his wisdom even to the extent of a memorial in Washington, DC. Adams has far less adulation afforded to him, not only Jefferson but other founding fathers such as Madison and Hamilton.
Ellis makes a interesting comparison of style and intellect between Nixon and Kennedy, and it is used effectively to contrast Adams and Jefferson. There are many similarities between these four men and a quote from Nixon seems to make the argument; Nixon said, " when people look at Kennedy, they see what they want to be, yet, when they look at me they see what they are! Ellis makes this quote come alive when he contrasts Adam and Jefferson.
It is clearly illustrated in this book that Adams had a great mind, Ellis, as well as, 21st century historians believe that Adams may have been the most notable thinker of the age. He understood the dynamics that drove the country in 1770, and almost in a mystic way, how it would appear in the future even to the extent of its decline, which we are seeing today. Adams seemed to have had the clearest understanding of the elemental urges of mankind and this contrasted with the Jefferson liberal view that trusted the instincts of the people. While Ellis presents the Adams, who saw the need for government to be the check and balance on the depravity of man; Adams mystical view has proved correct in the 21st century.
Ellis emphasized that both Adams and Jefferson were educated in the classics of Greek and Roman governance. They were also profoundly affected by the French Revolution. Each man was present in France to see the Revolution and each man saw that Revolution differently. Adams was frightened by the mob rule, the brutality and killing while Jefferson saw the beauty of the uprising of the people. This contributed to the animosity between the two men that lasted most of their lives until they were able to reconcile in their twilight years.
We are grateful for this reconciliation because the resulting correspondence has provided much insight into the thoughts of the two founding fathers. Ellis points out that the tide of discovery by historians because of all of Adams correspondence in his twilight years has exposed the brilliance of Adams and places him second to only Washington in the ranks of the founders of this country. This book is valuable historical research with 200 pages of notes and bibliography, it is not just a professionally written book but also a valuable historical document.
I first read this book in 2018, then recently picked it up again and enjoyed it a second time. I think the two books Adam's authored are part of his legacy. The two books Adam's wrote must be added to this review; the first "The Defense" makes the case that Aristocrat's and their kind will always be with us. The point digresses from Jefferson's view of the rule by the people. There have always been aristocrats and the synonyms: nobleman · noblewoman · lord · lady · peer · peeress · peer of the realm · patrician · grandee, all apply even to Communism! Certain people always drive the big cars (or are driven) while the peasants walk. The party elite enjoyed privileges such as better food and housing accommodations, so there is never a utopian commonality. Jefferson's "rule of the people" is a Utopian idea that has never existed in the history of man, Jefferson influenced by the French Revolution was naïve on this point. Adam's second book " Davila" makes the obvious observation that there must be checks and balance in our governance. If not, you have what we experience today. Namely, 1%er living large while the 99% eek out an existence; Here again, Adams diverges from Jefferson. Jefferson is quoted as saying, "he who governs least, governs best". While Adams believed that government was responsible for controlling potential abuses like capitalism, slavery, and other exploitation of power. These two books set John Adams apart in his wisdom and far sighted views on governance, if only we would have listened!

John Adams is the most undervalued founding father because he presents his arguments unvarnished. His demons or Puritan background won't allow him to play nice which makes him so human.

This's described as a biography of John Adams. It isn't - it tells some anecdotes about his life, focusing on his late Presidency forwards, but nothing more. It's more a book about his political and personal philosophy.

Read as that, it's really interesting. Adams had a cynical view of human nature, both his own and in general. In general, this led him to distrust popular sentiments and try to design government so the people at large and the "natural aristocracy" could check each other. Unlike some Founding Fathers, he saw America as nothing more than promising: its destiny was not yet manifest.

But, Ellis describes Adams as having a drive to place himself where he'd be misunderstood and maligned. The very phrase "natural aristocracy" is an example - he meant "talented people," but the phrase he picked was one which every Jeffersonian waved as proof he'd betrayed the Revolution.

I'm fascinated by this person, and a lengthy meditation on his political philosophy is fascinating. But now I want all the more to actually read the biography I thought I was getting and see how this was borne out in the rest of his life.

No one understands the inner workings of the minds and personalities of the Founding Fathers like Joseph J. Ellis, and few historians write so many quotable lines. A masterful little book.

An interesting book into the inner-mechanisms of John Adams, but I still found David McCullough's book on him much better. We can see the Adams personality come out in the book and how he responded to things and events in his life. Though often overlooked, I still find him to be one of the most influential of our Founding Fathers. This is almost a book about his character rather than a biographical story. You get the inner-workings of his mind (and mindset) more than anything. A good overall book, and I do recommend, but I still wish there was still more of the narrative mixed in with it.

This was the 10th book in my journey of Presidents. I backtracked to Adams because I thought it would be a good idea to more fully understand him as a man. I previously read American Sphinx, also by Ellis, and thought it was wonderful. I expected a similar story here, and only got some of the way there. This was an early one for Ellis, and maybe he hadn't worked out the kinks yet. Parts of it were good and other dragged on. I like the familiar feel of the man I came to know through Ferling, McCullough, and on the screen through Paul Giamatti. However, there was less to learn about Adams's character here for me than I expected. The parts that were slow were just okay, but the good parts really grabbed me. I especially liked the very end where Ellis tells us what Adams might have said if he were alive today and able to comment on everything that's happened. ("Today" being 1993 of course). I'm still glad I read it, and if you're looking for that extra little bit about Adams, it's worthwhile.

This is another excellent book by author Joseph Ellis. I have to say, however, I was somewhat disappointed that I could not find explicit reference to Adams’ signing the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, given that it continues to tarnish his reputation and was a primary reason for his losing to Jefferson in the election of 1800.

That said, let me share with you what I’ve discovered researching the more or less sainted George Washington’s perhaps surprising support for the Alien and Sedition Acts. From similarly renowned author David McCullough’s later published “John Adams”:

“Though it [the Sedition Act] was clearly a violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution guaranteeing freedom of speech, its Federalist proponents in Congress insisted, like Adams, that it was a war measure, and an improvement on the existing common law in that proof of the truth of the libel could be used as a legitimate defense. … Even George Washington privately expressed the view that some public actions were long overdue punishment for their lies and unprovoked attack on the leaders of the union.”

And from from Marshall Smelser’s “George Washington and the Alien and Sedition Acts,” The American Historical Review, 01 Jan 1954, pgs 322 -334:

”I [George Washington] highly approve of the measures taken by the Government…. I even wish they had been more energetic.” In correspondence to former general Alexander Spotswood, Washington, who abhorred lies and dishonesty, “defended the Alien Act and made no mention of the Sedition Act.”

One must remember that the Alien and Sedition Acts were enacted in the time of the Quasi-War with France from 1798 to 1800. There was fear of a French invasion, as well as subversion from the large number of French and “wild” Irish immigrants and their sympathizers. While president, Washington himself had been threatened with lynching by mobs in Philadelphia stirred up by France’s “Citizen Genet” and the Democratic-Republican societies (who wanted the U.S. to join revolutionary France in its war with England), and was saved only by a yellow fever outbreak that cleared the city of many of its inhabitants. James Callender (Thomas Jeffersons’s hired journalist/scandalmonger) and Benjamin Bache (Benjamin Franklin’s grandson) were instrumental in publishing heated and often untrue charges (lies) and thus turning the press poisonously political. As seen in 1793 France with the beginning of the Terror, an unrestrained press, such as that operated by Marat, could bring a country to its knees.

Again, recall that those supporting the Alien and Sedition Acts believed that the population was effectively being incited to riot by the unrestrained press (in a conspiracy with the French) and that libel laws would protect those agitators who spoke/wrote the truth, all in a time of wartime crisis. As it turned out, Adams, after great effort and diplomacy, was able to avert the war with France. Nevertheless, and again, bitter remembrance of the passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts was a prime reason Adams lost to Jefferson in the election of 1800. It’s interesting to note that Adams signed into law the “Sedition Act” on 14 July 1798, the ninth anniversary of the day of French insurrection and mob action, Bastille Day.

But back to Ellis’ book itself: As per the majority of the previous reviewers and as a fellow author, I highly recommend it for any student of the character of John Adams and other Founders.

Great read on John Adams

Ellis is my favorite chronicler of the Revolutionary generation because he's as interested in how they thought as what they did.

In this book, he's even more interested in how they FELT. And it's an incredibly emotional read.

Superb stuff.

4.5 stars. John Adams is arguably our most misunderstood and underappreciated member of the founding generation. After nearly 150 years in the wilderness of American memory, his achievements and role in the American Revolution has become more clear over the past few decades as a result of this, and other, scholarship. If you want to learn more about Adams and the legacy he has left us, whether we fully realize it or not, this is right up your alley. This is a must read for students of American history and political thought.

Of the four Adams biographies I've read, this is the only one that I can say that I felt ambivalent about. I would not recommend this book to anyone who only wanted to read one book about John Adams.
Ellis provides an overview of Adams' political theories and does so accurately and fairly, but one would hard-pressed to nail down a compendium of his policies, accomplishments and victories that truly define the man for posterity.
More importantly, the author does a pretty amazing job of rendering a psychological profile of our nation's 2nd president. Ellis does not simply pull things from the air to critique Adams, mainly because he does not have to. There is probably no political figure that ever existed that left behind more documentation than Adams. Ellis has given the reader a very educated character portrait of the subject, not to be taken lightly.
My only real problem with this book is that I felt that the author exceeded his bounds when judging Adams emotional constitution and animation. As I read it, I felt like every outpouring of emotion from Adams was a negative in his account as far as Ellis was concerned. Adams simply did not fit the status pro quo. At times, I felt as though Ellis might be a resurrected enemy from Adams' past. A question that kept popping up in my mind was "If You don't like the man, why did you take the time to write about him?" All in all, by the end of the book I changed my mind about him and was glad I had read it. I still disagree with him on some things but he's probably more right than I am.
I recommend this book but only as an addendum to a full length biography on John Adams.