This is a good read for going to bed. There are vignettes about each founder. They tend to get repetitive if you read them all at once, but read one at a time are very interesting.

While Gordon Wood is one of the leading historians of the 18th Century nascent American republic and his depth and breadth of knowledge is remarkably impressive, this book comes across as a pale version of Joseph Ellis's "Founding Brothers," with the essays on select founders. Too often does the author come across as lecturing the reader about these significant revolutionary men instead of simply weaving a binding and mesmerizing analysis that continually engages the reader upon each page turn.

There were under five misused words throughout this book that escaped the eyes of a diligent proofreader (but spellcheck didn't catch due to them not being misspellings) which unacceptably reflects a cursory effort on behalf of such an esteemed writer like Mr. Wood.

Nonetheless, in spite of these shortcomings, he does write an interesting series of essays about these characters. I thought it was refreshing to see an overview of Thomas Paine included in this book as he is often overlooked. I also give the author due credit for properly defining and explaining the word "disinterested," which in today's lexicon tends to erroneously mean "uninterested" when in fact it should quite correctly mean "fair" and "impartial."

Overall, this is a good read yet with glaring imperfections. I would recommend Joseph Ellis's "Founding Brothers" instead for a better written and more enjoyable take on these important characters and events of this era.

Some of the founders this book included are Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison, John Adams, and Paine. The tendancy of some today is to try and paint these men as villains, as evil men. This book was refreshing because it didnt try to tear them down, nor did it try to white-wash their flaws. One thought I liked: "Beneath all the images, beneath all the allegorical Jeffersons, there once was a human being with every human frailty and foible. Certainly Jefferson's words and ideas transcended his time, but he himself did not. The human Jefferson was essentially a man of the 18th century, a very intelligent and bookish slaveholding southern planter, enlightened and progressive, no doubt, but, like all human beings, possessing as many weaknesses as strengths, as much folly as wisdom, as much blindness as foresight." It is encouraging that God doesnt require that we be "perfect" before we can take part in His work.

Beautifully written, and a useful one-stop for those who already know some revolutionary war history to gain deeper insight into the unique legacy and true character of the major founders.

Gordon Wood is a conservative in the classic sense, and it is his insightful essay on the decline of the intellectual of leadership of great men (and the rise of the unthinking masses) which I found most original and a little saddening.

Highly recommended.

Wood has set down biographical portraits of several of the Founding Fathers. This isn't a complimentary one. While Wood claims to depart from the 20th Century "debunk" movement among historians, he nevertheless brings down most of these characters a few notches, most especially John Adams ("irrelevant"), Thomas Jefferson ("shallow"), and James Madison ("warped"). Washington comes off pretty well as, in a way, Aaron Burr. This book doesn't help, I'm afraid. In our day and age we need to rediscover heroes and recalibrate our societal objectives. Wood let me down.

I've recently been obsessed with re-learning about the Revolutionary War time period. This book wasn't what I thought it would be - a history of the time. Instead it was a collection of essays on several of the important men from the era - it was a good read.

"Nearly all of what follows has been previously published, either in articles, reviews, or books . . ."
- Gordon S. Wood

And there you have it. If you have ever read anything about the eight founding fathers (founders) briefly summarized in this book then don't bother with Gordon Wood's Revolutionary Characters.

On the other hand, if you never read anything about George Washington et al, don't remember anything from high school or college and are not interested in learning a whole lot, then Wood's work will provide you a few details that you can quickly forget.

This book is primarily an op ed piece that is highly repetitive, makes liberal use of "we" (as in Americans, historians, or scholars) and has a good deal of absolute statements with little support. "No one . . ." might be Wood's favorite phrase.

The first four chapters are essentially a puff piece while the last four actually do a little bit of tearing down. Wood didn't have much to say about Thomas Paine or Aaron Burr which is why their chapters might be the shortest.

The primary issue is that Wood is trying to demonstrate how the founders were different but doing it within 20 to 30 (or so) pages. Not an easy thing to do and ultimately Wood fails to meet his goal. The amount of space allotted per founder was simply not enough to provide the detailed support Wood needed.

The eight (Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison, Paine, and Burr) are all important to American history. Yet were they truly "different" or were they just in the right place at the right time and willing to seize an opportunity? If the latter, then they are like many other historical Americans students are forced to study, e.g. Rockefeller, Ford, Vanderbilt, etc.

But Wood wants the reader to think it's the former and spends 240 pages (not counting the epilogue) summarizing the gentlemanly (or not in Burr's case) characteristics these men possessed and how they related to the Enlightenment.

There are even historical errors and/or historical, um, forgetfulness in the book. For example, Wood says that Washington was the only one to free his slaves when in reality Jefferson did release a handful himself.

And in a twist of irony, Wood was more than willing to note that the founders were amateur writers, and yet Wood himself uses the same term or phrase over and over within a span of few sentences (hello thesaurus). How many times can one use the word calculated in the same paragraph (see Ben Franklin's chapter)?

Ultimately I found this to be a rather boring book.

Excellent overview of the various influential founders and the competing ideas. A relevant read today and a good book to read before delving into more in depth biographies of each individual . Relevant reading still today .

Revolutionary Characters by Gordon S. Wood is a book that aims to discover “what made the founders different?” I found it to be a super helpful, if slightly academic, companion to a lot of the Presidential biographies I have been reading. Of particular interest was the author’s supposition and conclusion that by planting the seeds of democracy, the Founders actually sowed the seeds of their own demise. They saw themselves as the new aristocracy, qualified to lead and govern by virtue of education, intellect, and ability, not land, wealth, and birth. But the republican principles they espoused gave way to the democratic principles we know today, thus ensuring there would never be a generation of American leaders like Washington, Jefferson, Adams, et al: “If we want to know why we can never again replicate the extraordinary generation of the Founders, there is a simple answer: the growth of what we today presumably value most about American society and culture – egalitarian democracy…the Founders had succeed only too well in promoting democracy and equality (of opinion, influence, and right to rule) among ordinary people; indeed, they succeeded in preventing any duplication of themselves.”

Interesting book about the characteristics and relationships of and between our founding fathers. I have read a lot on this subject already, so I did not learn a whole lot of new information. However, there were some interesting insights into these men, and overall it was an enjoyable read.

Great book. I wish this is how we were taught about the founding fathers in school. It just reinforces how far we haven't come in our political and personal hangups. It might be time for the next Revolution...

I love history especially that of our Revolution so I was looking forward to reading this book. I wish I could say I enjoyed it but I did not. Certainly Wood's scholarship and writing are not at fault as the book is quite well researched and written. Unfortunately, it is a book that only a reader devoted to historical scholarship and political science is likely to enjoy. While the book offers chapters on several of our Founders the book is really about their various political ideas and philosophies. It then becomes more of a history of the rise and fall of the American gentleman in politics before and after the Revolution and the adoption of the Constitution. It would appear that the Federalist and Republican Founders had their ideas of what our country should become and who should lead it and they were both undone by the nature of the American people. On the whole I didn't learn anything I didn't already know and what I didn't know really wasn't all that enlightening.