Tags
American history, biographies, book reviews, Jean Edward Smith, presidential biographies, Presidents, Pulitzer Prize, Ulysses Grant
“Grant” is Jean Edward Smith’s 2001 biography of the eighteenth U.S. president. It was the 2002 finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in Biography. Smith taught at the University of Toronto for 35 years before joining the faculty of Marshall University where he is Professor of Political Science. The most recent of his dozen books are “FDR” and “Eisenhower in War and Peace.”
Smith’s biography is the most widely read of all the Ulysses S. Grant biographies and with good reason. Among the eighty-four presidential biographies I’ve read so far, Smith’s narrative has perhaps the best combinations of effortless fluidity, vivid detail, historical context and insight that I’ve encountered.
Weighing in at over 600 pages (not counting notes or bibliography) this biography feels surprisingly light while remaining appropriately erudite and serious. The half-dozen or so pages in Smith’s preface are among the most potent and thoughtful introductory pages I’ve seen written on behalf of any president.
For the first three-fourths of the book I had a hard time convincing myself to put this biography down…even for a moment. Not until Smith begins his careful five-chapter analysis of Grant’s two-term presidency does the book’s pace slow measurably. At that point the weight of Grant’s complex and sometimes controversial presidency alters the flow but not the intelligence of the text.
Smith’s description of the Mexican War is easily one of the best and most wonderfully descriptive I’ve ever read. Even Zachary Taylor’s biographers were unable to provide the same level of clarity and perspective. And, more importantly, this is the chapter where Smith begins to connect Taylor’s unique, reserved leadership style to that of the future military genius and president Grant is to become.
Despite being my fourth biography of Grant, I found details embedded in the narrative I had not seen elsewhere. But rather than seeming tedious or unnecessary (as details so often feel) they serve to enhance the story and do not weigh it down. And rather than simply providing a chronological template to Grant’s life filled with interesting nuances and minutiae, Smith regularly connects the dots for the reader by making observations other biographers occasionally ignore or miss.
Excellent in nearly every way, this biography is not quite perfect. In addition to slowing measurably during Grant’s presidency, this book suffers from at least one other flaw: after treating its audience to six-hundred pages of war, peace, poverty, fantastic military genius and perplexing presidential naiveté, the last eight years of Grant’s life are dispatched in about twenty pages.
His around-the-world trip is well chronicled and the facts surrounding his authorship of his Memoirs seem complete. Yet the book terminates one paragraph following his death. The reader is left to wonder how the world reacted to his passing or how his legacy evolved in the decades ahead. It feels a bit as though the author bumped against a publishing deadline and was forced to abruptly finish the book.
Despite my desire for a longer, more satisfying conclusion, however, this biography is excellent. It combines certain narrative elements of McCullough’s “John Adams” with the flavor and perspective provided by Doris Kearns Goodwin’s “Team of Rivals.” Simply stated, Jean Edward Smith’s “Grant” is very nearly my ideal biography; it is colorful and descriptive, consistently articulate and incredibly informative. I almost cannot imagine a better biography of Ulysses S. Grant.
Overall rating: 4½ stars
Well written book review of a well written book.
I saw your tweet about McPherson also loving this book. That article from NYT gave me a bunch more books to read
It gave me several ideas, too. I already had Chernow’s “Hamilton” on my list but I’ve added Allen Nevins’s multi-volume study of the Civil War and Keegan’s “The Face of Battle.” Good enough for McPherson? Probably good enough for me…!
Finally finished Smith’s “Grant” this morning. I still can’t believe that in my studies I hadn’t read this volume yet, but I am glad I finally did.
Your review is spot on–it is one of the best balances of context, description, and vivid detail of any biography. Like you mention about the ending, it certainly ends far too quickly. Smith could have fleshed out some sections to add about 50-75 pages and I wouldn’t have complained a bit. His writing style flows so well. His descriptions of the many successes of Grant’s presidency are appreciated, and his recognition and fair analysis of the failures seem objective.
One small area I would disagree is regarding the section on Grant’s presidency. I actually found that section just as engrossing as the Civil War battles, and honestly couldn’t put the book down in those chapters just as much as earlier ones. In fairness, however, I was already far more familiar with Grant’s Civil War experiences than those of his presidency, so I was more engaged in the chapters on his presidency simply because they were offering new insights and analysis I hadn’t been exposed to yet. I’ve ready about Grant’s presidency, but Smith had a gift to describe things so clearly and eloquently that I found it a pure joy to be reading about what any other authors might deem mere political monotony and treat it as such.
I am looking forward to Paul Kahan’s upcoming “President Grant” to learn more about Grant’s presidency, as the Civil War often steals the spotlight in any treatments of his life.
Thanks for sharing your view of Smith’s biography of Grant! It’s always interesting to read where people come away with slight differences in perspective (and gratifying to know I wasn’t completely off-the-mark!)
If and when you read Kahan’s biography please let me know what you think! I’m anxious to read it when I get to my “follow-up” items.
Still my favorite Grant biography. Smith is a brilliant biographer, being both highly readable and insightful in his analyses.
For me, JES is one of those biographers who never seems to let me down. His bios of Grant, FDR and Eisenhower were each my favorites for those respective presidents. I’m not sure how I’m going to feel about his biography of Bush…but we’ll see!
I felt like I was reading a book by a completely different author while reading “Bush.” For me, it was nothing like Smith’s other works which were ALL very well done and amazing. Reading “Bush,” it felt like I was getting Smith’s personal, unvetted opinions of Bush in much the same way you’d get your neighbors opinions while talking on the front lawn. Raw, premature, and more knee-jerk reaction than anything else. It did not feel like a well researched or reasoned analysis, more of an opinion based piece. It’s too bad, as there isn’t really a good book out there on Bush 43 (“Days of Fire” is the best right now, it’s just not a cradle to grave type biography).