|
|
May 21, 2007John Quincy AdamsIn every portrait taken at every age, his eyes just snap with intelligence. To look at John Quincy Adams, is to acquaint oneself with lightening held barely in check. He was not a man in love with the idea of being loved. He abhorred small talk and trends. Although a gifted linguist who served successfully as a foreign diplomat, it was his pragmatism more than his populism that garnered respect. Perhaps that preference would be valuable to the nation in 21st century American politics.
In John Singleton Copley’s portrait Adams is undeniably handsome but the young man in we see here - who graduated from Harvard College in two short years - seems anxious to break the pose and move on - you can envision him walking through the frame, exit, stage right, to get on with more important matters - in this he reminds me of Bobby Kennedy. Sitting for this daguerrotype (earliest photography) shortly before his death, the eyes still snap; the man seems disinterested in mere fripperies.
As a boy he watched the Battle of Bunker Hill with his mother, at a discreet distance from the fighting. Like his father he never owned a slave and never liked slavery. He loved free speech, both in concept and in practice. He skinny-dipped in the Potomac. For all his diplomatic skills, he was never one to glad-hand. An all-night pizza-and-bull session - had pizza been available in his day - would have held no allure. Attempting to explain his disinterest in crowd-pleasing he wrote, “I have no powers of acclimation.” He acknowledged that some called him a “gloomy misanthrope.” Adams got the presidency on a technicality and wrote of the office, “I can scarcely conceive a more harassing, teasing, wearying condition of existence.” If the foibles and nattering ankle biters were that annoying 200 years ago, imagine him being president in the day of internets, blogs, “netroots”, “wingnuts” and 24-hour-always-hungry news networks. Perhaps it is the technology of the age that has brought affability and a gift for hucksterism to the fore in politics, and rendered them supremely consequential. I wonder how the giants who formed our nation would fare, these days, hunkering down with Chris Matthews and Barbara Walters. Would Ben Franklin’s genius be undermined or enhanced by insta-media? Would John Adams be considered too crotchety, like Bob Dole? Would George Washington be considered too staid? Would Thomas Jefferson have to endure the wrath of Keith Olbermann for daring to play his violin while something was left unresolved in the nation? Would any of them get elected under the intense scrutiny of our age, wheren - as Don Surber notes here - so many are so easily scandalized? Failing at his bid for re-election, Adams went home to Massachusetts for just a year, then went back to congress - where he stayed for another 17 years - a powerhouse nicknamed “Old Man Eloquence.” He died at age 80 saying, “This is the end of earth; I am content.” I look at John Quincy and think, “I’d like to talk to you, to make your acquaintance, to know what you thought about things, then…what you’d think of things, now.” To which he would probably reply, with brow barking, “stop daydreaming, girl, and do something sensible!” I need to read a good biography of the man. http://theanchoressonline.com/2007/05/21/john-quincy-adams/trackback/ 12 Responses to “John Quincy Adams” |
May 21st, 2007 at 9:56 pm
One thing I love about your blog, Anchoress - you have a knack for being refreshingly random. An interesting little post, and now you’ve got me hankering for a decent biography of the man, as well - let us know if you find one, please?
May 21st, 2007 at 10:08 pm
I’d like the chance to talk with J.Q. Adams too - he’s one of the founding fathers I find most intriguing. There may be a more recent biography of him, but the one I recently read and enjoyed was Catherine Drinker Bowen’s biography. You could look for it used if you can’t find it in a library.
May 21st, 2007 at 10:43 pm
Anchoress
Your thoughts on how our Founding Fathers would have fared today is quite timely. Especially when one looks at these nonsense
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904
It is true back then that the Founders had to deal with a politcal tabloid like style of Journalism. I suggest people watch the excellent PBS show on Alexander Hamilton too see that. But today is different. The Public was engaged more. Now I am not so sure. THe days of my Grandfather where people would pack the town square to hear a politicain is long gone. Now there is way too much fluff . Political Fluff that is more competing with movie stars and custody cases and not with serious political discussion.
JH
Louisiana
May 22nd, 2007 at 7:42 am
Boy, Anchoress, you can be a pain. Just when I’m ready to delete you for being a totaly pollyanna (see above), you turn around and write something this insightful and beautiful. What am I to do about you?
I get a different feeling from the picture, one of interrogation. “What have you done with this America that we have bequeathed you.”
No hero, I avert my eyes.
May 22nd, 2007 at 8:50 am
I have to agree with Casey, this was a refreshing post. Makes me want to go out and read up on this very interesting man. Perhaps you can write some tid bits on all of our founding fathers.
May 22nd, 2007 at 9:41 am
We have had many conversations about John Q. lately around the house what with AP American History tests being studied for … interesting that the conclusions they have been studying agree greatly with those of my favorite historical fiction author, Kenneth Roberts … one of the worst presidents ever and especially when it comes to looking at his unabashed manipulation of judges to achieve his ends.
May 22nd, 2007 at 9:42 am
I should add that Kenneth Roberts was well known for using only the facts in his historical fiction novels. Fascinating books if you haven’t come across them. Oliver Wiswell is his masterpiece but I believe that Lydia Bailey covers the John Q. Adams time.
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:25 am
Igout wrote: Boy, Anchoress, you can be a pain…What am I to do about you?
You sound a lot like my husband. He’s decided the only thing to do is just love me and put up with me!
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:40 am
Anchoress–
One of the books about JQA that I liked was Paul Nagel’s John Quincy Adams: a Public Life, a Private Life.
May 22nd, 2007 at 5:29 pm
He’s decided the only thing to do is just love me and put up with me!
Well, your husband is a saint. You too, of course.
May 22nd, 2007 at 10:22 pm
I love the Adamses, John and John Quincy. I had the privledge to attend a workshop at BC last summer on John Adams; I saw this actual Copley portrait of John Quincy; and yes, Quincy looked dashing. However, I do think the photograph makes him look too stern. In fact, I believe Dickens saw this and then penned, “A Christmas Carol.”
Both men, father and son, were men of deep faith and reason; yes, surprising I know to a post-modern world, but you can be both! They had core beliefs, standing strong despite the inconsistant winds of public opinion. Father, John defended British soldiers at the Boston Masacre trial because everyone was entitled to a strong defense; this did not sit well with his cousin Samuel and other patriots. Son, John Quincy, defended the slaves at the Amistad trail, for the same reasons his father had gone against the grain and of course, John Quincy too believed in the truth that all men are born free and that slavery was a death sentence against which these slaves fought.
Great post Anchoress!
I would recommend Richard Brookhiser’s “America’s First Dynasty, the Adamses 1735-1918″ You’ll love reading about Quincy’s son, Charles Francis and then his son, the writer, Henry Adams. Check it out! This is a good overview of a family that believed in this nation and believed in public duty and service.
May 22nd, 2007 at 11:11 pm
I always found Adams’ years as a Congressman inspiring, especially given his abolitionism. The ban on mentioning slavery must have made every day seem like an uphill battle, what with people treating him as an annoyance at best. I find his presidency rather dull except for the controversy surrounding Clay’s appointment as Secretary of State and Jackson’s immediate opposition. One of the worst presidents ever? I’m not so sure about that, given the circumstances.