thomas jefferson: a life by willard sterne randall

instead of the usual, “i just finished” line that i start my reviews with, i must first confess that i finished this book a couple of weeks ago, but my busyness (or is that word just a lame excuse for laziness? you be the judge) has kept me from writing my review until now.

with that said, i finished thomas jefferson: a life by willard sterne randall.
i have many good things to say about this book. i am in the middle of a revolution and early american formation kick. anything covering this time period is something that i want to read. hopefully this doesn’t surprise you, but this book fits the bill. i thoroughly enjoyed this book, i recommend it, and at some point i will probably read it again.

randall writes in a style is very matter-of-fact. it is much more “old school history” in the sense that he obviously didn’t write it as if trying to write a story so enthralling that anyone would read and enjoy it. it’s written almost more in a text book style than a book targeted to mass audiences. in my opinion, too many authors write their historical accounts of times, people, and/or events in a style that they use to try to “transcend” genres so that readers who hate history because it is dry, boring, and nothing but dates and facts will want to read it. “readable” history is the trend right now (see mccullough, winik, brokaw, etc). that’s not a slam against those authors, that’s just their style. it’s also a style that has a broader appeal to readers, therefore selling more and increasing the royalties for the author and the sales for the publisher. the point i’m trying to make is that he seems to say “screw the masses. this book is for those who want to read history because it is facinating, not for those who want to read an interesting story only to find out it’s true.” anyways…

jefferson lived quite a life and randall gets it all in there. jefferson is such a fascinating character to me. he was so incredibly bright and talented. sorry that’s a bit of an understatement, he was absolutely brilliant. his mind moved faster and in more places that i can ever hope to steer mine. he was accomplished on so many levels, it astounds me. by the time he was my age, he had graduated with honors from william and mary, passed the bar exam, and had developed a large and wealthy client list, was considered a peer by lawyers who were twice his age and were well established within the legal community and within the virginia gentry. at the same time his flaws were almost as pronounced. the fact that he regularly denounced slavery, but never freed his own slaves (and would have been completely broke without them). one other thing i noticed is that he was so smart and so intelligent that whenever someone disagreed with him, he would get so frustrated. it would blow his mind that people could be so ignorant. he didn’t’ always stop to see where the other person was coming from and what shaped their opinions. of course, this isn’t a fault that is uniquely his. i find that the smarter we are as humans, the more upset we get when others disagree with us.

one thing i didn’t like about randall’s biography of jefferson is that reading through the pages, i got the feeling that he was a bit of a jefferson apologist. when randall approached difficult subjects with jefferson (slavery, sally hemmings) he seemed to almost discount them. when dealing with the slavery issue he tread very lightly and was very apologetic of jefferson’s behaviors and (sometimes) double standards. in terms of sally hemmings, he completely denounced the affair as impossible and totally unrealistic. while no one knows for sure if they did have an affair, no one knows for sure that they didn’t.

again, i enjoyed this book immensely and absolutely recommend it. for those who don’t know much about thomas jefferson, you have to read at least on biography about him. his life, his skills, his contradictions are so impressive and interesting that you will learn something new about him and about yourself. it’s definitely worth the time investment.

kansas does it

so kansas won the national championship last night.  i’m not going to say i called it or anything…but i did.  in the espn bracket challenge, i finished roughly 150,000th.  that sounds ridiculously high, but considering there were like 3,000,000 entries, finishing in the 95th percentile isn’t too bad.

so it sounds like this was one of the best games in recent memory.  pat forde says that mario chalmers shot at the end of regulation was the best final four shot since keith smart’s shot in ‘87.  chalmers’ shot was second to smart’s shot only because chalmers’ shot didn’t win the game for iu.  had he managed to make the shot and give the national championship to iu then he would have been #1 on my list for so many reasons.

i didn’t get to see the game.  i was were i normally am when something exciting happens:  at work.  i wasn’t all that upset about not seeing the game.  after all, my team isn’t in it.  i thought it would be a good game, but not a great game.  oops.  guess i was wrong.  oh well.

congrats to bill self and the kansas jayhawks.  you played a great game and entertained the nation.

iu basketball

on wednesday, indiana university hired tom crean as their new head basketball coach. listening to the press conference (you can find it here, here, or here) was my first opportunity to be proud of my team in a long time. this year has been so disappointing that, i half expected the university to screw up this hire, bring in someone who isn’t good enough, and i would be left to loathe college basketball for several years. instead my hoosiers made the perfect hire, who said all the right things, and verified my belief that as bad as the last couple of years have been, iu is still a preeminent program. in fact, he made me want to go out, but a pair of their candy striped warm up pants and a crean and crimson t-shirt and wear them everywhere i go.

here is how i know coach crean is going to be successful at iu.

1) he recruits the right kids to fit his style of play. he doesn’t go out at recruit nothing buy mcdonalds all-americans and then worry how he’s going to find enough shots for all of them. he recruits good players that fit into his system, not the other way around.

2) his marquette teams are athletic enough that they try to run up the floor and get quick transition baskets. if the defense doesn’t bend, then his team is totally comfortable transitioning into a motion offense. (for those of you who have only seen the hoosiers of the last eight years, this is when the players are constantly moving and setting screens until someone gets an open shot).

3) his teams play smothering defense. the constantly follow the ball. there aren’t quite wisconsin, but they are impressive to watch.

4) even when his teams lose, there isn’t a question of whether or not they put a maximum amount of effort into the game. they did, they just got beat. again, it’s been a couple of years since i’ve been able to say definitively that the hoosiers gave it their best and just got beat.

5) coach crean is a tough coach. his players love him and respect him because he will get in your face if he needs to. he’s not as mean as coach knight, and not as nice as coach davis, but a happy medium. as much as you will never question a game’s outcome because of his players effort, we will also never question a game’s outcome based on the coaching.

6) he knows how to work the media. none of the coaches in my lifetime have been able to say that. knight despised the media, davis was always confused and defensive, sampson was mute, and dakich’s short time was spent making jokes because that is what the teams play had become.

7) read this and remember it because this point is the most important over the short-term for the program. coach crean will unite hoosier nation which has been divided since 2000 when coach knight was fired. in his press conference he held an obvious (hopefully you saw it) hand out the bridge the divide by saying that one of his most memorable events as a child was meeting kent benson. benson might not be the most important person in hoosier nation, but he IS the most outspoken. making an effort immediately to bridge the gap is as good as winning 30 games the first year. having a unified fan base, boosters, and alumni will go a long way towards making sure that the program has support (emotional and monetary) and make sure that the school and community puts it’s best foot forward for recruits.

thoughts?