4 ms·

Ron Chernow's biography on him is really excellent. It's so good that I think it's actually a disservice to mention that it inspired the Broadway play. If you

Ron Chernow's biography on him is really excellent. It's so good that I think it's actually a disservice to mention that it inspired the Broadway play. If you can respect Scalia's legal talent, this video where he mentions the federalist papers is interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ggz_gd--UO0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ggz_gd--UO0

jprd 3y ago
Absolutely not a disservice. Chernow has to play 2nd fiddle, though that audience is leagues larger due to the influence of the generational gem that is the musical. Everyone wins here, especially those who will _never_ read the Chernow bio, let alone finish it. Chernow is his own generational talent, though in a niche most would never look askance at. Lin-Manuel Miranda's nerdy-ass beach book inspiration has now opened a gateway for many more to discover Chernow and hopefully, rediscover the genius of the Federalist Papers and the U.S. Constitution. They wrote in the remedy to their original sin, acknowledged they were imperfect, and fought SAVAGELY to protect us from ourselves. We've haven't yet lived up to the ideal, but we (U.S.) have also not yet let that idea die.
- billfruit 3y ago
  Isn't Chernow a bit too referential towards his subject? Gore Vidal for example has much more cynical view of George Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton and Aaron Burr. I recommend Gore Vidal's "Burr", an account a lot of the early days of the US with Burr as the focal point. "Burr (1973) portrays the eponymous anti-hero as a fascinating and honorable gentleman, and portrays his contemporary opponents as mortal men; thus, George Washington is an incompetent military officer, a general who lost most of his battles; Thomas Jefferson is a fey, especially dark and pedantic hypocrite who schemed and bribed witnesses in support of a false charge of treason against Burr, to whom he almost lost the presidency in the 1800 United States presidential election; and Alexander Hamilton is an over-ambitious opportunist whose rise in high politics was by General Washington's hand." -- from Wikipedia
  - calgarymicro 3y ago
    I wouldn't recommend relying too heavily on an explicitly fictionalized novel for an accurate historical narrative, even if Vidal did attempt to ground it in fact (with some notable exceptions, such as the instigating factor behind the infamous duel).
Georgelemental 3y ago
That Scalia video is a classic, highly recommended
WalterBright 3y ago
I read Chernow's biography of Rockefeller, "Titan". It's an excellent biography. But it has one amusing flaw. In a chapter he'll present facts about Rockefeller, and then have a summation. The summation is the popular view of Rockefeller, while the facts in the rest of the chapter tend to contradict it.
- arkis22 3y ago
  If the summation of the popular view is at odds with the facts of the man, is that a flaw, or perhaps the natural contradiction of Rockefeller as a human being? The title is "Titan", but he dies just like all of us. I can't help but think of the ending of Barry Lyndon or The Seventh Seal
  - WalterBright 3y ago
    Since Chernow never explained this, I suspect he just couldn't break free of the conventional view. For example, in the chapter on the anti-trust trial, Chernow concluded that Rockefeller had an unstoppable monopoly that needed the government to reign it in (the conventional view). Yet in the text he wrote that throughout the trial, Standard Oil's market share steadily declined and Rockefeller was unable to stem the retreat. There was no explanation of the discrepancy. A different take on this is "Nothing Like It In The World" by Ambrose. It's about the building of the first continental railroad. Ambrose writes in it that he fully embraced the conventional view of it, but his research for the book turned everything on its head, and he came out of the experience with a very different view. I do have copy of Chernow's tome on Hamilton, but haven't got around to reading it yet.
    - macintux 3y ago
      > Yet in the text he wrote that throughout the trial, Standard Oil's market share steadily declined and Rockefeller was unable to stem the retreat. The general consensus seems to be that the antitrust trial against Microsoft had a significant impact on the company's behavior long before it concluded, forcing it to stop acting like a bull in a china shop. I don't see the two views on Standard Oil as necessarily being contradictory, but I'll freely admit I'm completely ignorant of the situation.
banana_feather 3y ago
[flagged]
- psunavy03 3y ago
  "The mirage" of a Supreme Court justice's legal talent? Come on. That's childish, whichever side of the aisle you're on. Might as well also talk about "the mirage" of Elena Kagan's legal talent. Unless what matters isn't their legal talent, but whether they agree with your priors?
  - banana_feather 3y ago
    [flagged]
jesusofnazarath 3y ago
[dead]
hackernewds 3y ago
Scalia is fantastically eloquent and objective in this disposition. He's my inspiration for adopting the principle of textualism.
- watwut 3y ago
  And motivated reasoning

jprd 3y ago

Absolutely not a disservice. Chernow has to play 2nd fiddle, though that audience is leagues larger due to the influence of the generational gem that is the musical. Everyone wins here, especially those who will _never_ read the Chernow bio, let alone finish it. Chernow is his own generational talent, though in a niche most would never look askance at. Lin-Manuel Miranda's nerdy-ass beach book inspiration has now opened a gateway for many more to discover Chernow and hopefully, rediscover the genius of the Federalist Papers and the U.S. Constitution. They wrote in the remedy to their original sin, acknowledged they were imperfect, and fought SAVAGELY to protect us from ourselves. We've haven't yet lived up to the ideal, but we (U.S.) have also not yet let that idea die.

billfruit 3y ago
Isn't Chernow a bit too referential towards his subject? Gore Vidal for example has much more cynical view of George Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton and Aaron Burr. I recommend Gore Vidal's "Burr", an account a lot of the early days of the US with Burr as the focal point. "Burr (1973) portrays the eponymous anti-hero as a fascinating and honorable gentleman, and portrays his contemporary opponents as mortal men; thus, George Washington is an incompetent military officer, a general who lost most of his battles; Thomas Jefferson is a fey, especially dark and pedantic hypocrite who schemed and bribed witnesses in support of a false charge of treason against Burr, to whom he almost lost the presidency in the 1800 United States presidential election; and Alexander Hamilton is an over-ambitious opportunist whose rise in high politics was by General Washington's hand." -- from Wikipedia
- calgarymicro 3y ago
  I wouldn't recommend relying too heavily on an explicitly fictionalized novel for an accurate historical narrative, even if Vidal did attempt to ground it in fact (with some notable exceptions, such as the instigating factor behind the infamous duel).

Georgelemental 3y ago

That Scalia video is a classic, highly recommended

WalterBright 3y ago

I read Chernow's biography of Rockefeller, "Titan". It's an excellent biography. But it has one amusing flaw. In a chapter he'll present facts about Rockefeller, and then have a summation. The summation is the popular view of Rockefeller, while the facts in the rest of the chapter tend to contradict it.

arkis22 3y ago
If the summation of the popular view is at odds with the facts of the man, is that a flaw, or perhaps the natural contradiction of Rockefeller as a human being? The title is "Titan", but he dies just like all of us. I can't help but think of the ending of Barry Lyndon or The Seventh Seal
- WalterBright 3y ago
  Since Chernow never explained this, I suspect he just couldn't break free of the conventional view. For example, in the chapter on the anti-trust trial, Chernow concluded that Rockefeller had an unstoppable monopoly that needed the government to reign it in (the conventional view). Yet in the text he wrote that throughout the trial, Standard Oil's market share steadily declined and Rockefeller was unable to stem the retreat. There was no explanation of the discrepancy. A different take on this is "Nothing Like It In The World" by Ambrose. It's about the building of the first continental railroad. Ambrose writes in it that he fully embraced the conventional view of it, but his research for the book turned everything on its head, and he came out of the experience with a very different view. I do have copy of Chernow's tome on Hamilton, but haven't got around to reading it yet.
  - macintux 3y ago
    > Yet in the text he wrote that throughout the trial, Standard Oil's market share steadily declined and Rockefeller was unable to stem the retreat. The general consensus seems to be that the antitrust trial against Microsoft had a significant impact on the company's behavior long before it concluded, forcing it to stop acting like a bull in a china shop. I don't see the two views on Standard Oil as necessarily being contradictory, but I'll freely admit I'm completely ignorant of the situation.

banana_feather 3y ago

[flagged]

psunavy03 3y ago
"The mirage" of a Supreme Court justice's legal talent? Come on. That's childish, whichever side of the aisle you're on. Might as well also talk about "the mirage" of Elena Kagan's legal talent. Unless what matters isn't their legal talent, but whether they agree with your priors?
- banana_feather 3y ago
  [flagged]

jesusofnazarath 3y ago

[dead]

hackernewds 3y ago

Scalia is fantastically eloquent and objective in this disposition. He's my inspiration for adopting the principle of textualism.

watwut 3y ago
And motivated reasoning