Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: rogwar on October 21, 2009, 11:07:34 PM
-
I'm somewhat concerned about posting this because of a #14 but did any of you get to see the HBO series on John Adams? It's available for rent or to buy. This last week and a half traveling in Chile I brought the DVDs with me that I borrowed from a friend. Have been watching them on my laptop. Just finished the last one tonight. I have read several books that were about or included John Adams. This just brought some of the stories and that time period to life although a true, absolute historian might butcher the series. Very interesting and rewarding series to watch.
Please keep this thread away from a discussion of politics in the late 1700s because I wish to avoid a lock if at all possible.
What did you think of the series? If you have not seen it's worth renting.
-
I thought it was a good series.
-
One of the greatest minds (and I mean great) that I know told me he thought the series was the best ever done but not purely accurate (though close). I am so curious given that description I have to check it out and see if I can catch the discrepencies.
-
My wife and I both really enjoyed the series. Parts move a little slow, and it's not an action flick that will keep the kids attention, although it has it's dramatic moments. For me, it had the effect of making people from my history lessons seem so much more real, and human, and less removed from our lives today. Without getting political here, the series explores politics and competing ideologies that motivated the men that influenced our founding documents and became our first several presidents. Mostly though, it was a human story of the really great courage of a deeply thoughtful man to rise to the challenge of his time at significant cost to himself and his family. Fans of history should love it.
:salute
-
Who is John Adams?
-
That right there speaks volumns. :old:
-
John Adams and Ben Franklin were traveling into Boston from New York when the carriage they were riding in broke a wheel. Being only three miles from their destination they decided to proceed on foot but after reaching the graveyard at the outskirts of town Franklin needed a rest and leaned on the fence of the site as he noticed a new gravestone which read 'Here lies a Lawyer and an Honest Man.' At that point he turned to his friend and said:
"Look there Adams they have buried two men in one grave."
-
I caught it on showcase when it played here and while the pacing was a tad slow at times, I thought it was an excellent historical drama
Tronsky
-
Excellent mini-series. Excellent.
-
That right there speaks volumns. :old:
Viewing history through HBO speaks volumes, asking a legit question.
Is he a famous American?
-
Are you trolling or just that stupid?
-
Must be People in Britain know little.
-
Well heck, you could have just googled it up a few posts ago as well instead of this path. One would think people in Britain would know that much.
-
Who is John Adams?
To you he would be an insurgent. :D
-
John Adams is the guy that was going around advocating freedom from the tyrant you people called a king.
-
Adams was wedged between two of the most dynamic, and intelligent men of the late 18th Century, Hamilton and Jefferson. He was a weak administrator, and completely outclassed by both of these men. He only managed a few real successes during his Presidency, most notably his policy regarding France, and the resolution of the Quasi-war. I like Adams however as there is no doubt that his moral character was of the highest caliber, and was a keen and just observer of human rights and justice. But he is somewhat reclusive in nature, which curtailed his ability to administer as he needed to during his Presidency. He frequetly retreated to his estate and left important issues on the table, undecided for long periods of time. The real Great man of this period was his predecessor, George Washington, who was able to keep both of these two dynamic personalities (Hamilton and Jefferson) largely in check, and use the best ideas of both, although Jefferson often felt he was being overlooked.
As for the series, Hamilton is not the arrogant, scheming elitist, and Jefferson is not the humble, good-natured gentleman that is presented. Both were hopelessly uncompromising, with Hamilton easily the most intelligent visionary, Jefferson, the most aristocratic and naive idealist, and Adams was the quiet spoken reclusive patriot. Still, I believe that Adams was the most faithfully done of the three, as his personality and nature was well captured by the actor, yet I will have to watch more of it to see how badly Hamilton was demonized.
-
John Adams is the guy that was going around advocating freedom from the tyrant you people called a king.
Freedom for slaves that's nice
-
Both freedom for slaves and despots. In order to keep the southern states loyal to the new union the freedom for slaves had to be given up. 'One cause at a time' Adams told Jefferson.
-
So Jefferson had slaves?
-
So Jefferson had slaves?
Over 200 of them, and was one of the only founding fathers that did not free his slaves, or a large number of them upon his death.
To Adams credit, he was the only founding father that had Zero slaves. Hamilton, possibly even more of an abolishionist than Adams, had only a couple household slaves, which came from his wife's side of the family.
-
So let me get this right he was a wonderful person who freed people from despots, and he bought and sold human beings?
-
So let me get this right he was a wonderful person who freed people from despots, and he bought and sold human beings?
That is correct. This is undoubtedly Jeffersons biggest flaw. However, it would be a mistake to discount his many other accomplishments because of this, but it is a glaring inconsistency.
-
Flaw is a nice safe word, Britain banned slavery not Adams and Jefferson.
-
Flaw is a nice safe word, Britain banned slavery not Adams and Jefferson.
:headscratch:
When did Britain ban slavery? 1945?
-
Flaw is a nice safe word, Britain banned slavery not Adams and Jefferson.
Oh, here we go.
Britain may have nominally banned slavery before it was abolished here, but up until modern times native peoples living under the British Empire may AS WELL have been slaves, because that's exactly how they were treated.
-
Native American Indians?
-
Flaw is a nice safe word, Britain banned slavery not Adams and Jefferson.
Not really...it was deemed "illegal" in 1772 but it wasn't until 1807 that Britain officially "abolished the slave trade" for the entire "British Empire". Britain's slave history is not something to overlook though, since British ships were used heavily in the slave trade and the country profited greatly from slavery.
And don't bring up the Native American Indians...they were victims of the Western European "Christianity mindset plague"...started by British immigrants.
-
Oh, here we go.
Britain may have nominally banned slavery before it was abolished here, but up until modern times native peoples living under the British Empire may AS WELL have been slaves, because that's exactly how they were treated.
One of the crucial hanging points on the Peace Treaty with England following the War was the resolution of the Slaves that were carried off by England. There were large numbers of Plantation owners that wanted their slaves back, but the treaty did not demand their return, so many in the south were sorely disappointed with the Jay Treaty. I am not sure if these slaves were freed or not while in English hands, but it seems to me that it was better to be a black man in England than in the American South at the time.
-
Quit it Frog before you get this thread locked.
Zack, people forget this our little BBS is viewed world wide. Maybe people didn't know you are British. Most Americans would know who John Adams is because he was the second president of the United States.
Adams was a lawyer in Massachusetts who served the cause of justice faithfully, even defending the British soldiers and their officer who fired upon the crowd in Boston before the war. Adams had ambitions to serve in the Kings continental government but chose instead to be guided by his conscience. He regarded with disdain the infringements of freedom imposed on the colonists, and the arrogance of King George in setting terms with the Continental Congress. Adams ultimately became the strongest advocate in the continental congress for secession from the crown. During and after the war, Adams served as an ambassador of the United States in Europe, and was eventually received by King George as a representative of the United States. While other men near him had more vision, leadership, ambition, and charisma, Adams employed his intelligence and deep wells of character to the American cause.
-
Wait a minute you missed one very important point. Jefferson was by law forbidden to free any slave that could not support themselves on their own and there was also a law forbidding the sale of slaves while under debt which Jefferson always was. This was because they were considered attached property under lean. Jefferson is the President that abolished the slave trade so overall portraying him the way a few of you have is not very honest to the facts of history.
-
Wait a minute you missed one very important point. Jefferson was by law forbidden to free any slave that could not support themselves on their own and there was also a law forbidding the sale of slaves while under debt which Jefferson always was. This was because they were considered attached property under lean. Jefferson is the President that abolished the slave trade so overall portraying him the way a few of you have is not very honest to the facts of history.
I was not aware of such restrictions on the release of slaves in Virginia. I guess that Madison had different circumstances than his Virginian companion then. Thanks for noting this point that I will most certainly research.
Stalwart:
Your points are noted on Adams behalf. I did not mean to taint Adams character in my earlier post as he is definately beyond moral reproach on a personal level.
-
I did not mean to taint Adams character in my earlier post as he is definately beyond moral reproach on a personal level.
Of course not... The series does a good job portraying Adams weakness as an administrator and politician. While Franklyn is portrayed as the consummate politician, as he surely must have been. I thought you were spot on.
-
Not really...it was deemed "illegal" in 1772 but it wasn't until 1807 that Britain officially "abolished the slave trade" for the entire "British Empire". Britain's slave history is not something to overlook though, since British ships were used heavily in the slave trade and the country profited greatly from slavery.
And don't bring up the Native American Indians...they were victims of the Western European "Christianity mindset plague"...started by British immigrants.
When did these British immigrants become American, was Custer British?
-
I am willing to admit that Britain has done nasty things in it's history are you willing to do the same?
I think rule number 14 is about to be envoked.
I am going to have a cup of tea, by the way don't think we have forgot about Boston and our tea :salute
-
When did these British immigrants become American, was Custer British?
ROFL!!!!
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
What the hell does Custer have to do with anything? He was a soldier, a glory hound, and an idiot. His decision to attack at Little Big Horn had nothing to do with his personal beliefs or prejudice against the Native cultures (LOTS of evidence he actually had a great deal of respect for them) and EVERYTHING to do with just wanting his name in lights.
-
So he was pro Native American?
-
When did these British immigrants become American, was Custer British?
Geez...Imperial loyalist. You need to look before Custer...as in the Puritan colonials. They started the systematic elimination of the Native American tribes long before Custer was born.
-
So he was pro Native American?
He was NEITHER, and first and foremost served his own ego. His orders at Little Big Horn were to follow and scout the Native forces for the army following behind. He attacked to take all the glory for himself.
-
So he was pro Native American?
If Custer had not been the glory hound career military officer that he was...he probably would have been more pro-native than anyone of his time would respect. He had a great respect for the plains tribes, but he also thought that he and the 7th Cavalry was destined for glory.
-
Geez...Imperial loyalist. You need to look before Custer...as in the Puritan colonials. They started the systematic elimination of the Native American tribes long before Custer was born.
America history is spotless then?
-
John Adams and Ben Franklin were Freemasons.
-
John Adams and Ben Franklin were Freemasons.
Franklin was, Adams was not.
-
He was related to perry mason?
-
America history is spotless then?
In relative comparison to the great British empire? Yes...but then I'm biased. Human history in general is far from spotless.
-
John Adams and Ben Franklin were Freemasons.
So what!? Please stay on topic.
-
Zack is trolling. Don't give him the satisfaction. :P
Lock the thread, and go watch the series. :aok
-
I did watch the series...slow...over acted...a little theatrical in places...ok for what it was but not worthy of much more than a nod.
-
What, no one has mentioned how much he depended on his wife, who always had something wise to say about everything?
-
What, no one has mentioned how much he depended on his wife, who always had something wise to say about everything?
I think they put the best possible spin upon the relationship between Adams and his wife. The relationship was completely foreign to the one I had created in my mind, however I found the series interpretation much more enjoyable to watch, so much so that I do not protest in the slightest at its liberties. I would prefer to remember Abigail the way she was portrayed in the series over any other. There is no doubt that they were inseperable in both mind and spirit.
-
I loved it. It's terrible that I didn't necessarily picture any of those guys from that time period as actual people... just stoic sitting-still-for-the-photo guys. If not for anything else, it prompted me to reread some of the books from that period & see those folks with a little bit more of a realistic view.
-
just stoic sitting-still-for-the-photo guys.
What photos?
:D
-
What photos? :D
In the books. You're right though... they're 'artists renditions...' not photos. *grin*
-
Native American Indians?
We didn't enslave them, we merely shot them....
-
America history is spotless then?
Compared to English history? Linen white.
-
We didn't enslave them, we merely shot them....
Who is this 'we' you are referring to? :D
I think we can blame it all on the attitudes of the early Spanish explorers and after that it was on again off again expansionism. Quite often times it was kill or be killed and to point fingers from the comfort of your computer desk and say it was 'that countries fault' or the result of genocide toward an entire way of life is a great over-simplification and completely dishonest.
-
Zack is trolling. Don't give him the satisfaction. :P
Lock the thread, and go watch the series. :aok
Trolling? I asked a legit question about a American politician and I got a sarcastic answer.
By the way I proud of my country and if you don't like fair enough, I won't be insulting your country as you have with mine.
-
Flaw is a nice safe word, Britain banned slavery not Adams and Jefferson.
No this was a flame on one of our Presidents (not a particularly great one but still a forefather and due a great deal of respect) and it is factually incorrect. It was Jefferson that banned the slave trade in 1807 before Parliament did in England. On March 3 1807 President Thomas Jefferson signed into act a bill approved by Congress the day before “to prohibit the importation of slaves into any port or place within the jurisdiction of the United States.” Three weeks later on the 25th the British House of Lords passed an Act for the Abolition of The Slave Trade.
By law even after the Slave Trade Acts were law the trade itself could not be abolished until 1808 and so the United States ended slave trading on January 1 1808 and England on March 1 1808 (ironically delivering African captives to America).
-
I apologise if I insulted a American president this was not meant as a insult, despots and insulting the British monarchy is seen as a insult to the British.
Again I state you talk about freedom and liberty, and ignore the major fact that it was freedom for a select few.
Jefferson had slaves and talked about freedom and liberty from despots, again this is not meant as a insult.
We in Britain are told every day in the liberal media how evil our forefathers were, my forefathers were living in slums in Liverpool and living to the ripe old age of 25.
God save the queen and her corgis
-
I apologise if I insulted a American president this was not meant as a insult, despots and insulting the British monarchy is seen as a insult to the British.
Again I state you talk about freedom and liberty, and ignore the major fact that it was freedom for a select few.
Jefferson had slaves and talked about freedom and liberty from despots, again this is not meant as a insult.
We in Britain are told every day in the liberal media how evil our forefathers were, my forefathers were living in slums in Liverpool and living to the ripe old age of 25.
God save the queen and her corgis
The actual facts of what happened and why have been obscured by some................ for a reason. IMHO you don't have the ACTUAL facts, but many here in America today haven't gotten them either. And IMHO that was done DELIBERATELY and for a purpose. I could go on but I'm tired of getting banned for a week or so LOL. Might want to go have a look at FlameWarriors BBS. But people aren't always nice over there though :lol :O :bolt:
-
I apologise if I insulted a American president this was not meant as a insult, despots and insulting the British monarchy is seen as a insult to the British.
Again I state you talk about freedom and liberty, and ignore the major fact that it was freedom for a select few.
Jefferson had slaves and talked about freedom and liberty from despots, again this is not meant as a insult.
FYI: The original Declaration of Independence included a clause for the total abolition of slavery. Jefferson was adamant on it, and so was Adams, and they fought tooth and nail for it for the very reason you point out here.
The problem was to keep the South (particularly the Deep South) on board they were forced to remove it.
-
Trolling? I asked a legit question about a American politician and I got a sarcastic answer.
By the way I proud of my country and if you don't like fair enough, I won't be insulting your country as you have with mine.
Re-read my posts. There's nothing insulting in them. In fact, I've stayed on topic in this thread.
Great new trolling cast though. ;)
-
We didn't enslave them, we merely shot them....
I've never thought about it that way before. One the one hand I find it cynical, and the other I think, "yes, very true."
-
I'm enjoying the conversation about the John Adams series and the personalities the series depicts. :aok
I wish you (you know who you are) would take the valid discussions of slavery, expansionism, and treatment of Native Americans to another board where political discussion won't get the thread locked. :old:
-
Just don't say the word "politics" or make any flaming posts and it won't get locked.
Who is this 'we' you are referring to? :D
I think we can blame it all on the attitudes of the early Spanish explorers and after that it was on again off again expansionism. Quite often times it was kill or be killed and to point fingers from the comfort of your computer desk and say it was 'that countries fault' or the result of genocide toward an entire way of life is a great over-simplification and completely dishonest.
"We" refers to those of Western European descent who settled in the U.S and decided it was "manifest destiny" that they own everything they saw. The early Spanish explorers had more to do with South American natives than North American natives. And yes, the demise of Native Americans in the U.S. was due partly as a direct result of the same Christian mentality that was responsible for more than 500 years of European death and destruction "in the name of God"...in other words, convert or perish. The South American natives perished from pure greed, compliments of the Spanish Conquistadors.
-
I watched more clips of the Series last night courtesy of Youtube, and I loved the portrayal of Benjamin Franklin. I am not as schooled on the relationship between Adams and Franklin, except for the knowledge that they were diplomats to France at the same time, and they differed greatly in their approach to their duties. The series clearly showed how Adams chaffed at the slow, ceremonial pageantry he was continually subjected to, and Franklin flourished in the role. I liked the way Franklin advised and tutored Adams in many cases.
Washington was also very well portrayed. He was a commanding figure, always distinguished and proper, often the center of attention, but never the life of the party because of his sense of decorum and proper etiquette. His gentlemanly ways were not natural to him, his grace and charm were only acquired through much study and intense discipline on his part. He was also prone to intense displays of anger when his discipline failed to control his emotions. I thought Washington was as closely matched as Adams and Franklin was to the role played.
I got the impression that Jefferson and Hamilton were not as accurately portrayed, only because it lends itself to describing Adams better. The two antagonists need to be fairly harshly contrasted so that Adams role can be more easily shown between them. Still Hamilton and Jefferson were not horribly miss represented, and the ideas they present are all factual if not accurately dramatized.
-
I'm enjoying the conversation about the John Adams series and the personalities the series depicts. :aok
I wish you (you know who you are) would take the valid discussions of slavery, expansionism, and treatment of Native Americans to another board where political discussion won't get the thread locked. :old:
None of that is political so get over yourself.
-
So is this a precedent? The topics of imperialism, slavery, and extermination of a people are not in violation in rule #14?
edit: good spelling catch.
-
Its a matter of how they are discussed I believe as they are not subjects of politics alone. So far we have mentioned when they were abolished as a trade and by whom and I corrected the inconsistencies. Expansionism was mentioned only as a partial cause for the treatment of native peoples. Your lumping them together (and its 'imperialism' by the way)' is probably the closest thing to a rule violation yet but thats for Skuzzy to decide.
I find the period that Adams and Jefferson and Washington and Franklin and Hamilton lived in to be very fascinating as people no longer think anything like them and you would be hard pressed to find like thinkers today. I think Franklin is pretty much an individual like no other and his humor is amazing. Adams is the same way but in Adams you find someone more mature in a lot of ways than Franklin could ever be. I wonder how much the 'free-thinking' of Franklin influences his maturity in nature.
-
Really, i just wish we could stay on topic. :P
-
He was NEITHER, and first and foremost served his own ego. His orders at Little Big Horn were to follow and scout the Native forces for the army following behind. He attacked to take all the glory for himself.
I've always enjoyed Stephen Ambrose's book: Crazy Horse and Custer: The Parallel Lives of Two American Warriors...I'd recommend it
Just don't say the word "politics" or make any flaming posts and it won't get locked.
"We" refers to those of Western European descent who settled in the U.S and decided it was "manifest destiny" that they own everything they saw. The early Spanish explorers had more to do with South American natives than North American natives. And yes, the demise of Native Americans in the U.S. was due partly as a direct result of the same Christian mentality that was responsible for more than 500 years of European death and destruction "in the name of God"...in other words, convert or perish. The South American natives perished from pure greed, compliments of the Spanish Conquistadors.
I've always believed American Indians were mostly victims to the wonderful English invention of "Terra nullius" ie. the land belongs to no-one, a wonderful way to legalise occupying native peoples (of the world) traditional lands either by force or coercion. That idea that is land is deemed vacant and not being used to produce is still pretty prevalent.
Tronsky
-
I find the period that Adams and Jefferson and Washington and Franklin and Hamilton lived in to be very fascinating as people no longer think anything like them and you would be hard pressed to find like thinkers today. I think Franklin is pretty much an individual like no other and his humor is amazing. Adams is the same way but in Adams you find someone more mature in a lot of ways than Franklin could ever be. I wonder how much the 'free-thinking' of Franklin influences his maturity in nature.
I keep hoping someone would try to adapt Jeff Shaara's Rise to Rebellion and The Glorious Cause into films. Unfortunately with how badly the mucked up Gods and Generals we're probably not even going to get The Last Full Measure, much less the American Revolution series.
-
When do these 'English' actually become 'American'?
This idea 'It was them not us perception is a very interesting concept which has been used on a regular basis throughout history'
There is a very good book called 'The SS Alibi of a Nation' it basic outline is 'It was not us it was them'
This is not political this is historical perceptions on a HBO Television program, HBO make Television programs also on Vamipires etc.
HBO is American so will percieve History from a American perception, this is not political this is fact as every country will follow this line of thinking.
Every country will percieve history from there point of view at the exspense of other countries.
Films are fine to get a overview on historical facts but at the end of the day they are there to fill in the spaces between commercials (Ads for those who live in the colonies).
-
No HBO is opinion viewpoint and agenda driven just like everything else. Every now and then even HBO can come up with a good miniseries though I wish it was more precise and honest to all history in everything it presents
-
History is can never be impartial it is always from a individuals perspective.
Amercan perspective is different from everyone's else's as is the English perspective.
Historical perspective changes overtime and will always change depending on how a individual or country wants to portray itself.
Washington,Jefferson etc were not Americans they were from English stock, 2nd sons of landowners and squires who wanted create Britain on a larger scale in the America's.
Oliver Cromwell chopped of Charlies boys head not for the people but for the people who had land and influence, not for the common man in the field.
-
Washington,Jefferson etc were not Americans they were from English stock....
Y'know, that's part of the attitude that helped lead to a little thing here we call the War of 1812. Because the British didn't acknowledge naturalized citizenship, they felt themselves free to march aboard American ships and press-gang American citizens into British service, while in American territorial waters, and even American cities. Because they were "British Stock."
-
Yes The British were nasty sods.
But are you willing to say that Americans were not?
Your not able or willing to say yes we were just as nasty as other nations.
Can one American please stand up and say YES we have done cruel things to other people for our own gain!
It is amazing that you refuse to admit that today and in the past you have put American interest first at the exspense of other countries.
Just one please will do
The nasty British they should be ashamed of themselves for the cruel things they have done, appalling.
I watched the trailer John Adams i don't need to watch the rest - nasty redcoats and us and we won.
I am present reading a essay American Diplomacy 1900-1950 by George F Kennan his job was to investigate for the Department of State, from the standpoint of American Interests. He openly discusses the American Mexican war 1898 - Nasty Mexicans and us and we won.
Can someone enact rule number 14 please!
-
I thought it was slow and eventually just got tired of watching it.
-
Yes The British were nasty sods.
But are you willing to say that Americans were not?
Your not able or willing to say yes we were just as nasty as other nations.
Can one American please stand up and say YES we have done cruel things to other people for our own gain!
It is amazing that you refuse to admit that today and in the past you have put American interest first at the exspense of other countries.
Just one please will do
The nasty British they should be ashamed of themselves for the cruel things they have done, appalling.
I watched the trailer John Adams i don't need to watch the rest - nasty redcoats and us and we won.
I am present reading a essay American Diplomacy 1900-1950 by George F Kennan his job was to investigate for the Department of State, from the standpoint of American Interests. He openly discusses the American Mexican war 1898 - Nasty Mexicans and us and we won.
Can someone enact rule number 14 please!
I believe in American Exceptionalism!~ America is GREAT!~ God Bless America!~ :banana:
Zack, You can go choke on your self loathing. :P
-
I thought it was slow and eventually just got tired of watching it.
Unfortunately, life was slow then. It was an accurate portrayal even tho condensed for TV.
I thought the storyline was excellent. Who knew Ben Franklin was a superfreak?
-
Hurrah!
At last!
Well done :salute
America is great!
British people have the up most respect for the USA,
we have fought in many conflicts defending liberty and democracy in the world.
Most European countries are anti American and anti British so I think this thread is finished.
I am proud of my country - so if you feel the need to insult a countries history talk about the ungrateful
Europeans. (Britain is not European)
-
(Britain is not European)
So.... you've dropped out of the EU?
-
Our governments are traitors who's members are filling their own pockets.
-
Unfortunately, life was slow then. It was an accurate portrayal even tho condensed for TV.
I thought the storyline was excellent. Who knew Ben Franklin was a superfreak?
Back to the original topic thank you.
I guess that is some of what I liked the most.
-
Can one American please stand up and say YES we have done cruel things to other people for our own gain!
Ok I'll say it
YES we have done cruel things to other people for our own gain. I can even list some of them if you like.
Its the way of the world. Always has been.
-
I am present reading a essay American Diplomacy 1900-1950 by George F Kennan his job was to investigate for the Department of State, from the standpoint of American Interests. He openly discusses the American Mexican war 1898 - Nasty Mexicans and us and we won.
Read more closely. The Mexican American war was in 1846. The Spanish American war was in 1898.