An Interview with Richard Brookhiser
Published September 12, 2003
The heights of controversy were higher, the depths were lower. We don't write Federalist Papers now, nor do we write merry racist poems about Sally Hemings.
Q: When "The Rake" did finally settle down it was not without controversy.
How would you describe his relationship with the Randolph clan?
The Randolphs were a proud, prominent and slightly crazy Virginia clan, and Morris fell afoul of their internal divisions. Nancy, whom he married, he loved dearly. Her cousin John, who accused her of being a prostitute and a double murdress, was more difficult to deal with.
Q: What is in your mind the legacy of Morris?
The Preamble of the Constituion, especially the words "We the People," which prophetically shift power from the states to the people. Lincoln would begin the Gettysburg Address by recalling the Declaration-"the proposition that all men are created equal." He ended it by recalling the Preamble-"that government of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish from the earth."
Q: As one who writes "popular biographies", how important is non-academic history in the US? What impact do you think it has on culture, etc.?
There is a great hunger for history that teaching and our own civic rituals hardly satisfy. Popular books take up the slack. Witness David McCullough's best-sellers.
Q: What led you to begin writing on the lives of American founders? What were you hoping to accomplish in writing these works?
I began with Washington, following an interest that had awakened in college, and then was led on to the others. I want my readers to understand and admire great men.
Q: What authors/writers inspired you?
Garry Wills taught a course at Yale my freshman year on Thomas Jefferson, which also included quite a bit of Washington. That was the beginning.
Q: Besides writing critical acclaimed books you are also a journalist. As a
Senior Editor at National Review what is it like to write for the New York
Observer?
The Observer is like four journals of opinion in one, plus bright coverage of New York. It is a delight to appear there. Who else carries Hilton Kramer and Simon Doonan?
Q: I have to ask: Do you read blogs (besides The Corner)? Any in particular?
I read The Daily Dish and Instapundit. After 9/11 I read Debka until I figured out how it works. Half of it is stuff that Israeli intelligence found interesting twenty four hours ago. The rest is stuff that made some Israeli intelligence agent say, "Why are you putting this crap on my desk? Give it to Debka."
Q: One last question: Could you explain again why you drive a 1977 Camero?
It belonged to my mother-in-law. It has a tiny trunk, it doesn't corner well, and it's worthless in snow. But it loves hills and straightaways. I also like the 265 air conditioning--two open windows, going 65 mph.
- An Interview with Richard Brookhiser
- Published: September 12, 2003
- Type:
- Section: Interviews
- Filed Under: Books: Politics and Affairs, Books: Nonfiction, Books: History, Books: Biography, Books
- Writer: Kevin Holtsberry
- Kevin Holtsberry's BC Writer page
- Kevin Holtsberry's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments
What a fascinating and brilliant figure Brookhiser is, although I don't share most of his views. It perplexes me that he is associated with National Review, a magazine with very poor standards. He deserves better than that.
Good interview though not probing enough to get really inspiring. And it isn't 'peaking' interest, it's 'piquing' - I can't believe R.Brookhiser let you get away with that.
Who is lunatic who listed Bloggs as their contact addy for Genealogy reference?
Thank you
Re: "The Preamble of the Constituion, especially the words 'We the People,' which prophetically shift power from the states to the people." This statement by Richard is sadly a case of faulty conventional wisdom. The Constitution actually says: "We the people of the United States..." (as in the several states united). I have to disagree with Richard's assessment of a "legacy". What he's referring to actually amounts to a federal usurpation of political power, that was clearly reserved to the several States, under color of law and all along claiming that it is now the People's power. This was not the legacy intended by Morris.
John Michael
Nevada City, California







Great Kevin, thanks! You've been on an interview roll, much appreciated.