R.I.P. David McCullough, Who Saw the Bright Side of History
McCullough didn't just build on academic historians' work—he filled a gap they left.

One of the first things I did after signing a contract to write a biography of Samuel Adams was to try to hire Mike Hill, a researcher who worked with David McCullough on his John Adams.
Hill, who has gone on to emerge as an accomplished author in his own right, turned out to be helpful, a skilled researcher and an exceptionally gracious person. But what my call to him was really about, in retrospect, wasn't so much my need for research assistance or even for guidance as a first-time book author setting off on a big project. It was about my admiration for McCullough, who died this week at age 89.
The news of McCullough's death set me to thinking about what, precisely, it was that had me so admiring of his example and eager to emulate it.
Part of McCullough's greatness was his combination of writerly craft and commercial success. A lot of the historical heavy lifting on John Adams was done by academically trained historians working at a slow pace with government and philanthropic funding on the Adams Papers project of the Massachusetts Historical Society. McCullough took what they had found, boiled it down, and rewrote it in a way that was accessible and interesting to a wide audience. John Adams was published in 2001 by Simon & Schuster, a commercial publisher with a profit motive. It became an HBO miniseries.
McCullough's book on the the Wright brothers traced how the entrepreneurial pioneers of the airplane outperformed competing efforts by the government-funded Smithsonian.
McCullough, while building on the work of academic historians, was also filling a gap left open by them. The university professors increasingly focused on unearthing America's flaws, its history of discrimination against women and blacks and indigenous peoples. They described a past to recoil against or to be ashamed of, not to be proud of. McCullough, derided as middlebrow, outsmarted the professors by understanding that the American Founders and the Constitution they crafted, if imperfect, were nonetheless worthy, perhaps even blessed by divine providence.
Lin-Manuel Miranda's Hamilton was based on Ron Chernow's 2004 biography, but McCullough helped clear the way for a heroic Hamilton.
You could say that this was generational, that McCullough was too old to be hip to the identity politics that have come to dominate academia. That's not quite accurate, though; the Founders had been attacked going back to Columbia University's Charles Beard and his fellow progressive historians of the early 20th century.
Not that McCullough was entirely uncritical of capitalism or that he failed to appreciate government institutions. He tried to see the bright side. At an event at the Vineyard Haven public library on Martha's Vineyard, he celebrated, "anytime you start to get a little down about the state of American society or the state of American culture, keep in mind that today, still, there are more public libraries in the United States than there are McDonald's. May it ever be so." It seemed to me, at the time, a cheap shot against McDonald's.
McCullough's doorstop biographies of John Adams and of President Harry Truman got a lot of attention and won the author his two Pulitzer prizes. As someone who for years commuted by foot from Brooklyn Heights to Lower Manhattan, McCullough's The Great Bridge, about the Brooklyn Bridge, is one for which I have sentimental affection.
My all-time favorite of McCullough's works, however, is the slimmer 1776. It ends, "Especially for those who had been with Washington and who knew what a close call it was at the beginning—how often circumstance, storms, contrary winds, the oddities or strengths of individual character had made the difference—the outcome seemed little short of a miracle."
Miraculous, in their way, too, were McCullough's storytelling gifts, his work ethic, his voice, and the way they enlightened so many Americans. McCullough, by his words, connected his readers and listeners to the "strengths of individual character" that are the American genius.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
He was able to make American history into a good story. He will be greatly missed. He loved the story.
I am creating eighty North American nation greenbacks per-hr. to finish some web services from home. I actually have not ever thought adore it would even (avt-05) realisable but my friend mate got $27k solely in four weeks simply doing this best assignment and conjointly she convinced Maine to avail. Look further details going this web-page.
.
---------->>> https://smartpay241.blogspot.com
And best audio book narrator ever. His narration of Ken Burns’ “The Civil War” was a good part of its success.
An American treasure. I've read most of his books and will be certain to read those I haven't.
Oh blech. He stated he only wanted to write about people who had happy married lives. He started on a project about Picasso but dropped it because he realized he didn't like the guy. McCullough could only write about people he likes? How lazy.
Mute worthy, if even that.
To be fair, modern American academics seem to only be interested in writing about people they don't like.
OK, Ms Sour Apple.
Have you read anything he wrote?
"...How lazy."
How stupid.
His book on the Wright Brothers was excellent. I read it a few years ago and it's on the shelf next to me.
The university professors increasingly focused on unearthing America's flaws, its history of discrimination against women and blacks and indigenous peoples.
Welcome to post 1960s academia.
My all-time favorite of McCullough's works, however, is the slimmer 1776. It ends, "Especially for those who had been with Washington and who knew what a close call it was at the beginning—how often circumstance, storms, contrary winds, the oddities or strengths of individual character had made the difference—the outcome seemed little short of a miracle."
This puts me in mind of a documentary I just watched on Benedict Arnold. It was full of great information, even though the documentary itself was of... middling production values.
I hadn't spent a lot of time thinking about Arnold, but this documentary certainly put his name in a new light for me.
Anyhoo, I'll try to check out McCollough's work.
I've read stuff which says Arnold was just misunderstood.
A victim of soicomstance.
One of the things I learned from the documentary is he was one of the most effective commanders in the field for the Americans in the early part of the war and even won the begrudging respect British commanders for his battlefield prowess. He was also highly respected by his own troops under his command.
I also learned that he effectively won the battle of Saratoga by disobeying orders and taking command of the faltering American attack on the field.
Benedict Arnold did not lightly give up the patriot cause. He is too often dismissed as a simple traitor, out to line his pockets or improve his standing. It's a shame that the earlier part of his career is not better known by most of us.
Am I the only one who had difficulty decoding this:
As someone who for years commuted by foot from Brooklyn Heights to Lower Manhattan, McCullough's The Great Bridge, about the Brooklyn Bridge, is one for which I have sentimental affection.
You'd appreciate it better if you could buy the Brooklyn Bridge for yourself and look at it at your leisure. I can sell it to you at a reasonable price.
Is he saying that mccullum walked the bridge or the writer walked the bridge
Seems Stoll so commuted and I find the attraction easily understood.
2022 Reason: Court historian gets the hagiographic remembrance.
McCullough tended to provide history in the form of a Happy Meal, from the start of his work to the end -- his Johnstown Flood book, for example, short-armed the seemingly criminal negligence that precipitated the flood and the cynical, abusive legal maneuvering with which the culprits avoided liability for their reprehensible conduct.
Not that there's anything wrong with a Happy Meal -- if you have the tastes of a child.
At an event at the Vineyard Haven public library on Martha's Vineyard, he celebrated, "anytime you start to get a little down about the state of American society or the state of American culture, keep in mind that today, still, there are more public libraries in the United States than there are McDonald's. May it ever be so."
At least McDonald's eventually kicks out it's vagrants, including ones that flourish their cape while spouting their yammerings.
McCullough was a great story teller. He had to be to turn a Filmore/Harding/Carter class president like Truman into one of the "greats."
Did he turn Truman into a great man? Or did he write a great narration of a president's life? I don't know, I haven't read that yet, but all this makes me think I will. If it's as good as "John Adams" was, I'll wind up liking the guy (Truman) and wanting the story to continue just to read more of McCullough's writing.
Didn't find it a hagiography, but after FDR, Truman was a definite improvement and outside of his temporizing on removing econ controls post WWII (which lead to med insurance being an occupational issue) and his truculent personality (Trump, you say?), I don't see a lot of harm from him.
Far worse that tin-pot-dictator-wannabe FDR and his willful ignorance of impending death, refusing to inform Truman of any of the issues regarding the greatest war in human history. Oh, and his lying personal physician ('No, really, he's in wonderful health!')
Truman gets a courtesy B from me, but we in the west are fortunate he was a quick study.
Harding was one of our better presidents. That's why progressive historians portray him as the worst.
Dunno if all of his books are on the shelves, but the ones which are were certainly informative and well written; the Wright Brothers in particular gets a re-read when nothing new is on the incoming shelf. Unlike Ambrose, I do not recall reading the same paragraph lifted from an earlier book and pasted in this one
I haven't read his Wright Brothers, but I'm glad he didn't limit himself to politicians (no matter how distinguished). If you look for great Americans, you're more likely to find inventors and entrepreneurs (or people who combine both in the same person) than politicians.
Speaking of history it looks like The Russo-Ukrainian War is becoming history...with Putin on the losing end:
Ukraine's Strike in Crimea Could Be A Turning Point in the War
https://www.thebulwark.com/ukraines-strike-in-crimea-could-be-a-turning-point-russia/
Sorry, Francis Fukayama. It ain't over yet:
Salman Rushdie: Author in surgery after being stabbed on stage
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62524922