"... in his living situation in Baltimore, his intellectual curiosity exploding in the midst of the stultifying Auld household, gazing out on ships parting and arriving in the harbor, Douglass realized that slaveholders fear of outside denunciation...provided proof he was not alone." p. 51
And so began the inspiration for Douglass to reach others who could join him in an endeavor for freedom, not just for himself, but all those in bondage.
This is a very dense book- full of facts, quotes, excerpts of speeches, newspaper editorials, letters, and photographs.
The book chronicles the rich life and influences of Frederick Douglass- not just his professional life as an abolitionist, journalist, orator, and writer, but his personal life. This makes the "prophet" more human. He was beset with family problems, money woes, and scandals. He certainly was not perfect. He was anti-Catholic, dismissive of cultural plurality, and not completely supportive of women's rights. Still, he was a man to be admired.
( )

A magnificent biography. An incomparable story that stretches from the troubled earth to the open sky. If only he lived longer. Much longer. ( )

This was the book I’d been reading on and off for a couple of years—a bit of a doorstop, this one, and a challenge to read anywhere except on a comfy chair and a bright light. I picked the book up after reading, in succession, all three versions of Douglass’s Life and Times. (I know that sounded strange. But it becomes apparent how Douglass expands on sections he previously glossed over (like his escape) or portrays key incidents differently. It's fascinating, for instance, to read how Douglass remembers his mother, or chooses to remember his mother, from version to version.)

Blight pores through Douglass's writings and letters (and interestingly, what’s missing from the letters) to create a complex historical and psychological portrait of “the greatest American who ever lived.” It sometimes feels too stuffed with historical detail; Douglass was constantly on speaking tours, and so we are repeatedly told of his itinerary, what he ate, who he met, and so on. What worked best for me were Blight’s close readings of Douglass’s speeches, and how Douglas metaphorically positions himself in relation to the Biblical prophets, or the rupture and tumult of the previous few decades of American history, or his own personal biography. ( )

Fredrick Douglass is a fascinating figure, but a heavier editorial hand and a culling of at least 150 pages would improve the quality of this work substantially. I have some guess that this biography is well-regarded not for its content but for its subject and the résumé of its author.

David Blight, Yale-educated and Yale-employed, often uses phrases such as “may have” or “perhaps thought” regarding his subject. Douglass’s initial meeting with his later wife Anna Murray is so littered with these suppositions it beggars belief that an experienced biographer would write such.

Another egregious passage concerns a woman with romantic interest in Douglass staying near their house. Blight admits we have no idea what Douglass’s wife Anna’s response to this was, and so turns to a modern poet. The next seven sentences concern this poet and conclude with “art provides the means to elusive truths, but not the truth itself”. This is true, but as much justification is provided for why this poetry is in a book of facts as there is for the basis of the poetry: none at all.

At this point my respect for Blight is so low I check how many pages remain in this ebook. I have only 150 left.

Another convention of Blight’s is a broad statement of fact as if it is generally accepted, but as the statement is often about the 19th century, I’m not aware of the context or historical circumstances. Presumably I’m reading this book to learn those. An example of this is his statement that Douglass devoted himself to the Republican Party postbellum, though it was in decline in the 1870s. What events mark its decline? Loss of the presidency? (In fact, the Republican Party held the presidency until the election of Cleveland in 1893.) Congressional infighting? Corruption and misguided policy? These last two seem to be the case, as Blight mentions them in passing, but not in direct relation to “decline”. Eventually these questions are answered, but this is biography, not a thriller.

Perhaps most troubling are the points at which Blight essentially dismisses Douglass’s writings about his own feelings. In his 1892 autobiography, Douglass states, essentially, that his life has ultimately been good and his friends have contributed more to his life than enemies took from him. Blight dismisses this out of hand, saying Douglass would rather publish positive sentiments than “bitter truths”. Is it inconceivable that Douglass actually believed this? We have no private writing to contradict his published word. For Blight to write to his readers that Douglass was wrong about his personal reflections is a disgusting act for a biographer. A few pages later, Douglass’s descriptions of visiting an old slave plantation leads him to muse that “war and slavery” were things of the past. Blight describes this as “odd”. Why Blight finds this odd is never greatly expounded on, beyond drawing a parallel between the civil war and the “memory war” of the historical events and the Lost Cause revision of the south. At this point I wonder if Blight understands metaphor and nuance.

Blight’s editorial voice carries an axe to grind in one hand. Why that is the case isn’t so obvious in the text, initially. At later points, however, Blight seeks to wield Douglass against the modern Republican Party. He also seems disappointed that Douglass never disavowed his Republican Party even as they withdrew from racial treatment as an issue. I find this disturbing. In many ways, modern politics are too separate from the past to draw clear parallels, and in other ways, to wield a historical figure as a weapon is to assume their beliefs wouldn’t change without the additional context of one hundred years. I say the same to modern Republicans seeking to use Douglass or Lincoln as a stamp of approval.

As a result, this biography often holds Douglass at arm’s length. It’s telling that the longest quotations in the book are remembrances of Douglass by other writers. Quotes from Douglass are often scattershot quotations of 3-5 words littered through a paragraph in an effort to convey the former slave’s ideas. Do I feel like I know the man Douglass now? Yes, but I wish I could shake the feeling that he has been filtered. ( )

I knew the broad outlines of Frederick Douglass' life, but this biography provided a lot of detail and placed Douglass in the context of 19th-century history. I was particularly fascinated by Douglass' opinion and relationship with Abraham Lincoln, who Douglass only expressed lukewarm (at best) support of and then went on to meet with several times. The author is clearly a scholar of Douglass and 19th-century America, and it shows in this book. I also appreciated the author's efforts to show Douglass with humanity, as a great man, but also one who navigated personal and family problems. And finally, I was struck by how similar the issues Douglass spoke and wrote about are to the ones which society grapples with today, making this book feel incredibly current as well as a work of history. ( )