Reminder: If you’re reading this in your email, you have to go to dpauthor.com and click on the Blog tab in order to view the actual blog post with the featured image.

Dear Reader:

This post is a vehicle for sharing some discrete observations, as follows:

A Comment About What Just Happened

I probably speak for many in expressing relief that the election season is finally over (at least until the 2028 campaign commences, which will probably be any day), but the electoral Sturm und Drang reminded me—as per the subject matter context that sets the tone for these posts—of George Washington’s greatest legacy, one for which we owe him an incalculable debt of gratitude as it created the template for democratic (small “d”) governance at the apex of America’s republican (small “r”) structure. That is the fact that he refused to regard himself as the indispensable custodian of the Revolutionary movement and thereby passed on the opportunity to use that as an excuse for maintaining an iron grip on the governance of a new nation. Unlike Oliver Cromwell after the English Revolution in the previous century and a litany of revolutionary figures in the centuries to come (see Napoleon, Lenin, Mao, and Castro), the Continental Army’s commander in chief by his actions made the ethos of the American Revolution incompatible with the assumption of dictatorial power. And he demonstrated his recognition of the fact that his place in history would be enhanced by voluntarily yielding power rather than seeking to magnify it.

BTW, the above tidbit was culled from my current book project.

Well, enough sermonizing.

Reading suggestion

Reminder: If you’re reading this in your email, you have to go to dpauthor.com and click on the Blog tab in order to view the actual blog post with the featured image.

Dear Reader:

Reminder: If you’re reading this in your email, you have to go to dpauthor.com and click on the Blog tab in order to view the actual blog post with the featured image.

Dear Reader:

Reminder: If you’re reading this in your email, you have to go to dpauthor.com and click on the Blog tab in order to view the actual blog post with the featured image.

Dear Reader:

Reminder: If you’re reading this in your email, you have to go to dpauthor.com and click on the Blog tab in order to view the actual blog post with the featured image.

Dear Reader:

The following information is for anyone who may be interested (or knows anyone who may be interested):

Reminder: If you’re reading this in your email, you have to go to dpauthor.com and click on the Blog tab in order to view the actual blog post with the featured image.

Dear Reader:

Various and sundry items that may be of interest:

>  Here’s a link to an interesting article brought to my (and others’) attention by historian John Maass at the National Museum of the U.S. Army. It’s more about battlefields of our second civil war than our first (AKA the Revolution) but has relevance for both.

Reminder: If you’re reading this in your email, you have to go to dpauthor.com and click on the Blog tab in order to view the actual blog post with the featured image.

Dear Reader:

The following is excerpted from a column by Bret Stephens in The New York Times (August 4):

What, uniquely, does writing do? It compels thought. It compels thinking in ways that silent contemplation or spoken language rarely can. It compels us to subject our thinking to the effort of articulation, the rigor of grammar, the tests of intelligibility and coherence, the inspection of others. In doing so, it also enjoins us to be clear, logical, accurate — and accountable. People may easily forgive a word said in anger but not so easily one written in anger, precisely because the fact that it was written tells us that it was considered.

The considered word matters. It has staying power and moral weight. We use the expression “I want that in writing” not only so there’s no mistaking the exact words that have been agreed upon but also as proof that the words are meaningful in the first place.

Now, the writer, who is an opinion columnist for the Times, employed the above wording in an effort to plead for originality in written communication rather than relying on artificial intelligence, not so much for ethical reasons as because reliance on A.I. is—as he puts it—”mentally enfeebling.” Stephens argues that the use of this high-tech crutch (my words, not his) is “an escalator toward a result when you really need to make a daily habit of taking the stairs.” And “as it becomes ubiquitous,” he warns that “it undermines not only our individual ability to write but also a society’s collective ability to reason, a culture’s inner capacity to create and everyone’s reason to care.”

As someone who spends a lot of time at a keyboard, the above really resonates. In my current literary endeavor, I’ve resorted to A.I. a number of times to check on certain technical minutiae that I would then corroborate by reference to another source; and I’ve really appreciated the convenience of being able to do that. But the satisfaction one derives from crafting a well-reasoned and coherent agglomeration of words is, to me, foundational to the whole experience of conveying ideas and facts in writing. It’s (ahem) key to any literary activity and is, I think, what’s fun about doing this sort of thing.

Unfortunately, I have the distinct feeling that Mr. Stephens’s plea is the functional equivalent of trying to halt an ocean wave by yelling at it to stop. Writing about it won’t be any more effective, but at least that process makes you think in greater detail about your message and its delivery (unless you’re using A.I. to make the argument for you).

Best regards,

dp

Reminder: If you’re reading this in your email, you have to go to dpauthor.com and click on the Blog tab in order to view the actual blog post with the featured image.

Dear Reader:

Hope you’re enjoying your summer.

Reminder: If you’re reading this in your email, you have to go to dpauthor.com and click on the Blog tab in order to view the actual blog post with the featured image.

Dear Reader:

Hope you’re enjoying your summer.

I wanted to make note of three books that will soon be released and should garner interest among Rev War aficionados (listed in order of their anticipated publication):

Reminder: If you’re reading this in your email, you have to go to dpauthor.com and click on the Speaking of Which tab in order to view the actual blog post with the featured image.

For anyone who may be interested, you can view an image of the preliminary cover design for my next literary enterprise at the bottom of this post.

The focus of the book’s content will be twofold:

(1) to explain and analyze twelve significant choices by General Washington that preserved the Continental Army and shaped how the American rebellion survived over the course of eight long years; and

(2) to place these decisions within the larger context of an array of factors that impinged on the outcome of the war for independence, including British logistical and administrative weaknesses, the challenges of distance and terrain, growing American military competence, civilian resistance, and the decisive impact of foreign intervention.

The purpose of this work is to explain how Washington’s judgment and the limits of British power determined the outcome of the Revolutionary War. Along the way, the reader will (hopefully) be treated to a measured reassessment of the ongoing historiographic debate over the question of Washington’s indispensability and a credible analysis of whether it was ever truly possible for Great Britain to win a military or political victory that would have restored the status quo ante in colonial America before the Revolutionary spirit embedded itself “in the minds and hearts of the people” (to quote John Adams).

I hope to submit the manuscript to Brookline Books (an imprint of Casemate Publishers) early next year, in which case I believe it will be released in the second half of 2027—perhaps as early as August.

Stay tuned, and have a great semiquincentennial 4th!

dp