( 2 reviews )
-
Posted: Dec 28 2007
I read this book a couple of months ago, so my memory isn't as specific as I'd like at this point. What I do remember is the "big picture" that this finely written and carefully researched book presented of the unruly "lower sorts" in the economically depressed, hardscrabble waterfront of Boston in the 1760s and 1770s. Looking at the early years of the Revolution from this perspective is undeniably appealing to modern Americans, who view protest against "the Man" as a birthright, but it's also the smart thing to do. It was the "unrest" of these years--the rebellious actions of regular people--that simultaneously underscored the views of so-called radical leaders such as Samuel Adams, and disturbed the upper-crust of Massachusetts and other colonies that sought abrupt political change, but not social upheaval. To the extent that the "mobs" could help the gentry achieve their goals for political change, they were directed, sanctioned, even assisted in conducting what we would call street action. But to the extent that the social and economic change demanded by those mobs would have upset the status quo, they were opposed, undermined, and even sold out. In one sense, then, it's sad to read this book and cheer for the underdogs opposing "the Man," be he the British Parliament or the colony's own elite--only because we know, in the end, that the economically underprivileged never did win get the social revolution they'd hoped for. On the other hand, because of this careful tightrope-walking by the colonies' elite--in harnessing the power of the "street" when it could be helpful and restraining it when it could have gone too far for the tastes of the gentry--the American Revolution is one of the few, perhaps the *only*, successful revolution in history. (I phrased that like it's my opinion, but it's more the general consensus of historians.) We have the Boston waterfront residents of the 1760s and 1770s to thank for fomenting the rebellion that resulted in the United States. We also have them to thank for showing us the egalitarian ideals they fought for--regardless of whether those ideals were achieved. As if these intriguing and thoughtful concepts weren't enough to take away from a simple book, I found the writing style to be engaging and active. This book "reads" well--don't be put off by all this high-falutin' talk if that isn't your thing. It's a great read! As I read this book, I kept hearing the old line from the play "1776" in my head, uttered by a frustrated Pennsylvanian: "Why is it always *Boston* that breaks the King's peace?!" Well, this book explains why.
-
( 1 of 1 found this review helpful ) Posted: Mar 16 2007
The so-called "Liberty Tree on Boston Common" was in fact on "Boston Neck" -- the narrow strip of land between the mainland and Boston which prevented the latter being an island, along which ran "Orange," now "Washington," St. And characterizing the North and South Boston gangs, rivals until Sam Adams brought them together, and which operated under his direction -- the "Liberty Boys," the "Brown Shirts" of the day, which he used in various ways against political opponents, not all of whom were the "enemy," to achieve his political ends -- as "Waterfront Mobs" goes beyond stretching it, especially in suggesting they were employable, or interested in being employed beyond the self-chosen "job" of freelance "enforcers". "Wharf rats" would be more accurate had they actually spent their time as putative dock workers on the actual docks instead of having the run of the city, largely as members and leaders of the criminal underbelly, as if funtionally illiterate semi-mature teenagers with too much time on their hands. They were among those -- and likely initiated -- the Sam Adams' propagandized "Boston Massacre" by throwing chunks of ice and worse at the small contingent of British troops they had trapped, and yelling "fire!" from within the crowd. But, I guess in order to sell a retelling of an often-untruthfully-told story to the unsuspecting reader one must wrap it in a new slant, regardless accuracy.
