The Book, the Man, and the Venue — Franklin D. Roosevelt
Book Review — "FDR" by Jean Edward Smith
Welcome back to “The Book, the Man and the Venue”, my weekly newsletter that aims to shed light on every U.S. president in a way that is engaging, informative, and hopefully, fun!
Every Monday, I’ll be releasing a new article in which I chronicle my journey through one biography for each U.S. President. Each post will consist of three parts: I’ll offer a brief review of the biography (the Book), share reflections on the president’s character and legacy (the Man), and choose a location where I would spend time with the president if they were alive today (the Venue).
Hopefully, you will find the content both enriching and enjoyable, and if you like what you read, please consider checking out my other articles (and subscribing if you don’t already)!
Without further ado: FDR
The Book
About 13 weeks ago, I wrote a somewhat scathing (by my standards) review of Jean Edward Smith’s “Grant”. It wasn’t that the book was low quality, but more so that it failed to meet my incredibly high expectations. As I stated previously:
“I want to be clear – Smith’s book is far from being bad. The preface is excellent, the analysis is sharp, and the author successfully adds detail at every turn…Unfortunately, there are times in the book at which I think the forest gets lost in the trees. Its middle section tends to drag, and there were instances where I felt like I was reading the same chapter over and over again. Similarly, I found Smith’s portrayal of Grant to be overly sympathetic. The author’s criticism of General Orders No. 11 is both fair and poignant, but he sweeps the corruption of Grant’s administration under the rug and is clearly rooting for his subject. To me, the best biographers are a bit more dispassionate.”
Well, today, after reading Smith’s 636 page rendition of FDR, I am happy to report that he has more than made up for his previous performance. FDR is one of the most dynamic figures in American history and a top three president to ever grace the Oval Office. Such a figure demands a biography capable of matching its stature. We are lucky that Smith was up for the task.
One of the things I enjoyed most about Smith’s biography was the way he illuminated the dynamics of FDR’s marriage. FDR’s relationship with Eleanor was often rocky and invariably complex, and Smith’s dissection of their marriage—along with his depiction of how they reconciled their issues for the greater good—was both delicate and captivating. It can be easy for a biography to lose sight of their subject’s personal relationships, but Smith did wonderfully to intersperse politics with personal conflict. By doing so, the reader is able to understand FDR in a more holistic manner.
Smith's writing style also merits credit. While it can be a tad dry at times, his prose is almost always clear and journalistic. The book never veers off course, and the depth and quality of the author’s footnotes is astounding. One almost gets a sense that Smith worked as a reporter before becoming a biographer.
As always, I do have a few minor nitpicks. Like my guy Stephen Floyd at BestPresidentialBio, I was upset that Smith never fully explores “the mystery of FDR’s evolution from Hudson River aristocrat to champion of the common man.” Similarly, I was not a fan of the book's abrupt ending – although that seems to be par for the course with Smith’s books. Nonetheless, for single-volume biographies, “FDR” is about as good as it gets. Jean Edward Smith is often recognized as one of the best biographers for American history. I now understand why.
Rating: 8.6/10
The Man
In some ways, I find it harder to write about the great presidents than the others. I mean, what more can I say about FDR that hasn’t already been covered in one of the 800 biographies written about him over the past 60 years?
And yet, in other ways, reading about the Washingtons, Lincolns, and Roosevelts of the world is where my journey has had the greatest payoff. After all, it’s only by understanding the best people we’ve had in the Oval Office that I can identify the traits that make great leaders—one of the main points of this whole journey in the first place.
Over time, I’ve come to realize that a president’s ability to succeed comes down to a mix of three things: experience, character, and luck. While these factors have certainly shaped the decisions our presidents have made throughout history, paradoxically, there are very few consistent attributes that make a good president.
Certain presidents, like Washington, Grant, and Eisenhower, leaned on their wartime experience to inform their decisions and earn respect. Indeed, prior experience seems like a plausible explanation for presidential success—except that other presidents, like John Quincy Adams, James Buchanan, and Herbert Hoover, struggled significantly despite their impressive credentials.
Presidential character, too, is hard to pin down. You could argue that Andrew Jackson and TR’s toughness were the core factors in their success—until you remember that Andrew Johnson and Richard Nixon were just as unyielding, yet far less accomplished.
Is it simply luck that defines presidential outcomes? Put differently, are presidents just a byproduct of their circumstances and opportunity? You could certainly make the case that Lincoln benefitted from the polarizing time in which he lived, but the ever-eroding legacy of Woodrow Wilson muddies the hypothesis.
My point is that it’s hard to find a common predictor of presidential outcomes. As obvious—and perhaps disheartening—as it sounds, certain times inevitably require different leaders.
And yet, if I’ve found two common threads (alongside the three broader traits I’ve highlighted earlier), they’re perseverance and optimism. A great president must have the determination to carry through a cause no matter the cost. It’s not enough to just believe in something—a president must think it’s impossible for their cause to fail.
Lincoln once said, “I am an optimist because I don’t see the point in being anything else,” and FDR’s struggles with polio are an even more striking example of this attitude in action.
This was a man who grew up on a thousand-acre estate along the Hudson River, before being shipped off to a prestigious private school and then Harvard.
Then, suddenly, he contracts polio, and his whole life is flipped upside down. Not only are his legs paralyzed, but his whole body is pretty much immobilized. He has to rely on Eleanor (who deserves her own post) to perform his most basic bodily functions, and the thought of a political career becomes almost unthinkable.
Rather than crater and rely on his family’s affluence to sustain the rest of his life, he attacks the problem almost by dismissing its inevitability. As Allida Black explains: “What polio did to him was… give him ‘patience and never-ending persistence.’ And so, when he had to rebuild his life and his whole image of himself—what he could do for his country and what his marriage would be like and how he could play with his children—there’s just this ebullience that was there. You just couldn’t get rid of it. I mean, you never heard FDR say he was never going to walk again.”
At its core, this is the attitude that makes a president great: an unwillingness to be deterred from their mission, an unrelenting optimism in the face of challenges, and an ability to face a big challenge and tackle it one day at a time.
FDR certainly had his faults, and there were more of them than are popularly remembered. But in presidencies, as in life, it’s about getting the big things right. And in that respect, FDR had a pretty damn good batting average.
The Venue
Throughout his life, FDR was an avid stamp collector, a hobby he picked up at age 8 to learn more about geography and foreign politics. His passion for philately (which, by the way, is the official term for stamp collecting) stayed with him until his death in 1945. For Roosevelt, organizing stamps was more than just a pastime — it was a form of stress relief. As Cheryl Ganz, chief curator of philately at the National Postal Museum, noted: “Taking a pile of stamps that are in total chaos and putting them in order was a very relaxing thing for him to do…Here we had a man taking the world in chaos because of the Depression, because of the war, and able to put it in order as well.”
After his death, Roosevelt’s family auctioned off his impressive collection — featuring U.S. Die proofs, full sheets, worldwide stamps, and covers — for a whopping $228,000. His personal stamp sketches now reside in the National Postal Museum, where visitors can still admire them today. As a fitting tribute to his lifelong passion, FDR was posthumously inducted into the American Philatelic Society Hall of Fame — because, you know, he didn’t have enough honors already.
Now, while I don’t claim to know much about stamps, I can always appreciate someone’s passion, and would happily accompany FDR to the National Postal Museum. We can check out the museum’s exhibits on the Railway Mail Service or Star Routes – or, of course, admire his own collection if he feels like reminiscing.
I hope that you’ve enjoyed this installment of “The Book, the Man, and the Venue.” If you have feedback about today’s issue, or thoughts about future topics, please feel free to send me a message.
And if you liked it, please consider sharing (and subscribing if you don’t already)!
Tfw you are able to quote your own previous blog post
What a thought-provoking man section today