Episode 8:John Quincy Adams, Secretary of State
Episode 9: John Quincy Adams, President
Episode 10: John Quincy Adams, Congressman
"Whatever the hearts of party may be, however the tone of disappointment against Mr. Adams may sometimes rise to something like hatred, there is undoubtedly a deep reverence and affection for the man in the nation’s heart; and any one may safely prophesy that his reputation, half a century after his death, will be of an honorable kind. He fought a stout and noble battle in Congress last session in favor of discussion of the slavery question, and in defense of the right to petition upon it; on behalf of women as well as of men. While hunted, held at bay, almost torn to pieces by an outrageous majority – leaving him, I believe, in absolute unity – he preserved a boldness and coolness as amusing as they were admirable. Though he now and then vents his spleen with violence when disappointed in a favorite object, he seems able to bear perfectly well that which is the great fault of Americans to shrink from, singularity and blame. He seems, at times, reckless of opinion; and this is the point of his character which his countrymen seem, naturally, least able to comprehend." Harriet Martineau, from Retrospect of Western Travel, 1838
After watching these three episodes, I coincidentally began re-reading Daniel Walker Howe’s invaluable book What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815–1848, which opens with this contemporary description of John Quincy Adams. Howe’s account of antebellum America is a wonderful, sprawling read, and a tribute to the younger Adams is an appropriate opening. He emerges in Howe’s account of the period as one of the greatest, least appreciated figures of early American history.
The Adams Chronicles does not quite manage this, and I don’t know that it’s anybody’s fault. The Golden Age of Television we are apparently in would have you believe that it’s impossible to center a multi-episode series around an essentially noble and well-meaning character, hence our current penchant for anti-heroes. I don’t agree with this, but I can’t deny that as much as I admire JQA I did not enjoy spending four hours watching a dramatization of his career.
John Quincy Adams was an ugly, reserved, and brilliant man, without any particular vices that we know about. He was a pretty bad husband and father, but of the sort that lots of real people are, and it’s more depressing to watch than entertaining. He married someone with whom he was probably fundamentally unsuited, and he did his best to be kind to her, but could not make her happy and they both knew it. He had expectations for his children which did not (in two out of three cases) align with those children’s real talents or desires, and those children knew it too.In two out of three cases they died young and miserable and disappointing. He loved America and gave his entire life to it, even dying in the halls of Congress, but America never quite managed to love him back.
John Quincy Adams was a man who devoted his life to public service, apparently without ever considering whether another kind of life was possible; in many ways the decision was made for him before he was able to consider it. He accompanied his father to Europe as a child, and left to pursue his first diplomatic appointment, alone, at only fourteen. He distrusted his parents’ (particularly his mother’s) opinions of his personal life so much that he didn’t tell them he was engaged until after he was already married. He lost all of his children but one. He was fantastically insecure about his personal appearance. He had few friends.
What epic is there to tell about this guy? There has to be some way to dramatize him, or some part of him. The great second act of his American life, when he surprised himself by winning a seat in Congress after his loss of the Presidency; couldn’t there be a movie in that? In his late and unexpected dedication to the anti-slavery cause, in his solitary battle to promote debate on the issue in the House of Representatives? In his defense of the Amistad captives before the Supreme Court? There is something cinematic there, and The Adams Chronicles touches on each of these, but never quite elevates them as they should be elevated.
William Daniels, in a bit of casting that could not have been coincidental, plays Quincy Adams in these three hours, and he does his best. His best really is quite good. John Quincy Adams is brilliant and serious and straight-backed, and the writers wisely avoided characterizing him as simply a younger version of his father. Pamela Payton-Wright provides a credible Louisa Catherine Adams; she plays her as a bit of a neurotic mess but unfortunately that wasn’t far off the truth. I watch these sections and I can’t find anything wrong with them, exactly. They’re fairly accurate, historically speaking, on both facts and the subtler issues of characterization.
It just doesn’t work as fiction. John Quincy Adams wasn’t a tragic figure, or a triumphant one. He was a great man whose culture hadn’t caught up to him, who had a life with some success and much disappointment. The series’ commitment to accuracy was laudable, but it doesn’t make for satisfying drama. The first six sections had the same flaws, but the central relationship between John and Abigail Adams was a necessary emotional anchor. The four John Quincy Adams sections have no emotional anchor at all. It’s good history, but it’s not good TV.
Recommend?
If you’ve stuck with it this far you might as well see it through.
I unreservedly recommend What Hath God Wrought, which is one of the best books I've ever read on American history. Pick it up.