Everybody starts reaching. So as not to disturb the conversation. We have a microphone affinity this one for the q a portion of the event it will get passed around if you raise your hand. We are recording this evenings event so we want to use the microphone for any questions we have. Copies of the book are available at the registers youd like to purchase one copy or many copies. We encourage many. If youd like to get your purchased books sign sign up in an orderly fashion. Against this cabinet. At the conclusion of the talk. Its now my pleasure to introduce alexis coe, author of you never forget your first, a biography of George Washington. Hope follows her awardwinning alice plus free to forever a murder in memphis soon to be a major Motion Picture . With a fresh and lively look at George Washington that firmly separates the men from the legend. The host of audibles and no mans land, cohosted president s are people too and a consulting producer on abcoviews the founders to a feminist lens. Drawing on curiously unexamined archival material she recounts how he was raised by a determined single mother, chrtas the stubbornness that caused him to never back down, relates the youthful error that caused an International Incident and traces the effect of his failure to face the contradiction of a free nation reliance on free labor. Alexis will be in conversation with jamel buie, columnist for the New York Times. Please join me in warmly welcoming alexis coe and jamaal bully to politics and prose. Hello alexis. Hello. Lets get started. Lets do it. What was the genesis of this book . His first book as mentioned is about a murder of a young couple and it seems like a very different direction then crime. And asked this question and ask it enough you would think i have a really good distinct answer and i dont. They seem really different. As a historian, when you are in grad school you study with very little time period, which is literally a year, 1922 of them acted at my first job was at the new york public library. The schwartzman building in bryant park. I worked in exhibitions and my job is really collective memory. You start with the mayor form, Virginia Woolf walking stick. Its all over the place. During that time i began to think a lot about Allison Freda forever which i found an example in a book when i was in grad school. I didnt want to be someone who is known as a woman, i wanted tenure and i thought you cannot touch love as a woman as a historian or else youre not gonna get a job. I thought about it for years and i felt like it was a really interesting story and explains so much about the origin of prejudice against samesex love. I felt like if i knew the story and didnt talk about it and didnt make the connections i was somehow complicit in it. Thats what i felt about washington too. I love president ial biographies, the audible series the president s president s are people too would require in my mind to understand what it was going on as i read micro history. I would also read three or four biographies of the same time in conversation with each other and i would emerge with some sort of understanding of the president , hopefully. That just never happened for me with washington. It needled me and i felt like its a surprising assertion to make because you look at washington books there are quite a few one book on Allison Freda but i felt like i had to do something to that bookshelf it needed something. In the introduction you talk about how these washington biographies its not just that theres a lot of them that but they all have a similar cast and written by a similar person. I will be honest, at the beginning is a typical washington biographer grew up going to historical sites, lived in virginia and i was like it sounds like me. [laughter] could you talk more about what you are trying to responding to the world of washington biographies . I found that i joke that when these men got their book contracts that before they signed it they had to take a solemn both and say, i will proceed in the exact same manner, i will say the same things i will say i have the same goals. I will do it the same way. I didnt take the oath. This thing at first i thought it was really sort of funny. They all say hes too marble to be real and negatively came out and then they do talk about things that i joke about. They are really into his size that seems inappropriate. Its funny. [laughter] they are nice, ive seen nicer, hamiltons are also nice. Like hamiltons thighs are like adam driver . While this is called off in a feminist biography, if they had written a book versus size, we would all be up in arms. Its also a double standard it works both ways. I thought it was very strange, they were is a defensiveness around washington. There is zero interest in women. I didnt understand can we talk about lord, obama, clinton, as president s were raised by single mothers who struggle. Why are we talking about washington . He is the ultimate american story. His mother was born to an indentured servant. That is amazing. So why do we talk about that . Nothing made sense to see addison as i checked what i do specialize at the same time we know its a little number in a sentence mean. He checked the end know if the endnote keeps quoting a secondary source and a secondary source quotes another secondary source then it keeps happening you know something hinchey is going on. That takes us to the book proper and is divided into four sections, one dealing with washingtons early life is early middleage and then his death. I found the first part to be so fascinating, in part because you begin it was basically a series of acoustical is about washington and you can talk about that, even as someone who knows a bit about the guy i find it immensely useful to be given an info dump like that. I love to hear you talk about the reasons for approaching the information andrefers with fred to weave it into a narrative. It jumps up at you but its also its a very useful way of getting into the book. So much of this early part of washingtons life as you discuss it is consumed with the people around him, his context as this young virginia stryver. A social climber. He is a guy who wants to has his eyes at the top. He cant feed his horse. Theres a lot of struggle going on. In early virginia if you walked at all you were poor and looked down upon. That was esseial to him if you look at the washington biography they have the same portrait. I called them coffins. Washington always destiny which i have a problem with. Nobody is destined to do anything it takes i want president ial history because the presidency and especially the person who established the office to person built around who everybody pressure is really important that everyone understand him in the presidency but the biographies are alienating them in the ways that visual presentations, their titles, the way that they are written. I really wanted the world to feel like if they had never that they had everything they needed the beginning of the book and at the beginning of each section to up to feel as though they were the expert so that was part of it. I did think a lot about my reader and the other parts of it dear president ial editor called him vanilla once to my face. [laughter] i think, cristobol, adams, you cant compare, there too much fun thats why their letters survive, they do that. But the thing is, he is, you can break him out of the smoking can be fun he can be interesting but you have to have fun with them as a person, its called reverent, which i think is a whole the link. A lot of the things you see the way i organize the material in my head when i was trying to make sure i got things crossed decided to be vulnerable and share it with everyone. I think that there are certain things that help you understand, i can tell you in a sentence at the beginning of the revolution we can say is they all do, he lost more battles than he won. So why are we talking about the battles . Hes not fighting on the front lines. Hes in a tent most of the time. Hes not out there. Why are we wasting time talking about it. Thats less important to me that you understand something thats usually just a sentence but everything gets lost in a paragraph, which abwe had one general and the british had many generals. By presenting you with the chart at the beginning of that section and listening to George Washington and then all these other guys get it and you take the knowledge with you. I just wanted you to have those. I dont want my reader ab longest answer ever abi dont expect you to turn around and give a really long talk about this, i want you to be really excited about it. I want you to turn around and talk about it like a cocktail party. Was talking to my wife i was like, you know washington loved the abloved his dogs . [laughter] she didnt know that we talked about the dogs. To your point, i really wanted to talk to you about these facts i learned about George Washington. It is important to note that he loved dogs, he has to be a fully formed person to you, you have to know that he was silly enough to call his dog sweet lips and he that, right . It makes him like you imagine him like that it was an you also tells about like you cant just know that company inflate people he owned and felt a certain way you need to know he insulted his slaves. You can hear that. You said something earlier that got my brain turning and that was because those so much to commit demystify washington, place it in the context of his relationships. Because he is a model for the presidency, what kind of almost also does demystify the presidency. Unlike the more traditional biography feels like they are really biographies about roman emperors. This is a biography about president and the president at certain point is just a dude that we chose. I think its interesting how it did around the book. You are always sure to emphasize not just somebody who has goals and aims but i had in mind danny glover in legal weapons. Im just to old for this sh and i dont want to do it anymore. We think of the founder as a model list and in agreement at all times. They understood what they were doing. They set out with all the details worked out and thats not true. Washington was annotating the constitution while president. He was doing the best he could. I found that so revealing. Getting into his head about how he understood himself doing the job. I think that this humanizes him in the office and it should give us comfort in the messiness in some ways. A big part of the book deals with washington as a slave owner. You cant not deal with that. Its one of the overriding identities of his entire life. smain business. Right. He was always concerned about what he was going to do about the farm, how he is going to feed and house other people he owned and what they were going to do for him. I think you talked about toward the end how washington would always say that yea im going to free my slaves at some point and never acted on that. I wonder if you could talk about his ambivalence there. His unwillingness to take the extra step. He appears in virginia who did take the extra step. I also feel like this is something that biographers are trying to pull over on us. They make it sound as if washington had this abi think this is helpful to them because its hard to. Which is a bias. Its hard if you cant see him as having this beautiful realization so washington begins to have not a change of heart but a change of priority during the revolution. The argument is sometimes that enslaved and free black men fought during the revolution and that thats what changed his mind. No, he didnt want that, he is really reluctant about it. Just like billy lee his righthand man is always presented to the narrative as though hes always been there and though he is representative of everyone rather than the exception. What i wanted to do was have that presence because its present in his mind. Its as important to him as anything else. He is presented as writing home to mount abwhat to concerned about at mount vernon . His labor force. His forced labor force. To me, to be honest, and to understand him and his anxiety and priorities had to be there the whole time has close as i could get it. I wanted to smash a bunch of micro histories into one biography because i think it can be that way. Washington, its not a wish he would have done this its understanding why he ultimately did the thing he did, he could have sold his land when we say he was cash poor, all we call them planters which is i think misleading. They are plantation owners which is a genteel reflection for forced labor camp. They were all cash poor but they had land and no one had more land than George Washington because he had gained a ton of really choice land during the french and indian war when he fought for the british. I think he wouldve happily continue to do and we might be british subjects had they just given him the promotion he wanted. [laughter] he was a reluctant rebel he was not some idealist. Not talking about thomas paine here. I think thats important to think about the things that he is saying are not quite sure hes saying i dont have the money i cant do this i cant do that, he could have if you really wanted to. If he wanted to be the person that lafayette thought he could have. He had examples people like to say he had no examples. There were people in virginia who did this who had to leave under duress because of their slave masters were terrified of this. I just think lets look at him clearly and when we also do that, lets talk about how it was kind of vague objectsabit e up hurting the inevitable but also the same problem existed that he just didnt want to see and be responsible for which was the separating of families forever. If you could refresh my memory, how many people were enslaved at mount vernon kind of throughout . It fluctuated. Martha was married before she had two children from her previous marriage. The custis estate had over 130 enslaved people. Washington inherited 10 enslaved people when he was 11. That number swelled because he purchased them. The other weird thing is his biographers would say an enslaved man was sold to him. Its not like he was like, oh fine. [laughter] he went with the explicit purpose of buying people. That number swelled to 214 by the time he dies. The thing for me reading about washington as a slave owner is it also reminds you that most of the people he saw for most of his life were enslaved people. I think, i live in charlottesville and monticello is right there and they talked about it in those terms there that most people jefferson saw, most of the time, the people who he enslaved. But for me at least radically changes how you think about these men. And how they mustve thought about themselves because it wasnt a salon every day with all the founder buddies. Thinking big thoughts like ben franklin. [laughter] it was from sun up to sundown most days seeing the people you enslaved thinking about fast track at some point during the day when you had to discipline. Maximizing. Right. I dont know about the questionnaire its more of an observation. I think there is something really worthwhile and just thinking about it and talking about that that washington was really, people talk about he was so impressive the way he thought about these new schemes and inventions to maximize profit and labor to make sure that he was applying that. I think its really important because we do think of them as sort of like doing important work all the time. They were messy, they were drama queens and they were also cruel and thought themselves to be better. Its important we understand that on a sunday washington would hang out with his wife and make enslaved people rowboats and race across the potomac. Thats like what he did on a sunday. I want to know that he went to church sometimes but i also want to know that he did that. A big part of the book and what to me i never thought about as washington goes as this patriarch as not just with enslaved people but a large number of young men and young women, some related to him through various connections although part of a Washington Post old and washington as a keeper. Its something traditional biographers dont deal with at all. In terms of washingtons life. But seems to be a very big part of his life and something he was very invested in. They really married to this narrative that he had no biological children, our conception of children has really changed over time. It wasnt uncommon to marry a woman who had children. That was a really good sign that she could have more. It was so strange to me we spent so much time because it doesnt further the understanding to talk about 10 pages of what he couldnt have children. Instead what it would look about the fact that he was lousy with children. They were everywhere and always going giving people problems. Thats what the archives tell us he wrote so many letters finding a better tutor giving unsolicited love advice and that was a part of his worldview. Thats what he saw every day. You dont read those letters and think, hes not really interested in this. He so angry and its not like there just like us but when he lectures his grandson he doesnt say step grandson, we say step grandson. When he lectures washington its about losing his umbrella. The other part of that and something that really struck me throughout is how much not just that washington seems followed by death, most of the men on his side of the washington side of the family died pretty young but also he at a certain point becomes hyperaware of his death and becomes almost acting with his legacy in mind. How are people going to remember me when im dead. What should i do now to ensure those memories are positive 2. I think he was really sensitive. Untouchable the first four years and the second four years he was not and become really angry about that. He surrounded himself he created this cabinet with people who disagreed, Health Jefferson leading the pack and he thought, this will be like a counsel war and asked them all for their opinions because he did really value other peoples opinions and then i will decide what i want to do and he thought he was still in general and that would be fine, of course it wasnt, it was a disaster. He realizes worst fears and partisanship and became really aware of how people thought about you when they were seeing his face all the time. And he was the most famous person in the world. Then he didnt really think about how could i, he was a control freak. How could i get control of the situation demands of slaves certainly was a big part of it. You dont want to deny that it had a real impact these peoples lives. Good and bad. They never saw family members you will like this he was proud of telling indians that the white mans way of life was better and why dont they just follow his example. He was saying listening incredibly paternalistic way. He thought that was great. He thought we would think that was a very positive thing. Before we go to questions, there is one thing i think stran