from,begin bold, His Highness,end bold,
paragraph 1,Most of the time, though, Sparks stayed at Mount Vernon, shut up with Washington's papers. He guessed it would take him a year just to ,begin italics,read ,end italics,them. He wrote to Bushrod Washington,,superscript,1,baseline, begging permission to bring them back home, to Boston. He planned the removal down to the last detail. He would build boxes. He would buy insurance. He would build a fire-proof safe, and have it installed in his study, or else he would lock the papers in a vault in a bank. The judge agreed. Washington's papers left Mount Vernon. Back in Massachusetts, Sparks moved, with his eight boxes, into a house in Cambridge that had briefly served as Washington's headquarters, so that he could edit the papers where the great man himself once wrote them.
paragraph 2,Sparks adored Washington, his courage, his character, his poise, even his handwriting, which he found "close and handsome." He did not, however, adore his literary style. "That Washington was not a scholar is certain," [John] Adams wrote. "That he was too illiterate, unlearned, unread for his station and reputation is equally past dispute." Washington was poorly educated and, at least compared to writers like Adams, Franklin, Jefferson, and Madison, a charming fluency on the page was not among his talents. On paper, he could be clumsy and awkward, exactly the opposite of what he was in person. Sparks wanted to fix that, and did. His ideas about editing came from the world of magazines, where he had a very heavy hand. One of his ,begin italics,North American Review,end italics, writers, the historian George Bancroft, was forever warning him, "You must not make any alterations or omissions without consulting me," and Sparks was forever ignoring him. (Late in 1826, while Sparks was preparing for his trip to Mount Vernon, Bancroft threatened legal action.) Sparks corrected Washington's spelling and punctuation. What he found badly expressed, he rewrote. Where Washington called Israel Putnam "Old Put," Sparks had him call him "General Putnam." (Putnam was the general who is supposed to have told the Americans facing the British at the Battle of Bunker Hill not to fire till they saw "the whites of their eyes.") When Washington called too little money a "flea-bite," Sparks changed this to a sum "totally inadequate to our demands." Passages in which Washington criticized New England men, . . . Sparks simply struck out—silently—despite having been advised that if he must make emendations he ought to at least mark an omission with an asterisk.
paragraph 3,The work of selecting, copying, and editing took ten years; Sparks's ,begin italics,Writings of Washington,end italics, was completed in 1837. The next year, Sparks joined the faculty at Harvard, the first professor of American history. In 1849, a year after the cornerstone was laid for the Washington Monument, Sparks became president of Harvard. He had also published Franklin's papers, written a life of Franklin, and launched a popular book series, the Library of American Biography. People called him the American Plutarch.
paragraph 4,No one noticed Sparks's changes to Washington's prose until 1851, when several of them were separately observed by a British historian and by a contributor to the New York ,begin italics,Evening Post,end italics,. In a flurry of charges and rebuttals, Sparks was accused of painting the president with "patriotic rouge.",superscript,2,baseline, The ,begin italics,Democratic Review,end italics, called him an "Old Fogy" and concluded, "Mr. Jared Sparks has made biography what it never was before—the lie to history." (It was certainly bad, but was it that bad? The fuss had less to do with fleabites than with the stature of the man whose words had been messed with.) As to the specifics, Sparks defended himself by pointing out that he had, after all, supplied a preface, describing at least in part, his editorial methods. And, as to the principle, he invoked "the dignity of history": Washington would not have wanted to be seen, exposed (which is doubtless true); these were his private writings, and if he had intended them to be published, he would have hired someone just like Sparks to fix them up first (also true). The ,begin italics,Literary World,end italics, answered back that what Washington wanted wasn't the point. The point was what the reading public wanted:
paragraph 5,"Washington, we may be sure, will bear to be looked at . . . . The public has seen him too exclusively on horseback and in his regimentals. We want to be nearer to the man. Every reader has felt this—and the biographer who will best supply this by personal anecdotes, even if they fall below that excessive bugbear,,superscript,3,baseline, the dignity of history, will be the truest and best biographer."
(Adapted from ,begin underline,THE STORY OF AMERICA: Essays on Origins,end underline, by Jill Lepore. Copyright © 2012 by Jill Lepore. Published by Princeton University Press and reprinted by permission.)
,superscript,1,baseline, ,begin bold,Bushrod Washington,end bold, George Washington's nephew, an associate justice of the United States Supreme Court from 1798 to 1829
,superscript,2,baseline, ,begin bold,rouge,end bold, makeup that adds color to the cheeks
,superscript,3,baseline, ,begin bold,bugbear,end bold, irritation
Question 1
This question has two parts. Answer Part A, and then answer Part B.
,begin emphasis,Part A,end emphasis,
How does the author respond to the conflicting viewpoints in paragraphs 4 and 5?
Question 1 Answer options with 4 options
1.
The author suggests that Sparks was wrong but did make some logical arguments.
2.
The author indicates that modern historians would likely take a different approach.
3.
The author describes both sides of the disagreement as amusing and out of date.
4.
The author agrees with the claims Sparks made and is scornful of the claims of his critics.
Question 2
,begin emphasis,Part B,end emphasis,
Select ,begin emphasis,two,end emphasis, excerpts from paragraph 4 that together ,begin emphasis,best,end emphasis, support the correct answer from Part A.
Question 2 Answer options with 5 options
1.
"several of them were separately observed by a British historian and by a contributor to the New York ,begin italics,Evening Post,end italics,"
2.
"It was certainly bad, but was it that bad?"
3.
"The fuss had less to do with fleabites than with the stature of the man"
4.
"Washington would not have wanted to be seen, exposed (which is doubtless true)"
5.
"The ,begin italics,Literary World,end italics, answered back that what Washington wanted wasn't the point."
1 answer
Question 1
Part A:
The author suggests that Sparks was wrong but did make some logical arguments. (Option 1)
Question 2
Select two excerpts from paragraph 4 that together best support the correct answer from Part A.
(2) "It was certainly bad, but was it that bad?" and (5) "The, Literary World, answered back that what Washington wanted wasn't the point."
1 answer
1 answer
1 answer
1 answer