Analysis of David McCullough's 1776

¶ … 1776" by David McCullough

The novel "1776" by David McCullough functions not only as a recollection of historical event surrounding the American Revolution and the eventual independence of America as a nation, but it also acts as a supplement source or guide to the realities that both Americans and British have experienced during the Revolution. In it, McCullough provided insights into the "makings" of a conflict and revolution that radically changed the world order from 18th century onwards. By projecting the lives of the British and Americans during this period, McCullough had effectively portrayed the contrast between the lives of the two nations (Great Britain and America), and how the latter nation's explicit experiences of repression led to its triumph as a powerful nation of the world.

Noteworthy among the McCullough's depictions of American hardships prior to their independence is the contrasting lives of Great Britain's King George III and America's Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army. Contradictions in the life of the British King and the American Commander-in-Chief demonstrated the effects in the lives of Americans as they are continuously controlled -- politically and economically -- by their parent country, Great Britain. The novel, in effect, highlights the "fall" of Great Britain from being the prime European nation that dominated the New World, and the rise of the Americans, who, despite their experiences of hardships and potential great loss from the Revolution, were able to triumph because of Americans who considered unity vital and the key to achieving independence from Britain.

The life of King George III was illustrated as that of an individual who had a great vision for his country, but lost sight of this vision after Britain achieved greatness since its discovery and dominance of the New World. McCullough's slant became obvious when he depicted the life of the British King, wherein he demonstrated how King George III was "unfit" to rule over the British Army because of his lack of experience to hardships and his inability to experience and understand the hard life of both British and American civil societies. As a leader, the author described him as follows: "[h]e had never been a soldier. He had never been to America, any more than he had set foot in Scotland or Ireland. But with absolute certainty he knew what must be done. He would trust to Providence and his high sense of duty. America must be made to obey."