5 comments about From Rage To Reason: My Life in Two Americas: My Life in Two Americas.

1. This book is so mistitled on two accounts. First, I would agree with the reviewer below; "From Rage to Reason" was for me, too, "From Rage to Disgust." How can anyone who is writing their OWN story come off so nauseatingly unlikeable? The more you read, the more arrogant, self-centered, and disengenuous Janet Langhart Cohen becomes. Maybe it should be "From Rage to Sickenly Manipulative." Second, this is clearly not a book about "My Life in Two Americas." Her story is simply not about the experience of being black in America. Forget that she's white skinned with caucasain features, she is astonishingly and uniquely beautiful. Perhaps, in her case, the two Americas could more adequately be described as the "few privileged with astounding beauty and the rest of us ordinary-looking people." Now, I have a great admiration for beauty and nothing against a woman using it to her best advantage; we should all put our assets to their best use. But this woman has done nothing to help the plight, the image, the future hopes and dreams of anyone but herself. As the old saying goes, for some women beauty is the biggest disadvantage because they have no need or motivation to develope any skills beyond dressing well and flirting when necessary. Janet Cohen has not proved that race has been a disadvantage for her, only that beauty paired with selfish ambition can produce a hollow, grating, selfish personality. Her "blackness" is used as a convenient excuse when she doesn't get her way or people don't like. People don't like her, obviously, because she is unlikeable. This woman is a horrible role model for any young woman, black, white, or whatever.



2. Janet's book is very excellent, she deserves a standing ovation for a book well written. This book is so interesting and captivating. This is the first time, i have seen someone so clear-cut honest. Janet Cohen is a beautiful woman who deserved all the good things in life. She has broken down racial barriers like Oprah to become of the greatest African-Americans of this era. I strongly recommend this book to people who haven't read it.



3. This is an autobiography so you'd expect Janet Cohen to present herself in a good light. She doesn't. Instead Cohen comes off as a very bitter, self absorbed woman who doesn't seem to have learned anything over the years.



4. for having the courage to tell your story about your rise from the projects of Indianapolis to being a member of a power elite. Yours is a story of struggle, guts and determination to make a name for yourself. Your interracial marriages did create a lot of controversy in the elite, for they don't accept the idea of black/biracial black women marrying elite, upper class nonblack men such as your husband.
   
   You made a name for yourself in modeling early on. I have to give it to you for having kept your face and figure, but that's not all. You have a mind of your own that sometimes conflict with the prevailing views of the establishment, which isn't too accepting of smart, assertive women like you. But then again times has changed.
   
   All I have say is that you rose above it all.



5. I recieved the book very fast and it was in excellent condition.

5 comments about The Years with Ross (Perennial Classics).

1. This biography (which I am very pleased to see has become a classic!) is wonderful - a fine personal memoir of the New Yorker founder and editor, Harold Ross. It talks about his life at work and otherwise, from the point of view of one of the pillars of that magazine's early life, James Thurber. The writing is funny (of course), vivid and immediate. Together with Letters From the Editor and Genius in Disguise, it will bring you as close as it is possible to get to Ross, who was, in my humble opinion, one hell of a guy. A must-read for all editors, would-be or otherwise.



2. James Thurber was in his 60s when he wrote THE YEARS WITH ROSS. Harold Ross was the first editor of The New Yorker. He was a homely man, awkward in manner and speech. Ross couldn't write, but he was a fine editor. He lacked a good education and was sadly unaware of most social graces so he was often uncouth, but he created one of the USA's outstanding magazines. The New Yorker is a stalwart of literary sophistication.

   Thurber's study is not only an intriguing look at a real character of an editor but the story of how a magnificent magazine grew under the guidance of one of the truly talented editors of all time.




3. Thurber got into trouble with his friend and co-New Yorker stalwart E.B. White for writing this portrait of their boss and benefactor. Between them the three wrote most of "The New Yorker" in its crucial first decades. These chapters, first written as a series of articles for "The Atlantic", are a model of the rich, primary source biography. Thurber pulls no punches. His Ross is not "a monument" as he puts it, but a man, worth looking at in all his strange glory. I would rate this book alongside Herndon's Life of Lincoln as one of the best accounts of a man by his contemporary, without the veneer of legend and without an undercurrent of envy. Thurber shared an office with Ross for who knows how many years, learned a lot about writing from him (some examples of his razor fine editing are here to learn from), and did a great deal of his best writing in the man's employ. One of Thurber's best books, and that makes it one of the best books there is. You could do worse than read this book before trying to write a life of anyone who's still living. You could do worse than reading this book before trying to write even one article about the life of somebody alive and real.



4. From 1927 to 1951, James Thurber, the humorist and cartoonist, worked under Harold Ross, the editor of The New Yorker. Both men became internationally famous in those years. The New Yorker was a magazine for the sophisticated.
   
   How Ross created this aura is elusive. Thurber tells us about Ross's devotion to the magazine-he was married "for keeps" to his magazine-and about his hairsplitting attention to detail. These good points seem to be heavily outweighed by his bad points. He quit school early. He wasn't much of a reader: his favorite magazine was True Detective and most of the American writers who are now studied (Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Faulkner) rarely or never appeared in his magazine. He didn't pay much attention to politics. He was a prude. And, as Thurber shows us, he was a poor administrator. He does not seem to be anything out of the ordinary. In fact, Ross often seems like a movie version of a harried editor with the gruff personality and tendency to "bark" orders, but with the heart of gold behind the exterior. He was the unsophisticated editor for the sophisticated.
   
   The secret of his success was the way he could inspire devotion, as exhibited by Thurber writing this book in the first place. The two men's live were bound together for over 20 years. We learn how Thurber met E.B. White five minutes before a meeting with Ross; how White helped Thurber publish his cartoons despite Ross's skepticism; how Ross helped keep Thurber going despite his growing blindness. And, despite the fact that Thurber often makes Ross look foolish, it's a loving portrait. Ross shown at his worst is still endearing.
   
   Because of this, it's probably not the best way to find the whole story about the magazine. In a way, it's just as much about Thurber as it is about Ross. That's not so bad, though.
   
   Thurber tells us a lot about the production of magazine and the writers and cartoonists who appeared there. As mentioned before, Ross didn't publish the big names of the time and because of that, most of the New Yorker contributors of his day are now forgotten. Anecdotes about them and a chapter about Ross's system of payment are the low points of the book.
   
   High points include a chapter about Ross and H.L. Mencken, Wolcott Gibb's guidelines for New Yorker style, and the chapter about Ross's friendship/feud with Alexander Woollcott. The story of Thurber's development as a cartoonist is interesting as well.
   
   The Years With Ross is similar to Mencken's memoir,
   Newspaper Days, in that it also is about the production of a periodical and about the lives of literary figures who aren't remembered today. However, where Mencken's style ranged from slightly acidic to vitriolic, Thurber's is gentle, even when he is poking fun. Here he describes Katherine White's visit to Alexander Woollcott: "He met her at the door clad as usual in pajama bottoms and dressing gown, and every now and then during his monologue that day his great bare belly would coyly appear and disappear, like a romping sea lion. "
   
   Thurber has a nice style and is an amusing writer. He is the sort of writer who more often provokes a chuckle in the back of a reader's throat than he does convulsive laughter.
   
   This isn't an indispensable American classic, but certain people will like it. Thurber's light humor can still amuse. And people who still believe in the magazine will want to read this book. Ross said that the New Yorker wanted "superior prose, funny drawings, and sound journalism, without propaganda." Recently a book review in the Nation complained that a journalist's collection of articles taken from the New Yorker was handicapped by the "the flat-footed New Yorker style." It was different in Ross's day.



5. I grew up with James Thurber on the shelf, his cartoons peopled my imagination from my earliest years and as reading skill grew, his stories (The Secret Life of Walter Mitty, Life and Hard Times, etc.) comprised some of my first grown-up literature. Much later I discovered The New Yorker magazine, the acme of commercial journalism and cartoon art in which this author had once played such a central role. By the time I bumped into the magazine it was well into middle age, James Thurber was gone -- he died in 1961 -- and blindness had ended his drawing career ten years earlier. Prodded by a friend who is a great fan of this author, I have looked him up again in recent years and rediscovered the fresh wit and off-kilter humor of one of our best "casual" writers. (As he would label himself.) THE YEARS WITH ROSS is a biography of Harold W. Ross, the eccentric fanatic who founded and edited The New Yorker for twenty-six years (1925-51). Here is the story of how one dogged genius drew together the best editorial talent of an era and lured many of the best writers of the century to fashion his dream. Ross was capable of utter precision and befuddled oversight. His payment schedule for writers was not only the most niggardly in the magazine business, it was an arcane system of word count, add-ons, deductions, bonuses and penalties which left authors baffled. Meanwhile, Ross' personal secretary siphoned off seventy-one thousand dollars in the late 1930s without his notice. He could agonize for weeks over placement of a comma, dueling with an exalted staff which included the authority himself, E.B. White. Though I found this gem as a second-hand paperback which fell to pieces as I turned each page, I see that it and dozens of Thurber titles are in the local library system, and happily commend it to other New Yorker fans. For a taste of the best of casual writing, check out The Thurber Carnival and other collections from this prince of whimsy. (See also my review of Thurber's ALARMS AND DIVERSIONS, Harper & Brothers, 1957)

5 comments about All Governments Lie: The Life and Times of Rebel Journalist I. F. Stone.

1. I had been looking forward eagerly to All Governments Lie, Myra MacPherson's thorough study of I.F. Stone's work and times. I had a deep personal interest in the project and confess to being absolutely delighted with the results.
   
   I mention a deep personal interest and the reasons for this are many. For starters: I am a contemporary and there aren't too many of us left. It is true that he was 10 years my senior but still we shared depression and war and cold war years. I can't say that we knew each other, although we did meet on a few widely scattered occasions, but I did attend his school, The University of Pennsylvania. There in his home town of Philadelphia, I moved in circles that included relatives and friends with whom he had grown up. That enables me to say that I had a good second hand acquaintance with him.
   
   I introduce myself in this manner to justify the comments I am about to make about the book. I confine myself to just one area of the book's treatment of the life of the man the author calls "the rebel journalist". I felt warm satisfaction in the way she swept into the garbage pail the ludicrous charge that Stone was guilty of espionage for the Soviet Union. She is convincing on the subject and reminds us of what should put an end to this baseless gossip. The F.B.I. never found one shred of evidence, and it was not for lack of trying.
   
   J. Edgar Hoover was a stubborn, determined man when he had a hated target in his sights. He despised Stone to the point where he had made up his mind to get rid of him. To him the Stone threat was in the same class as those of Martin Luther King and Albert Einstein and we recall the viciousness and relentlessness of his attempts to ruin them. On the matter of the espionage smear, I can state with warm satisfaction now, because of this book: "Case closed!"
   
   On a related theme, Ms MacPherson demonstrates a level of insight and understanding not always displayed by writers discussing her book. She comprehends, as they do not, that one had to have lived through the epoch to realize how it was possible to have taken pro-Soviet stands in the 1930s and '40s. With the hind sight of this century one can sneer at one who was so blind as to be taken in by Joseph Stalin. But for one who lived through the period, and Ms. MacPherson did not, I am in a position to make some points on this.
   
   Those of us who lived during those years with our eyes and ears open, were aware of the threat that soon developed into the nightmare of World War II. We saw in Mussolini's invasion of Ethiopia and Hitler's various menacing moves what the world would be faced with if measures weren't taken. Yet it was only the Soviet representative at the League of Nations during the mid to late 30s, Maxim Litvinov, who stood up and made the much needed accusations and called for collective security. The Italian and German n delegations walked out and the representatives of the great democracies remained cowed and silent. Let me add to this the shameful memory of the Spanish Civil War and the so called Non-intervention Committee. Only The Soviet Union and Mexico came to the aid of the legitimately elected government of Republican Spain.
   
   Many highly respected people wrote admiringly of the Soviet Union, from the muckraking journalist, Lincoln Steffens, to Beatrice and Sidney Webb to Ambassador Joseph E. Davies to the saintly Hewlett Johnson, Dean of Canterbury Cathedral.
   
   If you weren't there then, it's easy to look back now and ask: "How could he not have known?" Well, Myra MacPherson wasn't there then, but she has the insight to reveal the situation that existed and to explain the way decent people lined up.
   
   This book is a must reading for younger generations who know so little about these times.



2. In the interest of full disclosure, I have a bit of personal history with Izzy, Esther, and their son Chris, as well as a smaller bit with the author. From 1959 to 1962 I was a classmate and acquaintance of Chris in law school. Chris told me about his dad and convinced me to subscribe to I.F. Stone's Weekly, which I continued to do until its demise. Sometime in 1966 or 1967 while living in Washinton, DC, I threw a party and on a whim invited Izzy and Esther, and to my great surprise, they accepted and showed up. Then, to cap it off, two months ago, when I was about halfway through the book, I was at a cocktail party and was introduced to someone named...Myra MacPherson. Of course I was entranced with the bizarre coincidence of meeting someone whose book I was currently reading. I mention all this in case you might want to discount my enthusiasm for the book because of possible bias.
   
   This book is valuable for so many reasons: first, it tells the story of a life well lived, of a man who had the courage to follow his passion and tell the truth as he saw it, letting the chips fall where they would without being intimidated by any possible reactions. It is an inspirational story. Second, it provides a perspective on American history from the thirties and into the seventies, with Izzy's prescience about our role in Vietnam presaging similar concerns about our current role in Iraq. Third, it traces the history of leftist politics with all the various and twisting strands during that period. Fourth, it documents the depredations of the FBI in its view of certain varieties of free speech as subversive, along with those of the House Un-American Activities Committee. And fifth, it reveals pusillanimity of most other journalists, who were passively accepting and passing along goverment lies during that period. All told, quite an accomplishment.
   
   If I have a quibble, it would be the 600+ page length, especially all the space devoted to each FBI report. I kept thinking, "Enough already--I get it!" Also, I felt concerned that the formidable length might deter potential readers, and that would be a shame because this book is a gem, a slightly oversize gem perhaps, but a gem nonetheless.



3. This is a good book, although I agree that it's too long. My one quibble is with the subtitle, specifically: "Rebel Journalist I. F. Stone." Izzy Stone is one of the few celebrities I admire, but he was no rebel. The noun "rebel" means "To refuse allegiance to and oppose by force an established government or ruling authority." Stone certainly did not support the idea of opposing the United States government by force. The very foundation of I. F. Stone's Weekly, and his rare genius, lay in exposing government misdeeds and power abuses by revealing the government's own words! Hardly a rebellious act. As to refusing allegiance, although Stone was no blind patriot, he refused allegiance to the illegitimate authority of the likes of Joseph McCarthy, HUAC loyalty oaths, and the infamous J. Edgar Hoover. Stone was a reformer, in the best sense of that word. He was no rebel.
   On the other hand, if the English language has so deteriorated that I.F. Stone was a rebel, then we need millions more like him!



4. To suggest, as Myra McPherson does, that I.F. Stone was willing, too often, to give the Soviet Union the benefit of the doubt, is to elide entirely, that Stone was an agent of influence for the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union bought enormous numbers of his mom and pop newsletter, thus subsidizing him handsomely. He was able, as a result of this, to maintain a comfortable life style while paying for his children's college tuition. His job was to always attack America and to never to criticize the Soviet Union, even praising it when necessary. It seems incredible now that Stone was able to get away with it during his lifetime. McPherson, a writer of the left who served as Ben Bradlee's pit bull at the Washington Post, where she did her damage at the Style section, never has an unkind word for her fellow lefties. To miss this basic and most important aspect of Stone's career is inexcusable.



5. To his throngs of fans, he was a "rebel" who stood up to the powerful and exposed the lies they told those beneath them. Always digging to find the truth in a story, and expose the corrupt use and abuses of power.
   
   However, to a more objective observer, Stone's lust for the "truth" only extended to the United States and her allies. For the early part of his career he was remarkably silent on the Soviets and other progressive "bulwarks against fascism". After his romance with the Soviets ended, he continued to afford their third world proxies, from Castro to Ho Chi Minh, the same uncritical support.
   
   While McPherson is partially correct in her assessment that Stone was not "officially" (wink wink, nudge nudge) working for the NKVD/KGB, she is dead wrong that Stone was not mentioned in the VENONA cables as "BLIN" and that he was not an "agent of influence" for the Soviets. The definitive book on the subject (which McPherson uses as a source) by Haynes and Klehr is quite explicit on the fact that the Blin was Stone's code name, and that he was open to recruitment by the NKVD, although nothing came of it because he feared the FBI would find out. Stone did cooperate with the KGB, Kalugin makes this 100% clear. Stone's willingness to uncritically regurgitate Soviet propaganda is why would the Soviets never had to buy the cow. McPherson uses the ploy of minimizing the evidence and overstating the accusation.
   
   From Stone's lies about Syngman Rhee starting the Korean War, to his lies about the US's use of biological weapons against the North Korean and Chinese forces, to his continued defense of Alger Hiss (birds of a feather I suppose) and to his long and slavish devotion to Soviet socialism and later just Soviet style socialism, he has demonstrated himself less a journalist and more the type of propagandist he accused everyone else of. While I am sure that all of Stone's conclusion were "gleaned from key pieces of official documents" his shockingly poor judgment on some of the most critical questions of the 20th century, and the tortured logic he used to defend these positions, certainly does not qualify him for the showers of praise and respect he now receives.
   
   McPherson obviously has a blind spot for Stone and this trite, hero worshipping, agitprop of a biography is a reflection of that. Any reading of this book should be tempered with that fact.

1 comments about In Defense of Our Neighbors: The Walt and Milly Woodward Story.

1. One of the tragic consequences of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 was the panicked reaction of the American government resulting in the forcible relocation of the Japanese Americans into internment camps for the duration of the war years. "In Defense Of Our Neighbors: The Walt And Milly Woodward Story" is the true and personal account of a husband and wife who used the pages of their Bainbridge Island, Washington newspaper 'Banbridge Review' to plead for compassion and restraint with respect to the government's relocating the 227 men, women and children of Japanese descent who lived on Bainbridge Island (a half-hour ferry ride from Seattle across the waters of the Puget Sound) on March 30, 1942 in accordance with orders originating with President Roosevelt. This was the first relocation effort the government engaged in and became the model for all the other community evacuations up and down the western coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington. During the years of internments, Walt and Milly continued to publish news of their neighbors' weddings, births, deaths, and other milestones -- including details of the conditions of those internment camps to which their neighbors had been exiled. This obscure episode of 20th century American history is told in great and documented detail by Mary Woodward, the daughter of Walt and Milly and includes previously unpublished photos from local historical societies, poignant reflections from internment survivors and Bainbridge locals, and is a unique, informative, and highly recommended addition to academic and community library 20th Century American History reference collections and supplemental reading lists.

5 comments about Nancy Cunard: Heiress, Muse, Political Idealist.

1. Regrettably, this biography is seriously flawed, frankly a disgrace, in respect of Henry Crowder and throughout. There is hardly a page in the book without demonstrable error of fact, misrepresentation, unfounded speculation or garbled citation. Columbia University Press were twice alerted that there were problems when an advance proof fell into the present writer's hands two or three months before publication. The Press did not respond. Caroline Weber's New York Times review is foolish in the extreme. Anne Chisholm's 1979 biography remains indispensable. While Gordon has uncovered new material (not about Henry Crowder in which she is particularly deficient) she has not been able to make sense of it. The true story of Crowder is told in the book+CD Listening for Henry Crowder scheduled fall 2007.
   
   Although readers must judge for themselves, it is incumbent upon someone or other who has studied some of the particulars to point out the book's shortcomings, which are drastic. The book's flamboyant style may appear to be "a good read". All the more reason to alert the general reader. That Cunard's life was replete with extraordinary events and relationships does not confer upon the biographer the right to play fast and loose. Such treatment may befit an exploitative Hollywood movie but not a literary documentation with academic credentials. It may be that few care. Neverthless . . . In respect of, for example, Crowder, by Cunard's admission the single most important man in her life, a good deal of the information the author needed had been available to her for some years in an exploratory article in a journal, which was also posted online. Either she chose to ignore it or she did not find it, though it was easy to find. Unfortunately, she does not even get the facts right from the sources she does use and her misdemeanors extend far beyond that particular subject. (Crowder does not even figure in a list of Cunard's friends in an interview with the author on the publisher's website, while another, with whom she had no relationship whatsoever, is proposed as a lover.)
   
   In response to a comment on my original brief posting: I have mentioned my forthcoming book on Crowder's life (which will not receive wide distribution or review) and Anne Chisholm's earlier, easily available, elegant, sober, generous, decent biography of Cunard, which is grudgingly noted and casually mistreated by Gordon, in order to give general readers the opportunity to find other takes on Cunard, which they might otherwise miss, and so allow them to judge from a well-informed position.



2. I just finished Lois Gordon's deeply moving tale of an unbelievably heroic, remarkable woman about whom I knew very little. I now feel I know the soul of Nancy Cunard, thanks to the author's wonderfully engaging, well-documented presentation. The book's fluent style and breadth of information are impressive. I agree with the majority here who have praised this fascinating biography. Buy this book, settle into your favorite chair, and prepare to meet the caring, complex, flawed, passionate woman that was Nancy Cunard.



3. This is a brilliant, sensitive, thoroughly researched biography which is a model example of how such things should be done. The author writes of the First World War experiences in London as if she had personally lived through them. Her understanding of the complex and bizarre Nancy Cunard, of her weird mother, of her strange friends, of her insane promiscuity, of her serial preying upon the creative elite by means of 'genital consumption', of her impossible psychlogy, of the whole phantasmagoria which Nancy Cunard represented, are really a triumph of empathy and insight, as well as of organisation of material. Lois Gordon's ability to master large volumes of action and hysteria without flinching qualify her for a top military command.



4. A facinating look at a most interesting woman. Well ahead of her time. Also many insights to a span of recent history often neglected.



5. If Lois Gordon was writing about a fictional character she could not have told a story of a more exciting person than Nancy Cunard. However, Nancy Cunard was indeed an individual who lived in the early part of last century whose exploits, altruism, and literary talent were extraordinary by any standards. She was a legendary beauty, with a great mind, who was extremely devoted to the disadvantaged people of the world and their struggles. This is an unusual and remarkable combination of qualities that is brilliantly depicted throughout this wonderful book. Simply, I could not put the book down once I had started reading. I can highly recommend it.

5 comments about The Gonzo Way: A Celebration of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson.

1. Don't waste your time with this book. It's horrible and lacks any insight despite being written by Thompon's wife (though she wasn't with him long and it shows!). Why does she feel the need to apologize for his "stoned twisted, ripped...good people" side? I mean REAL Thompson fans KNOW that's not the only essence of him...even though, yes, his "lifestyle" did provide a sort of romatic idea for the outsider to think about while living mundane lives. But thanks to Anita she does a good job of ruining that too...I don't smoke, use drugs of any kind, and have always loved Thompson for his work and his life and I can tell you, this book has NOTHING!. So sad and it only diminishes my ideals for true Gonzo and Thompson since it appears he really did have a load of "leeches" at his side. So sad to see his legacy degraded this way!



2. I think The Gonzo Way is great, especially now that I've had some time to reflect on it.



3. This is a very short and simple insight in to Hunter S. Thompson's lifestyle written by his wife. It is an interesting enough read. Definitely lacks the originallity and verve of a work authored by Thomspson.



4. I bought this as a gift for my son and he was very pleased with it. He loves anything to do with Hunter S. Thompson. He did not even know this book was out there so he was very pleased with it and it was written by his wife so it gave a totally different look at his life. It is also a shorter story and that really appealed to my son. For those of you out there that don't like to read a lot this is the perfect book for you. It gives a lot of detail but is not over written,



5. A refreshing & touching look at the good Doctor from the person who was closest to him, his widow. A VERY quick read, it offers the reader an insight into what made Dr. Thompson OUR Dr. Thompson. It describes what drove the man that drove a generation. Written as a list of code of ethics{yes,I here you laughing},it shows the humane side of H.S.T.
   I was skeptical at first after reading some of the reviews. Most of the negatives are not deserved. If your looking for same old Hunter madness,this is not for you.
   If your open to see another side of the good Doctor, as he said best, "buy the ticket, take the ride"....

5 comments about Prisoner of X: 20 Years in the Hole at Hustler Magazine.

1. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll wish that once in a while you had actually read some of the articles. This book is as hilarious as Hustler often was during Allan's tenure. A common misconception about this book is that it is about Larry Flynt. This book is not about Larry Flynt--it is about Allan MacDonell. If you want to learn more about Larry Flynt, you should probably visit his website. If you want to learn more about what it is REALLY like to oversee the day-to-day operations of America's most notorious stroke rag--penile scabs and all--then this is the book for you! My only complaint about Prisoner of X is that Allan has not yet recorded an audio-book version, but that's coming up next, right Mr. MacDonell?



2. Although the prose is a little self consciously rich at times, this is the most laugh out loud funny book I have read since Howard Stern's Private Parts memoir.The most inside look at not only Flynt and Hustler but the entire porn scene from the 80's and 90's. His description of porn legend Tori Welles on page 118 is uncanny-"Complexion the color of cinnamon or bourbon, brunette mane of body and bounce, flaunting the defiant cheekbones and chin of an urchin empress, the sublime Ms. Welles stepped with the self-assurance of the lifelong stone fox." (See what I mean about the prose?) When he's done describing her, you will know exactly what she looked like and what her sexual magnetism was all about even if you have never seen her. Hilarious, insightful, sarcastic. Would make a great movie.



3. Is it possible to write a book where the main character is yourself and you are the hero only because everyone else is insane, a sleazebag or just generally unpleasant? The author, MacDonell, at least, proves that you can. I kept thinking, "Boy, this guy's a jerk," at the same time I feverishly sped through his 20 year memoir of working at Hustler magazine. The stories he tells are at times shocking, sad, hilarious, occasionally boring (but these bits pass quickly), titillating and raucous (hey, kind of like Hustler magazine itself!). One can't help but feel for the guy at the same time one might not want anything to do with him.
   
   The first half of the book is probably the toughest on his character (and interestingly he doesn't spare himself much). He was abusing drugs, women and himself, paranoid that he would be fired on a daily basis, and basically existing hand to mouth on his low wages (dating a girl at one time because she owned a VCR!). At a certain point time (after a particularly scaring DUI incident) he gets cleaned up and doesn't even drink. It's somewhat downplayed, but his success at the magazine soars at this point.
   
   While he bashes almost everyone, (name dropping Dennis Hopper, Frank Zappa, who at times were friends of Flynt or connected to the magazine, and he cares for neither), he is particularly nasty to his fellow inmates at the asylum and of course hardest on his pyscho boss, Larry Flynt. (Once again these people probably deserve even worse criticism), but it would be nice to hear a more good tales (he admits at one point that his staff - when he rises to power - was actually a good one).
   
   Comparison's have been made to Hunter S. Thompson, and while I think these are somewhat accurate as far as characters and subject matter, that should not indicate that the writing (and or editing) is nearly in that league. The book feels a little flabby (and repetitive near the end), and probably could have been 50 pages shorter.
   
   Another complaint is no photos - it would be nice to know what some of these people looked like. The great cover art is by Daniel Clowes but there are no further illustrations (that would have been better than photos!)
   
   Besides all the juicy gossip about the mag there is also some poltical stuff that is very fascinating (as they destroy one Republican senator's career, defend Clinton and try to trash Bush (Jr.). If you've ever read the magazine this book will be of interest to you. Even better on the porn industry itself is "The Other Hollywood: The Uncensored Oral Histroy of the Porn Film Industry" by Legs McNeil (also reviewed by yours truly).



4. This is an interesting book by a writer who worked his way up the ranks at Hustler magazine for twenty years. He's brutally honest about the inner workings of the magazine including his descriptions of the pedophile Dwaine Tinsley and the sociopathic Larry Flynt, as well as about his own moral and social failings. This is good reading for anyone interested in the history of the magazine or in learning about what it was like working inside the porn magazine industry during the latter part of the Twentieth Century. As to be expected it's sexually explicit so if that bothers you, you might want to skip this one. The sexual descriptions were not gratuitous and I felt they were necessary for the honest story-telling this book provides.



5. I met Larry Flynt once. It left an impression on me. It wasn't good. The man just seemed to have sleeze permeate out of his pores. And he seemed all spaced out, like way too many drugs had interacted with way too much debauchery, intermixing in a personality that was pretty degraded right from the get-go. What must it be like to work for such a man?
   
   Allan MacDonell knows, and he tells all the dirt in PRISONER OF X. An inside story of the man who rose to top of the pond scum at Larry Flynt Publications, it is a story well worth reading, boys and girls. Well worth reading.
   
   For some quirk of personality that would require years of therapy to explain, MacDonell had always wanted to work for a smut mag when he finally landed the job at Hustler. What he found was a work environment that was akin to a school of piranhas, with each fish trying its hardest to eat the flesh off of anyone higher up the ladder. And with Larry himself often enjoying the spectacle, like a Roman emperor enjoying the modern day gladiators of smut trying to take one another down. Amazingly, the dude lasted 19 years.
   
   During that time, MacDonell met his share of pornstars, celebrities, and, of course, downright degenerates, many of whom were on the payroll. But many were more famous, and no details are spared. Even if you are familiar with the Godfather of Soul's reputation with the ladies, you wil still be really, really alarmed at what you read here. MacDonell also was there for some of the high times, like when Hustler took down Congressman Livingston, who was set to become Speaker of the House, or the offer to Jenna Bush to pose naked for a cool $10 million.
   
   Often hilarious, often mermerizing, PRISONER OF X also often leaves you with the same feeling as you have after looking at porn. You known, all empty inside and a bit embarassed. But for some reason, you keep going back, don't you? Yeah, you know you do. And you want to check out this book, too. Don't you? Well, do it. It won't leave any permanent damage.

5 comments about Woodward and Bernstein: Life in the Shadow of Watergate.

1. This book is a terrific explanation of the Kismet that brought Woodward and Bernstein together with the fortunate, and rare, backing of a committed publisher to chronicle truth in the midst of near-battlefield conditions. Read it and be amazed that it happened. Read it and be proud of journalism, many members of Congress, our courts and citizens reading, watching, and caring that our government, not politics, carried the day. It's so interestingly written that it shoved aside all the rest of the books on my "must read" pile.



2. Alicia C. Shepard has written what should become the definitive biography of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. Her book is scholarly without being pedantic and revelatory without being salacious. She skillfully shows how Watergate affected not only history, but journalism, and the lives of the two young men who doggedly pursued the truth. This book is must reading for anyone who wants to become a journalist, or who cares about what journalists do.
   
   John DeDakis
   CNN Senior Copy Editor, "The Situation Room"
   Author, FAST TRACK
   [...]



3. When the five burglars bungled their bugging mission at the Watergate in June of 1972, they unwittingly changed not only our country's political history, but its journalistic one as well. Alicia Shepard has masterfully chronicled the successes and struggles, both professional and personal, of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, the men who blew the lid off Watergate, in this informative and enjoyable book. She recounts their investigation of the scandal, illuminating a new perspective through extensive interviews with their editors. She pulls no punches in exposing their triumphs and their failures in the ensuring three decades, in their reporting, their marriages, and even their relationship with each other. The result is an eminently readable book that will leave you feeling as if you have finally gotten the inside scoop on the men whose names are synonymous with Watergate.
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   



4. A MUST-READ FOR WATERGATE JUNKIES! We have all followed Woodward and Bernstein's careers through newspaper articles and the occa¬sional TV interview. Now Alicia Shepard has gathered all those data into a book about what Watergate did for them...and to them. It is a fascinating tale of young reporters who got sudden fame and fortune early in their lives, and how Woodward prospered while Bernstein foundered.
   Shepard had access to their entire Watergate archives, and my only criticism of the book is its liberal quotations of that material. When "letters and telegrams" pour in from all over the country to them, it is not necessary to quote from so many. It slows down the narrative and you will find yourself skipping over most of these repetitive passages. All in all, it is a 266 page book that would have a much easier read at about 225. But if you love Water¬gate and all that came in its wake, pick up this book and read about how it careened the careers of these little reports to un¬known heights and depths.



5. The irony here is that neither Woodward nor Bernstein would speak with the author, despite having made millionaires out of themselves over the past 30-plus years by insinuating themselves into other peoples' lives and putting everything they've ever been told by anyone about anyone else between book covers. A bit of a double standard. Still, this look at how Watergate affected these two reporters is an engrossing read and a first class research job. Many many intriguing revelations for anyone who follows journalism and those who still like to read about the Watergate scandal. It's all tied up with a red bow because of the revelation in 2005 that Deep Throat was former FBI official Mark Felt, a secret that Woodstein kept religiously for three decades. Woodward's latest books on Bush are a bit boring, but that doesn't come across here. His Belushi expose remains his best, but this book points out that Woodward never again went outside politics in his reporting. Too bad. He should.

3 comments about The Making of FDR: The Story of Stephen T. Early, America's First Modern Press Secretary.

1. THE MAKING OF FDR: THE STORY OF STEPHEN T. EARLY, AMERICA'S FIRST MODERN PRESS SECRETARY tells of one of the most influential men in mid-20th-century America - the press secretary who got Roosevelt's image and message out to the press, helping shape his image and programs during the Depression and World War II. More than just another FDR biography, this highlights the actions and approaches of the behind-the-scenes man who helped not only publicize FDR, but furthered programs that were to change America. Any high school to college-level history holding needs this.



2. Biography of Stephen Early. A rich and compelling account of how Steve Early managed press relations for FDR. Early brought to the White House a solid grounding in covering high level public affairs. Given the 'fly by the seat of your pants' policies of the New Deal responses to the Depression and the desperate secrecy required by waging WWII, he figured out ways to make the White House more accessible to reporters while helping to frame FDR's image as a great leader. A really fascinating juggling act. A valuable insight to difficult decades in U.S. history.



3. Excellent historical account of the rise of FDR and the importance of the media in creating an interest in - and image of - a rising politician in an era when the media actually protected the privacy and peccadillos of political figures. A very interesting read, very rich in detail, about the power of the press and the life of the White House Press Secretary.

1 comments about An Orphan in History: One Man's Triumphant Search for His Jewish Roots.

1. I read this book many years ago, and still remember it. Cowan was raised a secular Jew, in a wealthy family, in one of the richest suburbs of Chicago. His parents did raise him to be proud of his culture, and to remember the tragedy of the Holocaust.
   After he attends elite schools (one Episcopalian), and moves to Manhattan as a journalist, he becomes interested in Judaism, especially its spiritual aspects. He studies it; attends synagogues; and becomes very open to it in every way. He eventually takes up its ancient rituals, such as putting on tfillin (phylacteries) and praying.
   His wife, a non-Jew, observes him carefully, and also becomes extremely involved in Judaism, eventually converting.
   He also interviews others about Judaism. One interview which is particularly compelling is of a Jew who had attended the elite Episcopalian school with the author, where all students had to pray (Christian) prayers every morning in the chapel. He revealed to Cowan that he had been raised as a Jew, and even had had a Bar-Mitzva. He became very upset every day in that chapel, being forced to say
   non-Jewish prayers, but could reveal his feelings (and his background) to no one.
   This book is one of the best-written describing a person's tremendous attraction and exploration of Judaism. It is not easy writing about one's spiritual experience, but Cowan does a tremendous job.
   I feel sad that more people have not read this book. Also tragic is that the author died (from leukemia) in his forties, so that his work is not well-known. However, his wife, Rachel Cowan, has continued her own exploration of Jewish spiritually, eventually becoming a Rabbi. She carries on the essence of this book.