4 comments about Scott of the Antarctic: A Life of Courage and Tragedy.

1. The history of Arctic exploration is not a subject I've ever had a particular interest in. I picked this book up more or less by chance, was intrigued enough to buy it ... and haven't been able to put it down. The story itself is absolutely gripping from beginning to end, but it's the intelligence and skill of the writing that makes this such a memorable and remarkable book. Wonderful. Six stars.



2. I particularily like the subtitle to this book, 'a life of courage and tragedy.'
   
   Scott was undoubtedly courageous. He could not have been otherwise. On the other hand, his courage and drive to get to the South Pole was not exactly balanced by experience or perhaps by common sense. There's an old saying that if you wanted to get somewhere like the South Pole, Scott would have been a good leader to follow, but if you wanted to get back, then other expedition leaders like Shackleton would be your first choice. Shackleton's quotation: 'Better a live donkey than a dead lion.' Consistent with this, Scott got to the South Pole, Shackleton didn't. Scott didn't get back.
   
   In this book, the author is clearly a deep admirer of Scott. And indeed he did great things. Coming from a humble beginning he appeared driven to accomplish things, and he did. He was a complicated man, and Mr. Crane's access to the family papers and Scott's letters give a view that is perhaps more balanced than what we have seen before.
   
   If nothing else, Mr. Crane is an excellent writer and the story becomes one of those can't put down books.



3. The book is dreadful. It continually refers to other expeditions that the average reader will not know about. The writing is random and its impossible to follow the thread. There are also many deliberate and irrelevant literary references just inserted to be clever. A great subject that I w\as looking forward to, treated very badly by a pseudo intellectual. Try as I might I could not finish it.



4. David Crane shows how the death of the explorer Captain Scott galvanized the UK on the edge of World War I, but he qualifies British response to the tragedy by pointing up that, despite the weight of popular opinion, the pre-war Edwardian years were not exactly the Golden Age of empire the way they are nowadays painted. Crane's life of Scott is in every way a re-revisionist biography, kicking against what he feels has been the unfair denigration of Scott's life and deeds over the past thirty years.
   
   Sometimes this approach works, sometimes it doesn't. Through meticulous handling of evidence, he tells the story without a hint of strain, and yet sometimes whole paragraphs stop the action to argue that history has shafted Scott once again. A prototypical Englishman in the days when "God was an Englishman," Scott has suffered from unthinking backlhas, or so says Crane, and indeed he says it about four hundred times so that, frankly, I began to sympathize with Scott's attackers a bit, for no one's that perfect.
   
   Indeed Crane admits as much, citing his rivalry with Shackleton and then finally with Amundsen as proof, but in each case, the other man is deeply at fault and Scott was just trying to muddle through on Naval smarts and years of experience leading men. It was a time for heroics, and something in the air (together with a thriving media culture) made heroes out of the most unlikely souls. England expected every man to do his duty, and alas so did Norway and Amundsen came home with the gold, so to speak, whereas the Englishmen after the same glittering prize were all dead by the time Amundsen returned home. "The Englishmen, the goal accompished," bleated the press, "lay quiet in the snows. Through the months since . . . while wives and friends set forth for meetings and counted time, they lay oblivious. All was over for them long ago."
   
   Beyond the heroics of the era, Crane attributes the legend of Captain Scott to his indispitable skill as a prose writer. There is something macabre about the veneration given to his last journal, found by the relief party, but it's a bizarre twist totally understandable in the context, the words that live on after the hand that wrote them has grown cold and still. Without that last journal, its reinscription of subaltern heroics, its narrative of deprivation and memory and love, how else would Scott be remembered? In this regard Crane has an interesting passage about the way in which Westminster Abbey had its own little competition going on with St. Paul's Cathedral about which site had the most pomp and had the most heroes of empire commemmorated there.

No comments about Simon Bolivar.

5 comments about Campaigning With Grant.

1. Porter writes as if the North was never wrong, its commanders never fooled or mistaken, its armies never disspirited, and that the Union campaigns always succeeded. We all should know better. According to Porter, every time the Confederates didn't hold a field they were "repulsed handsomely." Every time the Union didn't hold the field, they were merely "compelled to retire." You will see these gross aberrations throughout this stale and shoddy work. His characterizations add nothing fresh about the famous personages surrounding him, and certainly his military perspective offers less in quality of insight than the diary of any Union private. There are many great books on the Civil War by the figures who fought it: this one can wait until you've exhausted everything else.



2. These are the personal reminiscences of Horace Porter, Aide-de-Camp to General Grant. He joined Grant April 4, 1864 and served with him for 9 years, 1864-1872. So by definition expect Federal bias and a father like depiction of Grant. That said, this is a very good Civil War learning tool, insightful as only the reflections of someone who was privy to the highest councils of Union command could be.

   From his promotion to General-in-Chief until the end of the war, Grant had to make many tough decisions. Porter reports a number of these in this book. But he also reports on Grant, General of the Armies. My comments to come are not intended to in any way denigrate Robert E. Lee. Let's face it, Lee's performance was awesome. However, Grant's performance was much better, if for no other reason than Grant's authority was greater than Lee's. Until the very last days of the war, Jeff Davis acted as his own General-in-Chief. For all but 3 weeks, Lee only commanded the Army of Northern Virginia. Grant, however, commanded all Federal armies. Thus, as biased as Porter's work necessarily is, Porter does give us the first and best look at a true modern general. Grant's political awareness, his understanding of logistics, close coordination with the navy, handling multiple armies, ability to improvise, understand and forge new methods of warfare such as Sherman's march, "mark him as the exceptional general of the nineteenth century".

   Porter book gives us a unique view of how Grant's abilities evolved. Equally important we get in-depth reviews of a variety of Union participants everyone from Lincoln, to Hancock, Dana, Meade, Sherman and Sheridan just to mention a few. These personal reflections are quite worthwhile.

   This is one interesting book, written by a well positioned observer. It is a book that adds greatly to understanding the Union participants of the Civil War.




3. These are the personal reminiscences of Horace Porter, Aide-de-Camp to General Grant. He joined Grant April 4, 1864 and served with him for 9 years, 1864-1872. So by definition expect Federal bias and a father like depiction of Grant. That said, this is a very good Civil War learning tool, insightful as only the reflections of someone who was privy to the highest councils of Union command could be.

   From his promotion to General-in-Chief until the end of the war, Grant had to make many tough decisions. Porter reports a number of these in his book. Most importantly, however, he reports on Grant, General of the Armies. My comments to come are not intended to denigrate Robert E. Lee in any way. Let's face it, Lee's performance was awesome. However, Grant's performance was much better, if for no other reason than Grant's authority was greater than Lee's. Until the very last days of the war, Jeff Davis acted as his own General-in-Chief. For all but 4-5 weeks, Lee only commanded the Army of Northern Virginia. Grant, however, commanded all Federal armies. Thus, as biased as Porter's work necessarily is, Porter does give us the first and best look at a true modern general. Grant's political awareness, his understanding of logistics, close coordination with the navy, handling multiple armies, ability to improvise, understand and forge new methods of warfare such as Sherman's march, "mark him as the exceptional general of the nineteenth century". He really was.

   Porter's book gives us a unique view of how Grant's abilities evolved. Equally important we get in-depth reviews of a variety of Union participants, everyone from Lincoln, to Hancock, Dana, Meade, Sherman and Sheridan just to mention a few. These personal reflections are quite worthwhile.

   This is one interesting book, written by a well positioned observer. It is a book that adds greatly to understanding the workings of the Union high command during the final year of the Civil War.




4. The personal anecdotes are truly amazing. This was written by one of Grant's closest aides during the Eastern Theatre campaign. This book shows and disputes the old arguments of Grant as a Butcher. An Important read for those who want to find the real Grant!



5. I'm in the middle of this right now. It's a long book, over
   500 pages, and yet there is nothing tiring or tedious about it.
   Somehow it flows on in a way few other books have for me.
   I credit Porter's writing.
   
   When this book was first handed to me, I set it aside, having
   little taste for the carnage I had read of before. But this
   book is about *people*, not about death. Its as a study of
   humanity that this book excells.
   
   Yes, there is a heavy Union partisanship - Porter is human.
   But he also writes about the near-insanity of waging this war
   across the American map. He knows how deep he and everyone
   around him has descended into the pit.
   
   The greatness of the book is that Porter's humanity and his
   keen study of the human natures around him grow greater in
   these monsterous circumstances.
   
   And there are hints here of a history that I've read very little
   of. A terrible shadow of despair behind Lincoln and Grant, a
   feeling that Grant is the Union's last chance. Porter paints a
   group portrait of the Union leadership on the verge of tearing
   itself apart. Teetering on the edge of a wave of duels. A war
   of personalities in the Union which reflects the Civil War
   itself. The very concept of human society put to the test on
   all scales.
   
   And what is Porter's opinion of Grant? Calm. Utterly fearless.
   An executive genius. Utterly respectful of other human beings
   *except* those who mistreat the people and animals entrusted
   to them. A man who engenders iron loyalty. As Porter says at one
   point, Grant was given the most appalling task in the history
   of the nation, and he accomplished it. A man with a genius for
   stabilizing personalities, for keeping them socialized, for
   bringing out the very best in them. A man with absolute faith
   in the human spirit, and the force of will to bring out the
   best in people.
   
   One last note: somehow I grew up with the idea that Lincoln
   was this slow-moving man, and a stodgy speaker. Porter describes
   the exact opposite, a Lincoln still angular, almost freakish,
   but swift-handed in greeting his friends. And a Lincoln who's
   verbal fluency is as swift as his anecdotes are wise.
   
   This is a marvelous window into our past.

4 comments about MERCS: True Stories of Mercenaries in Action.

1. This is a highly interesting collection of stories. It covers the history of merenaries from the Greeks in Persia to the modern day drug wars. This book has a definite intellectual edge to it, as the writers clearly have a decent education. If you are used to reading military stories written by veterans with little or no education (not to say the stories are not interesting) this is a refreshing, clearly written book. I enjoyed it thouroughly, and learned many things that I found both surprising and entertaining.



2. "Mercs" is a series of tiny anecdotes (usually anywhere from 3-10 pages) about various mercenaries throughout history, with a special emphasis on the twentieth century, except for the final section, which is a long long piece on mercenaries sent to start a coup in Ghana. Most of the stories range from lame to fascinating, depending on what happens. My favorite anecdotes were the ones about Sir John de Hawkwood, English condotierre in Renaissance Italy. The anecdotes that didn't hold too much of an interest to me are the ones from the mid-20th century, especially the ones in Vietnam (they just kinda blend together to me). I also thought it might have been a bit better if they included a bit more of the post-Cold War mercenaries. But all in all I would say it's a decent book.



3. This book contains short stories on mercenary actions around the globe. Most of them are condensed versions of books on the subject. There is no connection between the chapters and no overview from the editor.
   Nice to browse thru, but I recommend the real deal instead:
   Mike Hoare, The road to Kalamata
   Anthony Mockler, The new mercenaries



4. There are many causes worth fighting for, but some just go without mention thanks to lack of media coverage (Biafra comes to mind). Some mercenaries do not fit the Hollywood mold of a ruthless, senseless warmonger with a thirst for blood and the next big paycheck. Some mercs are angels of mercy, sacrificing themselves for those whom it may not be "politically suitable" for other large nations (read: USA) to aid.

   "Mercs" covers some of these individuals with interesting non-fiction short stories. Of particular interest to this reader were the accounts of Count Carl Gustav von Rosen, who led five modified light aircraft armed with small rocket pods on morning raids against the Nigerian Air Force (mostly MiGs), and the stories concerning the history of the French Foreign Legion.

1 comments about All the Brave Promises: Memories of Aircraft Woman 2nd Class 2146391 (The Mary Lee Settle Collection).

1. Mary Lee Settle is an American writer who tells us of her experiences as a woman member of the RAF during WWII. Because of her wonderful literary ability, these stories are vivid and thought-provoking. They deal with the cultural differences, class differences, and wartime conditions she experienced. A memorable read - you'll never forget her confrontation with some of her fellow women RAF members or how she learned to understand them. Highly recommended.

2 comments about My War Diary: Lebanon, June 5-July 1, 1982.

1. The book is not a mover in any sense, the author makes it painstakingly clear that he was not responsible for the IDF's mistakes. The reader is left with either pronouncing him an unrecognized hero or a coward who would not go through with his pasifistic inclinations. Which ever the case it still lives as aliving document of a person who refused to march to the drum beat that was offered at the time. for those who have been to Israel you are aware of the bravado that is placed on their soldiers and this man was in the autumn of life and had seen enough tradgedy from the second world war to fill a life time. Don't go into it expecting to much and you won't be disappointed.



2. Dov Yermiya's observations of the 1982 Israeli war with Lebanon are saddening. It is not just the descriptions of hardship, brutality and injustice wreaked upon a civilian population that saddens, but the actions of high ranking Israeli military commanders and senior level Israeli government leaders who perpetrate these hardships while assuring their own citizens that everything possible is being done to alleviate the plight of innocent civilians.
   
   If this was only an Israeli phenomenon it could possibly be dismissed as shocking, but not of great moment in the world at large. But, can we as Americans continue to overlook what the world says of our own military actions and government leaders. Why is this book not reviewed in the press? Why is it not available in libraries? Are the parallels between Israel and the United States uncomfortably close? They certainly are for me.
   
   I strongly recommend the purchase and reading of this book by all American citizens.

5 comments about American Shogun: A Tale of Two Cultures.

1. During the years leading up to Pearl Harbor, Japan was becoming the most industrialized state in Asia while the US was emerging from its depression years and becoming a global power. Today's partnership between the two was forged by Pearl Harbor events and the reconciliation of the two nations afterward - a relationship cemented by the experiences of two leaders of the times: General MacArthur and Emperor Hirohito. AMERICAN SHOGUN: GENERAL MACARTHUR, EMPEROR HIROHITO AND THE DRAMA OF MODERN JAPAN surveys these two men and how a popular American hero and a Japanese monarch came together to bring two great nations together. It surveys events of war, peace, and eventual friendship and is a 'must' for any who would understand the evolution of modern political relations between the two nations.
   
   Diane C. Donovan, Editor
   California Bookwatch



2. 
   I picked this up thinking it was about the occupation of Japan. The occupation is less than 1/3 of the book. While the book's a good read, it sprawls beyond the subtitle too.
   
   Harvey is at his best when describing the colorful life of MacArthur and the social/political/economic state pre-war Japan. At times the text bogs with no point to the larger story, for instance, over 10 pages on a family during the bombing of Nagasaki. The Philippine part while lengthy, could be justified because it shaped MacArthur. The Korean saga, while interesting, is far too long for a book called "Shogun" about the "drama of modern Japan". These are a few examples where more focus would improve the book.
   
   The emperor's restoration is an example of Harvey at his best. He brings to bear all opinion of the time, including a reasonably popular one in Japan, for abdication in favor of his son. The emperor's staying in place, (only to build his own celebrity and undermine MacArthur), and the effect that protecting the emperor from prosecution had on the war crimes trials, left me with two new perspectives.
   
   One is a new understanding of Koizumi's visits visits to the Yasukuni shrine. I had thought these visits were merely to appease a right wing, but I see them in a wider context. The war crimes trials, the post-war behavior of the emperor (not divine, but descended from the sun), and the forces at work to discredit MacArthur, provide substance to the view that the Japanese military was responding and not aggressing.
   
   The other is that I now understand why so many young Japanese have never heard of MacArthur. I teach and have recently taught perhaps 200 Japanese students, who are late teens to early 30's. It's unusual when a student recoginzes his name. Given the forces above, which provide context for the recent text book controversy, it's pretty clear that this piece of history is not accessible to the average citizen.
   
   (Amazon advertizes this book as a "two for" with a bio on Huey Long. I puzzled over this strange mix. Perhaps the Amazon marketers have read the book. Harvey quotes FDR is as saying MacArthur and Long are the most dangerous men in America.)



3. I found this book worthwhile reading for the author's interesting and, at times, startling insights into the events and characters he describes. But, the coverage of the events leading up to and during the war in the Pacific are often at odds with the facts and the logical conclusions of anyone familiar with the details of the actual events.
   
   Also, the book's editors know absolutely nothing about WWII and performed poorly in correcting obvious errors. For example, B-52 airplanes are mentioned twice within the text, but these eight engine jet bombers wouldn't make an appearance until the late 1950's. Possibly the author meant B-25's, although in one instance I doubt that MacArthur had any B-25's and certainly never employed B-52's. In another instance, the author has MacArthur starting his invasion of Leyte after his successful invasion of Luzon. In reality, it was just the reverse. In defending the controversial Philipine campaign in 1942, the author has MacArthur's forces outnumbered when in fact the Japanese were initially outnumbered when they invaded Luzon after Pearl Harbor. The editing and factual errors that went uncorrected were amatuerish and make the reader lose confidence in the author's research and/or honesty of presentation.
   
   However, despite the poor scholarship and atrocious editing, the author almost redeems himself with very interesting insights into the Japanese character. For example, the author's description of how it was impossible for the Japanese to understand the Americans and their incredibly unique 2,000 year old culture was masterful. His explanation of how the Japanese viewed the August,1945 bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is a very sophisticated piece of psychological analysis, if true.
   
   The book over-reached in trying to develop three separate themes: biographies of Hirohito and MacArthur, the Pacific war and the occupation of Japan after the war. I had hoped the book would focus more on the occupation years and what MacArthur and the Americans did and how Japan reacted. He does this for a third of the book, but he often fails to give a coherent picture of the events and his conclusions alternate dizzyingly between praise and condemnation of American actions.
   
   His description of WWII is the weakest section of the book. I'd recommend the reader disregard the author's treatment of events and motives and consult other, more reputable histories of these years. For example, MacArthur's initial defense of the Philipines was considered poor generalship, despite the author's effusive praise. MacArthur made the mistake of organizing a beach front defense agaist the Japanese landing and the Japanese simply landed elsewhere without opposition. A majority of Japanese casualties weren't caused by MacArthur's forces, but rather by malaria, dengue fever and malnutrition. MacArthur treated our Australian allies with contempt and misused their fighting qualities. In his inter-sevice rivalry with the Navy, he advocated ambitious but logistically impossible plans such as the 1942 invasion of New Britain and capture of Rabaul.
   
   The author obviously likes MacArthur, although he tried hard to perform an even-handed analysis of MacArthur's character. Where this plan failed was the author's propensity to skip over or understate some of MacArthur's outrageous and egotistical actions. For example, he dismisses in one sentence MacArthur's acceptance of the Medal of Honor after his escape from Correigidor. Awarding America's highest medal to someone for a successful escape was an insult to those left behind to die and suffer starvation and torture by the Japanese. The author isn't an American and perhaps failed to grasp this important nuance. To shine a praiseworthy light on MacArthur's WWII military campaign, the author is forced to understate or leave unmentioned several blunders and emotional judgments on MacArthur's part. The author never mentions MacArthur's mistake in trying to repel the Japanese on the beach when so many landing sites were available within the Philipines - how this can be considered brilliant military strategy is difficult to understand. And, he neglects to mention that the MacArthur publicity machine portrayed this non-existent beach defense as a furious battle was a complete lie.
   
   In summary, the author excels in insights into motives and psychological analysis. While his insights and analysis may not be true, he did a workman like job and there is no way to factually determine if such nebulous things as motives can be accurately determined. Still, the author tries hard and I liked and admired his reasoning. Buy this book for these qualities, but if you want a conventional history, I'd recommend something else.



4. The first thing that comes to mind, where are the footnotes? Robert Harvey's American Shogun: General MacArthur, Emperor Hirohito and the Drama of Modern Japan examines the lives of General Douglas MacArthur and Emperor Hirohito, and how these two men were significant to American and Japan history. Robert Harvey does not explore unknown territory. Most of the material in this book has already been studied and examined by other writers and historians. What is unique about this book?
   
   Harvey attempts to intertwine the stories of MacArthur and Hirohito as two monumental actors of World War II history. However, the book oversimplifies and overemphasizes certain aspects of each of the men's histories, and their roles in shaping or creating a particular historical event in which they were the participants. As an observation, the events and their intricate details tend to take over the narrative, which were posed in the discussions of the atrocities in Nanking, Pearl Harbor, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, post-war Japan, and the Korean War. What did MacArthur and Hirohito think about at the time these events occurred? MacArthur's story surpasses Hirohito's, and throughout the book one wonders, what happened to Hirohito and what did he do during World War II? His name disappears amongst the mass information. In addition, at times, the bulk of the book reiterates what has been mentioned before in other books, such as William Manchester's American Caesar and Herbert Bix's Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan as well as John Dower's Embracing Defeat, which provides an overall assessment of post-war Japan; Harvey specifically states the these books were the inspiration to his research.
   
   American Shogun may interest history readers who may want general insight about MacArthur and Hirohito. Possibly to compensate for the lack of notes, Harvey provides a good bibliographical list where readers may further inform themselves. Little do we read about the activities that occurred before and after the Pacific War, but Harvey offers a little insight for those who want to understand this part of history.



5. This book is a just another run-of-the-mill book to gather some quick $ and 5 mins fame. Besides lacking genuine insight on the subject, Robert Harvey hasn't done a better research in getting some of the facts mentioned in the book straight. For example, after the ending of Korean war for over 50 years, anyone who is adequately read on that piece of history knows that the commander of the Chinese force is actually Marshal Peng DeHuai, not Marshal Lin Piao, as it was presented in Harvey's book.
   For a better narrative on the relationship and interation between Gen. McArthur and Hirohito and the making of modern Japan, read the books: 1) Hirohito, and the making of modern Japan. written by Harvard scholar Herbert P. BIX. and 2) Emperor Hirohito and Showa Japan by Stephen S. Large. At least they have notes attached to the book for scholarly research and presentation.

3 comments about Paths of Glory: The Life and Death of General James Wolfe.

1. Paths of Glory: The Life and Death of General James Wolfe is the first full-length biography published in half a century of Major General James Wolfe, a British military hero whose decisive 1759 victory against the French, on the Plains of Abraham before Quebec, ensured that English would become the dominant language of North America. Wolfe paid for his victory with his life; since then he has been enshrined in paintings, praised for his military genius and self-effacing modesty, and reviled by revisionist historians who paint him as bloodthirsty and snooty. Paths of Glory seeks to uncover the truth, as best as historical records and testimonies can deliver, of the chronically ill Wolfe's life and death. An inset handful of color and black-and-white illustrations, notes, and an index round out this absorbing in-depth chronicle of a pivotal historical figure.



2. Stephen Brumwell's biography of General James Wolfe is a top notch read for those interested in the man behind one of the most decisive battles in North American history. Through extensive research, Mr. Brumwell delves into the known facts, testimony and controversy surrounding this determined and inspirational leader and gets as close as anyone can to the truth, heart and life of General James Wolfe. As I read the book I felt I got to know Wolfe as a real person--through his hopes, desires, disappointments, doubts and courage during his short lived life leading up to his death on the Plains of Abraham in his "against-all-odds" victory against the French at Quebec. For anyone interested in the history of North America--this is a Must Read! I only hope this book is used as a blueprint for an epic movie about one of the greatest British Generals of the French and Indian War.



3. Very well-done book; good background too on the events Wolfe was involved in as well, esp. the '45 in Scotland. Well written.

No comments about Mademoiselle Miss: Letters from a First World War Nurse at an Army Hospital Near the Marne.

3 comments about Shooting the Pacific War: Marine Corps Combat Photography in WWII.

1. This book gives the reader, in hair-raising detail and gentle humor, the story of a green-horn photographer turned battle scarred fighter for freedom, in the days before and after Guadalcanal. The "can do, will do" spirit of the American troops in spite of all odds, is beautifully depicted. Thayer Soule was there and his word pictures are as good as his photography, which won many awards. Well worth reading.



2. Soule's book is a must read. It not only demonstrates great heroism of Marines and Marine photographers busy documenting the Pacific War, it also conveys a series of valuable anacdotes derived from his personal diary of the time. These are valuable to readers who might be engaged in dangerous endeavors such as reporting or documenting events in hotspots around the world today. Truly an exciting, pleasant and informative book well worth your time.



3. but for some reason I expected this to be a book with Marine Corps combat photography in it. There are very few pictures- it's mostly text. Maybe I didn't read the review well enough, but it wasn't what I expected. It might be a good read, but I'll be returning it to get something with combat photos in it.