4 comments about Gatewood and Geronimo.

1. "Gatewood and Geronimo" by Louis Kraft documents the heroic deeds of a man of unheralded greatness, of one Charles B. Gatewood. Many lesser men rose to the rank of general while Gatewood died holding the same rank he held when he played the key role in efecting the surrender of the formidable Apache warrior, Geronimo. The surrender of Geronimo effectively ended the American Indian Wars. Kraft's volume brings focus on the long neglected importance of Gatewood's role in American history, and on the long term effects that one ordinary man's moral integrity can have on human history, even though it was ignored, and even despised while Gatewood was alive.



2. KLIATT, November 2000 Reviewed by Raymond L. Puffer, Ph.D., Historian, Edwards Air Force Base, CA

   Most historical accounts of Geronimo and the lengthy struggle of his Apache warriors against white settlement have focused upon either the Chiricahua leader himself, or the two U.S. Army generals usually credited with forcing their bitter surrender. George Crook and Nelson Miles were indeed instrumental in planning and leading the campaigns that hounded the remnants of the Apache people into their inevitable subjugation. Neither, however, could convince the holdouts ot lay down their arms and put themselves at the white man's mercy. That role fell to a weary cavalry lieutenant, Charles B. Gatewood, who had won the Indians' grudging respect through hard fighting and his sympathy to their plight. In the course of a final meeting, which was as poignant as it was historical, Gatewood at length persuaded the exhausted "renegades" to lay down their arms to General

   Miles, and to accept his offer of farmland and aid. When Geronimo did so, the last native resistance to federal hegemony came to an end. Ultimately, though, Geronimo and Lieutenant Gatewood were betrayed by the federal government.

   Louis Kraft has written an important and historically significant study of the final phase of the Apache Wars. Unusual for such books, this one is as readable as popular history, and it will be enjoyed by those who have an interest in looking behind the scenes of history. The book is a fine reminder that earnest, hardworking and suffering people were responsible for the events in their textbooks.

   Publishers Weekly, April 17, 2000

   This recent addition to the parallel lives genre is a superbly told tale of the vicious Apache wars of the 1880s in Arizona, New Mexico and Mexico. Drawing upon a variety of original sources, Kraft (Custer and the Cheyenne) reconstructs the complex story of the famous Chiricahua leader Geronimo, a medicine man who came forward as a tribal leader and headed resistance to the coerced settlement of his people on reservations where they were to become farmers instead of nomadic hunters. Lt. Charles B. Gatewood of the 6th U.S. Cavalry was posted to Arizona in 1878 and became a respected leader of Apache scouts, who tracked Apache guerrillas for the U.S. The frail lieutenant, sent to administer the Apache reservation, seemingly treated his charges fairly, earning the enmity of civilians and army brass, which led to a stalemated career and a lengthy court case brought by a man whom Gatewood arrested for defrauding Apaches. After meeting at various times and maintaining a mutual respect, Gatewood and Geronimo came together again in 1886, when the former was ordered to track the latter to Mexico and convince him to surrender, even as columns of American and Mexican troops searched for Geronimo's elusive group. The tension and frustrations of what was Gatewood's final mission are palpable, as he convinces Geronimo to allow the tribe's "relocation" to Florida. Gatewood, who gets much fuller treatment here than his counterpart, never got his due for brilliant service in tragically misguided cause, and Geronimo never again saw his homeland or many of his family, from whom he was separated.




3. I have not counted the number of books and papers regarding Geronimo's surrender but they are many. Here are the facts, easy to read, accurate, and presented in a very enjoyable read. The author has done an excellent job presenting to the common man the story of bravery, death, and hardship of the early American soldier, and the betrayal of the American Indian. Many thanks to the author and publisher. Where are the awards for them?



4. If you don't feel capable of wading through the Western history in this book, I suggest you see the movie "Geronimo." It's an excellent, slightly-fictionalized story of the Apache war chief Geronimo played by Wes Studi and Lt. Charles Gatewood played by Jason Patric.

   Gatewood, the U.S. army's foremost expert on the Apaches, persuaded Geronimo to surrender in 1886. Both Geronimo and Gatewood were betrayed by the U.S. government. Geronimo was sent to Florida to prison; Gateway was sent to oblivion, remaining a lieutenant until the end of his military career.

   Geronimo is remarkable as a cunning, cruel guerilla leader fighting to keep his freedom from the encroaching Whites; Gatewood is remarkable for the integrity he brought to his job as an indian agent and soldier. It's comforting to see Gatewood's qualities are remembered in book and movie long after more conventionally successful men have been forgotten.

   This book maintains a high standard of accuracy and scholarship. It tells one of the best stories from the old West.

4 comments about PAPPY GUNN.

1. If there is a single outstanding American hero of World War II (and perhaps in all of American history) it is Colonel Paul Irvin "Pappy" Gunn.A former US enlisted naval aviator, Gunn had retired from the Navy and was living in the Philippines with his wife and four children when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and invaded the Philippines. As the owner of a small air taxi operation, Gunn and his airplanes were impressed into the United States Army Air Corps immediately after the outbreak of war. On Christmas Eve, 1941 Gunn was ordered to fly a load of Far East Air Force staff officers to Australia and to stay there awaiting further orders. His family - including the author - remained in Manila and were interned by the Japanese for the duration, leading Gunn to fight his own private war. And fight he did! Historian and author Walter Edmond stated that no other single invidual did as much to defeat the Japanese as did Gunn, who is best known for his conversion of the Douglas A-20 and North American B-25 into powerful gunships that did a number on a Japanese convoy in the Battle of the Bismarck Sea. But he did a lot more, especially in those dark days of early 1942. It's not widely known, but Gunn flew several missions from Australia to Bataan by way of Mindanao in his role as the commander of the newly organized Air Transport Command. During the Java Campaign he took a war-weary B-17 that had been turned over to his transport squadron and used it to attack Japanese ships in the Java Sea. In March 1942 he literally stole two dozen B-25s from the Netherlands East Indies Air Force, then flew one of ten on the Royce Raid into the Philippines a few weeks later.
   
   Pappy Gunn is the the famous aviators story in the words of his son Nat, who grew up in the Japanese internment camp at Santo Thomas Prison, then lived with his dad in the Philippines after the war and until his untimely death in 1957. Nat has done an outstanding job of telling not only his father's story, but also that of his mother, brother and two sisters as they waited helplessly in the Philippines for their father and husband to return for them. Instead of their father, it was no less a figure than General Douglas McAthur who came to the gates of Santo Thomas University to put them on a C-47 for the flight to Australia, where Pappy Gunn had been evacuated a few months before after recieving a serious wound from a Japanese white phosphorus bomb. This book should be read by every American! It's the story of a real hero, not a media or politically generated one.
   
   Sam McGowan, Author - The Cave, A Novel of the Vietnam War



2. This is a singularly unique book that tells a true life, historical account of one of the greatest heros of "The Great War." With stunning photographs, and with every fact offered supported by actual photocopies of historical documents proving each assertion, and written with skill and heart as only his son Nathaniel Gunn could, this is a "must read" for anyone interested in the "Greatest Generation," in WWII lore, etc. In our current existential angst about what constitutes a righteous and reasonable occasion for war, this is a book that will make the most liberal anti-war wonk thank his/her lucky stars that in a time long past there were those who had the courage to stand up and fight for all that we have come to hold so dear. You won't be able to put this book down, I promise you! So put on a pot of coffee, curl up in your most comfortable easy chair, and be prepared to bear witness to one of the most incredible true stories of courage, love, and patriotism that you will ever read.



3. This book is a great read, and would have made great fiction, but it is based on real life. Pappy Gunn's life was incredible and how he dealt with adversity should be a model for current Americans. America is what it is because it creates people like Pappy Gunn, who rise to crises and overcome overwhelming odds to persevere, through hard work, innovation, skill and risk-taking. I couldn't put this book down once I started reading it. What was accomplished with severely limited resources, and the American can do attitude in the Southwest Pacific by Pappy Gunn and his contemporaries was incredible, and was skillfully expressed in this book. I highly recommend it.



4. After having read numerous books on the 5th Air Force operations in the Southwest Pacific (SWP) theatre during WWII, that made constant reference to Pappy Gunn and his contribution to the success of the operations, it was great to finally obtain an in depth look at the man. The book provides a wealth of information on the ability of Pappy Gunn to get what was needed to accomplish his goals of not only modifying B-25s and A-20s into strafers and capable of longer range, but to show that his dedication to his captive family was his motivation. This is not just a war story, but an in depth story of a very significant character in the overall picture of the war in the SWP.
   
   The shortfall in this book is the poor reproduction of the photos and the letters. The letters were especially hard to read and as a result, significant information that could have added depth to the story was lost.

5 comments about Flying Through Midnight: A Pilot's Dramatic Story of His Secret Missions Over Laos During the Vietnam War.

1. After reading all the other reviews, I started to think our reviewers (which include many ex-service) are missing one key point. "Flying Through Midnight" is well written and keeps its emphasis until the end.
   
   
   I kept re-reading the scene where the grizzled old mechanic "Toothless...Yearlong untrimmed beard..shoulder length uncombed hair.filthy Korean War fatigues" patched up the C-123 and got Halliday/crew back to NKP. It would make a hell of a movie. I would nominate Nick Nolte as the mechanic. I do admit that I pictured Long Tien to be at the bottom of a mile high ravine,which doesn't agree with phtographs I've seen.
   As far as its veracity, the reviewers should read some of the Luftwaffe novels wriiten in the fifties purporting to be true.



2. My theory is that the author saw that Richard Hooker did pretty well for himself with a comic drama novel based upon his experiences with a support unit during the unpopular Korean (which he entitled MASH) so Halliday thought that he would go to the well with this comic drama novel based upon his experiences with a support unit during the unpopular Vietnam War. Let me begin (before I rip him a new one) by saying that there is some funny stuff here and the drama is not bad either (although I find the prose a tad purple).
   
   But there are problems with this book. First and foremost, there is entirely too much hippy-Zen-Tao navel gazing in this book. The basic premise is that the military is far more concerned about compliance with their rules than it is with winning the war or saving the lives of its men; therefore the average guy's only hope for physical and moral survival is to break those rules. The good guys break rules and the bad guys adhere to rules. (Did someone mention MASH?) You must disregard the rules and trust your inner self even if that means that the full weight of military authority will come crashing down on your head. The first half of the book (and you could even say the entire book) is the story of TJ learning to disregard more and more rules. The problem with this philosophy, of course, is its inherent contradiction: I get to break your rules but you don't. TJ is great when he disregards the rules of the squadron commander and various and assorted other brass but when Don't-Call-Me-Dick, TJ's co-pilot, disregards one of TJ's rules, there is hell to pay. The result is a very non-democratic and non-American standard in which the rules don't apply to cool people but they sure as hell apply to nerds. Apparently the author spent twenty-six years in the Air Force. With this attitude, one is tempted to ask how? Or better yet, why?
   
   Another problem is that remarked upon by numerous reviewers more qualified to comment than I, this story simply does not feel real. Not only does TJ complains like a middle school girl when as a memoir of the horror of combat, it doesn't hold a candle to such works as With the Old Breed by Eugene Sledge, The Forgotten Soldier by Guy Sajer, or Company Commander by Charles MacDonald (to name only a few), the explanation and descriptions don't make a lot of sense. Ignoring the technical details, an example would be that TJ and his mentor, Wiley, seek solace from the stress of combat by cranking Wiley's stereo to a reported 1000 decibels and singing along with Karen Carpenter's Rainy Days and Mondays Get Me Down. (1000 decibels of Karen Carpenter! I may have to take back what I said about this book not revealing the true horror of combat.) That is a major problem with this book, it just doesn't ring true. Indeed, as I write these words, Hillary Clinton is being subjected to public ridicule for exaggerating beyond all recognition her experience visiting a Bosnia airport. "Hamburger" Hill described dodging snipers as she descended from above to bring peace to the Bosnians. The only problem was the snipers were a figment of her imagination. One gets the feeling that this memoir has been exaggerated by Clintonian standards but at least Hillary was kind enough to include comedian Sinbad in her war story perhaps as a "tell" that she was fibbing. Sinbad was not available during the Vietnam War but perhaps the author could have included Henny Youngman to let us in on the joke. ("Take my airplane, please!")



3. My unease with this book started from the very first page. I had just finished Tom Yarborough's excellent "Da Nang Diary", documenting his experiences as a special forces forward air controller in Vietnam, and was hungry for more on this topic. But "Flying Through Midnight" proved to be a very different book, and I plowed though it trying to ignore the red flags that kept popping up far too frequently.
   
   Small inaccuracies like the rainy season starting rather than finishing in November, or the Thai waitress using the polite ending "krup" which is reserved for men (women say "ka") I put down to forgetfulness and lax editing. But anyone who writes about a vintage MiG 17 trying to destroy an unlit transport aircraft at night with air-to-air bombs has little idea of military aviation.
   
   Numerous other small technical inaccuracies that one would not expect from a career pilot grate throughout the book. An example: the air cushion that forms under a low flying aircraft is called "ground effect" not "water effect". Its influence is felt at half a wingspan not half a wing chord length, and it's a well known effect taught to every trainee pilot, so Halliday's experienced copilot would not have been stunned by experiencing it for the first time so late in his career. Small inaccuracies for sure, but they accumulate throughout the book to increasingly test its veracity.
   
   All the characters appear to be caricatures with such exaggerated traits that they are difficult to accept as real people. In particular, the inflexible rule-spouting copilot, who becomes worried about dumping government property overboard to lighten an aircraft in mortal danger, beggars belief. Nothing you can place a finger on, but the book's characters just don't read true.
   
   The first two-thirds of the book is little more than a rant against an Air Force hierarchy that deliberately stifles even the slightest innovation. I would have thought that like most military organizations, this squadron would have adapted rapidly to wartime conditions, and welcomed suggestions from its combat pilots. The last third is an admittedly very well written account of an emergency landing that is reminiscent of the best writing of Richard Bach, including all of that author's mysticism. But even the good part of the book is marred by implausible characters and airstrip topography only Hollywood would normally have thought up (as pointed out by another reviewer).
   
   So what to make of it all? There seems little doubt that Halliday is a retired airline captain who did fly C-123s over Laos. His detailed narrative of the difficulties he endured in getting his book published mentions real people, some well known, who helped him. So why is the book full of so many niggling, doubt-inducing entries? Perhaps, in his desperation to get published, the author adopted many of the edits suggested by literary rather than aviation people during the numerous re-writes he was forced to make to get the book published. Or perhaps, as other reviewers have suggested, this is a "faction" book, a Vietnam version of Catch-22 loosely based on the author's experiences, not intended to be an accurate autobiography.
   
   Either way, the book disappoints.
   
   For a first-class read about the work of an unorthodox forward air controller during the Vietnam war, I strongly recommend Tom Yarborough's "Dan Nang Diary" instead.



4. This fella is a pretty good writer but the content of the book and especially his claims leave it with one star. The part about throwing a chain out back of the aircraft and bringing down a chopper was the least believable part. If it were to be found under "Fiction" I would gladly give it a couple more stars.



5. Fast delivery and a good book. My husband was a helicopter pilot in Viet Nam , so these books are a good read for him. ' To The Limit " was the best one according to him.

1 comments about A Soldier to the Last: Maj. Gen. Joseph Wheeler in Blue and Gray.

1. My favorite story about Wheeler is when he was at the Battle of Las Guasimas, the first major engagement of the Spanish-American War he is rumored to have seen the Spaniards running away and to have yelled, 'Come on, we've got the damn Yankees on the run!'
   
   Even Mr. Longacre has to admit that this is just a rumor and it's isn't known if it's true or not. But it's too good a story to let it die. And it is true that of the six ex-Confederate generals appointed to be general officers by President McKinley, Wheeler is the only one to have seen actual combat.
   
   The bulk of this book is on Wheeler's activities during the Civil war where he began as a Second Lieutenant and worked his way up to Major General (when he was 26 years old). He was active in most of the battles of the west from Shiloh to the final surrender to Sherman in the Carolinas campaign after the defeat at Atlanta.
   
   The war in the West has never received the attention paid to Lee and the battles in the East. And Wheeler has been overshadowed by Morgan and Forrest as cavalry leaders in the West. This book is a welcome addition to the literature.

No comments about Memoirs of General W.T. Sherman, both volumes in a single file.

5 comments about Andrew Jackson: The Course of American Democracy, 1833-1845 (Andrew Jackson).

1. Excellent finish to an excellent 3-volume biography; the first volume took us from Jackson's birth through his tenure as governor of Florida; the second took us from there through the end of his first term as president and his successful bid for re-election. This volume takes us from the beginning of his second term to his death.

   As with both previous volumes, the marvellous thing about this book is that Remini provides the reader with sufficient information that it is possible, with nothing more than the information he provides, to disagree with his evaluation of his subject. Clearly, on balance he is much more taken with Andrew Jackson than I am, although there are a few instances in which I actually think that he is too harsh in his judgement. But the marvellous thing is, he gives me sufficient information to make that judgement, an invaluable characteristic in a biographer.

   Anyone interested in reading a detailed, in-depth biography of the first truly populist president (whether one considers that a good or a bad thing to say about the man says a lot about one's personality) and the president who appointed Roger Taney, the chief justice responsible for the Dred Scott Decision, to his post as Justice of the Supreme Court, needs to read all three volumes of this set.




2. Robert Remini completes his biography of Andrew Jackson in an excellent third volume. This biography is very well written and a pleasure to read. Remini is so well versed on his subject and really makes Jackson come to life as one of the major figures in U.S. History. This is as honest account of an individual that I have ever read and have come away with a new found respect for Andrew Jackson.
   Remini does not shy away from Jacksons many faults nor does he make excuses for them and he also shows how tender and loyal Jackson can be to those that were family and friends. Remini makes the case that Jackson was the most influential person in shaping the Presidency and government to the modern democracy it is today and I am inclined to agree with him. Jackson had certain convictions on government and policy and would not bow under pressure and reshaped the role of the Presidency despite pressure from Congress. I would definitely recommend this biography to everyone interested in Andrew Jackson as well as those interest in the evolution of our government.



3. If you have read my reviews of the first two volumes in this biography you already know my opinion of Remini and of his subject. Suffice it to say that if you are serious about learning about American history these volumes are for you. Not only are they an excellent introduction to many of the political and social issues of the era but they also allow the reader to wrestle with our national proclivity toward uncritical hero worship. Our past leaders were every bit as complex, as flawed and as human as our current crop .... What follows is a small portion of what I have learned from Remini's hard and honest labors.
   Jackson's accomplishments were extraordinary by any standards and some of them are quite ironic. He very much believed in states rights yet he probably did more to strengthen and expand the executive part of the federal government than any President until Franklin Roosevelt. Consider the following (all discussed in Remini's volume):
   1. He was the first President to use the pocket veto. He was the first to use the veto power for nonconstitutional reasons. We are so used to our Presidents using the veto because of policy disagreements with legislation that we forget how much of a shift this was in the balance of power as envisioned by the original generation.
   2. He reformed every department of the federal government and greatly expanded the bureaucracy as a result. He eliminated much of the graft that was rampant at the time and (at least, gave the impression of) greatly democratizing the civil service by making it more of a meritocracy. All this inevitably led to more people working for the government. A lot more people.
   3. Jackson changed the relationship of the various Cabinet members to the President. He was the first to fire a Cabinet member because of a disagreement over policy. Up until then Cabinet officers and ambassadors, because their appointments had to be approved by the Senate, were regarded as being accountable more to Congress than to the President.
   This is only a partial list of the ways that Jackson's Presidency changed the stature of the Executive branch of the government.
   Jackson's ideology (as I see it) comes from him trying to work out the tensions between his state's rights philosophy with his military experience, which taught him the necessity of a clear uncontested chain of command with his love of and trust in the people. I will comment on only one portion of that dynamic. Like so many of our leaders, the tensions in Jackson's ideology led him into conspiracy theories. He believed in and trusted the American people to always make the right decisions (the ones he would have made) and almost always credited any electoral reverses to cabals acting to befuddle and delude the populace.
   As a result, he became one of ablest early advocates of putting a good spin on the issues. Early on in his first term he helped to establish a newspaper that served as the official organ of the administration. Altogether, Jackson was a fascinating and maddening character.
   I find myself greatly in the debt of Remini. Jackson has always repulsed me by his blatant racism and his paternalism. Remini has humanized Jackson quite a bit for me. I am more appreciative of Jackson's great accomplishments and I have learned quite a bit of the politics of the time. I will be reading Remini's book on Van Buren next along with Seller's biography of Polk. One of the ways that I evaluate the work of a historian is by how much they increase my interest in further reading on their subject and on the period in question. By this standard, Remini belongs to my first rank of American historians.



4. The final volume in Robert Remini's definitive biography of Andrew Jackson follows the life of the seventh president from the beginning of his second term through the end of his life. In it, we see many of the things that made Jackson one of our most important presidents despite his significant flaws.

   Prior to Jackson's presidency, the executive office was much weaker. The designers of the Constitution, with their fears of strong central figures, had intended Congress to be the most powerful of the supposedly co-equal branches. Jackson, however, viewed himself as the sole representative of the people - the only person elected by a nation, not a region - and through various measures such as an expansion of the use of the veto, was able to shift the balance of power. Although the following presidents would be weaker, the presidency as an office had been redefined.

   As the book begins, Jackson's second term was beginning and he needed to deal with South Carolina and the Nullification Crisis. Essentially successful with this problem, he also dealt with other issues, including his war with the Bank of the United States and bad relations with France. By many measures, his presidency was a success, but there were a number of negatives as well, in particular his treatment of Indians and his disregard of slavery issues. His appointment of Taney to Chief Justice would eventually lead to the Dred Scott decision. Remini finds more positives than negatives with Jackson, but he doesn't disregard the black marks.

   Probably only Washington was as universally adored in his time as Jackson was, and unlike Washington, Jackson was a true man of the people, a populist who courteously met with rich and poor alike. Even after his retirement, his popularity guaranteed his continued political clout, and few Democrats defied his wishes while he was alive.

   The three volumes in this biography are around 1300 pages (plus notes and indexes), but Remini is such a good writer that this is far from a burdensome read. There may be shorter biographies of Jackson, but there aren't better. Remini knows this era well (he also has written excellent biographies of Clay and Webster) and he brings it to life.




5. Few Americans have won the mythical status enjoyed by Andrew Jackson. Often portrayed, in his day and since, as the champion of the common man, Jackson came to Washington as an outsider, the first President born outside the thirteen original states, indeed the first president born neither in Virginia nor Massachusetts. Throughout Jackson historiography, Jackson via his policy of `rotation' in office has been accused of instituting the spoils system in American politics. This criticism highlights how Whig myths have come to permeate the historical writing on this subject.
   
   Starting with James Parton in 1860, anti-Jackson historians have followed this criticism, blaming Jackson for replacing a supposed merit system with a partisanship that corrupted the civil service for generations. Despite further research since Jackson's time, many historians have uncritically repeated these accusations without examining the actual record of appointments during the presidency unhappily described by some as "The Reign of Andrew Jackson".
   
   There have been essentially four cycles of studies into the life and Presidency of Andrew Jackson. The first cycle began soon after the death of Jackson with the "liberal patrician" or "Whig" school, who were generally unfavourable towards the policy of rotation. Most familiar is James Parton's classic The "Life of Andrew Jackson". So critical of rotation was Parton that he stated "this single feature of his administration would suffice to render it deplorable rather than admirable." Other members of the "Whig" school include Sumner, Schouler and Von Holst, all very critical of Jackson's policy of rotation. Parton's biography was the standard source on the Jacksonian era, until the second cycle represented by the Progressive Historians, such as John Spencer Bassett's "The Life of Andrew Jackson (1911), which cast Jackson in somewhat of a different light. Bassett reduces the amount of blame put on Jackson for rotation by suggesting that his democratic views made him oblivious to unintentional dangers from partisan appointments. However, the Progressives shared with the Whigs the view that Jackson had brought a spoils system to national politics and that its effects were negative.
   
   Historians in the third cycle of Jacksonian studies, of which Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr.'s "The Age of Jackson" (1945) served as a pivotal work, shifted attention away from Jackson himself towards larger forces in his era. Historians of the third cycle, such as Hofstadter and Hammond, debated the effects of class and culture in determining party differences while showing little interest in evaluating Jackson's rotation policy, though tending to criticise it briefly. No biographies of Jackson discussed the policy of rotation in depth during the next thirty years.
   
   The appearance of Robert V. Remini's three-volume biography of Jackson marked the start of the fourth cycle of interpretation. Based on modern scholarship, Remini covers all aspects of Jackson's life and career, demonstrating his contribution to the great developments of nineteenth century America, particularly empire, freedom and democracy. By returning to first hand sources, Remini shows that the policy of rotation in office has been exaggerated and misunderstood. However, having set himself the remarkable task of producing a thorough study of the life and Presidency of Jackson, Remini did not have the scope for a detailed re-interpretation and re-evaluation of rotation. Since Remini's work there have been many scholarly works on Jackson, but none offer an in-depth reassessment of rotation as touched upon by Remini.
   
   Remini states that Jackson has received a disproportionate share of the blame for the spoils system and that there is a need to disprove the Whig myths, which have come to permeate the historical writings of historians over the generations. Remini was not the first to stress the need for such a revision; in fact a similar plea was expressed by J.R. Poinsett in the "Oration on the life and character of Andrew Jackson, delivered July 4, 1845" when he stated about Jackson, "His instinctive love of justice... gave a high tone to his government and exalted the honor of his country. His hatred of corruption rendered his administration pure.... I will content myself with expressing my belief that in future time the impartial historian will justify both his motives and his conduct on this trying occasion.
   
   Remini offers the reader a great insight into the pioneering mind of one of America's greatest Presidents.
   
   
   [The above Review is taken in part from 'Andrew Jackson's policy of 'Rotation in Office' by Alexander Rayden. © Copyright 2005 Alexander Rayden, All Rights Reserved].

2 comments about When the Devil Came Down to Dixie: Ben Butler in New Orleans.

1. I have always been fascinated with General Benjamin Butler both because of the story of his ill fated term as military governor of New Orleans during the Civil War and because of his physical image. The photographs always show someone who seems to be a grotesque characature of a human being rather than a real person, somehow appropriate for a man known as 'the Beast of New Orleans'. This book is significant not only for its detailed account of the conflicts and controversy that surrounded Butler during his time in New Orleans, but also for providing enough complementary material to see him as more than an evil abberation. The author does detail the evidence for Butler's depredations - his thefts, corruptions and overzelous application of lethal force - but also provides ample evidence that he was a complex and sometimes thoughtful person as well. In one case, he condemns a man to be hung because he had pulled down the union flag. The man's wife and children go to Butler to plead for his life. He refuses to stop the hanging but promises to be of whatever assistance he can be in the future. Years later the widow approaches him to say that she has been cheated by her lawyer out of her life savings and that she and her children are in jeapordy. Butler finds her a government job and, at his own expense, sees to the children's education. A very complex 'devil' indeed.

   For those who enjoy new light cast upon old oversimplified history, this book is excellent. Well written and with a lot that is new to say, this book represents a chance to actually learn something new rahter than simply revisiting the old story.




2. So General Benjamin "Beast" Butler summed up his time as military governor of New Orleans. Chester Hearn's book is an examination of Butler's six-month tenure in the Crescent City.
   
   Everyone who knows anything about the Civil War knows something about Butler. A political general from Massachusetts, Butler was cross-eyed, huge, bald, loud, arrogant, stubborn, and crooked as a hound dog's hind leg. He was also remarkably inept as a military leader. His arrogant tenure as commandant of Fortress Monroe came close to pushing Maryland into the Confederacy; he lost one of the initial battles of the war, Big Bethel, largely through extraordinary incompetence; he did absolutely nothing in the capture of New Orleans, but took as much credit for it as he could; he evacuated Baton Rouge when scared by the threat of a(nonexisting) Confederate invading force; and he famously allowed his entire Army of the James to be bottled up at Bermuda Hundred during Grant's overland campaign (where he was probably less bother to Grant than he would've been in the field).
   
   But what Butler's primarily known for are two things: declaring runaway slaves "contrabands of war" and brutally ruling New Orleans. His depredations in that city are remarkable. Along with a crew of trusted scoundrels (including especially his brother Andrew Jackson Butler) equally interested in lining their own pockets, Butler stole everything he could get his hands on. He bought commodities such as sugar and cotton at forced low prices and sold them high in the North; he sold salt to Confederates stationed just across Lake Pontrachain; civilians requesting interviews with the general or travel passes routinely paid out the nose for the privilege; under the two Confiscation Acts, houses with all their possessions were swallowed up; and specie at New Orleans bank tended to disappear. Butler was smart, and although there were numerous complaints and several official inquiries, he was never caught. But it's clear he was on the take. When Butler went to New Orleans in May '62, his personal worth was about $150,000. When he left in December '62, he was worth about $3 million.
   
   In addition to being larcenous, his reign in New Orleans was also brutal. He regularly imprisoned at hard labor civilians who angered him, and he notoriously executed a man who defiantly tore down the Stars and Stripes right after the city was captured (but before it surrendered--a legally important point). Although Butler did go out of his way to feed the city's hungry, his motive seems to have been more hatred for the landed aristocracy than the unlanded poor.
   
   Hearn's book is largely derivative. There's little original research (which is okay; not every book can or should be ground-breaking). But a bit more documentation on how Butler's peers reacted to his larceny, as well as some reflection on the state of affairs during the Civil War that gave men such as Butler almost unlimited power, would've been welcome.

5 comments about Joan of Arc: A Military Leader.

1. While the subject matter of this book holds great potential interest to the reader, unfortunately, Mr. Devries fails to deliver on that potential by way of new material or analysis - notwithstanding his own claims to the contrary. Mr. Devries, however, does break new ground at the very beginning of his book - in the Acknowledgements. Typically, this section is devoted to thanking other people who have played a role in supporting the author, but Mr. Devries has shown great creativity by turning that old-fashioned notion on its head. His Acknowledgements proudly features - well - himself! In addition to jamming twenty-six (count `em) instances of the pronoun "I," two of "me" and nine of "my," into this short section, he manages to drag in his family members throughout, and even then, only so far as they must have missed his delightful presence while he wrote this book.
   As to the text itself, while not purely a redaction of existing works on the subject, this volume appears to shed little new light - especially as it lacks a certain capacity for critical insight, which one hopes to find in such works. If one does not have ready access to more original works on the subject, this volume may serve to point the reader in the right direction. How sad that readers of exciting materials such as the trial transcript of the Maid of Orleans find no glimmer of that brilliant female mind in the strategies addressed in this volume. If the author had effectively compared Jean's maneuvers with those of past military leaders who found themselves in similar circumstances, we would have had a firm grasp on how Jean's brilliance compared to theirs. Unfortunately, this requires familiarity with a broad range of military analyses and a reading knowledge of the sources in their original tongues--especially since the names of weaponry and even military maneuvers frequently do not translate consistently.
   Our universities have for decades been turning out graduates who are hampered by forays beyond their native languages. I can't help but remember how even the limited introductions, terse footnotes, and line drawings in our old Latin editions of Caesar's Belli Gallici carried enough information to bring to life the military strategies of that great leader. Where are the descriptions of the battle techniques utilized by Jean? Where the analysis of how her forces utilized their resources better-or worse--than others of her time? Alongside the spate of TV films on this extraordinary woman, we now have yet another volume that adds inches and weight, but little fire and light, to our love of a singular woman's mind.



2. The history I knew but what I was hoping for a detailed analysis and study of military tactics used by Joan.
   
   If you want a fairly good history of her, you might read this.



3. Kelly deVries sets out to correct a serious oversight in modern historical analysis of Joan of Arc. Other twentieth century writers have downplayed her role as a war hero and general, often in contradiction to the original source material. I am what you could call a serious aficionado of Joan of Arc: I have read most of the leading modern biographies and plays, perused a good part of the original documents, and once spent three weeks in France following her campaigns. Ms. deVries's book deserves a place on the shelf of any Joan of Arc devotee.
   
   Historical records about Joan of Arc are unusually abundant. She led what was probably the best documented life of her era. We have far more reliable information about her career than, say, of William Wallace. In fairness to Ms. deVries, these original documents are sometimes frustrating. They say so much that they tempt the reader to demand more. The captains who fought alongside Joan of Arc have high praise for her military skill yet are sketchy about her tactics. Where the scholar wants to deduce an artillery arrangement the records instead report which color horse she rode that day. Many of the fortresses where Joan of Arc fought still stand, at least in ruin. The surrounding earthworks are largely unrecoverable. At a distance of six centuries we cannot reconstruct these scenes with the detail of the American civil war.
   
   This well-researched work corrects and amplifies the subject. That said, I have a few bones to pick. The topic deserves a discussion of weapons technology. Ms. deVries overplays the importance of gunpowder to the point where I suspect she misunderstands the fifteenth century meaning of "artillery." Medical scholarship might have illuminated some issues, particularly the instances when Joan of Arc overcame battle wounds and returned to combat. Finally Ms. deVries omits all mention of Joan of Arc's escape attempts as a prisoner of war. As examples of good soldiering they deserve attention: Joan actually leaped from a seventy foot tower and survived with no broken bones.
   
   With minor reservations, Joan of Arc: A Military Leader is a welcome addition to my collection.



4. I have been reading over several sources for a research paper on Joan for a graduate seminar class. Some of the complaints on this book strike me as odd. The title of the book seems somewhat...well false. After reading several documents (Craig Taylor Compilation) it is clear that Joan was little more than a mascot for the French army. While she claims to give orders, she is always positioned away from the battle (excluding a few times where she joined the fight). None of the sources give exact details on how the French attacked or if Joan really directed the attacks. Where the French leaders may have listened to Joan because of her spiritual claim, the period makes it less likely that Joan actually led a battle. The title of the book is attractive, but probably further from the truth.



5. Joan of Arc, A Military Leader by Kelly DeVries presents one very notable problem: it doesn't truly establish her as one. While the book is a passable biography, it fails on most fronts to present Joan as anything more than an inspirational mascot and a rallying point for the dispirited Armagnac forces of the dauphin of France.
   
   By DeVries' own admission, Joan was excluded from nearly every war council occurring between the siege of Orleans and her capture. Thus, any discussion of tactics and strategy, necessary components to establish leadership qualities, are limited to Joan's proclivity for the frontal assault. Unfortunately, the headlong charge when deployed for every contingency, no matter how brave, is neither tactics nor strategy. It is, at best, a habit.
   
   DeVries tries to compensate for this shortcoming by repeatedly alleging that the jingoism of Joan's contemporary Burgundian and English opponents (and latter-day English historians), provides a willful underestimate of her wartime acumen. He seems oblivious that this cuts both ways. Might the French be guilty of embellishment? Indeed, DeVries provides a quote from one of Joan's high-ranking Armagnac compatriots comparing her to Alexander, Hannibal, and Julius Caesar! Even the most casual of amateur historians can recognize this as ludicrous on its face.
   
   Mitigating in favor of Joan of Arc, A Military Leader is the quality of its design and construction [hardcover]. Solidly built with glossy pages and ubiquitous text-specific photographs, it is a very handsome edition. But this, in the end, is all it is: a quality edition containing an average biography falling short of its stated goal. 3 stars.

5 comments about Black Virgin Mountain: A Return to Vietnam.

1. This book has its moments. The author returns to Vietnam years after being a soldier there and travels around the country.
   I really wanted to like the book more than I did. However, even though it is a small book, I got the feeling that at least 25% of it was sort of filler. I understand his Paco's Story is a great book. I need to read it. In the meantime, I wouldn't recommend this book.



2. Although it did not garner national attention or give rise to any widespread outpourings of remembrance, this past April marked the thirtieth anniversary of the fall of Saigon. The most lasting impression we have - aside from that gleaming granite commemorative engraved with 58,000 plus names on the Washington Mall - seems to be the quintessential "bug-out" photo of a chopper on the roof of the American embassy, a too-long tether of people desperate to clamber aboard.
   
   As is often the case, the years have been kind to Vietnam annealing some of its sharpness, if not in the memories of the generation that served there, then at least in terms of the original stigma attached to it. Perhaps as a country we have mellowed enough to see that it had some unpleasant but necessary lessons to pass along. All wars do, though it is the young who must purchase that knowledge for us. But even with that, there remains the lasting stench of defeat, along with the awkward doling out and acceptance of blame by aging politicians, whenever the word 'Vietnam' is uttered.
   
   According to the record books, American soldiers were long gone by the time those frantic Vietnamese began queuing up for the last chopper out. But when it comes to war in general and Vietnam specifically, the records aren't always on mark. Which is why three decades later books like Heinemann's Black Virgin Mountain are still being written and read. We simply cannot get enough of the subject to affix it with a permanent, acceptable label and then hang it away like an out-of-fashion coat.
   
   The mountain of the title was the focal point of Heinemann's year in hell. He had already returned to the country a number of times in the 1990s, often in conjunction with writers' conferences, when he and another writer, Larry Rottmann, took the trip to what is known in Vietnam as Nui Ba Den.
   
   The text crackles with an anger that, by Heinemann's own admission, remains unabated despite the passing of thirty-seven years since his tour in `Nam. Having lost two brothers to those residual emotional conflicts that simmer long after the actual combat is over, he is brutally frank about his experiences ("Every human vitality is taken from you as if you'd been skinned; yanked out like you pull nails with a claw hammer; boiled off, the same as you would render a carcass at hog-killing") and his opinions concerning the conduct of the war. It is difficult to decide which leader bears the greater brunt of his scathing commentary - LBJ or William Westmoreland.
   
   Happily, the entire book does not focus solely on the author's lingering revulsion for the war. There are large travelogue segments, life slices of rich imagery showing how the Vietnamese have moved along with far less lingering acrimony than have we since the end of what they call the "American War." Included is a wonderful description of the French colonial era bureaucrat's home-turned-guest-house at which they stayed in Hanoi. Its exotic past (koi pond, louvered windows with a dozen coats of paint) resonates like something straight out of 1940s cinema - "Casablanca" on a different continent. Heinemann includes engaging snippets of a portion of one trip involving the Vietnam Railway and its sometimes idiosyncratic train station employees. Something we don`t expect after all those plane loads of bombs and Agent Orange, is the spectacular scenery. Perhaps most revealing of some kind of personal transformation is a statement he makes after watching the Southeast Asian panorama from the train`s window, "And there it was, the country at peace, the thing I had come to see."
   
   In contrast to the many positive things Heinemann has to say about that nation, in the latter part of the book there is the unnerving visit to the tunnels at Cu Chi. Juxtapositioned next to his own middle-aged physical discomfort at "duckwalking" through a small section of the enlarged-for-tourists-maze, Heinemann gives us a palpably frightening description of what it was like for an outfit's smallest soldier to be pressed into service as a tunnel rat. Fear, claustrophobia, the myriad things to remember to listen for, to smell, to see in order to scope out a tunnel and stay alive - if after reading it you don't come away with the distinct itch of something crawling on your skin, the feel of dirt sticking to the sweat on your bare back, then you may already be dead.
   
   Language rampages back and forth between politely literate and gritty street talk, oftentimes within the same sentence. Normally this would be where a caution against putting it into the hands of middle school children doing history papers would be placed. But there is little early teens have not already heard. For obvious reasons anything related to that period of time is best displayed in the lingo of the day. Heinemann's choice of words may have been his way of showing us that he can walk both sides of the line, i.e., that he is an accomplished writer with a well-developed, post-tour vocabulary, but whose awareness is forever etched with the earthy, peppery talk of men at war. He may also be enjoying his ability to keep the non-military reader a little off-balance: the seriously out-of-kilter, day-after-day world of the average soldier. And whoever predicted the pending demise of the semicolon, hasn't read Larry Heinemann.
   
   But to the rest of those doing research on the embattled 60s and 70s, this is a seminal book, one that stands outside all the political posturing and sociological conjecture. It is an invaluable look into the dehumanizing influences of combat by someone who lived it.
   
   So, once again to war and its lessons. Our unglamorous departure from Saigon over thirty years past remains a thorn in the side of many, though for an assortment of differing reasons. It is a picture we need to keep close to us as we devise our exit strategy for Iraq after destroying their corrupt, sadistic, but functioning political infrastructure. It would be lamentable if history were to look back on our crucial departure from Baghdad only to have it described by some future Heinemann as "an agony, and an orgy of unambiguous betrayal ... right to the end and still, a bungled tangle..."



3. My dad was in Vietnam and I have often wondered what went through his mind when he returned in the late 60's. This book gave me some idea, though of course each man is unique, and Larry Heinemann's story is brilliantly written. He pulls no punches and tells it like it was and like it is. Truly an honest look into the heart of the average Vietnam Veteran. God bless everyone of them for their courage in the face of a nasty, bloody, unjust war. They didn't deserve the kind of misery they got when they were drafted into the US Army. Larry shows us the heart and soul of Vietnam and his story is a beautiful thing!



4. The voice of violence is heard in cities and among the rural poor across America today, and its not just because the corporate statists have successfully veiled the voices of peace that have been ignored by corporate media or sometimes forcefully silenced; but also because violence is the voice that America has taught to its own disenfranchised for a long time now. America is a violent teacher. Violence is as American as apple pie.
   
   Author Larry Heinemann grew up in an American working class family with a "straight arrow upbringing", a result "of all those belt whippings" by his old man who had a "fierce and violent temper". This was normal for most working class families living in what would become known as cannon fodder neighborhoods - neighborhoods from which Uncle Sam conscripted draft slaves to fight his war in Vietnam. Heinemann tells us that when his draft notice arrived in the mail box back in '66, there was another draft notice with it for his brother. These two young men and later another brother were all drafted into the armed forces, instructed in the use of deadly weapons, taught how to kill, and then brainwashed into believing it was honorable to wage war against innocent civilians. That whole draft affair and military induction was violent instruction.
   
   For over two hundred years America has permitted genocide against its own native peoples as well as thousands of lynchings of African-Americans. America has burned babies in Alabama and in Vietnam. Heinemann was in Vietnam shooting "Vietnamese down like dogs", napalming or strafing "them hard enough", and poisoning them and their farmland "with Agent Orange". Is it any wonder that the violent whirlwind haunts America with her echo "Burn, baby, burn"?
   
   Heinemann returned to America, the Violent, only to find one brother a post-war suicide while the other left his family never to be heard from again. Heinemann realizes that America has a class system, though not as apparent as Europe's, and that the children of fat cats never paid the sacrifices that blue collar do. As Tom Paine once put it - "War is the gambing table of governments, citizens the dupes of the game", or as Heinemann says - citizens are "an integral, even dedicated, party to a very wrong thing".
   
   Heinemann is still trying to get over growing up in America, the Violent, and his killing experiences in Vietnam in order "to be rid of it". He is unable to become proactive in today's peace movement. Heinemann doesn't address current concerns, such as what is the future of violence in America? Will Bush's information warfare against Middle Easterners give way to riots with whites against Arabs and Blacks? What are the corporatists in power teaching those not in power? The crop of peace or blood depends on the seeds sown today - so move on Heinemann! There's peace to reclaim.



5. There's no shortage of blood and guts in this text; nor is there a shortage of the enumerations of military equipment that insures fellow Vietnam War writer Tim O'Brien a place in every college literary anthology. In fact, the literary nature of the text is a sub-theme of the work: Heinemann is either enough of a gentleman or schooled enough to make direct references to other writers, and does so in the casually learned style of hooks' use of author/title rather than formal citation. Ironically, Heinemann refers to Samuel Clemens and Mark Twain -an amusement, to be sure, for the reader-and the text of Black Virgin Mountain itself echoes a social acid reminiscent of the much-lauded, much banned Huckleberry Finn.

No comments about Forward into Hell.