No comments about German Fighter Ace Werner Molders: An Illustrated Biography (Schiffer Military History).

1 comments about History of the 15th South Carolina Infantry A: 1861-1865.

1. Jim Clary's regimental history of the 15th South Carolina Infantry is by far one of the most outstanding modern unit histories in print.
   
   Jim spared no effort and expense in researching and producing a simply tremendous all-around product. As the Amazon product description states, the book is not short on covearge (600pp). But, whereas many older regimentals and some of the newer, more cursory works, focus highly on just a unit roster, Jim provides one of the finest unit combat narratives in a book of this type as well as an exhaustive roster.
   
   He misses absolutely nothing in the unit's history and writes that history with a flowing, yet detailed prose, using dozens of obscure and never-before-mined sources. Soldiers' letters, diaries, memoirs, service and unit records, newspaper articles, a plethora of rare photographs, and dozens of detailed battle maps grace these pages. It is, without doubt, one of the most prolific accumulations of unit data ever to come under one cover.
   
   But, don't let the size of the book or its great detail deter you in perusing this gem. The book is so well put together in format and narrative that it was not only an easy but highly enjoyable read. Not an easy accomplishment for a unit history.
   
   The 15th South Carolina belonged to Kershaw's famous 1st Corps brigade in the Army of Northern Virginia and, so, particpated in most of Robert E. Lee's operations. In addition, Kershaw's Brigade saw action in the Chickamauga and Eastern Tennessee Campaigns and in the war's last campaign in North Carolina. It is no boast, then, to say that the fighting Fifteenth saw almost all of the war east of the Appalachians. Very few unit histories can cover such a wide range of the war's experience.
   
   The edition I reviewed was the softcover, but I hear Jim is hoping to prepar a hardcover release as well. In whatever form you read this work, just READ it for sure; it is one Civil War book you cannot afford to pass by.
   
   Theodore C. Mahr
   
   ( author of "The Battle of Cedar Creek: Showdown in the Shenandoah: October 1-30, 1864;" former U.S. National Park Service Seasonal historian at Manassas and Fredericksburg NMP's and past book review contributor to "Blue & Gray Magazine" )

5 comments about Walking Out on the Boys.

1. Sadly, any woman who's achieved a doctorate (& not just in medicine) will relate wholeheartedly to this book. I greatly admire Dr. Conley's unbelievable courage in standing up to the Boys' Club & trying to make things better for women in academia. Hopefully this book will encourage ALL women to stand up to the misogyny & be heard.



2. Frances Conley offers a compelling indictment of gender discrimination at Stanford Medical School, past and present, focussing on her own recent experience. I started this book at midnight and could not put it down until finishing it at 4 a.m. Conley provides case after case of medical school professors given virtually absolute and unchecked power over their subordinates and their subordinates' careers, abusing that power, and the medical school administration covering up that abuse. While she never addresses the issues of solidarity in the face of sexual harassment, her cases all indicate that when one woman protests, she loses, and only a pattern of abuse reported by multiple women leads to any punishment of the harassers at all. Conley was fortunate and grateful that 37 others came forward to support her claim that Gerald Silverberg engaged in inappropriate sexual contact and other activities counterindicating his capability for leadership. I'll be passing this book onto many women who have had the choice to be treated at Stanford Hospital and may well now rethink that choice.



3. I'm not an MD or a PhD; I don't work in a hospital or academia. Yet I too have experienced sexual harassment, and I too have consulted the EEO department that is supposed to get involved in handling these issues, and I found that they were disinterested, that they gave subtle and obvious messages that the problem was "my" problem and not the corporation's, and that they relied on my being too timid or unmotivated to initiate a lawsuit so the whole thing could be, well, ignored. Sexual harassment exists because the society permits men (even encourages men) to expect that it is their right to harass women. Not all men harass, and not all men admire harassers. In fact, it is quite the opposite, but those who possess the attitude that women who dare to compete must be put down through sexual threat or debasement will harass (they also enjoy and even need it, since these men have very real problems). Through her description of her own experiences, the author illuminates the social mechanism of harassment. She also brings to light the story that all we women know -- what it feels like to be the victim not just of a troubled person but of an organization that insists she accept the role of victim. When we are harassed, we women discover the battle we are in, not against one man but against all those societies which are founded on (this does sound harsh, I know) the hatred of women. This is a marvelous book -- hard to read at times if you've been there -- but it is important that women know what we are facing (especially our daughters, who like us may have been programmed to think that all men will be nice to us, will treat us fairly, and that if someone is abusive, it is our own fault, there is something wrong with me, etc.). Important too is having the author detail the steps she took to handle the harassment. This is a very supportive book for anyone enduring just such a situation (harassment as well as gender discrimination, which is a lot more rife and a lot less obvious). I'd recommend this to any woman who is willing to step outside of the traditional role, because we all need to know what we are up against, how the system is going to fail us, and especially all the steps we are entitled to take to combat this problem so that we change society's viewpoint and not just our own. I'd also recommend this to men, because there are many who are supportive of women in the workplace. Our husbands and boyfriends need to read this book to know how difficult it is for women, because in the end we can only effect a change if we all stand together.



4. As a minority faculty in the academics Frances Conley's book vividly portrays the reality of the ivory tower that, though pretentiously progressive in ideas, is way behind the iota of gender equality that exists outside the academe. I, sometimes, feel I am living in the medieval period when entering the academe.

   When I first came across this book I thought this must have been written in the seventies and I could share it with my students as a historical autobiography of sexism in an academic institution. I was horrified to find that it was written in the nineties about one of the most prestigious institution in California.

   I have always felt alone, alienated in the academe and of course disconnected from other women who were struggling too much to bother with the problems of their women peers. This book validated my experience and helped me understand where my alienation was coming from.

   I wish this book could be a standard read for all freshman students in all universities. Only when women who appear to be in power tell their stories of powerlessness and abuse can we act collectively to stop the misogyny that exists among our men and more particularly among our elite men.




5. Men groping women. Men coming on to women, and making incredible jackasses of themselves in the process. Men getting drunk and acting like barbarians. Men with one thing in mind. Men whose compulsion to talk about sex is so strong that they do it at highly inappropriate times in public. Men who think that pressuring women is their God-given right. If you think that what I just described is a high school football team on an overdose of steroids, you're wrong. These sexual antics weren't perpetrated by adolescents with testosterone bubbling out their ears, they were committed by male doctors at Stanford University. Not being stupid, these demigods put two and two together and realized that they could use their power to pressure women. One of these men made a fatal mistake, though: he pressured Dr. Frances Conley, a topnotch neurosurgeon and renowned researcher at Stanford. Bad move, fella. I suppose that guy never learned that if you're going to pick a fight, you don't provoke someone who can whack you back so hard you just might rethink whether it's wise to be a bully.

   As publicity spread about Dr. Conley's fight, more and more women came forward to reveal their stories. This was certainly an eye-opening book. Before reading it, I'd never given much thought about the sexual harassment of women in medicine and allied healthcare fields. Perhaps we're more civilized here in Michigan, because I've never seen or heard of any such hanky-panky. Well, let me revise that last statement: I have witnessed a lot of sexual inducement, but what I saw was women chasing men not the other way around. But everyone knows that those California folks are trendsetters.

   Dr. Conley never envisioned herself as a trendsetter, though. For years, she passively participated in the abuse until a concatenation of events convinced her that it was time to draw a line in the sand. To make a long story short, the men didn't believe she'd put up much of a fight, but she did, and they lost. Big time.

   (...) Perhaps the most chilling message in this book is that some men in positions of power are willing to use that power to stifle the careers of women. So what is an attractive woman to assume? That if she goes into medicine her pulchritude will serve as a magnet for sexual harassment? Perhaps this abuse is, unbeknownst to me, more pervasive than I think. I suppose because most of my friends are women, I can't understand men who view women as being somehow inferior. However, you shouldn't necessarily construe from that statement that I think women physicians are as competent, on average, as male physicians. There's no doubt that some are, and there's no doubt that Dr. Conley is a superior physician, not just competent. (...) My only major criticism of the book is that it is too focused upon abuse of women by men. Since the core of this book is hinged upon some of the depredations that ensue when power is abused, I think she could have achieved a more balanced perspective by pointing out that powerful people often use their power against men, too � not just women. I've seen male docs fight one another with such a vehemence that it made the stories in Dr. Conley's book seem as pleasant as afternoon tea and cookies with a neighbor. Consequently, while I don't intend to trivialize the unfortunate reality of the abuse Dr. Conley documents, it's important to keep in mind that this abuse is but one aspect of a much larger problem. In defense of Dr. Conley, broadening the scope of this book to include other aspects of hospital politics would have diluted the message she wished to inculcate, and it would have made for a very unwieldy book. With that in mind, I suppose I'm on shaky ground by wishing that her book had a wider focus. Her book, her demeanor, her dedication, her resolve, and her competence are commendable. Dr. Conley is a great doctor and I am happy to have met her, however indirectly, by reading this book.

   Review by Kevin Pezzi, M.D.

No comments about The Fighting Cameliers - The exploits of the Imperial Camel Corps in the Desert and Palestine Campaign of the Great War.

5 comments about Grant and Lee: A Study in Personality and Generalship.

1. This is a small book, but don't judge it by its size. It is a great little book. Grant & Lee, with such different backgrounds, lead two great armies in the strangest of times. In the end, with no grudge, the two men get to know and respect each other. But the story of how these men fought & how they thought so similarly in the battlefield and how they were both so noble and courageous help show that two men that could not have been more dissimilar, ended up being so alike serving their causes. I highly recommend this book. Very entertaining, and very educational.



2. If you read the introduction to this book, you will understand that Fuller has set out to write a brief but direct book on the Generalship capabilities of Grant and Lee. In the introduction, Fuller notes that Henderson's classic book on Jackson is more a romantic study than one that is an objective view. He goes further to say that a full study of Jackson gives a different appreciation. A respect for his maneuvering and desire to fight but also his idiosyncrasies and secrecy that Fuller indicates would cause one to question Jackson's sanity. With that introduction, you are prepared for the author's blunt assessment of both Generals. The book is brief concentrating more on strategy than just battlefield tactics. He concentrates on the critical battles of the war and the general effect the war has as a whole not just the eastern theater. In Lee, he notes that he was not a grand strategist but one that fought with intuition. As a General, he excelled on fighting on the defensive as showed in the final campaign. However, Lee preferred fighting aggressively and his errors show at Gettysburg and Malvern Hill. In the case of Chancellorsville, Fuller notes that Lee should have used the wilderness more often as a greater asset for defensive maneuvers instead of coming out in the open into battle. That like a spider, he should have waited for opportunities to attack and withdrawal with the protection of cover. He further indicates that Lee had a poor operating staff and his administration impaired supply and clarity of orders as all were given verbally and minimally. Grant on the other hand was a former quartermaster, was well organized and had a global plan of the war hence his simultaneous operations with the western theater and his multiple prong attacks in the east. Fuller notes that at first his objective was to follow Lee and not concentrate on the Richmond. But later he changed to maneuver so that Lee had to react to him as opposed to the reverse. Grant was often accused of having little imagination but as Fuller notes, he did not have the imagination to inflate numbers that were against him (McClellan) but he was rational in knowing that the Confederates had limited manpower. Through his intuition, Lee had success against the earlier Union generals but as Fuller points out, he could not fathom Grant.
   
   The book is critical of both; however, as an overall commander, Grant comes across as much more able and Lee a totally different commander highly capable on the defensive but not as much a hands on commander as most would previously think. Both men are stripped bare; the author offers a unique unbiased view of the war without the human frailty of sentiment.



3. Whatever your view of Robert E. Lee and U.S. Grant, Fuller's book will challenge you to think long and hard about your beliefs concerning both generals.
   
   As a Southerner, I have to admit that Fuller makes a compelling case for Grant being the better general between the two. One instance is where he confronts the idea that Grant was a butcher because of the heavy casualties during the Wilderness-Spotsylvania Campaign. While Grant indeed suffered the heavier losses, the percentage of losses was acutally lower than Lee. In fact, this was a common occurence in many battles in which Grant commanded.
   
   The book's contents are as follows:
   
   1. The Two Causes - the two nations, presidents, armies and other North/South factors both generals had to operate within.
   2. The Personality of Grant - modesty, common sense, courage.
   3. The Personality of Lee - humility, tact, audacity.
   4. The Generalship of Grant and Lee, 1861-1862 - description of the battles fought by both generals during both years (Shiloh, Fort Donelson, Antietam, Fredericksburg, etc).
   5. The Generalship of Grant and Lee, 1863 - Vicksburg, Gettsyburg, Chattanooga, Chancellorsville.
   6. The Generalship of Grant and Lee, 1864-1864 - Spotsylvania, Wilderness, Cold Harbor, Petersburg, Appamattox.
   7. The Two Generals - comparison and contrast between their two styles and personalities.
   
   One other interesting point mentioned by Fuller was perhaps making the Confederate capital in Atlanta instead of Richmond. I have often thought how such a move would have affected the fighting in Virginia, Georgia, and my home state of North Carolina. Something interesting to ponder!
   
   I highly recommend the book. Read and enjoy.



4. Grant and Lee, A Study in Personality and Generalship, published in 1932, compares quite favorably in its detailed research and readability with works by modern writers and historians like Shelby Foote, James M. McPherson, Gary W. Gallagher, and Stephen W. Sears. This work by Major General J. F. C. Fuller is notable for directly challenging the conventional wisdom that Grant was little more than a "butcher" and that his eventual success was almost entirely due to the North's larger population and more abundant resources. In Fuller's view Grant was not only the greatest general of the Civil War, but ranks among the greatest strategists of any age. Fuller generated even more controversy with his contention that Robert E. Lee in several respects had major failings as a military leader.
   
   Controversial or not, Major General J. F. C. Fuller was no ordinary soldier writing about the Civil War. Fuller was a highly respected British military strategist and noted author. In the 1920s he collaborated with B. H. Liddell Hart in developing new ideas for the mechanization of armies. Ironically, their recommendations were more readily adopted in Germany than in Britain, France, or the U.S.
   
   Grant and Lee, A Study in Personality and Generalship, is a relatively short book, around 300 pages. Fuller writes with clarity and precision. He makes careful use of firsthand accounts; he paid particular attention to opinions of staff officers, as men in these roles were likely to have gained greater insight into the personalities of Grant and Lee. He also utilized the opinions of foreign witnesses of the war, like Colonel Fremantle, as a check on insiders' observations. His sources were identified through extensive end notes as he realized that his findings would be controversial. He includes statistics on battle losses to illustrate that the persistent belief that Grant's losses were abnormally high is simply a myth, and that Lee's percentage losses were actually higher.
   
   There are many exceptionally good books on the Civil War, but there are few that are as readable as Fuller's Grant and Lee, and offer such a fresh viewpoint (albeit, now nearly 75 years old, but one that remains stimulating and thought provoking). Grant and Lee, A Study in Personality and Generalship, is available in a reprint edition (1982) by Indiana University Press. Five stars.



5. There are so many books on this subject that it's easy to start a fight from any point of view. Fuller is writing from across the Atlantic, and I believe that has given him a perspective that makes for a clear study of the two men. Fuller makes good use of Freemantle's observations from the latter's time in the Confederacy, extending observations into well reasoned analysis. This one is worth reading.

4 comments about The Death of Crazy Horse: A Tragic Episode in Lakota History.

1. Like The Killing of Chief Crazy Horse this book comprises various interviews with individuals who knew Crazy Horse or were present at his death. However there is no repetition here. Those accounts that are by the same people, have different dates (which, in itself makes for interesting comparisons). This book also includes valuable additions such as telegrams between the various officers involved--giving us the true picture of what their plans for Crazy Horse actually were--and many newspaper accounts, showing just how important an event this was throughout the country.
   
   Anyone who has studied this period knows the controversy that rages over Crazy Horse and his death. Was he the quiet man beloved by his band and betrayed by the agency chiefs out of jealousy? Or was he sullen and withdrawn, plotting a return to the warpath, and stopped just in time? What you find in these pages, as you would expect, is that the answer depends largely on who is doing the telling. E!ven the physical descriptions of this man, of whom no photo exists, vary greatly. Some say he was tall. Most say he was slight. Some call him handsome. One man said he was downright ugly. The only agreement seems to be on his unusually light hair and complexion.
   
   This book is not recommended for someone who is not already familiar with the story of Crazy Horse. However, for those who are, it provides access to some great primary sources, that you will probably want to re-read many times.



2. The Death Of Crazy Horse: A Tragic Episode In Lakota History is a collection of interviews of Indian and mixed blood contemporaries of his last days between May 15, 1877, when he was sworn in as a noncommissioned officer in the U. S. military and September 5, 1877, when he was killed by a military guard, bayonetted in the back. Recollections and interviews are supplemented by a collection of official documents, including telegrams, military dispatches, newspaper accounts, and other eyewitness reports. Stark, bloody detail emerges quickly, along with complex shadows of views of the man known as Crazy Horse. The aspect of betrayal and fear of this charismatic, modest young Oglala Sioux man is underlined again and again. A dark fascination arises from the accumulated documents.

   What was the cause of the martyrdom? One response comes from the newspaper account in The New York Sun, dated September 14, 1877, titled "The Death of Crazy Horse:" Crazy Horse's father is quoted as saying 'His boy...would never have fought the whites, but they (the military) hunted him and his village in their own country, and they had to defend themselves, all would have perished. He had enough buffalo in that country to last several years, and (he) wanted to stay. He fought only the Crows and Snakes and stole their ponies. But he was not left alone. Every courier that came North to him said,"Come in! Come in! Or the Gray Fox (Crook) will drive you after Sitting Bull!: At last he came. Spotted Tail and Red Cloud, the greatest chiefs of the Brules and the Oglalas, had to stand aside and give him the principal place in council, and on this account they and their young men became jealous. They were the cause of his poor boy lying there. He was killed by too much talk. He had said (p. 243).'

   The Death Of Crazy Horse has a documentary quality. Though brief, less than 300 pages, its impact is gut-wrenchingly huge. It will take more than one reading of even these few pages to construct a new truthful understanding of the end of this man's life. Though events described are often brutal, the information is presented in a tone of respect. Additional informational details such as the genealogy of Crazy Horse, in Appendix C, and the description of Crazy Horse from the Campbell letters help enflesh the image of the man. There is a hard, painful beauty about this book. The Death Of Crazy Horse: A Tragic Episode In Lakota History is a must to read for any serious student of Lakota history.

   Nancy Lorraine, Reviewer




3. I purchased this book since I am researching one of the army officers who witnessed the death of Crazy Horse, Officer-of-the- Guard Lt. Henry Lemly, who left behind an account that appeared in the New York Sun and is reproduced herein. I found that and much more. For anyone who is familiar with Hardorff's similar treatments of the Little Big Horn, CUSTER BATTLE CASUALTIES I and II, HOKAEHY! A GOOD DAY TO DIE, this work follows a familiar approach, compiling numerous Lakota accounts of the circumstances surrouding the famous warrior's death.

   Beyond that, it is much, much. Many of the first-person accounts describe other aspects of the life of Crazy Horse--his appearance, deeds in battle, his demeanor, marriage, nicknames, family etc. All of this culminates with the recollections of his fatal wounding, how it happened, who was to blame, and the reaction of both the Lakota and the army. In other words, a treasure trove of biographical information on Crazy Horse that is far more instructional than any existing biography of him. The general reader should be warned that such accounts can be repetitious and certainly aren't as readable as, say, Stephen Ambrose's CRAZY HORSE AND CUSTER. If it is unedited first person recollections you are after though, you will find them here.

   Two items of mystery especially surround the great warrior--was he ever photographed? (Hardorff is very skeptical of any such photographic claims), and where was he buried? On this last question, there are various accounts of his body being buried and then moved, etc. to the point that no one knew where he ultimately rested. There is even a photograph of his first burial site that I have never seen published before, showing an army-built wooden structure surrounding the temporary sepulcher of Crazy Horse's remains, erected on a bluff above Camp Sheridan, Nebraksa. The inclusion of such photographs and the many conflicting details of his burials make this a fascinating aspect of this book.

   In all, an excellent source of information for anyone interested in Crazy Horse, the Lakota, the Little Big Horn and the frontier military.




4. For those who are interested in the controversy surrounding the death of Crazy Horse, then this is definitely the book to read. This book contains various interviews with people who knew Crazy Horse or were present around the time of his death. Also it contains newspaper accounts and telegrams between various officers involved, which shines a light on what their true plans for Crazy Horse were.
   This is an outstanding book presented in a factual format and I would recommend it to any one interested in reading about the sad and tragic death of one of my personal favorite Lakota braves.

5 comments about Generals in Bronze: Interviewing the Commanders of the Civil War.

1. This is the best first-hand account of Civil War action and detail that I have read since "Campaigning with Grant," and likely the greatest collection of its kind in American historic literature. Every page is a gold mine of detail straight from the lips of the Generals themselves, often expressing their true feelings about other officers that they never allowed into their memoirs. It also provides a rare glimpse into their true personalities as aging war heroes, reported objectively by artist and author James Kelly of NYC, while they sat for their sketches. Kelly transcribes their words, appearance, mannerisms, and peccadillos.
   Myths are broken, and the detail provided by the generals is almost unimaginable -- from what style hat they war in a particular battle to where they took a nap will Lee surrendered to Grant at the McLean house.
   Imagine Gen. Winfield Scott Hancock describing how the doctor removed the bullet and saddle-debris from his 8-inch deep wound at Gettysburg...simply an unbelievable treasure of information. The book also contains many of the actual pencil & charcoal portraits of the Generals, which are especially compelling, as you just read the actual conversation they had with the artist while he sketched away at the portrait you now hold in your hand, and the general autographed the sketch attesting that it was drawn from life and approved. If you have questions you always wanted to ask a Civil War general like Grant, Sheridan, Sherman, Hancock, or Doubleday, they answer your questions in this book; like a ghost returning from the grave to sit in your favorite chair. I am grateful that I caught editor William Styple on C-Span. In fact, all history buffs should fall on their knees and thank editor William Styple for finding Kelly's masterstroke memoir and resurrecting it so beautifully, in our lifetime.



2. I saw a rerun of the interview on CSpan with the author and ordered this book immediately. What a pleasure to read the off-hand remarks by the various Generals about the Civil War. MORE PICTURES please but otherwise a detailed, challenging and rewarding read if you can plow through the details.



3. As a young boy in New York City during the Civil War James Kelly fantasized about being a soldier and fighting for the Union. His passion for the heroes of that war continued into his adult life. A noted artist and sculptor, Kelly went on to immortalize a great many of them in ink and bronze.
   
   Kelly was also a unique historian. He could obtain from these men details and circumstances of events that an ordinary reporter could not. As he had them pose for his sketches, he told them that in order to get the picture right he had to know every detail. Then, as he was drawing he would write down their comments in his journal.
   
   In this way he gleaned fascinating insights from them that will change your view of the war. Here are some examples.
   
   We know that several generals turned down command of the Army of the Potomac during the period 1862-1863. Kelly found out in his interviews that one of the conditions of command was the stipulation that the general had to pledge that the war would not end until after the [presidential] election of 1864.
   
   I have always wondered why there were so few casualties during the bombardment of Fort Sumter. Why didn't the big guns of the fort not inflict any damage on the Southern batteries? The answer is that the Secretary of War under outgoing President Buchanan [1856-1860] was a Southern sympathizer. In his last days in office he had ordered that the powerful casement guns in the fort be removed and replaced with old ships' guns.
   
   Kelly obtained intimate details of the battles and why things happened the way they did as well as vivid images of life in combat. One general described having a horse shot out from under him. "He was hit as he reared. He went down over his front legs and blood shot from both nostrils like water from a pump".
   
   This is a "must read" for all afficionados of Civil War history.



4. It is hard to add anything new to what has already been written in the reviews, although I would say that not only does the book have excellent insight into many of the key Federal officers that fought in the war, but it is a window into 19th Century post war culture. James Kelly, the sculptor and artist who is at the center of the book, vividly recounts how he meets these gentlemen. Most of the time he must use calling cards to announce his arrival before he is called in- something wholly archaic in our modern casual society. There are other tidbits that are fascinating. One general whom he calls on uses a fan and a block of ice to keep cool as he answers Kelly's questions.
   Speaking of these questions, we the readers are very fortunate in that Kelly had studied the war and often asked the same questions we would. He was a small boy during the war, and these men were his heroes. We meet these men as real people, not just as names in a book. I do agree with one reviewer who writes that there is too much detail, but there again, it is the details that make the book come alive.
   My only regret (but it is a very small one) is that Kelly was so prejudiced against Southerners that he only recounts his meeting with one of them, and absolutely refused to sculpt any ex-Confederate officers. However, given his time and how he felt about the war, such feelings are understandable. It is instructive that most of the men he talked with did not share his extreme negative views about Confederate veterans.
   I would recommend this book for any seasoned Civil War enthusiast, as they would be familiar with the controversies and issues Kelly recounts. But Styple does a great job as editor and so perhaps even a novice might be able to wade through some of this and get something from it.
   Speaking of Styple, he deserves much credit for bringing this book into print, as he had to wade through all of Kelly's material to publish it. Not only that, but Styple researched Kelly's life and found that Kelly died a pauper with an unmarked grave! Styple was able to remedy that and recently had a grave marker erected for one of the finest sculptors our country ever produced.



5. Outstanding book, get a better feel of what the Generals were thinking during the Civil War.

5 comments about The Victors: Eisenhower and His Boys The Men of World War II.

1. I have read most of the books by Ambrose and the material in The Victors is covered better in his other works. It isn;t bad, but the only reader who might find it interesting is someone who was looking to get into Ambrose's WWII works. Anyone else but the completists will probably not enjoy this book.



2. This covers the European theater from D day to the end.
   The futile battles of the Hurtgen forest are documented. A waste of men for nothing. We gave up our advantages of air power and tanks to fight in an impenatrable forest.
   What struck me over and over, was what the men fighting endured.
   The supply situation was what is was always in the military. Those in the rear get the gear. Those doing the fighting get the remains.
   In the battle of the Hurtgen forest, during a visit by Ike, a company of Rangers complained to Ike about the lack of cold weather gear. He got the Rangers cold weather gear, but not the other thousands of men doing the fighting.
   The same applied in the battle of the Bulge. The people in the rear out of the line of fire had waterproof, warm boots, and huge overcoats to keep warm. Those doing the fighting had summer uniforms, leather boots, and had to fight without benefit of fire to keep them warm, or get their food warm. The result was thousands of men with trench foot. The men went hungry a lot of the time due to impassible roads, so food supplies could not be brought up.
   The men who endured this were heros.
   Ike was the first to realize what Hitler was up to when the Battle of the Bulge started, and got Patton moving on a counterattack plan immediately, which succeeded.
   Thanks to Steve Ambrose, the suffering of the men who did the fighting is documented.



3. From the very beginning of the book I was enticed. I thought it was very well written and an enjoyable read. It includes stories and things I would have never expected. I thought the relationship between Marshall and Eisenhower was most interesting. I had not learned much about Marshall and Eisenhower's personalities. They were opposites yet worked very well together. Their relationship was based on trust. It is inspirational to hear of all that our soldiers went through during World War II. As someone looking back it helped me to better understand what went on and what the soldiers experienced first hand. I thought "The Victors" was a wonderful book and spanned over a good period of time. I would highly recommend it to others as a World War II informative book.



4. Unlike his other works, DDay, Band of Brothers and Citizen Soldiers, which cover specific elements of the European theater, The Victors tries to cover the period from DDay through the fall of Germany. As always, Ambrose demonstrated why he was one of the best story tellers. Unfortunately, as his preface pointed out, this was put together from the research he had done on his other books.
   
   If you are familiar with the three books mentioned in above, you will find a lot of overlap. I am sure he did some more original research for this, but the overall premise is very similar.
   
   The over-arching theme of the Victors is that the allied success was due to the flexibility of the US troops, in particular the LTs and other NCO's, and the regular soldiers. Their determination and ability to adapt to the changing situations on the ground, the antithesis of the Germans, was what helped carry the war in the favor of the allies. He also spends the beginning of the book on Eisenhower. Ike is the other piece of the puzzle that, despite some mistakes and flaws, he credits with putting together the largest military campaign in history - Operation Overlord.
   
   The only real criticism I would have is that the story line was somewhat disjointed. Stories are told seemingly for the sake of telling them, rather than having a real purpose. But I can overlook that since there is a lot of first person accounts that give the war a very human touch. And the stories you read about, make it very worthwhile.
   
   Aside from that, it was an entertaining read, just like all of his other books. His admiration for the courage of that generation is clear. And his talent for telling a story certainly shines through. If you are interested in more detail, I would recommend reading DDay, Citizen Soldiers and Band of Brothers first. If you are simply looking to pass the time on the train, as I was, you will find the time passing along much more quickly.
   
   I purchased the book at the Newark Penn Station Bookstore. I recommend the bookstore and the book.



5. A point of view seldom seen: the kids in the field who had to grow up very quickly. With a strong sense of duty and honor they lived up to their moniker, The Greatest Generation.

5 comments about 15 Stars: Eisenhower, MacArthur, Marshall: Three Generals Who Saved the American Century.

1. Very detailed, perhaps too much so, but accurate historically. I enjoyed the book very much.



2. This is a well researched book that provides a fascinating insight into the workings and interactions of America's great Word War Two generals. I chose the book because it is unique in focus and I thoroughly enjoyed. It can be hard reading sometimes because there are too many ideas in one sentence, but this is good stuff.
   
   Kevin Ashcroft, 11 July 2008



3. I have read several Bio's of for each of these men, but never one which covered all 3 before. The books author is quite comprehensive in detailing the professional lives of all 3 generals from the 1930's forward. Author definitely is fond of Gen. Marshall, lukewarm on Eisenhower, and clearly dislikes MacArthur. With Mac and Ike the details of their foibles and errors come through clearly in the book. The author is much gentler on the essentially colorless G.C. Marshall. Definitely not a canonization piece for any of the 3 men, lots of behind the scenes information. A good book for folks who have previously read bio's on all of these Generals. I would not recommend this book to someone who knows little about the professional accomplishments of these men or WW2. Enthusiasts will enjoy it beginners in this area of history should look elsewhere first.



4. Weintraub's 15 Stars is billed as a study of how three 5 star generals of World War II fame "saved the American Century." However, as I forced myself to plod through over 500 pages it became clear to me that the author's goal was the adulation of his hero George C. Marshall at the expense of Douglas MacArthur and Dwight D. Eisenhower.
   This "historian" through blatant criticism, gossip and constant innuendo demonstrates that he cannot bring himself to say anything positive about either "Mac" or "Ike". In my opinion, Weintraub feels his high esteem for Marshall, no doubt a great American of the 20th Century, will be enhanced by demeaning the accomplishments of two other giants of the American Century.



5. I learned two things from reading this book: the British thought the Americans were stupid and the author thought MacArthur was stupid. Other than that I got very little out of it.

5 comments about Colonel Chabert.

1. Carol Cosman's translation of Balzac's French 'Colonel Chabert' into the English has been very effective here- she does not input her own interpretations and seems to have a good handle on Balzac's natural, concise wording style.

   The story itself is fascinating. In a nutshell, it focuses on a military man who is essentially erased from society, and the tribulations and insights he has from this 'non-existant' state as he tries to re-establish himself. Not only is this a witty and profound social commentary, but an entertaining twist which just keeps twisting.

   In reading other's reviews of this short masterpiece, it seems as if many people have missed the meaning of the finale. While it is indeed a very enigmatic ending, it is not as lugubrious or fatalistic as most believe. What happens is that Colonel Chabert, in essentially having his old identity annihilated, becomes enlighted. In the ultimate destruction of his ego he becomes free. This is the magic finale which Balzac labors so hard, and so majestically, to set up in the plot.

   This tome is very impressive, and relatively short (just over 100 pages) for those new to Balzac who want a nice, piquant appetizer. Balzac is one of the most brilliant French fiction writers of all time! He is a giant, and in 'Colonel Chabert', he weaves another illustrious stitch into his tapestry the Comedie Humaine.




2. Balzac, one of the greatest writers who ever lived, did not trip up with this one. I read it with great pleasure and conclude, as people so often say, that the movie based on the story did not equal the original. Ever the cynic (some might say 'the realist') Balzac portrays here the efforts of a noble-minded soldier, who rose from an orphanage to serve his country under Napoleon in Egypt and eastern Europe, only to reap the all-too-common fate of dedicated and true warriors---to be forgotten and ignored. Death (which he accepted) might have seized him, but he found a living death, a denial of his sanity and identity, as the reward of his service. Reported killed at the battle of Eylau, against the Russians, after a heroic action, the soldier literally crawls from his grave to a kind of shadowy survival. In his earlier life, Colonel Chabert had raised a woman to his own status, but now finds that she is unwilling to let others learn of her origins and does not want to recognize that he is, in fact, her long lost husband. Honestly thinking she was widowed, she married a highborn aristocrat who knew nothing of her humble beginnings.

   The tale is one of greed, intrigue, loyalty and disloyalty. As usual, Balzac manages to cast a light, pitiless and bright, on every rotten corner of the human condition, while offering a few inspiring examples in contrast. Every detail of a lawyer's life in 19th century Paris is scrutinized, every glimpse of urban dairyman or elite country squirehood rings true. No wonder I admire him so much, no wonder I have no hesitation in urging you to read COLONEL CHABERT and any other volume of Balzac you can lay your hands on.




3. One of the greatest novelists of all time, Balzac was most at home in the Paris of Post-Napoleonic Paris. In a time when the middle class was showing its strength and starting to reach towards the aristocracy, Balzac shows just how selfish and grubby and greedy humans can be in attaining and how treacherous they can be in keeping their all important upward mobility.

   Colonel Chabert is a man disfigured in the Napoleonic Wars who was left for dead on a battlefield. After digging his way out of a mass grave, he finds that he has no legal right to his title or his massive estate. Nobody will believe his true identity. For ten longe years he goes about trying to communicate his plight to anyone who will listen. They only see a crazy bum, and his wife rebuffs his letters. She already has a new husband and kids. Finally Chabert is able to convince a lawyer named Dervilles to accept his case, namely that of reclaiming his title, lands, and wife. The problem is that noone is really interested in his life being resurrected. Most people would rather that he remained dead. So begins the ludicrous battle of a man against the law to prove his own existence.

   This short but great novel, or novella, is a tragic take on the world's thirst for social status and the judgement by visuals that our society is only too guilty of to this day. If it walks like a bum, talks like a bum, it must be a bum. Colonel Chabert has such a hard time convincing people of his identity because of how they perceive him. It sounds echoes of Frankenstein in that a good man is reduced to a monster when all he really needs is love. The fact that even his wife wishes he were dead just drives home the isolated suffering of the book. As in all Balzac novels, you feel a world moving under the mantle of the book. The Human Comedy of Balzac is one of the crowning achievements of literature and ranks right up there with Shakespeare and Thomas Hardy.




4. ...of a great Balzac novella. Ms. Cosman captures the rigorous, logical quality of Balzac's prose - most translators get lost in unidiomatic wordiness. This 100 page novella showcases the Master's comfort with legal matters, his profound understanding of "the fang and the claw" and features at its center the incomparable Derville, Balzac's great, recurring lawyer character. I usually recommend Pere Goriot for first-time Balzac readers because of the rich connections between that novel and many other Balzac works - but I am hard pressed to imagine a better one-course meal than this rendering of Colonel Chabert by Ms. Cosman. I certainly plan to read her version of The Girl with the Golden Eyes.



5. "Colonel Chabert" is one of Honore de Balzac's volumes from his omnibus work, "The Human Comedy." The Colonel is a comic figure in and old military great coat and a wig who is ridiculed by young legal workers at the beginning of the novel. But, the joke is on the clerks, because Chabert is a war hero of the Napoleonic era who was given up for dead on a battlefield at Eylau. This translation from the French by Carol Grosman tells the story of the old soldier's resurrection in contemporary jargon. The novel is relevant today considering the service of soldiers in many wars continuing in our world. What happens to these heroes when wars end, or more accurately, shift to new fronts? Balzac paints the portrait of one old colonel who remains honorable and as a consequence seals his fate. The translation is very readable and the short novel is brief "scene from private life." The work will stimulate further interest in the monumental work of Balzac who had a relatively short life (1799-1850).