5 comments about Fatal Purity: Robespierre and the French Revolution.

1. Ruth Scurr successfully manages to be neither overly critical nor too flattering in explaining Maximilien Robespierre to her readers. Scurr highlights the significant influence of the classical Greek and Roman tradition and the 18th century Enlightenment on Robespierre's intellect. Scurr also quotes Robespierre and his contemporaries to give her audience further insights into the complex, contradictory personality of the Incorruptible.
   
   To his detractors, present and past, Robespierre was the first of a long list of modern dictators. Think for instance about the multiple purges over which dictators such as Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Saddam Hussein presided during their respective reigns of terror. Terror increasingly became self-perpetuating and indiscriminate when Robespierre was at the apex of his power in 1793 - 1794. Robespierre, unable to compromise, convinced himself that he embodied France and the Revolution. Unsurprisingly, anyone who did not share his views was a traitor to France and therefore a counterrevolutionary who deserved death. Terror could only be stopped by Robespierre's own elimination.
   
   To his supporters, present and past, Robespierre was the first modern democrat. Robespierre embraced the social contract theory of government that Jean-Jacques Rousseau propagated and the concept of republican virtue that Charles-Louis de Secondat (Montesquieu) advocated. Robespierre built a genuine reputation as the defender of the poor and weak in the different positions that he assumed, especially after the Revolution. Robespierre went far in his quest for power because he sincerely believed everything he was saying and convinced many people around him of his sincerity in working for the well-being of the Revolution.
   
   Perhaps, more importantly, the fate of Robespierre is a stern warning to the revolutionaries of all stripes, present and future. Revolutions often devour their own children.



2. A fine study of personality...with considerable attention to accuracy. Literary quality is very good.
   
   Sometimes, history outshines any novel, in intrigue and tragedy; such is the case, here.
   
   There is little opinion in this book, thankfully. Furthermore, the author respects Robespierre as a creature of not only his inner mannerisms, but especially of his times.
   
   In my education, I missed the French Revolution. It was my great pleasure to happen upon this book, as excellent as it is. Thanks to PBS, too, for stimulating my interest, quite accidentally, in this man and his mission. The creations of the Revolutionaries, such as revamped calendar and religion, are discussed pointedly. No mention of metric system, but perhaps none is needed!
   
   My greatest regret, from this book, was that the story ended with the death of Robespierre. I will look with interest elsewhere, to see how the fledgling republic, so fraught with discord, shortly afterward degenerated into the Napoleonic monarchy.
   
   Some societies just are not mature enough for democracy, perhaps.



3. This is an excellent biography of Robespierre that really gives the reader an inside look at the French Revolution. The style of writing is very easy to read and personal so the reader feels like they are present at the events. I would recommend having at least a cursory knowledge for the revolution before reading this as she does assume some knowledge for events that Robespierre is not directly involved with. The biggest drawback to the book and the main reason for the four stars is that it is very pro-Robespierre and this comes from a reliance on his sisters journal (Catharine) as a primary source. Some further work which would have been done had this been an academic book would have been better. Nonetheless it is comprehensive and well done. The analysis of the terror is very unique and the bloodletting that so many focus on is explained very well here. This is a great start to understanding Robespierre and despite the fawning praise it is well worth the read.



4. I was not going to write about this book, but have decided to do so after reading some of the other reviews. This book is a biography, and tells of Robespierre from the beginning of his life to its end. It does not begin with the King's flight to Varennes, as implied by one reviewer. I found the writing clear and easy to read, not boring. I have never admired Robespierre and this book did not change my opinion of him, even though it is even-handed and tells what good things can be said of him. I don't know of a better modern biography of him and I have no hesitancy in giving this book five stars.



5. This book is an highly readable history which makes the sequence of events (which can seem convoluted in other accounts) of the French Revolution easily understandable (understandable in that we can see why the National Assembly and its constitutional monarchy failed, which was then succeeded by the Convention, which was where Robespierre eventually gained control both as President of the Convention and as the most influential member of the Committee of Public Safety, which was formed by the Convention).
   
   Hard to understand a man (Robespierre) so committed to his ideal of defense of the Revolution and the purity he thought it should embody that he'd send old friends (Danton, Desmoulins), with whom he mostly agreed on things, to the scaffold. Cannot understand it from the point of view of being a human being. The book does provide explanation of Robespierre's thinking, so that's as close as humanity/Robespierre we can link.
   
   Thank you, Ruth Scurr (the author).

5 comments about The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin: Second Edition (Yale Nota Bene).

1. The purpose of the book is difficult to pin down, primarily because Franklin never completed and cohesively tied his biography together. The purpose, it seems, is then left to the effects that it has had upon history. Although difficult to follow and often a confusing narrative, Franklin composes a portrait of the prototypical American success story, perhaps even the first. His emphasis on personal virtue and industry is a sermon not only to his son, but also to Americans throughout time, on the formula for success. His descriptions of life in the colonies and the nature of self-teaching seem to set the standard for history's view of pre-revolutionary America.
   
   The ethics of clean living and a hearty work ethic that Franklin sought to impart upon his son are still alive as ideals of the "American dream." Although it can be argued how much of a dream this really is, the value given to hard work and personal responsibility are very much a part of the American rhetoric that is indoctrinated through political and nationalistic institutions. It seems undeniable that Franklin hoped to have a lasting effect on future generations, as he certainly did not succeed in living the virtue of humility.
   
   While vanity certainly must play a part in the drive for any public figure to pen to paper and detail their life, part and parcel with that is the desire to be a good role model to a wide audience. Franklin seems to have prided himself on being a good role model throughout his life, from his time in England until returning to Philadelphia, assisting others in setting up businesses and becoming self-sufficient.
   
   We can only speculate what Franklin's reasoning must have been. Indeed, it may be that assuming history will have well recorded the time period, a personal account was unnecessary. It may be that Franklin simply never finished his Autobiography and certainly intended to return to the subject. Whatever the reasons may be, this is certainly the most jarring and notable deficiency from an otherwise detailed record of the life of one of our most important statesmen.



2. The autobiography of Ben Franklin is a worthwhile read simply because of who Ben Franklin is. It is beneficial to understand the character of this great man by judging him through his own words. There is no doubt that Franklin was an ingenius man and his witty rhetoric further confirms his intelligence. It also confirms his egotistical nature I hate to say.... But I suppose he had every right given his success...
   Anyhow, I thought the first portion of the book (written before the revolution) was much more interesting that the latter half. Unfortunately the autobiography was never really finished by Franklin. He ends off abruptly during the French and Indian War period and there is nary an remark concerning American Independence, which would have been interesting to read about from his point of view.
   Still, overall, it's worth the read.



3. Well, it has been nearly 30 years since I first read Benjamin Franklin's autobiography and one can still gain some insights after a good second reading. Both the American Icon's wisdom and insights are time honored and worth repeating no matter what your age.
   
   This edition has copious footnotes on every page unlike traditionally at the end of the book. The authors may have felt that the reader would be interested in the quick reference aspect verses paging to the back. Though this can be a little strange at first, I get their point and maybe it was better this way.
   
   One aspect that I would have liked; however, would have been if they had added some of his other selected writings like "The Way to Wealth" and others. Irrespective, this is a good edition and recommended as one of the more authoritative editions.



4. Like so many people I only know Benjamin Franklin from school and history books where he comes across as someone stiff and formal. But here in the first half of this book we find Ben Franklin the boy. We hear him complain of his parents, his restrictions, quarrels with his brothers, and of course things that all boys do. He steals from a construction site to build a fishing pier -- and gets caught. We see him finally breaking away and moving to Philadelphia where he arrives with very little money and must subsist on bread. He describes his youth and his gradual maturity as he builds his life and fortune. Interestingly this book leaves some doubt as to whether he was actually married to Deborah Read or had an "arrangement". I particularly enjoyed his description of General Braddock and his defeat by the Indians. Although this was only briefly touched on this and other similar references to the English gives you insight into why the colonists rebelled. Clearly the English completely misjudged the American Character as most Europeans do even today.
   
   Unfortunately the second half of this book was written after the war and when Franklin was an old man and clearly not terribly interested in finishing this book. It reads as an after thought and really doesn't provide any insight into his role or the extraordinary people and events of which he was a part. But it does show the close relationship he had with his son so when the estrangement came it must have hurt him deeply although this is a subject not mentioned at all in the book.
   
   However, the editors have kindly provided a marvelous timeline in the appendix, which really gives you a summary of the Revolutionary War as it places various key events into perspective. You see the impact that John Paul Jones's victory over the Serapis had on events in Paris. It shows how Franklin's diplomatic skills had a huge effect on the ultimate outcome of the war.
   
   Franklin was an extraordinary man who lived an extraordinary life. He writes about himself rather modestly and really doesn't touch on his activities during the war in any detail and for this reason I only gave this book four stars. Still this is an interesting book about a truly fascinating man.



5. The autobiography of Franklin was a worthwhile book to read. I suggest ignoring the footnotes as you read his autobiography since it distracts you from reading Franklin's work. It was a good book that details how industriousness results in a wonderful, useful public life at an older age. Franklin is the type of public servant that we are lacking today.

5 comments about Radio Free Dixie: Robert F. Williams and the Roots of Black Power.

1. Ultimately, the notion of white supremacy and the so-called glory of the Lost Cause always devolved to the use of violence and intimidation against black people and any one who sided with them. Williams' is an amazing story of courage and determination as he challenged the KKK and assorted white rabble of rural North Carolina in the 1940s through the 1960s in his quest for racial justice.
   
   Williams, a soldier during WW2, came back to Monroe, NC after the war and took on the clowns and goons of the KKK and the local and state white government. When they fired on his home, he shot back, upsetting the applecart of segregation.
   
   Tyson's book is a powerful portrayal of a man quite willing to die for his rights, a man fed up with the violence degradation inflicted on him by southern society, and a man willing to kill to protect his property, his person and his family.
   
   Tyson's realistic and entertaining portrayal of the stupid and inane actions of white southern racists in North Carolina is another reason to read this book. The local thuggery is almost comical, until one remembers they are well armed and prone to alcholism and violence. Tyson goes into great detail about a 1958 case where two black boys, 10 and 8 were BEATEN and IMPRISONED for kissing a white girl.
   
   Williams and his wife are not well known heroes of the Civil Rights struggle. This book gave me a greater appreciation of the vicious hatred, violence, and stupidity they were fighting, and how disciplined and determined the Civil Rights struggle had to be in the face of overwhelming white resistance.



2. The civil rights movement was not created by, lead by, or moved forward by the dozen or so media heros whose names we all now know. The civil rights movement succeed because so many ordinary people decided that they could no longer stand to live in the midst of injustice, and decided to step out of their daily lives and do something about it.
   
   Robert Williams did just that. An ordinary working class guy, he used his people skills to form a network of working class black people who did not have the patience of the old line leaders of the local NAACP chapter in his hometown. He got himself elected president of the chapter, and backed by dozens of local people, formed one of the most activist chapters in the country. The national NAACP never was comfortable with Williams or the work of his chapter, and at best held them at arms length.
   
   Inevitably, Williams' hard pressure on local structures of racism lead to a backlash. When he was attacked and his family threatened with death, the local police did nothing. When he and his community defended themselves, by taking up arms to combat the armed violence of the white racists, he was charged with murder, and became the subject of a massive FBI hunt. Escaping to Cuba, he operated a radio station, beaming the "truth" along with progressive jazz and blues which would never be played on corporate radio in the south, to Dixie.
   
   Ultimately, Williams' stance of self-defense was taken up by Stokley Carmichael in the South, and by the Black Panther Party in Oakland, and is now well known as the "Black Power" movement. But at the time, it was simply a slightly more hardline version of the NAACP. Local chapters of the NAACP, building on long traditions of mutual support in black communities throughout the south, supported by thousands of ordinary people, formed the backbone of the civil rights movement. Anyone who thinks otherwise should read the statements by Bob Moses and the other SNCC organizers, who readily admitted that they could never have accomplished anything at all if not for the decades of groundwork done by the local NAACP chapters throughout the south.
   
   Great book, which everyone interested in the history of the Civil Rights movement, or just interested in the way social changes really happen, should read.



3. Mainstream history seemingly gets real nervous about who is carrying a loaded weapon and who one associates with. Combine the two and it will take an outstanding historian like Timothy B. Tyson to bring to life the tireless work and controversies surrounding civil-rights activist Robert F. Williams.
   
   Williams brought the element of armed self-defense in seeking equal rights, especially in his hometown of Monroe, N.C. Though Williams, a military veteran, stressed that the specter of self-defense was necessary - and proven successful in confronting the KKK and other racists - his stance drew the ire of the NAACP's national office, the FBI and other government agencies & those in the civil rights movement who stressed non-violent actions no matter what the situation.
   
   The book is more than a biography on Williams. It shows how his demands for equal rights meant something different to various individuals and groups, though Williams would not politically "fall in line" with any movement. It was the perceived idealism that drew many to Williams, but it was such a coalition - including Malcolm X and the Socialist Workers Party - that made him particularly dangerous in the eyes of federal officials.
   
   While in exile from the U.S. after being erroneously charged for violating several federal laws, Williams was in Cuba after the revolution, North Viet Nam during the war, China as the Cultural Revolution caught fire and travelled to Africa. His independent thinking got him in trouble in Cuba; a radio show he conducted to the U.S., Radio Free Dixie, along with public comments he made, found Williams facing the wrath of Cuban government officials and ultimately led him to China.
   
   The book also shows how his wife, Mabel and women in Monroe & in other cities not only demanded civil rights, but were willing to defend themselves and their families from violent attacks through the barrel of a gun. Mabel Williams was also an important person in the writing, editing and publishing of a newsletter that gained national and international attention.
   
   Williams was an important catalyst for Huey Newton and the Deacons for Defense in their quests to skillfully confront the haters on the streets. In yet again another example on why we must continue to look past the history as it is written in textbooks, Robert F. Williams showed what can be accomplished when the intimidators become the intimidated while trying to perpetuate the myth of white supremacy.



4. A compelling look at a fascinating figure of the modern American civil rights movement whose story continues to be relevant. Particularly interesting is the nuanced and thoughtful treatment of the complex dialogue and tension between "nonviolence" and "self-defense" in the history of the Black freedom struggle in the US.
   
   The period of Williams's life following his exile is only very tersely outlined (as the author himself admits), giving the book a bit of an abrupt end. More analysis of Williams's decision to renounce public life, of his scepticism about the later direction of the "Black Power" movement that had claimed him as one of its icons, and of his decision to seek an "understanding" with the US gov't enabling his return from exile, would probably make for most interesting reading.



5. As one reviewer notes, Robert Williams name is not noted in other books about this era. This is a great loss to history. Also reading "Blood Done Sign My Name" will give readers a more complete picture of life for Blacks in the South in the 60's & early 70's.
   However, as Timothy Tyson told me in February, "desegregation is not complete". "Blood Done Sign My Name", is in production as a major movie at this time. It is being filmed entirely in North Carolina.

5 comments about Witness.

1. Witness is among the most haunting books that I have ever read. The reader who picks it up expecting only a combination spy story and courtroom drama is likely to be as profoundly surprised as was I.
   
   I had somewhat absent-mindedly placed Witness on my birthday gift list, in deference to the frequency with which it is cited as one of the indispensable political books of the 20th century. Upon receipt, I assigned it to the "to-read" stack, failing to note that it was a daunting 800 pages long. Shortly after I began it and realized its length, I feared it would prove too dense for me to enjoy. How wrong I was: when I at last closed the book a couple of weeks later, I knew that it would haunt me, possibly for all the years I have left.
   
   Many conservatives regard this book as a seminal founding charter, a characterization that not only underrates its literary quality, but which also erects a needless barrier before others who would appreciate it. This book is must-reading, regardless of political persuasion. I myself differ from Chambers in several fundamental ways: I am as predisposed to optimism as he was to pessimism; I relished elementary school as greatly as he was tormented by it; and I do not share his religious faith. But these and other differences do not inhibit a reader from appreciating this magnificent book.
   
   This book not only tells a riveting story, it does so with a poetic, melancholy beauty reminiscent of a great Russian novelist. Something about his writing reminded me of Nabokov (an inexact comparison, given that the style exhibits none of Nabokov's exuberant, puckish wordplay). But Chambers's fluid, graceful sentences, and his gift for reconstruction of sensory and emotional states, are comparable to those of the brilliant Russian emigre. Suffice it so say that this book does not read like a bestselling memoir, but rather as a great work of literature.
   
   The story of Witness is of a man originally alienated from his society, and of his struggle to find good and meaning in his world. Chambers's account of his early life is deeply saddening. One suspects that the entire family was genetically predisposed to depression, considering his brother's suicide, the narrator's own similar attempts, and his parents' many self-destructive actions.
   
   Attending school only accentuated young Vivian's (later Whittaker's) sense of isolation. One story he relates is hard to forget: on one of his first school days, he witnessed three boys urinating on a lollipop, and then tricking a later-arriving fourth boy into putting it into his mouth. (The incident itself is gloomy enough; equally so is the fact that Chambers later remembered it as emblematic of his school experience.) Young Chambers is traumatized by the pervasive cruelty around him. He struggles through the ordeal of school - the mockery of his name Vivian, the taunts of being a "sissy," and being compelled to fight.
   
   One is hardly surprised that such an alienated, secretly intelligent, unappreciated youth, convinced of the intractable injustice of the world, would be seduced by communism. In the central section of the book, Chambers details his gradual descent into that world, first as an open party communist, later as a practitioner in espionage. It is in this section that he meets Alger Hiss, and collaborates with him in betraying his country.
   
   This middle section of the book is probably the most arduous reading. At points, many of the figures and spy escapades seem to all run together. But stick with it, because the final 300 pages or so, detailing the Hiss case, are among the most gripping you will ever read.
   
   Chambers at some point realizes that the actions and amorality of communist agitation offend his still-living conscience. He finally responds to that conscience, and begins a further personal journey to where he locates the spiritual comfort he previously lacked: in truth, in family, in working the land, and in religious faith.
   
   Ultimately, Chambers's break with the party compels him to inform on Alger Hiss and others during a Congressional investigation of communist infiltration of the executive branch. Chambers chooses his title of "Witness" advisedly, meaning "witness" in quite the literal, religious sense - a moral compulsion to testify to what he knows, in spite of the danger to himself, in order to help save the world around him. Indeed, Chambers is convinced that he is defecting from the winning to the losing side when he makes his break, but feels he cannot rightly do otherwise.
   
   Popular memory of this period in American history has been, unfortunately, blurred by the excesses of Joe McCarthy. McCarthy's crude and reckless actions have made him a convenient whipping boy for subsequent Hollywood treatments of the Cold War. It is too little remembered that prior to the McCarthy debacle, it was revealed that in fact, there were many communists who had ensconced themselves in the highest levels of the American government, where they practiced a treasonous espionage. The Chambers-Hiss case, much more than the buffoonery of McCarthy, is the truly dramatic and relevant parable of the age.
   
   Much of the final chapters of Witness is told through transcripts of the Congressional hearings. Reading them, one can only wish for a skilled Hollywood treatment of these scenes. The events included every dramatic turn one could hope for - the steady unraveling of a senior State Department official as his lies are exposed on the witness stand, the relentless and skilled probing of Congressional investigators, dramatic personal confrontations, the discovery of critical evidence midway through the proceedings, and even the secreting of classified material in a hollowed-out pumpkin.
   
   What is sobering to realize is that the case would be likely to play out in much the same way today: the press reflexively sided with the urbane, politically-approved Hiss, while the slovenly, seemingly-shady Chambers was subjected to every calumny imaginable. But it turned out that it was the schlub who was actually the man of intelligence and integrity. Appearances are often deceiving.
   
   One thing that leaps out from these pages after the fact is just how pathetically incompetent a liar was Alger Hiss. You follow him weaving and revising and hedging, and not very convincingly. But so blinding were the ascendant political assumptions of the time that he was the one who was initially believed.
   
   One needn't share Chambers's views on politics, religion, or even of the mind of the typical communist subversive, to find his memoir to be a story of surpassing poetry and haunting resonance. Few people have had such an important story to tell in their memoirs, and almost none have told them so lyrically. Few are the books that are virtually impossible to forget. This is one.



2. I read this book when it was first published. I was fourteen or fifteen and in high school. It made a profound impact on me. Besides being beautifully written, its tale of a man who leaves what he calls the winning side (Communism) and joins the losing side (God) in the great conflict of the 20th Century influenced the course of my life.
   
   I am now 69 and still have memories of reading Chambers' autobiography. I became a lifelong anti-Communist even before I became a conservative. I come from a family of blue-collar Irish Democrats but even at a young age felt the call of the other party and when I registered to vote at age 21, I immediately registered as a Republican.
   
   Read this book and be astounded (as I was) about Chamber's life first as an overt Communist writing for the Daily Worker and then as an underground Communist working with cells in our nation's capital. We meet Alger Hiss and other important figures in the Roosevelt administration who led other lives as traitors and spies for the USSR. Doubtful as to those individuals? Then read the many books chronicling the findings in the Soviet archives after the fall of the Soviet Union (the Venona Project).
   
   My only regret is that Whittaker Chambers did not live to see the collapse of the USSR. He would have been pleased.



3. This reads like a great spy novel, but (of course) it is true. After one has finished the last page there is a feeling of loss ... where are giants like Chambers these days?



4. During a recent vacation, I was able to finish reading Whittaker Chambers' startling eight hundred page autobiography, "Witness". And I must say that I feel both well informed and somewhat disturbed by the experience. Perhaps I may be allowed to explain.
   
   Whittaker Chambers is the name finally employed by the very strange character, born as Jay Vivian Chambers. This man was raised by a rather odd set of parents, his father, a failed artist and bisexual, and his mother, a never launched actress. Now despite the failings of his parents at their chosen professions, they nevertheless had the audacity to look down upon their economic peers, among whom the Chambers boys grew up. And, though much of the personal information included in the early chapters of this book, relative to Chambers' formative years, is excruciatingly boring, it is also instructive.
   
   Chambers was a diffident, slovenly young man, though evidently somewhat gifted academically. As a consequence, he was able to gain admission to Columbia University. There, his academic career was singularly unsuccessful. First expelled for publishing a blasphemous play about Jesus Christ, he later returned, but was unable to complete his basic degree. With this, we see a very odd, but recurrent aspect of Chambers' unique personality. Though unable to complete even a bachelor's degree, due to lack of discipline, he had the audacity to style himself as an intellectual. He began then, as his parents had done before him, to sneer condescendingly at those more disciplined and accomplished than he was. And, finally, he found a rationale for his rejection of discipline and orthodoxy in the writings of Marx and Lenin. Chambers became then a "dedicated" Marxist.
   
   Our "hero" then went to work for a number of Marxist journals, and pursued a deviant lifestyle. Finally, he joined, quite willingly, the communist underground, and became an asset of Soviet intelligence. In this role, Chambers recruited numerous government officials, including the noteworhty Alger Hiss, and was associated with such men as Soviet agent and US Treasury Department official Harry Dexter White.
   
   The cowardly Chambers eventually "broke" with communism, ostensibly on the occassion of the Soviet Union's treaty with Nazi Germany. In any case, Chambers then turned on his former colleagues. This turncoat behavior of the traitor brought him finally before the House Committee on Un-American Activities, and enabled him to establish a strange professional relationship with a hard charging young congressman on that committee, Richard Nixon of California.
   
   Having charged Hiss, and others, with that which he had been guilty of, being a communist, Chambers spent years as a cooperating government witness. Hence, we have the title of this book. In a stunning admission in this, his autobiography, Chambers allows that he perjured himself before a grand jury on the question of whether he had personal knowledge of espionage activity done in the United States on behalf of the Soviet Union. Hiss was later convicted of perjury on essentially the same set of facts. But Chambers was spared conviction, as a cooperating government witness.
   
   Given the above, it is stunning that the bisexual, cowardly, and deceitful Chambers has become a hero of the American "right". But perhaps this represents an essential aspect of the dialectical materialism of the "left/right" dichotomy of top level American politics. The despicable Chambers "broke" with communism. Hiss, equally despicable, never renounced this hideous ideology. American "conservatives" have since made a fetish of comparing Chambers to Hiss. To this reader, this comparison appears rather like trying to determine which is the taller of two midgets.
   
   Despite the above, the book is worth reading. It is overly long and terribly turgid. And the author is surely no hero. But the history contained within this account is well worth knowing.



5. I've never given much thought to Whittaker Chambers, although I was sympathetic to him in the Hiss case. His book, however, is powerful and insightful. Even though the Soviet Union is gone, the forces at work that are trying to undermine Western Civilization are still present. Now more than ever we need a "Witness".

5 comments about Living History.

1. A Memoir Review: Living History
   By Hillary Clinton
   
   Upon witnessing abridged television clips of Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign speeches, I made the ignorant assumption the Presidential hopeful was clueless: "she's the wife of a former President; based on what professional formation does she speak?" The impression was unjustifiable. I considered her candidacy an attempt to re-establish the family name given former President Bill Clinton's embarrassing impeachment. Politics, after all, is much more than meets the eye, and as I discovered via the woman's autobiographical memoir Living History, Hillary Rodham Clinton is certainly much more than meets the eye.
   
   My primary reason to pick up Clinton's book was to learn about her political career--nevertheless, the work covers her early life extensively. This is appropriate, and crucial to set the context of her years as an executive. The initial chapters are engaging: not only are they an insightful look into Hillary as a young woman, but also an insightful look at being an American youth in the sixties. Clinton's extensive resume is testament to her scholarly knowledge, and her presence behind the scenes at The White House contributes to an equally significant practical knowledge. Hearing of her pioneering speech at Wellesley College, the first student to have ever given a commencement address, her entry into the all-male Rose Law Firm, and her intertwining of typically hardball politics and compassionate child work made me recognize Hillary Rodham was bound for a high-profile political career long before meeting William Jefferson Clinton.
   
   Clinton's writing embodies humanistic qualities, as if she is still an accessible advocate for everyday hiring. This fact is emphasized by her commentary on routine activities, and her naming of each political associate with which she worked. This latter aspect truly fleshes out the memoir--regardless, the squat descriptions of her colleagues sound unappealingly phoney. Everybody in Arkansas seems to be a close friend of the couple: "As soon as Bill and I became a couple, they became friends of mine. And their sons became close to Chelsea" (Clinton 105). Speaking of partner Sara Ehrman, a member of Senator McGovern's legislative staff, "We sized each other up and decided we would enjoy the ride together, and it was the start of a friendship that endures today" (Clinton 60).
   
   Alluding to "businessman and longtime politico" Jim McDougal, he "was a character: charming, witty and eccentric as the day is long" (Clinton 87). Admiring former Mayor of Little Rock, "Webb Hubbell was a big, burly, likeable man" (Clinton 80). Referring to trip director Kelly Craighead, "she had a lot of insight, dedication and spunk." Clinton chooses three formulaic adjectives to describe each of her acquaintances, and the mechanical style soon becomes tedious. The technique corroborates the "safeness" of Clinton's autobiography: nothing shocking, nor a "tell-all"--simply reserved commentary of nationally and personally historic moments. Understandable, since she would be running for President six years later. In this sense, I do believe there were ulterior motives for the memoir's release; the 2003 year of publishing was opportunely timed for Clinton's 2008 candidacy. The latter stipulation supports my learning that a Presidential campaign begins as soon as one shakes hands with the lowest-ranking political official twenty years from an official convention, and that one's private life will be increasingly scrutinized and distorted.
   
   There is little mention of the financial burden statewide and national elections place on nominees, which I found surprising given Bill Clinton's numerous campaigns. This is insight I was looking forward to reading about, given its increasing importance in our visually driven and electronic society.
   
   Though I have not reached the chapters focussing on the infamous Whitewater scandal, nor her conversations with Eleanor Roosevelt, I have already changed my impression of Hillary Rodham Clinton: she is a well-informed Democrat, whose has consistently demonstrated her leadership skills. Clinton is an activist currently living in manner she has promoted all her life, literally living history.



2. For me, the book was particularly a big bore. It seems as though her autobiography is an attempt to glorify her years sidelined in the White House. The book can only be truly enjoyed by Hillary enthusiasts. I'm not a critic of Hillary Clinton, but specifically this book was written with very dry, shriveled style. If you'd like to read a decent biography of Hillary Clinton, I suggest Carl Bernstein's biography of her.



3. A very real, open look into the life of Hillary Rodham Clinton. She dares to be vulnerable in many areas of the book, while maintaining the class and dignity she is known for by her fans. A great read...I couldn't put it down.



4. Reading Hillary's book has given me a sense of the determination, courage, strengths AND faults of this strong woman.
   
   From her early days growing up in the Midwest, to her quest for leadership roles in Wellesley college and Yale law school, and her role in the Watergate impeachment investigation, as well as her days as first lady of Arkansas and the country, up until her role as senator in New York... this woman has been through a lot and has a lot of insight into this world.
   
   The only problem I had with reading this book is that you see that she did live (somewhat) in the shadow of her husband. I mean, he was the President; she was just the first lady. But you see that she tried to get involved in the issues she cared about, namely healthcare, which she continues to talk about in the 2008 election season.
   
   Hillary is an amazing woman. And her book is a great read too.



5. What kind of president would she make if she has to rely on obama to pay off her debts?! If elected it will give us over twenty years with the same two families in the White House, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton... God help us!

5 comments about Washington: The Indispensable Man.

1. This just isn't sufficiently accurate nor well-written given its hype and other ratings here. One example is at page 13, where Flexner describes young Washington's trip to a French fort at the confluence of French Creek with the Monongahela ("now Franklin, Pennsylvania"). The problem is that French Creek flows into the Allegheny, not the Monongahela.
   Another problem occurs when he describes (p. 24) how Washington accompanied General Braddock at the disastrous defeat at Turtle Creek in July 1755. Of course, Washington was 23 in July 1755, having been born in February 22 (Feb 11 by the old calendar), 1732. In the next chapter, he describes how after Braddock's defeat the British Army left Virginia defenseless, so the Virginia Assembly created its own army, and Washington "now twenty-two" was elected colonel (page 28).
   In an early battle of the Revolutionary War he describes how Washington held a strong position at White Plains, NY, but was outflanked and decided to move to higher hills near New Castle. Although New Castle, NY and North Castle, NY are close geographically, the hills in question are in North Castle.
   The book is also written in an annoying manner, using words (not quoted) like "unwisdom" and "plaguey." The writing seems at the level of a sophomore term paper. There have to be better one-volume biographies.



2. As a student for some reason I have never been able to focus on the founding fathers. I have read an assortment of biographies of Revolutionary-era politicians and military leaders and always emerge with only the faintest understanding of who these men were and what the different issues were being debated in the 1780's and 1790's. This book is the first one I've read from this period that really held my attention. Too bad I didn't have it on hand when I took my first class in American history but perhaps it might come in handy somewhere down the educational road.



3. This book is a "distillation" of the author's award winning four-volume biography of Washington. "The extreme reduction of scale - to about one fifth - dictated that, if the shorter work were to have its own integrity and literary effect, the material would have to be revisualized and rewritten. Except for the account of Washington's death, the text is almost altogether new." (viii)
   
   The literary style is excellent. The narrative, however, stays so close to Washington that the historical context of his life is often only hinted at, and at times left out entirely. The chapters are, in almost every case, less than ten pages long. The book reads, with exceptions, like a series of extended, well polished essays written from selected notes compiled for a longer work - which I suppose is exactly what it is.



4. This is an excellent book. It is well written and very informative. Not having read all of the single volume biographies of Washington, I cannot testify to its being the very best, but surly it must be one of the best. The book is Flexner's single volume abridgement of his four-volume biography. Being only one quarter the size of the complete work it cannot be as detailed, but it nonetheless provides a very coherent and compelling portrait. Perhaps the best accolade that I can give is that I now I want to know more and I am considering reading the complete Flexner series. As might be expected from the subtitle "The Indispensable Man" the book paints the most favorable picture possible and shows why Washington was indeed the "Indispensable Man". He was indispensable not only as the leader of the army but also as America's first president. His firm hand set many of the precedents that shaped the office of president.
   
   While Washington is shown in the most favorable light the same cannot be said of Jefferson and Hamilton. Both (but mostly Jefferson) are shown to be more loyal to their party (the Federalists in the case of Hamilton and the Republicans in the case of Jefferson) than to Washington. Confidences were betrayed, especially by Jefferson. If there was a villain in this story it was Jefferson, who is painted as one who was willing to bring on war with Britain in order to support France and to further his vision of an agrarian America.
   
   One word of caution - this book is not a military history of the American Revolution, or of the detailed causes of the revolution, the writing of the constitution or the complete history of Washington's presidency. All of these things are covered, but not in the detail provided in books devoted specifically to these subjects.



5. This is one of the better books I have read on the life of an American President. Thorough, but written in a flowing, easy to read style. I would highly recommend this book.

5 comments about The Catcher Was a Spy: The Mysterious Life of Moe Berg.

1. I'd been anticipating reading this book for some time, but getting through it was a chore. Dawidoff's writing and research are thorough. Berg left behind a wealth of personal material and many who knew him were still alive and available by phone or personal interview to Dawidoff. Hundreds of anecdotes and details about Berg's life emerge from these resources, and Dawidoff marches them all past the reader. The question is "Why?" Berg never becomes very interesting. It is well-known that he was a mediocre major league catcher. He was not much better as a spy, excelling mostly at running up large expense accounts. His tradecraft was abysmal; making and keeping notes to himself about briefings he received is such a fundamental error as to be ludicrous. After more than 300 pages it remained hard for me to take Berg seriously in any of his endeavors. In the end this is the biography of a moderately interesting obsessive dilettante, whose avoidance of normal human contact except on his own often strange terms seems almost pathological. Dawidoff tries valiantly but a New Yorker profile of about one-tenth this length would have been a sufficient account of Moe Berg's mildly curious life.



2. Moe Berg is truly one of the most interesting, and enigmatic, characters in sports history. What always fascinated me was how, after WWII and no longer in baseball, Berg never worked. He would stay at friends and relatives' homes throughout the country, reading multiple newspapers, and maintaining strict control of those papers. My guess, and this would make for an interesting investigative study, is that he stayed on the OSS/CIA payroll and was working for them, in some capacity: Dissecting the news, dealing with Communist espionage - or who knows, maybe he was working with foreign elemnets. Berg was something. He has to be considered a major hero. Surely the fact that he was an ex-ballplayer makes him stand out from the other heroes under "Wild Bill" Donovan, as does the fact that a Jew was sent to Nazi-controlled Finland to get German scientists. This is a terrific story. (...)



3. Moe Berg was completely unpleasant. I found myself wondering why I should care about his life. He was a mediocre ballplayer, a mediocre scholar and a mediocre spy. His talent was that he was pleasant to be around. Why write a book about him?
   
   Why read about him? I wondered that. My reaction was, "So what?"



4. This interesting biography covers a most unusual person. Moe Berg (1902-1972) was a talented linguist, ballplayer, and U.S. espionage agent for the OSS (forerunner of the CIA) before and during World War II and briefly for the CIA after the war. Author Nicholas Dawidoff describes Berg's mysterious life, including New Jersey boyhood, studies at Princeton and Columbia, and years as a second-string catcher for the Dodgers, White Sox, Indians, Senators and Red Sox. Even as a player Berg was better know for his linguistic skills and stealth than for his baseball exploits. Then readers learn of Berg's years as a spy, which probably began when Berg toured Japan with other big leaguers in 1934. The author describes Berg's secret wartime activities, including his 1944-45 mission to ascertain the status of Nazi nuclear research. We also read of his later years, when except for brief CIA assignments, Berg chose to freeload off relatives and friends rather than employ his superb linguistic and legal talents (he had a law degree). A Overall, Berg was an enigmatic man, and this biography, written two decades after his passing, fails to uncover much about him - perhaps Berg would have wanted it that way. Still, this is an interesting and nicely researched biography.



5. I felt like I was reading the sports pages for the first 140 pages. Too many stats, facts and figures. The storyline didn't flow, the plot was sluggish and languished for the most part. The story of Moe Berg's life should have packed some punch! I expected more pizazz. His life warranted it, but the book didn't deliver.

No comments about The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World.

5 comments about Dreadnought.

1. It was the First World War - known at that time as "The Great War" which changed Britain and Europe forever. As the Generals on both sides sent millions and millions of men to their deaths in the carnage which they regarded as warfare, there came about a change in the psyche of the British male - a change which would herald a complete alteration in the way he thought and acted towards those of the upper, ruling classes. No longer would that British male be so quick to use such words as "M'Lord" or even "Sir." No longer would he doff his cap as a mark of respect, no longer would the ordinary police Constable be so quick to "arrest that man" just because a well dressed person had ordered him so to do.
   
   That change in British Society continues to this day and is easily traced back to the feelings of loss and despair which came with the realisation that far too many young men had died "at the front" - even though the war itself had been won and mainland Britain had escaped unscathed.
   
   In this epic tale, author Robert Massie delves deep into why that war occurred in the first place. Every single aspect of argument and behaviour on both sides (both military and political) is exposed and analysed. As the title of the book would suggest, the theme is the world's first great arms race. When Britain produced the first Dreadnought Battleship it rendered all other battleships obsolete at a stroke (including the remainder of the British Fleet!). From that moment onwards it was always a question of who could produce the most new Dreadnoughts in the quickest possible time. Set against this wish by both Britain and Germany to be seen as the world's supreme masters of the seas was a political intrigue which few have been able to commit to print in such a masterly fashion as is found in this book.
   
   In short, this is one of the greatest books of our time. It is also a damn fine read.
   
   NM



2. The book discusses a period in history when British power was at its height.
   However emergence of Germany as a great power disturbed the status quo.
   To exacerbate matters, Germany was ruled by a man who was abrasive,impetous,
   arrogant.Kaiser Wilhelm II wanted nothing but an exalted status for his nation
   under the sun. He advocated that Germany must have a colonial empire like Britain and
   a strong navy commensurate to her status. "Seize the trident",Kaiser said. This forms the background to the naval
   armament race between the two nations.
   
   Both incurred colossal expenditure in building Dreadnoughts. This was a super
   battle ship [huge,floating steel monster] capable of cruising at high speed and firing
   armor-piercing shell at a long- range.Thanks to wealth she could draw from colonies
   London was able to withstand the strain.
   
   Kaiser's scheme of things envisaged a subordinate role for Britain under renascent
   Germany which English pride,self-respect found hard to accept.As threat from across
   the North Sea mounted ,London was forced to end her splendid isolation .Between
   1904-1908 Britain became close with her former enemies : France,Russia.Europe was
   now divided into two hostile blocs: Triple Entente,Dual alliance. As tensions mounted
   Britain and Germany came closer to war :Agadir crisis in 1905.
   
   German army General Staff was crowded by Prussian militarists .These men had no
   qualms in violating in Belgian neutrality: the Schlieffen plan ,how Germany intend to
   wage war in the west.Further Berlin was served by an ally [Hapsburg -ruled,partially
   defunct Austro-Hungarian empire]which was very brash toward its neighbours.Under such circumstances sanity will never prevail.So the
   two like-minded powers fused to generate violence on an unprecedented scale.Sad,tragic
   incident in the Balkans, assassination of heir to the Hapsburg throne served as raison d'etre.
   
   My gripe about this book , the text in many areas contains details which has no relevance
   the subject making it exceptionally verbose. The book revolves too much around personalities.So I liked it only in patches.
   
   However the section dealing with Admiral John Fisher's life was interesting.Innovations he effected in naval firepower ,ship propulsion revolutionized
   war at sea. Also illuminating is author's elaboration of Admiral Alfred Von Tirpitz's
   `Risk Theory' and run down of events leading to the outbreak of great war.
   
   A reader requires abundant time, perseverance to wade through this tome.
   Indispensable read for history buffs.



3. Probably one of the best histories of the period yet produced and - as an important bonus - written in excellent English.



4. First of all -- you've got to have a real interest in the politics behind the First World War in order to complete this monster. There is some fascinating stuff here!!! The stories of Queen Victoria, Bismarck, the Kaiser, Admiral Fisher, and Winston Churchill were terrific. I give it four stars rather than five because the long narrative can be dry reading at times.
   
   Still, if you've read the well-known WWI books already, this is a great read. 'New' history from a unique perspective -- the Royal Navy.



5. This is perhaps the finest, most informative, and eminently readable book on history I have read in 50 years of exploring the subject. It is comprehensive and an indispensable book for those who wish to understand the dynamics of European and world history since the mid-19th century. Dr. M. H. Wilkinson

5 comments about The First American: The Life and Times of Benjamin Franklin.

1. This book was an excellent review of Revolutionary War history and of a true founding father. The prolific references in this book to primary sources domonstrate what an inspired inventor and early American Benjamin Franklin was.



2. This, without doubt, must be considered as one of the finest and most thorough work done with regards to paying full tribute to the biography of Benjamin Franklin. You may learn many things you didn't know about this remarkable man as well as being refreshed on the things you had partially forgotten since history classes of your school days. He was to be considered a Founding Father of our Country, but his influence began long before the seeds of Revolution began to form, and his bright and steady, surefooted approach to diplomacy without submission or compromise of principals was nothing short of the genius we knew he possessed.
   
   His humble beginnings, which he was never ashamed of, did not hamper him, but rather enriched his understanding of the human condition in his continual search for truth, justice, science extraordinaire; and a philantropic desire to further higher education for youthful successors. Feet of clay, he undoubtedly had, as do we all; but they were lovable feet from start to finish. We have heard it all before about this most famous of our first citizens, but it is well to begin again to pay tribute to him, especially in this age of uncertainty, bizarre political events, the lack of leadership.
   
   Perhaps the most amazing element about Franklin was the apparent lack of ego. He did not do things for personal gain but rather for the overall good of the people, a goal he genuinely seemed to embrace above all else. His sense of humor was also unique for such a man; his penchant for penning controversial ideas under the guise of pen names was nothing short of genius in itself. It was a safety valve attached to a desire to effect change - you tentatively "test the mood" before admitting authorship. Waiting a decade for public opinion to soften is often soon enough if the ideas are sound enough to claim later as your own! Let the seed be sown, to rise not during the winter chill, but later, afterward - when the spring sun warms the soil and brings it to life under more suitable conditions.
   
   Moreover, not only were his covertly penned arguments gems of far-reaching vision, but this most excellent, prudent strategy was developed at the age of.....of....16!
   
   We need him to come again to the service of this country, which will always be his; but I fear there was only one of him made. Thankfully, we were able to have such a man in the right place at the right time, especially at the end of his career, when he was such heartwarming support for our Revolutionists as they "committed with their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor".



3. Hands down, one of the best books I've ever read. This book is wonderfully detailed without getting lost in the minutia. It was the first book I read on this era and has compelled me to read everything I can get my hands on about the founding fathers.



4. This is perhaps the best biography I have ever read for the following reasons:
   The author has the wit, ironic tone, and command of the language that is worthy of Ben Franklin the writer.
   The prose is beautiful and is seamlessly interwoven with quotes from letters, articles, contemporary commentaries, and Ben's own memoirs.
   This book reads like a novel, tells a great story about a brilliant, admired, and patriotic man who lived an incredible life. He was a true renaissance man whom Brands has captured in all his many facets.



5. The reading of this biography of Benjamin Franklin is well worth the investment. It is important to understand where we have come from and the life of Franklin is as much about the United States as it is about the life of one man. It is very well written. My only criticism is that its snippets of John Adams seem unbalanced against David McCullough's John Adams. I believe that although Adams was very critical and suspicious of Franklin early on, he did come to greatly respect him in the end. If this was my only exposure to Adams, I would not value him as a founding father as I do. Having said that, I still give this book 5 stars.