1 comments about For King and Country: The Maturing of George Washington, 1748-1760.

1. I would really enjoy meeting Thomas Lewis, and talking historical facts and old Washington legends with him.

   There is nothing flashy or trashy about For King And Country. It is a very well researched and very connected account of young Washington between 1748 and 1760.

   I can't help, but, wonder if Thomas Lewis is a descendent of Washington's nephew Lawrence Lewis. There is that much cool headed depth of feeling evident in For King and Country.

   We tend to forget that Washington had to personally put up with hundreds of uniquely American cantankerous characters during his youth. Thomas Lewis gives a little flavor to that part of the formation of young Washington's character. When Lewis contrasts Washington's "uncommon ambition" to be recognized by the British, and also recognized by those Virginians with British pretensions real or affected; Lewis firmly grasps Washington's American reality.

   I do sincerely hope that Thomas Lewis writes of Geo Washington again.

No comments about The Great Experiment: George Washington and the American Republic.

5 comments about Woodrow Wilson (Penguin Lives).

1. If you don't know much more about Woodrow Wilson than an overview of the important events of his life, this book isn't going to help much. There's very little political analysis, almost no attempt to portray what diffiulties Wilson needed to overcome, and no passion at all in the writing. Actually this book feels a lot like a high school term paper that someone knew they had to write and just wanted to turn in for a passing grade. Auchincloss talks a bit about the two Wilsons (one good one bad) and hints at Wilson's dependance on women, but neither of these positions is fleshed out or used consistently. Maybe Woodrow Wilson's life is just too large for a book this small.



2. This is a reasonable brief introduction to the career of Woodrow Wilson. His upbringing and early academic career are disposed of in short order in the first chapter. Then one chapter deals with his presidency of Princeton, one deals with (or covers the same time period as) his governorship of New Jersey, and the remaining seven cover his Presidency, all in an engaging and chatty style.

   The book's strongest point is describing what happened, although even here there are some strange omissions. It mentions his break with Hibben in Princeton without describing the circumstances, noting that Hibben went on to succeed Wilson as President of the university, or exploring the parallels with his later breaks with House and Tumulty. All of this could have been covered in a single paragraph. In addition, there is no mention of the country's Caribbean adventures in 1915; none of the Red Scare of 1919; and, probably worst of all, nothing about the Sedition Acts and the imprisonment of Eugene Debs, and no discussion of why America behaved worse towards its own citizens during and after the war than either Britain or France did. The first time the book mentions the League of Nations, it doesn't clearly describe what its purpose was (and it would have been nice if it had mentioned that it was actually the idea of the British Foreign Secretary, not Wilson). Still, as an overview of the events of Wilson's life it hits most of the main points.

   The book has less to offer on why things happened. In trying to explain why Colonel Harvey picked Wilson for Governor of New Jersey, it gives two pages on what Harvey got wrong about Wilson, but nothing on what he got right. It also takes at face value the idea that Wilson was offered the governorship "without ... even lifting a hand". It describes Wilson's feeling of betrayal by House when he returned to Paris in March 1919, but not what House had actually done!

   As noted by another reviewer, the book also fails to put Wilson's international achievements in a broader context. His aim of a just, lasing peace with Germany failed; his aim of encouraging self-determination among smaller nations succeeded, and he is still looked on as a hero in many smaller nations of Europe. Some more insight and context, and a more detailed assessment of his legacy, would have been welcome.

   Woodrow Wilson was a fascinating and controversial President. This book helps explain -- and to an extent shares -- the fascination, but it doesn't do enough to help the reader assess the controversies. Still, it's an reasonable starting point for people who know little about Wilson.

   One final comment: I'd also have been interested to know how the author is related to the Gordon Auchincloss who attended the Versailles conference -- it's not that common a name, after all.




3. Of all the men who have tried to fill the shoes of Washington and Jefferson, who was the worst? Our current crop of "Hallmarxist" professors consider anyone who would assign Wilson and FDR to the lower depths as deserving a quick commitment with Ezra Pound into loony bin of St. Elizabeth's, and for anyone to hold Lincoln among the worst invites being regarded a simple crank. But Thomas DiLorenzo's _The Real Lincoln_ has finally exposed Old Abe as well worthy of infamy, and Jim Powell's _FDR's Folly_ has corrected the omission of Murray Rothbard's _America's Great Depression_ by exposing FDR as really nothing more than - pardon the pun - Hoover on wheels.
   
   This leaves only Wilson, the man whom Mencken denominated _Doctor Dulciferous_ for his cooing blovations. The lack of a good biography of Wilson that reveals him for what he was - our worst president - or at least a book as good as DiLorenzo's on Lincoln- is not remedied by Louis Auchincloss (hereafter LA).
   
   LA for the first 64 pages gets his facts roughly right and his conclusions quite wrong. For example:
   - LA calls Wilson's claims to being a Southerner "factitious". This is putting it mildly: Wilson in his heart was an utter New England barn burner and witch-hunter, oblivious to the positive achievements of Calvinism (Milton, Rembrandt, and the Jansenist Pascal) and a perfect specimen of non-conformism's worst faults: obstinacy, a cocksure belief in one's moral correctness, a deluded sense that he was the agent of the Almighty, and that his opponents were tools of the Devil.
   -- Wilson's view of blacks can only be called sheer racist, even in a time when "racist" has become a word of cultural socialist McCarthyism - yet LA offers the lame excuse that everyone else from his background thought the same.
   - LA faults Wilson for appointing an Anglophile to the Court of St. James, yet LA's own facts prove Wilson the most Anglophilic of all. He tried to remake Princeton into the image of Oxford and Cambridge. He wanted American government to resemble Westminster, knowing full well that in Britain today the Prime Minister is a dictator, free of any checks. Wilson wanted the same for the President in a manner that would make even a Gaullist blush. Indeed, one of Wilson's many bad legacies is a chief executive out of control. Mencken was right to observe that the US State Dept. was simply an antechamber to the Foreign Office in Whitehall.
   - LA mentions Wilson's stokes, one after another it seems, and tries to blame them, wrongly, for his manifold shortcomings. In fact, I have yet to see in print what seems quite possible: That Wilson - and for that matter Theodore Roosevelt - were really unhinged.
   
   Wilson's 2nd worst foreign policy blunder was his treatment of Latin Americas - a treatment inept when it wasn't contemptible. LA tries to make Bryan the fall guy for Wilson's folly, and considers the Villa fiasco as "necessitated". I pray the Mexicans now flooding into the country have short memories. When it comes to economics, LA really shows himself wanting. He considers the Federal Reserve Act a "great success", giving us an "elastic currency", when in fact the fiscal solvency of the US -- relatively sound after Hamilton's schemes were put down and prior to Wilson - has been a shambles ever since. Need proof? Check the inflation monitor at the Commerce Dept website and see what a dollar in 1950 is worth now. And thank Woodrow Wilson. Desperate for something good to say about Wilson's domestic turn at the helm, LA chooses his tariff reduction - only on the same page to state, rightly, that the taxpayer was now to be equally robbed by the new Federal Income Tax (also a Wilson deed), that tariff reform was aborted by the Great War, and that it was repealed in 1922.
   
   LA never mentions Wilson's lasting effect on domestic US politics: Completing the work of Lincoln in the destruction of the Jeffersonian party in the US (I'm grateful to Thomas Dilorenzo and Clyde Wilson for this insight). Prior to Wilson, we had such a party, the Democrat Party - with support for minimal government, subsidiarily, states' rights, low tariffs, originalist construction of the Constitution, Anglophobia, gold standard (at least until Bryan), staying out of European affairs, and a healthy suspicion of banks. Wilson turned this party into a socialist party. In fact, now we really only have the choice between two socialist parties: The Hamiltonian version of the Republicans, and the 100 proof offered by the Dimmycrats.
   
   After page 64, LA offers a complete whitewash. Wilson's utter disaster - still visited upon all of us, and re-uttered in the inaugural addresses of Kennedy I and Bush II - was, or course, his entry into World War I, with all the suffering that this decision caused. LA can only find sympathy for Wilson's views, and wastes a whole chapter of this short book demonizing Lodge. I am reminded by the estimable Clyde Wilson (no relation, certainly!) that Woodrow Wilson was our only Ph. D. president. LA offers nothing better than the socialist and PHuddy-Duddy camorra presiding in our Potemkin universities
   
   So, as we wait for a good biography, anyone who really wants to know the truth of the Old Fool should save his money and buy instead Jim Powell, _Wilson's War_, and Thomas Fleming, _The Illusion of Victory_.
   
   Two stars for being mercifully brief with readable prose.



4. Enjoyed the taped version of WOODROW WILSON by
   Louis Auchincloss . . . it is a brief account of our 28th President
   that gave me insight into how a professor and then college
   administrator could make the leap into politics . . . hearing it
   reminded me a bit the Classic Comics that I read when
   younger, in that much detail was left out . . . however, you
   got just enough information . . . I'd recommend this book
   by Auchincloss, especially for the fascinating tale it told
   of how when Wilson became sick, his wife practically ran the nation.



5. In the annals of American history, few presidents have a more interesting story to tell than Woodrow Wilson. Despite this truth, Wilson's legacy has produced such a terrible collection of biographies. This book is a continuation of that standard of trampling the legacy of the greatest idealist to reside in the White House.
   
   While this book is intended to be a brief biography of Wilson, this characteristic would seem to cause more focus on landmarks in Wilson's life. This does not stop Louis Auchincloss from going off topic for pages at a time. The author repeatedly references Bill Clinton, whose most striking similarity is being a democrat. There also seems to be a lot of speculation on the part of the author, such as speculating that Wilson's childhood illnesses were psychosomatic (p. 7). Like the original source of this fact, he lacks tangible support for his agrument. It is nothing more than an educated guess. Just like the guess that Wilson suffered from dyslexia (p. 6). The chapters on World War I are clumsy because of the digressions. The better chapters focus on Wilson's first and second wives, as well as his years at Princeton.
   
   I initially thought the author loathed Woodrow Wilson, but softened in this stance as the book progressed. Still I wondered why one would write a book about a seemingly undesirable topic? Not that I expected much from this book, but I, like many readers of history, am still waiting for an outstanding biography on Woodrow Wilson.

5 comments about Complete Idiot's Guide to the American Presidents.

1. I bought this for my son's school report on presidents and got hooked myself. This is a fantastic book. Filled with all the facts and information you need to know, but fun to read. Don't take the Idiot's title literally. This is for anyone who wants or needs to know anything there is to know about our greatest, worst, and most mediocre presidents.



2. This is a very interesting book if you're wanting an overview of Presidential History. It covers the highlights of each president, but of course in about 400 pages, it's simply impossible to go very deep.

   The book is arranged, not in chronological order, but in descending order of each president's success in office, as judged by the author, of course. I probably would have preferred a chronological discussion, for the simple reason that it would be easier to view each biographical sketch in it's larger context.

   But again, overall it's a good read. I'd suggest it for anyone who is interested in American Presidential History but doesn't want to read multiple books to get the overview he wants.




3. The problem with this book is that if one is not somewhat familiar with U.S. history, there will no framework on which to hang the few actions and events that occurred on each president's watch. And the organization of the book contributes to that problem, because the presidents are not presented chronologically. The continuity of events across presidencies gets lost in this book.

   The presidents are discussed in five tiers, from the "undisputed champions" to the "tomoto cans." In other words, they are ranked from the best to the worst. After the top tier, there is definitely room to quibble with the ratings. The author is rather vague as to the selection process. As a side note, for this reader what is especially noticeable in this journey through the presidents is the remarkably few really top notch presidents we have had. Most have been rather mediocre.

   Contributing to the narrative disorganization of the book is the author's scattering of snippets of presidential facts in boxes on each page that are not necessarily connected to the main text. In addition, despite the modest amount of information that is actually presented in the book, there are several errors in facts and dates and in some cases there is an absence of dates.

   For a quick read that will yield a few basic facts, this book will serve that purpose. Beyond that, the book's utility is doubtful.




4. This is an excellent source for information about the men who have served as Chief-Executive. Some of it is obscure, hence, it makes the subject matter entertaining.



5. The only reason I didn't give this book 5 stars is because the presidents are not listed chronilogically. They are grouped together as "Legends" or "Heavyweights" etc. It was sometimes difficult to remember what tariff did what or what law hurt who's presidency if it's not listed in order and you keep having to go back and check. If you can get around that timeline thing than this book is very good for giving great info.

2 comments about The Inner Jefferson: Portrait of a Grieving Optimist.

1. yet another broad look at jefferson, from political career, near-romantic encounters, family life, friends & correspondences. the writing is crystal clear & fast-paced. you get a snippet of tj's sharp epistolary hand. no huge controversies being discussed here altho i think there were some defenses made for the slavery issue. pick up this book. it's one of the better ones for introducing yourself to tj. good b&w photos of his favorite haunts & some skeletons in the closet.



2. I'm about two-thirds of the way through this book. The content is highly interesting, but it's kind of a difficult read. Definitely not the lighter, "speedy" read of an Ambrose or Vidal book. Burstein is very analytical, with somewhat of a sociologial and/or psychological perspective to this analysis of Jefferson. There is a early section on Love/Emotion (?) which is a bit laborious. However, I will continue to work my way to the end, and do feel that I've gained much insight into Jefferson's background, family life, political affiliations, intellectual interests, his love of the Parisian salon-type intercourse, and so forth.
   This book is definitely NOT for the reader of lighter history.
   Dry and laborious at times.

No comments about Ariel Sharon: A Life in Times of Turmoil.

No comments about Abraham Lincoln: Man of God.

No comments about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: President of Iran (Newsmakers).

5 comments about Disraeli: The Victorian Dandy Who Became Prime Minister.

1. A miserably rendered biography of one of the most complex men in British history. Hibbert writes from within his comfortable, unexamined cell of "Britishness." He superficially dismisses Disraeli's Jewish upbringing with a wave of the hand, showing not a whit of insight or interest into how it may have affected Disraeli's adult behavior--his choices of dandyism, novel writing, and even his peculiarly powerful oratory. Hibbert just neatly fits Disraeli into categories he, Hibbert, pulls out of his own experience from within what's normal and usual in British life. Moreover, the book quotes huge, unedited swaths not only of Disraeli's letters and journals (somewhat defensible) but also from other recent biographers. So it reads like the work of an undergraduate. Ultimately, Hibbert is not at all inquisitive about what led this man of many and great parts to find such a singular way to live, and to succeed in what, in the book's only success, we see was a terribly hostile social environment for a Jew(populated by powerful anti-Semites like Carlyle and Dickens, Trollope, etc.). This is poorly done work.



2. An embarrasing and lazy pastiche of quotes from Disraeli's correspondence woven with an old fashioned snobbish viewpoint. There is no historical context and no discussion of what made Disraeli the importasnt figure he was. Disraeli comes off as a self-serving, superficial and useless fop, lusting after high-class recognition. This bojk should have been rejected in manuscript. Whatever reputation Mr. Hibbert may have had, it is vitiated by this piece of sophomoric drivel.



3. This is not so much a biography as an itinerary. Benjamin Disraeli went to a country house in High Bascombe-on-Boring, the seat of Lord Irrelevant Nobody, and his wife, the daughter of Viscount Who Cares? and the cousin of the mistress of the architect of another country house Disraeli visited ten years later. Oh, and he was vain and self-promoting, but gave great speeches. Or so he says, in his letters, which (as noted in the other reviews) appear to be the author's exclusive sources. We don't know what they were about, but, boy, did he ever think they were great! I don't know what the author thought, either, about Disraeli, or why he wrote such a book. What puzzles me, and what I have yet to figure out, is, who is the intended audience? Who would ever want an utterly non-political book about Benjamin Disraeli? His only interest to posterity -- which is substantial yet ignored here -- is as a politician and statesman. Everything else -- and especially his travelogue and endless fetes with foreign dignitaries --is unworthy of our attention. This is an astonishingly lazy book by a writer who apparently only wanted to add another impressive title to his bibliography. Fine. But leave us out of it.



4. As those before me have said, DONT BOTHER. It's sad that so great an author as Christopher Hibbert was allowed by his publisher to put out this book which is just a rehash of a book he wrote about Disraeli 30 years ago. Except that mostly it's with a lot of additional material that is only excerpt from letters he wrote and those written to him.
   
   Soooo much of the book is wasted on discussions of people who meant nothing to him in his later life and seem like nothing but fill. If this was a student paper it would fail.
   
   There is a very good short bio by Edgar Feuchtwanger, and two monstrous volumes (over 700 pages) by Robert Lord Blake, and Stanley Weintraub.



5. Christopher Hibbert is one of the greatest and best-beloved contemporary historians. His biography of Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli is an excellent, informative, entertaining work that lives up to Hibbert's outstanding reputation. Disraeli is not easy to like. Though brilliant and highly talented, he is sarcastic, critical, and at times a bit of an arrogant snob. But Hibbert's prose is so fluid, and his skills so very well honed, that the book is a joy to read. I recommend it highly.

5 comments about Lives of the Presidents: Fame, Shame and What the Neighbors Thought.

1. Hi! I read this book for facts for a report I had to do. The covers really hooked me in by the funny pictures! It had great information, but I would read another book also if you wanted to report on the lesser-known presidents!



2. this is such a great book! all the other books about the presidents just tell about how "great" the first men were, while we ALL deep down know what inconsiderate jerks they REALLY are!!! cheerio, mates!



3. In Lives of the Presidents: Fame, Shame (and What the Neighbors Thought), the author writes brief biographical sketches about each of the presidents from George Washington to William Clinton. Included in the sketches are both historical and anecdotal information about the leaders of our nation. Also included are caricature illustrations of each president.
   The information has been compiled from many sources, and communicates new information to the reader. The purpose of the book is to integrate historical facts and humorous tidbits. The information is presented in chronological order, starting with President George Washington. The table of contents includes names, dates in office, and number of terms served. The number of the president is listed on the left; therefore, Grover Cleveland is listed as 22 * 24 (between Arthur and Harrison). The illustrations are interesting, and enhance the biographies. Since they are caricatures, they are not historically accurate. A benefit of the illustrations is that the reader can better remember certain things about a specific president based upon the illustration. The jacket, both front and back, includes a guessing game. Although not every aspect of the figure is examined, much new information can be acquired. Different viewpoints are presented, and fallacies are also addressed. The information sparks interest in biography, as well as government.
   
   Classroom Activity: After reading this book, students will write biographical sketches about world leaders. Included in the class book will be caricatures of the leaders.
   
   Age Group: This book can be read aloud to 3rd through 4th graders, while independent reading is recommended for 5th graders.



4. This book, as stated by a previous reviewer, is not really for younger children. Even worse, it presents rumors as fact . Warren Harding was rumored to have joined the KKK, even though most of the evidence comes from Klan members themselves. Many historians doubt this happened and have sited far more reliable sources. One of my students, for example, takes this book at face value. It proved a positive learning experience about taking this stuff as is in the book, however, I wish I had not had to do that.



5. I bought this book some time ago and I realized how good Kathleen Krull and Kathryn Hewitt are at writing books. I am hoping to get Lives of the Artists. Unfortunately, my 9th birthday already passed so I have to wait 5 months (Chistmas.) I highly recommend this book. Hope this was helpful to you.