1 comments about Public Pillars/Private Lives: The Strengths and Limitations of the Modern American Presidents.

1. An outstanding work that is both engaging and readable! Historians will value its accuracy and scholarly analysis, while average Americans can appreciate its interesting explanations and insights into historical events surrounding presidents FDR through George W. Bush. It is unique among presidential treatments because its authors treat each president through biography, positive assessment, and negative assessment separately. Thus, its genius is the "balanced approach."
   
   Particularly noteworthy is the exceptional chapter on Nixon that captures the tension between a highly apt yet paranoid leader. There is an additional, special study depicting both the drama and the background of the 2004 presidential election. A great "read" for any interested in these modern political figures or just interested in reading about America over the last 70 years.

No comments about Vargas and Brazil: New Perspectives (Studies of the Americas).

No comments about The Forgotten Prime Minister: The 14th Earl of Derby Volume I: Ascent, 1799-1851.

No comments about Franklin Pierce - Young Hickory of the Granite Hills (Biography).

No comments about The Papers of Thomas Jefferson.

No comments about The Papers of Andrew Jackson: 1825-1828 (Papers of Andrew Jackson).

5 comments about Edith Kermit Roosevelt.

1. I read this biography as a companion to "The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt" and "Theodore Rex" -- partly because I wanted a different perspective, and partly because I wanted to know what happened to Theodore after 1908 and volume III of his biography isn't likely to be out in the near future. In the end I am glad I read the book, and I learned a great deal more about President Roosevelt and his family -- but I think for the serious or dedicated history buff you must also read the aforementioned books to get a more detailed, nuanced view of the Roosevelts' life and the times in which they lived.

   Morris's writing varies markedly from section to section, perhaps due to inconsistent editing rather than her own writing.




2. Her lifelong romance with Theodore Roosevelt is certainly the stuff that films (or at the very least, TV movies) are made of. She never stopped loving the brilliant, bellicose, captivating, exasperating "boy" she had fallen in love with at a very young age. She helped mold him into a man. How two strong-willed persons of such opposing personalities thrived in such a successful marriage is even more reason why their story in film would be interesting. If Edith, certainly one of the most private historical figures in our country's history, had not the burned thousands of letters from her "Teedie"/Theodore (wishing to keep their lifetime of thoughts and passions to themselves), their romance might be up there with John and Abigail. TR also destroyed most of the letters from "Edie"/Edith because of Edith's constant pleading to him to do so.

   What has survived through thousands of letters that friends and relatives did not destory and through Edith's 40+ years of private diaries (left to her daughter Ethel) is a portrait of a iron-willed, intelligent, passionate lady who survived many family crises and lived through enough U.S. political history for a couple of high school textbooks.

   She was often the mother AND the father of her large household of children and pets as TR would often leave to go on hunting trips, safaris, and political campaigns. She ran the household in every area mostly because she had to get control of the family finances. (TR almost had to sell Sagamore Hill before he married Edith because he had lost so much of his inheritance in the Badlands. His older sister helped him get through some lean financial years.)

   But, she knew that he would always return to her bed and to no one else's. She often looked down at her sisters-in-law, nieces, and female friends who had married "safely" and did not have a passionate, romantic partnership such as the one she shared with TR. In many ways she was as contradictory in her beliefs as her husband. She was certainly Victorian in her moral strictures, yet one of her closest confidants and friends in the later White House years was the not-so-in-the-closet homosexual chief military aide to her husband (and this gentleman, Archibald Butt, would later help many of the Titanic's passengers to safety before he perished).

   One of the most poignant chapters in the book deals with the sons getting ready to go off to fight in the Great War. Quentin, her baby, is eighteen and falling in love with the daughter of one of the anti-Roosevelts, the Whitneys. Edith and TR are concerned with their son falling in love with one of the "plutocrat" Whitneys. However, once they meet Flora they fall in love with her and take her into their family as one of their own. Quentin has to leave the safe environs of Sagamore Hill and the Long Island air training centre and be shipped off to Europe. The elder Roosevelts try to get passports for themselves to travel with Flora so that Flora can marry Quentin in Europe. They can't get passports to travel overseas during the war. Quentin is shot down over France, and TR & Edith have to break the news to her at Sagamore Hill. Flora would remain close to some of the family members until she died many years later.

   In short, this is a detailed biography of a great lady, First Lady, wife, world traveler, mother, and grandmother. The vivid detail of the White House during TR's electric eight years at the head of the country is worth the price and time alone. The Kennedys and Camelot had nothing on the intellectual and artisic salon that the Roosevelts inspired and supported during their many years in Washington.




3. During a recent visit to Sagamore Hill on Long Island (the home of the Roosevelts), this book caught my eye because it gave a such a different perspective of Roosevelt history. Though I am now only about 3/4 of the way through, I cannot say that I am at all disappointed. It reads like a novel and is extremely well written. I cannot put it down. While it is true that there are other books which better cover the details of TR's colorful political career (Sylvia J. Morris's husband's books accomplish this) and even TR's earlier family history (try "Mornings on Horseback" by David McCullough for this), this book is must for those interested in the story of Edith and her remarkable family. Also, the story does have a great deal of romance and some poignancy -- particularly in the death of TR's first wife, Alice Lee, and his troubled relationship with his daughter, Alice's namesake. I agree with one of the other reviewer's -- Edith's story would make a marvelous motion picture.



4. Being an admirer of the Roosevelt family (Theodore and his kin), I was amazed at how I much this biography. The insight into her life, the little they know (from diaries and a few letters she did not burn) is amazing and her love for Theodore (and his love for her) is so incredibly romantic, showing intense it became over the years as opposed to just dying out.
   Edith was an amazing woman, probably the epitome of the First Lady, wife, mother and a woman in general. She stood by her husband, helping him along, while still standing for what she believed in and caring for her large family.
   It's an excellent read about an excellent woman.



5. I agree with the other reviews who say there should be a movie about Edith Roosevelt. I didn't know much about her at all but the biography was well written and very informative. Everything about her would make for a great movie. Edith was an intellegent woman and possibly one of the best first ladies we ever had. She seemed very well organized and very efficient whether she was running her family household or the White House staff. I highly recommend reading this biography.

3 comments about Alexander the Great: Man and God.

1. This book is a wonderful chronical both of Alexander the Great's life and conquests. It's primary strength is in the amount of sheer details of Alexander's conquests, his social programs, etc. By reading this book you'll get an excellent understanding of the politics during his time, the practical difficulties that Alexander had conquering such vast regions, and the various ramifications of Alexander's decisions.
   
   However, this book does go a bit politically correct when it gets into the issue of whether Alexander the Great should be called "the great" or "the accursed" (which btw the Iranians seem prefer...seems they haven't gotten over Alexander ending their golden age). Although, to be fair the author does lay out a good case for relabeling Alexander "the accursed"...or at least acknowledging that his legacy was mixed.
   
   This book does an excellent job imparting a comprehensive understanding of Alexander the great, his life and his effect on history, etc. You even learn enough to see how thing could have gone differently (if Alexander had an obvious heir when died, if he accepted the proposal of Darius to accept all land west of the Euphrates, if he had lived longer and conquered Arabia and Carthage which he was planning on doing).



2. I find it funny and irksome to read the writings of these armchair kings and generals calling themselves "scholars" sitting on some moral high horse they erect for themselves. I'm just curious what they get out of it. Worthington is certainly a noteworthy scholar with great credentials, but why he sits in his den or office and think he could apply the morals of today to those of some 2500 years ago is not something I could fathom. Clearly, there is an agenda of some sort that belie the thoroughly researched materials.
   
   The book is certainly well-written and it's obvious that Worthington knows his stuff, but his obvious undisguised bias towards the negative over the positive gets a little old. It's so easy to exaggerate the negative (which we ALL have) into something monstrous and totally unsavory. This is exactly what Worthington does time and time again, selectively citing sources or leaving them out to make his point as some sort of prosecutor/judge.
   
   I've read many books about Alexander by noted historians and scholars and they do indeed run the gamut from gushing positivity to dark sourpuss vitriol like this book by Worthington. It's fascinating that Alexander means so many different things to different people - kind of like the German opera composer Wagner. The thing about Alexander is that - no matter what - he'll be studied, admired, revered, reviled, debated over for many millennias to come (assuming mankind survives that long), long after irrelevant books like these have disappeared...



3. The quantity of books that I have read of Alexander the Great are self explanatory in by looking at my comments.
   I was born in the first Alexandria that he created and from his dreams. Mixtures of cultures.Italians came centuries ago,hence I was born.
   It is very hard to judge Alexander,as all of the papyruses regarding his life and conquest were distroyed when the library of Alexandria was burned down centuries after his death.
   However some and other related documents have survived the centuries.It is hard not to admire such a bright kid,who captured the lives of many over the centuries with his astonishing tactics of war.
   Many books have been written and I am sure that many more will come.The point however is that nothing new has been discovered,therefore these are all assumptions of his character and megalomaniac attitudes.This book is very well written,with some sections that are new to me.How did these come to be,and not by famous historians I am not sure.
   There are more details in this book about Bessus,the women in Darius life,the invasion of Sogdiana,Bactria,the Hindu Khush.Details of the cities that Alexander invaded with the actual modern location is important for the reader.
   It is not a stunning book but very well written.
   To me Alexander was not born a conqueror instead he was a discoverer.He wanted to discover the world,but in doing so he had to invade in order to go on.He did not seem to be interested in gold and precious things rather he gave them away.
   His tactics for war,were cunning and seemed like a little kid playing with tin soldiers with his friends.
   I still have not read or heard of anyone in history who has accomplished so much in such a little time in his life.
   I liked the maps with the details of the assaults in this book.as well as the maps altogether.I like to follow the trails of the battles.
   He certainly was not a God, never the less you can find him in the Bible as well as the Koran.Isn't that strange?
   A lot of discoveries and archaeological sights have been discovered in Alexandria Egypt in recent years.Still the mystery remains.Where is Alexander's body? Are we every going to find him? I hope so.
   If we do, we may also discover the papyruses that were also buried with him.What a breakthrough in history that would be.

No comments about Lee Teng-Hui and Taiwan's Quest for Identity.

No comments about The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Volume 31: 1 February 1799 to 31 May 1800 (Papers of Thomas Jefferson).