5 comments about Sherman: A Soldier's Life.

1. Over the last few years several outstanding biographies have been written. Biographies that delve deep into their subject and bring that person and their entire family to life. This is not one of those books. This is not to say that Lee Kennett has produced a bad biography, just a biography that pales in comparison to some other works. Simply put, it is impossible to do a complete biography on a man as complex as William T. Sherman in a scant 353 pages. To write a reasonably detailed account of the, "Great March" alone would have taken more space than this whole book.

   What Kennett has produced is a good quick scan of the General's life. The details of his campaigns and many other facets of his life have been left for others. As an example, he covers the battles around Atlanta in about two pages. Not much in the way of detail will be found on any of the battles that Sherman was involved in for the author has instead tried to deal with the personality traits that made Sherman into Sherman. Unfortunately, the search for Sherman the inner man is not all that successful. The author does make some interesting points but he never seems to really get into the soul of his subject. It would indeed be interesting if someone could really get into the soul of the man who devastated so much of the south and then turned around and attempted to give back to the south all it was about to lose.

   On the whole, I found this an interesting book. It is the first time I have read about General Sherman in any detail, and I'm sure that those who have studied the General before will find this book lacking. However, for someone not very aquatinted with Sherman this is a fairly good book. I never quite felt that I knew, "Cump" but I did begin to feel as if I would like to know much more about him. That in itself is an accomplishment for Mr. Kennett for I, like many other sons of the south, was raised to detest that foul Yankee firebug.




2. William T. Sherman seems to have a biography written of him every three years or so. There are currently four bios available, not to mention his own memoirs and more venerable books such as the volumes by Liddell Hart and Lloyd Lewis. He's an endlessly fascinating character, multi-faceted, complex, and as amazingly verbose. He had an opinion on most everything, and to use my wife's phrase, "never had an unuttered thought." Because of this he's great biography material, and historians have been interested in him a great deal as a result.

   Those recent bios vary greatly in their treatment of their subject. John Marszalek's Sherman: A Soldier's Passion For Order is the culmination of that man's life, seemingly. Marszalek lived with Sherman for a great while, to the extent of naming a dog Cumpy (Sherman's childhood nickname), and it showed in that the book is still the longest and most exhaustive biography. He sees Sherman as a twisted soul, tormented by his inability to control the world around him, but able to deal with things once he gets in command of an army and is able to influence events to an extent. Michael Fellman's Citizen Sherman is more harsh and unforgiving. Fellman is a Canadian historian who looks at the American Civil War through relentlessly modern lenses, and sees racism, misogyny, elitism, and various other ills pretty much everywhere in 19th century America. He doesn't think much of Sherman. Stanley Hirshson's The White Tecumseh, on the other hand, is apparently a very forgiving portrait of what the author considers a great soldier (this is the one Sherman bio I haven't read). The author of the present book, Lee Kennett, falls somewhere between Marszalek and Hirshson. He handles Sherman pretty mildly, though he does make note of his foibles and prejudices (as expressed in things he wrote) in passing.

   Most biographers of Sherman note that he wanted to be judged as a soldier, and then dutifully tell you that they will abide by his wishes. Kennett follows suit, but only sort of succeeds. Instead his book is largely a study of Sherman's personality, with a whole chapter devoted to this subject on the eve of the Civil War. The book is remarkably spare in terms of narratives of the actual battles themselves: instead there's a great deal of space devoted to the politics of the army 1861-1865. So the Meridian raid gets about a paragraph, and the battles around Atlanta are disposed of in a page or so.

   The author also leaves things out, things that make it into some Sherman biographies. Perhaps the best-known anecdote is Joe Johnston killing himself by standing bareheaded at Sherman's funeral, and catching pneumonia. It's not here, and there are a number of other things that didn't make the book either. I know this is a short biography, but somehow I expected some of these things to make the book.

   Several previous reviewers put this forward as an introductory biography of Sherman. One thing the book definitely is is neutral on the subject. Until now, the one neutral book was Marszalek, the longest, so I suppose this one, at half the length, is better. I don't consider a 352 page book an introduction to anything, however, and I can't say I agree here. Introductory books are 200 pages or so.

   That being said, this isn't a bad book, and I can't come up with any reason to review it negatively. It's just not a particularly good one either.




3. If you want a good solid exciting biography of Sherman - this is your book. I'm tired of reading bloated biographies of
   say 1000 pages. This book has a nice quick pace. Sherman would have liked that. It gives adequate coverage to Sherman's military and personal life as well as a nice perspective on his historical legacy.



4. Lee Kennett has accomplished the impossible: he's taken one of America's most celebrated and brilliant generals and made him seem like nothing more than an average commander and a less-than-average human being. After reading Kennett's biography, I'm left wondering why President Lincoln and General Grant, to name but a few, were so impressed with Sherman's capabilities as a soldier, and why the Confederate generals feared him as much as they did. Rather than portraying Sherman and his accomplishments in a fair light, Kennett seeks at every turn to diminish those accomplishments and the man who achieved him. Sherman, we are told, was at best a competent general, not the great strategist that his contemporaries and subsequent students of military history recognized him to be. Trouble is, Kennett doesn't back up his dismissive assessment of Sherman with any kind of analysis, impartial or otherwise. Instead, he gives short shrift to Sherman's accomplishments in the field, including the famed "March to the Sea" -- all topics that Kennett glides over with astonishing little detail. Instead, Kennett is content to engage in psychobabble of the worst kind: Sherman's behavior in America's greatest conflict, and indeed throughout his life, was nothing more, in Kennett's eyes, than repeated manifestations of a "narcissistic" personality disorder. I bought the book expecting a serious treatment of one of America's greatest generals and instead got a hatchet job (and an unconvincing one at that). Unless you are a Sherman hater, save your money for one of the other good biographies of Sherman or, better yet, his own memoirs. This book, I regret to say, is worthless.



5. When I first got this book and started reading it I made the mistake of thinking this as a plain old Biography. As I read it I learned that wasn't the case and the second half of the title "A Soldier's Life" made a whole lot more sense. This is a Military Biography on Sherman, not a life Biography.
   
   This book was my first step into the world of reading about America's Civil War. Ever since I was a kid I have been fascinated by it and after reading this my old fascination was ignited ten fold. I would call this a must for anyone interested in Sherman.

5 comments about Jacqueline Bouvier: An Intimate Memoir.

1. If one is interested in learning about Jackie Kennedy's early childhood and teen years, this is the perfect book to examine. The author, a cousin of the late First Lady, shared many of her early experiences and thus provides excellent primary source material. Also noteworthy are photographs from Jackie's childhood and teen years



2. A new insight into Jackie's childhood and teen years. A fresh change from other biographies on Jackie O. Highly recommended. FOR QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSIONS ON JACKIE ONASSIS, PLEASE E-MAIL ME AT MellissaLD@aol.com. HOPE TO HEAR FROM YOU!!!!!!!!!!



3. This was one of the first books I read about Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, and though I've read many since, I still consider this one of the best. It is filled with reminisces of events experienced by the author, a cousin of Jackie's who kept in touch with her throughout her life. The author has done extensive research into both the Bouviers and the Kennedys in his other writings - this book is an interesting and informative combination of that research and his personal memories of Jackie as a child and young woman. Highly recommended to all who wish to learn more about the less documented part of Jackie's life.



4. This book was good, but it only talked about her childhood. There was nothing about Onassis and her life after she married JFK. It didn't even mention her kids. John H. Davis also needs to learn to stick to the subject, he would often wonder off into stories about himself. If I cared about him I would have gotten a book about John H. Davis, but I didn't, I got a book on Jacqueline Bouvier. No one really cares what she did day by day of her childhood. We just really need the basic stuff. My final words are that it was a good book about her childhood and thats it, so i believe this book doesn't deserve more than two stars because there was more to Jacqueline's life than just her childhood and it doesn't even talk about her White House expirence or how she died.



5. Book was in better condition than was described; time contract for delivery was accurate. Very satisfied with product and service.

5 comments about Rogers Hornsby: A Biography.

1. Alexander captures Hornsby and his times perfectly. While not as readable as the author's previous "Ty Cobb", this is due more to Hornsby's general colorlessness than in Alexander's writing. As enigmatic as Hornsby was, Alexander does a great job in telling the life of the man who hit for the highest average in the 20th century.



2. This is the third book I've read by Alexander, which I suppose is evidence that his books are readable.

   In the end they all share the same strengths and weaknesses.

   For a straightforward narrative of the key points of Hornsby's career and life, this is perfectly OK.

   But the book really stays on the surface. For example, there is never any in-depth discussion of techniques of batting or fielding. It's like reading a book on Napoleon without finding anything about the nature of warfare in the period.

   Also, there is very little meangingful discussion of Hornsby's relative baseball greatness. Alexander doesn't need to become a zealous SABRmetrician, but some basic statistics about Hornsby and others (beyond saying what the average batting average for the league was in a given year) seems called for. Alexander doesn't even include a table or appendix with Hornsby's basic statistics.

   I've given this 3 stars, because for the general reader it's OK. If I were rating it as serious history, I'd give it a 1. You come away from this book unaware that there have been lots of serious books written about baseball and its relation to society. Alexander's attempts to provide historical context are embarassing--on the order of, "The same continued hot, dry weather than made the Great Plains a Dust Bowl was present on Opening Day 1936 [my paraphrase, to be honest]".

   In short, there is the same strain of intellectual laziness in this book that I saw in his others.




3. This is an outstanding biography of the hitting machine, Rogers Hornsby, perhaps the greatest right-handed hitter in the history of Major League Baseball (MLB). The story that Charles C. Alexander tells explores the rise and fall of this remarkable baseball player, an individual who could work magic on the diamond but had real difficulty off of it.
   
   Signed out of Texas to the St. Louis Cardinals, he had a "cup-of-coffee" with the team at the end of the 1915 season, hitting a measly .246. Hardly a stellar debut, but after working hard all winter the next year Hornsby made the Cardinals and batted .313 while becoming the everyday second baseman. He went on to compile a career batting average of .358 and established the highest single season batting average when he hit .424 for the Cards in 1924. Indeed, from 1921-1925, Rogers' overall batting average was .402, a truly amazing accomplishment. In 1925 Hornsby became player-manager of the Cardinals and the next year his team captured its first National League pennant by edging Cincinnati in the final week of the season after an August spurt had shot them into pennant contention. The season was made perfect by the Cards' first victory in the World Series, coming at the expense of Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, and the rest of the New York Yankees.
   
   Always an abrasive force on the Cardinals, the year after his World Series success the owner shipped him off to the New York Giants for Frankie Frisch and Jimmy Ring. It was only the first time in which Hornsby's personality led to adversity for him. But there was room for only one massive ego on the Giants and within a short time manager John J. McGraw shipped him to the Boston Braves. From there he went to the Chicago Cubs, back to the Cardinals, and then to the St. Louis Browns. He finally retired in 1937. Hornsby lived another 26 years after retiring from MLB, always hovering around the fringes of it but never truly a part of it. He eventually died in 1963, bitter about his fate.
   
   Charles C. Alexander is an outstanding historian, the author of several other books on baseball as well as on other subjects. This is a superb addition to his path-breaking series of studies on a range of subjects.



4. I thoroughly enjoyed this book. I thought the author did a marvelous job of capturing the essence of Rogers Hornsby's personality, warts and all. By the time I finished it, I felt that I really knew what Hornsby was like.
   
   I also had a small personal connection to Hornsby that served to increase my enjoyment of this book. When I was ten years old in 1960, living in the Chicago suburb of Lincolnwood, my grandfather, who was retired and living with my family, somehow became friends with Rogers Hornsby. What was the one common interest that brought these two guys together? You guessed it - playing the horses! Almost everyday, from the time they met in 1960 until Hornsby died in 1963, he would drive his car to our house, and then ride together with my grandfather in my grandfather's car to Arlington Park Race Track. Knowing of my love for baseball even at the age of ten, my grandfather introduced me to Mr. Hornsby and even had him sign a baseball for me - unfortunately long since lost! I also spoke to him numerous times on the phone when he called our house.
   
   Mr. Alexander makes it vividly clear that, other than his love for baseball, the major constant in Hornsby's live was his addiction to playing the horses. It's now very clear to me why these two old codgers became fast friends - their love of horseracing.



5. Just like his book on Cobb, Alexander's bio on Hornsby is excellent. What I especially like about it is that the author provided considerable info. on Hornsby's personal life during and after his career as a player. I don't feel that Hornsby was "colorless." He had an abrasive, stubborn insensitive personality and his interests were generally confined to baseball and horseracing. Still he managed several major league teams and married three times. I think Alexander really captured the essence of Hornsby. you were actually able to feel Hornsby's one track obsession with baseball and human failings that his contemporaries saw. If Hornsby had been able to contain his horseracing gambling addiction, he would have become a wealthy man after he retired as a player instead of struggling. Yet Hornsby was always able to find someone- in baseball or out to hire him.
   
   The author's writing style makes for an easy read. Alexander's research is excellent. This includes interviews with players who played for him. There's just enough detail about his career to make the chronology of his baseball career complete- without a boring recitation of every game he played. And in contrast to one reviewer, I don't find the author's omission of Hornsby's baseball statistics or discussion of his saber metrics a problem at all. There are many other sources for such information.

1 comments about Militant Mediator: Whitney M. Young, Jr..

1. Whitney Young was a very effective leader in the fight for equal rights for everyone. He was effective both in fund-raising and in resolving conflicts. He learned to speak the language of the whites he had to deal with, so that they preferred to deal with him rather than with more militant black leaders who were unable or unwilling to speak to whites in terms whites were used to. He had the knack of knowing how far he could push whites toward fairness to blacks without getting their backs up, but never taking a straight "no" for an answer. He would accept less than what he really wanted, but always more than the other side really wanted to give. He made good use of the fact that prejudiced whites would generally prefer to compromise with him rather than deal with the more confrontational black leaders.
   
   Dickerson recounts Young's life from birth to death. It is a story well worth reading, of a brilliant and dedicated person who made a substantial contribution to the progress of racial relations, and whose methods future leaders could do well to study and emulate.
   
   Unfortunately, the narrative drags at times. Young brought to each new challenge the same impressive list of strengths; enumerating them yet again eventually becomes tiresome.
   
   
   watziznaym@gmail.com

3 comments about Lee's Young Artillerist: William R.J. Pegram (Nation Divided).

1. More than just a blood-and-guts biography of a incredibly brave young officer, this book provides really very interesting insight into the minds and motives of educated Southern twentysomethings before and during the war. This is a fine offering from one of the better young historians working today.



2. I found this book a very interesting read. In it, Peter Carmichael describes the military career of the young Confederate officer, William Pegram. The books gives a nice overview of his successful role in the Army of Northern Virginia as an artillery officer. Most of the text chronicles Pegram's swift rise through the ranks as he boldly leads his men, cannons, horses and caissons on the battlefield. Mr. Carmichael uses many of Pegram's letters home to tell his story. More importantly, Pegram's view of the war, slavery, and the Confederate Cause, come through as well.

   Mr. Carmichael does a fantastic job of revealing how some of the young Confederate officers like Pegram viewed the Civil War. Since most Civil War books focus more on the Generals than the junior officers who actually fought the battles, I felt that this book really brought a new perspective to my understanding of the conflict.

   I do not recommend this book for those who do not already possess a good understanding of the Civil War. Instead, I highly recommend this book to anyone who has gained an appreciation for the war, and is looking to find out more about its participants. This book really opened my eyes about "the Southern Cause", and how it meant different things to different people.




3. The great strength of this book is in highlighting the ethos of Southern gentlemen like Willy Pegram. Carmichael demonstrates that men like Pegram were engaged in a holy war and as such, performed heroic feats on the battlefield. So if you're one of those people who are still facinated by "the cause" of this war, then this is a book for you. If you're looking for a book on Confederate artillery tactics, techniques, and procedures, however, you'll have to look elsewhere.

1 comments about Nixon (Reputations Series).

1. This cool, thoughtful book by a Welsh academic is an excellent, concise life of Richard Nixon -- one of the pivotal figures in modern American history. Morgan ranges through the whole of Nixon's career and always retains balance and good sense. Not for reflexive Nixon-haters nor for reflexive Nixon-worshipers -- this book is a remarkable feat of concise and thoughtful narrative and interpretation. It should be read alongside Elizabeth Drew's equally valuable study in Holt's AMERICAN PRESIDENCY series.

No comments about General George Washington: A Military Life.

4 comments about Millard Fillmore.

1. Historians have relegated Millard Fillmore to virtual obscurity. This biography, however, attempts to improve his image as a strong, effective, chief executive. The author traces Fillmore's lineage, childhood, law career, Congressional years, and presidency.

   The author argues that Fillmore based his presidency on nationalism, Constitutional principles, and laissez-faire economy. Although opposed to slavery, Fillmore supported the Fugitive Slave Law as a compromise to avert Civil War. He supported the Compromise of 1850 that submitted California as a free state. To promote economic growth, he endorsed a moderate 20% tariff. He also appealed for the Transcontinental Railroad. According to the author, he strongly handled the Texas-New Mexico dispute. Fillmore advocated neutrality in foreign affairs with moderate diplomacy.

   This book adroitly recognizes Millard Fillmore's accomplishments in an intelligent manner. The book has many interesting anecdotes and quotes that greatly embellish the narrative. For example, Fillmore's writings demonstrate an adherence to Constitutional principles, nationalism, and favorite foods, stand on slavery, and political ideology.

   This book includes illustrations and thorough footnoting. The chronological format adds to my reading enjoyment. The appendix includes letters and notes at the end to supplement the text. An excellent bibliography gives the reader a list of books for further exploration. The book also includes a useful Millard Fillmore chronology about important dates and events. The lucid prose adds cogency in perhaps a too sympathetic biography.




2. Robert Scarry was a retired history teacher and town and village historian for Moravia, New York. Scarry's own study of Fillmore spanded several decades. In this work, Mr. Scarry has probably created the definative work on our country's thirteenth president.

   Robert Scarry has shown that much of what is commonly held to be true of Millard Fillmore is not. His earlier work (1965) on Fillmore was a small booklet that underwent several printings. Now, in his book, Millard Fillmore, Scarry has presented new material that stands even some of his earlier research on its head.

   As a much-misunderstood figure in American history, Fillmore has both received blame for that which he should not be held to account for and not enough credit for the his overlooked or forgotten successes during his pre-civil war presidency.

   Civil War period buffs and anyone intersted in the early days of our country and the presidentcy should get this book.




3. While I agree with the author that Millard Fillmore has been unjustly maligned by historians as a weak boring president, I found this biography to more of a disservice to Fillmore than anything else.
   
   Detail in a biography is nice, but this book reads more like a giant pamphlet, with endless recitation of one tidbit after another, than a coherent, analytical biography. The paragraphs often seem to have nothing to do with each other; the author states a single fact, cites his source, and then moves on. The facts being stated sometimes seem to be more than the reader really needs:
   
   "Fillmore wrote home about accidents. In 1838, a head-on collision of locomotives occurred on the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad which prevented a passenger train arriving with mail. In 1841, a flood on the Susquehanna River carried away a steamboat to Chesapeake Bay. A rescue boat was sent for relief." (p. 123)
   
   What usefulness such information serves in understanding Fillmore (other than the fact that he wrote letters to his family) is beyond me. Unfortunately, the book is full of such paragraphs.
   
   When he is not inundating the reader with minutiae, Scarry tends to sound like a character witness in Fillmore's trial. He clearly reacts personally to what he perceives as negative attacks on Fillmores character, and indignantly leaps to Fillmore's defense. Since I don't find Fillmore to be a particularly controversial historical figure, I find this passion to be somewhat misplaced. It tends to detract from a sense of objectivity on the author's part.
   
   When all is said and done, I guess you can say that this is informative a biography on Fillmore as the reader can expect to find. Being informative does not necessarily equate with being a good biography. For example, one could read Robert Remini's biography of Daniel Webster to get a contrast on how one can write about this time period. Fillmore is important to a certain degree, but I really don't think his importance merits a biography as exhaustive as this.
   
   This is not a terrible biography, and it does fill a void regarding Fillmore. However, the author would be well-advised to remove much of the minutiae, which would cut the book's length in half. The tedious nature of the book means many readers may lose interest halfway through.



4. I sympathize with chefdevergue who also reviewed this incredible biography. Is McFarland & Company a vanity press? Did the editors run out of time?
   First, the good news:
   I have read hundreds of biographies of which about two dozen are of American presidents. I remain surprised and disappointed at the futility of my search for cradle-to-grave biographies of the less famous presidents. For example, try to find such a biography of John Tyler. So I really appreciate the comprehensive, detailed treatment of Fillmore (although the author never explains how Fillmore supported himself from the time he left the presidency until he married a rich widow). I applaud the inclusion of a timeline, genealogy, illustrations, index, notes, and bibliography.

   Now to the reasons why I shook my head till it started to rattle:
   How can a book this long and expensive ($75.00) escape critical editing and some semblance of a peer review? Page after page, I shook my head in amazement as I wrestled with weak sentence construction, loose paragraph structure (as chefdevergue explained in an earlier review), frequent double prepositions, improper antecedents, and the ever present Department of Redundancy Department.
   Of course the author is on a mission, not to rehabilitate Fillmore to the status of at least an "average" ranking among presidents, but just to rescue Fillmore from obscurity. I wonder how poor Millard would feel about becoming well known as a result of this biography.
   If you want informed political analysis to set the context for Fillmore's adult life, look elsewhere but be prepared to look far and wide. This is not scholarly work, but rather a detailed story.
   Considering the dearth of alternatives for adult readers, those who are interested in learning about the life of Fillmore should put on their neck braces so they don't shake their heads too much, get comfortable, and read this book.

1 comments about A Sketch of Sam Bass, the Bandit: A Graphic Narrative : His Various Train Robberies, His Death, and Accounts of the Deaths of His Gang and Their History (Western Frontier Library).

1. It was for school so I kinda had like absolutely no choice BUT 2 read it

2 comments about Sea Wolf of the Confederacy: The Daring Civil War Raids of Naval Lt. Charles W. Read.

1. Although a life-long Civil War buff I had never heard of this attempt by a young Confederate Naval officer to take the war to the seas off New England. Lt. Charles A. Read had previously served on the ironclad "Arkansas" and the commerce raider "Florida" and had seen a lot of hard fighting - which he seemed to relish. In February, of 1863, the "Florida" captured a Union merchant vessel and Read was given permission to take over and convert this captured ship into another commerce raider. Read promptly sailed to the North and with only one small cannon on board began to wreak havoc on the New England fishing industry. The Northern states then began beseeching Washington for more protection - threatening to divert resources from the bloackade of Southern ports. Shipping insurance rates started rising, too.
   
   Shaw skillfully interweaves the two sides of the story - the motives and actions of the protagonist, Read, and his antagonist, Union Secretary of Navy Gideon Welles. The author may have a Northern bias but it does not ruin the story. There are many good accounts of Civil War naval actions - we can add this one to the list.



2. Charles W. Read was an inept student, he graduated last in his class at Annapolis in 1860 just before he re-signed his commission in the US Navy. What he showed (just like US Grant and a lot of other military minds) was that some people do best by doing, not studying. Having lost his steam ram in a battle on the Mississippi River near Vicksburg. He is called to work on a "Raider" out of Mobile Bay.
   
   Once on the open ocean "Florida" sailed into the Caribbean where they attacked Union commerce and merchant marine. Taking a captured ship "Tacony" with one howitzer and some fake (Quaker) wood guns, Read proceeds to damage over twenty ships on his way up to Portland Maine where they are caught but only after they steal a US Revenue Cutter and blow it up. The story is a lot like that of the "Shenandoah" which had two books about it published in 2005; more interesting from an historical point of view but not that thrilling. (How exciting can it be to read about the capture and burning of fishing Schooners?)