5 comments about The Eloquent President: A Portrait of Lincoln Through His Words.

1. In this book, White expands the focus from his previous work on Lincoln's Second Inaugural ("Lincoln's Greatest Speech" published in 2002). White looks at the progression of Lincoln's thought and the increasing greatness and eloquence of his speeches and public letters during his presidency that leads to that final and considered by many to be his greatest major speech.
   
   In the process of examining these speeches, White looks at them each individually, but also looks at their relationship to one another as "a string of pearls" (a term he uses more than once in the book). White uses this visual description of the speeches stating that while each pearl is beautiful in its own way and can be examined separately, they also come together and one pearl connects to others in the string that can best be understood by comparing them to each other and examining the ways they are connected. In many of the speeches, White demonstrates that Lincoln leaves the audience with thoughts and ideas that his mind is still wrestling with that are picked up again in a later speech and developed more fully as his thoughts on those subjects have matured over time.
   
   White has also done an excellent job in selecting the best and most memorable speeches and public letters from Lincoln's presidency. He begins with Lincoln's farewell remarks at Springfield on February, 11, 1861 and includes remarks from his journey to Washington. Also included are both of Lincoln's Inaugural Addresses, his reply to Horace Greeley's "Prayer of Twenty Millions," the 1862 Message to Congress, Conkling Letter, and Gettysburg Address. As I read each chapter on each of the speeches, I got a sense of the growth of Lincoln and the development of his thought until it reached its twin climaxes of the Gettysburg Address and the Second Inaugural.



2. Wonderful analysis of this remarkable and sensitive wordsmith and President



3. This was really well done, and certainly can be appreciated not just by admirers of Lincoln, but readers interested in the process of writing and speaking - especially for the purpose of winning an argument.
   
   Some earlier posts are correct in noting that the book is superior to some other efforts that focused on single speeches, such as Garry Willis' book on the Gettysburg Address and Lincoln at Cooper Union. I haven't read White's Lincoln's Greatest Speech.
   
   However, my feeling is the book could have taken an even longer view. That is pick up Lincoln as a speaker at a much earlier point in his life and follow him from his days as a country lawyer to the Second Inaugural Address. As it is, starting at a point in his life when Lincoln was already an accomplished speaker, we see him go from very good to great.
   
   Also, while I thought the Mr. White's argument that the Bible was a strong influence on Lincoln's speaking style has merit, it also often seemed forced. I would have taken Lincoln's comments that both sides were praying to the same God as the view of a religous skeptic, for example.



4. I first read this book at a coffee house and found it not just a great piece of art, but, a large insight to a Great American and his love for his country and his faith. As a chaplain and a student of human communication, I believe Mr. Lincoln's words can help all of us remember what the United States is all about. If you are not moved by the speeches, then you cannot hear and feel the words. And if you cannot hear and feel what is being expressed in those words. Then you need to not only check your faith in this country. You need to see if you are truly in touch with God our Father through his son Jesus.



5. What a package: you see His picture, you know you will read His words (judged correctly "eloquent"), you review His chronology. . .and you can't not finish this book.(And the biggest prize is the end-matter, the over 100 pages of appendices and notes.)
   I'm thankful--to a good extent--for Mr. White's tour. Without him, I would know less of the background of the speeches, less of the Civil War, less of the politics of the time. And he lets Lincoln star.
   I tired only of Mr. White's repetition. It seemed he used the same putty to tie Lincoln's speeches together. But that might be too harsh: anything linking Lincoln to Lincoln will suffer. (But it seemed to suffer in the same ways: Yes, the divine meditation was for Lincoln's eyes only. . .for his eyes only. . .for his eyes only. Yes, Lincoln used parallel structures. . .parallel structures. . .parallel structures. Yes, the word count was minute with heavy use of one-syllable words. . .count. . .minute. . .syllables.)
   Thank you, overall, for presenting the greatness of this man, the wisdom of his words, the nobility of his leadership to today's world. May we be wise enough to understand and think and feel him presently.

5 comments about The Compleated Autobiography by Benjamin Franklin (1757-1790).

1. I gave this as a gift to my mother. My father read it cover to cover and enjoyed it and my mother is in the process of doing so. It is written in an older style and can be a bit dry, but history buffs (my parents) are really enjoying it.



2. Book received timely and in excellent condition. Am still in the process of reading it.



3. Let's just say I am a Franklin buff. If you really like Franklin or history this is a worth while read. If you want to learn more about Franklin you should start with the Autobiography and then move to one of the many Bios, the most recent of which is Walter Isaacson's "Benjamin Franklin." If you get through those, you may be well ready for this read. To be honest, in my opinion, the author stands in the way of this work a little but it is not bad.



4. This is a review of the audio version of this work.
   
   I found this to be a great disappointment, bordering on annoying. The author was attempting to complete Franklin's autobiography which doesn't cover the second half of his life. I found two very difficult problems with the work.
   
   First, the opening of the audio book presents the author's background including why he wanted to do this. This introduction was distractingly self-serving and provided quite a bit more about the author than any reader would probably expect. He is a descendant of Franklin, which may spurn his motivation....but failed to make the experience any more enlightening.
   
   Second, the book is written "using Franklin's own words"...or so says the notes from the publisher. What it does is try to use the language of Franklin's day including quickly worn out expressions and lines. I tired very quickly of the authors attempt to turn every phrase like a Poor Richard quip. What he may have gained in accuracy, made the audio experience painful.
   
   I do not recommend the audio edition for those two reasons, nor would I recommend the book. One would be better served with Isaacson's (BF: An American Life) book for a look at the second half of Franklin's life....it's simply written better and it offers more insight.
   
   The idea of getting inside Franklin's head and finishing the autobiography is compelling....but this attempt failed in it's lofty goal.
   
   --Cudo



5. I had never read Volume 1 of Benjamin Franklin's autobiography, so I didn't know what to expect when I bought Volume 2, which was compiled from Dr. Franklin's diaries by one of his descendants, Dr. Mark Skousen. I really thought that because 200 years had gone by, it would be rather dry with way too many historical details and that I would never finish it. A good book to help me fall asleep at night. But I was wrong. I simply loved it.
   
   Dr. Franklin was quite a character and this book shows in his own words what he thought of his fellow 'founding fathers,' (especially his opinion of John Adams!!) how he managed to keep some of his English friends in the midst of the Revolutionary War, and the woman who got away (quite possibly the only one).
   
   This is not a book just for a history class. It is most, most entertaining and I finished it in record time. I wish Ben had lived to 100 instead of just 84.
   
   Highly recommended if you like history and even if you don't.
   
   Heidi Walter
   [...]

5 comments about American Scoundrel: The Life of the Notorious Civil War General Dan Sickles.

1. Dan Sickles, the notorious scoundrel of this book's title, appears to have gotten away with so many of his sins because he was colorful, resourceful, and charming. Unfortunately for the reader, the same cannot be said of Thomas Keneally's writing. Keneally tells us what a colorful character Sickles was, but never really shows us or makes us feel it. One is left with the thought that Sickles must have been a fascinating and complex man, and the hope that someone will someday write a decent biography of him that will truly capture those qualities.
   
   Despite the fact that Sickles is best known as a Civil War general, this is not a book for Civil War buffs. Keneally's writing on the war is superficial at best, and sometimes nakedly erroneous. (He states more than once that Gen. Stonewall Jackson was shot dead at the Battle of Chancellosville, when of course, even a casual student of the war knows that the general only received a wound in the battle and lingered on for some time, dying of pneumonia while recovering from his wound.)
   
   The intended audience of this book, which is reflected in the writing style as well as content, instead appears to be those who loved following the O.J. Simpson trial in the tabloids. The bulk of the book is devoted to Dan's amorous affairs, his young wife's affair, and his murder of his wife's lover and subsequent trail and acquittal. He writes extensively and floridly on these subjects, without managing much real illumination. I must admit that I was only able to make it through the endless trial material by resorting to skimming the text. However, if you are captivated by tabloids coverage of celebrity trials, this book may suit your tastes.
   
   There were germs of interesting facts in this book. Sickles led a fascinating life, from his notorious service in the diplomatic corps, his machinations as a Tammany politician, his work to help create New York City's Central Park, and his controversial service as a Union general. For its outline of the fascinating facts of Dan Sickles' life, I give this book two stars, but because of its sadly disappointing execution, I cannot give it any more, and cannot recommend it.
   
   Theo Logos



2. Read this biography and decide which still-in-the-news contemporary politician Dan Sickles most reminds you of (hint: like Dan, now a New Yorker). The personal traits they share are amazing.
   
   Here is why you should be fascinated by a biography of Dan Sickles. He was a hard core practitioner of Tammany Hall politics and mastered that machine in the 1850's. He deserves at least some credit for forming New York's Central Park through is expert lobbying and deal making. He was a Congressman and a prime example of the type of northern Democrat who was willing to support the South on slavery for the sake of keeping them in the Democrat Party. He was a notorious woman-izer who traveled with a prostitute to England on a diplomatic mission and presented her to the Queen as his wife. He was a great friend and supporter of President Buchanan. He shot and killed the son of Francis Scott Key (yes, that Francis Scott Key), in front of the White House when he learned that Key's son had been carrying on a torrid affair with his wife. His legal team included Edwin Stanton (later Lincoln's able Sec. of War) and used the first ever argument of temporary insanity to win Sickles an acquittal in the slaying. With secession, Sickles became a relentless advocate for a hard war and supporter of Lincoln. He helped raise a brigade and became a general. At Gettysburg, Sickles defied orders and moved his entire corps out in front of the Union line giving history the Peach Orchard, the Wheatfield and an almost disastrous outcome on Day 2 of the battle. In that battle, Sickles had his leg shot off by a cannonball. He saved the leg, it was sent to the medical military museum in Washington (where you can still visit it today) and used to visit it regularly. He participated in séances with Mary Lincoln. After the war he was a military governor (apparently quite good and fair) of South Carolina and North Carolina. A sometime-diplomat, he married a Spanish woman after carrying on an affair with the deposed queen of Spain. He became great friends with Longstreet as they banded together to defend their miscues at Gettysburg. Head of the New York Monuments Commission, he helped spur the building of grand monuments at Gettysburg Battlefield and arguably helped convince the US Government that it ought to take over and preserve the battlefield as a park. Reelected to Congress for a single term several decades after the Civil War, he found times had changed politically. Still Tammany till the end, he was arrested in his nineties because the accounts of the New York Monuments Commission were some $27,000 short, money which he apparently pocketed.
   
   You can't make this stuff up. Its all true and should be the foundation for a great book (and a couple of great movies). Unfortunately, the killing of Barton Key and his acquittal on temporary insanity overwhelms the book. Or, more correctly, the plight of his wife Teresa overwhelms the book. Every chapter returns to his wife and Sickles' complete boorishness toward her before he found out she was cheating and complete unwillingness to let his still wife share his life at all after the murder. It is a great episode in Sickles life and it stained him for a brief time until the Civil War and Sickles incredibly strong and charming personality removed that stain from his life's adventures.
   
   But the reader is treated to repetitive and numbing descriptions of his suffering wife Teresa's domestic situation and habits throughout the book. She plainly receded in Sickles' life after the Civil War but doesn't recede in this book's telling of those chapters. Instead, she intrudes again and again to repeatedly make the author's point that she was cruelly ignored and wanted back into her husband's world. So much so that this book perhaps should have been titled "The Story of Dan and Teresa Sickles" (or maybe "The Story of Teresa and Dan Sickles"). The author's unwillingness to let go of her long after she has ceased to be a factor in Sickle's life really interferes with this book.
   
   There were also a few historical mistakes, like placing Senator Ira Harris in Lincoln's box at the assassination (it was his daughter, Clara, who was the fiancé of Major Rathbone) and having South Carolina secede in January of 1861 instead of December of 1860. These would probably only be picked up by Civil War buffs (arguably the audience which would read this because of Sickle's infamous Gettysburg excursion) but call into question the author's command of the facts.
   
   Dan Sickles is a very interesting subject for a biography. Disappointingly, the author blows what could have been a fascinating and rollicking bio with a long treatise basically dedicated to rehabilitating Sickles' wife Teresa, a woman who undoubtedly suffered because of the double standards of the time and who unfairly had her life severely constrained because of the actions and attitude of her husband Dan Sickles. But come on, we get the point. For example, I did not know Sickles had been military governor of South Carolina (with North Carolina later added to his administration) after the war. He appears to have been quite fair and just and to have protected the new freedmen from harassment. The book doesn't plumb this enough. We get some of the information but are treated to poor Teresa's lack of an invitation to join Dan Sickles in Charleston where she could reign as the General's wife over Carolinian society. The author really let his evident sympathy for Teresa overwhelm the all too fascinating portrait of a man rightly called "American Scoundrel."
   
   Interesting in parts, but broken-up with digressions on Teresa. A deserved three stars.



3. You might not have heard of Daniel Sickles, but his accomplishments were impressive. A Union general in the Civil War who served at Gettysburg (a Medal of Honor winner who lost his leg there), an intimate of Abe and Mary Lincoln, a congressman, and an ambassador, Sickles was just the sort of hero you ought to know about. Except that he was a scoundrel, too. _In American Scoundrel: The Life of the Notorious Civil War General Dan Sickles_ (Nan A. Talese / Anchor Books), Thomas Keneally has given a full and amusing biography of this American, non-fiction Flashman. His many transgressions were public knowledge, and yet he dressed and spoke well so that he rose to heights of power without any precipitous fall except the natural one provided by old age and death. It is a story often hilarious and sometimes horrifying, and Keneally (who will always be known for _Schindler's List_) has depicted Sickles and the mood and manners of his age in an unforgettable portrait.
   
   Born in 1819, Sickles took to the law, and as a rascal, joined the other rascals of the Tammany political machine. He learned to cut financial corners, and would never be good at balancing the books, especially governmental ones. He eventually was appointed as a secretary to the American Legation in London, and took a favorite prostitute to his post instead of taking his wife; he even arranged for her to be introduced to Queen Victoria. When he was elected to Congress, he and his wife Teresa were a successful power couple, but he neglected her. Filling the void in Teresa's life came Philip Barton Key, who saw Teresa at parties, and in secret trysts in not-so-public places and at a house Key had rented for the purpose. Sickles eventually found Key on Lafayette Square and shot him. His trial was a sensation. The prosecution was poorly performed, and Sickles's hyper-competent lawyers led the jury to find him not guilty due to temporary insanity. It was the first time in American jurisprudence that such a plea resulted in acquittal. What rescued him from infamy was the Civil War. At Gettysburg Sickles made his greatest contribution. He precipitously led his men into battle, creating a controversy at the time that has continued to the present day; there are those who say his unilateral advance almost lost the battle, while others say it saved the Union. Early in the fight, however, his right leg was shattered by a cannonball. He coolly kept his cigar in his mouth (Keneally says it was "a moment of which the right sort of general could make a myth of his easy gallantry") and was carried to a field hospital where his leg was amputated.
   
   He stayed busy. He became an ambassador to Spain and began an affair with the deposed Queen Isabella II. Theresa had died of tuberculosis, and Sickles married a young lady from Isabella's court, but returned to America without her or the two children he had fathered. He had worked earnestly to develop Central Park in New York before he went to Washington, and he contrived to bring it animals for its zoo. He made his fortune on behalf of railroad stockholders by bringing down the notorious Jay Gould who had robbed them of millions. He did everything he could to ensure that his military reputation was brightly presented to posterity, and he got himself appointed as head of his state's Monuments Commission which had the task of erecting on the Gettysburg fields monuments to his own regiment and others from New York. No one should have been surprised when thousands of dollars for the commission went missing, and no one should have been surprised that there was a surge of donations from well-wishers that kept the elder Sickles from winding up in jail. When he died in 1914, he got a full hero's funeral and interment at Arlington National Cemetery. It was just as he would have wished, and this is a tale of a life lived just the way he wished, brash, impetuous, resolute, and irresponsible. There is no hero to match him.



4. If you are interested in the American Civil War, this is not the book for you. Keneally fails to understand the core audience for this book, Civil War aficionados, and is erroneous in his basic facts surrounding important events. The focus is the scandal surrounding Sickles and his young bride and not the historical events of the day.



5. AMERICAN SCOUNDREL is interesting in that it is flawed on so very many different levels.
   
   It fails as psychohistory -- Dan Sickles, a notorious womanizer, shoots down his wife's lover in front of the White House, and is judged NOT GUILTY. This simply begs for psychological introspection, but all we get is "standards were different then."
   
   It fails as the story of Dan Sickles. We never learn how he got the way he was, we never climb the money tree enough to see how he supporter his lavish lifestyle, or even the entire story of his life. We get long chapters on his wife's affair, her lover's murder, Dan's trial, and the second day at Gettysburg, but very little of anything else. The final 60 years of Dan's life are covered in less than 30 pages. The old saying goes, "There are no second acts in American lives," but this is ridiculous.
   
   And when there are horrible historical mistakes in what we already know, the rest of the historical research becomes very suspect. Stonewall Jackson did not die on the battlefield at Chancellorsville; Andrew Johnson was actually impeached.

5 comments about John Adams: The American Presidents Series.

1. It hasn't been hard to notice that John Adams's reputation has been undergoing a serious rehabilitation in recent years. Joseph Ellis in particular has been dedicated to revising our understandings of both Adams and his nemesis/friend Thomas Jefferson. In his PASSIONATE SAGE: THE CHARACTER AND LEGACY OF JOHN ADAMS, FOUNDING BROTHERS: THE REVOLUTIONARY GENERATION, and AMERICAN SPHINX: THE CHARACTER OF THOMAS JEFFERSON, Ellis has been challenging a long established scenario in which the arch conservative John Adams was pitted against the populist liberal Thomas Jefferson for the political destiny of America, and the hero Jefferson triumphed over the mildly villainous Adams. Ellis has been questioning whether any part of this scenario makes any sense, whether Adams is at all a villain, and whether Jefferson is nearly as heroic. He has done this not by asserting the virtues of conservativism, but whether Adams has been correctly understood at all, both by his contemporaries and by subsequent generations. This reevaluation of Adams was continued by the spectacular and unanticipated mega-bestseller by David McCullough of 2001. This process of reassessment is clearly carried forward by John Patrick Diggins. For the record, I find the rehabilitation of Adams by these and other writers to be both welcome and highly convincing.
   
   For two hundred years, our view of Adams came very much through the lenses of his critics and opponents. The truism that history is written from the standpoint of the victors is perhaps truer of Adams than any other major political figure in United States history. Adams was said to be a closet monarchist, a favorer of aristocracy. In the face of this criticism, Adams explicitly challenged Jefferson to point to a single passage in any of his writings that endorses monarchy or aristocracy. In fact, if one reads extensively in Adams works, as argued by Ellis, Diggins, and McCullough, one finds instead a powerful and subtle critique of the dangers of the development and influence of an economic elite, placing him at the opposite extreme of Alexander Hamilton, whose ideal of government came very close to the espousal of plutocracy. Adams did hope for the emergence of natural elites, but this was based on ability and character, not on wealth. Contained in the reassessment of Adams is implied a questioning of whether Adams is the arch conservative he is often portrayed as being. The case for Adams's conservativism is based largely on his belief in monarchism, his favoring aristocracy, his support for a bicameral Congress, his looking to the past for guidance, and his opposition to the French Revolution. As these authors have shown, Adams transparently did not favor monarchy or the growth of an aristocratic class and a bicameral legislature in the United States has not resulted in the Senate being a sort of House of Lords. Today many leftist historians have found grounds for critiquing the French Revolution, and a host of leftist political figures have found inspiration for their beliefs in the past (not least Karl Marx, who was a student of the Greeks and Romans). Furthermore, Adams was hardly a passionate capitalist, and was suspicious of a life devoted to the acquisition of wealth. In fact, if you compare Adams and Jefferson to that modern conservative icon Ronald Reagan, it is hard to find many issues that Adams would not differ sharply on from Reagan, while one can see a number of points of contact between Adams and Reagan. Diggins, in fact, finds numerous points of contact between Adams's political writings and many French radical writers of the late 20th century. I will say that as a leftist myself, I find much to love in Adams's thought. I share his fear of the negative effects that economic elites have on the democratic process, his belief in the need for a strong central government to protect citizens from the pernicious influence of greed (Adams would understand my fear of deregulation), and his instincts that government rather than less or no government is a better safeguard of individual liberty. Diggins rightly states that the American president who would most closely incarnate Adams's principles would be Teddy Roosevelt, who envisioned government as the means of breaking trusts and promoting economic justice.
   
   Of all the books in the Schlesinger series on the American presidents, this is probably the one that I found most provocative intellectually. It is a dense, rich book, in large part because Diggins focuses more on the thought of Adams than his life. Diggins is more intent on explaining Adams ideas than the various events in his life. In one sense this is a weakness as a biography, but because his discussion of Adams's ideas is so clear and interesting, it more than makes up for the lack of biographical detail. I do regret some of the sketchiness of the biographical narrative. For instance, he doesn't' deal in any detail on how Adams became either vice president or president. This contrasts sharply with the rather deep discussion of Adams's ideas. This is in line with Diggins's role as apologist for Adams. On the purely historical side, most of Diggins's effort is put into dispelling the myth that the election of 1800 represented the defeat of Federalism by Republicanism (that's Jeffersonian Republicanism, not what we associate today with the GOP). I personally found this section less interesting that the sections dealing with Adams's thought.
   
   I would strongly encourage anyone reading this volume to consider picking up the new volume THE PORTABLE JOHN ADAMS, edited by Diggins. I completely agree with Diggins that Adams's writings are more interesting than his presidency, and that he may be the most unjustly neglected political writer in American history. This new volume contains a wide ranging collection of his writings, not merely from his theoretical writings, but his diaries and letters as well.



2. This isn't much of a biography. It gives just a quick history of Mr. Adams early life. It mainly focuses on his political and philosophical career and his feuds with Jefferson and Hamilton. It does a good job of reviewing his term as second president and the policies and precedents he initiated. This book may be a stepping stone to a more comprehensive analysis of Mr. Adams's personal and political life.



3. John Adams (1735 --1826) was rescued from relative obsurity by David McCullough's popular and accessible biography. Engaging as it is, McCullough's work has little on the thought and writings of John Adams and on the impact of his thinking on American government and on Adams's own presidency. John Patrick Diggins's short biography, written as part of the American Presidents series, helps remedy this lack. It provides a deeper picture of an American political philosopher and president. Diggins is a distinguished professor of American history at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. He has written widely on American intellectual history, including books on Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan, pragmatism, and the American left.
   
   Adams was born to a family of modest means in Massachusetts. Following graduation from Harvard, he became a lawyer and married Abigail Smith. Adams early became involved in the Revolutionary movement and served in the Continental Congress. During the Revolutionary War, Adams was abroad where he made vital contributions to the war effort in France and Holland. He helped draft the treaty by which the United States secured its independence. Adams served restlessly as Washington's vice-president and then became the second president in a close election against Thomas Jefferson, who became vice-president. After his narrow defeat by Jefferson for reelection in 1800, Adams retired to his home in Quincy.
   
   More important than these external events, Adams was a writer and a thinker who wrote works in support of American independence in the 1770s and books expounding his political philosophy and his understanding of American constitutionalism in the late 1780s and continuing early into his tenure as vice-president. Adams continued his writings in his long retirement, particularly in a wonderful series of letters he exchanged with his former rival, Jefferson.
   
   Diggins gives a good overview of a complex body of thought. Adams was opposed to the French Revolution and to writers such as Thomas Paine whose works helped to spearhead the American Revolution. Adams developed a philosophy based upon the unreliable and depraved nature of the human heart and its ambitions for power, wealth and success. He argued that a diverse government structured to allow for the wealthy classes and the common people, headed by a strong executive, would be the best way to restrain human greed and folly and to channel these traits for the common good. He objected to the French Revolution for its levelling tendencies -- for its attempt to obliterate distinctions, which Adams thought, were ingrained in the human desire to compete and excel, and which could not be artifically supressed. Adams also objected to the French Revolution because it was not properly succeeded with a solid institutional form of government. The American Revolution, which unlike the French revolution, was not based upon classes within the United States, and the American Constitution, with its separation of powers and strong executive were, for Adams, the antithesis of the French Revolution.
   
   During his presidency, Adams was excoriated by his fellow-Federalist Alexander Hamilton, who found Adams too weak and vacillating and by Thomas Jefferson, who attacked what he claimed were aristocratic and monarchical tendencies in Adams. Yet Adams worked carefully and delicately to avoid a war with France, the most significant accomplishment of his presidency. He established a tax system and pardoned a group of protesters who had been found guilty of treason by opposing it. Adams strengthened the military and left the budget with a surplus at the conclusion of his presidency. During his presidency, Congress enacted, and Adams enforced, the Alien and Sedition Acts, which Diggins somewhat downplays in his account.
   
   In 1800, under attack from both Hamilton and Jefferson, Adams came in a close third to Jefferson and Burr in the presidential race. Jefferson prevailed in the House of Representatives when Hamilton lent his influence and support. This hotly contested and little-known election marked a watershed in American politics as it marked a peaceful transition from Adams to a leader and a party with a far different stated political agenda. The American era of party politics, based upon images, perceptions, and the pursuit of power, had begun.
   
   Diggins is not afraid to state his own positions, and he shows a marked sympathy for John Adams over his rival, Jefferson. He sees Adams as a unique example of a president who tried to govern based upon principle rather than party or power. Together with Lincoln, Jefferson, Madison, and perhaps Theodore Roosevelt and Wilson, Diggins places Adams in a small group of American presidents who demonstrated intellectual leadership and accomplishment prior to and in the Executive Office.
   
   For Diggins, Adams's strengths as a thinker, together with his curmudgeonly disposition, led to the weaknesses of his presidency. He writes (p. 174) "At times the sin of pride cursed the Adams presidency. He often preferred to work alone, rarely sharing his thoughts or seeking the input of others as we was making up his mind. ... Adams was one of America's most solitary presidents, and the isolation of the mind, while healthy for poetry or phiosophy, is fatal in the sphere of politics.... politics dwells in the present, in bargains and distortions, naneuvers and manipulations, and other strategies of exigency that had no appeal to a thinker better at analyzing power than dealing with people."
   
   Diggins has written a thoughtful introduction to a thinker and president who remains incompletely understood. This short book should inspire reflection on Adams and on the nature of the political system which he helped bequeath to us.
   
   Robin Friedman



4. Excellent read. A new appreciation for John Adams' contribution to the founding. Once again, Jefferson comes out as the original "conniving politician."



5. While the book does have good info on Adams' personal life & early career as lawyer, it is more of a "political biography", and is therefore weighted heavily on his career as congressman, diplomat, Vice-President, and President.
   
   The chapter titles are as follows:
   
   Introduction: Plato's Wish
   
   1. From "Senseless Turpitude" to Stately Duty
   
   2. "The Most Insignificant Office That Ever Man Contrived"
   
   3. The Prescience of the Political Mind
   
   4. The Halo of Washington, the Shadow of Jefferson
   
   5. The French: Foe or Friend?
   
   6. War Measures, Free Speech, States' Rights
   
   7. The American Landscape
   
   8. War and Peace
   
   Conclusion: The Moralist in Politics
   
   The only part that I somewhat struggled through was Chapter 3, which delved into Adams' thoughts on politics and political philosophy. The difficulty, I suspect, was more due to my own unfamiliarity with thinking & reading about such topics (and perhaps the fact that I was reading late at night) than with the author's writing.
   
   Diggins has done a fine job of explaining Adams' thinking and those things that influenced his ideas about people and, by extension, about government. He examines the issues of the times, both domestic and foreign, as well as the struggles Adams had to deal with within himself and within his administration.
   
   The author writes from a pro-Federalist POV, but this is by no means a polemic or screed against the views of Jefferson's Democratic-Republican "interests". He explains where both (or all) sides are coming from and, IF he expresses an opinion, he calls it like he sees it. He also is not averse to pointing out where he thinks Adams was "weak"/wrong or when the arch-Federalists went too far (e.g., in re the Alien & Sedition Acts and subsequent prosecutions). Similarly, Diggins mentions instances where both the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans were inconsistent when it came to "practicing what they preached," so to speak. I very much appreciated this balanced approach.
   
   I only caught one or two typos, which is not bad, and one error of miscalculation (i.e., stating that Adams was 91 at his death, when he was "only" 90). There were also a couple places where the wording seemed awkward. Overall, not a bad record.
   
   The endnotes are in a style I did not care for, consisting of one block of text per chapter. There is a single-page "Milestones" chronology of Adams' life & career, which was helpful. And, of course, an index. There is no bibliography other than those works mentioned in the endnotes.
   
   Content: 4
   Style & Structure: 4
   Average: 4

2 comments about Letterbook of Eliza Lucas Pinckney, 1739-1762: Intriguing Letters by One of Colonial America's Most Accomplished Women (Women's Diaries & Letters of the Nineteenth-Century South).

1. I thought I had written a review for this book awhile back but hadn't so here it is. Wonderful journal of information on Eliza Lucas Pinchney, a South Carolina woman of history who brought Indigo into prominence. Fascinating research within about this woman and her passion for nature and plant dye.



2. Eliza Lucas Pinckney did almost everything. She was the daughter of a British Officer, making her a military brat, she helped run the plantation, developed the market for indigo that allowed Charleston, SC, to survive, wrote a cook book, educated some of her slaves, made sure her children were educated and fought cancer! Her letters are full of amazing facts, of both her daily life and the life of the colonists. Her letters cover everything from her own problems to wars, Indian attacks and taxes. It is a great addition to any library.

5 comments about The Clinton Crack-Up: The Boy President's Life After the White House.

1. While I hated to see Clinton move into the presidency, and, of course, hated his actions even more following Lewinsky, it's a wonder that we still have a country at all. I most certainly would not buy anything that might give him (or her, for that matter) any type of grace, and only scanned the pages at a local bookstore. That was quite enough for me, thank you very much. Now, unfortunately, it looks as though Miseries Clinton might be our next president. Hold onto your wallets, people!



2. Moron Tyrell is yet another wingnut who can't accept that Clinton is gone. They must all have a secret yearning for Hillary in '08 to make their pathetic lives seem worthwhile. Maybe they're all in denial after seven years of G. W. Dumbass and the weekly scandals of his crooks and cronies.



3. This is a must read for anyone considering putting another Clinton in the White House.



4. Tyrell has made his living pandering to the neocons who consider sex between a man and a woman to be more important than national security, foreign relations, and domestic policy matters. If you want to get a sense of why the neocons have become the laughing stock of the free world just read this book and then do your own research to find all the fictional statements Tyrell makes on virtually every page. As is typical for neocons they continue their hatred rant about America when American is doing well, but claim to love America when we're being broken apart and the Constitution is thrown in the trash - as the neocons have been trying to do for decades. This is a great book for America-bashing neocons in order to get a false sense of vindication.



5. Perhaps it is because Mr. Tyrrell is, in my opinion, an intelligent and well researched writer, which gives him the factual perspective enabling clear-headed criticism. For many years, there has been embarrassment, humiliation, and utter disbelief surrounding the actions and inactions of this former president, his apologists and enablers. Almost en masse, the media has dutifully carried his water, parroted his lame excuses, giggled at his "bad boy" philanderings, made us all a little smaller for it, and helped to make the highest and most respected office of our land a playground for this sad man. It is thanks to people like Mr. Tyrrell who take on the burden of supplying documented background, so the rest of us can have the proof that unfortunately, many people do not seem to want. Additionally, he maintains a level of humor about darkly disturbing human behavior, which allows an element of pity to be conjured for this former president.

5 comments about Billy the Kid: The Endless Ride.

1. Michael Wallis offers a book - "Billy the Kid" - to prove not much is known about Billy the Kid. The Kid (name not certain, Wallis says) was dead before he was 22. There usually is little enough to say even about the greatest in our histories from the years of childhood and adolescence. There is not much factual to say about The Kid. Anyway, no one was watching him closely or chronicling his deeds.
   
   What is known is not sensational. Even The Kid's murders do not rival the records laid out by Charlie Starkweather or Charles Manson.
   
   Wallis introduces a score or more of men (mostly) who associated with The Kid, or knew of him. His account becomes a maze of names for one-dimensional characters.
   
   Reviewers agree Wallis' account probably is the most factual in print.



2. I wanted to like this book. The author, with his subtitle and thesis ("The Endless Ride") implies that he's going to look into not only Billy himself, but his myth and legend. Instead, what we have here is a lengthy biography replete with guesswork and innuendo, and lots of padding, some of it vaguely worthwhile, some of it not, really.
   
   Billy was an interesting character, if only because of how little is known about him, and how many people have been almost hypnotized by his mythical persona. I was hoping that the book would concentrate on this aspect of his life: instead, it spends most of its words discussing the life and the possible origins of Billy. The author is well-versed in the story of Billy's life, and in the circumstances of his fame and death. He's also very conversant in the various rumors, stories, and theories about Billy's origins and roots. That's all very well and good, but beyond that there isn't much here, to be honest. For one thing, the book isn't as long as it appears. The publisher used pulpy paper, which makes a 328-page book look longer. They put a picture at the front of each chapter, and inserted a large picture section in the middle of the book. With chapter breaks (which result in blank pages frequently) and other devices, this book isn't really that long.
   
   Much of what's in the book isn't directly related to Billy anyway. Imagine my horror when in the first pages I ran across a reference to America's "love affair with guns," turned to the bibliography, and discovered Michael Bellesiles' book "Arming America" in it. For those who aren't aware, Bellesiles was the darling of the gun control set when he released "Arming America" in 2001, right up until it turned out he'd fabricated or distorted much of the evidence for his thesis, which identified a large conspiracy among 19th-Century gun manufacturers to fabricate a "frontier myth" which would include settlers who carried guns, when (according to Bellesiles) everyone went unarmed in the frontier era. Anyway, Bellesiles lost his job teaching at Emory University, and the Bancroft Prize his book won was revoked, the first time that's ever happened. No historian, including most of the liberals who were supporters of his, takes him seriously any more. Unfortunately, Wallis appears not to have gotten the memo.
   
   The PC angle of the book turns out, in the end, to be not quite as bad as you'd think. Wallis uses Bellesiles for context, but when he discusses the Lincoln County War, he becomes much more common-sense-oriented. He basically thinks that the whole war was between two groups of greedy oligarchs who used the various gunmen as pawns in a deadly game of Monopoly. That might not be a completely fair opinion, to those who have a side they root for in reading the history of the war, but it's always been closer to my opinion than anything else I've read. I don't think it particularly PC: the author makes it clear that both sides engaged in back-shooting, skullduggery, and general viciousness.
   
   I generally enjoyed this book, within limits. I wish the author had been a little less interested in injecting his 21st-Century politics into a biography of a 19th-Century person. It also could be a bit better organized. There's a lengthy passage at the beginning where the author discusses Billy's origins, and then later in the book there's a chapter where the author skips back and discusses the possibility of Billy being part Mexican-American. All, or most, of this would have probably been better-placed in an appendix. Frankly, you wonder what the point to the publication of this book was: there's almost nothing here, that I could see, that's not contained in Utley's book. That being said, this isn't necessarily a bad book. Recommended, but only guardedly.



3. Henry McCarty/Billy Antrim/William Bonney/Billy the Kid is biographized here, in an OK attempt to weed out the myth surrounding this very young man's very violent life.
   
   Wallis spends much time talking about what isn't likely to be true and bemoaning the lack of verifiable information about the life and actions of his subject, and not enough time talking about those verifiable facts.
   
   Wallis does place The Kid in the context of his place (a fluent Spanish-speaker who loved and was well loved by the Hispanics of his stomping grounds, Wallis mentions but is ambivalent about recent research that suggests that The Kid may have been part-Hispanic) and time (in the Lincoln County War in which he was just one participant of hundreds but the only one convicted, Wallis believes The Kid was--intentionally or otherwise--made the fall guy for the political and business interests who "won" the "war"). However, the last two years of The Kid's life, when Wallas says "William Bonney's activities can be documented week by week and sometimes daily," are accorded a bare 30 pages out of a 250-page book with lots of images and white space.
   
   So, Mr. Wallis, if you can document your subject's activities on a daily basis, in a biography in which you claim to separate the fact from the myth and constantly bemoan the lack of fact, one not use the ones you have to the fullest?
   
   See also my review of Lucky Billy a new fictionalized account of Billy the Kid by novelist John Vernon, which I found perhaps better at capturing the person at the core of the legend than was Wallis's biography.



4. This book presents the most detailed record of the Kid's background-family origins, early life, locales, and influences on his behavior that I have ever read. Michael Wallis is a master at presenting "the whole story" plus the many photos of the characters in the Lincoln County War, from the Robert G. McCubbin collection add tremendously to the story. This is a very good book, enjoyable to read, and presents a detailed, factual picture of the subject.



5. Michael Wallis does a great job in placing Henry McCarty aka Henry Antrim aka Kid Antrim aka William H. Bonney aka Billy the Kid into his proper context. Here is a young and slight boy who is literate and most importantly alone, making his way in the world. He becomes fluent in Spanish and practiced in gun craft, horse-riding, and gambling. Inspite of a livid earlier review, post Civil War America had created conditions where available weapons, unavailable justice, and the pain/callousness of the Civil War made using guns a regular way of settling disputes.
   
   Wallis deals with the overall political situation in New Mexico: Republican (at least for convenience) Masonic Anglos upending the existing land grants to Hispanics--the corrupt sutler/US Army connection that became the rationale of the Dolan-Murphy enterprise and the target of John Tunstall and Alexander McSween's greed and ambition.
   
   Billy is thrust into all of this and at the end of the Lincoln County War, he becomes the survivor and the scapegoat for the losing side. An offered pardon disappears and in the end, only his death can satisfy the winners. As Wallis details, his end in a bedroom at Pete Maxwell's ranch becomes the beginning of the legend.
   
   My only beef with the author is that three card monte is a confidence game, not a gambling game, although both 2 card and 4 card monte were played at that time. Not anymore because casinos would risk too much money in a game that like faro, has virtually even odds for the house vs. the players. Still that is small potatoes for the way Wallis has taken the work of others and made his story in many ways, new again.

4 comments about The Bravest Man: Richard O'Kane and the Amazing Submarine Adventures of the USS Tang.

1. I read this book as part of a History Day project I am doing on Dick O'Kane and the USS Tang. This book was extremely helpful. It tells the story of the Tang in a very thorough and easy to understand way. It's almost like you're there in the control room with the officers. Another great thing about this book is that it also gives you a good feel for the entire submarine force of WW2 by breifly telling many other stories about the best, worst, and most bizzare things that were happening, and explaining problems submariners had to face. All in all, if you want to get a great basic knowledge of WW2 Submarines, and read a gripping story about real heros and real drama, this book is for you.



2. This is the second book that I have read about Richard O'Kane and his experiences in the Wahoo and Tang and waiting on two more books to arrive. I simply cannot get enough! Will someone please make a movie about him?



3. This is a fine read about Dick O'Kane, the ace of aces among WWII submarine commanders. Tuohy has a fine grasp of the dramatic wartime events and of O'Kane's tremendously brave and competent character. He, also, brings in some general discussion of the submarine war in the Pacific including the terrible problem of faulty torpedoes.



4. The term "Ace" is usually reserved for fighter pilots who shoot down five or more enemy aircraft. But, Captain Richard O'Kane took the term to new levels as a submarine executive officer and later, Captain.
   
   O'Kane's career began as fourth officer aboard the USS Argonaut. He was somewhat upset with the Captain's lack of aggressiveness. The problem continued after O'Kane joined the USS Wahoo. The Wahoo's original Captain suffered from the same lack of aggressiveness. However, that all changed when Captain Dudley "Mush" Morton took over the Wahoo. In the coming months, Morton and O'Kane formed one of the deadliest one-two punches in the submarine war. Under Morton's command, Wahoo became legendary, sinking enemy ships at an astounding rate. After five successful patrols aboard Wahoo, O'Kane was ordered to the U.S. for new construction; he was about to take command of the new submarine USS Tang.
   
   After taking command of the Tang, O'Kane used many of Mush Morton's techniques. It wasn't long before O'Kane and the Tang had surpassed Wahoo's impressive record. The Tang was the preferred destination of many new submariners, as O'Kane showed no fear in the face of the enemy. On Tang's last patrol, O'Kane sank ten enemy vessels before a defective torpedo, the last aboard, malfunctioned and circled back upon Tang. The torpedo threw O'Kane from the bridge into the water. A few others managed to escape from the stricken vessel by using Momsen breathing devices. But, they were soon picked up by a Japanese patrol boat and spent the rest of the war as prisoners of the Japanese. O'Kane was later awarded the Medal of Honor. Over the course of the war, no other submarine commander sank more ships, rescued more downed aviators, or made more successful surface attacks than O'Kane.
   
   This is a first-rate book. Author William Tuohy does a masterful job of describing O'Kane's brilliant career. Plus, he does a very good job of describing the entire submarine war in the Pacific by telling of other submarines' successful patrols and how a group of offensive-minded submarine captains virtually destroyed Japan's merchant shipping fleet..
   
   I give this fine book my highest recommendation; submarine fans won't want to miss it.

5 comments about The Greatest Generation.

1. this is a great book - every red blooded american should read this no matter his or her party affiliation, politics, race, creed, color or gender - i think brokaw did an excellent job of representing the mix of WWII characters fairly - definitely should be required reading in all high schools



2. America how it should be. All liberal idiots should be required to read this to understand patriotism.



3. Tom Brokaw has brought forth one of the most inspiring and touching
   accounts ever written.The Greatest Generation is a must-read for each
   and every American.
   His subjects will leave the reader feeling both admiration and gratitude
   for these wonderful individuals and their sacrifices for our great nation.
   You will be thankful for being an American when you experience this book.
   Jeffrey Bryan
   white Oak,NC



4. Tom Brokaw has coined the World War II generation the greatest generation ever. In this book, he chronicles the lives and times of those who fought in World War II and how it affected them. The book is broken up into sections with miniature biographies of individuals telling of there lives before, during, and after the War.
   
   Undeniably, there were tremendous sacrifices by those in uniform and at home and the whole country rallied to help the troops win the war. The book includes average Joe and Jill type of people as well as more well known veterans such as Hank Greenberg, Bob Dole, Andy Rooney, George H.W. Bush, John F. Kennedy, and Art Buchwald. It also covers the story of women's contributions to the war effort whether in or out of uniform. Additionally, the civil rights issues of equality to minorities is covered in fairly extensive detail. Some of the stories describing the inequalities and discrimination which occurred provided better insight into the nature of things in that day.
   
   By and large, veterans following the war were eager to get on with life, start families and successful business and political careers. The war helped shape their focus and sense of purpose. This generation helped create a framework upon which all living in America today now benefit.
   
   Towards the end of the book, things seemed to slow down a bit and the overall flow of the book could probably have benefited from cutting down the length 50 or so pages. This is not to say the stories were not worthy of being told, it simply had a feeling of weightiness and length at 390 pages.
   
   This book should be a required part of high school curriculum so that all students would better understand the tremendous sacrifice, efforts, and heroics performed by the incredible men and women of this generation. By understanding the values and things that drove this generation, the youth and upcoming leaders of today can draw upon their wisdom and positively shape the future of our nation. Like individual pieces in a jigsaw puzzle come together to create a picture, the individual stories of the regular folks and well known come together to create a picture of the greatest generation America has yet seen.



5. The copy recieved was not as described. I was expecting a clean used copy and I recieved a copy that was used as a text book and had yellow & green highlighter and hand written notes in the margins. I could not give it as a gift.

5 comments about Three Years Among the Comanches: The Narrative of Nelson Lee, the Texas Ranger.

1. Nelson Lee's straightforward account of his life as a Texas Ranger and then an Indian captive is enthralling. He also offers a valid critique of how the US govt was misguided in their approach to the Indian problem. Moreover, he pleads for the govt. to do something about those still in captivity. Fewer people might have gone West had they known what was really going on and the dangers ahead. This first-hand account is highly recommended.



2. Interesting anecdotes of a white man living among the indians, the hardships and struggles, but it's obviously a biased tale. Quite a stretch for the reader to believe that a man- Texas Ranger no less- would be unable to "escape" before 3 years. Personally I don't believe it. Anyway, while one reviewer highlights a particular commanche torture to an infant, it's best to keep everything in perspective and acknowledge the extreme brutality whites displayed against all tribes in the western hemisphere- for example, Sand Creek, Wounded Knee. That said, if you like stories similar to this, try Nat Love's autobiography.



3. I have read the book and most of the negative comments as well.
   As an author and a person that have lived among the Indians,I am familiar with a lot of what Lee has declared. Indian culture, no matter the tribes, has a great deal of weired beleifs, witchcraft included. They like smoking the weed and getting high.I suggest you buy the story, I assure it walks with truth.



4. The author relates actual events in Texas Ranger history as though he was present. However, the Texas State Historical site has no record of him ever being on Ranger rolls.



5. I am an avid reader of true Indian/pioneer books. This was new to me in format because only the first story I had read written by an adult captive and a male.
   
   Most of the books seem to be about young children or perhaps a young woman. The treatment and thoughts of an adult male were interesting. I kept wondering if I could have gone thru the ordeal. A quick read and makes you appreciate today! If you like history you will enjoy this true story.