5 comments about Pickford: The Woman Who Made Hollywood.

1. I am looking for a Mary Pickford bio that has lots of information on her personal life. This book is not the one. I found it dull, boring and uninformative in regards to Mary's personal life. I stopped reading it!! I want to know more about Lottie and Jack and their deaths, and this book tells very little, and one paragraph when each of them die. No details, no places, addresses-all the things that make for really interesting and well researched books. Anyone can get information on their movies, filmographies and details of the studios. You could almost just repeat many books like this and just change the person who you're writing about. Everytime I found a tidbit of interest, it referred to Mary's own book "Sunshine and Sadness". Maybe I should read THAT book instead!



2. I'm not rating the book, but rather some misinformation: in the book's description it says that she did not make the transition to talking pictures. I watched a talking picture this morning on Turner Classic Movies, Coquette(spelling?), released in 1929, which she was nominated for Best Actress. So yes, she DID make the transition to talking pictures; it just may not have been for long.



3. I think I can say that this book changed my life. I love movies and the people who make them, and for some reason I was not at all familar with the great Mary Pickford. Reading Ms. Whitfield's PICKFORD: THE WOMAN WHO MADE HOLLYWOOD, I laughed, I cried and I was amazed with what this actress accomplished in her life. This is the sort of book for me that as I approached its last pages, I had to put it down because I did not want it to end. Maybe I didn't want Pickford's life to end. Her life, and particulary her relationship with her mother, has all the workings of a great motion picture. I am now searching for all films that feature Mary Pickford. I have seen many recently and through her and her movies the world of Silent Film has come alive for me. This book fills in the blanks I had about the earliest days of U. S. films and has given me a glimpse into the working life of Pickford. For any students of film, this is a book that must be read. I will never forget the beautiful moment in this book when Mary Pickford is sitting next to Douglas Fairbanks, some time after they had divorced. Their brief converstion, as told by Whitfield, still gets me all misty eyed when I think about it. For me, without a doubt, this is the best book I have read all year!



4. Whitfield's book on Pickford is the definitive biography of this Hollywood legend. Her research is extensive and storytelling touching. It's fascinating to read about the rise and fall of such an intelligent and artistic actress who was one of the first to create the art of film acting. I've also read Scott Eyman's book ("Mary Pickford"), which is also good, but doesn't offer the same depth of research that Whitfield does. A must have for any film buff's library.



5. I don't have much to add to the foregoing reviews except to toss my own opinion in the ring. This book was well-written and great fun to read. I found it hard to put the book down at times. I can't say this is the definitive biography of Mary Pickford -- that's beyond my realm of expertise -- but it sure as heck was an enjoyable one. I popped back in on Amazon to see if the author has published any other biographies. She hasn't. Drats.

4 comments about Name-Dropping: From FDR On.

1. What a great read this is. Galbraith brings out a personal side of people we could only imagine exists. Of course, he reveals the same of himself. (Ever see a picture of him smiling?) The book reads quickly. In fact, my only complaint about the book is that I got so relaxed while reading it that I fell asleep too easily. (I read late at night). I'm sure, as I did, you'll be envious of Galbraith's acquaintances with the "characaters" of this book. Buy it!



2. Name Dropping is a great high-level recap of Galbreath's insider experience as an influential 20th century statesmen. Like a grandfather recounting the salient parts of our recent American history and his career, its everything that you would not expect from an agricultural economist -- entertaining, witty, and easy to read. Highly recommended for train rides, short flights, or rainy days.



3. My daughter gave me this book as a gift, I guess, because I'm an economist. I wish she hadn't. Others obviously think Galbraith's musings more than a little entertaining; I don't. He came across to me as asserting that the only people worth knowing were the ones he once served/worked with. I would rate some his ancedotes as amusing, but the flavor of the book seemed to be that of a very old man, whose core beliefs have been repudiated by history, claiming that the idea of a command economy just didn't get a fair shake. All these socialist countries just haven't done it right, and they just don't make 'em like they used to.



4. John Kenneth Galbraith was at one time a hero of mine. Read more than 10 of his books over the years. Bought this book and read it having been a hero of mine. I urge for all people to read to this book for the sole reason to show how out of touch, "ivory tower" tenured intellectuals has misguided us.

   The 20th is ending and the era of "ivory tower egghead" is coming ot a close. The preeminent egghead is Professor Galbraith and this books is a clarion call of a out of touch egghead socialist. Buy it for records.

   As a former student of economics and history, only when one leaves the university does one realize none of these people have ever had a "real" job so much as working McDonald. Tenure has given them lifelong employment-what in China is called the "iron rice bowl".

   Professor Galbraith has written over 30 books. However, has this man ever open a business, work at a private company, try to make a product or services that the people want and need.

   Academica and Government are havens for those who want job security, lifetime employment and insulation from the marketplace and the "customer".

   Professor is the ultimate egghead socialist and dreams up fantasies where everyone lives "fulfiling life" with jobs, health care, and education. The Soviet Union and China failed miserably building stagnant socialist economies and the whole world is moving from a planned economy to a market economy. This books by Professor Galbraith is a testament to "ivory tower egghead" who refuse to confront reality. Never mind the "egghead" refuses to get a real job where they have to actually work for a living.

   I recommend all to buy this book. Agree or Disagree. This book is a final testament of the greatest "egghead" of them all and how the world is moving to markets and totally bypasses them and yet they continue to champion socialism and collectivism: ideas that are going the way of the dinosour.

5 comments about At the Right Hand of Longstreet: Recollections of a Confederate Staff Officer.

1. General Gilbert Moxley Sorrell's memoir of the War Between the States is a must-read for any serious student of the War and a fascinating historical account of soldierly life and experiences. Sorrell served in Longstreet's Brigade beginning at Manassas and as his staff officer until his promotion to Brigadier-General in 1864. He paints a vivid picture of camp life and of the political climate of the times that is often overlooked in military accounts. Highly recommend



2. This late memoir seems to have been one of the most heavily used sources for scholars of Lee, Longstreet and other generals and the Gettysburg campaign in particular.
   
   As a memoir, it's not very personable, with the author's personal experiences and even his serious injury told in a distant manner, which is not uncommon for works of this kind. It is interesting as an account of Longstreet and others around him, although it shouldn't be taken as absolute gospel; Sorrel's opinion on the Gettysburg campaign in particular seems calculated to deflect any possible criticism from his erstwhile chief.
   
   There are some interesting and unexpected tidbits here -- for one, the role of the spy Harrison, whose very existence has been questioned by some writers. Far from appearing only once on the eve of Gettysburg, he appears in Sorrel's memoir as a regular contact of Longstreet's and one who was still living when the memoir was written. This would seem to strengthen the argument that Harrison's information about Federal activities in the Gettysburg campaign would have been useful to the Confederate command.
   
   It's also interesting (and refreshing) to see how non-teetotal Sorrel's Army of Northern Virginia is -- whiskey everywhere, and even a priceless scene of Longstreet and other officers singing arias while standing on a table.



3. VERY GOOD BOOK, I ENJOYED IT VERY MUCH, WROTE VERY WELL



4. maybe it was because Longstreet wasn't a very talkable sort I don't know but this book does provide some interesting insights and seldom bogs down.



5. Moxley Sorrel was one of the best staff officers in the Confederate army. He served as one of the key staff officers in the service of Gen. James Longstreet's First Corps. This book, in his own words, is one of the more insightful books by an "insider" from the Civil War.
   
   The book provides some brief background, prior to Sorrel joining Longstreet's staff (which, by the way, appears to have been one of the better corps staffs on the Confederate side--east or west or trans-Mississippi).
   
   His career was distinguished and he had a rare opportunity to observe Longstreet and other major Confederate officers. The book portrays Sorrel's views on major battles of the war--from the Peninsula to Seven Pines to the Seven Days to Second Manassas and on to Gettysburg. Then, an examination of the First Corps' movement to the western theatre, where it played a key role at Chickamauga.
   
   Sorrel became a battlefield figure at the Wilderness, as he led a flanking attack on Union General Winfield Scott Hancock. He finished the war as a battlefield commander rather than a staff officer.
   
   What is best about this book, though, is his careful and thoughtful analysis of events and officers. A very nice work indeed.

4 comments about An Autobiography of George Washington.

1. I found this book to be really amazing and carefully researched. The authenticity is really incredible. It turned George Washington from a wooden stick figure, into the really amazing person he was. I know some people will question the authencity of the material. But, to me, the wealth of detail, emotions, make it an unquestionably good read.



2. This book was written several decades ago, but there was a small readership in those days for information channeled from the Other Side. Thanks to an ever-growing acceptance of this type of writing, we are able to gain access to valuable information.
   Here is the story of George Washington's life, told by the man himself from the Other Side. I was fascinated from start to finish. Perhaps there are those who would argue that this was not channeled, but that instead, Edith Ellis concocted the whole story. This seems implausible, given the wealth of detail and feeling that comes across. Of course, it is up to the reader to decide.
   I had Amazon send this book to my mother, and after she read it, she sent it to me. There was something strange in the ending of the book, and on closer inspection, I found that the last 2 chapters were missing, and the void was filled with a repeated section of pages from earlier in the book. I asked Amazon to replace it, and I also asked them to send me a copy as well.
   My copy had all the correct pages--but apparently Amazon sent my mother another defective copy; the important last 2 chapters are once again missing, thus cutting out Mr. Washington's presidency and his death.
   Of the three copies I requested, two were defective. I was surprised that Amazon did not take the trouble to see how many of these defective books they have in stock; they replaced a defective book with just another defective book. I wonder if they have notified the Hay House Publishing Company of this.
   Amazon's service is usually outstanding, but until they work this glitch out, save yourself a hassle and order it directly from Hay House Publishers.



3. Yes, this book is channeled literature. However, if you have an open mind and can get past the messenger, you'll find the message is both entertaining and enlightening. Personally, I find the realistic detail of this book to be very refreshing. It seems we all too often look upon George Washington as a hero and leader without par and forget to actually get to know the man. In this book you'll get to know the man and Mason that was the father of our country.



4. Without a doubt one of the best books published. You will have no doubt this great nation was founded with God's guidance. Great read!

No comments about Abraham Lincoln and Robert Burns: Connected Lives and Legends.

3 comments about Harriet Tubman: The Life and the Life Stories (Wisconsin Studies in Autobiography).

1. Harriet Tubman: The Life And The Life Stories by Jean M. Humez is an exhaustive biography of this celebrated and heroic woman. Grounded in exhaustive research as well as the complete texts of stories Harriet Tubman told about her life. Harriet Tubman: The Life And The Life Stories follows Tubman, who was born a slave in the American South, as she escaped to freedom in the North, and vowed to liberate her entire family. Her work to guide dozens of slaves to freedom, as well as her service as a spy and a scout for the Union Army, are also described in historical detail. After the Civil War Tubman settled in New York and founded a home for the indigent aged. an absolutely essential addition to academic library Black History and African-American Biography reading lists, Harriet Tubman's memory and legacy are cherished in this profound and all-encompassing chronicle.



2. Harriet Tubman: The Life and the Life Stories, by Jean M. Humez

   This book is a treasure. Eminently readable, impossible to put down, totally absorbing, this book will satisfy meticulous scholars and the general public. What a great way to learn U.S. history! Great quotes, critical appraisal of the work of earlier historians, new documentation, wonderfully illuminating photographs. A feast for the curious mind and eye.
   I have always wanted to know more about Harriet Tubman and as soon as I heard this book was out I dived into it. Harriet Tubman's life has been the subject of several biographers in the past, but in this work Humez convincingly argues that Harriet Tubman, who could not read or write, was able to produce a "self-authored life story" by carefully choosing the writers she collaborated with and exercising control about what stories to tell and how to tell them. This results in a fascinating and kaleidoscopic interpretation of Harriet Tubman's life, as seen through different authors and through Harriet Tubman herself.
   In the first section, "The Life," I learned about the salient facts of Harriet Tubman's life: her years as a slave in Maryland, seeing two of her sisters sold and carried away in a chain-gang, her successful escape from slavery in 1849, when she was probably 29 years old, her contacts with the anti-slavery movement in the North, the mutual admiration of Harriet Tubman and John Brown who referred to her using the masculine pronoum ("Harriet Tubman hooked on his whole team at once. He is the most of a man, naturally, that I ever met with"). It is also about the clandestine trips she made to Maryland to rescue her extended family and others, her military and nursing work during the civil war and her settling in Auburn, New York, in poverty, taking care of old and sick people of color and children-- the John Brown Hall project, as she called it.
   Interesting quotes from her dictated letters reveal details that throw light on her views on other issues, such as women's rights. For instance, in telling about the successful Combahee River raid in South Carolina, in which she worked with Col. James Montgomery and a band of 300 black soldiers, she states after her dress was shred that "...I made up my mind then I would never wear a long dress on another expedition of the kind, but would have a bloomer as soon as I could get it..."
   It is in the second part, "The Life Stories," that Humez makes the case that Harriet Tubman's gifts as a story-teller, singer, and performer and her reputation as an African-American celebrity ensured that her experiences as a slave and her deep spirituality would be preserved. Here, through a discussion on the politics of research, the dynamics between a researcher and her/his subject, and the cultural and social context that influences much of those dynamics, I felt Harriet Tubman's presence and resourcefulness vividly, towering above those who tried to capture her complex story and interpret her life according to their values and the racial views of their culture.
   The third part, "Stories and Sayings," offers a hypothetical version of Tubman's "autobiography" culled from every individual life history story Humez was able to locate from the earlier works. While all the stories and sayings are revealing and offer significant insights my favorite part was the "Stories of Clever Exploits and Tricks," probably because I always wondered how she actually carried out her rescue missions. In this section the intelligence, courage, and humor of Harriet Tubman shines through, like in the story "Avoiding Capture by Pretending to Read." It says: " At another time when she heard men talking about her, she pretended to read a book which she carried. One man remarked. `This can't be the woman. The one we want can't read or write.' Harriet devoutly hoped this book was right side up" (Tatlock, 1939a).
   The final section, "Documents" is a gift of primary source materials for future researchers and anybody interested in pursuing an in-depth study of Harriet Tubman's life.
   Read this book. See for yourself how illuminating the past and looking at history with a fresh eye can instill hope. This book is yes, about Harriet Tubman, but more fundamentally, it is a book about courage, dignity, persistence, and solidarity in incredibly harsh circumstances. What a gift for us all in these troubled times.




3. Several years back I was watching a documentary on Harriet Tubman in which one of her relatives was interviewed. I suddenly realized I had never thought of Tubman as a real person, with actual living relatives! Her legend looms so much larger than life that she hovers somewhere in the realm of Paul Bunyan.

   This book begins with a traditional biography, presenting the bare bones of Tubman's life. The section called "Stories and Sayings" puts meat on those bones, breathing life into someone who has nearly been lost to us in legend. It's a fascinating concept, and I think it works.

   Equally amazing is the Documents section, reflecting 10 years of research and which will be required reading for any future Tubman scholars because, as Humez herself says, "...my retelling of her life story cannot be definitive." Highly recommended.

   Curator, AfroAmericanHeritage dot com

5 comments about The Beat Hotel: Ginsberg, Burroughs & Corso in Paris, 1957-1963.

1. The first time I read this book, I turned back over to the first page and read it again. It was that good. I am a huge Burroughs fan, and I learned a new appreciation for Allen Ginsberg, Gregory Corso and Brion Gysin. The grist of this book provides insight into the day-to-day maze of creativity whose epicenter happened to be Post WWII Paris. If you are looking for a fresh, lively, intelligent glimpse into the creative process of Burroughs, Gysin, Corso, Ginsberg and others, this is the book for you.



2. Like, baby, I am not a big fan of the beats, dig? I was too young for it - it was dead by the time I was aware of it. And in hindsight it seems so self-indulgent.

   But.

   This book is really great. I lived in Paris for a spell, not far from said hotel (though it was long gone) and this is wonderfully interesting chronicle of ex pat life in Paris during the late 50s, early 60s, a bunch of fabulously interesting characters - reminiscent of Orwell's Down and Out in Paris and London (or whatever it was called) which was pretty darn clever (and if you like this, you have to read that.)




3. Perhaps 9, rue Git-le-Coeur will never be one of those addresses that everyone immediately recognizes. Yet, for a brief period of time, it was home to Allen Ginsberg, William S. Burroughs, Peter Orlovsky, Brian Gysin, and was infamously known as The Beat Hotel.

   "The Beat Hotel" serves as an extended biographical sketch, presenting detailed glimpses into the histories of these artists - Burroughs' accidental shooting of his wife, his intense love affair with Ian Sommerville, Ginsberg's problematic relationship with his mentally ill mother, the "Howl" obscenity trials, his affairs with Burroughs, Kerouac and Orlavsky.

   What results is an often frank, always engaging depiction of the drugged out, free-loving world that produced such classic as Burroughs' "Naked Lunch" and Ginsberg's "Kaddish."

   It's to the author's credit that he achieves and exceeds his goal of increasing the reader's appreciation of these often neglected rebel artists.




4. Really, I do. The book is in-depth and includes pertinent photos. The cut-ups and Gysin's paintings, as well as the total exploratory consciousness mindmeld attitude in inspiring. Barry Miles has once again succeeded in writing another great book on the Beats.



5. The goings on in this decrepit old Paris Hotel, run by an old French lady who cooked Cassoulets for the guests, were astounding. A gathering point for starving artists, especially planetary beatniks, we discover that the unbridled use of hard drugs and graphic homosexuality were a lot more common than Eisenhower would have let us in America think! *.*
   
   This book is a hoot but I want to say up front that it was seriously well-researched by the author. It's predominantly about some well-known, perhaps infamous, American Beats, most of whom (in this hotel anyway) were bisexual drug users. There were also other 'artists' from various places in the world who either lived in The Beat Hotel (the hotel really didn't even have an official name), or they 'visited' as guests of residents for varying lengths of time.
   
   The peccadillos of these characters defy sanity. There's scrying, crying, heroin use, singing, pornography generation, speculating on psychedelic inventions, poetry readings, and tons of all manner of sex.
   
   William Burroughs seems to be the main guy in this life adventure -- we hear of the untimely death of his wife (at another location) as Burroughs was smashed, playing "William Tell" with her for the entertainment of the equally drunken and high guests, ultimately putting a bullet in her forehead. He was never arrested for this incident.
   
   The chief guy whom we expect to find lodged firmly in The Beat Hotel never made it: Jack Kerouac. But pretty much every one of his dubious associates made at least a visit.
   
   This book is well-written -- a real page-turner and quite hilarious. It matters not if the reader is gay, straight, or anywhere in-between sexually... you'll much enjoy this book. And, if ever there was a clear example of 'truth being stranger than fiction', this one is it.

5 comments about Been There, Done That.

1. I liked this book. There is a lot in it. Not just gossip from one side but how life was during that time period for people in Hollywood. It was not a boring book. A real page turner and well written. While I might not agree that everything in the book happened exactly as accounted... it is Eddie Fishers story and his perception of how it occured and how he felt about it.



2. yes, Eddie Fisher is full of himself. yes, Eddie Fisher is a has been(since the 1960's). yes, much of the book was tmi(too much info). i get it.
   
   don't hate the playa, hate the game. lol
   
   it is good trash. enjoyable, light, something to do instead of watching "I Love Lucy" reruns.



3. I have never been interested in Eddie Fisher for any reason. All i know of him is that Elizabeth Taylor says he is the only husband she ever hated, that he was Married to connie stevens ( who i had even LESS interest in) that he was Carrie Fishers father and Debbie Reynolds husband and He sang, and he was Jewish. That was about it. This book was a breath of fresh air. It was candid, funny, witty, had enough insight to be interesting and enough regret to make this man highly likable.
   So what if he exaggerated? at one time he WAS a big star, and say what you will, he obviously DID get many of these women to fall in love with him, and he probably did it with that tremendous ego and charm. How else did this Little Jewish boy from Philly end up as one of the biggest players of Hollywood for Decades? The only bitter note of the whole book is His feelings about Debbie Reynolds, and even that i believe is honest and from his perspective understandable. I do believe most of what he has written. It has the ring of truth throughout the entire book. If you find it outrageous its because most autobiographies are completely edited and even bio's are edited for salacious content. These people really did live that way and the more i read about old hollywood, the more astounded i am.
   So eddie fisher bragged about himself, so what? Why would anyone read about Eddie Fisher's life and then complain that he lacked morals? Did you NOT know this going into it? Did you think you were reading Eleanor Roosevelt's Bio? Frankly he has quite the life story even if HALF of what he says was true. Wish he'd write another.



4. I enjoyed the book. I may not have agreed with some of his statements but...it's his book. A bit self-serving.
   However, I did want to read it and Amazon filled my order quickly and I was reading within a few days. I've never had any problems with Amazon and look forward buying my books from them.



5. Tawdry, icky, and weirdly self-aggrandizing while being self-degrading at the same time (he was bigger than Elvis, and he was a terrible father who also let his career go to hell). The book is rather compelling up through the end of his marriage to Elizabeth, and the rest comes off mainly as a tell-all (and I do mean 'tell all,' with a 'more than I really wanted to know' quality) concerning all the women he's been involved with from one-offs to longer romances. He has little good to say about almost anyone, and Debbie Reynolds gets the worst of it. One thing the book is seriously lacking in is photos. The one photo section has very few pages, although there are some other pictures included at the beginning of each chapter.

5 comments about Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of America's Most Hated Senator.

1. I have never read a biography of Joe McCarthy. Most of what I have always heard about him and his career has been quite negative (i.e. the blacklists, "commie" trials etc.) To be sure, Joseph McCarthy could not have been the only man involved in the blacklisting and destruction of so many reputations of politicians, artists, scientists etc. We would be giving McCarthy the man way too much credit (and from the book, it is clear that he was not all that capable.)
   
   However, the book never looks at anything in McCarthy's career (beyond his work in the commitees investigating alleged members of the communist party or communist sympathizers.) As a man who was a senator (and supposedly working on behalf of his contituents in Wisconsin) one would think that there would be more. Mr. Herman does not discuss this. I would have liked to know what Joe McCarthy did, as a seator, for the people in the state of Wisconsin!!
   
   In my opinion, Mr. Herman's book is a defense of Joe McCarthy, period. He does not write as an impartial observer, using the many primary and secondary sources as a historian should. There were many times in the course of the book where Mr. Herman seems to rant and interject his own subjective views about McCarthy or his era (i.e. page 90), rather than letting the evidence and his sources speak for themselves. In this way, the writing was disappointing.
   
   Did I learn about Joe McCarthy and his era? Absolutely. However, Mr. Herman seems more desperate about getting his own conservative agenda across than writing a true and balanced history of that time.



2. "Received wisdom" places Senator Joseph R.McCarthy(1908-1957)only a few notches below the likes of Hitler and Stalin in the pantheon of great political villains of the twentieth century.The fabled "visiting Martian" might find this hard to understand.While Stalin,Hitler and co waded thru the blood of the millions of victims of their tyranny,Senator McCarthy never killed anyone,never started any wars,never even had anyone put in jail! He did once drunkenly assault columnist Drew Pearson in a tender spot though! The Martian would doubtless have his amazement compounded by the knowledge that McCarthy spent his career opposing communism,a despotic totalitarian political system,responsible for countless deaths and vicious oppression across the world,setting himself against those in his own country who sought to serve the interests of foreign communist regimes and who eagerly wished to overturn the US political system in favor of the communist one.
   This biography by Arthur Herman,seeks to explain the "how and why" of Joe McCarthy,the man,his career,the political context in which he operated,and the Senator's legacy.This is a broadly sympathetic picture of the the Senator and his "crusade".The only similar pro-McCarthy biographies before Herman which I am aware of,are those by Joe's friends and colleagues-William F.Buckley and Brent Bozell(1954)and Roy Cohn(1968).Biographers who have tended to "have the floor" on McCarthy,are Richard Rovere(1959)and heavyweight writer Thomas C.Reeves(1982).The latters biography has probably been seen as the "standard" one up to now(admirers of the Reeves take on McCarthy might not be so pleased about his later demolition job biography of liberal icon Jack Kennedy!)
   Herman has the advantage in having access to intelligence material de-classified in the US(especially the "Venona" documents),and the Soviet archives opened after the fall of communism.This allows a much fairer assessment of the period,and McCarthy's career,grounded in solid research.
   Here we see that the so-called "Red scare" of the 40's and 50's,far from being based in unjustified hysterical paranoia,exploited by seedy political operators like McCarthy,Jenner,McCarran and co,was a response to a subversive threat which was all too real.Soviet spies and agents of influence-many directly in league with Russian intelligence, were working within the heart of the American political and cultural establishment,secretly promoting communism at home and overseas.It was indeed "a conspiracy so immense"(McCarthy's words),which had seen,for example,the widespread entry of communist agents into highly influential positions within Roosevelt's Democratic administration,often with access to classified material which they passed on to Moscow.Stalin was allowed to swallow up large chunks of "liberated" Europe,China fell to Mao and communist North Korea invaded the capitalist South-all this seemingly with US acquiescence.Those,such a Whittaker Chambers(a former communist agent),who had warned the authorities what was happening in their midst,were largely ignored or ridiculed by a complacent administration and a "liberal"leaning press.It was only when the revelations surfaced about Alger Hiss,that a reluctant establishment was forced to at least look seriously at the issue.However it was generally the "outsiders"-poiitical mavericks like Richard Nixon and J.Parnell Thomas of The Un-American Activities Committee(HUAC) and Senators like McCarthy and William E.Jenner-who forced the issue to the forefront of politics.Many of the political and media elite found men like McCarthy "vulgar"-rowdy and unsympathetic.Unlike(say)the Soviet agent from Harvard,Alger Hiss,who they initially championed,farm boy Joe McCarthy was not "one of them".
   The idea of a reign of terror by "redhunters" is seen to be a misleading exaggeration-in fact it was often more "respectable" and acceptable in many circles to be opposed to the likes of McCarthy than be for him-there was massive hostility in much of the press,and among the political and legal elite(though Joe did,of course have his cheerleaders too-notably in the Hearst papers and among veterans groups).The CBS TV network could still run a breathtakingly unbalanced attack on McCarthy by Ed Murrow on "See it now"(mythologized by Hollywood at the moment in "Goodnight and good luck"),at the height of "McCarthyism"(this term itself-significantly-was coined by McCarthy's target,the academic Owen Lattimore-a State Department advisor on China,who did much to promote the cause of the murderous maniac Mao and his communists in the United States)
   Herman does not shrink from identifying McCarthy's faults and failings-he was a heavy drinker(it killed him),had a volatile temper,often didn't do adequate research,exaggerated,lied(which politician has not?),was a publicity hound who loved to be in the headlines,and was prone to serious errors of judgement(the biggest being over his blind faith in the Chief Counsel to his Senate Committee,Roy M.Cohn-this directly led to his downfall).But we are given a portrait here far removed from the one dimensional ogre of legend-McCarthy was basically kindly,he didn't tend to hold grudges(Drew Pearson excepted!),even when it came to his biggest political enemies like Secretary of State Dean Acheson(meeting Acheson in an elevator,McCarthy shot out his hand saying "Hi Dean!"-Acheson,coldly furious,stiffly ignored Joe,a reaction which left the Senator genuinely puzzled).His methods could be clumsy and his manner harsh(though no more than other government investigators in other areas),yet he was often right about his targets.In this context,Herman looks carefully at some of McCarthy's best known "victims" like George C. Marshall(so insouciant in allowing pro-communist advisors to guide him into effectively handing millions of Chinese to Mao),Owen Lattimore,Irving Peress and Annie Lee Moss.Even the notorious 1954 Army case(known as the "Army-McCarthy hearings")-which would destroy him politically and eventually personally-shows McCarthy was quite justified in launching his probe into Army "leaks",and came to grief thanks to his unreliable subordinates(especially Roy Cohn),his unfortunate television image and style(in contrast to his slippery unctious adversary,Army counsel Joseph Welch)and because he had taken on the massed ranks of a jittery political establishment(Democrat and Republican-including President Eisenhower),which finally decided to unite against him.
   McCarthy's last years were a miserable record of political oblivion,heroic boozing(he became a hopeless alcoholic)and poor health.Ignored by the press(which was especially hard to take)and fair weather friends-only a few stuck by him such as Bill Jenner,Roy Cohn and notably Bobby Kennedy(who briefly worked for Joe and liked him)-McCarthy died of liver disease,still in his 40's.Yet when he passed away,even his inveterate enemy and victim Drew Pearson expressed genuine regret.



3. Professor Herman does a great job in clarifying the real story of the so-called McCarthy era. Most books and movies rehash the same tired line: innocent Americans were persecuted by witch-hunting Congressional investigators. Herman shows that was not the case. As he points out, no one was deprived of legal counsel or of their Fifth Amendment rights. The McCarthy era was far more benign than the administrations of Lincoln and Woodrow Wilson, where Americans were jailed by the thousands for speaking out against the government.
   
   Herman makes a vital point: McCarthy was concerned only with investigating Communist subversions among government employees. He had nothing to do with the Hollywood investigations. Herman makes an even more important point, one that is the heart of his book. There was a massive infestation of Communists in the government. The Truman state department did a horrible job doing background checks on government employees. McCarthyism was not, as most historians have said, a withchunt against innocent liberals. There was a legitimate problem with Communist subversion, and McCarthy was destroyed for trying to do something about it.
   
   Herman freely admits McCarthy made errors of judgment. He also points out McCarthy was often right. I wish more Americans would read this book. What people think they know just isn't so.



4. An excellent book and invaluable for understanding this pivotal cold war episode - the rise and fall of Senator Joseph McCarthy.
   
   McCarthy, on the heels of the Hiss Case in late 1949, started asking, loudly and publicly, what the administration knew about Communists in the State Department and other sensitive places, and what it was doing about it. For the next four years, and particularly after gaining the chair of a Senate investigation subcommittee, McCarthy bore down on this issue, attracting millions of followers who believed in his mission, but also making enemies among the intelligentsia, among elites threatened by McCarthy's populist style, among liberals who saw Communists as ideological allies. McCarthy's own missteps, and those of aide Roy Cohn, helped bring down his career and blacken his name. But only in recent decades has newly declassified intelligence information shown he was more or less on the right track.
   
   It is important to remember the context of the times. The Soviets had ended any illusions about democracy in Eastern Europe. China had fallen to Mao. Manhattan Project spies had given the Russians the atomic bomb and in 1949 they detonated their first. The Korean War began in 1950. Communism was seeking to establish its influence in the developing world. The Cold War was heating up, the U.S. seemed to be losing, but meanwhile the Truman administration didn't seem to want to know about potential traitors in their midst.
   
   Some of the best chapters here focus on historical context rather than McCarthy himself. Herman recreates the Popular Front days of the 1930s, when Communists successfully infiltrated many liberal organizations or duped liberals into joining Communist front groups. In the "Who Lost China?" debate, Communist-influenced diplomats tweaked U.S. policy to finish Chaing on Mao's behalf. And Herman renders a fine consideration of McCarthy's effect on politics between then and now, including the death and rebirth of conservatism, the death of the liberal establishment with the Vietnam War, and the Popular Front's rebirth as the New Left.
   
   History reads quite differently from the liberal conventional wisdom when the then-secret Venona Decrypts or only-recently-availaible KGB files are factored in. Virtually no one McCarthy exposed was innocent. Today's conventional wisdom mistakenly regards Communist ties then as no more than an expression of dissent, a sympathy for the underdog. The CW fails to recognize that it was a lifelong commitment - more like being in the Mafia or a religious cult - where one swore fealty to a foreign and hostile power, created discord to destabilize one's own society, and sometimes aided spies and traitors.
   
   Herman does not spare McCarthy's faults - his drinking, his judgment-impairing mania, his too-trusting reliance upon Cohn. He shows how McCarthy destroyed himself, such as his fit of pique during the televised Army vs. McCarthy hearings, where he reneged on a deal not to expose the Communist-front involvement of one of opposition counsel Joseph Welch's aides.
   
   Those close to him knew the youngest senator was not the best person for this job. He was too raw, too impulsive and too unschooled in Washington's ways. But the way he saw it, no one else was doing it and the job needed to be done.
   
   McCarthy became undeservedly vilified. No one went to jail because of him. He didn't kill anyone. Unlike dissidents in Communist states, those questioned by him were protected by due process of law and had legal counsel. McCarthy was performing quintessential Congressional oversight - shining the bright light of publicity on dark spots within the administration, to influence change through the bringing of social pressure. McCarthy often held closed hearings, when the publicity of open hearings would have helped him more, to protect witnesses or those they testified about from being smeared. His questioning style was tough but typical of a courtroom. And the government really did have Communists buried in its bowels, often with access to sensitive information, with an administration too often unwilling to act.
   
   Herman highlights some amazing ironies of McCarthyism:
   
   --The truest single victim of "McCarthyist attacks", someone railroaded and hounded to death in sham hearings, was McCarthy himself. Liberal journalists with little regard for the truth smeared him, and frequently.
   
   --The executive privilege so loathed by liberals when Nixon claimed it during Watergate, was pioneered by Eisenhower expressly to stonewall McCarthy. That marked the beginning of "the imperial presidency" and decline of Congessional oversight which liberals particularly often decry - sentiments with which McCarthy himself actually agreed.
   
   --Bobby Kennedy's well-received Congressional investigations of the Mafia and labor racketeering in the late 1950s used the identical tactics he had learned working for McCarthy, and for which McCarthy was condemned.
   
   --The Kennedys were not only McCarthy allies, but refused to go along with the rest of Congress in abjuring him. John Kennedy scheduled surgery so that he would not be present for the vote to censure McCarthy, while Bobby discreetly attended McCarthy's funeral in Wisconsin.
   
   --The New Left, born in 1962, was explicitly an attempt to revive Communist activity in the United States, minus the Soviet ties. The biggest purveyors of the "paranoid style" in American politics, a term often tied to McCarthy, has actually been the left, with its dark vision of a world dominated by a malign U.S. government and its all-powerful corporate allies.
   
   This book is one of the major sources for Ann Coulter's bestselling "Treason". Coulter's polemics rouse her base but may alienate even the undecided. Herman's evenhanded tone and treatment of the subject matter, though, do credit to his work, which lends a measure of vindication to McCarthy's short but searing political career. He continues to be vilified today, through movies such as "Good Night and Good Luck". Hollywood wants to keep history's spotlight on McCarthyism, but you get the idea that's mostly to keep us from looking where our attention belongs - on what McCarthy sought to expose.



5. Thoroughly researched and excellently written, this book is a great read.
   
   It gives a distinct picture of Joe McCarthy, and also educates the reader about the events occurring.
   
   GRADE: A++

2 comments about Letters of a Civil War Nurse: Cornelia Hancock, 1863-1865.

1. As an English civil war re-enactor, and a nurse by profession, Cornelia Hancock brings alive the horror, and difficulties faced by the wounded and the woman who choose to nurse them. The book is useful in its detail, and describes medical care at the battlefield, in hospitals, and the improvements made as the war developed. A book worth owning.



2. I wish the press had released the other version of this book. The introduction isn't very helpful.