5 comments about Catherine the Great.

1. i hard to believe a little german priness would become the most powerful woman in europe.but that catherine story .married to a stupid czravish who had no sense. he was determine to stay greman in russian,but katherina made show she learn langauge ,religion and people.she learn the art of policital when the time was right she took over.brought a new age not seen since peter the great.i would had like more about here early life in german but this book was well done.



2. This is one of the very best biographies I have ever read. Troyat has taken a very interesting but not particularly palatable historical figure ( My mother-in law referred to Catherine as "that awful person")and brought her to life with all of her fascinatingly complex character in a well wrought historical background.



3. Bad translation of a mediocre and sappy history. I couldn't stand it and have gone looking for a different biography of Catherin the Great.



4. Prior to reading this book, the only information that I had on Catherine the Great, Empress of Russia, was that she was an 18th century Czarina of some repute and that she was essentially a nymphomaniac. While the author disputes my clinical characterization of Catherine's sexual prowess, he certainly does take great pains to point out her long list of conquests, right up until her death at a then advanced age.
   
   This book is very informative and quite enlightening as it relates to the political and social mores of Eastern European and Asian aristocracy during the period of Catherine's reign. The tangled webs of shifting alliances during the roughly 50 years covered by the book are many times fascinating and at times hung by the thread of whether a 16 year old heir to a throne was enchanted at first site by a 13 year old princess. Entire nations hung in the balance.
   
   Especially interesting was the author's repeated juxtaposition between Catherine's espoused liberal "enlightened monarch" ideals and her actual rule over, and disposal of millions of enslaved serfs. Her fascination and financial support of many liberal French and Swiss political reformers and philosophers and then her horror when such philosophies actual came to fruition in the French Revolution.
   
   Ultimately, Catherine was a woman of her times and indisputably proved to be a most able successor to the earlier Peter the Great inasmuch as she made Russia a major player on the European stage and greatly expanded the territory under her control. The personalities involved make for a highly entertaining read.
   
   I've seen some of the comments labeling the prose as dry or tedious and tend to disagree. Certainly, writing style of non-fiction historical biographies differs from that seen in fictionalized accounts. In addition, this is a translation which perhaps hinders certain elements of style that others might prefer. All in all, I was not dissatified with the writing or the content. I recommend this book to any seeking an understanding of Russian or Eastern European history and/or culture during the mid to late 18th century.



5. Troyat needs no bolstering from me: his credentials as a well-known documenter of Russian monarchic history are legion. I relished every page of Troyat's documentaries on Ivan IV, Pjotr I, and Aleksandr I (ranking in strict chronologic order). However, his bio of Yekaterina II--while unquestionably meticulously researched--is dry. For one thing, it is quite overlong, which one must question right out of the starting gate insofar as Henri Troyat's book on Pjotr I--also a fabulous monarch of critical importance to the emergence of the empire, arguably even more so than Yekaterina II--was brief and swift. (Indeed, every paragraph literally burst with fascinating facts and characterizations.) Troyat goes on and on and on about every minor detail to the point where the essential message is basically lost amid the sheer volume: a crystalline example of forest-amid-trees overpowering. As a basis for research, for high school papers, etc., "Catherine the Great" is to be most highly commended. However, as an armchair read for the history devote [only one 'e': I can't render accent aigu through this medium, and devotee is the feminine form--Ed.], it plays marked second fiddle to Henri's Ivan, Peter, and Alex.

5 comments about The Diary of Samuel Pepys (Modern Library Classics).

1. Very entertaining and enlightening. Pepys gives us a glimpse of what life was like in that period before the "Glorious Revolution" in England which was so important in the developement of democracy in England and the United States. Pepys was on the wrong side of that revolution - a loyalist to King Charles II, although he was never convicted of treason. Good thing, since there seemed to be a lot of beheadings, etc. in that era. Occasionally, it is not absolutely clear what Pepys is talking about, and sometimes the vocabulary is not easily understood,as language and customs have changed, but that is to be expected.



2. When I started reading the diary, I expected it to be extremely boring and very old fashioned (seeing how it was written in the 1600's) - how wrong I was!!!
   Samuel Pepys (pronounced 'peeps') is a human, funny, moody man who has his ups and downs like the rest of us. His narrative during the plague records his concern about neighbors, and his real sorrow when people he knows succumb to it. He also records his experiences during the great fire of London in 1666 and his first mention of it strikes me as entirely human - he says that his maids wake him as they have heard of the fire and as it is not near his doorstep he simply goes back to bed as he's tired. He has arguments with his wife, and has cast a lusty eye upon the kings mistress for years! He also has, what I call 'mini affairs' where he kisses and fondles women quite regularly, (including his own maids) and seems to have no guilt about this whatsoever. Most mornings he 'drinks' his breakfast and at one point is outraged that his new wig is teeming with nits! An historical and very human read. Makes me realise that after 450 years we are all no different at all........



3. It is kind of hard to match up these reviews of the Pepys' Diary with specific volumes, probably due to the nature of ISBN numbers. However, this review is about Volume 10, the Companion to the 10 vol. set of paperbacks (complete edition) by the University of California Press. IT IS a valuable book indeed, being 1700 entries, alphabetically arranged, on the details about the people and places mentioned in the Diary. It has 626 numbered pages and genealogical tables and maps.



4. There are on the Amazon site two excellent, informative reviews of the Pepys' diaries. They say far more than my own contribution.
   I have read in and out of the Pepys' diary more than once. I did this in part because I have read many times that they are the ' best diaries' ever written. Without contending with that I found that they were not for me the most interesting. This probably shows more about my own shortcomings than it does about the work of Pepys.
   Pepys' work is filled with description of the life of the time. It is rich in perception of the great city of London in Restoration times. It is filled with personal anecdote, gossip including that relating to his prodigious sexual appetite and activity. It is a busy, businesslike work. And it tells more about a world outside than a world in.
   In the diaries I most love there is the quest of the soul to deeply understand itself and its relation to other people, and God. I find that the flurry of activity in the life of Pepys does not lead to this kind of reflectiveness. And thus for me the 'diary' is not a highly significant work personally.



5. I've long been a student and a collector of information on the personalities of Restoration England, growing out of a desire to know more about the background in literature classes. The Restoration crowd loved life, and in this volume (and presumably the next) you see how tenuous their lives were -- 5000 a week in the City of London dying of plague, two fleets of 100 ships each at war in a narrow sea, everyone so intent on feathering their nest and getting their next place, and an honest man rarest commodity of all. I love all these diaries. I've learned to ignore a lot of the textural (not text) notes that tell you if there was a blot on the page, or the symbol was not quite clear, but the footnotes are amazing and so is the information. Love Sam; he could have done pretty much as he pleased with me, I fear. But in his daily strolls of 5 miles and more I fear I could never have kept up as he went up and down the town, up and down the river. I've been to London and took the boat tour on the Thames from the houses of Parliament down to Greenwich to see the naval museum and Queen's house -- and he would walk, day or night, from London to Depworth, to Woolwich, to Greenwich (though he'd borrow the boat if he could) and pay attention to all he passed. What a companion!

   Unfortunately for my budget's sake I started buying these in 3s and am now having trouble filling up 1666-1669. I will persevere, though, and anticipate a re-read of all or part probably every summer (while TV takes a dive and there's good light to read by until long into the evening). The only thing I have wished for is more portraits of the people he is speaking of--and the portraits by Huysmans and Lely that he reports having seen fresh painted. However, financially that may not have been doable. Will have to keep searching for a companion Restoration Portraits volume to keep me happy.

   Great reading - do start from the beginning to get into the swing of things. A random paragraph doesn't put you "in the life" like the unrolling panorama does. A better map of London at your elbow (though there is one in the back of each volume) will also increase your pleasure.

4 comments about Facundo: Or, Civilization and Barbarism (Penguin Classics).

1. I am currently a history major and took an Argentina class because I thought it would be interesting, this book was not interesting in the least. Sarmiento's book, Facundo, is during the revolutionary stage in Argentina. There is to much emphasis placed on trying to describe in great detail mundane things while not getting to the important issues at hand. On the parts that I thought would be of the utmost importance they were explained in very vague terms which half the time I did not know what he was getting at.



2. This is NOT, like other reviewer says, an account of Revolutionary Argentina in the 19th century (the period of civil war that followed the independence from Spain). This is not a book of history. Sarmiento is much more than a mere witness/narrator of a period. He is a man of letters, a writer -and one of the very best from Argentina- it takes you only the reading of the first sentence "Oh, Shadow of Facundo..." to realize that you are in the dark territory of myth, not of the clean, sunny history classroom.
   
   This book, like many great books, escape the incarceration of genre, but if there is one thing it demands from the reader is a capacity for being amazed, for being swept away by the story and the writing itself.



3. There are very few primary sources one can find when studying Latin American revloutions, with Argentina being the subject here. This being a primary source, isn't one that should be taken for an overall look on the Argentina Revoultion. Sarmiento has a sort of bias that shouldn't be taken too seriously. It is hard to get really a good account of Juan Facundo Quiroga because he is such a vague figure in Argentinian history. This is probably the only elaborate interpretation of the figure. Sarmiento also has a sort of habit to go off on tangents on things that are totally irrelevant to the subject matter at hand.
   
   Domingo F. Sarmiento is of European descent and has a biased for "civilization" and defies everything that is "barbaric" as he puts it, which really is what the story is about, and his protest to Rosas one of the leaders of Argentina at the time this story was written who is also "barbaric". The author compares "civilizations" and "barbarism" and how the "barbaric" gauchos are a threat to society. Facundo is a gaucho and is interpreted by Sarmiento as a dicator who made is way to the top by hate and carelessness and is partially at fault for the state of "deterioration" that Argentina was presently in during mid-19th century Argentina.
   
   All criticism aside, one does get good descriptive imagery of the man that was Juan Facundo Quiroga. Due to the fact that this book was written on a sort of bias, it would be better if it was written under a more accurate scholarly account, but then again it is a novel and that is what makes it interesting. It is by no means a useful primary source.



4. It's difficult to classify "Facundo" written by Domingo Faustino Sarmiento (argentine thinker, politician and educator) in 1845: it is at the same time history, myth, essay, pamphelt and sociological discourse. It was published for first time as a newspaper serial in Chile where Sarmiento was in exile and written against Rosas'dictatorchip in Argentina. The text is influenced by the Enlightment and specially by the romanticism. Because of the romantic influence, it tells Facundo Quiroga's biography since for romantic'stream a "great man" (Facundo in this case) expresses an epoch. This book has the intention of solving an enigma: how independence's revolution in Argentina (1810) reached Rosas ' dictactorship (1835-1852) This drama, product of the revolution, was caused by the combination of 2 elements which shouldn't have been combined: the city, civilization's field, and the countryside, barbarism's field. The book can be read as the city and the countryside were the characters.

5 comments about Richard M. Nixon: A Life in Full.

1. This was a great read. I was thrilled to discover that Conrad wrote a fair and even-handed biography of the late President. (I enjoyed Nixon's memoirs, too, so lengthy tomes aren't a problem for me, as they might be for a few of the reviewers.) I liked the book's emphasis on Nixon's persistence and ability to remain on the political scene for so many years, despite media prejudice and pumped-up mobbings. Nixon had to perform on one of the most volatile stages of American history, and this book made it clear that he managed to stay on it, decade after decade.



2. Richard Nixon was one of the most influential man in the world, and also someone who was misunderstood



3. Conrad Black is not a typical historian or biographer. Indeed his approach and style are singular. Unlike "professional" historians and idelogues like Robert Dallek, Black does not have an ideological axe to grind. Although a professed conservative, Black's biography of FDR is the best I've read, utterly balanced in its approach to the man who so divided the nation before he saved the world from the darkness of fascism.
   
   At 1,059 pages, the book is too long. Yet, if I were editing it, I would be hard-pressed to figure out what to cut from the manuscript. Even so, only the dedicated student will make it all the way through or not skim in some places.
   
   Black does not flatter his subject. He sees Nixon as a man of some great strengths and some equally great weaknesses. Thirty-some years later, in fact, and reminded by Black's book, i56 is still mystifying that Nixon was so tone-deaf in his handling of the Watergate "scandal". Black makes a solid case that Watergate was a tempest in a teapot that, with the aid of left-wing journalists, venal Democrat politicians and intellectuals and pundits, was turned into a coup against a sitting President. Certainly nothing that Nixon did was any worse than what was done in the name of national security or just plain politics by Roosevet, Kennedy and Johnson. But Nixon had been hated by the left-wing for his anti-Communism since he first appeared on the political scene.
   
   Critical phrases such as "Nixon's duplicity acheived a new depth . . . " mark Black's narrative, leaving no doubt that Black sees all sides of Nixon.
   
   Nixon was a President of great historical significance. The fact that he was so endlessly attacked by the left-wing is proof, in a way, of his power. He also made mistakes, such as imposing price controls. He never gave up, though, successfully rehabilitating his image before his death.
   
   As he did with Roosevelt, Black has written a superb biography of another controversial, immensely talented, vastly misunderstood American President. Well worth reading, but the length of the book is daunting.
   
   Jerry



4. The moment I finished reading this book, the image of the late USA President came to me when he left office and waved to the crowd his last Good-bye. Nixon looked hesitant and undecided like a man relieved of an overwhelming burden. His Good-bye expressions were made indicating how far he had worn out of his Office; his eyes refused to meet the camera.
   Perhaps what is quite revealing is that Nixon policies and behaviors were formulated to keep pace with `Détente `. There has been a wave of publicity unparalleled in contemporary American foreign policies relating to the appointment of Henry Kissinger in September 1973. Never before has a President and a Secretary of State had such interest by Newsmen and Biographers alike. Both names were associated with secret channels notably in Vietnam, Arab/Israeli conflict, and of course - Detente. I can safely say that Nixon, in particular, was less a friend of the media until Watergate blew its hurdles in the face of the world and the legend `'impeachment" was then born. What followed invoked a cauldron of aggressive and sympathetic editorials. Hostile comments were destructive in character and reflected envy.
   I am convinced these 1000+ pages transpire feelings of persecution centered more upon the Office and less upon the Person whom many have loudly hated and secretly admired.
   Mr. Conrad Black could picture the late President of the United States of America at his best moments slouched back in his chair, his long legs stretched out above the table in the deceptively thoughtful pose caricaturists had made famous in their media.



5. I worked to help Richard Nixon get re-elected in 1972 because I thought he was a great president. I was a huge supporter of Nixon. Even up to the night he resigned, I thought he was getting railroaded. I was 23 at the time, but I'm a lot older now, and I see things more clearly, honestly, and objectively. That's one thing this book does not do--look at Nixon's life clearly, honestly, and objectively.
   
   I enjoyed the first half of the book, as I thought it was about time someone gave Richard Nixon a break and be truthful and fair to him. The writer seemed to be doing that, and although I was glad he was giving Nixon a lot of credit and understanding for the first half of his life, as the book continued I began questioning the author's use of personal comments and judgments as becoming less about history and more about punditry. By the time the book reached the frenetic beginnings of Nixon's second term, it had stopped being a historical narrative and became instead a very partisan editorial on Nixon's behalf. The author took on the role of a Nixon apologist. (One can understand why the conservative reviewers have praised it so much.) I am a student of Watergate; I've read dozens of books and articles, and watched countless interviews about it and its participants. I quickly came to realize that Black left out a lot of unflattering Nixon actions, glossed over others, minimized Nixon's criminal behavior, and routinely re-wrote historical facts. Black described those people who disagreed with and were willing to testify against Nixon, and those public servants who acted with honor and integrity, as "rats," "weasels," "turncoats," and "liars" over and over again. I can't imagine T.H. White, Edmund Morris, William Manchester, Dumas Malone, Stephen E. Ambrose, or David McCullough injecting such unprofessional personal indignities in one of their wonderful--and objective--biographies. As the book progressed, Black's writing style became more reminiscent of Kitty Kelly's gossipy tomes about Frank Sinatra and the Royal Family than of a professional historian writing what could have been the seminal book on Nixon.
   
   Black repeatedly stated some transgression of Nixon's only to point out that other presidents were worse in this particular violation of law or lapse of ethical behavior. Black sounds very much like a 21st century authoritarian when he routinely, even excessively stated "it's okay if Nixon did it because the other guys did it worse." Black regularly portrayed FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, and even Nixon's mentor, Eisenhower as having less integrity than Nixon. It didn't work when Nixon tried to do that 35 years ago, and it didn't work in the book either.
   
   "Richard M. Nixon, a Life in Full" hardly qualifies as an objective or truly scholarly biography although it could have been. I could have overlooked the occasional glossing over of and bending of the truth as poor reporting, but Black was blatant in his omissions and measurably flawed in his translations of events. By the time the book came to an end, I realized that this was a Nixon I didn't know, and I know an lot about Richard Nixon--much of it good, and some of it not so good. I should have read about the author's credentials before I read the book instead of during the middle of the reading when I began to suspect that it was more than just a biography. Once I realized Conrad Black was connected to the Nixon Library, I understood that this book was just a re-writing of history: a deconstruction of the facts and an attempt to paint a different picture of an undoubtedly important but flawed life.)
   
   Black is a talented writer and a relatively thorough researcher. What he is not is a praiseworthy historian. I would not say don't read this book, but I would say be aware you are not getting an objective look at an interesting life and otherwise effective president. I did enjoy the book to some measure because it was exciting to relive that period in history, but I did get frustrated reading accounts of situations that I knew were just not true. I don't mean to sound crass, but reading this book is like reading a book about L. Ron Hubbard that was written by one of his followers, and then expecting it to be an objective look at Scientology. In spite of Black's efforts, "Richard M. Nixon: A Life in Full" because of its overt lack of objectivity, will be soon relegated to the bottom shelf of dusty libraries rather than be viewed as an important addition to the Nixon canon of political thought.
   ---------------------
   LATE ADDITION: The following was taken from a conservative publication's Conrad Black bio page: "Conrad Black, an erstwhile media mogul, closely connected to rightist political factions in the United States, was convicted in July 2007 for defrauding shareholders of his Hollinger International newspaper empire out of millions of dollars. He was sentenced to 6.5 years in prison in December 2007 for his conviction on three counts of fraud and one count of obstruction of justice (Associated Press, December 10, 2007).
   ---------------------
   I guess that speaks to Mr. Black's objectivity better than I can. It's all the more reason to be suspicious of the content of the Nixon book. After all, with his conviction for obstruction of justice he has much in common with the Nixon White House.

5 comments about The Dark Side of Camelot.

1. Given the obvious falsehood of the Clinton era nonsense that personal morality is irrelevant to the public figure, we now need to start in on the fools who, with hubris and no qualms about bald-faced lying to the American public, we need to start revising our views of the men REALLY responsible for mutilating the constitution in favor of ego and a misguided sense that they knew better than the founding fathers, instead of just second tier types like JFK, academicians should start on the (attempted) court packing, congenital liar, and true war monger F.D.R (or the brain dead, subservient socialist mouthpiece Woodrow Wilson, and his Edgar Bergan, Col. House.) One chapter on what could have happened if F.D.R had died before replacing Socialist Henry Wallace during his last, fourth,ego-trip term-perhaps Henry Dexter White as Secretary of State and Alger Hiss as Secretary of Defense should make it obvious what a dangerous, naive fool F.D.R was. It COULD have been even worse than that, instead of "just" knowing every secret communication out of F.D.R's White House sieve, Stalin could have actually RUN the damn thing personally. Given what F.D.R gave Stalin at Yalta, what would Wallace have given him? All of Western Europe, too, or just Germany,France and England?



2. Seymour Hersh, the man according to whom we have to thank for the Church Commission (which led to idiotic government intelligence "reforms" that, in turn, contributed to the intelligence failures that permitted 9-11), presents his best shot in this book at smearing the Kennedy clan. John especially, but also Joe and even to a certain extent Bobby. In most of the book, he succeeds in this task only to the extent we can trust mobsters, convicted felons, former madams, self-professed ex-lovers, hustlers, disgruntled employees and bankrupt, disbarred attorneys to tell us the truth.
   
   However, Mr. Hersh does present some very compelling testimonies from JFK's secret service agents, who describe JFK's White House adolescent hijinks in rhyparographic detail. Believe me, that section alone (pp 226-246) is enough to take the shine off Camelot -- permanently.
   
   Hersh is perplexing. He has impeccable anti-American and Democratic Party credentials, yet he savages JFK, a fellow Democrat, in a way that no one had done before, or in the eleven years since the book was published. Why? I can only conclude that Hersh's anger stems from his view that JFK was responsible for Vietnam. Hersh addresses Vietnam in the last two chapters of the book, and although these chapters are better sourced than some of the more salacious sections, the chapters seem disjointed, meandering, and tied together only by rage towards JFK.



3. Normally I would not review an 11-year-old book, but as it presents a distorted view of JFK to say the least, and is still in print in 2008, here goes.
   
   Mr. Hersh has obliged his corporate and government sponsors with a double-barreled hit. First, he produced a best-seller, and second, he produced a JFK biography sure to please both the corporates and their government cronies.
   
   Mr. Hersh reveals JFK's sexual escapades in great length and detail. I estimate that at least 25% of the book is spent on this topic. This is fair enough, since JFK apparently spent the same percentage of his time pursuing sexual adventures. Mr. Hersh also presents much evidence backing claims of JFK's health problems, including frequent doses of various medications that kept him going. The early chapters tell some interesting stories about JFK's father, Joseph, and other family members including JFK's maternal grandfather, John F. "Honey Fitz" Fitzgerald.
   
   Mr. Hersh presents some interesting insights into crucial moments in JFK's presidency. The Bay of Pigs, the Berlin crisis, the Cuba missile crisis, plots to assassinate Fidel Castro, and the escalation of US involvement in Vietnam are dealt with in detail. Mr. Hersh contradicts accounts of these events written by close Kennedy associates, Ted Sorensen in particular. Mr. Hersh reveals a secretive, inexperienced, power-hungry and vindictive President who trusted only one man other than himself, his brother Robert. There does seem to be some truth to Hersh's contradictory accounts, but there also seems to be an underlying motivation behind this book, and this is the promotion of an official version of JFK and his presidency that focuses on JFK's personal weaknesses, presents CIA in a favorable light, and either lies about important events, or omits them entirely.
   
   Did you know, for example, that the Bay of Pigs fiasco was entirely JFK's fault? Did you know that JFK and RFK micro-managed plots involving the Mafia to kill Castro, and that the Vietnam War is JFK's legacy, not something he would have ended? With that knowledge, surely you should also learn about JFK's firing of Allan Dulles (later appointed to the Warren Commission), General Cabell and Richard Bissell? Sorry, that's not in the official story. Furthermore, since JFK was obviously so much at odds with CIA, surely you should read about JFK's threats to disband CIA? Sorry again.
   
   I quote from the "Author's Note" at the beginning of the book:
   
   "It [this book] tells of otherwise strong and self-reliant men and women
   who were awed and seduced by Kennedy's magnetism, and who competed with
   one another to please the most charismatic leader in our nation's history.
   Many are still blinded today.
   
   In writing this book, my hope is that I have been able to help the nation
   reclaim some of its history."
   
   Some very select and well chosen bits of its history, perhaps, but nothing that really matters, like who was responsible for JFK's assassination. Mr. Hersh is not one to talk about being "blinded", as he still professes to believe the official Lee Harvey Oswald "lone nut assassin" myth. Among the few remaining adherents to the myth are mainstream corporate media types like Mr. Hersh, anyone in government, and current and former intelligence agency employees who don't want to lose their security clearances or be sentenced to "dine alone". John Loftus and Tennent H. "Pete" Bagley are two examples of the latter.
   
   Despite this best-selling book and others written with the same intent, most of the public continue to admire JFK despite knowing that he was a highly flawed human being. Most people also disbelieve the official lone-nut assassin myths about JFK and RFK. To remove the spell of Mr. Hersh's quote above, I'll close with a quote from St. John Hunt (source: a Rolling Stone article you can easily find), author of "The Last Confessions of E. Howard Hunt":
   
   "Actually, there were probably dozens of plots to kill Kennedy, because everybody hated Kennedy but the public."
   
   Edit June 22, 2008: There is a new book that anyone with an interest in JFK should read: JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters. In particular, it puts paid to Hersh's contention that Vietnam must be considered as part of the Kennedy legacy.



4. Mr. Hersh paints a convincing picture of JFK as an extremely hard working, ambitious man who was party to a myriad of addictions including painkillers and sex. I actually found the early sections of the book which deal primarily with his father Joe Kennedy to be insightful into the kind of environment he grew up in and undoubtably led to his immoral nature. Where Hersh is on weaker ground is when he tries to psychoanalyze JFK. He attempts to connect all of Kennedy's personal issues to decisions made about international politics, a hazardous course. I think Hersh was too close to Kennedy and his sense of profound disappointment as well as his breathy, rumormonger style of writing sometimes hurts his credibility which is unforunate because I think the author wrote a thought provoking, intelligent book



5. Legend and hero are the words most of us learn in school to apply to John F. Kennedy. We usually tend to see him only in his media and photographic image, but Seymour Hersh portrays him here as being a man with an abundant set of flaws and characteristics. Most likely, although I grant that not everything the author says can be definitively proven, Hersh's depiction of JFK is far closer to that of the real person than the one we see gazing down upon us in posters. Of course, The Dark Side of Camelot is about a whole lot more than the 35th President. We find out all manner of fact and rumor concerning his grandfather, Honey Fitz, his father, and the rest of his family; not to mention Richard Nixon and an array of women who are too numerous to name here. Kennedy was the quintessential high status male, and, intrinsic to his status, were a great many politically incorrect features that are fun to read about (while still being informative in regards to the leader and his times).

5 comments about The Jim Morrison Scrapbook.

1. I am a big fan of the Doors, and Jim Morrison (went to his grave in Pere La Chaise twice) and I had long been looking for a coffee table book on Jim that was both interesting to look at and a fine read, too. This pop-up book has pockets and slides of letters, photos and mementos so well reproduced they look like originals; it's a must-have for anyone who loves arts and crafts and The Doors! Enjoy it!!



2. The Jim Morrison Scrapbook *****
   
   With the abundance of material that has been released and re-released and alternately released from the Jim Morrison estate in the past decade very little of it has been any good. It is mostly things that had already been released on one thing or another deeming it pointless to own, but not The Jim Morrison Scrapbook. Oh-no! This is phenomenal and a must have for Doors-geeks like myself. This shows sides of Morrison rarely or never shown.
   
   Chronicling the genius from birth, poet, songwriter, lover, performer, and death. This is a book explaining all of those things about the man, but with actually tangible documents like his will, report cards, letters, his handwritten lyrics, rare seen photos; some of which have never been released to the mass public.
   
   The Jim Morrison Scrapbook is the first in a series of "scrapbooks" being released of famous legends. As of right now a Bob Dylan, and John Lennon version is also available. This is essential for all rock fans! A must read!



3. I am a devoted Jim Morrison/Doors fan but wasn't aware of this book until my nephew mentioned it to me while we were at a Ozzie/Rob Zombie concert. I promised to give it to him for his birthday. I bought it from Amazon and before I wrapped it I spent at least two hours going through it. This is the most well-conceived, cohesive, unbelievably put-together book I have ever seen. I could not stop going through it and taking all the papers out of their pockets and reading Jim Morrison's letters to his mother, report cards, letters to Jim from his pastor, teachers, etc. Every insert looks like the original document. I cannot say enough good things about this book. I gushed over it so much I hope my kids get the hint and give it to me for Mother's Day!



4. Excellent collector's edition book for any Jim Morrison/The Doors fan. Full of never before published pictures, handwritten lyrics and letters by Jim Morrison. A must buy for any Doors fan.



5. My husband loved this book and all it has to offer. This is for a true fan of The Doors and collectors.

5 comments about Careless Love: The Unmaking of Elvis Presley.

1. I have reviewed this book and must say that although Peter is a fantastic researcher the work comes up very short and has sunken to the level of Alana Nash. I am at the point where it is almost better to only read from people that were actually around Elvis like Joe Esposito or Jerry Schilling. Read what they write and you cannot go wrong. From Joe Esposito Remember Elvis, Elvis Straight Up and the Celebrate Elvis series with Daniel Lombardy. Jerry Schilling his book Me and a guy. If you want a great Guralnick book aquire Elvis Day by Day pound for pound the best in terms of an Elvis dictionary.



2. I first read the Guralnick books on Elvis about four years ago (2004) when I was just ready to explore the Elvis World. I'm second-generation (about Lisa Marie's age) but missed all the hoopla, and my parents didn't say much. So when I decided to "research" Elvis for myself, I searched the Amazon.com reviews for guidance.
   
   I have to agree with the heavy, authoritative (but not authoritarian) reviews of other Elvis fans who felt Guralnick's work was "comprehensive and accurate." Once I read the Guralnick books, I felt -- not disillusioned -- but bludgeoned with information. Reading Guralnick's book, the reader almost has no choice but to come out not liking Elvis, not only personally but musically or artistically. It was a bitter pill; I had really liked Elvis before reading Guralnick's work.
   
   Four years later, while I'm still "researching" Elvis, what I have found is most of Guralnick's work is actually a compendium, a "Reader's Digest" if you will (a Brittanica), of nearly all major Elvis publications up to that time. In short, Guralnick's work wasn't so much the decisive definitor of Elvis' composite work, but rather the encyclopedia of combined published information. I hasten to point out that Guralnick was not deceptive in any way, but fans and interested persons may have made the mistake of thinking because Guralnick had the "most" to say about Elvis (in two large books) he may have been the most accurate or comprehensive, and that simply isn't true.
   
   As a fan, and someone who has since come to truly appreciate Elvis in all his humanity, my advice for those who want to know Elvis is to BEGIN with Guralnick, as a map, then read the books Guralnick quoted from (and attributed) and then read the little offbeat books written by people claiming to know Elvis. (Use your discernment to know which may have merit and which are entirely fictitious.) Elvis wouldn't want one author to be the judge of his life.
   
   Guralnick did a great service by collecting and basically annotating the collected written works regarding Elvis up to that point, but I think if you really read between the lines, Guralnick himself does not claim to be an expert, nor does he really draw a conclusion. Guralnick's great service is he opened a door, but he does not claim to define the beginning or end of Elvis Presley. That choice -- like the music -- is up to the individual to decide for him or herself. In short, start with Guralnick, but do not end with him. I think he himself would agree.



3. Extremely revealing portrait that makes clear that Elvis became a drug addict even before he went into the Army in 1958. This bio leaves out nothing, including all the dreary and the tawdry as well as the musical genius. While Jerry Lee Lewis lost his career for dallying with his 13-year-old cousin, Elvis got clean away with dating a 14-year-old Priscilla. All the bizarre details are here. Guralnick does it again. A must read for anyone who wants to know the story of Elvis.



4. This second volume, along with the first -- Last Train to Memphis -- are riviting. One of the absolute best biographies I have ever read. A journey through the life, from beginning to end, of one of the world's great entertainers and personalities. Highly recommend.



5. This book is a detailed account of the second half of Elvis Presley's life. Peter Guralnick has painted a vivid portrait of the man whose life should have been magnificent, but instead was so terribly sad.
   
   After reading Guralnick's first volume (Last Train To Memphis), I ran out immediately to buy this one. While I did devour it, it's a bitter pill to swallow. Many nights, I closed the book and then lay awake, thinking, or trying to stop thinking about Elvis. Why did a life with such promise turn out this way? Why did a man who should have been on top of the world, end up so low? Enormous fame and the death of his mother were major contributing factors. Drugs, prescription and otherwise, killed his spirit, his talent, his health and his relationships. And he was exploited by many, especially Col. Tom Parker who trotted him out on tour, when he should have been hospitalized and certainly long-retired.
   
   When I finished the book, I thought, "Did I really want to know all this about him?" Do you? It's your call. I do now understand many things I never did before. And I will not be so quick to idolize, judge or envy anyone unless I've walked a mile in their shoes.

5 comments about Life on the Mississippi (Signet Classics).

1. Every time I look at a river, I think of Mark Twain and his adventures on the Mississippi. His writing, always funny and warm, tells us first of the history and stories of his beloved river, and then of his experiences learning the steamboat trade. I found his description of being a steamboat student very similar to being a medical student: two-hundred years later and in completely different trades, route memorization and gradual responsibility for people's lives still have much in common. This book made me want to travel the Mississippi, not as it stands today but as it appeared to Twain in his youth. I feel the same way about Gabriel Garcia Marquez and his Magdalena river. I think it is amazing how these inspired authors can make me love a river I have never seen.



2. In Life on the Mississippi the steamboat is depicted as the workhorse of Midwest expansion. Prior to the advent of the railroad efficient inland transportation was confined to waterways and the Mississippi river basin , with "about 1,250,000 square miles," was the "Body of the Nation." (Twain, preface) Mark Twain fulfills his boyhood dream of becoming a river boat pilot and, returning some twenty-one years later, writes of his youthful experiences and later observations
   
   The steamboat was a technological phenomena. The vehicle that evolved to meet the unique demands of this particular environment was a special design of river boat. In his own inimical style Mark Twain captures both the excitement of the riverboat's arrival and describes its essential components:
   
   "She is long and sharp and trim and pretty; she has two tall, fancy-topped chimneys, with a gilded device of some kind swung between them; a fanciful pilothouse, all glass and "gingerbread," perched on top of the "texas" deck behind them; the paddle-boxes are gorgeous with a picture or with gilded rays above the boat's name; the boiler deck; the hurricane deck, and the texas deck are fenced and ornamented with clean white railings; there is a flag gallantly flying from the jack-staff; the furnace doors are open and the fires glaring bravely; the upper decks are black with passengers; the captain stands by the big bell calm, imposing, the envy of all; great volumes of the blackest smoke are rolling and tumbling out of the chimneys...the crew are grouped on the forecastle; the broad stage is run far out over the port bow, and an envied deck hand stands picturesquely on the end of it with a coil of rope in his hand; the pent steam is screaming through the gauge cocks; the captain lifts his hand, a bell rings, the wheels stop; then turn, back, churning the water to foam, and the steamer is at rest." (27)
   
   Within a period of ten minutes the boat has been offloaded, loaded and departed. It is an efficiency of system and design ideally suited to its unique purposes, but as the Civil War looms its days are numbered. By then the steamboat had already evolved to it most advanced state and the steam locomotive has become the dominant form of transportation
   
   As a literary piece by a "brilliant travel writer and incomparable humorist" (Kaplan, in Twain, xvii) Life on the Mississippi earned its accolades, but, as a window into a period of time, one can extract an eyewitnesses truth. In Life on the Mississippi, Mark Twain describes the latter period of the steamboat's heyday dramatically cut short. Wartime technology did not improve the riverboat other than to convert it into an instrument of war. What doomed the steamboat to oblivion was the advent of the steam locomotive and the railroads. The steamboat well served the purposes of river life in its time but was eclipsed by the railroad.
   
   That the steamboat was functional is indisputable, but if form determines function, it was a perfect adaptation of a water craft in conformity with purpose and contemporary technology. Combined with light weight and flexible wood construction the steamboat evolved into a shallow draft, wide beamed, low freeboard hull propelled by stern or side paddle wheels. The overall size of a steamboat was a compromise between maneuverability and economy. Power plant, fuel, cargo and passengers were accommodated within a superstructure rising above the hull. Bulk items, machinery, deck hands and low fare passengers were located on the main deck; superior public and private accommodations at higher fares were on the upper decks. Here travelers could enjoy incomparable luxury.
   
   High on top of all was the pilothouse. River pilots, by necessity of their position earned through their experience and knowledge of the river, had the best view. By status, they were the pinnacle of river hierarchy. Mark Twain, on his 1882 return to the river, quaintly asks of a fellow passenger he suspects of being a river pilot: "Have you ever traveled with a panorama." The passenger responds, "I have formerly served in that capacity. [Twain's] suspicion was confirmed." (315) Only higher than the pilothouse were the tall stacks made so for the purpose of disgorging noxious black smoke and dangerous smoldering ash to the wind.
   
   All components contributed to functionality, but perhaps the "stage" or ramp which bridged the gap between the boat and shore, contributed most to its versatility. It enabled the boat to be hailed from landings along the shore without the aid of a dock. As an apprentice, Mark Twain is left alone on the bridge for the first time by his mentor. His initial proud serenity is broken by a sudden awareness that the boat is heading for imminent impact with a "bluff reef." His panicked reaction throws the ship into reverse, but he is saved by the return of the pilot who calmly restores order and chastises him. "When you have a hail, my boy, you ought to tap the big bell three times before you land, so the engineers can get ready." (53) The "bluff reef" was actually a wind reef (from the effect of wind on the surface) and they sailed uneventfully through it.
   
   The romance of the steamboat era is tarnished by frequent tragedy. Mark Twain loses his brother Henry, a cabin boy on the Pennsylvania, who died when the ship's boilers explode in June 1858. The hazards of operating year round and during night and day, plus the varying river conditions contributed to mistakes of judgment and probably just bad luck too! The pilot may have been king, but he was still human and suffered from the human faults of vain glory, unrealistic confidence, ego, and infallibility.
   
   When he returns to the river in 1882 after an absence of twenty-one years, Mark Twain notes the changes that have occurred on the river. There are very few ships left in operation. Passenger travel is limited in frequency and destinations. The romance he once knew is gone, but a new one is beginning, the romance of the rails.
   
   Today we know that the railroad too would have its heyday and, in time, its romance would also wane. But has the romance of the steamboat and rail eras disappeared? Today you can take cruises on Mississippi riverboats and luxury train trips across the continent. The difference now is that trips are for novelty and not necessity. The romance only comes from the remembrance of a time past and not the needs of the present.



3. This is the book that Mark Twain himself thought to be his greatest. It is basically a memoir in two parts of his life spent on the river with historical sketches, statistics, and other matters thrown in.
   
   The first part of the book tells of Twain's early years as a riverboat pilot. He talks about being a cub pilot, about learning about the intricacies of the river and the difficulties of navigating it, and about his mentor Horace Bixby. Twain's love of the river and his pride in "mastering" it are made obvious in these chapters.
   
   The second part recounts Twain's return to the river in 1882, mainly to "see it again" in preparation of writing this book. Starting in St. Louis, he first goes south through Baton Rouge to New Orleans. He spends a bit of time there and describes life as he sees it in the city (there's a funny chapter regarding the above-ground cemeteries and an argument about cremation). Then he heads north on the steamboat City of Baton Rouge, piloted by his old mentor Horace Bixby. He stops off in Hannibal for three days, just enough time to see how much the town and some old acquaintances have changed, and then continues all the way to St. Paul, Minnesota.
   
   Twain's humor, as he recounts conversations with people, sights seen, reminiscences dredged up, and a myriad of other matters that fill the book, is always evident. It's one of the great books on the mighty river, and whether you are a lover of the works of Mark Twain or interested in the Mississippi River during the time period just before and after the Civil War, you will enjoy this book.



4. I read this recently after having kept a copy around for years; I now wish I had read it years ago. It is witty, observant, and a wonderful slice of American history; the
   now-vanished steamboat culture comes alive like nowhere
   else. However, the best part is the contrast between the author's confident early youthful years and the much later, postwar years of bittersweet reminiscence and regret for what has passed, never to return. A wonderful book - I simply cannot praise it highly enough.



5. Let me guess: your total exposure to Mark Twain came in high school, when you were forced to read about the antics of Huck Finn or Tom Sawyer, right? Well, now that you've reached adulthood, you should make time to read _Life on the Mississippi_. It's mandatory reading if you live in a state that borders the great river, anywhere from Minnesota down to Louisiana. It's mandatory reading if you have come to that point in life when you can suddenly appreciate American history and post-Civil War stories written by someone who lived through that time.

   Writing in the first half of the 1870s, Twain retraces the steps of his youth: the watery highway he knew when he trained to be a riverboat pilot nearly 20 years earlier. He speaks of how life _was_ along the river, and what life _became_. It's almost a "you can't go home again" experience for him, while the reader gets the benefit of discovering both time periods.

   I have two favorite parts that I share with others. Chapter IX includes a wonderful dissertation about how learning the navigational intricacies of the river caused Twain to lose the ability to see its natural beauty. And Chapter XLV includes an assessment of how the people of the North and the South reacted differently to the war experience. If I were a social studies teacher, I'd use that last passage in a unit on the reconstruction period. So put this title on your vacation reading list, and don't fret: the chapters are short and are many -- 60! -- but you can stop at any time, and the words go by fast. _Life on the Mississippi_ should make you forget all about any Twain trauma and report-writing you may have suffered as a teenager. [This reviewer was an Illinois resident when these comments were written.]

5 comments about Patton: A Genius for War.

1. I've been facinated by history since grade school and just fell in love with this book. Patton was an amazing character and one of those rare individuals that only comes along every hundred years or so.
   
   This book is very long, but gives as complete a biographical picture of Gen Patton as possible. It details his entire life, from childhood through WW1 and WW2 all the way until his untimely death. Sadly his career was constantly derailed by lesser gifted generals like Ike or Bradley. If you are a history buff or Patton fan, then this book is for you.



2. I had never read anything regarding General Patton, but after having watched the movie "Patton" again, I went to find the best biography of Patton available. I read many of them, but BY FAR, this is the best available. A work of biographical art: reveals the humanity of Patton the warrior, and reviews his place in history without prejudice.
   
   Sincerely recommended to everyone who wishes to read an excellent biography of General George S. Patton.



3. This is by far the most comprehensive and enjoyable biography I've read on General Patton. Mr. D'Este has painstakingly recorded the entire life of one of the greatest battlefield commanders in history. As the New York Times Review states "...he neither damns nor beautifies his subject". There's no better way to sum up this work. It's brilliant and fair. I'm looking forward to the author's new book on Winston Churchill that should be arriving this year.



4. I for one, certainly do not agree with Alistair Horne's phrase,"Revisionism at best" with regards to this book.
   As mentioned by earlier reviewers, Carlos D'Estes book traces the Patton family history to soldiers in earlier times. That General Patton was influenced by these family heroes is without doubt. In fact, it explains a lot about the man's sense of destiny, responsibility, and continual need to excel at whatever he attempted.
   More than a quick sketch of a complex man, this is a biography worth reading and studying.
   Patton was one of his kind.
   An invaluable book to anyone seeking to understand Patton on and off the battlefield.
   Well written, I couldn't put it down.



5. Patton is often described as "controversial". To those who have never fought in war, or perhaps even just engaged in competitive sports, or who otherwise have only a sort of normal, everyday idea about how people ought to act, I suppose he is: Arrogant, sometimes outwardly cruel, demanding, competitive, a taskmaster, single-minded, agressive, angry, all the rest. I've never fought in war, but I've played my share of competitive sports (a paltry parallel, but the best I can do). In sports, everyone (if they're lucky) had a coach like this somewhere along the way, and they most likely took more lessons away from that man or woman than all the colorless middle-of-the-roaders combined. They most likely achieved things under that person's direction that they didn't know they had the capacity to do. They most likely recall details about that person many years later, after they've forgotten most of the others. When the old team-mates get together, that's who most of the stories are about (many told as being funny, now - not so at the time).
   
   To me, that's Patton: An American original who just barely escaped being a bombastic buffoon. He avoided that fate and scaled the heights of history because he was a born leader of men - one who either broke them (rarely), or got the best out of them (much more often); because he knew his business inside-out; because he worked at it day and night; and most of all, because finally, he WON.
   
   I think that this intensely personal essence is what is most completely captured in this book. It fills in many of the overlooked or understated details from the well-known George C. Scott movie, and adds much new material besides. An excellent book, worthy not only as a war biography, but as a study of what it honestly takes to do REALLY well at any endeavor in life.

5 comments about Royal Babylon: The Alarming History of European Royalty.

1. Be aware that Karl Shaw seems to have a very strong anti-royalist agenda, which he makes fairly clear from the first page to the last. Every time he says anything good about one of his subjects, he makes sure to overbalance it with several bad things. In fact, his relentlessly downbeat portrayals of several royals are very much at odds with those of other recent writers in the field (for example, compare and contrast Shaw's slashing attacks on Russian Czarinas Elizabeth and Catherine the Great with Eleanor Herman's much more sympathetic and nuanced portraits in her recent "Sex with the Queen"). Shaw seems bent on hammering home his theory that royals are actually _worse_ than just about everyone else, physically, mentally, medically, morally, socially. One might therefore expect him to close the book with an all-encompassing blast against the institution of monarchy, but instead, he basically wimps out with a limp few paragraphs about how the mystique of royalty still captivates people.
   
   Short version: entertaining nasty gossip, but you need to go elsewhere to get really fair portrayals of the people written about here.



2. I don't know why I bought this book--hoping to be entertained and informed I guess. It was an absolute waste of time and money. The book content was boring and repetitive. The author kept saying the same thing over and over. I couldn't finish it because it was such a dull read. I have read other babylon books and have found them interesting. This one, however, was not. I read the reviews before I bought it, but I should have passed on this book.



3. I read this excellent book, here in Brazil.This book is very fun.Kings, queens are the focus of this excellent book, but counts, barons, lords and even artists are also present.
   This very fun book tells about three centuries of madness, debautchery, drug adiction, sex, adultery, gays, lesbians,etc. among kings, queens, lords, ladies, nobles in Europe.
   If you want to read history and to laugh, this book is an excellent choice.As is book concludes and also shows that monarchy can be laughable, but as an institution it is far from dead worldwide.



4. ...I found it at my local library. It's like reading news from National Enquirer! The author sounded like a cheesy tour guide:
   * Louis XVI was mistakenly referred to as Louis XIV's great-grandson
   * Louis XIV's sister-in-law was an English princess, somehow the author decided to move her birth place to Austria
   * Perhaps the author felt sorry for Louis XV, an only child orphaned at age two, so he made Louise de la Valliere, the well-known mistress of Louis XIV who left Versailles to become a Carmelite nun, his sister
   ...there are just too many obvious and laughable errors, makes you wonder if the author has ever heard of the word 'Google'!



5. This book was not at all what I had expected. What I thought I purchased was a book with amusing anecdotes about European royalty. What I ended up buying was a book filled with gossip, rumors, and just plain old trash. I could not even bring myself to finish it. Why taint the memory of anyone who is not alive to defend themselves? What ever happened to respect for the dead?
   
   This book is not worth the paper that it is printed on. Period.