5 comments about King of the World: Muhammed Ali and the Rise of an American Hero.

1. When boxing mattered, boxers were more than pugilists trying to break each other's wills; they were symbols that attracted the attention and aspirations of the masses. Like gladiators in Rome, these courageous men allow us to project our hopes, fears, and insecurities.
   
   David Remnick tells the story of Cassius Clay's growth from a skinny, mercurial, but morally upright boy, to a hero and symbol of resistance and hope for millions of anti-establishment figures. Ali captivated the hearts and minds of fans unlike any athlete before or since. Remnick does a beautiful job of explaining why and how this happened. No matter how dominate Michael Jordan was, or Tiger Woods is, neither absorb our emotions like the sponge known as Muhammed Ali.
   
   His grace, speed, and power thrilled, while his words, political stances, and humour enthralled. Everyone in America should learn the story of this hero. There is no better place than Remnick's book to do so. Highly recommended.



2. It is, as many have said, one of the great sports biographies of all time -- but it's also one of the great history narratives of all time. It's not just Muhammmad Ali profiled here, but the trio of heavyweights who dominated headlines in the early 1960s: also Floyd Patterson and Sonny Liston. And in many ways, those two are more fascinating because, before I read "King of the World," they weren't accompanied by the same pre-fight hype. Here's Liston, a dangerous and sullen felon who's achingly lonely; there's Patterson, a great athlete but at the same time so thoughtful and intelligent he was plagued by a boxer's worst enemy, self-doubt.
   
   And that's not to say anything of the portrait of the time, of Black Muslims, Malcolm X, Norman Mailer, the media, John F. Kennedy... Trust me, even a non-sports fan will be mesmerized.



3. Bertz / Randall
   
   "Almighty god was with me! I want everybody to bear witness! I am the greatest! I shook up the world! I am the greatest thing that ever lived! I don't have a mark on my face, and I just upset Sonny Liston, and I just turned twenty-two years old. I must be the greatest! I showed the world! I
   talk to god every day! I am the king of the world!" shouts Cassius Clay (Muhammad Ali) to the sporting press, after defeating Sonny Liston in 1964. This statement enraged boxing fans all over the world. Here was a twenty-two year old nobody with a big mouth, and he just defeated Sonny Liston. At the time, Liston was viewed as invincible. Liston was an experienced fighter who was known for defeating his opponents in two rounds or less. Not only did he lose the heavyweight championship to Ali, but he quit without being knocked down once. This declared Ali the king of controversy. "King of the World" by David Remnick is the story of the rise and fall of Muhammad Ali. Remnick does a fantastic job of showing us the different sides of racism. He focuses greatly on Ali's devotion to the Nation of Islam. The book showed many similarities between the Nation of Islam and the Klu Klux Klan. Remnick explained that both the Nation and the Klan were for segregation and that they both use methods of violence and terror to enforce their beliefs. After reading this book, I realized that the similarities are uncanny. Remnick's numerous references to these similarities proved to me that Remnick is a non-violent integrationist. I believe that one of the main points of the book is that segregation is wrong. The book greatly describes how the Nation of Islam had interfered with Muhammad Ali's personal life. For example, Remnick noted Ali's marriage to Sonji. He went into great detail how strong Ali's love was for Sonji, but he couldn't accept her inability to conform to his
   religion. This became a problem for them and they eventually got a divorce. Remnick also noted the emotional distance between Ali and his father being caused by his decision to join the Nation of Islam. Remnick goes even further in describing the way Ali turned his back on his best friend Malcolm X. He also wanted to let the reader know that religion should never get in the way of your personal life. The book said that the only thing in Ali's life that Ali regrets is "his cruel and hasty rejection of Malcolm." Now days, Ali looks back at Malcolm X with great respect. The main point Remnick was trying to communicate with his audience was that Ali stood up for what he believed in. Not only in the boxing ring but, also with his religious and political beliefs. In 1966, Muhammad Ali refused to be drafted to fight the war in Vietnam. The government threatened to take away his heavyweight championship and throw him into a federal prison for the next five years. Ali still refused. When they asked him why he refused to fight in the Vietnam war, he replied "I ain't got no quarrel with them Viet Cong." Eldridge Cleaver described Ali as a "genuine revolutionary" and the "first `free' black champion to confront white America." Writer, Jill Nelson, called Ali's refusal of the draft a "supreme act of defiance." However, not everyone supported Ali's refusal of the draft. Conservative boxing fans
   called him an unpatriotic bum. They thought he was hiding behind his religion because he was lazy. Remnick took a much more liberal stance on the situation. The author seemed to support Ali's decision. For many years, Muhammad Ali would be both loved and hated by boxing fans of all races. Some people believe that Ali should not have been allowed to be exempt from the war because of his religion. Others looked at his exemption as an amazing defeat. The only thing anyone could agree on was his amazing abilities in the ring. In 1997, during the summer Olympics, Muhammad Ali was invited to light the Olympic torch. In my opinion, this proved Ali to be a very patriotic man. It proved that the world had never forgotten about Ali, and it
   never will. Lighting the Olympic torch is one of the highest honors any athlete could be given. "King of the World" was published in 1998. Exactly one year after he lit the Olympic torch. I think that's why this book was written when it was.
   The ignition of the 1997 Olympic torch was Ali's return to the public eye. And this book was written to honor him.



4. King of the World by David Remnick was one of the best books I've ever read. It is the true story of a champion and how he got there. I recommend anyone who likes stories about winning and glory, to read this book. If you also like reading about dudes getting smoked by a champ. Read this book.



5. For me, this book should have been titled "Death of One of My Heroes," which should become self-evident if you read this entire review. I believe the book is mostly accurate, and it is a well-written book.
   
   Remnick (the author), in my opinion, devotes too much time to Floyd Patterson and Sonny Liston. I also wish he had given more details about Ali as Ali got older and continued to box.
   
   Without question, Muhammad Ali, in his prime, was the greatest heavyweight fighter that has ever fought.
   
   "DEATH OF ONE OF MY HEROES": I did not realize how much Ali allowed the Nation of Islam (NOI) to influence him. Because he let the NOI influence him--yes, Ali DID have a choice!!!--Muhammad Ali: (1)lied about throwing his Olympic medal over a fence, (2)divorced his first wife, (3)broke off a friendship with Malcolm X, and (4)claimed to be a "minister" to avoid the draft. If you think the above describes a "hero," your definition of "hero" differs from mine.
   
   The book is good. Unfortunately, it killed one of my heroes.
   
   Buy it and read it. It is well worth the $$$.

5 comments about Winston Churchill: A Life (Penguin Lives).

1. I've never been a big fan of Winston Churchill, but after reading esteemed historian John Keegan's succinct biography of the man, I must say that I like AND respect him just a little bit more. Keegan himself confesses that he never thought much of old Winston until he stumbled across an old recording of his speeches (in NYC of all places) and realized what a gifted and inspirational orator and leader he was. He led his beloved Britain through her darkest hours in modern history, to a victory that was anything but assured. The people seemed to genuinely love him, and his sentiment was seemingly mutual.
   
   His years as Prime Minister during WW2 are the most well known, but Churchill led an amazingly full life, and his life of public service began way back in the late 19th century. Keegan describes how the young Winston, who did poorly in school, but had an undeniable intelligence, educated himself in politics, history and the English Classics. He was a romantic who was in love with his small island nation, and he dedicated his life to it. He was a brave soldier who served in numerous wars, including WW1, and while it would be fair to say he was a little too fond of war, he was no different from the average English officer of the time in this regard. In my eyes, his major fault was his hypocrisy. It just seems hard to reconcile his staunch imperialism with his constant talk about the virtues of freedom and liberty, and how Britain was the main proponent of such things. I would have liked for Keegan to address this point a bit more, but for such a short biography, I can let it slide.
   
   I was intrigued to learn that Churchill and IRA founder Michael Collins were on friendly terms and greatly admired each other. In fact, Churchill apparently had a "gut sympathy for fighters" which is why he had more respect for the Irish and Boers of South Africa than he did for Ghandi and his passive movement in India.
   
   Anyways, the book is extremely well written and entertaining, and I found it to be an overall excellent introduction to the life of one of the most important figures of the 20th century. 4.5 stars.



2. In 1895 when his father died, the sickly and indifferent 21-year-old military cadet Winston Churchill was flat broke, the legacy of a father who was a compulsively extravagent wastrel.
   
   Lord Randolph had been syphilitic since early youth. His mother, American-born Jennie Jerome whose father was a stockbroker and part-owner of 'The New York Times', was always attracted to men other than her husband or her sons (Winston, born 1874, and John Spencer, born 1880). In modern terms, they were trailer trash; in Phoenix, Sheriff Joe would have set aside a bunk in his tent-city jail for Winston.
   
   But, instead of slums, Winston was born and brought up in Blenheim Palace, built 1704-22 and still one of the great estates of England. American ex-presidents get palatial libraries as their memorials; the British rewarded their leaders with mansions and great estates. Blenheim Palace was one of the finest, far better than the estates later awarded to Nelson and Wellington.
   
   Perhaps it was the milieu of Blenheim Palace, but Churchill matured into a man absolutely convinced of the majesty of the British virtues of patriotism, loyalty, courage and fair play. For him, being British meant manliness, courage, tenacity and ultimate moral decency. It resonated with the vigorous American spirit of Theodore Roosevelt and the beauty of the strenuous life.
   
   President George Bush is reported to keep a bust of Churchill in the Oval Office; perhaps as a reminder of the complete contrast to himself. Bush ducked the Vietnam War in the Texas Country Club Air Guard; Churchill eagerly sought war, even though he hated it.
   
   Like Ulysses S. Grant, Churchill was a gifted wordsmith instead of a stumblebum. He free-lanced as a journalist while serving as a British officer and was sometimes earning 20 times his military pay. He never stopped learning, he wanted facts, order, reason. His mother sent him crates of books while he was on duty, and he devoured them all.
   
   Gen. Sir Herbert Kitchener described him as a "medal-hunter" and "self-advertiser" who was "super-precocious" and "insufferably bumptious." It was a good assessment. But, the public loved his books and even the Prince of Wales praised him. Whatever one thinks of Churchill, his career and successes are due to his own effort, intelligence, work and nerve.
   
   In brief, this is the story of a man who might well have ended up as a Soho souse, but instead became the greatest man of the past century. He did it through his own efforts, not because of Daddy's friends, money or ability to pull strings.
   
   This book defines the character of a great man.



3. Doubtless this biography is insufficient to really understand Churchill, but for those who are fairly ignorant of the man, it provides a useful quick sketch, and perhaps a jumping off point for further reading.



4. Let me make clear at the outset that I am no historian. Indeed, I wouldn't even qualify as an amateur historian. I am just your average 30-something fairly ignorant reader living a period of love for more or less recent history. Given this premise, I found this little book quite perfect for what I was looking for.
   
   This is a short, entertaining, and VERY well written biography of one of the greatest men in the 20th century. Because of the serious limits of my knowledge on the subject, I certainly cannot judge on the accuracy of the reports. However, to the best of my knowledge, the author is considered a reputable WWII historian. Indeed I liked this book so much that I also purchased his history of WWII. You can read this book in a day, and it will entertain you like a good novel, while also informing you as few novels would do.
   
   I would not pay too much attention to those reviewers that complain about this book not delving into Churchill's shortcomings as a man or as a politician. This is a very small book, about 190 small-format pages. You can hardly expect a comprehensive treatise from such a book. Also, I suspect that emphasizing Churchill's shortcomings would be like emphasizing Hitler's moments of tenderness with his lovers or with some German children during the Nazi regime. I mean, they surely happened, but it's not what you want to spend pages on, if you have only limited space to devote to the topic, isn't it? Besides, even if the Churchill that emerges from this book is certainly a truly great man, he does not emerge as a perfect great man. To me that was enough, and I am glad I read this book.
   
   I am grateful to the author, and I highly recommend it to anyone looking for a short, beautifully written biography of this man, to whom I certainly owe something...



5. Publisher's Weekly is entirely mistaken, in their comments above, in suggesting that Sir Winston Churchill once belonged to the Labour Party.
   
   He never did, of course.
   
   Churchill did, however, cross the floor to join the Liberal Party, often making common cause there with his Liberal ally David Lloyd George. He left the Liberals and returned to the Conservative Party (at first, as a "Constitutionalist") in the 1920's...
   
   Alan D. Hyde

5 comments about Under a Wing: A Memoir.

1. Reeve Lindbergh gives a most interesting overview of her very famous parents - her father with his eccentric behavior - her mother with her focus on life through the eyes of a true poet. Her parents would be proud of her writing skills and her father would probably have given her rare praise for this particular book as well as her others. Kathleen Wyatt



2. I really have enjoyed reading Reeve's memoir of her family. She has an amazing memory and can describe details of any past situation like it just happened minutes ago. I am always amazed by people who can do that (especially since I am not one of them). I come from a famous family too and enjoyed reading this book because I have always been fascinated at hearing about someone elses recollections of the past. Reeve's family experience isnt much different than my own family's and in some cases I laugh because some of the stories she has told (i.e. burping a fountain pen) is the same as my familys. My grandfather, who's stories are much the same as Charles Lindberg's, was also raised in Minnesota (St. Paul & Hallepin) so I was delighted to hear Reeve inform the reader of her father's recollections of this same period and place.
   
   Reeve writes her book in a way which makes you feel like your her best friend. She opens her soul to you and pours out all that makes her happy and sad. Although I am confident that this book will be considered one of the best memoirs of its time, I am sure that her family will be very glad she wrote it because she has unearthed the legends of her family's past and how it made them who they are. This is truly a great book...



3. What I especially like about Reeve Lindbergh's memoir is its candid and utterly sincere tone. This is not a dusty historical treatise; it is a simple sharing of thoughts and experiences. The reader is drawn into the life of a young girl with remarkable and famous parents. We already had an idea of what it was like to live with Charles Lindbergh from the diaries of his wife, Anne Morrow. Now Reeve's book gives another view, helping to round out the picture. Along the way she presents us with snapshot images that offer glimpses into his character. Charles Lindbergh wasn't an easy man to understand; and if he is difficult for us adults to get a handle on, what was it like for his offspring? Reeve tells us in her straightforward and heartwarming manner. This book should be an essential part of any Lindbergh fan's library. I highly recommend it.
   
   Richard Salva--author of Soul Journey from Lincoln to Lindbergh [UNABRIDGED]



4. Reeve Lindbergh tells stories that we want to hear about everyday life with her famous, complicated father and her intelligent, artistic mother. Reeve's delicate, precise prose is reminiscent of her mother's style of writing. A reviewer said of Anne Lindbergh that she "combed" her life for meaning and the daughter seems tuned into that same compulsion. It helps that she writes with as much insight as did her mother. The passage that describes the hours mother and daughter spent together after the death of Reeve's child is heartbreakingly revealing of the private Anne and her anguish after the kidnapping and death of her own child. Reeve's reminiscences of flying with her father (she was not an enthusiast) and her longing for her enigmatic father are poignant. She does not avoid discussing Lindbergh's perceived anti-Semitism; she does not attempt to defend him but rather keeps her emphasis on the effect this controversy had (and has) on her connection with him. I challenge any daughter to read Reeve's account of her visit to her father's childhood home without weeping.



5. There can be no doubt that Reeve Lindbergh's memoir is the most touching book about that family that I have read. Through her eyes we go beyond the covers of other books and see what it really meant to be a Lindbergh.

   They were almost a closed society onto themselves, yet they still experienced the same joys and sorrows as the rest of us. We find the man who was depised as an isolationist to be a concerned and loving father who read to his children.

   We dine with the children at their grandmother's house and we soar above the Connecticut house on Saturdays. The famed aviator at the controls and a bored child in the rear seat.

   After reading this book I felt very attached to this famous family. Being the same age as Reeve herself, my only knowledge of the Lindbergh's was the famous flight and the kidnapping as I read in history books. Now, after this book, I feel as though I have become part of them.

   It can only be summed up in one word, wonderful.

2 comments about Wade Hampton: Confederate Warrior to Southern Redeemer (Civil War America).

1. After a dearth of many years, four biographies of southern soldier and politician Wade Hampton have recently appeared. I have read three; Rod Andrew's work is easily the best. Many of Hampton's personal papers were lost to fire; there are virtually no letters from him in existence before the war and most of his war papers were also lost, but Andrew has done an excellent job finding sources and scattered letters. Andrew used several letters from Hampton or close acquaintances that Brian Cisco did not include in his recent popular biography of Hampton. Andrew also gives a much fuller portrait of Hampton as a slave-holder than does Cisco, contrasting Wade III's paternal management with the brutality of his grandfather Wade I.
   I was impressed that Andrew detailed Hampton's amazing record as a cavalry commander with such detail, surpassing the treatment of Edward Longacre, who wrote about Hampton's Civil War service. But it is Andrew's analysis of Hampton's character and his commitment to southern ideals that stands out the most. Andrew has done an excellent job of defining Hampton in the era and landscape of his own existence, not forcing him to abide by modern standards of racial justice. Hampton was a racist, and a paternalist, but his legacy to the world was vastly different from men like Ben Tillman, Martin Gary, and James Henry Hammond. Hampton was a man of honor, who came to bitterly hate Yankees, especially William Sherman, and who never regretted or apologized for his role in the war. Although he did earnestly seek black votes and appointed many to office after his disputed gubernatorial election in 1876-77, he was never committed to enforcing civil rights and was an impotent defender of the limited success of his racial policy by the 1890s. Nonetheless, Hampton's record is largely remarkable. He was deeply mourned in passing as one of the finest of his era and section.
   Rod Andrew's biography is a first rate example of research and analysis. William Davis's work on John C. Breckinridge and Andrew's work on Hampton are my favorite biographies of Civil War-era southerners.



2. Wade Hampton III who was born in 1818 and whose life spanned the century (he died in 1902) was an important figure in South Carolina and in the American South. He was born to near-aristocracy, his father having fought in the War of 1812 and his grandfather in the Revolution. He was a wealthy plantation owner, one of the wealthiest in his state. He was also a conservative who opposed the break with the union, but when called upon to do his duty went to war and raised his own regiment known as 'Hampton's legion'. He served in the Stonewall Brigade and then took over JEB Stuart's cavalry units after the battle of Yellow Tavern. He served to the end with Lee. His son died in the war and his house and properties were destroyed by Sherman's union army in its march to the sea. After the war he was drafted to run for Govenor by the Democrats but relented waiting until 1877 to take the helm of his state as a passionate opponent of reconstruction and northern meddling in southern affairs. Later he served as a Senator.
   
   This book is not an fawning biography but rather a more critical one that examines the importance of this influential leader whose life mirrored that of his southern compatriots and that of his class. He was the embodiment of the south and as the title suggests, both a warrior and a redeemer whose efforts and politics hang over the South today.
   
   A very interesting, well written account that will appeal to devotees of Southern history and the Civil War.
   
   Seth J. Frantzman

5 comments about Under My Skin: Volume One of My Autobiography, to 1949 (My Autobiography, To1949, Vol 1 1949).

1. This was actually my first experience with Doris Lessing, tho I've heard of her for years. Her picture of the So. African experience was quite revealing but I got a little tired of the analysis of those who joined the communist movement. It seems that though she worked as an activist, she never really
   'bought' the doctrine, to her credit. But she seems to have a need to over analyse the motives. It seems to me that most of the people were just trying to improve the social ills of the time and were taken in by the communist rhetoric. The writing was good enough to keep me reading even though I wasn't too happy with the her bohemian attitude; abandoning her children, taking successive lovers.... I respect her intellect but not her morals.
   I am not inclined to look for the second installment.



2. This is a hard-hitting piece of autobiography. Lessing looks at her parents and their world of colonial mastery from the point of view of her younger, increasingly disenchanted self. Lessing was gathering steam in those years, to emerge as one of the prominent novelists of the post-war era. In this, the first of a two-volume autobiography, she is beginning to grow critical of her parents, colonialism, white supremacy, men - her husband in particular - and just beginning to flirt for a short time with the great experiment in group-think of the period known as Communism. She falls for it for a time, but not for long. It will take her a while, but she finally emerges along with George Orwell as the most articulate critic of this mindless, toxic form of self-imposed mental slavery. She writes of her fellow-traveling, communist-sympathizing friends as silly people, which strikes me as as good a way to think of them as any. Lessing provides, along with her political autobiography, a lovely evocation of Africa, the landscape and people, about whom she wrote as a young novelist and to whom she has continued to refer throughout her long and continuing career as a writer.



3. Doris Lessing has led such an interesting life, and writing a diary all the time. She writes of a time completely foreign to me, living a history of the changes in Southern Afica. I find her autobiography a great read, and prefer it to her novels. Interesting and moving, and explains much about her!



4. Under My Skin

   Doris Lessing's autobiography traces her political and emotional development from her earliest childhood memories to her growing, overwhelming, disenchantment with provincial (as she saw it) small town life. "Small town" life for her was pre-WWII Salisbury in the (then) British colony of Southern Rhodesia. Salisbury was a complacent capital city of 10,000 white settlers in a country the size of Spain.
   Lessing is quick to debunk the myth of the prosperous, close knit, white farming community - poverty was a real fact of life both for blacks and whites. Her most vivid childhood memories are of escaping from the family home and off into the limitless veld. The emptiness of the veld parallels her youthful emptiness and her growing convictions that the communist party represents a real hope for the world.
   The book, a masterpiece of autobiographical writing, is brutally honest in parts and wilfully obscure in others. Some of her emotional mistakes are hardly glanced at (leaving her first two children, for example) but others (the joys of being part of a fast, hard drinking sect, embracing radical politics) are wonderfully engaging. Reading her thoughts you could be forgiven for thinking that the "party" was the only opposition to conservative white rule in Salisbury. This is what makes her book so appealing, her supreme skill as a novelist allowing us to enter the heady world of rushed meetings, leftist newspaper deliveries, drinks on the sports club verandah and back in time to find the cook still waiting to prepare supper. Naturally it couldn't last and Lessing is far too intelligent to think that that is all there is to life. The book ends in 1949 as she arrives in London, apprehensive and hopeful in the capital city of her parents.
   This is more than a `who-did-what' from a long time ago, times and dates are (probably deliberately) rarely mentioned. It is the personalities and the ideas - most of all the ideas - sliding from youthful enthusiasm to mature realism which fuse the book with life and vitality. `Under My Skin', published in 1992, is that rare thing, a candid autobiography written by a consummate novelist with skills to spare. Doris Lessing is a national treasure.




5. This is a candid autobiography with as main themes love, sex (good sex, as Doris Lessing calls it, is a right for everybody) and politics in South-Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) ruled by a blank minority.
   It is a gripping, moving and realistic picture, wherein the author tries to find answers to personal and more general human questions: why was she so outspoken rebellious and, on the contrary, so strictly loyal to the communist movement?
   Why are people fighting relentlessly each other, and on the other hand, striving for happiness?
   Are the people of her generation all children of World War I? Why was her father a freemason?

   This book is written like an irresistible waterfall. Not to be missed.

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 Nathanael Greene: A Biography of the American Revolution.

1. Gerald Carbone has written a book that every Rhode Islander should read.
   Nathanael Greene was a true Patriot and unsung hero in this country's fight for freedom.
   
   Mr Carbone's journalist's background can be seen in his absorbing portrait of a true American hero.



2. In "Nathaneal Greene: A Biography of the American Revolution", Gerald Carbone provides the reader with an outstanding view of the American struggle for independence, at the same time providing tremendous insight into one of our country's most significant (and perhaps tragic) figures.
   The author's skillful use of the subject's own writings, as well as those of his contemporaries, provides the reader with an exceptional insight into both the characters and the tenor of the times. Exceptionally well researched and well written! An excellent read!



3. It is amazing that after hundreds of years of review and many factual accounts being written that an author can bring new life and perspective to the American Revolution....but Gerald Carbone has done it with this book.
   
   This review of the General Nathanael Greene's personal life and war time thoughts and actions are documented in letters to his family, friends, General Washington, and other major military players. These letters are woven into historical accounts of this war providing a play by play to the game of cat and mouse he played with British Generals in both the northern and southern fronts over many years. The race to victory over the second half of the book is especially exciting for a story which we already know the outcome.
   
   Over and above the insight into Greene's thoughts and never ending planning for the war, the book provides an interesting perspective of the communication, travel and logistics of operating a war in that time period. His personal thoughts of balancing the responsibility of leading an army in war time and family duties are also intriguing.
   
   Definitely worth reading for the whole family.



4. Gerald Carbone writes that Nathanael Greene's involvement throughout the entire war results in the general's biography being quite similar to that of the American Revolution itself. This is a good summary for the book. In fact, Carbone even provides a refresher on the litany of acts imposed by Parliament that precipitated the war and discusses some of the battles in which Greene was never even involved.
   
   The writing is succinct and moves quickly through the events. Largely, based on Greene's Letters (but, unfortunately, not those of many others), Carbone describes Greene as a meticulous tactician and fervent patriot. The reader learns exactly how Greene was so successful in battle. After initial defeats in New York and Pennsylvania, perhaps due to over-optimism, Greene distinguished himself in New Jersey - at Springfield and in a victory of sorts at Monmouth. His ability to impose discipline and thoroughly understand local geography and use it to his advantage was extraordinary.
   
   The second part of the book deals with Greene's Southern command leading to the British surrender at Yorktown. This is quite a thrilling read about partisan warfare and daring tactics. For a further account of the less discussed, but highly important Southern Campaign, refer to Walter Edgar's Partisans and Redcoats.
   
   Through all the battles, however, the reader learns little about Greene's character. Why was this man, raised as a Quaker, so intent on leaving his new wife and family and successful business to fight against the British? Was it ambition and glory that propelled him to seek positions of authority? Or was it genuine support for the Patriot cause? And if so, what had turned him against the British?
   
   Furthermore, Greene commanded the first segregated regiment in Rhode Island and he was not an insignificant slaveholder himself; however, there is scant discussion of his views about slavery. We know that most of the other Founders were against it, many of whom were from a Southern society dependent on slavery, yet they vehemently renounced it (at least in writing) and declared it to be opposed to the egalitarian principles of the Revolution.
   
   The author pays homage to Greene's military successes, but Greene, despite his absence from politics, was an important leader and deserves further analysis. Fittingly, the author notes that Greene was buried in an unmarked tomb - after reading this book we still don't really know who he was.



5. After reading Mr. Carbone's Nathaniel Greene series in the Providence Journal, I contacted him and asked if he had plans for a book. I felt that it was extremely well written. It kept my interest so much that I was anxious for the next morning's paper to arrive. It was written in such a way that you feel that you are there. As a big history buff and with the success of HBO's John Adams, I think that this book should be made into a major movie. Congratulations, GED!
   I highly recommend this book for all that are interested in American history.

5 comments about Sophie Scholl and the White Rose.

1. If you have a restless conscience then you will better understand the members of the White Rose. Like most kids in Germany in the 30's Hans and Sophie Scholl joined the Nazi youth movement and bought into National Socialism. However through their father who opposed National Socialism and a God instilled restless conscience they soon saw National Socialism for the evil it was and is. The author does a good job of making you feel the tension and stress as the story unfolds. Their dileama was how do you mount a meaningful opposition to a totalitarian state from within. Who can you trust? Gestapo everywhere and all opposition to the State outlawed.By 1940 most of the 500 or so pastors who would not bow down to Hitler were in jail or executed. By the time the White Rose decided to take action in 1942 most Germans were scarred to death of the police state they had allowed to enslave them. But there was sporadic uprising against Hitler. One interesting story in the book was when the gov't banned all the crucifixes from the public schools in Bavaria in 1941. The parents signed protest letters and petitions and even threw the mandatory picture of Hitler out of classroom windows. The protest was so strong that Hitler backed down. Its scary to think that our gov't has taken Christianity out of the classroom but Hitler couldn't. As you read the book you feel that they felt they were going to get caught but their restless conscience would not let them turn from the course of action that would lead to their deaths. As we see our own freedoms of privacy (Patriot Act), speech (Hate Crime Bills) and other constitutional rights being taken from us by an ever growing central gov't we can learn a lot from this book. At her trial Sophie Scholl said "Somebody had to make a start". They certainly did and their pamphlets and death had a lasting effect on the German people. Hans Scholl's last words were "Long live Freedom". The essence of freedom is the limitation of gov't and requires eternal vigilance. The German people allowed Hitler to much power and he enslaved them. We still have the time and ability to limit the power of our gov't but it will take a lot of work and most importantly a restless conscience. 5 stars for this book.



2. This book was definitely a must-read, not only for those that are interested in this time period of study, but for anyone who wants to have a better understanding of world history. It's amazing, simply put. It reads so quickly. You are definitely drawn in from the very first page to the last.



3. I bought this for research and it is terrific. It really gets into the mindset and political background of the story of the White Rose and helps the reader to understand the 'why' of the story. Not as personal as other accounts, it nevertheless is a wonderful background that will help you see Nazi Germany in a whole new light while telling the moving and touching story of Sophie Scholl.



4. It is quite impossible to do an adequate job of reviewing this book.
   Knowing that these young German students really lived, daring to risk their young lives and, indeed, losing them, for their distribution of their printed words challenging German people to act against Hitler, is unbelievably humbling and cause for great hope for mankind. Passive resistence worked. Life triumphed over death. Good was stronger than evil.
   The authors, Annette Dumbach and Jud Newborn, became accomplished talents with the publication of this book alone.
   Their ability to combine the biographies of Sophie, her brother and their compatriots in the making and distrubtion of the White Rose and the requisite history and analysis of the political climate in Germany during The Holcaust is masterful.
   The book reads like a suspense thriller one could read in a few hours. However, their thoughtful, detailed insights into the minds and hearts of the protagonists, compel the reader to read and then reread many passages before being emotionally able to read on. This is a must read for young and old students of the human condition, a truly unforgettable book.



5. SOPHIE SCHOLL & THE WHITE ROSE is, essentially, about the finest aspects of human nature. The White Rose members' integrity and their compassion for their fellow Germans and, more surprisingly, for the Jewish population who had endured years of prejudice and oppression followed by vicious persecution is very impressive.
   
   To mount a secret campaign against the Third Reich, a totalitarian regime of insidious oppression and unbelievable brutality against both the German people and its conquered populations, takes amazing courage.
   
   But to face up to that regime on an intensely personal level, without hesitation or - apparently - regret, fully aware of the consequences, is simply awesome. And it awes me that most of the White Rose members were students like myself! This is a very memorable book with a powerful message.

5 comments about Panzer Leader.

1. Too many German Units by numbers, Maps(sketches) hard to read. Mayby great for a true student, but for me a little hard to follow.



2. I focus on matters not elaborated by the many other reviewers, and this review is based on the original (1952) edition.
   
   Guderian claims that the Pomorska Cavalry Brigade charged German tanks with lances, "in ignorance of the nature of our tanks" (p. 72). This contrasts with western accounts, which blame Polish impetuousness and foolhardiness for this supposed act. In actuality, the Polish cavalry had discontinued the use of lances well before WWII (see the Peczkis review of Poland 1939: The Birth Of Blitzkrieg (Campaign)).
   
   Otherwise, General Guderian shows more respect for the much-maligned 1939 Polish Army than did the British and Americans. "The first serious fighting took place...the leading tanks found themselves face to face with Polish defensive positions. The Polish anti-tank gunners scored many direct hits." (p. 70). He writes of the "fierce battles for Warsaw" (p. 84), and characterizes the Poles as "a tough and courageous enemy." (p. 73).
   
   Guderian recognizes the fact that the Communist alliance with the Nazis had not been simply an innocent, tactical move: "On September 29th, 1939, Russia signed a pact of friendship with Germany and at the same time made a trade agreement that was of considerable value to the Germans in the economic prosecution of the war." (p. 140).
   
   The much-romanticized Hitler bomb plot never had a chance (pp. 344-345). There was no means of destroying the many pro-Hitler leaders. And, when Stauffenberg flew into Berlin with his mistaken announcement that Hitler was dead, he found no significant following.
   
   In describing the Warsaw Uprising, Guderian mentions the losses which the Germans had just inflicted on the Red Army (p. 359), and this is distorted by Soviet apologists into proof that the Red Army was thereby immobilized. To begin with, Guderian was referring to the period around August 1--certainly not the entire 5.5 months that the Red Army sat idly on the eastern bank of the Vistula. Moreover, Guderian's information is instructive. Throughout the first half of 1944, the Red Army had been routing the Germans with its "considerable superiority in strength" (p. 327), causing the total destruction of 25 German divisions (p. 336). Then, on the outskirts of Warsaw, the Soviet apologists would have us believe, the Soviet Army magically lost its strength for 5.5 months (August 1--January 12), only to magically regain it (and more) in the form of a 20:1 advantage in guns and 7:1 advantage in tanks (p. 382).
   
   Guderian claims credit for talking Hitler into recognizing the Warsaw combatants as regular soldiers (p. 356)--otherwise they wouldn't surrender knowing that the Germans would kill them all anyway. He mentions the frightful atrocities of the Dirlewanger and Kaminski units. Against the impression that Bach Zelewski had stopped them as a matter of principle, we find that nothing so noble was at work: "Von dem Bach took the precaution of having Kaminski shot and thus disposed of as a potentially dangerous witness." (p. 356)



3. My son got me this for Christmas a couple of years ago...it may well be the finest memoir by a General Officer I have ever read [I have to admit that most of those by Confederate Generals are bure bilge]. Heinz Guderian was a commander of early, primitive, tanks in WWI, essentially invented modern tank warfare between the wars, then commanded Panzers in WWII, leading the invasions of Poland, France, and Russia.
   
   General Guderian makes no moral judgments on the right or wrong of his job; he was told to go after lebensraum, and he did it. A devout Christian man, he must have been bothered at times, but....remember, Pope Benedict XVI fought for the same cause, though far below General Guderian's pay grade. He makes plenty of judgment on the stupidity of the Russian campaign, and on the defective plan in France, but that's all.
   
   This was no modern day JEB Stuart [tanks are the military descendent of horse cavalry]; Guderian left the flash and style to the likes of Patton and Rommel, on whom it looked better. Maybe Guderian was Wade Hampton or Joe Wheeler. [The are no comparisons for Forrest; he was unique, though so few are].
   
   This fine book is, of course, a translation. I can't vouch for the accuracy, as I can't read German, but it is quite readable. In most wars, the books are about, and by, the winners; the two exceptions are Germans from WWII, and Confederates. It has been said that that's because those are the two losing sides that still have adherents....maybe, but if you want to find out how a horse turned into a tank, and how a modern army is built, start right here.



4. Heinz Guderian's "Panzer Leader" provides an inside story of the development of the German armored forces before World War II and the operation of those forces during that war. Guderian was one of the major figures helping to develop the Panzer doctrine of quick striking and deep thrusting armored attacks. And the book portrays the resistance from more traditional army leaders in the German military.
   
   The Introduction (by Kenneth Macksey) observes that (page vii): "'Panzer Leader' is about one man's endeavor, at a moment of institutional change, to defend his country by the modernization of its army." An obvious question is what do talented military leaders do when serving political leaders who are not worthy of their loyalty? In the "Foreword," B. H. Liddell Hart casually notes that (page 13): "'Their's not to reason why, theirs but to do and die. No nation that maintains fighting services can afford to revoke that rule of experience. Where soldiers begin to question the rightness of the cause for which they are fighting, armies soon collapse." And perhaps Hart unwittingly makes a point. When should a military recoil from the madness of a leader like Hitler? Hart may be far too forgiving of soldiers fighting for wicked causes. Still, a difficult issue.
   
   The book itself traces, briefly, Guderian's early life. It then considers his role in the development of German armor and the consequent doctrines of warfare based on the use of armor. He discusses the German movements against Austria and the Sudetenland and then the invasion of Poland.
   
   The role of armor was most dramatically seen with the German attack on the Western front. The Panzer divisions sliced deep into the allied defenses, creating havoc. Only Hitler's foolish calling off the army at Dunkirk allowed the English to rescue substantial elements of its ground forces.
   
   Guderian's tale of the preparation for and carrying out of the attack on Russia is detailed (and dry). Much detail is provided (and see Manstein's book on the same subject, "Lost Victories"). Perhaps most telling is his tale of the slashing retreat as German forces found themselves vastly outnumbered by Russian forces and subject to the awful weather of Russia. Guderian explains the mad strategy of Hitler of refusing to let the German forces find better sites to defend their positions. For his criticisms of Hitler (pretty courageous of Guderian), he was relieved--only to come back later as, of all things, Chief of the German General Staff.
   
   At the end, he ventures a few observations on leading personalities of the Third Reich and concludes with some very brief comments. It would have been interesting to get deeper reflections from his perspective on the nature of the war, the role of the army vis-à-vis a despotic government, his own sense of the role that he played. The final part of the book is a series of Appendices that are useful (memos of critical events, for example).
   
   This is a book, like Manstein's, that is useful for providing graphic detail of the military struggles of the Second World War. And both reveal little perspective by the two fighting generals of their role in the misery created by the Third Reich.



5. Guderian was a military theorist and innovative General of the German Army during the Second World War. Germany's panzer forces were raised and fought according to his works, best-known among them Achtung - Panzer!
   
   As some have already pointed out, this is not a cowboy action book like a "D-Day" or "Bridge too far". Instead, it is a detailed account covering the formation of german tank forces, key battles and an exhaustive analysis of the russian campaign. This book is not for casual WW2 readers - you need to be passionate about WW2 to appreciate this book. The lack of coherent maps (while describing campaigns, strategies, offense etc) is the only reason why I am giving 3 stars instead of 4.

5 comments about About Face: The Odyssey of an American Warrior.

1. This is a story of a soldier in an army in decline, a lost war and a premature end of a magnificaint career. It is also the most motivating war story that I've ever read. It is the story of a man with barely a 7th grade education who joins the army at 15 years old and earns a battlefield commission in Korea and in Vietnam becomes the only soldier to be awarded two Distinguished Service Crosses, 10 Silver Stars and three times nominated for the Medal of Honor (which he did not recieve) and became the youngest Colonel in Vietnam. The book is a cry for military reform and it is also a war story. Hackworth tells of the desparate fights on nameless hills in Korea in a fasion that makes you wish that you were there, not an easy task, with the Korean War. When a lackluster soldier is killed Hackworth is proud that he died well and makes him a hero to the unit. He never seems to feel fear-"I guess I just like war...I like the cameradship. Adversity brings out the best in men"- Hackworth told Ward Just in the book "Military Men." In Vietnam Hack often took hopeless situations and turned them into victory. In a way his resignation was a victory, this self educated soldier stood up to a buracatic army that was losing a war while others went along. This is the most motivating book that I've ever read, so much so that I retured to active duty after reading it, insisting on infantry. David Hackworth may have been "Once An Eagle" but he was no colonel Kurtz-as the hardback dusk cover suggested. Hackworth died in 2005 from cancer, the only fight that he ever lost.



2. Colonel David Hackworth was a soldier's soldier. Born too late to see active service in the crucible of WW II, he lied about his age and enlisted in the Army as soon as he could. Often credited as being the most decorated American soldier of his era, Hack was well-known within the U.S. Army for his courage, honesty, and derring-do exploits.
   
   Hack ranks right up their with the U.S. Marine's Chesty Puller and Gregory "Pappy" Boyington as the sort of officer who is a pain in the a** to have around in peacetime -- but who is exactly the sort of leader you want when the bullets start to fly. It is impossible to read about Hackworth's battlefield experiences during the Korean War without getting a lump in your throat for the privations those poor guys suffered. (Many U.S. Army units were airlifted from the States via Japan directly into combat in Korea, still wearing their Class 'A' uniforms -- totally unprepared for the Korean winters and the raging fighting they found upon landing.)
   
   Col. Hackworth's Vietnam experiences are fascinating, too. As he rose in rank he displayed an uncanny ability to call a spade a spade, and his dismay with how the war was being fought eventually led to his being personally cashiered out of the Army by the Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army!
   
   Buy this book and read it -- you're in for a real treat! Hack was the real thing, and his demonstrated courage and abrasive honesty make him worthy of study and appreciation by both junior and senior officers throughout the armed services.
   
   Captain Michael L. Pandzik, U.S. Navy Reserve (Retired)



3. Excellent Read......... Highly Recommended ... 5 stars
   
   About Face chronicles the experiences of the youngest colonel serving during the Vietnam circumstances. The book itself begins in February 1951 with Hackworth facing the enemy in Korea and is divided into twenty-three chapters. About Face follows David Hackworth the length of his military journey from the days when as a young soldier nick-named 'Combat' he charged into the face of the enemy along a path to near ruin at the hands of disgruntled superiors. The work includes maps, author's notes, a foreword by Ward Just, an Epilogue and an Appendix including a Glossary, Index and final notes.
   
   About Face is a well written page turner presented in language clearly understood by the typical reader. The book is certain to interest those who have any link at all to the Vietnam situation faced by so many men and women from our country. The book helps to demarcate what happened, when and to whom.
   
   I first read About Face written by Col. David Hackworth during the late 1980s. I found it particularly helpful in helping me...a woman with little knowledge of anything military, understand better my children's dad, a land based Viet Nam combat vet and the problems he had to deal with before his death.
   
   As the wife of yet a second Viet Nam combat vet, special forces, I suggest this book for anyone who wants a better understanding of the debt of gratitude and respect we citizens owe those who served during the action in Vietnam and those who willing to serve in The United States Military today.
   
   Molly Martin
   Reviewer



4. This book was an inspirational read. Even though it takes forever to read this book, it's well worth the time. Hack's experiences shared in this book changed my outlook on life, and my outlook on human interaction/organization.
   
   I would recommend this book to anyone, as I'm sure his experience can be applicable to anything you will ever have to deal with in life.



5. Great book! Hackworth was a true warrior stud. He was the essence of an instinctual soldier and was quite lucky to have survived so many brushes with death. I did find his conclusions interesting as he was not entirely correct. He became a liberal after Vietnam and predicted things that did not happen with the USSR, Central America, and more. He did give great insight into how bungled the Vietnam War was and what could have been done to "win" it.