5 comments about All the Strange Hours: The Excavation of a Life.

1. The book & reason for this essay is his autobiography All the Strange Hours. Its subtitle hints at both the man's existence & its aim: The Excavation Of A Life. Eiseley (henceforth LE) was a well-respected anthropologist, scientist, & essayist. In his spare time he was also a poet. Many years have passed since I had read his engaging essays. He mastered what might be called the Covert Inner Essay- i.e.- those which tie in the ostensible subject matter at hand with whatever the essayist really sought to speak of: personal axes, incidents, or other such muses. Think of this not then as much an essay nor an homage- per se- but rather as an experiment in persuasion. OK?
   The book by LE is divided into 3 main sections: Days Of A Drifter, Days Of A Thinker, & Days Of A Doubter. The 1st of the 3- Drifter- concerns mostly LE's youth through college & mid-20s. It has some of the most beautiful & poetically heart-wrenching prose I have read. His detailed episodes as a rail-riding hobo, assorted illnesses, his call to the natural & an episode in Mexico with an ex-hood from Detroit are marvelous. LE resurrects the Great Depression & Dust Bowl iconism with an eye & ear greater than Steinbeck. This section's closest literary antecedent is Kenneth Rexroth's Kenneth Rexroth: An Autobiographical Novel, however- as good & even great as that book is in sections- as a whole it never coheres nor moves 1 to the totality of empathy that LE's work in this section does. It is this fidelity to the unnoticed conflated almost effortlessly with larger themes, & the utter Occam's Razor-like detailing, that draws me because it is so resonant with my own writing style- both prosaic & poetic. There are a number of passages & images that will be with me always. Not only that, but it is the very way he uses words to damn-near holographically duplicate the scientific process of inspecting & investigating things. In my aforementioned poetic struggles of late it has been a combination of lack of time plus an exhaustion of `ins'- or approaches to poetry as a craft & myriad subjects.
   I was struck by time's distort during its reading. Not only did the craft of writing consciously do that upon the page, but within my cranial nook time ebbed & dashed in varied rhythms to such an extent that my both my emotions & intellect were disjuncted. So much so that I realize that I may have sinned. I have not excerpted pieces of LE's craft. Did I write an essay? Did I review & critique it? Did I merely effuse? Did I declaim more copiously on the book's apportive effect on my creativity than draw you to it? Did I put trust in you that yours in me & my words would kindle you to be where I am? Perhaps. But, maybe, I shall just content myself to reread it & you shall desire our company in some small resurrections. & if this experiment of mine has failed do not blame poor dead LE, or what was his life- the brunt is rightfully all mine. So, too, his book.



2. A fascinating look into the man behind such a creative literary & scientific mind! He is quite 'bare bones' about himself. Also suggested bio.: "The Lost Notebooks of Loren Eisley" ed. by Kenneth Heuer.



3. An excerpt from 'All the Strange Hours'
   
   "...Oncoming age is to me a vast wild autumn country strewn with broken seed pods,hurrying cloud wrack,abondoned farm machinery,and circling crows..."
   Frankly I lost my reference notes.But this is a wonderful read.You enter deep into the thinkings and passions from the heart of one man.Eiseley will invite you into his thoughts and observations about life and people like a quite and unassuming gentlemen.These stories bring you deep into the core of the Midwest cast of mind.
   Great Read



4. Thoughtful writing, and interesting, but Eiseley sure was a bitter and despairing fellow. He held grudges forever and never forgot a slighting, even from childhood. It appears that he wrote this at an advanced age, when his friends and associates were dieing off seemingly all around him, and he wasn't very happy about it and his own mortality. Interesting, but definitely a downer.



5. There are few books written today that I don't want to rewrite. All the Strange Hours is one of them. This is the real thing- forget "Magical-Realism" and forget all other memoirs. This is unlike any memoir, or book I've ever read before, and should be getting out to a larger audience. You don't need to be into science, archeology, or even know who Eiseley is to appreciate this work. His writing is so good that it doesn't matter.
   He also doesn't delve into the mundane things that most writers would- in fact, you go through the entire book, and you don't even know his wife's name. If I met Eiseley, I'd feel that I'd know little about what he likes to eat, or what kind of music he enjoys, or if he's a morning or night person. But none of that matters- because I feel like I know him on the inside. People who knew Eiseley say that those who read his works often knew him better than those who knew him in person. I'd list Eiseley easily as one of the greatest writers of all time, and at minimum I'd put him in the top 3 of great prose writers. Check him out, and you'll see. You won't be disappointed. Trust me- - I don't like most contemporary stuff, and if you don't either, this is great literature for you.

5 comments about Richard M. Nixon: The American Presidents Series: The 37th President, 1969-1974 (The American Presidents).

1. Candid and revealing book about this controversial president. I enjoyed reading about Richard M. Nixon.



2. Even thirty years after his presidency and fourteen after his death, Richard Nixon is still a controversial leader. Drew who lived through Watergate can't seem to get past the anger she feels toward Nixon. Nixon's presidency was one of brillance and stupidity. Brilliance in his pragmatic handling of domestice issues and his careful handling of foreign policy, and stupidity in creating a wall around himself with bad advisors and then committing crimes. Give credit where credit is due, but Drew states that Nixon, although smart, was not really a good politician. One comment is very telling. Nixon's first cabinet did not have stellar quality, because there were no good quality people there. Then Drew goes on to tell the Eastern establishment was not represented in this cabinet. Maybe, just maybe Nixon was right when he talked of the elitist Eastern establishment because it is obvious Drew is from this group, being a former writer for the New Yorker.
   
   Another telling comment is the drug charge brought up in The Arrogance of Power. She then tells how Nixon probably took drugs, along with being drunk on most nights. Again, I have issues with both the objectivity of the drug charges. With other writers, it is obvious Nixon was under tremendous strains and used drink as an escape clause during this time. However, I don't think he was an alcholic. I guess Drew just wanted to rip down this man once more and the American President series let her.
   
   This series is fine. I learned a lot about the American Presidents. It was sad that Drew had to write on Nixon. She proved Nixon's theory that the Left took the sword and twisted it. Unfortunately Nixon is dead. He had brillant moments in foreign policy. He also did stupid and criminal things that resulted in his resignation from the American presidency. Drew is not an objective author.



3. Great, short book on Tricky Dick. He was a nut. A brilliant nut. But a nut nonetheless.



4. Elizabeth Drew's biography of President Richard M. Nixon is yet one more entry in Arthur Schlesinger, Jr's "The American Presidents" series. One interesting wrinkle. Other volumes in this series have suggested that the incessant critique of certain presidents may have missed other aspects of their work that is not so negative. The works on Warren Harding and Ulysses Grant come to mind. One may well disagree with the authors, but they provide sympathetic--albeit realistic--evaluations of their subjects.
   
   Elizabeth Drew is pretty hard-nosed in her biography of Nixon. The final line is very different than other ill-regarded presidents (Page 151): "[His actions] leave the historic question of whether this otherwise smart, talented man, but most peculiar and haunted of presidents, was fit to occupy the most powerful office in the nation--and large room for doubt that he was."
   
   The biography begins with an equation of Nixon with a Shakespearean figure (Pages 1-2): ". . .he brought us into his tragedy and made us go through it with him." And the story begins with a childhood that was hard, including a hard to please father and a distant mother. He worked hard, and his native intelligence served him well. But he was himself a remote person, and many of his peers didn't fully understand him. After rather routine military service during World War II, he began his political career soon after war's end. He began with a victory in a House of Representatives race and then for one of California's Senate seats. His campaign style was hard-nosed and brought him the nickname of "Tricky Dick."
   
   Through a series of circumstances, he was named as Ike's Vice-Presidential running mate in 1952. There follows the story of his career as VEEP, his defeat by John Kennedy in 1960, and his subsequent defeat when he ran for governor of California in 1962. His political career seemed over (Nixon himself said in a press conference, when he famously mentioned that [page 18] ""You don't have Nixon to kick around anymore."). But he began his rise to president shortly thereafter, as he worked tirelessly for the Republican Party and its candidates. In 1968, he was rewarded with the party's nomination and his subsequent election.
   
   Then, his presidency. Drew related his domestic successes and failures, as well as his foreign policy successes and failures. And how his tortured persona affected him (including excessive drinking). There are occasions that I think Drew too harsh. For instance, Nixon may not himself have been serious about his Family Assistance Plan, but this was an innovative effort to attack poverty that still intrigues today. His trip to China and his negotiations with the Soviet Union and the development of the concept of detente were important (whatever one thinks of the wisdom of such decisions, they do represent major achievements). And then, the loss of everything with Watergate. But the road to Watergate was presaged by many other actions. . . .
   
   So, an interesting read of Richard Nixon. Sometimes, I think it quite harsh. On the other hand, history has not redeemed his presidency and he still stands as an example of how personal demons can affect a presidency. A useful biography of Richard Nixon, in short, and one that will provoke reflection of this complex person.



5. At the outset of her short biography of Richard Nixon (1913 -- 1994), Elizabeth Drew quotes Henry Kissinger's comment: "Can you imagine what this man would be like if someone loved him"? Nixon served as the 37th President of the United States and as the only president who resigned from office following his efforts, and the efforts of those close to him, to obstruct justice in the wake of Watergate. As the reviews on this site show, Nixon still inspires strong passions, predominantly negative, in many people. And these negative views were undoubtledly earned by Nixon's actions which threatened the rule of law of our political system.
   
   I was alive during almost the entirety of Nixon's political career and able to remember most of it, including the 1960 election and Nixon's presidency. I have always found Nixon an enigmatic figure, and in my younger days admired him more than I should have. Elizabeth Drew's short biography, "Richard M. Nixon" (2007) written for the American President's series is unsparing in its criticism of Nixon. Yet Drew shows some sympathy for her subject and some appreciation of his strengths. Her book was not easy to read, with its reminders of our recent American past and with the appeal Nixon at one time had for me; but I found it rewarding as well as troubling. Drew has, on the whole, tried to present a balanced picture of Richard Nixon.
   
   Drew portrays a Nixon who is introspsective and a loner -- he is intelligent, highly driven to succeed, and resilient. The Nixon of her portrait is also an extremely ruthless vindictive and unprincipled paranoid, who drinks to excess, is merciless towards his perceived enemies and opponents, and viciously anti-semitic. Drew shows that these aspects of Nixon were inextricably intertwined and operated to doom his presidency.
   
   Drew traces Nixon's complex psychological make up to his days as a child in California growing up in a loveless, poor home with few friends. Nixon became a loner and a fighter -- qualities he was able to recognize in himself. The traits that would doom his presidency -- the corruption and the no-holds-barred dirty campaigning, were evident in his first campaign for Congress in 1946, in his Senate campaign of 1950, and in his activities in securing a place on the Republican presidential ticket in 1952. Many of Nixon's advisers from his early political years found a place in his presidency.
   
   During his presidency, Nixon had a modestly progressive domestic program, for which Drew may not give him enough credit, including substantial environmental reforms, increased aid for the poor, the end of the draft, an activist approach to the problems of Native Americans, and other matters. Nixon was, Drew points out, the last progressive Republican president, although much of this may have resulted from his relative uninterest in domestic affairs. In foreign affairs, Nixon established detente with the Soviet Union and broached an opening with China -- large accomplishments which Drew justly praises. Nixon had many other foreign policy setbacks, and he protracted the United States involvement in Vietnam which -- together with Watergate -- became the defining aspects of America for an entire generation. Drew briefly but powerfully describes the Watergate story which led to Nixon's disgrace and to his resignation from office to avoid impeachment. It was an extraordinarily difficult time for our country.
   
   There was a quality of grit and fight in Richard Nixon which was a strength as well as the source of his downfall. Thus Nixon was able to surmount any number of setbacks which could have ended his career -- his 1952 "Checkers" speech, the loss of the presidency to Kennedy in 1960, the loss of the California governorship in 1962, and the resignation from the presidency itself. Following his resignation, Nixon attempted to rehabilitate himself in a series of books, speeches, and interviews, and soirees in an attempt to portray himself as an "elder statesman". In part, he succeeded. Nixon was also able to transform his early background of poverty and to use it in terms that resonated with many Americans -- paradoxically in Nixon's criticism of elitism and of those more fortunate than himself whom, he believed, stood in his way. In the turbulent times of the late 1960s, during his presidential campaign, Nixon's slogan was "bring us together." Unfortunately, he was unable to use the gifts he possessed in a constructive way but instead pursued a course that led to a devaluation of our political life and to his own self-destruction.
   
   Elizbeth Drew's book is a good introduction to a tortured man and to his presidency.
   
   Robin Friedman

3 comments about The Diary of Petr Ginz.

1. A very thought provoking account of the holocaust. At such a young age Petr inspires through his art, poetry, boyish nature and keenness to learn. Such a clever boy could have grown to be an amazing man and no doubt, if given the opportunity, would have contributed a lot to the world. Unfortunately he was murdered at Auschwitz at age 16 so we are left to a two year snippet of life as he saw it.
   
   His account of Prague during the occupation is very matter of fact, which is very poignant in itself, as it seems almost a natural state of being to Petr. His diary provides a unique insight into the systematic erosion of his rights and the rights of the Jewish community, and the seemingly endless transportation of his friends and family.
   
   Sad and cruel. But I'm glad the diary was uncovered and I was able to experience it is such a small way.



2. This book must be read by both young and old. It will touch your heart and soul. I was moved to tears many times while reading.



3. In reading numerous Holocaust accounts, one is struck especially by the tragic loss of young lives, who had yet to experience the richness of life...Petr Ginz is one such soul. The Diary of Petr Ginz is a chronicle of a 14 year-old boy's day-to-day life under Nazi occupation in Prague. The entries themselves are brief, but are accompanied by Petr's poetry and illustrations, a testament to this young boy's talent, and resilient spirit. His diary chronicles his life between 1941-1942, and ends in Aug 1942, prior to his being deported to Thereisienstadt where he was incarcerated for two years before being sent to a tragic end at the Auschwitz death camp. One can't help but feel a sense of impotent rage at the Nazi monsters that robbed so many innocent souls of a life meant to be lived, especially at the senseless killing of ones so young, and in Petr's case, and many others, possessing such talent that would have enriched the world. This is a remarkable diary, in the vein of the diary of Anne Frank, and other Holocaust diaries that prove the resilience of the human spirit during a dark period in history.

5 comments about Company Aytch.

1. Sam Watkins is amazing and a part of you wishes he were still around signing books.
   
   There are primarily two first hand accounts of the Civil War that get qouted a lot this one and Eliha Hunt Rhodes's "All for the Union." I like this one the best because unlike the guy who wrote "All for the Union" Watkins never moved beyond the rank of corporal. When Sam Watkin's joined the "glorious cause" in 1861 1,200 marched away from his home town 65 returned including Watkin's himself. Sam states many times that this is not a history of the war, just a few things that have stuck in his memory 20 years later.
   
   The book flows in a mostly chronological order and includes personal observations of Jackson, Bragg, Johnstone, the Honorable Jefferson Davis (who shook Sam's hand) and many others. These accounts are extremely insightful and even eloquent.
   
   There are the accounts of battles in which Watkins fought 1861, Murfreesboro, Shiloh, Corinth, Perryvile, Chattanooga, Missionary Ridge and the darkest of all Frnaklin.
   
   There are also extremely entertaining elements of social history that are not directly related to battles but give you a good idea of how an average solider of the south lived and how they had fun; of these the segment "pass the butter" is probably the most hilarious. Then there is also the story of how Sam was arrested while on leave and one of his old friends from his home town got him out of trouble.
   
   Overall-This book has something for everyone and if Watkin's is correct and this book was not intended as a history it is definatly one of the most entertaining not-histories that I have read.



2. This book lives up to its reputation. If you have any interest whatsoever in the Civil War, whether you're from the North or South, you need to read this book. It has an immediacy that's lacking in history books, because the author was there and lived through some of the most hellish events in the war. And the kicker is that he was a great writer... Imagine if Mark Twain had fought in the Civil War and then wrote about it afterward. He has a gift for making you feel the exhiliration, terror, heartbreak, and drudgery of life as an infantryman in the Civil War... with a degree of literacy and introspection that raises the writing above merely a 'this happened and this happened' sort of account. His writing style is very accessible, too- this book is timeless.



3. My wife and I enjoyed reading this book together. It captured the day to day grind of life during the war years that southern people love to read about. We both recommend this insightful book.



4. 
   While this book is not for the beginner Civil War reader it is a must have for those that want to understand just how it must have been. Along with "All for the Union" "Bayonet's forward" and other Company level collections.
   
   This is an editted version and has cleaned up some of the grammer and errors per the author.
   
   Further the text presumes that the reader knows what is going on and makes scant reference to the common names for the battles he fought in or other forms of reference, hence the not for the casual reader comment earlier.



5. This book was written by a Confederate private who served in the Army of Tennessee for nearly the entirety of the Civil War. Published in serial form after the war (one reviewer suggested that his material was written during the war, such as a diary would have been; however, that reviewer is simply incorrect, and the distinction is important enough to warrant mention) and then in book form in 1880, this memoir of civil war experiences from a private's perspective is priceless in terms of primary source material. Watkins is frank and unapologetic, a quality that provides the historian with unique material in terms of dealing with the sentiments that the non-elite confederates often held.
   
   Watkin's candor is probably the most important feature of this work. His hatred of Yankees and often equally strong hatred of some of the Confederate command suggests an individual who probably defies current simple notions of Yankee/Rebel mentality. Watkins is often witty, especially when reflecting upon feelings that we would now understand as being imbedded in "class struggle". Of course, Watkin's frankness extends to his views of blacks and slaves, illuminating an individual who was both racist and yet not in the generally held stereotypical manner.
   
   I would recommend this book to anyone who wants to understand the Confederate experience from the perspective of the non-elitist point of view. This book would be great for a high school curriculum covering the Civil War era, and would also be a good part of any similar college-level syllabus. This is a relatively quick read (especially when compared to such works as "Mary Chesnut's Civil War" or "The Diary of Edmund Ruffin"), which makes it ideal for those just beginning their exposure to the Civil War or more specifically to the Confederate experience.

5 comments about The Guynd: A Scottish Journal.

1. I really looked forward to reading this book because I have long wanted to travel in Scotland, and I enjoy the extended travelogue where people live in a new land for a long time and get to know the locals. This was a good book, but not great. I had unanswered questions when it ended. For example, why did it take her 10 years to realize she and he husband were incompatible? Why did she keep her apartment in New York during the time she was living in Scotland? I kept thinking that if this were fiction, some of it would be implausible. Still, the characters you meet are worth meeting, and I did enjoy the book.



2. Ours was not the 'big' house, but the 'gardener's cottage' which we rented for a year, and both the marriage and the enterprise of that particular country home survive. But all the characteristics and challenges of the estate, garden, community, and home came to life again in the author's witty, canny prose. This is the best description of the many, layered facets of Scottish society and how the great homes and their residents fit into the scheme of their surroundings that I have read.



3. I enjoyed the book, but was shocked when I came to the passage describing how the author, while in a late stage of pregnancy, climbed a tall scaffolding to paint a wall. It seems like an amazing lack of judgment for someone who was pregnant late in life.



4. I wanted to read this witty memoir because of my romantic childhood fantasy of living in a mansion or castle in Europe. Oh how lucky the American author was to have fallen in love with Scottish man with an ancestral home and property. I was rather envious of their son, Elliot, who was able to spend his childhood exploring and playing in the gardens, on the lake, and in the house.
   
   But life isn't a fairytale. This is a story about a deteriorated, cluttered mansion, its 400 acres and a marriage that started as a whirlwind romance and came to mirror the mansion itself.
   
   There's a lot of humor in the writing. How could you not laugh at the author's stories about how hard it was to heat the house, find proper tenants, clear out a garden untouched for decades and to try to throw junk out when married to someone who can find a use for everything.
   
   If you don't know what an Aga stove is, you soon will. I highly recommend this book, but suggest curling up in a warm house with a hot cup of tea and a blanket. You'll need it.



5. I bought this book at my mother's request. She loved it. I'll be getting it back from her and reading it too.

5 comments about The Pirates Laffite: The Treacherous World of the Corsairs of the Gulf.

1. This is the best Laffite book on the market. Tremendous research and great references. This is a must for pirate historians and those interested in the gulf coast and New Orleans.



2. Davis turns the potentially exciting story of "treacherous" pirates into a story as dull as an annual report written by lawyers and accountants, because he relies too much on raw reporting of legal and accounting records.
   
   Davis is in love with this research, and spends too much time pointing out the faults of the sources and and not enough summarizing them to a higher level. Like many non-fiction books I have read in the last couple of years, Davis seems bound to justify the purchase price by the pound. There is a truly exciting 300-page book about the treacherous world of the Pirates Lafitte in here, but unfortunately it takes Davis 490 pages to finish it.
   
   My advice for the condensation-minded: read chapters 5 through 11 and 18 through 22, where the history is the must interesting and the narrative flows like a narrative should.



3. Overly-detailed telling of the life of the pirates Laffite.While I admire the authors historical prowess, I must admit reading this book was like swimming upstream....R. D. Morgan..



4. The Pirates Laffite: The Treacherous World of the Corsairs of the Gulf is another great book about Lafitte!! I love this book!! A must read for all pirate and Galveston history buffs! Lafitte was no pirate, he was however, a smuggler and a privateer... and he was a gentleman. Great reading!



5. Here's the bottom line on this book: If you're looking for a colorful folk tale of these characters, with all the atmospheric (and largely fictional) accoutrements, you're going to think that it's an "unreadable, tedious, overly detailed" bore.
   
   If you want a well-researched narrative, one in which the author leaves no stone unturned in his search for authenticity, you'll like this book with all its warts.
   
   This is a history book. It reads like a history book, with its emphasis on details, which brings our attention to facts that seek the more mundane truth of the matter. The life of the Laffites is so distorted by folklore that Dr. Davis has taken a hard line on archival detail and ambiguity.
   
   He won't give you the answers to the questions he can't solve, and he won't give you the romantic picture of the setting he can't control.
   
   This is a book for people more interested in history than pre-conceived imagery. Dr. Davis is a prolific author, and we know he has a tendency to crank out the words. That makes him subject to a few grammatical blunders from time to time, as he immerses himself in the subject matter. I will never criticize an historian for getting into his subject at the MINOR expense of a few mis-chosen conjunctions and misplaced commas.
   
   For portraits of early American New Orleans and colonial Galveston, this book is a valuable contribution to the literature. I should mention that its annotation is extensive, as is its bibliography.

5 comments about Mugabe: Power, Plunder, and the Struggle for Zimbabwe's Future.

1. For anyone interested in beginning to understand the dynamics of Zimbabwe's recent electoral crisis, this book is essential. Meredith goes into Mugabe's long history of violence,who like Mao sees violence as essential for politics. From the war waged against opposing guerilla forces because of political differences, the slaughter of 10,000 in Matabeleland, the seizure of white farms, threatening judges who ruled against the ZANU-PF government, and electoral violence, what we are seeing is nothing new, as Meredith reminds us. He also hints at the ethnic and racial tensions driving the politics and violence, something too often forgotten in today's media coverage. For example, Mugabe's ZANU-PF has its roots in the rural Shona ethnic group, while the Movement for Democratic change is much more urban and has many white supporters.
   
   The book is also relatively short (about 244 pages) and easy to read. Meredith provides a huge amount of detail without wasting too many words (or the reader's time).
   
   I think the book could have used a bit more of an introduction into Zimbabwe's and Africa's history more generally for the uninitiated to allow us to compare Mugabe's rule to how politics was conducted in the past in the country and the wider continent. For example, some readers might not realize the importance tribal and ethnic divides play in many African countries. However, any ignorance in this regard could be fixed by reading Meredith's other books on Africa.
   
   Usually in biographies authors try to psychoanalyze their subject. Fortunately, Meredith does not try to do this. He provides insights using quotes and sources, not psychobabble. This is not only good academic practice, but also creates an alarming effect in the book in which Mugabe himself often seems somewhat distant, except through his public statements. That indeed appears to be how he is in real life, alienated from his nation, isolated from the people, and removed from reality.
   
   I hope he comes out with another revised version when Mugabe finally falls from power.
   
   [note: this book is a revised version of "Our Votes, Our Guns". It says this clearly on the front cover and back, but just to warn future readers...]



2. 2 stars is not a judgment on the quality of this work. No, the low rating is due to the misleading title of the book. As an earlier reviewer suspected, this book simply is a "revised and updated" version of "Our Votes, Our Guns" -- which I already own! Needless to say, I would not have purchased this book had I known that. Yes there is a small footnote on the BACK OF THE BOOK, but you don't see that until the book arrives.
   
   Furthermore, Meredith doesn't even provide and introduction telling one just what parts he has updated or revised. I'm sure this version contains valuable commentary on events since the earlier book, but there's no easy way to find the new material.
   
   Overall I'm sure the book still is a valuable introduction to the insanity that is the Mugabe regime (that's why I gave it 2 stars rather than 1). If, however, you have read the earlier "Our Votes, Our Guns," save your money and wait for "Dinner with Mugabe" to be released.



3. great book. i'm not really a book guy. i had to read an african book for a class so i chose mugabe.
   
   this book easily held my attention. i read every word of it in a few hours. i knew nothing about modern zimbabwe. this book changed that.
   
   if you want to read a book that in 3 hours will make you an expert on a very relevant and important current world issue.. pick up mugabe.



4. I served briefly in Mugabe's Zimbabwe as a transiting diplomat in 1998 after the bombings of our East African embassies. I was astounded how someone could spit in the face of the economic forces that provided him with the lavish lifestyle he so enjoyed. This book does an excellent job of portraying the nascence and subsequent decay of one of the world's most corrupted minds. The breadbasket of Africa was turned into desert by this man. Everyone should read this book.



5. As a Zimbabwean who had to leave the country due to it's current troubles, it was very difficult for me to pick up this book and look for answers to some of the many questions I had about what went wrong in my homeland. However, I came away fascinated by Martin Meredith's careful piecing together of the last three or four decades of Zimbabwe's history. He has assembled a brilliant account of the rise and rule of Mugabe and his Zanu-PF party, and has, for the most part, accurately detailed the major events that have occurred since Mugabe came to power in 1980. The book is not only an account for Zimbabweans, but is written so that any person who is not informed of Zimbabwe's present crises will receive an in-depth look of all that has gone wrong in what was once "the breadbasket of Subsaharan Africa."

   On an aside, this book bears a strong resemblance to another Amazon listing: "Our Votes, Our Guns: Robert Mugabe and the Tragedy of Zimbabwe" by Martin Meredith. Although I have not read this second book, I believe that they are one and the same book.
   by Martin Meredith

5 comments about Carry a Big Stick: The Uncommon Heroism of Theodore Roosevelt (Leaders in Action Series).

1. This at first appears to be a short well written comprehensive story of Teddy Roosevelt's life. It turns out to be a right wing evangelical
   christian propaganda piece. Actual facts are interspersed with false
   statements to influence the reader on modern social issues which have
   no place in an objective scholarly work. Do not read this book if you
   want a fair and balanced picture.



2. What a wonderful book! Teddy Roosevelt was brilliantly ressurected for us by George Grant in this comprehensive, yet easy-to-read work (because of the chapter lengths). Section 1 is a biography of his life; Section 2 contains short chapters on his character, and many sides to his life; Section 3 deals with his legacy.
   
   This book gives the reader a good look a life in the U.S. during the last half of the 19th century, as well as one of the period's most beloved of heroes.



3. I just wanted a simple biography on Theodore Roosevelt, but this was pretty openly and obviously a book with an agenda. True, the basics about Theodore Roosevelt are here, but the emphasis is on spiritual faith and values. Since I read this book, I read Roosevlet's autobiography and came to realize that he is much more complex than this book suggests.



4. This is an incredible book, that truly gives you the insight of one of the greatest men that ever lived. Filled with many incredible principles to live by, you WILL enjoy this book and the excitement it brings to your life!



5. I've read 40+ plus books by or about TR and this is the worst, one-sided view of this complex, multi-facted man. This is as bad as the radical-left "Howard Zinn-ism" revisionist history of TR's foreign policies.

   There are too many "blatant" errors to list in this mini-review, but just for starters:

   1). TR did not, as the author claims, visit his mother's Georgia plantation "10 or more times". It is well documented that TR only visited Bulloch Hall twice -once as president and once post-White House. He did not have a very high opinion of most Southerners, despite the author's claims to the contrary. His wife abhorred most Southerners.

   2). TR did not force his children, particulary Alice, to attend church every Sunday. Edith was the religious task master of the family and in her quiet manner usually rounded up all kids, except for Alice. Alice was a well-known, open atheist from her teen years until she died. TR and Edith had accepted the teenager's refusal to be confirmed in the Episcopal church or any other church. Their son Archie also grew up to be an agnostic.

   3). TR most certainly did NOT shower Edith with flowers and jewels. He never even remembered her birthday (though he never forgot the date of their engagement and wedding anniversay). Edith hated receiving extravagent gifts from anyone, especially her husband. They did have a very happy marriage and home life but he also known for taking off on 3-month hunting trips soon after Edith would deliver another baby.

   4). TR most certainly did like to attend parties and was a professional social butterfly because he knew he would probably end up as the main attraction - just what his ego needed. The author paints TR as a man who shunned social gatherings to be with his family 24/7. Definitely not true. He LOVED being around people of all and any type, though his wife certainly like to stoke the home fires more than making the social rounds.

   5). TR never made any speeches about abortion. Abortion was not on the radar screen in his time. The author uses quotes that TR said about women not wanting to get married and raise families to make it seem as though TR were speaking direcly on the subject of abortion.

   6). TR believed in and preached on the separation of Church and State. He wanted to remove "In God We Trust" from the US coinnage and even pushed one of the leading artists of that time, Grant LaFarge, to create a new design. The "religious right" of his time went ballistic over this decision and he later backed down. He made many speeches proclaiming that the Church stay out of the affairs of the State. Indeed, he was a strong, "old school" Christian who did preach to the citizens the value of religion, a happy home life, and following the morals one teaches to his/her children. However, he also thought a country would head down the dangerous path if a certain religion or belief were forced upon its citizens.

   I would not recommend this book on TR to ANYONE.

5 comments about Scipio Africanus: Rome's Greatest General.

1. Reading the differing views of reviewers Asaro and Augustin makes one thing clear: while the latter has obviously read the book, the former, despite being an ardent fan of Scipio, has not. Otherwise he would have noticed that Gabriel himself discounts the myth of the 80 elephants Roman propaganda gives to Hannibal at Zama, and also that Gabriel realizes that it was Hannibal who was responsible for luring the cavalry of Massinissa and Laelius from the battlefield. It was sheer luck that they returned before Hannibal's veterans cut down the Roman line--probably it was a matter of minutes that saved Scipio from defeat. At Zama the armies were not evenly matched. Hannibal was unable to bring back his cavalry from Italy, and with the exception of his last line of veterans, he had only inferior troops. Massinissa's betrayal gave Scipio a large cavalry advantage. It is clear that without Massinissa Scipio's chances of defeating Hannibal were non-existent. Scipio did not fight any great armies or generals prior to Zama. The Carthaginian commanders in Spain were largely incompetent, with the possible exception of Hannibal's brother Hasdrubal, and in his case Scipio failed to prevent him from escaping with his army largely intact to cross the Alps to attempt to join his brother in Italy, so that Baecula was untimately a fiasco rather than a great victory. To compare Scipio's victories against incompetents such as Hasdrubal Gisco with Caesar's victories over the likes of Vercingetorix or Pompey (a great Roman general himself, leading a first class professional army) is preposterous. And Scipio's "victory" against Syphax and Hasdrubal Gisco by the treacherous burning of their camps in the middle of the night while pretending to negotiate a peace treaty was dishonorable to say the least (similar to the Japanese "victory" at Pearl Harbour). Mr. Asaro further shows his ignorance by stating that the cavalry battle of the Ticinus was a standoff rather than a victory for Hannibal, which is total nonsense. Hannibal defeated the Romans at the Ticinus river, at the Trebia, at Lake Trasimeno, at Cannae, at Herdonea (twice), remained undefeated on Italian soil for over 15 years, and would have vanquished Scipio in the last battle ,had it not been for the lucky (for the Romans) return of Massinissa. It was a tragedy for the world that lack of resources did not allow him to win the war in Italy, for after Zama the militaristic Roman Republic became the predatory Roman Empire. To understand the implications, read Faulkner's Rome: Empire of the Eagles. And for a better appreciation of what really happened at Zama, see the article by Mosig & Belhassen in The International Journal of the Humanities, 5:9, 2007, pp. 175-186.



2. Paul Grabiel's book "Scipio Africanus" is a stunning biography of one of the few Roman generals who never suffered defeat in military combat. The book goes far beyond a discussion on Roman Society, and the Punic Wars, it also teaches many lessons that can still be applied in military arts today.
   
   The book's main focus is on the military campaigns of Scipio Africanus across Spain and Carthage in The Second Punic Wars. The military campaigns culminate with the Roman defeat of Hannibal's army in the Battle of Zama. Each of the campaigns is laid out by discussing the strategic context of the battle and is supported by graphics depicting the layout of the armies.
   
   Scipio Africanus was a master at building alliances. He knew of his own army's weakness in cavalry, so he specifically formed an alliance with the Numidians, who were known for their master horsemanship. His ability to form strategic alliances carried over into other key areas, such as logistics. The old adage is that an army moves on its stomach. Scipio Africanus understood this very well, and he planned his campaigns to ensure that his army never moved beyond its supply base.
   
   What other lessons can we learn from Scipio that can be applied today? Scipio Africanus exemplified two key tenets of what is known in current military parlance by such buzzwords as the "Revolution in Military Affairs", or "Transformation". The first element was tactical innovation. Gabriel asserts that until his time, Roman legions could only maneuver in only two directions - forward and backward. Scipio Africanus invented the means for second echelon units to maneuver to the outside of the formation, enabling an envelopment of the enemy. At the time, these tactics were revolutionary concepts and caught many adversaries by surprise.
   
   A second lesson is on the standardization of equipment, with the corollary of integrating technological improvements. Gabriel writes of Scipio Africanus' adoption of the Spanish sword after the battle of New Carthage. Gabriel writes "With some design changes, it became the gladius hispanicus, the Roman army's basic infantry weapon."
   
   This book was my first experience with the Punic Wars, and it is a great book for the the casual reader.



3. Dr. Gabriel,the widely-known and respected military historian and ethicist served justice in this new volume in his series of biographies of the world's greatest generals.
   While historians and textbooks present the adventures of Hannibal, this author brings to the reader the genius of Scipio as one of the greatest generals of antiquity whose talents are proven -among many others- in the brilliant strategies applied in the battles at the Tower of Agathocles, the Carthagian Camps, the Great Plains, Zama, and the Ebro River in the early years of 200 BCE. All make it evident that he set Rome on its imperial course, expending Rome's power over parts of western Europe, Africa and Asia. This unmatched military biography is a significant contribution to scholarly interest as enlightening reading to all who have interest in history.
   The thirty-five pages of notes and eight pages of bibliography witness to the author's thoroughness and deep knowledge of the topic.



4. I am writing this review to correct what are very serious errors by the first review that appears here, and what also appear to me to be a bewildering perspective given in that review, in the hope that those who are not familiar with the history of the second Punic War and its aftermath may be more encouraged to read the book and the few that have proceeded it - including the history of Polybius. In the first place, the first review completely fails to note that Scipio Africanus faced a far more professional set of generals than the likes of Marius, Sulla, or even Julius Caesar. He did this, despite the lack of full support of Rome. To compare Scipio to them is absurd as their circumstances and the significance of what Scipio faced and they did are so far apart as to render comparison meaningless. The reviewer fails to note Scipio's defeat of 4 Catharginian armies in Spain, 2 more in Africa, before meeting Hannibal at Zama; all armies were led by well seasoned and highly professional commanders. At Zama Hannibal had advantage of his veteran troops, 80 war elephants, and a well manned cavalry. The two sides were rather evenly matched. Hannibal's veterans troops were at the rear - so why do you think Scipio had Laelius and Massinisa first drive the Hannibal's cavalry off the field and then encircle Hannibal's veterans? Luck? Now comes a typical Hannibal apology - "It wasn't Scipio that beat Hannibal, it was the Roman cavalry" - Oh lord! Let me digress a bit to demonstrate the nonsense of this type of "reasoning". Try saying it wasn't Montgomery and later Patten that drove Rommel all over North Africa, it was the British and then the American armored divisions. The comment is absurd of course, but that is my point! Scipio fully realized the criticality of a well disciplined cavalry and very effectively built one, first around Laelius, and then around Laelius and Massinisa. He also built an effective naval force as he needed it. He revolutionized Roman tactics, which of course the likes of Marius, Sulla, and "what's his name" inherited, but never really did themselves. As for a grand strategy, that began with Scipio's father and uncle who decided to press on to Spain rather then turn back to face Hannibal - the battle of the Tinicus was more of a standoff then a victory for Hannibal! It appears that the reviewer would benefit from a bit of background reading and not rely on Hollywood movies for his "facts" and perspective.
   
   To call Scipio Rome's greatest general is quite appropriate - after all, within 53 years after Zama Rome went from being an Italian city state to ruling most of of the world it knew - did the others accomplish that? Hannibal and his country lost it all. But, as Hart had told us, folks like the loser, not the winner.



5. Scipio is one of the great Roman heroes and I was looking forward to this book with the hope that it would offer a biography more in historical context than earlier works. It may have succeeded but as I was unable to finish it, I'll never know. There is a good bit of theorizing about minutiae of interest only to an historian and none to me. The thread of Scipio's life eventually go so lost in interpretations and asides that I gave up.

5 comments about The Lonely Empress: Elizabeth of Austria.

1. I enjoyed the book. It was well written and obviously well researched.
   I like the way it had info from personal writtings from the time, also.
   
   I enjoyed the gallery of pictures included in the text, as well.
   
   I will probably read the book at least one more time.



2. to me she should never married franz joseph i,she was to much of a free spirit.austria court was to old fashion for a soul like hers.she had the mother -in law from hell didn't help.



3. I was dreading that this book would be like all other's in that it would portray Elizabeth as a poor little spoiled, mis-understood rich girl. It didn't and I found that very refreshing.
   My only critism of this book is that there is only one occasion when the author translated the french, german, russian, etc. quotes that were used and I found that mildly annoying as I don't speak or read any of those languages.
   Overall a very good book!



4. I really enjoyed this book, there was only a minor matter which rather annoyed me. I wonder why nobody seems to have taken the trouble of checking the proper spelling of all those European names?
   As a native speaker of both German and Hungarian, I was quite
   distracted by reading Gödollo instead of Gödöllõ, to name just one of many blunders.
   Crenneville sometimes becomes Grenneville, Marie Vetsera turns into a Mary, Maria Theresia is always Maria Theresa, robbed of an i, the Ballhausplatz is shortened into Ballplatz, and while Hapsburg is not exactly wrong, it was apparently never used officially - and you don't often come across it even in Austria.
   Perhaps in future editions someone might provide corrections? I think the book is worth it.



5. Top of Form
   
   
   I was somewhat reluctant to first start reading The Lonely Empress because, from the some of the biographies I've read (but certainly not all!), they tend to start out interesting but then become dull and boring. It usually takes a talented author to write a biography on a boring royal. But even an unskilled author would have no trouble about sounding fascinating if their subject matter was Elisabeth of Austria.
   
   Born a mere daughter of a duke in Bavaria, Elisabeth had a fairytale (ish) romance. The emperor of Austria, Francis Joseph, was already engaged to Elisabeth's sister Helen when he fell in love with her. All of a sudden, to everyone's surprise, the Emperor started to rant about the grace and beauty of this younger sister, much to the dismay of his mother, the archduchess Sophie, who thought that Helen would become the perfect empress.
   
   Elisabeth was still a child when she became engaged to the Emperor. Suddenly, she wasn't allowed to run wild, like she had been when she was younger. Elisabeth had been known to skip her lessons and go out riding for hours. She inherited her father's peculiarity and was known to be her happiest when surrounded by less than royal people. Her father, Duke Max, was renowned for his strangeness. He was known to travel the Bavarian countryside to escape his duties and delighted in circuses. The poor Duchess Ludovica, Elisabeth's mother, must have had a terrible time with her daughter and equally childish husband. Because of her strangeness and wild country ways, the Viennese court look down upon Elisabeth.
   
   What makes this book more interesting is how the author has portrayed Elisabeth. She doesn't try to make her into a selfish, spoiled woman yet she doesn't spend the whole book describing her flawless beauty. Elisabeth seems to be a difficult topic to write about. As many people who have met the Empress say about her throughout the book, "She could be quite charming when she wanted to be. Yet she could also become cold and haughty."
   
   Elisabeth has you admiring her at times, like when she tries to help the Hungarian people regain their Constitution, and at other times hating her, the way she treated her husband and children, the woman whose husband spent fortunes building her three homes around Europe and who still wasn't grateful or satisfied. This woman traveled to countries far away so she could escape her duties as an Empress and her husband.
   
   But one feels for Elisabeth at how much misfortune she had dealt with in her life. She seems to be a caged bird, she seems to have those natures that cannot be trapped or caged. She needed wide spaces so she can spread her wings. The author portrayed Elisabeth excellently and made the book an enjoyable read.