5 comments about A Narrative of the Life of David Crockett of the State of Tennessee.

1. Great Book!!! I especially liked the "folksy" way it was written, to give readers a real feel for the frontier, backwoods life in the Eastern States of 200 years ago. It's even endearing to read of Davy's real-life adventures in his own semi-literate writing style. He did make quite a life of his too-short 50 years on this Earth! I also highly recommend American Legend: The Real-Life Adventures of David Crockett, a more recent book by Buddy Levy. This was the first book I've read on the subject of Davy Crockett, and found the reference to "A Narrative...." in it. Also a very enjoyable, and engrossing book, although not written by Davy Crockett himself. Get both! If you have a fascination with American history, as I do, beside sharing Davy's birthday of August 17, you won't be able to put them down until you're through reading them! Enjoy!



2. Professor Hutton gives us a scholarly edition of an essential American folk narrative. Partly an exercise in self-promotion (Crockett makes it clear he sees himself on the way to the Presidency) and partly an attempt to correct - or recast - the myth that already surrounded him, it remains a valuable insight into the social history of early nineteenth-century America.
   
   Davy was the great hero of the children of my generation, following the Disney movie, the Ballad and so on. It's nice to meet the real person at last. For, despite the fact that it was his friend Chilton who wrote down the words, and the fact that Crockett was very selective in what he reported and how he reported it, I think the man's real voice comes through.
   
   Like all memoirs, this one gives the reader a feel for what life was like for people - frontier folk, that is - at the time, in a way that no history book, no matter how well researched, can. The overriding impression is of a life of extraordinary hardship, in which terrible setbacks are shrugged aside and the struggle resumed. It was also a culture of racial hostility, which gives rise to some references to non-whites - black and Indian - that will fall uneasily on most modern ears. But so it was.
   
   The story gains added poignancy from the knowledge that it was published just two years before Crockett's death at the Alamo. It was there that his enduring fame was assured.
   [PeterReeve]



3. Confusion about authorhip has followed "A Narrative" more than 170 years. It helps to understand that Thos. Chilton, Representative from Kentucky, shared living quarters with Crockett at Mary Ball's Rooming House. They were actual bedfellows, which was the custom of the times; Thos. Chilton was father, eventually, to 15 children. Thomas Chilton had a university education and wrote with recognized eloquence. He crafted "A Narrative" from Crockett's notes and dictation, using carefully the homespun dialogue of his friend.
   
   Thos. Chilton, a skilled lawyer, was not fool enough to do all this this work for free. Davy Crockett arranged for his publisher to pay fifty percent of the book's royalties to Thomas Chilton, who agreed to have no mention of his name in the book. What remains rather obscure is the disposition of royalites after Crockett's death. Thomas Chilton died in 1854.
   
   The role played by Thomas Chilton in "A Narrative" was lost to history for nearly a hundred years, except inside the Chilton Family.
   -- Edward M. Chilton



4. 
   Davy Crockett's Narrative first appeared early in 1834 at the height of his political career. During the 1820s he had won a couple of terms in the Tennessee state legislature, and in 1827 he won a seat in Congress representing the western half of the state. He was a foe of Andrew Jackson and a political maverick; when he advocated for Indian rights he won the enmity of many in Congress and his constituents, and was voted from office in 1831. He licked his wounds and patched up differences, and was re-elected in 1833. To bolster his image, which was already taking on legendary aspects, this Narrative was written with his friend Thomas Chilton. Told in bold, humorous, boastful strokes, it is nonetheless a campaign biography and ends with sharp attacks on Jackson.
   
   The way the Narrative is set up here is very useful for the reader. It appears in facsimile form, with wide margins set around it, in which Shackford explains, corrects, and separates fact from fiction in Crockett's assertions. It's almost like watching a movie on DVD along with critical commentary. Interestingly, many errors that appear in the Narrative were intentional and are often self-deprecating, making Crockett more unsophisticated and lowbrow than he really was in order to win votes with the farmers and backwoodsmen of western Tennessee. Most of the historical references he makes are quite accurate. As a campaign biography to help him win re-election in 1835, however, it was a failure, as he lost to a Jacksonian. After that, he set his eyes on Texas.
   
   The format chosen here is what makes this book a success. The many annotations make this edition of the Narrative the most informative and "honest" in print. Highly recommended.



5. David Crockett found himself to have become mythologized in his own lifetime. Every indication is that he arrived at this place accidentally, but that once he recognized his own pop-culture status he took advantage of it and nurtured it at every turn. His Narrative, therefore, must be read with a certain amount of skepticism nevertheless it is still valuable as an historical record.
   
   The narrative is a journey from start to finish; true Homeric stuff. He describes his journey into adulthood in pre-Mark Twain style, then his journey as an adventurer in the military, his journey across the state of Tennessee with his family, and finally his journey into politics. There may be many embellishments within his narrative, but considering the period in which it was written (while he contemplated a much larger political career) the topics he chose to describe actually seem prosaic and understated, as if he were deliberately trying to avoid bragging about himself. In this light, perhaps the Narrative is more accurate than is generally assumed. The Narrative may have been ghost-written by someone else, but there is enough Crockett in it to give it legitimacy. His jabs at Andrew Jackson are quaintly hilarious, but they are also true. In this pre-Alamo period of his life, his willingness to take a stand against Jackson might be the bravest thing he ever did.
   
   Lastly, the language itself is fascinating. The Narrative may be laced with over-the-top phrases such as, "knocked his trotters out from under him", but at the same time he writes, "if a fellow is born to be hung, he will never be drowned..." This is classic southern wisdom, words I have heard with my own ears in the mountains of eastern Tennessee, so Crockett's Narrative is either very authentic or was itself the basis for an evolving southern culture. In this way, the Narrative should be considered classic American literature.

No comments about Samuel Johnson: The Struggle.

5 comments about Behind the Urals: An American Worker in Russia's City of Steel.

1. A very good account of life in 1930s Russia under the Bolshevik regime led by Lenin and then Stalin. Stalin's policies of collectivism of agriculture and rapid industrialization is very apparent throughout the book. What stands out is the dim view held by many Russian citizens of the capitalistic society of western nations including the United States which is clearly exploited by Stalin to pursue his objectives of social engineering and absolute power. You even find yourself buying into Stalin's propoganda as seems to be the case with the author, John Scott. But Stalin's brutal tactics must not be overlooked. He does create impressive cities and a very strong army, but at a great cost to the Russian people.



2. Other reviewers have done a good job pointing out the positives of this book; it's a unique look at a moment in history in a region most westerners have never heard of. One issue that needs to be made clear, however, is that this book is under no circumstance to be considered unbiased. In reference to Stalin's purges, John Scott makes such statements in as "Often they tried the wrong people, but in Russia this is relatively unimportant" and "Most of these people were innocent, but some were guilty, and some might have become excellent Nazi fifth-columnists. Stalin considered this investment a good one" without a hint of remorse. He plays the apologist, by constantly citing figures like pig iron production or cement tonnage, which are somehow supposed to negate the Stalinist terrors. Yes, the author is a victim of that same blind denial that kept Jews in concentration camps and the Gulag full of innocent Soviets. After reading Eugenia Semyonovna Ginzburg's "Journey Into the Whirlwind", her account of her life in Stalin's prison system, I almost felt physically ill when I reexamined "Behind the Urals". I can not blame Scott for what so many other Soviets fell victim to, the Cult of Stalin, but you have to go into this book with the mindset you would an uncritical book about the wonders of arms production in Nazi Germany. "Behind the Urals" is full of history, but it needs a liberal dose of critical interpretation, and an understandings that his political views should best be taken as an historical curiosity.



3. This book is a first-person account of work life in the Soviet Union in the 1930s. Disenchanted with opportunities in Depression America in 1931, Scott takes off for the Workers' Paradise. He finds a job as a welder building the massive steelworks in the new Soviet city of Magnitogorsk in the Ural Mountains. Altogether, he spent six years living and working in Magnitogorsk until he lost his job due to Stalin's purges.

   The conditions that Scott found himself working in are simply incredible. He rose well before dawn and went to work outdoors in -30 degree temperatures with no breakfast. Lunch, the major meal of the day, was a hunk of bread and some watery soup with perhaps a slice of tough meat. Work place injuries were extremely common, due to the cold, lack of food and lack of training or safety equipment. For example, Scott describes an incident where he was working high above the ground and saw something, or rather, somebody, go sailing past only to the pipes below. As a foreigner, Scott knew some first aid, so he was always called on to care for such injuries when they occurred at the work site. In addition to describing work life and living conditions, Scott also discusses the educational and training systems that were in place and spare time activities such as vacations. He also includes some anecdotes about ex-pat workers who he met in Magnitogorsk.

   Scott remains objective throughout the book, making the message of the book extremely powerful, much more so than if he had pressed political arguments or personal viewpoints. A particularly interesting facet of the book is its discussion of the purges of the 1930s and speculation on their cause. Few other outsiders were living inside Soviet society at the time, so Scott's views can be uniquely enlightening about how Soviets perceived what was happening to their society and why. Scott identifies several possible causes for the purges, but seems to place great emphasis on the fear of foreign saboteurs and does not mention Stalin's personality at all as a possible cause. Area specialists and historians will find much of interest in this book, as will casual readers.




4. This is a great first hand accont of Stalinism at work. John Scott five year experience in Russia gives us a fairly good overview of some of the accomplishments (such as increase production of pig iron three fold in a decade) and also the problems usually involving poor planning or lack of materials. Scott as an American working in Russia gives us an unusual perspective that is quite refreshing. His writing is easy to read and includes many entertaining and revealing anecdotes. Also his writing is not bogged down by the didactic language and relentless facts that plague most works of history. True there is a history of Magnitogorsk that drags a bit but it is over soon enough. Generally, this is considered the definative work on everyday Stalinism



5. John Scott gives us the reader an interesting point of view of Stalin's Soviet Union. His epic journey is not one to bew taken lkightly. He was in an era when disillusionment was high -- the Great Depression and he believed in the fream of work, even in the figid vastlands of the Urals. Scott gives a good account of what wlife was like, but the book goes by either very quickly or very slowly and does not capture a medium of speed that is accpetable to some readers. However, it is a brittlant account of first hand experence if you are looking for suh an account, Scott is your man.

5 comments about Bismarck: The Man and Statesman.

1. Taylor's "Bismarck: The Man and the Statesman" is an accessible piece to the casual reader as well as a provocative piece to the more seasoned historian. Taylor's evaluation of Bismarck's character is the primary strength of this work. More specifically, the author paints Bismarck as an epic statesman who thrives on conflict to the extent to which he needs to create conflicts where they may not exist. He also toys with Bismarck's megalomania in a non-accusatory way--leaving the reader to make such a judgment. The reader is also left to assess whether Bismarck was an opportunist or one who created opportunities. Concerning Bismarck's character, Taylor demonstrates a subtle, tongue-in-cheek (which could be read as anything but subtle or tongue-in-cheek) sense of humor which increases the allure of this book.
   
   The genius of "Bismarck" is the author's treatment of the great statesman's strategic negotiations with Russia and Austria-Hungary. Less stellar, but still impressive, is the analysis of Bismarck's means and ends of German unification.
   
   Taylor is less adept in his evaluation of Bismarck's domestic policies. Notwithstanding the fact that Bismarck's foreign policy legacy has overshadowed his domestic policy triumphs, Taylor offers little more than a perfunctory analysis the creation of the most extensive social welfare state of the 19th Century. The author even goes so far as to deem the socioeconomic safety net as the model for other European states. If this is the case, and I agree that it is, then it deserves more treatment. A second weakness is Taylor's unremitting comparisons to William Gladstone. Taylor openly concedes to the futility of this parallel, then goes on to fruitlessly draw this parallel throughout the book. A final chink in the armor of this otherwise sturdy biography is the final chapter, "Into the Grave and Beyond", in which Taylor unsuccessfully tries to superimpose the legacy of Bismarck onto two World Wars and Cold War diplomatic relations. Though I appreciate Bismarck's impact on these eras, I can't help but wonder if this deserves either a more thorough treatment or no treatment at all. Of course, perhaps I selfishly just want Taylor to elaborate on Bismarck's legacy.
   
   Taylor's "Bismarck" is highly acclaimed and rightfully so. It will satiate the curiosities of some readers and further inspire the curiosities of others.



2. this portrayal of Bismarck gives him a more human aspect.For one thing,Taylor quotes Bismarck's memoirs often,in regard to his motivations and decisions.The other author of a bio on Bismarck,Crankshaw in particular,believes Bismarck's memoirs are not reliable at all and are in fact clouded due to the Iron Chancellors bad memory and multiple(at time unconscious layers of deceit. So being familiar with Crankshaws more recently published bio,it sort of deflates Bismarcks bombastic,philosophic,at times idealistic quotations that Taylor generously sprinkles his bio of Bismarck with.Taylor is aware of Bismarck's duplicity in politics,however the difference between Taylor and Crankshaw is one of degree.Crankshaw's is a supreme deflation of the puffed up Chancellor.Taylor gives credit to Bismarck however for designing social legislation that was later copied by most European governments.Bismarck's 3 wars against Denmark,Austria,and France were contained and had limited objectives,and according to Taylor "cost thousands of lives whereas the wars of the 20th century have cost millions of lives".You can see from a read of Taylor's book how the German govt. could have believed that the War started in 1914,would probably be over as quickly as the other 3 successful wars that lasted a month or two during Bismarck's tenure ithe 1870's.Of course in Crankshaw's work he would say that Bismarck's 3 relatively bloodless wars helped to set up the greivances that led to WW1.Taylor also injects alot of his own philosophical musings into his works. One quote is an an oftake about learning from history,he says,basically that sometimes governments in attempting to correct errors of the past commit even bigger ones in the effort.Still you can't help but believe from Taylor's book that there been a "Bismarckian" type figure in 1914 WW1 could have probably been avoided or have at least been on a smaller scale.But was Bismarck responsible for thwarting coalitions in German government and as a result making the German confederations too dependent on a strong central person?Both of these bios on Bismarck are worth a read and complement each other.Crankshaw seems to take amusement by mentioning that Bismarck's wife became known in later life as a "malicious gossip".He also spends time on Bismarck's son Herbert who Crankshaw characterizes as a dud.This despite being carefully groomed by the Iron Chancellor in the hopes of a little nepotism.Crankshaw concludes it was a "bad hair day" for Herbert.Taylor indulges in none of this type analyzation in his bio,although I'm sure he was aware of the facts or lack of facts.Numerous references to Bismarck's "Lutheranism" is mentioned in the Taylor work,but he was willing to work with Catholic interests if they didn't interfere with the Iron Chancellor's views on a strong and united Germany.



3. I really love books like this one. Now this book may not be the definitive, authoritative biography of Bismarck and it certainly leaves out some key points, but the book is only 288 pages. The book is not supposed to be the definitive work on Bismarck's life. I don't see how someone could pick up a book that is less than 300 pages and think that it will have everything they need to know about one of the greatest politicians the world has ever seen.
   
   So why do I like this book enough to give it five stars? The book is very well written and Mr. Taylor has a nice style so the book is entertaining and easy to read. It is also filled with very good information and, for its size, the book does a very good job hitting the major highlights of a very important historical figure. I think the book does a fantastic job giving the reader a lot of information for the pages read.
   
   I really like these short, well written books on history. They make reading about a topic that is outside one's course of study or interest accessible. The relative small size of the book means it isn't as intimidating as other works and hopefully gives the book a wider audience.
   
   The main thing is know what you're buying here and you won't be disappointed. You cannot get a definitive biography of Bismarck into 300 pages or less, but you can get a really good book that is informative and fun to read. I really liked this book and I think others will enjoy it as well.



4. This has been one interesting read that I just could not put down! A.J.P. Taylor really knows how to make history interesting, concise and maybe a bit too explicatory.



5. Bismarck may be read by high school students,housewives and educated men and women...A.J.P Taylor wrote to several audiences at once. So I would recommend this book to anyone who wants to read a well written book and wants learn about the facts of Bismarck's accomplishments. Furthermore "Bismarck" is a great example of what politicians do and say. The Difference between what constituents want to hear and what great politicians actually do. Examples are when British politicians make anti-Euro currency declarations in order to gain votes, while at the same time quietly adopting European integration measures. Conversely Italian politicians agreeing quickly to sound pro-European Integration,while all the while in practice stalling every European integration measure so as not to loose voters. This book is a great introduction into Parliamentary and extra parliamentary manoevuring,the basics on Right,Center,Left and the Grand coalition,or all party initiatives for US readers.
   Summing up,Bismarck is a pre-requisite to understand European politics and history as well as great lessons in practical politics.

5 comments about A Lady's Life in the Rocky Mountains (The Western Frontier Library, 14).

1. This book arrived in top condition and in time. In a college book store this book cost a lot more, so I am very pleased to be able to buy it from this seller.



2. I thoroughly enjoyed this book and the descriptive way the author wrote. I have been through Colorado and have seen the beauty she described. Also enjoyed the story because there wasn't a lot of violence and if there was any sex, it was only in our imagination which is the greatest kind. I was amazed at how the lady rode for miles in rugged wilderness without seeming to get lost. The fact that she could subsist on meager food was also interesting.



3. I bought this book while visiting Estes Park, CO...hungry for books about life in the West that may not be so readily available here in NJ. I found it to be one of the most enjoyable books I have ever read! Isabella's descriptions of the Rocky Mountains and the climate through which she travelled are vivid and gripping. But more than that, she gives a detailed and honest account of what life was like for settlers on the frontier. How she managed to ride thru the mountains where the only "trails" were tracks of wagons or animals, when often those were covered with the seemingly constant snow, boggles the mind. Her love for Colorado sings out in every word she writes. I too was deeply touched by its beauty, and hope to return again, this time with an enriched appreciation due to this wonderful recounting of Isabella Bird's journey.



4. For many years I saw this book in National Park bookstores and passed it by thinking it would be an example of the overwritten, rather tedious journals of other Victorian travelers. When I finally found it at a used bookstore and rather reluctantly bought it, I was surprised to find out how exciting and relevant her story was.
   
   Because I live in Colorado, I recoginize and travel through many of the places she describes. Just this weekend as we traveled along Highway 67, my husband and I remarked on the likelihood, that this was the same route she'd taken out of Colorado Springs.
   
   Her accounts lend life to the grey, weatherbeaten cabins, abandoned roads and rusting rails that we see. Even though many parts of Europe and the US were relatively modern at the time of her adventures, it is surprising to read just how primitive and precarious was the life of many Colorado settlers.
   
   Even if you aren't from Colorado, read this book to become aquainted with a Victorian woman who found a way to live life fully. Read it to learn about life in the west. Read it just because it's a good read.



5. Did you ever read any of the BEANY MALONE novels by Lenora Mattingly Weber? In them I first read about Isabella Bird and her remarkable life in the American West. Beany's older brother, Johnny Malone, is a teenager when the series begins, a young Denver boy with a remarkable passion for unearthing the memoirs and daguerrotypes of Colorado pioneers and taking notes on the old-timers who settled the state. Their colorful lives make his ordinary life seem rather pastel, so he often sinks into a nostalgia of the past, while his family members tease him about the dreamy look in his eyes. He helps a veteran journalist, Emerson Worth, complete his magnum opus, OUR CITY HAS DEEP ROOTS. And among the pioneers Johnny obsessed about was none other than Isabella Bird, so when I found this book on a recent trip to Boulder, I added it to my rucksack.
   
   If you are reading on horseback, as Isabella Bird did, this is perhaps the ideal book to carry with you. She was a woman used to the English-style horse with its Ascot breeding and high carriage. What she found in Colorado were, naturally, the horses of the West, more perfectly adapted to the mile-high atmospheres, but slung somewhat lower than anything she's been used to and slightly swaybacked. Bird adapted quickly, and the fun of her autobiography is to see her taking in her stride a series of calamities and hardships that would have Job complaining bitterly! No matter if it's an insect infestation or tumbling right through a sheet of ice into zero degree river chills, for Isabella Bird it's all part of a day's fun. Travel writing in the 19th century was, of course, the leading genre of prose. From no other source were English-speaking readers able to find out more about other people's lives, and the curiosity was immense.
   
   You'll like Isabella, and her crazy love affair with Colorado. She remains very much a lady, but will challenge your preconceived notions of what a lady is and isn't. Most of all you will thrill to follow the course of her journeys up and down the mountains through which, now, there are some better trails but still the same amazing sunrises which she describes with the thrill of one for whom every day's an adventure.

5 comments about Kafka Was the Rage: A Greenwich Village Memoir.

1. This is one of the best memoirs I've read. Broyard is brilliant, an elegant writer, and his story is interesting. Anyone in love with New York, or just in love with good memoirs, should read it.



2. My first reaction was, I wish I had been there too. As he said, the public was visually hungry at that time. Now the public is pretty much jaded in mho, but also, there are probably many more visual artists per capita than in 1947.
   Other quotes I liked: pp129 On Delmore Schwartz, he was like the grammar-school bully who rips open your fly buttons. It was Delmore who helped me to understand what I came to think of as the malice of modern art.
   pp134 The social history of the world is, in some ways, a history of censorship.



3. Returning from World War II, Anatole Broyard, a young man of New Orleans Creole stock who had grown up Brooklyn working class, took advantage of the GI Bill to jumpstart his fortunes. Manhattan beckoned across the river, and upon enrolling in The New School, he fell down the rabbit hole and into the Wonderland that was Greenwich Village. At The New School, he sat in the classes of the major intellectuals of the era, many of them from Europe. He had only just begun when he met artist Sheri Donatti, a protégé of Anais Nin, who instantly provided him with a place to live and a relationship that would come to define the entire mad scene, where everyone read Kafka and modern art was It. The old rules, whatever they were, were out the window and where Sheri was in command, the rules changed daily. Broyard, who paints himself as an outsider has enough access to the epicenter of the action and thinking of the place in this time frame to be its ideal interpreter.
   
   This memoir covers just a couple of years, but that's enough to get down the Bohemian culture of Greenwich Village a few years before Keroauc appeared on the scene and nearly a couple of decades before the sixties would recast their own version. Broyard went on to become for 3 decades an admirable book critic for The New York Times and to live a happy, domesticated family life in the suburbs. His lucid, literate and witty style shines in KAFKA WAS THE RAGE. He was working on this memoir when he died of cancer in 1993.



4. If you're expecting an overview of the 1940s Greenwich Village scene, adjust your expectations. This is for the most part an account of Anatole Broyard's life, as he lived in Greenwich Village in the 1940s. The focus is on Broyard's concerns of the time and his particular perceptions. It is a distinct difference.

   That acknowledged, I'd like to say that I recommend the book anyway. Broyard's account is valuable for its loving criticism of the 1940s art world, for its honest recognition of the stupidity of youth, and for its meandering remembrances, repleat with similes and earnest attempts to find meaning in the past. The book is valuable because of its examination of life, an examination that is all the more interesting for the time period and the location of the subject.

   I said that Broyard's account was more an account of his own life than of the times. But it is also an opinion of mine that one life tells a lot about a time period. The setting for the memoir is New York just after WWII--the whole city is glad to be alive and glad to be carefree for the first time since the beginning of the war. And Broyard's account of himself and others in the period is fascinating for that reason, for the way this made people act. Need another reason? Broyard's memoir is peppered with chance meetings with prestigious artists and writers of the time. He exposes the mentality they all lived with--the way they lived with art the way other young people live with football or pop music. He exposes the advantages and disadvantages that that presented. Most of all, he exposes your youth--your own youthful pretensions, and stupidity, and wisdom. It's the account you would write if you had the time... And the insight.




5. One brilliantly sunny day in July, I decided to head out to the lake to bask in the sun and read. Unforuntately, I realized halfway there that I hadn't bought anything to read. So, I trotted over to my local used bookstore and began browsing their recent acquisition table. This little volume immediately gained my attention. It looked like fun, it looked like it would be a quick read, and it was short enough that it wouldn't keep me from continuing in any of the other books that I was already reading. So, off to the lake with this book in hand I went.

   KAFKA WAS THE RAGE was quite a nifty little read. I had read a fair amount about the Beats at one point, so this had some of the same post-WW II Manhattan atmosphere, but that was set more in the area of Columbia University, so this shifted the scene further south. There is no real story to tell here. Broyard merely recounts in a more or less anecdotal form a number of events and individuals from a particular moment in time. He has a gift for summoning up particular moments in vivid detail, and a talent for the brilliant line. An example of the former is his recounting of an adventure in which he took Delmore Schwartz, Clement Greenberg, and Dwight MacDonald to a Spanish Harlem nightclub. Another is his description of his art professor Meyer Schapiro.

   Some great lines:

   "I thought that being a Communist was a penalty you had to pay for being interested in politics."

   [on Dylan Thomas] "To him, an American party was like being in a bad pub with the wrong people."

   [on Delmore Schwartz] "Like Samuel Johnson, whom he resembled in many ways, Delmore was not interested in prospects, views, or landscape. He had looked at the city when he was young, and saw no need to do it again."

   [on a painter friend] "His voice was soft, deep, and cultivated and his manners were a history of civilization."

   As one might expect (and hope for) in a memoir set in such a vibrant era, the book is marvelous for its incessant name-dropping of famous individuals who pop up briefly as characters: figures as diverse as Erich Fromm, Maya Deren, Anais Nin, Caitlin and Dylan Thomas, W. H. Auden, Gregory Bateson, as well as the previously mentioned Schwartz, Greenberg, MacDonald, and Shapiro.

5 comments about Madame de Pompadour (New York Review Books Classics).

1. This is one of my favorite books. I just re-read it recently, and found it just as fascinating and well written. Mitford really manages to capture the interplay of myth and history played out on very human people. This is one of the greatest periods of history, with so many brillant figures flowing in and out of the story. 2 minor MINOR quibbles. 1) As a musician I was disappointed that music doesn't seem to figure in Mitford's world... with Lully, Rameau and the music wars that existed during this time, it would have been nice to hear how that figured into the other arts which she gives good account of. 2) Many quotes not translated. I speak french, but some of these are extensive and really need some translation. Minor quibbles in one of my very favorite reads.



2. Not much of a scholar of French history, but a huge fan of Nancy Mitford, I ordered this book as a tribute to the author. Once reading it, I found out much more about the French court of Louis XV and the intricate rules it observed than I ever thought I'd learn. And am very glad I learned them. The interesting, well-written biography hold the reader's attention and bring compassion to the often reviled lead character.



3. This biography was a refreshing and fun, written by a sympathetic aristocrat. The flavors, entertainment and relationships of the court come to life. It is hard not to develop a deep respect for Madame de Pompadour in the course of the book. Highly recommended.



4. Mitford was a writer who specialized in describing the intricacies of court life at Versailles , from fashions and decorum to architecture and romance. She was not quite as adept at the political situation of the time; while she doesn't gloss over it, there is no pizzazz in discussing. Nevertheless, I enjoyed this book very much. It's colorful and conveys a sense of what Madame de Pompadour endured to become the most powerful woman in France and how she gained that power by being not only beautiful but very intelligent and alluring.



5. Anyone who has enjoyed Nancy Mitford's novels "The Pursuit of Love" and "Love in a Cold Climate" will appreciate what a deliciously witty writer she can be, especially when describing the lives of the privileged class. Reading her biography of Madame la Marquise de Pompadour (Mitford is strong on the use of proper aristocratic titles) one is not certain where Nancy's life ends and la Pompadour's life begins. Some of her comments are so ultra-sophisticated so as to be hilarious, such as calling the Parc aux Cerfs, where Louis XV kept his women, a "nice little brothel." This book may not be at the top of my list of serious scholarly tomes, but it is not without merit as a work of history, and one is given a colorful glimpse of another world.

5 comments about Set Up Running: The Life of a Pennsylvania Railroad Engineman, 1904-1949.

1. Essential reading for all rail enthusiasts, not just PRR. A great historical overview of the life and times of a railroad engineer in Central Pennsylvania, from the turn of the century to WWII.



2. As I read this book I could almost feel the track clicking below the engine, hear the chuffing of the engine as it labored to pull the cars, listen to the lonesome sound of the whistle as the engineer arrived at the crossing and feel the power as the fireman put the coal to the firebox and the engineer pulled the Johnson bar. All in all a great read and a book that anyone interested in the steam era would read with relish.



3. One of the most compelling railroad books I've read - the narrative is compelling because of Orr's consistent, insightful commitment to doing his job well and discovering the most efficient way to get his train over the road. Of course hardcore railfans will enjoy this book, but I think students of industrial history and those interested in the way people go about their jobs (a la Studs Terkel/working) will get something out of this book as well.



4. Set Up Running is simply the VERY BEST railroad related book which I have EVER read! If you don't have it GET IT! PERIOD! (PS: I have NO financial interest in this book or any organization/company which sells it). I'm doing YOU a favor by rating this book and advising YOU to get it!)
   
   ceh



5. The detailed descriptions in "Set Up Running" will have you smelling coal smoke. Even though I have been a rail fan for all of my 65 years, was an NYC-PC employee, and I'm a native of Pennsylvania, I learned something new on nearly every page and thoroughly enjoyed this book.
   
   Although "Set Up Running" deals almost exclusively with operations on a PRR branch line, ferroequinologists (students of the iron horse) everywhere will love this book. It has the unique quality of making you wish it would go on forever.

5 comments about Shakespeare: The Biography.

1. I'm surprised by the number of five-star reviews: I feel I'm being rather generous with four. This "biography" is a collection of very short chapters dealing with aspects of Elizabethan life nominally connected with specific periods or events of Shakespeare's life--aspects political, economic, cultural, religious, moral, aesthetic, economic, literary, theatrical, architectural, sartorial, legal, familial, pedagogical, erotic, hygienic, pathological, psychological, sociological, and linguistic (among others). Some of this is quite interesting: I found the book generally held my interest. But these lucubrations--they often amount to a kind of noodling--are almost never tied to a real argument, and while they sometimes seem to enlighten, they rarely allow a strong sense of a Shakespearian personality to coalesce.
   
   Still, I'm grateful to Ackroyd for some insights, among them: the collective, open-ended nature of the process of composition as well as of the performance of the plays; the influence of legal education and practice upon Elizabethan theater in general and Shakespeare's work in particular; the improvisational nature of his writing; they way in which the plays' unity is often mainly a matter of language and image rather than theme.



2. Peter Ackroyd is the greatest living biographer. Simple as that. Unfortunately, this is probably his least satisfying biography. This is not to say that the book is not an enjoyable read, for it most assuredly is. But it is not up to Ackroyd's usually outstanding snuff.
   Part of the reason for this is that there is so little evidence of Shakespeare's life available to the researcher beyond the plays themselves. We just don't know that much. Mr. Ackroyd also presents the book in numerous very brief chapters, which tends to make the work choppy, and lends itself to occasional repetition.
   Still, the book is well worth the effort. Ackroyd's prose remains a rich, sumptuous meal, highly satisfying, yet easily digested. As the evidence is so thin, Ackroyd frequently speculates about what Shakespeare may have done, or what he may have been thinking at any given time. One gets the impression that Mr. Ackroyd's speculations are right on target. The book gives tremendous insight into what life was like in the late 16th and early 17th centuries. This is probably its greatest strength.
   In short, Shakespeare: The Biography is an excellent book. It's just not quite as excellent as what I've been used to with Peter Ackroyd.



3. Of course, any biography of Shakespeare is mostly a biography of Renaissance England, since so little is known of his actual life, but Ackroyd pulls together every scrap of fact and weaves it all together in a way that makes the era and the man full of life and energy. He uses a lot of "evidence" from the plays, but that's okay. Did Shakespeare follow the dictum "write what you know?" I loved this biography; I feel like I know Shakespeare the man as well as I possibly can! (I listened to it on CD; very well done.)
   Bobbye Larson



4. The following is a review of the Audiobook version of Peter Ackroyd's "Shakespeare: The Biography" read by Simon Vance.
   
   The hallmark of a good biography is the author's ability to breathe life into both his subject and the time and place his subject lived. It isn't enough to tell the story of a man if you fail to put that man in his proper context Peter Ackroyd has a gift for bringing both his subject (for example, see The Life of Thomas More) and a time and place (for example, see London: The Biography) alive.
   
   In "Shakespeare: The Biography" Ackroyd brilliant re-creates the milieu of both Stratford-on-Avon and London by culling a great deal of source material. Ackroyd captures both the startling seditious plots against Elizabeth I as well as the mundane land transfers and legal court cases of the day.
   
   In rendering Shakespeare, Ackroyd makes amply sure the reader is aware that there is not much material (other than his collected works) to which to draw from. When Ackroyd is positing a hypothesis about the whereabouts or the attitudes of Shakespeare, he alerts the reader that he is doing so. He provides the evidence for which he posits his hypothesis and even offers alternatives and allows the reader to choose.
   
   "Shakespeare: The Biography" turns out to be just as much a "biography" of the collected works of Shakespeare as it is a biography of the man. All of Shakespeare's "accepted" works are represented and some it is speculated that he wrote.
   
   The narration by Simon Vance is phenomenal. By the end, I easily concluded that if Simon Vance were to read the local phone book, I would probably listen to it. Vance's voice is clear and distinct. His diction is spot on.
   
   All in all, I would highly recommend "Shakespeare: The Biography" in any format you could get your hands on.



5. A very readable book that perhaps repeats what thewriter believed to be shakespeare's many facets and qualities. Chapters are very short and invite the reader to carry on reading. It is an easy read book, filled with lots of fascinating information and one that i would recommend to someone wanting not just to find out a lot about Shakespeare but someone who wanted him set into his slot in history.

5 comments about Dwight D. Eisenhower.

1. "I like Ike." A statement that defined the political world of the 1950s. The popular leader of Allied forces in the European Theater during World War II received high approval ratings from the public throughout his presidency. This brief book, a part of The American Presidents series, provides a brief and readable glimpse of Ike's life and his presidency. The author is Tom Wicker, who originally achieved considerable visibility as a columnist with The New York Times.
   
   If you're like me, you might rather read D'Este's "Eisenhower," which takes almost 700 pages to text to bring his biography to the end of World War II. However, most people will not be interested in such a massive work, and the 140 page volume by Wicker is apt to prove more attractive to people.
   
   As with other volumes in the series, this one begins with the family background and Dwight Eisenhower's early years. Some readers might be surprised to know that, when he went to West Point, he was a star football player (and see the incredible confrontation between Ike and his mates and Jim Thorpe and his in books such as 'Carlisle vs. Army"). Later, he began to work his way up the military hierarchy, by providing excellent staff support to leaders such as Generals Pershing, MacArthur and Marshall. When World War II broke out, he was not an especially visible figure. Soon, though, he rose to Allied command in North Africa and then in Europe. Other books describe this period in much more detail--and illustrate both his strengths and his weaknesses. After the War, he served in a number of capacities. In 1952, he began his quest for the presidency.
   
   The book does a nice job of showing how he won the nomination. Then, his major challenges: the War in Korea, Quemoy and Matsu, the U-2 shoot down, Dienbienphu and Vietnam, Senator McCarthy, economic slowdowns, physical ailments (heart attack and stroke), the space race, relations with the Soviet Union, and so on and so on. Once thought of as a rather amiable cipher as president, historians and political scientists more recently have reappraised his presidency. I am not sure that that reappraisal always manifests itself in Wicker's book.
   
   Then, the transition as of the election of 1960. The relationship between Eisenhower and Nixon is played out reasonably well in this book. Then, after the e3lection, Eisenhower's retirement from public service and his later years.
   
   As a brief biography, this works pretty well. For those wanting to get a sense of Dwight Eisenhower in a compact book, this is pretty good.



2. As I write, our country is in the midst of a highly contentious presidential campaign, including, today, the sharply-fought Pennsylvania primary. In light of the furor of the ongoing campaign, I have been trying to revisit the American presidents in the short series of biographies edited by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. I thought a consideration of our 34th President, Dwight D. Eisenhower would be especially appropriate for these tumultous events. I was alive during the Truman presidency but Eisenhower was the first president I can remember. I have always had the sense that he was, somehow, undervalued as a leader. Thus I was eager to read Tom Wicker's brief biography.
   
   Wicker admits at the outset that he was never a political supporter of Eisenhower. With that in mind, his admiration for Eisenhower as a person and for some of his accomplishments as President comes through in this book. I didn't find this book as harsh or unfair towards Eisenhower as did some of my fellow reviewers. Yet I agree that Eisenhower warrants a more detailed look than Wicker's and, indeed, deserves more.
   
   Eisenhower (1890 -- 1969) was born in Texas but grew up in Kansas. He served two terms as the 34th president (1953 -- 1961). Wicker's book, probably for reasons of space, quickly passes over Eisenhower's early life, including his extraordinary military career, to focus on the eight years of his presidency.
   
   The 1950s were a difficult time in which the United States and the U.S.S.R came perilously close to war on several occasions. Wicker offers Eisenhower qualified praise for his foreign policy and for his role as a "man of peace." Eisenhower ended the war in Korea and worked for disarmament even though, in Wicker's terms he "fumbled" on opportunity to secure a nuclear test-ban treaty late in his administration as a result of his decision to authorize a final U-2 flight over Russia. Wicker gives Eisenhower high praise for his handling of the Suez Crisis in 1956, which he describes as the President's finest hour, and for his calming influence after the U.S.S.R launched Sputnik in 1957, leading to panic among many Americans over our educational system and scientific and military readiness. Wicker faults Eisenhower for his engagin in covert warfare in Guatamala and Iran and he is vaguely critical of Eisenhower's role in precipitating what would become America's involvement in Vietnam.
   
   In domestic affairs, Wicker focuses almost entirely of Eisenhower's role in discrediting Senator Joseph McCarthy and in his actions regarding Civil Rights. Many writers besides Wicker are critical of Eisenhower for not being more agressive against McCarthy. But as Wicker shows, Eisenhower worked effectively to bring about McCarthy's demise, not the least of which work was in allowing him to self-destruct. Eisenhower's approach may well have been more effective and less divisive to the country than a more confrontational approach.
   
   Wicker also is highly critical of Eisenhower for his less than full support of the Supreme Court's decision in Brown v. Board of Education and for his failure to exercise the moral suasion both he and his office possessed to implement civil rights. Many admirers of Eisenhower have come to the same conclusion. Yet, Eisenhower used force to protect the rights of African American students in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1957. And Eisenhower's two immediate successors in the presidency were themselves slow to commit to the civil rights movement. A recent book by David Nichols, "A Matter of Justice: Eisenhower and the Civil Rights Revolution" (2007) reassess in part Eisenhower's contributions behind the scenes to the cause of civil rights.
   
   The 1950s are sometimes regarded as a time of somnolescence and conformity in the United States and sometimes as a subject of sentimentalized nostalgia. Eisenhower had proven his ability as a leader during WW II and he served the nation well, even Wicker admits, as President during a difficult era. According to one of his advisers quoted by Wicker, Eisenhower's greatest strength was "in getting people to compromise divergent views without anyone's surrender of principle." (p. 138) In view of the never-ending tumult our country has undergone since the 1960s, one can do worse than the balance, sanity, and quietly effective leadership that characterized the presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower.
   
   Robin Friedman



3. Wicker shows the complexities of our 34th President. Eisenhower was a great wartime commander. He led men into battle and exercised diplomacy in his wartime alliance. He was a so-so president who did some memorable things. Ike started the intrastate highway system, warned against the military-industrial complex, toppled two legitimate governments (Iran, Guatemala) and came close to a nuclear test ban treaty. He was a man many Americans treated as a father figure. He won two terms as President. Many people would have voted him a third term if the law allowed it. He was against the Brown vs. Board of Education decision but used the military to back up the judiciary.
   
   Wicker spent a week with Eisenhower in 1962. Even though his admiration of President and General Eisenhower in there, his book is a fair accessment of this great American. Eisenhower may not have been a great President, but he was far better than most of our chief executives.



4. FIRST OF ALL, I TEACH HISTORY FOR A LIVING, SO I KNEW QUITE A BIT ABOUT THE SUBJECT MATTER BEFORE READING WICKER AND AMBROSE'S BOOKS. AFTER READING BOTH PIECES OF WORK, I CAN STILL DECLARE "I LIKE IKE." NO QUALITY, RELIABLE PIECE OF HISTORICAL WORK SHOULD HAVE A PERSONAL SLANT BY THE WRITER HIMSELF. IS THIS BOOK PERFECTLY WRITTEN? CERTAINLY NOT. IS IT WORTHY OF BEING READ; CERTAINLY. I HAVE TO ADMIT THOUGH, IT DOES HAVE A VERY NEGATIVE SLANT TOWARD IKE, ALMOST A PERSONALLY NEGATIVE SLANT.
   
   HOWEVER AFTER READING AMBROSE'S WORK ON IKE, YOU ALMOST FEEL AS IF IKE WAS THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST. AMBROSE WHITEWASHED IKE'S FLAWS COMPLETELY. I THINK AMBROSE WAS ENAMORED WITH IKE. HELL, WHO WOULDN'T BE? THE MAN LED THE BIGGEST BUNCH OF HEADCASES (PATTON, MONTY, CLARK, MACARTHUR, AND DE GAULLE) IN WWII (OUTSIDE OF THE AXIS POWERS) TO VICTORY! IKE WAS A TREMENDOUSLY FLAWED INDIVIDUAL, BUT WHO ON EARTH ISN'T? I AGREE WITH THE OLD SAYING, "A MAN IS NEITHER GOOD NOR BAD FOR ONE ACTION." OR SEVERAL ACTIONS WITH IKE!
   
   I BELIEVE THAT MAYBE READING BOTH OF THESE GIVES YOU A BETTER PERSPECTIVE ON IKE RATHER THAN JUST PICKING ONE OVER THE OTHER. ONE PRESENTS IKE AS THE ANTI-CHRIST, AND THE OTHER PRESENTS IKE AS CHRIST REBORN. I'LL LET YOU DECIDE WHICH IS WHICH. IT WON'T TAKE YOU LONG.
   
   FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO THINK THAT THIS BOOK IS "TOO CRITICAL OF EISENHOWER", THE FACTS ARE WHAT THEY ARE! HE DID NOT INTEGRATE THE ARMED FORCES, TRUMAN DID. EISENHOWER DID HAVE AN AFFAIR WITH HIS BRITISH SECRETARY AND WAS TRYING TO LEAVE MAMIE, NO MATTER HOW AMBROSE TRIES TO DOWNPLAY IT. EISENHOWER WAS TREMENDOUSLY WEAK IN URGING CIVIL RIGHTS REFORM WHEN HE SPOKE TO SEVERAL KEY SOUTHERN SENATORS AND TOLD THEM THAT HE WAS ONLY SENDING IN FEDERAL TROOPS TO LITTLE ROCK BECAUSE HIS "OFFICE DEMANDED IT, BUT IT WAS GOING TO BE THE MILDEST OF CIVIL RIGHTS REFORM POSSIBLE." IF ANY PRESIDENT HAD THE PUBLIC SUPPORT TO BRING ABOUT RADICAL CIVIL RIGHTS REFORM, IT WAS IKE. HE WASTED THAT OPPORTUNITY COMPLETELY. IKE ALSO HUNG MARSHALL (A CLOSE PERSONAL "FRIEND" AND MENTOR) OUT TO DRY WHEN MCCARTHY BEGAN TO ACCUSE G.C. MARSHALL OF BEING A COMMIE IN THE EARLY 50'S. HE SOLD MARSHALL DOWN THE RIVER TO FURTHER HIS OWN POLITICAL CAREER. TRUMAN'S RELATIONSHIP WITH IKE DID NOT GO SOUTH BECAUSE AS AMBROSE CLAIMED, "IKE WAS A REPUBLICAN", IT WENT SOUTH BECAUSE IKE WAS EXTREMELY RUDE TO TRUMAN'S WIFE, BESS, ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS, AND BECAUSE TRUMAN BELIEVED IN LOYALTY TO YOUR FRIENDS (MARSHALL) NO MATTER HOW MUCH IT MIGHT HURT YOUR POLITICAL ASPIRATIONS. IF ONE REMEMBERS CORRECTLY, TRUMAN ACTUALLY APPOINTED A REPUBLICAN TO THE SUPREME COURT DURING HIS PRESIDENCY. SO THE "REPUBLICAN ARGUMENT" DOESN'T HOLD WATER AND IF AMBROSE HAD READ ANYTHING ON TRUMAN, HE WOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT. IKE ONLY DISTANCED HIMSELF FROM MCCARTHY WHEN IKE FELT MCCARTHY MAY ACTUALLY SAY SOMETHING NEGATIVE ABOUT IKE PERSONALLY, SINCE HE WAS THE FORMER HEAD OF THE ARMY THAT MACCARTHY WAS ACCUSING OF BEING LED BY REDS. BOTH BOOKS ARE FLAWED, AS WAS IKE THE MAN.



5. There really could have been so much more said of this man, this General who led our troops during the Second World War, who entered politics in order to preserve the peace. In this short volume (the series is generally short and introductory in nature) the author, Tom Wicker, misses so many chances to engage his reader into discovering Dwight D. Eisenhower.
   
   Something I found especially difficult to ignore was the glaring omission of any mention (I believe there was but one fleating reference) of the Interstate Highway Act...something which arguably did more to change the face of American life and culture than any other measure of the time.
   
   Wicker does manage to capture a bit of character in discussing the 34th President of the United States. We are introduced to a man who served his country as both a military commander and as Commander-in Chief, who, following his first-hand experiences in war beleived that war should always be the option of last resort. Eisenhower's Farewell Address, warning his country against the dangers of an organized military complex, still is remarkable today.
   
   However, what Mr. Wicker does most successfully is present Eisenhower's failures. As president, Eisenhower was unwilling to spend political capital on divisive, politically-charged issues such as the growing tension of the Civil Rights struggle and the anti-communist witch hunts spurned by Senator Joseph McCarthy and HUAC (the House Un-American Activities Commitee). A more compelling figure might have stood up and directed his country through such difficult times; Eisenhower failed to act.
   
   Unfortunately, so does Wicker. The pages here feel as though the author slept through most of the writing. The book skims the surface of any real substantive discovery of what Wicker refers to as "the most popular president of modern times."