5 comments about Broken: My Story of Addiction and Redemption.

1. This is a very important topic substance abuse concerns permeate all facets of our society. Hearing the courageous stories of people's struggle with addiction helps to bring strength to all of us.
   Aaron Bryant: BSW,CSAC Author A Synchronous Memoir of Addiction and Recovery



2. Having a family member suffering with addiction is hell, for both the addict and the family. I've read many books relating to this topic, and think that Cope Moyers "Broken" is one of the best. Harrowing and honest, well written. As a parent of an addict, I related to the horror of trying to find my missing son, the craziness of checking phone records, talking to dealers and drug "friends", trying to find him...all of course to no avail in terms of actually being able to help and solve the problem. It was excruciating but a reality dose for me to read this tale from the addict's perspective. Also to see that we families of addicts are not alone when our smart, attractive, well-loved ones become addicts. It's an important part of our own recovery to educate ourselves about addiction, and understand what role we've played, and maybe not repeat those enabling patterns.



3. Truth is uncoverd here in this open and to the point story. This is the down dirty truth spoken here about addiction. No holding back. Show where the disease can take one. Honesty is one of keys to healing and recovery also told here in this book Not All Prisons Have Bars



4. As in any memoir of addiction, this is the author's story. To people who do not suffer with addictions, memoirs like these can help make sense of the nonsense. Here is William Cope Moyers, raised in a "proper" family, with more advantages than most kids can imagine, and he ends up a hard core drug addict. His first person explanations of the how, why and what it feels like are hard to believe, but offer some understandding of the disease. His honest revelations allowed me to have more sympathy for alcoholics and addicts. Moyers also describes his path to sobriety which involved repeated attempts at treatment. Again, for me it was helpful to understand that there is no easy 28 day cure. Other reviewers have criticized the religion in Moyers message, but this is his memoir and he is describing what has worked for him. For me, as a non-addict, memoirs like this, "Tweak," "A Million Little Pieces," "Dry, " "A Beautiful Boy," etc., put a real face on this disease, help me to understand some of my friends and family, force me to examine the costs of this disease on our society, and even help me look critically at issues in the present health care debate. For anyone trying to recover from addiction or just trying to understand it,this is a great book.



5. I'm sorry but I've read a lot of memoirs about addiction and recovery and Moyers' book is boring. That may sound terrible because it must be hard to expose yourself and your own personal struggles as he did, but quite frankly, it put me to sleep. He repeats the same ideas and feelings over and over and over. His journal entries made me want to bang my head against my desk. I've only read half-way into the book. I can go no further. Poor little rich boy who's parents cared to much. He had no real reason to propel himself into the depths of addiction like he did. He was obviously bored with life-maybe because he got handed everything and anything he wanted. I have no sympathy for him. He isn't broken. He was never beaten or raped or forced into a way of life against his will. He was able to attend college and sleep in a warm bed any night he chose to. He got handed job after job making more money than the first...
   If you want to read a real story about a gritty struggle with addiction..read something like "A Piece of Cake" by Cupcake Brown. Leave this guy on the shelf.

5 comments about My Paper Chase: True Stories of Vanished Times.

1. A book about a man I don't know, a world I don't know, and an age I don't know; so, needless to say it was all news to me. Interesting book, even to one such as I who isn't interested in journalism. The problem was the book wasn't written like a story, or written like one was telling a story, but more like commentary on a story.



2. My British father, having lived in Massachusetts now for more than 30 years, felt like he was given a looking glass into his life's struggle as a Brit wanting a good deal more for himself and a better quality of life in post-war Britain. Yes, he got escaped the UK in 1965. He was tickled pink over this book.



3. MY PAPER CHASE: TRUE STORIES OF VANISHED TIMES is a memoir from one known for his legendary career in journalism and publishing and tells how he entered the industry. He left school at 15 as wartime Britain was being hammered by the Germans and became a reporter for a tiny newspaper, beginning a long career in journalism and newspaper reporting. His long career observes many milestones and keys of newspaper history and thus is a top pick for any serious library strong in journalism.



4. From the first page this autobiography captured my attention. Being born about the same time as Harold Evans, in the same area of England and living through the childhood experience of World War II, I also remembered my own childhood very vividly through his writing. I too saw the soldiers returning from Dunkirk and talked with them, experienced bombing and all the other privations of the war. I also was reminded of the spirit of the times, and now, on reflection, the very different spirit of how journalism has changed over the last fifty years. Then there was a purpose of wanting to "set thing right" and fairness in dealings with other. Now it seems to be everyman for himself and if it is not profitable for me, who cares. Needless to say I liked the book very much but felt that the discription of his memories of his early life were much more vivid than those towards the end. But maybe that is true of all of us as we age.



5. I had expected a well written, engrossing book. I was disapointed seeing that the author is a practicing journalist. The book did not hold my attention.

No comments about Conversations with Cronkite.

5 comments about True Story: Murder, Memoir, Mea Culpa.

1. This book makes you think/question.....deeply. I truly honestly completely believed Chris Longo's first version of the killings. That he killed his wife and last child and someone else (his wife) killed the 2 older kids. I just believed it in the bottomless pits of my stomach. And to later read that Longo lied?!?!?!??!?! I had to put down the book for a day and re-access my ability to read/understand people. I am truly shattered, I can tell you. I am not stupid to believe in the truthfulness of mankind. We all lie for one reason or the other. But Longo???? He is con artist. A cruel man. A liar liar liar. I am so hurt. I cant even imagine how Finkel feels. This book...em em em! I recommend again and again and again.



2. What if your worst moment was someone else's dream? In True Story, journalist Michael Finkel tells the story of how his identity was stolen at the worst moment of his life. As he is being fired from his dream job at the New York Times, a man is being arrested, a man who was pretending to be Michael Finkel who was alleged to have killed his own wife and three children. The man stole Michael Finkel's identity because he wished to be Michael Finkel.
   
   Michael Finkel gets to know Christian Longo, and in the process of writing about this man accused of killing his family, he must also reveals his own flaws and worst traits. It's a profoundly affecting book, as Finkel explores how his own excesses led to his downfall, at the same time talking about how Longo's problems led to his making heinous choices. That the two share some traits is very disturbing. The book asks the question, "What separates the journalist from the subject? What separates the writer from the murderer?"
   
   I recommend this highly.



3. I read this book when it was first released and it still sticks with me. The best aspect of the book is the interweaving of the author's personal story and that of the man who supposedly killed his family then fled the country. When he was caught, he was using Michael Finkel's name and identity at a Mexico resort area living the good life.
   
   Imagine getting a call to find out someone was using your identity -- and that person was suspected of murdering his family. Wouldn't you be compelled to find out why?
   
   The author is looking for redemption from his own journalistic mistakes by finding and writing the truth of a news-worthy event. Other reviewers found Finkel to be self-serving but I'd have to disagree with that. He was PART of the story itself because the suspected murderer identified with him enough to use his identity. Gradually, that identification allowed him to open up to Finkel through the taped conversations. If they had not shared that link, there would be no story.
   
   Maybe readers of murder mystery are accustomed to having an "aha moment" when the crime is solved and all the pieces of the puzzle are revealed. This book reveals more of the main characters' inner selves without having a tidy ending. I love ambiguous endings.
   
   Well worth a few intense nights of reading.



4. There were times throughout this CD when I wanted to just turn it off, but somehow I made it through. The events depicted are well worth knowing about, and Mr. Finkel can ply the skills of his trade when he wants to. The research and facts are all done quite well.
   
   But long before the story was finished, I had complete understanding of why the author had gotten in trouble at the NY Times. He can't see past his own shiny self-image. The same ego that caused a talented young reporter to throw his career away while attempting to make a name for himself is the driver of the hubris that bloats this book. We know he's being taken in by a lifelong con artist ages before he can admit it to himself.
   
   The author tried to build up suspense that would lead to a moment of truth at the climax of the story, but just like his fabricated articles for the newspaper, there was no truth to be told. We know not to trust a habitual liar, but apparently another habitual liar doesn't. I would get so frustrated with his naiveté while driving in my car listening that I'd yell at Finkel as if he was a pedestrian stopped in the middle of the street before me, trying to decide whether to continue crossing the road or head back to the curb he just came from!
   
   Despite the unique nature of this bizarre tale I can't recommend the book. I'm all for author involvement ala Ira Glass' "The New Kings of Nonfiction", but in this case you'd be better off reading someone else's coverage of the same material.



5. A thoughtful, well written description of a horrendous crime that explores the psyche of the killer; the author's growing understanding of the killer's psyche as he gets to know him; and the author's own travails while all this is going on.

5 comments about Fat Man in a Middle Seat: Forty Years of Covering Politics.

1. Like Robert Casey, the great war correspondent of WWII, Jack Germond is a journalist's journalist. In this book, he not only expresses the values of a great journalist, but illustrates them by reporting what he knows and how he gathers information. He even writes about himself, to make his personal bias clear, as good journalists do. One gets the feeling that he used everyone he ever talked to--in bars, at dinners, on airplanes, in offices--as sources for his political beat. Hard drinking? Sure. Uncompromising? Always. Informed? In depth. It's interesting to note that his prose in this book differs from that of his newspaper columns, which use shorter and simpler sentences, an indication that he knows how to write in different forms. His "insider look" at the political figures of our time, warts and all, illustrate Epicurus's observation that "fate is character," because character controls choices. He changed my view on Dale Bumpers, but I'm not sure that I'll accept his pronouncement that Dave Yepsen is one of the great political reporters of our time, until David Broder agrees. And I'd have to say that Broder can get people to talk without imposing on them, although both listen more than they speak. Other than that, Germond is a great political correspondent, who is willing to share his experience, particularly with those who know how to "read between the lines." If he seems a tad pessimistic, well, experience makes cynics of us all, and he experienced America's slide into disposable leadership, which is why he's worth reading.



2. This book is written by a very entertaining individual who has an extensive knowledge about politics. On top of being informative, he gives his information in a stylish flare that can only be characteristic of Germond. Great book!



3. I liked this book. JG is basically my concept of a political reporter. He was intimately involved in the lives of Robert Kennedy and Jimmy Carter, one could argue. So being a journalist means looking deeply into the psyche (soul?) of a politician, without being too close or personally involved. This became a problem with Jimmy Carter. Maybe this is why there are few, if any, Germonds out there.
   
   Germond's comments on Reagan are pretty amazing, to me. The same for Clinton. I guess he's getting more bitter. I have the new book, but I picked this one up used on Amazon, and I'm pretty sure it is the more significant book.
   
   I never quite knew what the deal was with Germond on McG Group. Now I do. That's where I really grew attached to the guy. Sorry it was such a bum experience. Dr. M does not come off well, yet he basically seems to have spawned Chris Matthews, another rather wildly pretentious churno-journo.
   
   I really didn't find any hatchet jobs in the reviews. I'd like to thing Germond commands this kind of respect. I guess I'm not giving the book 5 stars because this man has had a life that was terribly special. I think he needs to offer a little more perspective, be a little more grandly philosophical, at this point. You know, without being pretentious.



4. At a time when the term "liberal" has come to be a dirty word, and mass media punditry is dominated by corporate suits pushing a Big Business agenda, it is refreshing to see a blue-collar journalist dissect politics from the perspective of the old school of newspaper reporting.

   Drawing on his 40 years of experience covering everything from local mayoral races to national presidential campaigns, Jack W. Germond has written "Fat Man In A Middle Seat" as both a memoir of his encounters with some of the past generation's most interesting political personalities and an analysis of the news coverage the public gets of those candidates. In each case, Germond's observations are astute and fascinating, but ultimately discouraging for what they reveal about the men who hold or seek power, as well as how they are portrayed to the voters.

   Culminating in the farcical non-election results of 2000, and the atrocious reporting of the outcome, Germond reaches his inevitable conclusion that he no longer expects the system to ever "get it right" and produce real executive leadership or accurate press accounts of current events. Now semi-retired in West Virginia, he makes it depressingly clear that the failure of broadcast and print news to adequately explain what was at stake for the direction of the country (both during and after the 2000 presidential race) represented a new low in American journalism and politics.

   Maybe worst of all, Germond notes, too many modern journalists apparently never even tried to pierce the market-tested, micromanaged images that the Bush and Gore campaigns spoon-fed them. This did not serve the public interest and, Germond argues, it led directly to the situation in which we saw the travesty of a Supreme Court case determining control of the federal government. Without exaggerating, he says, the future of democracy itself may be at stake if this trend in superficial reporting continues.

   Surprisingly, however, Germond reserves his most scathing comments for former president Bill Clinton. Coming from the left, this savage indictment of the Big Creep's pathologically selfish character is more devastating and effective than anything the Republican attack dogs ever produced. Other descriptions of John and Robert Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Sr., and many presidential wannabes are equally crisp and vivid.

   Perhaps the best thing about this work is Germond's impressive candor and modesty about his own accomplishments and mistakes. He is honest about his personal and professional errors in judgment, and does not seem to have an ax to grind against his ideological opponents. That alone sets "Fat Man In A Middle Seat" apart from the self-bronzing, unctuous autobiographies of most fourth estate superstars. Read this book if you want a breath of fresh air in the dry desert of what passes for media criticism and political commentary these days. With grace and grit, Germond makes his life ring true.




5. It's as if lightning struck twice. HLM the ultimate conservative curmudgeon, JWG much more the right, but not quite, and not consistently so. HLM the scholar, dealing with the big picture, JWG with personalities, up close and personal. A great book: no need to wonder what Jack really thinks about Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush and Clinton. Jack was the only reason we watched The McLaughlin Report. He nails the pompous (call me Doctor) McLaughlin and candidly informs us how much he and the other participants were paid. It's also refreshing to read that he thought the Herald Trib under James Bellows was a much more entertaining and interesting paper than the Times. This is not a book for middle-of-the-roaders, and that's exactly why it's so refreshing to read it. You're one in a million, Jack.

No comments about Preso sin Nombre, Celda sin Numero (THE AMERICAS).

5 comments about Confessions of a Mullah Warrior.

1. This is one of the few books I've had a hard time putting down. Was fascinated by Farivar's spiritual adventure and humbled by his willingness to again serve his homeland after years of immersion into the American culture. Farivar helped me to see recent Afghan history through a completely different pair of glasses.



2. Masood Farivar provides an enjoyable and digestible first hand account of a complicated region and nation. His upbringing at the crossroads of tribal life and what was then the closest thing in Afghanistan to 'suburbia' life, combined with his journey to becoming a warrior fighting communism in the 1980s would serve well for any literature. Yet, Masood adds the cherry on top; he left Afghanistan for a Harvard education in the 1990s, and then returned to his country a couple years ago. As such, he applies a unique lens that provides a viewing angle for "western" readers. The outcome is a great read!



3. This book has given me a new understanding of Afghans, their faith, motivations, and family life. Second, it is a necessary primer on recent Afghan political history, without which it is impossible to make sense out of current events in that romote land.



4. Written without much insight and lacking either an index or chapter titles this book could have been authored by anyone, anywhere, anytime, maturing in a ravaged society.
   
   The author did go to Harvard after receiving special treatment. He majored in history but if he learned anything its not apparent here. The book does show the ultimate irreconcilability of Islam and the west as well as the wisdom of Samuel Huntington's Clash of Civilizations a book I recommend.
   
   By illustrating the psyche of Afghan warriors this book also shows the hopelessness of the Bush-Obama policy in Afghanistan and why, like every war since 1945, the US will lose interest then lose in fact.
   
   I gave this two stars in the hope that the author's next book will prove analytic in ways this book is not.



5. Masood Farivar's book tells of his upbringing in Afghanistan, refugee life in Pakistan, service in the mujahideen, education in the U.S., and ultimate return to Afghanistan. It's main value is serving as a window into another culture.
   
   One particularly interesting point was his observation that Afghans saw their struggle vs. the Russians as a jihad (holy war) fought to liberate their country. Arabs, on the other hand, were seen by Afghans as war tourists who had bought their way into the country, saw the Afghans as lesser Muslims, and were seeking heavenly rewards (martyrdom). Some would even have themselves tied to trees in bombarded areas in hopes of being killed.
   
   Another particularly interesting segment covered his finding a family manuscript that begins in 1582 - fighting to convert the last non-Muslim pocket of Afghanistan. Then in continues on to 20th century fighting in defense of the king, his predecessors attending madrassahs (originally developed during the 11th century, two centuries before European counterparts that eventually evolved into secular institutions of higher learning), the conflict in Afghanistan between secular and religious education in the mid-1950s.
   
   Masood's father was a Soviet-educated petroleum engineer, and only a mild observer of Islam - thus, the forays and "culture shock" later experienced by Masood were far less than likely for others, and the opportunities greater. For example, 95% of the Afghan population in the mid-1970s was illiterate.
   
   Communists took over Afghanistan in 1978 - it first it was benign, then people began disappearing and a reign of terror followed, with parents spying on children, etc. Resistance developed, followed by a Russian invasion. In the third year of the occupation (1982), resistance fighters again formed - the mujahideen.
   
   Masood and his family escaped to Pakistan, where he was introduced to Islamic fundamentalism by a relative living in Pakistan, and Masood became a devout Muslim and attended an Arab-funded (Saudi Arabia) madrassah. While much stricter than Afghan traditions, it was not as strict as Wahhabism. Besides studying the Koran, Masood learned Arabic grammar - key to understanding the Koran and its phraseology.
   
   At 18 Masood left to join the mujahideen in Tora Bora, despite his parents objections. The tide of battle had already turned, thanks to Stinger missiles. Masood learned how to fire AK-47s, etc., and the importance of good relations with villagers by patrolling their homes, spending nights in their mosques, and giving them a sense of security. Return benefits included food, shelter, and intelligence. Often competing mujahideen groups fought over territory, creating greater suffering for the populace.
   
   Masood's group had foreign-supplied mortars, heavy machine guns, rocket launchers, and American Stingers. By chance, Masood met both Ahmad Masood (famed guerilla leader) and a Harvard graduate and Islam convert from London that had become involved in supporting the jihad. The latter individual recommended Masood's being admitted to Harvard, his +ultimate acceptance (after a year of preparation at Lawrenceville School), and eventual graduation. Culture shocks included seeing so many "unclothed" (casual shorts, t-shirts, dresses, etc.), having to greet females, realizing that men holding hands had a homosexual aspect in America (friendship in Afghanistan), and seeing that not all of the U.S. was pristine as depicted in the photos he had seen.
   
   After graduating and wandering the U.S., Masood missed his family and returned. However, he found that neither he nor his family fit in with the new Taliban rule, and returned to New York City. Ultimately, Masood returned to Afghanistan to stay where he now operates a national radio program.
   
   Masood believes the U.S. should have taken over Afghanistan from the warlords after the initial "victory," and that failing to follow-through on Bush's promised rebuilding was another mistake.

2 comments about Sports Illustrated: Hate Mail from Cheerleaders and Other Adventures from the Life of Rick Reilly.

1. A co-worker recommended this book and I'm glad I ordered it. Each story is typically about 3 pages long. Some nights I'd read a couple stories, other nights many more. Reilly is very witty and I found myself chuckling during several of the stories. I'd highly recommend the book and will probably order another of his now; if I like that one too I'll keep buying!



2. I purchased this book for my sixteen year old son for Christmas.
   He told me more than once he would read it again and that it made
   him laugh. Therefore I can recommend it for any sports crazed
   reader.

5 comments about Perfect Spy: The Incredible Double Life of Pham Xuan An, Time Magazine Reporter and Vietnamese Communist Agent.

1. When I first went to university in Atlanta, arriving from the North, in the mid-60's, I was struck with the proliferation of car tags with the subject quote, accompanied by the Confederate flag. The same flag was incorporated into numerous flags of the states of the old Confederacy... there were also the ubiquitous statues to "our Confederate dead" in the squares of the small towns throughout the South. It was 100 years after the end of the American Civil War, yet the "lost cause" still had numerous adherents. And I suspect the Vietnam War will be much the same way, with the arguments raging on for a hundred years, a "civil war" within American society. We're more than a third of the way to that 100 year mark now, and the book itself, and Berman's efforts to unravel the truth concerning the enigmatic An is lost, in the partisanship of these reviews. Perhaps it's impossible for any sentient human who lived through that period, or who gave it a subsequent serious examination, to be "non-partisan," certainly myself included.
   
   Pham Xuan An did led one of the most incredible lives of the 20th Century. Without any true training in the "arts" of espionage, he was one of the most effective spies of all times. An was loyal to many of his friends, and duplicitous at the same time. He became a trusted friend of General Lansdale who first went to Vietnam on behalf of the CIA in the `50's. It was Lansdale's recommendation that helped An get his visa to study for two years, in Orange Co., CA., the first Vietnamese there, and the place which is now their informal capital, with the influx of refugees after the fall of the South. From Lansdale on, An knew the top leadership of both the South Vietnamese and the Americans, and he was always the essential "go to" source for the American journalists. And all the time he was working for the other side, so effectively that General Giap joked: "We are now in the U.S.'s war room." Overall, despite some caveats below, I believe Professor Berman did an admirable job telling the essentials of this man's story, and interviewing a man who lived a double-life so effectively that he could have been fooling even himself. Berman starts his story, suitably enough, by telling how An, at considerable personal risk to himself, used his influence to save the life of NYT reporter Robert Sam Anson, and ends it with the story of his help to a top South Vietnamese official, Dr. Tran Kim Tuyen, on the last day of evacuations during the fall of Saigon. A "private honor" indeed. On several occasions Berman quotes An as to the motivation for his actions, one that is easy for Americans to understand: he simply did not want Vietnam to be ruled by foreigners, be they French or American. After the American war ended, An was never fully trusted by the Northern leadership--he had been too close to the Americans, and still said injudicious things, and Berman does raise the question: Had he been a double or triple agent? My inclination is to say No.
   
   As for the caveats, I felt there were serious ones of omission. Whether we are talking about Iraq, or Vietnam, given factions will use the argument that this particular action "saved American lives." It is an important consideration, certainly on a personal basis, and wouldn't it have been judicious to include a reasonable speculation on how many lives would have been saved if: 1. When Ho Chi Minh went to Versailles in 1919, before he "turned communist," that Woodrow Wilson meant self-determination for ALL people, and not just white ones; 2. After the Second World War, that the USA supported the only faction in Vietnam who supported us during the war, Ho Chi Minh and his band of partisans, and that we answered the letters that he sent the American government, requesting independence from the French colonialists who had collaborated with the Japanese; 3. Or that after their war of independence against the French, that America actually supported the free elections called for in the Geneva accords of 1954, despite President Eisenhower's estimate that 80% of the population would have voted for Ho Chi Minh. A different course at any of these three junctures might have saved 58,000 plus American lives, and three million Vietnamese. Finally, in terms of speculation, there is that haunting picture at the end of the book, of President George W. Bush standing with An Pham, An's son. Omitted from the book was Bush telling the Vietnamese that one of the most significant "lessons" of the Vietnam War is if we had stayed there long enough, we would have won!! Absolutely mind-boggling. An might have saved innumerable American (and Vietnamese) lives simply by having the war end - finally - in 1975.
   
   There are a few errors of commission too: "the bulk of them ground combat troops," in reference to 540,000 Americans in Vietnam (p24). The "bulk" of our troops in Vietnam were ALWAYS support troops. It was Nui Ba Den, Black Virgin Mountain, not Ba Den, Black Mountain (p77). "fearful of a scenario such as the invasion by the People's Army of Vietnam that had defeated the French in 1954..." (p133). What invasion? It was there country!
   
   I briefly met An in the Majestic Hotel in Saigon in 1994. I was in the company of one of the big name American journalist of the war, unnamed in the book. An was very much still under suspicion for meeting so many Americans, and they had a subsequent private conversation. It was my one and only time in Saigon, despite having spent a year in the country, 1968-69. And that is another point about the book... clearly what happened in Saigon and what was going on in the "field" somewhere in country were related, but they were highly separate worlds, in which journalists feed on the latest rumors, and visited the field from time to time, but rarely saw or experienced the reality that troops in the field did. Completely different versions of the same war.
   
   For those who rate the book a 1-star, demonizing An, and his actions as a "Communist," I wonder what they think about the greatest threat to America today, (still!) "Red" China. It is not the military, but the economic threat that should be of utmost concern: all they have to do is stop buying our debt, and there would be financial panic of the worst sort, or stop manufacturing, and the shelves of so many retailers would be empty. A dependency of our own making.
   
   Overall, Berman is to be commended for telling this important, essential story of one man's remarkable actions during the war. You sensed that he pushed and prodded, gaining as much as he could elicit, before the veil was dropped again: "... we can go no further on that...". Clearly Berman has empathy for An, but wisely does not accept all aspects of the story at face value. This is the only authoritative book we will ever have on Pham Xuan An, and Berman deserves a full 5-stars for his efforts.



2. Larry Berman's book, The Perfect Spy: The Incredible Double Life of Pham Xuan An is a fascinating read on many levels. First, I believe the book should be considered an indispensable volume in the vast collection of Vietnam War literature. It is more than an intriguing tale of espionage and history of the Viet Nam War, it's an enlightening view into the soul of the American press corps and how they provided cover and legitimacy to North Vietnam's most successful spy. An, working for his communists' masters, successfully deceived and manipulated the foreign press corps as well as U.S. and South Vietnamese security officials for the duration of the war. Truly An was one of the great spies of the Twentieth Century, whose chief enablers were well-known members of the American press corps.
   
   The book unfortunately is colored by the author's desire to make An's treachery something we should accept and forgive, notwithstanding his direct culpability in the deaths of U.S. servicemen and untold numbers of South Vietnamese soldiers and civilians. If I had a nickel for every time An was referred to in the book as "charming" or "helpful" I'd have a nice start on my son's college fund. For the most part, these "friends" served as useful idiots to An, who played them like a fiddle. The larger question that remains unanswered is to what degree An succeeded in coloring press stories critical of U.S. policy. The book points out that almost all the newly arrived American correspondents in Viet Nam sought out An because he was a man of uncommon insight and was reputed to have the best sources. An surely fed anti-American or anti-war views to the Viet Nam press corps, many of whom arrived in Viet Nam profoundly opposed to the war. He essentially gave them what they wanted to hear. An's impact on the U.S. press reportage must have been enormous. Despite An's professions of love and friendship for his American press colleagues, he must have been utterly amazed at how easily duped and trusting the anti-war journalists were.
   
   The author quotes Frank McCulloch of Time who said of An, "I can say in retrospect that being a spy never warped his journalism." How could it not? I've never heard a more ridiculous statement and the book is full of quotes by An's former American colleagues that are equally ludicrous. But then they are trying their best to justify their association with this utterly charming and helpful communist spy. Robert Sam Anson was quoted as saying that the "delicious irony was that all the while the empire of Henry Luce, the great Asian anti-Communist, had been paying his (An's) salary." In truth the most delicious irony here is that anti-war journalists like Anson were willing pawns in planting communist slanted stories influenced and/or partially written by a North Vietnamese agent, who successfully manipulated the American press corps for years.
   
   An, like all good spies, was calculating and cold blooded, but above all he was a master at manipulation. How else can one explain the loyalty of his former Time colleagues felt towards An even after they learned he betrayed them and their country. The most extraordinary part of the story is that An was able to continue to manipulate his press friends long after they found out he had duplicitously used them. With very few exceptions, his former war time press friends seemed all too happy to overlook An's treachery to forgive and even praise. But then this reveals quite a bit about the American Viet Nam press contingent, many of whom have gone on to make a great deal of money criticizing America's involvement in the war. They are eager to forgive enemies, but are less magnanimous when it comes to forgiving Westmoreland and Nixon. Most of these Viet Nam era journalists viewed the U.S. government/military as the main adversary so it is understandable they would be so quick to forgive An.
   
   There is much that An does not share, by the author's own admission, presumably because it would be even too much for his loyal American friends to stomach. An claims that he only provided detailed analysis of events to North Viet Nam leadership. He also admits to helping plan the successful assaults on Saigon during the Tet Offensive (how many Americans and ARVN died in Saigon during Tet?) and to passing to the North Viet Names advanced warning of impending offensives. Despite his denials, An undoubtedly provided lists of anti-communist South Vietnamese officers and officials that would eventually be liquidated by the Viet Cong. It strains credulity that An would not provide such lists. One can only guess what the brutal Viet Cong would do to those found on such a lists. What other murderous acts An conducted on behalf of NVA/VC one can only speculate?
   
   An has quite a bit of blood on his hands, but we should forgive him, according to many sources quoted by the author, because he was a "nationalist" and loved his country. When the war was over, An even had the gall to send his family to the safe confines of America and later even persuaded his former friends at Time to underwrite An's son's education in the United States. It's ironic indeed that these journalists, whose careers were made by their so-called "principled" stand against the Viet Nam War, owe so much to a North Vietnamese spy. Fearing that they were being used by the American military, our journalists were oblvious to the spy who helped them write their stories. I highly recommend the book, but one has to read between the lines to understand the true value of the book.



3. This book aptly demonstrates that most reporters are only selecitvely critical of their subjects. Larry Berman does nothing to double check Pham Xuan An's assertions. He is in love with the man and easily allows himself to be manipulated by this master con artist and terrorist. The book's only value is shows to what length journalists will go to avoid admitting that, far from being independent thinkers, they willing believe the first source that confirms their own prejudices. In short Perfect Spy is an excellent example of Stockholm syndrome.



4. Before the review, a preface. Let's face it, any book on the Vietnam war will find a polarizing reception, for obvious reasons that the death and destruction of that war are recent and still with many. In choosing a book to read, the general tone of 5-star or 1-star reviews should not be a guide; nor should one's agreement with the author's general point of view (easy enough to determine before reading). Rather, a basic question, how much new material will the book cover?
   
   I have been interested in the intelligence aspect of Vietnam operations, and in fact wrote a thesis in college on Edward Landsdale and the CIA involvement in the 1950s. Pham Xuan An's major intelligence contributions mostly cover the 1960-1975 period. In addition, the book covers the "making of the spy" - the strategic decision to send An to the US in 1950's and a somewhat poignant post-1975 chapter. My general conclusion is that the book contains plenty of original research (obviously interviews with An are the bulk of new material) and is a must read (accompanied by a general history of the Vietnam for a context).
   
   I am not a researcher and I cannot really evaluate the quality of historical scholarship, so in general I accept factual claims made by Berman, though not all the interpretations. Here are several questions to ponder (which are addressed but not fully resolved in the book).
   
   - How can a spy be so successful for so many years at such high level of access? Berman's answer is that one must truly live one's cover, but if that is so, did Pham Xuan An have to sacrifice some of his comrades to prove his effectiveness to his sources in S. Vietnamese govt and CIA?
   - What was the true value of Pham Xuan An to his bosses in the "jungle"? Berman insists it is the analysis of the American and S. Vietnamese intentions. To me it appears that the lion's share of his contribution was passing on the information basically verbatim, whether overheard reports, or photographed documents. In addition, every American journalist claims they were not influenced by An, but simply came to see the war in much the way he saw it. I have some doubts there...
   - Was An a nationalist or Communist? I actually agree with Berman on the blurring of the two identities and being more first than second, but I can certainly see merits to the opposing view: An was a staunch Communist and everything else was just melodrama.
   
   I give the book 4 stars rather than 5 for two main reasons:
   - It's annoying that some periods are skipped over--e.g., there seems little going on between 1968 and 1974.
   - Some unnecessary lionizing pieces on N. Vietnamese (Ho as father of nation, Dung as clever general) which do not seem to fit into the context of the narrative about Pham Xuan An and give an easy target to portray the book as leftist propaganda piece. Instead, I'd rather have more info on the Vietnamese intelligence agents that worked (and are buried) alongside An...
   
   But overall, a fascinating read!



5. Larry Berman's trace and insights into this master spy, An, forces one to confront the arrogance and amateurishness of Americans who touted their professionalism at war. The complexities of the Vietnamese people, their culture, history, hopes and dreams, all as unknown to Americans of 1955-1975 as their language, provide the means to understand why we lost and now the South Vietnamese nationalists were betrayed by the communist party of the North.
   
   Not a book for those who want to see that time, or this, as a set of clearly defined opposing choices, or the "less developed" nations of the world as simple, backward or unenlightened.
   
   His subject is a sophisticated, complex individual who understands he was ultimately used.

3 comments about Max Perkins: Editor of Genius.

1. Magically, Amazon.com switched my address to my old address, an apartment I moved out of over 3 years ago. In that time, I have ordered from Amazon more than a dozen times, so there should have been no reason that my account still had that address.
   
   When I contacted Amazon, they said I should contact the seller. Of course, it's not the seller's fault.
   
   It was an obvious response that any big business would have. I didn't know I had to be more careful when ordering.
   
   So...no review of this book, I only paid for it but didn't receive it.



2. Note, first of all, how that title can be taken two ways -- depending on whom one considers to be the genius. (Second, puckishly, note that this is not *the* Scott Berg, but merely A. Scott Berg.) Perkins is probably the most famous book editor in the history of the world -- most famous as an editor, I mean -- but he's still not all that famous. Berg, probably astutely realizing exactly what the audience for a book like this is, concentrates almost entirely on Perkins's professional life. That means that MAX PERKINS reads almost like a group biography of Hemingway, Fitzgerald, and Thomas Wolfe, with occasional digressions on Ring Lardner and a few others. Berg skips Perkins's childhood almost entirely, only sketches his (apparently tumultuous) relationship with his wife, and mentions their daughters only for color or when one of them is getting married. MAX PERKINS is organized semi-chronologically, which came to seem a mistake -- Berg keeps getting ahead of himself while running through Perkins's work with one author, and then has to back up and fill in on other aspects of his life. Perkins will probably never get another biography, but I think the materials here, and Berg's aims in writing this book, would have been better served if Berg had organized it by author, and written much more obviously a book about Perkins's working relationships, rather than writing what looks like a biography but spends so little time on its subject's actual life. MAX PERKINS is a fine book, both about what it means to be an editor specifically, and what kind of life a dedicated man in any line of business is likely to have -- one defined entirely by the work he does, and interesting only insomuch as that work is -- but it substitutes Homeric catch-phrases about "Yankee reserve" for a deep examination of Perkins's character and personality.



3. Quite simply, a must read for anyone who is a fan of Hemingway, Wolfe, Fitzgerald, Maxwell Perkins or the early part of the 20th Century in America. The insight gained into who these men were was astounding if not downright life-altering. What I thought I knew of the "Big Three" early-century writers changed with each page. Who I thought the men were are not who I now know them them to be.
   
   An easy read filled with moments of joy and heartbreak as each image was shattered and rebuilt (or not). Highly recommended.