No comments about Grant's Lieutenants: From Chattanooga to Appomattox (Modern War Studies).

5 comments about Blood Makes the Grass Grow Green: A Year in the Desert with Team America.

1. A good topic that kept me interested. Unfortunately, I thought the writing was immature and a bit self-serving.



2. Well it wasn't all bad, it certainly brings up some of the things the army doesn't like to tell us about like those re-enlistment "Incentives" but the over all writing of the book seems rather childish especially for an older person with university etc.
   
   But certain things are just not right. Most glaringly is the fact that Rico couldn't have been in the 5/2 Bobcats 25th ID because quite simply that unit doesn't exist in the 25th Division. Perhaps he meant 2nd Battalion 5th Infantry 'Bobcats' in which case perhaps he really was. Even a pathetic soldier like Rico would surely know his own unit seeing as he spent 3 years of his life there.
   
   I'd love to see his Personal Record and see for real what he really did in the Army if in fact he was at all.



3. Wow i could not put it down for fear of missing out on the next line.



4. This is one of the greatest books I have read about soldiering in a war. I got this book at my local library and immediately started to read it and couldn't put it down. Being a psychologist with experience working with the military and returning soldiers I am glad someone had the guts to write this account! It was funny, sad and sometimes made you mad- but it's the military thru and thru.
   
   I love the parts in the beginning about lying of recruiters and how the military loves the paperwork and all the passive aggressiveness.
   
   I'm looking for more from this author and hope a movie of it comes out.



5. Well Mr. Hanner....it might have helped if you had actually "read" the book, instead of just looking at the shiny pictures. Rico acknowledges time and time again that he is in fact NOT a natural born killer. He goes into detail to explain that he did not take his military training as seriously as he should have, was NOT adequately trained to do his "military" job and in fact doesn't know what the hell he is doing half the time.
   
   As far as the "tough guy" on the cover....it's IRONY...ever heard of IRONY? Just in case you don't know what that means, here's the definition:
   
   a technique of indicating, as through character or plot development, an intention or attitude opposite to that which is actually or ostensibly stated.
   
   Read the book, then write a review about it. It's a great raw read. Very well written.

5 comments about A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier.

1. A Long Way Gone chronicles the life of a young teen in Sierra Leone who is fleeing the Rebels who are wreaking havoc in villages throughout the region. He falls in with a group of boys trying to survive, but since everyone is suspicious of groups of boys, they live a hard life. Eventually they, between the ages of 14 and 17, are conscripted into the Army to fight the Rebels.
   
   The book is very well written. It is intense, gripping and honest. You will be amazed what was transpiring in Sierra Leone less than a decade ago. This, like so many tragedies in Africa, didn't get a lot of press until after the fact.
   
   If you ever think you have a lot of problems or find yourself complaining a lot, you will gain a lot of perspective from this book. It is a short book (about 250 pages) and so engrossing that you will probably finish in just a few sittings. I haven't read a book this good in quite a while. Highly recommended.
   
   Caveat: this book is not for the faint of heart. If books got ratings like movies, this would easily get an "R" rating - the war it describes is not pretty. However, I felt the book was well done and does not unnecessarily dwell on anything unpleasant.



2. Surprisingly well written for someone with a background of being a civil
   war soldier at such a young age. His intelligence shines through. What this boy has lived through, and the ways he tries to overcome adversity, should be an inspiring story to anyone. Once I started this book I never put it down.



3. 
   FACT OR FICTION
   
   Do a background check on the author and you'll see articles in SLATE, the NY TIMES and others in which the author's veracity is, tragically, in question.
   
   Please don't shoot the messenger when you find some disturbing questions, and just as importantly, don't shoot the _message_.
   
   After all, these events did take place, and it's important that we recognize and absorb them, so we can act quickly to help when they happen. (Think the Rwandan genocide, when the international community sat on the sidelines as 1,000,000 people were killed over 100 days.)
   
   IF, however you are interested in the controversy surrounding this particular book and my take on it, read on:
   
   CONTROVERSY
   
   This is an important, gripping work that brings attention to some of what's happening in other parts of the world.
   
   However ....
   
   ... if you read-up on this author, you'll find out about the ongoing controversy over the accuracy of events that occur in the book. (Look for articles in Slate, the New York times, among others.)
   
   As a result, several salient points emerge:
   
   1) Some of the work appears to have been written originally as _fiction_ with the aid of his Oberlin University Creative Writing teacher Dan Chaon, which was then changed to non-fiction.
   
   2) Having said that, the author probably *did* experience some of what was written about in Memoirs, although to a different degree than described. How much, unfortunately we'll never know.
   
   This means that:
   
   3) The book contains BOTH FICTIVE AND NON-FICTIVE ELEMENTS, the fictive elements (in the Creative Writing teacher's own words, captured on tape by an Australian journalist) added as "poetic license."
   
   And here is where I take umbrage.
   
   FACT VS. FICTION: WHY IT'S IMPORTANT
   
   With the relatively-recent publication and retraction of fake biographies (such as "Love and Consequences," a fake memoir of growing up in an L.A. gang, since discredited and pulled by the publisher), I think the blowback against this book is reasonable.
   
   There's a REASON we have categories such as "fiction" and "non-fiction," and why we keep them separate.
   
   Fact is the opportunity to examine the nuances of history and its consequences, and learn something from the net result. Fiction is highly subjective, one person (or group's) untested ideas of what might be (even if the fictive work is set in the past). To blur the line is to cheapen the lessons of history.
   
   SAY NO TO FACT-ION
   
   Faction has become a bit too rampant nowadays, from "historical movies" that invent unsubstantiated love affairs (think Truman Capote kissing Perry Smith in "Infamous," or Queen Elizabeth having an historically unsubstantiated affair with Sir Walter Raleigh in "Elizabeth: The Golden Years,") to books like "Dutch: A Memoir of Ronald Reagan," which blessedly received the ridicule it deserved.
   
   And perhaps it's true that it's the publishing houses -- or even the public's taste for only the most sensationalistic -- that are to blame, putting pressure on well-intentioned authors such as Ishmael Beah to color stories that are already horrific enough, for the sake of maximum marketability.
   
   By all means, read and absorb Ishmael Beah's tragic story.
   
   You can be sure some of these things happened to him, and certainly to others.
   
   COMMERCE ABOVE ALL?
   
   But let's start thinking about saying "no" to another machine, although one less horrific than the one Beah had to endure: the machine of sensationalism-over-truth, which encourages writers and publishers to color facts to maximize sales, thus potentially discrediting what is an important core message.



4. This is a compelling true story. A boy named Ishmael leaves his comfortable life in an African village to attend a rap music event with his brother and a few friends. While he is gone, rebel forces attack his village destroying his home and family life. He, his brother, Junior, and his friends then wander the countryside of Sierra Leone trying to survive and avoid both the rebel and government troops. Identifying the enemy is difficult in a country rich in resources and awash with government corruption. Ishmael is separated from his group and eventually attaches himself to another group of teenage boys all under 16. Eventually, the war catches up with him and he and his little band are conscripted into the government troops. For the next two or more years and armed with an AK 47 and RPG's, he kills, maims, and robs in the name of the government. These boy soldiers take many drugs to dull their feelings and allow themselves to participate in the inhumane slaughter. Finally, aid workers either buy the boys' freedom or settle with their army leader and obtain their release. They are taken into the custody of rehabilitation counselors where they are given an opportunity for redemption. Ishmael clearly a natural leader is selected to travel to New York to attend a U.N. conference on child soldiers. While there he makes many friends. I understand that he was taken in by one of them and that he subsequently attended Oberlin college.
   
   I gave this book 4 stars instead of 5, because it drags a bit during the years of army participation and killing. Further, Ishmael's parents are divorced, but he lives with his father. His family is Muslim and that may be why the father retained custody. Very telling in the book was a description on pg. 77 (hardback) of his formal naming ceremony. A huge feast is prepared. First the elders eat their fill, then the men, then the boys and lastly the women and children. I presume that if there isn't enough to share, the women and children starve. I don't know if the author realized what he revealed about his culture by this telling description. However, we never learn the basis of the divorce or why his father retained custody. Living conditions were somewhat primative. The houses were made of concrete brick or mud and they had tin roofs which were particularly noisy when it rained. Their diet was complete though not luxurious, and they were not hungry. However, they walked for miles to save bus fare and did not have electricity or telephones in their homes. Sierra leone sounds like a terrible place. The film, Blood Diamond, was about a similar subject.
   
   I really don't know if there is a solution when countrymen kill one another over money, resources, and power. However, perhaps, this book and the film, Blood diamond, will be the stimulus for a resolution.
   
   This book was worth reading, and I recommend it.



5. Incredible memoir...
   Easy to read, difficult to believe. Sometimes I wanted to stop because it was so painful, but I am really glad I pushed through those hard time because it is an amazing story and most important a true one. I feel it is vital to be aware of such atrocities to be both educated and balanced as a person. It is a story that really needs to be known. I deeply hope it is put into film so a wider audience knows of it.
   Wherever Ishmael is now I hope he is at peace and finding joy in his life. I want to hug him and shake his hand and tell him he is amazing.

5 comments about Sgt. York: His Life, Legend & Legacy : The Remarkable Untold Story of Sergeant Alvin C. York.

1. If you've seen the 1941 film "Sergeant York" with Gary Cooper, then this book is a must read for you. Perry delves into the man, Alvin York, and tells us the rest of the story. Yes, the defining moment of York's life happened in the Argonne Forest in WW1, but he went on to do more. He battled Lindberg, the IRS and more. This book doesn't paint York as faultless by any stretch, but it also is by no means an exposé. Just a keen insight into the complex life of a simple man.
   If you enjoyed Laura Hillenbrand's "Seabiscuit", you will also be moved by this book as well.



2. Alvin York spent 19 months of his 76 years in the United States Army during World War I (WWI) and 20 minutes to an hour in the action which made him America's greatest hero of that war. In writing a book about Alvin York, then, the author had to make a decision. Should he write about those 19 months, about that hour, or about the man's entire life? For any other man, the answer would be fairly simple: write about that hour. For Alvin York, however, the answer is quite different, and this author rightly chose to write the complete story of his life both before, during, and after his heroic military service.
   
   When I began reading the book, however, I didn't realize this, and, as a result, I was somewhat disappointed. It seemed to me that all the action, the interesting stuff, was up front and then the book slowly transitioned into the more mundane story of York's later life. But I persisted and gradually came to realize that that was the way York, himself, would have wanted it. After all, as he said many time throughout his life, "Uncle Sam's Army is not for sale."
   
   I must agree with some of the previous critics that this book is almost too detailed, particularly in the middle chapters, as York, with his third grade education, struggles against entrenched politicians to fulfill his dream of building a Christian school in the Tennessee mountains so the backwoods children could have the education he never had. But if you persist, you will likely come to realize, as I did, that his actions after the war and the manner in which he lived his life are much more heroic than anything he or anyone else did in the Great War or in any other war.
   
   The bottom line is this: Alvin York is much more of a hero than I had ever imagined, and, although this book may at times be a difficult read, I highly recommend it. After all, although he never caught a touchdown pass or hit a ninth inning home run, Sergeant York is one hero whose like will never be seen again (guaranteed).



3. The Sgt York Biography by John Perry is an exhaustive effort to give a representation of the Life of Alvin York in the highest degree of accuracy, and tedious attention to detail in painting the most True to Life version that anyone is likely to come across. If one is interested in what made Alvin C. York Tick, then John Perry's account is your book. If only a general understanding is what is sought, then these pages will be far more than what you may have bargained for. But For Fineness of intricacies which permeated Sgt. York's Life, Read John Perry's version.



4. After reading his life of Mary Custis Lee, which was quite impressive and turned up many unique insights into a tragically misjudged lady, I sought out other books by Tennessee's own and only John Perry. I found a copy of UNSHAKABLE FAITH, but it had mildewed badly and was nearly unreadable. But faith must have led me to a path of light because on a dark shelf in an East Bay bookstore my hand crept down past a row of Elizabeth Peters books, and landed almost by a miracle on this earlier book by Perry.
   
   I knew very little about Alvin York, except that my grandfather, whose name was Alvin, always blamed the remarkable fame of Sgt York on the popularity of this previous unknown name. He said when he went to school there were thirty-four boys in his graduating class called Alvin. John Perry addresses this amazing renown. His exploits in the Argonne Forest became the stuff of legend, and the Gary Cooper biopic in 1941 muffed the facts a bit to give York more of a country background than actually he had. Many members of his extended family were quite erudite, and my grandfather always used to say that one of York's aunts had written the very first home economics textbook in English, predating Boston's Fannie Farmer by some years.
   
   Perry has a sincere way of writing, and the excitement doesn't let down when York comes back home a hero. You see him doing good works in the name of the Lord and, although many politicians and lawmakers were ever ready and anxious to buy up a piece of his ass, hoping to enlist him into one or another misbegotten crackpot scheme. To his credit York paid them no mind and just continued on his humble way. As with his life of Mary Lee, Perry shows how a good writer concentrates on the facts and lets the legend go its own way, like a small boy cutting the string to a kite and waving it goodbye. The truth is, what becomes a myth is something we have no control over, and Perry acknowledges this with good grace and a wry smile.
   
   Highly recommended not only to Tennesseans and to Christians, but to everyone out there interested in a good life story.



5. I'm going to do what the author couldn't seem to do "get to the point" This book was very dry and I hope that Sgt York had a more
   exciting life (other than his war experience) than this book makes it sound. I had a hard time getting through it.

5 comments about Memoirs: Ten Years And Twenty Days.

1. This has been one of a number of books in either biography or memoirs categories of the elite or main players from World War 2 that I have read and again this is excellent reading.
   The book gives details of his earlier career in the German Navy during World War 1, inter war years then through to World War 2 and his days as the last leader of the Third Reich - covers everything from torpedeo development / failures, submarine development or advancement to counteract Allied advances in anti submarine warfare, uboat losses and the aces, the constant pressing to enlarge the uboat fleet and gain a naval air arm - this book is well written, easy to follow and certainly not something you will get bored with.



2. The book is fairly complex reading; only because, I feel, that I was looking at it from "my side", and the analysis was that much more difficult. Doenitz was a remarkable man, a brilliant strategist, and a professional soldier in the highest regard. One has to constantly keep referenced to the basis of Doenitz's dissertation, and moreso, keep in proper perspective the historical trackwork of the war.
   One of the things that I found a little humourous was the statement that Doenitz was "appalled at the pictures of the contrentration camps". I believe that statement was to keep his neck out of the noose! And he was smart enough to know that he was in a position to "stay above" any indictments of war crimes and atrocities. His only crime, as recorded, was to have been "GrandAdmiral ReichMarine". To his credit, many allied high-ranking officers, Nimitz in particular, accorded him the highest respect and esteem. To his fear and chagrin, Eisenhower seemed to be "gunning" for him; at least as I perceived it.
   Excellent book. Read the liner notes on rear cover. I think you will agree. Gives one pause to wonder...



3. Ten Years and Twenty Days is a direct reference to the time Karl Doenitz spent in Spandau Jail having been convicted of War Crimes.
   
   As an English boy growing up in a post-war Britain (I was born in 1950), we would play games where the Germans always lost - just like the Cowboys always won and the Indians always lost. Much later in life, I began to research various ships and shipwrecks through my scuba diving and the name of Karl Doenitz came up time and again. Over many years I came to respect this man for the way in which he conducted both himself and his branch of the war with Britain. I consider him to have been an honourable enemy of my country.
   
   Having read so many accounts of this once great Admiral before reading his own memoirs, I have reached the conclusion that he was convicted of no more a crime than "being one of the enemy" and it was for that he served his ten years and twenty days. Others, of course, were directly responsible for the great human atrocities of WW2 and it was they who were either sentenced to death of life imprisonment.
   
   I am sure there are those who will disagree with my assessment of this man - and, indeed, their own assessment may be more accurate. Nevertheless, this book is a great work and one which should be read by all those with an interest in Karl Doenitz the German Naval Officer and Karl Doenitz - the last Fuhrer who's first task on succeeding Hitler was to seek peace.
   
   NM



4. My friend lent me this book. It was my first book on the naval aspect of the Second World War. I figured after the hundreds I had read on the land and air element I should start to look into the naval war. I could not put this book down, I devoured it. I have been gobbling up submarine books since that day.
   Wow! First you have to be awed by the fact that this is a book written by the man that became the successor to Hitler. Second, its the best way to get the big picture of the U-boat campaign from the German viewpoint. Doenitz wrote this before he found out about allied successes in breaking his naval codes.
   There are many fascinating stories here, about individual submarine actions, convoy battles, raids, rescue missions. Great stuff that you could make into great movies some day. You really get a good sense of how close the Germans were to winning the war. Thankfully, and Doenitz goes into it, the Third Reich did not take the U-boat arm seriously until it was too late. Whew!
   Doenitz was charged with war crimes after the war and jailed. Specifically for conducting unrestricted submarine warfare.
   Like every nazi that seems to write after the war - he defends himself by saying that being at the front he was not aware of everything going on back at home. Truth? Maybe, maybe not. But you cannot stop yourself from sympathizing with the man who was left holding the bag in May of 1945. We forget that the Allies waged unrestricted submarine warfare against the Japanese from the beginning. Doenitz has written that some American admirals were sympathetic after the war, and tried to get him acquitted. Very interesting story. A must for every World War Two reader.



5. Do you know Doenitz? Are you a WWII enthusiast? A historian? A submariner? Then, this book is a MUST HAVE. There are lots of books about the WWII submarine campaign, from both sides, many of them better written. So what's special? No other book provides that specific background knowledge and information. Why didn't Germany build more submarines than it did in the crucial early years? How did the wolf pack tactics evolve? What measures did the German Naval High Command take after discovering their torpedo crisis? How did they counter Allied scientific breakthroughs? Why didn't they devine Enigma was being broken? Finally, you will hear the German opinion about Roosevelt's "Short of War" strategy - nowaday's United Nations would be in turmoil...

   Second, if you can read between the lines, this book will reveal the personality of one of the mightiest leaders of WWII. Was he a war criminal? Maybe, but certainly his biggest crime was to be a soldier (with very limited horizon apart from his daily duty) who happened to fight on the wrong side. Bad luck, for both sides...

   This book certainly doesn't replace other narratives about the "Atlantic War", but it supplements all of them. Only here, you can find the background story.

   If you're looking for more WWII memoirs, try Doenitz' superior, Raeder, and DON'T OVERLOOK Churchill, as he was the greatest writer among all of them.

   If you still have no idea as to who Doenitz might have been, then try to read Lothar Guenther Buchheim's vivid picture about how the submariners themselves felt, instead; that is indeed great war literature.

5 comments about One Soldier's War.

1. Lots of stories about Russians soldiers stealing, scrounging for food and brutalizing each other while at the same time accepting that their fate is to die at anytime at the hands of the Chechen rebels. Little about the overall story in Chechnya (1st or 2nd war). But it's quite clear throughout that the Russian soldiers are absolutely terrified of "the Chechens." Although I might be sympethic, this book makes the regular Russian army look pretty bad...
   
   This book could have been very good had a different approach been taken to its purpose and construction.



2. I have been going back and forth to Russia on a regular basis for the last 13 years. I have had the fortune to make the aquaintance of many ex and active Russian soldiers in my wanderings of the regions there. I find this book to be one of extreme exaggeration and an over dramatic amature attempt to shock the reader into a kind of unthinking, stupified, state of horror. While some things are accurate in the big picture such as the conscription of new recruits, the "on the job" training style, atrocities commited by both sides, for the most part this book is making a "grain of sand into a beach". That is a quote of my friend who fought in both Chechen wars. If you want a good but inaccurate, unprofessional biography of someones experience there, this is the book for you. If you want a more, this is not the one. Worst 20 bucks I ever spent, and I'll mark it down to propaganda.



3. It is just a coincidence that I finished reading this sad and terrifying book while at the same day news tell us:
   
   "MOSCOW -- Missiles, tanks and other heavy weaponry rolled through Moscow's Red Square in the annual Victory Day parade Friday. President Dmitry Medvedev said "the true purpose of weapons and military equipment is to give reliable defence of the homeland....We must treat very seriously any attempt to sow racial or religious enmity, foment the ideology of terror and extremism or meddle with other states, particularly any attempt to revise boundaries"
   About three million Second World War veterans are still alive, their pensions are small and many live in poor conditions... Mr. Medvedev's first decree after taking office was to order that all Second World War veterans receive housing by 2010."
   
   So here we have it, full hypocrisy and how it is to be the soldier. "All Quiet on the Western Front" comes to my mind, because "One Soldier's War" is as much terribly shocking, candid, and will testify forever about nonsense of wars, espceially wars against insurgencies and ethnic nations seeking independence.
   Just consider this excerpt, young soldiers' line of thinking:
   "...It would be realy cool if they led Yeltsin and Dundayev out onto the landing strip and let them get struck into each other. Te one who cripples the other wins. We stand around and cheer them on: we cheer our guy and the Chechens cheer theirs. And no war, no corpses. That would be much simpler and more just than this arrangement, where the wrong people do the fighting."
   
   This statement is a pure gold essence, like the whole book, showing how armies serve to fulfill agendas of leaders, politicians and presidents.
   "One Soldier's War" is a must read, it took my breath away from me.. Deeply personal, and well translated, it shows total and terrible demoralization of Russian soldiers during the wars in Chechnya. Although you will not read a lot about merciless fighting and horror of it (this is quite obvious and vivid background of the book), the bulk of the text presents what was happening to the conscripts within their units, death stalking them almost with the same intensity as on the battlefields. Ramifications of such wars are immense and summarized with passion Babchenko. Total disarray of Russian army reflects for sure the state of Russia after USSR collapse in 1991, no doubt. But is it better now? I am not sure.



4. This is a grisly account of the two Chechen wars (1990s and to this day) Mostly this is an account of how the Red Army fights, but there is ample insight into the religious nature of the conflict. The stories of the brutality among fellow members of the Army is astonishing, even among the oficers. The treatment of Russian prisoners, young soldiers utterly unprepared to fight a war, by the Muslim Chechen warriors, is equally astonishing. This was complete savagery. The Red Army has not learned from WW II; they're still just throwing people at the adversary and they're not so amply supplied with bodies anymore. The book is a series of independent vignettes and not in time order, nor clustered together by subject. It is a reporter's notebook.



5. Wow ----- never thought I would be caught up in a book until 1:30 a.m. This is an account that I will never forget. It allows a non-military person a rare look into the workings of what must be one of the most brutal military organizations in the world. The hardships are probably overcome by fear, love of mother Russia, and personal comradeship. Certainly there should be no loyalty to such a corrupt organization. A remarkable account. This book should be read by anyone with an interest in military issues or contemporary Russia. The style of writing is objective, not editorial. Young Arklady Babchenko simply tells it as it happened. Many thanks to Nick Allen for bringing this to the English-speaking world.

1 comments about Command Of Honor: General Lucian Truscott's Path to Victory in World War II.

1. Although Lucian Truscott, as someone who rose to army command in World War II, is a person worthy of a good biography, this one is not it. It practically defines the word "lightweight." It is unsourced and, if the bibliography is any indication, poorly researched. Unpublished primary sources seem to have been used minimally. Large sections of the book seem to be based on nothing other than Truscott's own memoirs. The text also contains numerous "space filler" diversions irrelevant to the subject and typical of authors trying to pad the length of a book.
   
   Needless to say, there is little in the way of incisive analysis or critical examination.
   
   I don't really see an audience to whom I can recommend this book.

3 comments about A Vietnam Experience: Ten Years of Reflection (Publication Series: No. 315) (Publication Series: No. 315).

1. These are the reflections of a well-educated leader for any age, yet an experienced Navy pilot in his post-captive years as a POW during the Vietnam War.Jim Stockdale makes clear throughout this book the differences between enlightened leadership and the business ethos permeating the Pentagon after Eisenhower.He even reveals early censorship and manipulation of "facts" by TV and print media decades ago. Throughout this philosophical lecture-filled book, this decorated Vice Admiral sprinkles historical naval decisions to underline his points.This is recommended for those who believe in the careful study of history and the wisdom of those who pass them down.



2. I read Vice Admiral Stockdale's obituary and became interested in his writing, given what I learned about him in the outline of his career. It was truly tragic that his moment in the national spotlight made him seem a confused old man, as anyone reading any of his writing will quickly discern.
   
   This book could well serve as a 150 page handbook on the true meaning of manhood and ways of attaining it. Stockdale had a classical education and put it to excellent use during a long public career and an unbelievably difficult eight year period as a prisoner of war. He has important things to say about character and courage and leadership and adversity and history. The breadth of sources from which he draws his observations is breathtaking.



3. It is an honor to review this book. Vice admiral Stockdale reflects on his personal experience as senior officer in a POW camp in Vietnam during 8 years. This is one of the most remarkable example of human fortitude I have ever heard of told by a man of supreme intelligence and culture.

5 comments about 1858: Abraham Lincoln, Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, Ulysses S. Grant and the War They Failed to See.

1. 1858: Abraham Lincoln, Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, Ulysses S. Grant and The War They Failed to See, Bruce Chadwick , Sourcebooks Inc., 355 pp., notes, bibliography, index, 2008, $24.95
   
   1858 offers clear and concise descriptions of key political and social events that shoved the states into rebellion and resistance. Adventurous and even compelling at times, 1858 moves the reader through twelve months of political and social turmoil. Chadwick explores not the mundane but the exceptional.
   
   Not familiar to most Civil War readers is Jefferson Davis' 1858 visit to Maine in order to recuperate from herpes and build a coalition of Northern Democrats in a bid to establish a presidential candidacy in 1860. The Southern press pilloried him to the point that when he returned he retracted his statements. Ironically, these retractions put him into a position where he would be offered a presidency in 1861, that of the Confederate States of America.
   
   In one six page chapter, Chadwick offers a cogent and balanced description of the Dred Scott Decision, one of the most important U.S. Supreme Court event in U.S. history. His ability to put into place the origins, personalities, issues, and outcomes of this event is exceptional. As a Advance Placement U.S. History test reader, CWL reflected that this chapter would be a fine contribution to student resources.
   
   Though CWL is quite familiar with the Lincoln-Douglas debates, the Oberlin Ohio Rescue and John Brown's escape with slaves from Missouri to Canada, Chadwick offers the essentials in a manner that captures the excitement and underscores their place in bringing the states to the brink of rebellion in 1860. After reading 1858, Civil War buffs may have a new appreciation for the events leading to the Secession Winter of 1860-1861. Some readers may need to keep in mind that all soldiers in the ranks had lived through and had argued over the events of 1858.
   
   Though a Pennsylvanian, CWL has not be able to work up any enthusiasm for James Buchanan, 15th president of the United States. Chadwick's 1858 covers the Buchanan presidency in nine chapters that fall between chapters on Davis, Lee, the Lincoln-Douglas debates, the Oberlin Rescue, Seward's Irrepressible Conflict speech, and John Brown's rescue of slaves from Missouri. Read consecutively the Buchanan White House chapters make the case for this Northern Democrat holding Southern Democrats' interest higher than his own section and possibly allowing the conflict to become truly irrepressible.
   
   Some quibbles: The subtitle is unclear; nine of 17 chapters deal with the Buchanan White House, two deal with Lincoln and Douglas, and single chapters deal with Lee, Davis, Seward, Sherman, The Dred Scott Decision, John Brown's Raid on Missouri and the Slaveholder's raid on Nicaragua. Mysteriously, U.S. Grant is mentioned only on four pages in the book but is in the subtitle. Buchanan has nine chapters but has no mention in the title at all.
   
   CWL suggests that the subtitle be changed for the paperback edition: 1858--The Year the Civil War Became Inevitable for Davis, Lee, Douglas, Lincoln, Seward, Sherman and John Brown. Or 1858--Blood Before The Civil War's Dawn: The Men Who Pulled the Trigger on the War.
   
   Chadwick assumes the reader has no detailed understanding of the period; 1858 is written for the general audience. For the paperback edition, a chronology for the year should be added as well as a brief chronology of the 1846-1860 era. A list of characters would also be helpful for the general audience. Also, the index needs some attention. The entry--Forney, John--lists 6 pages with three subtopics. John Forney has a whole chapter, Number Nine, pages 135-140 but these pages are not listed under the entry--Forney, John--in the index. Some proofreading needs to be done. Notes 159, 160 and 161 are the same font size as the text font; these note number should be the superscript font size, just like the other 744 notes.



2. I have to admit that I can't quite place this book. I would say on the one hand I was disappointed because while it did a good job of portraying the year 1858 it could have just as easily been 1856 or 1860, both of which would have been more interesting. The book spent a lot of time focusing on personal rivalries to the detriment of painting the national picture. Also certain figures who would rise to prominence in the Civil War were given great exposure yet others were barely mentioned. (Like Grant)
   
   So all in all if you like the period, there are worse reads out there but I still think that James McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom does a much better job at portraying the period.



3. Reads like a novel, but its pure history and gives a perspective on the Civil War which has been lacking. The war wasn't about slavery in the south, but more so about slavery in the new states of the west....



4. Why 1858? I found myself asking that question repeatedly the entire time I was reading this book. What made 1858 THE year to look at in regards to the coming of the Civil War. Author Bruce Chadwick tries (largely unsuccessfully, in my opinion) to argue that 1858 was the year slavery became THE main issue facing the United States and events which occurred in 1858 played a large role in bringing about the war. In his Foreword, Chadwick tells the reader he will attempt to accomplish this by weaving together seven stories of people and events, linking these disparate stories together with looks into James Buchanan's "spectacular failure" as President.
   
   1858 weaves together seven stories all (loosely) tied together by Buchanan's Presidency. These stories are, in no particular order:
   
   1. Jefferson Davis
   2. Robert E. Lee
   3. William T. Sherman
   4. The Oberlin-Wellington Slave Rescue
   5. William H. Seward
   6. John Brown
   7. The Lincoln-Douglas Debates
   
   At first, I was intrigued by the author's decision to abandon a traditional narrative and use what I thought would be an interesting change of pace. The idea works better in theory than in the pages of 1858, however. Stories are broken up into different chapters with little regard for continuity or chronological order. For readers new to the subject, this may very well be misleading as far as a time line of these events goes.
   
   As I stated in my introduction, my main and overriding question while reading the entire book was "Why 1858? What makes this year so special?" Unfortunately, although the author does claim he chose 1858 because it was THE year slavery became the overriding issue facing the United States, he doesn't give nearly enough reason WHY, and thus doesn't really answer my question. In essence, he argues FOR 1858, but he really gives no arguments AGAINST other years. To me, slavery had been THE issue for quite some time. A post concerning the Compromise of 1850 at Elektratig shows that slavery was very much at the forefront of the country's concerns as the 1850s opened, and that the Civil War may well have started a decade earlier had the Compromise of 1850 not happened. I can agree with the Lincoln-Douglas debates and the Oberlin-Wellington Slave rescue as two MAJOR events involving slavery and an acceleration towards war. However, other events outside of this year, especially John Brown's Harpers Ferry Raid in 1859 and obviously the Presidential Election of 1860 were major events which did much to hasten the Civil War. Chadwick does argue that the seeds were sewn for these events in 1858. He stresses that John Brown's raid into Missouri and successful escape with slaves into Canada in 1858 and the Lincoln-Douglas debates led to these other events. That may be true, but the MAIN events happened in years other than 1858. Without belaboring the point too much, I believe you simply cannot make a strong case that 1858 was any more important than many other years in causing the Civil War or having slavery become THE issue facing the country. Chadwick's failure too largely explain WHY or argue against other years only drives home the point for me.
   
   To me, deciding to include William T. Sherman was an odd choice other than to allow the author/publisher to get Ulysses S. Grant's name into the subtitle of the book. Grant is barely mentioned, and Sherman had hardly anything to do with the author's assertion that 1858 was the year slavery became the most important issue in the country. The only reason I can see to include Sherman is to show an example of a Northerner who had no strong feelings towards slavery, much like Robert E. Lee was personally opposed to slavery as a Southerner. In reading the chapters covering Sherman, I was puzzled as to what purpose his antebellum life story served to the narrative as a whole.
   
   The subtitle of the book is especially puzzling to me. U.S. Grant is listed and he is barely mentioned in the book, pretty much only in relation to the Sherman portion of the story. Putting a famous figure into your title or subtitle only to barely mention them isn't going to win points with this reviewer. Another issue I have with the subtitle is "The War They Failed to See." Huh? Lincoln's "House Divided" speech is mentioned. So is Jefferson Davis' ascension in late 1858 as the leader of the Secession Movement. John Brown not only saw war coming, he was determined to start it himself! And lastly, Seward's "Irrepressible Conflict" speech is also stressed. It seems to me these men at least had an inkling that war was at the very least very possible if not imminent if some drastic steps were not taken with regards to slavery. I don't want to pin this on the author at all. Marketing sells books, and the subtitle screams MARKETING from a tall building. Blame the publisher here folks.
   
   If you have lasted this long, you might believe I hated 1858. This is definitely not so. My policy is to get the bad out of the way first and move on to the good. Let's start with the author's style. Bruce Chadwick is definitely a good storyteller. Despite some continuity issues in his narrative choice as mentioned earlier, I read this 300 page book in only two sittings. I could not put it down.
   
   Chadwick's chapters on the gross ineptitude of James Buchanan's Presidency were my favorite portions of the book. Rather than focus on the slavery issue and try to resolve it in some way, Buchanan instead completely ignored slavery when possible and blinded himself to the enormity of the problem the rest of the time. His "Don Quixote-ish schemes", as Chadwick calls them, to annex portions of Central and South America by any means possible while ignoring slavery was just one issue. In addition, Buchanan chose to fight petty feuds with two powerful men, Senator Stephen Douglas and newspaper editor John Forney, and these feuds were disastrous for the Democratic party in the elections of 1858 and the Presidential election of 1860. More than any other man, Buchanan had the power to slow or even prevent radical developments with regards to the slavery situation. Instead, says Chadwick, he did nothing while radicals on both sides led the nation to the brink of war.
   
   I was also pleasantly surprised with the bibliography and notes. Chadwick uses a nice number of endnotes, including 747 in exactly 300 pages of text. He did use quite a few secondary sources, but for what was obviously to me a "pop history" book aimed more at the masses than to deep readers, Chadwick also looked at the papers of many of those involved in the events of the year 1858 and around 90 newspapers published at the time. A serviceable index rounds out the book.
   
   Bruce Chadwick's 1858 sets out to prove that year was the year slavery became THE issue in the United States, but was rather unsuccessful in this regard. His arguments for 1858 as the year were sparse and his arguments against other years were non-existent. The story's continuity suffered somewhat as a result of some conscious choices on the author's part. Despite these flaws, 1858 is an enjoyable read aimed at the masses which I would be happy to recommend to readers new to the subject. Deep readers will find this material covered elsewhere in much greater detail.



5. "1858" is a solid overview of a pivotal year in the run-up to the Civil War. Certainly, this is not an exhaustive treatment, and, as other reviewers have suggested, more in-depth analysis of the year's key personalities and events can be found elsewhere. I agree with previous comments critical of the subtitle. In particular, Grant makes a few fleeting cameos in the narrative, while lengthy chapters are devoted to Seward, Douglas, Sherman and John Brown, all of whom are absent from the subtitle. The book's primary antagonist also escapes mention: James Buchanan. Frequently ranked by historians as our worst president, the flawed and inept Buchanan chose to feud with friends and rivals within his own party and engage in fanciful foreign policy pursuits (like trying to purchase proslavery Cuba) rather than confront the deepening divisions over slavery.
   
   Clearly, this book aims at a mass-market audience. Scholars and aficionados of the period will be disappointed. On the other hand, Average Joe readers like myself will find new information and fresh insights. For example, the friendship between the firebrand abolitionist Seward and the rabidly proslavery Jefferson Davis, or how Buchanan's meddling cost Stephen Douglas the popular vote to Lincoln in their Senate contest, providing Lincoln with the rationale for his subsequent Presidential bid. The anecdote about the slave rescuers in Oberlin, OH was also new to me. For the general reader, "1858" is time well spent.

5 comments about It Doesn't Take a Hero : The Autobiography of General H. Norman Schwarzkopf.

1. I picked this book up in a used bookstore and bought it because I was curious about General Schwarzkopf's life and how he became the man he is.
   
   His life is very interesting and I learnt a lot from it regarding leadership to the extent I used one of his war stories in my book " Your Attitude Determines Your Altitude."



2. This book was surprisingly good. It was straight forward. He said a lot of things that I hadn't expected to hear from a man in his position. My guess is that he received a lot of "poop" for it also.
   He has a lot of heart and a lot of good emotions.
   I have read some negative stuff about him also but all in all he seems to be a pretty good man - and a pretty good story teller.
   I haven't checked yet but if he has written something else, I would probably buy it. I think he has brains and insight and I don't think that he would be a paen to the established order - He would be loyal to his country of course - but I feel that he would tell it as he saw it without being afraid to be critical - if he felt criticism was necessary.
   I would like to see him write something on military history - past wars or battles or something like that.



3. "Cometh the hour, cometh the man" is an adage that was penned for men such as General H. Norman Schwarzkopf.
   
   It is very easy for Englishman to prefer British heroes over those from other countries. Some might say it is even easier for United States citizens to acknowledge the achievements of their own citizens whilst deprecating those of any other nation. Eisenhower, for example, was a great man - but so was Montgomery!
   
   This book, however, is about a man who is not in open comparison to any. He tells an account of his own life which, as others have already stated, is so honest as to be brutally so. How odd that the fickle finger of fate is able to steer any man towards his ultimate destiny. What if Eisenhower (or even Montgomery) had joined the Navy?, what if Norman Schwarzkopf had railed against his father's wishes and "not" joined the US Army?
   
   But they did and I am unable to avoid that cliché which demands that "the rest is history." Having said that, I would suggest General Schwarzkopf's contribution to that history is as great as any man's.
   
   Other reviewers have sought to express their views in their own ways and quite rightly so! Some of those reviews give the reader a quick impression - "it's a great book" and all that, whereas others seek to paraphrase the book and, is so doing give the reader a better impression of what is found within it's pages.
   
   Me, well, for the very first time in a long time, I feel as though I have read a book. Just think about that. Take a moment to look at any of my book reviews, then click on that button which says "see all my reviews" and you will see what I mean. Some of those books are on subjects I feel very passionate about. Some are great books and well worth the 5 star rating given. Others are less than ordinary and not even worth the single star one is required to donate to the charitable cause that best describes that particular offering in print.
   
   Then I find a biography from a retired general who came to prominence during the first Gulf War, the biography of a man who recognised it does not take a hero to order men into battle, the biography of an ordinary bloke who did good, served his country and the cause of freedom well and expects nothing in return.
   
   Buy it. Read it. Only then will you also appreciate what I mean by having "read" a book. There will come a time when you will read it again.
   
   NM
   Retired British Army major.



4. I went into this read thinking that this would be another in a long line of self-serving autobiographies from officer blow-hards that are so full of themselves it is disgusting. I expected, like I have read in so many other memoirs, a tale where the main character is bigger than the times he served in.
   
   Not so with General Schwarzkopf. He is truly an American hero who was given an impossible mission during the first Gulf War and he pulled it off partly due to a sense of history, in part due to political accument, and in no large part because this took a lot of balls.
   
   The General starts the book out with a touching portrait of his childhood; his formative years were spent living in the Middle East, learning the customs, an appetite for the cuisine, and the art of falconry.
   
   He is no Gen. Eisenhower, to be sure, but he is still a larger than life figure that served our nation during a pivotal time in our Middle Eastern Diplomacy.
   
   "Stormin' Normin" is neither falsely self-effacing, nor does he "toot his own horn." He is what he is, and his not only has his biography born testimony to his greatness as both an officer and as an American, subsequent interviews with the gliteratti have done nothing but illumine the brightness of his "star(s)."
   
   A great read for the history buff, or a lover of biographies of great Americans.



5. I thouroughly enjoyed reading this book. General H. Norman Schwarzkopf was brutally honest in telling his life story! I can see how a deserving general that he was. Honor, duty, country and yes a very just man. I just had some wishful thinking that if only South Vietnam had one or two men just like him to prosecute the Vietnam war! A fine man he is!