5 comments about Dreadnought.

1. This is perhaps the finest, most informative, and eminently readable book on history I have read in 50 years of exploring the subject. It is comprehensive and an indispensable book for those who wish to understand the dynamics of European and world history since the mid-19th century. Dr. M. H. Wilkinson



2. First of all -- you've got to have a real interest in the politics behind the First World War in order to complete this monster. There is some fascinating stuff here!!! The stories of Queen Victoria, Bismarck, the Kaiser, Admiral Fisher, and Winston Churchill were terrific. I give it four stars rather than five because the long narrative can be dry reading at times.
   
   Still, if you've read the well-known WWI books already, this is a great read. 'New' history from a unique perspective -- the Royal Navy.



3. Probably one of the best histories of the period yet produced and - as an important bonus - written in excellent English.



4. The book discusses a period in history when British power was at its height.
   However emergence of Germany as a great power disturbed the status quo.
   To exacerbate matters, Germany was ruled by a man who was abrasive,impetous,
   arrogant.Kaiser Wilhelm II wanted nothing but an exalted status for his nation
   under the sun. He advocated that Germany must have a colonial empire like Britain and
   a strong navy commensurate to her status. "Seize the trident",Kaiser said. This forms the background to the naval
   armament race between the two nations.
   
   Both incurred colossal expenditure in building Dreadnoughts. This was a super
   battle ship [huge,floating steel monster] capable of cruising at high speed and firing
   armor-piercing shell at a long- range.Thanks to wealth she could draw from colonies
   London was able to withstand the strain.
   
   Kaiser's scheme of things envisaged a subordinate role for Britain under renascent
   Germany which English pride,self-respect found hard to accept.As threat from across
   the North Sea mounted ,London was forced to end her splendid isolation .Between
   1904-1908 Britain became close with her former enemies : France,Russia.Europe was
   now divided into two hostile blocs: Triple Entente,Dual alliance. As tensions mounted
   Britain and Germany came closer to war :Agadir crisis in 1905.
   
   German army General Staff was crowded by Prussian militarists .These men had no
   qualms in violating in Belgian neutrality: the Schlieffen plan ,how Germany intend to
   wage war in the west.Further Berlin was served by an ally [Hapsburg -ruled,partially
   defunct Austro-Hungarian empire]which was very brash toward its neighbours.Under such circumstances sanity will never prevail.So the
   two like-minded powers fused to generate violence on an unprecedented scale.Sad,tragic
   incident in the Balkans, assassination of heir to the Hapsburg throne served as raison d'etre.
   
   My gripe about this book , the text in many areas contains details which has no relevance
   the subject making it exceptionally verbose. The book revolves too much around personalities.So I liked it only in patches.
   
   However the section dealing with Admiral John Fisher's life was interesting.Innovations he effected in naval firepower ,ship propulsion revolutionized
   war at sea. Also illuminating is author's elaboration of Admiral Alfred Von Tirpitz's
   `Risk Theory' and run down of events leading to the outbreak of great war.
   
   A reader requires abundant time, perseverance to wade through this tome.
   Indispensable read for history buffs.



5. It was the First World War - known at that time as "The Great War" which changed Britain and Europe forever. As the Generals on both sides sent millions and millions of men to their deaths in the carnage which they regarded as warfare, there came about a change in the psyche of the British male - a change which would herald a complete alteration in the way he thought and acted towards those of the upper, ruling classes. No longer would that British male be so quick to use such words as "M'Lord" or even "Sir." No longer would he doff his cap as a mark of respect, no longer would the ordinary police Constable be so quick to "arrest that man" just because a well dressed person had ordered him so to do.
   
   That change in British Society continues to this day and is easily traced back to the feelings of loss and despair which came with the realisation that far too many young men had died "at the front" - even though the war itself had been won and mainland Britain had escaped unscathed.
   
   In this epic tale, author Robert Massie delves deep into why that war occurred in the first place. Every single aspect of argument and behaviour on both sides (both military and political) is exposed and analysed. As the title of the book would suggest, the theme is the world's first great arms race. When Britain produced the first Dreadnought Battleship it rendered all other battleships obsolete at a stroke (including the remainder of the British Fleet!). From that moment onwards it was always a question of who could produce the most new Dreadnoughts in the quickest possible time. Set against this wish by both Britain and Germany to be seen as the world's supreme masters of the seas was a political intrigue which few have been able to commit to print in such a masterly fashion as is found in this book.
   
   In short, this is one of the greatest books of our time. It is also a damn fine read.
   
   NM

5 comments about Stilwell and the American Experience in China, 1911-45.

1. How far will the united States go to support a ruler on the words of others? Stilwell was, first and foremost, a soldier; a general of uncommon skills. Not so much the common touch as the respect by the troops for putting them first, their welfare was his top priority. His years in the east made him the obvious choice for the China post. No general has been asked to do as much as he had to do on the political front, treating with allies who were concerned above all for their place in the sun, while at the same time, fighting a tenacious, skilled, dedicated enemy. Surely a harbinger of what was to come in a place tro the north, called Korea.



2. This book very elegantly and faithfully documented the Stilwell's point of view of what happened during this part of history, but it is very one-sided.
   
   First of all, the KMT commanders were not mostly corrupt and incapable like Tuchman had described in this book. A direct quote from TIME artile titled "The Army Nodbody Knows" in the June 16, 1941 issue:
   "...Four years of war have hurt China a lot, but have also taught China a lot. The most spectacular discovery, for a nation in which military leadership has classically been an affair of coin and cunning rather than martial skill, has been that China could turn out first-class officer talent.
   
   There is no younger officer class in the world than that of the Generalissimo's crack divisions. Generalissimo Chiang is 53, Chen Cheng is 41, Chen's Field Chief of Staff is 34. It would be hard to find a divisional or regimental commander in those divisions over 40. Regimental colonels are sometimes in their 20s.
   
   These baby officers are tough babies. They are trim as well-kept guns, big fellows, by Chinese standards, hearty and jolly in rest and brutally energetic in action. They lead in person. With their divisions they clamber up mountainsides which would put most corpulent U.S. colonels hors de combat. In nearly four years of fighting, the young officers have mastered the arts of the field--silent de ployment, timely retreat, sudden concentration, plausible ambuscade, dependable supply of vegetable camouflage..."
   
   But as this book has gone out of its way to emphasize, it is true that Chiang's administration towards the end of the second Sino-Japanese war was becoming weak and corrupt, which eventually led to his lost of mainland China to the Communist. However, this fact needs to be put into context as well. China fought alone for 4 years against a vastly more superior enemy. Therefore many of the best Nationalist Chinese generals were KIA or incapacitated early in the war of resistance against Japan. There were 73 KMT generals KIA during WWII (plus 1 Chinese Communist general), more than any other country Allied or Axis. It is reasonable to assume that many of the KMT military commanders that managed to survive and rise in ranks to the end were more interested in self preservation and personal gain, rather than defeating the emeny. Chiang knew this all too well but could do very little to alleviate this problem, all he could do was execute one or two of them from time to time to warn others not to go too far. So Tuchman's analogy comparing KMT to AVRN is not only inappropriate, but also failed to take into account the context of China fighting a 8-year long war with marginal industrial capacity and grossly inadeqate military supplies. It is a miracle that Chiang did not surrender and broker some kind of peace agreement with the Japanese.
   
   Finally, this book has indirectly proved that Stilwell spent (and wasted) way too much time and energy accusing the KMT leadership and fighting Chiang and Chennault, instead of accepting the tremedous shortcomings of his Chinese Ally and try to work out a less than perfect solution to fight the Japanese. His despise and hatred toward Chiang got to a point when Roosevelt gave Chiang an ultimatum to hand over command of all Chinese armed forces to Stilwell (with explicit instruction to keep this confidential), he rushed to have the letter read out loud in front of all the Chinese and American generals attending a meeting, for the sole purpose of embarrass and discredit Chiang in public. This event led directly to his recall as Chiang replied to Roosevelt that the KMT would rather fight alone than cave in to this ultimatum.



3. As much as I think this books has provided a lot of information/insight during the period, I found author's comtemptuous attidude towards Chinese a bit hard to swallow. In a way, she was somehow biased when she wrote the book. In no way I'm accusing her of distorting the fact, but, how the fact is presented will shape the opinion of a general reader about Chinese. This is probably not the main point of the book, but for a book that has won putlizer prize, I would have expected more.



4. This book is of exceptional quality and stands up very well after nearly forty years. If not for Tuchman, Stilwell, who was one of the best generals in the U.S. Army during World War II, would be lost to history given his unrewarding work in a backwater region.
   
   Tuchman does an excellent job of letting Stilwell speak for himself. His integrity, brilliance, and humble nature come through. So do his pugnacious and combative personality, which while quite useful for a general in an operational command, were counterproductive in China. Having written a book on Stilwell myself, I believe she is absolutely right that he was the wrong man for this posting, which was about diplomacy as much as it was military campaigns. If he had not gone to China, he probably would have lead the U.S. invasion of North Africa instead of Dwight D. Eisenhower. Given their differing personalities and Stilwell's Anglophobia, Vinegar Joe would not have done well there either. He was an exceptionally able military leader, but he needed to be commanding field armies rather trying to be a diplomat.
   
   This book, though, is more than a biography. It is a life and times study with Stilwell being a tool to study the U.S. relationship with China. Many people blamed Stilwell for poorly managing relations with China that ended up weakening Chiang Kai-shek and allowed the Communists to come to power. An easy claim to make since Stilwell died in 1946. Tuchman is balanced in her account and gives Stilwell's critics their moment. She also develops Chiang's point of view and shows that he and Stilwell were pursuing different policies because they had different goals. This leads to her main theme that China has never been under the sway or control of the United States, and that we have many experts on China, and ignore them at our peril. Tuchman was writing with the Vietnam War in mind, seeing Stilwell's experiences as setting in motion events that brought U.S. involvement in that region. That assertion seems a little simplistic, but this book is still highly, highly relevant given the current nature of U.S.-Chinese relations.
   
   With all these points made, this book is not without certain shortcomings. She skimps a bit on operational matters, which is understandable given her focus. While this biography is good, very good, it is not Tuchman at her best. "Guns of August" is better. That comment, though, is like complaining that you won an Olympic gold medal without setting a world record. Most of us would take Olympic gold under those conditions and Tuchman really deserved the Pulitzer she won for this study.



5. This is a remarkable book and well worth reading nearly four decades after its initial publication. Tuchman is a gifted author and her subject, "Vinegar Joe" Stilwell, is an outrageous, memorable figure. Even readers with a limited familiarity with China or the Pacific theater during the Second World War will find "Stilwell and the American Experience in China" captivating.
   
   Joe Stilwell was, to say the least, an unusual Army officer for his generation. He had a gift for languages and was drawn to career-limiting foreign assignments from the moment in he left West Point. He spoke fluent Spanish and French before he accepted a chance posting to China in his mid-thirties primarily because it offered the opportunity to get out of the country and learn a new language and culture. By the time the US entered the Second World War, Stilwell was the most highly rated Corps commander in the Army, but also had many years experience in China and spoke fluent Mandarin. Although George Marshall wanted him to command the first US ground campaign of the war - the TORCH landings in North Africa - Stilwell was sent to Asia because no one else was better qualified to serve in China, a region of great importance after the British were booted quickly out of Hong Kong, Singapore and the rest of East Asia by the Japanese.
   
   The irony of this book is that Stilwell was at once the best-qualified officer in the US Army to serve in Asia in support of Chiang Kai Shek's KMT Army and also the worst possible choice because of his abrasive mien. On the one hand, no other senior officer had his command of the language, years in country, or understanding of the Chinese culture. On the other hand, no other senior officer was as tactless or boorish - two qualities that do not serve one well in Asia. For instance, Stilwell had the habit of assigning mocking and often cruel nicknames to his tormentors, real and perceived. Almost from the beginning, Chiang Kai Shek, his nominal superior in the China theater, was "Peanut" - an insulting moniker that Stilwell used rather openly and regularly and was well-known by the Generalissimo and his staff, an incredible affront to the Chinese sense of position and authority. Even more insulting and offensive was Stilwell's occasional reference to his polio-stricken command-in-chief as "Rubber legs."
   
   Yet, Tuchman is clearly a fan of Stilwell's. She sees in him the same talent, passion and energy that led Secretary of War Stimson and Chief of Staff Marshall to put him in the role and steadfastly defend him in the face of repeated requests for his dismissal by scores of highly placed US, British and Chinese officials, whose number included FDR himself. But after reading "Stilwell" one cannot help but think that Stimson and Marshall made a mistake in sticking with Joe for so long.
   
   "Stilwell" also reads like a case study in the perils and heartaches of coalition warfare. From the outset, the major allies in the CBI Theater - the US, British and Chinese - were fundamentally at odds over objectives and therefore completely out of sync on strategy. The British did not see the point in bothering with China at all and wanted only to regain their colonial possessions, Hong Kong and Singapore above all, and Burma only if convenient and if it could be done without mixing Chinese and Indian troops. Chiang Kai Shek, on the other hand, had little interest in ejecting the Japanese from China in a bloody, all-out racial war, but rather preferred to stockpile American supplies and allow the US Navy and nascent Air Forces to slowly erode the Japanese war machine. Meanwhile, the US was guided by FDR's dream of seeing China emerge as one of the world's great post-war powers, fully on the side of the United States and committed to democracy. Tuchman stresses repeatedly that the US public, and to a certain extent the US government, was greatly misled on the truth of the KMT regime. The missionary lobby and other important Chiang supporters, including high-level visitors that were successfully hoodwinked, such as defeated presidential candidate Wendell Wilkie, generated a flood of propaganda that gave the average American a wildly unrealistic and positive impression of the Chinese ally. Tuchman contends that Stilwell himself saw the balderdash written about the KMT as the primary culprit in the inability or unwillingness of Washington to change policy once it became clear that the continued support Chiang was a waste of resources and American prestige and position.
   
   "Stilwell" succeeds on many levels and will likely remain in print and widely read for decades to come. It is a stellar blend of biography, military history, American foreign policy, US-China relations, and a case study in coalition warfare.

5 comments about The Last Lion: Winston Spencer Churchill: Visions of Glory, 1874-1932.

1. yeas the most popular book on sir winston but mistakes are in it and volume three will appear after a 20 years break .



2. The finest biography of Churchill (and one of the best biographies of anyone else) ever written. Manchester is unequaled in providing a balanced, thorough and readable product. Only down side is that he died before completing the third and final book on Churchill.



3. This is a very good analysis of Churchill, a thorough and colorfull portrait of a man I consider to be the greatest man of the 20th century. I have only two complaints, first I would have liked to have known more about his life with his wife and children. I also would have liked to have known what he thought of the Lusitania sinking. Not only does Manchester say nothing about Churchill's role in this business but the word Lusitania is not mentioned at all in nearly 2000 pages. Very strange. The letters of Churchill point out the chivalrousness and romantic nature that the public has not seen. All in all - very good and well worth a good read.



4. William Manchester is a tremendous writer. A man like Churchill deserved to have his biography writted by a writer as gifted as him.
   I highly recommend this book to anyone wanting, not only to learn much about the great man Churchill, but also to have their mind expanded and stretched by excellent literature like this. There are not many people writing like this today, sadly enough.
   This is not an easy read, in fact most people will do well to have a dictionary near by - but it is worth it. Drink deeply and you will learn so much more than you would have thought possible about the world from the late 19th century up through WWII.
   Drink it up! 6 stars.



5. This fully lives up to its reputation as perhaps the best biography ever written. Manchester does a peerless, masterful job filling in the background colors and giving a complete picture of Churchill from a young man into his early fifties. As Manchester emphasizes, this background was essentially the decline and fall of the British Empire and the aristocracy who ran it. Manchester's main point, that Churchill was a Victorian who also lived in the twentieth century, is brilliantly made. Churchill himself is presented in all his perplexing, influriating splendor: an impetuous, charming, ambitious genius who all too often jumped out of the plane without a parachute. If you wish to know why he was rejected by the British people at the polls just after his greatest triumph (and job done) this fascinating volume of his early triumphs and memorable failures is indispensible (answer: they needed his boistrous energy in war but they didn't trust him in peace

5 comments about The Autobiography Of Eleanor Roosevelt (Quality Paperbacks Series).

1. I bought this book during a visit to Eleanor Roosevelt's Val-Kill Cottage in Hyde Park. I had read Doris Kearn's "No Ordinary Time" years prior and it had stoked an deep interest in me for more on the Roosevelts of Hyde Park. This book is an interesting look at a woman whose transformation impacted the nation and the world. Surely, she is the most interesting and influential woman of the 20th Century.
   
   The book covers a great many historical events as well as personal incidents in her life. The early years give us a glimpse into the thinking of an awkward and self-conscious girl. She guides us through her growing involvement in New York politics. The presidential years are interesting. But I found that reading a book ABOUT Eleanor in those years as opposed to reading her self deprecating and understated views was mor enlightening. The most captivating portions ofthis book were the post presidential years, particularly her roleas a UN Delegage and as Chairman of the Human Rights Commission. I thought the book was good, although I had to keep reminding myself that an autobiography is one person's personal story of events - not the grand history of events.
   
   I am very glad I read her autobiography and read her own words. She is that much more a compelling woman to me. History buffs should not shy away from this book. Immensely readable, with an occasional slow spot.



2. This book sheds light a long period of American history through the narration of an amazing woman who you will grow to admire as much as I did. Born into an elite aristocratic American family, Eleanor could have remained hemmed in by the insular values with which she was raised. Women were supposed to stay out of politics, Anglo-Saxons were supposed to run the country and only mingle amongst themselves, and the poor deserved their lot.
   
   Eleanor grew up with a lot of the prejudices someone of her class and generation might be expected to have but then she transformed into a woman who fought tirelessly against poverty, racism, sexism, and injustices of all kinds. I think that is her true legacy and what makes her so remarkable. In a society that wanted women to be purely ornamental, Eleanor could have done as so many women of her age and class did, remain prisoners to their narrow views and beliefs.
   
   But Eleanor did more. Because she was not conventionally attractive, she was supposed to hide away from society. Because she was a woman, she wasn't supposed to get involved in political affairs. But she got involved! She told FDR what she thought about everything, urging him to pass anti-lynching legislation, include more women in his cabinet, and earning his profound respect-if not always his complience!
   
   Sometimes she could be a bit naive, (like when, in the fifties, she told a soviet leader how much Americans had done to improve the "life of the negro", but Eleanor's empathy, compassion, humility and personal strength comes through so strongly in these profoundly human writings of hers that I really think anyone would enjoy them. What a wonderful woman!



3. While reading this book you get to share in the many personal experiences of Eleanor Roosevelt. She does not focus much on her relationships, rather she focuses on sharing her experiences. The places she has gone to and the people she has talked to are absolutley amazing. She shares her firsthand experiences of the mine workers and her talks with people in communist Russia. It is amazing that just one woman has seen and heard from so many varying perspectives. She really did try to empathize with the people and situations around her and this really comes out in her book. I think many people can learn from reading this book on how to be a better listener and observer and critical thinker of the life happening around you.



4. If you're looking for a "first" Eleanor biography, don't start with this one. Read it eventually, but not at first.
   
   If you have read her collected writings, "No Ordinary Time" or the biography(ies) by Blanche Wiesen Cook this autobiography is a much needed voice. It may not be as engrossing or tantlizing as the others, but it offers a layered look into her history. I struggled with the Wiesen Cook books but ended up enjoying them very much and I would have to say that with out them, this autobiography would not have had such an impact. What she shares in her autobiography is enlightening at times, but what is more significant is the specifics she leaves out or vaguely refers to in the generalist of terms.
   
   The best way to describe this book is comparing it to a long chat with a woman you've respected for a long time. You knew things about her, you heard the rumors, but now you're sitting with her, listening to her tell you how she really felt things happened.



5. Eleanor Roosevelt's autobiography provides very little information about her life. She vaguely refers to many seemingly important events (such as the death of her father, her husband's presidency) with little emotion and no detail whatsoever. If you know a lot about her and the politics of the time already, it may offer an interesting perspective. If you want to know details of ER's incredibly interesting life, read her biography by Blanch Weisen Cook.

5 comments about I Have a Dream: Writings and Speeches That Changed the World, Special 75th Anniversary Edition (Martin Luther King, Jr., born January 15, 1929).

1. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is one of America's greatest heroes and this is a collection of his wonderful writings and speeches. Often people stop at "I Have a Dream" but this shows the complete evolution of Dr. King. A wonderful read that has been part of my library for the past 10 years -- and I've read it three times and often use it for reference and store it next to the Bible.



2. Dr. Martin Luther King's collection of writings and speeches, "I Have A Dream", brings aspiration to light. The events that surrounded the life and death of this true hero reveals the shameful fact that no matter how great the United States of America is today, it is one country that was nurtured with inhumane machinery: slavery, racism, injustice, Mickey-Mouse freedom, and Mickey-Mouse democracy. I hate to think about it, but it is an honest fact, which we should all come to terms with. Nobody can rewrite history.
   The 256 pages that is "I Have A Dream" was enough to highlight the wickedness and the violence that were deliberately sustained in America, for a full century, after a bloody Civil War ended her tenacity on slavery.
   One question that will always beg for answer is: How on earth did U.S. Presidents who presided over the ruthless color-bar era qualified for those Nobel Peace Prizes that they received? Knowing what life was like in the U.S.A. just a couple of decades ago melts my heart. "I Have A Dream" is a big eye-opener!



3. "I Have a Dream: Writings and Speeches That Changed the World," by Martin Luther King, Jr., is a fine collection of texts by this important figure. The book has been edited by James M. Washington. Coming in at less than 300 pages, this is a concise but meaty book.

   Washington includes King's most important texts: the "Letter from Birmingham Jail"; the "I Have a Dream" speech; his Nobel Prize acceptance speech; "My Trip to the Land of Gandhi"; "A Time to Break Silence," his 1967 speech criticizing the United States war in Vietnam, and more. These writings and speeches cover King's great themes: nonviolent resistance, the African-American civil rights movement, etc.

   Those seeking a more comprehensive collection of Kings' work should seek out "A Testament of Hope: The Essential Writings and Speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr." also edited by James M. Washington. At more than 700 pages, this is a truly monumental collection, and includes much material not found in "I Have a Dream": the 1965 "Playboy" interview, transcripts of television interviews, and more. But for those who want a shorter text that cuts to the heart of King's life and work, "I Have a Dream" is perfect.

   "I Have a Dream" reveals King to be a true Christian prophet, and a man with a global vision. As literature, these texts also show King to be the heir of such American thinkers as Henry David Thoreau and W.E.B. DuBois. Highly recommended.




4. This collection of Dr. King's writings includes all the major speeches -- such as I Have A Dream and I See the Promised Land, as well as important writings such as Letter from A Birmingham Jail. It also has great essays on the lessons Dr. King learned from Ghandi and a wonderful introduction from Mrs. King. This is a great collection to get started learning about Dr. King -- from his own pen. I highly reccomend it.



5. Reading the speeches of Dr. King are inspiring. You get a glimpse into his mind and to genuinely understand the struggle he was up against. I'm not just refering to the Civil Rights movement. you also get insights into the responsibilities and pressure he felt as the leader of this movement. He was a man who changed history. This book offers glimpses into his humanity as well as his motivational and inspirational speeches. A must for anyone interested in American history, the Civil Rights movement or in biographys. It will continue to effect you long after you have put the book down.

5 comments about Pure Goldwater.

1. I live here in AZ and allot of things here are named after Goldwater. Some streets, buildings and foundations. And living here 12 years I know nothing about him! Only that he was a senator. My curiosity got the best of me and I ordered this book (audio book so I can listen on my way to work). And in finishing this book I feel I have a very intimate, honest, and broad look in to Goldwater's life. From the lil notes that he jotted down that were discovered, to whole letters written to and from the president!... It really shook me at the core, very raw stuff. Goldwater really had some simple and firm beliefs that once I was exposed to it (this book), I am now a firm believer. To go a step further, I considered myself a Democrat. After exposure to Goldwater's thoughts on many issues I realized how dead wrong I was on my stance as a Dem. I actually think now that I am a Republican or even a Libertarian (can't believe I just said that). More to the point, I'm a Goldwater believer now. To think, I almost cast my vote down the wrong path, & I am glad that I read this book in time for the election.



2. Pure Goldwater is just what the title indicates, vintage, pure Goldwater. How good it was to read about my conservative, political hero once again. This book was a delight to read. Sen. Goldwater's character, honesty, and leadership traits shine throughout the book. You always knew where the good Senator stood on issues - he didn't waffle; the book does an excellent job bringing his noble traits out. There were few people in the 1960's his equal, and even fewer today. In your heart you know he was right then, and he is just as right today. Bravo for such a great book. Pure Goldwater should be mandatory reading for US History students.



3. For those of us of a certain age, Barry Goldwater was the prickly candidate for president in 1964, whose "extremism in defense of liberty" speech turned away millions of voters. But Goldwater stayed around long after that and it's a good thing he did. "Pure Goldwater", a neatly arranged compilation of his journal entries (along with some letters and speeches) reveals a much more complex and attractive man than the public got to know more than a generation ago.
   
   The title of the book could not have been more appropriate. Here we see Senator Goldwater in all of his frankness, lambasting presidents with whom he worked, yet revelling in the love of his family, photography, flying and service to his country. In reading "Pure Goldwater" it's not hard to be in agreement with him on one page and subsequently want to wring his neck on the next. He seemed always to be on the cutting edge of the day's events, even when he was doing some of the "cutting", himself. It's fascinating to see him comment on every president from FDR to Clinton and there was much about most of them he didn't like.
   
   Much of the book centers around his relationship with Richard Nixon and the trials and tribulations of Watergate and perhaps the most intriguing part of the book follows his recollections on summing up Nixon's chances in the Senate for impeachment survival. I remember that day well and how it changed my mind about Senator Goldwater. Here was a true statesman rising to the occasion in a most difficult time in our nation's history.
   
   Barry Goldwater's seeming drift to the left regarding such issues as women's choice and gay rights no doubt sent shivers up and down the collective spines of his conservative colleagues. But Goldwater reasoned well and was always practical and this will be a big part of his legacy...a conservative man ahead of his time. "Pure Goldwater" is a pure joy to read and I commend John Dean and Barry Goldwater, Jr. for allowing us this terrific look at the senator...as told through his own words. I highly recommend it.



4. What a Gem! Honest, thought-provoking, riveting and well-written. Pure Goldwater gives an insightful look at an important time in history. Entertaining and politically relevant during this election year. Conservatives will love it, and so will just about everyone else.



5. Let me state from the get go that I am a Senator Goldwater and President Reagan style Republican.
   
   What I think this books value is in 2008 is how it sheds alot of light on Senator Hillary Clinton who was a Goldwater girl as well as Senator John McCain who in his pre 2008 years was more Goldwater minded than most people know. But he has gone off course so badly and isnt the same open honest straight talking express man he once was.
   
   Also of interest to me was how Libertarian minded Senator Goldwater was and not the conservative Republican of recent years which is right wing Christian close minded mode. I say this as a Christian who is Goldwater mode.
   
   This is a book that anyone interested in sanity, smaller government, and Constitutional law should read. Sadly so many people probably see Goldwater as some right wing zealot. Thats President G. W. Bush, not Senator Goldwater.

5 comments about The Last Lion: Winston Spencer Churchill, Alone 1932-1940.

1. Finest biography on Churchill ever written. A pity Manchester died before completing the third book of the trilogy.



2. The Last Lion, Alone covers the history of Europe from the time Hitler first came to power in Germany to the time that Hitler invaded the Low Countries and World War II began. During this period Churchill, who continually fought against the appeasement policies of Chamberlain, rose from Back Bench irrelevance to become Brittan's Prime Minister.
   
   The history of this period is a gripping saga of one man's malicious attempt to dominate Europe and another man's noble efforts to stop him - a classical case of good vs evil - told as an almost unbelievable story in the words of a master story teller.



3. William Manchester informs and entertains in this excellent historical account of the critical years leading up to WWII, juxtaposing the appeasement practices of predecessors Baldwin and Chamberlain with the unwavering belief in the principles of freedom held by Churchill. The book (along with Manchester's first volume) gives terrific insight into the transition from the glory days of the British Empire to the Post WWI apathy that beset the British public. As well, the work provides delightful commentary on the characters surrounding Churhill's life including his colorful mother Jennie, his wife Clementine and his nemesis Adolf Hitler.



4. After the fall of France in June 1940, Winston Churchill was begging USA President Roosevelt for military aid (in fact, all sorts of support was then needed) as no one knew what would the 'fate' of the French fleet was going to be.
   Churchill kept reminding the American president that Britain would not surrender even if left alone.
   Churchill was defiant despite the fact that the two 'key' American ambassadors, in France and Great Britain, were pro Hitler (or at least they were not anti-Nazi).
   Joseph Kennedy (USA Ambassador to GB) openly cautioned his fellow Americans against entering the war because the 'allies' would soon be beaten.
   However, I would have liked to see more comments about the position and reaction of the king - king George VI.
   Was he indifferent?
   We should remember that Hitler had been addressing the King as the man whom the British Government circles have loathed, and as the only 'hope' for a reconciliation between the Third Reich and GB.
   In this context it is true that Churchill was indeed ALONE



5. I was adrift when I finished this volume.
   grasping at pathetic things to read for a while - nothing satisfied - Manchester can set the stage, his historical background is so rich that you'll find yourself spouting about it to your friends.
   
   You'll learn more from this book than a two semester course in 20th century history.
   
   Churchill himself is the lead player in a panapoly of exciting elements. But manchester never lets the reader forget the place in history - the man was a masterful writer.

5 comments about Living History.

1. Reading Hillary's book has given me a sense of the determination, courage, strengths AND faults of this strong woman.
   
   From her early days growing up in the Midwest, to her quest for leadership roles in Wellesley college and Yale law school, and her role in the Watergate impeachment investigation, as well as her days as first lady of Arkansas and the country, up until her role as senator in New York... this woman has been through a lot and has a lot of insight into this world.
   
   The only problem I had with reading this book is that you see that she did live (somewhat) in the shadow of her husband. I mean, he was the President; she was just the first lady. But you see that she tried to get involved in the issues she cared about, namely healthcare, which she continues to talk about in the 2008 election season.
   
   Hillary is an amazing woman. And her book is a great read too.



2. A very real, open look into the life of Hillary Rodham Clinton. She dares to be vulnerable in many areas of the book, while maintaining the class and dignity she is known for by her fans. A great read...I couldn't put it down.



3. For me, the book was particularly a big bore. It seems as though her autobiography is an attempt to glorify her years sidelined in the White House. The book can only be truly enjoyed by Hillary enthusiasts. I'm not a critic of Hillary Clinton, but specifically this book was written with very dry, shriveled style. If you'd like to read a decent biography of Hillary Clinton, I suggest Carl Bernstein's biography of her.



4. A Memoir Review: Living History
   By Hillary Clinton
   
   Upon witnessing abridged television clips of Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign speeches, I made the ignorant assumption the Presidential hopeful was clueless: "she's the wife of a former President; based on what professional formation does she speak?" The impression was unjustifiable. I considered her candidacy an attempt to re-establish the family name given former President Bill Clinton's embarrassing impeachment. Politics, after all, is much more than meets the eye, and as I discovered via the woman's autobiographical memoir Living History, Hillary Rodham Clinton is certainly much more than meets the eye.
   
   My primary reason to pick up Clinton's book was to learn about her political career--nevertheless, the work covers her early life extensively. This is appropriate, and crucial to set the context of her years as an executive. The initial chapters are engaging: not only are they an insightful look into Hillary as a young woman, but also an insightful look at being an American youth in the sixties. Clinton's extensive resume is testament to her scholarly knowledge, and her presence behind the scenes at The White House contributes to an equally significant practical knowledge. Hearing of her pioneering speech at Wellesley College, the first student to have ever given a commencement address, her entry into the all-male Rose Law Firm, and her intertwining of typically hardball politics and compassionate child work made me recognize Hillary Rodham was bound for a high-profile political career long before meeting William Jefferson Clinton.
   
   Clinton's writing embodies humanistic qualities, as if she is still an accessible advocate for everyday hiring. This fact is emphasized by her commentary on routine activities, and her naming of each political associate with which she worked. This latter aspect truly fleshes out the memoir--regardless, the squat descriptions of her colleagues sound unappealingly phoney. Everybody in Arkansas seems to be a close friend of the couple: "As soon as Bill and I became a couple, they became friends of mine. And their sons became close to Chelsea" (Clinton 105). Speaking of partner Sara Ehrman, a member of Senator McGovern's legislative staff, "We sized each other up and decided we would enjoy the ride together, and it was the start of a friendship that endures today" (Clinton 60).
   
   Alluding to "businessman and longtime politico" Jim McDougal, he "was a character: charming, witty and eccentric as the day is long" (Clinton 87). Admiring former Mayor of Little Rock, "Webb Hubbell was a big, burly, likeable man" (Clinton 80). Referring to trip director Kelly Craighead, "she had a lot of insight, dedication and spunk." Clinton chooses three formulaic adjectives to describe each of her acquaintances, and the mechanical style soon becomes tedious. The technique corroborates the "safeness" of Clinton's autobiography: nothing shocking, nor a "tell-all"--simply reserved commentary of nationally and personally historic moments. Understandable, since she would be running for President six years later. In this sense, I do believe there were ulterior motives for the memoir's release; the 2003 year of publishing was opportunely timed for Clinton's 2008 candidacy. The latter stipulation supports my learning that a Presidential campaign begins as soon as one shakes hands with the lowest-ranking political official twenty years from an official convention, and that one's private life will be increasingly scrutinized and distorted.
   
   There is little mention of the financial burden statewide and national elections place on nominees, which I found surprising given Bill Clinton's numerous campaigns. This is insight I was looking forward to reading about, given its increasing importance in our visually driven and electronic society.
   
   Though I have not reached the chapters focussing on the infamous Whitewater scandal, nor her conversations with Eleanor Roosevelt, I have already changed my impression of Hillary Rodham Clinton: she is a well-informed Democrat, whose has consistently demonstrated her leadership skills. Clinton is an activist currently living in manner she has promoted all her life, literally living history.



5. So many people want to give their opinion of Hillary and not the book itself. I found the book extremely interesting and informative and the information she provides about all of the things she learned as First Lady I do feel made her perfectly well suited to become President. She knows all the appointments that need to be made, all the jobs that need to be filled, and she's learned what types of comments and actions can get you in trouble while in the White House. I find her incredibly smart and had no idea of all the different issues that she is familiar with and all the people and friends she has made over the years who can and do give her insight. All in all a delightful book and a good read.

5 comments about Andrew Carnegie.

1. Insight into a fascinating and complex person living in a fascinating complex time. A man who was unique and had incredible influence on his surroundings, yet in many ways was typical of his era



2. David Nasaw succeeded in creating a complete record of the life of Andrew Carnegie. As the reader, you come to know that Carnegie was born to a family of poor weavers in Scotland before moving to the United States, beginning work at a young age and eventually becoming unfathomably wealthy as an investor and entrepreneur in the steel business.
   
   All of the details are there in this book, and in that way, you know the facts of Carnegie's life, but at the same time, you really never get the feeling you know Carnegie. I don't know if that is Nasaw's fault, or if Carnegie is just not a man who allows a biographer to know him very well. Either way, the book feels empty in a way that the best biographies feel full.
   
   You catch glimpses of Carnegie's true personality; he obviously liked to see himself as the wise elder statesman, handing out advice to protoges, even when those protoges were successful 50 year old business men, or even presidents. He seems to wear out his welcome, and relationship with a lot of these people because he only sees the knowledge and advice flowing one way. Carnegie comes across as a man too removed from the realities of life to understand (or maybe care) how he was truly perceived.
   
   Other than that, you never get a real feel for how Carnegie became wealthy, whether he possessed a unique talent or ability which allowed him to become the richest man in the world, or how he fit in to the world in which he lived. I recently finished "Mellon," by David Cannadine, which tackles a similarly tough subject, but I finished that book feeling like I had much more insight into the man than I did in this case.
   
   Recommended for fans of history or biography, but still missing a critical spark required of a five-star biography.



3. How to describe Andrew Carnegie? Certainly he would have to be one of the most fortunate individuals to have ever been born. Son of a hardscrabble weaver from a small hamlet near Edinburgh, Scotland, Carnegie and family immigrated to Pennsylvania whan he was a young man. Perhaps never before in history, has a particular man, with certain skills, found himself at the right place, at the right time and under the right circumstances as did Andrew Carnegie in 19th century western Pennsylvania.
   
   Despite having no formal education, Carnegie was certainly a very intelligent man. He educated himself over the years to the extent that he was considered a very philosophical author and sought after speaker on many of the issues of the day. He hitched his wagon to the right horse when he became assistant to an up and comer in the Pennsylvania Railroad. From an early age, Carnegie discovered the beauty of dividends and compound interest, money earned not by virtue of labor, but solely by virtue of having money. Due in large part to his connections, he was able to parley inside information into increasingly lucrative investments, to the point that he was soon able to turn over daily operation of his several businesses to very able lieutenants while he enjoyed the good life. These lieutenants, assisted by a series of unique events and developing technologies, made Carnegie the richest man in the world.
   
   While it may sound as if Carnegie was merely an observer and accumulator, he certainly deserves much credit for his success. He was an early pioneer in the concept of cost accounting and through a ruthless system of unit cost reduction, both in the areas of vertical integration and labor cost, was able to successfully grow his business and survive numerous economic downturns which bankrupted his competitors.
   
   Many decry Carnegie's business practices, most notably in the areas of labor/manangement relations and anti-competitive practices. However, this demonstrates a very common failing in many commentators; holding historical personages to current standards. The same people that condemn Carnegie's labor practices, denigrate George Washington for owning slaves, or Harry Truman for making racist comments. Each of these, though immoral by current standards, were men of their times.
   
   Owners of manufacturing entities were expected to battle with labor. Labor, in the mid-late 19th century was heavily connected with the burgeoning socialist movement which was looked upon with disfavor by much of society. In fact, it is no coincidence that those of Carnegie's competitors whose labor forces became organized, were largely those that failed in the repeated economic panics of the day. Carnegie succeeded, and grew, as a result of reinvesting profits and maintaining low unit cost. Ironically, though his Homestead steel works became the symbol for labor/management violence, he considered himself one of the most enlightened managers of the day.
   
   Carnegie is viewed, with Rockefeller, Morgan and Vanderbilt in the class of "Robber Barons" which sprang up during the era, however, Carnegie is vastly different than each of these individuals. While many of his contemporaries benefited and suceeded largely due to watered stock and market manipulation, he was very proud, and quick to point out that he never operated a corporation and never sold a share of stock. He was definitely NOT a monopolist (U.S. Steel was formed as a result of his sale of Carnegie Steel to J. P. Morgan and investors). He was simply a supreme capitalist and the first of his type and scale.
   
   He is condemned by others for taking advantage of political and business connections not available to others. Again, that was common practice in the era. Many things that he did, while legislated against now, were perfectly legal and accepted business practices of the times.
   
   All that having been said, I get the impression, especially in the later parts of the book, that Carnegie could be an insufferable prig. I imagine it becomes easy to view ones self as omnipotent and all wise, when everything one touches turns to gold and one is constantly praised for his good works. However, it is telling that he constantly bragged of being successful while only working 2-3 hours/day, lecturing his many employees to enjoy leisure time, while at the same time instituting a 12 hour/7 day a week work schedule. It seems almost unbelievable that he was unaware of the hypocrisy of some of actions, but after reading the book, I actually believe that he was. By letting his managers do the dirty work of making his money, he was able to "keep his hands clean" and disavow any unpleasantness that might result.
   
   Though hopelessly naive, it is difficult to condemn a man who literally pioneered the concept of philanthropy and spent his last decade in a never flagging crusade for world peace. He tirelessly advocated the formation of a League of Nations/United Nations style world arbitration body, with military enforcement powers, well before any of his contemporaries. While he would doubtless be overjoyed to learn of the existence of the current United Nations, he would nonetheless be less than pleased with its corruption and lack of effective authority.
   
   All in all, a rather good treatment, not just of Carnegie, but of the period itself and many of the historical figures of the era. At times, the book dragged and became tiresome, but not exceedingly so. I would highly recommend the book for anyone interested not just in Andrew Carnegie but in late 19th century American and British history.



4. A fascinating biography of the exuberant Scottish-American tycoon and philanthropist.
   
   Nasaw covers all of Carnegie's life from early boyhood in 1830's Scotland, to ambitious telegraph boy in Pittsburgh, to iron and steel magnate, to philanthropist and finally to international peace advocate. Most of the 800 pages go swiftly. Nasaw writes well and I generally found his very detailed account valuable, especially for Carnegie's business adventures and for his final peace activities, although perhaps rather less so for all the details of his family life.
   
   In Nasaw's account Carnegie comes across as much more of a "businessman" than an "industrialist". His initial fortune was made in his twenties through insider dealings from his role as a key aide to railroad magnates who were making their own fortunes by tricks such as awarding lucrative contracts to companies that they themselves owned. But starting in his late twenties Carnegie did build a mighty iron and steel empire, with remorseless business logic.
   
   Carnegie in his middle age inevitably comes across as a great hypocrite. He had given speeches extolling the virtues of unions and of the need for employers to treat workers fairly, but he went on to mercilessly repress workers at his own plants, including cutting wages, extending hours, and suppressing all unions. He denied responsibility for the climactic Homestead lockout which was designed to break the steel unions, but Nasaw shows that he was kept fully informed and must have either made or supported the key decisions. Nasaw explains how Carnegie rationalized this harshness to himself, as a necessary part of business and of social evolution, but still his deeds fit poorly with his words.
   
   However in his later life, especially after selling Carnegie Steel, Carnegie became indisputably a genuine exuberant philanthropist. He lived well (very well indeed!) but he also gave away a vast fortune, founding an astounding 2500 libraries, plus many Institutions, the Carnegie Hall, various Hero funds, and many peace organizations.
   
   In his latter years, Carnegie's incessant lobbying for international peace is truly striking. Nasaw sometimes deprecates Carnegie's endless expressions of optimism in the face of repeated failures and his ceaseless lobbying of presidents, monarchs, and statesmen. But given that Carnegie believed war would be a disaster (as WWI proved all too well) and was committed to doing whatever he could for peace, then his behavior seems both entirely rationale and commendable. Yes, he was often grasping at straws and he did aggressively pester and "name drop" to try to move things forward, but given the stakes it is difficult to condemn his donning of a bold face and his trying again and again in the face of failures and cynicism. Alas, his efforts were probably inevitably doomed, but given his beliefs and commitment, it seems hard to criticize him for trying as hard as he did.
   
   Overall, Carnegie's life is a fascinating one, involving many contrasts and apparent contradictions. Nasaw captures it well and succeeds in making Carnegie a surprisingly sympathetic character, without concealing his flaws.



5. This book flows well and is elegant in its prose. Some biographies can be quite tedious this one isn't.
   
   This book is full of insights such as that Teddy Roosevelt although he sought for Carnegie's support he didn't like the man. Because Carnegie was an intellectual and a manager but Roosevelt hands on in the trenches type manager.
   
   For good or evil Andrew Carnegie is right up there with Washington and Lincoln in his impact to the United States. Through his management skills he drastically cut the price of steel. This allowed for cheap consumer and industrial goods. The low cost of steel allowed the US to build the its fleet of battleships, skyscrapers, bridges dams and other large scale public and private works projects. Carnegie's mills alone had a greater output and at lower cost then England and Germany.
   
   The second reason why he transformed the US was the Gospel of Wealth. He was the impetus of charitable giving. It wasn't until after Carnegie's vast sums that his peers such as the Rockefeller's started to contribute. While others focused on art, which has a small but important impact on this country. He focused on education and funding the retirement of thousands of professors from all over the country. 2,500 public libraries. Including 5 million dollar grant to the New York Public library system.
   
   The great cultural institutions of this country Carnegie Hall the Metropolitan Museum of Art by JP Morgan National Gallery by Andrew Mellon were all funded by Republicans. The same is true today see Bill Gates.
   
   Nassaw states that 5 million dollars circa 1900 was approximately 3.5 billion today. If this is true Carnegie gave away 20 to 30 million dollars a year a sum greater than the total assets of Bill and Melinda Gates foundation.

3 comments about For Freedom's Sake: The Life of Fannie Lou Hamer (Women in American History).

1. Fannie Lou Hamer was a remarkable person who may not have received the publicity and accolades of other Civil Rights personalities, but she certainly accomplished as much as anyone in the movement. Lee does a very solid job of taking the reader through Hamer's life. The only criticism I have is that Lee on occasion editorializes about contradictory things that Hamer said, as well as speculates as to what motivated Hamer in certain instances. It would have been more effective to simply let the reader think about such things and make up their own mind. This is a minor quibble, however, because Lee has contributed to the small body of work on Hamer in a substantive manner. I had a hard time putting this book down even though I already knew all the details of Hamer's life from reading other books. Lee synthesizes her information nicely which makes this book a coherent read. The reader gets a vivid picture of the ups and downs Mrs. Hamer encountered in her brilliant life. Fannie Lou Hamer's life was a testament to the human spirit and will to fight for justice. The Civil Rights Movement cannot be fully understood without knowing about the contributions of Hamer. You need to read this book.



2. I have read and heard so much about men in the Civil Rights Movement, and I have read so little about women. This book for me filled a gap.It told an exciting story with great eloquence. It portrayed the life of a heroine of the Civil Rights Movement, and described the times. And it was at the same time rich and intellectually sophisticated. I cannot recommend this book enough to all readers, and I hope these comments motivate others to get this wonderful book and read it.



3. Chana Kai Lee makes a crucial contribution to our understanding of the civil rights movement with this stirring and important biography of Fanny Lou Hamer. Mrs. Hamer, an icon in the movement and a force unto herself, was one of the strongest and most influential voices in the African American struggle for freedom. Thanks to Professor Lee, that voice echoes for the ages in the pages of For Freedom's Sake. This is a book that all Americans should read and that students and general readers alike will enjoy. Like its subject, this well-crafted book will be a beacon for freedom for many years to come.