5 comments about Lindbergh.

1. I've read parts of this book, and from what I can tell, it is similar to other biographies of deceased controversial figures in which the biographer works too closely with the family of the subject to be objective. In reality, there were three points to Lindbergh's life that everybody should know who wants to know about him. This book covers the first two points well and glosses over the third.
   
   1) Aviation Pioneer: He did much more than become the first person to fly the Atlantic solo nonstop. He was a talented aeronautical engineer, a tireless advocate of air power in defense circles, and an explorer who risked his life again and again to chart new air routes for the world to follow.
   2) Son Kidnapped and Murdered: However, Lindbergh's initial fame had a tragic downside. He was the most famous man in the world for a while, and Time Magazine created its "Man of the Year" award for him. But renown brought disaster on his family when his son was kidnapped - apparently for a ransom, which was paid - and then murdered. This was known as the "Crime of the Century" at the time, and was not eclipsed by any other crime until the JFK assassination in 1963.
   3) Anti-WWII Activist: Lindbergh and his wife travelled to Nazi Germany in the thirties, ostensibly as tourists, but covertly to gather information on the Nazi air force, the Luftwaffe. Luftwaffe chief Hermann Goering tricked Lindbergh into reporting back that the Nazis had a tremendous advantage in air power by flying the same planes over his head and around in circles to make them appear more numerous. Also on the this trip, he accepted a medal from Hitler's government. Upon his return, Lindbergh became the most famous figure in the movement we now know as "isolationist," which was mottled with anti-Semitic and Anglophobic prejudices. He wrote a number of articles and gave speeches in which he criticized - fairly or unfairly - supporters of America entering the war, most specifically Jewish groups and FDR's government, as selfish and more concerned with the welfare of their demographic group than that of the U.S. This created a tremendous backlash against Lindbergh, who was widely pereived as "defeatist" and, for many, openly pro-Nazi. After this backlash, Lindberg's star fell and never rose again, and this was because of his own political naivete in perceiving the fascist movement as nothing more than a reaction and counterbalance to Soviet communist power.
   
   Berg's book does not deal adequately with this third point, merely presenting basic facts without exploring deeper motives and intentions that, for someone like Lindbergh, were often readily apparent through his statements and actions. I do not mean to endorse the case that this book errs in not presenting Lindbergh as a potential fascist dictator, as Phillip Roth has recently done in novel form, but simply that Berg's book seems to ignore the reality that Lindbergh was an anti-Semite, that he openly espoused fascism as a suitable form of government for Germany, and that the amount of bad publicity his enemies and even neutral observers marshaled against him effectively ended his importance in American history during and after the war.
   
   And if you want proof of how far his star fell, consider the facts I listed above about his pre-war fame, and then count the number of full-length Lindbergh biographies of any modest stature that have been produced. Aprroximately one, this one, and this one simply fails to acknowledge the reality of the magnitude of his fall from celebrity into obscurity over the WWII intervention issue.
   
   Then do an Amazon search for "Howard Hughes," Lindbergh's only competition for aviation fame in his heyday, and see what you get. There are many, many biographies of Hughes, and almost all of them are openly muck-raking works, but still far superior in quality to Berg's book. The fact that this one got a Pulitzer is clearly indicative that that literary honor has become meaningless in the real world, almost as meaningless as Lindbergh became to history after he vacationed in Nazi Germany.



2. ~Lindbergh~ is an astute an well-written biography by acclaimed writer A. Scott Berg. Berg captures the life of this most fascinating character. What unfolds is an amazing tale of the aviator turned adventurer turned statesmen turned war hero.
   
   Aviator Charles Lindbergh, gained acclaim for the first solo, non-stop transatlantic flight across Long Island, New York to Paris, France in 1927 in the famed "Spirit of St. Louis." Not long after, he was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. At the time, Lindbergh was seen as a man of seemingly impeccable character. He became an American hero overnight.
   
   A. Scott Berg casts light on Charles' complex marriage to Anne Morrow Lindbergh, the daughter of the famed J.P. Morgan investment banker. His marriage had its ups and downs due to his indiscretions, and it was not a fairy-tale marriage by any stretch of the imagination. Though, public perception certainly believed the marriage as a storybook romance in 1927. Berg also illustrates how tragedy hit the Lindbergh family and the whole nation in 1932 with sensitivity.
   
   Lindbergh, being an acclaimed aviator, was invited to Germany in the 1930s, where he subsequently received a medal. It was an opportunity that intrigued him, for the Germans were renowned for their innovation in aeronautics. With the approval of Nazi chieftains Hermann Goering and Ernst Udet, Lindbergh was permitted to inspect and tour German Luftwaffe facilities, and view some of their latest innovations such as the Messerschmitt Bf 109 and Junkers Ju 88. He became enamored of German aviation technology not coincidentally thereafter. He believed that German aviation was superior to that of the Americans and British. Why? Probably, because it was. His trip to Germany, however, soon soiled his reputation, particularly after 1939, despite the fact that Lindbergh returned the commendation awarded by the German government. When misguided historians like Max Wallace present Lindbergh as a Nazi sycophant, he conveniently forgets, either out of ignorance or obfuscation, that Lindbergh came to Germany at the urgent request of the U.S. military attaché at the American embassy in Berlin. The military attaché was charged with learning everything possible about Germany's new warplanes. In other words, Lindbergh was covertly providing U.S. intelligence, and playing off of his reputation as an aviator of international fame to gain a warm reception by the Germans. He might not have brought back stolen 1:6 scale airplane models from the hangar offices and secret James Bond snapshot pictures, but he was doing his country a service nonetheless.
   
   His political odyssey took some strange turns, and it put him at the helm of the American First Committee which pressed the case for keeping the United States neutral and out of World War II with Germany. While his patriotism and motives have been brought into question, Berg gives us a few reasons not to question Lindbergh's sincerity. When the war began, Lindbergh was quick to uphold his honor, and be a part of the Army Air Corps unofficially. Unfortunately, being the bitter partisan, President FDR, stripped him of his opportunity to fly in dress ranks, and he flew unofficially as a contractor. But Lindbergh earned much success dogfighting against Japanese over the Pacific. He was denied his deserved commendations because of politics.
   
   This book is a marvelous journey into the life of aviator Charles Lindbergh. Berg sculptures a sensitive and astutely written account of the life of this acclaimed American. If read, in tandem with Lindbergh's on autobiographical journal "The Spirit of St. Louis," one can certainly get a fascinating picture of his life. The superb prose is matched by the fascinating insights of the author who had direct access to the Lindbergh family's personal archives.



3. This book is extremely readable, which is why everyone gives it 5 stars. But it fails to mention the fact that Lindbergh fathered at least 3 illegitimate children in Germany in the late 50's-60's. In 2003, 3 German siblings took a DNA test vs. one of Lindbergh's legitimate grandchildren and paternity was proved. Lindbergh kept their mother as a '2d family,' and he possibly fathered others. This book was extremely well-researched, so I can't see how Scott Berg can continue to sell this book without an update that talks about this.



4. If you want the most complete look at the life of Charles Lindbergh,then read this book.There are many glowing reviews on [...],about this book.Yet,the section about the famous kidnapping is NOT the full story.You are just getting a good historical account of Colonel Lindbergh,however,from an outsider looking in.I have yet to read a Lindbergh biography that comes as close as to the truth as this book does.Scott Berg did not research enough about the kidnapping,and as well as millions of other biographical book-readers.They just accepted the Bruno Hauptmann guilty verdict. World War Two is long over.And the Anti-German hysteria is mostly forgotten,by modern Americans. Lindbergh accepted Hauptmann's guilt because Bruno was a former Berlin communist,who helped kidnapp the Berlin burgermeister's infant son.And for ransom.When Hauptmann jumped off the 'Friedrich der Grosse',he swam to shore.He married Anna Schuffeler,who worked at Frederiksen's Bakery.Hauptmann invested heavily in the stock market,during the 1920s.And reaped the benefits,of the easy profits.Then Wall Street laid on egg,and Hauptmann's goose was cooked.Hauptmann's business partner ,Isidore Fish,also lost everything.These former left-wing radikals turned American capitalists may have discussed Lindbergh's fortune. Fish may have hatched the plan to kidnapp America's number one eaglet,the Lindbergh Baby. Fish died of TB ,a short time after the March 1st,1932 kidnapping.Hauptmann alone faced the electric chair.His only guilt was that of association with Isidore Fish.Updated-12.Jan.2007.=If the decomposed child's remains had a DNA link to Charles Lindbergh,there may be some truth, to the corpse being an illegitimate child of his.Elizabeth Morrow was believed to be a jealous sister-in-law of his.Did they have an unwanted child that Colonel Lindbergh sadly refused to accept?Lindbergh did have three German children from a secret affair.The mistress was a Bavarian milliner. If Dr.Bill Bass of the Knoxville 'Body Farm', does not have any DNA proof,then he is a "Quack".The story thickens.+Updated=June/10/2007 There is another guy that has been claiming he is the real Charles Jr.His website is 'Charleslindberghjr.com' and he was on the coasttocoastam.com show.He may be the real deal and Harold Olson may be the real son of Charles Sr. and Elizabeth Morrow.The direct Lindbergh children,Jon and Reeve, have refused to do DNA testing for him.The story continues.



5. Excellent. I enjoyed this book because of the ease of reading it. It was very informative and interesting.

3 comments about Me llamo Rigoberta Menchú y así me nació la conciencia.

1. I am an intermediate level student of Spanish. This book keeps being mentioned and I would like to read it in Spanish. I can't find a copy where I can read a page or two to see if that might be possible. Does anyone familiar with this book have a recommendation?



2. Although I've read this book before, this time, as an older and wiser reader I was able to recall a lot more information and specifics that had slipped my mind since the previous reading. As a non-native spanish speaker, it was easy to follow, in a dialect I could easily translate if necessary. Plus, this book is useful in the spanish classes that I teach in portraying a realistic view of guatemalan history.



3. After reading this book, I realized how truly blessed I am. My problems are so minor compared to theirs. It also helps you to understand the suffering of the Indigenous persons both in Guatemala and in other countries throughout Latin America. I highly recommend this book to anyone who cares about the world around them.

5 comments about Prisoners: A Story of Friendship and Terror (Vintage).

1. What a fantastic book.
   
   Jeff Goldberg takes us through his life's journey from an aspiring child zionist to his time as an Israeli military police officer, his return to America for life as a journalist, and his return to Gaza and other cities in Palestine where he tries to reconnect with many of the prisoners he watched over during his time as a "shoter" (policemen) in the prisons
   
   Without telling too much of the outcome, I will say that the many experiences are thrilling, very telling of the situations, and seldom experienced by anyone. It is very rare to find someone trying to find a prisoner he once watched over so that he can open his home to that person. This will open up a whole new set of experiences and ideas for Goldberg.
   
   What drives Goldberg to do this? Maybe it was his desire to end his own personal conflict with the course of middle eastern politics. Maybe it was his apologetic retribution for being a police officer in a palestinian prison. Maybe it was his want to show the Palestinian people that the Israelis are prisoners too, to the hostility that is perpetuated by suicide bombings. Maybe he thought he could end the conflict by reaching out.
   
   After reading the book, all the complexities and truths that exist within this conflict become more clear. The perspective he brings is fascinating and worth being read by anybody who has a care about the situation in Israel/Palestine.



2. This is a must for anyone Jew, Muslim gentile (like me) who despairs at the Israeli/Palestinian problem to be confirmed in the view that there are people of good will on both sides where common humanity exists but unfortunately frustrated by those in power who believe that force is the only way forward



3. This is a very well written book that grips you from the start and makes you want to keep reading to find out "what happened next" in the manner of successful fiction. The events outlined display a considerable amount of courage on the part of Goldberg, who stayed a few weeks in a Pakistani Madrasa, and repeatedly entered the Gaza strip and was alone among what were, officially, his enemies.
   
   While the author's need to see signs of hope as to the future of the Israeli-Palestinian situation via his friendship with his former Palestinian prisoner "Rafik" is constant throughout the book, many of the questions Goldberg raises throughout his journeys are destined to dead-ends because they are based on a perspective that has been subject to a considerable amount of editing. And, as the nature of any quest goes, if you don't ask the right questions, you don't get the right answers.
   
   Whereas the author's pursuit of these signs of hope, even in hostile territory, is admirable, his premise is not as impassive as the synopsis of the book wants us to believe; It tells us that, as a prison guard, Goldberg "realized that his prisoners were the future leaders of Palestine", hence "this was a unique opportunity to learn from them about themselves", but, when you get to that part of the book, Goldberg tells you that one of his tasks in prison (as a member of the military police) was to confiscate any and all signs of Palestinian national aspirations (flags, rocks in the shape of Israel, national songs). These were the pre-Oslo days, when a "Palestinian state" was unacceptable to Israel. And while Goldberg was genuinely curious about understanding his prisoners, he did not think they'd be "future leaders" of any state, as confiscating any signs of such aspirations testifies. It is very interesting to note how taking such liberties in shuffling around elements of the time-line for the sake of a stronger pitch in the synopsis mirrors what happened with the larger picture of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
   
   One of the questions the reader is inevitably lead to upon reading Goldberg's accounts of such confiscations in prison is:
   
   What drives one people to try and confiscate all signs of the identity of another people? Or, more accurately:
   
   How can a people base the security of their identity upon the elimination of that of another?
   
   In Goldberg's latest account of the conflict covering the last few years, he presents it more as one that has its origins in religious intolerance and Muslim extremism. It is ironic that Goldberg quotes Israeli writer "Amos Oz" at some point in his narrative, because it was precisely Oz that repeated that this was not a religious conflict, but a real estate one. While the rise of militant fanaticism in the Muslim world is an undeniable fact of considerable threat to many countries, recasting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as being caused by religious pathos is, again, a reshuffling of the story for the sake of a stronger pitch.
   
   Anyone who is interested in knowing more about what is going on in that unfortunate part of the world could benefit from the account of "Susan Nathan", a British Jewess who lived in an Arab village in Israel, in her book, "The Other Side of Israel", or "Emma Williams", a British doctor who lived and worked in Jerusalem, in her book "It's easier to reach Heaven than the end of the street, a Jerusalem memoir". Both provide some parts of the picture that were edited out of Goldberg's story, courageous as he may be.
   
   Some questions open doors to other questions that may well be very different from the ones the author intended, but which are the only ones that could bring the reader closer to an understanding of the real story.



4. When this book originally came out in 2006, its title was: Prisoners-A Muslim and a Jew across the Middle East Divide. When I received the book to review it had a new title: Prisoners-A Story of Friendship and Terror. I found this very interesting because the new title seemed more hopeful, a strong message woven throughout this book.
   
   Jeffrey Goldberg is the Washington correspondent of The New Yorker. Until recently, he served as the magazine's Middle East correspondent. Before joining The New Yorker in 2000, Goldberg covered the Middle East and Africa for The New York Times Magazine. He is also a veteran of the Israel Defense Forces.
   
   Prisoners is a memoir of his time in the Israeli Army. In 1990, during the first Palestinian uprising, Goldberg served as a prison guard in the largest prison in Israel. He decided early in his service that he would talk to the Palestinian prisoners, mostly out of curiosity but also because he thought it was possible to be friends with them. Rafiq, the prisoner and Fatah activist that he spent the most time with, was as he describes, "a bookish kind of guy who had some ironic distance from the essential absurdities of prison life." Despite their extreme differences, they began a dialogue in the prison that grew into an astonishing friendship--and now a remarkable book.
   
   Goldberg brings real faces to the war on both sides of the conflict, something we don't always get when reading about this topic. He believes this book is meant for anyone who is mystified by the issues in the Middle East. He hopes that, through this memoir he will explain to all sorts of readers why the Middle East is such a puzzling and troubling place.
   
   The message of his book is that it is not impossible--it is terribly difficult, but not impossible--to build a friendship with your enemy. Rafiq said it best: "If a million people in the Middle East could have the sort of friendship we have created--a tenuous, fraught friendship, but a friendship nonetheless--than the Middle East might become a better place." We can only hope.
   
   Armchair Interviews says: A thought-provoking story.



5. Brilliant...Prisoners is a stunningly personal, humorous and poignant memoir that is rare in its scope and reach. In the book, Goldberg deftly presents both his own breathtakingly honest and bittersweet life history as well as the story of his close friendship and kinship with Rafiq - a Palestinian prisoner he was once charged with guarding while in the Israeli army. This account of their conversation through the years explores the possibility of peace in an area of the world fraught with strife throughout the millennia.
   
   Goldberg is a seasoned journalist who masterfully presents the extremely complex situation between the Israelis and the Palestinians in a way that facilitates understanding and renders it accessible to everyone - from novices of the region to experts in geo-politics. Of note, he is fair-minded and even handed in his approach describing the tense conflict between the two sides. Goldberg's deep knowledge of and experience in the Middle East coupled with his evocative writing style produces an exciting and immensely satisfying read. Overall, Prisoners is at times hilarious and others heart-wrenching but ultimately it is a story of hope measured with an experienced and realistic perspective.

4 comments about Hitler (2nd Edition) (Profiles in Power Series).

1. This is a good read, but like most books on Hitler it's all pretty much the same.



2. This book Focuses on the power structure of the nazi party. It doesn't reveal much about personalities or everyday life, but describes the interrelation between the beauracrats, industrialists, land owners, populace, and nazi party members. It is appropriate for anyone interested in political structures and how they are held together. It gives a fascinating look into the accumulation of power into one charismatic leader and the appointed henchmen/disciples who would literrally do anything to please the whims of their demigod, and thus gain more power for themselves, And how this monopolistic and 'anarchic' power structure ultimately led to such a terribly disfunctional outcome.



3. Ian Kershaw is the premier historian on Hitler and Nazi Germany and this book from the Profiles in Power series is an excellent study on the roots, success, and ultimate destruction of the "Fuehrercult." Two schools of thought are used by historians to understand the power of Nazism. "Intentionalists" see the Nazi regime as the embodiment of Hitler as the totalitarian leader. "Structuralists," however, believe the policies and, ultimately, the crimes of Nazi Germany were stumbled upon by underlings working under a loose framework rather than a deliberate program. As one would expect, Kershaw takes from both these theories to develop his comprehensive profile.

   Kershaw examines Hitler's worldview of racial struggle, anti-Semitism, and living space for the German empire--how these ideas developed (Hitler's background) and how Hitler used them to create his leadership image. This Fuehrercult unified a fractional party, helped repress opposition, and created a mass following. Through Hitler's charismatic leadership the German people would be prepared to fight the Nazi fight (inevitably WWII). Kershaw also looks at the feudal-like power relations inside the Third Reich; a regime of open-ended decrees that left no "smoking gun" pointing at Hitler for the Final Solution. Finally, Kershaw examines the destruction of Hitler's power during which the irrational optimism that "Providence" (i.e. Hitler's will) would prevail was still believed by many (particularly the 'court' of Hitler's bunker). I recommend this book especially to advanced history students who want an in-depth examination of Hitler's power in a compact 230-page book. The book includes footnotes, an index, a chapter on further readings, and a chronology of events.




4. It is not your typical biography of Hitler. It is a thorough examination and analysis of Hitler's rise to power. It examines how he got power, how he maintained power, how he used power, and, finally, how he lost power. Quite an interesting book. Be sure to check out other books in this "Profiles in Power" series.

5 comments about Eleanor Roosevelt : Volume 2 , The Defining Years, 1933-1938.

1. In the first volume of her series on Eleanor Roosevelt, Blanche Wiesen Cook, a historian and women's studies professor, introduced us to a compelling historical figure who, after years of living in passive submission to her husband and mother-in-law, had finally broken free to create her own "independent life" - a life filled with careers (teacher, writer, public speaker) and fulfilling private friendships. In volume two, Eleanor Roosevelt faces the challenge of keeping her independent life as she assumes the traditionally social (and passive) role of First Lady. "Eleanor Roosevelt: Volume Two, 1933 - 1938" contemplates Eleanor Roosevelt's life during the first five years of her husband's presidency.
   
   In her first volume on Eleanor Roosevelt, Cook took a feminist approach in asking questions about power, relationships, and identity. Unfortunately, volume two falls short of the first volume, in leaving many of these questions not only unanswered, but sometimes even unasked. Whereas the central theme of volume one was Eleanor's struggle to assert herself as an "independent power," in volume two, we are not just reading the story of Eleanor Roosevelt, but also the parallel story of her husband and his presidency, which places Eleanor Roosevelt in a dependent role as she must work her way into her husband's political circle to gain influence. In fact, too often, volume two devolves into a story of FDR's presidency and Eleanor's reaction to it, rather than the story of Eleanor Roosevelt as an individual, independent agent. Eleanor is often portrayed as dependent on FDR for power, her moods uplifted when his speeches reflect her views and depressed and cold when they don't, particularly when she is shut out from the inner circle and has to learn about what is going on from her own son. While she occasionally dissents from the administration's talking points, her writing and speaking career is now primarily aimed at advancing FDR's policies. The most disappointing example of Eleanor's capitulation to her husband is on the subject of the Holocaust, where she remains silent from 1933 to 1938. When a German refugee appeals to Eleanor Roosevelt's sense of justice, asking, "Can you really stand by and watch this? Can you stand and see us more or less all gassed? I should like to have your word, you will do something," Eleanor Roosevelt replies, "Unfortunately, in my present position I am obliged to leave all contacts with foreign governments in the hands of my husband and his advisers." Obviously, Eleanor Roosevelt does gain power within FDR's political circle, but it is never clear what the extent and significance of this power really is.
   
   Another central theme in volume one was how Eleanor Roosevelt's relationship with a new circle of feminist and lesbian friends helped her create her own life apart from FDR. After Eleanor discovered FDR's infidelity with Lucy Mercer, and they began living separately, Eleanor established her own new life at Val-Kill, a residence she shared with Nancy Cook and Marion Dickerman. In addition, Eleanor made her first true friend in Lorena Hickok, an established reporter with the Associated Press. In volume two, these relationships all dissolve, as Eleanor acrimoniously splits with Cook and Dickerman and drifts apart from Hickok. Hickok, in fact, is the key figure in volume two, as her relationship with Eleanor Roosevelt is chronicled in painful detail. While their relationship is clearly the most important in Eleanor's life during her time as First Lady, it unfortunately takes a bit of a tragic turn as Hickok gives up her job with the AP, and along with it, her self-respect, becoming dependent on Eleanor Roosevelt for work, in addition to financial and emotional support. As Hickok grows increasingly depressed and resentful of Eleanor's other friends and busy schedule, they continue to drift apart, to the point where, when they do share a vacation alone together, Eleanor is miserable, missing her work and eager to return to her life as First Lady. As Eleanor Roosevelt drifts away from the friends who were so important to her in first creating her own independent life, it is clear that her interests and priorities have changed. Her political life is now the most important thing in her life.
   
   What does this say about Eleanor Roosevelt's identity? This is the final question then left to be answered. Unfortunately, the question is never even posed to readers. Does it matter that Eleanor Roosevelt depends on her husband for power and she no longer has an independent role of her own? What does it say that she pulls Lorena Hickok into a dependent relationship where she retains all the power? Why is her public life more important to her than her private relationships? What, in fact, is her new identity? While in volume one, we are left with the image of Eleanor Roosevelt as an independent woman, pursuing her own career interests and developing her own loyal set of friends apart from FDR, in volume two, we are mostly left with an image of Eleanor Roosevelt not as an independent force, but as the First Lady, a woman who keeps a busy schedule and cares for a lot of causes and people, but none in particular.
   
   In focusing on the day-to-day details of Eleanor Roosevelt's life and FDR's administration, "Eleanor Roosevelt: Volume Two, 1933 - 1938" reads more like a timeline from a boring history text - a list of dates and facts - than a compelling biography of Eleanor Roosevelt the person, her priorities and main accomplishments. In trying to tell two stories - first, of the political movement behind the New Deal and, second, of the role Eleanor Roosevelt carves out for herself within her husband's administration - ultimately Cook fails to tell either story.



2. I have to admit that I gave up on this book. I'm hoping to find a more readable biography of Mrs. Roosevelt. Cook's style and grammar are just too jumbled for me.
   
   Look in the "look inside this book" section here and go to page 14. This is a prime example of Cook's overuse of quotes. I appreciate that she did her research, but if she was going to quote so much, she should have just included one whole article. As it is, the whole page is a mish-mash of sentances and words taken from various sources creating a confusing unreadable mess.



3. I was shocked to discover that volume 2 only covered 5 years, albeit 5 important years. However, that should serve as a caveat for a potential reader.
   
   This volume is a much harder read than volume 1 as this version grinds to a screeching halt in places. While I agree it was important to document ERs long, tortured relationship with Lorena Hickock, too much emphasis (and repetition) was placed on what looks to be a normal parting-of-the-ways as ER ascended.
   
   There are some very intriguing and thoughtful moments in this book (which makes its a worthwhile read), but they are broken up by too many abrupt harbringers of moral/political doom or redemption with sparse or no follow-up.



4. This is a very well-researched and meticulously written book. However, I never felt I got to know Eleanor Roosevelt. I found the reference to Mrs. Roosevelt throughout the book as "ER" off-putting. It put an emotional distance between the reader and the subject. While we are treated to many details of Mrs. Roosevelt's life, we are never really let in to her emotional life. BWC (the author) goes into such detail about everyone else around Mrs. Roosevelt and she tells us what happened, but she doesn't let us see things through Mrs. Roosevelt's eyes. I still have no idea what the relationship between FDR and his wife was. Nor do I really understand why she remained with Lorena Hick so long. This book really amounts to a laundry list of who, what, where. A really effective biography will let us into the personal lives of the subject and let us feel as they feel as the story of their life unfolds. I never found that emotional resonance in this account. Eleanor Roosevelt left behind copious amounts of source material. I think that the author could have done a much better job of letting us experience Mrs. Roosevelt more fully as a person and not just as a public figure with a lot on her agenda.



5. Although not being an American, I'm aware that there are many in the States who are not too fond of ER and who are very critical of her. This second volume of Blanche Wiesen Cook's series on America's former First Lady is as remarkable and absorbing as was the first. There is no doubt FDR was a man of character,courage and great personal charm and warmth, there is equally no doubt that his wife suffered great personal trauma (and embarrassment) at his refusal (doubtless for political reasons)to speak out against the racial problems (in particular lyching in the South) and the Hitlerites treament of Jews in prewar Germany and Austria whilst the US continued to trade with the Germans. The same could be said of his stance during the Spanish Civil War. Eleanor was a nag (as was mentioned here in other summaries of this book) but never without good reason.
   And all of her dire predictions came true. ER's passion for life, her beliefs, her love and respect of her husband, come through over and over again. Her ability to manipulate people, a less attractive aspect of her character - is also here for all to see (as her relationship with Lorena Hickock so aptly demonstrates).
   Was there too much of Hick in this book ? I didn't think so. The relationship was a long term, on going one. The letters were not destroyed by ER, who I believe must have realised they'd become public after her death. Finally, ER's energy levels must have been extraordinary - her ability to criss cross the country seemingly non stop was remarkable considering that travel and the mode of travel was nothing like it is today. What an absolute bonus such a partner was to FDR's re electibility !
   I look forward to the next "installment" with great anticipation.

5 comments about To the Castle and Back (Vintage).

1. What Havel lacks in chronological narrative structure, he makes up for in depth and candor. In the intro to the book, he acknowledges that this is not a traditional memoir and he encourages the reader to move on to the next section should he or she become bogged down in and bored by the intricacies of Czech politics. To quote Havel in his introduction, he writes, "[W]hether you read it whole or piecemeal, I will be satisfied if you feel this book has given you something of value."
   
   As a professional writer, Havel demonstrates the ability to express his wit and his gravitas with equal quality. This comes through even in translation. Havel breaks up his story into sections: memos between him and his closest staff while he was president of Czechoslovakia (and later the Czech Republic), reflections from his then-current perspective and finally, answers to questions from a Czech journalist. The three parts are intercalated with each other throughout the text and give a very unique and enriching story of one of the 20th century's most fascinating world leaders.



2. Vaclav Havel communicates with the open-hearted clarity of a good friend who happens to be a world-class writer. I find myself using his perspectives as I go about my life, far as it is from the great transitions of the Czech and Slovak nations from totalitarianism to democracy. Paul Wilson's translation is superb. Vaclav Havel deserves his reputation as a very human hero.



3. I enjoyed this book, but I don't believe it is for everyone. Two themes give this work its form: a Heideggerian commitment to the notion that his Being over the past 15 years is best disclosed by sharing the "average everydayness" of his former presidential responsibilities; and a profound physical and spiritual exhaustion with his role as fairytale hero. For hardcore fans of Havel, and for scholars engaged in close examinations of the post-communist era in Central and Eastern Europe, there be gems here. But you have to rummage for them. For the reader looking for a memoir possessed of the usual pleasures of clear chronology and steady narrative, To the Castle and Back will be extraordinarily frustrating. One other word of caution: I found the few passages devoted to Havel's first wife, Olga, pretty hard to take. My lasting impression of Havel's account, though, is of a man who worked prodigiously for the good of his country: One reads over and over again how he readily spent his meager political capital to remind citizens there and everywhere of the big picture issues. Perhaps nobody has ever played the role of public intellectual quite so well.



4. I just finished Vaclav Havel's memoir, To the Castle and Back, and the harsh feelings I had towards the book as I began it dissipated a bit by the end. It has an odd structure, equal parts an interview done concerning events before he was president, memos he wrote while he was president, and recollections he wrote some years after he left office, all interspersed randomly among each other, with occasional repetitions of texts. As a biography, it's a failure. By the end of the book, I still know little of the history of the Czech Republic, or what Havel did while in office. Readers looking for that should go to Havel's book, Disturbing the Peace. That book remains one of the most influential books I've ever read, and I still count myself as lucky for stumbling on it in a friend's bookshelf.
   
   As a piece of literature, though, To the Castle is a success. Fundamentally, it casts Havel (and all writers and activists) as a sort of postmodern Sisyphus. He writes in depth and at length about his difficulty getting motivated and starting to write. He write, to the point of being whiney, about his intense doubt that his writing and political projects will ever achieve their high objectives. Indeed, he seems to argue that writing is fundamentally futile: "man will carry the complete truth about himself to the grave." And yet Havel write, driven on by the "somewhat ridiculous" idea that "the world desperately needs the work in question, and will fall apart if it doesn't appear." I too like writing and thinking yet have intense self-doubt, and so I get great joy seeing that someone way more gifted than I like Havel suffers the same. I agree with Havel's quote: "I sometimes ask myself whether I did not originally begin to write... only to overcome my essential experience of inappropriateness... in order to be able to live with those feelings."
   
   Yet somehow the Sisyphean task of the writer gives him meaning: "He simply tried to capture the world and himself more and more exactly through words, images, or actors, and the more he succeeds, the more aware he is that he can never completely capture either the world or himself... but that drives him to keep trying." Imagine Sisyphus as conscious of the absurdity of his task, yet still drawing meaning from it. Camus would be proud.
   
   This book is also a lament, for it is perhaps his last, and is certainly written as such. Havel is sending a message: he did his best to write himself into the world, but ultimately failed to communicate his internal self. Like a mortal Sisyphus in old age realizing he will never reach the top of this hill, nor could have.



5. To those of us deeply involved in Czech history or culture, this is an essential book. It's a fascinating insider's look at the choices a dissident was forced to make when he became President of a postcommunist country. But for people not deeply familiar with Havel's work, this is not the place to start. First read "Open Letters" and "Disturbing the Peace," then John Keane's (similarly unconventional) biography.

5 comments about Living My Life (Penguin Classics).

1. I'm happy with the purchase, just typing on the keyboard in the privacy of my own home, selecting a book, clicking on it, easy, quick, effecient. Book arrived quickly, new book. All was well in my world. Only complaint would be that 2 of the 3 books I ordered simultaneously came packaged together in an excessive amount of packaging. Overboard on the plastic wrap followed by extra cardboard for protection, followed by a box. Don't need all that for books. Need to think about the environment Amazon.



2. This is the best autobiography I've ever read, because her life was lived with such commitment & independence. Certainly, she was hugely influential in her time, but her success was scratched out of nothing, with no support, and huge opposition. The difficulties and the times are conveyed amazingly well. The book will make you look carefully at your own life ... in ways that can only change it for the better.



3. NOTE: THIS IS VOLUME ONE ONLY! It's a great book but it is not labeled as just the first half of the memoir.



4. I could not disagree more with Goldman's ultimate philosophical conclusions, but I enjoyed this book, and volume II as well. Her essential humanity emerges, and it is a good case study and an interesting read, historically, philosophically and personally. She is no Mark Twain or Billy Faulkner, but her life was interesting and her prose adequately conveys the milieu she became enmeshed in. A fair degree of antecedent historical knowledge is necessary to fully enjoy this book, but you most likely have that or you wouldn't be reading about Emma to begin with. If you don't, or find that you are getting lost in the history and sequence, it would pay to do a little research to better understand what she lived through. It will also help you spot bias on Goldman's part. I heartily recommend this book. It is informative, enlightening and entertaining to boot.



5. In her autobiography Emma Goldman explains her life, narrating the experience of marching to her own drummer. Depending on the reader's political expectations, Emma's life is either inspiring or downright terrifying. Those who believe in social conformity would probably be more comfortable moving on to other fodder.

   Nevertheless, this eyewitness account of American and Russian history, ought not to be trivially dismissed. Emma fought for things we have taken for granted in modern life, such as birth-control and the eight-hour work day; she went to jail in the struggle to obtain these for us. This book explains how she lived her commitment to individual liberty, choosing who she would love, advocating revolution, and harrassing those of her "allies" who compromised on these principles.

   Perhaps the most interesting portion of the book is her years in Russia. Here she describes arriving at the "Promised Land" of the peoples' revolution and how that mutated into a sense of disillusionment and horror at what she saw as the betrayal of that revolution by the "dictatorship of the proletariat."

   Her writing style is nothing exceptional, but the story she weaves from the material of her life is nothing short of fascinating. Another reviewer suggested taking a break between volumes--I couldn't! I had to know what happened next.

   Although there are a lot of pages to wade through, I will give this book as a gift to the young women in my life. I believe that Emma can serve as a role model for living one's own life, not living out the expectations of friends, family, or society. In a dysfunctional world, we have too few people who model this.

   Emma gets three stars for writing style, but the powerful and plentiful content bring the rating up to five stars. Not to be missed.

   (If you'd like to discuss this book or review, click on the "about me" link above & drop me an email. Thanks!)

5 comments about Baruch: My Own Story.

1. Bernard Baruch ranks up there with the Morgans, Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Warburgs, Thomas Ryan, etc, in the cutthroat world of business and securities. This brilliant individual found himself rubbing elbows with all of these men along with Presidents, congressmen, senators, rich and powerful elite of the U.S., and Foreign leaders like Winston Churchill. His writing is highly entertaining with insights into the mind of one of the greatest investors the U.S. has ever witnessed. It is one of the greatest books I have ever read, and is a staple for anyone who wants to learn not only what it takes to be a player in this arena, but also the pitfalls many inexperienced and some experienced investors have fallen into. He is a truley enlightened individual who prides himself on taking advantage of the panic behavior found within human beings. This book is for people interested in power, wealth, and speculation in the stock market.



2. You may not agree with many of his philosophies on life, markets or politics. Like Soros, he wasn't a supporter of uncontrolled laissez faire capitalism. He was a disciplined man who espoused discipline and control in public and private affairs.
   
   I was drawn to this memoir through the mention of Baruch by Jim Rogers (who founded the Quantum fund with Soros) in an interview two decades back. Then at another place i had heard he sold off his stocks in 1929, just before the big break, when a shoe-polish boy gave him a tip.
   
   Who was Baruch? One of the most successful men in speculation and politics in his time - a wall street partner at 25, a millionaire at 30, a statesman by 50. A very rational observer, he trusted his own judgement above all else. There are many lessons for the trading/investing mind. The one i liked the most was his insistence on never trusting inside information above one's own rational judgement.
   
   This is a fabulous book written by a great man in his closing days. A man who was as big a success in public life as he was in his private.



3. This biography is a great read for anyone interested in this great man who counseled presidents and was associated with Winston Churchill. It is interesting in showing how far ahead of his time Mr. Baruch was in not only stock speculating but also discrimination and economics. He was a millionaire in his early thirties after a few good runs in the stock market and devoted the remainder of his life serving the public and helping the U.S. when WWI and WWII. If you are reading it for only his advice on stocks just read chapter XIX My investment philosophy. It is one of the greatest chapters you will find anywhere on successful stock speculation. He will explain to you that economic conditions do not drive prices, peoples perceptions do. Cut your losses fast. Sell your worst performers keep your best. Know what you are investing in. You can only truly learn the rules of stock trading by experiencing the losses personally. Here is a summary of his 10 rules summarized:
   
   1. Only speculate if you can do it full time.
   2. Ignore inside information and tips.
   3. Have a complete understanding of a companies fundamentals before you buy the stock.
   4. Don't try to buy bottoms or sell tops.
   5. Cut your losses quickly.
   6. Focus on and buy only a few stocks.
   7. Review and update your investments periodically for changes.
   8. Study your tax position to know when to sell at greatest advantage.
   9. Never invest all your funds. Keep a reserve.
   10. Stick to the field you know best in investments.
   
   Chapter 19 is a must read for all serious stock traders.



4. A fantastic writer, a brilliant business leader and judicious statesman. Bernard Baruch's explanation of the background and definition of the term speculator in chapter IX, is one of the finest pieces of business mentorship and insight available in print. He believes it is an ability of priceless value in human affairs, especially the need to act in time. Practical wisdom in any age.



5. This book is the best autobiography that I have ever read. Baruch, the Wall Street financier and advisor to Presidents Wilson through Truman, lived an amazing life. Unlike many autobiographies, which are written with an eye to aggrandizement, this one accurately portrays Baruch as a decent humanitarian that did not let his success and power go to his head. There are no intimations here (or elsewhere) that Baruch was dishonest or untrustworthy, and he served in many public service capacities without pay. Baruch writes about his friendships with guys like John "Bet a Million" Gates and "Diamond" Jim Brady. As an investor, I was impressed about how Baruch was able to write about his early failures in the market and was steeled by the fact that he made so many mistakes in his youth but was undeterred on the path to wealth. This book was so good I read it in one day.

5 comments about An Unfinished Life: John F. Kennedy, 1917-1963.

1. An extremely informative book. I came away from the book having only a little respect for Kennedy as a man or politician.
   
   1) He accepted a Pulitzer Prize for a book that was almost entirely ghostwritten for him.
   
   2) His daddy helped him cheat to win in elections and primaries.
   
   3) His primary accomplishment as a Senator was keeping the seat warm for the next guy.
   
   4) He, like at least one other President, lied about or withheld the truth about significant medical/physical problems.
   
   5) He appointed his brother to post of Attorney General even though RFK was completely unqualified.
   
   6) He treated his wife with blankfaced disrespect (openly philandering) in public and private.
   
   7) He was primarily responsible for the Bay of Pigs fiasco which made him look weak and emboldened Cuba and the USSR, thus leading to the Cuban Missle Crisis which he handled surprisingly well.
   
   8) He dragged his feet on Civil Rights because he was afraid of losing the support of Southern Democrats. (MLK Jr. said JFK's assassination was the best thing to happen to the Civil Rights movement)
   
   9) He freely admitted his first year as President was a miserable failure.
   
   10) He stepped up involvement in Vietnam without actually dealing with the problem. This forced Johnson and Nixon to make strategically terrible, morally insupportable and after-the-fact decisions.
   
   He was good looking and well spoken. Even his fiercest detractors admit he gave a great speech. He had a beautiful and cultured wife and adorable kids (Camelot). He was intelligent and erudite. He did his duty in WW2. As the President, he meant well but was inexperienced, naive & hopelessly out of his depth in high level cut-throat politics and completely lacking in moral courage. He did at least listen to the Civil Rights leaders and proposed bare minimum legistation. He got the space program off the ground (so to speak). He started the Peace Corp. He stared down the bombastic Khrushchev and the belligerent Castro. He encouraged Americans toward volunteerism and thinking of America 1st and themselves 2nd. All in all, a failed half-presidency with a few points of light redeemed by his martyrdom and subsequent mythology.



2. Robert Dallek is a gifted historian. He is also a complete historian, because he writes extremely well. I wonder if he has ever won the Parkman Prize, because his apparent meticulous research is consumed by the reader with such ease. Of course, because it is Dr. Dallek, I have but one complaint. In the young, Kennedy years, prior to the presidency, the biography feels intimate -- as if we were talking to someone who was right in the house growing up with him -- almost if we were like Lem Billings. But when we get to the presidency there is a bit of opinionating that oftimes goes from historian to editorializing. For example, when speaking of the Berlin Crisis, Dr. Dallek opines that it is best that JFK was running the show because RFK, being a hothead, might have gotten us involved in a nuclear exchange. Other than that minor, minor complaint, (because he is probably right on his opinionating), I think Dallek is great. So is his new title about Nixon, (and Kissinger,too.)
   
   Joe Nichols



3. Thought that the book was an adequate one volume account of the life of JFK. The author talked alot about JFK's medical problems, more than I would have liked. He could have written a chapter about the medical problems JFK had with his stomach and back and about how the Kennedy's covered up those ailments during the run for the presidency and during the presidency.
   
   But overall I thought that it was a very good book and would recommend to anyone who is reading their first Biography of Kennedy.



4. I very much enjoyed this biography of JFK. It is very well written and exactly what you want in a biography. It has a very detailed account of his entire life, from birth, through school and his travels, and on to his time as President.
   
   My only criticism is that for those of you who were not alive at the time of JFK (like me), you can get lost in many of the pages surrounding his Presidency. The author's accounts are so detailed, that I often found myself turning back in the book to refresh my memory about the many names and places that are referenced.
   
   Other than that, I highly recommend this book. The accounts of his young life (the privilege, the travels, the women) are fantastically interesting. The accounts of his many illnesses were also well done, and news to me.
   
   If you are like me and a big fan of biographies that start from the beginning and tell the whole story chronologically without leaving out a single detail, then this book is for you.



5. Well packed and arrived in a timely fashion. Everything as expected. A pleasure to do business with.

5 comments about Ben Franklin: America's Original Entrepreneur.

1. I was expecting a book that was translated into modern readability, and that is exactly what I got. Although the book is incomplete, it gives the reader the best part of Ben's writings in a no-nonsense format. This book also helped be get a very good grade in my History Final.



2. I am a pretty big Franklin buff and probably read about a dozen books on him, but this one stands out as the one I would recommend the most. First and foremost the excellent rewriting of Ben's text create the wisdom of Franklin in it's most accessible form.
   
   Reading Franklin can often be challenging to sort out the entire meaning due to the antiquated language of his day. This book restates his thoughts and wisdom with updated syntax and language, so you can focus more on the wisdom, less on the translation.
   
   The author (McCormick, not Franklin) did an outstanding job organizing both the time line of his life and his mastery of business, politics and science.
   
   For those who have an interest in learning more about the greatest American, this is the book I would recommend most. For those passionate about Franklin this book feels fresh, rich and thoughtful.
   
   --Cudo



3. Ben Franklin: America's Original Entrepreneur is the modernized version of Ben Franklin's autobiography. Though extremely intriguing and interesting in its own right, the original biography was written in a rather disjointed way in the natural language and voice of the times. These aspects make reading the original autobiography difficult while reducing the powerful messages contained in this important man's life. I believe the author has done a tremendous job of reorganizing Franklin's musings and updating the text into modern English so that Franklin's true messages are clearly understood.
   
   As I read this book, I keep thinking that this was a man who would have been interesting to meet. He was steadfast in his values of integrity, humbleness, thriftiness, and a strong work ethic. Yet, he continually tried to better himself and the world around him.
   
   I was also surprised at the number of interesting things that Ben Franklin had accomplished that I didn't even realize he was involved in. For instance, I hadn't realized his part in setting up the first public library, fire department, and militia in Philadelphia. I also hadn't realized that this man's talent for gently but firmly guiding projects to completion without being in the spotlight. I think that says something extremely important about his character both in his daily life and business affairs.



4. This is a great modernized adaptation of the real autobiography.
   There are some areas that could have been better,
   but no one can ever completely communicate the intensions of the original.
   
   I almost gave it 4 stars -- but I gave it 5 because the minor flaws
   are off-set with the great format and organization of the book.
   The original is not as well organized as this one.
   I recommend reading both versions for greater understanding of this unique life.



5. As with all of Blaine McCormick's work, "Ben Franklin" is a marvel of clarity and insight. McCormick is a thoughtful writer with a deft hand for both language AND research -- a rare combination. I recommend this highly not just to people to are interested in Franklin, but to people who are interested in the United States ... how we got where we are today.