5 comments about Nine and Counting: The Women of the Senate.

1. "Nine and Counting" is a book that captures the feeling of good cheer felt among many women in early 2000 when nine different women found themselves serving in the U.S. Senate. The women who earned membership in this prestigious political body include Barbara Mikulski (Maryland), Kay Bailey Hutchison (Texas), Dianne Feinstein (California), Barbara Boxer (California), Patty Murray (Washington), Olympia Snowe (Maine), Susan Collins (Maine), Mary Landrieu (Louisiana), and Blanche Lincoln (Arkansas). Each of these women has some stories and experiences to share and many of them will surprise but also inspire the average reader.
   
   With each of these nine women, the author spends a little bit of time talking about the important facts to gain an understanding about where each came from and where each is headed. Backgrounds of each of the nine women are discussed, along with a little information on their life before politics and their personal decision to run for the U.S. Senate. Important political battles are also highlighted, with each of the women sharing with the reader what it was like to ram heads with some of the men in the senate- men who did not always appreciate that there were now women in the ranks.
   
   Each of these nine women is different and has her own unique personality as well as distinct governing style but they all share certain things in common. Like the book says, most all of these ladies never dreamed they would one day be serving in the U.S. Senate. The opportunity for this type of career was too far- fetched prior to the modern era to make election victory realistic. Until recently, only boys were told that they could one day reach the pinnacle of U.S. politics and serve in the Congress or the Presidency. Girls were not told this and hence almost none of them even bothered to fantasize about serving in the highest offices of government. These nine women, however, did think about public service in various other capacities and it was these other offices that served as a launching pad for making it all the way to the U.S. Senate. Diane Feinstein, for example, once served as Mayor of San Francisco. Mary Landrieu got her start in the Louisiana State Legislature. These public offices and others liked them served as stepping stones to the race for the U.S. Senate.
   
   This book is organized in a way that some will find enjoyable but others may not like at all. Author Catherine Whitney divides the book into sections within each chapter that include her own writing and sections that include the actual words of the nine women for whom this book is dedicated. Whenever one of the nine is about to speak, the individual name is written out above the text and the section is set aside from the rest of the text with bars above and below it. This makes it easy to find the actual words of one of these nine women and to separate them from the contributions of the author.
   
   Most of this book offers good reading and many will be inspired by the courageous actions taken by these women to serve the public and do what they felt was right. But there is one bad thing about a book like this one: It becomes outdated very quickly. This book was published in the summer of 2001 and since that time, another five women have been added to the Senate, bringing the total to fifteen. As soon as the next Election Day has passed, this number could easily change again. Because of this problem, this is the type of book that outdates itself in a very short time.
   
   The writing in this book is good, but it's a little simplistic and more sophisticated readers will find its content inadequate. The way it is written makes me wonder if its targeted audience was teenage girls. The nine women talk in such a benign way that it seems like the book was written specifically to appeal to the younger crowd.
   
   Overall, "Nine and Counting" is a good enough book to read and it offers some good stories of achievement that will inspire some of its readers. It is already out of date, but some of the advice and the stories included here are timeless. Women have come a long way since the founding days of the republic and while they still have some distance to travel before they reach completely equal representation, the nine women mentioned in this book show that one woman can make a difference. With perseverance, positive attitude, and the wish to make the world a better place almost any woman has a fighting chance to win election to the prestigious club known as the United States Senate.



2. I feel as though this book was very well written in the aspect that it depicts women as stong intelligent people. It shows how also women can make big changes in this world depanding on their opinions. The way they think is what makes them who they are, and who they are is succesful politicians showing what their work is all about.



3. Nine and Counting is an inspirational book that all young women should read. The struggles and obstacles that each of these women had to overcome show that anything is possible. The stories included in the book are very interesting and show how different each of the female senators are. I would recommend this book to anyone who wants an insight into nine of our current senators.



4. This book is phenomenal for any women looking to make a difference in the world. I found it interesting that the senators were not all wealthy, Anglo Saxon individuals, but rather many came from second generation immigrants. The government appears closer to home. I really enjoyed Kay Baily Hutchinson mentioning being called a, "mom in tennis shoes." When I read that one of our senators was called a mom in tennis shoes I was amazed, it was a definite realization point. Suddenly average people were politicians. I've always heard politicians say they are just like me, but really this woman as well as many of her colleagues really are. They balance families and debate over what to make for dinner. It was quite comforting.
   This book is also written quite simplistically making it a good book for all ages. At first I was a little insulted by the nature of the writing, but as it moved on it began to gain more of a Chicken Soup for the Aspiring Politicians soul. It left me with a good feeling as if I could go out and change the world with a lot of determination and a little elbow grease.



5. This book is proof that women can accomplish anything regardless of the odds against them. Infiltrating the biggest boys' club in this country, the women in this book have struggled against seemingly insurmountable obstacles to earn the right to call themselves United States Senators. Read this book if you aspire to political office, if you are interested in politics or if you believe that the American dream really does apply to all Americans, not just all male Americans!

5 comments about A Life in the Twentieth Century: Innocent Beginnings, 1917-1950.

1. Art Schlesinger (1917-2007) is a name well-known to any student of politics.
   
   Most notably a name associated with the Kennedys, Schlesinger documents the activities of the U.S. government for a specific window of history. He also gives us a rare peek into the personal lives of the movers and shakers of the period, ending around 1950, and especially of era Democrats.
   
   Schlesinger was a great fan of Felix Frankfurter, an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, and researchers should consider this book as an excellent source of information on that significant jurist.
   
   This 2000 work is a fine read and Schlesinger was a great apologist for the root thinking behind the Democrat platform to this very day. I wish his book would have continued on chronologically but for the slot of time discussed, this volume is a rare political treasure. Recommended.



2. Arthur Schlesinger is one of the pre-eminent American historians of the 20th century. He is a winner of two Pulitzer Prizes, for The Age of Jackson (1946) and A Thousand Days (1966), Schlesinger's account of the Kennedy administration for whom he was a special assistant.
   
   The man has seen and experienced a lot which is why this memoir is so interesting and in many ways enlightening. Born in 1917, he claims his motivation for writing this memoir is that he should do it while he "can still remember anything."
   
   The reader need have no fear that Schlesinger is losing anything. The level of recall and sometimes even minutia in the book is astonishing. Much of his source is journals and diaries that he seems to have kept religiously.
   
   A Life in the 20th Century is a very enjoyable read partly because of excellent content but also due to some wonderfully descriptive prose. Schlesinger's ability to paint pictures of characters is a lesson in communication. Friends of his father - also a historian - were "brilliant and effervescent," "dour and trenchant," "jovially caustic."
   
   Schlesinger's memoir also shows how much western society (U.S. particularly) matured during the century in question. The level of Puritanism, distrust, isolationism and racism which permeated the first half of the century has to a great extent dissipated.
   Schlesinger write, "As late as 1939, the Gallup poll reported that a third of respondents thought it indecent for men to appear topless" on the beach. The level of Anglophobia during the thirties is difficult to comprehend today, given as in Margaret Thatcher's famous phrase "the special relationship" between the United States and England. However, there was a virulent anti-British mood, motivated mainly by a belief that the U.S. had been hoodwinked into the First World War. Schlesinger suggests that the level of debate between the isolationists and those who wished to take on Hitler was more vicious and aggressive than even the national debate over Vietnam.
   
   As an Irish person, it is illustrative to read that the great black scholar and activist, W.E.B Du Bois wrote in his memoir, quoted by Schlesinger, that "the racial angle was more clearly defined against the Irish than against me."
   
   The chapter on `The Thirties' is particularly evocative. Hitler's shadow looms ominously through the decade. "We danced the night through, my English friends not knowing when they would dance again, the purple shadows fell, and Hitler's clock ticked steadily on."
   
   Just how close the world came to domination by totalitarian regimes - fascist or communist - can be gauged by the fact that by the end of 1940, there were only a dozen democracies in the world.
   
   The liberal Schlesinger is an avowed anti-communist who paints a very vibrant picture of the anti-communist fervor that ran through America after the war. While writing very critically about communist intrigue, he does give a number of American communists credit for believing - however wrongly, that the best future for mankind was in communism. Schlesinger never hides his anti-communism. Sometimes this interferes with his objectivity about individuals e.g. he describes former Communist Party USA chief Earl Browder in the following terms, "The benign exterior was marred by a pair of shifty eyes.... Each word carefully planned and followed by a crafty smile. His face had an overcrowded look - not enough room between forehead and chin for eyes and nose." Not what I would call objective!
   
   The author's personality does not come through in the memoir. He does make a number of references to being, or being seen as a rather pompous individual, given to outbursts of anger. There are also very few humorous examples or references in what is generally a very good read. Indeed the only sections where I lost interest were when he referenced the innumerable social occasions, local personalities and the very many `dear friends' he got to meet.
   
   All in all, well worth reading if you want to get a good overview of US and world politics during a very traumatic time. It has definitely given me the motivation to read other works from a fine historian and wonderful writer. Not sure if that is how Arthur M. Schlesinger wants to be remembered though.



3. For aging baby bombers like myself, Arthur M. Schiesinger's A LIFE IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY is a trip down memory lane. When I got the recorded version out of the library and realized it was 20 tapes, I figured that I would never finish it, barring a drive across country. However, the melodious voice of Nelson Runger, with whom I have traveled many miles with other recorded books, makes Schiesinger's story not only interesting but memorable.
   
   The book relates much of Schiesinger's life and the hundreds of people that he had close contact with. Many of the people that he mentions are familiar. His war time experiences brought back memories of stories from my parents. There are hundreds of bits of Americana along with Scheisinger's insights into many famous incidents of the 20th century.
   
   There are early glimpses of people who went on to be major figures in American politics and history.
   
   I certainly don't know that I could have read all 680 plus pages of this work, but the 20 tapes passed very quickly and I really enjoyed it.



4. As a Schesinger fan, I found this book a delightful insight into the life of the best living historian. The book was very well written, and as a current college student, I found his account of his college years particularly interesting.

   I would especially recommend this book to anyone interested in either twentieth century history or twentienth century American culture.




5. Schlesinger writes a book of personal recollections that reads much like a grandfather relating his rich and rewarding life onto his next generation. It is not a hard facts history book, and it will not be remembered as such (regardless of Dr. Kissenger's overly optimistic review on the dust jacket).
   
   There are high points and low points to this book. His experiences at Harvard, worn torn Europe, and the ideological battles between communists and liberals over control of the American left were fascinating. However, we are also privy to every movie, play, book, and cocktail dinner that schlesinger ever attended. It's interesting to gain this perspective, but it gets tedious. This book could have used substantial editing.
   
   I'm a Schlesinger fan, but I skimmed through many pages. Despite these shortcoming, Schlesinger still imparts his genious.

5 comments about Not For Ourselves Alone: The Story of Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony.

1. This was a wonderful and engaging read. Not only were you given a clear picture of both Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, but the book cites numerous powerful men and women who were active in the suffrage movement. This book is like a small taste of women's history that leaves you yearning for more. However, I wouldn't overlook this book just because it is not extremely specific, it is very helpful in getting a feel for the suffrage movement as a whole.



2. This book fills a glaring need in history books. Not many people know more about Susan B. Anthony than she was one the dollar coin. This book corrects that oversight, and then some. Not only does the book give a balanced and well thought out look at Anthony and Stanton, the reader is also introduced to many, many other women who worked so hard for women rights.
   I especially liked that the book didn't shy away from some of these women's more controversial stands, such as taking on the black person's cause.
   All in all, a very good book.



3. This book provides insight and history on the struggle that women went through to get the right to vote. It includes all kinds of interesting background and perspectives. It was a real eye opener for me and I'm giving it as a gift to all the young women I know.



4. This book was an eye opener for me. Every woman should read this book to understand the fight for our right to vote. These women devoted their lives to something they knew they would never even see in their live time! Its a story of courage and strength. It's makes one feel proud to be a woman.



5. This book is richly woven with details that dive into the true characters of these two beautiful souls. The book gives a truly amazing account of not only Elizabeth Cady Stanton & Susan B. Anthony, but dives into their lives and characters. The reader obtains a true understanding of these women's motivations, techniques, skills, and contributions, in a brilliant biography with great quotes, accounts, photographs, and special archives directly from the time period of Susan & Elizabeth, relating to their work. Ken Burns & Geoffrey C. Ward have made quite an accomplishment with this extraordinary account.

3 comments about The White House Physician: A History from Washington to George W. Bush.

1. Terrific! This is a thoroughly researched body of work. It contains great insights into the development of American medicine, and I highly recommend it to those interested in American and presidential history. Furthermore, its examination of legal, political, and moral issues make it a must-read for those in the medical profession.



2. 
   
   Ludwig Deppisch is a medical doctor who has an interest in medical history, and out of that interest he has given us a book that sets out the fascinating story of the doctors who, from the time of the founding of the republic up through the modern era, have served as physicians to the Presidents. This story is doubly fascinating because it not only traces the historical progress of medicine through time but it also reveals how medical practices, sometimes in conjunction with political subterfuge, can impact the presidency itself.
   
   The first part of the book, which covers the practices of the best doctors of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries - the doctors who treated Presidents - exposes the shortcomings of the medical profession in those years, even as medicine itself was becoming more professional. Thomas Jefferson wrote about his friend doctor Benjamin Rush, a greatly influential figure, that the doctor had "done much harm" with the practice of bleeding patients to treat illness. Indeed, calling on the aid of a doctor did not guarantee a cure; just the opposite could be the case. President James Garfield, who lived in a somewhat more advanced medical period, when shot by an assassin had his wound examined by doctors with hands so dirty that, according to the author, the doctors themselves likely caused his fatal infection. Still, a physically tough old President like Andrew Jackson could have a bullet removed from a dueling wound years after the duel and emerge much improved from the surgery.
   
   But it is as the story moves toward the twentieth century, while medical knowledge seems to be progressing, that we see another compelling issue begin to emerge, and that is how political and medical subterfuge can be employed to deceive the citizenry about what is going on in the health of a President. Grover Cleveland had a secret operation, for example, on board a private yacht, to remove a cancerous growth in his mouth. In the event the operation was a success and the public never became aware of what had taken place. Woodrow Wilson, however, had a stroke of such massive proportions that he probably should have left office but he did not. His physician was complicit in keeping Wilson isolated and the public misinformed about his true condition. FDR's health was so badly failing at the end of his third term that he should never have run for a fourth. But we were in the midst of war. His actual medical state was concealed and the reelected President died a short time into his last term. President Eisenhower had a series of serious medical problems which were interpreted to the public through rose tinted glasses. Never the less, Ike was popular, he completed two terms, and what Americans were told about the President's health likely gave them the reassurance most of them were looking for. Finally, it should be noted that JFK deliberately misrepresented his awful health facts to the American people throughout his political career with the audacity of Harry Houdini making an impossible escape. We might admire the audacity, but was it the right thing to do?
   
   The author also raises some related and interesting issues about using psychiatry as a tool both for evaluating the mental fitness of a President and as a mode of treatment. Hindsight suggests it might have been useful to know more about the mental health and psychological makeup of Richard Nixon before he was elected. But would it have been possible, we wonder, to get an objective and non political pre-election evaluation of Nixon's personality? By the same token, Senator Thomas Eagleton was forced off the Democratic ticket as a Vice Presidential candidate in 1972 when it was revealed he had been treated for serious depression. Was this action appropriate? And how would the American people react if they learned that a President was undergoing current psychiatric treatment? These are worthwhile questions to ponder.
   
   All of this leads us to note that there is some useful discussion in this book about the place of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment when it comes to dealing with the ramifications of any severe medical impairment of a President. And while this constitutional amendment was specifically passed to provide guidelines should a crisis occur, we have unfortunately seen, as in the shooting of President Reagan, that when a crisis does occur key officials can still be caught flatfooted in the immediate aftermath as to what to say and do. Moreover, the question of whether a President is medically fit to continue in office places the White House Physician squarely in the cross hairs of decision making. Thus, relevant officials in any new administration need to discuss and understand all of the protocols to be followed and all of the attendant constitutional and medical implications well in advance of any medical emergency. Deception of the public will probably no longer be tolerated as it has been in the past.
   
   Lastly we should note that, like a good novel, this tale contains some rich characters, strong personalities like Dr. Cary Grayson, Wilson's physician, who can color the story and influence the plot. And we see the potential for conflict when there are many doctors involved in treatment, a few of whom may have large egos. Kennedy had a wide range of treating doctors and his titular head physician, Dr. Travell, was shunted aside while the President received secret and controversial treatments from Max Jacobson, the Manhattan doctor known as "Doctor Feelgood" because of the injections he gave the rich and famous, injections that contained amphetamines and steroids.
   
   All in all, it would be fair to sum up that the author has given us a book that is not only rich in scholarship, but one that tells a tale which is fascinating on its own merits. Moreover, this is a book that is a significant resource of information for any doctors or officials who are newly being called to serve in an administration and who might have to grapple with a replay of history sometime in the future. For them it might be essential reading; for the rest of us it is just a darn good read.
   
   G. F. Shirley



3. This is a well crafted, researched and comprehensive treatise, yet it is an entertaining and fluid "read". I did not expect that the topic could be presented in such an interesting and entertaining manner. The book succeeded in educating me not only in the specifics of the various actors, but in the evolution of the roles and responsibilities of the President's physicians. I had assumed that the provision of medical care to the President had been static over the decades; it was fascinating to learn just how much and how recently it has changed. This book not only deals with presidential physicians, the evolution of presidential medical care (including political overlap), but also provides fascinating insights into presidential history.

5 comments about The Other Man: John F. Kennedy Jr., Carolyn Bessette, and Me.

1. After reading this book I feel heartbroken, as if the events had actually happened to ME. What an unimaginable, incredible love story. Their passion made me cry. I felt so empathetic reading Michael's story, as if I could've been either one of them. It was that easy to relate to. I read the entire book in one sitting. Contrary to what some ignorant, miserable people may want to believe, this book was not written in attempt to gain publicity. But rather to quite simply convey an amazing love story, as you would imagine anyone who's ever truly felt unconditional, relentless love for another human being, wanting to tell the world. What an amazing story.



2. I remember when this book first came out and actually wanted to go pick it up. But i forgot and never got around to it. Here i am a few years after the books release and then one day Michael Bergin for some strange reason popped into my head so i decided to type in his name in on AMZ, just to see what was available in his catalog. Of course the 1st thing 2 pop up was the book & right then & there i realized that i should finally pick this up. I have the hard copy and i absolutely love it. I think Michael writes really well. Its nothing ground breaking & it's not going 2 win any Pulitzer Prize awards but it's a good book. He is very honest & candid with his relationship. I know a lot of reviews really enjoyed trashing him & just bashing him for no apparent reason. He dated the woman and has the total right to publish this book. Yes of course he got paid for writing the book but I am sure that was not his 100% reason for doing so. I feel awful that he had to go out and promote this book & get slammed by many of the people interviewing him for publishing his experience & relationship. I am sure deep down inside he probably just wanted to cry after all the negative press he received. He wrote this book & promoted it in a way defend her honor & to show "What would have happened if she was with Michael". It proposes the question "Would JFK Jr. & Carolyn still be alive if she was still with Michael"? I am sure not everything is word for word because nobody has perfect memory. There's always 3 points of view for any story and this was his. I do believe Carolyn was secretly ashamed of him because he was a door man when they initially met. I don't like the way she treated him and this was a story of a very average girl who decided to choose between being financially stable, rather then being with someone who she might have had more fun with. I remember Michael back in the 90's when he was becoming a big star. Of course fashion related things on TV have so much more exposure and dedication now then they did back then. So i heard about Michael here & there and saw his ads in New York. Of course I found Michael to be interesting & was fascinated by him. I mean how can you not be? Of course I don't have a fascination for every model. You need to have that certain something to really spark my interest. Michael is really down to earth & doesn't sugar coat anything in the book. He is also very honest that he used drugs in the beginning of the book. I feel like he wasted his time with Carolyn because i really don't see her BEAUTY at all. She is a very below average type of woman in society. But then again we always see beautiful people date unattractive people. That's how it goes. She really was down right below average. I look at her over & over and I just DO NOT GET IT!!!! Her beauty is something I do not understand at all & she needs a tan.
   
   Also people on here BASHED this book a lot and some of them didnt even read the book. I understand you want to voice your opinion which is fine. On another note Camelot was not perfect & it never will be. Some bashers just couldnt handle what they thought was paradise actually had FLAWS!! JFK Jr. & Carolyn were anything but saints. Then again nobodies an angel anymore. Don't judge from what you see externally because it's usually just a really good mask. You never know what lies behind closed doors. Pick this book up i know you will enjoy it.



3. After reading this book I am still confused about the author's intent. On the book cover's back flap he states, "Above all, The Other Man is a testament to the enduring power of love and a story about painful choices we make with our all-too-human hearts." I must agree with the part about painful choices because he made some painful ones when he agreed to be the other man. Why would he try to compete with John Kennedy Jr.?
   
   I don't agree with him stating that this book is a testament of love. If so, why did he paint Carolyn Bessette Kennedy so negatively? This book trashes her image, character and morals. Michael Bergin tells of lustful sex, drugs, infidelity, lies and a possible abortion. Yes, it is his personal story of a season in his life and he has a right to tell it, but don't mislead the readers.
   
   Despite my feeling mislead and still questioning his intent, overall the book was well put together. The book contains many full page photos, some of which validate that he did in fact know Carolyn and did some modeling.
   
   If you are a true fan of Carolyn and/or John Kennedy Jr. this book is not for you. If you are one to have a curious nature about the lives of the above mentioned people then you will enjoy this book.



4. I ordered the book for three dollars and when it arrived, I couldn't put it down. I stayed up all night reading it until the end.
   
   I don't think Michael sold her out, not at all and I think he was right when he said that there was nothing for her to defend. She was a real woman, more beautiful and privileged than most but she was authentically kind, incredibly smart, funny, and she meowed when she loved you. It doesn't get any better than that, imo. It was so obvious how much he loved her, still loves her. How much he admired her and credited her for all she had done for him, made me cry. To most of the public, she had an affair, if true, I say "yes", and they are all indignant about it. To me the issue is more why? Did she really think she had made a mistake marrying JFK,Jr.? It happens all the time. Why are we so quick to think she couldn't have felt that way just because he was JFK,Jr.?
   
   Who realy was the "other man", Michael or JFK? Michael knew her years before she met JFK. I say JFK was the other man.
   
   
   I cared about JFK, Jr. and I am not saying he was a bad guy. I am saying that according to Michael's book, none of them were bad guys.
   
   My only complaint is when the end of the book came and Michael had learned that her plane was missing and shortly after that she was dead, he seemed to hold back much more than in the rest of the book. He barely wrote about how he felt, just more who he called and what he did. That is somewhat understandable considering he must have been in utter shock and despair but I wanted more. The end of the book seemed abrupt and a bit contrived, probably in part due to his impending fatherhood. Again, somewhat understandable but when he wrote that he "had" loved Carolyn, I took offense. To me when you love, you love forever regardless of other loves. That is what Carolyn wanted.



5. Extremely interesting. It seems as though from Bergman's point of view that, Carolyn led a very tortued life. She was still having sex with Bergman for almost 3 years while she was married to JFK, JR. She seemed like a terribly unhappy person. It's a must read for Kennedy watchers! I highly reccomend it!

5 comments about Andrew Wyeth: Autobiography.

1. I discovered this book at my sister's home after I bought a print while visiting. The comments accompanying each print in the book provide an intimate look at Wyeth's life and art. It added a new dimension to my fondness for his work. I'd highly recommend this book to any admirer of Andrew Wyeth.



2. This isn't a linear autobiography, in the usual sense. Instead, it presents selections from Wyeth's entire life as a painter, from his mid-teens to his late seventies, when this book was published. Wyeth's own notes on each piece make it an autobiography.
   
   This says less about the artist than about his artwork, which speaks for itself. His subdued palette captures the people and places of his life. Places include farms, barn or farmhouse interiors, Maine shorelines, and other open spaces that are increasingly hard to find. Wyeth's people include his wife Betsy, his sister, and neighbors. Grittier than Norman Rickwell but no less affetionate, he presents them at work, at hard-earned rest, or simply at a quiet moment. A few nudes of teenaged Siri, including the remarkable "The Virgin," capture the gawky grace of emerging womanhood. Two images really stood out for me, though, images I would never have associated with Wyeth. "Spring" and "Christmas morning" carry a surreal sense, somehow even closer the the supernatural for their entirely realistic rendering. "Spring," especially, offers an amiguous sense of hope using the starkest and bleakest of visual language.
   
   As Wyeth narrates each painting, a sentence to a paragraph for each, parts of his life emerge: friendships, successes, and losses. Without being mysterious, the text comes across as spotty and selective, omitting far more than it presents. If you want a standard kind of biography, you'll have to look elsewhere. Instead, this book is closer to the occasional cup of coffee with the artist, shared over weeks or months, in which different moments of his life arise almost at random. His words add an intimacy to the art that's hard to express, but that is worth experiencing - as is the art itself.
   
   -- wiredweird



3. I purchased this item as a gift for an artist friend, she was very happy with the quality of the reproductions in this book.



4. I didn't know a lot about Andrew Wyeths work before reading this book. I had seen the paintings and I liked them a lot, but I didn't know that much about them.
   
   The book is labeled as an autobiography, but its form is not what many might expect. This is not a book consisting of prose with the occasional picture, it is a book that mainly shows Wyeths paintings with a paragraph or two about the paintings below. Written by Wyeth. For some this may not be what they are looking for, but I liked this very much.
   
   It is a very good introduction to Wyeth's paintings and the subject matter he painted. The people, the places and their history. There isn't a lot of information about Wyeth himself in the book. At least not in the sense one would expect from a traditional biopgraphy. But after reading it I feel I know a lot more about both Wyeth and his paintings than a typical art-history or biographical text would give me.
   
   I'd be happy to recommend this book.



5. My teacher introduced me to Andrew Wyeth's paintings and drawings about a year or two ago. I've been in love with his work ever since. It's just how beautiful his linework is and how he brings life to the paintings. That is so incredibly rare. There are plenty of portrait artists out there, but I can't think of one that impresses me as much as he does. I think this is because of how well he knew his subjects.
   
   He said drawing with pencil helped him get to the core of a thing. If you've ever drawn or painted people and animals from life, as he did, it increases the appreciation for his work one hundred fold. I also think that this is why his paintings and sketches are so full of life - you just don't get that from a photo, there is NO comparison. His landscapes blow me away every time, and I'm not really a fan of landscape paintings. Something about the solitude of it all just takes me in.
   
   My favourite is Night Sleeper, which is on the cover. His palette is just beautiful, i don't really think it's muted or drab - the closer you look, the more colours you see. How he played colours in juxtaposition, so that they glow, is another part that gives his work such intensity and life.
   
   The comments beside all the work are, as people have mentioned, very good. The entire book is one of those slow joy books. It's just nice to sit with it and turn the pages slowly and take in every thing.

5 comments about Mo: The Life and Times of Morris K. Udall.

1. Morris King Udall was one of the great Democrats of the 20th century. After reading this book, you will see why - and you will also regard "Mo" as one of the greatest legislators of the last century. Rep. Udall certainly was one of the most complicated.
   
   The strength of this book rests in the writing style as the authors present a human portrait of a legendary politician who is model public servant. The writing is tight and the story is brisk. The book is a solid work that covers all the facts in Udall's public and private lives - warts and all. It is a perfect blend of personality and public policy as the book discusses Udall's towering legislative achievements regarding environmental protection and Native American rights, his legendary and futile White House run, all the while describing the price his career cost his family and, with heart-breaking impact, the toll Parkinson's Disease took on the legendary Arizonan and his unrelenting battle against the illness.
   
   By the end of the book, regardless of political persuasion, you will regret that there are no more Mo Udalls in public life today. And, you may lament, as I did, that Morris Udall never achieved his dream of serving as President of the United States.



2. Every student of U.S. politics or Arizona history should read this book. Carson and Johnson thoroughly and brilliantly chronicle the life of a man who profoundly influenced the course of America in ways that politicians of greater renown never did. The authors reveal how Mo Udall could champion the most liberal causes and yet gain the respect of someone as conservative as Barry Goldwater. Read this book and you'll wonder what turns America might have taken had Udall fulfilled his dream of becoming president.



3. Its amazing how quickly we forget our leaders. After serving 31 years in Congress, running one of the most likeable Presidential campaigns in history, and nearly getting elected majority leader of the U.S. House of Represenatives, Democrat Morris Udall's political career was cruelly and tragically brought to a halt by Parkinson's disease. Once famed as perhaps the wittiest man in Congress (as well as one of the most effective), Udall died seven years after his retirement -- his sterling wit permanently silenced as the disease robbed him of his ability to speak. Most tragically, this man who -- with his brother Stewart -- co-founded both the current conservation movement and America's first Mormon political clan, died a forgotten figure, remembered only by a few political junkies like myself. Fortunately, however, Donald Carson and James Johnson have produced a wonderfully engaging biography of this man that gives us a warts-and-all portrait of a remarkable public servant. While giving ample reason why the man was so beloved, they also don't flinch from revealing why Morris Udall ultimately remained a mystery to even his own family. Unlike other political biographies, this book neither sets out to debunk or canonize Rep. Udall but instead stands as a sharp portrait of a complex man whose public service -- whether you agreed with his liberal politics or not (I certainly don't) -- made this country a better place.

   Written in a breezy, conversational tone that still manages to maintain a proper biographical distance, Mo follows Udall from his strict Mormon childhood in Arizona to his first election to the U.S. House. While a great deal of the book focuses on Udall's legislative achievements -- Udall was an environmentalist before it become trendy -- the best of the early chapters deal with Udall as a liberal upstart setting out to reform the stodgy House. As Udall himself would often wryly point out, his political life was often a bizarre tragic comedy of second-place finishes that ultimately became victories for others. Both of Udall's insurgent campaigns for both Speaker and Majority Leader ended in failure but sparked the revolution that overthrew (however briefly) the Congressional seniority system. The book's highlight is the detailing of Udall's 1976 campaign for the Democratic Presidential nomination where he managed to finish second in a record number of primaries without ever once finishing first. If Udall didn't set the electorate on fire, he did distinguish himself by revealing himself to be one of the most genuinely witty Presidential wanna-bes to ever pop up on a primary ballot (or, as one columnist put it, "Is Morris Udall to funny to be President?" That's the 70s talking. As of late, some genuine and intentional humor in American politics would be a bit of a relief, I'd think.) The campaign made Udall famous for his wit but as this biography reveals, that wit often concealed a rather distant temperment that so focused on work that even his own children grew up calling him "Mo." As a politician, Udall was that rare thing -- an honest and sincere compassionate liberal who actually saw big government as a way to help the downtrodden. Yet this same man who dedicated his life to helping strangers drove one wife to divorce and another to alcoholism and suicide. The dichotomy makes for a fascinating read and Carson and Johnson explore these issues without ever descending into lurid muckracking. The book concludes with a touching (and quite frankly heartbreaking) section dealing with Udall's final, brave, and tragic battle with Parkinson's Disease (which, as I read it, was also sadly reminicent of Ronald Reagan's -- another politician never given the respect that was his due -- current battle with Alzheimer's; another nefarious disease that, like Parkinson's, cruelly robs men and women of their dignity without reason or warning.)

   Despite the fact that, politically, I'm probably about as far to the right as the late Congressman Morris Udall was to the left, I still find myself mourning the comically tragic failure of his 1976 campaign for the Democratic Presidential nomination. As the election was the first post-Watergate election and the Republican Party was going through one of its periodic near-deaths, the election of a Democrat was pretty much assured. All Udall had to do was win the nomination and, for four years at least, a one-eyed, 6'5, former probasketball player and nonpracticing Mormon named Mo Udall would have been President. Of course, the nomination didn't go to Udall but instead went to the far less witty Jimmy Carter. Considering the way the world was in the late 70s, its doubtful Udall would have had any a better time of it than Carter but instead of hearing that America's problems were due to "malaise," a President Udall would at least find time to tell at least one corny, Ayatollah joke. And, even if the voters didn't realize it at the time, America would have been better off for that joke. Just as its now better off to have this book to remember Morris Udall by.




4. This meticulously researched and scholastically outstanding biography of Morris Udall follows his life and political times, focussing on his career, his 30-year congressional history, and his radical challenges to seniority systems. Recommended for anyone studying contemporary American politics in general and House/Senate politics in particular, Mo is a "must" for the legions of Mo Udall supporters and admirers.



5. The authors do a masterful job in telling the story of one of America's most valuable public servants during the 2nd half of the 20th century.

   The authors, two gifted journalists and writers chronicle the good, bad, ugly, and the excellent parts of Mo Udall's extraordinary career in congress.

   And (a terrific plus) this is a very readable book. I love reading authors who can tell a complex story using simple everyday English -- the kind they use with thier friends. This is real nitty-gritty history -- documentation, footnotes, and all -- but the story reads fun and easy. I highly recommend it.

   Jay Rochlin

5 comments about Nader: Crusader, Spoiler, Icon.

1. For as much as Ralph Nader has influenced and shaped events in this country, most people know next to nothing about the man. Nader has had a long, fruitful career fighting for those without a voice. In this book, Justin Martin has provided the most revealing, eye opening account of a truly great citizen.
   
   As far as biographies go, this book is pretty straitforward. Martin covers Nader's childhood, school days, college days, and then onto Nader's career in Washington D.C. Martin invterviewed members of Nader's family and also his friends to help accumulate the material for the book.
   
   Part of why this book seems so fantastic to me may have something to do with the fact that it's the only one of its kind. If you want to know about how Nader got to where he is today, Martin's book is the only one available. That notwithstanding, I think the book does a great job. The fact that Nader hasn't publicly spoken out against the book also speaks to its merit. If Nader didn't like this book, or thought Martin got anything significant wrong, I believe Ralph would have let us know about it.
   
   Hopefully all those angry democrats will sit down with this book and find out how much good Nader has done for this country...



2. The intelligent, take no prisoners, crusader of consumer rights is featured in Justin Martin's new book, Nader: Crusader, Icon Spoiler. Martin is also the author of Greenspan: the Man Behind the Money. Overall, Nader: Crusader, Icon Spoiler, 288 pages, reads well and is organized, but suffers from what appears to be some author-induced opinions that detract from the book's authenticity.

   Still, the book is an interesting story about a guy who never gives up, made life a little safer on the highways, but doesn't know how to stop when he's ahead. As Martin points out by quoting Teddy Roosevelt, muckrakers are an important part of society, but must know when to stop raking the muck. Nader, according to Martin and other accounts, just doesn't know when to stop stirring up the muck.

   Martin brings us through Nader's early life in Connecticut, his college and law school days at Princeton and Harvard and then his life struggle against for profit corporations. Ultimately the theme of Nader's life, as described by Martin, is essentially a life long vendetta against the corporation. In the early days of Nader's career, as told by Martin, Nader had the issues behind him. Auto safety, for instance, was an important issue which Nader championed with much success. In the later years, however, Nader picked fight after fight, including a fight with President Jimmy Carter, according to Martin. This fight just seemed so unnecessary, according to Martin. This experience highlighted by Martin brings out the defensive, never satisfied, approach Nader always gives to his project. Nader is more worried about looking like a compromiser than in getting a good result, according to Martin and this comes out in this episode.

   The political quotes that Martin chooses in the Nader biography are fun to read, but some of Martin's chosen quotes to describe a point he wants to make seem unnecessarily targeted to the more liberal audience likely to read this book and, in my view, take away from the author's credibility.

   For instance, Martin seems to take some unnecessary pot shots at Donald Rumsfeld and George Bush. Martin, in describing how Nader disliked the typical Ivy Leaguer, chooses this quote by Nader: "At Princeton, the athlete was king... Donald Rumsfeld was on the wrestling team and he would swagger around campus." Another unnecessary quote was when Martin is describing how hard working the Nader workers were; Martin chooses to insert a quote by one of Nader's guys from Yale who attended at the same time as our current President, "When I [referring to the Nader worker] was studying..., Bush was getting drunk at the frat house across the street." These quotes appear to add little more than some cheap pot shot humor that should not be used in a serious biography.

   In any event, other than these unnecessary quips, the book is an interesting overview of Ralph Nader.




3. The intelligent, take no prisoners, crusader of consumer rights is featured in Justin Martin's new book, Nader, Crusader, Icon Spoiler. Overall, the book, 281 pages, reads well and is organized, but suffers from what appears to be some author-induced opinions which detract from the book's authenticity. Still, the book is an interesting story about a guy who never gave up, made life a little safer on the highways, but doesn't know how to stop when he's ahead. This, leading to the title of this review, in a quote by Teddy Roosevelt listed in the Nader biography by Martin to describe Nader.

   Martin brings us through Nader's early life in Conneticut, his college and law school days at Princeton and Harvard and then his life stuggle against for profit corporations. Ultimately the theme of Nader's life, as described by Martin, is essentially a life long vendetta against the corporation. In the early days of Nader's career, as told by Martin, Nader had the issues behind him. Auto safety, for instance, was an important issue which Nader championed with much success. In the later years, however, Nader picked fight after fight, including a fight with President Jimmy Carter, according to Martin. This fight just seemed so unnecessary, according to Martin.

   The political quotes choosen by Martin in the Nader biography are fun to read, but some of Martin's choosen quotes to describe a point he wants to make seem unnecessarily targeted to the potential reader audience which, in my opinion, takes away from the biography.

   For instance, Martin seems to take some unnecessary pot shots at Donald Rumsfeld and George Bush. Martin, in describing how Nader despised the typical Ivy Leaguer, chooses this quote by Nader:
   "At Princeton, the athlete was king... Donald Rumsfeld was on the wrestling team and he would swagger around campus."

   Another unnecessary quote was when Martin is describing how hard working the Nader workers were; Martin chooses to insert a quote by one of Nader's guys from Yale who attended at the same time as our current President, "When I [referring to the Nader worker] was studying..., Bush was getting drunk at the frat house across the street." These quotes appear to add little more than some cheap pot shot humor that should not be used in a serious biography.




4. I'm admittedly biased towards Ralph Nader, having volunteered and voted for him during the 1996 and 2000 presidential elections. That being said, I found this book to be remarkably balanced. It's neither a hagiography nor a hatchet job, but rather gives equal weight to Nader's achievements and shortcomings.

   Martin writes extremely well, with a brisk pace: by page 30 Nader has finished law school, and by page 45 he's written "Unsafe at Any Speed" and is ready to take on GM! Despite the quick pacing, Martin doesn't gloss over Nader's early years: he presents the reader with all the necessary information on Nader's upbringing and influences, relying on well-chosen anecdotes rather than tedious genealogies.

   The section on Nader's crusade against GM practically reads like a spy thriller. Fans of Nader will thrill during his "peak period" of 1969-1976, when it seemed he could do no wrong. But those same fans will scratch their head later on, when Nader inexplicably sabotages some of his own initiatives through a refusal to compromise with Congress.

   Martin quickens the pace of the book yet again when detailing Nader's quixotic presidential runs. He describes the alienation Nader felt after being rebuffed by the Clinton/Gore administration - a feeling than no doubt sparked his candidacy and defused any feelings of remorse at possibly costing Gore the 2000 election. The irony of Nader's career is that he achieved the most when Republicans were in power, because he expected little of their administrations and focused on galvanizing grassroots efforts to achieve reform.

   This is an excellent biography, a revealing portrait of a man who has devoted his life to consumer advocacy and making America a safer place to live.




5. I gotta say, who knew this guy was this cool? I kind of thought Ralph Nader had a story behind him. And here I find it in full living color. Martin, who wrote the fab Greenspan book from the high falutin era, now takes on an "icon" whom no one really knows...which is the point. Since Nader's plan was to stay silent and mysterious so it is wild to see Martin foil it in such an artist, comprehensive and above all, surprisingly fun manner. (Nader with his clothes off, so to speak...) I'm sure no one expected to see 'fun' and 'Nader' in the same sentence and in this book you finally get to see what all the fuss was about. I'd stood at a brick bookstore perusing a copy of Nader's quasi-autobio and thought "What is this?" Was all jargonish propoganda. This book is terrific and fascinating cause Martin goes for the jugular in a style that is refreshing - and yet not muckraking in the least. I say this bio is a new form of art: taking the wraps off someone no one knew or even thought of as more than a figurehead, and showing what that person has really done - and the consequences too. Oh and the cool part - that he's more than a political geek, that's for dessert.

3 comments about Ivan the Terrible.

1. Biographies are strange business. The author has to assemble lots of potentially disparate, even contradictory facts into something that feels like a coherent narrative; one with a logical progression of events and characters whose thoughts and motivations make some kind of sense. When the subject is 500 years old and an absolute monarch, the sources that remain are likely to have suffered so many revisions that their relation to fact must be especially hard to ascertain.
   
   So, assembling a story about Ivan IV was a big job and the authors deserve a great deal of credit for crafting a story out of the pieces available. And, if only because of the events contained in that story, it makes for really interesting reading.
   
   But, part of a biographer's responsibility is to point out the limitations of the available information and to try to give the reader some sense of how actions taken out of the context of their own time and place may feel very different than they might have for contemporaries.
   
   That's not to suggest that the wholesale slaughter of his own subjects doesn't earn Ivan a deservedly nasty reputation. But the authors don't even try to make any sense of it, except to describe him as a madman and a paranoid.
   
   That's where the book fails as a good biography. But it really slips into strange territory when the authors describe some historical figures as "saints," without any apparent metaphorical overtones. What's even weirder are their descriptions of divine interventions or miracle-working icons with the same uninflected tones they use to describe a banquet menu.
   
   The book often reads like a hagiography, not just in its reference to divine machinations, but even in the authors' choice of words and form. You can't help but come away from the work feeling that their real intent was to denounce the tyrants of Russian history - be they Ivan or Stalin - and to champion the fair and truly Christian rulers whom history should remember with more affection. I was surprised, but relieved, that there was no postscript pleading for the return of Russia to the monarchy.
   
   In a nutshell: the story's a good one because the subject and his time are inherently interesting. I'd like to read someone else's take on it sometime.



2. To concur with the previous review: this is an engaging read. I enjoyed it and learned from it.
   
   A concern: There were a number of places where I knew something about Russian religious practice that the authors got wrong in their book. This is disturbing to me because my one area of expertise was inaccurately referenced. When this happens, I wonder how many areas out there that I don't know about are fouled up. A look at academic reviews assures me that they're aware of some of these, but that they're not rampant in the text.
   
   One academic review claimed that the authors took the word of chronicles and other primary sources on Ivan's life without thinking them through. This is not true throughout the text, although I wish they'd taken Kurbskii's comments with the big grain of salt they require.



3. Robert Payne's "Ivan The Terrible" is sensational. The book, in addition to being a great historical research project, is also a lively read. Though it nears 500 pages, this book manages to navigate Ivan the Terrible's life in detail, without continual sidetracking or nitpicking. The pace of the book moves well and is free of dead sections that seem to be aimed at specialists instead of the lay reader.

   The danger in writing a biography on someone like Ivan the Terrible is to psychoanalyze and read too much into the turbulent times and events. While Payne offers some explanations for the erratic and awful behavior of the Grand Prince of Muscovy, he certainly doesn't try to explain away, apologize or revise the life of Ivan.

   There is also a tendency in biography to get mired down in political intrigues and military minutae of the times. While there is certainly plenty of intrigue and military history, the book never wanders far from the subject matter which is Ivan, a man possessed by history, demons and angels.

   This book may not satisfy the specialist, who might yearn for more detail and more footnotes, but it is certainly a good, solid starting point for someone wanting to know more about Ivan the Terrible.

   Payne has done a great service for Russian history buffs.

5 comments about Bobby Fischer Goes to War: How the Soviets Lost the Most Extraordinary Chess Match of All Time.

1. "Bobby Fischer Goes to War" revisits the Cold War showdown between Soviet World Chess Champion Boris Spassky and American enfant terrible Bobby Fischer in Reykjavik, Iceland in the summer of 1972. Billed by the press as an ideological duel between Western individualism and the Soviet chess machine, the match inspired an unprecedented interest in the game in the U.S. and ultimately rejuvenated the Soviet chess program as well. BBC journalists David Edmonds and John Eidinow propose that the greatest battle was not on the chessboard. This is a chronicle of the drama behind the scenes, among the American and Soviet teams and their Icelandic hosts, that makes the battle on the board look tame.
   
   Background information about the two competitors, their personalities, how they got to this point, and an attempt by the authors to explain how a chess player's mind works bring us up to the negotiations for the World Championship match. If it seemed that getting everyone there was a feat, matters only got worse once the match started. It was to be two months in constant crisis, due mostly to Fischer's unrelenting, bizarre demands. The authors provide a blow-by-blow account of the confrontations on and off the chessboard, as the organizers tried to deal with Fischer, Spassky dealt with the stress, the Soviets with the prospect of losing, and paranoia on both sides that the players were victims of espionage.
   
   "Bobby Fischer Goes to War" is a snapshot of a symbolic event in a particular political climate which, not surprisingly, does not seem to symbolize what it was made to at the time. Boris Spassky was hardly a Soviet loyalist, and Bobby Fischer was a poor representative of the Free World, hated by the U.S. State Department. Yet, these two men at this juncture in the Cold War fought "the most notorious chess duel in history". This is a very readable, engaging account of that event and its cast. I am puzzled, however, that no one suggests that Bobby Fischer suffered from some degree of autism, which, combined with a domineering and self-important personality, explains his behavior. He is demonized a bit too much considering that he clearly had a neurological disorder.



2. As someone with a moderate curiosity in chess, and wanting to be drawn into its world through enlightening analysis, this book is simply atrocious. To my way of thinking, the purpose in reading about this game would be to illuminate the relationship between psychology and complex strategy on the board -- if you're going to write this book than you have to get a handle on making that angle interesting or forget about it. A tabloid study about a irrritating egoist is not what I want. I cannot finish this.



3. Prior to the match Boris Spassky said that regardless of the results the events in Reykjavik would be a "celebration of chess". Bobby Fischer on the other hand, was going to war and wanted "to crush the Soviets". Two thoughts on Fischer come to mind after reading this book: What a jerk, and what a shame. He pretty much flushed his career down the toilet after this match by refusing to defend his title against Karpov in 1974, and for the most selfish of reasons - he couldn't handle losing - and he went out on top. How convenient. While his chess games are incredible to follow (and I highly recommend you take the time to do so) the fact is that he lost in life; while Spassky, whom he beat over the board, won (some observers even say that Spassky should've won the match based on pure chess skill and preparation; regardless of the results, his best games are as well worth studying as Fischer's). Fischer's absence throughout much of the 70s and all of the 1980s is lamentable, and like so many of his acquaintances, the more I find myself making excuses for his ridiculous behavior. "Bobby Fischer Goes to War" depicts this paradox and phenomenon pretty well and anyone interested in Cold War history might really enjoy the bizarre and intriguing events in this little corner of the wider, global show-down between communism and capitalism. Nevertheless, I have a few reservations about this book.
   
   Despite its being a well-researched, compelling and easy-to-read account of the off-board, behind the scenes battles between Fischer & the Russians, it has several short-comings, the foremost of which is a lack of chess. Sure, the authors make some token efforts to summarize certain highlights of a few games, but the focus is on Fischer's antics rather than his moves (or, if you're a Fischer apologist, his "off the board brinksmanship") and this seems unfortunate to me. By having the games interwoven into the main storyline the peripheral hoopla of the match would have its proper context. Not only this, but it would relieve the tedium of some 300 pages of some rather petty and exasperating behavior, and ultimately, would redeem the man himself. Reading about Bobby Fischer without his chess games is like, well, try imagining Mike Tyson without boxing. Additionally, I'm not sure how this book is any different from "The Russians vs. Fischer" (D. Plisetsky & S. Voronkov, Everyman, 1994, 2005 2nd ed.)? Not having been able to read it I can't say for sure, but from what I can tell it contains more interviews from the Russian side (the authors apparently utilized the same "unpublished U.S. & Soviet records" so prominently advertised on this book's jacket) and the games themselves. These two factors alone make me suspect that I bought the inferior product, and so I recommend you compare the two.
   
   Other criticisms:
   
   A complete absence of reference notes for any of the some 150+ sources for this book make it difficult, if not impossible to locate the sources for a large amount of curious material. Have these guys ever heard of plagiarism?
   
   The authors, who are journalists, write in the typical "play by play" style of their profession, which works well in pithy newspaper or magazine columns (or for John Krakauer & Mark Bowden), but wears thin in a full-length narrative about a chess match without any real chess.
   
   The coverage of the 1992 re-match is given short-shrift and conveniently written off a "a bad sequel".
   
   In the end I wanted to hear more from Spassky and Fischer themselves. There are a lot of secondary viewpoints and great sources of information here, but how much better could the text have been had the authors solicited or used more direct quotes from the participants themselves - especially Spassky since he seemed most willing to talk? Recently I discovered "B. Fischer: The Wandering King" by H. Bohm & K. Jongkind (Batsford, 2005) which looks to be fill this gap.
   
   The one thing that redeems the author's decision to focus on the non-chess related action in my mind is that it does illuminate something important that I don't believe they intended; namely that, despite their extreme differences, both chess masters managed not only to play some great chess, but refused to be manipulated by their respective political systems. That is, regardless of Fischer's obsession with control and the fiasco he made of this match - not to mention the ass he made of himself - it seems to me that the "celebration of chess" Spassky envisioned came about in-spite of all this, and in no small part due to his own tolerance, patience and ability to challenge Fischer on the chess board. For it was these two individual chess-artists who not only enriched and popularized the game worldwide through their immortal play, greatly benefiting their fellow players through larger purses future tournaments, but most importantly, their outmaneuvering of systemic powers that sought to constrain them for narrow-minded political propaganda.



4. BOBBY FISHER GOES TO WAR is a well-researched book, using, among other sources, recently opened Soviet files on the match. The authors (Edmonds and Eidinow) fill in the background leading up to the match, including bios of the lives of Fisher and Spassky, the two combatants in "the chess match of all time". However, the story lacks for sustainable drama; things poke along, the authors obviously stretching out a long magazine piece into a book. This is fine for chess fans but the general reader may feel too bogged down. On the other hand, there is little analysis of the games played in the match, which might frustrate a chess buff who has not yet read any of the analytical books on the match. BOBBY FISHER GOES TO WAR is probably more a political book than a sports book as all the negotiations, psychology, and behind the scenes manuvering are spelled out as well as the actions of the Soviet Communist party machinery regarding the match and very little on the games itself. Fisher comes off as brilliant but insane and this reader had little sympathy for his pathological behavior or the chess authorities caving into his ridiculous and nuerotic demands. All of that is covered in detail in the book. Ultimately, this is not the story of an American hero but of a pathetic, spoiled, ungrateful boy in a man's suit.



5. really wondeful. the appendix chapter his mother is, in my opinion,
   even more interesting than the book. book, of course, is a fantastic read.