5 comments about Slobodan Milosevic and the Destruction of Yugoslavia.

1. This book is worth checking out from the library, but I wouldn't buy it.
   
   The book is well written and easy to read. I have to give Mr. Sell credit. He is a very talented writer, which is why I gave the book two stars rather than one.
   
   Unfortunately, the book is poorly documented (there are a conspicuous lack of end notes for this sort of a book) and the author frequently writes as though he had privlaged access to Slobodan Milosevic's thoughts and feelings. Mr. Sell may have been an "insider" with the State Dept., but I don't think he was clairvoyant.
   
   It is important to keep the author's position in mind when reading this book. He was a U.S. foreign Service officer serving in Yugoslavia. He was there to advance U.S. Government policy in the region. The real point of the book seems to be to justify the policies of the United States with regard to Yugoslavia.
   
   This book may be valuable as an insight into the thinking that prevailed within the State Department, but it is not an impartial or even accurate assessment of the events that led to the destruction of Yugoslavia.



2. Louis Sell describes this place like he was born there. I can just imagine how beautiful this country was before the Balkan wars. How can such a peacefull Country turn to The Land of Demons. After Titos death Yugoslavia slowly began to fall apart. It used to be one country before Titos death, but after his death and after Milosevic there was six.



3. Although the facts and the personality of Milosevic are properly described, the book is, in my opinion, too partial. I don't think it is lack of knowledge but the will to believe it that way.
   This eternal dichotomy of "good boys and bad boys" that in America is so much extended, appears very strongly in this book, specially when the role of the USA is concerned.Too simple,I must say.
   Let's say that it is a good book to be red in America...



4. How does a political hack working for the Yugoslavian Communist party evolve into a skilled manipulator of people, and Europe's worst Fascist politician since Adolf Hitler? In the case of Slobodan Milosevic there are no easy answers, yet former diplomat Louis Sell offers a riveting account of Milosevic's life that depicts the latter's transformation from Communist bureaucrat to a dangerous political demagogue. Along the way Sell provides an in-depth look at the rise and fall of modern Yugoslavia, beginning with the closing phases of World War Two, as Tito's Communist partisans battled both the Nazis and other forces belonging collectively to the Yugoslavian "underground", most notably the Serbian Chetniks. Sell suggests that Milosevic hasn't become a rabid nationalist, but instead, has used the cause of Serbian nationalism to further his own political agenda, granting him virtual control over the rump state of Yugoslavia until his sudden downfall in free elections held after the NATO bombing of Serbia in response to the Serb-Albanian conflict in Kosovo. Sell introduces us to a fascinating group of characters, beginning with Croatian president Tudjman, and ending with the likes of American diplomats and soldiers such as Richard Holbrooke and General Wesley Clark. Unquestionably this may be the best book published yet on what transpired in Yugoslavia during the 1990's.



5. Mr.Sell was my professor at the University of Maine at Farminton, and he was incredibly knowledgeable on the conflict in Yugoslavia. I recommend this book to anyone interested in the region and the conflicts that have gone on there. Sells experience is reflected in this writings and is a must for any political science or international relations student.

2 comments about Benjamin Harrison: Hoosier Warrior (Signature Ser. ; Vol. 1).

1. Over the last several years, I've read more than 30 presidential biographies, usually with Amazon readers as my guide. With the American Political Biography series it's usually either feast or famine. The biographies of William Henry Harrison,Chester Arthur, Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce, and James Buchanan are highly recommended, but James Polk and John Tyler are to be avoided. Sievers' biographies are among the worst of the presidential biographies I've tried. The first volume covers his developmental years in exhaustive detail and ends with his service in the Civil War. While these years are more interesting, overall this book reads more like a presidential campaign biography than anything like an objective presentation of Harrison's life. The whole book has a sort of gee whiz and what did our hero do next feel to it. Hoosier Warrior is really only a book for those who want to read a biography of every president, and even then I think I would look to the more recent series of brief biographies, rather than this one.



2. The first in a set of three, this volume runs from Harrison's birth through the end of the Civil War, in which Harrison helped raise a company of Indiana volunteers and became a Brigadier General active in Sherman's march on Atlanta.
   
   
   First off, this is, to my knowledge, the only real biography of Benjamin Harrison available. So if that's what you're looking for, I don't think there's anyplace else to go. Which makes it all the more a shame that this isn't really a very good biography.
   
   Not only is a trilogy rather excessive for a comparatively minoir figure like Harrison (although the author, like most biographers, argues that his subject is more important than generally supposed), the worse flaw is that it doesn't, even at that excessive length, tell us what we want to know. It focusses too closely on the events, often minor, of Harrison's life, without telling enough about the major incidents of the era. For instance, the rise of the Republican party was an enormous event, in some ways as consequential as the Civil War. Harrison, the grandson of the only Whig president and the son of a Whig congressman who cast his lot with the new party, would be an ideal figure to explore how the Republicans replaced the Whigs, yet why he went against his family's party is never explored or explained. Was it because he had passionate opinions about abolition? Remarkably, the book discusses the details of his work for the Republican Party, but says less about his stance on Kansas, Dred Scott, John Brown, and the other great controversies of the 1850s. Many contemporary newspaper clippings praising Harrison's speeches are quoted - it seems he had quite a reputation for oratory in his day - but no quotes from the speeches themselves to show us why he was an admired orator and what his ideas were.

1 comments about Admiral Nicholas Horthy Memoirs.

1. Horthy was elected regent ín a dísmembered, revolutíon torn, plundered wasteland. In two decades Hungary was put on the map as a respected índependent country. Horthy díd not ínterfere wíth domestíc polítícs and ordered hands off the Honvéd Army to prevent nazí propaganda spreadíng líke wíldfíre. Horthy trusted hís mílítary leaders, who deserted hím, as díd the Vítez Order. Born, educated as noble gentry, Horthy was a predestínate to joín the crowd and escape before the Bolshevík Army. He chose to stay wíth hís Natíon, settíng eternal exemple of true patríotísm.

1 comments about Abraham Lincoln: A History, V1.

1. Being a loving reader of history of the time of the Civil War, I was over anxious to receive this volume of history written by two individuals who were Abraham Lincoln's secretarys.
   
   I was not disappointed. A good read for someone who likes to read about Abraham Lincoln and the period where he grew up and the attitude of the nation at that time, especially Illinois.
   
   I can't wait to purchase the other volumes.

5 comments about Dearest Friend: A Life of Abigail Adams.

1. I am very happy to have read "Dearest Friend". It makes me sad that this kind of wisdom, courage, and selflessness seems to be lacking in our leaders today. I wish I had 1/4 of the courage Mr. and Mrs. Adams had. I am ashamed of my own lack of conviction and courage.
   Read this book and "John Adams" if you need to be inspired to serve your country and learn how to love unconditionally.



2. My book club read this several years ago. We went on the read John Adams, 1776, B. Franklin, etc. DEAREST FRIEND was the best of them all. I was as engaged and interested on the last page as I was on the first.
   If you are enjoying the HBO John Adams read this book next.



3. So I was disinclined to read it for a long time. I thought it would be a book of interest for only women. I was completely wrong. I won this book at a book fair years ago. It is not one I would have puchased on my own. I picked it up soon found myself reading it avidly. It is Abigail Adams' complete life story. A faithful, constant, patriotic wife for the cranky but brillant John Adams. Every bit her husband's intellectual equal, she was his most important advisor throughout his public life. She kept the family together during his long absences first in Philadelphia during the revolution & later in Europe. During these periods apart, once, over seven years, she raised the family, saw to the education of their children (Harvard for the boys) & ran the family finances quite well. All the time she was corresponding with John & we have many of her letters to him & others. After the war she spent several years with him in Europe. Although she was always loathe to leave her beloved New England, she knew she had to be with her husband to understand what he was trying to do, that is helping to build a nation. Her observations on the years spent in Paris & London are valuable social history. As mush as she was a revolutionary during the war, in her later years she turned into an uncompromising reactionary, unwilling to change & adapt to the evolution that she had fought to create. She became what she had fought against. Most of his career John Adams was unpopular & underappreiciated. This fact bothered Abigail all her life, more that it did John. How could anyone compete with George Washington, even if you were smarter than him? Eventually in her old age she mellowed. This was in part due to the sucessful career of her one of her sons John Quincy. She could be described as a earily feminist for sure. But for all her self taught political savvy, family always came first. Yes, there were Founding Mothers & she was. I fear very few people have read this book or will ever read this review. However, for the first person who reads it & gives me a positive vote I will send my copy, free, if you will read it, p&h included.



4. This is a somewhat disappointing book about a fascinating woman during a fascinating period of our history. The book was highly recommended to a friend of a member of my book club, but the women in my club agreed that the author failed to make Abigail Adams "come alive." The writing was tedious, especially in the first half. I read "The Summer of 1787" just before this, and "Dearest Friend" pales by comparison, especially in the richness of the story telling. Nonetheless, the book contains history I didn't know or had forgotten, and I'm glad I read it.



5. I assigned this book to college freshmen and sophs.... in US History.

   I did not like how it portrayed Abigail as "long suffering," yet strong. The two did not mesh well.

1 comments about America, Roosevelt, and World War II.

1. This work is essentially a college textbook on the subject. While the author writes rather in considerable detail,the treatment is superficial despite some interesting observations re FDR & the issues of Pearl Harbor & Yalta. The book is laced with many photographs,some original. However,minor errors abound in the printing & the reference on page 49 concerning a photo taken from the film,"To Be or Not To Be" is totally erroneous in identifying Shemp Howard as the actor who played Hitler in the film. It was character actor Tom Dugan!

4 comments about America's First Families (HC) : An Inside View of 200 Years of Private Life in the White House.

1. This is a fascinating book. It is a wonderful compendium of trivia, probably not available in any other volume. It contains a wonderful assortment of pictures of First Families, some of which have never before been published. The book is well organized into chapters detailing various aspects of the Presidential families' lives and activities. for me, one of its prime attractions is that it does not include the politics or issues of the President's era.
   At times, it is a little confusing, because the author skips from one family to another rather abruptly, so it requires a little getting used to in order to follow the narrative.
   I would strongly recommend this book to anyone interested in the social and "human" aspects of the White House families.



2. This book gives an insight into the private lives of the first families. We learn about their extended families, hobbies, illnesses, preparations for leaving the White House when their terms are completed, etc. The pictures are what really makes this book great. We see Lyndon Johnson in bed with his wife watching tv and we see the older George Bush in bed too (can you imagine Nixon or Clinton letting down his guard like this?). We see Gerald Ford in his bathrobe. If you always wanted to see such a sight, there is a photo of Eleanor Roosevelt in a bathing suit and a rare photo of Franklin in shorts with his polio ravaged legs exposed to the camera. We see painful personal moments such as the famous photo of Nixon hugging his daughter Julie when he made the decision to resign. In short this is, at times, a very rare personal and intimate glimpse into the lives of the first families. I enjoyed it and recommend it highly.



3. I have been fortunate enough to read Mr. Anthony's brilliant "First Ladies" mini-opuses, and highly looked forward to this epic on the lives of our First Families. I sat for three hours stright with an almost constant smile on my face as I ran through the pages. What an amazing acheivement Mr. Anthony has pulled together! I can only imagine the painstaking research needed to find out the tidbits sprinkled throughout. There is so much information in this novel that it almost boggles the mind at times and is a bit overwhelming. I wondered if everything was sinking in, when I saw Mr. Anthony speak at the Richard Nixon library on CSPAN one night recounting the tales found here. Every story he told was instantly recalled and sentences finished before explaining. The sheer knowledge that one can gain from reading this novel is tremendous. (Where else can you find a list of President's favorite movies? By Reagan selecting Rambo, it does nothing but prove what a complete and utter moron we had occupying the White House under his reign).....Point proven further....When listing President's favorite reading options, Mr Anthony lays out beautiful examples of this. President Clinton enjoys biographies of his predecessors, Eisenhower military biographies and TR, anything he could get his hands on. Reagan? Newspaper comics.....I shall leave my review at that.



4. I purchased this book yesterday and I can't put it down. It is filled with great pictures and stories of the forty-one famlies who lived in the White House. This is a great source of presidential trivia and provides a human element to the most famous family in America. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in American history and the lives of the presidents.

5 comments about Presidential Temperament: The Unfolding of Character in the Forty Presidents of the United States/With Supplement.

1. I've only read portions of the book so far, and I'm sure to enjoy the rest with my interest in both temperament and American history. But I wanted to note that when I recently ordered this, Amazon neglected to ship the supplement with newer presidents. The book itself goes only up to George Bush, Sr.



2. I love this book, and while it many have numerous mistakes as stated by other reviewers (wrong dates, pictures swapped...) overall the work is insightful and an interesting read. All papers have mistakes, and finding them in a specific work is a favorite assignment that is given in graduate level courses.



3. David Keirsey's work in refining MBTI is phenomenal and should be much, much more extensively used in the education system, as it already is and has been in the business world (where efficiency and practicality actually matter, unlike education) for decades now.
   Of this book, which again was mostly fascinating intellectual meat, I must beg to differ about Keirsey regarding Ronald Reagan's type. I also find it amusing that even geniuses like Keirsey can occasionally "blow one"--even when they are alive to witness the direct observation. Now, concerning Reagan, and concerning Keirsey's assertion that no idealists have ever been president, Keirsey has indeed finally made a gaff.
   You see, folks; you see, Mr. Keirsey, it's like this:
   RONALD REAGAN WAS AN ENFP!!!
   YOU DON'T ALLUDE TO UFO'S a total of 18 TIMES DURING YOUR PRESIDENCY, as REAGAN did, AND YOU DON'T FOCUS ON FUTURE-ORIENTED, BIG-PICTURE DEFENSE SYSTEMS LIKE 'STAR WARS,' as REAGAN did, UNLESS YOU ARE AN INTUITIVE!

   Keirsey's got Reagan as an ESFP--what he's probably seeing is an ENFP that was raised by Sensor parents (this would account for a higher percentage of Sensor-like everyday quotes from Reagan, which is mainly what Keirsey is basing his mistaken identification on). The more I look at Type, the more I see that parents play a huge role in how we later act, often altering our basic Type to something like a "sub-Type", but they don't determine or change our overall Type/Temperament, to be sure.

   David--Mr. Keirsey--it's okay to admit you made a mistake. You are such an intellectual giant, and have done so much incredible work, and I am such a HUGE fan of yours. It's okay. Hell, even Einstein made mistakes, right?




4. Loved the combination of psychology and history. If you find both interesting, you should definitely get this book. And you can contact the publisher to get an update that includes Bill Clinton. Other errors not mentioned by the previous reviewers include that the pictures for W.H. Harrison and J. Buchanan are actually swapped, that it has W.H. Harrison born in 1793 and married in 1775 and that John Quincy Adams's middle name is once spelled "Qunicy". Another curious thing: it appears that the book was written as if the presidents were to be discussed in chronological order, then later changed to group them by types. I think the latter was a better idea, but some references were left which seem to indicate the prior ordering. Then there is the question of the typing of the presidents. Both Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter seem different enough from others in their groups that it's interesting to wonder whether they are really correctly typed. Do we really understand Johnson well enough? After all, he is the man who everyone is suprised to learn once uttered: "Two things are necessary to keep one's wife happy. First, let her think she is having her way. And second, let her have it." Then there is Martin Van Buren, who many on the web consider an Idealist INFJ. Even based on just the evidence presented in this book, it seems like it might be the case. His admiration of Jefferson, the fact that diplomacy was his best talent, his lack of charisma (compare to Jackson) and his tendency to work behind-the-scenes all seem to point this way. In addition, I don't think it's necessary to see Van Buren's efforts to avoid dividing the Union over slavery so cynically. Perhaps because he is married to one, Author Keirsey seems to idealize the Idealists out of proportion. They are 12% of the population, but to read him it seems that every single one has goals as earth-shattering as Gandhi's. Does this tally with your experience? Perhaps it's the lack of information about this president that leads to this misinterpretation. But don't Idealists have the tendency to be very private people? I hope it's not just the case that saying "No Idealist has ever been president." sounds more dramatic and marketable on the book cover.



5. As someone who loves US history, politics, and psychology, I've always been fascinated by books which try to "psychoanalyze" Presidents and historical figures. Two books which have done this are Dr. James David Barber's "Presidential Character" and William Strauss and Neil Howe's "Generations", which looks at US history throught the prism of four generational types, which repeat themselves in cycles (they argue that the Baby Boomers are the descendants of the Puritans!). And this book, "Presidential Temperament", uses a system which should be familiar to many readers. The book's authors use the well-known Myers-Briggs Type Indicator to "type" each of our Presidents. Many businesses and schools use the Myers-Briggs test, but for those who are not familiar with the system, it tests people on four different sets of preferences (Extrovert-Introvert, Sensing-Intuition, Thinking-Feeling, and Judging-Perceiving). Thus, there is an "ISTJ" type (quiet, reserved, methodical, thorough, practical, etc.); an "ESFP" type (outgoing, "touchy-feely", compassionate, idealistic, spontaneous, etc.), and so on. The test is not supposed to be used to judge or rate other people, as every type is useful and necessary to make our society function. In "Presidential Temperament" the Myers-Briggs test is applied to all of our Presidents since Washington. The authors use biography and history books to examine the childhoods, personalities, leadership styles, successes and failures of the Presidents to place them into one of three Myers-Briggs types: Artisans, Guardians, and Rationals (a fourth type, the Idealists, have never had a US President, according to the authors. Instead, leaders such as Gandhi and Eleanor Roosevelt fall into this category). The Artisans are the "SP" types - fun-loving, optimistic, tough-minded, and above all, action-oriented. They love the "action" part of politics - they live in the "here-and-now" and are great at dealing with crises. Among the Presidents in this category are both Roosevelts, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton. The "Guardian" types are the "SJ"s - they are tradition-oriented, generally honest and reliable, addicted to duty and "law-and-order". They are the good managers and administrators who keep things running smoothly, but they dislike change. According to the authors, George Washington, Woodrow Wilson, Harry Truman, and the first George Bush all fall into this category. The final category are the "Rationals" - they are "NT"s on the Myers-Briggs scale. They are the visionaries and strategists - they can marshall great forces to accomplish great things, but can be undermined by their distaste for showing emotion and "people skills" in public. They are extremely intelligent, but can come across as arrogant or aloof. Thomas Jefferson, both Adamses, Abraham Lincoln, and Dwight Eisenhower are all Rationals, according to the book. After "typing" each President, the authors then show how their temperament type affected their Presidency - Jefferson the Rationalist designing the University of Virginia and envisioning a continent-size United States, hence the Lousiana Purchase; Franklin Roosevelt the Artisan "Performer" dealing with the twin crises of the Great Depression and World War Two, etc. This is all truly fascinating, even if you don't always agree with the author's claims. However, the book is severely hampered by the numerous factual errors that I found. For example, in the chapter on Bill Clinton they listed his birthday as August 19, 1947 (it is actually August 19, 1946), and then later in the same chapter gave his birthdate as August 14, 1946. John Quincy Adams' birthday is given as July 11, 1967 (he was born in 1767), and Eisenhower's birthday is listed as October 14, 1880 (he was born in 1890). Woodrow Wilson is listed as having lived in Atlanta during the Civil War, but he actually lived in Augusta, not Atlanta. The chapter on William Henry Harrison even has an incorrect photograph - it has a large photo of James Buchanan labeled as Harrison! While these errors may seem insignificant by themselves, taken together (and there are numerous other inaccuracies, from presidential birthdays to biographical information) they cast some real doubt on the author's credibility and research. In short, while "Presidential Temperament" is a fascinating "psychological" look at our Chief Executives, the many historical errors left me wondering just how much "research" and editing the authors put into their arguments - and that overall makes the book something of a disappointment.

4 comments about Moments With Jackie.

1. This book is what it is...an extremely well-written coffee table book with beautiful photographs of an intriguing, talented, influential woman--Jackie Kennedy Onassis. The overview of her life is beautifully crafted--this book is a wonderful, moving tribute to Jackie Kennedy Onassis' life.



2. A wonderful tribute to the woman who dazzled us as first lady. Lovely pictures. The perfect coffee table book. Highly recommended. FOR QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSIONS ABOUT JACKIE ONASSIS, PLEASE E-MAIL ME AT MellissaLD@aol.com. HOPE TO HEAR FROM YOU!!!!!!!!!



3. For one of the most photograhed woman of the twentieth century it is amazing that with each new book that is published that the photo's used to illustrate it are generally one's that have been used often in the past...this book is no exception...very few unseen or different photo's here..and as usual the content is sadly unbalanced..the book is 120 pages long...86 of those pages refer to the years up until 1963..the last 30 years of her life...which wre just as interesting are dismissed with a scant 34 pages.Aristotle Onassis makes one appearance and Maurice Templeman who shared more of her life than any other man doesn't get a look in...all in all a very disappointing pictorial look at this facinating woman's life.



4. Nothing new in the written content - just a basic description of her life. But features beautiful (and often big) black and white photographs of Jackie as a child, wife, First Lady, and beyond. Some photo's are of events and functions I had seen before, but taken from a different angle. Other's are more rare. Lovely book, but only for a true collector.

5 comments about James Madison: The Founding Father.

1. This is one case where I should have heeded the advice of this site's reviewers.
   
   I wanted to read a Madison biography, but I wasn't looking for a 500-page book, and since my father had this one at his house, I thought, "How bad could it be?" Well, it's pretty shaky.
   
   First of all, Rutland does not make this easy on the readers because he's all over the place. It's not neat and focused like a good biography generally is, perhaps because he tried to cram so much information into less than 300 pages. He just jumped around too much.
   
   For example, the first chapter is a disaster. Rutland barely mentions Madison's upbringing, and even when he does, it's buried amongst other information. You will not get hooked by the first chapter. The last chapter was supposed to be about Madison's post-presidency life, but Rutland continues to mention parts of the presidency. I also really wanted a more focused description of the events leading up to the War of 1812, and what I got were bits of hard-to-follow details here and there. This is just not smooth story telling.
   
   There was some valuable information, such as the detailed outline of the Republican platform during the early stages of the party. And the book was not painfully sympathetic to its subject, but rather a fair account of the great man's life. Perhaps another 100 pages and a more defined overall direction, with chapters addressing a few specific issues rather than bouncing all around, would have made this a decent book.
   
   For those looking to learn about Madison, I don't know what book you should read, but I would not recommend this one.



2. The War of 1812 was fought with Great Britain. The British captured Washington, D.C., and burned the White House. Madison fled. He is known as the father of the Constitution and wrote the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights is the first 10 Amendments. The first Amendment guarantees free speech.



3. I did not really care for this book. Rutland makes the premise that Madison was THE founding father implying that he was the most important. He finishes the book with a quote from JFK that Madison was the most under-rated president yet the book dedicates less than 40 pages to the presidency of James Madison. In those 40 pages, I did not gleam anything that Madison did exceptionally well - it all sounded pretty bad to me. I believe the point that Rutland was trying to make is that Madison was not Jefferson's crony and that it was Madison who actually shaped the early Republican party (early version of today's Democratic Party). This was a point well taken and I might accept that Madison was Jefferson's superior. At that same time, I remain unconvinced that he was THE founding father with such peers as George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin. Important yes but...
   
   The failed argument of Madison's superiority aside, I found the book to brief to be interesting. James Madison was a central figure in the formation of our country, the formation of party politics, and the early days of the republic and to try and tell the story of his entire life in a 250 page book is simply impossible. Many important stories that I have previously enjoyed in book volume detail were reduced to a sentence or two in Rutland's book.
   
   I think this book perfect for a high school student who needs a quick read for a research project but has no real interest in the life and career of James Madison. For a history nut like me, it is a bit too much like reading an encyclopedia.



4. Read the title: "James Madison: The Founding Father" focuses on Madison's role in the founding of our country. Here we learn little of Madison's youth and upbringing. Although Dolly plays a role in this book, it is a relatively minor part.
   
   This book explains Madison's role in the development and ratification of the Constitution, including his authorship of some of the Federalist Papers. The narration of Madison's leadership in the early Democratic-Republican Party can change the reader's view of history. Whereas we usually think of Thomas Jefferson as founder of the Democratic-Republican Party, Rutland makes a strong case that it was really Madison who united and organized the party from his seat in the House of Representatives. Much as Alexander Hamilton founded the party which elected John Adams, so it can be said that James Madison founded the party which chose Thomas Jefferson as its first standard bearer.
   
   Rutland progresses through Madison's term as Secretary of State and even puts a favorable spin on his two terms as president. This is no easy task, considering that the British burned the White House and Capitol on his watch.
   
   Rutland follows the wind down of Madison's career with his post-White House collaboration in the establishment of the University of Virginia.
   
   I appreciate books which enable me to see things differently. This book meets that test. I had always thought of Madison as, so to speak, Jefferson's underling and less talented successor. Through Robert Rutland's eyes we see him as one of the most influential and talented men of the early Republic. Madison comes across, as a practical political operative, the equal of Hamilton and, in result at least, perhaps his better. In the title, Rutland tells us that James Madison is The Founding Father. In the book he proves it.



5. not like Jefferson & Hamilton or celebrated like Washington & Franklin. My fellow reviewers seemed disappointed in this as a biography. But it was not Mr. Rutland's purpose to write a personal story of Mr. Madison's life although his later years were covered quite well. I am glad, however, I took the easy way out by listening to the audio version (unedited). It was as if I was in Mr. Rutland's class as he was giving a lecture. The years after The Revolutionary War, The Federalist Papers, The Constitution & The Bill of Rights, are the real meat of this book. Madison's behind the scenes leadership in Congress was consummate. If we do not appreciate how important he was 200 years later, it seems that he contemporaries did. To his sorrow he was, with Jefferson, responsible for creating the two party system we now operate under. That he wanted to heed Washington's advice against the party system is evident. But he found this advice quickly outdated. As a result Washington, & to a lesser extent Adams were the only unaffiliated presidents in our history. Happily, none of this two-party stuff is cluttering up our Consititution. As Secretary of State under Jefferson & President on his own he was unremarkable. Any one could have mucked things up as well as he did. Indeed his best years were his early years. What seemed to me remarkable was the love, respect & friendship that existed between Madison & Jefferson all of their adult lives. It was an alliance of two great men that never wavered & recreated the "republican" type government of ancient Greece. Mr Rutland was obviously impressed by this relationship & alludes to it several times. I appreciate biographies that teach me something about history I didn't know. How great is this book? Hard to say. But it fit the bill.