1 comments about Things Grew Beautifully Worse : The Wartime Experiences of Captain John O'Brien, 30th Arkansas Infantry, C.S.A..

1. Ably edited by Brian K. Robertson, Things Grew Beautifully Worse: The Wartime Experiences Of Captain John O'Brien, 30th Arkansas Infantry, C.S.A. is the personal civil war diary of a Confederate officer who had a first-hand perspective of the battles, bloodshed, and gangrene of the Civil War, and who came to languish in Union Prisons with nothing to do save write down his experiences. Heavily annotated for the modern reader's benefit, this slim volume adds a very personal touch to a divisive era in America's history. Things Grew Beautifully Worse is a highly recommended and much appreciated addition to the growing library of Civil War memoirs and eye-witness accounts.

No comments about Wealth and Wisdom: The Way to Wealth and The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin: Two Timeless American Classics That Still Speak to Us Today.

5 comments about A Charge to Keep.

1. I've never seen another book that gets mostly just 1-star or 5-star ratings. That's how it manages the 3-star average. Don't bother reading the reviews. They depend only the political views of the writer, and not really on the book at all.
   
   However, it's worth noting that by far most of the bad grammar and spelling in the reviews are from the voters who gave the book 5 stars. I can't imagine that that has ever happened with another book.



2. This book was written during the pivotal time in Bush's life between serving as Governor of Texas and choosing to run for the U.S. Presidency.
   
   Without checking his facts or follow-through, the book fairly outlines several topics both personal and political where Bush feels passionately. In one sense the book is a fairly candid insight into the man -- I would say that his presidence is fairly consistent with the outline in this book -- and in another it's a fairly cozy memoir covering his daughters, his ownership of the Texas Rangers, his drinking and his courtship and marriage with his wife.
   
   In another sense there is very little balance between Bush the successful leader and Bush the mistaken official. Almost every report here gives off only positive vibes. He speaks of learning here and there and moving on from his mistakes but in retrospect perhaps the whole book was an outline of what to expect of him as president -- results, devotion and faith-enriched judgment.
   
   It's a history without a lot of pith meriting a read only because it is the man himself talking. Here and there he tells his side of things as only he can attest, but usually we're treated only to Bush's unflinching optimism and hand-wringing anecdotes of his rosy results.
   
   If it weren't for the source, this book is not one to remember.



3. first of all...you stupid libs down here spraying your political rants and insane lies...go critique a michael more rag will you!
   
   Some made the point this book doesn't give any new insights in the political mind of the president, and that's true, but it does a great job painting a picture of the man george W. Bush and his outlook on life...written before his defeating of enviromental cry-baby al gore the book talks about Bush as a father, husband, friend, neighbour...a side we don't see very often anymore after he took back the white house.
   
   The book helps people remember Bush is human like every-one else...we learn a bit about his character and what's important to him. We read about the things that matter to him, the things libs refer too when they call him dumb, like loving the outdoors, being part of a comunity, working for your money (that's the #1 liberal 'no!no!'), raising your kids right,...
   
   if you're a liberal, don't bother...this book won't help you "get it"...you don't have the IQ to "get it". If your interested in what bush is like in normal life, how he became the man (not the politician) he is today...read this book as an introduction to the life of the greatest president the world ever had safe for R.Reagan.



4. If I had read this before the 2000 election. I would have learned that Americans want a leader that posseses honesty, compassion, morals, and the courage of his convictions. I should have at least pretended to posses some of these qualities. Bush stole Florida in 2000 and Ohio in '04, if you don't believe me just ask John Kerry. And where did I come up with that stupid imaginary lockbox stuff anyway?



5. I recently saw someone reading this book which I had never heard of before so I looked it up on Amazon. This tome was so moving and uplifting it brought tears to my eyes. Okay, I admit it wasn't the book itself but the reviews. And they weren't tears of joy or hope but tears of hysterical laughter. There were three categories - each engrossing in it's own way: the honest critique, which universally panned the book as as hackneyed as the author himself (and his co-writer, apologist, Hughes); the spoof, which embellished on Bush's phony life making him a Nobel Laureate and corporate magnate; and the honest, heartfelt descriptions that prove that no matter how incompetent, corrupt and morally bankrupt a person is, there's still that percentage of the population who believe he's a good, sincere, visionary leader. With the fortune of hindsight, the latter group stands out though. If you haven't read this book but still want to after reading this and other reviews (unless your looking for a laugh) then God... er, invisible man in the sky help us all!

5 comments about The Last Schoonerman.

1. Finally, a book about sailing schooners, their captains, crews and adventures that is not contrived. No frills, just honest to goodness nautical experiences that thrill men and women alike.
   The book gives us all the chance to be part of the experiences of a very special man, a man who seemed to know what he wanted from birth.
   I was saddened at the end of the book. Saddened because it had ended and with it an era had ended. An era of yankee skippers, fast schooners and a time of heroes. A must read for anyone who dreams of a fast ship and a star to steer her by. Brian Kenedy...



2. That it was possible during the middle of the twentieth century to profitably haul cargo between the Caribbean, Canada and the northeast USA with sailing ships similar to those used in the 1850s will probably come as quite a surprise to many of us today.
   
   This was how the legendary Lou Kenedy, who owned and skippered ten vessels, earned his living from the age of twenty-one during the height of the Depression until he retired and sold his last schooner in 1985.
   
   With his clear and simple style, Joe Russell invites his readers to share the personal experiences, escapades and hardships of Captain Lou Kenedy as he paints evocative images with his tales pertaining to each one of Kenedy's schooners beginning with his first one, Abundance and ending with Sea Fox.
   
   Russell in his The Last Schoonerman: The Remarkable Life of Captain Lou Kenedy depicts a world that is filled with excitement and much danger. And what a way to earn a living when you have to endure horrendous hurricanes, run-ins with the authorities, tragedies that at times ended in the death of some of your crew members, being attacked by German submarines during World War II, crewmen that get into all kinds of trouble, while at the same time keeping calm and making sure you don't loose your sanity.
   
   Russell gathered his material from boxes of photos, transcripts, magazine articles, log books, and family memorabilia that were sent to him from Kenedy's daughter, Patsy who approached him offering the opportunity to write about her feisty father. It should be mentioned, as Russell asserts in the preface, that all his writing up to then was centered on cruising guides and destination pieces for Cruising World. In addition to these resources, Russell used material from a four-part, 1953-54 Saturday Evening Post series. The biography also includes many quotations from an interview conducted by Ralph Getson of the Lunenburg (Nova Scotia) Marine Museum Society that was recorded in the 1980s. And as Russell mentions, "Captain Lou Kenedy was, if anything, a master story teller, and he rarely missed an opportunity to entertain his listeners."
   
   Rich with research and anecdote, this is a remarkable book depicting a character who exhibited a great deal of moxie or as Russell states, "this is a story of a man who successfully pounded a square lifestyle into a round society." It should be pointed out that each chapter contains a brief description of each one of Kenedy's schooners that includes its name, year of launching, rig, official number, builder, and material, length between perpendiculars, beam dimensions, draft dimensions and depth of hold. The book also contains a very useful glossary of nautical terms, the Beaufort Wind Scale, the 32 Points of the Compass and a comprehensive index.
   
   Russell has done an excellent job of capturing the flavor of a by-gone era that we will never see again providing his readers with nuggets of fascinating tales of not only a unique individual but also of the sea with its unknowable beauty and terror.
   
   
   Norm Goldman, Editor & Publisher Bookpleasures



3. The Last Schoonerman is the best saltiest nonfiction I've read in too many years ! Captain Lou was a remarkable individualist; a memorable character through which the sea and the seasons of life flowed vibrantly, and momentously with toughness, ingenuity, sensitivity, good humour and fun. So glad he (and wife Pat, and his children) were a part of Capt. Art's and my lives. Alas, nowadays cannot recreate his kind. But we can enjoy excerpts of his life, thanks to author Joe Russell's taking up the challenge to compile the vast research which was given him. History needed this recorded. Splendid ! --- Peggy Crimmins



4. Author Joe Russell spent over two years working with and gathering stories from Captain Lou Kennedy's family prior to penning The Last Schoonerman: The Remarkable Life of Captain Lou Kennedy, a biography that reads like an exciting nautical adventure. The ten vessels that Kennedy owned and skippered highlighted his remarkable life; chapters tell how Kennedy dared to leave college in 1918 to live on his own terms, used sail-only "tern" schooners to deliver freight up and down the eastern seaboard from the Nova Scotia to the Caribbean until nearly the 1950s, and continued to pursue his passion for sailing schooners until his passing in 1991. An enthralling story about a schoonerman who spurned excessive changes in modern boats and defiantly remained passionate about the type of vessel he loved, until he was almost literally the last of his breed. An enjoyable read for armchair travelers and nautical enthusiasts alike.



5. This book is extremely engaging.
   
   Sailors will adore it, and those who don't know port from starboard, a mizzen from a spanker, will STILL find it compelling reading.
   
   Lou Kenedy and his family carved their own distinctive lives out of an all-too-usual world, the family often sucked along in the slipstream of Cap't Kenedy's forceful personality. The scene, from Canada to the Bahamas, will be familiar to anyone who was in either of those places during the time covered, as the mis-en-scene is clear and evocative.
   
   Truly a compelling picture from one of life's other sides -- we are very lucky to have this book to preserve it.
   
   Buy it, read it, give it to anyone who might have wished to take the family for a sail-away; for anyone interested in the Rugged Individual; for anyone interested in adventuring around the world. Armchair dreamers or real-life adventurers will enjoy this one.
   
   It's fascinating.

5 comments about Grant and Lee: A Study in Personality and Generalship.

1. There are so many books on this subject that it's easy to start a fight from any point of view. Fuller is writing from across the Atlantic, and I believe that has given him a perspective that makes for a clear study of the two men. Fuller makes good use of Freemantle's observations from the latter's time in the Confederacy, extending observations into well reasoned analysis. This one is worth reading.



2. Grant and Lee, A Study in Personality and Generalship, published in 1932, compares quite favorably in its detailed research and readability with works by modern writers and historians like Shelby Foote, James M. McPherson, Gary W. Gallagher, and Stephen W. Sears. This work by Major General J. F. C. Fuller is notable for directly challenging the conventional wisdom that Grant was little more than a "butcher" and that his eventual success was almost entirely due to the North's larger population and more abundant resources. In Fuller's view Grant was not only the greatest general of the Civil War, but ranks among the greatest strategists of any age. Fuller generated even more controversy with his contention that Robert E. Lee in several respects had major failings as a military leader.
   
   Controversial or not, Major General J. F. C. Fuller was no ordinary soldier writing about the Civil War. Fuller was a highly respected British military strategist and noted author. In the 1920s he collaborated with B. H. Liddell Hart in developing new ideas for the mechanization of armies. Ironically, their recommendations were more readily adopted in Germany than in Britain, France, or the U.S.
   
   Grant and Lee, A Study in Personality and Generalship, is a relatively short book, around 300 pages. Fuller writes with clarity and precision. He makes careful use of firsthand accounts; he paid particular attention to opinions of staff officers, as men in these roles were likely to have gained greater insight into the personalities of Grant and Lee. He also utilized the opinions of foreign witnesses of the war, like Colonel Fremantle, as a check on insiders' observations. His sources were identified through extensive end notes as he realized that his findings would be controversial. He includes statistics on battle losses to illustrate that the persistent belief that Grant's losses were abnormally high is simply a myth, and that Lee's percentage losses were actually higher.
   
   There are many exceptionally good books on the Civil War, but there are few that are as readable as Fuller's Grant and Lee, and offer such a fresh viewpoint (albeit, now nearly 75 years old, but one that remains stimulating and thought provoking). Grant and Lee, A Study in Personality and Generalship, is available in a reprint edition (1982) by Indiana University Press. Five stars.



3. Whatever your view of Robert E. Lee and U.S. Grant, Fuller's book will challenge you to think long and hard about your beliefs concerning both generals.
   
   As a Southerner, I have to admit that Fuller makes a compelling case for Grant being the better general between the two. One instance is where he confronts the idea that Grant was a butcher because of the heavy casualties during the Wilderness-Spotsylvania Campaign. While Grant indeed suffered the heavier losses, the percentage of losses was acutally lower than Lee. In fact, this was a common occurence in many battles in which Grant commanded.
   
   The book's contents are as follows:
   
   1. The Two Causes - the two nations, presidents, armies and other North/South factors both generals had to operate within.
   2. The Personality of Grant - modesty, common sense, courage.
   3. The Personality of Lee - humility, tact, audacity.
   4. The Generalship of Grant and Lee, 1861-1862 - description of the battles fought by both generals during both years (Shiloh, Fort Donelson, Antietam, Fredericksburg, etc).
   5. The Generalship of Grant and Lee, 1863 - Vicksburg, Gettsyburg, Chattanooga, Chancellorsville.
   6. The Generalship of Grant and Lee, 1864-1864 - Spotsylvania, Wilderness, Cold Harbor, Petersburg, Appamattox.
   7. The Two Generals - comparison and contrast between their two styles and personalities.
   
   One other interesting point mentioned by Fuller was perhaps making the Confederate capital in Atlanta instead of Richmond. I have often thought how such a move would have affected the fighting in Virginia, Georgia, and my home state of North Carolina. Something interesting to ponder!
   
   I highly recommend the book. Read and enjoy.



4. If you read the introduction to this book, you will understand that Fuller has set out to write a brief but direct book on the Generalship capabilities of Grant and Lee. In the introduction, Fuller notes that Henderson's classic book on Jackson is more a romantic study than one that is an objective view. He goes further to say that a full study of Jackson gives a different appreciation. A respect for his maneuvering and desire to fight but also his idiosyncrasies and secrecy that Fuller indicates would cause one to question Jackson's sanity. With that introduction, you are prepared for the author's blunt assessment of both Generals. The book is brief concentrating more on strategy than just battlefield tactics. He concentrates on the critical battles of the war and the general effect the war has as a whole not just the eastern theater. In Lee, he notes that he was not a grand strategist but one that fought with intuition. As a General, he excelled on fighting on the defensive as showed in the final campaign. However, Lee preferred fighting aggressively and his errors show at Gettysburg and Malvern Hill. In the case of Chancellorsville, Fuller notes that Lee should have used the wilderness more often as a greater asset for defensive maneuvers instead of coming out in the open into battle. That like a spider, he should have waited for opportunities to attack and withdrawal with the protection of cover. He further indicates that Lee had a poor operating staff and his administration impaired supply and clarity of orders as all were given verbally and minimally. Grant on the other hand was a former quartermaster, was well organized and had a global plan of the war hence his simultaneous operations with the western theater and his multiple prong attacks in the east. Fuller notes that at first his objective was to follow Lee and not concentrate on the Richmond. But later he changed to maneuver so that Lee had to react to him as opposed to the reverse. Grant was often accused of having little imagination but as Fuller notes, he did not have the imagination to inflate numbers that were against him (McClellan) but he was rational in knowing that the Confederates had limited manpower. Through his intuition, Lee had success against the earlier Union generals but as Fuller points out, he could not fathom Grant.
   
   The book is critical of both; however, as an overall commander, Grant comes across as much more able and Lee a totally different commander highly capable on the defensive but not as much a hands on commander as most would previously think. Both men are stripped bare; the author offers a unique unbiased view of the war without the human frailty of sentiment.



5. This is a small book, but don't judge it by its size. It is a great little book. Grant & Lee, with such different backgrounds, lead two great armies in the strangest of times. In the end, with no grudge, the two men get to know and respect each other. But the story of how these men fought & how they thought so similarly in the battlefield and how they were both so noble and courageous help show that two men that could not have been more dissimilar, ended up being so alike serving their causes. I highly recommend this book. Very entertaining, and very educational.

No comments about The Sixth Corps: the Army of the Potomac, Union Army, During the American Civil War.

2 comments about Capt Jepp and the Little Black Book.

1. Far before it became the quickest way to get around, aviation was a renegade industry filled with thrill seekers. "Capt. Jepp and the Little Black Book: How Barnstormer & Aviation Pioneer Elrey B. Jeppesen Made the Skies Safer for Everyone" is a look at the man who began to take steps to bring the industry away from the daredevil and deliver it to the mass consumer. The tale of a former aviation daredevil turned practical, "Capt. Jepp and the Little Black Book: How Barnstormer & Aviation Pioneer Elrey B. Jeppesen Made the Skies Safer for Everyone" is a riveting story for aviation fans and community library aviation collections alike.



2. Written by great friends of Capt. Jepp, this book reveals the inner truth behind his life and accomplishments and tells a story for the ages. In a "new world" of information and technology, his tale reminds us that innovation is rooted in a passion for life, the necessities of discovery, and the wonder of the possibilities we can find in our selves and others. Pilots worldwide navigate their way on the coat tails of Capt. Jepp, who gave to his time what the Internet gives to ours -- a pathway for commerce, exploration, and even fun.
   
   Some notable reviews:
   
   "Every pilot will enjoy this story of aviation pioneer, entrepreneur, and businessman Elrey Jeppesen, who literally made the skies safer for everyone." - Stephen Coonts
   
   "Capt. Jepp may have been an unknown giant in aviation, but not longer. What a great story!" - Curtis Lee Brown, Space Shuttle Mission Commander
   
   "And so, each time I climb into a cockpit, I must tip my cap to Captain Jepp and all the other intrepid flyers that went before me and give them silent thankds for a job well done. I trust you will do the same as you turn the pages of this magnificent journey through Captain Elrey B. Jeppensen's life story."
   - From the Foreword by Erik Lindberg, grandson of Charles A. Lindberg

5 comments about I Remember Ben Hogan: Personal Recollections and Revelations of Golf's Most Famous Legend From The People Who Knew Him Best.

1. I have read a lot about Ben Hogan but this was by far and away one of the best books I've read. I will read this again from time to time.



2. It's fascinating to me that a guy as reclusive as Hogan could command so much public adoration and curiosity. This is a book that offers a lot of neat stories about Hogan that I had never read. A bunch of people who knew Hogan, both well-known and not so well known, tell their stories about Hogan in their own words---in oral history form. I've read a couple of other books on the Hawk and those were nice reads in their own way as well. I read the other reviews on this page and don't understand why "clucas" called this a "duck hook." It isn't--it's not John Feinstein-caliber, but it's still worth the price. Sounds like some bitterness being expressed by clucas, probably someone who doesn't know anything what it takes to win at golf or can recognize good book writing.



3. there seems no in between. I have 800+ golf books and have read everything just about everything on Hogan. (What club did he REALLY hit at Merion in the famous photo?). Due to the negative reviews I didn't get to this one for a while. When I did, I truly enjoyed it. Is some info repeated? Sure. But this is mostly new, original and genuine investigation, not reguritation. If you are a golf and golf history BUFF I think you will enjoy. If not, pass and read the more current books. (a 2 iron.)



4. While I understand that any author that wants to write about The Hawk will have his work cut out for him, it seems that Towle took the path of least resistance. A couple of phone calls here, 5 minutes of editing there, and you're left with a book that tells you two things:

   1.) Hogan was a gruff but soft-on-the-inside guy.

   2.) Hogan got the yips later in life.

   Those who want to learn more than those two points would be better off avoiding this book.




5. The last two reviewers before me couldn't have read the same book I did. The whole point is that while Hogan is such a legendary figure inspiring tremendous curiosity, information about him has come out in bits and pieces over the years. There were dozens of tidbits in this book that were revelatory to me, and I'm someone who lived in Fort Worth many years while the reclusive Mr. Hogan was still alive. I found this book really good and informative, and full of new material. Based on its oral-history format, and the author's own admission in the introduction, this wasn't supposed to be an earthshaking biography full of dirt. Instead, it offers a lot of nifty snapshots about Hogan from people, a number of whom were his close freinds that, while not celebrities, had insights into Hogan's real life that "celebrities" who thought they knew him didn't. This book is definitely worth at least one read.

5 comments about Jefferson Davis and His Generals: The Failure of Confederate Command in the West (Modern War Studies).

1. For a Confederate examination, Steven Woodworth's book is essential reading in understanding the complex relationships between President Davis and his western theater leaders. Peppered throughout the book are insightful examinations of such generals as Beauregard, Polk, Van Dorn, Albert Sydney Johnston, Joe Johnston, Bragg, and Hood. Woodworth delves into Davis' leadership weaknesses by showing that his health problems and his lack of humility and people-skills (he would have six different War Secretaries) increased his inability to cooperate with others. His unyielding loyalty to promote incompetent friends to high positions routinely injected failure and casualties in campaigns, but Davis refused to bow to the facts and remove them. Woodworth wraps up his analysis with a fair theory that interconnecting these problems was Davis' hesitancy and indecision. The president often submitted suggestions and not orders in correspondence and he falsely believed backbiting and arrogant generals would just cooperate towards the common cause. His inability to provide unifying command authority, especially over the Mississippi River region further fractured what little strategy existed. Woodworth's analysis is a rare addition in the often-neglected study of western command. It is insightful, extremely well-wrttien, and engrossing.



2. Seemingly endless Civil War books are written rehashing every minute move of Robert E. Lee and his Army of Northern Virginia. There are far fewer that cover the situation of the Confederacy's western armies and generals, despite, or perhaps because of the fact that it was in the west that the Confederacy lost the war. With Jefferson Davis and His Generals: The Failure of Confederate Command in the West, Steven E. Woodworth steps up to fill this gap with a first rate book that every serious student of the Civil War should read. He presents a clear and reasoned argument that the failure of the Confederacy in the west was not due to the quality or quantity of its armies or even of its supplies, but a direct result of a monumental failure in its high command.
   Woodworth writes of Jefferson Davis as a man who seemed to be eminently and uniquely qualified to become commander in chief of the Confederacy. He was a West Point graduate, a Mexican War hero, had served as a particularly effective secretary of war under President Franklin Pierce, and had been a United States senator. He understood politics, and he clearly understood war. His resolve for his cause, like his loyalty to his friends, was unshakable. Contained within these impressive qualifications and traits, however, were flaws and blind spots that would severely hinder Davis' management of the war in the west, where he had no Lee to take charge. Foremost of these faults was a lack of judgement when appointing friends as generals, and unreasonable loyalty to them thereafter. Compounding these problems was a fierce pride in his own military judgement that left him unable to acknowledge and correct mistakes. Finally, his pride led him into bitter personal feuds with key generals that hindered his ability to utilize them to the fullest.
   Woodworth follows Davis' moves in the west, from his initial organization of the Western theater, through the high stakes game played and eventually lost to gain Kentucky for the Confederacy, to the crisis at Shiloh, where with the death of General Albert Sidney Johnston, the Western Confederacy lost its best hope for competent command. The catastrophe of the loss of Vicksburg, the disastrous infighting among the generals under Bragg in the Army of Tennessee, the loss of Tennessee, the Atlanta Campaign, and Hood's final failed campaign are all covered. In each instance, Woodworth notes the command decisions that Davis made, or failed to make, in the crisis. At the end of each chapter, he summarizes and critiques Davis' performance, highlighting areas where Davis was at least partly responsible for the problems, as well as pointing out where he performed as well as could have been expected.
   Woodworth clearly has a strongly opinionated point of view. He is nearly unique among the Civil War historians that I have read in his spirited defense of General Braxton Bragg as a competent commander, and lays all of the blame for the failure of Bragg's campaigns on incompetent and insubordinate generals under his command, chiefly Davis' personal friend General Leonidas Polk. He also repeatedly accused General Joseph Johnston of lacking a will to win, and of never believing that the Confederacy could win the war. While many will disagree with these positions, his boldness in stating them is characteristic of the bold approach that is evident throughout his book.
   Jefferson Davis and His Generals is a bold, original work, that addresses a theme that is too often neglected in Civil War studies. It is consistently engaging, insightful, and controversial. It is clearly written, well researched, and a pleasure to read. I consider it to be among the very best books that I have read on the Civil War, and would recommend it highly, especially to those with a specific interest in the war in the west.
   
   Theo Logos



3. Insightful and thought provoking analysis of what Davis did and did not do to save the West. I feel this is a very important book and one that a serious student of the war should read. Additionally, I feel that this book should be read after Connelly and Horn to preserve a balanced picture. Woodworth presents a more favorable view of Bragg than I have seen from other authors. Some of this is fair and some maybe the author's perceptions of Bragg. It takes getting used to and the more you know about Bragg and his failings the better off you are. He scores many good points and made me modify my view of Bragg and the problems he had with Polk and Hardee.
   
   His treatment of Jefferson Davis is very fair. His points are valid and well supported, showing where Davis did well and where he did poorly. The reasons for the decisions are supported and logical, given Davis' personality. This is the best part of the book and balances the blame the "Eastern Block" that is found in other books.
   
   I am less happy with his treatment of Longstreet, feeling that he has accepted the "Lost Cause Myth" and not explored the situation. Rather than dismiss Longstreet, I would have liked to see an explanation of his relationship with Davis and Lee's influence in this area.
   
   This is a well written, easy to read informative book. Not without faults but a valuable addition to my ACW library.



4. I re-read Woodworth's excellent treatise on Jefferson Davis and his involvement in the Western Theater. The chapters are succinct and focus more on strategy than in specific battle details. My favorite parts are the reviews at the end of each chapter. I have always believed that Lee's strategy to invade the North rather than deploying his forces in the West was a major blunder. If there is one salient point that screams from this book it is that Jeff Davis' personal relationships with his generals (Polk??) definitely was a detriment to his decision making. This book should be required reading for high school and undergraduate students. Indeed any leader could profit from the analysis and history rendered here.



5. This book is a must read to understand the generals, campaigns, strategy, and the thinking of Jefferson Davis in the Western Theater. The book is well-written, informative, and features good analysis of the differing generals, Davis' actions, and some very good mini-biographies of the major players. Although the book does not go into major detail about specific battles, Woodworth does give a good overview of the major campaigns and battles of the West. The book also has some interesting theories on why Davis failed in the West. Although I disagreed with some of Woodworth's conclusions, especially regarding Braxton Bragg's capabilities as a commander, I found his arguments well-reasoned, although I thought he went out of his way to bash James Longstreeet. The major sticking point I had with the book was Woodworth's analysis on Bragg and his theory that J.E. Johnston thought the CSA's cause was doomed so he didn't really try to win. I thought that was utter nonsense, but that was really my only quarrel with the book. Well-written, informative, just an excellent book.

5 comments about American Jezebel: The Uncommon Life of Anne Hutchinson, the Woman Who Defied the Puritans.

1. Anne Hutchinson is one of those figures of American history I'd catch fascinating glimpses of - the Hutchinson River Parkway (named for a woman!), a few lines in Paul Johnson's History of the American People, a portion of a lecture in a Women's Studies course - but could never find her whole story in an accessible form. Until now.
   
   Eva LaPlante has the luxury of a well documented life in Anne Hutchinson. From her birth to her death, Anne was the rare non-royal woman of her time to leave her mark and her words. The centerpiece of this book is Anne's trial for "traducing" the ministers of Boston. Defying the conventions of acceptable behavior, Anne held her own, defending her own actions and quoting scriptures to support her claims. She very nearly won and even LaPlante has to admit that Anne pretty much grab defeat from the jaws of victory.
   
   But the Anne Hutchinson in these pages would have gladly taken honorable defeat over kowtowing to those she believed were corrupting the word of God. It's not easy to enter into a world where extremely fine points of religious doctrine excite such passion and controversy but LaPlante wisely uses the trial transcripts to let Anne's own words convey the passion. This was life and death, not of teh body but of the soul to Anne.
   
   LaPlante also does an admirable job of placing Anne's boldness in context. She was an educated, forward-thinking woman in an age when women were allowed no public voice. The mere idea of Anne "preaching" was heretical, let alone her content. I thought LaPlante avoided over-reaching the case, however, as she doesn't claim that Anne was the "first feminist" or other slightly silly claims. She keeps Anne's acts in their time and they are all the more compelling for this.
   
   The book has two narrative strains, the first is the trial and the second (woven around the first) is the chronological story of Anne's life. This can make for a disjointed feel but I adapted to the flow by chapter 4. The are no photos in this book but the maps included are fascinating. For those interested in early American history, religious history and just who "The Hutch" is named after this is fine popular history.



2. American Jezebel, a scholarly work about the life of Anne Hutchinson, told through an examination of the primary sources of documentation about her life, is a well written and compelling biography of one of the true founders of what became the United States. That our educational system does not give the same attention to Anne Hutchinson's life, as is afforded to the "founding fathers", is compelling proof of the sexist nature of recorded history. Eve LaPlante, though a direct descendant of Anne Hutchinson, handles this work with both objectivity and thoroughness. Her book filled in a large gap in my knowledge of early New England. After reading this book, you will never again think of Massachusetts as that charming land of happy pilgrims and may develop, as I have, a deep antipathy for John Winthrop, a man revered in our history books, largely as a consequence of ignoring his cruelty to greater persons such as Anne Hutchinson and Mary Dyer.



3. I'm mystified by the rave reviews here. Hutchinson is indeed a fascinating figure, but LaPlante's oddly-arranged book obscures more than it illuminates. LaPlante presents Hutchinson as a proto-feminist rather than a zealous religious dissident. Although LaPlante acknowledges that Hutchinson exhibited as much moral certitude as her prosecutors -- she believed, for example, that she could personally identify those chosen for salvation by God -- the majority of the book either downplays the significance of theological dispute in favor of gender politics (John Winthrop was primarily motivated by a desire to keep women in their place, etc.), or twists itself into knots trying to recast arch-Calvinist Antinomianism as a progressive movement. Incredibly, there is no serious discussion of theology until 50 pages into the book.
   
   Gender is naturally significant to the story (we are, after all, talking about a woman in seventeenth century Boston who brazenly challenged the city's Cambridge-educated male leadership). But the reason for Hutchinson's banishment -- like that of the more influential and sophisticated Roger Williams a few years earlier -- was theological, and the faith of Hutchinson and her slippery mentor John Cotton (grandfather of Cotton Mather) was no more rational and no less fanatical than that of Winthrop, whose tendency to seek conciliation actually marks him as a rather moderate fellow by Puritan standards. Unlike Williams, whose radical separatism led him to become one of the first notable advocates of religious freedom, Hutchinson was primarily concerned not with political liberty but with denouncing those who she believed to be under a "covenant of works." This category included all the ministers in Massachusetts except for Cotton and her brother-in-law, John Wheelwright.
   
   LaPlante is evidently not an expert on Puritan New England, and she has trouble with theology. To give one example, she employs the word "orthodox" as a general term of abuse -- using it at one point to describe the Puritans' Anglican opponents in England, and at other times to describe the Puritan leadership in Boston. Like Howard Zinn (who blurbs the book), she sympathizes with the underdog to the point where underdog status alone is apparently an indication of righteousness. In retrospect, we can see that Hutchinson's religious views were no more enlightened than those of her enemies; Hutchinson was ahead of her time only in her belief that women are as able to interpret scripture as men, and in her relatively humane views regarding Native Americans (which she shared with Williams and Samuel Sewall, among others).
   
   Of course, historical figures should not be chastised for every transgression against contemporary sensibilities. But as someone with no dog in the fight between between varieties of seventeenth century English Protestantism, I was irritated by LaPlante's verbal gymnastics on behalf of her ancestor -- especially after she declares in the intro that her work will avoid the "exaltation" found elsewhere. While we get a sense of Hutchinson's admirable qualities, including her sparkling intelligence and stubborn bravery, criticism is limited to the occasional throw-away sentence, and there is little in the way of psychological insight. LaPlante's Hutchinson is opaque and two-dimensional -- a symbol rather than a human being. LaPlante is not (thankfully) one of those historians who dismisses all historical figures as benighted and morally backwards, but she makes an equally serious mistake in attempting to transform a proud, complex, and extraordinarily devout woman into a straightforward, easy-to-digest hero for contemporary readers.
   
   Three final points, two negative and one positive: (1) LaPlante has an unfortunate habit of substituting her own language for that of the protagonists, leading to some confusion about who is saying what. Quotes end abruptly, replaced by LaPlante's paraphrasing. I suspected at several points that her summaries were generous to Hutchinson (facilitating her transformation into a Puritan version of Susan B. Anthony) and less than charitable to her opponents. The book is at its best when LaPlante isn't speaking at all, since her commentary adds little to the drama. (2) Although LaPlante does voice some minor criticisms of Hutchinson, the general tenor of the book is hagiographic. Many of the quotes that LaPlante culls from other histories of the era seem to have been included only because they are highly complimentary of Hutchinson. LaPlante defends her subject in an almost lawerly fashion, informing us, for example, that "Harvard University" credits Hutchinson with its founding (actually, one Harvard professor!), and that Hutchinson founded Rhode Island (only very technically true, since Williams had settled Providence a year earlier). These are minor details, but combined with the suspicious paraphrasing, they undermined my trust in the author. An honest defense of Hutchinson would have been fine, but this book attempts to lionize its subject using sleight of hand. (3) I learned some things from "American Jezebel" that I had not found in other books on this period. Particularly interesting were LaPlante's discussions of Lincolnshire and Boston, England.
   
   For better books on pre-Revolutionary New England, I suggest Philbrick's Mayflower, Morgan's Puritan Dilemma (on Winthrop), Gaustad's Roger Williams, and Richard Francis' wonderful book on the admirable Samuel Sewall (another LaPlante ancestor on whom she has apparently written). American Jezebel isn't worthless, but it would be unfortunate if anyone picked up their whole education on the Puritans here -- as many of the other Amazon reviewers seem to have done.



4. The genealogy given in the appendix of this book shows the author thirteen generations directly removed from the book's subject, Anne Marbury Hutchinson. Anne's descendants are also said to include Franklin Delano Roosevelt and George Walker Bush. Other books about Hutchinson have been written, but this one is probably the most thoroughly researched.
   
   Eve LaPlante says she is a journalist; it appears that she has published a couple dozen freelance pieces as well as three other books. She also says that this is a non-fiction book. Although there is quite an extensive bibliography, there are no citations within the text, and one wonders how she knows so precisely that the sky was clear at sunrise on November 8, 1637 (p. 70), to pick an instance of literary embellishment at random.
   
   One expects a journalist to understand the difference between an institutional view and something said by a member of that institution. Thus, on page xxi, she says, "According to Harvard University, it is she rather than John Harvard who 'should be credited with the founding of Harvard College.'" She puts things better into context on pages 133f. Harvard Professor Peter Gomes calls Hutchinson the "midwife" to the College, and explains why this is appropriate. (In addition to this unintended and symbolic role, Hutchinson was a midwife in her "normal" life.) Prof. Gomes teaches the history of Harvard and is probably more qualified than any other to offer such an opinion, but to say that "Harvard University" holds this view (indeed, any view) is no more accurate than to say that the New York Times does simply because Ms. LaPlante has published there. And while both Anne Hutchinson, indirectly, and John Harvard, more directly, played important roles in the establishment of the College between 1636 and 1638, the politics are far too complicated to ascribe the title "founder" to any one person.
   
   The book is somewhat uneven; the story of Anne's trials is quite drawn out and interspersed with many flashbacks, while the commentary once she has died seems to be as rapid a recitation of whatever notes and thoughts were left over as can be stitched together. It is evident where the author's heart is.
   
   Because of these mechanical issues, I cannot give the book a full five stars. As a period piece on Massachusetts in the 1630s, it leaves a bit to be desired. But as source material on her subject with enough documentation to be able to read between the lines why she believes what she writes, it is unlikely that any other author will have the same passion for the subject, the wherewithal to carry out the research, and (mostly) the ability to pull off a moving story.



5. It is marvelous to read details about the nation's first feminist,Anne Hutchinson, a woman who ought to make more appearances in classrooms. LaPlante's writing keeps the story moving, although it was disconcerting at the beginning of the book to have her give 1637 as the date when Harvard was founded. The year was 1636, which may change her reference to Hutchinson in that connection. That's minor, however, compared to bringing to life a woman who stood up to the austere and determined men of Boston, founded a place in Rhode Island and then had her life ironically ended in a massacre by Indians when she had been a champion of at least some Native American rights. Few Americans who travel the Hutchinson River Parkway on a daily basis probably know where its name came from, but perhaps LaPlante's book will widen that awareness. Like Abigail Adams, Hutchinson was a powerful woman at a time when women were not supposed to have any power. This book is particularly interesting to me because, like LaPlante, I'm a Hutchinson descendant.