1 comments about American Empress: The Life and Times of Marjorie Merriweather Post.

1. Superb biography which open the window (and the door) into Marjorie Merriweather Post's fascinating life - - and shows that "money cannot buy everything" ....

5 comments about The Radical and the Republican: Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, and the Triumph of Antislavery Politics.

1. I am reading this book now and am struck by the evolution of Douglass' ideas about politics. At first, he was angry and rejected all compromise, influenced by radical abolitionists like William Lloyd Garrison. Later, he began to see the value of politics and compromise and became a Republican in 1856 when John C Fremont was the nominee of the new party. Douglass accepted the necessity of compromise and a strategy of gradual starvation of the institution of slavery. From rejecting the Constitution as a "slaveowners' document", he became an enthusiastic supporter of the American system and sought citizenship for the freed slaves once the South collapsed, by war or economic forces they could not resist. I wish some Black Liberation advocates would read it. Douglass was a wise man and not as radical as the title suggests. An excellent book. Also a new look at Lincoln although I knew most of the story.



2. There is a perennial tension in any democracy between those who insist that there must be scrupulous respect for the law, and those who insist that at times a higher law must be followed. Philosophical and moral disagreements separate the two groups. But so does temperament.
   
   James Oates' The Radical and the Republican masterfully witnesses to the crucial role temperament plays in determining which side of the political and moral divide one lands in the higher law debate. Lincoln (the republican) was by nature a man inclined toward moderation, reason, patience, and unemotional analysis. Although always a loather of slavery, it took the 1854 Kansas-Nebraska Act to put slavery in the middle of his political radar screen. Even then, he insisted that slavery was implicitly guaranteed in the Constitution, and that, short of a constitutional amendment, the most a President or Congress could do was to geographically contain it. Lincoln, who eventually adopted a policy Oates calls "strategic racism"--refusing to speak against the race-baiting so popular in the U.S. in order to make his eventual decision to emancipate the slaves an easier pill to swallow--thought John Brown a madman.
   
   Douglass (the reformer--or better, perhaps, the rebel) had a much more phlegmatic tempermant: emotional, volatile, black-and-white thinking, quick judgments. Although aligned when young with the pacifist Garrisonians, Douglass was never much of a pacifist. But he imbibed the Garrisonian insistence that the Constitution and the government, through their complicity with slavery, were utterly corrupt, and that a higher moral law not only sanctioned but obliged disregard of them when it came to slavery. Douglass, who adopted a policy of black self-reliance which Oates calls "strategic separatism," thought John Brown a hero.
   
   The Civil War created an extraordinary environment, argues Oates, in which Lincoln the republican and Douglass the reformer began to converge. Lincoln dropped his idea of gradual and compensated emancipation by issuing the Emancipation Declaration and lobbying for the passage of the 13th Amendment. Douglass, under the influence of Gerrit Smith, came to see the Constitution as an anti-slavery document and politics as a legitimate method to reforming society. By the time Lincoln was murdered, Douglass had come to greatly admire the man who he mercilessly criticized through much of the war. And Lincoln went out of his way to refer publicly to "my friend" Douglass. Still, their basic temperaments remained quite different, and it's curious to reflect on what their relationship might've evolved into had Lincoln lived.
   
   Oates' discussion of the two men is fascinating, well-written, and well-documented. Strongly recommended not only for those interested in the Civil War but also for anyone interestd in the higher law debate.



3. One of the easiest things to do, especially on the web, is to take a highly regarded leader of the past, say, Abraham Lincoln, pull a few of his quotes or actions out of their historical context, and supposedly "prove" how horrible that leader actually was. In contrast, author James Oakes explains Lincoln to us postmoderns the way an historian should - by reminding us of Lincoln's circumstances and explaining Lincoln's overarching purposes. Oakes does this without resorting to making Lincoln a saint. According to Oakes' compellingly-supported evidence, Lincoln refused to compromise two essential commitments - to antislavery and to the American political system. Lincoln would not compromise his antislavery position to get more votes, nor would he compromise his oaths to uphold the Constitution to undermine slavery. This dual commitment of Lincoln's goes very far in helping us understand why Lincoln limited his goal to preventing the spread of slavery before he became president, why he didn't just go ahead and free all the slaves when he became president, why he moved slowly towards emancipation during the war, etc. Furthermore, the author's discussion of Lincoln's overwhelming desire to change the hearts and minds of Americans about slavery instead of merely forcing through political change regardless of wider support was especially useful. As the "Republican" in the title, Lincoln wanted a government that represented the will of the people; therefore, the will of the people needed to be converted before the government could make radical change. The fact that Lincoln helped accomplish this more widespread change is quite a testament to his legacy of leadership.
   
   The "Radical" in the title is another great American, Frederick Douglass. Unlike Lincoln's, Douglass' reputation typically is not in dispute. Most of us love Douglass, and for good reason. Oakes doesn't tarnish Douglass' reputation, but he does help us to understand how Douglass' singular commitment to antislavery/antiracism, as compared to Lincoln's dual commitment explained above, often put Douglass at odds with the political process AND caused Douglass to speak out so vehemently against politicians like Lincoln. From Douglass' perspective, only immediate emancipation and egalitarianism would serve justice. Thus, by necessity, Douglass would oppose and criticize Lincoln - that is, until the two men met.
   
   One of the reviewers below critiques Oakes for supposedly overstating the relationship between the two men. I believe this critique is misplaced because Oakes never claimed to be writing primarily about the interpersonal relationship between the two. Instead, he's writing about the interplay of the radical ideology of one, and the antislavery politics of the other. Also, I think that Oakes analyzes the relationship between Brown and Douglass comprehensively, not simplistically, as a reviewer below seems to believe.
   
   As a person who teaches history at the college level, and as a person who enjoys reading history for fun, I would recommend this book. I intend to make it one of my required texts for my survey American history course, alongside Frederick Douglass' autobiography.



4. Author James Oakes tells us this: in 1860 Frederick Douglass wrote of the upcoming presidential election "I cannot support Lincoln." But in 1888, Douglass said he had met no man "possessing a more godlike nature than did Abraham Lincoln." What had happened?
   
   Oakes gives us a quick glance at his hypothesis within the subtitle of his book: the triumph of antislavery politics. As he explains, this doesn't apply to Lincoln. Lincoln was always an anti-slavery politician, although his thinking on how and how fast slavery should be destroyed changed over time. But with regards to the use of politics as the means to abolish slavery, the man whose thinking moved more was Frederick Douglass. And although the two men share the billing in Oakes' title, this is far more a book about Douglass than Lincoln. It is a book about the evolution of the reasoning of Frederick Douglass.
   
   That evolution, as Oakes paints it, began for Douglass from the belief that the issue of slavery transcended politics and the compromises that came with it. Oakes traces how Douglass the reformer began to be drawn into the political arena, alienating the abolitionists who had first supported his career. But still he carried with him that insistence on absolutism. He brooked no delays, no strategic maneuverings. Lincoln and the Republicans were gradualists, and therefore were deemed irresolute and untrustworthy.
   
   After the Civil War began, Douglass found even more reasons for outrage. Lincoln refused to immediately emancipate the slaves. The President even countermanded the Union generals who issued proclamations freeing the slaves in the territories they conquered. Lincoln had not yet issued a retaliation policy against confederates who captured and often executed southern blacks who had joined the Union army. Oakes gives us deft insights into Lincoln's thinking on all these issues. Douglass, who apparently was not himself an acolyte of consistency, bounced back and forth in his electoral attitudes. But he never let up in his pressure on Lincoln nor in his condemnation of the President's lack of strong steps against slave-holding interests.
   
   Then, first in 1863, Lincoln meets with Douglass. About a year later, at Lincoln's request, they meet a second time and Lincoln asks Douglass to draw up a plan to get as many slaves freed under the Emancipation Proclamation as possible. Over that span Douglass' thinking with regards to Lincoln undergoes a dramatic shift. Afterwards, his criticism of Lincoln essentially stops.
   
   Oakes describes these meetings, including a third just after Lincoln's second inaugural address, in as much detail as consistent with the small format of the book. He relies largely on Douglass' own recollections. Oakes also gives us dramatic retellings of other events in Douglass' career that illustrate the development of his thinking, but also the refinement of his skills as a political strategist.
   
   We are still left wondering what exactly was the effect of those meetings with Lincoln. Was Douglass simply overwhelmed, as others were, by the force of Lincoln's understated humaneness and thereby convinced of the President's genuine concern for blacks? Or did Lincoln persuade Douglass that his political methods were the best possible under the evolving circumstances? Or did Lincoln flatter Douglass into acquiescence, especially in enlisting his help during that second meeting?
   
   These possibilities are not mutually exclusive. Oakes in no way downplays the significance of these meetings. But I believe he wants us to see that what happened was entirely consistent with the evolution of Douglass' thinking with regards to politics. As a reformer, he saw it his job to always keep the pressure on. But where and how best to apply that pressure --- that changed in his meetings with Lincoln. And, near the end of Douglass' life, when he raised Lincoln to sainthood, he was still putting the pressure on. But he was using Lincoln's reputation to apply that pressure against the backsliding that the post-Reconstruction era had brought. Douglass had found a way to combine the duties of a reformer with a sophisticated instinct for politics.
   
   "The Radical and the Republican" is not a dramatic retelling of events. It is certainly not a co-biography of its two principals. But it does have drama. That drama comes from taking Douglass' thinking seriously and mapping out its development and growing political sophistication. To do this, it uses comparisons with Lincoln's thinking and the interplay of the two men's principles and actions. But it's not by accident that Douglass comes first in the book's title and its cover. There are many books about Lincoln. This is a book about Frederick Douglass.



5. Abraham Lincoln (1809 --1865) and Frederick Douglass (1818 -- 1895)are American heroes with each exemplifying a unique aspect of the American spirit. In his recent study, "The Radical and the Republican: Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, and the Triumph of Antislavery Politics" (2007), Professor James Oakes traces the intersecting careers of both men, pointing out their initial differences and how their goals and visions ultimately converged. Oakes is Graduate School Humanities Professor and Professor of History at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. He has written extensively on the history of slavery in the Old South.
   
   Oakes reminds the reader of how much Lincoln and Douglass originally shared. Lincoln and Douglass were self-made, self-educated, and ambitious, and each rose to success from humble backgrounds. Douglass, of course, was an escaped slave. Douglass certainly and Lincoln most likely detested slavery from his youngest days. But Lincoln from his young manhood was a consummate politican devoted to compromise, consensus-building, moderation and indirection. Douglass was a reformer who spoke and wrote eloquently and with passion for the abolition of slavery and for equal rights for African Americans.
   
   Much of Oakes's book explores the difficult subject of Lincoln's attitude towards civil rights -- as opposed simply to the ending of slavery -- and of how Lincoln's views developed during the Civil War. Oakes uses Douglass as a foil for Lincoln beginning with the Lincoln -- Stephen Douglas debates in Illinois in 1858. Steven Douglas tried hard to link Lincoln to Frederick Douglass and to abolitionism. He claimed that Lincoln favored equal rights for Negroes and raised the spectre of intermarriage between white women and black men. Portions of Lincoln's responses to Stephen Douglas were almost as distressing, as Lincoln carefully avoided supporting civil equality between the races and stressed instead the evil of slavery and the need to stop its expansion. It is not surprising that Douglass the abolitionist was ambivalent and mistrustful of Lincoln in the early years, doubting his committment to the cause of ending slavery.
   
   Douglass continued to distrust President Lincoln. Douglass found the President too quick to temporize and too slow to act towards freeing the slaves. In widely publicized actions, Lincoln had rebuked two of his generals, Freemont and Hunter, who had tried to take aggressive action to free slaves. Lincoln had acted in order to keep on good terms with the border states whose support he deemed necessary to a successful war effort. But Douglass saw Lincoln's actions as weak and waffling.
   
   Douglass's attitude gradually changed with the Emancipation Proclamation and with three meetings between the two men in 1863, 1864, and 1865. Douglass was won over by the President. Lincoln, for his part, seemed to view Douglass with genuine affection and friendship. Douglass gave masterful orations summarizing Lincoln's accomplishments following Lincoln's assassination, in 1876 at the unveiling of the Emancipation Monument in Lincoln Park, Washington, D.C., and throughout the rest of his life. Lincoln had fought slavery with every means at his command, Douglass came to believe, given the difficult political and military situation with which he had to deal.
   
   Douglass' career moved in an opposite direction from that of Lincoln. He began as a reformer and a follower of the abolitionist William Garrison and he initially shared Garrison's contempt for the American political process. Gradually, Douglass found his own voice, and he became convinced the the United States Constitution did not support slavery. He came to conclude that it was possible to work for change through the political process, and this belief eventually allowed a convergence between him and Lincoln. With the conclusion of the Civil War, Douglass became a party man and a stalwart Republican -- perhaps giving up more than he should have of the passion of his early years. While he ultimately saw the failure of Reconstruction, Douglass remained for the rest of his long life firmly within the American political process.
   
   Oakes does an excellent job of comparing and contrasting the work of Lincoln and Douglass. His accounts of the complex events leading to the issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation are particuarly lucid. Oakes argues that Lincoln had surreptitiously delivered the death blow to slavery by the end of 1861. As to Douglass, I learned a great deal from Oakes's discussion of his three autobiographies, written in 1845, 1855, and 1881 (editied, 1891) and of how these works document the change of Douglass from reformer to an instance of the American success story. Oakes also describes well and detail a chilling meeting between Douglass and other African American leaders and President Andrew Johnson in which Douglass unsuccessfully tried to persuade Johnson to extend the right to vote to African Americans.
   
   Oakes has written a readable, informed account of the achievements of two great American leaders. The attitudes which they represent -- the politican and the reformer -- and the issues with which they struggled remain with Americans today.
   
   Robin Friedman

5 comments about The Fields of Home.

1. I cannot praise Ralph Moody enough. This book is so well structured and well written that it is obviously a "made" work, but that certainly doesn't make it false. It is a truthful story inasmuch as the characters speak as they should, and the times are brought alive as good writing should do.
   An emotion-packed experience perfect for taking us back one hundred years. Highly recommended!



2. I recommend this series as a great alternative for boys who just don't like the idea of the Little House series. It is a well written series that really keeps the young and old alike interested in the way life was 100yrs ago.



3. This is the chronological fifth in Ralph Moody's series of memoirs, and while I didn't enjoy it nearly as much as I have the previous titles, it definitely chronicles a major phase in his life. In 1912, at age fourteen and a half, he has repeatedly run afoul of the police chief in Medford, who seems to think he's bound for reform school, so his mother sends him to Maine to stay on her father's farm. Unfortunately she neglects to explain to her father exactly why she's doing it, and Grandfather labors under the delusion that she wants him to "make a man of him." And there Ralph's troubles begin.
   
   Grandfather Gould is perhaps the most vivid character I've found yet in Moody's books. Past 70, he is (as his younger brother, Uncle Levi, explains to Ralph) bound by his position as a son born when his father was even older than himself (and already had a grown-up "first family") and "spoiled rotten" in consequence. "Father and the Almighty stand about shoulder to shoulder in Thomas's eyes," says Levi, "and the land they left him is holy ground." He can't see any way of doing things except the way his father taught him--the old, pre-industrial, farm-by-hand way--and as age closes in on him he has let the place go back mostly to pasture. Ralph sometimes comes close to tears at being called useless and worthless and a "tarnal fool boy," getting senseless jobs to do and being rebuked for "wastin'" or wanting to use "work-saving contraptions." Cranky, erratic, often laid low by the chronic malaria that is his legacy from a term in a Confederate prison camp, Grandfather succeeds in driving away just about everyone who cares about him, including his brother and his long-suffering housekeeper Millie. Another splendid character, as well drawn as any human in the book, is "the yella colt," an irascible buckskin work horse who's far from being a colt but apparently was never told so; to save his own hide Ralph is forced to improvise a way of teaching him who's boss, though Grandfather keeps undoing his efforts.
   
   In this book, Moody admits for the first time how difficult it was for him to adjust to life in the East after his years in Colorado and how much he missed both the "wide open spaces" and his work with his understanding father. More than once his grandfather's ways rub him so raw that he makes plans to run away and go back to the West he loves. Yet he also experiences the innocent joys of first love, and in the end he realizes how truly alike he and Grandfather are and how Maine has a beauty of its own, and the book ends on a positive note as the two seem to reconcile, having finally agreed to try some of the boy's ideas.



4. I have read all of the Little Britches books many times over the years, including reading them aloud. I recommend all of them heartily.
   Now I have some real problems with the audio books versions. Mispronounced words! And I checked everyone I questioned, just a few listed here. Cameron Beierle, the reader, should check a dictionary.
   This may seem nit picking, but I wince every time I hear one of the many mispronunciations, and I think of those who may not understand what he is saying, or worse, might think he is right.
   Victuals -- it is not pronounced as it is spelled. It is vit'ls. We may mock what we consider illiterate pronunciations, but it is correctly vit'l (vittles)
   Mow -- you moe - long o - the grass or the hay, but you then store the hay in the mow -- to rhyme with cow. Over and over the reader says moe.
   Row -- same objection. Things grow in a roe, long o, but when you have a fight or a quarrel, you row -- again rhyming with cow. It may be a back formation from rouse, and that gives a key to how it should be pronounced.
   My comments apply only to the books as read by Cameron Beierle. The books are wonderful, but I should have read them aloud myself and recorded them.



5. Having read the first several volumes of Ralph Moody's works, I didn't think they could get any "better" than they already were. "Fields of Home" is better though, although perhaps I feel that way because it struck a chord with me in where I live, in the cold northernmost part of New York State. The descriptions of the farming and other activities resonated with stories of my grandparents, my parents and my childhood experiences. The characters seem to be people I know. Awesome book in a great series of books that are appropriate for all ages (my parents love them too).

5 comments about Henry Clay: Statesman for the Union.

1. Of all the biographies of early American figures, I rather like Henry Clay best. He boasted a lengthier political career than Washington, Adams, Hamilton, Jackson etc. Of his rivals in the Senate, neither Daniel Webster nor John C. Calhoun were as effective in meeting the great challenges of his time: the BUS, the various Tariffs and territorial expansion. As a former debater, it is truly depressing that we have no audio to record his momentous speeches--those rarities which permanently altered the course of history.. Lincoln, Madison, Van Buren and virtually everyone else he met (save Andrew Jackson) admired his many abilities.
   
   Robert Remini is a biographer in the classical sense, the emphasis is heavy on the political, and far lighter on the more personal/psychological aspect of Clay's character. We are told he was a ladies' man, party-goer and gambler, but of these habits there is precious little detail despite almost 800 pages of work. Remini favors the younger Clay, House Speaker and leader of the National Republicans over the elder statesman and undisputed champion of the Whig Party. Perhaps 3 failed presidential elections took away his luster not only for the American public, but the biographer himself. After reading Clay, I will now give 'equal time' to Jackson, likely from a more contemporary biographer.



2. I have read this book two times, because it was very interesting to me to learn about one of America's finest statesmen. Robert V. Remini is a favorite author of mine. I also liked
   
   Daniel Webster: The Man and His Time
   
   Andrew Jackson 3 Volumes The Course of the American Empire 1767-1821, The Course of the American Freedom 1822-1832, The Course of the American Democracy 1833-1845



3. This important chapter of American history is usually analyzed as the period of the 'Great Triumvirate' of Clay, Calhoun and Wesbter, three failed politicians who never achieved the highest office. Nevertheless Clay was one of the most important men of his period, when the Whigs vied with the Democrats for control of the nation. He was first elected to the house in 1811 and helped forge Jacksonian populist democracy as well as preside over the compromises stemming from slavery and ensuring that America was a vibrant democracy.
   
   An interesting read, fair, and decent and well written.
   
   Seth J. Frantzman



4. This is certainly the best of Dr. Remini's books to date. It is an honest appraisal of the man as a human being with human weakness and a great patriot and statesman. Remini had the opportunity to use the "Works of Henry Clay in the writing of this book and the expert researching of the character.
   
   We see Clay as John Q. Adams saw him, as the members of the House of Representatives as he reached his goal of Speaker, we sympathize with the grief stricken father of the boy who died in the Mexican War and how it affected Clay's politics. We share Clay's emotions as his different bids for the Presidential nominations are lost.As we are exposed to the genius and frailties of character of this stateman we see him through the eyes of his contemporaries and they show themselves through him.
   
   This is a marvelous story well told. I would recommend it to every person interested in 19th century America.



5. This was a pleasure to read at almost 800 pages of text! Mr Remini made it all come alive and I feel as if I truly knew Clay and Calhoun, Webster, Benton, Van Buren, Buchanan, etc. I plan to read more Mr Remini's books in the future.

5 comments about James Madison: A Biography.

1. Ralph Ketcham's JAMES MADISON: A BIOGRAPHY was originally published in 1971 and was a national book award nominee. This biography is comprehensive (671 pages), and looks like it is the result of long study of our fourth president by this professor of history emeritus at my graduate school alma mater, Syracuse University.
   
   This presidential biography took me 10 months to read (about halfway through, I quit reading it straight and took other book "breaks" between chapters), but I found it enjoyable. Ketcham really sketches a detailed portrait of Madison's life by closely examining almost all of its aspects, from what life must have been like for him growing up in Orange County, Virginia, to his work as "Father of the Constitution," his work on the Federalist Papers, his work as Secretary of State and as president, as well as a lengthy final chapter on his productive and active retirement (including his involvement with the founding of the University of Virginia).
   
   This is not a fast read, clearly, but I can't help imagine that it is the definitive work on Madison's formative years, education, political career and contribution to our country. I learned a great deal about his relationships with the other framers of our democracy, his Republicanism, his stance on separation of church and state as well as slavery.
   
   An interesting thing about Madison, to me, is that he was a slight man, who was often ill with some kind of recurring "attacks." He was only 5'4" and weighed about 100 pounds, and he did not have a charismatic presence or strong speaking style. While a man who made this wee of a physical impression would not be likely to be president today in our media age, this book demonstrates the level to which we owe Madison for the shape of our government, political system and political philosophy today. He informed the development of a free America at every step of the way through his keen intelligence, his ability to communicate his arguments and his affiliations with the other framers, who liked and respected him for his intellect and dedication to the cause of democracy.
   
   I found one of the most interesting sections to be on Madison's presidency during the War of 1812. Ketcham details the war's events along with the political temperature in the nation at the time, including the opposition to Madison and his decision to go to war with England at this time. I always find it fascinating that the men and women we venerate as the founders of our nation were subjected to similar (if not worse) public abuse for their decisions -- decisions that our knowledge of history help us understand in a way their contemporaries could not. Madison took a great deal of criticism over this war, but by the end of his presidency, he was triumphant. This chapter also illustrates some ways in which Madison's inability to act without feeling he had clearly thought through all ramifications hurt him and his administration at times. (I also noted that several Little Rock streets are named for War of 1812 military leaders, which made this book more "local" to me.)
   
   While Ketcham details the loss of an early love of Madison's when he traces the development of this relationship with some personal detail, Ketcham does not include a great deal about Dolley Madison in this book (her presence here does not compare to Abigail Adams' presence in McCullough's John Adams), which I found somewhat disappointing. Their family life is interesting, as she was a widow when he married her with a son, Payne Todd, who later became a lazy, shiftless, wanderer and gambler, who had to be bailed out of quite a few fiscal scrapes by his stepfather. Dolley and James Madison never had children together, and the portrait this book paints of her is fainter than I had expected.
   
   This book is the book I would recommend to anyone who really wanted to dig into the life, career and impact of James Madison. The writing is authoritative and objective, giving the reader a sound education in our fourth president. While this book is not my favorite of the four biographies on presidents I have read so far, I think Adams and Madison are my favorite individuals I've studied in this effort to read about each president of the United States.



2. James Madison was the man who did research and wrote for the politicians of his era. He was the brains behind the speaker (John Adams), the warrior (George Washington), and the diplomat (Thomas Jefferson). He held true to the republican principles, to a fault, literally.
   
   This book can be tedious. It is dense. But it is the very best explanation of the circumstances leading to the War of 1812 I have ever found.
   
   Plan on having another book going at the same time you are reading this one. Or, plan on some good naps along the way because it is complex reading.



3. I will start this review by saying that this book is not for the casual reader. To enjoy this book, you have to have a serious interest in the life and political thought of James Madison. The writing style, while certainly not as bad as other reviews have stated, is a straightforward academic presentation that at times can be a bit tedious. That being said, in terms of content this is as excellent a one volume biography as I believe you will find. Ketcham manages to present a full portrait of James Madison with thoughtful and excellent analysis in a surprisingly short amount of text. After reading this volume, I came away with a much better understanding of, and appreciation for, James Madison. Unlike other biographers, who sometimes waste more text than necessary on their own analyses, Ketcham interjects his analysis sparingly but brilliantly.
   
   My minor criticisms are similar to others. The beginning of the book is the most difficult part to read and reflects Ketcham's main weakness as an author - narrative biography. This is especially pronounced in one instance, where he tells the story of Madison's first trip to Princeton, admitting that the story is based on his own best construction of what probably happened since no records are available, and then proceeds with the most boring narrative imaginable. If you are going to tell a conjectural story, at least make it interesting. Ketcham also overuses to annoyance the term "bilious" and frequently uses the word "insure" incorrectly where "ensure" should be used.
   
   Ultimately, my criticisms of this volume are more for providing a two sided review than real detractions. Ketchams volume, while not lively reading, is a superb biography and undoubtedly the best one volume biography of James Madison currently available. Indeed, this biography is perfectly in line with the personality of Madison - while not exciting for its own sake, thoroughly well researched and executed, and ultimately essential.



4. I read this book working toward my goal of reading a biography of each President. I'm now nearly half way though and this was by FAR the toughest one to finish.
   
   I read Stephen Ambrose's entire three-part, 18000 page series on Nixon faster than I read this nearly 700 page book on Madison. I can't say I wasn't warned because all the reviews said it was deep and detailed but I didn't want to take the easy way out because the experts say this is by far the book to read on Madison.
   
   It was truly a very well researched and informative book. However, there were chunks of the book that were too detailed and moved too slowly. For instance, I don't care what Dolley Madison wore to balls or how the decorations looked or what political couples attended and what the other wives were wearing. I also don't care how tough the trip was for everyone to get everywhere and how Madison got sick everytime the wind blew the wrong way on the Potomac.
   
   What I do care about is how Madison worked with Jefferson and others to shape our form of government. I care about his time in congress, how he handled his duties during the revolution, the circumstances that lead to his Presidency, how he managed the war of 1812, what role he played in critical issues such as the development of the national bank and the treatment of American sailors by the British navy. I also really wanted to know about his relationship with other well known historical figures.
   
   All of that information is in there but it is buried amongst stuff that to be honest I just didn't care about.
   
   Ketcham is obviously "The Man" when it comes to James Madison and I'm quite sure in historical circles this book is highly respected because it is such a complete bio of him. But, it definitely isn't for your average reader.
   
   For those new bio readers interested in Presidents I would suggest Robert Dallek's book on JFK or Jead Edward Smith's bio of Grant. Those are detailed but they are told with the backdrop of better known periods - Civil War/Reconstruction and WWII/Cold War. Those are more interesting periods I think and those bios seemed to move faster.
   
   This book was good but you've got to be ready to get into it and pay attention because the details and stuff that you really care about can be hidden and very laborious at times to get to.



5. James Madison might be the worst president in history when his life is laid out as Ketcham has done here. The administration was a complete failure from the loss of the capital to economic problems. Despite this Madison's contributions to the constitution and the bill of rights are impressive. Unfortunately this biography was not very well written and although the information was good I found myself slow to get through it. It does not hold in the tradition of many other biographies on people from these times that are real page turners. If you are truly interested in Madison this biography will do the job otherwise I would only rate it as mediocre for those who have an interest in the American Revolution.

5 comments about Blood on the Moon: The Assassination of Abraham Lincoln.

1. this is , in my opinion, the definative book on the lincoln assassination, and the escape of john wilkes booth. not only does the author give a clear and concise accounting, he takes us out of the vacuum and explains the minute details of the very knotted relationships between the conspirators, and the links of the confederate underground to canada and back. there is no mistaking the intention of any one of the people involved. he also establishes the money trail that funded booth. im surprised that more people were not prosecuted. it doesnt let anyone off the hook.



2. Without a doubt this is the most accurate accounting of Mr. Booth and Mr. Lincoln leading up to and after April 14th, 1865. Ed Steers, Jr. did his research well and has the talent to present the story in an enjoyable fashion. The final page tells it all. A must read.



3. Edward Steers wrote one of the best accounts of Lincoln Assassination in recent history. Although his writing style is bit dry as many reviewers in the past have noted, his research is untouchable and this is a very readable account to anyone who have any interest in this subject. The author laid everyone and everything out in a clear and understandable matter. He take a careful reading to all who was involved, their backgrounds and the roles they played during the war. He also take study to Lincoln's own lackluster desire for security and how that encouraged men like Booth to take him on. Lincoln didn't realized that perception of protection can deter an assassination then the actual protection itself. The author take the efforts to debunked many myths and self-serving stories surrounding Lincoln assassination plot including if the real John W. Booth was really died on the porch of the Garrett house. The author also explained the legal definitation of the case and how it may be applied even in modern era.
   
   One of the great services of the book comes surrounding the role Dr. Samuel Mudd played. The author made it loud and clear that Mudd was clearly guility of the role he played and richly deserves his life sentence although he only served four years before being pardoned. Dr. Mudd is definitely not an innocent bystander and he was deep into the plot to assassinate Lincoln. Most of Mudd's guilt ironically come from Mudd himself which is a testament to the author's research. Mary Surratt's role was also clearly pointed out. Whether she deserves to hang or not is up to the moralists but she was definitely guility as Mudd.
   
   If I had a singular gripe, I would have to say that the author could have included the very last photographs of Lincoln taken on 10 April 1865 (by Alexander Gardner), the one which have him smiling would have been a better choice then his Nov 1863 photo on the cover of the book or Lincoln's Springfield photo since the author states quite often in his narrative how happy Lincoln seem to be during his last days.
   
   I would regard this book as a mandatory reading material for anyone interested in the Lincoln's assassination story. Although it little dry but still readable, superbly research and highly informative.



4. Last year, I visited the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library & Musuem in Springfield, Illinois. At the Musuem, they had a temporary exhibit called "Blood on the Moon". It was a fascinatating exhibit and when I saw that the exhibit's name was taken from a book, I started looking for the book to go slightly more in-depth about the assassination. The book is pretty good. The beginning is good and I liked all the photos that were included in the book. But there are two reasons why I couldn't give this book 5 stars: there were parts that I had a hard time keeping myself interested in. A slight bit of dry reading. The second reason is the author's repeated repeatings of somethings in the book. I'm not quite sure if the author forgot that he had already mentioned those facts or perhaps is underestimating the readers intelligence in remembering what they've read but I was annoyed that some things that I had already read kept popping up. I prefered the parts of the book when the author wasn't just reeling off facts and put things into action. The story of the assassination was fascinating and I liked how the author included maps of all the various Booth getaways. I also found the information about Lincoln's final trip back to Springfield very interesting.
   
   So I wouldn't say this would be a book for anyone who is more interesting in maybe the story-telling aspect of this part of history since the telling of fact upon fact might bore some people slightly. But I would recommend this to anyone who is interested in learning about the Lincoln assassination and especially anyone who was lucky enough to see the Blood on the Moon exhibit at the Abraham Lincoln Musuem.



5. Steers write one of the most accurate and detailed books on the Lincoln assassination. He provides a history of the times when the "black flag" of warfare was raised after the Union's infamous Dahlgren raid that was part of a two prong attack on Richmond. The mission was to free prisoners and disrupt Richmond and allegedly included plans to kill Davis and his cabinet. This controversial raid, As Steers points out, may have raised the ante of warfare without rules as the Confederates start their own controversial plans such as biological warfare that included an attempt to spread yellow fever. Steers starts breaking myths early with the Baltimore controversy where Lincoln switched trains to avoid a real plot to assassinate him as his train passes through Baltimore earlier than scheduled with no sop on his way to his inauguration. Steers documents how surprisingly accessible Lincoln was to the public and how he was relatively poorly protected or at times not at all at his request due to his intuition that anyone could commit the crime regardless of a guard detail. The author provides fascinating detail on Booth and his companions as they initially plot the kidnapping of Lincoln and in failing to do so, turn to assassination as the war is closing and Lincoln's sentiments toward "black human suffrage" raises Booth's ire to an intolerable level. The high points of the book are the well documented associations between Booth with not only his immediate quadrant of conspirators but also with Mary Surratt and a number of Confederate agents in Maryland, D.C. and Virginia. Steers' analysis breaks any myth that Dr. Mud was innocent of aiding and abetting Booth. A recent book offers that Mud may have not recognized Booth when Booth appeared at Mud's home during his escape but that seems circumspect since Mud met Booth several times before and Booth was a relatively famous actor. The manhunt for Booth is covered in great detail and it is extraordinary fascinating as Booth escapes to Virginia with the help of established agents. Steers describes the temporary haven that Booth and Herold finally reach outside of Bowling Green at the Garrett farm but Stanton's dragnet discovers Booth's trail in Virginia. Although quite by accident, that accident puts them amazingly right on the trail of Booth at Port Royal, Virginia just west of Fredericksburg and a handful of miles from Booth's quiet and seemingly safe haven. As Steers notes, there is some interesting speculation as to why the three Confederates, who provide Booth assistance to his temporary haven, suddenly turn up to offer assistance at Port Royal. The author also presents excellent bios on the men involved in the conspiracies; the incompetent George Atzerodt who not only abstains from killing Andrew Johnson at the last minute but leaves evidence and a relatively easy trail to follow; Lewis Powell, the mysterious young veteran soldier who wounds virtually the entire Seward family in his attempt to kill the Secretary of State and goes stoically to the hangman; and young David Herold who deserts Powell but is Booth's guide in his escape through Maryland and into Virginia. Along with these prime conspirators, Steers brings in Booth's early associates that also get captured in the dragnet even though they withdrew from Booth's later plans. And finally Steer's aptly dismembers the theories that Booth escaped and that an imposter was buried in his name. Steer's even tells of an odd character that drags a corpse around for years eerily claiming it is Booth in an attempt for notoriety and money. The final chapter covers Lincoln's long funeral train trip that stopped at several large cities on his long trek back to Springfield, allowing a large population to view Lincoln's open casket. As the author notes, Lincoln returned to his hometown as he inferred when he left, that he might not return with the ability to enjoy his homecoming.

3 comments about Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass (Signet Classics).

1. The Narrative is another book, like Hiroshima, that ever person should read. The in-depth look into Douglass' life shows how slaves were treated during the 19th Century. It explains why the struggle for freedom that led to the American Civil War and why it was such a brutal confrontation.



2. Douglass' personal account of slavery is riveting and one would never believe that a former slave could write so well. The novel starts of explaining Douglass' beginnings and from then on each chapter recounts an important moment in his life. He relives his tortured childhood by giving an accurate and honest description of the horrors of slavery. Being constantly traded from one master to another, he tells of what he saw and experienced with each. Douglass provides real-life stories and shares with us the brutality he encountered. This heart wrenching novel leads up to tell how Frederick Douglass obtained his freedom and how he used it to benefit the many other slaves who were tortured just like he was.



3. I loved the book from beginning to end. If you are looking for feelings, emotion, and real point of views of the slavery era this is the book for you. It is a short right to the point emotionally filled novel that always keeps you turning pages.

5 comments about Anne Sexton: A Biography.

1. This biography is a psychologically compelling, fascinating portrait of Anne Sexton the person. I wouldn't call it a relaxing read, but if you are interested in Anne Sexton or in a rather mysterious mental illness this is for you. I've been telling many friends about this book.



2. This advice applies to anyone who has stumbled upon this page whether or not you like biography or poetry or Anne Sexton. It is one of the few biographies I have read that I would describe as a true page-turner. Yes, Sexton's life has all the ingredients of a page turner. There's incest, there's adultery, there's substance abuse, there's mental illness. All this in the life of someone whose adulthood began as a rather typical 1950s housewife. Middlebrook does not spare us the gritty details, but neither does she exploit her subject for mere sensationalism. Always, even in taking the controversial step of using Sexton's psychotherapy tapes, she demonstrates respect for her subject and for the surviving members of Sexton's family. When her evidence is conflicting about what really happened, as in the case of Sexton's memory of an incestual episode with her father, Middlebrook presents us with the various views of family members and friends and gives us their reasons for believing what they do. Then she presents her own conclusions. Above all else, this is the story of a woman's survival, of her finding herself and saving herself through poetry despite little education and little interest, at first, in art or poetry. Sexton's first poem was a sonnet she wrote after seeing a lecture about sonnets on TV.



3. Biographies are a tricky business. To tell the truth about a person's life, to be fair and thorough without being unkind is a fine line to tread. Diane Middlebrook certainly didn't flinch at giving the reader the dirt on Anne Sexton. From her series of extra-marital affairs to her daughter's memories of Sexton's inappropriate, incestuous behavior--all of it was fair game in Middlebrook's book. She even quoted from audiotapes of Anne Sexton's therapy sessions. This is a biography of a woman brutally exposed, psychologically naked and under a spotlight; strangely, I think that Anne Sexton would be at peace with this enormous invasion of her privacy.
   
   In addition to the lurid personal details and the deep analyses of Sexton's troubled psyche, Middlebrook shows the reader Sexton's intense determination and devotion to becoming a famous poet. Anne would sit at her typewriter for hours everyday, working on poems. She was also very aware of the benefits of creating a dramatic public persona.
   
   Sexton would walk up on stage in a striking black cocktail dress with red lipstick and a seductive swagger. Her throaty voice would cast a spell over the audience as she read her poems. "I am a middle-aged witch. . ." she would begin, and the room would be spell-bound by both her glamour and her bold confessional poetry. But underneath it all, she was a nervous wreck, unable to give a reading without a quick shot of liquor to make her knees stop shaking!
   
   Diane Middlebrook's biography was so piercing, so unforgiving, it was, at times, truly uncomfortable to read. I felt almost voyeuristic, pouring over these shocking private details of Anne Sexton's life. Yet, Middlebrook's book did give me an amazingly powerful feeling of intimacy with one of my favorite poets. She revealed the fragile, flawed Anne Sexton behind the public shell of dark glamour.
   
   Any fans of Sexton's poetry that want to understand the woman behind the words should go ahead and get this book; just be forewarned that Middlebrook does not try to flatter Sexton, only to be truthful.



4. I have not been able to disregard the fact that this brilliant biography by one of the most important poets of our age appears to have been forgotten amid the heat of commerce. But there is another kind of commerce: one in which women have an expertise. When one of us is felled by tragedy, like the huge loss of Anne Sexton, it touches each and every one of us as we learn of its happenstance. One does not have to be a poet, an artist or suicidal to get this. Our collective history as women struggling to balance our lives within a largely patriarchal society with love, home, marriage, divorce, children, career, and faith in whatever form or not - is a burden to which few will admit. Anne Sexton, however, met all of the latter head on with genius artistry and with all the passion and complexitiy any soul could bear. Indeed, as Diane Middlebrook brilliantly writes - she bore it for as long as she possibly could with more grace, style and courage than most. In fact, not only is this biography essential as a purchase, but take the time to collect (if you can...) everything Anne Sexton wrote. You will never be quite the same. And I can only guess that she would have liked that....



5. I am drenched in Sexton,
   now I only wish I could write a poem as well as her-
   minus the insanity!
   
   "I live, Live because of the sun,
   the dream, the excitable gift." -AS-
   
   I loved this biography. I love Anne Sexton. I love her poetry, images, confessional style. I would love to sit with her, have a glass of merlot, discuss what works in a poem, what doesn't. I would say..."Anne, does being crazy help one write a brilliant poem?"
   
   "I am really quite normal for being crazy." Anne said.
   "It's very embarrassing for someone to expose their body to you. You don't learn anything from it. But if they expose their soul, you learn something. That's true of great writers."
   
   And Anne does expose her soul completely, ...but then, this is what makes her interesting, isn't it? This is what makes us want to know her, read her poems, read this biography.
   
   -The woman is bathing her heart.
   It has been torn out of her
   and because it is burnt
   and as a last act
   she is rinsing it off in the river.
   This is the death market.- AS-
   
   I feel without poetry Anne Sexton could not have lived at all; without poetry she would have been in a mental institution and none of us would have been able to savor her gorgeous words.
   With poetry, she lived the best way she knew how.
   
   "Anne Sexton a Biography" reveals much about the woman, the wife, the mother, the friend, the lover, and the artist.
   The reader may feel sorry for her, hate her, despise her, or worship the ground she walks on.
   
   I am still trying to figure it out, but one things for sure...Anne was far from boring.
   
   "One of my secret instructions to myself as a poet is - whatever you do, don't be boring. Every poem owns itself, has it's own voice; the poet is an actor, producing a character out of words." -AS-
   
   Ohhh, Anne Sexton is anything but boring. Middlebrook did her job well, giving us every single imperfection of the poet-
   every pill, drink, affair, kinky, sexual desire...
   
   but don't worry---It's truly about the POETRY, the beautiful, flowing, musical poetry.
   
   --- My nerves are turned on. I hear them like
   musical instruments. Where there was silence the drums, the strings are incurably playing. You did this.
   Pure genius at work. Darling, the composer has stepped
   into fire. -AS-
   
   The reader will step into fire also***a must read for Sexton fans.
   

5 comments about Careless Love: The Unmaking of Elvis Presley.

1. Extremely revealing portrait that makes clear that Elvis became a drug addict even before he went into the Army in 1958. This bio leaves out nothing, including all the dreary and the tawdry as well as the musical genius. While Jerry Lee Lewis lost his career for dallying with his 13-year-old cousin, Elvis got clean away with dating a 14-year-old Priscilla. All the bizarre details are here. Guralnick does it again. A must read for anyone who wants to know the story of Elvis.



2. This second volume, along with the first -- Last Train to Memphis -- are riviting. One of the absolute best biographies I have ever read. A journey through the life, from beginning to end, of one of the world's great entertainers and personalities. Highly recommend.



3. This book is a detailed account of the second half of Elvis Presley's life. Peter Guralnick has painted a vivid portrait of the man whose life should have been magnificent, but instead was so terribly sad.
   
   After reading Guralnick's first volume (Last Train To Memphis), I ran out immediately to buy this one. While I did devour it, it's a bitter pill to swallow. Many nights, I closed the book and then lay awake, thinking, or trying to stop thinking about Elvis. Why did a life with such promise turn out this way? Why did a man who should have been on top of the world, end up so low? Enormous fame and the death of his mother were major contributing factors. Drugs, prescription and otherwise, killed his spirit, his talent, his health and his relationships. And he was exploited by many, especially Col. Tom Parker who trotted him out on tour, when he should have been hospitalized and certainly long-retired.
   
   When I finished the book, I thought, "Did I really want to know all this about him?" Do you? It's your call. I do now understand many things I never did before. And I will not be so quick to idolize, judge or envy anyone unless I've walked a mile in their shoes.



4. From cover to cover, this book was absorbing. The quotes were intertwined with the fast-paced narrative. I felt as if I were living life alongside Elvis as a "fly on the wall" so to speak. This is a book every Elvis fan must own. His human flaws only make you love him more and wish we still had him with us. What a dear person he was: An original.



5. Moving story written with care and respect.
   
   You can't change the facts, you can however handle them discreetly and with care. Well done.

4 comments about Lincoln and the Court.

1. I found Brian McGinty's book on Lincoln and the Supreme Court a well written, comprehensive review of events and legal thinking on several levels. I learned a lot about the history of race relations in the U.S. from the earliest days of the Revolution through the 1870s, and why the Dred Scott decision was such an important event. I learned a lot about how the Supreme Court developed as an institution, the many personalities that made up the Court over this period, and how the growth of what was a young nation was reflected in the kinds of issues the Court considered. There is a lot of interesting insight about American politics through the middle of the 19th Century, and the personal relationships that influenced the advent of the Civil War, its execution, and its aftermath.
   
   There is a good review of various areas of the law that were important at the time, some of which, such as Admiralty, of less general interest today, but others, such as Civil Liberties and habeas corpus, very much current.
   
   McGinty provides good support for his professed esteem for Lincoln. There is much in this book about the personal and political relationships Lincoln had, and how Lincoln showed wisdom in managing the many forces seeking to influence the course of his presidency and the war.
   
   There is a lot of information packed into the 315 pages of text. McGinty expresses himself well and clearly. Sometimes he uses 10 words when 7 or 8 would suffice, and sometimes he summarizes things he had just explained a few pages earlier, but the reader won't lose track of who the characters are.
   
   As a general reader, I found this an interesting history of the Supreme Court and the Civil War, and I thought it a useful addition to my knowledge of Lincoln's life and philosophy.



2. I found this to be an outstanding work in legal and constitutional history, bringing a fresh perspective to this topic that already has been well covered by others. See, e.g., James F. Simon, "Lincoln and Chief Justice Taney." I think there are several reasons for the outstanding success of the book. First, the author takes his time and thoroughly discusses his topics--no quick summary of a case and then moving on here. Second, the author is extremely through in covering his topic--not just Lincoln and Taney, although that is an important theme obviously, but also he discusses topics such as Lincoln's appointments to the Court and how the Court continued on dealing with these issues after Lincoln's death. Finally, the author writes so effectively that even familiar material becomes interesting and stimulating.
   
   All of the major cases are examined (habeas corpus, trial by military tribunals, Legal Tender, McCardle limitations on jurisdiction, and Texas v. White holding that the Union was never dissolved). Several chapters stand out, including that on Dred Scott (one of the best treatments I have seen) and the Prize Cases, which I used to think were quite boring. In addition, each Justice is profiled in depth, and a Gallery section contains excellent full-page photographs of each. Lincoln's challenge in making Court appointments is well covered, presenting the President with the opportunity to secure solid votes to uphold his conduct of the war, but also the need not to antagonize the border states he sought to keep in the Union. The author's attention to the post-Lincoln Court allows him to offer a fine assessment of Taney's successor, Salmon P. Chase, who managed in the Legal Tender Cases to vote exactly opposite the position he had taken as Secretary of the Treasury.
   
   The book is supported by 29 pages of notes, an excellent bibliography and index, as well as being a beautifully-printed volume to boot. Sometimes taking a new look at an old topic can result in important insights--such is the case with this book.



3. A nice overview of the Supreme Court, encompassing the years just prior to Lincoln's election, his term in office, and through the cases decided after his assassination but on matters that arose out of the conduct of the Civil War. The era's critical legal disputes, from the infamous Dred Scott decision to the Test Oath cases, are reviewed. Of special interest to today's reader is the discussion of the validity of sentences imposed on civilians by military tribunals.
   
   This book is a good reminder of the importance of the U.S. Supreme Court, and the rule of law, during our country's Civil War. It also provides useful short character sketches of the various justices who served at that time and the role politics played in the selection of these same men, including Roger Taney and Salmon P. Chase. (More attention, rightfully so, is paid these two flawed but historically important chief justices.)
   
   Brian McGinty provides a good legal analysis in prose that while not soaring is more than adequate to the task. One significant overstatement, I think, is made on page 245, when the author writes, "Although his own views on racial equality had evolved over the years, he [Lincoln] never denigrated blacks." While Abraham Lincoln was ultimately a great man on racial issues, he did say certain negative things about blacks during his life, such as in his famed debates with Stephen Douglas.
   
   (As an aside, the use of the word "denigrated" is interesting in that it is derived from the word "nigare" or "black". It means to "blacken" or disparage.)



4. I am not much for political history or biographies. Given a choice between reading Sears' Gettysburg and Goodwin's Team of Rivals, my choice is reading Gettysburg. That fact needs to be explained as I found this a difficult book to read but a very rewarding learning experience. My difficulty has nothing to do with the author's skill as a writer but my preference as a reader. This is a book about judges, most of them old, and their ideas on how the law should be applied. President's have problems with the court when the court's idea conflicts with the Presidents. Lincoln was no exception but he faced a greater danger to the nation and the court's actions could have had a much greater impact than they normally do.
   
   McGinty starts with a series of portraits of the judges and how they had achieved their position. He manages to make them both human and inform the reader of their outlook in an interesting an informative manner. He covers personal quirks, deeply held beliefs, family and background showing us these men as both human and political beings. This provides a very firm foundation for a somewhat technical discussion of the cases and issues that follow.
   
   The chapter on the Dred Scott case is one of the best in the book. Having covered Lincoln's opposition to the Court's decision in a prior chapter, the author walks us through the issues and the Court's decision. He insures that we have the opportunity to gain a solid understanding of their reasoning based on their personalities and the law.
   
   The next major case is Merryman and once more, the author takes the time to cover the issues, the history and the decision. Again, this is a very good chapter and fully explains the issues and what happened after the decision was made.
   
   I was very impressed with the introduction and the author's ideas of the Court's view on secession. While never tested, it has given me a new series of ideas to think and talk about.
   
   This is not an exciting book to read, unless you enjoy reading about legal precedent. However, it is well written and thought provoking. As my title says; this is not an easy read but it is a rewarding one that will give you an additional perspective on the Civil War.