1 comments about AMERICAN FEVER: A Biography of Ole Ruud Pioneer of the Washington Territory.

1. I very much enjoyed reading about Ole Ruud. Ms. Stradling has done an admirable job or fleshing out the life of her pioneer ancestor. When I had finished the book I felt like I knew Ole very well and he was the kind of man you'd love to have as a neighbor and friend. The basic format of the book is a compilation of Ole's letters to relatives interspersed with Stradling's commentary to keep the story in perspective. Both Ole and Ms. Stradling knew how to tell a story and so the book flows naturally. It is quite informative about what it was like to be a pioneer at the turn of the last century in Wasington Territory's Big Bend.

No comments about Copper Country Journal: The Diary of Schoolmaster Henry Hobart, 1863-1864 (Great Lakes Books).

No comments about Representative Americans: The Romantics (Representative Americans).

4 comments about Stephen F. Austin: Empresario of Texas.

1. This is the first biography of "The Founder of Texas" since Eugene Barker's magisterial work published in 1925. A wait of nearly 75 years for a modern follow-up is tolerable when the results are as good as this.
   
   Austin was a complicated figure; much of his life played out in contradictions: born a Southerner, he was educated in the Northeast; an eloquent and persuasive spokesman in the public arena, he found it difficult expressing his emotions to those closest to him and never married; abhorring slavery, he fought for the right of slavery to exist in Texas; a cultivated man, he spent most of his life on the coarse and harsh frontier; he longed for peace and stability in his life, yet lived during extremely chaotic times; driven to "put his house in order," he claimed his only mission in life was "to redeem Texas from its wilderness state." His father inspired his son to dream big dreams and take on the challenges and responsibilities required to make them realities; when Moses Austin died before being able to colonize the 200,000 acres he acquired in Texas, he left it to Stephen to accomplish. And he did. Austin was not perfect and made mistakes (and enemies); possibly his biggest mistake was going to Washington to petition recognition for Texas at the time that the Alamo fell and, even more importantly, when Sam Houston defeated Santa Anna at San Jacinto six weeks later. Recognizing the significance of that victory not only for Texas but for himself, he hastened to Texas from Washington as quickly as possible. He lost the presidency of the Republic to Houston. A sickly man most of his life, he died of fever in December 1836, only six months after his return.
   
   Gregg Cantrell's biography is a pleasure to read. Informative and compelling, it's a "Life" of Austin and not a "Life and Times." He captured my interest right from the beginning; not hesitant to indicate Austin's shortcomings, he also obviously respects the man. It's a solid, well written biography of an important figure in Texas (and American) history. Highly recommended.



2. Gregg Cantrell has tackled a sacred cow and come out unscathed. His new book, Stephen F. Austin, Empresario of Texas is a meticulously researched and carefully written profile of a man we only thought we knew.

   Our knowledge of Stephen Fuller Austin, is gleaned largely from the work of Eugene C. Barker. His 1925 tome, Life of Stephen F. Austin, painted this renowned figure as "The Father of Texas"...and rightly so. However, the Austin we see in Barker's work is a flat two-dimensional character lacking much of the humanity needed to explain the heroism behind the hero.

   Though technically accurate, Barker provided little to help us understand the motivations behind Austin the man or of the dynamic forces that led to the making of a republic.

   In Stephen F. Austin, Empresario of Texas. Gregg Cantrell brings to life the real Stephen F. Austin with all of his strengths and foibles. We learn in some depth how Austin was destined for greatness, a direct product of his father's influence. His father, Moses Austin, at one point was quite wealthy and wielded a powerful hand in creating his son in his own image. He wanted him to be a gentleman living in the world of high finance. Who Stephen F. Austin was and the way he thought all bear the mark of Moses Austin's influence.

   When the younger Austin grew into manhood, his father put him in charge of various business ventures within the Austin empire. Stephen's training paid off as he showed himself to be adroit at business. Unfortunately, an economic depression and several bad business dealings (mostly initiated by the elder Austin), left the family buried in overwhelming debt.

   By 1820, Moses Austin saw a possible way to get his head above financial water. He became the first Anglo to get permission to colonize Spanish Texas. Unfortunately, he died before realizing his goal. His deathbed request was that Stephen bring the colony to fruition. Under a sense of instilled familial loyalty very characteristic of the young Austin, he reluctantly abandoned his own course to obey his father's wishes.

   When Mexican independence became a reality, Stephen F. Austin skillfully navigated through the waters of the diplomatic intricacies to which he had been thrust. He began to see that building his colony was a way to repay the enormous debts the family had accumulated and to restore a measure of honor to his father's name. He would make his fortune through land. He threw himself wholeheartedly into the work of colonizing Texas and it soon became clear that it was not just another business venture but a mission. This mission would eventually be to create an independent Texas by any means.

   Austin earned the title "Father of Texas" by overseeing every aspect of the colony and the lives of those under his care. He became a fierce advocate for the rights of his colonists and worked tirelessly for many years (many times to his own detriment) to ensure the success of the colony.

   His was not an easy task. The central government in Mexico was in a constant state of turmoil. Cantrell shows us that one of Austin's biggest strengths was his ability to forge alliances with the powers at the heart of Mexico and the Tejano elite of Texas. Men like Don Erasmo Seguín and Lorenzo de Zavala had the deepest respect for Stephen F. Austin and shared his vision of Texas. He even earned the respect of those who opposed him.

   Throughout the book, Cantrell discusses Austin's struggle with his personal demons. All through his life, Austin was plagued with self-doubt and self-pity. He also experienced bouts of deep depression. His physical stature was not great and sometimes even frail due to chronic illness. What set Stephen F. Austin apart was that he pushed himself to the limits of human endurance and set his own interests aside many times for the good of others. Therein lies his heroism. He persisted when lesser men would have quit.

   Our tendency with heroes is to deify them and negate their humanity. Cantrell pulls no punches in revealing the full human nature of Stephen F. Austin. It was surprising to this reader to learn Austin's attitudes toward blacks and toward Catholics. Though in theory, Austin opposed the institution of slavery, he himself owned slaves. He fought diligently for his colonists to keep their slaves and not to free slaves already living in Texas. He feared that if blacks were freed, their number would increase. His vision was for a Texas populated predominately by whites.

   He looked upon Catholicism as gross 12th century ignorance, a yoke of oppression that retarded Mexico's progress into the 19th century. Austin seldom voiced these feelings except to a few close friends. It would not have faired well in his diplomatic relations.

   Stephen F. Austin was indeed human. He wasn't perfect. He made mistakes; but until his death at age 43, he never faltered in his devotion to Texas.

   Stephen F. Austin, Empresario of Texas brings a clear understanding of the events that led to the Texas Revolution. If you have ever wondered why there was an Alamo, Goliad or San Jacinto, then you should read this book.

   The narrative is clear and well written and it held my attention from page one. I highly recommend this book.




3. Comments about the personal development of historical figures are sometimes ignored in favor a list of achievements. Cantrell includes details of how Moses Austin encouraged his son to be a big thinker. The Austin family's "can do" attitude is certainly reflected in in Stephen's life.



4. This biography is written so well, and the story so interesting, it could be a novel from James Michener. If you are interested in Texas history, Southwest history, Mexican history, or Westward Expansion and Manifest Destiny, this book is a must read. I'll be VERY suprised if you don't like it.

3 comments about Nellie Bly:: Daredevil, Reporter, Feminist.

1. This is the only scholarly biography of Nellie Bly available. It is carefully researched and documented, and presents a nuanced and composite picture of Nellie Bly. It is not a splashy story, which is probably why the other reviewers found it dull and dry. For research purposes, however, that's a very good thing. An excellent bibliography points interested researchers to secondary and primary sources.



2. While Nellie Bly was certainly a compelling character, and the biography clearly well-researched, the author presents her subject in a dull, lifeless manner. After waiting for years to read a comprehensive work about someone I have always found so fascinating, I was terribly disappointed.



3. Nellie Bly (born Elizabeth Jane Cochran) was a very interesting lady. I chose her for my report, and this was the most helpful book. I didn't think I'd want to read the whole book through, but I did since Bly's life was so exciting!

5 comments about Sharing Good Times.

1. Having the highest regard and respect for former President Jimmy Carter (in fact, world leaders should emulate his wisdom, style and ideals), I say the following very delicately.
   
   Admirable in that former President Carter communicates to the world his inner and private feelings from childhood thru adulthood. The meaning of sharing with family, friends, total strangers, foreign dignitaries, etc. is the purpose of a contented existence. At first this did not come easy to President Carter, but as the years came and went it surfaced, and he was at peace with himself.
   
   So-so in that the redundant theme of the Carters gallivanting and vacationing all over the world could lead some to resentment for not being able to do the same(?). One must take into consideration though that President Carter would oftentimes combine work with pleasure (the presidency, Carter Center). So, why not take side trips while in Europe, Asia, Africa, etc.?
   Overall, a warm and compassionate read on morals, values and hope.



2. From our greatest living statesman come more pearls of wisdom.
   A kind and thoughtful man, husband and father, Jimmy Carter shares insightful stories of his life with friends and family. Learn how love and trust can carry us through the tuff times and reward us in the golden years.



3. This book is not a biography per se rather a collection of the most pivotal moments in Jimmy Carter's life containing little "work" and much "play". In this collection of short stories we see Jimmy Carter the son, father, grandfather, climber, painter, and outdoorsman. The conspicuous lack of politics, apart from a brief couple of pages, establishes just how human Jimmy Carter really is. His greatest joys are his children and charitable works not the galas he has attended or the dignitaries he has met, making this a refreshing memoir.



4. This man is a dying breed. You really just wont find too many more Americans with value as true and with priorities leaning toward all of the right places. I just took away so much from this humble little book. I did not expect it. It did not floor me by any means but just spoke gentlty of one mans life as he shares it with the people around him.
   
   At one point as he is campaining or going on a business trip or whatever he says to Rosalynn "Rosalynn I am going out of town, please pack my suitcase and I need pressed shirts blah blah blah. And she says right out of nowhere "pack it yourself". So he says that he was fuming really bad while he was packing his bag but from that day forward it was no longer his show only. They became partners in all of the decision making and even let the children in on it. You really dont see many people possessing such good manners/leadership/practicality/humilty and just real common sense intellegence in life today. And you certainly wont find anyone like that running for president. Please I hope I am proved wrong someday soon.



5. Where do I begin? This is such a dreadful book, full of Jimmy's flawed recollections, rewriting of history, and outright lies. He brags about his close relationship with dictators, like the murderous Kim Il Sung, with whom he conducated negotiations on his own, while President Clinton was trying to run a foreign policy.
   
   Not being content with destroying the reputation of the US during his brief term, Jimmy then dogged Bill Clinton for eight years, travelling around the world courting the Nobel Prize comittee while certifying corrupt elections and similarly making Clinton's job in the international sphere that much more difficult. You won't find any admission of that here. (Nor will you find mention of the cryptically racist campaign he used to win one-term govenorship)
   
   More recently, he's been on the move certifying electrons in dictatorships, in one case- Ethiopea- certifying the election as fair, and leaving the country before the votes were even counted!
   
   Great men rarely write autobiographies; they leave that to historians. Books like these are written by petty men who have little to say aside from their own self-aggrandizement, and are looking to pre-empt historians looking for truth.
   
   For a better, more accurate picture of Jimmy Carter, I'd suggest "The Real Jimmy Carter: How Our Worst Ex-President Undermines American Foreign Policy, Coddles Dictators, and Created the Party of Clinton and Kerry", by Steven F. Hayward.

2 comments about Out of the Frying Pan: Reflections of a Japanese American.

1. As the son of the author, it is impossible to write an objective review. The author is a retired editor with the Denver Post and a member of the Journalism Hall of Fame. He has written several books on the history of the Japanese Americans in the U.S. This book brings together his stories, perceptions and insights around his experiences prior to and after World War II. It is a "quick read" written in the concise style of a journalist. It is not a victim's story nor a hero's story. It is reporting of little-known events with the personal insights of the author.



2. Bill Hosokawa remind us that history must not repeat itself nor be forgotten; that is, placing Japanese Americans in concentration camps during the out break of World War II. "Out of the Frying Pan" explains and exemplifies the true meaning of being an American of Japanese descent, while overcoming racial discrimination in the land of the free. This book must be read by those who believe in the true colors of red, white and blue.

No comments about The World of Benjamin Cardozo: Personal Values and the Judicial Process.

3 comments about The Remarkable Life of John Murray Spear: Agitator for the Spirit Land.

1. Dr. Buescher is to be commended for this masterpiece of comprehensive, detailed, richly anecdotal biography of a man so diverse in his passions as to make your head swim. And for this reason perhaps this book may not become as well know as it should- though I certainly hope otherwise. John Murray Spear was an epitome of trying to live so altruistically for his fellow disenfranchied beings that like Ariel he moved on the winds of each social progressive movement that manifested itself in 19th century America.
   
   This book for the first time gives you the entire alternative landscape of fringe religion, social movements and experiments through the almost Baron Munchausen inner adventures of Spear. From passionate Universalist, abolition, prisoner rights, (Spear & his brother should be honored as the father of the parole movement alone), feminism, free love and finally culminating in Spiritualism. Finding a spiritual home at last he becomes an apostle of this new movement and was instrumental as a first generational Spiritualist in taking the new dispensation to England.
   
   Additional fascinating pieces of this superb book includes for the first time a detailed history of the entire "New Motor" experiment. I recall as a child first reading tantalizing tidbits in fortean paperbacks about this Victorian "Frankenchrist" event that boggled my childish mind with gothic pleasure & beginning theology. I also discovered for the first time the Spiritualist/sewing machine connection- you'll have to read the book for this one. And unless one reads a history of the Oneida colony. you'll not find a more comprehensive survey of the free love movement in America. I hope that a copy of this work may find itself falling into the hands of a Tim Burton or Terry Gilliam, no other director could capture the visual sheer surreality of the life of the Reverend Spear. Giddily recommended.



2. "The Remarkable Life Of John Murray Spear: Agitator For The Spirit Land" by John Buescher (Chief of the Tibetan Broadcast Service of the Voice of America) is the biography of one of 19th century America's most idiosyncratic and radical religious figures whose flamboyant spiritualist proclivities led him to protest slavery and capital punishment, invent 'spirit machines', and perhaps most surprisingly -- advocate 'free love'. While Spear help organize public support for anarchist, socialist, peace, and labor causes, his personal life was an eccentric mixture of the comic and the profane and provides contemporary readers with a remarkable perspective on 19th century American religious and social life. An impressive body of well research and superbly written detail, "The Remarkable Life Of John Murray Spear" is informative, entertaining, and very highly recommended reading on the life and times of a remarkable distinctive man who helped to shape American history.



3. This is a proud legacy for John Murray Spear - to have his life and times depicted by John Buescher, someone so devoted to historical fact and sensitive to the motives and paradoxical moments of the pioneer days of Modern Spiritualism. Spear, an early practitioner of that belief, is also one of the 19th century's most colorful characters. He is rendered here with a deft touch and keen perception by scholar and historian Buescher who meticulously researched and wrote an earlier, wide-ranging book featuring Spear, "The Other Side of Salvation: Spiritualism in the Nineteenth-Century Religious Experience." The author's skills truly shine in this immensely readable biography of the magnetic Spear's inventive and eccentric persona -- a healer and medium who attracted a multitude of devoted supporters and endorsed the ambivalent tenets of "Free Love" plus a number of colorful (if not downright crazy) plans for a utopian community at Kiantone, New York (near Jamestown). Spear also possessed a frantic commitment to development of his New Motor Project (near Lynn, Massachusetts) which seemed to cause his nubile assistant, Caroline, to become pregnant with a child that - surprisingly! - strongly resembled the married Spear. John Buescher is the genius behind the wonderfully inclusive [..] and here he has authored an entertaining and illuminating book for anyone with an appetite for nineteenth century religious doctrines and their idiosyncratic practitioners. Spear is depicted as engaging, funny, thoughtful, flamboyant, and true to his convictions. Buescher treats his subject with authority and warmth. It's a great read. I highly recommend it.

5 comments about The MAN WHO ONCE WAS WHIZZER WHITE: A PORTRAIT OF JUSTICE BYRON R WHITE.

1. I first read this biography when it was published in 1998; because I am working with a former White clerk on a matter, I recently took another look--it has held up very well. The author, Dennis J. Hutchinson, long affiliated with the University of Chicago and its law school, had the advantage of having clerked for White. But this is no hagiography, and is quite critical in spots. Because White (1917-2002) has become all but invisible to current generations of Court watchers, and this is the major biography available on him, it is an important book. One measure of the author's thoroughness is that White does not make it onto the Court until page 335 (he served between 1962 and 1993)--the previous pages are devoted to a meticulous account of his prior life, and what a life it was: football All-American; Rhodes Scholar; graduate work at Oxford; then onto Yale Law School while playing in the NFL; valuable work during the war in Naval Intelligence; then clerking on the Court; followed up with a successful law practice and politics in Denver, including work on the JFK campaign in 1960; a stint as Deputy Attorney General under RFK and then appointment to the Court.
   
   Hutchinson does not follow the frequent practice of reviewing every major decision a subject made while on the Court; rather the picks out three terms (1971, 1981, and 1991) for extended analysis. He looks at such topics as White's opinion style, including his dissent format; his incremental approach; the problems some had with White's opinion style; his interaction with fellow Justices; and his views on such topics as affirmative action, abortion and finding "new" constitutional rights. Always central to the discussion is White's independence, as manifested for example in being the only Justice against taking away (in effect) Justice Douglas's vote due to his incapacity. The author also speculates as to the forces that did and did not shape (such as Yale legal realism) White's view. White's reputation for being a difficult and distant individual to deal with certainly is borne out by the book, although White clerks will tell you he was great to work for. Whatever, White is a fading figure, and it falls largely to this fine biography to keep his memory and accomplishments alive.



2. Byron White intentionally did not leave much of a paper trail, as a man distrustful of the press, which is why this book has nowhere near the depth of Jeffries' Powell biography. White may well be most vilified and castigated justice in his own time, a fact which Hutchinson recounts in great detail, because he frequently ruled against the interests of the intelligensia-- frivolous First Amendment rights claimed by the media, and, of course, homosexuals, in Bowers, which won him the most profane attacks of all, from gay rights activists imbued with more passion than respect for the deliberative function of the Courts.
   
   White, though he is accused of "moving right" over the course of his career, was in fact remarkably consistent. The problem was that he was guided by a considerably more complex set of principles than most justices, another fact which Hutchinson brings out quite well. He had an extremely uptight view of electoral politics, disliked formalism in all of its forms, was always against categorically forclosing judicial review, and absolutely despised substantive due process, especially Roe v. Wade. Yet White was an extraordinarily fair-minded and scrupled man. He was the only justice to object to the Court's attempt to retire the debilitated Justice William O. Douglas on its own accord, was an aritculate opponent of formalistic separation-of-powers and federalism doctrine, and frequently came out on the side of the downtrodden (see his role in Jacobson v. U.S.). History should view White more kindly than most of his contemporaries-- he was a man totally without an sort of a political agenda, the type of fair-minded and intelligent person so lacking from our Courts today.
   
   There are some faults here: Hutchinson's forays into Constitutional commentary in the text are very opaque and inappropriate for the book. This book is generally well-written and well-researched, but its appeal will generally be to hardcore watchers of the Warren, Burger, and early Rehnquist courts or fans of White himself-- evidently a small group, as this book is now nearly out of print.



3. Byron White began his long judicial career in dissent, resisting the rising tide of criminal procedure liberalism of the Warren Court, and ended it as the balance wheel of Rehnquist Court. In his 31 years on the Supreme Court, from 1962 to 1993, he was in the majority in 807 five-to-four decisions, more than any other justice in history, except for the wily William Brennan who served on the court for 34 years. White also has the signal distinction of being the only Democratic appointee to the Supreme Court since the end of World War II who profoundly disappointed his erstwhile partisan allies. Beyond the fact that White refused to "grow" his jurisprudence from its New Deal origins to accommodate the latest cultural avant-garde enthusiasms of the juridical left, little is known about White and his jurisprudence is widely misunderstood.

   The litany of White's accomplishments and his early rise to the court serve to obscure the lines of his jurisprudence, which he never made an attempt to clarify. Hutchinson's principal accomplishment is to discern from the mass of White's opinions a sound jurisprudential framework obscured by bulk of White's output (1,275 opinions in 31 years), and in doing so refute the assertion that White was unpredictable.

   Although White was popularly described as a conservative jurist, this confounds the term as it is used to describe a specific interpretive philosophy with the judicial tradition which White came to exemplify. Today judicial conservatism is virtually synonymous with "original meaning," the method of constitutional interpretation that holds that the Constitution means only what it was understood to mean by those whose assent made it law. This has certain implications, among them that the Congress's powers are limited to those enumerated, that the three branches of federal government and their powers are strictly separated, and that the states retain inviolable spheres of sovereignty. In this sense, White was not a conservative at all. Where, say, Justice Antonin Scalia would subscribe to these general notions, White would not. For instance, while Scalia believes that the law permitting the appointment of Independent Counsels violates the separation of powers doctrine (Morrison v. Olson), White sees it as a permissible experimentation with the form of government. And though Scalia believes that the powers of Congress are, however tangentially, limited (Lopez v. United States) and that the states retain areas of discretion where the Congress may not intrude (Printz v. United States), White views the powers of the Congress as essentially unlimited (Katzenbach v. McClung) and the states as retaining no sovereignty that the Congress is obliged to respect (Garcia v. San Antonio Metro. Transit Authority). Although Hutchinson views "New Deal liberal" and "pragmatist" as imperfect labels, his carefully wrought and insightful analysis of White's jurisprudence nonetheless establishes that they are fair and roughly approximate descriptions of Justice White.

   In it's judicial aspect the New Deal generally sought to eliminate restrictions on the exercise of federal power. These breaks on government power were exemplified early in this century by an activist libertarian Supreme Court's invocation of natural rights and non-textual notions of substantive due process to strike economic regulation. Lochner v. New York, where the court struck down regulations on the working hours of bakers as a violation of their liberty to contract their labor, is perhaps the most famous bugbear of New Dealers. But restrictions also came in the form of the enumerated powers doctrine and in the form of early criminal procedure cases which, as Professor Akhil Reed Amar of Yale has noted, invoked natural law and private property rights, and thus restricted the government's policing powers. All of these, in one way or another, restricted federal action. Judges of New Deal era, then, had a distinctly negative ambition: To remove the restrictions on the exercise of federal power so that the Congress, acting with the Executive, could enact social reform.

   The ambition of liberal judges changed, of course, with the rise of "the real Warren Court," which historian David P. Currie of the University of Chicago dates to the replacement of Justice Frankfurter by Arthur Goldberg late in 1962. "Willful judges," as Justice Scalia describes them, were no longer content with deferring to the overtly political branches, but were now eager to enact social reform themselves. The criminal procedure cases of the Warren Court were animated by the ideas that policing by the states was institutionally racist and that crime was a manifestation of disease, not evil, and should be addressed as a public health concern. Steeped in the New Deal idea of the judicial function, however, White largely dissented from Warren Court's innovations. He dissented from Miranda v Arizona, which mandated the now famous warnings to criminal suspects; prefiguring contemporary arguments, he wrote "there will not be a gain, but a loss, in human dignity" because under Miranda some criminals will be returned to the street to repeat their crimes.. White would also labor to limit the scope of rule excluding from trial illegally obtained evidence, and would dissent from Robinson v. California, where the court struck down a California statute criminalizing narcotics addiction. The court said that the state could not punish a person's "status" as an addict, only his conduct; White, sensibly enough, pointed out that addiction accrues through continuous willful behavior.

   White was a pragmatist. He didn't believe that the provisions of the Bill of Rights had a "single meaning" or that constitutional provisions could be measured like the provisions of a deed, in "metes and bounds," but he was insistent that constitutional innovations be small and slow, and linked in a rational process. His father taught him that "You can't just stand on your rights all the time in a small town," and White had a lifetime aversion to "the angels of fashionable opinion," as Hutchinson memorably calls ideologues of various stripe. But White's contempt for philosophy could lead him astray. In Reitman v. Mulkey, White wrote the opinion of the court holding that California could not repeal a fair housing law because the repeal was motivated by animus toward minorities. In time, the case was precedent for the current Supreme Court's invalidation, in Romer v. Evans, of Colorado's attempt to deny homosexuals privileged legal status, and for a lower federal court to stay the implementation of California's Proposition 209, barring racial and sexual discrimination in state services. Pragmatism unguided by a philosophy lead White to judgments the long-term ill consequences of which he was not equipped to foresee.

   However, White's small-step pragmatism and disdain for ideological enthusiasms kept him from joining most of the Warren and Burger Court's radical social agenda. Although he was willing to recognize, in Griswold v. Connecticut, a non-textual right to privacy permitting married couples access to contraception and even was willing to extend the right to non-married couples in Eisenstadt v. Baird, White famously and vigorously dissented from Roe v. Wade, privately telling people that he thought it was the only illegitimate decision the court made during his tenure. Perhaps just as upsetting to the votaries of judicial activism was White's majority opinion in Bowers v. Hardwick, which held that Georgia could constitutionally prohibit homosexual sodomy. White briskly dismissed the argument that homosexual activity was constitutionally protected: "[T]o claim that a right to engage in such conduct is `deeply rooted in this nation's history and tradition' or `implicit in the concept of ordered liberty' is, at best, facetious."

   In an sense, White was precisely the type of conservative -- one who slows progress, but does not reverse it; one who ratifies the past, whatever its content -- that liberals claim they want. Except for Roe, White would later vote to reaffirm precedent, on the basis of stare decisis, with which he had earlier disagreed. And yet, few modern justices -- except, perhaps, Justice Clarence Thomas -- have been the object of so much vitriol as White. When White retired in 1993, Jeffrey Rosen of the New Republic called White "a perfect cipher" and a "mediocrity," Bruce Ackerman of Yale said he was "out of his depth," and the New York Times' Tom Wicker called him the "bitterest legacy of the Kennedy Administration." The best Calvin Trillin, writing in The Nation, could say of White was "We count his loyalty to team a boon/The other side might well select a loon" -- this in backhanded praise that White retired during a Democratic administration. These facile slurs betray the mercurial enthusiasms of the age more than they carefully trace the lineaments of Justice White's jurisprudence and are therefore more reflective of their authors than White's jurisprudence.

   In many ways White is entirely alien to today's culture, popular and lega




4. Hutchinson has written a fascinating contemporary biography of Justice White who is almost unique in his continued insistence on his privacy and personal dignity. Although the author eschews speculation as to White's family or personal life, one still gets a good sense of the man--his intelligence, tenacity, and just plain decency. At least as interesting are the times he lived in, and few lawyers or judges have shared the action and passion of their times more fully than Justice White--first on the gridiron, then in the classroom, in the world of affairs, and on the court. White had his shortcomings as a communicator and legal theorist, as Hutchinson aptly illustrates with the oral and written record. But would that our society had more such self-effacing, dedicated and excellent lawyers and public servants!



5. This book was a disappointment. I think that with the recent comprehensive late 20th Century biographies, such as the recent ones about Rockefeller and Lindbergh and Nigel Hamilton's Reckless Youth, we have come to expect the biographer to do a thorough investigation and analysis of the circumstances that impacted the subject. While I do not expect a Freudian approach in every case (and would probably object to it if done expressly), I welcome gentle suggestions that link early events in the subject's life with the later, more well known, events. This analysis was missing from Whizzer (with the exception of the origins of his hatred for the press). The book reads as if it is a collection of on-line newspapers searches, ones that I could have done myself if NEXIS had newspapers dating back to the 30s. Didn't anybody keep a diary? Didn't anybody write letters? Didn't anybody have any introspective thoughts? To those who say that this type of analysis is not necessary for a judicial biography, I direct them to John Jeffrey's book about Powell, which I thought was very well done, and a good model for what a judicial biography can be.