5 comments about The People's Tycoon: Henry Ford and the American Century.

1. It's a great book with TONS of Information and in Wonderful condition which I received in a very timely manner and MY HUSBAND LOVED IT!



2. Here was this supreme industrial genius, Henry Ford, with a dark side which was hard to understand. Do read the two professional reviews above. They cover some very good ground about this book between them. Beware that, like many overly-highbrow reviewers, both are guilty of the "but" syndrome: they will tell you that Henry Ford was the premier genius of the 20th century, BUT his personality wrecked a lot of things. That implied "but," as any negotiator or linguist will tell you, says that the reviewer didn't mean any of the good stuff before the "but." That's unfair. Reading this quite lengthy book cannot help but let the reader conclude that Ford muscled this country into the modern age we all have now.
   
   The author often brings in Ford's own version of what a modern society ought to be. This is interesting, but not key to U.S. history. It is surprising that this very detailed book does not seem to distinguish the differing importance between: Ford's gifts to manufacturing technology and philosophy - decisive; and his wishes about how people should act in a society - irrelevant. The book makes this point indirectly many times, although the author seems not to catch on himself.
   
   The only really troublesome aspect of "People's Tycoon" is the wandering too freely through time in telling the Ford story. Like many histories in print, the author follows a thread of thought through years, then comes back to other threads of thought (think back to some of our confusing 6th grade history books). If this drives you crazy, then pick another biography of Ford. This may not cause a problem for many readers, but it is understandable that it could be for some, and this is a cautionary note. For example, as Henry Ford lost his intellect slowly through the decades, one might want to know if these losses were happening at the same time as, say, when he was shamefully ranting about races and cultures, or about his misunderstandings with son Edsel Ford. Still, this large work is well researched, and very well worth the time.



3. This is a review of the condition of the book - not the content of the book.
   
   I purchased this because I enjoy biographies of iconic American figures - and at 7.99 this book is hard to pass up so I figured I would add it to m y collection.
   
   This book came wrapped in celephane as a new book would - with a tight binding and inexpensive material for binder cover. The pages at the end of the book did not line up as the same width along the edge where you open the book. It looks like a 100 year old library book where pages could be falling out.
   
   The paper quality for a hardcover book is also below what one would expect. Most of my paperbacks have a better quality more durable paper than this book does.
   
   I guess I'll chalk this up to " You get what you pay for " but If I paid full price for this book - I'd definitely send it back for anohter copy.
   
   I'll try and update the content review of this book later after I read the book. But I'm currently reading another title.



4. How interesting. Henry Ford was the Bill Gates of his day and changed America forever. But he was kind of a nutcase!
   
   This book gets bogged down occassionally by too much information on his social positions. And he sometimes repeats himself. But all-in-all it was a good read and an eye-opener about one of the men who made the American Century. I would recommend it.



5. While the facts are presented in a more or less historical fashion (Watts jumps from one year to the next and then back again with dizzying speed) the author continually and exhaustively repeats himself. He resorts to quoting newspapers of the day (make that ALL of the newspapers of the day) to reinforce his already over-stated and rambling views. In fact, one wonders how much of this book was actually written by the author. Three out of four paragraphs on every page are nothing more than quotes from newspaper articles. The title of the book should be something along the line of, "Henry Ford -- According to the Newspapers -- With a Smattering of Left Wing Collegiate Opinion Thrown-In for Good Measure."
   A long-winded, anti-corporate, pro-Marxist-Unionist perspective by a college professor obviously hoping for PBS to turn this voluminous sleeping pill into an equally borish mini-series.

5 comments about Robert E. Lee: A Biography.

1. This is a fine biography of Lee, though not necessarily the best. In an attempt to provide new insights the author seems to stretch the evidence in areas that just don't add up. The insinuation that Lee's flirtations with women were less than innocent is just speculation that takes away from the book. The author does a good job of explaining the little things that Lee had to deal with in his life. He comes off human. Lee has to deal with parenting and marital issues. In one incident his wife embarrasses him by causing him to overdraft his bank account. I thought the book's strength was the period of the last year of the war until Lee's death. Here we see Lee struggling with his helplessness in the face of Grant's ever tightening noose. Realizing the inevitable, Lee becomes testy with his staff and subordintes. Finding defeat certain Lee ponders the advantages of death over the agony of surrender. I thought the post-war years were covered very well. Lee doesn't just retire to academic life, he has to deal with the headaches of reconstruction. Whether it involved his students attacking freedmen or having to personally testify to federal agents, his post-war years were challenging. In the end Lee faces these challenges with the courage and character for which he is so rightly famous. This book is worth a read.



2. This is the best book on the market of its kind. It is a fascinating and intimate look into the personal and public life of one of the most revered figures of the Civil War. Robert E. Lee was not a man who wore his heart on his sleeve, and only a handful of very close friends, most of them women, really knew what made him tick. This work exposes his private flaws while celebrating his public strengths. Best of all, it transforms him from the symbolic marble statue which time has created, into the human being that he really was.



3. Thomas' book offers a fascinating insight into United States history during the early and mid parts of the nineteenth century. Lee's early career and his family life are treated in great and revealing detail. Robert E. Lee emerges as a man of exceptionally high principles and as a concerned, (but at a distance) father), of seven children. However, to one's great disappointment, Lee emerges from the book as an enigmatic man whom it is difficult to like. A very good read.



4. Emory Thomas gives a southerners perspective on the life of Robert E. Lee. The preface of this book gives the reader a sense that they will be given a pro-southern view of the war and while that is true at times the biography is generally balanced well. Lee is portrayed as a hero which he was to the south and shown as a military genius which was mostly true. Lee accomplished amazing things by bold actions and the principles of movement and concentration. This book tracks his childhood where he lived in the shadow of a father who was a failure. It then moves to his years at West Point where he excelled and graduated at the top of his class. He was given several assignments across the country from building a fort in Savannah to defending the Mississippi near St. Louis. He even spent time in New York City rebuilding forts there before heading off to war in the 1848 Mexican American War. Lee served with distinction in the war and learned a great deal from Winfield Scott about fighting an offensive war with smaller numbers than the enemy. He would take these lessons to heart against the north.
   Lee would refuse both the United States Army and the Confederacy when they offered him posts in their armies. It was only when his home state of Virginia left the union that he accepted command of all Virginia militias. As the militias were absorbed into the army Lee found himself without a command. Jefferson Davis would use Lee as a roving advisor helping to make overall strategic decisions, a sort of Halleck of the South initially. Lee would eventually take command of the army once Johnston was sent out to command the Army of Tennessee. This would be a post that Lee kept throughout the entire war. Lee was able to achieve stunning victories by daring action but in the end resources were against him. Lee correctly believed that his army had to achieve victory very quickly because a war of attrition favored the north. Unfortunately for Lee he was at times too bold and all of the battles are categorized well here. For a book written in 1995 there is a good deal of attention paid to the west which is now considered a vital battlefield. Lee was forced to surrender after a vicious battle near Appomattox courthouse where PA miners actually blew up a whole underneath his army. Lee won daring defensive victories but each time his army was smaller and his position more tenuous. After the war Lee accepted a post to become President of Washington College in Lexington. It was a post he would excel at. Lee would not become a citizen of the union until historians discovered his petition in 1975 when Congress made him a citizen again. This biography provides an excellent and balanced look at Robert E. Lee's life. I would highly recommend for Civil War scholars who want an updated biography and one that is not too biased in one direction.



5. Emory Thomas promises to deploy the cool eye and analytical prowess of the historian to present a Lee much more vulnerable and flawed than that portrayed in Douglas Southall Freeman's titanic classic, R.E. Lee. And I certainly learned a lot about Robert E. Lee from Thomas's book. He does a good job of summarizing Lee's eventful life and his character, and shows why this defeated Confederate retains a more potent place in American history than most of those who won the Civil War.
   
   I was most struck by his insight that Lee was a man whose deeds were more important that his words. Lee never wrote his memoirs. He gave no important speeches and left no pithy quotes. His letters were pedestrian and full of thoughts on household economy, family vacations, and the fates of various pets. To understand Lee, you have to look at how his actions revealed traits like honesty, courage, and grace. Lee embodied what every Southerner aspired to be. For many, he still does.
   
   On a personal level, I also liked reading about Lee's careers as engineer, soldier, and educator. It's reassuring to realize that famous historical figures were actually fellow human beings who suffered the same frustrations as anybody else.
   
   When Thomas strayed from his historian role, I found the book less satisfying. He puts Lee on the couch, psychoanalyzing his thoughts about God and his relationships with his ne'er-do-well father, self-sacrificing mother, crabby wife, and underachieving kids. I saw precious little evidence for some of Thomas's conclusions.
   
   Similarly, I was shocked at the harsh and unsympathetic portrait that Thomas paints of Mary Lee. I was disturbed to realize that Thomas cherry-picked quotes from both Robert and Mary's letters to make Mary look bad, and I wonder why it was so important to him to do so.

5 comments about Last Man Down: A New York City Fire Chief and the Collapse of the World.

1. Number one fact: Picciotto probably sensed the opportunity to make a few extra bucks from his ordeal in September 11, and seized the opportunity.
   
   Number two fact: It's strange to NOT like a book about September 1, but I did not like this book at all. Not because of the selfish and auto-congrulatory mode, but due to the literally (or lack of) characteristcis of the book. I think it's badly written, even with Mr. Paisner at the helm.
   
   As for Picciotto actions those days, only people under that kind of stresssful situation could know how they would have acted... Generally, I think he did the best he could for his city and for his companions and for the civilians he encountered.
   
   For all his detractors, I put the question: if he had died along with the shocking number of victims, even with all his "faults" he would have benn considered a hero, ego or no ego involved. Am I right?



2. I had wanted to read this book for a while, so I purchased it. Richard Picciotto is not the best writer, but he does give you a sense of what it was like to be under pressure and trying to survive the tower collapse. He doesn't pull punches as to who he blames for the loss of firefighters that day. Lack of adequate equipment, department cuts, etc. I think to a certain extent he has a valid point, but I also know that there were many other factors involved as well. Mr. Picciotto's focus is understandably on his personal experience and his emotions around what happened that day. I am glad that I read it, but I have to be honest and say it is what it is. Mr. Picciotto will probably not win a Pulitzer, but he calls it as he sees it and he was there and I wasn't.



3. I just recently read the paperback version of this book. The first half of this book is pretty interesting and heart pounding in detailing what it was like to be in the World Trade Center while it collapsed. The second half was very disatisfying. It was very self-serving and is mostly about Mr. Picciotto praising himself and his actions and criticizing absolutely everyone else. I also find it interesting that Mr. Picciotto said how hard it was for him to return to the site and that it took him a very long time do this. However, in the acknowledgment at the end of the book, he returns barely a few weeks after the collapse and with his collaborator of this book. He had already found the time to get a book deal and co-author!



4. As a firfigther who understands chain of command and the need to work with in an Incident Command System, this book perfectly explains how one FDNY Battalion Chief breaks all the rules, chosing to respond to the World Trade Center Disaster rather than remain responsible for his own Battalion, risks the lives of members of 110Truck to "sprint" to the 35th floor of the North Tower, ABANDONING them on the way to freelance some more in the burning tower, only to ultimately become stuck in the collapse of the North Tower where he goes on to shout at and berade a PAPD Officer who's lost his partner, a K9, to the collapse of the bulidng. This book is a shameful and embarrasing for all American firefighters, those silent heros who risk their lives daily.



5. I have had this book for a few years but have not been able to read it till recently.The story is quite interesting and astonishing (especially as it is a true story) but the writing is somewhat repetetive - I think this is done to make the story longer - and the Firefighter seems to be too full of himself always going on how great he is and how well he did what a good leader he is ...... and so on.Entertaining and interesting but the way the story is written spoils it.

3 comments about FDR and Lucy: Lovers and Friends.

1. When I first started graduate school in history, I used to speculate as to how there could be another biography of Lincoln or Washington, or who ever without some newly discovered source of information. I came to learn that historians reevalute existing sources in light of new events and/or place their own unique perspecitve on the materials.
   
   In the case of Resa Willis' FDR AND LUCY, Willis did none of the above. When a new book comes out on a subject in which one has interest, there is always hope that there is some new sources or new perspective. While doing a fine job of research and writing, Willis adds nothing new to a story that came to light in the 1960's after the death of Eleanor.
   
   Willis quotes children and friends of FDR and Lucy Mercer but as another reviewer said - there's nothing new. The story is stretched a bit with the inclusion of lots of basic facts about American history. There is a decent amount of information about the geneology of some of the characters, but other than showing the Mercer and FDR lived in a relatively close circle of friends and relatives, its old hat. She offers some speculation. Did FDR have an hand in arranging the marriage of Lucy and her husband Wintrop Rutherfurd. But she offers no anwers. She talks about FDR's circle of women friends but the author draws no conclusions about these relationships or how they reflected on FDR's personality.
   
   One of the amazing things about the relationship between FDR and Lucy is that the servants never talked. In the 21st century, all of the servants and secret service agents would have published tell all books. As an African American, whose family lived in Aiken, I always found it amazing that no one in the African American community, who clearly would have served as servants, ever mentioned a visit from the President. I've looked for the railroad siding that was suppose to have been built to accomodate the President but have never figure out where it was.
   
   Willis takes no sides in relating her story. She relates the story of two people who had an affair and the came to be great friends. She provides an insight in to life at the White House during the War years but there is little character development.
   
   If you know nothing about FDR and Lucy Mercer, read the book. If you know the least little bit from previous readings, don't bother.



2. Resa Willis tells the story of a time in American history as skillfully, objectively, personally, accurately and compassionately as humanely possible in 152 pages. How refreshing!
   
   You are privileged to hear about all the FDR doings and Eleanor Roosevelt doings along with all the important players.
   
   And, you come to learn how a great man so deeply loved by so many women could be fundamentally lonely.
   
   Some would call it Eleanor's sweet revenge.



3. I was expecting a thorough examination of the love affair between FDR and Lucy Mercer. The affair has been common knowledge for forty years and it's always touched upon in Roosevelt biographies and documentaries. But this book is a rather crushing disappointment, padded with much unnecessary and repetitive information. Most of the book consists of boring material relating directly to Lucy's life as Mrs. Rutherford in the 20's and 30's. Personally, I was expecting more details on FDR's affair with her throughout WWI, Eleanor's discovery of her love letters in Franklin's suitcase, and then the hysterical control-monster, Sarah Delano Roosevelt, demanding Franklin dump Lucy or risk losing his inheritance. Now that is the stuff of legend!
   
   Instead we get a dreary narrative with no new information. The book picks up a bit when Lucy re-enters Roosevelt's life in the 30's and spends considerable time with his in the closing years of his life. Most of their meetings took place in Warm Springs, Georgia, and also in the White House. FDR's daughter, Anna, was the one who invited Lucy to the Executive Mansion while Eleanor was away on one of many tours during the war. It's mindful to recall a remark from Alive Roosevelt Longworth in this context: "Franklin deserves a good time. He was married to Eleanor!"
   
   If you know little about the mechanics of the Lucy-Franklin alliance, this is a well-written and entertaining book. But if you know more about the pair, it wouldn't be particularly revealing. The characterization of Eleanor is especially weak. While I'm not advocating adultery, let's face facts: Eleanor was frigid, disinterested in sex and in the 30's took up close "friendships" with people like Lorena Hickock (who makes Yogi Berra look gorgeous in comparison). I really can't blame a man as charming and handsome as Franklin Roosevelt pursuing sex outside of marriage. His choice may not have been the "moral" one (whatever that means), but it was the only logical thing to do under the circumstances.
   
   To sum up, if you're an FDR newbie, this would be nice. If you're not, forget it.

5 comments about Running With Bonnie and Clyde: The Ten Fast Years of Ralph Fults.

1. After reading the Blanche Barrow book, the James R. Knight and the E.R. Milner book I have to admit I was a little disapponinted in this one. I found it to be very self-serving. After all, these people were common criminals who chose to make a life of robbery and violence. Mr. Fults wanted to project the idea that it was solely the corruption of the Texas penal sytem that was most to blame for the lives of the badmen of the era. Also, he constantly surrounded himself with vicious violent men; yet he wants us to beleive that even though he was willing to kill and came close several times, he was basically innocent and an honorable man.
   One last point that confused me. In all the other books, Ray Hamilton was portrayed as afraid of, and loathed by, Joe Palmer. In this books, supposedly they are best of pals and are comforted in the fact that they are executed at the same time. There just seems to be more than a few inconsistancies in thsi book.



2. A must read for anyone interested in Bonnie and Clyde, Ray Hamilton, Joe Palmer or about American crime in the 1930's. A well written review of an amazing life, offering a new angle on the story of the infamous Barrow Gang and the long term results of the 1934 Eastham Camp 1 breakout. A great book that takes you on a journey that you can see being played out before you. Buy it, you won't regret it!



3. I know this for a fact by the author. My dad, Ralph Fults is who the book is about. John Neal Phillips did not just take my dad's word on the events in the book, he interviewed many people to back up the details of each story. If you want to encourage a young person, who thinks they cannot turn their life around, please give this book to them. It will be a great encouragement to them. If my dad can turn his life around, anyone can.



4. A very thorough book on Bonnie and Clyde. More in-depth than others I've read.



5. Mr. Phillips is currently considered the foremost authority on Bonnie and Clyde, and for good reason. He is also the editor of Blanche Barrow's recently published memoirs (GREAT). I enjoyed the detail included in this book. His premise is that Clyde was driven in his life of crime by his desire to raid Eastham Prison - one of the worst prisons in Texas. As an historian myself and huge Bonnie and Clyde fan, I would have to say that the raid on Eastham was certainly a part of Clyde Barrow's larger plan (if indeed he had one), but not the sole driving factor. I also appreciate the fact that Mr. Phillips was able to interview Ralph Fults face-to-face, but Mr. Fults seemed to be a bit-part player in the story of Bonnie and Clyde. All in all this book was worth the read - the research is incredible and many former publications' myths and mistakes are straightened out.

5 comments about Franklin Delano Roosevelt: Champion of Freedom.

1. Franklin Delano Roosevelt: Champion of Freedom
   
   What can you say? It's a thoroughly researched, skillfully wound tale of a man who has no statesman-like comparison in modern American history. I'm an 'Eisenhower Republican' - though, I fear we're a dying breed - however, remark at the leadership and undying dedication to country this magnificently flawed giant of a president consistently demonstrated throughout the course of his illustrious political career.
   
   It's exhaustively researched and fact packed, to be sure - but will nary leave you wanting to leave this bulky work on the nightstand before dozing off. Whether you agree or disagree with FDR's policies or tactics, this book is never tendentious and should appeal to readers across political spectrum and ideologies....the way a masterful biography should, in this humble history junkies mind.
   
   Fans of Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt may want to pick up a separate bio for her life story, as Black certainly does not treat her with kid gloves. However, this book accurately hones in on the key subject - FDR - and Lord Black sticks to his prime subject matter with uncompromising rigdity, a keen focus and honesty.
   
   Bravo. I promise to read more of Mr. Black as a result of this admirable and impressive work.
   
   - Johnny Concannon



2. It took a month to receive my book; I was happy with it once it arrived, but the slowness was a problem.



3. We would be remiss to not credit Washington with defining the parameters of the powers of the Presidency, but for all intent and purposes, as far as impact is concerned, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was the greatest President in the nation, including Lincoln. We must remember that history tends to overestimate martyrdom. As good as Lincoln was, he was never tested in a peace time setting.
   Conrad Black has written the definitive and best book on the great FDR, hands down. Far from being a fawning soft sell, "Champion Of Freedom" is very fair, and Black does not hesitate to discuss Roosevelt's shortcomings, as well as his triumphs. It is an incredibly thoughtful read, and the research is amazing.
   Roosevelt could, at times, be calculating, devious and even mean, especially toward political enemies. This was fair game, however, and in a world where deceit and hidden agendas permeate every action, Roosevelt simply was a mile ahead of everybody else and played the politics game better than anybody ever had before, or will again.
   His concern for the working man, the New Deal and landmark programs like the WMA put America to work when there was none to be had. Some lunk headed conservatives claim he stole the work from industry, but that is pure bull. We have Social Security, the Labor Relations Act, and a great park system because of Roosevelt's domestic programs. As far as a wartime president, his foresight and action was almost divinely inspired, and may well have been.
   While critics blame him for Pearl Harbor, Black points out that Roosevelt, who loved the Navy and was Assistant Secretary to the Navy in WWI, would never have deliberately put the men of Pearl Harbor in harm's way as it happened. Rather, he had expected the admirals to be fully prepared for possible attack, and was aghast (albeit privately) at the incompetence shown at Pearl Harbor, which should have been more than able to put up a very good fight against the Japanese attackers. True, he expected war, and knew that the sooner, the better once our armed forces were ready, and that was well underway.
   This is just one revelation of a very complex man who was regarded in Messianic proportions by the populace and by the world at large. Black is a master writer, and truly has created a masterpiece worthy of its subject. For serious history and Roosevelt fans, it's a must have.



4. We gave two copies of this book for Christmas this year. The recipients have had nothing but great things to say.



5. This one was a tough read - 1134 pages and a couple of laps around the world later I finished - but it was definitely worth the time. While not as readable as David McCullough, Conrad Black not only tells the amazing story of FDR, but also puts you right in the middle of this pivotal time in American History. Sometimes vindictive, often underestimated, FDR's ability to lead and leverage public opinion is unmatched by any modern day president. The complicated relationship between Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill was navigated with great expertise. The personalities surrounding him - Eleanor, Teddy Roosevelt's side of the family, Stimson, Smith, MacArthur, Patton, Eisenhower, etc. are cause to hit the Barnes and Noble shop again soon for a few more biographies. If you like American history and biographies, this book comes with my recommendation.

3 comments about The Vanderbilt Women: Dynasty of Wealth, Glamour and Tragedy.

1. I HAD NO IDEA HOW INDUSTRIOUS THESE WOMEN WERE. I LIVE NEAR THE BILTMORE AND THIS INSPIRED ME TO FOLLOW UP ON THE HISTORY OF THIS FAMILY. THE MEN ARE INTERESTING BUT THE WOMEN FANTASTIC. THEY DID IT ALL AND WERE A GUTSY BUNCH. I COULDN'T PUT IT DOWN ANTICIPATING THE NEXT ROUND.



2. Though the men built the fortune, their women spent. They also took up social causes not always popular @ the time..... Their standing memoirals are the Mansions and gardens they created.



3. This is a must read for anyone interested in the Gilded Age. The Vanderbilts were a huge part of it, and the women of the family are as dynamic as the men, in spite of the Commodore's opinion of them. Included in the book are little known figures, such as the Commodore's much put-upon wife and daughters. I found this book hard to put down and highly recommend it, especially in the newly available paperback form.

5 comments about Young J. Edgar: Hoover, the Red Scare, and the Assault on Civil Liberties.

1. I knew the content would be interesting and was pleasantly surprised to see the well crafted text. The paragraphs flowed from page to page and chapter to chapter. It was hard to put down. Well selected photos accompany the text and add even more understanding.
   
   This is more than a bio of one man, it is a bio of the times. I did not know that Hoover cut his bureaucratic teeth on the Red Scare, so this book rounds out his portrait for me.
   
   Ackerman's engaging prose brings to life the colorful people of the times. He presents Palmer in all his complexity. President Wilson is totally detached not only from the Red Scare but also the upcoming election where he has a son-in-law in contention. The totally obscure Louis Post is a true hero. Many great legal minds, Frankfurter, Darrow, Cardozo, Holmes and others play a role. I had not known of the eccentric millionaire socialist Lloyd before nor the colorful immigration official from California, Caminetti.
   
   The most intriguing story of all, of course, is Hoover's. The reader learns how his character and style were formed. As a young man he got away with a tremendous breach of the US Constitution and he lied to his mentors. He knew how and when to be on and off the stage and who to play up to. He was probably given a pass for his presumed honesty, long hours of work and his youth.
   
   I was struck by narrow the decision making. Only a few people held the reins than made life impossible for many. While the book doesn't spell it out, I would imagine people lost their homes (be they foreclosures or evictions) and children went hungry. None of the perpetrators suffered much. Hoover went on to great "success", Caminetti went on to comfortable obscurity and Wilson is heralded for his international vision. Palmer suffers somewhat but not in proportion to his deeds. The main hero is virtually unknown to history.



2. One line brought home to me how different the times were shortly after the First World War: ". . . a doctor told Edgar he needed to start smoking cigarettes to relax his nerves." But more important to this story of the Red Scare were the attitudes toward freedom of speech and individual legal rights that allowed wholesale abuses as the U.S. Government and the young, energetic J. Edgar attempted to remove every last threat of Communism through massive raids and deportations. As inconceivable as a medical doctor recommending cigarettes is the thought that running roughshod over legal rights on such a scale could happen without raising an immediate uproar in the press; what a difference 24 hour television news makes!
   
   Understanding Hoover is critical to viewing the evolution of law and individual rights in America during the 20th century. For good or bad, he certainly had an impact during his half-century tenure and as Ackerman summarizes "Of all the experiences shaping him . . . none loomed larger that the Red Raids." The author gives us an excellent account of these events, the times, and important players including Felix Frankfurter, Oliver Wendell Holmes, and Clarence Darrow.



3. Post-WW ( period is not well understood in America and our history books hardly mention how fear and loathing of terrorists (anarchists and Bolsheviks) and their (real and potential) activities led to violent over-reaction by government. Suspension of rights and rule of law, warrantless break-ins and arrests, thousands of completely innocent citizens held without charge or access to counsel in sub-standard "holding" facilities, authoritarian override of law enforcement principles and practices without regard to rights (beating of those arrested, denial of access to medical services, denial of access by the press nad watchdog organizations, etc.
   A very good book and very well-written!



4. And we thought Joe McCarthy invented "McCarthyism!" Fascinating and well written. We not only learn that Attorney General Mitchell Palmer wrote the book on creating mass hysteria to assault anything one happens to dislike, but we gain a broader understanding of how easily attitudes can be swayed for egregious purposes in this country. Given that Young J. Edgar earned his stripes by implementing Palmer's plans, it's not hard to understand how he could so easily pick and choose the information he wanted to assail Martin Luther King, Jr. and scores of others he disliked. Ackerman did his homework and presented it very nicely.



5. An excellent biography of Hoover's early years--a time that is often eclipsed by the later years when Hoover was a well established bureaucrat. Young J. Edgar looks at the circumstances--surroundings and people--who led to the formation of the man. Ackerman's descriptions of the Palmer Raids of nearly 90 years ago can't help but make the reader think of post 9/11 America and the way "we" treat our own citizens and their "inalienable" civil rights. It really makes you think. America has to find a way to protect ourselves without losing sight of what makes this country great--freedom of speech, thought, religion etc. The freedom to ask questions and be different are two of the qualities that make America great. Pick up a copy of Young J. Edgar, learn about Hoover the man and the post WWI era, and let's try not to keep making the same mistakes over and over again.

3 comments about True West.

1. I didn't like TRUE WEST. But there's nothing wrong with it that could be blamed on this particular production of the play. The actors are good considering the flimsy material that they have to work with. The music is used sparingly, but is very effective at setting the scene. I just couldn't get over the shallow development of the characters and a script that was constantly attempting to be deeper than it was.

   The story has one location. Two brothers sit in their mother's house, yelling and screaming at each other until the parental unit herself appears near the end of the play. I like the idea behind the story, which is to put two people in a confined area and see what happens to them. Unfortunately, most of what we learn about these two is quite dull. One brother is a moderately successful screenwriter while the other makes his living as a petty burglar. I had hoped that we wouldn't get soppy scenes of each brother revealing that he secretly envied the other's lifestyle, but that's exactly what we get here. The successful brother is the one without good people skills and the streetwise brother really wants to make it big, but doesn't have the proper school learning to do so. You've probably seen this sort of thing played out in films, television and theatre thousands of times before; I know I have. The problem here is that there is virtually nothing else going on in the script to distract from the banality of the characters.

   The humor comes across as being forced -- very forced -- especially in the second half. The play is billed as a tragicomedy, but the transition from the funny scenes to the dramatic is shockingly jarring. You can almost hear the goofy, "Hey, this is funny!" music in the background every time a supposedly lighthearted moment comes up. It's possibly attempting to be a black comedy, but I just can't really see it that way. People who moan and whine and complain constantly could very well be hilarious, but I just wasn't amused by them. The comedy didn't flow naturally from the drama, and the drama just hung limply by itself out in No Man's Land.

   If you already know that you like the play, then you will probably enjoy this particular staging of it. The various sound effects and music are used in moderation, and are very efficient at placing the audience right inside that house. The script does have one or two nice lines about the falseness of the Hollywood lifestyle and the boundary between the life that we see in pop culture compared to the reality that we drive through every day. They aren't the most original observations that you'll ever hear, but the wording of them and the acting of the principals really make those short sequences work. It's a pity that the rest of the script wasn't as sharp as these moments, because they really had me longing to hear more.

   At one point near the end, the hardened brother (who is attempting to write a screenplay, just like his sibling) asks, "What do you call it when something's been said a thousand times before?" The answer that he receives is, of course, "a cliché". And unfortunately that sums up almost this entire production. Other dramas that have utilized these rather basic elements haven't made the mistake of not including anything else. But TRUE WEST is just one big cliché.




2. in True West , Sam Shepard's method is a kind of allegorical realism, where the use of everyday items such as golf clubs, houseplants and toasters is not at all intended to suggest us reality.
   In this play, Shepard illustrates the duality of human personality, and our primitive instincts for violence against the unavoidable family ties that usually discourage an individual from acting as wanted. In this case, two brothers, Austin and Lee, who experience the typical good boy vs. bad boy sibling rivalry unexpectedly meet. As a result a series of emotional angry outbreaks take place as Austin can't defined himself: Is he frightened of Lee or does he admire his brother's willingness to break the rules? Austin graduated college, got married, has a family to whom he will return soon. He is disciplined, striving and ambitious. Quite the opposite, Lee is uneducated, violent, envious and resentful.
   Austin, a Hollywood screenwriter, is housesitting his mother's home while she is on a sightseeing trip to Alaska. His brother, Lee, has appeared all of a sudden and wants to share the house. Lee is a tramp and small-time criminal, who has just spent the previous six months in the Mojave Desert with their alcoholic father.
   The filthy and foul Lee invites Austin's Hollywood producer for a round of golf, and ends up selling him on a story idea for a modern Western film, totally displacing his hard-working brother, who as a result crumples into a chaotic and violent wreck.
   Shepard's focus is not on verisimilitude, but on the intensity of the conflict that is revealed. For instance, the main action in the play is the reduction of the mother's neat household into a garbage dump. This includes the destruction of Austin's typewriter with a golf club, vomiting into the desiccated remains of a philodendron and squashing fresh toast into the linoleum. Additionally, Lee had stolen several toasters from the neighborhood, "There's gonna be a general lack of toast in the neighborhood this morning..." he says.
   In various occasions, Austin seemed to be afraid of his brother as he winds up doing what Lee asks him, such as lending him his car or typing the script of his imaginary screenplay. However, what Austin mostly seems to fear is not Lee, but his own deep-set, self-destructive impulses as he lives out the paranoiac nightmare of being displaced by his brother. "You think you are the only one in the brain department?" Lee questions him.
   When Lee is dictating Austin the lines of his screenplay, he narrates the story of two characters that are running after each other -- actually referring to themselves. He says: "The one who is chasing, doesn't know where the other one is taking him, the one who is being chased, doesn't know where he is going." The two brothers are constantly competing with each other; even though, they head in opposite directions in life. Austin has a career and a family while Lee doesn't but he has the ability to break the rules, his brother strictly follows.
   Towards the end of the play, both brothers who are very intoxicated from having being drinking alcohol the night through, start to act both wild and silly at the same time. Under the influence of alcohol, repressions and taboos are forgotten and one acts and says things that would not normally do. As in Fool for Love, the protagonists confess their deepest fears and feelings when drunk, in True West, Austin reveals how he feels lost and lonely despite of his accomplishments, he says:" there's nothing real down here... streets look like a postcard..." He is living his dreams (he is becoming a playwright, has a wife, etc) but he seems not to get acquainted with his reality and does not know anymore what is real and what is not.
   Then, decides to "try" the toasters and make some toasts, which Lee steps over and smashes on the floor as he criticizes him: "you're making that toast like salvation or something...I don't want any toast..." to what Austin replies: "...I love the smell of toast...it's salvation...". While this argument goes on, their mother comes back doesn't surprising much when finding out the disaster her sons had made to her house. But, she tells them they'll both end up in the same dessert.
   At the end of the play the phrases: "...Something to keep me in touch" and "It's easy to go out of touch" made me realize that one must hold onto something that will keep one focused in order to go on -- either focus on one's reality or on one's dream(s). Everyone needs that toast of salvation!



3. this play is great, buy it!

5 comments about Hemingway: The Paris Years.

1. Isn't it strange that having lived up with Hem's books and later with all the student's stuff on him - every book and most writers take you back to those early day's good feeling which you had after having read his shortstory stuff?? And having read almost everything which is written about Hem until today, this is still one of my absolute favourites. I like his style and I appreciate the accuracy and all the work that is behind every project he publish on Hem. I recommend this book.



2. Here's the thing with most biographies...they're biographies. I'm a lover of fiction, the crafted tale, the sculpted language. There is a certain freedom of the word that seems to only exist in the "made up" story. A freedom almost never captured in the strict confines of an accurate and truthful biography. Enter Michael Reynolds. He tells the tale of Hemingway's Paris years with so much fluidity and grace you'd swear he fabricated this Hemingway guy out of his own gorgeous imagination. This reads like a novel and a damn good one. It's peppered with minute historical facts ie: the value of the dollar, the franc, the German mark, the pound, at any given time. Political unrest, social change, fashion, food, and most importantly...the state of literature at that point in time. All of this swirls around the incredibly multi dimensional main character. You'll read it three times.



3. This is an engrossing book that makes you feel like you are actually walking alongside Hemingway during his early years in Paris. I could feel the cold that he felt on his cheek, I could see the smile that Hadley gave him every time he walked into their dark little apartment after a hard day of writing in the cafes. This is due to Michael Reynolds superb, painstaking research, the photographs, and the copies of original manuscript that he included in this biography. I cannot stress enough how unlike an usual biography this is...Hemingway literally leaps out at you from the first sentence and pulls you into his world, lets you experience his poverty and first marriage in Paris, the birth of his son, the arrival of his first mistress, and the amazing literary scene in Paris that has now apparently died for good. Hemingway has amazing quotes on writing, life, living through your failures, and it was a pleasure to get to read the library list of every book he checked out during this time period. This is an amazing book, and the best biography I have EVER read in my life.



4. Ah, this is one of those books that a reader savors. This is one of the most enjoyable books for the student of Hemingway or for those writing prose fiction in general. Many, many of Hemingway's techniques are explained here. Also, for those of us who have been putting up a good fight--writing short stories and novels all these years--it helps seeing what a beating Hemingway took when he started. This is a fabulous book and the only thing that mitigated its conclusion was the knowledge that Michael Reynolds wrote another three more books in this series. They too are great but this is the best one.



5. I've been trying to read two other books, on top of The Paris Years, but put them both down yesterday so that I could finish this one. The biggest thing that stands out about it is the excellence of Michael Reynolds' prose. He has the rare skills which enable readers to successfully jettison themselves back in time.
   
   This is the perfect companion to A Moveable Feast and elucidates the historical nature of the characters present in The Sun Also Rises as well. Reynolds, although sometimes pretending to do otherwise, is a psychologizing narrator. The good news is that most of his observations have the ring of truth. The biographer seems to understand his subject which is of great benefit to the rest of us. Hemingway's first marriage is discussed extensively and the coming of Pauline Pfeiffer is also elucidated at the very end. Hemingway had Ford and Pound as his philandering role models, and, eventually, he proves to be a most capable student.
   
   What I liked best about the book was the way in which Reynolds lets us know what Hemingway's writing process was; the daily habits he undertook which allowed him to excel at his craft. He struggled mightily to master the short story and, throughout this work, his emergence as a novelist is far from certain. The scenes in Pamplona are vivid as is the depiction of the cafe life in Paris. You may well want to go back and tour it as badly as I do by the time you're done. Ah, the past. Anyway, it is unfortunate that more on F. Scott Fitzgerald was not included, but you'll understand Ford Maddox Ford almost as well as Hemingway once the last page is turned. Overall, it was simply outstanding, I may well read the other editions of the biography now based on what I discovered here.