5 comments about Ulysses S. Grant: The Unlikely Hero (Eminent Lives).

1. Factually deficient. Some errors have been cited in earlier reviews here on Amazon. I will only point out that Korda repeatedly referred to Gen. McClellan as Gen. Mckennen. It gives one no confidence if the author cannot even remember the correct name of such a prominent person. Oddly, Korda seems to remember that Grant once remarked that he often wore a private soldier's jacket with stars on the shoulders so that the army might know who their general is. But then Korda triumphantly points to photos of Grant wearing a full general's frock coat in his meetings with Lincoln. Is this supposed to prove Grant was dishonest? Doesn't it occur to Korda that even Grant might think it appropriate to dress up a bit for a meeting with the President of the United States or for a photo? Some analysis! Korda's commentary on Grant's military decisions is on a par with his remarks on Grant's uniform: not worthy of a high school paper. Finally, it was annoying to see the author dip into academic hippy analysis of major events. Somehow, in a biography of Grant, we are to be dragged into Korda's hatred of President Bush. Aren't we sick of this yet? I couldn't--wouldn't--finish this pathetic book. It's in the garbage can. If the rest of the biographies in this series are this deficient, the publisher would do well to abandon the project.



2. The only books I've previously read about the civil war are All For The Union and Company Aytch. I recommend both if you want to read the memoirs of soldiers. Mr. Grant is a fascinating person and Michael Korda tries to capture his complexity of character. I can't say that I learned much more than I already knew from various Discovery Channel shows or visiting the home of U.S. Grant in Galena. As noted in previous reviews, some of the historical data is questionable. For example, is Mr. Korda correct about the position of forces on a battlefield or the several maps and writings I found on the internet that say otherwise? One thing I could do without is Mr. Kordas need to bring in his obvious dislike of president George Bush and anything whatsoever that has any connection to him. Mr. Korda, if you feel a need to vent your Bush-hatred get a job with the New York Times or Washington Post. I don't know about other folks but when I sit down with a book about U.S. Grant I don't expect to be hammered with the non-too-subtle neo-liberal desire to tie everything to George Bush.



3. These amazon reviews have done their job, in convincing me not to bother reading this book. There are two excellent studies of Grant as a politician and president, both by Brooks Simpson: LET US HAVE PEACE and THE RECONSTRUCTION PRESIDENTS. I highly recommend them.



4. 
   
   
   Military history is often a tragedy the first time around and a farce when it repeats, as this perceptive book makes abundantly clear in outlining and assessing the career of America's greatest general.
   
   Fans of Robert E. Lee may well argue about the "greatest", the blunt fact is that Grant understood Lee better than Lee understood Grant. Korda makes the point again and again that Grant, except on rare occasions, was able to correctly assess battlefield conditions and quickly exploit every indication of weakness.
   
   Grant was bitterly criticized as a butcher, similar to Gen. George "Blood and Guts" Patton in World War II. Veterans of Patton's armies have told me Patton's success was based on "his guts, our blood". But I've yet to meet anyone who regrets having served with Patton. The same is true of Grant; good soldiers always praise a general who wins, dead soldiers don't complain.
   
   Grant understood that victory meant killing enough soldiers to make the Confederate states quit. He understood the war was won at Gettysburg; just as Gen. Dwight Eisenhower knew World War II was won in Normandy. The tragic legacy of Grant is that too many generals since then have copied his "butcher" qualities without understanding his tactical brilliance; thus the appalling slaughter of World War I.
   
   Grant was the perfect American success story; literally a "barefoot" buy who rose to command the armies of the nation and then serve two terms in the White House. He was also the "perfect" American because of his absolute trust in the essential goodness, decency and honesty of others; politicians and business people took cynical and unlimited advantage of these qualities, which left his administration mired in the deep stink of scandal.
   
   In war, Gen. Grant faced one massive task -- victory. Everything was directed to one goal. In peace, President Grant as a politician faced a thousand simultaneous large and petty challenges, something he was never able to handle. His astounding successes were two great single-minded challenges; the war, and writing his autobiography as he was dying of cancer. Facing these two great challenges, he succeeded brilliantly.
   
   The contrast with today's politicians could not be more dramatic. Grant was instinctively drawn to the sound of the guns fired in anger; too many of today's politicians, who blithely send others to war which they cleverly avoid themselves, have never hear a shot fired in anger let alone a voice raised in anger in the White House.
   
   This book, and the story of Grant, is vividly relevant in today's politics. Everyone who reads it will understand at least some of the fundamentals of success, of America's greatest general and the current military incompetence that has led to another quagmire.



5. 
   This is one of two brief biographies of Grant (1822-1885) I recently read, the other written by Josiah Bunting III which is part of Times Books' "The American Presidents" series, with Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. serving as general editor. Although both Korda and Bunting cover much of the same material, there are significant differences between their respective approaches to the18th president of the United States.
   
   For example, Bunting clearly disagrees with, indeed resents the fact that Grant is generally remembered "as a general, not a president, [which] explains in part the condescension - there is no better word for it -- from which pundits and historians have tended to write of him." Bunting asserts that if judged by the consequences of Grant's common sense, judgment, and intuition, his presidency, "so far from being one of the nation's worst, may yet be seen as one of the best."
   
   Korda indicates no inclination to view Grant's presidency as "one of the best." He duly acknowledges the problems which awaited Grant after he was elected to his first term in 1869. "What did Grant's reputation as a president in, however, (and continues to do so today whenever journalists and historians are drawing up lists of the best presidents vs. the worst ones), was the depression of 1873, which ushered in a long period of unemployment and distress, made politically more damaging by accusations that the president's wealthy friends were making money out of it." Given that the United States was growing too fast, in too many different directions at once, and the inevitable consequence was corruption and an unstable economy, "it would have taken a more astute man than Grant to slow things down or clean them up."
   
   This last observation by Korda is consistent with a contemporary assessment of Grant by the Edinburgh Review, one which Brooks Simpson quotes in his own study (Let Us Have Peace: Ulysses S. Grant and the Politics of War and Reconstruction 1861-1868), and which Bunting also cites: "To bind up the wounds left by the war, to restore concord to the still distracted Union, to ensure real freedom to the Southern Negro, and full justice to the southern white; these are indeed tasks which might tax the powers of Washington himself or a greater than Washington, if such a man is to be found."
   
   In his Epilogue, Korda explains that he wrote this book because, from time to time, "it is necessary to remind Americans about Grant, first of all because his is a kind of real-life Horatio Alger story, exactly the one that foreigners have always wanted to believe about American life...and that Americans want to believe about themselves." Yes, his presidency was severely flawed but as a general, Grant "defined for all time the American way of winning a war": It must have an essentially moral base to earn and sustain the full support of the American people, it must take full advantage of its great industrial strength and depth of manpower, and it must apply aggressively - without hesitation -- all of its resources to achieve the ultimate military objective, total victory.
   
   However, Korda suggests that any politician contemplating the use of military force should first consider lessons which Grant learned from failed Reconstruction initiatives in the South: "armies of occupation are no substitute for political thought, and that generals are not be necessarily the right people to institute basic political reforms or to reconstruct society."
   
   It remains for others much better qualified than I am to comment on the relevance of that statement to America's current military involvement in various parts of the world. However, I greatly appreciate Korda's attempt to provide a balanced view of Grant in terms of his character, talents, and values...all of which served him so well on the battlefield but which proved insufficient to the political challenges which he encountered later as the 18th president of the United States.
   
   Those who share my high regard for this volume are urged to check out Bunting's biography as well as Grant's Personal Memoirs.

5 comments about Crazy Horse: A Life (Penguin Lives Biographies).

1. While musing over what to write for a review of this atrocious attempt at literature, one of my students said, "just say it sucked." IT SUCKED!



2. As he states in this volume, it's less a biography than a testament to the impact Crazy Horse had on his own people during and after his life and what he means to Americans today. Illusive yes, but Crazy Horse is a symbol of all that could've been for natives of the plains. He was an Indian who never capitulated, who never gave up on his way of life or on his dreams and those dreams, both figurative and actual, guided him through life and into the walk with the spirits. What does this man mean to us all? He's more than a simple representation. He's an embodiment to self-determination. He's an example of charity and caring of a leader who placed his own people ahead of all else.
   
   Unlike Geronimo, who spent time in prison and then ended up selling autographed photos of himself for a dollar apiece to the very white people he'd sworn to kill, Crazy Horse avoided contact with Whites until his last days and never accepted their systems or their ideas of justice. He only came to the reservation because his people were starving. He only talked to the Fort's doctor because his wife had tuberculosis. He never allowed his photograph to be taken and wasn't known for talking much.
   
   He took his responsibilities very seriously as a shirt wearer and did everything he could to provide for the poor of his tribe despite preferring to be alone and preferring the open prairie to population centers.
   
   I can't help but draw parallels between another mythical figure after reading this tightly told tale. Jesus was said to express great concern for the poor and Crazy Horse was told in a vision that this was his mission in life. Jesus was a symbol for his people of a spiritual life outside the realm of Rome. Crazy Horse was a symbol of a way of life on the plains, free to pursue the Sioux ceremonies and religious observation. Jesus was killed through the betrayal of a friend and stabbed in the side by a Roman spear while hanging from a cross. Crazy Horse was restrained by his friend, the tribal policeman Little Big Man, when he was bayoneted by a soldier. In death, both Christ and Crazy Horse are rallying points for more than just their own people, but for people everywhere.
   
   CV Rick



3. Larry McMurtry (Telegraph Days, Lonesome Dove) brings his clean and concise writing style to this brief but illuminating life of Crazy Horse.
   
   This compact little biography is one of the Penguin Lives series that features what Penguin Books web site describes as an "innovative series of biographies pairing celebrated writers with famous individuals who have shaped our thinking." The series is worth looking into for its other biographies of Churchill by John Keegan, Buddha by Karen Armstrong, and Saint Augustine by Garry Wills among others.
   
   In the case of Crazy Horse not a heck of lot is really known about the man. As McMurtry points out, most of what we know about Crazy Horse and most Indians derives from their contact with whites and Crazy Horse generally avoided whites to the fullest extent possible. He was a brave warrior, a leader of his people at times, but not truly a chief, a loner, an iconoclast within a tribe of iconoclasts.
   
   Crazy Horse is an iconic figure who captures the imagination. His life of some 35 or so years spanned the rapid transformation of the West from the free days of the nomadic Plains tribes and limitless buffalo herds to the confinement of those peoples on poor reservations and the destruction of the herds. Crazy Horse never really yielded to the whites unlike nearly all other Indian leaders, not that it mattered much in the grand scheme of things because no strategy was going to change the ultimate outcome. Crazy Horse declined to go to Washington, resisted any restraints, refused to attend the parleys with the whites.
   
   He did ultimately sacrifice his own freedom when he brought his 900 or so followers after the brutal winter of 1876-1877 - just months after the twin victories over Crook at Rosebud and Custer at Little Bighorn. Crazy Horse was killed, probably by the bayonet of a white soldier as he resisted his final arrest. His death was a blessing as the whites planned to ship him to Fort Jefferson in the Dry Tortugas, a tiny prison atoll in Florida.
   
   Unlike other popular authors, notably Stephen Ambrose, McMurtry resists the temptation to let his imagination roam too freely and sticks mostly to the known facts and reasonable deductions to be drawn from them. Those facts however immutably established Crazy Horse as perhaps the single most romantic and heroic figure of the great American Western epic. He lived free, defeated Custer, the great white romantic figure, and then died young "in the last moments when the Sioux could think of themselves as free. By an accident of fate, the man and the way of life died together...he came to be the symbol of Sioux freedom, Sioux courage, and Sioux dignity." (Page 17, hardcover edition)
   
   Highly recommended for any reader with an interest in the American West.



4. I don't generally go for books on tape,but decided to give this a try. I was exceptionally pleased with it. I guess just about anyone who has read anything of the West covering the period from the 1830's to the end of the century;knows something about Crazy Horse. There are so many references and they vary so much,one has difficulty in trying to separate fact from legend.
   Mc Murtry puts on his historian hat for this one and tries ,and I might add very suscessfully,to sort it all out. To attempt such a thing,could result in a very long book with reams of details and references;but McMurtry has managed to avoid that;and comes up with a concise,easy to follow book that covers the whole Western Indian experience centered around one of the most prominent Indian leaders at the time.On top of that he builds into it references of other books where the "story" may differ;and where there is differences or actual unknown details;he addresses them. He also refrains from "making up" details and introducing them;which would do nothing but add to the confusion.
   When you finish this book ,you will be left with the impression that you now know the story about as well as one can possibly know it,particularly at this stage of the game.



5. Crazy Horse has been one of my American heroes ever since I read about him in "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee: An Indian History of the American West" by Dee Brown back in the 1970's. When I discovered that Larry McMurtry, a favorite author of mine, had written a biography of Crazy Horse, the book immediately made the top of my TBR list! And glad I am that I did immerse myself in this brief but rich biography. As usual, McMurtry does not disappoint - nor does his subject.
   
   Despite extensive writings about the great Sioux warrior Crazy Horse, there is actually a dearth of hard facts about his life. The man was born around 1840, at a time when the nomadic way of life of the Plains Indians was dying....or to be more accurate, at a time when the traditional way of life was stomped out though the US government's broken promises, lies, ineptitude, and the sheer number of US soldiers with rifles and their seemingly never-ending supply of ammunition. Manifest Destiny was very much a reality and it could not be fulfilled while nomadic tribes roamed the Great Plains hunting buffalo, "impeding progress," the westward march of settlers, the building of the railroads.
   
   What kind of written historical record would there be of a man who lived the life of a Sioux warrior, "raiding and hunting on the central plains?" He rarely had contact with whites until the end of his life. And what translations exist are appalling.
   
   Worm, his father was an Oglala healer; his mother was thought to be the sister of Spotted Tail, the Brule leader. From the first, Crazy Horse, called Curly as a boy, marched to the beat of his own drum. He was a loner and although he lived in the traditional way, he was not interested in the usual rituals of purification, like the sundance rite. "He took his manhood as a given and proved it in battle at an early age."
   
   He went on a journey as a young man, to seek a vision. Never orthodox in his beliefs or behavior, Curly did not purify himself in the ancient ways nor did he speak with a holy man, such as his own father, before making the trip. The vision or dream he achieved on this quest, and the interpretation, were to prove very significant throughout his life. There are enough consistent reports about this episode to prove its authenticity.
   
   The author takes the known facts about the period, as well as material garnered from documented interviews with Native Americans and whites who knew Crazy Horse, and recreates here a vivid portrait of the warrior, the human being who cared first and foremost for his people - for the very young, the sick and elderly - the man of such moral authority that he sparked deadly jealousy amongst some of his own men. "Among a broken people an unbroken man can only rarely be tolerated." Crazy Horse "became a too-painful reminder of what the people as a whole had once been."
   
   McMurtry, also paints a clear and accurate picture of the place, the times, the large Native American councils, of the Ghost Dance, the battles, the parlays, the betrayals. He recounts a much reported conversation Crazy Horse, near the end of his life, had with his old friend He Dog. General George Cook wanted all the Sioux at Red Creek "to move across the creek, nearer to White Butte, so he would have them handy for a big council. He Dog thought it might be best to do as he was told." Crazy Horse did not want to make the move for his own reasons. He Dog, concerned about what the move might mean for their friendship asked Crazy Horse if "such a move on his part would mean they were enemies now. Crazy Horse laughed, perhaps for the last time; then he reminded He Dog that he was not speaking to a white man. Whites were the only ones, he said, who made rules for other people. Camp where you please."
   
   Larry Mc Murtry invites the reader to camp where we please amid the recountings and recollections of the life of the legend who was Crazy Horse. This is a brief but beautifully written story of a life...and of a death. It is also a tribute to a great man.
   
   Apparently Penguin has published a series of brief biographies called "Penguin Lives." James Atlas, the editor, plans for six volumes a year from "celebrated writers on famous individuals who have shaped our thinking." The list includes the Buddha, St. Augustine, Joan of Arc, Dante, Mozart, Jane Austen, Dickens and Chekhov. Unfortunately I only see two women on his list. I sincerely hope this grave omission is corrected.
   JANA

2 comments about The Personal Memoirs of U. S. Grant, Vol. 2.

1. General Grant wrote this book while dying of throat cancer. He had been swindled by a dishonest Wall Street Broker and his trophies and possessions were stripped from him to satisfy the demands of his debtors. Bankrupt, suffering from a terminal illness and never passing a moment without acute pain, he produced this magnificent monument to his greatness. Those who denigrate Grant as a drunkard, butcher or bumbling President need to read this book in order to correct these errant assumptions. It is impossible to read this book and not realize that Grant was an inordinately intelligent man and one hell of a writer.

   Grant's Memoirs are a deserved classic in American literature and considered the greatest military Memoirs ever penned, exceeding Caesar's Commentaries. Grant wrote as he lived: with clear, concise statements, unembellished with trivialities or frivolities. The only "criticism" the reader might have is that Grant bent over backwards not to wound the feelings of people in the book. He takes swipes at Joe Hooker and Jeff Davis, but what he left unsaid would have been far more interesting. A compelling and logical reason why Grant was so spare in his comments was because he was involved in a race with death. He didn't know how long he could live and therefore, "cut to the chase."

   Grant's assessments of Lincoln, Sherman, Sheridan and other military leaders are brilliant and engrossing. His style, like the man himself, was inimitable and couldn't be copied. In everyday life, Grant was a very funny man, who liked to listen to jokes and tell them himself. His sense of the absurd was acute. It's no accident that he loved Mark Twain and the two hitched together very well. Twain and Grant shared a similar sense of humor, and Grant's witicisms in the Memoirs are frequent, unexpected and welcome. There are portions where you will literally laugh out loud.

   Though Grant's Memoirs were written 119 years ago, they remain fresh, vibrant and an intensely good read. I have read them many times in my life and I never weary of the style and language that Grant employed. He was a military genius to be sure, but he was also a writer of supreme gifts, and these gifts shine through on every page of this testament to his greatness. All Americans should read this book and realize what we owe to Grant: he preserved the union with his decisive brilliance. In his honor, we should be eternally grateful.




2. General Grant wrote this book while dying of throat cancer. He had been swindled by a dishonest Wall Street Broker and his trophies and possessions were stripped from him to satisfy the demands of his debtors. Bankrupt, suffering from a terminal illness and never passing a moment without acute pain, he produced this magnificent monument to his greatness. Those who denigrate Grant as a drunkard, butcher, bumbling President need to read this book in order to correct these errant assumptions. It is impossible to read this book and not realize that Grant was an inordinately intelligent man and one hell of a writer.

   Grant's Memoirs are a deserved classic in American literature and considered the greatest military Memoirs ever penned, exceeding Caesar's Commentaries. Grant wrote as he lived: with clear, concise statements, unembellished with trivialities or frivolities. The only "criticism" the reader might have is that Grant bent over backwards not to wound the feelings of people in the book. He takes swipes at Joe Hooker and Jeff Davis, but what he left unsaid would have been far more interesting. A compelling and logical reason why Grant was so spare in his comments was because he was involved in a race with death. He didn't know how long he could live and therefore, "cut to the chase."

   Grant's assessments of Lincoln, Sherman, Sheridan and other military leaders are brilliant and engrossing. His style, like the man himself, was inimitable and couldn't be copied. In everyday life, Grant was a very funny man, who liked to listen to jokes and tell them himself. His sense of the absurd was acute. It's no accident that he loved Mark Twain and the two hitched together very well. Twain and Grant shared a similar sense of humor, and Grant's witicisms in the Memoirs are frequent, unexpected and welcome. There are portions where you will literally laugh out loud.

   Though Grant's Memoirs were written 113 years ago, they remain fresh, vibrant and an intensely good read. I have read them in! their entirity 30 times in my life and I never weary of the style and language that Grant employed. He was a military genius to be sure, but he was also a writer of supreme gifts, and these gifts shine through on every page of this testament to his greatness. All Americans should read this book and realize what we owe to Grant: he preserved the union with his decisive brilliance. In his honor, we should be eternally grateful.

No comments about Cavalryman of the Lost Cause: A Biography of J. E. B. Stuart.

5 comments about Sleeping Where I Fall: A Chronicle.

1. some of these reviews with one or two stars attached are perfectly accurate. they express far better than i can just how bad this book is. the author is so smug and full of himself as to be laughable. the author becomes a parody of himself, if thats possible, maybe better said- he is everything he claims to hate. i felt pangs of embarrassment for him. awful.



2. This book is almost completely unreadable, a puff piece, really, navel-gazing by yet another grown child, raised in wealth and privilege, who turned his back on his family in order to drop out of society during the turbulence of the late 1960's.
   
   Peter Coyote's personal life story is nauseatingly boring, a life without any particular real angst or pain, a life in which one must import and manufacture angst and pain. One is reminded of Candice Bergen's autobiography Knock Wood, in which she admits that as a very young actress, a director tried to elicit some kind of sense memory within her, one of grief and loss, and she had nothing in her past upon which to draw upon the needed emotions. Coyote's life and self-realization in Standing Where I Fall just isn't very interesting, and beyond being some kind of catharsis for him as the author, there isn't much here to interest any reader.



3. Peter Coyote, was that incredibly cool "older brother", born just in time "to do" the sixties in all its guts and glory, that later generations would look back on with envy. Tall, dark, handsome and talented Coyote (are you really surprised that's not his real name) from out east lands smack dab in the heart of San Francisco just at the moment when the town is experiencing the labor pains that will soon give birth to hippiedom. We begin the journey of the sixties when Coyote was a twenty-something grad student sharing digs with the daughter of legendary Americana painter, Thomas Hart Benton, and continue to watch in fascination as he becomes an active participant in street theater, the Diggers (a band of revolutionary artists), the drug scene of Haight-Ashbury, radical politics, commune life and a lover to many lovely young women. Coyote and his friends drifted outside their urban existence when they took to the road like modern day gypsies in a beat up school bus carrying their caravan into the wilderness. It is there that they attempted to build a walden pond utopia in northern California; shooting and growing their own food, making their own clothes and birthing & raising the next generation, on a rustic farm. In his tell-it-like-it-was warts and all style, Coyote depicts how the unhygenic conditions they lived in lead to a bout with hepatitis and his baby daughter getting sick from eating dirt from the ground. Despite that rough road of youth, Coyote came out alive, and with his political & social beliefs mostly intact. Unlike many who never made the journey back from their drug addled and counter-culture adventures, Coyote, has made hay with the 2nd half of his life as an actor, political activist and can stake a claim to one of the most recognized voices in commercial television, audio and documentary narrations. Oh yes, and he can write.



4. I've read several books on this era, books I consider definitive. Specifically, The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test, Ringolevio and Hell's Angels, by Hunter Thompson. This may be a late addition but it actually points out a quite amazing fact, my claim of which I'm certain will be looked upon as utterly outrageous. But I've read this book and I know psychology. And I've read between the lines. The fact is this. If it weren't for Peter Coyote, the sixties would NEVER have happened. Not anywhere remotely resembling what happened. It would have been a rather disjointed affair and wouldn't have gone anywhere but Peter Coyote's involvement in the Diggers was what changed the world. And I'm not talking about any butterfly effect. I'm talking about an entirely NEW WORLD that was the inevitable result of Peter Coyote's having done what he did, all those years ago. HE himself never made such a claim. He simply states, in no nonsense terms, the specific things that he was involved in, things that were done BECAUSE HE MADE THEM HAPPEN - things that snowballed into an entire counter culture. The movie Forrest Gump was about a retard who caused world events to unfold. Peter Coyote was NEVER a retard but he has had more effect on the world than ANY HUMAN BEING ALIVE TODAY and more effect on the world than any human being in the last century save for Nicola Tesla. And I mean any politician, doctor, scientist, entertainer, what have you, Peter Coyote stands head and shoulders above anyone you can name as having some kind of effect on the world.



5. I lived through the '60's, but on a different, more acceptable level....married to a student. I did, however, live in Vancouver's "hippie district", and had a half-hearted admiration for those who thumbed their noses at society's norms. This book gives me a better insight to the ideals and the guts to live those ideals the hippie culture evoked. Peter Coyote's book was honest, insightful and informative. He creates a feeling in the reader of having been in San Francisco and in the communes. I couldn't help but being impressed by his knowledge, abilities and his joy at being what he had been.

1 comments about Gilded Girls: Women Entertainers of the Old West.

1. I love the wild west books written by Chris Enss. They are very vivid and detailed. The subjects are created very realistically. Great reading...

1 comments about Wives of the Signers.

1. Describes the hardships and struggles experienced by the wives of those who signed the Declaration of Independence. A very enlightening read; something that should be a part of every high school American history class!

3 comments about Closest Companion: The Unknown Story of the Intimate Relationship Between Franklin Roosevelt and Margaret Suckley.

1. A fascinating book. If you like history, particularly the Roosevelt era, it is the day-to-day letters and diaries between Franklin Roosevelt and his fourth cousin Margaret Suckley who was present at most of the major events during the Roosevelt presidency including his death. She traveled extensively with him throughout the United States. She lived down the road from him in Hyde Park and edited his papers at the White House with him during his presidency. This book an unknown treasure.



2. This is the story of Franklin Roosevelt's friendship with a distant cousin Daisy Suckley, based on journals long kept from the public by Daisy herself. It is fascinating for that story, but more so for the information it gives of a time in our history, when the President could leave the country and only those closest to him would know it. As Daisy relates the daily comings and goings of her life, she give us an intimate look at how Franklin Roosevelt managed to travel to secret meetings with other world leaders. She also lets us see Rosevelt's failing health and how his determination to win the war kept him going.

   Geoffrey C. Ward's editing keeps the story moving. It may not be scholarly history, but it is a fascinating read for any history buff looking to understand the story behind the history.




3. Having visited Ms. Suckley's home and the nearby Roosevelt home and library, I felt as though I were along for the ride as I read Daisy's accounts of their picnics and "tea dates" at various sites along the Hudson. In this day of "tell-all" books and seemingly unlimited voyeuristic snooping into Presidential private lives, this book was a pleasant departure from the norm. It also offered new insights into the life of a much-studied President, but one about whom there are still many unknowns. Margaret Suckley, even while preserving much of the account of her longstanding (but unknown to most contemporaries) relationship with FDR, took care to take the more private elements of their friendship to the grave.

5 comments about Minor Characters: A Beat Memoir.

1. I just finished reading this novel yesterday, I loved the novel and how Johnson describes life in that inner circle. I agree with other reviews, do not read this book if you're only interested in Kerouac. What I came to realise was Johnson's point of view was not only to the idea of being a "minor character" in the history it self, but the fact that women during that time frame were only considered minor characters in life. I highly recommend this novel to any.



2. Baby boomers will recognize the freewheeling emotions and impulses described in this book about the late '50s, because these were ours in the '60s and '70s. Joyce Johnson's own transformation, and her close observations of her beat companions and the intellectual stew of NY in the late '50s, give hints of what will happen to America in the following 15 years.
   
   In particular, the author has a unique ability to articulate the feelings female baby boomers absorbed growing up, before the feminist revolution swept us away in the early 70s. As a small example, she points out how girls reading adventurous novels (like On the Road) didn't separate themselves from the guys but fully inhabited the male characters. Male narrators are not a problem for women the way female narrators can be for men.



3. This was the third book I bought at the City LIghts bookstore when I was there in 2005 or so. It was this one, a book of beat poety and a collection of San Francisco short stories. I read the beat poetry and this memoir at about the same time, which was a good way of doing so, as many of them dovetailed. I bought it for Joyce, not for Kerouac, as I'm not his biggest fan anyway and have never read On the Road. Was very impressed. It does a good job of showing the lives of the beats and how they lived and the insanity moments of them. Captured the feel of it. But sad. I liked Elise and Hettie a lot and kinda want to read Hettie's memoir too. And probably the dudes at some point too. I like when she's talking about beatnik as a commodification situation.



4. This memoir recounting a young woman's years spent in the inner circle of Jack Kerouac is well-written and gripping enough to hold its readers' attention. Placed firmly in the center of the Beat Generation, her story teems with indecision and insecurity, the desire to get up and go, leaving responsibilities at home to see the nation and experience life.
   
   -- Reviewed by Jonathan Stephens



5. Joyce Glassman's memoir is very well written and is truly a fascinating account. She manages to describe a scene and give the reader a glimpse of a particular era--long gone. I would recommend this book to anyone who wants to know more about the 1950's, the beat generation, women in the 1950's, and New York City at that time.

1 comments about Thomas Jefferson: A Brief Biography.

1. .....than the man who wrote the encyclopaedia? This little [48 page] book had its genesis back in the 1930s when Dumas Malone got stuck with the job of editor of the "Dictionary of American Biography". Then, 50 years later, he revised it to to be published in the form we see here. Normally, such a thing would not rate mention, much less five stars, BUT, Dumas Malone was the greatest Jefferson scholar that ever lived, and the forward was written by Merrill Peterson, the second greatest. Now, I could write a very good 50 page article on Mr. Jefferson, but I barely belong on the same planet as these guys.
   
   What we have here is the most basic life of Jefferson, touching all the high [and some of the low] points of his public life. From cradle to grave, it's ALL here, but in the merest outline. The name "Maria Cosway" is not mentioned, so we lose the "head and heart". Citizen Genet, Alexander Hamilton, John Marshall, and Aaron Burr all get appropriate notation. John Adams gets a bit more, which is proper. Betsey Walker gets named, and apologized for; Sally Hemings and James Callendar are noted, and dismissed with due scorn. The debt problems, sadly, have to be here, and they are. And the books, books, books......
   
   In the fifty years between the first and second appearances of this article, Dr. Malone wrote the six volume "Jefferson and His Time", one of the two greatest works of biography in the English language [the other being Dr. Freeman's "RE Lee"]. And, Dr. Peterson wrote the 1000+ page "Thomas Jefferson & the new nation", MAYBE the greatest one volume bio of anybody ever written. The present edition is published by the TJMF, to sell in the gift shop at Monticello. [GREAT gift shops, by the way]. For a lot of folks, it's enough. If you want more, try the works of Noble Cunningham, or Joe Ellis. {FORGET Fawn Brodie}!! Why do I bother with a long review of an article?....Dumas Malone. [I even have a small bio of him that I wrote published on the 'net]. Of course, Malone and Peterson's long works are definitive, but their length will deter most readers.