2 comments about The Incredible Band of John Philip Sousa (Music in American Life).

1. This book is primarily a reference work for those looking for deeply detailed information from primary sources. It has other excellent background material as well, but if you want to see a nice cross-section of actual Sousa Band programs, or you want to find out if your great-grandfather actually played in Sousa's Band like your grandmother always told you, this is the most definitive reference available.



2. This author has written extensively about Sousa and his band before. Much of that information is repeated here, but there are some new additions as well. The author has nicely highlighted each aspect of Sousa's career which makes for easy reading.
   
   The problem with Sousa is that we tend to exclude all other band composers and their music. There were many other great band composers around including R. B. Hall, Karl King, and Henry Fillmore to name some of the prominent American ones. Their music deserves notice as well, as Sousa often played their works.
   
   Sousa's band also tends to be somewhat over-rated by hero worship. Sure it was a great band, probably the best in the US at that time. But it was not the greatest in the world! Too many other European bands were around to deny Sousa that title. Sousa knew that any British Guards band like the Coldstream Guards, Scots Guards etc. was certainly as good. The French Garde Republicanne were also. In Prussia you had William Wieprect who did much to modernize the modern military band. His combined Prussian Guards band got top ratings in Paris during a band festival there just before the Franco-Prussian War. How ironic indeed!
   
   So Sousa was not the only around with a great band, and any serious reader should know this. Certainly Sousa did. But what Sousa did was market himself far better than anyone else. He saw that as a civy street guy he could make a lot more fame and money than he was as director of the US Marine band. This was Sousa's main advantage, and he knew how to make the most of it. His conducting style was flamboyant, his programing entertaining and interesting. The whole concept of the encore march after a long piece of music was unique, and introduced excitment to his concerts. These things are what made him and his band great.
   
   Unfortunately Sousa developed the cult of his personality so much for his concerts that when he was not on the podium concert hall attendence often suffered. This indicated that his band would not likely outlive him. Americans came to see Sousa the man as much as the great music his superb band played. I doubt Sousa could have promoted his works any other way in this country. In that regard he was the first super-star who got his name all over the media. Many have followed in his foot-steps since.
   
   Some might think I am trying to downgrade Sousa and his great band here. Certainly not. One should merely have a little sense of perspective when reading about him. His marches were first-rate. He wrote 136 of them, of which only the top 10-15 often get played now. Most of them were excellent, some certainly were better than others. While this sounds like a lot of music, keep in mind some famous German march composers wrote hundreds of marches. Blackenberg is believed to have composed over a thousand! Kenneth Alford, the Great British march composer did only about 20, but they are all classics. Alford was a regimental bandmaster, and thus did not have the means to promote himself like Sousa did.
   
   Sousa should also be known for his many opperettas, novelty pieces, and classical transcriptions. In this regard he greatly expanded the musical level in the US during this time. Orchestras were around as well, but these did not travel like Sousa. There were also other great bands, like the Allentown band, far odler than Sousa's from 1828. In fact Sousa took many players from this great band which still exists today, and which probably recreates the approximate sound and style of Sousa better than any other.
   
   The great strength of this book are the many details provided of the personnel who played in the band, as well as concert programs, and tour iternary. There is one chapter devoted entirely to a band memebers diary recording his expereinces during Sousa's great World Tour of 1911. Great stuff, if perhaps a little too much at times. There is a lot of detail here, perhaps excessive at times, but obviously a labor of love by the author. This is certainly THE book to have about Sousa and his incredible band who left their mark in the world's concert halls.

5 comments about W. E. B. Du Bois, 1919-1963: The Fight for Equality and the American Century.

1. I just finished rereading DL Lewis's first DuBois biography, and am thinking about purchasing the second bio. I own a copy of the first, and did read the second bio as a library book. Reading the current reviewer comments for this book refreshed my memory somewhat about the second bio. I would agree with reader praise for the first bio; it is a splendid book, as good as historical biography can be. The second bio starts out well but ends up reading as having been rushed, which is probably what happened, Lewis rushing to meet a publishing deadline. We would all be well served if Mr. Lewis would consider reissuing the second bio when he has time to flesh it out.



2. W.E.B. DuBois was born 2 years after slavery was abolished, and died two years before the wide ranging civil rights acts of 1965 were enacted. During this century, America was transformed from a largely rural nation whose economy depended on agricultural production (not the least of which was the cotton grown in the south by slaves) to an urban nation with the world's largest economy, built on industrial production. Throughout most of this transformation, DuBois was the loudest and clearest voice proclaiming the injustices suffered by the nation's Blacks.

   DuBois voice took many forms. He was the nation's leading Black Sociologist, Political Scientist and Hstorian scholar for most of his life. He was among the giants, regardless of race, in each of these fields. This alone would have been remarkable, even had he not had to struggle against the burden of racism every step of the way. What makes DuBois' life truly amazing (an over used word, which is fully justified here) is that in addition to his academic leadership, DuBois was a newspaper columnist, speaker, and founded dozens of popular mass organizations (most famously, the NAACP). He was quite literally the mentor of virtually every leading Black scholar, lawyer, business man, politician, etc. that followed.

   Surprisingly, given the transformation of the rest of society, DuBois retained his leadership role in the country as his many competitors and detractors faded--Booker T. Washington, Marcus Garvey, and Walter White, among others.

   Lewis has produced a masterful biography of this complex, vastly under rated man. Lewis keeps his writing interesting, as he traces the twists and turns DuBois was forced to follow in his battle against racism. He began with a traditional middle class, elite (which DuBois dubbed "the talented tenth") analysis which urged the white power structure to recognize that elite blacks were as crucial to the nation's future as were the elite of the white population. He ended as a communist, victim of McCarthy, having given up all hope of democratic change, living in exile in Ghana, where he was finally accorded the unstinting respect he was denied during the first 90 years of his life in America.

   Lewis gives DuBois final years short shrift. Lewis seems to agree with most of the contemporary civil rights leaders, who thought DuBois had simply lost his marbles in his dotage. Lewis therefore skims over the last two decades of DuBois life in a few all too brief pages.

   I beg to differ. I believe that DuBois' thinking was an entirely accurate reflection of the frustrations he had encountered. As Lewis hints at, but fails to explore, DuBois tried every conceivable means of combating America's deep seated racism. He was rejected at every turn. Despite apparent victories, many would have said that the plight of Blacks at the end of DuBois' long life was not very much improved over their plight at the beginning of his life. The white controlled governments, universities, financial instutions, and political parties had not embraced the black elite, and the black masses had yet to see any benefit from the legal victories won by Thurgood Marshall and the Inc, Fund in the late 50's.

   Lewis quotes DuBois aunt as chastizing DuBois for his attacks on Booker T. Washington as a quisling--DuBois may have grown up facing racism, but he did not have the whip marks of slavery on his back that Washington had suffered. Similarly, those who criticize DuBois for his emrace of communism had not suffered the frustrations of almost a century of struggle during which everything in America had changed--except its racism.

   As DuBois lay dying, virtually his last words were to the President of Ghana, apologizing for not living long enough to "finish" his work.

   I know of no one who was more reviled during his lifetime that better deserves the masterful biography Lewis has given us, and given to the ages.

   Everyone should not only read Lewis, but should go back and re-read some of DuBois own works. DuBois could not be given a higher honor, and deserves no less.




3. I agree with Schmerguls, above, that David Levering Lewis' vol. II of DuBois has too many typographical errors; the endnotes are a nightmare; and that it needs a bibliography. But the book is more than a flawed book about a flawed man. It is readable, in general; Lewis could have skipped some of the big words in favor of words that ordinary readers could understand without a dictionary simultaneously open. Lewis uses colorful, precise verbs in many cases and succeeds in bringing characters to life in one word descriptions. He humanizes DuBois by discussing his friendships and by examples (through verbs and description ) of DuBois's autocratic manner. If this biography does not deserve a Pulitzer, I am curious what biography Schmerguls would consider worthy? The Oakland reviewer, above, is more on the mark in that this is a thoroughly researched and keenly insightful recounting of the life of a towering figure. I, too, sorely miss a bibliography. And the last quarter of the book is indeed full of typographical errors which a careful copy editor should have caught. One hopes that there will be a revision someday with all corrections made. Still, this is a wonderful history of the times and of an amazing (though "flawed," like the rest of us) figure in American history. DuBois certainly provoked solid thought at a time when mainstream America was unsure that Negroes could think. I have heard David Levering Lewis speak on C-Span. He writes better than he speaks because he says "Uh-uh" too much as he searches for those big words. But I'm so grateful that his work on DuBois came to fruition in my lifetime so that I could read it.



4. It seems odd that Lewis's biography of W. E. B. DuBois should be felt to be entitled to two Pulitzer prizes. The author disapproves at least on the surface of some of DuBois's more outrageous positions, but yet Lewis's biases show thru, and one gets the idea that in general if Lewis had not had the benefit of what has happened in regard to Communism in the past 15 years Lewis would be even more approving of DuBois's opinions than he now indicates. As others have mentioned, it is disconcerting to have a book from a major publisher have so many typographical errors. One would think they could have been easily avoided. And the endnotes are a nightmare. Instead of footnotes there are page notes in the back, with no discernible system: some indicate sources, but I found them very user-unfriendly. There is no bibliography as such, and overall I thought the book poorly edited. But the book tells a story of interest, especially during the period from 1945 to 1963.



5. With volume two Lewis completes his magisterial work chronicling the life and times of the controversial W. E. B. Du Bois, and this second volume is every bit as fascinating and scholarly as the first one which won the Pulitzer Prize. This volume follows Du Bois' descent from a founder and spokesman for the NAACP to his self-imposed exile in Ghana in 1963. Throughout the journey Lewis thoroughly develops the changing viewpoints Du Bois put forth as solutions to the problems of racial discrimination and the powerlessness of people of color in this country and around the world. From an integrationist (who at the same time criticized the assimilationist attitude of Frederick Douglas), Du Bois moved into the Pan-Africa movement (although he disliked and opposed Marcus Garvey and his movement), and eventually supported Black separatism before settling on socialism and Marxism in the later years of his life. His "petty bourgeois" ideas concerning Black economic separatism were, of course, vehemently criticized by his Marxist friends. Many believed "Du Bois was a romantic, a racialist, and an old man given to dreams of a 'shopkeepers paradise' as a solution to the depression."

   Although Lewis soft-pedals Du Bois' deep character flaws which caused him to be constantly at odds with others who were "on his side" in the fight for racial equality, and permitted him to excuse the murder and outrages of Stalinism and the Japanese military aggression and ethnic cleansing in Asia, the author clearly reveals these facts of Du Bois' life. Lewis reveals how Du Bois' mind became so poisoned with a visceral hatred of White power, and its adjunct Western capitalism, that he eventually reached the point where he could look the other way or excuse the outrages committed by peoples or regimes opposed to Western interests (which he never seemed to quite grasp were really his own interests and those of the Negro in America). In the end Du Bois seemed opposed to almost any policy his country adopted and he supported any force in the world (be it Pan-Africanism, Bolshevism, Japanese militarism, or Chinese communism) that opposed the interests of the "White governments." Thus, did a brilliant social critic end up a confused mind destined to play the role of a pawn for regimes opposed to Western interests.

   Lewis is very good at highlighting Du Bois' conflict with Marcus Garvey of whom he draws a great character sketch. He points out that Garvey's early followers were often poor, less educated, and often of West Indian origins, while the more "elitist" Du Bois circulated among, and pretended to speak for, the Talented Tenth of the African American people. Du Bois was an elitist and intellectual who could not stomach the irrational pronouncements of Marcus Garvey. Du Bois' viewpoint was that of the Black urban, educated, professional.

   Lewis is also very strong with detail concerning Du Bois' widening differences with the NAACP leadership and the association's approach to fighting for equality. Du Bois was not a great fan of Walter White, Roy Wilkins, and Thurgood Marshall who, with their legalistic approach, stressed working within the "White system." As in volume one, Lewis does a good job of discussing Du Bois' many writings and shows how Du Bois himself (as witnessed by his "The Gift of Black Folks") never outgrew his own racial stereotyping. Lewis also soft-pedals Du Bois' many affairs with intellectual women, but he does document these relationships. He shows how Du Bois, a believer in the rights of women, virtually abandoned his wife Nina over a period of many years in almost every sense but financial (many of his friends and intellectual acquanitances never met his wife) and how he was less than a father to his unfortunate daughter Yolande (who was one of the great disappointments of his life.)

   Lewis' book is possibly most fascinating when he deals with the Harlem Renaissance and the various figures with whom Du Bois was familiar. He details Du Bois' eventual alienation from the creative people of this era who depicted the seediness of Black urban life and culture. This too realistic depiction of Black life by the Renaissance literary figures embarrassed and angered Du Bois who wanted to believe that the "Negro race" was destined for a special place in history and, as a race, manifest certain elements of racial superiority. Du Bois criticized the Harlem Renaissance writers, poets, and artists for not sharing his belief that art and culture should serve racial politics. As Lewis shows, "Du Bois's own deep anti-modernist taboos surfaced" in his criticism of the Renaissance literati. Lewis also spends a good deal of time on the historiography of the Reconstruction Era to enable his reader to grasp the importance of Du Bois' writings on the subject and how they served as a necessary correction (despite Du Bois' own one-sidedness and exaggerated claims) to the more traditional school of historical writing on the Reconstruction Era. He also reveals the extent to which Du Bois would never give up the ridiculous notion that the freed slaves saved democracy in America. He desperatly needed to find a special role for the African American in the history of the the great country. Despite Du Bois' brilliant intellect, it was his tendency to see "White" hatred of the Negro as the central paradigm of all modern history, that prevented him from being widely accepted as a scholar. For him, all historical understanding began with this simple fact. Often his own worst enemy, Du Bois, Lewis tells us, "managed to give the impression that racial discrimination had been invented soley to make his life miserable."

   In the end, Du Bois felt the American Negro had let him down and he lost his faith in the special role the Negro was to play in history. As he himself admitted, "I misinterpreted the age in which I lived." One has to think that this disillusionment played as much a role in his decision to leave the country as any other reason. All in all, Lewis' biography portrays Du Bois as not so much a heroic figure, as a tragic one; a brilliant mind warped by a troubled soul that was the reflection of much of the pain experienced by an educated African American in the first half of the twentieth century.

1 comments about The Life and Legend of E. H. Harriman.

1. Mr Klien has done it again. I read Mr. Klein's The Life And Legend of Jay Gould with much anticipation and found it to be very engaging. That is exactly how i felt about his latest endeavor, The Life and Legend of E.H. Harriman. Mr. Klien handles a complex person with much skill and depth. He brings to life a monumental person who was both very complex and yet very human. His use of the social and cultural aspects of the era help to put his subject in context without detracting from the person. Many biographies fail either because the subject is dimmed by the amount of background information on the social and cultural aspects of the era or just the opposite, the subject is not brought to life by too little backgroung of the forces that helped shapped his/her life. Mr. Klein succeeds in reaching a great balance. The book is a great read.

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

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



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



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



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



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

No comments about George Stoneman: A Biography of the Union General.

No comments about Famous Americans in History (Junior Classics).

No comments about John Washington's Civil War: A Slave Narrative.

1 comments about Helen Clay Frick: Bittersweet Heiress.

1. I bought and read "Helen Clay Frick-Bittersweet Heiress" because I greatly enjoyed the author's previous work published in 1998, "Henry Clay Frick-An Intimate Portrait".These books are large,"Helen" is 9"x12", and they are published on very heavy glossy paper. This enhances the family photographs as well as selected works of art that fit in with the biography. Do not let the size of either book or their many pictures of art treasures frighten you away if you are looking for a biography. Both books are outstanding biographies, filled with money,violence,greed,contention,love,charity,a whisp of incest,treachery,and eccentric behavior.Henry Frick's involvement with the 19th Century steel industry and attendant labor problems is told well in both books."Helen" is written through the eyes of Helen and continues the family biography after the death of Henry in 1919.The historical scope of "Helen" is from the beginning of Henry's business career in 1875 to Helen's death in 1984.
   
   The author exceeds the expected in every respect with both of the two books that I have mentioned. The books are lovingly written with much interesting detail about Henry and Helen ,including a generous assortment of warts and foibles.The author has been courageous on a number of her forays into her family's history...she motored through some rather tricky areas about friends and family members that she will no doubt encounter from time to time.The art work and other pictures were a priceless addition to the narrative and were introduced in exactly the right place in each book.Reading "Helen Clay Frick" is a poignant journey about a young woman that began life as a loving daughter and care giver and ended it as a very wealthy but eccentric and demanding woman.

5 comments about Red Cloud: Warrior-Statesman of the Lakota Sioux (Oklahoma Western Biographies, 13).

1. This book is a good read. Every collection of American History should have it.



2. The book the Red Cloud is a really good book about the native american period. It talks about the history of one leader, Red Cloud. It talks about his life and his effect on the land and his people. He was a strong and couragous person. He stood up for what he believed in. He was kinda of like the the person in between, that is the person between the government and the tribes. Red Cloud did not favored the separation of people. He believed that we can coexist together. Red Cloud lived a long time for someone back then. This is a good book for educational purposes. It is a great tool for learning about the history of Native Americans. Even though this is an biography, it can still be a great learning experience for all.



3. Along with Crazy Horse, Red Cloud is probably one of the best known
   Native American leaders, at least by name. He is also probably the
   most controversial. Some see him as a statesman and visionary
   who,aware that war against the whites had become pointless, negotiated
   in the best interests of his people. Others see him as self-serving
   and vain, using white insistance on negotiating with "one true
   chief" as a means to his own ends.

   For the most part, Larson
   weighs in on the side of statesman, but he doesn't fail to show the
   other side too. He points out how Red Cloud would often make a point
   of a small issue, that would benefit only him, at the expense of a
   larger issue that affected his people. One example he uses is when,
   on a trip to Washington in 1870, Red Cloud became sullen and withdrawn
   until he was assured that his delegation would be given 17 horses to
   for the trip from the train to the reservation. However, he largely
   ignored the bigger and more important issue, of mining for gold in the
   Black Hills.

   Unfortunately, though, on the most controversial
   issue, how much Red Cloud had to do with Crazy Horse's death, or at
   least plans for his arrest, Larson is disappointingly vague. He does
   acknowlege that Red Cloud was probably jealous of the younger leader.
   Indeed, in the last chapter he notes that "...his role in this
   tragic affair is probably the blackest mark against his name."
   (p.302) Unfortunately, though, Larson doesn't cover the incident in
   nearly enough detail. He implies that Crazy Horse truly was planning
   to go back on the warpath, rather than fight the Nez Perce as
   requested by Lieutenant Clark. He also makes no mention of any possible
   misinterpretation of Crazy Horse's words by the less than reputable
   interpreter Frank Grouard. Larson may have had good reason for
   choosing to leave out some of this material. Certainly his list of
   sources shows that the book is well-researched. Unfortunately, the
   choice by the publisher, not to use footnotes in this particular
   series makes it difficult to determine on what Larson bases his
   assumptions.

   On the whole, though, the book is well written, and
   easy to follow. It is especially valuable for information about Red
   Cloud's life before and after the Indian Wars, a period that is not
   covered much in any history books. I can definitely recommend this as
   a good introduction for those not familiar with the period, or for
   those who simply want to know more about the role Red Cloud played in
   those important times. However, I would follow it with a good
   biography of Crazy Horse.




4. Traditionally, stories of Indian leaders view them as temporarily dangerous nuisances the whites had to deal with during the reasonable and inevitable process of moving the Indians onto reservations. This book is part of a new approach of looking at what an Indian leader tried to achieve for his people and assessing how he went about it and how successful he was in meeting his own goals. There is much detail. Larson has been extremely thorough in his researches, and, though we do not really hear Red Cloud's voice, we respecfully watch him do what he had to do to further his people's best interests. He didn't wear a suit or tie or have an Ivy League degree, but Red Cloud functioned very well indeed in opposing an alien force. Anyone who thinks the earth may one day be invaded from outer space should study Red Cloud. Thank you, Oklahoma University Press.



5. Red Cloud:Warrioir Statesman of the Lakota Souix is a really excellent biography. Larson does a great job of presenting all the informaton in an understandable and captivating way that really makes me want to learn more about Native American history. There is even a map/picture section in the middle of the biography that helps clarify any questions you may have while reading, as all the different battles and tribes might confuse you. Other than that temporary confusion, good job Mr. Larson

5 comments about Walt Whitman's Memoranda During the War.

1. From 1862-65, Walt Whitman visited hospitals, camps and fields of hospital tents, over six hundred visits or tours and ministered to 80,000 to 100,000 wounded and sick. He wrote letters for them. To his dismay, he found far more Union Southerners, especially from Tennessee, than he expected. After the Battle at Columbia, Tennessee, no Rebels were left alive. "They let none crawl away, no matter what his condition."
   
   Hero stories are almost always myths. MEMORANDA DURING THE WAR is made up of articles published in the New York 'Weekly Graphic' and published in 1876 to go along with his special "Centennial Editon" of 'Leaves of Grass.'
   
   "I shall not easily forget the first time I saw Abraham Lincoln. It was a rather pleasant spring afternoon on 19th of February, 1861, in New York City." Whitman was from Brooklyn, New York. "The figure, the look, the gait, are distinctly impressed upon me yet; the unusual and uncouth height, the dress of complete black, the stovepipe hat..., the dark-brown complexion, the seamed and wrinkled yet canny-looking face, the black, bushy head of hair, the disporportionately long neck...." He describes Lincoln as having eyes with a deep latent sadness in the expression. Mrs. Lincoln, too, when she ventured out always wore black.
   
   At the first Inauguration, Lincoln's carriage had been surrounded by a dense mass of armed cavalrymen eight deep, with drawn sabres; and there were sharp-shooters stationed at every corner on the route. Four years later, he was in his plain two-horse barouche with his ten year old son, with no soldiers, only a lot of civilians on horseback, with huge yellow scarfs over their shoulders.
   
   April 14, 1865, a day to be remembered, as President and Mrs. Lincoln attended a performance at Ford's Theatre; at intermission, a shot was heard. Booth, dressed in plain black broadcloth, bare-headed, with a full head of glossy, raven hair, and his eyes like some mad animal's flashing with light and resolution, yet with a strange calmness, jumps to the stage holding a large knife. After he sprains his ankle, he turns around and looks at the audience his face of statuesque beautuy, lit by those basilisk eyes, flashing with desperation...launches out in a firm and steady voice the words, "Sic semper tyrannis."
   
   At the Cemetery in Andersonville, with its thirteen thousand graves, on the slope of a beautiful hill in June, 1875, he wrote: "And now, to thought of these -- on these graves of the dead of the War, as on an altar -- to memory of these, of North or South, I close and dedicate my book."
   
   Whitman was an old man with a bushy white beard and white hair in the photograph by Matthew Brady in 1863. The first part by Peter Goviello appears to be a thesis on this particular book. He is an English professor at Bowdoin College, and previously published INTIMACY IN AMERICA: DREAMS OF AFFILIATION IN ANTEBELLUM LITERATURE. I didn't know there was such a thing, but then I took English Lit. and learned American Lit. by typing the exams for my college teacher/husband who taught both.



2. Walt Whitman, upon hearing the news of the wounding of his brother George at the battle of Fredericksburg , took off from New York City to find him on the battlefields of Virginia. After discovering him at a hospital, and spending time with his company, Whitman decided to live in Washington DC. His sojourn there, which last many years, is brilliantly recounted in the simple book "Memoranda During the War".
   
   While working at the Patent Office during the war, Whitman volunteered much time caring and tending the wounded at the many Civil War hospitals that sprang up to take care of the men. Whitman would bring the men simple treats, such as fruit, or paper, or things to read, and spend hours tending to these brave men. This book is a recollection, however brief, of those times he spent caring for the men, including some important events of the time.
   
   While people learn about the history of the Civil War by memorizing dates and places, they often miss the impact of the Civil War. Whitman's book brings the impact of this war into real contexts. Even he, in his writing, says that the true reality of this war may be unknowable to those who would never see it. Whitman attempts to correct this by telling stories of the wounded soldiers he tends; stories of battles; and a particularly gruesome story of a raid gone bad and its horrific consequences.
   
   Whitman's prose is succinct and touching. The few soldier's lives he manages to capture on paper, some in just a few sentences, are compelling. Anyone wanting to understand this war certainly should spend an hour with Whitman as he describes his small part in this grand conflict, for with his words, comes a grander understanding of this war.



3. How great that this amazing book was liberated from the dusty
   shelves of the Library of Congress rare books collection.
   In a weird way, it's sort of like Walt Whitman's "On The Road,"
   except HIS On the Road was the Civil War. It's a touching, sad,
   glorious & never boring book. Perhaps the most incredible thing about the prose is how "modern" it reads; and isn't it sad, about humanity in general, how Walt's accounts from 1862-1865 are still TOTALLY relevant today, in 2005; and will probably remain TOTALLY
   relevant for as long as human beings occupy this blood-stained planet.



4. I read this book while also reading "Don't Know Much About the Civil War" and Lincoln's letters and speeches. What a wonderful view into the century that gave rise to this great one. If you are planning to cover the civil war, or even the nineteenth century in America, this would be a central piece to help modern readers understand that time. Whitman's prose style is very modern.



5. This collection of notes by Walt Whitman written during a period of time when Whitman was visiting war hospitals and camps is superb.

   Whitman gives one a glimpse of the war that is photographic and poetic. Its attention to detail, and sympathetic approach must raise a lump in the throat of even the most hardend reader.

   He shows you the places, the times and the players. He lets them speak their stories through his lines. Through sadness he exalts them.

   This book should be a required reading for all highschool or college American History classes.