Reviews (2)

A Very Good Book
This was truly a wonderful book. The writer really gives you personal account of the "comeback" of Nixon. There were a lot of details that I am sure most Americans do not know as Nixon basically fell off the radar screen until his death. This book gave you some much personal information that I put it down and have a new appreciation for what he went through. I would suggest reading this book right after 'The Final Days", the two books work very well together. There is also an interesting section in "Shadow" about Clinton and his speak at Nixon's funeral. This is a very interesting book and if you are interested in his life of just American politics I am sure you will also find the book interesting.

A very engaging, deep look at the man behind the president
An excellent book for those at least slightly familiar with all the ins and outs of the Nixon story. Many stories and anecdotes that are rare and memorable involving Nixon and everyone around him. I highly reccomend this book. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Instructive on 'how not to write history.'
Roger Morris, unfortunately, has been the most cited biographer of Nixon's early political campaigns and provides an excellent example of 'how not to write history.' The main problem is Morris's research methodology in which he bases his conclusion on Nixon's advesaries partisan statements. For instance, many of Jerry Voorhis's accussations did not surface until the 1956 presidential campaign. Democratic Presidential candidate Adlai Stevenson knew he could not appeal to voters by attacking war hero Dwight D. Eisenhower, thus he attacked the media's favorite target, Vice President Richard M. Nixon.

It was at this time and during the 1972 campaign when Voorhis, being a party man, attacked Nixon's alleged "red-baiting."The same is true for Helen Gahagan Douglas, who Morris claims Nixon destroyed politically and almost personally. Morris forgets to mention that Douglas FIRST ATTACKED NIXON AS BEING SOFT ON COMMUNISM and that it was a Democrat who first unveiled the Pink sheet.

While there are many
people who want to believe Roger Morris and his claims(he was one of the principal interviewees on PBS's American Experience Nixon biography), they are simply not factual and only fuel the partisan legends and myths of Nixon. I would reccomend a more objective and thoroughly researched work, Irwin F. Gellman's "The Contender."

The Wrath of Morris
Before beginning this review, the reader should be made aware of some facts about the author of this book. Morris was a National Security Council staff member during the Nixon years. Nixon and National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger had his phones tapped. Morris resigned his position in protest following the invasion of Cambodia. Since then he has written biographies of Kissinger, General Alexander Haig, and now Nixon.

The reader watches young Nixon grow up in a relatively prosperous family. Despite the future president's claims of poverty, the family sent to sons to college and owned a car during the depression. There were limits to the Nixons' finances. Richard was smart enough to win admission to Harvard, but his family could not afford to send him East. Despite the death of two brothers, Nixon's home was a supportive, nurturing environment. Yet, as hone high school friend noted, Richard was "admired rather than liked."

After the war, Nixon and his wife, Pat, dreaded returning to small town life. As a result, the interest a group of community leaders showed in him as a candidate to take on Congressman Jerry Voorhis was a godsend. According to Morris, this election marks the start of red-baiting in American politics and in Nixon's career. Voorhis and Nixon would later downplay the role of red-baiting in this election for very different reasons. Morris argues that this first campaign is the start of an inverse relationship ethics and political success in Nixon's career. That is, the higher Nixon rose in politics, the less he cared about the methods he used to get there. While this assertion might be true, Nixon in 1946 was nowhere near the cutting edge of mudslinging that Morris would have us believe. In his shorter and much better biography of Nixon, historian Stephen Ambrose points out that Senator William Knowland, a man Morris sees as a Paragon of virtue, was actually far dirtier than Nixon ever was against Voorhis.

Encouraged by his congressional victory, Nixon gravitates more and more towards the anti-Communist right wing. He eagerly sought and gained a seat on the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC). Morris clearly exaggerates Nixon's influence when he contends that a freshman congressman had enough power to intimidate Hollywood into making anti-Communist films and artistically inhibiting filmmakers for a decade. Nixon and HUAC soon hit pay dirt when they stumbled upon on one of the few incidents of a communist actually holding a high position in the U.S. government. The FBI leaked to the committee the testimony of Whitaker Chambers, an editor with Time-Life, in which he accused former State Department official Alger Hiss of spying for the Soviet Union. That these accusations were taken seriously Morris argues is a sign of how strong the anti-Communist witch hunt was in America. Chambers had made the charges before, but only at a time when red-baiting was acceptable political tool would they be taken seriously. Morris contends that Hiss was innocent of the charges hurled at him, but the evidence he offers simply does not support his case. In addition, a good deal of material declassified in the last ten years here and in the former Soviet Union shows Hiss was as dirty as his detractors claimed.

Intoxicated with his success, Nixon decides to run for the U.S. Senate against Helen Douglas. Once again he uses his favorite tactic and once again he destroys another respectable career. In a moment of pure hyperbole, Morris characterizes this race as "the most notorious, controversial campaign in American political history." In making this statement, he ignores the Presidential elections of 1824, 1876, 1968 and U.S. Senate Races in Texas in 1948 and in North Carolina in 1984. The Nixon-Douglas race did, however, contribute to some of the better political one-liners in history. Nixon said Douglas was "pink right down to her underwear" and Douglas called Nixon "Tricky Dick." Only in 1952 with the slush fund controversy would Nixon get a taste of his own medicine.

There are many problems with this biography. The first is its length. Morris could have easily trimmed 200 pages without damage to his narrative. Ambrose covers the same period and 10 additional years with 250 fewer pages. Another problem is his habit of making over arching indictiments against Nixon. The biggest shortcoming, though, is Morris's portrayal of his subject. He sees Nixon as a crude, ambitious, paranoid politician with few scruples. That Nixon had these traits is beyond question. Morris unfortunately overlooks the complexity of Nixon's personality. Nixon had the capacity to be generous, thoughtful and compassionate. The portrayal in this book is most unrewarding.

Definitive on the early Nixon
Roger Morris' book covers the life of Richard Nixon through his 1952 election to the Vice-Presidency. Most of the book focuses on the years 1946-52, covering five pivotal episodes in Nixon's career 1)His 1946 House campaign against Jerry Voorhis, 2) the Hiss case, 3) his 1950 Senate campaign against Helen Gahagan Douglas, 4) his role in the 1952 Republican convention, and 5) the 1952 campaign with emphasis on the "secret fund" scandal that culminated with the "Checkers" speech. Morris clearly is not from the David McCullough, portray-your-subject-as-a-saint school of biographers. A reader gets a very clear sense of why Nixon came to merit the nickname "Tricky Dick" from Morris' portrayals of the dirty, dishonest campaigns against Voorhis and Douglas, and from Nixon's duplicitous behavior at the Republican convention, outwardly loyal to the California delegations chief, Gov. Earl Warren, while secretly maneuvering to throw the state's delegates to Eisenhower. Yet Morris' Nixon is also a three-dimensional man, not a cardboard villain. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

An excellent and concise account of Nixon's Vietnam War
Chapter 14, pp 569-614 of "One of Us" is probably the best account of Richard Nixon's Vietnam War policy that I have read. Most Vietnam books tend to skimp on the latter years of the war, when it was winding down. In general this book is very even-handed and at times surprisingly sympathetic. However, Wicker is also honestly frank in his criticisms of Nixon's Vietnam policy and other aspects of his foreign policy.
The reviewer is the author of "Killed In Action: The life and times of SP4 Stephen H. Warner, draftee, journalist and anti-war activist"

policy discussions during the nixon administration
good work on the policies during the nixon adminstration
very clear and concise writing in laymen's terms of some rather complex subject matters. the writier's skill in presenting his ideas clearly are done very well inthis book.

truly, one of them

Tom Wicker, whose career as reporter, Washington bureau chief for the New York Times, and then columnist overlapped Nixon's political career, has thus written a book which though awfully weak as biography has some interest as a kind of weird rehabilitative essay. His quest requires him to minimize Nixon's truly reprehensible behavior as President. Instead, it indicts them. To his credit, Wicker does acknowledge that the growing centralization of power in the hands of the Federal government created a situation in which corruption was inevitable.

Meanwhile, Wicker also betrays rather extensive squeamishness about some of the particulars of Nixon's foreign policy. He argues that Nixon should have gotten out of Vietnam much quicker, should have ditched the Shah of Iran and shouldn't have tilted towards Pakistan during its dispute with India. He bemoans our involvement in the toppling of Salvador Allende in Chile. And he thinks the pace of negotiation with the Soviets should have been quicker. The general case here seems to be that Nixon was okay on the big stuff, thawing out the Cold War, but not quite good enough. That's fairly timid criticism.

It is only on domestic policy that Wicker is completely enamored. He goes so far as to adopt Daniel Patrick Moynihan's assessment that the Nixon Administration was "'the most progressive' of the postwar era." In particular, he likes the way that Nixon used his powers to desegregate Southern schools.

In the end, the quality that Wicker seems to admire most in Nixon is, appropriately enough, the same one that people admire in Bill Clinton : the awesome capacity to sustain political damage and live to fight another day.

where Wicker tries to psychoanalyze Nixon, particularly his paranoia and his willingness to cut ethical corners. Since the book is really more of an essay than a biography, this exercise might have had some limited value had Wicker discussed why it was that people of his ilk, Eastern journalists, had such a hard time loving Nixon. The mere suppositions about the demons that drove Nixon don't have much value on their own. Wicker is absolutely correct, though it's hard to believe he's thought out the implications, that the sheer size and inordinate power of the Cold War presidency and government made corruption and scandal inevitable.

Sympathetic but accurate review of Nixon's achievements
I was born in the late 60's. Growing up one heard of "Tricky Dick", Woody Allen jokes about the secret service counting the cutlery every time Nixon left the White House. But what of Nixon's domestic achievements and results? EPA, OSHA, Indian rights, abolition of conscription, affirmative action, school integration in the south? Or increasing social security 25% in 1972 and putting it on a COLA.

Thinking that Nixon was a conservative I marvel that he signed a capital gains tax increase. Nixon won the '68 election narrowly. He reached out and brought in or tried to bring in Democrats like Pat Moynihan (achieved) or Scoop Jackson for defence (not succesful).

He must have loved his country or else he would have challenged the 1960 election result.

I highly reccomend this well-written book to all students of history, politics or America. ... Read more

Book Description

The President's Private Eye is a passage into history, a unique episodic memoir that tells about the desire of a Polish kid from New York's Lower East Side who wanted to become a cop and where that career took him--to the position of being the only private detective ever hired to work for a President of the United States. And now, along with never-before-seen documents, including key memos from the Nixon White House, Tony Ulasewicz tells his story. ... Read more

Book Description

The Nixon crisis of 1973-1974 threatened the nation in ways we did not immediately understand. Stripped of drama and confusion, however, the problem was that our President had placed himself above the law. The nation had to decide whether that could be allowed.

Theodore H. White starts this story with the last days of Richard Nixon in the White House -- as those closest recognized that he had deceived them and that they must force him out.

He follows the thread of manipulation back to its origin 20 years earlier and shows how the Nixon team came to see politics as war in which no quarter was given, in which the White House was a command post where ordinary rules did not apply, where power could be used without restraint. ... Read more

Book Description

More than a century after his death in 1900, Nietzsche remains a seminal figure in the history of European intellectual life. Celebrated as a liberator by some, maligned as a pernicious influence by others, he was the subject of controversy during his lifetime, pursuing a hedonistic individualism and espousing concepts such as the Superman and the Will to Power until he died after a decade of institutionalized insanity.In this groundbreaking biography, Joachim Köhler seeks for the first time to understand Nietzsche's philosophy through a reconstruction of his inner life. In a revealing reinterpretation of his letters, diaries, and writings, Köhler shows that Nietzsche's suppressed homosexuality, generating a hatred of Christianity and conventional morality, was a central influence on his work. Further, Köhler argues, his philosophical position was fundamentally compromised by the concealment of his forbidden sexual desire. Throughout his life, the unhappy genius was also plagued by horrible nightmares, stemming from his much-loved father's death, which led to a profoundly disturbed conscience and an intense loathing of metaphysics. Seeking to disguise the truth of his innermost torments, Nietzsche contrived the persona of Zarathustra. The story of the great Persian philosopher, contends Köhler, reveals Nietzsche's own suppression and dionysiac liberation, and presents the culmination of his secret yearnings in the new myth of the Superman who, in his naked beauty, resembled the gods of classical Greece. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Borderlands of nightmare
Charged with some degree of speculation, this work is nonetheless a significant perspective on Nietzsche that any student of the subject ought to consider. Isn't the author's point, despite a near animus toward his subject, rather clear from the data examined? We need not finalize opinion to be grateful for an examination of a man who lived the discovery of the unconscious, without jargon or theories. You can be genuinely confused by Nietzsche, and the strange riddle of his philosophy deserves a bit of demystification. This was a dangerous subject that routinely confuses all discussion of social equality, 'good and evil', to say nothing of the complex history of Zarathustra, from a starting point that misconceived the nature of Greek tragedy.
With Nietzsche style triumphs over the stark danger of intoxicated encounter with the fringe-border world of the noumenal,and the fragments of the explosion are strewn across a modern philosophical wasteland. I think the author unsufficiently consider this point, the wreckage of a true genius on the shoals of psychological confusions and ambiguity. It takes more than genius to resolve the philosophical heritage Nietzsche encounters, and the result shows the burnout of a facile Schopenhaurian rockstar type, which almost makes the man more interesting. In any case, this was a compelling, somewhat chilling account, that made Nietzsche interesting in a new way. One need not agree with Freud's theories, which their own such legacy, to suddenly see why his efforts to 'lance the wound' of the Victorian psyche made such sense for its time. Fascinating work, if a bit cold for Nietzsche fan clubs.

Was Nietzsche Gay?
At first sight, it would seem to the reader that Nietzsche's biographers have finally run out of things to say. We've had the French Nietzsche, the Positivist Nietzsche, The Existential Nietzsche, the Postmodern Nietzsche, ad nauseum. And now the Gay Nietzsche? But hild on here; not so fast. While I may not agree with many of Kohler's arguments, he has still managed to write one hell of an entertaining book without insulting my intelligence in the process.

When I first began reading this tome, I thought to myself that this may well be another of those works in which anyone in history who was anyone was, of course, gay. But then I remembered Siegfried Mandel's "Nietzsche and the Jews," in which Mandel made many of the same assertations. Kohler, however, wants to pursue the issue of possible homosexuality as the centerpiece of his biography, instead of leaving in on the sidelines as Mandel does.

It is a difficult task, as Nietzsche was one of the most open philosophers in terms of private life, but one who had his life heavily edited by his manipulative sister after madess rendered him helpless. Anything that went against the ideal she had made for her brother was rewritten to have its meaning changed, or was simply discarded it to the dustbin. Because of this huge gap in out knowledge, Kohler can only rely on information rescued from the scrap-heap, and to this addes a great deal of speculation. Granted, some of it is learned speculation, and some of it appears dead on target, but it is speculation, nonetheless and must always be viewed with the proverbial grain of salt.

Ther author is also aided greatly in this effort by reference to the definitive three-volume biography of Nietzsche by Curt Paul Janz. Published in Munich in 1978, it appears never to have been translated into English and is, alas, now out-of-print in Germany. Much of Kohler's biographical information comes from this book, which helps explain why it blows away all English biographies in terms of depth. I have learned many more facts about Nietzsche's life from this book than I have from, say, the biography of Ronald Heyman, which itself adheres to the familiar paradigm about the life of Nietzsche.

Does Kohler prove his point? Sadly for him, no. Most of his evidence is purely circumstantial and some second-hand. But he gives the reader enough good information for many evenings of argument until those documents that will prove the argument one way of another are found. As that day is not very likely to come, at least not soon, the speculations in this book should serve to entertain and provide ammo for countless future arguments. And sometimes there is no greater intellectual fun to be had. ... Read more

Book Description

During 1888 in Turin, Italy, Nietzsche wrote three of his most important works--Ecce Homo, Twilight of the Idols, and The Antichrist.In this accessible, moving biography, Lesley Chamberlain examines with passion and insight the mind of a genius at its creative pinnacle.In her account, Freidrich Nietzsche emerges as a gentle, tortured man, dominated by his rigorous mind and his love of music, and soothed by the strangely otherworldly city of Turin
... Read more

Reviews (11)

a must for nietzschephiles
lesley chamberlain, a traveler, food critic, and philosopher, is admirably equipped to write about a man who was also those things. we see turin almost through nietzsche's eyes, the hotels, bookstores,theaters and grocery stores, the weather and even the predominant colors. we see the overman himself getting lost on trains, smiling at comic operettas, and surviving on sausages mailed to him by mom. we also see the working philosoher in his final productive year, reaching a crescendo of creativity at the same time he struggles to evade syphlitic madness. chamberlain has an eye out for his weak points: are his books mad, was he a proto-nazi and an anti-semite? chamberlain suggests that war and the military, of which nietzsche had personal experience, were frequent metaphors for him, and can lead to misunderstanding when nietzsche's style turned as heated and shrill as at last it did. a book full of color, thought, ompassion, and not a little criticism, too.

Nietzsche In Turin. A book in which Nietzsche becomes Human.
Chamberlain lets us see Nietzsche with a personal side. As an immortal, I see a very inside depthness to Nietzsche, a mortal with dark sided problems. It is a very good glimpse at Nietzsche's latter life in Turin though some important wonderings are left out.

Sometimes chatty, a very human effort
Subtitled "An Intimate Biography," NIETZSCHE IN TURIN by Lesley Chamberlain might be considered a new age treatment of a life dominated by the urge to write, as exhibited by someone torn by his appreciation of the power of music to make things clearer in a far more artistic fashion, driven by a personal rivalry with Wagner that assumed more importance than his personal relationships, and suffering from a disease which would deprive him of his ability to behave. Big philosophical issues are avoided as thoroughly as Nietzsche is pictured trying to avoid having contact with anyone who would want to discuss Hegel as he takes his daily walk in a city which "has a long reputation for magic and a disconcerting number of writers, from Tasso to Rousseau, J.M. Symonds to Primo Levi, have become depressed or gone mad there." (p. 211). The final chapter, "Collapse into the Beyond," is close to "The role syphilis played in heightening his pronouncements may be glimpsed through a comparison with his fellow sufferer, and ultimate madman, the French writer Guy de Maupassant." (p. 201).

I frequently wished that the book had an index. There is some discussion of Nietzsche's appreciation of the artists of his time, but the names show up as substitutes for some picture, as when Nietzsche, in his autobiography, ECCE HOMO, mentioned the autumn of 1888 as like "a Claude Lorrain thought of into infinity, each day of equal, unbounded perfection." (p. 187). This is so similar to a comment in his letters of October, 1888, about "the leaves on the trees are a glowing yellow, sky and great river a delicate blue, the air of supreme purity - a Claude Lorrain in a way I had never dreamed of seeing him" (p. 167), with a note that only specifies "18.10.88, 19.10.88, 30.10.88" (p. 244), that I wonder if searching the web might give me more information about this artist, and more quickly than looking through the rest of this book.

NIETZSCHE IN TURIN ends with a Bibliography, pp. 253-256, which provides the sources for much of the information in the book and its notes. An American professor has written a biography called YOUNG NIETZSCHE, but NIETZSCHE IN TURIN cites a book from 1912, THE YOUNG NIETZSCHE by Elisabeth Foerster-Nietzsche, which must have at least 330 pages, as the more recent book does not. Page 330 recorded that "Fritz knew only too well how characteristic it was of all three of us in the first flush of our indignation to say and write sharp and unpleasant things which a day or two later we scarcely remembered having thought or written." (p. 239, Chapter 8, note 18). THE SCIENCE OF JOY is also used as the title of a book by Nietzsche known by other translations into English, and THE SCIENCE OF JOY makes so much sense in a new wave understanding of the world that it might lead readers to the conclusion that all of Nietzsche could be understood best in that way.

Nietzsche originally moved to Turin in April, 1888, but this book provides a comparative chronology for philosophical breakthroughs from 1819 to 1930, when Sigmund Freud wrote CIVILISATION AND ITS DISCONTENTS. A far better translation of Freud's title is given somewhere in the text, but not in the Bibliography, and Freud appears offhandedly in the notes often enough that even an index might not clarify how much this book depends on how Freud is affecting new wave thinking recently. Names of people that Nietzsche wrote to in 1888 often appear without any explanation of who they were, and events in 1882 involving Lou frequently appear as explanations for the major forces driving Nietzsche's thoughts as he attempted to turn himself into the culmination of all history, drama, and the ultimate music critic. Even closer to perfection, Nietzsche is described as "delighted in 1888 when Carl Fuchs, well placed in Danzig to know Polish, told him that the name Nietzsche could mean `man of nothing.' " (p. 123). Trying to be Polish, in the April '88 outline of his life that he sent to Brandes, who had begun to lecture on Nietzsche's work, "gave him strength against the world which rejected him." (p. 123).

NIETZSCHE IN TURIN is so sympathetic that it is no surprise to find, "Here is the moral underside of life, in which the good are destroyed by their own goodness: an excess of sympathy." (p. 105). Self-reflection predominates so much that the author pictures herself writing in Turin in the autumn of 1994, hardly modernized by the 106 years which had passed since Nietzsche was putting himself into an autobiography with unusual glee. The world could hardly appear more sane to Nietzsche now, though I think he could have found much better examples of music now, if he was willing to look beyond operas, musical comedy, and what anyone considers classical music. Chamberlain seems more concerned about how "Psychotherapy has become incorporated into the Welfare State. How Nietzsche, with his sensitivity to language, would have baulked even at that name, which might be translated back into German as *der Mitleidsstaat,* and given a Nietzschean reading as the state that killed God." (pp. 105-106).

I read this book looking for things that could remind me of "Harold and Maude," a movie about age and youth in which the young man had an uncanny ability to fake death. What was not even suggested by the plot in that movie was a comic ability to fake the death of God, an accomplishment that Nietzsche might be given credit for, if anyone could figure out precisely how that could be done. This book did not apply itself to that problem, and most readers might not be surprised that such an attempt is missing, but something might still seem to be lacking.

A sensitive re-appraisal of a great thinker...
Nietzsche's writings have been interpreted, misinterpreted, translated, mistranslated and mutated to serve many individual interests - from the evils of the Third Reich to the man's only sister, 'editing' his work to suit her personal, social and political gains. Like Freud, Nietzsche has been used and abused as a platform in the creation of 'new' philosophies, some citing his work as inspiration, while others, in a fit of intellectual dishonesty, claim his ideas as their own. It has been said many times that he is the most misunderstood philosopher of the modern age. From my readings and experience, this claim is not far from the truth. This brilliant book, however, in a single brush of elegance and heart, re-examines Fredric Nietzsche and his work in a gentle, unpretentious though concise way, and attempts to introduce or re-introduce readers to this intriguing, inspiring and highly complex mind.

Chamberlain writes with passion and intuitive insight about the last sane year of Nietzsche's life while he lived and worked in the beautiful city of Turin. This was more than any other a happy and productive time in the professor's life. This is much more than a biographical narrative, but a brave exploration by Chamberlain into the sights, sounds, thoughts and relationships of this fragile though contradictory philosopher. This book is not so much a cerebral approach to the man and his thought, but an emotional, visceral appraisal of a unique thinker striving to understand the human condition.

Of the many biographical narratives about Nietzsche's descent into madness, Chamberlain is the most sensitive without the sentimentalism or coldness similar to the many other descriptions I've encountered. It strikes at the heart with precision and leaves a lasting impression.

If you are a philosopher or merely interested in a unique approach to telling the story of a thinker who has shaped modern philosophy in the twentieth and twenty-first century, read this text. It will be well worth the time, money and effort.

An interesting read...
I have to begin this review by saying that after sporadically reading Nietzsche over the last fifteen years, I still consider myself an amateur philosopher. Like most that appreciate his work, I have recognized the impact that his pen has had in my life. Still with that said, I lack the experience or ability to compare and contrast him with other philosophers, ideologies or viewpoints. I do believe that Nietzsche left the world a very human energy, a connection if you will that flows through his many words right into the hearts of those who feel they understand him the most.

This is the first biography of Nietzsche that I've read that seemed to capture the essence of a very human man. Chamberlain's account is warm, sensitive and wonderfully written. To me, it depicted a brilliant man whose philosophies were all encompassing, not limited to classical thought and who battled disappointment, brilliance and physical handicaps.

As a layman, who has admired Nietzsche for many years, I recommend this book to those who are interested in learning more about a wonderful and often misunderstood philospher. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Perceptive Biography
I found this biography for young adult readers to be a thorough and in depth account.It was interesting and informative.I would highly reccommend it!

The Intersting story of a controversial president.
Randolph tells the story of Richard Nixon,the only president to resign the office of the president.You get a rarely seen glimpse of the president whom history and the public tend to remember as the crook, instead of as theonly president who could have gone to China , or ended Vietnam. It goesinto detail from his childhood in Yorba Linda, California, to his return tothe public life of the eighties. ... Read more

Book Description

At long last the true Richard Nixon can be revealed. The man known as "Tricky Dick," who is seen today as the greatest villain in the history of American politics, actually began his amazing career as a principled campaigner and a scrupulously honest member of Congress.

Sadly, the first real reassessment of Richard Nixon's early career -- his Congress years -- had to wait until after his death in 1994. Only then was Pulitzer Prize-nominee Irwin F. Gellman able to get the documentary access of which previous Nixon biographers could only dream. Gellman became the first historian to have complete and unfettered access to (among other sources) the 1946, 1948, and 1950 campaign files in the National Archives; papers from the executive sessions of HUAC; and every document dated through July 1952 in the Nixon Library & Birthplace. All told, Gellman scoured millions of pages in dozens of collections, the vast majority of which have never before been used.

Gellman's research revealed that much of the work done on Nixon was not only based on incomplete information but was wrong. The legend of "Tricky Dick" was little more than a series of myths. For example: The "Committee of 100" did not buy Nixon his 1946 upset of Jerry Voorhis. Nixon did not unfairly smear Helen Gahagan Douglas. There was no secret funding of his Senate race in 1950. Nixon did not out-McCarthy McCarthy on HUAC. And finally, Nixon was true to Earl Warren at the 1952 convention -- there was no secret deal made for the vice presidency. As Gellman irrefutably shows, each of these myths has been built on guesswork or faulty sources.

Who then was the real Richard Nixon? Other historians have given us ominous hints and vague charges of financial and moral misconduct. Gellman shows otherwise, and the proof is in the details. In 1946 Nixon used his own meager savings in a shoestring campaign. In 1950, operating with a budget in the low six-figures -- high for the time, but many times lower than other estimates -- he reaped the benefits of his opponent's bruising primary. And the Red bashing? On HUAC Nixon was a moderate who won universal praise for his even-handedness. Behind the scenes he cautioned McCarthy against his excesses.

Even during the incredible success of Nixon's Congress years there are occasional lapses of judgment. But, as Gellman shows, it was innocence and energy -- not deceit -- that made a fresh-faced Richard Nixon the victor against great odds in contest after contest. Here are the triumphs of the early years of a young man that we can unabashedly admire. Here is the rise of Richard Nixon, from nobody to vice president, that makes all previous biographies obsolete. Here is the Nixon that history will now remember. ... Read more

Reviews (10)

Penetrating look at the young Nixon
Though there were shades of the later Nixon in the young man, he was not nearly as visceral, vulgar or mean-spirited as he was to become as President. There were tinges of guilt in his make-up when he stepped over the line of decency, and such signs were utterly absent in President Nixon. Gellman is a fluid writer who is painstaking in being fair to Nixon and presenting him as a fairly likeable, though monstrously aggressive Congressman. He maintains that the young Nixon was a good father and attentive husband, thought he evidence for this is grossly lacking. He was the quintessential absentee father who spent almost no time with his daughters. Gellman conveniently ignores this.

More troubling is that Gellman almost seeks to exonerate Nixon from two of the most mudslinging and tawdry campaigns of all time: his 1946 run for Congress against the hapless, though decent Jerry Voorhis, and his inhumane hatchet job against Helen Gahagan Douglas in 1950. Nixon's brutal character assassination of Douglas in conveniently skirted, or excuses are made for RN. Because Gellman frequently falls into the habit of glossing over Nixon's destructive impulses, the book never reaches any grandiose literary heights.

Nixon has been the subject of much nonsense, particularly of the psycho-babble genre. Gellman thankfully doesn't attempt any of this and the book is a better product for it. Ultimately, this is a readable, balanced (overly balanced!) portrait of a young man driven by demons and a lust for power. For anyone wishing to understand Nixon in his 30's, this is an essential study.

In the beginning....
For the record, this is an excellent book, and I too have read almost countless books on Nixon the last 25 years. The research is excellent, and perhaps for one of the first times we get to see Richard Nixon in the early years, without the baggage he is saddled with by people looking back.

Still, there are problems with that: while Gellman can claim the early campaigns were nothing compared to later years, for their time they were shocking. It was a departure from the standards, and he was forever recognized as a campaigner that would go as far as necessary to win. The personal notes Gellman quotes from in the early years are insightful. Unfortunately, personal insights are missing by the end of the book: one wonders if Mr. Nixon stopped writing notes, or just stopped writing such personal ones.

There are a surprising number of grammatical errors in the book (at least 5, perhaps more) but the surprise is due to Mr. Gellman's diligence in his research. Do not let these small errors prevent you from reading one of the few books on Nixon that attempts to provide a fresh look without apology, and without anger.

Epitome of historical research
The Contender is by far the most objective, well-researched, and best historical work on Richard Nixon. Instead of focusing on the slurs and character assasinations that make up most of the present works on Nixon, Dr. Irwin Gellman has restored some integrity to the discipline of history by producing history based on facts (what a concept, hey?). Instead of writing a politically motivated book, Dr. Gellman's goal was to produce a history of Nixon's early campaigns. The chapters on Jerry Voorhis and Helen Gahagan Douglas are extremely sensible and its surprising that it has taken academia this long to figure out the truth about the two campaigns. Instead of the "sinister" Tricky Dick using smoke and mirrors to win seats in Congress and the senate, we have a hardworking, sometimes naive, idealistic, and dedicated young man who wants to make a diference by entering politics. After reading The Contender, there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that Voorhis and Douglas lost because they were out of touch with their constituents, their own party abandoned them, and Nixon was a part of a new political movement that wanted to discontinue the excesses of the new deal but keep its practical programs. The left-wing myths created to discredit and smear Nixon will never hold weight again.

A Remarkable Assessment of Nixon's Other Side
Richard Nixon, to most, is America's most controversial president of the last century. An intelligent and competent person (Nixon was awarded a scholarship to Harvard University), and an adept politician, he was also the first American president to resign (announced on 8 August, 1974), the result of his 'Watergate' connection.

Nixon was not a public's darling. His Watergate involvement, his resignation, the "Tricky Dick" image is what most Americans (and the world) remember about the former president. This unfortunate reality is due to the fact that many authors only dare to write about the negative side of the person. But not Irwin Gellman.

THE CONTENDER is a passionate, remarkably intelligent and unmatched account of Richard Nixon's other side- the "other Nixon" every student of politics, whether of the Left, Centre or Right, should understand and appreciate.

Gellman's book is intelligent, impressively researched, and written in a readable manner. The portrayal of the subject is stimulating, balanced and sensible, a portrayal that will surely provoke many readers.

Prepare to be challenged
When you read this book, you should be prepare to be challenged on what you have heard about Nixon before. This book undoes--or purports to--all of the early Nixon myths. It appears to be exhaustingly researched, and Nixon haters can take comfort in the notion that Nixon became the Nixon they hated after the 1960 Presidential Election.

Still, Gellman does sugarcoat some things Nixon does, and appears to draw some charitable conclusions without any backup. It is an interesting read, and a portrayal of what by any accounts is a remarkable journey from unknown to Vice President. ... Read more

Book Description

The ideas and writing of the controversial German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche have provided ground for contentious debate over numerous aspects of philosophy and cultural theory that remain relevant even a century after Nietzsche's own death. The work also includes a general introduction, a brief glossary of helpful terms, and a curriculum vitae and bibliography for Nietzsche, designed to help readers expand the horizon of their knowledge on this influential thinker. ... Read more

Book Description

A major work of political biography, ixon: A Life will inspire historians to recognize the outstanding diplomatic achievements of a man whose journey from tainted politician to respected foreign policy expert and elder statesman has been nothing short of remarkable. ... Read more

Reviews (17)

This book by Aitken was really excellent - hard to put down
I couldn't recommend this book highly enough if you are interested in Richard Nixon's story/life. Aitken writes in a very entertaining manner and has obviously had access to Nixon that other writers may not have enjoyed. From my perspective as an Australian looking into American politics and history the book was well worth the read.

At last, some balance
As both a non-American and one too young to remember Watergate, I read this book with little of the baggage that I suspect many Americans bring to their assessment of Nixon. What emerges is an insight into arguably the most significant post-War politician in the world - someone who did more to shape the world in its journey from 1945 to 2000 than any other.

Aitken's own fall from grace as a British politician including his criminal convictions make me suspect a particularly strong empathy with Nixon. I couldn't avoid the sense that Nixon's faults were somewhat glossed over by Aitken, but even so the text provided some real balance to the seemingly unethical approach adopted by the press and Democrats to the man when he was President.

Also interesting to compare Aitken's analysis of Nixon in the 1960 presidential election with the subsequent actions of Gore in the 2000 election. Nixon's magnaminity at that time enabled a comeback - Gore has probably blown his chances of the same.

Not touched on by the book but certainly an issue is the constitutional issues surrounding the growing propensity for Congress to impeach Presidents (Nixon and Clinton) when controlled by the other party. According to the book the Democrat congress would have impeached Johnson also, if he had been Republican. America's union of the Head of state and Head of Govt in one position is increasingly fraught. This book may provide an insight into why most (all?) other democracies separate their head of Govt (Prime Minister) from their head of state (Monarch/President).

A great insight into a complex and influential man.

A pretty good perspective
Nixon lovers won't enjoy this book, as the book does not at all apologize or try to legitimize Nixon's fall from grace. Two central comments about the book:

1. Aiken gives short shrift for what readers are probably thirsting for: the time leading up to resignation and Nixon's resignation itself. There aren't nearly enough pages about this in an otherwise good effort by Aiken.

2. The book did not strike me as tremendously biased, and perhaps this is because Aiken is not an American, but British, so perhaps he doesn't have the passion and partisanship that colors many books on our most enigmatic of presidents.

For an excellent, in-depth account of Nixon's final two years in the White House, I would highly recommend Richard Reeves' "Richard Nixon: Alone in the White House." (I have reviewed that book as well.)

Aiken's account is a good overall read on Nixon, but it is by no means exhaustive. I'd recommend it as a good inclusion on a list of books to gain a good overall perspective on Nixon.

Best Biography on Nixon
Finally, an actual scholarly account of Nixon. There are plenty of fictitous and demeaning books on Nixon (Anthony Summers and Stanley Kutler) but it is good to know that there are people like Aitken who try to look at Nixon in the context of his times. Anyone who seriously wants to study the character of Nixon should read Aitken's work and go and listen to the Watergate tapes in Maryland and avoid Kutler's selective editing of conversations. In the end, I believe the student will actually understand what an honorable, hardworking, and brilliant man Nixon was. Also, I reccomend reading Nixon's own books and reading Monica Crowley's works to get an insight into Nixon's personal life. Here you have a man who worked his way through college at Whitier and Duke, served in the Navy, never cheated on his wife, and served his country as commander-in-chief in one of the most turbulent decades of the 20th Century. If you want to understand Nixon, read valid sources, and don't rely on half-truths or assumptions of journalists, biased babyboomers, and politically driven revisionists. After all, some historians believe Nixon was actually a liberal and was about to break the tw0-party system.

Through the eyes of an admirer
Richard Nixon is probably the most controversial figure in modern american politics. The conventional wisdom is that this very smart man, some say brilliant, was so deeply flawed that he caused his own destruction with a mercilessness that fate reserves for the fallen heros of epic dramas. Given this prevailing opinion, it would seem best to approach this human puzzle through the eyes of a friendly biographer, one who instead of demonizing him, as many have, would try to explain how such a volatile mixture of talent and insecurity would come to test the constitutional limits of the US. Unfortunately, Aitken is not just a friendly author. His adoration --if not worshipping-- of his subject is apparent throughout the book. As an example of Aitken's idolizing, here is how he describes Nixon in his post-Watergate rehabilitation years (p. 564):

"Nixon took great care at his dinner parties not to dominate the conversation himself, but he was a powerful conductor of the orchestra, changing the topics, calling the speakers and taking care to bring even the shyest guest into the spotlight. [...]"

To be fair, this corny prose is not an accurate reflection of the entire book. And Aitken does make an effort to maintain a distance of objectivity from his subject, though the tendency to offer excuses, rather than insight, is usually transparent. He submits to the accepted verdict that Nixon must be held responsible for Watergate, but for the lesser crime of cover-up. The fact that many of Nixon's close associates ended up in prison does not seem to strike Aitken as odd, as if it's something that happens in every administration...

This book packs a lot of information in its nearly 600 pages, covering the period from Nixon's birth to the years before his death. At the end, however, it amounts to little more than an encyclopedia of Nixon trivia. The fire that made the man tick remains unexplored. And that's a pity. ... Read more

Book Description

The first rigorous psychoanalytic investigation into the heart and mind of Nixon explores the forces and events that shaped his complex personality, presenting an enlightening portrait of a troubled man whose insecurities doomed him to suffer the most sensational downfall in American political history.

Reviews (1)

Interesting but not enough
Psycobiograghies are new in genre, but they may be enlightening, provided the subject that is being studied is analysed deeply.
So, to write a similar kind of work regarding so complex a man as was Richard Nixon requires a good amount of knowledge about his life, his personalandpolitical choices and particularly the latter for the very reason that are the most delicate : how can this be accomplished with a book a mere 149 pages ? Inevitably the informations here given verge on the general and the analysis done seems to be a little bit amateurish. Although the book is good to read, it certainly does not say the last word on Nixon'personality - not in the least !
In the end, I appreciate the choice of having chosen former president Nixon as a subject, but that would have required a very bigger work, at least three times as big as the size of the present book. ... Read more

Book Description

Elisabeth F–rster-Nietzsche was two years younger than her brother, Friedrich Nietzsche, and outlived him by thirty-five years. In 1901, a year after Nietzsche's death, she published The Will to Power, a hasty compilation of writings he never intended for print. In Nietzche's Sister and the Will to Power, Carol Diethe contends that F–rster-Nietzsche's own will to power and her desire to place herself, not her brother, at the center of cultural life in Germany are responsible for Nietzsche's reputation as a belligerent and proto-fascist thinker.

During the latter part of her life, F–rster-Nietzsche propagated and presided over a Nietzsche cult in Weimar Germany. Many intellectuals believed she had abetted her brother's legacy by bringing his publications to print. But, as Diethe claims, F–rster-Nietzsche's well-known fascist and anti-Semitic ties, as well as her declaration that her brother would have supported the Germans in World War I, have marred Nietzsche's legacy and linked him to political campaigns and ideals he did not actually endorse. Offering a new look at Nietzsche's sister from a feminist perspective, this spirited and erudite biography examines why Elisabeth F–rster-Nietzsche recklessly consorted with anti-Semites, from her own husband, Bernard F–rster, to Hitler himself, out of convenience and a desire for revenge against a brother whose love for her waned after she had caused the collapse of his friendship with Lou SalomÈ in 1882. In distilling the reasons F–rster-Nietzsche betrayed and endangered the reputation of the man she loved best, the book examines the dynamics of their family, Nietzsche's dismissal of his sister's early writing career, and the effects of limited education on intelligent women. Diethe also plumbs the details of F–rster-Nietzsche's brief marriage and her subsequent colonial venture in Paraguay, maintaining that her sporadic anti-Semitism was, like most things in her life, an expedient tool for cultivating personal success and status. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Ehhh
This was the first book I read on or by Nietzsche. It did provide a good introduction to some of Nietzsche's ideas, but is very outdated and mediocre. Mencken is a racist, as evidenced by many of his comments, and tries to present himself as an expert, when he is far from it. Instead, check out Walter Kaufman's analyses of Nietzsche. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Christopher Matthews, the Washington bureau chief for the San Francisco Examiner and a former aide to Tip O'Neill, offers a fascinating look at the connections between the two most well-known politicians in the last 40 years. He traces the symmetries of their beginnings--both were elected to the House of Representatives in 1946 and assigned to the same committee--as well as their similar thirst for power. While both men's rise and fall, events that had profound effects on America, have been well chronicled, Matthews' book is one of the few, if not only, that places the two in parallel historical context. ... Read more

Reviews (29)

Think You Know These Two?
You might be surprised after reading Matthews' fascinating story on the friendship and rialry between these icons of post-WWII America. Having read numerous books on Nixon, and a few on Kennedy, I began reading without much expectation that I would walk away with any new insights or knowledge. How wrong I was.

What surprised me most was the number of similarities between Kennedy and Nixon's political views. From their ardent anti-communism to their disdain for the prevailing purveyors of liberalism, it's easy to see how they forged a friendship upon their election to Congress in 1947.

Kennedy and Nixon also shared a strong desire to move ahead and gain the ultimate prize - the Presidency - and this evenaully lead to their rivalry and ultimate disdain for one another. I never realized how Kennedy (and his family) consumed and impacted Nixon's political and physical psyche. But given Teddy Kennedy's significant behind-the-scenes involvement in Nixon's ultimate downfall, fully chronicled here, he had good reason.

If you're searching for a fresh analysis and interpretation of these two icons in American history, this is the book for you.

A Star-Crossed Rivalry!
This book is a fascinating look at the long term connections between two politicians whose presence stood like a giant shadow on the post-war period. As Matthews chronicles, Jack Kennedy and Richard Nixon entered Congress together in 1946 and from the day they met had a love-hate relationship. Nixon, pathologically jealous of Kennedy's family conncetions, style and grace, nonetheless deeply admired him. Kennedy was more contemtuous of Nixon but, nonetheless, his family gave money to Nixon's Senate campaign. When both Nixon and Kennedy served in the Senate, their offices were right next to each other. Nixon was invited to Kennedy's wedding in 1953 but was required to play golf with President Eisenhower instead! The anectodes from this period show Nixon's warm affection for Kennedy. When Kennedy was near death from back surgery, Nixon broke down in tears. The relationship changed when the two opposed each other for president and as Matthews demonstrates, when Nixon narrowly lost, he was devastated. Kennedy's death in 1963 tormented Nixon but according to Matthews, it led to the transfer of the rivalry from JFK to his brothers. First, in 1968, Nixon was deeply afraid that Bobby Kennedy would get the nomination and beat him. More importantly, in 1972, Nixon was desparately afraid that youngest brother Ted would suddenly appear on the scene to take what he had won. According to Matthews, this may well have been the real reason for the Watergate break in. While it is difficult to understand why a super popular Nixon in 1972 would so fear defeat that he would go down the path of Watergate, I think it is far fetched to state that his pathological fear of defeat by the Kennedy's was the prime motive. Nevertheless, this does not detract from the book at all. Both Nixon and the Kennedy's are fascinating larger than life people and their unique friendship/rivalry is virtually unheralded in American history. The story makes for a great read.

A Political Page-Turner
This book on mid-twentieth century politics reads like a page-turning novel. It follows Kennedy (and Kennedy's brothers, after JFK's assassination) and Nixon from World War II to Watergate, providing many little-known details and stories about the two men, meaning that both political junkies and people only moderately interested in politics will find the book both informative and entertaining. It is a great introduction to American political history of the 1950s and 1960s.

Political Rivalry/Tragedy Recalled in "Kennedy v. Nixon"
MSNBC host and news columnist Christopher Matthews charts the rivalry of "Kennedy v. Nixon" as backstory and inspiration behind most of America's post-World War II history. His meticulous research and breezy storytelling style creates a psychological/historical drama mixed with Shakespearean tragedy and some hilarious, touching anecdotes.

In it, Richard Nixon, the 37th president who resigned under pressure from the Watergate scandal, battles the ambitions, then the "Camelot" mythology of President John F. Kennedy, who defeated Nixon in 1960's close, contested election. Nixon is then shadowed throughout his political life by memories of the slain president: first by brother Robert, (a likely 1968 candidate before his assassination), and finally youngest brother Edward Kennedy.

"Kennedy vs. Nixon" tells a story of personal friendship souring under political differences and career paths. It shows how these cordial political colleagues who shared a hallway both opposed what they saw as Yalta's squandered victory after World War II, and fought Communist insurgency and infiltration domestically and internationally. Matthews traces their roles in the era's major events, all playing against a Cold War backdrop: tacit support for Joe McCarthy's investigations, distrust of Alger Hiss as Nixon prosecuted him, 1952's infamous "Checkers" speech preserving Nixon's vice-presidential candidacy even as President Dwight Eisenhower coldly minimizes Nixon's accomplishments and even attempts to remove him.

During these chapters Matthews reveals the start of Nixon's legendary personal distrust, hinted when vanquished Congressional opponent Helen Douglas branded him "Tricky Dicky." Here Matthews also introduces characters (Archibold Cox, Charles Colson, Larry O'Brien) who became household names less than 15 years later as henchmen for or targets of Nixon's need to retain power . You also see the slow roots of America's painful Vietnam involvement, and how it helped fuel Nixon's 1968 comeback victory.

The core of the book is dedicated to 1960's presidential election and TV's major role in its presentation and outcome. Matthews meticulously retells 1960's "Great Debate" and how Nixon's TV image which, compared to Kennedy's carefully crafted public persona (and what Nixon saw as creative counting) painfully cost him that election. But recounting private taped and untaped unconversations, you sense both men's anger and frustration against enemies foreign (Kennedy's Bay of Pigs, and 1963's assassination of South Vietnam president Ngo Dihn Diem) and domestic (Nixon's "Saturday Night Massacre," his palpable need to discredit Ted Kennedy even after 1969's Chappaquiddick tragedy ended any hopes for his presidential run.)

Matthews effectively argues Ted Kennedy's threat as fueling Nixon's self-destruction, but adds Nixon's suspicions were justified. From being used by Kennedy's wealthy father as pawn for President-elect Kennedy before the inauguration, to investigated for loans given Nixon's brother Donald (for "Nixonburgers"), to Ted Kennedy's role in prosecuting Watergate, Nixon felt constantly chased by Kennedy legacy and perceptions he only held space until another Kennedy "restoration" and couldn't compete with Kennedy' carefully written legacy. This leads to several bitter but even hilarious anecdotes (the ones about the phony train conductor, the pregnant woman and the beach photo opportunity being three favorites).

Even in Nixon's declining, post-retirement years, his foreign policy expertise respected and presidency re-examined, he couldn't hide antipathy for his 1960 rival and events leading America to the Vietnam war always associated with Nixon's presidency. Even his 1994 death was shadowed a few weeks later by that of President Kennedy's widow Jacqueline (with whom Nixon shared sweet and sincere correspondence after Ms. Kennedy's family visited Nixon's White House in 1971.) It is a somber, fitting ending to Matthews' remarkably told story, whose details provided deeper, long-missing reasons behind some of history's tragic, yet seismic events. "Kennedy vs. Nixon" is a recommended story addressing personal and political clashes between two of American history's most significant, forever fascinating figures.

An uneasy friendship
A compelling account of the friendship and rivalry between two men who changed the face of American political campaigning in the Cold War era. Matthews charts their long friendship, which was seriously challenged in the 1960 Presidential election that pitted them against each other. Along the way, they had used many of the same techniques (one might say dirty tricks) to elevate themselves onto the national stage. In the limelight of national television, Kennedy clearly got the better of his opponent, and their relationship took on a more adversarial tone after that. Matthews covers the campaign with great relish.

One senses a certain sympathy with Nixon, speaking of his earlier campaigns against Voorhis and Douglas in a defensive tone. Conversely, Matthews challenges the myths that surrounded the Kennedy persona, noting his "fighting conservatism," which often found him at odds with liberal establishment, especially in regard to Joseph McCarthy, whom Kennedy thought "might have something."

Nixon comes across as the underdog, able to eventually overcome his handicaps and attain the office he so long desired, even if it came at a heavy price with Watergate. One senses the tragic figure in Nixon. On the one hand, wanting to be a part of the intellectual elite, and on the other hand, dispising its condescending attitudes. He seemed to view Kennedy in the same way Nick viewed Gatsby in "The Great Gatsby" (which Matthews alludes to). But, Kennedy seemed to think little of Nixon in turn. In the end, Nixon was a terribly bitter man, but much of this was his own undoing.

The book covers a lot of ground, skimming over some parts of their lives, providing valuable insights into others. It is a timely comparison of these two men, as many of the same themes have resurfaced in recent years. Clinton clearly modeled himself after Kennedy, and Bush seems to have gleaned much from Nixon. ... Read more

Book Description

This book examines Richard Nixon within the context of the emerging revisionism that his place in history should not be defined entirely by Watergate. It assesses his many achievements and explains his equally numerous shortcomings. Nixon himself was assidious in taking advantage of changing perspectives to remodel his shattered image and portray himself as a great leader brought down by one mistake. While most historians resisted this revisionism during his lifetime, a growing number have called for his achievements to be reassessed since his death in 1994. It is time to look again at the Nixon presidency and, without falling into the trap of apologia, try to discern how Nixon's reputation has evolved and how far it corresponds to his actions and their effects. Can we give credence to his self-promotion as 'world statesman'? Should we re-evaluate the domestic record of a president whose policies had more in common with those of his liberal predecessors than his conservative successors? These and other issues that contribute to a fresh understanding of the ways in which Richard Nixon's historical image has been fashioned are at the heart of this incisive new study? ... Read more