Book Description

Richard Marcinko was the U.S. Navy's most unconventional warrior -- and its most deadly.A master practitioner of the "Let's Do It to Them Before They Do It to Us" school of survival, he was often as feared by his own high command as by the enemy.

This brilliant, tough-as-nails military virtuoso of violence -- ambushes, booby, traps, exotic weaponry, high altitude parachute drops, underwater infiltrations, face-to-face killing -- rose through Navy ranks to create and command one of this country's most elite and secretive counterterrorist units, SEAL TEAM SIX.

Now, in his own colorful voice, this thirty-year veteran recounts the story of the secret missions and Special Warfare madness that make up his harrowing worldwide military career.Here, too, he opens doors that have long been locked: the riveting truth about the mystery-shrouded Navy SEALS; what went onbehind the scenes during the infamous Desert One hostage rescue attempt in Iran; and the stunning inside realities of the Granada invasion. Born on Thanksgiving Day, 1940, Dick Marcinko was raised in mining towns, housing projects, blue-collar bars, and on the streets. He quit school at seventeen and enlisted in a new life of thrill-seeking.

He joined the Navy's Underwater Demolition Teams, which he calls "a masochist's dream." Then he attended over eighteen special-training schools, where he excelled in the lethal, survival and leadership skills that would gain him entrance into the upper strata of military warfare: the SEALS.

Marcinko was almost in humanly tough, and proved it on hair-raising missions across Vietnam and a war-torn world: blowing up supply junks, charging through minefields, jumping at 19,000 feet with a chute that wouldn't open, fighting hand-to-hand in a hellhole jungle, and experiencing the tragedy of watching a buddy die in his arms.He was such a threatening force on the killing fields of Vietnam that the enemy posted a reward for his death.

For the Pentagon, Marcinko organized the Navy's first counterterrorist unit, the legendary SEAL TEAM SIX.One of the most feared weapons against terrorism in the world, the Team went on classified missions from Central America to the Middle East, the North Sea, Africa and beyond. Out of this success, Marcinko was tapped to create the explosive unit know as Red Cell, a dirty-dozen team of the military's most accomplished and decorated counterterrorists.Their unbelievable job was to become terrorists themselves -- to test the defense of the Navy's most secure facilities and installations. The Navy was actually going to pay go-for-broke Marcinko to wreak havoc.The result was predictable: all hell broke loose.

In Rogue Warrior, Marcinko recounts his searing adventures in the special branches of the military reserved for a handpicked few. Here is the hard-working hero . . . the killer who saw beyond the blood to ultimate justice . . . and the decorated warrior who became such a maverick that the Navy brass wanted his head on a pole, and for a time, got it. This, and more, is Marcinko, a man made for war.

Reviews (126)

An autobiography from a real American character
This is a great read. Marcinko's style is both literate and rambunctious, and his personality comes through strong; it's almost like he's there telling you these stories in person.

You also learn a lot about SpecWar, as Marcinko addresses some of the standard misconceptions about Navy SEALs and describes the reasoning behind the strategies his men use.

"Rogue Warrior" offers a fresh if somewhat romanticized view of this important facet of modern warfare, and I this book is a must for anyone with an interest in the subject.

an interesting first hand account
Cdr. Marcinko's account of his Naval career with "the Teams" certainly qualifies him as a genuine American hero. From Pennsylvania miner, to BUD/S training, to his active service and eventual creation (and command) of SEAL Team 6, Rogue Warrior is a true story that reads like fiction. Marcinko details some of his operational information, which is probably not enough for some, but provides an idea of what a SEAL does.

What I found more interesting was his relationship with the Navy in general, and his superiors in particular. For anyone who has served in the military, it is readily apparent that Marcinko ruffled feathers and stepped on toes. While the CDR. (perhaps justifiably) feels his actions were necessary, it is evident that his circumscription of proceedure and detail eventually hurt his career. The bitterness and anger he (rightly) feels is apparent and, it seemed to me, part of the reason behind his book. While interesting, I thought it detracted from the "story", which is why I can only give it 3 stars. Nonetheless, for old and armchair warriors alike, there is much to appreciate from Marcinko's exploits.

This Navy vet think's he's at least 50% full of it
Ok, I believe the author was in the Navy. I believe he went to UDT school, he MAY have been a SEAL. What I don't believe is that anybody this uncouth and uneducated was EVER an officer. I wasn't a SEAL, but I did have some contact with them, and it just doesn't ring true to me.

When Marcinko goes on about dealings with purchasing equipment, I KNOW he's full of it. He claims the higher ups told him to buy an American car for undercover ops in Europe and he disobeyed, claiming the US nameplate was a dead giveaway so he bought a Mercedes instead. Yes a US car may have been a bad idea, and yes brass may have ordered one without thinking. I do know however that the procurement system does NOT intail giving a Comander a check for several thousand dollars and telling him "go buy a car".

I don't think the navy has ever acknowledged this yahoot and it wouldn't surprise me to find out he was a E3 Yeoman that got thrown out for drunken brawling.

Apparently he never expected anyone that was station at roosevelt Roads naval station to read this book. In the opening scene he describes an action where his team was sent to recover a stolen nuke, they were not told it was an exercise, didn't check their loads to dicover blanks, and were apparently dumb enough to believe terrorists would hide their pilfered nuke on the Naval gunnery range on the island of Vieques. Which for 2 years I could see from my bedroom window. 3/4 of this island was owned by the military! What kind of moron would hide something you stole in the house of the person you stole it from? OK Jon Benet Ramsey's parents, but other than that?

The positives Outweigh Negatives in this Man
As a person who have read everyone one of his books I am an avid fan of Mr Marcinko. I find Marcinko to be a leader of men among men among men- and the best of the best are willing to follow him when the going gets tough and there is no way out but in .I should say I am not a drinker and do not rate drinking and being out of control as anywhere near acceptable. I do say that Mr Marcinko has negative traits as everyone else.We cant expect someone to be Jesus Christ.So I should tell the people who write such reviews saying he has an oversized ego or that he overstates things or thinks big of himself ---by thinking of what they themselves did for America or for the world for that matter.Did they face extreme dangers to fulfil missions or ever be in situations he has been. The megalomaniac ego he probably has-- is the self confidence needed to fulfil the mission-impossibleS he did during the 1970s-1980s.Whereas DELTA failed (due mainly to the fallibles of the bureaucracy)during Tehran,SEAL SIX was created to succeed or ship out.There was NO room for failures.
Many of the things about fraud that might have occured later in the 1980s which put him behind bars could be true.I would say the people on top should reward men who accomplish impossible missions (by giving them some incentives) rather than treating them like beggars as had been in 1980-1985-1990s to SIX.A Navy Vendetta cannot be ruled out.Made up accussations can also be a probability .Politicians who make money by fraud get away on a daily bases.Especially the one about Commodore Ted Lyon III makes be laugh about the shoelace episode.We deal with such birdbrains everyday.Also Mr Marcinko is humble enough to admit his own mistakes and fallibles.Not a lot of people or politicians or anybody we know do that these days.He tends always to say things with humor and a touch of irony.My only regret is that his drinking and brashness rubbed himself and others the wrong way.Admiral Marcinko would have sounded neat---we really need more men like him --without the drink of course. From a reluctant but ardent Marcinko disciple

Blunt talk from a guy who was SOF before it was hip
I read this book not long after Marckinko's interview with 60 Minutes. At the time, I was very impressed with Marcinko's testosterone filled prose. However, as time went by I began to see Marcinko more as sort of a loud mouth alcoholic than as a guy to be taken seriously. Marcinko definitely went "rogue" after his SEAL Team Six command was up and he created Red cell.

Personally, I believe Marcinko would have gone much further in the Navy chain of command had he stopped drinking. Had the guy had the sense to cut the boozing out, he probably would have made Admiral. I seriously doubt he would have ended up in prison had he cut out the booze. Its obvious the guy lives for booze and is a hardcore alcoholic. Because of his boozing, I dont see Marcinko as someone to look up to, like say I would look up to Colonel Charlie Beckwith or Dick Meadows.

As for the book itself, its basically a more flamboyant, testosterone filled version of Charlie Beckwith's "Delta Force." Marckinko describes basically the same exact problems in establishing SEAL Team Six that Beckwith encountered in establishing Delta Force. Principle among these problems were intense disagreements over the SEAL Team Six chain of command. Marcinko describes how he was oftentimes more at war with the conventional Navy bureaucracy and the established SEAL community of the early eighties era than with international terrorists.

Marckinko describes how conventional SEAL officers of the early eighties era fought vigorously to keep SEAL Team Six in the east coast SEAL chain of command. Basically keeping it regular Navy and having total Navy control. Whereas Marcinko wanted Team Six in the brand new, "high speed" JSOC chain of command that Delta Force was part of. Marcinko wanted Team Six as part of the JSOC, whereas the east coast SEAL Headquarters and conventional Navy resisted this severely. It was only thru repeated bypassing of the normal chain of command that Marcinko got his way. And he obviously made a ton of enemies within the regular Navy and even the conventional SEAL community doing this.

Marcinko was an independent officer who did his own thing, rather than bowing down to the conventional Navy and the conventional SEAL officers of the late seventies and early eighties. Again, many of his problems are exactly what Charlie Beckwith describes in his own book "Delta Force," written in the early eighties.

In addition, some of the things Marcinko mentions in his book are pure bull. Such as his claim that his men had to be able to bench press 500 lbs to climb special ladders to clandestinely board ships underway. Being able to bench press 500 lbs has little to nothing to do with being able to climb ladders or ropes. In fact, the muscle groups used in these activities are totally different. Again, much of this book is testosterone filled bull, from someone who is obviously a megalomaniac.

Despite this, its still a good read and Id recommend it to anyone interested in SEALs or SOF. One thing I admired about Marcinko was his total lack of respect for bureaucracy and conventional thinking.

Its my personal opinion that had he stopped drinking in the late seventies or early eighties, Marcinko probably would have made Admiral and might have ended up commanding the SEAL community when USSOCOM was formed. Or he might have been able to have become the second or third in command officer at JSOC. Instead, he ended up going to federal prison.

After reading this book and Marcinko's other books the basic message Ive gotten is threefold and simple. First, you cant have a real SOF unit without a clean, direct, bureaucracy free SAS type chain of command. Secondly, in the real world the SEALs take a backseat to Delta. And thirdly, booze destroys good men. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Wonderful glimpse into the mind of Sherman
William T. Sherman was an irascible, unpredictably brilliant man and his letters bring out these myriad traits. He was a fascinating man and his own words illuminate his fiery personality. Sherman's own 1875 memoirs are a mixed bag, marred by an over-abundance of wartime correspondence and ancillary material. This collection of his letters actually makes for more engrossing, instructive reading. We hear his opinions on the major players of the Civil War: Grant, Halleck and Lincoln. We gain an understanding of his tortured relationship with his wife, Ellen, to whom many of the letters are addressed. His visceral hatred of the press and reporters is well represented.

The collection is expertly edited by Brooks Simpson, someone who thoroughly understands both Sherman and the civil war era. The notes are instructive and unobtrusive and the introduction lays the groundwork for appreciating Sherman and his correspondence. This is an outstanding book for anyone who wishes to get to know the erratic and intellectual General who was second only to Ulysses S. Grant in ability and results. ... Read more

Book Description

In this remarkable book, 103-year-old George Dawson, a slave's grandson who learned to read at age 98, reflects on his life and offers valuable lessons in living as well as a fresh, firsthand view of America during the twentieth century. Richard Glaubman captures Dawson's irresistible voice and view of the world, offering insights into humanity, history, hardships, and happiness. From segregation and civil rights, to the wars, presidents, and defining moments in history, George Dawson's description and assessment of the last century inspires readers with the message that-through it all-has sustained him: "Life is so good. I do believe it's getting better." ... Read more

Reviews (69)

A Book For Students and Teachers of All ages
George Dawson is a remarkable man. He was the son of a slave and grew up in Texas. At the age of four he began working the family farm. At twelve he was sent out as a hired hand to help earn money for his family. He left home at twenty-one and traveled the country by rail. He worked hard all his life and encountered many hardships but there is no bitterness in this book as there is in so many memoirs today. This book is like a mini lesson in American history from a black respective. I loved this book because it showed so much perserverance and determination. George Dawson never was able to go to school as a child because he always had to work but at the age of 98 he learned to read! At 103 he was working on his G.E.D. He died in June of 2001. I read part of his story to my first grade class this year and they were fascinated. It shows how it is never too late to learn. This is the best book I have read all year.

An inspiring, true story
This book is about the life of George Dawson, a remarkable 101-year-old man who is the grandson of slaves. Born in 1898, he tells of what life was like in Texas before integration. He turned away racial hatred by his gentle manner and kept his dignity during the most trying circumstances. He did manual labor from the time he was 4 until he was 90, and at age 98 he began to look for new challenges and so decided to go to Adult Education classes and learn to read. When he was growing up, he was always working,and as the oldest son he was depended upon to contribute financially to his family. His younger brothers and sisters went to school, but he never had a chance until someone knocked on his door and offered him the chance to learn to read. His quiet dignity shines through the pages as his story is told to co-author, Richard Glaubman. Glaubman is an elementary school teacher from Washington who became fascinated with a newspaper article he read about Dawson in a Seattle paper. The two became good friends over the course of the writing of this book and it is told in a narrative style of two friends chatting about the past. Some of the most interesting stories involve Dawson's early years and the times in his 20's when he traveled around the country just to satisfy his wanderlust. This is a wonderful book and in the course of reading it I felt as if I'd gotten to know a very special person

104 and still going¿
Imagine being the grandson of slaves, learning how to read at the age of 98 and living through one whole century. A rare life like this is proudly owned by one very lucky man named George Dawson. A writer named Richard Glaubman and George wrote a book together called "Life is so Good". This book takes you on an amazing adventure through this man's life. He lived all the way back to the awful times of segregation between blacks and whites, and the Depression at the beginning of the 20th century. Fast forward the date all the way to the 21st century, he is still as healthy and active as ever at the age of 104. One of the things I enjoyed the most about Mr. Dawson's book was that he would always do his very best and never gave up even when things were really tough.

The most interesting book Iv'e ever read!
When my teacher said that we were going to read a book outloud I thought oh no another baby book! but when I heard the first chapter I couldn't wait to read the rest it was so exciting and to know that this really happened it was like taking a trip to a virtual tour through history! Maybe it isn't the best book ever. Maybe the fact that my PE teacher is the author inched me to think it was great I love it! When I heard that Gorege Dawson was coming to our school I was thrilled I even got to shake Goerge Dawsons hand! This book is probably the best book I've ever read! It's true.

After 5 years, I still think about this book
I read this book about 5 years ago and have never forgotten it. I wanted my grandson to read it, but I couldn't remember the title and was so glad after trying many searches to find it. This is one of those quiet books. I found it very engaging and soulful when I read it, but I have only come to understand recently how much it affected me. I still think about it often. This is a sign of a great book. ... Read more

Book Description

Hailed as a prophet of modern war and condemned as a harbinger of modern barbarism, Sherman is the most controversial general of the Civil War. "War is cruelty, you cannot refine it," he wrote in fury to the Confederate mayor of Atlanta, and his memoir is filled with dozens of such wartime exchanges and a fascinating, eerie account of the famous march through the Carolinas. ... Read more

Reviews (17)

One of the most interesting characters of the Civil War
After the Civil War, there were many public misunderstandings and misrepresentations about General William T. Sherman. Secretary of War Stanton had caused to be published certain opinions of his that Sherman had messed things up, and many supporters of General Grant gave him all the credit for Sherman's famous march to the sea and Atlanta campaign (which was entirely Sherman's idea). Partly to dispel popular misconceptions about him, and partly to provide future historians with a great primary resource (which intention he states in the opening pages of this work), General Sherman decided to undertake the writing of his memoirs, and this is the result.

The historical value of these memoirs is enormous. Sherman contributed a great deal to the war, and was partially responsible for the war ending when it did. He conducted one of the most brilliant military campaigns in modern history (actually, they were three campaigns--Atlanta, Savannah, and the Carolinas) and accomplished what many considered to be the impossible. His policy of total war, applied in the South, was utilized by Sheridan in the Shenandoah, and was later slightly modified to be used against the Indians. Thanks to his memoirs, we have a step-by-step account of how this policy developed.

Sherman's work is engaging and very to the point. He is meticulous almost to a fault in his quest for accuracy and detail. His writing is very, very good, and easy to read. Also, Sherman truly (I believe) endeavored to be completely objective in his evaluations, and accomplished this end better even than most modern historians. He is quick to give praise and slow to censure, but is not afraid to record the failures of his subordinates when necessary. He sometimes points out things they could have done better, but is never overly critical of them. He even admits that he made mistakes sometimes. In fact, I believe this is one of the most objective and fair autobiographies I have ever read. Sherman had much reason to dislike many people, but never, in reading this work, did I find a single instance of him trying to debunk the character of any man. Even Stanton, the man who falsely represented Sherman's actions, receives fair treatment at the general's hands.

William T. Sherman is a very colorful figure in Civil War history. He may well be one of the most complex and intriguing individuals of the war. To some, he is a barbarian; to others, a deliverer. He is immensely quotable, and was very opinionated and outspoken. If you're contemplating studying the Civil War, do not be put off by this book's length. Far from being a dry account of a man's recollections, this is a very engaging and very worthwhile autobiography, and any student of the war will profit by reading it.

A story of a man who changed the face of war.
This book is probably the most fasinating biography I have read. Sherman was an talented outsider whose abilty won the civil war. The book begins with Shermans early military career and civilain life before the civil war. Sherman crisscrosses the content to support his family and becomes a Dean of students, a surveyor, a banker, a rail road man and a partener in a law firm. All these skills and travels blend together to make a master stragist and leader.

Sherman was a man always moving to survive. His plan of attack was to move quickly to destroy property and save lives of his men as well as those of the enemy. He stood for loyality and a chain of command, yet was willing to congole the president and U S Grant into allowing him to march through Goergia and the Carolinas while living off the land.

This is an analytical story of stragidty and passionate story of a man who was unwilling to slaughter men and instead destroyed the means to war.

All war is hell. WT Sherman

"The Most Magnificent Army in Existence"
"What Dercyllidas said of the court of Persia may be applied to that of several European princes, that he saw there much splendor but little strength, and many servants but few soldiers." So Adam Smith (although it was not Dercyllidas but Antiochus). In an anecdote, he thereby captures the essence of classic small-r Republicanism: a society of individuals who are fit, self-sufficient -- and armed. It is the model that gives such sentimental appeal to the campaign for the right to bear arms.

Was there ever such a society? Doubtful. But if you wanted to find one, you would have done well to show up on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington D.C. a little after 9 a.m. on the morning of the 23d of April, 1865, to review the Army of the West in review formation behind its commander, William Tecumseh Sherman. Here, from his memoirs, is Sherman's own account.

"When I reached the Treasury-building, and looked back, the sight was simply magnificent: The column was compact, and the glittering muskets looked like a solid mass of steel, moving with the regularity of a pendulum. . . . It was, in my judgment, the most magnificent army in existence - sixty-five thousand men, in splendid physique, who had just completed a march of nearly two thousand miles in a hostile country, in good drill, and who realized that they were being closely scrutinized by thousands of their fellow-countrymen and by foreigners. . . . The steadiness and firmness of the tread, the careful dress on the guides, the uniform intervals between the companies, all eyes directly to the front, and the tattered and bullet-riven flags, festooned with flowers, all attracted universal notice. Many good people, up to that time, had looked upon our Western Army as a sort of mob; but the world then saw, and recognized the fact, that it was an army kin the proper sense, well organized, well commanded and disciplined, and there was no wonder that it had swept through the South like a tornado."

Sherman had reason to be proud. One assumes that his name still evokes bitter memories around Atlanta where he tore up and twisted so many miles of rail track. But Sherman was, ironically, the kind of general who is good for victor and vanquished alike. He had the temperament of a fighter, but he knew that the goal of fighting was not to shed blood, but only to win. His campaigns inflicted legendary damage but most of it was swift and highly focused. There was some pillage, but even the pillage seems to have been planned and organized and permitted only to the extent necessary for the campaign. In all the accounts that I have seen, there is little or no talk of rape.

It is a commonplace that good soldiers make bad writers, but the evidence is not so clear. There is a reason why Caesar and Xenophon persist as staples of the classical curriculum. Ulysses Grant, who was said to write military orders so clear that they could not be misunderstood, himself produced a military memoir of great vigor and force. But it is hard to think of anything that will compare with Sherman's own account - particularly his narrative of the long march from Lookout Mountain across George and then up through the Carolinas to the Capital and the end of the war. If there ever was a time to be optimistic about the future of a free citizenry, surely the day of that great parade was the day.

Sherman's own perspective: surprisingly riveting
William T. Sherman was one of the most fascinating, unique characters of the American Civil War. Explosive, profane and brilliant, he was surprisingly cautious on the battlefield and never incured the casualities of either Lee or Grant. Sherman's strength was in manouvering to avoid combat and he generally succeeded.

So, how does Sherman hold up as a writer? Surprisingly well. Though the book is not as well-written as Ulysses S. Grant's Personal Memoirs, it is still a solid, riveting piece of work. A small criticism is that Sherman included copious amounts of correspondence which are printed in small letters at the bottom of many pages. The correspondence is frquently difficult to decipher and not especially edifying. The acual text, however, is stellar. Highly recommended.

Great book, GREAT PUBLISHING!
The Library of America edition of Sherman's Memoirs is one of the most fascinating books I've ever read. The man had a brilliant mind. He was efficient in all that he put his hand too. And, if he failed in some ways, he cleaned up his messes and went on his way. The war would probably have lasted forever if he hadn't had the foresight, the leadership ability, the stamina, and just plain guts. But he knew how to end the war, and he had no illusions that he was playing at war. He knew it was hell, and he did what he had to do. I loved the dated letters and wires between the various players on the scene. Thank God Sherman saved these written pieces of history for us. If he hadn't, his memoirs would have only been from his point of view. And, when something he's telling us is from his memory only, he states it as such. If you are going to war, it's not a good idea to play at it. Sherman knew that. And biding his time, he was given the chance by U.S. Grant to end this. If he hadn't been elected to take his "show on the road" we would probably be living today in a divided, bickering country, and without the power we enjoy as a nation. And, by the way, Grant was brilliant enough and his ego was intact enough so that he was able to award the job of sweeping up Georgia and the Carolinas to the best man--Sherman.
Regarding the publishing, it's about time I didn't have to crack open the binding to read a book. Because the binding is sewn, it opens flat to any page you choose. The paper is thin to keep the book from being too heavy and large. The paper is also acid free so it will not yellow and become brittle with age. The cloth binding is exquisite--designed and manufactured in Holland; it is Rayon, which probably will last forever. Even the dusk jacket is quality paper. That's how my books were when I was young, and that's why I don't remember ever having to break the binding open in any of my books, no matter how large they were. It's a pleasure to be able to lay on my stomach and read a book without having to hold it in place. If you want to write in your books, buy cheaper versions. Don't complain when you receive a gem. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Someone once said that more books have been written about Abraham Lincoln than any other person in history save Jesus and Shakespeare. Indeed, it is impossible to understand the Civil War without getting to know the complex figure of the 16th president. More than any other biographer, Stephen B. Oates brings the plain-talking man from Illinois to life as a canny politician, a doting husband, and a determined wartime leader. Oates has an appealing appreciation for Lincoln's majestic control of the English language, his raw humor, and his undeniable heroism. The final pages, covering Lincoln's death and his legacy, are graceful and moving. ... Read more

Reviews (30)

A "70s" Lincoln, Not The Right One.
Oates' biography, though very readable and quite good on Lincoln's personal tragedies, is far from a persuasive or fair portrait. Oates advertises his 1970s New England liberalism by painting Lincoln as all but wanting to be an abolitionist and egalitarian, but darn those dang border states and that Constitution tying his hands! Such authors have stretched long chapters around a few tidbits like Lincoln's one-time public favor of limited black suffrage and very little more. Lincoln was more of a moderate realist for reasons of his own view on the desireable pace of national reform, and not simply because of external factors. He was neither a Radical Republican restrained by the Constitution, or a conservative wishing to maintain the status quo. Before this book, Lincoln biographers dragged him too far right, and Oates overcompensated, dragging him too far the other way. David Donald's LINCOLN is far superior.

Most readable book ever written on Lincoln
IMO, this is "the" biography of Abraham Lincoln. While I consider David H. Donald's bio of Lincoln to be slightly more sophisticated and detailed, Stephen Oates' bio of Lincoln is the most enjoyable and interesting to read. Prof. Oates has a smooth writing style that tackles complex issues and makes them easy to understand. He never gets bogged down in boring, hard-to-understand statistics or details.

One of the 3 Best 1 Volume Biographies About Lincoln
I have been studying Abraham Lincoln for nearly 40 years. Many Lincoln scholars consider WITH MALICE TOWARD NONE by Stephen B. Oates one of three BEST one-volume biographies of Abraham Lincoln ever written to date. The other two are LINCOLN by David Herbert Donald and ABRAHAM LINCOLN: A BIOGRAPHY by Benjamin P. Thomas.

An excellent biography of an incredibly complex man.
"With Malice Towards None" is a very creditable work and a fine attempt to explain the author's view of Abraham Lincoln. Oates views Lincoln as a genuinely good man, highly ambitious, self-made, and first and foremost: a politician. Like all politicians who are heads of state, Lincoln had to grapple with the issues of his day. In his day, however, the issues were unusually intractable, difficult, and complex, such that the nation was unable to solve them through established institutions. It took an actual Civil War to decide whether slavery in America must go, whether America is first and foremost a union of united States, or whether it was a Union of essentially sovereign single states. These were and are great issues, and the greatness of Lincoln is that he stood in the center of these issues, spent his entire presidency grappling with them, and ultimately, it was his unswerving leadership, not perfect but great, that ultimately led America to resolution of these issues.

Oates shows us that Lincoln was a politician. He wheedled, compromised, and was carried by great events as often as he shaped them. This does nothing to take away from the man who, along with Washington, ranks as doubtless one of our two greatest presidents. While opposing slavery, Lincoln was ready to compromise with it, at least sometimes to some extent. Oates does a good job of explaining this in a non-revisionist way that shows respect to Lincoln and to history.

Oates' writing is clear, and his research thorough. This is not a perfect book in that it is not a complete view of Lincoln. No 400 or so page book about this complicated man could achieve that. On the other hand, Oates portrays Lincoln brilliantly, and with insight, as a gifted leader and politician in an incredibly difficult time.

I would have enjoyed more discussion of some of Lincoln's more extreme actions, his bending (some would say breaking) of the Constitution, and the extremes to which he went to achieve ultimate military victory for the North. Oates does touch on this, but more would have been welcome.

An excellent book about a difficult and complex subject. Recommended.

A decent portrayal of Lincoln, but not a great one
Abraham Lincoln is one of the most written-about men in history. There are scores of biographies, profiles, analyses, everything to do with this great man. Because of this, it is difficult to find a good, comprehensive work that details his life adequately and faithfully. In this book, Stephen B. Oates gives a good representation of Lincoln, giving a pretty good account of his life and not trying to raise the man to deity (as others have done). Despite this, however, there are several flaws in this book that make it only of average quality.

Oates commits what I consider to be the unpardonable sin in biography--he attempts to get inside Lincoln's head. One of the necessary qualities of a good biographer is that he or she should not try to psychoanalyze the subject, should not assume he knows what was going on inside the subject's head, and should certainly not embellish the account with a bunch of supposed conversations and feelings which are more the fabrication of the author than the feelings of the subject. Oates breaks all of these rules.

The most annoying thing about the book is that Oates will paraphrase what he thinks Lincoln said. He may give a short quotation, but then he closes the quote and proceeds to adlib what he assumes Lincoln would say, speaking in the first person as though he were the President himself. He uses the pronoun 'I' in his own narrative, when he should be using 'he.' If you can get over Oates pretending to speak for Lincoln himself throughout most of the book, the rest of the account is pretty decent. But I had a hard time getting past that.

For a 400 or so page biography, this book covers the subject moderately well, though not excellently. Many men, such as Jefferson Davis, Stonewall Jackson, or Admiral Farragut, are barely mentioned, as if Lincoln had nothing to do with them at all. It would have added greatly to the account to have a more detailed description of the Civil War, and about Lincoln's counterparts in the South (such as Davis). Still, this is a pretty good book, though far from definitive in any way. With the mountains of work available on this great man, there's got to be something better out there. ... Read more

Reviews (50)

HAVING OUR SAY BOOK REVIEW
HAVING OUR SAY by Sarah L. Delany and Elizabeth Delany with AmyHill Hearth is a great book that describes an american black familythat lived in the l9 and 20 centuries.It is about the problems they found, their fights, their life.Finally this book shows us the history at racism between black and white people in those centuries.Also this book brings to us an important history of american culture. This book talks about two sisters, sadie and Bessie who lived in Raleigh, North Corolina,on the campus of St. Augustine's college with their parents. I liked to read this book and I recommend it to everybody who wants to know about American Black History. END

American History at its best
Having Our Say is a remarkable book written by Sadie and Bessie Delany that details their lives over a hundred year period.

Bessie and Sadie grew up in a large family on the campus of Saint Augustine's school in Raleigh, North Carolina during the 90s. They led sheltered lives; Sadie was quiet and well mannered whereas Bessie was very quick to anger and opinionated. They were also very intelligent women who were taught early on to aim high. In a time when most people did not go to school beyond high school, Bessie and Sadie received college degrees. Bessie became the second black woman to practice dentistry in New York.
Sadie became the first black home economics teacher in a New York high school. The Delany sisters spoke their minds, and what they give the reader is a story of pure American history.

This autobiography is filled with stories about racism and how it affected their lives. Sadie and Bessie lived together for over a hundred years. Although the sisters are deceased, their story and words of wisdom live on in the hearts and minds of readers.

I would recommend this book to anyone who is interested in American History. This book is the best history book I've read and the pictures in the book make the story come alive.

Reviewed by Dorothy Cooperwood

An Amazing Story, it touched my heart!
All I can say is wow! This book was truly an inspiration for me. I learned a piece of my history that I don't often get to hear about from the point of view of people who actually lived it. These women went out there and made a positive contribution to the world and stayed true and honorable to themselves at a time when being black in America was a crime. To know that amid all the turmoil and opression it didn't stop them from getting their degrees and becomming prominant and just plain old good American citizens. My heart is proud...The Delany sisters are truly the ultimate representation of Black America. I suggest anyone interested in American, Women, and Black history (which all coincides anyway)to pick up this book and read it. You'll find pride and strengh in these sister's story.

Not dull if your old
Having Our Say is basically a recollection by two sisters, Sadie and Bessie Delaney (aged 102 and 104) of their lives. They began their tale way back with their great grandfather and great grandmother who were slaves and progress onward with their family history from there. Their lives seem to be full of great adventures and accomplishments as they recall them back to you, for example Bessie becoming the second black woman licensed to practice dentistry in New York. Many historical events are chronicled through this moving historical record such as the Golden Age of Harlem and the Post Reconstructive South. The sisters go through many things such as Sadie almost getting lynched but they never allow them to bring them down. Even at age 102 and 104, which is the age they began to write the book they are still full of joy and encouragement for life.

The one thing I liked about the book was learning about some of our nation's lesser-known history from a different perspective. Since, it's a true story a lot of historical events were mentioned and I found out how it really was for black people during their younger years. One particular event that sticks out is when Sadie gets dared to drink from the whites only fountain and does it, though her father catches her. Its hard to believe that America was really like that in the past. This book was really a learning experience and I found out about things I wouldn't have otherwise.

The thing I disliked this book was its lack of action. It sometimes got very boring because it seemed to be relaying things no one cared about. Points in the book were often focused on to long until it lost your attention. For example, five pages would be used to describe the detail of some very minor thing. I wouldn't recommend it to people who love a book with mystery or suspense because this book has none. Its almost like your going to know what happens before it does.

Well worth a read
The short length and simple format belie the wisdom and inspiration contained in this book. Vignettes from the lives of two remarkable sisters, 102 and 104 years old, span the end of slavery and follow the continuum of American and black history to the present. Their lives, stories, and attitudes are admirable and this is a book well worth reading. ... Read more

Amazon.com

As with most books written by politicians while in office (or at least aiming for one), Living History is, first and foremost, safe. There are interesting observations and anecdotes, the writing is engaging, and there is enough inside scoop to appeal to those looking for a bit of gossip, but there are no bombshells here and it is doubtful the book will change many minds about this polarizing figure. This does not mean the work is without merit, however, for Hillary Clinton has much to say about her experience as first lady, which is the primary focus of the book. Those interested in these experiences and her commentary on them will find the book worth reading; those looking for revelations will be disappointed.

Beginning with a brief outline of her childhood, college years, introduction to politics, and her courtship with Bill Clinton, Clinton covers a wide variety of topics: life on the campaign trail, her troubled tenure as leader of the President's Task Force on National Health Care Reform, meeting with foreign leaders, and her work on human rights, to name a few. By necessity, she also addresses the various scandals that plagued the administration, from Travelgate to Whitewater to impeachment, though she does not go into great detail about each one; rather, she seems content to simply state her case and move on without trying to settle too many old scores.

Along the way, she offers many apologies, though perhaps not the kind some would expect. She does not shy away from her "vast right-wing conspiracy" comment, for instance, though she does wish that she had expressed herself differently. Regarding the Monica Lewinsky scandal, she maintains that her husband initially lied to her, as he did the rest of the country, and did not come clean until two days prior to his grand jury testimony. Calling his betrayal "the most devastating, shocking and hurtful experience of my life," she explains what the aftermath was like personally and why she has elected to stand by her man. In all, Living History is an informative book that goes a long way toward humanizing one of the most recognizable, and controversial, women of our age. Shawn Carkonen ... Read more

Reviews (651)

Pretty good book
I just love Hillary Clinton, but this is only after I read this book. I never really cared for her, but I decided to give this book a shot. Now that I've read it, I can see what an incredible woman she really is. I admire her greatly.

As for the book itself, it wasn't the best thing I had ever read. Some of it was a little boring, but overall I thought it was worth reading. I enjoyed reading about her childhood and I loved hearing about her getting involved in politics. I now see her relationship with Bill in a new light, and I am glad she didn't dwell on the Monica Lewinsky scandal. She had a much bigger story to tell, and I am glad she did it.

The reason some people may not like this book is because it reads more like a political manifesto rather than an out-and-out memoir. The times when she went into too much detail on foreign policies were things I could have done without. Still, I am glad I gave this book a shot because it really does make you see her in a new light. She is no longer the ice woman I once thought she was. Then again my family is predominantly Republican, so it's no wonder I thought that. It's hard for me to think I once thought so little of this incredible woman.

Another reason people may not like this is because they were expecting a juicy gossip rag about the Lewinsky scandal. Like I said earlier, Ms. Clinton does not dwell on this and I love her for that. That is a time in her life she has moved on from and we should all take a page from her book.

I have a newfound respect for Hillary Clinton. She has inspired me to become more involved in politics and I think she is just an amazing woman. Thanks to her, I have come to embrace my liberal views and am not afraid to be the only Democrat in a family full of Republicans. Go out and buy this book to get a glimpse into who this woman really is. She will get my vote if she ever decides to run for the presidency of the United States.

History Light
I must admit that this is the first memoir I have ever read that was by the First Lady and given this one is graded as one of the better ones, I think it may be my last. It was not that the book was badly written, it was just that the majority of what the First Lady does is not all that interesting to me. Reading about this fund raisers, good will trips or party planning are not my idea of thrilling political insider info. I am more interested in the hard fought, inside the beltway battles that make major decisions. I obviously new this book was about the First Lady, but given the Clinton Presidency, I assumed that it would cover more in depth the political battles the administration faced. Then again the book was about her.

The next compliant I would have about the book is that the author seamed to take the high road on all the areas you thought she would come out with both guns blazing on. Her comments were so bland that they almost acted to diminish or completely disregarded the very negative attacks the Clinton's faced during their terms. Sure she touched on the items of major interest, heath care reform, the full independent counsel investigation, Monica and the Senate race, but it seamed to be at such a high level that all the real nasty, dirty inside details were left out of the book. Ok I know that she has a new job now so that she did not what to lay waste the political landscape that she will be working in and one could make the argument that the First Lady needs to stay above the partisan attacks, but hey this is the edge of the seat reading I wanted.

Lastly I wanted more detail. Now given that she had lead a rather full life, Governors wife, working on the Nixon impeachment, First Lady and now Senator, to get a real detailed account of all of these areas she would have needed a much larger if not multiple volume book. I guess I would have just liked her to focus on the First Lady section of her life and have gone into more detail. Just as the book seamed to be getting into a topic, the chapter was over and on to the next installment of Hilary on the move.

Even though I have focused on the areas I disliked with the book, overall I thought it was probably better then most books dealing with the Clinton years. I did think the writing was better then average and she did have an interesting story to tell. The details she did given about the life of the First Lady and some of the inside information about the Clinton Presidency were worth the purchase price, throw in some of the personal bit and the book was not bad at all. I also have a sympathetic spot for her, so the increased my enjoyment of the book. I guess I am just a bit disappointed that the book could have been so much better. It could have been a stinging and focused rebuttal of all the overly negative and harmful to the country attacks. Then again how could one book fight back the 8 year, over the top negative campaign focused against the Clinton's. I felt the book was interesting and enjoyable.

She's a good girl...
Hillary Clinton is an interesting woman, with tremendous drive and ambition, and this will often get a woman branded as the devil incarnate. The very polarized views of her are not surprising.

What was surprising was the tone and lack of depth in this book. It reads as if she had a list of items she wanted to tick off as having explained. 'I'm a good girl, really.' was the underlying theme. I can't believe she's as naive as she portrays herself. She does admit to a few mistakes, but her apologies are all for not doing a better job, like any good girl.

The healthcare chapter is a good example. She was unable to overcome hurdles around the complexity of the legislative process involved, and she makes 'apologies' for her failure along the lines of 'well, we tried really hard & it's a good cause'. But as she & Bill are both Yale lawyers, with experience in private practice (her) and as the Arkansas attorney general (him) and as they had easy access to many of the best legal minds in the country, it is hard to understand. It comes across more like professional negligence than the naivety it is painted as. I suspect ambition (the 100 day goal) was the real cause for failure, which is a shame given how important this issue is to our country and how badly we need healthcare reform. To put something this complex under a 100 day deadline is almost sophomoric - or ambition out of control.

She is also careful to mention every person and cause that might win over supporters. An extraordinary number of her enounters seemed to have resulted in 'lifelong' friendships. Many iconic figures like Jackie Kennedy and Nelson Mandela get a lot of airtime. It's a bit too good to be true. It reads almost as if she's running for something.

Maybe Sarah Bradford, who wrote that wonderful biography of Jackie Kennedy, will write the book about Hillary one day and we'll get a better picture of who she really is - from all angles. Personally, I would have found the intelligent, ambitious Hillary much more interesting and admirable than the girl scout we hear about in this book... it's a shame powerful women still feel they have to paint themselves as 'good girls' to be heard.

10 things to love about this book.
1. Candid revelations: "It was no surprise that Bill turned out to be a cheat. He used to hang out in the parking lot of Arby's to pick up Monica types, but it still hurts."

2. On the Sixties: "Bill really did inhale, as did we all."

3. On lesbianism rumors: "I am not a Lesbian, I only tried it those times to find that out."

4. On faith: "I am a deeply spiritual Church goer, I also dabble in Voodoo and my Wicken name is priestess Dominatrix."

5. On movies: "My favorite movie is that one by Tarintino, I forget the title, something Bill."

6. On her detractors: "They call me a cold angry lady. I am just aloof and have some hate issues."

7. On the vast right wing conspiricy: "They put a computer chip in Bill's head that makes him not very particular about the ladies."

8. On forgivness: "We all make mistakes, even I can recall waking up next to Monica after a night of drinking on a few occasions."

9. On Terrorists: "Let's find out why they are unhappy, maybe they need a hug."

10. On running for President: "I understand that France hates us for being powerful so I will reduce our power to an amount equal or less than that of other countries and stop all this helping people in forign lands stuff."

An intelligent account of history, (not gossip filled)
If you are looking for gossip, go read another book. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's book is as the title states: It is a Living History. It is well-written and filled with facts and stories of past generations. If you have children or grandchildren this is a book you should buy for them. It is a warm and compassionate way to learn history (as opposed to our education system that tends to teach history via war dates). Buy this book. You Won't Be Sorry!

(...) ... Read more

Book Description

A former Reagan White House Counsel presents a comprehensive picture of Ronald Reagan, focusing on how his distinctive leadership style was the source of both his setbacks and his success.

An icon of the twentieth century, Ronald Reagan has earned a place among the most popular and successful U.S. presidents. In this compelling firsthand account of Reagan's presidency, Peter J. Wallison, former White House Counsel to President Reagan, argues that Reagan took office with a fully developed public philosophy and strategy for governing that was unique among modern presidents. "I am not a great man," Reagan once said, "just committed to great ideas."

Wallison shows how Reagan's unyielding attachment to certain key ideas--communicated through his speeches--created a cohesive administration and revived the spirit of the nation. In Ronald Reagan, Wallison describes what it was like to be on Reagan's White House staff and how Reagan's attachment to principle produced both the best and worst days of his presidency. Updated with a new epilogue. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

A true American Conservative Leader
I love this book as it contains what it means to be a true conservative and not a false one. As the great Conservative economist F.A. Hayek once stated "    . . . the whole conception of social or distributive justice is empty and meaningless; and there will therefore never exist agreement on what is just in this sense... I am certain, however, that nothing has done so much to destroy the juridical safeguards of individual freedom as the striving after this mirage of social justice."
That is in a Capitalistic Socieity there will be more losers than winners and that is just the way it is. If you can not make ends meet it is not "societys fault" but your own. Don't expect your mommy "the state" to make it right!
From here the author goes own to explain how all the scandals of the Reagan presidentcy where not the leaders fault but those of his underlings for they were to blaime not him. The buck stops there my friend!

An Excellent Read
This is an excellent "insider" perspective on Reagan's management style and the Iran-Contra scandal. Wallison debunks thoroughly the prevailing view of the liberal media that Reagan was intellectually limited, disengaged and manipulated by his advisors. Reagan's remarkable accomplishments are attributed to the clarity of and his unfailing focus on a few "big ideas" (e.g. a smaller and less intrusive government, freer trade, a strong defense, faith in the traditional American values of individualism and sense of personal responsibility) and his ability to inspire those within the administration to actively pursue his policy objectives. As legal counsel to the President, Wallison was the White House staffer most involved with Iran-Contra. He persuasively argues that the scandal was basically a foreign policy blunder made worse by a renegade NSC staff (particularly Oliver North) and a press corps more interested in scandal mongering than issues. ... Read more

Book Description

In the first full-scale life of the most
important composer-lyricist at work in musical theatre today, Meryle Secrest, the biographer of Frank Lloyd Wright and Leonard Bernstein, draws on her extended conversations with Stephen Sondheim as well as on her interviews with his friends, family, collaborators, and lovers to bring us not only the artist--as a master of
modernist compositional style--but also the private man.
Beginning with his early childhood on New York's prosperous Upper West Side, Secrest describes how Sondheim was taught to play the piano by his father, a successful dress manufacturer and amateur musician. She writes about Sondheim's early ambition to become a concert pianist, about the effect on him of his parents' divorce when he was ten, about his years in military and private schools. She writes about his feelings of loneliness and abandonment, about the refuge he found in the home of Oscar and Dorothy Hammerstein, and his determination to become just like Oscar.
Secrest describes the years when Sondheim was struggling to gain a foothold in the theatre, his attempts at scriptwriting (in his early twenties in Rome on the
set of Beat the Devil with Bogart and Huston, and later in Hollywood as a co-writer with George Oppenheimer for the TV series Topper), living the Hollywood life.
Here is Sondheim's ascent to the peaks of the Broadway musical, from his chance meeting with play-
wright Arthur Laurents, which led to his first success--
as co-lyricist with Leonard Bernstein on West Side Story--to his collaboration with Laurents on Gypsy, to his first full Broadway score, A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum. And Secrest writes about his first big success as composer, lyricist, writer in the 1960s with Company, an innovative and sophisticated musical that examined marriage à la mode. It was the start of an almost-twenty-year collaboration with producer and director Hal Prince that resulted in such shows as Follies, Pacific Overtures, Sweeney Todd, and
A Little Night Music.
We see Sondheim at work with composers, producers, directors, co-writers, actors, the greats of his time and ours, among them Leonard Bernstein, Ethel Merman, Richard Rodgers, Oscar Hammerstein, Jerome Robbins, Zero Mostel, Bernadette Peters, and Lee Remick (with whom it was said he was in love, and she with him), as Secrest vividly re-creates the energy, the passion, the despair, the excitement, the genius, that went into the making of show after Sondheim show.
A biography that is sure to become the standard work on Sondheim's life and art.
... Read more

Reviews (27)

Satisfying, but not completely.
Secrest is a fine writer, although I think her very straightforward style seems a bit pedestrian in the face of her fascinating subject; much like with her Frank Lloyd Wright biography. I wish she had been more attentive to Sondheim's personal life, since his work has been dealt with better elsewhere, and the book really works best when it looks at the man who shapes the artist. A good job, but not as monumental as we Sondheim freaks wished for and needed.

A mess, but for now it's the only mess we have
If you want to learn about Sondheim's life in detail, this is the most thorough account. Although there are books that are mostly about his work in which you can also find biographical information, this is the first and (thus far) only biography. That's the only reason why I'm giving three stars to this generally shoddy book.

What's wrong? First, there is an astounding number of factual errors.

In addition to the outright errors, Secrest also makes many misleading, imprecise, or incomplete statements. Loose ends and chronological confusions abound.

Some of the people Secrest quotes also make statements that are factually incorrect, and neither she nor her editors (who must take a good share of the blame) caught these mistakes. All of this suggests that she knows little about musical theatre in general or Sondheim's work in particular. She actually gets major plot details of Sondheim's shows wrong. Unbelievable.

There are also numerous places where she makes statements that contradict what she writes elsewhere.

All these problems seriously call into question how much of the material here that isn't public knowledge can be trusted. You end up wondering how someone who is so clearly unqualified persuaded the people at Knopf to give her this assignment, much less how she got Sondheim to cooperate. She must talk well, but she certainly doesn't write well.

Which brings us to the final problem: She isn't a very good writer.

Still, if you want a Sondheim bio, this is it. Since Secrest had access to Sondheim and to many of his friends and associates, I'm sure that some of what she writes is accurate. But if you read this, you should just realize that a good deal of what is here is unquestionably wrong.

Okay, but the definitive book on SS has yet to be written
Secrest has written a book on Sondheim that skims the surface and gives a broad overview. It rarely has insights, however, except a few "anaylses" of the musicals themselves that often border on the ludicrous (such as how many references to S&M there are in his works). There are misspellings of people's names, wrong dates, and some confused plot descriptions as well. But most of all, she seems too polite and distanced from her subject, offering facts but not insight or exploration. I'm not asking for National Enquirer-style dirt, but there is more on the inner-workings and intrigue of such works as "Merrily" in Craig Zadan's "Sondheim & Company," which unfortuantely is out of print, I believe. Furthermore, Secrest is often a confusing writer. She switches pronouns without always making it clear who is now doing the talking, or includes an out-of-context quote without explaining its meaning or context. She also repeats herself in several spots, making me think she revised one segment while forgetting what she had written just a page later or earlier. In short, this book needed an editor, as well as a more probing and insightful author. Most biographies suffer from excessive speculation. This one has just the opposite flaw.

derivative, banal, plodding, unauthoritative
The prospective purchaser of "Stephen Sondheim: A Life" is likely to be misled by this remark: "people seem to be missing the point--this isn't a critical biography, but a personal one". In fact, until she undertook to write it, the author of this book had no personal or professional relationship with its subject whatsoever. It is a thing anyone sufficiently motivated could throw together, and I can't in good conscience recommend it. I can and do recommend Craig Zadan's "Sondheim & Company", and for those interested in musical theatre in general, Richard Rodgers's "Musical Stages" and Alan Jay Lerner's "The Street Where I Live".

Stephen Sondheim: A Life
Meryle Secrest presents a balanced, authoritative, comprehensive view of Sondheim. Secrest does "get" Sondheim: the man, the composer, the lyricist. She also "gets" his musicals, both as chronicler and as listener. Virtually all Sondheim screenplays, plays, musicals, and individual songs are intelligently discussed. Extensive and intimate interviews with Sondheim provide the basis, but alternative outlooks from his principle collaborators, associates, friends, and enemies also appear. (Insights of his peers are not present since Sondheim has no peers.) The book carries an inside, but not reverent feel. Sondheim's troubled relationship with his mother leading to extensive therapy, his difficulty in coming to grips with his homosexuality, and his periods of self doubt and perceived failure are sensitively covered. Secrest does not hesitate to call attention to perceived shortcomings, but her undisguised love and admiration for her subject continually shine through. The book is geared toward an audience with a serious interest in Broadway musicals with emphasis on beauty and meaning in lyrics. Secrest does footnote her interviews and references meticulously, but I would also have enjoyed a discography and a listing of his songs by musical as elements of an appendix. I especially enjoyed the insight on Leonard Bernstein. ... Read more

Book Description

Reviews (7)

Brilliant analysis, beautifully written
I went out and got this one immediately. As she did with the Mrs. Lincoln book, Baker drwe a superb and isngihtful portrait of a President second to worst next to Harding. Lancaster Pennsylvanians understandly are defensive, but how could one's marital status, one's daily life, one's aloneness NOT affect the way the world is viewed and life conducted?! How ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Buchanan's single status DID affect his stubborn attitude that the world must run his way. It doesn't mean all bachelors are that way! Who wrote that!? In a short space, Baker takes an amazing life and gives up the essence and essentials. Life is not black and white - it is shaded and this book is subtle but clear. Get it, get it, get it if yu have any interest in Presidents.

jean baker
subtly great book. baker is a wonderful historian. perhaps the male reviewers are not used to reading female historians... particularly the man who nailed baker in the longest review on here for pointing out buchanan was single. that gentlemen, i believe, missed baker's point. she was not saying that all single men are uptight, etc... but i believe she was saying any man like any woman would benefit from having intimate association with the opposite sex. not necessarily sexual association. but an intimate connection and active relationship. it broadens one's mind to be associated with people different than himself. try it sometime.

Average
A very short book. I was disappointed with the length. It was not researched enough to really understand what type of man Buchanan was. I think any person elected to be President should be studied in depth. This book is more like a high school history book. Not really what I was looking for the understand Buchanan the man. Buchanan gets a bum deal by history and this book does nothing to help him.

Competent and Well-written Addition to the Series
This book has been unfairly maligned by some reviewers here. Jean Baker has written a readable and competent biography of someone who is generally considered one of the worst presidents, if not the worst president, in American history. "The American Presidents" series was not created to highlight original historical works, but to provide a brief and lucid overview that could pass scholarly muster of each of the U.S. presidents . Baker has done this job well.

Some might complain that she failed to footnote her work thoroughly or with reference to primary source material. But several of the biographies in this series are not footnoted at all. Indeed, many of the books are not even written by professional historians.

Some might complain Baker doesn't have the background to write a biography of Buchanan. But she has already written one well-reviewed biography of someone who was Buchanan's contemporary. Furthermore, she has published other historical works on America's mid-nineteenth century. She is obviously very familiar with the period. What else is needed?

Some might complain that she carried an animus into her writing. If so, I didn't see it. Sometimes a bad president is a bad president. While Baker might have provoked some thought with a revisionist biography of Buchanan for this series, her line on Buchanan is well within the historical consensus of a man who is usually at the very bottom of presidential rankings.

I've read better biographies in "The American Presidents" series, but frankly I was surprised to see a mere two stars for this book. It deserves better.

lousy book
This book reads like it was written by a mediocre high school student. It is poorly and ungrammatically written, sloppily researched, and generally really boring. ... Read more

Book Description

The most successful and neglected president of the 20th century. ... Read more

Reviews (22)

The real Coolidge
The late author, Robert Sobel, has done a fine job in peeling away the crusty layers of our thirtieth president. Known for his taciturn and somnolent personality, Calvin Coolidge is revealed in this book to have had more substance than one might have given him credit.

Biographers of presidents who are generally regarded as average or below average often write about their subjects with a bent of pushing them up a notch or two in history. A current biography of Warren G. Harding written by John Dean of Watergate fame, for instance, lays out a theme of trying to lift Harding out of the cellar of presidential comparison. Sobel is a bit less interested in Coolidge's lasting reputation although he would like the reader to be reminded that Coolidge did have some accomplishments while in the White House and that his administration, in stark contrast to Harding, his predecessor, was scandal free and that Coolidge, himself, was a man of tremendous virtue.

The myth that Coolidge was a hard worker is not quite dispelled in Sobel's book. One can surmise that the only midnight oil Calvin Coolidge ever burned was on the night of his sudden inauguration at his father's home in Vermont following Harding's death..... the oath being administered by Coolidge's father.

Sobel spends a little too much time on analyzing the country's finances during the Coolidge administration. At these times the author's writing becomes bogged down in detail and his prose begins to sound like that of his subject...humorless and dry.

That said, I would recommend this book to those who are not only interested in the period between the two World Wars but also in the juxtaposition of the Harding and Coolidge administrations. I also think that reading the Dean biography on Harding in conjunction with the Sobel book on Coolidge would give a fairly accurate, if not overly deep sense of the United States during this period.

One cannot imagine a Coolidge as president during World War II (or for that matter during the depression) any more than one might look at Franklin D. Roosevelt as president during the 1920s. The point of this book seems not to be so much about the successes of Coolidge policy but rather an effort to glimpse the president in a slightly more favorable light. To this end Sobel triumphs. Yet he reminds us in the end that Coolidge was a man who was decent, sometimes shrewd and who filled his role as president in a detached but popular way. Perhaps Calvin Coolidge was indeed the right fit for his times.

Much Needed Cure For The Usual Coolidge Dogma
I think Mr. Sobel has done an excellent job in destroying much of the criticism of Calvin Coolidge the man as well as Calvin Coolidge the President.
I picked up this book out of curiosity - I read the Coolidge chapter in Nathan Miller's book "Star-Spangled Men - America's Ten Worst Presidents", and decided to learn more about this silent, penurious, enigmatic President who was apparently heartless and supported big business while in office.
I soon found that this man was quite likable, although he lacked the garrulous nature of many politicians. One of his major faults, as Mr. Sobel put it, was in "not being able to predict the future." He cut taxes four times and had good reason not to interfere with Wall Street (read the book to find out why!).
To any person that wishes to know more about an OUTSTANDING U.S. President who was in office during a time of great prosperity, please consider this wonderful biography.

Only a Beginning. . .
How interesting that as we look at the last century, President Coolidge has become a polarizing figure. After smears from William Allan White, Arthur Schlesinger and others, Coolidge has finally merited re-evaluation. While not an activist President in the vein of, say, Franklin Roosevelt, Coolidge was far from indolent or passive. He gave more press conferences than any other, inaugurated the use of radio, and sponsored airplanes in the military. However, it was indeed his belief that government should exist for the people, not the other way 'round. Interestingly, he was the last President to refuse to have a telephone in the Oval Office--he considered it undignified. He supported women's suffrage and his wife, Grace, was the first First Lady to smoke in the White House. I have undertaken to read many accounts of Coolidge; he does remain a mystery to us in so many ways. Regardless of the slant of the source, though, his deep sense of decency and honor in performing public service always shines through. I'd recommend purchasing a copy of 'Grace Coolidge and Her Era' from 1962 to give a more human side to both the President and his wife. Another characteristic of this man is that despite his reserve, his overriding love for his wife and sons remains there. The heartbreak that he and Mrs. Coolidge endured with the needless death of their youngest son in the White House cannot be overstated. Especially since we know now that the Staph. infection from which young Calvin died would nowadays have certainly not been fatal. I think part of the reason the Coolidge times have become fascinating for those of us interested in history is the obscurity to which these years have been consigned. The terms of FDR with his extensive radio and movie coverage has overshown the previous three Republican administrations, not by accident. I have concluded that no one book can cover all the aspects of President Coolidge, and he deserves further reading.

Coolidge: Public Servant; King of Dry Humor
Great book for an overall view of Coolidge. A very unassuming man with a dry sense of humor. He was a great public servant who realized that the answer does not come from some government program.

Our most forgetabble, understated president
Calvin Cooliedge. Who remmembers him? not very many people. This book will explain why Coolidge's simple ways made him one of the most imporant presidents of the 20th century, not because he accomplished alot but prescisely because he set out to do as little as possible.

Reagan thought Coolidge was an American hero. Why? This book will explain the great enigma of Calvin Coolidge. Coolidge emerged as an American hero when he stood up to the Boston Police department when they went on strike. He fired them and hired new officers because this was a time of anarchy in the city and the people needed security.

As president Coolidge vowed to keep his hands off government, off taxes and away from the public space. He beleived what was good for business was good for America, and he helped support the rising market. Coolidge wanted to pass as few laws as possible so as to keep the government from encroaching on the people. He was a true Jeffersonian.

Coolidge was sworn in with his family bible. He never travelled abroad(except Cuba) and never flew in an airplane or went down in a submarine. He was the last of a dying breed of simple politicians who valued the simple american life. This is an important addition to any collection of American political biography and an important read for someone perplexed with the current governments invasion into our daily lives. ... Read more