Reviews Written By: A3NY79KXAIZPGXprovided by Amazon.com |
 | ||
 | Lincoln : A Biography | |
 | "A Great Pictorial Collection" | 2009-01-25 |
| This is the best collection of Lincoln and Lincoln related photos I have ever seen. It took me more than an hour just to leaf through its pages the first time. Possibly every picture taken of the iconic president (some completely new to me) is in here. I had read once of Lincoln's "leathery" complexion, but saw it for the first time here. In some pictures, Lincoln is nearly handsome (!) and in some his plain homeliness is clear. Put together chronologically, the reader watches the young man age and be worn by the war. Photography at the time required long exposures, so anything approaching a smile is difficult and so Lincoln smiles are very rare. In addition to Lincoln, his family, friends, rivals, generals and secretaries are here, many famous, many not. A few pictures are repeated when the text needs the visual support. Picture of his towns, his few homes, even the sort of fences he built are here. There are few Civil War battlefield pictures but those can be found elsewhere. The text, a panegyric, is helpful for Lincoln novices and often with well chosen quotations from the man and his contemporaries. The authors do not distinguish between the prolific but suspect recollections of law partner Herndon or relative Dennis Hanks and the more credible witnesses. This is a visual paean to Lincoln, well put together and worth owning. One more note: it is often hard, in other books, to see Lincoln's eyes, shadowed by his heavy untrimmed eyebrows and increasingly sunken in his face. Lincoln's intelligent eyes become progressively sad and experienced, bagged and wrinkled. Perhaps that combination is what we see as wise. | ||
 | Lincoln: An Illustrated Biography | |
| "A Great Pictorial Collection" | 2009-01-25 |
| This is the best collection of Lincoln and Lincoln related photos I have ever seen. It took me more than an hour just to leaf through its pages the first time. Possibly every picture taken of the iconic president (some completely new to me) is in here. I had read once of Lincoln's "leathery" complexion, but saw it for the first time here. In some pictures, Lincoln is nearly handsome (!) and in some his plain homeliness is clear. Put together chronologically, the reader watches the young man age and be worn by the war. Photography at the time required long exposures, so anything approaching a smile is difficult and so Lincoln smiles are very rare. In addition to Lincoln, his family, friends, rivals, generals and secretaries are here, many famous, many not. A few pictures are repeated when the text needs the visual support. Picture of his towns, his few homes, even the sort of fences he built are here. There are few Civil War battlefield pictures but those can be found elsewhere. The text, a panegyric, is helpful for Lincoln novices and often with well chosen quotations from the man and his contemporaries. The authors do not distinguish between the prolific but suspect recollections of law partner Herndon or relative Dennis Hanks and the more credible witnesses. This is a visual paean to Lincoln, well put together and worth owning. One more note: it is often hard, in other books, to see Lincoln's eyes, shadowed by his heavy untrimmed eyebrows and increasingly sunken in his face. Lincoln's intelligent eyes become progressively sad and experienced, bagged and wrinkled. Perhaps that combination is what we see as wise. | ||
 | Castles of Steel: Britain, Germany, and the Winning of the Great War at Sea | |
 | "The English - German Naval History of WWI" | 2009-01-03 |
| The Dreadnought, also by Massie, describes the transformation of the English and German navies just prior to WWI. Massie realizes that the personalities of the leaders and the governments matter as much to the results as the technological changes and does a masterful and suspenseful job of informing the reader of both but ends thebook at the outbreak of the war. Castles of Steel continues the drama starting with the chase of German ship Goeben by the English through the Mediterranean and up to the Dardanelles. It follows the legendary Admiral von Spee in his voyage from Japan to the western coast of South America then around the Cape to the battle near the Falklands and the tragic efforts of Admiral Craddock to stop the threat. (Even with the modern Falklands battle, I had not realized that the islands off Argentina were the only south Atlantic outpost for the English navy.) The scene moves to the North Sea, the outlet for both navies from their home port and the most likely battleground. Three battles comprised the North Sea war: Dogger Bank, Heliogland Bight and the titanic Jutland. The disastrous Gallipolli attack (with a fascinating footnote about Rupert Murdock)that ended Churchill's rise in government for years is chilling. The rise of submarines and the major combatant's ambivalence, for reasons of both political and traditional behavior, about their use is worth a book of its own. There are two terrific strengths to this book: understanding the people and the battles. Massie continues the biographies started in The Dreadnought that illustrate both navies and their governments. Jacky Fisher (First Sea Lord) was the author of the modern English navy, touting technological change and modern battle technique. Young, brash Winston Churchill, First Lord and impetuous leader is Fisher's boss and, for a while, friend. Fisher ends his career in a series of childlike rages and resignations, putting his career and reputation on line time and again, often for a paltry reason. Churchill fares a little better -- but not much -- failing to realize the depth of the military effort necessary to achieve his ends. The crucial players, though, are the admirals. Massie launches a strong and detailed defense of John Jellicoe, the mild and thoughtful commander in chief of the English. He presents Jellicoe's second in command, the jaunty and handsome David Beatty, in a much less flattering light. There clearly is a battle between the naval historians regarding the roles of each commander. Covered in less partisanship but equal detail are the German admirals: commander in chief Scheer, young (in his 50s)and smart and foiled by his Emperor; Hipper (who seems more lucky than brilliant, Tirpitz, the father of the German modern navy, and Von Spee. The governing figures are covered: the loyal Louis of Battenburg, sidelined by prejudice, the prime ministers Asquith and Lloyd George (a footnote alone makes me want to read a full biography of this bad boy), Kaiser Wilhelm, Germany's immature and ambivalent leader, Hindenburg the figurehead who waslead around by his subordinate, Ludendorff--and many more. It is not possible to understand history without understanding the moving personalities behind it, and Massie does a wonderful job of both fact and color that aid the reader. The second strength is the description of the battles. These are complicated movements of hundreds of ships. I found the descriptions of gun size, weight and displacement a bit technical for my interest levels but have to concede they are critical to understanding the reasoning of admirals and outcomes of the skirmishes that comprise the battles. Unspoken, but clear, is the odd mix of new technologies (diesel engines are rare and coal smoke both advertised position and obscured the battlefield; ships are now heavily armored but communications are by hard to see flags). Both navies have one foot in the 1800s both in their chains of commands and decision processes (submarines are "ungentlemanly and undignified"). The battle descriptions are fairly clear even for a non-military historian as I am, and at times the spray and smoke and noise envelopes the reader. Chaos is a factor in a win nearly as much as caliber; the human losses and the ways they died are horrifying. The maneuverability of the ships, the distances over which battles are fought and the difficulty of effectively commanding the squadrons is well illustrated as is the need for just plain guessing in tactical decisions. Massie describes battles well complete with why the win occurred and liberally dotted with the anecdotes that may be irrelevant but are certainly interesting (a Maori shaman gave the captain of the New Zealand charms against disaster that made the captain look a trifle odd, but seemed to work). Castles of Steel is a very good book, if not quite up to The Dreadnought (perhaps because it is more military and tactical history than its predecessor, and thus less to my taste). It remains clear, and as well written as always. I would read anything written by Massie. The two books make me feel well served in a detailed overview of the naval WWI and they are easy to recommend highly. [Dreadnought | ||
 | Dreadnought | |
| "A Good Place to Start WWI" | 2009-01-03 |
| If you are a reader of history, rather than a true student of history with a fixed compass for study, and for some reason you begin to wonder about World War I, read this book just after Barbara Tuchman's Guns of August. Tuchman does a wonderful job of introducing the reader to the world just before the Great War, with the rise of anarchy as social movement, the economic status of the various states, the mind set of the English, French, Germans, Austrians and Americans. She does a wonderful job of setting the stage for the war that changed the world. Once you have that under your belt, read The Dreadnought. Massie looks at the British Navy which fell into a competition with the German need for a world class fleet. As an island, England depended on its Navy for the military control of its fate, a method that had worked well for several hundred years. In nearly pure idolization and jealousy of the hegemony of the British, Germany's Kaiser Wilhelm began his own arms race to build a Navy that had been largely neglected by the almost landlocked nation. This so alarmed the English that they retaliated by increasing the number, efficiency and effectiveness of their own fleet, largely through the efforts of Jacky Fisher, an extraordinary Admiral and naval visionary, but also the man with childlike emotions. Massie is of the school of historians that believes that to understand what happened, you have to look at the history of the parties, the politics, the personalities -- strengths and often horrible weaknesses-- of the leadership as well as the social context. Any number of mini-biographies pepper the book, but so does nautical detail: the size and deployment of ships, the focused goals that dictated the strategy that was supported by the tactics of both nations, the command systems that encouraged or discouraged innovation or expertise. Winston Churchill and Jacky Fisher, prime ministers and ambassadors, the Kaiser, Admiral Tirpiz (the Jacky Fisher equivalent in Germany) and many other figures provide a level of insight and a breadth of scope that many histories miss entirely to the detriment of the readers who want to understand why it all happened. For the naval side of the years before the first 'modern war', The Dreadnought is a broad, engaging introduction to what must be the strangest war in history. Massie, like Tuchman, often writes more like a novelist, adding suspense, pacing and humanity to the pages. He is the master of the telling anecdote that sharpens the story. But the scholarship is huge--10 years in the writing and an endless bibliography -- with the broad scope that gives the reader a much better sense of how these nearly accidental enemies entered the disastrous conflict. Dreadnought is followed by Massie's Castles of Steel published in 2003, which continues the story through the war itself (more on that, if you like, in my review of Castles). The writing is crisp and clear, the story is fascinating and the book pulls you along, helpless to put it aside. Once you have gotten through Tuchman and Massie, get to The First World War by John Keegan, the political and military history of the war on the ground. If you are still entranced, there are many more biographies and military histories to consult. Massie, Tuchman and Keegan are terrific places to start. As a side note, in my opinion, WWI was a war that did not have to happen at all. There were many opportunities for the various antagonists to avoid the enormously bloody, horrific attempts at mutual annihilation. Generals were trained in warfare tactics that were based on the less technologically capable years of the 19th century, outmoded strategies that long range guns,submarines, 'wireless transmissions' and the new modes of efficient killing one another made pointless. Issues of honor, ego, status, and heredity 'right' stained the decision making processes, hugely increasing the loss of life. The Peace of Versailles was equally anachronistic, where vengeance and reparation was valued more highly than returning two continents to stability and avoiding the nearly inevitable World War, Part II. Unlike WWII, with a defined enemy easy to hate (Hitler), WWI was a bungled, bungling affair that anyone who wants to understand how such things might, perhaps, MAYBE could be avoided in the future is well advised to study this war just a bit. | ||
 | Skagen Women's Silver Face Stainless Steel Watch w/ Stainless Steel Mesh Band | |
| "Lovely but clasp is uncertain" | 2009-01-01 |
| I have had this watch twice: I lost the first one because its clasp, over time, has a hard time holding on, and it dropped and broke the face. But it is lovely, elegant and easy to read, and the band is nearly jewelry...which is why I bought it again. I would like to find something similar that is a trifle more hardy. | ||
 | Peter the Great | |
| "Massie's detail wonderfully illuminates this page turner" | 2009-01-01 |
| I read this book ten or more years ago and still remember it well. It changed the way I read history. I get interested in a period a biography ends up suggesting other aspects of the time. My interest is largely in the ways personalities and intellects interact with their times and cultures to propel events. Peter the Great does a wonderful job of illustrating the times, the mindset in Russia and Europe and how this man, with one foot in the nearly tribal habits of Czarist and the other in 'modern' Europe, began to move his gigantic nation from an entirely inward view to a more global perspective. Massie is immensely readable which, for some reason,'serious' historians feel is a flaw. I've never understood the reason for that complaint. (Barbara Tuchman--Guns of August and others-- was criticized for the same trait.)His scholarship is equally huge and his scope is broad enough to understand context and narrow enough to remain a biography. But that is not what changed my reading of history. As a not particularly crucial portion of the book, Massie describes some battles. I usually avoid military history as tactics and strategy did not appeal to me. (I read Shelby Foote's stunning 3 volumes on the Civil War and nearly collapsed from the details from one battle to the next.) Massie's descriptions not only described pincer movements and troop massing, but illuminated the reasons for military decisions, and the personalities that drove decisions. He describes the battles that make clear the abilities (or lack thereof) of the participants. His description of tactics made it clear to me for the first time the larger meaning of military efforts in the overall results--not simply victory or failure, but the impact on the battlefield and off. For example,a successful military leader can be pushed into a larger more influential political or governmental role, even if the reasons for his success do not bode well for being successful in the evolved role. I don't recall that exact circumstance [excellent general becoming a failed political leader]arising in Peter the Great, but I do remember realizing that it could. It was something I had not thought of before. He does not say "general X could not translate military maneuver into political skill". Instead he describes what happened and its result. The point is made and never a pedantic minute spent. He converted me from reading quickly through the battles of history to considering their larger import, and I am still grateful for the lesson. And, mind you, this is a relatively small element within this book. Massie enlarges your understanding of history. His treatment of the military action is repeated in his treatment of all of Peter's life. His detail of the competing European aristocracies, the charming and much less than charming aspects of Peter's character (was Peter a humanist as Europe saw it or a man willing to casually torture others..or both?), the limits of the Czar's impulse to the modern explain the man and his time. Massie does not rely on declaring his subject, but allows the life to declare itself. History is a story, which is part of the reason we read it. It is not a series of facts, but instead the interweaving of many facts, of which perhaps the most important are the characters and capacities of the principal players and the societies they inhabit. Massie is very, very good at keeping one finger on the psyche of the participants, another finger on the social movements, the psychology of the region or country or crowd, another finger on the technology that effects outcomes, and so on, so that when he folds his hands around the tale, you are informed of the aspects that, taken together, made history. Moreover he does it with suspense, never telling the tale too soon while hinting of direction, so that novel like, you are compelled to turn the page. Peter the Great changed Russia forever and you will better understand that time and this one for reading it. Massie's clear, well written, well paced book and its comprehensive grasp of its subject puts it on the 'must read' list for anyone interested in history of any time or any place. | ||
 | Peter the Great | |
| "Massie's detail wonderfully illuminates this page turner" | 2009-01-01 |
| I read this book ten or more years ago and still remember it well. It changed the way I read history. I get interested in a period a biography ends up suggesting other aspects of the time. My interest is largely in the ways personalities and intellects interact with their times and cultures to propel events. Peter the Great does a wonderful job of illustrating the times, the mindset in Russia and Europe and how this man, with one foot in the nearly tribal habits of Czarist and the other in 'modern' Europe, began to move his gigantic nation from an entirely inward view to a more global perspective. Massie is immensely readable which, for some reason,'serious' historians feel is a flaw. I've never understood the reason for that complaint. (Barbara Tuchman--Guns of August and others-- was criticized for the same trait.)His scholarship is equally huge and his scope is broad enough to understand context and narrow enough to remain a biography. But that is not what changed my reading of history. As a not particularly crucial portion of the book, Massie describes some battles. I usually avoid military history as tactics and strategy did not appeal to me. (I read Shelby Foote's stunning 3 volumes on the Civil War and nearly collapsed from the details from one battle to the next.) Massie's descriptions not only described pincer movements and troop massing, but illuminated the reasons for military decisions, and the personalities that drove decisions. He describes the battles that make clear the abilities (or lack thereof) of the participants. His description of tactics made it clear to me for the first time the larger meaning of military efforts in the overall results--not simply victory or failure, but the impact on the battlefield and off. For example,a successful military leader can be pushed into a larger more influential political or governmental role, even if the reasons for his success do not bode well for being successful in the evolved role. I don't recall that exact circumstance [excellent general becoming a failed political leader]arising in Peter the Great, but I do remember realizing that it could. It was something I had not thought of before. He does not say "general X could not translate military maneuver into political skill". Instead he describes what happened and its result. The point is made and never a pedantic minute spent. He converted me from reading quickly through the battles of history to considering their larger import, and I am still grateful for the lesson. And, mind you, this is a relatively small element within this book. Massie enlarges your understanding of history. His treatment of the military action is repeated in his treatment of all of Peter's life. His detail of the competing European aristocracies, the charming and much less than charming aspects of Peter's character (was Peter a humanist as Europe saw it or a man willing to casually torture others..or both?), the limits of the Czar's impulse to the modern explain the man and his time. Massie does not rely on declaring his subject, but allows the life to declare itself. History is a story, which is part of the reason we read it. It is not a series of facts, but instead the interweaving of many facts, of which perhaps the most important are the characters and capacities of the principal players and the societies they inhabit. Massie is very, very good at keeping one finger on the psyche of the participants, another finger on the social movements, the psychology of the region or country or crowd, another finger on the technology that effects outcomes, and so on, so that when he folds his hands around the tale, you are informed of the aspects that, taken together, made history. Moreover he does it with suspense, never telling the tale too soon while hinting of direction, so that novel like, you are compelled to turn the page. Peter the Great changed Russia forever and you will better understand that time and this one for reading it. Massie's clear, well written, well paced book and its comprehensive grasp of its subject puts it on the 'must read' list for anyone interested in history of any time or any place. | ||
 | Secretariat: The Making of a Champion | |
| "A Girl Who Loves Horses " | 2008-08-16 |
| Thirty six years ago I was a girl who loved horses. I fell for Secretariat because he was beautiful. Over the years I have gone to the races to see horses run, because they are beautiful. Nack's book is not about beautiful horses. It is not about flowing manes and streaming tails and the loving relationship between a horse and his humans. It is about horse racing and in particular describing what made Secretariat the phenomenon he was. In clear, magazine like prose--only occasionally lyrical -- Nack covers his breeding, the unromantic coupling that produced the red horse, his gentling and training. More centrally, it covers the background of the farms and families that owned and managed the horse. The two families key to Secretariat are the Chenerys of Meadow Farm, particularly Penny Chenery Tweedy, and the Hancocks of legendary Claiborn Farm. Penny Tweedy and Seth Hancock are nearly as bred for their businesses as the horses they raised. In taking over the management of Meadow Farm, Mrs. Tweedy has to learn the economics of horse racing and take the chances that this expensive and complex industry demands -- and that Nack ably describes. It is a successful farm, but with her father's death, she must do something to raise the cash to pay the stiff inheritance taxes. The syndication of Secretariat raised a then-record breaking $6MM in four days by the nearly as inexperienced, but farmed raised, Seth Hancock. The investors bought into the 1972 Horse of the Year with a fine albeit brief one year record. They were betting that the virgin horse would race well in 1973 and earn enough in stud fees to earn a nice return on their investment. With this understanding well in place, Nack describes in detail the races of 1973. His race descriptions combine technical detail (racing to the 12s), summaries of the competition, the jockey's strategies. The race narratives get your heart pounding and add suspense when the outcome is already known. These are the best race descriptions I have read--but I could be prejudiced, because he is describing the best running horse of -- perhaps ever. Broken down by starts and furlongs and stretches, the reader is shifted between the being in the saddle from jockey Ron Turcotte's point of view to the view from the rail, watching the entire field. These are thrilling, exciting, moving passages that educate the reader at the same time--strategies around the curve, horses bumping one another, assessing the competition in split second observations. Nack also describes the players. Mrs. Tweedy does not show as well as her public persona suggests, much to my surprise. (Does Nack not like Mrs. Tweedy?) The Martins who trained Sham also appear badly, supporting that impression with some whining quotes. Most other figures that peopled those two years show well: the Phipps family, the Hancocks, the trainer Lucien Lurien, Ronny Turcotte, groom Eddie Sweat (who seems under served by this book), Charles Hatton, the Racing Form writer who loved Secretariat from the start and score of others who directly or peripherally were part of Secretariat's life. These are all described as a reporter would describe them, without attempts at psychological insight but through observations and extensive quotations. This is not writing for the little girl who loves horses, this is writing for the adults who people horse racing or would like to. While Nack does not emphasize it unduly, one thing does come through for the girl who loves horses. More often than not, Secretariat ran his own races. The specific strategy was up to his jockey, but when Secretariat felt like running --and he often did -- Turcotte simply let him run, without a whip, without much encouragement at all. The Triple Crown races are deeply detailed but two of them particularly stand out. At the Preakness, early in the race, horse and jockey move from their usual last place out of the gate and circles the field in a quarter mile in a burst of speed that is amazing, stunning all by itself...and all the more stunning when the horse maintains the sprinter's pace. And the 1972 Belmont is beyond superlatives--Secretariat races the small field entirely on his own, Tucotte "sitting chilly", winning by 31 lengths, moving 'like a tremendous machine', running because he loves to run. I wanted to read the races with the book in one hand and the race clips on You Tube in front of me. Nack explains the races in a way my own observation never could, but, boy, to see that big red horse run is enough to make you cry. That is, if you are, or were, a girl who loves horses. | ||
 | Made in America | |
| "A knowledgeable conversation about the language" | 2008-05-10 |
| Pardon me while I whine a bit, but the reviewers who complain that the book lacks scholarship and similar pedantic complaints have missed the point. Bill Bryson is a writer, a storyteller, and man of wide interests who can churn out charming, remarkably well researched books at a satisfying rate. Like his History of Everything (the "history" of science), The Informal History of American English is not a textbook, not complete and not intended for a serious study of the language. It makes the point that language is evolutionary, a flexible, variable tool that, in America, probably has had a broader range of lasting influences than most languages, and those influences reflect American society. If you are a reader and like words and their derivations, this is dessert--fully satisfying but not the complete meal. He prefers the words and sayings that have good stories about them, and his 20 years of living in England are reflected in is often wry, dryly witty take on the facts. It is occasionally laugh out loud, has any number of chuckles and is interesting throughout. He writes easily and occasionally reflects some real depth in his efforts. He relies perhaps a bit too much on Mencken's research, but then they share a world view and sense of humor. Originally a travel writer, he takes a trip through American history and points out the bits that interest him most, and makes it enjoyable, entertaining and even educational. Like a conversation, the book sometimes wanders off topic to charming or ironic side note, but he always returns to the main road. If your expectations are reasonable, this book is a pleasure and I suspect you will pick it up later, from time to time, to remind yourself of the story or circumstances behind the way we speak or just to get a moment of intelligent wit. I gave it 4, instead of 5, stars because he could have written more, because it needs a little editing and because despite an impressive bibliography, a bit of the philosophy of language development would not have gone amiss. But for a pleasurable read on an interesting topic for the dilettante (history of the word dilettante is in the book), this is a good buy. | ||
 | The Diary of a Nobody (Oxford World's Classics) | |
 | "Not Quite Three Men in a Boat" | 2008-03-01 |
| If you have read, and loved, Three Men in a Boat by Jerome K Jerome, you may be tempted by this slice of slightly befuddled English life. Mr. Pooter and his wife live the simple life (circa 1920)of nobodies, with friends who drop in from time to time, and their son Lupin. Mr. Pooter has only the faintest idea that his son is less than he hopes and is pretty equally clueless as to the intents and character of nearly everyone else: his employer, his son's actress girl friend, the man who sells hats, and more. Pooter believes he should be able to lord over mere tradesmen, not to mention be the king of his own castle and worthy of a published diary. The book arose from a story so popular that it eventually became a newspaper serial. It is dry, with subtle clever insights into the life and limits of clerk's existence and social pretensions. If you like dry and bumbling English humor, The Diary of a Nobody does not hold a candle to Three Men in a Boat which may be the funniest book I have ever read. I missed the exuberance of Three Men. Diary/Nobody relies more on stock characters (which may have been less of a stereotype when it was written than it seems now)and less slow motion slapstick than Three Men. A slight, short pleasure to read once and pass along. | ||
 | A Scandal in Belgravia (Missing Mystery, #10) | |
| "One of Bernard's Best" | 2008-02-12 |
| The other Bernard Best is The False Inspector Dew. It is fabulous.
Occasionally, Robert Bernard writes a book that ambles along, telling a story by a fairly distant narrator who is propelled by curiosity to look into a tangled set of facts. The Scandal in Belgravia is the most successful of Bernard's approach--the sort of book you are sorry to finish--and the narrator is not removed. Belgravia is an area of London where the well to do and -- at one time --the literati, lived. Usual conventional mores war with the individuals who have a different point of view. Our hero has worked for the government his whole life ( a former minister)and is the picture of respectability. He becomes interested in a death, and the tangled set of facts, and as he investigates, he changes. It is too easy to give away the plot and its "Gee, I should have seen it coming" ending. It is hard to ask you to take on faith that this cleverly plotted, carefully unfolded novel is a gift to any reader who enjoys the understated English approach to mystery and human psychology. It helps, but is not required, if you know a bit of the Profumo scandal [government minister found supporting a prostitute] which shattered the public view of the English government as more morally pure than yours and mine. You do have to accept that, once upon a time, a scandal was a bad thing that brought down careers and ruined that most valuable of commodities: respectability. (A point of view that is rapidly becoming archaic.) If you like an English mystery, you will love this one. | ||
 | Malice on the Moors | |
 | "Lightweight but dreary" | 2007-10-04 |
| This is an English police procedural starring Erkine Powell, a Scotland Yard Chief Inspector whose marriage is nearly on the rocks, who hates a boss who returns the favor, who is attracted to a lovely sergeant, and who is awash in two dimensional suspects of the murder of an unlovely victim. There is very little action, too much review of what we have learned so far, no humor and other than perhaps liking his lager too much, an unflawed hero. This is sort of in the Deborah Crombie genre but not written as well or appealingly. If you are stuck for a book on an airplane, it will do, but that is about it. | ||
 | Burr, Hamilton, and Jefferson: A Study in Character | |
| "Rambling, badly written --only for readers who crave detail" | 2006-11-18 |
| This book has a beginning but not a middle or an ending. He skips, for example, Burr's final trial in front of Marshall that was the cornerstone of the Jefferson/Marshall antipathy. (There is discussion of the surrounds political background and a touch of the law involved, but no more.) I was, and still am, very interested in the character of our founding fathers, and this is what is promised. Other than Hamilton was a good guy (you won't find out why) and Jefferson was a scheming politician with an uncertain grip on ethical behavior (Kennedy is certainly not the first historian to think so), I don't know much more than when I started the book other than to follow Burr's ramblings around the country while he was searching for either treason or a life purpose. I certainly know nothing more about Burr. He is defended generally, but there is no factual skeleton to which these conclusions can be attached. Why did Jefferson so hate and distrust Burr? No clue. Did Burr have treasonous plans? Kennedy thinks not, but never proves it. We learn that Burr is educated, amiable and good company but always from indirect testimony of side characters whose lives are pursued in painful and unecessary detail. This book is for historians already familiar with the duel, Jeffersonian politics and with overview of the times, and already knows whether Burr was looking for land or adventure. Burr's motivations? Unknown. There is a list at the end of possible motives but they are not compelling argued--and nearly not argued at all. The detail is excruciating without being informative. Sometimes I felt as though I was reading another book altogether: lush descriptions of architecture or the landscape or side trips into historical detail that doesn't have any bearing on the character of anyone. Kennedy's word choices are certainly academic but often unecessary flourishes that detract from the flow of his text. The time line tangles. I had the sense he wanted to impress me with his erudition and slap around unamed but apparently competitive scholars--neither of which are reasons for reading the book. I still would like to read the book the title promises. This is just not it. | ||
| © 2009 GoSale.com (S1) |