Book Description
The American Gospel–literally, the good news about America–is that religion shapes our public life without controlling it. In this vivid book, New York Times bestselling author Jon Meacham tells the human story of how the Founding Fathers viewed faith, and how they ultimately created a nation in which belief in God is a matter of choice.
At a time when our country seems divided by extremism, American Gospel draws on the past to offer a new perspective. Meacham re-creates the fascinating history of a nation grappling with religion and politics–from John Winthrop’s “city on a hill” sermon to Thomas Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence; from the Revolution to the Civil War; from a proposed nineteenth-century Christian Amendment to the Constitution to Martin Luther King, Jr.’s call for civil rights; from George Washington to Ronald Reagan.
Debates about religion and politics are often more divisive than illuminating. Secularists point to a “wall of separation between church and state,” while many conservatives act as though the Founding Fathers were apostles in knee britches. As Meacham shows in this brisk narrative, neither extreme has it right. At the heart of the American experiment lies the God of what Benjamin Franklin called “public religion,” a God who invests all human beings with inalienable rights while protecting private religion from government interference. It is a great American balancing act, and it has served us well.
Meacham has written and spoken extensively about religion and politics, and he brings historical authority and a sense of hope to the issue. American Gospel makes it compellingly clear that the nation’s best chance of summoning what Lincoln called “the better angels of our nature” lies in recovering the spirit and sense of the Founding. In looking back, we may find the light to lead us forward.
“In his American Gospel, Jon Meacham provides a refreshingly clear, balanced, and wise historical portrait of religion and American politics at exactly the moment when such fairness and understanding are much needed. Anyone who doubts the relevance of history to our own time has only to read this exceptional book.”–David McCullough, author of 1776
“Jon Meacham has given us an insightful and eloquent account of the spiritual foundation of the early days of the American republic. It is especially instructive reading at a time when the nation is at once engaged in and deeply divided on the question of religion and its place in public life.”–Tom Brokaw, author of The Greatest Generation
“An absorbing narrative full of vivid characters and fresh thinking, American Gospel tells how the Founding Fathers–and their successors–struggled with their own religious and political convictions to work out the basic structure for freedom of religion. For me this book was nonstop reading.”–Elaine Pagels, professor of religion, Princeton University, author of Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas
“Jon Meacham is one of our country’s most brilliant thinkers about religion’s impact on American society. In this scintillating and provocative book, Meacham reveals the often-hidden influence of religious belief on the Founding Fathers and on later generations of American citizens and leaders up to our own. Today, as we argue more strenuously than ever about the proper place of religion in our politics and the rest of American life, Meacham’s important book should serve as the touchstone of the debate.”
–Michael Beschloss, author of The Conquerors
“At a time when faith and freedom seem increasingly polarized, American Gospel recovers our vital center–the middle ground where, historically, religion and public life strike a delicate balance. Well researched, well written, inspiring, and persuasive, this is a welcome addition to the literature.”–Jonathan D. Sarna, Joseph H. & Belle R. Braun Professor of American Jewish History, Brandeis University, author of American Judaism: A History
From the Hardcover edition.
Customer Reviews:
A Balanced Study.......2007-10-20
"American Gospel" examines the story of the role religion has played in American public life from colonial times to the present. Utilizing quotes from clergy and presidents, among others, author Jon Meacham presents an interesting narrative of one of the most important forces of history.
Through this book, Meacham follows the role of religion in shaping crucial eras. The inspiration or use of religion molded the colonial experience at the beginning of the story. One of the most interesting sections deals with the role that the founding fathers, whose religious orientation often differed markedly from that of many modern readers, saw for faith in the nation's birth. Later high points included the Civil War, both World Wars and the Depression when God was invoked to guide the country through these trying times. Not limited to periods of crisis, Meacham also involves the words of Theodore Roosevelt, Billy Graham and some historical figures who are less frequently quoted.
The theme of this book is that public religion has and always will play a role in public life, most effectively when it respects the religious diversity of America. Those looking for book to praise or denigrate religion will be disappointed. The reader looking for a balanced study of the religious thread woven into our history will be well satisfied.
American Gospel - No Answer.......2007-09-28
I have to admit, after reading A Peoples' History of the United States, I had much concern about this book. It seems that it was either going to state that the United States was founded on Christian beliefs or it was going to say that it was absolutely not founded on Christian beliefs. Much to my surprise, the answer was 'sort of.'
As much as one could, Mr. Meacham seems to have taken a middle road, analytical view of the topic. From the origins of separation of church and state to discuss what God and maker were the founding fathers speaking of, the book was found to be most informative an interesting. It seems that some readers will get annoyed because they want the book to pick a side and argue it but instead he presented both parts of the argument and follows history to where we are today with respect to faith, God and government.
His citation system is far superior to that found in A Peoples' History though it was still lacking. He provided a long citation list but only by page with no corresponding reference on said page. I don't know...maybe in popular history books editors feel that when a reader sees a superscript number that they will be turned off. What I would hope is that two editions could be published, one as the book currently is but also one with exact citations so the reader, if she so chooses, can look up a quote or fact and see if it is presented in an appropriate context. Another good thing was the inclusion of entire documents within the appendix to allow the reader to see the source material as it was and to either agree or disagree with Mr. Meacham's interpretation.
Pablum.......2007-09-13
Jefferson, Washington, Franklin, Adams, and Madison were Deists, not Christians. Deism, not Christianity, was the religion of the enlightenment and of the early American intelligentsia. This work is well-intended, but superficial, and only feeds into the big lie that America is a "Christian country." That charade needs to be played out, not played into.
Finally, a Balanced Truth.......2007-08-18
American Gospel tells the truth of the history of religion (primarily the belief in Christianity) in the United States. It is very satisfying because it tells the whole story.
I have been an evangelical (born-again) Christian for almost 30 years. In that time, I have heard people say "America is a Christian nation," and I even went to a lecture by David Barton, founder of Wallbuilders, who claimed that the founding fathers were all Christian men.
I love the Lord and I love to study American history. But when I would hear and read about how Christian the nation was (and many evangelicals want to ensure that it remains so), I always think, "How could this Christian nation have tolerated slavery? How could these Christian men say 'thou shalt not steal,' and then take land away from Native Americans?" I often felt like those I've heard go on about how America was founded by Christians would like for people to forget our country's greatest sins, or believe that Christians had nothing to do with them. In fact, on Independence Day weekend 2007, I went to Church and my pastor gave a message about America, and he said "The battle cry of America has always been freedom." That's a nice thought, but it's just not true.
The truth is that the founders wanted a nation where people could be free in every aspect, including their spiritual beliefs. I'm glad for a book that respects Christianity but does not justify, minimize or ignore America's sins.
Bad history written by a journalist.......2007-08-15
If you want a real historical account and worth while scholarship, I would suggest reading "The Faiths of the Founding Fathers." Meacham is an amateur. Any senior in an undergraduate history course should be able to point out the glaring omissions, half truths and shoddy scholarship. His thesis is not even original. It seems to me Meacham is a reporter who found a way to make money during a time where religion and government are of more concern to Americans. Meacham should stick to reporting and let historians write history.
Amazon.com
Starting from scratch, simply by picking stocks and companies for investment, Warren Buffett amassed one of the epochal fortunes of the 20th century -- an astounding net worth of $10 billion and counting. That awesome record has made him a cult figure.
This illuminating biography reveals a man whose conscientiousness, integrity, and good humor exist alongside an odd emotional isolation.
Buffett also masterfully traces his life: his enormously successful partnership; his early, inspired investments in American Express and Geico; his companionship and investment with Katharine Graham of the Washington Post; his role in the Capital Cities purchase of ABC; his unique relationship with his wife and mistress; and his rescue of the scandal-ridden Salomon Brothers.
Book Description
Since its hardcover publication in August of 1995, Buffett has appeared on the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Los Angeles Times, Seattle Times, Newsday and Business Week bestseller lists. The incredible landmark portrait of Warren Buffett's uniquely American life is now available in paperback, revised and updated by the author.
Starting from scratch, simply by picking stocks and companies for investment, Warren Buffett amassed one of the epochal fortunes of the twentieth century--an astounding net worth of $10 billion, and counting. His awesome investment record has made him a cult figure popularly known for his seeming contradictions: a billionaire who has a modest lifestyle, a phenomenally successful investor who eschews the revolving-door trading of modern Wall Street, a brilliant dealmaker who cultivates a homespun aura.
Journalist Roger Lowenstein draws on three years of unprecedented access to Buffett's family, friends, and colleagues to provide the first definitive, inside account of the life and career of this American original. Buffett explains Buffett's' investment strategy--a long-term philosophy grounded in buying stock in companies that are undervalued on the market and hanging on until their worth invariably surfaces--and shows how it is a reflection of his inner self.
Customer Reviews:
Buffett by Roger Lowenstein.......2007-10-17
Buffett: The Making of an American Capitalist
This is a beautifully written book about Warren Buffett, one of today's most important business persons. Lowenstein is an experienced and deep business writer.
I have purchased many copies of this book as gifts for friends. As a business school professor at UCLA, I make reference to this book several times per year in my class.
One of the BEST Books I've Ever Read.......2007-10-14
WOW! This is one of the best books I have ever read. How inspiring!!! I felt that I really got into the mind (the thinking) of this man through Lowensteins account. I felt like I learned a LOT about big business and investing even though there are no direct "lessons" or strategies taught in this book. It also validated the way I run my own business as far as making quick judgements based on my gut knowledge, having a hatred for wasteful reports, and a slew of other "common sense" approaches to business -- including old-fashioned TRUST between business partners. This book was also a HUGE eye-opener about big business CEOs and the "merger" mentality in the business world. I used to think that these folks were so smart and knew things I didn't know. It turns out that Buffet was often doing the OPPOSITE of these folks, and the book is quick to point out the fallacy of their ways. It was also an eye-opener as far as what a "shareholder" really IS (or should be) according to Buffet. It gives me hope, and I am now ready to start thinking about how to get to that first billion! ...now...if I can just get my hands on those past Bershire annual reports...
You can't copy an artist.......2007-09-01
Reading this account of Warren Buffet, I am in awe of this man's intellect and aptitude for what he has spent his life doing. Investing. You will soon realize that any hopes of copying Buffet's strategy or system isn't possible for the "average Joe". It would be the same to think you could produce an outcome exactly like Michaelangelo or Rembrandt-it can't be done.
Buffett biography.......2007-08-04
I've found that if one has a handle on money, most everything else in life falls together. After reading this book, I put 90% of my savings in Berkshire Class B. 10 years ago. I tap dance everyday that I did. Oh, by the way, it's a great read. He was emotionally abused by his mother. Anything by Roger Lowenstein tells important money stories well.
Great work - but could have avoided few chapters .......2007-07-21
Roger has done a great job portraying the life of master investor, especially the way he has described each of Buffet's major takeovers. I was about to give 5 stars, but at last moment I changed my mind to 4 stars because a few chapters I seem were out of context, especially the ones that describe more about his children and the ones that are totally dedicated to Salomon brothers. I guess these chapters seemed a liitle bit out of context.
Dayanand
visit me @ http://annualreportanalysis.blogspot.com
Book Description
The Willie Lynch Letter and the Making of a Slave is a study of slave making. It discribes the rationale and the results of Anglo Saxon's ideas and methods of insuring the master/slave relationship.
Customer Reviews:
Slavery and aftermath was certainly real..........2007-08-09
I read this little book a while ago back when I was about 18-19 yrs old. It was very powerful and thought-provoking that such a plan could be conceived and carried out. But then again, Willie Lynch was not the first white person of tha time to come up with a plan to enslave blacks, both physically and mentally. Up until that point, I thought that if I just got my degree, got a job, and stayed out of trouble, everything would be ok (being a good NEGRO). Of course now I am more conscious about African studies.
I was a bit troubled when before writing this review a couple of reviews that stated. I looked also at a wikipedia article that also mentioned that the actual letter itself may have been an internet hoax. I immediately went back to the pamphlet, which I still have, to see for myself. Now I did notice that the pamphlet is broken into about 5 main parts:
1) Introduction by Mr. Hassan-EL. (with references)
2) William Lynch letter (no reference)
3) Commentary on on Let's Make a Slave
4) Food for Thought from the Internet
5) Short attribute to Africans in America sailors
Now I was disappointed that the author didn't reference the letter itself other than to mention that the letter was "Editor's repeat: This speech was delivered by a white slave owner, William Lynch, on the banks of James River in 1712." The argument is whether or not this letter/speech actually took place. The author doesn't cite where he found the letter or got the information of the letter. I did try to contact Lushena Books, and I was unsuccessful in reaching them for comment. In other words, I couldn't verify from the source that the letter/speech part of the pamplet was true or fiction. So I gave the review 4 stars. And it the letter was in fact a forgery, then it deserves even less stars. I do agree that it is important to make sure that when we bring facts to the table that they are actual facts (either based on experience or documented facts).
So maybe there was no person named Willie Lynch or it was a pen name. Maybe the speech didn't take place in 1712. But what was described in the letter was certainly real. Pitting the 'house negro' against the 'field negro'. One good example of this was rewarding 'good slaves' for turning in runaways or revolters with either lighter work, monetary cashout, or even freed status.
What I will do is attempt to gather actual names of people (besides the common names Christopher Columbus, Sir John Hawkins, George Washington, etc.) who conspired to enslave, murder, rape, etc Africans and Native Americans for their own financial or political gain from the before the 1800s. (Well I guess that would be a lot of people, eh?) Specifically those with a written or spoken plan against the Natives and Africans in America. Then I will revise this review :)
Willie Lynch Letter.......2007-03-14
The Willie Lynch letter is an interesting dig into the psychological control of slaves by slave masters. I am not sure of the validity of this letter, but it is an important part of studying American slavery. The book is a short read that can be easily read in one short sitting.
Willie Lynch letter/the making of a slave.......2007-01-12
Very important to the education of all. Willie Lynch letter has been questionned as to its actual authenticy, but no matter because the content is historically correct and the attitudes remain to this day. That is unfortunate, however, it's value to all Americans changing their attitudes and behaviour have great global implications.
A Must Read.......2006-08-20
This book should bread by every young black male in the United States. Some have proclaimed that it is false but the information is essential to the growth of black males. It sheds light on some of the condition that we face in this country.
Ignorance of the Truth in History is Everyone's Problem.......2006-06-04
First, to Andre M. "brnn64" - - your response was a result of not reading and knowing your history. And, to to all the others who described this as "Fiction", and/or recently written. This material was a "manual" - - a guide actually used by Southerners to learn how to handle their slaves. It may be one of the reasons why slavery lasted as long as it did, and why so much of the same attitudes prevail today. Unfortunately, I have heard many whites say "why should I be penalized for something my ancestors did back then - - well, the answer to that is that "you are still reaping and enjoying the benefits of what your ancestors did back then. AND - - they are ancestors to us all - - with the racial mixing which resulted - - making us all related to each other in some way. But that is another issue.
Some"smart" caucasian thought he was an expert in breaking slaves and thus, wrote his "letter" to other slave owners as an instruction manual. Since we live what we learn - - we have two forms of this mentality present today - - the mental conditioning that has spread in the African American community generationally today that makes us think blacks are not as smart as the white person - that whites are smarter, better, superior, etc. On the other hand, the mental conditioning has spread in the white community generationally, that blacks are dumber, slower, inferior.
The letter gave specific instructions on the process to use, with the major one still affecting our educational systems now - - that if you keep blacks uneducated, you keep the control. Unfortunately, this has backfired, and being uneducated affects everyone.
The overriding factor in this situation is that all of us should look at this document as an example of what we want to get away from, what we want never to happen again - - so that documents like this one can become fiction - - only written in someone's imagination, and not become a reality.
Book Description
This book examines how it was possible and what it meant for ordinary factory workers to become effective unionists and national political participants by the mid-1930s. We follow Chicago workers as they make choices about whether to attend ethnic benefit society meetings or to go to the movies, whether to shop in local neighborhood stores or patronize the new A & P. Although workers may not have been political in traditional terms during the '20s, as they made daily decisions like these, they declared their loyalty in ways that would ultimately have political significance. As the depression worsened in the 1930s, not only did workers find their pay and working hours cut or eliminated, but the survival strategies they had developed during the 1920s were undermined. Looking elsewhere for help, workers adopted new ideological perspectives and overcame longstanding divisions among themselves to mount new kinds of collective action. Chicago workers' experiences as citizens, ethnics and blacks, wage earners and consumers all converged to make them into New Deal Democrats and CIO unionists.
Customer Reviews:
Great insights on the labor movement during the depression.......2005-01-20
Cohen presents a seemingly broad and well-supported thesis to explain the success of unionism in the 1930s. However, while all persuasive, some of her major arguments seem only tangentially relevant to either each other or her main thesis. While she provides a strong, coherent explanation as to why Chicago workers' political loyalties and attitudes shifted so dramatically during the depression, it is frankly nothing new. Yes, workers felt entitled to aid and came to favor a strong, interventionist federal government, but the connections she draws between this and the unionization of Chicago factories remain tenuous. Correlation, as they say, is not causation; but Cohen argues, both implicitly and explicitly, that workers' preference for government intervention was a major factor in the labor struggles of the 1930s. If Cohen had acknowledged that labor solidarity and preference for big-government welfare programs were but two symptoms of worker's frustration, and accordingly broadened and adjusted her thesis, her chapter about Chicagoans attitudes vis-à-vis big government could have provided excellent support for her final argument. In the context of her overarching thesis, however, the chapter seems almost like a square peg in a round hole. Instead of letting her explanations-albeit insightful-of the working class's political consciousness reflect back on the people who hold them, she advances the somewhat further-fetched notion that worker's political experiences led directly to the later growth of unionization. None of this, however, detracts from her excellent account of the organizations and institutions that were shared between the too. Cohen primarily fails by not supporting her argument that these interrelations were anything more than marriages of political expediency forged in desperate times. That the Communists dabbled in both the labor movement and various forms of political activism does not mean that both were one and the same. Cohen rejects the simple explanation that they were both separate outlets for the collective rage of the underemployed.
Ask many American historians for a short answer why the CIO was so successful in the 30s, and they may answer: because of the NLRA, hesitance of local, state, and federal governments to take the politically inexpedient step of supporting industry, and, most importantly, a mass of desperate workers imbued with a newfound distrust for the system that had betrayed them. This is essentially the answer Lizabeth Cohen arrives at; she simply takes a circuitous-if enjoyable-path to reach it. She provides a complex, nuanced answer in a place where a simple answer might do. Perhaps she's asking a different question than it appears she is. The title of her book, Making a New Deal: Industrial Workers in Chicago, 1919-1939, implies that she's looking at a topic broader than the unionization of Chicago factories, but by bookending her many salient and though-provoking claims with the tales of 1919's failed strike and the CIO's ascendancy in the 1930s, she is limiting the scope of her book far too narrowly. Nonetheless, nothing is intrinsically wrong with any of Cohen's arguments and she provides a fascinating window into the mind of America's urban, industrial workforce during the depression.
In-depth Analysis of Chicago and Chicagoans.......2004-02-15
Cohen's work based on her Ph.D. Dissertation at UC-Berkeley proves to be a comprehensive, engaging, and insightful look into popular culture in 1920s and 1930s Chicago. She moves seamlessly from labor history to cultural history to ethnic history without losing the reader by including helpful charts, figures, and photographs. Her section on the nature of mass media and mass consumption undoubtedly provides evidence of her writing style in The American Pageant.
Cohen does not create a delineation between immigrants that came to the area and natives of the Chicago area, which goes a long way in terms of bias. She covers African-Americans, Polish, Italians, and Jews without being critical one way or the other. Each chapter seems to be able to live by itself, which gives the book a flavor of being a compendium of papers instead of a conjoined work. All in all, Cohen does a wonderful job examining Chicago and Chicagoans whatever their ethnicity may be.
Outstanding view of workers in Chicago between the wars.......2003-02-17
Making a New Deal is an absolutely incredible look at workers during the Interwar period in Chicago. Cohen has crafted a monumental work that not only covers workers political and union organization but also covers the changes in their lives resulting from societal changes such as the advent of radio and the chain store.
What's particularly appealing and interesting about this book is also what it says about modern times. Cohen discusses that due to the advent of radio and national networks, fewer workers got their local and world news from ethnic newspapers or other papers in Chicago. As can be seen from this, the current lement concerning the consolidation of newspapers, TV and radio stations isn't new, it began even in the 1930s. Also interesting is how many immigrant parents worried about their children becoming influenced by American culture that they did not understand, particularly clubs, dance halls and radio music.
Cohen's work is profoundly important and most of the book is a great read.
A superior book on labor, ethnicity, and politics.......2003-02-01
A well-researched and original book describing the shifting allegiances of Chicago workers from ethnic help societies to their welfare capitalist employers to finally the US government. In addition to the subject of the growing labor movement, the book is also a great survey of the various ethnic/racial groups of 1920s Chicago and their differing experiences with Americanization.
There is a book I would like to recommend as a virtual "sequel" to this one. The Origins of the Urban Crisis by Thomas Sugrue. While Cohen's book is about the creation of the New Deal coalition in the factory neighborhoods and towns of Chicago, Sugrue's book is about the disappearance of the factories and the departure from the Democratic coalition in the 1960s of the same groups who joined it in the 30s. Sugrue's book also won a Bancroft prize and if you like one you will surely like the other.
Making Sense of the Great Depression.......2001-04-21
Cohen's synopsis of Chicago through the 1920's and into the tough times of the 1930's is truly a remarkable account that makes sense of the Great Depression in a way that truly brings it to life for the reader. Though focused on Chicago, the story she tells really holds true for the whole US and delves deeply into the real world reality of the depression experience. Carefully outlining the change in America from an industrial capitalism to a welfare state society, the important changes in America are clearly explained and brought to life through understandable and vivid human stories. The fourth chapter discussing the actual alteration in the worker's mindset that created an atmosphere for not only the New Deal, but for the federal government activity we are used to today, is truly the highlight of the book. Just chapter alone earns this book my highest recommendation, as overall it is one of the better books of this era and topic with which I am familiar.
Average customer rating:
- Amazing Visuals, Informative Text!
- Another Gee's Bend book
- An exciting look at quilts as modern art
- Gee's Bend: The Architecture of the Quilt by Paul Arnett, William Arnett
- A great book on a legendary art
|
Gee's Bend: The Architecture of the Quilt
Paul Arnett ,
William Arnett ,
Bernard Herman ,
Maggi Gordon ,
Diane Mott ,
Dilys Blum ,
Lauren Whitley ,
Amei Wallach , and
Joanne Cubbs
Manufacturer: Tinwood Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
 African American
| Regional
| History & Criticism
| Arts & Photography
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Museums & Collections
| Arts & Photography
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Museums
| Museums & Collections
| Arts & Photography
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Exhibition Catalogs
| Museums
| Museums & Collections
| Arts & Photography
| Subjects
| Books
Textile & Costume
| Design & Decorative Arts
| Arts & Photography
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Arts & Photography
| Subjects
| Books
Folk Art
| Schools, Periods & Styles
| Arts & Photography
| Subjects
| Books
Quilts & Quilting
| Crafts & Hobbies
| Home & Garden
| Subjects
| Books
Look Inside History Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Home & Garden Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
The Quilts of Gee's Bend: Masterpieces from a Lost Place
-
The Quilts of Gee's Bend: 30 Postcards
-
Mary Lee Bendolph, Gee's Bend Quilts, and Beyond
-
Nancy Crow
-
Quilt National 2007: The Best of Contemporary Quilts (Quilt National)
ASIN: 0971910456 |
Book Description
In 2002, Gee’s Bend burst into international prominence through the success of Tinwood’s Quilts of Gee’s Bend exhibition and book, which revealed an important and previously invisible art tradition from the African American South. Critics and popular audiences alike marveled at these quilts that combined the best of contemporary design with a deeply rooted ethnic heritage and compelling human stories about the women. Gee's Bend: The Architecture of the Quilt is a major book and museum exhibition that will premiere at the Museum of Fine Arts, Houston (MFAH), in June 2006 before traveling to seven American museums through 2008. The book's 330 color illustrations and insightful text bring home the exciting experience to readers while displaying all the cultural heritage and craftsmanship that have gone into these remarkable quilts.
Customer Reviews:
Amazing Visuals, Informative Text!.......2007-09-17
This book is gorgeous!!! It includes large photographs of tons of quilts, in a size that allows you to see the smallest details, such as topstitching. It also includes inspirational photos of details of the town. However, it's not your typical coffe table book, because it has probably equal parts very informative text and visuals. Since it's not small enough to carry with me on the train, it's been hard separating myself from this book-- it is beautiful!
Another Gee's Bend book.......2007-05-13
I like this book because it is full of information about the construction of the quilts and alot of trivia about the makers of the quilts. Very beautiful pictures! A great book for learning.
An exciting look at quilts as modern art.......2007-02-08
This book illustrates the link between the incredibly beautiful quilts produced by five generations of African American women in the South to the architecture they saw around them and to their own artistic vision. Their personal stories, contained in chapters toward the end of the book, are very moving and inspirational.
Gee's Bend: The Architecture of the Quilt by Paul Arnett, William Arnett .......2007-01-12
Wonderful book full of pictures and inspiration, and the story of the Gees Bend Quilts.
A great book on a legendary art.......2007-01-04
This book shows the Gees Bend quilts in all their gorgeous and unself-conscious art, as well as telling the story of these women, descended from slaves in an isolated community, who created this amazing abstract art. A wonderful book, with many color photos of the quilts.
Customer Reviews:
Romanticism and the Middle Ages.......2007-05-01
The Making of the Middle Ages is a study of the period 972 to 1204. Before Southern wrote this book in 1952, the period has traditionally been called the High Middle Ages or the "Renaissance of the 12th Century". However Southern sees it as more than a Renaissance (usually thought of as a period of *re* discovery of classical texts and ideas), but also a period of *new* and original ideas and institutions. Southern says the period "had been overtaken by a creative spirit, which was not derived from the past, but nourished by a medley of influences both past and present." What is the "creative spirit"? According to Southern, it is Romanticism, which can be defined as a heightened sense of self-consciousness in perceiving the physical and natural world, both in the secular and spiritual.
It was with the publication of "Making" that decades of subsequent research into the period has focused on Romanticism as the primary creative movement that helped propel European culture from a backwater throughout the early middle ages to a leading civilization by 1500. The Virgin Cult, courtly love, the Arthurian tradition, the origins of Gothic architecture, are just a few of the peculiar institutions and ideas that have been re-examined from a Romantic viewpoint. And it is for that reason "Making" is so often classified as one of the most important medieval history books of the 20th century. Further, it was groundbreaking stylistically because it legitimized speculative and imaginative cultural history, which has found many imitators, such as Peter Brown (The World of Late Antiquity) and Robin Lane Fox (Pagans and Christians). It's influence on generation or two of Medieval scholars can not be over-estimated and it still remains one of those classic books every medieval student is familiar with.
Although "Making" is accessible and readable by anyone, the books intent as described above is subtle and nuanced, in particular outside of the "state of the art" of medievalism in 1952 which saw the 12th century as a Renaissance at best, or a "dark age" at worst. This was a revolutionary and groundbreaking book for its day and is as interesting today for historiographical reasons, some of the actual content has since been refuted. Literary speaking, it is well written and delightful. It does contain interesting anecdotes about the period, but this is not a survey text and those looking for a introduction to the Middle Ages may be disappointed if not bedazzled.
The Transistion from Epic to Romance.......2005-05-18
An acknolwedged classic of european history, R.W. Southern's "The Middle Ages" focuses on the period between 900 and 1200 A.D. His geopgraphic focus is mostly northern france, with some asides to Germany, Italy, Southern France and England. His main thesis is the idea that this period saw the emergence of a personal devotion to faith via monasticism that in turn prefigured the rise of invdividual identity in western culture.
No small accomplishment, that thesis, and no small accomplishment this book. Southern's style of writing is charming and concise. You don't get the thesis till the last chapter, but the preceding chapters are entertaining, enjoyable reading.
The author who turned me on to this book was the recently deceased Norman F. Cantor in his dishy "The Making of the Middle Ages", which I also recommend for any one who is reading on this subject outside the academy. Cantor's main point was to show how the empire building mind set of the "Annales" school of the history of the middle ages (which concentrates its focus on the role of the peasant in the society of the middle ages), had deprived other "schools" of much needed oxygen. Well, he didn't put it that way exactly, but that's what he said.
Cantor, of course, studied under Southern, so the bias is there. None the less, having read several books from the Annales school and none from Southern and his progeny, I would have to say that the two compliment one another (and Southern cites Marc Bloch, the much revered founder of Annales school).
So read this book if you want to learn more about the history of the middle ages and the growth of invdividualism in the west. You won't be dissapointed.
Astonishingly good for such a short book.......2003-10-15
In just over 400 pages Mr. Southern manages to cover crucial 700 years of European history. What makes this book a standout study is the author's ability to integrate the demographic, economics, societal, artistic and pholosophic/religious development in a comprehensive picture, which is easy to follow and comprehend. While the book may be a little too narrowly focused for the casual reader, it is an excellent, rich in detail and perspective introduction to pre-Renaissance Europe.
An acknowledged masterpiece.......2002-08-14
This is the brilliant book that made Richard Southern's reputation as one of the finest medieval historians. Everything that the two earlier reviewers have said is true and needn't be repeated. The bottom line is this: if you are very interested in the subject, and have already read about it to some extent, then you must read this book. It is astonishly rich in ideas -- almost too much so; and many of the observations that Southern makes in a seemingly casual way can give such blinding insight that you may find yourself stopping for several minutes at a time just to marvel at what you've read.
One the other hand, this book is for serious students of history (it was originally devised for a college course). Those casually interested in finding out "what happened" in the middle ages will find it boring and useless.
Fascinating, but not introductory-level material.......2001-05-11
The Making of the Middle Ages by RW Southern
When I asked for suggestions as to what I should read to expand my knowledge of the social history of the Middle Ages, a friend with a degree in Medieval History suggested Richard Southern's The Making of the Middle Ages. I was hoping for a fairly straightforward book about women, warfare, technology, medicine, what it was like to live in a Medieval town and so forth, and The Making of the Middle Ages is not that book. It is, nevertheless, a fascinating and well written volume, and well worth the time and money.
Southern limits his discussion to the period from the end of the 10th century to the beginning of the 13th century--from 972 to 1204 to be exact. The book is divided into five chapters: the first discusses the relationship between Europe and its neighbors--the Byzantine Empire and the Islamic countries. The general European perception of these countries, trade, the Crusades, and the transmission of knowledge all form parts of this chapter. The second chapter is on "The Bonds of Society"; in this chapter Southern treats the emergence of centralized government, serfdom, and the idea of knighthood. The third chapter deals with Christianity and society--the mingling of secular and sacred in the medieval church, the growth of power of the papacy, and monasticism. The fourth chapter is about intellectual and literary changes which took place during Southern's period, and the final chapter "From Epic to Romance" concerns the growing interest in mysticism, in the cult of the Virgin, and in more personal forms of piety. One of the most charming aspects of The Making of the Middle Ages is the astonishing diversity of the anecdotes that Southern relates to illustrate his points. Southern introduces us to a host of interesting and esoteric historical figures: the "nameless traveller" who carried the news of the death of Count Wilfred of Cerdana from Spain through France and into Germany; the elusive Prester John; the heroic Boethius who undertook the Herculean task of saving the entire corpus of Greek scholarship; and the virtually unknown Peter of Blois--poet, archdeacon, and correspondent--whose letters give us a glimpse into the life of a high-ranking ecclesiastical official, to list only a few. Southern also relates, with vigor and style, the history of the bloody and cynical Counts of Anjou and how they slowly and strategically consolidated and expanded their territorial holdings.
Southern's language is also amusing. This is not a dry textbook-style introduction to Medieval history--Southern allows himself to indulge in the colorful turns of phrase which impart so much pleasure to reading, but which have been so rigorously winnowed out of most scholarly and academic writing. My copy of The Making of the Middle Ages is full of underlined passages which are interesting for their writing as much as for their content. In the final chapter of the book ("From Epic to Romance"), Southern observes that "Chretien probes the heart, but it is the enamelled heart of the twelfth-century secular world, not yet made tender by the penetration of strong religious feeling." I don't know if I will ever have occasion to refer to the "enamelled heart of the twelfth century secular world," but I hope I will.
However, from the point of view of an interested layperson, The Making of the Middle Ages is a challenging read. Southern assumes a great deal of knowledge on the part of his reader, and many of the connections he draws are difficult to appreciate for someone who has only a tenuous grasp on Medieval history and who is struggling to assimilate the mass of information on which the author is drawing to support his points. Also, Southern's book has something in common with another book that I continue to enjoy each time I read it: Peter Brown's The World of Late Antiquity. Each time I open The World of Late Antiquity, I am again charmed by Brown's style and by the subtle connections that he draws. Yet as soon as I put it down, the details begin to slip away from me. I am afraid that The Making of the Middle Ages may have the same ephemeral effect on my understanding of the late 10th to the early 13th centuries, but I would nonetheless recommend it to anyone who has at least a Western-civ level of background knowledge to provide a jumping-off point from which to appreciate this book.
Book Description
Americans today "know" that a majority of the population supports the death penalty, that half of all marriages end in divorce, and that four out of five prefer a particular brand of toothpaste. Through statistics like these, we feel that we understand our fellow citizens. But remarkably, such data--now woven into our social fabric--became common currency only in the last century. Sarah Igo tells the story, for the first time, of how opinion polls, man-in-the-street interviews, sex surveys, community studies, and consumer research transformed the United States public.
Igo argues that modern surveys, from the Middletown studies to the Gallup Poll and the Kinsey Reports, projected new visions of the nation: authoritative accounts of majorities and minorities, the mainstream and the marginal. They also infiltrated the lives of those who opened their doors to pollsters, or measured their habits and beliefs against statistics culled from strangers. Survey data underwrote categories as abstract as "the average American" and as intimate as the sexual self.
With a bold and sophisticated analysis, Igo demonstrates the power of scientific surveys to shape Americans' sense of themselves as individuals, members of communities, and citizens of a nation. Tracing how ordinary people argued about and adapted to a public awash in aggregate data, she reveals how survey techniques and findings became the vocabulary of mass society--and essential to understanding who we, as modern Americans, think we are.
Book Description
Affirming Reagan's position as one of America's greatest presidents, this is a bold and philosophical reevaluation.
Following his departure from office, Ronald Reagan was marginalized thanks to liberal biases that dominate the teaching of American history, says John Patrick Diggins. Yet Reagan, like Lincoln (who was also attacked for decades after his death), deserves to be regarded as one of our three or four greatest presidents. Reagan was far more active a president and far more sophisticated than we ever knew. His negotiations with Mikhail Gorbachev and his opposition to foreign interventions demonstrate that he was not a rigid hawk. And in his pursuit of Emersonian ideals in his distrust of big government, he was the most open-minded libertarian president the country has ever had; combining a reverence for America's hallowed historical traditions with an implacable faith in the limitless opportunities of the future. This is a revealing portrait of great character, a book that reveals the fortieth president to be an exemplar of the truest conservative values. 13 photographs.
Customer Reviews:
Reagan's Three Dragons.......2007-10-15
There is already a vast amount of literature on the life of Ronald Reagan, and it shows no sign of abating. The 40th President of the United States is a continuing subject of fascination as the man who reasserted his country's superpower dominance, engineering the fall of communism and the end of the Cold War.
His domestic policies, dominated by his passionate belief in small government and the ability of individuals to shape their own destinies, earned him the enmity of liberals, yet even on his own side of politics he is not the unquestioned hero as for example his contemporary, Margaret Thatcher, is among British conservatives.
I recall a conversation with a retired American diplomat who preferred the unsuccessful 1964 Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater as the true founder of the modern conservative movement in the US, dismissing Reagan as an opportunist, a former Democrat who could see the way the wind was blowing, jumping on the bandwagon in the right place at the right time.
John Patrick Diggins seeks to dismiss this argument. For him Reagan deserves to be rated alongside George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt as one of the greatest presidents of all time. He believes history will vindicate Reagan in the same way it did Lincoln, whose reputation was besmirched for many decades after his death, but more about that relationship later.
The problem that Diggins and any other biographer of Reagan face is proximity. As the author states with some exasperation in the bibliographical notes, more than 80 per cent of the material in the presidential library remains classified and can be obtained only through the laborious and often unsuccessful method of applying under the Freedom of Information Act.
Undeterred, he turns to other sources, notably the evidence emerging from Soviet archives of the relationship with the Soviet Union's last President, Mikhail Gorbachev, as well as the burgeoning amount of literature discussing the origins behind the sudden collapse of the Soviet Union two years after Reagan left office.
The result is a scholarly, meticulously-researched book that seeks to understand not just the president of the 1980s, but the film actor of the 30s, 40s and 50s, the California Governor of the 60s and 70s and the man who passionately believed in a new beginning for his country - a rebirth that came to be called "Morning in America".
For Diggins, the man who took office in January 1981 had three dragons to slay: the nuclear arms race that threatened the world with extinction; the expanding welfare state that increased dependency and lowered self-esteem and the third, most controversially "a joyless religious inheritance that told people their kingdom was not of this world and they needed to be careful about pursuing happiness in case they enjoyed it".
This was hardly the language that the increasingly influential religious right would have wanted to hear but Reagan could see no conflict in embracing the rewards of this world - after all, it was what trade unions had been advocating for their members for half a century. He may have been ushering in the decade of Wall Street and `Greed is Good', but it is the author's insistence that the president wanted Americans to enjoy the pursuit of wealth and not be ashamed of the bounty they accumulated. It was, Diggins asserts, a necessary step in order to restore Americans' confidence in themselves after the debacle of the Vietnam War, Watergate, the Iran hostages humiliation and a decade of economic malaise.
Diggins does not hold back on the obvious black marks of the Reagan presidency, most notably the Iran Contra scandal, occurring deep into Reagan's second term and at least partially resorting from the arrogance that comes from years of unbroken power.
As with the Nixon presidency 15 years previously, there had been the subtle growth of a macho `can do' culture with little regard for moral or ethical objections. The difference being that Reagan quickly shouldered the blame in a televised mea culpa address in which the Great Communicator was at his best: "A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not...what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated in its implementation into trading arms for hostages."
I take issue with the final chapter in which the author seeks to link Reagan even closer to Lincoln by likening Reagan's battle against communism to Lincoln's struggle to free the slaves. It is for readers to follow Diggin's closely argued reasoning and come to their conclusions, but the fact is Lincoln went to war not to free slaves but to save the Union and that the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 was a ploy to turn foreign opinion against the Confederacy and disrupt it internally at a time when the conflict was going badly for the North.
However, it is certainly worth noting that the Cold War was won bloodlessly while the Civil War resulted in the deaths of more Americans than have been killed in all conflicts combined in the century-and-a-half since.
There are times when this book stumbles into academic denseness, and I am unconvinced that Diggins has made his case for Reagan to be elevated to the heights of the presidential pantheon, but for those seeking an insight into the mind of the man who radically altered the face of American politics, it is to be recommended.
An Intellectual Historian in Name only.......2007-08-26
The dust jacket of this biography claims that John Patrick Diggins is one of America's "most interesting intellectual historians". This description gets two things right - Mr. Diggins is interesting, and Mr. Diggins is undoubtedly a historian. Whether he is much of an intellectual is another matter.
Mr. Diggins' thesis is a peculiar and engaging one - that Reagan is one of the greatest Presidents of our nation, and also one of the most Emersonian, classically liberal Presidents of our time. Diggins, however, does not quite manage to provide definitive proof for either claim, though he does a better job of proving Reagan's intellectual roots than of proving his greatness. The reason for this failure, unfortunately, is not a problem with Diggins' scholarship, but rather an unfortunate case of self-sabotage which begins to show in the latter half of the book. During this section, one wonders if Diggins himself doubts his own thesis. In fact, one wonders if Diggins actually wanted to write a book with said thesis, or if the original argument he wanted to make was as follows: "Ronald Reagan is not a conservative, but even if he was, conservatives can't beat communism in the long run, anyway. Ha ha ha. Neener neener neener."
To this end, many passages within the book are unabashedly, obnoxiously didactic. In fact, one often feels as though one is reading a philosophical essay meant to impugn the purity of American conservatism, rather than a biography of a conservative figure. One of the more absurd of these moments comes near the very end, when Diggins tries to impugn Reagan's conservatism by contrasting his vision with that of Edmund Burke. There are two problems with this analysis - firstly, Diggins misinterprets Burke's quote about the necessity of restraint for rights as implying that a paternalistic government is required to stop people from being greedy. What Burke was actually talking about, of course, was the tendency of people to believe they have a right to everything they want - a dangerous tendency, which often leads to things like the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights (which contradicts itself numerous times). The second problem with this analysis, however, is that Mr. Diggins is assuming that conservatism's nature has not changed at all since Edmund Burke. It is not as though Burke sat down and wrote out a "Constitution of Conservatism". Many conservative thinkers, in fact, believe that deriving a contemporary position from Edmund Burke's writings is impossible. It doesn't help, of course, that Burke was from England, and the conservative tradition in England is almost completely non-applicable to America.
Furthermore, Diggins seems determined to convince his audience that Reagan was not really all that religious, as though there is something shameful in one of our greatest presidents being religious. Diggins also seems fixated on Reagan's fiscal policy, which he often links with the words "greed" and "selfishness." Finally, though Diggins initially credits Reagan with ending the cold war, he later throws in backhanded implications that it had more to do with Gorbachev than Reagan. It is as though Diggins wrote his thesis that Reagan was one of our greatest Presidents and then choked on it and had to go back and assure his readers that while Reagan was one of our greatest Presidents, he was still the selfish, shortsighted clod that Academics envision him to be.
The existence of these flaws is unfortunate, because the book is historically excellent and so readable that it almost rivals a Harry Potter novel. Ultimately, I must recommend the book, with reservation. I give Mr. Diggins three stars for interesting history, and no stars for his intellectual pretensions. It is a pity. If Mr. Diggins had the courage to stick to his original thesis rather than frantically reassure his audience that he was not one of those awful Reagan-loving freaks, we might be reading the best Reagan biography yet.
Uninformed by recent events.......2007-08-09
Dr. Diggins seems to be an erudite, intelligent man who put some serious time into researching his book. The other reviewers have rightly praised his efforts to look at Reagan through the lense of history and not idealogy, and for his ranking of Reagan with Roosevelt and Lincoln among our greatest presidents.
At the same time, I must confess that having recently read the Reagan Diaries as well as other books dealing with the Reagan legacy like Victory, Bill Bennett's recent second history volume, Reagan "In His Own Hand" etc., I must find that some of the conclusions drawn in this book diverge from the facts and tread familiar academic paths of thought about our great President.
The final negotiations that ended the Cold War occured PRECISELY because Reagan worked on every front to thwart the Soviets. This included Bill Casey flying all over the world covertly, actions to stop Soviet technology acquisition, efforts to make them spend money they didn't have on defense, and a lot more. Reagan mentions anti-communist efforts on a daily basis in the diaries. Also, the preposterous comment that Reagan did nothing to support Solidarity is false on its face - not making speeches about something (even though he did) does not mean inaction. Again, his diaries reveal many efforts on behalf of Solidarity, and Walesa himself gives Reagan great credit for his support. The fact remains that Reagan didn't alter or change his demands on the Soviets when Gorbachev came to power - the final agreement reached was the US STARTING POSITION on disarmement years earlier. His strong stance in negotiations and the arms build up (laughably described as starting under the Carter administration in the book - are you kidding?) drove the Soviets to the table because they literally could not afford to fight anymore. Fighting them on every front was intended from the beginning to realize this result. It is as Reagan described before he became President - his view of the cold war was "we win and they lose".
On a philosophical point, Diggins rightly remarks that Reagan often acted against the conservatives of his time's wishes. This does not make him somehow "less" conservative - just proven right in the argument. All idealogies are constantly in these debates, and Reagan comments on his reviews on the right constantly in his diaries as well, since he was such an avid reader of their writings. Just because the greatest conservative of the last fifty years didn't agree with every midget wonk at National Review or in congress is a comment on the midgets, not him. The line between "classical" and contemporary liberalism also seems to blur in his discussions. Yes, many current conservative thoughts on freedom and liberty are classicly liberal views (as many liberal statist views are classicly conservative), the modern distinctions are all that really matter in current discussion.
I started to read this book with great enthusiasm, as its take on Reagan seemed fresh and interesting, but as I saw conclusion after conclusion follow other tired academic views on Reagan and contradict what I had read him say in his own hand were his views and thoughts, I found it ultimately unhelpful.
The Great Communicator's Political Philosophy.......2007-08-07
I read this book for a graduate class in American history. In this noteworthy biography, John Patrick Diggins sheds light on Ronald Reagan's evolving political philosophy and how this philosophy was his rule and guide throughout his life. Expertly written and based on both primary and secondary sources, this book's view favors Reagan's political career in general. Diggins did an excellent job of pointing out both historical and contemporary figures who helped form Reagan's religious beliefs and political philosophy. Some examples are Thomas Paine, Reagan's mother, Whittaker Chambers who was an anti-Communist, and economist F. A. Hayek. By following a more psychological approach in this biography of the fortieth president of the United States, Diggins drew a clearer picture of Reagan's political motivations than has been previously available. Diggins' biography has made Reagan, who was perhaps the most important president of the second half of the twentieth century, more understandable to his readers.
In his biography, Diggins was adept at pointing out many of the misconceptions that liberals had of Reagan's religious and political beliefs. As an example, Diggins emphasized the role Reagan's mother had in formulating his religious beliefs that stayed with him throughout his life. From his mother, Reagan inherited the optimistic outlook on life that the Disciples of Christ Church espoused. It would fit very neatly with his political philosophy that he shared with Thomas Paine. Both men were staunch believers in people attaining liberty and freedom from oppressive government. After all Diggins made the point innumerably throughout his book, that if there was one defining and deeply held belief that Reagan had, it was that "Reagan inevitably saw government as the problem" (xvii). There were so many incongruities in Reagan's religious attitudes and actions that historians will be debating them for many years to come. Diggins expertly pointed out that for all the support that the Moral Majority crowd, led by the Reverend Jerry Falwell, gave Reagan in both his presidential campaigns, he truly shared little in common with their strict religious beliefs. Reagan did not wear his religion on his sleeve. He did not claim to be a born again Christian. During his years in the White House, he seldom attended church services. Although as Governor of California in 1967 Reagan signed a bill to grant women the right to have an abortion, he soon had misgivings but never tried to push legislation through to abolish abortion. He would speak out against abortion for the rest of his life. Similarly, Reagan spoke of the need for religion in the classroom; however, he made no political moves to bring that goal of the Moral Majority to fruition. In essence, "Reagan looked to religion less as a source of divine guidance than as a bulwark against the power of the state" (32).
Since Reagan believed that removing the stifling yoke of government off the neck of the people was of paramount importance, it is no wonder that Reagan came to believe that Communism was the worst sort of government that could be foisted on humanity. His anathema against Communism and to its liberal sympathizers was sharpened by the Hiss-Chambers congressional hearings of the early 1950's. It was also influenced by two particular books. One book was Chamber's book, "Witness as the book that would shape his political outlook" (10). In addition like many conservatives, Reagan read F. A. Hayek's book Road to Serfdom and "accepted Hayek's thesis that liberalism paves the way for communism by institutionalizing a centralized state" (110). Diggins recounted the numerous times throughout Regan's life that he railed against the evils of Communism, which led to his well-publicized "evil empire" speech in 1983. This speech finalized Reagan's reputation as the anti-Communist jingoistic cowboy. Diggins cogently showed in his book that it was Reagan's life long vitriol against Communism, was the only cold war president that could reach out to the Soviet Union and substantially reduce the nuclear weapons arsenal.
Diggins did a masterful job of showing how Reagan, while in the hospital recovering from the wounds he received from the attempt on his life in 1981, awakened to the realization that he had to do his utmost in reducing the chances of the world being destroyed in a nuclear holocaust. Diggins found Reagan was completely misunderstood by liberals who characterized him as a warmonger. Reagan came to see the folly of Mutual Assured Destruction, which had been the cornerstone of America's nuclear deterrence. For the always-optimistic Reagan this new mission was akin to Nixon opening China. Only Reagan who called the Soviet Union the "evil empire," could befuddle his neo-conservative supporters and liberal critics time after time as he worked to get Mikhail Gorbachev to trust him and ultimately become his partner in arms reduction. In doing so, Reagan was instrumental in paving the way for the end to the cold war, and ultimately the collapse of the Soviet Union. In his book Diggins recounted one of the most poignant speeches Reagan, also known as the great communicator, ever delivered, which took place in 1988 to students at Moscow State University. It was Reagan, the optimist and defender of liberty and not the warmonger and staunch anti-Communist that addressed the audience. Reagan spoke about the new revolution that would sweep across the globe, and a technological revolution that computers would bring, which would ultimately transform humanity with the new information age.
In conclusion Diggins' book, though written when very little of Reagan's presidential papers have been accessed by historians, has captured the essence of the ideas and life experiences that motivated Reagan to act the way he did. Since Diggins' book focused more on the psychological, religious, and philosophical makeup of Ronald Reagan and not on the details of his administration, it will be valuable for years to come by students studying Reagan and the Cold War era. It is doubtful that Diggins' book will need much revision as more presidential papers are released.
As a graduate student I recommend this book for anyone interested in Reagan, American History, Cold War History.
Like Reagan himself: gets some lesser things wrong, but the big, important things beautifully right.......2007-06-11
I never thought I'd give a five-star review to a book with which I had disagreed in so many places. But this is just a fantastic book; original, provocative, magnificently insightful, and oftentimes poetic. It should revolutionize understanding of Ronald Reagan, even if not every interpretation in the book holds up.
Diggins sets out to rescue Ronald Reagan from his acolytes on the right and his detractors on the left. He argues that both fundamentally misunderstand the nature and meaning of his greatness. For Diggins, Reagan is clearly among the greatest two or three Presidents after Lincoln. He credits Reagan with finding a peaceful way to end the Cold War, and for the Soviet Empire to dissolve without war or violent revolution. Diggins states that this is one of the great political surprises in all of history, and so it is.
Diggins rejects the conventional rightist explanation that the Soviet Union collapsed only after Reagan and his conservative Administration challenged the Soviets on every front: via a military buildup with which the Soviets couldn't contend; with counter pressure against communist aggression around the world; with the strategic defense initiative, etc. In fact, Diggins depicts many of Reagan's policies, both domestic and international, as misguided. Diggins contradicts the Reagan view that many of the world's communist insurgencies were facilitated by Moscow. Diggins further asserts that the Soviet Union imploded on its own, and would have done so with or without US economic and military pressure.
But Diggins credits Reagan for seeing beyond other US strategists, and for understanding the opportunity and necessity of negotiating communism's demise without war. Diggins depicts Reagan as seizing a unique historical moment, and understanding how to do business with Gorbachev. He portrays Reagan not as a warrior but as a great diplomat and educator of the international public. The final pages of the book are very moving, when Reagan goes to Moscow State University and addresses the Russian people. Taught that the pursuit of wealth led to despair and to self-estrangement, they instead heard from Reagan that free economies were the path to fulfillment and self-reliance, something that America's "academic-media complex" (a felicitous phrase) failed to understand, perhaps because their own well-being depended less than the Russians' on such understanding.
One needn't agree with Diggins's take on Reagan and his policies in all respects, and I certainly did not. But Diggins is absolutely right in showing the Reagan that was utterly misunderstood by the American left. Far from being a warmonger, Reagan maintained a horror of nuclear war, and he fully grasped the folly of the doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction that had held decades of American thinkers in its deluding sway. Reagan understood that an American President could not assure his people's, or the world's, security solely with the threat that he could destroy the Soviet Union while the USSR destroyed America. As Diggins noted, the survival of humanity depended utterly on innovative conceptual thinking, and this Reagan had, perhaps uniquely among American statesmen of the time. Many of Reagan's policies, from his attachment to SDI to his determination to negotiate disarmament, rightly or wrongly stemmed from the priority that he attached to avoiding a nuclear exchange, indeed a higher priority for him even than his lifelong objective of destroying communism.
Diggins also reveals a Reagan that was in many ways very distinct from the American religious right. Reagan rejected the traditional religious view that humankind was inherently sinful and needed to be restrained. Rather, Reagan saw human nature as fundamentally good (a view Diggins says he acquired from his Transcendentalist mother), and he tried to eliminate government restraints upon that noble nature. The support of the religious right for Reagan was in many respects a consequence of their common objection to American liberalism, and especially its coddling of communist strong-arm tactics. Reagan understood the tendency of the American left to look the other way from the worst habits of America's enemies (a tendency that persists today), and he felt an obligation to speak out against this. But Diggins argues that while Reagan and the religious right made common cause, Reagan's fundamental view of humanity was far different from theirs.
Reading this book was, for me, an unusual if not unique experience. At first I was surprised by several of Diggins's interpretations, which were counter to my own. As I read on, I found the book so provocative, so original, that I found myself reconsidering many of my own long-held views, and loving the book despite my occasional disagreements. Around page 200 or so, however, I reached a sort of critical mass in no longer tolerating what I believed to be interpretative errors by Diggins. He wrote one too many statements that I felt were inexcusably sloppy and ahistorical, shattering my faith in some of his other judgments. But then on the strength of the book's final chapters my reading experience recovered, and by the end I felt that Diggins had put his finger on something fundamentally great about Reagan, so important, and so right, that it outweighed the other factual beefs I had compiled along the way.
Among the many examples of the sloppy statements that Diggins makes en route: He says early on that the US government now faces its highest debt in history (in reality, debt has been declining, and is fairly typical of historic norms.) He writes that Carter easily beat Ford in the 1976 election (in reality, it was one of the closest elections of the era). At one point, Diggins mocks Reagan for reminding Gorbachev of the US/USSR common cause in WWII (Diggins parenthetically wonders what Gorbachev thought of this, given that America had looked the other way as Hitler prepared to attack Russia. This is an absurd aside from Diggins, given that Stalin himself was sending resources to Hitler on the eve of his attack on the USSR. Most assuredly, Gorbachev would have been well aware that Stalin's tunnel vision had been worse than FDR's.) He also asserts that no American statesman has ever offered a rationale for why the Vietnam war was fought, an absurd statement even for a strong opponent of that war.
There are many such slips in the book, and one is a bit surprised that an editor didn't catch and remove them. But in the end, they do not undo one of the most fascinating reinterpretations of a Presidency that I have ever read. In Diggins, Reagan finds his most important biographer to date. Diggins finds in Reagan the "greatness of soul" that saved the world at a truly critical time. Reagan's legacy deserves and needs this understanding, and Diggins's book is the finest available place to discover it.
Book Description
A rising star of the Democratic Party tells the fascinating story of the ways his multicultural heritage and political education have shaped his dreams for America and given him vital lessons in the art of successful negotiating.
Bill Richardson, the governor of New Mexico, may be the most charismatic figure in the Democratic Party today and one of its best natural politicians whose name isn't Bill Clinton. He is the man Colin Powell has called for advice, and the man George Stephanopoulos once called the Red Adair of diplomacy in homage to his ability to put out international fires. He has been nominated four times for the Nobel Peace Prize and is counted as one of our most knowledgeable politicians on Iraq and Saddam Hussein; on Afghanistan, the Taliban, and Al-Qaeda; on North Korea; on energy policy; on Latin American affairs; on domestic politics; and on Hispanic America.
Richardson's background as the son of an American businessman father and a Mexican mother has offered him an unusual starting point from which to seek a life in public service, but one of his most interesting roles has been that of global troubleshooter. What he has to say about how to negotiate to get what you want shows his true colors: He can be blunt, but charming; tough, but respectful; realistic, but hopeful. Through his work as a hostage negotiator sitting across the table from the likes of Saddam Hussein, Fidel Castro, and many others-as well as his toil on Capitol Hill, in the United Nations, and New Mexico's state government-he has learned the vital importance of preparation: know as much as possible about your adversary; test your partner's truthfulness; know how much you can concede; never lie and always be direct.
Between Worlds is the surprising story of one of our most seasoned and captivating national figures.
Customer Reviews:
Personalizing of History.......2007-09-08
The first part of this book was initially disappointing. The constant "I did this..." or I travelled to ..." sounded like so much puffery - what one might expect in a book by a Presidential candidate. The more I read, however, the more I realized that the "I" was essential to the entire focus of the book. The book brings history alive from the actual events and conversations in order to show that individuals can help make history or at least nudge it in a desirable direction. Historical events can not be viewed in a vaccum. They are most meaningfully understood in the context of the minor details of the events themselves. One that jumps out is Richardson's meeting with Saddam Hussein (regarding the release of two individuals who strayed into Iraq from Kuwait)when Richardson casually crossed his legs and inadvertently showed the soles of his shoes to Saddam. Saddam jumped up and left the room. It turns out that showing the soles of ones shoes to someone in that culture is a real sign of disrespect. The best part of the book is "Richardson's Rules" which he sets forth in anecdotal context throughout the book (with the list summarized at the end). The "Rules" are a great guide for dealing with not only high level political or diplomatic negotiations but also with everyday personal and business relationships. All in all a very enjoyable read for someone who overwhelmingly reads fiction - not non-fiction - and certainly not political books.
What a man! .......2007-09-03
How very fortunate this country is at this time in our history to have someone of this magnitude and calibur seeking the Presidency. His experience and different way of thinking allow hope for a better tomorrow for the US and the world. Good luck to you, Sir. Good luck to us all that you lead us all into a brighter and more peaceful tomorrow.
What Makes Bill Tick.......2007-08-12
Bill Richardson is a rather unimpressive candidate. However, candidates aren't elected - Presidents are. Having said that I can say that I believe Bill Richardson is ready for the Presidency. The question becomes is America ready for Bill Richardson?
The book is about as interesting as Bill Richardson's performances in debate. Clearly, this is a book about Bill's life, by Bill himself. Many of his positions are explained, but it is not comprehensive, and not meant to be. Reading this book will give the impression of what makes Bill tick, so I give credit for writing a successful book. There is no shorting the reader of 360 pages of substance. Personally, I too would like to see more from Richardson, and in fact, this is already happening.
Campaigns for officials that are based on results and performances while in office must have someone touting that record, and this is what Richardson does without much modesty. Between World's describes the position Richardson inherited from birth and the position Richardson has dealt with throughout life. The book moves from his childhood in Mexico to his life in school in New England. Richardson was the one in the middle that learned to relate to everyone. His entry into public service and political office was destiny. When you combine these with love for individuals and an unapologetic stance you have a man with superior credentials as a diplomat.
A portion of the book that could be developed further is "Richardson Rules". Richardson doesn't discuss development and application of his rule set, but presents these as simply his personal rules - I don't know whether as a human being, a public official, a diplomat, or other.
Richardson comes across as result-oriented, fun-loving, but serious. Inspiration here comes from hard work and having done a job well - unfortunately, not great oratories and smooth gestures. Richardson could partially compensate with combinations of brutal honesty and jest. He must continue to rouse voter curiosity with more manufactured "celebrity-in-jest" performances such as the one created for the New Mexico gubanatorial election. It wouldn't be a bad move if Richardson says in debate, frankly, I suck at this. I want to be telling you what I've already achieved as President - not what I would like to achieve.
A Career Politician: The Good & The Bad.......2007-07-11
I had been hearing good things about Democratic presidential candidate Bill Richardson, so I decided to pick up his autobiography. Honestly, I'm not a huge fan of autobiographies or biographies for that matter. Especially, not ones with the sole intent of extolling the author's virtues. So that's why it gets a B-. And I'm just not a huge fan of the writing style that biographies employ. It just gets a little boring and tedious at times. But to be fair, the book gave me a better picture of Bill Richardson than I had before. About half-way through the book, I was seriously thinking about giving him some consideration with my vote. Although I know he'll never get past the big 3 of Edwards, Obama, and Clinton. He grew up in Mexico (born in US) where his mom is Mexican and his father American. He was a senator for the state of New Mexico, the ambassador to the UN that followed Albright, Secretary of Energy for Clinton's second term, and current 2nd term governor for the state of New Mexico. Needless to say, that makes him extremely qualified. And hands down the most qualified of all current presidential candidates. To his credit, he tells it like it is. And for a politician, it doesn't feel like he is full of BS. He has a record for giving his opinion even when it's controversial. And has offended both parties at times, despite being a staunch Democrat. But he's honest. Over and over again he gives examples where he spoke his mind and how it either paid off or got him in trouble. So that I respect. But ultimately, I feel like he's a politician. And a bit of an opportunist. I do believe he has a vision for this country that centers around a better energy policy. Which I totally jive with. Ultimately though, I just feel like he's a politician at heart. And I don't really want a politician in power. I want someone who is not definded as a politician. And I'm well aware of the rarity of that.
What Jesus Meant
American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21stCentury
The Faiths of the Founding Fathers
Revolutionary Characters: What Made the Founders Different
Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why (Plus)
