1968

Rating:
Summary: GREAT. a year to remember
Review: a must read for any student of history. brings back memories of that amazing year that changed the world a chance to revisit the events that shape our world.

Rating:
Summary: an outright toure de force
Review: As complex as any year in our history, Mark Kurlansky makes 1968 understandable (though not comprehensible in the strict sense) with a credible honesty about the time without the usual 'oh wow man, it was cool' histrionics. As you read 1968, you can tell that the author wanted to write it so many years earlier, but most likely felt that he could not be objective enough because of his direct involvement in the rebellious protests of the time. At some point he decided that this particular view of his was irrelevant, that it was high time he wrote something that was so meaningful to him and to an entire generation and beyond.

The great thing about this book is the world-wide scope that he addresses: There were serious student-generated uprisings happening in Paris, Warsaw, Mexico City, and of course, Prague. 1968 wasn't just about the campus protests of Berkeley and Columbia University and the assassinations of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King, which is usually most of us think about as being the essense of that year.

As a matter of fact, it's concerning Prague that the author makes the most surprising statement of all (in my opinion, of course): That the Soviet Invasion of that spring marked the true 'beginning of the end" of the Soviet Empire. Because up until that point, except for the invasion of Hungary in the previous decade, the Soviet Empire had always tried to be a beneficient empire that freed people, not an oppressor of revolution. So much for that image. Regardless, this view is in sharp contrast to the usual credit given to the policies of the hard line Reagan Administration's "Evil Empire". Nothing as ever as simple as it's first told to you.

What the author has produced here is a truly important book that will hopefully give us a better understanding of what we have become as a society since 1968, and perhaps garner him some justly earned recognition as a great nonfiction writer.

Rating:
Summary: Walking the tightrope of history...
Review: Every college professor will tell you that history is more than a study of dates and events. Only by looking at the long term and greater societal trends can true understanding be gained. Mark Kurlansky proves this belief dramatically wrong in his newest, and best work to date, 1968. The research alone must have taken years, to say nothing of the narrative flow and care in crafting the book. What happened to make this one year so important? How about Vietnam in full swing complete with the Tet Offensive, the Nigerian oil war, Czechoslovakia moving toward democracy only to be invaded by the Soviets, Muhammad Ali being convicted of draft evasion, student demonstrations of every kind from Mexico to France, Martin Luther King being assassinated, Cuba perceived as the most exciting nation in the world, Robert Kennedy looking like the next president only to be killed, the cartoon-like atmosphere of the Democratic Party Convention in Chicago including seventeen minutes of televised police brutality, the Black Power salutes of Olympic medal winners, and the orbiting of the moon by Apollo 8? And most amazingly, Kurlansky ties it all together; interconnecting the many separate and diverse movements and moments and showing how they affected one another. He also retains the human touch with numerous quotations and interviews with the people who were there. This is history, pure and untainted, as close as you are likely to get without experiencing it. It is often said that those who lived through historical events are unaware of their importance until afterward, but 1968 shows how so many participants were very aware that "the whole world is watching" and they acted accordingly. This book is a must read for those who were there, and even more so for those who weren't. One more good book, and you can shelve Kurlansky right next to Bradley or Ambrose.

Rating:
Summary: If you were there you understand, if not, .....!
Review: For those of us who were there to witness these great shifts in the world and America, who saw the tragedy of murdered heroes, a war no one understood and the divisive political atmosphere that permeated almost every day, 1968 serves as a reminder that everything old is new again. As a college student at the time the world seemed like it was exploding every evening on the news, and the future looked grim. We were the children of "The greatest generation" and the world our parents helped save for us didn't seem to be living up to its promise, Camelot was a pipedream.

Reflecting on many of those events it is easy to see how they compare with today, especially the similarities of the Vietnam War and the war in Iraq. Both were politically motivated by corporate power mongers, and seem to serve no purpose other than to enrich a few. The gross inequities of the draft - the day after I graduated from a state university my draft notice was delivered, and dozens of my friends suffered the same fate, yet not a single graduate of Harvard, Yale or Princeton was ever drafted into the Vietnam war - unlike John Kerry who enlisted, they used money, political favors and connections only open to the "favorite sons" - like Bush, Cheney and Rove - were unjust, unfair and discriminatory to the extreme. The hard lessons of that time are lost on those very same "favorite sons" who still extoll the extremism of a right wing sense of entitlement.

Kurlansky admits he is subjective, but it was difficult to live through those horrific events and not become jaded, and subjective. Du Pont in 1968 and Hilliburton in 2004 is the biggest example of the failure of our leader to understand the lessons of history, and Kurlansky is right to put it out there for others, too young to have witnessesed it to gain at least some understanding of their parents' experiences and current world views.

This is not great writing or even great history, it is best viewed as a window into a year when almost everything changed, and not always for the better. This should be required reading for every member of the Bush administration and anyone who thinks that history does not repeat itself - but of course we know Dubya doesn't read, so maybe Laura can read it to him - and soon.

Rating:
Summary: 1968
Review: I didn't go beyond page 18 of Mark Kurlansky's 1968 because I wonder about the veracity of the content. Pages 16 through 18 deal with Palestinians (a subject I know) and contain much misinformation due to his not consulting Arab sources in English.

Rating:
Summary: The Bias Weakens It
Review: I found this book really interesting but, as Kurlansky admits right up front, weakened by the very evident personal bias he writes with. Too bad because it was a great idea. Still worth the read for the view of a very different world pre-1968.

Rating:
Summary: Informative!
Review: I saw only one reference to the Peace Corps in the index. 1968 was a year in which the number of American Peace Corps Volunteers were at their zenith. Peace Corps Volunteers were serving in large numbers in Iran and Afghanistan in 1968. Both of these countries were displaying civility in this crucial year. There was little civil unrest in either nation at that time. This is juxtaposed to the riots in much of Western Europe and the USA. Such is this dichotomy.

Rating:
Summary: Waiting for my review to appear
Review: I sent my rewiev of Kurlansky's book last night and I wonder where it will be posted. I pointed to a number of shortcomings that makes this book that is "about history", historically incorrect.

Rating:
Summary: This is a pop-history book
Review: Kurlansky's commendable attempt to analyze turmoils of 1968 fails because of his unobjective leftist bias, and lack of deep background historical knowledge about the countries where the events took place. His claim that after World War II, communists in Poland built "from the rubble of society that became a nightmare" a society "of greater social justice" is simply historically incorrect. His obvious anti-Polish sentiments allow him to say, without pointing to any sources, things that are manipulation of history.

A writer who picks a historical topic that in itself may guarantee a bestseller book, has a basic obligation to follow truth.

Rating:
Summary: Good summary of 1968 -- bad edit
Review: Kurlansky's writing is easy-going as always. However, there are way too many errors in the book. Willy Brandt was not Mayor of Berlin when the Schah came for a visit; the following demonstration was Benno Ohnesorg's first ever etc. A bit more care could be expected, I think. Unfortunately, there are also errors when Kurlansky attempts to translate newspaper headlines and the like into English. Its pop-history, I guess.