Rating: 
Summary: Burned Once ....
Review: Perret's knowledge of the Civil War is woefully lacking, as anyone who has read his biography of Ulysses S. Grant knows. I expect scholars will pick this volume apart as well.
Rating:
Summary: Don't be fooled again ...
Review: Reading Geoffrey Perret is like going out with what you think is Jessica Simpson. At first, it all looks good, even immaculate: the snazzy dresser, bright teeth, urbane wit ... and then you begin to delve into what's there ... the empty head, the superficial smile, the sense that you are being conned by yet another effort to separate you from your hard-earned money for some more Civil War fluff. And in this case, you finally discover that it's not Jessica Simpson across the table after all, but some dyed blonde wannabe who's invested a lot of money with her surgeon, dentist, and makeup staff ... as you find out when the foundation peels off and the liposuction gives way. He's a combination of Michael Caine and Hugh Grant, minus any real sparkle, charisma, or brains, and not quite as visually appealing. But if you like that sort of thing, then Perret's the man for you.Perret's ignorance about Ulysses S. Grant is known to all who are familiar with his book, in which he becomes the author who couldn't write straight (there's a double meaning to this phrase, revealed in his musings about the homoerotic appeal of John Rawlins, whom he likens to James Dean and River Phoenix). Perret's an effete fop who has personal issues to work out (he once wrote about MacArthur's "member" as a little crooked thing). Now he returns to the scene of his previous crime, hopeful that his smooth prose and turn of phrase will entrap those who don't know any better (although his prose fails to sustain that promise). There's nothing, nothing new here, the reviews by non-experts for LJ and PW notwithstanding. My goodness, the poor chap even botched up his description of the Kennedy assassination, although at least it was corrected in the paperback (he had the Kennedys sitting FACING the Connallys -- hello, have we seen the Zapruder film?). There are better books on Lincoln, and even T. Harry Williams did a better job in the badly dated LINCOLN AND HIS GENERALS. People who are impressed by pseudo-urbane flash (usually those with self-esteem issues) may find Perret an intriguing character, but anyone who suffered through his C-SPAN Booknotes interview knows his work is plagued by some serious problems that can not be smiled away. I imagine he thinks he's Edmund Morris or a good-looking Henry Adams, except that he's already at work on his next fatuous opus. As for this book, you'll come away aware that you've read this all before--except, of course, where it's hilariously wrongheaded--and that you've been snookered. BUYER BEWARE!
Rating:
Summary: style good; facts awful
Review: The author's style is catchy; reminds me a bit of Fletcher Pratt. But there are errors of fact on almost every page! Save your money.
Rating:
Summary: style good; facts awful
Review: The author's style is catchy; reminds me a bit of Fletcher Pratt. But there are errors of fact on almost every page! Save your money.
Rating:
Summary: Good writing trumped by Inaccurate History
Review: This is one of those books I wanted to be good, and was sorely disappointed when I read it and found it wasn't anywhere near as good as I hoped it would be. While the writing's good, the history is hopelessly inaccurate. This is one of my rules: if you catch errors, significant ones, in a book of history, then you must wonder if any of the facts that you accept are correct. Some may be: my knowledge of Civil War history is pretty good. But in some instances, I am not familiar with the anecdote Perret recounts, and since his accuracy is in doubt, I can't take anything the author says seriously. This makes the book essentially worthless.
To recount just a few of the errors: (for those who doubt) the Prince de Salm-Salm is identified as an Austrian (how did he get killed in the Franco-*Prussian* War, then?); O.O.Howard commanded the XII Corps (in reality the XI); and John Bell Hood wins the Battle of Kennesaw Mountain, only to see his army annhilated at the Battle of Franklin by George Thomas. If you don't see the inaccuracy of the last assertion, get yourself a copy of Battle Cry of Freedom, or something (anything) else on the Civil War.
I wouldn't recommend this book to anyone, and I think Perret needs to look into a new editor.
Rating: 
Summary: Lincoln's War
Review: While I found the author's style a bit florid for a history and analysis book, I have enjoyed it nonetheless. His analysis of Lincoln's military genus has been describe in a more condensed way then Shelby Foote's "The Civil War", but in doing so brings it to the forefront of the readers attention. Great battles are reduced to a page or two, which may disappoint many readers who love the details of all the various military units and commanders. This book concentrates on how a lawyer from Illinois becomes, in the course of three years, one of the greatest military minds of the 19th century. One note that is bound to create controversy is the statement that U.S. Grant was the greatest general the United States ever produced. The R.E. Lee and T. Jackson fans are sure to be angry for that. I highly recommend buying this book and intend to purchase another as a gift for a dear friend.
|
