Rating: 
Summary: A terrific survey of the REAL American History
Review: I read this book first in high school several years ago as part of an advanced placement U.S. History course. I hated it then - but love it now. Bailey captures the depth of the issues the nation faced in each step of its development. His accuracy and profound insight keep the subject matter from becoming too dry. What I loved most about the text is that it never over-simplifies the significant historical events such as the political struggles of the 1st and 2nd continental congresses, secession issues and America's position in both World Wars. He digs deep beneath the surface to paint a thorough understanding of what the root causes were of historic events. The 10th addition adds interesting subsections that profile the various immigrant cultures that influenced American history. I recommend this book to anyone who wants to understand the nation's history and the people who made it.
Rating: 
Summary: Beats the heck out of Howard Zinn
Review: This book handles its subject very well. It was the basic text for my 11th Grade history course, where it provided a good balance of mildly amusing wit and genuinely useful information.The main advantage of "The American Pageant" is that the author is not trying to push a major political agenda. It lacks the patriotic drivel for which "traditional" history texts are often denounced. However, it also lacks the negative, depressing Socialist philosophy which makes Zinn's "People's History of the United States" so difficult to read. The end result is a history text which does a history text's job: telling what happened. The book covers politics, economics, and major events in a style which is sometimes amusing and usually informative. Although not overly political, it also pays due attention to such important issues as race and gender. Not a particularly "specialized" book, but an excellent survey text.
Rating: 
Summary: Worst. Book. Ever.
Review: I may not be able to write all I can about how this book is really bad but the book, Lies My Teacher Told Me : Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong -- by James W. Loewen does a really good job with it. I just can't believe some people found this book ok to read. I had this book in school and I absolutely hated it. This book personifies America A LOT for example on page 4 "The American continents were slow to yield their virginity." They uses a lot of metphors and flowery language. Everything is very biased. He refered to the English as Anglo-Saxans. Just like Americans are Christian. (note the sarcasm) The author likes to ignore some facts about history, like the existance of the Native Americans and believe me there was a LOT and their massacre is comparable to what happen to the Jews--- but more brutal. Of course I didn't learn that from this book. This book takes the existance of the Native Americans very lightly and passively.
-Page 4 "The American republic, which is still relatively young, was from the outset singularly favored. It started from scratch on a vast and virgin continent, which was so sparsely peopled by Indians that they could be eliminated or pushed aside."
-Page 10 "The English settlers, disagreeable though the thought may be, were more successful than the Spaniards in kiling off the Indians."
-Page 13 "The main attraction was hoped-for gold, although there was some desire to convert the heathen Indians to Christianity and to find a passage through America to the Indies." Once again there's more that is wrong with this book. Just that I have to go to sleep now. But if you like flowerly language, a biased opinion on history, and the glorification of America then go ahead. I don't know about you but I just can't learn history like that, its a terrible way to try to improve our country if we don't learn the flaws or the wrong things that our country does.
Rating: 
Summary: Not Useful to the Student
Review: This book has good points and bad points. On the good side, it is very tongue in cheek and humorous, if one likes that sort of thing, though some puns were used over and over. I can't count how many times the alliance of countries was likened to a marriage. On the downside, it was not an ideal textbook. My class is using it for our AP US History class, and it really does not suit the purposes of a high school course. The authors obviously spent so much time attempting to be humorous that they forgot to put facts into the book. The section on the Webster-Hayne debate said absolutely nothing about what the actual subject matter of the debate, only described the orators themselves in great detail and made jokes. It also contains a lot of useless information a high school student would never need to know, such as a physical description of each president and the exact parallel of every territory's boundary. It probably suits the purposes of someone trying to learn and study American history on their own because it is amusing enough to keep the reader interested. It is not suited to a high school class trying to learn and memorize straight facts.
Rating: 
Summary: Kinda sucks
Review: No, I'm not some ultraconservative saying that this book has a huge leftist bent, because it doesn't. For example, while in the final chapters it focuses more on the negative impacts of Reagan's economic program than the positive ones, it also talks about how the idea of New World discoverers simply being savage murderers of perfectly innocent, starry-eyed Indians is an exaggeration - so, while the former could be described as a leftist bent, the latter could be described as a rightist bent. But anyway, the true reason this book is obnoxious is because...well...it's obnoxious! Cheesy phrases like "oil, the black milk of the world's economy" abound, and the book seems to obsessively focus on issues such as women's rights, almost like they're required by law to include information about minorities and women every X pages. I'm not saying that white men own the history of America, but it could've flowed better. This book is also anything but objective, but the biases seem to go both ways at times.
Rating:
Summary: The best textbook I ever read
Review: I'm 32 now and this was my AP US History book in high school. I'm thinking about buying it and reading it again, as a refresher and a pleasure. The satirical quips made it a joy the first time around, and I still remember charming phrases like "Nebrascals" and Martin van Buren being a "veritable steam engine in breeches." I remember about nothing from the rest of my high school and college textbooks. The authors find their subject grand, tragic and humorous, and that's the way they present it. Even if you think the style is inappropriate, you remember what is said. Perhaps it's even gotten under your skin enough for you to spout about it online for fifteen minutes instead of cracking open a bag of Doritos and firing up the Playstation. I'd say that's a colossal achievement when it comes to high school textbooks. And in case you're concerned that the relevent facts are missing, I got a 5 on my AP test.
Rating:
Summary: Not as bad as they say it is...
Review: I'm using this book for my A.P. US History class. Some may complain about the flowery prose, but I absolutely love it. The authors' use of metaphors and other forms of figurative language makes it a joy to read. Is it leftist? I don't think so; for the most part, the authors present facts quite objectively. However, I think the authors are just a bit too obsessed with "women's issues." (It's no surprise: one of the authors teaches "gender and working class issues" at Harvard.) Don't get me wrong, I am a woman myself (though not a feminist), and I appreciate the fact that women are now integrated into public life, but it begins to get annoying when I am constantly reminded that women were perpetually chained to the kitchen but were just on the fringe of tasting the sweet fruits of "liberation." Excuse me, but I personally don't think that a woman needs a paycheck to improve her sense of self. I certainly don't. And the authors seem to be annoyed that women went right back into the home after both world wars. Nonetheless, the first few chapters, in which the authors chronicle America's gradual drift towards revolution, is just exciting, full of almost patriotic fervor. They clearly love the subject, and their enthusiasm shows. And besides, there is a fascinating discussion about the roots of modern conservatism near the end of the book. Overall, a fine textbook.
Rating:
Summary: This is a history of crap.
Review: Did somebody in my 11th Creative Writing class secretly publish this book? Because this is without a doubt the most prosey, flowery, melodramatic writing I have ever encountered. It doesn't so much "explain history" as much as it "wishes it were fiction." Are the authors still bitter that those romance novel publishers rejected their drafts? One of my favorite gems in this book is the sentence: "America stumbled through the cellar door in a drunken fit of idealism." I mean, at what point is it okay for that to be used in a textbook? I could write a more factual sentence IN A FREAKING COMA. And what's sad is that the book is filled with this kind of flowery prose on every page. (It seems to be a particular fan of personification -- "America was a big hulking monster of war that sank its claws into the bloody corpse of Europe." That isn't in the book, but it could be. You think I'm kidding, but I'm not.) I'm a student and even I think that this textbook has no business teaching me anything when it can't get its act together. Here's a tip for the authors: when the students are laughing out loud at some of your ridiculous language, it's a good sign that you probably aren't doing your job to the best of your ability.
Rating:
Summary: A History Textbook
Review: The field of history has the dubious distinction of being interesting yet oppressively dull. A teacher not worth his salt can turn an American history class into nap time. Conversely, an engaging teacher can make students interested but part of accomplaishing this objective is complementing the classroom with an equally engaging textbook. The American Pageant is that book. The aesthetic qualities make it appropriate for high school or introductory university level American history courses. The content equally qualifies. There is no doubt that it took 12 editions to make this book even better than it was; progress simply has that deliberate quality. There are aesthetic considerations that can engage those with short attention spans, such as vibrant pictures, humorous cartoons, two column page setting, and explanatory chronologies among others. However, the crowning achievement is that the average reader cannot distinguish where one author stopped writing and another picked up. David Kennedy and Lizabeth Cohen both have their oen distinctive writing styles but they blend magnificently with Bailey's writing in this work. This work is a testament to the love of teaching felt by all three authors.
Rating:
Summary: unbiased? i think not...
Review: i had this book for my 11 grade ap us history class and i didn't start learning us history until i stoped reading this book and picked up another one. while it does have "wit" and metaphors up to here (*motions to the forehead*), it lacks key words in bold or a glossary. granted, i used an older edition and maybe this one has updated its ways, and maybe some scholars hate key words in bold, but it was essential. when scanning the text for important information that you KNOW you read somewhere in the text, you cannot find it. that is infuriating and frustrating beyond compare. you might be trying to prove something and you don't have any bold words as guides. you can't find it and your argument is left unsupported. it has wit (and contrived, forced wit at that). and it has endless metaphors that bog down the reading of history. and it has not much else.
| 
