Rating: 
Summary: Well meant, not well written
Review: As a World War Two buff, I was looking forward to this book. A strong case can be made that the men and women who grew up during the Depression and fought or helped with the war effort during World War 11 are The Greatest Generation in American History. The same point could be made for the European, Russian and Asian young adults of that era who not only fought in the war, but had to suffer the unimaginable horrors of invasion and occupation. So, the premise of the book is a good idea and I have no doubt about Tom Brokaw's sincerity in writing it (with the help of a team of researchers.) Good intentions don't yield good research, good thinking and good writing, however. The book lacks substance, and depth. Be prepared to wade through chapter after chapter of Readers Digest-like writing that gushes with sappy salutes and honey-dipped hyperbole. This isn't meant to at all demean the courage or accomplishments of the men and women who are the subjects of "The Greatest Generation." It's just that the book would have been much better had more effort been put into the depth and detail of their stories, and less effort into Flag-waving rhetoric.
Rating: 
Summary: Thank You
Review: I was born in 1958, and have two uncles in "The Greatest Generation". They are both deceased now, but served in WWII, one in the Pacific, and one in Europe. I never talked to them about that time, but this book helped me to understand it much better. I have asked my mother to share with me what she remembers as a young teenager at that time. I listened to the book on tape, and was filled with emotion and pride for them, so much so that I stopped my car at the nearest pay phone to call my mother, long distance, and ask her about it. The most important point I think Tom Brokaw makes, is that these people thrived on responsibility, the more the better. This is what is missing in society today. Thank you Tom.
Rating:
Summary: self-congratulation ad nauseum
Review: This unimaginably hyperbolic sack of tripe has as its premise the single most asinine argument ever made by a network anchor, which is no small feat. It is sort of the literary equivalent of Leni Reifenstahl's Triumph of the Will. Let me make it clear that I yield to noone in my admiration for the men who fought in WWII. Anyone who fights honorably in his nation's service is deserving of our respect and our thanks. But here are a few of the questions that are necessarily raised by Mr. Brokaw's treacly hyperbole: *The first generation of Americans settled and subdued an unknown land. The Revolutionary generation created the nation and defeated the world's greatest empire. The Civil War generation saved the Union and freed the slaves. Brokaw's subjects won a war in Northern Africa, France, Italy and the South Pacific. By what stretch of the imagination was their battle vital to the nation's existence? *If there really was a horrible darkness falling on Europe and this generation fought it out of a sense of duty, why did they stay out of the fight for a full two years, until the Japanese attacked us? *Why did they declare war only on Japan at that point, waiting until Hitler declared war on us to return the favor? *Is there any reason to believe that there has ever been a generation of Americans who would have reacted differently to the bombing of Pearl Harbor? Wouldn't every generation of Americans have eagerly sallied forth to crush Nippon? Succeeding generations fought to free South Korea, South Vietnam and Kuwait; does Brokaw really wish to suggest that they would not have fought Tojo? *Is it appropriate to consider this generation the nation's greatest considering the fact that the Armed Forces were segregated and that we interred our own American Japanese population during the war? *How difficult a task was it to win WWII? With Japan failing miserably in its desperate gamble at Pearl Harbor and the German offensive grinding to a halt in Russia, was there any way that we could have failed to win the war or wasn't this merely a mopping up operation, however costly? *Having freed half of Europe, why did this generation abandon the Eastern half of the continent to the ministrations of Stalin and the USSR? Do the dead of the gulag really feel comforted by the fact that America allowed them to be murdered by Stalin and not Hitler? *Did this generation's responsibilities cease on V-J Day? Besides the question of the Soviet Union, where was this generation during the Cold War, Korea, Vietnam, etc? Were they responsible for these failures or merely unsupportive of our soldiers during them? *Do the difficulties of the Depression and service in WWII really justify the massive transfer of payments that this generation has secured to themselves from future generations? Social Security, Medicare, etc. are justly called entitlements; why is this generation the one in our history that felt entitled to so much in exchange for their service to the nation? *Do they bear no responsibility for the enormous deficits that were rung up throughout their lifetimes, in order to pay for the thorough Social Safety Net they demanded? Deficits, mind you, which our generation will be the one to pay off over the next twenty or thirty years. *Who is responsible for the tremendous cultural damage that their Baby Boom children have done and are doing to this country? Wasn't it this "Greatest Generation" that raised the most spoiled, selfish, over indulged crop of brats ever to walk the face of the Earth? Now Brokaw does treat many of these subjects--including interviews with Japanese Americans and blacks--but does not even consider others and its obviously impossible to answer or justify most of them. In the end, what we're left with are some interesting oral histories, like the reminiscences of George Bush and Julia Child, that add fairly little to the prior work of folks like Studs Terkel (The Good War : An Oral History of World War Two & Hard Times : An Oral History of the Great Depression), unified by a thesis that is completely risible. GRADE: D+
Rating: 
Summary: Stopped reading it
Review: Well, what can be said that hasn't been said in 327 other reviews. In short, I found this book to be too shallow and "bland." Just lost my interest. This is the first book I have ever given up on. I feel a great shame in not finishing but I just can't subject myself to it no longer! I thought it would be moving and inspiring, instead it was "blah." With regards, Max
Rating:
Summary: A Democratic Party book
Review: Unfortunately, I decided to start reading first the Famous People section and The Arena section. Mr. Brokaw can barely speak kindly of Republicans! George Bush is described as someone who is inarticulate about his war experiences. Much more was written about Chesterfield Smith who started the independent counsel to investigate Nixon. Of course now, the independent counsel "has created a incentive for zealortry." Mark Hatfield is spoken of glowingly, but it is clear at the end of his story it was because he is not part of the "newer Republican senators, with their strict conservative dogmas." Bob Dole is depicted as someone rather harsh, but since he is quoted with a joke against Nixon, he gets good coverage. Caspar Weinberger is linked with Iran-contra, but the country was "already anticpating the arrival of a new, young president, Bill Clinton." Liberals are intellectuals, and the segration and the hatred for African Americans in the South is depicted as a religious conservative way, not the entire South's way. He could only quote hatred from an Espicopalian minister's wife. Nothing bad about Kennedy or Johnson years, only Nixon, Reagan, and Bush years. This book should come with a warning label, that although the media is supposed to give us unbiased reporting, Mr. Brokaw's bias against anyone who thinks other than liberal Democrat is to be ridiculed or vilified. I'm very disappointed.
Rating:
Summary: Incomplete writing by committee
Review: Tom Brokaw had as much to do with the writing of this book as King James I had in the writing of the King James Bible. This book is a classic case of writing by committee. Though the positive achievements of the World War Two generation are undeniable, given that they had a major hand in the defeat of Italy, Germany and Japan, the less positive achievements of the "Greatest Generation" are not probed by Mr. Brokaw and company. The social welfare entitlements the "Greatest Generation" voted themselves have been a great burden to future generations as the current high tax burdens can attest. Any attempt to lessen the burden of entitlements is usually crushed by the unusually selfish "Greatest Generation". I can remember one of the "Greatest Generation", when informed by John Stoessel that he had put into Social Security three years worth of payments yet had received seventeen years worth of Social Security, ranting that he had earned it all and wouldn't put up with a reduction. This greedy, unfair little man is what the "Greatest Generation" is also about, too. The hubris of this devoutly government-oriented generation was best magnified by the travesty and tragedy of Vietnam. The thought at the time was that the US government could do anything and certainly could defeat a communist insurgency in a land almost no American had ever heard of. Fifty-eight thousand Americans and a million Vietnamese were sacrificed on this high altar of "Greatest Generation" hubris. And don't forget that LBJ's Great Society was part of the "Greatest Generation"'s hubris. It crashed much like the flaming Hindenberg and it's dire results remain with us still. This is a very flawed book that is certain to make millions for Mr. Brokaw and sooth the feelings of America's most overrated generation.
Rating: 
Summary: Falls short of its promise
Review: I think the premise of this book is great. The generation that survived the depression and fought in WWII was the pivotal generation in American history. They saved the world from tyranny, helped bring about the civil rights movement, built the interstate highway system, built a modern education system, and did it with quiet dignity and grace. They did bring us their whiny offspring the baby boomers (who think they are the greatest generation for introducing drugs and free love) but no one is perfect. While the stories and vignettes were interesting, I wanted more. Brokaw never goes in depth to explore the true magnitude of what these people accomplished. This is a good starter book, or appetizer. For the main course, I would recommend one of Stephen Ambrose' excellent works on WWII.
Rating: 
Summary: The Greatest Generation
Review: On the chapter about Lloyd Kilmer, there is a picture titled "Liberation Day". The photo was dated April 29, 1945. I help a gentleman by the name of Roy Sage. He is in this photo. Is there a way to make contact with any of the other soldiers? I believe this would make Mr. Sage very happy. Thanks for a great book, it brings joy to many. Marlese
Rating:
Summary: The Next Great Generation
Review: Brokaw does a commendable job of describing how the "Greatest Generation" earned its name. For those who are interested in which generation is likely to be the next great one, I highly recommend a new book titled "Millennials Rising" by generational authors Neil Howe and Bill Strauss. They believe that in the cycle of generations, today's youngsters--the Millennials (born 1982 to the present)--will replace the G.I. generation as the next great generation. The Millennials are already reversing many of the negative social trends associated with the last generation of young adults, i.e. the Generation Xers.
Rating:
Summary: Shut up, Brokaw.
Review: Evidently, the good news anchorman has been watching a little too much Saving Private Ryan lately. Naturally, the book gloats with little restraint over this generation's stance against fascism, neglecting its evident shortcomings as a nation half-governed by Jim Crow laws, or the social preception of the proper role of women as being confined to the household. Simply utilizing the fact that this generation took such actions that would easily have been undertaken by any sane people under these circumstances as an excuse to decry other generations as less worthy is grossly unfair. Yet, given Tom's journalistic background, his embellishments is hardly surprising. If anything, this book is testimony that history can only be properly evaluated by historians, not the news media.
| 
