![]() ![]() But overall, the biography is captivating, a bit provocative and capable of holding my attention to the very end. And in contrast to McFeely, who was reluctant to praise Grant, Perret is liberal with applause. Although the errors I spotted (or read about) are generally minor and of relatively little consequence to most readers, they would be acutely annoying to a professional historian.īut my issue with Perret’s book is that it seems too casual at times – and filled with excessive hyperbole. Grant: Soldier & President.” Often described as fatally riddled with factual errors, I found Perret’s survey of Grant’s life much more interesting than McFeely’s. * Next was Geoffrey Perret’s 1997 “ Ulysses S. Important messages, except those key to his take-down of Grant, have to be teased from the text and when something could be said clearly, McFeely often seems to choose a more abstruse path. But McFeely’s writing style is anything but smooth and fluid. After all, I’m seeking the best and most enjoyable presidential biographies thoughtful and transparent bias can be tolerated. Possibly more important to me than objectivity is writing style. I can’t recall a single mention of praise or adoration toward Grant…but surely there must have been one somewhere. Although I could not detect it at the time without broader exposure to Grant, McFeely’s perspective of the general now seems flawed and unreasonably jaundiced. In addition, McFeely is well-known for his negative opinion of Grant. ![]() McFeely focuses too tightly on Grant and provides little historical context – background which could have explained Grant’s actions in connection to his surroundings rather than leaving them in isolation as if somehow random or detached. * My first biography of Grant was William McFeely’s 1981 “ Grant: A Biography.” Knowing little of Grant’s story when I began this Pulitzer Prize winning biography, I found it educational and thought-provoking. Each of the Grant biographies I read was published during this recent period of re-evaluation and each, save the first, judged his reputation unfairly tarnished. He was that kid we all knew who sat in the back of class, paid little attention to the day’s lesson, never had much to say and would befriend almost anyone who would make even a modest effort to get to know him. Incredibly unpretentious and modest, no one could have foreseen that Grant was destined to become a spectacularly successful military leader…and president of the United States.Ī cursory review of the ebb and flow of Grant’s presidential legacy over time reveals a remarkable evolution in opinion. After a enjoying an early period of spirited acclaim, Grant’s reputation suffered within a few decades of leaving office and did not recover until the last two decades of the twentieth century. Grant certainly seems to prove the adage that you can’t judge a book by its cover. But biographers tended not to linger on those moments and taken as a whole, Grant’s sixty-three years are almost inspirational. There are certainly stretches of his life which proved dull and uneventful – and sometimes spectacularly unsuccessful. Ulysses Grant’s life story is astonishingly fascinating. Fortunately, Grant and his biographers proved me very wrong! When I finished reading a dozen biographies of Lincoln a couple months ago I assumed I would be in for a slow spell until my encounter with Teddy Roosevelt sometime early in 2015. During that drive to Austin we had to do something.…so those of us on the trip decided to learn the presidents’ names in order. Sad, really. My only brush with his presidency involved memorizing his name as one of the then-forty presidents during a high school trip to the Texas State History Fair. Despite the pivotal role he played in the Civil War and the importance of his administration to Reconstruction, I don’t recall spending any meaningful time studying Ulysses S.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |