|
I looked at other reviews and found that if I needed further documentation I could get it, BUT that didn't detract me from getting it. I found a copy of this book at work. It is a wonderful resource for a history class. I loved the book and received it. It belonged to a co-worker that had left it in the lounge. As I browsed through this book, I decided I had to have it.
For these reasons you should read this book with a critical eye. Additionally, the book is of almost equal use to history buffs and those with only a modest (or miniscule) knowledge of the subject. But the author is a little too eager to attack the nation's faults, he misstates a couple facts, and he offers some debatable opinions - at times from the left, other times from the right, other times from neither. This book is similar to those PEOPLE's ALMANACS (by Wallace and Wallechinsky) that appeared in the 1970-1980's; crisp, readable, and informative. Still, this very informtaive popular history is worth a look. history. Author Kenneth Davis provides an attractive question-and-answer format to over 100 major events in U.S. He starts with Christopher Columbus and the Native Americans, and keeps going thru George Washington, the Civil War, Great Depression, all the way to the disputed 2000 Election and terrorist attacks.
At My Lai, hundreds were killed but at Hue it was thousands. Inferring that the Navy at Guadacanal was pretty much victorious means the author skipped his research on Savo Island. There is one item I must compliment the author on and that was his courage mentioning the slaughter of civilians at Hue, Vietnam during the Tet Offensive. The section on FDR was, again, right out of a high school text with virtually all positive messages.
As mentioned in the previous review, the book shows the author's liberal intent. The press and historians choose to celebrate My Lai and ignore Hue. For a liberal to include this piece of history must have been difficult. In addition, there are sufficient inaccuracies to make the book somewhat suspect.
The author had the right idea with this book about filling in gaps in our history, but using it as a platform for his bias detracts from the work. The book is a good read as long as you understand the agenda being presented and know something about history. Describing the Battle of the Coral Sea as a Naval victory is right out of a high school text book when, in fact, the Navy's definition of victory then was we got out with most of our ships. He even included the old wive's tale about the USS Arizona taking a bomb down the stack at Pearl Harbor.
For example, he tells us the first world war was about "Empire Building," which was not the original cause of the war. This book is very informative but the author is almost un-American in the way he skims over America's great accomplishments while concentrating mainly on it's moral shortcomings. I am sure some people stood to profit but I highly doubt that was the main reason.This information in this book is worth reading but combine it with other research if you want the whole picture. He also indicates that the United States entered the war for profit. He is very liberal in his thinking and it shows in his book. He is also very cynical about human intentions, always pointing out negative reasons for an action.
For example, according to Davis the fall of Constantinople ended European trade with the East; however, this is not the case, as it was really that the Portuguese fleet claimed control of the route. This book is simply not in the same class as James Loewen's "Lies My Teacher Told Me," whose scholarship is much better and facts straight.
Historical facts than "Don't know much." If you want to learn history right the first time, don't bother with this book or author, there are simply too many errors in the text itself. Loewen's book is a much more worthwhile read on the topics of American myths vs.
Only a few pages of reading demonstrate the author's lack of expertise in History. He muddles facts he believe are not important, which misleads the reader into the same historical "myths" that the author claims to want to dispel.
I'm frankly surprised that anyone would publish it without correcting the mistakes, especially for a book intended to "one-up" traditional history readers. Too many errors exist in the text to really make this book worth reading; in fact, it can be construed as misleading in many areas of history.
Part of the trouble is that Davis attempts to treat many complex subjects with impossible brevity.
|
