Truman Books

I read a lot of autobiographies and biographies and they are often praised extensively and turn out to be very, very boring. This autobiography is great. Mark Twain writes it from the point of view that he is already dead and therefore can say whatever he likes. Of course it is funny but it is also very sensitive. His explanation of his feelings after the death of his daughter is gut wrenching.
I am not being negitive here but I was delighted to find in this book that even the great Mark Twain can be boring at times. This fact truly impressed me and brought me to realize that even old Mark Twain was human. This was a wonderderful book and just the other day I took it out of mothballs to read for a second time. It is really too good for just a once over. It is too good man! Too too good!

It is one of the more interesting autobiographys that I have read. The author Charles Neider has taken a confusing pile of writings and has assembled them into a more streamline reading and a timeline of Samuel Clemen's (Mark Twain's) life.

This book has given me a yearning to read more books by Neider on Mark Twain and reread some of Twain's classic's like Huckberry Finn.

Buy this book, kick back in your easy chair and be prepared to take a journey with the Master of American Literature himself as he lies near death. From the Mighty Mississippi to the latter days of the Gold Rush; to the lecture (lyceum) circuit of his thirties-forties; and on to a family life of tragedy after tragedy and finally triumph, Mr. Twain will take you, the reader, into his mind where you'll share his wit, wisdom, and secrets. A must buy for any Twain lover or anyone interested in the 19th Century from a man who lived it. Lived it indeed!

One of my favorite five books in the last five years, and I read a lot of books! I'm going to try to be brief, which will be a challenge, because I loved it.

First, the concept behind this book is pure genius, especially for an autobiography. Because he didn't release his life story until he died, Twain was able to be completely honest. It's true- everyone on earth must restrain their tongue somewhat. But when we read about a great person from the past, we want to know the real deal.

I won't go too much into how great Mark Twain was. I'm sure that subject has been covered quite well. But as a public speaker, writer, and fledgling humorist myself, I found many of the vignettes priceless. He tells us what the 'Lycium',the 19th American speaking circuit, was like, how one good writer failed miserably in front of an audience, how he (Twain) turned an old tired joke into a new exciting one... and on the subject of fame, he talks about how inconsequential was a particular woman who had become famous simply for having opinions (and because she happened to be the wife of a newspaper man). Indeed, except for Twain's ridicule, this woman has been utterly and appropriately neglected by history. We are thereby warned of the worthlessness of fame without substance or purpose.

At times Twain sounds pompuous or narcissistic, but it fits his humorous style. We forgive him because we know he was great and because condescension is a great position from which to heap ridicule and satire. And you have to wonder- don't some great men know they're great even while they live?

Twain had the fortune to be celebrated within his lifetime, and remains one of the most important Americans. He is the deep root from which modern humorists such as Garrison Keillor and Dave Barry spring forth. He is an example of the gruff and almost crotchety American intellect.

His story also demonstrates how not to run your writing business (by letting suspicious character run it for you and steal your money).

And he provides touching accounts of both his awkward courtship, and the exceptional character and intelligence of one of his daughters.

What else? They say in public speaking: Begin with a laugh, end with a tear. Twain's autobiography does the latter - it's sad to see how quickly he went from the apex of life to lonely grief as most of his family died within little more than a year.

Before we know it, before we want it, the book is over, and the great life is done. We are reminded of the temporary nature of life, and as this famous and delightful personality recedes again from our consciousness, perhaos at least for a little while, because of his example, we seize life with more vigor.

American.
Coinsidentially I finished the audio version of this autobiography the day he stopped writing: Christmas day. His daughter died Christmas Eve 1909. His wife had died a few years earlier. Another daughter died several years before that in chilhood. He had never recovered from those tragedies. His surviving daughter lived in Europe. He wrote of this in his diary & wrote no more. He was alone in a big house & died shorty after that. He knew that his autobiography would not be published until he died, long dead he hoped, so he didn't pull any punches. This editor Charles Neider was not as brave. He missed much of the insouciance that was Twain. He came out with a long linear, biography. Twain dictated a lot of it in his later years but just talked about whatever came into his head. Editing this disorganization admittedly was no mean feat. Mark Twain was not a disiplined writer. He could set down a novel he was writing & not return to it for several years. So it was with Tom Sawyer & Huckleberry Finn. They were, by the way, populated with real people he knew in his youth. A gonzo writer of sorts, he wrote what he knew & had lived. He was one of the most travelled Americans of his time, spending long periods in Europe. He was a printer, a journalist, a riverboat pilot, lecturer & of course, novelist. He was a celebrity in his own time but a very poor investor & money manager. He had to go back to lecturing to recoup his loses. He hated that. It was too much like work & he admitted to being very lazy. He was very quotable & whole books have been devoted to his musings. Many of these concerned his atheism, his distaste for organized religion & he ridiculed the bibical god. These particular items were not to be seen in Neider's version which was the biggest disappointment.

I very much enjoy profiles of interesting people and had high hopes for this book, but it's awful. In fact, I gave up on about the fourth tape.

I managed (with great difficulty) to get through part of the article on Richard Pryor but the vulgar language made me stop. Granted, that might be appropriate for a piece about Pryor, but I think it would be possible to write an interesting biographical sketch without it.

The article on Ernest Hemingway was the most boring and meaningless piece of tripe I've ever read. How could ANYONE make Hemingway seem deadly dull? By recounting an almost minute by minute, blow by blow, excursion in New York to buy a coat. What was the author thinking????

The short article on Katharine White was okay, but nothing special and actually more about the writer than her subject.

The article on Mr. Hunter's Grave, which was a 'non celebrity' piece, was overly long and exceedingly dull, with very poor narration.

That's when I decided life is too short to spend listening to books like this. If this is the best The New Yorker can do, it's no wonder I don't subscribe!

If you are a fan of biographies but are intimidated by 1,000-page tomes, Life Stories is a great choice. Some say the New Yorker invented the "profile," and though it does seem the magazine was the first to call its biographical pieces by that name (amazing, considering how ubiquitous the term is today), editor David Remnick is quick to assert that they hardly invented the style. What they have done for decades is find the most interesting people and have the best writers provide illumination. Nearly every profile here is profound and nearly every one of them is short enough to read in a single (long) sitting. And while it's a treat to learn intimate details of some of the most famous people of the 20th century, it's the profiles of the lesser-known people that shine: from Joseph Mitchell's encounter with an aging churchman with a penchant for baking to the story of the Chudnovsky brothers, Russian emigres who built a supercomputer in their apartment from salvaged parts. Fantastic reading from start to finish.

The writing is beautiful. The story telling is beautiful. The stories are amazing. Five Stars.

This is a collection of prime examples of the long gone "profile" piece in The New Yorker magazine. They just don't write 'em like this anymore!

Choose Truman Capote's profile of Marlon Brando, or Lillian Ross' profile of Ernest Hemingway, or any of the 20-some other profiles in this book. You will read some of the best writing about some of the most exciting people in 20th Century history.

Is there a second volume in the works? I hope so!

Hemingway, Baryishnikov, and Henry Luce are the subjects of some of my favorite celebrity profiles in this wonderful book. But topping my list is "Man Goes to See a Doctor", the awesome Adam Gopnik's sweet and funny rendering of his shrink. Here's a snippet: "Your problems remind me of" - and here he named one of the heroes of the New York School. "Fortunately, you suffer from neither impotence nor alcoholism. This is in your favor." Highly recommended!

how can one say victory after a few million people lost their lives in all the proxy wars, I couldn't understand why this author "praises" these people, communism fell under it's own faulty economic structure. I thought when I first picked up this book, lets see what he has to say, by the time I finished the book I was disgusted! How can ANY side claim victory in a war, everybody loses in a war, everybody.

Joseph Shattan has assembled a series of short, but informative profiles of six leaders who played central roles in the Cold War. His roster of heroes includes:

-- President Truman. After initially toeing the accommodationist line of FDR, Truman soon recognized the expansionist ambitions of the Soviet Union and reacted accordingly. His Truman Doctrine, Marshall Plan, Greece and Turkey aid package stopped the spread of Marxist hegemony in its tracks and set the contours for the four-decade struggle that was to come.

-- Winston Churchill. In and out of office, he warned early and often of the rising Bolshevik threat. But like his earlier forebodings about Hitler, his alarms fell largely on deaf ears. It was not until the 1980s that the West pursued Cold War strategies that can truly be called Churchillian -- with predictable results.

-- Konrad Adenauer. As the first Chancellor of the Republic of Germany, he planted the vital country squarely in the Western camp. West Germany was the crucible of the Cold War. Lacking a leader of Adenauer's resolve and conviction, that country could have easily fallen under the Soviet orbit, or, as Stalin designed, opted for a feckless, hollow "neutrality."

-- Solzhenitsyn. In Shattan's words, he "re-moralized the struggle" after Viet Nam and other setbacks cast doubt on the West's Containment policies. His seminal writings, especially "The Gulag Archipealgo," laid bare the repressive underpinnings of the Soviet system, while his public outrage at detente opened many eyes in the West.

-- Pope John Paul II -- The first non-Italian Pontiff in some 400 years came around at a most propitious moment. (Andropov and other Soviet paranoids contended that the Pope's selection was engineered by the U.S.) Lech Walesa credits Pope John Paul II with "saving Solidarity" -- the counter-revolutionary movement that administered the first schisms in the Soviet armor --and in inspiring his fellow Poles in their stuggle to shake off the yoke of Communist domination.

-- President Reagan. He foresaw the demise of the Soviet Union at a time when many saw history moving inexorably away from the West. Beginning in the 1970s, he called Communism a failed and failing system that would ultimately be trumped by the West -- heretic words to Western leaders who thought befriending the Soviets was the best way to change their behavior. As President, he pursued policies (Churchill's) expressly designed to exacerbate the tensions within the Soviet system. The Berlin Wall was toppled (it did not "fall"; it was pushed) less than 10 months after he left office.

Shattan's work is required reading for anyone interested in learning how the Cold War began -- and ended.

This is the ideological nonsense that passes for intelligence on the rabid right. In regards to Reagan, although a critique of the importance of these "Hero's" is overdue. If just spending the USSR into destruction were true, the Soviet Union would have fallen in 1943 when they spending virtually everything on materiel. Read about the economic situation the Soviets faced and Gorbachev's thoughts. He knew the situation was desperate long before he got to the top, and knew there must be changes. He allowed the borders to open. A few more facts, i.e., Solidarity, Perstroika, and you'll get a picture of what happened. The USSR would have collasped without Reagan. Why would the Soviets just throw in their hand after Reykjavik? (read Frances Fitzgerald's new book.) The first time I heard this inane theory about Reagan I did the same thing Gorbachev did when he first heard it - I broke into a good belly laugh. I will admit the right has a PR machine that is second to none. But in the end this is just another specious attempt to revise history, a close cousin to "FDR was in on Pearl harbor."

This book is a very impressive piece of work. Shattan is very fair when he writes about each and every person, no matter what their political stripe. From Churchill's prescient knowledge of what must be done to Truman's acknowledgement of the danger that Communism posed to Adenauer's firm and unwavering alignment with the West to Solzihentisyn(sp?) showing how the Cold War was really a moral struggle to Pope John Paul II's unwavering determination to free Poland to Ronald Reagan who ultimately caused the end of the Cold War; even though it came under Bush's administration; Shattan demonstrates a keen eye for details and an excellent sense of analysis. This is well worth reading for anyone interested in the Cold War.

This book's objectivity is suspect due to the fact that it was published by the conservative Heritage Foundation; however, Joseph Shattan does a good job in making his case for these six men who did so much to alter the course of late 20th century history. It is remarkable that his list includes two American presidents (one Democrat, one Republican), a German chancellor, England's greatest prime minister, a pope, and a Russian writer. Such a disparate group makes this more than an essay on politics, it is a rich analysis of fifty years of world history. You can disagree with Shattan (as other reviewers have done), but you cannot deny that he has offered good reasoning for his heroic choices. It is enlightening to read about the contributions of Solzhenitsyn, Adenaur, and John Paul II, which are not well known. It is extremely satisfying to read a concise analysis of what Truman, Churchill, and Reagan brought to the mix. I believe that conservatives give Reagan too much credit for "winning" the Cold War, however I also believe that history will bear them out to a very large degree. Churchill is a giant, truly the Man of the Century (despite what TIME magazine thinks), and get his credit here. Truman obviously had a strong grasp on "the big picture" even as he grew into his role. It is interesting to apply what Shattan teaches us to the study of governments, economies, and social progress in this same time period. Joseph Shattan has done us all a favor by publishing this book; maybe efforts like this will finally begin to reduce the luster from Mikhail Gorbachev. Buy this book and read it. Then donate it to your kids' school library.

These stories are not the best examples of Truman Capote's writing, but they are a good resource for tracking his development as a writer, leading up to the mastery of his "In Cold Blood" which, in my opinion, is one of the best books published in the latter part of the 20th century.

Because it is so well known and almost universally regarded as a masterpiece, Truman Capote's "In Cold Blood" is the work with which most people are familiar. To judge the man's literary talents by that single book would leave him in great company, but tragically diminish his rare and spectacular ability to write in virtually any style with remarkable elegance. His collected short stories draw from the Gothic Southern tradition favored by Eudora Welty and Flannery O'Connor, with minimalist descriptions capable of evoking distinctive character voices, tactile sensations, and even smells. Anyone interested in writing should explore this collection, which will especially appeal to those of us who lament the decline of quality writing since home theaters replaced front porches as neighborhood gathering places. Capote is among the finest in a generation of great writers.

Truman Capote was a brilliant, eccentric novelist and author of a shocking at the time of its publication, documentary fiction book "In Cold Blood". And although he is famous for these works, his short stories are equally captivating and original. They are small masterpieces, weird and magnetizing.

The protagonists are usually strange children (in his other works, Capote did not pay much attention to children), fascinating and different than adults, with their own world, dreams and agendas, or alienated, nerdish, unhappy adults, losers, who also have much of a child in them. Some of the protagonists are said to be modeled on the real people the author met during the course of his life, but some can be only attributed to his imagination...

The world in the stories is only semi-realistic, like a dream, everything is wrapped in a fog of uncertainty. My favorite stories are " Children On Their Birthdays" (the longest of the stories, I think, and very well structured) where the life of a certain Miss Bobbitt, a girl of extraordinary discipline and set life goals, is abruptly ended by the afternoon bus; "Miriam" (which won The O'Henry Prize), where an elderly lady enters into a nightmare, after meeting at the cinema an angelic-looking little girl-demon, not to be able to get rid of her again (actually cost me some sleepless nights...); "Master Misery" about a mysterious New York City man, who buys people's dreams and a girl who gets addicted to dream-selling; and "A Tree of Night", about a dreary encounter on the train. The stories are spooky, but if analyzed, the events recalled may not have anything strange in them to the outside observer; yet the interpretation and way in which they are told suggest otherwise.

These short stories show the other side of Capote's fiction and are a great round-up for anyone who wants to know his works thoroughly.

Capote is bad when he writes about poor people. He's alright when he writes about rich people. He's extraordinary when he writes about himself. His "complete short stories" attempt all three. However good his style is, sentence for sentence, avoid the stories that suck. Because they suck. Read Capote when he's himself, and avoid him when he's masquerading.

I forgot how wonderful Capote writes. His short stories make me laugh, cry, and think.

It was the best weekend spent reading that I have had in years.

This is my first encounter with a Margaret Truman mystery; I choose this audio book after reading her obituary. I did enjoy the experience overall - she had a very engaging writing style. There are spot-on descriptions of characters that fall into classic archetypes. And the book is full of rich detail on the Washington and arts milieu. I especially appreciated how facts about Lincoln's life and death were made relevant through various characters. However, I found the story itself serviceable; there were several plausible suspects to keep me guessing, but not much action or twists.

Johnny Wales is six feet, four inches. He is employed as a stage hand at Ford's Theatre. He trained as an actor and stage technician at the University of Wisconsin. He hears park rangers conducting tours of the facility. Next, Johnny runs into a dead girl, Nadia Zarinsky, an intern who worked for a senator.

Johnson and Klayman are partners in the police force. A homeless man, Joseph Partridge, claims he saw a man hit the woman. Mackenzie Smith is teaching a course entitled Lincoln the Lawyer. Mac's wife, Annabel, is a gallery owner. Her friend, Clarise Emerson, is the theatre director. Clarise has been tapped to lead the NEA. She is a former wife of the senator. Johnson and Klayman interview an English actor and employee of the theatre, Sydney Bancroft. Johnson is a scholar of jazz, and Klayman a scholar of Lincoln. In fact, Klayman has enrolled in Mac's class. Since Clarise's son is charged with the homicide and Mac and his former partner represent him, things start to get interesting.

In the end, Clarise withdraws her name from NEA consideration. The actual murderer is discovered in very vivid fashion. The couple of Mac and Anabel Smith are pleasant characters as are the twosome of Johnson and Klayman. The intelligence and taste Margaret Truman brings to the task of crime writing are welcome qualities.

Margaret Truman's mysteries get better with each new one that appears. In this one, she uses Ford's Theatre as her site. Anyone who has visited Ford's Theatre will agree that she picked a place with the right atmosphere for a mystery. Someone murdered Nadia Zarinski in the alley behind Ford's Theatre. She was an intern for Senator Bruce Lerner, and there are rumors of an affair, so he is a suspect. The murder also casts an unwanted spotlight on Clarise Emerson, Lerner's former wife, head of the Ford's Theatre Society, and presidential nominee to chair the National Endowment for the Arts. Aging actor Sydney Bancroft claimed that Jeremiah Lerner, son of the Senator and Clarise, had been dating the victim. A surly brat, he ran when confronted by detectives, and was soon arrested for the murder. Clarise begs law professor Mac Smith to help her son. Mac and wife Annabel, an urbane couple, are in many of Margaret Truman's mysteries. Mac agrees to help, and the real mystery unfolds until it reaches a surprising climax. This is a splendid tale, with real characters (not cardboard) and a nice pace.

This was not one of Truman's best books. I kept waiting for some action and mystery... and then it did not come. The other Capital Crimes book I read most recently (Murder at the Smithsonian; Library of Congress) had a lot more intrigue. I did like the many DC references, but those are in all of her books... hopefully Ms. Truman will have some better books to offer in the future.

In her latest novel, Margaret Truman stages "Murder at Ford's Theatre" with a cast drawn from recent headlines and past novels in her Capital Crime Series. The murder of Senate intern Nadia Zarinski, romantically linked to her boss, outside the historic theatre now run by the senator's ex-wife and Hollywood producer, Clarisse Emerson, who is preparing for her confirmation hearing as the next chairperson of the National Endowment for the Arts sets off a media frenzy all too familar in the nation's capital. The case is so sensational that Truman's favorite Washington couple, George Washington University law professor Mackensie Smith and his wife Annabelle, are compelled to play leading roles once again. Supporting cast members and Lincoln buffs, detectives Klayman and Johnson, representing the Metropolitan Police Department, and Sydney Bancroft, aging British thespian and Ford Theatre artistic director, add colorful moments to this fast paced drama.

It is impossible for me to criticise Truman's work. Her attention to detail especially about local landmarks and legends in Washington, DC provides the reader with a sense of place that locals recognize and visitors remember. I don't doubt that Truman strolled the cafes and galleries of Dupont Circle sipping latte at Kramerbooks & Afterwoods researching the details about historic Ford's Theatre that she got correct right down to the spelling.

Above all, "Murder at Ford's Theatre" is first rate suspense. Whether you live inside the infamous beltway or not, add this book to your list right away.

I bought this book for school.. I have not read it yet but it arrived in perfect condition.. Very fast shipping.

One of the most complex, divisive, and nuanced debates in the history of the twentieth century is the decision by U.S. President Harry S. Truman in August 1945 to drop two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, thereby ending World War II. A traditional conception of the decision, indeed the one most often voiced by actors in the decision, was that it was done to speed the end of the war and thereby preserve American lives that might be lost in future combat. The revisionist interpretation, often identified with Gar Alperowitz, argues that the war was almost over and that the Japanese were on the verge of surrender anyway. The reason to drop the bomb, therefore, had little to do with the ending of World War II and was aimed more at impressing and influencing future relations with the Soviet Union. Another interpretation suggests that the use of the atomic bomb had more to do with American racism, and that the U.S. would have refrained from using such a horrific weapon on other Caucasians in Europe. Other scholars condemn the use of such a weapon targeting large populations, including non-combatants, as immoral and obscene. Subsequent historians have argued various permutations of these interpretations and the debate remains far from settled.

J. Samuel Walker's "`prompt & utter destruction': Truman and the Use of the Atomic Bomb against Japan" is a superb short discussion of the merits of each of these interpretations and an assessment of the current state of understanding on the subject. He takes an exceptionally even-handed approach, pointing up the strengths and weaknesses of each major argument and assessing how they have evolved over time. In the end, as Walker documents, five fundamental considerations played into the decision to use atomic bombs in August 1945.

First, the decision makers, especially Truman, sought to end the war at the earliest possible moment. They believed this new and terrifying weapon would do so and should therefore be employed for what they considered the greater good of ending the bloodshed. Wrapped up in this argument, although Walker thinks it a bit of side issue, was a widely held belief that bringing the Japanese to the surrender table would require an invasion of its islands. This would be, as those considering it believed, a costly and lengthy campaign that might mean the loss of thousands of lives on both sides. Casualty estimates of all types exist, and they have been used in the debate since then to justify or condemn the use of the bomb. Walker finds that those estimates, which are at best educated guesses that range broadly depending on the assumptions and the perspectives of those making them, are less useful in assessing what took place than the understanding that Truman was unwilling to accept any more casualties than absolutely necessary.

Second, Walker notes how Truman and his advisors were intensely concerned that they had to justify the enormous cost of developing the atomic weapon, and a decision not to use it once it existed would open them to significant criticism. As Walker states, "The success of the Manhattan Project in building the bombs and ending the war was a source of satisfaction and relief" (p. 94). In this context, Truman expressed great concern that should he decide not to use the weapon once he had it that every American life lost thereafter would have been wasted. As he explained to Secretary of State James F. Byrnes in 1947, "I believe that no man, in our position and subject to our responsibilities, holding in his hands a weapon of such possibilities for accomplishing this purpose and saving those lives, could have failed to use it and afterwards looked his countrymen in the face" (p. 94).

Third, at least one of Truman's advisors, Secretary of State Byrnes, realized immediately and argued to his colleagues that this weapon would be useful in helping to bend the Soviet Union to American wishes in the post-war era. Truman recognized this as well, but according to Walker this was definitely an added bonus and not the primary consideration in using the bomb. Walker concluded, "Growing differences with the Soviet Union were a factor in the thinking of American officials about the bomb but were not the main reason that they rushed to drop it on Japan" (p. 95). Gar Alperowitz's "atomic diplomacy" thesis, therefore, has merit however overstated it might have been.

Fourth, Walker asserts that there was a lack of incentives among those making these decisions not to use the bomb. "Truman," Walker notes, "used the bomb because he had no compelling reason to avoid it" (p. 95). While many people since 1945 have questioned the morality of its use, Truman and his advisors did not let those scruples--and they did exist among them--outweigh their goal of ending the war as quickly as possible. Indeed, by the last year of the war conventional weaponry had laid waste to so many cities containing thousands of non-combatants--witness the firebombing of or Dresden and Tokyo--that virtually no one in a senior decision making role in the U.S. questioned the use of nuclear weapons despite their destructiveness since they believed dropping these bombs would shorten the war and save American lives.

Fifth, Walker comments that "Hatred of the Japanese, a desire for revenge for Pearl Harbor, and racist attitudes were a part of the mix of motives that led to the atomic attacks" (p. 96). Again, this was not the primary consideration in dropping the bomb on Japan, "But the prevalent loathing of Japan, both among policymakers and the American people, helped override any hesitation or ambivalence that Truman and his advisors might have felt about use of atomic bombs" (p. 96).

Walker ends "prompt & utter destruction" with a series of questions still being debated about the decision to use the bomb. These include: "(1) how long the war would have continued if the bomb had not been used; (2) how many casualties American forces would have suffered if the bomb had not been dropped; (3) whether an invasion would have been necessary without the use of the bomb; (4) the number of American lives and casualties an invasion would have exacted had it proven necessary; (5) whether Japan would have responded favorably to a American offer to allow the emperor to remain on the throne before Hiroshima, or whether such an offer would have prolonged the war; and (6) whether any of the alternatives to the use of the bomb would have ended the war as quickly on a basis satisfactory to the United States (pp. 108-109).

These historiographical questions ensure that future study of this subject will remain contested; overlaying all of it, of course, is the question of the morality of Truman's decision. Walker offers no conclusion to the debate, instead inviting further inquiry and exposition as each scholar makes a contribution to the marketplace of ideas where positions will be evaluated and accepted, rejected, or modified. This book is a must read for anyone who wants to understand the nature of the end of World War II and the beginning of the cold war.

This book gives a good overview but just that - an overview. The events and circumstances surrounding the use of the A-bomb simply must be addressed in greater depth for one who wishes to become truly knowledgable on the subject. However, its brevity is also a strength in that for one just getting into the subject it serves as a fabulous introduction and for those already familiar with the subject, it sums things up into a nice recap. Contrary to some reviews of the book, the author does NOT ever say or even imply that the bomb should not have been dropped. Quite the opposite, he provides compelling reasons why the decision to use the bomb was sound and wise militarily, politically, diplomatically, and morally. Nor is this book any where near a "one-stop-shop" on the subject. So while not the final say, this book would be a good addition to a collection for the reasons mentioned above. The research is credible and the arguments are as a whole very sound. Highly recommended.

Prompt and Utter Destruction carefully builds arguments in favor of the decision to use the bomb based upon correspondence, interviews, etc., then tries to demolish them with speculative opinion. Perhaps this was done in the interest of objectivity; however, the result is a difficult to read, conflicted narrative. It is certainly not the definitive word on Truman's decision to use nuclear weapons against Japan.

If you have a passionate interest in atomic age politics, WWII, and/or the Manhattan Project (as I do), this short book is worth reading, if just to have imaginary arguments with its author. However, if your interest is less intense, I can save you some time. The main conclusion of Prompt and Utter Destruction is that Truman had very strong reasons to authorize the use of atomic weapons, and no good reason not to do so:
(1)Atomic bombs might shorten the war and save American lives.
(2)Demonstrating that the US will use nuclear weapons would scare the heck out of Stalin, making him easier to negotiate with after the war.
(3)If they were not used, Congress and the American people would want to know why the government spent $2 billion developing them.
(4)Japan had it coming (payback for Pearl Harbor, the Battan death march, etc).
Against these reasons stood only the vague concern that maybe atomic weapons were immoral. Not a big concern to politicians of any era.

Ideology defined: The body of ideas reflecting the social needs and aspirations of an individual, group, class, or culture.

If you have already made up your mind that the atomic bombings of Japan were wrong, you have two choices: (1) Don't buy the book and participate in the next demonstration against the bombings which will, again, make you feel morally superior; (2)buy the book and realize that it was not as simple a decision as you thought it was. Then ask yourself, what would I have done in 1945? Very challenging book. It certainly provides a very good understanding of the choices Truman had to deal with and the feelings in the US at that time.

One final point for the anti-bombing crowd: Check the stats on the casualties in the conventional bombings of German and Japanese cities.
And educate yourself about Japanese atrocities in China: 350,000 slaughtered in Sungchiang, and between 260,000-350,000 civilians murdered in Nanking. That's for starters.

SPOILIER ALERT. (But, really, I'm saving you the trouble of reading this silly book.) Only a 10-year-old could be engaged by this ridiculous protagonist who is the smartest, toughest, baddest dude around, yet is still a sensitive guy who cries over his longtime girlfriend's infidelity. (He forgives her, though, because he suddenly remembers that back in college he had a one night stand.) Everyone at the martial arts studio stops in awe to watch him as he practices. That's why he can beat anyone up who dares to get in his way and even big tough bodyguards are cowed by a simple whispered threat. The plot is ridiculous and completely unbelievable. The bad guy is so bad that he is constantly enraged and psychotic, even with the briefest innocuous comment from his secretary. He is a psychologist with an active practice, even though he gets equally furious and abusive towards his patients. The hero's client loves him so much for solving the case and rescuing her from certain death that she gives him $400,000 worth of stock in her company, which quickly becomes worth a million. The last line of the book is, "There are some things in life that are simply perfect . . ." Sheesh.

I've become a Barry Eisler fan in the last few years, and after being shown that good can kick the arse of evil with good old-fashioned techinique, I went in search of more in the "martial-arts thriller" genre. I found that the pickin's were slim. It seemed that most writers who were practitioners of martial arts, as well-versed in violence as their protagonists were supposed to be, were not all that good at spinning a tale. Wolfe is different, and I hope to see more from him. It loses a star for being a little over-the-top in the plausibility stakes.

Mind Games
I enjoyed that while main story developed, the characters everyday lives were interwoven so that the characters were real people. Just when I thought the case was resolved, the plot thickened and a far more sinister situation existed behind the scenes.

OK, so maybe "lost" isn't the best way to put it, but I was actually up all night reading as I couldn't put it down once I started! So thank you Mr. Wolfe for a VERY good read with great characters that I found myself really caring about, or hating depending on who, an engaging story with an interesting (but not too out-of-left-field) plot twist and plenty of detail throughout to keep me totally consumed. Many times through the night I would think "OK, after this chapter I'll stop and go to sleep," but when I got to the end I would think "there's no way I can stop here!" I was very happy with the ending (not always the case with me and a fast-moving story) and I look forward to many more adventures of Tom McKenna and his crew!

Having experience in the California area made this even more special. But, regardless of that I have enjoyed this author's writing style for a number of years. I don't know exactly why, but he is simply that good and he connects with the reader in an adventurous way. Unique story line. Mix of truth and fiction. Enjoy! I look forward to more.

The author writes with much detail about the day to day experiences these men faced during their mission using humor and emotion to bring the reader closer to the story.

Please read my comment in response to the negative critical reader review offered by R. Axelrod. It is important that the reader fully understands the fact that this book is based upon fact, not fiction. The nine Americans and sixty-six Nationalist Chinese military that died demand to be honored for what they accomplished. Had they failed, a third world war and a possible nuclear holocaust would have claimed the lives of millions. This book is not, as Axelrod stated,"a fraud." Abundant historical and circumstantial evidence fully supports the authenticity of the mission. As I stated in my comment, "I consider Axelrod's review to be cruel and a disgraceful insult to the memory of my dead comrades. He drove the nail in the coffin with his closing comment, "You can delight in a creative adventure story." Anyone has the ability to lay claim to being some kind of "specialist," but often their words fail to support this assertion.

I am convinced that Broken Reed is fiction pretending to be fact. Being an academic, I regard fraud as a serious office.
Here are some of the claims in the book that I find particularly implausible or nonsensical. I suppose in any true spy story there are likely to be a few implausible claims, but not nearly as many as this book has.
* Truman authorized the mission without telling the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
* The landing was made deliberately close to the front lines, and then the convoy set out along the coast road moving north away from the front line. As the author says later, being near the front lines is dangerous. No explanation is given for why the landing took place so far south when the first leg of the trip was to go north on the coast road.
* Several dozen Korean soldiers loyal to the South (and presumably "stay-behinds") could be assembled and moved to a specific place without causing alarm.
* The stay-behinds were able to capture two working T-34 medium tanks, as well as a half-track, a reconn vehicle, several trucks, plenty of ammunition, and hundreds of gallons of gasoline.
* The stay behinds were able to move all this equipment to a specific place in North Korea.
* The two most senior stay behinds for no specific reason identified themselves to the Americans as former bodyguards to Chiang Kai-shek. The book repeatedly makes makes two points: it was very important that none of the participants should be able to identify each other, and it was very important to conceal that Chiang Kai-shek's Taiwan was at all involved in Korea War.
* In 1952 the author was told that the mission would remain secret until would be declassified in exactly 46 years, i.e. 1998.
* No records exist about this mission, even after the mission was declassified in 1998 when the author started work on the book.
* The only piece of tangible evidence the author kept was a cyanide capsule he was issues, but then after saving it for many years he discarded it before he wrote the book.

I do not dispute that the author is a veteran of the Korea War, or that he is a good story teller. But the book needs a better editor, and a fictional classification. If you stop believing the events actually happened, you can delight in a creative adventure story.

I have know Arthur, Nell, and Lanny Boyd since about 1995. I remember some time in about 1998, when Mr. Boyd came into my pharmacy and asked me how to dispose of a cyanide capsule. At first I ask myself why does this man have such a capsule, then knowing Mr. Boyd for the time I had, I figured he had been involved in some sort of highly classified work in his life.

I have absolutely enjoyed reading "Operation Broken Reed". The story was captivating and heart warming. I believe some long overdue recognition should be given to those men. This book would make an incredible movie that would share the story of these men and their mission that averted another world war and possible total nuclear destruction. This story needs to be documented and preserved for future generations.

Colonel Boyd has brought to our attention a successful American intelligence-gathering sortie into North Korea in 1951 that was previously unknown, and declassified just ten years ago. As a young lieutenant he was the code and signals officer for a brief foray behind the Korean/Chinese lines to ascertain the strength and intent of communist forces across the entire Korean peninsula. Authorized by President Truman personally, and not known to our military or civilian intelligence services, this venture prompted Truman to modify the United Nations response to the communist juggernaut and accept the partitioning of the Korean peninsula. By Boyd's reckoning this intelligence coup may well have saved the world from nuclear war. Boyd's story reads better than spy fiction, from a remove of over fifty years he recalls fascinating details of an operation that took the lives of seven of the team, leaving Boyd alive with two critically wounded comrades whom he believes may have died in hospital after their rescue. Boyd is unassuming, modest, and self-effacing in his descriptions of brave men travelling, hiding, and working in a sea of enemies. Oh behalf of my children and grandchildren I thank him for what he did in 1951. On behalf of all Americans I thank him for telling us that extraordinary leaders - President Truman in this instance - have the sense and guile to get a proper database before making the most difficult and important of decisions.

If you know Jesus personally, this is an encouraging book to read. Before I read this, I had no idea there were Christian civilians who were living in Iraq when Saddam was in power. Very colorful pictures, with heart stirring words.

Oliver North is one of our most undervalued American Heroes! He stood up to Congress and supported his President; in time showing the Soviet Union that we wouldn't be weakened internally.

Every television show or book he's involved with shows his intellect and understanding of America's fighting men and women! A must read book, but better yet to have in your library!!

Oliver North and friends helped arm the fundamentalist mullahs of IRAN back in the 80s. The fact that North is not locked up is a testament to the high level of corruption the U.S. government is bathed in. This guy should turn in his uniform. He was interviewed on Alex Jones awhile back and dodged questions on the scandal. He just wanted to promote his ghost written garbage books.

This is a beautiful book. I keep buying more copies so I can give to others. This is such a touching, soul-moving story of God's protection to a Marine Batallion who put their faith and trust where it could not fail. The experiences of these soldiers will 'blow you away'!

I loved it, it was a very moving experience. The photos were excellenet and the stories that went along with them were very touching and inspirational.
An excellent work.

The more of this I read, the more I reluctantly came to conclude that, to really enjoy Jane Bowles, one probably needs to be either gay or lesbian or intensely interested in women's studies.

I really wish I could jump on the bandwagon of singing Jane Bowles' praises, but I haven't been able to understand what all the fuss is about. "The greatest novelist of the century?" Whoa--this is not on my list of the top 100. I've long been a great fan of Paul Bowles--surely one of the most intense and talented writers of the last century--and Jane sounded interesting in all the reviews, but after reading both Camp Cataract and Two Serious Ladies, and several other of the stories, I was disappointed. Almost all are about odd, neurotic women with overpowering urges to escape their dreary lives of conformity, and/or who relate to other odd, neurotic women in strangely belligerant ways. All of the male characters are pathetic and superfluous, or are at least treated that way by women who have no use for them.

I found it frustrating that all of the characters constantly make decisions, or say things, that seem without any apparent motivation. It's very difficult to get a read on why any of the characters do what they do. A woman who seems to have been content all her life to live a staid, "respectable" existence decides she's going to be a prostitute. Why? Then she decides not to. Why? There's no explanation, in either inner monologue, dialogue, background plot, or anything--the characters just do things that seem...strange. I like strange--Paul Bowles, for example, can be very strange, and it's fascinating--but Jane seems to keep writing, I assume, about herself, in the obsessive manner of the narcissist who can't stop thinking and talking and writing about her personal concerns as though they were universal. And maybe they are universal, among lesbians, I can't say.

Paul Bowles is timeless--his stories could have been written yesterday. Jane's are musty and dated, as well as very unsatisfying. They may be very fertile ground for exploring Jane's psyche, but if that's not of primary interest to you, you may find yourself finishing one story after another saying "Now what was that all about?"

Jane Bowles is still an unfortunately neglected writer despite Tennessee Williams' statement that she is our finest American prose fiction writer. He wrote that in the early 70s, and it is still true today. She manages to surprise and fascinate and perplex and amuse in nearly every sentence. She is the kind of original our university writing courses and the 'searching for a hit' publishing industry are stifling.

My Sister's Hand In Mine: The Collected Works Of Jane Bowles (1970) offers readers the rewarding opportunity of entering the strange but oddly homey world of its author. The volume contains Bowles' only novel, Two Serious Ladies, her single work for the theater, the uneven In the Summer House, and thirteen short stories and unfinished pieces. The book's real strengths are Two Serious Ladies and the long story Camp Cataract, works that compliment one another and successfully define the unique landscape of Bowles' vision.

Married to the more famous novelist, composer, and expatriate Paul Bowles, Jane was an apparently bisexual woman with strong lesbian leanings. Though her liveliness and wit were widely appreciated by other artists of the period, most of whom were also ardent admirers of her talent, Bowles' life was compromised by anxiety, and her final years were marked by severe illness and tragedy.

The individualistic Bowles was probably an introvert in Jung's original definition of term. Her character's fears largely revolve around the idea of "passage into the outside world," the states of existence that most people must inevitably face, embrace, and accept beyond the personalized state of the home and the nuclear family. But while confronting the outer world is a unpleasant necessity for most of Bowles' characters, family life, far from a paradise, remains a sentimentally idealized but claustrophobic circle in hell. Achieving and maintaining states of grace was also an important matter for the author, though her unsettlingly tragicomic approach to both these themes has historically kept her work from being widely understood and accepted as mainstream American literature. While other idiosyncratic writers like the vastly more prolific Muriel Spark have enjoyed decades of popularity and critical and commercial success and thus the opportunity to carefully evolve their personal vision, Bowles found the act of writing difficult, and her readership during her lifetime, in commercial terms, almost nonexistent.

Two Serious Ladies concerns Christina Goering and Frieda Copperfield, casual acquaintances who synchronistically strike out on no longer avoidable quests for personal salvation after meeting at a Manhattan party.

While Mrs. Copperfield seems to be seeking fulfilling love and all kinds of meaningful sensual pleasure, the independently wealthy Miss Goering apparently seeks spiritual development through material sacrifice, meager living, and confrontation with her fears in their social and public forms. Both women are simultaneously asexual and semi-consciously lesbian in their preferences; the married Mrs. Copperfield enthusiastically chases the love and company of other women in a Central American village, while the somewhat sheltered but more confident Miss Goering, who shares her home with both a woman and a man in an ambiguous arrangement, actively pursues first a failed businessman and then a gangster in the name of achieving her goals. Both women are weirdly naive, and Bowles never allows the reader a clear understanding of how knowledgeable, sophisticated, or self aware either character is. Both encounter and embrace a hilarious assemblage of oddball characters and misfits; like Miss Goering and Mrs. Copperfield, these eccentrics often seem incapable of objective or comparative perception, and may thus be doomed to lives of starchy parochialism. Only Mr. Copperfield, a figure unmistakably based on Paul Bowles, seems stable, clear-headed, and rationally self-motivated.

Unstable, indeterminate social conventions and mores haunt Bowles' characters. Routine train rides, visits to relative's homes, evenings out in taverns and restaurants, business meetings, and even the simple act of purchasing become comic war zones in which all present seem to enjoy a vastly different understanding of what behavior is appropriate and acceptable. Misunderstandings, breaches of etiquette, emotional hypersensitivity, and insults are common in The Collected Works Of Jane Bowles; fluid, trusting, easy, and healthy communication is sadly unknown.

The grueling Camp Cataract concerns a shrewd, secretive, and uncommonly self aware adult woman, Harriet, who is quietly and carefully planning a final break from her smothering and unconsciously incestuous sister Sadie. Unlike Two Serious Ladies, Camp Cataract contains surreal elements, fugue states, and odd flights of fantasy, but is also more far more specific about the intentions and inner workings of its characters: Harriet's desperate motivations are laid bear in a way that neither Miss Goering's and Mrs. Copperfield's ever are. During her alternately forlorn and energetic pursuit of her sister, Sadie is unpleasantly forced to confront the devouring public world she fears as well as the heavily repressed psychosexual underpinnings of her character. Though wildly funny, few works of fiction can cause readers to twist and squirm like Camp Cataract.

Throughout, the writing is simple, subtle, admirably crisp, and compellingly readable; Bowles is also a master of peculiar, perfectly timed dialogue, a talent she uses to great effect throughout. Also notable are A Guatemalan Idyll, originally a section of Two Serious Ladies, and A Stick Of Green Candy, in which a young girl learns that violating the fidelity of her creative imagination brings about the permanent end of innocent fantasy.

The only bad thing about this collection is that Bowles' collected work is so limited. The writing is experimental, intriguing and engaging. Her language is so fresh. The different genres show her reach as an artist. You only wish that she had been more prolific. She will be read for years to come.

Incredible book. Jane Bowles has the unique characteristic of amusing and depressing us at the same time. Two serious ladies and her short fiction(Camp Catarat and Plain Pleasures are masterpieces) are unique. Her play is funny but she is not as good as in her narrative.
What you will find in this book is a complete diferent way of understanding live, you will encounter an original brain that expreses itself with the most personal sentences you will ever read. Jane stands alone in the whole literary tradition. Surrounded by her terror, obsessions and complete understanding of human heart what Bowles achieves is the perfect expression of human essence.