Kansas Books

For a little over 9 months I have been working with a pastor team by the name of Joel and Kathy Davisson, (visit them at www.godsavemymarriage.com), and through their ministry my husband and I are braking the cycle of abuse in our marriage. The Davisson's highlightly recommend reading Paul Hegstroms books, "Angry Men and the Women Who Love Them" and "Broken Children, Grownup Pain".

Along with Both of Joel and Kathy's books "The Man of Her Dreams and the Women of His" and "Livin' it and Lovin' It", they are showing my husband and I how to have an outrageously happy marriage and to break the chains of marital frustrations!

Paul Hegstroms teaching at Life Skills showed Joel how to grow up emotionally and because of Paul's teachings, Joel and Kathy are showing thousands of other couples how to have the same kind of marriage that we all dream about.

Both my husband and I have met with and talk with the Davisson's on an almost daily bases and they are real people who just want to help couples. They are NOT in this ministry for the money, they are in this to help men become Christlike husbands and to teach them how to lay down there lives for there wives as Christ did for the church.

Because of their teachings and Paul Hegstrom's teachings, my husband and I have found the answer to our prayers, and are thankful to God for bring these pastors into our lives, even at the darkest days, when I thought that my marriage was over for good.

Between emotional abuse, porn and affairs, I didn't think that my marriage would survive, let alone in 9 short months start to thrive and come alive again.

If you are looking for a way to save your marriage, then look no futher than Joel and Kathy Davisson! I have been where you are at, and if my husband and I can do this, Paul and Judy Hegstrom can do this, if Joel and Kathy can do this, and thousand of other couples can do this, then so can you!

This is a good book if you need awareness about the abusiveness in your marriage and how things should be in a marriage and the appropiate behaviors your husband should be asserting. At the end of the book it leaves you with little more than that and his advice is to leave. Unfortunately it doesn't help with the skills needed to CHANGE the relationship. I was helped a great deal more by You Don't Have to Take it Anymore: Turn Your Resentful, Angry, or Emotionally Abusive Relationship into a Compassionate, Loving One I feel like this book had some very good information about the abusive relationship, but left me feeling just as helpless as before.

It was Dr. Paul Hegstrom's teaching that changed our lives forever. In 1994, we were struggling in a ten year marriage that had lots of problems including abuse and adultery.

Dr. Hegstrom's teachings began the miracle that we needed in our life and marriage. The next ten years of our marriage were so wonderful that in 2004, we wrote our first book on marriage, "The Man of Her Dreams/The Woman of His!" Dr. Hegstrom wrote the Preface to the book.

Let Dr. Hegstrom's teachings change your life!

Order this book today! While you are at it, look at ours by clicking on The Man of Her Dreams The Woman of His! and The Man of Her Dreams The Woman of His 2 - Livin' It and Lovin' It! (Volume 2)

These books are full of help from a real couple who overcame adultery and abuse to experience an outrageously happy marriage utilizing the principles of Life Skills International which was founded by Dr. Hegstrom.

Joel and Kathy Davisson

The psychology in the book was excellent. I especially appreciated that it discussed both sides of the relationship. What I didn't like were the Christian references. It was very annoying and there were many pages that I completely skipped over because of the Christianity. If you can overlook Christian references then this book was very insightful and helpful to me.

An excellent book to help couples having anger issues. I was suprised to learn that I was angry (by definition) and that it is controllable (never thought so). It turned me round, made me face myself, in a similar way to an alcoholic.

I think every person who was born and raised in Kansas and Missouri should be required to read this book. Lots of history in it and very inspiring to know how these states history affects us all.

While it does assume you know a fair bit about the Civil War period in America (I didn't), this is a good solid bit of history. Good to see someone challenge the previous historical versions of Quantrill and his raiders.

Donald L. Gilmore's book is unadulterated rubbish. It is revisionist history at it's worst. His absurd exhortation that the Missouri guerrillas "were not ordinary men but members of the elite class of western Missouri," is utter nonsense. Perhaps what he meant to say was some of the guerrillas came from elite families. Quantrill, Anderson, and Todd certainly did not spring from the upper crust of society. Those Missouri guerrillas who did in fact come from elite families probably had more in common with Vice President Dick Cheney than with Quantrill. Like the VP during the Vietnam War, the elite guerrillas seem to have had "other priorities." I would think, that if they really cared about the war effort, they would have signed up for the Confederate Army. When a real Missouri elite, General Sterling Price, met Anderson for the first time, he was shocked and dismayed, and promptly sent Anderson away. Like most real Missouri aristocrats, Price wanted to maintain as much distance as possible from these reprobates. Gilmore's work ranks with those who would have us believe there were legions of Black Confederates and that the South was right. Simply stated, Gilmore's book does a great injustice to history.

Gilmore's book rightly covers the time period before 1861, as well as after, and he notes that history is written by the victors. But instead of offering a more balanced view of both sides of the border war, he becomes an apologist for the secessionists and rides the pendulum in swinging too far the other way. Of course, since I live in Lawrence, Kansas, I have a hard time feeling sorry for Quantrill! Gilmore's references to other conflicts in history don't always work, either. Instead of comparing Missouri bushwackers to U.S. troops in Vietnam, he should have referenced the VC and NVA. Gilmore's own ancestors may have worn blue, but he sees everything through gray eyes. This actually obvious in the title of the book, since it says the Missouri-Kansas border, instead of the more common and alphabetical Kansas-Missouri. Which came first - the border ruffians or the Jayhawkers?

[...]

CIVIL WAR ON THE MISSOURI-KANSAS BORDER, Donald L. Gilmore, Pelican Press, Gretna, LA, 2006, 376, $[...].

Donald L. Gilmore has written a vivid, enlightening account of events along the Kansas/Missouri border from 1854 to 1865. He discusses the Kansas-Nebraska Act, the Compromises of 1820 and 1850, and other problems that led to the border conflict. This was a time that challenged men's souls as they experienced life and death in "Bloody Kansas" and in western Missouri's "Burnt District," and Gilmore describes it well.

Gilmore breaks new ground by offering a version of the border war from mostly the Missouri point of view. In doing so, he provides an in-depth study of why good men do bad things. The book highlights infamous Kansans such as John Brown, James Montgomery, Daniel Anthony (brother of Susan B. Anthony), James Lane, Charles Jennison, and the "Red Legs" whose solution to problems were to terrorize, murder, pillage, and burn (a practice otherwise known as jayhawking). Many of the Red Legs' actions (not unlike the exploits of Genghis Khan and Attila the Hun) would be considered war crimes today.

The book discusses law-of-war violations in Missouri, such as scalpings, the severing of extremities, executions of prisoners of war, illegal use of civilians on the battlefield, robberies, the burning of homes and businesses, and the round-up and confinement of insurgent families. According to Gilmore, these events help explain why William "Bill" Quantrill transitioned from a school teacher to a bushwhacker, and how he overcame his moral scruples to raid Olathe, Paola, and Lawrence--the latter resulting in the massacre of every townsman from 16 to 60.

Quantrill wasn't the worst of the lot: Many of his men considered his actions insufficient to stop the Union plague in Missouri and took it upon themselves to fix the problem. One Quantrill apostate, "Bloody Bill" Anderson, earned his nickname in 1864 by wiping out a 115-man Union force and by massacring 24 unarmed Union soldiers during a train robbery. Anderson's father had been killed by abolitionists, and in 1863 some of Anderson's sisters were killed and the others maimed in a make-shift Union prison. He was already a killer, but these events made Anderson psychotic. Frank and Jesse James, who were part of Anderson's party, learned devious lessons from him for their postwar careers as bandits.

Gilmore also provides insights into insurgency and counterinsurgency operations before and during the Civil War. The book discusses the tactics, techniques, and procedures of seasoned Civil War insurgents, the experiences they had and the lessons they learned during the first 2 years of the war, and how they developed into seasoned, hard-edged raiders.

In sum, Civil War on the Missouri-Kansas Border is a captivating account of western life during the violent years prior to and during the Civil War. A thorough, well-researched study of the realities of life during a particularly volatile time, it should appeal to scholars and laymen alike.

--MAJ Jeffrey Wingo, USA, Retired, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas

In the tradition of Kramer vs. Kramer by Avery Corman, Dance Real Slow explores the relationship between a father and his 4 year old son after the boy's mother walks out on them. In, at times, heartbreaking clarity, this book describes the life of Gordon and Calvin, set adrift and learning to cope as a twosome instead of a threesome. Managing hard to put his life in order, Gordon a part time lawyer, reflects not only on his marraige to Katie as he goes through the day to day living of rasing a son, but also his own realtionship with his father. Then when Gordon is finally comfortable in his role as a single parent and when Calvin seems to be well adjusted to his situation, Katie returns. Complicating matters further is Gordon's developing realtionship with a new woman.

Although the subject of fathers and sons has been explored by other writers, particularly Russian authors, Jaffe's book prsents this realationship in a somewhat predicatable and contrived manner. But in the end the predicatement had me rooting for the futther sucesses of Calvin and Gordon.

While I enjoyed most of the novel perhaps its my memory of Kramer vs. Kramer, both the book and movie which I read first and enjoed more, that somewhat spoiled this book for me.

A warm thoughtful story of a father's daily trials of raising his four year old son alone. I wasn't sure it would hold my attention at first but the language and scenes rang true and reminded me much of my own sons early years. The author's attempts at giving the story deeper meanings seemed contrived and I wasn't always sure where he was going with the remembrances of his own father. The story tackles many interesting single parent concerns highlighted by attempts to get on with life after a spouse has left, moving to a new town, taking a new job, finding a new lover. I like best how this father's love for his son permeates this story even in those parenting moments when he is frustrated or impatient. A book whose total was greater than the sum of its parts.

Jaffe's story provides a wonderful example of how a thirty-something single father deals with parenthood, while at the same time living through the trials and tribulations of his new found life. Love, loss of love, security, and insecurity are all very important themes within this book. Jaffe provides a wonderful set of characters who play out the problems of life in a small town in Kansas (a slow paced backdrop which allows the reader to put into perspective the interaction which occurs between its complex protagonist and the rest of the characters within the novel). All and all, this story is well thought out, and it is very well portrayed. In terms of writing style, Jaffe has room to improve. Though he shows flashes of briliance, his narrative, many times, appears to be organic and repetitive. Written in the first person, there are a lot of "I's," and there is not a whole lot depth in the description of setting. In conclusion, this book excells in bringing to life the problems of a man trying to become a father, and lacks in literary maturity. Something this good writer will only get better at.

The misapplied metaphor and the meaningless adjective overwhelm this slight book pretending to be a serious examination of love and fathering. But besides the numerous inappopriate and gratuitous modifiers, there is nothing here. The conflict feels grafted on by an author who recognizes the dullness of his tale, the plot surprises would only surprise the comatose, and the predictability of the whole thing left me weary. A book for those who feel rather than think, for the feelings are all good in this. Nice man, nice boy, nice girlfriend. Nice make-believe story line.

Nothing in here approaches real. Nothing is thought out. It is the harmless cotton candy of modern fiction, tastes great (in very limnited quantities) with no content whatsoever.

Though Jaffe's novel is far from perfect (weak writing in parts that sounds contrived, some plot strands that just don't work out), let's dwell on the bright side. He captures quite well the frustrations and joys of parenthood. Even the most patient parent occassionaly feels like smacking his/her child at times. Calvin is a cute 4 year old who becomes enamoured of the Portuguese Man of War that his grandmother sends him in a jar! In one of the funniest scenes in the book, they make a trip to a doctor friend who treats the decaying jellyfish and adds formaldyhide which prolongs the creatures jar life a few more days. The love interest part of the book works, although we never find out much about her, but the scenes when his exwife comes back just don't seem to hang together. There were times that the writing sounded "workshoppy" to me. In short, this novel is worth reading for some poignant moments and sweet scenes, but it has several weaknesses that interfere with the novel as a whole.

Many people believe that religous persecution has rarely or not occured in twentieth century U.S. This book makes it clear that there has been alot of religous persecution in the United States during the twentieth century. I found it very interesting that the Ku Klux Clan not only persecuted certain ethnic groups, but Jehovah's Witnesses as well, regardless of thier racial background. However the Author does not have an accurate view of certain Jehovah's Witnesses pracitices such as disfellowshipping. He should have researched furthur.

Sorry Wayne Rogers...all it takes is humility...usually ex-JW's are so irrate because religion does not cater or turns a blind eye to serious sinners. It's not to say it is a perfect organization by no means but overwhelming majority of "disfellowshipped" witnesses deserved their judgement. As far as supposed problems that are "plaguing" JW's, completely false, increase in numbers worldwide prove more people are attracted to JW organization than are leaving because of Jah's power.

As a history major and a Jehovah Witness I ound this book to be absolutely amazing. The book discusses in detail the facts leading up to the presecution of JWs in America, and also the persecution itself. I was amazed to lean how lil "freedom" there was in America at that time, as will all readers. If it was not for the JWs who knows what the US would have been able to do to people if the people themselves did not rise up, as this book shows the JWs did.

5 stars great history book for anyone who likes history of the US, religion, or JWs.

I have been privileged to be one of Jehovah's witnesses since the time I was a teenager. I have made it a point to read anything I could regarding the unprecedented series of Supreme Court decisions in the late 1930's and early 1940's brought about by the activities of, and opposition to, Jehovah's witnesses. This is by far the most enlightening of these works, for several reasons. First, the author has thoroughly researched this work and included a great deal of information regarding the often ignored decisions of the lower courts. In many cases the eloquence of the lower courts and their grasp of the constitutional issues involved surpassed that of the majority of the Supreme Court. Second, the role of those courageous enough to champion the witnesses' civil rights was given a prominence I have not seen in other works. The ACLU, certain liberal clergymen, and the editorials of the Christian Century were given a prominence that has been downplayed or ignored in other works. In addition, the brilliance of the witnesses' legal team, Hayden Covington in particular, in orchestrating their strategy is acknowledged. Third is the author's uncomfortableness with, and in some cases dislike of, the teachings and practices of Jehovah's witnesses. Although I found some of the comments regarding the witnesses unnecessary (weird, odd, obstreperous, etc.), it made his acknowledgement of the witnesses contributions to freedom in this country all the more meaningful. Finally, the role that this series of decisions played in shaping the Supreme Court for its role as the guardian of civil liberties in the 1950's and 60's is explained in a way that makes me swell with pride to be a part of the group that helped to guarantee the freedoms that at one time in the not too distant past were in danger of being suppressed.

Very accurate chronology of the Supreme Court cases that not only spotlighted a religious group, that could have destroyed them; however, the court's visible determination to protect the Constitution turned the situation around to protect freedom of speech and religion for everyone.

I wonder why people love this book so much. I found it too silly and dull even for chick-lit standards. Witty dialogue is just stupid, characters are sterotypes or underdeveloped or uninteresting and the book is way too long. It needs serious editing - the art of everyday detail should be left to more skilled writers.

This is a wonderfully told story. Some of the minor characters seemed a bit improbable but that's what fiction is all about! There are so few stories written today about families that really love each other so the relationship between the sisters is rewarding. Each chapter changes to continue the story line of one family member or another as the story progresses. At the end of each chapter I would be so interested that I was disappointed to rejoin the story of a different character - which character I would forget about two pages into the next chapter! The only reason a star is missing is that the ending left me with an unsettled feeling for one of the sisters because in reality her husband's alcoholism would not be so easily dealt with.

I found it very hard to get into this book and consequently I havn't managed to finish it. Usually I can keep pushing through books but not this one. Its boring and dull has no life the characters are dull. If those of you who have managed to get through this book and have enjoyed it, good for you and well done

I haven't quite reached the end of this very long novel yet, but have enjoyed the developing story line. I enjoyed the concept that of this seemingly perfect family being far from flawless. The story line shows that once you delve under the surface, no one has the perfect life.

However, aside from the story line, I found the wording to be a little cheesy. The characters in the book would openly talk about feelings, when real-life situations would most likely not warrant the same reactions. It is, on the other hand, an easy read. So, if you can get past the cheesy lines, and are looking for something to quickly speed through, this is the book.

Contemporary and heartwarming, this story is about a family who seems to have it all until one day they start having to open up one by one until they realize that everyone has ups and downs. Cathy Kelly does a tremendous job of making the characters sympathetic and believable. It felt like home when I read it and helped me feel even more comfortable with my family. It's good to be reminded that we are only human and that its okay to have faults and mistakes. Afterall, a true friend is one who knows all your faults, your deepest/darkest secrets and still loves you for you. This is a from the heart page turner that starts out simple, but with the greatly timed twists and plots, this story grows more complicated with every chapter, and sometimes every page. I would highly reccomend this book!

Also recommended: The Rock Orchard by Paula Ward

Retired cop Gunther Fahnstiel played only a bit part in Scott Phillips' first novel, The Ice Harvest; a sensational example of noir crime writing featuring a narrative that unfolds in the Wichita of 1979. But in Phillips' second novel, The Walkaway, Gunther is front and center.
This fascinating gem of a book is set in the Wichita of 1989, but with frequent extended flashbacks to 1952. So, The Walkaway has the distinction of being both a sequel and a prequel to The Ice Harvest.

The Walkaway has a decidedly complex structure. Not only does the time frame repeatedly jump back and forth between 1989 and 1952, but the identity of the narrator keeps changing as well. In the hands of a less talented novelist, this would result in a chaotic hodgepodge. But Scott Phillips really knows what he's doing. The unconventional construction allows the reader to put the pieces of the various plot threads together and have plenty of fun while doing so.

There's a lot going on in this book. When Gunther, now 77 years old, wanders away from his nursing home, his memory impaired mind dredges up thoughts of Sally Ogden, a girlfriend from the distant past. Sally worked for Collins Aircraft, a local defense contractor. But in her spare time, she was known to supplement her income by hostessing sex parties. Unbeknownst to Sally, her estranged husband Wayne, an Army master sergeant last stationed in Japan, returns to Wichita intent on wrecking her lucrative operation.
As Gunther's concerned friends and family search for him in the Wichita of 1989, author Scott Phillips masterfully reveals what happened between Gunther, Sally and Wayne in the same city 37 years before.

The Walkaway is a very engaging black comedy that succeeds in presenting a largely unsentimental picture of life in middle America. Its intricately crafted narrative is very effective as it relates a number of intertwined stories that span the decades. Original in structure, uninhibited in content and deliciously cynical in its point of view, this book is a refreshing treat. Highly recommended.

I read Phillips' _The Ice Harvest_ in preparation for the film release and liked it so much I immediately started on _The Walkaway_. The book is a sequel and a prequel to _Harvest_ and a passing familiarity with the earlier book helps, though it is not an absolute requirement. _The Walkaway_ isn't as dark a book, though it does trace two separate plots, one in 1952, the other in 1989, as they meander in and out of the criminal underworld of Wichita, Kansas. At times, it's almost as if Phillips is writing the secret history of Wichita by chronicling the criminal classes, though the book isn't as epic as that may sound. The events all have to do with Gunther Fahnstiel, an old man who has wandered away from his retirement home, and whose memory isn't as sharp as it used to be. Back in 1952, Gunther was a young policeman, trying to stop Sally Ogden's estranged husband, Wayne, home on leave from the army, from settling his accounts with her. In the present day, Gunther is wandering around his old home town, seeking the cache of money he hid ten years before (following events in _The Ice Harvest_). If that sounds complex, well, it is, but Phillips is such a strong writer that he can tell this fractured story from multiple viewpoints and tell it in such a way that it all fits together by novel's end, which is one of the more poignant and satisfying conclusions I can remember. I can hardly wait to get my hands on Phillips' third novel, _Cottonwood_.

THe Ice Harvest was a dark piece of noir, very funny and painfully good. With this one, Phillips paints several pictures at once, all a little different, all building to a great story. I like the fracture of different points of view, giving me more depth than a single POV, more complication added to the richness.

And still, he's just drop dead funny in the darkest sense, which is the best sense.

This is one of the worst books I've read recently. It is confusing in structure without apparent purpose other than to be cute. Characters come and go and are not particularly well developed or interesting. I kept reading because of the strong reviews of this and his first book, but it wasn't worth it.

I don't normally read "crime fiction" (or whatever this is) but I really enjoyed Phillips' first book, "The Ice Harvest," which created a neat, sweaty mood and sustained it.
The twist ending of that book sets up the beginning of this book, but you really don't need to have read that one to enjoy this one. Again, it's a well-written story of greed and lust and rage, set in a small Midwestern town. I couldn't put it down.
Two notes: First, as has been noted by other reviewers, there are multiple points of view here and two different time frames. You'll be well-served to take notes on the characters' names and who they are, what their relationships are, etc. This isn't Dostoyevsky, but there are a lot of names here and the relationships and time frames are pretty tangled. Half the fun, of course, is unravelling all of it (especially the relationships), but a simple list of characters would have helped. The publisher should really consider doing that in the paperback edition.
Second, as a result of keeping the notes above, I realized that one character is referred to by two different names, with no narrative reason or explanation. The character is "Carswell" who is also referred to in a couple of places as "Gladwell." I think it's just a mistake or an editorial problem or something. That should also definitely be corrected in future editions.
This is a well-written book, with a lot of depth, an interesting plot, and some despicable characters doing nasty things to each other - and I mean that in the most complimentary way possible.

Robert Citino establishes quite convincingly that the German army's methods in the opening years of World War II were little different, from a doctrinal standpoint, than its traditional methods before the advent of armor. It was World War I and its defensive stance in 1944 and 1945 that were the aberration, in his view -- ironically, given the excellence of its defensive skills. From the days of Frederick William (the Great Elector) in the 15th century to the coming of World War II in the 20th, the Germans stressed the offensive, rapid movement and flank attack. Citino's work is masterfully researched and extremely well-written. He makes his points clearly and moves on. Well worth adding to your library if you have an interest in the material.

Don't get me wrong. This is a great book! Very well written academic scholarship for the general public. I had a hard time putting it down. Citino really master the subject and the vast array of litterature used. His thoughts and ideas are brought forth in a credible and reader-friendly format. It could do with some more maps though. Add those and it'll get 5 stars.

Highly recommended!

~The German Way of War: From the Thirty Years' War to the Third Reich~ is a sweeping historical overview of the Germany Way of War. Well-written and intriguing, Citino offers a fresh perspective on Prussian military strategy and its implementation in the great battles of the modern world. This book is timely and relevant to the strategy of military operations today. In a controversial and fresh perspective, Robert Citino wonderfully illustrates the recurrent pattern of German military operations. He demonstrates how German history had contributed to her peculiar tactics, and how the Germany Way of War served her well. From Fredrick the Great's victory at Leuthen to Moltke's triumph at Koniggratz, the Germans relied on superior speed and the use of shrewd, impromptu tactics at the operational level.

Frederick William I as the originator of the Prussian way of war in the modern era, had prescribed a recurring mode for German warfare, namely kurz und vives ("short and lively") wars. The geostrategic situation of the Germans throughout history left her vulnerable to conquest on all sides. Situated in the center of the European continent ("die Macht in der Mitte"), Germania was long divided into a series of feuding fiefdoms before finally being united into a strong centralized government at the behest of Friedrich the Great.

Facing grave difficulties at fielding massive armies for any length of time, the Germans acclimated themselves to their small size, and opted for superior strength by superior strategy. Necessity dictated that they catch their enemies offguard and overwhelm them with short, aggressive, and decisive operational campaigns. Citino traces a recurrent pattern in German military operations, namely the utilization of rapid troop movements, surprise attacks, extraordinary flanking maneuvers, and an extraordinary willingness to annihilate the enemy. A student of Carl von Clausewitz sees how this bold strategy meshes perfectly with the principles elucidated by Clausewitz. For the Germans, however, war did not consist solely of adherence to abstract principles, but was an art, and an art that was forged with actual battlefield experience coupled with historical experience.

Germany's disgrace and redemption following the Napoleonic-French domination of Europe taught her the necessity of military preparedness. She further adapted Napoleonic innovations in warfare to her own successful kurz und vives strategy which showed in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 and the subsequent Great War.

In the interwar era in the 1930s, the Germans pioneered combined arms tactics, devising a potent and lethal method of integrating their new mechanized mobility of tank and aircraft into field operations. The world would later herald this strategy as blitzkreig ("lightning war"). Utilized against the French, the Poles, and the Russians, this strategy allowed for extraordinary surprise attacks whereby the Germans overwhelmed their enemies by superior strength. For the Germans, old strategic gambits such as the battle of encirclement ("Kesselschlacht") gained a new dimension with the mechanization of its armed forces. For example, in the opening months of Operation Barbarossa, the Germans inflicted devastating losses against the Russians, inflicting more than four million casualties upon the Soviet Army.

Citino also challenges the myth of Augtragstaktik ("flexible command"), and explains that it was the willingness of the Germans to delegate autonomy and freedom of action to its subordinate commanders that made her armies such a formidable foe. This tactic allowed for battlefield commanders to be more responsive to battle conditions and deploy rapid changes in tactics and strategy on a whim. During World War II, after the successful lightning war against both France and Russia, Hitler and the centralized Wehrmacht command significantly undermined the historic freedom of action in the war of attrition. This implosion in the command structure proved detrimental to the long-term success of their military operations; and stood athwart German historical experience in military operations. Essentially, Nazi Germany's failure was to consolidate its gains, which led to the characteristic sluggishness in the command structure following the counter-attacks of their enemies and their own counter-insurgency directed at enemy guerrilla operations. Accordingly, careful historical inquiry shows that it was never Germany's kurz und vives tactics that failed her, but rather her failed post-attack strategy to consolidate and solidify her gains. As well, historian Richard Overy documents Nazi Germany's logistics failures to resupply its armies, and demonstrates how its production capacity was insufficiently utilized at the onset of the war. On 25 Februrary, 1947, the Allied Control Commission issued Decree 46, declaring, "The Prussian state, which from the early days had been the bearer of militarism and reaction in Germany, has de facto ceased to exist..." As Citino explains following the collapse of Nazi Germany, the Prussian State was abolished, and in many ways her military culture went with her: "Apparently, in the age of nuclear weapons, the world could no longer tolerate a state in the heart of Europe dedicated to the prosecution of 'short and lively' wars."

Breathtaking in scope, brilliant in execution, this is a wonderful contribution to military science. Historian Robert Citino is to be commended for this excellent book.

After reading Robert Citino's excellent books "Quest for Decisive Victory" and "Blitzkrieg to Desert Storm", I was excited to read his latest book. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a disappointment. Citino reduces the German way of war down to a few basic concepts: the limited resources of the Prussian state created a need to keep wars "short and lively" (kurz und vives) which, in turn, led to a focus on operational maneuvers (bewegungskrieg) to achieve decisive victories, preferably by flanking or better yet encircling the enemy (kesselschlacht). Subordinate commanders were given wide latitude and could even flout orders with few or no consequences (the independence of subordinate commanders). For someone who echoes Moltke's disdain for catchphrases, he uses them a lot.

He makes the point that the German army's shortcomings were mostly the flipside of their virtues, although he doesn't discuss this in much detail. He also puts forth the idea that the independence of subordinate commanders derived from the unique social contract between the Junker class and the monarchy. It is an interesting, if not entirely convincing, argument. After all, as he explains, many of the best (and most independent-minded) officers of the 17th, 18th and even early 19th centuries were not Junkers, but foreign mercenaries.

His evidence is also a bit one-sided: it is easy enough to come up with a list of cautious and/or defensively-minded generals to put against his litany of aggressive "attack dogs" (his phrase). Which does not invalidate the truth or value of his conclusions: they help make clear many choices by German generals that otherwise seem inexplicable. But once you get this far, there's no more to say. Citino just keeps pounding away at these few points over and over again, as if we were third graders being taught the multiplication table. If I never see the phrase "kurz und vives" again, it will be too soon. Is there nothing more to the "German Way of War"?

It would have been more interesting if he had explored some other aspects of the German army's performance; particularly such contradictory points as its excellence in defense when its doctrine was so focused on the attack. At the least, he needed to explain better how these doctrines were transmitted down the generations. Saying that it was bred into their genes is a singularly useless metaphor. Certainly Frederick the Great thoroughly imbued these ideas into his army; his comment that the Prussian army only attacks sums up much of Citino's thesis. But only British subsidies allowed him to replace the soldiers his doctrine killed off. His victory at Rossbach did not keep the French off his back, a British-Hannoverian army did that. This is hardly a resounding endorsement. Geriatric generals who began their careers under Frederick help explain the disasters at Jena and Auerstadt. But why, after such clear proof that it was not a panacea, was it still treated as dogma in 1866, 1870, 1914 and 1939?

The book has its strong points. It's basic thesis is clear and well (overly?) supported, if a bit simplistic. Citino does a first-class job of describing many interesting campaigns and battles from 1656 to 1941; although this is rather spoiled by the few and sketchy maps. He does a better job at bringing to life the key characters: the Great Elector (Grosser Kurfurst), Seydlitz, Derfflinger, Frederick the Great, Clausewitz, Moltke and Schlieffen. It is fascinating, but totally irrelevant, how many of these names ended up on German battleships and battlecruisers. The footnotes (as always with Citino's books) do an excellent job of pointing you to further reading on every topic or event discussed.

His final conclusion, that by 1941 the independence of command crucial to the German Way of War had been rendered obsolete by advances in technology, rings hollow. Certainly Rommel, Manstein, Patton and others were prepared to flout orders when they saw the need, right up to the end of the war. Ultimately, in spite of its strengths, I found this book disappointing.

This is another excellent book by author Citino who consistently maintains a very high level of scholarship and analysis in all his works.

Although the sub-title is "From the Thirty Years' War to the Third Reich", the Thirty Years War was from 1618 to 1648 and this book really starts with 1675 and the birth of the Prussian Army. Some may criticize Citino's thesis because it does not look at other German states like Hannover and Bavaria, but the Prussian dominance from 1870 onwards renders other studies relatively meaningless to understand why the Germans did what they did in World Wars One and Two (militarily.)

The central theme is that the German Army was organized and constructed for a very rapid mobilization of well-trained troops able to drive a single campaign through to the defeat of the enemy. However, the infrastructure of the German economy was left relatively intact, so long wars caused unacceptible stresses and defeat. The three Prussian wars in the 19th century proved the validity of the quick war, and the strategy for defeating the Entente in World War I followed the same line. Unfortunately for the Germans, the campaign of 1914 against the French and British did not achieve victory, and in some respects, its failure doomed German aspirations.

In World War II, Hitler, the OKH and OKW all constructed plans for rapid campaigns, and initially in Poland, Holland, Belgium and France they were successful. Barbarossa did not achieve its ends in Russia, however, and the turning point was reached according to Halder and other high-ranking officers following the setbacks before Moscow. A single chance remained -- that of defeating the remaining Soviet armies in the summer offensive of 1942, but by July (well before Stalingrad) the handwriting was on the wall.

The German logistical concepts were also oriented towards quick campaigns, and both in the winter of 1914/15 and 1941/2 the German armies experienced severe supply problems. What had gone wrong was simply that a long campaign was not planned for, and commanders were forced to improvise to an extreme degree. Some writers have even characterized the German Army of 1940/41 as a Schaufensterarmee (show window army), all for show instead of being a well-supplied, long term military machine. Following France's defeat in 1940, Hitler even reduced military equipment production -- an act in hindsight that appears to be the untimate in folly.

A second major point in Citino's work is the development of the officer corps and its Auftragstaktik (mission-oriented tactics) and the issuing of orders specifying the mission and leaving execution up to the field commanders. Bolstering this was the Army's excellent training of officers, both in staff and line functions, and the pushing of authority and responsibility for accomplishing the mission all the way down to the squad leader and assistant squad leader level. Although American films like to present German officers and men as blindly following orders, in actual reality German officers and NCOs enjoyed more freedom in decision-making than American officers. Not surprisingly, after World War II the American Army adopted German training and testing methods on a wholesale basis.

With respect to discipline and ruthlessness, Citino noted that the German Army carried out 22,000 death sentences in World War II as compared to only 48 in World War I. These are undebated statistics, but the vast majority of death sentences were carried out on the Eastern Front while the Wehrmacht was in retreat, and commanders such as Schoerner and Model consistently resorted to draconian methods to maintain effective resistance. It is quite possible that such methods were necessary, since the two commanders named were better able than others to halt the Soviet advances late in the war.

At any rate, this is a thought-provoking and highly interesting book. It is a significant addition to the military historian's library, and I recommend it without qualification. It is difficult for me to understand some reviewers' low ratings. Even if one resists the author's thesis and conclusions, this book is so well done that it deserves a high rating.

The reader would be well advised to read this book in conjunction with Citino's other fine work on German Army doctrine and training, "The Path To Blitzkrieg."

The Franco-Prussian War is an unusual conflict in that it is in many ways a study in contrasts. Historically, it set the stage for two twentieth century conflagrations even as it settled scores from the early nineteenth century. Politically, it marked the zenith of French national influence, and the ascendancy of a united German power. Finally, militarily, it offered the first widespread use of breech-loading rifles and modern artillery, even as it often languished in the tactics of an earlier age.

It takes a broad brush to capture all of these elements, and in this book, Michael Howard has succeeded admirably. He has taken an often overlooked conflict and placed it squarely at the crossroads of modern Europe, and a new, more terrible type of war. For while the American Civil War (or even the Crimean War) is often referred to as the first modern war, it is in fact in the Franco-Prussian War that we see all the key elements of modern warfare: national mobilization, citizen soldiers under the guidance of a professional general staff, and the ascendancy of industrialization in both transport and new, more destructive, weapons. At the same time, newer, more insidious developments in the form of guerrilla warfare and the targeting of civilians centers for strategic reasons first make their appearance on a large scale.

Arising out of French objections to the Prussian selection of the Spanish monarch, this war, like many before and since, arose out of a complete lack of French appreciation for the changes that had overtaken the battlefield. While the French had relied on a small, professional army, the Prussians had adopted a model of mandatory service that allowed them to raise massive, reasonably competent forces with unprecedented speed. Thus, when hostilities broke out the French, who had assumed an easy victory, were caught on their heels and never regained the initiative.

Thus from the summer of 1870 through the depths of winter and into 1871, the story of the Franco-Prussian War is the story of the courage of the French soldier being failed utterly by inept leadership. It wasn't in the strength of Prussian arms, or in the courage of its soldiers that the war was won; rather, it was in the ability of the centralized Prussian command structure to adapt rapidly to events when their French counterparts were still in the dark that victory was secured.

Thus, while Howard's writing on the actual combat is vivid, it is in his appreciation of the fundamentally new Prussian way of war that he is most successful. From the king, through the Bismarck and Moltke, and on down through the rest of the senior command, he paints a vivid portrait of Prussian ideals and ambition. Conversely, he is equally successful at capturing the decrepitude and ineptness of a fragmented French government that lost the war in its opening days, and then prolonged it, to the never ending suffering of its soldiers, long after all hope was lost. Likewise along these lines, Howard nicely illustrates the increasing conflict that inevitable comes between politicians and the military in an era of total war.

That said, I do have a few minor complaints. The first is that Howard almost never translates quotes from the original French or German, and while I was just barely able to muddle through with what I remember from high school and college, any one who hasn't been exposed to these languages would certainly be frustrated. Secondly, as anyone familiar with European politics knows, nothing happens in a vacuum, and yet Howard spends precious little time discussing the implications of the conflict within the international system of the time. Finally, while Howard offers many maps, they offer little to know information about troop positions and lines of march, which leaves the reader flipping back rather than digesting a detailed map at a glance.

However, these are minor complaints about an otherwise eminently successful work. Howard has packed a tremendous amount of research into a readable and digestible volume. His appreciation of the politics and personalities is matched only by his understanding of the weapons of war and the nature of combat. Not only is this a successful history of the Franco-Prussian war, but also a model of what good history writing should be: balanced, well researched, and above all, readable. Finally, Howard's success elevates the Franco-Prussian War to its rightful significance as one of the root causes of the tensions that led to WWI, and hence, to WWII. Thus the student of history should appreciate this work not just for its success in considering immediate events, but for providing a bridge from the Great Power politics of the nineteenth century to the wars of the twentieth.

Jake Mohlman

I don't know enough about the Franco-Prussian War to criticize the research and the facts presented. But this is certainly not an enjoyable book to read. If that is a factor for you, be warned.

I actually have not finished the book yet, so forgive my hypocrisy. From an information and accuracy perspective it is probably the best book on the war. However it is a bit of a tough read, so be prepared. Howard details technology and warfare of the time, along with politics and the like and the book doesn't miss much. However, perhaps that is the reason it seems so long. overall I would say a good book.

Howard does a masterful job in detailing the the military preparations of both sides before the conflict, describing the war itself, and even going into some detail about the increasing importance of technology in "modern" warfare (especially transport). However, there are some shortcommings - the chief among them are the maps. While they are useful in giving the reader an idea of what happened where, they really needed to be more detailed, showing troop movements and positions. I also thought the lack of perspective on the war was disappointing - after all, the Franco-Prussian war was instrumental in the creation of German nationhood, the birth of the Fourth republic, and a foundation stone of the First World War. None of these important after-effects were discussed in any detail whatsoever. As a book of pure military history, though, Howard's book is beyond reproach.

This is a very detailed account of the military and - to a lesser extent - political maneuverings of the Franco-Prussian War. Given the detail and the heavy footnoting, it is a surprisingly brisk read, though I do have one suggestion to assist future readers: photocopy the various pages that have maps on them so you can easily refer to them as you read on. Since I hadn't thought of this idea while reading the book, I found myself holding two or even three such pages open with the fingers of my left hand while reading battle descriptions many, many pages later.

One disappointment was in the very brief epilogue. The author discusses how the speed of the Prussian victory raised the stakes for all European powers, Germany in particular, but the author does not really discuss the aftermath of the war in France or explain how France formed a post-war government given the fractious way it had fought the war. Every history needs to stop at some point, of course, but a brief explanation of France's recovery seems in order.

I know it sounded like a good idea. The story of childhood friends and authors Truman Capote and (Nelle) Harper Lee has so many facets it is seemingly open to endless interpretation. In 1959, the two writers went to Kansas to research the murders that became the subject of Capote's legendary book, "In Cold Blood" (1966). The experience was so disquieting and traumatic; so powerful that it seems to have haunted their consciences and dampened their literary output forever. Almost 50 years later, the story has never been told nor dramatized so often as in the last several years. To fully enjoy "Capote in Kansas: A Ghost Story," the reader needs to know the backstory, and know it well. Kim Powers integrates real-life figures and events with fictional characters with some facility, but the novel falls short of casting the spell a novel of this subgenre should. A book like this really needs to effortlessly glide the reader into suspension of disbelief, and the ghosts need to appear to the reader, not just the characters. The reader who is unfamiliar with many of the books, historical works and movies that inspired Kim Powers to write his ghost story may find this a frustrating read to say the least. It seems to me to be pointless to pick up "Capote in Kansas" if the title doesn't ring an immediate, loudly pealing bell.

Powers creates a characterization of Nelle that seems plausible, but again, only if you have read other books ahead of this one. Both the fictional and real-life Nelles seem to have been so intelligent. Why did they let Truman get away with emotional blackmail for so long? Several of Capote's best-realized characters were emotional thieves, too, having been dreamed up by a master. The best of Capote's late short stories is "Handcarved Coffins," which is dominated by such a manipulator. Unfortunately, Powers retells the entire story to set up a leitmotif, which would have been more successful had it not come across as "variations on a theme by Capote."

In fairness to Kim Powers, this is a tricky premise to master. E. L. Doctorow's "Ragtime" (1975) is the blueprint for all such novels that have appeared in the last 35 years; Doctorow set himself an ambitious task and fulfilled it magnificently. Some books, like Tracy Chevalier's "Girl With A Pearl Earring," succeed quite well. On the other hand, Chris Bohjalian's "The Double Bind," in which he attempts to weave characters from "The Great Gatsby" into a present-day story, doesn't work at all. "Capote in Kansas: A Ghost Story" is not a disaster. Powers may have simply been too caught up in the story to do it justice, even as fiction. He would not be the first.

appropriate enough, given the disembodied legs on the cover...but cover art notwithstanding, Powers grabs you from page one and will not let you go until you have read the last word.

A few caveats: it will definitely help if you know the stories of In Cold Blood and To Kill a Mockingbird; knowledge of Capote and Lee outside of these stories is a definite plus. Powers freely admits that he takes liberties with the histories (and true fans of above will certainly spot them). But the important things to know about this book: Powers is a canny story teller, a skilled writer, and a polished wordsmith. He gets into the minds of his characters and brings the reader right along with him. There are a few heart stopping moments; a great deal of build up and suspense, and a great deal of satisfaction in the denouemont.

This book is admittedly for a pretty rareified audience, but I certainly enjoyed it. I think that's what makes it worth the read; Powers assumes intelligence in his reader. Highly recommended.

Kim Powers's fictional account of the friendship between Harper Lee and Truman Capote long after their climb to fame and publishing success is an interesting point of view which will both please and anger fans of the two infamous authors. As a huge Capote fan, having read both Gerald Clarke and George Plimpton's books which inspired Powers, I was quite pleased for the most part.

The Capote that Powers has painted here was probably very close to the way Truman actually was in his final days. He still craved success, determined to write the masterpiece Answered Prayers, but the booz and the drugs got in the way. He had few friends left, having upset most of them, and was probably very lonely. Here, Powers writes that Capote is haunted by the ghosts of the Clutter family and one of their killers, Perry. This "ghost story" plot definitely kept the pages turning for me.

The fictional story line of Harper Lee could probably be much more appreciated by other reviewers here if Lee herself was not still alive. Since Lee has remained very private, it's intriguing to imagine what her relationship was like with Truman during this time. The rumor that Truman wrote her book for her is addressed in this book, and I think Kim Powers handles it well.

Other real-life traits of the two authors also help to flavor this work including their trip to Kansas to investigate the Clutter murders, Truman's housekeeper, Harper's sister Alice, Truman's Black and White ball, Harper's real-life childhood inspiration for her book, Truman's Halloween Party when he was a kid, his snake-bite kit crafts, and Truman's relationship with Joanne Carson. There are also many hidden suggestive references to their writing and characters which fans will enjoy discovering throughout the book.

For hesistant readers, I'd suggest flipping to the back and reading the author's notes first. Powers takes the time to let you know what really happened and what didn't in case you don't already know. Overall, I thought this was a great read although the conclusion seemed a bit rushed for me. Some of the lines are a bit cliche and I'm surprised they got by an editor, but if you take them into perspective as part of the dreamy, haunting story Powers was trying to create here, they actually fit quite nicely.


Check out my own Listmania List, which I created because of this book, for other work from and about Capote and Harper which you might find of interest.

Kim Powers has crossed the line by inserting the made-up actions, thoughts and conversations of a living author into a work of fiction. And instead of being lambasted for the unmitigated gaul of it by Publishers Weekly, the author is praised for thrusting a pulp fiction-style invasion of privacy into the very private world of Harper Lee because the author's fans "will welcome" it.

Hardly. If Harper Lee were less private, this matter might very well have already ended up in court.

Had Powers written about two fictional authors, or authors both long dead, this book might be worthy of praise. But of course, without the names "Capote" and "Lee" attached to it, there would be lower sales. Kim Powers knows how to write well in spite of the sagging end of this novel.

Were the novel perfect in its prose and construction, the abomination of this work would be even greater for more would read it and more would praise it, thinking, I suppose, that we have a right to peer through the windows--fictional or otherwise--of living people simply because doing so will help us understand them better.

Fans of Truman Capote and Harper Lee would have probably found Capote in Kansas to be irresistible even before the two recent movie treatments of Capote's life and Mockingbird: A Portrait of Harper Lee, the unauthorized biography published last year. But since the book and movies have raised public interest in Capote and Lee to its highest level in the last two decades Kim Powers could not have published his novel at a more perfect time.

Capote in Kansas is set in 1984, just a few weeks before Capote's death from liver disease in the home of his longtime friend Joanne Carson, Johnny's second wife. Through flashbacks to 1959 Kansas, when the pair did the research for Capote's In Cold Blood, and to their childhood days in rural Alabama, Powers explains the powerful bond between the two, imagines what may have caused them to stop speaking to each other for so many years, and unfolds a devastatingly sad version of what their lives became after each was visited by relatively sudden fame and fortune.

Powers imagines a time shortly before Capote's death during which Capote suddenly telephones Lee in the middle of the night, after years of silence between the two, with a panicked plea for her help to rid his bedroom of Nancy Clutter's ghost. Nancy is not happy about having been turned into a celebrity by Capote's book and her ghost eventually visits even Nelle Harper. But this book is not really a ghost story. Rather, it is an unblinking look at two people who despite the powerful bonds of a shared childhood and so many years as best friends allowed themselves to drift apart for reasons the rest of us can only speculate about.

Neither Capote nor Lee ever published a book after the successes of their two masterpieces but they handled that fact very differently. Capote became a regular on the celebrity circuit of television talk shows, for years working hard to maintain the illusion that he was on the verge of publishing his next big book. Lee quietly moved back to Alabama to live with her older sister in the family home and has maintained her privacy and silence regarding Capote and any future writing projects ever since.

Capote's inability to complete another book was compounded, if not caused outright, by his years of alcohol and drug addiction. Many, as Powers does here, have speculated that his behavior may also be the reason that Lee has never published another book. Capote is likely to have been responsible for the rumor that he, not Harper Lee, was the author of To Kill a Mockingbird. At the least, it was a rumor he encouraged by his refusal to ever deny it. Some think that Lee was so embarrassed and tormented by the rumor that she simply decided that she had had enough of fame and retreated to small town Alabama to live out the rest of her days.

Capote in Kansas is a nice blend of fact and fiction and, although they will be somewhat saddened by its contents, fans of Capote and Lee will enjoy it.

With the racial connotations of much that Ellis discusses in this book, I wonder if calling his book The "Dark" Side of the Left has any subconscious footing.
The book starkly keeps out the failings of liberalism itself. In fact, even though he uses the word "illiberal" in his title, there is no discussion of liberalism at all.

in the end, my friend, postmodernism worships the god of the free market. Alarmists should be happy.

This is an important book, not because it "exposes" the "hypocracy of the left". Such right-wing polemics are common, and usually worthless. In fact, it is by no means anti-left.

Unlike right-wing polemicists, who lose no opportunity to show their disgust of ideas such as black liberations, women's rights, or seperation of church and state, Ellis supports these ideas. His point is not that the IDEAS are "bad"--but that "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". Ellis argues that it is precisely BECAUSE the nominal goal of many leftist movements is so appealing that such organizations, in practive, become, first, beurocratic and inefficient, and finally tyrannical and cultic. Utopianism leads to extremism: if your goal is "make money", it's unlikely that you will kill millions to achieve it--it's not worth the trouble. But if your goal is "world peace forever", you just might: after all, what are the lives of a few people compared to this magnificent goal?

An excellent example, given by Ellis, is Bellamy's "Looking Backwards"--a look back, from the year 2000, which lives in utopian socialism, at all the capitalistic injustices of 1900. The "tiny" problem is that, in order to achieve this utopia, most of Bellamy's adherents were quite willing to commit murder and arson in order to get rid of the "evil capitalists". The DID succeed in doing that in Russia--but, of course, Bellamy's utopia never materialized.

This book is important because of the asymmetry between right and left extremism. The difference is not that the left extremists are essentially worse than the right extremists (Ellis notes, rightly, that it is Utopianism that is the problem--whether a "left-wing" or "right-wing utopia doesn't matter); it is that people are already aware that nazism and fascism weren't such hot ideas, and not too many are aware that the soft-spoken "liberal" professor in your local college town is working along the same lines....

The one problem with this book is that it takes the left too seriously. Unlike Russia before the revolution, the left in the US is, essentially, confined to college campuses and a few "enclaves" such as Greenwich Village and Berkeley. The risk of "totaliatarian thought control" by extremist academics is a problem for the tiny minority working in the humanities; not nice, but not exactly the same as life under Stalin or Hitler. Everybody else--from academics in business or science to the "average Joe"--can free themselves from these supposedly "powerful" organizations by simply ignoring them (which, incidentally, they do.)

Ellis, who IS part of this minority, naturally sees the threat very seriously; but becoming hysterical about the "evils of the politically correct university" can lead to the same extreme actions--only from the right--against anybody suspected of being a "radical leftist"; the same kind of witch-hunt that Ellis, rightly, abhors whether it is from the right or the left.

The remarkable capacity of mankind to hear what he wants to hear while disregarding the rest is as evident in the close mindedness of the Left as it is in the religious zealotry of the Right. Ellis does a fine job of bringing this compartmentalized brain syndrome condition into focus as he covers all the bases while uncovering the corruption of the various Liberal bastions. We need more intellectually honest social critics like Ellis to call the hand of the Tom Hayden's of the world. Anything to increase the speed of the pendulum as it continues its swing back toward the political middle. It can't happen soon enough

An interesting book to read as a companion piece to Ellis' book is "Damned Lies and Statistics" by Joel Best. In it he discloses the methods that institutional elite's, who would have their way with you, manipulate statistics to their gain and to your loss. H.G Wells predicted that the ability to think statistically would become as important, to citizens of a democracy, as the ability to read and write. In this statement he was, and is, correct.

Loved it. Cheers, thanks a lot!