Alabama Books

I got through this study of a hardline Secessionist in just a few days as it is so very interesting and well put together. There's lots of good American history to read and this certainly deserves to go on lists of excellent up-to-date works.
Chapel Hill produces books that are a pleasure to hold

One day, Lucien Bouchard promised, he would build himself a home exactly like his boyhood ancient chateau. And he sensed that it might be far, far from his childhood Normandy. He would have to conquer a new land, do battle against men stronger than himself and struggle to maintain a hold on his heart and soul. Windhaven would rise from American soil, raw earth softened by the sweat, blood and tears of one man...and those who loved him. This is the first book in the Windhaven series.

The Amazon "Book Description" from the book jacket is a fair account of the book. But what exactly is in it?
The papers were originally presented at the 48th Annual meeting of the Midwest Archaeological Conference in Columbus, Ohio held in October 2002 and the 68th Annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology in Milwaukee, Wis., held in April 2003

The 15 papers in the Contents are:
-Woodland Taxonomy in the Middle Ohio valley:a historical overview
-Adena and Hopewell in the Middle Ohio valley:To be or not to be/
-Archaeology at the Edges of Time and Space: Working across and between Woodland period taxonomic units in Central Ohio
-The Bullock site: A forgotten mound in Woodford County, Kentucky
-Walker_Noe: An early early middle Woodland Adena mound in Central Kentucky
-Middle Woodland Ritualism in the Central Bluegrass: Evidence from the Amburgey site, Montgomery County, Kentucky
-Adena: rest in peace?
-Reflections on taxonomic practice
-learning from the Past: The History of Ohio Hopewell taxonomy and it's Implications for Archaeological practice
-Rethinking the Code complex, a Post Hopewellian Archaeological unit in Central Ohio
-The Many Messages of Death: Mortuary practices in the Ohio valley and Northeast
-taxonomic homogeneity and Cultural Divergence in the Midcontinent
-Valley View: Hopewell taxonomy in the Middle Ohio region
-Building Woodland Archaeological units in the Kanawha River Basin, West Virginia
-Some comments on Woodland taxonomy in the Middle Ohio valley

This is a book for graduate students or archaeologists working in the subject. Better choices for others are:
G Milner "The Moundbuilders: ancient peoples of eastern North America" 2005 or
Bradley T Lepper "Ohio Archaeology:An Illustrated Chronicle of Ohio's ancient Indian Cultures" 2005

This big book biography is a great way to introduce the life of Rosa Parks to emergent readers. The book begins with the showcasing of Rosa's humble beginnings as a small child and concludes with the epic struggle of the Montgomery Bus Boycott. In spite of the controversial issues of race relations between white and black people, neither group is portrayed in a negative manner. Although the graphic showing of houses being burn to the ground by the KKK will and may provoke questions by young readers who in all likelyhood are beginning to understand the historical conflicts of America. Because of its big size, and this book is "immense," no listener who is within 20 feet away will say that he or she cannot see the pictures. Notwithstanding, the pictures could have been more colorful.

I think this book is a bit inconsistent, as other reviewers have pointed out, and often has factual errors. By inconsistent I mean he spends many pages on one song and then dismisses another in a few sentences. The author's biases and personal taste are apparent in these instances, and the reader loses out on decent critical analysis for the songs the author deems trivial. There are also factual errors throughout the book (though he may have corrected them in the most recent edition - I have only read the first edition): for instance, attributing certain instrumentations to the wrong Beatle (i.e., the "Taxman" solo to George), just flat out quoting the lyrics wrong (i.e., misquoting the line as "shook" instead of "shoot me" in "Come Together"), or misrepresenting the meaning of a song (i.e., "A Day in the Life").

For all its faults, there is a little insight into the Beatles' music contained within, and it's always interesting to hear others' perspectives on the Beatles, but I would not consider this book to be definitive in any respect.

I love this book. The author's trenchant, insightful analysis of the Beatles' music is nothing short of scholarly. He brilliantly discusses what the Beatles used to create their own unique sound. Fans will no doubt love and appreciate the Beatles all the more.

Tim Riley's research into the background of each Beatle is accurate and well done. He piques readers' interest in the group all the more by making them more aware of the influences that led them to create the songs they did.

This book is one musicians, guitarists in particular will love. Readers are treated to discussions of chord progressions so as to play Beatle songs the Beatles' way.

I enjoyed this book immensely. I appreciated the song-by-song analysis from someone who obviously is a true scholar of music -- his articulation of what were the ingredients that went into making the Beatles' music so great truly enhanced my appreciation of them.

His knowledge of biographical and historical information -- such priceless vignettes as John's gleeful enjoyment of an obscure, chaotic Side B by a one-hit wonder group -- puts their music in a wider context, further deepening our understanding of how their music developed.

I dabble in music theory so I did appreciate the technical aspects of the book, such as getting into chord progression and such. I read this book many times -- it has provided me with many enjoyable hours.

I did not like the Beatles when I first heard them in high school, but by the time Sgt. Pepper came out, I had matured enough to discover that they were a very special phenomenon. Now there are so many books about them that it is hard to know what to read to get the best sense of their contribution to music. I recommend Tim Riley's book for that purpose. The best thing about this book is that it will increase your sensitivity to the Beatles creative art as you listen to their songs. If you pay attention, you will be able to hear the way Paul brings the bass in to support the lead guitar or to counter the drums. You can hear how Ringo changes the beat in accord with what the song is trying to convey, and you have a better sense of how the words and music work together.

As other reviewers have noted, it does require some knowledge of music, notably chord theory, to understand some of the details, I do not think it is entirely necessary. I know just enough about chords to understand major and minor changes and what they mean to the music, but I get lost when he goes into descriptions of the tonic and dominant. You will also need to know a lot about percussion, because he refers not generally to Ringo's drumming, but to what he is using (high hats, tom-toms, snare, etc.). It is clear from this book that Ringo contributed more to the group than he is usually credited with doing. He is the one, according to Riley, who was able to subdue his ego and try to keep everything together with his beat and ability to complement everyone else.

Riley likes John Lennon the best and tends to favor whatever Lennon did, albeit not uncritically. He gives Paul a rougher time, putting down any song that lacks an edge or an angle as another "silly love song" unless it rises to the level of a standard such as "Yesterday." Unlike other reviewers, I did not find his analysis of George Harrison's contribution to be all that insulting, but I do think he understated Harrison's contributions as a forward looking instrumentalist. Riley has a low opinion of the vocal abilities of both Starr and Harrison, but it is true that both (and a lot of other singers) suffer in comparison to both Lennon and McCartney, whose vocalizing was overshadowed by their composing talent.

You also need to understand that he is writing his opinions of the meanings of the lyrics and the reasons the Beatles did certain things musically. His bias shows clearly. He admires the group and his disappoint over some of their less than stellar creations is palpable. It is a very high standard that they set for themselves and, although Riley acknowledges the timeless nature of their best work, he is scathing in his criticism of their more mediocre efforts. Bruce Greenfield's review is correct in saying that Riley pontificates a bit too much. I also found it irritating that he claims to know exactly what the lads were trying to do with each note and word. Again, these are only Riley's opinions. Another problem I had with that is that he goes into great detail on the songs he likes and admires, but if a song does not measure up to that, he will give it a sentence or two, dismissively.

I found value in the book from his ability to explain some of the innovations the Beatles developed from the very beginning of their career. A few of these are almost common knowledge to rock fans, such as the use of feedback at the start of "I Feel Fine" to George Harrison's introduction of the sitahr. There are some very good insights that never occurred to me, though. Riley points out that the lyrics to "She Loves You" break new ground in that although it is sung in the first person, the singer is speaking to a friend rather than to the listener. Their music conveys a sense of excitement and joy in carrying this good news. Another example is from McCartney's bridge in "Day in the Life," which is marked by a quicker sharper beat from Ringo. Riley notes that this beat evokes the "corporate precision" of every day life, but notes that while this may seem like waking from Lennon's nightmare verses, it becomes hard to tell who is singing about the real nightmare.

You really have to listen to the song while reading the book and even then, it is often hard to hear what Riley is writing about. He devotes a lot of words to explaining how different sounds come from the right, left or center in stereo, but I found it hard to detect these even after numerous playing. Perhaps, as others have pointed out, it is very hard to hear without the 1982 masters.

Riley uses the albums that were originally issued on Parlophone and neither the US Capitol releases (which were a greedy manipulation of the buying public while sacrificing the art of the Beatles created in sequencing the songs) nor CDs. Younger readers will have difficulty relating to his idea of endings and beginnings of vinyl sides, which CDs have rendered meaningless.

In the second edition, Riley gives a bow to Mark Lewisohn's book "The Beatles Recording Sessions," which is a description based on Lewisohn's hearing of all of the Beatle's master tapes. This book has its own insights and I would recommend it as a less harsh book than this one. Riley did not have the use of Lewisohn's book in writing "Tell Me Why," and it is clear that he would have benefited from it. The two authors disagree on a number of points so it would is useful to have the balance of their opposing views.

I loved this book. I don't know why so many people seemed to have a problem with it. Tim Riley is a knowledgable music critic,schooled in musical theory and an expert on classical music. He also absolutely adores the Beatles' music. With very few exceptions,he loves everything they ever did and tells,in great detail exactly what it was musically,that made them so special. Each and every song from Love Me Do to Let it Be,just like the title says,album by album, song by song. Actually,my love of the Beatles' music is a viceral thing. From the moment I first heard the opening chords of I Want to Hold Your Hand,this music seemed to enter my blood stream. I still get the same feeling whenever I listen to certain favorite songs,or hear their voices in harmony. But I never understood it in musical theory terms. The chord progressions, changes from major to minor chords in the same song, this had never been done before in pop music, only classical,until the Beatles. This is what excited everybody about their music but only other musicians can describe it accurately. Us lay people just think, "that song makes me cry" or "wow, I've never heard anything like this before". Riley dissects each song,practically note by note,every guitar lick,bass line, and drum fill. He particularly loves Rubber Soul and Revolver sighting them as two of the greatest albums of all time. He also loves Please Please Me, With the Beatles, and A Hard Day's Night. So he doesn't just give their later music a lot of acclaim,which would have been annoying. He feels that all of these albums were important, along with Abbey Road and the White Album. He describes them in a way that makes you think of them as little works of art. Each one pivotal and ground breaking in their own unique way. He also describes why each Beatle was wonderful and essential to the greatness of each song and album. He never lets you forget that they were an ensemble. He worships John and Paul's singing, calling McCartney's voice, "peerless". He details their songwriting and George's. He talks about how BOTH Lennon and McCartney were melodists, not only McCartney. He points out Paul's melodic,inventive bass lines,George and John's brilliant guitar work (not just George's like other books have). And he loves Ringo,calling his drumming underrated, because it was. He goes into so much detail about Ringo's drumming that it made me sit up and take notice of it also. Listen to 'Rain' and 'Ticket to Ride' and Ringo's live drumming, which he also loves. He dissects the Live at the BBC cds, and after reading that long section,I've begun to listen to all the things he hears on them. I see what a great live band they were. This book made me listen to their music from a fresh perspective, and I realize that I never really HEARD their music until now. There is so much going on, on their records. So much to listen to. While reading this book you need to have a cd player handy and a good pair of head phones with a bass booster. You need to be able to hear what he's talking about. In this new edition there is a section added which details the 3 Antology CDs, Live at the BBC,and others that have been released since the first edition of this book came out, in 1988.There is also a section on the solo records. You don't have to be a musician to enjoy this book either. You just have to be a fan of Beatle music.

The controversy here is the labeling of cracker culture as "Celtic" in origin. That is too broad a label even though many of the crackers probably do have some Celtic blood. McWhiney's book seems to be a study of one of the four British folkways examined in "Albion's Seed" by David Hackett Fischer, specifically what Fischer terms the backcountry migration of the Britsh border people: northern English, low country Scots, and Irish. They came over mostly in 1675-1750 and settled upcountry, away from tidewater areas, most prominently in Appalachia, and their ways became the ways of the interior south.

Once you get past the whole Celtic question, you can enjoy the wealth of primary sources cited by McWhiney, travel journals and diaries of both northerners and southerners. These first-hand accounts made me laugh out loud numerous times since I am a lifelong southerner but have made the acquaintance of many northerners in my corporate career.

An error appears in the prologue where the Roman historian Livy is described as writing in the third century B.C. This same mistake appears in another McWhiney book, "Attack and Die."

I believe that this is one of the most important books written on the social and cultural schism between the northern and southern states. The author's insight that the basic problem between the two sections is based on early colonization patterns, smells like the truth.

It can be argued that there were plenty of English descendants in the South and there were plenty of Scots-Irish in the north. Therefore a cultural divide between Celt and Anglo is unlikely. In my opinion, this is not the right angle to look at it. It is the very EARLY patterns of immigration that are, by far, the most important. Once an area is stamped with a certain culture, later immigrants drink it in like mother's milk. This may or may not be a conscious thing.

This happens everywhere. I've lived in South Louisiana and have watched how quickly Ango/Celt and even Mexican peoples are absorbed into the prevailing Cajun culture. Granted, if there is a mass migration of a certain cultural group into an area with a lesser number of individuals of a different culture, the more recent culture may swamp the earlier culture. This is not what happened in the South.

One of the South's problems is precisely that, following the initial immigration from the British Isles, immigration was relatively low in comparison to the north. Southerners therefore maintained the laid back culture of their Scots' ancestors. It's a comfortable,sociable existence and later Anglo immigrants to the South liked it. This was evidenced during the Civil War by the many northern men--men who had previously lived in the south--who joined the Confederate Army. I'm reminded of a boy who was killed on Culp's hill in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. He was wearing a Confederate uniform and his last name was Culp. He was a son from the family for which the hill was named. He went South before the war and, judging by his fatal allegiance, became an ardent southerner--and bearer of Celtic culture.

Certainly the roots of secession are multiple, but culture has to be at the top. Slavery was also important but slavery was abolished 150 years ago. Despite this, Southerners and Northerners are still suspicious of each other. Culture.

Ron Braithwaite, author of Mexican Conquest novels, "Skull Rack" and "Hummingbird God"

Although I highly recommend this book to anyone intested in understanding the culture of the American South, it is especially indispensable to Southerners seeking to understand why their ancestors did the things they did. Cracker Culture is the culmination of many years of research into what has become known as "The Celtic Thesis" (which says that Northerners and Southerners had different cultural origins and that this explained their many divisions and disagreements in the 18th and 19th centuries), and the distillation and continuation of many journal articles published by McWhiney and his frequent collaborator, Forrest McDonald. This is one of the earliest scholarly books to take the South down from its "stool of everlasting repentance" (to use Robert Penn Warren's phrase) and to investigate the cultural origins of poor white Southerners - a group that is still understudied by academic historians to this day. Although it sometimes exaggerates to get its point across, and is completely mistaken in its insistence that Celts and the Scots-Irish knew little about farming, it is a major contribution to Southern history by a major Southern historian. Perhaps McWhiney's greatest contribution in this book is when he explains the importance of open-range herding to Celts - including those from Scotland, Ireland, and the American South. In fact, as he points out (according to the 1860 agricultural census), livestock raising and herding was worth twice that year's cotton crop! That is revolutionary, and shows that the poor white yeomen farmers of the South not only kept their Scottish and Irish traditions, but also participated in the United States' predominately agricultural economy in large numbers. To top it all off, Cracker Culture, though filled with historical footnotes, was written for the layman and is a rousing and fun book to read!

I recommend Albion's seed by David Hackett Fischer for a more credible explanation of White Southern Culture. In fact it is an essential read for anyone interested in the culture of the Southern states. His research goes beyond such inaccurate terms as 'Scotch Irish' to reveal a more accurate interpretation for the identity, culture and customs of the migrants from the British Isles into this region.

This book starts with the premise that "Celtic" culture defined the south. Not so.

The coastal areas of Virginia and the Carolinas were settled by Englishmen. The mountain areas were settled by the Germans and Scotch-Irish.

The Scotch-Irish were an amalgam of Protestants from England, Scotland and France, who had settled in Ireland for a few generations before moving on to America. Even the "Scottish" element of the Scotch-Irish were not "Celtic" -- they were from the Lowlands and Borders of Scotland, areas of predominately Anglo-Saxon culture.

The only concentrated "Celtic" immigration into the South was a small group of Scottish Highlanders to North Carolina in the early 1700s. And this group, far from being hostile to England, was strongly Loyalist in the Revolution.

The great "Celtic" wave didn't begin till the Irish famines of the 1840s, and these immigrants settled overwhelmingly in the North, in New York, Boston and other urban areas.

The author takes a false premise and milks it for all it's worth to him.

I was really excited when I stumbeled upon this book in a bookstore in Florida. I lived in Phenix City for about 9 years and had heard about the book. Finally I found it and I grabbed it and headed to the register to purchase it, however somethign told me to take a look at it first. This is one of the most poorly wirtten works of literature.. or lack of literature there is.... I was flaberghasted. I would not recommend this book to anyone, much less a person that was there or had some knowledge of what had transpired. I think those who have purchased this book and liked it, must be someone that is more in love with the nostialga than actual literature.

but the book never grabs you. The story, those things ordinary people do to free themselves from evil, is what holds the reader. You'll remember the city.

For decades, Phenix City, Alabama, was the worst city in America. Young girls were enslaved into prostitution, gambling and moonshine went uncontrolled, and murder was cheap. Phenix City's Sheriff, local prosecuters and judges, and most of the other powers were deeply involved in crime and its payoffs. At the state level, the Governor and the party establishment are in debt to Phenix City's corrupt bosses--who don't are happy to bring busloads of whores in to vote on command--or to lose boxes of ballots as needed. When a local lawyer with an appetite for cleaning things up wins an election for State Attorney General, Phenix City's powers aren't about to stand by and let him close down their profitable operation. He's murdered before he can take office.

Although the Phenix City movers and shakers have never been seriously challenged, there are those who resent their actions, and there are more who believe they need to put on an appearance of caring when a prominant lawyer is gunned down in the center of town. At first, the National Guard posted to control the 'wicked city' don't find anything and don't do much. But when they approach local gas station manager and former boxer Lamar Murphy to step in as sheriff, Lamar leads them to some of the open secrets everyone in town knew about--moonshine stills, pornography, and houses of prostitution. Even Lamar has no clue, however, how deep the corruption went, or that girls as young as twelve were forced into prostitution, serving out their short lives in locked barns, beaten, and murdered.

Based on the true events in 1954, WICKED CITY is an intriguing window into the recent past, as well an impassioned plea that so-called 'victimless' crimes like prostitution can have horribly real victims.

Author Ace Atkins brings historical Phenix City, its culture of corruption, and the very real people who benefited from it and who fought it to life. Cleaning up corruption is far from costless and one of Atkins's more powerful moments comes when Murphy confronts a man who has lost his job in an illegal bar and whose children are now starving.

Possibly because it's a fictionalized version of real events, WICKED CITY doesn't have the strong central character or driving personal involvement I like to see in a mystery. While Murphy receives threats, I never really believed him to be in danger--somewhat reducing my emotional investment in the story. Similarly, I would have liked to really understand what made Murphy different from all the others who simply let the corruption of their city continue. Atkins did a stronger job with Billy Stokes, son of an illegal bar manager who falls in love with a girl who's been forced into prostitution.

Although Phenix City was real, and the events of this novel actually took place barely fifty years ago, I'd never heard of Phenix City, never knew that these events took place or that mobster-run towns weren't simply an artifact of prohibition but continued into recent times. WICKED CITY is a useful reminder of where we've been--and a warning of dangers we face.

WICKED CITY continues Ace Atkins's practice --- inaugurated in his last book, WHITE SHADOW --- of crafting a novel by basing it upon real world events visualized through a fictional prism. It concerns Phenix City, Alabama, in the early 1950s, a small town where corruption, graft and vice had taken root to the degree that, like the kudzu native to the region, it appeared to be impossible to uproot.

The relative complacency of the townspeople to the extent and degree of the wickedness --- there is no other word for it --- is shattered by the cold-blooded murder of Albert Patterson, a crime-fighting attorney who had campaigned on a promise to clean up Phenix City. Fresh off a primary victory that all but assures him of being elected the Attorney General of Alabama, Patterson is gunned down in a downtown alley. His son, John, vows to take his place, and not only to see that the killers are brought to justice but also to fulfill his campaign promise. Among John's early recruits is Lamar Murphy, a quietly upright and decent soul whose former career as a boxer has given way to a married life that involves nothing more complicated than operating a service station by day and spending time with family in the evening.

At first, Murphy is underestimated by the entrenched vice lords of the city, referred to derisively as a "palooka" and a "grease monkey." When they realize, however, that he is a serious opponent to be reckoned with, Murphy soon has a price on his head, one that will not be easy to escape. But as time passes, Murphy's example leads others to stand up as well, including witnesses to Patterson's murder who previously had been reticent to speak up. Armed with truth, a righteous indignation and firepower, Murphy and John take what is sure to be their one and only shot at cleaning up Phenix City and avenging the murder of Albert Patterson.

Atkins has done yeoman's work researching Phenix City, and the results show that. It turns out that the author had relatives who were intimately familiar --- and involved --- with the goings-on in Phenix City; indeed, one of the characters here is based on a composite of Atkins's grandfathers. Atkins met and interviewed Murphy's direct descendents as well, so that, combined with other extensive research, one feels at times while reading the book that one is in the process of actually witnessing the events. One example of many: Murphy, at one point, leads a raid on what is referred to as the "Rabbit Farm." Atkins's description of what follows, and of the premises itself, does not border on genius; it stakes the term out and marks it as posted.

So how good is WICKED CITY? As I was reading, I experienced the high that readers seek, that of total immersion, where your immediate reality is limited to what is between the covers of the book at any given moment. There were also times when I thought I was going to jump out of my skin. And right to the end, Atkins lobs subtle surprises at the reader, never letting up for a moment. You will read and re-read it, copy passages from it, jealously guard it, and run back into a burning building just to rescue your copy.

--- Reviewed by Joe Hartlaub

An incredible mix of fact and fiction takes the reader back in time and plops you back in 1950's Phenix City!
Great Read Ace!!
War Eagle!

It's hard for me to describe. I find it a nice story to read, but I feel it would be better if I did not know the truth. I spent the first 19 years of my life in and around Little River. I have 2 uncles there and my family live off County Road 59 and have for over 100 years. We are the Lamberts. And as much as I am enjoying the book thus far, I deeply regret the way he portrays my paralyzed uncle. The facts are far from right. My uncle was driving his truck, there were NOT 2 trucks "drag racing", the truck that hit my uncle was my uncle and dad's DRIVER, as my family OWNED the business he portrayed as being owned by someone else.

We spent a long time at Dixie Landing fishing on weekends, and my uncle and dad spent 16 years playing at Frosty Acres as the River Road Band. They still live down there. I moved to Huntsville 7 years ago with my own family, but still make frequent trips to South Alabama. This man will never understand our life there, where time stands still, and family is family regardless of whatever quarrels might go on.

Thank you for a good read, but next time, why not ASK the people whom you are talking about for facts, instead of every gossiper you find at the local store?

Hemphill captures each character, and has unerring diction, in this profile of life in rural southwestern Alabama. His detailed portrait of Little River and Baldwin County could stand in for any number of out-of-the-way old places in the New South. Contrary to other reviewers, I found that Hemphill does arrive at a truth, even if it isn't what many might hoped to find, namely, a Klan conspiracy to burn African-AMerican churches. Hemphill finds this, and it was news to me: the African-American family is stonger than the Anglo-American family in the Outback.

An excellent book! It reminds me somehow the situation in what formerly was called "East Germany". The thing I like the most, is that the author doesn't fall into the trap of segregation between "them" and "us". He talks to everyone and nearly everyone is talking to him. Read it!

I strongly disagreed with the Kirkus review of this book. I don't think that Hemphill went to Little River trying to make a connection between the burning of St. Joe Church and the other church burnings that had occurred elsewhere.

I think he went in order to find out what would make a bunch of drunk teen-agers want to burn a church. Indeed, he examines the race issue in Little River. While some of the inhabitants are cordial to those of other races, for many, it only goes skin-deep.

He examines the pathetic ignorance and hopelessness of that little "wide place in the road" and shows that this, probably more than anything else, led to the crime. Race didn't have everything to do with it, except that when the kids felt like burning a church, it happened to be the one black folks attended. Even as drunk as they were, it probably wouldn't have occurred to them to burn down a white church. Such is the core lack of respect they had for the black citizens of Little River and their place of worship.

I think Hemphill has written a book of great importance for us Alabamians, anyway. If we are to press forward in equalizing race relations, we must look at ourselves, and face how we feel about people of other races, and this book forces us to do just that.

Digging through Hemphill's rambling Faulknerian sentences, disfigured O'Connor-like characters, and sensationalized tabloid-type facts, I couldn't find a plot. And I knew what was going to happen. Mr. Hemphill obviously found so much gossip he couldn't stand to leave any of it out, making for a long and winding trip up and down and around and through Highway 59.

And while many of his facts were correct, many were terribly skewed: I suppose making for a more salacios tale. Read at your own risk of falling to sleep.

I never saw an Alabama game that Coach Bryant was a part of, at least that I remember, because he retired when I was a kid. But I love college football and the history and Bear was the biggest figure of all. The book does a great job on his history and achievements and is never boring but I think it may have been written with a little bit of homerism. I would like to see some of the darker sides portrayed more in depth (racism, rules violations, etc.) Overall, a great introduction to a great program, a great coach and the best sport, college football.

Dunnavant just doesn't deliver with his enamoured account of Bryant.

I suggest "The Last Coach: A Life of Paul "Bear" Bryant" by Allen Barra.

All told, "Coach: The Life of Paul 'Bear' Bryant" is probably the best in-depth analysis of Bryant as not only a coach but as a man. Although "The Last Coach", a new Bryant biography, may eventually take this particular book's place in that regard, this is nonetheless the standard text for those seeking an in-depth look at Paul "Bear" Bryant.

Most Bryant biographies lack depth and real analysis, and mostly just repeat common knowledge such as "Mama called", etc. However, this particular book thoroughly analyzes and details Bryant as he grew up in the Moro Bottoms of rural Arkansas, and what were the influences that shaped his life. It has a great section regarding Bryant as a player, and the writing on Bryant as a coach is particularly good, dealing with Bryant's views on the psychology, philosophy and strategy of the game. Moreover, the sections of the book regarding the Bryant / Butts scandal, and the Holt / Granning incident are all particularly good.

I would recommend this to anyone looking to read about Bryant.

Bryant was a great coach, but Dunnavant is a Bryant fan, plain and simple. He tells a sweet and sugary account of Bear's storied life, and leaves out the true tales of Bear's excessive drinking and also of his extra marital adventures. A "fan" should never write a "biography" about his or her hero. I think Bryant was an outstanding coach, but you'll have to look elsewhere if you want any REAL enlightenment about the life and times of Bear Bryant.....

"Coach" is a well researched biography of Paul Bear Bryant, but like many of the other books written about Bryant, author Dunnavant is relunctant to tread on issues that might tarnish the image of the man in the houndstooth hat. For instance Dunnavant's reporting about the Condredge Holloway recruiting story is interesting; but Dunnavant does not allow himself to express how Bryant could have become a conduit for change regarding the civil rights movement in the South. Dunnavant quotes Bryant as saying "I'd love to have you ( Holloway) at Alabama, but Alabama's not ready for a black quaterback". That one sentence tells me that Bryant lacked the courage and moral integrity to change the acceptance of Blacks as leaders in the state of Alabama. Instead Bryant shrewedly hedged his position with the likes of George Wallace. Dunnavant also quotes Bryant as saying "We're not recruiting Negro athletes; that's a policy decision for others to make". According to Dunnavant, Bryant made that quote in a 1965 interview for Look magazine. Paul Bryant wielded tremendous power and influence; he could have been that individual to change "policy decisions". Instead 2,000 miles away, in a town nearly void of Blacks called Green Bay, Wisconsin, Vince Lombardi took the stand that Bryant backed away from. Lombardi did not see white or black players, he saw players that were Green Bay Packers. It should also be noted that Lombardi sought out Black players as early as 1958, seven years before Bryant's interview with Look magazine. Bryant was "forced" to recruit black players at Alabama when he realized that he could not compete with other Division I programs with an all white Crimson Tide team. Dunnavant also reluctantly avoids any mention of the unlimited NCAA football scholarships that Bryant took full advantage of. When Bryant's winning teams were storming through the South in the 1960's and early 70's they did it with close to a hundred players on football scholarships. Since the University of Alabama placed such a high premium on its football program, the university could spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on players; money that other Division I colleges in the South would not do. A 18 year old boy in the South recruited by Bryant had an easy choice. Get a full 4 year scholarship and maybe play 2nd or 3rd team (that is why Bryant's platoon system worked so well) or be a back-up at another university as a non-scholarship player. Bryant stockpiled scholarship players because he had deeper pockets than other coaches. When the NCAA limited football scholarships to 30 incoming freshman; (75 total) things began to change at the University of Alabama. How many national championships has Alabama won since the Bryant era? Not many. The final issue that Dunnavant avoids is Bryant's record against Bowl teams. Sure Bryant's teams made it to 29 bowl games, which Dunnavant cites in bold print on p. 331. But Dunnavant omits that Byant won only 15 of those bowl games. This is barely above a .500 winning percentage, well below Bryant's lifetime winning percentage of .780. When the playing field was even and Alabama began to face football powers outside its conference, Bryants success diminished. Dunnavant fails to make any mention of this glaring fact. A Bear Bryant team, never beat Notre Dame. Bryant's teams were 17-14-3, against Tennessee, the only other formidable SEC team during the Bryant era. It was easy for Alabama to steamroll over SEC teams that the Crimson Tide were "locked into" such as Vanderbilt, Southern Mississippi, Virginia Tech, Tulane, and Mississippi State. Lombardi's Packer teams of the 1960's lost 1 playoff game, the NFL championship to the Eagles in 1960. The Packers never lost a playoff game again under Lombardi, and they went on to win 5 NFL championships, 3 championships in a row. I have read 5 books about Bear Bryant. He was a very good football coach who demanded commitment and excellence from his players and coaches. What I still don't feel from my readings, especially from this book, is a sense of Bryant's character,integrity, and human emotion. It seemed that author Dunnavant wrote this book high atop Bryant's famed practice tower, afraid to expose the soul of a man who is considered great by many, but is considered shallow by this reader.

A few months ago, I saw this case on "48 Hours." It interested me because I had knowledge about this situation that was not in the program, so I bought the book. Not surprisingly, Schultze is even more biased in the book than he was on the program.

Betty: "He [Jack] insisted upon my having affairs." That statement is so outrageous that it is laughable.

Betty said that she had rather face execution in the Electric Chair rather than be locked up for life. I find that comical because if she is being honest, she should kill herself. She didn't. Yes, this is yet another outrageous lie by Betty.

Betty is a patholical liar.

Schultze either "bought into" her lies or isn't being honest in the book. When you buy it, do some independent research. Don't be fooled by Shultze's incredible lack of even basic legal concepts, and don't be fooled by his bias. He doesn't tell the entire story.

Lord, they were tried by 2 different juries. Betty's sister wasn't sleeping with whomever she met that day. The defendants were different in many ways. It was Betty's husband that she had killed, not her sister's husband. The trial of Betty's sister and the trial of Betty are two completely different events. Schultze seemingly cannot understand that basic concept.

Or, can he?

I bet his book sold more copies the way he wrote it rather than it would if he had done his research and reported the truth as unbiased as possible.

Could it be that Schultze is more concerned with $$ than with the truth?

You decide. I already have.

Schutze has no clue as to what happened or how. He has been swayed. There is a new book coming in mid 2004, it tells who, what, when, how and why. You just might be suprised!

I want to know some background on Betty and Peggy. Maiden name and parents, and siblings?? What city and state they were born in? childhood pictures?

Author Jim Schutze has written some terrific non-fiction books in the past but this is his best one! Unlike most true-crime books, this one uncovers a judicial travesty where one twin sister was sent to prison for life and the other one acquitted for a crime they didn't commit. The first twin to be tried, Betty Wilson, was a controverial figure,in that she lived a life of luxury, had numerous affairs, some with black men, and cussed a lot. These traits were instrumental in paving her way into prison for the horrific beating death of her husband, a wealthy dentist. She was convincted on the incredible testimony of a known psychotic and drug addict,James White, with a rap sheet a mile long. He was given a written contract by the district attorney, that assured him of avoiding the electric chair if he would testify that the twin sisters were behind the murder of the dentist. Betty was painted as a promiscuous, alcoholic "slut" in the Tuscaloosa, Alabama courtroom and this is basically what sealed her fate. Her twin sister, Peggy, whose case was tried in Montgomery, Alabama, was acquitted on the basis of the identical testimony that doomed her sister. This time around, her lawyers pointed out the bizarre lies told by the killer who, by the way, was sent to a dentist to have his teeth capped for his trial appearance. In the jailhouse, he was awarded the status of mascot while he smirked and grinned at the imprisoned Betty. The author says frankly that he considered the twin sisters to be guilty of something when he first started covering the courtro testimony. But he said he gradually became outraged that the district attorney used a known psychopathic criminal to railroad the twin sisters into prison. The fact that it was election year and the DA wanted a high profile case to impress the voters for his re-election, contributed to this travesty. Betty Wilson is now serving life sentence without a chance of parole in the Tutwiler Prison in Alabama. Her twiwn sister, Peggy, is still working with attorneys to have her case appealed. In the meantime, the real killer, James White, is free after savagely murdering a man. The state of Alabama has been good to him for his crime.

I should be surprised, but am not, by two so-called reviews of the book. What they present are not reviews but personal opinions. This is largely what the book lays out as a reason for the conviction of Betty Wilson. This woman was not convicted on any evidence or fact but on the testimony of a proven liar, schizophrenic, alcoholic, drug-addicted man that turned on his own men in Vietnam. Whether people agree or disagree with the verdict, people are supposed to be convicted on fact and not opinion. This book is eye opening and needs to be read by those possessing skills of discernment and reason. One can only hope that justice will prevail in the end although it appears that will not happen in this case.