 | |
 View Larger |
Journals: 1952-2000 By Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. ( Penguin Press HC, The )
Release Date: 2007-10-04
Average Customer Rating:
List Price: $40.00
Price: $23.64
Eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25.
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
|  Add to Cart |
|
|
Product Description
A landmark event in the history of American letters: the publication of Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.'s extraordinary, revelatory, never-before-seen journals. For more than a half century, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., has been at the vital center of American political and cultural life. From his entrance into political leadership circles in the 1950s through his years in the Kennedy administration and up to the present, he has been that rare thing-a great historian who has enjoyed an extraordinary eyewitness vantage on history as it has been made. On intimate terms with many of the most prominent political, cultural, and intellectual figures of the last fifty years, he is a man whose proximity to power has never obscured his appreciation for the reality of those who don't have it. For that capacity for empathy and for much else, he has been called American liberalism's greatest voice. For nearly fifty years, from the early 1950s through the late 1990s, Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., recorded his experiences and opinions in his journals. Edited by his two oldest sons into a beautifully packaged two-volume work, the journals offer remarkably fresh and lucid observations on a half century of public life and a rare and privileged view into the mind of one of America's most distinguished men of letters. They form an intimate history of postwar America, from Schlesinger's days working on both of Adlai Stevenson's presidential campaigns and his years in the Kennedy White House through to the Clinton administration. These are not personal journals of the "where I had lunch" variety; this is one of twentieth-century America's greatest moral and intellectual forces chronicling the big stories of his and our time, usually from the inside out. Their publication is truly a landmark event and a fitting opportunity to celebrate a most extraordinary American life.
|
|
 I learned a lot! ( winston08 )
I liked the journals by Mr. Schlesinger and learned a lot from this journals especially when it came to the issue of the Iranian revolution, hostage crisis and the late Shah of Iran. Not that I agreed with Schlesinger's liberal and wrong ideas on how to deal with the Iranian revolution but it confirmed what I have always thought about the incompetence among Carter's aides and advisers which resulted in loss of a great ally. As a typical leftist the author disliked the late Shah of Iran and thought it is okay to replace him. Also, it showed how terrible Carter admin was in dealing with the Iranian crisis where Carter says to Zbig: "I can't tell a fellow head of state what to do". Also, it confirmed my earlier belief that Zbig was in favor of supporting the Shah and preventing the revolution but Commie Carter and State Dept were against his tough proposals. All in all, journals are a great way to learn about the past and I do appreciate his time for writing the journals even though politically I disagree with him so much.
|
Us Magazine for History/PoliSci buffs ( forstneger )
Schlesinger's 'Journals' is a fantastic insight, focusing mainly on the Democratic Party's inner battles as well as a juicy dish piece for an intellectual socialite. The author may embarrass himself on a number of occasions, but he's always thoroughly readable and deadly honest. Criticisms of his devotion to the Kennedys might be accurate, but he's honest in his affection and very aware of it. Anyone thinking this is just a load of leftist propaganda ought take note of Schlesinger's animosity toward Gore Vidal and American communists, as well as warm relationships with Henry Kissinger, George HW Bush, and eventually William Buckley. (A fantastic subtext is the declining role of alcohol in American politics.) Does anyone know if there's a conservative book like this?
|
 Belongs on the coffee table ( clex@msn.com )
Unless one is a scholar, those under 60 will not find this book of great interest. For someone my age (71) who's also a political junky with still-vivid memories of the 1960s forward, this book is an artistic and intellectual treasure. The editing--and there was obvious a lot of editing--results in jewels on virtually every page. Schlesinger undresses everyone of consequence he ever worked with, no holds barred, including the Kennedy family.
In 1969 (maybe 1970) Lloyd Norman, dean of the Pentagon press corps, addressed a class I attended at Fort Benning, GA. He claimed before the so-called Cuban missile crisis, he was given a briefing about how the crisis at sea would be orchestrated, so there was never a real chance of armed confrontation. I could never get verification of this, and none of the popular or historical accounts mention it. Yet, on page 176 Schlesinger mentions an October 1962 letter from Khrushchev to Bertrand Russell about "his instructions to Soviet ships to avoid confrontation..." When Schlesinger heard about the incident from Averell Harriman, he sent a memo to the President describing the Khruschev letter. Kennedy, according to the book, "called Harriman the next day and asked him questions about it." Is this validation of Norman's account? Maybe.
|
Biased but Interesting and Important ( farrons )
Anyone who has read Schlesinger's books on Andrew Jackson, the New Deal, or John and Robert Kennedy knows how partisan he was. He viewed American history as a perennial struggle between noble, idealistic, intelligent liberals and selfish, materialistic, moronic conservatives. This is not my interpretation of his views. It was explicit in his meta-historical cyclical conception of American history, which he adopted from his father. Indeed, his partisanship was so obvious that it was harmless. These journals are no exception. Those people who opposed his heroes were not only wrong, they were morally and intellectually corrupt; and even, in the case of Lyndon Johnson, borderline insane. The only exception I could find was Henry Kissinger, whom Schlesinger usually described with respect. The same is true of events. The American involvement in Vietnam enters his journals only in 1966, with regard to Robert Kennedy's opposition to it. There is no way of knowing from these journals that John Kennedy was responsible for it.
Nevertheless, these journals provide many interesting and important insights into the events and people that shaped American political history in the last half of the twentieth century.
Moreover, among their most valuable passages are those in which Schlesinger's liberal bias itself is illuminating. For example, on page 363, he attributed George McGovern's catastrophic loss to Richard Nixon in the 1972 election mainly to racism, which he says was "the all-pervading issue of the election." According to Schlesinger, it was "the belief that Nixon can be relied upon to keep the blacks down" that caused large numbers of traditionally Democratic voters to vote for him. Schlesinger acknowledged that Nixon's supporters did not say that that they were racists. Schlesinger claims that instead of admitting their racism, Nixon's supporters used code words: welfare, crime, busing, schools, quotas. However, it should have been obvious that these were real and serious grievances. At that time, the rate of violent urban crime was rising by more than ten percent a year; children who lived a few blocks from a public school were being bussed for hours each day; etc. McGovern lost so terribly because he and his supporters thought like Schlesinger. They dismissed these real and serious grievances as expressions of racism.
Another example is on page 437. There Schlesinger makes the interesting observation that Carter was the first Democratic president of the twentieth century whose programs did not have a label, like Wilson's New Freedom, Roosevelt's New Deal, Truman's Fair Deal, Kennedy's New Frontier, and Johnson's Great Society. He attributes this to Carter's defects. (Schlesinger loathed and execrated Carter.) Schlesinger could not see that the reason was that the Great Society completed the New Deal. (Completing the New Deal was Johnson's purpose, the dream he had had since he entered Congress as a fanatical Roosevelt supporter in 1937.) After the Great Society, there were no longer any new, broad, governmental economic programs that could gain the support of most Americans. Schlesinger regarded McGovern as the last Democratic candidate who represented the true Democratic tradition. But anyone who now reads the 1972 Democratic platform will be stunned by its vacuous phrase-mongering and shameless racial posturing. (Most Americans were revolted in 1972 also.)
|
50 Years of History, Tragedy in Schlesinger's Daily "Journals" ( trivialtony )
Historian/columnist Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. was the last half-century's most prolific, eloquent liberal voice. He served John Kennedy's administration as "special assistant to the president," wrote best-selling biographies of JFK, RFK, and Franklin Roosevelt, advised, wrote and edited speeches for Senator Ted Kennedy and most major Democratic leaders, and had working friendships with most of recent history's most influential political, literary, even entertainment figures. His exhaustive life journals numbered more than 6,000 pages; Schlesinger approved their publication before his 2007 death, and they were edited by two of his sons and Penguin Press to a still-formidable 858 pages.
Yet amid Schlesinger's power lunches, society parties, and foreign trips seeming the setting for each page, he writes compelling, honest looks at friends and loved ones (wife Alexandra and children, the Kennedys, Adlai Stevenson, Henry Kissinger), enemies (Roy Cohn and Caspar Weinberger but chiefly Richard Nixon as the comic villain Schlesinger calls "Tricky") and loyalty to FDR/Truman/JFK liberalism.
Schlesinger's opinions and observations fascinate, whether from inside as cabinet member or distantly as seasoned political observer. He called political gamesmanship his "favorite spectator sport," and his election year entries (especially those involving a Kennedy as late as 1984) are especially savory. Not to mention his disappointment at reduced roles in Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter's administrations. (Schlesinger even paraphrased Gerald Ford describing Carter's 1980 defeat.) His year 2000 entries even echo into this year's election race with frequent positive references to Hillary Clinton (in her First Lady and Senate campaign roles), John McCain, and a haunting closing sentence on then newly-elected President George W. Bush.
Schlesinger's brief period as Nixon's next-door neighbor (years after placed on Nixon's "enemies list.") reads hilarious, as do some of the more pithy presidential cracks at predecessors (JFK on Eisenhower, Ford on Nixon).
Yet even in these informal settings, Schlesinger's chronicles 1963 and 1968's horrific events with mastery and mourning for friends and political heroes. He repeats a generation's feelings on November 23, 1963, when wrting, "I still cannot believe this man (JFK)...of such intelligence and gaiety and strength, is dead. The wages of hate are fearful."
Schlesinger's June 9, 1968 entry is possibly even more saddening. He speaks of Senator Robert Kennedy's assassination with personal heartbreak associated with losing a younger brother: "There was for me such a poignancy about RFK," he wrote, "all the greater now that they killed him before he had the chance to place his great gifts at the service of the nation and the presidency; Jack had at least 2 ½ years." These events shadow Schlesinger throughout the rest of his life and journals, from Ted Kennedy's presidential campaigns to tourists on the Kennedy front lawn.
In his recent hit album, "Memory Almost Full," Paul McCartney writes, "When I think that all this stuff could make a life/it's pretty hard to take it in." It can be argued Schlesinger stood too close by one political family to keep an historian's objectivity. Or his Washington-New York social life (chronicled endlessly) cost him understanding of how Americans lived and viewed their history. But his was an important voice and seconding motion for the post-World War II years, and this well-edited collection of observations and perspective cement his niche in history behind the political giants he advised, chronicled, and befriended. Highly recommended.
|
|
|
