Crítica de los usuarios - Marcar como inadecuado
Baker's "James Buchanan" is surprisingly gripping.
Why is it that most historians delight in studying failed conflicts but so rarely delve into the failures of individuals? I'd just read volume 1 of Wallner's "Franklin Pierce: New Hampshire's Favorite Son", which may provide a clue: biographers, whether out of empathy or some baser reason, often dwell on the best qualities of their subject. Pierce was almost as bad a president as Buchanan, but if your only exposure to Pierce was Wallner's book, you'd think that he was a stand-up fellow, devout patriot, brilliant politician, and a great man. Wallner teaches at the Franklin Pierce College and had his research subsidized by the New Hampshire Historical Society. Did this affect his judgment? I leave it to real historians to decide.
I have no such uncertainty about Baker's biography of Buchanan. She calls a spade a spade, making no apologies for Buchanan's incompetence or corruption. Instead, she digs into the genesis of his failings. I'm not qualified to comment on the quality of her scholarship. All I can say is that I found this short book to be an enjoyable read.
LibraryThing ReviewCrítica de los usuarios - dasam - LibraryThing
An excellent, brief biography of the worst president in US history, and nearly a traitor at that. Leer comentario completo