7 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Humdrum writing levels interesting history, August 6, 2008
This review is from: 1858: Abraham Lincoln, Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, Ulysses S. Grant and the War They Failed to See (Hardcover)
"The year 1858 could not have started in a grander fashion than it did...in Washington, D.C." (p. 1), but subsequent events would prove the year's political events decisive as the nation moved toward civil war. The text considers these events primarily by presenting a series of vignettes focusing on the administration of President James Buchanan interspersed with extended biographical studies of individuals shortly to become famous, as well as in-depth studies of critical events transpiring during the year. Of necessity, events occurring outside of 1858 are reviewed to set the context as well as to place studied situations within their greater historical significance--but the text successfully balances the presentation of material to maintain a focus on 1858. The text presents Buchanan as an ineffectual and vindictive president out of touch with political reality and incapable of dealing with the polarized politics of the era. Buchanan, derisively known as "Old Public Functionary" (p. 4), was pro-slavery and erroneously believed the best way to lead the nation was by decree, not compromise. The general and widespread failure of his administration, more than anything else, is proposed in the text as the root cause of the Civil War.
Biographical chapters include studies on Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, Abraham Lincoln, William Seward, William Tecumseh Sherman, and John Brown. Each man is presented in a method befitting his legacy, and each is matched to the impending conflict. However, while the biographies on Lee and Sherman are instructive and fascinating, in 1858 they were essentially insignificant as national figures and this is felt in the text, as their biographies to 1858 are largely disconnected from other events. Davis, suffering from "herpes...in the form of neuralgia that incapacitated his left eye" (p. 29); Lincoln, stating "that the United States could not go on with half of the country condoning slavery" (p. 96); Seward, "one of the country's most spellbinding orators" (p. 173); and John Brown, "like a biblical figure" (p. 247) are period figures well-known to any student. Their biographies are fascinating though often marred by stereotypical portrayals. A concise biography is also presented for Stephen Douglas. In-depth studies of critical events include the infamous Dred Scott decision; the Lincoln-Douglas debates; The Buchanan-Forney feud; the anti-slavery activities transpiring in Oberlin, Ohio; and Brown's various compelling and divisive actions.
The text does an excellent job of presenting a singular year in history and establishing it within the greater context of the Civil War while it suffers from a fairly unimaginative writing style with a preponderance of similarly-constructed sentences. Various kinds of typographical errors are unfortunately common. The compound effect of these defects renders the book's overall texture mechanical and uninviting: an editor's influence is conspicuously absent.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
9 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
"Pop History" for the General Reader, May 10, 2008
This review is from: 1858: Abraham Lincoln, Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, Ulysses S. Grant and the War They Failed to See (Hardcover)
Why 1858? I found myself asking that question repeatedly the entire time I was reading this book. What made 1858 THE year to look at in regards to the coming of the Civil War. Author Bruce Chadwick tries (largely unsuccessfully, in my opinion) to argue that 1858 was the year slavery became THE main issue facing the United States and events which occurred in 1858 played a large role in bringing about the war. In his Foreword, Chadwick tells the reader he will attempt to accomplish this by weaving together seven stories of people and events, linking these disparate stories together with looks into James Buchanan's "spectacular failure" as President.
1858 weaves together seven stories all (loosely) tied together by Buchanan's Presidency. These stories are, in no particular order:
1. Jefferson Davis
2. Robert E. Lee
3. William T. Sherman
4. The Oberlin-Wellington Slave Rescue
5. William H. Seward
6. John Brown
7. The Lincoln-Douglas Debates
At first, I was intrigued by the author's decision to abandon a traditional narrative and use what I thought would be an interesting change of pace. The idea works better in theory than in the pages of 1858, however. Stories are broken up into different chapters with little regard for continuity or chronological order. For readers new to the subject, this may very well be misleading as far as a time line of these events goes.
As I stated in my introduction, my main and overriding question while reading the entire book was "Why 1858? What makes this year so special?" Unfortunately, although the author does claim he chose 1858 because it was THE year slavery became the overriding issue facing the United States, he doesn't give nearly enough reason WHY, and thus doesn't really answer my question. In essence, he argues FOR 1858, but he really gives no arguments AGAINST other years. To me, slavery had been THE issue for quite some time. A post concerning the Compromise of 1850 at Elektratig shows that slavery was very much at the forefront of the country's concerns as the 1850s opened, and that the Civil War may well have started a decade earlier had the Compromise of 1850 not happened. I can agree with the Lincoln-Douglas debates and the Oberlin-Wellington Slave rescue as two MAJOR events involving slavery and an acceleration towards war. However, other events outside of this year, especially John Brown's Harpers Ferry Raid in 1859 and obviously the Presidential Election of 1860 were major events which did much to hasten the Civil War. Chadwick does argue that the seeds were sewn for these events in 1858. He stresses that John Brown's raid into Missouri and successful escape with slaves into Canada in 1858 and the Lincoln-Douglas debates led to these other events. That may be true, but the MAIN events happened in years other than 1858. Without belaboring the point too much, I believe you simply cannot make a strong case that 1858 was any more important than many other years in causing the Civil War or having slavery become THE issue facing the country. Chadwick's failure too largely explain WHY or argue against other years only drives home the point for me.
To me, deciding to include William T. Sherman was an odd choice other than to allow the author/publisher to get Ulysses S. Grant's name into the subtitle of the book. Grant is barely mentioned, and Sherman had hardly anything to do with the author's assertion that 1858 was the year slavery became the most important issue in the country. The only reason I can see to include Sherman is to show an example of a Northerner who had no strong feelings towards slavery, much like Robert E. Lee was personally opposed to slavery as a Southerner. In reading the chapters covering Sherman, I was puzzled as to what purpose his antebellum life story served to the narrative as a whole.
The subtitle of the book is especially puzzling to me. U.S. Grant is listed and he is barely mentioned in the book, pretty much only in relation to the Sherman portion of the story. Putting a famous figure into your title or subtitle only to barely mention them isn't going to win points with this reviewer. Another issue I have with the subtitle is "The War They Failed to See." Huh? Lincoln's "House Divided" speech is mentioned. So is Jefferson Davis' ascension in late 1858 as the leader of the Secession Movement. John Brown not only saw war coming, he was determined to start it himself! And lastly, Seward's "Irrepressible Conflict" speech is also stressed. It seems to me these men at least had an inkling that war was at the very least very possible if not imminent if some drastic steps were not taken with regards to slavery. I don't want to pin this on the author at all. Marketing sells books, and the subtitle screams MARKETING from a tall building. Blame the publisher here folks.
If you have lasted this long, you might believe I hated 1858. This is definitely not so. My policy is to get the bad out of the way first and move on to the good. Let's start with the author's style. Bruce Chadwick is definitely a good storyteller. Despite some continuity issues in his narrative choice as mentioned earlier, I read this 300 page book in only two sittings. I could not put it down.
Chadwick's chapters on the gross ineptitude of James Buchanan's Presidency were my favorite portions of the book. Rather than focus on the slavery issue and try to resolve it in some way, Buchanan instead completely ignored slavery when possible and blinded himself to the enormity of the problem the rest of the time. His "Don Quixote-ish schemes", as Chadwick calls them, to annex portions of Central and South America by any means possible while ignoring slavery was just one issue. In addition, Buchanan chose to fight petty feuds with two powerful men, Senator Stephen Douglas and newspaper editor John Forney, and these feuds were disastrous for the Democratic party in the elections of 1858 and the Presidential election of 1860. More than any other man, Buchanan had the power to slow or even prevent radical developments with regards to the slavery situation. Instead, says Chadwick, he did nothing while radicals on both sides led the nation to the brink of war.
I was also pleasantly surprised with the bibliography and notes. Chadwick uses a nice number of endnotes, including 747 in exactly 300 pages of text. He did use quite a few secondary sources, but for what was obviously to me a "pop history" book aimed more at the masses than to deep readers, Chadwick also looked at the papers of many of those involved in the events of the year 1858 and around 90 newspapers published at the time. A serviceable index rounds out the book.
Bruce Chadwick's 1858 sets out to prove that year was the year slavery became THE issue in the United States, but was rather unsuccessful in this regard. His arguments for 1858 as the year were sparse and his arguments against other years were non-existent. The story's continuity suffered somewhat as a result of some conscious choices on the author's part. Despite these flaws, 1858 is an enjoyable read aimed at the masses which I would be happy to recommend to readers new to the subject. Deep readers will find this material covered elsewhere in much greater detail.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
5 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
So so over view of the last years before the Civil War, June 2, 2008
This review is from: 1858: Abraham Lincoln, Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, Ulysses S. Grant and the War They Failed to See (Hardcover)
I have to admit that I can't quite place this book. I would say on the one hand I was disappointed because while it did a good job of portraying the year 1858 it could have just as easily been 1856 or 1860, both of which would have been more interesting. The book spent a lot of time focusing on personal rivalries to the detriment of painting the national picture. Also certain figures who would rise to prominence in the Civil War were given great exposure yet others were barely mentioned. (Like Grant)
So all in all if you like the period, there are worse reads out there but I still think that James McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom does a much better job at portraying the period.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
