Customer Reviews

Journals: 1952-2000

5 star:		(21)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Everyone loves gossip. Especially if it's true. Well, "Journals" has the dish. The author was there. When he talks about the Kennedy brothers, for example, we get more information than we've ever had before. It's not the old rehash. Yes, we hear about Marilyn Monroe and the Kennedy testosterone. But there's lots more here too.

This is about cafe society. The author was at the center of it for so many years. Much of what he tells us, he heard at private dinner tables and parties. So the stories are not well-known if known at all. That's one thing that makes this book so special and such a good read. Where else could you get this sort of information?

About the Kennedy administration the author pens, "I cannot banish from my mind the picture of these brave men, pathetically underequipped, dying on Cuban beaches before Soviet tanks" and "J.F.K. was in superb form at lunch."

This Washington insider gives us a look at the people in power that's not been generally known. It's fun and yet it's a bit scary when we discover how utterly ill prepared some of them were (and perhaps are) to deal with the major affairs of governing.

Nonetheless, this is a good book and I recommend it to you.

Arthur Schlesinger Jr. was a fixture in American politics for a quarter-century and a passionate observer for at least two decades beyond that. This book is fascinating for anyone interested in the post-World War II history of America. Schlesinger was on a first-name basis with most of the period's giants, and he offers equal doses of inside information, analysis and just plain gossip in his Journals. The sad thing is that this dispassionate historian, this acclaimed author who wrote with such style and insight about Jackson and FDR, was so surprisingly close-minded and sometimes mean-spirited about the leaders of his own period. He was especially myopic about the Kennedys, believing they could do no wrong, and accepting their major mistakes while excoriating other Democrats and Republicans for smaller transgressions. The professor, in fact, comes off as much the snob, hailing only those of either party who were born to wealth and/or attended Ivy League schools. The other drawback with the Journals is that Schlesinger's sons edited the book so poorly. Typos abound, and dozens of names are misspelled, both in the text and in the index. A two-time Pulitzer Prize winner certainly deserved better.

Arthur Schlesinger died in February of 2007 at the age of 89. In 2006, already ailing, he requested that his sons go through some 6,000 pages of unedited journals in which he had jotted done his daily observations and musings of the last 50 years. The pared down version is still a doorstopper at 894 pages. It is virtually a who's who of politics, literature, art, and academia of the last half century. Schlesinger's journal is reminiscent of Gore Vidal's memoirs and some of Truman Capote's works in that they are written in the chatty upper-crust Manhattan society banter of an earlier time. As in Vidal's and Capote's books, this one also contains lots of name-dropping and juicy bits gossip.

Schlesinger was a man of many talents: He was a great historian, a leading spokesman of liberalism, and he was the in-house intellectual of the Kennedy White House, the role for which he is most well-known. Kennedy was his contemporary and his hero, for he embodied the kind of liberalism that Schlesinger believed in deeply. Contrary to what many believed, Kennedy was very astute politically. Kennedy was quick to grasp political complexities and was able to skillfully turn them to his advantage. Schlesinger's tour of duty at the White House was undoubtedly the defining moment of his career. Although he was already an accomplished historian with important books on Jackson and Roosevelt, he was for the first time actually living and making history. This "proximity to power" remains a constant theme in these journals.

After Kennedy's assassination, Schlesinger stayed for a short time with the Johnson administration. This relationship did not last long since Johnson's temperment and style were antithetical to Schlesinger's. Johnson was a product of Congressional dealmaking, who did not have the vision component that Schlesinger saw as an essential for presidents. Schlesinger claims that Kennedy would not have let the country become mired in Vietnam nor allowed the Democratic Party to succumb the infighting, which paved the way for the election of Richard Nixon.

Richard Nixon, along with Henry Kissinger, are two figures that appear throughout these journals as well as Schlesinger's life. In 1979, Schlesinger was surprised to find out that Nixon had moved in a townhouse in Manhattan a few doors down the row. His observations of Nixon bring back the uptight person we always knew he was. Apparently Nixon sunbathed in his backyard in a shirt and tie. This small detail is emblematic of his entire presidency.

In 1981, Schlesinger accompanied Nixon, Kissinger, Carter, and Ford to the funeral of Anwar Sadat. Kissinger confided that Nixon was still his old self "trying to manipulate everybody and everything, dropping poisonous remarks, and doing his best to set people against each other. Ford had said that, "Sometimes I wish that I had never pardonned that son of [...]."

Schlesinger had a love-hate relationship with Kissinger, for they had known each other since their early days at Harvard. Although they were genial toward each other, Schlesinger was always wary of Kissinger's duplicity. He writes that, "I like Henry very much and respect him, though I cannot rid myself of the fear that he says one thing to me and another to, say, Bill Buckley."

His his later years, Schlesinger continued to live the charmed life in the celebrity circles of Manhattan, always with copious amounts of fine food, martinis, and Cuban cigars. With the financial demands of his social life it is not difficult to see why he was "perennially broke." It is, however, difficult to see how he found the time to produce a big book every few years to pay the bills. This work is a testament to the energy and tenacity of one of our greatest historians and bonvivants.

Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. (1917 - 2007) is arguably the most prominent historian to come from the World War Two "GI" generation. The son of a distinguished Harvard historian, Schlesinger never earned a PhD, yet he still became the leading liberal historian of his era. He earned two pulitzer prizes and numerous other literary awards, but his prominence came from his activities as a leading intellectual voice for the New Deal, New Frontier, Great Society-type liberalism that dominated the Democratic Party from Franklin Roosevelt to Lyndon Johnson. In the 1950's Schlesinger became a speechwriter and confidant to Adlai Stevenson, the Democratic Party's presidential candidate in 1952 and 1956. In 1960 he angered many of his liberal admirers when he effortlessly switched from Stevenson to John F. Kennedy, whose liberal credentials were then suspect. When JFK was elected, he appointed Schlesinger as the first White House "Historian-In-Residence", and Schlesinger reached the peak of his power and influence in Democratic and intellectual circles. He energetically defended the Kennedy brothers from all critics, attended Bobby Kennedy's famous pool parties, and also found time to write theater and movie reviews and hobnob with Hollywood celebrities and famed novelists and artists. When JFK was assassinated Schlesinger - who despised Lyndon Johnson despite sharing his liberal views - left the White House. He then spent the rest of his career defending the Kennedy "legacy" from a growing number of critics, advising Bobby Kennedy during his tragic 1968 presidential bid, and loathing Richard Nixon, (surprisingly) Jimmy Carter, and Ronald Reagan. He never found the time to finish his most respected academic work - the multivolume "Age of Roosevelt" series. In 2006, his health failing, Schlesinger asked two of his sons to edit and publish his massive journals, which he had kept since 1952.

Schlesinger is a fine writer, and his journals are no exception. Schlesinger describes in perceptive, witty - and at times acerbic detail - his encounters with famous politicians, movie stars, and other celebrities over a half-century. Schlesinger doesn't pull any punches, and he doesn't hesitate to criticize (sometimes harshly) those people he dislikes (Lyndon Johnson, Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, etc.) and he also goes to great lengths to excuse those people he admires, such as all three of the Kennedy brothers. It's absorbing in a catty, gossip-style way (and in fact this book is filled with tidbits of celebrity gossip), but I must confess that it doesn't present a very flattering picture of its author. Although he was an outspoken liberal and advocate for the poor and downtrodden, Schlesinger spends remarkably little time in his journal entries discussing them; instead he is obsessed with hobnobbing with what used to be called "high-cafe society" in the New York-New England-Washington axis. In many pages he comes off as a condescending snob, and after finishing this book one gets the impression that the only "liberals" Schlesinger cared for were men who had been raised or educated in the Northeastern US and were graduates of Ivy League schools. For Schlesinger, a politician's pedigree and personal style were at least as important as their political views. Naturally, conservatives and Republicans in general are disdained by Schlesinger in his journals, but many liberals reading this memoir will be surprised to note Schlesinger's generally low opinion of liberal icons such as Harry Truman, Hubert Humphrey, Eugene McCarthy, and Jimmy Carter, just to name a few. Even Adlai Stevenson, his old boss, comes in for a bit of Schlesinger condescension. Only the Kennedys, Franklin Roosevelt, and a few other well-born patrician liberals tend to escape Schlesinger's acid pen. From reading this book, the impression one gets is that his idea of "liberalism" was one in which an Ivy League-educated elite, based in the Northeast, would control the government and benevolently manage a welfare state to help the poorer classes, who would then gratefully give their votes to the elite to keep them in power. As an admirer of Hubert Humphrey, I was particularly struck by Schlesinger's harsh judgement of Humphrey following the Senator's death in 1978; Schlesinger wrote that "I doubt that history will make much of him...he always faded in the crunch...(and) I do not feel that the history of the last thirty years would have been much different" had Humphrey never been in the U.S. Senate! This about a man who stood up for civil rights when few other politicians (including the Kennedys) were willing to do so, and endured years of harsh treatment by the Southern segregationists who ran the Senate because of his views on civil rights. It was Humphrey who proposed the Peace Corps to John Kennedy, and it was Humphrey who played a key role in the passage of the historic Civil Rights legislation in the 1960's. But, of course, Humphrey wasn't from the Northeast and didn't go to an Ivy League school, so he wasn't Schlesinger's kind of "liberal". In the end, I left this book feeling that, while Schlesinger was a fine writer with an eye for the interesting anecdote, as a person he was often snooty, petty, and surprisingly mean-spirited. I recommend this book for the interesting stories, but as for the man, well, let's just say that Schlesinger wasn't my kind of liberal.

This was my first Schlesinger book and, considering how much I enjoyed it, definitely will not be my last. As the title suggests, it's written in a diary style, with daily entries spanning from 1952 to 2000. Arthur's vocabulary, wit, and expert analysis make this a delight to read. It's like having a front-row seat to historical and political events, as well as some of the author's own personal life and thoughts. Especially fun, of course, is the "gossip", or the parts when Arthur tells what so-and-so is really like. He knew many famous people, from politicians to world leaders to movie stars, and hobnobbed with the likes of the Kennedy clan, the Clintons and Gores, Kay Graham, Henry Kissinger, and Lauren Bacall. He repeats his conversations with these people, complete with quotes, and makes you feel like you're eavesdropping on history.

Particularly interesting was Arthur's observations on Richard Nixon, who at one point moved in next door to him. He tells how his whole family looked out their windows in the hopes of a peek at the reclusive ex-President, and tells a few funny stories about encounters with him.

Also interesting is the fact that, while writing this book, he discusses writing other books. He mentions that Bobby Kennedy's wife asked him to write a biography of him, and discusses the process of writing and publishing what would become the first version of his memoirs.

His views, many of which are eerily prescient, on current events and people and events from my own time are especially fun to read. He makes predictions for all of the Presidential elections, and comments on how he thinks each administration did, from Nixon to George W. Bush.

In all, entertaining and informative- I wanted to read ALL of the entries he wrote! (his sons edited the diaries for the sake of brevity).

Arthur Schlesinger Jr.'s great literary regret was that he did not complete his historical project on the Roosevelt years. The three volumes he did publish , along with important works on a variety of subjects- the Jackson years, the cycles of 'Conservative and Liberal' power in American history, the first thousand days of the Kennedy Administration, the conception of the 'vital center' in American politics, the dangers of multiculturalism -made him both in professional and public mind one of the most important American historians of the century. It would be thus quite ironic if the volume he is most remembered by is one he never intended to publish, this volume of his journals.
This close to nine- hundred page work was selected and edited by Schlesinger's two older sons from a manuscript five times its size. It is by all accounts not only a valuable historical document but an insightful and often highly entertaining look into the doings of the political and cultural elite of America. Schlesinger Jr. loved the good life, the best restaurants the best parties the most important and interesting people.
While he came to prominence first in the academic world he readily made the transition to the rough- and- tumble of White House politics when called to the flag by President Kennedy. And in fact the Kennedy years are the time of insider - Schlesinger's most passionate and vivid writing. He had true admiration for the intellect, the keen political instinct , the leadership qualities of President Kennedy. He was even more closely connected with Bobby Kennedy whose compassion for the outsiders of this world, and ability to learn from tough experience were appreciated by Schlesinger.
Schlesinger was close to many different major figures at many different times. His character sketches of numerous celebrities are outstanding. His anecdotal power is great, as is his openness and ability to surprise. He in the course of knowing Presidents from Truman provides his evaluations. Though FDR remains for him the great figure of the century, the man who saved the world for Democracy he gives very high marks to Kennedy and also appreciates Lyndon Johnson's overpowering political skill. His most scathing remarks are reserved for President Carter who Schlesinger saw as incompetent.
Schlesinger was a person of the Liberal Left with a strong non- isolationist conception of America's central role in the world. There are important inside looks at the decision- making process, including one in which Schlesinger was the lone dissenter, the failed Bay of Pigs operation.
Some of the most quotable remarks in the book come from his good friend Henry Kissinger, with Kissinger often making himself a bit more liberal than he truly is. Kissinger may also be made uncomfortable as will others by Schlesinger's direct quotations. The fact that the book was published posthumously without requiring Schlesinger's approval means he gets off the hook here for having 'betrayed' friends by telling publicly what they said to him in private.
In any case this is a book which bring a lot of pleasure and insight to its readers. It may well achieve textbook- status in courses on American political history.
My guess is it will be an enormous bestseller. And in this case justifably so.

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.)

Schlesinger had to be one of the coolest people who ever lived. Urbane, self-confident, intellectual , insightful and incisive. He taught college and worked for his country by day and partied with high society at night. This book is filled with candid and sometimes cruel assessments of such notables as Marilyn Monroe, Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Gary Hart, Nixon, Vidal, Buckley, Hillary, JFK, Jesse Jackson, Lauren Bacall, Joan Didion, both George Bushes, Adlai Stevenson and countless others. A great read!! Especially if you are a political voyeur.

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?

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.