|
|
39 of 43 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Overall, an unsatisfactory biography., November 19, 1999
First, the book has a nice dust jacket with a very attractive portrait of Napoleon. I enjoyed some parts: Napoleon's youth, family gossip, and the murder of Napoleon (revealed years ago by Ben Weider). But often I got bogged down, and overall, Schom's book is unsatisfactory. His stated purpose of an all encompassing, one-volume, fair and balanced Napoleon biography falls short. He glosses over or misses important accomplishments: economics, law, nationalism, etc. Moreover, his prejudices are too obvious. Depending on how the psycho-babble definition of psychopath in 'medical notes' is applied, it would cover a very large number of successful military men (even the Iron Duke), businessmen, and politicians, including the current President of the United States.His research shows a curious use of sources. As other readers have noted, Schom uses selective parts of secondary sources omitting pertinent explanations. Primary sources should be sifted and evaluated by a historian, but Schom seems heavily dependent on some of the less reliable memoirs available. (1) Bourrienne's memoirs are interesting, but he was fired by Napoleon for embezzlement, turned pro-Bourbon, and his memoirs were ghost written (presumably with his input). So, much of Bourrienne must be taken with a grain of salt. (2) Memoirs of the Duchess of Abrantes (Junot) were also ghost written and include lots of pure fantasy. (3) Barras was Napoleon's enemy (and Josephine's previous lover). His memoirs are generally considered to have very little credibility. Yet Schom seems to accept Bourrienne, Abrantes, and Barras as gospel. Despite, the pretty dust jacket, I have limited shelf space. I prefer to keep Cronin's Napoleon, a much better read, showing Napoleon as a flesh and blood, three dimensional figure, not a cardboard cutout tyrant. Also, Cronin has an excellent bibliographical essay. And for those essential accomplishments overlooked by Schom, try Holtman's Napoleonic Revolution. For military actions, Chandler, The Campaigns of Napoleon, has shortcomings, but for the most part, he is pretty good, and I still like the old study by Wartenburg, Napoleon as a General. J.C. Herold doesn't like Napoleon at all, but his Napoleon in Egypt is a pleasure to read compared to Schom's account of this campaign. Schom has obviously spent a great effort in this large volume; unfortunately, it is tainted and disappointing.
|