Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
29 of 30 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Historical fiction at its very best, September 25, 2005
In the nineteenth century the historical novel enjoyed the highest possible esteem. William Thackery's historical fiction HENRY ESMOND and not VANITY FAIR was regarded by his contemporaries as his finest work, and it was routine for writers like Dickens in A TALE OF TWO CITIES and Tolstoy in WAR AND PEACE to write novels set in a different historical period. In the twentieth century, however, as novelists began more often to fictionalize their own experiences and focus on the psychological make up of their characters and historian forged a more rigorously scientific form of historical research, historical fiction suffered a sharp decrease in critical respect. To be sure, there were exceptions, whether Robert Graves writing about the Roman emperors in I, CLAUDIUS and CLAUDIUS THE GOD or in Patrick O'Brian's superb series of novels about the Royal Navy at the time of the Napoleonic Wars. But these were exceptions and not the rule and even O'Brian garnered less respect than he would have in the 19th century. All of this is to explain why Gore Vidal's superb series of novels that he calls Narratives of Empire have failed to achieve as much acclaim, as they deserve.
LINCOLN is in essence exceptionally accurate history encapsulated in the form of a novel. I have read a spate of books on Lincoln and the Civil War and I was almost never able to fault his scholarship. In a note following the conclusion of the novel he indicates that the manuscript was seen--and corrected--by no less an authority on Lincoln than David Herbert Donald, who is arguably the supreme authority on Lincoln of this age. But accuracy would be an empty thing if the narrative were not enlivened by Vidal's remarkable skills as a writer. He has a fascinating style, moving without transition from a scene with one group of characters at one point of time in one paragraph to another group at another time in the next. The narrative fairly races along.
This is not a novelistic retelling of the entirety of Lincoln's life, but focuses instead exclusively on the period of his presidency. The story begins with Lincoln's arrival in Washington and ends shortly after his assassination. In fact, the subject matter is almost precisely the same as that covered by Doris Kearns Goodwin in her new book TEAM OF RIVALS: THE POLITICAL GENIUS OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN. The story Vidal wants to highlight is how Lincoln managed to hold together the Union despite widespread opposition to the War in the North and a cabinet that on the one hand imagined him to be a weak leader whom they could easily control and on the other filled with individuals who possessed presidential aspirations of their own. Interestingly, the two finest demonstrations of Lincoln's leadership skills come not from the work of historians, but by novelists: Vidal here and Shelby Foote in his depiction of Lincoln's extraordinary skills in his three-volume THE CIVIL WAR.
Though he is astonishingly faithful to the historical record, Vidal's greatest achievement is bringing to life in credible fashion a number of remarkable personalities in ways that are consistent with the historical record. In reading about the war, I had of course read about Seward and Chase, but neither truly emerged as vivid personalities before. Perhaps their biographers would disagree with the portraits Vidal paints, but for me whenever I read about either individual in the future, I will almost certainly do so through eyes of Vidal.
We live in an age that is obsessed with the notion of "political bias," an idea whose importance is, I think, outrageously overstated. One either is faithful to the facts or not and your bias might make you lean one way or another, but it won't allow you to distort the facts unless you are being deliberately dishonest (I think of Ann Coulter's almost macabre depiction of Joseph McCarthy in her writing). But given Vidal's well-known adherence to New Deal ideals, a word or two might be in order. I was surprised at how politically evenhanded this book was. In fact, if anything Vidal mutes the widespread belief of more contemporary Civil War historians that the conflict was overwhelmingly about slavery and instead presents the idea that it was more about states's rights (an idea that has been more and more discredited not merely by folks like James McPherson but Southern historians such as Shelby Foote). Actually, this is Vidal's New Deal point of view coming forth, as previous generations sought to not offend Southern politicians by intimating the war was about the admittedly (today, that is) disgusting institution of slavery, which no one would defend, so much as it was about states's rights, which is, while wrong, not so outrageously indefensible. In the New Deal, the Democratic Party functioned as an uneasy coalition of various groups, including labor, Northern progressives, and Southern populists. With the Nixon strategy, the South has split off from the Democratic party (initially over civil rights issues) and those on the left have been more comfortable in speaking of the Civil War and its causes in more historically accurate terms. I am, by the way, a Southerner, even if I today live in the Land of Lincoln, so I see this issues from both sides.
I recommend this novel in the strongest possible terms. It is not just a very fine novel: it is a great way to internalize history in a way that is rarely as possible in a straightforward historical account. Moreover, it is a richly complex Lincoln that is presented here. In contrast to the blandly hagiographic portrait by Carl Sandburg, this is a warts and all version. Lincoln isn't idealized, but is shown with both his virtues and vices, from his astonishing ability to handle people who imagined that they were handling him, to his self-proclaimed ignorance of financial matters. But he is more the admirable for his portrayal as a believable, flesh and blood human being, instead of mere statue.
|
|
|
45 of 53 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Vidal's Finest Hour, August 9, 2000
Even Gore Vidal can't take this icon down. Though he's done his best to submarine Washington, Jefferson and Hamilton, among others, he can't conceal his affection and ardor for our greatest national hero. He sides with his class on many occasions, primarily as regards Salmon Chase and William Seward. He treats both figures with even greater esteem than either of them actually merited. The secondary plot involving Chase and his daughter are particularly telling regarding Vidal's true feelings about class and ancestry. He is and always will be a snob, when it comes to family ties. Yet despite the fact that his protagonist is a social parvenue and a political bumpkin in many respects, Lincoln emerges as truly three-dimensional and heroic in this novel, just as he has in history in general. There are so many Lincoln biographies out there that I almost have a problem in highlighting this one; however it really is Vidal's most earnest, least cynical work; as such it deserves and earns high praise.
|
|
|
10 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
The finest political novel by an American writer, April 3, 2005
If I could give this book 15 stars, I certainly would. It is the finest political novel by an American writer. It has few rivals, maybe "I, Claudius" and "Claudius the God", both by Robert Graves, are as good, but students of history, political science or leadership will find "Lincoln" to be an exception work of literary art.
There are several reasons why I so strongly recommend this book.
First, this novel demonstrates exceptionally well the balance between self interests and loyalty, as exemplified in the Lincoln cabinet. Salmon Chase, the Secretary of the Treasury, and William Seward, the Secretary of State are finely portrayed characters. They both were positioning themselves in the Lincoln presidency to succeed him. This required careful political skills to appear supportive but make every move in regard to self interests. The passages where Lincoln wins over William Seward into a real honest partnership are masterful and my admiration for Seward soared. Salmon Chase on the other hand continues to play a careful game of undermining the President behind his back while playing the loyal servant to his face. The passage where Chase is eventually confronted by Lincoln, who was never fooled in the first place, is a wonderful example of the careful interpersonal chess moves required in political life.
Second, the novel does a wonderful job of demonstrating how difficult it is get someone to follow orders and do the job right. Lincoln remains totally frustrated with his generals, especially the handsome, charming General McClellan, with his own political ambitions. The man refused to engage the enemy. Lincoln eventually fires him and promotes General Grant. Mrs. Lincoln is somewhat scadalized by the Grants, but Lincoln finally has a military genius on his side and Lincoln offers minimal guidance as long as he sees the war turning around due to Grant's initiatives.
Third, the novel does a great job of demonstrating the total hell that Lincoln occupied in the White House. The public came into the public rooms of the White House every morning to try to intercept the President on his way to his office. His wife engaged in questionable kick-back schemes with the White House staff. His older sons went to war and his younger son dies of swamp fever. Mary Lincoln was a burden to the President and her nervous breakdown after the death of their child, Willie, further burdened this exceptional political genius.
Fourth, Lincoln practiced careful adaptive leadership, keeping his cabinet and officers focused on the grim realities they had to face every day without flights of hubris and fancy.
Lincoln held our nation together at its darkest hour. Vidal was able to capture the amazing day to day reality that this feat entailed. Vidal creates a vision of Lincoln that comes to life in this fine novel.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
