Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
18 of 18 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Fascinating look at a surpisingly complex man, March 2, 2003
Through the lens of history, Dwight David Eisenhower, General of the Army, Supreme Allied Commander, President, is often seen as the affable embodiment of all that it is to be American. Of course, the truth is actually much more interesting. In Carlo D'Este's superb biography we are introduced to an Eisenhower who is full of contradictions and failings, but one who ultimately takes on a greater, and certainly more real, stature as a result of them.
As with his likewise excellent biography of Patton, D'Este sets the stage for Eisenhower's life by exploring the origins and beliefs of his forebears. As a result, the reader is introduced to perhaps the greatest irony of Eisenhower's life: his parents were staunch pacifists, and while proud of their son's accomplishments, were never particularly comfortable with his chosen career path. It is also worth noting that Eisenhower's life was utterly different from George Patton's, whose career became intertwined with his own. Unlike Patton's privileged upbringing, Eisenhower was dirt poor for pretty much his entire life, and yet the two men were close friends for decades before the pressures of war drove them irretrievably apart.
What is perhaps most interesting about Eisenhower, is that America's most well known soldier never actually directly commanded men in combat. His proficiency as a trainer kept him out of the trenches of WWI, and his skill as a staff officer meant that thereafter, he was always the brain behind the throne for a string of officers including such luminaries as MacArthur and Marshall. Yet, it was this perceived deficit in his resume that actually proved to be his greatest strength.
Above all, Eisenhower was a master administrator; he could take a long view of the situation, and insomuch as he was able, build a consensus out of the egos of his generals. It is perhaps the greatest strength of D'Este's research that he can paint a portrait of Eisenhower beset on all sides by prima donnas like Montgomery, Bradley and Patton, who is still able to maintain control over the long term progress of the war. D'Este is particularly scathing of Bradley, who is clearly the most overrated general of World War II, but even with Montgomery and Patton, who were undoubtedly Eisenhower's superiors in matters of operational art, he correctly recognizes that they lacked the fundamental character traits that made Eisenhower so successful as Supreme Commander. Traits like patience, affability, and the ability to place the good of the Allies above his own feelings meant that he could guide a supremely fractious coalition to victory.
That's not to say that D'Este is an unabashed admirer of Eisenhower. He correctly recognizes that, particularly early in the war, Eisenhower was far too tentative in his command. Moreover, he had a tendency to place personal loyalty above competency, and tolerated far too many laggards on his staff for political reasons. Moreover, as an infantryman, Eisenhower never completely grasped the need for maneuver and speed in his operations, a failing that lay at the root of his problems with Patton. That said, Eisenhower is often unduly criticized for not capturing Berlin. Military considerations and possibilities aside, any captured territory behind that designated in the Yalta agreements would have been turned over to the Soviets at the conclusion of hostilities anyway.
Finally, a few complaints about what is overall an excellent work. First, D'Este all too frequently digresses into long descriptions of the operational situation and then fails to link it back to Eisenhower. It is perhaps inevitable in that Eisenhower was in a position where he was frequently just an overseer. Still, I would argue that there are plenty of fine operational histories of WWII, and that the narrative could have been greatly improved by more effectively tying Eisenhower to the action on the ground. Secondly, while I applaud the use of primary sources, D'Este's use of the them is oddly stilted. For example, he will insert the text of a letter from Mamie Eisenhower to Ike, but then fail to link it to the overall flow of the narrative. Such non sequitors can be very disruptive, and more than once I had to flip back a page to pick up the point D'Este was trying to convey. Lastly, I was rather disappointed that D'Este didn't include Eisenhower's illustrious post-war career. While 1945 is certainly a logical stopping point, and D'Este can hardly be blamed for not tackling the monumental task of researching the post-war years, I finished this work feeling that I didn't have a complete picture of either Eisenhower the soldier, or the man.
Those complaints aside, I would like to reiterate that this is a superb biography. As was the case with "Patton: A Genius" for war, D'Este reveals his admiration when appropriate but is never unbalanced as a result. He gives a fair evaluation of Eisenhower's triumphs, and likewise considers his tragedies, and his miscues. Throughout, he offers a fascinating, thoroughly real portrait of a remarkable man. Perhaps the best compliment I can pay to this book is to state that it is my sincere hope that D'Este will follow it up with a second volume covering 1945 to the end of Eisenhower's life.
Jake Mohlman
|
|
|
12 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Many new insights into a supposedly well-known career., September 20, 2002
This book left me wondering who the hell Eisenhower was. I also got the impression that I shared that curiosity with Ike himself. It confirms all the bad mouth of him I heard during and after WWII while in the military. For example, one very high ranking officer who was in a position to know offered this assessment: "He never made a decision in his life! He left them to his staff and took the credit if they were right, and blamed his staff if they weren't." This book confirms the near truth of that without exactly saying so. Eisenhower may have been a "soldier statesman" using euphemistic terminology, but it appears to me from the testimony of this deeply researched book that he was more of a man in a grey flannel suit. A company man. Also an apple polisher and "yes" man. These, of course, were exactly the traits necessary to make him the ideal man for the job that made him famous, "Supreme Commander" for the allies in Europe. If he had been any tougher in his decisions and in enforcing them he'd have been fired, or had to resign. He was, as the British said, "Chairman of the Board."
Having lived those times and been familiar with the famous names, I can't think of a single man who could have filled his shoes. D'Este suggests that Gen. Marshal was considered for the job and wanted it. I think he'd have been canned as too abrasive in the long run.
Ike's lack of combat experience was often painfully apparent as this book shows? It also shows that those who had such experience screwed up as often as he did. Examples are his principal subordinates, Montgomery and Bradley.
One strong point of this book for history buffs is the detail on Eisenhower's youth and early career. He was born into a very poor family headed by a father with problems that Ike may have inherited. First was a recognition, profoundly apparent in his father, that he was a born loser (which his son may have inherited and gone to extreme lengths to deny to himself, conceal from others and overcome in any case. ) Second was his father's inability to show love, or much emotion at all.
Eisenhower frantically engaged in contact sports and was a workaholic for whatever reasons. Men such a Pershing and MacArthur almost worked him to death, with little protest from him. It made him indispensable as a staff man and prevented his serving with troops, which he sorely wished to do. It also ultimately brought him to the attention of the top men in his profession on whose staffs he performed remarkably well and faithfully. Because of this Gen. Marshall ultimately recognized him as the Chairman of the Board that they needed in Europe to manage the prima donnas from several nations who held the top military commands. This made Ike famous since he automatically got credit for their successes. This book led me to wonder, however, if even becoming President ever really overcame a dark inheritance from Ike's roots.
Perhaps unrealistically, this book is full of episodes of grown men blowing their stacks, especially Ike. I was never yelled at by a General in my life and worked for a lot fo them, and never raised my voice at a subordinate in anger. It isn't typical military conduct, and especially not becoming livid while doing so like a kid with a tantrum. Big men becoming livid, like high school kids, is a chronic condition in this recital.
This is a tour de force of detail, a convincing revelation of the truth of Gen. Orville Anderson's appraisal: "We didn't beat the Germans because we were better men, but because they were stupider than we were."
On balance, a depressing book, since it is inevitable to conclude it is telling it like it was. The book suggested to me that I should read or reread a lot of other WWII memoirs and the biographies of the principal characters, since I am curious to know if during WWII, I and most Americans in and out of service, were living in an optimistic "fool's paradise" induced by war propaganda as this book suggests to me.
Ike's unhappy relations with his wife are also covered sketchily. I'd bet she was the classic example of a woman totally unqualified by background to be a military wife, or even an upper class one...
|
|
|
11 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Another fine biography by D'Este, June 11, 2002
In his second foray into biographies, D'este does a brillant job of bringing Eisenhower the man to the fore front. D'Este gives a great deal of insight into the nature of Eisenhower's peronality by delving into the relationships he had with his brothers and the some-what unique relationship he had with Mamie his wife. D'Este, in addition, shows a much differnt side of chain-smoking Eisenhower, than the public usually sees, who has quite a temper and a vocabulary to make a sailor blush.One of the best sections of the book deals with Eisenhower's leadership during the North African campaign. D'Este characterizes this period of where Ike's leadership was lacking for incompetant. The author does a great job dealing with Operation Overlord (for the definitive account of the Normandy campaign read the author's Decision in Normandy) and the time period leading up to the German surrender. This is a fine biography and one that should be in every WW II student's library. What makes this biography great is D'Este demonstrates all sides of Eisenhower - both good and bad; and his analysis is first rate.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|