Bob Younger has died. Morningside Bookshop seems poised to continue operations, looking at this staff roster.
His outfit has done Civil War readers a terrific service over the years and I myself have a few indispensable books reprinted by the shop. My hunch is that Mary Younger has been the practical half of this partnership. May she prosper.
The last fifty years of Civil War publishing have been, by and large, dreadful. Bob Younger, however, was there for us with important new work and essential reprints.
Interesting obit here by Eric Wittenberg. More here. My earlier posting about Morningside.
1/15/2006
1/13/2006
"Distortion, lies and fakery"
... that's how the Australian characterizes the current nonfiction crisis in American publishing.
It's a mistake to think this flap is simply about misleading readers with faked biographies (or fake details). The autobiographical excesses charted in this article have their counterparts in Civil War nonfiction, too. And they are rooted in the same source - authorial hubris.
It's not about a few ink-stained rogues - it's about standards in nonfiction editing.
Is anyone faking Civil War letters from start to finish? The particulars of this current crisis in trade publishing makes me wonder.
1/12/2006
Civil War authors of merit
... I think that success in life is largely a matter of luck. It has little correlation with merit, and in all fields of life there have always been many people of great merit who did not succeed. [...] The theory that art advances with the great artists in the van is not just a myth; it has led to the formation of cliques and pressure groups which, with their propaganda machines, almost resemble a political party or a church faction. - Karl Popper, Unended QuestSubstitute history/historians for art/artists and you will get another take on this quote.
It is 2006 and the day of the great Civil War historian has passed. "Great" in our field has only ever meant "great sales" and as the great sales fade, the claims of charlatans weaken. "The class of 1965" passes into memory - American Heritage struggles to survive - and that aggregator who decades later clumsily reiterated the historiography of '65 for cash and prizes now contends for store space with unlucky authors of real merit.
Popper: "... if I thought that there were no genuine philosophical problems, I would certainly not be a philiosopher..." We are crowding out the oafs who think there are no genuine problems in Civil War history, that all has been settled. They have become marginal.
And so I welcome the new year.
Refunds from Random House
Random House is refunding readers the cost of a nonfiction book bought directly from the publisher because the book contains exaggerations.
I like this - let it trend.
Welcome, Judge Alito
Mrs. Alito says about Mr. Alito: "He makes lists of novels that win the National Book Award, but at heart he's a history buff." " He's been reading Civil War stuff lately."
Hunch: If the National Book Award is your source for novel recommendations, your Civil War reading is likely to be dreadful, the kind of trash that wins prizes from committees of back-scratching plagiarist storytellers.
We all have to start somewhere, however. Welcome to the ranks of Civil War readership, your honor.
1/10/2006
1/09/2006
Bullwinkle's bullets
A few years ago, a stranger stumbled into the Usenet discussion group to ask where people liked to prospect for spent ACW bullets. The uproar was memorable, even by Usenet standards.
Since moving to Virginia, I have actually met two fellows who occasionally search our property, near the Potomac, for fallen rounds. Can this be a better use of time than searching the surrounding streams for gold? (Gold was mined commercially farther downriver until about 1948. Weekend searchers still collect gold flakes hereabouts.)
Here's a searcher who sells ACW bullets for $12 or more in cases.
Here's another fellow who has found so many bullets, he can only stow them in buckets and give them away.
The dynamic between searchers one and two, above, reminds me of an episode of Rocky and Bullwinkle. Some sort of economic council met to deal with the problem of saved cereal boxtops. They worried that Bullwinkle's huge collection could flood the world economy all at once pre-empting all other forms of economic production. Firms would compete to book factories to make all the trinkets that would be needed to honor unredeemed boxtops.
Far-fetched? Look at unredeemed frequent flyer miles.
Searcher one had better hope searcher two loses those buckets.
Funding fury over Richmond museum
The allocation of $1 million from a defense bill for a prospective Civil War museum in Richmond has ignited anger.
Franklin and Mac at the gaps
Tim Reese has some newly posted thoughts on the battles for the gaps on his website.
In reading it, you may want to keep in mind McClellan's plan of having Franklin act as a flying column in Pleasant Valley interposing between Jackson and Longstreet.
"... had he broken into Pleasant Valley while ample daylight remained, he would have thus threatened Lee with isolation before the latter could safely disengage at Turner's under cover of darkness, further 'cutting the enemy in two,' allowing McClellan to 'beat him in detail.'"
I appreciate Mark Snell's undertaking a biography of Franklin, but the man remains baffling. Kearny's correspondence makes reference to Franklin often, repeatedly referring to his great talent (unique praise from Phil). Franklin impresses everyone, always. He begins the war as an adjunct member of the cabinet, acting with McDowell as the Executive's "workaround" for avoiding Gen. Scott. Grant is still seeking his services near the end of the war.
Franklin will always repay more analysis.
1/05/2006
Fiends and oligarchs
Interesting sidelight on Alexander Keith Jr., ex-Confederate from Halifax, Nova Scotia: this fellow (Ann Larabee's Dynamite Fiend) was well known in his home town - but never as a terrorist - thanks to a press blackout.
See here.
See here.
1/04/2006
Back Door to Richmond
Brett Schulte has posted on Robertson's Back Door to Richmond, on the Bermuda Hundred campaign.
I very much enjoyed the book, its analytical cast, and its revision of the Butler guilt trip laid on by those who thought he should have taken Petersburg; Robertson thought that Butler was a victim of diffuse guidance. He also made Butler look good compared to his corps commanders, Gillmore and Smith.
IIRC, in a series of Usenet posts some time ago, Grant biographer Brooks Simpson, however, took aim at Robertson's reconstructions of the Grant-Butler communications on mission/operations matters, arguing that Robertson had overreached his material. Butler should not have been confused.
Keep a close eye on Robertson's handling of the communications evidence. It may be a balancing act that fails but it will well repay careful reading with the pleasure only a compact historical problem can deliver.
I very much enjoyed the book, its analytical cast, and its revision of the Butler guilt trip laid on by those who thought he should have taken Petersburg; Robertson thought that Butler was a victim of diffuse guidance. He also made Butler look good compared to his corps commanders, Gillmore and Smith.
IIRC, in a series of Usenet posts some time ago, Grant biographer Brooks Simpson, however, took aim at Robertson's reconstructions of the Grant-Butler communications on mission/operations matters, arguing that Robertson had overreached his material. Butler should not have been confused.
Keep a close eye on Robertson's handling of the communications evidence. It may be a balancing act that fails but it will well repay careful reading with the pleasure only a compact historical problem can deliver.
Good cavalry and bad books
Eric Wittenberg is rethinking McClellan and his cavalry and has composed a nice post about it. It reminds me that I need to write a little on the subject too, starting with the McClellan/Johnston/Davis cavalry doctrine disputes after the return of the Delafield commission from the Crimean War.
Which also reminds me that Eric had written some time ago, in an email, that he was dissatisfied with some of the books of a small publisher I had praised, Pelican. He had suffered an especially bad experience with White Mane, too. Buyer beware he said. There are publishers with some rot on the rosters.
Now, I should warn all that I like the publishers of bad little books - and I like their bad little books too. Of course there are two kinds of bad books. The first kind, which I read avidly, has interesting sourced material mired in bad history of one kind or another. I try to skate past the bad stuff and pick up the good.
The second kind is just bad history through and through. That is a losing proposition but perhaps a price worth paying to keep a pipeline open for bad book type one.
I remember plowing through this terrible 1968 self-published bio of Gen. "Bull" Sumner by a distant relative. At the end of this wearying read lay a morsel: the author complained that people made too much of Bull Sumner being cousins with Senator Charles Sumner.
Where have you ever read that before? Something to be verified somehow, but quite the choice bit. And I only had to read one bad, obscure book to get at it.
Win-win, no?
Which also reminds me that Eric had written some time ago, in an email, that he was dissatisfied with some of the books of a small publisher I had praised, Pelican. He had suffered an especially bad experience with White Mane, too. Buyer beware he said. There are publishers with some rot on the rosters.
Now, I should warn all that I like the publishers of bad little books - and I like their bad little books too. Of course there are two kinds of bad books. The first kind, which I read avidly, has interesting sourced material mired in bad history of one kind or another. I try to skate past the bad stuff and pick up the good.
The second kind is just bad history through and through. That is a losing proposition but perhaps a price worth paying to keep a pipeline open for bad book type one.
I remember plowing through this terrible 1968 self-published bio of Gen. "Bull" Sumner by a distant relative. At the end of this wearying read lay a morsel: the author complained that people made too much of Bull Sumner being cousins with Senator Charles Sumner.
Where have you ever read that before? Something to be verified somehow, but quite the choice bit. And I only had to read one bad, obscure book to get at it.
Win-win, no?
1/03/2006
What Emerson meant
I was re-reading the lovely Voegelinian musings of Marion Montgomery in his Why Hawthorne was Melancholy when I stumbled over a question of What Emerson Meant.
In 1864, Emerson wrote to Sen. Charles Sumner about a proposed law to set up a National Academy of Literature and Art. He thought it could offer "a jury to set upon abnormal anomolous pretensions to genius, such as puzzle the public mind now and then."
I wondered if a concern with "abnormal anomolous pretensions to genius" was sparked by military headlines or by literary goings on.
Perhaps he was envisioning the future state of Civil War history and its abject cult of authorial genius. Or perhaps he was envisioning the blog phenomenon.
Thanks for this rich quote, Marion.
In 1864, Emerson wrote to Sen. Charles Sumner about a proposed law to set up a National Academy of Literature and Art. He thought it could offer "a jury to set upon abnormal anomolous pretensions to genius, such as puzzle the public mind now and then."
I wondered if a concern with "abnormal anomolous pretensions to genius" was sparked by military headlines or by literary goings on.
Perhaps he was envisioning the future state of Civil War history and its abject cult of authorial genius. Or perhaps he was envisioning the blog phenomenon.
Thanks for this rich quote, Marion.
The point about Polk
This LA Times columnist makes some interesting points in comparing Polk to Bush, with a side glance at Lincoln.
As might be expected from a fan of Doris Kearns Goodwin, the Bush side of his analysis is based on pop stereotypes and the core comparison of Lincoln with Polk erroneously sets them up as contraries... to serve the purposes of a short essay, of course.
A deeper analysis would uncover a treasure trove of lessons Lincoln learned from Polk, especially in military organization and in the civilian management of professional soldiers.
Lincoln's Polkification of the Civil War (my term) had enormous consequences in losses and in efficiency trading off against gains in ardour and a certain broadening of participation.
The columnist is not far off in his assessment of Polk, however, and in the newspaper game one out of three ain't bad. Have a look.
As might be expected from a fan of Doris Kearns Goodwin, the Bush side of his analysis is based on pop stereotypes and the core comparison of Lincoln with Polk erroneously sets them up as contraries... to serve the purposes of a short essay, of course.
A deeper analysis would uncover a treasure trove of lessons Lincoln learned from Polk, especially in military organization and in the civilian management of professional soldiers.
Lincoln's Polkification of the Civil War (my term) had enormous consequences in losses and in efficiency trading off against gains in ardour and a certain broadening of participation.
The columnist is not far off in his assessment of Polk, however, and in the newspaper game one out of three ain't bad. Have a look.
The Dramatic Oil Company
Whiskey & Gunpowder (not the name of a a convenience store, a financial newsletter) has an interesting little piece on John Wilkes Booth's oil partnership, "The Dramatic Oil Company."
"You can find the remains and a marker of the Wilhelmina No. 1 today, on the Allegheny River Trail, just east of Titusville."
Booth's well can be visited.
"You can find the remains and a marker of the Wilhelmina No. 1 today, on the Allegheny River Trail, just east of Titusville."
Booth's well can be visited.
1/02/2006
On keeping quiet
Dr. George McClellan, founder of Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia, gave a valedictory address to his students at Jefferson Medical College in 1836.
I found this in a pamphlet among the papers of Max McClellan (the general's son) at Princeton University last week.
Some of his words in that address presage his son's refusal to engage his critics during and after the war:
I found this in a pamphlet among the papers of Max McClellan (the general's son) at Princeton University last week.
Some of his words in that address presage his son's refusal to engage his critics during and after the war:
If you have a low, crafty, and hostile competitor to deal with, let him alone and he will work out your reputaion for you. If you take the trouble to refute his calumnies too often, he will, in some measure, bring you down to his level in public estimation. ... A sensible author has somewhere observed that there are two ways of obtaining prosperity in the world - the first is by the praises of honest men, the other and surests is by the abuse of rogues.
Even the reviewers are noticing
A conventional ACW pop history retelling comes forth (Grant and Sherman, the Friendship that Won the Civil War) and even the book reviewer feels obliged to warn his readers, "the details of the famous relationship are familiar to event the most casual of buffs, and building his whole project on this framework sometimes feels slightly strained."
Why slightly strained?
At least this hackwork is being molested at the lowest-common-denominator of reviewing, the newspaper. I'll take that as an omen for 2006.
Why slightly strained?
At least this hackwork is being molested at the lowest-common-denominator of reviewing, the newspaper. I'll take that as an omen for 2006.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
