Collected Miscellany

A couple of weeks ago I discussed Paul Johnson’s very brief volume on George Washington. In that review I noted:

Johnson’s take on Washington is popular history (see here for more). If one is looking for tightly argued scholarship and debates about the latest paper this is not the place.

This is apparently more true than I had thought. In the current issue of the Weekly Standard Gordon S. Wood reviews both the Johnson and the Christopher Hitchens bio of Thomas Jefferson. Wood, who is a brilliant historian and fully capable of writing engaging popular history himself, takes Johnson to task for repetition and historical inaccuracies:

With only 30,000 words or so to work with, the authors of these little biographies should not want to waste any. But unfortunately Johnson does. He repeats himself several times, telling us more than once that George III never left Britain and never saw the sea until he was 34, and doing the same with the story of Washington addressing his officers at Newburgh in 1783, fumbling with his glasses and telling them that he had grown nearly blind in service to his country. Such repetitions are nothing, however, compared with Johnson’s many mistakes and unreliable statements, which suggest that the book was hastily written and poorly edited and vetted . . . One or two serious errors might be forgivable, but with so many mistakes and exaggerated statements the reader’s confidence in the reliability of the biography is undermined.

Not being an expert on George Washington I obviously didn’t notice the errors, but I admit I am disappointed in Johnson for his sloppiness.

Continue reading →

Michael Blowhard said some very nice things about this blog, and I want to thank him, especially for noting our story contest, which you can still enter for the opportunity to win a signed copy of Michelle Herman’s Dog. He writes:

It seems to me that the cheeriest and most enterpreneurial of the book-blogs is Kevin Holtberry’s Collected Miscellany. The CM posse — Kevin, David, Phil and Jeff — are nothing if not devoted readers and book-lovers, and their reviews and tips reflect a lot of brainy experience and sensible thinking. Energy, too: Kevin and the boyz publish q&a’s, for instance — and they’re open-minded and down-to-earth enough to recognize that the book-thang ain’t just about the writers.

Forgive me, Kevin, if you saw this before and sided with humility against posting a reference. I’m encouraged by it.

Michael Blowhard said some very nice things about this blog, and I want to thank him, especially for noting our story contest, which you can still enter for the opportunity to win a signed copy of Michelle Herman’s Dog. He writes:

It seems to me that the cheeriest and most enterpreneurial of the book-blogs is Kevin Holtberry’s Collected Miscellany. The CM posse — Kevin, David, Phil and Jeff — are nothing if not devoted readers and book-lovers, and their reviews and tips reflect a lot of brainy experience and sensible thinking. Energy, too: Kevin and the boyz publish q&a’s, for instance — and they’re open-minded and down-to-earth enough to recognize that the book-thang ain’t just about the writers.

Forgive me, Kevin, if you saw this before and sided with humility against posting a reference. I’m encouraged by it.

One of the Southern writers I admire and want to learn from, Shelby Foote, died yesterday. He had a strong mind and good literary voice, being compared to William Faulkner in positive ways.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports:

Foote worked on the Civil War history for 20 years, using his skills as a novelist to write in a flowing, narrative style.

“I can’t conceive of writing it any other way,” he once said. “Narrative history is the kind that comes closest to telling the truth. You can never get to the truth, but that’s your goal.”

Though a native Southerner, Foote did not favor South in his history or novels and was not counted among those Southern historians who regard the Civil War as the great Lost Cause.

Continue reading →

One of the Southern writers I admire and want to learn from, Shelby Foote, died yesterday. He had a strong mind and good literary voice, being compared to William Faulkner in positive ways.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports:

Foote worked on the Civil War history for 20 years, using his skills as a novelist to write in a flowing, narrative style.

“I can’t conceive of writing it any other way,” he once said. “Narrative history is the kind that comes closest to telling the truth. You can never get to the truth, but that’s your goal.”

Though a native Southerner, Foote did not favor South in his history or novels and was not counted among those Southern historians who regard the Civil War as the great Lost Cause.

Continue reading →

Close readers of this blog will not be surprised to hear that I completely agree with William Grimes on the blessing of smaller books. In the New york Times Grimes approvingly makes note of the wide variety of slim but potent books being packaged today. This is in contrast to the seeming bulge of so many books – fiction and non-fiction alike. Grimes is not against larger volumes per se but is happy with the sub trend of less is more:

All books should be exactly as long as they need to be. There is no ideal length. But like mainstream Hollywood films, nonfiction books have shown a tendency to expand in recent years, for no particular reason.

And he notes that size doesn’t always equal readability: “It’s worth pointing out that long books can seem short, and vice versa.”

I have found myself attracted to these smaller works (I have five of the works listed in Grimes’s sidebar) because I simply don’t have the time and dedication that larger works require. If one is to tackle a 500 plus page tome you have to have sizable chunks of time available to do it justice. Reading a few pages a night isn’t going to get you much. With the smaller volumes you can dedicate less time and still get the satisfaction of finishing the story. With the non-fiction side you can still brush up your history or enlarge your knowledge base without feeling like you are returning to grad school (I also happen to love book series that are well designed and packaged). In my estimation the ease with which one can write has not necessarily resulted in improved prose but rather longwindedness at almost all levels. Same with movies and music in many instances. So I am with Grimes: “Give me more. I mean, less.”

Since I seem to be asking questions these days, let me throw this out there: Do you find yourself attracted to smaller works? Or do you dive in based on subject/author rather than length? Are you turned off from books like The Historian, for example, by its length (656 pages)?

***Hat Tip: Booksquare