John Biggers came to artistic maturity in an academic setting far from the art centers of New York. He was repulsed by the New York art scene that had so summarily dismissed black art when he had participated in a MOMA black student art exhibit. Perhaps his avoidance of the centers of art commerce were as responsible for the late acceptance of his genius as was the segregationist mindset in the United States during Biggers's early career. As well as producing important paintings, drawings, and sculpture, Biggers is one of this country's most important muralists, creating more than twenty major murals in fifty years. His life has been dramatic in both content and context. Wardlaw draws a clear portrait of African-American life in the black section of a sharply segregated Gastonia, North Carolina, where Biggers grew up in the 1930s, and the rich family and community life of rural black America of the time. The other essays, written by noted scholars, trace the history of Biggers's artistic career through a careful study and analysis of his body of work.

Throughout history, no presidential administration needed to be given more benefit of the doubt than that of Gerald Ford. While other administrations had to come into existence as a consequence of death by natural causes or assassination, only Ford had to follow a person who resigned in disgrace. The political atmosphere was forever changed by the actions of Richard Nixon, as the American public no longer took the word of the president on faith. Jimmy Carter, who defeated Ford in the next election, made a simple, effective campaign pledge, "I will never lie to the American people."
However despite all of those problems, the sheer resilience and strength of the American political system was demonstrated, and that is the main theme of the book. Yes, Ford had his faults and probably could not have otherwise gained the presidency, but he is a good man and was the right person for the times. As someone addicted to the political theater, I was mesmerized by Watergate, disgusted with Nixon and sometimes laughed at Ford. And yet, I still liked him, and do so even more now that I have read this book. Given all the political problems, Ford did many things about as well as could be done. His downfall was the one really big mistake that he made, namely the premature pardon of Nixon.
Had he waited longer to issue the pardon, more could have come out, tensions would have been eased and the act would not have been quite so controversial. While I know why he did it, I will never understand why he felt he had to do it so soon. The behaviors of Nixon even as the pardon was being discussed and described in the book are amazing, showing a man who was still contemptuous of the political system. A delayed pardon may have altered that.
Gerald Ford was not a great president in terms of great accomplishments, initiatives or rhetoric. However, he was and is a decent man who was forced to pick up after an indecent one. For that reason he needs to be respected for what he did, helped make the political system work. This description of his presidency is a tribute to that decency and I encourage you to read it and pay a little more attention to him the next time you see him speak. I know I will.

Gerald Ford is not the most popular of presidents to write about. He's almost forgotten in studies of America after 1945. This book gives him his due. Profesor Greene does a fine job of examing the important issues that faced Ford, like "stagflation," the Mayaguez incident, and dealing with the Cold War. It's a balanced account and written for scholars and the general reader.

Greene adroitly recognizes that Ford's domestic legislative proposals faced staunch opposition from a Democratically controlled Congress. In foreign affairs, Ford failed to get SALT II ratified and an Egyptian-Israeli accord never materialized during his term. In addition, the author acknowledges that Ford used assertiveness in the Mayaguez incident. Furthermore, Greene avers that Ford received bad publicity from the press. Finally, Greene argues that Ford did not make a secret bargain with Nixon for a Presidential pardon. This book gives a balanced account about a much maligned President.

The title of this book is "The Presidency of George Bush." Needless to say, to adequately cover even the most insignificant president you need more than the paltry 200 pages that this book provides. So if Mr. Greene believes that he has written a major book on the Bush administration, he falls well short. Nevertheless, perhaps Mr. Greene sought to write a book offering fewer facts but more analysis. In that case, he also falls a bitshort. The final result is a hybrid of newspaper reporting, old and new facts, and a sprinkle of original analysis. It makes for a repectable work that is worth reading. Mr. Greene's final analysis of the Bush presidency is a positive one. He finds that "Poppy's" virtues of prudence and patience worked well in dealing with foreign countries and in conducting the Persian Gulf War. While admitting a dearth of domestic accomplishments, the author does praise Bush for the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Clean Air Act, both passed in 1990. One thing that stands out in particular is the author's emphasis on Bush's charcater. He sees the ex-president as a genuinely warm friend and gentle family man. This is absolutely true. In comparison to the other post-WWII presidents, George Bush probably would be the one you would most want to be your father. Nevertheless, I do not see why this quality should be an end in and of itself. This goes back to the recent debate over the role that character has for those who preside in the Oval Office. I do not believe that private values are an end. Instead, they should be a means to articulating public values. This lesson has been imprinted on Bill Clinton. Bush was a decent man but his public values were either a failure or more likely, unknown, because he never artiuclated them. The "vision thing" plagued him throughout his public life and his four years on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue did not awaken him to this essential aspect of any great presidency. There are three significant features when looking at the Bush presidency. First was the ending of the Cold War. Bush is given credit for this development even by many of his critics. But let's not forget that in 1989 when Bush took the oath of office, the die had been cast. The USSR was dying of a terminal disease. Bush largely sat and observed. He does deserve credit for not tipping the boat but that's hardly a compliment to build a legacy on. Bush deserves real applause for his handling of Germany's reuinfication. It was there that the Loan Star Yankee took an active and positive role. But should we ignore his appeasement of China following the Tiananmen Square masacre or his shiflessness on the ethnic cleasness in Yugoslavia? Its a mixed record. The second key issue was the Persian Gulf War. And clearly Bush's orchestartion of the allied campaign against Iraq was nearly flawless. But for every compliment that Bush receives here, he deserves criticism for his policies toward Iraq immediately prior to and following Deset Storm. With a little less prudence and more decisiveness, we could have either avoided the invasion of Kuwait completely or is so, removed Saddam Hussein from power following the war. The third issue was Bush's undoing: his lack of a domestic agenda of any shape or form. In 1989 it is true that he faced severe limitations when working with the legislative branch. But after the Gulf War he could have gotten a 30-acre personal mansion from Congress if he requested it. Instead, he rested on his own laurels, convinced that there was nothing he could do to help an American public, hurt and restless in the midst of an economic recession. He chose to do nothing and worst of all, he seemed blind to the concerns of his citizens. Who will ever forget the supermarket scanner? The result was a re-election fight that ended with 62% of the voting public unmoved by his pleas for a second chance. George Bush is a good man and he was not a bad president, per se. But he obviously had serious shortcomings as both a president and a public leader.