This book, by the editors of the Washington Post, does a good job of describing the events which led to the deadlocked 2000 Presidential election. In addition to detailing the paths which led to the deadlock, the book discusses all the post-election issues in a very readable format. Surprisingly, the books editors seem only slightly tilted towards Gore (especially considering it is the Washington Post, which is noted for its liberal bias), so no matter who you voted for, there is much to be found here for anyone with an interest in contemporary politics.

Deadlock: The Inside Story of America's Closest Election is a workmanlike and emotionless recollection of the events surrounding the most controversial election of the past 100 years. It is a well organized, easy to follow and not visibly biased view of the relevant events leading up to and following the November 7 Presidential election. Seemingly accurate and double checked to a fault, reading this book left me with the impression that I had just read an excellent 275 page newspaper article and not much more. With almost no humor, lacking any sidebar comments, it is a book Joe Friday would be proud to call his own. While I am a Texan and Bush supporter, I much preferred Jake Tapper's Down & Dirty: The Plot to Steal the Presidency. I guess this means that like most people, when push comes to shove, I'd rather be entertained than informed. I do regret this intellectual weakness and like some of the votes in Florida I may change. But probably not in the next 36 days.

Two things struck me while reading this book, the first is that I doubt there is a book out there that is truly balanced and not somewhat biased. The second thing was that Gore really got the shaft, not so much by the recount wars, but by the election official that came up with the Butterfly Ballot. In the history of the USA this decision ranks up there with new Coke and the XFL, what a mistake. As far as the reporting in the book it was not bad for a review of all the articles they had in the paper, but it did not really dig into the particular issues very deeply. I wanted more detail and behind the scenes with both the candidates. I also wanted more details on the court cases; I felt like the sky-high overview of the issues of the cases did not do such an important issue justice.

In reading the book I think a little bit of a democratic bias comes out, just a little, but enough to notice. I also thought it interesting that they had far more details of the Gore group then the Bush camp, it follows the perception that the Post is somewhat liberal in its views. The book is an overview that came out almost 10 minutes after Gore hung up the phone on the second concession call so there are a few more details out now that they did not get in the book. Overall it is a good effort and a readable book, but not the end all be all on the subject.

(The Fabulous) Gay (Life)

Straight America may always be schizophrenic in its relationship with the gay community, but as evidenced in Charles Kaiser's THE GAY METROPOLIS 1940-1996 (Houghton Mifflin Co., $27), no matter what the level of rejection, toleration or acceptance- there was no stopping us then and there is no stopping us now.

Kaiser tracts a burgeoning gay community, building as a collective force, at the national upheaval of America during WWII. What emerged in US cities at the time is a formidable, if rutterless minority. One that didn't seek to mirror the dominant straight society, but rather, was forced to be refracted by it, through an arbitrary sexually fuedalism.

Kaiser's sober, respectably researched and thoughly engrossing book is a light panoramic history of the indeflagitable homosexual urban culture in the US since that defining period. Interviewing many who where there then and here now, he draws sharp parallels and contrasts that show how far we have come and how far we have to go.

The gay mines have been swept and few exploded in THE GAY METROPOLIS- The least of them turns out to be scandalous exposes of celebrities and politicals in pre-liberation days. Although, a little bombe like the fact that House on Un-American Activities Sen. Joe McCarthy didn't rout out homosexuals (an institutionalized government tactic since WWI), along with his commies because he had sex with men, is delicious.

The real mushroom cloud in this book is that lesbian and gay men through sheer normalcy of will thrived in pre-Stonewall decades no matter what forces moved to oppress them. From fascinating personal remembrances of non-celebrities to the sublime tales of the infamous, Kaiser is expert in interfacing the infinite cross-culturalism that has molded gay life, for better or worse.

It's obvious from the assessable scope of this book that Kaiser has both the authoritative power of a historian and the storytelling flair of a great novelist. For instance, writing potently of the shrouded shenanigans of McCarthy aide Roy Cohn, New York columnist Joseph Alsop, J. Edgar Hoover, among other politically powerful closet queens, Kaiser de-sensationalizes the venomous gossip and instead disects the socio-political background that produced such internalized homophobia.

Another laudable method Kaiser employs is to regard all expressions of gay life worthy of even-handed reporting, from the (necessary) clandestine trysting places of toilets and salons to the complex socio-political structures of the gay-rights movement, the whole prism is in there.

Yet he always brings the antecdotes back to the point that, all along, no matter what the gay-bashing flavor of the year is, for gays, it is always about a civil-rights struggle-

"Gay Life in New York City in the 1950s was by turn oppressive and exhilarating, a world of persecution and vast possiblilities."

Kaiser tends to fawn over the importance of the arts and celebrity as pivotal touchstones and breakthroughs within the gay community. His observations are fascinating, even asute, you get the feeling that he should have written a separate book. He goes on about gay milestones in the theater, yet gives an almost one-dimensional reportage of the New York lesbian community.

He provides a great service, though, in drawing perspective on the impact of the crucial scientific research of the 1950s of homosexuality by Alfred Kinsey and Dr. Evelyn Hooker, whose studies, along with the personal experiences of gays, provided the solid architecture for a unified gay rebellion, movement, liberation and community infra-structure.

He also heralds the almost forgotten achievements of early gay militantcy, such as that of The Mattachine Society, the first known grassroots gay organization, which was founded by Harry Hay.

Although the vibracy of Kaiser's chapters on the 40s and 50s quiets a bit by the time we get into the closer ring of the latter decades, he writes movingly and accurately about the early years of the gay community's response to the AIDS epidemic.

With this book, the author can join the list of important gay historians like John Boswell, George Chauncey, Elizabeth Kennedy and Martin Duberman in liberating the invisible and silent past. Crisp, objective and colorful, Charles Kaiser has rescued from obscurity, the private and public lost stories that have weaved the tapestry of the still unfurling gay flag.

Lewis Whittington

There is much to enjoy in the Gay Metropolis (subtitled the landmark history of gay life in America since World War II). The history is presented as a series of observations and anecdotes from many people who lived in the gay scene during this time. The subtitle is a little misleading as the book is really only covering New York and not America and there is no he said, she said as it is basically (with a few very interesting exceptions) only men who are covered in this book. It is by no means a definitive history but it is an entertaining read as the stories are usually told well and are intimately personal. As the book goes on, most readers over the age of thirty will learn nothing new but it still reads quickly and pleasantly. A fun volume for the general reader of a slice of the Big Apple gay life.

What a wonderful, wonderful read! Go and get this book for yourselves to read. Find out who you are, and where you came from, and where you have the power to go.Obtain strength from others you read in this book. Charles Kaiser has concentrated on New York, but it does not detract from an overall understanding of the 20th Century gay tapestry. The use of New York could probably be seen as symbolic for the broader gay commonwealth.Probably a wise move. The decision to make this mainly an oral history was most likely a wise one as well.It brought this book, and our community's history to life in a way that traditional academic writing cannot possibly achieve. Kaiser has very pertinently compared our situation with all other minorities, and it's what we have in common that counts, not the differences.

The treatment of our history in different decades was the most interesting feature - the 2nd World War, and the 1990's being the most interesting and illuminating episodes, in an episode-filled book. The history of the '80s was the hardest to read, but to appreciate what Kaiser writes of the 1990s, it's necessary to read the book from beginning to end.

As a group, we still need positive reinforcement, and this book does it beautifully. You won't regret reading it, and I am indebted to a wonderful straight friend for bringing this back from New York as a present for me.

Does a good job of presenting the outlook of a white, Jewish, liberal college student living in New York in 1968. There is nothing wrong with that in itself but Kaiser's frame of refernce and the material he choses covers are hardly large enough to warrant "The Shaping of a Genertion" claim in the title. "1968 on The Upper West Side: Music, Democratic Politics and the Shaping of Charles Kaiser" would seem a more apt title.

Despite this narrow focus, what Kaiser does cover is written about in an adequate, if somewhat bland, journalistic style.

Charles Kaiser's "1968 In America" is going to be a big disappointment to those who bought it thinking that they would learn a great deal about the culture and music of the sixties. Only one chapter of the book looks at the music and counterculture of the sixties in any detail, and the other chapters only briefly mention them. Anyone who wants to learn more about sixties music and the counterculture should look elsewhere. But if you're a political buff like me then this book should be a delight. The great majority of this book is taken up with describing the bitter fight for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in 1968. It was a fight that came down to four men: President Lyndon Johnson, whose policies in Vietnam had turned many Americans against him(especially the young), but who still had the support of the old-fashioned big-city mayors who used to run the Democratic Party, but whose influence even in 1968 was declining. Waiting in the wings if Johnson withdrew was his talkative Vice-President, Hubert Humphrey. But the real focus of the book is on Eugene McCarthy, the eloquent, intellectual, but also enigmatic and curiously passive Senator from Minnesota. Many people disliked McCarthy and considered him to be a snob and too "lazy" to be President, but as Kaiser demonstrates it was McCarthy who had the guts to join the antiwar movement and oppose Johnson when most of the "experts" thought it was political suicide. McCarthy's gamble paid off when he nearly defeated Johnson in New Hampshire, giving the President a death blow which led to his sudden withdrawal from the campaign a couple of months later. However, McCarthy's surprise showing led Bobby Kennedy, the "Prince-in-Waiting" to enter the race. This triggered a bitter, no-holds-barred war of words and emotions between McCarthy and Kennedy and their supporters. In the end this fight became so nasty that it would probably have prevented either man from beating Vice-President Humphrey at the Democratic Convention. But then Kennedy's murder in Los Angeles in June 1968 following his narrow victory over McCarthy in the California primary changed the race all over again, and gave, Kaiser argues, McCarthy one last chance to win the nomination. Typically, McCarthy procrastinated and quoted poetry while Humphrey wooed the delegates he needed to win. The book loses much of its passion after that, and Kaiser's description of the fall campaign between Humphrey and his Republican opponent, Richard Nixon, isn't nearly as interesting as his descriptions of the McCarthy-Kennedy feud. In short, if you like politics you'll love this book, and if you don't - well, then don't buy it.

This book gives a great outline of 1968-- specifically the antiwar movement at Columbia University starting on April 23, 1968. This was my primary reason for buying the book, and for this, it was well worth it. A lot of ground is covered in the book, and I found all of it intresting-- the Vietnam war (Tet Offensive), history of music, LBJ... 1968 In America will prove very enjoyable to anyone who finds great intrest in the history of the 60's! Note: the book is told from the perspective of a liberal jew, so if you're looking for pure chronicling of the year, it's not what you're gonna get.