Although I loved the Rough Riders movie on TNT, they got the character Buckey O'Neill wrong. This book will set you straight on a forgotten hero, who did more in 38 years than most men would do in a life time. Just how far would he have gone had he not been killed at Kettle Hill? The next time that I'm on Whiskey Row, I will give a toast to William Owen O'Neill. This is a great book.

Dale L. Walker's biography of O'Neill, one of the early West's most fascinating figures, is richly drawn, authoritative, and distinguished. O'Neill is best known as one of the Rough Riders of the Spanish-American War, but Walker meticulously depicts all the other facets of this legendary Arizonan. This is surely the standard work on O'Neill.

I first read this eye-opening history in college back in 1983, in the revolutionary Reagan era. During the '70's it was taboo to talk about the left's enthusiasm for Stalin during the '30's and '40's (that was a form of McCarthyism, you see.) This was one of the first revisionist books to break that taboo and point out the obvious--that during the Great Depression and World War II a large part of the "chattering classes" (maybe even the majority) were enraptured by the vision of "a better world" put forth by the Soviet Union at the height of the bloody Stalinist era. What makes this indictment all the more serious is that Prof. O'Neill was at the time a political moderate; he wasn't even a neo-conservative, let alone a Reaganite (I wonder if his politics have changed in the years since.) My college senior thesis leaned on this book (perhaps too heavily, I liked it so much.) A couple of my professors had a hard time with the idea that the position of the intellectual class had been that bad. And that was at conservative Brigham Young University! Since then of course a lot of information has come out of the Soviet archives about espionage and "agents of influence." For an updated look at these issues, see Arthur Herman's revisionist biography "Joseph McCarthy."

O'Neill's Coming Apart was written in 1969 -- a fact that would seem to disqualify it as cultural history. But in fact the author's closeness to the zeitgeist, as well as his freewheeling willingness to speak his mind and waffle around with mummified standards of "argument" and "evidence" make for a truly good narrative. The author is an extremely smart, well-informed person who writes equally well about politics, diplomacy, the drug scene, Vietnam, and everything else that seemed to define the decade, and does so with a verve that makes you feel like you are there -- or at least there with the author. It is brilliantly informative, and funny at times. Deserves the Parkman Prize if there were any justice in the world.

One of the comments on the back cover says it pretty aptly: "A compassionate, shattering character study, more short story than play." This is basically a 30-page monologue by one of the characters, with an occasional interjection by the other. It centers around the feelings of Erie (the main character) for the previous night clerk at the hotel where he lives (Hughie), who has died. I found it hard to really like Erie, and I was disappointed with the sudden transformation of the new Night Clerk at the end. However, it has to be said that this play would be great for choosing a monologue for acting class or an audition.

My class had to read Hughie as an assignment. I have read Beyond the Horizon and have fallen in love with the complete intimacy in which O'neill writes his plays. He used personal experience and showed us a new way to think. This is an incredible play to read and even better on stage.

Objectivity, or a shot at it, is, admittedly, not something one should always expect to find in a historical work, especially if it is aimed at a broad audience. But if a book is opinionated, it should at least be an fun read. O'Neil's volume fails on both counts - it is blatantly subjective and painfully boring, in addition to being rambly. The author includes a lot of detail where a brief summary would surfice, and brushes over important issues, leaving a reader with pages of generalities. The chapter on minority discrimination, for exapmle, is perfunctory, and shot through with anachronic assumptions, providing little insight into the issue beyond the (selective) listing of facts. The technicalities of descriptions of military operations will quickly put you to sleep. Frustrating reading!

I have to read this book for my World War II history class thats taught by the author himself. By all accounts, the author - Professor O'Neill is a splendid lecturer whose emotionative, compelling narratives can often leave the listener wanting for more once the class had ended. A master story teller who can weave together the boring, mundane historical facts associated with every history class to bring to the audience a sense of the nature of the times being studied, of the people involved, and most importantly of its consequences and significance that shaped how our present society evolved from the past. It is with these high expectations that I began reading "A democracy at War" a week before my midterm. To my dissappointment the book was littered with facts, dates, and confusing battle descriptions. The book was well written overall. Had I not been one of lucky ones to listen to one of Professor O'Neill's lectures, I would've given this book a five star rating.

I had to read this book for my course on twentieth-century American history (which was taught by the author). I will admit that the book reads like one of his lectures, where it is up to the reader to discern his main points. However, O'Neill does try to touch base with the various aspects of the war effort, from the men in the trenches to the millions at home who took up factory jobs to keep America moving. That in itself is a daunting task, and O'Neill does it quite well. This book is a must for anyone who is interested in World War II!

This book, published in the early 1950's, summarizes the changes to our society during the first half of the 20th century. Comparing these changes to those of the second half, it can be inferred that the pace of historical change has actually slowed down. The world is actually becoming more stable. A fascinating perspective on modern times

Well, this book was recommended to me by a teacher who was surprised by the fact I went through my US History class without learning much about the first half of the twentieth century. I only knew about the New Deal & FDR. This book is wonderful. It gives a more colorful perspective on the first half of the twentieth than a textbook could ever and what's ironic is it doesn't talk about the New Deal as much as my US History teacher did. From this book, I've learned more what America was like and who were the truly big movers and shakers, and it wasn't always the president! If you like history and you want to read something from someone who actually lived through the "big change" (and want to read something less formal that a textbook and chuckle about situations of the past), I truly recommend this book. What's even more ironic is the book I have was one of the original copies which only cost 85 cents. Now it's up to about $25. For a paperback! What a change!

Nice piece of work that does a good job of tracing the transformations that took place in the first half of the century. I found an old copy at a bookstore for $20 in mint condition...on-line you may find it cheaper at an auction. Writing style is a bit dry, so the book does plod in some places. Still, a good starter for anyone wanting to better understand the growth of the USA from rural/isolationist to global superpower.