Has history shortchanged General George Washington, the strategist? Dave Richard Palmer thinks so. "Historians have talked around rather than to the subject.... Washington's generalship and the war's strategic framework are inextricably spliced together.... It was he who executed it and, in most instances, planned it. It is he, therefore, who should receive credit or criticism" (p. xviii; 76).

The historiography of the Revolution offers a wide range of opinions regarding American strategy in the war and the role of Washington as strategist. Depending on which author you read, claims Palmer, Washington was "bold or cautious, brilliant or bumbling, judicious or just plain lucky" (p. xix). This debate provides the impetus for Way of the Fox. Palmer believes the issue is much more complex than the existing literature would have us believe; likewise, Washington possessed a much greater strategic acumen than history has credited him with.

Palmer dedicates part I to exploring the "various ingredients of strategy as they acted to shape the conduct of the Revolutionary War" (p. xix). Part II chronicles the actual planning and execution of American military strategy during the war. Although a sound approach, I have a problem with Palmer's execution: he gives equal weight to both parts of the book.

Part I begins with a general discussion of eighteenth century military strategy and tactics and ends with a specific description of the situation in North America in 1775. Although Palmer is a good writer, he offers six chapters of deep prose where one chapter would have sufficed. His description and analysis of the opposing sides in the American Revolution, particularly that of the English, is the only passage truly germane to part II.

Palmer's description of the British high command is on the mark. London fielded an incompetent war team that deserves much of the blame for the outcome of the war. Palmer correctly indicts the most culpable subjects: King George III, Prime Minister Sir Frederick North, and Secretary of State for Colonies Lord George Germain. Of the three, none "stands charged at the bar of history for possession of any unusual degree of wisdom" (p. 34). Palmer profiles Lord Germain, the central point for strategic direction, as an "ex-army officer convicted by a court-martial of malfeasance in the face of the enemy during the Battle of Minden in 1759" (pp. 35-36).

Part I closes with an assertion and a question. First, Washington could not have achieved either of his goals by pursuing a patently defensive strategy. America went to war with England because it sought territorial aggrandizement and independence. Both goals required aggressive action by Washington. However, Palmer asks, did America emerge free and enlarged because of or in spite of the strategy it pursued?

Part II is the meat of Way of the Fox. Here, Palmer neatly divides the war into four phases: (1) April 1775 to June 1776, when the Americans could attack without fear and had nothing to lose; (2) July 1776 to December 1777, the period when George Washington could not afford to risk his outnumbered Continental Army in pitched battle with the British; (3) January 1778 to October 1781, after the French intervened and provided a legitimacy to the American cause while also counterbalancing the Royal Navy; and (4) November 1781 to December 1783, the negotiation period when the Americans struggled to "win the peace." According to Palmer, General Washington consciously recognized each phase and adopted his strategy accordingly: "In the first period which called for audacity, he was audacious; when the second cried caution, he turned cautious; as decisive victory became feasible, he thirsted for a decision; when events after Yorktown required steadfastness, he became the nation's solid anchor [p. 202]."

General Palmer is a soldier and a scholar. He taught military history at West Point and among his other books focusing on military strategy, he is most famous for his work on the Vietnam War: Summons of the Trumpet (1978).

So, how does Way of the Fox grade out? Palmer presents some valid arguments. Yes, the vast literature of the war generally overlooks Washington's performance as America's principal strategist. General Washington is generally portrayed as a figurehead--an amateur who, with more inspiration and luck than skill, preserved the Continental Army and outlasted the British. Way of the Fox corrects this oversight while showing that yes, "even before the word [strategy] was coined, George Washington had become this nation's preeminent strategist" (p. 204). Although Palmer over generalizes and often lacks the in-depth analysis to carry his arguments to completion, Way of the Fox still passes scholarly inspection. In sum, as the only single-volume work devoted to American military strategy, Palmer's book deserves a space next to Don Higginbotham's War of American Independence (1971) in the war literature of the American Revolution.

My boyfriend and I were in a long distance relationship for a few months and I thought this book would make a nice gift for him. Big mistake, It's nothing like I expected. The whole thing is drawn in cartoons. It's just a joke book for a gag gift. It had nonsensical scenes with puppets and Jell-O, and lame jokes.... I thought it would have new tricks and positions for men but in the end I was too embarrassed by its immaturity to even give it to him as a joke.

Why do you need a partner when you can do it yourself ? Once I got this book and a good old pot of KY Jelly, I left my wife and Bob's my uncle now. Why go through the pain of relationships if there is good books like this out there. A must by for loners, or men that lost interest in relationships. The good thing about using your hand is it doesn't need the half-an hour talk afterwards.

Book is a collection of picture postcards with brief captions for each one. The book follows along northern New England's railroads with pictures of stations, trains, and sometimes industries. Pictures are well reproduced, but are in black and white only. Captions are often too short but the format doesn't allow much room for elaboration. I liked it and hope the author will write one like this on soouthern New England.

This book is very easy to read, although it is difficult to find. Tony Palmer recounts the OZ trial--one of the longest obscenity trials in history. The background and the trial itself is described very well. My gripe about the novel is that it IS a biased account of the trial, so one cannot form his or her own opinions about the obscenity of OZ magazine--Schoolkids Issue. For those with no background on this trial, it arose from OZ 28, the Schoolkids Issue. Kids, 14-18, edited, wrote, and illustrated for one issue of OZ. Neville, the publisher, allowed the adolescents to express how they felt. Many people found this offensive (because they thought he was targeting children). Although this novel is biased, it does give one information about the trial--since there is such limited imformation about it. Another novel to check out is _Hippie Hippie Shake_ by Richard Neville.

This book, following the modern trend towards "relating to the people" loses all overview of Menander. Upon reading this book, one does not ask himself the age-old question, "Does Menander imitate life, or does life imitate Menander?"