Lucius D. Clay has the distinction-and it is not one in which he took any pride-of being the first four star general in the history of the U.S. Army never to have seen any combat. One might think that the career of a uniformed bureaucrat might have little interest, but such is hardly the case. Clay was a key figure in getting the U.S. Army mobilized during the Second World War. As military governor of Germany during the immediate postwar period, he was in the front lines of the early Cold War. In later years, he was a major force in the Eisenhower campaign of 1952 and a foreign policy advisor to several presidents on matters involving Germany and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Biographer Jean Edward Smith certainly has the expertise to tell the story of Clay's life. He edited Clay's papers, wrote an important history of Berlin during the Cold War, and had a series of long interviews with the general and his family.

The man that emerges is a paragon of virtue. Clay came from an influential family; he was a distant relative of the nineteenth century statesman Henry Clay and his father was a U.S. Senator from Georgia, but finances were tight. He attended West Point because it was free. Clay saw no combat in World War I and progress in his career during the interwar period was slow and frustrating like so many others who went on to have large commands during the war. During the conflict Clay's administrative and logistical talents earned him general's stars, but also kept him in Washington. He was willing to take a demotion to get a combat command, but the War Department would not let him go.

The bulk of the book focuses on the last four of his military career; the time he served as military governor of Germany. Clay recognized that the occupation and decisions about its future were political issues, he treated them as such, and insisted that his administration not be part of the normal Army command structure. He wanted, and got, direct access to Eisenhower, the supreme commander of allied forces, and the Secretary of War back in Washington. Clay was serious about establishing democracy in Germany and denazification efforts. He, however, maintained a distance from most German officials, not wanting anyone to be tagged as a collaborator. He also wanted to avoid a punitive peace settlement and made sure that Germany had a solid fiscal foundation upon which to base its economic recovery. Smith shows that the French, rather than the Soviets, were the biggest obstacles to him in these efforts. Clay ultimately ended reparations in Germany because of the amount of plunder headed west, not east. Although Clay was one of the last to give up on cooperation with the Soviets, he was one of the first to defend German liberties. He oversaw the Berlin airlift that preserved the freedom of the western half of the city.

After retiring from the Army, Clay became a corporate CEO, but refused to take a position with any company that did defense work. He was a foreign policy troubleshooter in the 1950s and 1960s, when the status of Berlin threatened to turn the Cold War into a real war. His trips to Berlin helped reassure the nervous population of American protection and support. Smith adopts Clay's position that President John F. Kennedy handled the German issue poorly and allowed the Soviets to divide Berlin, dooming thousands to life in a Communist state.

Smith has done an impressive job of letting Clay's personality and views comes through the text. Clay made this difficult, he left no collection of papers or letters for a biographer to use. Smith's solution to this problem was extensive research in the collections of many other individuals and interviews with the general and his family. At the end of each chapter, Smith includes excerpts from his interviews with Clay. These sections make Clay's views clear, but it also makes for redundant reading. Smith also has a tendency to exaggerate his subject's influence. He soft peddles his criticisms, and usually faults Clay for minor, trivial matters. Still, it is clear that Lucius D. Clay was a man of integrity and he type that Americans can be proud to have had serve in their government.

Edward Lucie-Smith has long been a champion of the Belgian artist Jean Rustin. Until recently there was a very impressive (in size and content) monograph of Rustin's paintings and drawings by Lucie-Smith, but unfortunately that wondrous volume is out of print. For those who are unfamiliar with the art of Jean Rustin, this little book will be a fine starting point.

Rustin limits his subject matter to figures seemingly incarcerated in mental institutions or old folks homes. Rustin doesn't pity these elderly people of questionable mental capacity; his paintings are tender, a bit voyeuristic at times, and explicit. His people seem to seek solace with each other, explore their bodies together and alone, seem sad and yet somehow complacent with or resigned to their plight. The drawings shown here are good, but the paintings not shown are more poignant. Rustin is not at all well known in the USA but should be. In a time when we are groping with our inevitable mortality, when we are producing a prolonged life spans that will fill retirement homes, Rustin's commentary seems particularly piquant. And as usual, Lucie-Smith pulls focus to an important painter with his terse commentary.

This is a good read about a fascinating individual. John Marshall is clearly one of the most underrated shapers of our country and this book goes a long way in providing the texture and context of his life. The author does a good job of balancing history with legal scholarship and I believe that this is worthwhile for both the "lay-man" and the "law-man". I did believe that the author abridged the content a bit too much at times(for example, he did not cover Marshall's point of view on the Declaration of Independence or Articles of Confederation, and he covered the last 12 years of Marshall's life as Chief Justice in less than 50 pages), but overall, it was a solid investment of my time.

This is an outstanding biography of a great American who not only gave the United States a solid foundation for its judicial system, but also shaped the judiciary as one of the major branches of the Government. The biography is a marvellous and beautiful piece of work by Jean Edward Smith. The focus is on John Marshall and the law. This exquisite literary work reveals a great mind and a great man! The author, by often quoting John Marshall's letters and legal opinions, portraits a creative mind with a capacity for splendid expression. I would recommend this book for anyone interested in American history and Government. I will also recommend this for all students and practioners of law.

John Marshall defined American law, politics and power. This book paints a vivid picture of who Marshall was, and why he is still important today. The author does an excellent job stating the facts and letting the reader decide for her/himself whether or not Marshall did the right or wrong in the very important decisions he made. This book is enlightening and well written. Marshall's life is wonderfully told through the authors use of clear and concise writing. This book is excellent. It clarifies many misconceptions of this great man who came out of a generation that claims many great men. Marshall may be the least understood of them all, but he certainly is no less important than any of his contemporaries in forming and defining the United States of America.

A must read for all Civil War buffs and those even remotely interested in history. The 600+ pages in this book (both volume I and II are included together) articulately spell out the military career of one of the United States' greatest generals. Grant's Memoirs are well-written, thoughtful, insightful, and offer more than a glimpse into the mind of U.S. Grant.

Volume I opens with a heartfelt preface where Grant explains how his diminishing health pushed him to complete this work and "asking no favor but hoping (his remarks) will meet the approval of the reader." They most definitely do. Following the preface, the reader is given a (very) short review of his early childhood, life at West Point, and early Army life. The next one hundred pages are dedicated to the Mexican War followed by his resignation from the military and civilian life in Illinois. The remainder of Volume I and all of Volume II extensively deal with the War Between the States.

I found Volume I (written before Grant realized he was critically ill) to be rich in detail of the various military campaigns (perhaps too detailed) and his ascension through the military ranks, but it is somewhat lacking in personal observations and insights. It even drags at times--but stick with it. The patient reader will not be dissapointed. Volume II hurls the reader into the conflict, reads rapidly, and is rife with Grant's personal observations and insights.

This second volume picks up where the first left off--following Vicksburg to the campaigns in Tennessee to the Battle of the Wilderness to Sherman's March to the Sea to the Battle of Franklin right up to Appomattox and all the events of April and May 1865. These campaigns are told from the commanding general's perspective with great overview and detail. However, what really makes Volume II (and this volume is much more fast paced than the first) special are all the personal observations and insightful (rarely negative and always humble) comments about those Grant served with and against. Grant is thoughtful and displays much about himself as this great book draws to a close. An eloquently written, detailed, first-person account of the Civil War that offers much to those who read it.

I cannot recommend this book highly enough.

Being a Civil War buff, I just received a copy of the old 2-volume edition of this book as a birthday present. It turned out to be one of the better presents I have received. Grant begins by stating that he will NOT present all the details of each campaign and battle. He keeps this promise. Rather, the book is a general overview of his background, youth, and military career from Mexico through the Civil War. I expected some self-aggrandizement, but was (pleasantly)surprised by Grant's frankness and obvious sincerity. He tells things as he experienced them, with no flourishes. When he was wrong, he says so. When credit belongs to someone else, he also says so. It is a straight-forward story by an obviously straight-forward man. Knowing that he was soon to die, Grant wrote a remarkably honest piece - especially compared to the works of some of his contemporaries. When I finished reading the book, I don't believe that I knew that much more about the war itself. Rather, my strongest impression was of Grant's character; that I had, in a sense, met the man. It is a book NOT be to missed.

That U.S. Grant is telling one of history's great tragic and glorious stories as the key actor would make this book a fine piece in its own right. He has a gift for story telling that renders his Personal Memoirs compelling and engrossing. One of the best books I have read. It is remarkable from several levels. First, it is undeniably great history. The story of our Civil War is moving enough to leave a tremendous impression upon the reader in Grant's hands. Second, this book is a great study in management. Grant succeeded where scores failed at similar command levels throughout the Civil War. He did due to his: knowledge and focus on his mission; his ability to conceive plans that served his mission; his ability to have alternatives that stayed the course; his ability to learn from mistakes and experience; his calm in the face of stress and chaos; his decisiveness and his willingness to take reasonable risks.

This book surprised me by being an excellent management study. The lessons which are easy to take away from the book are aplicable to anyone who is faced with mission definition and achievement. It should be must reading in MBA programs.

Grant's lack of ego is surprising when compared to other Civil War figures and high achievers who have reflected on their lives and actions. By not only focusing on things that went right for Grant, the book has a tremendous credibility borne of real life trial and error, frustration, lessons learned and later employed.

A great book.

Jean Edward Smith is a competent writer who has produced a relatively error-free and certainly positive look at Ulysses S. Grant, but there is something missing. Grant is an elusive subject and after reading this treatment, he will remain as enigmatic and unfathomable as he has always been. Smith has no background on Grant or the civil war and his limitations show, particularly in such a lengthy tome as this. Much of the book is culled from other (superior) Grant biographies and certain issues, such as Grant's drinking, are treated in a paragraph, when pages are necessary to do justice to the topic.

Most disturbing is Smith's propensity to borrow liberally from other authors in his interpretations. Certain sections of this book read similarly to words written by previous Grant biographers. See particularly his views on Grant's drinking, which are similar to McPherson's sections in his book, "Battle Cry of Freedom" (available on Amazon).

Smith is strongest in his post-civil war sections and his chapters on Grant's much-maligned Presidency are well-written and contain much needed revisionism. Grant was not the bumbling fool as President as is so often depicted. Smith deftly shows that Grant's years in the White House were not devoid of achievement.

Still, the flaws of this book surmount any of the positives. The pacing is poor and only a few scant pages are devoted to Grant's valiant race with death and the publication of his brilliant memoirs. The civil war chapters are fairly flat, with no fresh information or anecdotal material. He relies on dated sources and accepts whatever they offered without critical analysis. There are better Grant books out there and you would be advised to search those out.

This is an excellent and complete history of the life of Ulysses S. Grant. It is certainly complete form the viewpoint of Civil War activities of the general, relying on all known sources -- from Grant's letters to his military orders to analyses by others from the war.

Particularly good is the analysis of Grant's presidential administration, treating his role in quashing the Ku Klux Klan; his policy toward American Indians; his role in the attempts by Jay Gould to corner the gold market. This book is strongly recommended for understanding the Reconstruction period politics; also for Grant's role in disarming the 1876 constitutional crisis over the election -- one very similar to the crisis the country faced in the 2000 presidential election.

The only important topic not treated well is the aspect of the Civil War that William Tecumseh Sherman represented: war on civilian support for the rebellion.

In addition, Smith's writing style is crisp and lively; full of anecdotes. The author's side-by-side contrasting two views of Grant expressed by the Adams' brothers is a classic. And Smith's own appreciation of Grant's writing style caused me to seek out the general's Memoirs after reading this book.

Jean E. Smith's biography delivers a long overdue, refreshing and considerable recast of Ulysses Grant, especially the post-War years. While sustaining his reputation as an accomplished military leader, Smith's Grant emerges as a politician and stateman of considerable acumen and accomplishment. Rather than present Grant as a successful soldier and failed politician, Smith emphasizes the continuity in Grant's life. The common thread is an indomitable strength of character. Throughout you meet a man of quiet, resolute determination and honesty.

The early chapters focus on Grant's experience at West Point, in the Mexican War, military outposts, and in his many varied and often failed commercial ventures. Throughout these early ups and downs, what emerges is the picture of a man of absolute integrity and humility... a man unwilling to solicit position or accept patronage, unfailing in his payment of peronsal or financial debt, and unflinching in his duty.

Not unexpectedly half the book addresses Grant's military service; most of the accounts are familiar. Smith, however, goes to considerable length to discuss Grant's relationships with subordinate and opposition leaders (e.g., Simon Bolivar Buckner, Sherman, Longstreet, Thomas). The author points to the Federal movements at Vicksburg (1863) and James River (1865) as among Grant's most inspired, while bringing perspective to the momentum gained and lives lost during the campaign of 1864 (e.g., Wilderness, Spotsylvania, Cold Harbor). Sometimes labeled a butcher, Grant's casualty ratio was consistently less than Robert E. Lee's and, unlike preceding Eastern commanders, Grant refused to pay for the same ground twice, choosing to defeat the Confederate Army rather than focus on "geographical trophies."

While the sterotype of the Grant White House is one of corruption, graft and patronage, the book reveals Grant's efforts to avoid or alleviate all. After supporting Lincoln's intent for the South during a true failure -- the Andrew Johnson years (1865-1968) -- Grant makes notable contributions as President. Against a backdrop of residual post-war division, Grant supports the civil rights of freedmen in Reconstruction and of Native Americans in the West. Despite legislative resistance he outlined model civil service reform to prevent rampant patronage. Internationally Grant and his outstanding Secretary of State, Hamilton Fish, oversaw successful treaties governing future relations in the Carribean and enduring peace with England, Through timely, adept and honest maneuvering Grant vetoed the 1874 "inflation bill" and oversaw passage of the Resumption Act establishing sound monetary policy and placing the country on a strong economic footing. Destruction of the Whiskey Ring affirmed fair taxation and removed corrupt officials of both parties. Grant also addressed and sustained separation of church and state.

The book is easily read and balanced in its treatment. Smith discusses the motivations of Grant's occasional "benders," and allows that the General was often too trusting of his friends, many of whom hoped to profit by their association with the great man. Thoughout, however, Grant's honor, motivations and intentions emerge unstained. Jean Smith's book is well researched (ample footnotes, a 38 page bibliography, and 78 pages of citations and endnotes), the only complaint being that many are from eminent but secondary resources. I whole heartedly recommend "Grant" to the general reader, Civil War historian, and politically curious. As I did, you will come away impressed with a Ulysses Grant few have troubled to know well.

The Book I read was George Bush's War. The Author of this book is Jean Edward Smith. I think that Smith is a very smart man or he's got some inside connections, because he has information on meetings that happened incognito, if you know what I mean. I also thought this book was exceptionally educational. The reason why I felt this book is educational is because it provided me with a different sense of humor than I am used too, while getting some strong information in-bedded in my head. I felt that the main plot in this book is about one person, George bush, rounding up a group of people to rise against Iraq. I feel that the strength of this book is when the U.S walked up on the Iraqi people. It also talks about how Iraq placed Saddam on a pedestal, as a hero and how he was viewed that way by the entire Arab world. This book included "behind the scenes" interviews, and information that had not been released to the public. It had real life interviews. This book contains many details that are irrelevant to my research, but over all I would say this book is good. I feel that this book is good for writing papers or reports, but if you want to learn a lot about the war I would recommend you to another book. Thanks
By Justin

I read George Bush's War by Smith. I liked most of it. The thesis of the book is that George Bush was the sole figure in rallying opposition against Iraq.

The strengths of the book is that the book contains good material on why Saddam was regarded as a hero in the Arab world. He gives a pretty good history of the Middle East. Also, I like some of the "behind the scenes" information of the campaign against Iraq.

The weaknesses of the book are glaring. First, there are too many quotes. I do not really care what the assistant to the US Ambassador to some country that I never heard of says about something that an equally minute representative said about Saddam Hussien, just to give an example. Keep in mind that not ALL quotes were bad. Another thing is that the book STOPS at the bombing of Baghdad. The questions of why did Jordan support Iraq or Did Iraq and Iran mend fences were never mentioned. The major weaknes is that there was not enough historical distance at that time to justify writing a detailed work. In political terms, the book is above average. In military terms, it is pretty weak.

If someone was writing a paper on the Gulf War, I would recommend this book as a starting point. If someone wanted to know about military concerns, this is not the book for you.