Grant's story, "Just a Drunk" perhaps a nexus where the contemporary news media narrative over shadowed the truth as it often does today. Where the larger truth is sacrificed for the convenience of the news media finding an angle and getting a story out as it has with Al Franken where not one of his accusers were held to account. Much less even identified. Kirsten Gilibrand who turned from right wing gun advocate to darling of the New York liberal set has shown her true colors as she throws one of our best protagonist under the bus to further her own ambitions.
5
I'll read Grant's memoirs, thanks.
Mr. Chernow is an excellent biographer. He captures Grant's character and his humanity. I am relearning US history and appreciating it. Thank you Mr. Chernow!
5
1. Grant didn't write his biography all by himself. Mark Twain was his ghost writer. Not a big secret.
2. No one succeeds alone and Grant wasn't an exception. His success as a general depended upon a great cadre of professional officers educated at West Point led by William Tecumseh Sherman, Phil Sheridan, George Gordon Meade (the general who defeated Lee at Gettysburg before Grant came east), James B. McPherson, and Winfield Hancock, among others. Grant had little to do with the professional development of these men, but he did have something to do with putting them into positions where they could be effective, especially Sherman and Sheridan. As leader of the Union forces, Grant even benefited to a degree from the legacy of George McClellan who was an excellent organizer and strategist, but a less effective battlefield manager. Grant's final campaign against Richmond took the same path as McClellan's. As president, Grant was less fortunate with the material available to him and sometimes less astute in his choices, and his results were more mixed.
3. Calling Grant a butcher was and is propaganda. His campaigns in the East weren't any more bloody than the campaigns in the East that proceeded his arrival. Grant didn't lead the Union army at the Bull Runs, Antietam, Fredericksburg, Chancellorsville, Gettysburg or on the Peninsula. Chalk that moniker up to Lincoln's "loyal" opposition, which was trying mightily to end Lincoln's presidency in 1864.
5
George Thomas should be included of Grant's associates. He was possibly the most gifted of them all in leadership and tactics.
5
Not true. Chernow debunks the Mark Twain theory in "Grant." He has studied the original manuscript in great detail. Twain was the publisher and that is all.
22
Jim, I would argue that Grant's Overland Campaign did not really borrow or resemble McClellan's 1862 campaign other than the fact that the Army of the Potomac wound up on the James peninsula. Grant was not after the capture of Richmond but rather to pin down and defeat the Army of Northern Virginia. To that end he pursued in bulldog fashion always moving aggressively after stalemate to draw Lee out and to try and catch him outside of defensive works. His tenacity in the Vicksburg campaign mirrors his approach in Virginia in 1864.
Coming from the Western theater, he did not benefit from any of Little Mac's work but instead had to constantly push his subordinates past their fears of being outfoxed by Lee. The events of 1864 are studded with examples where the corps commanders of the Army of the Potomac flummoxed Grant's plans, resulting in missed opportunities. He wound up elevating the role of generals Sheridan and Smith because he knew them from the west, and he saw that Meade was not able to manage the corps commanders as Grant assumed he could.
3
Maybe I missed something in your article. However saw no reference to his effort to inter Jews during the Civil War. As noted with documentation in Sarna's book on the subject.
Since Grant's criminal father had a Jewish partner in his black market business, Grant wanted to punish all Jews. Thank goodness Lincoln stepped in to stop it.
Supposedly Grant went on an apology tour after the war and placed Jews in his cabinet to make up for his actions during the war.
3
Chernow discusses this issue at great length in "Grant," which I hope people will read, since its purpose is to debunk certain unfair characterizations. Grant did make a terrible mistake--and spent the rest of his life trying to fix it. Please read this book lest you judge him too harshly.
14
As a Jew myself, it is necessary, honesty to admit, that wherever prices are manipulated by non-market forces (i.e. by governments, military necessity, etc.) certain individuals are drawn like bees to nectar.
Such groups are found all over the world. They are typically ethnically different from the masses. They are family-oriented and loyal at least as much to the family’s finances as to the larger nation around them.
In Africa, Indians have filled this role. Throughout East Africa Indians have become the merchants, importers, exporters, lenders etc.
Throughout Southeast Asia ethnic Chinese filled this niche in Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia etc.
In large parts of the Middle East and southeastern Europe, Armenians were the grease that kept the economy of trade moving.
The Jews had risen to preeminence oil the time of Pax Romana and before throughout the Mediterranean. The courts of Medieval Europe, depended upon Jewish lenders to float bonds to pay for pomp and military glory.
And of course in the two para-European regions, Anglo-America and Russia, Jews were instrumental in the maintenance of markets.
So, to be sure, where cotton was bought by license by Northern interests from southern growers the license created a voltage, a disparity of price between seller and buyers. This voltage is the nectar that draws the trader financier class.
Grant despised those benefitting from the blood of his men who were able to enforce such a voltage.
4
I'm currently reading several of Jeff Shaara's historical fiction books covering various periods during the Civil War. Although I have read any number of books covering the conflict and it's protagonists on both sides,, I never fail to come away from the parts dealing with Ulysses Grant without a sense of awe. Cashiered from the Army after the Mexican War for drunkenness, a failure at every civilian occupation that he tried, Grant literally had to beg for an appointment as an office in the Illinois volunteer regiment.
What combination of fate, timing and luck allowed him to eventually command all Federal troops during the war and force the surrender of the one man, Lee, who personified the image of the "gentleman soldier" that the South believed was its strength. It's an amazing story and while it doesn't appear that Mr. Cher now covers any new ground, I'll be happy to own the retelling of a great story by The pre-eminent biographer of our time.
7
It is ironic that the final battle of the English Civil Wars, namely the American Civil War resulted in the ideal of the Cavalier Robert E. Lee to be defeated by the creator of the American version of the New Model Army, U.S. Grant.
2
A very eloquent and enjoyable review.
I remember reading the earlier biography by Ronald C. White and thinking that Andrew Johnson resembles the current US president in so many ways. Divisive and putting personal loyalty above everything else, even to the detriment of the country.
I doubt the current incumbent bothers to read history in any depth, but if he misses the lessons from history, he does so at his peril. Reading about Grant would be an excellent place to start rectifying this.
7
Yes, a great biography of a great man--I would suggest that our arguments about historical monuments across the South be immediately addressed by a campaign to improve the accuracy of our understanding of our history. Let's install monuments to Grant and Lincoln and Sherman and Butler etc etc as abundantly as the Confederate generals--right next to them, in fact. Grant's Gen. Marshall-like drive to extend compassion to the losing side reflects my own family history; on one side, a Union private from Massachusetts starved to death at Andersonville, on the other, a Confederate soldier dying slowly of his untreated wounds in south Texas a year after peace was declared. We must resolve the pain and conflict by looking at the complete picture.
10
Great review from a highly qualified reviewer who did grow up in Arkansas, where the past is surely the present. I will read the book. And somehow a relief today to see we used to have a President who knew how to read and write. Thank you President Clinton the First, we miss you.
11
I find it hard to believe that Bill Clinton could have written this book review. The prose is fluid and graceful, except for the awkward sentence denouncing present -day Republicans. Compare the writing in this review to his bumbling stilted autobiography. Also the author of this review knew that Grant's wonderful autobiography ends with Lee's surrender. It is not believable that Clinton would know this.
2
Overdue reassessment of Grant who like Lincoln rewards endless study .Fine men who reflect the best of America.
5
Grant's legacy is overdue for revival. A fine review of a timely book.
Unlike contemporary politicians, Grant saw and acted against the county's real enemies - racists trying to establish white supremacy. Given the lack of support for that cause, Grant's Presidency was little respected by historians.
Grant's alcoholism was unique. It was more like a mistress, something he'd go to periodically, finding complete oblivion. Grant could be sober for as long as necessary. This doesn't fit the usual models of addiction.
Finally, Grant was a product of Lincoln's management. He'd never have been selected by more orthodox, conservative leaders. Lincoln experimented and took risks, to find what worked. Grant was a risk, and a very successful experiment.
24
About Grant's drinking - there was one period in his life when there is evidence he drank to excess. He was stationed in a backwater in the Pacific Northwest, his beloved family was thousands of mile away and he could not afford to bring them west, he had the boss from hell, and could see no way out. He resigned and went back east.
The army was a small gossipy fraternity in those days, and they spread stories, especially during the Civil War, when there was a lot of ambition and backbiting, I believe that every story of his being drunk during the war has been debunked. In at least one case, there are official communications which show he was miles away during a reporter's account of a wild drunken spree.
There are no stories of him being drunk in his youth, during the Mexican War, as President, when he was under a microscope and had many enemies, or after the presidency, when again, he was watched wherever he went.
Hard to believe he could have hidden it in every period of his life but one.
8
To read Mr. Clinton's eloquent and thoughtful review of Mr. Chernov's biography, I am reminded that, as in Grant's time, Americans can only tolerate two or three intelligent presidents before they feel the compulsion to vote with their limbic systems.
18
Amen!
3
Why does it always seem that those with poor marks in college often go on to become great leaders? My guess is that poor grades can be a sign that a pupil is unwilling to conform to the demands of his professors because he regards himself as above his teachers, i.e., that his motto is "who are you to tell me what to do?" A good leader must have that kind of unyielding iron will, to refuse to be intimidated by anybody. Grant apparently had it. So did the 20th century master politicians, FDR, and LBJ.
7
I don't think it's so much that they feel themselves above their teachers. Instead, they see things differently, and are not convinced of the 'correct' answers, often found within the narrow parameters which their teachers keep their own minds confined.
11
Great review, Mr. President. I look forward to reading this book and learning more about General Grant and his aide-de-camp, Ely Parker, a Seneca Indian who graduated from Cayuga Lake Military Academy in Aurora, NY.
10
I've read all of Chernow's books. He is both a great author and a great detective. His objectivity is brilliant. Can't wait to read Grant.
13
Self serving commentary meant to reinforce the false narrative that deeply flawed candidate Hillary lost to extremists versus mainstream Americans. Set this piece aside but eagerly await his review of Harvey's memoire: "Mr. Weinstein, I am a GREAT ADMIRER of your work!"
5
Give it up already...lol ...Its a book reveiw..
12
Which bears what relevance to the article and the subject of Ulysses S. Grant?
Harvey Weinstein is repulsive on so many levels; but unlike either Mr. Clinton, whose peccadilloes are well documented, or the current occupant of the White House, an admitted groper, who is also repulsive on many levels, he does not have his finger on the nuclear codes, or his hands on the short hairs of policy.
7
"If we still believe in forming a more perfect union, his steady and courageous example is more valuable than ever" and the voice of the distinguished author of this book review, a successor to Grant in office, we need to hear from more often these days on the topic of "the struggle to defend justice and equality in our tumultuous and divisive era." Thank you, President Clinton.
23
What comes through in this detailed and thoughtful review is an appreciation for how easily small misreadings of history can alter the assessment of a President's record. I can't help but think President Clinton wrote this with an eye towards how history will view his own presidency.
10
A fine review of a fine man by a fine president
33
A fine man? Bill Clinton was a serial sex offender and quite possibly a rapist. Women have a right to be believed, right? Right...?
2
Women certainly do have the right to be believed. Especially the 16 who claim that trump harassed them. Right?
4
Thank you, son of the south, William Clinton.
Could Jefferson Davis Pierre Beauregard Se(ce)ssions have written this review? Could he even have read the book? To do either he would have to admit the unremitting imorality of his forbears and his present self. This he can never do; he can only blame the “negro” and white “negro lovers” on his blighted path to regain white supremacy in his personal “lost cause.”
22
...”If we still believe...” That last sentence gave me a start. I would expect a Dem leader to say “Since we still believe.” I hope our former president has no doubt despite current appearances.
Agree Mr. Obama would be a better choice as reviewer, but it’s comforting to know Mr. Clinton has found good, clean ways to use his time. I cannot see 45 even reading a book review (in the “failing NYT”) much less a 1000 page book.
Glad to see the review. Grant is worthy of such a work and may finally be getting his due.
9
Thank you, President Clinton, for a well-written and thoughtful review of "Grant" by Ron Cherlow. I particularly appreciate your suggestion of how timely this book is in light of the horrors in Charlottesville, VA this past August, widening income inequality, and the discontent of voters. The polarization of the Civil War seems to have grown like a festering cancer and resurfaced with more intensity now that Southern "Dixiecrats" have fully migrated to the GOP.
I am fascinated by Clinton's explanation of the origins of the Klu Klux Klan as social clubs in the South based on the Greek word for circle "kyklos", and its gradual transformation into a force for domestic terrorism (suppressing African-American votes was its raison d'être). While the Department of Justice (DOJ) came into being under the supervision of President Grant (his appointment of the first Attorney General from a Confederate state was a brilliant move), it has been a countervailing force for supporting justice ever since.
I fear that under Jeff Sessions, we are in a dangerous period in which the dark forces of the KKK are ascendant (and trying to undermine the DOJ from within). It is disturbing to see the KKK has gained prominence in the wake of certain periods of time as a reaction (to Reconstruction, the Civil Right Act, and now President Obama), and we are witnessing another surge in the KKK today.
20
"Horrors"?
If you're referring to the stifling and silencing of free speech in America, incompetent policing, mob-ism and criminality in response to legal protest, hypocrisy rampant generally, and particularly among the self-righteous, thought policing, lack of accountability, identify politics run amok, and a very sad fatality that was completely avoidable, I'd say not a good day for the nation, but horrors? Hardly. Not interested in useless rhetoric. And in referring to the criminal fatality, and its 'horror' you might want to check local and national crime statistics for any single day across America to get a little perspective.
Hard to believe Clinton did not mention Grant's ejection of Jews from three southern states (until countermanded by Lincoln). What am I to read from the omission from this review of this notorious incident? Was it omitted from the book or is this Clinton?
1
Others have suggested that you read into it that Grant did wrong, that the order wasn't carried out, and that Grant learned and behaved correctly thereafter.
9
I have been reading this book since it arrived on my Kindle this week. The author makes a point of telling about Grant's "notorious incident" and also brings it up when Grant, being ashamed of his ejection (really an ham-handed attempt to keep Jewish wheeler-dealers from coming south to take advantage of the confusion during the early days of the Reconstruction), tried very hard to recover the respect of Jews by bringing them into his administration. I have just read Chernow's life of Washington, in which he makes a point of showing us Washington's flaws. And he is equally frank about Grant's.
9
It is discussed at great length in the book. Please read the book.
2
Grant is the greatest general in US history by far --also the most underrated figure in American history.
14
Grant was truly a great general, and he may have been our greatest general. There are however other generals who were also great, and if surpassed by others it was definitely not "by far". George Washington, John Lejeune, and Smedley Butler are among those. My personal opinion is that among the very few American generals who commanded on a major scale, Eisenhower was the greatest general. And he was a good President.
8
In Arthur Miller's "All My Sons", there is an exchange between the father, Joe Keller, and his son, Chris:
"Why do you want the book review section? You never read any books."
"I like to keep abreast of my ignorance."
I'd settle for a President that could at least keep abreast of his ignorance, rather than one who compounds it.
20
My pre-ordered copy came on the 11th, one day after publication. So far, it is a good read, to me, a Grant admirer. The fact that Ron Chernow has written this biography is immensely important as Chernow's fame as a writer may move more people to read about this great president and US general. What must be noted about Grant is his character; he was truly a man worthy of imitation. A man of many strengths who loved his wife faithfully, his children dearly, who loved his country without fail, was brave and true, and fought for freedom and justice for all in the most difficult times of all. It would be good for citizens of the US to know more about the Civil War, the years leading up to the war, and the aftermath of the war. Most people seem clueless about this very important period of our history. Thanks to Ron Chernow, maybe now more people will know a great deal.
36
Yet another more evidence that the South was fighting for slavery, not states rights. After gutting the country causing 700,000 deaths and untold injuries, it was not enough. So it began a systematic campaign to destroy blacks. Arguing now that the Confederate monuments were to honor states rights is a travesty of history.
34
Good to discover a new voice in the Book Review! Hope to read more of Mr. Clinton's reviews in the new future.
17
I would like to be sure Clinton wrote the review.
Remember Profiles in Courage written by Ted Sorenson?
The reason we get into trouble in this country is we believe our favorite politicians. Case in point: Trump.
2
We know that Bill Clinton embellished his speeches quite a bit (unlike Kennedy who is said to have co-authored his); we also know that Clinton wrote an autobiography of over a thousand pages, as well as three other books: "Back to Work: Why We Need Smart Government for a Strong Economy," "Between Hope and History: Meeting America's Challenges for the 21st Century," "Giving: How Each of Us Can Change the World." All of these were best-sellers, suggesting he possesses some writing ability. According to the Wikipedia, he is working on a fifth book, his first work of fiction, "The President is Missing," disposing one to believe he likes to write. I think the evidence supports a hypothesis that Clinton is an able and energetic author, with an interest and perhaps expertise in presidential history. I'm no authority on ghosting, but have never run across an account of a book review being ghosted, nor does the entry on "ghost writing" in the Wikipedia mention one. Given that neither the NYT Book Review nor Clinton, himself, would seem to gain any advantage by publishing a ghosted review, and that Clinton had opportunity and motivation to write the review, himself, I think it more reasonable to assume he did write the review than otherwise. I admit that admiring Clinton, I'm ready to believe the review is his, but I think his renown as a verbally skillful person, as opposed to Trump, who possesses the verbal ingenuity of a shaving mug, warrants the belief.
5
To provide financial support to his family, Grant in the last year of his life wrote his memoirs while suffering through throat cancer. How times have changed.
For decades now, starting with Reagan who collected a million dollars for a speech to a Japanese outfit shortly after he left office, down to Obama, who's piling up money with speeches and a multi-million dollar book contract, former presidents get to cash in from the day they exit the White House. Bill Clinton, of course, is a prime example of this not-so-seemly tradition of grabbing at money with both hands after leaving office.
P.S. The one shining exception to this greed is former president Jimmy Carter.
17
John H.: What's the difference between writing your memoirs to support your family and giving speeches for the same purpose? And what is, to you, particularly galling about speaking to a "Japanese outfit"?
14
Without Grant the war and its aftermath would have been so different. What a hero
16
Thank you President Clinton, for being willing to share your literary intelligence with us, in addition to your life's hard work and dedication. You have chosen to give, when you could have retreated.
16
The period in Grant's life when he was reduced to selling firewood has always fascinated me. To have risen from that to becoming Lincoln's hammer and then President. What would he have been if the war had not happened? How many people are there now who are awaiting the right circumstances?
13
Grant was never able to truly celebrate and give full credit to the best general (of both sides) in the Civil War, the masterful George Thomas. Was it spite based on envy or egoistic reluctance to give credit where credit was due? No matter, he did make it to Thomas' funeral.
2
Sam Grant . . . a great soldier and a great man. Long maligned by southern revanchists.
16
Mr Clinton writes: “As president, Grant appointed a record number of African-Americans to government positions all across the board.” That’s meaningless: a bit like saying, “In the 1950s Americans watched a record number of hours of television.” To set a record at something means to surpass everyone else who is doing it. In the competition implied by Mr Clinton’s statement President Grant was virtually alone in the field. Before his two terms and Johnson’s fragment of a single term almost all African-Americans were slaves and hence ineligible for appointment to govt positions.
4
Perhaps you would like to comment on Woodrow Wilson's record with respect to African-Americans in government. History works in both directions.
1
Well written commentary by one who's been there. His and your contributions to our nation's greatness are revealed in time.
12
former president barack obama would have been a better choice. his personal character and writing skills supersede this sullied ex-president.
4
Who among us wouldn't be "sullied" if given power and put under a microscope. This attitude, rejecting the good in the service of something great, is a source of political madness. Bill Clinton's sexual life may be worthy of a harsh biography, but it wasn't relevant to his capacity to be a good president. That Republicans dragged Clinton through muck to reveal his sexual relations isn't him being sullied - it's the country brought low by self-righteous Republicans.
5
Perhaps Eva Staitz you might learn to take a look at a person´s life & work as a complex entirety rather than throwing a stone based on an aspect of that life.
2
Grant is maligned quite rightly for his banning Jews as a class from certain Southern military districts. His decree was quickly rescinded when a Jewish Union officer begged relief from "Father Abraham ". Grant could have born a grudge for this minor humiliation but instead was the first President to attend a Jewish service and employed a substantial number of Jews in his administration.
29
Bizarre attempt to turn a notorious incident into a sign of Grant's "good heartedness. " Please.
No -an example of an individual who reflected on his less than sterling behavior and made changes. Gee- why can't have Presidents like that anymore?
14
too bad clinton could not act in private with the same class and style with which he writes in public
always looking for money, a deal, an semantic way out of a jam......he could have been much more .......
a legacy tainted by several all too human failings.....
6
still better than any republican since the 1950's
16
I think it shows class for Clinton to write about Grant without detailing his [Grant's] notorious failings, while knowing that at least half his audience would be very aware of his [Clinton's] own -- it's a red herring. THe thrust of the piece is to praise Grant's tenacity in preserving the union and safeguarding the freed slaves and especially their right to VOTE. I think this is a beautiful piece of writing, clear, moving, and humane. Hes chosen a few representative details, eschewed the many colorful things he could have mentioned, and laid out the big issues confronting those [and these] times so you cant misunderstand what he thinks is at stake. And it IS at stake.
4
Bravo, Mr. President.
14
No mention, Mr. President, of Grant's anti-semitism?
Thank you Times for a terrific review. In an offbeat play
"Ulysses S. Grant in Ocean Grove," Playwright Dr. Larry Myers captured Grant s visit to that Religious enclave in New Jersey. This is a good time to reevaluate Grant.
8
Thank you, Bill Clinton, for this beautifully written and insightful review of a great man by a great writer. I think Grant has suffered more nasty, wrong-headed and outright lying criticism than any other great leader. During the war, it often came from Northern journalists who had never met him. His Personal Memoirs have a unique, clean, fast-paced style that was utterly his own. His phenomenal memory allowed him to write at a pace probably unequalled by any writer. I believe he had a photographic memory for terrain.
Twain's gamble that the book would be great was based on Grant's orders from the field during the war. It is a remarkable event in American history that our greatest writer and greatest soldier, one modest and the other ravenous for fame, played opposite roles to bring out Grant's book. I am grateful for Chernow's deep appreciation of Grant, who finally (along with Ron White) has the biography he deserves. Walt Whitman writes of Grant, "Man of the mighty days and equal to the days!"
16
This review makes me want to read the book. I know very little about President Grant currently. I vaguely remember reading about the literary critic Edmund Wilson rhapsodizing over the Grant memoirs, especially his lucid writing style, and Mark Twain championing the effort. I did see an interview with Marlon Brando wherein he accused Grant of encouraging genocide of Native Americans (Sam Houston, in contrast, lived among them). But I also vaguely remember a quote from Grant calling the Mexican-American war a totally unjustified one. His tomb was left in disrepair for quite some time, and I remember a Sunday Today segment from Garrick Utley covering this oversight. Chernow's book will definitely fill in the gaps for me.
8
In 1985 I was reading Bruce Catton's history of the Civil War. One day as I was riding with a friend on the West Side Highway with one of the volumes in hand (my first time on that road), I saw an old building that was defaced and neglected. My friend told me it was Grant's tomb. I was floored.
9
Thank you for your marvelous review, Mr. President. How reassuring it is to read such elegant writing by a brilliant gentleman and extraordinary leader who resonates with calm reason.
I miss you and your presidency more and more every single day.
Best wishes to you and your lovely family.
19
As a retired Air Force colonel, I am pleased that Grant is finally given the respect he fully earned. He was a better general and person than Lee. Lee knew how to win battles sometimes, but Grant knew how to win wars. He was personally totally honest. Another wonderful biography of Grant has recently been written by Michael Korda.
24
So Grant "granted" did want to and did diminish and effectively end the Klan. KKK he knew they were dangerous and Grant did want to protect the freed slaves and save the UNION - not just the North or the South. He did his best to become honorable to the country. He does deserve credit for that. He was not responsible for the Klan, hated them and wanted them destroyed. He wanted to make the country save for Blacks and Whites. Many people do not forgive or believe the truth. Put it is still the truth. Sort of like Susan B. Anthony was first and foremost an abolitionist for ending slavery and voting rights for all MEN and all WOMEN regardless of color. She did not believe or support that all men should be given the vote before any women. And this is just right and an honest position. However, today blacks will say Susan B was against black men getting the vote. That just is not true and is wrong against this women who from her early years was raised to fight for justice for all - regardless of skin color - sex - religion. It is a disgrace to malign her character as is done by those who want to hurt women and keep them from advancing to the Presidency and their rightful equality with all persons.
10
This was so well done. Thank you, Mr. Clinton, for a fine review. I'm reading Grant now and am enjoying it. Chernow writes with such ease; the book has been a great read so far. And as an African American man, I'm looking forward to reading about Grant's time as president. It is a shame that our schools have not taught more about his civil-rights legacy - certainly the finest such legacy for a president between Lincoln and LBJ. I assume this has to do with the "Lost Cause" propaganda that has dominated our understanding of American history since the late 1800s. I hope with Mr. Chernow's effort here that the tide continues to turn against the "Lost Cause" and in support of a respect/appreciation for Mr. Grant.
Again, well done, Mr. Clinton.
50
Mr. President, Thank you for writing about Chernow's biography of Grant. I recently finished "An American Ulysses" by Ronald White. Also a fabulous read. Having read everything about General Grant that I could get my hands on in the last 40 years, I now look forward to this. I know it will be a respite from the unbearable, horrible, often incoherent, and incessant rantings coming from the white house these days.
You, and your wife are profoundly missed!
35
Check out J.F.C. Fuller's writings on Grant if you have not already done so. They're about 50 years old now, but they are still relevant.
4
Richard Whites "The Republic For Which It's Stand" is a worthy read along side this new bio of Grant It is an excellent history of reconstruction and Grants role in it and the genesis of "white supremacy"
9
What a beautifully written review! Mr Clinton, such a shame your sensible wife didn't get elected!
24
Very underestimated President.
12
I somehow can't imagine the current occupant of the Oval Office writing something like this.
28
I can't imagine the current occupant of the Oval Office even finishing a Little Golden Book, to say nothing of a book like this.
21
I can't even imagine him reading this, let alone writing it.
5
Or reading a book.
3
I miss you.
24
"Hung-over Grant saved the Union? I like Presidents who don't have to save the Union. Known for his small crowd at inauguration. Smoked small cigars to make his hands look bigger. Sad. KKK still here, another fail." Review by President Donald J. Trump.
24
Thank you Mr. President! New book just arrived along with the annotated autobiography of Grant by the Grant Presidential library at Mississippi State University. Grant was truly one of the important men in our history. There is much to admire about him in reflecting on today’s tumultuous times. Let us here from you more often, please, as you still have something important to offer- clarity- to this confused and troubled world.
12
Thank you Mr. President! New book just arrived along with the annotated autobiography of Grant by the Grant Presidential library at Mississippi State University. Grant was truly one of the important men in our history. There is much to admire about him in reflecting on today’s tumultuous times. Let us hear from you more often, please, as you still have something important to offer- clarity- to this confused and troubled world.
30
One of the things I miss so much is listening to President Clinton speak. No matter how far he traveled from Arkansas, he never lost the ability to speak to common people and make it sound to each listener like he was sitting in their living room, speaking to them like a neighbor. He has the gift of never--NEVER--sounding condescending, even though it is well known that he is brilliant. These qualities shine through in his writing, and I can tell you that people in my part of America need to hear some healing words very, very intensely right now.
I wish he would write for this paper every week.
75
Obama succeeded where Bill Clinton failed.
1
Both were great presidents.
7
Oddly, in all the hoopla about taking down Lee's statue in Charlottesville Grant's assessment of Lee is almost never mentioned, "He was the most valiant of foes but he was fighting for the worst cause imaginable."
72
The Lee statutes should be replaced with those of Grant.
6
It may be instructive to note the fact that Grant was a Republican, and, more or less, a political protege of Lincoln. It was Democrats that tore down Grant's reputation as President. Even as he was elected twice and served for eight years.
The Klan was founded by Democrats, and until the assassination of John Kennedy, LBJ's New Society, and the determined march to freedom by a black citizenry inspired to their souls by the leadership of Martin Luther King, Jr. the Democratic Party was known as the home of the, "solid south" AKA the dixiecrats who had institutionalized Jim Crow. Most, if not all, of those statues memorializing the Southern side during the Civil War were originally put up by Democrats. FDR? Dixiecrats voted for him in droves.
It was during the sixties that Republicans who supported individual responsibility, and conservative economic policy over Federal intrusion into every aspect of our lives, were tarred as racists by Democrats who had morphed into salespeople for dependence on Government for just about everything, and what happens when socialist leaning government bureaucracy become a growth industry, the discouragement of initiative in the private sector among the poor.
And so was completed the Democrat transformation from virulent racists to condescending patronizers. The progenitors of the idea that every citizen is, or should be considered, a victim.
You're welcome, Mr. President.
8
Tim,
You are correct in pointing out that it took nearly a century for the Democrats to discover the importance of civil rights. But once they did, they were all in.
After LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 he lamented that, in doing so, he had lost the South for the Democrats for a generation. He was wrong. The South would be lost to the Democrats for MANY generations.
5
We don't think you have much to tell former President Clinton, or anyone. Yes, The Democrats became Dixiecrats, Republicans reformed into liberals, up is down, and the GOP has Trump. Baffoon, bankrupt, grifter, charlatan, take your pick of descriptives for Don.
Is it patronizing to hope that billionaires don't receive tax credits and cuts paid for by middle class workers? That universal health care is good for the nation? Is regulation of weapons that mow down dozens of citizens a bad idea or an attack on the Second Amendment? Not really.
Corporate welfare is twice the size of social welfare spending. Wrap your head around that. Look it up. Linda McMahon as welfare queen. Trump as her beau.
32
What you are saying is so ridiculous that it would be humorous if your second-hand talking points (since what you are saying completely lacks originality, it's basically handed down to you from right wing think tanks and other assorted right-wing hacks) weren't so influential.
9
Fantastic article. Thanks, Mr. President.
19
I would point out that Bill Clinton produced an eloquent and compelling defense of an embattled president, and in the discussion almost entirely dismisses the significance of the scandals and corruption of the administration. Just sayin.
4
The present administration, you mean.
8
Wow, heck of a book review! Had no idea Bill Clinton wrote so well. I'd also like to recommend William Vollmann's epic, The Dying Grass, for anyone interested in reading about this crucial period in American history. Vollman's main focus is the pursuit and epic fighting retreat of the New Perce Indians by General Oliver Otis Howard in 1877. There are some lengthy passages regarding the politics of the times of Grant's successor, Ratherford B Hayes who promulgated the Indian Wars of the period.
10
Well done, Mr. President! Can you imagine our current president writing a review for anything other than a comic book, and even that would be a stretch?
45
“The only regret I have is that assault at Cold Harbor.” If only we heard those words about Iraq, Vietnam, the rest of them, now NK? God help us.
3
And, of course, with Iraq and Vietnam you're talking about entire wars that didn't need to be fought, not just the final assault of a single battle. Grant certainly didn't doubt the necessity of fighting and winning that war.
8
Like so many other readers, I didn't realize until I read this review how thirsty informed Americans are for a literate and competent individual who actually occupied the White House. I have a couple of things to add. First, Grant's grades at West Point were (as I understand it) pretty good in mathematics, which was also, interestingly enough, a subject that in its logical aspects absorbed and exercised Lincoln's brilliant mind. Second, although he had a chequered record on Indian affairs, Grant was able to spot and nail a fraud on the Ottawa Indians in my home County, Franklin, in Kansas. He made the fraudsters pay and restore, rare enough in the annals of U.S.-Native American relations. Again, a brilliant review by a brilliant former President.
45
Grant also chose Senaca Chief, Ely Parker, as one of his top aides during the Civil War. Parker wrote out the terms at Appomattox. When Grant became President, he named Parker as Commissioner of Indian Affairs.
14
Bruce: Thanks for reminding me of that. Again, in the assault on intellect and competence that we see in this White House, we are getting another opportunity to see the authentic greatness of our former Presidents in a new light. Grant's own generation certainly didn't neglect to honor its leaders. The place names in Kansas, especially the County names, are an index of Civil War politicians and military leaders. That generation would be horrified and scandalized by the puny race whistlers who have flourished under Trump, Sam Brownback and Chris Kobach.
3
Apparently, Grant's consideration for the needs of the African American has been lost on the current administration. It would behoove Trump to read Chernow's biography of Grant, but we know that Trump can't get past the dinner menu.
20
...past the dinner menu, Jim, or the ketchup bottle!
5
behoove Trump to read ..."
at 1074 pages trump would have to read more than a page a day or a lot of pages quickly if Mueller has his way. On twitter, it would take the remained of his lifetime at 140 a clip.
4
Good review! I read it thinking that this might be a good holiday gift for my husband if President Clinton thought it a worthy read, having read he values well written history. He obviously does think Mr Chernow wrote a compelling history and shared enough positive consideration about the writing that I will buy it as a gift, and I will read it too. In college 35 years ago we visited Grant's home in Galena and I read a bit about him out loud on the drive to Galena. I am sorry to say my impression of him and his life was the limited picture of a failed drunken elevated general. Hope to change my view with this book. Thanks Mr. President.
16
Hopefully it's more accurate than Chernow's Hamilton bio, which was more fan-fiction than history.
2
How many National Book Award, Pulitzer-Prize winning biographies have you written, Doug?
18
After I read Chernow's George Washington biography, I became so interested in Alexander Hamilton, I read his biography by Chernow as well. Ron Chernow is a master storyteller. His books are well researched and well written. Writing style is very important. It can make or break a book. Chernow's writing style keeps you engrossed. Based on my past experiences with his books, I can bet this will be a great read.
10
A review that interests one in reading the book: keep it up! All Americans should read some of Grant's autobiography, in our age of sound-bites & dumbed-down addresses to a public that has had the benefit of years of free public education--a far cry from Grant's & Lincoln's time. Grant, a military man, could marshal words, phrases, syntax, as well. I recall reading years ago Mark Twain's remark about him: 'There is something about the Sun that makes you forget its spots.'
15
I'm about 2/3 of the way through White's, last year's ,Grant biography. A book I decided to read as a refuge from our current president. What strikes me so far is Grant's self effacing inner strength and reluctance to blow his own horn. Almost alone in the military, he had the inner strength, vision, and institutional diplomacy to realistically prosecute a civil war to its conclusion without resorting to the retribution and civil terror that historically marks those conflicts.
Whatever judgement historians may make on his presidency, Reconstruction must have been an almost impossible task. Grant's humble pragmatism, humanity, sincerity and self sacrifice seem almost heartbreaking to contemplate today.
16
How exquisite to have a contemporary President reviewing the life of a President of a century earlier. What remarkable clarity and insightful observations he brings to Grant’s legacy. One can only grimace and wince in horror in the future when the trumps books come out.
17
Of late, Presidential candor is not what it used to be - thank you for the refreshing piece.
10
He's on the Fifty, which is my favorite bill...
I grew up in Humboldt County, CA where there's a little-remembered eponymous fort upon a bluff.. apparently this is where Grant first succumbed to the soothing siren-call of whiskey; anyone who has spent any time in Eureka, CA can certainly sympathize with his discovery.
6
I'm sure the book is at the top of Trump's reading list.
11
Kudos to Clinton
For giving Grant his due:
Ancient lives oft reward
Being considered anew.
20
OK, Mr. President. You got me. In the last fifteen years I've read Jean Edward Smith's, H.W. Brand's, and, most recently, Ronald White's biography of Grant. I realize it's Ronald Chernow, but I thought "a FOURTH Grant biography?" I'll find time to read it, somehow. I agree Grant's the most misunderstood and underappreciated of our "non-great" presidents. Maybe Mr. Chernow will finally put the canard that Grant was one of our worst presidents to rest.
20
Like Alexander Hamilton, Grant is a flawed individual. The truth is that both had the basic humanity to see that a country based on slavery or second class citizens, lacking the freedom of speech or the right to vote, is a country doomed to moral decay and failure. With marches like the one in Charlottesville, the attempts at voter suppression in many red states, the villinization of black athletes exercising their First Amendment right of free speech puts back on the slippery slope of the evils that Hamilton and Grant fought against. Both our Democratic and Republican leaders are flawed but true commitment to the spirit of law within our Constitution can save us.
13
An excellent review! Bill Clinton, former Rhodes scholar, is a good and thoughtful writer and a careful student of American history. Compare this President with the current illiterate and uninformed occupant of the White House and weep for our country.
191
A terrific review by Bill Clinton. How I appreciate his articulate grasp of history. I love Chernov's Hamilton and will now turn my attention to his "Washington".
Great way for an immigrant to learn and enjoy American history.
Tom McMahon
12
".....weep for our country."
EVERY. SINGLE. DAY.
3
Oh to once again have a president who reads ... anything!
165
Hey now, Trump definitely colors inside the lines of his coloring books.
3
Beautifully written, an inspiring account of a great American. God, how I miss true leaders.
97
More evidence that the 'heart' of a candidate is, in all likelihood', the most important characteristic among many to consider when gifting your vote.
51
Thank you. I will be sharing this review with my non-NYT-reading friends. Education, especially about our history, is a very long-term fix, but I believe it is now our only hope.
29
Bill Clinton writes beautifully. It would be great for him to write a regular column for the Book Review. He also reviewed the book and not the subject, an error that many reviewers fall into. I appreciate the attention he gives to Ron Chernow's fine efforts.
134
Thanks to President Clinton for his excellent commentary. For too long Grant's presidency has been remembered only for the corruption of Grant's subordinates, much in the same manner as the presidency of Warren G. Harding. This has always been extremely unfair, and it is gratifying to see Grant's achievements as president -- even if they were tragically short-lived -- finally receive their due recognition.
23
Thank you for this engaging review. The length of the book seems daunting, but on the strength of your assessment, I think I will purchase it and plunge in.
In his memoirs, Grant reveals himself as a humble man capable of humorous self-deprecation. His account of the Battle of the Wilderness shows his empathy with the common soldier, and his keen anguish at the suffering of the wounded. The sweep and scope of his narrative demonstrate his focused, deliberate, and strategic vision of the war's progression. And finally, his effort to chronicle great events in a cool and factual way--while he was dying of cancer--is absolutely heroic. Grant's faults were large and often obvious, but they can't eclipse his capabilities as a military leader and as a man.
So I do look forward to this new biography. It sounds like it offers a fuller account of Grant's presidency, long overdue. As well, perhaps it will afford a better understanding of this complex man and his accomplishments as a peacetime leader.
Thank you for the incentive to read it.
49
If the subject of a book remains interesting for the entire book, regardless of its length, what is the justification for calling it too long? In my view, a good is either worthwhile or not, but if it is worthwhile, then the longer the more you get for your money. I savor the notes and bibliography as well as the main text. I'm a better person and voter as a result of reading these books and ever cease to recommend them my friends and clients.
Quit carping over the length of good books. What else are you doing with your life that is better than savoring a long and delicious book? I have read all of Chernov's major books and given away many copies of each to spread the knowledge of his subjects (and by coincidence, Chernov's own remarkable skills and insights). I feel like his books are the best bargain available to read. And I feel like the choice of subjects and the depth of knowledge of history, and the remarkable appreciation of politics, makes the Chernov books the best available antidote to the increasingly deep divisions between the Republican and Democratic Parties. I first read Washington. As a result, I read Hamiliton. We've had a Broadway musical on the latter. When are we going to get grand operas on Washington and Grant? Both had amazing heroes and story arcs!
Chernov is our best antidote to a new civil war!
It's so refreshing to read a literate, well thought out, compassionate review from our Former US President. I hope those in D.C. read it, remember, and take heed of the foundations of Democracy which were forged by so many countless men and women who sacrificed. Bravo Mr. Clinton.
77
Our President Clinton comes to mind a lot these days as does Our President Obama. They stand in sharp contrast to what we now have. These are hard times and we have to hope for better to come with another.
33
Governance is complicated because life is complicated. Bill Clinton does an excellent job briefly describing the key complications of President Grant. The past is, indeed, never even past. It is a service to us all when authors like Ron Chernow illuminate it for us.
35
Nice review, though it seems unlikely that Mr. Clinton has the time to wade through a 1,074 page historical biography and whip up a cogent review? If a staffer wrote it, nice work! I intend to read the book, as a history nerd it will give me something to read until Candice Millard is able to write another book. Mr. President, if you're out there and looking for similar reading, I highly recommend Millard's "Destiny of the Republic," about James Garfield. It's elegantly written and impeccably researched.
4
but he said he read the book!
8
Reviewers get advance copies of books up to two months before their publication dates. It is not "unlikely" that Bill Clinton read the entire book since he was known to be a man who enjoys reading.
65
Mr Yurick, your response shows how low our cultural expectations have sunk: yes, Pres. Clinton is capable of reading a long book and writing intelligently about what he has read. Oh, for the good old days of literate, intelligent Presidents! We had a few, back then ...
88