Rating: 
Summary: Research is broader than it is deep.
Review: Wish I could give this book 4.8 stars. I do agree with the bulk of the praise given it, and I especially like the author's ability to view the end of the war and reestablishment of our nation from his professional and modern perspective. The book doesn't lack for insight. Still, there are times when jarring errors pop up. Winik treats Gen. James "Pete" Longstreet as 2 men, James Longstreet and Pete Longstreet. Even gives them seperate index listings. When he goes into reverant and affectionate nicknames Lee's troops had for him, he lumps such derisive ones as "Granny" and "King of Spades" (from when he assumed command in 1862 and his men were less than impressed)as among the compliments paid him. Winik also bites on LaSalle Pickett's creation of deep friendship between Lincoln and George Pickett. The bulk of current opinion is that the relationship is one of the myths Gen Pickett's widow created about him. My view is that any historian who wishes to present that relationship as factual should state what he bases his movement against the tide upon. Winik doesn't. My overall view is that Winik did an exceptional amount of research outside his area of specialty and did the bulk of it very well. The book is both enjoyable and important. Much so because of his professional assessment of the unstable state of our nation in April of 1865. For that reason it transcends small issues such as the ones raised above. At the same time, the fact that such issues can be raised, suggests to me that while his range and scope are impressive, other matters of nuance and context might also have been missed or misstated as well. His attempt to make his end notes more 'readable' make it difficult verify some of his assertions. This remains an excellant book. That someone writing about the Civil War could somehow believe that just as the CSA had 2 General Hills, it also had General Longstreets, and STILL get a "4" rating rather than a "0" speaks loads about the worth of this book.
Rating: 
Summary: A very good book, but not great.
Review: I approached this book with great enthusiasm, having read the gushing and glowing first 6 reviews on Amazon.I was somewhat diappointed.To be sure, the book is well written, but I found it very easy to put down.The whole major premise of the south being able to fight a guerrilla war "for twenty more years" as Lee is reputed to have said is plain silly.And numerous historical analogies with other guerrilla wars are lame,except perhaps the Boer war,where the author conveniently forgets to mention the BOers were eventually crushed by the British.The major premise is overly romanticized and poorly thought out.True, Missouri was a bloodbath because of some nasty psychotics like "Bloody Bill " Cantrill.But he eventually was hanged.The South of 1865 was nothing like the North Africa France had to contend with, or the Vietnam struggle.Not even close,I guess you could say if the Viet COng were really strong in Lee's army and getting massive aid from England, France,Germany etcetc, they could have held out.Ok thats a little unfair.There is lots of excellent descriptions of the protagonist, Lee, Grant,Forrest(a real psychopath, and the man with the most monuments to this day in the South,Sherman, best described by one of his own men as "nervous and mean." Had the South tried a guerrilla war, it more likely than not,would have been devastated even more than it was by the burgeoning numbers of Northeners pouring in from Europe, and the new Gatlin gun and etc etc.To agree that a protracted war would have meant "the vietnamization of America" is bad and not very well thought out history. The author also goes nuts with the slavish romantic image of General Lee as if he were a godlike creature.Come on now, a brilliant General, but he lost the war at Gettysburg, with an insane charge that is still romanticized to this day. A very strong argument can be made that Lee would have been a much greater hero had he ended the slaughter months before and accepted the inevitable.He knew the war was over after Gettysburg.Honor, glory, bla bla, thousands more died because of his sense of honor.I guess you could argue that we should still be in Vietnam, fighting for the 37th year or so for our honor???Huh??? The history is very well presented but the arguments about the South being able to carry out a credible guerrilla war are far fetched and foolish and the historical comparisons are equally flawed. All in all, a lively discussion of the events but too much imagination to make it excellent history.
Rating:
Summary: Reads Like A Novel
Review: Winik captures the drama and uncertainity of the ending of the American Civil War. The thrill of history is that life did not have to be as it was and Winik anwers why this story turned out the way it did. The greatness of Lincoln, Grant and Lee and to lesser extent Sherman, Johnston and Forrest is confirmed by Winik's narrative. If these men are not judged by the arrogance of presentism-they deserved the title of great enlightened men. So many interserting quotes and facts (Sherman writing a memo for President Polk on the discovery of gold in California)(p.304) the footnoes occasionally seem inadequate. Simon Cameron is referred to as Lincoln's tresury secretary (p.240) when he was the first war secretary 1861-62. In criticsim of Lincoln's April 11, 1865 speech Winik refres to Chase as his treasury secretary when at ime he was Chief Justice. (p.217)
Rating: 
Summary: LIVING HISTORY
Review: The phrase "living history" is often falsly ascribed to books that take the reader back to a period and the events being written about. In the case of Jay Winik's "April 1865", this phrase is an understatement. Winik has managed to achieve what so few writers ever come close too. He weaves the complex web of events that and individuals who helped shape the UNITED STATES that we know and love into a narrative which is truely magnificent. The political, military and above all moral dilemmas facing Lee, Grant, Lincoln et al in the closing days of the Civil War come to life at the end of Winik's fluid penmanship. One can only imagine the truely appaling consequences for all involved in that bloody conflict as the remnants of Lee's once great army struggled to escape the jaws of Grant's seemingly endless onslaught. Again Winik takes the reader into the thoughts of the adversaries, both those who would ultimately decide the fate of both armies, and the men who struggled to understand why they were there and what they were fighting and dying for. Winik more so than any Civil War writer todate encapsulates the motivations of various individuals - Union and Confederate - and the way in which parties on both sides could have chosen a far more horrific and uncertain outcome. From the prelude to the last page, Winik's unique style of conveying such a complex and oft misunderstood period in our history, will keep the reader enthralled and longing for more. This work truely deserves to become one of the standard texts on any Civil War reading list and should become a classic. A truely magnificent achievement!
Rating:
Summary: April 1865 is a can't-put-it-down historical thriller
Review: April 1865 is the most riveting civil war history you will ever read. It contains brilliant, compelling descriptions of the factors that drew America into Civil War, and the equally compelling factors that caused it to end in April 1865. Jay Winik provides a fascinating analysis of the dangers that faced the Nation in April 1865 and how the peace we all assumed was inevitable that month was anything but. His interpretation of events is filled with rich detail and keen insights that will make you rethink the concept of Union and what it meant (and still means) in this country. You will not want to put it down and when it's over, you'll wish there was more.
Rating:
Summary: The first "saga" I didn't want to get to the end of
Review: Jay Winik writes in a most moving and elogent style. The book is a masterpiece, filled with historical and moral value. I loved it and I am not a Civil War buff. April 1865 is a must read, trust me you will not want it to end.
Rating:
Summary: This book is even better than the promo
Review: When I saw an ad for April 1865, with lavish praise from Doris Kearns Goodwin, James McPherson, and Paul Johnson, I thought this must be a pretty good book. Well, it's even better. Winik's "April 1865" is one of the best histories I've read in years. It reads like a grand story -- brilliantly constructed, filled with rich insights, and paced like a good page-turner. The book reminds me of one of those great histories that come along every once in a rare while -- in a class with Tuchman's Pulitzer Prize-winning "Guns of August" or McPherson's "Battle Cry of Freedom." Winik also has a knack for asking the questions that other historians never seemed to have thought of. He points out (rightly) that far too many civil wars end badly or are perpetually self-renewing -- think of the centuries old "Irish Question," or the ongoing bloodshed in the former Yugoslavia, or the horrors of Rwanda. Positioning America within the larger sweep of history, Winik then shows that America's Civil War could easily have ended just as badly -- but didn't. Why? Winik tells that fascinating story. I highly recommend this book.
Rating:
Summary: Terrific Book
Review: Being somewhat fascinated by the Civil War it's no surprise that I found Jay Winiks "April, 1865" to be thoroughly engrossing. However, unlike many other books on the subject the focus of this work is not as much on the individual events of the war itself as much as the implications each of these events had on the further development of our country. Between informative passages about the strategic manuevering of the armies Mr. Winik paints compelling portraits of Generals Lee and Grant as well as Abraham Lincoln, who's insight into the importance of reconcilliation of the two sides after the war laid the groundwork for a lasting peace. Indeed, Mr. Winik illustrates how differently things may have turned out had men of less wisdom held the positions that directed the course of the war. Although well researched the book hardly reads like a textbook. In fact many passages read like an epic story, which, ultimately, the Civil War is. If you want to know how closely this country came to dissolution and come to know the people who prevented it then by all means read this book.
Rating:
Summary: Outstanding, A Remarkable Achievement
Review: Occasionally, it is possible to say of a book: "This is amazing." April 1865 is just such a book. If you are a Civil War reader, you will love this book. If you are a fan of top-notch history and quality non-fiction, you will love this book. The writing is superb. Winik is better than Ambrose. He writes with the grace and flair of Catton. But it is not just the powerful narrative that engrosses you (I finished the book in two sittings), but also Winik's remarkable history. April 1865 stays with you long after you have closed the cover. Winik makes you see the Civil War and the United States completely anew. This book is a treasure, and book lovers are blessed to have it.
Rating:
Summary: A New Civil War Classic is Born
Review: Let me start by saying I am not a Civil War expert. However, I have read some of the "so called" classics of Civil War history. Based on what I have read, I believe this book will long be considered a "classic". Mr. Winik brilliantly weaves together the political and military issues our nation had to face in April 1865. In no other month in American history has our country had to wrestle with more complex and emotional issues than they did in this one month. Today, we tend to believe that things were destined to turn out as they did but, this is far from the truth. It was very possible that Robert E. Lee could have disbanded his army and continued with a guerilla war that could have lasted for years and cost thousands of more lives. In fact, this was the greatest fear of both Lincoln and Grant. Mr. Winik's book makes clear that if not for a few leaders who did rise above the emotions and hatred of the moment the nation would not have come back together as it did. He makes it clear he believes the formost of these leaders was Robert E. Lee. Without him, the south was ready to continue the fighting to the very end regardless of how many more died. Lee's calm example, dispite the heartbreak of surrender, was responsible for the other southern generals following his example and laying down their arms. In short, this is a remarkable book about a remarkable time. We get a new appreciation for the men of that time, such as, Lincoln, Grant, Lee, Johnson, and Sherman to name a few. I think it will be read for many generations to come.
|
