Rating: 
Summary: Don't be intimidated by the size of this work.
Review: Shelby Foote's mamonth narrative of the American Civil War is defenantly one of the best ever written. I highly recommend these novels to anyone who has an intrest in the conflict that tore the American nation apart from 1861-1865. Foote tells the reader about the war, and more importantly, about those who fought it in the same folksy, storyteller style that made him the most popular consultant in Ken Burns documentary The Civil War. The casual reader will find these books a very easy read. By the time you are finished, all the great participants will have been transformed from the dusty, unknowable historical figures of your high school history books into real human beings with all the faults and frailties that we all possess and you will have a far greater knowledge of the war that did so much to shape modern America.
Rating:
Summary: A monumental work on the Civil War
Review: This trilogy of the American Civil War is daunting to most people due to it's sheer size; right at three-thousand pages. Despite this "The Civil War: A Narrative" is THE book series to read if you want a detailed knowledge of the Civil War. Shelby Foote first came to my attention through Ken Burns' "The Civil War" on PBS. I loved Foote's unashamed southern drawl and his gift of telling a great story. That's when I decided to read his life's work. Foote has a talent for bringing the characters alive-they seem to jump off the page at you. He has that rare ability to make readers feel as if they are part of the story, looking on or even participating in events. The books are written in a way that makes it easy reading for anyone. Do not let the number of pages intimidate you. A book this well written is hard to put down, making a quicker read than you think. I think all Americans should read this trilogy-in order to understand the horror of that war and its consequences.
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent but for serious readers only
Review: This second of three volumes covers the conflict from late 1862 to early 1864. This is the period where events began to favor the Federal or Union forces. The largest portion of this volume covers Grant's successful but difficult campaign to seize Vicksburg Mississippi and Lee's disastrous invasion of Pennsylvania (i.e. Gettysburg). While other books provide more details of a single battle, Foote touches and summarizes nearly every engagement during the period covered. He also covers political, economic and civil events on both sides.A note of criticism or warning if you will. Approaching 1000 dense pages "Fredericksburg to Meridian" is not for the faint of heart. While the narrative style and inclusion of several black-and-white maps make it more readable, the additional inclusion of small details can interfere with the 'big picture'. For example, Foote mentions nearly every Brigadier in the conflict along with the movements and actions of their commands. Nevertheless, the book is recommended for serious history readers and a must have for Civil War buffs.
Rating:
Summary: Essential Civil War Reading
Review: In the early 1990s, I saw Ken Burn's CIVIL WAR
series on PBS, and was interested to see as part
of that series commentaries by an easy-going
"propah" Mississippi gentleman named Shelby Foote. Foote turned out to be something of the godfather
of the series, since Burns had been influenced
by Foote's monumental three-volume history of the
war, titled simply THE CIVIL WAR. I picked up
the three volumes, beginning a ten-year exercise
in writing up notes and going through other materials to figure out the war. Having completed
this exercise, except for tying up some loose
ends, I figure it's time to reflect on the books
that started it all. The first thing is that this is basically one of
the essential books to read on the Civil War if
you want to get into the subject in reasonable
detail. It is a work of proverbial grand breadth
and scope, engrossing and inspiring, that gives
the reader a real feel for the conflict. However, it is important to point out that Foote's
THE CIVIL WAR has some limitations as well. The
biggest is that it is mostly a battlefield history,
minimizing the social and political framing of the
conflict. For example, Frederick Douglass is not
mentioned once, at least as far as the index is
concerned. It also tends to lean somewhat more towards
the rebel point of view, though Foote apologizes for
this, portraying it as "sympathy for the underdog",
and the book is by no means unfair to the Union side. The other issue is that this is a novelistic and
relatively unstructured work. This is fine in a
sense, since it makes it very entertaining to
read, and it's not like it's haphazard by any
means -- it's just a little like following a
big, slow-moving, meandering river. The problem
is that it can make keeping track of details and
chronology difficult, which is what led me to the
note-taking exercise ... which I never figured
would drag out for ten years. The biggest complaint about Foote that I can make
is that he occasionally fails to be redundant when
it would make life much easier for the reader.
He will sometimes make references to minor incidents
from hundreds of pages previous as if the reader has
a perfect memory of them, leaving the reader
scrambling through the index, which is a particular
nuisance if the item is in a previous volume. This is a quibble. This is essential reading
for anyone with a major interest in the war, though
given its limitations I wouldn't say it should be
the only book on the subject to be read.
Rating:
Summary: A momentus achievement
Review: Foote, best known for his charismatic appearances on Ken Burns's Civil War series, is also one of the most prominent historians in the country. Shelby Foote's CIVIL WAR served as the definitive history of the American Civil War for well over a decade -- from its release in the mid-70s to 1989, when James McPherson's BATTLE CRY OF FREEDOM was released. Nonetheless, this is one of the all-time Civil War classics. Although this is non-fiction, Foote is first and foremost a novelist. His narrative skills come in handy here. The best part of this book is that it maked the Civil War seem like a story instead of a detached series of battles and causes and motivations. The personifications in this set -- Jefferson Davis, Abraham Lincoln, Nathan Bedford Forrest, are wonderful. I had always hated Forrest because he was the founder of the Ku Klux Klan. Although this book did not make me hate him any less, it shows his military genius and his skills as a cavalry general. (Foote's two genuises of the war are Forrest and Lincoln). Foote views the war through a distinctly southern lens. He is such a good writer that he can be forgiven for his regional bias.
Rating:
Summary: Shelby Foote writes like an angel.
Review: These books have been treasured companions for many years. I love Shelby Foote's prose and the scholarship that informs it. One thing I find puzzling - some reviewers are referring to this trilogy as a novel. Why?
Rating:
Summary: Southern chauvinism in an anecdotal battlefield history
Review: As everyone knows from Ken Burns, Foote is a wonderful storyteller and his epic Civil War history is filled with wonderful stories. It is strictly a battlefield history, and very much a top-down history at that, written at times as if the generals themselves were going at it hand-to-hand. Editorially those are reasonable decisions (it's long enough!), but they are also decisions that make his pro-Confederacy sympathies easier to take. If one were reminded that the War was, among other things, a fight to end slavery, Foote's idealization of Southern generals could make one feel a bit queasy. He presents the Southern officers as gentlemen to a man, even Forrest, while he rarely misses a chance to question the motives and decency of Union officers. After a while his descriptions of Ulysses Grant become funny -- even while ransacking Grant's memoirs for vivid quotes he cannot stop himself from making little digs, questioning his motives and denigrating his competence, his ethics, his character, you name it. The reader begins to wait for the next gibe, which is never long in coming. There's something profound about the Southern historical consciousness expressed there. Even a liberal intellectual writing almost a century after the fact cannot forgive Grant for winning. (Or, perhaps, for overseeing Reconstruction as President.) If you look past the editorializing, which perhaps can be justified as a corrective to triumphalist accounts from the North, Foote presents the evidence fairly. If what you want is a vivid account of the major military actions, this is the book for you. If you want to know about the causes and effects of the Civil War, or its impact on civilians, especially blacks, look elsewhere. But if you want to know the way the war continues to influence the minds of Southern intellectuals, just read between the lines.
Rating:
Summary: Both sides of the Civil War
Review: This is a 3 volume work. it describes in detail the entire war, from before the start to after Jeff Davis finished writing his book about the war in the late 1870's.
It goes into detail describing what each side was doing at each of the battles, as well as what was going on in Lincoln's head, and Jeff Davis.
You are dealing with about 3,000 pages, so it takes awhile.
The writing is excellent.
Rating:
Summary: So, you're wondering whether to read these books?
Review: You already know this is one of the classics of American history. Here are some thoughts that might help you decide whether to read them:
1. You have to read all three volumes. This is one epic tale broken into three volumes because it would be too large as one book.
2. This is a VERY substantial undertaking. Each book is about 1,000 small print pages. Also, you need to spend time flipping back to the excellent maps because this helps you get a feel for what is happening in the battles. You can't rush this process because the whole point of the book is to really imagine what the battles were like.
3. This is almost a purely military history of the war. There is very little about the political context.
4. After having just finished this epic, I know I won't think of the Civil War in the same way, and I probably won't think of the United states in the same way. These books are transforming. I wholeheartedly recommend these books, and hopefully these thoughts will help you decide if they're right for you.
Rating:
Summary: Parting is sweet sorrow
Review: You know those hypothetical questions you get asked in adult board games (i.e. If you were stranded on a island what CD/book would you like to have)? No doubt about it, Shelby Foote's masterpiece trilogy would be resting beside my palm leaf makeshift bed as I sleep and I would turn those pages until they whithered away. The reason I used the above quote is the reading has been so "sweet" and has hooked me into the ACW. I will go on to read dozens of more books on people, places, battles, politics. The "sorrow" lies in the fact that the journey has come to an end. I'm an avid reader, so it took me about 2 months to finish the approximate 3000 pages. I look forward to reading it again in a few years, when I want a little refresher. I suspect that a work like this will probably take most people several months, if not years to finish. In any case, it's well worth it. The amount of detail is perfect. The major engagements get full treatment, down to brigade and in some cases regimental levels. But no stone is left unturned. Minor skirmishes and rear guard activity are also noted. The west, the east, the naval battles. The focus is primarily military, however, there is a nice dose of political, social, biographical and cultural topics. Tons of anecdotes and "I did not know that" type information. There is also a good balance of tactical vs. down in the ditch accounts. Very good maps. Just as the details of troop movements start to get a bit hazey, you turn the page to find a perfect map. I would have like to seen just a few more, but there are plenty and all well done. There are a few comments from other reviewers about Foote's allegiance to the South and leaving out atrocities and such. This is hogwash. I knew very little of the ACW before reading these volumes and I feel that his treatment was very fair to both sides. A poor leader is critized, whether he wore blue or gray/butternut. Just as a good leader is praised. Grierson's raid during Vicksburg gets as many high marks as any of Forrest's. Many others have noted all the highlights, much more articulated than I ever could, so I'll refer you to those reviews. Simply put, this book is a must read to begin or expand your knowledge of the ACW. It took 20 years for Foote to finish, and literally every word was well thought out. It ranks in many "top 100" lists for best nonfiction of the 1900's.
| 
