Rating: 
Summary: The Hornet's Nest - Review
Review: I have great respect for Jimmy Carter. He is a wonderful human being. His kindness, understanding, vision, and willingness to do what must be done are outstanding positive examples for human growth. I am grateful for his book about the South's role in the Revolutionary War. Historians fail to mention their contribution to the success of this conflict. However, I don't understand why he chose Ethan Pratt as his main character. To say that Ethan's character flaws are deficient is to say the least. I understood Ethan's inner conflict with the war. Initially, he was a pacifist that eventually grew into militarist. But, he proved himself a coward in several situations. How could he sleep on the eve of his brother's horrific execution? Why didn't he attempt to rescue him? Or, at least talk of the desire to save him? How could he separate with his wife and have an adulterous affair with his neighbor's wife. He abandons , pretty much, his wife Epsey and impregnates his neighbor Mavis on the heels of the murder of his and Epsey's son Henry. Carter's choice of this man as his main character diminishes his attempt to deliver the passion and fervor of the southern mind during this time in our Nation's history.
Rating: 
Summary: Good Research - Bad Novel
Review: I have to agree with the reader from Pasadena, CA. President Carter did a fabulous job of research. But, it did not flow as a novel. The first half of the book was bogged down in waaaay too much detail about the main characters. The second half of the book flowed much better in terms of integrating the details with the story.
Rating:
Summary: It works as a history, but not as a novel.
Review: I have tremendous admiration and respect for former President Carter. I am truly sorry I can't post a better review of his first novel, but - well, here it is.
The book's greatest strength is the tremendous amount of research that went into it. It works wonderfully well as a history of the American Revolution in the South, and that's certainly a neglected viewpoint. It is also, exactly as I would expect, well written from a technical standpoint.
Presented as nonfiction, I'd have found it enjoyable reading; but for me it didn't work as a novel. Its characters speak in stilted, pedagogical voices, imparting information to modern readers when they should be interacting with each other in believable fashion. The endless pages of detail would be appropriate in a history book, but in fiction they make excruciatingly slow reading because they fail - most of the time, anyway - to move the plot along. Getting lost in the story and caring about the characters might happen for some other reader, but it wasn't possible for me. I learned from this book, but I can't say that I was entertained by it.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting with a lot of action and detail
Review: I liked this book and think it worth your time, regardless of your politics.
+ Action and attention to detail.
+ Just enough moralizing to give it a substantive feel. Carter does a great job explaining why "hearts and minds" and not committing atrocities help a campaign win. He gives a version of the facts that rings more true than the sugar-coated glossed over version that I was fed in high school.- There are lousy, stilted, and awkward sex scenes. Seems like an editor was saying there had to be some horizontal action to make it a novel. The book would have been a lot stronger if these had been edited out completely. After all, this was written by Carter, not a more, ahem, experienced president :-) - The "story" aspects run out of steam about 2/3 of the way through. Part of the problem is that we all know who won the war. Also, some of the more interesting characters are killed off with a lot of book left to go.
Rating:
Summary: The Revolution in the South
Review: I might not have read this book if I had not gone to a book signing by President Carter. I had not been particularly interested in the subject.
I gave it four stars rather than three for two reasons: President Carter's research is astounding, and the book did keep my interest throughout.
I do agree with most reviewers that it is a history book trying to be a novel. But I did not mind. I acually found Ethan, the fictional protagonist, to be a flawed but sympathetic human being, like most of us.
"The Hornet's Nest" shows the ugliness and brutality of the American Revolution. There aren't too many "heroes" here (a much over-used word anyway). It gives one pause for thought about who the American people really are.
I do hope President Carter writes a sequel or at least a history of the next 20 or 30 years in the South.
Rating: 
Summary: A Revelation to the Revolutionary War
Review: I never fully understood or appreciated the Southern United States' pivitol impact on the Revolutionary War until I read President Carter's supurb and eye-awakening novel. He provides the reader with arcane yet crucial knowledge and perspective into how Southern America's people, geography, and events, all uniquely combined to have a decisive role in the Revolutionary War's outcome.Upon Reading Carter's book, I am amazed historian's have given so little attention to the South's critical influence on the war. Do not expect to read a historical, prototypical text book account. Carter conveys the information in the form of a novel, which makes the reading much more colorful.
I believe this is President Carter's 17th book, and the first ever novel written by a President. On a personal note, my review is somewhat biased based upon my deep respect and admiration for President Carter. What a first class president he was and world renowned, respected leader he remains and will always be.
The President adroitly combines his Southern heritage, presidential experience, writing skills, hard work (seven years of research), and love for country and world to create an interesting and historically valuable account of Southern America's vital role in the Revolutionary War.
Rating:
Summary: History does NOT come alive, unfortunately
Review: I wanted to like "The Hornet's Nest". I'm becoming more and more of a history (and, by extension, historical fiction) buff these days, and when my brother lent me this book I accepted it eagerly. However, his initial reservations ("It's badly written; I can't get into it") were absolutely on the money. Sad but true--the book is a failure. Though his subject matter is interesting (the Revolutionary War as it was fought and experienced in the South) and his research is thorough and admirable, Jimmy Carter is simply unable to bring it all alive in novelistic form. Style is required in the writing of a novel, and Mr. Carter doesn't have it. Page after page of thudding exposition and flat dialogue from stiff characters cripple the story's momentum to the point of exasperation. Though I learned from the book, I didn't enjoy it -- of course your mileage may vary, but proceed with caution.
Rating:
Summary: Befitting a respected American President
Review: I was so incensed by the Missouri reviewer who thought this book was just a Revolutionary War history "textbook masquerading as a novel", and who thought that it wouldn't have been published if an ex-President hadn't written it, that I decided to write a rebuttal review, my first fiction review on Amazon. So first of all, let's be clear on what actually happened. The Revolutionary War in the south was hardly the stuff legends are made of, but it was certainly vicious. Here's an outline.
There was strong Loyalist sentiment in Georgia and the Carolinas at the start of the war. The British planned to exploit this when in 1778 they seized Savannah as their base in Georgia. The plan worked, for two years later, British forces commanded by Sir Henry Clinton, the top British general, could advance north and besiege the American-held city of Charleston in South Carolina. The city was defended by General Lincoln with 3000 men. But Clinton forced Lincoln to surrender, which put the whole region in British hands. For all practical purposes, there were now no American regulars left in the south. Clinton then went back to New York, and left the subjugated south in the care of Lord Cornwallis. American Patriot forces, however, were still active in the region, and kept up a bloody guerilla campaign against British and Loyalist forces. (Had the word been invented back then, the British might well have called them terrorists.) Encouraged by their struggle, Congress eventually got around to sending a General Gates south with a force of 3,000 to help the Patriots fight Cornwallis and the Loyalists. But Cornwallis defeated him in August of 1780 at Camden, South Carolina. Finally it was the turn of the Patriots. In October of 1780, a Patriot force of 1,000 mountaineers attacked and totally destroyed a Loyalist force of 1,000, in their stronghold of King's Mountain in South Carolina. General Clinton, when he heard of it, wrote that it was the first link in a long chain of "evils" that eventually led to the loss of America. The American General Nathaniel Greene now marched south to help the Patriots' guerilla war against Cornwallis. Eventually, General Greene did battle with Cornwallis in the spring of 1881, at Guildford Court House in North Carolina. Neither side won, but Cornwallis retreated north with worn-out forces, and took charge of the vital British naval base at Yorktown. There, he was later besieged by 9,000 Americans and 30,000 French, and, as all the world knows, finally surrendered to George Washington in October of 1781. The war in the south was thus mostly a guerilla war with many minor engagements, individually unimportant, but collectively playing a significant role in the eventual defeat of the British at Yorktown. So what kind of a book has Mr. Carter written about this war? Would it have been published if you or I had written it? Almost certainly not. But so what? A then unknown John Grisham couldn't get "A Time to Kill" published by a major publisher. Jimmy Carter is hardly unknown, but his novel deserves to be published because it brings expertise, devotion to historical accuracy, literary creativity, and a presidential viewpoint to the story of that southern war that nobody else could. That makes it unique, and worth reading. And besides, it's very good. Is it a history textbook masquerading as a novel? Definitely not. But let's be candid on what kind of novel it's not. It's not anything like the tactical drama of the Gettysburg battle as told in Michael Shaara's classic "The Killer Angels", or the WW1 horror story depicted in Eric Remarque's "All Quiet on the Western Front", or the conflict of self-interest and honor in Hemmingway's Spanish Civil War novel "For Whom the Bell Tolls", or the chilling suspense of Ken Follett's WW2 classic "Eye of the Needle", or, to continue into the future, the suspense and surprise of Thomas Cronin's extraordinary USA/EU future conflict novel "Give Us This Mars". So certainly, if you buy the book expecting a classic literary masterpiece or riveting page turner, you could be disappointed. But I'm sure Mr. Carter didn't intend it to be any of those things. Instead, he has created a solid, interesting, eye-opening dramatization of the southern Revolutionary War. It needed doing, and Mr. Carter is just the person to do it. He has done an outstanding job of dramatizing the many interwoven events, even bringing in the local Indian tribes, which each side tried to exploit. This obviously well-researched novel, which includes a horrible massacre (fictional I hope) of Indians by whites, beats a history textbook every time.
Given the relatively minor nature of most of those far off events, we could expect that a history textbook about the campaign would be bed-time reading only for insomniacs. But war is never a minor matter for those at the front line, and Mr. Carter's novel brings the war in the south back to life. You experience it vividly through events in the life of Ethan Pratt and his friend and neighbor Kindred Morris, solid folk who have moved south to Georgia to live in a peaceful Quaker community. Many people, after reading this book, will probably be motivated to look up the history texts, as I was. If so, Mr. Carter will have succeeded admirably in bringing an important segment of American and world history to public awareness, a task befitting a respected American President. I have one minor complaint. The writing style is good, but is not quite right for a novel. A bit on the academic side. Every so often, I wanted to alter sentences and paragraphs to speed things up. But what can you expect? Mr. Carter is over eighty and has written sixteen nonfiction books. You can't expect him to turn into a Dean Koontz or John Grisham overnight. Be thankful he has worked hard to create this very good novel, and enjoy it for what it is.
Rating:
Summary: Fighters and Farmers
Review: I will be brutally honest right from the start. Carter is not a great novelist. But I do not regret for a moment having taken the time to read his historically accurate tale of backcountry farmers and militia men at the dawn of our nation. Chapter after chapter, I was exposed to new perspectives on our revolutionary heritage. Each main character tells a unique tale, and yields interesting new ideas. For example, at one point the main character reflects on his new life as a soldier and finds that risking his life in battle is at once easier and more rewarding than the unending labor of farm work. Yes, at times the story reads like a history textbook, but that really is the value of this book. The history is rich and alive and the reader can quite easily picture the narrow trails and tiny farms of 18th-century Georgia. But the characters are what keeps the story moving, and some are fairly complex and well developed. There is drama, tragedy, humor, and even sexual tension. As a life-long resident of the Pacific Northwest, I don't have any personal connection to the South, or its geography and history. Yet I still found this novel very compelling and rich. To a resident of Georgia, the Carolinas, or Florida, this novel will resonate much more deeply with your own life and experience. It's not exceptionally well written, but it is more than good enough. And it is a little bit of history in itself, the first novel written by a US President.
Rating:
Summary: I thought I was reading a James F. Cooper novel
Review: I've read the other reviews and find the novel left me with a different feeling than most. J.F. Cooper did the public a service by telling tales of Natty "Hawkeye" Bumpo and his two indian friends. We vivedly learned about the dangers of life in rural America at a time when European authors were the rage. Jimmy Carter is not J.F. Cooper, but he accomplishes the same thing. He takes a part of our war for independence that isn't in the forefront and explains it to us in a relational way that is easy to understand. I learned something of husband/wife relationships in the rural south, how neighbors interacted, farming and how to build a log cabin. This book opened my eyes to the plight of early Americans and their struggle to do what was right. I recommend this book. The research was great!
|
