Rating: 
Summary: A Fascinating read, but ultimately disappointing
Review: I admire Paul Johnson's unabashedly biased approach to his discussion of the drivers of American history. There is no reason why historians must limit themselves to mere description stripped of analysis. Such analysis shines through in the early chapters and up to the events of the Civil War. But starting with the late 19th Century, the book begins to lose its edge, and at times it seems that even the author is bored. But more than that, he loses his historian's sense of balance of major personalities as we enter the 20th Century. Whereas, for instance, Johnson intriguingly explores the brilliance and shortcomings of Jefferson, building a complete picture of the man, we are treated to only half of the picture by the time we reach the 20th Century's presidents. The only democrat who is spared is Truman, and rightly so. I certainly agree that Kennedy was far less the man than the one painted in our popular culture, but Johnson's attacks on Kennedy for expanding US involvement in Vietnam leaves Eisenhower (who initiated US involvement) curiously uncriticized. Conversely, Nixon is treated as almost saintly. True, we should give credit to his geostrategic vision, but a reasoned analysis of his pushing the envelope of presidential authority would have been of more use to the reader. To this end, an important thread not wholly explored but culminating in Nixon's unprecedented use of presidential authority, is an exposition on why power in the 20th Century was being increasingly abrogated by congress into the President's hands. Instead, for example, we are told that the Reagan Administration was morally no worse than any other administration in circumventing the Constitution in pursuit of covert foreign activity. There is much to praise Reagan for, yet Johnson spends far more time describing Reagan's sense of humor than on taking him to task for letting the deficit explode during his tenure, or explaining his role in Iran Contra. Bush is treated with near derision for not marching into Baghdad (even though his Arab allies threatened to break up the coalition if he did so, a point not mentioned by Johnson). Yet little is said of Bush's management of his administration's reaction to the collapse of the Soviet empire and talk of the expansion of NATO. Bill Clinton is derided for being a sleaze almost as surely as Kennedy was. True, but even with little to show for his foreign policy record even now, Clinton's support of an expanded role for NATO, his support for Most Favored Nation Status for China, or his signing of NAFTA, is not mentioned at all. Ultimately, my feeling is that if, say, NAFTA were signed into law by a Republican, Johnson would have spent as many pages on that momentous event as he did on Reagan's joketelling.
Rating: 
Summary: Fascinating Read but not objective History
Review: Paul Johnson is a true iconoclast as well as an excellent historian. His conservative perspective becomes obvious as we get into the twentieth century. Nevertheless, unlike many writers of the left, he makes no attempt to pass his conclusions off as neutral unbiased historical assesment. I felt the book was strongest in discussing the colonial, revolutionary and civil war periods. Johnson's lively style brings long dead people to life. I appreciate his anti-revisionism in which he acknowledges wrongs that were committed but refuses to apologize for the natural consequences of progressive western civilization which has driven human history for thousands of years. As he gets into the twentieth century his biases become more clear, even extreme. His description of FDR, a president almost uniformly regarded as a great president, as a patent fraud who contributed little to positive to American History is ridiculous and unsupportable. His discussion of the New Deal as failing to solve the Great Depression is accurate. He fails to acknowledge the role of ROosevelt in boosting American moral in some of its darkest times as well as some vital and lasting reforms to the banking and securities industries that have prevented similar catastrophes. His description of Kennedy as essentially a complete gangster controlled by his father is also popular today among those of the right and is also an extreme exageration. In short, Johnson weakens his case against these more recent figures (or in favor of Nixon) by resorting to extremism. ALl in all though, this book will be enjoyed by all history fans who are not left wing ideologues. If you are a left wing ideologue do not waste your time, you will hate it. I myself am a political moderate who disagrees with a lot of Johnson's assesments but not with his overall themes.
Rating: 
Summary: Fascinating Journey Through American History
Review: This work is impressive. To figure out if you want to commit the time to sift through this nearly 1,000-page tome, first read the last part of his book and skim through the sections you have living memory of (Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton) to see if his analysis of recent history matches your own. If it does then you're going to have an enjoyable romp through American history with Johnson as your time travel guide. If it doesn't, put down your Howard Zinn and read Johnson anyway for a thoroughly researched, refreshing and energetic retelling of one of the greatest epics ever told. This book is for the news junkie who feels trapped in the present and wants to get a better grasp of America's origins but is too embarrassed to sit through another round of high-school AP History. Johnson assiduously untangles strands of history that seem to have been politicized or distorted for whatever reason, demolishing long-held myths, vindicating key people, and offering quirky information that will certainly improve your performance on Jeopardy. Despite the right-leaning biases he sprinkles throughout the book, he's consistently fair-minded in his analysis from the treatment of the Indians, causes of the Civil War, to today's media industrial complex. Also, in spite of his distillation of America's key events this work is appreciatively expansive in its scope. Often he breaks from the timeline story telling either referring back or fast-forwarding to other events capturing critical themes in his exhaustive effort to make sense of America's story. As you read this you get the feeling that Johnson is a mad perfectionist obsessed with leaving no pebble unturned in a vast forest. In a time where skepticism in America is fashionable, it is assuring to see an Englishman, an outsider, believing that there are lessons from the growth of our nation that can benefit the world. This is an important work and a must read for everyone.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent objective treatment of American History
Review: Paul Johnson's "A History of the American People" is very readable history whose objectivity is manifest. While necessarily abbreviated in many respects, the book offers a sweeping panorama of the American political, cultural, and religious landscape. It captures and defines the spirit that made this country the greatest and the most powerful in the history of mankind. Unlike most writers of the modern textbooks of history Paul Johnson understands that it is individual freedom of thought and action and the extension of that freedom to the economic, political, and religious spheres that enabled this country to dominate the rest of the world. Johnson brings to light the moral dilemma that arose when the American ideals of equality and liberty came in conflict with the economic and social pragmatism of slavery. A moral dilemma that has influenced American ideological, political, social and intellectual history since the country was founded and continues to this day, from the Civil War to the Civil Rights movement up to the present banal multiculturalism. He also rightly points out that attempts to restrict man's freedom through higher tax rates reduce productivity and progress. The increasing government involvement in the economy during FDR's administration probably weakened the economy and extended the Depression. The economy was recovering on its own at the time FDR took office. Johnson points out that the debilitating effects of FDR's interference with the economy remained with us until Reagan reinvigorated not only the economy but also the Ameritech spirit, which unfortunately again is under siege with Clinton's administration. Unlike most modern writers of history textbooks, Johnson gives credit where credit is due to Ronald Reagan for ending the cold war and for demonstrating to the world the inherent bankruptcy of communism and socialism and their handmaiden egalitarianism. I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in American history without the current politically correct revisionism that permeates most modern treatments of this subject.
Rating: 
Summary: A Bizarre and Eratic Romp Through History
Review: As a history book, Johnson's text has one thing going for it from the start: it is quite thick. Not being personally intimidated by thick books, I dove into this one with anticipation. He starts out well enough, with a wonderful survey of pre-colonial and colonial life in the New World. His is one of the few history books I have read that attempt to explain the mindset of the colonists, and why they felt so strongly about forming a nation of their own. Johnson is not afraid of offering his opinions about the venerated Founding Fathers, and quite a few are found wanting. Not surprisingly (given Johnson's political views) he gives short shrift to Jefferson, and high marks for Hamilton. What struck me as bizarre is that while Johnson obviously appears to be a proponent of small government, he idolizes a man who embodied the vision of an all-powerful Federal state. Rather like sampling from a buffet table, Johnson's history jumps from subject to subject, with lit! tle or no segue. He may discuss trade relations with Europe in one section, and then launch into a survey of the American art scene in the next. As the text continues, his opinions become more personal and more critical, often resorting to criticizing someone's personal appearance in the absence of more tangible faults. By the time the narrative reaches the 20th century, all pretense of historical objectivity is lost. Instead we are subjected to a line-by-line excoriation of "liberal" thought and progressive action. He manages to gloss over quite easily the abuses of the late 19th and early 20th century industrialists, and instead aims his barbs at those who attempted to expose wrongdoing and exploitation. He criticizes the "liberal" establishment for their adoration of JFK, but then heaps unconditional praise upon Nixon and Reagan. I could forgive him his point of view if it were not for the constant glossing over of entire aspects of both administ! rations. What makes an effective history book interesti! ng is the way that events are linked together. The good historian will spend his time showing how this happens, and he may try to offer some lessons for tomorrow. In this, Johnson's text is deficient. Instead, he uses his book as a pulpit for political assassination. It is not that he is wrong for stating his opinions so vociferously, it is just that a history book is not the best place in which to do so.
Rating:
Summary: Best at reviewing earlier American history
Review: Paul Johnson, who wrote the epochal _Modern Times_, has more recently delivered this behemoth on the history of America. This excellent work, which overall I heartily recommend to all Amazon customers, demostrates what I pointed out in my review of _Modern Times_; Johnson, like most historians, is at his best when he's talking about events far enough in the past that they can be objectively analyzed. From the 16th century right up through the early Cold War period, Johnson's analysis is, IMO, unparalleled in its clear-eyed objectivity. He takes hard looks at the follies of both Left and Right. Civil War fans will particularly be interested in his word-portraits of Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis. Johnson stumbles, though (and I feel I can legitimately say this as a conservative) in his recounting of more recent events. As I remarked in my _Modern Times_ review, when it comes to post-1950 history, Paul Johnson's writing probably best belongs in National Review as an op-ed. Not that there's anything wrong with that. National Review is the flagship think-mag of conservatism, and Johnson's writing lays out the conservative view in smart, crisp fashion. One would have wished, though, that he would have taken a more nuanced view of Watergate, which, as in _Modern Times_, he dismisses as a case of liberal hysteria. Most of us (those of us who are old enough to remember) remember the proceedings somewhat differently. All the same, though, this is a most worthy work, written in the same crisp, incisive style as all his other historical works. Buy it and be enlightened by the story of how the American people came to be as they are today.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent overview, drawing contemporary issues together
Review: This is an excellent book. As a Southernor, a libertarian, and history buff, I did not see ONE SHRED of bias in his writings that others have mentioned..in fact, he praises democratic presidents (and progressives like Lincoln) endlessly in this book. Unlike the singular/linear fashion in which we learn education in American public schools (this president leads to this president, leads to this war, to this war, etc), Johnson does a wonderful job of showing WHAT is going on at the same time a particular person is president or a particular, well-known event is occurring. So instead of just learning about the two leading men of a certain era, we also learn who their contemporaries were in industry, finance, art, etc. Most Americans do not realize for example, that so many people (Presidents, Generals, etc) were contemporaries during other matters/conflicts...that those who shaped the Civil War, and Reconstruction, were around during the Mexican-American War...which also had leaders who were around the same people who formed the Revolution. There is much overlap, and while reading you are amazed at how Johnson brings this to light, with social and political references, as well as dates and places. He further explains another phenomena (ok, I'm biased here) that is often overlooked. The role of geography and immigrant group in the "second tier" leadership of the US. Yes, there were the stereotypical Jeffersons/Washingtons/Adams..of Anglo-Saxon origin running the early US...but behind them were the rugged Scots-Irish "country" (or Southern in many cases) leaders like Jackson, Calhoun, Clay, etc. (or Cyrus McCormick in industry). It is a wonderful book, and provides insight into many areas simply not taught in primary and secondary education. And contrary to what other reviewers have written, I found it quite DRYLY refers to such politically weighty matters such as the use of the A-bomb. You simply get references to letters, quotes, and news accounts...in other words, FACTS...NOT his views on the matter. So I am not sure where that is coming from...he is quite objective about FDR, as he is with every other president. The statistics on industry are enlightening...rail, steel, skyscrapers...you simply don't get this broad of an overview in school...and you certainly don't get the impression that skyscrapers (or their early predecessors I should say) were being built in the late 1800s, while we think of that era as simply the era of the "old West". Buy this book..it's fascinating.
Rating:
Summary: Captivating enough to keep one's interest throughout.
Review: Although this book is nearly a thousand pages long, there are only eight defined parts. This is only one way in which a lot of material is structured in a way to make it hold together as one unified work. As the title suggests, the heart of the book is the profile of American individuals, but told only in a quasi-biographical form. Rather than fill every profile with every detail, Johnson picks out the essential details, with a goal toward letting the reader get to know these individuals as people first, and historical figures second. In that sense, it takes some of the shine off of the icons of American history and makes them more real. For instance, the achievements of James Madison the revolutionary are well-known to most students of history; his folly as president doesn't get as much attention. Yet Johnson tells this side of Madison's career as well, with unflinching detail. Johnson does a great job of relating these lives to the backdrop of the broader context that affected their lives. For instance, in describing the founding of each colony, Johnson's view that even at the very beginning, the nature and development of the northern and southern colonies were set up for the conflict leading to the Civil War. By highlighting this aspect, it helps set up the reader for a conflict that gets mentioned again 300 pages later. Other literary devices are used as well. In describing the experience women and families had during the Revolutionary War, a striking anecdote is told about Elizabeth Jackson's children/soldiers who suffered at the hands of the British. It is mentioned without any special attention that the youngest (and who would lose his entire family) was named Andrew. In effect, this passage (p.174-75) serves a dual purpose, one in the immediate context, and also as foreshadowing for a hundred pages later when Andrew Jackson emerges onto the national scene. Every once in a while, Johnson steps into the role of historical myth-debunker, whether it be to correct blatant and untrue attacks on Warren G. Harding, to put Richard Nixon's political career in context with the East Coast media's hostility, or the behind-the-scenes work it took to create the image of John F. Kennedy, and the same media's complicity in allowing it to happen, all the way into his presidency. The book concludes in 1997, so obviously there has been a lot of major events that have happened in America over the relatively short time since then. But the book is still a very enjoyable read, even if the low-key ending can now only be seen as a prelude.
Rating:
Summary: Now that I'm actually interested in History...
Review: ... I appreciate this summary of 400 years of American History, ending in 1997. While addressing negatives in American society, which seem to grow in number and size as time passes, Johnson (who is British) also leads a number of cheers for the American people and their spirit. He also makes several jabs at the French. So, while I learned a great deal, I am also somewhat cautious in sifting between what is fact and what is opinion in the book. I read this in preparation for reading Zinn's 'People's History', I may have more to say after I've read that.
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing
Review: I will first off admit that the book was entertaining and engagingly written, but that the authors right-wing agenda made the reading painfull. Mr. Johnson's obvious prejudices obscured any accuracies that the text might contain, and renders the book to the "feel good about your political bent" reading list, and not of much value for any true student of history. Don't get me wrong, I am a registered Republican, and this is not a rant against conservatism, but the tone and FDR/Kennedy bashing in this book is offensive and hardly what I consider the work of intellectual objectivity.
|
