Rating: Summary: The worst-researched Grant biography ever written Review: Without a doubt this is the most poorly-researched historical biography I have ever read. It's amusing that other reviewers here dismiss the criticism that the book is laden with errors and have a "don't care" attitude about it. Why would anyone want to read a book that has hundreds of factual mistakes? Curious indeed.Perret specializes in breezy and fairly incompetent treatments of historical personalities. He moves from icon to icon, skimming the surface, engaging in haphazard research and producing pop biographies which are always compromised by egregious errors. He's written books on Ike, MacArthur and his new study will examine JFK. The old adage "Jack of all trades, master of none" immediately comes to mind. There is never anything new in his books and one can always count the mistakes on nearly every page. Perret's limitations with Grant are obvious to anyone with even a peripheral interest in the subject. Others have listed and detailed the mistakes, but they cripple the book and ultimately make it something of a joke. Dates, personalities, people and battles are constantly being mangled, mixed up and treated incompetently. Perret's analysis of Grant's complex personality is something out of "17 magazine," it's so wide of the mark it's ludicrous. None of the major players in Grant's life are profiled correctly. His take on Grant's wife, Julia is incorrect and mistake-ridden. Similarly, his profiles of Sherman, Rawlins and Lincoln are also facile and obtuse. His writing style is mid-Victorian and quirky. There are some passages that are rather moving and beautifully written, but then a misstatement of fact is thrown in to ruin the mood. For anyone with an interest in Grant or the civil war, this is a primary book to avoid. It's the nadir of scholarship, devoid of any revelations about Grant as a man or military entity. It is also crippled with mistakes of the most rudimentary nature. Grant deserved much better than this treatment.
Rating: Summary: The worst-researched Grant biography ever written Review: Without a doubt this is the most poorly-researched historical biography I have ever read. It's amusing that other reviewers here dismiss the criticism that the book is laden with errors and have a "don't care" attitude about it. Why would anyone want to read a book that has hundreds of factual mistakes? Curious indeed. Perret specializes in breezy and fairly incompetent treatments of historical personalities. He moves from icon to icon, skimming the surface, engaging in haphazard research and producing pop biographies which are always compromised by egregious errors. He's written books on Ike, MacArthur and his new study will examine JFK. The old adage "Jack of all trades, master of none" immediately comes to mind. There is never anything new in his books and one can always count the mistakes on nearly every page. Perret's limitations with Grant are obvious to anyone with even a peripheral interest in the subject. Others have listed and detailed the mistakes, but they cripple the book and ultimately make it something of a joke. Dates, personalities, people and battles are constantly being mangled, mixed up and treated incompetently. Perret's analysis of Grant's complex personality is something out of "17 magazine," it's so wide of the mark it's ludicrous. None of the major players in Grant's life are profiled correctly. His take on Grant's wife, Julia is incorrect and mistake-ridden. Similarly, his profiles of Sherman, Rawlins and Lincoln are also facile and obtuse. His writing style is mid-Victorian and quirky. There are some passages that are rather moving and beautifully written, but then a misstatement of fact is thrown in to ruin the mood. For anyone with an interest in Grant or the civil war, this is a primary book to avoid. It's the nadir of scholarship, devoid of any revelations about Grant as a man or military entity. It is also crippled with mistakes of the most rudimentary nature. Grant deserved much better than this treatment.
|