<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Shirer's memoirs of McCarthyism and beyond
Review: I rate this a 9 because it isn't quite The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, or The Collapse of the Third Republic. For any other author, this final volume of memoirs would be a 10. Academic historians hate the man, because he has outdone them at every turn and has made modern history readable. This final volume of memoirs is fascinating, because it recounts Shirer's view of his departure from CBS -- a view far different than that expressed by Ann Sperber in her biography of Edward R. Murrow. It is fascinating because it sets the reader down, and explains what it was like to be a world class author and intellectual unable to ply his craft due to the inclusion of his name in the notorious "Red Channels". In the final analysis, it is fascinating because it is William L. Shirer writing about William L. Shirer surviving ouster from CBS, McCarthyism, and going on to write two of the most important works of contemporary history the western world has ever been privilaged to read. This work cannot be commended too highly to the intellectually aware. Conservatives and other knotheads ought best to look elsewhere, for these are fools that Shirer does not suffer gladly, indeed at all.
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent, but not up to the first two in the series.
Review: Shirer's historical narrative suffers somewhat when he turns the spotlight on himself. The first two books in the series, where his focus is growing up in early 20th century America and his years as a foriegn correspondent, are outstanding. In this voulme, his focus is on his blacklisting, struggling as an author, and his vindication in writing the definitive history of Nazi Germany. Instead of the candor he displayed in the earlier works, at a few points he leaves me feeling he is holding back. His description of his firing by CBS leaves me wanting more, some feeling of why there was such pressure to remove him. Instead, he just gives us his criticism of how he was wronged. I felt this same reluctance to be totally honest with the reader when he described his visit to the Soviet Union in 1982. He seems to have a stong admiration for Russia, but he just won't lay his cards on the table.In summary, William Shirer seems a man I would disagree with on most subjects, but one whom I could admire and respect. He is mostly candid and honest about his liberalism, but I wish he would have not left some blanks in the record.
<< 1 >>
| 
