Rating: 
Summary: Truely Terrible!
Review: Dreary illustartions and bizarre perspective. A long "historical" set up to explore leftist writers and the "civil rights" movement. Forget about it! I can only imagine this would be of interest to those who are still lost in the haze of a nebulous Woodstockesque paradigm. Read the Eddas and Hesiod instead.
Rating:
Summary: Truely Terrible!
Review: Dreary illustartions and bizarre perspective. A long "historical" set up to explore leftist writers and the "civil rights" movement. Forget about it! I can only imagine this would be of interest to those who are still lost in the haze of a nebulous Woodstockesque paradigm. Read the Eddas and Hesiod instead.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting Browsing, Could Have Been So Much More
Review: First, you need to appreciate that this is indeed a "coffee table" book, and is not, never was intended, to be a piece of serious scholarship. It's for browsing, and with that purpose in mind, "Witness to America" offers enough disparate accounts to make it interesting. The book consists of first person narratives at various junctures in U.S. history, broadly organized by the major societal transitions that this nation experienced (e.g., "The Last West" "The Rise of the City, "The Progressive Era," "The Individual Rights Movement"). These strike me as pretty standard categorizations, what you would typically find in most school texts, so ignore the reader comments that allude to some special "agenda" of the editors -- liberal or otherwise. Besides, the editors keep their prefacatory comments to each reading exceedingly brief, and allow the "witnesses" to speak for themselves. "Witness" does cover broad territory, with many accounts that represent both influential and minor participants in America's development. That's a plus, as it is always enlightening to see how both the big players as well as the everyday citizens interpret events around them. On the other hand, these are all American observers, and you wonder how much more the book might have accomplished had it included "witnesses" from the outside looking in. For example, we get to read General Washington's farewell address to his troops. Wouldn't it have been fascinating to see some of General Cornwallis' observations on the defeat of England and his take on this new nation "born of rebellion?" Similarly, we read Secretary of State Cordell Hull's recollections of the day Pearl Harbor was attacked, and sense his scorn for what seem in his mind to be those "naughty little Japanese ambassadors." Again, what about a view of America from somebody like Admiral Yamamoto? Okay, maybe I'm being a bit picky here. Including these "outside views" would make a 600+ page book even longer. But then again, so much of U.S. history is cast as how we look at ourselves. The added diversity of other views would have been fascinating in a work like this. So look at "Witness" as the work it was intended to be -- a reference for browsing. Even the editors explain at the beginning of their citation list that they have declined to annotate it because they are serving the interest of general readers, not scholars. Three and one-half stars.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting Browsing, Could Have Been So Much More
Review: First, you need to appreciate that this is indeed a "coffee table" book, and is not, never was intended, to be a piece of serious scholarship. It's for browsing, and with that purpose in mind, "Witness to America" offers enough disparate accounts to make it interesting. The book consists of first person narratives at various junctures in U.S. history, broadly organized by the major societal transitions that this nation experienced (e.g., "The Last West" "The Rise of the City, "The Progressive Era," "The Individual Rights Movement"). These strike me as pretty standard categorizations, what you would typically find in most school texts, so ignore the reader comments that allude to some special "agenda" of the editors -- liberal or otherwise. Besides, the editors keep their prefacatory comments to each reading exceedingly brief, and allow the "witnesses" to speak for themselves. "Witness" does cover broad territory, with many accounts that represent both influential and minor participants in America's development. That's a plus, as it is always enlightening to see how both the big players as well as the everyday citizens interpret events around them. On the other hand, these are all American observers, and you wonder how much more the book might have accomplished had it included "witnesses" from the outside looking in. For example, we get to read General Washington's farewell address to his troops. Wouldn't it have been fascinating to see some of General Cornwallis' observations on the defeat of England and his take on this new nation "born of rebellion?" Similarly, we read Secretary of State Cordell Hull's recollections of the day Pearl Harbor was attacked, and sense his scorn for what seem in his mind to be those "naughty little Japanese ambassadors." Again, what about a view of America from somebody like Admiral Yamamoto? Okay, maybe I'm being a bit picky here. Including these "outside views" would make a 600+ page book even longer. But then again, so much of U.S. history is cast as how we look at ourselves. The added diversity of other views would have been fascinating in a work like this. So look at "Witness" as the work it was intended to be -- a reference for browsing. Even the editors explain at the beginning of their citation list that they have declined to annotate it because they are serving the interest of general readers, not scholars. Three and one-half stars.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting Browsing, Could Have Been So Much More
Review: First, you need to appreciate that this is indeed a "coffee table" book, and is not, never was intended, to be a piece of serious scholarship. It's for browsing, and with that purpose in mind, "Witness to America" offers enough disparate accounts to make it interesting. The book consists of first person narratives at various junctures in U.S. history, broadly organized by the major societal transitions that this nation experienced (e.g., "The Last West" "The Rise of the City, "The Progressive Era," "The Individual Rights Movement"). These strike me as pretty standard categorizations, what you would typically find in most school texts, so ignore the reader comments that allude to some special "agenda" of the editors -- liberal or otherwise. Besides, the editors keep their prefacatory comments to each reading exceedingly brief, and allow the "witnesses" to speak for themselves. "Witness" does cover broad territory, with many accounts that represent both influential and minor participants in America's development. That's a plus, as it is always enlightening to see how both the big players as well as the everyday citizens interpret events around them. On the other hand, these are all American observers, and you wonder how much more the book might have accomplished had it included "witnesses" from the outside looking in. For example, we get to read General Washington's farewell address to his troops. Wouldn't it have been fascinating to see some of General Cornwallis' observations on the defeat of England and his take on this new nation "born of rebellion?" Similarly, we read Secretary of State Cordell Hull's recollections of the day Pearl Harbor was attacked, and sense his scorn for what seem in his mind to be those "naughty little Japanese ambassadors." Again, what about a view of America from somebody like Admiral Yamamoto? Okay, maybe I'm being a bit picky here. Including these "outside views" would make a 600+ page book even longer. But then again, so much of U.S. history is cast as how we look at ourselves. The added diversity of other views would have been fascinating in a work like this. So look at "Witness" as the work it was intended to be -- a reference for browsing. Even the editors explain at the beginning of their citation list that they have declined to annotate it because they are serving the interest of general readers, not scholars. Three and one-half stars.
Rating: 
Summary: Perspective of history
Review: I love the way he lets people who were present tell the story. It is very enlightening, not your normal text book history. It is a must read for anyone with an open mind.
Rating:
Summary: Leftist Tripe
Review: I was extremely disappointed with the section on the 20th century. Where was the chapter on the SDA or the Eco-Terrorists. A very biased view and a waste of money.
Rating:
Summary: First person accounts give new perspective to history
Review: I've been a huge Stephen Ambrose fan since reading his biography of Nixon years ago. This book dispays Ambrose's flair for research, and ability to make the past come alive. This time, however, rather than using his own prose to set the scene, he has compiled a collection of accounts from people who were there. It's not textbook history, and it doesn't always present events from an objective view, but it is nevertheless an effective and fascinating read.
Rating:
Summary: Dreadful!
Review: Really Bad. Other than the required salutes to National(?)heroes(?) such as Malcolm X, Betty Friedan, Carl T. Rowan and JimmyCarter included in "Witness" a delusional essay which charecterizes GenXers as having respect for only for the Baby Boomers "who devoted their lives to the cause", 'the cause' ofcourse is to thank for integration at gunpoint, failed schools, rampant STDs, disdain for our Western culture and traditions and a legacy of a broken Nation and an ailing culture. Also (one of my personal favorites) and essay exploring, yes 'the Flawed White Southerner' and ofcourse it wouldn't be complete without the triumphant story of Mexican immigrant who crosses the American border. This volume is weighty enough to break a limb, the cheerless images conjure up a sullen malaise and the editors' political agenda is appallingly obvious. This is not a work of history but unfortunate disinformation and impotent propaganda. END
Rating: 
Summary: Great teachers resource
Review: This book is great for history and social studies teachers. The book is broken into small snipets of history that are the perfect length for one lesson. In a time when textbooks give only partial views on history slanted towards the views of the editors and publishers of the textbook, this is a refeshing use of primary source material. Ambrose and Brinkley let historic figures speak for themselves.
|
