Rating: 
Summary: Spreading the Myth
Review: Do not be fooled by what this book aspires to be. The authors claim this is an even-handed, accurate retelling of the Battle of the Alamo and the Texas Revolution, but it adds nothing new to the oversimplified accounts you'd find in a 4th grade Texas history book.
The book tries still portrays the Alamo defenders as flawless men of great honor... mythical heroes fighting for a just cause. They try to argue that the Texas Revolution was similar to the American Revolution. They could not be further from the truth; The two events had little in common. The Texas Revolution consisted of a group of opportunistic American settlers who took advantage of the internal turmoils in Mexico at the time to seize a piece of property they had long set their eyes on. It was a prime example of Manifest Destiny at it's most voracious, if you'd like to put a label on it.
The Mexican side of the story gets lost in this book, despite the authors' claim at being unbiased. If you'd like to read an informative book on the subject, pick up Jeff Long's "Duel of the Eagles". That book is indeed an eye-opener (at least for the open-minded). On the other hand, this book might as well had been written by the Daughters of the Texas Revolution for distribution at the Alamo gift shop! It's a badly written history book.
Rating: 
Summary: Typical Santa Anna and Mexican stereotypes revisited
Review: I didn't think the world needed one more book on the Alamo till I read this one.The first half of the book tells the story of the battle although the battle itself is kind of an anti-climax. The second much more interesting half is the telling of the telling of the story. It explains how people views the story over time. It critques the eyewitness accounts and the diaries and some people selective reading of both. It shows how a Disney movie reminded the whole US of the battle, it shows how an American Icon told the story , it tells the story of JFK trying to avoid a crowd asking a D(aughter of the R(epublic of) T(exas)where the back exit was and was told "Senator," she returned, "there are no back doors at the Alamo. Only heroes." And finally it tells the story of the modern attempt to re-write it. Very much worth the money
Rating: 
Summary: Starts Slow but Finishes Strong
Review: I read this book more for the cultural history than for an account of the actual battle. This was probably good, because I found the first couple chapters very choppy and thought they didn't do a good job of setting up the background to the battle in a clear way. HOWEVER, once the siege of the Alamo started, the book improved tremendously. The account of the battle was very well handled and clear. Still, I think the book's real strength is in what comes after, in dealing with the fate of the battlefield itself in the decades after. The story of how Walt Disney came to make the Davy Crockett movie is especially well-handled, avoiding both Disney worship and Disney bashing. The same for their treatment of John Wayne's Alamo movie. Also, they do a good job revealing how attitudes toward LBJ affected how people thought of the Alamo. All in all, this is a very good book, very interesting even to people who are not that interested in Texas history as such. If you want to understand post-war American culture, this book is a must. I just wish the opening chapters had been as well organized as the rest of the book
Rating: 
Summary: I loved it!
Review: I tend to read a lot of historical nonfiction, and much of it seems to range from either well-intentioned but amateurish to, worse, underresearched to support a (not-so-well-) hidden agenda. On the other hand, this book is exceedingly well-researched and well-written, and caught me up in a reading frenzy like none since Ambrose's "Undaunted Courage." The first half of "A Line in the Sand" covers the events leading up to the fight at the Alamo in 1836 from both Mexican and Anglo perspectives, and paints both sides in a fairly honest and unsentimental light. It also does the two thing all nonfiction should do: It doesn't play favorites, telling both sides of the story with journalistic integrity, and it shows the event to be what most similar events inevitably are: a collision of ideals, fate, timing and personalities. Concentrating first on what happened immediately following the battle, through the hagiographic treatment of Crockett, Bowie and Travis, and finally to the view of these men and their actions in 1999, the latter half of the book shows, with a surprising yet believable spin, that a combination of the Cold War, Walt Disney's politics, John Wayne's patriotism and increasing multiculturalism have caused people to view this hourlong battle as everything from a defining moment in American history (even though Texas wasn't IN America at that point) to an attempt by Bowie, Travis and others to preserve slavery and racism. Compelling and very enjoyable book.
Rating: 
Summary: dull first half, excellent second half
Review: I think this book waspartially written as a response to Jeff Long's Duel of Eagles since the book make pains to countered Long's assertion on the racial aspects of the Texas Revolution. But the first half of the book appears to be bit dull in the end. Rehashing historical events which have been written many times over don't add to much to the literature unless you are a first time reader. However, the second half of the book the part where the authors dealt with post-Alamo period up to the present day proves to be quite interesting as people tried to put the Alamo in the proper perception as burden of political correctness creep in like a bad plague. Even poor Davy Crockett fall into the mud as people argued if he died swing his Betsy or on his knees pleading for quarters. I think the authors failed to show that picking between a murdering warmongering Santa Anna and racist white American defenders of the Alamo, there can be no real winner. (Of course, if you are a Texan or even an American, the choice would be pretty obvious since in the long run, American take over of Texas proves to be quite a benefit for all concern or otherwise, we won't have any illegals coming into droves from Mexico, eh?)
Rating:
Summary: Nice broad perspective
Review: Just because this book does not agree 100% with Jeff Long is no reason to condemn it. A topic like the Alamo is supposed to include room for debate and disagreement. Although the book may have been written partly in response to Long's version of the Alamo, I feel it also serves as a viable alternative to the current dominant historiography on the Alamo (Hardin and Huffines are good, but they would agree, I think, that theirs is not the "last word"). This is a balanced account which, as other reviewers have noted, includes a complete post-1836 history of the Alamo. A good example of the common-sense historical honesty in this book comes in part of the authors' treatment of the Crockett debate: "...what had been the end of Davy Crockett?...Scores of people had an answer to the question, but their answers banged against one another, knocking silly any hope of discovering the truth."(p.196) There will never be a "last word" on the Alamo, but I do recommend this book to those interested in the topic.
Rating:
Summary: Nice broad perspective
Review: Just because this book does not agree 100% with Jeff Long is no reason to condemn it. A topic like the Alamo is supposed to include room for debate and disagreement. Although the book may have been written partly in response to Long's version of the Alamo, I feel it also serves as a viable alternative to the current dominant historiography on the Alamo (Hardin and Huffines are good, but they would agree, I think, that theirs is not the "last word"). This is a balanced account which, as other reviewers have noted, includes a complete post-1836 history of the Alamo. A good example of the common-sense historical honesty in this book comes in part of the authors' treatment of the Crockett debate: "...what had been the end of Davy Crockett?...Scores of people had an answer to the question, but their answers banged against one another, knocking silly any hope of discovering the truth."(p.196) There will never be a "last word" on the Alamo, but I do recommend this book to those interested in the topic.
Rating:
Summary: Consise, Comprehesive History of the Alamo
Review: The first half of "A Line in the Sand" gives a good overview of the history that led up to the famous siege of the Alamo from both the Mexican and Texas settler perspectives. The battle itself and its aftermath (the Texan victory at San Jacinto) are given a good overview as well. Along the way, the authors attempt to portray the battle for what it was, free of either liberal condemnations of the defenders as imperialisist or reactionary attempts to elevate the defenders to God-like status. The truth lies somewhere in the middle of the elevated rhetoric. The defenders made a galliant stand against an authoritarian despot, but they did so in defense of slavery among other things. Whatever else they may have been, the stand of Davy Crockett, Jim Bowie, Colenol Travis and the others remains unassailable as an act of bravery. The second half of the book focusses on the history of the shrine since the battle. It covers preservation attempts and the lionization of the battle by such 20th Century luminaries as Walt Disney and John Wayne. The Alamo has become a powerful political symbol, a fact that was emphasized particularly during the Vietnam war. All of this adds up to a fascinating and very well written book. The only flaw is that covers the first part too quickly, giving more of an overview than an in-depth history. Nevertheless it is still an informative and enjoyable read.
Rating:
Summary: A good overall study of the Alamo
Review: This book is a rather complete overview of all or most of the legends and myths about the Alamo, as well as a pretty good coverage of the things that are accepted as historical facts. It also goes into the legends, and historical records about the major characters involved in the battle and the politics of the time. It shows the Mexican side of things as well as the Texan side. There is an in-depth discussion of the impact of the Alamo on Texas and the United States, also Mexico. There is a lot about the specific way the most famous Alamo defenders died, especially "Davy" Crockett. It is said that Crockett was not killed in the battle, but surrendered and was executed by Santa Anna. It discusses the issues that came up about preserving the Alamo and the fights made by two ladies in the effort to preserve it. There was also a political fight between the two ladies for control of the destiny of the buildings. That was called the "Second Battle of the Alamo". The book discusses the movies about the subject and goes into depth about John Wayne's efforts in making the movie, "The Alamo", the work, politics, etc. involved and the reception of the movie. "Line in the Sand" then discusses the modern idea of scorn about the Alamo and the resentment of some people who consider it a shrine to imperial land grabbing and racial prejudice. It finishes with a discussion of the Alamos effect on Presidents and other politicians. This is a pretty unbiased look at all sides of the atmosphere leading to the battle, the battle itself and a lot of the effects since the battle. It seems to cover all sides of every issue concerning the Alamo.
Rating:
Summary: A comprehensive look at the Alamo and its myth
Review: This is a very enjoyable book that both tells the story of the siege and battle of the Alamo and the development of the myth and symbol of the Alamo in Texan and American memory. The account of the Texas revolution and siege are balanced and scrupulous, carefully distinguishing between what we know and we infer. That account makes up the first half of the book. The second half relates the cultural history of Alamo preservation and its place in the current "culture wars" and revisionist history. An interesting account of the making of both the Disney "Davy Crockett" series and John Wayne's "The Alamo" feature in this latter half. I recommend the book highly. The history of the siege and battle is fairer and more balanced here than in Jeff Long's "Duel of Eagles."
| 
