A Time to Stand

Rating:
Summary: Great introduction to Alamo history
Review: "A Time to Stand" is perhaps one of the best books ever written on the historic Battle of the Alamo. Walter Lord, a reporter turned non-fiction writer, focuses mainly on the general events that took place during the siege, rather than on specific character studies of the three main heroes (Travis, Bowie, Crockett), but that does not in any way tarnish the end result. His account is very vivid and detailed, and gives the reader a real sense of what it must have been like to be behind those old adobe walls. An good addition to the book is a fold-out map of the Alamo complex as it looked in 1836, plus various pictures and facsimiles of letters sprinkled throughout. A highly recommended read and wonderful introduction to the real story of the Alamo.

Rating:
Summary: Great introduction to Alamo history
Review: "A Time to Stand" is perhaps one of the best books ever written on the historic Battle of the Alamo. Walter Lord, a reporter turned non-fiction writer, focuses mainly on the general events that took place during the siege, rather than on specific character studies of the three main heroes (Travis, Bowie, Crockett), but that does not in any way tarnish the end result. His account is very vivid and detailed, and gives the reader a real sense of what it must have been like to be behind those old adobe walls. An good addition to the book is a fold-out map of the Alamo complex as it looked in 1836, plus various pictures and facsimiles of letters sprinkled throughout. A highly recommended read and wonderful introduction to the real story of the Alamo.

Rating:
Summary: The Alamo as epic adventure story
Review: As a writer, Walter Lord has written the history of some of history's most epic stories, from the sinking of the Titanic to the American victory at Midway. It seems the better the drama, the better his prose. He retells the story of the battle for Texan independence from Mexico the treatment it deserves, in the process seperating fact from myth. The story of the Alamo is of course exciting, but I found Sam Houston's victory over Santa Anna at the battle of San Jacinto even more interesting. This is a great history book from one of the best history writers of the 20th century.

Rating:
Summary: best book ever writtin on the alamo
Review: even though this book was writtin in 1961, it is still the father of all alamo books,this man is a true historian. some "new" facts may have come out since then but this is a true and balance account of the story. if you only buy one alamo book, this is the one to get.

Rating:
Summary: Dispite Fluff, "A time to Stand" still stands true.
Review: I was pleased to find "A Time To Stand" in print again after many years. Although I've enjoyed every book of Walter Lord's I've read, and admit that he does his homework and strives to present the historical facts, I feel his writing tends to lean to the fluff and lacks bite. The historical subjects he has chosen to cover useually contain tragedy, (The sinking of the Titanic), and violence, (Pearl Harbor), yet his prose tends to be polite and fluffy, lacking the blood and guts of the bottom line that the events actually presented themselves in. It's almost as if there is a fictional writer in Lord screaming to be set free. Yet none of this subtracts from the hard hitting, factual research that is the nut of Lords work; he never fails to present the facts as they happened.

Rating:
Summary: An English View
Review: It seems virtually impossible for anyone outside the USA to find any form of realistic guide to the best narratives or texts on American history by Americans.
Whereas English history, French history, Russian history, etc. etc. has its recognised 'authorities', US history seems to have a collection of 'pro' tradition or 'con' tradition writings.
Walter Lord's book 'A Time To Stand' may have its detractors and its supporters but in the simplest of terms it does actually tell the story of the siege of the Alamo including the build up and the aftermath. Further reading may be a good move for in depth study but this book gets the reader into the history itself with very little forced interpretation of possible fact or rumour or political spin.
For the non-USA reader who just want to know what happened it's a must.

Rating:
Summary: Walter Lord can Write!
Review: My five star review can actually fit for any book by Walter Lord. Walter Lord is one of those Historian writers who can recreate an event so well its like you are there. He has done it for the Titanic, Pearl Harbor, Dunkirk, Midway, and the Alamo.

As other reviewers have pointed out this is an older book. Yes many books have been written on the Alamo since. But none are as good. Lord recreates what happened and even though we all know the results, the book is still exciting. Lord also includes an interesting sections on linguring questions about the Alamo.

This book is highly recommended as are all other books by Walter Lord.

Rating:
Summary: The Real Story, without the Spin
Review: The battle of the Alamo is currently being fought all over again between Traditionalists, who present the "Texans as heros" view, and Revisionists, who view this heroic view with post-modern skepticism. Why is it being re-fought, and what is at stake? Simply, because the viewpoint that prevails will impact current social attitudes towards multi-culturism and racial diversity - a central motif of current American politics. Once again, the battle is fierce - with no mercy, and no prisoners. Deguello!

It is almost impossible to find an objective presentation of the facts without this modern political spin. As a remedy, I recommend the following considerations, before reading any book about the Alamo:

1.) Mexicans and Texians were at war. Both sides had extremely prejuidiced views of the event - such is war. These extreme views are the source materials for ALL writers of the history of the battle.

2.) All but a few of the Texians that were present at the battle died without telling their stories. The Mexican view had far more voices left afterwards to tell their version. Even so, the Texian's version has usually prevailed.

3.) Eyewitness reports are extremely contradictory. This is not suprising, considering that the climax events occured in the dark, within a small walled compound filled with black powder smoke, erupting cannons, fire, confusion, screams, panicked soldiers, etc.

4.) In a sentence, the war was between extremely independently minded American pioneers (regardless of their various personal agenda) and an army serving the will of an extremely controlling Mexican President (seeking rigorously centralized government power). In the simplest sense, the fight was between men who wanted minimal government influence on their lives, and a government who wanted maximum influence and control on their lives. (Somehow, this story always repeats itself.)

Nonetheless, as with all historical events, something of a coherent story can be tickled out of the confused mass of information. A good detective can "triangulate" the most probable facts of the event, if he or she approaches the information with common sense and a minimum of personal agenda.

I have read all but a few of the books available on the Alamo, and can attest that Walter Lord does one of the better, most complete, jobs of reporting the event objectively. He also does it within the shortest space - "A Time to Stand" is a comparatively brief book.

Revisionists will tell you that this book is "fluff", or biased - usually because they have a different bias they want to sell you. Beware the "historian" that has found "new information", has a "new and improved analysis", or who applies modern worldviews to an age when people saw the world differently. There is nothing new about rewriting history for political ends.

Walter Lord's "A Time to Stand" is the standard. Read it first, before you sample the works of the combatants in the new battle of the Alamo.

And read it before you watch the new movie, to be released Christmas 2003. With Revisionist Stephen Hardin as one of the historical advisors, it promises to be the Revisionist "Manifesto".

Just a few opinions from a world-wise Texan...

Rating:
Summary: The Real Story, without the Spin
Review: The battle of the Alamo is currently being fought all over again between Traditionalists, who present the "Texans as heros" view, and Revisionists, who view this heroic view with post-modern skepticism. Why is it being re-fought, and what is at stake? Simply, because the viewpoint that prevails will impact current social attitudes towards multi-culturism and racial diversity - a central motif of current American politics. Once again, the battle is fierce - with no mercy, and no prisoners. Deguello!

It is almost impossible to find an objective presentation of the facts without this modern political spin. As a remedy, I recommend the following considerations, before reading any book about the Alamo:

1.) Mexicans and Texians were at war. Both sides had extremely prejuidiced views of the event - such is war. These extreme views are the source materials for ALL writers of the history of the battle.

2.) All but a few of the Texians that were present at the battle died without telling their stories. The Mexican view had far more voices left afterwards to tell their version. Even so, the Texian's version has usually prevailed.

3.) Eyewitness reports are extremely contradictory. This is not suprising, considering that the climax events occured in the dark, within a small walled compound filled with black powder smoke, erupting cannons, fire, confusion, screams, panicked soldiers, etc.

4.) In a sentence, the war was between extremely independently minded American pioneers (regardless of their various personal agenda) and an army serving the will of an extremely controlling Mexican President (seeking rigorously centralized government power). In the simplest sense, the fight was between men who wanted minimal government influence on their lives, and a government who wanted maximum influence and control on their lives. (Somehow, this story always repeats itself.)

Nonetheless, as with all historical events, something of a coherent story can be tickled out of the confused mass of information. A good detective can "triangulate" the most probable facts of the event, if he or she approaches the information with common sense and a minimum of personal agenda.

I have read all but a few of the books available on the Alamo, and can attest that Walter Lord does one of the better, most complete, jobs of reporting the event objectively. He also does it within the shortest space - "A Time to Stand" is a comparatively brief book.

Revisionists will tell you that this book is "fluff", or biased - usually because they have a different bias they want to sell you. Beware the "historian" that has found "new information", has a "new and improved analysis", or who applies modern worldviews to an age when people saw the world differently. There is nothing new about rewriting history for political ends.

Walter Lord's "A Time to Stand" is the standard. Read it first, before you sample the works of the combatants in the new battle of the Alamo.

And read it before you watch the new movie, to be released Christmas 2003. With Revisionist Stephen Hardin as one of the historical advisors, it promises to be the Revisionist "Manifesto".

Just a few opinions from a world-wise Texan...

Rating:
Summary: Fluffy But Worthwhile Account
Review: This book was written in 1961, three years after Lon Tinkle's Thirteen Days to Glory. Like Tinkle's, this book provides a rendition of the traditional view of the Alamo, with valiant Texans fighting evil Mexicans. The book is somewhat better written than Tinkle's, but it is not as good, because it is more fluffy. It does, however, have a superior diagram of the Alamo. It also has an interesting section at the end, "Riddles of the Alamo," which gives Lord's opinions on a number of questions about the battle, such as whether or not Davy Crockett surrendered. (Lord says he probably did.) The book is worth reading as an adjunct to other books about the Alamo, but if you were to read only one book, it should be Jeff Long's Duel of Eagles.