Rating: 
Summary: Before the Civil War...
Review: ...the legendary characters of North and South fought alongside one another on the battlefields in Mexico. Robert E. Lee, Winfield Scott, U.S. Grant... all fighting on the same side, but this time on foreign ground. As the book begins, Winfield Scott is a old soldier in command of the U.S. forces in Mexico. He doesn't get the respect he deserves as the president and other politicians back in Washington are too busy playing their political games to understand or really care what is happening on the battlefield... But Scott pays them no attention, he is an individual who goes against the grain to accomplish his objectives. He understands the "true" nature of some of his officers (who are only there to look good and win medals). But Scott proves to us he is a great leader of men when he recognizes and rewards the nature of his best men who do their duty and find new ways to accomplish their goals. Early in the book we are introduced to one of these great men, a military engineer named Robert E. Lee. Throughout the book, Lee and Scott work together in spite of all the noise and nonesense to achieve victory after victory on the battlefield. Even U.S. Grant makes an appearance at the final battle for Mexico City showing his trademark ingenuity as he fires a cannon from atop a church steeple surprising the enemy. For Civil War buffs, I would highly recommened this book. I have read many a tome on lee and grant, gettysburg, bull run... and loved them all, but there are few stories, good stories about what these great men did before the Civil War and how they gained their much needed experience to prepare them for the great battles they fought against one another. This is a good solid four star book. I need to read it again.
Rating:
Summary: Not Forgotten, Only Reacquanted
Review: Historians like to call The Mexican War a "forgotten war." I grew up in Iowa and in that state The Mexican War is only forgotten because it is not easily recalled by any veterans. However, the county names, Cerro Gordo, Palo Alto, Polk, Taylor and Scott can all be linked to the battles and the heroes that inspired early city and county officials in Iowa. My state was not yet a year old and the names they chose for their cities, counties and landmarks would mark the time. Like the previous Shaara novels (ie: "The Shaara Trilogy" by father Michael and now Jeff), this book seeks to flesh out history using the techniques of novelization. Jeff Shaara follows the philosophy that there is no reason that history must be limited to just facts. It is also truth. Did some of the events and conversations he writes about actually occur? Probably not. Does it matter? This is presented as a novel--just like the prior 3 books, the Shaara team has never steered away from making that crystal clear. Is it entirely POSSIBLE that there is some truth to these "fictitious" conversations and events? to thoughts that can never be recorded except in letters and diaries? Those are better questions that the Shaaras manage to answer exquisitely. Good novelists know their characters well. Without a doubt, the Shaaras know their characters as well as can be known. "Gone for Soldiers" is not the storytelling masterpiece of "Killer Angels." Not much is. For anyone unfamiliar with The Mexican War, this is a fantastic introduction. But part of what I feel held the story back may have been the author's approach. I was not sure if he intended this novel to be the prequel to the Shaara Trilogy (ie: the Civil War). He alludes to the challenges of command that Cpt. Robert E. Lee witnesses in his superior, Gen. Winfield Scott as well as the other generals surrounding him. But Shaara is almost determined to introduce a quick story for every important character in the Shaara Trilogy and tell how they cut their combat teeth fighting in Mexico (Longstreet, Grant, Jackson, Beuregard--they gang's all here!) I know the author feels this may be important, but it's a bit distracting when the stories are so brief and sometimes irrelevant (though the Grant story was really inspiring). "Gone for Soldiers" is just as fast paced and intense in its battle scenes as the rest of the Trilogy. Yet, one of the reasons Civil War history remains so popular is because the individual stories are so endless. Anything and really everything can be written from that war. The Mexican War seems to not have the same staying power. Otherwise I think it may be better remembered. Historically, it just isn't a popular war for several reasons. In the Introduction, Mr. Shaara, tells us that while doing the research for this book, he was surprised by the similarities he found between the politics and public opinion of the Mexican War and the same policies and public outcry over the Vietnam War. He does a tremendous job highlighting many of the parallels without making it overt and preachy. To anyone familiar with Vietnam history, you will figure them out. This was an enjoyable read, but like most prequels to major Trilogies, the story is thin. Thank God for no Jar Jar Binks (Gen. Santa Anna does provide for some comic relief, though, in his own arrogant way). One could do worse looking for a good introduction to the history of The Mexican War. And of course, it helped for me to clarify the significance to all those prominant names in my home state of Iowa.
Rating:
Summary: engrossing
Review: I found this book to be an engaging read, and the interior monologues of the characters to be a useful tool to place them in context. It was particularly interesting to note that political interference with commanders did not start in Vietnam. Knowing little or nothing about the Mexican War, this filled some historical gaps and made me want to know more. I would love to read the same story from the other side. I suspect it would have a much different flavor. This book made me want to read his other works as well as his father's.
Rating:
Summary: Another good book!
Review: In this book, Jeff Shaara tackles the little discussed Mexican-American War. He does a great job of teaching the reader the progression and events of the war. The only worry I have is the over-emphasis placed on Robert E. Lee's role in the war. Overall, I would definitely recommend the book.
Rating: 
Summary: Has this series run out of steam?
Review: This is Jeff Shaara's novel about the Mexican-American War in 1847 and in it he uses the same method of narration as his other books about the Civil War. This means he takes leading characters and writes chapters from their perspective. In this case, the major particpants are Winfield Scott and Robert E. Lee. If you've read the other books (Gods and Generals, The Last Full Measure, or his father Michael's The Killer Angels), you might enjoy this since it offers a glimpse at some of the major Civil War generals in their younger days. However, the problem I had with this book was there wasn't nearly as much "action" as the other books - a result of the fact that the war with Mexico wasn't all that action packed. There are long, often boring, chapters covering simple things like one of Lee's scouting missions - pages and pages are devoted to him lying under a tree in hiding for a single day. Also, it seemed that Lee's character was almost obnoxiously religious. In the other novels (and true in Lee's life) it was clear that Lee often put things in "God's hands". But in this book, nearly EVERY thought of his reflects on God. It got to be a little much. Also, for nearly 300 pages (of the 400 page book), the story simply went back and forth from Lee to Scott. It's not until the battle for Chapultepec that we finally get chapters (although only one short one each) on men like Longstreet, Stonewall Jackon, and Ulysess Grant. Bottom line: don't start here with Shaara books but diehards will probably want to read it to close out the series on these men.
Rating: 
Summary: A View of the War from A Skewed Perspective
Review: Jeff Shaara is a good writer, but sadly not his father. Gone for Soldiers was an interesting read, but not engaging. As a military officer, I had a big problem with the incredible inflation characters like Robert E. Lee received. Hundreds in that war had more impact, yet because of Lee's later success, he got the focus in this novelization. Mr Shaara was remiss in his treatment of the war from any Mexican perspective. Most notably lacking was a better treatment of the chilren from the military academy who were defeated at Chapultepec Castle. Their legend has achieved near saint status in Mexico, so it would stand to reason US audiences would want to know something about their sacrifices. Also missing was the treatment of St Patrick's Brigade, a very interesting subplot about the Irish-American conscripts who turned coat in the vicinity of Mexico City and began fighting for the Mexicans. They too get heroic mention in Mexican versions, but are ignored here. Certainly a novel covering the Mexican-American War using speculation about real people is a tough nut, but the book would have been a better read had more of the perspective from the other side been included. In post-script I would have added that a large percentage of our problems and misunderstanding of Mexico today, stem from this most egregious intervention. Who, after reading the book, can truly say they have any idea why we were engaged in that war? Mexicans have NEVER forgotten. It shapes their view of the US and the subsequent land-grab that was 50% of Mexico in 1845. They aren't happy to this day, and who can blame them?
Rating:
Summary: Don't Spoonfeed Me, Give Me Something To Chew On
Review: As an enthusiastic reader of Shaara's past work I was excited to begin this one but found it soft and flat. I was constantly bothered by little unimportant words and phrases that should have been edited out while important questions, such as the whole San Patricio issue, were glossed over. I enjoyed the battle scenes, particularly Jackson's heroic and efficient working of his artillery and Grant's flanking maneuver, but it lacked the in-depth view into the character's heads and historical detail that I've come to expect.
Rating: 
Summary: Sloppy history
Review: Mr.Shaara's new novel might appeal to the young adult crowd who liked to be entertained by war action scenes and are not concerned that the historical background be either true or even-handed. While Grant and Lee (one a Lieutenant, the other a Captain) figure significantly in Shaara's novel, only two of the major Mexican generals receive more than a passing mention, with the exception of Santa Anna who is described most usually as a passionate but rather foolish or venal. One of the major battles in which U.S. losses were dramatic was the Battle of Churubusco. The victory according to Shaara was due to the superior "spirit" of the Americans.However, the dispatches and all original documentation shows the American victory to be due to an accidental explosion in the Mexican ammunition park. After which they continued to fight against the Americans using their bayonets against the American's guns. "Spirit" was clearly not the factor that turned the tide, otherwise we'd ALL be talking Spanish in Southwest today. In almost all of the battles it was superior artillery and inexhaustable supplies of ammunition which led to U.S. victory. The U.S. Navy blockaded the Mexican coast so the Mexicans often were without sufficient ammunition and were forced to retreat. Shaara's handling of the San Patricio Battalion is also muddled. Besides under-estimating the size of the force and the percentage of Catholics in the U.S. Army, he also credits Gen. Scoot with mercifully reprieving some of the Irishmen from the noose. In fact, no mercy was involved. They had deserted the army prior to the declaration of war. Their punishment nevertheless, was brutal even for the time. They were whipped 50 times by Mexican muleteers under orders of Col. Harney, branded with hot cattle brands on their faces, and sentenced to hard labor. Harney,accused of both rape and murder during the Indian Wars, was promoted to Brigadier for his tortures of the San Patricios. Lastly, Shaara has a touching schene when Scott enters Mexico City and a Mexican senora gives him a rose. In fact, Mexican women fought the Yankee occupation for months following Scott's entrance and are remembered in Mexico City for their heroism. Shaara's book is an insult to Mexican men and women, and a distortion of history. U.S. teenagers who like to see large numbers of brown folks shot by bold American soldiers, however, might find it stirring.
Rating:
Summary: Irritatingly Eccentric Writing Style
Review: I was certainly looking forward to reading Shaara's book, not having read his previous works. But the writing style was so off-putting and the dialogue so interchangeable that, frustrated, I gave up early in the game and didn't get a quarter into it. The introduction was so much better written than the narrative that I wish Shaara had written a nonfiction work about the period. Some sample eccentricities, of which the book is replete: "No one spoke, knew Scott did not require an answer." "He shook his head, said, 'What the hell is the matter. . . .'" "Lee saluted, did not hesitate, followed Scott down the narrow passageway." "Scott did not look at Lee, turned, said, 'We may proceed.'"
Rating:
Summary: Another excellent account from Shaara
Review: I thoroughly enjoyed this book as I have the others by Shaara. I do think it could have been improved with greater background on the Alamo, which most people believe was the Mexican War. I also think there was too much effort given to try to draw similarities to Viet Nam - political infighting and manipulation, unpopularity, etc. There should have been greater emphasis on Manifest Destiny and how that shaped the political and military climate of the day. Shaara's greatest strength as an author is drawing the reader into the novel through the use of fictionalized, yet historically supported dialogue. I highly recommend this novel.
|
