Rating: 
Summary: Gritty, Unvarnished US History
Review: Mr. Zinn has written an honest and gritty History of the U.S. Having been schooled in the late 50s; I found this book to be an real eye opener. There is no George Washington chopping down the cherry tree, And Ol' Abe doesn't come off too good either, and, well, Mr. Hamilton was just a hussy elitist hypocrite. So I can kind of understand the harsh reviews of some folks here who thought all those tales in grade school were true. In all, this a very well researched book and should be read by folks who wish to get a more grounded version of US history.
Highly recommened!!
Rating: 
Summary: A "People's History"...? Which "People" is that, Mr. Zinn?
Review: So often do I find that members of academia, as a result of their detachment from everyday commonfolk, clearly miss the mark when attempting to capture the essence of the common man. This is a problem that has unfortunately befallen Mr. Zinn. While many will argue that by virtue of the fact that Zinn takes great pain to capture the words and emotions of the common man (or should I say "man and woman" as to not offend Mr. Zinn), this cannot be mistaken for historical context by the reader. Although copious recognition is given to the merits of social change, the change is inevitably in spite of and unmagnanimously victorious over middle America. The irony of it is that middle America is every bit as "common" as the subjugatged groups (most notably and ubiquitous women and blacks) that he posits as the common member of society.A valiant crusade, one may argue, and one worthy of consideration even of the magnitude that Mr. Zinn dedicates to it. However my main beef lies in the fact that the emotion he captures, the sentiments that are of the abused, discriminated, the poor oppressed souls of a racist, misogynistic and ethnicidal nation, leaves at least one reader questioning the authenticity of many of his assertions. It is as if he has searched the globe for the most destitude, emotional, despair-ridden instances and accounts of the "everyday" individual. That in and of itself is inherently contradictory, although plausible and perhaps even admirable when positioned in a disinterested manner. But the fact is that in search of the sentiment of the common individual, he has managed to quote ad nauseum the sentiment of the fringe of many political movements of the past century. Granted, the fringist crusaders tend to effect the most change and therefore garner the most historical recognition, but these people for the most part have not represented the common man's view. While they may have embodied a supressed or unarticulated emotion of the common man, it still represents little of the common individual's "history". In positing the narrative as a history of common people, he subsequently has gone out and captured the essence of the angry and the oppressed, not the everyday human being. An example is the feminist movement, in which he cites person after person expressing rage towards a society that oppresses and discriminates against women for the crime of not being a man. His "common" history gives absolutely zero attention to the millions of women who were and are housewives and mothers who have no problem in dedicating their lives to making a home and raising their children and would never consider an abortion, whether out of maternal instinct or moral virtue. It is as if this point of view does not and never did exist in society, and that the laws are made by an evil establishment with an axe to grind against any and all who are not white and male. In other words, these views of millions of women are not at all common to him, or he would have made mention of them. One exits chapter after chapter wondering if Mr. Zinn finds individuals with "traditional" values of little redeeming character. This is only one example, the list is comprehensive. Another example is Nixon's behavior in Vietnam. His gives no reference to the fact that it was Nixon who undid the escalation of Kennedy and Johnson's war, instead citing offensives undertaken during Nixon's unfortunate reign. Anyone with a modicum of military knowledge knows the difficulty in executing a withdrawal without offensives. Without offensives, it becomes a duckshoot. Please don't misunderstand me, if this is what you are looking for, then this is the book for you. But the simple fact remains that he does little to capture the everyday man, rather he uses the book as a platform to deprecate and assail the history of our country in regards to its treatment of ethnicity and sex. He cites instance after instance of racial discrimination, and honestly makes this white male almost ashamed to be just that. He cites masterfullly written diary-esque passages that most common idividuals would never have the ingenuity or eloquence to express. The plight of a common criminal or an uneducated youth is represented by the poetic prose that is hardly characteristic of the "commonness" he puprportedly aspires to convey, hence I must say that the title is quite misleading. If you want an insight into the mindset and history of the common man, I would recommend looking elsewhere. If you want subtle allusions to the virtues of communism and not-so-subtle allusions to the discriminatory history that was and is so allegedly pervasive in our society, then this is the book for you.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Content, Tough Reading
Review: I don't know about you, but I work all day and have kids at home. I strongly desire to acquire knoweldge and become more educated, but just because I want to read about something educational doesn't mean I want it written as though it's supposed to be difficult. Zinn, while adept at research, of course, writes, to a degree, like this, with many apositives, and other elements to sentences which, while descriptive, make it unneceessarily, and unfortunately, tough reading. No fun. However, while it's not wonderfully written prose, the content appears to be superbly researched and thorough. It really makes you feel cheated by the school system that they taught us everything SO one-sided. To think that potentially 2/3 of colonial citizens were NOT supportive of the revolution is completely contradictory to anything I've been taught. However, it's potentially true. One important thing to know, though, is that this is the other side of the story, and not the whole story. If only this book were written more simply, I'd lobby for every child 6th grade and up to read and know this book in addition to text books. It has fantastic knowledge, important information for every american and makes each us a better person for reading it.
Rating:
Summary: A 700 page long superficial judgment of history in the US
Review: I was only able to read 3-4 chaptes of this book.
There are two main problems with the book. (1) The insights are not surprising, and (2) there is hardly any evidence of worthy research behind the opinions of the author. He often cites completely absurd sources to make a point, like a bumpersticker in 2000 or "one person writing in the Gazette in 1764". I am sure you can prove anything if you can argue with "one person once said". I was expecting from a book on the "history of the people" to trully investigate how "the people" have felt and lived history in this country. What you get, instead, is how the author's modern western and quite leftish view of things perceives history in hindsight. Quite a different thing.
The book doesn't read like the work of an academic, but rather, like an angry ultra-left superficial view of the world. The kind of writing one finds in free weekly newspapers like "Citypaper". At least those editorials have humor!
Rating:
Summary: Life in America - Yesteryear
Review: This book, brilliantly researched and presented, sites numerous historical court documents, books, treaties, newspaper articles, government records, and personal letters to give a highly readable view of history that -- unlike other history books -- does not concentrate on the lives of a few "heroes," but on the lives of the everyday man and woman. Outlining the hopes, dreams, frustrations, daily conditions and sacrifices of the people who lived in historical times, the author gives the reader a vivid sense of what life was like in America in times past. Contrary to comments by previous reviewers, the author does not champion any ideology, but rather he reveals the triumphs and shortcomings of democrats, republicans, liberals, conservatives, socialists, communists, labor unions, and labor leaders. "Heroes" we are used to seeing idealized -- and demonized -- appear more human, more real. History should not overlook the accomplishments of everyday people simply because today we take for granted their contributions. There are valuable lessons from the past to be learned here.
Rating:
Summary: An Introduction to Socialism.
Review: Oh the hand wringing this little tome must have caused back in the 1980...the guilt...the angst. Of course these days, many of the ideas first espoused in "People's History" are so commonplace (i.e. politically correct) that reading this book cover to cover get's a little tedius. What must have seemed seditious in 1980 is now taught in practically every high school, and almost certainly every public university in the country. My thoughts on reading this book were not along the lines of "wow, that's an amazing perspective", but "tell me something I haven't heard!" Other reviewers are right; this book is not for the neo-con or traditionalist. And those looking for a centrist view would do well to pass on this book. But for an iluminating glimpse into the mind of the modern socialist...the hemp-wearing...the utopians...the Earth First-er's and PETA misanthropes...those who can't survive the day without a warm glass of guilt, Zinn's propaganda piece is a must read. It is a rallying cry and prima facie evidence for those already bent on self-loathing and hatred of country....and a warning claxon to the rest of us of their growing influence.
Rating:
Summary: Good, but don't treat it as gospel
Review: It's very hard to find non-political reviews of "A People's History of the United States." When your author makes his viewpoints clear from the opening page, readers are immediately polarized. You think this is the revealed word or utter blasphemy. In truth, it's a well-written book with its share of faults, worth a read but not the final word on American history. Zinn's prose is clear, and his narrative is often exciting, with some terrific individual stories -- his chapter on the Railroad Strike of 1877 moves as powerfully as a train rolling across the plains. Zinn's biases are obvious, but they're more important for leading him to shadowed areas of American history -- whether the role of class or peace movements in World War II -- than as propoganda for any one of his viewpoints. The book's "revisionism," though, is overstated. Maybe its contrast to standard textbooks was sharper in 1980, when "A People's History" was first published, but colonial rebellions, our shoddy treatment of Indians, our unforgivable use of slavery -- all that was in the history textbooks I used in the 80s and 90s. The book is often thought of as a "Secret History" the powers that be don't want you to read. If so, they're doing a lousy job -- I studied virtually all of Zinn's subjects in fifth and sixth grade. Is that a sign historians are way ahead of Zinn, or a measure of his influence? At the very least, one can say his ideas have made it into the mainstream. Zinn's tendency to simplify people or movements is his biggest flaw. Andrew Carnegie was cruel to unions, and Zinn rightly makes the point. But Carnegie was also a philanthropist who personally paid for hundreds of libraries in inner city neighborhoods throughout the nation. Zinn ignores that. Socialists faced deep-seated and frequently vicious opposition from the establishment, as the author notes. But it failed in America in large part because of the mistrust between different racial and ethnic groups. Zinn tells a charming story about an elderly Irish woman welcoming a black person to an organization meeting, but that, sadly, was the exception to the rule, and he doesn't adequately address impact of racism on labor organizing. Don't skip "A People's History of the United States." For its frequent absence of complexity, it casts a light into ignored corners of history (even if they're not as benighted as Zinn thinks), addresses class issues and has terrific individual set pieces. But don't ignore its shortcomings, either. Read it like you would any book -- with a critical eye and an open mind.
Rating: 
Summary: 3 for history 5 for alternate perspective
Review: While this book does show some bias, I would say no more than my high school textbooks. Refreshingly, it comes from the other side. An entertaining read, but I would not use it as a serious historical text. It does a good job of showing an alternative perspective on things, but takes it a bit too far in my opinion. Since he does not believe in objectivity, I think he tends to hyperfocus on his own self-acknowledged subjectivity.
Rating:
Summary: A Minority History
Review: This is a highly useful book that is easy to revile if one feels threatened by minority points of view or if one takes offense at criticism of American values or behaviors. But it's doesn't purport to be a balanced account of American history; it's history filtered through the experiences of those marginalized and brutalized in the American experiment -- our "lab animals," so to speak. Is it any wonder that not a little resentment is present in such voices? The assertion that Zinn and those he focuses on hate the US and its brand of capitalism is a simpleminded overgeneralization at best. Zinn well understands that many of us do benefit from our system, but he wants us to look into the eyes of those who have not benefitted, whose experience the right wing wants to expunge from history books. Yet it behooves the complacent and conservative majority of Americans to listen to the minorities in our midst. Anything that increases our desire to work for justice and fairness is valuable. This is an insightful, intensively researched book that offers all of us a crucial opportunity to question our assumptions. Yes, America-bashers will find plenty of ammunition here, but if your object is to understand the fault lines running through the American fabric, to learn from history, to avoid repreating errors, and to improve the country your love, this is the book for you.
Rating:
Summary: History you should learn - that was never in a school book
Review: In this brilliant analysis of american history, Howard Zinn brings us not the stories of the generals and presidents but of real folk who have suffered and strived. We can learn from these stories and, if we have the strength and courage, they can show us how to build a better country. Though I'm fairly cynical about this book making the difference that it can make, I promote it whole-heartedly and encourage you to read it. I honestly believe you'll be a better person for it.
|
