Rating: 
Summary: Does Edmund Morris really exist?
Review: Enthralled by Morris' Rise Of Theodore Roosevelt, I waited for another magnificent window on history to open. Unfortunately, the window provided only a few insightful views and a vast amount of cynicism. EM's unprecedented access should have sought more than a one-line explanation of Ronald Reagan. While appearing to be thoroughly researched the book disappointed me with the spin applied to events and substantial inaccuracies reported in the two events of which I have firsthand knowledge. Makes me wonder if Teddy really did....Please leave the fictional characters at home.
Rating:
Summary: Boring...filled with too much author supositions
Review: Very dissapointing...lacks first hand knowledge of events
Rating: 
Summary: The conservative assault on the book got me interested.
Review: As a progressive Democrat, I wasn't interested in any accolades for Ronnie. But I was curious: Why was he so well-liked by all sides of the political and personal spectrum? 700 pages later, I know more about Reagan than I wanted to know. I understand what made him work so hard...albeit from 9 to the stroke of 5. He was a Presidential clock-watcher. The book works. It is an good and at times, exciting, glimpse into his quirky personality. Why he needed trusted advisors on every issue...advisors who misused their position and his trust. Who knew he was short on detail but long on oratory. A man with the attention span of a fruit fly, but the determination to better America by ridding the world of our 'enemies' for all posterity and at any financial or budgetary cost to that same posterity. A rich man with little empathy for the poor or disadvanataged...he believed they were where they wanted to be. Reagan was not a man of great vision...more a man of tunnel vision with ideas set in concrete. He was not a man who could change his mind, yet he had a gut feeling for what the country needed. What 'was working' in his intellect brought the Russians to the bargaining table so that Bush, obviously a lightweight in the pages of history, could steal the credit after the 'Wall' came down. It becomes apparent that any results Vice President Bush obtained in his own presidency were the overflow left from Reagan. And when Reagan's shadow fell off of Bush, Bush dropped off the electorate's short radar. Without a Reagan, we would not have had a Bush presidency. Reagan's controversial scandals which permeated and damaged his legacy are detailed as I haven't seen anywhere else, as were his lack of their understanding and shameful loss of control over his power-hungry staff. There were no viable Democratic candidates to run against the Gipper... Americans were not going to put another Democrat in office after the Jimmy Carter debacle. Reagan was lucky again. More Americans died in foriegn countries when Reagan was president, and his scandals ended his popularity and drove him into depression. Did he really know what was going on? Probably during the last part of is presidency, no. The presence of Edmund Morris' character does not detract in any way...perhaps there was no other way to detail the life of the 'Acting President.' As hard as it was for Morris to work with Reagan, this same difficulty enters into a description of the conclusions of this reader in summation. Maybe we can only understand Reagan or his politics when viewed as part of the big picture...his childhood, his vision, his close brush with communism. And Morris captures the big picture for me. I would never have stayed with this tome so long unless the biography was as this sincere and loving. Reagan was not cannonized...deified, vilified or demeaned herein. He became the man ... Ronald Reagan. Past and present. I find myself missing him, and sending my love to Nancy and his family, as the giant shadow he cast on American politics becomes a lost memory.
Rating: 
Summary: I would have liked more Reagan, less Edmund Morris ....
Review: OK, I really like political biography, so it's hard to disappoint me ... a fascinating book and a great read, yes, but this one is as odd as some of the commentators make it out to be...I still don't know whether I "liked" it or not ... it's a very frustrating reading experience at times. Without doubt, Morris' use of the fictional narrator in the beginning of the book undermines his unique, insider perspectives in the latter half. I'm glad Morris attempted the format, but I have to agree with others who believe he may have squandered a unique historical opportunity to instead write a book that would more aptly be titled "Dutch and Me". Author's journeys don't interest me except as they give me insight into the principal, and Morris didn't get there, although he gets points for trying with a difficult and perhaps ultimately uncooperative subject.
Rating:
Summary: Worth a read
Review: I like many others out there looked forward to the release of this book. However, I find the writers style a bit distracting. The role of a biographer is to present facts and although the writer was trying to present the real Ronald Reagan, he fails to give an adequate history of the years in office. Reagan was a man with a dream. He was honest, not lily white but as honest as most can hope to achieve. He spoke to us not at us or above us. It is so tiresome to see elected leaders adopt an elitist attitude and treat all of their employers like morons. Reagan never did. He treated the presidency as it should be, a priviledge. Mr. Morris should of wrote a real biography and waited to experiment with this literary style on another book. I wanted to read it just because the reactions were so split. Some of the readers loved it because it capture the Reagan they loved and those that hated him loved it because they thought it slaughtered him. Oh well, I'd say it was for the real bored or real curious, you choose.
Rating: 
Summary: A memoir of Edmund Morris--err, I mean Ronald Reagan
Review: There once was a writer named Morris
Did he write on Ron Reagan tobore us?
For there's too much of him
which made many feel grim
as many reviewers did chorus ______ Although I am no fan of Ronald Reagan's politics, I must admit that he was a better person than I had thought; the book did give me that much, but as my limerick goes, there was far too much of the fictionalized Morris in it-- was he trying to fill up space or was it ego or a somewhat of both?
Rating:
Summary: Mr. Morris, you owe us an apology!
Review: How can someone spend so many years with so much information and have so little to show for it now? I did not vote for Reagan, I didn't want this book to make him into some sort of mythical God of perfection and I didn't want to spend 800 pages trying to tear down a President. I did however, expect to learn a little! There was nothing in this book that I had not already learned about this man and his Presidency! Many times I had to put the book aside out of frustration. Morris included more information on his TR book than on Iran-Contra! Was he even interested in Reagan? As an American I feel cheated out of the book that should have been written.
Rating:
Summary: Reagan was neither odd nor confusing, but this book was.
Review: "Disrespectful" is the word that comes to mind first when I think of the book Dutch. I did not appreciate the author referring to Reagan as an "airhead", though he went on to disprove that he was. I did not need to know about the young actor Reagan getting layed; I did not need to know about President Reagan joking about masturbation with George Bush. This irreverance for any president is appalling, but it's worse when you know that Ronald Reagan is a man of strong character and solid moral values (and he is still alive Edmund). These odd passages are in keeping with the contemptible, oddball assortment of fictional characters (all of whom have a burning hatred of Ronald Reagan). One is a campus radical/terrorist, another is a gay liberal with the great honor of being among the first to succumb to Aids, and another is the author himself who just happens to be 30 years older than he really is -- confusing isn't it? This confusion created by the author is one of the most consistent elements of the book. This is not a biography; it is a sad waste of a great opportunity to write the definitive biography of a great president.
Rating: 
Summary: A wonderfully written book about an enigmatic personality
Review: I just finished reading this book. The fictional characters did not bother me and I applaud Mr. Morris for "outing" all biographers--there is much more of the author's personality in any biography than most would admit. Mr. Morris's beautiful prose and insightful observations made the book an excellent read. Ronald Reagan was the consummate performer, always in need of an audience. Hence the author as observer. Reagan was also a man of great moral conviction, despite the obvious lapse of judgment regarding Iran-Contra. But this, too, arose from a moral compassion for the hostages in Iran. There is no evidence he knew about the contra diversion. I felt proud reading about him going toe-to-toe with Gorbachev in Geneva and Reykjavik. Reagan, more than anything else, will be remembered for bringing an end to Soviet communism. He also restored enthusiasm for this country and brought great dignity to the office of President.
Rating:
Summary: Edmund Morris's Memoir
Review: EM writes very well, and he had a good subject. However, he seemed to have decided that the personality qualities he saw in an older Ronald Reagan needed to be sown throughout the man's life, always quick to link some thought or action of the past to the future. It was interesting but seemed to reach at trying to prove the author's point.
There were many vague references to people and phrases from movie scripts and literature, both in English and other languages, that was sometimes annoying because not all were easily understood.
The invention of the fictional character is a complete flop and most annoying. Res ipsa loquitor. (How do like that Mr. Morris?)
As many others have pointed out, EM's mixing the past, present and future tends to ruin the mood of the moment.
The one thing I can't explain is why a work with so many flaws was able to hold my attention. I think EM needs to take another shot at this.
| 
