Rating: 
Summary: What Would I Have Done?
Review: I have to enter the realm of reviewer for the 1st time after reading Newt's Gettysburg. Having read volumns before this one, visiting Civil Wars Sites for the past 3 years, William & Newt do this conflict proud in the datailed reproduction of this decisive battle. In fact, will head back to Gettysburg and Antietam for another humbling experience thanks to these 2 great authors.
After the completion of each chapter one can't help but raise the haunting question, "What would I have done?"
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting, Entertaining, but historically flawed
Review: I really wanted to love this book. But in the end it failed, in my opinion, because of a lack of clarity in the authors' conception of just what changes were being made in this alternative history. In an alternative history one can change the specific decisions that people make, but if it changes their essential nature then it stops being an alternative history and becomes a mere fictionalization. In this case the authors created a George Meade and a Robert E. Lee that simply did not exist on those first days of July in 1863. One would be hardpressed to find a real history of those days that describes the Lee of Gettysburg as a dynamic leader in complete control of strategic plan, his forces, and his health. This was particularly apparent to me as I had just finished Stephen Sears' new book on the battle. Sears describes a Lee who is lethargic, who does nothing to correct improperly placed troops, and who does not ensure that his corps commanders are communicating and coordinating the attack on the third day. He describes a Lee who has little condifence in Ewell yet who allows Ewell to twice talk him out of taking action. Meade is similarly misrepresented. Meade's performance at Gettysburg after mere days in command of the Army of the Potomac shows him at his very best. He knows his commanders well enough to know that he can safely delegate to Reynolds the option of selecting Gettysburg at the battleground even though he had previously drawn up plans to make his stand at Pipe Creek. This is different from Lee's being talked out of his decision by Ewell because Meade had complete confidence in Reynolds, who was a proven quantity while Lee had no such confidence in Ewell, who had recently been elevated to corps command and was seeing his first action after losing his leg. Meade also made an excellent decision in placing Hancock in command of the right wing after Howards corps disintegrated even though seniority would have placed Howard in command. Meade did a masterful job of exploiting his inner lines of communication to shift troops around to reinforce weak spots. Yet none of these qualities of Meade come out in the book. Worst of all the book portrays the tactical genius on the Northern side as Dan Sickles who in reality almost lost the battle by creating an unsupported salient in direct contravention of his orders. This political general is made out to be always correct but never listened to. The real Dan Sickles showed little military talent and owed his position to his political connections, not his military acumen. In the book Meade is an ill-tempered man who is overwhelmed by Army command. He exhibits none of the organizational, strategic, or tactical skills that he exhibited in reality. The Meade of the book is less than a caricature, it is a Meade who never existed. It will be interesting to see how US Grant is portrayed in the sequel to come, and what role is planned for the Cassandra of the East, Dan Sickles.
Rating:
Summary: Great First Installment
Review: I was unable to put it down. This work clearly is an improvement over the authors last joint outing, 1945. The charactrers were true to there historical biography's and you can see the experience that William Forstchen has gained in describing Civil War cpmabt throught the Lost Regiment series (another excellent body of work). I am looking forward to the second and third books with enthusiasm (as with a continuation of the Lost Regiment books.
Rating:
Summary: Not again, guys!
Review: I'm sorry to feel obliged to write a 'downside' review of what is actually a well-written and gripping novel by two fairly good authors. But we have to face the fact that the "alternate civil war-the South wins" topic is so overdone that you can fill a library shelf with this genre. Lee wins at Gettysburg? Haven't we all been there, done that, and got the t-shirt? Another book making out the Union to be a pack of villains and heaping hagiography on Bobby Lee? I can see all the negative votes for this review piling up from you guys south of the Mason-Dixon line, but this theme's been chosen already. It has to be said: the alternate civil war genre has been done to death. "Guns of the South," "Stars and Stripes Forever," "A Rebel in Time" or "Alternate Generals," all jump to mind but there have to have been a dozen other less-memorable titles at least. One more thing needs to be said. Forstchen and Gingrich are good writers. I've read many of their books. But let's not forget that they've both started some alternate history series and then let them die, stranding readers ("Down to the Sea" or "1945" ring a bell, anyone?). We can hope that won't happen here and maybe if you go out and buy enough copies of this it won't. Since anything that smacks of the civil war sells like hotcakes, one wonders if that wasn't why the authors chose this topic. All that cynicism and fretting about cliches aside, this is, in the end analysis, a good read, well-crafted and with a good knowledge of the real history of the time. If you just have to read yet another alternate civil war book, it might as well be this one.
Rating: 
Summary: What Might Have Been
Review: In 1853, Robert E. Lee understood that drastic measures were needed to bring the Civil War to a conclusion favorable to the Confederacy. Although the Army of Northern Virginia was blessed with often brilliant generalship, Lee knew that the Union's ability to endlessly churn out soldiers and war materiel meant that even with mediocre leadership the North would eventually grind down the Confederate forces by sheer force of numbers. Lee could win only by destroying the Union's will to fight, and this would not be done by fighting a strategically defensive war strictly on Southern soil. These considerations led to Lee's fateful decision to invade the North. We all know how that venture ended. Lee, in an uncharacteristic tactical lapse, decided to stand and fight against a well-supplied, entrenched Union force that occupied superior defensive ground south of Gettysburg. Under the circumstances it should not have required brilliant Union leadership to successfully repulse Lee's attacks, but Lee's efforts to take Little Round Top on Day 2 came within a hair's breadth of succeeding. Had Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain failed in his now-famous last-ditch defense of the Union left, the outcome of the Battle of Gettysburg might have been very different. 'Gettysburg' takes the "what if" scenario a step farther. What if Lee, instead of making the bullheaded decision to stand and fight at Gettysburg, had withdrawn after the chaos of Day 1 to mount a flank attack designed to draw the Army of the Potomoc to him on ground that gave the rebels all the advantages? Such a strategy seems more consistent with Lee's reputation for audacity and creativity, and co-authors Newt Gingrich and William Fortschen play out the premise in fascinating detail. The authors obviously know their Civil War. The Union and Confederate officers are brought to life and act in accordance with their historical reputations, although Lee, with his sustained air of careworn courtliness comes off as something of a one-note caricature. The picture painted of life in both armies, the weaponry, tactics, the protocol, traditions and habits, are true to life and full of interesting bits of trivia. The political leaders are less well-rendered and seem one-dimensional. One gets little understanding of the interpersonal dynamics of Lincoln's Cabinet. While the politics of the war were not the focus of the book, it would have been enlightening to spend a little more time on this part of the picture. It's interesting to see the new roles that Gingrich and Fortschen built into their story for well-known officers at Gettysburg. Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, the hero of Little Round Top, is found unsuccessfully defending the Union right against as flanking maneuver by Confederate forces, a role he played successfully in the real battle. Gen. Dan Sickles, who impetuously advanced his division at the real battle thus imperiling the entire Union line, revives his reputation here by unsuccesfully pressing Gen. Meade to allow him to advance forward to investigate some mysterious Confederate troop movements. In the book, had Meade only allowed him to go, Sickles would have discovered the Confederate flanking maneuver soon enough to thwart it. I got the book as a gift and initially thought it was an historical novel that followed the actual battle faithfully. While at first I was disapppointed to find that it branched off from true history, I nevertheless quickly became engrossed with the this sharply-written novel and it was interesting enough to finish in just three sessions.
Rating:
Summary: Gettysburg--a Must Read for Managers
Review: It would be a shame if the readership of this masterful book were confined to Civil War buffs and students of military history. For them this book will be of enormous interest, but "Gettysburg" has great value to those who manage at all levels of the corporate world. What sets this book apart from the many others that have crossed over the topography of that great battle is its uncanny ability to get inside the heads of the major and minor characters who fought there. The dialogue comes across as authentic and highly revealing as the principle actors share their convictions and misgivings with the reader. There are dozens of case studies within that tell aspiring and seasoned managers more about so many of the situations faced in business than a dozen issues of the Harvard Business Review. The inner workings of self-doubt, motivation, timing, risk taking, prioritzation and, above all, leadership flow out of each chapter. This is a meticulous exposition of the science and black arts of making things happen. It is a compulsory read for those who manage through people as well as the numbers.
Rating:
Summary: Gripping Alternate History
Review: Living so close to the battlefield you truly get a feel for the terrain and conditions of the area. This book was wonderfully and painstakingly research down to the smallest of landscape details. You are drawn into the actions, running with the soldiers along the narrow roads and through the woods of southern Pennsylvania and Maryland. You feel their exhaustion and excitement, as you are both propelled into the "fiery hell!" of those hot days of July 1863. I'm a huge fan of alternate history and found this to be the greatest I've ever read. You need to take the time to read this book, and by all means add it to your collection.
Rating: 
Summary: Why Gingrich is a subversive right wing hypocrit
Review: New Gingrich is a subversive hypocrit. His works should be sold with an asterisk that reminds people this man has worked his entire life to undermine freddom and liberty in this country. He is a right wing hypocrite that no publisher should publish. He should be exiled to Siberia . We do not need individuals like GIngrich in this country.
Rating:
Summary: Wishful thinking!!
Review: Of course, this brings out the disenchanment and wishful thinking of someone like Gingrich. While I think he is a smart guy, this goes to the heart of who he really is, a longing for Southern supremecy. My guess is that the people who REALLY find adventure and solace in a book like this are probably from the south. Nevertheless, a fantasy fole playing is big business. Hey, maybe they should turn this into a game for Playstation 2.
Rating:
Summary: You can't put it down
Review: Saw the book at our library. First I figured junk, right, cause Newt-baby ... well just forget about that. From page 1 till the end you can't put it down --- vivid, lively American writing. Neither smarmy nor crude, the book is shot through-and-through with the big picture. Yeah, it's about Gettysburg - sort of - but even guessing the books flow and affections, don't think you know what that big picture is till the end. I wonder ... in completing books 2 & 3 ... Gingrich and Forstchen, do they have the same guts as the Union & Rebel men they follow?
| 
