If you’re looking for a Civil War history that’s less daunting than Shelby Foote’s. youi might also want to look at James McPherson’s “Battle Cry of Freedom”.
I’d of course appreciate it if anyone clued me in as to which particular bias their book(s) champion. Of course, before I really hunker down and buy a few (if it wasn’t obvious from the get-go [it was], it is now: I’ll need a whole bunch of books), I was planning on doing some research in addition to the recommendations here. Apparently, some strong feelings on this Loewen fellow and I can’t tell you fact one.
But so far: thanks a million. This is really valuable for me as a starting block. When the thread dies down, I’ll let you know which ones seemed the most appropriate.
Exapno Mapcase: Thanks for the clarification and the oh so brief summation of historical biases. I appreciate you gifting me a wide range of possibilities here.
spoke-: Your comments on Andrew Jackson were among the first reminders that I knew squat about American History. I still think we should replace him (MLK!), but, hey, thought you should know.
I’d like to do a personal howdy to all, but my boss is giving me the hairy eyeball. Until soon.
Wow. I disagree. I’ve read two Chernow books,* Titan* and Alexander Hamilton, and really enjoyed them, particularly the AE book.
Don’t Know Much About History By Kenneth C. Davis. Is the book I usually recommend to people asking what you are asking. It’s a very readable overall history of the United States. It’s meant for people who aren’t big time history buffs but want to know more. In my opinion.
Rewriting/embellishing/falsifying history is also a part of history. Reading a history book written in, say, 1912 might not tell you much about what really happened before that, but it may tell you a lot about how things were in 1912…
Another good author to learn about the Civil War from is Bruce Catton. He wrote a three-volume work for the Centennial, and has numerous single volume works covering the war from various perspectives. He has a very interesting way of getting at the story by looking at personalities.
He said he DIDN’T want an overtly political and biased book. :rolleyes:
Thanks for the shout-out Birdmonster.
And I don’t necessarily disagree about Jackson and the $20 bill. I just don’t think Jackson was a moustache-twirling villain who awoke each morning wondering what new evil he could inflict on the poor innocent Indian. History is (much) more complicated than that. For one thing, Jackson didn’t have a moustache.
I haven’t read this book, but I have friends who used Don’t Know Much About History as a starting point. Some of the Amazon reviews suggest a strong liberal bias though, so be careful. (And I say that as a liberal myself.)
It’s really hard to find history written with no bias at all. Everybody has some bias that shows through in their work. The best thing to do, really, is to read two or three different perspectives on the same event(s) and then draw your own conclusions.
Credit where credit’s due.
I’ve actually been leaning towards this one for a variety of reasons. First off, Kkrose came out of the dark cave of lurkerdom to recommend it. Always worth something, methinks. Secondly, you’re right: I’m realizing there is no bias-free history. I’m thinking about trying to offset it with something fairly conservative, but not overtly so. Paul Johnson’s book sounds like a good start. Neither sound as far from center as Zinn, who, while interesting, isn’t what I want to learn about right now. I don’t want to play the outraged liberal at parties. I want to get an overview, find what I feel is the most interesting stuff in our history, and get expertice on those certain eras & movements. There are seriously gaping holes in my knowledge right now. Plus, I want to slay my roommates at Jeopardy. I’m petty like that.