I’ve been meaning to ask this question for a while, and the latest “Daily Show” reminded me. Is Shelby Foote’s “The Civil War: A Narrative” worth reading?
The first volume was published in the late 50s, so I wonder whether the writing style and scholarship still hold up today. And is it solid history or gauzy, sepia-toned romanticism?
Any thoughts?
Absolutely, if you have a couple of years.
Foote was perhaps a bit of a romanticist, but he not anything you can’t handle and mainly in the way that builds dramatic tension. Also, while he was a lifelong southerner (mostly Memphis) and he had a grandfather and great-grandfathers who fought for the south, he was very interested in genealogy in general and his mother was from New York City and of Austrian-Jewish ancestry so if for no other reason than that he researched the northern side, so he doesn’t paint the Confederacy as without seam or flaw by any means.
That said- while personally I like this others may not- he really doesn’t moralize much one way or the other. Yes the war was about slavery, yes there were states rights issues, yes there was great inhumanity on both sides, here’s what happened. He was very interested- and it shows- in the effects of that war on the southern identity, but he doesn’t preach.
While ordinarily I take Amazon reviews with a grain of salt, I can’t help noticing that Foote’s 3 volume history has more than 200 reviews in various editions and ALL are 5 and 4 stars. The only negative review is of the new edition featured on The Daily Show, and that’s because the edition itself is apparently shoddy (at least in the opinion of the reviewer, who says he loves the content from having read it before). That’s an amazing record.
I feel it’s one of the best books ever written. His descriptions of how the outcome of the War were dependent on a few hundred folks, acting over the course of hours are gripping.
haven’t read it but I know he is one of the reasons why I love the shit out of Ken Burns’ Civil War series.
One reason Foote’s books are popular is that he devotes an extraordinary amount of space to the battles themselves. The section on Gettysburg was excerpted and published as a separate 250-book, e.g.
Your interest and attention span about accounts of the actual battles themselves will probably determine your appreciation of the whole. If you are not a battle buff, however, I recommend not making the investment.
There is no more detailed account of the war, for one thing. He lists every battle in detail (do you know anything about the New Mexico campaign? Foote covers it).
Foote was a critically acclaimed novelist before starting the book. He knows how to tell a story and manages to make even the trivial details (he lists the casualties in every single battle) fun to read about. He’s not objective – he clearly admires Nathan Bedford Forrest and Abraham Lincoln – but his accounts are (he covers Lincoln’s many political mistakes in the early days of the war).
It takes a long time to read through, obviously, but you won’t regret it.
The book is packaged as a trilogy but it’s also packaged in 9 volumes. I have the trilogy but would actually like to have the 9 volume series strictly because the size of the books is less daunting. I’d also love to have it on Kindle but it’s more expensive than buying the full set because (sneaky bastards) they sell it as 9 rather than 3 volumes.