No More Vietnams by Richard Nixon

This is what is known as "double-dipping" - posting something I wrote for some other purpose. Not Civil War related, but related to my current research (I'm doing a research paper comparing the election of '68 to the one coming up in '08). This is a book review I did for my History Seminar (American History 1945-present) class on No More Vietnams by Richard Nixon. I figure book reviews are always a good thing, right?

I am glad to have rescued yet another book off the dusty shelves of my school library; this one had been stranded there since 1995. And this one was very interesting. I was intrigued by the title, and then when I noticed who authored it I knew I had to read it. No More Vietnams was written by Richard Nixon in 1985 and includes six very telling chapters: the Myths of Vietnam, How the Vietnam War Began, Why and How We Went Into Vietnam, How We Won the War, How We Lost the Peace, and Third World War. The book is the story of Vietnam as Richard Nixon saw it, and thus it is quite biased. But then again, no one ever said it couldn't be... it is his book after all.

Nixon provides many details when writing about the events leading up to, during, and after the Vietnam War. He mentions things the public probably did not know at the time of the fighting, such as the more confidential reasons behind the administration making some of the decisions that it made. The former president then defends the choices he made concerning the war. Though he blames his Democratic predecessors for the way they handled the war and left him with the burden of sorting things out and making tough decisions – such as whether or not to follow the North Vietnamese into Cambodia – Nixon also claims to have great respect for them. He is especially sympathetic towards Lyndon B. Johnson, who suffered a great deal during his presidency when the public began blaming him directly for the deaths of U.S. servicemen. In fact, Nixon believed Johnson died of heartbreak related to the war. According to Nixon, we won the Vietnam War by "winning the peace." However, we later "lost the peace" when Congress cut funding drastically, withdrew our troops from the Indochina Peninsula and refused to take action when the North Vietnamese broke the Paris Peace Accords by invading South Vietnam.

It seems as if the main purpose of writing this book was so that Nixon could explain his actions to the public and revamp his image. Whether that ever actually happened in his lifetime, I do not know. Nixon seemed to have believed he’d handled the war in the best manner possible, that he did what was best for the country instead of what would benefit him most politically. If this was truly the case, I believe that is admirable.

The thing that really struck me while reading was how similar everything is to the current situation. People seem to compare Iraq to Vietnam frequently these days, but I never realized how incredibly similar they are. So many things that Nixon writes seem like a prophecy of what was to come. As I was reading, I kept thinking how it’s too bad that Richard Nixon isn't around anymore, because he would have had some very helpful hints to share with the world concerning terrorism and warfare. Some of his ideas are very reasonable, but everyone acts as if reasonable is a bad thing these days, so I’m not surprised that no one has considered utilizing the ones found in this book.

People who should read No More Vietnams include anyone who wants to know why we were in Vietnam and why the decisions that were made were made, people who like amusing presidents who resigned in disgrace (the category in which I fit), and George W. Bush several years ago.

Shades of Gray by Jessica James

When I first opened Shades of Gray, I must admit I wasn't expecting anything amazing. I haven't read much historical fiction since middle school, and what I have read in recent years has been easier to enjoy because it's easy to make fun of than for its quality (Unholy Fire by Robert J. Mrazek comes to mind). But I wanted to give Jessica James's new novel about the Civil War in Virginia a shot.

In the first chapter, I was introduced to the two main characters: Andrea Evans, a strong-willed and dedicated young lady who spends her days dressed as a boy in order to act as a courier. Unofficially, she spies on Alexander Hunter, the Mosby-esque Confederate cavalry officer.

I expected the plot to take the cliché route, but the more I read on the more exciting and complex it became. I grew attatched to the characters, felt for them and wanted things for them. I am not exaggerating when I say that I became obsessed with Shades of Gray. I stayed up past 3 AM multiple nights in a row (all school nights, too), reading as many chapters as possible. When my friends at school inquired as to why I was a zombie, I was only too happy to share with them the cause. But falling asleep in Spanish class... and calculus... is a very bad thing, and so I forced myself to refrain from reading for a few nights until I could catch up on my sleep. On a Friday night I finally allowed myself to read more and actually finished the book.

This is embarassing for me to admit, as it's something I rarely do - and never have with books - but I cried. I bawled like a baby for two chapters straight. I could not avoid getting caught up in it all. If cliché at that point, I no longer cared nor noticed.

Jessica James has a way with words. Her ability to speak metaphorically is unprecedented. She not only makes it easy to picture the beautiful locations in Virginia, but makes you want to be there. Even if you dislike the plot, I think Shades of Gray is worth reading for the style in which it's written.

Shades of Gray affected me greatly. Not only emotionally, but it made me realize something. I think as historians we (I'm going to include myself in the historian category for these purposes) forget about emotion. Everything is all facts and figures and tactics. Even when we do venture into the realm of personal histories, what we find are just stories to us. It's difficult to focus on how the people felt (unless perhaps they've left a diary or letters behind). I think film and even historical fiction are more important than we generally accept. Not only can they inspire an interest in history that was never there before in some viewers/readers, but I think they can also bring us historians back to what's really important, make us focus on the feelings instead of the numbers, the people instead of the tactics. Don't tell me you didn't cry (or at least want to) when you saw Glory. This kind of thing has a major impact, something I'd forgotten thanks to my arch enemy, Jeff Shaara, who told me once that historical fiction (other than his) is worthless because it's too easy to make up characters and throw them into a story. No research involved, he said. Thus, worthless.

I want to challenge all of you manly historimen who read my blog to read Shades of Gray. Do you have what it takes to read something fictional and involving romance? Any of you who decide to take me up on this challenge will be handsomely rewarded... somehow or another (still need to figure that out). And if you cry and admit it... well that will have to earn you an even greater reward, I guess! Or if any of you happen to be married to someone who isn't quite into the Civil War thing, this would be a very good way to spark their interest.

Go here and order yourself (or your loved one) a copy. Go go go.