Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

There is much of interest in this book, but it could so much better. The author repeats himself, rambles (almost as if he's trying to fill pages), and re purposes much.

I came away with a much better understanding of the way the civil war wrapped up. I've read much on the civil war, but nothing about the specific concerns expressed here. That Lee led a radical shift in confederate thinking is a new thesis (and one not stated with enough emphasis here).

More distressing, he makes several conclusions that are not supported even by his own information. Example: Jefferson Davis was unable to garner agreement or personal support, he meddled in the prosecution of the war, he was completely out of step with his own generals at the end of the war, he tended to form an opinion and hold it against all evidence to the contrary... yet he was (to paraphrase) better at his post than he is generally credited.

Abraham Lincoln was unable to pull the string in removing General McClellan, yet Lincoln clearly had no one else to put in McClellan's place and very clearly articulated the situation is saying that he couldn't replace the man until a better man was found.

Lincoln knew that McClellan had the confidence of his troops and was a sound administrator. He simply could not effectively prosecute the war. Lincoln couldn't put just anyone in McClellan's place. This position of Lincoln's is reflected in this book by Mrs. Lincoln, but Winik still uses as a mark against Lincoln, apparently to balance the scales for Mr. Davis.

I found several misrepresentations of fact, mostly minor, quite annoying. An example was the the statement that Jefferson wrote the declaration of independence and it was adopted almost unedited. That just isn't true. Jefferson was very bitter over the many edits (see John Adams, McCoullough).

In the final analysis, Mr. Winik makes an important point about the importance of April 1865. His contribution is that revolutions that do not end with a clear winner and a clear loser tend to linger. The problem is that Winik is simply not a strong enough writer to pull this off without competent editing.

I'm betting he rejected editorial help. He probably felt insulted by any interference. Even if he rejected substantial editorial support, he should fire his publisher. The book was not ready for prime time and it reflects poorly on the editor, the writer, and the publisher.

There's not much else I can say other than... I agree. When I first picked up this book, I was like, "Huh? This guy serious?"

A useful read but he ignored important players Like General Thomas who did much more to bring about the end of the war than did Grant and Sherman.

It's always interesting to finish a book and find out what discussions have taken place on Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ about it.

I have no complaints about the editing. The book was immensely enjoyable and I learned a lot about the Civil War that I didn't know before. There were a lot of "extras" in the book, but I never understood why people complain about every word as if it's such an imposition to read. Most of us are reading this for pleasure, aren't we?

I agree with this original post. Overall I enjoyed his take, but his conclusions fly in the face of some pretty well known facts about the shape of the Confederate Army and the morale of the South by that point. There just wasn't the stomach for the kind of insurgency he thinks was possible.

Also, in addition to some typos, I noticed one passage comparing the Confederate soldiers fleeing Petersburg to "dim purgatorial souls" that could only have been plagiarized from William Manchester, who used the same exact phrase in describing the British soldiers awaiting evacuation of Dunkirk, in his biography of Winston Churchill.