 Not the MSM you're used to |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Me e-mail
GreyMatter Archives Blogroll < # Homepage ? > |
March 23rd, 2005 Greener Than You Think A Desert Should Be - On the way back from Flagstaff I was amazed at all the greenery in Arizona. According to the chart, Tucson is about 0.56" above normal rainfall for the year, as of March 12th, and reportedly we got some more rain last week. The grass is now growing wild just north of Phoenix and Tucson, where before it was just dirt between the creosote bushes. Its a wonderful sight. But a horrible breath. The creosote bushes smell great, but the trees with the little orange & yellow puffies are playing havoc with Jennifer's allergies. It also looks like we both caught a small cold from Jen's sister over the trip, and right now my ear is plugged like a sink. But at least Spring is pretty. Reviewing Amateurs to Arms by John R. Elting - The cabin trip was very fruitful for clearing off my reading list. I finished not only Blog but also Amateurs, to Arms! A Military History of the War of 1812. Colonel Elting has very harsh words for the leaders and fighters of the War of 1812. His constantly severe treatment of the Dramatis Personae Americanus gives a very jaded impression to the student of American history who was always taught that the War of 1812 was a simple little affair where the English seized our sailors and burned our capital. The differences between his report and the taught record are stark and surprising, yet refreshing and critical. Though his assertions of poor leadership are occasionally offset by begrudging respect for certain individuals (John C. Calhoun, Winfield Scott, and Sylvanus Thayer to name some of the few) his regard for Madison, Monroe, and others jars the perspective uncomfortably. The overview is thorough and coherently written, but it dismisses certain points of history that have been raised in other historical presentations. For example, in the battle of Washington, the History Channel 2-hour show described the storm that ransacked the British forces afterwards as a hurricane and quoted from British accounts of the devastation wrought in their ranks. Elting describes it as "A heavy rain that night", mentioning no effects on the British ranks whatsoever. The treatment of Andrew Jackson is accurate as to the military accounts but is derisive of the man himself as incompetent militarily. Elting focuses on the blunders but does not focus on the positive results of Jackson's actions. If a man is inexperienced a victory on his part, despite capable opposition, calls into question claims of incompetence. Conversely, an inexperienced man who loses can chalk it up to inexperience, even if the opposition was incompetent. Elting seems willing to call an "inexperienced" man incompetent, despite his victories. Though Jackson did have a bit of short-sightedness (apparently a quality in abundance at the time) he was able to use his battlefield positions to defeat his enemies. Likewise the treatment of Madison is dismissive, considering him too aloof and bookish to be an effective leader, though there is plenty of blame to be laid at the feet of a Congress that does not allocate funds for the army it desires. The treatment leaves much to be desired, though its lack of attention to the fourth president is understandable, this being a military history, not a political one. The conclusion is that the war was a "Mexican standoff", by which the US got away with our country intact but shouldn't have expected more than that. His claim that the war "achieved none of the objectives for which America went to war" is difficult to accept. We managed to stop England from taking our sailors, which they had agreed to before the war, and we managed (though through negotiation and slow communications) to recover all the territory we had lost in the course of almost 3 years. That England had other problems to overcome at the close of hostilities and we used the fact to our advantage is not necessarily a detriment. Overall I would recommend this book only after reading other books on the war. His dismissive accounting of certain aspects - and nearly ignoring the war at sea, a general success - leads me to believe this may be a book written to advance the Colonel's perspective, not to advance the general history of the war. Though his accounting of the land battles is thorough, the book is best read as a follow-on to other books, perhaps Henry Adams' The War of 1812 and Theodore Roosevelt's The Naval War of 1812. Unfortunately for me, those books are next. Fortunately for you, those can be first. Unknown Blog - There are days when picking the unknown blog is difficult, and days when it is easy. Today it's easy, because there are several candidates at the Lowly Insect level that can be mentioned. Today's "winner", you could say, is A bit of red in the Big Apple. New Books To Read - My grandfather sent me, while I was away, a copy of Presidential Leadership, which makes an excellent read. I'm through Jefferson, and enjoy it thoroughly, highly recommended. Still working on David Weber's The Short Victorious War. In other news, I submitted my poem Intelligence a few weeks ago to poetry.com. They selected it for inclusion in the Eternal Portraits Series, so I'm going to be published for the first time in over a decade. My previous publishing was of my Cygnus photo on a CD called Eyes to the Stars. The CD was supposed to be followed by a coffee-table book, but the sales of the CD didn't justify the book, so I only got a copy of the CD for free. Poetry.com sent me a notification letter, along with an order form. I can order one or several copies of the poetry volume when it comes out. E-mail me if you're interested in getting one. |
Toys |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This site is copyright 2001-2005 by Matthew Maynard. All rights reserved. All your trademarks, copyrights, insignia, and other distinguishing characteristics are belong to you. Sharks in suits make for good joke material. Don't leave a mess on your way out. Links to external websites are valid at the time of article authoring and may decay as time goes by. But we'll always have Paris. The opinions on this site are those of their author and do not represent anyone else's views. That is, unless and until you agree with them, at which point they become yours as well. Opinions expressed in the comments belong to the comment poster and may be edited for content. Play nice with others, since you want them to play nice with you. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
