Average Customer Review:
 ( 60 customer reviews )
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
72 of 75 found the following review helpful:
 In Noble Pursuit of HistoryJun 01, 2000
By Brian K. Peterson
Barbara Tuchman has a way of viewing history as few can. Instead of falling back on just "telling of a story," Tuchman does what few historians are able to pull off without sounding self-rightious. She gives us a comentary. Kind of like the "color-man" while listening to a sporting event, Tuchman examines the idea of "folly," or the persistent pursuit of a policy by government or those in power that is "contradictory to their own interests." Since a topic like this could take volumes, the author chooses 4 primary historical examples: the Fall of Troy, the breakup of of the Holy See in the 16th century, the British monarchy's vain attempt to keep the American colonies, and America's own arrogant persistence during the Vietnam War. The fault in this book is that this subject matter can be pretty exhausting even with the only 450 page book. The examples used are valid and make sense. The author finds something different within each one that allows us to see the many levels of government folly. However I found the chapters dealing with the six terrible popes to be mind-numbing. Perhaps it's due to the fact that this history is not examined extensively in current day curricula like the American Revolution and Vietnam, but I think this section was tedious and repetitive. Also, within the Vietnam chapters, Ms. Tuchman tends to reveal her adoration towards Kennedy--like many historians of her era--and her disdain of the Johnson and Nixon administrations. This can distort her objective examination of the topic in some areas, but if it is noticed and ignored, the rest of the study is outstanding. Some may read these excerpts and label them as "liberal" but they are ignorant of history. In any event the book is an excellent supplement to studying Machiavellian politics. The governments' "wood-headedness" towards policy that is counter to anything rational (as well as contrary to respected voices of reason) is something that all ordinary members and voters of a democratic society ought to take heed of. The example of Troy is used simply as an example of how Homer and the Greeks had foreseen and probably experienced, the lack of reason when pursuing particular policy. This is usually done because those in power are so consumed by power and what it brings, that their arrogance and ignorance blinds them. Without carrying this review too far into the book's wonderful and biting commentary, I will just say that this book is recommended, but not for those that have no real experience with intellectual historical study. Some areas will be interesting, such as the Vietnam chapters, but otherwise the book would dull the amateur historian. But if you do wish to challenge yourself and your understanding of how power corrupts and destroys after it corrupts, then "March of Folly" will be admired. All politicians should be forced to read this book. Kind of like a supplement instructional manual for their job...paid for by taxpayers. Within 100 years, they might actaully learn something.
89 of 104 found the following review helpful:
Tuchman unloads on the US policy in VietnamNov 27, 2000
By Jay Stevens
In the same way that Pauline Kael used her movie reviews, Barbara Tuchman uses history as an outlet of moral yearning. Every book is a cry of pain and joy for the injustices and beauty of life. Tuchman chooses her subjects carefully to convey a message to her readers, usually a cautionary tale of the abuse of power. "The March of Folly" is her most direct message yet. In it, she describes the folly of government-defined as action against self-interest despite an overwhelming preponderance of evidence to act otherwise-and how it led to several notable disastrous events. Namely, the sack of Troy, the split of the Catholic See, the loss of the American colonies, and the policy of Vietnam. But let's face it. Tuchman wrote this book with the Vietnam chapter in mind. Each chapter simply lays the groundwork for the material on Vietnam. The chapter Trojan Horse provides us the groundwork, the mythic case of folly we are all familiar with, and the lasting image we carry as we consider Vietnam. The Renaissance popes provides us an example of a self-perpetuating and stale system we can remember when thinking of a moribund Congress mindlessly voting appropriations for a war no one wanted. Consequently that same chapter gives us the image of a pope throwing lavish parties for which he hired prostitutes to crawl about on all fours, completely naked, picking up scattered chestnuts with their mouths-which might remind some of our own nation's zeal in its misuse of third-world nations-El Salvador, Iran, Panama, and Vietnam spring to mind-in Cold War play. The chapter on the loss of the American colonies allows readers to take pride in their forefathers' proaction and righteousness in comparison to the slothful and ignorant course corrupt, money-bought English Parliament followed, before comparing U.S. government in the 1950s-60s to those same English aristocrats of the 1770s. This chapter later raises uncomfortable questions about the U.S. anti-nationalistic policy in Vietnam, which worked against self-determination and, consequently, democracy. But by the time she arrives in Vietnam, she has stored up too much information. Tuchman bombards us with so many facts, memos, and bad decisions that we get lost in a labyrinth. Her prose gets bogged down. We forget where we are in the war, every page sounds the same, and it ends up so overwhelming that it's ineffective. It's like she's waited years to write this chapter, and has done too much research and wants to cram it all in a few pages. In the end, I have to agree with other reviewers who say it's not her best work. It is a work of passion. And as such, it's admirable for its passion, because it all rings true. PS - Ignore all that conservative/liberal claptrap. Both sides of the political coin had their hands bloodied in Vietnam. And if you can't learn from your mistakes, you're bound to repeat them.
23 of 24 found the following review helpful:
 An excellent review of military politicsOct 15, 2006
By Chris
Other reviewers have suggested that this is not one of Tuchman's best books. This may not be a fair observation in comparison to "Guns of August" or "The Calamitous 14th Century". Overall I found this book to be a concise and well-written work with the chapters well organized and consistent.
Some reviewers have pointed out that this book may have been intented to viel a criticism of the US war in Vietnam. Whether that is the case or not, it seems evident that referring to the Vietnam war as folly is hardly controversial these days. True, her points may be relevant to the current Iraq war, but I think that the larger point that she is trying to make is that folly applies to many political and military conflicts between nations. If her comments apply to the Iraq war, could they not also apply to Serbia's Balkan wars, or Chechnya, or the UN's disjointed attempts at reining in North Korea or Iran? Her points and concerns raised through these case examples are worth considering in modern times throughout dozens of current conflicts worldwide.
All in all, this is an excellent book. fans of Tuchman or history in general will not be disappointed.
15 of 16 found the following review helpful:
Entertaining history at its bestNov 21, 2004
By C. B Collins Jr.
Barbara Tuchman's The March of Folly certainly is an interesting and informative book. I give this excellent book 5 stars even though there are a few concerns I had on a few of her assertions and a wish for more detail in other areas.
One strength of the book is Tuchman's effort to define "folly" with a strict criteria and then compare events from history to that criteria. Basically she defines "folly" as the pursuit of policy against self-interest in the face of evidence contradicting the wisdom of the policy. Further, the "folly" must be counter-productive and the decision of a group rather than an individual. The "folly" must continue despite dissenting voices and articulated options or alternatives.
The chapters on the Renaissance Popes was very entertaining and decadent. Tuchman takes the reader through the papacy of Sixtus IV (from the powerful della Rovera family)who expanded the college of Cardinals to meet his policitical ends; Innocent VII who indulged his son and promoted the rise of the Borgia and Di Medici families in the papal court; Alexander VI who would have to be considered as the worst pope in history due to his total conversion of his religious office into a secular worldly power; Julius II (another della Rovera) who was a warrior pope and the patron of Michaelangelo; Leo X (a di Medici) who used the papacy for indulgence and gain of his Florentine family; and Clement VII who became the virtual prisoner of Emperor Charles V after the invasion and conquest of Rome.
The story of these 6 popes is a wild tale full of murder, treachery, theft, bribery, sexual depravity, and power politics. In short, the Papacy had become a secular state during this period and Realpolitic was the driving philosophy rather than a church concerned with Christianity. Tuchman indicates that a rising voice of discontent was developing, which erupts with the resistance of Martin Luther in protest against the sale of indulgences. It is on this point that I wish Tuchman had written more. The development of resistance and rebellion against Catholicism needed more explanation and historic development to parallel the decadence and worldly pursuits of the papacy. These six popes seemed insulated to the point that only secular power politics and self aggrandizement were within their range of concerns and actions. Whereas as a group they certainly practiced "folly" in terms of the credibility of the Catholic church, they each pursued rational behaviors if survival in a world of warring states and gain from office are seen as the overiding concerns of these 6 men. The Catholic papacy had drifted away from it's Christian mission and taken on new missions more realistic for a secular state. Thus the "folly" was embedded in organizational drift.
The chapters on the loss of the American colonies by the British better fit Tuchman's thesis on the nature of "folly". In these chapters miscalculations, pride, and minimization of dissenting information and voices certainly led to a break between Britian and the Colonies that was initially desired by neither party.
The chapters on the war in Vietnam certainly document the gradual fall into this crisis over the Presidencies of Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon. Tuchman does a good job of explaining how the French had practiced unfair dominance on their Vietnam colony, setting the stage for rebellion against western domination; how DeGaul pressured the United States to support the French in Vietnam in return for France's participation in NATO; how the United States interpreted interactions in Vietnam through the prism of the Cold War as compared to the Vietnamese who saw the conflict as a war of independence.
After reading all the wonderful examples given by Tuchman; what is the answer as to how to avoid "folly"? Tuchman sees pursuit of power as a force that sets the stage for folly. Power means that the interests of one group is advanced over the interest of another creating a competitive dichotomy of concerns and interests. Tuchman also sees vested interests contrary to the larger principles as a force that initiates "folly". Personal incompetence in persons with power allows mission drift and creates the furtile soil on which others can play for personal gain rather than collective gain. Excessive power frequently leads to disorder and injustice in many cases but a powerful central force that maintains mission goals over personal gain would also seem to be necessary. Conceptual stagnation when mental flexibility is needed also leads to "folly", primarily because adaptive leadership to new and changing conditions is absent. Tuchman gives examples of situations where policy is based on outdated principles and that when contrary information arises, the policy becomes more rigid rather than more flexible. Error is to be expected. Persistence in error is the path to "folly".
10 of 10 found the following review helpful:
Studying History Can Be FrustratingFeb 08, 2003
By David M. Sapadin
Barbara Tuchman was probably getting frustrated by the time she wrote March of Folly. Because anyone who studies history learns early on just how much of human history is, well, folly. In this work, Ms. Tuchman focuses on four graphic examples of it. Sometimes the fabulous human follies actually works out (such as the American Revolution which worked out well enough for us if not for the British!) but most times it doesn't, such as Viet Nam. Nowhere will you find such a clear, relatively brief, yet very accurate and readable history of how the U.S. found itself stuck in that debacle than in this fine work. Many will be surprised how far back our involvement went, and that it wasn't all Lyndon Johnson's fault...although our involvement was brought to its inevitable climax (and failure) under his watch. So if you aren't interested in the other three "follies" Tuchman examines (Troy, The causes of the Protestant Reformation, The "loss" of America by the British) then, as another reviewer has suggested, read it for the Viet Nam part alone. So how many of you think we're headed into a "folly" in Iraq? Hmmm - I see the show of hands is just about even. Which also goes to prove (once again) how easy it is to find folly when you have the luxury of hindsight. Nevertheless, Tuchman implores us to continue to try to learn from the past.
See all 60 customer reviews on Amazon.com
|
based on 60 reviews
