Scan barcode
cdbarker's review against another edition
5.0
A wonderful read of a lesser know chapter of American History.
I thoroughly enjoyed this work, even when my lack of understanding of how the specifics of a sailing vessel of the 19th century worked. Philbrick is careful to paint a reasonable portrait of a real, if flawed commander, one who would feel somewhat hollow were he fictional. Wonderful moments of historical intersection abound in this engaging work.
I thoroughly enjoyed this work, even when my lack of understanding of how the specifics of a sailing vessel of the 19th century worked. Philbrick is careful to paint a reasonable portrait of a real, if flawed commander, one who would feel somewhat hollow were he fictional. Wonderful moments of historical intersection abound in this engaging work.
misterjay's review against another edition
4.0
Nathaniel Philbrick's "Sea of Glory" is a fascinating look at what should have been a shining jewel in the history of the young United States. Instead, "America's Voyage of Discovery, the U.S. Exploring Expedition, 1838-1842", the subtitle of the book, is a largely forgotten, or unknown, piece of early American history.
Philbrick's narrative focuses on the leader of the expedition, Charles Wilkes, a troubled, emotionally unstable man who drove his crew to accomplish enormous feat after enormous feat but, at the same time, alienated everyone around him. And while the American public cared quite a lot about the feats accomplished - the discovery of Antarctica, the charting of the Fijian islands, the discovery of thousands of species of plants and animals - they cared more about the courts martial and scandals that occupied the decades after the conclusion of the expedition.
By choosing to focus on the leader of the expedition, and his tempestuous relationships with his officers, and the politics of shipboard life under a dictatorship, the book creates an intimate portrait of a man who knows he is in over his head and yet who refuses to either give up or ask for aid. This focus is both the book's strength and its biggest flaw: as a biography of Charles Wilkes, it is very good. As a chronicle of the Ex. Ex. it barely scratches the surface of what is, truly, a lost adventure of the American people.
This is an understandable problem, however. The expedition was so long and accomplished so much that to chronicle the whole would require several volumes. In fact, the published chronicles of the Ex. Ex. by the sailors and scientists who made the journey do occupy several dozens of volumes and Philbrick is exemplary in citing his sources and recommending others for further reading.
Which may be the key to reading this book: Rather than reading this as a complete history, readers would do well to consider this an introductory passage, an Ex. Ex. 101, so to speak, and to follow up with any piqued curiosities via the reading list appended to the back of the book.
All that aside, Philbrick is a talented writer and historian and succeeds in making a lost part of American history accessible, engaging, and fun. The writing is tight and brief without being terse. Quotations and other lengthy, verbose passages are kept to a minimum yet are frequent enough to support the narrative the author has constructed.
Recommended.
Philbrick's narrative focuses on the leader of the expedition, Charles Wilkes, a troubled, emotionally unstable man who drove his crew to accomplish enormous feat after enormous feat but, at the same time, alienated everyone around him. And while the American public cared quite a lot about the feats accomplished - the discovery of Antarctica, the charting of the Fijian islands, the discovery of thousands of species of plants and animals - they cared more about the courts martial and scandals that occupied the decades after the conclusion of the expedition.
By choosing to focus on the leader of the expedition, and his tempestuous relationships with his officers, and the politics of shipboard life under a dictatorship, the book creates an intimate portrait of a man who knows he is in over his head and yet who refuses to either give up or ask for aid. This focus is both the book's strength and its biggest flaw: as a biography of Charles Wilkes, it is very good. As a chronicle of the Ex. Ex. it barely scratches the surface of what is, truly, a lost adventure of the American people.
This is an understandable problem, however. The expedition was so long and accomplished so much that to chronicle the whole would require several volumes. In fact, the published chronicles of the Ex. Ex. by the sailors and scientists who made the journey do occupy several dozens of volumes and Philbrick is exemplary in citing his sources and recommending others for further reading.
Which may be the key to reading this book: Rather than reading this as a complete history, readers would do well to consider this an introductory passage, an Ex. Ex. 101, so to speak, and to follow up with any piqued curiosities via the reading list appended to the back of the book.
All that aside, Philbrick is a talented writer and historian and succeeds in making a lost part of American history accessible, engaging, and fun. The writing is tight and brief without being terse. Quotations and other lengthy, verbose passages are kept to a minimum yet are frequent enough to support the narrative the author has constructed.
Recommended.
dswhite's review against another edition
4.0
I read this book for a book club and was not one that I would have read on my own. It was well written and informative.
mikebarbre's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
informative
inspiring
tense
medium-paced
5.0
xxstefaniereadsxx's review against another edition
informative
slow-paced
3.0
This has probably been my least favorite Nathaniel Philbrick book that I have read thus far, but it was still good. It was well researched and the facts were presented in a way that wasn't boring. This was pretty much classic Nathaniel Philbrick. This book, in particular, was about the attempt to map the Pacific Ocean. I was unaware of these events, so I did learn quite a bit.
mightync's review against another edition
4.0
Another great book by Nathaniel Philbrick, this one about an oft-forgotten expedition to Antarctica, a multitude of islands in the Pacific, and the Pacific Northwest. The reason for its obscurity, and I'm willing to bet you've probably never heard of it either, is revealed here along with all the remarkable discoveries procured during the four years of exploration. The accounts of near-disasters, violent confrontations, dangerous treks, dazzling sights, and internecine turmoil are taken from the journals of the officers, sailors and scientists on board and are manifested brilliantly by Philbrick throughout. You can only shake your head at would could have been, and should have been, a crowning achievement for the Expedition's leader, Charles Wilkes, and a triumphant boon to American prestige, but instead became an overlooked afterthought, a ship lost at sea.
meekorouse's review against another edition
4.0
This book was more about personalities at work than a scientific overview of the Ex Ex; It was interesting reading about the people, their personalities and how they inter-played with the often (deservedly) maligned Lt Wilkes. Wilkes, who led the four year survey team of the Pacific, Antarctic region and the Northwest coast of the US was given more responsibility than he was probably equipped to deal with under a highly stressful situation. It most likely didn't help that he was never given the actual rank that his task needed, and thus never really had the full measure of trust from his entire squadron of ships. The few people he had respect from lost it because of things that he did.. things that probably could have made the expedition more of a success. On a happy note, it was because of the great success of the scientists and sheer volume of specimens involved with the Exploring Expedition that a certain wealthy American's dream of establishing some sort of place or institution (a man named Smithson) became a reality which we call the Smithsonian Institute.. "You gotta have a place for your stuff."
I felt it was a good reminder of the flaws of humanity, the petty nature of people, and a very good example of how we don't always get what we deserve or want and life just isn't fair.. Wilkes felt he deserved so much more and was driven by ego rather than talent. The people with real talent never got the revenge they felt they needed or were justified. I think it would make a great book for psych majors too. ;P
I felt it was a good reminder of the flaws of humanity, the petty nature of people, and a very good example of how we don't always get what we deserve or want and life just isn't fair.. Wilkes felt he deserved so much more and was driven by ego rather than talent. The people with real talent never got the revenge they felt they needed or were justified. I think it would make a great book for psych majors too. ;P
socraticgadfly's review against another edition
4.0
Not bad, but not fantastic. Nice overview of the Exploring Expedition in general, the tensions within it and why they happened, and especially of some of the scientific work, most notably James Dana.
As for telling a story, given the amount of tension that seems to have been there, it perhaps could have been heightened more.
Main failure area overall is that I think Philbrick is too sympathetic to Wilkes. Yes, the Dept of the Navy may have erred by not promoting him in advance, but Wilkes was already both high-strung and a martinet before that.
As for the matter of rank in general? It seems the Navy had lieutenant commander and commander ranks between lieutenant and captain back then, as Philbrick references them once. But, ONLY once. He also makes no mention of the possibility of giving Wilkes a brevet rank. (This is almost, but not quite, enough to cost a second star.)
As for telling a story, given the amount of tension that seems to have been there, it perhaps could have been heightened more.
Main failure area overall is that I think Philbrick is too sympathetic to Wilkes. Yes, the Dept of the Navy may have erred by not promoting him in advance, but Wilkes was already both high-strung and a martinet before that.
As for the matter of rank in general? It seems the Navy had lieutenant commander and commander ranks between lieutenant and captain back then, as Philbrick references them once. But, ONLY once. He also makes no mention of the possibility of giving Wilkes a brevet rank. (This is almost, but not quite, enough to cost a second star.)