Scan barcode
buttercupita's review against another edition
3.0
Good overview of the last 50 years of U.S. History (sobering to think that, as an undergraduate, I took U.S. History since 1945, and this is essentially the equivalent.) Having lived through this history, it is fun to be reminded of some of the trends and blood boiling to be reminded of others. As a survey, it was too superficial to be entirely satisfying.
bhgold1711's review
2.0
I like Kevin Kruse. But there are better histories than this which would cover the same period.
adamrshields's review against another edition
4.0
Short Thoughts: This is a good, very readable historical overview of 1974 to 2016. The framing is about the increasing polarization brought about by four fault lines, income inequality, racial division, changing gender roles and changing understanding of LGBT and other issues of sexuality.
Even though the framing is on those fault lines, the main focus is telling the story of of the era to provide context for today. From what I understand this is roughly based on the author's undergrad history course at Princeton. I think there can be disagreement with where the authors start. The fault lines cited certainly didn't start in 1974. Racial and gender issues were definitely earlier. Sexual mores have long been changing. Income inequality did start spiking around that time, but did fuel previous political issues. But 1974 was a reasonable starting place.
I listened to this on audiobook, there is not an audiobook edition on goodreads yet. The narration was generally good, but the narrator kept sort of doing impressions of well known politicians that were close enough to be annoying but not close enough to really be accurate. I would have preferred straight reading of the quotes.
My longer thoughts are on my blog at http://bookwi.se/fault-lines/
Even though the framing is on those fault lines, the main focus is telling the story of of the era to provide context for today. From what I understand this is roughly based on the author's undergrad history course at Princeton. I think there can be disagreement with where the authors start. The fault lines cited certainly didn't start in 1974. Racial and gender issues were definitely earlier. Sexual mores have long been changing. Income inequality did start spiking around that time, but did fuel previous political issues. But 1974 was a reasonable starting place.
I listened to this on audiobook, there is not an audiobook edition on goodreads yet. The narration was generally good, but the narrator kept sort of doing impressions of well known politicians that were close enough to be annoying but not close enough to really be accurate. I would have preferred straight reading of the quotes.
My longer thoughts are on my blog at http://bookwi.se/fault-lines/
jsisco's review against another edition
3.0
Reads more like a broad-based primer for history rather than anything approaching an argument. Impressive in its detail and scope, but not a particularly fascinating view here.
k80uva's review against another edition
3.0
I'm sorry to say I was a little lukewarm on this book. It's a fine overview and it's written clearly, which would make it a good book to teach from, but I was really struck by how closely the first 100 pages resemble Bruce Schulman's The Seventies, and the 1980s and 1990s parts are very similar to Gil Troy's "Morning in America" and "The Age of Clinton," as well as the CNN decade documentaries. It's not plagiarism, exactly, but it doesn't offer a new perspective and it actually felt a little too broad on the fault lines we're dealing with--it's focused on Democrats vs. Republicans, but there are other fault lines (populist vs. centrist, isolationist vs. internationalist, urban vs. rural) that are not really discussed in depth here.