A review by bowienerd_82
Washington's Crossing by David Hackett Fischer
2.0
I was severely unimpressed by this one. I noticed several errors throughout the book including incorrect listed ages and ranks for various figures, which makes me wonder what other mistakes might have been in the book that I didn't catch.
I was also displeased by the style of the book. It was at times pedantic with a slightly condescending air, but chapter conclusions often read like a sophomoric essay in which the author felt the need to hammer home an obvious thesis point. And good god, the conclusion of the book was the worst of all. It felt like Fischer let a high school student do the writing: it reiterated obvious points from the book without adding anything new or of interest.
The scope of the book was also poorly chosen- Fischer's stated goal was to cover the highlights of the crossing of the Delaware and the related battles of Trenton and Princeton, but he did not narrow his focus properly. He tried to cover far too much information for a spotlight book, but didn't have enough substance for a more general history.
I almost gave up on this one because of the flaws, but I wound up grudge reading the whole thing because I was irritated at the time I'd already wasted and wanted to be able to properly skewer it. And yet, I wound up giving it two stars instead of one, largely because I found the appendix somewhat interesting. I don't, however, understand how this possibly could have won the Pulitzer Prize for history(?!?!) or why it has so many positive reviews.
I was also displeased by the style of the book. It was at times pedantic with a slightly condescending air, but chapter conclusions often read like a sophomoric essay in which the author felt the need to hammer home an obvious thesis point. And good god, the conclusion of the book was the worst of all. It felt like Fischer let a high school student do the writing: it reiterated obvious points from the book without adding anything new or of interest.
The scope of the book was also poorly chosen- Fischer's stated goal was to cover the highlights of the crossing of the Delaware and the related battles of Trenton and Princeton, but he did not narrow his focus properly. He tried to cover far too much information for a spotlight book, but didn't have enough substance for a more general history.
I almost gave up on this one because of the flaws, but I wound up grudge reading the whole thing because I was irritated at the time I'd already wasted and wanted to be able to properly skewer it. And yet, I wound up giving it two stars instead of one, largely because I found the appendix somewhat interesting. I don't, however, understand how this possibly could have won the Pulitzer Prize for history(?!?!) or why it has so many positive reviews.