Saturday, July 21, 2007

Reading the Man by Elizabeth Brown Pryor

Reading the Man: A Portrait of Robert E. Lee Through his Private Letters by Elizabeth Brown Pryor

I enjoyed this book, with a few caveats. I thought it would have more full length letters in it. Instead each chapter opens with 1-3 letters and the rest of the chapter explains an aspect of Lee's life. Throughout the chapter other letters will be quoted, but only as a few lines. After I got over my disappointment at this not being a large grouping of Lee's letters I did end up liking the chapters on their own merits. A much more complex view of Lee is presented, something between the Lost Cause myth and the attacks that have been in vogue the last few decades. This was needed and Pryor's portrait of Lee is probably the most accurate, and complex, view of Lee we've ever had. For that the book is a must read.

However I also need to give this warning, there are some errors when Pryor talks about the war. After 1st Manassas she comments that the Army of Northern Virginia could have retaken its leader's home at Arlington. And it might have been able to capture Arlington, except it wasn't yet called that and it's leader was not yet Lee. There is mention of a Confederate General Carl Van Dorn, but I have not yet found a Carl Van Dorn, Pryor probably meant Earl Van Dorn. She says that Lee's resignation was part of the reason Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and I've never heard of this being part of Lincoln's reasoning for that. Pryor refers to Harper's Ferry as Lee's supply base during the 1862 Maryland campaign but since that was in Union hands until the campaign was nearly over that is wrong. Also she says that Burnside was relieved because of the battle of Fredericksburg, and while that surely played into Lincoln's thinking Burnside stuck around until after the disastrous Mud March. Basically when Pryor wrote about battle actions I cringed because I did not have enough confidence that she was right after those above mistakes. Luckily the book is mostly about the inner Lee, not the battle Lee.

Despite the battle mistakes I would still recommend the book, but I think the reader should be aware that the battle stuff is not as accurate. Does that throw the rest of the book open for debate? Yes, but I think when dealing with personality issues Pryor is on firmer ground. The huge mass of Lee letters, in the book its claimed the collection (which includes stuff written to Lee and other family members) runs over 10,000 pages, so it can be believed that Pryor is not making a statement with just one or two letters as support, but probably has many others to support her position. I have no problems accepting her interpretations on this front.

Disclaimer: I did not buy this book, it was sent to me for review.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Nick,

Just curious ... why did you include the disclaimer?

Mike

Nick said...

Mike,
I thought you all should know how I got my books in case it seems like books I'm given by publishers tend to give favorable reviews. I don't think I review books I was given any differently than books I spent my own money on, but just to be safe I thought my readers might like to know how I obtained the book (in case I do tend to give a free book a bit easier ride). For the two books I've received free I don't think I've been any tougher or easier in my review but someone else might have a different perspective. Make sense?
--Nick

Anonymous said...

Nick,

Perfect sense.

Mike

Anonymous said...

Nick,
Have you been able to identify Ms. Brown's educational background? How do you justify her the credibility to analyze Lee subjectively? Am curious. She's off base in more areas than battle stats. I say this having read over 100 books on Gen Lee and the entire Mary Custis Lee collection. Marilyn

Anonymous said...

Am reading through certain chapters of the book first...then will read the rest of the chapters. Have read many of the "other available" Lee letters.

I would probably like to read the new Lee "Letters" first without Pryor's interpretations and then see if I agree with some of her conclusions.

I did find the chapter on R. E. Lee's handling of the Washington Parke Custis inheritance (property and slaves) very interesting. The chapter Theory Meets Reality tries to paint Lee as a somewhat typical slave master which I disagree. I think it is so easy today to judge the "slavery" issue but not understand the commercial agricultural culture of the south, especially before and after the invention of the cotton gin. Also, Pryor does not mention the colony history impact on underscoring the importance of states rights protocol. Even today, states are making morale laws (gay marriage) based upon state legislative/court mandates.

Anyway am enjoying reading the few new letters that are available for veiwing. I would like to see some more qualified historians get a chance at reviewing the "Lee" letters. I think the Civil War era was the most challenging era of American history as of to date.

Anonymous said...

interesting comments ref Ms. Pryor's book; I only recently learned of its existence (but I am just a VERY amateur history buff), and have begun reading it also. very interesting. would very much like to correspond with the person who posted March 30, 2008 - and said Ms. Pryor is off base in more than battle state. Brian Cook

Anonymous said...

does anyone know how to contact/ email Ms. Elizabeth Brown Pryor?