basically OK- sometimes too detailed, sometimes not detailed enough
This little book seeks to defend President Harding, and does a fair-to-middling job of it.
By focusing on Harding's pre-presidential life, Dean paints a reasonably interesting portrait of Harding's personality: genial, a bit pompous, smarter than generally believed. However, Dean's use of detail is uneven. Sometimes he provides an almost tedious level of detail; other times, his discussion is so sketchy that it reads like a few sentences are missing.
In particular, Dean's portrait of Harding's presidency is a little scattershot. By devoting a page here and there to lots of issues, Dean misses the opportunity to focus more on Harding's major achievements (healing the economy, balancing the budget, liberating political prisoners, partially desegregating the federal workforce). To be sure, he mentions all these things- but a more detailed discussion of each issue and a more liberal use of statistics would have sharpened his defense of the Harding Administration. Instead Dean wastes space focusing on the minutiae of railroad strikes and other ephemeral issues.
On the other hand, there are some things I really liked about this book. His discussion of the 1920 Republican convention is mostly excellent. I had always thought that Harding sat passively by while a few bosses nominated him in a smoke-filled room. In fact, Harding's strategy was quite ingenious: he knew that most delegates were committed to three major candidates whose supporters hated each other. So his campaign contacted delegates asking them to consider Harding if their first choice faltered in the early ballots. After the convention appeared deadlocked, these delegates turned to Harding (a choice facilitated by the delegates' lack of desire to pay for an extra day in hotels; the final ballot ended early in the evening). However, Dean's discussion of Harding's vice presidential choice could have used more detail. He writes that Harding preferred Sen. Irvine Lenroot to Calvin Coolidge, and writes: "Before Lenroot could inform Chairman Lodge that he did not want to be nominated, his name had been offered." Does that mean Lenroot declined the nomination? That delegates rejected him? Surely, Dean could have explained a bit more.
Dean's discussion of the general election campaign also contains some surprises. Just as today's smearers accuse Barack Obama of being a secret Muslim, some Democrats accused Harding of having African-American blood. One key difference between now and then: the Internet allows smears to be spread more easily. By contrast in 1920 the mainstream media's refusal to print such rumors may have kept them out of public view.
Dean also has a good discussion of Harding's civil rights record: I was surprised to learn that in addition to hiring African-Americans for federal jobs, he went to Birmingham, Alabama to speak on civil rights, calling for "economic equality between the races" and "equal educational opportunities."
Of course, all of this begs the question: why does Harding have such a bad reputation? Partially because some of his appointees were corrupt (though others were excellent, including future Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes at State). Also, his widow's decision to destroy many of his papers allowed scurrilous rumors to pass without rebuttal.
Warren G. Harding--Not so bad after all?
Interesting factors. John Dean (of Watergate note) authors this biography of Warren G. Harding in The American Presidents series. And he grew up in Marion, Ohio, where Harding lived for many years. And, against all odds, Dean makes Harding seem much less the failure that he has been branded over time. Does the author succeed fully? Each reader will have to judge for himself or herself, but I did come away from this book with a different impression of Harding than the one I brought with me as I sat down to begin reading this volume. One thing to Dean's advantage--access to Harding's papers which were not available to many earlier biographers.
Dean makes his view plain at the outset (Page 1): "Warren G. Harding is best known as America's worst president. A compelling case can be made, however, that to reach such a judgment one must ignore much of the relevant information about Harding and his presidency." As with all books in this series, we begin with a brief introduction to the character's life, in this case starting with his birth in Ohio in 1865. He tried studying law and selling insurance, but only came into his own when he managed to purchase the Marion Star, a daily newspaper. He appears to have been good at managing the paper and serving as a reporter in addition.
He began to be active in Republican politics in Ohio and, down the road, with the help of some political pros, he was elected as a state senator. Shortly thereafter, he became one of Ohio's two Senators in Washington, D. C. He came to national attention with a speech at the 1916 Republican convention. Some even thought of him as a dark horse candidate to get the nomination, but he chose to bide his time. His career in the Senate was not characterized with any major legislation bearing his name (and he often "missed" roll call votes on divisive issues, thus not offending either wing of the Republican Party). He decided to run a low key campaign to be the Presidential nominee of his party, surmising that no single leading candidate could gain enough votes to clinch the nomination. His suspicion turned out to be correct. He received the nomination and won the election.
His presidency, as described by Dean, is an interesting mix of positive steps, such as his effort to undo some of Woodrow Wilson's racist policies, his foreign policy, and even his choices for the Cabinet (most were very fine, although Albert Fall, of course, represented a major exception!), but not a presidency where major accomplishments emerged that caught historians' eyes later on.
One will have to evaluate the extent to which Dean makes Harding appear to be something more than the worst president in American history. I think he has made a case that the reader must confront, however, and that itself is something of an accomplishment.
A must read!!!
I could't wait to read this book. After seeing all the reviews with most being positive and some being highly negative I was intrigued about this book causing so much debate in its reviews here on Amazon. I must say the book did not disappoint me at all! It is a excellent must read book! It made Harding a human being, not some ogre, dummy or crook who never did a good thing as some would have you believe. It showed him in his best moments, in his bad moments, showed his shining achievements and his terrible failures. Harding comes through as a big hearted well-meaning man who learned much from being President and was growing into the job as he went along. The book also shows his shortcomings and his own coming to realize his own limitations and how he tried to compensate for these. While the book leaned more to the positive, it also did not diminish or apologise for his mistakes, shortcomings or bad decisions. However, it was nice to see his achievements, advancements, victories and strengths applauded and explored. What a refreshing breath of fresh air to read about Warren G. Harding in this light and this alone makes this book a must read! If you want to see Warren G. Harding in a more balanced way do read this book!
Unlike many books this one is well-researched. It has tons of footnotes so you can check out the statements, quotes and if they are taken in context by John Dean. Check them I did, and I found no misquotes, misstatements or anything taken out of context. Excellent job by John Dean in this area! I like well-researched books that can back up their claims with documentation. I also like the fact that this author uses the papers of the Warren G. Harding administration in drawing his insights and conclusions. Excellent job in documentation makes this book much more powerful in its presentation.
It was refreshing to read about Warren G. Harding in a positive light. Some would have you believe that nothing good happened under the Harding Administration. This book describes very well the accomplishments that most overlook when Harding is considered. Every President has their failures and accomplishments and this book touches upon both bringing a much more balanced account of Harding and his Presidency than most books in the past have. However, John Dean does play up the the positive side slightly more, but with good reason. So much negative press has been given in the past with regards to this President and his Administration that to dwell upon this would not justify a new book on this topic. By reading this book in combination with others, which are more negative, one gets a much more balanced account of President Harding and his Presidency.
I liked how John Dean also explored the negative claims and clarified them, putting blame where blame is due and through documentation and use of other's first hand knowledge he refuted some of the more outragious claims. His use of Colonel Starling's quotes is one example of documentation that is helpful. I've read Colonel Edmund Starling's book and his being a Secret Service Agent from Woodrow Wilson thru FDR's years is interesting, informative and eye opening in regards to the Presidents he served and protected. John Dean perhaps plays a bit too lighty upon the negative, but in the introduction Dean does state he was concerned at how to best portray the truth of who Harding was, how he was elected and how he operated and performed as President. I feel he accomplished his goal very well with this book.
The flow of the book was done very well also. It was a pleasure to read and I never found myself bored, distracted or the reading tedious. It is a very well written, very well organized, very well researched and a very impressive book. You will come away from this book with a very different view of Warren G. Harding and his Presidency. For me I see him now in a much more balanced light. He made good and bad decisions. He had some of the best and some of the worst Cabinet members. He saved the government lots of money only to have some in his adminstration steal quite a bit. He had his moments of brilliance and his moments of either extreme ignorance or extreme naivete. Warren G. Harding was a very human President who did some very good things and made his share of mistakes. Was he the worst President ever? I don't think so, but I sure do not believe he was anywhere near being a great one either. If you want a much more balanced look at this man who I believe did the best he could do and achieved more than we are led to believe read this book! Five Stars.
Whitewash
I've read every known book about Harding and own most of them. He certainly was an interesting man; bad presidents are often more fun to read about than good ones. I've been through Harding's house in Marion, Ohio, several times, listened to docents there try to beatify him outrageously and visited his and the Duchess's magnificent tomb in Marion. I've even tried to listen to Harding's speeches on the record put out by the Ohio Historical Society, but that was too painful. As H.L. Mencken said, Harding strung words together like wet sponges. If Harding was trying to say something, it was all lost in droning and alliteration.
John Dean, whose other books I admire, just tried too hard, I think, to redeem Mr. Harding with a coat of whitewash. He never should have been president--by experience, by education, by leadership qualities, by common sense. He prefered to play poker and dandle Nan Britton on his knee, perhaps even at the White House. He liked to golf and write mushy letters to another lady friend--letters on U.S. Senate sationery while sitting in the senate, in session. He paid lip service to prohibition and drank alcohol, but only one glass per day, Dean explains. It seems doubtful that Harding ever really understood the real issues. In short, he was a bungler and a hypocrite. Oddly enough, that makes him fascinating, in a way that, say, Jimmy Carter is not.
Fortunately Harding was president at a time when he could do no great immediate harm, although his opposition to the League of Nations may have contributed to the disasters that followed. His biggest fault was probably naivete. He was simply done in by some really bad friends, such as Fall. Forbes, Smith, Daugherty, Means, Denby et al. As Truman is quoted in the introduction to this book: "The buck stops here." Harding, like Nixon, is responsible for the sort of people he attracted and put into government.
Mrs. Harding comes across in Dean's encomium as an attractive and rather self effacing woman in the Dean book. She was older than her husband by several years, and there was nothing attractive about her, physically or intellectually. No wonder Harding slipped out of the house at night to drink with the boys, play poker and whatever. One observer at the time said Mrs. Harding had a voice that would etch glass and called her husband "Warrrn."
The biography by Mr. Dean tries to polish off all the rough spots on Harding's CV, but it just doesn't work. Harding wasn't the worst president we've had, but he wasn't a good one either. The Dean book doesn't change that.
facts, fiction and supposition
There is nothing wrong with giving a broader perspective on Harding, but the documented facts are never going to go away. Anyone who says Harding wasn't responsible for Teapot Dome and all the other corruption scandals that went on during his administration (such as the Veteran's Administration) simply doesn't understand the concept of Chief Executive accountability. While no one has ever said that Harding himself was corrupt, the fact that so much of his inner circle was corrupt says all we need to say about the man. Harding was a simple man who gave a great speech and had an authority about him. He had a cold wife but he was a man of privilege who preoccupied himself with the pleasures always afforded such men: good cigars, women on the side, golf and other activities with his male peers of the day. He left the day to day running of the country to a set of cronies who ultimately proved to be thoroughly rotten. Apologetic Republicans would like to re-write this little stretch of history because it is a cautionary tale of cronyism masquerading as conservatism. The fact that John Dean penned this book makes it all the more interesting, but Harding was no Nixon by any stretch of the imagination. Nixon may have left office in disgrace but I think that he was still one of the most intelligent and innovative presidents of the 20th century, and he was running his own show, not somebody else. Harding was more like George W. Bush, a mouthpiece for a staff full of robber barons.
(31 reviews)
