Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. (1917–2007)

The foreward to this slender volume states its premise:
"Every Presidential campaign has its facile and fashionable cliches. The favorite cliche of 1960 is that the two candidates, John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon, are essentially the same sort of men, stamped from the same mold, committed to the same values, dedicated to the same objectives [...] this essay is an attempt to explore these cliches."

You'd be hard pressed to come up with two modern-day presidents that play such different show more roles in the American consciousness than Kennedy and Nixon, so it's an historical object lesson to realize there was a time when they were perceived to be virtually identical and interchangeable. That anyone would feel the need to write an essay forcefully arguing that Kennedy and Nixon have personalities that are poles apart is literally inconceivable today.

From our vantage point in time, some of Schlesinger's observations have uncanny prescience. Regarding Nixon, he writes: "He seems not to understand that he is the only major American politician in our history who came to prominence by techniques which, if generally adopted, would destroy the whole fabric of mutual confidence on which democracy rests." (Watergate anyone?) But his description of Kennedy is full of surprises: " Kennedy himself is a bookish man" (Football on the beach?) "Kennedy's political manner is studiously unemotional, impersonal [...] "he presents himself as he is, giving his critics who cry 'cold' and 'machinelike' the target they desire" (cold? machinelike? -- the man who romped in the Oval Office with his little children and fought passionately for civil rights?)

This essay is a time tunnel into a world that is by turns entirely familiar and utterly foreign. It's a fascinating and fresh view from a period when events that are now seared into the American psyche hadn't yet taken place. Kennedy or Nixon allows you to shuffle off fifty years of memory and step into 1960 as though it is a new day. show less

This is a fascinating work and an example of an audiobook experience that cannot be equaled by the printed word, in my opinion. After an introduction by Caroline Kennedy describing the history of the tapes and how and why she decided to publish them. The basically unedited conversations (more than a half dozen of them) between Jacqueline Kennedy (not yet Onassis) and Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. come across as very intimate, as if you were in the room with them. There are the sounds of ice show more clinking in glasses, Jackie smoking, the kids at play and planes overhead let alone every pause for consideration, intonation and hesitation that only comes across in conversation.

Schlesinger, having served as special assistant and "court historian" to President Kennedy from 1961 to 1963, is hardly a disinterested party, so the converstaion is often one more of mutual recollection than a historian interviewing a subject. It is interesting to watch (listen) to Schlesinger work. He doesn't immediately leap to help recall a fact or complete a sentence, letting Jackie stumble through the halls of her own memory at times, which is itself a service to history. Also, he seems to gently redirect the conversation at times when Jackie seems very willing to put forward very negative opinions about persons (Mrs. Eisenhower, Mrs. Luce, MLK, etc.) or peoples (the French).

There is more insight here about Jackie raising children on the campaign trail, getting the White House guide done and availabe for sale and confronting the possibility of nuclear war as a wife and mother than there is in political insight. Either Jackie succeeded in staying out of the loop of policy deliberations or she just chose to not be forthcoming about such things. She is more divulging about state dinners, such as the personal mannerisms of Kruschev, Nehru and the leaders of Pakistan, Indonesia, and Sudan. show less

I really enjoyed reading the transcripts of these conversations and I'm so glad the interviews were unedited. Started to listen to the CDs but it was faster to read. It was a walk through a time capsule. I had to keep reminding myself that she was only 34 years old and her husband had been killed just four months earlier. She was remarkably composed. I found it so interesting to hear her views on JFK and the political scene and characters of the 1960s and the footnotes were wonderful in show more clarifying the people and situations she was referring to. It was funny in a shocking way to hear her views on male/female relationships and feminism. Mostly I loved the history both the good and the bad .... one item that jumped out was Ike's appointment (Lyman Lemnitzer) as Chairman of Joint Chiefs who approved a classified plan for the US government to commit acts of terrorism against Miami and other US cities and blame those acts on Castro. Thankfully JFK rejected it. JFK said he thought it a disgrace that there were less than 100 people in Washington working on disarmament ... and he was upset there was no proper award for civilian achievement while there were many for military achievements so he created the Medal of Freedom. Also interesting, he had no chief of staff so ideas didn't get filtered and each cabinet head had access to him. Lots of good stuff and makes me wonder how the world might have been different had he finished his term. Depressing to compare it all to political "leaders" of today. show less

I have read various biographies of John F. Kennedy, both for and against, whitewash and mud-raking, but could somehow never bear to have his widow submitted to the same unauthorised coverage. Instead of the usual anecdotes from so-called 'friends', this collection of interviews recorded in 1964 by Arthur Schlesinger is perhaps the closest there is to an actual autobiography of Jacqueline Kennedy, released and edited by her daughter Caroline.

Speaking less than a year after the assassination, show more Jackie is obviously still devastated and filled with bitterness, but her love for her husband really shines through. The personal details are what stand out for me, not the political opinions that Schlesinger is pressing for (Jackie's interview was part of an oral history project to record JFK's term of office for posterity). Why he keeps asking her what she thought of this man, or what she remembers of that event, I'm not sure, because while Jackie is certainly more clued up that she lets on, her standard answer is usually 'Oh, I was in hospital/home sick/don't know'. Yet when she talks about her home life with Jack and the children, she sounds much more thoughtful and animated.

While I appreciate Caroline Kennedy's decision to transcribe her mother's oral history recordings almost verbatim, the print format is hard to follow in places - perhaps listening to the audiobook would be easier. And again, Schlesinger's political questions seem like a wasted opportunity with hindsight. He hardly lets her talk about herself, and his questions about Jack mostly concern his political career. After William Manchester's book, however, and her controversial interview with Theodore White after the assassination, this remains one of the very few honest and expressive accounts that Jackie gave of that time, so every word counts. I was touched by the flashes of genuine love and grief in and amongst the politicians and presidential crises. show less