Max Wallace

Wallace and Halperin present a compelling case that Kurt Cobain was murdered by his not so loving wife, Courtney Love. I tried to read this book cynically since I actually like Courtney Love (for what unfathomable reason, I don’t know.) I also didn’t want to jump unthinkingly onto the conspiracy bandwagon, however fun that might be. Conspiracy theories abound when celebrities die young and most of them are untrue. (Except that Elvis really does run a donut shop in Arkansas. Really.)

I show more started out taking the time to come up with logical explanations for each piece of damning evidence, but by the half way point of the book there were so many “coincidences” to explain that it made more sense to let them fit together sensibly than go on denying the murder. It was getting to the point where I was grasping, “Ok, maybe aliens came down and shuffled the space/time continuum.” A series of increasingly bizarre events would have had to transpire for this to have been a suicide. But if it was a murder, everyone behaved normally and the universe was operating within its usual parameters. In the end, even my last respite, “Courtney is a crazy woman on drugs and had no idea what she was saying,” makes less sense than that she was a crazy woman on drugs and knew exactly what she had just done.

This book is an intense, engrossing read whether you’re interested in either of the Cobains or not. Wallace and Halperin work hard to stay objective, and they discredit much of what they’re told if there isn’t evidence to back it up. A sizable chunk of their information comes from recorded conversations with Courtney Love, who unwittingly forgets to protect herself when she’s desperate for ego stroking. It’s a well balanced, disturbing, and fascinating look at how badly humans can behave when they’re needy and hurting. show less

Sonny Liston? Joe Frazier? George Foreman? Lean Spinks? Which each of these heavyweights who fought with Muhammad Ali gave him his toughest fight? Who was the adversary who was the most persistent and determined? As memorable as these and many other fights of Ali’s career were, the claim of Howard Bingham and Max Wallace is that his most dogged opponent was the government of the United States, a case they make in the new paperback edition of Muhammad Ali’s Greatest Fight: Cassius Clay show more vs. The United States of America (M. Evans: Lanham, MD, 2000).

Bingham and Wallace sketch out a biography of the early life of Ali, which includes his childhood growing up in Louisville, his rising career as a professional boxer, and his membership in the Nation of Islam. But the focal point of their work is his ongoing conflict with the United States government over his status as a resistor to being drafted into the Army, something that occurred simultaneously with the years that should have been the peak of his boxing career.

Ali claimed to be opposed to military service as a conscientious objector due to religious reasons. This claim was vigorously opposed by the government at many levels, which the authors demonstrate included local draft boards, state boxing commissions, local politicians, members of Congress and the FBI. His claim was intrinsically connected with the mood of the country at-large in regard to civil rights and opposition to the war in Vietnam. As the author’s present Ali’s case they also note that for large segments of the population the mood on the events of the 60’s was something that evolved over time. They cite comments from a number of people that could have been assumed to be natural supporters of Ali, i.e. black America at-large; who initially supported the war effort and thought that he was clearly wrong both in resisting military service. These opinions changed, both for Blacks and the country, but only gradually and not in ways that overtly shaped the outcome of Ali’s legal case.

The authors are in Ali’s corner, so-to-speak, holding him up as a leading example of someone resisting the war in the interest of the greater good. They cite sportswriter Jerry Izenberg, who said: "You have to remember that all those kids protesting the war were basically acting out of self-interest. They didn't want to go to Vietnam so they did everything they could to stay out of the Army. They got themselves student deferments, they fled to Canada, very few of them actually took a real stand. Compare that to Ali who put everything he had on the line and was willing to go to jail for what he believed in." (194)

Ali may have said he was willing to go to jail for his cause, and the authors give numerous quotes to support that contention, but at the same time Ali’s legal appeal ran for four years and I think that particular claim rings a bit hollow, given that at any time he could made his point while incarcerated and his appeal progressed through the legal system.

Much like a fight with two opponents slugging out 15 rounds to reach a decision, so did Ali’s legal fight play out. He won his appeal through an action of the Supreme Court, who somewhat reluctantly uncovered the right holes in the government case to decide in his favor. Undaunted and without holding any grudges, after a three-year absence as his legal case was reaching its conclusion, he was able to return to boxing. And three years later Ali regained the world title.

I enjoyed this book and recommend it as a very readable glimpse into the convergence of a colorful personality, one who generated either affection or dislike, with no middle ground, and a fractious time in US history. show less

Howard Bingham’s title, “Muhammad Ali's greatest fight : Cassius Clay vs. the United States of America”, explains the thesis of his book. Ali’s most powerful opponent wasn’t Liston or Frazer or Foreman but the government of the United States. I have to say that this could well be the most enjoyable book I will read this year. Bingham presents the very compelling story of Ali’s fight to follow his own personal morality. Because even a serious student of history cannot know show more everything about an era or topic I was pleased to see that Bingham does an excellent job of explaining to the reader the history of race and boxing in America and, just as importantly, he bookmarks events in Ali’s story with the world events that shape it.

This is not the story as it was reported in the newspapers and on network news. Bingham is a friend of Ali and worked as his photographer for a time so, in addition to details that the media left out, there is some bias. However, as any historian knows, everything written has a bias. I think that the 1960s media was more biased against Ali than Bingham is for him. As American writer Budd Schulberg observed in the early 1970s, if you knew someone’s opinion of Ali, you knew where that person stood on half a dozen other issues. “Never before in this ideological sense had there been a champion of the world. Never before a champion fighting for millions of people of the United States against the government of the United States.”

What I found most interesting was that Ali failed the military aptitude test, twice, the second time under observation by a military appointed psychiatrist who testified that Ali made an honest effort to answer the questions. It is obvious to anyone who has heard or read Ali that he is verbally brilliant. His poetry and his off the cuff eloquence is legendary. That he had such problems with math brings up the question did his school fail their brilliant boxing champion or, as one of his teachers speculated, does he struggle with a learning disability which, in the 1950s would have been a mystery to everyone. When it was apparent that Ali honestly did not meet the standards the Pentagon lowered the minimum score required for induction into the military from 30 to 15. Ali’s score was 16.

My only disappointment with the book is that it is not better documented. That is not the fault of the book, it is meant to be popular, not scholarly, history and is documented as well as I should expect, but is it wrong to hope for more?

Regardless of your opinion on Ali and the draft I think that you will find this book as entertaining as it is enlightening. show less

I grew up watching The Miracle Worker on television. Anne Bancroft plays Annie Sullivan to Patty Duke’s Helen, blind and deaf since babyhood, an uncontrolled child who needs taming and civilizing. One day, Helen understands that Annie’s finger language is a communication. An excited Helen eagerly wants to understand the words for everything. Sullivan has worked a miracle. It is an affecting story. But it is also a story with all that implies.

I realized that I knew very little else about show more Keller–except that she had an Akita named Kamikaze, a gift received while in Japan. I didn’t know anything about her “political crusades.”

After the Miracle will disrupt many misconceptions about Keller.

She read five languages. She attended Radcliffe and received a B.A.–the first blind-deaf person to attend college. Raised in the segregated South, she spoke against racism in America and Apartheid in South Africa. Her sympathies were socialist, strongly anti-fascist. She championed the rights of the poor, the working class, women, and the blind and deaf. Helen was anti-capitalist, but accepted an annuity from Andrew Carnegie. Helen had wanted to marry, but her family sent the man packing; some who knew them thought she had a sexual relationship with Annie. She rejected her family’s Presbyterianism after reading Swendenborg, attracted to the social justice aspect of Jesus’ teachings.

The biography begins with Helen’s early life and development. It traces her political development as she responsed to the changing political scene, including the rise of Hitler, the Russian revolution, Joe McCarthy, and the American presidents.

Annie Sullivan had vision problems all her life. Helen called her Teacher, and gave her credit for all of her success. After Sullivan’s health failed, other caretakers stepped in. Helen was dependent on them to relate conversations through finger language, although Helen could also read lips with her hands.

The most complete biography of Helen is analyzed for bias, downplaying her political alliances. During Helen’s life and after her death, her radical view were dampened. Her work for the American Foundation for the Blind and other groups required an idealized Helen, not a radical socialist.

After the Miracle reveals Helen’s life-long fight for social justice. And it is interesting to see how iconic personages have their public image and heritage shaped by the desires and needs of those who capitalize on them.

I received a free ebook from the publisher through NetGalley. My review is fair and unbiased. show less