Michael Freedland (1934–2018)
Author of Al Jolson
About the Author
Works by Michael Freedland
Tagged
Common Knowledge
- Birthdate
- 1934-12-18
- Date of death
- 2018-10-01
- Gender
- male
- Nationality
- UK
- Birthplace
- London, Middlesex, England, UK
- Place of death
- Aberdeen, South Dakota, USA
- Cause of death
- heart attack
- Places of residence
- Luton, Bedfordshire, England, UK
- Occupations
- biographer
journalist
broadcaster - Relationships
- Freedland, Jonathan (son)
- Organizations
- Luton News
Daily Sketch
Sunday Telegraph
Spectator
Guardian
Observer (show all 8)
Economist
BBC Radio
Members
Reviews
You May Also Like
Statistics
- Works
- 49
- Members
- 397
- Popularity
- #61,078
- Rating
- 3.2
- Reviews
- 5
- ISBNs
- 118
- Languages
- 6
What I know about this period in American history has come piecemeal. I have learned about it from discussions others have had, from occasional references in articles, and the odd documentary. In other words, I know what it was about and why it was something to be feared, but I really don't know the details. I don't have the knowledge to accurately engage in any kind of informed debated about the actions that were taken.
It is a lack I have been meaning to fill for some time and, when I stumbled across this book, I felt it was as good a time as any to get started.
Unfortunately, I still need to fill that void by finding a good book on the subject because what I found here, instead, was a book full of anecdotes and stories that were poorly tied together. And what I found here was a very one-sided approach to the telling of the story. Now, I am not looking for a book that provides apologies for the actions that were taken. However, I am looking for a book that takes an unprejudiced view of the proceedings. I am one who sides with those who say this was a black mark in our times. And yet, I kept reading statements so purple with prose, so jaded in their perceptions, so damned one-sided, that it put in doubt the author's objectivity. It reached the point where that I had to question the veracity of anything that was written.
So there is that to contend with as you read this book. But perhaps the bigger problem (as I've already mentioned) is that the narrative of this book did a poor job of laying out exactly what was happening and how the pieces came together. The book is extensively researched (that is, there are a great number of interviews used to back up the stories that are told), but this research is not used to tell the story. Rather, it is used to tell stories. (Those are, indeed, two different things.) And there is even some question about how those interviews are used. I lost count of the number of times I read something to the effect that a statement made by an interviewee was just a belief they had about a situation. In other words, innuendo and hearsay were reported as hard evidence.
HUAC and McCarthyism represent significant times in American history; it is a period every person should understand. It is only by understanding what occurred that we can hope to keep from repeating those mistakes again. However, no good is done by a book that fails as basic journalism in the pursuit of flashy stories and potential truths.
If you have read other books on McCarthyism, then this might be a good book to fill in some of the missing information. But do not – I repeat do no – make this the first step in your research.… (more)