Lincoln and the Abolitionists

Recently reading a short hagiography of Lincoln, my interest in the topic of slavery in America was piqued. Even a 21st century New Zealander, thousands of miles and more than a century and a half removed from the scene can discern the continued relevance of the world-changing events encompassed in this book. I happened upon it during an unplanned visit to the local library, and was compelled to take it home. Of course I would have to do a lot more reading before I could pass comment on Professor Kaplan's themes and conclusions, but I will say that the book was a difficult introduction to the subject.

Telling a story is vital when presenting history to the general reader. He or she needs to able to follow a narrative, and feel a sense of engagement with the individuals and incidents described. My old English teachers were fond of telling us that a story has a beginning, a middle, and an end; and this is where Professor Kaplan fails his readers. The book is a mess (an infodump, as another reviewer here has put it). We are jerked back and forth in time, whilst incidents and individuals loom up suddenly and just as quickly vanish again, some to come back around later, others to never be seen or heard from again. For example, the three-fifths compromise makes several brief appearances before we are treated to even the most skeletal of explanations, and that wasn't enough to prevent me from having to consult the internet. Elsewhere I found myself reading lengthy quotations from Frederick Douglass without being told anything about him. His use of the plural pronoun at one point made me realise abruptly that he must have been black - cue another internet search. Thank goodness for Google and Wikipedia! I spent half my time reading the book, and the other half online trying to catch up with Kaplan's racing, leaping, diving mind. I started to think that I was reading the wrong book, and I needed a better grasp of American history and politics of the period before tackling it, but upon reflection I realised that it wasn't me, it was Kaplan. He has written a very disorganised, wordy and rather exhausting book. In the acknowledgements he thanks a bunch of people including his editors and a bunch of people who read the manuscript, but I'm compelled to conclude that none of them did their job. The fact that other reviewers have pointed out some glaring factual errors reinforces this impression.

It's a great shame. With good editing, and far more thought about narrative flow, Kaplan might have produced a extremely informative and interesting book on a subject whose legacy affects us all to this very day. Instead he has given us a tedious and tiring read. Even the title turns out to be confusing and not true to the scope of the material. I can only say in its favour that, despite the book's major flaws, I saw it through to the end and actually learned a lot. But Kaplan came close to scaring me back under my rock.