Scan barcode
A review by papidoc
The Bully Pulpit: Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, and the Golden Age of Journalism by Doris Kearns Goodwin
5.0
What a marvelous juxtaposition of the intersections and interactions between Teddy Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, and the muckrakers of the period (Ida Tarbell, William Allen White, Lincoln Steffens, and others) who were among our first true investigative journalists. In her usual "make a really hard job look easy" style, Doris Kearns Goodwin has provided us with another insightful, perspective-altering view of that time period.
I found myself being no less impressed with TR's accomplishments, work ethic, and leadership than before (after having read several biographies of him), but a little disappointed in his pride and arrogance. That especially came through as he reconstructed history so that he could believe that Taft's election was entirely due to TR's own machinations. When Taft saw it otherwise, TR engineered a years-long estrangement of the two formerly close friends. And this in the midst of traumatic personal (mostly) troubles experienced by Taft shortly after beginning his presidential term, such as the strokes experienced by his wife, Nellie. Those may be one reason he seemed a bit disengaged from his work, though he himself acknowledged that he was not the kind of energetic, glad-handing extrovert TR had been as President. To his credit, Taft never stopped trying to reconnect with Roosevelt, and to my great appreciation, was eventually successful in doing so. That episode reminded me just a bit of the 14 years estrangement between two other close friends, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, who also eventually reconciled.
Toward the end of the book I began to realize that while I still see Roosevelt as the more accomplished politician, the stronger and more effective leader, and the more exciting of the two men, I think Taft was probably the better man. Both had strong and positive values, but I think Taft was somewhat the better in living consistently in accordance with his values. Roosevelt departed from them once in a while, no doubt justifying it by considering that sometimes the end justifies the means. However, my own feeling is that those are precisely the times when it is most important that a person live up to his or her values, and Taft seems to have been the better in that regard.
I also think, and I believe that Taft himself would agree, that he allowed himself to be pushed into the presidency when he was much better suited to a seat on the Supreme Court, to which he was eventually appointed after serving as POTUS. I am glad that he had that opportunity.
Also, it was fascinating to see the emergence of investigative journalism through the actions of S.S. McClure, McClure's Magazine, and the aforementioned journalists. They not only brought about a new way of acting as journalists, but also began an era of direct intervention of, and interaction with, the politicians of the day, an approach that continues (though not with the same success, I think) to this day.
All in all, this was a fascinating treatment of the men and women of that time period, and I can't recommend it highly enough to anyone with consonant interests. Well done, Dr. Goodwin!
I found myself being no less impressed with TR's accomplishments, work ethic, and leadership than before (after having read several biographies of him), but a little disappointed in his pride and arrogance. That especially came through as he reconstructed history so that he could believe that Taft's election was entirely due to TR's own machinations. When Taft saw it otherwise, TR engineered a years-long estrangement of the two formerly close friends. And this in the midst of traumatic personal (mostly) troubles experienced by Taft shortly after beginning his presidential term, such as the strokes experienced by his wife, Nellie. Those may be one reason he seemed a bit disengaged from his work, though he himself acknowledged that he was not the kind of energetic, glad-handing extrovert TR had been as President. To his credit, Taft never stopped trying to reconnect with Roosevelt, and to my great appreciation, was eventually successful in doing so. That episode reminded me just a bit of the 14 years estrangement between two other close friends, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, who also eventually reconciled.
Toward the end of the book I began to realize that while I still see Roosevelt as the more accomplished politician, the stronger and more effective leader, and the more exciting of the two men, I think Taft was probably the better man. Both had strong and positive values, but I think Taft was somewhat the better in living consistently in accordance with his values. Roosevelt departed from them once in a while, no doubt justifying it by considering that sometimes the end justifies the means. However, my own feeling is that those are precisely the times when it is most important that a person live up to his or her values, and Taft seems to have been the better in that regard.
I also think, and I believe that Taft himself would agree, that he allowed himself to be pushed into the presidency when he was much better suited to a seat on the Supreme Court, to which he was eventually appointed after serving as POTUS. I am glad that he had that opportunity.
Also, it was fascinating to see the emergence of investigative journalism through the actions of S.S. McClure, McClure's Magazine, and the aforementioned journalists. They not only brought about a new way of acting as journalists, but also began an era of direct intervention of, and interaction with, the politicians of the day, an approach that continues (though not with the same success, I think) to this day.
All in all, this was a fascinating treatment of the men and women of that time period, and I can't recommend it highly enough to anyone with consonant interests. Well done, Dr. Goodwin!