Felice Belman, the editor of the new, expanded Forum pages
at the Concord Monitor, emailed three
weeks ago and asked me to review Days of Fire.
This is Peter Baker’s new book on the George W. Bush years. The subtitle is Bush and Cheney in the White House. I said
yes. Reluctantly.
I’m one of those people who tried to forget the Bush years
even as they were happening. This was difficult, as I was the Monitor’s editor throughout his two terms,
and presidential politics is New Hampshire’s official state pastime. A few months
before his second term ended, my brother Robin gave me one of those baseball caps
sporting the legend “1-20-09,” the day Bush was to leave office. I wore the cap – not in public, where my neutrality was vital to my work – but when I walked in the woods.
So, with what I consider the Bush-Cheney nightmare finally
fading, I was not eager to read an 800-page book about their administration.
But Peter Baker has delivered an account that is informative,
entertaining and straight down the middle. Baker has been a top-level political
reporter for 20 years, much of it covering the White House. It is as a reporter, not a historian, that he approached
the story of the Bush administration. His research was prodigious: 400 interviews, memoirs by key White House players, documents public now that were not public
then.
I interviewed Baker by phone the other day, and he described
his intentions for the book. A newspaper reporter gets only a snatch of what
happens on a given day and distills the information into a deadline story that captures the essence and the broad strokes of an event. Only later are the participants willing
to fill in the larger picture. And that was Baker’s aim in Days of Fire: to give readers the more nuanced story of the Bush
presidency – an account unavailable as events were unfolding. He wasn’t out to
make a point or posit a major historical revision.
Peter Baker |
Baker is a companionable writer. His prose is
vivid and moves quickly, and he explains complex issues without dragging the
reader away from the story. After interviewing most of the participants in a meeting
where a big issue was decided, he can – and does – put the reader in the room.
For me, the joy of reading history is to see major
characters come alive. The central figure in Baker’s book is, of course, George
W. Bush himself. Baker's Bush is a three-dimensional character, a flawed
human being but in some ways a sympathetic one. His ego vacillates between
neediness and hubris. Baker delves into his relationship with
his father, his fanatic bicycle riding, his recovery from alcoholism, his maddening
blind spots, his competitiveness and his stubborn streak.
I don’t want to give away too much – or repeat myself –
before the Monitor publishes the review
and interview a week from tomorrow. As I’m sure you can guess, despite my reservations
about a major dose of Bush and Cheney so soon after their White House years, I enjoyed
the assignment.
No comments:
Post a Comment