Robert E. Lee

This book is highly readable and fascinating in its insights. For a short biography, it is packed with information that one would not find in a more encyclopedia-type treatment. Blount's narrative style flows nicely and he includes enough humor to make the book sparkle. In fact there is a section at the end just on Lee's humor. Blount does a good job of explaining Lee's upbringing, marriage and early adult life, and especially his relationships with other people, both in and out of the military. By the time we get to the Lee's leadership in the Civil War, a great deal of his behavior and decision-making becomes clearer. Blount pays appropriate attention to Lee's considerable talents and achievements but also goes into the famous man's shortcomings and personality quirks. The result is a believeable picture of Lee that is, like with all other great people, a mixture of amazing abilities and personal failures. Along the way, Blount gives some fascinating vignettes of other memorable people such as JEB Stuart, US Grant, Stonewall Jackson, Lee's children and especially Lee's father Light Horse Harry Lee. I wish the book had told a bit more about Lee's life after the Civil War but to keep within the length limits of the short biography series, I'm sure that wasn't possible. It does give some interesting information on that five-year period, though. I enthusiastically recommend this book to anyone who is interested in Lee, the Civil War or the psychology of notable people under great historical pressures.

Several generals of the American Civil war are enigmas, to various extents. Thomas J. (Stonewall) Jackson, for instance, is very difficult to read, because he left so little in the way of letters or whatever that tell you anything of what he was thinking. Robert E. Lee was equally close-mouthed about this sort of thing, and amazingly stiff and standoffish with most male acquaintances and friends, to boot. The result is that we know very little of what he thought or felt about a variety of things, and must piece together opinions from various sources.So it was with some trepidation that I approached the Penguin Lives version of Robert E. Lee. These are intended to be very short biographies: sketches rather than anything detailed. In addition to the fact that it's a short book, the series editor took a chance and commissioned Roy Blount Jr. to write the book. Blount is a Southerner (though he lives mostly in the North now) who writes newspaper columns and books, and is generally what's called a humorist. He also appears on the radio. This is (as far as I know) his first venture into real non-fiction (as opposed to funny stuff that's based on reality) and I'll admit I was some what curious and a bit apprehensive as to what he would do with the book. I needn't have worried.Blount is an accomplished writer (obviously) and does a good job of outlining Lee's life and career. He's also a Southerner, and understands the mystic attachment people of the south have for their culture and society, and recreates what things must have been like for Lee in the mid-19th century. The military aspects of Lee's life are dealt with only in outline (as you would expect in a book with ca. 170 pages of text, but they're explained in enough detail that you get the gist of what's happening. There's a fair amount of information on Lee's life, little of it new, but much of interpreted in a fashion different at least in nuance from previous biographers.Unusually, Blount relegates his speculation about Lee, his character, and such things as his sexuality, to an appendix labeled "Speculation." This is very unusual in a biography, and I would encourage other writers to use a similar device. While I didn't agree with every one of Blount's judgments, I could see how he came to the conclusions, anyway. On that note, I enjoyed the book a great deal, and think it valuable, in spite of its small size.

I am not familiar with the author, Roy Blount, from his previous writings, but I believe that he showed himself quite an able biographer with this latest edition of the Penguin Lives series. In some ways, his assignment was the most difficult of characters to study. Robert E. Lee is one of the more enigmatic figures in American history, but it is hard to say why he is not just a footnote instead of a figure of reverence, to some folks. Unlike, say Lincoln or Jefferson, he wrote very little beyond chatty personal letters and so we cannot study his writings and speeches to better understand his character and development (the exception is his often quoted statement of following his state of Virginia if she chooses secession or union. Curiously, those who mostly cite this statement fail to read the clause Lee also inserts of his belief that secession is doubtfully Constitutional. Blount gives the full quote). Unlike Grant and Napoleon, his orders of battle were usually vague and (on its face) uninspired (except when given to superior general such as Jackson, and Stuart, as has been noted in numerous other biographies and histories of the Civil War). Lee is noted for some spectacular victories, but he also can be recalled for equally spectacular failures and it is doubtful that his most famous strategies would have worked over more astute generals rather than McClellan, Burnside, and Hooker. Just imagine his splitting his army against Sherman, or Grant or leaving himself without a line of retreat against these gentlemen? But, Lee's endearment is mostly traceable to the paucity of insight into his character. He is there for everyone to read what they want to in his person. Blount takes this opportunity to speculate into Lee's psyche by considering the influence on him by his parents, one of whom was an American hero, but a neglectful-embarrassing father; the other a virtuous mother, but emotionally-physically dependent on young Robert. Blount is not a psychologist, but as opposed to other biographers with no significant psychological training (see e.g., Doris Kearns Goodwin's bio on Lyndon Johnson), he does not try to insert this form of speculation as fact. The bulk of this thesis is reserved for a section titled, "Speculation." As a person with clinical training, I found his psychological notations perfectly reasonable. And let's face it, those who only see goodness and deity in Lee (see e.g., Jeffrey Shaara's pathetically simplistic "historical" novels) are also just speculating. There is little left that I can see to write about Lee. However, I think the more interesting question for future writing is the psychological, sociological, and anthropological aspects of those who use Lee as the symbol for a "pure" society that, in fact, never existed. To clarify, Blount does not attack Lee, he is simply seeking to understand Lee. The author seems to be an admirer of the general, but not blind with passion.I also recommend Tony Horwitz,

Blount helps us understand the real Lee for a change, not the "marble man" admired and revered by simple Civil War buffs. Those looking for yet another breathless account of the same old stories will be intellectually overmatched by the insightful, sensitive and illuminating portrait Blount presents. A real contribution to understanding Lee, the Civil War, and the mindset which led the nation to and through that disaster.

This is the fourth Penguin Lives title I've read (the other three being Auchincloss on Wilson, Keegan on Churchill, and Johnson on Napoleon), and for pure biography, this one is the best of the four. Other reviewers who criticize the relative superficiality of Blount's analysis need to recognize that the Penguin Lives are not intended to be comprehensive, ground-breaking studies. That just couldn't be done in under 200 pages.No, these books -- essays, almost -- are introductions to, surveys of, key historical figures. The question shouldn't be, Did Blount give us all the answers about Lee? but rather, Has Blount painted a sharp enough portrait that we have a clear idea of who the man was, why he did what he did, and what impact his life had? I think the answer to that latter question is a decisive Yes.Unlike Keegan and Johnson, Blount is not a professional historian. But he's done a fine job with a subject all biographers admit to be a man very difficult to get close to. This fact in itself forms part of Blount's theme, as he explores the roots of Lee's famous reserve and inapproachability. He largely avoids pop psychoanalysis -- when he wades into those waters, he tells us he's doing so -- and his insights seem to make sense.I particularly appreciated the way Blount addressed the issue that defines (many, if not most) modern treatments of Lee: the question of whether he can justly be called a Great Man while having fought, if not explicitly for slavery itself, at least for a nation and a culture in which slavery played a central role. The fact that Blount sees nuances to the discussion, instead of making the absolute, unarguable, definitive statement "Lee = slavery = evil", may cause ideologues, or people who just don't know any better, to reject his reasonings entirely. But that would be their loss because this section, too, is rewarding reading.I said this book is good pure biography. That's because Blount is an excellent writer and storyteller, as well as a fine presenter and interpreter of facts. As a "humorist," (I've always hated that term), he has a keen eye for the ridiculous, both in human behavior and in historians' more labored interpretations.So, no, this isn't a scholarly, definitive, biography that will become the new gold standard in Civil War Studies. But as a highly readable thumbnail portrait of one of the most loved and reviled, admired, misunderstood, and dare I say, greatest, figures in American history, I think it will be hard to beat.