The March of Folly: From Troy to Vietnam

Tuchman's "Folly" surveys four episodes in history - distinct in culture, chronlogy and geography but otherwise united in folly by the ruling leadership. Folly, as sess it, is policy pursued by leaders "contrary to self-interest". The problem for these leaders is that self-interest is often confused with selfishness - short-term benefits taking precedence over the longterm (or even when the benefits are illusory - with each episode displaying just outright stupidity). The Trojans greet Greeks bearing gifts; The renaissance Papacy provokes a protest; the British lose America and America loses Vietnam. In each of Tuchman's episodes, man's leadership not only trails his advances in science and the arts, but is actually inverse in relation - civilization takes a few thousand years to put a man on the moon, but hasn't yet developed a genuine government on Earth. Works like "Folly" could easily fail based on prose (another boring history book!?) or if there are flaws in the overall analysis. But Tuchman excels on both counts. Not as in-depth as "Distant Mirror" (with its encyclopedic survey of the 13th century), "Folly" makes its point with razor-sharp clarity and Tuchman's prose are crisp and inviting. "Folly", for its thinness manages to find common ground in different eras and different forms of self-inflicted harm. Active, if ill-informed policy-making mires America in Vietnam, while the Trojans all but knock down their walls to make way for that gift-horse. On the flip side, British policy in the colonies seems clumsy, indicating that those for or against the colonies were incapable of formulating a cogent policy - the bane of a purely parliamentary system. Most lamentable (also the most entertaining), is the case of the renaissance popes. The Papacy raises an interesting issue, because the thesis requires the policy to issue from governments that choose the wrong course despite their capacity to go the right way - excluding "terminally corrupt regimes" like the Tsars and the KMT. Though the era of its folly (for purposes of the book) only spans the rule 6 popes over about 60 years (Sixtus IV - Clement VII), it's hard to fathom an analysis that allows for that leadership's capacity to lead. Among the myriad failings of each of the renaissance Popes was their habitual stacking of the College of Cardinals. Nepotism wasn't new before the reign of Sixtus, but in raising it to new heights held as an example by his successors, he set the Papacy into a cruel cycle. The stacked College chose successive popes who only were able to stack the College again. Being at once the product of the college of cardinals and also the architect of its new generation, the renaissance popes can do no more than prolong a corrupted system that bestowed upon them the papal tiara. Of the six popes cited, three actively pursue policy - while the remaining can do no more than continually tax christendom (especially the disunited German states), pursue confused allianc

Other reviewers have suggested that this is not one of Tuchman's best books. This may not be a fair observation in comparison to "Guns of August" or "The Calamitous 14th Century". Overall I found this book to be a concise and well-written work with the chapters well organized and consistent. Some reviewers have pointed out that this book may have been intented to viel a criticism of the US war in Vietnam. Whether that is the case or not, it seems evident that referring to the Vietnam war as folly is hardly controversial these days. True, her points may be relevant to the current Iraq war, but I think that the larger point that she is trying to make is that folly applies to many political and military conflicts between nations. If her comments apply to the Iraq war, could they not also apply to Serbia's Balkan wars, or Chechnya, or the UN's disjointed attempts at reining in North Korea or Iran? Her points and concerns raised through these case examples are worth considering in modern times throughout dozens of current conflicts worldwide. All in all, this is an excellent book. fans of Tuchman or history in general will not be disappointed.

Barbara Tuchman's The March of Folly certainly is an interesting and informative book. I give this excellent book 5 stars even though there are a few concerns I had on a few of her assertions and a wish for more detail in other areas. One strength of the book is Tuchman's effort to define "folly" with a strict criteria and then compare events from history to that criteria. Basically she defines "folly" as the pursuit of policy against self-interest in the face of evidence contradicting the wisdom of the policy. Further, the "folly" must be counter-productive and the decision of a group rather than an individual. The "folly" must continue despite dissenting voices and articulated options or alternatives. The chapters on the Renaissance Popes was very entertaining and decadent. Tuchman takes the reader through the papacy of Sixtus IV (from the powerful della Rovera family)who expanded the college of Cardinals to meet his policitical ends; Innocent VII who indulged his son and promoted the rise of the Borgia and Di Medici families in the papal court; Alexander VI who would have to be considered as the worst pope in history due to his total conversion of his religious office into a secular worldly power; Julius II (another della Rovera) who was a warrior pope and the patron of Michaelangelo; Leo X (a di Medici) who used the papacy for indulgence and gain of his Florentine family; and Clement VII who became the virtual prisoner of Emperor Charles V after the invasion and conquest of Rome. The story of these 6 popes is a wild tale full of murder, treachery, theft, bribery, sexual depravity, and power politics. In short, the Papacy had become a secular state during this period and Realpolitic was the driving philosophy rather than a church concerned with Christianity. Tuchman indicates that a rising voice of discontent was developing, which erupts with the resistance of Martin Luther in protest against the sale of indulgences. It is on this point that I wish Tuchman had written more. The development of resistance and rebellion against Catholicism needed more explanation and historic development to parallel the decadence and worldly pursuits of the papacy. These six popes seemed insulated to the point that only secular power politics and self aggrandizement were within their range of concerns and actions. Whereas as a group they certainly practiced "folly" in terms of the credibility of the Catholic church, they each pursued rational behaviors if survival in a world of warring states and gain from office are seen as the overiding concerns of these 6 men. The Catholic papacy had drifted away from it's Christian mission and taken on new missions more realistic for a secular state. Thus the "folly" was embedded in organizational drift. The chapters on the loss of the American colonies by the British better fit Tuchman's thesis on the nature of "folly". In these chapters miscalculations, pride, and minimization of dissenting information and voices certa

Barbara Tuchman was probably getting frustrated by the time she wrote March of Folly. Because anyone who studies history learns early on just how much of human history is, well, folly. In this work, Ms. Tuchman focuses on four graphic examples of it. Sometimes the fabulous human follies actually works out (such as the American Revolution which worked out well enough for us if not for the British!) but most times it doesn't, such as Viet Nam. Nowhere will you find such a clear, relatively brief, yet very accurate and readable history of how the U.S. found itself stuck in that debacle than in this fine work. Many will be surprised how far back our involvement went, and that it wasn't all Lyndon Johnson's fault...although our involvement was brought to its inevitable climax (and failure) under his watch. So if you aren't interested in the other three "follies" Tuchman examines (Troy, The causes of the Protestant Reformation, The "loss" of America by the British) then, as another reviewer has suggested, read it for the Viet Nam part alone. So how many of you think we're headed into a "folly" in Iraq? Hmmm - I see the show of hands is just about even. Which also goes to prove (once again) how easy it is to find folly when you have the luxury of hindsight. Nevertheless, Tuchman implores us to continue to try to learn from the past.

A marvellous book. People looking for a synopsis of the book can get that from the other reviews. I'd like to take exception to A.Bowdoin Van Riper's contention that nothing useful can be gleaned from the book in respect of understanding history. I would have thought that illustrating how folly in its variety of manifestations operates in forming governments' policies is a very useful lesson of history. It is precisely in the manner that Tuchman illustrates how folly - a very human condition - comes into play that lessons for the future can and should be learnt. Her definitions of folly are much more intellingent and pertinent than this reviewer gives credit for.As for the reviewer who dismisses this as 'liberal', well ... what can you say to the wilfully blind that might open their eyes? Nothing.