What do you think?
Rate this book
Herbert Hoover: A Public Life
He was one of the extraordinary Americans of this century. Inexhaustibly energetic, a progressive and a humanitarian, he would build a society on the virtues of hard, intelligent work, voluntary cooperation, commonsensical decency, and good neighborliness. Yet for three decades after he left the presidency Herbert Hoover met with opprobrium and derision, and now his name is almost invariably associated with economic depression and inept leadership. But, as historian David Burner argues in this compellingly readable biography, the conventional view of out thirty-first President is distorted and largely unjust.
Hoover's early years were the classic American tradition. Born in Iowa, orphaned by the age of nine, raised by relatives in Oregon, he was in the first graduating class of Stanford University. He spent the next twenty years as a mining engineer and entrepreneur in Australia, China, and England, and quickly became a millionaire. His organizing and supervising of the massive Belgian relief operations of World War I made him an international figure, and he came home to the United States to oversee the wartime production and distribution of food. After the war he led a European relief program that saved millions of lives.
Mr. Burner focuses on Hoover's eight years as Secretary of Commerce during the Harding and Coolidge administrations, when he assiduously promoted American economic development. With his enormous prestige and genuine idealism, he campaigned for a more equal distribution of wealth, conservation of natural resources, the eight-hour day, the elimination of poverty, and other social reforms. When he became President in 1929--the first professional engineer to reach the White House--Hoover's standing was at its zenith, and he urged upon Congress a program that was the most socially adventurous proposed in America before Franklin Roosevelt's Hundred Days in 1933.
But, as Burner makes clear, there were fatal flaws in Hoover that rendered him unable to deal with the crises following the Wall Street crash of 1929. He shows Hoover as a lonely individualist traveling faithfully along on his own uncommunicative course, who understood the importance of instilling public confidence but could not bring himself to employ public relations techniques to manufacture it. He shows Hoover as a private person who shrank from rough political contacts, who believed he could transcend congressional factions and interests and make decisions like a technician. he shows a Hoover who desired progress but would fail to take into account the subtle components of the whole community. Finally, he shows Hoover as a man who foresaw the country's economic collapse, but whose rational and impersonal approach to social problems was bound to fail. As a result, this exceptional man;s reputation essentially rests on the last three years of his beleaguered presidency. Burner's biography should go a long way toward restoring Herbert Hoover to a fairer place in history.
Hoover's early years were the classic American tradition. Born in Iowa, orphaned by the age of nine, raised by relatives in Oregon, he was in the first graduating class of Stanford University. He spent the next twenty years as a mining engineer and entrepreneur in Australia, China, and England, and quickly became a millionaire. His organizing and supervising of the massive Belgian relief operations of World War I made him an international figure, and he came home to the United States to oversee the wartime production and distribution of food. After the war he led a European relief program that saved millions of lives.
Mr. Burner focuses on Hoover's eight years as Secretary of Commerce during the Harding and Coolidge administrations, when he assiduously promoted American economic development. With his enormous prestige and genuine idealism, he campaigned for a more equal distribution of wealth, conservation of natural resources, the eight-hour day, the elimination of poverty, and other social reforms. When he became President in 1929--the first professional engineer to reach the White House--Hoover's standing was at its zenith, and he urged upon Congress a program that was the most socially adventurous proposed in America before Franklin Roosevelt's Hundred Days in 1933.
But, as Burner makes clear, there were fatal flaws in Hoover that rendered him unable to deal with the crises following the Wall Street crash of 1929. He shows Hoover as a lonely individualist traveling faithfully along on his own uncommunicative course, who understood the importance of instilling public confidence but could not bring himself to employ public relations techniques to manufacture it. He shows Hoover as a private person who shrank from rough political contacts, who believed he could transcend congressional factions and interests and make decisions like a technician. he shows a Hoover who desired progress but would fail to take into account the subtle components of the whole community. Finally, he shows Hoover as a man who foresaw the country's economic collapse, but whose rational and impersonal approach to social problems was bound to fail. As a result, this exceptional man;s reputation essentially rests on the last three years of his beleaguered presidency. Burner's biography should go a long way toward restoring Herbert Hoover to a fairer place in history.
433 pages, Hardcover
First published January 12, 1979
1 person is currently reading
118 people want to read
About the author
David Burner
98 books1 followerA specialist in 20th century American history, David Burner taught at the State University of New York. A graduate of Hamilton College, he earned Ph.D. at Columbia University in 1965 and later founded the Brandywine Press.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
August 10, 2020
One of the challenges in writing a biography of Herbert Hoover is coming to terms with the sheer length and scope of his life and achievements. Over the course of his many years Hoover was a mining engineer, an author, a humanitarian, a wartime administrator, a cabinet secretary, and a president of the United States, all during one of the momentous periods in American and world history. Recounting it all poses a formidable challenge for any author; George H. Nash, who was commissioned by the Hoover Library to write a multi-volume biography, took three volumes just to chronicle the first forty-four years of Hoover’s life, leaving it to three other historians to write another three volumes addressing the rest of it.
By this standard David Burner’s achievement in summarizing Hoover’s career within the covers of a single book is a commendable one. Doing so requires him to trade detail for accessibility, yet it also allows him to more easily delineate themes running through the course of Hoover’s life. Burner sees Hoover as a far more activist and progressive figure than is often remembered, one who pursued a number of significant reforms as both Secretary of Commerce and as president. When faced with the successive economic crises of the Great Depression, he moved quickly and aggressively to provide solutions, many of which served as the foundation for the later New Deal. But his response to Depression was ultimately hampered by his commitment to a philosophy of voluntary cooperation that proved inadequate to the magnitude of the crisis, by his poor relations with Congress, and by his technocratic public persona.
That Burner succeeds in making Hoover a sympathetic figure is a testament to the quality of his analysis. Considerable space is devoted to explaining his views, and Hoover’s consistency to them is one of the themes that emerges. Yet ultimately this is a choice that involves some sacrifice, which is reflected in chapters on Hoover’s tenure as Secretary of Commerce and (especially) his post-presidential career that feel rushed and lacking in sufficient detail. Such compromises are forgivable, though, given the result: a book which does a commendable job in summarizing many of the key points in Herbert Hoover’s lengthy resume, one that can be read profitably by anyone seeking to understand him and his impact on American history.
By this standard David Burner’s achievement in summarizing Hoover’s career within the covers of a single book is a commendable one. Doing so requires him to trade detail for accessibility, yet it also allows him to more easily delineate themes running through the course of Hoover’s life. Burner sees Hoover as a far more activist and progressive figure than is often remembered, one who pursued a number of significant reforms as both Secretary of Commerce and as president. When faced with the successive economic crises of the Great Depression, he moved quickly and aggressively to provide solutions, many of which served as the foundation for the later New Deal. But his response to Depression was ultimately hampered by his commitment to a philosophy of voluntary cooperation that proved inadequate to the magnitude of the crisis, by his poor relations with Congress, and by his technocratic public persona.
That Burner succeeds in making Hoover a sympathetic figure is a testament to the quality of his analysis. Considerable space is devoted to explaining his views, and Hoover’s consistency to them is one of the themes that emerges. Yet ultimately this is a choice that involves some sacrifice, which is reflected in chapters on Hoover’s tenure as Secretary of Commerce and (especially) his post-presidential career that feel rushed and lacking in sufficient detail. Such compromises are forgivable, though, given the result: a book which does a commendable job in summarizing many of the key points in Herbert Hoover’s lengthy resume, one that can be read profitably by anyone seeking to understand him and his impact on American history.
January 25, 2016
http://bestpresidentialbios.com/2016/...
“Herbert Hoover: A Public Life” by David Burner was first published in 1979 and is widely recognized as the most authoritative one-volume biography of Hoover’s life. Burner was an expert in 20th century American history and a long-time professor of history at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. Burner died in 2010 at the age of 73.
Two things are quickly evident about Burner’s 341-page biography of Hoover. First, it is obviously the result of careful research (indeed, Burner apparently spent a decade mining every available source prior to writing this book). Second, this book covers Hoover’s public career in a level of detail that seems unlikely to be surpassed by any other single-volume treatment of Hoover’s life.
Burner’s approach to his subject is probably best described as that of a slightly disappointed admirer. While his book is generally well-balanced, the author rarely misses an opportunity to throw in a good word for his Hoover. But seldom does he fail to criticize Hoover when the opportunity arises…and there is no shortage of opportunities.
The biography is at its best when describing Hoover’s early presidency. Here, Burner’s commentary is particularly insightful and and no reader will leave without a deeper appreciation for the era and the challenges Hoover faced entering the White House. Another excellent chapter covers the Great Depression (which, fair or not, proved fatal for Hoover’s legacy)…but this section will prove too lengthy and detailed for many.
Pervading the biography, however, is a dull and lifeless style of writing. At no time does Hoover come “alive” – not even when he is breathlessly circling the globe on behalf of his latest mining project or when he is almost single-handedly coordinating a massive food-relief effort. Instead, the text proves uniformly dry and offers a level of detail not always commensurate with the importance of the topic at hand.
Many readers will be pleased with the depth of discussion of Hoover’s early life, but this is where the lack of vibrancy is most greatly missed. And few will be satisfied with the sparse coverage of Hoover’s post-presidency; this three-decade period receives fewer than twenty pages. Only the lack of coverage of Hoover’s personal life comes as no surprise – the author warns the reader early of the inaccessibility of Hoover’s inner-self.
Overall, David Burner’s “Herbert Hoover: A Public Life” is a biography rich with details of Hoover’s public life, but devoid of any sense of vitality or engagement. The curiously fascinating Hoover I read about elsewhere was nowhere to be found in these pages. And despite suggesting that his book was designed for scholars as well as the general reader, this study of Hoover will appeal primarily to the former and rarely to the latter.
Overall rating: 3¼ stars
“Herbert Hoover: A Public Life” by David Burner was first published in 1979 and is widely recognized as the most authoritative one-volume biography of Hoover’s life. Burner was an expert in 20th century American history and a long-time professor of history at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. Burner died in 2010 at the age of 73.
Two things are quickly evident about Burner’s 341-page biography of Hoover. First, it is obviously the result of careful research (indeed, Burner apparently spent a decade mining every available source prior to writing this book). Second, this book covers Hoover’s public career in a level of detail that seems unlikely to be surpassed by any other single-volume treatment of Hoover’s life.
Burner’s approach to his subject is probably best described as that of a slightly disappointed admirer. While his book is generally well-balanced, the author rarely misses an opportunity to throw in a good word for his Hoover. But seldom does he fail to criticize Hoover when the opportunity arises…and there is no shortage of opportunities.
The biography is at its best when describing Hoover’s early presidency. Here, Burner’s commentary is particularly insightful and and no reader will leave without a deeper appreciation for the era and the challenges Hoover faced entering the White House. Another excellent chapter covers the Great Depression (which, fair or not, proved fatal for Hoover’s legacy)…but this section will prove too lengthy and detailed for many.
Pervading the biography, however, is a dull and lifeless style of writing. At no time does Hoover come “alive” – not even when he is breathlessly circling the globe on behalf of his latest mining project or when he is almost single-handedly coordinating a massive food-relief effort. Instead, the text proves uniformly dry and offers a level of detail not always commensurate with the importance of the topic at hand.
Many readers will be pleased with the depth of discussion of Hoover’s early life, but this is where the lack of vibrancy is most greatly missed. And few will be satisfied with the sparse coverage of Hoover’s post-presidency; this three-decade period receives fewer than twenty pages. Only the lack of coverage of Hoover’s personal life comes as no surprise – the author warns the reader early of the inaccessibility of Hoover’s inner-self.
Overall, David Burner’s “Herbert Hoover: A Public Life” is a biography rich with details of Hoover’s public life, but devoid of any sense of vitality or engagement. The curiously fascinating Hoover I read about elsewhere was nowhere to be found in these pages. And despite suggesting that his book was designed for scholars as well as the general reader, this study of Hoover will appeal primarily to the former and rarely to the latter.
Overall rating: 3¼ stars
January 11, 2019
Herbert Hoover is alive again in David Burner’s thorough biography. Rescued from the pit of Depression, Hoover is revealed to be a wise, charitable and faithful public servant, one of the best qualified for the office of president in US history. His pre-presidential life is covered in great detail. His presidency is dissected in its entirety, without an undue focus on the economic trauma that has come to define him. The chapter on the Great Depression is longer than the others—rightly so—and does get a little burdensome for a reader not wise in the details of economic policy. But it is not so long that it overwhelms the book. The Bonus Army disaster is placed in the context it deserves, but the final chapter covering the last 30 years of Hoover’s life does not do justice to the first nonagenarian president since John Adams. A fitting comparison is made between Hoover and John Quincy Adams, another brilliant diplomat who had a forgettable presidency.
September 15, 2018
This book is terrible. I picked it up because I don't know much about Herbert Hoover. I feel like I still don't know much about him. David Burner wrote this book from the perspective of Hoover's politics, financial ideas, and mining. There was very little personal antidotes about Herbert. He announced that Herbert moved his wife Lou and his newborn son to London. The NEXT time we see little Jr, he's entering Stanford.
It was very easy for me to drift off as I got bogged down in literal chapters devoted to politics and economics. I still don't understand what was going on. I know that the depression really hurt Hoover politically, but there was so little emotional connection.
Hoover died in a paragraph! A paragraph. Seriously, chapters devoted to anti-trust laws, and a paragraph to the man dying. This was a book for someone who is going to write a paper, not someone who wants to learn about an ex-president.
It was very easy for me to drift off as I got bogged down in literal chapters devoted to politics and economics. I still don't understand what was going on. I know that the depression really hurt Hoover politically, but there was so little emotional connection.
Hoover died in a paragraph! A paragraph. Seriously, chapters devoted to anti-trust laws, and a paragraph to the man dying. This was a book for someone who is going to write a paper, not someone who wants to learn about an ex-president.
January 17, 2016
Herbert Hoover: A Public Life by David Burner
4 Stars
I have to admit, prior to reading Burner's work I completely bought into the popular perception of a cold, wealthy, uncompassionate, and incompetent administrator. Burner approaches this work with a great deal of objectivity and provides very good analysis of Hoover's background to examine the administration that most people associate with causing the "Great Depression".
Burner drills down to two salient aspects of Hoover to explain his reaction to circumstances - his Quaker upbringing and his education and career as an engineer. In some instances that background benefited him. Hoover went from a poor orphan to a successful international businessman, amassing great wealth. Eventually, he felt he had "made enough money" and left the private sector. His first foray into the public sector was managing the humanitarian relief food relief efforts for Woodrow Wilson in Belgium after Germany invaded at the onset of WWI. He was so successful in negotiating with both allied and belligerent countries, attracting adequate funding, and managing the delivery of food that England offered him a job if he would become a British citizen. Wilson then tapped into him to manage the U.S. Food Administration during WWI. Hoover believed food would win the war and reverted to his "benevolent dictator" theory employed during the Belgium food relief effort in order to ration food at home in order to ensure adequate distribution to soldiers overseas fighting the war. He performed so well under Wilson that the Democrats approached him about running on their platform for president. Hoover actually considered it prior to joining the Harding administration.
Unfortunately, it was in the presidency chapters where Burner falls short. After doing such a superb job of analyzing Hoover's personality and attributing those to his successes and how they influenced his decision making process he completely ignored the glaring question of why Hoover didn't not see the economic crisis as a war of sorts and take more deliberate and bold action. It is a fair argument that while the US had experienced numerous recessions before this crisis was unique to our history. Burner successfully argues for a more compassionate and competent man than popular perception suggests. It is simply sad that he came to understand in his experience during WWI that at time a more aggressive stance from the government is needed and yet missed it in the one area that mattered, which stained his otherwise illustrious career. The closest Burner gets to an explanation is pointing to Hoover's unmitigated belief that the philanthropic community would step up and execute better than the government. I can see why he would hold to that theory. It served him well in Belgium. Government support came into effect only in the latter days of that effort. The vast majority of his success there was a result of the altruistic nature of foundations and wealthy individuals. It simply didn't repeat itself when it counted in the U.S.
4 Stars
I have to admit, prior to reading Burner's work I completely bought into the popular perception of a cold, wealthy, uncompassionate, and incompetent administrator. Burner approaches this work with a great deal of objectivity and provides very good analysis of Hoover's background to examine the administration that most people associate with causing the "Great Depression".
Burner drills down to two salient aspects of Hoover to explain his reaction to circumstances - his Quaker upbringing and his education and career as an engineer. In some instances that background benefited him. Hoover went from a poor orphan to a successful international businessman, amassing great wealth. Eventually, he felt he had "made enough money" and left the private sector. His first foray into the public sector was managing the humanitarian relief food relief efforts for Woodrow Wilson in Belgium after Germany invaded at the onset of WWI. He was so successful in negotiating with both allied and belligerent countries, attracting adequate funding, and managing the delivery of food that England offered him a job if he would become a British citizen. Wilson then tapped into him to manage the U.S. Food Administration during WWI. Hoover believed food would win the war and reverted to his "benevolent dictator" theory employed during the Belgium food relief effort in order to ration food at home in order to ensure adequate distribution to soldiers overseas fighting the war. He performed so well under Wilson that the Democrats approached him about running on their platform for president. Hoover actually considered it prior to joining the Harding administration.
Unfortunately, it was in the presidency chapters where Burner falls short. After doing such a superb job of analyzing Hoover's personality and attributing those to his successes and how they influenced his decision making process he completely ignored the glaring question of why Hoover didn't not see the economic crisis as a war of sorts and take more deliberate and bold action. It is a fair argument that while the US had experienced numerous recessions before this crisis was unique to our history. Burner successfully argues for a more compassionate and competent man than popular perception suggests. It is simply sad that he came to understand in his experience during WWI that at time a more aggressive stance from the government is needed and yet missed it in the one area that mattered, which stained his otherwise illustrious career. The closest Burner gets to an explanation is pointing to Hoover's unmitigated belief that the philanthropic community would step up and execute better than the government. I can see why he would hold to that theory. It served him well in Belgium. Government support came into effect only in the latter days of that effort. The vast majority of his success there was a result of the altruistic nature of foundations and wealthy individuals. It simply didn't repeat itself when it counted in the U.S.
March 8, 2020
The Great depression of the 1930’s has sometimes been coined “Hoover’s Depression.” Herbert Hoover, 31st President of the United States had a background that belied this title. He was only the second president to be raised Quaker (Richard Nixon being the other) as well as an orphan (Andrew Jackson being the other). Hoover’s adoptive aunt and uncle transported him from Iowa to live in their home in Oregon when he was 11 years of age. Hoover remained in Oregon until attending Stanford University as a member of its inaugural class of 1891. He graduated in Geology, becoming the first president to work as an engineer (Jimmy Carter being the second), and was a self-made millionaire doing mining on five continents. Prior to being elected president, Hoover adroitly managed food relief for Belgium during World War I, and subsequently helped to prevent post-war famine in Europe. These efforts showcased his skills as a manager utilizing Quaker essentials such as volunteerism and community associations to address problems. Subsequent to Hoover’s relief efforts, Hoover worked in the Coolidge administration as head of the Department of Commerce. It was in this role that he championed the building of a gigantic dam on the Colorado River that bore his name when completed in 1936. Hoover was nominated as the Republican candidate for President in 1928. Defeating his Democratic opponent, Al Smith (Roman Catholic from New York), Hoover hoped to champion progressive issues, perhaps not unlike Woodrow Wilson or Teddy Roosevelt. However the “Great Crash” of 1929 soon ended those hopes. Biographer David Burner challenges the idea that Hoover “caused” the depression, noting that he had been providing economic warnings and that he attempted to change the course of reckless Federal Reserve board policies. However Burner also notes the conundrum of Hoover’s “curious mix of boldness and hesitation” as he attempted to deal with the aftermath of the crash. Where was the decisive Herbert Hoover who had successfully managed post-war European relief? The author postulates that the Quaker ideals of voluntary efforts and quiet fortitude were not what the nation needed – ideals that Hoover’s famous successor, FDR, would soon augment or reverse. Hoover and many Republicans wrongly believed that “posterity was just around the corner” (quote by Vice President Charles Curtis). It would take a new administration and a second world war before Americans realized that hope. Lastly, I applaud David Burner’s fair analysis and excellent research in this work. I would have rated the biography 5 stars if the author had not got bogged down in minutia to the point that it often made for tedious reading.
May 25, 2011
Probably a majority of people associate and fault Hoover with the Great Depression. Burner's biography dispelled most of my notions of that kind. Harding's disregard of big business ethics and Coolidge's fear of regulation allowed the financial sector to blossom. Silent Cal assumed that if unimpeded, people would do good. He was wrong. Many of FDR's New Deal programs were extentions of Hoover's attempts to deal with the depression. Hoover's failure was to not realize that philanthropy would not solve the crisis. The greedy rich really didn't care about the state of the nation anymore. Hoover begged Ford to not take his money out the banks but Ford said screw you. Thousands of banks failed quickly and the country despaired. After being vilified in the 1932 elections (rotten eggs thrown at him and worse) Hoover became a bit bitter. I like his response to his doctor's limiting him to one martini a day: He bought a much larger glass.
December 17, 2021
He was a self-made millionaire before he was 40. He entered public life almost casually — establishing a program to keep Belgium fed during WWI. He becomes famous because he was good at organizing a volunteer program and then joined the government. Before 1920, people did not even know if he was a Republican or a Democrat.
By the end of 1933, Hoover was the face of incompetent, heartless Republicanism.
This is one heck of a life — it ought to be fascinating. And, yet, it, somehow, just isn’t. Part of the problem is Hoover did not leave letters or diaries or witnesses that gave any sense of the personal man. Hoover is one of those guys who just did what he did and didn’t explain and didn’t complain. Before 1928, this was admirable and quite extraordinary. After the Depression started — it was a disaster.
The biographer, left with archives full of mining reports and state papers and Hoover’s badly written books, ends up with something that lists out the accomplishments and failures and nothing much else for the casual reader. Who was Hoover? The biographical data available can only give you the public data. And that, alas is dry.
There is rich material here. It will take a novelist to make something of it.
By the end of 1933, Hoover was the face of incompetent, heartless Republicanism.
This is one heck of a life — it ought to be fascinating. And, yet, it, somehow, just isn’t. Part of the problem is Hoover did not leave letters or diaries or witnesses that gave any sense of the personal man. Hoover is one of those guys who just did what he did and didn’t explain and didn’t complain. Before 1928, this was admirable and quite extraordinary. After the Depression started — it was a disaster.
The biographer, left with archives full of mining reports and state papers and Hoover’s badly written books, ends up with something that lists out the accomplishments and failures and nothing much else for the casual reader. Who was Hoover? The biographical data available can only give you the public data. And that, alas is dry.
There is rich material here. It will take a novelist to make something of it.
February 6, 2016
The first engineer president. At an early age he lost both parents. He is the only president from Iowa. After the death of his parents he was sent to California where he lived with relatives and was in Stanford University's first class. As the author notes his rise after college was remarkable. He managed to obtain a job with a mining company because he could type (Carly Fiorina?). He swiftly became the assistant manager of a mine. He then was offered an engineering opportunity in Australia due to the gold rush. He went and became a great success and soon was a partner in a major mining company, after this success he went to China where he happened to be at the time of the Boxer Rebellion. He helped organize the defense of Peking. As a result of his mining activities he became a millionaire. He then transferred his international mining activities to London. He was there at the start of WW I and helped aid stranded travelers.
This led to his new career. He was asked to organize food relief for Belgium. He did this brilliantly according to the author and had to balance the competing interests of Germany, England, the USA and of course Belgium. His success in this led to his appointment by Woodrow Wilson to be Food Dictator in the USA after America entered the War in 1917. Again, he was brilliant.
In 1920 according to the author Hoover was wooed by both Democrats and Republicans.
Even though his progressive record made him almost too progressive for the Republicans he ended up choosing that Party. Harding rewarded him by making him Secretary of Commerce a post he held from 1921-1928. Again, he was a great success. Perhaps, his crowning achievement was organizing flood relief in 1927 which made him the overwhelming favorite for the Republican nomination in 1928 which he easily won. He beat Al Smith in 1928 in a landslide becoming the first Republican since the Civil War to win four southern states. The race was marred by the anti-Catholic slander that many but not Hoover mounted against Smith.
Entering the presidency in 1929, Hoover had perhaps more credentials than any other president before him. In his first year he started a progressive program that seemed to be like Theodore Roosevet. He did internal improvements, civil rights, programs for Indians, the Parks, appointed a Jew to the Supreme Court, etc. but disaster struck in the form of the 1929 Stock Market Crash
The author seeks to show Hoover started many Depression programs that were later imitated by FDR. Nonetheless, he failed. The author suggests Hoover had the right ideas. One problem was Hoover believed based on the history of recessions the downturn would be brief. "Prosperity would be right around the corner." It didn't happen. Also, when Hoover decided government intervention was necessary he was hampered by a Congress he could not control. Hoover could not stand criticism. One mistake he did make was the 1930 Smoot-Hawley Tariff which raised tariffs to their highest level in history. Other nations retaliated hurting world trade. The second mistake was raising taxes in 1932 in order to balance the budget. FDR did the same thing in 1937. Perhaps, this ultimate technocrat could have solved the Great Depression if he had been given four more years. However, any chance he had for that disappeared when government troops attacked the Bonus Army and burned their tent city. One reporter said the veterans should have had a sign saying WE ARE BELGIANS. As FDR said the attack by MacArthur on the Bonus Army has put me in the White House. In the 1932 campaign Hoover was not helped by his inability to campaign effectively and convince the public he could handle the crisis. He did receive some satisfaction in seeing many of ideas adopted in the New Deal.
When WW II broke out he was frustrated that FDR did not use him. After FDR's death Truman did appoint him Food Czar in 1946. A role he once again filled ably. In 1947 Truman renamed the Boulder Dam the Hoover Dam.
In conclusion, the author makes a convincing case that Hoover had the intellect and the background to handle the Great Depression. But in this crucial test Hoover according to the author failed because he was unable to utilize the Bully Pulpit like TR or his successor FDR. Hoover was unable to inspire the public even though many of his programs ended up in the New Deal. Hoover was not responsible for the Great Depression but the author makes a strong case that it happened on his watch and he failed to find a way out despite his great technical gifts. Like a similarly gifted President, John Quincey Adams, Hoover left the White House an embittered man and is considered a failed president.
This led to his new career. He was asked to organize food relief for Belgium. He did this brilliantly according to the author and had to balance the competing interests of Germany, England, the USA and of course Belgium. His success in this led to his appointment by Woodrow Wilson to be Food Dictator in the USA after America entered the War in 1917. Again, he was brilliant.
In 1920 according to the author Hoover was wooed by both Democrats and Republicans.
Even though his progressive record made him almost too progressive for the Republicans he ended up choosing that Party. Harding rewarded him by making him Secretary of Commerce a post he held from 1921-1928. Again, he was a great success. Perhaps, his crowning achievement was organizing flood relief in 1927 which made him the overwhelming favorite for the Republican nomination in 1928 which he easily won. He beat Al Smith in 1928 in a landslide becoming the first Republican since the Civil War to win four southern states. The race was marred by the anti-Catholic slander that many but not Hoover mounted against Smith.
Entering the presidency in 1929, Hoover had perhaps more credentials than any other president before him. In his first year he started a progressive program that seemed to be like Theodore Roosevet. He did internal improvements, civil rights, programs for Indians, the Parks, appointed a Jew to the Supreme Court, etc. but disaster struck in the form of the 1929 Stock Market Crash
The author seeks to show Hoover started many Depression programs that were later imitated by FDR. Nonetheless, he failed. The author suggests Hoover had the right ideas. One problem was Hoover believed based on the history of recessions the downturn would be brief. "Prosperity would be right around the corner." It didn't happen. Also, when Hoover decided government intervention was necessary he was hampered by a Congress he could not control. Hoover could not stand criticism. One mistake he did make was the 1930 Smoot-Hawley Tariff which raised tariffs to their highest level in history. Other nations retaliated hurting world trade. The second mistake was raising taxes in 1932 in order to balance the budget. FDR did the same thing in 1937. Perhaps, this ultimate technocrat could have solved the Great Depression if he had been given four more years. However, any chance he had for that disappeared when government troops attacked the Bonus Army and burned their tent city. One reporter said the veterans should have had a sign saying WE ARE BELGIANS. As FDR said the attack by MacArthur on the Bonus Army has put me in the White House. In the 1932 campaign Hoover was not helped by his inability to campaign effectively and convince the public he could handle the crisis. He did receive some satisfaction in seeing many of ideas adopted in the New Deal.
When WW II broke out he was frustrated that FDR did not use him. After FDR's death Truman did appoint him Food Czar in 1946. A role he once again filled ably. In 1947 Truman renamed the Boulder Dam the Hoover Dam.
In conclusion, the author makes a convincing case that Hoover had the intellect and the background to handle the Great Depression. But in this crucial test Hoover according to the author failed because he was unable to utilize the Bully Pulpit like TR or his successor FDR. Hoover was unable to inspire the public even though many of his programs ended up in the New Deal. Hoover was not responsible for the Great Depression but the author makes a strong case that it happened on his watch and he failed to find a way out despite his great technical gifts. Like a similarly gifted President, John Quincey Adams, Hoover left the White House an embittered man and is considered a failed president.
May 25, 2017
Having read a few books now that feature (or focus on) Hoover, I'm amazed at how little consensus there is on not only his administration but his personality. Some writers paint Hoover as a misguided interim President who had good intentions, but who was so self-absorbed and assured of his own intelligence that his fall from grace feels like justice. Others look at Hoover as a true technocrat among politicians, ignorant of political realities because he was so focused on creating solutions for the World's problems using his exceptional intellect and real-world experience (an uncommon trait among Presidents in the 20th century). Neither narrative feels complete, and so, not surprisingly, the truth probable lies somewhere in the middle.
That said, Burner definitely skews to the latter interpretation. He portrays Hoover as a renaissance man, born to humble beginnings, but extraordinarily intelligent and successful owing to his work ethic and an inherent belief in doing good things for his fellow man (often attributed to his Quaker upbringing). He highlights Hoover's work reconstructing Europe's waterways after WWI, praising his seemingly solitary effort. Meanwhile, the two biographies I've read on Wilson, the President at the time, barely mention Hoover. Nor does MacMillan's book, Paris, 1919, on the peace process at Versailles, though Burner talks about Hoover as being an important part of the American delegation. How is it that Hoover could have slipped from entirely from those three otherwise comprehensive (or seemingly comprehensive) books?
There are lots of other examples that I won't get into here, but the point is that this book represents one extreme in a wide-ranging continuum of opinions on Hoover. My own opinion is that Hoover was a smart man, with a lot of good ideas and intentions, but without the humility necessary to recognize why sometimes good ideas aren't enough. Hoover seems like a perfect example of a self-assured technocrat who can prove his ideas mathematically and simply cannot understand why everyone either can't understand the formula, or won't just take his word for it.
That said, Burner definitely skews to the latter interpretation. He portrays Hoover as a renaissance man, born to humble beginnings, but extraordinarily intelligent and successful owing to his work ethic and an inherent belief in doing good things for his fellow man (often attributed to his Quaker upbringing). He highlights Hoover's work reconstructing Europe's waterways after WWI, praising his seemingly solitary effort. Meanwhile, the two biographies I've read on Wilson, the President at the time, barely mention Hoover. Nor does MacMillan's book, Paris, 1919, on the peace process at Versailles, though Burner talks about Hoover as being an important part of the American delegation. How is it that Hoover could have slipped from entirely from those three otherwise comprehensive (or seemingly comprehensive) books?
There are lots of other examples that I won't get into here, but the point is that this book represents one extreme in a wide-ranging continuum of opinions on Hoover. My own opinion is that Hoover was a smart man, with a lot of good ideas and intentions, but without the humility necessary to recognize why sometimes good ideas aren't enough. Hoover seems like a perfect example of a self-assured technocrat who can prove his ideas mathematically and simply cannot understand why everyone either can't understand the formula, or won't just take his word for it.
June 24, 2016
I think Mr. Burner did a good job summarizing the life of Herbert Hoover, someone I knew only in the vaguest, and like many, derogatory way. By the time I finished, I had set aside any old prejudices. He was in fact quite a remarkable man. Much more progressive than often conveyed. an amazing early career, building a small fortune from mining. At least, he was a dynamo in keeping Europe from starving after the war; deserving of a Peace Prize. But his actions as secretary of Commerce and then President were quite credible. The opinions of him are more about style and personality (he was an engineer with faith in economy) than substance (he was not a cold reactionary). Other than style, he was remarkably similar to Roosevelt. He did everything short of the New Deal before 1932, again very progressive. What was done fell short, but had to be done, to make the New Deal seem reasonable. Burner speculates that if Roosevelt has been president in 1928 and Hoover came up in 1932, we would likely be praising Hoover, and discrediting Roosevelt for causing the depression. Unfortunately, he was a private man, and so his remarkable wife Lou, so the book is a bit dry. A hard man to get inside of which is why it gets 3 stars-it is not the author's fault.
November 11, 2016
Too brief summary of the President. Provides scarce information about his life in China during the Boxer Rebellion and too little about his formative years in an Australian mining town. Presidency is discussed thematically vs. chronologically - making it hard to follow how the Depression was impacting Foreign Policy and vice versa. Only one brief chapter about the 30 years of his life post- Presidency. Good account of his WWI relief activities.
May 11, 2013
Hoover had indeed a great life in public service, as European I admire his efforts for the starving Belgium peolple during WWI. He had the bad luck of the depression in his presidency. His life overseas the boxer revolution beginning 20 th century to the 60 ties in the 21 century with a lively spirit. The biography describes a lively picture of his life.
October 11, 2014
This book was a little dull - but maybe that was just the kind of president he was. There were some good things accomplished by him.
September 9, 2015
I found it informative but very dry and slow.
January 21, 2016
Did not like the layout - not chronological, but rather by topic. Hard to follow through the presidency. I feel cheated - don't have complete picture.
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews