What do you think?
Rate this book
Herbert Hoover
Foreword
Child of the American West
Quaker Boyhood
Student at Stanford
Australian Gold
Adventure in China
The Great Engineer
Hoover Chooses Public Service
The Belgian Relief
Food for Victory
Crusade against Chaos
Salvaging a Continent
Back Home from Europe
An Old-style Liberal
Consulting Engineer to the Nation
1928: Nomination & Campaign
No Politician
Paradox of Personality
Boom into Bust
Constructive Labors
The Big Smear
The Republican New Deal
Grappling with Calamity
In the Valley of Shadows
Direct Relief
1932: Hoover Is Defeated
Interrugnum--& Panic
Scapegoat for Cataclysm
Critique of the New Deal
Another World War
The Tide of Slander Recedes
Fighting Another World Famine
Reform of Government Operations
The Time of Vindication
The Elder Statesman
The Ninth Decade
Bibliography
Child of the American West
Quaker Boyhood
Student at Stanford
Australian Gold
Adventure in China
The Great Engineer
Hoover Chooses Public Service
The Belgian Relief
Food for Victory
Crusade against Chaos
Salvaging a Continent
Back Home from Europe
An Old-style Liberal
Consulting Engineer to the Nation
1928: Nomination & Campaign
No Politician
Paradox of Personality
Boom into Bust
Constructive Labors
The Big Smear
The Republican New Deal
Grappling with Calamity
In the Valley of Shadows
Direct Relief
1932: Hoover Is Defeated
Interrugnum--& Panic
Scapegoat for Cataclysm
Critique of the New Deal
Another World War
The Tide of Slander Recedes
Fighting Another World Famine
Reform of Government Operations
The Time of Vindication
The Elder Statesman
The Ninth Decade
Bibliography
456 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1947
5 people are currently reading
141 people want to read
About the author
Eugene Lyons
39 books12 followers American Anticommunist.
In his younger years Lyons was a member of the Young People’s Socialist League the youth section of the Socialist Party USA.
He became critical of the Soviet Union after working there as a correspondent of United Press International.
During the early 1940s and the Second Red Scare which followed World War II, Lyons was a frequent contributor to the popular press on anti-Communist themes, targeting liberals if Lyons deemed them inadequate in their denunciations of the Soviet regime.
Lyons also wrote a biography of President Herbert Hoover.
In his younger years Lyons was a member of the Young People’s Socialist League the youth section of the Socialist Party USA.
He became critical of the Soviet Union after working there as a correspondent of United Press International.
During the early 1940s and the Second Red Scare which followed World War II, Lyons was a frequent contributor to the popular press on anti-Communist themes, targeting liberals if Lyons deemed them inadequate in their denunciations of the Soviet regime.
Lyons also wrote a biography of President Herbert Hoover.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
November 13, 2016
If Herbert Hoover wrote a book about himself in the third person, his work would have matched what Eugene Lyons wrote here. From beginning to end, Lyons lionizes Hoover - constantly pointing out the most admirable qualities that Hoover possessed, and marginalizing (or, much more frequently, ignoring) any character flaws. Lyons does not even make a remote attempt to offer a balanced or scholarly assessment. In fact, on the second-to-last page, he readily admits to being biased and is not apologetic about it.
Lyons has a fairly perfunctory review of Hoover's childhood and youth: his becoming an orphan in West Branch, IA; being relocated to Oregon to live with one of his uncles; and his matriculation as part of the inaugural class at Stanford University. He then describes Hoover's rapid rise in the world of mining, his global travels, and his accumulation of hefty profits for both himself and those he worked for. Beginning during this time, and going throughout the rest of the book, Lyons repeatedly makes reference to how he cannot go into more detail. Well, why not? If one is a biographer, would it not stand to reason that you would want to get an appropriate level of detail about significant events or developments in your subject's life? Lyons apparently does not think so. Providing context and setting scenes is not his forte.
Ironically, Hoover was a great public servant both before and after his presidency in terms of results and intentions. He undoubtedly helped to save millions of people from starving to death in Europe during and after WWI, and then again after WWII. He was an extremely able administrator, with a knack for hard work and being able to analyze all facets of a situation and come up with a solution. This was also apparent in his work on the Hoover Commission in the late 40s and early 50s in an effort to help streamline government operations.
He also worked on many projects during his eight years as Secretary of Commerce. Unfortunately, Lyons skips right along and does not stop to go into any details. An example is the devastating Mississippi River Flood of 1927. Hoover was placed in charge of the government's response by President Coolidge. There have been books written about this very event. Yet Lyons dispatches with it in a paragraph. He is not just short-changing the reader here due to not providing any details on Hoover's performance; he is short-changing Hoover too by not writing about his diligent efforts to manage the situation and help people recover.
The book really becomes difficult to read once we reach Hoover's presidency. If you believe Lyons, Hoover was a great president and had a firm grasp on defeating the Great Depression, only to have FDR and the election of 1932 artificially re-trigger financial catastrophe. He portrays Hoover as hard-working (entirely believable), conscientious (also believable), President who is an activist (highly questionable) in terms of coming up with creative solutions to ending the Depression. No question, Hoover did work hard to end depression, and he ultimately did stretch his tight limits on what he thought the federal government could do. But he waited. And waited. And waited some more, before deciding to move. Hoover naively thought that local charities and neighbors would shoulder each others' burdens and help everyone recover. Lyons, of course, relates this in positive terms to Hoover's humanity and belief in his fellow man. That is fine to start off with, but Hoover let this go on for too long. Lyons repeatedly credits Hoover with starting the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) to help finance construction of new homes. That was in 1931, two years after the crash.
What Lyons does not discuss is Hoover's aloofness, his lack of warmth that he shows towards the American people (and colleagues, although Lyons breezes past that by saying that Hoover's character caused people to become devoted "Hoover men" and that people called him "Chief"), and his inability to connect with their plight. Lyons blames the WWI veterans for the Bonus March debacle in 1932. Certainly, some of the veterans did not behave like model citizens. But Lyons conveniently ignores the fact that Hoover repeatedly refused to meet with any representatives from the veterans group to see if some satisfactory arrangement could be fashioned. He also mentions General Douglas MacArthur in passing, even though MacArthur was a - perhaps the - biggest reason why things went awry. Again, Lyons fails to provide needed context.
When we get to the campaign of 1932, Lyons really pours it on: basically, FDR was a horrible person and the Democrats just tried to "smear" Hoover for everything under the sun. Lyons scours FDR for, well, everything. At one point, it seemed like Lyons thought FDR should not have even ran against Hoover. He continues this anti-Roosevelt diatribe for several chapters, and it really strains credulity to think that Hoover was constantly a saint, and FDR nothing but a sinner. Lyons obviously has a bone to pick with FDR and the New Deal. He did not even make an attempt to be slightly objective.
Lyons discusses Hoover's post-presidency in more detail, although still not to the level of a top-notch biographer such as Robert Caro. Perhaps what is most troubling about Lyons' book is that the closest that he comes to even offering a mild criticism of Hoover is when he says that Hoover was "too optimistic" about peace chances after the Munich Agreement in 1938. He also writes that Hoover was basically too moral and upright of a person to be a politician, and that perhaps the presidency was the wrong job for him on that basis only. This hagiography makes it extremely difficult to take Lyons seriously as a biographer. Added to that, there is no index and there are no notes in this book. Lyons lists a slim bibliography at the end. For a biography about a U.S. President, that is just not acceptable.
Grade: F
Lyons has a fairly perfunctory review of Hoover's childhood and youth: his becoming an orphan in West Branch, IA; being relocated to Oregon to live with one of his uncles; and his matriculation as part of the inaugural class at Stanford University. He then describes Hoover's rapid rise in the world of mining, his global travels, and his accumulation of hefty profits for both himself and those he worked for. Beginning during this time, and going throughout the rest of the book, Lyons repeatedly makes reference to how he cannot go into more detail. Well, why not? If one is a biographer, would it not stand to reason that you would want to get an appropriate level of detail about significant events or developments in your subject's life? Lyons apparently does not think so. Providing context and setting scenes is not his forte.
Ironically, Hoover was a great public servant both before and after his presidency in terms of results and intentions. He undoubtedly helped to save millions of people from starving to death in Europe during and after WWI, and then again after WWII. He was an extremely able administrator, with a knack for hard work and being able to analyze all facets of a situation and come up with a solution. This was also apparent in his work on the Hoover Commission in the late 40s and early 50s in an effort to help streamline government operations.
He also worked on many projects during his eight years as Secretary of Commerce. Unfortunately, Lyons skips right along and does not stop to go into any details. An example is the devastating Mississippi River Flood of 1927. Hoover was placed in charge of the government's response by President Coolidge. There have been books written about this very event. Yet Lyons dispatches with it in a paragraph. He is not just short-changing the reader here due to not providing any details on Hoover's performance; he is short-changing Hoover too by not writing about his diligent efforts to manage the situation and help people recover.
The book really becomes difficult to read once we reach Hoover's presidency. If you believe Lyons, Hoover was a great president and had a firm grasp on defeating the Great Depression, only to have FDR and the election of 1932 artificially re-trigger financial catastrophe. He portrays Hoover as hard-working (entirely believable), conscientious (also believable), President who is an activist (highly questionable) in terms of coming up with creative solutions to ending the Depression. No question, Hoover did work hard to end depression, and he ultimately did stretch his tight limits on what he thought the federal government could do. But he waited. And waited. And waited some more, before deciding to move. Hoover naively thought that local charities and neighbors would shoulder each others' burdens and help everyone recover. Lyons, of course, relates this in positive terms to Hoover's humanity and belief in his fellow man. That is fine to start off with, but Hoover let this go on for too long. Lyons repeatedly credits Hoover with starting the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) to help finance construction of new homes. That was in 1931, two years after the crash.
What Lyons does not discuss is Hoover's aloofness, his lack of warmth that he shows towards the American people (and colleagues, although Lyons breezes past that by saying that Hoover's character caused people to become devoted "Hoover men" and that people called him "Chief"), and his inability to connect with their plight. Lyons blames the WWI veterans for the Bonus March debacle in 1932. Certainly, some of the veterans did not behave like model citizens. But Lyons conveniently ignores the fact that Hoover repeatedly refused to meet with any representatives from the veterans group to see if some satisfactory arrangement could be fashioned. He also mentions General Douglas MacArthur in passing, even though MacArthur was a - perhaps the - biggest reason why things went awry. Again, Lyons fails to provide needed context.
When we get to the campaign of 1932, Lyons really pours it on: basically, FDR was a horrible person and the Democrats just tried to "smear" Hoover for everything under the sun. Lyons scours FDR for, well, everything. At one point, it seemed like Lyons thought FDR should not have even ran against Hoover. He continues this anti-Roosevelt diatribe for several chapters, and it really strains credulity to think that Hoover was constantly a saint, and FDR nothing but a sinner. Lyons obviously has a bone to pick with FDR and the New Deal. He did not even make an attempt to be slightly objective.
Lyons discusses Hoover's post-presidency in more detail, although still not to the level of a top-notch biographer such as Robert Caro. Perhaps what is most troubling about Lyons' book is that the closest that he comes to even offering a mild criticism of Hoover is when he says that Hoover was "too optimistic" about peace chances after the Munich Agreement in 1938. He also writes that Hoover was basically too moral and upright of a person to be a politician, and that perhaps the presidency was the wrong job for him on that basis only. This hagiography makes it extremely difficult to take Lyons seriously as a biographer. Added to that, there is no index and there are no notes in this book. Lyons lists a slim bibliography at the end. For a biography about a U.S. President, that is just not acceptable.
Grade: F
February 2, 2016
http://bestpresidentialbios.com/2016/...
First published in 1947, Eugene Lyons’s “Herbert Hoover: A Biography” was updated and republished in 1964 shortly after Hoover’s death. Although Russian-born, Lyons was raised in the United States and became a staunch critic of communism. Lyons was the author of about a dozen books, including several biographies. He died in 1985 at the age of 86.
The lengthiest of my four Hoover biographies (with 442 pages) this book proves lively, dramatic and highly sympathetic toward its subject. The biography’s coverage is well-divided between the three broad phases of Hoover’s life: his upbringing and early career, his presidency and his three-decade retirement.
The author’s review of Hoover’s early life includes a very interesting discussion of the Quaker religion which serves as an excellent foundation for understanding Hoover’s actions as Secretary of Commerce and, eventually, president. Lyons also provides a dynamic (if not uniformly exciting) description of Hoover’s global travels and travails as a successful mining engineer and entrepreneur.
Although Lyons occasionally abandons chronology to discuss issues out of sequence (such as Hoover’s personality) the flow seldom seems unnatural or awkward. And unlike most biographies of Hoover, Lyons provides extensive coverage of the this former president’s lengthy retirement including his work for the Truman Administration (to revamp the federal bureaucracy) and the partial revitalization of his legacy.
While comprehensive and broad-ranging, this biography is sometimes more a flattering character study; at other times it evolves into a study of Hoover’s life-philosophy. But no matter what form the book takes in any given moment it is almost always interesting and fully engaging.
In the book’s earliest chapters (those covering his youth and his career as a mining engineer and entrepreneur) the author’s pro-Hoover bias is not often on display. But as the biography progresses the author’s fondness for his subject becomes far more apparent – and nowhere is this more evident than during Hoover’s presidency.
Unfortunately the discussion of Hoover’s four years in the White House is almost completely consumed by a rebuttal to the perception he was either responsible for the Great Depression or, at the very least, was negligent in his efforts to combat it. Lyons’s rationale for relieving Hoover of much of this stain on his legacy is thought-provoking and compelling, but the tone is far too heavy-handed and defensive.
Lost among the glass half-full spirit is Hoover’s outwardly awkward personality. Where other biographers identify his uncommon inner strength, unshakable integrity and enormous compassion…they also fully recognize his astonishingly weak “people skills.” Lyons, on the other hand, recognizes Hoover’s impressive array of personal attributes but underemphasizes his politically ruinous interpersonal defects.
And in an apparent rush to begin defending President-elect Hoover against the reputational ravages of the Great Depression, Lyons almost entirely avoids issues such as Hoover’s selection of his cabinet. While usually a source of great insight into a new chief executive and his approach to the office, Lyons deals with this topic in just a single paragraph.
Overall, Eugene Lyons’s biography of Herbert Hoover is a comprehensive, energetic and colorful review of the life of a fascinating man (if not a compelling president). It is disappointing that the author’s affinity for Hoover eventually overpowers what is otherwise a lively and thoughtful narrative of the life of the thirty-first president.
Overall rating: 3¾ stars
First published in 1947, Eugene Lyons’s “Herbert Hoover: A Biography” was updated and republished in 1964 shortly after Hoover’s death. Although Russian-born, Lyons was raised in the United States and became a staunch critic of communism. Lyons was the author of about a dozen books, including several biographies. He died in 1985 at the age of 86.
The lengthiest of my four Hoover biographies (with 442 pages) this book proves lively, dramatic and highly sympathetic toward its subject. The biography’s coverage is well-divided between the three broad phases of Hoover’s life: his upbringing and early career, his presidency and his three-decade retirement.
The author’s review of Hoover’s early life includes a very interesting discussion of the Quaker religion which serves as an excellent foundation for understanding Hoover’s actions as Secretary of Commerce and, eventually, president. Lyons also provides a dynamic (if not uniformly exciting) description of Hoover’s global travels and travails as a successful mining engineer and entrepreneur.
Although Lyons occasionally abandons chronology to discuss issues out of sequence (such as Hoover’s personality) the flow seldom seems unnatural or awkward. And unlike most biographies of Hoover, Lyons provides extensive coverage of the this former president’s lengthy retirement including his work for the Truman Administration (to revamp the federal bureaucracy) and the partial revitalization of his legacy.
While comprehensive and broad-ranging, this biography is sometimes more a flattering character study; at other times it evolves into a study of Hoover’s life-philosophy. But no matter what form the book takes in any given moment it is almost always interesting and fully engaging.
In the book’s earliest chapters (those covering his youth and his career as a mining engineer and entrepreneur) the author’s pro-Hoover bias is not often on display. But as the biography progresses the author’s fondness for his subject becomes far more apparent – and nowhere is this more evident than during Hoover’s presidency.
Unfortunately the discussion of Hoover’s four years in the White House is almost completely consumed by a rebuttal to the perception he was either responsible for the Great Depression or, at the very least, was negligent in his efforts to combat it. Lyons’s rationale for relieving Hoover of much of this stain on his legacy is thought-provoking and compelling, but the tone is far too heavy-handed and defensive.
Lost among the glass half-full spirit is Hoover’s outwardly awkward personality. Where other biographers identify his uncommon inner strength, unshakable integrity and enormous compassion…they also fully recognize his astonishingly weak “people skills.” Lyons, on the other hand, recognizes Hoover’s impressive array of personal attributes but underemphasizes his politically ruinous interpersonal defects.
And in an apparent rush to begin defending President-elect Hoover against the reputational ravages of the Great Depression, Lyons almost entirely avoids issues such as Hoover’s selection of his cabinet. While usually a source of great insight into a new chief executive and his approach to the office, Lyons deals with this topic in just a single paragraph.
Overall, Eugene Lyons’s biography of Herbert Hoover is a comprehensive, energetic and colorful review of the life of a fascinating man (if not a compelling president). It is disappointing that the author’s affinity for Hoover eventually overpowers what is otherwise a lively and thoughtful narrative of the life of the thirty-first president.
Overall rating: 3¾ stars
December 8, 2019
I will admit: I knew nothing of Herbert Hoover, good or bad, prior to reading this book. I think that my American history education, seems to have repeatedly covered colonial times through the Civil War, with nothing covering the ensuing years (maybe they did not pace the curriculum, and ended up skimming the more recent years). I could place important post holes of the World War I, the Depression, World War II, but knew no details. So I was a bit of a blank slate on this one.
Eugene Lyons chronicles Herbert Hoover's life from his impoverished Quaker beginnings through his rise into his presidency (perhaps more accurately his fall) and his return public favor in his later years as a world statesman. Lyons describes the appreciation and dedication developed in colleagues who worked Hoover, their Chief, and Lyons appears to be one of them. Clearly, Hoover has a champion in Lyons.
Hoover was a remarkable man. Emerging as a mining engineer from the first graduating class in Stanford, he embarked on a mining career that took him world-wide: Australia, India, China, where he became a premier mining expert, establishing extraction methods that focused on efficiency which are still used today (at least into the 1960s at the time of the biography). He was, in his late-20s, responsible for the oversight of mining operations all over of the world that employed as many as 150,000 people. Lyons' description of the Hoover couple being trapped in the Tientsin compound at the time of the Boxer Rebellion has all of the elements of an action movie. (I think Tim Robbins could be cast as Hoover!) Hoover has made himself independently wealthy by his 30s and decides (according to Lyons driven by his Quakerism) to enter into public service.
World War I provides Hoover the opportunity to use his efficiency and organizational skills to head up a charity that provided food the unfortunate collaterals in the German overrun of Belgium. Hoover appears to go head-to-head with both the Germans over their used of local food sources in occupied territories and the British blockade preventing the arrival of needed food from outside sources. Hoover, arousing American sentiment, declared that non-combatants should not be used as pawns on either side of the divide. His efforts helped to keep many, especially children, from becoming casualties in the conflict.
Hoover's demonstrated abilities lead him into positions in the cabinets of both Wilson (a democrat) and Coolidge (a republican) in the Commerce Department where he continues to make a name for himself, and unwittingly becomes the natural choice for the republican presidential nominee in 1928. Clearly Hoover has skills for management on large scale operations; what he lacks is political savvy. Unwilling to play the partisan glad-hander who trumpets his successes, he just quietly, unobtrusively, goes about his business, giving the democrative party rumor mongers of Michelson Mills free reign to create the image that Hoover was a cold-hearted, do-nothing president, personally responsible for the Stock Market Crash in 1929. Ironic, when Hoover was one of a few lone reeds voicing concern to Coolidge about the over speculation. Hoover became the national whipping boy for everything that went wrong at the time, including the aberrant weather that resulted in crop failure. However, Lyons provides details that indicate that by 1931, the US was keeping pace with Europe in recovery, with unemployment easing, banks on more secure footing, insurance companies continuing to be solvent, and the needs of the poor and destitute being managed without fanfare on the state and local level. Then in November Franklin D Roosevelt becomes president-elect, and the nation becomes jittery with the proposed change. Banks begin to fail and things go south. Hoover reaches out to FDR requesting a joint effort for solutions, but FDR's mantra becomes "Not until March 4!". Lyons makes the argument that FDR and the Democrats worked against Hoover so that things would look so very bad that FDR would appear as the savior of the moment.
Even after Hoover has left the White House, he continues to reap the whirlwind of blame for the next 10 years, the unfeeling man who stood by and allowed the country to go to rack and ruin. Hoover sat by and watched as his fears about the use of partisan politics and increasing dependence on government subsidies of the farmer, business, and the destitute created a governmental bureaucracy of budget deficits and waste called the New Deal. Lyons makes much of the infiltration of communism into the American psyche, with Stalin's promise of a Brave New World, despite that he has been recognized as a mass murderer of his own people.
World War II brings with it a change in the winds of America's economic fortunes as the Arsenal of Democracy, Hoover still in the dog-house is not given an opportunity to serve, even though he had a proven track record of efficient service during World War I, though Hoover heads up non-governmental humanitarian efforts, involving quantifying food resources internationally and strategically distributing them throughout war-torn areas to prevent starvation.
According the Lyons, the 1940s bring with it some balancing of the record, people both great and small returning to the Hoover fold, expressing shame and sadness that they had abandoned him and had participated in his damnation. Boulder Dam, Hoover's pet project since his Secretary of Commerce days, was finally renamed Hoover Dam. Hoover was again recognized by the White House (Truman, this time) and given the opportunity to undertake two commissions to evaluate government efficiency and bureaucratic waste, that resulted in money-saving changes. He eventually becomes a revered statesman in Europe (where he never fell out of favor) and finally in the US.
Hoover truly was an amazing man, a man of moral character who used his unique set of skills to manage multiple large-scale projects during a 50-year period of international upheaval and chaos. Sad that a man who had such a positive impact on millions of people world-wide, especially children, was exposed to such vilification.
Eugene Lyons chronicles Herbert Hoover's life from his impoverished Quaker beginnings through his rise into his presidency (perhaps more accurately his fall) and his return public favor in his later years as a world statesman. Lyons describes the appreciation and dedication developed in colleagues who worked Hoover, their Chief, and Lyons appears to be one of them. Clearly, Hoover has a champion in Lyons.
Hoover was a remarkable man. Emerging as a mining engineer from the first graduating class in Stanford, he embarked on a mining career that took him world-wide: Australia, India, China, where he became a premier mining expert, establishing extraction methods that focused on efficiency which are still used today (at least into the 1960s at the time of the biography). He was, in his late-20s, responsible for the oversight of mining operations all over of the world that employed as many as 150,000 people. Lyons' description of the Hoover couple being trapped in the Tientsin compound at the time of the Boxer Rebellion has all of the elements of an action movie. (I think Tim Robbins could be cast as Hoover!) Hoover has made himself independently wealthy by his 30s and decides (according to Lyons driven by his Quakerism) to enter into public service.
World War I provides Hoover the opportunity to use his efficiency and organizational skills to head up a charity that provided food the unfortunate collaterals in the German overrun of Belgium. Hoover appears to go head-to-head with both the Germans over their used of local food sources in occupied territories and the British blockade preventing the arrival of needed food from outside sources. Hoover, arousing American sentiment, declared that non-combatants should not be used as pawns on either side of the divide. His efforts helped to keep many, especially children, from becoming casualties in the conflict.
Hoover's demonstrated abilities lead him into positions in the cabinets of both Wilson (a democrat) and Coolidge (a republican) in the Commerce Department where he continues to make a name for himself, and unwittingly becomes the natural choice for the republican presidential nominee in 1928. Clearly Hoover has skills for management on large scale operations; what he lacks is political savvy. Unwilling to play the partisan glad-hander who trumpets his successes, he just quietly, unobtrusively, goes about his business, giving the democrative party rumor mongers of Michelson Mills free reign to create the image that Hoover was a cold-hearted, do-nothing president, personally responsible for the Stock Market Crash in 1929. Ironic, when Hoover was one of a few lone reeds voicing concern to Coolidge about the over speculation. Hoover became the national whipping boy for everything that went wrong at the time, including the aberrant weather that resulted in crop failure. However, Lyons provides details that indicate that by 1931, the US was keeping pace with Europe in recovery, with unemployment easing, banks on more secure footing, insurance companies continuing to be solvent, and the needs of the poor and destitute being managed without fanfare on the state and local level. Then in November Franklin D Roosevelt becomes president-elect, and the nation becomes jittery with the proposed change. Banks begin to fail and things go south. Hoover reaches out to FDR requesting a joint effort for solutions, but FDR's mantra becomes "Not until March 4!". Lyons makes the argument that FDR and the Democrats worked against Hoover so that things would look so very bad that FDR would appear as the savior of the moment.
Even after Hoover has left the White House, he continues to reap the whirlwind of blame for the next 10 years, the unfeeling man who stood by and allowed the country to go to rack and ruin. Hoover sat by and watched as his fears about the use of partisan politics and increasing dependence on government subsidies of the farmer, business, and the destitute created a governmental bureaucracy of budget deficits and waste called the New Deal. Lyons makes much of the infiltration of communism into the American psyche, with Stalin's promise of a Brave New World, despite that he has been recognized as a mass murderer of his own people.
World War II brings with it a change in the winds of America's economic fortunes as the Arsenal of Democracy, Hoover still in the dog-house is not given an opportunity to serve, even though he had a proven track record of efficient service during World War I, though Hoover heads up non-governmental humanitarian efforts, involving quantifying food resources internationally and strategically distributing them throughout war-torn areas to prevent starvation.
According the Lyons, the 1940s bring with it some balancing of the record, people both great and small returning to the Hoover fold, expressing shame and sadness that they had abandoned him and had participated in his damnation. Boulder Dam, Hoover's pet project since his Secretary of Commerce days, was finally renamed Hoover Dam. Hoover was again recognized by the White House (Truman, this time) and given the opportunity to undertake two commissions to evaluate government efficiency and bureaucratic waste, that resulted in money-saving changes. He eventually becomes a revered statesman in Europe (where he never fell out of favor) and finally in the US.
Hoover truly was an amazing man, a man of moral character who used his unique set of skills to manage multiple large-scale projects during a 50-year period of international upheaval and chaos. Sad that a man who had such a positive impact on millions of people world-wide, especially children, was exposed to such vilification.
December 5, 2013
We all know that President Hoover was the president the day that Wall Street crashed in October, 1929, but most do not know what he did before this and few of us know what he did afterwards. He had a very stellar career and was probably the most knowledgeable president before or since on global affairs, food, agriculture, logistics, war and destruction. He raised millions to bring food to both the Western Europeans and the defeated Eastern side in WWI, then duplicated this effort to a worldwide effort after WWII. Amazing individual.
June 14, 2014
Library.
March 27, 2020
I love it when I read a book that absolutely compels you to read another. Such is the case with Eugene Lyons’ “Herbert Hoover: A Biography.” This is the second biography of the 31st President that I’ve completed. The first was by William Leuchtenburg, who is a notable FDR scholar and clearly NOT a fan of Hoover. Try as he might (and I do give him some credit for trying to find a balance), Leuchtenburg’s portrayal of “the Chief” was clearly colored by his very high opinion of Roosevelt. Eugene Lyon’s depiction of Hoover goes just as far in the other direction. Hoover is a misunderstood saint and FDR is the devil incarnate.
That said, I’m delighted that I read both. However, it leaves me looking for something in between the polar opposites presented by Leuchtenburg and Lyons. Charles Rappleye’s “Herbert Hoover in the White House: The Ordeal of the Presidency” is next up on my list. I’m hoping to find some balance to begin to solidify my mixed feeling about Hoover’s Presidency.
Lyons is part of a large army of Hoover followers who extoll him as a humanitarian, a man of the highest integrity, and, perhaps most of all, as a man unfairly vilified by Roosevelt and his public opinion operatives. Leuchtenburg doesn’t dispute Hoover’s humanitarian qualifications. In fact, he states that, through his actions in feeding Belgium and parts of Europe during and after WW I, and subsequently most of Europe and even the Soviet Union and its satellites after WW II, that Hoover saved more lives than anyone else in human history. Nor does Leuchtenburg directly question the 31st President’s integrity. Where the two biographers differ most relates most to Hoover’s actions (or inactions) as President, not his actions either beforehand (including eight years as Secretary of Commerce under Harding and Coolidge) or his work with Truman on rebuilding Europe and creating two blueprints for governmental restructuring afterward.
I came away from the Lyons book with a much higher opinion of Hoover than I had going in. Lyons manages to make a strong case for taking FDR down a few notches (and further strengthening my already high opinion of Truman.) I do think that Lyons paints too rosy of a picture in regard to Hoover all but pulling the nation out of the Great Depression and creates the impression that just about everything that FDR did was Hoover’s idea. For Lyons, the ongoing depression was solely the fault of obstructionist Democrats in Congress. My impression is that there is some truth to the Lyons position but that he simplifies the situation to match his elevated opinion of Hoover.
Lyons also conveniently ignores some topics that deserve exploration. It’s no secret that Hoover abhorred Communism. Yet there is little or no exploration of Herbert’s interaction with the other Hoover (J. Edgar – no relation) in identifying “sympathizers” in government and no discussion of the 31st Presidents views on Joe McCarthy during the work of the House Un-American Activities Committee.
Lyons is successful is disabusing readers of the idea that Hoover was “responsible” for the Depression. In fact, as Secretary of Commerce, he was one of the few pointing toward the storm clouds that burst in October 1929. Lyons is also successful in convincing all that Mrs. Hoover was an incredibly intelligent and talented woman.
To me, the missing piece is whether Hoover was simply deluding himself, as Leuchtenburg suggests, in believing that things were improving during his four- year term. Lyons would have you believe that we were almost out of the Depression in November 1932 and that it was the uncertainty created by the election of FDR and Roosevelt’s refusal to work with Hoover and to encourage inaction on the part of the Congress that condemned the nation to many more years of suffering. Fascinating questions that I need to continue to explore!
That said, I’m delighted that I read both. However, it leaves me looking for something in between the polar opposites presented by Leuchtenburg and Lyons. Charles Rappleye’s “Herbert Hoover in the White House: The Ordeal of the Presidency” is next up on my list. I’m hoping to find some balance to begin to solidify my mixed feeling about Hoover’s Presidency.
Lyons is part of a large army of Hoover followers who extoll him as a humanitarian, a man of the highest integrity, and, perhaps most of all, as a man unfairly vilified by Roosevelt and his public opinion operatives. Leuchtenburg doesn’t dispute Hoover’s humanitarian qualifications. In fact, he states that, through his actions in feeding Belgium and parts of Europe during and after WW I, and subsequently most of Europe and even the Soviet Union and its satellites after WW II, that Hoover saved more lives than anyone else in human history. Nor does Leuchtenburg directly question the 31st President’s integrity. Where the two biographers differ most relates most to Hoover’s actions (or inactions) as President, not his actions either beforehand (including eight years as Secretary of Commerce under Harding and Coolidge) or his work with Truman on rebuilding Europe and creating two blueprints for governmental restructuring afterward.
I came away from the Lyons book with a much higher opinion of Hoover than I had going in. Lyons manages to make a strong case for taking FDR down a few notches (and further strengthening my already high opinion of Truman.) I do think that Lyons paints too rosy of a picture in regard to Hoover all but pulling the nation out of the Great Depression and creates the impression that just about everything that FDR did was Hoover’s idea. For Lyons, the ongoing depression was solely the fault of obstructionist Democrats in Congress. My impression is that there is some truth to the Lyons position but that he simplifies the situation to match his elevated opinion of Hoover.
Lyons also conveniently ignores some topics that deserve exploration. It’s no secret that Hoover abhorred Communism. Yet there is little or no exploration of Herbert’s interaction with the other Hoover (J. Edgar – no relation) in identifying “sympathizers” in government and no discussion of the 31st Presidents views on Joe McCarthy during the work of the House Un-American Activities Committee.
Lyons is successful is disabusing readers of the idea that Hoover was “responsible” for the Depression. In fact, as Secretary of Commerce, he was one of the few pointing toward the storm clouds that burst in October 1929. Lyons is also successful in convincing all that Mrs. Hoover was an incredibly intelligent and talented woman.
To me, the missing piece is whether Hoover was simply deluding himself, as Leuchtenburg suggests, in believing that things were improving during his four- year term. Lyons would have you believe that we were almost out of the Depression in November 1932 and that it was the uncertainty created by the election of FDR and Roosevelt’s refusal to work with Hoover and to encourage inaction on the part of the Congress that condemned the nation to many more years of suffering. Fascinating questions that I need to continue to explore!
November 1, 2017
In my progress through the whole-life biographies of American presidents, I have often had difficulty selecting which biography to read. For Hoover, I very nearly went the route of the 6 volume work begun by George Nash. I'd probably have gone that way if the dang things weren't so difficult to source. The early volumes are easily obtained for ten or twenty dollars each, but later volumes run towards eighty apiece.
So after a fair amount of research, I decided this Lyons tome would be the way to go. This is the second edition of the book, published in 1964. The 1948 version, obviously, doesn't cover much of Hoover's post FDR service.
I expect that a biographer who spends so much time working on his subject may be quite sympathetic. That seems to be the case here. Although history places Hoover solidly in the bottom third of presidents, Lyons feels he deserves a much higher place. While it may well be that Hoover was one of the greatest men to serve as president, Lyons' book does not effectively make the case that he was a great president.
The book has some significant weaknesses, in my view. First, I expect these biographies to be well documented. That is, I expect footnotes or endnotes, a bibliography, and an index. Lyons fails to provide us any notes, there's no index, and the bibliography is quite short. As a reader, I have no way to follow up on any interesting tidbits I read in the text. Also, there are no photographs in the book, just a few on the front and back inside covers.
Another expectation when reading about presidents is that there is a significant effort made to cover the presidency. William Henry Harrison, of course, served just 30 days so I can forgive his biographer giving us just a few pages. Hoover served a full four year term. Lyons essentially covers a single topic - the depression. There is nothing on his cabinet - no discussion of their selection, how they worked with the president, their strengths and weaknesses. In fact, for the most part they are mentioned only in passing, if they're mentioned at all.
The book can be said to be divided into three parts - pre-Presidency, Presidency, and post-Presidency. The first part is quite strong. I'm tempted to pick up the first one or two Nash books so I can learn more. The chapters on Hoover's term are the weakest part, as I allude to above. The last several chapters improve, but the story they tell is less compelling than Hoover's younger years.
I'll also note the change in tone that the book goes through. Lyons makes the case that Hoover was unfairly maligned. At the same time, the tone of the book changes to one of bitterness, as if the author himself was the target of the attacks. Then, when the story proceeds past the death of FDR the tone modulates back. As I said above, I almost expect the writer to have an affinity for his subject. I'd rather he do it by shining a favorable light on his subject rather than attacking his subjects antagonists.
In the end, I'm left with a favorable opinion of Hoover the man, too many questions about Hoover the president, and a bit of a bad taste about the author.
So after a fair amount of research, I decided this Lyons tome would be the way to go. This is the second edition of the book, published in 1964. The 1948 version, obviously, doesn't cover much of Hoover's post FDR service.
I expect that a biographer who spends so much time working on his subject may be quite sympathetic. That seems to be the case here. Although history places Hoover solidly in the bottom third of presidents, Lyons feels he deserves a much higher place. While it may well be that Hoover was one of the greatest men to serve as president, Lyons' book does not effectively make the case that he was a great president.
The book has some significant weaknesses, in my view. First, I expect these biographies to be well documented. That is, I expect footnotes or endnotes, a bibliography, and an index. Lyons fails to provide us any notes, there's no index, and the bibliography is quite short. As a reader, I have no way to follow up on any interesting tidbits I read in the text. Also, there are no photographs in the book, just a few on the front and back inside covers.
Another expectation when reading about presidents is that there is a significant effort made to cover the presidency. William Henry Harrison, of course, served just 30 days so I can forgive his biographer giving us just a few pages. Hoover served a full four year term. Lyons essentially covers a single topic - the depression. There is nothing on his cabinet - no discussion of their selection, how they worked with the president, their strengths and weaknesses. In fact, for the most part they are mentioned only in passing, if they're mentioned at all.
The book can be said to be divided into three parts - pre-Presidency, Presidency, and post-Presidency. The first part is quite strong. I'm tempted to pick up the first one or two Nash books so I can learn more. The chapters on Hoover's term are the weakest part, as I allude to above. The last several chapters improve, but the story they tell is less compelling than Hoover's younger years.
I'll also note the change in tone that the book goes through. Lyons makes the case that Hoover was unfairly maligned. At the same time, the tone of the book changes to one of bitterness, as if the author himself was the target of the attacks. Then, when the story proceeds past the death of FDR the tone modulates back. As I said above, I almost expect the writer to have an affinity for his subject. I'd rather he do it by shining a favorable light on his subject rather than attacking his subjects antagonists.
In the end, I'm left with a favorable opinion of Hoover the man, too many questions about Hoover the president, and a bit of a bad taste about the author.
October 12, 2024
If it weren't so comprehensive, it would be pure puff
It has been a long path to redemption for the fans and legacy of President #herberthoover . Fairly or not, Hoover shouldered much of the blame for the #greatdepression . While he can't be held responsible for the #worldwari spending and the raft of government programs put in place to sustain industry and agriculture, his policies of austerity and insistence on by-your-bootstraps self reliance, including a refusal to honor bonuses to war vets led to the civil and economic collapse that put the Republicans out of the White House for 20 years as the Roosevelt New Deal attempted to expand government as Republicans had attempted to shrink it.
Biographer #eugenelyons was a self admitted member of the the #hoovercult . As a naturalized citizen from Russia and a concert from #communism it seems that he went overboard painting Hoover as the bulwark against the rise of communism in America is a bit overwrought. As our first #quaker president (#richardnixon was our second and only since Quaker), his revulsion towards war and his dedication to humanity goes unquestioned as being the original implementer of #globalrelief had he stuck to humanitarian causes, he would have been one of America's greatest people. But, as a trained geologist and mine expert who became fabulously rich from his abilities to reorganize and make profitable mines around the world, he became expert at being a multinational CEO with zero experience in elected office, habit been appointed to relief and cabinet posts by #woodrowwilson , #warrenfharding and #calvincoolidge and never having stood for public office until running for and being elected to the most powerful office in the world. His belief that, as "Chief" , his orders should go unquestioned, demonstrates how those who have never democratically served are woefully unprepared to lead as president. It's an important point to remember as, once again, a CEO president with a Nixonian penchant to think that, whatever one does as president is legally, sadly reinforced by recent #supremecourt rulings, makes clear the need for Americans to elect those who understand their responsibility to the people rather than their right to unlimited power. This biography, while informative and detailed, has the sole intention to praise Caesar rather than to bury him. That it was published weeks before Hoover's death seems to have been to succor Hoover in his waning days rather than honestly assess him. It obscures his legitimate accomplishments in a billowy cloud of fluff.
It has been a long path to redemption for the fans and legacy of President #herberthoover . Fairly or not, Hoover shouldered much of the blame for the #greatdepression . While he can't be held responsible for the #worldwari spending and the raft of government programs put in place to sustain industry and agriculture, his policies of austerity and insistence on by-your-bootstraps self reliance, including a refusal to honor bonuses to war vets led to the civil and economic collapse that put the Republicans out of the White House for 20 years as the Roosevelt New Deal attempted to expand government as Republicans had attempted to shrink it.
Biographer #eugenelyons was a self admitted member of the the #hoovercult . As a naturalized citizen from Russia and a concert from #communism it seems that he went overboard painting Hoover as the bulwark against the rise of communism in America is a bit overwrought. As our first #quaker president (#richardnixon was our second and only since Quaker), his revulsion towards war and his dedication to humanity goes unquestioned as being the original implementer of #globalrelief had he stuck to humanitarian causes, he would have been one of America's greatest people. But, as a trained geologist and mine expert who became fabulously rich from his abilities to reorganize and make profitable mines around the world, he became expert at being a multinational CEO with zero experience in elected office, habit been appointed to relief and cabinet posts by #woodrowwilson , #warrenfharding and #calvincoolidge and never having stood for public office until running for and being elected to the most powerful office in the world. His belief that, as "Chief" , his orders should go unquestioned, demonstrates how those who have never democratically served are woefully unprepared to lead as president. It's an important point to remember as, once again, a CEO president with a Nixonian penchant to think that, whatever one does as president is legally, sadly reinforced by recent #supremecourt rulings, makes clear the need for Americans to elect those who understand their responsibility to the people rather than their right to unlimited power. This biography, while informative and detailed, has the sole intention to praise Caesar rather than to bury him. That it was published weeks before Hoover's death seems to have been to succor Hoover in his waning days rather than honestly assess him. It obscures his legitimate accomplishments in a billowy cloud of fluff.
March 19, 2024
I am probably being a little hard on this book. It was written well and I learned a considerable amount that I did not know. However, Mr. Lyons was far too biased toward President Hoover to be in the realm of objective.
Before you even begin reading the book, the first thing that jumps out at you is the Christ image over his head I'm the pipe smoke.
I will admit that the author was forthcoming in the fact that he had an agenda, to help counter the negative media campaign that stained Hoover's reputation. However the adulation was so hyperbolic that parts were hard to read.
Hoover is incredibly impressive in his charitable works and his organizational prowess. He is one of several presidents whose accomplishments outside of the White House far surpass his accomplishments as chief executive. His potential may legitimately have been off the scale, but his inability to navigate politics and to move the masses resulted in an ineffective term.
I believe that Mr. Lyons was in many ways accurate in portraying the contrast between Hoover and FDR, but his pure zealotry for Hoover blinded him to the fact that the presidency is perhaps THE most public position and that for better or for worse people are moved far more strongly by their hearts than their minds. His speculation that history would clearly favor Hoover over FDR proved monumentally wrong.
In truth I believe that history probably thinks too highly of FDR and Hoover is still largely a scapegoat, but not to any significant degree.
Hoover very much reminds me of Carter. A kind, pious, well meaning man, who simply did not live up to the challenge of the office.
Before you even begin reading the book, the first thing that jumps out at you is the Christ image over his head I'm the pipe smoke.
I will admit that the author was forthcoming in the fact that he had an agenda, to help counter the negative media campaign that stained Hoover's reputation. However the adulation was so hyperbolic that parts were hard to read.
Hoover is incredibly impressive in his charitable works and his organizational prowess. He is one of several presidents whose accomplishments outside of the White House far surpass his accomplishments as chief executive. His potential may legitimately have been off the scale, but his inability to navigate politics and to move the masses resulted in an ineffective term.
I believe that Mr. Lyons was in many ways accurate in portraying the contrast between Hoover and FDR, but his pure zealotry for Hoover blinded him to the fact that the presidency is perhaps THE most public position and that for better or for worse people are moved far more strongly by their hearts than their minds. His speculation that history would clearly favor Hoover over FDR proved monumentally wrong.
In truth I believe that history probably thinks too highly of FDR and Hoover is still largely a scapegoat, but not to any significant degree.
Hoover very much reminds me of Carter. A kind, pious, well meaning man, who simply did not live up to the challenge of the office.
August 2, 2017
3.5 stars. It only took eight months - reading in fits and starts - but I finally finished! Writing in the 1960s, the author was definitely out to restore Hoover's reputation; his adulation made his credibility suspect in many parts. The author was at his best writing about Hoover's post-presidential years; the time in Hoover's life when his actions were not highly criticized and thus not in need of defense.
I'm adding Hoover to my list of solid, moral men who were highly successful in their careers but were lack-luster presidents.
I'm adding Hoover to my list of solid, moral men who were highly successful in their careers but were lack-luster presidents.
September 10, 2019
Definitely biased perspective of Hover’s Presidency. However the author does provide a detailed insight into Hover the engineer, scientist and humanitarian.
February 23, 2024
Everyone should read this book.
November 12, 2024
Really changed my opinion of him. The author is a bit harsh on FDR, but in some ways, this is correct. I think everybody needs to read this book - what a humanitarian!
January 5, 2026
Hagiography. Avoid this one.
February 25, 2017
It's commonplace for history textbooks and political pundits to blame the nation's greatest economic downturn on the actions of one man; Herbert Hoover. I can comfortably say that virtually every textbook I have read conforms to this point of view. Herbert Hoover by Eugene Lyons takes a refreshingly distinct look at a president that is universally reviled, and offers information and insight into the life of the man that gives context to his actions as President that help to explain some of his actions. The book was interesting and full of facts about our 31st president that I never knew, definitive positives in any biography or work of non-fiction. However, I found that Lyons tended to go off on tangents with his work, and though the book is largely in chronological order it was not uncommon that I found myself hurtling from childhood to Presidential years to college years and so on as Lyons attempts to prove a point. It made for tiresome reading. Additionally, the book is written somewhat dully, like a classic history textbook that would make uninterested students fall asleep, and I am not ashamed to say that I would use it as nighttime reading to ease myself into sleep. Perhaps most disconcerting, however, was the presence of a substantial bias in Hoover's favor. At times the author's lauding of Hoover was uncomfortably evident and so thick it was hard to tell where fact ended and accolades began. That being said, it was also refreshing because normally all we see is Hoover bashing, and I definitely feel after reading this that Hoover may not have received enough credit that he may have been due. I would give .5 star for style, .5 star for clarity, .5 star for reliability, 1 star for learning something new and one star for being entertained, rounding down to a 3 out of 5 only because the heavy presence of bias was more off-putting than exciting. Bottom line - If you are looking for a read that offers a different perspective on what seems to be a universally acknowledged fact then look for this book. You may not agree with the author, but you might just change your mind a bit.
July 16, 2023
This is an informative read about an often misunderstood subject. Known more for his overseeing of the beginning of the Depression than his humanitarian works before and after Hoover is widely considered one of our lesser presidents. Lyon points out much of the good Hoover accomplished. Unfortunately this book often comes off as defensive. It is not until the last chapter that the author is even mildly critical of his subject and then only vaguely. Lyons mentions somewhat regular personal contact with Hoover so perhaps they were friends. Our author is highly critical of Roosevelt with almost nothing good to say of him. Frankly, Hoover is painted as one of the finest human beings to walk the planet while FDR is essentially portrayed as incompetent. I feel there is a happy medium somewhere. All presidents get too much credit for positive events and too much blame when things go bad.
February 14, 2017
I appreciated the depth to which this book explored the youth and pre-presidential periods of Hoover's life, as well as the decades following his time in office.
However, Lyons has written this book from such a relentlessly pro-Hoover perspective that it gets a bit exhausting, and damages the integrity of the book. Constant slanders of FDR, constant berating of Hoover's opponents, constant praise of the purity and unquestionable greatness of Hoover. This book is not a biography, it is PR.
Hoover was a fascinating man who lived a fascinating life - I wish Lyons had stepped back and allowed the events and accomplishments of Hoover's life speak for themselves, rather than persistently bludgeoning us with his unqualified love for the former president.
However, Lyons has written this book from such a relentlessly pro-Hoover perspective that it gets a bit exhausting, and damages the integrity of the book. Constant slanders of FDR, constant berating of Hoover's opponents, constant praise of the purity and unquestionable greatness of Hoover. This book is not a biography, it is PR.
Hoover was a fascinating man who lived a fascinating life - I wish Lyons had stepped back and allowed the events and accomplishments of Hoover's life speak for themselves, rather than persistently bludgeoning us with his unqualified love for the former president.
January 23, 2014
This Presidential biography was written with a strong pro-Hoover bias that presented Herbert Hoover's humble childhood, his rise in the fields of mining and engineering, his humanitarian efforts during and after the Great War, and his work as Secretary of Commerce. Lyons presents Hoover as a Classical Liberal or Progressive and contrasts that to New Liberals that lead the New Deal.
Lyons' discussion of the Hoover Presidency focuses mostly on the Great Depression and the actions that Hoover took to counter it. This section of the book also covered the strained relationship with Franklin D. Roosevelt and even members of his own party. Frequently Lyons associated the New Deal with communism and collectivism, seeing Communists everywhere.
The book continues with discussion of Hoover's career as humanitarian (after World War II) and statesman and the welcome he received from the public in his latter years.
Lyon's book comes across as a Hoover apology, but in all fairness Hoover's culpability in the Great Depression was exaggerated by enterprising politicians. If there is a take home message to this book, it is that Hoover was a man of integrity and was a great organizer. One disappointment of this book is that it does not address Hoover's handling of Prohibition. All in all, though, it presents an excellent summary of the career of a remarkable man.
Lyons' discussion of the Hoover Presidency focuses mostly on the Great Depression and the actions that Hoover took to counter it. This section of the book also covered the strained relationship with Franklin D. Roosevelt and even members of his own party. Frequently Lyons associated the New Deal with communism and collectivism, seeing Communists everywhere.
The book continues with discussion of Hoover's career as humanitarian (after World War II) and statesman and the welcome he received from the public in his latter years.
Lyon's book comes across as a Hoover apology, but in all fairness Hoover's culpability in the Great Depression was exaggerated by enterprising politicians. If there is a take home message to this book, it is that Hoover was a man of integrity and was a great organizer. One disappointment of this book is that it does not address Hoover's handling of Prohibition. All in all, though, it presents an excellent summary of the career of a remarkable man.
October 11, 2015
Eugene Lyons is the omni-president (and maybe single member) of the Hoover Fan Club. Not completely unwarranted, but his bias seeps thru the pages. In fact, this book was published in Hoover's lifetime. I read this book because there are no comprehensive biographies currently being published about President Hoover and I wasn't willing to spend $80 on the alternative.
Hoover did a lot of great things before and after his life in public service, but his public service scars him the most. This is in large part to the FDR PR machine and the non-exsistant Hoover PR machine. Hoover felt as long as he was doing the work, the rest would handle itself. It didn't.
An engineer who had the knack of solving and organizing complex problems. From feeding the starving Europeans (multiple times), building railroads and re-organizing the federal government he could do it all. It just needed to be better about selling it. All in all this a good read, I could just use less of Lyons' justification machine.
Hoover did a lot of great things before and after his life in public service, but his public service scars him the most. This is in large part to the FDR PR machine and the non-exsistant Hoover PR machine. Hoover felt as long as he was doing the work, the rest would handle itself. It didn't.
An engineer who had the knack of solving and organizing complex problems. From feeding the starving Europeans (multiple times), building railroads and re-organizing the federal government he could do it all. It just needed to be better about selling it. All in all this a good read, I could just use less of Lyons' justification machine.
June 4, 2016
This book really made me rethink a lot of what I have accepted as fact about FDR, the New Deal and Herbert Hoover. I much prefer this rendering of HH's life for the "I knew Hoover" authority of the author vs.the shorter and harsher take on HH by an author whose name now escapes me (Leutenberg?). I recommend this book for those who want to know about the full scope of this man's fascinating life. He was so much more than the failed President his critics made him out to be. He fed millions of people and worked tirelessly for numerous causes throughout his long life.
November 30, 2012
Eugene Lyons was the editor of Readers Digest in the 1950s. Before his conversion to Republicanism, he was a strong and ardent believer in the socialist utopia. As a reborn conservative, however, he was quite sympathetic to Herbert Hoover and this biography, while informative and well written, is rather one sided and a defense of Hoover the man and his policies.
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews