I have to disclaim the caveat where I said it was, "Clearly not for everyone." By that statement I mean the following. Some people might be looking for a recap of only the battles waged in the field. Some people may be looking for a Naval history. Some may be looking for a view of technological advancement. Some may want to focus on political views. Some may want to explore the sociological tides in the Union and Confederacy alike.
For the reader who wants only 1 or 2 of those items, the book is not for them. The reason for this is because the book entails all of the above aspects; all of which are investigated objectively. Likewise, this book may not be exactly right for a beginner, as it delves deeply into a complex web of factors that shaped the war from start to finish. If a high interest level is not there, it could easily be overwhelming at first glance. In fact, it took me nearly a year to pick this book up.
I don't think I can say enough good things about this book. Every approach McPherson takes seems to be dripping with objectivity. Even widely held beliefs he dissects, with an attempt to get to the core of truth. And when a strict answer does not present itself in his inquiries, he presents both sides and lets the reader decide.
This book is long. In order to encapsulate this many aspects of the war (in addition to ones I assuredly have missed), a tremendous number of pages needs to be devoted to the subject. Over 800 pages from start to finish. The subject matter is approached at a medium-high level of intelligence such that the reader feels his efforts and conclusions were derived from a fair amount of contemplation.
I have read the 4 reviews that have not given this book a 4 star rating or higher. I think that a few general themes emerge with those complaints. The first is that this book is not perfect. While I do think this book is tremendous, I agree that the book is not perfect. No 800 page book will be perfect. Another thing I note is that several of the people who rate the book poorly did not read it fully. They cite examples of McPherson's failings that are simply incorrect.
I do find interesting the claims that this book is written through glasses colored by the tint of the Civil Rights movement of the late 1960's. While I can neither confirm nor deny this, the approach that McPherson takes in this book is a reasonable one and people are bound to disagree with things that they don't want to believe. Claims that this book has an anti-South slant to it are generally unfair, in my opinion. Neither North nor South come out of this looking morally superior. The only complaint that I can possibly lend credence to is that of McPherson's giving slavery too much of a role in the conflict. This is, perhaps, where claims of his Civil Rights involvement cloud his complete objectivity.
However, the above does not detract from the excellence of the book enough to warrant anything but a 5 star rating. I find most, if not all, complaints about this book to be generally unfair, and unrepresentative of what is contained in this work. While the book is not perfect, it strives to make sense of a very complicated subject matter and does a very good job doing that. Very highly recommended.
McPherson has a very good sense of drama. After finishing "Battle Cry of Freedom" I began to think about why this book was so good. One of the reasons, I concluded, is that he is able to give us the history of the war as if the reader were at either end of a tug-of-war, because that seems to be precisely how the war was regarded on both sides. The pendulum of victory swung back and forth so many times during the four-year period as it raised the prospects of victory in both north and south only to plunge them into the abyss of despair with the next battle outcome. If one thinks about actual photographic images of the Civil War, one can only see black and white. But the author provides the color....both in battle and in periphery.
Beginning with the Mexican War, McPherson lays the groundwork carefully and slowly. He is particularly adept at recounting the political aspects of this period, especially the impotency of U.S. presidents of the 1850s. By the time Fort Sumter is fired upon (almost one-third of the way through the book), the reader by now has a comprehensive look at the unfolding situation.
Although he is distantly related to one of the Union generals, McPherson's sympathies seem to lie in two places...with the South, but particularly with Abraham Lincoln. In fact, it would be easy to read this book in Abraham Lincoln's mind and shoes. McPherson writes with a broad brush approach and his style matches how we might think Lincoln preceived things.....like a radar box constantly surveying the horizon.
While the author's descriptions of the battles are certainly moving, he succeeds more in giving us the picture of what it was like in the non-combat arena. I particularly enjoyed his referrals to newspaper headlines and editorials....they were the chief news conduits of the day and the sway that they held over their readers was powerful.
McPherson's summation is concise. It outlines the four turning points of the war. With a little different foresight, planning, numbers of men, materiel, rations and luck, the outcome of the war might have turned out differently. The author shows us how close each side came to breaking through and staying on top. What is amazing is that it took so long for one side to achieve victory.
While not a book for "serious" historians (let them read original sources), I found McPherson's effort perfectly tuned to the average reader interested in Civil War history. If this book doesn't make you want to learn more about this pivotal conflict, then nothing will.
Kudos to McPherson for making the Civil War easily accessible to the reading public.
If you want to know how the war started, the status of the economies of both North and South, the politicians, the Generals, this simply is the book.
It is utterly free of bias. Perhaps some southerners might quibble with McPherson's view that slavery was one of the primary causes, but the way he writes his argument, it is hard to disagree with him.
Perhaps another grievance those might have is that it's not just a military history, but rather, a political one as well. This, I think is absolutely essential. Each had an effect on the other. If, let's say, a General appointed by Lincoln suffers a defeat (like John Pope for instance) at the hands of R. E. Lee, it had definite political consequences on how Lincoln will carry out his policy and war aims. McPherson shows this clearly.
Aside from superb analysis, McPherson is a outstanding writer. You never have to reread passages to understand his or his point. All political and military figures get their due here.
The only thing one might have a problem with is the maps. Hugh Brogan said orginally in the New York Times Book Review, that the Confederate movements are a bit difficult to see, but that's about it.
For the uninitiated, start with the Ken and Ric Burns/Geoffrey War Civil War book, then McPherson. If you want more, then move on to the master, Shelby Foote.
