| Washington Post reporter and editor Woodward studies the decision-making process in the Bush cabinet between Sept. 11, 2001 and the launch of the war in Afghanistan several months later. The author talked with all of the principals, although he seems to have gotten more cooperation from Powell and Tenet than, say, Rumsfeld and Cheney. This is a fast, almost facile read; Woodward takes you inside National Security Council meetings and private conversations, and lets the players tell their stories largely without comment or criticism. Though fairly gripping, "Bush at War" is history lite, almost a picture of government as a fraternity of good but naive guys, which may make them look nicer than serious historians will eventually discover them to have been. | ||
|
Kind Of History History of military? Yes Nationality? Specific war? - Afghanistan Subjects of this Historical Account Ethnicity (if plays a major part) - European/White Is the portrayal sympathetic? - Somewhat sympathetic From a certain profession/group? - bureaucracy Main Adversary How much of work is main antagonist actually present in: - a little/some Religion? (if plays a major part) - Muslims! Ethnicity? (if plays big part) - Arabic Is the portrayal sympathetic? - Somewhat Unsympathetic Setting United States Yes The US: - Northeast Big City? Yes City: - Washington D.C. Middle East? Yes Writing Style How much gore? - 1 () How fast-paced is the book? - 8 () Accounts of torture and death? - no torture/death Book makes you feel... - thoughtful How much focus on stories of individuals? - Focuses mostly on history of key players Minor characters feature lots of: Pictures/Illustrations? - A handful Maps necessary? - Maps not in sufficient detail Length of book - 350-400 pages How much emphasis on small details? - 6 () |
||