Member Review Grant's Memoirs

[Lincoln56]

I was the Gideon pillow of waiters.

Not seen Mr. Pillow employed in this fashion before - allowed me to grasp the concept with no further explanation needed - well played!

 

[13 IL Cav & 64 GA Inf]

It's an AWESOME read!! I'm thinking it's very accurate and honest, at least from Grant's perspective. And I think that we, as critical thinkers, need to take this in context, as one perspective of what happened at that time.

Yes! I finished reading Grant's memoirs in August 2023. It will be a permanent fixture on my bookshelf - not a book to give to a friend or donate to a "Friends of the Library" shelf for cheap resale.

 

[13 IL Cav & 64 GA Inf]

The great popularity of the Memoirs is due more to the celebrity of its author than any historical or literary value of the book itself.

I tackled it a couple of years back and found it boring and unreadable. Maybe I should give it another try.

I read it in 2023 and enjoyed it thoroughly.

 

[SSVilla]

Earlier this year I read his memoirs (available for free on Project Gutenberg, for the uninitiated) and since then, I wanted to have an annotated version and went for this one: The Annotated Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant (The Annotated Books) by Ulysses S. Grant
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07C8QJYNP?tag=civilwartalkc-20

Though I haven't read it cover to cover yet, the editor referred me to Bruce Catton for a description of how his health decline affected his writing that made me teary eyed. I thought I'd share it here because I didn't want to start a new thread for it.

Then, in a version published by the Library of America, which I have borrowed from my library just to read the comments that the editor, William S. McFeely wrote at the end, in his "Notes on the Texts" that towards the end of June, and beginning of July 1865, Grant had the opportunity to review the typed proofs of his chapter on Appomattox and made revisions after which he was satisfied. However, he expressed to his son Fred that he wished he had more time. He would have changed the Spotsylvania account had he been able to, and felt he could have improved his narrative for North Anna and Cold Harbor.

 

[SSVilla]

Note, for example, how Grant's superfans label Freeman "hagiography". It is not perfect, since he mindreads and does that whole "answer he was born to make" weirdness. But he does actually have criticism of Lee. Particularly, he goes after his performance at the 7 Days and Gettysburg, and he doesn't 360 and defend him at the same time. Mistakes are mistakes.

Grant's hagiographers do no such things.

I have no idea what you are talking about here.

Why are you comparing Freeman, a biography to Grant's memoirs? Perhaps comparing Freeman to Grant biographies can be its own topic, but comparing it to his memoirs is apples to oranges. I don't mean this in a confrontational way, this thread deviated into discussion of biographies which is a different subject entirely.

 

[SSVilla]

Grant is trying to imply in his memoirs he took it while Fremont was diliberating, when the PUSG says that he was operating from Fremont from this Hungarian guy.

Here is what Fremont wrote in Battles and Leaders:

"September 5th I sent to General Grant a letter of instruction, in which I required him to push forward with the utmost speed all work on the point selected on the Kentucky shore ten miles from Paducah, to be called Fort Holt. In this letter I directed him to take possession of Paducah if he felt strong enough to do so; but if not, then to plant a battery opposite Paducah on the Illinois side to command the Ohio River and the mouth of the Tennessee. On the evening of the day on which this letter was sent to General Grant, the officer who had been sent by me within the Confederate lines reached Cairo on his way to St. Louis to let me know that the enemy was advancing on Paducah. He judged it right to inform General Grant, urging him to take Paducah without delay. General Grant decided to do so, and in accordance with his instructions of the 28th immediately moved on Paducah with an adequate force and two gun-boats."​

Excerpt From
Battles and Leaders of the Civil War Vol I
Robert Underwood Johnson
This material may be protected by copyright.

Fremont wanted to claim credit for Paducah, yet the most he could point to was sending Grant a letter with instructions on the same day that Grant was sending him urgent dispatches by telegraph informing that he would advance unless countermanded. Fremont's letter is rather like a publicity stunt for the press, something common for him. He sent Grant instructions by letter when Grant was urging a quick response by telegraph.

 

[wausaubob]

The memoirs are about Grant's obligation to his family, to provide for them if he could, and the enormity of the debt he owed to the US soldiers that made him the winning general of the national tragedy. He also wrote with empathy towards the Confederate soldiers who were caught up in a conspiracy in which they had very little to gain.

 

[SSVilla]

Do you remember who the narrator(s) was/were? A specific recommendation would be great if you have one.

I really liked this old narrator from recorded books. It's in three different audiobooks I believe. The library has a different recording from a British narrator… a British accent for U.S. Grant? No thanks.

Here's the one I recommend.

Personal Memoirs of U.S. Grant, Part One

Among the autobiographies of generals and statesmen, these memoirs rank with the greatest. Mark Twain hailed them as “the best of any general’s since Caesar.” Refreshingly candid and honest, Grant’s assessment of his humble beginnings, his rise to fame, and his greatest triumphs and failures has...

share.libbyapp.com

 

[SSVilla]

There's this other narrator in podcast form below.

The subject of whether listening to someone versus some other narrator and which one is better etc. is something of a personal preference, so I'll leave this one here because someone may like it.

Personal Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant

Podcast · Narrator: T. Russell Sherman · Listen to the Memoirs of the 18th President of the United States and the General who won the Civil War.

open.spotify.com

Here's the British narrator. It was just really odd for me to listen to a British narrator when it's a memoir written in the first person and it reads like Grant is literally speaking to you. I found the accent too distracting from the subject—for me.

Personal Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant

Among the autobiographies of great military figures, Ulysses S. Grant’s is certainly one of the finest, and it is arguably the most notable literary achievement of any American president: a lucid, compelling, and brutally honest chronicle of triumph and failure. From his frontier boyhood, to his...

share.libbyapp.com

 

[TallTallMan]

Here is what Fremont wrote in Battles and Leaders:

"September 5th I sent to General Grant a letter of instruction, in which I required him to push forward with the utmost speed all work on the point selected on the Kentucky shore ten miles from Paducah, to be called Fort Holt. In this letter I directed him to take possession of Paducah if he felt strong enough to do so; but if not, then to plant a battery opposite Paducah on the Illinois side to command the Ohio River and the mouth of the Tennessee. On the evening of the day on which this letter was sent to General Grant, the officer who had been sent by me within the Confederate lines reached Cairo on his way to St. Louis to let me know that the enemy was advancing on Paducah. He judged it right to inform General Grant, urging him to take Paducah without delay. General Grant decided to do so, and in accordance with his instructions of the 28th immediately moved on Paducah with an adequate force and two gun-boats."​

Excerpt From
Battles and Leaders of the Civil War Vol I
Robert Underwood Johnson
This material may be protected by copyright.

Fremont wanted to claim credit for Paducah, yet the most he could point to was sending Grant a letter with instructions on the same day that Grant was sending him urgent dispatches by telegraph informing that he would advance unless countermanded. Fremont's letter is rather like a publicity stunt for the press, something common for him. He sent Grant instructions by letter when Grant was urging a quick response by telegraph.

My views have changed somewhat since

I'm still a Grant skeptic but not that much anymore.

 

[SSVilla]

odd double post… deleted

 

[SSVilla]

My views have changed somewhat since

I'm still a Grant skeptic but not that much anymore.

I enjoy chatting with you very much. I have also learned a lot since I started posting and have changed opinions as I learned more, in one direction or another.

Some of my earlier posts here are … let's just say I was surprised or outraged as I was discovering things I didn't know.

Elizabeth Samet, who really is taking a different approach in her annotations to Grant's Memoirs noted that in many ways he wrote as men of his time did, but what set him apart was that he didn't romanticize the experience. He doesn't describe battles as glorious, he's very matter of fact there. And if he doesn't describe the gore and stench of death, he also doesn't paint a picture that all of this was glorious, great or magnificent. She contrasts him with other war memoirs of his contemporaries and also, the genre in general. I look forward to reading her notes.

I also highly recommend the version published by the Library of America. McFeely I thought did a great job supplementing the memoirs with letters by Grant written at the time of events. His description of the conditions Grant wrote them under told me a lot that I didn't know before. Save for the narrative for Appomattox Grant didn't get a chance to review the second volume. Or rather he saw it, and gave instructions for insertions etc but his strength was fading and corrections or additions he would have made had he more time, he couldn't do.

McFeely included Grant's notes to his doctor, as well in the end, which were personal and show his decline. I thought McFeely did a good job with his edition.

 

[TallTallMan]

I enjoy chatting with you very much. I have also learned a lot since I started posting and have changed opinions as I learned more, in one direction or another.

Some of my earlier posts here are … let's just say I was surprised or outraged as I was discovering things I didn't know.

Elizabeth Samet, who really is taking a different approach in her annotations to Grant's Memoirs noted that in many ways he wrote as men of his time did, but what set him apart was that he didn't romanticize the experience. He doesn't describe battles as glorious, he's very matter of fact there. And if he doesn't describe the gore and stench of death, he also doesn't paint a picture that all of this was glorious, great or magnificent. She contrasts him with other war memoirs of his contemporaries and also, the genre in general. I look forward to reading her notes.

I also highly recommend the version published by the Library of America. McFeely I thought did a great job supplementing the memoirs with letters by Grant written at the time of events. His description of the conditions Grant wrote them under told me a lot that I didn't know before. Save for the narrative for Appomattox Grant didn't get a chance to review the second volume. Or rather he saw it, and gave instructions for insertions etc but his strength was fading and corrections or additions he would have made had he more time, he couldn't do.

McFeely included Grant's notes to his doctor, as well in the end, which were personal and show his decline. I thought McFeely did a good job with his edition.

I enjoy these chats too!

Have you read McFeely's biography of USG? It's not exactly favorable...

 

[SSVilla]

I enjoy these chats too!

Have you read McFeely's biography of USG? It's not exactly favorable...

I have read parts of it, and I really wanted to tackle it, just to see for myself what all the hoopla was about. I couldn't finish it however. The thing I didn't like about it to be really honest with you was that he gets too psychological… I couldn't get past that style of writing. Then I learned, which I didn't know before, that he wrote the first full biography of U.S. Grant — which tells us a lot, because it came in 100 years after his death! A character that significant in U.S. history didn't have a full biographer up until McFeely. There was Catton, who only covered his military career and the book Captain Sam Grant by Loyd Lewis, that covered his childhood and private life up until the start of the war. There were military studies like Fuller, a volume of "Lincoln finds a General" which is about his campaigns and how he fit into the Lincoln administration. There was not a single volume that was just his biography from beginning to end prior to McFeely, so it was special (very different from Freeman, so you can use it as a contrast in terms of perception).

I remember paragraphs that were just all psychology and I couldn't get past it. Maybe I'll attempt to read it again someday. He did a great job with the Memoirs however. He didn't annotate them, but included extra material at the end in letters and documents from U.S. Grant that give additional context, and allows us to get to know him better, and we can draw our own inferences in terms of personality and what not.

 

[Joseph A. Rose]

Here is what Fremont wrote in Battles and Leaders:

"September 5th I sent to General Grant a letter of instruction, in which I required him to push forward with the utmost speed all work on the point selected on the Kentucky shore ten miles from Paducah, to be called Fort Holt. In this letter I directed him to take possession of Paducah if he felt strong enough to do so; but if not, then to plant a battery opposite Paducah on the Illinois side to command the Ohio River and the mouth of the Tennessee. On the evening of the day on which this letter was sent to General Grant, the officer who had been sent by me within the Confederate lines reached Cairo on his way to St. Louis to let me know that the enemy was advancing on Paducah. He judged it right to inform General Grant, urging him to take Paducah without delay. General Grant decided to do so, and in accordance with his instructions of the 28th immediately moved on Paducah with an adequate force and two gun-boats."​

Excerpt From
Battles and Leaders of the Civil War Vol I
Robert Underwood Johnson
This material may be protected by copyright.

Fremont wanted to claim credit for Paducah, yet the most he could point to was sending Grant a letter with instructions on the same day that Grant was sending him urgent dispatches by telegraph informing that he would advance unless countermanded. Fremont's letter is rather like a publicity stunt for the press, something common for him. He sent Grant instructions by letter when Grant was urging a quick response by telegraph.

Grant edited a report (probably compiled by Rawlins and Bowers in 1864) in which he admitted that, after telegraphing Fremont about the information which de Arnaud brought, he received Fremont's orders of the 5th on the 5th, which instructed Grant to begin work at Fort Holt and to take Paducah, if possible. Grant replied to Fremont the same day and then went off to occupy Paducah. As he wrote the opposite in his Memoirs, perhaps you can tell me why you think one version is correct and the other not.