![]() ![]() ![]() Once again, Ambrose has written a history that reads like a novel, and perhaps that's why other historians don't like him - people actually want to read what Ambrose has to say. This book entranced me with the details of how the west was conquered by the railroads, and I was even more taken with his description of the spirit of the men who did it. Before picking up this book, I had no interest in the history of the transcontinental railroad, but after only a couple of chapters, this book was a page turner. But Ambrose has been able to do something most historians fail to do - he brings history to life and this book was no exception. He has made a few errors along the way, and his writing style is less meticulous than many academics today which has drawn widespread rancor from his peers. ![]() As I have read more of his work, I agree that he doesn't sound like a trained historian, and I find that a good thing. There is a vocal contingent of people who like to criticize Stephen Ambrose for his methods and style, who don't consider him a true historian, despite his academic credentials. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |