Ricci G. (goldie61) reviewed on + 39 more book reviews
It's difficult to read a critical book on a man that I admire. It was obvious to me that author Lasky was not a "Kennedy" man when he wrote this book. Still, the book has valid points and was written before RFK's death. A postscript was added to note his assassination just prior to publication. So on one hand, the book is not written in the afterglow following Kennedy's death, when critical points are downplayed and the man's work is put on a pedestal. This is a warts and all telling of RFK when his impact was at it's highest point.
The flip side to all of this is a number of troubling signs. One, Lasky never interviewed RFK and by all accounts, made only a passive effort to do so. Written in 1968, there are a great many quotes (largely negative) that are attributed to unnamed sources. After his death, I suspect more people were willing to go on record with their comments, but few were willing to do so while Kennedy was alive. Lasky's book is certainly not as balanced as he makes it out to be.
This is a good read if you find yourself loving the image of RFK that goes too far towards sainthood. He was a man with faults, which Lasky goes to great lengths to expose and highlight. As much as Robert Kennedy accomphished, it's my belief that what he stood for and what he could have accomplished are even more interesting. Lasky's book helped keep me balanced in my personal assessment of RFK, but at the same time, my assesment of his writting on Kennedy is colored by his personal dislike of RFK and his methods. I read it all the way through and gave it two stars for lack of balance throughout. Still, it's written without hindsight and while history on RFK was very much active so it serves as interesting fodder on the man.
The flip side to all of this is a number of troubling signs. One, Lasky never interviewed RFK and by all accounts, made only a passive effort to do so. Written in 1968, there are a great many quotes (largely negative) that are attributed to unnamed sources. After his death, I suspect more people were willing to go on record with their comments, but few were willing to do so while Kennedy was alive. Lasky's book is certainly not as balanced as he makes it out to be.
This is a good read if you find yourself loving the image of RFK that goes too far towards sainthood. He was a man with faults, which Lasky goes to great lengths to expose and highlight. As much as Robert Kennedy accomphished, it's my belief that what he stood for and what he could have accomplished are even more interesting. Lasky's book helped keep me balanced in my personal assessment of RFK, but at the same time, my assesment of his writting on Kennedy is colored by his personal dislike of RFK and his methods. I read it all the way through and gave it two stars for lack of balance throughout. Still, it's written without hindsight and while history on RFK was very much active so it serves as interesting fodder on the man.
