Status
Available
Collection
Publication
New York, New York : Penguin Press, 2015-
Description
A definitive portrait of the American statesman, based on unprecedented access to his private papers, challenges common misconceptions to trace Kissinger's beliefs to philosophical idealism.
Media reviews
Ferguson is Kissinger’s authorized biographer, and in 1,000 pages he begins the task of rescuing his subject’s tarnished reputation. It is a steep climb. The foreign policy chief for Presidents Nixon and Ford has been portrayed in dozens of books and by countless witnesses as a coddler of
Show More
dictators, a cynical practitioner of realpolitik, a war-monger, a suck-up to superiors, and a tyrant to subordinates—his genius and wit matched only by his underhandedness. Show Less
User reviews
LibraryThing member chaz166
This is a phenomenal book, tracing the early life, education, and rise of one of America's most influential statesmen. This book, part 1, ends with Kissinger accepting Nixon's offer to become his National Security Adviser - part 2 will cover his public life in office.
Niall Ferguson slays several
Whether you like or dislike Henry Kissinger, believe he was a great statesman or war criminal, you should read this book. You will learn much the man and the times that shaped him.
Niall Ferguson slays several
Show More
great myths, refuting the prominent and wide-spread beliefs that: Kissinger's worldview was entirely shaped by his early life under Nazi Germany (instead it clearly seems his experience in post-war Counterintelligence, transitioning from investigating Nazis to stemming the flow of Communist influence was far more influential), that he single-handedly ruined the 1968 peace talks by leaking information to the Nixon campaign (more detailed information was available to the press, not to mention the interaction between Pres Johnson and all of the presidential candidates), and, as his main thesis, that Kissinger was not a dyed-in-the-wool Machiavellian realist ab ovo -- instead chronicling how, at each stage of his life, his almost naive idealism was tested and weakened. Throughout, Ferguson highlights the major developmental advances in Kissinger's thought, not an easy task for a subject whose lengthy undergraduate thesis caused a word-count precedent still enforced at Harvard today.Whether you like or dislike Henry Kissinger, believe he was a great statesman or war criminal, you should read this book. You will learn much the man and the times that shaped him.
Show Less
LibraryThing member jwhenderson
Momumental biography of the first half of the life of Henry Kissinger. Excellent in its detail portrayal of the develpoment of Kissingers' thought. The research and Ferguson's access to personal documents help make this an excellent biography entwined with history and political philosophy.
LibraryThing member tuckerresearch
Niall Ferguson is a fine researcher, writer, and thinker, which makes this official biography of Henry Kissinger an important contribution to the historiography of Kissinger in the middle decades of the 20th century. Kissinger gave Ferguson access to his personal papers, his friends, and himself.
No, Ferguson and/or photo caption writer: Gerald Ford was not elected Nixon's Vice President in 1968, or ever. Photos, endnotes, bibliography, index.
Show More
The result is a thorough and complete life and times around Kissinger to 1968, when Nixon selected him as National Security Advisor. A lot is to be learned about the US occupation of Germany after WWII, Harvard, the Cold War, the National Security apparatus, and Vietnam. Ferguson makes mince meat out oft he conspiracy theory that Kissinger and Nixon, et al., sabotaged peace with North Vietnam to win the 1968 election for Nixon. It's a crap theory and always has been. Kissinger is an important figure, and this is an important book.No, Ferguson and/or photo caption writer: Gerald Ford was not elected Nixon's Vice President in 1968, or ever. Photos, endnotes, bibliography, index.
Show Less
LibraryThing member willszal
As you might have heard, Henry Kissinger has died.
Sam Kriss, in his article, "Very Ordinary Men," in "The Point" on Elon Musk notes that good biographies are about dead people. Although Kriss is derisive and dismissive of the biography as a format because of this, I see it as one of their
Now, it should be noted that this biography was indeed published before Kissinger's death. That said, it only covers the first half of his life (Ferguson is supposedly working on the second volume). Additionally, now that Kissinger is dead, the meaning of biographies on the subject already started to evolve, even if their texts stay unchanging.
Before reading this book, I knew very little about Kissinger. Maybe this is partially because he was an old man by the time I was born. Maybe this is also because he is often associated with evil; I don't have an obsession with Hitler, why would I care about Kissinger?
That said, I've been around some conversations recently asking: if Kissinger hadn't perpetrated the evils he had, would worse evils have followed? This seems a question worth exploring, so I've decided to dig a little deeper.
I began by attempting to listen to an eight-hour podcast from "Behind the Bastards," about Kissinger, referred by a friend. I found it entirely unlistenable; it consists of four guys laughing at their own jokes, many of which happen not to be funny. I did get one thing out of the part I listened to though; they extensively cite two book—"Kissinger's Long Shadow," and this book (I'll be moving on to the other title next).
Ferguson's biography is the authorized biography, meaning that it is likely the most laudatory in tone. That said, Kissinger did sign an agreement leaving journalistic voice up to Ferguson, and reserving Ferguson's right to publish critical perspectives.
We might begin with the subtitle. Apparently Kissinger is often thought of as a "realist." Ferguson posits that, at least during the first half of his life, Kissinger was an idealist. I think we can attribute some of this to semantics; there are many possible interpretations to these terms depending on how you believe reality works, and on the ideals you hold. Ultimately, I think it was chosen as a controversial statement to draw in the reader and we shouldn't read too deeply into the assertion.
One of the amazing things about the book is that it covers an incredibly broad swath of history, starting with interwar Germany and concluding with the election of Nixon. A lot happened in Kissinger's life, which means Ferguson has taken the time to educate the reader about some of the context that contributed to his decisions. Even if I wasn't interested in learning more about Kissinger, the book is an excellent way to learn about the foreign policy of the United States in the 1940s, '50s, and '60s.
What is the biggest takeaway from this era? The Cold War was very real, and the United States and the USSR pursued a policy of "little" wars around the war as opposed to embarking on World War III. One thing I hadn't realized was the extent to which the United States went to wage "psychological warfare." This included strategies such as hosting international conferences to establish the Overton Window on a wide range of cultural and scientific issues.
Of course, such a policy has savage, sometimes genocidal, outcomes. You could say that it is an extension of colonialism: "first world countries shouldn't need to bear the burden of war on their own soil, so these wars should be exported to the third world."
At times, Ferguson hits on poignant moments in Kissinger's life. While wrapping up his German military tour, Kissinger's girlfriend bought him a cocker spaniel in Paris whom he named Smoky. He was absolutely in love with this dog, and brought it to Harvard, explicitly against school policy. Tragically, Smoky came to an untimely death as the result of being forgotten in a locked car in New York City on a hot summer day (the book doesn't place attribution for this death, so we are left to assume it is Kissinger's negligence).
Yet on the whole, the book, despite its length, fails to give a thorough account of Kissinger's personal life (this is likely partially due to Kissinger's right to veto aspects of the text that compromised personal relationships). We hear almost nothing about Kissinger's lovers, wives, children, etc. This kind material provides invaluable insights into the nature of someone's character, so it unfortunately left to some future historian to discover.
For all of the facts that the book provides, it is light on narrative. As I mentioned above, I don't find that the "idealist/realist" dichotomy especially holds up. I'm just a short way into Grandin's biography, and already feel as though the author has hit on more of the fundamentals of Kissinger's worldview. On the other hand, this isn't always a bad thing; Ferguson ultimately lets his reader judge Kissinger's fate, as opposed to arguing for his redemption or damnation.
If you have an interest in 20th century history, this book is well worth the read. The Vietnam section drags on (as did the war itself), but otherwise it keeps a good pace. Ferguson manages quite intimate, human portraits of Kissinger's interlocutors such as John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson.
So have I answered my question about evil? Let me get to the end of this next book first and I'll get back to you on it.
Sam Kriss, in his article, "Very Ordinary Men," in "The Point" on Elon Musk notes that good biographies are about dead people. Although Kriss is derisive and dismissive of the biography as a format because of this, I see it as one of their
Show More
strengths. Someone's life gains significance in its place in history, in its meaning to others.Now, it should be noted that this biography was indeed published before Kissinger's death. That said, it only covers the first half of his life (Ferguson is supposedly working on the second volume). Additionally, now that Kissinger is dead, the meaning of biographies on the subject already started to evolve, even if their texts stay unchanging.
Before reading this book, I knew very little about Kissinger. Maybe this is partially because he was an old man by the time I was born. Maybe this is also because he is often associated with evil; I don't have an obsession with Hitler, why would I care about Kissinger?
That said, I've been around some conversations recently asking: if Kissinger hadn't perpetrated the evils he had, would worse evils have followed? This seems a question worth exploring, so I've decided to dig a little deeper.
I began by attempting to listen to an eight-hour podcast from "Behind the Bastards," about Kissinger, referred by a friend. I found it entirely unlistenable; it consists of four guys laughing at their own jokes, many of which happen not to be funny. I did get one thing out of the part I listened to though; they extensively cite two book—"Kissinger's Long Shadow," and this book (I'll be moving on to the other title next).
Ferguson's biography is the authorized biography, meaning that it is likely the most laudatory in tone. That said, Kissinger did sign an agreement leaving journalistic voice up to Ferguson, and reserving Ferguson's right to publish critical perspectives.
We might begin with the subtitle. Apparently Kissinger is often thought of as a "realist." Ferguson posits that, at least during the first half of his life, Kissinger was an idealist. I think we can attribute some of this to semantics; there are many possible interpretations to these terms depending on how you believe reality works, and on the ideals you hold. Ultimately, I think it was chosen as a controversial statement to draw in the reader and we shouldn't read too deeply into the assertion.
One of the amazing things about the book is that it covers an incredibly broad swath of history, starting with interwar Germany and concluding with the election of Nixon. A lot happened in Kissinger's life, which means Ferguson has taken the time to educate the reader about some of the context that contributed to his decisions. Even if I wasn't interested in learning more about Kissinger, the book is an excellent way to learn about the foreign policy of the United States in the 1940s, '50s, and '60s.
What is the biggest takeaway from this era? The Cold War was very real, and the United States and the USSR pursued a policy of "little" wars around the war as opposed to embarking on World War III. One thing I hadn't realized was the extent to which the United States went to wage "psychological warfare." This included strategies such as hosting international conferences to establish the Overton Window on a wide range of cultural and scientific issues.
Of course, such a policy has savage, sometimes genocidal, outcomes. You could say that it is an extension of colonialism: "first world countries shouldn't need to bear the burden of war on their own soil, so these wars should be exported to the third world."
At times, Ferguson hits on poignant moments in Kissinger's life. While wrapping up his German military tour, Kissinger's girlfriend bought him a cocker spaniel in Paris whom he named Smoky. He was absolutely in love with this dog, and brought it to Harvard, explicitly against school policy. Tragically, Smoky came to an untimely death as the result of being forgotten in a locked car in New York City on a hot summer day (the book doesn't place attribution for this death, so we are left to assume it is Kissinger's negligence).
Yet on the whole, the book, despite its length, fails to give a thorough account of Kissinger's personal life (this is likely partially due to Kissinger's right to veto aspects of the text that compromised personal relationships). We hear almost nothing about Kissinger's lovers, wives, children, etc. This kind material provides invaluable insights into the nature of someone's character, so it unfortunately left to some future historian to discover.
For all of the facts that the book provides, it is light on narrative. As I mentioned above, I don't find that the "idealist/realist" dichotomy especially holds up. I'm just a short way into Grandin's biography, and already feel as though the author has hit on more of the fundamentals of Kissinger's worldview. On the other hand, this isn't always a bad thing; Ferguson ultimately lets his reader judge Kissinger's fate, as opposed to arguing for his redemption or damnation.
If you have an interest in 20th century history, this book is well worth the read. The Vietnam section drags on (as did the war itself), but otherwise it keeps a good pace. Ferguson manages quite intimate, human portraits of Kissinger's interlocutors such as John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson.
So have I answered my question about evil? Let me get to the end of this next book first and I'll get back to you on it.
Show Less
Awards
Arthur Ross Book Award (Gold Medal — Gold Medal — 2016)
Lionel Gelber Prize (Shortlist — 2016)
The Observer Book of the Year (Politics — 2015)