Gods and Generals Publisher: Ballantine Books (edição: 1998)

Gods and Generals is written as a prequel to The Killing Angels, a Pulitzer Prize winning novel written by Michael Shaara. This novel, written by his son, seeks to further the historical retelling of the civil war up to the battle of Gettysburg. Jeff, his son, does a nice job of bringing the war to the reader by concentrating on four main Generals: Robert E. Lee, Thomas Stonewall Jackson, (from the south), and Joshua Chamberlain and Winfred Scott Hancock (from the north). Some points of interest include the relationship that all these men had with each other. They knew each other or of each other from attending West Point and some fought together in The Mexican war which was a land grab that gave us the southwest, and provided valuable battle experience for the men who would later fight the civil war.
Men didn't necessarily chose sides based on their views of slavery, but were more opposed to the right of the central government to impose laws on individual states. For many it was the state's rights they were fighting for. I was interested to learn that Lee was asked to lead the troops for Lincoln, but could not bring himself to first feel loyalty for his home state of Virginia. It was also fascinating to learn of how many
early Union losses were because of bad leadership. Meade constantly asking for more troops when he had Lee on the run. Burnside waiting for the pontoons instead of crossing in the shallow section of the Rappahannock River.Thus giving Lee a chance to man the bank on the other side and win the day in Fredericksburg .
Shaara deciding to describe the battle through the eyes of four men also gives you a good perspective of the opposing ideas and insights into their beliefs, for example how religious both Jackson and Lee were. I would be interested in continuing my education in America's bloodiest battle and will look to go on to read about Gettysburg. ( )

Mostly good. The battles are well described, the inner thoughts of the major characters make sense and you feel for everyone involved. I found the pacing a bit slow and the last third definitely lost me a bit and felt repetitive. Weaving in real tactics from the battles was very cool. As I'm reading more historical fiction, I realize I should do more research prior to reading so I have a better fundamental understanding of the goings on. Was surprised the author chose to highlight both sides and not really have a set protagonist antagonist and not mention slavery that much but I suppose the Civil War was about more than that? Not sure, a bit confused about that. I guess history isn't always as clean cut as good vs bad so this probably was a good decision by the author. Following in his father's footsteps is super cool, looking forward to the Killer Angels. ( )

Gods and Generals is a work of historical fiction, written as a prequel to The Killer Angels, a book by the author's father. That book has the battle of Gettysburg as its centerpiece, and this book covers the war leading up to the second invasion of the north, building up to Gettysburg.

The story is told through the eyes of confederate officers Lee and Stonewall Jackson, and union officers Hancock and Chamberlain. The book follows the four men from the lead-up to secession through the end of the Battle of Chancellorsville. The reader follows them to Antietam and Fredericksburg and learns about some other battles peripherally.

Most of the story unfolds in the actions, thoughts and dialogues of the four men being followed and this method limits the amount of detail that can be covered without breaking away from the flow and format of the storytelling. Thus, someone with no background on the American Civil War might find themselves overwhelmed or confused at times.

My primary criticism of the book is that it focuses on four officers, three of whom are already well know and their stories well-told. The most interesting tale is probably the story of Joshua Chamberlain, who was not a soldier at the start of the war and must learn his way in the heat of battle. This is the only truly unique perspective in the book.

The other aspect I found frustrating was the abrupt manner in which perspectives changed, often with no overlap - even when it would have been interesting to have some.

For instance, much of General Jackson's early exploits are uncovered not from Jackson's perspective but from Lee's. There are other times when the men are on the same battlefield and instead of exploring the same events from multiple perspectives - something I personally think would have added a rich layer to this book - the author instead hands the baton off between men with one man's story picking up where the other's ends.

This book makes characters out of the four historical figures in a way that supposes to know their innermost thoughts and feelings on various topics. This sort of creative speculation is necessary in this style of book, but can occasionally feel disingenuous.

That all being said, the book covers the men in a compelling way, and after a slow start, moves at a good clip. The books avoids the traps of excessive sensory details and of extraneous broader historical context and narrows in on the visceral experience of the main characters and the men they lead. It makes a drama of the civil war in a manner that feels remarkably free of moral judgement and only gets into technical criticism in situations where it is very believable and where historians generally agree with the criticism being leveled.

I was happy with the reading experience and felt like my knowledge of the civil war was enhanced, albeit in a more personal sense than a technical one. I do plan on reading The Killer Angels next. ( )

start of Civil War — 1st Battles
genius of RE Lee — "Bobby" Lee
Big Faith in God on both sides — doing right thing god on their side
No plans — other side North — look like fools always retreat
Units — Irish Brigade — Maine Brigade —
Rebell Yell — when charge —

Jeff Shaara explores the lives of Generals Lee, Hancock, Jackson and Chamberlain as the pivotal Battle of Gettysburg approaches.

Shaara captures the disillusionment of both Lee and Hancock early in their careers, Lee's conflict with loyalty, Jackson's overwhelming Christian ethic and Chamberlain's total lack of experience, while illustrating how each compensated for shortcomings and failures when put to the test.

I perform yet another reread of this first in the series of historic fiction. Characters we know from the civil war are personalized and given dialogue to illustrate story line. Lee, Jackson, Hancock and Chamberlain are the four characters chosen by the author to view the war, and we learn a lot about them. Through Hancock and Chamberlain, we see the Union leadership flailing for one who can lead. if you don't enjoy detailed instruction about battles, this book is not yours. It won't make much sense audibly, without a map or a memory of the ground. Great way to read a history lesson. ( )