What do you think?
Rate this book
Stover At Yale
Illustrations by F. R. Gruger
Hardcover
First published January 1, 1912
25 people are currently reading
257 people want to read
About the author
Owen Johnson
39 books7 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
Owen McMahon Johnson was an American writer best remembered for his stories and novels cataloguing the educational and personal growth of the fictional character Dink Stover. The "Lawrenceville Stories" (The Prodigious Hickey, The Tennessee Shad, The Varmint, Skippy Bedelle, The Hummingbird), set in the well-known prep school, invite comparison with Rudyard Kipling's Stalky & Co. A 1950 film, The Happy Years, and a 1987 PBS mini-series, The Lawrenceville Stories, were based on them.
Owen McMahon Johnson was an American writer best remembered for his stories and novels cataloguing the educational and personal growth of the fictional character Dink Stover. The "Lawrenceville Stories" (The Prodigious Hickey, The Tennessee Shad, The Varmint, Skippy Bedelle, The Hummingbird), set in the well-known prep school, invite comparison with Rudyard Kipling's Stalky & Co. A 1950 film, The Happy Years, and a 1987 PBS mini-series, The Lawrenceville Stories, were based on them.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
November 1, 2009
This story starts on the Yale campus as freshman Dink Stover arrives, bright-eyed and eager as all good early 20th-century undergrads do in fiction. He becomes aware of the secret societies of the campus, particularly the Skull and Bones. The story is not so much about campus life, per se, but about the politics of campus life, how to succeed in the campus societies, and really just how to make it to the top of the social ladder.
I think maybe I would have enjoyed this if I had more testosterone. As it was I was sort of 'meh' about the whole thing. It didn't feel new, though probably because I've read Fitzgerald and I felt he did a relatively decent job of detailing the campus life. The Skull and Bones and others was a nice addition, however. Overall, though, I was bored by the sports talk (lots of football, some wrestling). I don't often think that if I were a male I might appreciate a story better, and this actually may have been the first time the thought crossed my mind.
There is at least another book in the Stover saga, and perhaps if I had read the one about his Lawrenceville days first I might have enjoyed Yale a little better. Can't say I won't check out anything else by Johnson, but I'm certainly in no rush.
I think maybe I would have enjoyed this if I had more testosterone. As it was I was sort of 'meh' about the whole thing. It didn't feel new, though probably because I've read Fitzgerald and I felt he did a relatively decent job of detailing the campus life. The Skull and Bones and others was a nice addition, however. Overall, though, I was bored by the sports talk (lots of football, some wrestling). I don't often think that if I were a male I might appreciate a story better, and this actually may have been the first time the thought crossed my mind.
There is at least another book in the Stover saga, and perhaps if I had read the one about his Lawrenceville days first I might have enjoyed Yale a little better. Can't say I won't check out anything else by Johnson, but I'm certainly in no rush.
Read
August 28, 2025many thoughts about this book, so I'm just gonna number some ideas:
1. there's a scene in this book where a student is trying to throw a pool ball hard enough to hit the moon, and when someone tells him he's never going to hit it, he says "suppose I should hit it, suppose I should, just think -- think -- how my name would go reeling and rocking down the fushure generations." and the drama of the entire book is shrunk down and exaggerated here. that the incredible American ambitions of these students is like throwing a pool ball and hoping to hit the moon, they all want to succeed but they won't, except if they do, then their success becomes a legend reiterating itself; it's an impossible act of self-exceptionalizing, that then becomes un-impossible in the retelling.
2. Stover (also called Dink, hilariously) essentially makes the realization at some point that when every student on a campus is ambitious and transactionally career driven, that supposed marker of individuality instead becomes the cultural average. they are all ambitious, the group is ambitious, only the individual who is not ambitious is the true individual.
3. despite my assumptions that this would be a Yale-certified puff piece (perhaps because of how Lemann described it), Johnson, by the end, comes to argue that the internal exclusivity of Yale (the secret societies) should be abolished. they still aren't.
4. this guy, Brockhurst, who appears randomly to espouse the importance of individuality, learning, and 'laziness' (he works for the literary journal and gives up the chairmanship to a guy who apparently writes two poems, an essay, and a story every night), argues that the campus should remove all external sources. external, he means, geographically -- the campus should develop, the students should learn, irrespective of those things which exist outside the physical boundaries of the campus space.
5. Brockhurst also judges Yale as a 'business college', in that it's not creating well-rounded gentlemen, but leaders who view the world itself as transactional and profit-driven. as an example, he gives a painter whose work does not create paintings, but 4000 dollar products. he argues that a war is needed every 10 years to remind the boys of a college what actual democratic and substantial personhood is.
6. Stover calls all of the students 'types' at one point. Stover himself, especially once his ambition is supported and glorified by the ending (secret society stuff), is an archetype that doesn't seem to exist anymore, at least in college literature (or even mainstream culture). the uber-career driven, breeding-dependent, conservative supporter of the college, who works for it (a contentious issue for the book) rather than being rewarded by it. and Johnson is earnest in this description. now, the students of college literature are suspicious, anxiety-riddled, frustrated, progressive. this book was pre-world wars, and perhaps there's something to that -- that the satirical, psychologically dramatic aspect of the contemporary literary student is in response to the cynicism of war, to the democratizing of American society away from the elite, to the recognition that life and happiness are not guaranteed by one's actions or beliefs, but birth and money. Dink Stover could not function as a college protagonist anymore, but as a foil meant to work in comparison.
7. football relies on war rhetoric, the inherent homosociality of an all-boys program with all-boyish manner, and a flattening of the individual. football preempts the narrative following, just like the pool ball. Johnson's image of the college is a collective that diminishes the individual, while simultaneously pushing for the empowerment of the individual.
8. boyhood and manhood are clearly distinguished, and the college itself becomes both a rite of passage between the two, and the moment of suspension which makes that passage slow down and get drawn out. it's only in the intervals in between, the undescribed summers, that allow the 'truth' to slip in, such that boys become men. Stover's roommate's father dies in the summer, and he becomes a man; Stover works construction for a summer, and becomes a man. manhood never develops on the campus.
9. I would need to check the wording again, but one scene argues that the 'truth' is what happens outside of campus, while the 'real' is what happens inside of it.
10. I'm sure there's more. what a book.
1. there's a scene in this book where a student is trying to throw a pool ball hard enough to hit the moon, and when someone tells him he's never going to hit it, he says "suppose I should hit it, suppose I should, just think -- think -- how my name would go reeling and rocking down the fushure generations." and the drama of the entire book is shrunk down and exaggerated here. that the incredible American ambitions of these students is like throwing a pool ball and hoping to hit the moon, they all want to succeed but they won't, except if they do, then their success becomes a legend reiterating itself; it's an impossible act of self-exceptionalizing, that then becomes un-impossible in the retelling.
2. Stover (also called Dink, hilariously) essentially makes the realization at some point that when every student on a campus is ambitious and transactionally career driven, that supposed marker of individuality instead becomes the cultural average. they are all ambitious, the group is ambitious, only the individual who is not ambitious is the true individual.
3. despite my assumptions that this would be a Yale-certified puff piece (perhaps because of how Lemann described it), Johnson, by the end, comes to argue that the internal exclusivity of Yale (the secret societies) should be abolished. they still aren't.
4. this guy, Brockhurst, who appears randomly to espouse the importance of individuality, learning, and 'laziness' (he works for the literary journal and gives up the chairmanship to a guy who apparently writes two poems, an essay, and a story every night), argues that the campus should remove all external sources. external, he means, geographically -- the campus should develop, the students should learn, irrespective of those things which exist outside the physical boundaries of the campus space.
5. Brockhurst also judges Yale as a 'business college', in that it's not creating well-rounded gentlemen, but leaders who view the world itself as transactional and profit-driven. as an example, he gives a painter whose work does not create paintings, but 4000 dollar products. he argues that a war is needed every 10 years to remind the boys of a college what actual democratic and substantial personhood is.
6. Stover calls all of the students 'types' at one point. Stover himself, especially once his ambition is supported and glorified by the ending (secret society stuff), is an archetype that doesn't seem to exist anymore, at least in college literature (or even mainstream culture). the uber-career driven, breeding-dependent, conservative supporter of the college, who works for it (a contentious issue for the book) rather than being rewarded by it. and Johnson is earnest in this description. now, the students of college literature are suspicious, anxiety-riddled, frustrated, progressive. this book was pre-world wars, and perhaps there's something to that -- that the satirical, psychologically dramatic aspect of the contemporary literary student is in response to the cynicism of war, to the democratizing of American society away from the elite, to the recognition that life and happiness are not guaranteed by one's actions or beliefs, but birth and money. Dink Stover could not function as a college protagonist anymore, but as a foil meant to work in comparison.
7. football relies on war rhetoric, the inherent homosociality of an all-boys program with all-boyish manner, and a flattening of the individual. football preempts the narrative following, just like the pool ball. Johnson's image of the college is a collective that diminishes the individual, while simultaneously pushing for the empowerment of the individual.
8. boyhood and manhood are clearly distinguished, and the college itself becomes both a rite of passage between the two, and the moment of suspension which makes that passage slow down and get drawn out. it's only in the intervals in between, the undescribed summers, that allow the 'truth' to slip in, such that boys become men. Stover's roommate's father dies in the summer, and he becomes a man; Stover works construction for a summer, and becomes a man. manhood never develops on the campus.
9. I would need to check the wording again, but one scene argues that the 'truth' is what happens outside of campus, while the 'real' is what happens inside of it.
10. I'm sure there's more. what a book.
January 14, 2025
Love these campus Novels. Secret societies.
STOVER AT YALE
"suddenly found himself in a school for character, enchained to the discipline of the Caesars, where the test lay in stoicism and the victory was built on the broken hopes of a comrade."The deadly seriousness of the American spirit, the savage fanaticism of its race for sucess
Brockhurst. here's 20 great machines that need new bolts, work harder than the next man, work at only one thing too succeed. It used to be enjoy leisure and youth, ruin wits with everyone. He wants to abolish the societies.
Great thoughts come out in the discussions about ridgid education ruining imagination and ORIGINALITY.
Stover admirable in the end making up his own mind and standing on business.
STOVER AT YALE
"suddenly found himself in a school for character, enchained to the discipline of the Caesars, where the test lay in stoicism and the victory was built on the broken hopes of a comrade."The deadly seriousness of the American spirit, the savage fanaticism of its race for sucess
Brockhurst. here's 20 great machines that need new bolts, work harder than the next man, work at only one thing too succeed. It used to be enjoy leisure and youth, ruin wits with everyone. He wants to abolish the societies.
Great thoughts come out in the discussions about ridgid education ruining imagination and ORIGINALITY.
Stover admirable in the end making up his own mind and standing on business.
September 11, 2022
Excellent book!
Interesting how F. Scott Fitzgerald called it “the textbook of our generation,“ and obviously was hugely influenced by it, to the point that his “This Side of Paradise” feels like a copy of it. Yet, when one tries to research this inspirational connection, there is hardly a word to be found. I find “Stover at Yale” to be fresher than Fitzgerald’s work. This is a true forgotten gem.
In any case, the writing is effervescent and extremely witty. I found myself laughing out loud again and again, something that I rarely do when reading novels, even funny ones. I suppose it’s the universality of the story, the uncanny insights and honed talent as gifted narrator Owen Johnson displays. A modern reader can relate very well to the inner workings of the main character. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Stover at Yale is a coming of age tale, set at the beginning of the 20th Century at Yale University, which was then essentially a male world. This doubles as a valuable insight into a reality before emancipation and our modern social attitudes. The political and social problems Dink struggles with go the roots of the beginnings of our modern society. The well-written glimpses found throughout this work effect an understanding and appreciation of our historic struggles and the long road travelled, while at the same time entertain and awe. But be that as it may, Stover at Yale is certainly a terrifically written adventure story. Readers who enjoy masterly use of nuanced language and who do not get discouraged by occasional antiquated word usage — which does require looking up to attain best enjoyment — will get excited about this delightful book. As a bonus: it’s free to download since it’s copyright expired.
Interesting how F. Scott Fitzgerald called it “the textbook of our generation,“ and obviously was hugely influenced by it, to the point that his “This Side of Paradise” feels like a copy of it. Yet, when one tries to research this inspirational connection, there is hardly a word to be found. I find “Stover at Yale” to be fresher than Fitzgerald’s work. This is a true forgotten gem.
In any case, the writing is effervescent and extremely witty. I found myself laughing out loud again and again, something that I rarely do when reading novels, even funny ones. I suppose it’s the universality of the story, the uncanny insights and honed talent as gifted narrator Owen Johnson displays. A modern reader can relate very well to the inner workings of the main character. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Stover at Yale is a coming of age tale, set at the beginning of the 20th Century at Yale University, which was then essentially a male world. This doubles as a valuable insight into a reality before emancipation and our modern social attitudes. The political and social problems Dink struggles with go the roots of the beginnings of our modern society. The well-written glimpses found throughout this work effect an understanding and appreciation of our historic struggles and the long road travelled, while at the same time entertain and awe. But be that as it may, Stover at Yale is certainly a terrifically written adventure story. Readers who enjoy masterly use of nuanced language and who do not get discouraged by occasional antiquated word usage — which does require looking up to attain best enjoyment — will get excited about this delightful book. As a bonus: it’s free to download since it’s copyright expired.
March 20, 2015
Even for the early 20th century, the book is mostly bland and uses the redundant platform of privileged men at an Ivy League school.
Johnson almost offers a moment of grace when Stover ostracizes himself by shunning the socially hierarchical sophomore societies. Naturally, this is undone by Stover's sellout: he joins the most hierarchical of senior societies: Skulls and Bones.
Sigh. Silly love story, coming into one's own, dropping of the ego...
oh, I just woke up.
Johnson almost offers a moment of grace when Stover ostracizes himself by shunning the socially hierarchical sophomore societies. Naturally, this is undone by Stover's sellout: he joins the most hierarchical of senior societies: Skulls and Bones.
Sigh. Silly love story, coming into one's own, dropping of the ego...
oh, I just woke up.
March 7, 2023
“He had listened as a child listens. He went out bewildered and humble. For the first time
since he had come to Yale, he had felt something real. His mind and his imagination had been stirred, awak-ened, hungry, rebellious.”
This was lovely. Honestly, I really enjoyed the thoughtfulness of Dink Stover and how the book followed no specific plot other than that of Stover understanding who he was and everything he didn’t know.
since he had come to Yale, he had felt something real. His mind and his imagination had been stirred, awak-ened, hungry, rebellious.”
This was lovely. Honestly, I really enjoyed the thoughtfulness of Dink Stover and how the book followed no specific plot other than that of Stover understanding who he was and everything he didn’t know.
December 18, 2025
best book i’ve read all year. good for you dink stover. started for the hyperfixation, hooked on the silly, stayed for the emotional drama. yippee!
March 13, 2023
"I`m going out to lead because I can do it and I believe in the right things" - Dink Stover (also something said to themselves by every dictator ever)
Before reaching the end of the first third of the book I though I was never going to get to the end if it went on like this. I`m glad that I decided to push through, because a few chapters into the second third of it I realized the first third of Stover at Yale was there to provide contrast for the rest of the book.
However, I still feel somewhat conflicted about it. On the one hand, it carries a significant message that is as relevant (if not more so) now as it was back when it was published at the beginning of the 20th century: the necessity for honest discussion between all elements of society as a unifying force and foundation of democracy, the lack of which results in division, radicalization and - ultimately - social unrest. In this sense Stover at Yale, although written more than a century ago, remains relevant today. However, the approach with which this problem is tackled by the author seems highly naive and tends to illustrate a successful campaign of leveling the conversational field for all members of a micro-society (in this case - a university campus) without addressing problems that would prevent such equilibrium from forming. How do you deal with truly radical forces that have no intention of engaging in a conversation or listening? How do you prevent the leveling field from developing into a utilitarian distopia? How do you prevent the leaders from acquiring a monopoly on executive power and, conversely, how do you make a democratic executive mechanism efficient enough to make decisions promptly and avoid endless bickering between different parties within a given society when prompt response and action is required? I obviously do not expect a single medium length novel to answer all of them. However, at least one or two aspects could have been included in order to make the book less of a utopian snapshot. The values expressed in this book are commendable. However, they do feel rather removed from the real life, even though the novel is written in a realist, almost autobiographical, fashion. It is rather ironic how soon after its publication the problems mentioned in Stover at Yale will plague the Western World for the majority of the 20th century.
The absolute highlights of the book for me were monologue/dialogue sections by Brockhurst, which not only express interesting ideas, but are also written in a witty and vibrant vernacular. And, I suspect, are perhaps reflective of the ideas of the author himself. Overall, the book would have benefited significantly by more space being allocated for the depictions of ideological debates between characters, rather than painfully long-winded descriptions of football matches or lackluster depictions of the protagonist's emotional turmoil from a psychological lens.
In summary, reading Stover at Yale for me was an experience similar to reading What Is To Be Done by Nikolai Chernyshevsky: a novel of questionable literary value which is still an interesting insight into thoughts and values disseminated within the intellectual circles at the time of its writing.
Before reaching the end of the first third of the book I though I was never going to get to the end if it went on like this. I`m glad that I decided to push through, because a few chapters into the second third of it I realized the first third of Stover at Yale was there to provide contrast for the rest of the book.
However, I still feel somewhat conflicted about it. On the one hand, it carries a significant message that is as relevant (if not more so) now as it was back when it was published at the beginning of the 20th century: the necessity for honest discussion between all elements of society as a unifying force and foundation of democracy, the lack of which results in division, radicalization and - ultimately - social unrest. In this sense Stover at Yale, although written more than a century ago, remains relevant today. However, the approach with which this problem is tackled by the author seems highly naive and tends to illustrate a successful campaign of leveling the conversational field for all members of a micro-society (in this case - a university campus) without addressing problems that would prevent such equilibrium from forming. How do you deal with truly radical forces that have no intention of engaging in a conversation or listening? How do you prevent the leveling field from developing into a utilitarian distopia? How do you prevent the leaders from acquiring a monopoly on executive power and, conversely, how do you make a democratic executive mechanism efficient enough to make decisions promptly and avoid endless bickering between different parties within a given society when prompt response and action is required? I obviously do not expect a single medium length novel to answer all of them. However, at least one or two aspects could have been included in order to make the book less of a utopian snapshot. The values expressed in this book are commendable. However, they do feel rather removed from the real life, even though the novel is written in a realist, almost autobiographical, fashion. It is rather ironic how soon after its publication the problems mentioned in Stover at Yale will plague the Western World for the majority of the 20th century.
The absolute highlights of the book for me were monologue/dialogue sections by Brockhurst, which not only express interesting ideas, but are also written in a witty and vibrant vernacular. And, I suspect, are perhaps reflective of the ideas of the author himself. Overall, the book would have benefited significantly by more space being allocated for the depictions of ideological debates between characters, rather than painfully long-winded descriptions of football matches or lackluster depictions of the protagonist's emotional turmoil from a psychological lens.
In summary, reading Stover at Yale for me was an experience similar to reading What Is To Be Done by Nikolai Chernyshevsky: a novel of questionable literary value which is still an interesting insight into thoughts and values disseminated within the intellectual circles at the time of its writing.
February 6, 2024
With the book being 112 years old at the time that I read it and tyne setting being a very elitist environment, I didn't think I would find much in this book. I was pleasantly surprised to find that the book contained a great deal of positive life lessons, characters with strong moral conviction, and shades of gray to show that there can be many different sides to one issue. It's an excellent read for any young person facing the challenge of navigating complex social circles. Even after a century, the message and lessons are both relevant and supportive.
Want to read
June 5, 2009If Jacques says its his one of his all-time favorites, then I gotta read it!
August 13, 2022
Here's the start:
"Stover," said Le Baron, resting a hand on his knee, "I like you. I liked you from the first time we lined up in that Andover-Lawrenceville game. You've got the stuff in I'm trying to make you see this thing as it is. You come from a school that doesn't send many fellows here. You haven't the fellows ahead pulling for you, the way the other crowds have. I don't want you to make any mistake. Remember, you're going to be watched from now on."
"Watched?" said Stover, frowning.
"Yes; everything you do, everything you say that's how you'll be judged. That's why I'm telling you these things."
"I appreciate it," said Stover, but without enthusiasm.
Already running a gauntlet. Seen Everybody Wants Some!!?? Where he says, "When I was in high school, I was the best at what I did [baseball] — but here, everyone was the best at where they came from, and we have to start over" or something like that. He's already being winnowed. This is when you're in a class at all — and with Stover, we're talking no girls, and pre-World Wars.
"They pound out spontaneity," someone says later in the novel, sounding like a Generation X-er (which is why I mention Richard Linklater's movie, above — we all have to go through this, over and over, and so much the worse if we didn't get the notes to begin with!). "They make us do stuff that fits into a line of work later . . . " or something. The fact that they're rebelling, or considering rebelling, is what makes this book a milestone.
From F. Scott Fitzgerald to Thomas Pynchon and Richard Fariña, this book set the tone for what was to come later — what if it was appealing, to conform . . . ?? What if you felt all the eyes on you, and it wasn't so easy . . . ?? What if you said something really stupid to the girl, and didn't know if you could take it back . . . ??
These are the signal virtues of any good dramatist/fiction writer — putting you there, and Johnson qualifies in spades. It's just so different that it snaps back and hits you in the face.
A good book.
Highly recommended!
"Stover," said Le Baron, resting a hand on his knee, "I like you. I liked you from the first time we lined up in that Andover-Lawrenceville game. You've got the stuff in I'm trying to make you see this thing as it is. You come from a school that doesn't send many fellows here. You haven't the fellows ahead pulling for you, the way the other crowds have. I don't want you to make any mistake. Remember, you're going to be watched from now on."
"Watched?" said Stover, frowning.
"Yes; everything you do, everything you say that's how you'll be judged. That's why I'm telling you these things."
"I appreciate it," said Stover, but without enthusiasm.
Already running a gauntlet. Seen Everybody Wants Some!!?? Where he says, "When I was in high school, I was the best at what I did [baseball] — but here, everyone was the best at where they came from, and we have to start over" or something like that. He's already being winnowed. This is when you're in a class at all — and with Stover, we're talking no girls, and pre-World Wars.
"They pound out spontaneity," someone says later in the novel, sounding like a Generation X-er (which is why I mention Richard Linklater's movie, above — we all have to go through this, over and over, and so much the worse if we didn't get the notes to begin with!). "They make us do stuff that fits into a line of work later . . . " or something. The fact that they're rebelling, or considering rebelling, is what makes this book a milestone.
From F. Scott Fitzgerald to Thomas Pynchon and Richard Fariña, this book set the tone for what was to come later — what if it was appealing, to conform . . . ?? What if you felt all the eyes on you, and it wasn't so easy . . . ?? What if you said something really stupid to the girl, and didn't know if you could take it back . . . ??
These are the signal virtues of any good dramatist/fiction writer — putting you there, and Johnson qualifies in spades. It's just so different that it snaps back and hits you in the face.
A good book.
Highly recommended!
February 27, 2020
Fitzgerald made a reference to this book in This Side of Paradise. Dink Stover is a somewhat cloddish older brother-type to Amory Blaine. Stover is consumed with becoming the Big Man. Blaine has passed this stage in search of the Perfect Girl. It's kind of amusing reading them alternately. You can see the silkiness of Fitzgerald's writing assert itself over Johnson's.
January 26, 2022
Very interesting book to read first published in 1912
The this copy was published in 2017
The way it was printed made it a little difficult to read the book to me has no rhythm to make it more readable.
But nevertheless it gave a nice insight into college live a Yale.
An enjoyable read recommend it
The this copy was published in 2017
The way it was printed made it a little difficult to read the book to me has no rhythm to make it more readable.
But nevertheless it gave a nice insight into college live a Yale.
An enjoyable read recommend it
March 18, 2022
school book. boring. did not like. will not be elaborating
January 17, 2016
Surprisingly good, and still relevant after over 100 years
Somewhat predictable and not quite literary. Heavy-handed and melodramatic in a number of places, and the title character is not the most interesting... But it handles matters of continuing cultural weight and speaks to possibly irresolvable problems that persist in a de facto caste-ridden society and articulates them well
Somewhat predictable and not quite literary. Heavy-handed and melodramatic in a number of places, and the title character is not the most interesting... But it handles matters of continuing cultural weight and speaks to possibly irresolvable problems that persist in a de facto caste-ridden society and articulates them well
January 13, 2025
Okay, you have to know quite a bit about Yale’s history to appreciate this book, but once you do — and I’ve spent the past 2.5 years learning about Yale through my work as librarian and archives manager at The Yale Club of New York City — the book is just a fun, fascinating look at college life in the early years of the 20th century, before WWI would change everything. Loved this! And I was reading a copy from 1912, which just made it more special.
November 3, 2012
Read long ago if at all. Maybe it was Frank Merriwell instead. My Dad was a Yalie(me too albeit briefly) so he probably gave it to me. Rings a faint bell... Date read is a guess.
May 11, 2015
Interesting period novel about college life at Yale during the early twentieth century.
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews