What do you think?
Custer
All'accademia militare di West Point, George Armstrong Custer si diplomò trentaquattresimo su trentaquattro, ma con perfetto tempismo. Appena uscito, si trovò catapultato nella guerra civile americana, quattro anni di mattanze che sancirono la sua fortuna. Tuttavia, nonostante la sua partecipazione a numerose battaglie importanti, non sarebbe mai entrato nella storia se il 25 giugno 1876 non avesse dato prova di tremenda arroganza, ignorato tutti gli avvertimenti e condotto al massacro cinque compagnie del 7o Reggimento Cavalleria. A differenza delle poche notizie certe che abbiamo su Cavallo Pazzo, che forse sul Little Bighorn bloccò la ritirata del generale verso nord, la documentazione su Custer è cosí vasta da essersi meritata il nome di «custerologia». Lo stesso Larry McMurtry ci confessa di aver posseduto, a un certo punto, una collezione custerologica di piú di mille reperti. Da questa vasta biblioteca attinge con sapienza per tracciare un ritratto del generale degno di un grande romanziere. Poco empatico ma molto legato alla famiglia e agli animali, odiato dai suoi sottoposti, Custer seppe scegliersi una moglie volitiva, Libbie, che rimasta vedova avrebbe difeso pubblicamente la sua memoria per altri cinquant'anni. Con rapide e vigorose pennellate, McMurtry ci racconta i fatti salienti della vita di Custer e ne ricostruisce il contesto storico, ricordando la contesa delle Black Hills, gli altri generali impegnati nella lotta contro gli indiani, e soprattutto gli indiani stessi, dai capi come Toro Seduto, il cui sogno fu determinante per l'esito della battaglia, agli scout che, pur sapendo di andare incontro a morte certa, non abbandonarono il generale e morirono insieme a lui. La parabola di un uomo troppo sicuro di sé diventa l'occasione per tratteggiare un nuovo, grandioso affresco dell'Ovest in tutti i suoi aspetti, compresi quelli piú ambigui.
120 pages, Hardcover
First published November 6, 2012
About the author
Larry McMurtry
169 books4,799 followersLarry Jeff McMurtry was an American novelist, essayist, and screenwriter whose work was predominantly set in either the Old West or contemporary Texas. His novels included Horseman, Pass By (1962), The Last Picture Show (1966), and Terms of Endearment (1975), which were adapted into films. Films adapted from McMurtry's works earned 34 Oscar nominations (13 wins). He was also a prominent book collector and bookseller.
His 1985 Pulitzer Prize-winning novel Lonesome Dove was adapted into a television miniseries that earned 18 Emmy Award nominations (seven wins). The subsequent three novels in his Lonesome Dove series were adapted as three more miniseries, earning eight more Emmy nominations. McMurtry and co-writer Diana Ossana adapted the screenplay for Brokeback Mountain (2005), which earned eight Academy Award nominations with three wins, including McMurtry and Ossana for Best Adapted Screenplay. In 2014, McMurtry received the National Humanities Medal.
In Tracy Daugherty's 2023 biography of McMurtry, the biographer quotes critic Dave Hickey as saying about McMurtry: "Larry is a writer, and it's kind of like being a critter. If you leave a cow alone, he'll eat grass. If you leave Larry alone, he'll write books. When he's in public, he may say hello and goodbye, but otherwise he is just resting, getting ready to go write."
His 1985 Pulitzer Prize-winning novel Lonesome Dove was adapted into a television miniseries that earned 18 Emmy Award nominations (seven wins). The subsequent three novels in his Lonesome Dove series were adapted as three more miniseries, earning eight more Emmy nominations. McMurtry and co-writer Diana Ossana adapted the screenplay for Brokeback Mountain (2005), which earned eight Academy Award nominations with three wins, including McMurtry and Ossana for Best Adapted Screenplay. In 2014, McMurtry received the National Humanities Medal.
In Tracy Daugherty's 2023 biography of McMurtry, the biographer quotes critic Dave Hickey as saying about McMurtry: "Larry is a writer, and it's kind of like being a critter. If you leave a cow alone, he'll eat grass. If you leave Larry alone, he'll write books. When he's in public, he may say hello and goodbye, but otherwise he is just resting, getting ready to go write."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 228 reviews
December 26, 2012
Most readers know Larry McMurtry as a fine writer of fiction, but fewer people know he is a master of the short biography. "Crazy Horse" is an example of such a biography. "Custer" isn't. Which is not to say that "Custer" is without its virtues and pleasures.
"Custer" is a sumptuous coffee table book, full of a score of pictures of the Colonel and Mrs. Custer, and--even better--at least two score photographs of Native Americans--most of them involved in this great final victory of the unwinnable war against the U.S. Reading between the lines, I get the feeling that McMurtry, who believes the definitive work on Custer has already been done, and who is aware of how much (and how little) the ideal coffee table book requires, decided to indulge himself, rambling on like a seasoned docent at a small, well-endowed museum, spinning great yarns which illuminate the exhibits and while stilll taking the liberty of to face his desultory delivery with a tangentially relevant anecdote from time to time.
All this is very much okay with me. Even the "irrelevant" anecdotes are more relevant than they first appear: it's just that McMurtry lets you be smart and connect the dots yourself.
Once you have completed this brief but leisurely trip through the Little Big Horn Photographic Museum, you will find that you have seen more than a few good pictures and learned more than a few good things from a knowledgeable guide.
February 18, 2013
You don't have to be much of a salesperson to sell me a book on Custer or the fight at Little Big Horn, so when I saw this offering by Larry McMurtry I had my wallet out pretty darn quick. After all, McMurtry had penned Lonesome Dove , one of the best darn westerns ever. I soon found out that being a capable writer of fiction doesn't necessarily make one a capable biographer. I got the impression that he was thinking:
"I'm Larry McMurtry and I have a zillion books in print so I really don't have to make any effort to write anything good or even coherent. I'll just fill a book with pictures and fools will buy it because It has my name on it. Hell, I won't even hire a proofreader or verify any of the information I'm putting forth as fact". The following are a couple of examples of the literary gems the unsuspecting buyer will encounter:
P.27: " And Custer's dash and flare (sic) were genuine, besides which they made the generals look good, Sheridan particularly." ; and
P.42: " The Indians came by the thousands, riding their best horses and all their finery, in the way of bear claws and eagle feathers.
I could go on and on...Mr McMurtry did. Another thing that rankles is an image on page 36, which McMurtry identifies as being an image of Custer with his horse, Comanche. (I wish I knew how to insert images here). The photo is clearly a photo of the farrier, Gustave Korn, although the horse is actually Comanche. Comanche was in fact the property of Myles Keough. Maybe this isn't the biggest deal in the world, but if you err on that point your other "facts" are suspect, in my opinion.
In short, I found this short life of Custer to be a rambling and disjointed affair. The only reason I gave it 3 stars is that the book is resplendent with photographs and illustrations which offset the sloppy writing and lacklustre proofreading.
"I'm Larry McMurtry and I have a zillion books in print so I really don't have to make any effort to write anything good or even coherent. I'll just fill a book with pictures and fools will buy it because It has my name on it. Hell, I won't even hire a proofreader or verify any of the information I'm putting forth as fact". The following are a couple of examples of the literary gems the unsuspecting buyer will encounter:
P.27: " And Custer's dash and flare (sic) were genuine, besides which they made the generals look good, Sheridan particularly." ; and
P.42: " The Indians came by the thousands, riding their best horses and all their finery, in the way of bear claws and eagle feathers.
I could go on and on...Mr McMurtry did. Another thing that rankles is an image on page 36, which McMurtry identifies as being an image of Custer with his horse, Comanche. (I wish I knew how to insert images here). The photo is clearly a photo of the farrier, Gustave Korn, although the horse is actually Comanche. Comanche was in fact the property of Myles Keough. Maybe this isn't the biggest deal in the world, but if you err on that point your other "facts" are suspect, in my opinion.
In short, I found this short life of Custer to be a rambling and disjointed affair. The only reason I gave it 3 stars is that the book is resplendent with photographs and illustrations which offset the sloppy writing and lacklustre proofreading.
September 7, 2018
McMurtry On Custer
On June 26, 1876, General George Custer led about 264 soldiers of the Seventh Cavalry into massacre by a combined force of plains Indians at the Battle of Little Bighorn. The Battle and Custer quickly became legendary. Many books have been written from varied perspectives about Custer, Little Bighorn, and the United States' Westward expansion.
Released in early November, 2012, Larry McMurtry's "Custer" is among the most recent studies of an endlessly fascinating subject. McMurtry is a prolific novelist and writer on the American West. His longstanding familiarity and writing about the West and his love for the subject are themselves enough to make his thoughts about Custer of interest. His book on Custer does not purport to be definitive or particularly original. To the contrary, McMurtry several times commends to interested readers the detailed Custer studies by Robert Utley, James Donovan, Nathaniel Philbrick and, in particular Evan Connell. "Son of the Morning Star: Custer and The Little Bighorn". In his book, McMurtry expresses a preference for short biographies, along the line of his own earlier biography of Crazy Horse for the reason that they force most readers and writers to come to the heart of their subjects.
McMurtry's book is a coffee-table work of about 175 pages rather than a full scholarly account. It is a mixture of history and meditation, as is Connell's book on a much larger scale. For an event which has become iconic, such as Little Bighorn, writing tends to flow between the battle and its background, how the battle has been viewed by others over time, and the views of the author. This is emphatically the case with McMurtry's book.
The text of the book is spare, colloquial and for the most part eloquent. There are typographical errors, small inconsistencies, and some awkward grammatical contsrtuctions which are irritating. The larger portion of the book is devoted to paintings, photographs, and memorabilia of Custer and his era. They include popular prints, paintings by Catlin, Remington, Indian artists and much more. There are occasional errors in identifying the illustrations. The illustrations McMurtry has assembled for the book are difficult to find in one place. Some will be familiar to many readers while others are rare. They greatly enhance the value of the book.
There are those who argue that Custer and Little Bighorn receive too much attention. McMurtry disagrees. Throughout this book, he stresses the importance of the battle and its pivotal role in the settlement of the American West. Tragic and enigmatic, Custer and Little Bighorn deserve the attention they have received from historians and from the public.
McMurtry does not offer a linear narrative. His story tends to wander and he follows his thoughts. He offers fresh comparisons between Custer and the earlier explorer, soldier, and presidential candidate Fremont. He offers portrayals of leading characters who played roles on the American frontier, including Grant, Sherman, Sheridan, Hancock, Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse, Red Cloud, Black Elk, and more. The discussion of the Battle of Little Bighorn and of predecessor battles are brief. With all the illustrations, the book would have benefited from a detailed map of the Little Bighorn fight, showing lines of approach, Custer's divisions of his troops, the approach of the Indians, and the like.
When I wrote this review, "Custer" had been released for less than one month, and sparked many reader reviews. The reviews, in their number and content, show the interest and passion which Custer continues to inspire. Many of the reader reviews are written by individuals who obviously know and care a great deal about the facts of the battle. These reviews tend to point out the shortness of McMurtry's account, the factual errors and inconsistencies, and the sometimes sloppy editing that I mentioned above.
I found the book moving. The text, illustrations, and reflections made me think about Custer and Little Bighorn and their significance. They brought home a sense of American history and drive together with tragedy. The book gave me an overview of Custer's story, the West, and the different, seemingly conflicting ways of understanding it. The errors of the book, for most lay readers, will not appreciably detract from the presentation. McMurtry's goal was to present a short, distilled, thoughtful account of Custer and Little Bighorn. For the most part, I think he succeeds. The book offers many sources, including the four authors named above, for readers who want to learn more.
The reader reviews of this book and their different perspectives helped me think about what I found valuable in McMurtry's account and about why I found reading the book and thinking about the illustrations worthwhile.
Robin Friedman
On June 26, 1876, General George Custer led about 264 soldiers of the Seventh Cavalry into massacre by a combined force of plains Indians at the Battle of Little Bighorn. The Battle and Custer quickly became legendary. Many books have been written from varied perspectives about Custer, Little Bighorn, and the United States' Westward expansion.
Released in early November, 2012, Larry McMurtry's "Custer" is among the most recent studies of an endlessly fascinating subject. McMurtry is a prolific novelist and writer on the American West. His longstanding familiarity and writing about the West and his love for the subject are themselves enough to make his thoughts about Custer of interest. His book on Custer does not purport to be definitive or particularly original. To the contrary, McMurtry several times commends to interested readers the detailed Custer studies by Robert Utley, James Donovan, Nathaniel Philbrick and, in particular Evan Connell. "Son of the Morning Star: Custer and The Little Bighorn". In his book, McMurtry expresses a preference for short biographies, along the line of his own earlier biography of Crazy Horse for the reason that they force most readers and writers to come to the heart of their subjects.
McMurtry's book is a coffee-table work of about 175 pages rather than a full scholarly account. It is a mixture of history and meditation, as is Connell's book on a much larger scale. For an event which has become iconic, such as Little Bighorn, writing tends to flow between the battle and its background, how the battle has been viewed by others over time, and the views of the author. This is emphatically the case with McMurtry's book.
The text of the book is spare, colloquial and for the most part eloquent. There are typographical errors, small inconsistencies, and some awkward grammatical contsrtuctions which are irritating. The larger portion of the book is devoted to paintings, photographs, and memorabilia of Custer and his era. They include popular prints, paintings by Catlin, Remington, Indian artists and much more. There are occasional errors in identifying the illustrations. The illustrations McMurtry has assembled for the book are difficult to find in one place. Some will be familiar to many readers while others are rare. They greatly enhance the value of the book.
There are those who argue that Custer and Little Bighorn receive too much attention. McMurtry disagrees. Throughout this book, he stresses the importance of the battle and its pivotal role in the settlement of the American West. Tragic and enigmatic, Custer and Little Bighorn deserve the attention they have received from historians and from the public.
McMurtry does not offer a linear narrative. His story tends to wander and he follows his thoughts. He offers fresh comparisons between Custer and the earlier explorer, soldier, and presidential candidate Fremont. He offers portrayals of leading characters who played roles on the American frontier, including Grant, Sherman, Sheridan, Hancock, Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse, Red Cloud, Black Elk, and more. The discussion of the Battle of Little Bighorn and of predecessor battles are brief. With all the illustrations, the book would have benefited from a detailed map of the Little Bighorn fight, showing lines of approach, Custer's divisions of his troops, the approach of the Indians, and the like.
When I wrote this review, "Custer" had been released for less than one month, and sparked many reader reviews. The reviews, in their number and content, show the interest and passion which Custer continues to inspire. Many of the reader reviews are written by individuals who obviously know and care a great deal about the facts of the battle. These reviews tend to point out the shortness of McMurtry's account, the factual errors and inconsistencies, and the sometimes sloppy editing that I mentioned above.
I found the book moving. The text, illustrations, and reflections made me think about Custer and Little Bighorn and their significance. They brought home a sense of American history and drive together with tragedy. The book gave me an overview of Custer's story, the West, and the different, seemingly conflicting ways of understanding it. The errors of the book, for most lay readers, will not appreciably detract from the presentation. McMurtry's goal was to present a short, distilled, thoughtful account of Custer and Little Bighorn. For the most part, I think he succeeds. The book offers many sources, including the four authors named above, for readers who want to learn more.
The reader reviews of this book and their different perspectives helped me think about what I found valuable in McMurtry's account and about why I found reading the book and thinking about the illustrations worthwhile.
Robin Friedman
November 10, 2012
One of my favorite westerns was Lonesome Dove by Larry McMurtry. While I experienced this book in audio format, it was just a wonderful saga of the old West and as I recall McMurtry won a Pulitzer prize for the effort. It was with these thoughts in mind that this week with great anticipation I purchased a copy of "Custer" by Larry McMurtry. I made a mistake.
I want to provide a full paragraph quote from "Custer". This is the last paragraph in Chapter Four.
"Which man had the sadder lot is not easy to say. Custer's life was abruptly snuffed out by two Sioux or Cheyenne bullets. Almost every venture Fremont undertook failed. He philandered endlessly--Jesse grew fat and sad. He died while doing a friend a favor--he brought some flowers and placed them on a grave in Brooklyn. The grave was the friend of a friend. He would have done better to have stuck to his first love, topography; he had a real aptitude for landscapes. But, as a mere mapmaker, could he have attracted Jesse? He tried for glory and found a little bit of it."
The quoted paragraph follows a paragraph of similar length devoted to Custer, which followed a paragraph about Fremont (a military man mentioned earlier in the chapter) with one reference to "Jesse", who was Fremont's wife (mentioned in a still earlier paragraph).
The paragraph I quote is an attempt at a concluding paragraph comparing Custer and Fremont. But what a sad, disjointed effort it is! I conclude from this paragraph and others like it throughout the book that McMurtry followed one of two possible routines in writing it--either he wrote it off the top of his head, or he pulled slips of paper from a hat, and copied the results of the drawing into whatever paragraph he happened to be writing at the moment.
I was so disappointed in this weak effort by a great writer that I am debating asking for a refund. Could this work be a reflection of an immediate need for some quick cash? If not, I hate he got any of mine this week.
I want to provide a full paragraph quote from "Custer". This is the last paragraph in Chapter Four.
"Which man had the sadder lot is not easy to say. Custer's life was abruptly snuffed out by two Sioux or Cheyenne bullets. Almost every venture Fremont undertook failed. He philandered endlessly--Jesse grew fat and sad. He died while doing a friend a favor--he brought some flowers and placed them on a grave in Brooklyn. The grave was the friend of a friend. He would have done better to have stuck to his first love, topography; he had a real aptitude for landscapes. But, as a mere mapmaker, could he have attracted Jesse? He tried for glory and found a little bit of it."
The quoted paragraph follows a paragraph of similar length devoted to Custer, which followed a paragraph about Fremont (a military man mentioned earlier in the chapter) with one reference to "Jesse", who was Fremont's wife (mentioned in a still earlier paragraph).
The paragraph I quote is an attempt at a concluding paragraph comparing Custer and Fremont. But what a sad, disjointed effort it is! I conclude from this paragraph and others like it throughout the book that McMurtry followed one of two possible routines in writing it--either he wrote it off the top of his head, or he pulled slips of paper from a hat, and copied the results of the drawing into whatever paragraph he happened to be writing at the moment.
I was so disappointed in this weak effort by a great writer that I am debating asking for a refund. Could this work be a reflection of an immediate need for some quick cash? If not, I hate he got any of mine this week.
October 10, 2024
I haven't been a huge fan of biographies, but I love Larry McMurtry and he does a wonderful job. Shows you the brutality of both sides without being too graphic or too bogged down with dates.
December 19, 2012
"Custer" is a well illustrated but badly written book. I don't mean that McMurtry is ungrammatical, or that he is unknowlegeable, but that he has produced an ill-organized and inadequately conceived book. Individual sentences make sense, more or less, but they are not connected to the sentences around them in any meaningful way. The same is true of phrases, paragraphs, and chapters. You could change their order any way you wanted to and the effects of the change wouldn't decrease the book's clarity. Take the comparison that he makes between Custer and John C. Fremont. First, the points of comparison are only
very broadly connected; second, the point of the comparison is both understated and leads nowhere. Take the account of Ranald Mackenzie's madness. Take the absence of any strategic and tactical explanations of Custer's failings as a commander.
McMurtry takes somewhat snide potshots at writers like Robert Utley, Nathanie Philbrick, and James Donovan for having deeply immersed themselves in the details of what happened at the Little Big Horn, then provides an unbroken string of facts that don't relate either to each other or to a bigger picture. Several years ago, McMurtry produced a somewhat similar book about frontier massacres, one of them the Little Big Horn. It had a bit more cohesion than this book, but it made clear that a true understanding of the frontier experience would come from the work of other writers.
very broadly connected; second, the point of the comparison is both understated and leads nowhere. Take the account of Ranald Mackenzie's madness. Take the absence of any strategic and tactical explanations of Custer's failings as a commander.
McMurtry takes somewhat snide potshots at writers like Robert Utley, Nathanie Philbrick, and James Donovan for having deeply immersed themselves in the details of what happened at the Little Big Horn, then provides an unbroken string of facts that don't relate either to each other or to a bigger picture. Several years ago, McMurtry produced a somewhat similar book about frontier massacres, one of them the Little Big Horn. It had a bit more cohesion than this book, but it made clear that a true understanding of the frontier experience would come from the work of other writers.
August 7, 2015
Okay so I didn't abandon it but......this book sucked donkey balls. First of all, what is wrong with publishing these days? No one can afford a good proofreader or editor? Crazy. And why did McMurtry write this? His greed, his publishers' greed? He clearly didn't like Custer or his wife and put the most negative, simplistic spin on nearly every chapter of this man's life. No balance was attempted nor accuracy, nuance.
I almost got out a notebook to write page numbers and mistakes down. In the first 50 pages, he gets so many things wrong. Basic history - Custer was courtmartialed before the Battle of the Washita, not after. It's not true that all of his officers hated him, like many in the military - he had his clique. Which brings me to my next point - 2 brothers, a nephew and a brother-in-law were killed with him, not a stepbrother! And Comanche was Capt. Keogh's horse, NOT Custer's, and on and on. Well-known facts were just bungled and the typos accumulated. Depressing. What's the point.
On a positive note, the pictures are good, even if Libbie Custer was misidentified in one. She was seen in a rare photo of her wedding gown, a far more beautiful creation than many of the monstrosities one sees at Brides R, no wait, David's Bridal. I guess someone has to mass produce wedding gowns that will someday be part of the 50% divorce rate. ;) Come to think of it, mass production has become the scourge of our times.
I almost got out a notebook to write page numbers and mistakes down. In the first 50 pages, he gets so many things wrong. Basic history - Custer was courtmartialed before the Battle of the Washita, not after. It's not true that all of his officers hated him, like many in the military - he had his clique. Which brings me to my next point - 2 brothers, a nephew and a brother-in-law were killed with him, not a stepbrother! And Comanche was Capt. Keogh's horse, NOT Custer's, and on and on. Well-known facts were just bungled and the typos accumulated. Depressing. What's the point.
On a positive note, the pictures are good, even if Libbie Custer was misidentified in one. She was seen in a rare photo of her wedding gown, a far more beautiful creation than many of the monstrosities one sees at Brides R, no wait, David's Bridal. I guess someone has to mass produce wedding gowns that will someday be part of the 50% divorce rate. ;) Come to think of it, mass production has become the scourge of our times.
May 28, 2021
I listened to this as an audiobook, but apparently it is also a gorgeous coffee table book. (See Bill's review here: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...) It was great as audio, although it would have been nice to see the pictures.
McMurtry did a good, quick sketch of Custer & the events that led to & followed the battle of Little Big Horn. There was more from the Indian point of view than is normal plus a good balanced account of the man himself. Highly recommended.
McMurtry did a good, quick sketch of Custer & the events that led to & followed the battle of Little Big Horn. There was more from the Indian point of view than is normal plus a good balanced account of the man himself. Highly recommended.
December 8, 2012
This is a terrible book. The pictures are nice, but the text is disjointed and ungrammatical, and it's obvious that no editor or proofreader ever got anywhere near it. Chapters are thrown together willy nilly, with succeeding paragraphs having nothing to do with each other. The author repeats himself all over the place to no effect, and his few attempts to be clever are groan-worthy at best. At last, on page 106, he abdicates all responsibility for saying anything new or interesting about Custer's Last Stand, deferring to four other books on the subject. Had I known he was going to do that, I never would have picked this one up.
May 24, 2018
Custer....not my favorite person in history. Actually, I have pretty negative feelings about him. This short book was about all I could handle in a biography of the man. I just find him annoying so I’d rather read of something/someone more fascinating. McMutry did an adequate and (most importantly) brief synopsis of the General’s life. I feel a real Western history reader wouldn’t appreciate the vague overview that this book provided.
September 22, 2025
2.55 hours on Audible. Wonderfully narrated and enthralling story. Thoroughly enjoyed.
May 28, 2020
Custer was a dick who got those, including his own brothers/nephew killed with him on that fated Montana hillside. Myth says he died with a smile on his face, or a death rictus more like. This book contains some excellent period photos and depiction paintings.
April 23, 2013
It was good to have so many great photos all in one place. I particularly liked those of the wagon train on p 89, those of Custer and his wife Libby pp. 78-83, Custer in his study p. 88 and the many photos and paintings of the Indians and their leaders. The final photos of and about Wild Bill Cody seem to be an afterthought.
I don’t read many coffee table books (not many people do), or pick them up (which many people do), but this one caught my eye. I wondered what Larry McMurtry’s take on Custer might be. If it has a slant, it is how irresponsible Custer was as a general, how he showed lack of concern for his men, how he was hated by other officers (and President Grant), and how he relied on his intuition (in the face of facts and good advice), which sent him and his entire regiment to their deaths.
While the narrative is chronological, it rambles. It’s like your favorite uncle showing you a picture collection and stringing together anecdotes about them. Like other books of this format, there are no footnotes.
The photos are wonderful. The text is OK. How do you rate a coffee table book? If you want a book of Custer photos, this in a 5 star book for you. If you want an over lightly on Custer, this beats Wikipedia. If you’re looking for more, as McMurtry notes, there are literally hundreds of other volumes to choose from.
I don’t read many coffee table books (not many people do), or pick them up (which many people do), but this one caught my eye. I wondered what Larry McMurtry’s take on Custer might be. If it has a slant, it is how irresponsible Custer was as a general, how he showed lack of concern for his men, how he was hated by other officers (and President Grant), and how he relied on his intuition (in the face of facts and good advice), which sent him and his entire regiment to their deaths.
While the narrative is chronological, it rambles. It’s like your favorite uncle showing you a picture collection and stringing together anecdotes about them. Like other books of this format, there are no footnotes.
The photos are wonderful. The text is OK. How do you rate a coffee table book? If you want a book of Custer photos, this in a 5 star book for you. If you want an over lightly on Custer, this beats Wikipedia. If you’re looking for more, as McMurtry notes, there are literally hundreds of other volumes to choose from.
November 27, 2012
OK, this was a long way from being my favorite McMurtry. Obviously, fiction is his strong suit. However, I think some of our fellow Goodreads participants need to chill out and THINK for a second before writing a review. Some of the reviews were scathing, characterizing the book as worthless, historically inaccurate or incomplete and so on ad nauseum. First of all, this is a coffe table book for God's sake. If you want the detailed, complete story find one of the many good volumes that has been wriien on the subject in recent years. McMurtry, understaning that he has not written a history, even recommends four very good ones. Next, sure, there were errors, some of which may have been McMurtry's but the majority I would attribute to the fact that books today are by and large poorly edited and proof read. I almost never pick up a book without these kinds of errors and the frequency is increasing. This book contained some new information (and I've read three of the for books he recommended, plus others, so I know something about the topic) but most interestingly there were a number of illustrations that I had not seen before - not a bad thing for a coffee table book. If you have an interest in the subject this book is worth looking at.
March 12, 2014
This book was shockingly disappointing--truly bad, to the point where it helps me better appreciate other books. But first, a few positives: I listened to this on audiobook, and the chapters are very short, which made for easy listening. Also, the reader was very good. Second, the printed volume (I checked that out from my library as well) contained a lot of interesting pictures and paintings--well worth perusing but not owning.
What made this book so bad was its simplistic and roundabout analysis of issues. There was so much repetition--and in such a short book! McMurty would reference something, only to mention it again later, adding simply one more detail. The organization was scattered and unsystematic; the analysis lacked depth and insight. McMurty does have an amusing, folksy was of writing, but a little more sophistication of discussion would be appreciated. What a frustrating read...
What made this book so bad was its simplistic and roundabout analysis of issues. There was so much repetition--and in such a short book! McMurty would reference something, only to mention it again later, adding simply one more detail. The organization was scattered and unsystematic; the analysis lacked depth and insight. McMurty does have an amusing, folksy was of writing, but a little more sophistication of discussion would be appreciated. What a frustrating read...
October 20, 2023
I’m a huge fan of Larry McMurtry, viewing the Lonesome Dove series as some of the best literature in the world. I’ve also greatly enjoyed the Last Picture Show series. Before starting the Terms of Endearment series, I figured I’d give this nonfiction Custer book a chance. It turned out to be a real riot, like some sort of bizarre satire. Larry McMurtry writing a biography of Custer is like Alexander Dumas writing a biography of Napoleon. As I read the book, I couldn’t help but feel McMurtry was channeling his inner Mark Twain. I highly recommend, if you read this short book, not to take it too seriously. I can’t imagine it was meant to be viewed that way. As a fun little extra, McMurtry managed to work the phrase “Terms of Endearment” into the text during the last few chapters.
June 8, 2023
Easy listen and good quick biography on Gen George Custer. Nice primer of the Indian Wars and Wild West. Author noted several times that USA broke exactly every treaty made with the Indians (in the hundreds). No need to read lengthy biographies on Custer. This book gives you all you need to know about Custer. For more depth one can always dive into the many books on US history, Civil War, Homesteads, US westward expansion. Custer famously graduated precisely the bottom of his west point class (someone has to). He looked at warfare as sport and had almost a sociopathic ego that like all egoists lead to his demise. Despite repeated warnings of Indians at Little Big Horn, Custer's hubris took him straight into an ambush where 5 of the 7th Cavalry's twelve companies were wiped out and Custer was killed, as were two of his brothers, a nephew, and a brother-in-law. Good pictures in the book.
"Custer" is a quick historical non-fiction book and a fantastic primer of the Wild West! It will make you interested in reading more on this era of American History (it did for me).
"Custer" is a quick historical non-fiction book and a fantastic primer of the Wild West! It will make you interested in reading more on this era of American History (it did for me).
April 6, 2013
The value here is in the photos & art. There is a lot of that, all apropos, regarding the eponymous figurehead he's expounding on. Although "expounding" may not be the right word...this is a "short life", or an abbreviated bio--as opposed to the thick & thorough juggernaut tomes of TMI which larger-than-life real-world characters often attract. In this case, it was more about chiming in. McMurtry, an author whose career may be arcing to a close, given his age and voluminous output, and self-revealed exhaustion with his own literary voice. This isn't a bad book, nor is it a great book. It seems to be a quick comment, in & out, aimed to say out loud what the avid McMurtry reader has already guessed: Custer was no hero at the Little Big Horn. He was impulsive, solipsistic & not a little reckless. Bringing some 264 men to their deaths, including a handful of kin relation.
And while this is all true, the significance of this event is also laid out in other terms: the closing of the American frontier. The final huzzah of native defiance, sheer numbers overwhelming the technologically advanced white man. If I'm being honest, I was hoping for more, perhaps more engaging or witty (the jacket regards it as "enthralling"). A good summary of the life of Custer, who he was, what he did. And the author points us to other research should we desire all that detail, the nuances of research minutae.
A great summation of Custer, for the curious. The pictures and artwork give us a visual. Overall, a worthwhile read, for those of us who know the name, and maybe the general story, but want to be better informed. Very readable. Short chapters, conversational tones, a tad dry & sarcastic in places, which lifts us beyond a mere historian's perspective.
Overall, I liked it.
And while this is all true, the significance of this event is also laid out in other terms: the closing of the American frontier. The final huzzah of native defiance, sheer numbers overwhelming the technologically advanced white man. If I'm being honest, I was hoping for more, perhaps more engaging or witty (the jacket regards it as "enthralling"). A good summary of the life of Custer, who he was, what he did. And the author points us to other research should we desire all that detail, the nuances of research minutae.
A great summation of Custer, for the curious. The pictures and artwork give us a visual. Overall, a worthwhile read, for those of us who know the name, and maybe the general story, but want to be better informed. Very readable. Short chapters, conversational tones, a tad dry & sarcastic in places, which lifts us beyond a mere historian's perspective.
Overall, I liked it.
July 31, 2012
Did you watch the movie "Night at the Museum 2" and think they were exaggerating the Custer part to be funny? After reading Larry McMurtry's Custer on adobe reader, I have to say, I kept thinking of that movie the entire time. McMurtry is a wonderful writer. He is colorful, not-too-detailed, and he is funny. Who knew history good be so amusing? And remember, I am talking about a slaughter, so that says alot.
McMurty starts at the beginning of Custer's career and works his way to the end, even past it, including his wife's mission to save his reputation. He includes general history of the time, the Indians, and war tactics of the time. It isn't told like "this happened and than this happened and than this happened." He tells it more like a narration. The book also includes a lot of illustrations and pictures. It is a short book and perfect for someone who would like to learn more about history with as little effort as possible. Highly recommended.
I received this movie for free from "www.edelweiss.abovethetreeline.com.
McMurty starts at the beginning of Custer's career and works his way to the end, even past it, including his wife's mission to save his reputation. He includes general history of the time, the Indians, and war tactics of the time. It isn't told like "this happened and than this happened and than this happened." He tells it more like a narration. The book also includes a lot of illustrations and pictures. It is a short book and perfect for someone who would like to learn more about history with as little effort as possible. Highly recommended.
I received this movie for free from "www.edelweiss.abovethetreeline.com.
January 4, 2018
Larry McMurtry's "short biography" of Custer doesn't really cover any new ground. It contains lots of anecdotes and some damned fine stories.
If you want an in-depth read of Little Big Horn and Custer, look elsewhere (start with Nathaneal Philbrick). But if you want a quick look at Custer (probably a bit lacking on the Civil War side), pick up McMurtry.
And it's a great read if you're trying for four books in four days...
If you want an in-depth read of Little Big Horn and Custer, look elsewhere (start with Nathaneal Philbrick). But if you want a quick look at Custer (probably a bit lacking on the Civil War side), pick up McMurtry.
And it's a great read if you're trying for four books in four days...
September 4, 2026
I've written about this some previously, in a review one of the Landmark adolescent history books on the subject, much of the content of which I'll include here. This heavily-illustrated picture book, compiled by the famous author who penned the "Lonesome Dove" saga, chronicles both Custer's life and his eventual ignominious death. It's essentially a recounting of the same story, but with far more objectivity.
McMurty begins as follows: "At one time a picture called "Custer's Last Stand" hung in virtually every saloon in the land, and quite a few barbershops, too. I first saw it in our small barbershop, in Archer City, Texas. A painting by Cassilly Adams, lithographed by Otto Becker, was given away by the thousands by Anheuser-Busch, the greatest brewing enterprise of St. Louis: George Armstrong Custer, long locks flying, was fighting on staunchly against terrible - in fact, impossible - odds. And when he fell, along with some 250 of his men, the world was no longer the same.
"Buffalo Bill Cody often used a skit called 'Custer's Last Rally,' as the finale of his Wild West Show, bringing the notion of long flowing locks and also the notion of a last stand to much of the civilized world. Adam's painting and Becker's lithograph are among the most famous images to come out of America. They brought the tragedy of the Little Big Horn alive to people not yet born."
But: not all is as it seems. In hindsight, the centuries have not been kind to one George Armstrong Custer.
The famous battle that shocked the nation, which had only just emerged heavily traumatized by the Civil War which had left 750,000 Americans dead, is still widely known today. But those of the day pondered: how could a group of what they then considered to be subhuman savages more akin to local wildlife than actual people defeat a figure as renowned as the US Army's "Golden Boy?" What HAS changed is that George Armstrong Custer, far from being viewed as the hero he once was, is now a much-reviled figure.
The real account of what happened that fateful day is far more complex.
First and foremost, as the book gratefully acknowledges, George Armstrong Custer was anything but a "hero." He may have been hailed as the army's "Golden Boy" by some in his own time, but his legacy, which enjoyed almost a century of whitewashing, has increasingly been scrutinized, as its facade has meticulously and steadily been scraped away. What's now well-known and far more widely acknowledged, including by the general public, is that Custer was a born troublemaker. Impetuous, flamboyant and consistently demonstrating a serious lack of judgment and impulse control, he was clearly an overt narcissist with a God complex, one that got him killed.
He had a notorious reputation for flouting the rules: in fact, Custer racked up a total of 726 demerits over the course of his four-year tenure at the famous West Point Military Academy, earning himself the worst conduct record in the history of the institution - to the PRESENT DAY. His behavior was so egregious that he barely escaped a Court Martial, which, if it had stood, would have torpedoed his career and ended any aspirations of military greatness (but would have saved his own life and those of his family members).
Even during his admittedly-illustrious military career, on more than one occasion, Custer got himself in serious hot water for insubordination. He was officially court-martialed on eight counts in 1868, including for abandoning his post (to go locate his wife), but his friend and superior officer, likewise-notorious Gen. Philip A. Sheridan, lobbied to have him reinstated. Once again, his brashness and flaunting of the rules resulted in him avoiding any real accountability.
Custer was so brazen in his behavior that he was even arrested by President Ulysses S. Grant, his Commander-In-Chief. Custer's lack of respect for authority and rank hadn't diminished since his Academy days. After being summoned to Washington to testify at congressional hearings regarding official corruption pertaining to the Secretary of War, Custer attempted to meet with then-President Grant, a legitimate war hero, on three separate occasions, but he was refused an audience. Reportedly in a rage, Custer boarded a train bound for Chicago, and was subsequently arrested by Grant for essentially going AWOL.
Tempers were running high after the Civil War, however, and the arrest of the Army's "Golden Boy," one who was also protected by powerful friends like Gen. Sheridan, met with public outrage, to the degree that even Grant finally relented and allowed him to return to his regiment - a testament to Custer's renown, and his audacity, which, admittedly, at the time, many respected. However, once again, fortune was not really in his favor: a different decision may have ultimately spared his life, and those of his men who trusted his judgment and for whom he was ultimately responsible.
So, who was this guy, whose every move seemed to incline his trajectory toward ultimate catastrophe?
George Armstrong Custer, known by his childhood nickname "Autie," was something of a phenom in his day. He was reportedly adamant about becoming a general in early childhood, inspired by a dream he had experienced at age four. A rather poor student, he incessantly claimed that his tenacity and determination were what resulted in his ultimate admission to the West Point Military Academy, the product of good ole' fashioned hard work and grit. In reality, however, it was more complicated. Custer was also something of a natural politician, so there was certainly some nepotism involved - and it ultimately showed.
Despite his efforts to get himself admitted, Custer was clearly out of his depth at West Point. He graduated last in his class, the year the Civil War began, in 1861. Clearly, books weren't his priority. But what he lacked in intellectual and academic prowess, he made up for on the battlefield. His rash audacity and daring helped him make a name for himself early in the war, first at the Battle of Mananas (Bull Run to us Northerners). He was promoted to brigadier general at age 23, making him the youngest "general" in the army. The way he saw it: his courage and risk-taking (and probable measure of good luck, at least initially) had paid off, which only emboldened his irresponsible behavior.
Another good example of his propensity for foolhardy action (and perhaps boot-licking): reportedly, on one occasion, when his commanding officer, General McClellan, and his staff were scouting for a crossing point on the Chickahominy River, Custer overheard another general state, "I wish I knew how deep it is." Without hesitation or forethought of the potential consequences, Custer spurred his horse into the middle of the river, turned to the shocked onlookers, and shouted "that's how deep it is, General!" That's how brash and impetuous he could be.
His exploits didn't end at Bull Run: Custer also fought at Gettysburg, and was even present at Robert E. Lee's surrender to Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Courthouse in Virginia. That was another of his great talents: positioning and insinuating himself into events and circumstances that he and others knew would be historic, hence his presence at the signing of the surrender. He met President Lincoln in Oct., 1862 after the horrific Battle of Antitem. And, it worked: here we are today, talking about them.
After the war, and, perhaps, as not a few have noted, to get rid of him, or, at the very least, to sequester him in a place where many thought he was less apt to cause trouble (!), Custer was commissioned as a lieutenant colonel and sent west to fulfill his lifelong ambition - to become an "Indian Fighter." (!) He was subsequently posted at Fort Riley, Kansas. Perhaps even unbeknownst to him, Custer had been dispatched to a brewing firestorm. Tensions between the US Army and the tribes of the Plains Indians were, by the time of his arrival, at an all-time high. Custer quickly enhanced his dubious reputation: he was generally beloved by his men, but feared and reviled by his adversaries, and often his superiors.
It's also worth noting that Custer, as young as he was, wrote an autobiography, entitled "My Life on the Plains," which I have long resisted reading, although I may eventually relent. The passages I've seen make it more akin to a dime novel or penny dreadful than a real autobiography, such is his insufferable bragging and self-aggrandizement. I acknowledge that they may be highly selective, cited specifically because of their inflammatory nature, but his writings were heavily criticized even by men of his day. Contemporary Capt. Frederick Benteen, in fact, noted that his account was so rife with inaccuracies, factual errors and nonsensical claims that he referred to it as "My Lie on the Plains."
As for the circumstances surrounding the famous event in question: as a result of almost unceasing hostilities with settlers and the US Army, Lakota holy man Sitting Bull had gathered the largest ever contingent of Plains Indians, first at Ash Creek, Montana, and then at the Little Bighorn river, initially on the pretext of discussing what action to take about their dire situation. That specifically entailed the numerous broken treaties between the US government and tribal leaders, the most egregious of which was the construction of a railroad through land which had been granted to the Lakota and other native peoples.
With knowledge of the mass gathering of so many potential warriors, Custer's troops were apparently ordered to attack and scatter them. However, due in no small part to his characteristic overconfidence, arrogance and lack of any semblance of respect for authority, strategy or the potential for catastrophic consequences, the situation quickly spiraled out of control - the Army's control, that is.
The Battle of the Little Bighorn (actually a river), AKA "Custer's Last Stand," occurred in June, 1876, in what is now southeast Montana. The encounter pitted the 7th Cavalry Regiment against the combined forces of the Lakota Sioux, Northern Cheyenne and Arapaho tribes, under the generalship of two of the most famous Native Americans in history: Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse, among others. The exact numbers of native participants are unknown, but it is believed that approximately 3,000 warriors descended upon Custer's men, killing 267 of them, along with Custer himself and several of his unfortunate family members.
I won't offer a blow-by-blow account of the famous battle, but the major features were as follows. On or about June 15, Major Marcus Reno discovered a large village on the Rosebud River, comprised not only of warriors, but women and children. Custer's entire regiment was sent to follow the trail. The encampment was discovered near the Little Bighorn River. Custer had initially intended to attack the village the following day, but when he learned that his presence had been detected, he decided to attack immediately. Not wait for reinforcements: when he was informed that he and his few hundred men had been discovered, his first reaction was to attack a contingent of several thousand warriors who knew he was there and were waiting for him.
Notwithstanding the size of the force that would be unleashed against him, Custer divided his forces into three battalions - the fatal mistake. Custer himself rode north with a contingent of men while Reno charged the southern end of the village. Reno was quickly overtaken by mounted warriors and was forced to retreat. He was one of the few officers to survive the encounter, but since he was not with Custer and his troops, he could give no details as to what ultimately befell them.
Custer himself reportedly headed to the northern end of the encampment, and may have tried to cross the river, but his meager forces were beaten back and pursued by hundreds of skilled, experienced, mounted warriors. He ultimately ended up on a ridge north of the Indian encampment. Crazy Horse and his warriors reportedly drove the beleaguered general and his remaining troops to the top of the ridge, where they were surrounded and trapped. As more and more soldiers were killed and stripped of their weapons and ammunition, the situation became dire. When their ammo ran out, the warriors closed in on them, and eventually killed every man in Custer's detachment.
There has been almost endless conjecture about what actually happened in those final moments, as no one in Custer's immediate company survived to tell the tale. Some accounts from native warriors have survived, but most are highly conflicting. What is known is that the aftermath of the battle was gruesome. Most of the casualties were found days later, stripped naked and ritually mutilated - including Custer himself - in varying stages of decomposition. Some were identified, but many were not, so they were simply buried where they fell. Marble markers still at the site show where the bodies were found where they fell, and attest to the chaotic nature of the battle - no real skirmish lines were discernible.
Custer himself was found near the top of the ridge, now known as "Last Stand Hill," with two fatal gunshot wounds, one in the chest and the other to his temple. Some reports suggest the latter may have, in fact, been self-inflicted: Custer realized that his situation was hopeless, so he may have chosen to take his own life in order to avoid capture and torture.
Worst of all: the defeat at the Little Big Horn devastated his entire family. Killed along with him were his much-beloved two younger brothers, Thomas and "Bos" Boston (a civilian), his nephew, Armstrong, who had been named for him, and his brother-in-law. Custer and Tom were found and identified. They were wrapped in canvas and buried in a shallow grave. When his grave was visited a year later, however, it was discovered that it has been scavenged by animals and the bones scattered, so very few remain. What was recovered of him and his brother were re-interred at the West Point Cemetery. Some dispute, however, whether they even were his and his brother's remains at all.
As in the case of Custer and his brother, his men's remains were found scattered all over the battlefield. Due to their fragmentary nature, most were never positively identified. They now lie together in a mass grave at the site. Others were collected from the on-site graves and re-interred by Captain George Sanderso in 1879. He built a mound out of wood, filled it with as many horse bones as they could find on the site, and in the center, dug a mass grave where he interred all the human bones they could recover. He then covered all with wood stacked four feet high. A granite memorial was built in 1881, which also remains today. The marble markers which show where the bodies were found were placed in 1890.
Speaking of horses: another well-known account of the battle concerns the "heroic" horse Comanche, the "lone survivor" of the encounter. This actually happened. Comanche was found seriously wounded, two days after the battle, but he was nursed back to health to live out the rest of his days in retirement at various forts, where he reportedly inspired generations of cavalrymen, before finally dying of colic in 1891, at about 29 years of age.
So: what was the official response to the disaster? Custer's old buddy President Grant had THIS to say, and summed it up nicely: "I regard Custer's massacre as a sacrifice of troops, brought on by Custer himself, that was wholly unnecessary.... He was not to have made the attack before effecting the juncture with Generals Terry and Gibbon [his reinforcements]. Custer had been notified to meet them, but instead of marching slowly, as his orders required, in order to effect that juncture on the 26th, he entered upon a forced march of eighty-three miles in twenty-four hours, and thus had to meet the Indians alone."
The official report determined: Custer had disobeyed orders, and was responsible for not only his own death, but those of his men and his own family members. Curiously, however, many in the army, especially the unwashed masses of enlisted rank-and-file, didn't see it that way. Some more often than not saw the statements by their superiors regarding the massacre as maligning the memory of a man they admired and respected. Indeed, it may have been their efforts to keep his legacy alive that more than anything else led to Custer being hailed as a hero rather than a fool.
That said, however: not surprisingly, it was also noted that Custer was absolutely brutal to his men, so his reputation evolved somewhat over time. Many under his command certainly did not share the sentiment that he was a tragic hero. And, of course, Grant's statements about Custer's utter failure did nothing to endear his family members. His widow Libbie reportedly became Grant's enemy for life. Undeterred by later criticism, she wrote three books in an attempt to polish her husband's badly tarnished reputation.
This review has become just about as long as the book itself, but it's a fascinating story, one which continues to intrigue, perhaps because there are so many complex moving parts and unsolved mysteries. It's a good overview, but does omit a lot of detail, especially about the battle itself, so if you're expecting it to be a comprehensive account of the actual battle, you may well be disappointed. It doesn't go into much specific detail about any particular aspect of Custer, either his life or untimely death, but it provides a general introduction to the subject that's more than capable. And, of course, it's written by someone in the know, who once owned a fairly solid collection of Little Big Horn artifacts.
What it does do, however, is illustrate the tragedy of hubris, which is a valuable moral lesson for whomever might be inclined to blindly emulate Custer's example - it was more his character flaws than a tragic mistake which led to his untimely end.
The book is definitely worth a read, if you're interested in the history of the American West, and one written by an absolute legend, at that. It also references a number of other books on the subject, if you're interested in additional or more in-depth reading.
McMurty begins as follows: "At one time a picture called "Custer's Last Stand" hung in virtually every saloon in the land, and quite a few barbershops, too. I first saw it in our small barbershop, in Archer City, Texas. A painting by Cassilly Adams, lithographed by Otto Becker, was given away by the thousands by Anheuser-Busch, the greatest brewing enterprise of St. Louis: George Armstrong Custer, long locks flying, was fighting on staunchly against terrible - in fact, impossible - odds. And when he fell, along with some 250 of his men, the world was no longer the same.
"Buffalo Bill Cody often used a skit called 'Custer's Last Rally,' as the finale of his Wild West Show, bringing the notion of long flowing locks and also the notion of a last stand to much of the civilized world. Adam's painting and Becker's lithograph are among the most famous images to come out of America. They brought the tragedy of the Little Big Horn alive to people not yet born."
But: not all is as it seems. In hindsight, the centuries have not been kind to one George Armstrong Custer.
The famous battle that shocked the nation, which had only just emerged heavily traumatized by the Civil War which had left 750,000 Americans dead, is still widely known today. But those of the day pondered: how could a group of what they then considered to be subhuman savages more akin to local wildlife than actual people defeat a figure as renowned as the US Army's "Golden Boy?" What HAS changed is that George Armstrong Custer, far from being viewed as the hero he once was, is now a much-reviled figure.
The real account of what happened that fateful day is far more complex.
First and foremost, as the book gratefully acknowledges, George Armstrong Custer was anything but a "hero." He may have been hailed as the army's "Golden Boy" by some in his own time, but his legacy, which enjoyed almost a century of whitewashing, has increasingly been scrutinized, as its facade has meticulously and steadily been scraped away. What's now well-known and far more widely acknowledged, including by the general public, is that Custer was a born troublemaker. Impetuous, flamboyant and consistently demonstrating a serious lack of judgment and impulse control, he was clearly an overt narcissist with a God complex, one that got him killed.
He had a notorious reputation for flouting the rules: in fact, Custer racked up a total of 726 demerits over the course of his four-year tenure at the famous West Point Military Academy, earning himself the worst conduct record in the history of the institution - to the PRESENT DAY. His behavior was so egregious that he barely escaped a Court Martial, which, if it had stood, would have torpedoed his career and ended any aspirations of military greatness (but would have saved his own life and those of his family members).
Even during his admittedly-illustrious military career, on more than one occasion, Custer got himself in serious hot water for insubordination. He was officially court-martialed on eight counts in 1868, including for abandoning his post (to go locate his wife), but his friend and superior officer, likewise-notorious Gen. Philip A. Sheridan, lobbied to have him reinstated. Once again, his brashness and flaunting of the rules resulted in him avoiding any real accountability.
Custer was so brazen in his behavior that he was even arrested by President Ulysses S. Grant, his Commander-In-Chief. Custer's lack of respect for authority and rank hadn't diminished since his Academy days. After being summoned to Washington to testify at congressional hearings regarding official corruption pertaining to the Secretary of War, Custer attempted to meet with then-President Grant, a legitimate war hero, on three separate occasions, but he was refused an audience. Reportedly in a rage, Custer boarded a train bound for Chicago, and was subsequently arrested by Grant for essentially going AWOL.
Tempers were running high after the Civil War, however, and the arrest of the Army's "Golden Boy," one who was also protected by powerful friends like Gen. Sheridan, met with public outrage, to the degree that even Grant finally relented and allowed him to return to his regiment - a testament to Custer's renown, and his audacity, which, admittedly, at the time, many respected. However, once again, fortune was not really in his favor: a different decision may have ultimately spared his life, and those of his men who trusted his judgment and for whom he was ultimately responsible.
So, who was this guy, whose every move seemed to incline his trajectory toward ultimate catastrophe?
George Armstrong Custer, known by his childhood nickname "Autie," was something of a phenom in his day. He was reportedly adamant about becoming a general in early childhood, inspired by a dream he had experienced at age four. A rather poor student, he incessantly claimed that his tenacity and determination were what resulted in his ultimate admission to the West Point Military Academy, the product of good ole' fashioned hard work and grit. In reality, however, it was more complicated. Custer was also something of a natural politician, so there was certainly some nepotism involved - and it ultimately showed.
Despite his efforts to get himself admitted, Custer was clearly out of his depth at West Point. He graduated last in his class, the year the Civil War began, in 1861. Clearly, books weren't his priority. But what he lacked in intellectual and academic prowess, he made up for on the battlefield. His rash audacity and daring helped him make a name for himself early in the war, first at the Battle of Mananas (Bull Run to us Northerners). He was promoted to brigadier general at age 23, making him the youngest "general" in the army. The way he saw it: his courage and risk-taking (and probable measure of good luck, at least initially) had paid off, which only emboldened his irresponsible behavior.
Another good example of his propensity for foolhardy action (and perhaps boot-licking): reportedly, on one occasion, when his commanding officer, General McClellan, and his staff were scouting for a crossing point on the Chickahominy River, Custer overheard another general state, "I wish I knew how deep it is." Without hesitation or forethought of the potential consequences, Custer spurred his horse into the middle of the river, turned to the shocked onlookers, and shouted "that's how deep it is, General!" That's how brash and impetuous he could be.
His exploits didn't end at Bull Run: Custer also fought at Gettysburg, and was even present at Robert E. Lee's surrender to Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Courthouse in Virginia. That was another of his great talents: positioning and insinuating himself into events and circumstances that he and others knew would be historic, hence his presence at the signing of the surrender. He met President Lincoln in Oct., 1862 after the horrific Battle of Antitem. And, it worked: here we are today, talking about them.
After the war, and, perhaps, as not a few have noted, to get rid of him, or, at the very least, to sequester him in a place where many thought he was less apt to cause trouble (!), Custer was commissioned as a lieutenant colonel and sent west to fulfill his lifelong ambition - to become an "Indian Fighter." (!) He was subsequently posted at Fort Riley, Kansas. Perhaps even unbeknownst to him, Custer had been dispatched to a brewing firestorm. Tensions between the US Army and the tribes of the Plains Indians were, by the time of his arrival, at an all-time high. Custer quickly enhanced his dubious reputation: he was generally beloved by his men, but feared and reviled by his adversaries, and often his superiors.
It's also worth noting that Custer, as young as he was, wrote an autobiography, entitled "My Life on the Plains," which I have long resisted reading, although I may eventually relent. The passages I've seen make it more akin to a dime novel or penny dreadful than a real autobiography, such is his insufferable bragging and self-aggrandizement. I acknowledge that they may be highly selective, cited specifically because of their inflammatory nature, but his writings were heavily criticized even by men of his day. Contemporary Capt. Frederick Benteen, in fact, noted that his account was so rife with inaccuracies, factual errors and nonsensical claims that he referred to it as "My Lie on the Plains."
As for the circumstances surrounding the famous event in question: as a result of almost unceasing hostilities with settlers and the US Army, Lakota holy man Sitting Bull had gathered the largest ever contingent of Plains Indians, first at Ash Creek, Montana, and then at the Little Bighorn river, initially on the pretext of discussing what action to take about their dire situation. That specifically entailed the numerous broken treaties between the US government and tribal leaders, the most egregious of which was the construction of a railroad through land which had been granted to the Lakota and other native peoples.
With knowledge of the mass gathering of so many potential warriors, Custer's troops were apparently ordered to attack and scatter them. However, due in no small part to his characteristic overconfidence, arrogance and lack of any semblance of respect for authority, strategy or the potential for catastrophic consequences, the situation quickly spiraled out of control - the Army's control, that is.
The Battle of the Little Bighorn (actually a river), AKA "Custer's Last Stand," occurred in June, 1876, in what is now southeast Montana. The encounter pitted the 7th Cavalry Regiment against the combined forces of the Lakota Sioux, Northern Cheyenne and Arapaho tribes, under the generalship of two of the most famous Native Americans in history: Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse, among others. The exact numbers of native participants are unknown, but it is believed that approximately 3,000 warriors descended upon Custer's men, killing 267 of them, along with Custer himself and several of his unfortunate family members.
I won't offer a blow-by-blow account of the famous battle, but the major features were as follows. On or about June 15, Major Marcus Reno discovered a large village on the Rosebud River, comprised not only of warriors, but women and children. Custer's entire regiment was sent to follow the trail. The encampment was discovered near the Little Bighorn River. Custer had initially intended to attack the village the following day, but when he learned that his presence had been detected, he decided to attack immediately. Not wait for reinforcements: when he was informed that he and his few hundred men had been discovered, his first reaction was to attack a contingent of several thousand warriors who knew he was there and were waiting for him.
Notwithstanding the size of the force that would be unleashed against him, Custer divided his forces into three battalions - the fatal mistake. Custer himself rode north with a contingent of men while Reno charged the southern end of the village. Reno was quickly overtaken by mounted warriors and was forced to retreat. He was one of the few officers to survive the encounter, but since he was not with Custer and his troops, he could give no details as to what ultimately befell them.
Custer himself reportedly headed to the northern end of the encampment, and may have tried to cross the river, but his meager forces were beaten back and pursued by hundreds of skilled, experienced, mounted warriors. He ultimately ended up on a ridge north of the Indian encampment. Crazy Horse and his warriors reportedly drove the beleaguered general and his remaining troops to the top of the ridge, where they were surrounded and trapped. As more and more soldiers were killed and stripped of their weapons and ammunition, the situation became dire. When their ammo ran out, the warriors closed in on them, and eventually killed every man in Custer's detachment.
There has been almost endless conjecture about what actually happened in those final moments, as no one in Custer's immediate company survived to tell the tale. Some accounts from native warriors have survived, but most are highly conflicting. What is known is that the aftermath of the battle was gruesome. Most of the casualties were found days later, stripped naked and ritually mutilated - including Custer himself - in varying stages of decomposition. Some were identified, but many were not, so they were simply buried where they fell. Marble markers still at the site show where the bodies were found where they fell, and attest to the chaotic nature of the battle - no real skirmish lines were discernible.
Custer himself was found near the top of the ridge, now known as "Last Stand Hill," with two fatal gunshot wounds, one in the chest and the other to his temple. Some reports suggest the latter may have, in fact, been self-inflicted: Custer realized that his situation was hopeless, so he may have chosen to take his own life in order to avoid capture and torture.
Worst of all: the defeat at the Little Big Horn devastated his entire family. Killed along with him were his much-beloved two younger brothers, Thomas and "Bos" Boston (a civilian), his nephew, Armstrong, who had been named for him, and his brother-in-law. Custer and Tom were found and identified. They were wrapped in canvas and buried in a shallow grave. When his grave was visited a year later, however, it was discovered that it has been scavenged by animals and the bones scattered, so very few remain. What was recovered of him and his brother were re-interred at the West Point Cemetery. Some dispute, however, whether they even were his and his brother's remains at all.
As in the case of Custer and his brother, his men's remains were found scattered all over the battlefield. Due to their fragmentary nature, most were never positively identified. They now lie together in a mass grave at the site. Others were collected from the on-site graves and re-interred by Captain George Sanderso in 1879. He built a mound out of wood, filled it with as many horse bones as they could find on the site, and in the center, dug a mass grave where he interred all the human bones they could recover. He then covered all with wood stacked four feet high. A granite memorial was built in 1881, which also remains today. The marble markers which show where the bodies were found were placed in 1890.
Speaking of horses: another well-known account of the battle concerns the "heroic" horse Comanche, the "lone survivor" of the encounter. This actually happened. Comanche was found seriously wounded, two days after the battle, but he was nursed back to health to live out the rest of his days in retirement at various forts, where he reportedly inspired generations of cavalrymen, before finally dying of colic in 1891, at about 29 years of age.
So: what was the official response to the disaster? Custer's old buddy President Grant had THIS to say, and summed it up nicely: "I regard Custer's massacre as a sacrifice of troops, brought on by Custer himself, that was wholly unnecessary.... He was not to have made the attack before effecting the juncture with Generals Terry and Gibbon [his reinforcements]. Custer had been notified to meet them, but instead of marching slowly, as his orders required, in order to effect that juncture on the 26th, he entered upon a forced march of eighty-three miles in twenty-four hours, and thus had to meet the Indians alone."
The official report determined: Custer had disobeyed orders, and was responsible for not only his own death, but those of his men and his own family members. Curiously, however, many in the army, especially the unwashed masses of enlisted rank-and-file, didn't see it that way. Some more often than not saw the statements by their superiors regarding the massacre as maligning the memory of a man they admired and respected. Indeed, it may have been their efforts to keep his legacy alive that more than anything else led to Custer being hailed as a hero rather than a fool.
That said, however: not surprisingly, it was also noted that Custer was absolutely brutal to his men, so his reputation evolved somewhat over time. Many under his command certainly did not share the sentiment that he was a tragic hero. And, of course, Grant's statements about Custer's utter failure did nothing to endear his family members. His widow Libbie reportedly became Grant's enemy for life. Undeterred by later criticism, she wrote three books in an attempt to polish her husband's badly tarnished reputation.
This review has become just about as long as the book itself, but it's a fascinating story, one which continues to intrigue, perhaps because there are so many complex moving parts and unsolved mysteries. It's a good overview, but does omit a lot of detail, especially about the battle itself, so if you're expecting it to be a comprehensive account of the actual battle, you may well be disappointed. It doesn't go into much specific detail about any particular aspect of Custer, either his life or untimely death, but it provides a general introduction to the subject that's more than capable. And, of course, it's written by someone in the know, who once owned a fairly solid collection of Little Big Horn artifacts.
What it does do, however, is illustrate the tragedy of hubris, which is a valuable moral lesson for whomever might be inclined to blindly emulate Custer's example - it was more his character flaws than a tragic mistake which led to his untimely end.
The book is definitely worth a read, if you're interested in the history of the American West, and one written by an absolute legend, at that. It also references a number of other books on the subject, if you're interested in additional or more in-depth reading.
September 1, 2012
Custer, by Larry McMurtry, promises to bring the complexity of George Armstrong Custer to life by illuminating his difficult marriage and his glory-seeking in an assessment of Custer’s fame and the power of his personality while redefining the common understanding of the American West. This title is published by Simon & Schuster, ISBN: 978-1-4516-2622-3 as an ebook.
The author begins by explaining that his work will cut through much of the irrelevant guesswork that is common in most of the writing on Custer. For example, he seriously questions the necessity of discussing why one corpse was found with 150 arrows in it. It’s irrelevant, he argues. However, in chapter 30, the author expressly raises that very question. After considering CPT Tom Custer’s death, the author is puzzled as to why 105 arrows were found in a body and that this fact should really fascinate “students of mutilation”.
The narrative then launches into a lengthy comparison of Fremont, a man who was once employed as a topographer. This rather long section seems to be more of a set up for character assassination than it does with serious historical engagement. The reader is informed that Custer abandoned his men, like Fremont. Custer was court-martialed, like Fremont. Custer wanted to be president, like Fremont. Fremont is not relevant to the purpose of the book.
Many of the illustrations are carelessly mislabeled. Most of the photographs have no contextual significance. One picture bears the text “Custer with his horse, Comanche” yet it is not a picture of Custer (it’s Gustav Korn) and it’s not Custer’s horse (it belonged to CPT Keogh). The picture itself was taken long after the battle anyway. Another picture is described as being Custer and the scout Curly in 1876. It isn’t. It is a picture of the scouts Goose and Bloody Knife with Custer in 1874. Lastly, a photo of “Custer and Little Wolf” is actually a photo of C. Lyon Berg taken in 1908. Incidentally Charles L. Von Berg was a known “Custer battle impostor” who claimed that he was the inspiration for Buffalo Bill Cody’s Western tales. Why are those pictures placed in those chapters? What is the relevance? There needs to be some fact checking before Simon & Schuster unleashes this inaccurate study on the public.
Other examples of areas that need work are where the author claims General Custer wrote the famous last message, carried by John Martin, to Benteen. He even provides a picture of it with the actual signature, not by Custer, but by the real person who wrote the note, and the historical record bears this out, of Lt. Cooke who was Custer’s adjutant. Another is that this book claims Private Thomas Coleman was the first Soldier to arrive on the battlefield after the defeat. But this is far from true. LT Roe was the first US Soldier to see the carnage from a distance. LT Bradley, from Terry’s command, was the first physically on the battlefield, even performing the first body count before reporting the fate of the 7th Cavalry back to General Terry. Details matter. It is careless to go to print without diligent research. This book is not a reflection of serious study.
Overall, I did not find any of this title’s claims to be borne out in the text. I did not find scholarly participation with the subject. Much of what I read was conjecture or inspired by rumor. The errors struck me as minor at first--surely no historian can get every detail right¬--but error compounded error so much that I was overwhelmed by the careless mistakes.
I do not believe this is a good introduction to the subject of Custer and the Little Bighorn battle. It does nothing to contribute to the works already available. It does not meet a single of its intended purposes. It holds no content that is new or revealing about the topic.
Almost as if the author knew the work was faulty are the final statements appearing after the bibliography where the author accuses most Custer historians of being “peculiar” and “cranky.” Perhaps it is good to listen to cranky, peculiar scholars from time to time in order to avoid academic embarrassment.
The author begins by explaining that his work will cut through much of the irrelevant guesswork that is common in most of the writing on Custer. For example, he seriously questions the necessity of discussing why one corpse was found with 150 arrows in it. It’s irrelevant, he argues. However, in chapter 30, the author expressly raises that very question. After considering CPT Tom Custer’s death, the author is puzzled as to why 105 arrows were found in a body and that this fact should really fascinate “students of mutilation”.
The narrative then launches into a lengthy comparison of Fremont, a man who was once employed as a topographer. This rather long section seems to be more of a set up for character assassination than it does with serious historical engagement. The reader is informed that Custer abandoned his men, like Fremont. Custer was court-martialed, like Fremont. Custer wanted to be president, like Fremont. Fremont is not relevant to the purpose of the book.
Many of the illustrations are carelessly mislabeled. Most of the photographs have no contextual significance. One picture bears the text “Custer with his horse, Comanche” yet it is not a picture of Custer (it’s Gustav Korn) and it’s not Custer’s horse (it belonged to CPT Keogh). The picture itself was taken long after the battle anyway. Another picture is described as being Custer and the scout Curly in 1876. It isn’t. It is a picture of the scouts Goose and Bloody Knife with Custer in 1874. Lastly, a photo of “Custer and Little Wolf” is actually a photo of C. Lyon Berg taken in 1908. Incidentally Charles L. Von Berg was a known “Custer battle impostor” who claimed that he was the inspiration for Buffalo Bill Cody’s Western tales. Why are those pictures placed in those chapters? What is the relevance? There needs to be some fact checking before Simon & Schuster unleashes this inaccurate study on the public.
Other examples of areas that need work are where the author claims General Custer wrote the famous last message, carried by John Martin, to Benteen. He even provides a picture of it with the actual signature, not by Custer, but by the real person who wrote the note, and the historical record bears this out, of Lt. Cooke who was Custer’s adjutant. Another is that this book claims Private Thomas Coleman was the first Soldier to arrive on the battlefield after the defeat. But this is far from true. LT Roe was the first US Soldier to see the carnage from a distance. LT Bradley, from Terry’s command, was the first physically on the battlefield, even performing the first body count before reporting the fate of the 7th Cavalry back to General Terry. Details matter. It is careless to go to print without diligent research. This book is not a reflection of serious study.
Overall, I did not find any of this title’s claims to be borne out in the text. I did not find scholarly participation with the subject. Much of what I read was conjecture or inspired by rumor. The errors struck me as minor at first--surely no historian can get every detail right¬--but error compounded error so much that I was overwhelmed by the careless mistakes.
I do not believe this is a good introduction to the subject of Custer and the Little Bighorn battle. It does nothing to contribute to the works already available. It does not meet a single of its intended purposes. It holds no content that is new or revealing about the topic.
Almost as if the author knew the work was faulty are the final statements appearing after the bibliography where the author accuses most Custer historians of being “peculiar” and “cranky.” Perhaps it is good to listen to cranky, peculiar scholars from time to time in order to avoid academic embarrassment.
October 16, 2015
Ambush!
The alleged Indian fighter Custer may not have been scalped but I feel I was after stumbling and staggering through the pages of Larry McMurtry’s meagre biography of the controversial seventh cavalry commander. Furthermore, I came to realize that wasn’t the only wound I suffered in the process: I noticed a big hole in my wallet too. McMurtry’s “Custer” is awful.
Like Custer, I never saw this coming. And why would I? Who could possibly have thought that McMurtry, the doyen of writers on the West, the Pulitzer prize-winning author of the sublime Lonesome Dove, could produce a turkey like this? A little while ago I would have thought him constitutionally incapable of such banality.
There is nothing new here and, even more damningly, little of interest. Ostensibly this is a pick-me-up-and-browse “Coffee Table” book: lots of nice pictures - albeit ones that have done the rounds many, many times before – padded out with personal observations and tangential ramblings loosely centring on the long-haired general of the plains. The trouble is there is no sense of coherence, or even effort, in the whole project. “Chapter” 23 is, perhaps, the most striking encapsulation of the book’s failings. It is a disjointed, often irrelevant, and bewildering collection facts and musings that is almost incomprehensible. He begins with a paragraph on his and his partner’s award for services to the West before swinging abruptly to a mini discourse on McKenzie, another army general in the Indian wars, without any introduction or attempt at a segue showing the connection between the two quite unrelated subjects. Who the hell is McKenzie? Then, equally suddenly, he switches to Custer. The reader might as well be picking disparate trivia cards out of a box.
I can only wonder who made the pitch for this enterprise; was it McMurtry himself or his publisher maybe? It could well have gone along the lines, “Hey, here’s an idea to pocket some easy cash. Throw a bunch of Custer pictures on the table and then give us a couple of your thoughts to fill in some spaces. You know, nothing too taxing, top of your head stuff will do. We’ll let the pics. do the talking.”
McMurtry does say at one point that anyone wanting a detailed account of Custer at Little Bighorn should read Connell’s “Son of the Morning Star.” He’s right there.
The alleged Indian fighter Custer may not have been scalped but I feel I was after stumbling and staggering through the pages of Larry McMurtry’s meagre biography of the controversial seventh cavalry commander. Furthermore, I came to realize that wasn’t the only wound I suffered in the process: I noticed a big hole in my wallet too. McMurtry’s “Custer” is awful.
Like Custer, I never saw this coming. And why would I? Who could possibly have thought that McMurtry, the doyen of writers on the West, the Pulitzer prize-winning author of the sublime Lonesome Dove, could produce a turkey like this? A little while ago I would have thought him constitutionally incapable of such banality.
There is nothing new here and, even more damningly, little of interest. Ostensibly this is a pick-me-up-and-browse “Coffee Table” book: lots of nice pictures - albeit ones that have done the rounds many, many times before – padded out with personal observations and tangential ramblings loosely centring on the long-haired general of the plains. The trouble is there is no sense of coherence, or even effort, in the whole project. “Chapter” 23 is, perhaps, the most striking encapsulation of the book’s failings. It is a disjointed, often irrelevant, and bewildering collection facts and musings that is almost incomprehensible. He begins with a paragraph on his and his partner’s award for services to the West before swinging abruptly to a mini discourse on McKenzie, another army general in the Indian wars, without any introduction or attempt at a segue showing the connection between the two quite unrelated subjects. Who the hell is McKenzie? Then, equally suddenly, he switches to Custer. The reader might as well be picking disparate trivia cards out of a box.
I can only wonder who made the pitch for this enterprise; was it McMurtry himself or his publisher maybe? It could well have gone along the lines, “Hey, here’s an idea to pocket some easy cash. Throw a bunch of Custer pictures on the table and then give us a couple of your thoughts to fill in some spaces. You know, nothing too taxing, top of your head stuff will do. We’ll let the pics. do the talking.”
McMurtry does say at one point that anyone wanting a detailed account of Custer at Little Bighorn should read Connell’s “Son of the Morning Star.” He’s right there.
December 28, 2012
"Custer" is a well-illustrated and very brief "life and times" of General George Armstrong Custer, written by Larry McMurtry of "Lonesome Dove" fame. It's interesting in spots and engaging in its own way, but it rambles with a vengeance. The narrative wanders all over the 19th Century American West, touching on some aspect of Custer's life, then digressing to a quick and inconclusive "parallel life" of John C. Fremont, then a brief excursion into Custer's marriage to his wife, Libby, then to the "Battle" of Washita, then a quick aside about some aspect of the Last Stand, then on to Buffalo Bill Cody's Wild West Show, then a quick discussion of Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse and other Native American leaders, and then--well, you get the idea. And beyond the rambling, the narrative is internally disjointed--some paragraphs and sentences come out of nowhere, having little or nothing to do with what came before or after. My favorite was a throw away reference to Churchill's dismissal of Auchinleck during World War 2--I suppose that might have something to do with 19th Century American military decisions, but the point of the reference is by no means clear.
This is not to say that the book isn't somewhat interesting--I read it in a couple of sittings, and it includes a lot of well-rendered period photographs of the main characters, as well as full-color presentations of various paintings (mostly of the Last Stand), as well as posters from Buffalo Bill's Wild West show. Reading the book is a little like listening to an interesting and amusing uncle give a stream of consciousness explanation of what he knows about George A. Custer and the American West in the 19th Century, complete with photos (presented via PowerPoint).
If you already know something about George A. Custer and the post-Civil War American West, "Custer" is a briefly diverting gloss with lovely pictures. If you are looking for a detailed narrative history that systematically explores Custer's life, the Battle of The Little Bighorn, or the 19th Century campaigns against Native Americans, then (as McMurtry himself cheerfully notes) there are a number of other excellent and in depth books on the subject.
This is not to say that the book isn't somewhat interesting--I read it in a couple of sittings, and it includes a lot of well-rendered period photographs of the main characters, as well as full-color presentations of various paintings (mostly of the Last Stand), as well as posters from Buffalo Bill's Wild West show. Reading the book is a little like listening to an interesting and amusing uncle give a stream of consciousness explanation of what he knows about George A. Custer and the American West in the 19th Century, complete with photos (presented via PowerPoint).
If you already know something about George A. Custer and the post-Civil War American West, "Custer" is a briefly diverting gloss with lovely pictures. If you are looking for a detailed narrative history that systematically explores Custer's life, the Battle of The Little Bighorn, or the 19th Century campaigns against Native Americans, then (as McMurtry himself cheerfully notes) there are a number of other excellent and in depth books on the subject.
November 14, 2014
In the years after the Civil War my great-great-grandfather, a Union soldier, went AWOL from the Army in Kansas. An old letter from his daughter says that he was having trouble with a superior officer, and one of them was going to kill the other unless my great-great-grandfather took off. General George A. Custer was in Kansas at the same time, and I’ve always wondered if maybe he was the superior officer mentioned in the letter. I can easily believe that an ancestor of mine could become frustrated with a difficult leader, and Larry McMurtry’s “short life” of Custer shows how the general wasn’t very well liked among those with whom he served.
McMurtry’s Custer is a character sketch and personal reflection on the high and low points of the general’s career. McMurtry, one of my favorite authors, doesn’t attempt to cover every aspect of Custer’s life. In addition to McMurtry’s story-telling, I especially enjoyed the descriptions and photos of the Indian leaders of the time.
Although I learned a few things about Custer, nothing here shed new light on my great-great-grandfather, except maybe this tantalizing detail: “If Custer signally lacked something it was what the rest of the world calls conscience. He had no capacity for empathizing with the pain and suffering of others … Conditions being what they were, desertion was a constant problem, both in Texas or Kansas, sometimes running as high as 50 percent. Custer treated the deserters savagely, often sending his brother Tom to shoot them. Those who made it back to the forts faced cruel punishment.”
McMurtry’s Custer is a character sketch and personal reflection on the high and low points of the general’s career. McMurtry, one of my favorite authors, doesn’t attempt to cover every aspect of Custer’s life. In addition to McMurtry’s story-telling, I especially enjoyed the descriptions and photos of the Indian leaders of the time.
Although I learned a few things about Custer, nothing here shed new light on my great-great-grandfather, except maybe this tantalizing detail: “If Custer signally lacked something it was what the rest of the world calls conscience. He had no capacity for empathizing with the pain and suffering of others … Conditions being what they were, desertion was a constant problem, both in Texas or Kansas, sometimes running as high as 50 percent. Custer treated the deserters savagely, often sending his brother Tom to shoot them. Those who made it back to the forts faced cruel punishment.”
December 14, 2012
Larry McMurtry’s Custer includes lots of graphics, and that’s good. The text itself is choppy, consisting of short chapters sometimes chronological and sometimes not. The effect is to make the read uneven, as if the text had been put together by someone with ADD. It’s clear from the outset that McMurtry does not like Custer. Just about everything negative that could be said about the guy is included. The author does make some good points along the way. The 1876 debacle at the Little Big Horn “closed the narrative of American settlement.” The multitude of languages on the Plains complicated relations among whites and the various tribes. A cluster of factors explain the fascination with Custer. In the end this is not a volume that will settle any questions about Custer or his place in history. It is not, as one advertisement put it, the last word on the ill-fated soldier. The graphics, however, are well done and provide a convenient way to see many of pictures of Custer, Indians and such things as Buffalo Bill Wildwest show circulars.
December 7, 2013
I didn't know how to rate this book because it's the first book on Custer that I've ever read. I liked the historical notes and swift story-telling that unfolds. I little jumpy - here and there about people and places. Causes a lapse in some of the time and events, but overall, a great story of the West. The book was given to my by my father-in-law, Mac. He is a Vietnam veteran and absolutely loves Custer. He has the Last Stand poster in his office at well as Custer's famous portrait in hat. I have to ask him why he admires him so. As for me I don't like the fact that he just couldn't leave the Indians alone. I respect the Natives more than anything and find it hard to respect Custer at all. I think Mac likes him so much for his temerity. To me, he is overly-confident which is never a good thing and did a lot of wrong things for the wrong reasons. Most of the westward expansion was all done through ignorance, in my opinion. But still there's nothing better to me than a good ol' western story. I'm glad I've read this book.
May 2, 2014
A glorious literary career has come to this. Though it isn't a comeback as Larry has never stopped writing, Sugar Ray Leonard had more late career success. Somewhere around Dwayne's Depressed or the last of the BerryBender Chronicles, McMurtry ceased to be the writer he once was. There are some impressive pictures in this handsome volume, but the journalism is sloppy, unoriginal, and downright adolescent. I'm not entirely convinced he didn't find an intern who over-utilized wikipedia to produce this glorified middle school history essay.
June 13, 2014
As Mr. McMurtry terms it, it is a "short read" on Custer. It is enough to "wet the appetite" without boring. It made me want to get into some of the other books recommended, although I think I've got enough on Custer for now. I just appreciate the glimpse into this time in history. McMurtry makes the history interested in a very familiar style and certainly doesn't glamorize General Custer. I recommend this book especially since you will invest very little time. The audio version is very easy to listen to and the reader seems to capture McMurtry style perfectly.
December 15, 2012
Not great - though an easy run through of Custer's personal career set against the bigger historical events and trends from the Civil War through western migration and development of railroad and gold rush in Black Hills. As others have noted, it is so easy to find detail errors that almost nothing in this book can be counted on 100%. Lots of personal impressions from McMurtry and lots of filler too. It's pretty much a Custer picture book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 228 reviews