What do you think?
Rate this book
Concscience: Two Soldiers, Two Pacifists, One Family- A Test of Will and Faith in World War 1
Concscience: Two Soldiers, Two Pacifists, One Family- A Test of Will and Faith in World War 1 Paperback – 2011
272 pages, Paperback
First published June 1, 2011
7 people are currently reading
323 people want to read
About the author
Louisa Thomas
19 books44 followersLouisa Thomas is the author of Conscience: Two Soldiers, Two Pacifists, One Family—a Test of Will and Faith in World War I. She is a former writer for Grantland and a former fellow at the New America Foundation. Her writing has appeared in The New York Times, Vogue, The Wall Street Journal, The New Yorker, The Paris Review, and other places.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
January 17, 2016
Louisa Thomas writes of her Great Grandfather (and periennal Socialist Party candidate for President) Norman Thomas, and his three brothers responses to the first World War. Norman and his brother Evan objected while Ralph and Arthur both served. Norman Thomas wasn't an unfamiliar name to me, but I didn't realize he was an ordained Presbyterian Minister and establishment enough to have been a student and friend-of-sorts of Woodrow Wilson.
Pacifists may have thought the war was about profit but Thomas's book left me believing the country was in the hands of all these tortured Princton-Presbyterian consciences. Wilson and the Thomases all driven by their inner voice to do something.
Book's an important contribution I think to understanding US response and entry into WW1 as we approach the 2014 centennial. Also nice to see a subject placed in context of a family. Not everyone comes to the same conclusions despite common education, experiences, and values.
Pacifists may have thought the war was about profit but Thomas's book left me believing the country was in the hands of all these tortured Princton-Presbyterian consciences. Wilson and the Thomases all driven by their inner voice to do something.
Book's an important contribution I think to understanding US response and entry into WW1 as we approach the 2014 centennial. Also nice to see a subject placed in context of a family. Not everyone comes to the same conclusions despite common education, experiences, and values.
June 1, 2013
This book is about conscientious objection and the anti-war movement in America (and, tangentially, in the U.K.) during World War I. It's also about the socialist movement in America during that era. If you are interested in these topics, as I am, you might find the book worth reading. The presentation of President Wilson's leveraging of jingoism, racism, and xenophobia, and his suppression of speech in order to silence opposition to the war, is eye-opening and shocking.
However, the format is biographical--the subject is Norman Thomas, a pacifist and socialist who was apparently well-known in mid-century America--and in this respect it isn't effective for me. The author focuses on details of the subject's life that I don't find terribly interesting, and she passes quickly over subjects that I would be interested to read more about. For example, she indicates that Thomas advocated racial justice; however, it is not until she mentions, almost in passing and at the end of the book, a moving endorsement of Thomas by Martin Luther King, Jr., that one realizes the full extent of Thomas's commitment to that work. (And I still don't know in what, fully, that work consisted.) The author also takes what I find to be an unnecessarily harsh attitude toward the thoughts expressed in the correspondence that forms the foundation of the narrative: she persistently highlights what she views as specious reasoning, indications of character flaws in her subjects, and even poor writing style. This is, arguably, good scholarship, but here becomes--for me--distracting and irritating, inasmuch as her criticisms often aren't central to her own argument or to the story line. She approaches the correspondence of Norman Thomas and his brother, Evan Thomas--also a conscientious objector--somewhat critically, but writes with tremendous admiration of their brother Ralph, who becomes a soldier and goes to fight in the war. She also writes in much greater depth about Evan and Norman: if Ralph is treated admiringly, as a "naturally cheerful" man of tremendous "good humor," he is nevertheless a second-string player. But I can't help but feel that her true sympathies are with Ralph, and that he gets a free pass for expressing blood-thirsty sentiments which--though perhaps understandable for a very young man in the middle of a war--feel appalling at this remove.
Central to the narrative is the fact that the brothers in the family were each called by conscience to a different response to the war. As she points out at the book's close, conscience "can be used to justify any action, even heinous ones (a group of right-wing Germans that prefigured the Nazi party titled its newsletter 'Gewissen'--conscience)." But the book never grapples explicitly with the question of which brother *did* make the morally correct choice. I don't think the book needs to (or can) answer the question conclusively; but by rigorously avoiding judgment on any of the brothers, it feels wishy-washy and, ultimately, lacking in the conscience and bravery that are its subject matter.
However, the format is biographical--the subject is Norman Thomas, a pacifist and socialist who was apparently well-known in mid-century America--and in this respect it isn't effective for me. The author focuses on details of the subject's life that I don't find terribly interesting, and she passes quickly over subjects that I would be interested to read more about. For example, she indicates that Thomas advocated racial justice; however, it is not until she mentions, almost in passing and at the end of the book, a moving endorsement of Thomas by Martin Luther King, Jr., that one realizes the full extent of Thomas's commitment to that work. (And I still don't know in what, fully, that work consisted.) The author also takes what I find to be an unnecessarily harsh attitude toward the thoughts expressed in the correspondence that forms the foundation of the narrative: she persistently highlights what she views as specious reasoning, indications of character flaws in her subjects, and even poor writing style. This is, arguably, good scholarship, but here becomes--for me--distracting and irritating, inasmuch as her criticisms often aren't central to her own argument or to the story line. She approaches the correspondence of Norman Thomas and his brother, Evan Thomas--also a conscientious objector--somewhat critically, but writes with tremendous admiration of their brother Ralph, who becomes a soldier and goes to fight in the war. She also writes in much greater depth about Evan and Norman: if Ralph is treated admiringly, as a "naturally cheerful" man of tremendous "good humor," he is nevertheless a second-string player. But I can't help but feel that her true sympathies are with Ralph, and that he gets a free pass for expressing blood-thirsty sentiments which--though perhaps understandable for a very young man in the middle of a war--feel appalling at this remove.
Central to the narrative is the fact that the brothers in the family were each called by conscience to a different response to the war. As she points out at the book's close, conscience "can be used to justify any action, even heinous ones (a group of right-wing Germans that prefigured the Nazi party titled its newsletter 'Gewissen'--conscience)." But the book never grapples explicitly with the question of which brother *did* make the morally correct choice. I don't think the book needs to (or can) answer the question conclusively; but by rigorously avoiding judgment on any of the brothers, it feels wishy-washy and, ultimately, lacking in the conscience and bravery that are its subject matter.
September 21, 2012
Louisa Thomas tells the story of the Thomas family focusing primarily on the oldest of four brothers, Norman, her great-grandfather. I enjoyed the book for several reasons. First it was interesting to learn about the four brothers and the choices they made. The two younger ones joined the military in World War I, one spent much of the war in prison for his refusal to join the military, and the other, while not liable for the draft, worked hard for the rights of conscience objectors. In spite of the differences the brothers remained close, mostly I'm guessing because of the efforts of their mother.
Second, Thomas does a nice job of portraying the politics of the time. The progressives who felt they could shape life if only they had enough government control, the arrogance of the political elite such as President Wilson who were sure they knew what was best for all Americans; the intolerance of dissent once the US entered the war, and the fear of communism and radicalism after the war.
The last reason I enjoyed the book was the story of Norman Thomas and his relationship with the church. Fed up with the inability or unwillingness of the church to take a stand against the war, Thomas becomes disillusioned with the church. The author does a nice job of contrasting Thomas's understanding of Christianity with that of Billy Sunday and others who quickly became the cheerleaders for the US war effort. Thomas's frustration with the church continued to grow, till he resigns as a pastor, joins the Socialist party and becomes involved in politics, all though I wonder if his heart was really in it.
Norman Thomas asked important and sometimes troubling questions about the church, politics, government the role of society, and individual faith. Thomas sought to live life in a way which reflected his faith. Unfortunately the church did little to support him in his efforts.
Second, Thomas does a nice job of portraying the politics of the time. The progressives who felt they could shape life if only they had enough government control, the arrogance of the political elite such as President Wilson who were sure they knew what was best for all Americans; the intolerance of dissent once the US entered the war, and the fear of communism and radicalism after the war.
The last reason I enjoyed the book was the story of Norman Thomas and his relationship with the church. Fed up with the inability or unwillingness of the church to take a stand against the war, Thomas becomes disillusioned with the church. The author does a nice job of contrasting Thomas's understanding of Christianity with that of Billy Sunday and others who quickly became the cheerleaders for the US war effort. Thomas's frustration with the church continued to grow, till he resigns as a pastor, joins the Socialist party and becomes involved in politics, all though I wonder if his heart was really in it.
Norman Thomas asked important and sometimes troubling questions about the church, politics, government the role of society, and individual faith. Thomas sought to live life in a way which reflected his faith. Unfortunately the church did little to support him in his efforts.
May 3, 2016
I was intrigued by the idea of four brothers, all raised within the same home, who chose such different paths when their country went to war. I wanted to know by what process of decision-making did they arrive at their own decision to either fight or object? (Both positions required courage in WWI America.) And though the book provided copious detail regarding their actions, and some quotes from letters the brothers had written to family members, I still did not come away from the book feeling that I absolutely understood what experiences and reflection had brought each brother to his final position.
This was certainly not for lack of trying on the part of the author, and it was that meticulous attention to extensive detail that ultimately stalled my interest in this book. It was simply too much, and the reading became increasingly tedious. I would recommend this book only to serious scholars of WWI history (especially history of the "home front") or to descendants of the Thomas family (as is the author).
This was certainly not for lack of trying on the part of the author, and it was that meticulous attention to extensive detail that ultimately stalled my interest in this book. It was simply too much, and the reading became increasingly tedious. I would recommend this book only to serious scholars of WWI history (especially history of the "home front") or to descendants of the Thomas family (as is the author).
January 5, 2018
I came across this title while reading another book on pacifists in England during WW I. Having been a conscientious objector to the Vietnam War myself I was interested in reading Thomas' book as well.
I think the title is a bit of a misnomer. It refers to 'two pacifists and two soldiers.' But the two Thomas brothers who were soldiers in the War are not given anywhere near equal treatment. The youngest Arthur is barely mentioned at all, in fact.
That issue aside the author Louisa Thomas does a very credible job at culling out info mainly via family letters but also through some of Norman Thomas' writings of the way in which Norman and his brother Evan evolved into their opposition to the War. What some reviewers found a tedious/boring recitation of events I found to be a thorough and careful, albeit somewhat dry/academic at times, analysis. The author was skilled at putting Norman's evolution to anti-militarism and Socialism in the context of his family upbringing, his religious training and beliefs,and his efforts to live and work according to the Social Gospel. She also drew some thoughtful distinctions between Norman's anti-militarist beliefs and those of his brother Evan.
The book also gave me a very good sense of the extent to which President Wilson and his cohorts struggled to stimulate public support for a war which the vast majority of Americans did not want to fight. I came away seeing how much harder, if not even dangerous, it was for Norman, Evan, and other anti-militarists/pacifists to be true to their principles than it was for me and my generation in the late 1960's. I also learned about other anti-militarists and organizations like the ACLU.
I wish the author had included more on the two soldier brothers and the mother's efforts to support her sons, respect their different life choices, and encourage family cohesion in such difficult times.
I would rate it as a 4.5. I see she has written another book on the wife of John Quincy Adams. I like this one well enough to want to read that one as well.
I think the title is a bit of a misnomer. It refers to 'two pacifists and two soldiers.' But the two Thomas brothers who were soldiers in the War are not given anywhere near equal treatment. The youngest Arthur is barely mentioned at all, in fact.
That issue aside the author Louisa Thomas does a very credible job at culling out info mainly via family letters but also through some of Norman Thomas' writings of the way in which Norman and his brother Evan evolved into their opposition to the War. What some reviewers found a tedious/boring recitation of events I found to be a thorough and careful, albeit somewhat dry/academic at times, analysis. The author was skilled at putting Norman's evolution to anti-militarism and Socialism in the context of his family upbringing, his religious training and beliefs,and his efforts to live and work according to the Social Gospel. She also drew some thoughtful distinctions between Norman's anti-militarist beliefs and those of his brother Evan.
The book also gave me a very good sense of the extent to which President Wilson and his cohorts struggled to stimulate public support for a war which the vast majority of Americans did not want to fight. I came away seeing how much harder, if not even dangerous, it was for Norman, Evan, and other anti-militarists/pacifists to be true to their principles than it was for me and my generation in the late 1960's. I also learned about other anti-militarists and organizations like the ACLU.
I wish the author had included more on the two soldier brothers and the mother's efforts to support her sons, respect their different life choices, and encourage family cohesion in such difficult times.
I would rate it as a 4.5. I see she has written another book on the wife of John Quincy Adams. I like this one well enough to want to read that one as well.
November 2, 2022
Well written account of an entirely uniquely opposed family before and during the seminal conflict of the twentieth century. Thomas clearly understands the personalities, emotions, and motivations of her ancestors, citing and quoting letters whenever possible. The “family history” aspect goes slightly too far back in my opinion, but overall Conscience is a story that couldn’t be told better by any other teller.
August 10, 2022
This book had some super interesting parts. Looking at WW1 through the eyes of a middle class family explores of lot of the mundaneness of life even during crisis and helped me better relate to what it might be like to live during those times. Unfortunately, the prose and source material isn't the most engaging, which means the overall result is pretty middling and hard to get through.
November 25, 2025
An interesting book, I felt that I learned not only about the Thomas family but also about the time period and some of the civil liberties abuses that occurred under the Woodrow administration. I found that the book was less about “Two Soldiers, Two Pacifists, One Family” but was rather mostly about Norman's life but then Evan and Ralphs lives. and Aurthor was hardly mentioned at all.
January 25, 2019
Good book; ironic how closely it compares to the national landscape today! Very interesting on how alot of the national movements happened during this period of unrest during WWI and beyond. Fascinating history on the origins of the draft in America.
April 8, 2020
great account of a couple of heroes i didn’t know that much about.
February 3, 2022
This was a little like going to a friends house to watch home movies. The closer I got to the end of the book the more I longed for it to be over.
January 30, 2016
How does a pious young Presbyterian minister become a six-time candidate for the Socialist party? Such is the story of Conscience, the story of Norman Thomas and his younger brother Evan, who would go to seminary as conventional Presbyterians and emerge radicals whose faith found truer expression in political idealism than Christian worship. The promised tension between brothers is wholly overstated, as Conscience concerns Norman and Evan's struggle to find a way to live as authentic Christians in a world of violence and poverty. Unable to accept religious claims on their face, and deeply unhappy with the response of Christians in general to the problems of the world around them -- platitudes and minor alms for the poor, enthusiastic support for the horror of the Great War -- both grew further from Christianity and more politically radical as the years wore on. Although both eventually become ardent pacifists, to the discomfort of their family and institutions which bore them, in each political activism takes different forms. Young Evan's zeal took hold early, his high, strident ideals are so resolute he can make no concessions anywhere, and develops something of a martyrdom complex as a conscientious objector. Norman's own radicalism was slower to ripen; as pastor of a church with a growing family, he sought to effect change through the political system rather than his brother's active protests.
The piquancy of Conscience is how the brothers came to their respective positions, considering their very conventional background; their family was stolidly middle class and the boys were elevated into the elite Princeton University and its social clubs through their own scholarship. This was an era of tremendous social and political upheaval, a time in which comfortable politics-as-usual was giving way to demands for action by the populists and progressives. Louisa Thomas well delivers a sense of the changing spirit of the times, its energy impacting the lives of all who are involved. She draws largely on letters within the family, a feat made easy by merit of her being Norman Thomas's great-granddaughter. She is thus tender to her subjects, though it would be hard not to be considering their commitment to justice and peace; Norman is especially sympathetic, not being quite so much the puritan, and torn between old loyalties (to his mentor, Woodrow Wilson, who ran on an anti-war campaign and then locked up people like Evan for protesting when he joined in) and new expressions of old values. Conscience is thus a fascinating look into the souls of two young men during one of the west's darkest moments.
The piquancy of Conscience is how the brothers came to their respective positions, considering their very conventional background; their family was stolidly middle class and the boys were elevated into the elite Princeton University and its social clubs through their own scholarship. This was an era of tremendous social and political upheaval, a time in which comfortable politics-as-usual was giving way to demands for action by the populists and progressives. Louisa Thomas well delivers a sense of the changing spirit of the times, its energy impacting the lives of all who are involved. She draws largely on letters within the family, a feat made easy by merit of her being Norman Thomas's great-granddaughter. She is thus tender to her subjects, though it would be hard not to be considering their commitment to justice and peace; Norman is especially sympathetic, not being quite so much the puritan, and torn between old loyalties (to his mentor, Woodrow Wilson, who ran on an anti-war campaign and then locked up people like Evan for protesting when he joined in) and new expressions of old values. Conscience is thus a fascinating look into the souls of two young men during one of the west's darkest moments.
November 11, 2014
A rare nonfiction read for me (outside of work). The premise intrigued me: a family in which two brothers are pacifists and two join up to fight in WWI. On that score, I found it a bit of a disappointment. There's not really much family drama here, though it is heartening to see that the sharply divided family (even the two pacifists were sharply divided on many issues) managed to maintain their affection and respect for each other. Primarily, though, the book is about the most famous of the brothers, Norman, the perennial Socialist candidate for president of the U.S. from the 1920s through the 1940s (and the author's great-grandfather), with what amount to extended sidebars about his brothers. It's not about Norman's socialism, though, but about the intellectual, religious, social, and political foundations of his pacifism during WWI. And on that score, the book is a success. We also get a pretty good picture of the larger (elite) antiwar movement, because Norman was such a "joiner." The author treats her subject with great respect, though not uncritically. She treats Ethan, the other, more radical, pacifist brother, with great affection but less respect for his views and actions. All in all, it's a book that is both inspiring (for the subjects' moral courage) and disheartening (for how little impact they had). Unfortunately, the book is marred with way too many typos. Interesting coincidence: I finished this book on Veterans Day, 2014, and at about 11 o'clock in the morning, I read the following sentence: "At the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month of the year, peace was declared" (238).
March 16, 2012
NYT Book Review describes this biography of Norman Thomas this way: "{W}e are shown the “making” of a socialist, formed not by Marx but by the Bible. Thomas was an adoring student of Woodrow Wilson's at Princeton but later was disappointed by Wilson's "preparedness" strategy that inevitably led the US into WWI. Although the book focuses on Norman, we also learn to know his three brothers, two of whom joined the war effort. The other, 6'5" Evan, was also pacifist. Reading this book reminded me of my own foray into writing history that is somewhat personal, somewhat removed (The Same Spirit: History of Iowa Nebraska Mennonites). Though Conscience is mostly an appreciative history, the author sometimes feels moved to let us, the readers, know that she thinks her subjects were foolish or misguided or naive. Which I find awkward. She looks about 35 on the book jacket. I keep thinking, "Who are you to judge...?" But I probably did the same thing, and I was about that age. You want your readers to know you have perspective, but it's usually better to avoid overt statements of judgment. Still, this was not so very distracting. It was a wonderful, history-filled story about a remarkable family.
July 31, 2015
I don’t read many history books or biographies, but I do tend to love the genre: all those stories. And this was a pretty good story though Thomas says it’s about all four of the Thomas brothers and mostly it’s only about Evan and Norman, and mostly it’s really about Norman. Poor Arthur is pretty well completely left out.
And anyway it’s really more about the history of the draft and the conscientious objector during World War I as seen by the experiences of Norman and Evan. And in that respect it’s fascinating. A lot of it was information I didn’t know, or had long forgotten. Thomas does a very credible job of detailing the angst Evan felt, and the drive to take an extreme position. And the ambivalence of Norman’s position as an advocate of the working class and racial equality who could (and did) run away on the weekends to his wife’s family’s white country estate; and the ways in which Norman strongly opposed the United States’ entry into the war and yet he was exempt from the draft and so did not have to suffer with the conscientious objectors like Evan did. It’s not a perfect book, but it is worth reading for anyone interested in WWI, Wilson (who was Norman’s professor at Princeton), the draft, or, of course, Socialism and Norman Thomas, himself.
And anyway it’s really more about the history of the draft and the conscientious objector during World War I as seen by the experiences of Norman and Evan. And in that respect it’s fascinating. A lot of it was information I didn’t know, or had long forgotten. Thomas does a very credible job of detailing the angst Evan felt, and the drive to take an extreme position. And the ambivalence of Norman’s position as an advocate of the working class and racial equality who could (and did) run away on the weekends to his wife’s family’s white country estate; and the ways in which Norman strongly opposed the United States’ entry into the war and yet he was exempt from the draft and so did not have to suffer with the conscientious objectors like Evan did. It’s not a perfect book, but it is worth reading for anyone interested in WWI, Wilson (who was Norman’s professor at Princeton), the draft, or, of course, Socialism and Norman Thomas, himself.
March 25, 2012
Written by his great grandaughter, this story of Norman Thomas, who the New York Times called in his obituary "The Conscience of America" is a fascinating and illuminating story of a prominent American family, and their strong beliefs and characters. While he and his brother Evan were conscientious objecters to the war, and Evan was even put in prison and tortured, Norman kept his ties to former mentor and friend Woodrow Wilson. The other two brothers joined the Army, and Ralph was severely wounded in France, yet did not let their different beliefs rupture the tightly knit family. One of the founders of the Civil Liberties Union, Norman Thomas ran for president many times as a Socialist, and kept issues of peace, tolerance and individual freedom in the forefront of the nations thinking. Dr Martin Luther King Jr, after hearing Thomas speak in 1963, called him the bravest man he ever met. Heavy on the details, this book is a weighty read, but an important history lesson about a now all but forgotten American hero.
October 30, 2011
This book was incredibly "okay", almost leading to good. The fact that this book was written about the great-grandfather she never met, the author, eLouisa Thomas, made this book a little more interesting. One thing I love about this book is how the main charactors go into war, and come out as someone completely. What the war can do to your religion and personality, its mind games is comepletly mind-bottling. It showed me that sometimes going to go to war isn't all for killing your enemies, but to show how strong your faith is. And with that idea in mind the whole time, it made this book an incredible saga. It showed a big piece of critical history, and exactly how a man with first-hand experiece will react to it.
February 12, 2012
An interesting story about the upbringing of perennial Socialist Party presidential candidate Norman Thomas and his three brothers, written by Norman's great-granddaughter. The four all went to Princeton when Woodrow Wilson was president, but split over Wilson's push for WWI. Norman saw that Wilson's own actions would lead toward crushing of dissent and likely not make the world that safe for democracy. Evan, a true idealist, became a conscientious objector, even going on a hunger strike. Arthur immediately signed up and became an officer, getting wounded. And Ryan, who muddled the most at Princeton, muddled in his angle on the war before enlisting.
It was good but not quite great, in that the book didn't seem to have enough "frisson."
It was good but not quite great, in that the book didn't seem to have enough "frisson."
February 19, 2012
Maybe even 4 1/2. A really good book. From its description in a catalog, I thought it would be a novel; it turned out to be a biography of four brothers during World War I, two of whom, by conscience, felt called to serve in the military, two of whom, by conscience, felt the need to declare themselves conscientious objectors. The book deals with the political, social, civil, and religious atmosphere before, during, and after WWI. What is most disturbing about the book, for those of us naive enough to believe in at least the hope of progress, is how many of the issues are repeating themselves 100 years later.
February 15, 2012
Learned a lot about the political and social forces that shaped life in the US at the turn of the last century. At the level of detail the author goes into, I'm very impressed that the book didn't feel dense or boring. Actually made me interested in learning more about WWI time period in the US as a lot of the challenges the US was facing (economic recession, immigration policy disagreement, debate over the role US was to play in the world) have re-emerged at the forefront of discussions today.
March 27, 2012
This was the monthly QBP selection and I have to admit, it was not quite what I was expecting. I think I was hoping for something a little more Vera Brittain-y, a little less scholarly. But, I did wind up enjoying it and I felt like I learned a lot. The book is written by the grand daughter of Norman Thomas, the most famous of the four brothers and focuses the most on his story. Interesting to see the beginnings of the socialist movement in our country. Also interesting to read about the build up to WW1 and sobering to realize that as far as politics goes, nothing ever really changes.
July 27, 2016
When I picked up this book, I was immediately intrigued about a family of four brothers and their very different experiences during WWI. I wanted to like this book but I feel the author tried to do too much with it. Broad in scope, she included the common philosophies of the time but it was too much detail without a clear focus. I wanted to feel a connection with the author's family but I didn't. There was simply too much political detail which lessened the impact that the family story would have had.
Want to read
July 9, 2011Good review in last Sunday's NYT Book Review.
Having just finished Elie's The LIfe You Save May Be Your Own, which includes lots about Dorothy Day's pacifism, I'm interested to learn how other public figures responded to critism for their views during times of war.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/boo...
Having just finished Elie's The LIfe You Save May Be Your Own, which includes lots about Dorothy Day's pacifism, I'm interested to learn how other public figures responded to critism for their views during times of war.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/boo...
September 29, 2012
I finished it, but was a real tough slog. If I were not in a foreign-speaking country I would have ditched it and bought a different book at any nearby store.
I was intrigued by the premise, a family divided by war sympathies: two pacifists and two enlistees. But the book was all talk, no action. If you like verbatim recitation of intra-family letters (in 1910 flowery language), this book is for you.
I was intrigued by the premise, a family divided by war sympathies: two pacifists and two enlistees. But the book was all talk, no action. If you like verbatim recitation of intra-family letters (in 1910 flowery language), this book is for you.
January 5, 2013
What the history books don't tell you is that there was controversy about the USA getting into the Great War (WWI), and that dissent and opposition were strongly stifled by Woodrow Wilson and his government. Conscientious objectors and pacifists were jailed and frequently beaten and starved, and even treated as criminals. This book tells the story of the Thomas family and their ways of dealing with the crises.
January 31, 2012
I really wanted to like this book and gave it a fair shake at 7 chapters. But, the everyday minutia of the politics and history, their religious endeavors, and personal lives was just a quagmire. The incessant detail was just too much for me. Who would enjoy this book??? - maybe someone who is totally obsessed with the political and historical goings-on in the early 1900's.
Read
September 27, 2015It examines the tensions involved in non-combatant decisions on the American home front, with particular focus upon her great grandfather, Norman Thomas, who refused to fight at a time when two of his brothers had chosen otherwise. More of a meditation than an outright history book, but still quite interesting.
Read
September 3, 2011Who knew? What an interesting family and interesting story.
Well researched and well documented account of people knee-deep in history. I wonder who in this era have the courage of their convictions and conscience as the Thomas brothers?
Well researched and well documented account of people knee-deep in history. I wonder who in this era have the courage of their convictions and conscience as the Thomas brothers?
September 3, 2012
It's a nonfiction book about 4 brothers who decided to do very different things with their lives leading up to and during WWI. It ended up being quite interesting for me, especially the parts about what it was like for people who opposed that war.
September 10, 2013
I liked this book, but it is pretty serious. The family history makes the extensive treatment of the conscientious objector status bearable. There are interesting parallels to today though. It would be great in a college course on Just War or ethics in warfare.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews