Space News
space history and artifacts articles

Messages
space history discussion forums

Sightings
worldwide astronaut appearances

Resources
selected space history documents

  collectSPACE: Messages
  Publications & Multimedia
  New Yorker review, NAA bio

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   New Yorker review, NAA bio
KC Stoever
Member

Posts: 1012
From: Denver, CO USA
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 09-28-2005 11:56 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for KC Stoever   Click Here to Email KC Stoever     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
For those of you waiting for the Hansen bio of Neil Armstrong, here's an early review in the New Yorker, by Tom Mallon:
http://www.newyorker.com/critics/books/?051003crbo_books

I think it's the current issue on newsstands.

Full disclosure: Mallon is a friend. But a very knowledgeable friend who is often tapped to write reviews of space-related books.

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 42981
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 09-28-2005 03:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I think "review" should be placed in quotes, as Mallon spends less time commenting on "First Man" as he does Armstrong the person and the space program as a whole. I thought his opinion of Hansen as a writer to be largely comprised of throw-away comments that Mallon does little to justify (i.e. "Throughout this predicably authorized biography, he [Hansen] accepts answers from his subject that any lawyer would strike as unresponsive..." as though Hansen had the ability to force anything more from Armstrong, authorized or not, or that Hansen's success [or lack thereof] to do so is predictable.)

For a review of a biography, Mallon seems more concerned with making the case that Apollo was a stunt and that NASA has not amounted to much of anything in the years since. That's fine and good should you agree with such a concept (albeit, I do not), but it has little to do with gaining insight into the most famous explorer of our time, or of the most complete biography written about him.

Its not clear if Mallon is recommending "First Man" to his readers or not.

In the interest of similar full disclosure, I am quoted in "First Man" though my contribution was limited to just that, as an interviewee. collectSPACE will be publishing several articles about the book beginning next week, including a review.

[This message has been edited by Robert Pearlman (edited September 28, 2005).]

John McGauley
Member

Posts: 151
From: Fort Wayne, Indiana USA
Registered: May 2001

posted 09-28-2005 03:46 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for John McGauley   Click Here to Email John McGauley     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I have to agree with Robert. I've had the privelege of reading "First Man" already, and I think Mallon completely missed the point of what Jim Hansen was trying to accomplish. It seems that Mallon went into the task of reviewing this book with severe preconceptions, then reacted accordingly when the book didn't say what he wanted it to.

The reviewer, in my opinion, was looking more for a sequel to "The Right Stuff," filled with romance and lurid tales of mischief. Hansen has said from the start that his biography would try to overlay Armstrong's life story with a look at how that life contributed to accomplishments in spaceflight and aeronautics. It accomplishes that goal with extraordinary thoroughness.

Proof positive that Mallon didn't get the book's objective can be found in the line where he complains about acronyms and NASA performance reports. When you're trying to do what "First Man" attempted to do, those are a part of the story.

The lack of lurid stories genuinely also seems to irritate Mallon, as he refers to Armstrong's "apparently" happy marriage to his second wife.

Mallon seems to have little use for manned spaceflight or for Armstrong himself. All you need to prove this is to read the absurd attempt to make the Gemini 8 tumble some sort of early indication that the shuttle would be a flop. "Perhaps all the tumbling portended the bashful looping of the shuttle, its endless circumscription of the stay-at-home species that keeps launching it."

This isn't much of a review. This is an anti-establishment, anti-space rant that belongs in the pages of Rolling Stone.

Also in the interest of full disclosure, I contributed one of the articles for the package that collectSpace is publishing next week. I am not the author of the review that Robert mentioned.

OLDIE
Member

Posts: 267
From: Portsmouth, England
Registered: Sep 2004

posted 09-28-2005 04:11 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for OLDIE     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I have just read the "review" and have to agree with Robert and John on this. As I was reading, I began to wonder whether I was reading a review (in its generally accepted sense) or a radical student's attempt at a precis of the book, for exam purposes!
I still want to know whether the book was a good book or a bad book, in the reviewer's eyes.

KC Stoever
Member

Posts: 1012
From: Denver, CO USA
Registered: Oct 2002

posted 09-28-2005 05:19 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for KC Stoever   Click Here to Email KC Stoever     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
This isn't much of a review. This is an anti-establishment, anti-space rant that belongs in the pages of Rolling Stone.

Perhaps. I haven't read the Hansen bio but will both buy it and read it. Mallon, BTW, is a card-carrying Republican, and a conservative, and a huge fan of spaceflight. Rolling Stone isn't really his kind of magazine--the Atlantic, perhaps, or the New York Times Sunday Magazine (where he wrote the cover story on John Glenn's return to space), and the New Yorker. He's written scores of books, fiction and nonfiction. A truly nice guy.

My sense from the review is that Mallon felt the author might have missed an opportunity--should have pressed harder, or ventured a guess, or opinion about NAA--in an effort to give readers more insight into an enigmatic man. But, Lord knows, these pioneers are tough, tough interviews and tough subjects for the most diligent and gifted historians.

[This message has been edited by KC Stoever (edited September 28, 2005).]

FFrench
Member

Posts: 3161
From: San Diego
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 09-28-2005 05:56 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for FFrench     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Personally, I found Mallon's piece extremely informative. I'd much rather read a piece like this that puts the book in a wider context, than a more literal review. I thought he did a marvellous job of putting Armstrong in context in history, both in the 1960s and the 21st century. I didn't agree with all of his points, but they were points elegantly and intelligently made.

Regarding the book itself, his words tell me what I was most curious about - how the fallout after Gemini 8 is handled, and, most importantly, how does an official biographer portray a man who does not wish to really give anything away about himself?

Mallon compares this authorized account to prior versions of the same events with panache. It's an important thing to do for a book that may be used by some as an historical account.

I understand the points made above by others, and agree that other reviews should cover them... and I look forward to reading those too. But to criticize a reviewer for pointing out that an official biography is not too revealing of the person seems odd to me. Isn't that why we read biographies and autobiographies, to learn about the person?

I'd also much rather read a review that treats me with intelligence and leaves the buying decision up to me having told me what I need, than a blanket "I recommend it / I don't." Mallon's viewpoint was far more subtle, elegant, intelligent, and valuable to me.

FF

[This message has been edited by FFrench (edited September 28, 2005).]

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 42981
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 09-28-2005 06:19 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Francis, you are assuming of course that Mallon is correct in his contention that "First Man" does not reveal Armstrong more than past attempts have tried and failed. Having read the book, I would disagree. In fact, there are quite a few revelations brought forth by Hansen about and as told by Armstrong, as well as by Armstrong's colleagues whom Hansen interviewed. There are details captured in this book I have never seen in print elsewhere - nor based on my own discussions with some of Armstrong's fellow astronauts - had anyone else.

I agree that a reviewer is not obligated, nor always is it in his favor, to spoonfeed a recommendation to his readers. In my opinion however, Mallon skirts the issue entirely by focusing the discussion towards issues unrelated to the book. Further, where he does tackle Hansen and "First Man", Mallon does so with a shallow impression. His description of the Gemini 8 fallout is a good example; its accurate in its facts but misses a good part of the picture painted by Hansen.

Mallon is a talented and skilled writer, of that there is no disagreement. His prose is intriguing and captivating. I only wish he had spent more time on his subject than by trying to push forth his own view of history.

[This message has been edited by Robert Pearlman (edited September 28, 2005).]

FFrench
Member

Posts: 3161
From: San Diego
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 09-28-2005 07:12 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for FFrench     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Assuming, yes, you are correct... I have yet to read the book (have had the opportunity, but not the time). Your thoughts come of course with that added benefit, and are appreciated.

My impression of Hansen's review was different to yours - I didn't feel he was skirting, rather his approval / denial was extremely subtle, yet there if you looked. But everyone reads these things different ways, of course...

It will be interesting to see how I view both his review and your thoughts in a new light once I have read it. And it is perhaps hard for any of us to be objective when anyone posting here is almost by nature unusually knowledgeable about the subject matter of this book.

Thanks,

FF

[This message has been edited by FFrench (edited September 28, 2005).]

Wehaveliftoff
Member

Posts: 2343
From:
Registered: Aug 2001

posted 10-02-2005 12:26 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Wehaveliftoff     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I am intrigued as to Robert's personal review of the book. Have you done one yet Robert? I'd rather read yours than the New Yorker, I publication I'm not a fan of, Though I hope New York beats Boston today.
Spill the beans of the book about Neil the private man. I'm hoping the author did reveal a lot of the man not the astronaut, that's what I was looking for in the book in order for me to dceide if it was a success or not.

[This message has been edited by Wehaveliftoff (edited October 02, 2005).]

Robert Pearlman
Editor

Posts: 42981
From: Houston, TX
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 10-02-2005 04:46 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Robert Pearlman   Click Here to Email Robert Pearlman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I will be writing a review as part of our coverage of "First Man", as well publishing others' reviews as available.

If you are a member of the National Space Society or can find a copy of "Ad Astra" at your local library, the current issue has a well written review by journalist Leonard David, who previously had worked with Armstrong. Quest Magazine will publish a review by Dr. Tom Crouch, which we plan to reprint on collectSPACE.

D-Day
Member

Posts: 27
From:
Registered: Aug 2005

posted 10-11-2005 05:56 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for D-Day     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I just read this review this afternoon and have to ask, what is Mallon's malfunction?

The review reads as if it was written by a pompous, East Coast, manic depressive who wants to drag everyone, including his readers, down into the mud with him, so that they can be as unhappy as he is. This guy practically sneers his contempt at Armstrong's values of bravery, stoicism, hard-work, dedication and patriotism--not to mention his mother's religious faith.

It's one thing to not like the book. It's another thing to not like the space program. But this review indicates that Mallon doesn't value any of the personal traits that got Neil Armstrong to the Moon--or that used to be valued in American society (and still are in some places outside of New York City).

What are we to make of lines like this? "For all its technical brilliance, the unmanned American space program—its Voyagers, Galileo, and Hubble—has been a photo safari, merely a virtual triumph. Mars remains a red gleam in the eye of a species that can’t quite bring itself to go there. The space shuttle, between catastrophes, travels its circles to nowhere."

"Between catastrophes"?! Two accidents seventeen years apart defines this program? This is like saying "nice day" to a teenager on the street and having them reply "Yeah, but what's the point? We're all going to die anyway."

And notice how casually Mallon dismisses the achievements of Voyager, Galileo, and Hubble. Technically brilliant, but only a "virtual triumph," as if they didn't actually _discover_ anything. Voyager revealed volcanoes on Io and the rings of Saturn. It imaged ice geysers on the frozen plains of a moon orbiting a cold blue gas giant far from our sun. It has discovered the shockwave at the edge of our solar system. Galileo has provided evidence that several of the giant moons of Jupiter may contain subterranean oceans that might possibly harbor life. Hubble has revealed the age of our universe. But it has also proven that we understand far less about our universe than we thought, and has led to the discovery of dark matter and dark energy--both of which may potentially revolutionize our understanding of physics.

But for Mallon, it's all a letdown. Neil Armstrong walked on the Moon in 1969 and then it has been disappointment ever since. What's the point? We're all gonna die anyway...

But seriously, if we _had_ humans walking on Mars right now, do you think that Mallon would be at all enthusiastic about it? Does this essay read like it was written by a guy who finds joy in anything at all, let alone exploration or personal achievement? Is there anything in this essay that he praises? Anything that he values? He even points out that Armstrong's mother lost her faith late in life, that it was all just a panacea to shield her from the pain of existence. Did Mallon go off his meds before he sat down to write this review?

Let's continue:

"It would be churlish to blame Armstrong—this brave, talented man who briefly took us out of here—for the long failure that followed."

Huh? "The long failure"?

Presumably this "failure" is that we never followed up with more manned space missions. But there is no indication anywhere in this review that Mallon values space exploration in any way. He denigrates the Moon missions themselves, never bothering to discuss the scientific results--it was all just boring rocks that have been placed in archival storage.

In fact, the whole review is so overwhelmingly negative that it is hard to determine what "failure" Mallon really means. He has never defined success. And although he claims that he is not blaming Armstrong for this "failure," he certainly heaps a lot of criticism on the guy.

Mallon expresses no admiration for Armstrong himself, and even denigrates his achievements. He doesn't need to blame Armstrong for the "failure" because he finds plenty of other things to blame him for--for being boring, for starters. For not filling the bottomless pits of disappointment and emptiness that Mallon expresses towards everything.

Then there's this: "but he stopped signing autographs and continues a mild tendency toward litigiousness, suing Hallmark for the unauthorized use of his likeness on a Christmas ornament, and threatening action against a barber for selling his hair." Yeah, sure, that defines Armstrong--"mildly litigious." As if public figures never have to go to court once in awhile to defend themselves against people who want to take advantage of them. As if occasionally standing up for yourself when wronged is somehow a failure. I'm sure that Mallon has no problem with people who try to profit off of him, right? I bet that Mallon doesn't even have a lawyer. Sure.

In fact, what is perhaps most bizarre about Mallon's review is that his biggest problem with Armstrong is apparently that the moonwalker didn't sell out, he didn't bow down to the culture of Oprah and Dr. Phil that requires that you air all your feelings and failings in public and seek redemption through the power of the tearful television confession.

Armstrong didn't surrender to the fundamental rule of contemporary American society that says that there is no such thing as privacy, shame, or too much publicity, and that you are a nobody unless you have your own reality show, or your photo on the cover of People magazine. The space program already has at least one publicity-hogging moonwalker, ready to fling himself in front of any TV camera that comes along, and willing to sell his undershirts on eBay. We don't need another one. We _do_ need Neal Armstrong, who typifies the kind of silent stoicism and dedication to hard work that disappeared from our culture decades ago.

Mallon doesn't value those characteristics, however. Instead he writes bullshit like this: "Armstrong’s voyage knows today that the journey came to nothing, or at least to nowhere."

Oh, brother. What a pompous twit.

Henry_Heatherbank
New Member

Posts:
From:
Registered:

posted 10-11-2005 06:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Henry_Heatherbank   Click Here to Email Henry_Heatherbank     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I, too, read the book review with great interest, thanks to the posting on this website.

Isn't Mallon's review as much a lament that the post-1960s US space program didn't live up to its full potential, than the negativity that has been levelled against the review here?

I must admit, I haven't found it as negative as some others here. If anything, I'm even more inspired to read the book, and am eagerly awaiting the arrival of my copy.

There have been a number of competing views on NAA's reclusiveness over the years. Some, like Michael Collins (in Carrying the Fire) believe that Armstrong did the right thing by "rationing" his exposure to the public, so as not to cheapen the unique place in history afforded to the First Man.

Others believe that NAA was forever obliged to become a spruiker for the space program. As much as people like Walt Cunningham have criticised others like Gene Cernan for being, perhaps, undeserving of their place in history (I'm paraphrasing, so don't attack me on that one), at least he has been a staunch public advocate for the space program after he left it. So what was appropriate for the First Man - the "Armstrong model" or the "Cernan model"?

Contrast all of that with the expectations placed upon the first man or woman on Mars. Personally I doubt that this person will be permitted to be a "recluse" in the same manner as NAA. Proof of that is the media circus that people like Eileen Collins have gone on before, during and after RTF. No such historical parallels with Schirra after the fire or Shepard on the return to the Moon after Apollo 13, even taking into account the different media of the times.

No, I suspect that NAA will be the last great reclusive hero of our times, and that just makes him an extra-special commodity in my view. He should not be criticised for that, but he should be treated as an endangered species and probed carefully (albeit thoroughly) because of his rarity and his antiquity. Once he's gone, there will never be another like him.

I get the impression that Mallon was expecting an expose on NAA, as if he were a "modern hero" in an age of contemporary, disposable biographies. Perhaps Mallon has missed the point that NAA was never going to be the subject of an expose, and that the biography had to be approached like the delicate scientific examination of the last remaining animal of a particular species.

I haven't eagerly awaited a new book like this in years, and Mallon has only whetted my apetite.

Wehaveliftoff
Member

Posts: 2343
From:
Registered: Aug 2001

posted 10-11-2005 07:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Wehaveliftoff     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Anyone notice any promotional dumps (stand ups),posters, or cardboard items promoting the sales of this book?

All times are CT (US)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | The Source for Space History & Artifacts

Copyright 2020 collectSPACE.com All rights reserved.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a





advertisement