Stephen L. CarterRezensionen

This was very similar to 'The Emperor of Ocean Park' which I have just read: someone dies and leaves mysterious clues for the main protagonist to puzzle out while they work at Elm Harbor University. Here Kellen leaves clues for his former girlfriend Julia. The clues were ridiculously obtuse, Julia and the ex-police officer also trying to get to the bottom of things made enormous deductive leaps, and at one point it seemed as if every inhabitant of Julia's small town was implicated in some way.

The writing was as enjoyable as the first novel, but I found the conclusion to this one morally disgusting and I can't decide where the author wanted the reader to stand on the issues.½

This is long and slow moving and occasionally repeats itself, but I loved the writing and the characterisation, especially of the narrator, Misha, who must uncover the 'arrangements' everyone (from hitmen to the FBI) believes his dead father has informed him about. It takes Christianity and racial politics seriously in a way I do not often encounter, without coming to trite conclusions. I sought this out on a recommendation from my local library for legal thrillers, but although most of the characters are lawyers, judges or law professors, none of the scenes take place in a court, so I was mis-sold there, but am nevertheless glad to have discovered this series.

Recommended.½

It was mere coincidence that I picked this book up from a used book sale shortly before the current impeachment inquiry began.
The author makes it clear in his afterward that he does not think that Lincoln should have been impeached, he merely took an argument that has been discussed among historians and formed an alternative history- that is; if Lincoln had not been assassinated, would he( rather than Johnson) have been impeached? If he had been impeached, what would have been the outcome?

This was a great book to read as a follow- up to Gore Vidal's book, "Lincoln" The book raises some interesting questions about history's interpretation of Lincoln and his motives. Has Lincoln's reputation as a much loved president, who saved the Union and freed the slaves, been influenced by his assassination? Would his reputation have been different if he had lived and possibly faced a political backlash by both Democrats as well as radical Republicans?

The book is a political "whodunnit" with a fast moving plot and very believable characters- some fictional and some who were contemporaries of Lincoln. Many of these real life characters also appeared in the Vidal novel.
The book also thoroughly describes the impeachment process, both politically and constitutionally.
I highly recommend this novel for lovers of history and politics.

Religion and his place in American public and private life are a theme that has consistently remained at the center of our national debate. In recent years, many political leaders and opinion makers have come to view any religious element in public discourse as a tool of the radical right for reshaping American society so in our zeal to keep religion from dominating our politics, we have constructed political and legal cultures that force the religiously devout to act as if their faith didn't really matter. In the Culture of Disbelief, Stephen L Carter explains how we can preserve the vital separation of church and state while embracing rather than trivializing the faith of millions or treating religious believers with disdain.

Eunice Hunton Carter was a towering figure of American history whose many accomplishments have been forgotten or never given their true due because she was a Black woman. Carter became a lawyer in the 1930s and ended up working with Thomas Dewey as he prosecuted gangsters in New York City, and moved on to become one of the most known Black Americans in the 1940s as she worked tirelessly for equality and recognition. Her grandson’s biography, Invisible, tells her story with a solid base of primary sources and a passable effort at unbias reporting. Invisible is an excellent nonfiction book for history buffs looking for an unlikely but true tale of Black perseverance in the 1930s through the 1950s.½

A friend recommended this book before he had finished it. I think he ended up feeling much the same as I did about Stephen Carter’s bloated novel:it’s much too long, and the plot is intrusively complicated. The main character, law professor Talcott Garland, is a needed, often whiny son of a judge who has died, apparently of a heart attack. But maybe not. And that is what makes up much of the mystery in the book. I found the plot twists more work than I wanted to put in, especially for nearly 700 pages. The book is bloated by about half. To his credit, however, Carter’s writing is top notch. That said, I could have done with less religion.

What kind of book is this? It's clearly not an academic or pure history where the author is introducing new evidence or coming to new conclusions which help us understand the past in a new way. An excellent example of a pure history is Annette Gordon-Reeds's The Hemingses of Monticello. Nor is this book a classic. Classics often describe events of the time in which they existed. These help us understand the time and place. These are often written about events the author may have lived through and their insights help. An example of this may be Thackery's Vanity Fair. Then there's another category where the past is just a convenient background for a story they want to tell. Here the past helps us suspend our normal disbelief and accept the premise as at least possible. Some of these authors work hard at researching the past heightening our belief that this story might really have happened. The author often becomes a source of understanding a time and place. Alan Furst's many novels are set in pre-WW II Europe with cars, cigarettes, liquors, streets, locations and restaurants of that time. Then there are laudatory history's which are more interested in praising a particular time, place or person. Think of the antebellum south of Margaret Mitchell's Gone With the Wind. Some would put Walter Isaacson's Elon in that category. Then there's aspirational history which challenges us to think that we may have overlooked someone or something in the past because we had blinders on which obscured our ability to see what might has really happened. These point us to real people or events and ask what about them. Some place people we might see more positively in the light of today. This book has some of that. A young, female Black attorney makes sense using today's eyes.

More than anything this book is in a class I would consider alternative history. They raise the question of what if a known event had turned out differently. An example of this genre is Philip Roth's The Plot Against America. Often these reimagined histories eventually bring us back to a world looking the same as if the reimagined events never happened. Another well-known event is Lincoln's assassination. In this reimagined history Lincoln survives and Johnson is assassinated. Those events set the stage for this story. But like many alternative histories, the basic beat goes on. In this case the inevitability of an impeachment is presented. It's not Johnson's impeachment its Lincoln's. The same people who we know were upset with Johnson are, in this scenario, upset with Lincoln. And miracle of miracles, this impeachment also fails. What Carter introduces is yet another way we could wind up at the same place. Now the unlikely heroine is a young Black female attorney, someone we would least suspect of being able to save the day. To my mind that's Carter's point. There's potential here that needed to be released. Not only is this young woman Lincoln's savior but her unheralded sister and brother stepped up in their own ways. And not without cost. Carter has us convinced this might have been what happened if only the events at Ford's theater had gone differently. Interesting alternative.

law, politics & religion

Stephen L. Carter is a respected professor of law at Yale University and an author of several fiction and non fiction books. When publishing the Church Builder he used the pseudonym A. L. Shields and after reading this novel I have a very good understanding of why he used a pseudonym. Mainly; the book is bad. Quite bad.

Steven L. Carter's book The Impeachment of Abraham Lincoln is an alternative history in which Lincoln survives only to face impeachment by northern Republicans who feel he has become too lenient with the southern states. His legal team faces an uphill battle but an unlikely addition to the team--Abigail Canner, a young black woman with a degree from Oberlin and a dream to be a lawyer--uncovers a conspiracy that will change everything. I don't profess to have followed all the political twists and turns but was pulled along by the narrative and the way Carter connects his fantasy with the facts. I do have a decent understanding of Civil War history so was at least familiar with the real characters. I wonder how someone without any knowledge would fare and not sure it matters. It was a legal and action thriller in its own right.

Olivier Garland, famoso juez afroamericano de talante conservador, ha muerto repentinamente de un supuesto ataque al corazón. Antes de fallecer, el poderoso juez había protagonizado un escándalo público que arruinó su ascendente trayectoria profesional hacia el Tribunal Supremo, lo que le procuró importantes enemigos y le sumió en una crisis de la que nunca se recuperaría. Ahora, su hijo Talcott, profesor de derecho en una prestigiosa universidad, tendrá que dar respuesta a una serie de preguntas que apuntan hacia un escándalo mayor: ¿fue el juez Garland asesinado? ¿Qué misterio esconden las "disposiciones" que el juez dejó escritas en vida y que todo el mundo parece querer encontrar? Las sucesivas muertes de personas que, de un modo u otro, estuvieron relacionadas con el entorno familiar servirán de pista a Talcott para adentrarse en una aventura en la que pondrá en juego su carrera, su matrimonio y su propia vida. En El Emperador de Ocean Park, un excelente thriller literario y, al mismo tiempo, un penetrante estudio sobre el conjunto de la clase universitaria y los profesionales del derecho, Stephen L. Carter maneja con maestría la ironía y el suspense, diseccionando de paso el mundo de la alta burguesía negra estadounidense.

Philmont Castle lo tenía todo: dinero, prestigio y contactos. Nadie habría podido imaginar que acabaría muerto en un aparcamiento aferrado a una misteriosa cruz. Una noche, tras asistir a una fiesta de la alta sociedad negra de Harlem, Eddie Wesley, joven promesa de la literatura, descubre el cadáver accidentalmente. Cuando, poco después, su hermana Junie se ve involucrada en las actividades de grupos políticos clandestinos y desaparece sin dejar rastro, Eddie se embarca junto a la mujer que ama en una investigación que se extenderá a lo largo de dos décadas. Una reunión secreta celebrada en el verano de 1952 parece ser el nexo común entre los dos sucesos y, lo que es más inquietante, su objetivo continúa vigente: dar un golpe de efecto que desequilibre las relaciones de poder y cambie la política norteamericana para siempre.

I see why the CHURCH BUILDER is sold as a 2 volume set. It really is one novel broken into 2 sections. It hangs together in the end but is based on a difficult to swallow conspiracy theory. The ‘church builder’ character only plays a peripheral role.It is a journey to an orthodox monastery in Greece. The clues leading to the steps in the journey can’t be guessed by the reader taking away from the pace of the mystery.
I can’t see the story representing a statement of personal belief by the author Carter but perhaps it is a statement of unexpected personal beliefs.

The book requires a lot of willing disbelief. I got started reading Stephen Carter’s books after he spoke at my daughter’s graduation from Stanford in the mid 90’s. He has written some non fiction for popular consumption, then I discovered his fiction. It covers the gamut from contemporary fiction about black families to historical fiction involving a young woman’s affair with JFK, and a post civil war America where Abraham Lincoln isn’t assassinated. Then I discovered the Church Builder series he has written under a pseudonym.
I suspect he chose to write under a pseudonym because of the far out nature of the conspiracy theory that underlies the story. At first I found the story too outlandish to be interesting but I have gotten into the characters now.
The first book really doesn’t complete the dramatic arc. It’s as if the book was divided into two parts out of convenience rather then because they are truly free standing novels. I have just begun the second book and find myself more engaged.

Superb book. But would you expect anything less than that from the author of Invisible, Integrity, and Civility?

Carter's book is much more legal than the former 3, yet he explains much of the legal jargon clearly and succinctly as only he can. Again, he is refreshingly open about his bias, but still willing to explore other sides and he does so, quite well I think.

Written in 1999, his warnings regarding the mixture of religion and political power were sorely needed last October and would have been quite useful prior to a certain photo op. At the same time, he offers many thoughts on when it is appropriate to mix the two, as well as some interesting byproducts of religious discrimination and avoidance.

Anyway, it's late at night and I'm beginning to ramble. But I appreciate the constant quality of thought and research that Carter provides. Here's hoping I can get my hands on more of his non- fiction. Unfortunately, because of his legal background, a lot of his stuff is ensconced in legal libraries.

Stellar storytelling, stellar research, stellar writing.

A couple of notes:
-I really appreciated how Carter embraces the unknown. He makes assumptions but is careful to examine ALL the possibilities. And when there are gaps in his knowledge, due to lack of sources, etc., he is quick to admit that they are there. This creates trust between him and the reader.

-Similarly, he is quick to point out perceived disconnects between beliefs and behavior. Again, creating trust in him as a reliable researcher and narrator.

-Why wasn't Addie Hunton in my MA reading list? Unfortunately, I know why. A terrible byproduct of racism is the elimination of important and valuable voices. Her lectures would have been incredibly useful for my thesis. These are writers and speakers that need to be brought back into the "canon." *

- This opens up the reader's eyes to historical, turn-of-the-prior-century racism. Even in the North. The "Harlem Rennaisance" needs to be taught differently. Unfortunately, in many classes and books, it's often the token nod to a hugely influential part of our history.

- It also illustrates how things have changed with technology. It really used to be all about people. Real people who traveled and spoke and worked together. Now... technology has almost erased the need for crusaders like Addie. And that is a huge tragedy.

-I'm not sure if he meant to do this, but I found tracking political parties and their values invariably fascinating. Values in those parties seem to fluctuate and change through time, as much as party fanatics might claim otherwise.

Finally, Carter's summation is a wonderful tribute to his grandmother and those of her generation and the following generations that fought and still fight racism. "The wall is weakening."

Let's help it come down.

*Note-- I feel like it's exclusion was not purposeful on everybody's part. The issue is that the first generation deemed those lectures to be useless and, therefore, they were forgotten by many and not taught to the succeeding generation of educators. However, this is still an issue. Academia owes it to itself to research those that may have been excluded and insert them back into the canon.

And there was great mourning throughout the land... because it looked to Chrisanne like Carter had given up writing brilliant non-fiction to write fiction (which may be just as brilliant but not as interesting to her).

In all sincerity, this was just as intriguing as the prior books I had read by Carter, if not more so. It is a treatise on religious freedom that contains information such as--

- The separation of church from state was originally(and should be) intended to protect the church, not the state.
-When should the state upend religious rights? (answer: rarely)
-Why the topic of euthanasia is a tricky one (legally and morally).
-How racism, religion, and freedom intertwine and not always in the best way. And how we do the Civil Rights a disservice by disentangling it from religion...and how that relates to the abortion argument.
-Why prayers should not be said in public schools (He's got a rock solid argument on this one).
-How religion should be present and expressed in the present square (and how it shouldn't).
-Why rethinking the school system set-up might be fairer than our current set-up.

Let me give you 3 good reasons to read this book:

1. Stephen Carter is a brilliant African American Yale Law Professor, who clerked for Thurgood Marshall.
2. This gives him a unique perspective on the Civil Rights Movement (which happened during his youth, I believe), Racism, Law, etc. as it relates to civility.
3. He advocates, get this, for civility(obviously), diversity, and disagreement.

I picked the book up as a secondary recommendation from [a:Jonathan Sacks|55332|Jonathan Sacks|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1263131090p2/55332.jpg] and was not disappointed. In typical legal fashion, he explores every possible facet of our democratic (lack of?) civility. And, even though it was written over twenty years ago, not much has really changed (for the better).

I thought it was especially well done because I did not 100% agree with everything that he said.* But he expressed his thoughts so civilly that I saw his point of view. And it was legitimate. And I wanted to be his next door neighbor, and invite him to dinner, and pick his brain, and find out where else we disagreed so that I could have the privilege of listening, not arguing, to him.

It was just beautiful.

*Abortion somewhat and the Defense of Marriage Act (I think. Like I said, seeing his point of view expressed so well, I'm not quite sure he doesn't have a valid argument. But mine might(?) be better)

A brilliant masterpiece. Even better than [b:Civility: Manners, Morals, and the Etiquette of Democracy|253778|Civility Manners, Morals, and the Etiquette of Democracy|Stephen L. Carter|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1410132287s/253778.jpg|2088563], though they complement each other well.

It illustrates the diminishing trends in integrity--- which may not turn out to be just what you think it is. Particularly striking was his chapter on Civil Disobedience and the Civil Rights movement, Law and the Court, scholars and letters of recommendation, and his comments on the press(all of which he has some first-hand knowledge). As I have said before, his intelligence is striking and his civility would make him a good (and interesting) neighbor.

Now I wish he would write a book entitled "Tolerance".

I don't know why I didn't read this when it came out since I had read the three preceding books by Mr. Carter but I was happy to find it now as a "new" book. As expected the book is well constructed and the factual situation is interesting and complicated. I enjoyed the flow of the story and the gradual way information found its way to us. Like le Carre´ or similar writers it is very hard to know everyone's motivations and veracity, making the entire situation fraught and thrilling. A solid, good, enjoyable book.

I, for one, did not know that Lucky Luciano was taken down by an African American woman prosecutor in the 30s. Amazingly enough, this is only a tiny part of the story of Eunice Hunton Carter (the grandmother of the author), a remarkable woman, who should have had a more brilliant career than she did, being constantly passed over for higher positions because of her sex and race. The life of EHC is fully embedded in the activism of her parents (her mother toured the segregated and lynching South, on her own, to organize African Americans, her father was an officer in the WMCA), the Harlem Renaissance, luminaries such as W.E.B. Dubois, Thurgood Marshall, and the rest of the African American cultural elite. EHC both resented and had to submit to the demands of institutional racism and sexism, but also the demands the Harlem's Great Social Pyramid ruled by the Czarinas.
The book starts with the Atlanta riots of 1906 (her family lived there at the time) all the way to the McCarthy era (her brother was a communist who ended up leaving the US and joining Dubois in Ghana, and then settling in Zambia). EHC had judicial and political ambitions tied to Thomas Dewey and the GOP, squashed on both counts (and also because the FBI, under Hoover, had listed her brother as one to arrest in case of national emergency and had a 700-page file on), later reinventing herself as an internationalist after the creation of the UN (she did not like FDR but stroke a friendship with Eleanor Roosevelt). As successful as she was, there is no question that systemic and personal elements outside of her control (racism, sexism, red scare) thwarted what should have been an even more major career than she had.

I enjoyed this book - well written, lots of subplots and a few surprises. A good read!

I couldn’t even make it to one hundred pages before I dropped it. I got so tired of the infuriatingly arrogant and distant protagonist and his conceited tangents.

This truly is well done. I like Mr Carter's tone and the relaxed and personable manner in which his story unfolds. His use of language is lyrically elevated, slightly pretentious but not unapproachable or condescending. He offers multiple views on society, racism, poverty, etc that we are not familiar with in relation to Black American literary characters and he handles this balance well. He needs a better editor but at the same time this is incredible for a first novel.
I'll read his other books but I'm probably going to need to a break. Too many words and I just am not sure I've ever had that complaint of a novel before.

The Emperor of Ocean Park is set in two privileged worlds: the upper crust African American society of the eastern seaboard—old families who summer on Martha’s Vineyard—and the inner circle of an Ivy League law school. The Emperor of the title, Judge Oliver Garland, has just died, suddenly. A brilliant legal mind, conservative and famously controversial, Judge Garland made more enemies than friends. Could Oliver Garland have been murdered? He has left a strange message for his son Talcott, a professor of law at a great university, entrusting him with “the arrangements”—a mysterious puzzle that only Tal can unlock, and only by unearthing the ambiguities of his father’s past.

This was a long, wordy and rambling story that I wasn’t sure I would like when it started. But it drew me in with interesting characters and information that was slowly revealed throughout. The characters were flawed and not always likeable. The story touches on politics, societal attitudes, racism and religion but not too much. Overall, it kept me wondering what was going on and made me want to find out so I enjoyed it.