Paper Summary:

The paper sets out to prove that, while Eric Goldman is valuable as a source of details about the era, his work holds little value as an historical piece of work. It traces the life of Goldman and his writing of the work. It criticizes the lack of objectivity in the work and explains the reasons for this lack. It looks at the disparity in writing style of the work and concludes by evaluating the work's value as a whole.

From the Paper:

"As far as the relevancy to his subject matter, it is difficult to find fault in Goldman's work. He does not wander from the topic and his work is very focused. His intent was to give an overview of the events that shaped the cold War. He has access to many first person accounts of conversations and letters written at the time, which other historians could only dream about. He knows little know facts and stories, some of which he witnessed with his own eyes. His coverage of the topic is thorough and complete. "

Visitors who viewed this Analytical Essay also liked these:

• Essay # 19228 : "The Crucial Decade--and After: America, 1945-1960" by Eric Goldman"
• Article Review # 114204 : "The Me Decade and the Third Great Awakening"
• Analytical Essay # 149857 : "The United States and Latin America"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: