medieval to modern times from Englandnand America. There are lettersnfrom Jeb Stuart and Abigail Adams,ndocuments dealing with Gilbert andnSullivan and FDR. These essays willndelight and beguile the pedantic andnprecise, the lover of the factual andndetailed. (ECK)nGoing Back tonCharlestonnIntellectual Life in AntebellumnCharleston, edited by MichaelnO’Brien and David IVloltke-Hansen,nKnoxville: University of TennesseenPress; $45.00.nThe United States were once preciselynthat, a union of unique and independentnstates—each making its own literarynand intellectual contribution to thennational experience. Of these states,nnone was so peculiar as South Carolina,nand for much of its intellectualnhistory, South Carolina was Charleston.nIn the generation before The War,nCharleston was in the process of becomingnsomething like a regional literaryncapital presided over by novelistnWilliam Gilmore Simms and the statesmannand essayist Hugh Legare’, althoughnthe most enduring productionsnmay be a few poems of Henry Timrod.nDespite the historical significance ofnthe subject, Intellectual Life in AntebellumnCharleston represents the first seriousnattempt to put the Charleston literarynscene in focus. This well-conceivednand carefully edited volume includesnessays on Simms and Legare (althoughnnot Timrod), such 18th-century notablesnas David Ramsay and CharlesnPinckney, as well as lesser figures likenChristopher Memminger and the famousn(in Charleston) wit. Judge Petigru.nThere are also general discussionsnof classicism in Charleston and thentown-versus-country theme in women’snnovels. The volume is worth having ifnonly for a few very solid essays: MichaelnO’Brien’s forceful and lively treatmentnof Legare, Richard Lounsbury’s analysisnof “Charlestonian intellectuals andntheir classics,” and David Moltke-nHansen’s lucid survey that serves as annintroduction.nA few of the contributions, unfortunately,nexhibit the signs of narrow specialization.nSteven Stowe manages tonconvey the impression that the ancientnconflict between town and countrynmice was invented in Charleston. (Onnthis point he might have consultedneither Lounsbury or Theodore Rosengarten,nwhose thorough discussion ofn”The Southern Agriculturalist” includesnthe observation, “The country’sndistrust of the city is a very old tradition.”)nHe also engages in the deplorablen”what if” generalizations so commonnamong feminist social historians:nBut the bonds of feeling andnexpression between women andnmen . . . were stretched thinnernand more precariously across andeep misgiving about social life.nIt was a misgiving aboutnwhether the separate realmsnof the sexes, in dividing upnsocial reality, splintered socialnreality.nAs ever, slovenly syntax and mixednmetaphor betray the confused mind.nFortunately, few of the contributors tonthis significant symposium are subjectnto fits of ideological posturing. For thenmost part, they are sound scholars whonsucceed in combining original researchnwith the broader approach of intellectualnhistory. If they have a fault, it isnperhaps this: most of them (with thenexception of Lacy Ford and Moltke-nHansen) seem to be writing from outsidenthe Southern tradition rather thannwithin it.nAlas for the South. … No one interestednin American intellectual historyncan afford to neglect Charleston’sncontribution now that so good a startnhas been made at exploring this unknownnterritory. (TF)nJournalists andnOther Turncoatsnby John RomjuenConversations With the Enemy: ThenStory ofPFC Robert Garwood bynWinston Groom and Duncan Spencer,nNew York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons.nAmerica’s journalists enjoyed their finestnhour during Vietnam—indulgingnin reporting that overwhelmed all objectivenpresentation of American militarynaction. A recent book about RobertnGarwood by two former reporters fornthe Washington Star suggests that ournnewspapermen are not done yet.nMarine Private First Class RobertnGarwood, captured by the Vietcong inn1963 and released by his North Vietnamesenmasters in 1979, was the onlynAmerican prisoner of war brought tontrial by the Department of Defense forncollaboration with the enemy. In 1981nnna military court at Fort Bragg, NorthnCarolina, found Garwood guilty of collaborationnand physical maltreatment ofnan American prisoner, and dismissednhim from the service.nDuring the trial, seven former VietnamnPOW’s who had known Garwoodnin the camps took the stand. All testifiednfor the prosecution, none for Garwood.nTheir judgment of the “white Cong”nthey had encountered in the jungle wasnunanimous: Garwood had “crossednover.” He lived separately from them innthe compounds, ate with the campncooks, and enjoyed a general freedomnof movement around the camps. Garwoodnwas friendly and familiar in dealingsnwith his captors, and because of hisnacquired fluency in Vietnamese henserved as the enemy’s spokesman duringnpolitical reeducation classes.nGarwood’s recent biographers developnGarwood’s personal story in thensympathetic “interior mode” as if privynto tape recording of his private thoughtsnfor the past 16 years. From the extensivenpicture they present of Garwood’s captivitynin the jungle camp—interwovennwith detail of his depressing preenlistmentnfamily life and postreleasenadversities (including a child molesta-nREAGANnONCXTBAnrotd fey Vits-PresldentGeoi^ B«^nTlw!Cul>«a Aiaeite»nN«tifflBalF6tt»d«i6«n”This useful collection Is necessary reading fornthose interested in either Reagan or Cuba …”nAmbassador Jeane Kirkpatrickn”Reagan on Cuba should be read by all in thenCongress”nRobert Dole, United States SenatenAvailable in English and Spanish.n$4.00 per copynCUBAN AMERICAN NATIONAL FOUNDATIONn1000 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW Suite 601nWashington, DC 20007nSEPTEMBER 19861 37n