Anthony Lewis (1) (1927–2013)
Autore di Gideon's Trumpet
Per altri autori con il nome Anthony Lewis, vedi la pagina di disambiguazione.
Sull'Autore
Two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Anthony Lewis is the author of Make No Law and the bestseller Gideon's Trumpet. In his nearly five decades of writing and reporting for The New York Times, he served as the Time's London bureau chief for eight years; he now contributes the twice-weekly "Abroad at mostra altro Home" column to the paper's op-ed page. (Bowker Author Biography) mostra meno
Fonte dell'immagine: Uncredited photo at harvardsquarelibrary.org
Opere di Anthony Lewis
Opere correlate
History on Trial: My Day in Court with a Holocaust Denier (2005) — Introduzione, alcune edizioni — 441 copie
Etichette
Informazioni generali
- Nome legale
- Lewis, Joseph Anthony
- Data di nascita
- 1927-03-27
- Data di morte
- 2013-03-25
- Sesso
- male
- Nazionalità
- USA
- Luogo di nascita
- New York, New York, USA
- Luogo di morte
- Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
- Istruzione
- Horace Mann School
Harvard - Attività lavorative
- journalist
historian - Organizzazioni
- The New York Times
- Premi e riconoscimenti
- Presidential Citizens Medal (2001)
Pulitzer Prize (National Reporting ∙ 1955)
Pulitzer Prize (National Reporting ∙ 1963)
Edgar Allan Poe Award, Best Fact Crime (Gideon's Trumpet, 1965)
Utenti
Recensioni
Liste
Premi e riconoscimenti
Potrebbero anche piacerti
Autori correlati
Statistiche
- Opere
- 9
- Opere correlate
- 8
- Utenti
- 1,479
- Popolarità
- #17,374
- Voto
- 4.0
- Recensioni
- 20
- ISBN
- 86
- Lingue
- 3
Admittedly, so far as I am aware, a lot is unchanged. The basic procedure for a number of things is probably pretty much the same, and that's why only people directly involved in the legal field should read it. It's a nice learning tool and a neat look at history. There are some very interesting descriptions of people and events in the book that make you feel like you're actually there or watching archival footage of what was going on. One of the more interesting parts is a detailed letter Gideon wrote to Fortas about his life, contained in full detail. I enjoy reading about history, so that was quite interesting. My favorite part of the book, however, is reading about Gideon's last lawyer in the book, W. Fred Turner, who did a masterful job with some authorial explanatory detail that just makes it enjoyable to read, and particularly rewarding after reading the rest of the story. A true testament to what good lawyers can accomplish. Not what I know the average indigent defendant today will receive (and not for lack of trying; I understand the plight of the overworked public defender), but well. There's that 1964 publication date and the author does talk about the problem for a few pages.
And that's my biggest problem with the book. It was published in 1964, only a year after the case at the story's heart. I don't think that's too soon to talk about something or even write about it, but I really wish there was someone who had written a modern-day version of this novel for the 2015 audience. It's irritating, at best, to constantly hear about how lawyers and judges and justices are "men" who are the most educated and how Washington is filled with well-educated "men" and how the law is a man's world. The legal world still has plenty of gender issues. But lawyers aren’t JUST men anymore. Lawmakers aren’t JUST men anymore (and they weren’t JUST men in 1964 but whatever). It's a book out of time and the middle/upper-class white-male lens is aggravating, at best.
It's quite odd to see the author referencing certain seminal cases by name but for some reason choosing to reference what I'm presuming is Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education as "the school segregation cases". The observations on certain justices as living people when the entire bench of Gideon v. Wainwright has passed away (the most recent passed away in the early 2000s) is frequently disconcerting, particularly as this is meant to help us understand how the supreme court works today. I understand that reading historical literature does that, but still. There are also like two chapters that are completely invalid where the author waxes poetic on politics and legal decisions that have been invalidated or changed due to changing social opinion.
I do appreciate the way it didn’t just feature the case as an anomaly. Rather, the case was the culmination of social and political feeling moving towards the justices wanting this change. I liked how it focused on the people involved and it was really interesting to see how the states were largely on the side of this decision. Like my professor said, the way it focused on the people involved and not just the concepts really helped. There's a lot of detail about how the whole thing came together, who was involved, and how it wasn't just a tiny man named Gideon against an array of state lawyers who wouldn't let him speak (at least in the Supreme Court).
Overall, honestly, unless you’re a MAJOR history fan and there’s nowhere else you can turn to for a decent look at the history around this case, or else unless you’re a law student required to read this for something, read something else.… (altro)