second thought will be broadcasting excerpts from this interview. you can stream in the website or the app. one day jessica hammer will interview held heather lind about the fullerton bears. thursday author sadie jones ãb in conversation about writing this book should be great i'll be back tuesday, july 1 to talk about in the transition of this group. great book he collected stories from people who'd been through wrenching life changes. very timely in its own way. there's a full schedule incident link atlanta history center. thank you for joining us, i tried to get to as many questions i could can really appreciate it. ......

>> "washington post" columnist and thriller writer and then the pulitzer prize winner last month and this month we are joined by jeff shaara military historical fiction author. ranging from the american revolution to the korean war and we will talk about all those in just a minute but we will start with a facebook comment that a viewer has posted on our facebook page. what exactly is historical fiction?

>>guest: i have had this conversation with other authors it is an accurate historical setting but the people are totally made up that's a little different from what i do because i take you to these places with a lot of the real people with historical figures with names that you know like george washington or dwight eisenhower were robert e. lee it is fiction by definition because i put words in their mouth. my job is to tell you a story and not just do a textbook or names dates places facts and figures but to put you in the hands of the characters to tell you the story the way they would tell it by a definition that has to be fiction you are hearing dialogue and part of that

draws from the historical record but that is my job to fill in the blanks. if i've done my homework and research absolutely accurate. that's my job. and then number of authors who write alternative history and the germans win in world war i. with that speculation to do that. my job is to make it accurate and at the same time make it a good story. >>host: do you consider yourself a historian? >> no. any academic historian will say no you don't have the credentials. i have a phd in history but to

me that is an advantage for example i didn't have a professor at florida state tell me who robert e. lee is so i don't carry these lessons with me i have to start with scratch on - - start from scratch this is much more interesting and fresh then reciting something i could of learned in school years ago. >> do you use original sources? >> those are key to the research. it's my job to go back biography in modern history books don't do me any good and biographers object to this but a lot of biography you get a

take on who the character is unable argue that with you but if you have 50 different biographies of abraham link and you get 50 different versions. so all my research whenever possible original source material memoirs, collections of letters getting into the head of the character i have to get to know the character. that's a personal thing so very definitely the research is as personal as i can make it. >>host: you do use characters but what about lucy spencer or private rightly? are those real people? >> they are composites. generally. it's very rare like the example of the g.i. who is

everywhere i need him to be to tell the story. that's not to say i make it all up that typically a start with a real figure and then as a do the research i find out more information and i make a composite into this one character so he can still tell you the whole story everything happens it's all accurate maybe not just to this one guy. lucy spencer is an excellent example. i love that character the siege at vicksburg with the union army is teaching but the problem for the people is they are trapped with the confederate army that's really the first time i had a significant civilian character with a point of view very different from your general now you have a girl who was 19 years old and learns a lot about war and the gruesome list of what happens to people and the sacrifice. that was a very different take.

i have four diaries from four different women at vicksburg who were there. to me that is a treasure and that's how the character of lucy spence comes about. >>host: first let's talk about the theme i picked up reading. number one the recurring character it could be robert e. lee or winfield scott. >> i love winfield scott. many people never heard of him which is a tragedy. first of all born 1788 in the war of 1812 he is a brigadier general and starts the war in 18 oh seven he arrests a couple of british people who

are not supposed to be in a cause a big diplomat extinct but the british are upset. but by the 18 forties he is the commanding general of the united states army and the grand old man and when the mexican war begins scott is the leader of our troops in the field. what that means for history who the troops in the field are all these troops out of west point are all names that you know jonathan jackson, ulysses s grant george pickett. on and on. and then one in particular robert e. lee in a blue uniform and winfield scott teaches him how to be a soldier that's a fun story to write because it's a story nobody knows. >>host: another theme is

politics in the military. >> i really don't like politics. i'm not political innocents and people have said to me nudge nudge wink wink are you really talking about today like dwight out on - - eisenhower? know. no. not at all. but yes there is politics in every war. who fights the war? know. the people fighting it have very little to say. winfield scott is in mexico purposeful cuts himself off from communication from washington they can't stand each other so scott wants nothing to do with washington marches in land and could care less what anybody in washington saves on - - says. is harder to get away from that now that to add a third

dimension. >>host: from the american revolution to the korean war the role of washington dc? >> who was it named after? george washington. every school child learns he's the father of the country. okay but what does that mean cracks i know what it means i have no respect for george washington as a leader in a commander of the troops and then the president. there's a reason he's on the dollar bill i have enormous respect for this man but beyond that he go to the mexican war president polk tries to run the show from washington but that doesn't work. at the time of the civil war it is congress with the

senators and representatives, they leave first montgomery then to richmond to create the confederacy and because it's on the border the first battle of the civil war at manassas right across the potomac river and also is arlington today a big pillared house at arlington cemetery. washington is right smack in the middle when the civil war begins and all the way down the line getting to world war i and world war ii and george marshall here and eisenhower in europe. you have the break to get to the 20th century washington can play a greater role than they could in the 19th

century. >>host: there is a theme behind military successes a lot of failures. >> there are different reasons for failures. lack of confidence, ego, narcissism, the cure on - - terrible character traits not just military but everywhere. but looking at these characters and the generals like the civil war, having people like grant or sherman in the confederates but then braxton bragg's and men whose ego and personality get in the way of them doing their job when their bad things men die uselessly. that's the reality and a part

of the story. >>host: does it wear on you after a while? >> yes. definitely. and i will say talking about specifics but my last book the frozen hour is about korea. it's not a happy story. i talked to a number of veterans in the advantage of that story i can see it in their faces and feel it in their words the way they talked, that tragedy and what they went through 65 years later is still a part of who they are whether it is simply the memories of the guy next to him and what happened to him, he got to the point the emotion was very difficult. i'm not blood and guts type of

guy that it is a part of the story nobody really wants to read page after page of blood and guts are has to be humor and drama. and laughter is such an important part that by the end of the day by the time i finish the book i was wore out emotionally. i took a break for six months and didn't do anything. i had to separate myself. what i'm working on now is much less of war story with the cuban missile crisis but i just needed something different it took more of a toll on me than i expected. >>host: is there a direct link between the winter at valley forge? >> yes.

one of the unfortunate links between the two is these poor guys who were suffering in the 17 seventies it would seem logical they are equipped very well they don't have the shoes with a close to keep themselves warm they warmed their hands by the fire. korea 1950 it's the same situation. willfully under equipped with clothing given boots that make their feet sweat but then you stop marching at 30 below zero then they freeze in i.c.e. forms inside your shoe. frostbite. they are given these thinwall items how do you pull the trigger on your rifle they cut off the fingertips.

and it just adds up woefully underprepared for those conditions they run into just like valley forge. >>host: the gentleman rules of war stays? >> definitely. that probably happened more in the civil war first for a separate reason. but a lot of people don't realize those who graduate west point of all sides north and south all the tax points on - - textbooks up to that point our napoleonic. they are in french one of the requirements is to learn french so you learn the napoleonic tactics that are 60 or 70 years old and that is all they know. so they say line up in a straight line shoulder to

shoulder because the guns were not very good in that time in 1860 it was better the artillery is better now you have the musket. so the slaughter increases exponentially. that also happens in world war i. when that breaks out the french go out on horseback because it is the old way and the glory way 1914 the germans have come up with a machine gun machine gun and horses don't go together very quickly the french learns we have to do this a different way. there is a lot of tragedy dealing with changes or the technology gets better than

the tactics. >> the american revolution you wrote 4435 with two.4 billion the mexican war 13000 deaths and now the civil war four years of that 500,000 and death world war i us is in it for one year lost 116,000 soldiers at a cost of 334 billion and world war ii losing 400,000 plus americans four.1 trillion in the korean war, three years of that,

losing $331 billion. starting with the american revolution reading a couple of books about that rise to rebellion with the glorious cause what about general cornwallis? >> what we learned in school the one sentence lesson washington defeats cornwallis at yorktown that's the end of the revolution. no. that's not the way it happened. [laughter] yes washington in the french defeat cornwallis at yorktown that he is not in command of the british army. he's down the ladder with two people above him and cornwallis is on his own down in virginia so he is an interesting character because he is a very good man with a very good commander.

history treats him like the loser. i'm sorry. he is a great deal more than that. and then when washington was facing off between the british in manhattan or crossing the delaware river. i suspect would be a very different outcome. the people above him and telling him what to do. the other part of this is what i do for writing a history book cornwallis is a man of personal tragedy. his wife died during the war he goes back to england and

actually has a brief meeting and comes away with george the third saying he's not quite right but his wife died he is in love with his wife and he has to go back to the colonies and fight the war carrying that load with him. again it is the three dimensions. why is he interesting? because he is a human being. >>host: other facebook comment. i start to read your book on the american and revolution when i got to the part about george washington i stopped right there because i was certain the americans were going to lose spirit there is a point george washington thought would lose early on in

the war he lost almost every battle he was in. they are chased out of the battle of brooklyn they are chased across the east river cornwallis among them and then across new york city today the southern part of manhattan island 30th street and first avenue he is chased up to what we know today as harlem and then all across the hudson river and then across new jersey into pennsylvania. that's not a very good beginning for someone trying to fight a war. but then on christmas things change differently when washington re- crosses the

delaware. with the extraordinary victory and after that the battle that washington also wins and then to wake up to the fact this isn't what we can sweep away we could have a war on our hands. that's washington. it is a much more complicated story than what we hear in high school. >> what about not require seeing the delaware? >> of course because it's the men fighting underneath him. they want to go home. the winter passes and they need to work their farms and his army said we are doing too well we need to go away.

washington gives a speech and saves his army. and then philadelphia the continental army to put together bags of everything we can find relating to money pieces of silver or flatware and then horses are laden with this to distribute. that saves the army. with that passion for the cause and the desperate need to stick with him changes history because they do. >>host: he didn't have a sense of authority? >> he had the continental

congress and that wasn't much of a central authority anyway. they do unite behind the cause that they do not declare war on king george. king george declares war. when we signed the declaration king george hears about this and says they are in a rebellion. put that on the rebellion. and in washington the reason they choose washington sitting in the continental congress and doesn't want to take authority but is in uniform in british uniform with the virginia militia but he's in uniform maybe he knows how to

fight a war or organizing and army. nobody in boston. who is this guy? washington has one thing going for him. physically he is a big man he carries that stature people start paying attention and he organizes officers and that's what they take for granted they organize the army out of people and could care less about virginia and who he is you can tell by the way i'm talking about this i get excited it's not dry history of have to make it up because the real story is fascinating.

>>host: your book on for soldiers? >> gone for soldiers. >>host: it was popular during the vietnam war? >> earlier when i was a child kingston trio most people don't know who that is in 1860 that was a big hit song where have all the flowers gone. that stuck with me. with the sadness of that whole song i encourage anybody the essence of that song they have gone to the graveyards and through the process it is a sad song but in 1836 all these young men out of west point clueless about life for war and then they go off to be

soldiers it's not glory and that carries 13 years later for the civil war and those lessons stay with him. >>host: you skipped about the war of 1812. >> i had a heated argument with my publisher about that. the response that i get the publisher said at the time it's not a thick enough. i don't necessarily agree with that the war of 1812 is actually three stories the niagara campaign and niagara detroit and then washington and baltimore. and then battle of new orleans and it is three separate stories making a wonderful

book in three parts but they wouldn't go along with that so at the end of the day i have a contract in new york if they don't printed there is no point in me writing it. >> so was that war downplayed? >> a lot of people confuse the mexican war with the alamo. and also one parallel but i found out there is a parallel between the mexican war and the vietnam war. and they come home from their war in 1848 heroes and parades

but now they come home to newspaper stories talking how they are butchers or we have just abuse the government of mexico. the map of the united states how we know it today arizona, new mexico, texas all became part of our territory because of the mexican war. we took it. the guilt in congress over that the bill passed in congress but we took all the land and pay them some money so we did it was like $15 million we wrote a check to the government of mexico. but the unpopularity of that war talk about politicians , there was a divide in washington with what we were

doing in mexico clearly was conquering downtrodden. it affected the soldiers who deserved better when they came home. i know people from the vietnam era who were spit on when they got off the planes at lax and there's the same sentiment. i did not expect to find that. >>host: manifest destiny? >> right now i'm working on the cuban missile crisis. we should be able to dictate what happens in cuba there is a sentiment about that that north america and do what we want to buy the time the mexican war and the civil war broke that a part just because we say so doesn't mean it's

true. >>host: good afternoon this is the tv on c-span2 special fiction in addition military historical novelist jeff shaara is our guest for the next two and half hours. send an e-mail to the tv. we will go through those and you can see the information on the screen in just a minute. very quickly his books and

what they are about his first book has turned into a movie prick well to his father's book killer angels and then the sequel to killers angels came out 1998 about the civil war. the mexican american more rebellion in the american revolution prick well and then also about the american revolution move on to world war i world war ii there are four books and the final storm coming out in 2011 about the pacific blaze of glory came out in 2012 and the pain offender concentrating on vicksburg chattanooga and

tecumseh and the the frozen hours came out last year which is about korea. what is it about the civil war and your father quick. >> you answer the question. what michael did in 1974, first of all backup ten years 1964 we were tourist raised in tallahassee florida my father teaching at florida state. he had been a writer all his young life short stories no interesting history at all. we went to gettysburg. i was 12 years old we were there as tourists. over 8-millimeter film of me

climbing on the canons. something happened to my father there. he was a storyteller he was a master. he knew a good story when he saw one and started to do research on gettysburg and became obsessed with telling the story. it took him seven years to put the manuscript together he still had to teach to make a living he could ever make a living from his writing which is sad writing at night and teaching during the day he put the manuscript together turned down by 15 publishers in new york and finally the david mckay company the advance was $3500 and my father was thrilled here is his book coming out it comes out 1974. nobody cares. and of the vietnam war. nobody in this country wanted to read a book about generals

and then one year later this magnificent thing happens a telegram comes to my father's health congratulations it's awarded the 1975 pulitzer prize for fiction. nobody was more surprised of that in my father so he has the right to believe his ship has come in. even with the pulitzer it was not a bestseller. what a crushing disappointment to him. what other historical works did he write? none. there was no audience. he rode a baseball story, the love of the game which kevin costner made into a film again after my father's death. but he had no interest of going back to the civil war. in 1980 at 59 years old second heart attack died in his sleep. five years after that ted

turner puts up the money based on the book and it becomes a number one bestseller 19 years later provide of that is ever happened five years after my father's death. he had no idea what he left behind. the idea to do the priest well and seek well came from ted turner. the movie gettysburg was enormously successful and airing on tnt and he wanted to do more film and came to me and said when it be great to take the killer angels before and after with the same characters? i had never written anything before i delta and rare coins and precious metals. i thought about it and in the film director we had this conversation with whatever i come with one - - come up with

stinks i will put the research and put it together but if it is lousy throw it away. people say how did you know? i had no idea but i knew the research my father had done and getting into their heads so i figured i would do that. i'm representing my father's estate in new york now a number one bestseller people at random house would take my phone calls i'm talking to the publisher and she says what are you doing? is that i'm working on the prick well one - - prequel that was my father's original title for the killer angels and some reason he rejected that and i thought of that halfway through i said that's perfect for what i'm trying to create the publisher said send us the manuscript. really cracks that was september 1985 the phone call

was we don't care if it's a movie. we like to work with thank you are a writer. here is a contract. my whole life changed with that. the book comes out debuts on the bestseller list. i'm under no illusion the great american author has arrived. the critics cut me slack readers cut me slack i am touring everywhere. people are telling me good try. but it stays on the bestsellers list 15 weeks. then the publisher once the sequel. i am scared out of my mind now because mi a one hit wonder? now there are expectations and pressure. right another book so i write the sequel and same result.

my editor start to field questions from people he is the civil war guy now. show him this idea or that idea. my editor but that aside. no. you're a good storyteller. now what? i wanted to do the mexican wars story it's almost a prequel the prequel to the prequel and the publisher set american revolution? who cares. that was their response and this is not me saying this , there are 60 wars on - - sexy war world war ii a sexy. world war i is not. the american revolution is

not. my response was isn't that my job to make it sexy? that's my job to tell a good story. and in 2011 and the sesquicentennial of the civil war comes around 150th anniversary and then who said we are tired of hearing about robert e. lee virginia. as if that's the whole war what about everything else? what about the mississippi river? you are right woman i realize there is a story here i would like to tell. and the battle of shiloh.

i had never been there in south-central tennessee. this is a fascinating place to visit. i got excited about that. and the idea with the sesquicentennial is to have a book come out the 150th anniversary of the actual event. 2012. 2013 vicksburg. which by the way is going on at the same time as the battle of gettysburg. >>host: ulysses s grant is that vicksburg. >> yes he is in command of one of his finest hours. and that is so overshadowed was happening in gettysburg. and then what is called the media center of the day.

and it's on - - vicksburg is more important i have to be careful when i say that because i live there but the conquest of the mississippi river changes everything. and from they are going to chattanooga and lookout mountain comments seem to be important so i got very excited about that. but now that being said, i think that's all i can do on the civil war. people say what happens a bunch of things that happened

but i'm on to other things right now. i have done seven books of those characters i need to focus on something different for now. >>host: jeff shaara how valuable were the newspapers of the time for your research could you get a hold of diaries? >> a very separate question. the newspapers of the time were not that valuable because one of the great complaints we hear every day you have no idea. but the election of the 18 sixties you have not just taking sides suddenly and discreetly so when you read a newspaper you can tell whether charleston or richmond or philadelphia or new york just by the tone of the writing so

factually research wise you mention sherman's diary for his wife and friends he doesn't know 150 years later somebody would be reading his letters those collections of letters and diaries. who is he writing to? himself you don't think somebody like me whatever read that? that honesty cut through the public relations part and sherman is not the most attractive personally his thoughts are objectionable and

that's an interesting combination to deal with. >>host: here's what i got is that a fair assessment? >> definitely. by today's definition he would be a manic-depressive bull in a china shop but then he collapses into self-doubt and a newspaper in cincinnati labels him as insane. i don't think he is but i think he has some problems and is insecure in his first great battle and combat experience is manassas it is a disaster troops are collapsing and he

carries that around with him. anytime he runs into the enemy he blows up the numbers mcclellan is always inflating the numbers and sherman carries that and he is afraid and even after shiloh then there is the moment where the old ghost come back and anyone who has mental issues my father had similar issues the notion that it happens a couple of times he is human he is not a marble statue what he

accomplishes is magnificent. >>host: jeff shaara is our guest donald from new york city go ahead. >>caller: good afternoon. i would like to know if foreign peace reflects on karen roberts in march 1917 and to be published in november with the russian revolution. so that is similar to yours.

and if you are familiar with the red wheel. >>host: we appreciate the call. >> i am not familiar with that but it does sound fascinating. war and peace talking about people who write historical fiction it surprises people to hear there is a bunch of people who do what i do but i don't read them and there is a reason why i am scared to death of plagiarism i don't read novels if i pick up your novel in a particular line of

dialogue or something sticks in my head then later on comes out by accident in my voice that's a pure definition of plagiarism and could cost me my career. so to read how someone else tells a story on military story or war and peace, that doesn't do me any good. i don't want to know how somebody else tells the same story because i don't want to copy her ever being accused of copying somebody. i know that sounds strange but i don't read other people's works of fiction but that's why i don't ever want to be accused of being somebody off are using a line of dialogue because that could literally cost me my career.

>> a very descriptive illustration. >> i work with my editor going back to killer angels and the style of my father's book because these are novels to use of photographs whether george washington or dwight eisenhower if use a photograph that makes it look like a textbook or nonfiction so that gives us a whole feel so it is about normandy if you look at the image on the cover of the book it's a famous photograph in the library of congress i

cannot tell you how many use that as cover art but at random house they took the photograph and made into a painting so it looks like a painting i would never allow any of my book somebody else to design cover without me to have an approval. >>host: also how your name has grown in size. [laughter] >> i appreciate that. it's very nice but rise to rebellion, my first book on the american revolution because up until that point the title is at the top in my name is at the bottom now suddenly my name is at the top in the title is down below that was a shock. i guess the way that works with the marketing department

does things differently. i get a big kick out of that. >> what a great show it is mesmerizing. with the revolutionary war the british troops and with those thousands of british troops i never knew. >> with the british have two different types of troops the british go back to england that have a say of what they will do. but on the other hand a bunch of old people stayed here with those german troops settled in

the carolina and some of that may be the weather was better where they would live in a conditions were better so the british troops lay down and that is the enormous victory for washington and i love the scene because the french are right there the general is beside washington in these perfect white uniforms so when cornwallis is man, not cornwallis himself.

he would not surrender he feigned illness. and then the music playing upside down is well documented in the french troops on one side and with continentals on the other he comes out and looks for food to give the sword to. and he walks up with the sword and says no. that guy over there and points to washington. so that moment i get emotional talking about it and it sounds silly the great moment in the history of this country when the french and the british at the same moment recognize this is who is in charge and i

wrote that scene at that moment. >>host: john from new york. >>caller: thank you for taking the call. i would like to start with the statement. by definition and with history we always read in retrospect. so what happened and was inevitable there are so many twists and turns in one direction a completely different result. as one who writes about factual matters as a novelist, when the state on - - the states want to secede what committed him? over the next four years

, given what we do know the industrial power of the north and the south dependent upon and slaver slavery, based upon your knowledge of history will bring you to think what might have happened after four years of four and 600,000 deaths? could the south has sustained itself against the great industrial power of the north? >> it's possible and then to rely basically a state of serious hostility. and one the rest of europe that was the marketplace.

and so the south might have survived to get the carolinas or georgia with a natural trading partner and so the notion of four years thrown out the window. was lincoln assassinated? know. so that changes everything in the entire history of the world. of course the northeast would have survived if they had the money and the industrial capability but what would have happened to the south? the south cannot become

british colonies again you have the states who wanted their own independence. and then conflicts between mississippi and alabama. the whole world is an entirely different place today. but the first part of your question, talk about foregone conclusions. my job is to avoid at all cost the biggest example is remedy of d-day invasion. write a chapter from eisenhower's point of view. eisenhower doesn't hear anything. nothing for hours after the invasion is taken place.

do you think is not going mad with that? in his pocket is a letter he has written prepared to give to read to the newspapers accepting full responsibility for the disastrous defeat at normandy. he has no idea. we know what happened. . . . . . there are no bad guys.

so do need both voices. even going back to the revolution it is the british voice, thomas cage and the first bucket of cornwall is a. when you get to world war ii it changes everything because the bad guys are bad guys. he's not a nazi. he never joined. they say germany hero for what he does in the first world war, he is a legitimate german hero but he hates politics. he comes to hate hitler and he realizes he cannot win doing what he's doing and it makes him

human as an outstanding officer and soldier had he been given the material and manpower he wanted first in north africa where he's up against the british and then up against us. it would have changed everything but he treats him like a stepchild and because there is hitler looking, russia. hitler has all of his resources and focus on defeating the russians and he's down there in north africa with nothing. then she makes such a pain out of himself a taken on one side of the campaign and put him in the backwater of the war. they put him in a place called normandy so when we invade, the german in command of key was a

natural fit to come back into the next book. i love the character and i'm nervous about the political implication of saying this, but he is a good man. he's not a nazi and yes he fights in the german army and answers to hitler, but he's not that cliché like one of the minions around hitler. he's a good soldier and it makes for good character. character. by the way, this piece of trivia, the 50th birthday is june 61944. he goes home. he's not there when the allies invade. how my history have changed then. it's just part of the story. >> host: that speaks to one of the themes in the book. you jefferson davis, arthur,

polled. >> it isn't about names, places, facts and figures. the characters are the first part. what ithe first part i'm going l a. that is an isn't what draws me e story. you mentioned a couple of tandems about what we could talk about at length, but that is what is fun for me. if it isn't fun for me and i don't get passionate about the story, you are not going to want to read it so it starts with the personalities. >> host: let's hear from dick in california. >> caller: i'm curious i wonder have you ever thought about writing a book about

[inaudible] i just think that is such an incredible story about american defeat and wondered why you haven't taken that on as a top topic. >> guest: that's a good question and hopefully i have a good answer for it. when i was doing world war ii, i started getting the trilogy. it could have easily been a trouble to sit itroubled peace . i chose europe -- i just chose europe. i liked the characters, rommel, there were a number of -- when i did the trilogy, i began to hear from marines. the marines were not happy with my trilogy in europe. i started getting e-mails. what is this your stuff, we are not in europe. okay, there is another war halfway around the world, so i did a fourth book, what i call my for trilogy on the end of the war in the pacific called the final storm that deals with

okinawa and the bombs. it's that the end of the war ine pacific. no lately, talking to my publisher, we have talked about the idea of going back and taking another look at the pacific in the second world war, and you talk about stories. hiroshima has been -- there've been a lot of films from john wayne all the way up to, clint eastwood, the two parts. there is midway and others pearl harbor and there's the guadalcanal and on and on. there's a lot of stories, so i'm actually having a conversation with my publisher right now about going back and doing perhaps another trilogy and that would be good. pearl harbor is a good place to start obviously it is where it starts with us. but immediately thereafter, what you are talking about, i by chance was in a hotel in kansas city where they had the annual gathering of survivors.

i knew nothing about it. this was years ago. i knew nothing about it and i'm walking through the hotel and see this stuff, i see the posterposters and these are soms that had have a lot of bitterns because nobody really pays much attention to what happened to them and they are not especially fans of douglas macarthur. macarthur leaves them. i shall return. that's what he's talking about when he leaves and goes to australia. he's leaving those guys behind. it's a tough story and i don't know that i would do an entire book just on the, but it definitely could be a piece of another story starting probably with pearl harbor. and i want to point out the math we just showed the viewers is general macarthur's math that he had in the pacific. what about newspaper and contemporary accounts during world war ii and korea.

were they more valuable or not? >> probably so because the american public wasn't fully kept informed and because you didn't have two sides in the same country through which the original newspaper in philadelphia newspaper fighting each other over whose candidate or whose general was the good guy you didn't have any of that. we were very much united in this country whether the enemy was the japanese or the germans, so yes definitely the newspapers. while they are not as useful to the research point of view, certainly what they di with a de home front informed, and it's not always good news. i read some papers that actually surprised me in a good way that they were telling the truth. there were setbacks and problems thabut they were being honest at it and not just glossing over everything.

again my generation, the evening news it seems like every day we are winning. why is the war still going on. it wasn't like that in world war ii. they reported the good, but and the ugly and that was a nice thing to see because the american public was getting an accurate idea. >> host: this is in e-mail from elizabeth jones. mr. shaara talk about the hostilities between the genitals and mexican war tailored scott and the president told that they vary a different agenda. >> guest: zachary taylor first of all at the beginning of the war, which is in south texas where it began with the whole war, and maybe you can look at his house in excuse for starting the war is the border of texas and mexico would be the rio grande, as we know it today, or the north about 100 miles north. the mexicans wanted that hundred modules and settlers in texas through ten years earlier had defeated santa anna and the texas revolution, they wanted

it. they thought that hundred mile gap should be theirs. that is what started the mexican war. the mexicans moved into the area, the texas militia got together. zachary taylor goes down, takes command of these people, they fight three very significant battles and it could go either way. he wins a couple of them. boys are dying, american young men are vying for the first time in a number of decades and so winfield scott in washington who again is about the command an army, he goes out to the golf and takes command from taylor and he's left to sort of manage things and the war moves away from taylor. he's a legitimate american he really becomes president in the united states and said he does get his due, and i don't know if

i'd call them enemies really. scott had every right to do what he did and leaves taylor where he is, goes into the gulf of mexico and eventually goes to mexico city and wins the war. now, president ford is a different story construct a politician. he's in washington looking out for his own agenda and he cannot stand winfield scott, so when scott invades the coast of mexico, he can't stand cold holy more than he likes him. he cuts off all communication. he's telling him what to do and it takes a while for the word to get from washington down to the gulf of mexico. scott uses that as an excuse. i can't wait for you to tell me. i'm cutting off all communications. he goes in with no telegraphs or anything so scott is on his own and he becomes quite a hero for doing that and pulled is sort of

left out in the cold. lately there's been a total resurgence of interest in james capel. there were a couple of books written about him. that's fine he gets his due but taylor's is the real heroes of the american public. president zachary taylor unfortunately h he died very quickly in office of poor health. scott runs for president later and never get the affection of the american people the way that tailored us. >> host: when you look at the number of deaths in the mexican-american war, two years of war, 13,000 deaths, pretty substantial. >> guest: again the weaponry isn't very good but it's getting better. the artillery isn't very good but it's getting better. the tactics stay the same. some of that, i don't know what percentage of that is due to disease because again, you are talking about a part of the war

that is an evil enormously in the civil war. the battlefield conditions were just horrible. a wounded man there's very little chance. there is typhoid, scarlet fever, they are going through the countryside in mexico where there are no sanitary conditions, so it is a difficult place to fight a war and i have no doubt that number is accurate but i wonder how much of it is based on diseas disease or wound soldiers who died from infection. >> host: next call comes from jerry in illinois. >> caller: hello. i am fascinated with the mexican war and as an american i feel very guilty about the way they took all the territor that terrn gave them a token and we are still living with the implications of that today is

the mexican-american relations they've never been like the current political climate. it's right up to date, daca. so my question, we can't give california and etc. back but how can we heal the situation? >> guest: you are right it's an unanswerable question, so i can't answer it. the way we treat the mexicans during the war and immediately after again you mentioned early on manifest destiny, the munro doctrine. we know arizona, mexico, california, the rocky mountain states and texas. they are entitled to that. you look at the tv and it's sort of an archaic idea and get at the time that was our theme in this country.

the atlanta, the pacific and everything in between belongs to us so we pretty much justified taking whatever we want. obviously today that is pretty awful but at the time is what the country was all about a. i was nervous about what kind of response the soldiers would get from mexico. watch what i heawith what i heae mexican historians and i was gratified to hear about the trail of santa anna. we talked about the alamo earlier. ten years later, he's in command in mexico again and in charge. there's another character in the story, there's the point of view and i was afraid, i didn't want to portray him as a cartoon because that isn't fair to the man. i had his memoir only translated into english in 1988 it was called the eagle.

he paints himself as a cartoon. he takes the responsibility for everything that goes right into flames everybody else for everything that goes wrong. that's his personality, so i put a little bit of that into the story and i was nervous. how will the mexican historians take that? i got two letters from professors in mexico city that said that was outstanding. unfortunately being what it is a, often the spoils of the war oare unfair and a lot of people said as the gentleman mentioned, the token payment, it was a token payment, guilt, it was a guilt check for the war. you can justify it or not. how would the world be different

if the united states is half the size it is today is an unanswerable question. >> host: after seven books on the civil wa civil war how do yl about robert e. lee? >> guest: i knew this question was coming. obviously this is a hot button topic today. robert e. lee the man, to write him as a character and get into his head on a personal level, he's a man with seven children, giving advice to every one of them. his letters are to his children telling them what they should and shouldn't do because he's never home. his wife is a tragic figure. mary lee is an unhappy woman who hates the fact that her husband is never home and she lets him know that which is really interesting. as a general in the field i wouldn't say that he is unparalleled. i think grant is a better general and sherman. lee allows the confederacy to survive for as long as he does because he knows how to retreat

and that isn't a slam. he knows he doesn't have the arms power especially when he's up against grant. he knows the last full measure which is from the gettysburg address. i use it as a title for the third book of the trilogy because he understands they have to give the last full measure if they are going to survive this war. he knows they are not going to win but he also knows he owes it to his men and they wouldn't let him quit if he wanted to so there's all that. as a man of dignity and integrity and the fact that after the war he will not write his own memoir because then you have to pass judgment on other people and he won't give it. it's up to other people to tell the historytalkto history, he s. they wanted to become governor of virginia. he could easily walk into the

governor's mansion but he won't give it. he goes to washington college, reestablishes today with his washington we university and establishes the school to educate young southern men to help them get back into society, to give them an education and a good job, an opportunity for them to assimilate themselves back into the country. all of that is good. now, there's the other side. the other side is he takes up arms against his country. now in those days his country and his mind was virginia. today it's kind of hard to relate to that. he takes up arms against his country and fight for a cause that clearly very easily is the wrong cause. he's on the wrong side of history. and i will say this because i know preston will call sometime, i give him every time i speak. i've heard -- i grew up in

tallahassee, florida, i grew up surrounded by southerners. hearing that the southern war wasn't fought over slavery, it was fought over states rights, what were the rights that they were fighting for? the right ar or the paramount ws to keep slaves. you can dance around that and this will get people mad at me. i'm sorry but i've given this a lot of thought. the civil war, again you can define it any way you want to but at the end of the day when one of the principal products of the war ending the way it did, slaves were freed. had the south won the war very likely they wouldn't have been created. 30 years later and i've had this conversation who know more about the industrial revolution they mighrevolution theymight do wite cotton gin and the electric engine and all that. slaves might have become obsolete as the tool of the

plantation because you had mechanization, not maybe. 30 years later maybe. but the slaves were freed when the war ended. today lee as much as i admire the man and how much fun i had writing about him and getting into his head and seeing the world through his eyes, he was on the wrong side of history. that's not an insult. i'm not slamming anybody. i respect enormously southerners particularly who increase their own history, but i'm sorry, you lost the war and you can embrace the romance of some of the characters, stonewall jackson is one of my favorite characters. you can embrace that, but the war was wrong. it is being fought for something that hadn't succeeded. the entire world would be a different place and probably a

much worse place. one man's opinion. >> host: you are watching the tv on c-span2. this is our monthly "in depth" program, and this year it is a special fiction edition of "in depth" and this month it is military historical novelist jeff shaara as our guest. david is calling in from foley alabama. hello, david. >> caller: thank you gentlemen. i'm having a great time watching this. i had a different subject but if i can, i want to comment on what mr. jeff shaara mentioned about robert e. lee. specifically it is worth noting he was on record denouncing slavery as a moral and political people. he made some other comments in that letter to his wife that we would find more problematic in this modern era, but he is also on record in congressional testimony after the war in

response to a congressman's accusation that he had fought a war for the preservation of slavery. his response was so far from fighting a war for the preservation of slavery i rejoice that slavery is abolished. so i don't think we can put robert e. lee in the camps of the proslavery southern elite. that being said, and it's arguable, i understand. what i really wanted to talk about related to the atlanta campaign and one of the statements made by confederate commander josephine johnston that i think is one of the sort of tantalizing bits of history behind the campaign and as the confederate army were treated towards atlanta, obviously jefferson davis was getting

concerned. the people of atlanta were upset, and in response, johnston made a comment i can hold atlanta forever. and obviously, he wasn't given the chance to do that. and you can say about johnston he never saw an impending battle he didn't try to avoid. that might be a slight exaggeration. if you look at it in the context of the election, if the confederate army in georgia have been able to do what we did it r granted virginia, lincoln is going to have a hard time getting reelected. he suffered enormous casualties, we remained undefeated, richmond remained in confederate hands and well into the following spring, not just the election.

>> guest: johnston had been given that opportunity. >> host: before we get an answer, you seem to have a pretty deep knowledge of the civil war. >> caller: while, i've sort of studied it all my life in an unofficial capacity. [laughter] >> guest: me too i guess. [laughter] >> host: thank you very much. >> guest: it's a good point. i agree with what you are saying. it is not that simple. it is not cut and dry good guy bad guy. i started out talking about we saying as a human being, and anna integrity, it is hard to fault him. he ended up clearly on the wrong side of history. joe johnston, he is a character in the fourth book of the series the war in the west that deals with sherman's march. johnson by the way at the end which isn't, two and a half

weeks later joe johnston offers a surrender to sherman in north carolina. a lot of people don't realize. but johnston understands as he s backing up towards atlanta and of course driving richmond crazy. jefferson davis can't stand the fact that he is not out there talking sherman an sherman in td beating these yankees out and johnston instead is the master of tactical retreat. the joke in the richmond newspaper is that johnson is eventually going to have his army in bermuda. i am not making that up. people can just read about another retreat. johnson understands as he backs up what does sherman do, he goes around him, he's a better general. johnston knows he has limited

resources. sherman knows exactly what he's doing it "a. unfortunately, for the south and for atlanta, the replacement is john bell hood. he takes the word from richmond. okay i will fight. and he marches the army out head on three times in this blasted three times in his army is basically destroyed. when sherman does take atlanta, he walks in. there's nobody left because the army escaped west alabama to get out of the way. you can't really blame that on johnson. he certainly had his flaw in the vicksburg campaign and what he did is a terrible thing and another story. but i admire johnston and at the end of the war when sherman needs him face to face, those are things that i've really enjoyed writing. here are two different men

dealing with the same problem we have to end this war. how are we going to do this and it is a great piece of american history. >> host: speaking of general pemberton, he was a pennsylvanian and confederate general. >> guest: i love the story and i assume this is completely accurate. he marries a virginian. his wife is from virginia. when the war breaks out, she tells him you're going down. you're going to fight for the south. one could only assume they meant for that relationship and i will not get into that. but because he is a pennsylvanian and eventually becomes -- and he doesn't really show much confidence throughout his entire life, that he is in command at vicksburg which at the time is sort of a backwater. they put him out of the way and suddenly he is in the middle of things. his whole army knows that he is a pennsylvanian. there's always that little bit of distrust and as the reverse

fly, when he finally surrendered this 30,000 men to grant and vicksburg falls, there are a lot of people to this day who say that was the plan all along. he was a yankee in disguise. i don't buy any of that. he just wasn't a good general and it's a shame for those men who surrendered, but he tried. but it's interesting he is one of those northerners who went south. >> host: thanks for holding. you ar are only offered jeff shaara. >> caller: thank you very much. it is a pleasure to talk to. i have two questions. i was wondering have you ever considered writing a book on the indian wars dealing with washington, defeat at fort pitt and all that, and also about a book dealing with the barbary wars. wars. i will hang up and listen to your comments. thank you very much.

>> guest: the french and indian war is another one of those conversations i had with my publisher. we talked about three, the french and indian war, one of 1912 in the spanish-american war. the response earlier, the publisher decided they were not at the enough. you can make arguments in the other direction. the gentleman because he lives in pittsburgh is probably very close to all of that and i understand. never say never. it is a possibility down the road. the barber the idea came up just a few years ago and, i mean it's been done. there is a film about the barbary highlights and a lot of people have no idea what you're talking about. thomas jefferson during his reign, and we have a real problem with piracy in the mediterranean. maybe, i mean it isn't high on my list because the research would be interesting because trying to find some original and how do you get the site, you

know, how do you get accounts from the pilots, i don't know how that would work. but it should be possible. it just depends on it is up to me to convince my publisher there might actually be an audience. >> host: next is bob in thousand oaks california. good afternoon. >> caller: yes, hello. i have a question for mr. shaara in a comment. hello? >> host: you're listening please go ahead. >> caller: one of the criticisms of general lee was his decision to pick a picket te centerline at gettysburg rather than going around the right flank of the union army. my take on this commen, you live gettysburg area and i think you are familiar with the topography of the land -- -- >> guest: very much so. >> caller: when my father worked on the turnpike and 59 they actually had to send workers home cause they had no

accurate mapping of that area. they had to bring in surveyors and cartographers. with that decision based on the fact possibly, he just didn't know where the hell he was asked and didn't want to take a chance. >> guest: in his defense that would be a nice response but it was his decision and might take is a little bit different. think about up until two months before we have jackson to lead the attacks have jackson's audacity one a lot of fights. i think that it was a case of wishful thinking that he still had that kind of spirit and energy. as we know it if you've read the killer angels would have seen the film, going around the army

that's probably true. my father takes that as gospel and i don't have any reason to dispute that and i think there were a number of commanders under lee wondering why are we going straight up the middle, we should go around them and also one reason you go around if you cut off the union army from watching and which is part of the point. as i think what happened is looking at what is across from him. first of all he trusted his artillery to break up the union position. it didn't work. they tried to. they unleashed a bombardment on the center and anyone watching logically would think they smashed a pretty good holder, they didn't. that is one problem. and also i think part of his weakness at this point he relies

on his own as fate. in every war that i've ever researched, god is on somebody's side and to people across the line from each other each praying that god is on their side, there is a problem with that and i floated that a couple of different ways depending on the war. what happened is pretty obvious. god turned away and just didn't want to see what was happening. but i think that we had a tremendous faith thatremendous l would prevail if they were going to win it would be god's will. today that seems to be a fairly archaic way of looking at things but you cannot separate yourself today from what those people believe and he had absolute faith that god was looking out for his people, and he believed

that it would work. it was a catastrophic mistake and probably his worst mistake e is as a field commander. >> host: bawled in thousand oaks you said you had a comment house while? >> caller: i have a personal connection to the battle of gettysburg. when they sent my father home, but was january of 1939 and i was born in october 1939. >> host: lets try for u let's tn california. this is john. >> caller: i have a question concerning the civil war that never made sense to me. after the war was finished, why weren't the southern generals tried for treason? >> guest: there is a very good reason for that. the primary reason this will carry over from abraham lincoln. lincoln believed that we need to

bring everybody back together again with the least amount of punishment that we can have and as you well know, jefferson davis was the one man singled out for the most punishment, but by and large, and part of this plus grands doing, send the soldiers home, let them go back and work their farms. just punish the south or make criminals out of the people that fled the army. there's going to be no healing. lincoln preached healing and for us to father would have been no reconstruction. it would have been very benign compared to how it turned out because he very much wanted, maybe it is unrealistic to say that the friends. that's overstating it, but let's get the country back together again and working. to drag that out with military tribals and place blame and possibly hang people, that would

have created enormous backlog os more than already existed and it probably would have been very constructive. i pointed to what he did going back to washington college turning it into a first rate educational institution to help the southern men fight their society how much were constructed is that dan had we had a trial where he gets dragged through the mud and possibly could have been hanged as treasurer and some people would say deservedly so, what would that have done to the cause after the war, so maybe that is oversimplifying it, but that is how i feel. >> host: let's hear from j. england and virginia. >> caller: if i could begin with a homage to your father when i was a young captain at the army advanced course, we were assigned the killer angels

and had to write and essay analysis. i wrote about the qualities of lee as a general. i've followed you and your guys as an author with the bat on the killer angels and the historical fiction set earlier. my question though is a little tricky. it's about confederate monuments and how they are treated today. it is a very tough issue. at west point he studied all these wars. you might be familiar with the hapless of the american war and all these battles and some of thhave some ofthe generals thatd and now we are going through

hell based itself and the hell do we treat them now. there is a political, cultural side somebody that studied the war at west point and as an officer i've always been attracted to the leadership complements. how his personality worked.

they say they want to have monuments to the generals and it's a very prickly issue. we have these roads here in fairfax. what do you do, in alexandria we have monuments of their t two te confederate soldier is still. it is a very complicated issue and i don't know that there is a good answer except that it is american history. >> guest: be a complicated answers and those that try to made simple answers are generally wrong. one thing you didn't mentioned when you talk about the cultural and historical, erasing history is a bad idea and to learn what

they did and where they came from, there is no difference here. know who these people are, don't just decrease them from the textbooks. you do that and you'v you are nt making yourself better by failing to teach people what it's about and who these people were. that being said, and again i mentioned this earlier, the south lost the war. no country i know of they tore down the statues and yet so if

someone is offended, if an entire group of citizenry is offended by a statue that doesn't mean they should just be destroyed. it might be a piece of art. in richmond and whatever it might be. it's one thing to have the civic government of account recognized whomever. i had a little bit of a problem

with that. he's on the wrong side of history. but to increase it we just are not going to have anything to do with that, and i won't get into the slippery slope about they want to take on the statues of christopher columbus and pea fund funding for the jefferson memorial in washington, i'm sorry. jefferson wrote the declaration of independence. why don't they look at that and pay attention to the whole and not just single out the bad, so its education and that is what matters to me. if i am putting words in the mouth of robert e. lee or stonewall jackson or any of these other confederates, it isn't because i am confederate, it's because i want to know the history, i want to know what happened, i want to know the details and i wanted to be accurate. the racing all of that i'm sorry there is no difference. he reacted with outrage when we read about isis. the story in serbia some

500-year-old beautiful religious monument, they blew it up because they don't agree with that monument says, i am not dating necessarily people who want to remove statues to isis the principle is the same thing. you don't like the history, get rid of it. don't do that. >> host: let's hear steve you are on the jeff shaara. please go ahead. >> caller: i have a question and comment thread how about oliver wendell holmes, kept his buddies uniform in his office and goes on to write the decision of the 20s. there would be an interesting character since you for discussing and my question i just saw the movie hostels with christian bale and had a relation to the question regarding ptsd. civil war veterans fighting the calvary and the indian wars sume suffer from melancholia, one

actually kills themselves. if you can talk about the extent of ptsd in the civil war and how it was treated and then also in that movie as a frenchman and can you just discuss the effect of the foreigners during the civil war and after as well. thanks a lot. >> guest: that is a complicated question. first of all, ptsd is a fairly modern, it's been defined in fairly modern times. one of the problems with the soldiers, and this has happened i would imagine just about in every four when the floor and the soldiers come home, first of all if he's a young man, 18 or 19-year-old man who' has been td for a while to be a soldier with everything that entails and now he's not. now he has to get a job.

whether it's a vietnam vet or whomever, that is tough and a lot of the citrus is a very swiy difficult time adapting to that. to this day and again we've identified it, we put a name on it and there is evidence of treatment. back to the civil further with the treatment. nobody understood. again going back to the revolution. it's one of those things that's what it meant to no longer have that. there's no good answer to that.

if you are attack, fewer than if you have later but they were a part of our army all the way through before and didn' it didt just start in the civil war. they cover from germany and speak no english and end up being a commander under the revolution. i love that story. so yeah, i know the film you are talking about. i have not seen it, but i have a feeling that is basically a pretty accurate portrayal of what it was like the calvary after the war. suddenlfloor. suddenly they have nothing to do and that heightened sense of alertness when you are under threat that goes away, where does it go? that is a tough question.

>> host: you have been in the movie business. what i was the process like for you? >> guest: i have to be careful here. i learned in hollywood it is the authors job to stay out of the way. people assume and logically so it is a movie based on my book, i must have been right there telling them this, that and the other. it doesn't work that way. i would see things being done wrong or the mis- pronunciation of names and little pieces i've tried to be told thank you very much we appreciate your input and i was pretty much ignored. the film they made a major motion picture out of my book. how could anything other than a good thing. i know writers that would give an arm to have a film made up of the book.

i understand you have a screenwriter that has a vision of what they want to do that is their job. and unless you're jk rowling or stephen king would you have absolute control on what gets put on the screen it is always going to change. i wish -- and again, i know many fans i appreciate that and i've heard from them, but i wish it had been a better film because had it been a better film, we would have finished the trilogy. ed turner was ready to make the last measure. if you watch at the end it says stay tuned for the rest of the

story, for the sequel because gods and generals wasn't a commercial success, he dropped the project so last full measure likely now will never be made and that is a shame. however, if it was made or films are made out of any going forward, i promise you i will be more involved. >> host: have you auctioned any of your books? >> guest: there is one right now. i don't have any idea if anything will happen to that. it would be wonderful if it did. the korean but i think lends itself fabulously to a film, but it's not up to me. people go to my website and say why haven't you made a film out of the mexican war story. it would make a great film. but it's not up to me. you are talking about 60 to

$100 million. for gods and generals of the $60 million. i don't have $60 million. if someone out there does and they want to make a film, give me a call. that is really what it comes down to. it can be frustrating. i'm in the business. i like the book business. it's been very good to me and i've been fortunate. the movie business as a whole different animal. >> host: david kimball posts on facebook your publisher was wrong about the war of 1812. that would have been an interesting book. from what i understand, the revolutionary world war i or national dependence, before the team 12 secured as you mentioned it. it. >> guest: i'm not sure that i agree with that. the civil war is with secured a more national independence and actually secured the united states is a country. there's an argument, and i'm not the expert because i haven't done the research.

andrew jackson and the battle of new orleans. but you can make an argument that the british actually sort of a metaphor and again i'm not going to get into that debate because i don't know the facts, but i do agree with the fact that it is an epic story and one that would be interesting to tell and never say never. >> host: it was in 2007 jeff shaara spoke at the national book festival gala the night before. we want to show you a little portion of that. >> mr. president, mrs. bush, thank you so much for this invitation to be here. it has been a journey for me not

for 300 years, but it's been a journey. mine started with my father, michael shaara changed the way people look at the civil war. you probably left of school hating history. what michael shaara did in the killer angels is to take you back to the battle of gettysburg and i put you in the hands of te principal characters robert e. lee, john buford, josh lawrence chamberlain and to tell you that story not the way he would read it in your hig high school texts havtextbookbut to tell you the e way they would tell you the story. michael shaara didn't live to see his greatest success but we won a prize for the killer angels. he passed away in five years later the movie gettysburg comes out, the killer angels becomes the number one bestseller. he didn't live to

see that. in writing the prequel and sequel to his great work, while there is a certain care for that comes with it. there was no competition. this isn't about the shadow of the father. it's simply about the lesson my father taught me that is if you are going to talk about these people, told a good story. tell the story of was like during pickett's charge for those men to walk across the field into the guns of the enemy. and then annexed he goes down, you keep looking.

some people never heard of the man. going to world war i, blackjack, but sending you sort of know, the reder baron, there is a nam. i was appalled when i went around the country for my book the first gulf war to the last man. how many people thought the red baron was a cartoon character. that's not the way history should be taught. when i started looking at worldh war ii, i was really nervous because as i say, i like to tell you stories you don't know. what can i tell you about world war ii that you don't know x. hollywood alone has given us so many stories on world war ii. john wayne alone has given so ii stories.ar

all the names of famous names and names of places, we know all of that. when i began the research, the rising tide is the first of each wiki. the war in europe. the story covers america's first involvement in north africa and sicily. we don't do too well. we come up against thisoo guy called rommel and he sends us fleeing from the battlefield. it isn't quite an auspicious beginning that there is a man and he's one of the voices of the key story and i feel it is somewhat appropriate to talk about him tonight because of the setting. hsetting. he's like david eisenhower. the five david eisenhower is, you know, long before he was president eisenhower, dwight eisenhower was the man in charge, he's an administrator.

that's a terrible description for someone who might otherwise see himself as a fighting general. he's not george patton comes he isn't in and out with income in fact he never leaves troops on the battlefield of her. but what he does is he unites the americans and british and eventually the french and he creates an army and he defeats the finest fighting army that this world has ever seen up until that time and that is hitler's germany and he wins. and how he wins is part of the story. this is an extraordinary honor toor be included in this. i appreciate this. i'm walking in the enormous footsteps because if michael shaara had left from his second heart attack -- he was only 59 -- had he lived, he would be writing these books. the audience he couldn't find theth killer angels is the audience that has found these books and he deserved it. thank you very much. [applause]

>> host: jeff shaara, did you have a chance to meet the bush family after the's >> guest: yes, both before and after. i have to say first this isn't about politics or about being republican or democrat. when the president of the united states invites you to come to an event because he is a fan of your books, that's pretty good. and actually, i will say in the interest of bipartisanship, three presidents have said that to me, which is a pretty neat thing. but no, the event that was at the library of congress and laura bush have put together a national book festival. ihis the seventh of her age festivals. what an amazing event. just a tremendous. i was speaking in black tie. i noticed it was crooked. i heard afterwards. half of congress is there, half the cabinet is there and then afterwards, and i sat next to the president.

that's not an accident. my name tag was on the table next to his out of like 400 people. that was pretty cool. we talked for two hours about everything but politics. he talked about the books of mine that he liked, we talked about baseball, we talked about how his daughter was just coming out of the book at that time, jenna had written a book and he was cautioning her you are going to get blistered because nobody's going to believe you wrote the book. we -- it was an interesting conversation. i thought a tiny little anecdote when he came to the table, she went that way and he came over to the table and i had already met him at the basement whe beca held his hand out and i put my arm on his shoulder and i realized at that moment the secret service agent somewhere just plunged. don't grab the president.

so i pulled my hand away. that was an extraordinary evening. >> host: talking about michael shaara, you say that he's the greatest influence. >> guest: certainly. aa four packs a day smoker, his first heart attack at 36 and wrote about it, he won an award from the ama writing an article about his first heart attack and he was dead for 55 minutes and survived that. it was an extraordinary thing. because he was only 36 probably. but at the age of 59 it caught up with him and he died in his sleep. he created a lot of good work. he published four novels and 70 short stories and one eighth with surprise but never saw the kind of attention to his work that has come to me.

.. >> quiet reading in every military academy you fred the killer angels. he had no idea. he would be 90 years old this year if he was alive. the last 23 years of my life would have been very different because these would have been his books to write. >>host: now we show your favorite books passing of the

armies, ulysses s grant, my three years of eisenhowe eisenhower, here's your war. >>guest: iac at the running to that collection. i don't read novels because i'm scared to death to pick something up that sticks in my head and i could be accused of plagiarism. but they play a pivotal role in my research in whatever they apply to. for country and core it's about her grandfather the commanding general of the first marine division in korea. he is what are the main places in that story she wrote this biography. i didn't know her.

i was blown away. i want this man to be a voice in the story. i contacted her. i wrote her a letter actually and introduce myself and said i'm interested to learn more about this man i promise you i do not exploit i'm not looking for and expose i just want to tell the story. she wrote back and said i know who you are, i've read most of your books. that's a nice thing to hear. and she sent me three audio cds of her grandfather who did audio them are i had his voice. so somebody wants to contradict what he did i can get him to tell you. i love that. that's the best example of that personal getting into the head of the character.

>>host: see you can use direct quotes. >> yes. i tried to do that with all the books i have done ulysses s grant, there are plenty and robert e. lee. the more modern you go the more there is. eisenhower and patton. that's a good stuff and a lot of stuff you cannot repeat. [laughter] but yes that is crucial. >>host: is it fair to say you avoid foul language as much as possible? >> yes. there are two reasons. when gods and generals came out the young man comes up to me and says is anything in your book objectionable for my child to read? >> i hadn't thought about it and i said no. actually there's not. since that point then i realized children. even eight -year-olds what an

extraordinary thing. then i hear from high school teachers using my books in their classrooms. i'm not censoring myself but the point is if i can't tell you the story of a young marine, you can't tell me what it 20 -year-old marine talks like. i get it but if i cannot tell you that story without bonding you with severe profanity then i'm not a good writer to get the feelings and the passion across then i need to go find another job. it is interesting and i have said to people you will not read any language in my book you do not here on network television. but i still get grief why do you have to rely on such foul language?

[laughter] there is really nothing in there but people have different sensitivities and i get that but i'm very proud teachers are using these books to teach history. that blows me away and asked my responsibility to get it right. don't play games of the facts to make my story better if a 15 or 16 -year-old relies on that story to learn something then get it right. i didn't set out with that agenda but at the same time i need the shock value and if i do then i'm allows the writer. >> you said at the outset of the program you don't consider yourself a historian. >> at a book festival here in dc someone said they are using

your books to teach a person was really upset my point was if you can give them a character they can relate to they will learn history and not realize that's what they are doing then i hear from the same teacher we were using this textbook and the whole class fell asleep i get you need it if you really want them to learn history and pursue further give them something to relate to those teachers inspired me to play games at the facts tell the story accurately because you hear the dialogue but all happens the way i tell you.

>>host: what is your writing process? >> all the research first. i have to get the whole picture. the research all comes first. in every case it started with my father there is something to be gained and going off into the guns of the enemy it's better if i'm on the hill. that being said when i started working on korea i wanted to go to the reservoir i did not know what i'm embarrassed to admit it is in north korea the state department i talked to a fellow who said to me "we can get you when.

i waited in my wife said no. which really i had but no. that's a big part of the research to go there and see it and feel it it's almost mystical to feel what they went through by being there. how do you know when to stop researching is what i've been asked it's ripe and it's ready to come out and the hardest thing is looking at the blank computer screen page one you are looking at blank. my father was a piece of paper the first word. but what happens amazingly it for anybody who is a writer you write those first words

and then the second word and then the third and the next thing you know you have a page and that's cool when that happens and if it doesn't , you're not ready yet and go back and take another look at that process i've said it feels like the story is writing itself i'm just a conduit these people are real. they exist. not making it up the story is out here somewhere coming to my fingers to the page it may sound more mystical i'm not quite that way but my father said during the writing of the killer angels it sounds like he was a schizophrenic but i know what he meant when i'm writing a scene i am there. i hear the dialogue.

a to use the word but it's magic when it is ready to go in comes out like that , there's no more fun for me than that. >>host: what did you learn at gettysburg? >> first of all really going from 1993. i was doing book signings and going back and gods and generals came out a logical place to do a book signing and then november 19 the gettysburg address i was doing all kinds of events. twice a year i would go there in twice a year i would say on - - stay in the same boutique hotel i became friends with the manager over 22 years and we would talk twice a year for ten minutes and then six years

ago we were both in a position in our lives where we could talk a little more. we started to do that on the phone and we had our first date at the 150th anniversary of the battle of antietam and then a year and a half later we got married. her daughter was in high school. it made sense to not pull a child out of gettysburg now her daughter is at temple and doing extremely well. it's a family affair that's really how it happened. it was because of the women i love. >>host: back to calls from

kentucky. >> good afternoon gentlemen. c-span is truly a national treasure. i was raised in the same neck of the words as you i didn't realize your from tallahassee and to be the expert on the common sense of the civil war his causes were popular for that reason. and after i went to work for 40 years but i'm getting back into the subject now because there are so many parallels compared to today with a lot of disagreements in our society.

that we could learn lessons of compromise so my question to you regards shiloh i always heard that grant was in pittsburgh. but i have read several books and i wonder from the literature is that the case? >> it's not. when grant landed at pittsburgh's landing, there were no confederates they are there was fighting going on right there but what he ran into were hundreds of union soldiers who had run from the front line hiding under the banks of the river it was elevated and there were caves

all along the edge of the rave of the river they threw down their guns and were clamoring in fear but he was horrified at what he saw and realized we have a problem here and that's a big part the blades of glory but i love the character of grants. one of the things i hear a lot we have never been so divided are angry at each other and polarized then we are right now. it's kind of hard to argue when you go back to 1861 when we started a full-scale war against each other. god for bid that will not happen now. but we have been through this before. i agree we need to study our history and learn where we came from. >>host: jeff shaara, if you go to vicksburg today can you get

in the caves where they fled to do you get a sense of the battlefield? >> definitely a sense of the battlefield it's beautiful first of all it's an incredible place overlooking the mississippi. across from the river is a swamp because it's the delta and you're talking about louisiana it's very well preserved where you should definitely make a visit because they were just holes in the ground for 150 years they've been covered up what they did do at vicksburg they are cutting the trees if there were not trees they are then then they should not be there today i was doing this 12 years ago and doing a tour and the ranger apologized there is

a big ravine but it's solid words and the controversy was the park service should not be in the business of cutting down trees but this is not a park it's a historical park it's not just trees but the history so they been doing this at gettysburg for a number of years and i applaud that because it makes such a difference when you try to see to the eyes of the people that are there you get a sense of that now at both places. >>host: when you tour a specific location do you go in anonymously or as jeff shaara? >> i've done both with the civil war i would not go in anonymously because i needed help. we would be set up in advance jeff shaara is working on a book they would open some

doors. and sound behind the scenes things that i want to make it sound like i'm hot stuff but it helps. you get to bits and pieces of information you might not get otherwise if you are on the bus. i tell people use your feet and walk on the ground. >>host: baba from houston texas. >> a subject that i have a new very little about. so looking back at history we think of things that were inevitable but not at the time. so with quite a few military observers at the time.mexico could hold its own.

can you comment on that? >> there are a number of quotations in the back of the book. military observers paying attention to what's happening. winfield scott cuts himself off from all communication and walks toward the gulf of mexico people assume he is in. there's no way. he only has 10000 men. nobody ever heard from him again it would be a military disaster a stupid thing to do if flies in the face and then when he wins all of his observers say it's genius and wonderful he did a fabulous job. it's interesting even than 190 years ago how much attention is paid to these around the world. >>host: jeff shaara and e-mail from massachusetts.

did you notice he praised both generals cromwell and sherman who were noted for their attacks on civilians and food stock and other noncombatant entities. by the end of world war ii these were called war crimes. what is it about sherman and cromwell? >> i think he meant cornwallis. >>guest: i will disagree with that take. first of all sherman has a reputation that has been in embellished in the south and in georgia in particular to be savage, brutal. i'm sorry, that's not accurate. there are brutalities, most definitely. plantations were burned. places were ransacked. sherman did not authorize any of that and i could get deeply into that because the greater

issue but sherman and grant won the war the most gentlemanly war there is a letter from mississippi on the siege of vicksburg. the town people say please don't burn our town. we don't have soldiers here. and sherman says with all you know of the war, the occasional box comes home you wail and cry with a funeral and he goes into the ground and that's the end then you forget about it the next day. you have no reason because you have no contact with the war. so everyone has to hurt.

world war i that is fought on the western front in no man's land stretching from belgium to the swiss border. bombing of cities. there is no b-17s like world war ii. it goes on for four years. because the civilians are not hurting. i'm sorry but this is a brutal reality. war affects everyone not just a kid with a rifle in his hands and the civilians back home are not aware of what that kid is going through the war will just keep on going. that's an awakening we had in the late sixties with vietnam. and it's in your living room every night.

and once in a while you read a newspaper story it keeps on going. so after world war ii to be recognized as war crimes as americans bonded german cities re- fire bond hiroshima and use the atomic bomb we already firebombed tokyo and destroyed 15 square miles of tokyo and a quarter of a million people where is the outrage for that? it is war. sherman understood this in the civil war in particular better than anyone fighting that's why i admire him and say he ended the war. how much longer would it have gone on if lee could escape grant in petersburg? how long could it have gone on?

if you end the war then you end the war and i admire him for that. >>host: jeff shaara currently reading missiles of october. your next book is on the cuban missile crisis. >>guest: yes with the cuban missile crisis i'm really excited about this. what a story. i was ten years old. i have asked the question how many remember duck and cover? i was in third grade. in the event of nuclear war get under your desk put the book over your head we will close the curtains. i'm not making that up. [laughter] my neighborhood had a fallout shelter a hole in the ground with concrete blocks.

nobody could answer the question how long do you stay there? one day? one week, one year? 10000 years? is the time we were living in. we have said you have no idea how close we came to world war iii and that serious because we would not be here today that is at the cuban missile crisis is all about. i'm having a lot of fun with that. i've been getting so much input from vietnam vets about their story and when i'm struggling with with what that story would be. i don't want to do the nixon lbj story i don't know what it

would be i'm having a hard time finding a good story. not that there's not great stories but then they end and then the next day what's interesting about those stories? i'm not talking about the heroism of the individual but i'm struggling with what that story would be. it's hard to tell i'm up to my ears in cuba right now. i have to work on that. >>host: e-mail from massachusetts and world war ii marine veteran from okinawa marine 22nd regiment.

thank you for your excellent storytelling and accurate account of my personal experience as an 18 -year-old marine in the final storm. i also enjoyed reading your books in our reading the rising tide. have you ever eaten the cave ration? you write about them a lot. >>guest: write about them a lot because they all have them. yes i have actually i didn't enjoy it any more than he probably did. and okinawa in that situation did a muddy foxhole and somebody is shooting at you and that's all you've got to eat, so be at you. you probably appreciate it a lot more than i did at an army base is nobody shooting. when i get letters like tha

that, there is nothing that makes me feel better or more gratified for what i do. and those in the cd47 to drop into the water and he said you put me right back on that plane you made the hair stand up on the back of my neck and made me remember things i never wanted to remember. you got it right and i know because i was there. what's better than that? if i need any reinforcement i'm doing my job i'm so honored. and then to take the time to tell me.

but to recognize what i'm doing is useful and accurate with those memories no doubt is carrying around and i'm really doing my job. i'm so pleased to hear. >>host: did you interview? >> no. i received a couple of e-mails from other gentlemen in the past on his behalf. >>host: he must be mid- nineties? >> at least. okinawa was 1945 and he was 18 then. >>host: newt gingrich sent out a tweet when the frozen hours came out i don't know if you've seen this. jeff shaara the frozen hours is a remarkable reminder of the dangers of intelligence and strategic errors in korea. >> very nice. thank you.

i have not seen it. we could talk a long time about that. i was nervous about the character of douglas macarthur because a lot of people in this country who worship the man. how many of those would write me to say how dare you? that take the those marines. with a dismal reporting without getting deeply into the story but macarthur first of all what happens to the americans in korea to sweep everything in their path including us. with the perimeter and what

macarthur does then is the greatest thing he ever di did, stroke of genius, he invades south korea where the north koreans are to get behind them they end up streaming back into north korea and then basically he won the war to send them home not good enough for him. he decides to keep going north and crosses the border and then leading the way on two prongs and the korean army is defeated. and as they get further north they have a skirmish but they are not north korean. they are chinese.

macarthur's intelligence comes back and says if there are chinese here are a few volunteers to fight for their friends. so oliver smith of the marines they advance into a trap of 125,000 troops but macarthur has no idea they are in complete denial that they had entered the war with hundreds of thousands of troops and we were clueless and that was

catastrophic and i was nervous to tell that story and that was nasty letters and i got one. one guy in my face three weeks ago in dallas you have besmirch the reputation of a great american hero. okay. find. that's one opinion. but then i was in st. louis and then there was a marine who was a survivor he came in with a walker and he spoke up and said i can think of 15000 marines who hate his guts. i was so happy to hear that. i appreciate that. but americans in korea is avoidable but how often can you say that?

>>host: was america prepared? >> absolutely not. world war ii 1945 the war ends by far we are the strongest military the world has ever see seen. what do we need them for anymore cracks we sent them all home. the marine corps is downsized and truman toys with the idea to eliminate the marine corps altogether. then there is lobbying in congress to prevent that but in 1950 their bellies don't fit in their uniforms anymore they have a wife and a kid and now they need you. they are called backup. of course they are trained there's a bunch of people going to korea who don't have training so many people don't even go to boot camp and that's not a good thing. that's how the war begins and goes from there.

>> good afternoon. i have two quick questions. when lincoln freed the slaves and secondly in a different war he ever consider doing a book about morgan that would be an interesting short novel. >>host: that is a chapter i have done that story. my second book on the american revolution. it's a great story. i love daniel morgan it's a huge victory for the columnist one - - colonists. i'm not sure what you mean by grant. he did not have slaves. his father-in-law at the beginning of the war did own

slaves. grant had a problem with that. but no, grant never owned slaves and i'm not sure exactly what you mean. there were colored troops marching with grant during the war but they were not slaves. they were freed troops. i'm not sure what that implies.

here's an e-mail when we you tackle antietam? >>guest: it is in gods and generals from a couple points of view. one of the things i learned early on you cannot have too many battles. if you have too many battles that's one of the flaws gods and generals they show battle scene after battle scene the audiences and into that after a while you can only have two major battles in the film or in a book. the audience doesn't like it. so a treated antietam in a different way you see from the rear from chamberlain's point of view than the aftermath with hancock's point of view see you get the impact not just bullets whistling by your ears. >>host: john from mississipp

mississippi, when it comes from the first world war book did you originally planned to write multiple books were wasn't always going to be a single book? >>guest: i appreciate somebody mentioning that. that's probably my best book and probably my favorite maybe other than the korea book. originally yes it should have been two books but random house didn't think there was an audience for two books so they insisted i compacted into one book. it's also my longest have the red baron, flying ace which is a wonderful story those that no one has ever heard of. and then who taught rickenbacker how to fly a plane. not a cartoon character. the real guy. the red baron, and then purging in the marines people

don't even realize the role that they played in the first world war. so i really enjoyed that story of glad it was mentioned. i knew nothing about world war i. >>host: you are the civil war guy. [laughter] >>host: but the first time i did the american revolution my publisher was nervous. nobody cared about the american revolution and you are the civil war guy. what i found out there's a bunch of people out there who cares about the american revolution and don't care about the civil war and then i say this with raw humility a lot of civil war people followed me to the american revolution. what a nice thing that is.

now they read the world war ii stuff. i didn't know about that. when you get a following like that come i don't take that for granted. there is a bunch of them. never say never. >>host: we have to civil war questions. it's amazing how long in-depth discussion of the civil war and grant has hardly been mentioned. >>guest: i will set the record straight. grant is my favorite general. sherman was under grant. i love writing grants first meeting with lincoln. he doesn't know what to make of this guy and grant doesn't

know to make of this guy and lincoln explains to him if he will just fight i will leave you alone. do what you have to do. i will send you all the help i can send you. grant so appreciates that and the result is history in 1864. grant makes mistakes catastrophic mistakes. 8000 casualties and 30 minutes but yes he wins the war. and then to be responsible for the union victory. >>host: i am a civil war reenactor what is your favorite story to tell the public? >>guest: i have a behind the scenes story. on the set of the film gettysburg every time they set up the scene it has to be choreographed in all has to be set up very carefully. there is a scene with tom

barringer and martin sheen on horseback slowly going toward the camera and talking. the conversation is going on but the problem is the force martin sheen is on has a mind of its own. it goes off. cut. is not just do it again these guys have to go back over her here, it's very involved. after three times the directors getting frustrated with the stupid horse. we were running out of daylight, shooting the scene, scene, the horses minding the cameras are running. there taking down the seconds and just as they are about ready to finish the scene in the background is a building and the phone rings in the building and the reenactor yells out at stuart and he

will be a little late. if you know the funny on - - the story that's funny. >> here on with author jeff shaara. but that leads to my question why was lee with the an engineer with a battles he

watched those soldiers. they can't marching into those kind of situations that they all attacked those positions to get mowed down i really miss that. >> he was all manly to hide behind the tree and then 1864 all of a sudden with the queen

of spain into the big trenches with the shovel. and with the musket in my hand may not be the best place for me to be maybe it's not unmanly to hide that up until that time the generals have learned how to fight by reading books on napoleon and with the american revolution with the bayonet it wasn't the musket. and then to commit you with a bayonet like this. is a weapons got better the tactic is not change and slaughter is the result.

>>host: going through your 15 books that the importance of the supply line. >> it's easy to throw numbers around like oliver smith. they are marching north one skinny little road with snow and i.c.e. they have a backpack what's in the backpack? what happens then? the doctors, bandages, and they are putting morphine in their mouth to thought it out so they could inject it to a

guy who is in agonizing pain. what happens when that is gone? the supply line every commander of every commander ever in the history of the world you don't hear about that. but every good commander knows but what's happening back there. and that's a huge part. >>host: california that afternoon. >>caller: hello. i have a question. with the mortality of the mexican-american war. on st. patrick's day holiday i celebrate with my friends from the invasion of texas and from

mexico city. >>host: thank you. >>guest: i don't know if i went celebrate that there is a very brief history lesson. a lot of the americans go into mexico at that time was very catholic. a lot of the americans are not catholic but a few of them are the irish catholics have come over, summer catholic worshipers and they are very uncomfortable realizing going into a catholic country and doing what they are doing. so there are a number of them and it is disputed perhaps 80 give or take to desert the american lines but here is the problem. it's one thing to say i quit to fight for a cause i don't believe in. going home. they don't go home.

they pick up a rifle and they shoot back so now americans are killing americans. they are captured. a number of them are hanged. scott has to make that decision what to do with these people. is wanting to desert it's another thing to pick up a rifle and kill your own. so celebrating that i don't know if i agree with that. you can make the argument there is the immorality there. but what is the immorality of killing one of your own or anyone for that matter. >>host: according to the veterans administration and congressional research service, 4400 americans killed in the american revolutionary war. after that two.4 billion in current dollars mexican war. 13000 americans two.4 billion.

the civil war half a million and the estimates are all over the board on that. $79billion. world war i one year of us involvement 116,000. 334billion. world war ii, 400 some thousand deaths, four.$1 trillion in cost in today's dollars. korean war, 54000 death deaths, $341 trillion. washington dc go ahead. >>caller: thank you. from the beginning you talked about shiloh being authentic and the memorials in the

battlefields by the national park service. i'm curious when you go to these places the national park service of who was where and so on. but yet the archives have tremendous treasures from the mantle clock from the uss arizona, the bible or even lincolns coat that he wore at ford's theater. i'm curious how you had taken advantage of that information

getting into the heads of all of the's people that you write so well about. >>guest: thank you. the short answer is yes. absolutely. the park service to their credit they have limited resources. if you go to the visitor center there will be exhibits and museums. gettysburg has a good one for you can see the artifacts but on the ground it's hard for them to have the resources to tell the story the way i tell it. i'm not trying to sound facetious i will sound stupid but maybe if you go to the bookstore they will have my book on sale. [laughter] but extremely. that's why i go to the ground. shiloh the impact for me there is a monument that demanded six flag bearers.

what that means every time somebody carries the flag they get shot somebody else picks it up and carries it. all six were killed. there is a monument. so my character is the 16th in wisconsin is why just because what the monument told me what those men went through. i will pick up tidbits all over the place from things exactly like that. >>host: e-mail from susan. lot of discussion of blurred lines historical fiction and nonfiction how do you distinguish between the two genre? for example you invent secondary characters does that mean playing with the facts in the way you do not allow yourself? >>host: i'm not sure what nonfiction actually means.

i believe i'm writing historical fiction. the facts are there and accurat accurate. and as i have said before i beat this to death all over the country it's a novel by definition because you are there and hear the dialogue. sometimes a tertiary character will serve a function regardless of what that character may be but all of the characters the primary voices you hear are based on real people. eisenhower or patton that is easy and easy to research and the anonymous guy you've never heard of is tougher and they tend to be a composite of several people. the experiences all happened and are accurate maybe not just to that one guy. and in my world that's what i

do. >>host: retired colonel us marine corps who is your favorite character? >> the marine might be surprised he probably wants to hear chesty. i had a lot of fun with him in the frozen hours a great character. but going back to the beginning benjamin franklin. i get that response. [laughter] i mentioned earlier world war i comes to mind a hate the term comic relief it's the reality of human beings you need that character who makes you smile and makes you laugh. after a while you become

immune to it. franklin is that character for me. who would you most like to have lunch with? benjamin franklin absolutely. >>host: california you are on the air. >>caller: yes. there is a story as a young man hiking through pennsylvania and he slept on the grounds at gettysburg and he said that goes of gettysburg scared the crap out of him. what can you tell us about the ghosts of or? >> first of all the ghosts searching business in gettysburg is an industry 13 companies i'm not necessarily

a subscriber of that. i do know people that have had very intense experiences. but i will tell you a funny story back to the gentleman who was the reenactor. filming gettysburg patrick gorman play general hood a magnificent horsemen. they had to move the horses from one side of the battlefield to film something and they would put the horses in the trailer, running out of dayligh daylight. he said just ride it's quicker. so then going to the trouble they right across the battlefield. so imagine you are from iowa that night and walking across the battlefield and here comes general hood and his staff riding across the battlefield. under people saw that if they pretended they didn't see it

in uniform it looks just like him. [laughter] hammy people thought they had a major ghost experience seeing that. i'm not ridiculing that at all. that serious to a lot of people. there is some interesting experiences i have heard of around that town. i'm sure there are others at other sites i've never had an experience like that. may be interesting if i did it might change my perspective. a lot of people do. >>host: does it add significance that ike's farm was that gettysburg? >> yes am doing an event they are at the eisenhower farm i'll be doing a book signing. first of all it's beautiful.

that's why they settled there. he loved that area and after world war ii with his presidenc presidency, and even after he died mimi was there a few years later. my wife was a ranger at the eisenhower farm. it's a really neat piece of ground anybody doesn't realize it is right there. as part of the park service. take the tour even if it's with civil war take the time to do that. it is worthwhile. >>host: the most recent book is the frozen hours about kore korea, came out last year. the next book is on the cuban missile crisis. he had seven books on the civil war, 15 in total.

jeff shaara.com and has been our guest on the special fiction addition of in-depth. next month walter mosley. . . . .

now on booktv "after words" environmental progress founder shellenberger offers his thoughts on what he calls apocalyptic environmentalism and provides solutions to address provide solutions to address current and future environmental problems. he is interviewed by author and do columbia universities first in the initiative on communication and sustainability. >> host: michael, it is great to see you again. it's been a while. >> guest: good to see you again. i was sick of it before the pandemic. we are doing all they can to get