Goodwin's Lincoln, Part I

As of this writing, I am on page 470 of Doris Kearns Goodwin's Team of Rivals--basically, the summer of 1862 and Lincoln's move towards emancipation (and by the way, I generally like Goodwin's work; I thought the accusations of plagiarism were way overblown, and for me in no way detracted from her value as an historian and a writer). Some observations so far:

1. Yes, the writing is first-rate. James McPherson made this same point in his New York Times review: Team of Rivals is a familar story retold with great skill. Goodwin has a nice eye for vivid detail--Seward sitting placidly in his garden awaiting the results of the 1860 Republican convention, for example--and she knows how to establish context without losing focus. Her narrative roams all over the landscape, describing the family lives of Lincoln's cabinet members, the social life of wartime Washington DC, etc. without ever quite allowing the story to meander off track. This is no mean feat. It reminds me a great deal of her approach to the Roosevelts in No Ordinary Time, and both books succeed quite well.

2. Team of Rivals is light on serious analysis. So far, I don't see a lot of original thinking here. Her conclusions fit comfortably in the realm of mainstream Lincoln scholarship. Anyone who has read David Blight, Phil Paludan, Eric Foner, Allen Guelzo, William Gienapp, etc. will readily recognize her generally very positive take on Lincoln's policies and personality. There are no smoking guns--no "Lincoln was gay," or "Lincoln was a bigot" stuff here. I do think she has a general thesis about Lincoln, and frankly it is a thesis with which I disagree (more on that when I finish the book); but you really have to dig to find it. This is first-rate narrative history, and there's nothing at all wrong with that. But that is pretty much all it is.