From a reader:
Finished it last night, was very impressed, it was thorough, well-reasoned and well-written. I’m at work so can’t get too much into detail, but one thing struck me. Went back and glanced at the NYT review, and it seems to me that Oshinksy either skipped parts of your book or ignored them (or ignored what your book’s real theme was). He latched onto your comment about the country coming back to its senses after WW I and cites prohibition and the klan as examples you may have not known about – or were afraid to tell us. I think it was obvious that you were referring to a rollback of Wilson’s totalitarian war policies. and you did address the klan and touched on prohibition.That’s just one thing that jumped out at me. Anyway, excellent job, hope that it gets a broad audience and urges folks to question some of the policies being shoved down their throats.
Me: This is exactly what I’ve been saying from the beginning. I would have preferred a more negative review from the Times if the reviewer actually tried to engage the book. I never expected a rave from the Times. All I wanted was a serious review. The Oshinksy review is a textbook case of ducking responsibility.