About book What It Takes: The Way To The White House (1993)
I'm reposting this review today because the e-book version of this is on sale at Amazon for $2, or a .0005¢ per page. Tempting me to buy an electronic copy of a long book I've already read, that I probably won't ever read again.But if you haven't read this one, I really recommend it. Re-reading my review I found a handful of pretty bad grammatical mistakes, leading me to question my long-held disbelief in proof reading. Hopefully, corrected the most glaring one's and I apologize for not catching them earlier.Maybe it's just a function of my age, I was three at the time, but the 1988 election has never really seemed that notable to me. I may be a child of Reagan, but George H.W. Bush was president when I first grasped a notion of what a president was, so I may have seen the '88 election through an aura of inevitability. Politics and opinions aside, George Bush will always be the bedrock for my conception of president. '88 seems the Young Americans of presidential elections, a not particularly noteworthy event wedged between two groundbreaking eras (Reagan Revolution/"Ziggy" and Clinton Administration/"Berlin Trilogy.")* Does such a seemingly foregone conclusion as Bush beating Mike Dukakis deserve such a massive tome? Because Richard Ben Cramer's What It Takes is certainly foreboding. 1,047 pages filled with tightly packed text in a small font. That 1,047 pages is earned too, there's not stat padding commonly found in history books. Because the book is based off of original reporting there is no bibliography, end notes section, or even an index.** I'm a political junkie, as soon as I read about this book I knew I would end up devouring it. But this amount of work devoted to a not particularly interesting election which resulted in a one-term presidency may seem indulgent to those with a less fervent fascination. First off, all indications otherwise, it's not entirely accurate to say What It Takes is about the '88 election. In fact, judged as a history of the '88 election this book is a disappointment. I'll get into what exactly this book is shortly, but to give you an idea of what we're dealing with, the results of the Iowa caucus, the first actually meaningful raw data of '88 campaign, are first discussed on page 867. That leaves 180 pages for, well... 1988. Cramer's main narrative closes before the national conventions, and his 30 page epilogue opens up on Election Day. Obviously this would be a problem if the book solely aspired to be a blow by blow account of a political campaign. So, if the book isn't a piece of conventional history or straight-up journalism, what is it? Cramer's goal in writing this book were to examine what type of human willingly puts himself through the process and the effect of process on the human. To do this Cramer, starting in 1986, spent a baffling amount of time with six potential candidates, four democrats and two republicans. Those candidates were Bush, Bob Dole, Dukakis, Gary Hart, Dick Gephardt, and Joe Biden. The access that the text hints at is extraordinary in itself. The behind the scenes account Crammer was able to get almost demands a behind the scenes account itself. The book is basically a close third person narrative of each of the six candidates. Cramer isn't trying to be objective, instead he gives the reader something like a 'candidates eye view' of the events. He effectively inserts the reader inside the heads of one of the candidates. Because of this, the book is extremely sympathetic to each of the six main figures.*** In many ways the book is an exercise in empathy, and readers are more likely to empathize with a book's characters when they, at some level, like the characters. Politics aside, Cramer mostly succeeds in this. Perhaps the most impressive achievement of What It Takes is that it not only convinces the reader to like six politicians, but that the reader likes six politicians who are adversaries. He does this by interspersing biographic episodes into the narrative. The reader gets to know each of the candidates. These episodes are much more focused on the upbringing and family life of the candidates than their political history. For instance, more space is dedicated to the Congressional career of Prescott Bush than George Bush. What It Takes is concerned more about where each of the candidates are coming from than the specifics of the their political career. The book is concerned with the broad process rather than the details, so Cramer is able to avoid getting into specific issues which would detract from a reader's sympathy. Cramer doesn't interrupt the narrative to interject any editorializing or different perspectives. Cramer may use the events of the narrative and the candidate's biography to subtly hint at specific character flaws. But these flaws are human flaws, not the frivolous and general sound-bite associated gaffes and misteps obsessed over by the media in modern elections. The only way one of the candidates will be directly criticized is through another candidate. Through this narrative technique, a specific criticism will seem unfair in one chapter and then justified in the next.What It Takes is mainly concerned with depicting the personal struggle with the process of a presidential race. As such, the actual events leading up to the '88 election are mere background to the more personal drama Cramer is interested in. The actual 'history' of the campaign weaves in and out of Cramer's narrative as it suits the story. Some stuff is dealt with in detail, some stuff is ignored altogether. The '88 election is to What It Takes as to the Napoleonic Wars were to War and Peace. That being said, it's worth noting that the quality of the work is lessened during the last few hundred pages. Again, considering the parameters of the book, this isn't surprising. The book is entirely based on original journalism, so the quality of the work inevitably depended on the access Cramer was able to achieve. Once votes started being cast, Cramer's access to the remaining candidates must have been severely curtailed. Another thing worth considering is that this book was published in 1992. I think it's fair to criticize Cramer for inadequately anticipating future readers. For a book that sets out to be about something timeless in the way America selects its leader, it can often be weighted in the time it was written. Throughout the book there are dated pop culture references and sly allusions to events that would take place later that modern readers may not catch. Also, I know I have been stressing that the book is about the process more than the specific events of 1988, but Cramer's almost complete neglect of the general election**** make a 1,000+ page book seem incomplete. I'm not asking for a couple hundred pages, but when we leave the main narrative Dukakis is up by double percentage points before the conventions and then we cut to Bush giving his acceptance speech. I'm not sure if he was facing publishing deadlines or what, but even 20 pages of summary would have been nice. Wolfe's The Right Stuff, for instance, is about much more than the history of the Mercury Program, but all the same, still manages to be somewhat comprehensive about the subject it is using as a simulacrum of larger trends. The absence of this here is the reason I'm docking a star.I was going to go into the specifics of the 1988 election, but I've gone on long enough. Suffice it to say, whether it's Cramer's writing or the candidates themselves, the six main figures are written in a vibrant and compelling manner. The book works as a character study of six compellingly different, but somewhat similar, figures who had the courage or the egomania or the delusional capability to think that they should be Commander in Chief, and the willingness to serve, or, at least the egomania, to put themselves and their family through the process. I gained much more respect and insight on George H.W. Bush, my bedrock president.***** Bob Dole figures simultaneously fully justifies the Norm McDonald SNL sketches and becomes so much more.****** What It Takes presents real questions about how American democracy works. The most surprising thing about the book is how Cramer treats the political media, which comes off as a sort of demented Greek chorus, insisting on snooty comments on a candidate's sex life and focused exclusively on perceived character issues while Athens burns. Cramer depicts the media as obsessed with chasing the hot story or the daily soundbite at the expense of substance. George Bush was able to get elected by producing quality b-reel and spouting drivel because his team figured out the game. Gary Hart, who comes off as a less sleazy Bill Clinton, was hounded from the race by faux-Puritanical press whose real motive was moving copy. Dukakis, an effective bureaucrat but a lousy politician, was able to coast to the nomination and never forced to get his head out of his ass until Bush started hammering him with Willie Horton. Cramer begins the book asking who would want to be President knowing what they would have to submit themselves to. Since '88 the process has only gotten noticeably worse. With few exceptions, Warren Beatty's prophecy, made after his friend Gary Hart had to bow out of the race after the Donna Rice scandal have come true: "When forced to show all, people become all show." What It Takes shows that there is a healthy portion of egomania that drives someone to office, but there is also, or at least there was a generation ago, healthy portions of decency and commitments to serve. Whether that's always going to be the case, or is the case even now, remains to be seen.* To extend this completely ridiculous analogy of Bowie albums to U.S. presidential elections: '72 =The Man Who Sold the World(probably just because of the song), '76=Hunky Dory, '80=Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders From Mars, '84=Diamond Dogs (and not just because of the song), '88=Young Americans, '92=Station to Station, '96=Low, '00=Let's Dance. This makes sense to me, but to explain it I would need 5,000 words and hours of spare time. ** Which given the wide cast of characters, around a dozen important campaign officials in each of the six different campaigns, would have been useful. *** Fair warning: What It Takes is much more indebted to Tom Wolfe than Theodore White. The text is full of gonzoisms that can be well-placed or irritating or both. For instance, Cramer uses a variety of techniques, keywords, and phrases to distinguish each of the candidate's perspective (Examples: use of the third person, the preamble Argh, and phonetic Midwestern drawl for Dole; brash, cockiness for Biden; repeated use of the word neat for Gephardt). Cramer also uses a healthy portion of italics and elipsis to simulate stream of consciousness. Generally, this didn't bother me but I found myself sometimes wishing he would tone it down just a little bit. ****About 10 pages of the 30 page epilogue deal with Bush and Dukakis immediately after the election, and involves some reference to the general campaign. ******If George W. Bush was born on third base and thought he hit a triple, H.W. was walked on favorable calls, earned a hard earned steal of second, and reached third on a sacrifice fly.****** If it was on Youtube I would have linked to the Bob Dole on Real World sketch.
For political junkies, this book would probably be an instant favorite. For people just interested in learning more about politics, it is long and detailed but does tell a compelling story. By closely following the candidates in the 1998 election (Bush, Dole, Biden, Hart, Dukakis,& Gephardt) we see different characters and motivations represented by those who run in national elections, what the process takes out of them(and their families), and how campaigns end up redefining the public perception of a candidate's personal value system and goals. The story itself jumps around a lot, not just between chapters but between paragraphs, at times making the reader stop to reorient to a different candidate and time period. These shifts keep campaign action up to date with the various candidates. They introduce background that helps us understand the candidate's state of mind and purpose during the 1998 season. Sometimes the shifts become disorienting,requiring thoughtful readjustment from one storyline or one time period to another.One of the most impressive writing skills is Cramer's ability to take you inside each candidate's life, mannerisms and thought processes. Each candidate and each candidate's story has its own voice. Very impressive.Had I realized this book was 1049 pages, I'm not sure I would have picked it up. I like political and historical books, but am not a "pol junkie." On the other hand, this book was an excellent review of candidates and issues I remembered from my youth, as well as a depressing look into how media and campaign staff affect the public perception. Makes you question if we could ever really see, hear and elect the best candidate for the job or if the political machine will always take over the candidates and their messages.
Do You like book What It Takes: The Way To The White House (1993)?
What it takes to finish this book Hailed as one of THE best books written about US politics, What It Takes explores the 1988 Presidential Election, with its cast of characters and the drama that obviously surrounds US politics, especially during a Presidential Election. It was recommended to me as a must read and was heavily referenced in Matt Bai's introduction to All the Truth is Out. It probably is a precursor of sorts to books people are more familiar with, Game Change and Game Change: Double Down, which focuses on the 2008 and 2012 elections, respectively. Yet...I just couldn't get into it. TI noticed the first chapter struck me as very "breathless", like someone who just witnessed this ran up to me and began chattering about what they saw. Although this style is definitely not exactly new or unusual, I just felt very turned off by it and couldn't find it very readable or compelling, unlike what other reviewers have written and said. The chapters flip between different perspectives of the various storylines, including Bob Dole, Gary Hart, George Bush, etc. Which makes sense since they're all parallel storylines in this book but...I just wasn't impressed. It just seemed overly tedious. I tried skimming in later chapters to see if maybe different perspectives would help me out, but it wasn't happening. Perhaps I just wasn't in the right frame of mind to read this book. I thought I would need this before reading Bai's All the Truth... but I may read that instead and other sources before tackling this one again.
—Bookworm
According to Rob Lowe's Reddit AMA, "West Wing fans should all pick up the book What It takes by Richard Ben Cramer, it was source material we all had to read for the show."So I did.You failed me, Rob.To be fair, Cramer probably wrote a fantastic book, but holy nuts did it need an editor. I hate putting books down without finishing, but I only made it a third of the way through before I gave up. At times it was like slogging through a pool full of warm tar. Interesting, but 1072 pages was way too much.
—Todd
This exhaustive look at the 1988 Presidential primaries gives the reader a great look at how campaigning changed to meet the television age. Its language is a little off-putting at first, as Cramer often matches the candidates' rather distracting dialects and verbal eccentricities. In the long run, though, this helps keep the many, many candidates fresh and distinct. I was surprised to find both Bob Dole and George Bush quite sympathetic--but Joe Biden's story was every bit as awesome as you;d expect from Crazy Old Uncle Veep. Of special note is the very early characterization of George W. Bush as a petulant asshole in a book written eight years before his own presidential election; this alone makes the first few chapters worth reading. By that time, you'll know whether you're in it for the long haul.The end is a bit disappointing--after 1000 pages about the primaries, Cramer blows through the actual election and its aftermath in a heartbeat. Still, the stories he tell make the abrupt ending a small price to pay. What It Takes is a great successor to my all-time favorite political book, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72. I'm looking forward to the next generation's definitive campaign tome.
—Rob Lightner
