The March Of Folly: From Troy To Vietnam (1985) - Plot & Excerpts
Great historians address fundamental questions and use the lens of the past to provide answers. Tuchman is a great historian, and the question she asks in this work is : 'Why are governments so fucking stupid?'You are the leader of a powerful trading city-state. After a ten year war, your bitter enemies suddenly decamp from the battlefield. They leave a giant wooden horse at your gate. Powerful religious factions within your city assure you that they have had visions revealing it is a trap. When you move the horse, you hear both the cries of men within, and the clashing of armor. It's awfully heavy for a wooden horse.You should:A) Hack the thing open where it is, as per the advice of both your political and military rulers.B) Move the thing inside your city walls.We all know the answer here. Tuchman masterfully explains this situation-- how Troy's pride and superstitiously arrogant rulers made irrational decisions-- leading up to the fateful choice to wheel the horse within the walls-- with Tuchman noting even that according to legend, Troy had to disassemble part of her famous wall to fit the damn thing through the door.Stupid, yet people did it.From this semi-comic mythological stupidity, Tuchman takes us on a 4,000 year voyage of idiocy. Highlights include:1. How a force of 700 conquistadores (with a grand total of 12 guns) defeated a standing army of 64,000 via the sheer bureaucratic stupidity of the sitting king.2. A recount of 14th century wars, in which every single attempt at war ended with crushing defeat and financial chaos-- and how the same strategy was recycled literally for a century by dozens of European rulers.3. The insightful, powerful arguments to the British King before (and even during) the Revolutionary War that attempting to subjugate the colonies would end with total defeat. He didn't listen.4. Stunningly accurate German and Japanese analysis prior to World War I and World War II that revealed that if the United States were enter the conflict(s) defeat would be certain. This analysis was filtered through the chain of command to become 'We need to get the US involved in the war immediately.'5. A capitvating recount of how the world's largest superpower entered colonial Vietnam with an approximate 100-year technological lead and a million-fold material advantage and still managed to suffer a humiliating defeat. Hint: Nobody listened.This book is achingly relevant now. After a lifetime watching my own government move from 'somewhat competent' to 'dangerously incompetent' to 'utterly impotent', I more than identified with the Swedish king who confessed to his daughter 'It is shocking how completely without wisdom the world is run.'Without giving away too much of her sparkling wit and detailed historical accounts, I can summarize Tuchman's argument to a few concise discoveries:1. People will purposely overlook information when it is in their best interest to do so. Impossible Iron manufacturing quotas during Mao's Great Leap Forwards? Well, they made a whole hell of a lot of sense if you were a central planner getting paid by the impossible ton. Or, more recently-- if you were a banker making $800,000 a year in 2004 packaging CDO's for resale-- even though you knew beyond a statistical doubt that they were worth pennies on the dollar-- well, you make hay while the sun shines.2. People will ignore points of view that threaten their worldview. A hilarious example of this is France's Louis the XV's unflagging support of the anti-royal revolution in the United States. He spent millions and millions of gold livres and tens of thousands of troops-- supporting a revolution to violently overthrow all monarchies . Within ten years the revolutionary fire at spread to Paris, and the guillotines were humming. Whoopsies.3. People will continuously ignore history. France and England launched more than a dozen crushing expeditions against each other during the 14th century, all of which failed, all of which impoverished the countryside and lead to wide-spread looting and ruin. Yet, every dozen years or so, a new bunch of nobles showed up with a 'great new idea.'Tuchman's style is addictive. I spent more than a few nights up until 1 AM, refusing to end a chapter in the middle. She combines a sly wit with a master historian's eye for fascinating detail.This book is a classic, and is a high reccommendation for two classes of friends:1. Those who wonder why the present is so f-cked up. (It's business as usual).2. Those who wonder why the past was so f-cked up. (It's business as usual).It also suggests strongly what the map of the 21st century will look like. (It'll be business as usual).
Babs is one crafty, talented instructor and this ranks highly among the BEST history books I've had the pleasure of reading. You should be reading it right now. Seriously, I mean it. This is the second gem by Barbara Tuchman that I've tackled, after the stellar The Guns of August), and the impressiveness of her work has led to my developing rather intense, and possibly inappropriate, feelings for her. I'm smitten. You see, Babs writes history in such a colorful, engaging manner that you don't notice she's shoveling mounds of knowledge into your memory muscle. You're so interested that you just glide along the pages, absorbed in her narrative web, while she's filling your brain with smarts. It's downright spooky. Honestly, how often can you truly say that you've overdosed on happy reading a history book. Yes, she's that good. PLOT SUMMARYTo qualify as "folly" for this book, Tuchman explains that actions need to meet all four of the following criteria: 1. The actions must be clearly contrary to the self-interest of the organization or group pursuing them; 2. The actions must be conducted over a period of time, not just in a single burst of irrational behavior; 3. The actions must be conducted by a number of individuals, not just one deranged maniac; and4. MOST IMPORTANTLY, there must have been a significant group who "at the time" pointed out, correctly, why the action in question was folly (i.e., no Monday morning quarterbacking or 20/20 hindsight). Tuchman spends some pages at the beginning of the book describing a number of "bonehead" and "assclowny" decisions in history that didn't qualify as folly, either because they were a single instance of governmental psychosis, or because they were carried out at the command of a dictator and not a coordinated governmental policy. Based on the above criteria, Babs looks at four primary examples of FUBAR "folly" in history: The Fall of Troy: The loss of Troy as a result of the Trojans' failure to question the deployment of the "Trojan Horse" by the Greeks. While interesting, this for me was easily the "weakest" part of the book, mainly because there is just not enough historical knowledge on the subject for Tuchman to analyze convincingly. She managed to keep me engaged with her stylish delivery, but I think this segment was likely included in order to have the book span a larger swatch of world history. The Renaissance Popes and the Protestant Reformation: The reign of the Renaissance Popes and how their excesses, and their failure to recognize the growing discontent among the Church members, led directly to the Protestant Reformation. I loved this section and it was easily my favorite of the whole book. After finishing this portion, I immediately went about trying to locate other books on the period. It was a fascinating time. Now if I can only get Babs to re-write these other books to make them more interesting. How the Britsh lost the American colonies: Another superb section of the book. What I found most interesting about this discussion of the major events that led up the American Revolution is that Tuchman spent most of her time looking through the eyes of the British, in contrast to peering through the eyes of the American colonist, which is the more common perspective used in studies of this period. Despite my general familiarity with this period, I found this to be very enlightening. The failure of America in Vietnam:. A terrific end to an amazing survey of history. My only quibble here is that I think Tuchman's "objectivity" may have slipped away to make a sandwich or take a nap because you can readily see that she was strongly against the war. Nothing wrong with that, but I prefer not to be able to read historian's personal views in the work. Still, her analysis is excellent, well supported, and she lays out the history in a very engaging manner. Overall, this is as good as histories get. Engaging, informative and wonderfully delivered. I would call this a must for history fans or fans of military history. 6.0 stars. HIGHEST POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATION!!!
What do You think about The March Of Folly: From Troy To Vietnam (1985)?
Tuchman writes well, she obviously knows a great deal of history and can often reach that almost-impossible achievement of historians to both tell as many facts as possible while not overloading. I say 'often' because this book didn't always have this moment.Two things I liked about this book:1. Tuchman's deep familiarity with a very wide range of history topics and times.2. The obviously matriculate and objective, clear way of defining 'folly' by a certain logical and smart definition without getting too emotional and choosing more "hot topic" acts of silliness. Two things I didn't like about this book:1. Despite her great knowledge of the periods she wrote about, she failed to write a proper background of the ruling systems and the climate of the eras she discussed. Trying to understand how corrupt the six popes of the renaissance it'd help to know why the popes has such a control over Rome as if they were the kings (rather than the rulers of the Vatican as they are now...) or who were the French they fought against.2. The chapter about the US in Vietnam was both boring, tedious, overly-detailed and featured Tuchman referring to the Americans as 'us' and 'we' which indicates a lack of objectivity a historian should avoid at all costs.It's an OK book but definitely not the best general history book I've ever read.
—Meirav Rath
Excellent, excellent examination of the tendency for political policies to continue down damaging pathways though multiple experts advise against it, which Tuchman describes as “folly.” Her description of decadent popes directly encouraging the Protestant Reformation and the resulting loss of Roman power is fun, lively, and intellectually rigorous. She falters a bit while explaining the British loss of the American colonies as a result of folly. She would have been wise to shave at least 20-30 from that section and tighten it up a bit, although I attribute the boredom more to the tedious reality of the argument (repeated similar debates in Parliament) than her skill as a writer.American involvement in Vietnam is the subject of the final portion, and it is a wonderfully streamlined overview of the war’s political side while doing a hell of a job of arguing Tuchman’s thesis. This fine book should have become a match strike in causing widespread opposition to folly, and her use of the word should be utilized daily in popular discussion. It’s a real shit stain on this world that the nature of politics nearly eliminates the possibility of political parties examining themselves and their policies as it might damage “the team” to change course on a subject and appear weak.
—Aaron
The March of Folly is an unfortunate title. Or maybe not so unfortunate. Because, after all, what is folly?tBarbara Tuchman gives us several examples of the human animal at its worst — but parading at its best. From Ancient Troy right up through Vietnam (can a sequel including Chechnia, the former Yugoslavia, Iraq and Afghanistan be far behind?), we have proved ourselves to be little better than the apes. If there’s a difference, it’s only in the splendor of our rebarbative behavior. Kings, Popes, Ministers, Generals … it’s all the same. And the tragedy? Invariably, the loss of so many young lives to no real purpose other than to serve the interests of ambition, pride, ignorance, stubbornness — in short, of vanity.tYes, vanitas, vanitatis. It’s all right there in Ecclesiastes, and not much has changed. We are a prideful, belligerent, deceitful, artful, malignant, umbragious — a word I learned in reading this book—species. In short, we’re prone to folly.tAnd who pays the ultimate price of that folly? Our youth.tI cannot remember being so disheartened by a book since I read, at a young and impressionable age, A History of Torture — or more recently, Martha Gellhorn’s The Face of War. If you want to continue believing that “all is best in the best of all possible worlds,” don’t read this book. If you want to continue believing that we are governed by people who know what’s best for us, don’t read this book. If you want to believe that the march of history is inevitable, don’t read this book.tIgnore my suggestions at your own risk. But if you don’t, be prepared to undertake a life of activism — and don’t expect it to be a happy life. To buck folly is to question our very essence. And our essence would appear — if Ms. Tuchman’s major premise is to be believed — to be tragically farcical. That, or farcically tragic. The case of the former President Lyndon B. Johnson in one of this book’s final chapters could easily rival that of Shakespeare’s King Lear.RRB07/19/13Brooklyn, NY
—Russell Bittner
