Transcripts For CSPAN2 Frederik Logevall JFK 20240712

The generous support of our underwriters of the Kennedy Library museum. The Lowell Institute in our media sponsors the boston globe and wbur. We look forward to robust questionandanswer period this evening. You will see full instructions on the screen for submitting your questions via email or in the comments on our youtube page during the program. We are so grateful to have this opportunity to explore president kennedys earlier years and depth with our distinguished speakers this evening. This is the first major work about president kennedy in many years. We have been anticipating this for some time. Much of professor legevalls research took place in the kennedy archive and we are please to look at this conference a new look at president kennedys formative years. Im now delighted to introduce tonight speakers. We are so glad to welcome Frederik Logevall back to the Kennedy Library virtually. He is lawrence the bill for professor of International Affairs and professor of history at harvard university. A specialist on u. S. Foreign relations history and modern international history. He is the author or editor of nine books including embers of war were to want a Pulitzer Prize for history and the Francis Hartman project. Jfk comingofage and the American Century 1917 to 1956 his newest book. Im also pleased to extend a warm welcome to George Packer of moderator for this evening a staff writer for the atlantic. His nonfiction books include our man, Richard Holbrooke and the end of the American Century a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize. The unwinding, 30 years of american decline which won a National Book award, the assassins gate america in iraq and blood of the liberals. He is also the author of two novels and a play and the editor of a 2volume edition of the essay of george orwell. Please join me in welcoming our special guests. Welcome everybody. I hear they are at least a couple hundred of you which is fantastic and it will be a privilege and a pleasure to talk to Frederik Logevall and get her head out of the presence and out of the news for an hour or an hour and a half and into the past which is a great refuge as well as a guide for us as we try to navigate one of the stormy his years in our lives. Fred i know you as the author of the two essential books on the vietnam war and its not just me saying that the people i know who fought in vietnam and served in vietnam when not i asked where the books i have to read on where when i was researching my biography of Richard Holbrooke who served in vietnam theyd say oh thats easy choosing war and embers of war by the same guy Frederik Logevall so i knew you as a vietnam expert now i know you as something broader as an american expert in someone who shares a lot of interest with me in American History and foreign policy. Its great to get to talk to you about your completely engrossing and source a language is a word that kennedy in the book review a new biography of jfk. Welcome fred and welcome to our audience and i guess the first question is inevitable but why, i know there are biographies but there hasnt been a major one in some years but there have been some. It takes a little bit of chutzpah to wade into those waters where so many other writers have gone so why did you take this on . First off george its tremendous to be with you and to have this opportunity to talk to about all this stuff. Occurred to me listening to that in the way our two moores recent looks are kind of bookends here because mine is from the beginning of the 21st century and yours is about the latter part of the 21st century and maybe we can talk about that. I think ive been fascinated by john f. Kennedy and the kennedys for a long time. Ive written about kennedy in other contexts especially during the cold war and in particular vietnam and volume two which is still to come the vietnam question is what i like to call the mother of all counterfactual. What had what would he have done in vietnam had he survived but theres partly a sense that this hit me one day in the washington harvard yard that i wanted to write up a considerable biography. I did also use my training as a historian and used kennedys life to tell the story not just of his run but americas rise. The rise of United States to great power status and superpower status on Jack Kennedys life. He was worn in 17 right as the u. S. Was entering world war i is very important conflict of course died in 63 which is arguably the of American Power prior to the mass of vietnam so its those two things and then maybe a third george which is the materials in the library are just so phenomenal. The levy thats hosting tonights events, they are so good. I thought a lot of him hadnt been tapped by a lot of people so was something kind of fresh about them. And a sense the biography as you say they are out there but nobody is really done the kind of comprehensive life and times that im doing or trying to do here. And you read about it in your Vietnam Research . I knew about it from the war in vietnam and to some extent from other researchers graduate student of mine and others you said you know incredible folders files and documents in the library. Some of them used in a lot of them havent been used all that much and then of course some have come available that its partly because of my own private research, no question. So you actually zeroed in on documents that you knew were there when she committed herself and you said im going to find box 291 and 73 because i know whats there and no one is ever used it. Obviously some of it in terms of specific collections of specific folders i had to see them myself of course before i had the sense that i knew for example david nassaus triptych biography of joe senior. As historians we all do this and you do this yourself you look in the endnotes of your book to see what other people have written and to see what other people have done in terms of particular collection some of what i think havent been opened and available prior to that work. And then one of the marvelous things about the library even though i think a relatively small percentage of the librarys collections have been digitized, nevertheless anybody can access from their couch. There is stuff available that you can see without having to darken the doors of the library and its a great collection. How did you approach the genre of biography since, i dont think you had written one, right . And its not the same thing as the history of war or the history of even two years decisionmaking about a war. Its more i would say its a little closer to the problems that confront a novelist because you have to see the book with character and especially with one character and bring that character to life and i think all the harder is it is to know that character so how did you approach the genre, the enron unknown genre biography and what models to use or what guidance did you give yourself as you get out how to research and write it . Well, its so interesting especially given that you yourself authored in novel so you have a sense of what you are describing here. Its totally nothing to me and i think youre quite right history and biography are not the same thing. Ive come to realize just how different they are in some ways. Of course there are important similarities. About finding evidence and its about trying to figure out what happened. In this case centered on a particular life but they are similarities between this work in the work ive done previously but as you said they are also different. I think i have been fascinated by the kennedys. It is in some ways the Great American story. This family, its an extraordinary one and i began the book with the arrival of the kennedys and the fitzgeralds in the middle part of the 18th century and then of course joe, particularly joe senior and his huge family and his marriage to rose and jack was basically child emerges and i wont say that the story would right itself, turns out they never do but i think this has Great Potential for me as a historian but also as someone whos interested in biography to see if i can make this work and kind of as i said telling two narratives at the same time the kennedy story and americas story. Tonight i tossed this back to you because you have this experience george. How would you answer your own question in terms of how you approach this with respect to our man collects. I had a different problem which was Richard Holbrooke, by the time my book came out was a fading figure in American Foreign policy. He dominated many views and many events in this lifetime but he was not on the scale of jfk. He starts in the Foreign Service under jfk but is called to service that inspired hoover to join the Foreign Service. I thought i needed to grab the reader with the first paragraph and never let that reader go or else they would abandon the project because who cares . That was my great fear, who cares . You didnt have that problem. People care about jfk. A book about holbrooke in the base of a novelist even though the book has 35 pages of notes and to be as accurate as i can possibly make it. It begins as if youre about to get along by a raconteur and thats the voice that carries the entire book and it gives you the freedom to do things that traditional biographies dont do but always within the guidelines of the contract with the reader which is that it all has to be true. I try to make it sound like a great yarn that you would want to sit down and knit. You and i have talked about this before but i think when we were im chris leidens show together and one thing if i made that you say in the early pages which what i thought about which would be fun to talk about im paraphrasing. I didnt have a chance to look before we came on. He said Something Like only in fiction can we ever really get to know a person deep inside and i thought about that as jack kennedy many people think and maybe its true hes somewhat elusive. Some people warned me early on you were never going to be up to get close to this guy because of the nature that he has. He has his mothers emotional and i think you are so right in this and i hope readers will have to tell me, but i think i can get, given your parameters and only in fiction can we ever really know, i hope i get fairly close. I think you do. I wrote this to you personally and i think its sitting in this book jacket now. It brings us so close to jfk. It really gives us a picture and we should talk about how you achieve that. I think its engrossing and its a pageturner and thats because you are always right there in the middle of the scene or very close to the characters and of course he is ironic and attached. Thats his character but the things that created that character i didnt understand very well until i read your book. So lets just talk about that but two things. Your book, his story begins a month before we enter world war i. And this is an interesting parallel to mine because that other year the American Century began and we entered world war ii, tell me about your decision to frame jfks life as a life of the American Century beginning in 1917 and what that means for our understanding of americas rise to global power. I think it might have been ernest may the late great harvard historian member of this department that im now in. I think it might have been earning him the struck me at the time but i was a graduate student. Something like this. We think of the American Century beginning in 1940 or 41 or the late 30s. Some might say 1945 which i think is not correct but ernie said no. In fact americas contribution to the war in 1917 to 1918 was formidable and because the way the european powers were decimated i got a great conflagration that wasnt fully evident at the time sagacious farsighted europeans understood that it was only a matter of time before the americans would be dominant on the world stage and in a sense there was a delay i think in the 20s and 30s. American leaders were not quite sure what to do when i write about this in the book. Maybe they were the responsibilities of leadership and maybe not but i felt comfortable in saying 1917 is absolutely critical to the American Century for two reasons. The war in the bolsheviks will revolution which becomes crucial later on in two crucial to Jack Kennedys life. It defines kennedys public life and began in 1917. The true power of the cold war the trajectory and collision with each other. Say you can certainly make that argument and my students asked the question and if you looked at the characteristics of the cold war which i have to do that i say how many of the characteristics were present in 1917. It turns out maybe only two or three of them were in one of them might be a schism but some have been associated with the cold war which is the great arms race and suppression of internal dissidents. Also in the United States and the soviet union a World Structure as opposed to a multipolar World Structures. Some of those things may not be present in 1917 but ive had very smart students, interesting students make a pretty compelling case or 1917 as the start date of the superpower confrontation. Did you have a preconception about jfk going into this . Did you have a picture of him that you are going to then draw . What did you begin relatively agnostic and threeyear research . I think i the sense and its really interesting question. I think that a sense even when i began my work on indochina and the fact that he visited in 1951 span estimate the beginnings of the war. The beginnings of the war and there were all these questions about what the french were trying to achieve. I think i had a sense of the common view of Young Jack Kennedy as a kind of a playboy who had everything handed to him and wasnt serious about anything and only later became the mature striving politician. But i do sense that was maybe not correct. I think the research that i did in the materials on library or so beyond a doubt this is a guy who from an early age is serious about policy, deeply curious about the world. That thats sort of a half answer suggesting i had an inkling that i wanted to revise what was common view and i think the research actually supports that. Some of the most riveting pages are young jocks trip to europe in 1939. Europe is moving rapidly toward war and he has a mix of her rich boys vacation along with access to the most important councils of government all across the continent. Churchill, chamberlain, hitler. Then we see hitler give a speech he was there in limb building is in 37 and they have an opportunity. Then they said they should have gone but in 39 it was almost like a selleck quality that degree of twitchy shows up in places that become hotspots and i open the book on the preface with him in berlin in late august of 39 and even carried a message from the u. S. Consulate official and a senior diplomat in berlin to give him a message to carry back to his father who was the ambassador britain, joe kennedy senior and the message says the germans are going to attack poland within a week. So you have this kind of intrepid guide. He is certainly benefiting from his fathers connections. He wouldnt be able to travel and see these places that joe senior who was already ambitious , his two sons in particular his two eldest sons but its also jfks own early striving and motivation. Lets talk about his parents and his relation to them because i said earlier i felt i understood his caricature much better from his vote. Surely because of the relationship with his father. The relationship with his brother is distant and i said maybe the source of some of his misogyny because his mother was not around for a lot of his childhood and of course his father wasnt either but the mother was expected to be on the father was not. But his father comes across, joe kennedy comes across as making them feel like a lame father. Hes constantly arranging activities and events and we are going to go play football the afternoon and back to dinner and will be reading at night and hes incredible old for a man of that generation incredibly involved in as many childrens lives and incredibly devoted to them. That seems to me to be the core relationship for jack kennedy growing up. Its an extraordinary aspect of joe kennedy seniors personal life and its an interesting example george which is i think joe kennedy and say 1934, 35 is heading up the fcc in washington. He is heading up an important new government entity. And yet he pens these long letters, handwritten letters to jack who is in his last year. He sends long letters handwritten to joad jr. The other children. It strikes me that this is a guy who somehow manages in porton government policy is never blessed instructing his children trying to mold his children in particular his sons. Hes more concerned its quite clear about them especially the two older ones. So whatever one might say about joe kennedy is a businessman as a diplomat and ultimately disastrous term as ambassador to britain and we can talk about that, his devotion to his kids is something. Ill also say i think rose kennedy the mother deserves more in some ways credit for jacks upbringing than she sometimes given credit thing she gets as historical sensibility from her than his father but is actually more like his mother been like his father. His International Sensibility comes in part from her i suggest in the book but as i say shes emotionally withdrawn. She leads a separate life for all the onus is an Canterbury Prep School and at choate. She never paid a visit. I think she comes once to canterbury and she never comes to choate and meanwhile she takes extended vacations at herself including to europe. I think i was hard for him as you suggested. You also set a one point what do you expect from a woman who is flagrant whose husband is flagrantly cheating on her and her marriage and humiliating her bid ringing mistresses home to dinner. Of course shes going to be gone. Maybe that was the alternative based on her religions of the web is emotional withdrawal. I think thats exactly right and i think that i suggested the book they have a kind of arrangement which is he is going to be more discreet in his affairs and maybe he was early on and she is going to look the other way. I think that is what happens. He is a notorious affair in hollywood and i think on some level he comes to realize i cant continue to do this. But you are so right george. When you think about what she has to endure and when you think about his view, his object of flying women seeing them as objects to be conquered its just a hard environment for her. Where did jacks ambition come from because one thing your book made very clear is that it wasnt simply handed to him like instructions on how to be a man by his own father. In a way its extremely hes not seeing as the pampered spoiled son of privilege who went his fathers way because that was the path of least resistance. In other words hes not donald trump jr. He fights for his own path while never causing too much trouble. And finding it rebellious by his father but he nonetheless manages to against the great deal of magnetism coming from his overbearing father fighting himself so how did that happen and how did it. A political ambition and jack . I have thought a lot about that in the course of him going through the materials that are so rich but all the materials all the archival material in the oral History Collection of the library, they cant reveal everything. I think what we see is somebody who is because he was sick with his various ailments, continuously, he became a family reader. He devoured especially european history and statecraft of diplomacy. He was an early fan of churchill. I think the ambition comes in part from him realizing hey maybe i can do something similar here. He also has his maternal grandfather honey Fitz Fitzgerald who is a politician in the two of them are extremely close. They are quite different as politicians are jack is much more reserved much more urbain scholarly and is approached and his grandfather but theres also that. Grandpa fits, i can aspire to do something similar and finally especially in our own day and age for me such an appealing quality george he likes politics. And i think he likes politics for cicely because he thinks politics matter. Politics are important and i think from a pretty early age before it joe jr. Is killed in the war he is already thinking to himself and the particular girlfriend he was close to anga, maybe you want to or sue a political career. Its those things that i think ring in this serious quality to him early on. Its not as though when joe jr. Is killed over england or over the channel suddenly its up to jack to carryon his father streams. Jack was headed that way already. He was. And joe jr. Would not have had what jack brought to that career, that incredible intelligence but also that quality of being his own man which you were in the oval office and your general is telling you you need to start World War Three in the soviet union. And 62. I think its right and i do think joe jr. Who was the golden child and he brought a lot to the table. He was straight from central casting in terms of being incredibly handsome, healthy as a mocks, extremely ambitious. Im not going to suggest and i dont say in the book that joe jr. Survives and comes back from the war that we would have seen the same kind of charge at ture but he had his own way of running in as you suggest i think he had a better claim. He had already offered a book which was a lightly revised version who have rubbed joe jr. The wrong way because he was used to being with family. He already have these attributes before joe jr. s tragic death. And hes making his own decisions. Even in terms of which in 1946 its not his fathers decision. Tell us how his mind as a practitioner of statecraft and someone who thinks about and eventually cracked us as foreignpolicy develops through the crucial years from the late 30s to the early cold war when she first to when he first ran for office. How did he become the jack kennedy who is now president. It seems to me those are the keywords. Tell us what happened and how they affected him. Thats a crucial parting of the ways. This was such a fun part of their writing experience for me and my wife all tell you that i would talk about what the materials and elsewhere show about that period. I think what happens is he gets to harvard and he begins in 1937. Hes had a kind of a gap here so he starts before most of his classmates in the year of 1943 the student body is heavy isolationist and continues to be right up until then any ties into that. His father becomes ambassador to britain at 38 and is as you know and arch appeaser even more so than chamberlain and initially jack is inclined to agree with his position. This is the depiction between he and his brother. Joe jr. Think is never comfortable around us father shadow so he parrots his father until the very and so its fascinating to observe little by little jack kennedy began to see a more complex and crowded world than his father or his older brother, to see the problems with the narrow parochial nationalism that both have endorsed to see the threat posed by the japanese and the germans. And its hard to say exactly when but certainly before pearl harbor certainly by the early part of 1941 i think hes the confirmed internationalist and that shifts are that growth in his view i think is totally interesting and finally all to say his own war experience in the pacific in 43 is important and affirming for him this mix. A Young Jack Kennedy finds the United States has to play a leading role in World Affairs than that question has been settled and we have these long discussions and intent about what the u. S. War should be and i think he comes back from the war affirming that belief. He also comes back skeptical about i think the military is an instrument of policy. I think you see it in his letters home which are really interesting. A sense that military leadership may not be a contradiction in terms but i think hes skeptical of that and i think we see and ill see if i can develop this or if it should be developed but you see it through the end of his life. Its interesting because he is lieutenant, right . Correct. He was a young officer but he was not someone for whom the war was in any way abstract. He was out there obviously getting because a whole generation of officers became overconfident generals of vietnam who felt that america had nothing to worry about with peasants in black pajamas because we had bought the war machine and the jack abram were machine and this would be nothing in the United States. Jack kennedy did and come back from the Second World War with that kind of confidence in the american military. Maybe in american, and the american example to the world but not in our ability to impose our will. I have the feeling that maybe her experience in the South Pacific its also the nature to sort of have and i am the darkness and our frailty and the flaws in our nature and are blind spots in the way we see ourselves. All of that tends to be there at a very young age and im sure we will be able to trace it straight through to the crucial years in the white house. I think thats true but partly because of his ailments, partly because of the tragedies that he suffered. He effectively lost rosemary through botched horrible lobotomy in late 41. The sister was closest to him and age. They were about eight team of the party loses his brother and 44 and later uses his loses his closest sibling kathleen kick but it goes to your point his sense of life was fraught. He had a welldeveloped sense of ironing kind of selfdeprecating humor. I think that combined with as you say the experience in the South Pacific he came back i think with this sounds that there were limits to certainly in military terms limits to American Power even though in 45 United States is absolutely colossal and what it can do and achieve. So i think youre absolutely right. He doesnt fall prey to what many fell prey to and that is evidence early on. Forward it to the political chapters at the end of the book lets talk about jfk and women because there are a lot of women in this book. They come quickly most of them. He is a hound dog just constantly writing letters to his friends about having batted this nurse or failed to bed this nurse and there was a ton of girlfriend to come and go and some of them he seems really smitten with especially inga. They are clearly and schmitz for pleasure and maybe a bit of narcissism. As a biographer, you dont spare him. You definitely dont spare him but the worst moment is when his wife jackie has a miscarriage and hes off sailing around in the French Riviera if im not mistaken and finally gets back a week or two later. Its pretty unforgivable and its hard to want to stay with him so how do you handle that material which you dont go back and try to make it possible for us to go onto the next chapter. I think its a challenge. I think he will be a bigger challenge frankly in volume two. I dont think in that First Response i dont think behavior in the period up through 1956 is predatory if thats the right word here. There isnt a position of power. There is already a power different jail differential but i suspect having researched this or written volume two i think this is going to become more problematic. Its already problematic and some of it clearly comes from his father. I think we have ample evidence that he instructed his sons to proceed in the way that he did interview him as objects to be conquered. Theres no question about that. He was unfaithful to jackie before the wedding and after and i think i cant have it both ways. I cant on the one hand say hes his own man in politics. He does not follow his fathers dictate in terms of this political position in which office to see or which career to change or whether to support isolationism or interventionism before pearl harbor but he makes that argument with respect to the little stuff and career stuff that obviously she should show the ability to not follow his fathers dictates. It doesnt have as far as i can see some of the more problematic elements we see with joe senior. Sometimes he acts out if you can imagine. Nor can we say it was in a different time back then because it was a more pathological attitude towards women and i wonder at times i got a little riff if not hatred at least disdain. Dehumanizing as if i dont need to treat you the way i have been treated and lamb billings jack after rejecting his advances as a loyal friend for the rest of their lives. His sister is different. Shes like an honorary guide but i wonder if theres something darker than just being a bit of a scoundrel about it. It may be. Anga who we have talked about this kind of an exception because he treats her so differently from so many of the other women and respects her intelligence. That is envious of the fact that she speaks so many languages and shes been to so many places and shes clearly supersharp when they have these conversations some of them picked up at the fbi. She is under surveillance in which you see the two of them go at it intellectually. And in other ways too but intellectually and away that you are quite right there is some other exception. Ultimately jackie, though there are lots of rocky moments and i deal with these, she is very formidable and he comes to see how intelligent she is and she too has the culture quality that he really admires and he doesnt possess at the same way himself. But there may be a certain how did you put it, loathing . Theres something there thats problematic, no question. He becomes a member of the house from cambridge. The 11th district. And then he gets elected to the senate and all of that leads to this wonderful centerpiece which the book ends with which is the 56 convention with jack coming within a whisper of being Adlai Stevensons Vice President which may have been a bullet dodged rather than an opportunity missed but what do you make of kennedys politician in those years . What did you learn about him and what struck you as he doesnt seem like president ial material early on. He seems hardworking, curious and all that but there is not that quality that you immediately said this guy is going to go to the top so how would you describe him as a politician who sought domestic politics as what was the word contracts and being interested in World Affairs . I think its pretty clear from the time he enters the house and 47 that board policy is where hes most interested and he feels most comfortable. During the campaign in 46 as d lee 29yearold whos going to get the nomination and once he gets the nomination hes home free but that nomination is a ferocious one. You see even then that hes comfortable talking about the eroding cohort that is not a reality but its emerging and other international issues. Its already penetrating and seeing things from the soviet perspective and theres a certain empathetic standing he has. It doesnt have the same kind of engagement as all the domestic issues. I think, you think hes fundamentally liberal on most issues not so much fiscal issues or conservative. He is quite conservative on foreign policy. I suggest in the book that hes an early cold war hero that he does not see an opportunity for condemnation when Henry Wallace argues for the need to smooth things over with the soviets and jfk is pretty fast and swatting down that notion an interesting as a side note joe kennedy senior and david nasa brings this out is by free and may be schlesinger brought this out the joe kennedy articulated a position that more than the few cold war historians would articulate the soviets are not a threat to the United States in terms of we can take a handsoff approach here as joe kennedy senior. His son felt very differently at the time. And interesting incident that he goes to vietnam in 1951 and this is an opening of your wonderful book and asks all the right questions and what he sees of the friends losing a war fighting a losing war and why are we defending a colonial empire . We are the worlds democracy but by the mid50s he is taking a more hawkish view about vietnam as a threat giving speeches in which he thinks we have to hold the line against communism as the parallel between north and South Vietnam so what happened . Its a great paradox about jfk in indochina which is and i think this will be the thread in volume two as well. I dont think his skepticism george about a military solution in vietnam ever goes away. I think its there from 51 and there until november of 63 in effect we have lots of evidence of him in the white house project ding hawkish advice from his aides when they want to send Ground Troops and so on in one of the reasons why in terms of the wotus the whatifs though we can never know i believe if he would have survived he would have avoided, slightly he would avoided the kind of huge openended escalation with johnson. That the passage that i read brill carefully because you had earned the right to say that but you are still thinking about writing volume two. But go ahead. The paradox is as you say the same jack kennedy that even in the mid50s but especially is much more aggressive. He is careful of the very careful politician, careful in terms of his language, the very reasoned approach to all policy issues but as you say he now sings a different tune on vietnam and indochina. He said port above the government in the south. He believes that the United States must preserve and do all in its power to preserve the noncommunist soviet unions of figuring out how this guy who understood so early that western powers whether it be france or the United States and he said that. Anyone in power is not going to put down the solution. This is the same guy who in domestic political terms seeks the white house now. He knows that democrats cannot keep targeted with the communist slogan. Maybe thats the explanation of the paradox but however we explain it its there. And its going to be a major tension because even though i think you have convinced me that if kennedy had lived we would not have had 200,000 troops in vietnam within two years of 63. Nonetheless he brought in 15,000 advisers and he overthrew the government of south get mom. He may well have corrected his mistakes but the mistakes were readymade and how much domestic policies have to do it that with the present faced with pox and the government and the opposition party. Im interested to see you what you have learned. We will be taking questions in about five minutes but i had one or tumor things i want to ask you. There are various points in your book that i stumble at all and David Kennedy mention in this very wonderful review in this weeks New York Times book review and those are the mccarthy period and the question of authorship of profiles in courage. You look at those carefully so tell us why i might be wrong in thinking jfk deserves more of a harder for his hunting essentially the mccarthy era and trying to not to have too make a differ caught difficult call on that and why we shouldnt think that he may have written some notes in profiles in courage but he didnt write the book, page for page so take each of those please. Mccarthy, i thought i would need to take us about an address it somehow. And people at random house were absolutely marvelous of a double line. In such a wonderful publisher. They said yes we can do this. So in response, you will be getting this. It is because of how they we were than i can only do a few words. And change a few sentences. I think you are right. I do think that even before your introduction, i suggested that he was overly careful on mccarthy. I think you had something to do with the close family ties with mccarthy. Especially with joe senior who loved bobby. We have not talked about bobby yet. They remained close. Through to wisconsin to mccarthys funeral remained devoted to him in some ways to the end. It is partially about massachusetts politics. Irish catholics constitute a large part of the electric. By the way, interesting comparison to writers to the end, beyond the center, released through the century and 54, of joe mccarthy. George what about afterwards, he had the support of roughly 4d tent attend. I dont want to draw that comparison to costly but it is interesting after the Senate Begins moved even after his attack on the army. Mccarthy, a lot of american stay with him until the end. But i think jack kennedy would have spared himself a lot of great and he had instructions before him. He was in the hospital for legitimate reasons. So those who say that he went into the hospital to dodge mccarthy. I think that is not true. But he couldve through procedure called pairing, he couldve instructed and developed and he shouldve done so. Why he did not. Thats interesting. Heres a quick thing about this, and 56, that the aforementioned Democratic National convention, hank he had a meeting with Eleanor Roosevelt missus roosevelt basically said, i am paraphrasing. Why didnt you come out against mccarthy. And want to puzzle over george, when you have an explanation about this. I thought about it. I erased it. But i thought, why would he not in the summer of 56, when attacking joe mccarthy, the guys is gone. Why would jack kennedy not cinemas roosevelt, you know it, unlike the diet i dont think he ever liked mccarthy and prison terms. Even then however, he does not want to criticize mccarthy. I cant quite figure that out. George i didnt know. I can only imagine that he was loyal to his family. And this is one that didnt mean enough to him relate to go against what his father did. To inject his father that way. Fredrick this is good of an explanation as any. It. George my parents or a little younger than jfk. And the mccarthy. With three britain to them as liberal democrats of whether a politician could be trusted. Whether they could respect politicians. In the did not, they did not see them because largely because think stevenson was much more outspoken. And so when it came to 1960s, they celebrated kennedys election. But he was another man. And he never was the man. That is really during the mccarthy. And i think for a lot of liberals, that remains true so i think the decisive effect, not to mention the politics that time but on the camp that democrat saw him and have a divided on him. Fredrick i think thats a really good point. Ill talk just a little bit about this. That is that it is worth noting that the Democrat Party as a whole including liberals like hubert humphrey, for a very long time were unwilling to criticize mccarthy. We are. Far and 54 to see broad parts of the party begin to go after him in any serious way. So kennedy is not alone in this. In fact, another senior senator from massachusetts, republican is just as cautious if not more so than jacky kennedy. So hes not alone in this. Its an lets open this up. We differ a little bit. I think that the evidence is. Powerful that the broad architecture of the book, the argument which by the way and salience in our own day. Part of the need for evidencebased discourse. For bargaining in good faith rated in compromise and democracy. This argument, those themes are jacky kennedys. Another is way too young to have 2526. He will not be able to articulate those kind of things. Moreover the introduction and the conclusion, i think for me the most interesting and important parts of the book, i think those are more than kennedys. I think basically thats his work. George what about the closure predispute if the question that i will deal with, i can come back to this. How we shouldve responded to the warning, that is a fair question. Its one of the proudest moments of his life he later said. Is it reasonable to expect him to turn down the award. I dont know. I dont know what that wouldve meant to an aspiring politician. Theres no question about the middle chapters were drafted by others, not just sorensen. They had professors that i write about this. I guess i am suggesting this is more jacky kennedys book and perhaps you are. George i dont want to end on that minor disagreement because i want our audience to know that weve not even really talked about the way the book industry is a marvelous account of the convention that is not gone down in history as one of the Great Conventions but its a Democratic Convention and you see jack kennedy at its absolute best because he was maneuvering and showing videos how to play the game. But is also detached enough to be able to recognize that he can take a loss now and it wont be the end of him. In fact it might actually help them when the big term comes in four years. It. Fredrick i will just say here, i have this in one of the chapters, you can go in youtube, which is where were on now. And you can see concession speech that he gives said that convention. It is done without notes. I think it is a remarkable moment captured that we can all see it on youtube. It is an amazing clip. So the folks are interested in this. He comes so close, just moments before to get this nomination. By the way his father thinks its a disaster even seeking nomination. To come this close, and becomes clear that the tide has turned. They leave the hotel room. They go to the podium and the give the speech. And its an amazing moment. It. George its a great ending and it makes you either are eager to get to volume two. And finish volume two. Lets get to a few questions. Some of them that there are questions that i wouldve wanted to ask. Lets work, this comes from someone in columbia. How would you define leadership style and how does it apply to the day world challenges. Touched on that briefly fred. What marty had to say about that. Fredrick i think it is a leadership characterized by an absolute insistent on his part that he himself and his aides need to be well informed on the issues. He had very little patience for advisors and others who do not know their stuff down to the detail. Its a leadership style that is about the coming informed on an issue and then acting accordingly. Which leads to the second point. This is something that i find anadmirable. He wants people to have different views. He does not want yesmen. He wants to hear peoples opinions about which path to take. Then he will act accordingly. And also there was much more to be said about this. But the final piece about this maybe is when he needs to make a decision, even though he is openly cautiously about civil rights. We can discuss his brains legislative record overall fairly meager by the time he is killed. The cuban missile crisis. When virtually all his advisers are counseling the military response. They are aggressive. Almost to a person. Hes seeking a political Solution Company and type kennedy is. I think its really important that he looks at it from another perspective the nuts and now meant of his leadership style. George this next question is why did you and and 56. Are you really be able to get all of the late 50s in the election and his entire presidency and volume two. Theyre worried about your next book. It. Fredrick i going to remember that question. And whoever posted, thats when well be seared in my memory. I am committed to doing this. I think i can do it. And is seven years of his life and of course, so much happens in those seven years. But the first volume, theres a lot thereto is extraordinarily light that he leads which helps me as a biographer, the story is remarkable. Theres so much nearly volume also on his father. He himself is a huge year in the book and several others. But i think this is good question. It got to deal with the Amazing Campaign which will begins and 57th grade and the secret to jack kennedy success in all levels of politics is that a start earlier than the competition and he works harder than the competition. So i have to really involving to deal with this flying around the country. And speaking before tiny audiences on airport tarmac since prayed for a people and tall people. And then of course ultimately, the primary battle, and 60s and then the race against nixon. And he has even gotten into the presidency. Im helped by the fact this is terrible to say but not happen suddenly. And 63. I dont think that george, but my present plan is not to get deep into the conspiracies or obviously, i think the reader might viewed at what happened in dallas. It may be a state or save space by keeping that. Limited. George so you have the same fear, and hes older than you and in some ways between 64 and 68, Lyndon Johnson the presidency went to the dachshund crash back down to. Fredrickyou are asked what leges about jfk you either when the winder up and from the biography. Are there any stories that you either could prove on that you learned and included there we dont know. What is there hidden deep in the archives that might raise eyebrows or teaches something about young jfk. Speech of part of is what weve already discussed. Maybe the viewers wanting something more specific but i do think this is young jfk who is one of his best qualities, and jacky talked about this after his death read his curiosity. His interest in the world and what made the people take. So the young jfk is an think of more serious one page each individual that we had come to believe. We already about this and i will also say that i think maybe i opened ms which is that the illnesses which were real, some of them built diagnosed but nevertheless, he thought them. I think opened the notion that they were acutely debilitating. When he put it this way. This is a guy who despite these illnesses, from a young age was extraordinarily active. And he served in the war. He had this sort of fudge to get into combat but with his father so he did. Who runs this Prison Campaign and 46 layout works everybody. Often sleeps only three or four or five hours night. This guy is supposed to be on deaths door all the time. And supposed to be so ill that he can barely function. Is able to do these things. So maybe i suggest that we should not exaggerate the scope and the importance of those illnesses. Im not sure thats quite where the question was going. George and this is a question about what he knew about his own country. He seemed to know youre up and about the South Pacific deeply from personal experience. But as far as america goes, he knew riverdale, he knew harvard. It does he know much about the country. Looking at tillis how much about the best nation of the United States and possible and no some of his views on are diversities of the American People and all the diversity at this stage of his life. Speech of things are really good question. Think its. Limited, his knowledge is. Maybe even his interest to some extent. He had not for example traveled much in itself. Before he became even a senator. So nevermind in the house. Hannah right about the small number of African Americans for example. He interacted with. Do not believe he was personally prejudiced really. But, its also true than he did not really need wasnt really animated by the fearing experiences that African Americans have. And i think that comes later and i will talk about this in volume two. I also would say that when he runs for president in 1960, and he goes to places like West Virginia and he goes to other parts of the country that is not seen before. And he sees the degree to which there are deep income disparities in the country. I dont think he had fully grasped before thought about it before. I think it is clear from lots of evidence that West Virginia in particular made a huge impression on him when he encountered. And he came to appreciate the people that he met there. And he reached out and talk to them. I dont think that was so evident before and i think well see if we can involve this early but again traveling around the country for the first time really, him seeing lots of parts that he hadnt seen before. George is interesting that it was a book and a book review that brought Hidden Poverty to his attention in a big way. Michael harrington, the other america. And then the new yorker. So that is how a sue reeve real catch, non populace. Was not a populist. Fredrick know he was on the populist. George you could say attrition. And they both suffered debilitating illnesses that made it them better people may be better politicians for somehow maybe because his career coincided with a period of prosperity, that was in the great depression. Jfk was not it was not what animated him predispute if thats true. Im glad you raised that because we not talked with the two of them in that way. I think i suggest somewhere in the book that is never westward, he was never really engaged by the fdr phenomenon. He never connected with him in some way that a lot of the people did. I thank you so extraordinary to a degree which the kennedys were insulated from the great depression. Rose kennedy said later in life that one of the best. Neurotic, was the early 1930s. That gives you a sense of how the kennedys did not experience it so i think you are quite right that jfk becomes a political age after this. The result of the war in the aftermath. And he does not see things in the same way that fdr does. Suet right. And this question is today for the service and commitment to democracy and courage, what young jack leave you hopeful is todays generation can rise to make an impact. Fredrick i am hopeful. I do think that her Younger Generation can, my own kids are an example of this but also others i think they can do this. I do think we need desperately for americans to reengage with civic life. Will need to do this. I think the example of jack kennedy and Young Jack Kennedy helps us to do this. Hope this comes out of those chapters of the book. It struck by the degree to which within the meant or maybe 1936 and 37 or 38, when he is an undergraduate. He is asking large questions about the survival democracy. Is it suited to the stage. In responding to the authoritarian threats. Can we do this. Are there leaders who will grasp this and accomplish this. Is asking that even as an undergraduate in the pieces, as in some ways, that is the heart of the thesis. Why would an chamberlain, seemingly un able to prepare for war. If it is ultimately a think the hopeful message. And he comes back to the question. I think that he decides that democracy requires able leadership more than that it requires citizens who are informed, who taken interest in policy issues. They hold their leaders accountable and then for people themselves force them to Public Service and be engaged. That seems to me that that is the most powerful part of the legacy. George thats all said. And connects with a question that just came and interested in a car in the political world. What can i learn from young jfk. In the attitude to self learning and ambition. So to interesting terms the book of life to kennedy predispute if self learning and ambition. I think that is perfect. Because he commits himself to that. To say exactly what he does. And when he comes back, after which he talked about here and 39, hes in some ways i think different. I think that senior year of college we see that selfmotivation and that determination to succeed. And he becomes much more ambitious. Ambition has to be a part of this, there is no question about this. But i do think, that it is about to respond to the question, thats an excellent question from her 20 yearold friend created it is about taking an interest in policy which sounds like you already have in Public Service and in seeing how we can make things better. In jackson in one of his papers, i think it was a junior when he writes this. For democracy to survive, requires dedicated and capable leaders. I have that slightly wrong. I shouldve checked this before we came on. That seems to me what you and others your age should think about. Because i think under threat. I am worried about the current state of it and i think its going to require all of us may be especially generation to commit yourself to the hard work involved in this. I have no doubt that democracy can work. It has worked for this country and other countries. Then i will say one of the thing which maybe is controversial. It shouldnt be. I guess its an argument for, if not any bbs. Its an argument for remembering to tweet political opponents as adversaries not enemies. And i think that is something that kennedy committed himself to. Seeing the arguments on the other side which is really hard for all of us. George thats absolutely crucial that i was making the same point fred because we now live in a political world where were rewarded for the instant victory rated for wiping out your opponent humiliating them really. On twitter and anywhere. And what is the point. It what you glean from that. It and as a journalist, like there is a connection to politics. He always benefit from going out and talking to people with their experiences different from yours. The views are different from yours. Try to understand them. Try to hear them. You dont have to like its. You dont have to be friends. You dont have to approve of their views. To make the effort to understand them. It is something that obama said. And probably, since kennedy, try to walk around in somebody elses shoes. And then you will be able to see it better, public servant. Fredrick i think thats exactly right. I think that joe biden at least has talked in similar terms and was criticized earlier this year present primary opponents for this suggestion. That ultimately we are going to have to reach out and we are going to have to bargain hard, not abandon our principles the bargain hard. Nothing is essential. Also also, total fascinating conversation to me that i talked about in the book read is i think that in 65, between jfk and his good friend and englishman name david. Who are to the Kennedy Administration becomes britains ambassador to the United States the difference right to the end. And jfk says in this conversation. I dont know if im cut out to be a politician. Because of too often see the merits of the arguments on the other side. I too often therefore become a little bit uncertain about the arguments on my own side. And so very revealing conversation. As you say george, in our day and age, we dont talk in these terms. George right, exactly. It would be interesting see invited, my analogy for him is a creature of the senate, he is a rare paul, hes a centrist and yet he is coming in and if he makes an animal in history actually will make him a consequential president. So my historical analogy of the election at the moment that we are in right now. So what about his superb sense of humor. Weve not talked about that but didnt really friends all through this book. His letters and can you Say Something about that. Fredrick yes, it is true. I called him. He maybe should have it in a text, the conan obrien is a marvelous little essay about jfks sense of humor. But obrien says, we had exactly two truly funny president s. Abraham lincoln and john f. Kennedy. And he is right about that actually. Its not to say that other president s havent had a sense of humor. But not as will be involved that as we have seen with these two. I think its an ironic sense. Kind of selfdeprecating sense of humor which i think he used to greatness. Maybe especially the white house. He held this particular skill. You see and to some extent earlier as well. And its kind of a Service Quality to him as well. And maybe in part, im sure, the people can can explain it better. So part of me, and may also have something to do with these maladies that he had. And poking fun at them and not taking himself too seriously. This made sense with also winning strategy, people liked it. It cant fully explain where it came from. But there is no question that it is there. And it is key to understanding him. George we didnt talk about bobby but two questions that im interested in this wind did jack see bobbys talent and what did jack think of bobbys work for the committee alongside him. And in part because hes quite braun. Just gets the thing right on track. I think it is hard to state how important bobby is as a mentor and as a shrewd and ultimately kind of ruthless operative. When he sees bobbys potential as a politician is a more interesting question. I dont know that i have a good answer for this. He was very devoted to his brother. When the age gap was when they were young they were not very right theres a trip in 51 that i read about to the far east. Which they become much closer. He deeply admired his brother. And im sure saw hey this is a guy who at some point should run himself or office. How he felt about bobbys devotion to mccarthy and his service on mccarthys committee, i think early on he was very much inclined to let bobby do what he felt like he should do. It was a group good career move for bobby. The father wanted bobby to have that position. I think as mccarthy became more controversial and started to doing more and more outrageous things i think it became a problem. By then, bobby is no longer in mccarthys employ, we will put it that way. He was still very close to joe mccarthy. That creates more problems i think fort jack politically. But you know, this is a very close knit family. This is not a family that screams and yells at each other. So you dont see, at least in the records i have seen, any particular anger on jacks parts about that continued loyalty on bobbys part too mccarthy. Host lets end with this rather exotic question. I sense the majority of jfks thoughts and ideas never vocalized or discussed by him. Put it another way, a lot of this thinking remains unrevealed. Therefore there is a lot about jfk, the real man, that are a mystery of bool probably never know. Do you agree or disagree . And this gets to what we talked about at the very start about how a biographer would have access to the inner life of a real person who died almost 60 years ago. Guest i think is a very perceptive question. And i do think that he does keep a part of himself secret. I think we all. But maybe he doesnt a little more than some. He is his mothers son in this regard. Because rose, very prolific in her letter writing. At least i found. An excellent biographies of ros rose. Other biographers may disagree with me. Even with her letter writing, kind of hard to penetrate in this regard. And i think some of that with jfk. I still believe, as i said when we started. Maybe this is a good place to end. I think we can get to know jack kennedy. At various points in the story, and volume one, he writes a lot. And i think is quite open and what he says in these matters. Including sometimes about himself. C has friends in particular, but others. Let us to the communication between the two of them. I think it reveals a lot. It is going to be interesting and volume two, he will be more guarded. In fact they arty know georg george, that letters, plain old letters written by him to others become more scarce. And so that is going to be a challenge. I think it surprised me the degree to which i felt i could get at the young jfk. What are their people still live who were adults when he was liv live . And who can tell you their firsthand experience . Or is that generation pretty much disappeared . Guest that generation spring much gone. There are a few and ive spoken to a few of them. The late richard goodwin, are no longer with us. I dont think there are many. I do think the magnificent jfk library, though it would be have to be used with caution. As all collections must be used with caution. I think it is a great resource. Some of those interviews were conducted soon after the assassination parade which is both a good thing and a problem. But i would rely more on those sadly then not being able to talk with people facetoface. Host will i cannot wait for the next one. Meanwhile, congrats on a marvelous book that i wish all of the success in the world. May it reach many tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of subscriptions. I want to thank the jfk library and our audience for joining us tonight. And most of all for being one of the really great historians and writers in america today. Will thank you george. To have this opportunity with you, given your work. And you know if you have not seen folks, you have you have not read youve got to get your hands on that book. Georges recent writings from the atlantic are a must read. Its been great to chat with you tonight. I too want to thank the library. Many folks in the library are thanked in my acknowledgments. I have said much more there. Now we just need the doors to reopen. So some of us can get back into those marvelous collections. Okay, good night everybody. Take care. Weeknight this month or featuring book tv programs as a preview of whats available every weekend on cspan2. Tuesday night, our topic is science. It First Research seismologists, has a dual biography of geologist in the early studies of earthquake activities in southern california. In the Space Shuttle endeavor pilot harry burke gives exploration and later author and producer and provides a followup to her late husband, karl sagan study of space. It all begins at 8 00 p. M. Eastern. And enjoy book tv on this we can every weekend on cspan2. Election day is here, november 3. Stay with cspan for who leads the country in which parties were control congress. The live coverage starts tonight at eastern and continues through washington journalists 7 00 a. M. Eastern, join the conversation, share your experience as the results come in. And hear from the candidates. Watch live on cspan and cspan. Org. Or listen live on the cspan radio app. Election night on cspan. Your place for an unfiltered view of politics. From california welcomes to it a distinguished forum dwight d eisenhower, president of the United States of america. [applause] yermak