But, as good as this book is, one has to wonder if it's really worth the 500+ pages Shesol devotes to it. (Chris Matthews covered the just as interesting JFK-Nixon relationship in his much shorter, more piquant book "Kennedy & Nixon.) Shesol goes to some length to justify this book's subtitle -- "the feud that defined a decade" -- but doesn't really succeed. Say what you will about either LBJ or RFK, but both were far too canny politically to let their personalities completely overpower the events of the 1960s.
This book is comprehensively researched, sensitive, clear-headed, and impressive...just as you would expect from an academic history paper, which is what the genesis of this book was. But for all that, this book lacks the narrative force, drive, and passion that, say, Robert Caro is likely to bring to this topic when he covers it in his comprehensive, controversial series of "The Years of Lyndon Johnson" books--which are recommended to readers who like this story.
Especially early in this book, Shesol goes off on tangents (for example, on William Manchester & Jackie Kennedy) which might impress a history professor but aren't really necessary in this depth in this type of book.
Readers interested in RFK in particular should check out a very underrated RFK book by Jules Whitcover called "85 Days: The Last Campaign of Robert Kennedy."
Readers can argue forever who, in the end, Shesol likes better. My vote says RFK, but that's far from certain, and it really doesn't matter anyway. Enjoy this book for what it is - a good, somewhat dry, tackling of a subject that is both more simple and more complex than Shesol says.
Both men are drawn in stark relief to each other. One point I think is worth mentioning is that they really did have a lot in common. Both men were very bright, very aggressive and very determined. Both men had strong convictions and personalities to match. As has been duly recorded over time, one major point of contention was the Vietnam War.
I agree with one reviewer who questioned the harsh description of Johnson's character. I happen to believe that Johnson was a good, effective administrator. As for the Vietnam War, he inherited that headache and as an unfortunate consequence, followed bad advice about that war instead of bailing out sooner. RFK seemed to feel LBJ was wholly responsible for the war escalation. He neglected to note in his arguments and criticisms of President Johnson that the Vietnam conflict began in the late 1950s! (ca 1957, under Eisenhower's administation). During President Kennedy's tenure in office, the Vietnam conflict was well underway, but it is interesting to note that this author does not really point out that fact.
In this reading, one gets the feeling that Robert Kennedy was still working to protect the interest and reputation of his late brother. Since President Johnson assumed office after President Kennedy's death, one could sympathize with the Attorney General's resentment of anyone assuming that office.
The whole description of the "feud" is really a clashing of ideologies; it is really the parting of ways over issues. This author, to his credit does a thorough job in researching this subject and portrays historical events accurately.
It is hoped that in time, the general perception of LBJ will be softened; LBJ was by far and away the most progressive administrator on domestic issues since FDR. LBJ had more bills enacted during his tenure in office than any other president to date. He took a strong stand on environmental, education and civil rights issues that have positive impacts to this day. He was the president who negotiated and succeeded in securing public/subsidized housing, Head Start programs for underprivileged school children; MediCaid/MediCare and the 1965 Voters' Rights Acts which have today a positive impact on the large number of minorities who vote today. It is the opinion of this reviewer that President Johnson was a good and decent man whose many bills, budgets and proposals have had many positive impacts on the world as we now know it.
Robert Kennedy, the tireless worker who actively became involved in Civil Rights after the death of his brother, provided a parallel view of the work Johnson was already immersed in. Both men shared a vision and a quest for a better world with more advantages extended to all persons and with the rights of all persons more fully protected and enacted.
Robert Kennedy was in many ways not too different from President Johnson in objectives.