I have put this book on my schedule at least a dozen times in the last two years and then passed it up because I felt I just could not tackle a book about politics. Stupid me. This book is about political shenanigans, lust for power, and greed, but it is so much more about human relationships, the complex ways in which our lives are tied to the people who float in and out of our lives, and how we choose to judge ourselves and others.

At one point in the narrative Willie Stark says that everything in life is bad, and that goodness is something man must create from the bad he is given. It is much “the ends justify the means” for Willie, and we see, like a slow-motion reel, as that philosophy leads him and his followers deeper into a quicksand. It is this that makes the novel work so perfectly, for Penn Warren does not create any perfect individuals here, each of them is flawed and very, very real. One of his major themes is that of responsibility. When are we responsible for what happens to us or around us? Can we shuffle off bad events to fate, or do we have to accept our role in them, however small or untraceable that role might be?

There is that weighty, intelligent element of this book, and believe me when I say this book is about something on every single page; but there is also the remarkable command of language that comes from the heart of the poet who is Robert Penn Warren. Long passages of lyrical quality are peppered throughout, and not once did I have the temptation to skip a single word. In fact, I read many of them more than once.

Her eyes were glittering like the eyes of a child when you give a nice surprise, and she laughed with a sudden throaty, tingling way. It is the way a woman laughs for happiness. They never laugh that way just when they are being polite or at a joke. A woman only laughs that way a few times in her life. A woman only laughs that way when something has touched her way down in the very quick of her being and the happiness just wells out as natural as breath and the first jonquils and mountain brooks. When a woman laughs that way it always does something to you. It does not matter what kind of a face she has got either. You hear that laugh and feel that you have grasped a clean and beautiful truth. You feel that way because that laugh is a revelation. It is a great impersonal sincerity. It is a spray of dewy blossom from the great central stalk of All Being, and the woman’s name and address hasn’t got a damn thing to do with it. Therefore, the laugh cannot be faked. If a woman could learn to fake it she would make Nell Gwyn and Pompadour look like a couple of Campfire Girls wearing bifocals and ground-gripper shoes with bands on their teeth. She could get all society by the ears. For all any man really wants is to hear a woman laugh like that.
Come on–is that not heavenly?

Finally, there is an entire chapter, about half-way through the book, that is devoted to another story entirely. Our narrator, Jack Burden, recounts a history he researched for his college thesis, and tells us the history of Cass Mastern. I was engrossed in this tale, but wondered how Penn Warren was ever going to link it to the other, modern, political tale he was writing. Suffice it to say, he does, and with such a delicate hand that it seems like a gossamer thread that was lying, waiting to be pulled at just the right moment. I think this might have felt like a disruption in the wrong hands, with Penn Warren it is just another bit of magic.

I am reading all the Pulitizer winners for a challenge I set for myself in 2016. I have not always been impressed with the acumen of the Pulitzer Committee, but this time, oh my, yes, they got it right. This book is timeless, for it is about humanity, and in many ways, no matter the outward transformations time brings, humans do not change.

Jack Burden is one of my favorite characters. He hovers as a reflection of what could've been, yet his finality terrifies me. The scenes detailing Burden smoking in the dark and the winds arriving from the Canadian north are amazing. Warren eyes both Faulkner and Gibbon. His study of power echoes the Bard, though his poetic flourishes are native-born. He eyes his betters and replicates to placate Carson and Marsa Bill. All The Kings Men is regarded as the best example of the political novel. I'm not convinced by those hazy parameters. Warren looks at Time. He ponders Power. History remains as volatile as a Southern river. Sometimes the levees need to be dynamited for the common good, or at least to benefit those in peak tax brackets. Warren reveals that every Icon has greasy fingers, the task is to uncover such.

Robert Penn Warren is world-class with figurative language, and this adds almost mythological depth to his narrative struggle. However, he is SO good with similes and metaphors that this seems to preoccupy him and actually distracts from the progress of the story. I think I counted three different comparisons in succession to describe the same event. Too much of a good thing.

Nevertheless, this is an intriguing read. To get inside the head of a powerful man and those around him is a rare privilege. To pity them, and those who pin their hopes on them, is to be human.

Meaning to do good, Willie Stark rises from self-educated lawyer to political bigwig and eventually governor. Along the way he loses his moral compass and develops a taste for power, resorting to bullying, bribery, blackmail - whatever it takes - to get what he wants.







Willie does manage to help some of his constituents, taxing the wealthy to provide schools and hospitals for the poor. But he also betrays his wife; raises a selfish, self-absorbed son; corrupts good people; and eventually reaps the consequences of his actions.





Willie's story is told by Jack Burden, a journalist who signs on to be Willie's right hand man. Thinking of himself as essentially a good guy Jack believes he's 'only doing his job' when he betrays some of his closest friends at Willie's behest.





I gave the book 4 stars (rather than 5) because the philosophical rantings of some characters was tedious and incomprehensible (to me). Overall, this is a superbly written book with fascinating characters and the trajectory of a Greek tragedy. Though published in the 1940s the book seems just as relevant today in it's depiction of political machinations. Highly recommended.

You can follow my reviews at https://reviewsbybarbsaffer.blogspot....

First off, I would nominate this book as one highly in need of a much improved cover design. That being said, it perfectly fits the old adage about judging a book by it's ( mundane) cover. I love it when a book surprises me and the dread of reading it ( club choice) turns into excitement. The back-page blurb praises it as a Pulitzer Prize winner following the political career of Willie Stark, a fictional character loosely based on that of Huey "Kingfish" Long a post Depression Era Louisiana governor. Stark who starts out as a refreshingly idealistic man " of the people" ultimately ends up caught in a web of the corruption often associated with power. So yes, it's a precautionary tale, but perhaps even more about the life of Jack Burden, a sort of " every man" who works for Stark in a "holding it all together " capacity and learns a lot of life lessons the hard way. Though cited on the cover as THE definitive novel about American Politics ( NYTimes) I was happy to find it is written in a descriptive "old classic" format which makes it truly an enjoyable read. If you read it remember it was published in 1946, as it is very filled with characters who have stereotypical notions of the time ( meaning racist and very sexist) including our narrator who though interesting enough, is not always easy to like. Anyway to my total surprise , I'm giving this book a five star rating and thanking whomever it was who chose this as an April Selection for On The Southern Literary Trail. Great choice !!
Timely note: The 2006(audience rated 4 star) movie with Sean Penn, Jude Law, and Kate Winslet will be on Starz 4/25 and 4/26. I watched it on Amazon and quite enjoyed it since I liked the book. There is an earlier movie that is supposed to be very good ( thanks Diane B.) but that I cannot readily find.

Much more than just a great political novel or a great story, All the King’s Men digs deep into the human psyche. Can we always know the dividing line between good and bad? Can good come out of evil? If not how do we ever rise above our weaknesses? Is our identity built on our parents, our heritage? What if we find out our father was not who we thought. Does that make us different? Do we really know ourselves, our friends, or do we reference past images? Are we the same person as an adult that we were as a child? If not when does one person end and the other begin? When confronted by emotional pain and conflict do we become insular and dehumanize others or do we actively engage and work through it? When are the consequences of our actions our responsibility and when are they the responsibility of others that act upon them? If you enjoy tackling questions like these, Warren’s masterfully written book is a must read.

We are presented Willy Stark, based on former Louisiana governor and senator Huey Long, who fights to help the poor and oppressed and in so doing succumbs to immoral methods to fight a corrupt political establishment. Is this wrong if there was no other way to do it? But once adopting expedient means such as bribery and intimidation Willy cannot turn back. Is exploitive political leadership inevitable, regardless of the original intent?

This novel is excellent on many levels. First it is an engaging story of political intrigue and the individual’s search for identity and place in the world. Second it is the stories of the characters (Willie Stark, Jack Burden, Cass Mastern, Tom Stark, Anne Stanton and more), tightly woven to produce a single narrative and support a common theme. That a novel of this length and complexity had every storyline lead to the same important ideas and questions is remarkable. Nothing seemed superfluous. Third, the prose is exquisite without ever seeming excessive, another rare quality. The descriptions of people and settings create a vivid picture of life in the Louisiana of the 1920’s and 1930’s. It’s easy to see why Robert Penn Warren was the USA’s first poet laureate. Fourth, All the King’s Men is deeply philosophical and Warren cuts to the chase. Take this passage, “…no story is ever over, for the story which we think is over is only a chapter in a story which will not be over, it is just an inning, and that game has a lot more than nine innings. When the game stops it will be called on account of darkness. But it is a long day.”

Recommended for the reader who wants to explore the concept of personal responsibility and contemplate the meaning behind our thoughts and actions, who loves superbly crafted prose turned into a purposeful and compelling story and who appreciates history brought vibrantly to life.

Honestly... a let down. I was really looking forward to reading this book, especially given the story/setting and the wonderful reviews I read on Goodreads. However, I had to stop reading it just under halfway through.

I am at a loss as to why Warren won the Pulitzer in 1947 for this novel. The writing style is atrocious. There are countless long, run-on sentences (some of them run for half a page - literally) that are continuously overdrawn in metaphor and simile. I'm a fan of florid writing, but Warren's attempt is so awkward and it fails miserably. On more than one occasion, I found myself questioning what he was initially describing after going on and on and on and on and... you get my point. There were however brief moments of beautiful writing, but overall, it was smothered by his constant, tangential ramblings.

As far as the story is concerned, it never really.... captivated me. I never felt dragged into the story. At all. The pacing was painfully slow, and it became more and more laborious to keep turning the pages. With regards to the characters, well, talk about one-dimensional. The dialogue of Stark in particular is horrendously repetitive, as he manages to say the EXACT SAME THING over and over again in certain scenes. No one is really 'likeable' in this book, and while I understand that that is OK, I felt next to nothing for any of the characters.

I HATE not finishing a book, I really do. I feel as though one should tough it out, and finish what you started. However, I will be breaking that sentiment with this novel. I decided to give this novel 1 star. I like to find at least some redeeming quality in a book (in this case, there were moments of excellent prose, which is probably why I continued to stick around), but in this case, it was next to impossible.

Maybe I will revisit this novel in the future. Although, it won't be for a while.

▫️Գրքի գործողությունները տեղի են ունենում ԱՄՆ-ում 1922-ից 1939 թվականներին: Վեպի գլխավոր հերոսը Վիլլի Ստարկն է, ով դառնում է նահանգապետ, ու ամբողջ գրքի ընթացքում կարելի է տեսնել, թե ինչպես է նա սկսում փոխվել։

▫️Մինչ իշխանության գալը նա հավատում էր ազնվությանը, դեմ էր քաղաքական գործիչների կեղտոտ մեթոդներին, բայց քաղաքականությունը փոխում է բոլորին։
Հեղինակը երբեմն արտահայտում է իր մտքերը փիլիսոփայի, երբեմն՝ հոգեբանի տեսանկյունից։

▫️Գիրքը երկար կարդացի ու մի փոքր դժվարությամբ, բայց կարող եմ ասել , որ այն երբեք չեմ մոռանա։ Սա այն գրքերից է , որ դաջվում է սրտումդ և հանգիստ չի տալիս։ Այստեղ դուք կգտնեք ամեն ինչ՝ սեր, խիղճ, հանցագործություններ և հատուցում, մի ամբողջ կյանք:

▫️Ինձ համար վեպը քաղաքականության մասին չէ, այն մարդկային էության մասին է, այն մասին, ինչի դեմ մարդիկ չեն կարող պայքարել։

▫️Վեպում չկան պարզ պատասխաններ, չկա ակնհայտ բարոյականություն, ամեն ինչ բարդ է ինչպես կյանքը։

▫️Բոլոր հերոսները բարդ և երկիմաստ են: Նույնիսկ նրանք, ովքեր առաջին հայացքից պարզ ու հասկանալի են։ Կարդում ես ու տեսնում, որ բոլորը փորձում են լավ գործ անել, բայց իրականում ոչ մեկին չի հաջողվում։

Իսկ հայերեն թարգմանության մասին խոսքեր չկան։

Well written.
...but like I needed another reason to be cynical and depressed over politics right now.

Compelling, overstuffed, overplotted, sexist, labyrinthine, poetic, atmospheric. To me this book's status as The Great American Political Novel seems like a terrific bitter joke, because the author's vision of "politics" is comprised entirely of blackmail, physical intimidation, pork-barreling, rabble-rousing, nepotism, bribery, rigged elections, and hilariously contrived "family values" photo shoots. (I love the scene where a photographer and two aides attempt to wrestle a comatose, foul-smelling dog into position for a shot of the dog leaping up to greet its beloved master, the Governor!)

I would place this novel in the Philosophical Potboiler genre (together with "East of Eden" and "Sophie's Choice"). There are lengthy meditations on the Human Condition, the nature of History, the problem of Free Will, the Original Sin of slavery as a hereditary taint corrupting the southern upper class, etc... woven among scenes featuring such archetypes as the Angelic Woman (Anne Stanton), the Demonic Woman (Sadie Burke, and Cass Mastern's mistress), the Saintly Aesthete and Crypto-Homosexual (Adam Stanton), the Seductive Mother, the "Colonel Sanders" With a Secret (Judge Irwin), and What's Bred in the Bone Coming Out in the Flesh (Tom Stark, the embodiment of his father's egoism and brutality). In the ranks of minor characters we find the Long-Suffering Wife in the Country (Mrs. Stark), and Flannery O'Connor-style Mad Missionary (Jack's father). What an array!

There are a number of rather heavy-handed themes, of which I thought the most interesting was the contrast between Jack the self-identified "student of history" and product of History, and Willie the man without a history... no family, no formal education, no tradition, nothing to explain his ambition, charisma, ruthlessness, and power over others. There seems to be a trade-off between History and Act. Jack is Burdened by the past at every level -- his parents' broken marriage, his half-mad father, his unfinished dissertation, the end of the plantation class's reign in Southern politics, the guilt of slavery. He lives in a fog of depression, cynicism, sophistication, and rationalization. He is fascinated by Willie at their first meeting because Willie is his opposite: an earnest rube who seems unaware of his own dorkiness and believes the political game could and should be played fair.

But Willie isn't just a naif. He's also a kind of monster. Even at that early stage there's a monstrous ego and ambition germinating inside him... ambition not for political goals but for personal power and domination. Where does his ambition come from? What sets Willie apart from any other impoverished child of dirt farmers in any other wretched little town like Mason City? And which side is the true Willie Stark -- the idealist who fights on behalf of poor farmers and families, the builder of new roads and schools and hospitals, or the bully who fights for the sadistic joy of humiliating and dominating others?

These mysteries haunt the novel, and Penn Warren never offers a solution. Willie remains an enigma from start to finish. In fact I felt that Penn Warren wrote himself into a corner - he COULDN'T solve the enigma of Willie Stark's origins and essential nature, so he shifted focus to the more solvable mysteries in Jack Burden's past.

I don't think the Jack Burden plot has aged particularly well. It has the kind of heavy-handed Freudianism you see in 1950s movies... the seductive mother, the discovery of the True Father; the taboo of virginity; the sorting of women into angels and whores, spirits and bodies. Almost every character has at least one light or dark "double" (Willie/Jack, Willie/Adam, Jack/Adam, Sadie/Ann, Burden/Irwin, Lois/Ann, etc), which is very schematic. The happy ending is only achieved by the death/disappearance of everyone but Jack and Ann... they don't so much overcome or escape the Burden of history as have history conveniently relax its grip on them.

Don’t get too caught up in the belief that this book is, as the back of my copy suggests, “The definitive novel about American politics”. Oh, it’s “definitive” alright, and it’s both “American” and “politics”, but those words limit rather than describe the places this novel takes you.

First an admission on my part- there were three motivations which led me to tackle this 600 page beast: 1) It was selected as one of the monthly group reads within the Goodreads group “On the Southern Literary Trail”- come join us for more fun; 2) I found a great paperback copy at Goodwill for $1.99; 3) I had just finished Season 2 of Netflix’s Kevin Spacey production of “House of Cards”. The back cover blurb had me fooled into thinking this book would help keep those endorphins flowing until next season’s release (which isn’t till February I hear).

To that third point, the similarities are certainly there. A young, ambitious, Southern man takes the view that the best way to live out destiny is to take charge. Alter destiny, and in doing so, “create” your way in life. Just like the lead character in Netflix’s modern day political series, Willie Stark is an animal. He’s apt at finding leverage points, using others to place stresses on those weaknesses, and he’s unafraid to get his hands dirty in ways that others would view as ruthless and immoral. Both characters, during their development as young men realized that with intentional study, careful manipulation, and a willingness to embrace the less “traditional” portions of the electorate power grid (the poor and disadvantaged) they could gain influence and even power over the more “traditional” portions of the electorate power grid (the rich and powerful). But, as I said, this book isn’t about Willie Stark or his shenanigans……..it’s about the human condition.

Enter the more central character to my view of this book, Jack Burden. Jack was the product of an altogether different “rise to the top” story. His mother was “rescued” by a well-intentioned attorney representing the lumber camp she called home. The hero swept her off her feet and delivered her to a life of higher society and success. Along the way, she learned that her own influence on the world might best be leveraged using her beauty and charm. Jack was exposed to all the other “normal kids” in the neighborhood; his childhood playmates were in actuality the then Governor’s son and daughter (but I promise this book isn’t about politics).

Fast forward to Willie Stark’s life. By a chance encounter (“chance” is only accurate if you chose to believe this book is about politics), Willie Stark later employs a now post-college newsboy Jack Burden as a chief officer in his political machine. Jack is his “behind the scenes” dig up dirt man. He’s a pawn of sorts, but in the traditional way. Willie allows Jack great independence. He operates of his own free will. Cherry-picking his assignments for the most part (that point could be argued, but I see evidence that he only did what he “wanted” to do unlike some who didn’t think through their assignments of personal risk; he is certainly allowed latitude in what, how, and when he interacts with his “Boss” . Along the way, Jack is forced to confront his own past, his present, and his future.
So, if it isn’t about politics, what is it about you ask?

Well......there are broad themes of humanity; good versus evil (and whether that’s even possible), how our destiny can’t be made so much as it plays out according to some cosmic (not Godly) “Twitch”; but neither of those concepts prevail in the end.

It’s my thought that the closing of the book holds its secret. The original “rescuer” I referenced above, the attorney turned perhaps nutcase evangelist turned care giver turned care receiver surmises after much thought what in my view Warren might have intended the entire book to question. That thought then overpowers the other thoughts put to the test earlier in the text; Burden (interesting name choice) is quoted in the closing line of the book in a way I think points to that very possibility. The dictation that the quotes surmises that God..........well, I had better stop there so I don't spoil the surprise.

I have several quotes from this book which will make it to my profile page, but not in the review itself. I instead will leave you with two other “quotes” from works that I had no idea would work their way into my brain when I started into this “House of Cards” book. Most readers will not see the connections, but this is my review, and I see them, so read all three books and see where it takes you:

n  “I am the chosen of the Lord, for who He loveth, so doeth He chastiseth. But I be durn if He dont take some curious ways to show it, seems like”n – William Faulkner in As I Lay Dying

Lastly, and it pains me to put quotation marks around anything Cormac-

n  “To watch these things issuing from the otherwise mute pastoral morning is a man at the barn door. He is small, unclean, unshaven. He moves in the dry chaff among the dust and slats of sunlight with a constrained truculence. Saxon and Celtic bloods. A child of God much like yourself perhaps.”n –Cormac McCarthy in Child of God

A Pulitzer Prize winning novel based on a real life politician Huey Long, or so it goes. This novel does focus on the dark side of some people who go to great lengths to achieve and keep power over the ones they are suppose to help. Public service and it follows that still the lessons learned are soon forgotten. I thought it was a well written novel but not one that is going to stay with me.