Andrew Carnegie

I picked up this book hoping to learn how Carnegie earned his fortunes. I was deeply disappointed. One couldn't help but get the sense that the author loath Andre Carnegie. There's scarcely little about Carnegie's business dealing. And there's almost no detail about the business' profits and earnings. Such details where obviously available to David Nasaw as their existence were mentioned several times in the books, yet the author had intentionally left them out. One would be hard pressed to understand how the one time richest man in the world achieved what he did.

A large portion of the book was devoted to Carnegie's aspiration on the world stage and politics, which he is of little consequence. Relatively small portion of the book is about Carnegie the industrialist and financier. This is likely because the author is a Professor of history and probably knows little about the economy.

As the book was written in strict chronological order, all of Carnegie's life events are interlaced. The constant switching back and forth makes the story line difficult to follow. In the end, I have learned nothing useful from the book. Given that Carnegie was one of the most successful industrialist in history, this is a pity. In the end, I think David Nasaw may simply the wrong man for the job.

The first two hundred pages of this book were enthralling, the next two hundred tiring, and the last four hundred excruciating. As others here have stated this book is really a reference work, and I leave respecting it as such. My main complaint is the way it morphed.

I presume it's because, as Carnegie aged and his fame grew, the volume of text and documents associated with him grew even faster. And so the bulk of Nasaw's story is about his old age, which is less interesting and, I think, less important.

Of course, with less source material about his earlier life it's tough. Still, having read several biographies like this, here's my wish list...

Tell us more about the time period, and about the society and technology. Tell us about the shared cultural assumptions of the time. Tell us about the cities and the companies involved, give us more numbers and diagrams and photos.

Not the biographer's job perhaps, but it seems like these biographies consistently get lost in the trees.

David Nasaw's book on Andrew Carnegie was one of the more frustrating books I've read in a while. Unfortunately, the author never gives the reader a basic understanding of who Carnegie was and what motivated him, what themes are a constant in his life and help the reader feel like he knows the subject, like Ron Chernow does with Rockefeller. Instead of an analysis of Carnegie, we get a book report. In many sections I felt the writing lacked depth, particularly with respect to what was going on around Carnegie.

I'm somewhat ambivalent about Nasaw's frequent use of extended quotes from Andrew Carnegie. On one hand, what a better way to tell about Carnegie than using his own words, especially since since he speechified and wrote a lot, including an autobiography? On the other hand, the quotes quickly became tedious to read.

I'm not an expert on Andrew Carniegie, but I was let down when Nasaw didn't go into in any depth the long lasting and deep affect the Homestead strike had on the nation as a whole. The description of the event was interesting, but Nasaw totally missed the deep scar that it left on the nation for decades and decades to come.

I would also have appreciated a final chapter that tied Carnegie's whole life together, but instead, Carnegie dies and the book ends. There's no chapter on Carnegie's legacy nor any discussion of what happened to his daughter Margaret after he dies or even his multitudinous public institutions that he endowed.

The book was also very long, too long. Frankly, the only reason I plowed through it was that I had read extensively about many of the other titans during the Gilded Age and wanted to learn more about Carnegie. Joseph Kennedy seems like an interesting person, though after reading this book, I am very reluctant to read Nasaw's book on Kennedy.

Lastly, unlike the print version, the Kindle version did not include ANY photographs at all. The footnotes throughout the book also did not link up. Very frustrating.

Two stars - for the first two chapters keep you riveted.
85% of the book after that is about a long-winded saga with Frick (running the steel mills) against Andrew Carnegie and all the legal battles over Frick "shares" toward the end of Andrew Carnegie's life, almost like a 'vendetta' or "let's get the records straight" in a futile attempt to taint Andrew's legacy to the World - which of course is substantially more than that.

Not a single word on what Andrew wanted to pass on to newcomers up the success ladder, zero on the success strategies passed on to Napoleon Hill, of course, and not a word on his brainstorming techniques with 3 or 4 friends each Sunday to discuss fresh ideas, new contacts etc.. and not a word on his association with the Brotherhood.

So what you get is only what you manage to read between the lines. Obviously the young Andrew had an all encompassing energy, was a superb hussler, a top notch negotiator, with a keen eye for opportunities and an uncanny ability to 'leverage' his position.

Nonethelss, this whole book leaves you a little disappointed, maybe sad that the author - otherwise gifted - didn't fulfill the reader's anticipation.

David Nasaw is a most gifted historian and author. Few could have envied him the task of doing a life of Carnegie, who lived 83 energetic and at times tumultuous (and always noisy) years. As some reviewers note, in essence the end product comes across as more of a reference work, than an entertaining biography. Undoubtedly, this will always stand as the seminal work on an extraordinary life.

Mr. Nasaw makes copious use of primary sources, such as seemingly boundless troves of correspondence, and judicious use of reliable secondary sources. He separates the wheat from the chaff in the latter category, as much has been written about Andrew Carnegie that simply was inaccurate

A colossal figure in achievement (if not in stature), Carnegie is revealed as a true visionary. Simply put, he saw opportunities and possibilities that virtually no one else saw. Nasaw also shows how Carnegie seized upon the evolutionary, industrial Darwinism thinking of Herbert Spencer to guide his professional and personal lives. Things will always get better, thanks to the evolving genius of the most talented people, who will then better things for everyone else.

With undying faith in that credo, backed by hard work, sacrifice, incredible energy and, yes, some unsavory bits (that paled by comparison to others), he focused with a laser intensity on his goals. Once he had conquered industry, when he was by J.D. Rockefeller's own account, "the richest man in the world," he decided to devote the rest of his days to giving it all away toward the world's betterment.

And yet, as magisterial as Mr. Nasaw's account is of this remarkable man, I find myself strongly agreeing with reviewer M. Strong's (four star) observation that there is an "odd hollowness" about the book. We often receive little if any context of what working conditions were like, what the have-nots actually had and did not have; what were their bread-and-butter concerns; how, other than the disastrous Homestead strike, did they manifest their needs and spirits; what was the rest of America up to while Carnegie amassed and then dispensed with his fortune?

Instead, it seems we must read nearly every letter ever written by or to Carnegie, with little paraphrasing. (Where was the editor???) The citations in back are purely antiseptic (e.g., "AC to LW, November 29, 1886, CFP"). Why not provide detailed and meaningful end-notes for the chock-a-block details, and cut the narrative by 300-400 pages? Do we need to know of every domestic and international splendid junket?

I also longed for more information on the destinies of the myriad charitable and educational, philanthropic institutions Carnegie so generously bestowed: the end-notes would have been a great place to tell readers what has become of all of Carnegie's great works. Instead, things end with death in 1919, and yet barely a man or woman alive today does not know of Andrew Carnegie through largesse that persists. How does it? Where does it?

Several who prospered (and suffered) with Carnegie, like Henry Clay Frick, are shown to be remarkable in their own right, but similar people like Henry Phipps get short shrift. Equally puzzling, Carnegie's wife and daughter are relegated to ciphers. A "scandal" involving a woman who falsely claimed to be the mother of Andrew's lovechild is unearthed, and we're told the story has never been told, but it's reduced to one page? out of 801? Other times, the author describes meaningful photographs of Carnegie and others; yet, those are not among the photos in the book. Editor? Hello?

With such an abundance of materials from which to draw upon, most notably the writings of an "inveterate optimist" who had firm and enthusiastic opinions about every issue, and compulsively blanketed friends, the famous and the public with every musing, the chronological course taken by Mr. Nasaw must have been irresistible. My hope is that this masterful scholar's next subject will allow of many varied and unanticipated great moments, for both author's, and reader's, sakes.

A fascinating biography of the exuberant Scottish-American tycoon and philanthropist.

Nasaw covers all of Carnegie's life from early boyhood in 1830's Scotland, to ambitious telegraph boy in Pittsburgh, to iron and steel magnate, to philanthropist and finally to international peace advocate. Most of the 800 pages go swiftly. Nasaw writes well and I generally found his very detailed account valuable, especially for Carnegie's business adventures and for his final peace activities, although perhaps rather less so for all the details of his family life.

In Nasaw's account Carnegie comes across as much more of a "businessman" than an "industrialist". His initial fortune was made in his twenties through insider dealings from his role as a key aide to railroad magnates who were making their own fortunes by tricks such as awarding lucrative contracts to companies that they themselves owned. But starting in his late twenties Carnegie did build a mighty iron and steel empire, with remorseless business logic.

Carnegie in his middle age inevitably comes across as a great hypocrite. He had given speeches extolling the virtues of unions and of the need for employers to treat workers fairly, but he went on to mercilessly repress workers at his own plants, including cutting wages, extending hours, and suppressing all unions. He denied responsibility for the climactic Homestead lockout which was designed to break the steel unions, but Nasaw shows that he was kept fully informed and must have either made or supported the key decisions. Nasaw explains how Carnegie rationalized this harshness to himself, as a necessary part of business and of social evolution, but still his deeds fit poorly with his words.

However in his later life, especially after selling Carnegie Steel, Carnegie became indisputably a genuine exuberant philanthropist. He lived well (very well indeed!) but he also gave away a vast fortune, founding an astounding 2500 libraries, plus many Institutions, the Carnegie Hall, various Hero funds, and many peace organizations.

In his latter years, Carnegie's incessant lobbying for international peace is truly striking. Nasaw sometimes deprecates Carnegie's endless expressions of optimism in the face of repeated failures and his ceaseless lobbying of presidents, monarchs, and statesmen. But given that Carnegie believed war would be a disaster (as WWI proved all too well) and was committed to doing whatever he could for peace, then his behavior seems both entirely rationale and commendable. Yes, he was often grasping at straws and he did aggressively pester and "name drop" to try to move things forward, but given the stakes it is difficult to condemn his donning of a bold face and his trying again and again in the face of failures and cynicism. Alas, his efforts were probably inevitably doomed, but given his beliefs and commitment, it seems hard to criticize him for trying as hard as he did.

Overall, Carnegie's life is a fascinating one, involving many contrasts and apparent contradictions. Nasaw captures it well and succeeds in making Carnegie a surprisingly sympathetic character, without concealing his flaws.

I would love to give this work a higher rating than 3 "stars." Carnegie is a very important figure from the late 19th and early 20th century, someone whose life story reveals much about his times. Like Rockefeller, he could practice, or at least countenance, some very tough, self-focused business practices, yet at the same time engage in incredible works of charity towards others. And like Rockefeller, he seemed to be able to balance these two seemingly conflicting goals without ever seeing tension between these two realms of his life. Many of the institutions that he began are strewn across our social and physical landscape. Some are easily recognizable because they bear his name (Carnegie Hall, Carnegie-Mellon, Carnegie Institute for Peace) while others are not so easily identified (TIAA-CREF, Carnegie libraries all over the western world). Interestingly, Carnegie was a confirmed capitalist who held many very progressive political views.

Yet with all the important reasons for us to learn about Carnegie, this hefty, 801 page biography disappoints. The design is slavishly chronological, with no concessions to themes. Surely there were some themes to Carnegie's life, weren't there? His belief in the capitalist system? His promotion of the Gospel of Wealth? His love of the "good life?" Yet David Nasaw never lets us escape from the prison of the calendar, as this book marches on, chapter after chapter, 42 in all, never departing very long to explore a theme for too long, lest we miss the turning of a page of the calendar. This could have been a much better read if the book had been broken into parts, with each part representing different seasons of Carnegie's life, for surely it did seem to have seasons, each one seemingly representing his focus on different themes or interests. Each part could have had a chapter focusing on the theme for that season, perhaps giving us more insight into his motivations.

But I'm dreaming here about another book, one that has not been written, and certainly not Nasaw's biography. This plodding work lulls you to sleep, regaling the reader with the annual repetitions of Carnegie's life, needlessly repeating the cadence of his years. This project was in need of a demanding and thoughtful editor, and unfortunately for Nasaw and Carnegie such a person never showed up.

Andrew Carnegie was both the Bill Gates and Thomas Friedman of the Gilded Age. An industrial visionary and brilliant business practitioner with a ruthless drive to be the best and most efficient Andrew Carnegie would semi-retire in middle age, and in his later years focus on giving away his vast fortune to remedy what he believed were the most perplexing problems of his age. But Mr. Carnegie was also the Gilded Age's prophet and messiah, borrowing Herbert Spencer's philosophy to hail America's Gilded Age as progressive and splendid, and to justify the worst abuses of the age as necessary and right.

In his preface the historian David Nasaw notes that much of what has been written about Carnegie has been overly sympathetic, or -- in the case of Mr. Carnegie's autobiography -- just plain self-interested. So we could happily expect a more balanced and nuanced view of the great man, or at least some juicy gossip. Unfortunately, Mr. Nasaw's book is yet another overly sympathetic portrait, and a sedated and boring one at that.

Here is a man who did not marry until he was fifty, and who did not give his young bride (almost thirty years his junior) a child until she desperately begged for one -- and so how could Mr. Nasaw not speculate once that Carnegie was possibly a closet homosexual? His fanatical devotion to his mother and his narcissm -- he wanted to be respected as a writer and a thinker, and often paid for his writings to be published -- are hints as well.

What's most annoying about the book is Mr. Nasaw's presumptive tone. He tells us that Mr. Carnegie's greatest mission before he died was to give back to his community all the wealth he had accumulated. How could anyone know what really went on Carnegie's mind, and who would dare to presume Carnegie's priorities? Throughout the book Mr. Nasaw would claim that Carnegie had a very good rationale in banishing the unions from his steel mills, and in forcing his workers to work for long hours and little pay -- because he wanted to make as much money to give back to his community as possible.

Considering that Carnegie was a prime subscriber to Herbert Spencer's Social Darwinism, that he was competitive (he worked hard to create the most efficient and profitable steel mill in the world), that he was a control freak (he would wrest back control of his corporation from his lieutenant Henry Clay Frick, who had proven himself nothing but loyal and competent), and that he was a megalomaniac (in his final years he would single-handedly attempt to solve all of the world's problems) it's fair to say that Carnegie in his heart felt he did not have to justify himself to anyone: he was just right. Breaking unions and exploiting workers meant efficient and profitable enterprises, and efficient entrepreneurs meant progress, modernity, and civilization.

Even if David Nasaw considered reasons for Carnegie's asexuality and considered the extent of Carnegie's narcissm and megalomania it would still have a pretty boring book, and it's because Carnegie -- despite all his greatness -- is not deserving of an 801-page biography. A naturally optimistic and positive individual his life did nothing but justify his worldview. An early beneficiary of the cronyism in the railroads he became a beneficiary of the U.S. government's tariffs to protect the steel industry against British competition. The only bumps in Carnegie's otherwise charmed life (the 1892 Homestead affair where Carnegie viciously and violently broke the unions and his nasty break with Henry Clay Frick, who then publicly declared how the tariff regime was grossly enriching Carnegie at the expense of American consumers) are interesting but did nothing to change the course of Carnegie's life. There is no conflict and climax in Carnegie's life, just one assured ascent borne of his work ethic and his optimism and his incredible luck.

The real star of the book should not have been Carnegie but the Gilded Age itself. Unfortunately and surprisingly Mr. Nasaw talks little of the Gilded Age, and instead chooses to write a a year-by-year account of Mr. Carnegie's life, including the tedious trivia of Carnegie's vacations. And do we really need to know every huge estate Carnegie bought and renovated?

I haven't read enough of Mr. Nasaw to know his ability as a historian but the problem with biographers is that they often internalize the values and thinking of their subjects. And this is a book that Carnegie could have easily written himself: be charming and be glib, stray and amuse with the trivial and personal, and talk for a long, long time until your readers have no choice but to agree with you.

The book is lengthy, if nothing else. The biography is also well researched, but the author almost makes it seem like he wants to drop the hint of just how much research he did. If name-dropping had a research-amount equivalent, this author definitely does it. Still a good read though and highly recommended.

It is a tad difficult to understand the rave reviews this book received. Not that it is teribile, it is not. It is well-written, fair-minded, and abundently researched. But it is also overly long and in the end a rather pedestrian biography of a complicted and not pedestrian business man and philanthropist. It makes the reader do the work the writer should have done - separating the wheat from the chaff. What really made Carnegie so successful at accumulating capital? How did he manage to compartmentalize his life so effectively? How did he justify - to himself - such nasty business practices leaving his laboring employees so overworked and underpaid? Unfortunately even readers who make their way through this tome will still be left wondering.