Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #348630 in Books
• Published on: 1982-06-16
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 384 pages

Review

"A superb book that will supplant the two dozen or so Carver biographies already on the library shelves. It is an engaging treatment of a fascinating man."--History: Reviews of New Books
"A remarkable study of a remarkable man."--The History Teacher
"An intimate and sensitive psychological portrait, a well-informed intellectual sketch, and an unusually readable scientific treatise, this biography of Carver has a depth and a breadth of research rarely found in such studies."--John Blassingame, Yale University

About the Author
Linda O. McMurry is at North Carolina State University.

Customer Reviews

Super quick
The shipping was quick. I ordered a used copy of the book and it arrived in excellent condition. I was extremely pleased and if given the chance, I would order it all over again.

Is this a homophobic conspiracy?????
So long as Bart Simpson can say, "George Washington Carver is the guy who carved up George Washington." and so long as Black Americans are portrayed as lacking math and science aptitude, there needs to be publication about the importance of George Washington Carver. This book said many important things. For example, George Washington Carver was a credit to dark-skinned blacks because many critics at the time (and many people today) note that most famous or achieving Blacks were partially white. Also, this book suggests that the relationship between Carver and the famous black activist at the university where he worked did not always get along. Still, if Langston Hughes' biographer was criticized for downplaying Hughes' gay experiences, equal noise should be made here. The author repeats in several passages that no proof exists to say Carver was gay. Well, why would that be a concern? Who made the suggestion? Why isn't the allegation examined in more detail in this text? The author mentioned that Carver loved to give young men massages in peanut oil. Is that not considered homoerotic solely because it doesn't involve genital contact? This book was published a year after AIDS was discovered and when homophobia was at an apex. Thus, perhaps the author's avoidances can be contextualized and forgiven. Nevertheless, I find this book disturbingly heterosexist and I would avoid reading more works from this biographer.