Berlin 1961 by Frederick Kempe ~ September Book Club Online

[Jonathan]

The Book Club Online is  the oldest  book club on the Internet, begun in 1996, open to everyone.  We offer cordial discussions of one book a month,  24/7 and  enjoy the company of readers from all over the world.  everyone is welcome to join in.

Berlin 1961 by Frederick Kempe

JOIN US in September as we renew our history, a more accurate history, of events that most of us remember very well.   Historians are now able to not only do research into fresh new documents, but personal interviews have uncovered a wealth of information that is stunning to read.  A young, untested, wealthy,  U.S. president meets a Russian premier, son of a coal miner; Kennedy and Khrushchev, opposite in every way, yet holding the world in their hands.  It's drama at the very best. President Kennedy called the year a "string of disasters;" Kempe called it one of the worst of any modern presidency.   The book is divided into three parts:  THE PLAYERS, THE GATHERING STORM AND THE SHOWDOWN. Fascinating history, dramatic with new research into documents never before explored.

The Players

     

 Left to right: Krushchev - Ulbricht - Kennedy - Adenauer

Discussion Schedule

Sept  1-8      Part I
Sept  9-15    Part II
Sept 16-30   Part III and Epilogue

 

Some Topics for Consideration
Sept 9-15      Part II  Pages 129-290

1.  How did the President elect prepare himself for performing the duties of the office during the pre-inauguration weeks, Nov 5, 1960 – Jan 19, 1961?  To whom (what individuals) did he go for council, information and advice on how to run the Presidential office?   Discuss the Inauguration  Ceremony.   Do you have any personal recollection of it?

2. What were the results of the sub-rosa meetings between the President’s brother, Robert Kennedy and the Soviet NKVD Agent attached to the Washington Soviet Embassy, Georgi Bloshakov.  More specifically from these meetings what details did Kennedy learn about Russian policy and plans and what details did Khrushchev learn about American plans?
  
3. Discuss the Bay of Pigs Invasion of Cuba.  What last minute changes by President Kennedy in plans greatly affected the results?  What were the results and the consequence of the operation?  And what did the President learn from it?

4. When Kennedy agreed to meet Khrushchev was he ready?  Discuss the course of the two day conference in Vienna, June 3-4 1961 and the events leading to its rather abrupt end.   In particular discuss specific Kennedy failures mentioned on pp232-234.

5. How would you describe the mood of the President and his American advisors on Air Force one after the abrupt second day conference ending?

6. Discuss the situation at the end of the Vienna meeting resulting from Khrushchev’s ultimatum that he would sign a peace treaty East Germany ending WW II giving East Germany full control of its borders effectively ending U.S. rights in Berlin.
 
7.  At this point what options were open for President Kennedy?  Did Kennedy seem to realize limitations on his Power to respond?  To whom did Kennedy turn for advice? What concrete steps were taken in preparation for war? Who were the hawks, who were the doves?   How did a new more detailed map of East Berlin figure in determining future events?
  
 Related links:
Frederick Kempe's home page;
 New York Times Book Review;

Discussion Leaders:   Ella  & Harold

[Jonathan]

The 'short stories' are grim reminders of the many reports we got of how bad things were for many in Berlin. In East Berlin. They also bring to mind the many espionage stories we read. The Sniper! He really had something going. Playing his game with the Western intelligence people. And once he was safely in the West, he put on his crazy act. 'Kissinger was a KGB spy.'!!! Wasn't George Bush taken in by one of these know-it-alls? Via the CIA, of course. Some thing to do with the WMD business.

[Ella Gibbons]

JOANK, yes, I agree we must be mindful of assumptions; I suppose if we knew how many of the books in the Bibliography the author actually researched we could forgive a few inferences.  However, I'm glad you are finding the book interesting.

The New York Times Book Review is in the heading and here is the Washington Post Review:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books/frederick-kempes-berlin-1961/2011/05/23/AG6W5rOH_story.html


JONATHAN, thank you for the quote from Rumsfield's book.  Are you enjoying it?  All of the older statemen are coming out with books now it seems.  Are you going to read Cheney's book?  Who else has written one or who will be next?  I smiled at your last post!  JFK was very smart I think to stay clear of them all.  He had Bobby!

JEAN, I agree, the youth of America have always been the progressive, more liberal section of the country and as you stated was the case in 1960.  Somehow it seems at times as though everything today is dominated by the young:  clothing, movies, music.  Perhaps it is my age?  

[Ella Gibbons]

CAROLYN:  Thank you for your post.  Fear and mistrust was mutual; I remember the late 1950's and early 1960's very well.  The Cold War progressed and, as JOANP mentioned in an earlier post, the children were taught what to do in case of a nuclear attack.  How very frightening and I remember Civil Defense yellow and black signs on buildings, do any of you?  Also a few of neighbors were interested in personal bomb shelters, one engineer thinking of building one in his backyard.  Imagine!  What good would it have done?

But time is passing and we have more characters yet to discuss; the Communist of East Berlin, who I believe was more responsible for the Berllin Wall than any other, and the West Berlin chancellor.

What do you think of these two "Unruly Alliances?"  (See questions No. 10 and 11 in the heading)

[Jonathan]

Ella, thanks for the link to von Tunzelmann's short review of the book we are reading. He does have some interesting things to say. I like this statement:

Kempe reveals the unexpected slapstick of international diplomacy. And this: Nonetheless, “Berlin 1961” has more virtues than flaws. It is engaging, it is a great story, and it is generally fair-minded. This is both an enriching history and a rollicking good read. And this: 'Their (Kennedy's and Khrushchev's)  wildly differing cultural backgrounds made it difficult for them to communicate.'

Two world leaders on the big stage. They come out swinging. Khrushchev with bluster and Kennedy with rhetoric.

von Tunzelmann says about Kempe's style: He favors punchy, one-sentence paragraphs.

One such that got me thinking is on page 80, after a brief description of Kennedy's search for the eloquence of greatness, specifically the concept of endurance, so effectively used by the greats in the past, specifically Churchill and Lincoln.

Kempe summarizes Kennedy's effort with, It was memorable rhetoric based on a false understanding. Of the ambiguous bluster?

[Jonathan]

I'm not reading the Rumsfeld book, Ella. I'm saving it for later. I got curious about  what R  had to say about 1961, and was surprised to find it all in one short paragraph. Of course, R has other fish to fry.

[kiwilady]

From our perspective the fear of the East was less paranoic. We are a tiny nation and have always had a socialist leaning. (NOT COMMUNIST!). We were allowed to freely travel to the Eastern Bloc although of course our security services kept an eye on frequent travellers.

We did not have nuclear attack drills because we are at the ends of the earth, tiny and were no threat to any nation. I believe this is a huge advantage!

Our population is  not keen on having a large military, nuclear power or arms and we do not let ships carrying nuclear weapons or even nuclear powered ships into our ports. This has driven the US admins crazy and caused much angst and even punitive measures against us. After seeing the trouble in Japan our population is even more against nuclear power as we are a nation of seismic activity.

We of course did have our share of certain members of the Security services seeing Reds under the beds. The suspicions were proven to be unfounded in subsequent investigations.

So you can see my experience is vastly different from that of most of you!

[PatH]

So you can see my experience is vastly different from that of most of you!

Very different.  I've lived in the Washington, DC area all my life, and we certainly had good reason to feel like target #1.  During the Cuban missile crisis many of us felt we had about an even chance of living the week out.

[kiwilady]

I don't think Kennedy was ill informed. I believe he had hopes of being an instrument to bring about  peaceful co existence in a world that still had vivid memories of WW2.

Despite his reported infidelities etc I liked Kennedy and my impression was of a man with sincerely held beliefs that there was hope that every nation could live peacefully alongside one another despite differences in ideology.

[Jonathan]

I remember the strong stand New Zealand took on remaining a nuclear free zone when the two superpowers  were turning the world into an armed camp. That seems so long ago. Are you still in someone's black book over it Carolyn?

Of course, we all liked Kennedy. Except for Adenauer. What could have been the reason for his dislike? Because of what Kennedy said about him, when talking favorably about Willy Brandt? Or did Adenauer fear that Kennedy would reach an agreement with the Soviet Union that would adversely affect Western Germany? But peaceful coexistence could only be a dream in Europe, and the book gives the impression that Kennedy took office believing he should take a hard line in the Cold War. Whatever we get about peaceful coexistence is coming from Khrushchev.

What a fix Hitler left his country in. What a headache he left for his enemies. Sure I tried the Volkswagen in the sixties. What a reputation the car had worldwide. The best thing that ever came out of Hitler's Germany. But mine turned out to be the lemon. It needed a kickstart the first morning I had it. The steering would keep freezing up on me, and I hardly had the strength to get it around the corner. The gas mileage was lousy, etc, etc, etc. Even changing lanes required a half mile of highway.

[Jonathan]

It just occurred to me. Perhaps my little VW was programmed to go only straight ahead, like Hitler's panzers. Alas, the time comes when one is forced to turn around and go home.

[Ella Gibbons]

CAROLYN!  I've waited too long in life, darn it -  should have moved to your country when I was young.  It just sounds as though it is a lovely place to live, away from the madding crowd.  

We can't seem to get away from discussing JFK can we?  We all loved the man at the time, he was so elegant, eloquent after the ponderous, dull Eisenhower years (I did admire Ike's policies and, of course, his war record but he was not a politician).  

Since we are still on JFK I have a paperback book titled THE KENNEDY BROTHERS by Richard D. Mahoney, that I pick up and scan from time to time.  What promise the their administration held; the book stresses the word "their" claiming that Bobby was the power behind the throne.  It deals with domestic issues with a few paragraphs now and then on foreign affairs.

I'll quote a few on Krushchev in the next post - because as JOANK says after a few paragraphs in one post you run out of space and must start a new "reply."   Is this new?  

[Ella Gibbons]

JONATHAN, we are posting together.  I loved the look of the little VW when they were first introduced in America, I couldn't tell if they were coming or going, both ends looked the same.  Loved your story.

And I hope we get back to Adenauer and Ulbricht!!  

WHERE IS EVERYONE TODAY, sleeping off the holiday stresses - family, cooking?  It was quiet in my household.

Here is the quote (part of it)  I will paraphrase a bit:  de Gaullee  advised Kennedy that Khrushchev was a demagogue, full of bluster and not meaning half of it.  However, back in Washington his rhetoric was read differently and the hawks were soon circling over a Soviet-American showdown.  Dean Acheson recommended that the country should be prepared to go to nuclear war over Berlin.  Dean Rusk essentially agreed with this position.

Kennedy spoke to Kenny O'Donnell - (Schlessinger's A THOUSAND DAYS)  "All wars start with stupidisty.  God knows, I'm not an isolationist, but it seems particularly stupid to risk killing a million Americans about access on an Autobahn."

[Ella Gibbons]

I couldn't finish that last post.  And I do want to continue with a few more sentences from the book that impresssed me.

 Kennedy was so disgusted by the "kindergarten" quality of a top-secret briefing by the National Security Council that he got up and walked out.  Amazing that!  In exasperation to Rusk he said "And we call ourselves the human race."  

One more:  In his speech to the nation on July 25th he said - "Miscommunication could rain down more devastation in several hours than had been wrought in all of human history"

We certainly had reason to admire John F. Kennedy.  "Kennedy's sense of historical irony and his visceral distates for the military establishment ultimately confirmed him as a diplomat."

PATH, we will get into a bit of a discussion on the Cuban missile crisis soon.  A very frightening episode in our history.  Don't you wonder what the history books of Russia teach?

[Ella Gibbons]

I am going on a bit much.  SORRY, but ever curious (thank goodness that has not changed with age) I looked up the "madding crowd" expression from Thomas Hardy's book.

""Madding" means "frenzied" here.[3] The title may be ironic: the five main characters – Bathsheba, Troy, Boldwood, Oak, and Fanny Robin – are all passionate beings who find the "vale of life" neither quiet nor cool. - Wikipedia

Neither quiet nor cool - apt for the Kennedy's.

[JoanP]

Perhaps the reason our group keeps returning to JFK is because we are familiar with that period of our history - and fascinated with what was going on in the rest of the world as it related to our own well-being and safety.  I can understand that.

Do you get the feeling that Kempe is more sympathetic to Khruschev than to any of the "players"?  Even more so that he is to Kennedy? Khruschev is in an extremely precarious position on Berlin - with all of the leaders.  I'm going to admit that while reading about Mao's statements at that Nov. 1960 communist meeting, I silently thanked Khruschev for standing up to him...
Kempe tells us that Khruschev didn't like Mao.   Mao was ready for war even with devastation..."conventional or thermonuclear."  "We may lose more than 300 million people, but so what?"  (Were these really Mao's words?)  Mao wants a communist East Germany - and that includes all of Berlin.

Ulbricht's concern is the bleed of workers into the west.  Look at Khruschev promising him economic assistance - as if he has it to give!  Ulbricht views Khruschev as an inferior, condeming his tolerance of the Berlin situation. He believes Berlin - all of Berlin - should be considered part of East German territory.  "He rules East Germany like a dictator", we're told - with Stalin's blessing.  Stalin preferred a unified Germany outside of America's military presence.

I need some  help understanding Adenauer's position - and why Kennedy doesn't like him.  I can see why Adenauer worries that Kennedy won't stand up to the Soviets. And he worries about Kennedy's character and integrity.  But Adenauer, we're told was Time Magazine's Man of the Year - 3 times.  He's the freely elected German Chancellor.   What is there not to like about him? What has he done? Was it something that went on during that November meeting with Khruschev in 1950 and the release of the Nazi War prisoners the Russians were holding?

[PatH]

For my own benefit, I was trying to think of all the reasons East Germany was so much worse off than West Germany.  Might as well list them.

Perhaps they were more heavily damaged in the war.  Does anyone know this?

Their occupation by the Russians was more brutal and destructive than the Allied occupation of West Germany.

They had paid, and were still paying, huge reparations to the Soviet Union, while West Germany was rescued by the Marshall Plan.

The Russians were appropriating a lot of their goods and produce for their own rebuilding and to ease several years of poor harvests.

West Germany had more raw materials (coal, etc) and factories.

Ulbricht had imposed a strict, classic Communist regime, and I don't care what the "glorious" theory says, in practice collectivization seems to turn out to be a lousy way to try to get agricultural efficiency.

As the difference in prosperity became obvious, people left to go to West Germany, especially the better educated, plus the ones who had lost their family farms to collectivization, who were the ones who knew how to farm well.  This led to an accelerating spiral.  The more who left, the worse things got.  The worse things got, the more people left.

What have I left out?

[HaroldArnold]

Pat H, I think you pretty much ended up with the right  answer.  Your last three reason seems to sum it up correctly.  As for  the others the better pre war industrial sectors were in the west.  But all of Germany at war's end were rubble from bombing as well as many areas had been actual battle grounds.  Initially the Russians striped their East zone of  all factories and useful resources sending them to rebuild Russia.  By 1960 East Germans compared to their west German cousins lived dismally unhappy lives.  Is it any wonder that many took advantage of the open border in Berlin to escape?

Kiwilady hopefully your democratic socialist nation does better than the U.S. and Europe. Are your taxes sufficiently high to pay for the service provided?  Here in the US. taxes have become a bad word and many Countries, the US included, have run up staggeringly high debt loads that seems to herald a rather austere future at least for the near term.
  

[HaroldArnold]

A barbeque at the LBJ Ranch!  In mid April 1961 JFK with just 2 ½ months of his presidency under his belt scheduled a invasion of Communist Cuba.  The plans had been made months earlier by the CIA and other defense Department agencies.   At the same time the West German Chancellor, Konrad Adenauer was in Washington discussing the brewing Berlin problems with Kennedy.  JFK had made major revisions in the Cuban invasion plans including dropping most provisions for direct American involvement.  As the April 15 th invasion day approach the President had no time for Adenauer so he ordered Vice President to take him to Texas to get him out of Washington.  Johnson agreed So he took Adenauer for a 3 day trip where he treated the Chancellor to a Texas Style ranch Barbeque. 

There the Chancellor mingled with several hundred South Texans mostly old Democratic Party faithful eating Great quantities of barbeque beef pork and shrimp washed down with Lone Star and Pearl beer.  LBK would preferred to have stayed in Washington.  He knew the Cuba operation was being scheduled and this was the project of his major interest.  A few days later I had a first hand account of the Barbeque  from my  friend, Royce Jones who had been one of the invited local guests at the ranch,  Royce was from another old ranch family that had for many years been active in Democrat Party affairs.
 
The Invasion of Cuba came April 16th and was an immediate failure.  JFK had stripped it of significant air support and there was no US ground forces involved.  The small force of Cuban refugee volunteers in the landing party was quickly captured by the “Cuban Army.   It was a significant embarrassment for JFK that affected his foreign policy dealings with Khrushchev for the rest of his administration. 

[kiwilady]

We actually have a Conservative admin in at the moment and of course they gave their mates massive tax cuts. The middle class is really suffering and the poor get poorer. I fear that we will not be much better off than you unless at the next election the Greens get more seats. We have Proportional Representation so that the Conservatives will have to be very careful what they do.
Its interesting that the more right we swing the lower our standard of living becomes. Once we were no 1 in Health and education now we are way down the list. Good Health and education are things that create a successful and well off population.

There is no politician who will tinker with our health system. They already tried charging part payments for hospital care and the majority of the population refused to pay. This was in the early nineties. The Govt rescinded this policy. LOL!

The majority of us do not moan about tax. Only the very wealthy do and thats a joke because most of them have very clever tax advisors and they end up paying much less tax than the middle class on a percentage basis. They still moan about what they cannot get away with.  How much money is enough?

Enough of our politics!

 

[Ella Gibbons]

I have an earlly appointment this morning, so am off.  Will post later.  I think Ulbricht an interesting figure and will skim the chapter in the book again.  Adenauer and Ulbricht were both protecting their territories, in different ways, West Berlin being the more successful.  Back later.

I've read the posts.  THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR MAKING OUR DISCUSSION SO INTERESTING.

[Ella Gibbons]

PATH - A great post!!  Marvelous job of observation!   Thank you.  I don't know either if West Berlin suffered less during the war, a good question.  

From skimming the previously read chapter 5 I gather that both men, Ademauer and Ulbricht, were German citizens before the war although Ulbricht was a Communist.  One wonders how he survived Nazi Germany as supposedly there was a purge of communists?  

How differently these two Germans felt about government; as Kempe writes the two men "would come to define their era." One, I believe, was instrumental in the Berlin Wall and the Cold War as he consistently prodded and poked Krushchev for action against the West.  Further our book states that both "distrusted the men upon whom their fates depended"  But Kempe writes that Adenauer is "one of the great men in German history", so he did something right.  As for Ulbricht he did it all wrong, didn't he?

Are there ever true friends among leaders of countries?  Can you name them?  Impossible , don't you think -  as their own country and its interest would always take preference in any disagreement.  

What are the lessons of WWII?  Both these men thought they knew.  Do we know?

Thankfully, in recent decades Europe has been peaceful but history proves otherwise.  Will old enemies arise?

[Ella Gibbons]

MARJ, SHEILA, KIDSAL!  Are you still with us?  We'd love to hear from you.

JEAN, did you get your book yet!  We need everyone's opinions, we appreciate them all.

[Jonathan]

That must have been interesting, Harold,hearing about the barbeque at the LBJ ranch. I wonder. Did Adenauer enjoy it?  He wasn't where he wanted to be. We're told he was hoping for a few days with Eisenhower at the Gettysburg farm. It may seem as if JFK wanted him out of the way, but we are told that he had had three long meetings with the Chancellor in two days, before shipping him off to Texas. The meetings were not congenial, we're told, consisting of 'an elderly man's lecture to the young president.'

That wouldn't be unreasonable. The fine points of European problems may have been unknown to the American. Despite all the advice and briefings from his experts. What a strange role for Kennedy. The arbiter of Europe's fate. He should get most of our attention. The author seems to think so. In his Introduction, Kempe poses the question. Was The Wall a success or a failure for Kennedy?

[PatH]

From skimming the previously read chapter 5 I gather that both men, Ademauer and Ulbricht, were German citizens before the war although Ulbricht was a Communist.  One wonders how he survived Nazi Germany as supposedly there was a purge of communists?  

He rode it out in the Soviet Union (p 91)

The Wikipedia article  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Ulbricht on Ulbricht makes him look like a really nasty piece of work.

[HaroldArnold]

Thank you Jonathan for your comment above expanding the significance of Adenauer’s trip to Texas for the Barbeque at the LBJ Ranch.  Actually by bring up this Mid April event I slipped us ahead into the Week 2 discussion area, but this is alright since the move to Week 2 is scheduled tomorrow morning and the Week one chapters were short..  To answer your question, I’m sure Adenature enjoyed the event.  For certain there were German Texas there who were still speaking the German Language.   Fredricksburg is just 14 miles down Hwy 90 from the LBJ ranch and even today German might be heard on the main street.  By Brother Jack, a retired School Teacher and Principal lives there.

PatH asked a good questions concerning the WW II background  iof Konrad Adenauer.  The following sites provide information on both Konrad Adenauer and Walter Ulbricht.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konrad_Adenauer#Leader_in_Cologne  During te War Adenauer remained in Germany.  He had been Mayor of Cologne but was imprisoned by the Nazis several times.  He was lucky to have survived since so many  former politicians were executed after the 1944 attempt to kill Hitler,  After the war he was again installed for a while by the allies as Mayor of Cologne .  Later he emerge as Chancellor of West Germany.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Ulbricht Ulbricht had fought for the Communist side in the Spanish Civil War.  From 1937 until1945 he lived in Moscow where at times he was endangered by the Stalinist purges.  At the War’s end he returned to East Germany to become the East German leader.

[HaroldArnold]

Tomorrow we will move on to our second week assignment,  that is Part II of the Book entitled, “The Gathering storm,” pages 129 – 290.  A new set of Considerations for Discussion will appear in the heading.  This assignment will be an interesting one with the plot becoming more serious as the President-in-training gets his real-time introduction as a World Leader.  See you then

I see I have a Chandler commitment tomorrow morning.  I will try to insert an initial Part 2 post early and return in the late afternoon.

[kiwilady]

Tony Blair and George Bush seemed to be great mates. Churchill and FDR were rumoured to have a very friendly relationship. Yes I do think leaders can be good friends in some cases. Its the same with foreign diplomats. They can have a genuine friendship with a counterpart from a foreign country and still put their countries first. I have read biographies which illustrate this fact.

A classic example of a man who inspired huge respect and friendship amongst other leaders was Nelson Mandela. A very special man. The friendships he made while in office have continued into his retirement.

[straudetwo]

Ella, 
My book arrived this week and at lat I an glad to havae the text. Sill  I wonder whether I shouldn't first respond to some of the general questions regarding the Russian zone, where I visited my huband's relatives with him and, later,  with our children.

It is impossible to imagine the conditions under which the people lived there : the Russian zone was hermetically sealed.  It was in fact a separate state, a eparate nation, one might say. It was named DDR = Deutsche Demomkratische Republik.  The designation was laughable, and the cut-off state was anything but democratic.  (West Germany with the Amerian, English and French zones was called Bundesrepublik Deutschland = Federal Republic of Germany.)

Berlin, located in the middle of the' red sea' which was the Russian zone, was divided into four sectors, but thre was little doubt that the Soviets  would have liked nothing better than assume total unlateral control of the city. (Vienna was similarly divided. I remember a film made around that time, called "Four in a Jeep", an MP each from the 4 occupying armies).

As partial answer to quetion 5, here is a link with information on an international crisis about Berlin that developed in 1948/49.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_lockade

More tomorrow.

[straudetwo]

Ella, sorry I cannot recall a message I just posted. The URL lacks one letter. Here is the correct link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Blockade


The earlier message appeared. Good. Sorry.

[HaroldArnold]

Kiwilady another rather prominent Anglo-American couple a few years earlier was Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Regan.  In particular I remember in January 1989 when Regan’s term ended it was Margaret Thatcher who wrote Regan’s political obituary for Time Magazine.   A year later when Thatcher too left office Regan wrote Thatcher’s political farewell in the same magazine.

Thank you Straudy for the Wikipedia link about the 1949 Berlin blockade.  This was the event that really identified beginning of the Cold War.  Please stay with us for the discussion.  

Regarding my first discussion topic now posted in the heading,  were any of you in the DC area attending any of the inauguration events?  I don’t remember any TV of the Ceremony itself.  I was no doubt at work.  I do remember watching some of the TV coverage of the night events.  I watched the screen of my first B&W CBS-Columbia TV.  I remember there were multiple Balls and JFK and Jackie  and other Kennedy’s went from one to another.  The Johnsons to were followed too.  

[mabel1015j]

No, i haven't got my book and have a feeling the library may not be able to get it, so i'll just read your posts.

Harold, i remember watching the inauguration on tv. Altho WHAT i "remember" may be from news reels and video i've seen so often since then. Kennedy refusing to wear a hat, a cold wind blowing. I do remember it being a snowy, very windy and cooolldd day. I remember Jackie looking so elegant in her gown and matching coat. And i think i  remember that she didn't go to all the balls. Hadn't she just had John, Jr a short time before?

Sorry if i'm repeating things that are mentioned in the book.

Jean

[PatH]

I was living in Bethesda, suburb of DC at the time of the inauguration.  The snowfall had been quite heavy, and our back street had either not yet been plowed or was poorly plowed.  Our furnace had stopped working, and as new homeowners it took a lot of calling to find out that you needed a plumber for that kind of furnace, and it was going to take him another day for him to get to us.

So we were living in the living room, close to the roaring fire, and listening to the whole thing on the radio (we didn't have TV).  I remember being very impressed with his speech.  Robert Frost, on the other hand, wasn't so impressive.  Not all poets read their own work well, and I didn't care for the one he wrote for the occasion, though in general I like his poetry.

We were both very excited and enthusiastic about the new president.

[Jonathan]

Robert Frost was disappointing on that occasion. I remember that. So was the poet at Obama's inauguration. Politics and poetry just don't mix. The one is too truthful for the other.

Thanks, Pat, for the Ulbricht link. As you say, 'a nasty piece of work.' Leonid Brezhnev, the Soviet boss in 1971, finally sent Ulbricht packing. That's what Khrushchev should have done in 1961. What a headache he was for Khrushchev.

Another fine set of topical questions for Part II. The last one asks, what options did JFK have in dealing with the Berlin crisis. A good question, but we should ask it also about Khrushchev. If ever a man faced problems it was he. At home and abroad. What uncertainties did Kennedy face by comparison? The nation was strong, and so were his allies. Communism was a threat, but tottering on its feet. Khrushchev was begging for help. If only Kennedy had been an opportunist.

The Wikipedia article on  Ulbricht cites Kempe five times.

[JoanP]

Aren't we so fortunate to have Traude with us - with her first hand knowledge of war-torn Germany and post-war Berlin!  Doesn't get any better than that!  Welcome, Traude! Looking forward to your posts!  And your point of view.

I'll be out of the country for a week or so - look forward to reading all these interesting posts when I return.  

[PatH]

Bon voyage, JoanP.

[Ella Gibbons]

SPRINGTIME FOR KRUSHCHEV?  Not exactly!  

The crops were failing, he had incompetent subordinates, the situation in East Berlin worsened, Ulbricht kept nagging, and he was in poor health.  

Did you read those jokes on pgs. 132 and 133?  Nasty aren't they?

And meanwhile, JFK is getting advice from all sectors of the government.  Dean Acheson stated that "All sources of action are dangerous....if a crisis is provoked, a bold and dangerous course may be the safest."  Ambassador Thompson thought the real possibilitsy of world war likely; however Thompson then added "with uncanny clairvoyance:

"If we expect the Soviets to leave the Berlin problem as is, then we must at least expect the East Germans to seal off sector boundary."   Exactly! Thompson may have been the first U.S. diplomat to predict the Berlin Wall.

Kennedy, we are told didn't "get" Krushchev at all; Eishenhower had ignored the Soviet leader since 1958 and why now?

It's rather fun to read history coming alive.  When I read that Atcheson  was convinced the Berlin problem had no solution short of unification and unification could not be achieved until far into the future and through a consistent demonstration of Western strength, I want to yell down through the ages, back in time, and say, Yes, you were right.  It happened, in my time.

[Ella Gibbons]

Like Pat and Jean, I watched Kennedy's inauguration ceremony and snatches of the balls, etc. on TV later.  I don't remember when.  I know Jackie's gown is in the Smithsonian room with all the other First Ladies' gowns on inauguaration nights.  I'll see if I can find them on the Internet.

[Ella Gibbons]

 Here is one I found with video.  

http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/aroundthemall/2009/01/first-ladies-at-the-smithsonian/

It must have been in the late 1960's when we went to the Smithsonian.  We had a student from Chile living with us the time and my husband thought we should show her the capitol.  She was a teenager interested in American hippies at the time but we did enjoy a brief visit to Washington, D.C.

[HaroldArnold]

Click here for Maya Angelaou's  poem that she wrote on Bill Clinton's request and read at his 1993 inauguration.
http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~oliver/soc220/Lectures220/Angelou.htm Ths Poem entitled "On The Pulse of Morning" was probably a bit better received than some of the other recent inauguration poems/.