Columnist Thomas E. Lorentzen: Reagan bio is missing something: Reagan

Sunday, Oct. 10, 1999 | 10:40 a.m.

Thomas E. Lorentzen, a Las Vegan, served in the second term of the Reagan admin- istration. He was director of Private Sector Initiatives at the U.S. Small Business Administration, a speechwriter for Health and Human Services and a consultant to the undersecretary in the Department of Education.

Last Sunday Mike O'Callaghan wrote a critical column about "Dutch," the new biography of President Reagan. Nationally the review has been almost unanimous, from friends and foes of the president alike. The story behind this uproar deserves further attention. Last year I had the privilege of being invited to serve as the senior consultant to the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation. Having worked for the president as far back as 1965 it was considered a nice way to return home to my political and academic roots with Reagan.

Being a student of political history and having served in Reagan's administration in Washington, D.C., I was considered by the Reagan Foundation to have a comprehensive understanding of the president and his political career. There was also something else I brought to the table. The author of the biography, Edmund Morris, and I, had traveled similar roads studying Reagan. Mine began in 1964, while Morris began his journey in 1984. My first assignment from the foundation was to spend the day with him, and to help the foundation understand what to expect from his then-uncompleted biography.

Before meeting Morris last year I had followed him at Stanford while conducting research on Reagan's gubernatorial papers. The curator of the papers told me that she felt sorry for Morris. Every day for two weeks he would repeat the same phrase, "I can't figure out this man." She felt that despair was closing in on him, along with deadlines for the book. She wished that the two of us could talk, for she thought I might be able to provide insight.

After years of delay, the book was finally released last week, just preceding the millennium. If it were not for this threshold I think Morris would have delayed the book even further. Having read every word and reviewed every footnote, I find it unfortunate to say, but Morris never did figure Reagan out. That alone, however, should not have subverted the quality and integrity of the book. Other biographers have had similar problems with Reagan, yet they have completed quality books. The problem with Morris' book, quite simply, is that it is as much about Morris as it is about Reagan. There are other problems, however.

Of additional difficulty is the fact that Morris attempted to integrate the challenge of biographical writing (facts first, interpretation later), with the challenge of writing a novel. Morris had become the first "historian" to have been provided major access to the activities of a sitting president, having been selected by Reagan to be his "authorized biographer." In return for this unprecedented opportunity, Morris received a prepaid fee of $3 million to research and write the book for Random House.

As time traveled, however, and Morris failed to discover a secret formula to explain Reagan, and as deadlines passed, he stumbled upon a creative solution -- create a fictional character to follow Reagan throughout his adult life and have that person explain Reagan through his perspective. It would be a blended approach, but one that would provide an exit strategy. Besides that, Morris appeared to have the heart and ambition of a novelist anyway.

The problem with the approach Morris delineated, however, is that it was not just unorthodox, it also jeopardized the confidence of the reader in the integrity of the book. Regardless of the individual being studied, the facts must provide the foundation for the conclusions. In Morris' case, the facts provided the foundation for fiction, and fiction provided the foundation for the conclusion. Thus it is that the integrity of the book, as is Morris' professional obligation as a historian, becomes impugned.

Based upon the time invested and access provided (and thereby denied to other historians) it is a major disappointment. Most of us who were involved with Reagan could have told you better stories and provided clearer insight over lunch.

To end on a balanced note, however, there are some good portions to Morris' book. His review of the summitry process at Geneva and Reykjavik are profound. They appear, however, to have been largely based on the insightful observations of Ken Adelman, who was Reagan's arms control negotiator, and present at both summits. Morris' failure to broaden his international horizon further, however, to integrate Reagan's simultaneous and unprecedented alliance with Pope John Paul II exhibits a failure of understanding of grand proportions.

The greatest story of the last 20 years is the unprecedented collapse of the Soviet Empire and the peaceful conclusion of the Cold War. That story, more so than any other, helps to reveal the nature, character and life of Ronald Reagan. Morris has missed the opportunity of a lifetime, and with that, both he and his publisher, Random House, have done a disservice to us all.

archive