Submitted by Jan in CT, Mar 3, 2008 14:00

I highly disagree with the male- authored article that the book Living History by Hillary Clinton is inferior literature. It was written to chronicle a period of history that was unprecedented. That being the emergence of a politically savy and intelligent female whose role as First Lady subordinated her talents and dictated that she be in the background. With determination, Hillary Clinton fought to change the role of First Lady and became a world-wide champion for women around the world. Her book is an accounting of the FACTS and how she overcame all obstacles to give women the voice that is rarely heard. While Obama's eloquent style and candidness is not to be dismissed, his writing in neither superior or inferior to Clinton's books as they were written for a different purpose and therefore, have an entirely different tone. As an English major and a female reader, I wince when I see that the reasonableness and straight-forwardness of women such as Hillary Clinton is looked upon as a negative. Had Hillary written anything more personal and feeling, she surely would have been attacked by males such as yourself. Your article aptly points out that when writing a personal accounting of finding identity as Obama has done, it follows that you reveal your feelings more so than in a chronicle. The writings of both individuals are two different styles. I, for one, found Living History a fascinating account with a female main character that I could identiy with. Maybe that's why you just don't get it. You're not a female.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.