One Canada: Memoirs of the Right Honourable John G. Diefenbaker. II: The Years of Achievement 1956–1962 (review)

524 THE CANADIAN HISTORICAL REVIEW couldgetboththe factsand the atmosphere straight,andlearn to condense and consolidate hismaterial, hecouldgiveusawell-rounded pictureof Duplessis inthe background ofhistimes. Meanwhile, hispresent bookhasaddedsubstantially toour knowledge of thissuperpolitician. J.W. PICKERSGILL Ottawa OneCanada:Memoirs of theRightHonourable JohnG. Diefenbaker. II: TheYears of Achievement •956-•962. Toronto,Macmillan, 1976.Pp.xvi,33o,illus.$15.95. The readerof thesememoirsshouldnot expectscholarly analysis or a detached appraisal of pastevents. Mr Diefenbaker believes that'memoirs arebydefinition a series of personal views' (325)andhisviews areneitherscholarly nordetached. He offersa simplistic viewof events anda one-dimensional viewof colleagues and opponents. It isnotabookwhich islikelytoconvince posterity ofhisgreatness. Almost half of the book deals with international affairs: Mr Diefenbaker's world tour,hisspeech attheUnitedNations, hiscontribution tothecommonwealth andto Canadian-American relations.It istoMr Diefenbaker's creditthathedoesnotquote from confidential documents or refer to privateconversations to revealtheinside story ofinternational events. Oneoftheresults, however, isthatwelearnverylittle about international diplomacy. WhatwedolearnisthatMr Diefenbaker was always on the sideofjusticeand wasalways right,and we are givencitations from his speeches toproveit. An interviewwithGeneralde Gaulleontheworldtourisgiven ninepages whicharedesigned toshow howfullyheanddeGaulleunderstood and respected eachother.ThereisnothingaboutdeGaulle's views ontheinternational roleof France.Insteadwegetcitations from a publicspeech anda formalletterto showde Gaulle's 'warmfeelings' for Mr Diefenbaker. Then comes thepunch-line: maybe therewouldhavebeenno'LongLiveFreeQuebec' in 1967if Mr Diefenbaker hadstillbeenin office(89-97) . Mr Diefenbaker'scommentson domesticaffairs are no more perceptive.He obviously believes thatindividuals haveagreatinfluence overevents butpeople, as he describesthem, are almost caricatures. James Coyne'sbehaviouris easily explained: 'He wasanunregenerate GritandLiberalpartystrategists used himfor theirownends'(274).He isnomorerevealing abouthisowncolleagues, whomhe should haveknownbetter.HowardGreenmayhaveepitomized moralintegrity as DonaldFleming epitomized fiscal responsibility, butthereaderwouldlikesomething more.For thosewhomDiefenbakerdid notlikethereisdamningwithfaintpraise. DavieFultonwasa strong supporter ofhumanliberties butwasnotpolitically wise; GeorgeHees'principalasset washispersonality. Asfor Balcer,hewasnotonlya plotter,hewasuxorious! Thesememoirs mightat least haverevealed something of theinner'man,of Mr Diefenbaker's convictions, of hisfeelings andof hisreactions toevents. Hisconvictions , however, areexpressed inplatitudes andhisreferences tohisownreactions are notconvincing. Didheexpect towinin 19577 Hetells ushedid;hewas soconfident REVIEWS 525 thatheonlypreparedawinner's speech (33).Butin •958whenvictory was, tosaythe least,moreprobable,he tellsusheworkedontwospeeches (2o). And howdid he feelwhenhetookofficeforthefirsttime? Hebegins aparagraph bysaying hecannot rememberandendstheparagraphbydescribing hisfeelings (37). John Munro and John Archer are given credit for assisting Mr Dief•nbaker althoughthere is no explanationof how they contributed.The Forewordthey signed,however,suggests that theyonlyre-enforcedMr Dief•nbaker'segoand encouraged his propensityto seehimselfasthe crusaderwho single-handedly achieved greatthings. H. BLAIR NEATBY Carleton University ...