What do you think?
Rate this book
Endless Frontier: Vannevar Bush, Engineer of the American Century
As a young professor at MIT in the 1920s, Vannevar Bush (1890-1974) did seminal work on analog computing and was a cofounder of Raytheon, whose initial success was based on long-lasting radio tubes. But he is best known for his role in Washington during World War II: as President Roosevelt's advisor, he organized the Manhattan Project and oversaw the work of 6,000 civilian scientists designing new weapons. His 1945 report "Science -- The Endless Frontier" spurred the creation of a system of public support for university research that endures to this day.Although he helped to give rise to the military-industrial complex, Bush was a skeptical observer of the interplay between science and politics. He warned against the dangers of an arms race and led a failed effort to halt testing of the hydrogen bomb. This balanced and gracefully written biography brings to life an American original and his times.
528 pages, Paperback
First published September 3, 1997
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
May 12, 2010
A fine and useful book about the man who made possible large-scale government funding of research -- in other words, the man who made possible my life. Bush was an interesting set of contradictions -- a conservative who organized big-government, fiercely secretive believer in open science. His work in WWII is frequently omitted from conventional histories of the War.
But the book would have benefited by being a third shorter. Moreover, it spends lots of time on Bush's political tussles, but very little on how it was the Bush was such an effective manager -- despite the fact that Bush's lasting contribution was his management, not his somewhat misguided political efforts.
But the book would have benefited by being a third shorter. Moreover, it spends lots of time on Bush's political tussles, but very little on how it was the Bush was such an effective manager -- despite the fact that Bush's lasting contribution was his management, not his somewhat misguided political efforts.
May 7, 2020
Long and usually dry. Fascinating insight into World War 2 history. Bush was a doer - and he did a lot. His ideas were the breeding grounds for modern computers, search engine capabilities, and maybe even the internet.
While I am glad I read the book, it could have been 2/3 the length and better. This is more of a scholarly work (with every quote cited - I didn’t check the sources) and it is very detailed.
While I am glad I read the book, it could have been 2/3 the length and better. This is more of a scholarly work (with every quote cited - I didn’t check the sources) and it is very detailed.
December 25, 2019
The part after Bush retires was way too long. But it was very interesting to read about his battles with the military, him cutting through the bureaucracy and managing people really well, and how he was trying to convince basically everyone that scientists could be useful in war — people didn't believe that before WW2!
October 6, 2023
I really wanted to like this book. And I can't decide if its the writing, or the subject.
Vannevar Bush (rhymes with beaver) ( yeah I know) was the civilian in charge of the Office of Scientific Research and Development during WWII. He oversaw the Manhattan Project, antisubmarine warfare, the proximity fuse, and other such technological activities that ultimatly won the war. A confidante of Oppenheimer, of Forrrestal, of Roosevelt, he was responsible for the civilian application of the enormous funds on the civilian side of WWII. Yet he clung to an image of a fiscally conservative Yankee, claiming to just run a farm- yet never shying away from the spotlight. A graduate of MIT and Tufts, he was trying to position himself as a vanguard for the masses.
Yet this book ( again, not sure if it was due to Bush's view of his legacy and notes or the book itself) was painful at times to read. Characters got introduced multiple times. Occasionally as a villain and occasionally as an aside. Chapters either covered 20 years or 2 months. They overlapped with little consistent rhyme or reason except for chronology. His early life is covered in about three to four chapters, his life post 1955 is covered in a chapter but the focus is World War II, 5 years covered in 8 chapters. And Bush comes across as a word unprintable in family reviews.
His philosphy is hazy and indistinct. He champions the everyman and shuns corporations and waste.... yet runs a corporation(s) and directs federal money to his old alma matter. The everyman must triumph against the state but the state provides. Atomic bombs are just another weapon in the arsenal but better we have it than the other. He shuns writing his memiors and leaves it to others but hates on them for misrepresenting himself.
What I knew him for, the National Science Foundation, he actively disavowed it.
The sense of Vannevar Bush the man is non existent. He married and... his wife supported him. There is probably 5 pages, in total, about his wife and that's spread out. No fleshing out, no discussion of his private life just HE POSSIBLY INVENTED COMPUTERS AND SAVED US IN WWII. No explanation of his character and philosophy beyond some weak and tepid vindications of the factors of the time.
This book also veers into sociology, biology, corporate structure, operations research, management, WWII, the Manhattan Project, computers, etc. And it does none of them well. Read as a leadership book it's less than stellar and less than educating.
I wanted to like this but I really didn't. It was comprehensive, and thorough, and deep. The subject material just didn't do himself any favors.
Vannevar Bush (rhymes with beaver) ( yeah I know) was the civilian in charge of the Office of Scientific Research and Development during WWII. He oversaw the Manhattan Project, antisubmarine warfare, the proximity fuse, and other such technological activities that ultimatly won the war. A confidante of Oppenheimer, of Forrrestal, of Roosevelt, he was responsible for the civilian application of the enormous funds on the civilian side of WWII. Yet he clung to an image of a fiscally conservative Yankee, claiming to just run a farm- yet never shying away from the spotlight. A graduate of MIT and Tufts, he was trying to position himself as a vanguard for the masses.
Yet this book ( again, not sure if it was due to Bush's view of his legacy and notes or the book itself) was painful at times to read. Characters got introduced multiple times. Occasionally as a villain and occasionally as an aside. Chapters either covered 20 years or 2 months. They overlapped with little consistent rhyme or reason except for chronology. His early life is covered in about three to four chapters, his life post 1955 is covered in a chapter but the focus is World War II, 5 years covered in 8 chapters. And Bush comes across as a word unprintable in family reviews.
His philosphy is hazy and indistinct. He champions the everyman and shuns corporations and waste.... yet runs a corporation(s) and directs federal money to his old alma matter. The everyman must triumph against the state but the state provides. Atomic bombs are just another weapon in the arsenal but better we have it than the other. He shuns writing his memiors and leaves it to others but hates on them for misrepresenting himself.
What I knew him for, the National Science Foundation, he actively disavowed it.
The sense of Vannevar Bush the man is non existent. He married and... his wife supported him. There is probably 5 pages, in total, about his wife and that's spread out. No fleshing out, no discussion of his private life just HE POSSIBLY INVENTED COMPUTERS AND SAVED US IN WWII. No explanation of his character and philosophy beyond some weak and tepid vindications of the factors of the time.
This book also veers into sociology, biology, corporate structure, operations research, management, WWII, the Manhattan Project, computers, etc. And it does none of them well. Read as a leadership book it's less than stellar and less than educating.
I wanted to like this but I really didn't. It was comprehensive, and thorough, and deep. The subject material just didn't do himself any favors.
May 16, 2019
This was an excellent and exhaustive history of the state of research, engineering and manufacturing before World War II, during the war and following the war with the emphasis on the work Bush did in starting several companies, his consequential efforts of organizing research and manufacturing creating radar, precision firing of anti-aircraft guns, the atomic bomb and several other more minor devices and implements of war that helped win the victory.
The book also details how after the war the presidents began to use to research and manufacturing facilities to pursue their own agendas which brought about in Bush’s mind a debilitating effect on manufacturing. His premise was that manufacturing for defense contracts weakened a company because it was not producing equipment or goods in competition with other companies but rather producing equipment and goods specifically designed for a specific entity and purpose with cost not a factor. Thus, American manufacturing began to fall behind its world competitors.
Bush also decried the fact that in research PhD candidates were not doing broad training but rather specializing. “We know more and more about less and less,” was his analysis.
Bush lived to see the day personal computers began to make an appearance and an impact on the nation just as he had suggested it would against major criticism at the time from computer engineers who saw the machines they were building for use only in industry and academia.
But bush was not always right nor was he a man easy to get along with. Save for FDR there was not a president he worked for that didn’t suspend their faith in him.
The story was a fascinating one about a man who definitely lived life on his own terms and who had fiercely loyal friends and equally fierce enemies. His was a long life in which he not only observed history but to a large extent made history. Our history for that matter.
September 7, 2017
I enjoyed this book; however, it has one stunning oversight: Claude Shannon.
He is never mentioned, and the description of Van Bush would not lead one to believe that he would have been the mentor to the father of the Information Age. But, of course, he was. Shannon's Masters's thesis, perhaps the greatest ever written, done while Shannon tended Bush's analog computer! And that is the beginning of a long and productive relationship for both men.
Perhaps because Shannon was still alive, but very out of the news when this was written, there was not enough literature on Shannon to draw on. Still given Shannon's incredible legacy, it seems very odd.
In this book, Van Bush is portrayed as being left behind as computers transitioned from analog to digital. I rather think he recognized that he had helped usher the digital age in, by way of his relationship with Shannon (and others), and left it (computational science) in the hands of a new generation which he had helped to shape.
Read this book, but read a biography of Shannon, too. (I enjoyed "A Mind at Play: How Claude Shannon Invented the Information Age" by J. Soni and R Goodman.) Then the magnitude of Van Bush's contributions will multiply, and the seemingly odd abandonment of his original interest area (computation) has a far more satisfying resolution. He didn't quit the field defeated, he set the course through Claude Shannon, and that was enough.
This omission may represent why Van Bush didn't want a biography about himself! What of what he did was most important? What looms large to me, did not warrant mention by the author. Go figure.
This amused me: the MIT Press, really should have caught this, given Shannon and Bush are both distinguished in their joint association with MIT.
He is never mentioned, and the description of Van Bush would not lead one to believe that he would have been the mentor to the father of the Information Age. But, of course, he was. Shannon's Masters's thesis, perhaps the greatest ever written, done while Shannon tended Bush's analog computer! And that is the beginning of a long and productive relationship for both men.
Perhaps because Shannon was still alive, but very out of the news when this was written, there was not enough literature on Shannon to draw on. Still given Shannon's incredible legacy, it seems very odd.
In this book, Van Bush is portrayed as being left behind as computers transitioned from analog to digital. I rather think he recognized that he had helped usher the digital age in, by way of his relationship with Shannon (and others), and left it (computational science) in the hands of a new generation which he had helped to shape.
Read this book, but read a biography of Shannon, too. (I enjoyed "A Mind at Play: How Claude Shannon Invented the Information Age" by J. Soni and R Goodman.) Then the magnitude of Van Bush's contributions will multiply, and the seemingly odd abandonment of his original interest area (computation) has a far more satisfying resolution. He didn't quit the field defeated, he set the course through Claude Shannon, and that was enough.
This omission may represent why Van Bush didn't want a biography about himself! What of what he did was most important? What looms large to me, did not warrant mention by the author. Go figure.
This amused me: the MIT Press, really should have caught this, given Shannon and Bush are both distinguished in their joint association with MIT.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 29, 2021
A rather mediocre biography of Vannevar Bush. I don't feel like I gained much more insight into the singular character of Bush, nor that generation of engineers. Perhaps this is partially hindered by Bush's own reticence and reluctance to be interviewed, but a large chunk of the book just felt like a partial history of powerful engineers during the early 20th century.
I'm not sure if I have any real takeaways from reading/skimming this book. It seems to make arguments for how the military-industry-academic complex developed in the post-war era, but the message seemed muddled and confused.
I'm not sure if I have any real takeaways from reading/skimming this book. It seems to make arguments for how the military-industry-academic complex developed in the post-war era, but the message seemed muddled and confused.
June 22, 2020
A detailed biography of a little known character. Van Bush essentially pushed FDR to force the military to accept the help of the civilian scientific community before and during WWII. Force of will and brilliance were his hallmarks. Interesting character, and fascinating to see how different things were before the rise of the military-industrial complex.
January 21, 2024
The report itself is well-crafted, but the extensive commentary seems a bit excessive and lacks substance, giving the impression of being compiled for the sake of publishing a book. Overall, it does provide some worthwhile perspectives for contemplating the future of modern science.
February 17, 2021
How to build an atomic bomb. Slightly dense, slightly dull, but fascinating. Hard to understand the military-industrial complex (and all useful academic funding) without knowing this history.
October 19, 2018
Must read for anyone interested in engineering, government administration, the development of modern civilian R&D institutions, the development of the military industrial complex, the rise of academic institutions like MIT, and so much more.
Without vannavar bush there would be no modern America. Without vannavar bush, the years between WW1 and today would need to be completely rewritten.
Without vannavar bush there would be no modern America. Without vannavar bush, the years between WW1 and today would need to be completely rewritten.
June 25, 2009
Heavy going. I haven't managed to finish it but i got through the second world war.
April 9, 2014
I liked it. I think it is because I am an intellectual elitist too.
February 28, 2019
Comprehensive bio of one of the true “nodes” of US, indeed world history. A complicated but brilliant man, whose decisions and strategies still affect all of us. Highly Recommended.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews