5 comments about Johann Sebastian Bach: Life and Work.

1. This book came to my attention from a long review of it that appeared in the
   Intl. Herald Tribune by William F Buckley of all people. It is all that he said and then some. It is clearly written for the expert, and so there is a lot that is beyond both my interest and abilities, but there is enough that I seek to keep me engaged. Now, I admit my interest in Bach is highly specialised: I am a novelist and seek to place Bach alongside Caspar David
   Friedrich, Germany's great romantic painter, and Goethe all in various settings, but mostly in Dresden, Leipzig and Luebeck, which this book turns out to be highly useful. Handsomely bound and highly readable. A wonderful addition to a serious reader's library.



2. It's strange that with someone as famous as Bach that we really know very little about his personal life. In this book Martin Geck has written as much as we know, and has had to expand that with some of the generally accepted rumors. He has done a very good job in this area. That takes about a third of this book.
   
   The other two thirds of the book is on Bach's music. In this area, the book is absolutely supurb. Mr. Geck has been a professor of musicology at Dormund University. He has written about the other German major composers and now has produced this masterpiece on Bach.
   
   He covers every aspect of Bach's music from technique, to the impact on the listener. Surprisingly his analysis is not too technical so the average enthusiast can understant what he is saying. The last section of the book is called Horizons, and while fairly short (30 pages or so) he offers some opinions on Back's art, theology, symbolism and other aspects of his work that are seldom covered.



3. Other reviewers (three at the time of writing) have adequately addressed the scholarly content of this book, so I shall confine myself to a stylistic problem that none of them mentions. Perhaps it didn't disturb them? It certainly did me; in fact, it drove me crazy.
   
   And that is (if you will forgive me), that the author cannot make up his mind whether he spoke of Bach in the past or the present tense. For instance, on p. 38 we have:
   
   `Eisenach not only provides his musical world but is also the site of his upbringing and education' (etc.)
   
   But then:
   
   `The hymnal, the catechism, Latin texts -- these elements dominated the early education of young Bach.'
   
   Again:
   
   `At all events, he sets out on foot in March 1700 for Lüneburg, to arrive there before Easter. His classmate at the Ohrdruf lyceum, Georg Erdmann, released from school several weeks earlier, may have accompanied him.'
   
   These examples, perhaps not particularly egregious, are merely chosen at random from those that pervade the book.
   
   German is sufficiently like English, that it seems safe to assume that this is a characteristic of the original, and not of the translation (especially since we're told that the translation is `skillful'). It would be interesting to know for sure; I looked at Amazon Germany's website, but Search Inside was not enabled.
   
   Sad to say, the mannerism also affects the analysis portion of the book, contaminating not only syntax but semantics. On p.355 we read:
   
   `Bach continues his experimenting. For the very next Sunday, the fourteenth Trinity Sunday, he writes an opening chorus for the cantata BWV 25...'
   
   Since we have by now grasped the fact that Bach is dead, we can safely assign this event to the past. But then we have:
   
   `Taking a broad view of Bach's music, the musicologist Gerd Rienäcker speaks of a "consciousness of catastrophe," located in Luther's theology but...' (etc.)
   
   Is Rienäcker a denizen of the 18th century, or the 20th? Or is it the 19th? We have no easy way of telling.
   
   I personally find all this, as Caligula supposedly found Gemellus's cough, very irritating. While I would not go so far as to suggest Caligula's remedy, I would certainly hope that enough people will expostulate with the author and/or publisher that it will be corrected in future editions.
   
   The rating is a compromise between five stars for content and two for style. If you're a music student, this review probably won't -- and shouldn't -- affect your purchasing decision; but if you read merely for pleasure, you may want to take note.



4. This book is a strange combination of some interesting content (especially the part about the works; the biographical information is dry and gives no idea what kind of a person Bach was), and some very misguided choices in translation. Aside from the occasional translation error, the translator seems not to realize that the "historical present", which is used in German, does not exist in English (other than rarely). This gives, as another reviewer pointed out a sensation of cognitive dissonance. As I translator myself, I'm used to seeing this is French (the language I work from), but when I read a French book using this, it is rarely as disturbing as it is here. The translator should have normalized this into English, that is, using the past, but also should have normalized the disturbing shifts of time from the past to the present that occur on nearly every page.
   
   The biographical section is, as I mentioned, dry and static; you get no feeling that Bach ever ate a meal or went to the bathroom. It is fact after fact, date after date, written document after written document. The parts about the music itself are more interesting, but the overall feeling this book leaves is one of confusion. The decision to separate Bach's life and work is curious; the two were intertwined (especially because the author talks so little about Bach as a person, there's nothing else to hold up to the light).
   
   All in all, this is not a good book for someone wanting to understand Bach's life. Alas, in spite of the many books about Bach, not many of them do so. Others are also plagued by translation errors, or academic prose, and a real humanist biography of Bach is needed.



5. This book, like most written about J. S. Bach within the last hundred years, paints a man who wrote "J. J." at the top of his compositions as a humanist! (The two "Js" stand for "Jesu Juva," a Latin inscription meaning, "Jesus, Help Me." These same manuscripts were ended with S.D.G. = Soli Deo Gloria or, To God, Alone the Glory.)
   
   Men like Geck, with long strings of letters after their names, rush to derail the abundant and irrefutable proofs that J. S. Bach was a devout, believing and practicing CHRISTIAN, and they misrepresent him as a humanist. Some books, like this one are downright silly in proposing that a man who set to music more than five hundred deeply spiritual and Christ-centered cantata texts, did so while not believing a word of what he set. To accept the Bach as a humanist would mean that on every Sunday (except during Lent) and on all the major Feast Days, from 1723 to 1750, Bach's choirs sang a lie and he directed those lies.
   
   Bach never wrote words himself, or set to music words of anyone else who believed or espoused the Humanists mantra: That mankind's strength comes "from within." Read the words to the recitative for bass in the Christmas Oratorio that state: "My Jesus, when I die, I shall not die eterally. Thy name upon me Thou dost write, which puts the fear of death to flight!" No one, who reads the texts to Bach's Pentecost cantatas can come away with any doubt that the composer truly believed in an in-dwelling Holy Spirit and in the life-changing qualities of that infusion of God's power.
   
   To the unbeliever, these words are suffocating and seem excessive. But further familiarization with the texts Bach chose, reveal other, innumerable instances of just what he believed. Bach did not believe, as humanists would propose, that man is basically good. Bach did not believe that man can improve himself by merely being kind to others and by drawing upon some mysterious, self-contained strength.
   
   To confirm this, read the margin notes he wrote in his Calov Bible. The book is in the library of Concordia College in Missouri, USA. The "New Bach Reader" contains all these notes with very clear explanations of them.
   
   Further, Geck's book indicates that Bach was a pietist. This is clearly WRONG. Bach put up with a pietist rector in Muehlhausen and stomached the incursion and growing popularity of pietism, but he was an ORTHODOX LUTHERAN and he retained and practiced all the elements of that strong faith, inculcated in him and his father, Ambrosius, all his uncles and ancestors, going back to the earliest known ancestor, Lips Bach!
   
   J.S. Bach set to music and wrote in his second wife's "Notenbuch," arias, recitatives, chorales and choruses that support the teachings of Martin Luther: That man's salvation comes only through the grace of God, as a gift. It cannot be "earned" or "bought" as the Roman church had taught. He believed, as Luther did, "By Adam's fall, we sinned, all." Further, as Luther knew, Bach knew that good works are not the recipe for eternal life.
   
   Humanists believe doing good is what makes a person better. Luther (,St. Paul) and Bach believed people are worms to start with and that once you had accepted Christ's gift of salvation, one would WANT to do "good" in order to serve their new Lord and his creation. Geck apparently does not share or understand this, so he (and others) attempt to ignore or twist Bach's Orthodox Lutheran beliefs to suit the revisionist and humanist view of what the sermons and cantata texts in the Thomaskirche stated clearly.
   
   This is a long treatise on Bach's beliefs, but a full explanation is required to point out how misguided and uninformed Geck and the others are, when they minimize, debunk or distort Bach's beliefs and replace them with what most of "academe" thinks is a smarter and better-informed interpretation of them.
   
   The book does reveal Geck's sometimes extravagant conjectures about known happenings in Bach's life, but I could not discover anything new and useful. Instead, I found a tiresome re-hashing of popular fable and baseless and untruthful revisions in what Forkel and Spitta wrote about when it came to the great Sebastian's beliefs.
   
   Michael Lonneke
   Round Hill, VA

3 comments about Pascal's Wager: The Man Who Played Dice with God.

1. This fairly short (216 pages) book centers around the central dilemma of Blaise Pascal's, the 17th century math prodigy's, life philosophy: How to reconcile his austere view of life as should be lived by a creation of God with his obvious love of math, science, and worldly ideas. Another hundred pages could have been used to flesh out Pascal's writings and scientific ideas so that the reader could make more of his own decision about him. Instead the author has chosen to present his own thesis for acceptance or rejection. There is considerable interesting background provided on the France of Pascal's time and on Jansenism, the ascetic (Augustinian) form of deterministic (Calvinistic) Catholicism that Pascal ultimately accepted.
   
   There are several descriptions of the discoveries of Pascal and his peers but nothing that requires a math or science background. The last chapter is a musing by the author that uses the probabilistic view of modern life that Pascal originated by his seminal work in probability theory. The author's dividing of people into climbers and sprawlers is insightful especially if you're inunudated with amazing coincidence \ God's providence spam e-mails as I seem to be. Recommended if you're Roman Catholic, definitely recommended if you're a fan of the Jesuits (the author is a former Jesuit). The book reads fast and is divided into short chapters; useful if, as I do, you like to finish a chapter before getting off the mass transit. Well recommended.



2. As an engineer I had studied all about Pascal's products, the conic sections, the vacuum, and the probability studies. However, until I read this book never could have imagined the sad and inspirational story behind the genius, Blaise Pascal. It is written in short readable chapters that give you a vivid picture on the 17th century in which he lived. The book gives a spectacular vision of the beginning of science as we know it in the 21st century. It also examines the conflict of one man between his faith and his passion for science. I won't tell you how it comes out that for you to read. The only thing I will tell you is that it is not the usual science is good and religion is bad that you find in many book today. Read this book, and if you have children interested in science have them read it too, or better read it to them.



3. PASCAL'S WAGER: The Man Who Played Dice With God.
   By James A. Connor, Harper Collins Publishers, 2006]
   
   James Connor has given us the opportunity to enter the physical space and place of 1588-1670 France. He brings classic and substantive insight into the provincial and fomenting social mores of these times: the militancy and corruption of the papacy; the intrusive and diminishing ideology of Aristotelian philosophy; and, the deepening schism in the Catholic Church and monarchies of Pascal's times. Through the lens of Blaise Pascal's tightly-knit family, we enter the inordinate emotional sibling reliance (addiction) of children who have been raised in the isolated, dominating, and cloistered world of a widowed father suddenly thrust into self-survival and the salt of erudition. Through his infancy and childhood years Blaise Pascal was afflicted with an abnormality which forced him to shift into a shrieking knot of psychic pain whenever he was with more than one parent at a time. From the beginning of his days Pascal was labeled a dark angel. Caught in the polemic of the adamancy of original sin and simultaneously possessed with the fomenting dreams of a scientist, Pascal's heart and mind joined the tight rope of his life-long pain stricken body in total accommodation. The essential terror of this dilemma necessitated a sort of "doubling phenomenon" as a protective shield against the continuous threats to his spiritual identity and intelligence.
   
   "When I think about the shortness of my life," Pascal said, "melted into the eternity that came before me, and into the eternity that will come after...and the insignificance of the space I fill and even see, I'm lost in the infinite vastness of that space that lies beyond, that space of which I am ignorant and which has no knowledge or care of me. I'm frightened and astonished to awaken in this place rather than that and I see no reason why I should be here and not there, now and not then. Who put me here? By whose order and direction have this place and time come to me?" (Connor: 179)
   
   Living in these polemics eventually brought Pascal into conceiving a rationality of faith based on gambling. Miraculously, Pascal's lifelong physical and emotional pain coupled with the Faustian delight of formulating mathematical theories resulted in the genius birth of the science of probability. Further, his piercing insights into the "law of big vs. the law of averages" and his brilliant staging of a new metaphysics embodied in quantum mechanics; his prideful invention of the first computing machine, the Pascaline are primo among the collective hallmarks of his extraordinary life. Connor's case study of Pascal's divided psyche exposes a tightly leashed self-will evolving into a theology of moral powerlessness. Pointing out that, in 1658, with the return of signaling pain, Pascal had taken to wearing "an iron girdle full of sharp points, which he put next to his skin." Any time Pascal had a prideful thought, or felt pulled toward some diversion, he pushed on the girdle, driving the points into his flesh. He wore that girdle until the day he died. Connor's biography of Blaise Pascal provides a curved mirror adroitly exposing the primal desire of mortals as they seek to decipher the Immortal; and, to discover the veracity of that great spiritual river running between the heart and the soul. He beautifully illustrates Pascal's scientific mind as influencing today's inquiries into cybernetics, physics, nanotechnology; advanced theories of relativity, space stations, and, yes, "the truth and the comics" imbedded in blasting beyond Disney's Black Hole. Within the context of our stumbling steps at the cusp of the 21st century, Connor offers a beguiling interpolative rendition of the facts during Pascal's life and times: How do we reconcile the scientist and the mystic? How do we formulate true questions, questions that ask a question and continue to ask another after that? Perhaps Blaise is whispering to us today, reminding that the ancient hawk of peril, courage, and creativity of his times coincide with the "new age" inquiry of our own. James A. Connor whispers back:
   
   "Personally, this one universe is enough for me. I find it to be as weird as I can handle. Weirdness is a value in and of itself, for in weirdness lies poetry, and in poetry lies beauty, and in beauty lies truth, weird as it is. Pascal would appreciate this. (Connor: 215)
   
   Jess Maghan Chester, CT

5 comments about Alexander the Great.

1. An overview of the military conquests of Alexander the Great whose campaigns spread the influence of Greek culture into modern civilization. This is more of the story that wasn't shown in the 2004 movie. Once you learn more of the real Alexander you will truly wonder why Colin Farrell was cast as him.



2. I enjoyed reading "Alexander the Great" by Paul Cartledge, Greek History Professor at Cambridge University. Alexander the Great is among (if not) the greatest soldier in recorded history He achieved stunning military and political success in his short life. The book is structured thematically, which I found interesting and has good illustrations of battle lines, maps, glossary, bibliography, among other things.
   
   The author methodically explores the various fascinating aspects of the brilliant and visionary Alexander the great including his leadership style, his divinity, his conquests and how he related to the various countries that he conquered.
   
   After reading this book, I recommend that you also read "Alexander the Great's Art of Strategy". It is a thoughtful and perceptive book that is a joy to read. Another excellent biography of Alexander the great is "The Nature of Alexander" by Mary Renault.
   
   I recommend "Alexander the Great" to anybody that needs to understand the life and times of Alexander the Great as well as his numerous achievements.



3. Being a history addict and a Soldier has led me to read everything printed in english on Alexander the Great (nuministic and logistical books included). Some biographers depict him as a shining idealized soldier-king, while others as a drunken despot on a self delusional path to deification. Cartledge balances the historical record with fresh interpretations of events and a common sense test of putting the reader in Alexander's shoes at the moment of each event. This leads to a connection with the man and an understanding of his actions that lacks in most biographies of Alexander. The answer, it seems, is that Alexander was a man like any other before and since; brilliant and flawed, just like the rest of us. If you are going to read your first book on Alexander, or only one book ever, this is the one to pick up.



4. This book isn't the definitive biography about Alexander and isn't a fast-reading primer either. It is at once concise and scholarly. Some sections are exhilirating and fun to read and some sections bog down and have you skipping around looking for something more fun to read. As some other reviewers have pointed out, the book jumps around based on themes (Alexander as general, Alexander as statesman, Alexander's early history, Alexander's legacy, the romance of Alexander, etc.), so it doesn't lead you through his life in a chronological order. For that type of reading, I'd recommend Robin Lane Fox's bio which reads like an epic novel and Peter Green's superb seminal bio.
   
   If you already have a good overall grasp of Alexander's history and are looking for another perspective from a renowned scholar in this field, I highly recommend it as another addition to a well-rounded collection of works regarding this great military commander, world conqueror, and profoundly important figure in human history. Cartledge has a very thorough yet concise approach, but his very scholarly background sometimes gets a tad overbearing in some sections that read like academia. But then, some sections read like a modern article and are easy to absorb and relate to from our modern perspectives.
   
   The fascinating thing about Alexander is the timelessness of his achievements and the means he used to attain them. Certainly, like any other human being (especially a young and supremely confident one), he was deeply flawed in many respects, but in the end, there's a good reason why he's called Alexander THE GREAT. You can't help but learn a lot from someone who was as wildly successful as he was in his incredibly ambitious endeavors. The principles of his strategies, tactics, statesmanship, governance, and leadership are all things that we can apply in our daily modern lives. His magnanimity in victory, his chivalry towards the Persian royals, his generosity towards his friends and loyal subjects, his enlightened treatment of women (including the outlawing of rape), his ability to admit his mistakes in public, his goal of fusing different cultures (essentially the first serious attempt in history to marry the cultures of the West and East), and his love for the arts and sciences are other very admirable qualities. It's obvious that he had an insatiable curiosity about any subject matter and a thirst for knowledge and learning.
   
   We can also learn from his faults and mistakes - his delusions of self grandeur, megalomania, obsessiveness, paranoia, alcoholism, stubbornness, recklessness, ruthlessness, etc. Alexander was a man of extreme contradictions and the book examines these contradictions to a good degree. Another fascinating aspect of Alexander is the mythical aura that has followed his name since his death and this aspect is addressed in great detail in this book as well. Was he a noble libertarian who wanted to free mankind from slavery and unite mankind in brotherhood or was he simply a blood-thirsty warlord who massacred the innocents at will and only sought personal glory? Cartledge takes the middle ground and suggests that he was probably a little (or lots) of all of the above.
   
   There are many great books about Alexander and I do think this one belongs in the collection of all the Alexander buffs for those who want to skip around and get Cartledge's credible insights, but the biographies of Robin Lane Fox, Peter Green, Nicholas Hammond, and J.F.C. Fuller are recommended for those who want a more complete overview laid out in a chronological order. Still, this is a very good and welcome work from a noted historian of ancient Greece and is an enjoyable read for the most part. It's one of those books you like to come back to over and over again just to read a certain chapter or sections when you have limited time to read.



5. Alexander. After 2,328 years who else can be identified by a single name, without a title, and still be almost universally known? Often beloved, or at least highly respected, in the west, almost universally despised in much of the east, very few with knowledge of Alexander have no feelings one way or the other.
   Over the years I have read almost every book reasonably available about this remarkable man. Some of these books are highly informative but ponderous in the extreme. Some treat Alexander as the untarnished hero, the darling of the west, while others treat him as a villain and a drunk, unworthy of praise.
   It is up to each person to decide who Alexander was or is, but Mr. Cartledge has produced a well-written book, informative, without bias or agenda. It has excellent detail without dragging the reader into the minutea which is of interest only to the professional historian. His discussion covers the noble and the base about this man, who is, unarguably, one of the most important persons in the history of the western and middle-eastern worlds.
   Bob

5 comments about The Man Who Would Be King: The First American in Afghanistan.

1. If you enjoy history, especially military history, then you will enjoy this book. Written in much the same style as Byron Falwell's "Armies of the Raj," this amazingly true yarn about a Quaker who becomes, if not a king, the Prince of Ghor will keep you wondering just what is going to happen next. I absolutely enjoyed the book. My only negative comment is that the later years of his life are glossed over rather quickly, but, that is understandable since the last years were no where near as exciting as the first 40. I would recommend this book to anyone who enjoys history or biographies. Enjoy.



2. Considering all that's happening in Afghanistan today, this is a timely and fascinating story of an American who travled there in the early 1800's. Fast paced book that's hard to put down and it gives a glimpse into early 1800's life in a country that most people still don't understand today.



3. Most people who pick up this book will already have read some of the travelogues of the "mad dogs and Englishmen" who wandered through Central Asia in the 19th and early 20th century: Burnaby and Nazaroff's memoirs, as well as any of Peter Hopkirk's books on the era.
   
   But here we have a real fish out of water story, and a fascinating one at that: an American Quaker leading, or joining, armies through Afghanistan and elsewhere in the name of, variously: the sitting ruler of Afghanistan, the deposed predecessor, his Sikh neighbor, the British Empire, and arguably himself as "Prince of Ghor."
   
   The tale is fascinating because it's so poorly-known, despite the fact that Kipling's fiction, which I understand to be inspired by Harlan and other adventurers of the time, is so well-known.
   
   Undoubtedly, Harlan's own financial misfortune and quiet death contributed to the obscurity of the narrative, but Macintyre does a great job of weaving the scraps together, and keeping the story's pace. An interesting read, and a bit of history which has earned its place in Central Asian lore.



4. A fascinating read in every respect. Macintyre is a fluid writer and the book is a real page turner. Apart from vivid details of the remarkable adventures of the first American in Afghanistan; the intrigues, machinations and sheer depravity of virtually all the players in the great game are in plain sight. The book also provides rare insights - via Josiah Harlan's prism - of British mendacity, misrule and astounding arrogance. Harlan's account of British shenanigans may have a tinge of exaggeration owing to his eventual deep hatred of the Empire and many of its emissaries but the substance of Harlan's writings can be corroborrated in other accounts such as the Great Hedge of India by Roy Moxham (another British author) and in more substantive form with relevant data in Angus Maddison's The World Economy. Macintyre deserves considerable praise for presenting the unvarnished truth, albeit through Harlan's pen, about the largely negative legacy of the British Empire. It is a shame that Harlan's story, despite this wonderful book, remains largely unknown both in the US and the East.



5. In Rudyard Kipling's The Man Who Would Be King, a young adventurer named Daniel Dravot penetrates feudal Afghanistan disguised as a cleric. In this nonfiction account with a similar title, MacIntyre, a columnist for The Times of London, tells the story of the real life adventurer who may have been Kipling's inspiration. He describes the life and adventures of Josiah Harlan (1799-1871), a young Quaker from Chester County, Pennsylvania, who set sail for China in 1822, telling his fiancée that they would marry when he returned. Upon reaching Calcutta, Harlan received a letter announcing that she was marrying another man. He resolved never to return home.
   
   So began his adventures. After a failed stint in the Indian army--an action for which the Quakers excommunicated him--Harlan met Shujah al-Mulk (1792-1842), an Afghan king exiled to India in 1809 after just six years on the throne. Harlan offered a deal: he would raise an army, subdue Kabul, and restore the kingdom. In exchange, he would become vizier, the equivalent of prime minister. The deal struck, Harlan began recruiting native troops, using the U.S. flag as his own. In 1827, he and his army began their long march. But he soon had second thoughts about his army's loyalty. He picked a trusted team, paid severance to the others, and launched his Plan B: dressed as a dervish, he made his way to Kabul, arriving in 1828 just as an epidemic of cholera ravaged the city. Years passed and Harlan changed his allegiance to Shujah's rival, King Dost Muhammad Khan (1793-1863), to whom he became aide-de-camp. This Afghan king granted Harlan's wish for power. The itinerant Pennsylvania Quaker and stilted lover became prince of Ghor, today a province in central Afghanistan.
   
   Harlan's story is riveting. MacIntyre describes his adventures, disillusionments, and eventual return to the United States as the only Afghan general to serve in the U.S. Civil War.
   
   Harlan was not alone in his adventures. In the nineteenth century, a handful of men made dangerous journeys through Iran, Afghanistan, Central Asia, and Tibet. Not all survived. Author Peter Hopkirk has chronicled their stories.[1] But it is rare that so much new material surfaces in one book, and for this MacIntyre deserves special credit. After learning of this curious American from cursory references and footnotes in old travelogues gathering dust in the British Library, MacIntyre made it his mission to uncover the saga of this historical Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern. His quest took him to Punjab and Pennsylvania, Kabul and California. He scoured through the official records of the Maharaja Ranjit Singh of Lahore and poured over the intelligence archives of imperial India, whose agents were suspicious of Harlan's plots and schemes. Finally, in a Chester County museum, MacIntyre found a long-lost manuscript replete with love letters and sketches. Explanations of historical and cultural context weave together in his fluid prose. The result is impressive and well-worth reading.
   
   Note
   
   1. See for example, Great Game (London: Murray, 1990); On Secret Service East of Constantinople (London: Murray, 1994); Trespassers on the Roof of the World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001)
   
   Michael Rubin
   Middle East Quarterly
   Fall 2006

3 comments about Henry Kissinger and the American Century.

1. In "Henry Kissinger and the American Century," Jeremi Suri has chronicled the political history of arguably one of the world's most brilliant personalities. Suri's book leaves out much of Kissinger's personal history, beyond his childhood in Weimar and Nazi Germany, which is generally vague. "Henry Kissinger and the American Century" does, however, provide readers with the background necessary to begin to understand the man and his policies. Suri pays particular attention to Kissinger's skepticism of democracy, which truly helped shape those policies.
   Henry Kissinger is a Cold War oracle, subject to the failings of the human condition as any of us, but arguably far more attuned to the strategic and political situation than anyone ever was.
   Suri does not dodge logical criticisms and critics and provides a groundwork for understanding of Kissinger's philosophies. Reading the book, you might notice how just when you begin to forget Kissinger's German-Jewish childhood, Suri extols this fact in context throughout.
   The book reveals Kissinger's innate ability to address both his genteel and gentile contemporaries. If any American in history ever leveraged their "outsider" status to the maximum and re-define the idea of an "insider", it was Kissinger.
   The book is full of exceptional quotes from Kissinger, his influences and his contemporaries that are no less relevant in the War on Terror than they were in the Cold War.
   REVIEW EVERY BOOK YOU READ!



2. Henry A. Kissinger, one of a handful of memorable secretaries of state, is a German-born Jew haunted by the failure of democracy in his birthplace and the subsequent failure of the world's democracies to stop the Nazi drive for mastery of Europe in the 1930s. Those failures made possible the massive slaughter of World War II, the nearly total destruction of Jewish life in Europe (which marked Kissinger personally)and in its aftermath left the United States and the exercise of its power the main arbiter of the world's fate. Stalin's Soviet Union, however, had other plans.
   Kissinger did not view war with Soviet Russia as inevitable, nor did he regard Russian ambitions in Eastern and Central Europe as altogether unreasonable. But he did think that unless America was willing to project its power in strategic areas of the world, such as Europe and the Middle East, and confront Soviet ambitions in those areas, the Cold War would be lost with dire consequences for Americans.
   Kissinger thought the Cold War would make strange bedfellows--reactionary kings, military dictators and strongman-types whose personal vanity outweighed any concern for the future of their people.
   Kissinger was a supreme realist. He did not seek the make the world a better place, only a safer one for his adopted country and its friends.
   His hero was Metternich, of Congress of Vienna and Balance of Power fame. There was no room for sentimentality, and not much room for public opinion, in his world view. Wars and rumors of wars were not only expected, but exploited by Kissinger, which his critics viewed as coldly cynical, immoral and in some cases (Vietnam, Chile) indifferent to human lives.
   Kissinger owed his power, at the height of his career, to Richard M. Nixon, whose feelings toward Jews were mixed at best, bigoted at worst.
   Oddly, his Jewish background was an asset in dealing with Arab rulers. They figured that American Jews dictated U.S. policy in the Mideast anyhow, so Kissinger essentially cut out the middle man.
   The only weakness of the book is its brevity (less than 300 pages) which doesn't leave much room for analysis of complicated issues. Nuclear weapons negotiations are barely mentioned. None the less, an excellent introduction to a complex man who left a large imprint on America's place in the world.



3. Jeremi Suri presents Henry Kissinger in a very unique way, unfamiliar to traditional biographies. His writing and analytic abilities set this book far ahead of any others. Sure, you may read an eight hundred epic on every little think Kissinger did. In "Henry Kissinger and the American Century" the author provides a concise analysis of Kissinger's life and its implications on his later decisions which have gathered such controversy and his impact upon history as a whole.
   A fantastic, well written, unique take on Henry Kissinger - a man who is, without a doubt, one of the most influential figures of the twentieth century.
   Five Stars - I can't think of a bad thing about it.

1 comments about Herndon's Lincoln (Knox College Lincoln Studies Center).

1. This is a reprint of the Lincoln biography published in the 1880s by his former law partner, Billy Herndon. Lincoln biographers have spent 95 years telling why Herndon was mistaken about this or that--until recently. Now they are beginning to say the earlier historians were wrong and Herndon was probably right. I had never read Herndon, but only had seen him quoted selectively. Billy comes through as a very honest man and a bit like Lincoln. One can see why the latter asked him to be his partner, and stuck it out in partnership with him for a good 20 years. The editors say Herndon was a better back-room lawyer than Lincoln, but Lincoln a much better courtroom lawyer, and the partnership complemented itself that way. Billy was better at research, and that suggests Billy did very good research on his Lincoln biography, too. Shortly after Lincoln was shot Herndon interviewed and corresponded with scores of people from Lincoln's family and his early life. It's easy to see why the law firm was successful, because Billy was a real bulldog. But his book was not well received in the 1880s when first published, largely because many thought it too crude in those days to point out Abe's mother's illegitmacy, etc. But Herndon was going to put down whatever the facts bore out. He adored Lincoln, and believed his greatness would be enhanced more by the truth than by lies... I now have a much higher regard for Herndon than formerly... On the other hand, the editors and publisher deserve low marks for the smallness of the type face, which goes down even smaller in the footnotes, making this important book more difficult to read than it should be. Don't be put off by the first Preface, either, which should be either buried at the end of the book or deleted.

5 comments about Allan Pinkerton: The First Private Eye.

1. This books encompasses all of Allan's PI's work. I had an enjoyable time reading it. It is a fasination subjet for me. I am considering of changing careers and going into the PI business.



2. Pinkerton Biography

   The story of Allan Pinkerton, a poor Scottish immigrant and former working-class radical who rose through the ranks of society to become the protector and confidant of presidents and tycoons is a quintessential American story that deserves such a thorough telling. This book was a fascinating read, and left me wishing that the author had delved more into the numerous early cases that were only hinted at in the text.

   The only serious criticism of this biography is the author appears to have gotten a little too close to his subject, which in several points has clouded his objectivity. This is apparent in the book's tendency to rush to Pinkerton's defense, particularly regarding the handling of the Molly Maguires and other labor disturbances of the late 19th century. A sweeping condemnation of the labor activists as "terrorists," or stressing the fact that they greatly outnumbered the Pinkerton operatives during violent strikes, are intended to make Pinkerton and his agents "the good guys" in the eyes of readers. This stance is questionable, however, considering the book's general lack of background information on the U.S. labor situation at this time. The author also neglects to explore how Pinkerton, a well-known Glasgow labor radical in his own youth, so readily sided with "other side" -- the titans of American industry -- later on in life.

   But overall this book is a good read and well-researched, especially the chapters concerning Pinkerton's early life in Scotland and his association with President Lincoln during the Civil War.




3. Mackay is as talanted a literary detective as Allan Pinkerton was as a criminal detective, written in a clear style that's a pleasure to read. It's a well balanced account, explaining the character's actions in the context of the times.
   Mackay's first surprise is that Allan Pinkerton wasn't born when most biographers say he was. From there he goes on to uncover the truth about Pinkerton's early career in Scotland, and the truth about a 'supposed' assasination plot against Lincoln before he took office. (The plot was independently confirmed by a political enemy of Pinkerton who had no motive to make Pinkerton look good--which convinced Lincoln the plot was real, and to follow Pinkerton's suggestions to foil it. Political enemies of Lincoln denied the existence of the plot to make Lincoln out to be a coward.) Before he finishes the Civil War period, Mackay has 'rehabilited' the often pilloried Union general McClellan (whom Pinkerton worked for) and divulged startling information uncovered in 1967 about the plot to assasinate Lincoln. This book is outstanding, a definite 'keeper'.



4. This biography of the inventor of the private investigation industry is not only a thrilling look at a fascinating man, it is also a fresh perspective on a slice of American history. I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in mystery fiction or detective novels, as well as anyone who is looking for a history book that isn't boring. While it may well be a bit biased, the presentation is thought-provoking and makes me want to research the period of the late Civil War/early Reconstruction more thoroughly.
   Better than most fiction I've encountered lately, and definitely an overlooked gem.



5. As one who is both a American history buff and a lover of mystery, Private
   Eye novels- I was very drawn to this book.
   
   I am not familiar with the author James MacKay- he is very deep in his
   research and writing.
   
   If you can get through the first 2 chapters of the book, You'll find a
   very interesting novel.

5 comments about Whittaker Chambers: A Biography (Modern Library Paperbacks).

1. I found this book endlessly fascinating. Whittake Chambers emerges as a complex, torn figure, one who is driven by an overwhelming sense of what's right -- but all through his own perspective. There is no smarmy, politicized cheerleading or criticism, just the poignant portrayal of a complex man who placed himself at a vortex of American history. A wonderful, wonderful story, and an amazing accomplishment. It is rare that I cannot put down a biography, but this is one.



2. Chambers' autobiography "Witness" had left me speechless. It was a magnificent book, but unknown in most circles. I was hungry to learn more about Chambers' own life and times. It didn't take me long to get to Tanenhaus's fine biography, which gave me an outside perspective and did not disappoint. Tanenhaus is at his most valuable recounting Chambers' post-Hiss-Case life, not covered in "Witness"; in fleshing out the HUAC cast like Nixon, Mundt and Hebert, putting their careers and ambitions into perspective; and in covering the seamier sides of Chambers' personal and family background in even greater detail than Chambers had.
   
   In "Witness", Chambers focuses on his spiritual journey, managing to keep a reader fascinated when that might easily have become eye-glazing. Tanenhaus pounds facts, availing himself of documents and accounts not available to Chambers in 1951. He remains objective about Chambers but ultimately finds little to criticize. Chambers was a man who put his career and life on the line to expose a conspiracy, as he saw it, threatening the world and eating away this nation from within. Despite circumstances strongly suggesting his veracity - would anyone throw away a lucrative career, as he did, to falsely accuse someone? - few believed him. History proved he was telling the truth - one worth hearing, since Chambers was the second-ranking U.S. man in the Communist underground espionage network.
   
   Certain striking aspects of Chambers' character emerge here, some suggested by his autobiography but better to have confirmed independently. He was one of the great intellectuals of his time, the equal of better known friends and contemporaries from his Columbia days - Mark Van Doren, Lionel Trilling and Clifton Fadiman among them. His command of languages was exceptional. (Fabulous piece of trivia: Chambers translated the novel "Bambi" from the German in the 1920s, later inspiring the Walt Disney film.) His command of the classics, ditto. This was a man who never finished college - when he died, he was enrolled in a local college attempting to finish - but who dropped Dante quotations into interviews with ham-and-egger newspaper reporters. He was one of the greatest writers Time magazine ever had, writing first-class cover stories on philosophy, religion and other intellectual pursuits beyond most journalists. I was inspired to search out an available collection of his magazine work.
   
   Chambers' continuing intellectual and political development did him credit. He became a father figure to the modern conservative movement, inspiring those like the young Bill Buckley who shaped it. But Chambers refused to follow them where his own conscience and intellect did not dictate. He wouldn't pursue a scorched earth policy against Republican moderates like Eisenhower in the mid-1950s, unlike Buckley and others, despite Chambers' personal closeness with them: Buckley had more or less rescued him from professional and financial oblivion in the 1950s. Chambers regarded the struggle against Communism as far more important than a Republican civil war over doctrinal purity. He backed Sen. Joseph McCarthy initially, but ultimately broke with him, fearing his recklessness "would lead him and us into trouble," jeopardizing the entire anti-Communist movement, Chambers wrote in declining to endorse Buckley's pro-McCarthy book.
   
   And Chambers was willing, in his later years, to seek a politics that did not rationalize away the world's woes in favor of purist conservatism. It would have been easy for a man treated like Chambers was - who had seen the blindness of liberalism up close in the 1930s and 1940s, and had felt the savagery and hypocrisy of its backlash during the Hiss case - to become more extreme in his rejection of it. But he did not. Chambers expressed, in dealings with young writers, a fascination with the Beat poets then emerging. He saw in Columbia-tied bohemians like Jack Kerouac and Allen Ginsberg a reflection of his own distant youth. Very unBuckleyesque.
   
   Tanenhaus treats the Hiss case conservatively, letting the record speak rather than relying on Chambers' detailed account of it in "Witness". Chambers drew vividly his and his wife's close relationships with Alger and Priscilla Hiss, placing it chronologically in the 1930s when it happened. In contrast, Tanenhaus's treatment of Chambers' life in the 1930s mentions Hiss only in passing. He instead takes Hiss on in the context of the hearings and trials, as the two sides jousted over whether Hiss and Chambers, from very different walks of life, knew each other at all. The question was a proxy for the greater question of espionage, although Hiss was never tried specifically for that charge. He was, however, convicted of perjury in denying he had given Chambers government documents, which pretty much amounts to the same thing.
   
   It is sad we have had to wait so long to have this case studied in such fine perspective. The Hiss case put the New Deal itself on trial, asking whether its leadership was pervaded with Communists; whether those leaders had followed the Communist Party line in shaping U.S. policy; whether they had tainted American war and China policy during and after World War II. And whether liberals were either so blind to these problems or so secretly sympathetic to them as to forever render them incapable of loving and protecting their homeland as it was.



3. I grew up under the cultural shadow of Alger Hiss, stupidly thinking the term "commie" was a funny way to mock anyone concerned about the threat of Communism.
   
   But, being a victim of bad education, I knew nothing of the epic, mid-twentieth century showdown between Hiss (now known to have been a communist spy and traitor, though still, ludicrously revered as innocent by left intelligentsia) and Whittaker Chambers, the moral lodestone of the twentieth century ,who offered up his own life as a sacrifice of sorts to unmask and quell the poison tentacles of communist Russia that reached high into the U.S. Government of the New Deal era. And Chambers was not only a former communist spy himself, but a burgeoning literary icon. This is the history of a clash of ideas, submerged in the clash between two men caught up in the rush of modern history. The truth, as always, is right in front of us. Only ideological dogma can prevent one from pretending not to see it.



4. I cannot recommend this book highly enough for understanding the state of American politics, past, present and future. The inner turmoil of Whittaker Chambers is revealed to the world, leaving the reader without a shadow of a doubt as to his courage and greatness. His bitter childhood, his years as a Communist spy, his homosexual inclination, and ultimately his redemptive love for his wife and family, all lead to the climax of Chambers' courageous stance against Communism, which he wins despite all odds. This book fills in the gaps of Chambers' remarkable autobiography, "Witness," which I also recommend as essential political and moral reading.



5. Read this for graduate American history course. There are a few rare instances in American history when a court case grips the passions of its citizens and serves to define people's political or social beliefs based on which side they believed was in the right. The Sacco and Vanzetti case of the 1920's, the Rosenberg espionage trials of the 1950's, and the O. J. Simpson case of the 1990's were to some extent examples of this phenomena. However, the Hiss perjury trials of 1949-50 were the epitome of this phenomenon, and helped to create a divide between liberals and conservatives in American politics that is still evident to this day. During the Cold War era, one could easily identify the political persuasion of a person simply by asking them whether Hiss or Chambers had told the truth. Simply put, the innocence of Alger Hiss was embraced by liberals. If Hiss, a well respected New Deal advocate and important Roosevelt administration member, had actually been an American Communist spying for the Soviets since the 1930's, then a whole mass of conservative accusations would gain legitimacy, and all of FDR's New Deal programs and his foreign policy decisions at the Yalta Conference would become suspect. In addition, Hiss' guilt would call into question security breaches in the Truman administration, which was already being besieged by questions of "Who lost China." It is against this historical backdrop, that Sam Tanenhaus wrote Whittaker Chambers: A Biography; whose purpose was to make the first serious examination of the life and motivations of one of America's most contentious figures in the last half of the twentieth-century, Whittaker Chambers.
   
   Tanenhaus' description of Chambers' early life is an excellent insight into his psychological profile. Born Vivian Jay Chambers on April 1, 1901, (April Fools Day), he came from a middle-class family of meager means. Add to the mix a father who was bisexual and spent much time away from home, a mother who was paranoid, a grandmother who was insane, and his brother Richard who committed suicide, it is no wonder that you have the formula for a man who developed into a tormented soul and was generally estranged from the world and the people around him. In fact, throughout the book, Tanenhaus illuminates his theme, which is to examine Chamber's tormented life at key junctures; such as, when he joined and left the Communist party, when he became a reluctant informer against Alger Hiss and when he distanced himself from the political right near the end of his life. Chambers, who attended Long Island's South Side High School, showed himself to be academically brilliant and an exceptional writer. His parents had big dreams for their son's future. Chambers had dreams too but they did not involve college. Being too young to fight in World War Two, he decided to run away with a friend to see the world. They bummed around and worked their way to New Orleans--a city he fell in love with. "Chambers had discovered life as Hugo described it, a kind of prison, harsh and cruel, but lit from within by tender sentiment and from without by sudden shafts of illumination" (18). After a few months of life on the seedy side and running out of money, he returned home and changed his name to Charles Whittaker but went by Whittaker, and within six months entered Columbia University.
   
   A new world was opened to Chambers at Columbia with which he became enamored. He took English composition with Mark Van Doren, who later in life became a Pulitzer Prize winning poet. Van Doren quickly saw in Chambers a very talented writer and later remarked that he was the best writer among his undergraduate students in the 1920's. Chambers especially enjoyed the friendship of fellow students, mostly Jewish, whom he found brilliant such as Lionel Trilling, Meyer Schapiro, and Mortimer J. Adler to name a few. "It was the ernste Menschen" (serious men) "who shaped Chamber's idea, never altered, of the intellectual life" (22). However, academic bliss was not to be for Chambers. He ran afoul of the school administration for a play that he wrote which was deemed profane, and thus became despondent and quit going to class--eventually dropping out and never finishing his university education. He tried to travel to the Soviet Union to help build a new nation on the advice of Van Doren, but he only made it to Germany before returning home. He took a job at the New York Public Library which fed his autodidactic nature, and he started to consort with many women. It is at this stage in Chambers' life in 1925, that he joined the 16,000 member Communist Party of the United States, (CPUSA). "So much the better. He was used to being outnumbered. He had at last found his church" (46).
   
   Tanenhaus paints a portrait of a man who dove into his new life as a Communist with a religious fervor. Chambers became a much-respected writer for several party newspapers, which brought him to the attention of party apparatchiks in 1932. Chambers also met Esther Shemitz a Socialist, and they married in 1931. It was after his marriage that he accepted an assignment to go underground and actively spy for the Party. He was made the courier of the "Ware cell" in Washington D.C., whose mission was to pass sensitive information from Communist party members who had infiltrated various departments of the U. S. government to Boris Bykov, a Soviet intelligence agent. One of the best-placed spies in the "Ware cell" who provided information to Chambers, then using the alias George Crosley, was Alger Hiss. However, Chambers became so disillusioned by Stalin's purges and his nonaggression pact with Hitler, that in 1938, he quit the party. Fearing for his life and his family's safety, Chambers turned informer and confessed all of his activities to Assistant Secretary of State Adolf Berle, Jr., who forwarded his notes of the meeting to the FBI, which did not follow up on the case until several years later. In addition, an old friend recommended Chambers for a job at Time magazine, which he was elated to have since he was broke. Tanenhaus once again shows that Chambers' literary acumen and zeal for any new project he took on, propelled him to become one of Time's top editors in the 1940's. The magazine's owner Henry Luce said, "Chambers was the best writer Time ever employed" (165). While a writer and editor at Time, Chambers became a most vociferous anti-Communist.
   
   Soon after Stalin reneged on his Yalta Conference promises, a conference that Alger Hiss played a key role in for the State Department, the U. S. government finally moved to ferret out Communist infiltrators in the government. The FBI finally conducted extensive interviews with Chambers. This led to Chambers becoming a government informant in one of America's most dramatic congressional hearings and court cases of the twentieth-century. Tanenhaus' research shows Chambers' denouncement of Alger Hiss was a stinging indictment of the Roosevelt and Truman administrations, since it cast doubt on American liberals' willingness to conduct espionage investigations during the war years. The contrast between Hiss and Chambers could not be starker. Hiss was a Harvard graduate with impeccable looks and a sterling reputation as a government servant. He clerked for Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. His character references included Justice Felix Frankfurter, and John Foster Dulles, who was to become Secretary of State in the Eisenhower administration. Chambers was an overweight plain looking man who did not dress well, a self-confessed Communist and government informant. Tanenhaus did not write about the relationship between Hiss and Chambers until he wrote about the Hiss perjury case, near the end of the book, which made the book a bit awkward to read. However, Tanenhaus does a good job of retelling the facts of the perjury case and Chambers' testimony to the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), as well as his extensive cooperation and long and friendly relationship with Richard Nixon. One finds that Chambers was much more revealing of his own motivations in his critically acclaimed autobiography Witness, which was written in 1952 after the Hiss perjury trial. It was also disappointing that Tanenhaus did not cover more of Chambers' writings and views about Stalinism and his very prescient views of the Soviet-American confrontation that led to the Cold War. Tanenhaus' research does agree with other historians work. John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr, in their book Early Cold War Spies: The Espionage Trials That Shaped American Politics, written some ten years after this book, proved that their was a preponderance of evidence showing that Hiss was a Communist and did commit espionage against the U. S. government. Hiss was not charged with espionage because the statute of limitations protected him. The first Hiss perjury case ended in a hung jury. The second ended on January 20, 1950 with his conviction on two counts of perjury and a sentence to serve five years in jail--he only served forty-four months. Hiss went to his grave denying the charges against him. Haynes and Klehr wrote that he gained much sympathy with the political left again in the wake of the Watergate scandal claiming, "that a government conspiracy had forged evidence and coerced false testimony against him."
   
   Although Chambers was vindicated by Hiss's conviction, Tanenhaus showed that Chambers entered into a self-imposed exile on his farm in Maryland. However, for the rest of his life Chambers was visited by a small coterie of friends with whom he enjoyed lengthy discussions about world affairs. "Still convinced he had left the winning side for the losing one, Chambers foretold a global Communist victory. Gloomy as his predictions sounded, he was not devoid of hope" (450). He believed that the primary way the West could defeat Communism was with morality and religion and not militarily. Needing to earn money, Chambers went back to what he did best. He wrote his autobiography Witness, which occupied the top of the New York Times best seller list for several months in 1952, and gave him the financial security he desired. More importantly, Witness was an anti-Communist manifesto that for Chambers described, "a struggle between the force of two irreconcilable faiths--Communism and Christianity." Witness was a powerful exposé of Communist activity in America and changed the life of one future president, Ronald Reagan. Reagan remarked that Witness was his favorite book and pointed to, "Witness as the book that would shape his political outlook." In 1984, President Reagan posthumously awarded Chambers the Presidential Medal of Freedom. The other person of note that Witness made a huge impression on was William F. Buckley, Jr., who befriended Chambers and offered him the position of senior editor of his fledgling conservative magazine National Review. Both men maintained a very friendly relationship up to Chamber's death in 1961. Though Chambers would write articles for the National Review, he turned Buckley's offer down due to his poor health and his growing reluctance of the tactics that the political right was using--especially those of Senator Joseph McCarthy. Near the end of his life, Chambers became friendly with another former Communist and imminent writer, Arthur Koestler. Koestler wrote of Chambers upon receiving news of his death: "I always felt that Whittaker was the most misunderstood person of our time. When he testified he knowingly committed moral suicide to atone for the guilt of our generation. The witness is gone, the testimony will stand."
   
   In all, Sam Tanenhaus did an excellent job using primary and secondary sources, trial transcripts, and personal interviews to write an engaging biography of Whittaker Chambers. In his book, he provides informative notes and a thorough index; all of which helped to provide readers with a better understanding of the political mood in the country at the time of the Hiss-- Chambers case. The book would have been better organized had Tanenhaus placed the Chambers Hiss relationship information in its proper chronology and not moved it from the 1930's into the Hiss trial period of the 1950's. That small criticism aside, Tanenhaus' biography of Chambers is an important scholarly work for anyone wishing to gain a better understanding of CPUSA activities in U. S., the work of HUAC, and especially its star member, Richard Nixon, and the political left/right divide that was at the center of the Cold War era.
   
   As a graduate student in philosophy and history, I recommended this book for anyone interested in American history, foreign policy, Cold War history.

4 comments about When I Was a German, 1934-1945: An Englishwoman in Nazi Germany.

1. Victor Klemperer's "I Will Bear Witness". Christabel informs and entertains us, her writing is engaging and a world beyond the simple "diary entry" accounts. She is very perceptive, and her impressions from inside Nazi Germany, as a non-German, help us to better understand the people who brought Nazism to the world. Her writing style puts you right there in the minds and hearts of simple villagers, Nazi officials and those opposed to them. It also brings us a fresh perspective, one perhaps not encountered in other books on the subject. I have read numerous books, diaries and accounts of life in Nazi Germany (and Europe in general) and can highly recommend this one.



2. Until I read this book I never realized there were British (and American) women who had married Germans prior to the outbreak of WWII and actually lived in that "enemy" country while we were at war with them. The author suffered along with the German cicil population as the allies methodically bombarded Nazi Germany into submission. The constant fear of daily aerial bombings,hunger, and the fear of the Gestapo make this an epic story of survival.Better than fiction!



3. Fascinating account of life in Nazi Germany as told by an Englishwoman who had married a German aristocrat in 1934. Not as profound as Victor Klemperer's "I Will Bear Witness" but still one of the best of its genre. I liked it even more than Iris Origo's "War in Val D'Orcia" which I also highly recommend.
   
   Bielenberg writes beautifully, and although the narrative can be a little confusing at times, certain passages of "When I was a German" read to me like bits of "found poetry." Unfortunately a few typographical errors mar this edition; an historical document this important deserves better.
   
   There was a British television series produced in 1988 based on this book, called "Christabel" and shown in the United States on Masterpiece Theater. Bielenberg also testifies in various episodes of the "World at War" television series, which I am now looking forward to seeing again.



4. This was a good deal at the time, and by shipping it with more priority, was able to obtain it in the amount of time I needed.

5 comments about Not For Ourselves Alone: The Story of Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony.

1. This book is richly woven with details that dive into the true characters of these two beautiful souls. The book gives a truly amazing account of not only Elizabeth Cady Stanton & Susan B. Anthony, but dives into their lives and characters. The reader obtains a true understanding of these women's motivations, techniques, skills, and contributions, in a brilliant biography with great quotes, accounts, photographs, and special archives directly from the time period of Susan & Elizabeth, relating to their work. Ken Burns & Geoffrey C. Ward have made quite an accomplishment with this extraordinary account.



2. This book was an eye opener for me. Every woman should read this book to understand the fight for our right to vote. These women devoted their lives to something they knew they would never even see in their live time! Its a story of courage and strength. It's makes one feel proud to be a woman.



3. This book provides insight and history on the struggle that women went through to get the right to vote. It includes all kinds of interesting background and perspectives. It was a real eye opener for me and I'm giving it as a gift to all the young women I know.



4. This book fills a glaring need in history books. Not many people know more about Susan B. Anthony than she was one the dollar coin. This book corrects that oversight, and then some. Not only does the book give a balanced and well thought out look at Anthony and Stanton, the reader is also introduced to many, many other women who worked so hard for women rights.
   I especially liked that the book didn't shy away from some of these women's more controversial stands, such as taking on the black person's cause.
   All in all, a very good book.



5. This was a wonderful and engaging read. Not only were you given a clear picture of both Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, but the book cites numerous powerful men and women who were active in the suffrage movement. This book is like a small taste of women's history that leaves you yearning for more. However, I wouldn't overlook this book just because it is not extremely specific, it is very helpful in getting a feel for the suffrage movement as a whole.