5 comments about Marcel Proust: A Life.

1. This is a dangerous book. If you have not read In Search of Lost Time in all of its infamous 3000 pages and you pick up this book, beware. Chances are, like me, you will find yourself juggling this great biography, Vol 1. of the Search, and Roger Shattuck's Proust's "Way, A guide to In Search of Lost Time" all at the same time.

   Carter's biography is the first comprehensive one in 40 years and is based on much new information not available in the Painter volumes of the late 50's and early 60's. I ordered this biography and it immediately got me hooked. Proust, in all his eccentricity (sometimes hilarious) comes off as a real and likeable person. He is certainly a different person than the one living in his corked lined room writing page after page describing the wallpaper in his room that Dr. Kaufman taught us about in my 1958 high school World Literature class.

   At 800 pages, it at first appears to be a daunting read. What could be more boring than the life of an aristocratic French mama's boy never to earn more than a few Francs on his own until way past 30 years. It is hardly boring. Proust was an exceedingly complex person. (Aren't we all?) Proust was plagued by asthma that his doctors kept assuring him was psychosomatic in origin, and in some wisdom, he knew to be otherwise. Living at home totally supported by his mother and father, he lead an extravagant lifestyle, often leaving what amounted to $200.00 tips to the carriage driver. It was a salon society and Proust was a member of perhaps dozens. We tour the various salons and their status climbing members and hosts. In Carter's thorough biography we get to see the society of Proust in much the same way as he saw it.

   Letters and more letters! This was the time and place of letter writers but, whew! Proust would write as many as three letters a day to his mother while living in the same house. Letters to friends, lovers, enemies. Gads, it hardly seems like there was time for anything else.

   Some times the story of Proust becomes surreal. It appears that being a critic in this time in France was almost a death defying act. Trash a play or book and you were likely to be challenged to a duel. Well a sort of a duel, as by this time the duel was important but nobody was aiming to kill. Proust had his manhood challenged by a critic. Proust challenged the critic to a duel and it was accepted. The time and place was 9:00 am in a woods outside of Paris. Proust instructed his seconds to rearrange the time to 3:00 pm in the afternoon as 9:00 am was not a time when decent persons were up and about. Proust's bullet strucked the ground inches from his opponent indicating he was shooting to kill. Quite a dangerous mama's boy.

   Carter handles Proust's sexuality in a refreshing and matter of fact way. Neither making him into a homosexual hero as some have done with Wilde -- though Wilde can take the blame for much of that himself -- nor treating him as some sort of sexual misfit. Sexuality permeated Proust's life and it often had no gender associated with it, he was often smitten with the women surrounding him as much as the men. Carter can be commended for his sensitive portrayal of this essential part of Proust's life.

   If Proust is your interest, or if fin de siecle France is, this is a not to miss book. At 800 pages it is quite and investment in time -- it's a bargain in dollar per word! -- but if this era is your interest, it is well worth the investment.




2. Carter's Proust is as solid, readable, and absorbing as Ellmann's Joyce. While devouring Carter's text and endnotes too, I refer to maps and travel guides and continue to reread Proust's Proust. What a joy! I'm especially pleased with Carter's decision to lightly reference life to work (something I understand Tadie avoids in his biography, forthcoming in English). How could Proust's life be separated from his work or vice versa?

   I wish Yale had encouraged inclusion of a few reference maps and period photographs. Perhaps in a second, expanded edition, which would be an excuse to regain Proust's time once again, even at some loss to my own.




3. William Carter claims in the preface to this biography that his goal is "to understand, as well as one reasonably can, how Marcel Proust, generally considered by his peers a talented but frivolous dilettante, came to produce what is arguably the most brilliant sustained prose narrative in the history of literature." Fortunately, this is not his goal at all. Professor Carter knows better than to attempt any such thing.

   About four months before his death, we read, a letter from one of his first English fans infuriated Proust. Sydney Schiff had endorsed the anti-Proustian idea that when one knows someone, there is no need to read a book by that person. Nonsense, Proust replied: "Between what a person says and what he extracts through meditation from the depths of where the integral spirit lies covered with veils, there is a world." (p. 784)

   Some superficial spirit must in a weak moment have seized Professor Carter's pen when he came to write his preface, for his fascinating and enjoyable volume implicitly disavows the ambition to explain how Proust achieved his masterpiece. What Carter does instead is to recount, based on what records remain and in a simple and unornamented narrative style, the facts of Proust's life from month to month. Though we do not really feel that we come close to the heart of Proust's mystery as an artist, we do now and then get an idea of what it must have been like to know Proust, and be known by him.




4. Having read George Painter's two-volume biography of Proust many years ago, I might be unfair in comparing it to Carter's new biography, but my impression is that Carter has vastly outdone Painter. He has managed to write a very detailed, yet quite readable and engrossing biography of Proust. I think that conflating Proust and the narrator of "A la recherche..." has tended to diminish the author's genius, as if he had merely written a fascinating autobiography. Carter confirms Proust as a novelist, not a memoirist. Certainly, he helps the reader understand who may have inspired Proust's characters, but makes clear that Proust's imagination was the main engine behind the world he created. Some readers might be disappointed that there isn't more literary analysis of "La Recherche" in this biography, but Carter is adept at presenting passages from the novel that are representative of its genius and beauty. I'd also like to mention that the book is physically attractive, with a handsome typeface, and that there are very few typos and grammatical errors.



5. Carter captures the essence of Proust. This is a "must" read for anyone who is truly serious about "little Marcel." Fascinating! Will actually stimulate me to go back and charge through Remembrance of Things Past once again.

3 comments about Growing Up in the 1850s: The Journal of Agnes Lee.

1. Eleanor Agnes Lee was the daughter of General Robert E. Lee, the famous Conferderate Commander in the War Between the States. This is the journal from her girlhood. I thoroughly enjoyed it. There are many books about Robert E. Lee, but there are very few about the rest of his family. This is one of the only sources on his third, beautiful daughter, Agnes, and lets us see better the life of the Lee family. It tells of her faith, her struggles, and her wonderful relationship with her family. I loved this book!



2. The Journal of Agnes Lee was written over a 5-year period while Agnes was between 12 and 17, and before the Civil War that would make her father such a legend. Don't expect breathtaking adventure here, but rather sit back and enjoy a view of this young girl coming of age in the 1850's. My strongest reaction to the book was, "How I would have loved to know Agnes!" She really does come alive here with exuberant spontaneity. Her writings provide many glimpses into the overall family life and way of thinking about her life. Agnes' love for her family is intense, and it can make the reader jealous of such closeness, rarely seen in today's society. I do recommend this book to those who want to know about General Lee's family life, and those who are interested in knowing more about this delightful girl, taken from the world by illness at age 32.



3. Miss Agnes Lee, as the daughter of the famous general, was in a unique position to record the inner workings of one of America's oldest families. She records a touchingly ordinary life of a typical 19th-century young woman; home life, going to school, her hopes and dreams. Truly interesting to historians should be her position as "teacher" for her grandfather's slaves, who were being prepared for their freedom. General Lee wanted them to be taught to read and write so they could make a living, and Miss Agnes and her beloved sister Annie (who died tragically of typhoid during the war) taught the classes. Agnes, like her sisters, never married although she had a hearbreaking love over with Orton Williams, whom the war turned into a hard-drinking man. She tearfully refused his proposal and never healed from her grief when he was hanged by Union troops. This is an invaluable resource for a young girl's life of the period. Highly recommend

3 comments about The Personal Memoirs of U. S. Grant, Vol. 2.

1. General Grant wrote this book while dying of throat cancer. He had been swindled by a dishonest Wall Street Broker and his trophies and possessions were stripped from him to satisfy the demands of his debtors. Bankrupt, suffering from a terminal illness and never passing a moment without acute pain, he produced this magnificent monument to his greatness. Those who denigrate Grant as a drunkard, butcher, bumbling President need to read this book in order to correct these errant assumptions. It is impossible to read this book and not realize that Grant was an inordinately intelligent man and one hell of a writer.

   Grant's Memoirs are a deserved classic in American literature and considered the greatest military Memoirs ever penned, exceeding Caesar's Commentaries. Grant wrote as he lived: with clear, concise statements, unembellished with trivialities or frivolities. The only "criticism" the reader might have is that Grant bent over backwards not to wound the feelings of people in the book. He takes swipes at Joe Hooker and Jeff Davis, but what he left unsaid would have been far more interesting. A compelling and logical reason why Grant was so spare in his comments was because he was involved in a race with death. He didn't know how long he could live and therefore, "cut to the chase."

   Grant's assessments of Lincoln, Sherman, Sheridan and other military leaders are brilliant and engrossing. His style, like the man himself, was inimitable and couldn't be copied. In everyday life, Grant was a very funny man, who liked to listen to jokes and tell them himself. His sense of the absurd was acute. It's no accident that he loved Mark Twain and the two hitched together very well. Twain and Grant shared a similar sense of humor, and Grant's witicisms in the Memoirs are frequent, unexpected and welcome. There are portions where you will literally laugh out loud.

   Though Grant's Memoirs were written 113 years ago, they remain fresh, vibrant and an intensely good read. I have read them in! their entirity 30 times in my life and I never weary of the style and language that Grant employed. He was a military genius to be sure, but he was also a writer of supreme gifts, and these gifts shine through on every page of this testament to his greatness. All Americans should read this book and realize what we owe to Grant: he preserved the union with his decisive brilliance. In his honor, we should be eternally grateful.




2. General Grant wrote this book while dying of throat cancer. He had been swindled by a dishonest Wall Street Broker and his trophies and possessions were stripped from him to satisfy the demands of his debtors. Bankrupt, suffering from a terminal illness and never passing a moment without acute pain, he produced this magnificent monument to his greatness. Those who denigrate Grant as a drunkard, butcher or bumbling President need to read this book in order to correct these errant assumptions. It is impossible to read this book and not realize that Grant was an inordinately intelligent man and one hell of a writer.

   Grant's Memoirs are a deserved classic in American literature and considered the greatest military Memoirs ever penned, exceeding Caesar's Commentaries. Grant wrote as he lived: with clear, concise statements, unembellished with trivialities or frivolities. The only "criticism" the reader might have is that Grant bent over backwards not to wound the feelings of people in the book. He takes swipes at Joe Hooker and Jeff Davis, but what he left unsaid would have been far more interesting. A compelling and logical reason why Grant was so spare in his comments was because he was involved in a race with death. He didn't know how long he could live and therefore, "cut to the chase."

   Grant's assessments of Lincoln, Sherman, Sheridan and other military leaders are brilliant and engrossing. His style, like the man himself, was inimitable and couldn't be copied. In everyday life, Grant was a very funny man, who liked to listen to jokes and tell them himself. His sense of the absurd was acute. It's no accident that he loved Mark Twain and the two hitched together very well. Twain and Grant shared a similar sense of humor, and Grant's witicisms in the Memoirs are frequent, unexpected and welcome. There are portions where you will literally laugh out loud.

   Though Grant's Memoirs were written 119 years ago, they remain fresh, vibrant and an intensely good read. I have read them many times in my life and I never weary of the style and language that Grant employed. He was a military genius to be sure, but he was also a writer of supreme gifts, and these gifts shine through on every page of this testament to his greatness. All Americans should read this book and realize what we owe to Grant: he preserved the union with his decisive brilliance. In his honor, we should be eternally grateful.




3. This book is a good subject for the Civil War buff that delves into the personal accounts of a general from birth to retirement. This a must companion for "Personal Memoirs of U.S. Grant, Volume One."

4 comments about John Philip Sousa: American Phenomenon.

1. This book is by far and away THE book for the life of John Philip Sousa. Mr. Bierly has researched his subject in depth from help with the Sousa family former sousa Band Members and material in the Library of Congress, Masrine Band Archives, Univ. of Illinois and others. If you want to know Sousa, this is the book Joe L. Norcross



2. This is the definitive bio on J. P. Sousa. The author has lovingly researched his topic, gathering in all sorts of details about the legendary March King. It is sad that most Americans are only familiar with a handful of the great mans works. What this book reveals about Sousa is the great variety of music that he composed. Besides 136 excellent marches, he composed operettas, humouresques, and many other kinds of works. Without a doubt Sousa is our most prolific composer, the sheer volume and qaulity of his works far surpassing all other American composers. Yet the vast majortiy of his music is little heard these days. It is true that Sousa's music appealed to an America of a different time. His marches have all the power of an emerging young United States, just entering into the realm of international politics and industrial might at the turn of the century. In these political correct times Sousa's music might be perceived as being too chauvanistically patriotic in outlook. Hopefully in the post 9/11 world that we live in there is room for a revival of his music to bring back some of the nations pride in itself. Mr. Bierley considers the Sousa band is the greatest of its kind in the world. There is more than a little typical American tendency for overstatement here. Certianly in the States in the latter part of the 19th century there were few rivals for Sousa's band. But in Europe many fine military bands already existed and Sousa, though well received on his numerous tours abraod, faced much more critical acclaim. As director of the US Marine Band, Sousa certainly transformed that musical organization into the top-notch band that it is today. In fact, Sousa probably modelled his own band on the Garde Republicanne of Paris, but also any of the British or Prussian Guards bands could have served as inspiration as well. Mr. Bierley has brought together a number of fine photos of Sousa and his band, and highlights the many well known and famous musicians that served within the Sousa Band during its 40 year life-span. The music of J P Sousa evokes a bygone era in the United States. He was instrumental in both introducing and uplifting the music that was performed in this country. We could certainly use his like again as current music standards and tastes have fallen fall below what they were even in Sousa's day. Let us hope for a healthy re-birth of music and someone like Sousa to inspire us musically once more.



3. There seems to be little in the way of information on this amazing composer. The author, an engineer, writes like one: dry, factual, and with lots of padding -- a trait that the March King himself abhorred. However, as with trying to get the sweet meat out of Dungeness crab, there are some tidbits worth fighting for. On the back, I may have found a reference to what I was really seeking: the stories behind Sousa's music. I guess the best I can say is that, despite pedantic and fussy details, I was able to cull the appreciation of a true musical genius and American. I'll keep looking for a book I can enjoy -- perhaps Sousa's own autobiography, if I can find it.



4. This book is very well written with lots of great pictures of Sousa and people involved in this great
   American's life.
   This is a great book.
   
   Highly recommeded.

5 comments about Como Llego La Noche / How Night Fell.

1. Excelente libro y muy bien escrito. Comencé a leerlo y me lo terminé en 2 dias. Lo recomiendo mucho para conocer esta historia de la mano de su protagonista, algo que la mayoria de los cubanos que nacimos con la revolucion no conociamos. Magnifico.



2. I was born here in the Unites States from hispanic origins. Since I read, speeak, and write fluently English and Spanish, I read the memories of Huber Matos and some of the critics of this book. I recommend this book; however, I also recommend reading the critics of his comrades involved in the same events at [...]



3. Un magnífico ejemplo de coraje, integridad y valentía de un hombre que no se dejó doblegar por una de las peores dictaduras que ha sufrido América Latina. Este libro, claramente escrito, muestra la verdadera cara del régimen castrista.



4. A pesar de ser cubano solo conozco la historia de Cuba a la que fui expuesto en las escuelas y medios informativos del gobierno de Fidel Castro, donde los acontecimientos son moldeados y tergiversados para reforzar la imagen inmaculable del gobierno. Ahora que estoy fuera de Cuba estoy consumiendo libros y artículos calificados como literaturas "ilegales" bajo el fuerte sistema de censura del gobierno de Castro.
   
   En mi búsqueda por reconstruir eventos históricos que me ayuden a darle una imagen mas balanceada y que estén más acordes con mis experiencias bajo el gobierno represivo de Fidel Castro, me he encontrado con este libro el cual ha aportado al enriquecimiento y aclaración de una parte de la historia de mi país.
   
   Yo recuerdo escuchar en mis años educativos sobre la traición del comandante Huber Matos, ahora me doy cuenta que la traición no era mas que una carta de resignación a Fidel Castro, debido a claras señales que mostraban, que la revolución Cubana se estaba desviando del objetivo principal que los trajo a la lucha armada, ese objetivo no tenia nada que ver con implantar un sistema comunista y estaba enteramente enfocado en restablecer el sistema democrático y constitucional al cual batista le había dado un golpe de estado.
   
   Quede muy impresionado al leer la valentía demostrada por Hubert Matos tanto en la lucha armada contra el tirano batista, como en la larga condena de 20 años que cumplió en las cárceles Cubanas, donde su lucha y oposición a la nueva tiranía nunca cesaron, a pesar de las calamidades y las golpizas sufridas. Yo se que habrá un lugar para el en los libros de historia que circularan en las futuras aulas Cubanas.
   
   Yo le recomiendo este libro a cualquiera que quiera leer sobre un hombre de principios que no se doblego y se enfrento a dos sistemas totalitarios, y especialmente a Cubanos como yo que quieran tener una imagen mas completa de la historia de nuestro país.
   
   No solamente recomiendo este libro por el tema que el mismo contiene sino por la elocuencia y la intensidad con el que fue escrito, este es uno de esos libros que al leerlos te introduces tanto en la historia que cuesta trabajo poner a un lado.



5. Este es un libro espectacular, que se lee como si fuera una novela. Lamentablemente los hechos son reales y demuestran lo que es la "justicia revolucionaria" del despreciable dictador Fidel Castro y su igualmente excecrable hermano Raul. Una revolucion que comenzo' con los fines mas encomiables, degenero' en ese regimen totalitario que aun hoy azota a la sufrida isla. Matos nos hace ver ese proceso en este libro con total claridad y franqueza. Imperdible, para todo aquel que se interese por la revolucion Cubana y la historia de America Latina.

4 comments about Queen Victoria's Children.

1. A very in depth and intriguing view into the life and lifestyles of the children and grandchildren of the "grandmother of europe", Queen Victoria. If you are after something easy to read and digest but not too in depth,on a wide variety of royals, then Van der kiste is the author for you. I find his books to be very interesting to read as well as informative, which is a hard combination to find. Very good reading! Im on to his next book.



2. If you have nothing else in your library re: the 9 children of Queen Victoria & Prince Albert -- no other biographies of Vicky, Albert Edward, et al.-- then this is the book to have. It gives a good overview of the lives of all nine children. However, I found it a little tedious to read because I HAVE read separate biographies of Vicky, Albert Edward, Louise, Arthur & Beatrice, and those biographies are the sources for Van der Kiste's book. So, if you are like me a royalty buff who's already got the biographies, you don't need to read this because it has nothing to add. But it's a well-written & concise history of all the children's lives.



3. This author produces very workmanlike and highly readable popular histories of the modern period, this time with a bio-political survey of Victoria's nine children and forty grandchildren. They possessed widely differing personalities but remained a close-knit family -- though relations often were strained by divided loyalties through marriage into other European dynasties. The author also makes good use of illustration and includes a good (though brief) bibliography.



4. "Oh madam, it is a princess!"
   "Never mind, the next will be a prince." -- Queen Victoria's comment when informed as to the gender of her first child
   
   I've always been interested in the Victorian period of English history. One of the most fascinating of the people of the time is the woman who gave her name to the era, Queen Victoria herself. Longtime author John van der Kiste, who has penned several biographies of the European royalty, now turns his attention to the Queen and her nine very different and unusual children.
   
   While this is a good place to start research on the various children of Victoria, the treatment is just too light and shallow to be of any real use. Most of the information that is given is of the 'who was born, married, and died' variety, along with various illnesses and mishaps. Almost nothing is given of the sibling rivalries and dramas that must have played out in such a huge family with so many distinct characters. Van der Kiste has written other collective biographies of royal siblings, and several stand-alone biographies of various royals, but this is not one of his better efforts.
   
   The best part of the book is one of the appendices that lists all of the children, and provides pertinent information about their own children and the many intertangled relationships that they would create -- by the First World War, descendants of Queen Victoria would be found either occupying or marrying into nearly every throne in Europe with the exception of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, several small German principalities and the Italian royal house.
   
   The author did update his book and bibliography, making note of the new material and books published on the individuals, it's still not really worth the effort to seek out a copy unless you are a fan of van der Kiste's work. The photographs are rather muddled, and not very unique to the work -- many come from other sources. Most of all, the entire narrative has the feel of a cut-and-paste job; while it is good to see the story of Queen Victoria and her children presented in a cohesive whole, and in chronilogical order, it simply lacks the depth of other, far better written, biographies.
   
   Somewhat recommended.

5 comments about A Son of Thunder: Patrick Henry and the American Republic.

1. Few biographies manage to avoid the perils of the genre, and this one is no exception. Mayer celebrates his subject, misunderstanding Henry as a fore-bearer of Jacksonian democracy and failing adequately to appreciate Henry's conservative commitment to social hierarchy, genteel leadership, and religious establishment. As a consequence, Mayer cannot convincingly explain Henry's espousal of Federalist politics in the 1790s, which makes sense only if we abandon any lingering neo-Whiggish inclination to find in Henry a self-conscious commitment to democracy.

   There have been numerous other biographies of Patrick Henry. I would still recommend Moses Coit Tyler's 1887 PATRICK HENRY, which was reprinted by Chelsea House in 1980 with an introduction by Lance Banning. William Wirt Henry's three volume PATRICK HENRY, LIFE, CORRESPONDENCES, AND SPEECHES (originally published in 1891 but recently republished) should be used with care, since W.W. Henry incorrectly attributes a number of letters and other sources to Patrick Henry which more recent scholarship has established were written by others. Richard Beeman wrote a good analytic biography, PATRICK HENRY: A BIOGRAPHY, in 1974, which provides an excellent brief introduction to Henry's politics. The most comprehensive modern scholarly biography remains Robert Meade's two volume master-work, PATRICK HENRY (1959, 1967).

   Mayer's prose is far more sprightly than Meade's, but Meade provides the more balanced and judicious treatment, and Meade's documentation of his conclusions is much superior. While Mayer updates Meade and Beeman in a number of places, his work does not supercede theirs, and should be read in conjunction with the earlier scholarship. Mayer's is a good book, especially as an introduction to a general audience. It is not, however, a work of historical biographical scholarship in the same class as, say, Drew Gilpen Faust's biography of James Henry Hammond, nor is it researched with the same meticulous care as Meade's account of Henry.




2. 
   
   I enjoy history. I enjoy reading about the history of The United States, and the history of the world. While earning a BS in Physics I took almost enough history credits to get a BA in History. Through all the history I've read Patrick Henry seemed to be a supporting actor in the creation of the US.
   
   Last year my family and I went to Colonial Williamsburg. For one of the events Richard Schumann acts as Patrick Henry. Mr. Schumann stands out under an Oak tree. He greets the audience, informs them of the events of the day (in 1776) and then takes questions from people. I was so fascinated and so enjoyed this the first day I went, that I went every day I could for the rest of the week, and when recently we flew back to the East Coast to see Washington DC and Colonial Williamsburg, I went again.
   
   In response to some questions, Richard Schumann as Patrick Henry will "speculate" on the future. I asked if he thought there would be any good biographies written on him. As a typical Patrick Henry speech, he responded with a five to seven minute answer. He talked about the first biography written, about 30 years after Patrick Henry died, and gave the background on a number of other biographies written over the last 200 years. Finally he recommended "A Son of Thunder" by Henry Mayer.
   
   This is a well written book. It is informative and engaging.
   
   The book moves chronologically through Patrick's life. It starts with his ancestors, focusing on his parents. We learn of some of the major events in his childhood. As a child Patrick Henry was pretty easy going and had little drive. One he got married Patrick Henry finally grew up and started studying to become a lawyer.
   
   Patrick joined Virginian politics and led a major change. For decades politics were run by the Virginian aristocracy. Patrick worked with the common men. He supported them, and they supported him.
   
   Patrick is known for his ways with the spoken word. He was very gifted. The book gives some insight into how he developed this gift. As a lawyer he lost few cases. In fact after he beat Thomas Jefferson in a case, Thomas Jefferson gave up law.
   
   Patrick Henry was very influential in the creation of the United States. The first ten amendments, the Bill of Rights, are largely due to Patrick Henry forcing James Madison to commit to supporting them.
   
   The book shows that Patrick Henry was a good man. He had a few flaws, but Patrick Henry rates high in my mind for making the effort to make a difference.
   
   This is a good book to read. If you have any interest in the creation of The United States of American, this book is worth reading.



3. Before moving to Virginia I, like many Americans, only knew Patrick Henry for his famous sound-bite, "...give me liberty or give me death." This well-written book has helped open my eyes to the depth of Patrick Henry and the significance of his contribution to American life. Consider his accomplishments: self-made attorney, elected several times to the Virginia House of Burgesses, elected to serve in the first Continental Congress, colonel in the pre-Revolutionary Virginia militia and three-term Virginia governor. He did all of this before he was 45 years old. He was a successful farmer and land speculator. He was a faithful sponsor of religious freedoms and political rights. Once our independence was established, he fought for a 'bill of rights' to protect us from the federal government. We owe a lot to Mr. Henry and, curiously, most people barely know his name.



4. ......he was a fictional character. A couple of years ago, I had this book on my desk, and a Nurse tried to argue with me to the effect that "Patrick Henry wasn't real". Poor soul, I never did convince her...Even if you accept that he was real, all you probably know is an eight second sound bite from an 8-10 minute speech. There was a LOT more to Mr. Henry than that.
   
   This was no enigmatic Tom Jefferson or glacially distant George Washington; Henry was the nicest, and most personable of men. What you saw was what you got. Oh, he was tough in the courtroom, and in legislative debate, but he was, in most ways, an ordinary man supporting his [large] family with an extraordinary talent. He had his troubles: the initial failures at running a tavern drove him to the law [Who were the three signers of his law license? That's still debated]...his first wife's long mental illness, and eventual death just as The Revolution was starting would have taxed any man. But, Henry had a mission, and kept going.
   
   At the time of "Liberty or Death", Patrick Henry had been a prominent legislator for ten years. Remember the "Stamp Act"?...And, before that, the "Parson's Cause", our first important court case on religious liberty? And after the famous speech...first elected Governor of Virginia...Militia Colonel...bitter opponent of ratification of the US Constitution...father [along with George Mason] of the "Bill of Rights". His ratification debates with John Marshall are the stuff of legend. Though Henry and Marshall were opponents, they remained friends, and law partners.[The famous Randolph murder case] Both were surpassingly nice guys. Henry was the father-in-law of Marshall's opponent, and enemy, Judge Spencer Roane. Marshall was so nice that his enemies liked him: Roane was so acidly unpleasant that even his friends couldn't stand him.
   
   Henry had but one real enemy, and that was his political ally, Mr. Jefferson. The circumstances go back to the aftermath of Jefferson's unhappy time as Governor. The story is beyond this review, but was probably a misunderstanding. These are the two men largely responsible for our own freedom of religion; very different men. Henry was a lifelong devout Christian, and loyal Anglican, the nephew of a Priest, the son of a Vestryman. But, he always supported liberty. He was taught toleration early by his "dissenter" mother. [Dissenter doesn't mean athiest: in Mrs. Henry's case, it means Presbyterian: in some cases, Baptist. Methodists weren't dissenters; they were considered a branch of the Anglicans].The "Parsons Cause" was far from his only court case on the matter. When Baptist minister John Weatherford was jailed in Chesterfield County, near where I live, for preaching the Gospel, Henry got him out of the charges, and quietly paid his costs.[Weatherford didn't find out till later who had paid his fines]. Baptists telling this story will usually leave out the fact that an Episcopalian lawyer got Weatherford out of the mess...Episcopalians leave out Weatherford's name...From me, you get both. Though Mr. Jefferson wrote the "Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom", Patrick Henry laid much of the practical foundation.
   
   On a personal note, I am honored to be, occasionally, one of the actors who regularly present a reenactment of The Second Virginia Convention of March 23, 1775 at St. John's Episcopal Church in Richmond. Yes, the original site is still an active Church. I'm not Mr. Henry, I'm either John Tazewell, or Thomas Nelson, jr. Should you ever get a chance to see either Mike Wells or Kevin McGranahan play Patrick Henry, take it. Different men, different renditions, both superb. Which do I prefer? Of course I don't dare say, since both are friends, who might read this. The honest answer is I don't know. My wife prefers one, my son and daughter the other, but I prefer both. This fine book is sold in the gift shop at St. Johns, and at Scotchtown, Henry's home in Hanover County. It is well written, and comprehensive. It is, sadly, the only academic biography of Mr. Henry we have in print. Robert Douthat Meade, famed as biographer of Judah P. Benjamin, wrote a wonderful two volume biography of Mr. Henry, published in 1957, and in 1969. Good luck finding it. But, even if you have Dr. Meade's [I do, signed; I won't tell where I got it, but it set me back $55], I can recommend this volume strongly. It's time you knew...



5. A must read for anyone interested in Henry and the time period.
   
   It does go easy on Henry with his battles with Jefferson.

2 comments about Karl Marx, Fourth Edition: A Biography.

1. David McLellan's biography of the great man is perhaps the best of of them all. He describes with much wit and feeling Marx' life, from his upbringing in Trier to his final death in London. But not just this: included are also shorter overviews of various other people who played a significant role in the life of Karl Marx, starting of course with Jenny von Westphalen and Friedrich Engels, but also less well-known people such as Herwegh and Kugelmann. McLellan never introduces anyone without telling you what kind of person he was and what role he played in the politics of the time, making the era truly come alive, with all its grandeur and all its silly infighting.
   
   For this biography is certainly not a hagiography. McLellan shows Marx in all his brilliance and his wit, and as the greatest thinker of the age, but he also shows his bad sides: his vindictiveness, his pettiness, his rudeness, his incompetence at managing his financial and personal affairs, and of course the infamous bastard son. All the childish infighting between the socialist émigrés in London, Bruxelles and Paris is revealed, where Marx certainly does not get off scot-free. But there is also room for showing Marx as a family man, as loyal to his few close friends, and as a visionary thinker.
   
   McLellan focuses primarily on Marx' life in a "human interest" manner, rather than concentrating on the development of his theories, although those are of course mentioned. Because of this, many amusing and sometimes surprising anecdotes and oddities turn up to keep this book a page-turner. Before our eye passes a carpet belonging to Leibniz, a drunken outing which ends in vandalism and a police chase, Marx on the run for his creditors, yelling at the Prussian censor, Engels making a wine-tasting tour, a chance meeting with Bismarck's niece, French pornographic verse, carbuncles, and many more things.
   
   There are some minor problems with the book, as can be expected. Occasionally a strange spelling is used ("Carlsbad", "Vera Sassoulitch"), although this may have been fixed in the new edition. The final chapter, an epilogue concerning Marx' legacy, is very superficial and includes all sorts of nonsense about Marxist theory being outdated, and could best have been left out altogether. There is also the tendency to denigrate Engels undeservedly; but this is unsettlingly common among secondary authors on Marx, and is partially reinforced by Engels' personal modesty about his contributions. In any case these are all small issues, and any reader interested in the life of Marx as opposed to 'merely' his theories can do no better but to read this book.



2. This well-written account of Marx's life stands above the rest. It is a sympathetic but not uncritical recounting of Marx's life. McCellan's book Karl Marx: Selected Writings is a good companion to his biography.
   
   Lacking in the book, however, is much discussion of the ideas of Marx.
   
   For beginners, a clear presentation of the philosophical background of Marx's work can be found in Isaih Berlin's biography of Marx. A variety of opinions about Marx's political, social, and historical theory can be found in the Cambridge Companion to Marx. Ernst Fischer's How to Read Karl Marx clearly discusses some of the foundational notions in Marx's economic theory.

5 comments about I Am Jesse James.

1. This book's title just scream's "kids book" ... This redneck is a moron and his picture book and last review say it all. Any good book is not read "in about an hour".. if you're looking for a biography.. look elsewhere. I saw this book at the checkout in wallmart (if that tells you anything)... and read it while waiting in line. This picture book was meant for inbreeders and morons and I thought it was a good laugh... don't waste your time.



2. I received this book as a gift, which is the only reason it's not in a trash can right now. People are paying $17 for a bunch of recycled photos, only 40 or so of which portray Jesse James, along with a few hundred words of unreadable text? This is the "authorized" biography? Is the man's life so horrible that no one could write about it? Frankly, this book is an insult to Jesse's fans. If you want to read about Jesse, buy "Jesse James: The Man and His Machines," by Mike Seate.



3. I am a big fan of Monster Garage and of Jesse James. I bought this book after reading The Man and His Machines thinking it would provide an insight into who Jesse is and some details about his life and his struggles. The photo's of the bikes are great but I have seen those same photo's over and over again. I expected to see more photo's of Jesse. I also expected it would be a more autobiographical book, not something I needed a magnifying glass to read and finished within the hour. Jesse needs to release a true autobiography. His fans would love it.



4. Don't expect any lessons on how to build a custom Harley Davidson. This book is just pure eye candy. Considering that bike magazines are so expensive this book is worth buying for inspiration. As a 'coffee table book' (whatever that means!), it serves its purpose well, which is why I'm giving it 5 Stars.
   
   I'm not really into custom Harleys (As far as H-Ds are concerned I would prefer a Buell X1 Lightning or Sundance Performance Super XR1200) but I appreciate the effort, skill and craftsmanship that goes into each of his bikes. Jesse James is famous because he's the real deal. He can actually do his own metalwork, shaping sheetmetal into a tank or fender, and does his own welding. His style is a bit on the extreme side of things, yet isn't bizzare or cartoonish, which is probably why he's successful.
   
   I bought this book because I wanted to know ... "Who is this guy?" ... "Why is he so famous"? I've created a couple of special edition automobiles ... but why am I not even half as famous? :) We could all learn a bit about marketing, advertising and promotion from Jesse James. If you want to read about Jesse James himself, buy the Mike Seate book "Jesse James, the man and his machines".



5. I was a bit disappointed in this book. I did like the bike photos that were shown... not many. Lots of filler of Jesse and his gang posing with guns. What looks like porn stars on the bikes.... I would rather just see the bikes man. I don't need to see pictures of Jesse playing tough guy holding a shotgun or burning money. Or his freaking dog dish with the WCC logo on it... my god. It makes you wonder what he is trying to make up for. His bikes are cool. They need to show more of them. And the text is pretty much a joke too... F this and F that. Its like a big kiss up to Jesse as a bike god or something and F the rest of you. If you pay full price for this book, you deserve to get beat down by Jesse.

5 comments about Martin Heidegger: Between Good and Evil.

1. The epigram at the front of this brisk and efficient biography of Heidegger opens with an epigram from Arendt, 'The gale that blows through Heidegger...is not of our century...'. This is true, and evocative of the mysteries of philosophic history and origins, and yet the observation poignantly reveals the mystique that swept through the culture of the times and brought too many to a fool's ruin, among them students of Heidegger. One reviews the question ad infinitum reluctant to pass judgement on a philosophic genius, and yet the facts of the history show just this, a long grace period, viz. the postwar French devotion to this philosophy, now followed by a renewed offensive at the harsh reality of the facts of the case, and the difficulty of separating any longer the philosopher in politics from his philosophy. Hellishness beckons.
   This biography is very dry, neat, but includes the assessement of the case in the light of the work of Ott and Farias. Much was clear even before the rectorship speech, the influence of Junger, Spengler, then one gets unlucky, if one is mesmerized.
   How can one judge? Is there a choice? One looks at the wreckage in a hurricane and moves on.



2. There are a lot of reasons why I was interested in picking this book up: my mentor at Georgetown, Wilfrid Desan, stressed how important it was to know the life of a philosopher, even the likes of Quine, because philosophy is ever and always about one's life. In the case of Heidegger, the mysteries of this man, the profound impact of his work on the course of 20th century thinking, the controversies of his politics all left me wondering how to get a grip on this man.
   This book is not for beginners. I've spent my undergraduate and graduate years studying Heidegger. Like a moth to the flame, and it consumed me in every regard. His books have totally spun me inside out, shook me to my soul, sent me off into Asian thought. If ever there was a Dasein thrown, yers trewly is it. How to begin to come to terms with this writer?
   Safranski does an absolutely brilliant job at delineating the strands of thinking leading up to the advent of phenomenology. But, as I say, this isn't for the novice or the casual reader. This is disciplined, committed writing in service of Thinking itself. There are no two ways about it, Heidegger erupted into the Twentieth Century. There seemed to be a sense among his teachers that this was an extraordinary thinker. As he gains the acceptance and posts of influence in German university life, he gains his confidence and from the point of BEING AND TIME onward, nothing, absolutely nothing will ever be the same.
   This book documents the transitions remarkably and with great clarity.
   Of course, one of the things that troubled me the most in my undergraduate days was the prospect of Heidegger's anti-Semitism and his political allegance to the Nazis in the early days of their rise to power, all the while entering into a passionate romance with Hannah Arendt. The book does not hide or apologize for Heidegger. But it seems clear that it is not real clear just how anti-Semitic he was. He quite directly states to Arendt that he finds his Jewish students annoying, and he somewhat buys into the supremecy of the German state espoused by the 1920's and early 30's Nazis. And he very definitely benefits from their appointments. Yet, he witholds. His wife does not. She is clearly and vehemently disgusted by Jewish people. I'm sure that her husband's affair with Arendt only added fuel to that fire. Yet Heidegger does not seem to buy the whole program. On the other hand, he does little or nothing to help Arendt get out of Germany, and nothing at all to save Edith Stein, his colleague from their days with Husserl, who had become a Catholic nun, was murdered at Auchwitz and has since been canonized. Nor is he willing to give a full and clear account of himself in the trials after the war. I am as puzzled now as I have always been. Was this incredible thinker also so filled with narrow mindedness that he could watch a people get exterminated because some of his students were annoying him?
   And as his thought began to walk more Buddhist paths, how did he resolve this great beginning of thinkng with the conflicts in his life? Those questions are not answered. Still in all, this book is a remarkable achievement. I could go on about so many other aspects, but I'll leave it at this: this is a book about a man's beginning, about being thrown fully consciously into the ground of thinking, and it uncovers what he found in the clearing with great insight.



3. I have read four chapters of this book, the ones on Anti-Semitism, Heidegger and Hannah Arendt, and the concluding chapter. The book is clearly written and the philosophical exposition outstanding.
   I was interested more in the whole question of Heidegger's Anti- Semitism, and his relationship with Hannah Arendt- in part because I just finished Elisabeth Young- Bruehl's excellent biography of Arendt.
   My sense of it all is that Heidegger was not at all a Socrates willing to take the hemlock for a higher ideal. His relations to his great mentor , the Jewish Husserl are shabby to say the least. He did not stand for him in any way, removed the original dedication to Husserl of 'Time and Being' from later editions of the work. He did not go out of his way to save Jewish friends.
   And in fact he became a Nazi ideologue at a certain point.
   His 'rehabilitation' in the eyes of the world owes a lot to Jaspers and Arendt. She especially showed a lifelong devotion to him. His failure to recognize the quality of her own work, the power of her mind in anything but understanding him shows a certain obtuseness, and inhumaneness.
   It is always disturbing to deal with a creator who may well have done great work when that creator's personal life is not commendable. It is all the more so when the creator is one like Wagner , truly evil.
   Heidegger obviously does not fit 'the evil category'. He may not be exactly midway between good and evil, but he was not the worst of the worst.
   I myself cannot read his Philosophy simply because I would feel very guilty in doing so. The thought of all the innocent dead murdered by the Nazis by a regime he served, cannot let me do this.



4. Rüdiger Safranskis biography on Heidegger combines a profound understanding of Heidegger's philosophy with a wealth of anecdotes and perceptive analysis of Heidegger the man and his relationships. In particular, Heidegger's affiliation with National Socialism is well covered.
   
   Overall, the book is very impressive and well worth time and effort. As I am quite familiar with the young Heidegger via Theodor Kisiel's "The Genesis of heidegger's Being & Time" and the work of Scandinavian philosophers on the subject, my only regret is that Safranski didn't write more about the "thinking" of the late Heidegger.



5. Writing about philosophers is a rather difficult task in most cases. The author has to be able to separate the philosophy from the man without making too many conjectures as to how the man shaped the philosophy or how the philosophy shaped the man. It's rather understandable the different opinions on him. He was a rabid National Socialist, hough he saw the errors of this ideology with time, he alienated many of his close friends for petty reasons, and showed blatant infidelity towards his wife.
   
   His writing had a tendency to be obtuse, but this book is anytihng but. His philosophy is well covered, and there are some instances of a tongue -in-cheek amusement at his play on words. Like every philosopher, the philosophy changed with him, and there were times he was writing almost incoherently. It seemed he was in love with his own words as opposed to being at certain points, or perhaps couldn't come up with a logical structure to explain what he felt. Regardless, his influence is without question, and with time he always recomposed himself to the core of his teaching, to be-in-the-world, and to be open to one's own Dasein.
   
   An excellent biography that is a good introduction to his core teachings.