5 comments about John Fitzgerald Kennedy: A Life In Pictures.

1. This collection of over 300 pages of the usual suspected photographs, as well as many unseen or rare ones, was published to commemorate the passing of 40 years since our 35th President was vicously cut down in his prime.

   The layout of the photographs is great. You see JFK throughout his life, from childhood, to Presidencey and every passing moment between. The photos are powerful, moving, show glamour and fun, you see a politician throughout his political career, you see a loving father, son, brother and husband. I have had quite a few photo books on JFk, but this is by far the best and most desirable one I have seen.

   This photograph book would make a wonderful and truly appriciated gift for anyone who has any respect, love or interest in JFK. My sister is a huge JFK fan, she had a bust of him on our dresser growing up.

   The price on Amazon, is as always, unbeatable. I saw this at a bookstore tonight for the full price.




2. "John Fitzgerald Kennedy:A Life in Pictures"is a great way to remember President Kennedy.I'm a young,strong admirer of President Kennedy,and not only are there great pictures of Kennedy,there is a biography of Kennedy with speeches he made,including the speech he was going to make on November 22,1963.The best pictures are of Kennedy with Herbert Hoover and a picture of Jack Kennedy with his daughter Caroline and his niece Maria Shriver.I have seen a bunch of great Kennedy photos,and if you ever want the best Kennedy photo,buy Robert Stack's autobiography "Straight Shooting"and see the picture of Stack and Kennedy. "John Fitzgerald Kennedy:A Life In Pictures"is a must read for all Kennedy fans and even all non-Kennedy fans.



3. I highly recommend this book, primarily for the great picutures of JFK. This 40th anniversary volume succeeds in presenting many rare and never-before-seen photos. I especially like the ones depicting Secret Service agent Gerald Blaine on the rear of the limousine in Italy 7/63. Get this!
   [...]



4. This is a great picture book. I have almost every Kennedy family picture book available. I just happen to come across it in a bookstore near my home. I paid $19.99 for it, pretty good price. You can get here for about $16-17 but remember you have to pay shipping. So it comes out to more but it is soo worth it. When you are going through these pics its like being taken back in time. I'm pretty young my mom was born in 1957 so she was about Caroline's age when these pics were taken.



5. This is not the best book about JFK I have ever read, but it is up there. I like the pictures on pages 16 (all) 20, 173, 192-199, 268-275, and 242-258. This book is recommended for any Kennedy fan of all ages.

5 comments about I Will Fight No More Forever: Chief Joseph and the Nez Perce War.

1. I Will Fight No More Forever is an excellent telling of the Nez Perce and their flight to escape destruction. The story shows the real maening of the Indian wars,and the real people behind the legends. A must-read for anyone interested in American history.



2. Written in a vivid way which allows you to follow the flight of the Nez Perce as they struggled to survive, Mr. Beal keeps you reading until the heartbreaking end. This story of how a people were forced into battle, chased by the army and eventually shipped away, shows the errors of our past and adds perspective to the present. Mr. Beal's writing not only presents history, but helps to identify a culture that america tried to destroy within our own boundaries. A must read for anyone interested in the history of the American West.



3. This book is gut-wrenching and difficult to read at times. It is packed with so much emotion. The book also helped me in understanding more about the Indian Wars and how they were fought on the Western Frontier. Good Book!



4. a good history of the nez pierce
   this work could have been stronger if the author would had defined the nez pierce relationships with the other indian tribes better and whether or not the nez pierce became indian scouts themselves.



5. A tremendous amount of study involved; Beal received help from National Park services, College officials, archivists, and historical societies. There is an extensive bibliography for further study. Keep a dictionary close. Through eye witness reports we observe the details of the battles, the strategies used, the men who fought, the traversing of the land, the heartache, the despair, and the sadness. Descriptions of the chiefs and officers are also detailed. Misconceptions will be laid to rest.
   
   Joseph was considered the leader of the Nez Perce, but there were many chiefs. It is not till towards the end of the book where we hear most of his words. He was a man of great wisdom; a diplomat, and a man of faith. He blames his men and the white man for the war; he tried to avoid it. "Hear me, my chiefs, I am tired; my heart is sick and sad. From where the sun now stands, I will fight no more forever."
   
   The officers were amazed by the outstanding leadership, the resiliency and the exceptional fighting ability of the Nez Perce. By miscellaneous observers we understand their way of life: they were prosperous, welcoming, good natured, thoughtful, and forgiving; comparably more than other tribes. We get a good description of their physical appearance, early history, character, and home land.
   
   The war began because of Indian retaliation against local minors. The military had difficulties tracking the bands down. The Nez Perce fought well and were able to allude the military throughout the northwest. The battle of the "Big Hole": some say one of the most bitterly fought in the annals of warfare. Indian Woman and children were killed, but some woman engaged in the fight. The story ends of course with their eventual surrender, for the purpose of saving his (Joseph) people. We follow their journey by land and river too the reservation (see "Trail Of Tears"). How they survived so weakened is a true testament to the will to survive. Some honored the treaty some did not. When will white man learn tell truth.
   
   The white man has been called wicked for his actions, but this may not be justified. Settlers were quite sincere to treaty terms. Indians lacked unity, some committed murders and there was fighting between tribes. Although there were atrocities committed on both sides, there were few. It was destined to happen, although sad the way it went down.
   
   Wish you well
   Scott

1 comments about Sound Wormy: Memoir of Andrew Gennett, Lumberman.

1. Being raised a few miles from one of the first Gennett sawmills, I found this to be one of the most interesting books I have ever read. Gennett describes in fair detail various logging practices, and the technical vernacular is even footnoted to assist the reader with terms he/she has probably never heard.

   The brothers' Gennett certainly had a knack for making money, but it was always after much investigation and hard work, and certainly risk. It was interesting to me how Andrew, from the upper crust of society, rolled his sleeves up and learned the art of cruising timber and sawmilling. Accounts of the long nights in the cold camping or boarding with mountaineer families while on timber cruises and logging operations were fascinating.

   Gennett's views of the long arm of Uncle Sam and issues regarding private property rights are still echoed today.

   I highly recommend to this book to anyone interested in the history of the Southern Appalchians, natural resource management, logging, or the American entreprenural spirit.

5 comments about Golden Mouth: The Story of John Chrysostom-Ascetic, Preacher, Bishop.

1. This book is a very serviceable biography of John Chrysostom, the most famous preacher of the ancient church. It chronicles the entirety of John's life, from the monasticism of his youth, to his subsequent tenure as a priest in Antioch, his bishopric in the imperial capitol, and the quarrels with the bishop of Alexandria and the empress that eventually brought about his downfall.

   Kelly does an excellent job of showing John's character. We get to see that those things which in some ways were the best of John's traits, his forthrightness and lack of fear, were the very things which due to his intemperate nature led him into conflict with those who were easily made jealous and those who did not care for their misdeeds to be honestly spoken of.

   There is, however, one serious flaw in this book. Kelly seems undecided about who his audience is. He alternates between gripping narration and lengthy passages (sometimes several pages in length) wherein he dissects the arguments for and against the authenticity of a particular sermon of John's or the dating of one of his writings. In my opinion, the book would have been strengthened had Kelly simply based the main text on what he believes to be correct, and moved the disputation either to end notes or to an appendix.




2. 
   
   "John's career ended in failure. ... The tragic episcopate of John Chrysostom opened the struggle of supremacy in the East..." W.H.C. Frend
   
   
   
   
   
   John Chrysostom:
   
   Recognized to be among the most powerful orators of the ancient world, John Chrysostom was the most prolific of the Fathers, leaving us with many sermons, letters, treatises and apologetic works. He was an incredible speaker whose sermons often moved his audience to tears or applause.
   
   "Although not a formal polemicist, John Chrysostom influenced Christian thought notably. He wrote brilliant homilies, interpreting the Bible literally and historically rather than allegorically. His accomplishments as a preacher and theologian are marred by a virulent anti-Semitism." (The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. Copyright © 2001-05)
   
   
   
   J.C., Golden Mouth:
   
   The Principal of Oxford's St. Edmund Hall, described his book as, 'the Story of J.C.,' defining his selected offices as, 'Ascetic, Preacher, Bishop.' While the words of Fr. Sydney Griffith, one of the foremost Patristic scholars, are most fitting in the review of this book, I quote and apply them. One does not mean to complain immoderately, nor to appear ungrateful for what is on its own terms a good study of an important topic; nor does one want to review a book the author never intended to write. But here is the place to plead for a broadening of perspective on the part of students of early 'fathers.'
   
   Kelly recomposes the life of John Chrysostom in chronological order from his youth and its ascetic stage for his further development as a preacher. Later his pick as Archbishop of Constantinople and his career therein the capital.
   
   He remained a great orator and a moralist preacher but was socially and politically oriented. Kelly exposed the court politics and John's struggle to be faithful to his cause, by criticizing Empress Eudoxia, and inviting problems with Theophilus, who has consecrated him. John's conflicts led to his condemnation at the Synod of the Oak. John was eventually sent into his final exile, where he died on the way.
   
   
   
   Non-vindicated John:
   
   J. Kelly, described by The NY Times as, 'not only a distinguished church historian but also an elegant stylist,' remains for me and many, a reference on early Christian Creeds and Doctrines, in the first place, and expected to bring to the tragic career of the great preaching orator new lights to his thought, and vindicate his patristic literature as; "There is little original in his thought. He preserves throughout the moralizing tendencies of his Antiochene teachers," alleged to him by two great patrologists J. Danielou, and RPC Hanson. Earlier in the same chapter, J.C. is described as the friend of Theodore of Mopsuestia, and pupil of Libanius and of Diodore of Tarsus, and cast heavy shadow on his ethics as more Stoic than Christian! (J. Danielou, Historical Theology, Pelican, 1970, p.107)
   
   
   
   A Story, not a Biography:
   
   In his preface, the oxford scholar gives a version of his elaboration on the 79/80 lectures in Oxford devoted to J.C., but were not published because of Kelly's non satisfaction of his own treatment, and few years later, he modified them to chapters 2,3, and 16 of Golden Mouth. The author who explored Chrysostom's teaching on baptism, original sin, grace and free will, redemption, etc., in his classic 'Early Christian Doctrines', would not even quote himself, in reference. At least, John's treatise on the priesthood, which has been popular, though not accepted by mainstream Protestants, could have been given a brief parallel with St. Gregory Nazianzen who inspired John, but spoke in a different theological language.
   
   He concluded, "I should like to have included some tentative presuppositions underlying John's thinking, and certain of his theological ideas which still need clarification. Ultimately he decided to leave this task to 'younger scholars.'
   
   
   
   Biographer J. Kelly:
   
   The late Master of ecclesiastics J.N.D. Kelly is the Principal of St. Edmund Hall, Oxford, was Canon of Chichester Cathedral, a Fellow of the British Academy, and since 1966 a member of the Academic Council of the Ecumenical Theological Institute, Jerusalem. He is the author of Early Christian Creeds, Early Christian Doctrines, Jerome, The Oxford Dictionary of Popes, etc.



3. A comprehensive treatment of this Eastern Father of the Church. We have not had a study like that of J. N. D. Kelly, unless you count the originally German 2 vol study of C. Baur, translated in 1959. An eminent historian writes about an eminent (and tragic?) personality of the late fourth and early fifth century. Kelly succeeds in making real the (imperial and episcopal) politics of the early 5th century. In addition there is enough of the theology of the time which will influence later christological developments.



4. Kelly is easily recognized as our time's authority on early church matters. Here in similar fashion as his worthy work on Jerome he tackles Chrysostom.
   
   He breaks it down nicely into three major components of his life: ascetic, preacher, bishop.
   
   The politics of the church and interaction with secular authorities dominate his life, as it does most. John certainly had his prinicples and he chose not to break them. It got him into disfavor with many, thus cumulating at the end in action taken against him. That easily summarizes his end, the buildup of resentment and hatred catches up.
   
   He certainly exhibited a passion for the underpriviledged and sick and devoted his preaching and resources to this. His ascetic beginning permeated this and fueled much of his preacher/bishop energies. This will bring enemy retaliation.



5. J.N.D. Kelly presents a faithful portrait of the great Bishop of Antioch. He highlights John as a solid expositional preacher who rejected the allegorical method of intepretation as popularized by Origen. You learn of Chrysostom's reservations about being worthy enough to be ordained, and his initial interest in the monastic life.
   
   You also learn of how long periods of harsh fasting ruined his digestive system, and how for this reason, he preferred to eat alone. You learn of the turbulent and divisive times in which he served as a bishop in Antioch and then in Constantinople.
   
   You also read of his strict views about the role of women in the church and of how strict he was with the monastic communities and with the priests in Antioch and later in Constantinople.
   
   Chrysostom's sermons were powerful and held the attention of the people, even though some of them were fairly lengthy. You also learn of his friendship with Olympias, a godly woman also given to virginity and asceticism.
   
   Finally, you learn about Chrysostom's enemies from within Arianism, and from his fellow clergy, especially Severinus, Eudoxia, Theophilus, and others.
   
   We see that Chrysostom's spicy sermons sometimes got him into trouble, ie. exile.
   
   We also read of his sad death.
   
   The book is occasionally bogged down in historical minutiae, but I thought Kelly did a good job of showing how Chrysostom was affected by the times in which he lived and how he himself affected the times. I also appreciated how Kelly was able to defend the historical reliability of much of the material that we have about Chrysostom from that time period. A very good book.

5 comments about Henry Ford and the Jews: The Mass Production of Hate.

1. This book by Baldwin gave a searing history of automobile icon
   Henry Ford.Baldwin very capably shows one of the pioneers of
   American industry to be devoutly anti-semite.Ford himself was the
   financier behind a anti-Jewish newspaper that was published in
   Michigan.Ford was a fan of Adolph Hitler. Hitler had a portrait of Ford on thew wall in his office.Henry Ford received an award
   from Hitler and showed up in person to receive it bringing with him many guests.Charles Linberg and Thomas Watson of IBM declined
   the same award.Ford was also able to sell Ford products to the
   Nazis receiving a monopoly on the Nazi vehicle market in the military.This book is packed with documented of Henry Ford's
   anti-semite activities.Read this you will become better informed.
   This is a good book. Buy it.



2. Neil Baldwin's "Henry Ford and the Jews" is a compelling look at how a genius at one thing --- the mass production of a good automobile --- could become such a dangerous buffoon when it came to another thing --- the mass production of an idea. At some point, our title character ceased to be just "Henry Ford, automaker" and instead became Henry Ford, wealthy and powerful symbol of international antisemitism. Baldwin's portrait of Ford in all his horrible glory is fascinating.



3. I think I was the last person in the United States to become aware of Henry Ford's anti-semitism.

   I make it a practice to study one person a month and I decided as a business builder, Henry Ford was worthy of my attention and study.

   I found this particular biography and thought, "OK, this has a completely different approach, let's try it on."

   I found Baldwin's passion and zealousness for his topic and his particular slant to be very powerful. As is frequent in such writing, it also became a barrier because every action Ford took became, through Baldwin's eyes, a matter of Ford being the Personification of Evil.

   I am not condoning Ford's thoughts, beliefs or behaviors. I am believing that not every action he took was a result of some undercurrent of Anti Semitism.

   That said, this book is worth a read due to the level of research Baldwin has done both in this biography and the biography of one of Ford's friends and role models (and less rabidly Anti-Semitic although there was some there) in Thomas Alva Edison.

   I just had this thought: I wonder how many business leaders remain staunchly racist... yet it has gone deeply underground in this age.

   I wonder how many business (and political leaders) continue to harbor less than transformed thought?

   Something to think about... and continue to stand against.




4. This book enlightened me about many historical connections, above all, about Henry Ford's strong influence on Hitler, and his acceptance of honors from him. The author offers very fine understanding of the American scene that fostered Ford's views, and also the reaction to Ford's publications of major antisemetic works.
   
   Unfortunately, the American scene has recently showed uncomfortable parallels with Ford's views. The antisemetic campaign about the "war on Christmas" makes "Henry Ford and the Jews" all the more relevant in 2005.
   
   Hendrik Hertzberg, in a recent New Yorker article about the ongoing phoney war on Christmas, made a direct connection to Henry Ford and his antisemitism. He wrote:
   
   ... Christmas itself, in something like its recognizably modern
   ... form, with gifts and cards and elves, dates from the early
   ... nineteenth century. The War on Christmas seems to have come
   ... along around a hundred years later, with the publication of
   ... "The International Jew," by Henry Ford, the automobile
   ... magnate, whom fate later punished by arranging to have his
   ... fortune diverted to the sappy, do-gooder Ford Foundation.
   ... "It is not religious tolerance in the midst of religious
   ... difference, but religious attack that they"-the
   ... Jews-"preach and practice," he wrote. "The whole record of
   ... the Jewish opposition to Christmas, Easter and certain
   ... patriotic songs shows that." Ford's anti-Semitism has not
   ... aged well, thanks to the later excesses of its European
   ... adherents, but by drawing a connection between
   ... Christmasbashing and patriotism-scorning he pointed the way
   ... for future Christmas warriors.
   --- From "Bah Humbug" www.newyorker.com, posted 2005-12-19



5. The reason this book is rated 1 star is the reader was not swept away by information as it was "new". This was well known by informed people and it was well known that most national leaders previous to Mr. Ford to the founding fathers had the same leanings which are attacked here.
   Readers must understand what they are reading which is being lost. Mr. Ford seems to have believed he was of the lost Israelite peoples so he was a Semite.
   Without having any intent on defending someone of another era, adjectives do mean things. One notices the term INTERNATIONAL Jew in these writings which some might find associated with the term "globalist" now which has nothing to do with race, but a system of enslaving people.
   Currently, one can turn to scores of books labeling all Germans bad. In a great deal of Old Europe the term "American" is viewed with racism in the same hatred.
   Just look at how American media and pundits have used the racial slur "neocon" which is based upon leftist Jews who left that leaning and became right wing Jews. Leftist Jews created that racial slur to impune right wing Jews. Yet that term is praised as it attacks one group not in favor with leftist media.
   This is a complicated subject and the author of this book fails to do anything but make a profit off of slamming someone from a previous time with bias and prejudice now held.
   It is easy to bash Henry Ford as he is dead, but liberal publishers which the Ford Foundation back in telling Mexican peoples that the entire southwest America is their land and not Americans are deemed not as reprehensible.
   When authors take it upon themselves to be judge, jury and character assassin spinning a tale to uninformed people who think this is all new, they expose themselves to the same light of examination.
   Mr. Ford appeared to believe that Americans were Israelite peoples and that meant that Jews were his brothers in the same tribe. Mr. Ford did though make a distinction that "international" or communist Jews were a problem. It would be valuable to have a book examining this issue in how these communists who had absolutely no belief system in God and were not Jews by faith caused under Stalin the deaths of tens of millions of people in the Soviet Union.
   If the term was communist without Jew attached would it make a difference to readers in condemning Mr. Ford? That is open for discussion as the New York Times produces glowing accounts of Joe Stalin who slaughtered millions as a communist.
   Yet Mr. Ford who did not murder one person in his life is titled anti Semite and Mr. Stalin who slaughtered millions of Ukrainians has no title of anti Ukrainite as there is no such word, just lie there is no anti Americanite term for how the world hates and blames Americans as it is fashionable to do so in this present time.
   In all of this the Ford Foundation has done more damage to the United States in it's globalist propaganda than Mr. Ford could ever do.
   
   The question remains though is it right for a trader to go into areas after the Civil War and set up loans and impoverish black people? Gen. Sherman considered it was and stopped it. The people who were doing it were Jewish financiers. That is what Mr. Ford was focusing on.
   Right now India is having it's poor farmers taking out loans from Rothschild financiers for high production seed which has failed. The farmers can not repay the loans and are committing suicide in mass as this group of bankers in large scale agriculture gobbles up India's land.
   
   If one leaves off the European adjective, there is only profiteers to deal with and if Mr. Ford had left off the term Jews and only said "internationalists" then the author would not have profits in his pocket repeating what the informed knew.
   
   The purpose of this feedback was to show that there are in the past and in our present bias, prejudice and racism rampant in probably the authors friends in calling people "red state" as a group he disagrees with live there.
   Of course it is celebrated as the New York Times, CNN and other venues deem it acceptable. Acceptable now, but what happens in 70 years when an author discovers all of this and writes a book on Neil Baldwin exposing all of his hatred.
   Mr. Baldwin is not the final judgment in this. Strangely in his diverse world, one can find Jews who actually will agree with Mr. Ford in numerous websites online.
   The only Truth I know of is God and in this world Truth is dictated by who has the most power to supplant previous ideas and initiate their own.
   
   I sincerely hope that all came out correctly in reviewing this book, but the information was nothing new and only one dimensional as the few examples above reveal the gaping holes in this volume.
   
   It is a guarantee though that Mr. Ford would indeed gladly take the hand of a Jew if it was the only hand available if Mr. Ford was drowning and it is certain Mr. Baldwin would grab Mr. Ford's hand if he was drowning too.
   
   Thank you for your time and God bless.

5 comments about The Cap: The Price of a Life.

1. This is one of the best autobiographies ever written, and I have read many. Images from this book will stay in my mind forever, and puts all other troubles and accomplishments into prospective. Frister's eyewitness account proves that there can never be vindication enough for the victims of the Nazi regime.



2. This is not Etty Hillesum. This is not Victor Klemperer. This is not Primo Levi.

   I can believe that the author saw his mother killed before his eyes. I can believe that he watched his father die in a camp. I can believe that he survived the camps. After that, I just don't know.

   There are too many heroics for one teenage boy. There are too many miraculous escapes for one survivor. There are too many stories which sound vaguely familiar from elsewhere.

   The book appears to be a life's story which has foundation in fact but which has also liberally incorporated material from the general holocaust history.

   After 90 pages I gave up in exasperation. There seemed to be too many stretchers in the details. They tainted the credibility of the whole.

   A few weeks later I picked up the book again. I started making allowances. After all, if the author wanted to include in his account real outrages which were suffered by others, the outrages did nonetheless occur. I doubt none of them.

   But then near the end of the book I quit again in pluperfect exasperation. The author's story of how he broke back INTO the camp again after an inauspicious breakout lacks plausability completely. He says that he "trampolined" himself back over the fence from the tarpaulin top of an adjacent German truck. This is pure poppycock. The tarpaulins on army trucks are loose, flappy affairs. They are NOT taut, springy, trampoline devices. Not even a true trampoline, if it had been there, would have achieved what the author proposes. Magical realism does not belong in holocaust memoirs.




3. I want to say that I really loved this book. The author takes us on one of the best adventure stories of human life that I have read in quite some time. Even though the central theme is his holocost survival he does not dwell on the subject too long, or I should say just long enough. His real adventure begins when he gets out. Learning to survive in the camps gave him the ability to achieve and become successful in life.

   I hope Hollywood picks this one up. I'd love to see it on the screen.




4. This is a fascinating work of fiction undoubtedly based on a great deal of real-life experience, or if you prefer, it is an autobiographical work with a few fantastic anecdotes included.

   Like all holocaust survivor tales, it includes numerous near misses and miraculous lucky breaks. People who survived ghetto life, concentration camps and death marches to write about their experiences were the exceptions, and invariably their stories include such amazing incidents.

   However, a few incidents read like pure wishful fantasy. I do not believe for example that Roman Frister actually snatched his girlfriend as she emerged from her marriage ceremony and drove her off for a three-day tryst in the mountains, before returning her to her groom...

   Ultimately the fact that his narrative seeks to define its own reality is what makes the book very interesting. The book is about what defines the self, what memory means, what is real, and what, if anything, really matters. The book reminds me in this way of Robert Musil's "Man Without Qualities."




5. I will skip the personal details discussed by other reviewers, and focus on matters of historical significance. With one obvious exception, Frister shows an excellent grasp of factual events. He makes the unbelievable statement that the NSZ "did not kill Germans at all" (p. 263), only killed Jews, and then repeats the Communist-propaganda canard that the Brygada Swietokrzyska (Holy Cross Brigade) had fought on the German side.
   
   Even as late as 1941, Frister's mother didn't believe that the invading Germans intended to harm the Jews (p. 180). This adds to similar testimonies, and undercuts the argument that the massive Jewish-Soviet collaboration had been motivated by a desire to be protected from the Nazis.
   
   Unlike those who, from their safe perches, moralize to Poles about their need to have been more willing to risk their lives on behalf of Jews, Frister does not: "And what right did I have to condemn them? Why should they risk themselves and their families for a Jewish boy they didn't know? Would I have behaved any differently? I knew the answer to that, too. I wouldn't have lifted a finger. Everyone was equally intimidated." (p. 192)
   
   Frister writes: "Jozef Kruczek had prepared a perfect hideout for us. Beneath a bale of hay tossed with deliberate carelessness on the floor of the barn was a hidden trapdoor that descended to a cellar as big as a cottage. Before we came this had served as an abattoir. The screeching of the slaughtered pigs remained within its walls--a big help in avoiding German confiscations and getting the meat to the black market." (p. 97). Ironic to Polonophobes (e. g., Jan T. Gross), who accuse Poles of being willing to incur the German-imposed death penalty by illegally slaughtering animals, but seldom by hiding Jews, we see the same Polish secretiveness in both activities! (Besides, slaughtering an animal was a quick one-time act. Hiding a Jew was a continuous risk.)
   
   Unlike most Holocaust materials, Frister's work presents a balanced view of Polish and Jewish misdeeds. He mentions Poles looting Jews (p. 120) as well as regular Pole-on-Pole thievery (p. 100). The Judenrat, besides collaborating with the Germans in the roundups of Jews to their deaths (e. g., p. 92, 105, 120), also stole from poor Jews (p. 120). Jewish informers played an instrumental role in the uncovering of hidden Jews (e. g., p. 105, 112, 120, 190-191). Twice Frister escaped death despite being denounced to the Germans by Jewish informers (p. 112, 190-191), the latter of whom he found to be very clever and diligent in their undercover work. How many other fugitive Jews were betrayed, not by ethnic Poles as automatically assumed, but by Jewish Gestapo agents and informers?
   
   We were told, in the wake of the Auschwitz Carmelite convent controversy, that Jews find Christian symbols offensive because they remind them of past persecutions by Christians. Frister mentions a Jew, Henryk Leiderman, who had no problem with rosaries when it came to selling them to Polish peasants (p. 36).
   
   Frister spent some years in postwar Poland before emigrating to Israel. He is candid about the fact that he, and other Jews, got privileged positions in the Soviet-imposed Communist regime (p. 34, 169).

3 comments about The General and Mrs. Washington.

1. 
   Chadwick increases our admiration for George Washington, and gives us a glimpse into how exceptional Martha and his marriage to her were.
   
   Chadwick tells of their lives up to their meeting and what the marriage may have meant for each. For Martha it was a chance to enjoy family life with a man of her own generation. For George it seemed to be companionship, maybe a rebound and access to the upper reaches Virginia society.
   
   While I knew GW freed his slaves, I was unaware of his lifelong objection to slavery, and his attempts (however feeble) to do something about it. He did not really get a windfall fortune through his marriage as I thought, he got a challenge. It is not clear what he did to free Martha from her wastrel father-in-law's legal and debt burdens, but he did. I didn't know that Martha stayed with him in Valley Forge and Morristown when she could have luxuriated at Mount Vernon
   
   When the time came, GW's military, administrative and physical skills were exactly what the colonies needed. Once a new country was formed this first couple, started things right with honesty and dedication. The revolution could have turned sour, many of them do, and GW, with Martha at his side were a main component of starting out on the right foot.
   
   Chadwick assembles all this and more, with enlightening descriptions of life in colonial Virginia.



2. I think this is a very well developed history of a relationship and a nation. It is a great companion to George Washington: An Unexpected Life. I bought both together.



3. As an American history buff, I wanted to learn more about the relationship between our first president and his wife. While Washington's faults are lightly covered (his conflicting views on slavery, his temper and exacting demands), the book is generally an ode to the Washingtons. Martha is mostly portrayed as a patient, gentle, selfless soul who supports Washington unfailingly who patiently endures tragedy upon tragedy. Washington is portrayed as an ever-vigilant hero selflessly sacrificing all for his men. As I read it, I felt the author wrote with a favorable bias of the Washingtons and a more balanced view might have been more accurate.
   
   The biggest drawback for me, however, was the poor editing. As an example of one of the many errors, one sentence reads, "Prior to the war, the couple received just over four hundred guests a year, but after his resignation from the army, that number increased to over four hundred a year." It mars an otherwise interesting book on our first president and his wife.

No comments about Richard M. Nixon: An American Enigma (Library of American Biography Series) (Library of American Biography).

5 comments about Unforgivable Blackness: The Rise and Fall of Jack Johnson.

1. Jack Johnson was no saint, and certainly Geoffrey C. Ward does not defend his vices nor forgive Johnson in his book, "Unforgivable Blackness - The Rise and Fall of Jack Johnson". What Ward does do (with great research and writing) is gather details pertaining to periods in leading up to and between what generally is known as Johnson's triumphs and headlines. Furthermore, he does set the scene of a land not yet ready for Johnson's maverick ways.
   
   You get the early stories of Johnson as a youth and his influential mother who set upon him the idea that he was capable of anything. His days of leaving school for work, to his beginnings in early prizefighting are covered in detail as well as his participation in battle royals which many black fighters of his era too had experience in. These beginnings were the catalyst of the rise and conquering of the most distinguished pugilistic title "World Heavyweight Champion". His style was before any time; a defensive master who toyed with opponents and at times would carry conversations with ringside onlookers.
   
   Johnson and his women were always intriguing and really got him in a pickle with the government. Beyond Jim Crow, blacks acting "uppity" were easy targets to make examples of in judicial or extreme (lynching) measures. Johnson being the most notorious black American of that era certainly was as easy a target for the Anglo-Saxon sentiment. "Lil' Arthur" though was a rebel and lived his life as he chose, his extradition came after a long battle which he did put a good fight. I think to compare him to Ali is incorrect. Ali was unpopular to many, but popular on the flip side as well. Johnson was always looked upon as a threat by a white majority and eventually even looked down upon in disgust by many of his fellow blacks.
   
   His downfall was sad, but all in all Johnson lived his life as good as a black American could in that time. He traveled the world unlike any normal citizen would of and rubbed many known shoulders of his day. It is only tragic that if he were not black, he would have been regarded as the Babe Ruth of boxing.



2. I have made a study of this man and he fought at a time when a referee was basically the guy with the best seat in the house, as there were no such things as "standing eight counts", as a knockdown was the end of the round and this is why Jack Johnson, who started as a much lighter man, and he seriously had an I.Q. of a 4 year old, but, when he hit, the canvas shook!~!~! He was the first...the "VERY first BLACK MAN to be the 'International Heavyweight Champeen of the World' ". He respected no white man, and he showed his disdain by always having beauteous white women on his arms (plural) and he knew that he whipped up a frenzy where ever he went and esp. when he fought. He waited..a long time as NO WHITE man would show his face to get into the ring. The man "James Jeffries", dared to be the man to 'wipe Jack out'..he was called "The Great White Hope", and the whole world wanted the death of Jack Johnson by any white hands..he was that HATED!~!~! But, this man, worked out, not in a gym, like a "ROCKY" movie, He stood all day in the middle of barns as his best accomadations would be for Jack. He had barrells full of rocks (where do you think "Stallone's Barn scene in Russia" came from???) That was Jack Johnson for real, heaving as much as he could heaving and heaving those barrells as much as he could until all he was spent... he was a muscular man who could take your head off as Floyd Patterson did when he was the first "Heavyweight" (at 180 lbs)to regain the world's Heavyweight Crown before Muhammad Ali did it three (3) times!...Back to Jack Johnson...I cannot say much more except that when James Jeffries went down, he had NO HEART to get up..not one more time would he stand before what Jack Johnson called: "Da Hevywate Champeen of da world"! As he kept taunting his manager with that question time and again..."WHEN do I get a try"? So, the day 's temperature was over 100 degrees , if I recollect, and no wind blew, but, Jack entered into the ring first...then the "GREAT White- Hope", James jeffries, with thousands standing in that heat for what seemed as scores of years...and he was the first to leave, heaving the "spit bucket" at the newspress people, as he ran under the ring and on a waiting train...heading for "HIS FORM of GLORY": You shall read it, I know, and you will understand prejudice, hatred, violence in boxing, for it is gone as we see the sport today...this was a day of gladiators...standing, swinging, falling, the opponent standing above his opponent, waiting for a knee to leave the mat, them, again...POW!..before the "ref" even said "get back"!Jack would stalk the dizzy, man falling on the ropes, the mat, almost left the ring a few times..never a count to ten...it was down and out ...that was boxing in the "Glory Days" of the baddest Men in the world, not, greatest, or the hardest left hook, or the fastest jab..that all meant nothing.
   What was the value here was round 20, round 30, round 50...and the band beat on! As did Jack Johnson...in HIS lifetime~!~!~!..this must be read by sports heros of today who are covered with padded armor for protection and for millions and millions of US Dollars. Jack walked proudly everywhere, with a pocket of change and died a poor man... Yes, these were the true Boxers of the past..this was the ONE!~!~! The ONE that you'll remember...for a long, long time!~!~!
   Rick, "Strings"



3. I thoroughly enjoyed this book on Jack Johnson. The man was the best boxer of his generation and lived his life to the fullest extent outside the ring.
   
   The author has produced a tremendous work that completely looks at the life of the champion and gives a look at the USA in that time. Johnson had to deal with numerous issues in his day and he handled it in a manner that few could.
   
   Well worth reading.



4. I first read this book a number of years ago, pursuant to the Ken Burns production on PBS. I purchased a paperback addition, the spine of which broke during a second read; hence, the purchase of the hardback at hand.
   
   Needless to say, I consider Ward's book excellent. I say this both as a piece of general history and as a fascinating view of boxing in its infancy in this country. Johnson was polarizing, but no less interesting and influential. Consider his impact on Joe Lewis, Ali, and Miles Davis.
   
   Thoroughly recommend both the book and Burns documentary on DVD.



5. THIS BOOK PAINTS A REAL PICTURE OF THE LIFE OF A MAN IN A RACIALLY CHARGED TIME IN OUR HISTORY. THE BOOK REMINDS THE READER THAT jACK jOHNSON IS A HERO TO SOME BUT ALSO WAS A VERY REAL HUMAN BEING AND HE HAD VERY REAL PROMBLEMS, AS MANY BOXERS DO.

5 comments about Descartes: The Life and times of a Genius.

1. This is a very readable, enjoyable and informative book. Professor Grayling takes a lot of time putting Descartes into his proper historical context, which I think is essential to understanding him, or any philosopher. Even abstract ideas don't develop without any reference to what is going on at the time. The problem of reconciling faith with the nascent scientific revolution, the relation between the new anatomy and the locus of the mind, and religious wars of the 17th century were pivotal to the evolution of Descartes' thought. Grayling naturally emphasizes Descartes' philosophical ideas rather than his mathematical or scientific ones, though these also are discussed. Grayling also gives us as good a look as we can get at the motives and preferences of so private a person: the expensive green silk suit that he bought in hopes of securing a title show us a man who is vain rather than austere, despite his reclusive life in the Netherlands, for example. HIs arrogance was as expected, but not his pettiness towards, for example, Beeckman. And that he composed librettos for Queen Christina was a real surprise.



2. I found Grayling's "Descartes" to be an interesting read from a pure biographical perspective. Although I have an interest in philosophy, Grayling writes in a way that reasonably intelligent laypersons can understand. Unfortunately, though, Grayling treads very little new ground, relying on past biographers of Descartes to do the legwork for him. The only new ground the author treads is relaying the proposition that Descartes was a spy. I actually find this plausible for two reasons: one, it explains Descartes' travelling; two, Descartes doesn't talk about his travelling much in his writings. These two factors give Grayling's hypothesis some weight. Grayling doesn't take too much time expositing Descartes' philosophy, but in an appendex he does give a brief introduction to it. Like I mentioned, the author does rely on other biographers for information, but that fact doesn't take away from the quality of the book. One fact that Grayling kept mentioning was that Descartes seemed to want to portray his ideals as acceptable to the church, and also to have his beliefs fit into the framework of "orthodox" theology of the time. I wondered why Grayling kept hitting on this point so many times, and then I came to the following conclusion: Grayling wants to excuse Descartes. One would imagine that if Descartes applied his method to the idea of the existence of God, one would conclude that it would be necessary to doubt, or even reject, the existence of God. Descartes never stated that God didn't exist, nor did he (as far as I know) even doubt it. By not stating that he doubted it, Descartes attempted to stay on good terms with the church. Descartes' later politiking shows me that he was concerned with ensuring his own safety, both physically and financially, which is fine. Grayling doesn't go this far in the book, but I think it is a necessary and unavoidable conclusion; I'm just surprised Graying didn't call Descartes out on it. To conclude this review, Grayling's bibliography is strong, giving the reader lots of roads to travel if one wants to explore the subject further, which I plan to do.



3. This book brings up a very intersting set of connections that seem to explain a lot. True to program this book's focus is on biography instead of philosophy. But the biographical insights are well worth the read on their own. There is a good summary of Descartes' philosophical position in the first appendix. One surprise is how little mention there is of Spinoza especially in those sections that presents Descartes' impact on those who followed him. All in all, this is an excellent book to recommend to those students that want to spend some time on Descartes in an introductory course.



4. This book is an extremely well written historical (rather than scholarly) biography, but fails to really present the substance of Descartes' ideas and theories. I also have the following criticisms, in no particular order:
   
   1) I was taught to write in clear simple English. To read this book, you'd better have a dictionary handy. The book, understanably, is written in British English, not modern American English. This is not a fault, but the reader should be aware.
   
   2) This book covers Descartes' journeys theroughout 17th century Europe. Accordingly a map of 17th century Europe, with the cities Descartes visited or lived in would have been invaluable.
   
   3) An Introduction or Appendix discussing at some length the the SUBSTANCE of Descartes' books would also have been invaluable.
   
   4) This book mentions many, many persons in Descartes' life. A brief Appendix commenting on the more critical of these persons would have been helpful. Also, the book sometimes notes that certain characters played key roles in Descartes' life, but sometimes fails to provide much depth about such roles.
   
   5) The book notes that Descartes was held in high regard by other contemporary scholars and intellectuals. Based solely on Mr. Grayling's book, I fail to understand why. But I think that's more a failing of Mr. Grayling's book.



5. I appreciate the efforts of A. C. Grayling to produce a book, DESCARTES The Life and Times of a Genius (2005), which pictures how intellectual efforts produced many of the changes that we currently benefit from 400 years after the life of René Descartes (1596--1650). Being able to rely on a few clear truths to produce knowledge was fruitful in ways that those opposed to profiting from forbidden fruits had never imagined, but the emphasis placed by Grayling upon tumultuous events which Descartes witnessed early in life reminds me of cultural changes which the modern world is still having difficulty digesting.
   The French King Henri IV (1553--1610) founded the Jesuit college La Flèche in 1604 and Descartes was a student there from 1606 until 1616. One of the major ceremonies which took place when Descartes was 16 years old involved burying the heart of Henri IV in the chapel at La Flèche. Grayling attempts to fathom the significance of such events:
   
   ". . . Henri IV had been murdered by a Jesuit called Ravillac, so there is black irony in the fact that, by his own wish, the king was buried by Jesuits among the Jesuits, whom he had patronised and supported with such generosity. . . . The Jesuits, as already noted, were the advisors and encouragers of the Hapsburgs, who, like their Jesuit mentors, saw themselves as the champions of the Catholic church, and who were soon to plunge Europe into three decades of hideous war in an effort--ultimately unsuccessful--to reclaim for Catholicism all territories lost to Protestantism." (pp. 23-24).
   
   I can appreciate the idea of the Jesuits as an intellectual elite with a faith that they could change the nature of society by using whatever weapons were readily available. The same kind of thinking dominates those who think of themselves as a universal panacea. This becomes hideous when it is viewed with the sense of monstrosity that a knowledge of intellectual history is able to produce.
   
   Grayling considers it possible that Descartes was a spy for the Jesuits, which was highly suspect in his native France, so he spent years in an area that has become Belgium. The most prosperous Protestant area, "The seven dissenting Protestant provinces in the Union of Utrecht were Holland, Zeeland, Utrecht, Gelderland, Overijssel, Friesland and Groningen (without its city)." (p. 32). When Descartes traveled from Breda to join Duke Maximilian's troops for the Battle of White Mountain outside Prague, and to attend the coronation of emperor Ferdinand II in Frankfurt in September 1619, following the death of Matthias in March 1619, his circuitous route was through regions controlled by the Jesuits. With perfect timing, the battle had been revenge for the famous Defenestration of Prague on May 22, 1618, after Matthias had given Catholics the leading posts on the council of Regents, "The new regents' first act was to require that all Bohemian religious bodies should revert to the terms of their original foundation, thus at a stroke returning all Protestant churches to Catholic control, complete with their endowments and other property. The Bohemian Protestants immediately rebelled." (pp. 51-52).
   
   Try to imagine results like:
   
   "As these armies amassed, Frederick V arrived in Prague with his German Calvinist entourage, to whom the Bohemian Lutherans took an immediate dislike. Sweden, Venice, Denmark and the United Provinces of the Netherlands had all recognized Frederick's accession to the throne of Bohemia as a way of thumbing a nose at Ferdinand II, but they had no intention of sending troops to help him." (pp. 53-54).
   
   Instead of trying to separate these things from the life of Descartes, Grayling sees a link with the ideas that promoted a scientific revolution. "Of course the two things cannot be separated, just as Descartes' story cannot be told without reference to both." (p. 55).
   
   My own life and times have been interesting in ways that are all too much for those whose sanity claims that what is simple is true. Systems that are highly complex are prone to fail in unexpected ways, and Descartes was able to observe the rise and fall of human affairs in a way that suggests the wave motions studied in fluid mechanics. I took a few courses in fluid mechanics at the University of Michigan College of Engineering, and a professor there tried to interest me in the problems that he was working on, much like Descartes met Isaac Beeckman in Breda in November 1618. Descartes dedicated a treatise on harmonics to Beeckman and worked on a set of four problems in hydrostatics. Trying to figure out the problems Beeckman suggested, the modes of argument led to "the essence of Cartesian micro-mechanism in optics, cosmology, physiology, and natural philosophy generally, after being refined over the next fifteen years through practice, criticism, and deliberate metaphysical reconstruction." (p. 43, quoting Schuster, Descartes and the Scientific Revolution I.101).
   
   Recent biographies of my favorite philosophers are considered in Appendix II. On war, "In this, Descartes and Wittgenstein followed the example of Socrates, who was a hoplite--a heavily armed infantryman--in the Athenian army at the battle of Potidiae." (p. 254). Even Immanuel Kant can be found interesting if he is considered as "an atheist in a city wracked by religious strife, in which the Pietist community from which he sprang played a leading part." (p. 254). Nietzsche gets credit for "his revolution was not effected in the sphere of philosophy and science, as with Descartes, but in the psychology of an age." (pp. 258-159). Kant, Nietzsche, and Althusser are mentioned in connection with "their descents into madness or dementia at the last, are untypical of the general run of philosophers, who tend to live long and enjoy an alert old age," (p. 262), probably as a result of finding that what is simple is true, in spite of being alert to the forms of psychotic multiplicity that outrageous thinkers deal with daily.