5 comments about The Man Who Stayed Behind.

1. Anyone who has made seeking truth his or her quest should read this book. With a painful honesty, Rittenberg accounts a sincere believer's failed efforts in pursuing idealism. He does not shun away from the truth that idealism and stupidity were often twins in human history. In fact, "faith" can make one blind and an involuntarily contributor to harm. It took the author a lifetime - including 16 years in the prisons of the system he believed in - to realize this simple truth. An ordinary person might have woken up a lot earlier, but not a believer. Is this faith or stupidity? The reader should draw his or her own conclusion. Nonetheless, what I really want to say is: although his effort in pursing ideals has failed, his life experience is not a waste; we can all learn from his lessons. In this sense he is still a hero, or in classic Chinese terms, a "hero by failure". To the reviewer below who called Rittenberg a "coward" with the "integrity of a worm" I want to ask, could you do better than him in those circumstances - in the bombing and in the prisons? That is a very pointed question.
   
   Rittenberg's Chinese name Li Dunbai has been known to me since my childhood during the Cultural Revolution in China, though I never knew him personally, and still don't know him now. In this book it is his candid and thorough accounts of the personal experiences of the familiar history that grab me, from the opening page to the last. Unlike some other bestseller memoirs on the same period of China, such as "Wild Swans," which emphasize the virtue while downplaying the deficits of the protagonists, Rittenberg hides nothing about his own personal weakness and mistakes. Anyone who has gone through the same period knows that we were all participants, no matter how noble or gaudy our motives were, no matter you admit it or not. To deny this and dress up as a pure victim or even a hero is truly a shame. Only by facing our mistakes and failures honestly we can help ourselves.



2. Sydney Rittenberg was one of a tiny handful of misguided utopia seekers who escaped from America to the Workers' Paradise, Mao's China. Rittenberg spends decades of his life in China championing a supposedly idealistic movement that was rife with intrigue from its inception. I cite Mao's "Let a 100 Flowers Bloom" campaign as one of many examples. It was a call for a dialog with the country's intellectuals. After getting them to air their true feelings he launched his "Uprooting Poisonous Weeds" campaign in which those who's views didn't spout the official party line were sent to the laogai, the Chinese gulag. I won't get into Mao's manufactured famine (read The Hungry Ghosts and Scarlet Memorial) or the Cultural Revolution. He was imprisoned twice for a period of 16 years. He didn't commit any criminal offense he was simply an international pawn for the Communist Party. What is so frustrating about this autobiography is that he never wavers in his so called "faith". For whatever reasons he just can't contemplate the reality that the intensity of his obsequiousness and fanaticism or political correctness (we got that term from the communists) is irrelevant to the Chinese. Perhaps that realization would have totally destroyed his persona. At the end he decides that the Communist Party has deviated from its "pure and humble" origins and moves back to the capitalist United States where his wife makes a windfall from an import deal. The United States is hardly perfect but I think it speaks to our generosity that after Rittenberg's dream of a totalitarian utopia failed, after he spent decades denouncing the "yellow dog imperialists" he was allowed to return along with his Chinese wife and Chinese born adult children.
   
   I was more impressed with Army Private James George Veneris, the man who stayed behind until the end. Veneris was one of 21 POWs during the Korean War, between America and China, who chose not to be repatriated. Eventually all but Veneris returned to the US in disgrace. I realize that a lot of Americans would consider Veneris a traitor, but at least he stayed true to his principles to the end. I was quite intrigued by the adaptability of this man and what motivated him to sever all aspects of his former life. I spent the academic year of 1999/2000 in China and had many difficulties adjusting, even with access to the Internet, English TV, and Hong Kong nearby. I wanted to write his biography. Unfortunately, he died a few years ago. In the process of searching for Virginia Pasley's book, 21 Stayed: The story of the American GI's who chose Communist China: who they were and why they stayed, I came across Rittenberg's book.
   
   The book is worth reading for the fact that Rittenberg had a unique experience during an interesting period of history. I would also recommend Jan Wong's Red China Blues. Wong is a Canadian born Chinese who was a college student during the Cultural Revolution. She decided that revolution was the way to paradise and was allowed to go to China to participate in the process. She became an ardent fanatic, but it only took a few years for her to wise up.



3. Sidney Rittenberg is a truly amazing character, and you must read his story to believe it. It's also one of the most insightful and thorough evaluations of Maoism and the Cultural Revolution, written by someone who believed firmly in those ideals at the time, but came to reexamine and question them as he saw their darker sides. This book is highly recommended for anyone even remotely interested in China, Chinese history, Communism, or just a really well-written autobiography of someone with an extraordinary life.



4. Few books written about Communist China are pleasant to read because of the experiences related, this is certainly one of them. Mr. Rittenberg's quixotic adventure in China was tragic-comic to an unbelievable proportion but still his undying idealism commands one's respect.
   
   I have googled and read his speeches about China on internet and I think he is one of the wiser guys in matters of China. He knows China inside out.



5. Lots of people have derided Rittenberg in this space, most seemingly because of Rittenberg's religious-level belief in communism in his earlier years. Read this book not as a defense of communism (it isn't, at all), but as an intensely personal journal of one life, lived at the core of the PRC, from 1946 to the late 1970s. Rittenberg, now in his mid 80s, gives a unique perspective on the early leaders of the Chinese Communist Party, and the vision, plus the folly, that intertwined with the early years. Whether one believes that he earned his 15+ years of imprisonment or not, no feeling human can fail to empathize with those, including him, who were jailed by the regime.
   In recent years, the PRC has admitted that the Cultural Revolution was a mistake, and therefore these years have seen a flurry of what's called 'scar literature' in China. Rittenberg's work cover much more than just his years in jail during the Revolution--it provides a remarkably close-up look at the emergent PRC in its first 25 years. Read it without fail if you seek to understand the roots of China today.

5 comments about The Good Man of Nanking: The Diaries of John Rabe.

1. I came across this book when I'm translating first-person acounts of Nanjing Massacre survivors for a new documentary that's coming out in the US. I've read so many people raving about John Rabe, Minnie Vautrin and Father McGee, about how they saved the survivors' lives. I just don't get how there are so many Japanese still denying what had happened. How was it possible for the CCP to pay Rabe to make up stories like that? Some people are just unbelievable! I have several friends who did the JET program and taught English in Japan and they were shocked about how their students still thought Japan was a WWII victim. Many testimonies that I translated called John Rabe and Minnie Vautrin their saviors! Those are heart-wrenching stories, and heart-warming stories as far as how the foreigners in Nanjing really reached out for them. If you still can't open your eyes to the truth, go to the Nanjing Massacre Museum in Nanjing and see the grusome, disturbing photos for yourself - photos taken by American journalists. History is not there to invoke hatred. (Unless the hatred for some reason is there already, and then there's nothing you can do to change it.) History is there for us to learn from our past, so that the atrocity won't repeat itself one day. But if people are too stubborn or self-absorbed to acknowledge history, that's where the tragedy begins, all over again.



2. The book shows you what really happened in Nanking from a foreiger point of view. It's such a great book!! I have to salute to the author's courage and integrity.



3. With The Rape of Nanking by Iris Chang, this is essential reading for those who would like to know more about the Chinese Holocaust: millions of Chinese civilians murdered by the Japanese form 1931 on.



4. This is a topic that must be handled gently. We are dealing with peoples emotions and emotions are delicate things. In all wars there are men on both sides who commit crimes. Only a fool would deny that.
   
   "The Good Man of Nanking" is generating a lot of heat; that is why I think it is a good 2nd book to read if you're Japanese, not a good first book. I highly recommend the book (not the DVD) "To End All Wars" by Earnest Gordon. The book was written by a Scottish Army officer who was a prisoner in a Japanese POW camp. After you've read that book then I'd read "The Good Man of Nanking". Everything begins with a first step, including coming to terms with a controversial and sometimes uncomfortable past.



5. Like Anne Frank, whose diary remains a timeless testimonial to the horrors of the Holocaust, John Rabe kept a memorable diary that documented a horrific record of mass rape, murder and mutiliation committed by the Japanese toward the Chinese during WWII. And just as there are neo-Nazis who claim the Holocaust never happened and claim Anne Frank was fictional, so we have the Nanking massacre-deniers, primarily Japanese who claim that Rabe lied and that the massacre was an illusion. And yet it is common knowledge that the Japanese were, next to the Germans, excessively cruel and sadistic toward their enemies. Ask any surviving GI who had the misfortune of being in a POW camp run by Japanese. Strangely, the Japanese have no problem admitting that they bombed Pearl Harbor and killed thousands of American civilians, so why don't they accept the fact they raped and killed millions in Nanking? I'll read Rabe's book again on the anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki -notwithstanding the pacifists (and those with short memories). The atom bomb was dropped on Japan for justifiable reasons. Truman probably didn't want any American civilians going through the same hell as the poor Chinese civilians did in Nanjing. And after you read this book, you'll see why.

5 comments about To Hell and Back.

1. This is on of the best books ever written about war. I'm a NCO in the Army and I believe that this book should be a preferred read on any soldiers list. I've served in Iraq on the front lines and the emotions that Audie Murphy writes about in this book are still identical in today's war.



2. "To Hell and Back" is an amazing account of Audie Murphy's real-life military service during WWII. As far as the writing style it definitely lacks flare and, at some points, you feel as though you need to put it down for a while just to take a break the from the abuse of English grammar. However, this man's heroics and peril he endured during the course of his service is so compelling that it far overshadows any literative misgivings. To think that the man (almost boy actually) came back and was able to be even somewhat normal is nothing short of a miracle. It's not only worth the money but should also be required reading by every high school history student in this country. This is what it means to be free and what price we sometimes may have to pay in oreder to stay that way.



3. Audie Murphy's story is one of incredible courage and tragedy. The most decorated American soldier who ever lived -- the 2nd most visited grave at Arlington National Cemetary after JFK -- his war experiences would leave with him with nightmares for the rest of his life. One of his wives once said that Murphy always slept with a .45 automatic under his pillow and would have nightmares where he called out the names of dead buddies. SGT York is revered for basically one battle. Audie Murphy was involved in every campaign from North Africa to Germany. While the movie depicts real events, some are somewhat toned down. While he did shoot down the German who killed his buddy in real life Murphy fired so many rounds into the guy that he literally blew him to pieces. His final action, jumping on a burning tank and holding off a German advance does not quite show the incredible courage of this soldier. He held off that attack for nearly an hour. This is why he was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. Still, a very good movie with Murphy natural playing himself and solid performances from Marshall Thompson and Jack Kelly.



4. Very interesting true story of Audie Murphys life, how he grew up supporting his mother and siblings from the age of 12, signed up in the army after many rejections from the various services. He distinguished himself in battle with honours all the time with humility and bravery and consideration of his comrades. He educated himself through courses during his service. On early retirement from services to due injury he had to come to terms with the loss of a promising career. He made this movie of his life and then went on to make wonderful western movies. Audie Murphy is a legend



5. Being an avid reader of military history, and knowing someone with eyewitness knowledge of Audie Murphy's wartime exploits. I'd categorize the film as being fairly true to the autobiographical book, even if a bit "Hollywoodized" by a theme song written for especially the film, and by the sometimes hokey acting of Murphy's supporting characters. Murphy was, indeed, a hero. A hero who saw and experienced indescribable horror while still in his late teens. His persona was forged by many months of combat, and his eyes - the eyes of a man who'd seen too much - reflected that in all his films. I recommend the film as entertainment, and also as a piece of history. The story of a man from "The Greatest Generation" who gave so much. Perhaps too much.

No comments about The Illustrated Pirate Diaries: A Remarkable Eyewitness Account of Captain Morgan and the Buccaneers.

5 comments about The Life of John Wesley Hardin As Written by Himself.

1. Hardin begins his narrative by acknowledging that he is very much a product of a particular time and place, a particular culture. He does not see any reason why he should attempt to transcend that, let alone apologize for it. He accepts himself for what he is and expects everyone else to do the same. He is above all a man of violence, ready and able to resolve all conflicts with physical - if necessary, deadly - force. Raised in Reconstruction Texas, he finds plenty to fuel his resentment, including carpetbagger politicians from the north and newly emancipated slaves appointed as police officers (an unquestioning racialism was part of his heritage). Nor is it in his nature to run from a fight. When he hears that Wild Bill Hickok, then Marshall of Abilene, has threatened to kill him if he ever sets foot in the town, what does he do? Goes immediately to Abilene of course, to face him. I would have been inclined to go anywhere but.
   
   Tough, fearless, uncompromising and cunning (at one point, he pretends to cry, in order to throw his captors off-guard) with an uncontrollable temper, he became the most formidable gunfighter of the Old West. How many men he killed no one knows for sure. Not even he knew. It was at least 20, probably 40 or more.
   
   His life story has the strengths and weaknesses common to all autobiographies: it is the authentic voice, but it tells us a selective and heavily slanted story. It remains an invaluable primary source and should be required reading for anyone seriously interested in the history of the American West. Although not great literature, it is well written. The Western Frontier Library edition is good, with a useful introduction and postscript, but I would have liked a few footnotes, to save me having to go online for explanations of 'headright' and 'galluses', etc.



2. The autobiography of John Wesley Hardin would be illuminating if it was not one long tedious, blow-by-blow account of the man's life. Even though there is a brawl, a gunfight, or a mad chase on nearly every page the book manages to be excruciatingly dull. The reason? Stilted, cumbersome, self-absorbed writing. It is hard to find value in this work even as primary source history because there is not really much history there.



3. Although this book is far from objective and the author tries to justify the many murders that he commited, this is still a good book for someone interested in western history or western gunfighters. John Wesley Hardin was possibly the most notorious and most prolific killer of the era.
   While this book is not the most objective it does give a good insight into the subject's thinking. It is also the only way to track Mr. Hardin through some periods of his life



4. How could I not give 5 stars to a crack-shot gunslinger who murdered numerous men then became a lawyer and actually wrote a book about his violent life?
   I've read the other reviews so I will try not to repeat anything you've already read. It's rumored John W. Hardin didn't write the book! Considering what I already said about becoming a lawyer I can't see how he wouldn't have been able to write it himself. I'm not sure when he started or how long it took him but he was able to pinpoint some of the dates so I'd have to say he kept some kind of a diary or guessed in order to appear more authentic.
   If/when you read the book maybe you'll notice his writing seems to get better as the book progresses. At the beginning some paragraphs last more than a couple pages with him changing the subject throughout. Well before the end, however, the writing improves greatly. But I believe it was all written by the same person because the style didn't really change. Maybe if he had lived longer he would have gone back and re-wrote the earlier part of the book to match the style of the later parts when he became more educated.
   I remember hearing how he "was so mean he once shot a man for snoring." Hardin never mentions this but I believe it was the part about killing the guy who tried to sneak into his room to take his pants and then fleeing in his underwear and running around trying to elude Wild Bill Hickok and his men. Seems if Hardin killed the guy for the reason he specified he wouldn't have needed to run away especially since he and Wild Bill shared a respect for one another.
   His point of view on all the events may have not have been 100% true but it tends to validate the type of person he was... And it's all in his own words.



5. 
   Many thanks for splendid item & price, and professional service. KN

5 comments about Child of Hitler: Germany in the Days When God Wore a Swastika.

1. I think a book is good if it is thought provoking, enjoyable reading, written in an easy-to-read style. Although the style I found not so easy to read, I found this book very thought provoking and enjoyable. I was able to identify (somewhat tenuously) with this Nazi zealot. I was able to feel that "there but for the grace of God (went) I". This, despite the fact that his twin brother was not as zealous as he, that he saw his best friend taken away as a subhuman Jew, that even the people of his small town knew about concentration camps (what did he think went on there?), and that he witnessed a proud old German Jew WWI veteran, who had lost his leg in that war, punched in the nose till blood spurt forth merely because he complained that he could not get into the truck due to his missing a leg. I wish the author had written somewhat about how he managed to rationalize away these things he witnessed directly. But then, what can he say? We all want to see ourselves as superior to others and must work at learning that the ugly, the short,the blacks, homosexuals, women, the crippled, the retarded, the mentally ill etc. are just as good as we are. Certainly there are plenty of prejudices present here in the USA also and if we had gone through what Germany went through prior to Hitler's ascendancy, we might also be susceptible to a leader such as he. At any rate, I found this honest personal history very enlightening. One example: he says "I wish I could shoot the bastard who killed them (his dog and horse)" to which the General replies, "Nothing wrong with a desire for revenge." This sentiment seems so normal on the face of it, but he was a Catholic and don't they teach, "Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord"? I'd like to think an American general would say to me, "My boy, war is hell. They kill our loved ones and we kill their loved ones". At any rate,I thought this was a great book. I would recommend it for a book group, so that members would be prompted to discuss the issues it raises.



2. I first heard of this book in the late 1980s, when I was at Western Kentucky University. Alfons Heck was touring universities with a Jewish survivor of the Holocaust, and together they would tell the stories. Mr. Heck was amazing -- a sweet, gentle old man, now not only horrified at what he had participated in, but very worried that this could happen again, that people could allow themselves to be twisted in such a way. It was his message over and over -- look for ways that you are being manipulated, think twice before you look for blame on how your life or the economy is going, or you get caught up in a movement, etc. I bought the book right then and there. It is not a very well-written book, true, but the honesty and detail are spell-binding and put this book in the five star range. It's a must-read for anyone wanting to try to understand how entire communities/nations can go so very wrong. I had him sign my copy, and he said at the time that the rights had been bought to make it into a movie. I asked him who he wanted to play his part. He looked up from the book, smiled, and said, "Someone good-looking!" The Jewish lady he was touring with came up at last and put her hand on his shoulder. "Alfons, Alfons, we must go now. We have to go." It was said with such affection.



3. I enjoyed this book because Heck simply states the facts. There is not a lot of philosophizing - in straightforward language, he tells it as he experienced it. His story is interesting and moving and illustrates how children were used to further Hitler's goals. Heck died recently. I hope he has found peace.



4. Mr heck's book gives the reader a true insight into life in a militarized society. His details--from family members to the region near his home, paint a vivid picture of what happened in a rural part of Germany. many of his descriptions--his home and town, his service, and his travels, have not changed all that much since 1945. Much like Charles MacDonald's "Company Commander", this book takes the reader directly to the action.



5. This book is an autobiography of a young man of the Hitler Youth organization and explains the deep public support for Hitler, especially among young people. What is surprising is how long after the war it was before young Alfon saw and realized the depth and breath of the tragedy that the Nazi's inflicted on Germany, the Jews, and the world. It goes a long way to explain and reinforce how hard-headed the Germans really were in devotion to Hitler.

1 comments about Bob & Helen Kleberg of King Ranch.

1. A very insightful book on the history of Bob Kleberg and how he ran the King Ranch.

5 comments about My Country Right or Left 1940-1943: The Collected Essays Journalism & Letters of George Orwell (Collected Essays Journalism and Letters of George Orwell).

1. ...Country Right or Left is part of a four volume set of essays commissioned by Orwell's wife Sonia. Whatever the criticisms that have been made of her stewardship of Orwell's legacy, these four volumes contain much of the best of Orwell's essays, letters and diary excerpts. This volume covers the early war years and much of the writing is shaded by that war.

   This is Orwell at his finest, on one hand a confirmed socialist dedicated to fighting the right whether the Tory party or fascism; one the other hand an anti-Stalinist and critic of the left and always an anti-totalitarian.

   Contained within "My Country Right or Left" is some of Orwell's best writing. In "Pacifism and the War", a notorious piece at the time, he accuses pacifists of aiding the fascist cause. "The Art of Donald McGill" is an essay about, of all things, postcards that are popular among the middle and lower classes. The postcards themselves, Orwell argues, say much about England's political and social attitudes. It's actually a perceptive piece of pop art and social commentary. Among my favorites is the essay concerning Mark Twain (Mark Twain- Licensed Jester). Orwell, a great admirer of Twain's, is critical of him for not being forceful enough in his social criticism. He accusation is that Twain pulls his punches far too often. It's a great piece of criticism and is Orwell at his finest.

   What holds a large amount of this Volume together are the letters to the Partisan Review, a New York publication that contracted with Orwell to write commentary on England during this early war period. The issues vary from English politics, reflections on the clothing worn by the masses, attitudes towards democracy and so on. All well written, never dull and very often wrong in their predictions. There is much more here including excerpts from his diary, letters to other major figures of the day and reflections on the Spanish Civil War.

   This is some of the greatest essay writing in the English language. Even sixty years later the essay's read clearly and give insight to Orwell's thinking.




2. For years, I have been impressed by the quality of the essays in Dickens, Dali, and Others, Shooting an Elephant, and Such, Such Were the Joys. I was looking forward to reading more of Orwell's essays. I soon discovered, however, that Orwell's essays not published in book form shared all the faults of those that I had read, but few of the virtues.
   
   Many cite Orwell's honesty as his primary virtue, but these essays reveal a man who is, if not dishonest, then at least quite blind to his own experiences. He states, without any supporting evidence, that "only Socialist nations can fight effectively" (p. 67, from The Lion and the Unicorn), despite the fact that he served in an army organized along socialist lines (as narrated on p. 255), if not the army of a socialist nation, five years prior to the publication of this statement; the army was defeated decisively by Generalissimo Franco's decidedly non-socialist forces.
   
   Orwell also frequently resorts to name-calling. Those who disagree with him politically are almost invariably "reactionaries", "Fascists", or "pro-Fascist". Jack London is "not . . . a fully civilised man."; rather, he possesses a "streak of savagery". Any thought, expression, or even word of which Orwell disapproves is "vulgar", from the cartoon postcards of Donald McGill to Kipling's statement that "He travels the fastest who travels alone" to Yeats's use of the word (!) "loveliness" (Orwell also claims that "Yeats's tendency is Fascist." on p. 273).
   
   It is clear to me after reading this volume that the editors who selected pieces for the three volumes of essays published during Orwell's lifetime made the right choices; they show him at his best. The rest of the material here is hardly worth reading except as a window into the soul of a man who was incapable of viewing the world except through the distorting lens of a commitment to socialism.



3. This book is an anthology of Orwell's essays, literary criticism, letters to friends,and political criticism. Those who read this book can read some interesting letters that Orwell wrote to the editors of THE PARTISAN REVIEW on the fortunes of W.W. II involving the British. The book concludes with Orwell's diary of the war. While George Orwell (1903-1950)was a self admitted "leftist," he was not an ideologue. Orwell showed that he was a well read individual and knew very well that political labels conceal the desire for political power regardless of political titles and party affilations.
   
   Orwell was a master of literary criticism. Two examples are his review and comments on Hitler's MEIN KAMPF and Tolstoy's denounciation of Shakespear. Orwell commented that an English review of Mein Kampf favaored the German dictator. Orwell correctly predicted such praise would soon evaporate which it did. Orwell informed readers that praise for Hitler was not unusal. One must note that Churchill complimented Hitler in Churchill's book titled GREAT CONTEMPORARIES. Churchill also complimented Hitler in a speech to Parliament in November, 1938. Here Orwell shows not only his ability as a literary critic, but he informs younger readers that the political disapproval word,fascism, had a different connotation. Many Europeans including the British middle and upper classes had serious concerns of Big Communism with its record of mass murder and concentration camp brutality.
   
   Orwell showed himself again as a literary critic when Orwell critisized Tolstoy for the latter's condemnation of William Shakespear. Orwell correctly refuted Tolstoy on a couple of issues. First, Tolstoy read Shakespear in translation which may have tainted his understanding of Shakespear. Also Tolstoy tried to condemn Shakespear in lieu of Tolstoy's social philosophy. Orwell stated such criticism was useless because such criticism would have been incomprehensible to Shakespear and his English contemporaries in the 16th and early 17th centuries. Orwell also chided Tolstoy for his assumed superiority. Tolstoy could not understand why Shakespear literary work was so appealing and wrote that everyone should know that Shakespear was some sort of scoundral. Yet, Orwell wryly comments that Shakespear's literay work was available throughout the world while Orwell could not find Tolstoy's essay until he found it in a museum.
   
   The best part of this Orwell anthology are his political essays. Orwell noted that there was suppose to be a bitter political divide betwen Fascism and Big Communism. When the German-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact in 1939 unhinged this concept and angered Communists and their fellow travellers. When asked about this unexpected turn of diplomatic events, Molotov (I believe it was Molotov) who said that the difference between Socialism (Bib Communism) and Fascism was a matter of taste. Approximately two years later when the Germans invaded the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941, this view sure changed. Orwell stated that Stalin and his supporters would have called themselves Fascists if they thought such a label would enhance their power. Hitler and his supporters would have done the same. Orwell clearly indicated that men who have concentrated power will use whatever political labels to keep or enhance their complete hold on power.
   
   Orwell used the political chaos both inside the Soviet Union and in Europe to sound a serious warning that literature could be lost because of the rapid changes in political loyalties. The sudden changes in internal enemis in the Soviet Union serves as a classic example. The heros of the Workers' Paradise were concentration camp victims the next day because they could not stay current with ruling party's changing enemy's list. The Non-Aggtression Pact mentioned above is another good example. Orwell reflected that in previous centuries, literary men (an women)had "a frame of reference." Their political and religious loyalties were stable from cradle to grave. However, given the rapidly changing of enemies, literary figures had no such stability and writing could be dangerous especially in the Soveit Union where writers were either sent to concentration camps or committed suicide. Had Orwell lived longer, he would have been pleased to see such Soviet writers as Boris Pasternak (DR. ZHIVAGO) and Alexander Solzhenitsyn who surived the Soviet purges and yet were awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature. In fact, Solzhenitsyn sent ten years in a Soviet concentration camp from which he emerged as a literary giant. Orwell did suggest that totalitarian thought control could not survive the spirit and soul of thoughtful men.
   
   Among Orwell's many talents was his ability to expose political hypocrisy. Many of the British leaders were demanding that Mussolini be charged for "war crimes." Orwell scoffed at this nonsense. Orwell cearly indicated to his readers that those British leaders who demanded such "war crimes" trials against Mussolini were exactly the same British leaders who ten years previously praised Mussoini for the acts they now wanted to charge as war crimes. Orwell had a solid memory, and when Mussolini moved against the Communists and aided Franco in the Spanish Civil War, many of the same British leaders who wanted to try Mussolini for "war crimes," praised him for his actions which they awkardly tried to define as war crimes ten years later. Among those who praised Mussolini in the 1920s-1930s included Churchill.
   
   In parts of the book Orwell showed himself as a military expert. When there were threats of a possible German invasion, Orwell had practical suggestions of arming the British citizen with the most practicle weapons. Orwell fought in the Spanish Civil War and volunteered for W.W. II, but illness kept out of that conflict. Orwell also took pride in his position in the Home Guard.
   
   This reviewer has one criticism. Orwell's letters to the PARTISAN REVIEW, political essays, literary criticism, etc. should have been arranged by topic rather than by time sequence. This would enable readers to easily read the book. However, this reviewer could not have done nearly as good a job. Orwell simply enhanced his position as a great novelist, literary critic, political thinker, and excellent prose writer. Readers would to well to read this book to have a better understanding of the war years (W.W II) than is presented in badly written textbooks and popular accounts. This reviewer highly recommends this book.



4. This is my first volume of essays, articles and letters by Blair/Orwell, which I read thanks to Jim Egolf's recent review here. The man contradicts himself quite a bit, but I do not regret the time spent. Who wants to get bored by people that one always agrees with?
   The main theme of the book, due to the time of the sample, is England in war with totalitarianism/fascism/nazism. Though Orwell was in his heart a leftist, he had enough insight from own experience to understand the nature of totalitarianism, he was a dedicated anti-Stalinist, and he staid away from party politics.
   And yet: his long essay 'The Lion and the Unicorn', one of the core texts of this book, gives a political vision, that puzzles me. He displays a surprising naivete about the strength of economic planning in socialism. Of course, we have the benefit of hindsight, we know that a central planning bureaucracy can be the right approach for a short term effort, like for a war, but will be hopelessly lost in inefficiencies in 'normal' times. Orwell was deeply convinced that state capitalism or socialism was the future, there would be no return after the war.
   I have decided to ignore his political recipes, but to enjoy his social analyses: England is a rich man's paradise, but the ruling class is too stupid to run the country.
   One of his main contributions to our understanding of the confict of the time: his juxtaposition of the ideology of hedonism (which nearly led the West into the abyss) against the ideology of social sacrifice, which helped the Nazis to succeed, luckily only temporarily.
   I wonder if he fully understood the real antagonism of Hitler to the West or if he got deceived by the temporary diversion of the pact with Stalin. (I notice when I browse the reviews and comments in this neighborhood that there is a certain willingness to say, the West should have gone with Hitler against the Soviets. Oh my, what a misunderstanding.) Probably he did. In a nice remark after the German attack on Russia he says, had this happened before the Hitler-Stalin pact, there was a chance of serious political disturbance in Britain, because the ruling class might have wanted to join the attack on Germany's side.
   My favorite text in the collection is the essay on H.G.Wells' inability to understand Hitler. Wells was the man who envisaged scientific progress against reactionary societies earlier in the century. He was unable to understand that Hitler's essentially irrational and superstitious ideology was capable of an efficient alliance with the other side of science.



5. Does anyone else have a copy that's missing pages? Mine jumps from page 326 to page 339, and from 350 to 363

5 comments about Emperor of China: Self-Portrait of K'ang-Hsi.

1. Spence deserves his wide reputation as America's foremost China scholar. In this book (which I admit that I had to read for class) he tells of one of the most famous emporers from the Qing dynasty. Spence wrote this book using scraps and notes found from this era. Sometimes it's hard to see where the line is between hard fact and Spence's conjecture, however, given the quality of his other research, I'll trust his conjecture even if he doesn't always offer up the evidence to support it. Read it carefully though, so you know what's what.



2. This is an excellent book of absorbing interest. Not only does it open a wondow on Chinese history as told in the first person by one of its greatest emperors, it sheds light on the nature of power and the way absolute monarchs exert their power. It is a unique book, touching at times and terrifying at others. Being an absolute monarach wasn't easy, even for an enlightened emperor. The book is essentially a collection of the writings of a Mogul emperor describing in detail his life and the way he exercised power, including the decisions he had to make about his use of capital punishment. This book has something for everyone who is interested in the world about them.



3. Ordered several books which I received faster than expected in perfect condition. great job!



4. A remarkable portrait of a Chinese emperor. I have read few other books on Chinese history by Spence, and they inform the reader in an engaging style that is a true genius, and this, I think, is one of his best.
   
   Don't miss the selection of letters in the appendix - it hits home the portrayal of the emperor as a real person, not a historical fiction cooked up by the court historians.



5. This book was a good read; it showed a glimpse of 17th/18th century China in a very unique way: through the very words of the emperor at the time. Although it was interesting, it was not exciting or captivating and it became difficult to keep track of who was who in parts. I would recommend it, but only because it doesn't take very long to read so the benefits outweigh the costs.

2 comments about The Duff Cooper Diaries.

1. Duff Cooper's name is associated with two main tempestuous events.
   
   He played a remarkable role during the Egyptian crises of the early 1920s. Saad Zaghlul - prominent Egyptian Lawyer and Prime Minister - demanded at the head of Wafd Party, independence for Egypt but the British arrested him to weaken the nationalist movement.
   Britain's action sparked civil unrest degenerating to debauchery and unrestrained violence. About 1000 Egyptians were killed in one month when the British decided to deport Zaghlul to Malta.
   That was what Egyptians call the 1919 First Revolution.
   Cooper interfered with the British authorities in London and was able to convince his government to back down; Saad Zaghlul was released and returned to Egypt.
   The Wafd `Delegation' arrived in Paris and presented its case, at Versailles' Peace Conference - post WWI - for immediate independence.
   What Cooper succeeded in preserving as authentic support for Zaghlul, was ruined when the United States - the Champion of Wilson's 14 points - ended up backing Great Britain, and the British Protectorate over Egypt continued for thirty five more years.
   
   
   Cooper was adamantly against Munich agreement signed in 1938 with Adolph Hitler. He was a staunch critic of Neville Chamberlain policy of `appeasement' and played active role that led to Chamberlain's downfall. This appears quite interesting considering Cooper's great admiration of `Talleyrand' - known as widely controversial and equivocal in European history -. Chamberlain was not naïve, he was another Talleyrand but his cohorts never noticed.
   In 1943, under Winston Churchill, Cooper was appointed Britain's liaison to the Free French.
   By 1944 he became Ambassador to France.
   The city of `love and romanticism' flourished intimate relationships with wives of foreign diplomats. His wife, Lady Diana Cooper, had fostered intimate relationship with the American Ambassador in Paris. Cooper was no exception; he too had `special' relationship with the wife of `an' American diplomat and it is said they had illegitimate son.
   
   While the soldiers were fighting, the diplomats were flirting. (better not to use another word !!!!)



2. A great book for those interested in the public and private life of a key political player for HMG during the first half of the last century. Nicely edited by the diarist's son.
   
   Duff Cooper was a WW I war hero, writer, member of the House of Commons, who resigned from the British cabinet over policy related to Hitler. He was a handler for the difficult General de Gaulle during WW II, then ambassador to France. While doing all this, he greatly enjoyed pretty women (often married) and very fine living. It is fitting that he ultimately died aboard ship on a New Year's Day.
   
   An incredible role of bit players appear in these diaries: to name a few, the killer of Rasputin, Will Rogers, Cole Porter, Greta Garbo, and Evelyn Waugh.
   
   Aside from the high society social history of the time, serious readers will learn more on important events and people, such as Churchill, the rise of Hitler, the handling of Palestine, De Gaulle and early post-war France, and the seeds of what is now the European Union.