3 comments about George H. W. Bush: The American Presidents Series: The 41st President, 1989-1993 (The American Presidents).

1. George Herbert Walker Bush - 1989-93
   "Read my lips!" the elder Bush said when he promised no raise in taxes. When taxes were raised, David Duke said he meant, "Kiss my hips!" The door opened for a stampede on the Oval Office from Pat Buchanan to Ross Perot. Perot was an eccentric billionaire. "You want jobs? Here's the deal!" He got scared he was going to win and dropped out. He re-entered and got 19% of the vote as his Reform Party's candidate. The legacy of Bush 41 is his confrontation with Saddam Hussein and Iraq. Saddam invaded oil-rich Kuwait in 1990. Bush put together a coalition and drove him out. Bush said it was not about oil. If it was not about oil, then it was not about anything. Americans do not care about Kuwaitis or Iraqis. They care about driving to and from sporting events, getting home to their wives and kids and putting food on the table. Bush made enemies across the Muslim world. Americans who wanted regime change in 1991 would get their chance. Bush kept looking at his watch when he debated Clinton. He underestimated Baby Boomers.



2. This was not a strict biography of the entire life of George H. W. Bush. The author. Timothy Naftali, gave brief information about President Bush's family background, military service and early career and of course how he came into public life. Most of the book centered on the challenges that President Bush faced during his years of presidential service and how his early experiences influenced the decisions that he made at a very difficult time in the history of the world.
   
   President Bush was at the helm during the period when the Cold War ended and the people of the Eastern European countries were throwing off the shackles of years of enforced communist rule. The author states that "Poland was the scene of the first dramatic change. In February 1989 Solidarity was legalized and Lech Walesa entered into talks with the Communist government to prepare for a new electoral system."
   
   President Bush's diplomatic relationship with Mikhail Gorbachev was good which was helpful in negotiating peaceful resolutions to some of the many problems which surfaced as the Cold War was ending. The nonviolent reunification of East and West Germany was also accredited to the President's intervention. A few years later in 1991, his diplomacy helped to garner a coalition of united forces that joined together to defeat Saddam Hussein's take over of Kuwait.
   
   On the home front, the President was not particularly popular. The American people found him difficult to understand. In some ways his aristocratic coolness turned many people off and within the Republican Party, he did not have the strong backing that President Reagan had experienced. The election promise that President Bush made when he ran for office was, "Read my lips--no new taxes." When he was forced to break that promise he lost a great deal of support and his bid for reelection.
   
   Timothy Naftali's assessment of President Bush was that he was probably the right man for the job at that time and that "George Bush answered the call for greatness when his country required it." I thought this book was well done and it helped me to understand more about world politics and President Bush. Time and history seems to be the best judge of how well a president performed while in office.
   
   
   
   



3. This book, authored by Timothy Naftali, ends with the following comment (Page 176): "George W. Bush's controversial presidency led to a positive reassessment of his father's time in the White House. . . .[M]any missed the elder Bush's realism, his diplomacy, his political modesty, and, yes, even his prudence."
   
   George H. W. Bush was a one term president who presided over the end of the Cold War. This slender biography, another entry in The American Presidents series, provides a useful biography of the 41st president of the United States. The book begins with his childhood and youth, culminating in his estimable service in the Navy's air wing, including being shot down in the Pacific. Upon his return to the United States, Bush entered Yale and, upon graduation, became a businessman who did well, after moving from New England to Texas.
   
   In Texas, Bush became interested in politics, and public service consumed him until the end of his presidency. He was ambitious from the start of his career. He had successes (election to the House of Representatives) and failures (defeat in a Senate race). He became a person respected by his Republican Party leaders, and served in a number of important roles, from Director of the CIA, Ambassador to the U. N., Chair of the Republican National Committee, and head of the U. S. diplomatic post in the People's Republic of China.
   
   After his China tour, he began thinking about the presidency. It didn't work out in 1980 (Ronald Reagan simply did a better job as candidate); however, he got quite a consolation prize--Vice President. Then, the tale of his campaign to become President in 1988.
   
   Once elected, he displayed prudence. He ran into trouble when he backed off his "Read my lips; no new taxes" promise from the 1988 campaign. Many Republicans were angered. His presidency did feature both domestic successes and foreign policy successes (end of the Cold War and the stunning cobbling together of a coalition to boot Iraq out of Kuwait--and his refusal to advance on Baghdad). There were also problems, such as seeming sometimes to be out of touch. Then , his dismaying defeat by Bill Clinton in 1992.
   
   All in all, a good depiction of the man and his presidency. Another worthy addition to the series.

5 comments about Always Running: La Vida Loca: Gang Days in L.A..

1. What more is needed to say about this memoir? This is singlehandedly one of the most powerful memoirs I have ever read and that goes without saying. I was born and raised in the San Gabriel Valley, the same one that Rodriguez builds and describes and I can honestly say he is completely spot on. About? Everything. The racial, identity, and sexual struggle that Rodriguez weaves in this story is compelling and really grabbed me and immersed me into his life. This memoir says what there is to be said, and it says a lot.



2. I heard this book was good, but didn't know how good it actually was until I read it. There isn't a dull page.
   
   What's most alarming about the book is not necessarily the events that take place, as many movies about this lifestyle have been made since the book's first publishing, sort of numbing the harsh realities of gang life to even outsiders who grew up in secluded suburbs, but the age that Luis Rodriguez actually is when the events are taking place. Some of the day to day drama described in the book is so adult like that you can only picture the subjects of these tales being 18 to 25 years old, yet the reader is often reminded that the author was as young as 14 when some of them took place.
   
   What may also separate the stories told in this book from the stories told in typical 1990s west coast gang folklore, from hip hop to film to books like 'Monster', is the sexual situations Mr. Rodriguez describes that he took part in and witnesses, again, in some cases as young as 14. Some are romantic, and almost remind the reader of a time when romance was first discovered in their lives, yet there are some that are so disturbing that the reader is quickly brought down to earth, reminded that love and romance in a violent, drug infested environment is far different from the kind most Americans have grown to know, that is dictated by Hollywood fairy tales.
   
   Luis Rodriguez finding his outlet from the gang life through art and writing could give hope to any current gang member who happens upon this book. It's one thing for a suburban high school teacher to tell a 'homeboy' that he can express his views through art, it's another for an older 'homeboy' himself to tell him.
   
   A must read for everyone, from suburbanites with little knowledge of the gang life who would like another version than that given by media outlets and law enforcement agencies, where the knowledge tends to be limited to crime reporting and identification of territories and monikers, to kids and adults wrapped up in the gang life, and just looking for any story that can inspire them or give them some kind of direction to a better life.



3. I had no choice when it came to reading this book. It was after all, required in my college english class in order to survive the masses of quizzes and essays. But I will say that although I did not want to read this book at first, once I read the first couple pages I was hooked. I no longer wanted to read it just because it was required, now I was reading it for pleasure. Although the book is strongly graphic especially on the sex parts, it is done in a most tasteful manner. As a young latina born and raised in America, I was very touched by what my people had gone through in the past, and it is knowledge I had ignored taking the liberty I have now for granted. I really recommend this book if you're up to take a good dose of eye opener.



4. i was intrigued by this book when i saw it in the store so i bought it. it was very educational for me as i never knew how bad things would really get in gang life. i grew up in the burbs and this was all very shocking to me. it was truthful, sad and awakening.



5. This book is a great book, very eye opening and wonderfully written.
   
   I have to wondering though, throughout the book, what is going through the author's mind...
   
   He complains that the police treated them poorly. They were CRIMINALS. If they weren't up to no good at that SPECIFIC point in time, they were ABOUT to do something terrible or definitely had already DONE something terrible.
   
   I don't understand how the author calls the police... "rioting police... in a murderous frenzy..." HELLO, you were doing illegal drugs in a public place, your friends stole something from a liquor store, then a mob started banging on the doors of the liquor store to let them in - am I missing something? Can you really blame the police for acting as they did? You just committed several crimes! The police were doing there job and acting defensively when KNOWN gang members committed crimes...
   
   Then the author complains that he was thrown into an adult jail cell, with murderers and rapists, despite being a juvenile and too young to be in that specific jail. OK, fine, but earlier in the book, he was talking about hanging OUT with FRIENDS of his while they were RAPING UNCONSCIOUS WOMEN. He had SHOT people before, held guns to innocent peoples' heads during robberies. WHY IS BEING SURROUNDED BY MURDERERS AND RAPISTS *SUDDENLY* SO offensive to him? He wasn't old enough to be in an adult facility, but he was old enough to do drugs, drive illegally, drink illegally, commit robberies at gun point. Who is the author kidding? He acts like the police somehow treated him so badly but he DESERVED it. He was a criminal! The worst kind of criminal.

5 comments about Martin Luther: A Penguin Life (Penguin Lives).

1. I've got to give the book 5 stars simply because Marty, a Lutheran, had me disliking the guy at the end :-). It's a much more balanced biography, for example, than Here I Stand, which I read many years ago. Marty is an excellent writer. He uses words well, chooses good words, and doesn't waste them. Marty's writing is one of the highlights of the book. The book moves quickly, which is unusual for a biography. More than that, I think Marty provides a plausible, unifying theme to Luther's life. He was clearly not a fun guy. He was intense, fiercely competitive, short-tempered, "over the top". Unlike many religious biographies, this one portrays a man who was deeply flawed, who arguably never developed a satisfying relationship with God. To Luther, you either saw things exactly his way, or you were his enemy. If people had to die to get his gospel preached (himself or others), oh well. As with some Christians today, he felt perfect confidence that his way was THE way, the ONLY way, and that everyone else, for better or worse, was going to hell.
   
   As an example of steadfastness and single-mindedness, he's awesome. You've got to admire someone who knew so thoroughly what he wanted to accomplish, and pursued it with a vengeance, come whatever may. But I can't help wondering if in his zeal, he missed the heart of God. Luther seems to have had a hatred for anyone who didn't "get it", anyone who stood in his (and therefore the gospel's) way, be they peasants or Jews. Luther was a positive for the world and Christianity, but clearly a very flawed human being.



2. For a reader looking for a concise, relatively short, introduction to the life of one of Christianity's most important figures, "Martin Luther" by Martin Marty is an excellent choice. This book does a good job of surveying the life and teachings of this founder of the Reformation. Marty presents a balanced picture, neither attacking its subject nor ignoring his faults and shortcomings. He generally presents the facts and lets the reader draw his own conclusions. While not ignoring Luther's sensual appetites, Marty explains how they conform to his theological teaching. Luther's attractiveness to princes but his hostility to the empowerment of peasants is an example of an historical fact which limits the vision of Luther as a champion of "democracy" against the establishment.
   
   At times the book seems to focus on Luther's writings and preaching, but later gets into more personal details. I suspect that this reflects the scarcity of the historical record with respect to some parts of Luther's life. While not delving into an analysis of Luther's impact on the world, the mere recitation of his life's work enables the reader to appreciate the tremendous impact which Luther has had on history. The reader, whether Protestant, Catholic or non-religious, who is interested in either religious or secular history will find "Martin Luther" to an worthwhile read.



3. Not as comprehensive as Roland H. Bointon's "Here I Stand". But it will do the job if your time for Martin Luther is very limited. Marty Martin concentrates on providing the reader with an insight into Martin Luther's inner experience.



4. Martin E. Marty doesn't write like one of the most eminent, respected professors of our time. Instead, he introduces the reader to a man he knows well from his studies at the University of Chicago.
   
   Marty's prose is as clear and powerful as the bolt of lightning which terrified young Martin Luther and prompted him to devote his life to the Lord. This relatively short book does a superb job of introducing us to Martin Luther.
   
   We learn that he was a man of his time and that he didn't want people describing themselves as "Lutherans." As a Luthern myself, a lot of Professor Marty's book came as revelation.
   
   Luther shared a lot of the flaws of his age. He was a man of an imperfect time and place. Yet, imperfect as he was, he took his stand where he thought God wanted him to and therein lies his great achievement.
   
   This is a great book about an important man who lived during a critical period of Western History. If you're at all interested in shaking hands with Martin Luther, this is the book for you.
   
   It opens a window on the man and the time in which he lived and it's superbly written. You needn't be a scholar to understand it and it reads more like a good novel than an important biography.
   
   I like it and gave it five stars.



5. This title is a little short, but the content seems ok on the controversial figure of Martin Luther.

5 comments about Robert Kennedy : His Life.

1. The life and times of Robert Kennedy beg for a coherent and in depth book .... unfortunately this is not it. Living in the shadow of his presidential brother, the shadow of his oldest brother killed in WWII and the all encompassing shadow of his father, RFK was able to chisel out an identity of his own in US history before his tragic death. Hoping to gain some understanding/insight of/into this man's character and evolution from a sullen child to presidential candidate and everything in between, and a chonology of such things as his involvement in the US civil rights movement, McCarthyism, Cuba (Bay of Pigs and The Missle Crisis) and his relationship in the White House with his brother JFK... I was greatly disappointed. A glaring hole in this book is any serious treatment of RFK and Vietnam. What the book does contain are snippets, quotes and anecdotes, some mildly interesting, (i.e. RFK's role in the release of Martin Luther King from prison), without any cohesiveness and very little context. And although many of the conclusions reached in this volume are valid they are simply not borne out here. The book's attempt to cover significant parallel events is at best confusing and there is also an alarming amount of armchair psychology. I hate to be so hard nosed but the subject deserves much better than this book.



2. Evan offers much insight into an unfinished life. He meets the mark of a good biographer; as a history this is a well-balanced read.
   
   Bobby once famously said: "Progress is a nice word. But change is its motivator. And change has its enemies". Mr. Thomas has done a commendable job of tracking that change, speaking to the better known facets of Bobby's personal as well as political evolution. Evan's book captures the antecedents: his awkwardness as a young Kennedy; the shadow, and then death of, his brother Jack; the opportunities to question the rigidity of his Catholic faith; his decision to align himself with McCarthy (Joe not Gene). These alternately help set the foundation for the evolution of Bobby from FDR politician to modern-day progressive. These help explain what caused a 1950's era government attorney concerned about Comintern penetration of the State Department to become a proponent of the United Farmworkers in its most radical years. Or those changes that caused the one-time skeptic of Martin Luther King to become one of his most ardent political champions.
   
   Evans provides the rationale for the enmity shared by various mobsters, LBJ, and even Roy Cohn. His rationale is this: Bobby cared. Evans touches us when he describes Bobby as a man who strived to live lives as others did. The description of Bobby's pain witnessing the utter poverty of rural blacks in the 1960's Mississippi delta is palpable and authentic. But Bobby was also a shrewd strategist, adapting to a time when the solid south was no longer the dependable, conservative counterweight of the Democratic Party fulcrum, and the campus was no longer the only forum in America for frank discussion of problems in America. Bobby was not an opportunist, but he was a political realist, and in the days leading up to the '68 convention Bobby reflected not simply the changes occurring within the antiwar movement or the modern-day Democratic Party, but also those changes occurring all across America at that time.
   
   Would Bobby have turned around a country that was heading down a path of "secret plans" to end the Vietnam War, Watergate, "Trickle Down" economics and South American puppeteering? Evan Thomas to his credit wrote a book about an unfinished life, and a good one at that. But for those interested in what might have been, that's a different book.



3. Although I was only 7 years old when he died I have talked to many people about the passion they felt for Bobby. Boy, could we use someone like that now. Although the book does not shy away from his sometime machiavellian tactics, it shows a person who was so affected by tragedy that he really cared. I see film clips of when he visited Buffalo, and the entire Niagara Square was packed with tens of thousands of people. I cannot think of anyone, short of the Bills after a super bowl win, that would garner that much enthusiasm. Evan Thomas captures that and draws the reader in. I actually felt empty when finishing the book and sad that I could think of no one today that could fill that void. Thomas also through thorough research seems to dispel the popular myth of Bobby as a womanizer. He was actually a devoted family man haunted by his brothers death but loyal to wife and children. Not so with Jack. When Bobby was in Indianapolis about to speak before a black audience it was announced that Martin Luther King had just been killed. He discarded his planned speech and relayed his own feelings of how he felt when his brother Jack was killed. It was totally ad-libbed and from the heart. Indianapolis was one of the few major cities not to erupt in violence. I wonder how different this country might be had he the opportunity to serve us.



4. I was so looking forward to listening to this book and so frustrated with the outcome.
   
   That part that I did listen to was written well but read poorly. Attempting to mimick the voice of Kennedy (and others) grows so old so quickly one would have thought it would have captured the eye of an editor sooner rather than later. But never? Alas, apparently that was not in anyone's job description.
   
   If you must do anything buy the printed version.



5. The book is okay. It is that simple. The prose are incoherent and it is very hard to tell who or what the subject of the sentence is. He tries to be far too clever with his sentence structure which results in being forced to read a sentence several times, sometimes understanding what he's talking about the fifth time, sometimes still confused but forced to move on
   The most prominent of my complaints is that he is so repetitious. He will use the same adjectives to describe the same person over and over in almost identical sentences which begs the question: How long would this book be if he didn't repeat himself?
   My final complaint is that he will write ad nauseam about the most mundane events and details and will examine the motives and come to a verdict while repeating the evidence almost verbatim to what he just wrote the paragraph before.
   I haven't read another book on Bobby so I cannot compare it to other Bobby-books. However, since I was born in the eighties and did not live during all of this, it is new information and basically the only fact I can't give this a lower grade is because the information itself propels the book into mediocrity.

5 comments about Godfather of the Kremlin: The Decline of Russia in the Age of Gangster Capitalism.

1. Paul Klebnikov is a modern Russian hero. He was assasinated because he tried to show the world how corrupt Russia had become at the hands of the oligarchs. "The Decline of Russia in the Age of Gangster Capitalism" is well written and organized. It follows not only the "rise" of Berezovsky but also illustrates how the majority of the Duma (Russian Congress) was in fact acting on behalf of the gangsters or were in fact gangsters themselves holding seats in the house.
   It is a reavealing look into the saddest chapter of Russian history. A must read for anyone interested in politics or modern history. It is a shame and loss to us all that Paul was killed. Who knows what other truths he could have recovered had he lived. It is also a shame that in our modern age of information, only a few speak the truth - and if they speak to loudly they are silenced, as was Paul. May he rest in peace.
   If you enjoyed this book, Paul also did an interview called "Theft of the century: Privatization and the looting of Russia." If you google it, you will find it on the net.



2. Everybody should read this book - it helps to put the entire Litvinenko killing in perspective ; the dead Russian spy worked for Berezovsky - given Berezovsky long criminal history it would not be surprising at all that he was directly involved in murdering his own employee as part of his long ongoing campaign to overthrow the democratically elected president Putin and thereby illegally regain control of all of Russia's natural resources including in particular Russia's oil and gas wealth.



3. This book tells a powerful story that most Americans are, sadly, unfamiliar with. Mr. Klebnikov outlines in impressive detail the history of Russia during the very turbulent times of the 1990s. The development of gangster capitalism under the Yeltsin regime in an environment of political corruption was a tragic episode in Russian history and an example of an opportunity squandered. This book outlines the rise of the mafia in Russia in the post-glasnost time period and the links they had to the Chechens and to the political leaders of the time.
   
   While I sometimes became a bit lost in all the details and Russian names with which I was unfamiliar, the story came through well as Mr. Klebnikov built, step-by-step, a solid and well-documented case. This story is an important one for Americans who wish to better understand what happened during this time period and how it affected, and still affects, Russia. From political assassinations to presidential elections - the book tells a compelling and sadly disturbing story.
   
   Since I have several Russian friends, I felt I owed it to myself to become more familiar with recent Russian history. And this book did not let me down. I would recommend it to anyone who is interested in understanding Russia better and I suspect it will in time become a classic for the detailed description it provides of this time period in Russian history.
   
   Highly recommended!



4. I personally witnessed the outcomes of the corrupted rule of the culprits portrayed by late Paul Klebnikov.
   Many Russians believe that the truths revealed in this book were the cause of author's murder.



5. This is a great book by a good author with a fantastic approach to the subject at hand.Even with all the warnings about some of the things being to good to be true ( or bad for that matter) the reality has surface just by watching the news about Russia.I like the fact that the author was able to track all the corrupt corporations in countries like Great Britain,Switzerland and USA.The author mentions names,dates and places with accuracy.Also i enjoyed his explanations and the political and economic ramifications that the corruption in Russia has brought.It is very sad to see how Boris Yeltsin drove Russia to the ground while pretending to be a good president.The Book shows how Yeltsin is as guilty as anyone in Russia of its problems.He was just a mummified puppet with a stupid smile.Anyone with interest in recient history of Russia should read this book.

5 comments about African Nights: True Stories from the Author of I Dreamed of Africa.

1. I was quite offended by this white settler's life of endless parties, adventures, gourmet foods and travel around the world and throughout the stunning countryside of Kenya. Based on the colonial legacy of British, one of the many brutal European powers that profited from the domination of Africa, Gallmann was able to purchase 100,000 acres of land, stolen through the colonial system. All of Africa is in fact the birthright of the African people themselves. Gallmann's book is full of idealized and romanticized stories in which she is the central star. For a more realistic view of Kenya where nearly 60 percent of the people still live on less than $2 a day with a life expectancy of only 45 years, see, for example, Imperial Reckoning: The Untold Story of Britain's Gulag in Kenya by Caroline Elkins. This is the story of the British slaughter of the Kikuyu people of Kenya in the 1950s who were put by the millions in concentration camps and murdered when they were rightfully struggling for the liberation of their homeland.



2. How she does it I don't know. She's incredible, seeing beauty in everything, painting vivid pictures for all to delight in. Presuming it to be only remnants from her perfect book I Dreamed of Africa, I doubted the caliber of this work. I was skeptical but willing - but Gallmann has proved that everything she touches illuminates in melodious detail. Whether it is the amplification of a salmon pink sky, silhouettes at dusk, a tree that appears imbued with knowledge, or a night sky saturated with the sounds that are Africa, Kuki's awareness and ensuing stories are exceptional - encroaching inspirational. There is something in every story that appeals to heart and soul. I almost wanted to frame each story separately as if it were a sapphire or quartz rarity, explicit, precious and real. I'm so impressed by her writing and the lighted manner in which she takes in Africa. It's wonderful.
   
   I liked this book.



3. My family and I visited Kenya last year and were utterly overwhelmed by the experience. Following that trip we read several books on Africa and amongst them was firstly "I dreamed of Africa" and latterly "African Nights". On a subsequent trip to Oman, I was reading the former book on the plane and had to stop, lest the flight attendants and fellow passengers witness me breaking down in tears. (Kuki's words at her son's funeral service). The spirit and the eloquence of her writing and indeed of her very experiences touched our hearts deeply. So much so that we traveled this year (August 2007) to Likepia, to her 'ranch' (now a conservation area), as a kind of pilgrimage to an Africa that has mostly vanished, swallowed up in commercialism, in over-grazing and exploitation. What did we find? An incredibly special place where conservation efforts harmonise with nature; where people are valued. Where students from all over the world come to research 'projects', encouraged by the owner of the land - Kuki. We met a variety of people, both African and otherwise. Pokot Tribespeople. Belgium guides. Eastern European Photographers. Kenyan Musicians. Village children at the custom built school... An eclectic mix of people with a common passion - for Africa, for its people and for its land. All inspired by one person. An author of two books.
   
   The grammar in Kuki's second book may, according to several reviews, not be immaculate or even American, but given the life that Kuki has led, and indeed continues to lead, I believe that people should simply get past such utterly insignificant details and try to feel the reality that the author describes.
   
   Kuki tells her story her way, and obviously leads her life her way. She has suffered loss and tragedy, but this is an author who has 'moved on', in control of her destiny and embracing change with a passion and an artistry that the vast majority of us could not hope to emulate.
   
   Perhaps her sentences may be deemed a bit long by some. But when she describes a vignette of her family, of Africa.... you are there with her: With her husband at the coast. With her son catching snakes by the lake... And in being there through her writing, you are actually the closest you'll likely come to a very special part of Africa. A part that isn't on the tourist trail. A part that is rapidly encroached by charcoal burning; by agriculture, by population explosion. But a part that is still home to both Elephant and to Lion and to a very special community.
   
   Put criticism of grammar or sentence structure behind you. These matters do not rate for much in the overall tapestry of life. And it is that tapestry that Kuki so artfully weaves, allowing you to enter her world, and become a part of her life by doing so.



4. When I finished this book, I felt I had learned something, or perhaps been reminded of something I already knew. What struck me was the author's capacity to love, to suffer, and ultimately to find strength and see the beauty in her experiences. I admire this woman's spirit and her unique spirituality. The connection that she finds with the land and the animals and the people that pass through her life make me think, "wow, that is a life well-lived and worth reading about."



5. I did volunteer work at Kuki's Ol Ari Nyrio in 11/07 and it was the most amazing experience of my life. I also had dinner with Kuki and she is an artist- attentive, creative, intelligent, and misses nothing. Africa is a place like no other-you cannot expect the norm - truth is always more interesting & stranger than fiction, remember. Kuki is an amazing person and the work she has done for the people & animals in the area, without spoiling the natural habitat or trying to change the people's ways, is well told. The death of her son and husband, so tragic, has led her to different levels in life, where so much work has been done for the good of generations to come. Read her books-they are wonderful!

5 comments about Khrushchev: The Man and His Era.

1. First off, I read the British printing not the U.S. - but I assume it's the same text.
   
   The entire book left me feeling like I was not getting much. It's an immense book and the writing is tight so it is covering a lot of ground.
   
   But... I kept finding myself asking, what was going on here. Why did this event happen. Why did Khrushchev do this and not do that.
   
   The most egregious example is when he was removed from power - there is nothing about how it happened. The book jumps from he is absolute ruler to two days after he has lost all power. Who did it? How did they pull it off? What did Khrushchev do if anything to try and retain his power? You won't find out here.
   
   And then there is the central question that makes Khrushchev such a fascinating person - how did he survive under Stalin, helping in many of the purges, yet when he took over, virtually eliminate state sanctioned murder. On this subject the book talks a little, but so very little.
   
   The banal and boring parts of his life are here. The interesting parts are not.



2. My mom -- white bread, Communist-fearing, life-long Democrat -- has always had a soft spot for Nikita Khruschev. "I just don't think he was that bad. He couldn't have been that bad if he cried after President Kennedy died." This book vindicates my mom. He really *did* cry after Kennedy died -- although it's not clear how much that was due to grief and how much that was due to the realization he'd have to work with a US president with some actual political experience and ties in LBJ. (No word on how my mom knew about the crying thing....KGB files have now been closed).
   
   But even if Nikita Sergeyevitch, right hand man to Stalin, participant(however distasteful) in the Ukraine purges, cold war bully to Kennedy's (and to some degree Eisenhower's) naivete, and shoe banger extraordinaire wasn't Mr. Sentimentality, this book divulges a lot about him we can be grateful for. And in looking at the darker side of this major player of the 20th century, Taubman excels at helping us understand him from all angles: his son Sergei, Khruschev's own papers, the historical record here and in Russia, and indeed the correspondence between Khruschev and Kennedy, which began during the Cuban Missile Crisis and did not end until the fall of 1963 (both undoubtedly expected it to continue).
   
   The last is indeed the most poignant, perhaps just for the American reader, perhaps for all of us, since it does signify the attempts of two great but flawed leaders to struggle with the immense burden on their shoulders and try to come to some kind of understanding for the sake of their nations. In doing so, they seem just about to build a friendship.
   
   I found the book a bit too long, and would like the prose to have gone at a more clipping pace. Better editing may have helped. But I will read it again someday and I'm glad to have it on my shelf. I don't see how it could become outdated or lose its importance.



3. In the last 60's, Krushchev wrote "Khrushchev Remembers", a self-serving memoir. It was interesting to read depsite its heavy slant, but the book didn't provide the reader with a sense of the man, and it was clearly censored by Soviet authorities. William Taubman has written a fine biography that gives us a clear and astonishing picture of Krushchev along with a snapshot of the Stalin-era purges and a superb picture of the Cold War. He uses interviews with Krushchev's former associates and with his son Sergei to great effect. He also uses archives that became available only after the Soviet Union fell apart. As a result of his research and clear writing, we feel like we know the man who darn near blew us all up during the Cuban missle crisis. (Or at least that was the feeling I had in 1962, watching in a college dorm as it all unfolded on TV.)
   
   It's scary to see Krushchev as Taubman displays him. We knew he was a boor when he took off his shoe and pounded his desk at the UN in 1960, but it was fascinating to read about his highly charged, highly politicized encounters with Soviet artists and writers in the early 60s. Taubman shows us the man's temperament, which makes one wonder at how the Cold War failed to cause a nuclear war. It also makes one marvel at the distortion in national policies that come about when one person has such enormous power and is so undisciplined.
   
   Although the character flaws Taubman illuminates are serious and frightening in retrospect, Taubman also shows how important Krushchev was in ending the Stalinist era. In 1953, a politician in the USSR who fell from power would have been shot; in 1964 Krushchev was simply booted out, given a pension and made to shut up.
   
   It's hard to imagine anyone having better access to Khrushchev's contemporaries, and Taubman puts an astonishing story together for us in a beautuifully understated way.



4. This biography is the kind that I like. It's about an intermediate figure and uses that individual's life to frame up the times (ref: my review of Paul Preston's Franco biography).
   
   Taubman does an excellent job of research and a good job at having a view about Krushchev's character and motives. However, the book is just not executed that well. The early years are presented fairly slowly and don't seem as tightly focused given that Taubman does have a thesis about Krushchev the man. This may just be that there are gaps in what he could learn about earlier years. The second half when Krushchev is in charge picks up a great deal. Some of this is just that the stakes are higher plus he has better sources since there are/were people alive to interview. However, even here there is some sloppiness in presentation.
   
   The book is an excellent confirmation that much of what occurs in history is because of the idiosyncracies of individuals. Anyone who has worked in a large corporation would be familiar with unusual decision-making processes based on the personalities of people. That reality is presented clearly here even including how Eisenhower and Kennedy are presented in their dealings with Krushchev. On the one hand, it's almost amazing that war was avoided, But on the other hand, all of these individuals understood the amount of death that would have occurred and worked hard to avoid it. It speaks well that all understood that losing face was just fine compared to killing millions of people. However, it is repeatedly presented that Krushchev was certain that nuclear weapons could not and would not be used so the irony is that it made it easier to threaten with resulting in the view that he was kind of a mad man. It's similar to two bullies ready to fight as long as someone is restraining both of them. The good news is that Krushchev was not fundamentally evil like a Hitler who probably would have used the weapons.
   
   But, this leads to the most interesting question about Krushchev. Taubman clearly speaks to the contradiction of Krushchev participating in Stalin's purges but then subsequently denouncing these crimes. While not overtly stating it, Taubman presents Krushchev as a true believer in communism who is willing to kill to achieve it for the "greater good." I think the book should have more clearly discussed the probability that Krushchev also accepted that killing was necessary for his own personal power. And, if so, could everything have not just been the pursuit of personal advancement/power with communism as a convenient support for that? Did any of these communist leaders (Lenin, Stalin, Mao) actually believe what they were saying? Taubman does not address this.
   
   The other gap I think the book has is that it doesn't really speak much about Brezhnev. Given that Brezhnev maintains power till death, was there a contrast in his approach that would have shed light on Krushchev. My guess is that there probably is and I think it also might have helped answer the question of whether Krushchev ever believed in communism or was just out for himself.
   
   As it is, it is easy to say that Krushchev was not evil in the way that Stalin was. Once he was in charge, it became possible to be retired from the government rather than always branded a traitor and executed. Even to the point, that Krushchev could be forced to retire.
   
   So, this is a worthy read but expect to work a bit to get through it.



5. 
   
   It's about time we had a decent biography of Nikita Khruschev.
   
   Khruschev is a more important historical figure than seems generally appreciated today. He was something of a refreshing presence on the dreary world scene of the late 1950s and early 1960s. I remember his American tour, and you couldn't help but find a kind of pleasant and infectious quality in some of his observations and activities. I believe he sincerely wanted to slow or halt the Cold War the same way he diminished the horrors of Stalinism, an historic achievement.
   
   Taubman doesn't capture the more idealistic sense of Khruschev, which I believe was genuine, because I was a young man through his time and took an interest in events.
   
   Taubman's Khruschev is a bright (Khruschev had considerable analytical ability and a remarkable memory) peasant risen to the top, an extremely crude man, always regretful about his lack of formal education, who never ceases to behave as something of a Father Karamazov. I have no doubt there is truth here, but it provides an incomplete picture.
   
   Was Khruschev any cruder than what we now know of the private life of John Kennedy, who had prostitutes swimming in the White House pool while Jackie was away, or of the public Lyndon Johnson, who used to conduct interviews and bark orders while relieving himself? I ask this because Taubman repeats the word crude or offers anecdotes about crude behavior many, many times.
   
   Even as a young man I thought many of Khruschev's crudities were not so great as they were treated by America's press. The banging of his shoe at the U.N. is a favorite example. Crude? Yes. But significant beyond style? I think not much.
   
   I enjoyed this book and would recommend it to anyone interested in biography, the period, world affairs, or Soviet history, but I do have reservations about it, and it should be read with some caution.
   
   Taubman weaves into the text too great a sense of the correctness of America's position and policies of the time, giving a sense of Khruschev largely representing an irritating and sometimes dangerous opponent to them. America often behaved in provocative and dangerous ways through the Cold War. Taubman mentions some matters, as Eisenhower's saying that if the Soviets over-flew the United States the way the United States regularly invaded Soviet airspace there would be war, but the week-to-week reality of this is not stressed enough here to appreciate the intensity of the Soviet point of view. There were many such matters, including American submarines actually colliding with Soviet boats.
   
   Taubman gives a lot of attention to Khruschev's well-known habit of rattling his rockets in speeches, but we are not given enough background for why he might do this. The Pentagon actually had plans in the mid-1950s for an atomic pre-emptive attack on the Soviets. Generals like Curtis LeMay, the man who bombed Japan to the point of gratuitous horror, openly advocated nuclear hostilities. And, of course, America had used the atomic bomb, twice.
   
   Taubman's treatment of matters like the Cuban Missile Crisis suffers from this. The U.S. had a huge, generously-finaced terrorist operation going against Cuba at the time, including along more than one track, and that is an important part of the background that Taubman treats with what I believe is neglect. Taubman's words on the ghastly Bay of Pigs does reveal hints of American jingo attitudes. They are not offered loudly, but they are there, and I think they should not be if we want to understand what motivated Khruschev.
   
   One of the great missing chapters in the book is any detail around the Kennedy assassination. The assassination is there but not treated adequately. It was, after all, an epic event which had great consequences on both the Soviets and America. Of course, to treat the assassination adequately involves going into issues that remain murky and controversial.
   
   Despite my reservations, the book is an interesting and worthwhile read, however, I certainly do not agree with the New York Times review which said "Succeeds in every sense...unlikely to be surpassed any time soon...."

5 comments about The Twelve: The Lives of the Apostles After Calvary.

1. _The Twelve: The Lives of the Apostles After Calvary_ is an interesting book by a Catholic author, C. Bernard Ruffin. It catalogues the lives, travels and evangelical exploits of the twelve apostles from the New Testament, the writings of the Fathers and various apocryphal historical novels. The first problem about writing about the apostles, as Ruffin explains, is to differentiate between "the disciples," "the apostles" and "the Twelve." Disciple refers to any full-fledged follower of Christ and especially to the seventy (or seventy-two) missionaries sent to the villages of Judea during Christ's lifetime. Apostle refers to a special office within the Church that was instituted by Christ to officially declare the Gospel and later on ordain bishops, deacons and presbyters. "The Twelve" encompasses the twelve men explicitly named in the Gospels as those whom Jesus called and taught during his lifetime in this world. A number of saints in Christian history, notably St. Paul, have attained the status of "apostle" or "equal to the apostles" even though they were obviously not in Christ's original entourage. Ruffin does not address the issue of why twelve were called, but it is obviously an Old Testament metaphor of the Twelve Tribes of Israel who originated from Jacob (Israel) and his twelve sons. A problem exists in identifying exactly who the Twelve were because many of them went by multiple names and many figures in the New Testament shared the same name. Ruffin provides an authoritative list: Peter, Andrew, James the Greater, James the Less, John, Philip, Bartholomew (a.k.a. Nathaniel), Thomas, Matthew, Simon, Jude (a.k.a. Thaddeus), and Judas Iscariot whose place was later filled by Matthias. James the Greater and James the Less are both to be distinguished from James the Righteous who was Bishop of Jerusalem and author of the Epistle of James. Most suffered martyrdom for Christ having lived lengthy lives spreading the Gospel of Christ, except for John who died of an illness in old age. Peter of course founded the episcopacy of Rome and Andrew at Constantinople. Many were active in Judea, Syria, Asia Minor, Egypt, Greece and Rome. Some of the apostles are held to have traveled as far as Britain, Iran/Persia, Ethiopia, Armenia, Scythia/southern Russia, Spain, India and even China and Southeast Asia. The most extensive traditions exist regarding "Doubting Thomas." He is reputed to have traveled to the Punjab region of India, southward along the Malabar Coast and onward to what is today Burma and Malaysia. Thomas is considered the founder of the Indian Orthodox Church dating back to the first century. Ruffin examines the status and motives of Judas and what made him a traitor to Christ. More space in this book is devoted to Peter than to the other apostles and in some instances Ruffin argues for an interpretation of the New Testament accounts of Peter in order to justify papal supremacy over the Church. However, this book remains an excellent, easy to read introduction to early traditions regarding the apostles and their mission to the ends of the earth.



2. _The Twelve: The Lives of the Apostles After Calvary_ is an interesting book by a Catholic author, C. Bernard Ruffin. It catalogues the lives, travels and evangelical exploits of the twelve apostles from the New Testament, the writings of the Fathers and various apocryphal historical novels. The first problem about writing about the apostles, as Ruffin explains, is to differentiate between "the disciples," "the apostles" and "the Twelve." Disciple refers to any full-fledged follower of Christ and especially to the seventy (or seventy-two) missionaries sent to the villages of Judea during Christ's lifetime. Apostle refers to a special office within the Church that was instituted by Christ to officially declare the Gospel and later on ordain bishops, deacons and presbyters. "The Twelve" encompasses the twelve men explicitly named in the Gospels as those whom Jesus called and taught during his lifetime in this world. A number of saints in Christian history, notably St. Paul, have attained the status of "apostle" or "equal to the apostles" even though they were obviously not in Christ's original entourage. Ruffin does not address the issue of why twelve were called, but it is obviously an Old Testament metaphor of the Twelve Tribes of Israel who originated from Jacob (Israel) and his twelve sons. A problem exists in identifying exactly who the Twelve were because many of them went by multiple names and many figures in the New Testament shared the same name. Ruffin provides an authoritative list: Peter, Andrew, James the Greater, James the Less, John, Philip, Bartholomew (a.k.a. Nathaniel), Thomas, Matthew, Simon, Jude (a.k.a. Thaddeus), and Judas Iscariot whose place was later filled by Matthias. James the Greater and James the Less are both to be distinguished from James the Righteous who was Bishop of Jerusalem and author of the Epistle of James. Most suffered martyrdom for Christ having lived lengthy lives spreading the Gospel of Christ, except for John who died of an illness in old age. Peter of course founded the episcopacy of Rome and Andrew at Constantinople. Many were active in Judea, Syria, Asia Minor, Egypt, Greece and Rome. Some of the apostles are held to have traveled as far as Britain, Iran/Persia, Ethiopia, Armenia, Scythia/southern Russia, Spain, India and even China and Southeast Asia. The most extensive traditions exist regarding "Doubting Thomas." He is reputed to have traveled to the Punjab region of India, southward along the Malabar Coast and onward to what is today Burma and Malaysia. Thomas is considered the founder of the Indian Orthodox Church dating back to the first century. Ruffin examines the status and motives of Judas and what made him a traitor to Christ. More space in this book is devoted to Peter than to the other apostles and in some instances Ruffin argues for an interpretation of the New Testament accounts of Peter in order to justify papal supremacy over the Church. However, this book remains an excellent, easy to read introduction to early traditions regarding the apostles and their mission to the ends of the earth.



3. This book is a fast and easy read, perfect for beginners (1-3 years) who have studied some of the bible/new testament and start asking "who were they?" questions. It's not too long of a book, I read it in under a week, and it's a "pass along" book for a friend. (I would never pass along a book I thought bad or boring). Book is not a heavy end all on the subject, but answers enought questions and legends/historical footnotes to put a pretty good idea of what might have happened to the twelve we read about in the NT.



4. I had always wondered what happened to the Disciples after Calvery and this book was very enlightening and an easy read. It cleared up a lot of questions I had.



5. This is a very interesting book even if you're not a Christian. We forget that these biblical people where real people who lead fasinating lives. This helps to humanize them for us so that we see that both as the Saints they were and the humans they were. It also strenghtens faith since if makes us aware that these events really happened and aren't just pretty stories.

5 comments about The Story of My Life (Penguin Classics).

1. I found the book delightful. Not so much all of Casanova's exploits, they became a bit boring in time, but the descriptions of life around him, the rentals of houses, rooms, parlors, the modes of transportation, the meetings with others, the management of money, they were told splendidly and believably. The now so popular movie can't do justice to the story told in the book. Even the advertisements are bad. No one ever called Casanova a "pig."
   
   For anyone who likes to explore living situations of any class of people in the past, this is a great book.



2. Giacomo Casanova (his name has become synonymous with that of a fiery amatory male!) was born in 1725. Somehow he managed to live until 1798 in a life which would make many people tired by just reading about his countless adventures!
   Among his many avocations was that of priest; soldier; courtier; gambler; violinist; spy;translator and famed author. Casanova managed to cram several lifetimes into his 73 wild years. If you want to follow this ultimate rake across the world be prepared to visit Italy, Germany,England,France, Spain, Switzerland, the Ottoman Empire of Turkey and Russia. Along the roue's route he met such luminaries as Voltaire, Frederick the Great and Catherine the Great.
   Casanova a serial lover of the fair and innocent maidens he seduce dwith wit, charm and seductive skills. He was imprisoned at times always managing a daring escape or the ability to have friends in high place save his love machine hide. He was no dunce being able to write and converse in many languages. His autobiography was written in French being widely published in his lifetime and ever since.
   The Penguin edition is an abridgement of his monumental work which in its entirety would swell to over 3,000 pages. The translators add material which connects the episodes. The book is filled with colorful characters; excellent descriptions of what Europe was like among the elite and filled with enough sex scenes to keep the reader searching for more.
   Casanova was not someone you would want your daughter to bring home to meet her family. He would make an excellent guest on the TV chat shows!
   Enjoy a few hours of pure escapism with this famous work!



3. I love reading about Casanova's exploits, so I bought this copy for my collection. The pages are durable and strong, the spine doesn't bend or break like some books tend to do, so you end up with that funny "bump", you know what I mean? The text is legible and large enough, the font is a good choice. The front photo is cute to look at, and it doesn't fade. Over all, an excellent copy of this often reprinted story.



4. There are dozens of different versions of this book, and they are all DRAMATICALLY different. Do not buy this "Penguin Classics" edition!!!!!!!!!
   
   It is horrible! All the good parts have been "abridged" out of it.
   
   
   This is one of the silliest ideas I ever heard-but Penguin apparently tried to "clean up" Casanova. They have removed most of his stories about seduction from his auto-biography! Since Casanova was the world's greatest lover, I don't know why they think anyone would want the book except to read about seductions but those are exactly the parts they took out!
   
   Only Penguin could make Casanova boring.
   
   Buy a different edition of the book!



5. I gave this book four stars only because Casanova is such a well-known figure whose name has actually entered the English language. The book is a supposed autobiography and Casanova's sexual escapades and has much more in common with Baron von Munchhausen's fanciful tales than they do with reality. Casanova, who regarded himself as an artistic man of letters, tells literally unbelievable stories on himself. I especially like the tale in which a town's physician tells him to return "anytime" because he's infected half the women in the city with venereal diseases!
   
   The whole thing is one long dirty joke and, if you believe this thing, the joke is on you and Casanova gets the last laugh.
   
   Ron Braithwaite author of novels--"Skull Rack" and "Hummingbird God"--on the Spanish Conquest of Mexico

5 comments about J.R.R. Tolkien: A Biography.

1. I love biographies. This author was one of the few whom actually was able to meet the man, if you have not read it, please do, you will love it.



2. J.R.R. Tolkien is one of the world's most famous and well-known authors. He has and will continue to inspire the written works of others. His famous The Lord of the Rings trilogy, The Silmarillion, and his other books about middle-earth have been read by millions everywhere in the world. His books have been translated into over one hundred languages and sold in many countries. Humphrey Carpenter is one of the many people who has always revered and been inspired by Tolkien. He visited Mr. Tolkien and asked him about his life. He wrote this book for others like him who wish to know about Mr. Tolkien's past experiences and what occurred to inspire him to write his fantastic novels.
   J.R.R. Tolkien had a normal life. He wasn't rich or poor, and he didn't grow up in a powerful family. He grew up with his brother and his parents in South Africa. After his parents died, Tolkien fought in the First World War. During this time, Tolkien had to support his brother and his family. He had to take courage and stand up for what was right. This is much like the role and attitude of Atticus in To Kill a Mockingbird. Afterwards, Tolkien taught at Oxford, where he and other college professors, including C.S. Lewis, formed a group called "The Inklings." Mr. Tolkien started writing The Hobbit, and eventually, the Lord of the Rings trilogy. This book shows how Tolkien had a normal life; having hardships like everyone else does, as well as positive experiences.
   Tolkien by Humphrey Carpenter is a great read for anyone who is considering a career in writing, as well as anyone who loves Mr. Tolkien's books. Humphrey Carpenter does a great job of outlining Mr. Tolkien's life and achievements. I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book, and I believe that anyone can read this book. Mr. Carpenter used great vocabulary, and he had great development of his writing. I send my compliments to Mr. Carpenter for his spectacular job of writing this book.



3. I enjoyed this book very much. I learned a lot about Tolkien, but it wasn't like reading a text book. The book seemed balanced, not overly critical or sickenly flattering.



4. When I set about to read this book, I greatly feared that I'd be bored before I reached chapter two. Biographies have never seemed particularly appealing, especially those of authors. Yet I really wanted to learn a little more about Tolkien and the influences in his life that led to the creation of Middle Earth, so I prepared to suffer through. Carpenter, however, has a very conversational tone which made the read a pleasure. His use of actual letters, pictures and manuscripts, which the Tolkien family kindly gave him access to, was masterful. The text from those papers he chose to include was illuminating, but didn't weigh down the book as frequent quoting tends to do. Carpenter clearly had a sense of who Tolkien was, especially since he had the pleasure of speaking with the man himself.
   
   Carpenter also understands that most people will be reading this book for a glimpse at the creation of Middle Earth, and gives ample focus to that throughout. But he never lets that detract from tackling the man as a whole, giving the reader a well rounded picture of the man behind the legend; from his childhood and relationship with his mother, to his Oxford days and friendship with C.S. Lewis, to his family life with wife and children. A marvelous read for any fan of Tolkien.



5. This review is based upon the first edition which was written in 1977.
   
   This biography is fair and gives a vivid detail of not only the life of Tolkien but also the times and events that shaped the man. I would have liked to have seen more into the light of his religion as well as the depth of his relationships particularly with Lewis,Dyson, and Williams.
   
   I have to say that the ending had me near tears. It is hard to imagine that a man that has brought so much joy and creativity into the world that he would have died on a bed of loneliness. It was also sad for me to hear that the relationship between him and C.S. Lewis had fallen out and Lewis passed away before there could ever be any "rewrites" to make up for the past trespasses.
   
   All in all this is one of the better biographies out and I will look forward to reading other biographies out there on Tolkien to give a solid comparison to this one.