1 comments about Lord Burlington: Architecture, Art and Life.

1. Lord Burlington: Art, Architecture and Life is an attempt to unravel the life of one of England's most celebrated eighteenth century architects. However, Jane Clark's hypothesis that Burlington was infact a secret Jacobite with links to the exiled Old Pretender is pure rubbish. Clark's chapter, 'Lord Burlington is here', is full of unsupported supposition and amateurish guesswork that is quite frankly bad history.

5 comments about Odilo Globocnik, Hitler's Man in the East.

1. Odilo Globocnik, Hiter's Man in the East should have a lot going for it. The author obviously feels passionately about his subject; and an English biography is much needed. However, there are undeniable major problems with this book. Firstly. it's very poorly written. Punctuation and cadence are those of a non-English speaker. Secondly, and more importantly, Mr. Poprzeczny's references are lacking and controversial. For instance, rather than consult original documents or research materials, he chooses to use the works of David Irving, rightwing Holocaust denier. Although Mr. Irving is explained to be an "historical revisionist" in footnotes, no mention is made of this in text. Readers from the States and UK, especially, will find this to be a major trigger -- are the rest of the resources so questionable? Mostly, no. Mostly...
   
   Odilo Globocnik *was* Hitler's man in the East. He did his job ruthlessly well. The book does convey that truth. However, I wish it told the rest of the truth with more credibility.
   
   Had I been able to see the list of sources used, I wouldn't have spent my time or money on this biography.



2. Poprzeczny was not treated justly by the previous reviewer. Nobody before Poprzeczny wrote a biography of Globocnik in English, a man who killed 1,5 million people, most of them Jews. All major US univeristy libraries have this book now. It is quoted by academic historians and Jewish historical websites.
   As for the panctuation. Well, not everybody has to apply the American way of punctuation, Poprzeczny is not an American, he is an Australian, so he writes the Australian way. As far as comments concerning David Irwing, this comment is odd, as Poprzeczny clearly identifies where he stands recording Globocnik's murders and his efforts to loot the Jewish property.
   The sources cited are reliable, now worries there. And many of them have been dug out from places forgotten by historians.



3. Globocnik was a Nazi conspirator who became one of the worst of the monsters - amazingly enough, this is the first full-length book in English about him and as such is an essential read for all interested in the period.
   
   One necessary correction. There are some odd comments about the book in the first review, from which it could be assumed David Irving is a major source for this work: he isn't and indeed the author is careful to refer to Irving at the outset as "controversial", as well as only citing Irving on material where his well-known bias is not a potential distorting factor. Yes, there are many secondary sources but the author also includes many primary sources, and indeed uses them wherever possible. This is a work of scholarship, not the instant potboiler implied in the earlier review.



4. I have written another English-language biography about Odilo Globocnik and collaborated with Joe Poprzeczny for years while he wrote his book. I therefore feel that I can vouch for his character in this impromptu forum.
   
   First of all: Joe's Globocnik biography was no slap-dash job, but instead an extensive research in archives spanning almost twenty years. You see, Globocnik to Joe was the nemesis of a lifetime, because the "SS-Gruppenführer" deported Joe's mother in 1943 and put her in a concentration camp.
   
   During the final stage of the war, Joe's mother and other prisoners were shuttled to the Old Reich, and that is how Joe became a German native. He was born in Trier and moved to Australia as a young child. His mother refused to speak about the camp until very late in her life. The search for his roots and the man who caused so much misery for his family was the driving force behind this exceptional work, which has baffled historians with a host of heretofore unknown facts about Globocnik and his entourage.
   
   Joe is not one to rely on secondary sources. He had a host of detailed questions about Globocnik's Carinthian group that stimulated my own work. It was Joe's tenacity and journalistic skill that unearthed Globocnik's second fiance Irmgard Rickheim and made her talk to him.
   
   This is an important book. I know a lot of Holocaust historians and some who have read this book. Nobody found its sources questionable (even though a sensitive editor would have removed the Irving quotes). If you want an inside take on the daily lives of Holocaust perpetrators this is where you get it.



5. There are numerous biographical details given about Globocnik, especially his early life, but these are overshadowed by this study of his anti-Jewish and anti-Polish policies. This is probably the best English-language study of GENERALPLAN OST in theory and in action.
   
   The German dream of removing all the indigenous Polish people and the Jews, and replacing them with ethnic Germans, long predated the Nazis: e. g., Adolf Bartels, Heinrich von Class, Paul de Lagarde, and Otto von Bismarck. (p. 144) On August 22, 1939, Hitler said: "Poland will be depopulated and then settled by Germans...Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?" (p. 161) "To the Poles, Globocnik was yet another Germanic Margrave set on finally destroying them..." (p. 332)
   
   Poprzeczny hints at why the Germans usually treated Jews and Poles differently: "The administration of Dr. Hans Frank sought quite vigorously to see rural parts of Poland become a productive force in the overall German scheme of things. That administration did not seek to see the Poles tormented to the point of inflaming resistance, which Globocnik and von Mohrenschildt did provoke after November 1942, by launching their cleansing of the Zamosc Lands with Himmler's concurrence." (p. 199)
   
   In "Operation Zamosc", the Germans removed up to 200,000 Poles (p. 237) from nearly 300 villages (p. 182). Most of the Poles were sent to Germany for forced labor, while others were murdered locally or in death camps. Polish guerilla warfare, especially by the BCh (Bataliony Chlopskie: Peasant Battalions) and the AK (Armia Krajowa: Home Army) grew in intensity and became the "Zamosc Uprising". (pp. 182-183). The Germans tried to suppress it with increasing brutality, but eventually the Polish guerillas got the upper hand (p. 190), and this, plus German reverses on the eastern front, put a stop to this operation.
   
   The genocide of Poles in Volhynia in 1943 by the UPA (so-called Ukrainian Insurgent Army) is blamed by some Ukrainians on the Poles having first attacked innocent Ukrainian settlements in Hrubieszow in 1942. They were anything but! The Ukrainian officials and "settlers" had been collaborating with the Germans and their de-Polonization actions. (pp. 181-182, 190-191, 317, 320-323, etc.). (In addition, Polish actions against Ukrainian settlements were trivial in scale compared with the UPA's genocide against Poles).
   
   GENERALPLAN OST, of which "Operation Zamosc" had been merely a foretaste, had called for the resettlement of 100 million Slavs (p. 3), including 21 million Poles, to desolate western Siberia. But how could western Siberia, even with expensive development, possibly support so many people? Note that early plans for "Jewish reservations" (e. g., pp. 148-149, 154-155, 217) had to be abandoned as unrealistic, giving way to extermination. So how could the equally-unrealistic Slav-reservation plans fail to eventually follow the same course? For elaboration, see the Peczkis review of Hans Frank, Lebensraum and the Final Solution.

No comments about English and Catholic: The Lords Baltimore in the Seventeenth Century (The Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science).

No comments about Eleanor: Countess of Desmond.

5 comments about Royal Blood: King Richard III and the Mystery of the Princes.

1. The most contentious mystery of English History. This book is the case for the defence. Superbly written and very compelling, Fields brings to life a more probable account of events than those offered by the numerous anti Ricardian authors such as Alison Weir and even Shakespeare.
   
   The simple fact is that Fields hasn't perjured himself in this witness stand, Richard had less motive to kill his nephews than Henry VII, Richards succesor and the first monarch of the Tudor Dynasty for whom we have to thank for the evil and twisted image we have of the last Plantagenet King of England. Put simply, Richard had no need at all to murder his nephews. By the time of their death, he was already king, accepted by many as such and the claim of his eldest nephew, Edward V had already been discredited through his father's marital precontract to a woman he had met prior to his marriage to his wife Elizabeth. This bastardised his offspring with Elizabeth and under English Law in 1483, left Richard as the legitimate heir as the laet King Edward IV's eldest surviving male sibling. Henry VII, having discredited Richard's claim and reinstated Edward V's, needed to remove Edward so that he could claim the throne. Fields then goes on to inform us how Henry and his successors tarnished Richards name to justify their actions and lay the blame on him.
   
   Now on the balance of probability therefore, Richard must only be found Not Guilty on the weight of this evidence.
   
   Outstanding stuff! If you have any interest at all in history, law or the character of England's most fascinating king, or if you just simply like a good read, buy it now!!!



2. The biggest problem with Bertram Fields' book is that he has little to add to the question of the Princes in the Tower. It is thoroughly covered territory, and what he has to bring to the table - an 'impartial' perspective - is not enough to save his book, especially as his stance (that Richard is innocent) is not particularly well concealed. In a final attempt to preserve judicial integrity he declines to give a verdict, merely stating that it is probable Richard did not kill his nephews, which is a disappointing ending to a promising start.
   
   Fields is also plagued by his antipathy towards Alison Weir. It is true that she has been known to wildly distort fact in favor of her own theories, and her conclusions are nothing short of ridiculous, and it is annoying that she claims to have solved the mystery when so many others have failed, but his own work suffers from his constant focus on Weir.
   
   While his approach to the problem is interesting, it fails in this book. If you really want to know about Richard, skip Fields and Weir and go straight to Paul Murray Kendall, whose biography (perhaps because it is not about the princes) provides the foundation for drawing your own conclusions.



3. This book should really be read after Weir's "The Princes in the Tower." In this work, Fields works to shed new light on the disappearance of the sons of Edward IV. Interestingly enough, Fields uses his particular background, that of law to pursue his thesis.
   
   Fields' work is refreshing in that, while he advocates for Richard, he is never completely convinced that Richard may not be guilty. In other words, this might be the most straightforward account of the mystery and the possible suspects. It is a faster and more enjoyable read than Weir's work, and his "What If" chapter is entertaining, if not fairly idealistic. A unique place to stop in a survey of the tragedy of the Princes in the Tower.



4. The main thing I liked about this book was Fields' focus on the actions of the various people involved rather than on words written about the events. If the church can edit the gospels, then anything written is suspect, and most especially words written at the behest of kings with an motive to distort. For example, it was in the best interest of the Tudors to denigrate Richard the III, so how can any "historical account" sponsored by Henry Tudor be considered a reliable source? One might as well believe in the validity of drug studies sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. The perspective here is most certainly that of a defense lawyer, but that in itself is an interesting and different approach to history. Fields is passionate in defending Richard, but spends too much time attacking Alison Weir - by doing so, he gives her more importance than he probably intends. A well-written book, and I would read other books by Fields on historical events.



5. I found this book a rather interesting counterpoint to other accounts that I have read.
   
   I was particularly impressed with the bits showing that the so-called "imposters" may very well have been real. The particular evidence that convinces me was not even what he said on the subjects, but the pictures: the portraits of Elizabeth Woodville, Edward IV, and Perkin Warbeck.
   
   For those who have not seen these, Perkin Warbeck looks almost exactly like Edward IV from the nose down, and like Elizabeth Woodville from the nose up.
   
   Given that it's unlikely that whoever drew the portrait of Perkin Warbeck would have ever have seen Edward IV live, it's likely that those resemblances are genuine.
   
   And of course, the one bit that I have never heard anyone on either side admit is that the whole traditional premise is clearly physically impossible.
   
   We're supposed to believe that Richard III was a hunchback, an assassin, and a successful general. That last bit is the only real confirmed fact.
   Hunchbacks make bad assassins because they are automatically conspicuous; they would also have extreme difficulty with medieval warfare. A male hunchback suffers a muscular contracture that interferes with his control of his center of gravity. That being the case, a male hunchback is lucky if he can walk unaided, much less ride a horse. Riding a horse with any speed while wearing full armor and carrying a shield would be totally out of the question.
   
   Beth

No comments about Back to Beckett.

1 comments about The Monument.

1. If only Ursula and Justin knew what we know about clinical depression...this is a riveting and true love story with a mysterious, mystical quality to it. A 16-year-old manic English boy falls for a bewitchingly glamorous 26-year-old sophisticate of Eastern European origins ( I longed for some photos -- the best Justin's brother could do was compare her to an Afghan hound...was her long helmet of golden hair like Mary Travers' or Veronica Lake's?) and sweeps her away for 15 years of compulsive traveling and devoted hot sex. And they have enough money for a flat in Rome and a house in Greece accessible only by sea! He grabbed her just in time...she was already thinking of suicide despite her comfortable life married to an antiquities dealer. Justin's energy and ardor keep her afloat indefinitely..until that old death wish sweeps her away at the age of 42...when they were about to build another house in their beloved Sudan...what a little emergency medication could have done!!!
   An interesting historical story of the late '50s and the '60s...satisfying and devastating for all of us worshiping in the cult of undying all-consuming love.

5 comments about The Most Offending Soul Alive: Tom Harrisson and His Remarkable Life.

1. It seems impossible to imagine capturing the full and complex life of this man in book form but Heimann has done so - carrying out Harrrison's own plan for his autobiography. He had intended to be to be "self-pitiless", and this accountspares us no `warts'- but what fascinating warts! I am convinced that he would have been profoundly grateful to the author for this recording of his life. Only when fairly measured against the flaws of character and errors of judgment can we fully appreciate his amazingly varied contributions to human knowledge (on human behavior as well as that of birds,orangutans, turtles...) He said of himself that his greatest task was to keep up with himself but he gave it a gallant try, writing as much as 8000 words a day on a wide variety of subjects. One of his better known exploits was the creation of a team which discreetly observed the British public during WW II, getting a feel for the people's frame of mind, in ways that make today's polls look slapdash and superficial.

   Heimann makes it clear why Harrisson was more comfortable during his many years in Borneo (among other difficult travels) than he was back `home' in England, happier in the long houses with the various tribes he came to know and love, getting drunk with them and carousing with their women. His beloved tribesmen later gathered to help rid the Island of the Japanese near the end of the war (some using their blow pipes).

   The knowledge he acquired was never fully accepted by the academic community, due to his lack of formal training, but as Heiman points out, he contributed more to our knowledge of both anthropology and archaeology of Sarawak, where he was a museum curator among other things, than was garnered by specialists in either field in other areas of Southeast Asia. Throw in ornithology - his first love as a student - always a strong interest....and protection of orangutans, and green sea turtles.

   Harrisson had incredible energy, and an amazing lack of requirements for personal comfort, suffering every imaginable discomfort and disease, walking miles through jungle, climbing mountains at a brisk pace, and expecting the same from his behind-the-lines soldiers in the interior of Borneo during the war. He would eat anything, without complaint - had good survival skills! But in what is referred to as polite sociey he often behaved outrageously, being rude, picking fights and in fact being "the most offending soul alive." He had a dreadful talent for offending people who were later able to get back at him and cause a great deal of harm.

   This review could go on and on - buy the book! I am simply amazed at the amount of research that Ms. Heimann has done; there is no stone unturned, yet all this is laid out for us with no unwelcome suppositions on her part - he left plenty of traces without having to invent them - rather one feels led along by someone with a wise and balanced understanding of her subject. Some books about extraordinary people leave disappointing, pale images - the reader longs for a quick glimpse of the real McCoy. Heimann has been able to bring us Tom Harrisson alive and kicking, even while including the immense amount of details that needed to be sorted through and pulled together to describe his life. Bravo!




2. If the purpose of a book is to inform, entertain and delight - Ms. Heimann's book rates A+. Tom Harrisson must have been one of the most gifted persons of the 20th Century. His contributions in many fields of science were incredible. In his early 20's he became a veteran of scientific expeditions to the Arctic and Borneo with oustanding treatises on ornithology to his credit. His scientific pursuits only began there. He provided basic work, inter alia, in sociology, anthropology, ethnology as well as market research and documentary filmmaking! He was too brilliant for formal training and avoided it all his life to the chagrin and jealousy of many with degrees.

   An outstanding leader in WWII, he formed a small army of headhunters with deadly blowguns to drive the Japanese from the jungles of Borneo. This he did with a handful of losses while inflicting casualties in the thousands on the Japanese. Harrisson was no diplomat and often seemed to enjoy rubbing people the wrong way. Although his enemies were legion, he had a way with women. The book's title provides the kernel of his story. From Henry V, the full quotation is:

   But if it be a sin to covet honor, I am the most offending soul alive.

   This book demands reading.




3. Tom Harrisson did more different things in his life than any human being should be allowed to, and did them all outstandingly. And Judith Heimann does a remarkable job of following across continents and professions as he goes from one amazing adventure to the next. He was a war hero, an anthropologist, a naturalist, a pollster and much else. He was also a very difficult person who alienated many people, left a trail of broken hearts, and sorely neglected his children. But he was one of the most colorful and memorable men of his generation, and Heimann's terrific research and fine writing takes you along for an astounding ride. Once you've met Tom, you won't forget him.



4. What a life! Tom Harrisson is hardly a household name in the US but he was one of those rather well-connected and well-educated British misfits who turned their lack of enthusiasm for the British Isles into a grand adventure. He served the waning empire both as a military man and as a civil servant. The high point of his military doings is the guerrilla war against the Japanese that he organized and fought in Borneo with the local population. That part of his life alone deserves a movie.

   After the war he went back to his long standing interests in botany, zoology and ethnography, keeping at some point turtles in his bathroom as part of a study of their migratory habits. All through his life there was much womanizing,boozing and boasting. The latter two mainly got him the reputation that the title of the book refers to. But there was also much serious scholarly work and real concern for the local population he worked closely with. The work produced several publications and a couple of documentary movies.

   As Judith Heimann, who knew Harrisson personally and researched his life for about 10 years, tells the story, his contributions to ethnography have been underrated because of his unorthodox methods and his knack for making enemies. Of course, without that approach he would be a much less interesting character and a less engaging writer: after having read this book, one is actually curious about reading Harrisson's own books.

   However, don't skip this biography. It is a great read: carefully researched, well-written and not over-interpreted as so may biographies tend to be these days.




5. This is a fascinating biography of a man who can truly be considered a "hero in history" because he so personally designed his own life and lived by his own rules and yet had a huge impact. In this sense this is an inspiring biography of a man who in his individualism personified what Western culture is all about. But, the book is also a major contribution to history and social science in that it describes little known events about the war against Japan, the birth of survey data collection, etc. etc. A first rate job of writing and a hard to put down read. Herbert Weiss, Emeritus Professor, City University of New York

No comments about Martin Ferris: Man of Kerry.

1 comments about The Orgy.

1. This intensely interesting book, part fiction, part memoir, and part stream-of-consciousness writing, has such a unique premise (a trip to Ireland to research a wild festival first hand) that it would have been a great book even without a good writing style. Nevertheless, Rukeyser's startlingly vivid poetic sentences are a key reason to read this book as well. The narrator/author's observations are so detailed that the reader feels as though he or she is in Ireland with her. By some miracle, the details never slow the book down; I found myself regretting how quickly I'd gobbled down this marvelous book (two days). I would recommend it to anyone who enjoys travel memoirs, engaging novels, or prose poems.