History Books

Band of Brothers is the kind of stories I used to hear from my father and uncles of their experiences in World War Two. Stephen Ambrose has a particular talent for making the reader feel all the emotions these very brave men went through. I read the book before I saw the HBO mini-series, and I bought the autdo book for when I am traveling. I never want to forget, and I hope the country never forgets what these citizen soldiers did to change the world we live in.

This book defines what it means to be an American Soldier. It's a story of victory, defeat, good times and hellish times. It's not just a war story; it's a story of the human spirit. I recommend those of you who typically distance yourselves away from war stories to make an exception. This story is at times exciting, at times heart warming and at times tear jerking. I love it and I can't wait to read Major Winter's memoirs when the book arrives.

One of those books; I can't seem to put down. I'm thankful I have watched the movie, Band of Brothers, for I could "picture" everything that was happening though all these pages. This Regiment was truly remarkably determined and proud to be a participant in this long relentless war. How do you understand anything, unless you were there and have gone through all the circumstances? There are so many things we don't realize or understand and this book almost took you there to see what they had to experience. To be so proud and honored is an understatement for men like these and for all of our Military.

Like the movies "Saving Private Ryan" and "Gettysburg", this book (I haven't seen the HBO miniseries) left me fighting tears of pride as I understand my country's greatness and tears of shame as I understand the individual sacrifice such greatness takes, and wonder if I have done anything (let alone enough) to deserve this sacrifice.

E Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne spent two year's in training and staging, and a year in combat in Europe, landing behind Utah Beach on D-Day, then fighting under impossible circumstances in the Battle of the Bulge. The training, the combat, and the leadership of E company created indeed a remarkable bond of brotherhood not always reached under such difficult circumstances.

As one of E Company's veterans told a grandson in answer to the question "were you a hero in the war?":

"'No,' I answered, 'but I served in a company of heroes.'"

Ambroses' Citizen Soldiers: The U. S. Army from the Normandy Beaches to the Bulge to the Surrender of Germany is also a classic. See my review there.

Anthony Bates couldn't have said it better. It's shocking that so many readers out there just gobble up Ambrose's "feel good history" as unquestionable fact, when in reality what Ambrose writes little more than entertainment for ignorant readers. Everything Bate's mentions is true...the fact that other less fabled, yet equally brave and crucial formations that served in Bastogne get ignored by Ambrose is shameful. Also, his knowledge of the German Army in all of his writings is down right pathetic and revolves more around old 'folk lore' than any type of dedicated research. Ambrose does know how write an compelling story, I'll give him that...although there is a lot of better academic history out there, and it is not very hard to find.

Ted Sorensen's 2008 Convention Speech
Tuesday, August 26, 2008 at 03:20 PM

"In my more than 50 years of national conventions, this is one of the most important. Our 8 year national nightmare of mendacity, mediocrity and economic misery--with millions of Americans losing their jobs, their savings, their homes and their hopes--will soon end with the election of Barack Obama.

I have long dreamed that our party would produce another president matching John F. Kennedy's intellect and integrity, his capacity to inspire justice at home and peace around the world--and this week my dream is coming true. Once in a lifetime, said the poet, hope and history meet in one extraordinary man and movement--I thank the good Lord that I've lived long enough to meet and help such men twice in my lifetime, John Kennedy and Barack Obama.

Kennedy at 43 proved that age matters in the White House. His energy, appeal to other young world leaders, calm under pressure and openness to new thinking, well served our nation. Denounced as a candidate for lacking executive experience, he displayed sound judgment in leading a successful nationwide campaign, choosing a top-notch team, negotiating with difficult leaders, and out-organizing and out-th inking his adversaries--just as he would as president, particularly when, with prudence and courage, he induced the Soviets to withdraw their nuclear missiles from Cuba without the U.S. firing a shot; and the world gave thanks that the more experienced Richard Nixon had lost that close election.

In 1960, Kennedy, like Obama today, facing a Republican tied to a failed past, looked to a future of new ideas and opportunities. As president, he did not send the Marine Corps to preserve America's oil supplies, he sent the Peace Corps to preserve America's global standing. Confronting a Soviet military advantage in space, he made all Americans proud by literally reaching for the moon.

Today, we need new leadership. We have lost our way, lost the respect of our allies, lost the confidence of our investors and consumers. Are we to be the first generation of Americans to leave to our children a country in worse condition than we received it?

In short: this year, my friends, the fates will try us; erase all trace of fear and bias; we have the man we need at last to embrace the future, not the past, and to dispel eight years of pain and shame. Barack Obama is his name! Call the roll!"

A fascinating look at a fascinating time from a unique perspective, Ted Sorenson. Sorenson's own words & voice inflections are preserved for future generations. Anyone interested in the Kennedy Presidential era should add this to their collection. A must!

Should fairly obscure and relatively little known people write autobiographies? Answers to this question will vary, of course, but if the person's name is Theodore C. Sorensen, my answer would be 'definitely'. Indeed, Sorensen is one of several persons I identified several years ago in a category I labelled "I hope he writes and I can read his life story". [In case anyone is interested, the other two were/are musicians: Frederick Fennell (1914-2004) and Mitch Miller (1911- ).]

Ted Sorensen is one of those figures who essentially went from nowhere to become one of the closest aides to President John F. Kennedy. Readers of this memoir will be most interested in Sorensen's life between 1953 and Novemeber 22, 1963, during which he served as one of JFK's closest advisers ("Special Counsel" was his official title from 1961 to 1963) and his top speech writer.

There are many ideas a reviewer of this book could comment on. I will mention a few that especially interested me.

So, according to Sorensen, the following are accurate:
-- JFK was the person who conceived and was the main writer of his famous "Profiles in Courage" book, though he did receive lots of assistance from Sorensen.
--Kennedy "showed no courage" in avoiding voting on the censure of Senator Joe McCarthy during the 1950s.
--JFK did err (in accepting assurance of success from CIA leaders) in the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, but he recovered, learned from his experience, and was brilliant during the Cuban Missile Crisis, especially in triumphing over his hawkish associates.
--Kennedy took greater initiative in civil rights than any of the presidents before him.
--We really don't know what JFK would have done with respect to US involvement in Vietnam.

Here are a few additional revelations. Sorensen was responsible for the faux pas JFK made in his famous "Ich bin ein Berliner" speech in Berlin. The Kennedys and Lyndon Johnson really did not get along well, and JFK thought LBJ was just about useless as Vice President. There was much friction between Sorensen and JFK associates/advisers Ken O'Donnell and Richard Goodwin.

Regarding the JFK assassination, Sorensen was, along with many of JFK's close associates, too shocked and numbed by his death to give much thought to the question of who did it. But over the decades Sorensen has come around to accepting what most of the American people have believed: more persons than Lee Oswald were involved in this unsolved and unpunished crime.

The epilogue is extremely useful as a concise summary of Sorensen's view of JFK's strengths, weaknesses, triumphs, failures -- both personal and as a public figure. If one does not read all 530 pages of the book, at least read this epilogue.

I believe the book justified my hopes expressed in the first paragraph of this review. The writing is superb, for the most part candid, and full of humor. If the 1950s and and 1960s interest you at all, this is a book to investigate.
Tim Koerner
August 2008

A thoroughly enjoyable read if you are interested in the JFK era. Sorensen loved (in the most genuinely platonic sense) his hero Kennedy. While some of his praise for the assassinated President borders on cloying, the overall book is an excellent read. As a keynote speaker, (I reference the Kennedy brand in a jaundiced manner in Why Ireland Never Invaded America) I have a deep and abiding fascination for great wordsmiths and by any standards President Kennedy's Counselor is a great speech writer.

The author shows us how he and Kennedy wrote some of their great speeches. He is extraordinarily self-effacing in terms of his own contribution to Kennedy's work. This is most obvious when discussing Profiles in Courage where despite all evidence to the contrary, he still maintains Kennedy was the sole author of the book because it was his (Kennedy's) ideas and direction that produced the book. Maybe so, but there is not another person alive today who would not at least claim co-authorship if he or she were to contribute as much as Sorensen did.

He would never claim to be objective about JFK, which I accept, but this lack of serious objectivity stretches to almost anyone bearing a Kennedy name as he provides brief commentary on RFK, Ted and Jackie Kennedy.

As with most Kennedy fans, he suggests his boss would have kept the US out of Vietnam. Who knows? But the facts are that the domino strategy ruled American policy at that time, the people who convinced LBJ to get more involved in Vietnam were not dissimilar to Kennedy's team e.g. Robert McNamara, and North Vietnam would never have settled for anything less than a unified country in order to finish a war it believed was a war of independence.

Proof that opposites attract find evidence in the Kennedy / Sorensen relationship. To put it gently, Sorenson comes across as intense, boring and not particularly popular as he jealously guarded his extremely productive relationship with Kennedy. One could query how Sorensen was so effective given the level of apparent adulation that comes across in the book, but he was. He was hugely effective and a man whom Nixon, LBJ and others wished was on their side to advise them.

Even though he comes across generally as dry, he does have a wicked sense of humor and recounts some very humorous anecdotes about his time in Washington.

I skimmed his early life and was tempted to leave the book once he was finished with JFK. I'm glad I did not. One of the most fascinating chapters relates to his nomination for Director of CIA. The bottom line is that Jimmy Carter had not done his homework before nominating Sorensen. The nasty world of politics halted the nomination because Sorensen was a conscientious objector. This riveting chapter shows the dirtier side of politics and some of the blatant hypocrisy that pervades Washington.

Overall, a top class read. Buy it.

I am an Irish Catholic, born six months prior to JFK's murder; the admiration for JFK as lost leader has been a backround to my life, and is deeply felt in my society. I have been thrilled on the speeches - `A man on the moon this decade' represents, for me, the it audacity, ambition and directness that I associate with the USA -so I am up for the whole Camelot ticket. I admire what Ted Kennedy has done for the Irish Peace process, and am willing to go along with the Obama endorsement. So I bought this book looking for an insight into JFK's character and the philosophy that backed it up. It gave me neither.
What I had previous known about Ted Sorensen was limited, though I knew he played some part in writing the speeches. In fact it turns out that he was JFK's right hand man for most of the 1950's and special counsel to the President during the Kennedy presidency. However I must admit that when I started the book, I skipped straight to the second section which describes the time that Sorensen started to work with Kennedy, guiltily, I later returned to the first section for the sake of completeness. One of things that struck me about the narrative is Sorensen's complete sublimation of his personality to Kennedy his statement that his role in the speeches and in writing Profiles in Courage, were to express Kennedy's own thoughts, because he, Sorensen, had come to know them so well. I found this a bit creepy.
Another source of guilt for me is the fact, mentioned in the Epilogue, that Sorensen is dictating this book ( to Obama's speechwriter, if I'm not mistaken) having had a stroke in 2001, leaving him with blurred vision, unable to read or write clearly. For a man who is so clearly well read, whose profession and interest centre around reading and writing, this must be devastating. Sorensen has shown remarkable fortitude to deal with this cruel blow.
Despite the above, I didn't enjoy the book. I felt that the view of Kennedy was too deferential, only grudgingly admitting that JFK had any faults, acknowledging only those weaknesses which are now public knowledge - womanizing, the pressure on the New York Times to remove their Vietnam correspondent - " I know of no other instance where he made such a request to another newspaper". Sorensen tells how high-minded Kennedy was in pursuit of policy matters, even to the point of political disadvantage. This to me just did not seem realistic, I do think he showed great courage is tackling the Civil Rights issues associated with desegregating the Southern School system - however I also think its realistic to say that he came to this issue quite late. Even Lincoln came late to Emancipation. His handling of the Big of Pigs was hesitant, of the Missile Crisis was deft. So I think its ok to say that he learned on the job.
At the same time as JFK is venerated, almost held in aspic, I felt a curious lack of human detail. What made him such a leader? There are flashes of his winning humour - to overcome rumours that his millionaire father was funding his campaign (which was true) JFK read out, at a press gathering, a (false) telegram from his father saying " don't buy one more vote than necessary, I'm damned if I'll pay for a landslide". But what attracted such a talented team, how did JFK overcome his relative youth, his privileged backround and administrative inexperience to become such a courageous leader? There really isn't much clue in this book, I'm afraid.
Sorensen's own view of the team and his role in it is too rosy also. He seems to be surprised to find out that Ken O'Donnell, another Kennedy advisor ( Played by Kevin Costner in the movie Thirteen Days) disliked Sorensen intensely. Indeed Sorensen seems to have been unaware of personal animosity and tension within the Kennedy team at all. I think this is unbelievable, tensions among ambitious people under pressure is inevitable. It is incredible to me that Sorensen won't acknowledge its existence. He quotes a Boston Globe editorial (from 1977) which describes Sorensen as " never a well-loved man with his icy brilliance and his hard eye for competence". Why not own up to this? His contempt for President Johnson is just beneath the polite surface, he quotes Jackie's comments on the references to LBJ in Sorenesen's biography of Kennedy "You must know - as well or better than I - his [JFK's] steadily diminishing opinion of him[LBJ]...", the book would be better if we got more of this flesh and blood feel of what it was like to live through the interaction of these characters. There is, however, a classic anecdote which summarises Sorensens view of the contrast between JFK and LBJ - JFK's speech's would quote and reference all manner of classical sources, but when LBJ received a draught speech referencing a quote from Socrates, he crossed out the ancients name and replaced it with `my granddaddy', you can almost see Sorensens nose wrinkle.
Sorensen practised law in New York after leaving government service, occasionally being drawn back into the political life, once tragically with Robert Kennedy, once, sourly, as a potential Carter appointee to the CIA. His candidateship ran into rough water in the Senate, and he was very bruised by fellow Demoncrats and abandoned by Carter. His stories about his international law practice left me a bit cold - He helps found the South Africa Feed Election (SAFE) fund to help South Africa get ready for its first election after Nelson Mandela's release. Anthony O'Reilly is the co-chair of SAFE and Sorensen tells of explaining the work of SAFE to Mandela while flying back to New York from O'Reilly's estate in the Bahamas, on O'Reilly's private plane. Anthony O'Reilly is one of Ireland's richest men, formerly CEO of Heinz, he is a media-magnate who has developed significant media businesses in the new South Africa.
He mentions working to develop a pipeline in Panama in 1976, the agreement was worked out between General Torrijos, Panama's leader (unelected) at the time and the company's president Harold Bernstein. Sorensen takes some pride is stating that thirty years later he returned to renegotiate the deal between Torrijo's son, Martin, then President of Panama and Jay Bernstein, president of the company. I think the feel of the elite going about their business makes me quite uncomfortable.
In truth there are many fine attributes to the book, Sorensens loyalty is evident, his eloquence is breathtaking, his advice on speechwriting and the US political process is acute. I think what I disappointed me most is the absence of a clear political philosophy. His loyalty to and admiration of Kennedy are commendable, his loathing of the current administration is palpable. He is very comfortable with a president who knows the limits of the feasible, even for a superpower. But I can't discern an overachieving philosophy that will guide those who wish to follow his hero's footsteps. Conservatives have fashioned a credible philosophy around Liberty - which justifies a belief in small government, looser regulation, lower taxation, it is also (at a stretch) used to justify the Iraq invasion. It is most exposed on issues of personal morality. Progressives (or Liberals or whatever) don't seem to me to have a comprehensive set of beliefs - presumably it could be fashioned around Equality - though US policy in regard to Healthcare, Infrastructure and International Co-operation definitely needs some work. I don't get that some this book.

An absolute page turner from beginning to end on a subject I was unfamiliar with. That being American citizens emigrating to the USSR.

Highly recommended.

I have read many books about Marxist-Leninism, its promises of equality and social justice and the enormous devastation and loss of life it caused whenever and wherever it took power. This book details the experiences of Americans who, during the depression, left the US to go to the Soviet Union and what they hoped would be a better life. What Stalin gave them was gulags, disillusionment and death, which is what communism also brought China, Cuba, Vietnam, Russia and Eastern Europe, Cambodia and many other countries. US liberals fought hard to promote Castro in his early days and the sandinistas in Nicaragua and still mourn the end of Allende in Chile. Anytime liberals hear the words "equality and social justice," they are overcome with emotion and good intentions. They should read this book and many more about where good intentions can lead. I was once a liberal. I no longer am.

It is as Solzhenitsyn predicted in The Gulag Archipelago: "No, no one would have to answer. No one would be looked into." (Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956, 3:482; trans. Harry Willetts (New York: Harper and Row, 1978)). In this work, Tim Tzouliadis seeks to arouse an interest, to create an insight into the barbarities committed throughout the "socialist experiment" in Soviet Russia. Writing particularly to an American audience, Tzouliadis recounts the story of the lost thousands of American to the oppression of the Soviet state. Virtually unknown to Americans is that the existence of these thousands was well-known to U.S. government officials and journalists stationed in the Soviet Union during the 30's, 40's, 50's, and 60's, people who simply remained silent in the midst of their fellow-citizens' disappearance and murders.

This book is a primer on the brutality of the Communist regime. For those unfamiliar with this history, it is an introduction. For those who have read Anne Applebaum, Robert Conquest, Vassily Grossman, John Haynes, Harvey Klehr, Elinor Lipper, the Medvedevs (Roy and Zhores), Richard Pipes, Edward Radzinsky, Varlam Shalamov, Vitaly Shentalinsky, Dmitri Volkogonov, and, of course, Alexander Solzhenitysn, the history is not new. But, the story of Americans who once played baseball in Gorky Park only to end up executed by the gun or hard labor in Siberia is news to most.

Particularly of interest is the author's revelation of the betrayal of their fellow-citizens by government officials at the very top of the U.S. government. While the identities of the likes of Harry Hopkins, Alger Hiss, Dexter White, Paul Robeson, Joseph Davies and others is well-known to those familiar with the history of the era, Tzouliadis provides new insights by relying on more-recently divulged information to establish the extent of the betrayal of traditional American moral virtues.

The bones of the victims of Soviet repression cry out for acknowledgement of their torture and degradation, as well as condemnation and judgment of their persecutors. The victims of Communist deceit, it must be recognized, are us all. It is time for the full story to be told.

In addition to his simply telling this story, Tzouliadis offers a moral tale that is supremely relevant today: those with utopian ideals and a fractured understanding of human nature cannot be trusted to lead a nation.

Read this book; its style makes it an easy encounter; its disclosures make it essential reading for those who would be intelligently informed.

This book reflects a great amount of scholarship on the part of Mr Tzouliadis, he has done a remarkable job of research here to add to what is already known about the grim story of the gulags. This book is well written and engaging but it also is a fairly thorough survey of the literature on this general topic. I have discovered several good first hand sources that I did not realize existed.

This book also sheds a good amount of light on the question of why the conditions in Russia were so little known in the 1930s. Basically, once a person was inside Russia, censorship of their communication was full and these people had their passports confiscated by the Russian government so it was almost impossible to leave. The Russian government claimed that these American citizens had renounced their citizenships, resulting in the fact that the American state department was not able or very willing to help these poor people.

In addition it appears that the treaties with Russia establishing diplomatic relations were not thoroughly drafted with safeguards for the protection of American citizens in Russia. The Soviets exploited these loopholes extensively.

Mr Tzouliadis sketches in a number of missing pieces in the dynamics here. The Russian foreign ministry was deathly afraid of the NKVD, and so inquiries to the Russian foreign ministry were fruitless. The problem of helping these people could only have been addressed by the highest level of interaction meaning FDR to Stalin. However, unfortuanately one of FDR's key sources was Walter Duranty, one of the most famous newspaper reporters of his time and unfortuantely it appears that Mr Duranty was a very serious apoligist for Stalin at the very least, and quite possibly was an agent of the NKVD as some defectors have alleged. (the existence of these defectors was unknown to me) Hence, several of FDR's sources with respect the the reality inside the Soviet union were compromised. It also appears that bureaucratic lethargy played a role.

Mr Tzouliadis also sheds much light on the question of MIA's possibly being left behind in Asia. From reading this account it becomes pretty clear that American prisoners of war from World war two and Korea have been spirited into the Gulags. The reasons why this was desirable are not clear and Mr Tzouliadis does not engage in any wild speculation. It also becomes fairly clear that the Americans were far from alone in being pulled into the camps, it appears that many nationalities were present in the camps. It also appears that some other nations were perhaps more diligent in pursuing the release of their citizens.

In summary this is a sad tale, but one which fills in some important gaps in the overall story of the camps. It also clarifies why the reality of what was going on inside Russia in the 1930s was simply not known widely and unfortuantely this did lead to a good number of American emigres suffering horrendously and being trapped inside the abyss. I found some of the discussion of the state department behavior and Mr Duranty's writings and influence very interesting. The fact that nobody could get back out of Russia and that several of the most important information channels were tainted goes a long way to explaining why a better understanding of the realities of the Soviet Union under Stalin took so long to come to pass.

This is an excellent and very impressive book and it deserves a wide readership.

The Great Depression of the Twenties and the Thirties in the United Stated caused thousands of Americans to migrate to Russia.There they hoped their lot would be improved and saved.They came from many walks of life. However, in a very short period of time, not only would their lives change for the better;they would be sent to the Russian horror Gulags as a result of Stalin's decision to send there tens of millions.No one would be spared- not even those American citizens who honestly believed that Communism was the remedy to all their (financial) troubles.Many of them ended up as slaves in the gold mines of Kolyma.Others were executed or sent to corrective labour camps.After the demise of the Cold War did the truth of this forgotten episode of American history come out.
Tim Tzouliadis has written a masterfully- researched book. It is an original topic freshly investigated and was written by a great storyteller and historian.Basing his extensive research on American and definitely Russian archives,Tim shows the reader the extreme way American leaders and other well- known figures were duped by the Russian dictatorship of Stalin into thinking that Russia was some kind of paradise on earth, while the opposite happened.People like the singer Paul Robeson or the American Vice-President Wallace were convinced and seduced to believe the lies strewn along Russia in those horrible years.The true tragedy of those forsaken Americans was that nobody wanted to believe them or their stories or families ,while the American politicians and leaders did not care at all about them.The explanation for this behaviour seemed plausible:Stalin as an Ally of the West could not be bothered by such trifle things.The American embassy's obliviousness and the manipulations and machinations of the Stalin regime were other elements which helped magnify this tragedy.The State Department's indifference was appaling as well.
Some of these men and women escaped from the Soviet Union and managed to return to their homeland telling the author their horrible ordeal.They were baseball players and their physical fitness helped them survive and tell the rest of the world about their unbelievable tragedy.They have also depicted the monstrosities of a regime gone mad and totally paranoid which did not at all care whether thirty million Russians were expelled to the infamous Gulags.
This book should be a warning to those who tend to forget or want to make others forget.Collective amnesia-sometimes practiced by some politicians or statesmen- is the first sign of a country (or leadership) that does not care about its citizens.And it does not show any moral scruples.This is the main idea behind this wonderfully-written (and forgotten historical) episode.You will enjoy and treasure each page of it!!!

I find this book hard to put down, as I am really enjoying reading about the real life of Chinese citizens.

The Last Days of Old Beijing: Life in the Vanishing Backstreets of a City Transformed is like a New Yorker article that goes on forever, and I mean that in a good way. Michael Meyer's writing is engaging and personal. He skillfully interweaves characters, various settings, interviews, and lots of thorough research.

The book is tailor-made for those readers with an interest in city planning, the social aspects of design, or historic preservation, although anyone who has ever lived in a neighborhood will enjoy it, too. I highly recommend it.

Michael Meyer has crafted an engaging, sometimes funny, sometimes sad account of his life in Beijing. The people, places and occurences draw you into everyday situations in Meyer's current life. The mix of historical references is just right for those without a semester of Chinese History 101 in their past. Having recently visited Beijing, the author compels me to check my bank balance for the funds to return and find his neighborhood. Read this book - you won't be disappointed.

Reading my way through translated Chinese literature, I've found that there's so much assumed knowledge that words flip by without leaving their mark. Meyer is the remedy to the problem. He's not a giddy traveler, pausing for a week or two, observing and moving on again. He stayed put, settled down, got a job, all in the backstreets of Old Beijing. He is soon accepted as a part of the community, not so much as a foreigner, but as a teacher. It's a patient, somewhat wistful book. Meyer isn't a romantic, he understands that for many, a working toilet and electricity will be welcome as they leave the old, winding streets behind. But he also conveys what will soon be lost, and more importantly, gives us a background to the vast rebuilding project that has uprooted more than a million Beijing citizens, producing the stories of his neighbors to give us a focused view. In the context of China in the 20th Century, the Olympic push seems more of a strange continuum from the Japanese Invasion, through the Great Leap Forward and into the 21st Century. Meyer writes well, but this is a rather beautiful dirge and like all dirges, you'll find that it relies on playing the same notes again and again. Still, a beautiful and timely book, at least for the summer of 2008 and a glimpse beyond the pomp of the Olympic welcome.

About halfway through The Last Days of Old Beijing a question entered my mind. How long can Michael Meyer sustain a book which keeps repeating that Beijing's hutong are being torn down? The answer, to be frank, is 309 pages. I never tired of this one idea even though I expected my typical impatience to kick-in. This was a damn fine read.

So many ideas are floating through my head as I try to capture my reaction. Michael Meyer is a bit of a true believer. In some senses, this characterization portrays him as a romantic who has fallen in love with the hutong and its intangible cultural patterns and meanings. Yet, it also means he goes further than the rest of us, and that is something to be respected. How many times have I, or perhaps you, been to a museum or read the literature and dreamed of what it must have been like to experience life in another time or place? What empowers this book is that its author has done exactly what we only dream of. He moved to China, lived in a hutong, and made this experience all his own. The distance that allows us to safely consume the experiences of others is a divide that Mr Meyer has stepped over.

Consequently, this book is a portrait of what is to me another time and place, though it is present tense for our author. The portrait is a romantic one, his love of this place in every way seems genuine, and the sense of loss is compelling. Early in the book Mr. Meyer is cautioned by the police that living in a hutong is not safe, he stays and we are gradually introduced to a cast of characters such as the Widow, Recycler Wang, Miss Zhu, Soldier Liu, and Zhang Jinqi. Accounts of each are spread throughout the book, giving us yet another perspective on the hutong and reminding us that this special place in Beijing has no single meaning, as the Hand would have us believe.

The Hand is never seen or heard from, but its mark in well known. Overnight a character is drawn on the side of buildings scheduled to be demolished. Nobody knows who paints this symbol or how the decision is made. The Hand is not something you can speak to, as some folks might tell us in a movie or humorous commercial. Here the hand is power, authority, and decisive. The Hand is government. The residents learn they must move once this symbol appears, and they know there is nothing to be done. Hundreds of thousands of people have been subjected to this treatment.

And it is the Hand's action that destroys the hutong, and so much more. In other chapters we go through an extensive history of Beijing's history and development. We learn how a man-made mound protects the city center from negative energy coming down from the north and open roads allow positive energy from the South to radiate into Beijing unimpeded...or once did. We also learn about Chinese architectural history, a series of catastrophes and wartime acts that either built or destroyed portions of Beijing, and the various political leaders and groups at the center of these stories. Throughout it all, the hutong play an important role. In one sense, the Hand is no different as it tears at Beijing and reshapes the city into a modern marvel for the world to see at the 2008 Olympics.

But Michael Meyer does a wonderful job of not allowing the hutong to get lost in such broad strokes of history and distanced interpretation. He keeps our feet on the ground and shows the hutong are filled with fascinating people, a unique and rich culture, interesting foods, and more. Here I paraphrase, and the people themselves are quoted as saying we are merely poor, but we are not bad. We see that beautifully in Mr. Meyer's portrait.

I enjoyed this cookbook. The stories that accompany the recipes are enjoyable and familiar. I am a Georgia girl and love to find new southern recipes. These are great!!

I first saw a book review and article about the author in a local newspaper. The book was a gift to an outstanding cook who commented on the recipes; some old standards and some with a new twist. The storytelling throughout the book made it an enjoyable read! I would select this cookbook as a gift for anyone who is a foodie or has a selective taste for wonderful Southern food. It was a hit all around and brought many favorable comments from Mothers, Sisters, Aunts, and a few good neighbors!

From Lady Pea Salad and Sweet Tea Pie to Mustard-Rubbed Ribs and Blue Cheese Pecan Bread, SCREEN DOORS AND SWEET TEA: RECIPES AND TALES FROM A SOUTHERN COOK packs in stores and down-home cooking from the author's Southern background, includes a generous dose of color photos of completed dishes, and also represents the author's expertise as an Executive Chef of a cooking school teaching home cooks yearly. Any library strong in regional American cooking in general and Southern dishes in particular will find this a popular patron pick.

Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch

This is a wonderful book. It has great stories and really good recipes. I am not a good cook, but could be if I followed Martha's recipes. I bought this book because Martha is a distant cousin of mine. I am from Yazoo City, Mississippi too. I am her mother's third or fourth cousin and knew the whole family when growing up. I would have bought it anyway because I love cookbooks from the South. It is the best cooking in the world along with Cajun cooking!! We are all proud of Martha. I would recommend this book to anyone especially people from the North to see how Southern cooks really do it. Bettye Vaughan Johnson

As a native Mississippian, I can attest that this is one of the most authentic and beautifully written/photographed Southern cookbooks to hit shelves in years. I so appreciate all the effort that went into it so that, selfishly, it could become part of my "go-to" collection of the very best recipes out there. The beauty and simplicity of the recipes remind me very much of the Scott Peacock/Edna Lewis classic, "The Gift of Southern Cooking." This book, and chef, is also truly gifted. BUY THIS BOOK and you'll be delighted. Now....on to those tamales....and greens....and grits.....and fine stories to match.....

John Milton's "Paradise Lost" is one of the all-time classics of English literature. The epic poem begins with Satan just having been expelled from Heaven. Adam and Eve are tempted in the Garden of Eden, and fall. Before the two are expelled from Eden, Adam has revealed to him some of the major events of the Old and New Testaments, culminating in the Second Coming of Christ. The epic has enthralled readers for well over three centuries.

One thing that must be borne in mind when reading this work is that Milton's theology was not orthodox Christian theology, but Arianism, as he denied the Trinity and believed that Christ was not eternal, but created by God the Father. Also, the seventeenth century English is difficult to plow through. However, by forcing the reader to reflect on the origin of evil and to consider what they believe about the concept of original sin, "Paradise Lost" proves to be worth the effort one must make in reading it.

I have read "Paradise Lost" four times, and took no less than three semesters on it at university. This was the edition we used to work. Modernised spelling, coherent punctuation (plus variations of it in the notes), good introduction, and enormous work in the notes; this edition has all you need for a good reading of the epic poem.

As to the poem itself, some people are hard on it for all the wrong reasons. Remember that it is a 17th century poem, that English was not exactly similar as it is today, and that there are many, many words which were first used in English in "Paradise Lost". Milton was innovative with words, and he gave English new words, and expressions, such as the most famous "all Hell broke loose", which was first uttered in "Paradise Lost".

A poem like this cannot be read without good notes, and this is what this edition has to offer. Notes aren't enough, though, they have to be good, and in this edition, they are. The poem itself is not burdened by the numbers of the notes, because there are so many, the editor decided not to show them in the text per se, but at the end of the book, you will always have the reference, the lines, which the notes are about.

As to the poem itself, if you don't know it, you certainly know of the story of the Fall of Man, Adam and Eve, and the rebellion of Satan in Heaven. I'll only say that Milton's God is one seriously problematic figure in the poem, and that it caused centuries of academic discussion as to whether Milton's God is a good God or a devilish one, whether "Paradise Lost" was truly a "myth", in the old sense of a story which explains why we're here and how it got to be, or whether it was an attack on Christianity. Scholars still discuss this today, so make your own mind if you can!

Penguin Classic Editions of any book are truly great. One should also note that Signet Classics is also Penguin but this version should only be brought if Penguin Classics is not available. Of course, one has to evaluate one's purpose for the book but Penguin always has notes and good Intros for their books.

I purchased this book for a paper in which I had to choose a chapter and write about it. This version is really clear but is written as Milton would have written it so some of the old English is annoying but there are notes and major parts. The only problem I have with this edition is that there are no chapter titles so you really do not know what each cahpter is about unless you read it.

One of the many results of the increased literacy rate is the ability for every Tom, Dick or Harry to consider themselves literary experts and to opine on the supposed faults of great literature, presuming that it should serve merely their basest pleasures. The correct response to such vulgarity is to rebuke, letting them make their solitary way till one greater man restore them. Before the charge of arrogance is levelled against me, I must too opine that this attitude of literary snobbery should be applied to each one of us when we approach the genius of Milton and Paradise Lost, relenting to the sensation of humility as this epic poem enters our mind. Only by reading in such a frame of mind, can one truly appreciate and enjoy the poetry of Milton.

Paradise Lost is Milton's attempt to recount the debacle of Satan in Heaven, and his role in the Fall of Humanity. While Milton grandly presents his work as an attempt to `justify the ways of God to men' regarding His motivations for our expulson from Paradise, the focus of Paradise Lost is firmly upon Satan and his emotional turmoil at losing Heaven, only to see a creature of dirt replace him as God's focus. From a Catholic perspective, one of the faults of Milton is that his anthropomorphism of the devil is almost too convincing, making Satan appear as a tragic, almost pathetic figure, rather than the merciless deceiver that he is. That is not to say that Milton portrays the devil in a positive frame, but attempts to offer reasons of insecurity, envy and self-righteous hostility for Satan's path of destruction; all too human traits, as many readers will find disconcerting.

As some have noted, while one's grasp and love of the English language should improve at the behest of Milton's poetry, it is unlikely that one will find any theological inspiration from this work. Heresies abound in Paradise Lost; hardly surprising due to the unorthodox religious convictions of Milton. Without condoning such-in my conviction-wicked ideas, one should attempt to read Milton, not as a theological treatise or an attempt to historically describe the Fall, but as a courageous attempt to venture into the midst of the spiritual, the power of emotion and the capability of both unto despair.

A classic which all will do well to read.

John Milton's "Paradise Lost" is a timeless classic. It's imagery, based itself upon 1500 years of previous Christian-cultural imagery, has shaped how the Western world views Christianity, sin, the fall, life, death, heaven, and hell.

The open-minded non-Christian reader would do well to read "Paradise Lost" to become a literate student of Christian imagery. The Christian, willing to work through the descriptive poetry, will gain new insight into Creation, Fall, and Redemption. In many ways, Milton bridges eras (the Middle Ages and the Reformation), cultures (Southern Europe and Northern), and religious groups (Catholic and Protestant).

It's interesting how much "folk theology" owes itself to Milton's "Paradise Lost." Modern views of the Devil, in particular, are often unknowingly based upon the poetic images from Milton. Fortunately, Milton is at his best in describing Satan, first as the unfallen Lucifer with all his glorious, God-created brilliance, and then as the fallen False Seducer in all his distorted and tormenting deceit.

For example, Milton speaks of how revenge, dark requital, propelled Satan's monstrous motives:

To waste his whole Creation, or possess all as our own, and drive as we were driven, the puny habitants, or if not drive, seduce them to our Party, that their God may prove their foe, and with repenting hand abolish his own works. This would surpass common revenge, and interrupt his joy in our confusion and our joy upraise in his disturbance; when his darling Sons hurled headlong to partake with us, shall curse their frail Original, and faded bliss, faded so soon (Milton, Paradise Lost, p. 40).

Surpassing common revenge, Satan lives to spite the Author of life.

By Satan, and in part proposed: for whence, but from the Author of all ill could spring so deep a malice, to confound the race of mankind in one root, and Earth with Hell to mingle and involve, done all to spite the great Creator? (Milton, Paradise Lost, p. 41).

Milton's depiction of the temptation in the Garden displays psychological brilliance and biblical insight into the nature of the human personality as designed by God and depraved by sin. Perhaps only C. S. Lewis' "Screwtape Letters" matches Milton's understanding of Satanic seduction.

For instance, so whose fault their fall? Milton, imagining God's words to Christ, declares:

For man will hearken to his glozing lies, and easily transgress the sole Command, sole pledge of his obedience. So will fall he and his faithless Progeny. Whose fault? Whose but his own? Ingrate, he had of me all he could have; I made him just and right, sufficient to have stood, though free to fall (Milton, Paradise Lost, p. 63).

Well put. Sufficient to have stood, though free to fall. Made just and right and able to choose. Adam and Eve had all they could have from the generous hand of God, yet they transgressed the sole command, the sole pledge of loving, trustful obedience. Loving allegiance they chose to grant to non-god rather than to Father God.

Whatever could possess them to trade their birthright for one bite of the one forbidden fruit? When we last spied earth's Villain, he was tumbling toward hell. Having lost the battle for heaven, his hostility and hate triggers a new plan. Why a second siege on heaven's gates, when earth's shores suggest easier prey? As Milton envisioned it:

Nor will occasion want, nor shall we need with dangerous expedition to invade Heaven, whose high walls fear no assault or siege, or ambush from the Deep. What if we find some easier enterprise? There is a place (if ancient and prophetic fame in Heaven err not), another World, the happy seat of some new Race called Man, about this time to be created like to us, though less in power and excellence, but favored more of him who rules above. So was his will pronounced among the Gods, and by an oath, that shook Heaven's whole circumference, confirmed (Milton, Paradise Lost, pp. 39-40).

Readers also could benefit from his less known work, "Paradise Regained." Many have mentioned how difficult it is to write a riveting book about Heaven since the drama of evil is defeated and thus the tension is deflated. Yet Milton captures one possible vision of a future Paradise/Heaven as well as most. (Randy Alcorn's book "Heaven" is, in my opinion, the best modern book on the topic).

This book took an item we take for granted today, salt, and discussed its history. Some have criticized the author for including so many recipes. I disagree. Salt is used in cooking after all, and to put salt into a proper context we need to witness how it was used.

I enjoyed how the author wove the various aspects of the salt trade into a coherent history. For instance, that salt was so important in wartime never struck me before, though it seems obvious now.

A good, hard to put down read, Salt: A World History is a good book for people who like history, economics or the culinary arts.

Remembering 2nd semester of Western Civ with a dynamic prof who loved to use the "spectrum of history" to link events...food, religion, war, hobbies, work. That is how this book is read and you must eat the whole salty pretzel to get the flavor. You must try not to quibble with a few sweeping generalizations and dwell on the great facts that link this history together. A great prequel or sequel to "COD"

well written and fun

Man, this didn't work at all for me. Here's why:

- It zipped past the ancient history (which is what I like) and spent most of its time on European and (white) American history (which I usually already know and don't care about anyway).

- You know how in college you would find some weird tangent to write your paper on so it would seem somewhat original? This book feels like a whole bunch of those essays. I get it, salt was important, but it still feels forced sometimes.

- After a while, you start to get that dreaded "I'm reading history" feeling, where it all starts to look like a list of names and dates. It's totally possible to write history without writing lists; I just don't think this book pulled it off.

Here's the impression I came away from this book with: "15th-century Germans really liked salt. Here's how they made it. You know who else liked salt? 16th-century French people. Here's a recipe that uses salt. Guess who else liked salt?" Ad infinitum.

Meh.

This book is a relatively light look at how SALT has played a major roll in shaping our world and even the very language we use. The author has deeply researched the subject, compiling a very quick and fun read. While some of the historical ties might be overstated in parts, the roll of SALT really is undeniably important to both human survival and our culture.

One unexpected benefit of reading this book is that you can be the only "expert" on SALT around almost any table, a great way to fill those awkward long silences at company gatherings :-) I also recommend Cod: A Biography of the Fish That Changed the World for the same reasons.

Recommended!

This book earned me the UberDork rating from anyone I told about it, but they are the ones who missed out. The writing is clear and makes for fun snippet reading. (Got 10 minutes? Pick it up!) The useless but fun facts mentioned by another reviewer are a big part of what kept me reading, but I have to admit that the real attraction was how Kurlansky connected salt to so many locations through the centuries. I disagree that SALT wasn't organized; it simply takes a "global" approach, something which many people can't appreciate because they perceive history as a linear concept. Linear history is neat and clean, but misses the point that events evolve, appear and disappear no matter where you drop in on the so-called "timeline". It is more a bubbling stew than a piece of string, in my estimation, and explains the "repetitiveness" mentioned in other reviews. SALT has the kind of circular information that comes in so handy for teaching History, which I happen to do. It is also great for getting a deeper understanding in the broad sense of how something we take for granted is integral to how humanity developed. Yes, very geekish on the one hand, but on the other...cool information to annoy your friends with. Read SALT and consider its curious, circuitous route to your mouth.

great condition thanks

Photography: A Cultural History

An exellent source. The price was unbeatable. At school a smaller version of this book was over $100 and I paid less than $50for a more complete book!

This text was hardcover and gorgeous.. and over 1/2 off what the bookstore at my school was selling it for.. Thank you

I found photography a Cultural History a very hard to read book. The author seems to jump from subject to subject and from photographer to photographer without any cohesive meaning. The chapters get harder to read as you move towards the later chapters, unfortunately. I don't see what is the sense to mentioning what a photogrpher did or said in a 2 or 3 sentence paragraph, then jump to another photographer and do the same, then jump to another one and do the same and so on and so on. Also, why is the photographers years of existence printed next to each photographers name in parenthesis ? This only makes the book even harder to read. I bought the book because I'm a photography student and the book is mandatory for one of the required courses, but if it was up to me, I would rather use and purchase "The History of Photography" written By Beaumont Newhall even though it is out of date. This was the book originally used in the past, but a few years ago allot of schools decided to switch to the Warner Marien book which I think was a big mistake.

i had to buy this for class, and for once it isn't a "textbook" ! finally an art textbook that doubles as a coffee table book, and one you can read. very good text - easy, and not too "academic." highly recommend.

Sure, he goes overboard from time to time in linking his critiques to travesties to which they were not directly connected. Still, several chapters in this text serve well as introductions to how social sciences have donned the mask of objectivity and presented their findings as hard science when their conclusions were already guaranteed by their methodologies.

This is the best book I have read reviewing the source of the atheist momentum that recently has resulted in a rash of atheistic books on the market. This book traces the source of thinking over the past, leading up to why atheist want to rule God out of our thinking. This book will give any Christian the reason why their faith is important to the world-at-large, and give you the impetus to tell the story that relates the most to the reality of what has happen in the world to date. The assumptions and philosophy of atheists just do not hold water under the microscope of true logical thought. The questions of who we are and why we are here are not answered properly, unless you assume a creator God as a cause.

Overall, this book has value. Most of its pages I enjoyed, but it is a bit thin in my mind. The text is pretty interesting if you're a person who hasn't read the 15 books that it covers; although, you can glean a good amount from Wiker's analysis. My only serious reservation here is that such a work needs to be about 400 pages long rather than just over 200. I think the author's perceptions are strongest in Chapters Five, Nine, Eleven, and Fourteen where Wiker compellingly dissects and destructs the works of Marx, Lenin, Hitler, and Margaret Mead. As a matter of fact, one could easily devote 100 pages to each of these individuals and I wish more authors would (on a daily basis, lol). I also appreciated his analysis of Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan. I've never read it myself...and now probably never will. It's helpful though for libertarians who incessantly use the word to describe the state. However, I strongly disagreed with some of his contentions. I do not think of Machiavelli's The Prince as being a screw up. It tells us much of human nature which, of course, inherently contains the seeds of evil. Further, Sigmund Freud's The Nature of an Illusion is not reflective of his oeuvre and that the work had a major impact on our society is not clear. My religion professor assigned the text to us in college. He was a minister who gave us the book as a straw man which he could easily knock down. Most of my peers found its tenets totally unconvincing, but Wiker's is a worthy endeavor nonetheless.

If Dr. Wiker had included "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion", an
anti-semitic publication which was Hitler's favorite book, I would have given Dr. Wiker top marks for his interesting book.
The "Protocols", still popular in the Arab world, has led to many, many deaths and a vast array of anti-semitism. It is one of the most dangerous books around.

The author makes a valid point, in that the best way to respond to books containing "dangerous" ideas is to read them, study, them, know them backwards and forwards. So go read them, and give this peice of right-wing propaganda a miss.

The author is obviously well educated, but like the authors he criticises, he shapes his arguments to fit his pre-established views (biblical ideology in his case) instead of evaluating the arguments of others on their merits.

I will give you one small example. Darwin's "Descent of man". Infected with victorian era notions of race it may be, but the fundamental concept, that by protecting the weak, we risk weakening the species, is clearly, inarguably, un-flinchingly true (Your reviewer is a perfect example, I could not possibly fend for myself in the wild without corrective eye-ware).

However, the author does not want to accept this truth--indeed assumes his audience to see it as absurd, so he attempts to use it to refute Darwin's broader contribution to the world (bringing a realistic view of ecologic change into the light) and to equate Darwin with Hitler and Stalin. It is quite true that both these men fashioned them selves "social darwinists", but the truth is, they were evil not because they promoted eugenics, but because they used the cause of eugenics as a tool of political evil.

I doubt very seriously that many people would argue against preventing sociopathic killers from breeding in large numbers (if sociopathy were known to have a clear genetic root). And it doesn't take a genius to see that a more "fit" nation (either physically fit, or technologically or economically fit, although eventually these become interrelated) can destroy a less fit nation. The problem with Hitler is not that he wanted to "improve the race" but that he wanted to decide what constitutes fitness, and make the decision hinge on absurdities like religious affiliation or ethnic origin.

We humans are eventually going to be forced to confront our own evolution. Darwin was, in fact, correct. But sadly for Darwin, things are not as simple as Victorian's thought. The genes that helped us survive the ice age now make us fat, the left handeness that got some of us persecuted in the past may (for all we know) yet be our salvation in some unforeseeable way. And the "negros" and caucasians and "australians" far from representing a scale of fitness or primitiveness, are in fact each the most fit for their local environment (cheifly with regard to the directess of sunlight at different latitudes).

But the author ignores the reality of this, and merely casts his villians in simple form. Hitler was evil, so Darwin's ideas are evil. Yet, the ideas in the Cristian Bible have caused more horror and suffering than the third rieche ever could. It was defence of the Bible, after all, that gave us both cruesades and the dark ages, and while one can argu that we heathen atheistic modern folk make ourselves miserable in our pursuit of material gain, we most certainly are not as miserable as the rank and file who lived under the thumb of the church during the biggest chunk of recorded history.

So I say, ignore this book until the decides to play fairly and include the Bible on his hit list. Forget this little book and go read the ten he denegrates. Some of them are truely inspired by evil, if anything can be said to embody evil, but reading them and debating them with the fair and open-minded will do far more to improve the world and our lot in it than the smug, right-wing anti-intellectualism indulged in by this author.