Used price: $175.00
Collectible price: $15.88
Used price: $8.47
Collectible price: $9.95
Peter Gay is one of our preeminent authorities about cultural history, and professionals historians in all fields can learn much from both the substance and style of his oeuvre. In particular, this thin book, principally essays about the style of four renowned historians of earlier times - Edward Gibbon (1737-94), Leopold von Ranke (1795-1886), Thomas Babington Macaulay (1800-59), and Jacob Burckhardt (1818-97) - is a treasury of observations about the historian's craft. According to Gay, "style" means both the literary devices employed by the historian, as well as his or her "tone of voice." Gay addresses both, and more, while cautioning that the historian is "under pressure to become a stylist while remaining a scientist."
The back cover states that this book is a "guide to the proper reading of Gibbon, Ranke, Macaulay, and Burckhardt," but I found it more descriptive than prescriptive. Indeed, Gay expressly intended these essays to stimulate "debate over the definition of history." According to Gay, style is a function of both nature and nurture. It is "in part a gift of talent," but it also can be learned. For the aspiring historian who looks to Gay's four masters for guidance, many of his observations are profound. For instance, in discussing the belief of both Gibbon and Tacitus, the Roman historian who was one of Gibbon's principal sources, that "the supreme task of the historian [is] to probe historical actors to their depth," Gay concludes: "The chief use of the historian's penetration...[is] to dig beneath appearance to reality." Gay reports that Gibbon imagined himself, like Tacitus, to be a philosophical historian. (Gibbon believed that "the philosopher is a man who has conquered prejudices and given the critical spirit free play.") With regard to style, Gibbon employed a large arsenal of literary device, and Gay praises him for using irony, observing that, in Gibbon's writing, "gravity and levity coexisted without strain." Gay describes as "stunning" the economy with which Ranke wrote and praises his gifts of "speed, color, variety, freshness of diction, and superb control." According to Gay, Ranke believed that "self-imposed discipline alone brings excellence to all art." For instance, the one-sentence paragraph was one of Ranke's trademarks. Ranke is often credited with being the father of "scientific history," but, as Gay notes, Ranke approached his craft "as a branch of the storytelling art." In championing scientific history, Ranke extolled "the systematizing of research, the withdrawal of ego from presentation, the unremitting effort of objectivity, the submission of results to critical public scrutiny." Indeed, according to Gay: "Ranke's contribution to historical science...lay in his exalted view of documents." Furthermore, Gay offers the insight that Ranke "recognized that history is a progressive discipline." Ranke claimed "his own work was superior to that of his predecessors," but he also recognized that his greatest achievements eventually would be superseded by more modern scholarship. In contrast to Ranke's economic style, Gay subtitles his chapter on Macaulay "Intellectual Voluptuary" (borrowing the phrase from Macaulay, himself). Gay reports that Macaulay has been criticized as "verbose, artificial, and overemphatic," and Gay acknowledges other faults including "rhetorical self-indulgence," and "a failure of restraint and of taste." But these criticisms did not prevent Macaulay from becoming a member of "England's intellectual aristocracy." According to Gay, expansiveness and anxiety were the "essential qualities that make up Macaulay's temper and inform Macaulay's style." In discussing Burckhardt, Gay notes that the "historian's choice of subject...is a deeply emotional affair." According to Gay, in Burckhardt's masterpiece, The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy, his "personal voice is...highly audible and wholly apologetic," and his judgments are "cool." Gay notes that The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy is a "work of diligent research and meticulous construction." Burckhardt's used irony sparingly in comparison with Gbbon, but Burckhardt's the section entitled "The State as a Work of Art," is, as Gay observes correctly, in fact "an animated chamber of horrors." For Burckhardt, Gay concludes: "Style...is the bridge to substance." To Burckhardt, according to Gay, poetry and history - as art and science - are "allies, almost inseparable twins."
This book is not, strictly speaking, comparative intellectual biography, but are there any similarities in the subjects of Gay's essays? Gay defines "modern times" as beginning in the 1890s, and, of the four historians whose style he studies, three - Gibbon, Ranke, and Macaulay - died in the pre-modern era, and Burckhardt survived only into its first decade. In addition, I must raise one additional issue: Gibbon, Macaulay, and Burckhardt were lifelong bachelors, and Ranke did not marry until he was 48. Are we to view this as mere coincidence? I don't think so. As the author of a superb biography of Sigmund Freud, I am surprised that Gay did not devote at least a few lines of insight, in addition to his remark that Gibbon sought to hide a "professional bachelor's conflicts," to the tantalizing fact that three of the four great historian-stylists he studies never married and the other was well into middle age when he did so. Gay clearly believes that style matters in the writing of history, but I believe at least one succinct rule is clear: When in doubt, leave the stylistic flourish out. This leads me to this point: I cannot recommend Gay more enthusiastically because he is both a great historian and a wonderful stylist, which is remarkable for the fact that German, not English, was his native language. As an introduction to his writings, I suggest Gay's My German Question : Growing Up in Nazi Berlin, in which moments of humor leaven penetrating personal recollections of coming of age early in the era of Hitler's tyranny. After Gay's memoirs, the general reader may want to tackle some of his scholarly books, such as the biographies of Mozart and Freud, his superb studies of the Enlightenment, or this wonderful book, Style in History. And a few may even be motivated to read (or re-read) Gibbon, Ranke, Macaulay, and Burckhardt.
Used price: $18.78
Buy one from zShops for: $18.68
Used price: $11.75
List price: $21.50 (that's 30% off!)
Used price: $13.00
Collectible price: $17.50
Buy one from zShops for: $12.00
This is, as far as I know, the first attempt by a psychiatric professional to write a life of Lawrence. So much about Lawrence's personality - his illegitimacy, his craving for anonymity after the war even as he contrarily managed to worm his way into the spotlight so many times, his name change ostensibly in honor of G.B. Shaw, and probably most of all his experience at Deraa, made him an object of general interest, not to say lurid speculation. Lawrence, with his usual flair, manages to give us enough about his interior life in "Seven Pillars" to pique our interest without actually telling us anything.
While I must admit that I enjoyed the book, I must also say that I walked away from it feeling that I did not know any more about Lawrence after finishing it than I did before. The author covers a great deal of terrain, but I think that we're all not any closer to understanding Lawrence. Maybe the definitive biography is still waiting to be written. Maybe it never will be.
If you saw the movie, read this book.
Used price: $6.00
Collectible price: $21.18
Buy one from zShops for: $13.79
As one who fell asleep while trying to watch "Inherit the Wind," I find the truth far more rivetting. The bredth of the defense team.. and the strong convictions and performances of Arthur Garfield Hays and Dudley Field Moore are entirely bypassed in popular history.
The only fault with the work is Larson's apparent effort to be so objective that no one is offended. This causes him to refrain from defending Darrow from years of attacks for his "cross-examination" (outside the presence of the jury and ultimately stricken from the record) of Bryan. The prosecution-- and Bryan in particular-- had promised/threatened/guaranteed a showdown.. to prove that evolution was false, especially if one accepts a literal reading of the bible. The reason Bryan was called to the stand and Darrow was able to question him as he did without the jury present is because the PROSECUTION changed strategies. Unable to find a single competent scientist to support its view, the prosecution was forced to argue against Malone's efforts to show that christianity and evolution were compatable. By keeping out the evidence of the defense's religious and scientific experts, the only defense left was to demostrate the absurdity of Bryan particular views. Though Darrow no doubt enjoyed it, his treatment of Bryan was the third line of defense, not the first.
The manipulation of the facts surrounding Scopes and a rise in the number of so-called scientists pushing creationism demonstrates that, in spite of our supposed rapid intellectual growth as a nation, there are more individuals than ever willing to say, do, or believe whatever will give them control, power, or money. It is a shame that after more than 75 years, Bryan would today have no trouble finding an "expert" witness.
The truth is nothing like that happy story. What you're thinking of is the plot of Inheirit the Wind, a second-rate movie that used the Scopes trial to dramatize the McCarthy hearings. Spencer Tracy and Gene Kelley weren't in Dayton for the trial, and what really happened was far from black and white.
But in the hands of Edward Larson, it's also far more interesting. Larson's book, Summer for the Gods is a brialliantly reasoned look at what led to the trial, the trial itself, and its continuing impact on society. (Okay, on American society ... but it's still interesting.) Larson manages a tremendously difficult task: he manages to be unbiased and dispassionate without becoming dull. And he walks the line masterfully. There were times when I couldn't honestly say whose "side" Larson was on ... which is kind of the point. I read a lot of history, and it's very seldom I come across something that's so even-handed. Which would be a triumph in itself, even if it weren't so darn readable. For the rest of the review, visit my web page at exn.net/printedmatter
As I read I found myself marveling at how Larson so richly captures the cultural forces coming together like tectonic plates and crashing into the Scopes trial. I haven't seen as fair a treatment of the issues involved for all the varying parties (there were many more self-interested folks than Darrow and Bryan) on any other subject. To have that time before the trial captured in such a beautiful way is very valuable.
As others have noted, the notion of the trial started as a publicity stunt to promote the hard luck town of Dayton, TN. The ACLU wanted a narrowly defined test case to overturn the laws forbidding the teaching of evolution. Darrow and his crowd wanted to attack religion more than work out the civil liberties issues involved, Bryan cared more about the rights of the parents as taxpayers to control what their children were taught. Remember, universal public education was still a rather new thing in 1925 and parents then, as now, want to have the education support them in raising their children. The education establishment then, as now, feels a responsibility to teach what they think best.
Bryan and many others were also concerned about the political uses to which evolution had recently been put in the name of survival of the fittest. It isn't a simple issue and shouldn't be turned into a cartoon. Especially since we are in some ways still grappling with these issues.
Yes, Bryan was also a Fundamentalist (although some were more Fundamental than him because he didn't insist on the strict 6 days of 24 hours for the Creation), but imposing that belief wasn't his goal.
Clarifying the truth of the trial versus the popular perceptions in our culture provided by "Only Yesterday" and "Inherit the Wind" is a very valuable service provided by this book. However, the culture seems to want the oversimplification and distortions of "Inherit the Wind" more than the truth of Scopes being a willing participant in a test case more or less on a lark. Or that Scopes never really "taught" evolution. He had used the textbook provided to him by the school and it discussed evolution, but he may never have gotten to that section since he wasn't the regular biology teacher. He taught physics, math, and football and was substituting in the biology class.
The book has a number of very nice pictures that also help capture the period of the trial and the characters involved.
One especially small quibble is that the book does not address the difference between the anti-clerical activities in Great Britain and their political nature because of the state power of the Church and the anti-clerical activities in the United States that were really anti-religion. In fact, a great deal of the fundamentalist backlash against evolution came out of this anti-religion sentiment.
I think it a reasonable view to say that most of the reaction against evolution wasn't from a considered rejection of the theory, but a reaction against being attacked by those who wanted to free America of religion. We didn't have a state church, although most in power were also believers (or publicly posed as believers). The anti-clerical movement was transplanted but to somewhat different effect here than in Europe where evolution was not seen as necessarily inconsistent with Faith (as it has become to be viewed here). But this is a trivial point compared to many wonderful insights this book provides.
List price: $14.00 (that's 20% off!)
Used price: $3.35
Buy one from zShops for: $9.00
A personal selection of well translated material from a real scholar.
It is hard to avoid going back to particular sections for pleasure and reference again and again.
Used price: $0.87
Used price: $7.95
Eight copies of Seven Pillars of Wisdom were published by Oxford in 1922 (six still exist). The first limited edition was followed in 1926 with the private publication of 211 copies of the book. In 1935 another limited run was published. But the same year, Seven Pillars was reprinted at least four more times. Now, there have probably been dozens, if not hundreds of printings.
This work assured T. E. Lawrence a place in history as 'Lawrence of Arabia'. It is a military history, colorful epic and lyrical exploration of Lawrence's mind.
Nevertheless, it is largely fiction. Fromkin writes that when poet and scholar Robert Graves proposed to describe the liberation of Damascus in a biography of Lawrence, the subject himself warned Graves, "I was on thin ice when I wrote the Damascus chapter...."
A onetime junior officer in the Cairo Arab Bureau, Lawrence admitted that Seven Pillars of Wisdom included a false tale of Arab bravery to aggrandize the followers of Sharif Hussein of Mecca and his son Feisal. Indeed, as early as 1918, reputable newsmen reported that the Australian Light Horse division liberated Damascus from Ottoman control, not Feisal's Arab troops, who marched in afterwards, for show.
By 1921, Fromkin writes, Winston Churchill was in charge of Britain's Arab policy in Mesopotamia and tapped John Evelyn Shuckburgh to head a new Middle East department and Foreign Office man Hubert Winthrop Young to assist him. They arranged transport and supplies for Feisal's Arab army, earning hearty endorsement from Churchill's Masterson Smith committee, which simultaneously took grave exception to T.E. Lawrence as a proposed Arab affairs adviser. The committee considered Lawrence "not the kind of man fit to easily fit into any official machine."
Fromkin reports that Lawrence was frequently insubordinate, went over his superiors and in 1920 publicly disparaged Britain's Arab policy in the London Sunday Times as being "worse than the Turkish system." He also accused Britain of killing "a yearly average of 100 Arabs to maintain peace." This was of course untrue.
Efraim and Inari Karsh write, in Empires of the Sand, that Lawrence's Damascus victory was "less heroic" than he pretended. Feisal was "engaged in an unabashed exercise in duplicity and none knew this better than Lawrence, who whole heartedly endorsed this illicit adventure and kept most of its contours hidden from his own superiors." Yet Lawrence basked in the limelight Thomas created in London, attending at least five of the showman journalist's lectures.
As an unfortunate result of Lawrence's subterfuge, he had a large hand in shaping the modern Middle East.
Bad enough, we suffer to this day the consequences of Lawrence's fabrications.
Worse, a new generation of readers seems to accept as gospel the Lawrence of Arabia myth that stemmed from Lowell Thomas' hype and Lawrence's own Seven Pillars of Wisdom. While few seem to know it, this was long ago debunked. Those who want to know what really happened should at minimum also consult Fromkin's A Peace to End All Peace and the Karsh's Empires of the Sand.
--Alyssa A. Lappen
Equally fascinating is the book itself. A blend of truth and evasion, the book is told in a beautiful lazy style that suggests it had been thought out with the vast Arabian desert and ancient way of life in mind. It is helpful to have read another account of Lawrence's life, just to be sure of what is happening when he chooses to be vague, but the beauty of the writing and the insight of the keen intelligence from which it springs, is a great delight to experience.
Even more amazing is to realize that after this monumental book was completed, Lawrence left the complete manuscript - the only copy - on the London subway and had to recreate it from scratch using just his notes. This is a remarkable testiment to both his focus when he needed it, and his tendency to be frequently apart from the real world. A remarkable man. A remarkable book. Unique and worthy to be read and enjoyed.