As noted by other reviewers, this reading of Hegel is a post-Nietzsche, post-Marx, post-Heidegger one (meaning it incorporates or synthesizes these post-Hegel, though influenced-by-Hegel, strains of thought). It is therefore scorned by some Hegel 'purists' like Mr. Trejo below. However, having read quite a few commentaries on and interpretations of the Phenomenology I can say that this one is the most well-written, in the sense that it illuminates some very difficult Hegelian concepts (like "Spirit" itself) in a searingly direct manner. I have also never read another writer so convincing in their argument as to Hegel's essential rightness in his description of the Concept which brings closure to the riddle of Western metaphysics.

I would agree with the 'purists' in not taking this book as the 'definitive' interpretation of Hegel - it can't excuse not reading Hegel in the original, or other commentaries - but I would call it essential within the spectrum of Hegelian thought.

Interestingly, this book shows Hegel, though famously critical of Kant, to be essentially the extender of the Kantian philosophy to it's logical conclusion which is the completion of the Concept of Experience, identified as Time itself (ZeitGeist). That is, Human Time as the Absolute Subject constructing itself rationally via reflection on it's Object-negating activity (creativity in transforming the given or present), not in the classical notion of a rational Time as existing somehow outside or independentaly of a Subject.

Kojeve's reading however, though convincing in it's demonstration of anthropologically necessary development toward Hegelian 'harmony' between Subject and Object, leaves out Hegel's attempt at the absolute identity of the Object itself. This can be read in two ways that Kojeve touches on. First, in the truer-to-Hegel sense that the Object is necessarily different from the Subject to ensure the ability of the Subject to realize itself as Self, as free Subject of Object-negating, creative, activity. Another way to read this is as simply Kojeve's dismissal of Hegel's Philosophy of Nature and it's more cosmic attempt at spiritualizing the notion of matter. Either way, as many Hegel commentator's have noted, one is left, though certainly further enlightened as to the nature of subjectivity, with a sense that there is still something 'out there' and unknown, ala Kant's 'thing-in-itself'. This can be understood as the Heidegger-influenced side of Kojeve's reading.

My own conclusion at the moment is that both Hegel and the existentialist school following him ala Heidegger and Kojeve can be understood as essentially philosophers of subjectivity in the Western tradition who have exhausted the questioning of the Self about it's nature. As our great contemporary philosopher in the Continental tradtion Jurgen Habermas has noted, it's high time to move beyond the philosophy of the monological subject. For fresh thinking in this area and where to pick up the pieces after Hegel, Heidegger, Kojeve, etc. (rather than taking the nihilistic road of 'post-modernism') I highly recommend Habermas's _The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity_. Habermas as successor to this line of thought is convincingly stated in the opening chapter "Modernity's Consciousness of Time and It's Need For Self-Reassurance" and in his call for moving on to a paradigm of "Intersubjectivity" and Reason understood anew as Communicative Action.

As noted by other reviewers, this reading of Hegel is a post-Nietzsche, post-Marx, post-Heidegger one (meaning it incorporates or synthesizes these post-Hegel, though influenced-by-Hegel, strains of thought). It is therefore scorned by some Hegel 'purists' like Mr. Trejo below. However, having read quite a few commentaries on and interpretations of the Phenomenology I can say that this one is the most well-written, in the sense that it illuminates some very difficult Hegelian concepts (like "Spirit" or Geist itself) in a searingly direct manner. I have also never read another writer so convincing in their argument as to Hegel's essential rightness in his description of the Concept which brings closure to the riddle of Western metaphysics.

I would agree with the 'purists' in not taking this book as the 'definitive' interpretation of Hegel - it can't excuse not reading Hegel in the original, or other commentaries - but I would call it essential within the spectrum of Hegelian thought.

Interestingly, this book shows Hegel, though famously critical of Kant, to be essentially the extender of the Kantian philosophy to it's logical conclusion which is the completion of the Concept of Experience, identified as Time itself (ZeitGeist). That is, Human Time, initiated by Human Desire, as the Absolute Subject constructing itself rationally via reflection on it's Object-negating activity or creativity, not in the classical notion of a rational Time as existing somehow outside or independently of a Subject).

Kojeve's reading however, though convincing in it's demonstration of anthropologically necessary Historical development toward Hegelian 'harmony' between Subject and Object, leaves out Hegel's attempt at the absolute identity of the Object itself. This can be read in two ways that Kojeve touches on. First, in the truer-to-Hegel sense that the Object is necessarily different from the Subject to ensure the ability of the Subject to realize itself as Self, as free Subject of Object-negating, creative, activity. Another way to read this is as simply Kojeve's dismissal of Hegel's Philosophy of Nature and it's more cosmic attempt at spiritualizing the notion of matter. Either way, as many Hegel commentator's have noted, one is left, though certainly further enlightened as to the nature of subjectivity, with a sense that there is still something 'out there' and unknown, ala Kant's 'thing-in-itself'. This can be understood as the Heidegger-influenced side of Kojeve's reading.

My own conclusion at the moment is that both Hegel and the existentialist school following him ala Heidegger and Kojeve can be understood as essentially philosophers of subjectivity in the Western tradition who have rationally illuminated, but also exhausted the questioning of the Self about it's nature. As our great contemporary philosopher in the Continental tradtion Jurgen Habermas has noted, it's high time to move beyond the philosophy of monological subjectivity. For fresh thinking in this area and where to pick up the pieces after Hegel, Heidegger, Kojeve, etc. (rather than taking the nihilistic road of 'post-modernism') I highly recommend Habermas's _The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity_. Habermas as successor to this line of thought is convincingly stated in the opening chapter "Modernity's Consciousness of Time and It's Need For Self-Reassurance" and in his call for moving on to a paradigm of "Intersubjectivity" and Reason understood anew as Communicative Action.

As noted by other reviewers, this reading of Hegel is a post-Nietzsche, post-Marx, post-Heidegger one (meaning it incorporates or synthesizes these post-Hegel, though influenced-by-Hegel, strains of thought). It is therefore scorned by some Hegel 'purists' like Mr. Trejo below. However, having read quite a few commentaries on and interpretations of the Phenomenology I can say that this one is the most well-written, in the sense that it illuminates some very difficult Hegelian concepts (like "Spirit" itself) in a searingly direct manner. I have also never read another writer so convincing in their argument as to Hegel's essential rightness in his description of the Concept which brings closure to the riddle of Western metaphysics.

I would agree with the 'purists' in not taking this book as the 'definitive' interpretation of Hegel - it can't excuse not reading Hegel in the original, or other commentaries - but I would call it essential within the spectrum of Hegelian thought.

Interestingly, this book shows Hegel, though famously critical of Kant, to be essentially the extender of the Kantian philosophy to it's logical conclusion which is the completion of the Concept of Experience, identified as Time itself (ZeitGeist). That is, Human Time, initiated by the emergence of specifically Human Desires (i.e.; for recognition), as the Absolute Subject which constructs itself rationally via reflection on it's Object-negating or given-negating activity or creativity, not in the classical notion of a rational Time as existing somehow outside or independently of a Subject).

Kojeve's reading however, though convincing in it's demonstration of anthropologically necessary Historical development toward Hegelian 'harmony' between the Subject and it's Object, leaves out Hegel's attempt at the absolute identity of the Object itself. This can be read in two ways that Kojeve touches on. First, in the truer-to-Hegel sense that the Object is necessarily different from the Subject to ensure the ability of the Subject to realize itself as Self, as free Subject of Object-negating, creative, activity. Another way to read this is as simply Kojeve's dismissal of Hegel's Philosophy of Nature and it's more cosmic attempt at spiritualizing the notion of matter. Either way, as many Hegel commentator's have noted, one is left, though undoubtedly further enlightened regarding the nature of subjectivity, with a sense that there is still something 'out there' and unknown, ala Kant's 'thing-in-itself'. This can be understood as the Heidegger-influenced side of Kojeve's reading.

My own conclusion at the moment is that both Hegel and the existentialist school following him ala Heidegger and Kojeve can be understood as essentially philosophers of subjectivity in the Western tradition who have rationally illuminated, but also thoroughly exhausted the questioning of the Self about it's nature. As our great contemporary philosopher in the Continental tradtion Jurgen Habermas has noted, it's high time to move beyond the philosophy of monological subjectivity. For fresh thinking in this area and where to pick up the pieces after Hegel, Heidegger, Kojeve, etc. (rather than taking the nihilistic road of 'post-modernism') I highly recommend Habermas's _The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity_. Habermas as successor to this line of thought is convincingly stated in the opening chapter "Modernity's Consciousness of Time and It's Need For Self-Reassurance" and in his call for moving on to a paradigm of "Intersubjectivity" and Reason understood anew as Communicative Action.

This is (hopefully) an accurate factual portrayal of a fascinating individual. The author is clearly not sympathetic to his subject's world view, yet he mostly refrains from editorializing.

Indeed, the presentation is so dry and lifeless, the reader never gets much of a sense of the Savitri Devi as a person. Also, the author does a rather mediocre job of presenting the necessary background on Hindu nationalism and Devi's contributions to that cause.

But the author deserves credit for tackling the biography of such a politically incorrect figure.

A very well written book about the women who believed in Hitler worship. The only problem I have with the book is Devi, like Yockey, is not as important to the movement as the author claims. I've been in the movement for 25 years and can only name a few people who follow her teachings. A very few. Other than that it's great.

A Jewish journalist once observed that when writing about Nazism, objectivity is regarded with suspicion and writers feel obliged to pile on the invective. Just see some of the editorial reviews above. This makes it all the more remarkable that Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke has written such a balanced book on Savitri Devi, who taught that we should love all God's creatures--except Jews. Although the author makes it clear that he does not share Devi's views, he lets her speak for herself, and he actually passes silently over some of her more unattractive and fanatical statements, which would surely be insuperable barriers to otherwise open-minded readers.

I have only two objections to this book. First, the author does not adequately discuss Devi's deep philosophical debt to Nietzsche, who provides the framework for her interpretations of Akhnaton and Hinduism and makes possible their synthesis with National Socialism. Second, he never really captures Devi's unique and powerful personality--with its wild extremes of sentimentality and savagery, cold logic and enthusiastic rapture, love of cats and hatred for most human beings--which is stamped on all of her writings. It is her personality as much as her ideas that contributes to the haunting effect that she has on so many readers.

Devi has already influenced the world we live in today--far more for her work on behalf of Hindu nationalism than National Socialism. This influence will only increase as global capitalism continues to ravage the natural world and homogenize the cultural world, thereby drawing new people to the deep-ecological rejection of anthropocentrism and to the politics of difference. This is a wonderful book. Read it, and the world will seem a richer and stranger place.

I collect and have read hundreds of books about the Marine Corps and have long considered Eugene B. Sledge's WITH THE OLD BREED: at Peleliu and Okinawa as the finest book ever written about Marines in combat in any war.I consider it so because of his realistic no holds barred approach to the subject of which he is writing. The word pictures he chose to use to describe WWII certainly exposed a lot of brains, blood and bone. This realism is what makes his book a classic. PHASE LINE GREEN written by Nicholas Warr is as realistic a description of war as can be written. Warr's description of the brutal fighting in the street's of Hue during the Tet Offensive of 1968 are vivid, vicious and obscene. He recounts his experiences, mincing no words and sparing no pain. Simply and directly, this is how it was in the battle for Hue. He spares few in the telling, including himself. This book is a perfect definition for the word war. Nowhere will you find the courage, tenacity and bravery of Marines, or the unforgetable reality of combat better described. This book, in my opinion, is just as good as the one written by Sledge. Both books should be required reading for Marines or for anyone interested in military history. PHASE LINE GREEN should also be read by Robert McNamara, McGeorge Bundy and the other fools responsible for Vietnam and the rules of engagement that left men like Nicholas Warr so embittered.

As an English as Second Language person, I don't usually read any book other than books in Chinese. While looking for books to read for the school reading activity, I accidentally found Phase Line Green and got in touch with it. Just by looking at the short summary on the back of the book, I knew it would be a great book. Phase Line Green was very detailed on the date of the Vietnam War, landform, troops and other informations about Vietnam War. IT covers a lot information about the U.S. Marines during that time. Because of its very detailed story and well-expressed feelings and thoughts, sometimes you feel like it is you who was in the book and not Nicholas Warr. Overall, it's an excellent non-fiction story about Vietnam War and is the best english non-fiction book I had read. Therefore, I recommend this book to every one, no matter how old you are. It's easy to read so don't let a part of history slip out of your hand.

I have read more than a hundred books on the Vietnam war. I found this one to be the best. I'm astonished how any one could give less than five stars. I found his honesty refreshing. His integrity as top notch. The book is a must read for anyone who wants the dirty truth of how political correctness can be more important than mens lives. The micromanagement that lead to the the failure of the entire Vietnam war is made plain and clear by Mr Warr. I can understand how Mr Warr received a carthsis effect by writing this book. He does us all an honor by sharing the truth with us. I beleive he deserves a silver star for telling the truth. I shall read this book again and again.

The seventh of Dorothy Dunnett's eight book House of Niccolo series is Caprice and Rondo. The Niccolo books have never engaged me quite as thoroughly as her earlier series The Lymond Chronicles did. Those are among my very favorite historical novels ever. The Niccolo novels are good, but I have tended to find them a bit harder to follow. However, in the particular case of Caprice and Rondo, I was able to follow the action quite readily. Perhaps as the series comes to a conclusion the answers to the many mysteries are becoming clear.

This book opens with Nicholas in Poland. He's been kicked out of his company and exiled from Scotland and the Netherlands as a result of his actions in the last book. (This is another reason the Niccolo books are a bit harder to like: Nicholas does some pretty clearly bad stuff. Whenever Lymond seemed to be up to something bad, it turned out he was being misunderstood.) In Poland he spends a winter womanizing and drinking with the pirate Pauel Benecke, who wants him to join in a pirate mission the following summer. But Anselm Adorne, the upright burgomaster from Bruges who misunderstands Nicholas pretty comprehensively, and who stands in a role vaguely similar to Lymond's brother Richard Crawford in the Lymond books: a good man who tends to regard the hero as an enemy because he doesn't understand him, shows up on a mission to try to recover damages from an earlier piracy committed by Benecke. Also, Adorne and the Patriarch of Antioch, Ludovico da Bologna, intend to head to Tabriz to negotiate with the Persian Uzum Hasan for support against the Turks. (So far, every character I have mentioned except Nicholas is an actual historical character. Dunnett does this extravagantly, on occasion, I think, using characters mentioned very briefly in historical records, which allows her to claim a character is historical but treat said person just like a fictional character.) And Nicholas' long-time friend Julius and his wife Anna also intend to go East, to Caffa in the Crimea, to negotiate new trade agreements for their part of Nicholas' former Bank. Inevitably, Nicholas is drawn into accompanying Anna and the Patriarch to Caffa and Tabriz, and he's also drawn into (or does he do it on purpose???) shooting Julius so he can't come, and frustrating Adorne's plans so he has to go home, mad at Nicholas again. Follows then plenty of action and danger and sexual tension, (this last as Nicholas, frustrated by 8 years of separation from his wife Gelis, must resist his attraction to Julius' beautiful wife), as things go horribly bad in Caffa, and Nicholas ends up trekking to Moscow, and a meeting with the mysterious Greek with a Wooden Leg, Acciajouli, who was involved in the very first of Nicholas' escapades from Book 1.

In parallel, we follow Gelis and Katelijne back in Scotland and Bruges, as the evil David de Salmeton hoves into view again, ready perhaps to revenge himself on Nicholas by attacking those close to him. At the same time Gelis begins to work to resolve her conflicted feeling about Nicholas. Of course, eventually Nicholas is lured back to the west, to confront difficult revelations about his family, and about his relationship with Gelis, and with others, and to try to rebuff various threats to his family and friends.

Much is resolved: perhaps almost too much. Some of the eventual revelations are a bit lurid, and perhaps a bit too reminiscent of some "revelations" in the Lymond books. Nonetheless, the book is fascinating reading, absorbing, colourful, complex. Another fine chapter in an excellent series of historical novels.

This the seventh book in the Niccolo series does offer some explanations of Nicholas's early life and gives some reasons as to why he did the things that he did. Brilliant Nicholas has been exciled to Poland. He tries to forget all of his previous life and become a devil-may-care pirate, but his history keeps coming in to interfere, and he has to resume his life in order to protect those that are dearest to him. In this book we contine to see the beautiful Anna, Julius's wife, and without giving the story away she is certainly not what she seems.
We also see Nicholas and Gelis get back together at the end of the story. That is indeed a happy occasion, but it puzzles me where Katalejne fits into this. We don't see much of her in this story, and that is a great loss since I for one feel that she is by far the superior heroine in this series.

I can't wait to read the last book in the series. Perhaps then things will all make sense. I found that there were some similarities between this series and the Lymond series, and that disappoints a bit, since the Lymond series is so superior. But this is still a good series and it's well worth the time spent to read it. I recommend reading all the books in the series in the order that they written.

Caprice was everything I expected from Dorothy Dunnet, and I expect a lot. Great atmosphere, great story. But warning, don't start with this book. Read others in the series first. Like all the Niccolo and Lymond books, Caprice is beautifully researched and difficult to follow in the beginning pages. There are dozens of characters, most witty, and they often read each other's minds. Even minor players have large roles, so that following their conversations--and indeed who's talking--takes some getting used to. But there's a reward. Soon, you catch on and and it's a joy. Dunnet's ellipses let you participate much more than a simpler presentation that gives every character's every thought to you straight up. These people become your own family, friends, acquaintances and enemies. Unlike another reviewer, I found the characters exquisite, but then I know them from several prior books. It really helps to read the first book, Niccolo Rising, if not the ones between, to understand Nicolas and sympathize with him. And I doubt Gelis, Nicolas'wife, or her actions would have any meaning at all to readers who had not sufferred through her betrayal in earlier books. But it's still a great story. This edition does have a nice list of characters and summary of the plots from previous books, which are very welcome.

This is Amos Oz at his best. In the "Same Sea" Oz continues to grow and explore the boundries of literature and of the human condition.
His ability to synthesize prose and poetry is superb. He is among the greatest contemporay authors. He defines the relationships between the characters to each other to themselves and to the universe with grace. Beyond that he introduces himself as both chronicler and character without hubris and with grace. This is a literary feat. Many have failed at it. The best book I've read this year.

When we get tired of fight each other, we start trying to understand mutually and unexorablly search for peace. Life is a chain of simple-day-after-day actions, but finally we come to love, as Leonard Cohen said once "as refugees". It is useless to speak of many oceans or seas, cause in the end we all share the same sea. As Carl Sagan once said "we'll all will end sharing the same destiny, good or bad". This book comes to simple things of life, with simple but powerful truths. Amos Oz has a global and positive perspective and remember us that we have more in common, that what we belive. A great piece of stylistic literature, refreshing and motivational. "Life is very short and there is no time for fighting and fussing" (Lennon/Macartney): we share the same sea and if the sea level grows, we all will end paying the price.

This book illustrates the way in which a gifted author can use words to paint a world filled with beautiful and haunting imagery. Although it was initially hard to keep the story line straight, it was worth the effort. The language hovers on the line between prose and poetry and each section can stand on its own or be read as part of the whole. I look forward to reading more from this author.

Gloria Whelan is absolutely extraordinary in this book. I am a Romanov history buff, so that's probably one reason I loved it so much. The book is beautifully written however, and I sincerly believe anyone--child or adult--would adore this book. I am a children's librarian, and I recommended it to anyone in need of a good book. That's it: Angel on the Square is a just a plain good book.

12 year old Katya lives in St.Petersburg in 1914. She is an aristocrat and doesn't know about the world outside of her.She is pampered, and in her cousin Misha's opinion a "spoiled child." Misha doesn't like the aristocratic lifestyle, and particularly hates the ruling of royals. He sides with the peasants, and tries to be as simple as possible. Katya does not believe Misha's words about how peasants live in awful conditions, and that the Tsar does nothing to help. All she has heard is good things about the Tsar, her mother respects and would never say a bad word about him or his family. Katya and her mother soon leave off to live in the Tsar's palace as Katya's mother is invited as a lady-in-waiting. At first Katya's life is tea-parties and gossip galore with all the Romanov daughters. Soon, however, Katya sees behind the palace walls, and begins to agree with Misha on his opinions of peasants. Throughout the book you see Katya's emotions and opinions on the real condition of everyone other then the nobles in Russia. Katya takes a big journey form noble to a farming peasant, and learns so much on the way. I liked this book very much because it actually told what happened in the rest of St. Petersburg and not just in the Romanov's castle. If you liked this book you will definitely love Homeless Bird.

Twelve-year-old Katya Ivanova has everything anyone would want. She lives in St.Petersburg, Russia with her mother who is a close friend to the Empress Alexandra. Katya knows nothing of the turmoil in Russia and of the troubles of the poor. When her mother is asked to be a lady-in-waiting for Empress Alexandra and the Tsar Katya moves in with them and their four daughters---Olga, Tiatiana, Marie, and Anastasia, who Katya quickly befriends and is better known as Stana. To Katya everyday life is great. She is naive to the outside world of the palace. Little does she know of the pheasants who want to overthrow the Tsar. The only worry in her life is Misha, her cousin, who is one who feels strongly about the revolution. As the years pass Russia enters World War I and the turmoil starts. For young Katya it is very hard to bear seeing how mistreated the Tsar is by his own people, who he thought was loyal.

This was another great historical novel by Gloria Whelan. It was very emotional and meant a lot to me. I have always been one interested in Anastasia so I really liked this book.

In 1991, Nicholas Mosley resigned from the judging panel for England's prestigious Booker Prize when none of his choices made the shortlist. Writing about the affair in The Times of London, Mosley related that all of his choices were rejected because they were 'novels of ideas, or novels in which characters were subservient to ideas.' He went on to opine, in a statement that seems to apply as much to his Whitbread Prize-winning novel 'Hopeful Monsters' as to his view of his Booker choices: 'My point was that humans were beings who did have ideas, who were often influenced by ideas, to whom ideas were important. If they were not, then there was some lack in being human.'

'Hopeful Monsters' is a novel where character development is subservient to ideas, where narrative action takes place against big historical events. While it ostensibly tells the story of a life-long romantic relationship between Max Ackerman, an English physicist, and Eleanor Anders, a German-Jewish anthropologist, the romance is as much a vehicle for the promulgation and exploration of ideas as it is a tale of a man and a woman in the twentieth century.

'Hopeful Monsters' begins at the end of World War I. Max is ten years old and lives outside Cambridge, England. His father is a biologist who specializes in genetic inheritance and his mother is a woman of seeming artistic interests who had been 'brought up on the fringes of what was even then known as the Bloomsbury Group.' His parents have had long ties to the Cambridge University community. Eleanor, too, lives in an intellectual milieu, one in which ideas predominate. Eleanor lives in Berlin, where her mother is a Marxist and follower of Rosa Luxemburg and her father is a lecturer in philosophy. From such beginnings, novels of ideas are made!

From this starting point, 'Hopeful Monsters' narrates the story of Max and Eleanor through the rise of Nazism in Germany, the post-Lenin rise to power of Joseph Stalin, the Spanish Civil War, and the development of the Atomic Bomb. It does this while, all the time, interweaving Darwinism (and its Lamarckian heresy), Marxism, quantum physics and the uncertainty principle, Freudian psychoanalysis, Jungian archetypes, and even suggestions of Jewish mysticism. It is a story that runs from 1918 until the 1970s and continually challenges the reader to think about the ideas, the opinions, the intellectual sensibilities and feelings of Max, Eleanor and the books other characters. It is a magnificent and challenging novel of ideas, a novel that deservedly won the Whitbread Prize in 1990.

If 'Hopeful Monsters' has any shortcomings, it is that ideas and historical events predominate at the expense of character development. It also suffers, at times, from a somewhat turgid prose style. In particular, Mosley is fond of introducing statements by Eleanor and Max with the clauses 'I said' and 'You said'. It is a construction that helps the reader follow long spoken exchanges, but gets a bit tedious. Mosley also tends to write sentences as statements with a question mark at the end. This, too, can be annoying, suggesting a rising inflection by the speaker that can hardly be the intent. These are, however, relatively minor failings in a novel which is majestic in the breadth and depth of its intellectual suggestiveness, a really big modern novel that deserves to be more widely read.

Interplay of biology, physics, philosophy and politics. Going beyond the usual banal comparisons, the author presents the period between the world wars as a political and human investigation into uncertainty, quantum mechanics and relativity. Following 2 young people, a British boy and a German girl, the book proceeds in a series of backlooking narratives that take place in the major cockpits of the 20th century - from Berlin in the 20's to Russia and Spain in the 30's; politics plays a strong part, with Fascism and Communism playing for dominance across the continent. Through all this the characters try to find a way to create a meaningful life. Significant characters whose views permeate the book include the Lamarckian scientists Kammerer and Lysenko, Wittgenstein, Heideigger, Einstein, and many others. Never does the book bog down in didactic presentation, while still presenting a clear understanding of the major intellectual trends of the 20th century. Many other books have used this period as a background, but in this case, it's an essential element to the plot.

Great for book club discussions - you'll find no end of ways to interpret and discuss this book.

This book was recommended to me a decade ago and I loved it then, have reread it several times and will always be moved by it.Complex, challenging and always idiosyncratic while adhering to the grand tradition of the novel of ideas it has passages so dense and stimulating you want to memorize them or read it out aloud to whoever is listening. It tells the story of two idealistic individuals who are caught up in some of the crazier movements of the 20th century and manage what is so hard to do; to adventure from each other's safety and still stay true to the idea of each other. Despite the depth of the political analysis and the complexity of the portrayed philosophies I have always thought of it as primarily a love story that is both starcrossed and redeemed. By the time the author imagines them at rest as "one of these everlastingly happy couples on an Etruskan tomb" and the cancer( of fanaticism? of loneliness?) is dying it never fails to make me happy when I'm sad or sad when I'm happy.
It reminds me of Niels Bohr who said that you recognize a profound truth by its opposite also being a profound truth.
You guessed it: highly recommended

The author here may have violated the dictum of 19th century novels -- that you have to invent, not remember -- but certainly he knows the tools of the trade. He has written a fast paced account of what it is to be the son of a legendary figure, the late Prime Minister of Greece Andreas Papandreou. And it was not easy, either. We get a rare glimpse of the interplay of forces that fashion the life of a politician, both public and private. Well worth reading.

This book is a moving story, full of Greece, in which imagination blends superbly with reality. The author has written this story using his mind and heart in an expert way. I read the book "in one breath" and enjoyed it."As for me", he writes at the end of his book, "everything still seems possible".I'd say it's more than a possibility that he'll become a great author!

Being born in Greece, or being touched by the Greek culture,experiencing life under the Aegean light, can be dangerous, wonderful,wild, serene and devastating, all at the same time. This book revived this experience in my memory form the first pages until its closure. Having myself lived through the era and dramatic events that are described, I was brought back to my childhood years and the nation's adolescent attempts to shape its destiny. I could hear again the roar of the military tanks, through the streets of Athens, crushing the student's demonstrations.

This is a very authentic and different portrait of the Greek spirit, culture, and experience, with the eyes of an "alien". A lonely boy, even amidst endless crowds, calling his name, yet not calling him. Looking to meet and know the father that everybody knew. But of course, Nikos is not an alien to Greece. He proved again, through his novel this time, that he is a true native. This novel should be called a poem.

A Fine Place is very accessible, very dark, and very well wrought. The book is character driven. Vera and Sal and Sophie are unforgettable. These characters will stay with you--as I walk around Brooklyn I see them in the faces of the older people in my neighborhood. They are also elements in an important story by a writer who should become a familiar name in years to come. Selby is a tenuous connection (there's something to it). This is original work. The logic of character propels the story (which is moving (but again, dark)). A Fine Place is best described as a mosaic told from the different perspectives of five Italian-American characters. It is finally a story about heritage, a negative one--the heritage of hate--that expertly unfolds the ways in which the stains of racial bias, xenophobia, and narrow mindedness ooze into each successive generation. The result is a major novel. Strong comment on the broader issue of racism in this country through the close examination of a few ordinary people in an extraordinary situation. Highly recommended.

Nicholas Montemarano's A Fine Place is a remarkable debut, reminiscent of the debut of another great New York writer, Hubert Selby Jr. Last Exit to Brooklyn and A fine Place both illuminate the violence at the heart of a Brooklyn neighborhood, and yet the books' approaches are strikingly different. Selby's book is louder, the violence barely hidden beneath the surface. Montemarano's book is more muted. He depicts the interior lives of mostly decent folk who are caught up in the frustrations and tedium of their neighborhood life. And yet, the explosion of violence which is the central event of the novel, does not come out of nowhere. All the more impressive is the fact that Montemarano weaves a tale, which is captivating, in spite of the quiet nature of the book. His greatest accomplishment is the character Vera, who is a fully realized elderly lady. Montemarano captures old age materfully, and judging by his picure he's not in his seventies, yet. Can't wait for his next one.

A Fine Place is not like ANYTHING I've ever read before. I was given this book as a gift from a friend who loves Hubert Selby, Jr. (I do too) -- but this is a completely new voice in fiction. I was blown away. Tight and authentic and effortless -- no self-conscious, no artiness. Another writer could have so easily made this culture into a pity-party, and somehow this writer's avoided that. It works even without the crime -- this is how good it is. Also -- wanna say -- the guy "Tony" is based on here was never imprisoned for the murder -- I think the real guy was acquitted. But the probing into these elderly peoples' hearts and minds is pure genius. So real, they're still with me. I can smell them. I know them. And yet I've never met them. But they're out there somewhere. Not many books leave this kind of impression. The physicality is shocking and beautiful. I couldn't put it down. Every moment is a surprise. I really can't say this about too many books I've read. Who the (...) IS this writer??!

I thought it was a very good book with lots of nice photographs, but as said before, the names of the Grand Duchesses was changed and mixed a little and the author continually repeated himself. The years of the photographs and the ages of the Grand Duchesses in conjunction with this was also a little mixed at places. Other than that, it is a wonderful book and I love it!

This book has some of the rarest photographs taken from the family's private albums. Most of the photographs come from Maria and Alexandra's Album.

I reccomend this book because it has lots of great photograhs and focuses manly on the Royal Family at home, and not the big parade stuff that is in a lot of albums! I love this book!!!