Gilbert Seldes once called the newspaper column the most sophisticated of the popular American arts. It is that and more. It is a raft-ride through the white water of American opinion and thought. It is Mark Twain and Ring Lardner, Will Rogers and H.L. Mencken, Walter Lippmann and Joseph Alsop, Russell Baker and Calvin Trillin. It is nothing less than the American voice fortissimo-often blunt, occasionally eloquent, always opinionated, inspiring, infuriating, delightful. In this wonderfully diverse anthology, New York Times editorial writer Karl Meyer brings together 72 of America's finest columnists, the first such collection ever published. The range of voices is remarkable, stretching from Ben Franklin (who, as Silence Dogood, castigates the evils of demon rum) to Anna Quindlen (who writes on the travails of being pregnant in New York City). H.L. Mencken lambasts Truman's 1948 presidential campaign as 'unhampered by anything resembling a coherent body of ideas." Mary McGrory describes sitting in Judge Sirica's courtroom as the Watergate tapes are played on the "little Sony": how Haldeman slumps in his chair, how Mitchell turns faintly pink. Milt Gross renders a demented comic version of Pocohantas and Keptain John Smeet in American Yiddish dialect ("Hends opp!-odder we'll cot you off de scallop wid a tommyhuck!"). Heywood Broun offers a tongue-in-cheek explanation of "How I Became a Red." And I.F. Stone assails our collective guilt in Kennedy's assassination ("We all favor murder, when it reaches our own hated opponents"). To read these columns is to walk through American history and savor the views of some of our finest commentators, declaiming on everything from freedom of the press to yesterday's double-header.

I thoroughly enjoyed this book. It was informative and interesting all at the same time. Well written with the author's own style. Every author has their own way of conveying what they want to say, I think Karl did a good job with bringing his thoughts and ideas across in this book.

Having read Peter Hopkirk's "The Great Game", I was intrigued by the subject of the imperial machinations between Britain and Russia in Central Asia in the 19th century. The intrigues and maneuvers and subterfuge between the two opponents indeed offer some interesting insights into the development of the 20th century's Cold War and into the conduct of colonial powers and their proxy wars. Much of this, however, has faded from the public's historical consciousness.

Famous in their time, the explorers and military leaders of that place and time have now slipped into footnotes and obscure scholarly treatises. And of course, those figures who by necessity had to operate far more clandestinely on their secret missions are now almost wholly forgotten. Only the high points remain barely remembered, events like the Afghan Wars.

"Tournament of Shadows" is a good survey of the confrontations between Russia and Britain in India, Tibet, and Afghanistan. The book, like the figures on whom it reports, covers a lot of ground, dealing with the earliest Western penetrations into Central Asia and ending with events in post-WWII Tibet. A huge cast of characters is introduced, including men and women from England, Czarist and Soviet Russia, India, the U.S., and Germany. A great many significant developments are discussed, along with amusing and interesting side treks into historical minutiae.

The book's breezy, even gossipy, style is both its strength and weakness. Readers who don't want to delve too deeply into any one aspect of this fascinating period won't get bogged down by extended analyses. And certainly, the layperson will find out quite a few tidbits about the personal and private lives of quite a few people.

However, a narrower concentration would have helped focus the book and eliminate some confusion. So many governors and sahibs and explorers and diplomats and generals race on and off the page that it becomes hard to separate Bell from Bailey or remember who was imprisoned in Khokand and who got murdered in Kabul. It's certainly laudable to resurrect some faded luminaries and bring them back into the limelight, but little seems to be accomplished by trying to cram in every tangential figure and giving them only one or two paragraphs.

Still, it's a good (if overly lengthy) general introduction to the field, although with rather more time spent on Tibet than it seems to me was merited. Also, I would've preferred that sources be footnoted rather than directly referenced in the text, since the numerous citations to recent works and new archival discoveries border on authorial boasting. ("Look at how much homework we did!") But that's just a quibble.

Brysac and Meyer wrote a wonderful introduction to the "Great Game." Presented here, in readable prose, through the eyes of the men who participated, is the ultimately futile effort of the great powers to gain control of central Asia. The authors focus, not simply on the places, dates, and statistics, but on the motivations and personalities of the central characters.

While I read this book several months ago, recently I found myself rereading it. It serves as a wonderful reminder of the trials, difficulties, and cost in blood and treasure to those who have sought to hold sway over central Asia. While many people have at least a passing familiarity with Russia's failure to conquer Afghanistan in the 20th Century, few understand the rivers of Russian and British blood that were spilled in previous adventures in past centuries.

More than such military warnings, the authors also do an excellent job teaching the reader about the conflicting cultures of east and west. The disasters that result from misunderstandings of language and custom are presented in a riveting fashion. While the text is almost entirely about the 19th century, many familiar forces are at work. Multinational corporations, jingoistic nationalists, spies, glory-seeking officers, popular national pride, all play a part in this unfolding story.

I would offer one caveat in my praise of this work. The text lacks maps, which would have greatly increased my enjoymnet. In the end, I just read it with an atlas always in reach. It made it easier and more enjoyable. Despite this strange flaw, I highly recommend this work. If you are interested in this topic, I would suggest Bernard Lewis's work on international power politics in the Middle East as well.

The "Great Game" (a phrase coined by Kipling and the title of the competing paperback by Peter Hopkirk) was the nineteenth-century geopolitical struggle between Russia and Britain over control of Central Asia. As the authors of this study conclude, the "Game" itself did not lead to the Apocalypse many predicted, but it did spawn an amazing series of adventures (and disasters) across Afghanistan, Uzbekhistan, Turkmenistan, Nepal, Tibet and Western China. It also gave birth to a new generation of spies, immortalized in Kipling's "Kim," who in turn spawned the next century's of Cold War spies (immortalized in M16's "Kim" Philby"). Mayer and Brysac's account of this period is a competent and erudite history. They lose a star, however, because for me this book lacks a cohesive sense of what motivated the Great Game's players, particularly the Russians, to strive to such absurd lengths and against such absurd odds to gain so little. Surely their quest was not just patriotic, but metaphysical as well? What mythical forces drove these men? The authors cannot really answer this question. This is a serious thematic omission which deprives "Tournament of Shadows" the masterwork status to which it aspires.