Taylor's work on Bismarck is strangely contradictory. While he often makes reference to issues in German history that only knowledgable readers would understand, he also deals with the subject matter in a very superficial manner. While I found the work engaging and quick to read, it left me with a lot more questions than answers.

If you are looking for an in-depth review of Bismarck's life, don't go here. But if you want a quick read that deals effectively with the greater issues of Bismarck's career, then this is it.

Arrogant, confrontational, self-absorbed: one would be hard pressed to determine if these characteristics should be found in A. J. P. Taylor's Bismarck: The Man and the Statesman or if they should be in his autobiography. Moreover, it is curious that many other distinguishing characteristics of Taylor's Bismarck are in many ways reflections of Taylor himself. This parallel could even be extended one step further to claim that Taylor's assessment of Bismarck might be similar to the present assessment of Taylor; that is, both must be praised for their remarkable achievements but praised in such a way that they would be opposed to it.
Taylor, England's most flamboyant historian,# often broke the traditional bounds of the field. He brought history to television, radio and the newspapers. He closed the gap of the historical wait period by writing a history of the origins of War World II in 1961. His flashiness aside, he produced many historical masterpieces including Bismarck. In this work he goes beyond the face value of Bismarck's recorded statements and examines the actions, and subsequently his motives, to find the true character of this monumental figure. He develops the notion of a opportunistic and self-centered Bismarck as opposed to loyal servant of the king whose great foresight brought the unity of Germany.
One major theme of the book is chance. It is argued that it was stoke of luck that allowed Bismarck even enter the field of politics, the bad health of another deputy. Even his great foreign policy was based on providence. Repeatedly Taylor asserts that Bismarck had no plan, rather he would let events unfold and then act from there. Furthermore, when Bismarck intentionally carried a line of policy through it would normally backfire causing him more harm. Taylor remarks, the genius of Bismarck lie not in brilliant initiatives but in being able to recover from past blunders.
Closely related to the theme of chance is the notion that Bismarck had no enduring principles. His own greatness was the only value that he held to as he morphed from reactionary to liberal to conservative. He proudly boasted to the Reichstag "I have no fixed opinions... there are no eternal truths" (138). Beside his own will, the only other exception of complete devotion was his family. However, this might even be challenged. One the boldest claims of the book is that some of Bismarck's landmark achievements, unification and social reform, came as by-products for his bid to stay in power. Explicitly, his main motive for introducing bills was to split the Emperor and Reichstag and thus increase his power; and similarly his main motive for foreign policy was to split the Great Powers to increase Germany and subsequently his power.
In many respects it is a difficult task writing the biography of a man who is a deceptive diplomat. Bismarck's documents and speeches are overflowing with contradictions. It seems that Bismarck's policies stemmed from the hope of a desired outcome instead of personal convictions. Nonetheless, the historian has the difficult task of sifting through the political jargon to find the true motives of this complicated person. Taylor largely discredits Bismarck's talk of humble servitude towards the monarch and instead supports the Bismarck's claim of his own greatness. However, how can one claim certitude with a man who has changed his memoirs repeatedly, had no scruples in contradicting facts, and supported so many opposing principles? This is a contributing fact to the case that this debate will go on. As it does, Taylor's work will do much to help guide those who seek the motives and beliefs or the real Bismarck.

Arrogant, confrontational, self-absorbed: one would be hard pressed to determine if these characteristics should be found in A. J. P. Taylor's Bismarck: The Man and the Statesman or if they should be in his autobiography. Moreover, it is curious that many other distinguishing characteristics of Taylor's Bismarck are in many ways reflections of Taylor himself. This parallel could even be extended one step further to claim that Taylor's assessment of Bismarck might be similar to the present assessment of Taylor; that is, both must be praised for their remarkable achievements but praised in such a way that they would be opposed to it.
Taylor, England's most flamboyant historian,# often broke the traditional bounds of the field. He brought history to television, radio and the newspapers. He closed the gap of the historical wait period by writing a history of the origins of War World II in 1961. His flashiness aside, he produced many historical masterpieces including Bismarck. In this work he goes beyond the face value of Bismarck's recorded statements and examines the actions, and subsequently his motives, to find the true character of this monumental figure. He develops the notion of a opportunistic and self-centered Bismarck as opposed to loyal servant of the king whose great foresight brought the unity of Germany.
One major theme of the book is chance. It is argued that it was stoke of luck that allowed Bismarck even enter the field of politics, the bad health of another deputy. Even his great foreign policy was based on providence. Repeatedly Taylor asserts that Bismarck had no plan, rather he would let events unfold and then act from there. Furthermore, when Bismarck intentionally carried a line of policy through it would normally backfire causing him more harm. Taylor remarks, the genius of Bismarck lie not in brilliant initiatives but in being able to recover from past blunders.
Closely related to the theme of chance is the notion that Bismarck had no enduring principles. His own greatness was the only value that he held to as he morphed from reactionary to liberal to conservative. He proudly boasted to the Reichstag "I have no fixed opinions... there are no eternal truths" (138). Beside his own will, the only other exception of complete devotion was his family. However, this might even be challenged. One the boldest claims of the book is that some of Bismarck's landmark achievements, unification and social reform, came as by-products for his bid to stay in power. Explicitly, his main motive for introducing bills was to split the Emperor and Reichstag and thus increase his power; and similarly his main motive for foreign policy was to split the Great Powers to increase Germany and subsequently his power.
In many respects it is a difficult task writing the biography of a man who is a deceptive diplomat. Bismarck's documents and speeches are overflowing with contradictions. It seems that Bismarck's policies stemmed from the hope of a desired outcome instead of personal convictions. Nonetheless, the historian has the difficult task of sifting through the political jargon to find the true motives of this complicated person. Taylor largely discredits Bismarck's talk of humble servitude towards the monarch and instead supports the Bismarck's claim of his own greatness. However, how can one claim certitude with a man who has changed his memoirs repeatedly, had no scruples in contradicting facts, and supported so many opposing principles? This is a contributing fact to the case that this debate will go on. As it does, Taylor's work will do much to help guide those who seek the motives and beliefs or the real Bismarck.

When I started training in Family practice I searched for a large reference book to study from. I choose this text because it was written so well. The Language is direct, the explanations are clear and the advice is well founded. Now that I am in training the book is not as helpful as I hoped. Most of the time I find the treatment on any given topic too shallow for what I have to learn. I belive this is the result of a compromise between size and completness. I now wish I had saved my money and bought three textbooks - Harrison, Williams and Nelson as opposed to trying to find one book to cover all of internal medicine, obstetrics, and pediatrics.

This book is designed in a practical and understandable approach to family practice. It is an excellent text and a comprehensive reference especially useful for a nurse practitioner/graduate student in family practice. Not only does it provide treatment and management of common medical conditions but also includes psychosocial aspects of caring for clients and their families.

This book introduces only one novel concept, which is okay, because many best-sellers contain no original thought at all.

Brams and Taylor spend the book explaining the concept "adjusted winner" and its implications for dispute resolution. The authors begin by laying the following framework: the dispute involved is a two-party dispute, goods or issues ("items") are being divided, and the division is a voluntary choice.

Within that framework, according to Brams and Taylor, there are four basic ways of dividing items: strict alternation (taking turns); balanced alternation, which adds something to compensate for the disadvantage of going second; one-cuts-the-other- chooses, and "adjusted winner."

The "adjusted winner" situation has three characteristics: it is envy-free, efficient, and equitable. Each of these terms has a specific meaning in this book (the concepts can be hard to keep straight on a first reading).

"Envy-free" means that no party is willing to give up the portion it receives in exchange for the portion someone else receives.

"Equitable" means that both parties think they received the same fraction of the total items to be divided, as they value them.

"Efficient" means that there is no other allocation that is better for some party without being worse for another party.

How is this gold standard of negotiation outcome achieved? Ah, there's the rub. First the parties designation the goods and issues in a dispute. Then, each party indicates how much the value obtaining the different goods, or "getting their way" on the different issues, by distributing 100 points across them. Each item is initially assigned to the person who puts more points on it. Then, an equitable allocation is achieved by transferring items, or fractions thereof, from one party to the other until their point totals are equal.

The book addresses adequately, I think, the problem of one or both parties being insincere about their preferences (it can be demonstrated mathematically to backfire). However, despite the concrete examples offered of the David and Ivana Trump divorce, the Camp David Agreement, the Clinton-Bush debates, and the Spratly Islands dispute, the reader is left wondering, doggone it, how do I actually assign these point thingies in my next negotiation? And is this method just too fancy to get the folks across the table to buy into? I suspect it probably is.

In a broad perspective, we see a strong desire in society to understand dispute and simplify the process of closure. In one camp, there have always been those who have worked toward addressing the underlying reality of disputes through logic and wisdom (Solomon for example). In another camp, there have always been those who have arbitrarily simplified dispute resolution leading to forced, bureaucratic solutions, which more often than not led to a more intense conflict.

In this reviewer's opinion, it is critical to understand which camp ideas on dealing with disputes belong to. Win-Win does not present a variation of a one-size-fits-all solution or conjure up a quick fix by slight of hand. By recognizing that disputing parties have different needs and priorities, they developed an efficient process that offers the opportunity for all parties to assert, and perhaps win what they think best for themselves. Their idea is nothing less than an addition to the science of fairness in the Western philosophical tradition.

Fair division is not a complete solution to every dispute. Solomon might have been confused if confronted by two parents with equal rights, responsibilities, and motivation. In such complex situations as divorce with children, much can be gained however by partially stripping away disputed issues and focusing a new wave of effort on those that remain. Judging from what is presented in Win-Win, I believe the authors would be satisfied with a recommendation that their ideas deserve to be part of the general toolkit for dispute resolution. I would go farther in suggesting it as part of a basic scientific understanding of fairness that every culture needs.

Many books attempt to address a broad class of problems and eventually end up in the dusty stack of fads with Hoola Hoops. In Win-Win, Brams and Taylor have presented a valid idea with mathematical precision that adds to our understanding of fairness and is not likely to go out of fashion. But it doesn't stop there. They provide systematic processes for applying the knowledge in real life. I could not possibly imagine the full list of professionals and non-professionals, scientists, politicians, negotiators, and den mothers, who can find value in Win-Win.

Roger F. Gay, Project Leader Project for the Improvement of Child Support Litigation Technology http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5910/index.html

This is a book of essays, articles and bookreviews that were later published by Pelican in a paperback edition (along with similar works from two other books) entitled "Europe: Grandeur and Decline".

This book can easily be read in one sitting. It flows as a story comparible with the discovery of the "New World". There are four main characters in this fictional business competing in the 21st century. They are the Captain (strong leader and visionary), Mapmaker (budgeter and planner), Financier (procuror of capital), and First Mate (front-line manager). It is easy to tranpose the situations in the book to your own business world. You may even recognize a few of your co-workers. I recommend this book to anyone interested in having their mind stimulated with original thoughts and new ideas. John R. Jagoe, Director, Export Institute.

Coatsworth and Tayler have added a significant contribution to a field that have known, up to now, only individual monographies about the development of national economies in Latin America, not disregarding the excellent Victor Bulmer-Thomas "The Economic History of LA" or the more recent volume organized by Rosemary Thorp. The history of economic international relations of the Latin American countries and the region's insertion in the world economy is, of course, a chapter in the history of world capitalism, but we were still missing a comprehensive approach about the specific path of the economic modernization of the entire region, despite some general contributions, like Bradford Burns'"The Poverty of Progress" or the old books by Rippy and Platt. Now, the quest is (almost) over, at least from the point of view of "centric" economies. Coatsworth and Tayler add a new powerful academic tool for researchers and other people interested in better know how Latin America managed to become what Prebisch called "a periphery to the center". Perhaps the next significant evolution in this field would be to have a history of the economic insertion of Latin American countries in the world economy from the point of view of those countries. But, that is another story...

Lucidly written exposition with stress on concepts rather than notation manipulation. Dollar auctions, Arrow's theorem, Power indices were especially interesting reading. Probably the best place for a layman to get the dope on Arrow's impossibility theorem. Does get a bit tedious in some spots with some numerical permutations, but on the whole, I recommend it highly.

Twelve Miles From a Lemon (Selected writings and sayings of author Sydney Smith) gives real meaning to the phrase "rapier wit". Smith adds a gentle touch to wit. I purchased this book in the name of my two year old grand-daughter, Sydney Smith who is herself a little "wit". My insights as to the similarities of the Sydneys proved to be both true and delightful. Reverend Sydney Smith was a walking wit. His spontaneous sayings are treasures. The one that led me to him via Amazon was printed on a teabag: "I am glad I was not born before tea." A true Englishman! Last June my daughter and I took our Sydney to London and then to Bath. This book described Reverend Smith's life and moves to various parts of England and France. His vacation spot was Bath! His close friend was Earl Grey (for you tea-drinkers). The book is delightful, even though it plods in parts. Reverend Smith was a visionary, compassionate and intelligent. This selection of writings portrays a true feeling of his times (early 1800s), as well as insights of humor within the church. It will definitely make any Anglophile chuckle!

Just got back from China and used the latest edition as guide. That's all it is... a guide. Tries to be your "insider" pal but fails on several fronts. China's too darn big and changing too fast for any publisher to dare think a single "China" volume is sufficient. I mean, would you trust a single "USA" guidebook? Of course not, even if it's as thick as a phone book (and this ungainly little brick is just that).

Many wonderful sights/attractions/wonders are not even mentioned... Did editor decide to excise them, or do researchers look only so far?? I, for one, would have liked to see more attractions mentioned. But if the LP people are going to keep up the chatty little comments with every such entry (a Lonely Planet hallmark), they will have to break up "China" into many volumes. For example, book does not even show on Wuhan map the fascinating, large Taoist temple there... cutting the chit-chat about Mao's Villa there (worth visiting but the text on it is useless) could have made room. But if they want to keep the cute comments (surfing buddhas on a temple wall in Kunming, overrated herbalist in Lijiang, Europe in miniature in Chengdu), they are going to have to break the book up into at least three volumes.

Restaurant reviews could be chopped in half, that's for sure. They are boring, outdated, sometimes wholly erroneous. Phone numbers have always been a joke in LP editions for any country I have used ...I own some seventeen LP's... but these numbers were wholly useless to me on my recent trip.

As other reviewers note, it is necessary to concede that China is always changing, and with growing speed. Perhaps LP just can't send their researchers out fast enough. But there are enough expats living in Chinese cities to be tapped for updates. Incidentally, expats are a great resource for any traveller... already Shanghai and Beijing have weekly "what's on" style tabloids in English that are very helpful to the visitor. Anyway, on the expat account alone, generally clever LP editors really have little excuse for not having a finger on China's latest and greatest.

What's good about Lonely Planet China?? Liberal use of Chinese characters and Pinyin romanization, for one thing. Made it super easy to communicate with taxi drivers. The Orientation section for each city is excellent... three paragraphs to prepare you for the layout and characteristics of the city. History section is good, too. I truly love the off-the-beaten path viewpoint that makes Lonely Planet so much fun... so I hope future editions retain this, while getting on the ball with useful / necessary details.

Using this book, traveller / reader will get a generally good trip, but will be led astray / waste time more than once by old info (where to catch bus to Buddha, where to find Muslim food, etc), and from incomplete phone numbers.

I recently traveled for ten weeks in mainland China using LP's China guidebook. I have used the Lonely Planet series for over thirty countries and find them to be among the best if not the best of all the guidebooks out there. This edition falls short. Way short! I sometimes wondered if I was in the same city the guidebook was describing. For example, LP calls Chengdu, the capital of Sichuan Province, a "budget traveler's paradise" and then goes on to mention three places in a city of over 9 million people. In Hangzhou, their first recommendation is a vacant lot and has been for a year. Second pick is a restaurant.I began to really wander if anyone actually "traveled" these places to update them or just sat around in Yunnan Province,a drank beer and depended on other travelers for information. The bood has many good points. The maps are good. The transportation info is still fairly accurate and the use of Chinese characters is extremely helpful. It is not impossible to use the latest edition as your only guide. It is just that you had better have some well-developed travel skills before venturing into China and hoping this book will save you. It won't.

Lonely Planet has THE BEST travel guides for anyone travelling in any country. In many cases, especially covering areas that see more visitors than others, the coverage is excellent, very detailed. HOWEVER, for areas that see fewer visitors (like the section on Changsha, Hunan), there are several errors, usually in the area of places to stay and eat. (In past editions of this book, the map of Changsha was wrong. I do not know whether this has been corrected.) It almost appears that the person who was supposed to cover this area couldn't be bothered to really check the city out.

No matter what, whether you are just going for a short visit OR going to live there for a while, you must pack this book. IT WILL BE A BIBLE TO LIVE BY!

The Minutemen and Their World is a very informative book. So informative, at times I thought it was hard to recall of the specific details Gross talks about. The book deals with colonial Concord, MA before, during, and after the American Revolution. Gross wrote about many different people and families to portray their way of life in colonial Concord. The funny thing about this book is that the majority of the book details Concord before and after the revolution and there is only one chapter on the actual revolution. I personally found the book to be intriguing and truly interesting but it was difficult to recall all that I had read due to the amount of facts present in each chapter. I highly recommend this book to anyone who has to write a paper on colonial America or if you just really love history. Gross knows his facts and sighting passages from this book in a paper would truly impress your professor.

Robert A. Gross' historical work, The Minutemen and Their World is an authentic recollection of colonial Massachusetts prior to, during, and after the famous American Revolution. For those studying American history, this book reveals how civilians living in Concord, Massachusetts struggled to make a living under social upheavals while dedicated minutemen defended the nation. Gross has put forth a great amount of effort in researching primary sources such as letters, journals, and statistics in order to capture the political, economic, and social dilemmas that perturbed civilization amid the Revolutionary War. This comprehensive piece of literature includes heavy arguments pertaining to church membership, property distribution, colonial government, and taxation in Massachusetts. Gross illustrates how middle class men invested all their energy to train for a loosely associated militia. His novel portrays the famous events, such as the Coercive Acts and the Quartering Act that ignited the Revolution. In addition, Gross details the actual scene where the first shots were fired on April 19, 1775. Once the reader begins to read The Minutemen and Their World, he/she will feel as if the Revolutionary Era came to life in the twenty-first century! Any history fanatic and inquisitive historian will find Gross' work to be one detailed source of colonial history in Massachusetts with an overall reflection of civilian life in Concord, not just the militiamen, who struggled under the war for independence.

I agree wholeheartedly with editorial reviewer David Hackett Fisher. This book reads almost like a novel, and yet it is a work of history--with solid research and scholarship, at that.

Gross argues that the Revolution provided Concord an opportunity to re-assert control over the community and its destiny. In the years preceding 1775-1776, great changes were sweeping across the colonies, particularly in traditional New England towns like Concord. For example, there was the problem of decreasing supplies of land, and fathers, with sometimes large numbers of sons, had difficulty providing for all his heirs (without dividing the land and, hence, making it less sustainable). Other issues were occurring specifically in Concord--such as the desire of its residents farther from the town to hire their own minister. So threatened, Concord was experiencing not just stasis but actual decline in these pre-Revolution years.

Therefore, with all these fluctuations and challenges, participation in the Revolution offered Concord a chance to seize initiative and regain control over its political and communal life, to restore its autonomy. Gross writes, "The men of 1775 had not gone to war to promote change but to stop it."