Cultural Books

This is a facile read...an entertaining and enlightening account of the "life" of a priceless Stradivari cello since its "birth". Along the way we learn briefly of the various characters who played a significant role in the cello's life history. The first part of the book gives a review of famous stringed instrument makers and the construction of these instruments. Ideal for either the interested "aficionado" or professional musician.

My husband, a professional cellist, received this book as a gift. He enjoyed it immensely. He has sent at least 5 of them to other cellist friends--some professional, some who just love to play. All reports from those who have received this gift have been wonderful. Highly recommended to those who play... and those who don't... there's a lot of interesting information about the instrument, the musicians who play and teach, and the world of music.

In 1720 the elderly violin maker Stradivari made a masterpiece: it was known as the 'Red Stradivari', but it wasn't a violin - it was a cello. Under its new name, the Piatti, it left Italy on a tour, to eventually become the author's key to success. Here is the history of Piatti, from its creation through its different owners. Cello players and classical music enthusiasts will relish this affectionate survey.

I loved this book and you don't have to be a cello enthusiast to enjoy reading it. Some parts are a bit slow but the good stuff makes up for it. Prieto has a personable writing style and obvious emotional attachment to his cello that is infectious. He structures the story well - his path to cello stardom is unusual and offers life lessons to people of all ages. He draws the reader in early with the tension behind "How did HE end up with a Strad cello???" The book is kind of a smorgasbord of music trivia/ commentary, including and engaging (if informal) overview of the great composers from the past to the present (much better than the historical overview in The Cambridge Companion to the Cello). Lastly, he is also of an age where his own life story is begins to offer a window into an era gone by. Sr. Prieto will be on your "dream dinner party" list after you read this. Buy the book and pass it on...!

Prieto's fascinating account of his famous cello's life is just the base upon which he gives a wealth of information about cellos, cellists, the cello literature, performances, and the world of the classical musician. Cellists and anyone appreciating cello music will find many portions they can use or be amused by.

Mr. Kofi Akosah-Sarpong wrote an excellent review of "Africa and the West" by Godfrey Mwakikagile, an academic author from Tanzania who has written many books about Africa, seven to date.

It is a major African work in the African Renaissance tradition and dignifies Africa, especially in the author's philosophical discussion of the African personality and Africa as an organic entity, in a way many African writers don't. And as always, as in his other reviews, Akosah-Sarpong captures the essence of the author's work few reviewers are able to.

There is, however, one semantic detail that needs to be clarified. The reviewer says: "Meanwhile, though the book deserves to be taken seriously, Mwakikagile states in the introductory chapter as if he wrote the book with another person by stating 'we' repeatedly."

As a well-read person himself, I'm sure Mr. Akosah-Sarpong knows it's common for writers, especially for academic authors, to use the first-person plural 'we,' instead if 'I,' in their writings; for example, by saying, "in the first chapter we discussed...," "We are going to address in the next chapter..." May be it comes from the imperial "We," when British kings said "we" instead of "I," and probably still do. It's acceptable in King's English.

One renowned African academic author is Professor Ali Mazrui in his book "Towards A Pax Africana" and others. As he states in the introduction to "Towards A Pax Africana": "In general terms we are concerned in this book with...We do not propose to limit ourselves to..." In chapter one, he states: "In this book we define diplomatic thought to be..." In chapter two: "In the last chapter we discussed utilization..." In chapter four: "We hope to discuss..." In chapter five: "We pointed out in the second chapter that..."

It does not mean Mazrui wrote the book with another person.

Otherwise Akosah-Sarpong's review of Mwakikagile's "Africa and the West," is not only excellent, but one of the best I have read of a major African book by one of Africa's prolific authors.

An impressive range of scholarship. The author's knowledge of the works of leading Western thinkers - from Kant and Fichte to Heidegger and Montesquieu and others - and of African philosophical traditions, is indisputable.

A lucid thinker of penetrating intelligence, Godfrey Mwakikagile is one of those Africans writing scholarly works to reclaim the dignity of the African personality that has been subjected to so much abuse since the imperial powers conquered Africa. Yet he is honest enough to admit Africa's mistakes, and shortcomings, including many in the glorious past of ancestral ways so much glorified by Afrocentric scholars.

This is a vital text in the study of African philosophy and identity, an area of abstract ideas in which the African mind is grossly underrated.

And the chapter on South Africa is a brilliant analysis of where this multiracial nation may be headed after the end of apartheid. The legacy of apartheid may be with us for generations to come; a bleak prospect for a country that is a beacon of hope on a troubled continent.

To be a modern African is perplexing experience. Not only is Africa the only region with the most dominant of foreign values, but the African, more especially the elites, are confused, transmitting such confusion unto the entire African personality, and making the African not only misunderstand himself/herself but difficult to explain himself/herself to the world about his/her personality.

Godfrey Mwakikagile, a Tanzanian journalist who worked with Tanzania's leading mass circulation "Daily News," echoing a familiar rallying cry, argues passionately for Africans to return to their native roots for balance and order. "Africa and the West" is also a reflective treatise, especially in its philosophical discussion of the importance of African values, history and tradition, African philosophical concepts, and way of life in pre-colonial times as compared to the advent of colonialism. "Africa and the West" is also an uncompromising demand for dignity and respect for Africans which they have been denied by today's leaders, which was not the case in pre-colonial times and continuing, as the author says, though contentiously, under traditional rulers in most societies across the continent today.

The author says the traditional leaders ruled by consultation and direct mass participation at village meetings. How to transform such pre-colonial consultation and direct mass participation across Africa's 2,000 ethnic groups in order to usher in democracy that fits the African environment is missing.

Mwakikagile recognizes Africa's natural beauty and abject poverty, diseases and disturbing ignorance, but his thesis aims at Africa's weak unity - "That is one of the main reasons why they [Africans] were conquered by foreigners, and why Africa is still weak and poor today." Before Mwakikagile attempts to answer why Africa's weak unity is the root cause of all its crises, he reveals the contradictory nature of Africa: Africa endowed with numerous world-class natural resources but at the same time Africa as "the only continent where it has been so easy for foreigners to take what does not belong to them." Why this? Weak co-operative spirit among Africans, more markedly their elites.

For Mwakikagile, Africa's weaknesses can be located in its personality. So to understand Africa, there is the need to psychoanalyze the African personality in relation to the world, "especially to the West." Why especially to the West? Because the West, more than any other people, conquered Africa, colonized it, brutalized it, demeaned its culture and indigenous institutions, and a large number of Africans, especially those who have been to Western schools, "were brainwashed into believing that they had no history they could be proud of; that all their customs and traditions were bad, and that even their languages were bad. Nothing good."

More than physical brutality to Africans such as Belgium's King Leopold ordering the amputation of Congolese for not meeting working (quotas) as expected in rubber farms or Germans brutalizing and killing Namibia's Herero ethnic group, the author demonstrates that the West's capture of Africa has been more at the metaphysical plain through propagation of ideas that skillfully but quietly demeaned African values. While he acknowledges that not all foreign ideas are destructive to Africa, he also states that not all foreign values are good either. It is here that Mwakikagile takes a swipe at Africentrism, a courageous venture aimed against the excesses of Afrocentric scholars. For Afrocentrists, there is nothing wrong with African values, and in their zeal to recall Africa's glorious past, have distorted Africa's values in order to "inflate our achievements."

His prejudices are firmly on the side of African Renaissance thinkers who recognize both the negative and the positive values of African culture and how to discuss them for the health of Africa's progress. This reveals the balances of Mwakikagile who is honest enough to criticize his own kind regardless of the wrath which he may spark, and which the African intelligentsia need for the health of the climate of the African Renaissance process.

Mwakikagile's piece adds to the struggles being waged by the new generation of African thinkers, journalists, and media outlets such as "Expo Times" (Sierra Leone), "West Africa" and "New African" magazines to open up the African culture, its negative aspects as well as its positive aspects, for eventual policy formulation. The reason being that colonialism did not help the growth of African values in relation to Africa's progress, and African elites, ever weaker, have not been able to mix their colonial legacies with African values unlike other ex-colonies in the development game. Meanwhile, though the book deserves to be taken seriously, Mwakikagile states in the introductory chapter as if he wrote the book with another person by stating "we" repeatedly.

A perfect rebuttal to the imperialist arrogance of the West.
Blunt in its assessment, incisive in its analysis, "Africa and
the West" is a vital work by one of Africa's most important
writers.

He may not be well-known like many others the continent has
produced; at least I have never heard of him, or read about him,
until recently. But that's probably because he's relatively new
on the literary scene, all his books on the market having been
published only since 1999. That alone is a credit to him, a mark
of distinction as a prolific author. And it does not diminish the
importance of his works.

"Africa and the West" is not only a definitive response to the
denigration of Africa by the West and others; it is also a major
achievement in the rehabilitation of the African personality
after centuries of subjugation by our conquerors. Godfrey
Mwakikagile has written an important academic book, which is
also a significant philosophical work about Africa, members
of the general public will find to be equally useful in their
study of the world's second largest yet least understood
continent.

Except for a number of typos, the publisher's fault, the work is
virtually flawless: unassailable its logic, well-documented, and
passionate in its defense of the African personality as a
spiritual and organic whole reminiscent of German nationalist
philosopher Johann Fichte in his lectures he delivered at the
University of Berlin, and published as "Addresses to German
Nation."

In one of the most important books written by an
African about African identity and the concept of the
African personality, Godfrey Mwakikagile's work,
"Africa and the West," is a compelling argument for a
return to roots, what Amilcar Cabral calls "a return to
the source," in Africa's quest for peace and stability,
equality and justice. Born and raised in Tanzania where
he also worked as a journalist at the country's main
newspaper, "Daily News," and at the Ministry of
Information and Broadcasting before going for further
studies in the United States, the author knows Africa
well. His book is also a philosophical treatise,
especially in its discussion of the importance of
African values, philosophical concepts, and way of life
before the advent of colonial rule. The work is also
an uncompromising demand for dignity and respect which
the vast majority of Africans are denied by their
leaders who constitute the modern African state, which
was not the case under traditional rulers in most
societies across the continent; they ruled by
consultation and direct mass participation at village
meetings. The book is also a blunt assessment of
post-apartheid South Africa whose economy is still
dominated by whites, as are most of its institutions.
The chapter on Afrocentrism is one of the most
courageous statements ever made against the excesses
of Afrocentric scholars, by an African scholar himself,
who is honest enought to criticize his own kind
regardless of the wrath he may incur. The book is also
an important work in the history of Africa's conquest
and subsequent colonization by the imperial powers. But
the author could have done better if he had concluded
this important study with a much longer chapter. The
last chapter has some very strong points, but is just
too short. Nevertheless, the book is recommended for
scholars and laymen alike, and has undoubtedly earned
its place in some major public libraries, and in
institutions of higher learning where it is used for
undergraduate and graduate studies like all the other
books by the author. He has a thorough command of the
subject, and the book is well-written without scholarly
pretensions.

This is a book that all African American women should own. It gives a sense of pride to know where we come from. I applaud the author. Thank You.

I like african princess because it tells adventurous true stories.And woman who had great courage and great symblos for woman.In Ethiopia when you are 10 years old you get married and are trained to do elderly things. The Portugues and Ugandans were in a slave trade. The Portuguess wer in the slave trade to recieve slave trade, and Ugandas would get weapons. All of these stories I mentioned were great and they tell you African history.

I discovered African Princess: the Amazing Lives of Africa's Royal Women while searching for history about African Royalty, and it is most excellent. The artwork is gorgeous and the text is simple enough for my 8 year old niece to read it and understand it. Rich history, intriguing stories, and pride in our history make this book great for all generations.

Six examples of African feminine royalty are showcased in chronological order, from pre-Christian times to the modern era. Each of the women focused was representative of her time, yet she showed a foresight and independence that made her stand out from her contemporaries.

The text by former schoolteacher Joyce Hansen, along with Laurie McGraw's superb illustrations, makes for a captivating and inspiring read for youngsters, female and male. It also should be noted that the book should be shared with all children for there still remains some misconceptions in the general public about Africa, even to this day.

The book does a good job of addressing and correcting those misconceptions in a highly professional and insightful manner.

From a female pharaoh in ancient Egypt to an African princess of her people who avoided men, and an empress, African Princess uses words and pictures to recreate the lives of six selected powerful royal women of Africa. Good reading skills in grades 2-4 will lend to an appreciation of early female African leaders.

I actually bought this book because my late uncle Alfonso "Poncho" Munoz is featured in the book a few different times. My father also raced at Caliente so for obvious reasons I give this book 5 stars.

I heard about the Agua Caliente racetrack From Mr. Alessio when I meet him in 1993 at Ranch Tecate. After that, I saw him on a regular basis and once and a while he would reflect on the old racetrack. He told me about how he came up with the 5-10, the décor for the racetrack and some of the odd things that happened there. He even pointed out furniture at Ranch Tecate that came from the racetrack after the fire. But I never was able to put it all together till this book came out. The author did a excellent job putting this book together. I just wish I could have experienced the Caliente racetrack in its prime.

As a long timed resident of the city of Tijuana, I was excited to see a book on the Agua Caliente racetrack.I have had so many pleasant afternoons at this racetrack and this book brought back many wonderfull memories. I believe that no other racetrack has the the very interesting history that this track in Mexico ever had as researched and written by the author. The photos are great and the story rolls along in an easy to read manner. The author took on an interesting and important chapter in racing history and saved it for posterity. All 75 years of it. It is very sad that it is not in its glory years any more and I look forward that the new and enlightened administration will restore this historical site, one that was once vibrant and so alive.

For both lovers of horse racing and sports history, this is an exciting book, laced with rare illustrations and well-documented by both archival resources and the author's personal memories. Finally, Tijuana gets its due as the track which kept racing alive during its darkest travail in the 1920s and '30s as well as the one where innovations modernized the sport much as it is known today.
Dr. Paul J. Vanderwood, historian emeritus, San Diego State University

Highly readable and exhaustively researched book that thoroughly covers the history of racing in Tijuana. Includes fantastic photos and charts of the track's big races. The place had an even more interesting history than I had imagined, and the author's passion for his subject comes through loud and clear!

I really enjoyed reading The Alchemist. It's the kind of book that you
want to read to the very end without stopping. I think its secret is
the author's ability to awaken not only our adventurous imagination but
a sense of justice and heroism as well.

Imagine you are transported into the darkest time of the Middle Ages,
when freedom of thought and heart was a life threatening reality; when
dignity and respect of individuality were blackened by the mud of
ignorance.

The story shows that the forces of ignorance can be fought with Love.
Even in the darkest times there is always light and hope - It
demonstrates the importance of courage.

I recommend this book!

"The Alchemist" transports you back into the Middle Ages. It's a novel about the search for meaning and truth in the midst of chaos and ignorance. The story is about the life of Pablo Simon, a young alchemist searching for truth during the Inquisition. It's also based on the life of Giordano Bruno, a philosopher, who lived in the 16th century. The portrayal of the anguish and oppression that happened during this period of history is particularly vivid and I became totally engrossed by the characters in this story. Livraga has a knack for developing believable and engaging characters that fit into a historical setting.

The Alchemist is a fascinating novel that makes you feel as if you were living during the Renaissance. It's a great historical window into the 16th Century. I especially like the focus on Alchemy - an art that is not only material but rather spiritual and leads to a real transformation of the human being.

The Alchemist is a wonderful novel with insite into the 16th Century. It brings you to another dimension in time and takes you on a roller coaster ride through the period. The turmoil of these times is deeply felt and makes you appreciate the true essence of Life. It reminds you of what Giordano Bruno went through when speaking up for what he believed during a time when certain truths were unspeakable. Surfice it to say, "I thought this book was inspirational, to say the least." Take a chance and experience a reading adventure!

I loved the Alchemist. It is a riveting novel and seems to have so much profound knowledge. It is also wonderful for those eager for more knowledge about the medieval philosopher Giordano Bruno whose progressive, yet ancient philosophical theories led to his death at the hands of the Inquisition in Rome.

Highly Reccomended!

David Hirschorn Coral Gables, FL

This is a relaly grea tbook and has relaly cute pictures form when he was little and now! and it has good info!

This book is a portrail of Apolo Anton Ohno. It tells about Apolo's way of life. In my opinion I feel this book shows that he is not just a pretty face,or an awsome athlete, but that he is a person.It tells you so much about him. There are quots that are really inspiring.When you are through with this book you will be an expirt on our 2002 Winter Olympic star. Also, it shows you how tough a life he had it.I promise you will fall in love with the book and ... him.

I loved this book. Loved it so much I bought 4 copies. Beautiful pictures from childhood to present. Lots of good information too. The more I learn about Apolo the more I admire him and respect him. I recommend for ALL ages.

This book may be marketed for children, but believe me, female fans of Apolo are going to love it for the pictures!! The cover picture should be put lifesize in the window of the bookstore and they wouldn't be able to keep the book in stock!! There are some great photos of Apolo as a child and some new info about him. Just a wonderful book...a must for ANY Apolo fan.

All fans of Apolo Anton Ohno, kids and grownups alike, must have this book--it is AWESOME! It has tons of big, glossy pictures--dramatic moments from the Olympics, cute candid pics, and precious childhood photos. There's also fascinating information in "Getting Personal With Apolo" (did you know he has a cat named Tiggie?) and "Apolo's Faves & Raves" (his favorite room is the kitchen!). I suggest buying several copies (like I did). You need one copy to save (for him to autograph if you are lucky enough to meet Apolo!), one to read and enjoy, and if you are going to cut pictures out to decorate your room, you will need two extra copies since many pictures are back-to-back. Fans of Apolo Anton Ohno, young and not-so-young, will LOVE this book! If you are not a fan yet, you will be after you read this book!

This is an easy reading but powerful book about what it means to be an American and the formation and development of our culture and shared values. It is scholerly but entertaining. It should be mandatory reading for all high school and college students. In a time that people are looking for their roots and cultural identity, this book is a must.

As a social studies teacher (middle grades and secondary level), this book has provided me with invaluable discussion points and lesson plan ideas. In a time when we are trying to make learning relevant and exciting for our young students, this text will be a tremendous aid to me while I facilitate real learning in a public school classroom. John McElroy has genuinely motivated me to teach both history and civics in a whole new light. For all readers of this book, be aware that a resurgence of pride in our country is bound to occur! Furthermore, all Americans will frequently internally recognize the principles that are inherent in American culture. Of course, it is not a primer for zealous nationalism; rather, it is a honest exploration into the realm of the history of American culture. It is entertaining and informative. It is the best book I have read in several years!

Over the years I have read hundreds of books about America and this book is clearly one of the most stunning. In general, the book is well researched, well organized, and very readable. It explains America to Americans and to the world in a different and very clear and convincing way. Through most of the book I was enthralled. Most of his examples are well chosen, precise, concise, and convincing. But it is not perfect.

There are, in my opinion, two areas in the book which fail to match the high quality of thought, reason, and rationale found through most of it. First, in the chapter about Social Beliefs, McElroy appears to see America's history from the perspective of the proverbial WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant) and thus he ignores the lack of inclusion in the American mainstream at various times of such groups as Eastern European immigrants, Catholic immigrants, non-Christian immigrants, Asian immigrants, and Hispanic immigrants. He also neglects to mention that, in general, Americans of mixed raced were/are denigrated by both of the races from which they were/are descended. And he concludes the chapter by saying that if immigrants fail to succeed socially and economically in America it is no one's fault but there own. How amazingly naive.

Second, all of his fairness and impartiality and perspective seem to fall apart in the concluding section in which he views a very narrow period of time in America (the last 40 years or so) and suggests that many of the values on which this country was founded and built have fallen to the wayside. He concludes by saying there are some signs that things might get better over time. Certainly damning with faint praise. He sounds like an ultra conservative radio commentator. It spoils the flavor of the entire book. It is almost as if the rest of the book was just a way of reeling the reader in so that he could present this final diatribe. A sad finish to an otherwise excellent book.

I agree that every American should read this book -- and everybody else for that matter. I don't agree that it's scholarly. Rather, it's a joy to read -- easy to understand even for a person with two master's degrees! Between McElroy's chapter on How American Culture was Formed and Ken Burns' Lewis & Clark, I don't know which makes my blood run red-white-and-bluer. And as a child of the anti-establishment `60s, it's done a lot toward helping me understand why we Americans do what we do. It's the best history book I've ever read, the best history course I've ever taken or taught. I'm buying it for my home library for my grandchildren to use as a resource. We're also using it as a resource for a book on urban planning.

Beliefs A book review

Its been said that we learn nothing from history. This appears to be true, but only to the extent that history is ignored. When we pay attention to history, we are bound to learn something. A good dose of history can sometimes put us back on a road we've tended to leave. This may be the case while reading a brief account of how America and the American way of came to be.

In some 230 pages John Harmon McElroy reminds readers of the various reasons America developed as it did. McElroy, in American Beliefs (1999) from Ivan Dee Publishers, Chicago, expounds upon twenty-five beliefs or ideas that have contributed to America's development. The book, subtitled: "What keeps a big country and a diverse people united," has ten chapters. McElroy, professor emeritus of English at the University of Arizona, would have his readers look at the things which have kept us, as a people, together instead of the things which have so often divided us.

The 24 beliefs are listed under seven of the ten chapter headings: Primary Beliefs of American Culture, Immigrant Beliefs, Frontier Beliefs, Religious and Moral Beliefs, Social Beliefs, Political Beliefs and Beliefs on Human Nature. Along the way in his treatment of these beliefs McElroy shows how it came about that the land which developed into America was different from developments in Canada, Central & western South America and in Brazil. All of these areas were receiving European emigrants at about the same time, but development here was much different than in the other regions. So the author works to give a broad overview of history and how America came forth in a unique way.

One example of the beliefs McElroy presents is one we might think is only common sense: everyone must work. Such an idea or belief, it seems, developed in contrast to what was usual in England and much of northern Europe, the areas from which most people came. In the old country there was an aristocracy in which certain people, because of their birthrights, were expected to be served by others, those lesser-born people. This system did not work on these shores as there was simply to much to do, to survive...no place for lazy bones. So those who expected to be served were told, in effect, work or die. (Sounds like: 2 Thessalonians 3:10 "For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.") So those who had wished to be served, worked..and the belief that everyone must work became a part of our culture, and pretty much remains that way today. While people reach different economic stages, none is considered a nobleman by birth.and this was a new idea.

McElroy takes a little different twist on the idea that America is a chosen land, as being chosen of God. On page 131 he says: "The United States is God's country in the sense that Americans for many generations have felt that their nation has been especially blessed by God, that it could never have been established and endured so successfully without God's favor and protection. The belief is also true in the sense that, as a people, Americans have believed that God has wanted to use America as part of a divine plan for the redemption of mankind, by the creation of a new nation modeled on new principles of behavior. America is also a 'chosen country' in the sense that those who created it were mostly those who chose to emigrate to it and descendants."

Of special interested in these days of much discussion about the idea of Freedom of Religion, McElroy addresses the 'free exercise' clause of that first amendment to the U-S Constitution. Like many who insist that the Constitution only makes sense when its original intent is maintained, he makes this statement which needs to resound in many courts and public places today: "No provision of the Constitution protects any citizen from being offended by the religious practices of another citizen." How often we have instituted some legislation because someone is offended by religion, but the Constitution says there shall be 'freedom to exercise' our religious positions, regardless of any offense received., perhaps limited only to the extent of causing some public hazard. This clearly points out the value of history because as we have gotten away from initial Constitutional meanings, we have wandered off the road into confusion.

The books concludes with some observations, that much has happened in this culture in the past 40 years or so, perhaps instigated by the Supreme Court's decision to eliminate school prayers. "It is certain," he says, " that since WW-II some principles of American culture have been emphasized to the detriment of others. The principle of freedom, for instance, has been promoted without regard to responsibility, calls for improvement have been made without regard to practicality, and equality has sometimes been demanded with a zeal that ignores differences among individuals. Too often in the last 40 years of the 20th century, it seems, America's cultural history has been set aside in favor of uncompromising ideologies."

The book is an easy read and recommended for anyone interested in American history, especially high school and college students needing a better appreciation of what it means to be an American.

Dan Schobert August 29, 1999

I read these works for a graduate seminar on Aristotle. I think Aristotle's ethics is his most seminal work in philosophy. In early 1960's virtue ethics came to fore. It is a retrieval of Aristotle. It has very close parallels to the ancient Chinese philosophy of Confucius and the modern philosophy espoused in the 1970's called Communitarianism.

For Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics, (EN) is about human life in an embodied state. Area of inquirery for EN is "good" this is his phenomenology. What does "good" mean? He suggests good means "a desired end." Something desirable. Means towards these ends. Such as money is good, so one can buy food to eat because "eating is good." In moral philosophy distinction between "intrinsic good" vs. "instrumental good." Instrumental good towards a desire is "instrumental good" like money. Thus, money is an "instrumental good" for another purpose because it produces something beyond itself. Instrumental good means because it further produces a good, "intrinsic good" is a good for itself, "for the sake of" an object like money. "Intrinsic good" for him is "Eudemonia=happiness." This is what ethics and virtues are for the sake of the organizing principle. Eudemonia=happiness. Today we think of happiness as a feeling. It is not a feeling for Aristotle. Best translation for eudaimonia is "flourishing" or "living well." It is an active term and way of living for him thus, "excellence." Ultimate "intrinsic good" of "for the sake of." Eudaimonia is the last word for Aristotle. Can also mean fulfillment. Idea of nature was thought to be fixed in Greece convention is a variation. What he means is ethics is loose like "wealth is good but some people are ruined by wealth." EN isn't formula but a rough outline. Ethics is not precise; the nature of subject won't allow it. When you become a "good person" you don't think it out, you just do it out of habit!

You can have ethics without religion for Aristotle. Nothing in his EN is about the afterlife. He doesn't believe in the universal good for all people at all times like Plato and Socrates. The way he thought about character of agent, "thinking about the good." In addition, Aristotle talked about character traits. Good qualities of a person who would act well. Difference between benevolent acts and a benevolent person. If you have good character, you don't need to follow rules. Aretç=virtue, in Greek not religious connotation but anything across the board meaning "excellence" high level of functioning, a peak. Like a musical virtuoso. Ethical virtue is ethical excellence, which is the "good like." In Plato, ethics has to do with quality of soul defining what to do instead of body like desires and reason. For Aristotle these are not two separate entities.

To be good is how we live with other people, not just focus on one individual. Virtue can't be a separate or individual trait. Socrates said same the thing. To be a human being can't be just individual trait. Aristotle says we deploy reason to discover virtues and happiness. Logos=reason, ordering, or arranging. Logos="organization of desire." Virtues are those characteristics that allow humans to achieve eudemonia, which allows this high level of life.

Eudaimonia parsed is Eu="good, demon="sacred force" which is not in our control. Thus eudaimonia originally meaning is "blessing" or "good fortune" good happens to you but not planned or not by your effort. But, EN has to do with our own efforts. Important concept for Aristotle, good upbringing for children is paramount if you don't have it, you are a lost cause. Being raised well is "good fortune" a child can't choose their upbringing. Happenstance is a matter of chance.

Aristotle's many and the wise distinction. What is the aim of ethics or political science? Hoi Polloi=masses believe that the aim of living well and doing well is "happiness" such as wealth and honor and pleasure. Plato thinks it is a higher ideal. Plato believed that people were interested in wealth honor and pleasure, but he also believed in the "Universal, or pure good" which transcended the other "goods" in "pure good" is ultimate "good." Aristotle is saying that there is a variety of opinions of what "the good or happiness" is.

Utilitarian vs. moral philosophy like Kant, who believed in universal principles. Utilitarian is greater good cost benefit analysis. Both have to do with reasoning what is right. Aristotle says that ethics is part of political science or society, we are social animals, and this is our nature. Social arrangements give shape to individuals. Aristotle says we must recognize the difference between arguments from principles and towards principles. He has Plato in mind here who thought that the "pure good" was the ultimate principle, and once you get that, you will argue from that you will argue from principle. Kant thought similarly with Plato. Kant says the universal principle of the categorical imperative is then a universal nation set and once you get that principle that will be your measure, and so you will think from the categorical imperative to find out what is good. Utilitarianism argues in the same way as Plato and Kant. The principle that brings happiness to the greatest number, once you get that principle that will be from which you will argue. Aristotle says difference between arguing from principles and towards them, the second one, arguing towards principles is what he prefers because that is phenomenology. You don't assume a principle ahead of time and then find a way to fashion everything around you into that principle. You start with appearances and work your way towards some principle. Begin with what is known to us or evident to us and then build the idea of what "happiness" is. This is his phenomenology. Some people will say getting pleasure will bring you happiness, he will say well let's examine that and we will see. This is why we must be raised properly, it is the absolute starting point, without this proper rearing, ethics is futile. Thus, EN is a refinement of already functioning patterns, for him child rearing and education of the young is the absolute starting point. Aristotle says without good background people won't learn the virtues, we must rear children in a good way.

There is no one way to have a single principle in ethics or unify all instances of "the good," thus, Plato is wrong in trying to find "the good." Aristotle continues his critique of Plato and Socrates. No absolute universal term must survey different instances. Eudemonia is a climax word gathering all the features of "living well." Eudemonia is a guideword that gathers all the "ends." Ergon="function." One could say function is "its work," achieving something. Function means work, its activity. EN is how to order human life. Important function of human soul is in accordance with reasoning. Function and logos is the peculiar work of a human. Humans have set of capacities. Logos and reason is organization of desires. Logos thus means organizing and gathering capacities. Ordering skills and capacities as in learning a musical instrument. Activity comes in a lot with eudemonia we are truly happy when we are functioning well.

Pleasure cannot be an ultimate good. Part of the "good life" involves external goods like money, one can't attain "good life" if one is poor and always working. Socrates said material goods don't matter, then he always mooched off of his friends! Aristotle surmises that the highest form of happiness is contemplation. In Aristotle's Rhetoric, he lists several ingredients for attaining eudaimonia. Prosperity, self-sufficiency, etc., is important, thus, if you are not subject to other, competing needs. A long interesting list. It is common for the hoi polloi to say pleasure=happiness. Aristotle does not deny pleasure is good; however, it is part of a package of goods. Pleasure is a condition of the soul. In the animal world, biological beings react to pleasure and pain as usual. They are the marks of events of health on an organism. Whenever a soul is being fulfilled, it is accompanied by the feeling of pleasure for Aristotle. Pleasure of sex as an example, it insures our reproductive continuance. Thus, on a higher level, like in humans there must be some truth to this as well. Humans as reasoning beings must pursue knowledge to fulfill human nature. It must be pleasurable to seek knowledge and other virtues and if it is not there is something wrong according to Aristotle. These are the higher pleasures and so you may have to put off lower pleasures for the sake of attaining "higher pleasures."

Phronçsis= "intelligence," really better to say "practical wisdom." The word practical helps here because the word Phronçsis for Aristotle is a term having to do with ethics, the choices that are made for the good. As a human being, you have to face choices about what to do and not to do. Phronçsis is going to be that capacity that power of the soul that when it is operating well will enable us to turn out well and that is why it is called practical wisdom. The practically wise person is somebody who knows how to live in such a way so that their life will turn out well, in a full package of "goods." Phronçsis has a special meaning especially in contrast of Episteme= "scientific knowledge" where you are able to deduce reliable conclusions by way of following general principles. For Aristotle, Phronçsis is not deductive or inductive knowledge like episteme; Phronçsis is not a kind of rational knowledge where you operate in either deduction or induction, you don't go thru "steps" to arrive at the conclusion. Therefore, Phronçsis is a special kind of capacity that Aristotle thinks operates in ethics. Only if you understand what Aristotle means by phronesis do you get a hold on the concept. My way of organizing it, it is Phronçsis that is a capacity that enables the virtues to manifest themselves.

What are the virtues? Phronçsis is the capacity of the soul that will enable the virtues to fulfill themselves. Virtue ethics is the characteristics of a person that will bring about a certain kind of moral living, and that is exactly what the virtues are. The virtues are capacities of a person to act well. All of the virtues can be organized by way of this basic power of the soul called Phronçsis. There are different virtues, but it is the capacity of Phronçsis that enables these virtues to become activated. Basic issue is to find the "mean" between extremes; this is how Aristotle defines virtues.

Humans are not born with the virtues; we learn them and practice them habitually. "We reach our complete perfection through habit." Aristotle says we have a natural potential to be virtuous and through learning and habit, we attain them. Learn by doing according to Aristotle and John Dewey. Then it becomes habitual like playing a harp. Learning by doing is important for Aristotle. Hexis= "state," "having possession." Theoria= "study." The idea is not to know what virtue is but to become "good." Orthos logos= "correct reasoning," or "arranging." EN is not exact answer but an outline. General and particular cases are inexact. Orthos logos is connected to Phronçsis. Aristotle's "mean" is not the mathematical middle. It is more of a balance of the extremes. Orthos logos= "successful ordering."

Emphasis on finding the balance of the mean. Each virtue involves four basic points.

1. Action or circumstance. Such as risk of losing one's life.
2. Relevant emotion or capacity. Such as fear and pain.
3. Vices of excess and vices of deficiency in the emotions or the capacities. Such as cowardice is the excess vice of fear, recklessness is the excess deficiency.
4. Virtue as a "mean" between the vices and deficiencies. Such as courage as the "mean."

No formal rule or "mean" it depends on the situation and is different for different people as well. For example--one should eat 3,000 calories a day. Well depends on the health and girth of the person, and what activity they are engaged in. It is relative to us individually.
All Aristotle's qualifications are based on individual situations and done with knowledge of experience. Some things are not able to have a "mean" like murder and adultery because these are not "goods."
For Aristotle unlike the Christians, pride is a virtue. For example: 1. I did something that merits attention. 2. Self regard. 3. mean between, boastful vice and humility as deficiency. 4. Pride.
A fully developed virtuous person has cultivated themselves through experience and habit so they act effortlessly in living virtuously.

The word decision for Aristotle is a sophisticated adult taking an action, not a knee jerk reaction or child making a choice. Decisions refine people to act in a more sophisticated way. Idea of making a decision is a circumstance about making a choice between several options and picking one to act on, thus we bring it into being; it is not always necessarily the clear choice. Famous Aristotle quote- "We deliberate not about ends, but what about promotes ends." His example is the physician that does not deliberate about whether or not to heal his patient this is his function. He will have deliberated about becoming a physician or not. Many challenge Aristotle's idea on this.

Justice living well can only happen in a political society. Justice is a virtue that is not a individual trait, it is in relation to other people. Justice is other regarding not just self-regarding.

1. Virtue of justice.
2. Lawfulness. This is political society, abide by the laws.
3. Fairness, or distributive justice. There are many goods in life, so the question is who gets what.

Virtue of justice is above the other two. A person must have character traits above just abiding by the law to be considered virtuous.
Five virtues of the soul. These five virtues of thought all have to do with truth.

1. Epistçmç= "Scientific knowledge"
2. Technç= "craft"
3. Phronçsis = "Intelligence" really "Intellectual virtue that ethics is concerned with."
4. Nous= "understanding" (really the minds capacity to have insight into universals).
5. Sophia= "Wisdom." Aristotle says from a technical standpoint, Sophia is a combination of Epistçmç and nous.

Akrasia= "incontinence" really "weakness of the will. Socrates thought that all virtues are instances of intelligence or Phronçsis. Aristotle criticizes Socrates idea of virtue, virtue is not caused by state of knowledge it is more complicated. Aristotle does not think you have to have a reasoned principle in the mind and then do what is right, they go together.

The distinctions between continent and incontinent persons, and moderate (virtue) and immoderate (not virtuous) persons is as follows:

1. Virtue. Truly virtuous people do not struggle to be virtuous, they do it effortlessly, very few people in this category, and most are in #2 and #3.
2. Ethical strength. Continence. We know what is right thing to do but struggle with our desires.
3. Ethical weakness. This is akrasia incontinence. Happens in real life.
4. Vice. The person acts without regret of his bad actions.
5.
What does Aristotle mean by "fully virtuous"? Ethical strength is not virtue in the full sense of the term. Ethical weakness is not a full vice either. This is the critique against Socrates idea that "Knowledge equals virtue." No one can knowingly do the wrong thing. Thus, Socrates denies appetites and desires. Aristotle understands that people do things that they know are wrong, Socrates denies this. Socrates says if you know the right thing you will do it, Aristotle disagrees. The law is the social mechanism for numbers 2, 3, 4. A truly virtuous person is their own moral compass.

I recommend Aristotle's works to anyone interested in obtaining a classical education, and those interested in philosophy. Aristotle is one of the most important philosophers and the standard that all others must be judged by.

ken Telford provides a close examination of the text necessary for those without Greek or philosophy and immensely helpful to both classical scholars and philosophers. The analysis itself is quite wonderful and is helped by continuing contrasts with other Greek and modern philosophies. In addition, Prof. R. McKeons analytic schema is explicated to give a complete understanding of Aristotles position and its connection with other thinkers. More than all those good things, Telford shares with us his insights into life gleaned from decades reflecting about Aristotle and familiarity with his philosophy and our lives.

Ken Telford's translations and commentaries of Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics are the most significant reassessment of ancient thought since the Middle Ages first discovered the incredible wonder of Greek civilization. The discoveries made by Telford have been so basic and so important as to drastically change the significance of almost everything the Greeks said.

These disocveries were made in two areas, which never impacted on one another, until one person became skilled in both areas, linguistics, especially Greek, and the indispensible rigor in philosophic training for which Telford is well known. For until now, there have been few scholars, sensitive to both the profoundest philosophic problems and the nuances of linguistic implications.

Telford discovered that what the Greeks had tried to say was obscured by the projection, upon their language and their works, of precisely the reductive way of thinking that their philosophy was trying to correct. It is as if, in Othello, the only way to the understanding of Desdemona were through the eyes of Iago, or as in Much Ado About Nothing, the way to the understanding of Hero must be through the eyes of John the Baptist.

Above all, Telford has demonstrated that the Greeks were well aware of the procedure they used while today there are few who even understand the relevance of procedure to science or philosophy. And it is procedure, far more that discoveries consequent to procedure, that constitutes, not only the greatest contribution of the Greeks, but the knowledge from which modern science might most sensibly profit. For the Greeks were conscious of their own acts far beyond our own awareness of ourselves. And no one has better articulated this factor of science, discovered by the Greeks, the variety of ways inquiry might be accomplished, than Telford.

The cliche that translating from one language to another is to provide an interpretation is true. Fortunately, Prof. Telford knows all the nuances of that problem including the cultural divide in time, space, & thought which separate Attic Greek from contemporary American English. He also, uniquely since William of Moerbeke translated Aristotle from Greek into Latin, has guarded the idea that each Greek word should have, ideally, a single English word as its equivalent consistently translating it (the Greek word) the same way each time. This, along with a very helpful index, permits the reader to check Prof. Telford's translation and see for himself whether or not it is both accurate and fits the argument as it is developped in the whole text. The point that translating and interpretation are intimately connected shows itself here in the benefit that each receives. The text is illuminated by understanding of Aristotle's principles and methods as well as that understanding is furthered by a translation in sympathy with Aristotle's methods and problems. This book is a continuation of Telford's extraordinary contribution (tr. & commentary on the "Poetics") both to Aristotelian studies as well as the humanities in general. All lovers of Aristotle will have their understanding of his greatness and goodness clarified and improved by this translation.

One is continually astounded by the prescience of thought displayed by the ancient Greek philosophers, and Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics is indeed an exemplary representative of the field. As president of the world's only superpower, one must continually balance many important concerns -- not the least of which is ensuring that one operates from the highest of ethical principles, and Nicomachean Ethics certainly retains a considerable amount of relevance -- even today.I have found that the various translations of Nicomachean Ethics miss some important, yet subtle, details of Aristotle's original writings, therefore I recommend readers to explore the tome in its original Greek. Aristotle was certainly a very important thinker -- unparalleled in his day, and still with valuable contributions to make in this modern era. Nicomachean Ethics is extraordinarily rich in ideas and I have unashamedly borrowed numerous themes for incorporation into my public speeches. More personally, one also enjoys discussing Aristotle's point of view with the more intelligent and refined elements of the policy-formulation side of one's current administration.I cannot recommend Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics enough to other world leaders.

Dr Sanchez-H does a splendid job of documenting the influences inside and outside of Bolivia that shaped Bolivian film and culture. His work not only uses an analytical process but is highly creative as well. A "must read" for anyone interested in Latin American history, film, and politics. Two thumbs up!

Wonderfull book. Both Jorge Ruiz, 'the Bolivian Bob Flaherty' and Jorge Sanjines, 'the Pearl of the Andes', have produced works that stand the test of time. They are real filmmakers, in heart and soul. And trough their works speaks deep passion for the lives lived in this remote area of the world. Did you know that documentarist Jorge Ruiz was the first one to come up with the idea for the story that eventually resulted in 'Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid'?
And that the Jorge Sanjines picture that stars GERALDINE CHAPLIN, 'PARA RECIBIR EL CANTO DE LOS PÁJAROS' was photographed by the great Bolivian cinematographer Guillermo Ruiz? The son of Jorge!

A book descrbing in depth the present and past reality ofbolivina filmmakers, actors an d the strong political backgorundbehind it, showing the harsh reality of this 3rd world drug republic. a must for dope users and film freaks as well

Three unusual areas of film history at last receive their due. The Art and Politics of Bolivian Cinema, by Jose Sanchez-H. (Scarecrow Press, Lanham, Maryland) places this Latin American nation's films in a historical and sociological context, and features interviews with some of the leading directors, above all Sanjines.

"...a valuable contribution to the still slim bibliography on Bolivian Cinema...a vivid and total mosaic of the history of Bolivian Cinema."-From the introduction by Jorge Ruiz, Bolivian Filmmaker

Other Reviews:

"Detailed information, not available elsewhere in English, fills the book, making it a major resource..."-FILM QUARTELY

"...a very comprehensive history based not only on sound research, but also on interviews with Bolivia's most significant filmmakers..a very valuable tool for students and scholars of film and Latin American culture."-BRITISH BULLETIN OF PUBLICATIONS ON LATIN AMERICA

I recently completed my Bachelor of Fine Arts degree and this book was very helpful as a reference for my art history classes!

I am a docent and at times a docent trainer, and this guide came in very handy when I was preparing for an exhibition on contemporary artists. It is well-written, to the point, and has extensive coverage for a little book!

A glossary of art terms. This book is a definite must for those writing analyses of art. It's also good for looking up those tricky terms in your text books. It is filled with artsy terms and illustrations. I used it in all my art history classes.

I'm a BFA student at Virginia Tech heading to grad school and this is an excellent book to teach from, have as a reference, or just thumb through for fun. Simple and succinct while still thorough. It's really an invaluable thing to have for ready info at your fingertips. This book has been part of the curriculum here for Performance Art, Found Object Sculpture, and Installation classes, and everyone in the class universally approves and finds it helpful.

Perfect for writing critiques and analyses from all art movements. Great glossary of terms for a beginning art student looking up hard-to-understand words in text books.