Domain Books

This series of lectures by James illustrates well the fundamental attributes of pragmatism. As such it is an important book for any philosopher to read. A pity then that that the publication is so poorly published and typeset. It is clear that this book was set using a common word processor and that the user was not even able to control the size of type from one paragraph to the next. The inclusion of capitalisations in text is very distracting and interrupts the flow of the reader, which is further made difficult by the use left aligned text as though this was little more than a typed out draft for a letter. Even common typesetting practices such as allowing sufficient linespacing are absent. Such an important historical work deserves better than the treatment given this imprint.

I rate this work 5 stars because of its immense influence on today's common ways of thinking and its importance in understanding the rise of science and capitalism in America.

James challenges philosophers of all ilks to give us a net value to their systems; that is, how do they affect human life or make the world we know better or worse for us? James insists that no philosophy finally matters unless it impacts life in concrete terms. To lock down his philosophy he fashions a new model of truth, stating that whatever is beneficial is true.

There are huge problems here, e.g., the rise of the subjective. James doesn't specify to whom truth should be beneficial (humanity in general? Subjective selves?), so his theory leads to strange quandaries. It would be "true" for a sound-minded criminal on trial to plead insanity, and it would also be "true" for the prosecutor to charge guilt and sanity. Obviously, confusing "useful" and "true" is a category obfuscation. As well, morality would suffer on this view. If lying is useful then regarding lies as truths is fully permissible by James's line of thought.

Nevertheless, the book is important to read because so much of today's world is run in terms of the useful rather than the ideal or intrinsically good. That is why art is marginalized, morality compromised, and capital generating systems glorified. We need James's Pragmatism to understand ourselves today.

In 1906 and 1907, William James delivered a series of eight lectures at the Lowell Institute, Boston, and at Columbia University, New York City which he published as "Pragmatism: A New Way for Some Old Ways of Thinking". This short book, which James further described as "popular" lectures on philosophy constituted James's fullest statement of his thought up to that time. It remains a provocative, valuable, and important work, a classic of American thought.

I want to mention some important considerations in James's overall approach in this book. First, I was struck, in reading "Pragmatism", by the importance James attaches to the philosophical quest. He begins his opening lecture, "The Present Dilemma in Philosophy" with the observation that an individual's philosophy is the most important thing about that person because it gives his or her sense of "what life honestly and deeply means." James makes high and traditional claims for the importance of philosophical investigation -- claims which not been followed by a number of subsequent professional philosophers.

Second, James wrote his book for a lay audience of educated individuals whom he called "amateur philosophers". People in this class, for James, were not technically trained academic philosophers but rather were those who had a sense of both the claims of religion and spirituality and the claims of empirical science. These amateurs, James continued, wanted, in our modern terminology to "have it all"; and they were inclined to overlook conflicts or inconsistencies between types of beliefs that they wished simultaneously to hold. Many of James philosophical successors did not follow James in writing for amateurs. They wrote instead for other philosophers.

Third, James saw his role as a philosopher in mediating between the claims of Darwinian and physical science and religion. In a memorable phrase, he divided philosophers and philosophical tendencies into two broad types: "tender-minded" and "tough minded". The tender-minded thinkers of his day, the focus of much criticism in "Pragmatism" were the absolute idealists, American and British successors to Hegel. The tough-minded thinkers were empiricists, wedded to factual investigation and to materialism. Tough minded thinkers wanted nothing to do with metaphysical or religious abstractions. James conceived of pragmatism as a way to accept what was valuable in both tender-minded and tough-minded thinkers.

Thus, in the body of his lectures, James developed pragmatism as a method and a theory of truth. Pragmatism is an instrumental philosophy which holds, James states at one point, that "ideas (which themselves are but parts of our experience) become true just in so far as they help us to get into satisfactory relation with other parts of our experience." (Note the reference to "ideas" in this definition which may tie James unduly to some previous methods of thinking that he would otherwise reject.) Philosophy is not a subject for intellectualist abstractions but rather a tool to help people understand themselves and their needs in specific situations, consistently with their needs in other situations. Pragmatism, for James, is a forward-looking philosophy which tests ideas by their consequences, both in matters of science and in matters of religious belief. Thus, for James pragmatism is a philosophy which mediates between science and religion. Unlike some of his fellow pragmatists, the religious life was important to James.

James applies his basic approach to pragmatism to address traditional philosophical questions, including the nature of substance, personal identity and free-will. His discussions are still worth reading. For me, the strongest section of the book was the Lecture IV in which James contrasts philosophical monism and pluralism. This chapter helped me to both to understand and to question the fascination that claims to the unity of the world or of experience have exerted and continue to exert on many thinkers. This chapter is an excellent exposition of philosophical pluralism -- the view that there are many things and that they may only be imperfectly and incompletely connected. The lectures on "Pragmatism and Common Sense" and on "Pragmatism and Humanism" are contemporary and important in that they suggest the absence of fixed categories and the legitimacy of alternative means of describing experience for different purposes.

James writes so beautifully that he sometimes lacks the technical precision that might make his ideas clearer. He frequently uses loose metaphors that, while intruiging, serve to obfuscate rather than clarify his position. This is particularly the case in lecture VI, "Pragmatism's Conception of Truth" in which James expounds upon his claim that the truth of an idea is the use we can make of it. As James himself points out, his position was subject to a great deal of criticism, much of which may be misdirected. But James does not entirely help himself in expounding his position on this difficult question.

In the final chapter of his work, James explains his philosophical stance as a meliorist -- one who looks towards the future and tries to work to make his life and the world a better place. He finds that, for him, some form of religious theism is essential for this endeavor. While rejecting transcendental idealism and the absolute, James accepts the existence of a God, if not the all-powerful, all-knowing, unitary God of traditional Jewish-Christian theology. The method of knowing an idea by its use and consequence finds a place, for James, in both matters of the spirit and matters of science. Thus, James claims that pragmatic thought is able to honor both the claims of spirit and the claims of science. James modified his pragmatism in subsequent works and ultimately may have adopted a position closer to the idealism he criticizes in "Pragmatism".

With many modifications and qualifications, much of James's strategy for mediating between science and religion remains important and has been developed by subsequent thinkers. He articulated an important mission for philosophy and made it a subject and a quest which could continue to inspire and to help people with their lives. James is a challenging thinker that deserves to be read. He still has a great deal to teach.

Robin Friedman

It has been said that Pragmatism is the only philosophical school America has given the world. James is its great popularizer along perhaps with Dewey. Pragmatism in James is a ' theory of truth' which cancels common - sense correspondance theory of truth, and says that truth is the ' cash - value' of a proposition. The results of an idea or proposition in the marketplace are according to James ' its truth'. This sounds odd and in fact is certainly not what we ordinarily mean when we speak about the truth. It does make a certain sense however in trying to order the decisions of our life, and may help us in judging those beliefs we wish to hold on to.
My own sense is that this theory is pretty thin stuff, and the greater James is in the psychology of the ' Varieties of Religious Experience'
Again it seems to me that Pragmatism adds a certain element to the conception of Truth we should have, but it misses out on other crucial dimensions. There after all are truths which are painful, and truths which we do not want to know, and truths which it does not help us to know, and truths which we must grudgingly admit, and truths which do not promise to help us at all but may hurt us very much.

"The word 'pragmatism' is used everywhere today, from business to sports to politics. Although the word hadn't yet entered everyday language when William James published Pragmatism in 1907, the philosopher believed its doctrine had virtually become common sense in twentieth-century America. For James, pragmatism was a specific philosophical alternative to essentialism and foundationalism and argued that ideas are meaningful only insofar as they have practical consequences in concrete human experience; however today pragmatism has come to denote merely a general willingness to compromise principles, even to the point of selfishness or irresponsibility. Written in an engaging and accessible style, Pragmatism is a valuable corrective to modern uses of the word, since the voice that speaks in its pages embodies precisely the opposite values from the pejorative senses the word has acquired."

Evan MacIan and James Turnbull. Once you have read this novel, they are part of you: their thoughts are yours; their blood flows through you. But it is not just the two incredible protagonists that stay with you for ever. Father Michael, Professor Lucifer (like it or not): you begin to see the world through all of their eyes, and your own sight is all the clearer for it. This is Chesterton at his best.

Whatever your doctrine, whatever your mind, your spiritual life will be transformed by this book. Chesterton's "Orthodoxy," while wonderful, can be quite inaccessible, as well as being often uninteresting to the non-Catholic mind. But in "The Ball and The Cross," Chesterton's views cannot help but reach you and transform you, whatever you believe. In MacIan's fervent and eloquent speeches on Christianity; in Turnbull's short and terse explanations of atheism; and especially in the old drunk beggar's words of wisdom, Chesterton brings eternal truths into his work with eloquence and style. This book is worth having and treasuring.

Someone (Belloc?) said only Catholics and atheists are willing to play their beliefs all the way out. All other spiritual postions are compromise. This amusing novella illustrates the point. The main characters, an ardent Catholic and a committed atheist, wish to engage in a duel to the death in defense of their beliefs. They are continually interrupted by a stream of characters representing all sorts of moral types. Although the subject is interesting, the narrative doesn't flow well: first you have pages of philosophical dialog, and then intervals of action and plot development of varying length. The result is great difficulty in keeping everything straight. Although the book contains the usual GK wit and wisdom, it is not as tightly composed as his better works.

A word about this (Dover) edition: hard to read. The spacing between rows of type is very narrow and the margins are very wide.

The Ball and the Cross, (1906), G. K. Chesterton's second novel, both entertains and intellectually challenges the reader. Early in the story two diametrically opposed protagonists, Evan MacIan, a devout Catholic and James Turnbull, a passionate atheist, are interrupted by the secular authorities before they are able to carryout a traditional duel by swords. They escape with their swords, but become subjects of a countrywide manhunt and the center of media attention.

Chesterton's absurd plot thinly disguises a witty, profound, and provocative religious and philosophical inquiry, one that resonates with today's readers as well as it did with readers a century ago. (I suspect that not that much has really changed. In our contemporary context non-believers still distrust sincere believers, perhaps even more so given the growth in Moslem extremism, the Arab-Jewish conflict, and Christian activism in American politics.)

The duel is continually postponed due either to the untimely appearance of police, or to unexpected encounters with an eclectic mix of characters, all apparently allegorical representations of one type or another. As the story proceeds, we readers find that the two duelists are more alike than different, as they both hold firm beliefs, in contrast to the secular world around them which has largely embraced relativism and more passive religious convictions.

I suggest that you also visit the other reader reviews as they offer nsightful and interesting perspectives. Chesterton brings out the best in a reader. His stories encourage us, even prod us, to consider and reflect upon profound issues and matters - although he does so in a witty, amusing, even whimsical context. Perhaps Chesterton is saying that religious and philosophical inquiry is simply too serious not to enjoy.

Entertaining and thought-provoking, the Ball and the Cross delivers a nice punch of Chesterton in a thoroughly amusing satire. I am continuously amazed at the genius of these beleaguered Englishment - Chesterton, Lewis, Belloc, Tolkien, et al. While the Ball and the Cross doesn't quite rival Lewis' Screwtape Letters in sheer creativity, it does tackle a more subtle theme.

Chesterton's comedic conflict in the triad of Christian/Atheist/Society is heavily relevant to today's Christian/Muslim/Secularist conflict, which I would argue is the defining tension driving world events. It is curious to see how even diametrically opposed Believers can ally against Disbelief or Apathy, or to see how seriously the Agnostic or Apathetic take the threat of sincere Belief.

I was a little stunned by Chesterton's luddite streak as it is expressed in the Devil and his machines, although this is not a surprise considering the turn-of-the-century changes in England, and would seem quite prescient over the next few decades of Total War. Still, given the modern secular alliance with neo-pagan nature-worship, I would probably draw the Devil hugging a tree rather than piloting an airship.

In all a rousing, entertaining jaunt through Chesterton's imagination and philosophy. I agree with other reviewers that Martin Gardner's Foreword should be read Afterward, but it is of great value and well written, and should not be skipped.

When I first began this book, I thought it was a bit boring and rather absurd. By the time I reached the middle I though it was rather witty and absurd. Now that I have reached the end of the book I think that it is extremely witty, profound, and wonderfully absurd. It was one of the most wonderfully rediculous books which I have ever read, ranking only with Chesterton's The Flying Inn in the level of absurdity. Chesterton manages to turn a very serious plot into a very rediculous plot (an attempted sword duel between a Christian and an atheist which takes place all over England, from cities to islands to insane asylums), fills it with witty and profound lines from both lead characters, and sucessgully provides a stunning rebuttal of the popular philosophies of his day (i.e. Nietzche, Tolstoy, etc.). This was my favorite Chesterton book until I read Manalive, and I seriously doubt that is has many rivals (or much competition at all) in the genra of profound absurd fiction.

Overall Grade: borderline A+

This is one of the funniest books I have ever read. The characters are wonderful and take you back to a more naive time. My husband and grandchildren love this book as much as I do.

I read this book as a very young child and, as I collect old children's books, ran across it in my searches. Of course, I read it again and enjoyed it even more this time. I suppose it is"politically incorrect" now, but that's the way things were then--right or wrong. I still find the book both funny and sweet. I had no idea that someone had created a series after Mrs. Calhoun's death. I would love to find some of them.

I purchased this book for my father who read it as a child. He exclaimed with delight when I took the book to him. He loved rereading it after 60 years and laughed hysterically thru most of the book. It's a quick read. I wish the press would publish the others in this series, there's certainly an audience for them.

Yes, this is a delightful tale featuring traditional Southern humor and dialect -- if you don't happen to be one of the impoverished, uneducated black children who add so much flavor to the context. This tale comes from an unfavorable time in our past when racism was systemic in our society, when those of the racial minority were, when convenient, treated kindly -- but always as second-class citizens, and everyone realized that.

This book's value, now, is one of education. Read this book, and understand how differently our society once was structured (in law and in practice) from today. Put yourself in the place of those relegated to the back, always vulnerable to the caprice of the favored race. And be glad that (regardless of what many insist) our society indeed has gotten better than during Billy Green Hill's times.

I remember finding this book when I was visiting my grandmother at age 9, and just came across it unpacking a box of books.
I'd recently read it to my infant, to see if it still had the charm and hilarity that I'd remembered when my grandma had read it to me. So many times children's books fall flat when you read them again as an adult. To my surprise, it was laugh-out-loud funny. Although, the southern drawl written into text can sometimes be difficult, it added to the charm, and I found myself starting to speak in a southern drawl in between reading chapters. Sometimes the language can be a bit un-nerving, seeing as we modern folk don't use racial epithets, the children used them in a loving way, describing people they knew and loved. But in today's world, the text can sometimes be uncomfortable. When I was reading I substitued modern, politically correct terms, and when my husband heard me read, couldn't tell the difference and thought it was a great little book. I don't want to deny the reality and language of the past, only to promote the innocence originally intended by Mrs. Calhoun.
I was amazed and gladened to see that Amazon.com carried the book (printed originally in 1909), and that people still enjoyed it. I highly recommend it.

Praise of Folly is what it was intended to be, a modest satire, not a masterwork. Erasmus was an interesting and accomplished man - one of the lights of his age. However, this work, written, basically, on a lark for his good friend, Thomas More, is a little difficult for the modern reader but is still, at times, quite humorous. Unlike the work of Jonathon Swift (many years later) there's little reason to read this unless you're a student of the period.

Granted this is pretty dry reading. Erasmus may not be the greatest writer. This does make for a turgid evening if one plans or desires to read it from cover to cover in one sitting. That said, Erasmus rode (if not found himself starting) the beginning wave of the great reformation. In his writings (which bear a not so slight foreshadowing to the great C.S. Lewis) Erasmus gives hope for all of us sinners in the guise of wit. An important addition to any library of classical literature.

"It is not wisdom to be always wise, and on the inward vision close the eyes" That is Santayana's wisdom. To play with it a bit ," It is not foolish always to be a fool, and on the outward shows and games of mankind make endless mockery. For who is the fool in the one place we are all to go?"
I remember reading this work in graduate school. A dutiful plodder wondering why I was not laughing out loud and being so amused. Rather I was falling asleep inside and finding the dull complaints of Erasmus a kind of spiritless exercise in predictable dumping on all things.
Alas, I am usually apologetic about not understanding works generations of mankind consider classics. But in this case I will make a modest disclaimer. This one is not in my eyes a great one, not even a very good one.
And now to another complaint. The great tolerant Erasmus who could see the folly of human greed and vanity and prejudice everywhere was himself quite vain and greed and prejudiced in regard to one very small minority of 'Europeans' who can claim to be the most persecuted people in the history of mankind. Why should I sing the praises of someone who hates me?
The bootsteps of Nazism march to the tune that Erasmus and Voltaire the two great ' liberators' of European mankind sing.
I have no praise for Erasmus folly and his wickedness in this.

Sorry, I tried several times to read this book. I hunted for passages that might interest me. Unfortunately, all I found was [the author] blowing his own horn. But then fantasy and science is about all that interests me. I'm sure someone with a historical bent would find this tale exhilarating.

To say the book has less than perfect unity in tone, as was written in the introduction, pg xv, is an understatement. The reader is never sure whether it is Folly or Erasmus who is talking. Perhaps for the goddess of Folly, contradictions and inconsistencies are the very follies desired - how are we mortals to tell?

And that is what we have here - all the inconsistencies, as, for example, mentioned in pages xiv-xv of the introduction again, that Erasmus wrote with the learned sophistry he denied schoolmen, philosophers, courtiers, theologians and monks. It's almost like Lao-Tzu and his Tao-Te Ching which includes the famous "The name that can be named is not the eternal name; the Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao," only to have a later poet, Po Chi-Yi, quip about the 10,000 word effort to say what cannot be said in the first place. Yes, he did say at the end that 'I hate an audience that won't forget,' but that's not a courtesy he proffered to his opponents, of whom the criticism by Erasmus seems caviling, carping and nitpicking. He should have emulated his inpiration, Lucian with his 'philosophers for sale,' and made points simple like that here. It would be unfair, though tempting, to think that Erasmus took Quitillian to heart (pg. 81, 'what can't be refuted can often be parried in laughter') and disguised his voice in silly chaos for what has not been thought out cogently.

So, one is not quite sure whether wasting away a life in idleness, corruption or avarice as priests, bishops and monks are wont to do is the same kind of folly as the folly that comes from the innocence of the simple minded people or children, since Erasmus never quite made it crystal clear. Do we praise folly here but condemn it otherwise - without unity of tone and consistency of the vantage point of the writer, the whole thing just becomes a mess of confusion.

What Erasmus wanted to say does deserve our attention, but one wishes that he could have done it in a more fluid style and without all that pretentious classical references, for unlike Lucian, he lived not in that period. And certainly it could be better organized into chapters and sections, and used some editing to eliminate the endless repetitions, ensure consistency and unity of tone. Casson's 'Selected Satires of Lucian' is a much better read and is highly recommended over this one.

This handy book takes common tasks and presents how to accomplish them, but it does more than that - it puts context around the dry reference material I usually end up using. That context makes a difference and ends up saving me time when I want to accomplish some task I don't do every day.

This book is a time and headache saver.

I find this book a good mate for everyone who likes more reading on printed paper rather than a pc screen.
Through the pages you'll find plenty of examples and advices, expecially in the FAQ sections, but on the other side every single word is already available on the samba's official site.
Maybe, if this book was cheaper, people could buy it and place it on their desktop as a trusted fella.

The name says it all. This book is an excellent guide for the latest version of Samba. From small networks to enterprise level integration, Terpstra walks the user through examples.

I recommend this book not only for the great examples, but because it is great at instruction. In the first chapter it reviews network scanning and nessus as a way of troubleshooting and understanding the protocols. This kind of instruction is hard to find in most books.

Another great feature of this book is the breadth of the subjects covered. From active directory to ldap to kerberos and security - I was impressed with just the table of contents.

Overall, you can find more in-depth coverage of any of the individual topics in the book, but no one source quite like this one. It is a great book both for novices and for experienced administrators newly faced with unix/windows integration with samba.

Most books either provide untested examples for how to do this sort of thing, and so can only be taken as illustrative, and/or they cover a very narrow range of tasks. Terpstra has done neither: he's provided examples that actually work, that have been tested in operational environments, and he has provided a broad range of examples, examples that are useable regardless of the network type in place.

Further, he has written this book in a very accessible way. While Samble-3 is targeted at Readers with experience in networking, this book is useable by newbies, as well. Although Terpstra provides some rationale for his setups, his step-by-step directions simply can be followed in cookbook fashion until experience teaches more broadly.

Using Linux in a Windows desktop environment requires the use of Samba for file and print sharing via the Windows explorer. But Samba has grown up as a full-fledged package for communicating between Linux and Windows over the last few years. Installing Samba as a Primary Domain Controller, implementing ldap for easy directory integration, or just installing it as a file and print server are all easy to do with the help of this book. The author takes a much easier to follow approach than most other writers on this subject. Instead of trying to go through each of the features and discuss them in detail he organizes the book by the type of installation and then walks you through a correct setup for that situation. For example some of the sections are: No-frills Samba Servers, Small Office Networking, Secure Office Networking, The 500-User Office, A Distributed 2000-User Network, Migrating NT4 Domain to Samba-3, and Migrating Netware Server to Samba-3. For each one of these situations the author dissects the technical issues, discusses each one, and then walks the reader through the implementing. The author also includes sections on things like performance, reliability, LDAP, and updating Samba. Nothing is left unexplained but each time you are told to check something or do something the exact syntax for doing it is given. Even with only very little or no Linux experience you can walk through this book and install a correctly functioning Samba server. Samba-3 by Example is highly recommended.

This is the first book by economist John Maynard Keynes, and one of his most important. Controversial when it was released, and probably still a little controversial today, this book is an interesting view into the mind of one of the most influential economical minds.

The Economic Consequences of the Peace always feels like it's going to get dragged down by statistics, but it rarely does. Indeed it's one of the best presentations of a heavily numerical argument in plain English that I've seen.

Keynes wants to convince us, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Germany will never be able to pay the reparations demanded of it. Accordingly, the middle 70% of the book is a detailed accounting of Germany's exports, imports, and internal health. Among many other findings, Keynes shows that Germany couldn't possibly pay the reparations without giving up most every creature comfort -- down to coffee and tobacco. And as for its exports, allowing Germany to wither economically would drag down the rest of Europe with it.

Keynes dispenses with that middle 70% as clearly and briskly as he can, as support for the moral argument. In large part, Germany cannot pull itself out of the hell it's in until its people have some confidence in the future -- until, in effect, they stop hoarding their bread under the mattress and start eating it instead.

Keynes explores this from an angle I hadn't thought of before. In essence, his point is that fears about the future change the world as it is today: why would you sign a long-term contract denominated in marks if you believed the marks would be valueless in a year? Under the circumstances, the honorable thing would be to refuse to do business with anything but German businesses. Before you can conduct foreign trade, you need currency stability. And, in turn, how can you expect currency stability when reparations force Germany to hand over nearly all of its gold and silver?

This book is an excellent blend of the moral and the statistical, the practical and the hopeful. And it also happens to be a terrific ground-level view of the world immediately after 1919.

This book achieved instant fame when it was published in 1919, not only for its scathing criticism of the Versailles Treaty but also for its personal attacks against leading signatories (especially Clemenceau and Wilson). For a book focused primarily on economic concerns, the text is surprisingly easy to read. However, the book's poor organization vitally detracts from its effectiveness. The principle reason the book is still famous today lies in the fact that it was written by none other than John Maynard Keynes, the founder of 20th century style, gov't & debt driven economics.

The book is organized into chapters on pre-war Europe, Allied statesmen, summary of key treaty points, reparations, post-war Europe predictions, and Keynes' suggestion of remedies to provide a practical treaty settlement. Unfortunately, within each chapter things are jumbled together without clear rhyme or reason. (Is this indicative of Keynes' own personal organization and logical thinking?)

Within the book, he makes a very practical (but politically infeasible) argument for a non-vindictive treaty. He basically suggests that the Allies should forget both about reparations and repayment of wartime debts from the other Allies, and instead they should settle (though not ideally) for frontier adjustments and confiscation of only German gov't property. (Did the German gov't sponsor Keynes' work in writing this book?)

Keynes argues that a crushing reparations burden on the German people would disincent them to produce anything beyond a mere subsistence minimum and discourage entrepreneurial enterprise. There is some logic in this point; however, later on he goes on to state that the US should forgive its $10 billion debt to its wartime allies ($5 billion of which was owed by the UK). Forgive me if I'm wrong, but doesn't such a move disincent American entreprises from entrepreneurship as well. It's extremely hypocritical that the Allied gov'ts desperately sought loans from the US during the war and then once it was over to claim that they couldn't pay them. If they didn't want to repay, then they shouldn't have borrowed the money - period. (If I borrow money to buy a home, the bank won't ever agree to forgive my debt - regardless of whether I'm out of work, injured, or the house burns down. I don't see why gov'ts should get any exceptional treatment.)

Notwithstanding his problems with disorganization and inconsistent logic, Keynes does produce a reasonable, brief list of treaty rememdies, especially in his efforts to restore economic life throughout Central and Eastern Europe. Not until the advent of the Cold War and the interests of extending American political influence would Keynes' policies largely succeed (albeit yet again to the detriment of American taxpayers).

Overall, I felt the book was ok. I would only recommend it if you have an interest in reading all of Keynes' work. Don't expect to find any theoretical economic insights in the book, though. Based on the high ratings on this page, I think the other reviewers here might have some pro-Keynesian bias.

John Maynard Keynes describes in sufficient detail, and in the flowing language of his day, the terms of the Treaty of Versailles - particularly how they laid the groundwork for future conflict in Europe. It is easy to view his ideas as commonsense in light of the benefits of hindsight, yet this book is remarkably insightful in its predictions that eventually manifested themselves during the Second World War. Above all, this work should be valued as a classic example that the Carthaginian terms of the Paris Peace Conference did not go unnoticed during their time. They were then, as now, seen as a dangerous effort in retribution that would only rub salt in the wounds of Europe.

This prescient book displays the keen insights of a genius observing a process and result with a devestating prediction later coming to fruition on schedule. It should serve as not only history and foresight but also as an invaluable lesson and warning for those who desire to dictate to defeated or weak nations from a position of obtained military might or success.

Joseph Conrad's Under Western Eyes should be of interest to those with a particular interest in Russia, especially the period of the late 19th century. Others may find the book boring, given that it is largely devoted to dialogue rather than action and trite in that the main conflict is the inner struggle of a man with his conscience. The title refers to the fact that the story is told by an English professor of literature who comes across a diary written by the book's protagonist. The reason Conrad gives for this manner of telling the story is that, in his view, Western readers cannot comprehend the circumstances of life in imperial Russia and can only view them through the eyes of a fellow Westerner. On pages 106 and 107 he has the professor say, "for this is a Russian story for Western ears (sic), which, as I have already observed, are not attuned to certain tones of cynicism and cruelty, of moral negation, and even of moral distress already silenced at our end of Europe." I find this statement to be incredibly ethnocentric, and as events later proved, entirely wrong. He adds that Western European countries have already had their revolutions and thus are no longer able to fully understand czarist Russia. We can certainly argue with this viewpoint and in my view this literary device does more to get in the way of the story than to help explain it.

In any case, the book begins with the professor saying that he has come across a manuscript written by a Russian student at St. Petersburg University, Kirylo Sidorovitch Razumov. Razumov is impoverished and without family and sees his only chance for success in life as coming from academic success. Accordingly he largely avoids the other students and is intent on his studies. As he is in his room one evening another student, Victor Haldin, comes to see him proclaiming that he has just assassinated a prominent political figure and asks Razumov to help him to escape. Razumov, having no sympathy for Haldin's cause, is reluctant to get involved but finally agrees to go to the lodgings of a sledge driver who has agreed to drive Haldin away to safety. But when he finds the man he is drunk and Razumov cannot arouse him. After beating him in disgust he begins to walk back to his room, pondering what to do next. Fearful that if Haldin stays with him too long he will be implicated as well, Razumov decides to give him up to the authorities. Haldin is then captured and executed.

Razumov is still under suspicion and finally receives a summons to go to the office of Councillor Milukin, who, as it turns out, is the head of the bureau in charge of revolutionary investigations. After what appears to Razamov to be a kind of cat-and-mouse game he is given permission to leave. As he puts his hand on the doorknob Milukin asks him where is going to go.

At this point part one of the book ends and the scene shifts to Geneva in part two. Here we meet the mother and sister of Haldin. They see him as the hope for their future lives and are devastated when they learn of Haldin's death. The mother goes into a state of shock and stays in her room staring out the window, while the daughter, Nathalie, an idealistic, but naïve, young woman, tries to make the best of the situation. Other revolutionaries appear on the scene most notably Peter Ivanovitch, the leader of the group, Madame de S___, whose money is apparently financing their operations and Sophia Antonova, a long time revolutionary.

The Haldin women receive a letter stating that a "friend" of Haldin is coming to Geneva and Nathalie begins to believe that this person will help them. The friend, of course, is Razumov, who has apparently reached an agreement with the government agents to spy on the revolutionaries. Razumov arrives and is accepted as a fellow revolutionary and friend of Haldin. He undergoes a difficult inner struggle trying to maintain this pretense, particularly in the light of the goodness and trust Nathalie shows him. The story then progresses as a struggle by Razumov with his conscience, whether to report on the revolutionaries or to reveal the truth about himself.

The book bears some resemblance to Crime and Punishment with its psychological overtones and dialogues about good and evil, right and wrong. Much of parts two and three are devoted to conversations and it is only in the last part that there is dramatic action. I rate it as three stars because it is not as good as the best of Conrad (Lord Jim), nor is it on a level with the really good fiction of Russian writers. I could rate it at 3 and a half or even 4 as well. It can be interesting reading and thought provoking and does end in dramatic fashion.

Impoverished Russian student Kirylo Razumov doesn't have a great deal in life to look forward to. From an obscure background--and possibly illegitimate--Razumov's one dream is to write a prize essay for an upcoming examination. Pathetically, he imagines that winning the coveted silver medal granted by the Ministry of Education will lead to an illustrious career. As Razumov daydreams about the contest, a few miles away, fellow student and revolutionary Victor Haldin throws a bomb on a politician. The politician is killed and Haldin seeks refuge with Razumov until he can safely leave St. Petersburg.

Razumov's solitary ways and quiet intensity have led Haldin to the mistaken conclusion that Razumov is a reflective person with similar political leanings. Razumov, however, sees Haldin's arrival as disastrous, and angrily worries that his unwilling involvement will cause him to seen as part of a revolutionary organization with which he has no sympathy. Razumov chooses to betray Haldin to the authorities and imagines that he will somehow then be free of the entire affair.

Once brought to the attention of the sinister Councillor Mikulin, Razumov is caught in a noose of intrigue and espionage. He becomes a tool for the state as he finds himself recruited as a spy and sent to Switzerland--here he is to report back on the activities of Haldin's mother and sister, Nathalie and any revolutionary contacts Haldin may have had. Razumov isn't motivated by idealism, or politics, nonetheless, he finds himself adrift in a nest of anarchists--with no moral guide, no convictions and no desire to be involved.

"Under Western Eyes" is one of the greatest novels of the twentieth century, and it's arguably Conrad's finest. It's to Conrad's credit that he ultimately creates sympathy for Razumov's character. At first, Razumov's desire to save his own hide seems despicable. But once the less-than-stellar motives of the violent anarchists are revealed, then he is seen caught between two opposing forces--a small insect about to be squashed in the political fanaticism of others. Nathalie Haldin acts as the moral centre of the novel as she refuses to become involved and used by the tainted politics of the "feminist" revolutionary Peter Ivanovitch. Ivanovitch and his decrepit, repulsive patron, Madame de S. spout fine speeches about revolution and equality while savagely and hypocritically mistreating their downtrodden servant, Tekla. Razumov is one of the few characters to recognize this servant as a fellow human being.

Once the story moves to Switzerland, the tale unfolds through the eyes of an English gentleman who admires Nathalie Haldin while remaining a perplexed observer of Russian politics. Conrad includes a few pages of commentary at the end of the novel in which he notes that "the ferocity and imbecility of an autocratic rule" creates an equivalent response--the "atrocious answer of a purely Utopian revolutionism encompassing destruction." "Under Western Eyes" is often overlooked on college curriculums in favour of the more accessible "Heart of Darkness." And that's unfortunate, as this is a marvelously complex novel--displacedhuman

...of the 20th Century written in English by a Pole! Honestly, you could remove any and all of the prepositional qualifiers from that assertion, and I'd still be willing to defend it. Under Western Eyes is a superb novel in every way - in emotional impact, in intelligence, and in narrative art - and it is very specifically a Russian novel as well as a novel about Russia. Anecdotes suggest that Conrad wrote it in response to his reading of Dostoevsky; if so, he exceeded his model in dazzling narrative acrobatics and in intelligence.

The central character, Razumov, is the most dislikable anti-hero in all fiction, so it's an amazing feat of empathy by which Conrad brings us to care about his fate. Conrad's genius as a narrator is his ability to place himself and the reader in a realm of detachment, so that every event and every character can be observed from several angles at once. The "unreliable narrator" is child's play for Conrad. I don't want to spoil any of the prismatic effect of Conrad's narrative structure by telling any more of the tale of Under Western Eyes, but I will mention that the title is not insignificant.

The Russia portrayed in this novel is a land of cynicism and naivete intertwined - hyper-emotionalism and psychological repression in equal measure - omnicompetent surveillance and hopeless myopia - ruthless bureaucracy and utter disorganization - a land in short of oxymoronic self-destruction. This is NOT, however, the Russia of Communism! The novel was written in 1911! This is Russia as it existed under the Tsarist autocracy, and everything about it clamors for revolution. It's interesting to compare Conrad's portrayal of the old regime with the nostalgic and idealized version served up by Vladimir Nabokov in his memoir "Speak, Memory." Nabokov wrote far more beautiful sentences, but Conrad saw deeper. The horror for us, post-Stalinist readers, in Conrad's depiction of the pre-revolutionary state-of-things is that we KNOW that change will not change much, that autocratic, arbitrary repression will be replaced by...more of the same.

Conrad wrote two novels aground, away from the sea - this one and The Secret Agent. They are among his best. Some readers of today seem to find Conrad's style involuted and dry, and blame it on his status as a 'second-language' writer. To my mind, they are missing the point, the complex lensing of perspective through the minds of Conrad's narrative intermediaries. This is a book to be read slowly and observantly; the effort will be rewarded.

An English teacher (the 'Western Eyes') tries to find the truth behind the autobiography of a Russian agent, for 'words are the greatest foes of reality', and 'speech has been given for the purpose of concealing our thought.'
The Russian agent betrayed a friend-terrorist and meets afterwards his sister and mother. His friend combatted autocratic despotism, the destroyer of the spirit of progress and truth, of freedom, law and justice.
This novel is Conrad's version of Dostoevsky's 'Crime and Punishment': 'A moral spectre is infinitely more effective than any visible apparition of death.'

Conrad was a visionary: 'A violent revolution falls into the hands of narrow minded fanatics and tyrannical hypocrites. The scrupulous and the just, the noble, humane and devoted natures, the unselfish and the intelligent may begin a movement but it passes away from them.'
His picture of the world of revolutionary conspirators is excellent: double agents, opportunists, naive idealists, hypocrites, rogues, agitators, fanatics and cynics. 'It did not matter what it was, vanity, despair, love, hate, greed, intelligent pride, a stupid conceit, it was all one to him as long as the man could be made to serve.'

But this book has many flaws: melodramatic overreactions (attack on Ziemianitch, secret love of Razumov), high improbabilities (confession of Razumov, interventions of 'Western Eyes') or the ultimate verdict ('he was the victim of an outrage. He had confessed voluntarily.')

Joseph Conrad was an ambitious writer, but this book has not the same high standard as his masterpieces 'Heart of Darkness' and 'Lord Jim'.
A worth-while read.

Joseph Conrad had famously hard feelings for the Russians, occupiers of his Polish homeland. In "Under Western Eyes" (1911), Conrad employs tough love in depicting the Russian character, hopelessly divided between reckless radicalism and reactionary reasonlessness, between devotion and despair.

Razumov is a college student in St. Petersberg content to labor under the Czarist system, under which he hopes to advance through study. Fate intervenes in the form of a fellow student, Victor Haldin, fresh from blowing up a secret police chief, who thinks Razumov is the man to aid his escape. Razumov is horrified instead, not at the murderous nature of the act but what it could mean to Razumov's future. Will he turn Haldin in, or try and get him out of the city?

The introduction of my Penguin edition notes a popular criticism of "Under Western Eyes" is that its characters "exist only for the sake of the ideas." That's a problem of much of Conrad's fiction, and after the very taut and thrilling first part is over, we are treated to a number of garden-path colloquies in Geneva that slow things down considerably. But the ideas Conrad deals with, about Russia's political and philosophical underpinnings, are often fascinating and certainly to the point, especially considering the novel was written as the real Russia stood ready to implode from the strife depicted here.

Conrad tended to view revolutionaries with cynical remove, especially when they employed violence as a means to an end, yet many of the revolutionaries we meet here are a more sympathetic lot than the nihilistic goons of "The Secret Agent." "You have either to rot or to burn," explains Sophia Antonovna, a genuinely good character who supports the revolution. She's not one to wither quietly while there's injustice to be fought.

Razumov might disagree. It's not that he believes in the system, just the futility of fighting it. "The exceptional could not prevail against the material contacts which make one day resemble another," he tells himself. "Tomorrow would be like yesterday." But as he is pushed into the world of revolution despite himself, he finds himself doubting more and more the shaky pillars of his prior existence.

It's not clear to me which point-of-view Conrad held; likely he saw the merits of every ideology depicted here, a relativism that made him doubtful of any one solution. Certainly "Under Western Eyes" is about as even-handed a book about revolutionary struggle as you might care to read, compelling, deep, and quotable from first page to last. One wishes that Conrad could have sustained the dramatic force of the Part First in the latter three-fourths of the novel, but what you get is one of Conrad's most important books.

Those thinking novels about Russians are reflexively depressing and opaque are not going to have their minds changed here, but they will enjoy the chance at seeing one of the world's most complicated nations through the prism of one of literature's most discerning, eloquent minds.

This book was good although extremely hard to read and get through. I only finished it because it was for book club. I would not recommend this classic.

Illumination (1896) has been an underground classic among serious writers and readers since its publication. Although it sold well in its day, it was largely lost to mainstream attention for most of the 20th century. Only in the 1980s did it first start appearing in school settings with the first critical edition by Nebraska Press (and Penguin Press editions around the same time). It has been called an "American classic" by more than one critic and writer.

First, an explanation of the odd title. Frederic intended the title to be simply "Illumination", which it was indeed published as in England, but due to some mis-communication at his (soon to be bankrupt) American publishers - a working draft had the internal working name of "damnation" - it was mistakingly published as "The Damnation of Theron Ware". Later publishers in the 1930s then combined the two into the full title "The Damnation of Theron Ware, Or, Illumination".

This is an important novel and can be critically approached from a number of perspectives. Probably most important and timeless (c.f. Richard Dawkins "The God Delusion" (2006)) is Theron Ware's "Illumination" about truth in religion. Is the value of religion based on the belief in a real God, or just a belief in a god that may not even exist - the existence of which doesn't matter - the value in religion comes from _pretending_ to believe. It is unclear in the end if Sister Soulsby, Forbes and others truly believe, or just pretend to believe, and if it even matters.

The narrative technique of writing from Theron's perspective, hearing in the first person about his own "Illumination" and personal growth (a positive healthy thing it seems to him) - which is then re-played at the end of the novel from other peoples perspective, is very powerful and well crafted. It really makes the reader examine times in their own lives when they thought they were on the right and true path. It has a certain Rashomon theme of subjectivity and what is the truth of events from multiple perspectives.

Although I was a lit major, this book was never on any of my reading lists in college. I chanced upon it when it appeared on my son's required reading for a course..and wow, am I glad I did! It should be a classic, have no idea why it isn't, if only for the detail and insight about church politics and the workings of congregations in the 1800s.
This gem of a novel focuses on Theron Ware, a Methodist minister who has had a less than stellar career, which leads to his current posting in a small, backcountry town. He vows to make a new start and, for a time, things seem to go well. But alas, Theron is less certain than he appears, making him easy prey to those with questionable values and setting him on a parth towards destruction. For the first time in his life, Theron questions his calling, his values and even his marriage.
I couldn't wait to see how this one would end..and I won't give the ending away here. I'll just say that if you pick up this one, you won't be disaapointed.

Although this is a Faustian tale, the redemption is not uncertain-it is completely absent. The much put out Theron faces his new future in the West as a hopeless innocent, only his wife expresses modest doubt about his re-education. Having succcessfully ruined the surprise ending, I can only suggest everyone find a copy of this wonderful novel, set aside a day, and read it straight through. An amazing work from an under appreciated author.

Okay, granted. In some ways, this is pretty thin soup. A short novel, after all, and not by any stretch of the imagination a major novel, certainly not in the sense that Middlemarch or Ulysses are major. But I'd put this on a list of personal favorites. And there are certain second rate novels which for all their second-rateness should not be lost. Frederic lived not too long, accomplished not very much, saw not everything there was to be seen - but in this little fable of a Methodist preacher who never quite got the point, Frederic himself pretty much gets it right. Not a mean achievement for a lifetime, and so one not to be forgotten.

Freedom's Cause has a brilliant plot and a fictional character as the protaganist. He starts off as a teen and then grows up through the time of William Wallace and Robert the Bruce. The fictional protagonist interacts with historical characters from that period of Scottish History. The story is full of adventure, friendship, loyalty, honor, heroics, and history. Good values are presented. This book is great for anyone looking for something on Scottish history and which also is an outstanding novel.

This book is as excellent or better then any Nigel Tranter book I have read, like The Wallace and The Bruce Trilogy.

The accuracy of the historical period is superb and I have read much on this area of Scottish history. The persons discussed, the geography talked about, and the timeline presented is very accurate.

I highly recommend this and can't wait to read another Henty.

Liberty or death. This was the choice the people of Scotland in the 13th century faced if they rose up against their English ruler. Most would say it was no choice at all. Many of the Scottish nobles were English supporters. Few could be expected to rise up against the numerically overwhelming English army. The hero of the story, Archibald Forbes, joins the struggle for Scottish freedom led by the valiant Sir William Wallace and Robert the Bruce. The extraordinary valor and personal prowess of these men rival the deeds of the mythical heroes of chivalry.

I highly recommend this book to any lovers of historical adventure stories. The story is fast paced and carries you along with Archie in his adventures. Have a good map of Scotland and England handy to look up places as you read. Great way to learn history and geography!
Becky Maxwell

I highly reccommend G.A. Henty's In Freedom's cause to anyone age 10 and up who likes to read historical fiction. William Wallace, Robert the Bruce, and a ficticious charactor, Archibald Forbes, take the leading roles in fighting battles to stop the powerful English from taking over Scotland. This book is very closely based on factual hiistorical events. When England is very close to taking over scotland, William Wallace and Robert the Bruce fight overwhelming odds to get back their homeland.

This book is one of the most fascinating and interesting to readers who care about the past. For people who do not like history or to learn about the exciting feats accomplished by our predeseccors, I do not reccomend this book.
The story is about young Archie Forbes, a young man destined to be cheif of his clan. His father was killed when Archie was just a boy and his lands taken away by the Kerr family, nobles from nearby England. While Archie is determined to reclaim his family's lands he meets William Wallace and helps in the scottish revolution.

This was my first Elmore Leonard western. It was very enjoyable, and it kept me interested all the way. The dialogue was wonderful. I'm very close to giving it 5 stars, but will make it 4. I purchased Leonard's Hombre and will be reading it soon.

I have been on a Leonard spree, just finished Ride the Rap and Out of Sight. I have been wanting to watch Lancaster in Valdez is Coming, but thought I would read the book, since I haven't yet. As usual, it was a page turner.

Even though this came out originally in 1970, it's still a bit ahead of it's time. The lead character -- Robert Valdez is a low key peace officer and former Apache hunter. Leonard is brave enough to have the Mexican warrior-hero getting over on the everyone who wants to just push him off and ignore him. But he doesn't ignore so easy.

Valdez just wants justice for a man's widow but can't seem to find anyone willing to do the right thing on their own. So Valdez has to "convince" them in his own way.

The real value in this story is that Valdez' mores and individuality begin to rub off on the other characters. He earns the respect of the beautiful woman and his enemies who, in the end, find themselves siding more with Valdez than their boss, learn that there is more to respect in a man than his money -- and that there are some things worth fighting for.

In the end, even Valdez has trouble remembering what it was all about. He started off doing something selfless and that turned into finding some things about himself and possibly even a future he never envisioned. But all this did not deter him from enforcing his own code. And finally, it is the code that wins out, even in the face of money and guns.

The ending is more about honor than vengance and is a bit of a surprise. It is a different message than you might find in most pulp westerns. But you have to read the book, I'm not going to spill 'em for you.

Total pleasure. I hate Leonard's books because nothing gets done until you finish it.

I read Leonard's "Gunsight's", & I didn't really care for it, but I tried this book anyway. It was better than "Gunsights", but I still believe that William W. Johnstone's books are a better read. My advice to any western novel fan is try it anyway, --don't miss out because of someone elses opinion.

Whenever I'm about ready to start reading an Elmore Leonard novel, I feel like a kid anticipating Christmas morning! Leonard's books are always page-turning thrillers that can make me gasp over a surprising character/plot twist that I wasn't expecting. His novels are always fast-paced, fun, entertaining reads.

"Valdez is Coming" is no differant. Although it is a western,it's a page-turner written in the great Elmore Leonard style. This novel was written years ago, before Elmore Leonard began writing crime thrillers, but it still holds up and entertains.

There's a hero you love to love(Valdez), and there's a villian you love to hate. There's a damsel in distress, and the typical Elmore Leonard twists and turns that keep you quickly flipping the pages because you want to know what happens next!

I often tell people to turn off the damn tv and pick up an Elmore Leonard novel. Try this one, or many of his crime thrillers. You won't be disappointed. In fact, you'll find yourself having a pretty good time!

I started reading Elmore Leonard's crime novels and found them to be easy reading, fast-paced entertainment. Then I discovered that Leonard used to write westerns. While I enjoy his crime novels, his Westerns are even better. "Valdez is Coming" is the best one I've read so far. The characters are well developed and the action keeps one interested. I had seen the movie (Burt Lancaster as Valdez) when I was a teenager and considered it one of my favorite western movies. I wish Mr. Leonard would write a few more westerns because he is a master in this genre as well.