Berg Books

Gotta give it for France for bringing so many heavyweights in the Postmodern ring of thoughts. Baudrillard is something of a post-Marxist academic gone wild, hitting you from every angle, slowly decentering the virtual world of the subject into the ritualistic world of objects. A must-read, Worth the time deciphering through the countless paradoxes and hints of esoterism.

This review is admittedly brief and frankly only directed at those familiar with Baudrillard's work, since it's not really possible to buy the argument of The Intelligence of Evil without having bought the notion of the Impossible Exchange. That being said, the editor's word "summation" to describe this work in relation to Baudrillard's career is a little flattering--nothing significantly new appears here, and the kinds of things Baudrillard tends to say are fairly derivative of standard polemics a la Nietzsche, Bataille, Marcuse, and so on. Baudrillard once complained that no one describes his work as being 'serious', even when he thinks there are philosophically serious things in his works. One wonders why he feels entitled to that description when nothing in his writing invites the kind of attitude he thinks should be taken to his work. It is one thing to be philosophical and quite another to do philosophy. At best Baudrillard qualifies for the former since nothing about the way he writes could pass for 'philosophy', even if one is not particularly wedded to an Anglo-American idea of what 'philosophy' should be (as I am not myself). His paragraphs are at times provocative, but rambling and more often than not vague. The translator calls Baudrillard's work "philosophical analyses of current events in the best Deleuzian fashion", which again is a little flattering--Deleuze and Guattari's Capitalism and Schizophrenia 1 and 2 are incomparable with regard to the intellectual and philosophical challenge they present to the reader, regardless of whether or not one finds their arguments any more or less compelling than Baudrillard's. Baudrillard's jargon and terminology simply have nowhere near the rigor or historical depth of many of his compatriots.

The title 'The Intelligence of Evil or the Lucidity Pact' relies on a Platonic reading of a line from Adorno (strange in itself!): "It is no longer a question of a thought critical of reality, but of a subversion of reality in its principle, in its very self-evidence. The greater the positivity, the more violent is the--possibly silent--denial. ... But this denial does not lead to hope, as Adorno would have it: 'Hope, as it emerges from reality by struggling against it to deny it, is the only manifestation of lucidity.' Whether for good or for ill, this is not true. Hope, if we were still to have it, would be hope for intelligence--for insight into--good. Now, what we have left is intelligence of evil, that is to say, not intelligence of a critical reality, but of a reality that has become unreal by dint of positivity, that has become speculative by dint of simulation." (I read Baudrillard's reading of negation and transcendence as Platonic in this context.) In other words, Baudrillard is rehashing comments about hyperreality in Simulacra and Simulation or the kinds of things said by any number of social critics since Simmel, Marx, and Nietzsche that talk about the outstripping of the subject by the objective world. (Incidentally, Baudrillard's conception of the dual illusion of subjectivity and objectivity is one that I find incoherent with other criticisms he gives about the failure of transcendence and the loss of reality.) As for the "pact" part of "the lucidity pact", this relies on a distinction between a "pact" and "contract" which is interesting, but undeveloped.

Regardless of Baudrillard's work as a whole, what I really wanted to say about this work in particular is simply that it's only really useful either for those who have already read others of Baudrillard's works or those who are tired of (in my opinion) better social critics saying much the same thing about the loss of reality (the other theorists with whom Baudrillard aligns himself, such as Zizek and Agamben, seem to have more understandable criteria for knowing when we are actually experiencing reality) and/or ungrounding the war on terror. The motive is admirable even if the execution is not.

For anyone casting about for a place to begin with Baudrillard, this might be a good place to start. It is a sort of summing up of his main themes, and the curious reader who has heard about such things as 'simulacra,' 'virtual reality,' 'integral reality,' and the like can rest assured that he will find Baudrillard discoursing here upon the themes which made him most famous.

Is there enough room, Baudrillard asks, for both the world and its (virtual) double? As we attempt to seal the world shut beneath a dome of virtuality that attempts to eliminate all forms of noise and chaos, the inherent evil in the world continually resists this Western sanitization in the form of accidents, crashes, terrorist violence and natural disasters. The attempt to virtualize the world is simultaneously an attempt to eliminate all forms of evil from it, but Baudrillard seems fairly confident that this will never happen. A complete sealing shut of the world behind a dome of virtuality can never be a success since evil is part of the very nature of the world that is in process of being cloned. To clone the world is also to clone its evil.

Baudrillard is at his best when discoursing upon the death of the spectator or the effects of electronic technology upon society, but he is less effective in his discussions of ethics and evil. The reader constantly finds himself fighting the urge to categorize Baudrillard as Manichean, but this is a myth that is too radically certain of itself to fit comfortably within Baudrillard's nihilism, with its decentered and ironic gaze. At times, though, one suspects Baudrillard of being a closet mystic. Wouldn't THAT be a wonderful irony! At the root of all his sceptical perspectives would lie an urge to be free of Western culture forms and to dissolve himself into the white radiance of a non-existent certainty.

--John David Ebert, author of Celluloid Heroes & Mechanical Dragons: Film as the Mythology of Electronic Society

An outstanding blend of technology and superb character development. Unusual setting for a crime novel which I found intriguing. I will never walk up a lonely stairwell again!

A compelling, quick paced mystery featuring a complex and likable detective named Eric Berg. There is something for everyone - interesting ethical issues, mid-life crises, academia at its worst, theology, intriguing forensics and, as pointed out on the dust jacket by mystery author Gregory Mcdonald, "unique insight into the general human condition." I recommend this book to everyone who enjoys a good who-done-it. I am looking forward to the next Eric Berg mystery!

The Labcoat is a slender volume, and for good reason. The book seems almost skeletal, as if it's waiting for a more accomplished writer to provide the flesh. The weakest plot point (and boy do you see it coming) is that a professor of ethics might suffer from a lack of integrity. But we never care enough about the main character to be shocked. The Labcoat is merely an adequate book. I suppose it rates a C, even though the last page contains this third-grade error: "He told his story and Kate her's." This is Soderquist's ninth book. Perhaps he should put more effort (if he has the skill) into developing a truly good book rather than rushing off number 10. Maybe he should read The Goldbug Variations to see that a novel can be complex and intriguing.

This was the first biography of the enigmatic Moses Berg (1902-1972), a combination linguist-baseball player-spy. A reserve catcher in the big leagues for 15 seasons, Berg's linguist talents enabled him to speak more than ten languages (¨and he couldn't hit in any of them,¨ players joked). The authors show how Berg probably began spying in 1934 while a member of a Babe Ruth barnstorming team visiting Japan. We also learn about his wartime espionage for the OSS. Probably the most dramatic was when he attended a lecture by German physicist Werner Heisenberg in neutral Switzerland - if Heisenberg seemed close to building an atomic bomb for Hitler, Berg was to shoot him. The authors readably describe Berg's activities, steering clear of his latter years as a jobless freeloader. Also, some say the authors misfire on a couple spying facts. Still, this is an interesting book, as is THE CATCHER WAS A SPY by Nicholas Dawidoff.

This fast-paced biography of Moe Berg, reprinted from the 1970's, recounts an amazing life. As a catcher in the major leagues for several years, Berg was an asset both behind the plate and in the bullpen. A true linguist, he mastered more than a dozen languages perfectly, from Latin and Sanskrit to French and Japanese. He enjoyed newspapers in all languages and woe to anyone who disturbed his papers before he was done with them! Known as "the professor", Berg even obtained a law degree and would sometimes practice law in the off-season. Moe Berg helped introduce major league baseball to the Japanese in the 1930's. He also played a major role in espionage, both against the Japanese and the Nazi's. His encounter with Heisenberg in Zurich, trying to determine whether Germany was on the verge of producing an atomic bomb, is an amazing story. Athlete, scholar, and spy--yes, Berg was all three--a gifted and courageous man who is finally getting more widespread recognition.

Moe Berg was a second-string catcher for a number of big league teams, but better known as an expert in languages (he spoke 16 of them fluently). He worked as a spy for the OSS, focusing on Germany's progress with the atom bomb. He lived a very secretive life. Comparing this book to the later THE CATCHER WAS A SPY by Nicholas Dawidoff, the eccentricities that Dawidoff made much of (Moe's strange obsession with newspapers, the mooching off friends and family, the lonely, self-exhile type of existence he led) are glossed over here, if dealt with at all. There is more depth in the Dawidoff book in a tell-all sort of way; Kaufmann, et.al. keep their distances from the man and ignore what might be considered unpleasantries. Still a very decent biography, though.

I was just doing research about the Genesis prayer and how it relates to creation. Interesting reading, but anything that teaches contrary to Jesus being the final authority is not for me. My personal opinion.

It does give an intersting insight to creation, that part I like.

My son is going through a rough time the last couple of years. The most helpful thing for him is his study of Kabbalah and this is one of his favorite books to study from.

This book mainly emphasize in the kabbalistic principles and philosophies behind the ana b'koach prayer. I was hoping that this book can provide more on application of the prayer for a specific goals/objectives that we would like to achieve in the real life. In general, this is a very good book. I also recommend Jeffrey Meiliken's "Genesis Prayer" as a companion reading with this book. A final note, I found out from my experience in using this prayer that I can't always get what I want but I always get what I need.

FYI, JAMA reviewed this book (The Journal of the American Medical Association , Volume: 278 , Number: 11 , Page: 950(1) Sep 17, 1997). The bottom line of the review seems to be that the book is very dense (takes time and thought to read it) but worth the time and trouble. I'm going to buy a copy and will comment after I read it myself.

This was a book waiting to be written. Marc Berg discusses the turn to rationalization in medicine with exciting case-studies. The theoretical arguments are subtle and require a close reading but highly influential. Part of the intellectual off-spring of Bruno Latour and Donna Haraway. I use this book in my medical sociology and technology course.

I'm no slouch, but this book is really tough to get through. The author makes a difficult subject even more so with his overly erudite writing style, long sentences, and obscure references. A good editor might have helped a lot.

A man tracks down the father he never knew and, concealing his identity, befriends him and has an affair with his mistress.
Ann Quin's first novel was a big success in 1964 & remains her best known book. The plot is a characteristic 60s mix of lowlife absurd (Beckett, Pinter) & symbolism (Freud, Laing). In one scene the drunken father tries to rape the son who has dressed up in the father's mistress's clothes! And then there's some creepy perversity concerning a ventriloquist's dummy.... Although of its time & betraying some of the over-ripe awkwardness of a first novel, the extraordinary quality of Ann Quin's writing retains its disturbing power today. If you find the attempts of today's Brat novelists to write "on the edge" laughably obvious & shallow, then read some Ann Quin for the real thing.

I do recommend this novel, but only to those who will not desperately flee some miserably twisted circumstances. This novel continues the experimentation of the English novel as a form that Beckett put a halt to when he became French. Berg really is tremendously dark, but it has an oddity or eccentricity that makes it not only memorable but meaningful. In addition to the story indicated in the editorial reviews above, it does something to resemble in content an almost Graeco-tragedian structure puttied with a more domestically modern flesh. This novel is one that totally disturbed me in ways that did not make me love it but I find that the author is wonderfully comic, creative, pleasingly dark and intelligent. For such an odd book, I do not know how to say I recommend it, but for a continuance in one's education of novelistic recourses this may be one book that makes you happy in a rather uncomfortable way. If for no other reason, pick this novel up to read the first sentence.

Although I originally read this book in researching International Law pertaining to the application of Air Power, I discovered a wealth of information. This book presents a miriad of ideas and perceptions, from very notable authors, on just about every possible aspect of the Air War(s) of World War II.

A must for the researcher or WWII history buff.

Although I originally read this book in researching International Law pertaining to the application of Air Power, I discovered a wealth of information. This book presents a miriad of ideas and perceptions, from very notable authors, on just about every possible aspect of the Air War(s) of World War II.

A must for the researcher or WWII history buff.

My review of the book is quite simple. It should be brought back into print. Bassnett treats Elizabeth both as a woman in history, in her own right, and sets her within the larger framework of historiography. Bassnett chips away at the layers of invention that have surrounded Elizabeth and offers a refreshing and novel look at her life and times.

Elizabeth I has had many biographers good, bad and nasty. Susan Bassnett has provided a path through a maze of publications with her clear and calm approach that both refutes the many myths about Elizabeth Tudor and prompts the reader to take her consideration and reading much further.

Bassnett's conclusions of the Mary Queen of Scots relationship are lucid and sympathetic and demonstrate how Elizabeth felt her own position as a female monarch was threatened by Mary Stuart's disatrous attempt to balance rule and personal feelings. The interpretation of Elizabeth's virginity - akin to the holy order of a Renaissance nun - was highly convincing and illuminating. The Essex relationship was the best treatment I've read of it.

This book should lead readers back to the most accessible collection of Elizabeth I's letters by G. B. Harrison. I would have given this valuable book a greater star rating if it had been longer, but would recommend it to anyone facing the pile of books on this subject for the first time.

The translations are a bit too colloquial for my taste. In some plays for instance the names are changes, or a character is said to have a Bronx accent! The translators goal was to have lively and performable versions, and they do, so this may not bother everyone.

Each play has a simple stage diagram, and some notes on what the stage should be like (eg, the first house should be grand and imposing, but the neighboring house is small and unimpressive). The stage directions are good. Short helpful introduction.

The book physically is splendid, with nice easy to read type, and the speakers names in full, offset to make them clear.

Although it's been forty years since I have read any Roman comedy in the Latin, I can still enjoy what Plautus and Terence wrote over two thousand years ago. As for the translations, the rhyme scemes used for the different characters and parts of the plot make the play come to life. While laughing at the unfolding story I marveled at the ryhmes and the alliterations. It also didn't hurt that Dr. Douglass Parker was my advisor at the University of California at Riverside, lo those many years ago.

Well i don't have much to say on this one. I ordered it as a help for my media assignment. Found it useful but a little long-winded and a little too specialised in terms of examples.
I'd recommend Sarah Thornton's "Club Cluture" as a good partner to this book.

Muggleton's biggest strength is that he tries to understand subjective experiences of subculturalists in their neverending conquest for differentiating themselves from the conventional. Unlike Birmingham scholars, Muggleton does not start with a pre given, dichotomous assumption about materially opressed subcultures against a totalizing dominant culture, but rather has a nominalist cultural orientation. So, if you are a materialist or structuralist, his perspective might put you off.

This book is indispensable if you are studying subcultures/youth cultures/microcultures/etc. However I suggest you read Hebdige before this, because Muggleton builds most of his arguments against his. Otherwise, it is hard to see where all this comes from.

Although it is a short text, it is quite dense and packed with references, so it might not be an enjoyable read if you are not very familiar with theories of culture.