Eastern University Books

I'm a Taiwanese myself. Even though the content of this book is not new to me, it still provides a fantastic read for me personally and I can imagine it'd be more fantastic for someone wishing to know more about Taiwan. Because Taiwan is so isolated in the international arena, books such as this one is highly recommended for the average person. The only aspect I did not like about this book is the first part of this book's title: "Is Taiwan Chinese?". I'd just like to inform readers that all the population in Asian countries (east, north and south east) all originated from China. So basically everyone is Chinese, so it doesn't just apply to Taiwan. It is like saying: Is Australia British? Nevertheless, a rather informative book for all.

"The "one China" policy officially supported by the People's Republic of China, the United States, and other countries asserts that there is only one China and Taiwan is a part of it." The Description of this book is Misleading.

United States acknowledged China's claim but do not agree with "Taiwan is a part of China". United states position is the resolution shall be peaceful.

At last, a book that covers an aspect of Taiwanese history and culture not often discussed until recent years: the Taiwanese people are a hybrid people. Many have some Plains Aborigine blood (traced on the maternal side). But, with cultural stigma, many Plains Aborigines and part Plains Aborigines forfeited their identity and were absorbed by "Han" identity. I've been waiting for a book in English to discuss this area and am glad Melissa Brown published this book.

If - like me - you are interested in the title's answer, Ms.Brown's is the book! Quoting some of her words: " Many events are completely unknown to us, many events are known only through extremely biased perspectives, and many events are so contradictorily reported that is difficult to reconstruct even a chronological sequence of what occurred". And - believe me! - Ms. Brown interviewed people - in Taiwan ( living there) and interviewed people - in China !!! We are talking about an Stanford University Professor. Congratulations and thanks to Amazon .

This is essential for understanding North Korea and how it relates to the world of today. To undestand North Korea you must understand it's founder Kim Il Sung. The book goes on to show how he created a Stalinist State and huge army to insure it's survival. It talks about the many attempts on the lives of south korean presidents and his unpredictable nature that he passed on to his son and successor. Understandin Kin Il Sung will help the reader understand why Noth Korea is today run more like a cult than a country and why it is the most secretive country in the world today and a failed society.

In 2001 I visited North Korea and found this book very helpful because our guides would only give us the official version of their history. The book is packed full of information and the only one I have found that explains how Kim Il Sung gained and kept power. Dae-Sook Sue has put a great deal of reseach into the book and let's hope he writes another book on North Korea covering Kim Jong Il present reign and the future of the country. There is no other county like North Korea so I recommend reading the book then visiting the country.

This book is advanced but very good. It is complicated at times but in the long run it is good for reports or projects. It is very interesting. Kim Il Sungs career is much more interesting than Lenin's or Stalins. Very Good!

Ever wonder why North Korea is such a ... arrogant little country? This book will tell you exactly why. Guerrilla leaders scarred by years of eating rats, living in the hills, and butchering Japanese invaders do not necessarily possess the skills needed to run a country! This book is a must for anybody interested in the current standoff between America and Pyongyang, which North Korea seems to believe will end with the Korean peninsula being devoured by a sea of fire. Kim Il Sung's early days as a revolutionary and guerrilla fighter are given much attention, as are the purges he carried out in order to become the supreme leader. If you're looking for a play-by-play account of the Korean War, look elsewhere though- this book sweeps quickly through that period. The author focuses primarily on Kim's tight-rope act between the Soviet Union (which gave him the job in the first place), China (which saved his butt from the American-led U.N. forces), and the U.S. (which has refrained from crushing lil' Kim's summer camp of starvation in the name of East Asian harmony). Other topics addressed by the author include: Kim's frustration at not being acknowledged as the Emperor of the Third World, Kim's frustration at not being able to feed his population while spending 99.99% of his country's slight earnings on military hardware, Kim's frustration that the rest of the world didn't care much about the Korean problem (until now, of course), and Kim's frustration at not receiving a THIRD honorary degree from some university in Africa or Southeast Asia (naw, just kidding...but you get the point). The only complaint I have is this: the avalanche of names and details that sometimes disrupts the narrative. Perhaps a little too scholarly for anybody not specifically interested in the history of the North Korean Communist Party from 1946-1980's. Still, if you can get past this, the book is rewarding, and one will walk away knowing who Kim Il Sung was, how his son maneuvered into power, and why North Korea is a country with a Napoleonic complex.

The original version of this book, published in 1972 by Alfred A Knopf, reflects the thinking of historian Roy A Medvedev in the period of August 1962 to August 1968. The revised and expanded 1989 version must first be examined in light of the original.

The original was translated by Colleen Taylor and edited by David Joravsky of Northwestern University. Medvedev couldn't get published in the USSR, and this work thus first appeared in the West. It was written primarily during the transition from Khrushev's anti-Stalinist reforms to Brezhnev's immanent social-imperialism.

August 1968 is also the month of the Soviet invasion of Czechoslavakia and the defeat of Dubcek's "socialism with a human face." This is also the period of Mao's Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution.

Stalin was as evil as Hitler, yet he rose to power in the first Socialist state. The Second World War played itself out as one totalitarian dictatorship in a death struggle with another, yet Stalin ended up through the course of events as an ally of the democratic and capitalist Anglo-American West in its life-or-death struggle against fascism.

Totalitarianism turns out to have been the big infatuation of the twentieth century intelligentsia. Medvedev represents Russia's awakening from this plague. He is wrong about so much, yet for his age he was so far ahead of his times.

This book is a classic, and I believe the original should be the preferred version. Stalin's terror is nearly beyond belief. It is tragic in a different way than Nazism; perhaps with consequences more evil.

If Leninism ever revives, this will be a classic, just as it is now in the wake of the Cold War defeat of Communism.

This book is a very thorough and well-written biography of Josef Stalin. It was one of the few books I read in college that I didn't mind reading. The information on Stalin's political and personal life gives the reader an opportunity to make informed judgements about Stalin's actions.

This book was the first in the Soviet Union to treat Stalin in an objective way. Prior to its release Stalin had been the great hero of the patriotic war the father of the country and so forth. Whilst the secret speech by Krushev had distanced the country from his system scholarship had not taken the step of subjecting his rule to objective analysis.

The author was a person who was an opponent of Stalin and prior to the fall of the regime was active in its criticism. The book goes through the issues associated with Stalin such as the decision to collectivize agriculture, the forced industrialization, the terror and the handling of the war. The author forms the view that Stalin was an unmitigated disaster. That is the country would have progressed economically better without him, and his handling of the war was catastrophic.

It is a good book to read with other western accounts such as Bullocks.

The late 1990's saw the publication of numerous scatterbrained, and ill-intentioned, attempts to descredit Vladimir Lenin, Nikolai Bukharin, Leon Trotsky, and Karl Marx, by associating their actions, and ideas, with those of Joseph Stalin. One must ask, "were these attempts in any way successful?" Luckily, the answer is an emphatic, no. The individuals who bought into the "Marx and Lenin created Stalinism" theory, alluded to in works such as 'The Black Book of Communism', by Mister Courtois (or Miss), 'The Passing of an Illusion', by Mister Furet, and 'The Soviet Tragedy', by Mister Malia, already harbored such fantastic illusions. Most of the population has no interest in Sovietology, so attempts at descrediting Lenin, Marx, Bukharin, and Trotsky, were, and are, virtually fruitless (I took a Public Speaking course at a local community college, and most of the students hadn't even heard of Lenin, Marx, or Trotsky!.)

To find true objectivity, on the subject of Sovietology, one must reach back into the distant past, and read Roy Medvedev's incredible, 'Let History Judge'. One could refer to Medvedev's writings, as "Solzhenitsyn, without the racism and bitterness"(a spew of biographies show that Solzhenitsyn is without question anti-semitic; however, this fact doesn't mean he's no longer one of the elite writers of the twentieth century). 'Let History Judge', is not so much a history of Stalin, but a history of Russia from 1917-1953. Described, with minute detail, is Lenin's seizure of power, Lenin's benevolent feelings toward Stalin (which ended effectively after the Eleventh All-Congress of the Bolsheviks), Trotsky's role as leader of the Red Army, Trotsky's complete ineptness in regard to the left-opposition, and Stalin's remarkable, almost super-human, political abilites. In addition, one will never discover a finer description of collectivization anywhere (although I must admit Conquest's 'Harvest of Sorrow', is pretty excellent). Russia's grain production in 1930-1933, were almost certainly below pre-WWI levels, apparently, but Stalin wanted Russia to appear forceful, so he sold grain internationally, as if it were "business as usual", which resulted in the death of millions of non-guilty peasants (however, one can not deny George Carlin's classic quote, "there are no innocent people, once you're born, you're guilty as charged").The description of the horrible Gulag system is not quite as great as Solzhenitsyn's, but it's pretty darn close. Unlike Solzhenitsyn, Medvedev doesn't slander the dead, or embark on anti-semitic diatribes (thankfully, for the population at large, Medvedev critiques much of what Solzhenitsyn wrote in the 'Gulag Archipelago' with absolute clarity).

The price is pretty high, but at 800+ pages, the person isn't really buying just one book, they are buying a multitude of books, which cover a variety of subjects. In addition to, 'Let History Judge', I would also strongly recommend you read Edvard Radzinsky's 'Stalin', Volkogonov's 'Autopsy of an Empire' (being a Yeltsin staffer, Volkogonov is biased, but there is some interesting anecdotes!), and Robert Tucker's magnificent two-volume biograpy of Stalin. Unlike other works on the subject of the Russian Revolution, these works actually take a "scholarly" approach!

"Let Me Tell You Where I've Been: Let Me Tell You Where I've Been: New Writing By Women of the Iranian Diaspora" is a totally new first anthology of writing by women of the Iranian diaspora. Revealing unique outlooks in a formerly male dominated, patriarchal literary tradition, these vivid works of poetry, fiction and nonfiction give authentic artistic voice to the silence of the veil stereotype frequently perceived by the West. Over one hundred selections are presented by more than fifty authors, some famous and some unknown. Two thirds of the works are previously unpublished. The authors selected are a diverse group who represent a cross section, or a complex community of intelligent, sensitive, articulate women in a rapidly changing world. The voices of these writers have been named "Allegories of our enriched nation... the real thing," by Zohreh T. Sullivan, author of "Exiled Memories: Stories of the Iranian Diaspora." A list of the contributors include Tara Bahrampour, Susan Atefat-Peckham, Firoozeh Dumas, Farnoosh Moshiri, Azadeh Moaveni, and other less familiar writers such as Leyla Momeny, Gelareh Asayesh, Niloofar Kalaam, and Farnaz Fatemi. Certainly many kudos are owed to Professor Persis Karim, teacher of English and comparative literature at San Jose State University, for amassing this wondrous, stunning collection. The selections are organized by theme into six different main areas: Home Stories, For Tradition, Woman's Duty, Axis of Evil, Beyond, and Tales Left Untold Subjects include differentiating dual and multi-cultural identities, sexuality, love, traditional expectation and its failure, politics, gender, blood and suffering, and the desperate poignancy of silence. There is so much to absorb in this collection, it is so very rich. It is certainly a fragrant beginning to enable Western to grasp the barest outlines of the complexity and courage of these women and their worlds and cultures. It is impossible to read any part of this book and come away unchanged. "But she wants to step into/the whiteness of this inferno/and search Madison/for someone in his life/with the power to change him:/daughter, father, wife./She would become that person/undress him in the daytime/stand naked in front of him./say, look at what we've wrapped in./See this soft scraped creamy dark thing? It/s life." Farnaz Fatemi (p. 240)

Great book. It taught me a lot about contemporary Iranian writers and poets.

This book is a wonderful collection of poems and short stories by Iranian women. The variety of authors makes this an interesting collection and it is also enjoyable to read the short biographies of the authors. This is a book you can easily read from cover to cover or pick up and read a few selections at a time from anywhere in the book. This isn't a book only for Iranians, it is for anyone wanting to be immersed in well-told stories and conveyance of emotions and life's happenings.

Persis Karim has embraced a remarkable collection of work by mostly recreational writers and new poets in this book that is significant in a number of aspects. It is a testimony to the incredible spirit of all women, by exploring the journey most of these authors have taken while their immediate surrounding was experiencing significant turmoil and destruction. A voyage that was carried despite significant prejudice and eradication of an assortment of their basic rights. It is also a narrative of the immigration experience, being subjected to intolerance and narrow-mindedness on a different level and yet succeeding despite the odds. These incredible women are telling their story and the story of all of us who experience conflict, affection, separation, contradictions and intolerance, while struggling to maintain a conventional existence. A lesson for all of us in improved comprehension of one-another and recognizing the value of our differences. Highly recommended!

The idea of a book full of arguments for the war in Iraq from liberal authors seemed so interesting that I immediately ordered it and started reading it as soon as I had finished my book of conservative authors not so happy about the war.

Seeing the way liberals had reacted to Iraq was one of the biggest reasons why I have started calling myself moderate instead of liberal. I'm not trying to imply that the word liberal is monolithic by any means, but seeing the way so many different types of liberals were so strongly opposed to this war (many times out of pure hatred of George W. Bush and nothing else), really made me take serious look at what I thought.

Some of the articles in this book are a bit dense, and the average reader might not be able to get through them, but there are numerous other brilliant articles in this book that make a very strong case for their arguments. Put simply, the main point of this book is that a perfectly logical case can be made in favor of invading Iraq from a humanitarian perspective.

The authors in this book are not fans of Bush in any way, but yet they still make the case that getting rid of Saddam Hussein is a good thing. One of the contributors, Adam Michnik, put it best when he said "I believe you can be an enemy of Saddam Hussein even if Donald Rumsfeld is also an enemy of Saddam Hussein."

Throughout the book, the authors pose tough questions such as "If Bush really did lie about the weapons (and knew that none were in Iraq), why did the U.S. not arrange to plant the weapons after the invasion? A simple, but ironclad point in my opinion. The authors also tackle many of the liberal points used to argue against the war. Michael Moore is mentioned several times and because of this book, I am firmly cemented in my view that Moore has about as many positive contributions to make to the political world as Ann Coulter (which would be next to none).

Something I found particularly interesting was that a lot of what was said could be found coming from the right, but the point here is that the talk of liberating the Iraqi people from these authors are genuine. Hearing someone like Sean Hannity making these arguments isn't convincing because he's only for liberating another country if a Republican President is the one doing it. You never hear Hannity-types making the liberation argument in any other case.

I sincerely hope that anyone calling themselves a liberal that is opposed to the war in Iraq reads this book. It really challenges liberals to look at Iraq from the humanitarian perspective and I would venture to say that if you're a Michael Moore fan or a Noam Chomsky fan that could make it through this book and not have second thoughts, you're no different than the Republicans and conservatives you accuse of being blinded by ideology.

Irrespective of whether it leaves you believing that the Iraq war was just, this book is a fresh and valuable perspective. It explores important and critical arguments of a sophistication and depth that the lightweights and bigots of the contemporary media simply ignore (whether through bias or ineptitude).

Read the introduction here:

http://www.ucpress.edu/books/pages/10415/cushman.pdf

...and another example of the books chapters is here:

http://www.dissentmagazine.org/menutest/articles/wi04/berman.htm

Highly recommended.

With the exception of Roger Scruton, all of the contributors to this thought-provoking book come from the left of the political spectrum. It is most refreshing to see that there are still rational people on that side and that the strident, hateful and juvenile shrieking that one encounters in the media are not the only voices of the left.

Part One: Reconsidering Regime Change, contains contributions by the brilliant Christopher Hitchens, Jeffrey Herf, Jan Narveson and Mitchell Cohen. These essays state the case for the overthrow of the sadistic Saddam whilst discussing the liberal and humanitarian case for the liberation.

The next section, Philosophical Arguments, includes a reflection on national interest and international law by the conservative Roger Scruton, an essay on a just war against criminal regimes by Mehdi Mozaffari, and moral arguments on sovereignty, agency and consequences by Daniel Kofman.

Critiques Of The Left is the third section. This contains the most interesting dissection of leftist positions and thoroughly undermines the fallacy created by the mass media that liberals and leftists were unanimously against the war. My personal favourite essays in this group include Pages From A Daily Journal Of Argument by Norman Geras, Ethical Correctness And The Decline Of The Left by Jonathan Re and A Friendly Drink In A Time Of War by Paul Berman, a liberal.

In European Dimensions, people like John Lloyd, Michel Taubmann and Anders Jerichow reveal that many prominent European intellectuals, including Vaclav Havel, supported the war on liberal-humanitarian grounds.

Part Five: Solidarity, contains an interview between the compiler Thomas Cushman and the Polish intellectual Adam Michnik. There are also moving essays by Timorese leader Jose Ramos-Horta, Johann Hari, Pamela Bone and Ann Clwyd. It is quite clear that unlike the rest of the Left, these authors have genuine compassion for the weak and the oppressed. An important point made here is that indifference to the plight of the oppressed means abdication of the duty to protect them.

The volume concludes with Liberal Statesmanship that contains Prime Minister Tony Blair's full statement to the House of Commons on 18th March 2003 and another speech of his titled The Threat Of Global Terrorism. They are both eloquent arguments for the liberation of Iraq that are rooted in principle and morality.

This valuable book demolishes many myths perpetuated by the academic and media elites and more importantly, exposes their malignant mindsets to some extent. For example, Johan Hari points out how Anti-Americanism has become a religion and how leftists ignore the crimes of sundry third world dictators. It is made clear that the anti-war camp really did not care about Saddam's victims. Then again, this is nothing new - leftists of the past also tried to suppress knowledge of Stalin's atrocities and those of Pol Pot.

Another lie that is exposed is the myth of American unilateralism. Forty Eight countries had joined the Coalition by March 2003 and in Europe, states like the Netherlands, Italy, Hungary, Denmark, Poland, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Croatia and Macedonia strongly allied themselves with the USA. Many Asian states supported it too, including Australia, Japan, South Korea, Singapore and the Philippines. That puts the myth of unilateralism to rest.

In his introduction, Cushman mentions the relentless campaign of hatred and disinformation against Israel by the United Nations and the travesty of a UN Human Rights body that that includes representatives of cruel totalitarian states like Libya, Sudan and Zimbabwe.

He also mentions the shady motives behind the anti-war position of France, Germany and Russia. These essays were written and the book compiled before the full extent of the UN Oil For Food graft became widely known, but this scandal of the century only confirms the hypocrisy of the leadership of the aforementioned countries.

The book is not flawless. Some of the writing is perhaps too self-critical and as a Reaganite, I obviously disagree with many contributors on a range of other issues. But they are brave people who are willing to stand up for their convictions in a hostile environment. I regard the George Galloway/Michael Moore Moonbat Left as one would a hairy spider, but these authors are rational and decent. Their concern for the wretched of the earth is genuine. Their hearts are in the right place.

I also recommend A Long Short War: The Postponed Liberation of Iraq by Christopher Hitchens, Unholy Alliance and The Anti Chomsky Reader by David Horowitz, The Force Of Reason by Oriana Fallaci plus everything written by the wonderful Norman Geras.

The essays in this book about the Iraq War and international law are for the most part in clear and accessible English and do not rely on theories that are left unexplained in the body of the essay itself. For that reason I would recommend this collection to people who are interested only in the development of international law and mores and who are not much concerned with the Iraq War.

For those who are interested in the Iraq War, this collection is, I feel, indispensable. Not because the authors agree (they do not) but because the debate in this volume has about it a quality that has been largely absent from the Iraq debate: candor. Thus while the authors disagree on fundamental issues such as:

* was the war in Iraq, on balance, justified;

* did the governments that lead us to war lie or act in good faith;

* was the suffering of the Iraqi people alone sufficient justification for war; and

* do we have what it takes to see this war through

they do so without simplifying the arguments and without assuming that the Iraqi people agree with their positions.

For as profound as their disagreements are, the authors agree that:

* Saddam's regime was genocidal;

* leaving Saddam in place was not costless either (and most immediately) to the Iraqi people or (eventually) to the West; and

* the Bush administration has terribly botched the occupation, thereby endangering the whole enterprise.

And finally these authors point out that when in a public policy debate, the liberals sound like Henry Kissinger while the conservatives echo John Rawls, the political landscape is out of joint.

This is the sort of debate liberals like myself had every right to expect in the days and months preceding the Iraq invasion. We did not get it (for reasons addressed in this volume). We get it here; in this collection of essays. I highly recommend it.

MOUNT ATHOS: Renewal in Paradise is a history of this land of monasteries written by Graham Speake, a frequent visitor to the Holy Mountain and ultimately a convert to Orthodox Christianity. The first thing you will notice about the book is that it is lavishly illustrated, containing dozens of full-colour pictures that vividly portray the Athos' beauty. I certainly found myself enthralled by these pictures, and read the book with pleasure.

Before recounting the traditional founding of the monastery in the 10th century, Speake gives the various legends for early monastic settlement on the peninsula, doubtful though some may be. The political workings that regulated the monastery in its early days are clearly spelt out, Byzantine though they may be. The influence of non-Greek peoples on Athos, such as the Vlachs, Kyivan Rusians, and Serbs gets a large amount of space, and Speake dispassionately reports the ethnic conflicts that have led to Slavs and Romanians sometimes finding it difficult to visit the mountain today. Finally, as the subtitle of the book indicates, Speake gives readers an idea of how miraculous the Athos' contemporary flourishing is in comparison to the moribund state of monasticism there for much of the 20th century.

Beyond the history, though, Speake's guide is also a vivid portrayal of the timeless way of life on the Holy Mountain: the existing monasteries and their ways of functioning, the relation to the church calendar, initiation procedures, the preparation of meals, and so forth. Speake even describes the baptism of his godson, an adult convert, who profited from the Holy Mountain's remarkably rigorous and spiritually constructive cathechesis. Even though this comes from a university press, the book is very dedicated to Orthodox belief and appreciates the monastic way of life and what it can teach everyday Orthodox Christians.

This is a delightful book, it makes me wish I could buy my ticket now. And it certainly makes a good gift for friends and loved ones who for whatever reason cannot go themselves. Highly recommended.

This is a first class publication (slick paper/good photographs/excellent documentation) on the history of the monastic communities on Mt. Athos. This information includes both the physical history along with the spiritual history (a sort of metahistory, so to speak). The author includes information on the various spiritual movements (hesychasts, etc) that have originated on this peninsula that, while located in northern modern Greece, is actually a sort of autonomous republic. Especially interesting is the information on the unexpected, amazing renewal that is taking place there. 30 years ago, the end of Mt. Athos was in sight. Now, new monks come and the monasteries are again flourishing. Amazing. Also interesting is the information on Mt. Athos's place in the EU, and what that membership may mean to the monks. At any rate, this is a first rate book of interest to anyone who is interested in christian spirituality in general, and orthodox spirituality in particular.

This is a history not only of the Holy Mountain Athos, but also of the monks that inhabited it and those that dwell there to this very day. Speake has done a wonderfl job covering the world's influence on Athos as well as Athos' influence on the world.

It is incredibly refreshing to see a book about a monastic community published by a secular university press (Yale University) be free of the condescension and skepticism that one would expect to find. As a matter of fact, there's a general tone of reverence for the monks' traditions. It is, however, fair and balanced in the fact that he hasn't glossed over the rough patches of Athonite history.

Speake has produced a work of scholarship that is accessible to the academic and the average joe as well as to Orthodox and non-Orthodox. That is no small accomplishment.

Many people outside of Eastern Europe and the Middle East are embracing Orthodoxy today. This is happening in Asia, Africa, Western Europe, Oceania and the Americas. An intelligent, well written and accessible history (both political and spiritual) of Mount Athos in English is essential and Speake has provided us with what will surely be the standard for years to come. Athos is the center of world Orthodox monasticism and could be called "The Conscience of Orthodoxy." This book is essential for those wishing to understand Orthodoxy and particularly Orthodox monasticism.

I have read several books on Mt Athos, a subject that has fascinated me for many years. This is the best English language book on the topic and one that I think would be difficult to be surpassed. It is scholarly without being "stuffy"; it is eminently readable without the simplistic approach of a tourist guide; it is almost encyclopedic but not fragmentary. And most importantly, coming from a person who apprently went through a spiritual journey, it is permeated by the deeper understanding that such experience brings.

I recommend it to anyone who plans to visit Athos or, for that matter, to everyone who already made the customary brief visit to the Holy Mountain as he will discover many things he probably missed, often the larger perspective of the place that is sadly lost in the brevity of an overnight stay.

Weaving the history of the Black Mtns with the author's personal diary made this book exceptional. I particularly enjoyed the theory on how mountain balds were formed and how native americans survived and made most of the land. I recommend this book to anyone who hikes or camps and appreciates the mountains.

What an excellent book! Timothy Silver has given us a two fold view of Mount Mitchell and the Black Mountains of North Carolina. A combination of the natural history of the area, and man's exploration/exploitation of these lofty peaks. I think what I enjoyed most about the book, were the short "interludes" where the writer inserts his many experiences of car camping, hiking/backpacking, trout fishing, or just marveling at nature while sitting at some well known spot, or some "hidey-hole" known only to people who frequent the area. These personal thoughts heightened my reading pleasure, because like the writer, I have spent a great deal of time in the Blacks and know of what he speaks.

The battle between the Mountain's namesake, the Rev. Elisha Mitchell and his former student, future Confederate general Thomas Clingman about who measured the mountain first, is fleshed out completely, and is probably the definitive account of this famous row.

The end chapters deal with mankind's interventions on the mountain, and the consequences of these acts. This is followed up with concise information about the acid rain/woolly adelgid issues affecting the Fir and Red Spruce trees on the mountain tops, along with some discussion about the growth cycles about the above mentioned trees, which in my opinion, clears up some of the misinformation out there. For years, the problem was blamed on woolly adelgids, then on acid rain. I personally feel like these two scourges work together hand in hand to decimate the once proud Fraser Firs.

This is truly a groundbreaking book. I'd like to see more works that follow this vein. Nicely illustrated.

Timothy Silver has given us an excellent history of Mount Mitchell and the Black Mountains.
The work is titled as an environmental history, and it is supported by a wealth of factual information, but the whole presentation is a wonderful flowing story of these peaks in western North Carolina, and their history as they were shaped by nature and by man.
Of special interest is the account of the feud between Elisha Mitchell and Thomas Clingman. The story encompasses misunderstandings, fragile egos, and desperate politics. When Mitchell fell to his death in 1857, the public mind established Mitchell as a hero and martyr who died to establish these peaks as the state's best known landmark. His body was later moved to the higest peak, which is forever known as Mount Mitchell.
We are also able to see the history of man's interaction with nature. In the case of the Blacks, it is often with tragic results, and even when the intentions are good, the outcome is often marginal.
Dr. Silver leaves us with a compelling book that provides much information and asks many questions that we should consider not only for this mountain range, but for our environment as well.
I highly recommend this book. The author has done us a great favor.

What a terrific book Timothy Silver has crafted! Anyone interested in mountains, hiking, fishing, environmental issues, natural history, or the local history of North Carolina's mountains will enjoy this wonderful account. Professor Silver, a historian in western North Carolina, has written a book in which Mount Mitchell stars at the center of his narrative--and both general readers and professional historians can find meaning and pleasure in his tale.

Like many environmental historians, Silver sees in the reciprocal interaction between nature and culture a larger story of a region. And he brings us this compelling story from a variety of intriguing angles. He offers his own assessments, ones generated on his extensive hiking and fishing trips in the Black Mountains of western North Carolina. He provides insight into the steamy 19th century historical controversy between rivals each seeking to determine which was the highest peak in the region--and to see who could do it first and most authoritatively. (And as a New Englander, I found the tale inviting even if our White Mountains fall short in elevation to North Carolina's peaks!) Professor Silver also examines logging practices and regional boosterism, the antecedent of eco-tourism.

The book has something that will be compelling for a wide audience of readers interested in the natural world and local history--and the style is accessible and enjoyable. Whether you've hiked a lot, love North Carolina, want to investigate stormy political and personal feuds, or wish to know more about regional environmental history, "Mount Mitchell" is a fine read. I commend it to you!

book came in excellent condition, on time, as expected.

The Nan Jing is a fundamental book in the study of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM).
A lot of books of TSM were translated, but often the translation is not correct or definitively wrong or bizarre.
In this case we have a monumental work with a unique coincidence of positive situations.
The author of the revision is Paul Unshuld, a giant of the study of TCM.
Absolutely no doubt on the knowledge of the language and the understanding of the text.
The original text is present in the book and Paul added the main commentary at the text written by the most famous studious of TCM of all ages.
If you love TCM and you want to understand all subtle questions of this fine art, this is a book you must have.
A concentrate of Chinese TCM, language and culture like no other book.

Unschuld is a scholar, a genuine translator that doesn't leave much to the imagination. His understanding of the cultural contexts (as there are many) in which TCM grew are un-matched in terms of written text. Get his books, if not for the honest look he takes at TCM, but for the fact that his works are the bread and butter of TCM. The gross ignorance of the classics among so called "Doctors of TCM" in the western world is amazing. Don't guess about TCM, either learn to read Chinese or get good translations of the classics. Not pocket translations at a American grade five reading level. If we expect people to view us as Doctors, we should study like one.

If your professors don't quote the classics, they don't understand TCM. If you haven't read them you're really limiting your potential.

This book is the most profound, deep work that has ever been done on this book. As practitioners of Chinese medicine we allways read and give attention to the two books of the Huang Ti Nei Ching,the Su Wen and the Ling Shu. The nan Ching is a must for every Chinese Medicine practitioner. This book gives many aspects that made me think again on theories and practical aspects that I use every day as teacher and practitioner.
It is pointless to mention the vast knowledge and contribution that Pro. Unsculd bring to the field, saying that it is allways has been great to read his books.

I read this book for an introductory cultural anthropology course I took for personal enrichment. Although it does not at all explore the conflict between Israelis & Palestinians, it did give me some astounding insights into why conflicts in that region of the world seem so intractable to Westerners. It reveals how personal and political identities are created in societies and cultures that are tribal and oral. It challenges easy assumptions that writing things down is simple and desirable, and that talking produces political peace.

This book is a scholarly ethnography with the footnotes and discussion of theory and methodology requried in such books, and it is not a leisurely, easy read. But the diligent reader is rewarded with some eye-popping realizations about a culture that is very different from ours, some beautifully evocative tales from the Bedouin tradition, and even some flashes of perhaps unintended humor in Shryock's accounts of his present-day efforts to track down the 'truth' in a setting that makes the American red-state/blue-state rift blur into a pale shade of lilac.

I am an admitted egghead who enjoys academic writing more than the average person, but I intend to read this book again now that I am beyond the requirements of the college course that first brought it to my attention. Perhaps Sec. of State Rice might also enjoy it?

The author does an excellent job of skirting the volatile plausibility of transcribing oral histories to the written word. For anyone wanting to understand both the intricacies and basic histories of the Jordanian Balga Bedouin, it is a fascinating read. Having a Jordanian father and a Palestinian mother, I especially enjoyed Shryock's investigation into their age-old rivalries. Tribalism is alive and well, as Shryock adeptly shows, and he brings it to us in clear and cunning detail.

Andrew Shryock is the oldest of five boys. All the brothers are very close and that is why I, his youngest brother, am very proud of his work. All the brothers will be home for Christmas and will anticipate reading his work of art. Andrew is a great writer as well as a great person. Number Five, Benjamin Shryock.

Andrew Shryock captures the fragmented nature of oral histories among the Bedouin tribes of a Jordanian region known as the Balga. This text, which is actually an ethnography, brings into relief greater concepts of history that are often not obvious. The histories that Andrew collects have never been written, except a few segments in travelogues. This brings to mind questions about the unsubstantiated faith in written historical texts. Andrew illustrates that it is possible to interrogate the oral histories in the same way other historians interrogate archival data. Questions of the source of the document, the identity of the author, the comparison of data with other sources creates a "complete reality" of history. While Andrew flirts with this definition of history in chapter one when he compares the data he retrieves from oral histories to data found in archives, he also opens several other issues entirely. The oral histories of the Balga tribes are by their very nature fragmentary and disjointed. They do not lend themselves to a uniform, linear universal whole history. Instead, they provide only highlights. This brings to mind a question of validity for so-called modern history. How much is filled in like the archeologist filling in the gaps in crumbled structures? Is it possible that the Balga tribes' oral histories, untouched by the pressure of conformity, be closer to historical truth than the modern version whose rough edges have been hewn squarely into a proper line? Andrew also illustrates the uses that are not directly historical. Oral histories contribute a part to building political clout and are propagated because of political clout. Moreover, the oral histories play a part in identity forming for young members of the tribes. They relate to their place in the universe, not only in the tribe, but also in relation to other tribes, Jordanian politics and the world at large, based on how they see themselves in relation to the oral histories. For these two purposes, the non-textual aspect of the oral histories is part of their significance, part of their social power. It brings into question classic historical texts all over the world. Exactly how historically accurate is everything we call history? An excellent piece of work, it's easy to see why it won scholastic awards.

"Hujjat al-Islam" (Proof of Islam) Shaykh Abu Hamid al-Ghazali covered a very important topic in his famous book "Faysal at-Tafriqa Bayna al-Islam wa al-Zandaqa" - The Decisive Criterion for Distinguishing Islam from Heresy (or Masked Infidelity).

It's actually a really great read, especially the commentary by Dr. Sherman (Abdul-Hakim) Jackson. Very methodological, but also flows very well, giving great background on Ghazali's life, the development of his work, and the importance of his thought even today.

Dr. Jackson explains the importance of the book: "al-Ghazali's mission is to define the boundaries within which competing theologies can coexist in mutual recognition of each other, i.e., as 'orthodox,' in the sense of passing theological muster. Al-Ghazali's aim, in other words, is not to establish who among the theological schools is 'right', but rather to demonstrate the folly and unfairness of the practice of condemning a doctrine as heresy simply because it goes against one's own theology. Furthermore, he insists, even where a doctrine can be justifiably deemed 'wrong' or heretical, this does not necessarily constitute Unbelief."

It is a very important book, and i really recommend it to anyone interested in trying to make sense of all this stuff. It really helped me a lot, and made me see that this whole idea of who is right, and who is not, the notions people have of "haqq" (truth) and so on, are actually much more complex and deeper than at least I believed previously. I am sure for many others this will be the case too.

In it Ghazali (and Dr. Jackson) mention a number of interesting points. A few that i remember are:

1) Certain matters are Usul (foundations) and others are Furu (branches).
2) All Muslims must believe in the Usul, as that is what makes them Muslim, but the Furu can have differences and still be within the boundaries of Islam.
3) There are many different methods of dealing with/interpreting Quran and Sunnah that jurists/theologians use - especially ones that us everyday people don't understand. These are matters for specialists.
4) Sometimes scholars are speaking on different wavelengths about the same subject, and this can lead to misunderstanding, when actually they are perhaps using different methods/levels of interpretation (point 3 above).

From within that, al-Ghazali mentions that there are only a handful of things that are actually Foundations (Usul):

1) The Oneness of God
2) The Prophethood of Muhammad (s)
3) The reality of Judgement Day

According to his explanation, other things are secondary and as Dr. Jackson translates "there should be no branding any person an Unbeliever over any secondary issue whatsoever, as a matter of principle."

The exception to this rule is the secondary issues handed down by the Prophet in the state of tawatur (ie. Mutwatir hadith). Rejection of this is basically a rejection of point 2 above.

For me, this is abslutely fascinating, and led to me looking at the various different sects/interpretations of both law and theology within Islam in a different way. This is especially true when there are certain sects within Islam that seem to delight in calling 'Takfir' on others (pronouncing other sects of Muslims as unbelievers, or apostates).

The other most interesting part, is how al-Ghazali deals with non-Muslims and their place in the afterlife. It is a very topical question, and this book shows a master of theology at work. The complex relationship between non-Muslims and their relationship with Islam is explained, and various possibilities are given. It is much more nuanced than the standard "non-Muslims will be in the eternal Hellfire" that certain groups like to say - which is very black & white - something I feel completely disregards our intellectual tradition. Instead the principles of Justice and Mercy shines through (especially from the famous hadith "My Mercy precedes my Wrath.")

A truly remarkable book I highly recommend to anyone wanting to read the work of one of the greats in Islam and understand their importance!

Must read for every Muslim, especially those who are trigger-happy with takfir (declaring a Muslim to be a kafir, or unbeliever). The author gives a great introduction putting many parts of the book in their proper context.

Beginning with an excellent introduction, this translation of Ghazali's work is a valuable resource for intra-Muslim discourse, as it demonstrates that theological tolerance in determining orthodoxy is needed in order to take into account differing viewpoints within Islam, so long as certain precautionary measures are taken.
The introduction is great since it orients the reader and demonstrates the significance of Ghazali's work.
This book is fantastic and I hope to see more works from this author.

An excelent study of Ghazali's Faysal L Tafriqa. The author Dr Sherman Jackson carefully analyzes the context in which the book was written and shows how it is very relevant to our situations in modern times. He elaborates that "al-Ghazali's mission is to define the boundaries within which competing theologies can coexist in mutual recognition of each other, i.e., as 'orthodox,' in the sense of passing theological muster. Al-GhazAli's aim, in other words, is not to establish who among the theological schools is 'right', but rather to demonstrate the folly and unfairness of the practice of condemning a doctrine as heresy simply because it goes against one's own theology. Furthermore, he insists, even where a doctrine can be justifiably deemed 'wrong' or heretical, this does not necessarily constitute Unbelief." Everyone who is interested in reading a sober account of on-going theolgical disputes among contemporary muslims should pick this up.