Pittsburgh Books

I am a born and raised Pittsburger. This book is great. Anyone from Pittsburgh, or anyone that has visited for while and has gotten to know "the language" will love this book.

Yunz guys should really buy a copy.

Tonight in the Rivers of Pittsburgh As a Pennsylvania native transplanted to the rural West many years ago, I found this book to be a colorful reminder my roots. Careful character and location setup preceeds an artful, twisted story told with a storyteller's yarn and flashes of unexpected humor. The prose was crisp and only occassionally challenging to the avid reader. One of many favorite phases was "...ossified chewing gum...". I heartedly recommend this book to readers seeking an excellent mystery story set in an America that is not consumed with today's Homeland Security level orange terrorist alerts and red/blue presidential politics.

I anxiously await Mr. Weakland's second novel.

Chesnut provides a wealth of 21st Century ministry suggestions through the lens of his own personal experience at Cathedral of Hope. While he is unabashed in sharing his own theological and pastoral perspectives, he is equally open about how surprising and varied have been the resources that have enabled his vision. Great resource for anyone evaluating current trends in Protestant Christianity. Descriptive of renewal in a dwindling, urban, mainline congregation, but applicable to a wide range of congregational situations and settings. I found it inspiring, pastoral via the author's own vulnerability, and filled with both practical suggestions and stimulating reflection. It is a great read!

The development of one nation's politics is the business of another's, apparently. "Transnational Actors in Central and East European Transitions" is a look at western Europe and America's involvement in Eastern Europe's affairs. It is a collection of scholarly essays on both the positive and negative effects of these practices and the various subjects they are making themselves involved in from anything from Human Trafficking, Bank Privatization, Stabilizing governments, and more. "Transnational Actors in Central and East European Transitions" is an enlightening array of essays about a lesser known gear in how the world works.

This book is an excellent first hand account of Indian life in the 1700s in Pennsylvania and Ohio. Heckewelder was a Moravian missionary and spy for General Washington in the Ohio country during the Revolutionary war. He goes into great detail about everyday Indian life and how they interacted with other tribes as well as the early settlers. He writes as a reporter of Indian life, what he say & heard between 1762 and 1813 during his extensive travels in early Ohio country (including Marietta, Gallipolis, Cincinnati, Detroit, Pittsburgh and the Moravian Indian towns in Tuscarawas County, Ohio)

In the spring of 1881, a wave of anti-Jewish rioting and violence engulfed southern Russia, specifically areas within Ukraine. Called pogroms, they spread through both city and countryside following the assassination of Alexander II. The interpretation of the pogroms directly following the events and continued by subsequent historians saw them as being well-planned in advance, and that the Russian government or elements connected to the government played a leading role in the planning and/or carrying out of the pogroms with the complicity of officials in St. Petersburg. E. B. Levin wrote that "the anti-Jewish movement was not spontaneous ... and that it could easily and quickly have been suppressed and taken care of by orders from above...". I. Michael Aronson, in his book Troubled Waters: The Origins of the 1881 Anti-Jewish Pogroms in Russia, rejects this interpretation, and concludes that the not only was there no `conspiracy' by any group, let alone the government, to promote anti-Jewish rioting, the government was indeed against the pogroms, and though largely unsuccessful, attempted to prevent, and then halt, the pogroms. While anti-Jewish sentiment was widespread throughout the corridors of Russian power, the preservation of order and the fear that the rioters might turn against the state overrode any racist tendencies.
Aronson begins by placing the time of the pogroms in its Russian context. The Ukrainian provinces where the pogroms took place were the most prosperous in all of Russia. But though statistically the peasants were better off than those in central Russia, they nevertheless felt they were getting poorer. With the expansion of large-scale agriculture for export and the increasing industrialization of the region, more and more peasants looking for work traveled to the area. This transient population was "forced to confront or adopt new modes of behavior, attitudes, and values. This situation of upheaval and dislocation was a fertile breeding ground for frustration, alienation, and discontent."
In the economy of Ukraine, Jews played a major role, often as middlemen for both the peasantry and the urban lower-classes. They participated in almost all peasant business dealings and often excluded non-Jewish competitors. But the trading, manufacturing, and middleman occupations the Jews were concentrated in were considered "to be almost worthless and even exploitive by their very nature." The lower classes felt they were being taken advantage of by the Jews, and Christian businessmen wanted to increase their share of the market. In the year or so leading up to the spring of 1881, local crop failures in Ukraine had pushed the population to the verge of starving, and an empire-wide industrial depression further eradicated much of the work which laborers from other parts of Russia were still pouring into the region to find. "Thus the ranks of the unemployed and discontented swelled," Aronson writes, "and a roving and prolific source of anti-Jewish activities emerged."
Aronson tells us that "the pogrom movement began with an anti-Semitic press campaign." In the years preceding the pogroms, many influential newspapers accused the Jews of being exploiters of the lower classes. After Alexander II was assassinated, Jewish complicity was touted by the press. One of the major newspapers of the region under discussion, Novorossiski Telegraf, was a leading anti-Jewish organ. Aronson writes that "the government's tolerance of the Jew-baiting press was popularly interpreted as official approval." As Easter of 1881 approached, the newspaper reported that there were rumors of anti-Jewish rioting that would take place at Easter. While there was no instance found of the press openly calling for anti-Jewish violence, the prejudices of the masses were reinforced by the openly anti-Jewish newspaper reporting. Those that follow the interpretation that the pogroms were government-led point to the anti-Jewish press as an example, for, after all, there was strict censorship in Russia, and nothing could have been published without the government's approval. However, the pogroms began during the relatively liberal tenure of Loris-Melikov as interior minister, and censorship regulations had been increasingly relaxed. Not only that, but as Loris-Melikov's successor commented, "the provincial government does not satisfy even the most unexacting demands." As long as there was no open call to violence, the regime allowed for anti-Jewish sentiments in the press, but this certainly doesn't mean the government wanted the pogroms.
Rumors, as Aronson notes, had always played an important role in public events in Russia, and the pogroms of 1881 were no exception. One rumor in particular played an important role in the creation and spread of the pogroms, and the gist of the rumor was that the new Tsar had issued an ukaz which called on the people to beat the Jews. This ukaz was never actually produced or published by anybody, but this could be, in the mind of the mob, because of Jewish bribery and trickery. The rumors of the ukaz corresponded with the mass feeling of Jewish economic exploitation. But far from promoting the dissemination of the rumors, local officials sought to combat them. However, "the government had no formal or orderly means for communicating its will and intentions to the people." It was this vacuum that rumors filled.
One way in which the mass's belief in the rumored ukaz grew was in relation to the action (or inaction) in defense of the Jews. Some historians allege that local officials were ordered to react leniently with the rioters. Aronson, discounts this view, stating that "the sources demonstrate incontrovertibly that instructions were given to prevent" anti-Jewish violence. All sorts of measures were taken to combat, and in certain instances prevent, the pogroms, but control was extremely difficult to achieve. Frequently officials blamed inadequate manpower or fear for their or their subordinate's safety in the face of the angry mob. Uncertain lines of command and divisions of authority between civilian police officials and military commanders also contributed to the uncertainty on the ground. Authorities knew how to deal with problems in the countryside, but this was a new type of conflict and it was in the cities. All of these factors contributed to uncertainty and inaction by the military and police on the streets, which reinforced the people's belief that they were rightly acting in the manner the ukaz professed. As noted previously, an accepted historiographical interpretation of the pogroms was that the government could clamp down on the violence whenever it wanted to, but chose against it. Aronson tosses this aside, for the government "was simply not powerful enough or competent enough to exercise such control over the population at large or even its own officials."
The lenient way in which the authorities dealt with rioters also was interpreted in the minds of many contemporaries and subsequent historians as a sign of approval. Few were arrested, and many that were gained their release before trial. Punishment was meted out only in extreme cases. Authorities were reluctant to resort to arms or employ repressive measures on the general population, and this in turn reinforced the rioter's belief that the government approved their activities. Historians who believe in the government plot theory call the leniency intentional. Aronson points out, however, that Russian law was completely unprepared to deal with the unfolding events, without any laws or regulations dealing with this new kind of phenomena. Many officials called for swift and strict accountability before the law. But they realized that "severity in defense of the Jews might only anger the highly agitated population even more and ultimately lead to attacks on the regime itself." Many in positions in authority `understood' the rioters, but they nevertheless disapproved of their methods and sought to maintain order somehow. They could, however, deal with them leniently, and in this way "avoiding any measures that might dispel the mob's originally loyalist inclinations." The authorities sought the restoration of order without alienating the population. The fear that the anger of the mob might turn on the government, Aronson writes, "may account for the delay until 1882 in applying" relatively more severe regulations and punishments.
Aronson seeks to disprove that far from the government instigating and controlling the pogroms of 1881, it actually had no role it the promoting the actions of the rioters, and indeed sought to curtail the mob's violent activities. By setting the pogroms within their historical Russian context, he concludes the pogroms were a spontaneous reaction of segments of the population to the complex changes occurring in the country, and the regime's inability to adapt to that change. Russia as a whole, and the southern Ukraine in particular, was undergoing the massive social and structural changes that occurs with the growing pains of industrialization. The government, for its part, attempted certain reforms to deal with these changes, but was overall concerned with preserving order and the autocracy, and therefore hadn't the necessary ability to mount an appropriate response to the uncertainties that this period generated. This is shown by the pogroms of 1881. The regime didn't perpetuate or condone the riots as officials at all levels were against the mass violence and disorder which occurred during the pogroms. Their overriding fear was that the anger being vented would be turned against the regime, perhaps led by socialist revolutionaries. This, not some conspiracy, caused local authorities to work cautiously in dealing with the enraged mobs both on the ground and in the courts. The spread of rumors was historically prevalent in Russia during uncertain times, especially amongst the peasantry. With an uprooted and unemployed peasant population milling about, coupled with the assassination of the tsar and historical antagonism against Jews, the rumors of the ukaz was able to catch fire to the point of it being reported on in the local press, which only spread the rumors further. Aronson totally discounts any and all conspiracy theories, and assert that the pogroms of 1881 were a spontaneous "result of Russia's modernization and industrialization process," Aronson writes. He clearly and concisely sets up his argument, and consistently points out the differences between his interpretation and preceding ones. Most importantly, he sets the pogroms in their historical context, and therefor is able to better explain not only the pogroms, but late nineteenth-century Russia as well. I am completely convinced by his argument, and I heartily recommend this book.

This is the best and most comprehensive biography of Mazeroski ever written. I recommend it for anyone and by that I mean anyone who doesnt like the yankees since the book is a little short on pictures. Sorry guys I know words are hard.

This book pictures and covers many items not shown or discussed in other Tiffin/US Glass reference books. Collectors would be delighted to add this additional information to their library.

"Russians have an almost mystical relationship to drink in general and vodka in particular," writes Kate Transchel, associate professor of history at Chico State University. "Legend has it that a thousand years ago, when Grand Prince Vladimir ... pondered over which faith to adopt, he rejected Islam because it imposed restrictions on the consumption of hard liquor." So, in 986, Vladimir made Christianity the official religion of Russia. Transchel quotes a commentator as saying that "God, bread, water and vodka were the mainstays of Russia."

She writes that "the word 'vodka' historically referred to all common drinks based on spirits. In 19th-century Russian usage, the word 'vino' was more common than 'vodka' but still meant grain alcohol."

Just how ingrained (pardon the pun) vodka consumption is in Russia is the subject of Transchel's new book, "Under the Influence: Working-Class Drinking, Temperance, and Cultural Revolution in Russia, 1895-1932" ($35 in hardcover from University of Pittsburgh Press). Transchel's study is an engaging and accessible look at the culture of vodka in Russia and how even the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, in its forceful effort at building the "new worker," was no match against the "liquid assets" of the working class.

"Under the Influence" is a model of clear writing. Though it is a scholarly work -- the author traveled to Russia to study the archives of the industrial cities Moscow, Kharkov, Saratov and Tomsk -- the book presents telling details of the real life of the industrial worker.

The new Soviet state in the first decade-and-a-half after the Revolution tried "to craft a new society and a new type of citizen" by controlling education, getting rid of "bourgeois culture" and putting an end to "illiteracy, prostitution, religion and drunkenness." But in the 1920s "the Bolsheviks came face to face with their number one quandary: Workers did not act right. The proletariat was the new ruling class, but still it was stamped with the attributes of an oppressed class. Further, the behavior of the new working class, especially those fresh from the village, did not meet Bolshevik expectations: They came late to work, if at all; they broke their machines; they ignored the authority of bosses; and above all, they drank themselves into oblivion."

An attempt at imposing prohibition from 1914-1925 proved disastrous. Transchel reports that "urban workers resorted to drinking anything containing alcohol, including denatured spirits, cologne, lacquer and varnish. For example, in 1915 production of lacquer rose by 600 percent and varnish by 1,575 percent in Moscow. ... One can assume that in the absence of a concurrent surge in wood sales, the Russian populace had not turned to furniture refinishing for solace: A significant amount of these alcohol-based substances was being consumed."

The Bolsheviks were working not only against 500-year old Russian vodka culture but against the traditional state liquor monopoly (which Lenin reinstituted in 1925) and the use of grain for illegal samogon (home brew). Eventually alcoholism was redefined from a social disease "resulting from poor living and working conditions" to an "individual mental illness" (stemming from "believing in God or not learning to read") and official talk of workers' drunkenness ceased.

Stalin declared victory in 1933, urging workers "to reward themselves for a job well done with a 'little glass of champagne'." Just after World War II alcohol sales rebounded ("comprising approximately 29 percent of all state revenues") and a popular poster in the Khrushchev era said: "Delicious, cheap and nutritious -- drink vodka. Absolutely!"

Copyright 2006 Chico Enterprise-Record. Used by permission.

_Varied Harvest_ is an sustained investigation of one of the pivotal figures in American novel writing: Henry Blake Fuller. Scambray analysize what may be the most important influence on Fuller's aesthetic, namely his homosexuality: "Fuller made a seminal contribution to the development of the American novel in the 1890s. But his conflict with society is as contemporary as the struggle for acceptance waged by such writers as Truman Capote, Gore Vidal, Tennessee Williams, and Allen Ginsberg" (10). Scambray uncovers sources not yet utilized in other biographies and looks more closely at Fuller's "gay" novel, _Bertram Cope's Year_, than have other writers on Fuller. _A Varied Harvest: The Life of Henry Blake Fuller_ broadens the scope of Bowron's _Henry B. Fuller of Chicago_ (also an excellent resource), reinterpreting traditional views about Mr. Fuller and his works. A must read for anyone interested in Fuller's life and work as well as for anyone interested in gay historiography. Well done Mr. Scambray.