Independent Books

In the foreword to Clerambault, the author, Romain Rolland, says that 'This book is not a novel, but rather the confession of a free spirit telling of its mistakes, its sufferings and its struggles from the midst of the tempest'. He is correct - the story of Clerambault and his family throughout the Great War is hardly a novel at all. The plot is weak and the characters, with the exception of Clerambault, are poorly drawn. But where this piece does succeed is in the questions it raises about a topic that is sadly familiar to us all: War.

If not a novel, then what? The plot we have to work with is flimsy. Agýnor Clerambault is a minor poet, one of the many ambitious men living in Paris, who wish to make a living of their work. Happily for Clerambault, he manages to support his family with the strength of his poetry, but it is clear to all (except, perhaps, Clerambault himself), that his talents are minor. 'If we cannot amount to much, a good appearance is a consolation, and we love to be reflected in eyes which lend beauty to our mediocrity.' This is Clerambault. He is a weak man, but sincere within himself. He writes poetry because he loves it, and what else would there be for a man of few mechanical or physical talents to occupy his time with?

The far-away hum of the approaching Great War increases in volume until it is a roar. Paris is the intellectual capital of the world, the belle epoque or 'beautiful era' is in full swing, though to the perceptive, its last grand celebrations are the thrashings of a dying animal and not that of a healthy creature luxuriating in its endless potential. What better time then, to be a poet? To be an intellectual, living off the fat of the working class? To be Clerambault? As Rolland makes so clear, 'Safe in their West, it never occurred to them that their civilisation could lose the advantages gained; the march of progress seemed as inevitable as the rotation of the earth.'

And then the war comes. The Great War, the war to end all wars, it shatters the heady lifestyle of Paris, of France, of Europe. But how fares our hero? He becomes suddenly enamoured of his great country, much more than before. He buys newspapers and reads avidly of the war. In the mornings, with his family seated around the breakfast table, he reads out loud not only his own hastily composed poetry, but also news of the Front, of the encroaching war, of death and disaster and grand patriotism in all its glory.

Thus far, Rolland has steadily built up a rather fascinating character living in a defining time for the world. Thirty or so pages in, we have a compelling narrative, exhilarating prose, and an acute awareness of the outcome of the war. Rolland is easing us into his novel, his writing ensures that we slide along with the gentle current of easy patriotism, delicate fancy and clear metaphor. There are no intellectual snags, thus far.

But the novel changes. Clerambault begins to muse on the nature of war, not so much the violence or the death, but the way in which it rouses an extreme form of patriotism. He wonders at the manner in which politicians portray the events of the war, so that the young men of 1914 are swept up in the grandeur of it all. How is that an eighteen year old man can be convinced to throw his future away in a country he has barely given a thought to in his entire life? Clerambault believes it is patriotism, that subtle exercise of the State that has come into its own since the solidification of national identity.

Rolland writes with a firm, engaging hand. Yet it is the hand of an essayist at work, not that of a novelist. Characters are introduced as having an opinion that either compliments or disagrees with Clerambault, which allows the poet - which really means, Rolland - a chance to wax lyrical his own thoughts on this new information. Characters are not real life people so much as templates for ideas. When Clerambault's son, Maxime, returns home from the trenches, and is dismayed at the attitude of his family and friends, there is a chance that the novel will return to a narrative. But Maxime leaves, and is killed, which allows Clerambault to spend most of the remainder of the novel outraged at the sheer waste of war and violence. The plot stalls and dies; we are left to read essays.

The depth and breadth of Clerambault's convictions are staggering. At first, Clerambault seems fickle, able to alter his thoughts as the winds - or other characters - shift him about. But soon, his ideas solidify. As the novel progresses, he explores, with deeper and more insightful thoughts, the necessity for peace, not war. Understanding, not hatred. Clerambault's message is certainly not new, but it is told with such freshness and intelligence that it is difficult to disagree.

The plot of the novel continues, if only so that the predictable ending can occur. The French intelligentsia is outraged at Clarembault's pamphleteering of his desire for peace. How dare an upstart, middling poet write such inflammatory words? He is attacked, by foes and by friends who become foes, in a relentless example of the very problem which he is writing against.

Rolland wrote Clerambault in 1920, two years after the Great War came to its exhausted end. It is amazing to consider that, eighty-six years later, his words have as much resonance and accuracy as they did then. The unquestioning (and unquestionable) patriotism of certain countries in 2006 is dissected and criticised with remarkable fluency, and the question of war versus peace is one that will never grow old. This novel should perhaps not be read as a piece of fiction, but it should certainly be studied as a plea for thought, for rational decision, for peace and for understanding. As Rolland says in the introduction, 'God lends us the world to enjoy in common on one condition only, that we act uprightly.' Can we say that the events of the last five years have reflected this idea? Or the last twenty-five? Fifty? Ever, in the history of our species? I would argue not, as would Clerambault. Peace is something that is perhaps out of our grasp, but it is a end to which we should always struggle. Silence is our enemy and their weapon, speaking out is our duty.

Merriss' and Griswold's Composition Handbook has been around for many years. It is a fine tool to use in composition classes in grades 8 through 12. The book gives rules and shows the student an example of a correct usage and often an incorrect one. The book is ideal for revising papers, which, as most English teachers know, is when much of the learning of correct writing occurs. The book takes a little while for an instructor to learn, because the various grammar rules are referred to by a system of numbers and letters. However, it is very thorough and straightforward. Students are not likely to get confused if they just follow the system. And it works!
For more advanced students (and adults)I would recommend Pearlman's and Pearlman's "Guide to Rapid Revision."

First thing, I am new to PHP. Have read (some briefly) around 5 PHP books for the past weeks. Good things about this book are 1) the author used a light-toned approach like talking to the reader; 2) the author is apparently very familiar with PHP and web technologies and gave background/related info (e.g. CGI/Apache) plus relatively comprehensive handling of PHP. Code examples for large apps were not found. Code softcopy seemed unavailable either as download or CD. Devoted almost a good chapter on template management, which I personally found an overkill, especially one can use Smarty now. PHP 3 and 4 are covered (fully?). Unlike 'PHP and Mysql for Dynamic Web Sites' (Larry Ullman), OOP was covered here. To conclude, a good enough book but 1) would be nice to have a new edition, 2)a little on the pricey side for what it offers. Consider O'Reilly's (comprehensive treatment but not for the faint of heart, makes good reference or textbook.) and Ullman's (easy to take and very good pointers to related material and web sites, but not as theoretically-solid) first. Would give 5-star to O'Reilly (for the right reader) and 4 and a half to Ullman (for the lack of OOP, although not a huge deal as OOP covered in the PHP online manual from php.net).

If you want to get the best grades on your veterinary histology exams or quizzes, this is the book that can help you. It summarizes most of the key points in an organized, easy to understand manner. The electron micrographs have proven particularly helpful for identifying intra/extracellular structures, while the sample slides given are perfect for both pre-lab and test preparation. Plus, you can brush up on your knowledge with the study questions following each chapter. A must for any serious student, or for those having difficulties and needing extra help.

The editor/curators of this book got 50 contemporary artists to each write down instructions for a do-it-yourself art project, for the reader to try. Each is a small revelation of the artist, and a thought-provoker in itself. It's intelligent and fun -- a very clever expression and extension of contemporary art. It's just the thing for anyone who wishes they were artistic: you read an entry, and have the curious sensation that, not only is the project something you could do, but it would be an actual participation in the contemporary art world, pre-endorsed by prominent artists and curators.

The interesting thing about economics is the lack of emphasis on intention. Economists don't care what the intent of the policy is, only the outcome. The result of this all-consuming focus is that economic analyses have a fascinating way of seeing past wishful thinking. Nowhere is this more apparent than in Jeffrey Miron's analysis of narcotics prohibition, Drug War Crimes: the Consequences of Prohibition. Nearly everyone agrees that the United States has a drug problem, and our government arrests 1.5 million people a year fighting it. Is prohibition making the problem worse?

Miron certainly thinks so. Although the book is nominally objective, Miron's personal opinions on the issue are clear. This is not necessarily a criticism - to paraphrase Howard Zinn's argument in A People's History of the United States, the large body of evidence that has been built up in support of drug prohibition compels a one-sided account in order to balance the scales.

The argument goes like this: abridging the rights of citizens to use drugs is morally questionable in the first place; even if you decide that eliminating drug use is a noble aim of the government, the negative consequences of prohibition outweigh its positives; even if they didn't, outright prohibition is the worst way to go about achieving this goal. So why do we spend $33 billion a year on it?

Many negative effects of drug use are self-evident, such as increased corruption, the spread of infectious disease through the sharing of needles, and the transfer of wealth to criminals. Two questions, however, warrant extended analysis: To what extent does prohibition lower consumption? And what is the effect of prohibition on violence? Miron's analysis suggests that prohibition reduces consumption by only about 20%, while leading to dramatic increases in violence.

Some of these arguments are quite convincing, others aren't, while still others are neither, either due to moral subjectivity or to a lack of data. Nearly all of them, however, are thought provoking, and some are shocking. In an example rich with parallels to drug prohibition, Miron describes actions taken by the U.S. government during the 1920s. Knowing that individuals would attempt to use industrial alcohol to produce moonshine, congress ordered industries to change their method of alcohol production, making it unsuitable for ingestion. While their decision to poison their own citizens probably convinced some not to brew their own alcohol, thousands of others became ill or died.

As an example of the tenor of Drug War Crimes, consider the section exploring the idea of rational drug. The section argues that the negative effects of many drugs have been widely exaggerated. In support of this assertion, Miron cites a study of the consumers of certain products, including narcotics. The study finds that the percentage of consumers still using narcotics five years after the study began is similar to that of many legal products. Miron then concludes that heroin, say, is roughly as addictive as chocolate. Given the considerable legal, social, and health incentives to quit using drugs, this hardly seems a reasonable conclusion. But it's interesting, and it's an argument no one else is making.

A larger problem with the analysis is that the case against prohibition is, to some extent, academic. Every country on earth prohibits drugs; if any country were to change that policy, it would become a worldwide drug factory, not to mention violate international law and trade agreements.

Nevertheless, Miron didn't set out to write a book about politics - he wrote a policy analysis, and while his lack of neutrality will surely bother some readers, his overall conclusions are sound. He knows that in many of his arguments, there is no clear answer. The point is that "prohibition has enormous costs with, at best, modest and speculative benefits.... The goals of prohibition are questionable, the methods unsound, and the results are deadly." Given the available evidence, this appears undeniable. What to do instead is a tougher question.

Encyclopedia of Continental Army Units: Battalions, Regiments, and Independent Corps. Fred Anderson Berg. Stackpole Books, 1972. 160 Pages.

This is an odd book which I had on loan from the local library system. When it arrived it was much thinner than I expected it to be. Also it is an alphabetical encyclopedia just as the title indicates. Essentially it lists alphabetically all brigades, regiments, and independent battalions and some independent smaller commands.

Each unit has a synopsis of when it was established, who commanded it, how it was organized, and when it was demobilized. It tends not to list the actions and battles it was part of. There is also a listing of the major brigades and their commanders by date as well as a somewhat confusing presentation of the order of battle for the Continental Army.

What this book makes abundantly clear is that the Continental Army suffered greatly in a diffusion of its strength through the abundance of all these independent units. It is no small wonder that they were able to field as many regiments at 70% authorized strength as they did.

This book also does a masterful job of introducing the reader to the staff organization of the Continental Army. While it seems to have most of the components of a modern army it becomes a bewildering mess of overlapping responsibilities and troop drain when it comes to the issue of logistics and supply. This book provides through a history and outline of the major departments some insight into this muck.

It does suffer from a lack of tables and charts to graphically illustrate the various chains and organizational schema. However it is a good reference book to pick up for the more than casual student of the war. For those with a casual or passing influence it will merely confuse.

Eastland's book makes the case that the Independend Counsel Statute is not only expensive, impractical and unconstitutional, but that it also relieves the President and Congress of their accountability and responsibility to act in accordance with ethical politics. The "ethics of politics," which are the traditional (pre-1978) mechanisms for prosecuting executive 'malfeasance,' were enough to get rid of Nixon and should be all that we need to address the problem.

This book made it quite easy to quickly determine what our options were for travelling between cities in Europe. We could easily look at a country map and get the timetable numbers for the routes we were interested in. On the timetables it showed times for all the major stops and what kind of train it was. We then went on to use internet sites (which we got from Rick Steves guides) to get detailed information about ticket costs and levels of service. MUCH faster way to get all the options quickly than to use some web site that returns limited information!

This is a 1961 English translation of the classic 1899 work by Edward Bernstein, leader of right wing of famous Second International of Working Men's Associations.

This work sought to revise Marxism and suggest that revolution was not necessary for a Workers' Party to come to power in the governments of the world--they could be elected to office. Thus the title of the book--evolutionary socialism as opposed to revolutionary socialism. This became the predominant ideology of the Second International and was roundly condemned as heresy by Kaul Kautsky, Rosa Luxembourg and Leon Trotsky among others and resulted in a breaking away of members from the Second International to form the so-called 2-1/2 International. Later following the Russian Revolution, the Third International was formed which once again espoused the requirement of revolution to bring the workers' parties to power.

This work then stands as a marker for a special time in European History. It adds much to the understanding of Europue during that time.