4 comments about Fire: From "A Journal of Love" The Unexpurgated Diary of Anaïs Nin, 1934-1937.

1. This book is not as compelling as "Incest", but it's still Anais: still burning, still feeling, still wholly human, with all flaws and wishy-washiness included. But again, I warn away people who may not be down with heavily sexual content. If you are, though...



2. "This is not a lie. I was starting to tell lies and struck a truth! Very often I tell lies that are deeply true."
   -Anais Nin, January 17, 1937

   Diary opening with a visit to New York accompanying Dr Otto Rank. Searches for release from Rank. Back to Paris, Henry, Hugh, and to find Gonzalo More. Desriptions of interior worlds built for Hugh, Gonzalo, and Henry. Beautiful. Houseboat on the Seine, "Nanankepichu", Villa Seurat, Louveciennes.




3. Anais Nin was raised a devout Catholic and to earn her family's love she was expected to be demure, self-sacrificing, hard-working, and chaste. When her father abandoned the family she assumed, as children sometimes do, that he had left because she wasn't "good" enough. She played the role of "good girl" for twenty years in response. Then all hell broke loose.

   What I believe is different about FIRE is that it reveals Anais's explorations and experiementation with her inner "bad girl" in a way that she had only just begun in HENRY AND JUNE and INCEST. In it she is still married to Hugh and involved with Henry Miller, but in FIRE she has a relationship with the famous analyst Otto Rank that takes some treacherous twists and turns. Her writing is as wonderful as ever. For the Nin fan, this diary is yet another must-read.




4. As follower of Anais' Diaries (expurgated or not) and her novels I would like to express my admiration and my curiosity for her amazing literature and her rare personality, motivated again by "Fire". I believe that Anais was able to enjoy sex simultaneously with several men, each one of them however, playing an appropriate , no transferable, role: Hugh (husband),Joaquin Nin (father-lover),Eduardo Sanchez (cousin-brother), Henry Miller (friend-lover), Gonzalo More (lover-friend) and others. Occidental society usually attribute this promiscuous behavior only to men.As Anais shows, this may happen also among ladies, perhaps more often than accepted . Indeed, these "faults" may be heavily damned and punished by society when perpetrated by ladies. Probably Anais was the first woman , brave and courageous enough , to describe her own experiences and feelings about eroticism and sensuality written from a female point of view. Actually, looking at her inner mirror she describes herself with delicacy , ever avoiding disgusting pornography. I believe that Anais spent her life searching a Big One Love . As a result she found many "Love" and many Lovers . The sum of them never reached totality. Her Love was her fantasy and her invention, hence endless and inaccessible. On the other hand, in this and other books Anais masterly present unknown, almost domestic features and characteristic of the personality of several men and ladies who were outstanding representatives in art, literature, theatre, politics as Neruda, Alberti, Dali, Allendy, Rank, Gore and others.

5 comments about Daniel Morgan: Revolutionary Rifleman (Institute of Early American History).

1. A great read. Could have been titled The Wagon Master. It was the efforts of troops led by people like Morgan that held off the British long enough for Greene to 'succeed' and for the French fleet to arrive.



2. Higginbotham does a credible job of revealing Morgan's personality, character and genius as a military leader, particularly since there is little if anything known about Morgan before he appears in Winschester VA at the age of 18. The book reads fairly easily and describes the elements of the Revolution's Southern Campaign in which Morgan participated, but Higganbotham seems to have a penchant for defending Horatio Gates in a positive light I have not seen before. He seems to gloss over most of Gates's personality flaws and military errors to render him more effective than he probably was. This treatment of Gates raises the issue that face many biographers; i.e. they take a liking (or disliking)to a character and sometimes use literary license to make their points. This is the first biography I've read on Daniel Morgan, who is portrayed as a classic American hero, rising from nowhere to have a major impact on history. My interpretation of Higginbotham's characterization has me believing that without Morgan the Revolution may have been lost because Morgan's victory at the Cowpens effectively set the stage for Nathaneal Greene to later drive Cornwallis from South Carolina to Yorktown where Washington and the French conducted the final battle of the war. Stuff I love to read and talk about: unheralded heroes and certainly Morgan appears to be one of the most important in America's fight for freedom. But I have to wonder whether Higginbotham has skewed the facts about Morgan as he seemed to do with Gates. I hope not.



3. One can hardly pick up a book that has anything to do with the Revolutionary War without reading something ranging from a tidbit to several chapters on General Daniel Morgan. The significance Morgan played in the war for American independence cannot be overstated. And yet, only two biographies have been published on this heroic figure that played such an integral part in American history. This book DANIEL MORGAN: REVOLUTIONARY RIFLEMAN, by Don Higginbotham, being one of them.
   
   It borders on travesty that General Morgan is a virtual unknown in American society and certainly unknown among anyone lacking basic knowledge of American history. Higginbotham accurately portrays Morgan as a man among men; a portrait of the rugged individualism that characterized so many of our founding generation.
   
   Morgan, perhaps as much as Washington himself, I believe, had as much to do with winning the war for independence as any single individual. Many might disagree with that statement, but consider the outcome if Cornwallis' southern campaign had been successful. Consider the consequences if the southern revolutionary army had been annihilated. It is more than likely that there would have been a different outcome at Yorktown had it not been for the commanding leadership and battle tactics of the "Old Wagoner". It can certainly be argued that Morgan's actions at Cowpens, where he soundly gave Tarleton's light infantry a `Devil of a Whoopin', turned the tide in the south. And though he missed action at Guilford Courthouse due to illness, his same battle tactics were employed with success.
   
   This is not one of the best books you will ever read, but considering the lack of choices on Morgan, this is a must read for knowledge on the General's life and accomplishments. Perhaps in the near future, one of today's acclaimed historians will render an updated version, but until then, put Higginbotham's book on your reading list. The book is brief, but concise, and will lend a candid look at a somewhat forgotten, and often overlooked American hero.
   
   Monty Rainey
   [...]



4. A terrific telling of one of America's first heroes. Dan Morgan and his kind are the ones who helped birth America. Higginbotham's writing is slightly dry, but the content more than makes up for it.
   
   A simply outstanding story!



5. Dan Morgan epitomizes the rough-and-ready individualist who made America.

   A frontiersman from the Shennandoah Valley, Morgan knew a hard early life that steeled him for the physical challenges of his Revolutionary War service. A wagoneer in Gen. Braddock's Expedition, Morgan endured 400 lashes after tangling with a British soldier (he claimed only 399 and loved to regale listeners with the fact that he still owed the British one miscounted lash).

   His physical endurance and prowess was combined with the ability to lead men and a superior ability to plan and manage battlefield tactics. He has been described as one of the Revolution's best battlefield commanders and this book gives plenty of examples to support that claim.

   Morgan's service to our Republic was remarkable. Although a failure, his part in the Quebec expedition helped make possible one of the most grueling campaigns military history. Traveling overland through the spine of backwoods Maine, Morgan helped lead outnumbered American forces to a wintry showdown that could have produced a fourteenth colony in revolt against the Crown. In fact, Morgan stood at the moment of victory; had his desire to keep driving into the city after breaching its under-defended backside been followed, the city could have been captured. As it was, hesitancy on the part of other American commanders led to defeat and Morgan's capture. He had to endure a period of imprisonment until paroled.

   That parole was a costly one for the British. It allowed Morgan, when exchanged, to play his decisive roles at Saratoga and Cowpens.

   Morgan's ability to lead riflemen and read the battlefield was crucial to Gate's success at Saratoga (which led to French recognition, support and the resources to chance complete independence). Morgan's later brilliance at Cowpens, site of the famed double envelopment of Tarleton's British Legion, led to the series of events that ended with Cornwallis being pinned against the James at Yorktown. Cowpens, arguably the most decisive American victory of the war, was brilliant. Morgan, as the American commander, threaded strategic understanding, leadership (he had to persuade bayonetless American militia that they had a crucial role to fulfill in the battle and would be allowed to retire once fulfilling it), battlefield planning and tactical control to produce a victory that is rightly studied to this day.

   A character, Morgan is one of the men who made the Revolution a success. This highly readable account develops the man, his character and his military personae in introducing the modern reader to a historic figure who needs to be more widely appreciated for his great effect on the success of our founding.

5 comments about Henry Clay: Statesman for the Union.

1. The historian Robert Remini, having written arguably the definitive 20th century biography of The Life of Andrew Jackson, decided that all the material he had inevitably gathered about Henry Clay should be put to good use. So Remini wrote what is arguably the definitive 20th century biography of Henry Clay.
   
   Henry Clay is a towering figure in American history, but one known today almost exclusively to students of history because he failed in his greatest ambition: election as President of the United States. Clay's career spanned from the War of 1812 to the Compromise of 1850 - in both of which he played a prominent role. He served as Speaker of the House for most of 14 years between 1811 and 1825, as John Quincy Adams's Secretary of State, and as US Senator from Kentucky for most of the period between 1831 and his death in 1852.
   
   Clay is probably best known as the Great Compromiser and for his American System. His support for a central bank and an activist federal government (particularly supporting the construction of interstate roads) makes Clay seem modern by comparison with many of his contemporaries. These programs were funded by protective tariffs; thus, Clay's unpopularity in the South.
   
   Clay was perhaps the greatest political orator in an era of great speakers. Clay studied history and marshaled his facts in preparation for debate, but he excelled in devastating give-and-take. An extremely intelligent man, Clay's oratory often displayed his wit with biting personal attacks. He came to regret his attacks on Andrew Jackson, made when Jackson was a mere general and no political threat. Indeed, Clay's acerbic tongue was one of the reasons he never achieved the presidency. His open ambition for it was another. Oddly for the man known as the Great Compromiser, Clay had difficulty reining in his tongue and ambition.
   
   Clay sought the presidency in 1824, 1832, 1840, 1844, and 1848. Clay used his position as Speaker to maneuver Adams's 1824 election through the House (no candidate had a majority of the electoral vote, but Adams was a distant second to Andrew Jackson). Adams rewarded Clay with appointment as the Secretary of State and Clay was forever after tagged with the `corrupt bargain'. Clay lost his best chance for the Presidency in 1840 when the machinations of Thaddeus Stevens and Thurlow Weed denied him the nomination in a thoroughly manipulated convention. The Whig nominee, William Henry Harrison, easily won the fall election.
   
   Harrison was without doubt the least qualified man to serve as president to that date. The Whig Party's founding purpose was opposition to Andrew Jackson and his autocratic exercise of dictatorial power, as they saw it. A Clay supporter mused that Harrison was just the man to bring the president's powers back in line: "The throne is too high and it may be well to place a man upon it who will degrade it by his imbecility." (at page 553).
   
   Remini exhaustively details Clay's political career, but also gives due attention to the unending parade of tragedy and hardship that marked his personal life. Remini portrays Clay as a great public man, a great politician in the best sense, bright, witty, and charming, a raconteur, a risk-taker, but also a flawed man who displayed his ambition too openly.
   
   Very highly recommended for the reader with a sustained interest in American history, especially 19th century American history and the development of American democracy. The book is nearly 800 pages and one could argue that Remini could have cut at least 200 of them without doing violence to the story of Clay's life.



2. Of all the biographies of early American figures, I rather like Henry Clay best. He boasted a lengthier political career than Washington, Adams, Hamilton, Jackson etc. Of his rivals in the Senate, neither Daniel Webster nor John C. Calhoun were as effective in meeting the great challenges of his time: the BUS, the various Tariffs and territorial expansion. As a former debater, it is truly depressing that we have no audio to record his momentous speeches--those rarities which permanently altered the course of history.. Lincoln, Madison, Van Buren and virtually everyone else he met (save Andrew Jackson) admired his many abilities.
   
   Robert Remini is a biographer in the classical sense, the emphasis is heavy on the political, and far lighter on the more personal/psychological aspect of Clay's character. We are told he was a ladies' man, party-goer and gambler, but of these habits there is precious little detail despite almost 800 pages of work. Remini favors the younger Clay, House Speaker and leader of the National Republicans over the elder statesman and undisputed champion of the Whig Party. Perhaps 3 failed presidential elections took away his luster not only for the American public, but the biographer himself. After reading Clay, I will now give 'equal time' to Jackson, likely from a more contemporary biographer.



3. I have read this book two times, because it was very interesting to me to learn about one of America's finest statesmen. Robert V. Remini is a favorite author of mine. I also liked
   
   Daniel Webster: The Man and His Time
   
   Andrew Jackson 3 Volumes The Course of the American Empire 1767-1821, The Course of the American Freedom 1822-1832, The Course of the American Democracy 1833-1845



4. This important chapter of American history is usually analyzed as the period of the 'Great Triumvirate' of Clay, Calhoun and Wesbter, three failed politicians who never achieved the highest office. Nevertheless Clay was one of the most important men of his period, when the Whigs vied with the Democrats for control of the nation. He was first elected to the house in 1811 and helped forge Jacksonian populist democracy as well as preside over the compromises stemming from slavery and ensuring that America was a vibrant democracy.
   
   An interesting read, fair, and decent and well written.
   
   Seth J. Frantzman



5. This is certainly the best of Dr. Remini's books to date. It is an honest appraisal of the man as a human being with human weakness and a great patriot and statesman. Remini had the opportunity to use the "Works of Henry Clay in the writing of this book and the expert researching of the character.
   
   We see Clay as John Q. Adams saw him, as the members of the House of Representatives as he reached his goal of Speaker, we sympathize with the grief stricken father of the boy who died in the Mexican War and how it affected Clay's politics. We share Clay's emotions as his different bids for the Presidential nominations are lost.As we are exposed to the genius and frailties of character of this stateman we see him through the eyes of his contemporaries and they show themselves through him.
   
   This is a marvelous story well told. I would recommend it to every person interested in 19th century America.

5 comments about The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler.

1. This is a vague, basic overview that should not be considered by anyone who is searching for insight or more than general recall.



2. This book is very informative. It gives the background of one of the world's most infamous men. It is not biased in any way. Instead, it gives a clear history of Hitler's life. Readers might be surprised to find out about the many accomplishments of this much-hated man. It made me think about how Adolf Hitler could have contributed to society, instead of hurting so many people. Things could have been VERY different...It is so sad to realize he wasted his talents and destroyed many lives because of hate.



3. This book is about Adolf Hitler. Before I hated Hitler blindly only because of the Holocaust. Now I still hate him, but with a bit more understanding. There is no excuse for what he did, but I believe it may not have been entirely his fault. As he had a difficult child, with his father abusing him or his brothers, and later, after his father died, living homeless and poor in Vienna and Munich, I believe he may have been looking for a center to focus anger and to blame for his misfortune, and he found it in the Jewish people. On April 20, 1889, Hitler was born in a small village in Austria named Braunau. His mother pampered him, but his father had a short temper and would yell at and whip his children often. Adolf was not particularly good at school, gaining average grades at best. He was described as thin and pale. Hitler's ambition was to become an artist, but his father refused. Hitler only went to the college his father wished him to go to because that college had drawing classes. Hitler's father died on January 3, 1903, and in 1905, Hitler got a lung infection, and used it as a reason not to go back to school. Therefore, Hitler's education officially ended when he was sixteen. A couple years later, in 1907, Hitler's mother died of breast cancer. Hitler became homeless and had very little money. For years, he survived by painting postcards and then selling them. He barely managed to afford a small one-room apartment. When WWI started forcing Austria to conscript soldiers, Hitler at first avoided being drafted into the army. However, when Germany entered the war, Hitler willingly entered the army. He got many awards, but had to quit when his eyes were damaged. He soon started plotting to become Chancellor of Germany. He didn't want to be President, because the President actually had no power, and the Chancellor was the most powerful. Eventually he got his wish and made the Chancellor and President the same thing and even became the dictator for life of Germany. He wished to expand Germany and moved first into Austria. Austria was given to him to avoid war, and he even got part Czechoslovakia without bloodshed. However, as he moved on Poland, WWII was started. After many defeats and losses, Hitler turned to a goal of his- to destroy the Jewish people. An "option" was suggested and mobilized. Soon hundreds of Jews were being carted to death camps where they were exterminated or sent to factories to make supplies for the war. An attempt to assassinate Hitler failed, but injured him so he diminished. Always a powerful speaker, Hitler remained this, but was so shaky, the effect was diminished somewhat. Eventually, Hitler was pushed into an underground bunker in Berlin. There he shot himself in the head, and his new wife, Eva Hitler, took poison so as not to be captured by Allied troops. They were then cremated and buried. Several of Hitler's followers also killed themselves, preferring not to be killed by Allied persecutors. I would recommend this book to anyone who wished to know a bit more about Hitler or students who want to do a biography on him.
   
   T. Sprock



4. Adolf Hitler was one of the most evil leaders in human history.he dreamed of making Germany the most powerful country in the world.Hitler hated Jews,communis,andgypsies.He led to the organized murder of over 6 million men,women,and childern.



5. I do not pretend to be an expert on European History from the end of WWI until the end of WWII. Additionally I hesitate to judge anyone's book as I realize that a book represents a huge amount of work and an author spends a great deal of time crafting conclusions or even questions that the author says cannnot be answered. However, I have read perhaps a dozen books including Toland, Shirer, Fest and even that recent book by Junge that deal directly in large parts with the life of Hitler. I have also read perhaps four dozen academic books dealing with European history in the first half of the 20th century. I am aware of the of the feuding conclusions regarding Hitler's and the German people's culpability and conduct regarding WWII. I thought this book might give me more insight or least throw some weight to one of the sides of the current historical arguments.
   
   After reading the book, I found myslf severely disappointed. This book is so basic, it reads like a high school textbook. Indeed, it deals with areas of historical dispute by simply ignoring arguments in an almost breathtaking ways. For example, the author, absent one passing comment, simply rejects the argument that the Nazis had been behind the burning of the reichtag in 1933. Likewise, the author left out some of the most basic points found in any serious study. For example, he writes that Germans, dressed as Polish military, seized a German radio station. Although perhaps a bit too much to ask, the author totally leaves out the multiple postponements leading to the jump off. Not surprisingly, the auhor left out the fact of the German units that jumped off early and had to come pack over he border. As to the seizure of the German radio station, the author left out that the Germans left dead concentration camp inmates [called

5 comments about Alexander Hamilton, American.

1. Interesting, because of its interesting subject. However, it could have been better written, especially the opening chapters. Hamilton was a man of ideas and words, and these are not coherently portrayed until late in the work. Ultimately, though, it is of great interest, with particularized, insightful portraits of Hamilton, Burr, Jefferson, Washington, Adams, Monroe and others.



2. I had originally purchased Ron Chernow's biography of Alexander Hamilton but I found I wanted a quicker read and something easier to carry while traveling to and from work. Mr. Brookhiser's book was exactly what I was looking for, interesting and gave me plenty of insight into Alexander Hamilton's life and character. I'm sure some people might prefer "more" but I'm basically a "cliff note" type of reader. I would recommend this book to someone short on time but still likes to read about fascinating characters by a good author.



3. To preface this, I gave this book 5 stars due to the splendor of Alexander Hamilton. For as George Washington is the Father of America, Alexander Hamilton is his son cementing the United States into a nation.
   
   Not enough credit is ever bestowed upon what Alexander Hamilton earned. The same politics of today, banking problems, debt and war are the issues Hamilton solved as a Federalist or Conservative Republican of today at odds with socialist reactionary Democrats creating the same obstacles.
   That is the truest gift of Hamilton and the intriguers of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in setting up a conflict which is still ripping the United States apart.
   Other Federalists like Theodore Roosevelt would appear in the historian mode and castigate Madison and Jefferson for their shoddy leadership in attacking the very foundations of a strong government, standing military and strong finance, but yet even now these same reactionary individuals have followers today who have yet to learn the lesson Thomas Jefferson learned when at past age 70 he finally admitted to John Adams that he was wrong.
   
   That is what is remarkable about Alexander Hamilton in he stood alone, first as President Washington's advocate in American principles and later as John Adam's entire cabinet much to Adams jealous dismay.
   Hamilton would create a long line lone leaders in John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan whose leadership and financial policy reflect his.
   
   The problem with this book is the historian Brookhiser. I rarely ever read biography or historians as they always get in the way of the person. Brookhiser starts out by stating "he is no superior to Alexander Hamilton" and then in the entire book stomps in mugging for the camera like a faux grade Bill Buckley speaking Greek philosophy trying to compete with Hamilton's genius.
   It is not that bad until he reaches the end of the book when Brookhiser then attempts to disect Hamilton as some kind of Freud without ever understanding the simplest of point. A reader does not have to know the DNA function of Raquel Welch to know she is beautiful........and a reader does not need to have Brookhiser placing his own psychopathy onto Hamilton to try and explain him.
   Hamilton might just be a God inspired genius set down to guide the founding of a nation and not a boy tusseling with demons of abandonment and issues of a dead mother.
   That is the greatest problem of books like this in historians can never just allow Hamilton who wrote over a million words in public during his life to just tell his story. No Brookhiser has to jump in front of the mic and like Dan Rather tell moronic Americans what Hamilton was really about which he might not have been.
   
   I do recommend this book even if Brookhiser is boorish too often and is like Benjamin Franklins company and fish after 3 days, because even in the "rummage of musty words dusted by a fresh historian the light of Alexander Hamilton shines through".
   
   Plutarch in his Lives understood the biographies were about the person in telling who they were in a story of their life. Historians need to emulate Plutarch in knowing he was not the story, the great man was made great by the common thing he did which was great.



4. As the title of my post states, this is an excellent primer for those interested in learning more about one of the greatest and least appreciated Founding Fathers.
   
   This book provides and easy to read and yet thorough review of Hamilton's life and provides a good foundation and understanding before you read some of the more in-depth biographies and studies.
   
   I love this book.



5. The author has done a very good job of researching and reporting to us on one of the great icons of American history.
   
   There were a few times when writing on the machinations of government, politicians, and legal maneuvering got a little tedious but it was probably necessary to give readers a full perspective.
   
   At the end of the day, the author has done us a favor by giving us a detailed and historical perspective of Alexander Hamilton. Thank you!

5 comments about Forgotten Spurgeon.

1. Charles Spurgeon is quoted today in all types of corridors within Christendom. Various statements from within his poetic, powerful, and Christ-centered sermons are lauded by Arminians and Calvinists alike. As a result many today wonder if Spurgeon was a type of third party theologian, devoid of doctrinal controversy and strong theological conviction. Ian Murray aims to bring to light some of the specifics of Spurgeon's life and ministry that have been strangely overlooked:
   
   "The only way to deal with Spurgeon's theology is to accept it or forget it: the latter is what I believe has largely happened in the 20th century. And Spurgeon without his theology is about as distorted as the cheap china figures of Spurgeon which were offered for sale by charlatans more than a century ago."
   
   In The Forgotten Spurgeon Murray interacts with Spurgeon's thought and teaching. The overt aim is not biographical; however, the historical contexts from which these various scenarios arise cannot be avoided. What follows is an informative and interesting survey of one of history's most impactful ministries.
   
   The book is centered on three major controversies in Spurgeon's ministry.
   
   The first was during Spurgeon's younger years and centered upon his dealing with a diluted gospel message. Spurgeon's Calvinism sparked outrage among the religious as they had thought such theology was already laid to rest. His popularity only served to fuel this controversy.
   
   The second controversy sprang forth from a sermon that he did on Baptismal Regeneration in 1864. This resulted in a prolonged debate on matters outside of just the role of baptism with respect to salvation.
   
   Finally, Spurgeon encountered, in his later years, what was called the Down-Grade movement. This effort to dilute the gospel of its heavenly distinctiveness served to consume the elder Spurgeon until his death at age 57.
   
   The truth of the matter is that Spurgeon was embroiled in controversy from the day he began preaching. His messages were biblical and so therefore theological. This, along with his corresponding popularity, caused a significant reaction by those around him. The Forgotten Spurgeon is a helpful book in restating the record and helping us to see Spurgeon as more than a happy, soul-winning, quote machine. He was a pastor, a preacher, an ambassador for Christ, and so therefore, a defender of the gospel of Jesus Christ.



2. My good friend, a while back, let me borrow this book, as well as another Murray book on Spurgeon, Surgeon V. Hyper-Calvanism. After finishing that book, I was sold, both on Murray's writing, and on my interest in this 19th century preacher. However, it must be stated, in my opinion, The Forgotten Spurgeon is the weaker of the two books.
   
   Early in this book, Murray makes it clear that this is not an adequate biography, but more like a character study of Charles Spurgeon. Murray looks at the major controversies surrounding Spurgeon's ministry to help to illustrate the kind of man he was, and what kind of theology he held. Reading the pages, it's difficult to believe a so well balanced person existed. He seemed supremely committed to scripture, not necessarily to a theological camp.
   
   Spurgeon is referred to as the `last of the puritans.' He came right at the `end' of the reign of Calvanism in the church and contended passionately for its preeminence. Spurgeon saw many pitfalls and dangers in the rise of liberal theology and Arminianism; in fact, many of those predictions of danger have indeed found their way into the church.
   
   Spurgeon's life is fascinating, inspiring and offers many, many great lessons for the church today. Murray does a good job of communicating many of those lessons and painting a picture that's easy for us to learn from. Unfortunately for myself, it often seemed perhaps more dry than it needed to. During a short series of chapters discussing the `Down-Grade Controversy' it became incredibly difficult for me to keep awake. Constant accounting for denominational discrepancies is a tiresome thing to read, however it still ended with, I believe, an important lesson from Spurgeon.
   
   The Baptist Union at the time was becoming more liberal with its theology, which to Spurgeon, foreshadowed some grave consequences (again, many of which have come to fruition). However, even at the risk of standing completely alone, Spurgeon remained with his conscience. He did not budge from what he believed Scripture to say; he saw loyalty to God and scripture to be the only right loyalty.
   
   All-in-all, I wouldn't recommend the book to a completely casual reader; it requires some set of understood ideas. It will also likely require some level of commitment to get through as some parts seem drudging and hard to follow. If you're interested in Spurgeon or even the grassroots of many of today's major controversies and issues in the church, this book has lots of great information with a usually great articulation.



3. "The Forgotten Spurgeon" is not so much a comprehensive biography of Charles Spurgeon as it is a description of the major challenges Spurgeon faced as a preacher of the Gospel.
   
   The 3 main challenges mentioned in the book are:
   
   1. 1850s - Diluted evangelicalism and resistance of churches and press of the era - Churches were more concerned about maintaining a "pleasant" sort of Gospel that does not really challenge hearers.
   2. 1860s - Calvinism vs. Arminianism - the challenge of the two extremes of God foreordaining who would and would not be saved and the possibility of losing one's own personal salvation.
   3. Late 1880s - Early 1890s - Down Grade Controversy - The Gospel and Churches were in danger of being watered down by heresy.
   
   Murray describes how Spurgeon confronted these controversies which eventually led to his persecution and opposition by ministers, the press, and other sources. Interestingly, doesn't this sound familiar to what true Gospel preachers and believers around the world experience today? Just food for thought!
   
   Again, "The Forgotten Spurgeon" is not a true biography like the excellent biography Murray produced on Jonathan Edwards. Instead, the title deals more with the controversies Spurgeon faced during his ministry.
   
   Still, an interesting and informative read. Recommended.



4. The main thing Iain Murray believes is forgotten about Spurgeon is his Calvinism. That however can be considered a liability or a great benefit. It is sometimes forgotten that Spurgeon was a convinced believer in the Evangelical Gospel as articulated by Calvin, the Puritans and many others. Murray ask us to see his public ministry, his revivals and his controversies through this important lens.
   
   In doing so Murray also explores a number of ministry issues of the modern day and makes a preferred present path clear based on the examples of Spurgeon. His early chapters about Spurgeon's revivals and preaching of the Gospel and interaction with Arminianism come with applications to the present practice of preaching, and these, as well as the other chapters, read with Murray's own strange blend of academic information, historical facts, hagiography and devotional octane.
   
   My honest evaluation is that the book has a lot to commend it, including an exploration of parts of Spurgeon's life discussed in few other places; including copious quotations from the pen of Spurgeon himself.
   
   The liability is simply the dryness that creeps into the prose at points. Murray's thorough historical mind bored me at times and made me hunt for a considerable number of great nuggets amidst a sometimes laborious text. I found the latter chapters more of a labor than the first chapters. The first 113 pages I found mostly easy to read, and after that some of the chapters were a labor, especially those on the Down-Grade controversy, though even these chapters have some good parts sprinkled throughout.
   
   It is a good and useful book, but not in any sense essential.



5. This is truly a great work on Spurgeon.
   
   It is by no means trying to give a complete look at his life, but rather is focused at highlighting a few key controversies and aspects of his life that are often obscured in modern analysis of Spurgeon. That is the stated goal of the book, and it suceeds at this.
   
   Even though it is limited in scope, as I have mentioned, it still does a pretty good job at painting a picture of Spurgeon as a whole.
   
   I would recommend this book to anyone who is interested in learning more about the man named Charles Haddon Spurgeon. It is fairly short and is an enjoyable read with many quotes from Spurgeon's sermons.

5 comments about Marilyn Monroe.

1. 
   
   First, let me tell you what this biography is NOT.
   If you are looking for juicy gossip, look elsewhere. This is not the book for you.
   
   Also - and this seems to be surprisingly important for many - if you are passionately interested in the events on the night of her death, or have a definite opinion on it, this is probably not a book you would find satisfying. (More on this below.)
   
   But first, let me tell you about my personal attitude towards MM, so you know where I am coming from.
   
   I am not a »fan« of Marilyn Monroe. I do not rave about her, I do not idolise her.
   Nor do I consider her a »bimbo« or whatever the popular stereotypes may be.
   (And, which I am sure would surprise some, I find her singing delicious, because I prefer expressiveness to sheer »voice« and technique.)
   In short, I do not have an emotional attachment - either positive or negative - to her image and public persona.
   
   Through the years, I have seen most of her films, and I know many bits of trivia about her - I have for years (they are rather difficult to avoid), but I had never read a biographical work about her life.
   And so, for my first book book about MM, I wanted a really balanced biography: a biography that would show me MM as a person, »warts and all«, if need be. (Provided the »warts« are documented, not hear-say - unless the hear-say were properly identified as such and had a specific narrative or other function.)
   
   After having read the reviews on Amazon, and having browsed through the book, I decided I would go with this one. The fact that the author doesn't speculate much on the manner of MM's death - or even dwell on the events (her narration of MM's final night is relatively short) - only reinforced my decision.
   
   At this point, I should probably add that I have been an avid reader (in various languages) since I was a child.
   Which is why nobody could have been more baffled than myself when I found the book surprisingly difficult to read.
   
   The author knows how to write; she writes well.
   Consider the very first sentence: "On January 16, 1951, a black Lincoln convertible pulled into the driveway at 2000 Coldwater Canyon Drive in Beverly Hills."
   
   You feel being drawn into the story from the get go, don't you?
   
   Alas, this particular, initial story has nothing to do with MM, except tangentially. It deals with Arthur Miller and Elia Kazan; Marilyn is nowhere in the picture.
   
   But it introduces, very aptly, one of the the author's three main perspective points of this book: Arthur Miller and his activities.
   
   The other main »external« perspective is MM's relation with the studios - her professional life is essentially presented through her contracts and the lobbying or other activities leading to them.
   But there is no critical analysis of - or even accounts of popular and critical reactions to - her actual work. Amazingly (to me), her »break« into films is almost indiscernible in this book. I have a very good verbal memory - and yet, even after several readings of the the book, I could not describe her actual entry into cinema (if I didn't know it from other sources, that is), or her move from being an extra to speaking roles.
   
   Her extra-cinematic activities (»mingling« with various people from the business) are reasonably well (and not at all salaciously) covered; however, I remember having to search the book, page by page, to find any reference at all to the »Asphalt Jungle«, for example. And there are no references to critiques of her work in those early films.
   
   And finally, there is a third perspective point: a psychoanalytical one.
   A much as I appreciate the contribution of psychology (and often use it myself), I do wish the author, having avoided speculation in other matters, would refrain from it here, too.
   
   I am sure that the mother's attitude to Norma Jean (and vice versa) had a major impact on the actress' life. How could it not?
   But trying to actually peer into the actress' inner thoughts and feelings regarding her mother - based on a single incident that may or may NOT have happened, to boot (her mother's alleged attempt to smother her when Norma Jean was a baby) - feels contrived.
   
   Furthermore, the intimacy (however treacherous) of this perspective clashes with the other two viewpoints mentioned: her marriage to Arthur Miller and her involvement in his activities, and her battles with the studios.
   
   Between these three viewpoints, I find MM as an adult, a woman, independently of her relation to Miller and/or the studio bosses, simply - missing.
   
   Her other marriages are dealt with rather summarily; so are some (very few) of her affairs. Her coaches, Natasha Lytess and (especially) Paula Strasberg, do get a little more »air time« - but the information at times feels somehow randomly chosen. That's because we learn virtually nothing about MM's friendships, if she had any. (BTW, there are also a few errors of »continuity« if you will. I remember reading that »Like Natasha Lytess twelve years previously, she sensed something wrong«. The problem is... there is no description of that first event, twelve years earlier, to which this sentence refers.)
   
   
   This is not a criticism of the author's chosen perspective. It is as valid as any, I suppose - and much more valid than many other, more »personal« (code for »gossipy«) approaches. It is certainly dignified.
   
   I am just saying that, while I personally enjoy reading biographies that do not indulge in perpetuating gossip as if it were the gospel truth, I do like getting an insight into the person from the perspective of her interaction with other people - not just (predominantly) one husband, the studio bosses, and her publicists.
   
   And I do find it slightly infuriating (it's an oxymoron, I know ;) that nowhere in the book is the choice of these viewpoints even explained.
   To me, it is not at all self-evident why her marriage with Miller would be more relevant than her marriage to Dougherty or DiMaggio; or why a detailed look into each one of her contracts and the machinations leading to them would give more insight into her personality than her relationships with, well - PEOPLE.
   
   And frankly, the final verdict about her sad end, closing the circle established by the psychological point of view, sounds somewhat contrived: »Marilyn had finally given in to her mother's judgment.«
   
   So do the last sentences in the book: MM, says the author, »promises us that sex can be fun, without dangers. That indeed may not be the truth, but it continues to be what we wish. And that is why Marilyn remains, even now, the symbol of our secret desires«.
   
   Who are »we«? It is not at all self-evident.
   Which »secret desires«? They have not been identified.
   Furthermore, what is »sex without dangers«? What IS dangerous about sex, for that matter?
   None of those fine-sounding premises has been satisfactorily explained in order to warrant such a conclusion.
   
   
   Far be it from me to dissuade anyone from buying or reading this book (and I mean it)!
   It is an honest and certainly dignified effort to peer into the »inner works« of the pop icon; and personally I find it refreshingly free of speculation about the circumstances of her death, or salacious hear-say.
   
   But anyone looking for insight into the actress' personality and life as is revealed - inevitably so - through her interaction with a variety of other people, might want to read Michelle Morgan's Marilyn Monroe: Private and Undisclosed first, followed by Sarah Churchwell's The Many Lives of Marilyn Monroe.
   



2. When I think of Marilyn Monroe, I think of her troubling death. If you believet that she committed suicide, then this book is detailed enough for you about her poor life. One cannot help but feel sorry for her despite her unstable upbringing, her mentally ill mom and relatives. She was looking for a father figure in her husbands like playwright Arthur Miller and Joe DiMaggio. She spent part of her childhood in an orphanage because she was shuffled around from home to home. We know her first marriage was probably better than her marriages to high profile icons like DiMaggio who loved her as Marilyn and not as Norma Jean Baker and Miller who was in love with her as his muse. Marilyn wanted more than to be a movie star. She wanted to be loved. She loved kids who returned their love back because she never talked down to them. When she was Norma Jean is when I believed that she was the happiest. She has the vulnerability in her smiles and face. She desperately wanted unconditional love. A friend of hers, Jeanne Carmen stated that she was the loneliest girl in the world despite all her superficial friends, relatives, and acquaintances. Her fans to this day love Marilyn as the icon that she was created but we do not know the fragility of Norma Jean Baker who lived as Marilyn Monroe, the ultimate character. She wanted to act desperately to escape the misery of her life. The book glosses over her relations to the Las Vegas Mafia and the possible foul play of her death. Whether Marilyn was murdered or committed suicide, this book does not answer those questions at all. It's glossed over much like the cover of the book. I think it's still worth a read for any Monroe fan. I appreciated the author's research into the theatrical background of films, television, and theater in New York City where I think she loved to be and London where she filmed a film with Lord Laurence Olivier. Despite her difficulties on set and problems, was she worth it? You damn right she was worth every moment.



3. I am a Marilyn Monroe bio junkie, and this bio was good; however, I was disappointed in the ending.
   
   I felt the author tied up Marilyn's death too quickly, simply stating that the actress committed suicide. The reason this bothered me as a reader is because there are questions as to whether Marilyn really did commit suicide.
   
   This is a good book to learn about Marilyn's youth and her start in Hollywood, as well as her marriages; however, if you want to investigate the death of Marilyn, I recommend Goddess: The Secret Lives of Marilyn Monroe by Anthony Summer OR Marilyn Monroe: The Last Days by Donald H. Wolfe. Both books are thoroughly researched, and the authors inform their readers of how they obtained information.



4. This book is a very well written highly readable retread of everything you already know about Monroe.
   
   However, it does have a particularly strong emphasis on financial issues, contract negotiations and Monroe's money battles with the studios. This book contains far more detail about Monroe's financial dealings with Hollywood than you will probably find anywhere else. Not sure why though
   
   Besides giving the reader all they've ever wanted to know about Monroe's finances (it is unbeleivable by today's standards that Monroe was living in rinky dink apartments and using a party line after becoming a major star) the reader is given reams of detail on her early relationship with Aurthur Miller and Miller's homo erotic professional, personal and political rivalry with Elia Kazan. Miller and Kazan are given almost as much ink as Monroe in this book.
   
   Ms. Leamer tows the party line on Monroe. No one will argue that Monroe was not a tragic figure but it's old. There's more to Monroe's story than her tragic insecurity and her fragility and vulnerability (she wasn't so vulnerable when it came to negotiating her later contracts though nor was she so over wrought with sensitivity that she couldn't turn Milton Greene out afte all he'd done for her). Why was the most beautiful woman in the world alone so much? Could it be because she was tedious, draining, overwrought, consuming and manipulative? Maybe. But we can't look to writers like Ms. Leaming to explain.
   
   This book is well suited to a first time reader of material on Monroe. It is a good read that does a good job of weaving together the chain of events that led to Monroe's stardom. It fails, however, to put Monroe into perspective. It fails to veer from the well worn and explain to the reader why Monroe was living in a cluttered three bedroom bungelow when she was the biggest star on the face of the Earth. Has the myth of Monroe been woven since her death by people like Ms. Leamer? There must be some explanation in Monroe's behavior and relationships that explains why she died alone, in a middle class home, on a Saturday night with only her house keeper for company and why this is so incongruous with the surreal stature Monroe is viewed with today.
   
   We surely won't find out from books like this.



5. i am a huge fan of barbara leaming, she is the one the best writers and she has managaed to humanize marilyn as no one has before, the book was fluid and wasn't over-whelming as most marilyn books are, hurrah! barbara! if there is a chance that you are reading this, i would love if you wrote about dorothy dandridge, i think she'd make a great subject for you!

5 comments about Diana: Her True Story in Her Own Words.

1. I sort of liked this book more than some of the other biographies I've read before. To be honest before I read this book I have NEVER heard of Princess Diana. While I read this book I felt sympathetic toward her because she had a real hard life after she became involved with the Prince Charles. Most of the sympathy went into the fact that she received pretty much no help from any one except her mother and father but no help whatsoever from the royal family and was expected to know everything she was supposed to. She had bulimia and no experience at all at being royalty and the somewhat rude expectations from the royal position and the responsibilities that came with it. Not only that but the prince that proposed to Diana (the prince that became her husband) was cheating on her with another woman and everyone was trying to hide the fact that he was seeing the other woman. Along with that problem came the fact that her husband cared more about the other woman than Diane even though she was his wife. An example was that when Diana was still engaged to the prince and the paparazzi were following her and the other woman the prince was seeing, Diana was being followed by like 36 paparazzi the other woman was only being followed by 4 people the prince was sympathetic towards the other woman and didn't even care about the hardships Diana was going through.
   So overall I would give the book a good rating since it had a personal interview with Diana and used her own words rather than some facts that could very well be just rumors that were spread.
   S.Brock



2. Saint Therese of Lisieux, The Little Flower wrote that she had prayed to discover her true vocation - and that she had found it: "to be love in the heart of the Church"! A novel by Carson McCullers wears the title: "The Heart is A Lonely Hunter". "The heart" is the location of the reality of our life . . .it is where we really dwell . . . and where God dwells with us.
   
   Princess Diana Spencer was indeed a "lonely hunter" searching for herself and for meaning "in her heart" . . . and she found that meaning in the hearts of countless millions throughout the world -- many who encountered her personally and countless millions who never physically met her but DID meet her soul.
   
   Diana's external beauty simply was a radiation outward and visibly of her real true inner beauty - Melanie (Safka) the folk singer wrote a song titled, "Beautiful People", and while Melanie hadn't envisioned "Diana" who probably had just been born about the time she recorded that song, Diana WAS a "beatiful person".
   
   This book by Andrew Morton comes about as close as we might ever come to hearing the voice of Diana speaking for herself. She presents herself to us as she was: frailties included - but "the flaws" are what mark individuals as unique and as the amazing persons that they are - and the faults simply lend contrast to their perfections and more noble character.
   
   The world cried when Diana died . . . and she left us wondrous memories of a "Camelot" that did exist if but for a fleeting moment . . . and she left us an example of how "love" can exist in the heart of the worldfor any other person in need, whatever their need or hurt and wherever they may live. She was a friend of Mother Terese and Mother Terese was a friend to Diana (Diana was buried with rosaries Mother Teresa gave her) - they lived in two different atmospheres but shared that sense of "human pain".
   
   This volume lets Diana linger with us a while longer . . . and the photographs bring her back once again and remind us of why we all fell under her spell.
   
   And beneath the surface of her image . . . between the lines of her words, we can also find hints as to how we can live a more compassionate and understanding and caring life of "love" ourselves.
   
   Diana is missed . . . and she should be . . . but the world was blessed that she walked among us even for so brief a time. Her smile is now eternal.



3. I first read this book when it came out in 1992. Like everyone else, I was shocked and blamed Prince Charles for the marriage falling apart.
   
   Since she died, there's been a number of credible stories come out that shows Diana to be manipulative, emotionally immature, stubborn and just plain bizarre. While her devotion to her children is unquestionable, and her charity work obviously came right from her heart, there were too many other aspects of her character that were not so glossy.
   
   I mean come on, if your wife was pregnant and threw herself down the stairs to get your attention, would you not seriously question her mental stability? Anyone who can cut themselves with a lemon peeler or smash themselves against a glass cabinet is obviously a few bricks short of a load and in serious need of help. When she did the Panorama interview in 1995, she declared that she felt "betrayed" when her former lover James Hewitt did a tell-all book.............uh, well didn't she do the exact same thing to her husband when she told Andrew Morton all the dirty details of their marriage?
   
   While I despised Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles for their affair, I understand now (a decade later) why he would turn to her: for some NORMALCY in his life.
   
   Be that as it may, the one fasinating thing about Diana is her uncanny ability to predict things. In this book, it tells of her conversations when she was young that she was going to marry someone "in the public eye". She also apparently predicted her father's stroke in 1975. But what was fasinating to read in 1992 was Diana's belief that "while she knows that William will one day be King, she is firm in her belief that she will never become Queen" and "I am performing my duty as Princess of Wales, but I can't see it for much longer than 15 years." As we all know, she was Princess of Wales for 16 years. She made these statements 6 years before she died.....



4. Andrew Morton's book, written in collusion with the late Diana, is a well-written, cleverly confected polemic designed to undo the very people who made her what she was (or, as some in the UK were wont to say, "After all, she's just a royal by injection"). Purportedly the daughter of a famous alcoholic (Lord Spencer), she exhibited all the classic symptoms of an adult child of an alcoholic; low self-esteem, poor boundaries, poor impulse control, chronic depression, a pattern of blaming others for her problems, etc. Of course, one can add on bulemia (from which she suffered before she married her poor husband), and other deep-seated psychiatric disorders. All this is clearly shown in the book to any critical reader. My daughter's godmother, the late Ouida Huxley, used to regale us with stories told her by one of the Queen's closest confidants, who herself witnessed how during the height of her omnipotence Diana would disparage her husband to his face, in front of the family, on his lack of charisma compared to her. She pulled cute pranks like screaming and rolling about on the floor when she didn't get what she wanted (in this particular case, to go to Majorca instead of Balmoral) in a fine impression of a grand mal epileptic seizure, in front of the Queen at a family meeting. For some reason (and it wasn't Camilla, who re-entered the scene only after all efforts at marital repair were exhausted), Diana felt as if the ungrateful royals needed to be paid back for her psychic pain, not realizing that the source of her suffering was in her own head. Andrew Morton's book is the result. It's as one-sided as an autobiography by a narcissist. Morton was either duped, or a willing collaborator in the tearing down of Britain's primary civic institution, the Monarchy. This work (if such it may be called) is about as accurate as Soviet propaganda. It is a fantasy woven from scraps of truth. If Diana had lived, and married the dreadful Dodie Fayed, she would have lost her titular "Princess" title, and reverted to merely the (alleged) daughter of an earl, and would have once again been "Lady Di". Dodie's dad was planning to lugubriously install the two love-birds in the Windsors' old place in the Bois de Boulogne. Eventually, no doubt, she would have tried out one of her famous emotionally wracking "turns" on Dodie (an Egyptian man, mind you) and would have infallibly been kicked out on her coutured posterior. During that time anyone who knew her, even from a distance, could see that Diana's life was on an inexorable and endless downward cycle (remember, even her brother, who so "courageously" dissed his own godmother, the Queen, on international television, refused to have Christmas dinner with D the last year of her life). Andrew Morton's book is a classic celebrity bio. Poor Diana. She was never happy, she would never be happy, and she was going to sow chaos and destruction wherever she went. Death, however, mercifully came for Diana before her life got even worse.



5. If you need to read just ONE book rehardsing Princess Diana... This is THE one you must pick!
   
   You will be delighted with all the details and will admire even more this wonderful person.
   
   A book you MUST have on your shelves!

5 comments about Red China Blues: My Long March From Mao to Now.

1. An enthusiastic young activist, Jan Wong left Canada for Beijing in 1972, in hopes of simultaneously aiding Mao's cause and pursuing her ancestral roots. This well-written, enlightening account of her "journey from Mao to now" takes readers through her six years as a student and subsequent six years as a reporter in Red China's capital city.
   
   Wong was uniquely qualified to write this book, which privileges readers with deep insights into why things were the way they were then, and are now, in China. Having Chinese parents, but being raised in the West, rendered Jan part of both worlds. She experienced the Cultural Revolution and post-Mao China as both an insider and a "foreigner," resulting in a perspective on those periods that only a few can claim, and fewer still have written about.
   
   The first part of the book tells the story of the author's Beijing University days. In 1972, armed with only the vocabulary she had acquired in Mandarin 101, Wong left the comfort and security of her Montreal life to spend a summer in China. Inspired by what she observed in Red China, she found it a natural progression to move from worrying about feminist issues to supporting Maoism. So she petitioned and won permission to stay in the country to study at Beijing University for the next two years. Anti-establishmentarianism was "in," and "China was radical-chic" at the time, she explains. Western youth looked to the East for answers and antidotes to racism, "exploitation" of the masses, and materialism. Becoming a journalist seemed like the perfect job for a young woman seeking to change the world, so she decided to remain in China to learn Mandarin, Chinese history, and Maoism. Her goal was to bring knowledge of all that she thought China was doing well to the West.
   
   As a starry-eyed young Maoist, Wong did not realize how miserable people really were. Instead, when she discovered that she and the other foreign students were being given better rooms and special food privileges, they protested until they were allowed to eat the miserable starvation-level rations given to the rest of the students in their dingy canteen. Then she and her foreign friend petitioned to join their Chinese classmates in undertaking the required physical labor projects they had been exempted from. She was finally allowed to dug ditches, haul bricks, and harvest crops with everyone else.
   
   The author's first clue that Communist China might not be the paradise she had dreamed of came when the school asked her to end her friendship with a young Swedish man or be expelled. The school actually played a distressing mind game with her over this issue. From this experience she learned that in China people were not only unable to do what they wanted, but they were also not free to think what they wanted.
   
   Yet, Wong remains zealous in her attempts to prove that she is a good Maoist. In fact, Part One of the book culminates in her informing on two students who asked for her help to leave China for the US. At the time Wong thought she was doing the right thing by turning them in, but now she regrets her decision and feels great remorse for the terrible fate that probably befell these people after that.
   
   In Part Two, Wong returns to Montreal to complete her McGill University degree. Still supportive of Red China, she lectures locally in an effort to muster public support for the country and its political agenda. After graduating in 1974, Wong won a Canadian government scholarship to study at Beijing University, and off she went for more of the same. In addition to learning more about her school experiences and deepening understanding of what was happening on a personal and political level, the author meets and marries Norman Shulman---an American. After her studies end, she takes a job as a foreign correspondent for the New York Times. She finds that her Chinese appearance and fluency with the language give her a unique ability to get the local people to open up to her, when other reporters are unable to get interviews or comments.
   
   Wong reaches a turning point when Madame Mao and the rest of the Gang of Four are arrested. As she watches people rejoice in the streets, it dawns on her that the people hadn't believed in the Cultural Revolution for a long time. She feels betrayed and foolish because of her blind faith.
   
   Wong left China in 1980 to pursue a journalism degree at Columbia University, and then worked at various prestigious publications in the US and Canada for seven years. But in 1988, she was too curious to know what was really happening in China, so she asked her employer, the Toronto Globe, to transfer her. The third section of the book thus covers the late 1980s and early 1990s. The highlight of her career was covering the Tiananmen Square protests, the resulting massacre, and resulting fall out. This event served as the catalyst for shattering the last of Wong's illusions about communism in China. She declares herself no longer naïve and believes that she finally has a clear view of the "real" China.
   
   The last portion of the book presents some of Wong's most interesting interviews and perspectives on life in China, centering on human rights issues and social problems like how to uncover how many people really died in the Tiananmen Square massacre, poverty, the effects of the economic boom, retardation, drugs, prisoners, kidnapping women as brides, and the new robber barons of China.
   
   Wong left China in 1993 with no regrets. She concluded that without having spent 12 years living in and observing Red China, she would not have realized that what she was striving for all along was the socialist life style she enjoyed in Canada.
   
   Filled with interesting stories and well told, this book is a must read addition to your "good books about China" collection. As more and more people with Chinese roots return to this country, hopefully more voices like Wang's will emerge to give us perspective on what's happened between 1993 and the present, picking up where she has left off.



2. This is a beautiful book to read. It's well written and you can hardly put it down. Jan Wong let's us be witnesses of her life choices and their consecuences. It's interesting how and why she decides to go and live in communist China, how she strugles to get adjusted to that kind of political system and way of life. She then turns into a great journalist and let's us see some unknown aspects of modern China. It's a good book to learn more about China's history. I enjoyed it a lot!



3. If you want to understand China, you will need to read a considerable range of titles in order to see the country, its history, people, culture and so on from numerous and unique angles. Jan Wong's RED CHINA BLUES offers a very unique angle. Jan was born in Montreal. Her father owned a popular restaurant in that city and by the time he was thirty, he had made his first million. Jan herself, apparently suffering from an identity crisis, became disenchanted with Canada/Western culture and decided to head to China to find herself and her roots - during the height of Maoism.
   
   Young and impossibly niave, Wong hurtled herself into the Chinese world. She learned the language, demanded not to be given preferential treatment, shoveled manure on a pig farm/re-education camp, and worked in a machine factory. Ever so slowly, her idealism faded, but, as other critics have noted, this took a very long time. At one point, for example, she mentioned how at the machine factory the workers spent half their time going to political meetings as opposed to producing. One of the primary tenets or aims of Marxism (to which Wong subscribed) is to creat a "superabundance" so as to achieve economic surplus over material necessity. Only then will art, politics, philosophy, etc. be able to reach fruition. When factory workers ask Wong about conditions and money re a similar job in the West, she is reluctant to tell them. But such isolated inconsistencies didn't dampen her idealistic fervor; not for something like six years anyway. Wong returned to China in 1988, and from here the book really gears down. Because she looks and can speak Chinese, she is able to to go places and do things that real outsiders never could. Her visit to a labor camp is interesting and her first hand account of "the Tianmen Incident," (people being shot right outside her window) is, as you might imagine, chilling. This was either the first or second China book I read, and it made a lasting impression. I highly recommend it.
   
   Troy Parfitt, author



4. Red China Blues is the story of a woman who, in her youth, idealizes communism. This idealization is partly a lack of understanding about how communism in China really worked, and partly rebellion against her own Canadian culture.
   
   As she goes to China and slowly comes to understand the horror of China under Mao, we too see and understand both the regime itself and the ways in which the people dealt with their lot. She wants so much to believe in the dream-China she's created in her head that it's painful and difficult for her to see reality. This is a sin most humans commit at some point in their lives, and many readers will wince as they're reminded of their own delusional moments.
   
   Ms. Wong does not attempt to censor any of her own sins. From simple arrogance to participation in active thought control, she tells us everything she did and leaves it to us to decide what to think of her. The same is true of the people around her: she honestly talks about the good and bad in all the people she describes to us. This lends a wonderful humanizing touch to the book and turns it from the story of a regime into a story about people *in* the regime, living as best they can. You will not be able to forgive some of them, while others will move you. Mostly, Ms. Wong leaves you to decide for yourself which people fall into which category.
   
   In other words, this is a book that lays out facts and lets you decide your opinion for yourself. She gives you the facts, tells you her opinion, and leaves the rest to you. For a clear, honest look at China's people under Mao and after his death, read this one.



5. Jan Wong,a Canadian journalist of Chinese ancestry, in this illuminating volume writes of her experiences as an ardent young Maoist in the early 1970's who actually went to China to work and study.
   She hauled pig manure in a Chinese re-education farm, and at Beijing University she turned in a fellow student who had begged her help to escape to the West.
   Slowly she realized the evil of the Communist system in China and was repatriated to the West in 1978.
   Wong returned years later as an undercover journalist to China where she covered the Tianmen Square Massacre, in which three thousand pro-democracy students were mowed down in cold blood by Red China's army, on the orders of dictator, Jian Zemin.
   She also covered China's contradictory development into a capitalist state under a Communist dictatorship, or a Communist dictatorship with a capitalist economy...akin to Fascism!
   She covers the Tianmen Square Massacre of 1989, letting the the reader know of some of the lesser known details, and how the Communist army opened fire on the students after they began leaving the square:
   "A [...]girl was killed and they just brought her body back...After the third barrage I counted more than twenty bodies. One cyclist was shot in the back right below our balcony. There were two big puddles of blood on the Avenue of Eternal Peace. People carried the body of a little girl towards the back of the hotel. After twenty three more minutes, a few people gathred up enough courage to aproach the wounded. The soldiers let loose another blast, sending the would be rescuers scurrying for cover. The crowd was enraged. I grimly kept track of the time. An hour later, the wounded were still on the ground, bleeding to death.
   She speaks of the great poverty of the new Red China, with inequalities far greater than anything in the liberal democracies of the world, and crushing poverty in the rural provinces. Despite economic changes, China remains a brutal dictatorship, with no political liberalization or democratization having been allowed by the iron grip of the Communist Party.
   Peeople are still opresed in day-to-day life. People are not allowed to own dogs, and to deal with a fad of people acquiring dogs as pets in the early 1990s, special police squads swept through the neigbourhoods, strangling dogs with steel wire looped at the end of metal poles.
   The author recounts some regret at buying into the Communist lie, with the realization that "The Western world, especially Canada, is far more socialistic than China has ever been, with it's free public education, universal medicare, unemployment insurance, and government funding for television ads against domestic violence. China has made me appreciate my own country, with it's tiny ethnically diverse population of unassuming donut-eaters. I had gone all the way to China to find an idealistic revolutionary society, when I already had it right to home."
   She ends of on a positive note, predicting, in 1997, a great change in China , and the death of the Communist Party, and real democracy.
   Ten years later, this is not close to being realized, with a tightening of political control by the Communist dictatorship having taken place.
   Despite being one of the most brutal dictatorships on this planet, China has gained international acceptibility, without improving democracy or human rights!
   Nobody bats an eyelid at the Olympic Games for 2008 being set in Beijing.
   The worst abuses of the Communist regime has it's apologists in the WEst.
   The Stalinist Workers World Party in North America, (which has praised Stalinism in the Soviet Union, and applauded suicide bombings against Jewish women and chidren in Israel) congratulated the Chinese regime after the Tianmen Square Massacre, for having 'won a battle against imperialist and counter-revolutionary forces."
   The fact that such sentiments can be uttered makes one wonder how far the world has actually come.

5 comments about Memoirs.

1. I have been intrigued by American Empire and its ascent over the last century. I wanted to read Mr. Rockefeller's words for myself. It seemed as though he was skipping major details throughout- for example he glides right over the death of his brother Nelson, leaving out details of the circumstance. Which pretty much proved to me that the rumors were more than true.
   Chapter 27 was what I was hunting and in his own words on page 405 he solidifies accusations of his one-world agenda. Considering he has been a part of the Bilderbergs, CFR, and Trilaterals for most of his adult life- rather odd he only gives about a page a piece to each issue. A 500 page book and only 1 brief chapter on the bulk of his world vision. Dare I say conspiracy?



2. David's first trip to Europe began with an invitation to meet royal family in England. He never looked back. Bill Gates today has similar calling cards and would be welcomed in to any royal court. Money, to coin an expression, talks. That said, David climbed slowly to the top among 5 very competitive sons of one of the greatest forces of good in the 20th century, John D. Rockefeller, Jr. His father's legacy of giving is unmatched in history. David and his brothers lived in his shadow and none match his genius, but he was the sole heir, while the five had to share the family fortune. David stands out among them as the global leader. Nelson was the domestic wheeler-dealer, while the others seemed content to work more quietly. Of the group, one senses that Nelson was the least attractive. David's talents for diplomacy come forth best while trying to calm his pushy brother. Nelson was aggressive, while the others were gentlemanly. David Rockefeller's memoir seeks to show him in a good light and, in the end, he succeeds. With his death, we will finally be left without a great Rockefeller for the first time in over one-hundred years. The next generation seem more scattered, less rich, less prominent. It will be the end of an era.



3. It may be disinformation, but reportedly at the Bilderberg/Trilateral meeting in 1991 in Baden Baden, Germany, David Rockefeller made the following statement, with Bill Clinton in attendance:
   
   "We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."
   
   Whether or not he actually said this publicly, it does seem to capture the thinking of someone who makes the kind of decisions Rockefeller does. In his memoir on page 405, he actually does say this, "Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure---one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.".
   In this section he also criticizes "populists" and "isolationists" for not appreciating that the "active role" the international bankers have played in world affairs has contributed to economic growth and the defeat of Communism.
   http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0812969731/ref=sib_dp_pt#
   
   The dollar's value has declined by 90% since the Fed's beginning in 1913 thanks to the mismanagement of "elites", and at the same time we have experienced tremendous economic growth; due to natural human activity and technological advances. Private bankers have figured out how to profit from human behavior and economics, but they're not a necessary middle man; the Constitution authorizes Congress to coin money.
   
   I agree with Thomas Jefferson, who believed that if the People have the facts, we will make the right decisions. How encouraging that he acknowledges he couldn't not have advanced his agenda for global domination by bankers if the public's eye was on them- he thanks the MSM for their complicity in subverting the Constitution and the sovereignty of nations. He needs darkness to accomplish these things; he's more a vampire or a cockroach than a human being. The world will advance light years when a critical mass of awareness is reached and we lock up the bankers of the world along with the mass murderers, serial killers, child molesters and terrorists, and study them so we have the understanding needed to guard against their plotting.
   
   Rockefeller is scum, don't buy this book



4. The book tells of a life in one of America's prominent families. It's very interesting to know how one handles wealth, power and influence in the world's most powerful nation. I have learned so much. So will you out there. Give it a read. It's one of the best biographies on the shelf.



5. This book is a wonderful view of how wealth can work to benefit society and the role of philanthropy in American society and the world at large.
   A solid view of the world according to a special man, however priveledged, who had the right philosophy and work ethic in an evolving and historical time. Read this to help yourself actualize your own potential and change the way (e.g. lighten your path), perhaps, how you view the role of government (public servants), private business (corporations) and philanthropy. A wonderful contribution to American literature.