5 comments about The Life of Thomas More.

1. Sir Thomas More was a Londoner from birth. He was born in 1478 in the last flowering of the late Middle Ages Roman Catholic world of that distant day. More was a brilliant student who studied at Oxford and at the law courts of Lincoln Inn. More rose high and became Lord Chancellor of England under Henry VIII. All was well with Sir Thomas as he served King and Country as lawyer, judge, diplomat, Steward of Oxford and Cambridge, pious Christian layperson and author. His book "Utopia" has become a deserved classic of satire.
   More was a humanist who was friendly with great men such as Erasmus who often visited him in his estate in Sussex. More was twice married to Jane Colt who died at 22 and the widow Alice Middleton who was witty, wealth and wise. More had a quick wit, deep love of God and strong belief in the
   beliefs of the Roman Catholic Church. More had several children by his first wife. His daughter Margaret was considered to be the smartest woman in England being proficient in Latin, Greek and the classics. All of his children loved him. More indulged in scatological jokes; had countless pets and viewed life as a grand drama with him as an actor upon the stage of affairs.
   On becoming Lord Chancellor after the fall of Cardinal Wolsey he was zealous in the persecution and burning of reformers and Protestant. More opposed the English translation of the Bible by William Tyndale. He could be cruel and was a bitter enemy of anyone who opposed the Church. Like most people of the age he was superstitious believing firmly in ghosts, omens in dreams and the literal interpretation of the Bible. More called for reform in the existing church but believed everyone should obey the Pope in Rome as a father is obeyed in the well ordered home. He would not brook breaking away from Roman Catholicism.
   More was beheaded in July 1535 and his property was attained due to his refusal to subscribe to the marriage of Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn. More believed Henry's marriage to his first wife Catherine of Aragon was valid. He believed that by marrying Anne the King of England was not in obedience to God's law. More believed the church should be governed from Rome rather than be ruled by the King of England. He hated Martin Luther condemning him to hell. More was inimical to the Protestant Reformation. His faith was in the old church which had governed Western religion for a millenium.
   My feelings towards More are mixed. I do not like his persecution of heretics but one most concede that he was a product of the cruel times in which he lived. I do admire his courage in dying rather than sacrifice his belief in what is right to do as God gave him the light to discern that right. More has been sainted by the Roman Catholic Church.
   Peter Ackroyd is the author of this 400 pages book making it much shorter than the definite biography of Sir Thomas by Richard Marius. Ackroyd portrays More warts and all giving a balanced view of the controversial man's life and times. More and his contemporaries are often quoted using the English of the period. This may prove annoying to many readers who prefer to read about him in a standard English format. This is a fine biography by one of England's best biographers.



2. Thomas More lived an exemplary life during hard times. His faith in the Catholic Church was put to the test by his king, and though he failed his king and paid the price on the scaffold, he served his God and was rewarded with martyrdom and sainthood. Peter Ackroyd's book is a brilliant and dramatic telling of More's life.
   
   Thomas More was born in London in 1478. He was educated at Oxford where upon his father's insistence he studied law. But he was also interested in theology and thought for a while of becoming a monk. Famously he wore a hair shirt his entire life. Instead of taking vows, however, he took a wife and had four children. He made sure his daughters received as rigorous an education as his sons. (His wife died in 1511 and he married Alice Middleton and adopted her daughter.)
   
   The law was More's lifelong profession where he represented various groups in the courts and helped settle trade disputes abroad. He wrote a history of King Richard III, wherein he portrayed Richard as a cruel, even criminal, ruler. In 1516, he published his most famous book, UTOPIA, which described an ideal community governed totally by reason. When Cardinal Wolsey failed to secure an annulment of Henry VIII's marriage to Catherine of Aragon, he was replaced by More as lord chancellor. He worked diligently in this position and became a friend to the king. But troubles were already visible in the horizon.
   
   When Henry, through the Act of Supremacy, declared himself the head of the Church of England, More was in opposition to him: he refused to take an oath of allegiance to Henry that would deny papal supremacy of the church. He was tried, found guilty, and beheaded five days later.
   
   Ackroyd is especially good in relating the dramatic events during these last few years in More's life. He narrates this with the power and skill of a novelist; indeed, it's almost impossible to put the book down during the last 100 pages. Anyone in want of moral uplift need only read these last pages for complete satisfaction. More went to the scaffold bravely, even telling the executioner to stay calm and aim true. He joked after stumbling on the scaffold steps and received help: "When I come down again let me shift for myself as well as I can." Then "he died the King's good servant but God's first," which is his life in a nutshell. Ackroyd writes with authority and tremendous style, but it's the drama that he infuses in his account that truly sets this book apart. Highly recommended.



3. The moment I finished Peter Ackroyd's "Life of Thomas More," my strongest impulse was to close it, open it up to the first page again, and start -- immediately -- reading it all over again, word by word, page by page.
   
   I hung on every word of this text. I wanted to understand Thomas More.
   
   I wanted to understand a man whose misogyny was obvious in his many derogatory statements about women. For example, when asked why he liked short women, he said that it was best to choose the lesser of evils.
   
   When a mature man, More married a mere girl and got her pregnant so many times in such rapid succession that she lived only a few short years after marrying him.
   
   More married his second wife, as the saying goes, while still in mourning clothes for his first. He mocked that second wife, Dame Alice, publicly. He wrote texts that associated women exclusively with sex and disgusting bodily functions like vomiting and diarrhea.
   
   And, yet, More was exceptional for his time in educating his beloved daughter, the one great passion of his life, Margaret More Roper.
   
   More persecuted his countrymen who deviated from the Catholic faith, and published vile condemnations of Luther, and eventually, knowingly, and humbly, sacrificed his own life to his own interpretation of that faith.
   
   More rose, through obediance, flattery, and dogged labor, from relatively humble circumstances to being Henry the VIII's chancellor, and a wealthy man, and then tossed away his considerable worldly goods and power to die an ignominious death.
   
   You want to understand a man who could encompass so many passionate apparent contradictions.
   
   And, so, I hung on every word of Ackroyd's detailed and yet economical text.
   
   My attention was amply rewarded. Ackroyd marshalls the kind of authentic, telling details of the Medieval life that More lived that can make an era, and its inhabitants, come alive. Even so, Ackroyd is never wordy. When he has said enough, he simply stops.
   
   Along the way, Ackroyd brings to light the life and impact of a woman he says has been nearly forgotten: Elizabeth Barton, a seeress and nun in Kent. Barton spoke against Henry VIII's divorce of his wife, Catherine of Aragon.
   
   Her voice was considered so important that Henry himself visited her.
   
   For her trouble, Barton and her priestly followers were tortured to death.
   
   As I read, I could not help but reflect: in our own age of "celebrity," we know too many details about non-entities we don't care about at all -- the Britney Spears and Paris Hiltons enjoying their fifteen minutes of fame. We can view film footage of their most intimate moments on the internet; hear their every thought in televised interviews.
   
   Thomas More lived five hundred years ago. We can't ask him to reconcile for us his hateful diatribes against women and his love of Margaret, his ant-like accumulation of worldly goods and his sacrifice for his beliefs.
   
   The records just don't exist.
   
   And, yet ... even though the More in these pages has to remain something of a cypher, even though More, as was the norm in his time, wrote with extreme caution in ambiguous, tradition-bound, unspontaneous and sometimes flowery prose, I felt I had an encounter, through Ackroyd's book, with a remarkable human being. I was in tears throughout the final passages leading up to More's death.
   
   A final word: I am a fan of "A Man for all Seasons." Again and again, reviewers pit Ackroyd's book against the Robert Bolt play and subsequent movie.
   
   One does not necessarily cancel out the other...both the film and this book work, for me, from what I know about More, as explorations of his life and impact, and his famous final choice.
   
   I never saw Paul Scofield's More as a Thoreau-like figure, as some reviewers have said; he was not depicted as living in a house in the woods, after all, and he did base his decision on adherence to a greater principle than personal conscience, i.e., the law, just as Ackroyd's More does.
   
   So, yes, do see the movie, and do read this book.



4. Gosh, golly gee, crikey - the superlatives could go on all day. This is a superb, densely textured biography. Ackroyd revels in the complex psychology and sociology of his subject, e.g., his devotion to duty, his father fixation, etc. He also places Thomas More firmly in the London of his time and in his historical moment - the Reformation - especially through More's own writings.
   
   It has been remarked that the chapters amount to a series of vignettes. That's true, and the amount of knowledge retailed in each glimpse of More and his world is staggering.
   
   To give but a few examples:
   Chap. 3 - St. Anthony's Pigs: we follow young More through the streets of Tudor London to his school and get insight into the Renaissance education system.
   
   Ch 4 - Cough Not, Nor Spit: Thomas' early career as a page to Archbishop (of Canterbury) Morton, Henry VII's notorious "enforcer". This relationship illuminates More's later dealings with Cardinal Wolsey.
   
   Ch 8 - We Talk Of Letters: sketches of Grocyn, Linacre, Lily, Colet, More - the "London humanists", or More's intellectual circle.
   
   And so on. The book continues in the same fascinating vein. It is a hard slog to read, and I'm sorry that Peter Ackroyd did not give a glossary of A) Latin and Greek expressions, and B) even some of his more obscure English words. I also regret that there's no map to illustrate Ackroyd's loving depiction of the London where More learned, lived, worked and suffered.
   
   More's story is well known and often told. Ackroyd has given a fully-rounded portrayal of the man, his background, career, family and friends.
   
   What a pleasure to read.



5. I enjoyed this book, but I do think that as a narrative history it is perhaps slightly flawed. The main strength (and problem) I have with this book is that the character study is so dominant that is completely ignores the larger historical picture that More lived within and, at times the dominant philosophy, that may have allowed a deeper understanding of More.
   
   The gnawing problem I have with this book is the main currents that More struggled against and the ideas he fought for are little outlined. The church that he so selflessly defended is little described beyond its social context in which More was raised. The central point of More was that the sublimation of the time honoured traditions (though admittedly flawed) could not be merely circumvented by mans personal appeal to God. Direct dialougue with God allowed a virtual pandora's box of interpretation and clash of beliefs that could only lead to mass bloodshed --- and he was right! This belief is left unexplored and the historical events, such as the peasants revolt in Germany that More abhored and used in his polemical tracts against Luther (a thoroughly scatologically unsavoury character) is not described. In addition Charles V sack of Rome and its influence on the relations with Henry VII are not considered relevant.
   
   So I feel dissatified because I am not getting a wide historical narrative. Although I understand the texture of the stones that he worshipped upon and the feel of the robes he wore, I have little feeling of the times that surrounded him. For the first-time reader of More, this may appear disconcerting.
   
   I realise that my critique cuts another way: if Ackroyd did write the larger historical narrative I wanted, he may have digressed into the narrative historical self-abuse of the 1000 page biography (only acceptable in the most exceptional of circumstances).
   
   I also get no sense of a building dennoument in the encounter with Henry. There is a annoying blase telling of the story with some bright moments -- the book gets better as one goes through it -- it is dense and quite frankly, a little boring in the beginning.
   
   ALso the Olde Englysh translations do detract from the flow of the narrative. Although it is easily understood ones reading flow slows from 700 words per minute, to 50 words per minute in the old English translations. He should revise it from the 16th Century vernacular to modern spelling.
   
   In final analysis I feel that I really did not understand the man. I feel that I need to get a hold of a better biography of the man. So if Ackroyd succeeded in doing this, then it was worth the read.

5 comments about Grant.

1. Jean Edward Smith has written an outstanding biography of Ulysses S. Grant, one of the more complex heroes of American history. Grant's complexity does not stem from his own actions, but from the fact that his career as a general is considered such a success while his presidency has always been looked at as an abject failure. Henry Adams had even written that denunciation of Grant, saying, "The Progress of evolution from President Washington to President Grant was enough to upset Darwin." Mr. Smith had the good sense to compare what Adams wrote to the earlier thoughts of his brother Charles Francis Adams Jr. who admired the general and called him "an extraordinary man."
   Sometimes history needs to unfold over a longer period of time before a figure can be properly judged. With Grant the fact was that for over 100-years he came out on the losing end of history because he was for Reconstruction and the civil rights of the freed blacks. When Rutherford B. Hayes came into power in 1877 the freedoms of blacks had become a dead issue and Grant was destined to appear a failure in the eyes of history. It has only been with the success of the Civil Rights movement throughout the 1960s that Grant was in a large way vindicated. Finally southern biographers were unable to point to him as a man who picked the losing side of history, and a man who sympathized with blacks and therefore was wrong.
   It is always difficult to attempt to judge anyone or any act of the past by the standards of today. That is why it is hard to condemn George Washington and Thomas Jefferson for owning slaves because it was common-place at the time. They don't deserve any positive press for owning slaves, BUT if they had turned over their slaves while they lived and fought for the freedom of all then they would have been so far ahead of their time to almost not have been real. There was no-such-thing as Virginia planters of the 18th and 19th centuries who refused to embrace the benefits of free slave labor. At least, I do not recall anything of such people.
   Grant is different because while he was President he WAS popular and DID protect the freedoms of people (which is correct even though it was judged as wrong in the south from 1877 to the 1960s). Mr. Smith is actually righting a historic wrong by trying to view Grant as the people of his time viewed him rather than those who came after and detested him for taking what was for 100-years the losing side of history. For instance, if George W. Bush has many biographies written by his supporters (now less than 28% of the population) that help to shape how he is looked at in the future, it would require a writer like Mr. Smith to come in and show that DURING the vast majority of his term, he was not exactly what one would call "popular."
   Re-writing history is a dangerous game and it takes writers like Mr. Smith to set the story straight after it has gone too far astray. In the south for instance, it was around a century or more before there started to be seen positive views of Abraham Lincoln. It is said that history is written by the winner, but really history is written by whoever happens to be holding the pen, and it isn't always the winner. How else could one explain the "Lost Cause" mythology that turned Lincoln, Grant, and Sherman into villains? It is only after carefully dissecting what actually took place that the story can be set straight.
   In "Grant" Mr. Smith has written a biography of the 18th President and first four-star general in the nation's history that is more accurate than a great majority of those that have come before. His biography is free from the anti-Grant bias that flooded the view for so long. However he also does not gloss over faults of Grant. Grant was a man who sometimes drank too much, and Mr. Smith doesn't hide it. But neither does he extrapolate and assume (as many anti-Grant biographers have done) that Grant was a hopeless drunk who stumbled around at all-times and was hardly ever sober. That such views have been accepted by many historians as fact is absolutely ridiculous, and Mr. Smith finally sets things to right.
   In closing, what we get from Mr. Smith is not a biography that overlooks all Grant's faults and pretends that he was a man heaven-sent who never made a wrong turn in his life. Instead we are given the portrait of a man who sometimes trusted the wrong kinds of people too much and who would other times have been better off as President had he sounded his views out amongst the public (especially the Cabinet and Congress). We see a man who as general came close to defeat more than a few times, but who had the nerves and calm to stand his ground. We get an accurate view of a man whose best traits as a general (indeed the fact that he was not easily perturbed in the most trying moments) are what got him into such trouble with historians for over a century. Not only did Grant wind up on the losing side by supporting the rights of black Americans, he showed no remorse for having done so (nor should he have, though it hurt his legacy).
   Time has vindicated Grant in the end and given Mr. Smith the clarity to write a definitive biography of the man from Galena, IL. Finally Grant can be reassessed and while he may never crack the top ten or even top twenty on the list of the greatest presidents of all-time, he at least can leave the likes of Buchanan, Harding, Pierce, and (something tells me) George W. Bush behind at the bottom forever.



2. I really loved this book. What a great General he was. Very underrated President. Should be ranked right up there. His battlefield skills saved the country.



3. After reading Professor Smith's Grant biography, two apparent things come to mind: the same cult of ignorance that has removed George Washington and Eisenhower from the lips of children and TV ditto-heads was responsible for the "overlooking" of this great leader; and, they, the racist, largely-white Establishment is on the march as we wage unnecessary war today with clue-less leaders in charge. This southern biography in one volume does great justice to that 19th Century and our 21st Century that stands on a precipice,serving as a trumpet call-to-arms. From the middle of Grant's memoirs at Vicksburg, I went headlong into this thrilling read, moved many times by its revelations,riveting insertions of quotes that dramatize the action with tremendous clarity. Insightful, balanced and engrossing from beginning to end. Clearly, U.S. Grant was forgotten by those whose sensibilities were offended that one man could be charged with being a Negro-lover, Indian-lover and a unifier. And for once, Jean Edward Smith got it right: the man who masters the battlefield challenges can deftly handle the administrative ones as well, without the meddling of professional politicians and slicksters. Until reading this biography, I was led to believe that the Confederacy was more noble defending the genteel plantation ways and pleasantries against the crudities of Northern pride. Like, how dare they attack Miss Scarlett! The Civil War was much larger than Margaret Mitchell, and Jean Smith builds this biography to a deeper understanding about the war and its cost. Not only does Grant rise in dimension, but he levels off and enjoys a special relationship with Lincoln that is unique and illuminating, before moving into his White House years and retirement.If one needs to know why leadership is empty in the Executive Branch since Eisenhower, you need not look beyond the enemies of Grant's legacy. The standards of conduct,on and off the battlefield, by all participants, their levels of understanding of the cause, especially their civility was so moving and numerous that one is shocked to return to 21st century conduct. There is much to admire about those times and the great man, U.S. Grant. Read this, keep it and learn plenty.



4. This is an excellent and highly readable biography of Grant. However if you are considering the Kindle edition, note that there are some transcription problems:
   
   * Footnotes have been transcribed as inline paragraphs within the main text flow. They are normally included closely after the relevant paragraph, but they sometimes lag by a screen (or even two) and in one place surfaced in a prior screen.
   
   * The maps have been omitted.
   
   * The full original index is included. But since it includes neither hyperlinks to the text, nor Kindle locations, nor even paper page numbers, it is essentially useless.
   
   * The paper version uses indented paragraphs to indicate extended quotes. Unfortunately these show up as normal undistinguished paragraphs in the Kindle version, so I was sometimes surprised to discover I was in a quote, or that I had left one.
   
   * There are also occasional minor transcription glitches such as words being erroneously joined together or erroneously split apart; or sentences erroneously broken into separate paragraphs. But these are relatively minor.
   
   Note that most of these issues aren't due to the Kindle itself: for example it handle footnotes and textual links just fine. The issues are mostly with how this particular book has been converted.
   
   I don't want to overstate the issues: the book is still quite readable in the Kindle edition, and suitable for (say) travel reading. However the various glitches are sufficiently annoying (and the book sufficiently good!) that I have ended up also buying a hardcover version, for browsing and reference.
   
   For the biography itself 5 stars. For the Kindle transcription, only two.



5. This is one of the most fascinating books i've read in a while. Smith has a clear grasp of Grant's life. Both his virtues and flaws are given equal attention. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in either the Civil War or the Presidency.

5 comments about My Life: The Presidential Years Vol. II (Vintage).

1. As a long time follower of Bill Clinton, I have enjoyed his books. Clinton's time as President was overshadowed by his sexual encounters, which is disappointing. In my opinion, Clinton was an excellent President. Clinton gives insight in to his adminstration and the condition of the political world during his time in office. It's an unknown fact that we have only had two Presidents who did not have mistresses or affairs at some point in their lives. As Nixon had to face the music for Watergate, Clinton faced the music for his sexual indiscretions. Both became poster children for actions that neither were the first to participate in, nor the last, leaving their legacy's forever tarnished. Politics is a dirty business and for those who manage to endure the mud slinging and back stabbing, I take my hat off to them. Bill Clinton is a survivor who has managed to shake off past negativity, to reemerge as a strong and trust worthy leader. I highly recommend this book for any Clinton follower looking for insight in to the Clinton administration, as it is a very detailed, honest accounting of his life.



2. Most interesting of all is reader reception. For some reason, hundreds of readers commented upon the first volume of My Life. Yet, on the second volume, I am the fourth to make any remarks. So, why do people pay such great attention to the "developmental" volume and so little attention to the "consequences" volume? That is the question of prime importance, in grasping how Americans, in particular, have been overly receptive to issues of character and less attentive to more critical issues of policy formation, in the crucible of current circumstantial events. People would rather cling to some indefensible opinion of the man than explore the interleaved nuances of public necessity and private interest that we call politics. [Perhaps, volume III will draw our attention better to the stories we ought to read, of American public values processes!]



3. A homecoming of sorts, as much for Clinton as his readers---it's a weaving together of philosophy, religion, sex, and a deep love of country. Book was not what I expected, but in a word it was, compelling. Mr. Clinton explains the stress in those years in a manner that leaves the Clinton gang, I'm sure, wanting less compassion for those who tried their best to destroy him and his family. That's the difference between a politician, any politician, and a human being.
   
   I too felt stress in those years. It was impossible to find employees--everyone who wanted a job had one. Even more stressful was what to do with the huge surplus of money in our national treasury. Then there was that fulltime worry about Bill's sex life. That wouldn't have been an issue for me had I had a sex life. Then there was all that training and money we were spending on our armed forces who were not out there earning their keep invading oil rich countries so the likes of Exxon-Mobil and Halliburton could exploit their natural resources.
   
   Life has been worry free for me during the Bush years. It's the minorities and middle income whites who are doing the worrying now--about things like where to bury their war dead, employment and paying the bills. I confess, I'm not sure how these people are going to handle the national debt with me getting a tax cut and them without a job. But Mr. Bush said not to worry. What a relief! I'm Bob Miller, a registered Republican.



4. As someone who has written a lot about Bill Clinton over the years I was disappointed by his book. This was a chance for him to set the record straight on both the good and bad in his administration and he did neither. He talks about a lot of the issues but not how he approached them. He talks about what his administration looked at but not what he did and did not solve. He allows Yassir Arafat to get off completely free for his rejection of the Clinton plan the book is very well written and is still worth reading if nothing else to understand Clinton's perspective on what happened but overall it could have been far more enlightening.



5. As a Clinton Democrat, I grew up with issues like Social Security and welfare in my mind. I found out more about Clinton from this book then watching him for the last 14 years on TV. Clinton uses easy to understand words yet at some points he uses more complicated rhetoric. A fun book to read and will test what you know about Clinton's term in office.

5 comments about Selected Writings (Penguin Classics).

1. This collection of Marti's essays and letters are excellent reading for Marti scholars and beginners alike. The works are in chronological order and cover the most pivotal periods of Marti's life. Both of Marti's strongest qualities, the poet and the freedom fighter, are represented with conviction. This book is a definite must read for anyone looking to explore the mind one of the greatest literary figures of all time.



2. Jos Julian Mart y Prez was born in Havana, Cuba on January 28, 1853. He is one of the most renowned writers in the history of Cuba and Latin America. In 1874 Mart earned a Law degree from the University of Zaragoza in Spain. He essentially devoted his life to the cause of independence and to the foundation of a new Cuban nation. As we perceive in the Montecristi Manifesto, Mart was a talented humanist, born out of time; an idealist and martyr that left a legacy on Cuban affairs.
   
   As a philosopher, he attempted to navigate through the intricate mountings of thoughts. "Mart embarked early in life on a mission of political struggle and literary achievement. At fifteen, he wrote an epic poem in praise of Cuba's war of independence against Spain. At seventeen he was imprisoned and sentenced to hard labor for his political activities. For the rest of his life he wrote about and worked unstoppably for the freedom of Cuba. He founded the Cuban Revolutionary Party. His political involvement was accompanied and complemented by a constant and relentless outpouring of poetry, literary prose, journalism and political writing. In 1895 he returned to Cuba with a military force to embark upon another revolution and soon thereafter encountered a suicidal heroic death in battle."
   
   The final battle of his life came in 1895 on Cuban soil, in a place called Dos Rios, after going to the enemy front lines, fighting against the Spanish domination in his beloved land. The expedition that brought the continuation of the war of independence into Cuba commenced in and departed from Florida and passed through the Dominican Republic, on its way to Cuba. Before departing to the east of Cuba, Jos Mart and the General Mximo Gmez, Commander in Chief of the Liberating Army, made public a document in the town of Montecristi, a manifesto exposing the goals of a revolutionary war about to begin. This was an important document that provided the guiding principles for a new Nation or a Republic, as Mart had dreamed.
   
   The Montecristi Manifesto, as it is known in Cuban history, declared the revolution began not in 1895, but 1868, when the Grito de Yara was proclaimed by Carlos Manuel de Cspedes and the Ten Years War (1868-78) against Spanish domination took place. In this manuscript Mart pointed out interesting principles related to Cuba and Latin America, and even of a global undertone. It says: "The war of independence in Cuba...is a far-reaching human event and a timely service that the judicious heroism of the Antilles lends to the stability and just interaction of the American nations and to the still unsteady equilibrium of the world."
   
   The humanistic undertaking of the Manifesto is rooted on the idea of a fully and stable constituted republic with freedom of thought. That republic was to be, not the triumph of one Cuban party over another, but the victory of all elements of the society. Here he establishes the significance of necessary sacrifice for a sublime purpose as the transformation of the old colonial system, a call for harmony and wisdom, and the mandatory establishment of human rights. It denounced the corruption of the metropolis: "The revolution makes use of this language without fear because the mandate to emancipate Cuba once and for all from the irremediable ineptitude and corruption of the Spanish government." Spain was not the only preoccupation on Marti's thoughts; the forces pointing to an annexation of Cuba to the United States were rampant and seemingly viable.
   
   Marti saw in the liberation of Cuba the angular stone to stop the expansion of the North American imperialism. In his last and unfinished written letter to his longtime friend Manuel Mercado, then the Mexican undersecretary of the Interior, he pointed: "Every day now I am in danger of giving my life for my country and my duty-since I understand it and have the spirit to carry it out-in order to prevent, by the timely independence of Cuba, the United States from extending its hold across the Antilles and falling with all the greater force on the Lands of our America. All I have done up to now and all I will do is for that."
   
   The United States was expanding his dominion and influence around its neighbors. The Monroe Doctrine declared by the U.S. President James Monroe in the seventh annual address to Congress, on December 2, 1823, became the United States' policy regarding Latin America, limiting the rights and activities of the European powers in the western hemisphere. In the beginning, it was merely a declaration of policy, but within years, the idea of annexation of the so called backyard (including the Antilles) was supported by Cubans inside and outside the island, thinking that the annexation of Cuba to the Union would be a benefit; even today, such a concept is not a dead thought for many.
   
   Mart, a secular visionary, had the ability to see beyond the horizon in the entrails of the North American monster. In the same letter to Mercado he wrote: "The nations such as your own and mine, which have the most vital interest in keeping Cuba from becoming, through an annexation accomplished by those imperialists and the Spaniards, the doorway-which must be blocked and which, with our blood, we are blocking-to the annexation of the people of our America by the turbulent and brutal North that holds them in contempt." This so called monster, the United States, had seen in its Latin-American backyard a fertile campground to extract raw materials, dreaming one day, maybe, to be able to add more stars to the American flag.
   
   This monster has not changed too much since then. Its Transnationals, under the concept of democracy and prosperity, can annexate the innocent intentions of a nation. Today, Mart's concerns are incredibly up to date. Is that monster ready to conquer the Latin American lands? As it refers to a military occupation, that is perhaps and most certain a utopia. But things actually have not changed. The United States of America exhibits the same power thirst for money, wherever the possibility arrives. Within the Cuban exiled population, new modern oligarchs see the opportunity of enrichment, possibly after an overturn of the actual political system in the island. Cubans from both outside and inside the island must take Marti's flag again and fight with dignity for a better Cuba, for the principles of justice, and not a mere copy of the savage capitalism that monopolizes even your will, and all that money can buy.
   
   After the 1959 revolution, a new revolution is obligatory. That revolution brought a real independence to the island, but soon the egoist and dictatorial way of the government chose to incline the heart of the country to the red European bear. The Soviet Union made of Cuba a mere atheist puppet, a satellite of the communist interests in the world, an idle society, permanently dependant and attached to its belly button, through an umbilical square line of thought imposed on every Cuban. The Cuban Nation needs no more umbilical lines or written schemes of imported societies from the north, east, west, or south political science books. Our Judeo-Christian values had nothing to do with the reign of the dollar, the euro, or the peso. A mature society based on freedom and equality, justice for all, and dignity that embrace a brilliant future must to be built in godly honesty, sincerity and temperance.
   
   The times of Cuban legends must be buried in the deep sea that surrounds the archipelago. Martyrs, heroes, caudillos, and good-looking stars are enjoyable in the history books; hence, the history of the island should be written in present time. Cuba has no need for last names or bank account numbers to be counted as the many stars in its national blue sky. It is necessary to proceed in a peaceful but profound continuance of the transforming revolutionary process that began in 1868; Cuba has enough heads and hearts to build a society as the Montecristi Manifesto proclaimed: "A country must find a manner of government that can satisfy both the mature and cautious intelligence of its literate sons and the necessary conditions for the assistance and respect of its other people...From its origin, the patria must be constituted in viable forms, forms born of itself."
   
   
   Nac en un Archipilago
   rodeado de azules mares
   donde el disentir
   se silencia con deshonra
   
   All me impusieron al abuelo Lnin:
   destructor,
   apstata cegado
   y mediocre constructor de un porvenir atascado
   
   Ahora vivo en Troya
   y conozco al Caballo desenfrenado.
   Se afana mirando al tablero
   donde las carreras se apstan
   y el dollar se amontona
   para agasajar al incrdulo
   
   Hacia dnde vas
   Caimn que te escapas?
   Quin te lleva, florido ensoador?
   Has dejado de contar tus palmas reales;
   desmantela el oro,
   ese que te pertenece,
   no el que en el Atlntico profundo
   tus colonizadores sepultaron.
   
   Alejandro Roque.



3. One of the most amazing writers, and a wonderful small volume, showing the diversity of his talents through many years in a great translation (the poems include the Spanish and English texts). "Our America" is an essay on the cosmopolis that is Latin America, and essays on Emerson and Whitman are among the best that exist. Furthermore, one can forget that Marti spent perhaps more time in New York than anywhere else in his life, and his writings on some of the everyday things there, particularly "A Chinese Funeral," my favorite piece in the book, give one a great sense of the city from a unique and often unrepresented perspective. There is no American literature without Jose Marti.



4. Marti was a prodigy, a genius, yet he is little known in the U.S. either for his prose or poetry. Those who have heard of him may associate him with Radio Marti or know him as a Cuban revolutionary.

   While this beautifully rendered translation includes a broad spectrum of Marti's works, some not previously translated, his descriptions of America in the latter half ot the nineteenth century are by themselves sufficient reason to buy this book.

   Marti, coming from a different culture, sees things about America that we do not, and he describes them with a passion lacking in the reportage of his North American contemporaries.




5. Here at last--in English--is a comprehensive selection of Martí's writing, translated by a masterful hand. It leaves all other attempts at this task far behind. Esther Allen meets the challenges of Martí's exuberant and complex style with extraordinary success. This book will be a landmark text for college courses on Martí as a Latin American and Latino writer, and is an excellent introduction for the general public. Bravo to all involved in this effort to bring Martí to American readers!

5 comments about Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years.

1. If you're interested in conspiracy theories for the Kennedy assassination, this is probably not the book to read. However, if you're interested in the Kennedy administration itself, its key players and the various issues it dealt with, this is a must-read. Well written and entertaining to read, BROTHERS gives a historical yet personal and enjoyable description of John & Bobby Kennedy's time in the White House. President Kennedy is generally defined by the Cuban Missile Crisis and his assassination, but this book explores several other issues that are less publicized but no less significant, as well as the role his brother played in the administration. I highly recommend this book; it was extremely enjoyable and informative!



2. This is a unique look at the Kennedys from within the Kennedy camp. We witness the major events of our era through the eyes of Robert Kennedy and the close-knit "band of brothers."
   
   While this book doesn't settle the issue of the John Kennedy Assassination, it establishes who the Kennedy clan and its allies felt was responsible. RFK firmly believed "they" killed his brother. Whatever the reader's opinion of the event, it is interesting to view RFK's life and career as products of that belief.
   
   I was impressed both with the level of research and with the writing style. Though a great deal of information was presented, Brothers moved along very quickly



3. I am only on page 135 and I have learned more about the brothers than I could have hoped for. A great read with old family photos. It was written in 2007 so I am guessing it is one of the most current available??
   Any other sugesstions let me know!
   
   Derek



4. This book wasn't what I expected it to be... and it took me a long time to figure that out. From what I read of this title before buying it, I assumed it was an account of the JFK assassination through the eyes of Bobby Kennedy. Instead it was basically just a retelling of the Kennedy years. It was well-written and enjoyable, it just wasn't what I was looking for. One of the big questions the book asked was, "Why didn't RFK uses his position and power to solve the JFK assassination?" Instead of an answer, all it gave us was, "Seriously, why didn't he?" There was a little speculation as to why, but no real insight into the possibilities. I think the fatal flaw of this book was that it was just too broad, but despite that it is still an interesting read. I'm sure I would have enjoyed it more if I hadn't gone in expecting something that it wasn't.



5. This is an awesome book that takes a good look at the relationship of the two Kennedy brothers (John and Bobby) and what went on in the White House, and after the assasination, leading up to the 2nd.
   
   Using many good sources and unearthed documents and interviews the reader can see the heavy evidence of a conspiracy, and how other arms of the government (CIA, Military) really began to run things almost to the point of a coupes.
   
   So many interesting facts when put side by side of people who had evidence to the first killing, who themselves mysteriously died. The book only suffers in its last 25 pages (give or take) where new, non-corraborated "evidence" is introudced. All in all, a great read, that refreshingly, albiet depressingly brings up the true events of our recent history.

1 comments about Realities of Foreign Service Life, Volume 2.

1. Many have wondered if working for the State Department's Foreign Service is the job of their dreams. This book outlines the considerations that many have faced and how they have reacted - from real life. Anyone trying to understand that unique life will benefit from reading these accounts. I've been there-done that - and this is REAL! Check it out!

5 comments about Standing Next to History: An Agent's Life Inside the Secret Service.

1. I wanted to get a little more background on the life of a Secret Service Agent. I found this book filled with interesting tidbits of information. It was an easy read that I found entertaining, as well. His recounts of what it was like working around the Reagan administration, the Pope's US visit, etc. kept me interested for several hours worth of reading. It personalized some of the details that the public often may not realize.



2. This book is well written with just enough detail to keep you in every scene. It hooked me from page 1 and kept me interested all along.



3. If you have any interest in the presidency of Ronald Reagan or the Secret Service, I highly recommend this book. The tone is very matter-of-fact, but what comes through is what an honorable person Joseph Petro is. He lost out on a possible N.F.L career when he was drafted for the Viet Nam War, but our country, and especially its elected officials during the time of his service, gained a great deal.
   
   A very engaging book.



4. I found this book extremely enlightening as to what life as an Agent in the USSS will be like. Petro does a wonderful job at writing about what he is allowed to disclose yet still keeping the reader engaged. If you are interested in the USSS, you should read this book during your application process since little is know about the Service.



5. This book was very enjoyable and a easy read! Joe must have been a very good agent, (I forgive him about the Mrs. Quail incident) He is someone I would like to meet. This book is a GREAT find for anyone into politics, The White House and the Secret Service.

5 comments about I Have a Dream: Writings and Speeches That Changed the World, Special 75th Anniversary Edition (Martin Luther King, Jr., born January 15, 1929).

1. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is one of America's greatest heroes and this is a collection of his wonderful writings and speeches. Often people stop at "I Have a Dream" but this shows the complete evolution of Dr. King. A wonderful read that has been part of my library for the past 10 years -- and I've read it three times and often use it for reference and store it next to the Bible.



2. Dr. Martin Luther King's collection of writings and speeches, "I Have A Dream", brings aspiration to light. The events that surrounded the life and death of this true hero reveals the shameful fact that no matter how great the United States of America is today, it is one country that was nurtured with inhumane machinery: slavery, racism, injustice, Mickey-Mouse freedom, and Mickey-Mouse democracy. I hate to think about it, but it is an honest fact, which we should all come to terms with. Nobody can rewrite history.
   The 256 pages that is "I Have A Dream" was enough to highlight the wickedness and the violence that were deliberately sustained in America, for a full century, after a bloody Civil War ended her tenacity on slavery.
   One question that will always beg for answer is: How on earth did U.S. Presidents who presided over the ruthless color-bar era qualified for those Nobel Peace Prizes that they received? Knowing what life was like in the U.S.A. just a couple of decades ago melts my heart. "I Have A Dream" is a big eye-opener!



3. "I Have a Dream: Writings and Speeches That Changed the World," by Martin Luther King, Jr., is a fine collection of texts by this important figure. The book has been edited by James M. Washington. Coming in at less than 300 pages, this is a concise but meaty book.

   Washington includes King's most important texts: the "Letter from Birmingham Jail"; the "I Have a Dream" speech; his Nobel Prize acceptance speech; "My Trip to the Land of Gandhi"; "A Time to Break Silence," his 1967 speech criticizing the United States war in Vietnam, and more. These writings and speeches cover King's great themes: nonviolent resistance, the African-American civil rights movement, etc.

   Those seeking a more comprehensive collection of Kings' work should seek out "A Testament of Hope: The Essential Writings and Speeches of Martin Luther King, Jr." also edited by James M. Washington. At more than 700 pages, this is a truly monumental collection, and includes much material not found in "I Have a Dream": the 1965 "Playboy" interview, transcripts of television interviews, and more. But for those who want a shorter text that cuts to the heart of King's life and work, "I Have a Dream" is perfect.

   "I Have a Dream" reveals King to be a true Christian prophet, and a man with a global vision. As literature, these texts also show King to be the heir of such American thinkers as Henry David Thoreau and W.E.B. DuBois. Highly recommended.




4. This collection of Dr. King's writings includes all the major speeches -- such as I Have A Dream and I See the Promised Land, as well as important writings such as Letter from A Birmingham Jail. It also has great essays on the lessons Dr. King learned from Ghandi and a wonderful introduction from Mrs. King. This is a great collection to get started learning about Dr. King -- from his own pen. I highly reccomend it.



5. Reading the speeches of Dr. King are inspiring. You get a glimpse into his mind and to genuinely understand the struggle he was up against. I'm not just refering to the Civil Rights movement. you also get insights into the responsibilities and pressure he felt as the leader of this movement. He was a man who changed history. This book offers glimpses into his humanity as well as his motivational and inspirational speeches. A must for anyone interested in American history, the Civil Rights movement or in biographys. It will continue to effect you long after you have put the book down.

5 comments about William Wilberforce: A Hero for Humanity.

1. The story--or at least the legacy--of William Wilberforce is one that should be standard issue in all history courses. He is highly unknown in the US, perhaps because his greatest work came after its separation from Britain. But even I, who studied Political Science with strong philosophical and international emphases, had not heard of him until over 4 years after I graduated. Very well written book about the man who championed the cause and accomplished the abolition of the slave trade, and later the total abolition of slavery throughout the British Empire. Belmonte captures the essence of the man and his life through a text rich in its use of sources and first hand accounts, with appropriate use of personal insight and conclusions. True to the subtitle, Wilberforce is duly shown as a hero for humanity, a champion for everything human, and a role model for all who desire to make a real difference in this world. Couple with the movie "Amazing Grace," this book provides a rich look at a man who was the wealthies man of his time in all the ways that truly matter.



2. I read a lot of biographies, and have to say that while I am a fan of William Wilberforce and the movie Amazing Grace, this biography is not on my favorites list. Primarily, I disliked the structure of the book. It is written topically instead of chronologically having sections on his early life, his political life, his influence, his family life, etc. For example, the book has 10 chapters, and his marriage to Barbara Spooner isn't introduced until chapter 8! This made the book feel like a collection of essays instead of a typical biography. I won't read it again.



3. This was a fabulously written and researched book. The depth of the original documents that were touched made it authoritative and the writing style was captivating. The descriptions of his personal and family life and how he related to his peers was particularly valuable to me. I also gained any insights into the reading list of Wiliam Wilberforce which is always a window into a man's soul. Highly recommended.



4. This is a great introduction to the life and pursuits of William Wilberforce. His deep love and concern for humanity is fantastic.



5. I was truly unaware of who William Wilberforce was before reading "Amazing Grace" by Metaxes. Then I found "Real Christianity" by Wilberforce and now I am almost finished reading "William Wilberforce: A Hero for Humanity." The book, "William Wilberforce: A Hero for Humanity", is a can't put-it-down kind of read. It brings in notable contemporaries of Wilberforce which richly adds to the fiber of the text. Wilberforce's "Great Change" made him a mighty force for Biblical Christianity. I believe it should be a strongly suggested read for all politicians at every level of government (village, town, city, state, and federal). We need to see a moral turnaround in our beloved U.S.A. seen in the hearts of its citizens. Morality cannot be legislated. I give the book a five stars (thumbs) up.

5 comments about The Apocalypse of Ahmadinejad: The Revelation of Iran's Nuclear Prophet.

1. Mark Hitchcock is part of the very disturbing chorus composed of figures such as John Hagee and Tim LaHaye who have created an entire industry of selling books, CDs and videos promoting U.S. imperialism by warning us about Islamic "plans" to conquer the world, or something. His latest, "The Apocalypse Of Ahmadinejad," is a direct shot at the current President of Iran, whom Hitchcock claims is hatching some sort of underground plan to destroy both Israel AND the U.S. to usher in the Islamic equivalent of the Christian Second Coming.
   
   This kind of fantastical alarmism is similar to LaHaye's own writings about Saddam Hussein planning to build a "second Babylon" to usher in the end times, a plan apparently thwarted by the disastrous U.S. invasion of Iraq which LaHaye and Hitchcock feverishly support. Like John Hagee's "In Defense Of Israel," "The Apocalypse Of Ahmadinejad" suffers more from it's basic lack of good history as it does from the radical, almost cultish religious angle. Consider that even in the opening pages Hitchcock admits he's not very well-informed on geopolitics or political/historical matters, something which should already tell the reader something about the book's validity. Hitchock zeroes in on many of Ahmadinejad's more radical, neo-religious comments pertaining to classic Islamic symbols and beliefs, the problem is Hitchock takes them literally, never mentioning that the current Ayatollah of Iran has even limited Ahmadinejad's powers as President due to some of his more looney comments and is reported to be weary of radical stances Ahmadinejad has taken.
   
   Hitchcock also conveniently ignores basic history such as the fact that the Islamic Republic was not born out of some Satanic plan, but because in 1953 we overthrew Iran's elected, very progressive government headed by Mohammed Mossadegh. The CIA overthrew Mossadegh because he nationalized the nation's oil, a big no no to corporate powers such as ours, and then re-instated the very brutal regime of the Shah who in turn was overthrown in 1979 by what became the current government. Hitchcock, like Hagee and LaHaye also dismisses Israeli crimes in the occupied territories or the fact that Israel is the only real nuclear power in the region, instead painting them as the helpless victims surrounded by evil Muslims including those pesky Palestinians who live in a horrific apartheid state.
   
   Hitchcock also backs the imperial occupation of Iraq, accusing Iran of causing trouble in the country, not the foreign army who invaded the place. But it all somehow works for Hitchcock because Muslims are the children of Satan and they want to destroy us because we're Christian and our women wear miniskirts in America. Iran is a very complex nation, it has the second-highest Jewish population in the Middle East and a very strong, Liberal movement gaining more power little by little.
   
   If tensions get worst between the U.S. and Iran it would most likely happen due to the kind of military interventionism Hitchcock reports, one wonders how he would have reacted to the NIE report, where all 16 intelligence agencies of the U.S. concluded that Iran has no nuclear weapons program. And if Iran did arm itself, wouldn't it be logical considering a foreign power is invading it's neighbors and Israel is bent on dominating the region as seen in the brutal war it engaged with Lebanon in 2006? Again, Hitchcock simply dismisses important things like actual history and settles for Biblical code talk, Ahmadinejad's more curious quotes (not more curious than what President Bush says on a daily basis), and a recycled apocalyptic theory. One wonders how historians will look back at the kind of writings the radical fringe of Christian America produced, let us hope it's not for the need of understanding what drove America as a society to an armageddon of her own making.



2. Some might think because this author is a Christian who believes in what the Bible says about the endtimes that he is extreme. He is not.
   
   This book is the actual words of the president of Iran. They reveal his hatred of Israel and the United States and his willingness to destroy both.
   
   No one took Adolf Hitler's words seriously either until it was too late. Let's not repeat history.



3. An excellent, straight forward biblical based analysis of the situation in Iran as it affects all of us. It is well written, easy to understand and shows the relationship of this person and his views against blibical prophecy.



4. This book is so current that I can relate back to it almost nightly as I watch the evening news. Now, I know exactly what the news anchors are talking about and reporting. A must read not only for religious readers, but skeptics as well. Stay informed with the world news. Read this book!



5. The chilling part of this book is not Hitchcock's analysis but the words directly from Ahmadinejad. It is an important read for anyone desiring more insite into the nutcase at the wheel of the Mahdi Army. If you, like me had heard of the Madi Army but didn't understand the significance, then this book is a must read.