No comments about Margaret Thatcher - The Iron Lady (Biography).

5 comments about Inside the Economist's Mind: Conversations with Eminent Economists.

1. This book can make you fall in love with economics all over again. A collection of interviews with sixteen eminent economists, it presents the attractive face of the field--one rediscovers an economics concerned with improving the human condition by putting to good use tools borrowed from disciplines as diverse as mathematics and psychology.
   
   The book is a labor of love for William Barnett, the editor of the journal Macroeconomic Dynamics in which these interviews originally appeared between 1997 and 2005. Though the interviews were aimed at professional macroeconomists, much of the book is of broader interest. That's because these eminent economists, interviewed by their peers, are often able to describe their complicated work in simple terms, with modesty and humor, and enriched with anecdotes from their lives.
   
   Link to full review: http://www.imf.org/external/np/vc/2008/072508.htm



2. "Inside the economist's mind" is not a title that will attract readers without some background in economics, nor should it. This collection of interviews is by economists and for economists: there is a fair amount of economic jargon used that will make the book hard to read for laypeople.
   
   Having said that, most of the interviews are entertaining for economists. Getting an author's personal view on well-known ideas makes those ideas come alive, and it is interesting to read about the career paths and choices of famous academics. The selection of people is impressive, although in my personal view (as a micro-economist) there is an overrepresentation of macro-economists, and within this category an exaggerated interest for the rational expectations `revolution' and monetary policy.
   For those with other interests, treasures are more limited. There is a great and provocative interview with Robert Aumann that ranges from the existence of God to the foundations of game theory. The interview with János Kornai is great because having started his career on the other side of the iron curtain, he has a different perspective on the discipline. This is welcome, because it turns out that top-economists are a rather incestuous bunch, mostly bred within the top 10 or so departments in the US. This generates a lot of uninteresting institutional insider talk, the summit of which is reached in the useless last chapter in where James Tobin and Bob Shiller argue about the existence or not of a `Yale school' in economic thought, as if anyone cares.
   
   Some reviews talk about the `astonishing revelations' or the 'fabulous storytellers' in this book. Don't get your hopes up, it's still economics, unless they refer to the fact that Cass once said "[...]" to his head of department. The reviewer who calls this "A Beautiful Mind scaled up 16 times" must have read a different book (or did not read ABM).
   I would recommend getting this book from the library. Although interesting and occasionally entertaining, there is not too much here that you want to keep for reference. Still, 4 stars for the Aumann interview.



3. The editors should be commended on their choice of interviewees! A better, but still "mainstream", selection of major economists of the last half century could hardly be put together. While the selection is hopelessly skewed towards macroeconomics, it seems fitting, given the M.D. connection.
   
   Several interviews (e.g. Modigliani, Sargent) could be very interesting to graduate economics beginners, who'd like to put the contemporary tools and theories they learn in a more historic perspective. They also show how the rumors about the demise of "traditional Keynesian" concerns are largely exaggerated. (Modigliani is not shy about his views concerning unemployment in contemporary EU-15.)
   
   I don't find the book to be accessible to non-professionals or even to scholars in related fields such as PolSci. Some of the interviews are highly technical, which is not helped by the fact that the interviewers are often former students or junior collaborators of the interviewee. -- This is, I think, a good thing, since this level of discussion will be most useful for (future) professionals who look for insight and perspective rather than Principles hand-holding.
   
   On the down side, many interviews read like the interviewee is simply sampling his publishing record. "I wrote X and then I wrote Y..." The more politically-minded reader will be disappointed by the policy content (or lack thereof) in several interviews.



4. This is a collection of interviews commissioned for a journal, Macroeconomic Dynamics. The idea is to gauge the position of the profession by asking the people who invented large swathes of the theory their motivations for doings what they did, when they did it, and how they did it. Readers find eccentric and irascible characters behind some of the major innovations in economic science. I loved this book, and read it cover to cover in a day.
   
   The book purports (pg. xi) to "contain[] unique insights into the thinking of some of the world's most important economists, whose work contributed to the evolution of modern economic thought", and indeed it does.
   
   Scientific biography is a passion of mine, ever since reading Richard Feynman's writings on his life and work. Looking at the path integral method as an undergraduate, you can see how he came up with it (if, in fairness, I didn't really understand it), how startlingly original he was in doing his physics, because that's how he lived his life---he followed different paths as he felt he needed to, and arrived at different destinations that others because of his personality.
   
   So it's great that William Barnett, the editor of Macroeconomic Dynamics, and the co-editor of this book, decided to ask these men these questions.
   
   In future editions of this book and the further volumes to come, I'd love to see a focus on the characters behind different approaches to economics and their reasons for taking contrarian positions to the mainstream---Foley, Nell, Solow and Velupillai (my thesis advisor, in full disclosure), as well as more traditional mainstays of the profession. A focus on economists regarded primariy as great teachers would be great as well, not just the theoretical giants.
   
   The book is a very rare thing---an economic page-turner, like The Worldly Philosopher, Adam's Fallacy, and Freakonomics. The personalities behind the science's blleding edge make for compelling reading.



5. Thomas Keene has an Amazon Listmania List called "Book Reviews: Must Reads." It links to each of the books in Amazon that he recommends as a "must read," and there currently are eighteen of them on his list. But oddly the Amazon system does not provide reverse links from the Amazon page for each of the recommended books back to his review.
   
   He is the very influential Host of the radio program, "Bloomberg on the Economy." This book is on his list of "must reads." Here is his review:
   
   "Rules are meant to be broken. Samuelson & Barnett goes on the list without a complete read. Sixteen stunning interviews; the candor shocking. But then, this is Samuelson. Taylor interviews Friedman; Blanchard interviews Fischer. You get the must-read picture."
   
   Keene's rule that he says he is breaking is never to put a book on his "must read list" before he has finished reading the book. When he finishes reading this book, as I have, I am sure that he will not change his mind.
   
   I have only one criticism of the book. The stellar endorsement quotations that appear on the back cover are set in a rather small font on a black background. It would seem that the publisher could have found a way to make those quotations more inviting to read. But of course this is not a criticism of what is in the book.

5 comments about Citizen McCain.

1. I read a lot of books on political figures, this one included. And, while a long time GOP supporter, I can no longer support John McCain. I don't believe he is the same man that was described in this book. In fact, he seems to have lost his way, and his former values. I had been thinking this for some time, and have been slowly moving to "the other side" for this election.
   
   Now, I just read that even the author of this book, who admired him and spent a lot of time with him during the research of this, has become dismayed, and has publically stated that he is no longer a man of principals. I admire the author for having the courage an intelligence to admit that things change.
   
   That said, this is a great book about the "old" John McCain. Not the different one who is now running for President, the one who has lost his way.



2. So much is published about John McCain from those who seem to know him only from the campaign trail and yet we actually get to see only the side of him that he willingly presents for the cameras and not a more complete and honest account of the man.
   
   One one side, McCain is a war hero. On the other McCain as a war hero returned home to find his loving and dutiful (first) wife, mother of McCain's three oldest children horribly injured and permanently disabled. What do you think John McCain did then and why do we see so little of that part of his life?
   
   On June 8, 2008 the Times UK provided objective insight and in the process of exploring the complete life of John McCain and in the process revealed a side of McCain that demonstrates he is a first rank opportunist whose ambition rules integrity.
   
   John McCain met his first wife, Carol while he was at the US Naval Academy. The Times UK article notes that McCain was "a privileged, but rebellious scion of one of America's most distinguished military dynasties - his father and grandfather were both admirals." An examination of McCain's performance at the academy shows he was often disciplined for misbehavior and ultimately graduated near the bottom of his class. McCain struggled at the Naval Academy, finishing 894th out of 899 students, and was rejected by the U.S. National War College until his family intervened with the Secretary of the Navy. In active service, McCain was, by his lengthy acknowledgement in a commencement address given recently, a "discipline problem" resulting from a violent disposition with poor judgment and that he was frequently insubordinate. By all accounts McCain was slow to prove himself.
   
   The Times UK article explains that when McCain returned to America in 1973 he had simultaneous personal high and low points. On one side he proved himself to be a war hero as a POW and he was lauded by Richard Nixon upon his return. When he returned he also found that his wife, Carol, had been seriously hurt in a violent car crash three years earlier. After six months of medical procedures, Carol was discharged from the hospital but her prognosis was bleak. Carol suffered through surgeries that whittled away her legs and she was confined to a wheelchair and was forced to use a catheter. Despite the trauma and the disability, Carol learned to walk again through sheer force of will, but during recovery Carol gained a lot of weight and suffered from a lot of pain. H. Ross Perot, the brilliant billionaire Texas businessman, future presidential candidate and tireless long-time advocate for American prisoners of war, paid for Carol's medical care.
   
   Carol told the Times UK that she thought they would live happily ever after once John was home. But with new wings as a war hero, McCain was moving in ever-more elite circles. Ross Perot introduced McCain to Governor of California, Ronald Reagan. Nancy Reagan immediately liked Carol and took her under her wing.
   
   But by that point the McCains' marriage had begun to fray and according to the Times UK, quoting Robert Timberg: `John started carousing and running around with women.' The Times UK author pens that in 1979 - while still married to Carol - John met Cindy at a cocktail party in Hawaii. Over the next six months he pursued Cindy, flying around the country to see her. Then with Cindy effectively won, McCain began to push to end his marriage.
   
   Carol and McCain divorced in 1980 and one month later he married the heir to an Arizona brewing fortune, this girl named Cindy who was 18 years younger. Carol attributes the divorce to John's inability to be mature. Carol and her children were absolutely devastated. `It was a complete surprise,' says Nancy Reynolds, a former Reagan aide.
   
   The Times UK story digs deeper and adds that "[s]ome of McCain's acquaintances are less forgiving, however. They portray the politician as a self-centred womaniser who effectively abandoned his crippled wife to `play the field'. They accuse McCain of seeking marriage to Cindy, the former rodeo beauty queen, for financial reasons." In 1980 McCain was earning a naval officers salary, while his new father-in-law, Jim Hensley, was a multi-millionaire with deep political connections. McCain has acknowledged that he had girlfriends during this time with Carol, without going into details.
   
   Although McCain is a war hero there are many who won't forgive or forget his treatment of his first wife. The Times UK quotes Ted Sampley, who the newspaper describes as veteran who fought with US Special Forces in Vietnam and who is now a leading campaigner for veterans' rights. The Times UK write that Sampley said: `I have been following John McCain's career for nearly 20 years. I know him personally. There is something wrong with this guy and let me tell you what it is - deceit. When he came home and saw that Carol was not the beauty he left behind, he started running around on her almost right away. Everybody around him knew it. Eventually he met Cindy and she was young and beautiful and very wealthy. At that point McCain just dumped Carol for something he thought was better. This is a guy who makes such a big deal about his character. He has no character. He is a fake. If there was any character in that first marriage, it all belonged to Carol.'
   
   As a final point the Times UK adds that Ross Perot, who paid her medical bills all those years ago, now believes that both Carol McCain and the American people have been taken in by a man who is unusually slick and cruel - even by the standards of modern politics. According to the Times UK, Perot said that `McCain is the classic opportunist. He's always reaching for attention and glory.'



3. During the political season, it is good to read a political book which just gives some straight talk without attacking. Citizen McCain documents some of the years in which McCain worked with Congress on the McCain Fiengold Campaign Finance Reform Bill. After Congress got through with it, the final bill was not the same as it started. I'm sure he would like to see more reform. (At the time this was written, most people had not heard of Obama.)
   
   The book gives insight into how Congress works and how it takes persistance, cooperation, and the maturity to have the patience of Job to get a bill passed. I enjoyed seeing him at work.
   
   One trait which has not gotten the attention it deserves is his empathy. The author states: "...the empathy of someone who's suffered for someone he sees is hurting. There's a kindness, even a sweetness, that's unusual for people so ordinarily self-centered as polilticians." This book also shows his leadership during 9-ll.
   
   Faith of My Fathers: A Family Memoir offers more insight into McCain especially his experiences as a POW. It also shows how he was a maverick even when he was 2 years old. In this autobiographical book, it is amazing how much he talked about the importance of others and the need to serve a cause greater than self-interest. It is not an "all about me" type of book.



4. As the 2008 election season ripens, this six-year old "classic" will give you an extra interesting angle on one of the presidential candidates, and maybe future President of the US. No matter what, this work's popularity will increase shortly, then drop off sharply after January, 2009!
   
   The interesting angle comes from Elizabeth Drew, a columnist, pundit, and traveler-with author. Not everyone will like this kind of story, a sort of short-interval biography, or an informal/insider diary of trials and travels with a famous Senator. Nevertheless, it is a good tale showing in some detail what a national legislator must do to get his bills passed. In this case, of course, the legislation centers around campaign financing, resulting eventually in the McCain-Feingold law. One is also left marveling how anything much gets passed through Congress in the first place.
   
   Clearly, the author liked John McCain, and liked following the thread of the Senator's political life, as well as schmoozing in the company of the Senate's most famous maverick. She astutely points out, though, that an effective legislator has to get real business done, and McCain showed often how he was not a wild-shooting, alienating maverick. Given the author's usual philosophical tendencies, one also wonders what she will be thinking as the '08 campaign winds along. One bet might be that she will be "all kinds of sorry" she wrote such a glowing, pal-sy book back then!



5. I have to agree with one of the previous reviewers and say that there is too much admiration in this book for Senator McCain. However after saying that, it took guts to take on the leadership of his party to propose campaign finance reform. McCain did it for the best of reasons--because it will make our republic more democratic, and not beholden (as much) to money. For that reason along, I also have a lot of admiration for the Senator from Arizona.
   
   Even though the author shows her bias, this is a nice story about how the forces of politics works in our nation's capital. Introduction of a key piece of legislation requires diplomacy, conviction, and working with disparite groups. Senator McCain should be congratulated for his efforts in getting this legislation passed.

5 comments about Life of the Party: The Biography of Pamela Digby Churchill Hayward Harriman.

1. "Pam," as she was known by her friends, trading on her beauty, inquisitiveness and instincts, more than on her morals: again and again parlayed her feminine wiles into higher and higher orbits of class, wealth, international intrigue and a seat at the very table where high stakes policy was being shaped and made. Even one of her many lives would have been enough for an ordinary person to kill for, but being able to do it over and over again points to her very own special gift: being perfectly situated to marry older men of influence and then making them like it, as she "traded up " the ladder to better and better situations.
   
   Just her wartime activities alone, is worth the price of the book.
   
   Here, behind the scenes where the post-WWII world order was being shaped and fashioned, she played an important if unsung role as one of the king pin (or is it queen pin?) deal makers, that helped solidify the ties between the U.S. and UK, ties that eventually were responsible for bringing the U.S. into the war. She did this all the while being married to the notorious "bad boy" and son of Sir Winston Churchill, Randolph, and while "bedding down" one of her "husbands-to be," Averill Harriman. And she did this, all the while, if not with the full knowledge, certainly with the tacit knowledge of her father in law, the British Prime Minister.
   
   Just this part of the book alone is worth its price, but there is much more: all with the ring of truth, not with the ring of mere salacious gossip, which I admit, is all that I was really looking for. In the book "Nemesis," it had been reported as fact that Joseph P. Kennedy had raped Pam while she was an overnight guest of her friend the then Ambassador to the UK's daughter, Kathleen. I was unable to confirm this fact in this "unauthorized" version of her life. This omission, however, certainly does not mean that it did not happen, just that it could not be confirmed in this version of her life story. And even though I did not find what I was looking for, this is still easily five stars.



2. Reading this, more than decade after its publication when Pamela's primary skills were already passé, it was clear how much things have changed.
   
   Pamela came out of the 19th century British aristocracy where only the first born male was entitled to inherit the family's property and power and to call it what it is/was - human rights within a family. Pamela could not expect familial affection or support. Her family turned her over to nannies and decreed that education, no matter how great her ability or curiosity, would hinder her marriage options.
   
   Pamela made her own match (did not wait for family negotiations) and married what history made the ultimate commodity, a link through a male namesake, to Winston Churchill. She used this "child" and followed the cultural and psychological patterns of aristocratic women by supporting and living through her man with a modern twist--- he did not have to be her husband.
   
   WWII put a chink in the armor of the British class system and affirmed the American ideal of social equality. The super wealthy European men paid in cash and friendship for all she willingly gave. She wanted commitment, which due to European social codes, would not be forthcoming. No wonder Pamela was seduced (in the pure sense of the word) by America. In America she was able to achieve far beyond what her family or country c/would ever provide for her.
   
   She was Darwinistic about men/marriage. If a man's wife was not as fit as her, Pamela had no qualms about the wife, Pamela should have the "position". Her sympathy for her second husband's mother (over that of his children) who had abandoned her family may be testament to an understanding of her emotional situation.
   
   One can salute Pamela's achievements, but her treatment of others is too cold for sympathy. As presented here, her mothering of "The Child" and her stepchildren replicates that toward her in her own nuclear family. Her treatment of staff and other women is pure 1950's sexism and a workaholic's view of the world. She rose above the rigid role of her family and society had given her. Unfortunately, within her intimate family (birth and blended) she could not break the chain of creating emotional liabilities.



3. I had known one women who said: "Its better you ask for what you want,then to except what others offering to you."

   This can be related to biography of Pamela Harriman. SHe lived in extraordinary circumstances but what I find most compelling is the fact that she succeed to manage her life. Although, it was not always easy for her. She left and she was left. The biography is most interesting written and I read it very quickly.
   She maybe was in some way courtisan, but I think she wanted to enjoy in life nad she was led by it. SHe knew what she want and she was persistant. However, I did not manage to figure out was she open hearted as she was presented in some moments or little bit cold caculated as in the part regarding children of her husband Hayworth. But, for sure she was woman in complete sense of that word.




4. One can tell just from the photograph chosen for the cover of LIFE OF THE PARTY that author Christopher Ogden has constructed a fun read. Though his research is thorough and scholarly, LIFE OF THE PARTY flies by easily. (The title itself is a pun, alluding both to its literal meaning and to the fact that Harriman's generous donations gave new life to America's Democratic Party.)

   In crafting the biography of America's late Ambassador to France, Pamela Harriman, Ogden also provides a social history of the international "Jet Set" of the 1940's, 1950's and 1960's. Pamela's journey through the decades was complete with English aristocracy, French nobility, Italian racing car drivers, South American polo players, Arab sheiks, Greek shipping magnates and members of America's monied elite. The link among them is that Pamela Harriman slept with members of each of these groups!

   In her own, less liberated day, born to obscure English nobility c. 1920, there is no question but that then-Pamela Digby would have been considered a--ahem--loose woman (to use a mild phrase) by those who knew her. Not only did she sleep around, apparently with blatant calculation of how her liasons would benefit her financially and socially, but she also conspicuously went after married men. With the exception of her first husband, the single thread connecting the men she chose was that they were not merely rich, they were filthy rich. And her first husband was the son of Winston Churchill, Prime Minister of England at the time of their marriage. Thus, that match was socially advantageous to Pamela, and she would use the connection as her entry into highest levels of the world's interconnected rich. Nonetheless, despite her apparent rapacity, it is obvious that her men found her... appealing, to say the least.

   Some of the affairs that Ogden documents were with the fabulously wealthy Frenchman, Elie de Rothschild, with the fabulously wealthy oil sheik, Aly Khan, with the fabulously wealthy Italian auto manufacturer, Gianni Agnelli, with a fabulously wealthy American, Averell Harriman and another fabulously wealthy American, William Paley. Yet she married the merely wealthy theatrical producer, American Leland Hayward, whose daughter openly despises Pamela to this day. (It seems clear that Pamela settled on Leland due to an urgent need to wed quickly as a matter of financial salvation.)

   Of course, Pamela was a serial bride. Decades after she first began her affair with him, Averell Harriman finally tied the knot with Pamela. He had been middle-aged when they first had met, and she had been a very young woman. By the time she captured him, she was middle-aged and he was old. Conveniently, he died soon after their marriage and, even more conveniently, he left her his huge fortune.

   She immediately put that fortune to use in inserting herself as a valuable player in the United States Democratic Party and as an early and generous supporter of then-candidate Bill Clinton. After he became President, Clinton rewarded Pamela by making her his Ambassador to France.

   Truly, if this book were a romance novel, it would be dismissed out-of-hand as being too implausible. As it stands, it is an examination of an exploitative and greedy woman, yet a woman whose lifestory makes for entertaining reading. For the major events of the mid-20th century, when Pamela Digby Churchill Hayward Harriman was not present, she probably was waiting in the bedroom.




5. What an interesting woman. Okay so she may have slept her way to the top and made a few bad personal decisions. A saint she was not. For all that she was determined to enjoy life and make the best out of what talents she had. She used her friends as we all do to better her causes and even berated her children when she disagreed withj them. As if she was the first mother to do that. She gave her total devotion to the men she married, apart from Winston, and expected the same.The irony is that had Pamela harriman been a man all her negative aspects would have been overlooked and she would have been remembered more for her her political and social acumen rather than the men she had slept with. A very interesting read about one of the more interesting characters of the 20th century. It will be a while before her like is seen again. She will be missed.

5 comments about Reflected Glory.

1. every second of every minute of every hour of every day of every month of every year of her life...and
   
   it is SO MUCH FUN to read about it!
   
   i read this book almost 10 years ago when i wasn't sure i could ever REALLY laugh or marvel at anything again... it snapped me out of languishing in the "Is This All There Is?" ---
   
   back to the absurdity of life, to [what the heck] get back into the game -
   
   pamela harriman was so BAD --- and there's nothing to admire here except that she did take good care of the men she stole from other women!
   
   you have to hand it to her and to Scarlett O Hara: these broads set their sights on things and Got What They Wanted...
   
   a case study in manipulation and the business of maneuvering to get what you want from others - a page turner!



2. This biography separates itself from other Pamela Churchill Harriman tomes in that it reads almost like a fiction novel. Some of the salacious and outlandish goings-on seem almost implausible, if not absurdly bizarre. Harriman proves to be the most singularly opportunistic individual that I have read about - possibly ever. Although she does have her good points(although even her philanthropy seems perfunctory at best), Harriman(or should I say Digby, Churchill, or Heyward?) comes across as the most devilishly clever courtesan of the 20th Century.
   
   I recommend this account as one that makes for a most compelling, if not a trifle unnerving, read. From her days as a seductive young debutante to her days as the wily big wheel of Democratic Party fundraising and later as the U.S. Ambassador to France, you'll find yourself intrigued as you read about this incredibly shrewd seductress.



3. I have not read such a good biography in a long time. Ms Bedell is neither enamored nor appalled with her subject (a sin that many biographers commit). Her well-researched book has a good balance between the broader historic narrative and the focused portrait of the controversial individual.



4. This book is the type that I begin reading, and by the end am angry with myself for wasting the time.

   I purchased this book out of curiosity about Mrs. Harriman's life. Certainly the author dug up sufficient dirt on the subject to satisfy the most 'enquiring' minds.

   As with another reviewer, I am still mystified as to what so many famous men saw in this women. Not particularly attractive for most of her life, she apparently had a female magnetism that escapes the written page. No surprise, many women have had that ability. It doesn't read well for the male of the species, many of whom appeared as pawns to this woman's machinations.

   Ultimately this is a rather depressing book. Like others, Mrs. Harriman is in the end old, alone and a rather pitiful character. What a ride while it lasted, though!




5. Pamela Digby Churchill Hayward Harriman was a serial bride, and she interspersed her marriages with conspicuous love affairs. She was a 20th century courtesan who, apparently, chose her men for the money and gifts that they would lavish upon her.

   In REFLECTED GLORY, Sally Bedell Smith has done a scholarly and thorough job of researching and reporting the story of this rapacious woman. The only liason that Harriman had had with a man who was not wealthy was with her first husband, but he was the son of Winston Churchill, England's Prime Minister, at the time that they wed. For the rest of her life, Pamela used her Churchill connection as her entry to all things important--and, to Pamela, the only things that apparently seemed to have been important were rich men.

   She slept with English nobility--her own father was an obscure English nobleman--French aristocrats, Arab oil sheiks, South American polo players, Italian car manufacturers and filthy rich Americans. And she was an equal-opportunity mistress; she didn't care whether they were married or not.

   Decades after they first began their affair, Pamela got Averill Harriman to marry her. Thoughtfully, he died soon after, leaving her the bulk of his huge estate.

   She used some of those funds to underwrite America's financially insolvent Democratic Party, and a young politician named Bill Clinton. After he became President, Clinton rewarded her generosity by named Pamela Harriman as his Ambassador to France.

   Sally Bedell Smith has written an excellent biography of a woman who truly was fascinating, albeit in a horrifying kind of way.

5 comments about The Best Intentions: Kofi Annan and the UN in the Era of American World Power.

1. With insight, wit and stores of knowledge about the UN and world affairs, James Traub paints a sympathetic but brutally honest portrait of Kofi Annan as Secy=General. Five star.



2. The strengths of this excellent book far outweigh its weaknesses. It is especially compelling as a case study of leadership in a deeply flawed but essential institution. Traub's had access to Kofi Annan, as well as Annan's chief lieutenants at the UN, over an extended period of time that included his early successes, the events prior to the Iraq war and the Iraq "Oil for Food" scandal. Through the text we gain an understanding of the inner workings of the infamously cumbersome UN bureaucracy as well as the impossible constraints placed upon it by the United States government and the 191 other member states. Annan's early successes as Secretary General were substantial; yet his passive style of leadership made him very vulnerable. He ultimately paid a severe price. Traub documents Annan's physical and mental breakdowns and the blow to his reputation caused by his failure to properly monitor the Oil for Food program.
   
   The book would have benefited from a section with further details on the overwhelming complexity of the UN organization and the lack of power of the Secretary General to control it. Traub also occasionally feels compelled to engage in weak, superficial "fair and balanced" analysis that is not helpful to the overall narrative. Overall, however, this is a fine book that is a useful way to learn about the challenges of running the UN.



3. FDR was a leading proponent of the U.N. after WWII had proven the League of Nations (formed in response ti WWI) ineffectual. His vision was that the "four policemen" (U.S., Nationalist China, Russia, and Britain) would be able to prevent WWIII.
   
   Unfortunately, it is hard to think good thoughts about the U.N. as it currently operates, given its consistent failures in Darfur, Iraq, Serbia, Congo, Zimbabwe, and the Mid-East, as well as in the areas of nuclear non-proliferation, global warming, and HIV/AIDS. However, it is much harder to think of a realistic and better alternative, given the high-level and intense jockeying for power by the U.S., Russia, and China, and Iran, Venezuela, Iraq, India, and others taking advantage of every opportunity to increase their own agendas.
   
   In the midst of this never-ending squabbling, Kofi Annan, with little personal power within the U.N. and tarred by his son's role in the "Oil for Food" scandal, tries to convert his best intentions into constructive action. Predictably, he fails.
   
   Hopefully "The Best Intentions" will lead the way to effective reform of the U.N., and we won't need a WWIII to come up with a better alternative.



4. This is an excellent book, which reviews Annan's work from the inside of the UN secretariat. Traub was given generous access to internal debates and Annan's close associates, and gives a detailed account of the UN responses to
   difficult or impossible dilemmas and crises during his term, and to the attitudes of member states. Annan's own personality is itself described, with its strengths and foibles in a candid way.
   Recommended to all those interested in the UN and in the role of the UN Secretaries General.
   
   Yves Beigbeder (former UN and UNITAR official, Retired)
   January 2007



5. This book would have us beleive that were it not for 'bad' America the UN would have magically solved all the world's problems. But let us take one test case for this. Where has Kofi Annan been on Darfur and the genocide in the Sudan? Has he done anything? Dag Hamarskojld, the first Secretary General bullied western nations to intervene in the Congolese crises in Katanga in 1960. It is strange that he was able to acheive results in a place that was not a genocide, but Kofi wasn't able to do anything and not only that he won't even call the complete ethnic cleansing and murde rof 200,000 Blacks by White Arab miltiias 'genocide'. Kofi Anna is not the 'best' Secretary General, he is in fact the weakest and worst, the only thing he had going for him was that he was not a former Nazi the way Kurt Waldheim was. When Kofi goes the UN and the world will be a better place. This book doesnt bother to ask any important questions such as: Why did Kofi Annan's family become millionares through UN handouts and jobs while he was in charge, why is Kofi Annans house getting a 4 million dollar renovation? Why did the UN Human rights commission critisize Israel 50 times more than any other country in the entire world, thus attributing the problems of 6 billion people to a nation of 5 million? Why did the UN do nothing on the Sudanese genocide, the war in Congo and wars in Sri Lanka or anywhere else? Why did the UN ethnically cleanse all of the Serbs from Kosovo and why did it also colonize Kosovo?
   
   Seth J. Frantzman

5 comments about The American Agent: My Life in the CIA.

1. I love everything CIA. But his book gets off to a super slow start. 120 pages in and all the character has been in the hospital the whole time doing rehab. I realize this is a true story, but it is kinda boring at first.
   
   I may try to finish it... I am not sure.



2. A wonderful account of an interesting career. If you are into government, intelligence, foriegn politics, or just plain old spy novels, you should definately read this book.



3. Some of the content of the book is fascinating. I enjoyed when he discussed operational details, but they seemed few and far between. As other reviews have said, the book seems focused on house hunting and the like. I also found his writing style to be a bit up and down. It almost reads like a first draft, with a strange flow.
   I would recommend the book for anyone who is interested in the subject because there is not that much available that describes life inside the Agency. That being said, it is by no means a great read.



4. Good insite into the internal politics at the CIA. Pulls no punches regarding who (historically) supported the agency's mission and who did not.
   
   Good perspective of what our field agents face abroad, their lifestyle, challenges with landguages, cultures, etc.
   
   Slightly disappointed Holm did not go more into specific or theoretical cases. Also, he rants a bit too much at the end to get 31 yesrs of frustratio off his chest.



5. Holmes is a very detailed man. He tells his lifestory in great detail. Some of it is interesting, some of it is not. He does an excellent job in describing the agency and how it operates. Unfortunately, you have to read or go through a lot of junk to get there.
   
   If you want the "quick and dirty" info about the CIA and how it operates, do not get this book. If you want great details about our operations in the Congo, Laos, and Asia and you have plenty of time, this is the book to read.

5 comments about Eleanor Roosevelt : Volume 2 , The Defining Years, 1933-1938.

1. In the first volume of her series on Eleanor Roosevelt, Blanche Wiesen Cook, a historian and women's studies professor, introduced us to a compelling historical figure who, after years of living in passive submission to her husband and mother-in-law, had finally broken free to create her own "independent life" - a life filled with careers (teacher, writer, public speaker) and fulfilling private friendships. In volume two, Eleanor Roosevelt faces the challenge of keeping her independent life as she assumes the traditionally social (and passive) role of First Lady. "Eleanor Roosevelt: Volume Two, 1933 - 1938" contemplates Eleanor Roosevelt's life during the first five years of her husband's presidency.
   
   In her first volume on Eleanor Roosevelt, Cook took a feminist approach in asking questions about power, relationships, and identity. Unfortunately, volume two falls short of the first volume, in leaving many of these questions not only unanswered, but sometimes even unasked. Whereas the central theme of volume one was Eleanor's struggle to assert herself as an "independent power," in volume two, we are not just reading the story of Eleanor Roosevelt, but also the parallel story of her husband and his presidency, which places Eleanor Roosevelt in a dependent role as she must work her way into her husband's political circle to gain influence. In fact, too often, volume two devolves into a story of FDR's presidency and Eleanor's reaction to it, rather than the story of Eleanor Roosevelt as an individual, independent agent. Eleanor is often portrayed as dependent on FDR for power, her moods uplifted when his speeches reflect her views and depressed and cold when they don't, particularly when she is shut out from the inner circle and has to learn about what is going on from her own son. While she occasionally dissents from the administration's talking points, her writing and speaking career is now primarily aimed at advancing FDR's policies. The most disappointing example of Eleanor's capitulation to her husband is on the subject of the Holocaust, where she remains silent from 1933 to 1938. When a German refugee appeals to Eleanor Roosevelt's sense of justice, asking, "Can you really stand by and watch this? Can you stand and see us more or less all gassed? I should like to have your word, you will do something," Eleanor Roosevelt replies, "Unfortunately, in my present position I am obliged to leave all contacts with foreign governments in the hands of my husband and his advisers." Obviously, Eleanor Roosevelt does gain power within FDR's political circle, but it is never clear what the extent and significance of this power really is.
   
   Another central theme in volume one was how Eleanor Roosevelt's relationship with a new circle of feminist and lesbian friends helped her create her own life apart from FDR. After Eleanor discovered FDR's infidelity with Lucy Mercer, and they began living separately, Eleanor established her own new life at Val-Kill, a residence she shared with Nancy Cook and Marion Dickerman. In addition, Eleanor made her first true friend in Lorena Hickok, an established reporter with the Associated Press. In volume two, these relationships all dissolve, as Eleanor acrimoniously splits with Cook and Dickerman and drifts apart from Hickok. Hickok, in fact, is the key figure in volume two, as her relationship with Eleanor Roosevelt is chronicled in painful detail. While their relationship is clearly the most important in Eleanor's life during her time as First Lady, it unfortunately takes a bit of a tragic turn as Hickok gives up her job with the AP, and along with it, her self-respect, becoming dependent on Eleanor Roosevelt for work, in addition to financial and emotional support. As Hickok grows increasingly depressed and resentful of Eleanor's other friends and busy schedule, they continue to drift apart, to the point where, when they do share a vacation alone together, Eleanor is miserable, missing her work and eager to return to her life as First Lady. As Eleanor Roosevelt drifts away from the friends who were so important to her in first creating her own independent life, it is clear that her interests and priorities have changed. Her political life is now the most important thing in her life.
   
   What does this say about Eleanor Roosevelt's identity? This is the final question then left to be answered. Unfortunately, the question is never even posed to readers. Does it matter that Eleanor Roosevelt depends on her husband for power and she no longer has an independent role of her own? What does it say that she pulls Lorena Hickok into a dependent relationship where she retains all the power? Why is her public life more important to her than her private relationships? What, in fact, is her new identity? While in volume one, we are left with the image of Eleanor Roosevelt as an independent woman, pursuing her own career interests and developing her own loyal set of friends apart from FDR, in volume two, we are mostly left with an image of Eleanor Roosevelt not as an independent force, but as the First Lady, a woman who keeps a busy schedule and cares for a lot of causes and people, but none in particular.
   
   In focusing on the day-to-day details of Eleanor Roosevelt's life and FDR's administration, "Eleanor Roosevelt: Volume Two, 1933 - 1938" reads more like a timeline from a boring history text - a list of dates and facts - than a compelling biography of Eleanor Roosevelt the person, her priorities and main accomplishments. In trying to tell two stories - first, of the political movement behind the New Deal and, second, of the role Eleanor Roosevelt carves out for herself within her husband's administration - ultimately Cook fails to tell either story.



2. I have to admit that I gave up on this book. I'm hoping to find a more readable biography of Mrs. Roosevelt. Cook's style and grammar are just too jumbled for me.
   
   Look in the "look inside this book" section here and go to page 14. This is a prime example of Cook's overuse of quotes. I appreciate that she did her research, but if she was going to quote so much, she should have just included one whole article. As it is, the whole page is a mish-mash of sentances and words taken from various sources creating a confusing unreadable mess.



3. I was shocked to discover that volume 2 only covered 5 years, albeit 5 important years. However, that should serve as a caveat for a potential reader.
   
   This volume is a much harder read than volume 1 as this version grinds to a screeching halt in places. While I agree it was important to document ERs long, tortured relationship with Lorena Hickock, too much emphasis (and repetition) was placed on what looks to be a normal parting-of-the-ways as ER ascended.
   
   There are some very intriguing and thoughtful moments in this book (which makes its a worthwhile read), but they are broken up by too many abrupt harbringers of moral/political doom or redemption with sparse or no follow-up.



4. This is a very well-researched and meticulously written book. However, I never felt I got to know Eleanor Roosevelt. I found the reference to Mrs. Roosevelt throughout the book as "ER" off-putting. It put an emotional distance between the reader and the subject. While we are treated to many details of Mrs. Roosevelt's life, we are never really let in to her emotional life. BWC (the author) goes into such detail about everyone else around Mrs. Roosevelt and she tells us what happened, but she doesn't let us see things through Mrs. Roosevelt's eyes. I still have no idea what the relationship between FDR and his wife was. Nor do I really understand why she remained with Lorena Hick so long. This book really amounts to a laundry list of who, what, where. A really effective biography will let us into the personal lives of the subject and let us feel as they feel as the story of their life unfolds. I never found that emotional resonance in this account. Eleanor Roosevelt left behind copious amounts of source material. I think that the author could have done a much better job of letting us experience Mrs. Roosevelt more fully as a person and not just as a public figure with a lot on her agenda.



5. Although not being an American, I'm aware that there are many in the States who are not too fond of ER and who are very critical of her. This second volume of Blanche Wiesen Cook's series on America's former First Lady is as remarkable and absorbing as was the first. There is no doubt FDR was a man of character,courage and great personal charm and warmth, there is equally no doubt that his wife suffered great personal trauma (and embarrassment) at his refusal (doubtless for political reasons)to speak out against the racial problems (in particular lyching in the South) and the Hitlerites treament of Jews in prewar Germany and Austria whilst the US continued to trade with the Germans. The same could be said of his stance during the Spanish Civil War. Eleanor was a nag (as was mentioned here in other summaries of this book) but never without good reason.
   And all of her dire predictions came true. ER's passion for life, her beliefs, her love and respect of her husband, come through over and over again. Her ability to manipulate people, a less attractive aspect of her character - is also here for all to see (as her relationship with Lorena Hickock so aptly demonstrates).
   Was there too much of Hick in this book ? I didn't think so. The relationship was a long term, on going one. The letters were not destroyed by ER, who I believe must have realised they'd become public after her death. Finally, ER's energy levels must have been extraordinary - her ability to criss cross the country seemingly non stop was remarkable considering that travel and the mode of travel was nothing like it is today. What an absolute bonus such a partner was to FDR's re electibility !
   I look forward to the next "installment" with great anticipation.

5 comments about Worse Than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush.

1. I've read most of John Dean's books and enjoy them. This was a good book, very interesting and informative about the evil tenure of Bush/Cheney. I'm sure it's dead on with what went on behind the scenes and how we got into the sorry mess of a country that we are today largely due to these 2 idiots.



2. While the book is old (written prior to the 2004 election) and politics tends to change very rapidly, there is still quite a lot of relevant information. Dean dissects the Bush regime and compares it to Nixon's. He points out what Nixon did wrong and how Bush is following the same path. He does so in an intellectual manner and doesn't resort to Bush bashing or name calling like some books I have read. All of Deans points are well thought out and backed with evidence from sources from across the political spectrum. Overall, even though this is an old book, it is still a very good and worthwhile read.



3. This book is a bit dated as it was originally written before the 2004 elections but it has been updated a bit past that point so it still has relevancy today. Any impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney and their minions should use this book for talking points. Mr. Dean points out all the horrific and illegal things this White House has done that are far and above what President Nixon ever did. It also makes the "impeachment" of Bill Clinton look even sillier than the total farce it was. These two (and others in the administration) should be in jail.



4. Worse Than Watergate by John Dean is worth reading just because of the title and who he is. John Dean, counsel to the Nixon White House, says that the Bush/Cheney White House is "worse than Watergate" -- that is like Jesse Ventura calling someone an obnoxious loudmouth! The book was published in 2004, ahead of the presidential election, so by the time I found it on the bargain table, it was somewhat dated. However, Bush/Cheney are STILL in power, and while the country has largely turned against them because of the war in Iraq and the slumping economy, Dean's real case against them describes the more subtle ways that the Bush II administration has weakened our democracy.
   
   The main beef that Dean has with Bush and Cheney is their secrecy. True, this is definitely a politically motivated treatise written by neither a scholar nor journalist, but it is also true that Dean has researched his topic well and that he has some first-hand experience in the matter of damage caused by a secretive executive branch. Worse Than Watergate is not going to sway Bush supporters -- if they haven't lost their confidence in his leadership by now, they are never going to budge. But, Dean has an interesting perspective, and if you are capable of separating the facts from the commentary, this short book is definitely worth the read.



5. This book is a well researched and documented examination of the excesses of the Bush/Cheney presidency and how this came to be. In the book, Dean looks at the issues of secrecy within the White House, lying and dirty tricks. And, if there is anyone, anywhere who knows more about this subject I would love to see who they are.
   
   Dean does a wonderful job of comparing and contrasting the current regime with the Nixon presidency and writes in a clear, concise and easy to read manner. I look forward to reading his other 2 books, as to learn more about what has gone wrong with the current Republican Party.
   
   This is a must read for any American who wants to see this country remain free!

2 comments about William Wilberforce: A Biography.

1. A thorough, inspiring, and insightful biography, although the author at times displays a mean-spirited judgmental streak.



2. Tompkin's has written a sympathetic biography of the great reformer but the author shows a better understanding of Wiberforce's Christianity than he does of his conservatism. I think that the author is in danger of judging Wilberforce by 21st century standards over his opposition to trades unions, support of fewer of civil liberties in the face of threatened French invasion and the persecution of the promoters of atheistic books. Wilberforce's campaign to abolish the slave trade is the major theme of the book as it was the dominating thing in his life. But this history would be improved by the inclusion of a brief chronology or time line, putting Wilberforce's campaign and life in the world historic context of the time which included the American and French revolutions as well as the rise and fall of Napoleon. Wilberforce turned down all office and advancement including a peerage. He was ever a man of principle not party, a great philanthropist and saint whose perseverance was a greater gift than his oratory.