Rightshelf

Posted at 2:08am on Apr. 13, 2008 Reading Herodotus

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

Consider first this link. The following jumped out for me:

Herodotus made history by inventing history. There are two senses of "history" in that English sentence, neither of which corresponds to the Greek historia. The first sense seems to me to be a powerful one in public usage. This is the sense involved in such phrases as "making history", "history will show", or "the end of history". Really, this is the way that moderns get at a concept of "fate"--where fate itself is an ossified word that lives, for most people, as something the ancients "believed in".

Think of the Congressional Record: it is not the minutes of a meeting. Things get put in there that were never uttered by a live human being. Similarly, we all have a space in our consciousness for statements we consider "for the record", or "off the record", as though there were a cosmic ledger somewhere being filled with the detail of our lives and our countries' lives, a ledger of record, the last word before we "close the book".

Herodotus fears the wearing agency of time, which can turn colourful statues with piercing eyes into the falsely pristine marble of neo-classicism. (Greek temples were more like Hindu temples than like the touristy ruins now left behind.) Perhaps this justifies David Grene's use of "history" to translate historia. At the very least, Herodotus does want to get the record straight. But there is more, a majestic even-handedness in his recognition that both warring agents produced great and wonderful deeds that deserve to be remembered vividly. ("Great" and "wonderful" should not be taken to imply "good".)

The second sense is "history" as a discipline, a thing in which you can earn an advanced degree. The professional historian, along with humanists of many other disciplines, is especially concerned with a thing she has invented called "methodology". Whole books of historical writing climax with vindications of their own methodology. It is the way.

By these lights Herodotus does not usually qualify as an historian. He is merely a "story-teller". I rather think that he is anti-methodological, and hence a kind of champion. The irony in the modern historian's verdict comes when Herodotus is treated as source material. Whenever it has been possible to corroborate elements of his narrative or description independently, almost always Herodotus has been vindicated. (There are whole swaths of ancient history for which he is, apparently, our only source.)

And consider this one as well. Again, the following passage struck me as being especially important:

Perhaps Solon's admonition, "look to the end", best applies to those who are wont to confuse the extravagant external with an internal worth. Surely those who count themselves blessed are not completely aware of their situation. Croesus thought he was the most blessed of all, given his wealth and importance, yet he was deluded and delusional. But when Adrastus "knows within himself" that he was "the heaviest-stricken with calamity", he was smitten with perfect clarity and self-knowledge. Alas, those who think they're God's gift often have misfortune coming to them, but depressed people usually have good reason to be so. Adrastus shows us that there can be a piercingly specific, terribly non-delusional, and altogether internal clarity about one's random and yet genuine misfortune.

Read it all. My copy of Herodotus is this one. I look forward to reading it and I imagine that it will be considered a classic translation in the years to come.

Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 5:18am on Mar. 26, 2008 Book Review--In Search Of Lost Time: Within A Budding Grove

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

Proust continues to demonstrate his mastery of the art of observation in the second volume of his magnum opus. We see that mastery manifest itself in the way Proust writes about the first throes of love with Gilberte, the heartbreak and gradual indifference that he experiences concerning her and then his amorous feelings for Albertine. Proust's ability to describe and analyze in both passionate and dispassionate terms does not cease to amaze and though the work is fiction, it becomes clear quite quickly that Proust is as unsparing and as exact in his analysis of the self and of life as Augustine was in writing his Confessions. Again, it should be emphasized that Proust's greatest and most potent power as a writer is his ability to identify and empathize so effectively with the feelings of the reader; feelings that the reader thought were particular only to himself or herself until Proust was read.

Equally impressive is Proust's ability to focus on society's darker side, both on the macro level and on the micro one. The microanalysis can be found in Proust's discussion of Bloch, who quickly strikes the reader as being thoroughly annoying and insufferable. The macroanalysis comes from Proust's examination of anti-Semitism in France; a phenomenon that will have a greater impact on the story as we read through Proust's opus and concern ourselves with the ramifications of the Dreyfus Affair.

To be sure, reading Proust is a tremendous challenge. The writing is dense and while it is well-planned and plotted, the language resembles stream-of-consciousness thought (necessary, given the themes of involuntary memory that continue to run through the book). But it remains well worth the effort to read Proust; those who find themselves occasionally exhausted by the task of reading through his great work may console themselves with the thought that the satisfaction of reading through it is at least equal to the challenge.

Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 2:32am on Dec. 25, 2007 Book Review--Swann's Way

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

From the À la recherche du temps perdu series, Swann's Way begins the story of the narrator, his love for the Swanns' daughter Gilberte, the romantic travails of Swann himself, French society, infidelity, the dangers of idealization and the power of involuntary memory--evinced most strongly by the flavor brought about by dipping the madeleine into tea. Within the tremendously long and incredibly descriptive Proustian sentences lay dazzling insights into the human condition, insights that have the reader nodding readily in recognition and ensure that Proust takes his place alongside Nietzsche and Dostoevsky as a master psychologist as well as a tremendously talented novelist. The book is rich with description and imagery and Proust is one of the best there is at transporting the reader into his mind, the better to understand Proust's story. Tremendous credit must be given to the translating effort, which allows us to fully appreciate the overwhelming beauty of Proust's story and prose. The nostalgia that is redolent in the book is powerfully affecting and many times, deeply moving. And the characters are unforgettable. One naturally feels sorry for Swann, so hopelessly in love and so blind to the manner in which he is being humiliated by the truly repulsive Odette. The Verdurins remind us of the shallow clique of people each of us has, at some point, run across in our lives. The narrator seems deeply burdened and almost overwhelmed by his emotions and his inability to attract Gilberte's love is heartbreaking. And at the end of the book, we want more.

And more, of course, we are able to have. I look forward to completing the entire series and Within A Budding Grove, naturally, constitutes my current fare. Oh, and I suppose that it would be wrong of me not to note that Proust has become thoroughly iconic in our lives.

How iconic?

This iconic (the last little bit makes it Not Safe For Work):

Comments (1) / Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 11:38pm on Dec. 1, 2007 Book Review--My Grandfather's Son

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

Excellent and moving. There was a need for this book to be written given the fact that so many appear to have doubted just how difficult and challenging Justice Thomas's life has been--and not just when he was growing up in Georgia. With all due respect to the memory of Myers Anderson--Thomas's grandfather--he could have raised the future Justice to be the kind of person he is without resorting to some of the harsher things that Anderson did. I mean, does it make sense to kick your own grandson out of your house simply because the racism of fellow seminary students in the wake of the assassination of Martin Luther King disillusioned that grandson from pursuing a career in the priesthood? And yet, that is precisely what Anderson did. His action was incomprehensible and while I understand that Justice Thomas reveres the man--the Justice never had any kind of relationship with his own father and doubtless, it would have been too traumatic to have a complete break with two father figures in one's life--some of the actions Anderson took clearly seem wrong in retrospect.

In any event, one of the more laudable aspects of the book is that it will disabuse anyone who believes that somehow, Justice Thomas does not possess the intellect necessary to work and work well at the Supreme Court. The writing in the book is candid, passionate, powerful and at times, quite humorous. And while at times, the passages in the book revealed Myers Anderson at his worst, they also revealed the best of him; his refusal to allow circumstances to beat him down and defeat him, for instance and his insistence that if one puts one foot in front of the other, great things can be achieved despite the odds. A simple lesson, but one that needs repeating, especially to the troubled and the burdened.

Most autobiographies these days are pure saccharine. This one isn't. At times, one winces to read what happened to Justice Thomas throughout his life. But he overcame his burdens and troubles--a sustaining lesson for all.

Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 12:38am on Nov. 29, 2007 Stick With The Book

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

Why I won't go watch Beowulf at the movies. Reading it is doubtless, a far more enjoyable experience.

Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 7:51am on Nov. 11, 2007 Book Review--The Chicago School

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

This could have been quite the excellent book. It is certainly chock full of information on the free market economics movement at the University of Chicago and the figures who made the movement possible. However, it is told in clumsy fashion. Johan van Overtveldt refuses to stray from a literary formula in which he details a particular figure's birth, education, contributions and death and the more the formula gets repeated, the more annoying it gets to the reader. The story of the evolution of the study of economics at the University of Chicago could have been told in a fashion that would have aroused admiration for van Overtveldt's literary skills as well as deep interest in his subject matter. Alas, van Overtveldt has only a gift for recitation and none for narration. And even some of the narration elicits objections; the editing process regarding the book was quite poor, as a number of spelling mistakes and grammatical errors (it appears that English is not van Overtveldt's native language) slipped by the editors and made its way onto the final edition of the book. Most disappointing.

This is not to say that reading the book wasn't valuable. Quite the contrary. I should note as well that depending on one's intellectual upbringing and outlook, certain portions of the book will be more interesting than others--I was particularly fascinated with the discussions of the law and economics program at Chicago as well as discussions concerning the number of Chicago figures who went on to prominence in the world of policy and politics. But the book's literary deficiencies cannot be ignored. One hopes that the paperback version will have at least the grammatical and spelling errors corrected and if certain passages of the book are entirely rewritten--and this will have to include a lot of passages--then, to be perfectly honest, I won't object too loudly.

Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 7:29am on Nov. 6, 2007 Book Review--The U.S. Army/Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

The Counterinsurgency Field Manual is an impressive intellectual undertaking standing on its own. It addresses what was a serious shortcoming in American military doctrine and it does so with a great deal of detail and considered judgment in the formulation of its arguments concerning the doctrine of counterinsurgency. When one considers that the manual was prepared in a very short period of time so as to address the doctrinal shortcomings of the American military as swiftly as possible, the work is properly viewed as truly extraordinary.

To be sure, many of the observations found in the Field Manual strike readers as basic. But these basic definitions of terms must be presented in the manner that they are so as to ensure that everyone has an understanding of the premises from which the Field Manual begins before delving into more complicated doctrinal fare. The Field Manual is thorough and comprehensive in discussing issues like troop strength and deployment, the need to ensure that basic services are operational, the proper way to recruit and deploy translators, the best way to fight crime and lawlessness, and so on. It may well need further refining as time goes on but it will give future authors a great deal of valuable and rich material with which to work and to which they can add.

General David Petraeus was, of course, deeply involved in the creation of the Field Manual. His intelligence and erudition shows through the pages, justifying his reputation as the thinking person's warrior. Those who take the time to read the Field Manual will not only be impressed with the General's ability to formulate an argument. They will also be heartened by the fact that he has been chosen to put his arguments into practice. The results, thus far, give strong cause for hope.

Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 4:58am on Sep. 23, 2007 Book Review--Diplomacy

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

Henry Kissinger's defense of Realpolitik and his effort to reconcile Realpolitik with the Wilsonian tradition that has been triumphant in America (in rhetoric more than in works) is a serious, comprehensive, engaging and brilliant contribution to the field of international relations studies. It was written over a decade ago and yet remains quite relevant in its discussion of the evolution of foreign policy and its outlook for the nature of American diplomacy.

Kissinger's sympathies--naturally--lay with the practitioners of Realpolitik. Whether discussing the diplomatic approach of Theodore Roosevelt on the American side, or the work of Cardinal Richelieu, Metternich, Bismarck and Disraeli on the European side, the former Secretary of State barely restrains his respect and admiration for those who have a clear, cold-eyed view of the ebb and flow of international events. On the European side, Bismarck is clearly portrayed as the paramount practitioner of diplomacy but Richelieu is given great credit for having pioneered the use and implementation of raision d'état in enhancing French influence. Specifically, Kissinger is full of praise that a Cardinal of the Catholic Church would ally himself--and France--with Ottoman Turks in order to counter the spread and influence of the very Catholic Holy Roman Empire. This sublimation of doctrinal affinity with the Holy Roman Empire and a similar sublimation of doctrinal differences with the Ottoman Turks--all in the defense of French interests--plainly captures Kissinger's admiration.

Of America, Kissinger writes with apparent regret that Theodore Roosevelt's own brand of Realpolitik was rejected in favor of Wilsonian interventionism. To be sure, Kissinger accepts that America is a Wilsonian country and understands that American Presidents must pay at least a form of rhetorical homage to Wilsonianism in explaining their own foreign policy goals. At the same time, Kissinger reserves his highest praise for American Presidents who understood and implemented Roosevelt's foreign policy vision and platform. Including, of course, Roosevelt, this included Richard Nixon (naturally) and Ronald Reagan, who Kissinger praises for having had the ability to blend the practice of Rooseveltian Realpolitik with the rhetoric of Wilsonianism in discussing America's status as an exceptional country. To be sure, Reagan believed what he said and he deserves praise for his beliefs. What caught Kissinger's attention and admiration, however, was just how much the practice of a Reaganesque foreign policy owed to Realpolitik. Kissinger is right to praise Reagan on this score; the 40th President's foreign policy was never restricted to the Wilsonian rhetoric just about any President mouthes while in office. Quite the contrary; Reaganism lent itself to the crafting and implementation of a highly sophisticated foreign policy, one that would have seemed familiar in many ways to Richelieu, Metternich, Bismarck and Disraeli. No, the United States will never go fully towards the side of Realpolitik. But Reagan did more than any other President to blend the rhetoric of Wilsonian idealism with the hard-edged policies of (Theodore) Rooseveltianism.

It should be noted, of course that it is entirely within Kissinger's own self-interest that he closely identify himself with--and praise--a President like Reagan who put the decisive boot into a decaying communist empire. One might therefore doubt his praise as a result. But the manner in which Kissinger marshals his arguments in favor of Reaganism on the foreign policy stage appears to demonstrate that his praise is indeed genuine. Additionally, it should be noted that Kissinger traces the effort to blend Realpolitk with Wilsonian idealism back to Richard Nixon (who actually kept a picture of Woodrow Wilson in the Oval Office) and that he praises the other Roosevelt for having skillfully and masterfully guided America towards a position of involvement in World War II when every American instinct was to remain isolationist.

For foreign policy aficionados like me, Diplomacy is a godsend of a book. Written in a clear, engaging and brilliant fashion, it is a tremendous contribution to the field. Its description of seminal events in the conduct of international diplomacy is as welcome as it is gripping. Students of international relations will find much to admire in its treatment and analysis of historical events and those who want to understand where America and the world are headed will do well to get this book. Very highly recommended.

Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 4:56am on Sep. 23, 2007 Book Review--Alexis de Tocqueville: A Life

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

Having read Democracy in America earlier this year, I was, of course, anxious to read Hugh Brogan's biography of Tocqueville. I am relatively impressed. Brogan is an engaging writer with an obviously strong command of the details of Tocqueville's life. His relation of Tocquevillean correspondence between his friends and his wife helps open new vistas into the mind and soul of the man responsible for perhaps the greatest work on democratic government's effects on America. Brogan's book certainly carries with it tremendous value in considering and studying Tocqueville's life and we should consider ourselves grateful that he wrote it.

Having written the above, I am nevertheless disturbed by some of Brogan's contentions regarding the writing of Democracy in America, contentions that have been discussed by others who have taken note of Brogan's book.

Read on . . .

Comments (1) / Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 6:28am on Sep. 15, 2007 "The Inklings"

By Pejman Yousefzadeh

Stuart Buck wishes that he could have been a fly on the wall. So do I.

Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »