Book Description

A new kind of war requires a new kind of war story. This scorching, devastatingly honest memoir is a first-of-its-kind confession of love, friendship, and betrayal of ideals from civilians who volunteered to be on the front lines.

In the early 1990s, three young people attracted to UN peacekeeping for very different reasons cross paths in Cambodia. Heidi, a new York social worker on the run from a marriage gone bust, is looking for an adventure. Andrew is a young doctor seeking to save lives. Ken is fresh from Harvard Law and full of idealism.

The UN organizes Cambodia's first democratic elections, and Phnom Penh is the scene of wild parties, as the international community celebrates the end of the Cold War. There the three become friends for life.

Propelled by success in Cambodia, the US and UN sponsor peacekeeping missions to Somalia, Haiti, and Bosnia. Ken and Heidi find themselves together in Somalia. They dance on their rooftop to Jimi Hendrix while helicopters buzz overhead so close they feel the heat of the exhaust. "You're listening to 99.9 FM Mogadishu—Rockin' the Dish," American Armed Forces Radio announces, "Keep your head down and the volume up."

But after the infamous Black Hawk Down incident when eighteen US Army Rangers were killed in a firefight with Somali militias, a chain reaction of violence breaks loose. As the trio's missions unravel, their bond tightens. Andrew is sent to Haiti, to Bosnia, and then Rwanda where he finds Ken, investigating the mass grave of genocide. Heidi's journey is unforgettable—a rare woman in a man's world of conflict and war.

The three friends' voices mingle to paint an indelible picture—suffused with tenderness and unexpected humor—of life, love, and death in the world's most dangerous places. By day they struggle to bring order out of chaos; by night they use revelry, sex, each other—desperate measures from faith to flesh and everything in between—to find a human connection in a terrifying world. Graphic, lyrical, and astonishingly urgent, Emergency Sex and Other Desperate Measures is a celebration of the strength of the human spirit—and of the gritty power of friendship to keep you alive. ... Read more

Reviews (28)

Never made it to Mogadishu but always wanted to go?
This book is a gripping read--an alternately fun and horrifying, sexy and perverse look at what it means to be a UN Peacekeeper. If you're someone who is intrigued by war zones but self-protecting enough to keep yourself out of them, these three authors take you there. The story is one giant adventure, related with mirth, honesty, and a healthy dose of humility. I love the authors for not foisting a political agenda, for being honest about their missteps, their passions, and the persistent question of whether it's redemptive or even worthwhile to stick three fingers in the dyke of global poverty and oppression. I found it more illuminating--and far more engaging--than any policy-oriented or historical rendering of the conflicts in Cambodia, Haiti, Somalia and Bosnia.

Read this book, and learn about the UN and Clinton
I read a lot of press about this book before it came out. How the UN was not to thrilled about it. But the UN isn't the only one who should have been upset, Bill Clinton and his foreign policy team should have been worried as well. This book is a ground up look at the result of UN and Clinton era foreign policy decisions and mistakes.

The book is about three people trying to do the right thing. A lawyer who decides not to become another shark but lends his skills to monitor elections, a doctor who tries to help people who really need help, and a young woman who gave up the easy life to give back. I really felt for the three authors and am glad they tried to make positive contributions.

Much has been said about the parties, sex, and drug use talked about by the authors while on their UN missions. This is interesting stuff and interesting to read. But again, this is small stuff compared to the books overall and first hand look at the results of Clinton policy and UN policy weakness.

Anyone who favors an increased role of the UN in American foreign policy decisions needs to read this book.

I highly recommend this book

Gripping!
I'm typically the guy who gets half or two-thirds of the way through a book and then forgets about it.

This one, I was done with in two days. It's tough not to put it down. The stories make you feel like you lived through the slaughters they witnessed.

Granted, these folks aren't authors, so the flow seems more conversational than illustrative; however, their words make you read page after page!

timeless
To spend much time to review this book will give it more credit than it deserves....No, I am not a UN employee or a UN lover....
Just an average American who feels life is more important than
wasting it on a book by some United Nations cry babies.

Isn't it odd. . .
. . . that there are both incredibly positive and incredibly negative reviews here? Kinda extreme. And all the very, very negative reviews are unspecific, oddly angry. They really sorta seem like they were written by one person over and over again. Take a look. Same language. Same statements. ("I can't figure out why it was written!" is in, like, five different reviews.) Is that you, kofi, trying to tank this sucker 'cause you're pissed? Does amazon even check that s**t or can one freaked out UN guy make ten reviews under different names?

Anyway, I haven't even read this yet. Think I'll buy it tomorrow. I'm interested. Just wanted to point that out. Ignore my three stars. ... Read more

Book Description

In a powerful and deeply personal memoir in the tradition of Arthur Koestler’s The God That Failed, David Brock, the original right-wing scandal reporter, chronicles his rise to the pinnacle of the conservative movement and his painful break with it.

David Brock pilloried Anita Hill in a bestseller. His reporting in The American Spectator as part of the infamous “Arkansas Project” triggered the course of events that led to the historic impeachment trial of President Clinton. Brock was at the center of the right-wing dirty tricks operation of the Gingrich era–and a true believer–until he could no longer deny that the political force he was advancing was built on little more than lies, hate, and hypocrisy.

In Blinded By the Right, Brock, who came out of the closet at the height of his conservative renown, tells his riveting story from the beginning, giving us the first insider’s view of what Hillary Rodham Clinton called “the vast right-wing conspiracy.” Whether dealing with the right-wing press, the richly endowed think tanks, Republican political operatives, or the Paula Jones case, Brock names names from Clarence Thomas on down, uncovers hidden links, and demonstrates how the Republican Right’s zeal for power created the poisonous political climate that culminated in George W. Bush’s election.

Now in paperback and with a new afterword by the author, Blinded By the Right is a classic political memoir of our times. ... Read more

Reviews (340)

The Truth Will Set You Free. The Reader or the Writer?
Blinded by the Right is in some ways a remarkable book. In other ways, it is a frustrating tale of self-centeredness and greed -- the author's. Brock is a fine writer. He is informed and clearly intelligent. In Blinded, Brock provides a first-person account of the tactics employed by the conservative Republican extreme throughout the 1990's in their effort to "spread their message" and exert the considerable power of their money and influence.

The book is frightening in that political games are laid bare and the conservative Republicans look pretty reprehensible in the process. While there are just as many - perhaps more -- similar books on the opposite spectrum of politics, Brock's stands out because it is so strongly autobiographical and he was so much a part of the propaganda machine as a reporter for the American Spectator during the 90's. He wrote many of the stories that caught our attention in the news media. David Brock was one of the party's key delivery boys!

Even more frightening is the fact that David Brock was a soul-less chameleon who served as a political puppet for many years. While some folks are motivated to advocate positions because of deep personal conviction, David Brock was a shallow, selfish man, essentially interested in only one cause - himself. Brock essentially proved he was willing to be anything he needed to be and to go to any lengths to advance his own standing, inflate his own ego, make himself more money, and promote his own notoriety.

I can't say that I leave Blinded by the Right with much sympathy for David Brock. While Brock has obviously gone through some form of personal transformation in writing this book about his own dishonesty, he actually got quite a bit out of his personal prostitution over the years as one of the key party messenger boys. If he believes it was he that was used, I would urge another look. Even after his "breakthrough" there still seems to be disingenuousness to Brock's desire to "come clean" and his personal ego looms large throughout the book - even after his supposed "wake-up" call.

I'm not really very convinced that Brock has actually changed his agenda very much through all of his soul searching. So much of the undertone of Blinded by the Right seems to sound a discordant note that "the world somehow should revolve around David Brock". Sadly, he still seems to lack very much conviction or commitment to anything other than to himself.

While I enjoyed reading Brock's account of some of the zealotry that drove a wedge through American politics all through the 90's, I can't help but finish the book hoping that David Brock himself finds something to believe in that is worthy of his intelligence and giftedness. A man at middle age who doesn't have any personal conviction, regard for others, or much to believe in that is larger than oneself, quite frankly, isn't very impressive.

Daniel J. Maloney
Saint Paul, Minnesota

GOP = Gated Only Please
David Brock's "Blinded by the Right" gives an insider's view of what's being done "behind the curtain" by a veritable phalanx of "neo-conservative" societies, foundations, think tanks, newspapers, publishers, et al. Well written, the book is quite entertaining in a chilling "Star Chamber" sort of way. One must wonder how the underlying attitudes of misogyny, racism, and elitist classism would play if presented openly as the one and only "patriotic" American Way. Trouble is, the underlying philosophies (and the policies they promote) negate and/or corrupt nearly everything my twenty years in the American lit classroom spoke of and to. As for rational, meaningful debate in any election cycle, post Bork, -- forget about it.

Politics from here to Armageddon in this media-drenched culture will be a loud and insulting Limbaugh-Springer carnival, relying mainly on smears and character assassination. It will be this way because the hugely wealthy echelon that funds it will accept no less than their entitlement to the lion's share. Curiously, McVeigh could be the overarching poster boy for this version of a home rule, anti-DC, WASP-only vision of a grand "Gated Community of America." Such is the toxicity poisoning the executive branch.

Compassionate conservatism...sure thing.

A Kafkaesque Hate Trip
This book gets five stars for the list of names it drops, and I get five for actually making it to the last page without vomiting once. Brock gives us a guided tour of the hate matrix from the top down. Bizarre freaks like Rupert Murdoch, Sun Moon, and Richard Scaife bleed influence and money into a rat maze crowded with legions of hungry rodents thoroughly purged of principal and hungry to feed. And feed they do, on everything from the self-esteem of a 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton, to the tentative and twisted lies and fantasies of a bunch of power junkies, gold diggers, hillbillies, sociopaths, and miscreants, all floundering around together like pigs in a sty.

Brock and his buddies attended the delivery of the current Rosemary's Baby of a presidential administration that we currently cower under in a state of near-perpetual fear and utter victimhood. He appears to repent as it twitches away in its black cradle, but his confessions and regrets are little more than weak platitudes, and the author's core personal defects are neither explored nor resolved here in any meaningful way. At the bitter end, I was left with a haunting feeling that endures. The book is billed as an autobiography, but the interior world of its author is either heavily guarded or nonexistent. Who is this guy, and who abducted his soul? Certainly not the Berkeley anarchists who angered him, or his neocon professor friends who mentored him - no comic book activists or university faculty could ever warp a smart guy like this to such an extreme. Don't crack this book expecting anything but solid concrete - it's nothing more than a running diary describing who he screwed, how hard he screwed 'em, and his resulting ample compensation. That's what you get, but you get a LOT - perhaps more than you can take. Occasionally Brock describes his motivations with blubbering, intelligence-insulting rationale: "I wanted status. I wanted love and acceptance." After a while these shallow reflective utterances taper down to a predictable drone as he plods through detailed descriptions of year after unrelenting year of his own original and continuous journalistic atrocities.

Liberals wonder why they do not possess a frankenstein-meets-godzilla kind of media monster that might lumber forth to confront the fascist hate regime fueled by minds like the one floating around inside Brock's head. Read this book and you might gain some insight into the problem, but only by its very LACK of a real explanation. Maybe it has something to do with personality type. Brock's is a perfect fit for the extreme right - vain, superficial, materialistic, opportunistic, sex-confused - his every paragraph is an act of servile, self-conscious spite dedicated to advancing his puppetmasters' agenda. There's no way the left can compete with this stuff - David Brock's work makes Michael Moore's look like empirical science by comparison.

Actually, it's not even ironic that Brock could come out of the closet and still survive within the hard right on nothing more than his skills in the art of character assassination and slander. To me, there's no irony in even the very thought of this book, and this idea kind of scares me, and it leads straight to the conclusion that Brock is an incorrigible operator, a hard-core narcissist with a Huey Lewis soundtrack bubbling away endlessly in the shallow murk of his own semi-conscious mind. At the end of the day, David Brock was never really 'blinded by the right'; he was already blind before he ever enlisted his services. This book doesn't describe how that happened. Read at your own risk, serve up a short dose of pity, and pray that you and your offspring will never turn out like David Brock.

Needs More on the Ladies!
If you need to know, Brock tells how disgusting the right wing is. Reagan put a happy face, unity, and some civility on it all, but when Daddy left, the "kids" started to lose it. Gingrich and so many others could throw bombs, but couldn't lead. Nope. Brock found himself fronting and digging dirt for this wingnut crowd, after (understandably) shying from and countering ultra-PC lefties in college. So Brock went Reagan's direction in formative years, like so many others his age. And then... well, Brock tells the story best... and I can't think of a more encompassing history of 1990's politics. The story is dark, and if you're too alert you'll keep questioning Brock's initial motives for the book, and how he spins his tales in his book. (Especially after Bill Clinton's performances - with fingers to chest -, this reader is cynical toward apologies). But, if you lay back and give Brock the benefit of doubt (at least until you finish the book), it's a good read about 90's right-wing politics, tactics, $$$$, careerism, "friendships" of convenience, and hypocrisy, not in that particular order. When I finished the book (which is hard to do -- just keep plowing through it; the info and perspective *is worth it*) I actually felt for Brock (and I don't *think* I'm a bleeding heart :-). Brock's arc and inside perspective are wholly unique. Is this book a new Whittaker Chambers' (who left the communists and spoke up) "Witness" for the *left*? A little, maybe?

Anyway, I'm pretty conservative, and learned a lot. Brock's is a hard book to get through, but I'll never view the 90's (Newt, Clinton, all media) the same again. Oh yeah, back to my review title: Brock tells of his relationships with right-wing queens Arianna Huffington, Laura Ingraham, and Ann Coulter. More details next time! Do they like to play quarters? Caps?! Keggers or wine boxes?

A good read...
A great perspective on two decades of American history. Engrossing and powerful. ... Read more

Book Description

"Enthralling . . . As fascinating as any novel and more so than most." The New York Times Book Review
The Pulitzer Prize-Winning Bestseller by the author of DREADNOUGHT.
Against the monumental canvas of seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Europe and Russia unfolds the magnificent story of Peter the Great, one of the most extraordinary rulers in history. Impetuous and stubborn, generous and cruel, tender and unforgiving, a man of enormous energy and complexity, Peter the Great is brought fully to life in this exceptional biography.
... Read more

Reviews (71)

A brilliantly written biography
Massie has written THE definitive biography on Russia's most influential and important Czar, Peter I. The story of his life reads like fiction, although it is all true: escaping a palace revolt as a child, learning several trades in order to better understand the work, traveling abroad, building a new capital for the Russian empire, modernizing the Russian army, streamlining the Russian beauracracy, expanding the Russian empire's borders, "westernizing" Russia.

This laundry list of accopmplishments and changes are highlighted by Massies lucid and vivid writing, making Peter a flesh and blood ruler - a person with passion and temper, intelligence and a sense of humor. The scholarship is first rate, adding to the strength of the book. I highly recommend it, not only as a biography or history, but as simply good writing.

Robert Massie is the "master" story-teller of historians!
My introduction to Robert Massie came when I first picked up a copy of Nicholas and Alexandra last Spring. Frankly I was expecting a serious history book-- In other words I expected it to be dry, dry, dry! What a great surprise to find I could not put it down. Having that great experience made it a no-brainer to read Peter the Great as well-- it was even better.

Massie's gift is in his ability to write history in a narrative style, identifying the nuances of each setting and character as well as the heros and antagonists, all while maintaining historical accuracy. No wonder we find that Massie's works have been converted into both film and mini-series.

His account of the succession of Peter to Regent Sophia's intrigues is heart stopping. You see directly into the private and public life of this unique Tsar who attempted to drag Russia into the modern era- The good the bad and the ugly. It is simply great stuff!

If you are interested in Russia, start out with Peter the Great and go on to Nicholas and Alexandra. These are both excellent books!

A Masterpiece and epic in it's telling
This volume is simply one of the very best, most exciting, interesting, and highly charged biographies I have read. Fortunately for me, a pending visit to Saint Petersburg provided me with the motivation to pull this twenty four-year-old 1st Edition copy from my bookshelf. Its 850 pages had seemed a daunting task no matter how many people had recommended this as a "must read". Robert Massie has created a masterpiece of story telling. Each chapter is the equivalent of a short story and compelling in it's own right. And each is presented with an introduction that places you, the reader, in context. Massie also places you both in Peter the Great's time but populates his world with many other sovereigns and characters of interesting historical note. Most notably a large part of the book is devoted to King Charles XII of Sweden. Upon completion of this wonderful book I had a much better understanding of Russia, the Baltic States history and the origins of may Russian cultural traits. Peter the Great was a massive personality who's impact was both awful for those he ruled and passed judgement on, and visionary for pushing Russia into a modern and westernized nation. Overall, the book reads like an epic Russian Novel, deep in character study, action, adventure, and compelling social observation. Massie is just an excellent writer. I highly recommend this book as others have recommended it to me.

Wish more people knew about it
This is an excellent book about one of the greatest tsars of all time. Its incredible what he has done for my country and how he almost singlehandedly brought it out of the dark ages. Since he has been a personal hero of mine since I was little this was very enjoyable. Book is very well written.

one of the great biographies
I've always been a great reader of novels, but reading this book a couple of years ago has made me into a reader of history. Massie has a grand subject -- Peter opened a long-sleeping Russia to the West, founded St. Petersburg (a beautiful city built, somewhat like Venice, basically on a body of water) and fought many wars. People must have kept great diaries back then because Massie is able to recreate events at court and battles from multiple points of view, lending the book a novelistic richness. Equally impressive, since the book is as much about Peter's times as it is about him, Massie pauses to include mini-essays about the many places and types of things that Peter the polymath was involved in. So you get a brief sketch of the Netherlands at the time, or about popular torture techniques of the day, that don't break up the overall narrative flow. It's a long book but a great read ... Read more

Book Description

A compelling autobiographical testament to the spiritual pilgrimage of a woman who, in her own words, dedicated herself "to bring[ing] about the kind of society where it is easier to be good.'' ... Read more

Reviews (10)

The Only Solution is Love
Dorothy Day is an absolutely amazing woman, and should be a true inspiration for all Catholics concerned with social justice and care of the poor. The Long Loneliness is Day's autobiography. It details her life, from her childhood until her old age. The book describes how Day's growing concern for the poor leads to a growing inspiration in Catholicism, and how the mysteries of the church deepen her love for other people in her life. Her growing faith is, as to be expected, tinged with doubt, and through this doubt the reader can truly experience Day's humanity. Different experiences, such as her pregnancy, are developed so that readers can begin to see how different moments throughout her life make a profound impact on Day's life and work. In addition to the life of Day herself, this book provides an excellent reference in terms of the beginning points of the Catholic Worker movement. The Catholic Worker has developed houses of hospitality in various cities throughout the United States (135 today), which focus on works of mercy for anyone who needs assistance. The Long Loneliness provides an overview of the history of this movement, from its beginnings as a radical Catholic newspaper, to the founding of the early Houses of Hospitality, to attempts at farming which ultimately failed. Day's autobiography paints a life of Christian love, and is an outstanding work for anyone with a concern for developing a life filled with the richness of service to others.

A Worthy Read
More than a story of the life of a great and determined woman, this book is really the story of the Catholic Worker movement. The purpose of Ms. Day's life, and the Catholic Worker movement, was to make the kind of society in which it is easier for people to be good.

To that end, Ms. Day wrote of her life. I've often heard this book compared to Merton's Seven Storey Mountain. However, it does not show the level of introspection that one finds with Thomas Merton. This autobiography does touch on the personal level when Ms. Day speaks of her faith, her love of God and what that means to her. These portions of the book are worth reading and re-reading.

Unfortunately, this is only about one quarter of the book. The remainder regards the Catholic Worker movement and Ms. Day's journey through communism, pacifism etc. In short, the book is more about utopia than it is about Ms. Day.

Nonetheless, it is far more than a drab read about the socio-economic condition of man in the 20th century. I'm very glad that I've read this book, and I will read it again no doubt.

If you have an interest in putting your faith into action, this book will inspire you. It should inspire, and for the most part it does. For that reason I recommend it.

A Classic Conversion Story
Catholic faith fascinates people. How did her spiritual life develop, and how did it influence the remainder of her life? Many wonderful authors, including but not limited to people such as William Miller, Robert Coles, and most recently Paul Elie, have written extensively about Dorothy Day and help us understand this amazing and complex woman, but nothing is more rewarding than reading the writings of Day herself.

THE LONG LONELINESS is a classic spiritual tome and is often referred to as Day's spiritual autobiography. In many ways it is similar to Thomas Merton's SEVEN STOREY MOUNTAIN, and it is easily a close second in popularity with many Catholics. Though Day's writing style is much drier than Merton's writing and her story is not quite as spellbinding as the artist and aspiring writer turned monk, the reader can sense God working powerfully in Day's life. If the book were published today, it would probably be categorized as a memoir, rather than an autobiography since day does not as much tell her story as reflect on how God called her to a life of faith.

The book is a "must read" for anyone who loves and admires Dorothy Day. It is also a book that will interest people interested in religious social activism. Yet the book may speak most powerfully to those who are on a spiritual quest themselves, either knowingly or unknowingly.

she should've stuck to being a social activist
I was required to read this book for school this summer and it was by far the worst book I have read in my life. Its only a 280 page book, but her style of writing makes it seem as if it was about a thousand. She fills the book with useless information (i.e. she writes an in depth account of a cover of a book her brother brought home one day and then wonders what it was about. That was completely pointless and failed to advance the plot at all.) Instead of sticking to the core story, which might have been interesting she rambles off about random occurences constantly.

A model
Dorothy Dayƒ­s life story is one that I hope will inspire and motivate many Christians -- many more than it already has. A full-on Bohemian in her twenties, she wrote for Socialist papers, joined strikes and picket lines, and spent her share of time in jail for protests. She was an activistƒ­s activist.
And then she met Jesus. Actually the Call of the Spirit had been upon her, or inside her, since early childhood, but it wasnƒ­t until the birth of her child that she finally acknowledged fully and became a member of the Catholic church.
I can easily identify with her problems and issues with the church -- it always seems to be on the side of the Established, the Rich and Powerful, caring not and giving not to the poor and needy, the oppressed and voiceless. Dorothy found, as too few of us have, that God heart cries out for the poor, Jesus identified himself with the oppressed and voiceless, and, as James said, true religion that God honors is looking after the widowed and the orphans in their distress.
And so, with the help, mentorship and inspiration of her friend Peter Maurin, Dorothy continued her activist ways, in the name of Christ. She started the Catholic Worker newspaper, which championed the causes of the poor and working-class. She and her friends started hospitality houses, taking in and feeding any who needed it.
Like Mother Teresaƒ­s, Dorothy Dayƒ­s story is really very simple -- she saw what there was to do, she took her Masterƒ­s words to heart, and she started doing it. Without advanced programs, grants, visioning sessions, without much of a plan at all really, she just started doing it. And she has changed the world in important ways, giving glory to God all along the way. She is a hero of the faith to me, and I hope that God will use me as He chose to use her.

Dorothy Day trained herself as a journalist, a writer, and made her living as such all of her life. This training is evident in her writing -- the book is compact, imagistic, and quick to read. The first half is fairly chronological, as she relates her life up until the point of her conversion and move to New York. After that -- basically after she meets Peter -- it becomes more topical, and the timeline more of a blur. Which was probably true of her life, so much happening and unfolding that itƒ­s hard to tell what started when and where the endings are, if there are any.

I enjoyed this book, and I learned from it -- most notably that the work of activism, of giving voice to the voiceless, is long and hard, with many defeats. But many defeats add up to slow victory, as we make progress over decades at a time. Things are better than they were in Dorothyƒ­s heyday, and we owe much of it to her and her contemporaries. We also owe a great debt to her for the life she has modeled for us -- a modern day picture of Christ among the poor, the hope of many. ... Read more

Book Description

Michael Reagan’s life is much more than just an interesting story.It is a testimony of how Christ allowed him to find healing from many of the issues that confront our culture today, such as sexual abuse, divorce, loneliness, the feeling of rejection, and the belief that God does not care about us. Michael Reagan’s first adoption gave him an identity, but he did not find his true identity until he found Christ.

In this book, Mike Reagan shows how others can meet a God who loves them, and who wants to embrace them and bring them healing, salvation, and meaning to life. ... Read more

Book Description

Karen Hughes has worked beside President George W. Bush since, as she says, "the motorcade was only one car and he was sometimes the one driving it." As counselor to the president, she brought the working mom’s perspective to the White House, often asking of President Bush’s policies, "What does this mean for the average person?"

Yet the move from Texas to Washington was hard on her family, and in a controversial, headline-making decision that reverberated across America, she chose to place family first and quit the nation’s capital to return to Austin. There, Hughes continues to advise the president, where the kitchen wall calendar marks the State of the Union message side by side with her son’s orthodontist appointments.

In this disarmingly down-to-earth, warm, often funny, and frank book, Hughes looks at her unique career in George W. Bush’s inner circle and the universal concerns of balancing work and family. Ten Minutes from Normal—the title comes from the campaign trail––is a remarkable blend of the story of a "normal" woman who rose to great heights and an insightful look at American politics and America’s forty-third president.

This is a book for the legions of women and men everywhere who are seeking new inspiration for how to remember their priorities and achieve balance in their lives. Most important, in a post-9/11 world, Hughes redefines the very notion of what is "normal" as something special and precious, never to be taken for granted in America again. ... Read more

Reviews (107)

Watch what she does ...
As you might expect from a former communications director, Karen Hughes' book "Ten minutes from Normal" is all spin. She writes with total conviction, but her observations are often at odds with the observations of other administration officials who have written books. For example, Hughes says that George Bush "asked questions that went right to the heart of the matter" and had a "laserlike ability to distill an issue to it's core." In contrast, Richard Clarke and Paul O'Neill (as told to Ron Suskind) said he was clueless and disinterested.

Hughes' choices of what to include and what to omit from the book are sometimes curious. There are only a couple of lines that obliquely hint about how her conservative mother influenced her future political leanings. She describes a pineapple dish she served at a dinner party 15 years earlier and names scores of people she's met in her career but most of us have never heard of (who cares who was in her exercise and Bible-study groups). At the same time, she mentions nothing about what most readers would consider important issues that might have been discussed by top administration officials before September 11, 2001, such as terrorism and Al-Qaeda. You'd think Condi would have mentioned it many times during her briefings at the mandatory morning Senior Staff meetings. She also doesn't say much about the 2000 election considering how unique it was in the history of the country. She mentions the process of recounting the votes (which she calls "re-creating") but says nothing about the thousands of black voters who were unfairly purged from the rolls by Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris.

There are no new revelations in the book that might be of interest to a follower of politics. Hughes says she has no knowledge of who was responsible for the smear campaign against John McCain in the South Carolina primary, or who exposed Valerie Plame, the CIA undercover agent. She does confirm that Condoleeza Rice talked to Bush after the first plane struck the twin towers but doesn't mention if the discussion involved Osama bin Laden or "My Pet Goat." She does concede that Bush needs two days to prepare for a major speech whereas Clinton would make changes right up to the minute he gave the speech.

Hughes admits she can't sing but doesn't seem to realize she also has no sense of humor. This is clear from several instances in which Hughes says people didn't "get her jokes," such as "message ADD." When she characterizes Bush's selection in the 2000 election as "a resounding 49 percent victory," you're not sure she meant it as a joke or whether she's somehow serious. Even her son Robert has this figured out in his diary inserts (the only honest and genuine parts of the book). One unintentionally amusing piece of the book is the juxtaposition of the eight and ninth pictures that show Hughes wearing the same blouse and pant suit in photos taken a year apart. Fashion aside, it's surprising how someone who is so detail oriented and careful in the selection of words didn't notice the similarities in the two pictures.

Hughes grouses because Democrats characterized Bush as inarticulate and inexperienced during the 2000 election. Then she describes how hard her staff worked to characterize Al Gore as a flip-flopper who would do anything to win the election. Later, she says the Bush administration staffs were "remarkably collegial" (obviously Rumsfeld and Powell didn't get the word). She's angry because the terrorists aren't "constrained by the facts" and because they "hate everyone who doesn't think like them." Karen, please ... look in a mirror.

This book reaffirms the old adage, "don't pay any attention to what politicians say, watch what they do." You'll get more satisfaction from reading "My Pet Goat" than "Ten Minutes from Normal."

Karen Loves Herself
I read a review that said whether or not you are a Bush person would decide if you like this book or not. Well, I am a huge supporter of the president and I have to say, this book falls short. I found it hard to swallow how highly this woman thinks of herself. I do think she was a good communications advisor to the president and I guess that is why I was expecting more. For the money, you are much better off with David Frum's The Right Man. If you can pick this up at the library, it might be worth your time, but if you are spending money, I recommend looking in another direction.

Behind the scenes at the White House
I sat next to Karen Hughes at a breakfast during the time she was working on this book, and gave her an old Lauren Bacall autobiography I had just finished, insisting that she not trouble herself with returning it to me. She did, of course. I liked her at the time, and her book only reinforces the impression. She is a very forthright and intense person, yet in a very winningly feminine way. She is also a deeply religious person, and not shy about letting you know it from time to time, but to my mind she strikes just the right balance.

She deals with several topics of wide interest here. She began as a reporter and migrated to politics, as the communications chief for George W. Bush, so the interface between government and the press is a constant theme. The whole book is also a study in women in politics, not only because of Hughes herself but because Condoleeza Rice is her good friend and probably appears more often than anyone outside Hughes's family or Bush himself. (I am thinking of the ways in which Rice and Hughes actually influence our nation's governance throughout this story, and also the issue, for Hughes, of balancing family life with an all-consuming job-not just a women's issue of course.) The style and personality of the president is another overriding theme.

There are two other themes that are important but not so continual: the 2000 presidential campaign and the events after 9/11.

I mention all of this because I think the cover might narrow one's expectations: "Karen Hughes, Counselor to the President, Wife and Mother. The Woman who left the White House to put family first, and moved back home to Texas." Yes, the family is key, but there is so much more. I might add that her government ranking was equivalent to that of a three-star general. She is no lightweight.

Here's a nugget on the hard core side: "Ironically, the reluctance of nations such as France and Germany to join us in challenging Saddam probably emboldened him [Bush] and made war more likely, not less."

More personally, she lofts a great quote from Martin Luther King: "Everyone can be great, because everyone can serve."

This is not high literature, and doesn't pretend to be, but it's an important book for anyone who would like to understand a little bit of the background of our times and see a more personal side of the current administration.

I like Karen Hughes, but this book falls short.
Karen Hughes is a role model for a lot of women trying to balance career and family. She is a genuinely good person, and this book just exudes pleasantness. I would recommend it highly for women. I think she had women in mind when writing it. She was speaking to them.

So, as a man, it was not my favorite book, but it had some very admirable points. I think it gives a great insider perspective and insight into some moments of recent importance in American history, including the 2000 campaign, the Florida recounts, and September 11, 2001.

I like Karen Hughes, but I found some of her more autobiographical passages from growing up to be somewhat boring. I could have done without those, personally. Some people will definitely enjoy them, however.

I do give her points for her candid discussion of her faith. It takes courage as a national public figure to go on record like that.

While this book didn't quite win me over, the world definitely needs more people like Karen Hughes.

Ten Minutes From Normal
An inspiring read that gives one an idea what it is like to be in the White House and next to power. The difference is Ms Hughes gives it a much more personal flavor with humorous stories and her personal philosophy. It should be a must read for " Bush Bashers" as at least they can get a first hand understanding of the character of the President rather than base their judgement on spin and often times data that lacks supportive facts. I closed the last page and thought that it was an unsual woman who could balance family, faith, friendship and still survive and be at the top of the players in the jungles of Washington. Additionally, some lagniappe is her faith that weaves through the book and gave me food for thought and the realization that we have some people of excellent character in the White House. It is an easy fun and informative read. ... Read more

Book Description

Vincent Cannato takes us back to the time when John Lindsay stunned New York with his liberal Republican agenda, WASP sensibility, and movie-star good looks. With peerless authority, Cannato explores how Lindsay Liberalism failed to save New York, and, in the opinion of many, left it worse off than it was in the mid-1960's. ... Read more

Reviews (12)

The system, not the man
An excellent book, but Cannato is too quick to criticize Lindsay without pointing out the constraints that New York and other cities are tied with. Cannato asserts that Lindsay's failings came from his personality and liberalism, but I believe they came as much from the structure of NYC's governance and from the turbulence of the 1960s than the mayor himself.

New York City is burdened with more local responsibility for programs for the poor than any other county/city. Everywhere else in the country, Medicaid is entirely federal and state, not so in New York. No where else in the country does a city have to pay 50% of non-federal Aid to Families with Dependent Children (and w/ the successor too). Most states have neutral school funding, or funding that tries to help poorer districts, not so in New York, where the formula actually aggravates existing disparities. In common with other cities, New York City is home to concentrated poverty, unlike other cities, New York is made to deal with those problems alone.

NYC's mayor is also a weak one. He has/had to share power with the Board of Estimate, borough presidents, and independent school boards. Due to there not being a machine, to win elections you must pay off public sector unions. Lindsay had not been backed by the unions, but the years of appeasement of previous mayors had made the unions the most militant in the country, there was little Lindsay could do to temper them. Chicago has its problems, but public sector strikes are not one of them.New York also is an experiment in socialism in one city.It was during Lindsay's administration that New Yorkers realized the impossibility of that dream.

With more resources, and in a calmer time, Lindsay might have been a success. In another environment Lindsay might be remembered the same way Robert Kennedy is remembered, and not as a dupe.

Should have left out the political bias
Like many other reviewers, I found this to be an engaging review of some of New York's most recent history, and was pleased to have the opportunity to reflect on that tumultuous era. However, as a Native New Yorker who lived through Mayor Lindsay's administration, I was troubled by the inaccuracies of which I personally was aware, and therefore was led to question the scholarship generally. Otherwise, I share the same problem with many other reviewers: The fact that the book could have been better if the author had left his disdain for liberal policies on the floor with other discarded parts of the first draft.

I guess the theory that Lindsay's administration was a flop would have been appreciably harder to substantiate if there had been an accurate description of the racial turmoil New York avoided due to his leadership. I vividly recall what happened in the late sixties in Newark, and Detroit, Watts and a half dozen other cities. It matters not at all what the author says (particularly when it is a repetition of the mantra that because only two were killed and twenty arrested, Lindsay was wrong to deny that this constituted a "riot").

I don't know what another reviewer means when he speaks of a New Yorks's time as a "quiet riot" That seems rather onymoronic to me. The fact remains that New York avoided the turmoil that infected too many other cities because of Lindsay himself. Thousands correctly believed that Lindsay cared enough to actually interact with people who had been ignored (save at election time) in the past gave them a sense that there may well have been an alternative to destroying the City. I guess that the facts obscured the author's political agenda.

While it is certainly "Inside Baseball", I must point out that the author (in discussing Lindsay's relationship with teachers) describes the allegedly deteriorating relationship between teachers and kids at Springfield Gardens High School. Cannato quotes a teacher saying that prior to the strikes in 1968, life was better at that school. However, as a proud student of S.G.H.S. from those very same days, I know that the school didn't have its first graduating class until that year. Since it was not open in the years before (the good old days, I guess), I must question the validity of this comparison. Makes me wonder how legitimate some of the other justifications and his other "facts" are...

I grew tired of the unnecessary characterizations of some of the other individuals who were quoted. Noted sociology professor (of N.Y.'s Queens College) Andrew Hacker could have been quoted (like others) without having his political beliefs being labeled as he was. The truth will show itself, without varnish of this hyperbole.

Practically ignoring the fact that Lindsay inherited staggering deficits from his predecessor but responded with a string of balanced budgets reflects (at least to me) that Cannato is more interested in asserting his theory of the inadequacy of the Lindsay years than the facts. Without balance, there is simply no legitimate analysis.

Given the author's admitted bias, it is inexcusable to be so critical with NO suggestion whatsoever of what policies Mayor Lindsay should have put in place rather than those he did. What would Cannato have done with students at Columbia University, surrounded by the neighborhood hostile to its expansion on one side, and young activist students on the other? Ditto the New York municipal unions, like the Police, Transit Workers, Teachers and the Sanitation Department. Does Cannato suggest that the appropriate response would have been to bring in the National Guard to run the trains or teach the children? Or, should he have immediately capitulated to the Sanitation Workers, rather than seek the Court's intervention? It is so easy to be critical now, thirty years and some appreciable prosperity later. But even with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight, we are not afforded the author's wisdom. Be nice to hear what he would have done differently, as opposed to just telling us what he thought was wrong.

The bottom line? The challenges faced by Mayor Lindsay in The Big Apple were later seen by big city and small-town mayors all across the country. It sure made it easier for some others to respond after they had the chance to see what New York had done first, and respond either by imitation or contrast. Cannato has shown that those who can do, and that some of those who cannot merely criticize.

The failure of Liberalism
John V. Lindsay was a peculiar choice for mayor of New York Cituy. A WASP with absolutely no talent for administrative detail and a xstrong sense of noblesse oblige, his politics was the politics of platitudes and bromides.

I was 12 when Lindsay was first elected in 1965 (he never received 50 percent of the votes in either of his two campaigns). On his first day on the job New Years Day 1966 he was faced with an illegal strike of transit workers. After first standing firm against them, he caved in to most of their demands (a pattern he was to display with all the municipal unions) conceding benefits to them that would help bankrupt the city a decade later.

During Lindsay's tenure we were "treated" to lectures about white racism and the plight of the poor by a man who if you were a white ethnic from the outer boroughs who worked hard and paid your taxes and obeyed the law, he had no use for you. Lindsay never was able to connect with the outer boroughs middle classes and they sensed his distance from them and as a result New York City during Lindsay's 8 years lost almost 1,000,000 residents. The streets became more and more dangerous, the subways were full of graffiti and full of fear and menace. Municipal serivices fell apart and ..."the sunny city of Breakfast at Tiffany's gave way to the sullen despair of Midnight Cowboy." To which I could ad the terror and identification that so many people felt watching the movie Death wish in 1974.

The turning point for many people was the disastrous school strike brought on by the Ocean Hill-Brownsville decentralization controversy in the Fall of 1968. Militatns using anti white and anti Semitic language tried to fire white teachers for no other reason then they were white. Before that was the horrible Columbia University student takeover. That was quickly followed by the failure to remove the snow from the borough of Queens in 1969. It was obvious that Lindsay did not have any managerial skills and although a lot of the problems would have been there even if Lindsay were not the mayor, Cannato shows that Lindsay's philosophy and management style helped exacerbate the situation.

Lindsay is often given credit for keeping the city "cool" during the 1960's urban riots throughout the USA. However Cannato points out that that is misleading. Although New York CIty did not suffer the fate of Newark, Washington D.C. and Detroit, we did have several "quiet" riots during Lindsay's mayoralty such as East Harlem, East New York and sporadic rioting after the death of Martin Luther King. Lindsay referred to tehm as "local disturbances" and a sympathetic press went along with him. Lindsay also paid off many community militants by putting them on the city payroll. Lindsay's relationship with the police department rank and fiel was already starained by the controversy of the Civilian Complaint Review Board which he supported but was opposed by the police and defeated in a referendum. He seemed not to notice that the problem wasn't brutal cops in minority neighborhoods, but not enough law enforcement in those neighborhoods. Cannato also points out the interesting fact that Lindsay the champion of urban schools and integration never set foot in a public school as a student, nor did his wife and 4 children.

Ironically Lindsay losing the Republican nomination in 1969 helped get him reeelected that year on the Liberal Party line. As in 1965, he won against two more conservative (Democrat and Republican) candidates who split up the anti Lindsay vote. By this time Lindsay had become so left wing after joining the Democratic party in 1971 that when he ran for the Democratic nomination for President in an abysmal campaign in 1972, it was to the left of George McGovern!

By the time his term ended in 1973 Lindsay was a beaten and exhausted man and had no energy or politcal capital left to try to run for a third term. Shortly after he left City Hall, New York City went bankrupt -a result of Lindsay's ruinous fiscal policies. He resurfaced briefly in 1980 in an attempt to gain the Democratic nomination for Senator but came in a poor 3rd. After that he dropped off the radar screen until his death in December 2000.

This book is a good read for New Yorkers who need to be reminded how far this city has come from the years of Lindsay, Abe Beame (the hapless Controller who succeeded Lindsay as Mayor and who was taken by surprise when the city almost went bankrupt), to the inept David Dinkins. The mayoralties of Ed Koch and the great Rudy Giuliani stand as a sharp contrast to the failed liberalism of John V. Lindsay.

A memoir of false hope
In this thorough account of the John Lindsay years, Vincent Cannato seems to have condensed a life's worth of research into the few years it took to write this book. Though Lindsay wasn't a success by anyone's imagination, there are important lessons to be learned from this story of his failure.

Cannato begins The Ungovernable City with a discussion of Lindsay's ideological moorings. Given what Lindsay became (he ran for president as a Democrat a notch to the left of George McGovern) he may have seemed like the most unlikely Republican to have lived in the last half-century. But his rationale on why is revealing: "It seemed to me... that this was the party of the individual... It's the party of Lincoln, of civil rights, the protection of the person and his liberties against a majority, even against big business or the federal bureaucracy."Lindsay would go onto to decry "antilibertarian" impulses in a way that might make today's conservative proud.In reality, Lindsay's "individualism" led him in a very different direction: a distaste for unions and the "power brokers" who were virtually sovereign over the city, an embrace of the mindless youth rebellion, with its iconic portrayal of the whimsical individual overcoming sprawling organizations, and a lukewarm commitment to law and order. Lindsay's reluctance to impose standards of civil behavior, even in the most disorderly parts of the city, degenerated into a government-assisted permissiveness where welfare recipients would not (and indeed, in the Lindsay worldview, should not) be required to work, and where (often radical) community groups would be given more control over neighborhood schools.

These policies created new political fault lines that aren't likely to be replicated ever again: a liberal Republican mayor allied with ghetto blacks and upscale Manhattanites, standing against the heavily Jewish teachers union (and labor unions in general), white ethnics in the outer boroughs, and the police.The eruptions that shook the Lindsay mayoralty were too many to count.From our own immediate perspective, perhaps the most symbolic of these confrontations took place in lower Manhattan in 1970, when blue collar hard-hats (including a contingent of constuction workers from the World Trade Center) clashed with anti-war protesters.The mayor was harshly critical of the blue collar workers in the dispute.

With the successes of the Rudy Giuliani years fresh in mind, this is an important time to read Vincent Cannato's story of good intentions gone terribly wrong. As others have noted, this is also very much a story about Giuliani, whose way of running the city contrasted sharply with John Lindsay's reliance on sentimental dogma as a substitute for sound management.One hopes that Cannato will follow up with an equally meticulous and well-researched account of the Giuliani era -- a story with a decidedly happier ending.

Enough Balance?
Cannato aptly describes the social disintegration of New York City during the 1960s and early 1970s.The forces that changed New York, were also those that forever changed Newark, NJ, Washington, DC, Detroit, MI and many other major cities.What is lacking here is some perspective on how Mayor Lindsay's programs compared to programs in other cities.It seems to me that Cannato looks back at the Lindsay years through a Guiliani lens.That is patently unfair, can you imagine what the riots would have looked like in 1968 if a Diallo incident happened then?Especially since following the Diallo incident, Giuliani was notably quiet on the incident?

John Lindsay deserves more credit than he is given here. ... Read more

Book Description

A classic of literary nonfiction, My Traitor's Heart has been acclaimed as a masterpiece by readers around the world. Rian Malan is an Afrikaner, scion of a centuries-old clan and relative of the architect of apartheid, who fled South Africa after coming face-to-face with the atrocities and terrors of an undeclared civil war between the races. This book is the searing account of his return after eight years of uneasy exile. Armed with new insight and clarity, Malan explores apartheid's legacy of hatred and suffering, bearing witness to the extensive physical and emotional damage it has caused to generations of South Africans on both sides of the color line. Plumbing the darkest recesses of the white and black South African psyches, Malan ultimately finds his way toward the light of redemption and healing. My Traitor's Heart is an astonishing book -- beautiful, horrifying, profound, and impossible to put down. ... Read more

Reviews (35)

A terrible, necessary gift to the world
My book club chose this title for our most recent discussion....All caucasian women, middle-class or thereabouts, Canadian by birth. All quite whacked into silence and deep reflection by this book. Rian Malan has bared his own heart, his own mind, his own racist ancestry and his horrific awakenings to the demonic power of apartheid. He spares us nothing in the stories he shares and I wonder how he could keep himself sane and loving as he uncovered, witnessed and experienced an evil that is almost beyond description. He asks at the book's opening, "How do I live in this strange land?" -- He doesn't have an answer to the basic question of why we humans act with such hatred to one another, but his monumental courage in laying bare the poisons of racial cruelty is a horrible and necessary medicine for all of us. This book has jarred me permanently; I am grateful for its power. I hope that Rian writes again -- this first book was originally published in 1990; I would love to read his impressions of the last decade as South Africans struggle to release themselves from the noose of apartheid. Thank you, Rian.

finding a new understanding
A refreshing account of history as told by a man examining his own fears and passions. The use of story-telling, factual events, and mythical accounts gives the reader the opportunity to think critically about the atrocities of South Africa and learn from the experience of a man you have never met but who so courageously invites us into his most private thoughts. This book reads as though this descendant of the father of apartheid is talking to you and inviting you to share your thoughts with him as well.

As a reporter and "white African" Malan is trying to resolve for himself and his fellow countrymen the issue of race. Malan talks about a war that has been going on since the earliest Dutch settlers claimed parts of Africa as their own and helps us to understand the atrocity through accounts of murders and a detailed history of the events surrounding them. Through his journey Malan begins to form an understanding he did not expect and find hereos in unexpected places.

This is an excellent read for those who are looking for a good background of the history of South Africa and a general understanding of the society today.

Disturbing
This book is an investigation into the attitudes of a liberal who was raised in South Africa. In the book, Malan tells us that his original charge was to write the history of his racist ancestors, who were among the first Boer settlers in the region. But when Malan began his project, he found he needed to first explore and develop his own perspective on race in South Africa before he could begin. And once he began doing this, he never really got around to the history project.

The book is divided into 3 sections. In the first, Malan describes his own childhood and adolescence, leading up to his forced flight from South Africa, with a major focus on his youthful love for Blacks (especially in the abstract). The second part of the book details a number of violent murders that Malan investigated upon his return to South Africa in 1986 to write this book. In this section, Malan describes the intense violence that was occurring in South Africa at the time, and how all Whites, even doctors providing humanitarian services in the townships, became targets for Black rage. He also explores violence between rival Black political groups. In the closing section, Malan visits a White woman named Creina Alcock, who lived on the border of Msanga, a tribal homeland, where she and her husband had struggled to build a sustainable rural development project with the local Blacks. The woman was widowed after her husband was killed while trying to negotiate peace talks during a tribal disturbance in Msanga.

The book doesn't have a strong narrative thread- -instead it seems that Malan was trying to communicate some of his own confusion and ambivalence about racial questions by presenting so many stories and sides of the picture, and flipping rapidly from one to the next. The loose organization is effective to some degree; the reader slowly comes to understand the enormity and complexity of South Africa's problems. Yes, many Whites provoked anger from Blacks by their abominable behavior and laws. Blacks in turn responded with violence that was so overwhelming that even those Whites who tried as hard as they could to do the right thing were in mortal danger. And the worst and most senseless violence seemed to occur in Black communities that had no White involvement at all. The entire society was so focused on violence that as one White living on a farm in a rural area told Malan "The guy with the bigger stick wins." In closing with Creina Alcock's story, Malan tries to leave us with a little hope. He argues that Alcock's and her late husband's love for their community has made a marginal difference in the social structure, despite the ongoing attacks on them and thefts of their property by children they had adopted and raised as their own, and even the murder of Alcock's husband. With the infinitesimally small improvements that the Alcocks managed to make in their community by giving their entire lives over to the project, how many millions more Alcocks would it take to turn such a country around, and where might they come from?

This is not a book about South Africa
The previous review to the contrary, this book will always be relevant as long as human beings judge other humans based on race. I just finished reading it and, as an American living in the Middle East, I faced innumerable home truths about myself and my own racist biases during the two days I was glued to it.

It is a painful read, in terms of the atrocities it depicts and the questions it asks. However, it is an essential read, though I wonder if anyone who has not lived long-term outside their own culture can truly appreciate it. It's easy to be a white liberal at home, wrapped in one's own smug assurance and safe within the majority. (And I'm speaking of myself here). Surrounded by 20 million Arabs, Malan's own journeys into Soweto strike far too close to one's heart.

On only the most superficial level is this a book about South African Apartheid. It is also about Israelis and Palestinians, Hindus and Muslims, Northern Irish and the English, the US and its every victim.

Dare I say it? A masterpiece...
It seems that everyone has an opinion about Africa and all those opinions exist somewhere on a single sliding scale. At one end is the idea that all of that continent's problems are the result of some kind of post-colonial hangover and that if it hadn't been for the Europeans, Africa would be a wealthy, progressive Utopia. On the other extreme, is the opinion that the African culture has evolved in such a way as to virtually preclude 'successful' statehood. Critics of this book tend to dislike it based on their position on that scale relative to the author's (somewhere in the middle, by the way.) Also, they sometimes use dubious facts and theories to back up their positions (e.g. Malan does indeed discuss the Afrikaner disinformation campaign designed to turn tribes/political movements against each other, and trying to determine what ethnic groups have 'first settler' rights to a given piece of dirt is virtually impossible.)

But all this is completely irrelevant. As is clearly stated in the extended title, this is the story of one man's journey though his own past and conscience. On this level, it is a triumph. It is the only book I have ever read that doesn't seem to include a single divisive word. Whether you agree with Malan's observations or not, I think it is clear that he agonized over and believed deeply in every one. Additionally, the book is beautifully written on almost every level: smooth, engaging prose, balanced structure, and unfailing pace. It is almost impossible for the reader not be affected in one way or another.

It has been asked whether this book is still relevant in light of the fall of Apartheid and the progression of S.A. in the years since its publication. Certainly, as a wonderfully crafted look into one individual's soul and his struggle to find his place in the world, it is.

But has it become outdated politically, as has been suggested? I wonder. At the writing of this review, Zimbabwe is trying hard to destroy itself in a misguided effort to deal with its colonial past. Unfortunately, My Traitor's Heart may have some life in it yet... ... Read more

Book Description

Lane-Poole's classic biography of Saladin, the chivalrous opponent of Richard the Lionheart, depicts the sultan's decisive victories during the Crusades and his ambitious creation of an Islamic empire. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

The life story of a truly unique leader
Written by the late British historian Stanley Lane-Pools (1854-1931), Saladin: All-powerful Sultan And The Uniter Of Islam is an informed and informative biography of the great warrior, statesman, and faithful believer in Islam, Salah ad-Din ibn Ayyub, more commonly known as Saladin (A.D. 1138-1193). From his early years in a Kurdish military family to the beginning of his military service at age fourteen, to his conquest of Jerusalem marked by an unprecedentedly humane treatment of the citizens within, to his belief and application of civilized justice, Saladin: All-powerful Sultan And The Uniter Of Islam is the life story of a truly unique leader who deservedly earned his legendary status both in the West as well as throughout Islam. ... Read more

Book Description

Book Description

The classic, inspiring memoir of a political dissident-a man whose fierce spirit and drive for freedom triumphed over imprisonment, solitary confinement, the Soviet Union, and Communism itself. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

ONE MAN AGAINST THE KGB
This book lends incredible insight into the life of a Russian Refusenik under the oppressive Soviet system. Sharansky's mental tricks that sustained him during his years of horrific incarceration as well as his genius and amazing memory impressed the hell out of me.

Learning how one man could take on the KGB and outsmart, outwill, and outlast them is a truly uplifting experience.

Spirit Triumphant
Sharansky's autobiography is one of the most compelling works of literature that I have read. This is literature - it made me pause to think and reflect on what he said frequently, and my copy is well-thumbed. The story is of a spiritual journey, as the young Sharansky's awareness of his Jewishness de-Sovietizes him and leads him into the Gulag - willingly, as he forknew the risks of protesting Soviet emmigration policy. His voluntary civil disobedience seperated him from his bride, Avital, physically for a decade, but the growing intensity of the spiritual forces working within and through him bonded them ever more securely. The moral courage demonstrated by one of the most celebrated of the Refusniks is evident on nearly every page. The spiritual uplift that Sharansky found came from his faith, and from reading the classics, one of the few liberties permitted him in the Gulag. (Looted libraries and personal collections left the prison system well-stocked for this purpose.) The comments on how he was encouraged by his encounter with Aristophanes, when he understood the connection between himself and a character in a 2,500 play through a joke that he finally 'got,'are among the most uplifting in the book. Sharansky recounts how that joke opened a floodgate in his mind, through which came pouring the voices of Rabelais, Cerevantes and other great classics, reminding him of his humanity and the ways of man. The climatic chapter, "The Interconnection of Souls," should be re-read many times. -Lloyd A. Conway

Great inspiration and a great lesson.
It's hard to believe that one person could morally and intellectually defeat the KGB all by himself, to preserve his identity and his integrity despite all odds. There are many lessons for our everyday life that one can learn from this book. I recommend it very highly.

A increadible tale of one man's bravery in Soviet prison
An inspiring book in which Natan Sharansky tells of his struggle against the KGB and the power of the Soviet police state. I found myself amazed at the courage that this young, physically small man exhibited when faced with the full fury of the KGB. His intellectual battles with his interogators and his remarkable stamina during hunger strikes in support of fellow prisoners are memorable. The whole book helped me to put the small struggles of life in perspective, emphasizing the importance of following ones principles, yet having in mind the small magnitude of ones problems compared to the historic ones faced by refuseniks like Mr. Sharansky. -Michael Good ... Read more

Book Description

William Orville Douglas was both the most accomplished and the most controversial justice ever to serve on the United States Supreme Court. He emerged from isolated Yakima, Washington, to be dubbed, by the age of thirty, “the most outstanding law professor in the nation”; at age thirty-eight, he was the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, cleaning up a corrupt Wall Street during the Great Depression; by the age of forty, he was the second youngest Supreme Court justice in American history, going on to serve longer—and to write more opinions and dissents—than any other justice.

In evolving from a pro-government advocate in the 1940s to an icon of liberalism in the 1960s, Douglas became a champion for the rights of privacy, free speech, and the environment. While doing so, “Wild Bill” lived up to his nickname by racking up more marriages, more divorces, and more impeachment attempts aimed against him than any other member of the Court. But it was what Douglas did not accomplish that haunted him: He never fulfilled his mother’s ambition for him to become president of the United States.

Douglas’s life was the stuff of novels, but with his eye on his public image and his potential electability to the White House, the truth was not good enough for him. Using what he called “literary license,” he wrote three memoirs in which the American public was led to believe that he had suffered from polio as an infant and was raised by an impoverished, widowed mother whose life savings were stolen by the family attorney. He further chronicled his time as a poverty-stricken student sleeping in a tent while attending Whitman College, serving
as a private in the army during World War I, and “riding the rods” like a hobo to attend Columbia Law School.

Relying on fifteen years of exhaustive research in eighty-six manuscript collections, revealing long-hidden documents, and interviews conducted with more than one hundred people, many sharing their recollections for the first time, Bruce Allen Murphy reveals the truth behind Douglas’s carefully constructed image. While William O. Douglas wrote fiction in the form of memoir, Murphy presents the truth with a narrative flair that reads like a novel. ... Read more

Reviews (13)

A Fun Read and a page turner
This book is perhaps the easiest 500+ pages I have read in some time. Mr. Murphy's insight into the life of William O. Douglas, after fifteen years (15!!!) of research is not only fascinating, but contacts a surprising amount of humor. Reading about many of Justice Douglas' exploits, I could not help but laugh, at times so hard, I had to put the book down. As a soon-to-be law student, learning about the man behind the Supreme Court decisions helped me understand those decisions in new ways. But, and I am sure this is what motivated Mr. Murphy to undertake this task, the many facets of Justice Douglas are better than any fiction one could have invented. Buy the book. I'm glad I did.

AN AMAZING AND FASCINATING BOOK!
Bruce Allen Murphy's biography of William O. Douglas is not only groundbreaking, it is a truly amazing effort. It is a surprisingly easy read--in fact I found it hard to put down. He tells us in his author's note that he spent 15 years researching this work, and his careful efforts show. He talked to people who knew Douglas well, dug through newspapers from his subject's childhood homes, went through diaries and photo albums from Douglas's friends and acquaintances, and has told us the true story of Douglas's life.

Not many of us could be as accurate about our own lives as Murphy is about Douglas's. We tend to gloss over the parts of our lives that we wish were different. Douglas, however, did more than that. He invented a life that was the way he wanted the world to see him, and made it public through his autobiographies. Murphy has discovered the person beneath the myth that Douglas had build up about himself, and explains the reasons for Douglas's tall tales. It is high time we stop thinking of our Supreme Court justices as gods on Olympus, and realized that they are just as human as the rest of us. To understand Douglas's need to make his public image different than his real life is to understand the man--not just the judge.

This book is not just a really compelling biography, however. It is a fascinating history of 20th century American politics. It reminds us of where we have been, the struggles that we have survived for equality, freedom, and the environment. It also serves as a lesson for the future. Douglas foresaw many issues that are important to us today.
Murphy's book is as brilliant as his subject was prescient. It gives us some important lessons as well as being a highly entertaining read.

MOST HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!!!!!

Incomplete portrait of a fascinating man
This book will probably stand as the definitive examination of William O. Douglas the man. Having undertaken over a decade of research, Murphy has produced an exhaustive (though not exhausting) account of Douglas' personal life, from his boyhood in eastern Washington through his early years as a lawyer, law school professor, and New Deal administrator, to his years on the Court. While the basic details have been known for nearly a quarter century, thanks to James Simon's earlier biography of the justice, Murphy provides many new details gleaned from his research in the Douglas papers (which were closed when Simon wrote his book) and his extensive interviews with people who knew the justice offer several illustrative anecdotes. The result is an important corrective to the idealized image Douglas constructed of himself in his many autobiographical accounts, recounting his womanizing, his politicking, and his terrible treatment of his staff with considerable thoroughness. Murphy's descriptions of Douglas's failed campaigns to become the Democratic nominee for president are particularly fascinating, and alone justify the price of the book.

In his effort to debunk the Douglas myths, though, the author adopts an excessively negative interpretation of the facts. Murphy claims, for example, that contrary to Douglas's assertions he did not suffer polio as a child, yet without definitive medical evidence to the contrary, such a topic can only remain an open question at best. Murphy's charge that Douglas unjustifiably inflated his time in an officer's training unit in college into army service further demonstrates Murphy's assumption of the worst from Douglas and was subsequently refuted by other scholars, who argued that Douglas' interpretation of his service was a plausible one. Such matters call Murphy's overall judgment of the justice into question, as do the open questions that his book fails to address. If Douglas was such a jerk to his secretaries and his clerks, why did they