Description of the World -
Part 47
Ernest Gellner, Plough,
Sword and Book: the Structure of Human History (This ambitious book
appeared in the late 80s, but I think of it as belonging to a somewhat earlier
period, perhaps because I haven’t heard Gellner’s name mentioned much recently
or because Gellner’s particular brand of grand sociological synthesis seems a
bit dated. Trying to figure out what happened in history is also a
preoccupation of mine, of course, so I’m not complaining about the general
program. What altitude you chose to fly when you take your panoramic picture,
matters a great deal, however, though there may not be a single best choice. I
once suggested to some grad students the following exercise: write a one
sentence, a one paragraph, a one page, and a ten page history of the human race
and then decide which view was the most illuminating. Everybody thought that
was an interesting idea, but nobody actually did it. Well, I did write a
one-page history of mankind once, though I don’t know where I put it. I do
remember my one sentence summary: History is the struggle between elites over
who who gets to exploit the others. Of course putting things that way is mostly
just an expression of annoyance. It’s rather like Gellner’s tic of calling the
powerful of the Earth thugs, which he does quite often. Looking over my
marginalia, I find myself thinking that Gellner’s view of the development of
human thought if not human society is surprisingly like Comte’s, which may
simply reflect the extent to which Comte was simply right, much as we’d like to
hope for something more exiting.)
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy
in America (I don’t know if it is possible to read a book that has been
read as often and as badly as this one. I gave up trying long ago. I didn’t
happen upon one phrase in the book that demonstrates that the author’s view of
the country is perhaps a bit dated: “…the people are therefore the real
directing power.”)
George Pernoud and Sabine
Flaissier, The French Revolution (This is actually an anthology of
eye-witness accounts. It tends to focus on sensational events, which tends to
leave the reader with the impression that the Revolution was all about the
Terror. Because other accounts are similarly structured, I suspect most people
have a foreshortened view of what happened. The Bastille fell on July 14, 1789.
The terror didn’t begin until September of 1783, a full four years later, the
equivalent or the full term of an American presidency.)
Iris Origo, The
Merchant of Prado: Francesco di Marco Datini 1335-1410 (Dantini was a
self-made man who left behind an enormous volume of letters and other records.
The book makes an excellent counterpart to Peter Brown’s Eye of the Needle. Brown
wrote about how the early Christians dealt with the contradiction between the
radical critique of wealth found in the New Testament with the need to
incorporate the rich into the church. Origo wrote about how that same
resolution or perpetual lack of resolution took place in an individual
merchant.)
Paul Fussell, Wartime
(Fusell’s book on the first war, The Great War and Modern Memory is a
much better known work, and when I think of Fussell I recall an essay he
published about Hiroshima, which was not so much an argument in favor of the
rightness of dropping the bomb as an avowal of how obvious the decision seemed
to him back in ’45 when he was recovering from war wounds and faced with his
comrades the prospect of yet more war in a different theater. As a some time
copy editor, i’ve recast many thousands of sentences from the passive to the
active voice, sometimes more out of the custom and usage of my trade than any serious
reason, indeed, in technical writing the passive is more natural than the
active because engineers and scientists are more concerned with what objects
than subjects. Fussell reconstructs one edit of this sort that did matter. When
Eisenhower composed the message he would sent in case the Normandy invasion
failed, he originally wrote “Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have
failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and the troops have been withdrawn.’ He
changed that to “I have withdrawn the troops” before he stuck the paper in his
pocket. Fussell was a literary critic by trade, an expert on prosody in fact,
but he was interested in the ethics of forms, not formalism.)
Pius II, Commentaries,
Volume 2 (Before he became Pope in 1458, Pius II started out as the
humanist Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini. I’ve got the first volume of these memoirs
around here some place. He called them Commentaries in analogy with Caesar’s
works, which neither man called histories because they are too unadorned and
straightforward to deserve a title reserved for the more artful efforts of
genuine historians. Of course it’s the very fact that Pius didn’t strive for
elegant effects that makes his account of his life readable to us—he certainly
knew how to pile on the rhetoric. This volume, which is mostly about the
frustrations of trying to rally the Italians, Germans, and French against the
Turkish menace was less entertaining than the first, which includes a memorable
account of what it’s like to get elected Pope.)
J. Eric S. Thompson, Maya
Hieroglyphic Writing, 3rd edition (This tome is a monument to an
influential error. Thompson was the great mavin of Mayan studies for many
years, but his belief that Mayan hieroglyphs symbolized ideas instead of words
in the Mayan language held back the decipherment of the script for decades. The
same seductive error retarded efforts to read Egyptian hieroglyphics. Thompson
was rather like a later-day Athanasius Kircher on this score, though his work
was less fantastic, and he did manage to decode the calendar signs. The
physicist Richard Feynman played a minor but genuine role in getting past
Thompson’s mistake, a fact duly noted in Feynman’s official obituary and
perhaps included because the obituary writer was familiar with the Thompson book,
indeed with this very copy, and had been inspired by it into reading up on the
subject.)
No comments:
Post a Comment