More Pages: Hardy Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66


Includes summaries of some long conversations
A fabulous collection of essays
hedgehog and foxNever have the readers of the New York Times been more humbled and mystified than the November day in 1997 when the paper ran a front page obituary for the Latvian-born British philosopher Isaiah Berlin. You could hear the collective gasp and feel the pull of the intake of breath as thousands of folks who pride themselves on being "in the know" turned to one another and asked, across a table laid with grapefruit halves and bran cereal,, "Was I supposed to know who Isaiah Berlin was? I've never heard of him." The answer is that there was no real reason most of us would have heard of him, though we'd likely read a couple of his book reviews. He was after all a philosopher who never produced a magnum opus summarizing his worldview. His reputation really rested on a couple of amusing anecdotes, one oft-cited essay, The Hedgehog and the Fox, and on his talents as a conversationalist, which would obviously only have been known to an elite few. Oddly enough, he has experienced a significant revival of interest since his death, but he is basically still just known for this essay.
If, like me, you finally forced yourself to read War and Peace and were simply mystified by several of the historic and battle scenes, this essay is a godsend. Though many critics, and would would assume almost all readers, have tended to just ignore these sections of the book, Berlin examines them in light of Tolstoy's philosophy of history and makes a compelling case that Tolstoy intended the action of these scenes to be confusing. As Berlin uses the fox and hedgehog analogy, a hedgehog is an author who has a unified vision which he follows in his writing ("...a single, universal, organising principle in terms of which alone all that they are and say has significance...") , a fox has no central vision nor organizing principle; his writings are varied, even contradictory. Berlin argues that Tolstoy was a fox who wanted to be a hedgehog, that he longed for a central idea to organize around, but so distrusted the capacity of human reason to discern such an idea, that he ended up knocking down what he saw as faulty ideas, without ever settling on one of his own.
According to Berlin, in War and Peace, Tolstoy used the chaotic swirl of events to dispel a "great illusion" : "that individuals can, by the use of their own resources, understand and control the course of events." Or as he puts it later, Tolstoy perceived a "central tragedy" of human life :
...if only men would learn how little the cleverest and most gifted among them can control, how little they can know of all the multitude of factors the orderly movement of which is the history of the world...
This idea is strikingly similar to the argument that F. A. Hayek made almost a century later in his great book The Road to Serfdom, though Hayek made it in opposition to centralized government planning. Tolstoy's earlier development of this theme makes him a pivotal figure in the critique of reason and a much more significant figure than I'd ever realized in the history of conservative thought.
I'd liked War and Peace more than I expected to when I first read it--despite not grasping what he was about in these sections of the book--and I'm quite anxious to reread it now in light of Berlin's really enlightening analysis. I've no idea how to judge the rest of Berlin's work or how he ranks as a philosopher, but you can't ask more of literary criticism than that it explain murky bits, that it engender or rekindle interest in an otherwise musty-seeming work, and that it take a potentially dated book and make us realize that it is still relevant. This essay succeeds on all those levels. In this instance at least, Isaiah Berlin warrants his hefty reputation.
GRADE : A+


Must Read For Laughs
I think Douglas Adams has come back to life!I'll be watching for future releases from Steve Kelly, hope he lives for awhile and doesn't die of liver disorder.
I Hope You're Nuts

A great book chosen at random...read it!!
A wonderfully romantic story.
The best Love Saga Ever!!

Down to earth story
Required reading for a cutting edge
A Great Read

Wonderful!
Solid bio on the most elusive of Laurel & HardyA key reason, as John McCabe's solid bio points out, is that Babe wanted it that way. He deferred all creative decisions and most press inquries to Stan. In a sense, McCabe faced a Herculean task: he wanted to write a bio about a comedian etched firmly in world film culture, yet actual sources of information (Hardy died August 6, 1957) were few. Could it be done?
Yes. Babe etches out Hardy's life. And we learn a few fascinating tidbits along the way: how throughout his life he always cringed at jokes about his weight (his weight always bothered him) but went along for the laughs (Jackie Gleason reportedly had the same attitude); how he developed his fuss-budget film-personna quirks from a relative; how he viewed himself more as an actor (or reactor) than a comedian; how his love for music pervaded his life (he does sing in some of his films). And a LOT more. The book also gives fascinating details about his sad final year where he lost a lot of weight and his health went into a downward tailspin.
This is a solid book that also recounts some of the team's best shorts, features, and details their famous tour of England. And McCabe JUST pulls off his feat. His source material on Hardy is largely culled from interviews with Stan Laurel and Hardy's last wife, Lucille. If there is a complaint it's that this is still not as well fleshed out as a typical show biz bio where more sources and information were available -- but there is enough detail to make this a solid book that'll delight Laurel & Hardy fans, show biz bio fans, and students of comedy of all ages. Babe would be pleased.
Babe: The life of Oliver Hardy

This is the best Hardy Boys book that I've ever read!
I thought the book was exciting! There was a lot of action.
This book was AWSOME.

A thought-provoking and comforting book
A Lovely Gift
Wonderful

A Passionate guide for would be rose growers.
Hardy Roses earns its space on my bookshelf!
The best book on growing hardy roses in cold climates.

Cool Book!
It was totally awesome!
Nancy and the Hardys are stuckin the wilderness with killers

The narrative genius of HardyThe central tragic figure is Eustacia Vye, a young woman who has come to live on Egdon Heath with her cantankerous grandfather. Despising the dreariness of the heath and generally secluding herself from the local populace, she is somewhat of an outsider and not well liked by some in the community. She was in love with Damon Wildeve, a former engineer who now owns an inn and is not too happy about it; but their affair has since cooled and Wildeve has turned his attention to a girl named Thomasin Yeobright. Wildeve and Thomasin's wedding is aborted when the marriage license turns out to be invalid, and Thomasin, running home to her aunt in shame and anger, is caught on the rebound by Diggory Venn, her long-time admirer. A word about Venn's profession is in order: He is a "reddleman," who, not unlike the ice cream man in the summertime, rides around the heath in a van selling a strange product that shades its vendor most memorably.
Completing the quintet is Thomasin's cousin Clym Yeobright, an Egdon Heath native who is returning permanently after living for some time in Paris as a diamond merchant. Destiny eventually unites Clym and Eustacia in love, but Clym's mother does not approve of the union; she doesn't like Eustacia, and she fears their being married would prevent or discourage Clym from returning to his lucrative career in Paris. They get married anyway, as do Wildeve and Thomasin on a second try, leaving Venn as the fifth wheel but still not out of the running.
The catalyst for the tragedy of the novel involves an attempted reconciliation between Clym's mother and Eustacia, which results in the kind of ugly situation that could be cleared up by simple explanations and apologies but instead is exacerbated by normal circumstances. On top of this, Wildeve realizes he still loves Eustacia and is willing to help her in any course of action, no matter how lacking in judgment, that she thinks is an appropriate response to her plight.
This novel swells with Hardy's typical narrative genius, but no less impressive than the plot, the characters, the dialogue, and the prose, is the barren but hauntingly beautiful setting of Egdon Heath. Like the famous Casterbridge of his later novel, it is a world unto itself, defined by its own peculiar topography and populated by denizens who, with their own special jargon, customs, and folklore, act as a sort of Greek chorus towards the drama of the principal characters, commenting on events with humor and gravity. The heathmen and women don't much mind the hardships of life; they're the kind of people that will joyfully dance around their bonfires on the barrows even without musical accompaniment.
Read it again!Eustacia Vye is a magnificent heroine, and her power, ardor and ultimate destiny as perhaps in excess of the more common neighbors is intense and pagan and unforgettable. The heath is a pre-christian place, remote not only from civilization but from all that is ordinary. In a small country, with massive social rules, the heath is alive and in posession of a soul. They keep the ancient traditions of festivals and bonfires, the people even speak their own language. The book has enhanced battles with the elements that seem to be offended and punishing ill-fated love. No one who reads this book will forget the red man, seeming to be a favorite of those pagan gods.
This is a romance that is eternal. Read it again, or read it with an inner openness and it will repay your time and soul.
'A face on which time leaves little impression'Hardy's characterisation is highly realistic in that the boundaries between 'good' and 'bad' characters are somewhat fluid. He also explores the idea of the 'fatal flaw' and how people inevitably destroy themselves and those they hold most dear. If you're looking for a 'feel-good' novel this is not the one to go for but if you enjoy enjoy novels like Wuthering Heights and Tess of the Durbervilles then place your order now...
"His distrust of unworldly attitudes, absolute principles divorced from empirical observation, is fanatically strong - almost romantic in its violence; the vision of the great prince playing upon human beings like an instrument intoxicates him. He assumes that different societies must always be at war with each other, since they have differing purposes. He sees history as an endless process of cut-throat competition, . . ." (p. 318).
The index is great, and even has an entry for "Pasternak, Boris Leonidovich . . . conversation with Stalin." Pasternak wanted to talk to Stalin, but the question which Stalin put to Pasternak, "whether he was present when a lampoon about himself, Stalin, was recited by Mandel'shtam" (p. 533) was not what Pasternak wanted to talk about. Pasternak wanted to talk to Stalin "about ultimate issues, about life and death." (p. 534). After Stalin put down the receiver, "Pasternak tried to ring back but, not surprisingly, failed to get through to the leader." (p. 534). Stalin had been quick to decide where that conversation was going, and cut it short by observing, "If I were Mandel'shtam's friend, I should have known better how to defend him." (p. 534). It is not obvious that Stalin would have appreciated a defense which asserted that the poem about Stalin was more true than anything else that Pasternak had ever seen, read, or heard, and any decent country would have comedians that would constantly broadcast such ideas on the radio 24/7 until the invention of TV would allow people to watch movies like "Forrest Gump" in the comfort of their own homes. Stalin has been rightly condemned for being hopelessly authoritarian when judging humor that was aimed at his sorry self, and Isaiah Berlin sees the pattern as one that Russia was particularly prone to suffer indefinitely. "Whatever the differences between the old and the new Russia, suspicion and persecution of writers and artists were common to both." (p. 537).
Berlin's account of his conversations with Anna Akhmatova strive to reflect what culture means for people who actively create work like Heine's comment, "I may not deserve to be remembered as a poet, but surely as a soldier in the battle for human freedom." (p. 537). We are now such a comic society on a global level that pop mock rap on the internet can pick on the soldier's mentality in a hilarious way, but it is good to be able to read Isaiah Berlin to account for how much such humor matters.