Rewarding but flawed - Rated 
I picked this book up having been recommended the authors previous effort "Straw Dogs" by a college. Though I haven't read straw dogs, I was attracted by the discussion of Utopia.
The book is well written and most of the central ideas of Utopia, Religious Apocalyptic History and political ideals are communicated well. The author takes time to develop his ideas and provides well drawn examples supporting his interpretation. In particular, his discussion on the USA's use of "facts" in certain ways to justify means is very interesting and entertaining. In addition to this, the book is enjoyable in that regardless of whether or not you agree with the authors conclusions, he is certainly not overly dogmatic.
For me, what stood out was the books willingness to engage with the reader and get them to think. It is a book that asks many questions, more than it answers and really got me thinking about how to interpret history. For me, though the factual / historical focus of the earlier chapters was hugely entertaining, the final chapter was probably the most engaging. While I disagreed with certain aspects of it, that the author took the time to make conclusions that actually derived from his discussion, rather than simply being a restatement of what he thought, was particularly interesting and rewarding.
My criticism of the book would be that some liberties with interpretation are given. The author is prone to oversimplifying ideas for the sake of expediency and on one or two occasions this seemed to me to be slightly misleading. For example, one of his descriptions of Aristotle's thought is far too reductive to do justice to Aristotle's thought. However, I understand that this was for obvious reasons concerning the flow of the book.
All in all, a very entertaining and thought provoking read which takes time and effort to engage the reader, and I would heartily recommend it to anyone with an interest interested in the world and our interpretation of it.
DD
Difficult, but gripping. - Rated
I found this book extremely interesting although sometimes it was quite heavy going. The book looks at how the idea of a perfect world/state developed as an unachievable ideal, and how the attempts to realise it in later times have caused so much suffering and pain in the world but have achieved so little. Whether communism, Nazism or the current American Christian model of a world of democratic capitalist nations all attempts to remodel the world have ended in disaster.
This utopian thinking has a resonance for all of us, I think. It's easy to believe we can reach a state of perfection in our personal or professional lives where we will be happy and live in harmony, but our very natures make this impossible. We are always reaching for something - it's human nature - utopia for ourselves and for society as a whole is unachievable and we would do better to take a more pragmatic approach to the world's problems.
The other thing I got from this book was the idea that human beings are not rational creatures, nor are we going to become so in the future. We will always fight, compete, envy and believe in things we cannot possibly know. That is what it is to be human. Most of the decisions/beliefs of most of the people of the world are made and held because of emotion, belief, culture and the influence of others; not through rational analysis. There is no point attempting to develop conceptions of a better world that do not take this into account at their very core.
On the down side, this book was heavy going at times, and a little too focused on the recent Iraq war later on in the book. However, I'd certainly recommend it.
A forceful analysis of modern politics - Rated
John Gray's central thesis is that both liberal and neoconservative politics are flawed because they think forms of democracy are both attractive and historically inevitable.And in this they have merely taken on the mantle of religion,with democracy a secular version of the dream of utopia or heaven.Such simplicity and certainty is dangerous and not unlike commununism and fascism. Well-written and well-argued, I found myself agreeing with much of what Gray says. What stopped me giving him five stars was some carelessness here and there:a certain amount of repetition and the fact that in one chapter he says that there were no concentration camps in Russia, while saying the exact opposite in another. But these are really small gripes. The analysis of Blair's stance on Iraq is particularly good.
|
