Rating: 
Summary: definitely a discussion enhancer among students of all ages
Review: I first read "the 100" in snippets to pass the time while employed at the Thunderbird bookstore and restaurant at the Barnyard in carmel,ca.in 1987. I knew on my third or fourth read that I had to have this book. I have probably read this book and or referencedn it in some very delightful conversations with friends as well as family. Our 4 children, 18,15,11,9 have all found occasion to brainstorm on the rankings, and of course no one ever agrees on the rankings or the influence. I loaned this book to an acquaintance who loved to quote benjamin disraeli and buckminster fuller, I haven't seen the book since--which is ok, because a book that can spark that much discussion in such a positive manner or encourage us to seek more info deserves its own place on a 100 most influential....thanks Mr. Hart.
Rating: 
Summary: Perfect gift for a bright graduate with global interests
Review: Great compilation -- easy reading, interesting perspectives
Rating:
Summary: I can't agree with all his rankings, but I can't put it down
Review: Whenever someone tries to rank the most influencial people of all time, there will be some controversy. I was surprised at some omissions, like Abraham and Da Vinci, as well as some of his rankings of major scientists over major political and religious leaders(Newton over Jesus and Buddha), but Hart was able to almost convince me why Newton was more important than Jesus. In only 4-7 pages a person, Hart gave all the essential information and more. My only quibble about this book is the lack of importance he gives to Jewish religious leaders like David, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, none of whom are ranked, while Christian and Islamic leaders who were equally important to the spread of their respective religions were ranked througout the list. Still a must read before the close of the millenium
Rating:
Summary: One of the most marvelous books i have ever read
Review: I got a chance to read Micheal Hart's book last year. His criteria of ranking is awesome, as he hasn't favoured anyone because of personal liking or disliking. However, at very few places the reader feels that a favour is being given to the person he is reading about. I think that Mr. Hart's Book is on the whole very excellent and worth reading, but being a science student I would have never placed Einstein at #8. He was the man who gave a lot more contribution than Newton in the field of science. He changed the direction of the world of physics through an angle of 180 degrees. SO he should be placed in the first five people. It's is also being noticed that Jesus Christ was given third place in the ranking. It might be hard to swallow for a lot of christians, but I guess it is the fact. Mohammed(PBUH) really brought a change in a better way. He completed his religion in his own life, and muslims follow their religion in a better way. I would advice u guys to read this book, it's really worth reading. take care Ahmed
Rating:
Summary: Excellent, thoughtful, honest and totally inspiring.
Review: Michael Hart is an objective, well researched author who has done his homework on this book. A must in every household.
Rating:
Summary: Some thoughts on why Jesus was not ranked #1
Review: For those Christian fantasizers who have become disappointed by the ranking of Jesus at #3, had you studied history objectively, you'd realize that he deserves an even lower ranking. The #3 spot is a rather generous ranking. It was not Jesus who was influential with regards to the spread of Christianity. It was St. Paul, Constantine, the brutal European colonialists that forced others to become Christian that "influenced" others. To say that Jesus was the influence is a demonstration of one's utter stupdity and ignorance. I'd recommend reading John Dominic Crossan's recent book, THE BIRTH OF CHRISTIANITY, to outline this fact.
Rating:
Summary: extremely valuable
Review: As a primer in leadership and turning ideas into reality, this book is matchless. Offering succinct biographical sketches and a synopsis of each person's impact on their generation and those to come, it is an excellent reference work.
Rating: 
Summary: Diverting but dispensible history book
Review: Hart's "100" uses poor historical method, contains many factual errors, and the ranking is generally unconvincing. It is by no means a scholarly historical work. However, it doesn't claim to be. The fact that it attempts to rank the 100 most influential people in history begs discussion, as the reviewer who believes that Steven Spielberg should be on the list in lieu of St. Augustine illustrates. The slew of top 100 lists that have come out in the last few years, such as the AFI Movie list, the top books of the 20th century, and "The 100", are useful catalysts for discussion, but should not be regarded as replacements for film and literary critism, or good history.
Rating:
Summary: Great Book
Review: My on-line review was given for the more latter version of this book and can be found there. I would just like to disagree with the "history major" and agree with the person who criticizes the critics. It is the history major who is biased. Jesus would never had become famous if it were not for the major contributor to the bible, who never met him, as Hart states. We all have our opinions, but as a scientist I would have ranked Isaac Newton number one (instead of two). If not for his discoveries there would be no technology, no medicine, no modern times. But this is not what made the book a good read, but rather the mini-biographies that were contained therein. Religous bias seems to drive the "history major". Keep studying.
Rating:
Summary: The 100 is stimulating, and is great conversational fodder.
Review: In reading the other reviews, I tend to believe the critical comments to be too harsh, and based upon personal bias. I agree more with the review which provided the insight that the book's primary value is in the biographies. Ranking is in the eye of the beholder, and can be argued from many different perspectives. Hart rightfully presents his perspective because it's his book. When his critic's write their book, they can present their perspective. I read the book prior to Reagan's inclusion, but can imagine why he was ultimately included, notwithstanding by personal bias against the man. I believe the die had been cast for the disolution of the Soviet Union long before Reagan's "Star Wars". Reagan's biggest contribution was a negative one, primarily economic. Deregulating the Savings and Loans while still providing federal insurance, has directly increased the national debt of the United States by over a trillion dollars. Whether or not the effects of this colosal blunder were global is open to conjecture. Between Star Wars and Savings and Loans, Mr. Reagan certainly had a huge impact on the American public if not world economics. But that's only my opinion and takes nothing away from Hart's excellent book, the latest edition of which I am ordering from Amazon.com :~).
|
