Within Reason: A Life of Spinoza

Rating:
Summary: More of a Novel Than a Biography
Review: Margaret Gullan-Whur is a victim of bad timing. A Spinoza scholar, she released her book around the same time as Steven Nadler's excellent biography of Spinoza. Spinoza poses large problems for any biographer, for the vast majority of his life was "lived" in the public sphere. Letters from friends and intimates were destroyed. Whereas Nadler presents a straightforward biography heavy on philosophical analysis, Gullan-Whur, by contrast, attempts a psycho-biography of Spinoza, attempting to fill in the gaps in his life with speculation concerning his philosophical works, particularly the "Ethics." She tries to tie in the philosophical chapters, especially those on sexual desire, with speculation about Spinoza's life.

At times, when solid facts are there, her speculation is strong . . . but at other times, we are led down the road of fantasy, as in her specualtions on pp. 142-43 of a homosexual relationship between Spinoza and a Dutch student. And having made the speculation, she wonders what we are to think of it before wavering as to its veracity concerning Spinoza, citing a recent Dutch novel about Spinoza being homosexual. How can we be sure when she admits she isn't even sure. Who is the biographer here and who is the reader?

When dealing in the world of facts, Gullan-Whur is strong, evincing a strong, imaginative writing style. The first two chapters of her book are a joy to read. However, when dealing with the restrictions of biography, she comes off a distant second to Nadler. It would have been far better, given her fluid, imaginative writing style, to have penned a philosophical novel about the life of Spinoza. There she could have speculated to her heart's content.

Rating:
Summary: Spinoza within context
Review: Margaret Gullan-Whur's biography of Spinoza does a fairly good job of placing Spinoza's work within a philosophical, social, and historic context. The connections between the works of Hobbes and Descartes and Spinoza show intellectual reaction and continuity. The connections and associations between Spinoza's work and the Dutch Reform Church and the Jewish community in Amsterdamn seem logically constructed and documented. The potential influence of the rise of the de Witt brothers and their assassination also was also thoughtfully developed. I needed this background of Dutch protestantism, the rise of the Dutch republic, and the philosophical forefathers to better place Spinoza's thought. It is interesting that he and Rembrandt were contemporaries and yet there is no evidence that either knew of the works of the other. The final chapters where Gullan-Whur records the commentaries of Goethe, George Elliott, George Santayana, Bertrand Russell, and David Hume to the work of
Spinoza further places his work in context from the perspective of later centuries.

Bertrand Russell's quotation: "The noblest and most lovable of the great philosophers. Intellectually some others have surpassed him, but ethically he is supreme. As a natural
consequence he was considered, during his lifetme and for a century after his death, a man of appalling wickedness."

This observation by Russell is fully illustrated throughout the book as Spinoza struggles to express his philosophy while staying under the 'radar" of the repressive cultural and religious forces of his day.

A quotation by Hegel: "The allegations of those who accuse Spinoza of atheism are the direct opposite of the truth; with him there is too much God." is also fully illustrated by the exploration of Spinoza's philosophy that is integrated into the biography.

Rating:
Summary: Poor style, pre-conceived ideas and no insight
Review: Nothing invalidates an historical study more than the imposition of modern values on earlier times. Such an approach misleads the reader and misrepresents the subject. No amount of footnoting and references can redeem a book that applies this century's "political correctness" to attitudes of three hundred years ago. This work is a classic case of the faults of an "a priori" approach to history and philosophy. Gullan-Whur is self-deluded, confused both about Spinoza's life and his thinking, and sadly lacking in historical sense. Gullan-Whur's book makes meagre contribution to the recent studies of Spinoza's life and philosophy.

The chronological narrative would be a redeeming feature of this book, except that Spinoza's wanderings defy detailed analysis. This isn't Gullan-Whur's fault, but her struggles to locate him physically are on a par with her comprehension of his philosophy. Spinoza, in line with many thinkers of his day, adopted various nom de plumes in his dealings with others. A Jew of Portuguese ancestry living in the Dutch Republic made communication difficult. Gullan-Whur traces his attempts to learn Dutch, Latin, and even a smattering of English. Latin, however, remained the international language. This situation meant that in a given day several languages might be needed according to circumstances. Gullan-Whur blithely ignores this aspect of language and applies one of his various identities according to when and where she's describing his activities. Her variations in Spinoza's names are compounded by her exasperating habit of referring to many of his contemporaries by their given names.

Within a dozen pages, Gullan-Whur launches into a diatribe on the condition of women in the 17th Century Dutch Republic. A short comment would be understandable, but she returns to this theme throughout the book. At one point she accuses Spinoza of being both "arrogant" and "misogynist". As a final thrust, she entertains the notion that Spinoza's solitary life indicates a propensity to homosexuality. As final point, she abhors his affection for pipe smoking.

Gullan-Whur's attempt to deal with Spinoza's philosophy is little short of catastrophic. She trolls his writings to substantiate her pre-conceived notions. Using the material like a condiment, she sprinkles quotations from his writings throughout the text. These must be constantly referenced in the Notes to determine the source. The validity of the statements she attributes to him must be assumed. In most cases she imputes the citation to some early period in his life, implying that all his ideas were fixed at an early age. Development of ideas is apparently alien to her. The result is a goulash which the reader must reverse-engineer to derive some logical progression of thought. Given the breadth of Spinoza's ideas, her approach invalidates much of his thinking. This book has no place in early Enlightenment studies. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

Rating:
Summary: Poor style, pre-conceived ideas and no insight
Review: Nothing invalidates an historical study more than the imposition of modern values on earlier times. Such an approach misleads the reader and misrepresents the subject. No amount of footnoting and references can redeem a book that applies this century's "political correctness" to attitudes of three hundred years ago. This work is a classic case of the faults of an "a priori" approach to history and philosophy. Gullan-Whur is self-deluded, confused both about Spinoza's life and his thinking, and sadly lacking in historical sense. Gullan-Whur's book makes meagre contribution to the recent studies of Spinoza's life and philosophy.

The chronological narrative would be a redeeming feature of this book, except that Spinoza's wanderings defy detailed analysis. This isn't Gullan-Whur's fault, but her struggles to locate him physically are on a par with her comprehension of his philosophy. Spinoza, in line with many thinkers of his day, adopted various nom de plumes in his dealings with others. A Jew of Portuguese ancestry living in the Dutch Republic made communication difficult. Gullan-Whur traces his attempts to learn Dutch, Latin, and even a smattering of English. Latin, however, remained the international language. This situation meant that in a given day several languages might be needed according to circumstances. Gullan-Whur blithely ignores this aspect of language and applies one of his various identities according to when and where she's describing his activities. Her variations in Spinoza's names are compounded by her exasperating habit of referring to many of his contemporaries by their given names.

Within a dozen pages, Gullan-Whur launches into a diatribe on the condition of women in the 17th Century Dutch Republic. A short comment would be understandable, but she returns to this theme throughout the book. At one point she accuses Spinoza of being both "arrogant" and "misogynist". As a final thrust, she entertains the notion that Spinoza's solitary life indicates a propensity to homosexuality. As final point, she abhors his affection for pipe smoking.

Gullan-Whur's attempt to deal with Spinoza's philosophy is little short of catastrophic. She trolls his writings to substantiate her pre-conceived notions. Using the material like a condiment, she sprinkles quotations from his writings throughout the text. These must be constantly referenced in the Notes to determine the source. The validity of the statements she attributes to him must be assumed. In most cases she imputes the citation to some early period in his life, implying that all his ideas were fixed at an early age. Development of ideas is apparently alien to her. The result is a goulash which the reader must reverse-engineer to derive some logical progression of thought. Given the breadth of Spinoza's ideas, her approach invalidates much of his thinking. This book has no place in early Enlightenment studies. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

Rating:
Summary: Nice try, no cigar.
Review: Poor Margaret Gullan-Whur. Clearly, she worked on this biography of Spinoza for some years, even going to the trouble of teaching herself Dutch to research the seventeenth-century Jewish philosopher's life. And then, just as it's finally published, Cambridge University Press brings out Stephen Nadler's *Spinoza: A Life*, a book that in its dispassionate tone, its even-handed treatment of potentially scandalous subjects, and in its deep and thoughtful treatment of Spinoza's Jewish milieu, puts *Within Reason* very deeply into the shadows. It's hard to write about a philosopher who died over 300 years ago, and left almost nothing in the way of scandals or love letters. Gullan-Whur compensates by inventing a homoerotic relationship between Spinoza and a Dutch student (along the way showing her complete ignorance of the reams of scholarly work done in recent years on issues of Renaissance sexuality); by teasing out at great length the issues involved in Spinoza's "excommunication" by the Amsterdam synagogue (along the way showing her complete ignorance of Judaism in general--the "oral law" is NOT, repeat NOT, to be confused with the kaballah); and by generally wearing on her sleeve her manifest dislike for Spinoza as a person. The only thing that saves the book is its fairly lively writing, and some vivid pictures of seventeenth-century Amsterdam. Otherwise, it's a historical novel. Read Nadler, if you want to know anything about the philosopher Spinoza. If you want to learn about Margaret Gullan-Whur, read this.