<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: A Scholarly and Tightly Woven Study
Review: "The Great Melody" by Conor Cruise O'Brien is not your traditional biography; there is little here concerning Burke's personal and family life. Instead, the work concentrates on Burke's political career and thought and, specifically, how they relate to his Irish heritage. The result is a fascinating look into the mind and personality of a man who suffered from a conflict of emotions over his Irish heritage that included his father's conversion to Protestantism while his mother and wife remained Catholic. Burke himself was torn in different directions his entire life; loyalty to Britain and also his Irish ancestors and friends suffering under the Penal Laws, loyalty to the British constitution, but also a deep feeling for the need of justice for the oppressed people at home and abroad.O'Bien's book takes an in-depth look at Burke's career in parliament and as a member of the Whig party through an extensive analysis of his letters, speeches, political relationships, and writings, specifically, as they relate to his struggle on behalf of the American colonists, the struggle of the Irish Catholics, the people of India suffering at the hands of the rapacious East India Co., and the French Revolution. The work can be a little dry at times and tends to quote in an overly lengthy manner, but the immense erudition and scholarship and the insightful picture of Burke that emerges more than compensate for this. I do wish, however, that O'Brien had spent more time on "Reflections On The Revolution in France," but he feels that since it is so readily available to the reader there is no need. Finally we see an Edmund Burke as he really was and not the "old reactionary" that is so often depicted. We come to understand that Burke always believed that "the people are the true legislator," that Burke did not want to see Americans in Parliament who were slave holders, that he was a life-long opponent of increased powers for the Crown and the corruption such power entailed, that he was one of the few who consistently fought against injustice toward the American colonials, that he found all authoritaianism abhorrent, and that he opposed commercial monopolies and the abuse of power in all its forms. But, because he opposed the overturning of society and its reengineering on the basis of "metaphysical abstractions," he was often portrayed as a reactionary by later pundits. Lewis Namier and his followers are particularly taken to task by O'Brien for this tendency. In the end we see a Burke who always supported basic human rights, but remained constantly aware that real life circumstances must make social and political change possible if such change is not to lead to chaos and violence. Burke's fear of radicalism based upon abstract theory was real and the destructiveness of the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, and the Nazi bio-racial religion more than sufficiently proves his point. A reading of O'Brien's fine book can only lead the intelligent reader to a renewed respect for a great man, a decent and liberal minded man, and a man of immense vision.
Rating:
Summary: An excellent biography, highly readable, and bold in thesis.
Review: An excellent biography, highly readable, a bold and ultimately persuasive thesis - that Burke was not only a major political thinker but that he shaped much of the late 18th century. From a fascinating introduction showing how modern scholars had successfully destroyed and obscured Burke's true legacy to its brilliant organizing principle (a line from Yeats), this is a great book. This book should be required reading for every senator, congressman, and presidential candidate - if only to improve the level of discourse by reading Burke's great speeches. Yeats' lines on Burke: "American colonies, Ireland, France, and India/ Harried, and Burke's great melody against it." O'Brien shows how much one great man can do against tyranny, and how little. The book falls short on two counts: one, inadequate bios of Rockingham, Fox, Portland, Pitt the Younger, and his relation to Sam Johnson and Joshua Reynolds. Two, Burke the man does not walk these pages as Johnson does Boswell's book. True, O'Brien has organized the book around Yeats' lines, but the domestic Burke, the friend of Johnson and Reynolds could have been amplified. These are minor faults. This biography is excellent in so many ways that it compares very favorably with Boswell's Johnson and indeed excels it on many fronts.
Rating:
Summary: Burke is more than a few famous quotes
Review: Everyone knows Edmund Burke's most famous quote: "for evil to triumph, it is only necessary for good men to do nothing". As a former lecturer in political science, I was mainly familiar with Burke as the founder of Anglo-conservatism (infinitely more nuanced and modern than his equivalent in Franco-conservatism, the Count Joseph de Maistre). I had also read an early work, namely "An Enquiry into the nature of the Beautiful and the Sublime", which I thought a brilliant little jewel. But there's much more about Burke than that. O'Brien, the great man of Irish diplomacy, shows in this extraordinary book that Burke, whom recently history has shown as a fawning servant to the political leaders of his time (Rockingham and Pitt), was at the heart of the great fight between George III's royal absolutism and the emerging English democracy. Burke was on the right side of virtually all the fights he picked. He advocated equality before the law for the Irish subjects of the king, first tolerance and then freedom for the American colonies, the end of the colonialist abuses of the East India company, and a quarantine on the infectious ideas of the French Revolution. The later one is still a contentious affair. Zhou En Lai famously opined that it was still too early (in the 1970s) to judge the French Revolution. Burke would have had none of that. As early as 1790, in the "benign" initial phase of the revolution, he foresaw the Terror, the execution of the Royal Family, the Consulate and the Empire, and the French banner covering all of the Europe, in the name of "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity". O'Brien shows the extraordinary situation of an Irish Protestant (always accused of crypto-Catholicism) having great informal influence on the politics of Great Britain, while holding menial offices or representing various "rotten boroughs" in Parliament (this is no aspersion on Burke's memory- that's how politics was done at the time, and anything that gave Burke a pulpit couldn't have been all bad). The "Great Melody" of the title provides the underlying themes around which O'Brien organizes the public part of Burke's life. Far from tiresome, this is a useful device that provides unity and coherence to Burke's thoughts and actions. O'Brien's attacks on mid-century historiography are perfectly adequate, given that much of what was written as that period was designed to regress Burke into irrelevancy, as a sycophant and a lackey. He never was that. He was a good and a great man, and O'Brien does him justice in his book. Perhaps the only fault that I could find in it is a tendency to assume the reader's prior knowledge of the arcanes of Irish history. But these are quibbles. If you can stomach a history of ideas, full of events and studded with memorable characters, this is the book for you.
Rating:
Summary: A Scholarly and Tightly Woven Study
Review: Everyone knows Edmund Burke's most famous quote: "for evil to triumph, it is only necessary for good men to do nothing". As a former lecturer in political science, I was mainly familiar with Burke as the founder of Anglo-conservatism (infinitely more nuanced and modern than his equivalent in Franco-conservatism, the Count Joseph de Maistre). I had also read an early work, namely "An Enquiry into the nature of the Beautiful and the Sublime", which I thought a brilliant little jewel. But there's much more about Burke than that. O'Brien, the great man of Irish diplomacy, shows in this extraordinary book that Burke, whom recently history has shown as a fawning servant to the political leaders of his time (Rockingham and Pitt), was at the heart of the great fight between George III's royal absolutism and the emerging English democracy. Burke was on the right side of virtually all the fights he picked. He advocated equality before the law for the Irish subjects of the king, first tolerance and then freedom for the American colonies, the end of the colonialist abuses of the East India company, and a quarantine on the infectious ideas of the French Revolution. The later one is still a contentious affair. Zhou En Lai famously opined that it was still too early (in the 1970s) to judge the French Revolution. Burke would have had none of that. As early as 1790, in the "benign" initial phase of the revolution, he foresaw the Terror, the execution of the Royal Family, the Consulate and the Empire, and the French banner covering all of the Europe, in the name of "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity". O'Brien shows the extraordinary situation of an Irish Protestant (always accused of crypto-Catholicism) having great informal influence on the politics of Great Britain, while holding menial offices or representing various "rotten boroughs" in Parliament (this is no aspersion on Burke's memory- that's how politics was done at the time, and anything that gave Burke a pulpit couldn't have been all bad). The "Great Melody" of the title provides the underlying themes around which O'Brien organizes the public part of Burke's life. Far from tiresome, this is a useful device that provides unity and coherence to Burke's thoughts and actions. O'Brien's attacks on mid-century historiography are perfectly adequate, given that much of what was written as that period was designed to regress Burke into irrelevancy, as a sycophant and a lackey. He never was that. He was a good and a great man, and O'Brien does him justice in his book. Perhaps the only fault that I could find in it is a tendency to assume the reader's prior knowledge of the arcanes of Irish history. But these are quibbles. If you can stomach a history of ideas, full of events and studded with memorable characters, this is the book for you.
Rating:
Summary: Masterful Weaving of Political History and Theory
Review: Mr. Cruise O'Brien has let it be know that for the duration of
the preparation of this book he rose daily at 5.00am to carry
out his task. Would that he had spent a few more pre-dawn hours
editing before this volume saw the light of day!
The book is an insightful exposition of the thoughts of
Edmund Burke as gleaned from his public pronouncements. It is
an entertaining guide for the general reader to the major
international political events of Burke's era - the American
and French revolutions and their effects on the evolution of
the British Empire and British Parliamentary democracy.
Unfortunately the reader must wade through the cross currents
of the various subthemes which the author has dispersed
loosely through the text. While the book primarily deals with
Burke and his times, there are apparently random,swingeing
attacks on a school of Twentieth Century historians who have
sought to reappraise Burke in a manner with which the author
disagrees. Also littered through the volume are
repeated explanations of the books main title - a quotation
from W.B.Yeats, and the author's interpretation of Yeats's
words. Surely these two elements are best relagated to
footnote,appendix or preface if, indeed , they merit inclusion
at all. The eruption of these subthemes through the text is
at first merely an irritation, but ultimately distracts from the
thrust of the book.
Mr. Cruise O'Brien's most notable achievement is to
re-interpret Burke's motivations throughout his public life
in the light of research and inference into his Irish
origins. Indeed the preface's rather startling claim to
make wide use of inference where documentation does not exist
is, in this readers view, amply justified in the body of the
text. Burke's concern for Ireland, his vehement opposition
to authoritarianism, his belief in respecting the differences
between different societies and nations within the British
Empire are cast into vivid relief by the author's detailing
of Burke's ancestry and upbringing in Ireland.
The book's other main argument - essentially that Burke
was the motive force behind the major enlightened international
policies pursued by the British Parliament in the period 1765 to
1794, remains, in this readers estimation, unproven. This
period saw major policies implemented in America, India
and Ireland and two declarations of war against France.
Undoubtedly Burke's logic was formidable, his oratory
persuasive and in relation to the French Revolution his
predictions were indeed clairvoyant. However Mr. Cruise
O'Brien's thesis is that Burke single handedly moulded a
body of up to ninety MPs into a force which forced a halt
to the American War, brought an authoritarian King to the verge
of abdication, forced fundamental reappraisal of governance
of Ireland and India and that Burke finally smashed this force over
differences in relation to the impact of the French Revolution.
That these major events took place is a matter of record,
that Burke's penetrating analysis laid a basis for these
policies is in no doubt. However the book's contention that
Burke influenced and manipulated the nominal leaders of this
Parlimentary faction and virtually scripted and rehearsed
their every move over a period of twenty momentous years
is a leap which seems unsupported by the evidence. Closer
to the truth, I feel, is a quote from William Pitt, acidly
commenting on Burke " I return Burke's
letter, which is like other rhapsodies from the same pen,
in which there is much to admire and nothing to agree with".
Burke's eloquence,his certitude and inflexibility once
decided on a topic, made him a feared Parliamentary
opponent but also something of a mixed blessing as an ally
especially in the complex and compromising athmosphere of
Eighteenth Century British Parliamentary politics.
The book's major failure as a biography is its inability of
bring Burke to life as a human being. The author breathes life
into Burke's recorded words, shows the development of his ideas
and shows the passion and diligence which Burke displayed when
engaged on a cause. However save for occasional flashes
and inferences - Burke's despondant reaction to the premature
death of his son, the guilt complex inferred due to the
apostacy of his father - the Burke described in the text is the
Burke of the great speeches. Mr Cruise O'Brien mentions that
Burke destroyed a great deal of his private papers, however
contemporary accounts written by family,friends and opponents
are occasionally quoted in the book, more use could have been
made of these sources. There is an inadequate portrayal of
Burke's political benefactors - Rockingham, Fox, Portland
and Fitzwilliam, all emerge as a pastiche of two dimensional
characters whose chief purpose would appear to have been to act
as channels for Burke's intentions.
The book's attack on the reinterpretation of Burke's role
is both petulant and distracting. The main target of the
author's attention is Sir Lewis Namier, Mr. Cruise O'Brien's
disagreement with Namier's views is obvious Unfortunatley the
author is not content to allow his views to stand in refutation
of Namier and his school,Mr. Cruise O'Brien attempts to show
Namier to have malicious intent, to deliberately minimize Burke
at every turn, to have been selective in the presentation of facts
and economical with historical truth. This reader counted fourteen
separate attacks on Namier in the main body of the text, the preface
is peptic in its anti-Namierite fury and the thematic index
entry on "Namierism" is cross-referenced to an entry entitled
"Malevolance"! Such a diatribe clutters and confuses the
narrative and must rate as over-indulgence on the author's part.
An editor who had purged the main text of this material and
consigned it to an appendix would have done a service to both
the reader and the author.
Similiar irritation can be expressed with the authors
repeated justification and explanation of the book's
title. Each of Burke's main speeches are analyzed as to
whether it fits into the pattern called 'The Great Melody' by
Yeats. The quotation of two line except from Yeats
is mentioned on eight separate occasions through the volume.
The selection of the book's title, replete with Irish literary
and historical resonance, is a clever conceit. Mentioned
once, as a preface, it is to the author's credit and reader's
delight, however, on ponderous repetition, the reader yearns
for effective pruning.
In summary Mr. Cruise O'Brien's work is a useful
reintroduction to Burke, it contains valuable new inference
into his motivations. It fails to bring out a 'flesh and
blood' representation of the subject,and it over-emphasizes
Burke's role in the implementation of the policies of which
he was a champion. The text is enriched by the author's
judicious quotation of Burke's magnificent speeches and
pamphlets, however the work as a whole is badly served by
the author's over-indulgent communion with Yeats and
disparagement of his academic contemporarie
Rating: 
Summary: Burke the Cold War Liberal
Review: There is much in O'Brien's book that is interesting, original and insightful. But it suffers from two fatal flaws, one stylistic/structural, one substantive: (1) It is a mess. It is part personal biography, part intellectual biography, part annotated anthology, all mixed together in a confusing and unsatisfactory hodge-podge that may have been deliberate, given Burke's (and therefore O'Brien's) aversion to systems and abstraction. It is as if the author set out with a firm intention to portray Burke a certain way, collected up all the relevant facts, but just couldn't pull it all together in the end. It reads like a work-in-progress, several drafts short of completion and in dire need of a good editor; (2) It seriously overstates its case, and is therefore simply not reliable as an account of Burke's thought. O'Brien's Burke is a pluralist liberal, one of the "good guys" not to be classed among the "reactionaries", as Isaiah Berlin has done. But as Berlin points out--with far too much courtly politeness--in his exchange with O'Brien (reproduced in the appendix), the author has simply turned a blind eye to those aspects of his subject that make him appear illiberal. Most liberals at the time supported the French Revolution, at least in its early phase, and with good reason: it destroyed a confused mass of privilege, injustice and corruption that served the interests of a largely hereditary elite, which Burke vigorously defended. Most liberals since have supported it too. Few (if any) liberals today would hesitate to condemn someone who defended tradition, hereditary privilege and deference to authority as Burke did. To say that Burke was a liberal just doesn't wash. Granted he had SOME liberal tendencies, but he had many other tendencies that liberals have always found repugnant. It is a crude and one-sided portrait. O'Brien subscribes to the old-fashioned Cold War liberalism of Jacob Talmon, who interpreted the struggle between liberal democracy and "totalitarianism" in the 20th Century as a replay of the struggle between liberalism constitutionalism and the Terror. O'Brien's agenda in this book is to accept this dubious and anachronistic framework and to place Burke firmly on the "correct" side in it, with a demonic Rousseau on the other. THE GREAT MELODY was probably out-of-date before O'Brien wrote a word of it, just as much of Burke was when it appeared in the eighteenth century.
<< 1 >>
|
