Rating: 
Summary: Clarity!
Review: Hanson is something else. After reading Soul of Battle, and Carnage and Culture, I couldn't wait to see what Hanson had to say about 9/11. I was not dissappointed. More than anyone else, his writing has helped me to come to my senses and see clearly the war we must fight, and which we will win. Whatever our faults in the West, in the USA, we still represent the best opportunity and hope for most people of this world. We have a right, an obligation, to defend what we have, and what the USA represents. Hanson shows through history how countries who did not stay strong, who dallied when the enemy was at the gate, suffered the most. Similarly, most deaths from tyrants occurs outside the battlefield, and happens while killers and tyrants are allowed to do what they wish. Acting now will save lives in both the USA and the rest of the world. I am moved and feeling confident that right and strength, backed by compassion and morality, will see us through to the other side of this scary time. Yes, I can see now that my government is doing what has to be done, and I have confidence.
Rating: 
Summary: Sound and Fury Signfying Nothing
Review: Hanson wrote an interesting iconoclastic book about Hopelite warfare. There is nothing iconoclastic or interesting about this book. Its bigotory dressed up as scholarship. If any wanted to way Americans are hated around the world, reading this book makes you wonder why we are not more hated. The arrogance of the author is only matched by his ignorance. The idea that 9/11 can be seen as part of ancient continous struggles of the West is laugable when most people in the west would have hard time telling the difference between Pluto the dog and Plato the philopsher. His knowledge of Islam is even more flawed and owes a great deal to nineteenth century model of scholarship and repeats its limitations. It would been better if Hanson had spent some time reading more about Islam rather venting his spleen. The works of Marshal Hodgson, or Charles Tripp (for recent history of Iraq) are better at explaining political Islam than regugerating semi-racist sterotypes which say more about the author that the so called reality he is trying to describe. If this had been written by soviet author - we would condemn cheap and nasty propaganda. Good historians are those who understand the contextual nature of beliefs and values and are aware the way we look at the world is not the way the world necessarily is. Hanson, is unable to go beyond his upbringing, his prejudices, to bring a historicl dimension to the 'war against terror'. As a historian he should know, wars that begin with promises of swift victory, rarely ,manage to bring the "boys (and now girls) home before Xmas". At times likes these the role of scholors should be to inform and enlighten - a duty that sadly, this author neglects.
Rating: 
Summary: Sept. 11th: Why Military Action is Needed
Review: Hanson's "An Autumn of War" is a book of essays where the author utilizes military history to show how much of September 11th and its effects have been visited on us and other civilizations before. Refreshingly opposed to ubiquitous political correctness, Hanson discusses various topics related to the 9-11 massacre: the Taliban and bin Laden; Hollywood and academia's baseless anti-Americanism; discussions on the Civil War's General Sherman and the generals of ancient Greece. At times, Hanson's tone is a bit too opinionated, and he packs his essays with historical events and characters with which the layman may not necessary be familiar. Nonetheless, Hanson tackles a wide array of topics leaving the reader with a much better view of 9-11 and the necessity of current military action.
Rating:
Summary: An outstanding collection of essays
Review: Hanson's background in classics and military history make him the perfect person to put the events of 9-11-01 in perspective. Anyone familiar with his work knows that Dr. Hanson is a skilled polemicist. He is in top form in this work. His essays are chock full of discussions of historical facts combined with engaging arguments.Dr. Hanson offers a crucial assessment of the entire event, from roots to repercussions. Some may be taken aback by his politically incorrect observations, but with so much fluff and downright lies being written about 9-11, this attitude is most refreshing as well as warranted. He cuts through the self-doubt and obfuscation than surrounds many discussions of 9-11. He discusses the outrage of the event and what a proper response is. Overall, I think the book is a service to America. Which gets me to the question of whether Dr. Hanson is unduly profitting from the events of 9-11. A reviewer here has suggested that he is. I find this suggestion perplexing. What ought Dr. Hanson (or anyone else for that matter) who writes on such subjects do regarding the events of 9-11, not discuss them? If this standard were used, then who could write anything about historical events? Would there be a certain waiting period before anybody could write about them? Historical inquiry would perish if this injunction against 'profitting' from an event were taken seriously.
Rating:
Summary: Review process needs changes
Review: I apologize for using this review space as a forum for complaining about the review process itself. Unfortunately, I see no alternative forum available for this, so here goes. My complaint: The majority of these reviews contain not so much analyses or insights into the book as they do assurances to overly sensitive patriots that the book is safe, ie. "on their side," and will not offend their sensibilities. This doesn't seem to me the most appropriate forum for heart-warming patriotic speeches. And it isn't at all apparent to me that many of the reviewers have even read the book. Witness the following quote, for example: "I have read his articles in the National Review and they are excellent." The one guy who went against the grain and actually criticized the book, offering all kinds of interesting information, got slammed by most readers, presumably because they were offended. If you can't say anything negative about a book, what's the point of having a review page? And what's the point of freedom of speech if no one is willing to entertain an alternative viewpoint? I have to honestly say that I have not read the book, either, and the obviously skewed reviews and scores tell me that it probably isn't worth my bother to do so. Critics of my post may say this shows that the review page is doing its job. I wish I could be sure. Muslims and Islamic thought are every bit as varied as Westerners and Western thought. Those who attempt to get you to dismiss the entire Arab World as simply different flavors of bin-Laden style extremism aren't doing you any favors. I believe this quote from John Mohawk's 1989 book entitled New Voices from the Longhouse: An Anthology of Contemporary Iroquois Writing says it best: "In order to negotiate with other human beings, we must believe in the rational nature. We must believe that they are not suicidal or homicidal by nature-that we can reason with them." What is rational about crashing passenger jets into buildings, you might ask? The goal was the same as that behind the fire bombing of Dresden and the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. To create panic in your enemy's midst. Bin Laden and others have said as much. In response to the above question, one might reasonably pose the question "What is so irrational about wanting a foreign imperial power to get out of your backyard and stop propping up vicious, liberty-stealing, free-speech-hating, freedom-of-religion banning dictators in your midst?"
Rating:
Summary: Author is overcompensating for his own lack of service.
Review: I waited nearly a year after reading Hanson's book of opinions. One earlier reviewer thought it amazingly accurate that Hanson predicted the U.S. victory in Afghanistan, as if that would be even a close call. Some how, I don't think Vegas was worried about losing that bet! The more careful reader may have been concerned with Hanson's expounding on issues such as unilateralism. Pro war conservatives such as Hanson, who never seems to mention his military service record, would seem to have influenced the present Bush government to "go it alone," and condemn anyone who doesn't agree with us (freedom fries anyone?). Hanson, who never seems to mention his military service record, must have been smug safely on his California farm when the U.S. followed his advise. A year later, Bush's people are doing everything short of crying "uncle" to get the rest of the world to bail us out. Some people want to portray Hanson as the "great" American. Perhaps these people like Hanson, several Bush war hawks, and nearly all of the talking heads in the Conservative dominated news media, too skipped out of military service because they were too busy taking mid-terms when they were younger. Personally, I can look myself in the mirror and think of myself as a good American. I have not done anything that actively resulted in killing my fellow Americans. The body count is still running on the current occupations, and we are now humbling ourselves to North Korea and the rest of the world. I opposed the present war, and I did not have to lie about my reasons. I must have missed the chapter that Hanson predicted all of these events.
Rating:
Summary: Racist and completely Western-centric
Review: I'm a graduate student at Stanford University and was required to purchase and read this book in conjunction with a sociology class I'm taking. I have to say that I am PROFOUNDLY upset that I was forced to purchase this book and add to this author's royalties. It was incredibly hard to read through his essays, much of which kept repeating the same Greek tragedies of war which the author so loves to cite. I found his language pompous, bombastic, and downright racist when it came to discussing and lumping the entire "Islamic world" into a tidy ball of hatred and anti-Westernism. His privileging of Western forms of war was baffling to me--a sort of strange thing to keep pounding on in light that wars in general can be tragic. As an American I am embarrassed that books like these can circulate and find a wide audience. I wasted my time reading this book and found myself enraged at the author's lack of reflection on more global issues regarding cultures and civilizations. His premise is that the West is superior in all ways, and there is no question that everyone else is just jealous. Again, I can't state how angry I am that I have contributed to this man's coffers, be it ever in so small a way! This book is not well-balanced enough to offer a view of 9-11 and the U.S. reactions to it. If you are of the view that the U.S. should just bomb the hell out of anyone who crosses its path--total anihilation and humiliation--then by all means, read this book. Otherwise, do yourself a favor and do some thinking of your own.
Rating:
Summary: Not the Coventional Wisdom
Review: It is said that generals fight the last war. I think that the Iraq war shows that this maxim is not always the case. However a new maxim might be that reporters are always covering the same war: their first. Halfway through the Iraq war veteran reporters of Vietnam vintage were using the term "quagmire", only to have the war end in an overwhelming American victory two weeks later. For months before the war Hanson was predicting that we would win and citing chapter and verse why. The ancient Israelites had a simple test for distinguishing between false and true prophets: did what the prophet foretell come true? I suggest a similiar test for pundits. On that score, and for the joy of reading superb writing, I can not endorse this book more highly than it deserves.
Rating:
Summary: Rightwing demagoguery (mis-) using September 11th
Review: The 11th of September 2001 is "a date which will live in infamy", to use a phrase that Roosevelt coined after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, sixty years earlier. It was a day which taught all who witnessed it the meaning of shock and horror, words that were thrown around too easily before, in an age desensitised by mass media and familiar, but faraway global disaster. But it also reawakened the sentiments of sympathy and resolve, and was perceived in enlightened nations throughout the world as an attack not only on America, but on themselves and their shared values. This is easily forgotten, as such unity was quickly gambled away in the business of day-to-day politics, by various parties involved. With more distance, September 11th will be recorded by historians as a geopolitical turning-point, quite possibly the "real" starting date of the 21st century. Few events in recent history intensified as thoroughly the philosophical and political debate on all levels, and more than one commentator seemed tempted to present personal agenda and ideology as patent remedy. Victor Davis Hanson is a classics professor whose biggest attention-grabbers to date had been popular military histories carried by broad streaks of revisionism and glorification, accompanied by vociferous attacks on a perceived decay in contemporary culture. It was all rather loud, and marred by the proverbial putdown of historical works - the accurate part wasn't very original, and the original part wasn't quite accurate. Given earlier works like the polemic "Who killed Homer?", it is no surprise that Hanson would eventually seek greener pastures, reinventing himself as a rightwing political pundit. With a family farm, a column in the National Review, and a dinner with the Vice President, he is the voice from the bedrock, the mythic place America came from before it got lost in postmodern relativism and hedonistic trendiness. After lamenting furiously the careerism of fellow classicists in the past, Hanson had some celebrity of his own. In Greek, as he is fond of saying, word is to match deed. After September 11th, Hanson wrote a number of newspaper columns which he later published as "An Autumn of War". As usual, he stylises himself as both a learned scholar and a down-to-earth man of the farmer soil, and the result is a curious blend of erudite bombast and the peculiarly American anti-intellectual populism which de Tocqueville first observed in the 19th century. Hanson's rhetoric is hyperbolic and martial, with frequent usage of "the dogs of war", "blood and iron", "deadly carnage" and "smoldering ruins" - that's only the first two pages, for starters. It's a rattling call to arms, propaganda rather than analysis, and insistence rather than argument. Which is not a necessarily bad thing in itself, and quite understandable, given the time of origin - without a doubt, "An Autumn of War" is carried by genuine passion and conviction. However, there is a fine line between passion and rage, conviction and dogmatism, clarity and oversimplification, and Hanson crosses it frequently. In good demagogic fashion, he has a highly selective and limited number of easily understood and vigorously presented arguments, which he recycles over and over again - Hanson reaffirms "Western lethality" and other centrepieces of his earlier work, decorates them with numerous (if seldom entirely accurate) historical anecdotes, quotes Heraclitus ("war is the father of us all"), and insists that sheer determination is the single ingredient that will somehow take care of everything, eventually. Terms like freedom and democracy are used emphatically, but without explicit philosophical foundation, and the moral high ground is taken for granted. Upon examination, the argumentation is shallow and often self-contradictory. It picks and chooses whatever supports the point at the time and forgets about unwelcome, but compelling consequences later. As for the historical ornament, specialists will pick holes here, there and everywhere. Never mind Hanson's annoying habit of taking ancient lines of thought not merely as inspiration, but blueprint for today's global information-age. "An Autumn of War" ignores time and again the virtues it purports to uphold. Hanson has a great deal to say about freedom of speech and tolerance, for instance, when comparing the US favourably with other, lesser nations. At the same time, he trashes each and every opinion that dissents from his own as either clueless or malicious, in decidedly accusatory and ad hominem manner. He hails the separation of state and religion as an achievement of the West, but colours his own rhetoric with religious overtones. He appeals to reason and clarity, but charges every argument to the emotional boiling point. His ardent commitment to freedom and democracy suggests an optimistic picture of Man, while his view of war as a natural state and as frequently the only option harks back to the pessimism of a Thomas Hobbes. Much of the self-contradiction and muddled philosophy could be overlooked if Hanson would at least reserve his righteous rage for the plausible and positively detestable, like murderous fundamentalists and despotic regimes. But as if they were not a worthy target all by themselves, he employs the subject at hand for yet another searing assault on all the other favourite villains - the pansy and timid Europeans, the morally bankrupt United Nations, the backwards Islamic world in general, the "therapeutic society" at home, and above all, the political and academic left. All get their share of condemnation and derision. Indeed, after "An Autumn of War", the reader is left wondering who the real bad guys are - Osama bin Laden and the Taliban, or maybe those decadent smart-aleck European intellectuals, after all? Such divisive anger seems out of touch in the immediate wake of September 11th, which was indeed above all an attack on the shared values and heritage of the entire rationally operating world. Some would call Hanson prescient of future political developments, but a strong argument can be made that he exemplifies exactly the patronising mindset which helped bringing them about. In any case, his manner of carrying out old, indiscriminate grudges on the back of tragedy, even if the intention is genuine and not exploitative, is in effect both politically unproductive and intellectually irresponsible.
Rating:
Summary: Wow
Review: The author combines knowledge of history, shewd and smart judgements, and extreme readability. Everything I am read by him is Excellent. This book is a series of essays written in the year after September 11th which lay out the road ahead for America. It is emotionally gripping, saddening, yet hopeful. (I read it in 2005 and it isn't dated at all.)
|
