Rating: 
Summary: I feel happy when I read Riane Eisler's books
Review: When I read The Chalice and the Blade, I feel happy. I can't say that too many books have affected me in that way. Why do I feel happy upon reading Eisler's words? First, because her perceptions about the reasons for many of our world's social and environmental problems match my own. And second, because Eisler writes in a simple, accessible style that is simply a joy to read. I realize that this book (and her other books, such as Sacred Pleasure) are probably not considered "scholarly" by hardcore academics. And, I will admit, the evidence she presents for some of her assertions in The Chalice and the Blade does not seem to rest on a huge body of research. However, her vision of a world based on "partnership" and not "domination" is a wonderful one to hope for, regardless if it ever existed before. This vision, so wonderfully presented in this and her other books, is what makes me love them so much. My own philosophy: "The archy hurts everyone (even the very rich and powerful). Empathy is healing." Here's to a future world that realizes such a vision.
Rating:
Summary: Life Altering
Review: This is the most life changing book I have ever read. It's irrelevant to me whether or not her proposals are any more accurate than those upon which our cultures have been based for thousands of years. She made me think outside the box. She helped me value women more and helped me understand that women were not just spectators and victims in their own history. Her book helped me to understand that what has been passed down to us is not carved in stone by the hand of a vengeful, hatefel male God. What she suggests as an alternate history is certainly in keeping with the manner in which women and other 'minorities' are treated in the present time. It is certainly in keeping with the manner in which the aforementioned people's contributions have been virtually omitted from history. It is in keeping with the lack of value that is placed on what has always been labeled "women's" work. What is shocking is that we have not questioned more vigorously why there is such disparity in the treatment of one group over another. I was impressed with her research. What she proposes makes sense, more sense that all the gobbleygook I heard when I was growing up. That never made any sense. I loaned this book to a friend who asked me after she had read it if I thought Ms. Eisler hated men. I was astonished by the question. To me, Ms. Eisler's basic message was that we must stop fighting amongst ourselves, male vs. female, color against color, religion against religion, etc. if we are going to be able to salvage our planet and our civilization. I think she says that very clearly. I recommend this book to all my children, friends, and colleagues.
Rating:
Summary: Yes, but the partnership model never prevailed ...
Review: Riane Eisler's analysis of the dominator, hierarchical model is superb -- really tells it like it is. And, as she says, this male-dominator model, which can be seen in most governments and religious hierarchies, results inevitably in war. Men's treatment of women (that is, how much subservience is demanded of women) is the "canary" in the mine -- the more suffocating the subjection, the more violent the society (witness what is going on in the Mideast). I disagree with only one point -- that there ever was a time when there was a partnership society. Finding a few benign wall murals in Crete or a few Goddess figurines or a couple of tribes in which males are not ascendent is not enough proof for the idea that the partnership model ever prevailed. (The Virgin Mary is the center of worship at the Orthodox monastery on Mt Athos, and women are not considered worthy enough to be admitted.) Nor does the fact that there are some aggressive women or pacifist men prove that there was ever a time when society as a whole was not an expression of male violence and aggression. Basically, hierarchy and domination are built into male genes. The only way to control the violence is for men to admit they embody it literally and then for them to create social goals and structures that enable them to divert their aggression into constructive patterns (conquering space?). Colin Wilson once wrote that the Nazis found a simple expedient for eliminating the constant attempts of captured WWII pilots to escape from the camps in which they were interned -- the Nazis removed the five percent of men who were "leaders" from the camp. Presto. No more attempts at escape from the masses. It's important to find the excessively aggressive male leaders and neutralize them before they grasp the controls of the political machinery of a country. (It is usually at this point that my friends start pelting me with anecdotes about the Iron Lady Margaret Thatcher.) As as for the violence being pumped out now all over the world by the male media magnates in Hollywood . . . this is really scary. The global village, including the families of these shortsighted magnates, will eventually pay a heavy price. And U.S. schoolchildren are already paying the price.
Rating: 
Summary: something to consider
Review: It is important that we not swing back to an exclusivley feminine deity. It seems that most of these books are happy to paint old goddess religions as the ultimate utopian example. We are made up of both genders. Focusing soley on one gender as divine is harmful to everyone.
Rating:
Summary: great, provocative reading
Review: This book is full of fascinating new interpretations of history, essentially contrasting what she believes were the matriarchal, Goddess worshipping old societies, where everything was peaceful and egalitarian, and the male dominated warlike, death dealing hierarchies we in the West have lived in as far back as any of us really knows. It is possible that she is engaging in too much speculation with too little evidence, but somehow this does not seem to matter. For example, on the basis of those modern hunter-gathering societies that survived long enough for us to study, cooperation, gender equality, and peacefulness are almost universal. These societies do not usually have or need a Godess or matriarchy. but they fulfill all the characteristics of the societies of she wants us to have. The biggest problem I had with the book was Eisler's assumption that a peaceful egalitarian society can happen if everyone understands what it's about. I regret to say that our sorry history seems to indicate that if you try that kind of society, the violent patriarchs will come and crush you. Which is why there are no more indigenous people, and why the peaceful Indians of the Americas were overun and destroyed by warlike Europeans. It does seem as if domineering patriarchies just always happen when nation states develop. Of course Eisler's plan for the future includes the elimination of the nation state, which is certainly a great idea if we can do it. No matter what its shortcomings might be though this is a great book. While I was reading it I recommended it to everyone I know, and told stories from it. It's a wonderfully illuminating way of looking at history.
Rating:
Summary: "The Chalice and Blade" Presents a Sensible New Paradigm
Review: The Chalice and the Blade has impacted my life and created a framework in my mind for encouraging more peace and cooperation. I no longer believe that, as a society, we have to put-up with the violence and aggression we with which we have allowed ourselves to become accustomed. Ms. Eisler, indeed, presents a new and facinating paradigm; however, she repeatly points out that the "gylanic" social style is NOT a matter of ranking female above male, but a true partnership ideal. Furthermore, she is very careful to explain that there are many men that don't fall into this category, and never have. Indeed, there are many peace-loving, partnership-oriented people of both genders. Of course, the same is true of dominator-oriented people. In fact, the word she coined, "gylanic," utilizes roots for both feminine "gy", "l" to link the two and masculine "an" to indicate the union -- partnership of the cooperation of both genders to create the society that may well be necessary for the very survival of the human species. It's true that Ms. Eisler fills in the gaps with a possibility of how things may have been. I'm not an authority in the field, but I suppose the evidence is pretty scanty -- and may point in any direction. The book is very thouroughly footnoted. Our current belief (of hunters developing the first tools vs. baby-carrying gatherers--one- handedly, creating the first tools) is also the product of someone filling in the gaps. Her theory is as valid as earlier theories. Anyone who is concerned about violence in our culture, and especially alternative dispute resolution, creating peaceable schools/workplaces/ homes, etc. would be deeply interested in this book. It is not easy reading, but is well worth the time and effort it takes to read it.
Rating: 
Summary: great,but something just doesnt sound right
Review: i really cant grasp the concept that being in a matrichial society makes everything honky dory and that patrichial society messes everything up,what we need is a society of balance. i really enjoyed reading this book,but it seemed to antimale to me.
Rating: 
Summary: Eisler Makes Some GRAND Mistakes.
Review: The author, Riane Eisler, paints history with a broad brush. Most, if not all, of her sources are other feminist authors, my criticism being that original source material is rarely consulted, even for refutation. The authors she quotes are not only limited to her viewpoint, but are few in number. Thus her base of scholarship is thin. The fact that she uses endnotes instead of footnotes - knowing that most readers will not keep up with every one - lets you know that she is not interested in scholarship but readability. Footnotes allow instant checking at the bottom of the page used - who said this, when, in what context. Ms. Eisler avoids this benefit to the reader, telling me that she doesn't want readers to check her sources too closely. The entire book suffers from an unfortunate but typical feminist attribute which is a needless division of the world into men and women, like the racist who always sees skin color, Ms. Eisler cannot see beyond gender. Ms. Eisler's writings are very one-sided in that the women are always portrayed as the peaceful and loving, nurturing types while the men are painted as the violent natural-born killers who want to control women, rape, abuse and eventually kill them. If a man wrote this stuff, he would be hounded out of town, instead this garbage is taught in college courses, supposedly to give a "clearer" picture of history to young inquiring minds. Funny thing is, I have been a feminist for about 25 years, and in my view this type of writing does nothing to help the cause of women's rights. Of course, as is the standard mistake of left-wing feminists, they tend to buy into all the other protest signs on their side of the street - in this case, on page 173, when she spouts the typical late-eighties pre-armageddon environmentist pap about the world soon coming to an end - of course she credits the "dominator" model. Making the outrageous claim that capitalism has been responsible for the ravages of the earth, instead of her preferred communistic societies such as Eastern Europe and China which are so well-documented as being the environmentalist villains; Ms. Eisler goes on to claim that some sort of central planning ala Marx or "Small is Beautiful" ala E.F. Schumacher (she apparently has no preference - as long as women and "their values" (HA!) are in charge) will cure the ills of society. Ms. Eisler claims that the "dominator" system of capitalism is not responsible for more peaceful trade and food production and distribution than any other system in the history of the world - an error easily refuted. Ms. Eisler's intellectual reliance on the central planning economic model is another mistake, but I do not fault her for having faith until the end, the book was written in 1987, the Soviet Union fell in 1989 - and I am speaking from hindsight, so I don't want to bash her, except to say that anyone but ideologues reading the newspaper post-1945 would have a hard time supporting such systems, especially in a book touting itself as a scholarly tome. The Chalice and The Blade is for entertainment only, do not base your paradigm on Ms. Eisler's book.
Rating:
Summary: Bad points, good points
Review: I would have liked this book better if Eisler's personal speculations on prehistoric societies had not been presented as facts. The FACT is, we don't know what early human society was like. While I found Eisler's version at least plausible, she certainly didn't prove anything. The real value of this book to me was that it reminded me of feminism's importance -- critiquing our society, presenting us with new, sometimes startling possibilities, removing our blinders.
Rating:
Summary: A New View of Human History and Evolution
Review: This book is based upon the premise that our current society arose from a patriarchal, dominator system and prior to the advent of Christianity there were peaceful, agricultural societies that worshipped goddesses. From this premise the author hypothesizes that if we humans as a whole adopt the partnership characteristics of the ancient matriarchal societies, we will also become a peaceful, egalitarian society. The majority of the book explores the earliest civilizations and their worship of the Goddess and then the deliberate destruction of these civilizations by power-hungry men who utilized religion to control and manipulate people. This we all know to be a fact. Those events did take place. But what most us of don't know (and are learning now) is that many aspects of the Bible were derived from the Goddess religions. Consider the story of Adam and Eve: Eve is responsible for the downfall of man. Eve is symbolic of the Goddess, and the men who created the new religion reversed meanings of Goddess symbols to demonstrate their beliefs. For example, in Goddess religions the serpent was a regenerative life symbol but in the Christian Bible it is a symbol for Satan (Satan being representative of the Goddess). Taken in context of a patriarchal and dominator model, it is completely understandable why this particular group of men sought to destroy the Goddess religion: to obtain absolute power over all people. In light of this information I developed a better understanding of human history and a greater compassion for all humanity. Yes much of the information in this book will be a shock to those unfamiliar with the subject material, but from learning about the tragedies and mistakes of our past we can build ourselves a better future. For this very reason I highly recommend this book and all books that seek to enlighten the human race to its greatest potential.
|
