<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Great Idea Betrayed by Superficiality, Political Correctness
Review: Dominic Montserrat has succeeded in bringing to us a survey of the different myths, legends and scholarship that have surrounded the elusive Akhenaten and the finds at Amarna. Starting out with the thesis that how people illuminate this historical figure is directly linked with who those people are and what they are trying to accomplish. He proves this through an entertaining look at all the incarnations Akhenaten has had in our society since his discovery over a hundred years ago--as political, social, religious and even sexual icon. I appreciated the tone of this work because it was neither condemning, condescending or mocking of these different views but rather did a good job of showing how varied groups viewed him as the hero in antiquity that lent validation to who they were (are). However, it is hard not to smirk at least at how seemingly diametrically opposed groups, such as Nazis and homosexuals, could both see Akhenaten as their distant progenitor. Montserrat also looks at the different depictions of this period in fiction and movies, and even the opera of Phillip Glass. He also puts the scholarship of Amarna in the context of the scholars who wrote it and the sources from which they got their information. It is interesting to see the changing views of this intriguing period of Egyptian history and why. Montserrat furthermore succeeds by offering no opinion of his own as to who he thinks Akhenaten was. This would only further muddy the water and cause him to become part of his own thesis. I agree with him to leave Akhenaten as perhaps all things to all people.Well researched and well written! If you are interested in Akhenaten or in how historical figures are used in modern times, buy this book!!
Rating: 
Summary: The origin of a self-portrait, the memory that were twisted.
Review: For one Oriental who does not have tradition of Judaism-christianity-Islam,
this book is very interesting.I understood it a little why is Akhenaten exposed to praise and blame?
(Evaluation of this book seems to be exposed to praise and blame, too.) Archeology needs material evidence and history needs evidence of a document .
There are few definite things when only fragmentary evidence is left or when we are going to reconstruct the times eliminated by a record once.
A guess and the supposition that carved a seal of the times of advocate bury a crack.
It be spread with journalism and the subculture that a sensational theory becomes popular.
Scholarship is not free from the political situation of the culture that oneself stands.
We distinguish between a certain matter and fiction and cannot press the reason to produce a mystery.
What is an image reflected there why such a fiction is made? The contest of Akhenaten is the contest of the origin.
Curiously it seems to be the origin of Monotheism of Europe civilization and the origin of people plundered of. Akhenaten will become both an Aryan and a black.
This book is useful in order to ascertain dregs of Aten cults to loiter around still in the internet
and the mass-media.
I estimate this book to be a good guide as thinking about the history of Egypt understanding in Europe.
Rating: 
Summary: Horrendously overpriced for a mere skimming of information
Review: I couldn't agree more with the reviewer from Georgia who mentioned that this book is a great idea betrayed by an utter lack of thoroughness. Indeed, and without belaboring what has already been said in that review, this potentially valuable idea (for somebody else's book) is quite a frustrating read. And it does seem like more of an annotated bibliography than a real study of/comparison between competing notions of ideas about Akhenaten. While much of the information provided is interesting, there is basically no room for investigation, for follow-through, for earnest authorial postulation. Too, I found the book a lumpy piece of writing. For any American-educated scholar there seems to exist a wholly annoying and singular European mode of academc writing that would drive the MLA absolutely insane. Whereas parts of this book are utterly fascinating, such as the discussion of the aborted Akhenaten film script by the late Derek Jarman, such parts are touched upon ever so slightly . . . The idea of this book rates an A for me, but the combination of iffy execution and alarming brevity (and PRICE!) cause me to caution anyone, especially poor graduate students, from plunking down a veritable jackpot wad only to receive this disappointing scholarly effort.
Rating:
Summary: Horrendously overpriced for a mere skimming of information
Review: I couldn't agree more with the reviewer from Georgia who mentioned that this book is a great idea betrayed by an utter lack of thoroughness. Indeed, and without belaboring what has already been said in that review, this potentially valuable idea (for somebody else's book) is quite a frustrating read. And it does seem like more of an annotated bibliography than a real study of/comparison between competing notions of ideas about Akhenaten. While much of the information provided is interesting, there is basically no room for investigation, for follow-through, for earnest authorial postulation. Too, I found the book a lumpy piece of writing. For any American-educated scholar there seems to exist a wholly annoying and singular European mode of academc writing that would drive the MLA absolutely insane. Whereas parts of this book are utterly fascinating, such as the discussion of the aborted Akhenaten film script by the late Derek Jarman, such parts are touched upon ever so slightly . . . The idea of this book rates an A for me, but the combination of iffy execution and alarming brevity (and PRICE!) cause me to caution anyone, especially poor graduate students, from plunking down a veritable jackpot wad only to receive this disappointing scholarly effort.
Rating:
Summary: a volume of perspectives...
Review: Well worth a read - it's definitely the most entertaining and interesting book (that I've found) dealing with the plethora of contradictory views on the reign of Akhenaten.
<< 1 >>
| 
