fabrychenko's review against another edition
4.0
Как же Запад стал успешен?
Автор заявляет, что ключевыми были шесть направлений, которые решили этот вопрос: конкуренция, наука, собственность, медицина, потребление и труд.
И если к аргументам по конкуренции, науке, собственности и потреблению у меня вопросов нет, здесь Нил Фергюсон был предельно логичен в своих суждениях, то к оставшимся двум пунктам (а это, на секундочку, треть книги) есть вопросы.
В разделе Медицины были описаны в основном войны: кто куда ходил, кто кому морды бил и немного между прочим как и с какими болезнями боролись в Африке. Я не эксперт, конечно, и связь между развитием медицины и военными телодвижениями действительно выглядит логично. Но медицина (особенно 19-20 века) и сама по себе такая тема, что пиши-не-хочу. Зачем за уши притягивать ее к войне, чтобы описать войну?
В разделе Труда было одно предложение в духе «трудоспособность людей прямо пропорциональна уровню их веры в Бога» (здесь как по мне очень спорная заявочка) и все 50 страниц посвящено религийной жизни в Китае. Что?
А вообще неплохая вариация учебника по истории. Очень много фактов с мировой истории узнала/оживила в памяти. Если не придираться, то даже понравилась книга:)
Автор заявляет, что ключевыми были шесть направлений, которые решили этот вопрос: конкуренция, наука, собственность, медицина, потребление и труд.
И если к аргументам по конкуренции, науке, собственности и потреблению у меня вопросов нет, здесь Нил Фергюсон был предельно логичен в своих суждениях, то к оставшимся двум пунктам (а это, на секундочку, треть книги) есть вопросы.
В разделе Медицины были описаны в основном войны: кто куда ходил, кто кому морды бил и немного между прочим как и с какими болезнями боролись в Африке. Я не эксперт, конечно, и связь между развитием медицины и военными телодвижениями действительно выглядит логично. Но медицина (особенно 19-20 века) и сама по себе такая тема, что пиши-не-хочу. Зачем за уши притягивать ее к войне, чтобы описать войну?
В разделе Труда было одно предложение в духе «трудоспособность людей прямо пропорциональна уровню их веры в Бога» (здесь как по мне очень спорная заявочка) и все 50 страниц посвящено религийной жизни в Китае. Что?
А вообще неплохая вариация учебника по истории. Очень много фактов с мировой истории узнала/оживила в памяти. Если не придираться, то даже понравилась книга:)
welkinvault's review against another edition
informative
medium-paced
1.5
I bet the author is fascinating if you meet him in person, his digressions and diversions can be very interesting - but there were times it was truly irriating in the book when you really wanted him to get back to the point.
His ideology did not appeal to me, this was a very pro British colonisation, pro Capitalist point of view. And he completely ignored situations or even countries that did not fit his sweeping generalisations (especially his epilogue - India is the complete opposite of this claims, yet was only mentioned, not discussed).
This is only about 15 years old, yet felt dated.
His ideology did not appeal to me, this was a very pro British colonisation, pro Capitalist point of view. And he completely ignored situations or even countries that did not fit his sweeping generalisations (especially his epilogue - India is the complete opposite of this claims, yet was only mentioned, not discussed).
This is only about 15 years old, yet felt dated.
leguma's review against another edition
1.0
Nu-i înțeleg pe oamenii care zic că n-au fost de acord cu ideile din carte, dar i-au dat patru stele fiindcă era bine scrisă. E bine scrisă în sensul că toate cuvintele există în dicționar, sau cum?
Autorul zice că i-a venit ideea cărții, printre altele, fiindcă a observat la copiii lui că nu se mai face școală ca pe vremuri, maică. Copiii nu mai învață care-s conexiunile logice dintre evenimetele istorice. Așa c-a scris el cartea asta ca să ne dumirească, probabil.
Problema e că nu ne dumirește. În fiecare capitol sare de la una la alta cu o logică foarte trasă de păr și foarte superficială. Și alege din istorie aspecte care convin viziunii lui republicane (în sens american) și imperialiste (pe bune).
Și nu cred că zic asta doar fiindcă eu nu-s republicană și imperialistă. Dacă nu fușerea cartea, putea aduce argumente mai puțin ridicole în sprijinul ideilor sale.
Autorul zice că i-a venit ideea cărții, printre altele, fiindcă a observat la copiii lui că nu se mai face școală ca pe vremuri, maică. Copiii nu mai învață care-s conexiunile logice dintre evenimetele istorice. Așa c-a scris el cartea asta ca să ne dumirească, probabil.
Problema e că nu ne dumirește. În fiecare capitol sare de la una la alta cu o logică foarte trasă de păr și foarte superficială. Și alege din istorie aspecte care convin viziunii lui republicane (în sens american) și imperialiste (pe bune).
Și nu cred că zic asta doar fiindcă eu nu-s republicană și imperialistă. Dacă nu fușerea cartea, putea aduce argumente mai puțin ridicole în sprijinul ideilor sale.
jjupille's review against another edition
1.0
I won't discuss ideology.
My problem is that it's just written really badly. He does not sustain attention to his argument, which is that the West came to dominate the Rest because of six "killer apps" (blech): competition, science, medicine, property rights, consumerism, and work ethic. Leaving aside the endogeneity problems, he just wanders in and out of focus. The rather long chapter on medicine is a horror of non-sequiturism, with the dozen page discussion of the French Revolution, why Burke was smarter than Marx, utterly orthogonal to anything to do with the claims of the book.
It really is bizarre. It's pastiche. The guy is obviously brilliant, cultured and well-read. But this feels like he's got a huge stock of things he knows and has something to say about, but he doesn't care enough to really stitch together a tight argument. The silly jargon --killer apps? please-- endless alliterations, little personal observations from strolls through mysterious bazaars and famous art galleries, the whole genius at work, the peppering of patrician snobbery with a soupcon of plebeian hipness, give the whole thing a Friedmanesque feel. Selling books, but adding nothing.
Blech. I had to apologize to my students for assigning this. I had picked up a copy of [b:The Great Degeneration: How Institutions Decay and Economies Die|16129479|The Great Degeneration How Institutions Decay and Economies Die|Niall Ferguson|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1372541698s/16129479.jpg|21954506], but now I don't have the stomach to read it, brief as it looks, since a sin against my reading time is one of the most grievous one can commit against me. Fool me once, and all that.
Eureka! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_%28literary_and_historical_analysis%29
My problem is that it's just written really badly. He does not sustain attention to his argument, which is that the West came to dominate the Rest because of six "killer apps" (blech): competition, science, medicine, property rights, consumerism, and work ethic. Leaving aside the endogeneity problems, he just wanders in and out of focus. The rather long chapter on medicine is a horror of non-sequiturism, with the dozen page discussion of the French Revolution, why Burke was smarter than Marx, utterly orthogonal to anything to do with the claims of the book.
It really is bizarre. It's pastiche. The guy is obviously brilliant, cultured and well-read. But this feels like he's got a huge stock of things he knows and has something to say about, but he doesn't care enough to really stitch together a tight argument. The silly jargon --killer apps? please-- endless alliterations, little personal observations from strolls through mysterious bazaars and famous art galleries, the whole genius at work, the peppering of patrician snobbery with a soupcon of plebeian hipness, give the whole thing a Friedmanesque feel. Selling books, but adding nothing.
Blech. I had to apologize to my students for assigning this. I had picked up a copy of [b:The Great Degeneration: How Institutions Decay and Economies Die|16129479|The Great Degeneration How Institutions Decay and Economies Die|Niall Ferguson|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1372541698s/16129479.jpg|21954506], but now I don't have the stomach to read it, brief as it looks, since a sin against my reading time is one of the most grievous one can commit against me. Fool me once, and all that.
Eureka! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_%28literary_and_historical_analysis%29
ellabsimpson's review
informative
medium-paced
2.5
Engagingly written and the early chapters on China are convincing and consistent with other histories I've read of that period, but the treatment of Africa in Chapter 2 is full of holes and easily-debunked colonial apologism and undermined my confidence in the rest of the book's arguments.
andrewtaets's review against another edition
2.0
I don't even feel like getting into this because so much of this book was so unnecessarily dense, but ultimately I disagreed with a lot of points and found it so convoluted at times I didn't even know what point the author was trying to make.
skitch41's review against another edition
4.0
Niall Ferguson is one of the best popular historians today, certainly one of the most ubiquitous. And for good reason. His writing is crisp, well researched, and illuminating and appeals to both the hardcore history buff as well as to the uninitiated. However as good as he is, he has a strong tendency to wander off topic. This book is a showcase of the best and worst tendencies of Mr. Ferguson's work. Starting roughly in the 1500s, Mr. Ferguson charts the rise of Western Civilization through six different innovations, or "killer apps," that were unique to the West's success. Like his other works, [bc:Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power|852516|Empire The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power|Niall Ferguson|http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1347945894s/852516.jpg|838020][b:Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power|852516|Empire The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power|Niall Ferguson|http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1347945894s/852516.jpg|838020] and [bc:Colossus: The Rise and Fall of the American Empire|173744|Colossus The Rise and Fall of the American Empire|Niall Ferguson|http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1309282820s/173744.jpg|539682][b:Colossus: The Rise and Fall of the American Empire|173744|Colossus The Rise and Fall of the American Empire|Niall Ferguson|http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1309282820s/173744.jpg|539682], Ferguson tries to combine two different narrative structures: a topical structure, where each chapter corresponds to one of those six apps, and a chronological structure, where the narrative moves sequentially through history. In the first three chapters (Competition, Science, and Property) this works beautifully as the development of these three apps corresponds to the period in history. This is when Mr. Ferguson is at his best. But things break down dramatically starting in the second half of the book. In chapter 4, which deals with medicine, he abandons the overarching theme of what caused the West's rise to showcase some of the West's atrocities (eugenics and experiments on Africans during the 19th century colonial era). He's already charted the moral and economic decline of the West in [bc:The War of the World: Twentieth-Century Conflict and the Descent of the West|8907|The War of the World Twentieth-Century Conflict and the Descent of the West|Niall Ferguson|http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1165766703s/8907.jpg|1263465][b:The War of the World: Twentieth-Century Conflict and the Descent of the West|8907|The War of the World Twentieth-Century Conflict and the Descent of the West|Niall Ferguson|http://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1165766703s/8907.jpg|1263465] as well as some of his other works, so chapter 4 was rather repetitive for anyone who has read his other works. Chapter 5 on Consumption starts to get back on track, but not wholly back on course. Chapter 6 is where he gets back fully on course, which is absolutely fascinating, but he does seem to take a lot from Max Weber's work on the "Protestant Work Ethic." And his conclusion on the rise of China and the relative decline of the West is worthy of consideration. In summation, Mr. Ferguson has written another fascinating and pertinent work, but Mr. Ferguson's bad habits hold this one back.