! > The problem I have with Clancy is the same as the problem I ! have with ! > Tolstoy: ! ! Comparing Clancy with Tolstoy ???
I wasn't equating them on a literary level, just pointing out a general stylistic similarity that I perceive --- their books are large, but they tend to tell even more than they show. Look any deeper than that and, yes, it would be hard to compare them. ! I've read some Clancy stuff...the guy's a laugh a minute....reminds me ! of someone on this list... He specializes in military techno-thrillers, and brings his uncanny knowledge of the weapons of war to bare on his somewhat formulaic plotting techniques to tell stories involving conflicts based on today's headlines. I find his characters for the most part to be kind of boring and 2-dimensional (not unlike many of Tolstoy's, a few notable exceptions notwithstanding) and mostly fodder for his gruelling and inexorable plot devices. Tolstoy was trying to educate about history and life; Clancy is trying to entertain and teach people about military strategy in the modern age. Two vastly different projects. But again, I personally prefer the stuff of which Conrad, Dostoyevski and Melville are made. ! > ! > In terms of reading works of philosophy Nietzsche wins ! hands down over ! > just about anybody. ! ! This one ? ! http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/nietzsch/eccehomo/eccehomo.htm I've read all his stuff from all of his various periods, at least everything for which there is an English translation (alas, I have not yet gotten around to learning German, which is too bad because he's the one European philosopher I'd love to read in his native tongue--I still might learn German just for that). What I respect about him is that unlike most humanists, he doesn't actually believe in mankind (which in his mind is something yet to be "overcome") or indulge in soporific worship of all things "progressive", and his atheism is unabashed and yet honest about the nihilism that looms over it. He tried to overcome it directly and in a thoroughly original manner. I don't think however it was an accident of fate that in the last ten years of his life he was unable to think, let alone write. Amor fati indeed! ! ! Often misunderstood our Nietsche Or perhaps even too well misunderstood? ! ! This one was a quite interesting read during my vacation " ! Histoire de la Légion ! de Henri Le Mire " His "Anti-Christ" is pretty high octane too; not for the timid or tender. But I even enjoyed his earlier and more intentionally "rational" work "The Birth of Tragedy", esp. the last 3 paragraphs of Section 7, which conjure the voice of Anthony Hopkins in my mind when I read them in English (or actually more to the point Hannibal Lecter). He had a knack for summing huge thoughts up in small, precise, biting and often haunting aphorisms that literally require exegesis to make "true" sense of them (part of one of his works as you probably know, Geneology of Morals Essay 3, is really a case study of this process of deciphering a single aphorism from one of his other works). His American admirer and self-appointed protige, H. L. Mencken, directly imitated Nietsche's literary style to great effect---he could cut down a politician and rip out the guts of the average voter with surprisingly few clacks from his typewriter. Interestingly, he also endured a similar fate---crippled and unable to do what he loved the last 10 years or so of his life... As you can see, this is why (or in any case indicative of the fact that) I am fairly tolerant of non-Aristotelian, non-linear modes of expression, unlike certain other people on this list, who twit such things out... - Bob ! ! A+ ! jml ! ! [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
