Not a simple book to digest, what garnered my interest - aside from my need for a new audiobook along my traveling - was the promise of other books and the knowledge of what those books could offer me. If it became an ideological rant of 'Conservatives good; Liberals bad', that bent would prove a waste of time. However, if it settled into a cross section of other authors, spread across various points of history, it might actually enlighten me on matters of politics and the history of the times.
What is 'conservatism'? What is 'liberalism'? Could the definitions of a 'republic' and a 'democracy' by so thoroughly fleshed out I could finally understand how to identify which is and which is not? And the history? What of it? How did all these political philosophies develop? What about capitalism? Would there be any addressing socialism? These labels are bandied about with such ease today, surely there is some manner with which the common, everyday, ordinary folk could define them so as to identify them.
The first comment I must say is in regard to the reader. His voice is clear and easy to understand; but, in my opinion, it resounds a bit too on the smooth side to seriously focus on the heady subject matter. My mind drifts way too often for any definitive imbibing of the subject matter. This will require a second listen.
The information is there. Like many non-fiction texts of a similar nature, Wiker provides explanations of his beliefs, the political philosophy he espouses (with only slight shots at the opposing side - this is not an ideological hit piece), and historical perspective of how such philosophies fared through other eras. What I found a bit disappointing thus far is his tendency to speak of the 'authors' of the books mandated, rather than the particular books themselves. I thought I would be hearing more of the particular books and why those books reached his list of 'Ten Books Must Read'; but instead, he focuses more so upon the authors of the books, which is less than a poor approach, than why the particular book he selected was viewed as more vital to conservatism than a separate book by the same author.
I plan to listen to this selection a second time, as I do see what information offered is of great benefit to anyone who can comprehend it; but it is like many books to hold the non-fiction label: there is little here that resounds in an 'entertaining' fashion, making the practice of holding one's attention to the words spoken like a disinterested student stuck in a dull professor's classroom. The subject matter is fascinating, but the presentation lacks.
January 21, 2011
My prior post in regards to this book came prior to my actually having listened to the remainder of the story. While what I wrote above still holds true, I must add the inclusion of Jane Austen's "Sense & Sensibility", which I have not yet read, along with J.R.R. Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" trilogy stirred instant fascination. To consider both of these classic works of fiction in the realm of conservative vs. liberal, when most people would view them merely as "works of fiction", i.e. a story to entertain rather than truly enlighten (as I must add myself into such a camp), to view either, or both, in such terms is truly a fascinating journey in shedding the veil of ignorance that blinds people - again, myself included in that same camp.
0 comments:
Post a Comment