Shanghai at the beginning of last century was a city bubbling with energy and exuberance. It was a strangely workable cohabitation of British and French 'leased territories' and sovereign Chinese territory governed by an assortment of Chinese authorities. Authorities was usually not an elected or appointed one, it might be an authority that came as a result of military (or militia) prowess, but it was more likely that authority stemmed out of the control of the underworld. This book traces the lives of the interesting and important characters of the times to give the reader a full impression of the colourful city that was Shanghai.
Shanghai, like the rest of China, was in a tumultuous time in the first half of the century. Much wealth was in display co-existing with much poverty and deprivation. It was in the middle of the power struggles immediately after the fall of the Ching Dynasty with Sun Yat Sen's Kuomintang struggling to unite even the south of the country. After him, Chiang came to power and together with Big Ears Du, eradicated the Communists in what is known as the White Scare. And then the Japanese came and enticed Wang Jinwei to split with Chiang. All these are vividly captured in this book with much nuance and colour. This is a book detailing the power-plays, corruption, and ruthlessness of all involved. It brought to live different characters and how their lives were intertwined as each struggled for a piece of the city.
When I was reading the book, I wondered where to place it. It is not fiction per se, not historical fiction, yet not quite scholastic history. The author did not claim that it is a scholastic work; she provided no footnotes nor references. Yet I did not detect any fabrication anywhere (although I must admit that I am not an expert in the field), the people were real, their relationships true, and the events did take place. It therefore plays a role in informing readers of the history of Shanghai without being heavy. Also lending credibility to the book is the author's background. Not only was she born and grew up in Shanghai, she has enough academic and professional credentials to give one confidence in the thoroughness and honesty in her work.
This interesting book probably hard to find now which is unfortunate. People who are interested in knowing pre-Second World War Shanghai can find many useful materials in Chinese. Much less is available in English. This is therefore one of those rare books that fills the gap. Adding to that a higher readable style, readers will surely find this book one not to be missed.
(Find this book at Goodreads)
14 December 2017
02 December 2017
The Plague of War (Jennifer T. Roberts)
The subtitle of this book "Athens, Sparta, and the Struggle for Ancient Greece" gives one the impression that this book is another rehash of Thucydides' "The Peloponnesian War". This book is more than that, it doesn't just focus on the history, grand strategy or the tactics of the War, it also dedicates quite a bit of space to the social situation in the warring states, placing most emphasis on Athens. In other words, the author tried to tell a more complete story of the War and its consequences thereby supporting her thesis that in war, nobody wins.
I am always partial to books that try to present a complete picture of the history they are written for. In achieving this, I am not averse to the idea of authors including information from non-scholastic sources, even fiction, as long as the authors clarify them as such. To her credit Dr Roberts did exactly that, including materials from plays of Aristophanes, works of Plato and most gratifying for me, quoting lavishly from Xenophon, who is always considered an inferior writer compared to his contemporaries (particularly Plato).
However, this book somehow didn't work for me. The pattern adopted by the author is quite similar for all chapters. She would start with the War itself, spending much time on the strategies, tactics and the outcome. She would then close out the chapters by trying to help the readers to understand the socio-politico situations, quoting from the works referred to above. Unfortunately, in doing so, the momentum is inevitably broken. The Peloponnesian War is a long one and it should come as no surprise that all decisions and communication would be slow. But the action was constant throughout the 27 years and in between the actual fighting, we had the intrigue of one power trying to maneuver the smaller players to their advantage. The introduction of the socio-politico situations from the different sources not only disrupts the flow, they ended up becoming a distraction to the main story. Take for example, in one of the last chapters, the author dedicated much of the chapter to talking about education in Greece. Not only does this topic not fit nicely within the chapter, it is hard to understand how it enhances the book. An earlier work by the author's PhD supervisor, Prof Donald Kagan, known simply as The Peloponnesian War offers a much tighter narrative.
What I like about this book though, is the fairness with which the author treats both Athens and Sparta. Unlike the book cited above by Prof Kagan who clearly is partial to Athens, Dr Roberts is a more balanced in her approach. Athens was not without blame in perpetuating atrocities and Sparta was not always invulnerable on land. Similarly, in victory Sparta made some of the worst policies in governing whereas Athens appears to be a more robust society that can bounce back even in defeat.
Overall, I think this book is not a bad read. It is well-researched and has gone further chronologically than what Thucydides wrote in his book, extending the story using Xenophon's Hellenica and various other sources, telling the story of Sparta's eventual ruin. If you are only interested in the Peloponnesian War though, then you may find this book somewhat draggy and Prof Kagan's book would be better suited.
(Find this book at Goodreads.)
Listen to the podcast where the author discussed the book.
Reference
Kagan, D. (2004). The Peloponnesian War. Penguin Books, NY.
I am always partial to books that try to present a complete picture of the history they are written for. In achieving this, I am not averse to the idea of authors including information from non-scholastic sources, even fiction, as long as the authors clarify them as such. To her credit Dr Roberts did exactly that, including materials from plays of Aristophanes, works of Plato and most gratifying for me, quoting lavishly from Xenophon, who is always considered an inferior writer compared to his contemporaries (particularly Plato).
However, this book somehow didn't work for me. The pattern adopted by the author is quite similar for all chapters. She would start with the War itself, spending much time on the strategies, tactics and the outcome. She would then close out the chapters by trying to help the readers to understand the socio-politico situations, quoting from the works referred to above. Unfortunately, in doing so, the momentum is inevitably broken. The Peloponnesian War is a long one and it should come as no surprise that all decisions and communication would be slow. But the action was constant throughout the 27 years and in between the actual fighting, we had the intrigue of one power trying to maneuver the smaller players to their advantage. The introduction of the socio-politico situations from the different sources not only disrupts the flow, they ended up becoming a distraction to the main story. Take for example, in one of the last chapters, the author dedicated much of the chapter to talking about education in Greece. Not only does this topic not fit nicely within the chapter, it is hard to understand how it enhances the book. An earlier work by the author's PhD supervisor, Prof Donald Kagan, known simply as The Peloponnesian War offers a much tighter narrative.
What I like about this book though, is the fairness with which the author treats both Athens and Sparta. Unlike the book cited above by Prof Kagan who clearly is partial to Athens, Dr Roberts is a more balanced in her approach. Athens was not without blame in perpetuating atrocities and Sparta was not always invulnerable on land. Similarly, in victory Sparta made some of the worst policies in governing whereas Athens appears to be a more robust society that can bounce back even in defeat.
Overall, I think this book is not a bad read. It is well-researched and has gone further chronologically than what Thucydides wrote in his book, extending the story using Xenophon's Hellenica and various other sources, telling the story of Sparta's eventual ruin. If you are only interested in the Peloponnesian War though, then you may find this book somewhat draggy and Prof Kagan's book would be better suited.
(Find this book at Goodreads.)
Listen to the podcast where the author discussed the book.
Reference
Kagan, D. (2004). The Peloponnesian War. Penguin Books, NY.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)