G.K. Chesterson Saint Francis of Assisi

 

This was a short little book, so I downed it. In many ways I'm fascinated just as much by the author as Assisi. I started to notice Chesterson after reading Brian Mclarens a generous Othodoxy. It seemed as if many of Brian's referencing came from Chesterson. Then only recently after reading Paul Ham I was quite disappointed to find he was in the pro war camp of 1914

Anyway Assisi, I read and felt that I really didn't know Assisi. Most of Chesterson's writing was in the grid of nearly 100 years ago. When there was the British Empire and the only religion was Christianity. Most of Assisi's deeds where seen though this colonial view. I would like to read Assisi without this baggage.

He did have a few quotes such as "Christ came before Christianity" or something like that. It just reinforced to me that this puts into perspective the importance of differentiating Christ And Christianty. Reinforcing how difficult it is to find the historical Jesus.

2/5

Posted with Blogsy

1914: the year the world ended. Paul Ham

 

This is the second book of Paul Ham's that I've read. What I find with Ham is that he always seems to bring a twist or correct a preconception that I may have had on a subject.

In 1914 my preconception was changed regarding the start of the war. My impression after reading the book was the war was always going to happen. Ham emphasis was that the causes where greater than just the Baulkins conflict and the assassination of King Ferdanand. The Baulkins were just the trigger. Europe it's aristocracy and military where heading in a war direction for years prior to the outbreak of war.

I was expecting the book to be more about he war, instead I think Ham got lost in its causes and the build up to war. Well over half the book, I was expecting a chapter at he start. In that respect I think the title 1914 was slightly misleading.

I think 1914 will age as a book. There were a few comparisons to modern events, which in 50 years time non historians will wonder at these references.

It was a good book. It brought me back to poerty that I loved, Sassoon and Wilfred Owens. And Bengimin Brittens War Requim. It also brought me back to a time when I first started nursing 20 years ago. The last of those World War One veterans and their memory's were about to be extinguished forever. I was lucky to have listened to their experiences. Of what it was like been recruited in Bendigo and then sent off to a far away land and it's horrors. A lot different today with the backpackers experience.

4/5

 

Hiroshima Nagasaki, Paul Ham

Hiroshima Nagasaki by Paul Ham

This was a book that sent shivers down my spine. There where a few reasons mainly due to it changing my perception of how the World War 2 ended.

Firstly it was always my understanding that the war had concluded due to the use of atomic weapons on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Ham though argues and I think sucessfully that Japan was already looking for a way out prior to the first bomb been dropped on Hiroshima.

It was the Russian entry into the war which very quickly spread up the Japanese peace initiative. The Japanese leaders were terrified of Japan falling into Soviet hands.

The emperor Hirohito when he went on radio mentioned the horrors of the bomb as a reason for ending the war, Ham believes he did so as to 'save face' for the army which had been blitzkrieged in manchuria by the Soviets. (I found this the weakest argument yet it was still pretty plausible)

It seemed apparent that the US was hell bent on using their new weapon. I think there was an element that thought that it would speed up the end of the war. But in reality the caused as much destruction as the 'Firebombing techniques" (bombs which are dropped in a way and sequence as to create a firestorm sucking oxygen from the surrounding area and creating an inferno) which had already taken over 50 Japanese cities causing the loss of already millions of lives. .

The actual invasion of Japan had been called of indefinately even prior to the atomic bombs being dropped. The outcome would have been the same if the US had continued conventional bombing and the naval blockade of Japan.

The compelling reason for the bomb to be dropped was the unravelling of the allied partnership with the Soviets and the continued mistrust after potsdam. The dropping of the bomb in my mind was linked more to the cold war and was the opening gambit.

If I was Truman would I have dropped it? Nope. Yet its lingering affects, the horrors remained deeply imbeded in the leaders of the cold war for decades afterwars. You wonder if it was Hiroshima and Nagasaki memory which stopped them from pressing the button.

Errors, strangley I found one an 'F-13 fighter' which flew reconnisence after the bomb was dropped. The '13' made me wonder. Google revealed that no US fighter was ever given this designation due to the number...

I also found the chapter detailing the making of the atomic bomb overally technical and in someways interputed the flow of the book. I supose I'd been spoilt by reading 'The making of the atomic bomb' by richard rhodes.

Overall a great book which made me change my opinion 4/5

 

Posted with Blogsy