Rating: 
Summary: A fascinating, but demanding book
Review: Of course, this masterful work of 800 pages is not perfect in every detail. In the many references to political events I noticed some errors and imprecisions. Of course, one can argue about the selection of the many hundreds of persons described by the author, who have made geat cultural, artistic or scientific contributions. As a Dutchman, I regret that Dutch leading artists, philosophers and scientist didn't get their due share of attention. Barzun's chapters on the sciences are not quite on the same level as those on the arts, and especially literature. But in such an ambitious and, on the whole, succesfull master piece, all these objections only concern points of detail. The author justifies his sometimes arbitrary selection of the persons he describes with the argument that new developments rarely are the work of a single person. Mostly, new ideas « are already in the air ». There are always different contrasting and conflicting ideas at work. One of the major advantages of Barzun's « magnum opus« is that the author has a sharp eye for the fact that no epoch is characterized by a single idea. For instance, Barzun makes the reader conscious of the fact that there is more to «Victorian morality« than a narrow-minded, repressed attitude towards sexuality ; that puritanism was not solely characterized by fanaticism and bigotry ; that Rousseau's ideas were less absurd and one-sided than most people believe and that Nietzsche ment almost the opposite of what the larger public thinks he ment.Barzun starts his work around 1500, the time of Renaissance and Reformation, two currents of ideas he rightly considers as representing a new starting point for western culture. He frequently reports events which you hardly will find at any other place. For instance the political activities of de Beaumarchais, author of « The Barber of Seville » and « The Marriage of Figaro », who in 1776 as a secret agents helped to finance the American revolt against the English. A very positive thing is that Barzun regularly gives advise about accessible books in which questions treated by him are exposed at greater length. The drawback is, of course, that reading all these books would represent almost a life time of reading! An other objection against the book could be that little notice is given to economical factors. Phenomena like the labour movement, colonialism and decolonialism could have been treated at greater length. And when Barzun critically notices that all these modern household appliances do not always make life more easy, but often tend to complicate it, het omits a reference to the important social phenomenon of the virtual disappearance of the domestic. But in defense of the author, I have to point out that for economic and social history there exist other books. Barzun's speciality is the history of ideas. In this he excells. He considers literature to be our most important source for studying the ideas that dominate a certain epoch. Quite controversial, of course, is Barzuns opinion, which he expresses in the title of his work, that Western Civilization has now entered a period of decadence. Barzun sees a number of manifestations of this decadence : - the dominant exagerated relativism, which prevent people of distinguishing works of real merit from garbage ; this results in artists and thinkers not being stimulated any more to great exertions in order to produce works of quality ; (This is a tendency also criticized by the French philosopher Alain Finkielkraut in his book « La défaite de la pensèe ») - the prevalent moral laxity, which leads to the decay of education and the increase of criminality ; - the persistent denial of the necessity of self control and a sense of responsibility, which increasingly erodes the moral foudations of our society ; - the by now almost unbridgeable chasm between an « avant-garde » art, that in some respects has derailed, and the larger public ; - the co-existence of a technical elite, who excells in a one-sided, very specialized expertise about small areas of knowledge, with a semi-literate mass, which does not have any respect for anything pertaining to higher culture ; - the increasing fragmentation of society. Under the pretext of « national identity », « auto-determination » and « subculture » even larger groups of people are turning their backs to the rest of society. With the decay of Christianity a whole set of values and norms shared by the entire society has disappeared. Barzun recognizes that «techne« (science and technology) is florishing more than ever before, but in his view that does not compensate for the prevailing decadence in other, more important areas of culture. Barzun recognizes that decadence is not an abnormal phenomenon in an overly mature civilization. He situates the beginning of this decadence not in the years after 1960, nor even in those after 1920, but already in the period around 1890. When the author claims that in the past decades this decadence has reached a terminal stage, he is to somber, I think. Or anyhow, I hope. He does not exclude the posibility that on the ruins of western society, as we know it from the past 500 years, a new civilization will arise in due time. Those who think that current society with its lazy «we are the world» ethos of cheap progressivism, unbounded relativism, indifferent tolerance and uncommited humanitarianism represents the «akme» of moral perfection, will be well advised to take notion of the signs of desintegration and decadence which Barzun brings to our attention. To conclude, I can heartily advise reading this book to anyone who has the time and the stamina to read a fascinating, but demanding book of 800 pages. You don't have to agree on every point with the author to recognize the value of this book. Having formulated quite a few minor objections, I have to say that in view of the merits of this book, I would consider it a sign of Dutch stingyness to withhold Barzun even one of the five stars.
Rating: 
Summary: Ignores the Downside of Secular Humanism
Review: "The soul of a civilization is its religion, and it dies with its faith." The quote is from Will and Ariel Durant, and it is a concept that is lost on Jacques Barzun. Barzun ignores the dark side of the enlightenment, a light that in many ways failed. The atheistic hubris of the French philisophes blossomed and came to full bloom in the poisonous weeds of the French Revolution and Terror. Secularism is a disease that has, for the past two centuries, slowly killed the soul of Western Civilization. Moreover, Barzun is blind to the fact that his own secular relativism is the disease rather than the cure for the sickness of our collective postmodern era soul. Barzun mentions Edmund Burke with some respect, though Barzun appears to be a disciple of the opposition; Voltaire, Rousseau, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, et. al. Burke said, "Freedom and not servitude is the cure of anarchy; as religion, and not atheism is the true remedy for superstition." At the end of his book, Barzun rails against the self-indulgent, nihilistic, "godlets" of our present generation, without recognizing that only religion can constrain these monsters of postmodernism. If there is any hope at all for a true Western renascence, it will come with the recognition that Judeo-Christian morality, which is universal in its application, is the foundation of the entire structure of our civilization, and that those who seek to undermine that foundation and deconstruct the structure are the enemies of all humanity.
Rating:
Summary: Re: Greg Hullender's review
Review: the biggest failing in this review is mr. hullender's poor understanding of the english language. he confuses the words "shamefully" and "shamelessly." minor things annoy, as well. his prose is generally unreadable and hardly entertaining; all in all, nothing worth suffering through 500 words for.
Rating: 
Summary: a curious work
Review: Jacques Barzun did us all a kindness by publishing his catalogue of the last 500 years of Western Culture. From Dawn to Decadence: A Cultural History of the Last 500 Years is, by its breadth and erudition alone, an impressive work. The perspective he brings to his task is one of someone who remembers hiding in bunkers World War I in Paris as a child and who has spent the great majority of his career pursuing history as a professor at Columbia University. Barzun's perspective has advantages, one of the more instructive being his insistence on a precise use of language. This predilection leads him to write a number of "digressions on words", one of which is on the meaning of "culture", which, obviously, is central to his effort. He argues that the meaning of the word has been diluted by the profusion of ways that people have employed it. By culture Barzun suggests he means something along the lines of the word's sense in agri-culture -- I took this to mean the cultivated elements of society from which new products grow. The book then is not a history of ideas. It is, on the other hand, a description of a culture out of which ideas and artistic, political and scientific products have grown. If From Dawn to Decadence were a standard history of ideas, he would trace contemporary thinking and artistry to their sources. He does do some of this, but he also spends a good portion of the book resurrecting names that have lost their renown or rehabilitating persons he feels have unjustly fallen into disrepute. These include people like Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr., Walter Scott, Samuel Butler, Christina of Sweden, William James, Pierre Laval and many, many, more. Part of this effort includes mentioning books in passing for further reading providing a sort of syllabus. Combined with a demonstration of Shakespeare's weaknesses and an expose of the ups and downs of estimations the Bard has received over the last 500 years I wondered whether Barzun was competing with Harold Bloom's Western Cannon. In fact, I believe Barzun's effort is to identify sources of inspiration that have been neglected as of late -- parts of the culture, or field, that haven't been exhausted as if the field of the modern era needs to be rotated now, some thinkers, contra Bloom, need to be left fallow, others to be reinvestigated (planted anew) so as to reinvigorate our times. Thus, just as Barzun resurrects some, he eliminates (or considerably curtails) the contributions of quite a few others. I believe this is because Barzun thinks that some have been over-examined, wrung dry. The most conspicuous example is Walt Whitman, who finds almost no space addressed to him outside of noting that Tocqueville's description of a poetry suitable to America is suspiciously similar to the Whitmanesque style and an endnote dismissing WW's effect on Gustave Kahn and French free verse. This is short shrift given Whitman's influence on the poetry of the West in the last 150 years. In other veins Barzun mentions Ralph Waldo Emerson, but ignores his unquestionable influence on Nietzsche and therefore on subsequent continental thinking. (He does spend some time on Nietzsche himself despite his widespread and well-explored influence on our times, perhaps because no one really understands him.) His dismissal of Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. as being a mere cynic is totally unjust, Wittgenstein is only mentioned in passing, and Husserl and Heidegger don't even merit mention. Moreover, although resurrecting forgotten contributors is a real service, at least one of the rehabilitations is suspect -- that of Pierre Laval. Barzun argues that Laval was actually opposing the NAZIs as best he could given his position in Vichy France, saving many Jews in the process. I haven't read the book he uses to justify this estimation -- Laval, Patriot or Traitor? By Rene de Chambrun -- but my understanding is that Laval followed the traditional arc of fascists, beginning his career as a socialist and slowly moving to the opportunistic and ruthless far right. I would suggest those interested read The Collapse of the Third Republic by William Shirer. All in all From Dawn to Decadence is a very interesting work. Barzun brings a three-tiered perspective to his analysis: relativistic, anti-systemic and liberal (in the European sense of a supporter of free-trade and individual liberties.) Curious choices are made in From Dawn to Decadence, putting what I think Barzun hopes to be an invigorating selection to us. On a sour note, I wish his editors had paid closer attention -- it is especially annoying to turn to the end of a book and often find no endnote for the sentence so indicated. Dagestan not "Dargestan" and I've never seen "poser" used to mean, pose, posit or postulate before. At least not in English. But I am being petty, From Dawn to Decadence is a very powerful work harboring a rather curious presupposition. Worth the read.
Rating:
Summary: The Whigs strike back...
Review: Do I like this book? How many stars should I give it? Really now, who gives a damn what I think, and what difference does my (or anybody's) opinion make on this matter? Professor Barzun has created a work that clearly transcends the limits of history as an academic discipline, and Progressive historians who gag on Barzun's "Yea Western Civilization" approach are missing the point. I too found that I sometimes questioned Barzun's observations and conclusions, but it would be remarkable (and a little scary) if anyone could read 800 pages of honest, candid, and clearly stated commentary without finding themselves occasionally at odds with the author. More significantly, Barzun has made his central point (the West is pretty cool after all) without the pedantry and characteristic snottiness usually associated with other "cultural commentators". Monolithic in scope, but highly readable, Decadence announces itself to the reader as the product of a lifetime of study. After experiencing the book this summer, I decided to make it the cornerstone of the high school government class that I teach. Even if he had done nothing else during his entire career, a work of this quality would offer the creator total artistic redemption. Wow... what a legacy.
Rating:
Summary: Sloppy and Unconvincing
Review: Because this is a cultural history, it is not suitable for someone looking for a comprehensive description of the events of the past half millennium. You will find little mention of kings and politics, battles and treaties. For that sort of history, try "The Story of Civilization" by Will Durant, or "Europe" by Norman Davies or "Europe, 1815-1914" by Gordon A. Craig. If you are not already familiar with the contents of those (or similar) books, "From Dawn to Decadence" will be difficult to follow. The biggest failing in this book is the author's poor understanding of basic science and technology. He confuses "force" and "energy" and reads something ridiculous into scientists using two names for what he takes to be the same thing. Incredibly, he somehow manages to confuse "quanta" with "half-life." He equates pseudo-sciences like homeopathy and osteopathy with authentic developments in medicine. And he occasionally indulges in the wildest speculations on the impact of recent scientific discoveries, trying to argue that quantum mechanics supports Bishop Berkley's contention that matter isn't real. Given the huge role played by science and technology over the period under discussion, this is a terrible shortcoming. An almost equally serious problem is the author's determination to share the works of countless almost-forgotten artists, writers, and philosophers. Obviously Barzun feels that these people made serious contributions that are shamefully underappreciated today, and one expects some exposure to less-familiar names in a book like this, but as the list gets longer and longer (and as Barzun skips over many of the major talents in each age) this gets more and more difficult to take seriously. The relative lack of footnotes is surprising in a book of this type, and the reader looks in vain for support for some of the author's more daring claims. Even such footnotes as there are often address some trivial side point rather than offering evidence for the larger ones. One feels that rather than researching the book, the author simply constructed it from memory. The numerous spelling and even grammatical errors likewise detract. Minor things annoy as well. He quibbles endlessly about the "true" meanings of words. He claims technology shouldn't be called "technology" but "techne" instead - and then proceeds to call it "techne" for the rest of the book. Or that "utopia" should be written "eutopia" and then inflicts that on us too. This sort of nonsense becomes very tedious after a while, as does his habit of writing KEY IDEAS in small caps. Finally, his argument that the West has become decadent ultimately boils down to bitter resentment at the lack of popular interest in the various classic works the he himself treasures and lack of respect for purity of the language. Given that he has chronicled how different ages change their ideas of what makes for good art, music, literature, and philosophy, and how language use has changed as well (e.g. he reports that the Victorians couldn't discuss body parts - not even arms and legs - without using euphemisms) it seems surprising that he attributes the same things in our culture to decadence. There are a few good things in here - his technique of spreading the bibliography throughout the text (rather than collecting it at the end) is a good one, and his prose is generally readable and sometimes entertaining -- but nothing worth suffering through 800 pages for.
Rating:
Summary: true but alienating and elitist-not the whole story
Review: traditional -yes,complete -no. western culture should be known as history.hitler was part of western culture. but to be held up as a perfect role model the status-quo is not a guide nor is western culture finished or complete. arrangements which damage people need to be changed and decadence(decay)is a symptom of this demand for change. barzun is defending his turf.
Rating:
Summary: Not just for the academy
Review: Jacques Barzun has brought forth a lucid, accessible, monumental work that should be read by the general public as well as by scholars. His vast overview, filled with relevant and provocative particulars, has filled in gaps in my "liberal" political science degree from a major university. The tenor of this book ranges from erudite detachment to passionate opinion: On a scale from cynical despair to hopeful optimism, it leans toward the latter. There are a few minor editing flaws: As a musician, I must point out the Handel's oratorio is called simply "Messiah," not "The Messiah;" and there are other mistakes that could have been caught by careful proofreading, but in a work of this size, these are perhaps unavoidable. As the spouse of a cloud physicist, I think he could have given more pages and appreciation to all the marvels "techne" has rendered; as the mother of an adult daughter whose life was spared recently in an emergency by surgical intervention, I think he also could have lauded more fully another branch of "techne", modern medicine. This does not detract from his marvelous accomplishment. This book rewards it reader with a perspective on "Occidental" thought and history not to be found anywhere else.
Rating:
Summary: Talking Back To History
Review: This is that rare book which truly engenders thought. A master historian has brought the experience of a lifetime to bear on the last 500 years. As you read you are carrying on a conversation not only with the author but all of the characters he quotes and describes. If you love history, this is the book to read if only for a great arguement with yourself.
Rating: 
Summary: too drawn out
Review: Way to boring. Long and drawn out. Author needs to focus on more relevant details. A long read. Yawn.
|
