Rating: 
Summary: A different and perhaps even better O'Rourke.
Review: P. J. O' Rourke as a "serious" essayist, confronting the crucial problems of our day? Yes. And he's good at it.
Earlier O' Rourke work has caused some dissension in my household because I woke my darling from her sleep with my laughter. Not this time. There aren't many laughs in this work and the few that exist are not side-splitters. His essay on Iwo Jima is a must-read.
This is simply not what we have come to expect from O' Rourke. I don't know if this is the exception or a "new" O' Rourke, but regardless, O' Rourke's perspective is interesting and his commentary insightful.
Jerry
Rating: 
Summary: O'Rourke strikes again
Review: A witty and incisive collection of articles on the state of the world, it stars with 'Why Americans Hate Foreign Policy', and goes on to describe the baffling and tangled stae of affairs in Kosovo in 1999. I found the chapter describing his visit to Israel in 2001 particularly interesting, his comments on Zionism are fascinating. The chapter on Egypt is excellent too, though I did have rservations about his comment that we had no civilisation in Europe when the Pyramids were built. We didn't have civilisation on the scale and grandeur of Egypt, but we had some, after all, Newgrange was built before the Pyramids, and it's still standing. He also drags out those old chestnuts about the Arab world being more civilised than Europe during the Middle Ages, and about classical learning being unknown here until the Renaissance, both quite untrue. Mr O'Rourke knows a lot about a lot of things, but I don't think he knows much about the Middle Ages. The chapter about the anti-war demonstrations in Washington is very funny, and the chapter on Kuwait and Iraq during the early part of the war utterly fascinating. O'Rourke's genius for describing countries at war is unequeled. The chapter on Iwo Jima is interesting, but I found myself somewhat bemused by his statement that the Japanese officers were arguably more sensitive - nad more intelligent-than their American counterparts. Praising the culutral attaintments of the Japanese officers, he tells us that one of them knew Spencer Tracy, and that all three officers fought to the death. Having had an uncle who was taken prisoner by the Japanese, and was put to work building their vile Burma railway, I am not disposed to shed any tears over Japanese deaths during the war, and I don't care if every officer in the Japanese army knew Spencer Tracy AND Katherine Hepburn, there was nothing intelligent or sensitive about the way they treated their prisoners. This is a very good book, but not quite as dazzlingly brilliant and witty as some of his earlier books like 'Holidays in Hell' 'Give War a Chance' "All the Trouble in the World" and 'Eat the Rich'. And I definitely feel that when it came to writing about Iwo jima, he must have had too much saki
Rating: 
Summary: If peace kills, what does war do?
Review: George Orwell continues to be exactly right when he wrote that war is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength. P.J. (and what kind of grown man would use those initials anyway?) is one many right-wingers who truly embody a steadfast refusal to let go of their ignorance and see reality for what it is.
This nation is suffering from a widespread ignorance in which a president has brought us lies, deception, incompetence, atrocities, and one economic disaster after another, yet he still gets to keep his job and have supporters like O'Rourke!
One of the main problems with O'Rourke's beliefs is that it is a self-defeating prophecy. The hypocrisy and ignorance of the Bush administration will only bring more terrorist threats against the U.S., which will lead to more time and money spent on military solutions instead of trying to find other ways that would require ingredients that many conservatives don't really have: intelligence, communication skills, and a respect for justice, equality, and understanding.
If O'Rourke thinks peace kills, how about he have to deal with his family being killed in a bombing strike and he lose his arms and legs like some U.S. soldiers have had to face? What would he have to say then? How much "fun" would that be? Usually, it seems that only a trauma like that could get a republican supporter to wake up from his political slumber since extremes seem to be the only thing conservatives understand.
Rating: 
Summary: When does Classic =cliche
Review: Have loved PJO since "RPR" was published in the 1989 but he is starting to become predictable . This will be the last PJ book I purchase without having a review of the contents first . A sad day , as the arrival of a new PJ O'rourke was something to relish .
Rating:
Summary: Funny as a lead cloud
Review: How does O'Rourke get away with publishing these painfully macho & hugely unfunny pieces? He reminds me of the guy at the party you didn't want to go to but went because of some social obligation - he's the one wearing a green blazer & plaid pants, a highball in his fist, carrying on...& on...& on ... about some banal escapade on the golf course or in the conference room & he's surrounded by a bevy of sycophants wearing frozen grins & gripping empty glasses. (Shudder).He & David Brooks are what swore me off the Atlantic Monthly. It was like drinking whiskey sours & prune juice. (Double-shudder).
Rating:
Summary: This is the PJ we remember
Review: I own, or have at least read, nearly every book PJ O'Rourke has published, up to and including the original American Spectator "Enemies List." So it was disappointing to read "The CEO of the Sofa," which I considered a failed, if admirable, experiment. "Peace Kills," however, is much closer to the classic PJ his fans know and love, and a worthy successor to "Holidays in Hell" and "All the Trouble in the World."
Over the years, PJ's writing has come to rely less on the wisecrack and one-liner, and more on shrewd observation and memorable reporting. His chapters here on Israel and Egypt, especially, are both entertaining and insightful. But I've always thought PJ's greatest strength was his ability to see through and deflate the hypocrisy and BS of the Left. His brief chapter "Nobel Pretensions" and his reporting on Leftist demonstrations in Washington, D.C., are fine examples of this. (I have to note, though, that reporting on Leftist demonstrations in D.C. seems to be a staple of PJ's repertoire, and so this article may bear some similarities to ones you've seen before. But then, that's true of Leftist demonstrations, too.)
But PJ has more than one club in his golf bag, as his recounting of a trip to Iwo Jima shows. He can be funny, but he can also be moving, and sometimes almost poetic. And nearly always, of course, memorable and worth re-reading. This may not be PJ's Best Book Ever, but it's still a fine addition to the shelf. Fans will enjoy it, and people interesting in well-written and original viewpoints on the world's trouble spots will find it worth picking up.
Rating:
Summary: Disappointing
Review: I'd found 'Give War a Chance', 'Holiday's in Hell' and 'Eat the Rich' works of genius. Compared to his older work, this one is just sad. If you have any awareness of current events, then don't buy this book.
Rating:
Summary: Humorous Look at the World We Live In
Review: If you're looking for a knee-slapping, good time description of the world today, you should look somewhere else. Actually, I don't know where you could look, in light of the times. In any event, this is a funny, light and easy to read book that examines hot zones aroung the world with a lighter perspective. Oddly enough, the author makes quite a few valid points about the foundational aspects of conflict around the world. As Americans, it would be good for us to learn that we can't solve the world's problems with the fast-food approach that we find so satisfying to apply to other aspects of life. I especially enjoyed Mr. O'Rourke's descriptions of his interaction with common people in the Middle East, since it drives home the fact that most people just want to be left alone to make a decent living; without much regard for the politics of hatred that our leaders tend to focus upon.
Rating: 
Summary: Not His Best
Review: In this collection of essays, O'Rourke recounts his travels to such places as Iraq, Israel, and Egypt. As usual, he writes with a smirk and makes more than a few political jabs, but overall, this book is not as funny as most of O'Rourke's works. Probably the most entertaining essay is on the eclectic and often unintentionally ironic Washington, D.C. demonstrations. Overall, however, the book did not deliver the kind of high quality satire I have come to expect from O'Rourke. It was a quick and amusing read, to be sure, but it was one of his lesser books.
Rating:
Summary: Will you like it? Take this quick half-paragraph test.
Review: It's easy to find out if you'll like this book. Read the following half paragraph from the end of chapter one:
"But as frightening as terrorism is, it's the weapon of losers. When someone detonates a suicide bomb, that person does not have career prospects. And no matter how horrific the terrorist attack, it's conducted by losers. Winners don't need to hijack airplanes. Winners have an air force."
If you think that's funny and on target, you'll like the book. If you fail to see the humor, or think he's off in the weeds on his opinions, try something else.
I've been reading P.J. since his early National Lampoon days, and I think this is as funny as anything he's done in a long time. It's certainly better than his last two efforts ("Eat the Rich" and "CEO of the Sofa"). It's more comparable to "Give War a Chance". I'm glad to see him regaining his edge.
|
