<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: An account of the wasteland of Africa
Review: An interesting book on an extraordinary topic. When the French began to penetrate the Sahara in the 1830s they had no idea how much of a wasteland it was. The Sahara in fact is so big it could swallow the United States whole. In the last 19th century explorers and military adventurers began to venture into the vast wasteland, usually the expeditions originated from the south. Charles de Foucauld and Henri Laperrine star as the main characters in this historical account of colonialism and adventure. One is a wandering womanizer turned saint, a fanatic whose insane ideas knew no bounds. The other is a strict military officer. The only characteristic the two men had in common was devotion and strict discipline. They became fast friends as the fanatic led the soldier across the desert in search of empire and national redemption. The author details in great photographic text the many stories and adventures these two men had, one of which included the creation of a camel corps to explore the desert wasteland where no man could survive. This book is perfect for anyone interested in survival/adventure stories, anyone interested in the Sahara and life in the desert as well as colonial enthusiasts. This is not an overview of the French colonial experience in Algeria, although many of the subjects, like the rise of Muslim fundamentalism are touched upon, this book looks at the French colonial experience through the eyes of two very eccentric if typically French individuals. An important book on an oft not covered subject.
Rating:
Summary: An account of the wasteland of Africa
Review: An interesting book on an extraordinary topic. When the French began to penetrate the Sahara in the 1830s they had no idea how much of a wasteland it was. The Sahara in fact is so big it could swallow the United States whole. In the last 19th century explorers and military adventurers began to venture into the vast wasteland, usually the expeditions originated from the south. Charles de Foucauld and Henri Laperrine star as the main characters in this historical account of colonialism and adventure. One is a wandering womanizer turned saint, a fanatic whose insane ideas knew no bounds. The other is a strict military officer. The only characteristic the two men had in common was devotion and strict discipline. They became fast friends as the fanatic led the soldier across the desert in search of empire and national redemption. The author details in great photographic text the many stories and adventures these two men had, one of which included the creation of a camel corps to explore the desert wasteland where no man could survive. This book is perfect for anyone interested in survival/adventure stories, anyone interested in the Sahara and life in the desert as well as colonial enthusiasts. This is not an overview of the French colonial experience in Algeria, although many of the subjects, like the rise of Muslim fundamentalism are touched upon, this book looks at the French colonial experience through the eyes of two very eccentric if typically French individuals. An important book on an oft not covered subject.
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing Book From One Of My Favorite Writers
Review: I'd previously read, and enjoyed, both "Barrow's Boys" and "Killing Dragons." So, I fully expected to enjoy "The Sword And The Cross." Alas, it was not meant to be. The first hundred pages or so held my interest. After that, I just kept reading for the sake of finishing the book. Not a pleasant experience. So, what happened? Mr. Fleming wanted to tell us about the history of the French colonial experience in Algeria and the Sahara. He chose to do this by primarily concentrating on two people: Charles de Foucauld and Henri Laperrine. Unfortunately, the first fellow was so bizarre that it was impossible to sympathize with him. He was a hedonist turned religious fanatic. He was a masochist. Where others travelled by camel in desert temperatures of 120 degrees farenheit, Foucauld chose to walk. He ate almost nothing. He refused to indulge himself with creature comforts. He longed for death. (I'm not guessing about this or playing armchair psychiatrist. Fleming quotes several times from Foucauld's journal concerning his lifelong deathwish.) Foucauld wanted to convert Moslems to Christianity and set himself up as an example of a person living a Christian life. However, he really had no interest in other people and longed for solitude. Not surprisingly, he failed to gain converts. Despite espousing Christian principles, he was very inconsiderate of his long-suffering manservant and he spent much of his lifetime gathering intelligence to pass on to the French military. Mr. Fleming quotes many people who looked upon Foucauld as a holy-man. It is clear that, in person, he possessed "a certain something" which caused people to look upon him that way. Unfortunately, it doesn't come across on the page. One gets only the impression of an egocentric, unhappy, and self-destructive "nut." We wind up not caring about what he does or what happens to him. With Laperrine we have a different problem. Not much is known about him and he wasn't big on self-publicity. Hence, he floats in and out of the narrative and we never get a handle on who he is and what he wants, other than that he wanted France to be successful in the colonization of the Sahara. One of Fleming's major themes is that the French really had no compelling reason to be in the Sahara. It was sort of, "well, everybody else has colonies, so we want some too...even if we are talking about thousands of miles of desert." At one point, Fleming enjoys writing about one "native notable" who agreed to go to France for a visit. Upon returning home to Africa, he was mystified as to why people who "had Paris" would want to come to the desert. Fleming's point is that there was no point - after the initial contacts, the French presence just sort of snowballed. The book is filled with numerous trips through the desert by the French military, as they try to prove to the Arabs and Tuaregs that they are in control. But, since the whole thing is so pointless, we wind up not caring about any of this. Frankly, it is monotonous and boring to read about. I am a Francophile, and Mr. Fleming is a very good writer, but I couldn't get worked up about any of this. I suppose that if you are French, this background to what became the "Algerian Nightmare" of the mid-20th century (a military quagmire with terrorist attacks, to boot) might be of some scholarly interest. Otherwise, for the general reader, I just can't recommend this book.
<< 1 >>
| 
