Niall Ferguson, The War of the World

Do you read labels?  I do.  Always.  It's a little quirk of mine, but one that repeatedly proves very useful.  Getting familiar with ingredients list of your food or medicine can prove truly enlightening.

Perhaps it is only to be expected that I also study book covers, in detail.  I'm particularly fascinated by one-line excerpts from magazine reviews.  I truly admire the ingenuity of their creators.  The simple, if cloaked, request (buy the book) inevitably turns into a wordy eulogy.  How long can you spin a short message?  I would run out of creativity - and patience! - after three raves or so.  Magazine writers seem to be able to go on forever.

Niall Ferguson is a real darling of the critics, if the cover of The War of the World is to be believed.  'One of the world's 100 most influential people'.  'Niall Ferguson has transformed the intellectual landscape'.  'The most brilliant British historian of his generation...'.  Proud claims, wouldn't you agree?

One word: oversell.

The War of the World is pleasant enough.  It's engaging, easy to follow, accessible.  Yet...  I can't see how it is exceptional, much less how it transforms the intellectual landscape.

Simply put, the book is just another historical narrative covering the World Wars.  I know that Ferguson tried to avoid exactly such judgement, he admits this much in the preface.  As I understand, he tried to write an analysis of the twentieth century warfare, focusing on search for some general theory, applicable to all or most of armed conflicts.  I acknowledge his effort and applaud the idea, but I also believe he completely failed to achieve his goal in this particular volume.  With pretty much whole book devoted to the first and second global conflict and only a few chapters to the second half of the century, proportions are simply not right.

Unfortunately, I couldn't detect anything revolutionary or 'landscape transforming'.  The narrative is a standard 'World Politics according to a Western historian' story.  At one moment I actually wished historians were forbidden to write chronicles of their own country.  Moral relativism inevitably surfaces and after a while, irks.  But OK, Ferguson is not TOO guilty of this particular charge.

I also found some of his information not trustworthy.  I wouldn't stake my reputation on that - after all, he's the historian, not me - but at the first sight some of his facts beg for further questioning.
So does spelling of Polish names (I was born in Poland, I know).

Truth to be told, such obvious mishaps don't surface too often and I admit I'm being picky.  The War of the World is definitely readable.  Not life-changing, but very, very decent.

Niall Ferguson, Civilization - The West and the Rest

I have to admit, I approached this book with extreme caution.  Too many of contemporary works on 'civilization' prove to be a mixture of rhetoric and preaching, none of which I like.  Yet I do like to embark on verbal campaigns against consumerism and shallowness of the pop culture from time to time, so I thought it a good idea to learn some more on the subject.  The book was mine (for a time, that is - did I ever mention what a great fan of libraries I am?).

I have to admit (again!) I was pleasantly surprised.  Of course Ferguson does suggest his own explanation for why our civilization looks like it does.  I don't necessarily agree with him, but then again - it is not such a balderdash as I expected.  For details read the book yourself, I can only promise you that it's worth it. 

If The West and the Rest was called A Doctrinal and Economical History of the World the title wouldn't be too far off mark.  Ferguson gives us skeletal histories of most (all?) of contemporary empires, presented in pleasant and quite believable way.  He also remains impressively impartial throughout the narrative (in the circumstances, he can be forgiven for claiming that British imperialism was ok because it brought to conquered lands as many benefits as disasters).  Sometimes it is actually difficult to guess what are the author's personal beliefs and I have to admit this is something I admire in a historian, especially when he talks about religion (which Ferguson does, among other subjects).  One exception - he surely hates communism - it's the only instance I detected where his language turned rhetorical and preachy - but it doesn't take much from the book's quality.

I'm not quite sure if I agree with the author's explanation for the 'greatness' of the Western civilization or, to be precise, I'm not convinced if 'greatness' is the right word to be used here.  'Powerful', yes, 'influential' - of course.  I would probably add 'predatorial' and 'ruthless' to this list and, funny thing, Ferguson's book convinced me even more that I would be right in this judgement.  Regardless of whether you think that Western civilization is a blessing or a bane, The West and the Rest does a good job explaining what are the sources of its success. 

Even if you don't wish to join the debate, you can read the book for the sake of interesting, little known facts with which the narrative is generously peppered.  For example - did you know that most of Nazi uniforms were supplied by Hugo Boss?  I didn't.  That's why I'm glad I've read this book.