authors
data
Product: Book
ISBN-10: 0-333-63331-8
ISBN-13: 9780333633311
Publisher: Pan Books
Country:
Year: 1996
Number of pages: 512
Binding: Paperback
ISBN-10: 0-333-63331-8
ISBN-13: 9780333633311
Publisher: Pan Books
Country:
Year: 1996
Number of pages: 512
Binding: Paperback
editions
order
reviews
Rescuing Machiavelli and his prince from hell 
De Grazia's book on Machiavelli is an example of a kind of old-fashioned intellectual study one rarely finds these days: a close reading of the original texts--all of them, from »The Prince« to the least known of the letters--unencumbered by secondary sources and filled with arcane details that gradually build to a comprehensive and exacting overview of the man and his life. It is not an introduction for the uninitiated; rather, it's an explicative guide to all Machiavelli's works and a cohesive summary of the unique worldview imagined by this archetypal Renaissance man. More specifically, it tries to reconcile the goal (in political terms) of the »common good« pursued by the ideal ruler with the morality (in theological terms) of the »evil acts« this same ruler must sometimes perform to achieve this goal. In its crudest terms, the question is: How can the »good« (e.g., successful) prince avoid going to hell? »It is permissible to say good of evil,« according to De Grazia's reading of Machiavelli, »if that evil is but seeming evil and converts to a true good.« The qualities of such actions become »means, tools, instruments, detachable from the person using them.« Nevertheless, the prince »has to steer a course between cruelty and compassion«; his action must be accompanied by »grace and glory.« And in the end, the virtuous leader whose worth is misunderstood in this life will be rewarded in the afterlife; indeed, God prefers political action to spiritual activity. Along the way to reconciling Machiavelli's moral philosophy and his political philosophy, the author provides so much more: a solid biographical account of the episodes and experiences that influenced Machiavelli's thinking, the contemporary realpolitik that limited and often determined his advice to rulers and mentors, a portrait of the whimsical side of a man whose comic works have been neglected in recent decades (especially the farcical »Mandragola,« a satire ripe for rediscovery). Overall, for a literary-biographical study of such picayune detail, De Grazia's work is surprisingly readable--and, at times, unexpectedly funny. But its one fault major is the total lack of an introductory outline of the book's somewhat meandering journey through Renaissance history, culture, metaphysics, and etymology; I fear that many otherwise interested fans of Machiavelli may give up after the chapter devoted to the single phrase »God more a friend to them than to you« in all its possible variations and meanings and interpretations. It's really quite unclear until much later where the author's arguments are headed or why they are important, and the organization of the book as a whole makes sense only after one has finished it. Still, if you're truly interested in what Machiavelli »meant« to his contemporaries (and especially if you are hunting for a book unscarred by the political axes wielded by many of his modern interpreters), this is probably the best study available.
De Grazia's book on Machiavelli is an example of a kind of old-fashioned intellectual study one rarely finds these days: a close reading of the original texts--all of them, from »The Prince« to the least known of the letters--unencumbered by secondary sources and filled with arcane details that gradually build to a comprehensive and exacting overview of the man and his life. It is not an introduction for the uninitiated; rather, it's an explicative guide to all Machiavelli's works and a cohesive summary of the unique worldview imagined by this archetypal Renaissance man. More specifically, it tries to reconcile the goal (in political terms) of the »common good« pursued by the ideal ruler with the morality (in theological terms) of the »evil acts« this same ruler must sometimes perform to achieve this goal. In its crudest terms, the question is: How can the »good« (e.g., successful) prince avoid going to hell? »It is permissible to say good of evil,« according to De Grazia's reading of Machiavelli, »if that evil is but seeming evil and converts to a true good.« The qualities of such actions become »means, tools, instruments, detachable from the person using them.« Nevertheless, the prince »has to steer a course between cruelty and compassion«; his action must be accompanied by »grace and glory.« And in the end, the virtuous leader whose worth is misunderstood in this life will be rewarded in the afterlife; indeed, God prefers political action to spiritual activity. Along the way to reconciling Machiavelli's moral philosophy and his political philosophy, the author provides so much more: a solid biographical account of the episodes and experiences that influenced Machiavelli's thinking, the contemporary realpolitik that limited and often determined his advice to rulers and mentors, a portrait of the whimsical side of a man whose comic works have been neglected in recent decades (especially the farcical »Mandragola,« a satire ripe for rediscovery). Overall, for a literary-biographical study of such picayune detail, De Grazia's work is surprisingly readable--and, at times, unexpectedly funny. But its one fault major is the total lack of an introductory outline of the book's somewhat meandering journey through Renaissance history, culture, metaphysics, and etymology; I fear that many otherwise interested fans of Machiavelli may give up after the chapter devoted to the single phrase »God more a friend to them than to you« in all its possible variations and meanings and interpretations. It's really quite unclear until much later where the author's arguments are headed or why they are important, and the organization of the book as a whole makes sense only after one has finished it. Still, if you're truly interested in what Machiavelli »meant« to his contemporaries (and especially if you are hunting for a book unscarred by the political axes wielded by many of his modern interpreters), this is probably the best study available.
Finally a decent book on Nicolo 
I give this book an easy 5 stars. This is much less intimidating than many of Nicolo's own writings … De Grazia is interested in his subject, fun, and ultimately very sympathetic to Machiavelli. The book shows how Machiavelli was a poet, a lover, a (really good!) comic playwright, and a champion of democracy, in addition to being one of the founding fathers of political science. I've read the majority of Nicolo's surviving work, often in the Italian, and De Grazia truly portrays him as he was … a courtier after Castiglione's model who (even after his death) suffered more than his share of the »unremitting malice of fortune.« READ IT!!!
I give this book an easy 5 stars. This is much less intimidating than many of Nicolo's own writings … De Grazia is interested in his subject, fun, and ultimately very sympathetic to Machiavelli. The book shows how Machiavelli was a poet, a lover, a (really good!) comic playwright, and a champion of democracy, in addition to being one of the founding fathers of political science. I've read the majority of Nicolo's surviving work, often in the Italian, and De Grazia truly portrays him as he was … a courtier after Castiglione's model who (even after his death) suffered more than his share of the »unremitting malice of fortune.« READ IT!!!
Good, But A Pulitzer Prize!?
Da Grazia's intellectual, noetic style and sometimes peculiar authorial habits require some getting used to, but this is a decent, comprehensive, well-researched biography. I received my copy as a Christmas gift, and I do not regret taking the time to read it. Having done so, I feel like I know much more about the famous author of »The Prince« (which, I suppose, many folks used to have to study in school »way back when«), as well as much more about Machiavelli's unique circumstances, historical milieu, and overall literary output. Da Grazia, who I understand is an academic scholar, does a good job of putting a sympathetic, human face on his subject while simultaneously weaving together the disparate, rather derivative strands of influence and interesting life experiences that resulted in the incremental development of Machiavelli's reasoned and subsequently highly influential political/moral paradigm. However, I was a bit surprised and unsettled to learn that this biography was awarded a Pulitzer Prize in 1989. It's a good book, but, in my opinion, not that good! But, perhaps I am confused. I thought that standards were extremely stringent regarding such recognition, but maybe I am mistaken or somehow »old fashioned« and becoming increasingly clueless. Maybe the standards were tougher a few years ago and, like so much else, have since become somewhat »watered down«. It seems, that in this day and age, in which so few people regularly read books of quality, much less write them, it's all just amounts to one more of those »signs of the times«.
Da Grazia's intellectual, noetic style and sometimes peculiar authorial habits require some getting used to, but this is a decent, comprehensive, well-researched biography. I received my copy as a Christmas gift, and I do not regret taking the time to read it. Having done so, I feel like I know much more about the famous author of »The Prince« (which, I suppose, many folks used to have to study in school »way back when«), as well as much more about Machiavelli's unique circumstances, historical milieu, and overall literary output. Da Grazia, who I understand is an academic scholar, does a good job of putting a sympathetic, human face on his subject while simultaneously weaving together the disparate, rather derivative strands of influence and interesting life experiences that resulted in the incremental development of Machiavelli's reasoned and subsequently highly influential political/moral paradigm. However, I was a bit surprised and unsettled to learn that this biography was awarded a Pulitzer Prize in 1989. It's a good book, but, in my opinion, not that good! But, perhaps I am confused. I thought that standards were extremely stringent regarding such recognition, but maybe I am mistaken or somehow »old fashioned« and becoming increasingly clueless. Maybe the standards were tougher a few years ago and, like so much else, have since become somewhat »watered down«. It seems, that in this day and age, in which so few people regularly read books of quality, much less write them, it's all just amounts to one more of those »signs of the times«.
Intellectually stimulating and thought provoking
To those of you looking for an easy read on Machiavelli, I recommend going somewhere else. This book isn't going to skimp on the scholarly side just to make it easier to read for others. This is an intelligent book for an intelligent reader. Grazia intricately weaves together the mindset of Machiavelli as we see him through his many works and letters to friends. At first I was a little disappointed, perhaps because I was looking more for the momentous doings of Machiavelli. Yet, as I worked through the sheer volume of this biography (not by number of pages, yet rather by the number of words per page) I began to grow and respect Grazia as I slowly began to realize who Machiavelli was and how his thoughts and ideas influenced so many. His thoughts are his astounding accomplishments and those we certainly see here. For those interested in reading an intellectual book, definitely read this one. Machiavelli always believed that a person becomes a learned person through reading. For someone who agrees with this mindset I would wholeheartedly recommend this book to anyone that has intelligence enough to want to learn rather than those readers who simply are looking for an easy read.
To those of you looking for an easy read on Machiavelli, I recommend going somewhere else. This book isn't going to skimp on the scholarly side just to make it easier to read for others. This is an intelligent book for an intelligent reader. Grazia intricately weaves together the mindset of Machiavelli as we see him through his many works and letters to friends. At first I was a little disappointed, perhaps because I was looking more for the momentous doings of Machiavelli. Yet, as I worked through the sheer volume of this biography (not by number of pages, yet rather by the number of words per page) I began to grow and respect Grazia as I slowly began to realize who Machiavelli was and how his thoughts and ideas influenced so many. His thoughts are his astounding accomplishments and those we certainly see here. For those interested in reading an intellectual book, definitely read this one. Machiavelli always believed that a person becomes a learned person through reading. For someone who agrees with this mindset I would wholeheartedly recommend this book to anyone that has intelligence enough to want to learn rather than those readers who simply are looking for an easy read.
Elegant, curious, wrong-headed, learned
Machiavelli is arguably the greatest philosophical chameleon in the history of Western Civilization. He has been called the last of the medieval thinkers, a typical civic humanist and the first of the moderns. He has been declared the teacher of tyranny, the champion of princes, the defender of republics. He has been identified as the inventor of the idea of »reason of state« and the advocate of the common good. He has inspired great fogs of words (to steal a nice phrase of Roberto Ridolfi's) but few biographies. As much as I like and admire the work being reviewed, it is not a biography, not even really an intellectual biography. If you come here looking for a standard chronology, go to Ridolfi's work; De Grazia's is episodic at best. Do not rely on this book to make sense of the arc of Machiavelli's career, his love affairs or of his domestic life. You get snapshots of all these aspects of Machiavelli's life but there is no real focus on them, no real detail presented. What you do get is a discursive argument that Machiavelli's thought has two foundations. The first one is not too unusual- Machiavelli's political philosophy is based on his understanding of the common good. The second foundation is a bit more idiosyncratic- Machiavelli is best understood as a reformer of the Christian faith. I disagree really with both convictions of De Grazia's but what I do not question is his scholarship in regards to the primary sources. Dante Germino pointed out in a review back when De Grazia's book was first published that De Grazia has seemingly read every scrap of paper that Machiavelli ever scribbled on with his pen. De Grazia has absorbed the major political works, the poetry, the plays, and the papers that Machiavelli wrote during his work for the Florentine state. De Grazia does all of his own translations from the Italian and provides the original quote in his notes. What is weird is he cites no secondary sources whatsoever, even when they are needed. I would like to quote a passage from De Grazia's book about Machiavelli's conception of God: »Niccolo's God is the creator, the master deity, providential, real, universal, one of many names, personal, invocable, thankable, to be revered, a judge, just and forgiving, rewarding and punishing, awesome, a force transcendent, separate from but operative in the world.« (De Grazia, p. 59) I see most of De Grazia's book as an expansion and defense of this statement. In his defense of it, I believe that De Grazia relies entirely too much on An Exhortation to Penitence. And yet, I believe that this is a book that everyone interested in Machiavelli should read and learn from. Why? For one thing, De Grazia makes clear just how different the Christianity of that era was from ours. There may be only one God but there were apparently a ton of lesser deities. For example, see pp. 204-5, for a discussion of Fortune as a minister of God that occasionally, when He isn't looking, goes her own way. Secondly, De Grazia is focusing on one of the central questions of interpretation that any reader dealing with Machiavelli has to answer. How much did Machiavelli believe in God? How much of what he wrote was lip service? How much did he use the rhetorical tropes of his era to express (or hide) his thought? De Grazia has given us a sustained well-thought out answer to these questions that is based on the whole of Machiavelli's writings. I just feel that by the time you understand all of the nuances of God that De Grazia would have Machiavelli believe in, there isn't much of a Christian God left. I happen to be okay with that whole lack of God thing and I believe Machiavelli was too. But I learned a lot from De Grazia about Machiavelli and his times. And I admire him greatly as an elegant writer. And anyone who inspires someone to go actually read Machiavelli is a friend of mine.
Machiavelli is arguably the greatest philosophical chameleon in the history of Western Civilization. He has been called the last of the medieval thinkers, a typical civic humanist and the first of the moderns. He has been declared the teacher of tyranny, the champion of princes, the defender of republics. He has been identified as the inventor of the idea of »reason of state« and the advocate of the common good. He has inspired great fogs of words (to steal a nice phrase of Roberto Ridolfi's) but few biographies. As much as I like and admire the work being reviewed, it is not a biography, not even really an intellectual biography. If you come here looking for a standard chronology, go to Ridolfi's work; De Grazia's is episodic at best. Do not rely on this book to make sense of the arc of Machiavelli's career, his love affairs or of his domestic life. You get snapshots of all these aspects of Machiavelli's life but there is no real focus on them, no real detail presented. What you do get is a discursive argument that Machiavelli's thought has two foundations. The first one is not too unusual- Machiavelli's political philosophy is based on his understanding of the common good. The second foundation is a bit more idiosyncratic- Machiavelli is best understood as a reformer of the Christian faith. I disagree really with both convictions of De Grazia's but what I do not question is his scholarship in regards to the primary sources. Dante Germino pointed out in a review back when De Grazia's book was first published that De Grazia has seemingly read every scrap of paper that Machiavelli ever scribbled on with his pen. De Grazia has absorbed the major political works, the poetry, the plays, and the papers that Machiavelli wrote during his work for the Florentine state. De Grazia does all of his own translations from the Italian and provides the original quote in his notes. What is weird is he cites no secondary sources whatsoever, even when they are needed. I would like to quote a passage from De Grazia's book about Machiavelli's conception of God: »Niccolo's God is the creator, the master deity, providential, real, universal, one of many names, personal, invocable, thankable, to be revered, a judge, just and forgiving, rewarding and punishing, awesome, a force transcendent, separate from but operative in the world.« (De Grazia, p. 59) I see most of De Grazia's book as an expansion and defense of this statement. In his defense of it, I believe that De Grazia relies entirely too much on An Exhortation to Penitence. And yet, I believe that this is a book that everyone interested in Machiavelli should read and learn from. Why? For one thing, De Grazia makes clear just how different the Christianity of that era was from ours. There may be only one God but there were apparently a ton of lesser deities. For example, see pp. 204-5, for a discussion of Fortune as a minister of God that occasionally, when He isn't looking, goes her own way. Secondly, De Grazia is focusing on one of the central questions of interpretation that any reader dealing with Machiavelli has to answer. How much did Machiavelli believe in God? How much of what he wrote was lip service? How much did he use the rhetorical tropes of his era to express (or hide) his thought? De Grazia has given us a sustained well-thought out answer to these questions that is based on the whole of Machiavelli's writings. I just feel that by the time you understand all of the nuances of God that De Grazia would have Machiavelli believe in, there isn't much of a Christian God left. I happen to be okay with that whole lack of God thing and I believe Machiavelli was too. But I learned a lot from De Grazia about Machiavelli and his times. And I admire him greatly as an elegant writer. And anyone who inspires someone to go actually read Machiavelli is a friend of mine.
related products
© 1994–2010 Sascha Hendel
last update: 3/18/2010
URL: http://www.book-info.com/isbn/0-333-63331-8.htm
- search