The Only Living Witness: The True Story of Serial Sex Killer Ted Bundy

Average customer rating:

Book

Good book, bad edition.

Chilling epic on a deranged individual

In His Own Words.

Where has this book been?

The Only Living Witness: The True Story of Serial Sex Killer Ted Bundy
Stephen G. Michaud , Hugh Aynesworth , and Stephen G Michaud
Manufacturer: Authorlink
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books
Murder & Mayhem | True Accounts | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
True Crime | True Accounts | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

Ted Bundy : Conversations with a Killer

Killer Clown: John Wayne: The John Wayne Gacy Murders

The Jeffrey Dahmer Story: An American Nightmare (St. Martin's True Crime Library)

The Stranger Beside Me (Revised and Updated): 20th Anniversary

The Riverman: Ted Bundy and I Hunt for the Green River Killer

ASIN: 1928704115

Book Description

""The Only Living Witness" towers over the rest of the Ted Bundy bookshelf . . . (as) a monument to book-length journalism" (Jack Olsen, author of "The Misbegotten Son"). "A shining example of excellent reporting, fine writing, and a story of enduring value."--Carlton Stowers, author of "Careless Whispers."

Customer Reviews:

Book.......2007-09-22

This is a strong book that always keeps yo guessing and on the edge of your seat. I think that this author writes some nice pieces of written masterpiece! I will be buying more!

Good book, bad edition........2007-02-11

This is an excellent book, by a pair of thoughtful and talented authors with genuine first-hand knowledge of one of the most terrifying human beings ever to walk the planet. Their account of the life, crimes and psychopathology of Ted Bundy is certainly among the best of the many written. The only reason I gave this edition (the paperback) 4 stars instead of 5 is that it's full of annoying typos! There are mis-spellings, mis-prints and lapses in tense consistency which are really pretty ridiculous in this day and age. These are the type of thing that the most basic word-processing software picks up and they kind of jolt you out of the narrative and spoil your enjoyment from time to time. The publishers could simply have done a better job.

Chilling epic on a deranged individual.......2006-12-24

Studying criminals and crime is one thing... Being exposed to the mind and life story of a serial sex murderer is entirely different. You may watch a horror movie and see the special effects of a person being chopped to pieces. You may also see an episode of a crime show depicting the horror of an innocent woman being kidnapped and raped. But the mental images a reader receives when reading about the horror Ted Bundy reaped across the United States in the 70s is astonishing and chilling. It is very easy to see why a nation was scared to leave their house, walk down a dark alley or wonder if their daughter made if home okay from the library at your local college. This book tells all of Ted Bundy's life from his childhood all the way to old sparky. The author writes this book after much in depth research, not to mention countless first hand interviews with the most notorious serial killer of all time himself. A must read for anyone curious about the deranged killer.

In His Own Words........2006-06-06

Many books have been written about Ted Bundy and none are better known that Ann Rule's "Stranger Beside Me". While the author of this book refuses to mention Rule by name, the story in this book is much the same. Michaud's book does however go a step further than Rule in "The Only Living Witness."

Thirty females died at the hands of Ted Bundy. The stories of the murders are told largely the same in any credible book about the subject. The interviews with Bundy set this book apart. The interesting part of the interviews is that Bundy refuses to admit guilt. However, Bundy does tell how he believes the killings happened through a third person account. In almost a bi-polar reality, Bundy does confess through these interviews. The author varies the chronological order of events early in the book, but stays on a straight course after the initial chapters. If you acquire a newer printing of the book, you will also be able to read about Bundy's final days and admission to his crimes in his own words, without disguise of a third person account.

There were aspects of this book that I like better than other books about Ted Bundy. Yet there was no part of this book that sets it out as the definitive Ted Bundy book. Still, it is a very well written and well researched book.

Where has this book been?.......2006-04-24

"The Only Living Witness" has been around for awhile. How could I not know? Yeah, I loved Ann Rule's "The Stranger Beside Me," and this is even more interesting! It is amazing to hear Bundy's own words - to get an insight into his mania - and to watch as he denies denies denies only to ultimately try to come clean in hopes of living a few more months. The Stephen G. Michaud writes wonderfully - a high priority for me. As a writer, he obviously isn't "talking down" to his reader. This is definitaly worth buying...going to check out his other books now!

The Only Living Witness: The True Story of Serial Sex Killer Ted Bundy

Average customer rating:

The Only Living Witness: The True Story of Serial Sex Killer Ted Bundy
Stephen G. Michaud , and Hugh Aynesworth
Manufacturer: Barnes & Noble Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

ASIN: 0760774293

Book Description

A first-hand account of the ordeal of prisoners at the notorious Civil War prison camp.

Customer Reviews:

Kory's Review for Ms. Balentine.......2004-03-05

This book was good as far as memoirs go. It was a good read, and I learned a lot about the prison life during the Civil War. This book was about how horrible prison life was during the Civil War. This book takes place mainly in two prisons, and possibly two of the worst prisons, Andersonville and Florence.
The whole book was about the Civil War; mainly it talks about Ezra Hoyt Ripple's exploits in a Civil War prison, and how horrible the conditions were in the
prisons in the South. Ezra, and a few other soldiers from his regiment were captured during the siege of James Island, and sent to the prison in Andersonville. Ezra goes through his horrible ordeal with his three closest comrades in prison, John Rapp,
Michael Beavers, and John Brennan. Ezra is an amateur violin player, and in prison that can get you some respect, food, and even more freedom. In Andersonville, as with many Civil War prisons, disease was rampant, and many hundreds of people died every day, from diseases such as the fever, scurvy, dysentery, cholera, and the flu. The prison guards at Andersonville are particularly mean to the prisoners, because the prisoners are Union men, and the Confederate soldiers hated them for being so. The book describes in excruciating detail how prison life was harder for the Union soldiers in captivity, then it was for the Confederate prisoners. The people in these prisons had to deal with an insufficient amount of clothes, poor shelter, horrible weather conditions, and barely enough food rations to live. It's a wonder that anyone made it out of these prisons alive for being in the prison after an extended period of time.
This book's strengths are its main theme, which is how horrible prison life in the South was during the Civil War, and the storyline is interesting. The theme has a lot of textual backup, because the whole book relates to the main theme, I thought it worked well how Ezra tied events that happened in the book to the theme of the book. The pictures he drew were helpful to try to visualize what was going on. It is written well, and is as interesting as a memoir can be. It is a good war book, because the things written about are real events experienced by the author of the book. What I liked about this book was that it was very realistic, and that it actually happened, which makes it more tragic.
This book's weaknesses are that it is kind of wordy, and at times difficult to read, because of the many lapses in the action. This book could be better if it talked more about the more interesting parts, because most of the good action parts are only briefly mentioned, whereas the most boring, lame events are talked about extensively. What I didn't like about this book was that it was sort of boring, and very descriptive of the diseases, which is, in my opinion, disgusting.
Overall this book is a very good read as far as memoirs go, and I recommend it to anyone that needs to read a memoir, or that just likes to read war books. It is entertaining, and is very real. It takes you to the Civil War days, so you can understand what it was like for these freedom fighters.

Kory Breig's Review for Ms. Balentine.......2004-03-05

RICKS REVIEW OF DATDL FOR MS BALENTINE.......2004-03-01

The story starts out with a flash a telling of dates and numbers relevant to the story. Then he continues on to tell of his experiences in the army and the description of his capture. He is on a mission to attack a confederate fort when he and others of his regiment are captured. They are soon taken to a confederate prison to which most will not return. As he becomes accustom to the surroundings he realizes the true horror and struggle he will face to survive. With each passing day he learns new tricks to survive as other prisoners pass away. These tricks and his luck help him succeeded in surviving. His luck is great at times, first he is asked to play the violin for the confederate officers and declines, a poor choice, then a fellow prisoner asks him to play a song for him and he is paid in food and drink. As he plays more and more for the prisoners he earns their respect. This respect will grant him many gifts as he spends more and more time in the prison. He soon describes other events and rules in the prison such as a punishment for thieves was to have half the head shaved so that all who saw him would know he was a thief and punish him in such a way to make him regret such a poor choice. One trick used to smuggle food in was when the wood crew went out to cut wood they'd be allowed to bring in one log of their own as payment. They often times would bring in hollow logs and the confederates wondered why. They never found out the true reason until one day when a member of the wood crew stumbled and dropped him log, all the beans hidden in the hollow log were spilt across the ground. The wood crew while out cutting wood would buy beans off local slaves or anyone willing to sell for a much cheaper price than the prison and smuggle them in to eat or sell. Ezra's story continues when he tries his hand at escaping which unfortunately fails horribly. In the end he's is released and sent back to his home in the North.
Ripple does a great job of describing his story while in prison. It has its up and downs though. The detailed description and the pictures he drew help you to get a full understanding of what he went through. The bouncing between past and present makes the story confusing and tricky to understand. He goes from being in jail to after the war, to the reunions of the prisoners he went to. All these descriptions make the story hard to follow, but add to the feeling. Other than those few shortfalls it's an incredible book.
I would definitely recommend this book to others. This is great story of overcoming death and hopelessness to survive and come home again. This is an incredible tale of a man's overcoming of the worst odds through faith and hope. If you're interested in the civil war or just interested in stories of conquering the worst odds, then this is a book for you.

RSMITHS REVEIW FOR MRS BALENTINE.......2004-03-01

Life and Death Inside Confederate Prisons.......2003-11-02

Ezra Hoyt Ripple served the Union as a private in the 52nd Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry Regiment during the Civil War. He spent 9 months in Andersonville and Florence prisons as a prisoner of war. "Dancing Along the Deadline" is his detailed account of his experience in these infamous prisons, written originally for his family, then published during his lifetime. Mr. Ripple commissioned Civil War veteran and war correspondent James E. Taylor to illustrate his memoirs with drawings that depict scenes that he describes. This edition of "Dancing Along the Deadline" contains 55 of Mr. Taylor's black and white drawings, captioned by the author. Ezra Ripple worked closely with James Taylor on these excellent drawings to ensure their accuracy, and they help the reader immensely in forming a mental picture of what the prisons and their residents actually looked like.

In "Dancing Along the Deadline", Ezra Ripple paints a detailed picture of the conditions which captured Union soldiers endured inside Confederate prisons. As starvation was the greatest hardship, Ripple writes a lot about how the prisoners acquired food and how they made the most of it. He describes the physical layout of the prisons, the prisoners' routines, the prison guards and administrators, and his interaction with them. Although Andersonville was the Confederacy's largest and most infamous prison -and Ripple attests to its ruthless commandant- Florence prison actually had a higher death rate, in spite of its more sympathetic administration. And Ripple might have died there if not for his skills as a fiddler. He and several other prisoners formed a string band which performed for the officers and at local social gatherings. Ripple's memoirs are characterized by his general lack of malice toward his jailers. He was a religious man and a staunch patriot, so those are the eyes through which we see his world. He doesn't lump the Confederates who imprisoned him and his comrades into one "enemy" group. He criticizes the behavior of some, praises the character of others, and places the ultimate blame for the dreadful conditions in Confederate prisons on Brigadier General John H. Winder, who was in command of the prisons and whose goal seemed to be to bring all of the prisoners to their deaths. Although Ripple describes a lot of horror within the walls of Andersonville and Florence prisons, he claims to have omitted some "horrible details" of which "common decency" forbids mention. Reading his memoirs, I think we can guess what some of those "details" might have been.

"Dancing Along the Deadline" is required reading for anyone interested in the Civil War. And it's an interesting account of how people endure the unendurable and then how one man looked back on it. The "deadline" of the title is the line running around the outskirts of the prisons which any prisoner would be shot for crossing.

Book Description

Liberty is a revised and expanded edition of the book that Isaiah Berlin regarded as his most important - Four Essays on Liberty, a standard text of liberalism, constantly in demand and constantly discussed since it was first published in 1969. Writing in Harper's, Irving Howe described it as 'an exhilarating performance - this, one tells oneself, is what the life of the mind can be'. Berlin's editor Henry Hardy has revised the text, incorporating a fifth essay that Berlin himself had wanted to include. He has also added further pieces that bear on the same topic, so that Berlin's principal statements on liberty are at last available together in one volume. Finally, in an extended preface and in appendices drawn from Berlin's unpublished writings he exhibits some of the biographical sources of Berlin's lifelong preoccupation with liberalism. These additions help us to grasp the nature of Berlin's 'inner citadel', as he called it - the core of personal conviction from which some of his most influential writing sprang.

Customer Reviews:

Great treatise on the meaning of liberty.......2007-08-14

I read this book for a graduate class in Philosophy. Berlin in the book is talking about different understandings on liberty. How do liberals think about liberty? Not only liberals think about liberty, many isms do, there are many different ways to think about liberty. Berlin makes a few distinctions on liberty. In "Two Concepts of Liberty," he distinguishes between political liberty and individual Liberty. Political Liberty, democratic liberty having a vote and participating, like in Greek city-state. No limit on power of the government over any aspect of citizen's life, but a citizen has some control over government through his vote. Not all are citizens, women, slaves, etc. Liberals are interested in individual liberty; choose the activities they want to do. A tension between Political Liberty and Individual Liberty. Political Liberty implies that there is majority rule through the vote. Maybe a majority won't impose on people, but that can change through the majority vote. If you have a system that you set up to insure certain individual rights like the U.S. does you protect certain liberties like the 1st amendment to free speech. These rights are taken away from voting on by the majority and to change them you need a super majority. This takes away Political Liberty, so there is that antagonism between both liberties. Unless you are an anarchist, there are certain functions and liberties that must be given up to the government. The more individual freedoms you keep from government the less value Political Liberty has to citizens the fewer things we get to decide.

The famous concepts Berlin distinguishes between are Positive Liberty and Negative Liberty. 1. Positive Liberty means self-control over your own life. 2. Negative liberty means you are free from interference from other people. Other people can't force you to do something. Positive liberty is self-mastery, self-control. Negative liberty means you are free from interference from other people. Others can't compel you to act in a way you don't want to act. At first these sound like two sides of the same coin. What Berlin points out historically is that people who believe in Positive Liberty have taken it in a very different direction than those that believe in Negative Liberty. What they (Positive Liberty adherents) have done is to infer that from each person you can distinguish between what he or she thinks he or she wants, and what his or her better self or true self would want. Therefore, there is this idea that we all might have certain desires that we want but that they are not expressive of our real essence. An obvious case is an addict who has some part of them that really don't want the drug. Even though they put all their time and energy in getting the drug it might be tempting to think that they really don't want the drug. Once they got the distinction between ordinary desires that you are aware of and the desires that you truly want, then the Positive Liberty people are tempted to say that for someone to really have charge of their life to really have liberty than we have to make sure that they are doing what their true self wants to do, not the self that they are consciously aware of, not the self not the desires that seem to them to be strongest. But what the angels of their better nature want, that's real freedom. Even when the person is protesting that that isn't what they want, if you are making them do what their true self wants really then you are making them do good. Kant would be a supporter of this view.

We have two aspects of human nature. The numeral self and nominal self. The numeral self is our true self and is the basis of morality this is why we are morally obligated to do things because our true self accepts a certain kind of law and imposes it on us. We are obligated to obey it because it is a law our true self chooses even though we may not be consciously aware of it, we may have all kinds of desires pulling us in different directions. We are obligated to do it because it is what our true self chooses. Rousseau is very much in this tradition. He says people can be forced to be free. Historically, this is the direction that many people who believe in Positive Liberty go in.

The Negative liberty people tend to say that other people don't tell them what to do. They could have gone the same route thinking about two kinds of selves, and they could say negative liberty is when your lower self doesn't tell your higher self what to do, but that historically hasn't happened. That is not the kind of liberty they have been thinking about. Liberals generally belong to this kind of negative liberty position. The kind of liberty liberals tend to care about is freedom from other individuals or the government. Free to the extent no one tells you what to do, none of this true self-stuff. You are free if other people can't stop you from doing what you want to do. All the different liberals are going to believe that people should have a significant amount of this kind of (negative), liberty. All the critics of liberalism are not all going to want to take all this kind of liberty away, but they are going to definitely say that liberty is not as important as the liberals think it is and that it ought to be restricted in some significant ways.

Berlin says, once you see how the Positive Liberty idea was developed, it turns out not to have the same kind of tension with Political Liberty that Negative Liberty does. Since, you could always have the view what peoples true selves want can be discovered by a kind of democratic process, so that what the majority votes for is what everyone wants, even the minority, they just didn't really know what they wanted. We all really want what is best for our community, as Rousseau would say.

Recommended reading for anyone interested in philosophy, political science, and history.

Freedom of the wolves has often meant death of the sheep.......2007-04-14

Liberty is a very precious and rare quality of a living condition.
As I. Berlin states, `The periods and societies in which civil liberties were respected, and variety of opinion and faith tolerated, have been very few and far between, oases in the desert of human uniformity, intolerance and oppression.'

I. Berlin explains clearly that liberty has two faces: a positive and a negative one.
Positive liberty is the answer to the question: who controls? Am I my own master?
Negative liberty circumscribes the area wherein a third person can prevent anybody to make a free choice.
On these bases, a free society can be organized, with 1) absolute rights (not absolute powers) and 2) frontiers, defined in terms of rules, within which men should be inviolable.
For the author, freedom is not an end, but a means to create `room for personal ends', for happiness. He rightly criticizes E. Fromm: freedom is the opportunity to act, not action itself.

Philosophically, freedom has been ferociously contested by the determinists, the defenders of `historical inevitability' (Hegel, Marx, Bacon, Fourier, Comte). The author remarks judiciously that if the world is ruled by determinism, nobody is responsible: there is no free will, no morality, and no justice. Individual choice is an illusion. Determinism represents the world as a prison.
A more brutal kind of determinism is presented by those who believe that there is a final answer, a unique goal, a central principle that governs our life. This principle and its executioners provoked barbarous consequences.

Isaiah Berlin's reflections on liberty are profound and still very actual.
Not to be missed.

Stimulating but Perhaps Dated.......2007-02-26

Berlin's considerable reputation rests largely on his essays. In his chosen areas of political philosophy and intellectual history, he produced no major systematic works. His essays, particularly those in the history of ideas, are long, insightful, and informed by impressive breadth of knowledge and a humane temperament. He was a consistently excellent and sometimes elegant writer. Of all his essays, he felt his most substantial work was the writings on Liberty collected in this volume. The core of this book is the Four Essays on Liberty, which appeared originally as a book of that title about 40 years ago.
How good are these essays? They were written originally in the late 1940s through late 1950s and were directed, at least in part, at issues that preoccupied British intellectuals of that period. The backdrop was the Cold War, and debates about the justification of socialist ideals and the nature of socialism. Most of these essays have not worn well. I don't think there is much original or profound in either the first or last essays of the four; Political Ideas in the 20th Century, and John Stuart Mill and the Ends of Life. I suspect most critical readers will find the essay entitled Historical Inevitability to be fairly pedestrian. This leaves the most celebrated of these essays, Two Concepts of Liberty. It is on this essay and some of his best historical studies that Berlin's reputation rests.
In Two Concepts, Berlin developed his famous distinction between "negative" and "positive" concepts of liberty. He particularly focused on how a certain rationalist conception of "positive" liberty can become, though often via a tortuous route, a justification for attacks on "negative" liberty and assault basic human rights. Berlin argues that this conception of "positive" liberty leads to the great crimes of the 20th century. This leads to an eloquent plea for some form of pluralism in regard to ultimate human goals. Berlin develops this argument brilliantly and with a self-assured writing style that is a pleasure to read.
But how good is his argument? As he himself points out, there are circumstances underwhich the distinction between "negative" and "positive" liberty can be cloudy, casting doubt on the utility and reality of this distinction. He is incorrect in assigning blame for all the terrible crimes of the 20th century to the rationalist view of "positive" liberty. This is certainly a fair criticism with respect to Marxism and the great crimes of Marxist states. But does it apply to Fascism and violent nationalism? These movements were marked by wholesale rejection of rationalism and exaltation of emotion, quite different from what he describes as the rationalist wellspring of all the crimes of the 20th century.
Berlin is an interesting and thought provoking essayist but not a major figure in political thought or intellectual history.

Essays of the master moral philosopher of political liberty .......2006-04-27

Henry Hardy the devoted student and editor of the work of Isaiah Berlin has reedited and expanded Berlin's on Liberty. These essays are at the heart of Berlin's liberal political philsophy. And their most well- known conception is the distinction between 'negative and positive liberty'.
This is the way Wikipedia makes the distinction.

"He defined negative liberty as the absence of constraints on, or interference with, agents' possible action. I am more "negatively free" to the extent that fewer opportunities for possible action are foreclosed or interfered with. Positive liberty he associated with the idea of self-mastery, or the capacity to determine oneself, to be in control of one's destiny. While Berlin granted that both concepts of liberty represent valid human ideals, he believed that as a matter of history, the positive concept of liberty has proven more susceptible to political abuse. He argued that under the influence of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant and G.W.F. Hegel (all committed to the positive concept of liberty), European political thinkers were frequently tempted to equate liberty with forms of political discipline or constraint. This became politically dangerous when the relevant ideals of positive liberty were, in the course of the 19th century, used to defend ideals of national self-determination, imperatives of democratic self-government, and the communist notion of humanity collectively asserting rational control over its own destiny. In this way of thinking, Berlin contended, demands for freedom paradoxically become demands for forms of collective control and discipline - those deemed necessary for the "self-mastery" or self-determination of nations, classes, democratic communities, and perhaps of humanity as a whole. There is thus an elective affinity, for Berlin, between positive liberty and political totalitarianism."

Another of Berlin's major essays in this work deals with the conception of 'Historical Inevitability'. Here he is most fierce in his critique of Marxism with its posited inevitable stages of history. Something of a great man himself, Berlin was a strong champion of the idea that great individuals shape human events, and introduce novel transformations of reality.

A third center of Berlin's thought has to do with his 'pluralism' his sense of the differing ideals and values different societies have. His pluralism however is what he called an 'objective pluralism' as he thought that there are certain values such as 'individual liberty' which should prevail in all societies.

Ultimately though he claimed that both for the individual and for society 'ideal ends' often conflict, and that perfect realization in action, is therefore impossible. Life for Berlin moral decision for Berlin thus has a tragic element of incompleteness and contradiction.
In this sense of our limitation deriving from our own ideal ends and actions, Berlin 's thought ultimately corresponds to arguments concerning the limitations of Mind which have been made in modern thought regard to a wide variety of other areas of human inquiry, from theology to mathematics.

not another conservative or neo-liberal.......2005-10-04

I've read amazon reviews of this book that seemed to claim Berlin's liberalism for some kind of conservative or neo-liberal stance.
I find this misleading. I hope that nobody will be kept from looking into Berlins writings by that.
It is true that, especially in this book, Berlin argues against the fallacies of Marxism. And some shorter texts that the editors published here for the first time and an editorial essay make altogether clear, that Berlin intended a defence against the totalitarian currents in contemporary thinking of his time – being a victim of the Russian Revolution himself.
I read these essays very closely to see whether Berlin appeared to me like some kind of precursor of neo-liberlism (like Leo Strauss) but he is nothing of the kind. I am quite sure, that given the different situation today he would argue just as concisely against the neo-liberal ideology as he did against Marxism. For instance he admits that certain material means have to be furnished for freedom to be properly acted out. He does not leave everything to the supposedly free (if poor) individual. But active social politics were not the problem of his time. The welfare state was growing if anything rather too strong than to weak – it is missing today when the state is abused by neo-liberals.
His point was to defend freedom against any claim that there was „only one true way of seeing things“ which is precisely what Marxism did and what the preachers of the Washington Consensus etc. and propagandists like Fukuyama with his silly „end of history babble“ do today.

Berlin's argument is basically defensive – against the totalitarian impact of nationalism and communism. That is why he favors „negative freedom“ instead of positive freedom (i.e. the aspect: who governs which he links to the well-known totalitarian concept of true self, higher self, higher political conscience and so forth in the name of which so much manipulation and pressure was executed).

But while one sympathizes with his motives and his scepticism one can't overlook that negative freedom is just one important aspect. Berlin writes the basic image of freedom was the man tied to a tree or put in jail. Negative freedom meant being free from such (political) obstacles.
He doesn't seem to see that he is confusing liberty and liberation.
The main question (to this reader) is: what will we do once we ARE liberated?
That leads me to the question of inner freedom, i.e. psychological aspects of consciousness that Berlin avoids like most other scholars. That doesn't help.
If one wants to understand why man – born free – always enslaves himself again, negative freedom (liberation) alone is no answer.
Berlin stresses – although sceptically – the importance of knowledge to avoid prejudice and nationalism. But he doesn't care enough about the functioning of the subject that is supposed to use this knowledge.
He might have argued like so many before and after him that this was much to tricky terrain. But so is history, so is politics.

Book Description

In 1851, a war began in what would become Yosemite National Park, a war against the indigenous inhabitants that has yet to come to a real conclusion. A century later--1951--and about a hundred and fifty miles away, another war began when the U. S. government started setting off nuclear bombs at the Nevada Test Site, in what was called a nuclear testing program but functioned as a war against the land and people of the Great Basin. Savage Dreams is an exploration of these two landscapes. Together they serve as our national Eden and Armageddon and offer up a lot of the history of the west, not only in terms of Indian and environmental wars, but in terms of the relationship between culture--the generation of beliefs and views--and its implementation as politics.

Customer Reviews:

The Other Reviews Are Not About The Book.......2007-03-02

Wow, take a moment to read the other reviews of this book.

I picked this book up off a bargain table, and months later happened to take it with me when I was visiting Yosemite without knowing 1/2 the book was about Yosemite. That was kind of a thrill.

Solnit's historical and writing skills, her ability to build a world stage of activity and its interconnectedness with her narrative are extraordinary.

As a landscape artist and photographer, I find this book to be a great resource. Understanding the history of Yosemite is frankly consciousness shifting.

As the other reviewer says, nuclear weapons are our oyster.

Indians, big bangs, Central Park, Fremont and the Heart of Darkness. How about that.

People should really learn Yosemite Native American history.......2007-01-10

If people would really read the TRUE history of Yosemite Indians they would find something interesting. First the Miwoks in the area were friends and workers for James Savage and Charles Webber, the founder of Stockton. The Miwoks had a working relationship with both white men and they dug gold for them. The real Indians of Yosemite were Mono Paiutes who tried to fight off the invasion, and not Miwoks. They were allied with the white invaders and they called James Savage "White father". I am a descendent of the original Indians of Yosemite and there is a problem. The defintion "Some of them are killers" for Yosemite was fabricated in 1978 and is not the original meaning of Yosemite. The real meaning was "The Killers" or "The Grizzlies" because the Miwoks were afraid of the Ahwahnees. It was Chief Bautista and Russio, who were helping the Mariposa Battalion, who coined that term "Yosemite" for the Indians in Yosemite Valley which they were afraid to enter. It is because the Miwoks were once enemies of Chief Tenaya and the Ahwahnees. 30 years Yosemite National Park Service hired a person named Craig Bates who was married to a Miwok woman and had a 1/2 Miwok son who created that new defintion. So it is increble that ONE person changed the meaning and defintion of one of the most important and well known parks in the whold world...and no one noticed. The Miwoks were actually the scouts and guides for James Savage and the Mariposa Battalion, but you would not know it because the information was controlled by the "Indian expert" at Yosemite, which causes wrong information to be written...like the actual defintion of Yosemite. For the real story read Lafayette H. Bunnell's Discovery of the Yosemite to find out the truth.

A thrilling excursion into the heart of the West.......2004-05-19

If you have an open and inquisitive mind, no matter what your political outlook, you will enjoy this exploration of western America and our relationship with this unique landscape. Solnit weaves discussions about the settlement of the west by Euro-Americans, native American rights, nuclear testing, and other critical issues, with ruminations about H.D. Thoreau, John Muir, country music, landscape painters, and other intriguing topics. This is an excellent book about an important subject that will delight you if you let it.

Savage Dreams.......2004-01-15

This book is classic eco paganistic 1/2 truths and full tripe. Solnit carries on a dreamy and irresponsible massive 'feel good' opinion piece about the handfull of people harmed by our successfull development of our deffensive nuclear weapons. The author fails to note that our development and limited use of our weapons saved millions of lives.
If you are currently a eco pagan, here is more for your religion. If you want a full account of the history of our deffensive development of nuecs, don't waste your time reading this novel. However, if you want further insight into the basis that drives our planet's new pagan eco religion, then this book will help you to understanding their factualy fictionist journey into politics.

No romanticism here.......2000-02-06

Solnit's juxtaposition of the insidious nuclear poisoning of Nevada to the making of Yosemite National Park (that she shows has been "loved to death" since it was first discovered by whites more than 150 years ago)makes this book a must for all environmentalists. Solnit deals directly with themes of conquest and redemption in historic efforts to both tame and use these lands. Readers gain specific understanding about two places that are, after all, national icons. However, the deeper themes so well-developed in this book are being played out no less dramtically all across the country.

Savage Dreams: A Journey into the Landscape Wars of the American West

Average customer rating:

Savage Dreams: A Journey into the Landscape Wars of the American West
Rebecca Solnit
Manufacturer: Vintage
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Nature & Ecology | Science | Subjects | Books

ASIN: 067976660X
Release Date: 1995-10-31

Average customer rating:

Savage dreams: A journey into the landscape wars of the American West
Rebecca Solnit
Manufacturer: Vintage Departures
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Unknown Binding

Ecotourism | Specialty Travel | Travel | Subjects | Books

Books:

Books Index

Books Home

Recommended Books