Bismarck
In Taylor's book, Bismarck, the Man and the Statesman and Medlicocott's novel, Bismarck and Modern Germany, they both have differences and similarities. First, a summary of each book's contents is appropriate. The work by Taylor focuses on Bismarck's political career, with little else. This is not a portrait of a man that evaluates his background and tries to draw conclusions from his childhood for example. Rather, this volume focuses on the man's rise to power during the 1860s as well as his downfall. While it does not draw on extraneous materials, it does examine the man's motives and ideas far beyond the usual fare in this genre. The work is certainly written with a political point of view in mind, but objectivity is maintained to a degree. The author keeps the subject at arms length but it seems there is an anti-German sentiment woven in the pages of this work. The book by Mendlicott embraces Bismarck's political career as well, and is also not a biographical account in the traditional sense. Instead, this work focuses on the man's role in Germany and the impact his stint in power had on the nation. In some ways it is more of a country study. Yet, Bismarck's rule and personal strategies are revealed to some extent. The work
------------------------------------------------------------------------ To choose which author I agree on may serve as a practical conclusion. Here, I agree with Taylor's perspective, I believe that Taylor embraces the subject in such a way as to render the facts objectively, but not abandon his point of view. This is admirable. While the Medlicott work is also valuable, it falls flat because it does not have the energy that seems to originate from Taylor's book, which is both insightful and reasonable. It is difficult to view history through completely objective lenses. Taylor proves that one can see history quite clearly, while not totally letting go of human considerations. While that is the case, and both authors share a great deal in terms of perspective, there is also the idea that in some ways, the authors' perspectives do differ on key points. This is true, but sometimes difficult to discern. For example, Taylor seems to hold Bismarck responsible for several events whereas Medlicott treats the subject matter more objectively, and seems to put little blame on the man. sly at the same time. Yet, in both of these works, Bismarck's personal life is rarely considered and this is an important point, particularly in this genre. Bismarck's political career is looked at through a microscope by both authors and this has proven to be a rare and thorough evaluation. The life and times of Bismarck are explored in terms of how the man's actions influenced history, particularly as it pertains to the German state. Medlicott's work is simply stated and broken down in such a way as to be easily understood. Taylor's work is also meant for broad audiences, but Taylor sometimes tries to get into the mind of Bismarck-unlike Medlicott-and so another dimension is added to Tay
Some common words found in the essay are:
Karl Marx, Modern Germany, Bismarck Germany, Taylor's Medlicott, German Medlicott's, Bismarck-unlike Medlicott-and, bismarck's political, bismarck's political career, , political view, political career, subject matter, career bismarck, Statesman Medlicocott's, life times bismarck, try maintain, maintain objectivity, focuses man's, times bismarck, life times, try maintain objectivity,
Approximate Word count = 1200
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
