Reading Clausewitz (Pimlico)

Description:

About this item:

Clausewitz's On War, first published in 1832, remains the classic study of the nature and conditions of warfare. Best remembered for his pronouncement that war is a continuation of politics by other means and for his observations on total war, he gave a new philosophical foundation to the art of war. Complex and often misunderstood, Clausewitz has fascinated and influenced generations of politicians and strategic thinkers. Beatrice Heuser's comprehensive study is the first book on how to read Clausewitz and how others have read him—from the military commanders in World War I through Lenin and Mao Zedung to strategists in the nuclear age. The result is an accessible and illuminating introduction to the most influential study of the art of war.

Editorial Reviews

About the Author

Beatrice Heuser is a professor of Strategic and International Studies.

Review:

4.2 out of 5

84.00% of customers are satisfied

5.0 out of 5 stars Well done, Clausewitz. And well done, Prof. Heuser.

S. · April 7, 2016

Books on Clausewitz threaten to become as numerous as stars in the sky. This one starts a bit slowly; but readers who press on will be rewarded by a multifaceted, nuanced, discussion of what the two-hundred-year old German soldier/philosopher was really about. I found the discussion of Clausewitz's continued relevance particularly interesting and particularly useful.Well done, Clausewitz. And well done, Prof. Heuser.

3.0 out of 5 stars Disappointing

D.J.L. · February 1, 2014

I struggled with Clausewitz, decades ago. Not an easy read. Reading a lot of war diary material over the summer prompted me to want to go back and try again. The blurb for this book looked promising. A somewhat predigested easing into the material.It wasn't.At least I understand some of the reasons Clausewitz was so difficult to read, all those years ago. Having written the bulk of On War he had some kind of change of heart and went back to revise it. But died before he could complete it. Hence the contradictions. Another interpretation is that he sometimes used an Hegelian dialectical approach to working out his theories. (Apparently Engels and Mao seem to have thought so) Another is that he would state his main contention or thesis and then add rider after rider of exceptions to the rule or principle he was arguing for. Mmm.I had a couple of specific problems with Heuser's account. The first 25% of the book was not very interesting and decidedly lacked any kind of narrative drive. In trying to explain the dichotomy between Clausewitz's first and subsequently revised theory of war, she proposes that Clausewitz began as an idealist but then became a realist. Without satisfactorily defining how she means to use these terms as they apply to his theory. She vaguely waves her hands at Plato to define "Idealist" But her version of "idealist" has very little to do with Plato's theory of forms. (Granted he shifted the goal posts throughout the Socratic dialogs. Not a place, here, to get into that, but just to say that without dealing with the concept of contingency, in the real world, Heuser's use of the term, "idealist" especially linked to Plato lacks any analytical force.Just as the book starts to get interesting she takes on Clausewitz's definition of genius. It is not clear whether it is Clausewitz who has a very primitive and inarticulate notion of genius or Heuser. Genius is variously an attribute of intuition or instinct, or native predisposition. - "obviously, only an instinctive reaction made with the intuition of military genius could replace (the mathematical calculations requiring the genius of a Newton or an Euler.)" Or "Statistically, as we have seen, Clausewitz expected to find military genius more frequently in peoples who combined sophistication with a war like spirit..." Later she remarks that "Somewhat unjustly, political scientist Stephen Cimbala has accused Clausewitz of not having developed the concept of 'military genius' rigorously." I fail to see, from her account how this criticism is unjust.There are interesting nuggets in this book.- Jomini comes across as a more insightful reader of Napoleon's tactics than Clausewitz.- Foch seems to get to the point more readily than Clausewitz. And has more interesting and decisive things to say about war fighting and morale.- Joseph Compte de Maistre had already pointed out that " A battle lost is a battle that one thinks one has lost"There's more.But, this feels more like a gathering of notes of other people's commentaries on various features of some of Clausewitz's writing rather than any kind of analytical appreciation of Clausewitz the great military genius. Her point seems to be that throughout the history of contributions to war theory, whoever said something interesting, Clausewitz had said it first. So this feels less like secondary reading than tertiary reading. And not very helpful at that.John Keegan has been (probably reasonably correctly) criticized for his critical dismissal of Clausewitz. But on this present reading I'm not so sure.

5.0 out of 5 stars Good overview of a controversial subject

R. · October 4, 2006

Noting that Clausewitz is often misunderstood, Heuser's goal is to present a methodology for reading and therefore properly understanding Clausewitz. A large factor that has led to misunderstandings is the fact that Clausewitz himself learned more as life went on, and in 1827 he realized he had to totally realign his thinking to include the significant fact that war is a tool of politics/policy.At the same time he realized that any theory of war had to account for the fact that the majority of wars were limited in nature, and not the total "ideal" wars about which he had been writing. Heuser's book does an excellent job of summarizing and accounting for the major arguments for and against Clausewitz today, and then she analyzes On War and his other writings to draw her own conclusions, which, for the most part, are pro-Clausewitz.

Extensive review of the various interpretations of CvC

J.H. · April 17, 2020

Good read showing the various interpretations of the man himself. I was hoping for the author to weigh in at times, but she did so only fleetingly unfortunately. I’ll have to dig into some of her catalogue as she’ll have some marvellous insights.

Good book

D. · November 14, 2018

Was very useful in helping me complete an essay on relevance of Clausewitz

Reading Clausewitz (Pimlico)

4.4

BHD24445

Quantity:

|

Order today to get by

Free delivery on orders over BHD 20

Return and refund policies

Product origin: United States

Electrical items shipped from the US are by default considered to be 120v, unless stated otherwise in the product description. Contact Bolo support for voltage information of specific products. A step-up transformer is required to convert from 120v to 240v. All heating electrical items of 120v will be automatically cancelled.

All product information listed on the site are from 3rd party sources, including images and reviews. bolo.bh is not liable for any claims or promotions mentioned on the product description or images with textual content. For detailed product information, please contact the manufacturer or Bolo support by logging into your account. Unless stated otherwise during checkout, all import taxes and duty are included in the price mentioned on the product page. bolo.bh follows the rules and regulations of sale in Bahrain and will cancel items in an order that are illegal for sale in Bahrain. We take all the necessary steps to ensure only products for sale in Bahrain are displayed. Product stock and delivery estimate may change with the seller even after placing the order. All items are shipped by air and items marked “Dangerous Goods (DG)” by the IATA will be cancelled from orders. We strive to process your order as soon as it is finalized.

More from this brand

Similar items from “Military”