Most Helpful Customer Reviews
14 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Persian Letters, August 8, 2002
By A Customer
Persian Letters (Lettres Persanes) was first published in 1721 when Montesquieu was 32 years old. The book is about three Persians: Usbek, Rica, and Rhedi, who set out for Europe to study it's manners and institutions. Rhedi stops at Venice, while Usbek and Rica continue on to Paris. Very soon after their departure, there begins a brisk exchange of letters between the Persian visitors, and their wives, servants, and friends at home, as well as between the visitors themselves.One visitor, Usbek, a Persian lord, must keep in close contact with his harem of wives in his seraglio, as well as the eunuchs who guard the wives. When disorders break out in the seraglio, the eunuchs try to restore discipline by administering to two of the wives, "that chastisement which begins by shocking one's modesty, involving the deepest humiliation and takes one back to the time of her childhood." Montesquieu however, uses this framework to comment on a very wide amount of subjects. The book also attacks errors and vices that will last as long as humanity. It is sometimes witty, sometimes profound.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
21 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Philosophy in the guise of fiction, July 8, 2004
This was one of the books I read in my History of the Enlightenment Class my junior year of college. Our brilliant professor didn't assign all of the letters to read, though, and later I went back and read all of the book, not just the ones we'd been assigned to read for class. A lot of books about the politics and philosophy of a certain period in time don't age well, but this one, for the most part anyway, sounds just as fresh and entertaining today as it did in the eighteenth century. And using the pretence of this being a collection of real letters he intercepted from some Persian houseguests, Montesquieu was able to communicate the new exciting beliefs of his age by having them be told through the so-called eyes of Usbek, Rica, and Ibben, who were experiencing this all for the very first time and having to get adjusted to a real clash of values. This also worked to his advantage in a few cases, like where Usbek is talking about how there is a magician even greater than the King of France, saying "This magician is called the Pope" and going into a whole scathing litany about the Pope. He was able to attack the King and the Church by pretending that foreign travellers were writing and believing these things. The subplot is very interesting too. While Usbek and his friend Rica are away in France for seven years soaking up the Enlightenment, Usbek's wives, concubines, and slaves are getting more and more restless. While the cat's away, the mice will play, and the guiltiest party is the one the reader least suspects. This brings up the Enlightenment question about personal freedom, and how someone might react in such a situation. These women, and these male slaves, have never questioned their total subservience to Usbek until it becomes clear he's not going to be back for quite some time. They give in to their natural human instincts, wanting greater personal freedom and realising they don't have to be these obedient little automatons with no personal wishes or desires of their own apart from absolutely pleasing Usbek in all things. And by the time Usbek gets wind of this from his faithful eunuchs, the women and the slaves have already tasted freedom and will not go back to how things used to be without a fight. (Though I was surprised that the eunuchs never got into this rebellion against the restrictive rules too, and wondered where Zephis and Fatme, two of the other five main wives, went, since they aren't mentioned in the Chief Eunuch's first letter to Usbek telling him of the "horrible sins" which his women and slaves have been engaging in without him around.) This book is great not only as history, but also as fiction and philosophical, political, and religious commentary, ringing as true today in many respects as it did nearly three hundred years ago.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
19 of 22 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A delicious entertainment, August 1, 2001
There are many reasons one might choose to read this work, including reasons associated with one's studies at University, or for its historical interest, or for its views on law and justice. But, the compelling reason for me is that it provides a level of elegant discourse with such wit and charm that I would recommend it for its value as an entertainment alone. On the Spanish " Those Spaniards who do not get burnt seemed to be so attached to the Inquisition that it would be churlish to take it away from them.(p156)" On History " Here are the books on modern history. First you will see the historians of the church and the papacy, books which I read for edification, and which often have exactly the opposite effect on me.(p241)" " I observe that people here argue about religion interminably: but it appears that they are competing at the same time to see who can be the least devout.(P.101)" "There is not a single Protestant ruler who does not raise more taxes from his people than the Pope from his subjects; yet the latter are poor, while the former live in opulence. With them, commerce brings everything to life, while with the others monastacism carries death with it everywhere.(p213)" This book in short is a wonderful antidote to the protestations, statements, and self-righteousness of most living politicians and religious leaders. Relax and enjoy.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
