Customer Reviews

The Prince (Oxford World's Classics)

5 star:		(14)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I won't expound the joys of reading Machiavelli since many other reviewers have done so. Peter Bondanella's translation is wonderfully readable, capturing both the cadence and elegant simplicity of Machiavelli. Bondanella has updated his previous translation of 'The Prince' (with Mark Musa), which can be found in the previous Oxford edition and in the Viking Portable Machiavelli. The introduction by Maurizio Viroli is a pleasant new feature. The introduction covers all of the basic points necessary for anyone new to Machiavelli, while including some of Viroli's own ideas about Machiavelli's use of contemporary principles of rhetoric. For a more detailed introduction to Machiavelli you may also want to try the paperback edition of Viroli's book Machiavelli (Founders of Modern Political and Social Thought), although the price is quite high for an introduction. Two excellent and inexpensive introductions are Quentin Skinner's Machiavelli: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions) and Cary Nederman's 'Machiavelli: A Beginner's Guide' Machiavelli: A Beginner's Guide (Beginners Guide (Oneworld)), both of which cover more than just 'The Prince'. Finally, the low price makes this edition a great value.

UPDATE 11/19/2011: MORE DETAIL

After having worked with this edition for a few years now, I feel the need to adjust my initial review in one way. The translation is not exactly the same as the one provided in 'The Portable Machiavelli' The Portable Machiavelli. 'The Portable Machiavelli' translation is based on the older edition done by Mark Musa, which Peter Bondanella contribute to as well. However, the Oxford World's Classics edition listed above is done solely by Bondanella. Bondanella claims that "This new version of The Prince aims at accuracy but also at a more pleasing and readable English prose style than is possible if a translation respects Machiavelli's word order too closely." (p. xl)Presumably, this reference to strict adherence to word order is directed towards the older Mark Musa translation. Having worked with both alongside the Italian offered in an older edition (Machiavelli's The Prince: A Bilingual Edition), the Bondanella translation fulfills its stated objective well. Bondanella accomplishes this by breaking up some longer sentences into separate shorter sentences. The translations are substantively similar.

Here's a comparison of how the two translations and original Italian present a well-known passage:

Peter Bondanella, Oxford World's Classics
"I therefore conclude that, since Fortune varies and men remain obstinate in their ways, men prosper when the two are in harmony and fail to prosper when they are not in accord. I certainly believe this: that it is better to be impetuous than cautious because Fortune is a woman, and if you want to keep her under it is necessary to beat her and force her down. It is clear that she more often allows herself to be won over by impetuous men than by those who proceed coldly. And so, like a woman, Fortune is always the friend of young men, for they are less cautious, more ferocious, and command her with more audacity." (p. 87)

Mark Musa and Peter Bondanella, The Portable Machiavelli
"I conclude, therefore, that since Fortune changes and men remain set in their ways, men will succeed when the two are in harmony and fail when they are not in accord. I am certainly convinced of this: that it is better to be impetuous than cautious, because Fortune is a woman, and it is necessary, in order to keep her down, to beat her and to struggle with her. And it is seen that she more often allows herself to be taken over by men who are impetuous than by those who make cold advances; and then, being a woman, she is always a friend of the young men, for they are less cautious, more aggressive, and they command her with more audacity." (p. 162)

Machiavelli's The Prince: A Bilingual Edition
"Concludo adunque, che, variando la fortuna e stando li uomini ne' loro modi ostinati, sono felici mentre concordano insieme, e, come discordano, infelici. Io iudico bene questo: che sia meglio essere impetuoso che respetivo; perchè la fortuna è donna, ed è necessario, volendola tenere sotto, batterla e urtarla. E si vede che la si lascia più vincere da questi, che da quelli che freddamente procedono; e però sempre, come donna, è amica de' giovanni, perchè sono meno respettivi, più feroci e con più audacia la comandano." (p. 214)

I hope this is helpful and I'm sorry I couldn't say all this more quickly.

Niccolo Machiavelli was obviously very bright and talented man. He was negotiator in foreign affairs for the Florentine republic and has seen (and of course used) many diplomatic features which are commonly used even today. To be taken back to favor with deMedici family, which house arrested him after he defended his town against their attack, he wrote a book in which he put his vast knowledge to them. This book is a perfect example of 15th and 16th century politics and is written as a workbook for a succesful ruler. Its principles remain unchanged and therefore it is basic reading for most political and economical high schools. After you finish it you realize that democracy most of the time uses rules of brutal Middle Ages, they are only packed more nicely than they used to be. If you need political or business success or if you need to lead people in any sort of way, you can't miss this little book.

This book is very useful for politicians and rulers; no wonder many conquerors such as Cromwell, Louis XIV,Napoleon I, and Adolf Hitler have spent many years perusing and practicing it.Unfortunately, the passage of time has dimmed the influence and power of this book.Let me take several historical examples: Louis XIV and Cromwell on the seventeenth century has very successfully practiced the methods in this book to gain power. Louis XIV could rule France absolutely until his death without any considerable rebellion.On the beginning of the nineteenth century Napoleon I also did the same thing as Louis XIV;on the onset of his empire he ruled successfully, but his power diminished drastically and he was forced to abdicate twice and exiled.This is because his enemies had known that he was merely copying the methods in this book. Adolf Hitler, on World War II also did the same thing and he was forced to bow down to his enemies only 5 years after the beginning of the war. If we practiced these methods now, I think that we won't win more than a single battle or two. Nowadays many people in the world have read this book, not except an 11-year Indonesian girl like me. To gain power and deceive the world now, we should use a new method. Nowadays the world is almost united and democracy is very popular. To conquer the world we must use a new method, and not merely relying on this book like our predecesors unless we are ready to meet failure very soon. This book is a good beginning,anyhow. Go and get it. I am sure that anyone interested in history(especially Italian history in the sixteenth century),politics and art of war & gaining power will enjoy perusing it very much. Who knows, you will be the first(wo)man to conquer and control the world?

Machiavelli decribes the one thing about politics that Plato and the others don't, and that is the reality of it. He does not talk about the Ideal State, rather, the States as it is -- the real and almost always brutal State. His work does not hold anything back. He tells it like it is -- like a realist. His use of history and historical characters is grand. This is a book for all.

Although written centuries prior to Richard Bolt's masterpiece on the Anglican saint Sir Thomas More, it remains an incredible antithesis to the doctrine contained within. For a ruler to unify, control, and serve his populace, preached Machiavelli, he must forgo his morals and beliefs for the greater cause of nation, state, and religion. Whether this view is effective or destructive, it remains completely profound and has forever changed Western politics.

Many argue that Machiavelli wrote this brochure simply to please the ruling family of Florence, the principality in which he resided. Although correct to a certain extent, Machiavelli's genius for consistency in a political system remain's true throughout.

The vast majority of the ideas expressed within this piece are cruel and heartless. The reason for this is partially that a state contains no soul or conscience, according to Machiavelli, but must be devoted to the need for survival and independence alone.

I won't expound the joys of reading Machiavelli since many other reviewers have done so. Peter Bondanella's translation is wonderfully readable, capturing both the cadence and elegant simplicity of Machiavelli. Bondanella has updated his previous translation of 'The Prince' (with Mark Musa), which can be found in the previous Oxford edition and in the Viking Portable Machiavelli. The introduction by Maurizio Viroli is a pleasant new feature. The introduction covers all of the basic points necessary for anyone new to Machiavelli, while including some of Viroli's own ideas about Machiavelli's use of contemporary principles of rhetoric. For a more detailed introduction to Machiavelli you may also want to try the paperback edition of Viroli's book Machiavelli (Founders of Modern Political and Social Thought), although the price is quite high for an introduction. Two excellent and inexpensive introductions are Quentin Skinner's Machiavelli: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions) and Cary Nederman's 'Machiavelli: A Beginner's Guide' Machiavelli: A Beginner's Guide (Beginners Guide (Oneworld)), both of which cover more than just 'The Prince'. Finally, the low price makes this edition a great value.

UPDATE 11/19/2011: MORE DETAIL

After having worked with this edition for a few years now, I feel the need to adjust my initial review in one way. The translation is not exactly the same as the one provided in 'The Portable Machiavelli' The Portable Machiavelli. 'The Portable Machiavelli' translation is based on the older edition done by Mark Musa, which Peter Bondanella contribute to as well. However, the Oxford World's Classics edition listed above is done solely by Bondanella. Bondanella claims that "This new version of The Prince aims at accuracy but also at a more pleasing and readable English prose style than is possible if a translation respects Machiavelli's word order too closely." (p. xl)Presumably, this reference to strict adherence to word order is directed towards the older Mark Musa translation. Having worked with both alongside the Italian offered in an older edition (Machiavelli's The Prince: A Bilingual Edition), the Bondanella translation fulfills its stated objective well. Bondanella accomplishes this by breaking up some longer sentences into separate shorter sentences. The translations are substantively similar.

Here's a comparison of how the two translations and original Italian present a well-known passage:

Peter Bondanella, Oxford World's Classics
"I therefore conclude that, since Fortune varies and men remain obstinate in their ways, men prosper when the two are in harmony and fail to prosper when they are not in accord. I certainly believe this: that it is better to be impetuous than cautious because Fortune is a woman, and if you want to keep her under it is necessary to beat her and force her down. It is clear that she more often allows herself to be won over by impetuous men than by those who proceed coldly. And so, like a woman, Fortune is always the friend of young men, for they are less cautious, more ferocious, and command her with more audacity." (p. 87)

Mark Musa and Peter Bondanella, The Portable Machiavelli
"I conclude, therefore, that since Fortune changes and men remain set in their ways, men will succeed when the two are in harmony and fail when they are not in accord. I am certainly convinced of this: that it is better to be impetuous than cautious, because Fortune is a woman, and it is necessary, in order to keep her down, to beat her and to struggle with her. And it is seen that she more often allows herself to be taken over by men who are impetuous than by those who make cold advances; and then, being a woman, she is always a friend of the young men, for they are less cautious, more aggressive, and they command her with more audacity." (p. 162)

Machiavelli's The Prince: A Bilingual Edition
"Concludo adunque, che, variando la fortuna e stando li uomini ne' loro modi ostinati, sono felici mentre concordano insieme, e, come discordano, infelici. Io iudico bene questo: che sia meglio essere impetuoso che respetivo; perchè la fortuna è donna, ed è necessario, volendola tenere sotto, batterla e urtarla. E si vede che la si lascia più vincere da questi, che da quelli che freddamente procedono; e però sempre, come donna, è amica de' giovanni, perchè sono meno respettivi, più feroci e con più audacia la comandano." (p. 214)

I hope this is helpful and I'm sorry I couldn't say all this more quickly.

This is an excellent book regardless of what some people are saying. Don't be fooled by some of the bad reviews; their authors simply do not understand not are they able to appreciate the topic of the book. And how could they - take a look at the info about some of the reviewers and their interests!

Considered the first Modern, Machiavelli attempts to "decloud" Plato's Republic with practicality. A prolific work which shows the sinister workings of your fellow men. This is a definate reading for any remotely interested in philosophy or interested in a guide on how not to be virtuous.

In the course of my political science training, I studied at great length the modern idea of realpolitik. In that study I came to realise that it was somewhat incomplete, without the companionship of The Prince, by Niccolo Machiavelli, a Florentine governmental official in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. The Prince is an oft quoted, oft mis-quoted work, used as the philosophical underpinning for much of what is considered both pragmatic and wrong in politics today. To describe someone as being Machiavellian is to attribute to the person ruthless ambition, craftiness and merciless political tactics. Being believed to be Machiavellian is generally politically incorrect. Being Machiavellian, alas, can often be politically expedient.
Machiavelli based his work in The Prince upon his basic understanding of human nature. He held that people are motivated by fear and envy, by novelty, by desire for wealth, power and security, and by a hatred of restriction. In the Italy in which he was writing, democracy was an un-implemented Greek philosophical idea, not a political structure with a history of success; thus, one person's power usually involved the limitation of another person's power in an autocratic way.

Machiavelli did not see this as a permanent or natural state of being -- in fact, he felt that, during his age, human nature had been corrupted and reduced from a loftier nobility achieved during the golden ages of Greece and Rome. He decided that it was the corrupting influence of Christianity that had reduced human nature, by its exaltation of meekness, humility, and otherworldliness.

Machiavelli has a great admiration for the possible and potential, but finds himself inexorably drawn to the practical, dealing with situations as they are, thus becoming an early champion of realpolitik carried forward into this century by the likes of Kissinger, Thatcher, Nixon, and countless others. One of the innovations of Machiavelli's thought was the recognition that the prince, the leader of the city/state/empire/etc., was nonetheless a human being, and subject to all the human limitations and desires with which all contend.

Because the average prince (like the average person) is likely to be focussed upon his own interests, a prince's private interests are generally in opposition to those of his subjects. Fortunate is the kingdom ruled by a virtuous prince, virtue here not defined by Christian or religious tenets, but rather the civic virtue of being able to pursue his own interests without conflicting those of his subjects.

Virtue is that which increases power; vice is that which decreases power. These follow Machiavelli's assumptions about human nature. Machiavelli rejected the Platonic idea of a division between what a prince does and what a prince ought to do. The two principle instruments of the prince are force and propaganda, and the prince, in order to increase power (virtue) ought to employ force completely and ruthlessly, and propaganda wisely, backed up by force. Of course, for Machiavelli, the chief propaganda vehicle is that of religion.

Whoever reads Roman history attentively will see in how great a degree religion served in the command of the armies, in uniting the people and keeping them well conducted, and in covering the wicked with shame.

Machiavelli has been credited with giving ruthless strategies (the example of a new political ruler killing the deposed ruler and the ruler's family to prevent usurpation and plotting is well known) -- it is hard to enact many in current politics in a literal way, but many of his strategies can still be seen in electioneering at every level, in national and international relations, and even in corporate and family internal 'politics'. In fact, I have found fewer more Machiavellian types than in church politics!

Of course, these people would be considered 'virtuous' in Machiavellian terms -- doing what is necessary to increase power and authority.

The title of this piece -- the virtues of Machiavelli, must be considered in this frame; certainly in no way virtuous by current standards, but then, it shows, not all have the same standards. Be careful of the words you use -- they may have differing definitions.

Perhaps if Machiavelli had lived a bit later, and been informed by the general rise of science as a rational underpinning to the world, he might have been able to accept less of a degree of randomness in the universe. Perhaps he would have modified his views. Perhaps not -- after all, the realpolitikers of this age are aware of the scientific framework of the universe, and still pursue their courses.

This is an important work, intriguing in many respects. Far shorter than the average classical or medieval philosophical tome, and more accessible by current readers because of a greater familiarity with politics than, say, metaphysics or epistemology, this work yields benefits and insights to all who read, mark, inwardly digest, and critically examine the precepts.

This book was written by the famous Italian statesman Niccolo Machiavelli in 1531. This book is a classic and I was pleasantly surprised that the content was not dated and the principles translate easily into the modern worlds of business and politics.
The author wrote this book as an instruction guide for governing princes in the 1500's when Italy was divided into city states and were being defeated by many foreign powers. I belive that the work is directed to Lorenzo de Medici by a letter included in the work and because at the end of the writing Machiavelli calls for a prince to unite and lead Italy against its oppressors.
The book is not unethical as I had imagined from my understanding of the ruthlessness of Machiavellian ethics. The author is only explaining tactics to use to maintain power in a kingdom or city state that are pragmatic for his time period.
Here are some examples of principles from the book:
1. When conquering a territory keep the current laws and institutions in place, but eliminate all the family of the defeated prince.
2. When trouble is sensed ahead of time it can be easily remedied, if you wait for it to show itself, it is to late.
3. Whoever is responsible for another becoming powerful, ruins himself.
4. There is no surer way of keeping possesion than by devastation.
5. Men do you are harm either because they hate you or they fear you.
6. Violence must be inflicted once and for all, it must be over quickly.
7. Build your power through the people.
8. Power is maintained through religious institutions.
9. Neglect the art of war and you lose your state.
10. If you act virtuously, you will be undone by those who are not, make use of this or not according to need.
The above is just a small sampling of the lessons in this book. My review can not do this book justice, it is full of wisdom and life lessons. It is a guide book for business leaders and politicians. I strongly suggest adding this book to your home library and referring to it often