I give it the stars, only because it is the only English translation of the great Shaykh Al Alawi. The BIGGEST mistake of the book, and why oh why did they get away with it was when the story goes how Al Alawi was given the tariq. pg 68 says that he received the tariq in a dream. This is incorrect, and if it wasn't for that I would have given this book more stars! All in all, it was a nice read, there is a photo of him Rahimullah, Is it really him though?? Although it is a biography, at the end there are some of his wonderful poetry, and Mystical sayings to his murid's! That was the highlight of the book, oh and some nice brush ups on Islamic history of that time in the Maghrib area!

Though I don't know much about such things as whether this book is good in comparison to others, I can give my personal opinion. The first half of the book is more or less a biography, which is both entertaining and inspirational for anyone who likes to read about people and their lives...one interesting side note is that they compare his greatness to that of Ramana Maharshi. In any case...the second half of the book is absolutly amazing, and anyone who is new to the language the sufis use to explain universal truths will say "wow" more than once while reading this book...I would read a page or two and it would be interesting, and then I would suddenly read something that shifted me, made me give thanks and put the book down. This book is not for those who see themself as the judge..it is for those who are thankful for being gifted even the slightest desire to want to know and be with God. You will find something useful here. Peace.

The author takes upon himself a thesis too difficult argue successfully. His conclusions are evident before his evidence is presented. I found the narrative clumsy and repetitive.

As a reader with no particular agenda except that a book be well-written and/or informative, I found Nossiter's latest work to be a bit weak stylistically but strong in reportage.He describes all too well the phenomena of the Emperor's new clothes - townspeople turning a blind eye to the obvious, and rationalizing their actions to an extreme. Shadows of the horrors which occured hang over the selected three towns he visited even today though the people and the physical settings have changed almost beyond recognition.I found especially interesting the part the American Embassy in Vichy and its employees played during these dark days.A book which increases my knowledge of a time and place and which impels me to do further reading on the subject is one I like to recommend to others.

Usually, there's nothing like a thorough French bashing to put me in good spirits...I feel I'm entitled after living there for many years. But this book was very effective in showing the compromising, cowardly side of the French during WWII in a very subtle and unsettling way. Nossiter, like a good journalist, lets people tell their own stories, and somehow get people to talk themselves into some pretty deep holes. My one criticism is that the book is too scholarly, the topic is certainly dramatic, and I think that it drags a bit in some places. I once read that the French haven't yet figured out which side they were on in WWII. So true.

Why can't American Marxists leave Marxist interpretations to Frenchmen? Tbey are much better at it.

Irwin Wall's book on American relations with France during the Algerian war of independence is a sequel to his book on how America supported (and manipulated) France during the Fourth Republic. It is not as interesting as that book, but it provides a workmanlike overview of the problem. It shows the Eisenhower Administration in its best light (it has much less to say about Kennedy). Overall Eisenhower was an intelligent man, much more so than was thought at the time, and he was personally decent, in striking contrast to most of his successors. But his administration was deeply unimaginative and unsympathetic and his Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles, was extremely narro-minded and dogmatic, very bad qualities for a diplomat. Notwithstanding these problems, the Americans soon realized that the French could not suppress the FLN and that ultimately autonomy and independence were inevitable. Here Eisenhower and Dulles are in their best light, tactfully offering advice to a French government that will not lessen, not (for once) being hoodwinked by the claims of the French to be fighting communism, and making their own contacts with the FLN. They are properly angry over the British-French-Israeli aggression at Suez, and understandably disturbed over the French attack on Sakiet, Tunisia, where it is not clear whether the army or the government is in control. Given the unreliability of the government they decide that it would not be that bad an idea for De Gaulle to take power and inaugurate the fifth French Republic.

Much of this book narrowly reads the available diplomatic materials and often reads as a paraphrase of rather inconclusive discussions between the Americans, the French and the British on such questions as Algeria, trying to revamp NATO to increase French power (unsuccessfully), and the question of a French nuclear deterrent. Wall does have an important new thesis: in contrast to the hagiography around De Gaulle, he argues that the president did not in fact plan in 1958 to eventually give Algeria independence, but in fact wanted to keep it as French as possible. Unfortunately for the reader, the book is more than half over by the time he encounters this. The thesis is interesting and is certainly plausible; De Gaulle did appear to wish to cover Algeria in new euphemisms for dependence. And if true, it would mean that De Gaulle prolonged the war with worse results than if the government had stared down the military rebels in 1958. Still it is not definitive, since De Gaulle spoke different things to different people. Wall's verdict on De Gaulle's foreign policy is largely negative, since he achieved very little. Wall does make the interesting comment that by concentrating on the prestige item of nuclear weapons, De Gaulle failed to modernize conventional forces which would have made France more effective in a post cold-war Europe. One problem with this book is that Wall is somewhat repetitive. Another, and more serious problem, is that one learns relatively little about the partner in America's negotiations. The contrast with Walter Lafeber's The Clash on Japan, or Piero Gleijeses' Shattered Hope on Guatemala, or Neil Sheehan's A Bright Shining Lie on Vietnam is striking. There is some interesting information on France; there is much less, however on Algeria itself.

The material is well researched & the story is told with tightly reasoned clarity & in lucid prose. The specialized subject is covered in great depth, and Dr. Wall's backward look at the events of the late 50's & 60's is of great help in sorting them out. Their interest is further enhanced by contemporary tie-ins such as the Arab world & the Middle East today, & by their association with the American tragedy that was Viet Nam. I particularly enjoyed the analysis of motivation & intent of the western politicians & de Gaulle. The irony of all that careful planning & diplomacy, which came to nothing, yet, everything seemed to work out for the best anyway. So de Gaulle appears a seer & it's better to be lucky than smart.

This is a good first for introducing Algeria to a child. The photos are good, and the amount of info provided is adequate, but not too detailed. It is difficult to find non-encyclopedia type books on this subject.

Graham E. Fuller has produced a great theoretical work that not only studies trends and developments in Algerian fundamentalism, but attempts to project those trends into the future. Though important trends are covered, this material is dated as it was written in the pre-Abdul Aziz Butaflika reconciliation and pre 9/11 period. Thankfully the worst of Fuller's predictions, another Iran at the mouth of the Mediterranean, hasn't come true (yet).
Note: Don't buy this if you are in the U.S. Military. It is a RAND product and you can get it for free. If you are not U.S. Military it is still a good read and worth the price.

This is the first novel written by an Algerian, man or woman, that I have ever read. I suspect that could be true for many readers. As a new voice in my world of literature, then, it's an important book. I saw FANTASIA as a kaleidescope, though, always producing patterns and colors, always arranged, but not always understandable. I found it very hard to judge this work because it has many facets, like a shifted kaleidescope.

***** Five stars for the idea or conception of the novel, for language (if it is well-translated), for the whole effort of bringing a woman's perspective on colonialism, on revolutionary struggle, and on tradition. Djebar is obsessed with the "word", especially the written word and its strength. "The word is a torch; to be held up in front of the wall of separation or withdrawal..." Words preserve and pass on memories, tragedies, pain, love and lack of love. Words hold the keys to Algeria's past, the world shattered by the French invasion and conquest of the mid-19th century, when 25 years of war ruined the country. But the French conquerers wrote of it, much more than the Algerian defenders. Their words must be mined for the reality, we must forge the Algerian view from the 'ore'. Words again unite the Algerian women and men who fought France in the 1950s. But those very French words, the language of the conquerers and destroyers, are used to pass on here, in this novel, the very heartfelt, most intimate emotions of the author. She speaks of this. Perhaps silence is more powerful, implying resistance. "Writing does not silence the voice, but awakens it, above all to resurrect so many vanished sisters." Those are the sisters who didn't know French, who could not speak out from their cloistered existence.

****For bringing Algerian history to life from an Algerian perspective, and an Algerian woman's view at that, a woman who, through an educated father and schooling escaped the enclosed future that awaited her. The struggle, the never-ending resistance to the occupation of their land.

***The plot of a novel is a fishing line with some attractive hooks for catching readers. If this line is broken too often, no fish can be caught. The novel becomes a collection of beautiful fragments, leaving the reader to imagine what it could be if it were all joined somehow. FANTASIA suffers from a too intricate sub-division of the voices. It is a layered approach, the conflict between two worlds---a conflict that entered even into the author's soul--- it is effective poetically, but not as prose....we lose track of who is saying what, who is related to whom, where everyone fits in. Overall Djebar reaches us, but the novel has an abstract quality that does not emotionally involve us much with any characters.

very gripping on the emotional dilemma of the arab

It's hard to know exactly what to call this: thriller, love story, historical novel, tragedy... This is the story of Robert, a Jewish pied noir (a derogatory term used to refer to the non-French Mediterranean people invited to help colonize French Algeria) who, having served as a demolition expert in the French Foreign Legion in the losing war in Vietnam is sent back to Algeria to fight the FLN independence movement. The book starts in 1962 after his unit's desertion to the ranks of the OAS, the underground army determined not to retain Algeria as a French colony, regardless of the wishes of French politicians. (An OAS assassination attempt on Charles DeGaulle was the basis for the book and movie, The Day of the Jackal.) The first third of the book is written from the perspective of Marie, a young woman who has fallen in love with Robert, who is meanwhile engaged in a daily war of terror and attrition in Algiers. Once you read the author's capsule history in the prologue, it's gripping and absorbing stuff--although it loses a bit in being told through another's eyes.

The second part part shifts to Marseilles, and follows Robert as he flees the OAS and waits for his love to follow him. The is written from the perspective of JoJo, his longtime comrade and OAS commander, and is tautly effective as it is clear they will never let him simply leave. The final third is written from Robert's own perspective, as he is forced to join his former comrades to fight as a mercenary in the Belgian Congo. This is the least effective portion, as the hold JoJo has over him becomes more and more tenuous and implausible. The tragic ending is of little surprise and the coda (from the lover's perspective) is just a touch sappy. The book is clearly attempting to do a lot of things and cover a lot of themes at once, and although successful on an individual level in many of these, it also failed to fully come together for me. This is partly die to the use of three narrators with essential the same voice, but more so the ambiguous nature of Robert and JoJo's relationship. I suspect that unless one has an interest in Algerian history (as I do), the book will fail to satisfy on plot and writing alone.

This book was well researched and informative. The history behind Algeria's current problems is well documented in this book. I was disapointed because the title gave me the impression that the book would give me some kind of idea of what it's like to live in Algeria. From what I've read in magazines and newspapers I imagine it's pretty horrifying. The book just goes on and on about the government. Trying to understand what life is like for Algerians by reading this book is like trying to understand the U.S. Great Depression by studying the names of the men in congress at that time and how they managed their political campaigns. It reminds me of a lot of the Ph.D. dissertation type books that were forced upon me in college.

One bit of information given in this book was especially interesting, however. This is about the CIA hiring Algerians to fight in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union. This had very negative consequences on Algeria when these men returned to Algeria. It is also interesting to note that U.S involvement in Algeria has led to the current Taliban situation (a subject outside the realm of this book).

Fantastic book about Algeria. Though it seems it is much of collection of events and analysis based on news stories and other written bibleographies. Being an Algerian and have witnessed most events discussed in this book in real life, i found Martin's interpretation are based on wrong perception. Lot of typo and repeated words. I would recommend this book as a reference to get a big picture on Algeria, but be very carefull about getting wrong conclusions. The Author often refer the reasons of conflict into Berbers and Islam. he obviously forgot that Berbers are muslims and guard islam more than anything else. the problem of Algeria lied mainly on the poor managed state, corrupted regime, and it's failure to address proper development of post indepence traumatic society. Given all these notes, I would rate this book 3 stars.

The absurdities produced by Wills' eccentric treatment of Augustine multiply like rabbits. One example: Wills insists on calling Augustine's son Adeodatus "Godsend" rather than Adeodatus. It is true that the etymology of the name roughly corresponds to "Godsend," but given the fact that almost every name in antiquity "meant something," this tick is supremely annoying. His translations are clunky to the extreme. He translates the classic line, "Our hearts are restless until they rest in you" (inquietum est cor nostrum donec requiescat in te) as "Our heart is unstable until stabilized in you."

If you have to read the Confessions in English, by all means stick with Henry Chadwick.