The Prince

The Prince

Niccolo Machiavelli - The Prince. Penguin Books, 2004. 113 lk

Pingiiniraamatute suurte ideede seeriast on minu teada A-Raamatukogus kaks raamatut. Teine las jääda saladuseks kuniks ma ta läbi suvatsen lugeda, üks on aga see. On see'p siis kokkusattumus, et Euroopa ideede ajaloos on The Prince soovitatavas kirjanduses?
Mida ma võiksin "Printsi" kohta öelda, mida targad inimesed enne mind pole juba öelnud? Tõenäoliselt mitte palju. Seepärast teen lihtsalt märkmeid asjadest mis meelde jäid või huvitavad tundusid.
Machiavelli soovitab printsil kes on omandanud uue valduse, minna elama sellele valdusele. Kaugelt valitsedes saab ta probleemidest teada siis, kui need on tõsiseks kasvanud ja ühtlasi hoiab ta inimesi oma kohalviibimisega teatava kontrolli all. Palgasõdurite ja liitlasvägede kasutamist soovitab Machiavelli vältida iga hinnaga. Tsiteerides mõnda suvalist paha tegelast teleseriaalist Stargate: "They are not to be trusted." Parim variant on omada alalist sõjaväge ja olla rahva poolt armastatud - et need tormaksid printsi valdusi kaitsma, kui aeg saabub. Suurt austust avaldab Machiavelli valitsejale, kes rahuajal ei tegelenud millegi muu kui sõjandusega. Selline valitseja kasutas oma aega selleks, et käia nõunikega läbi oma valdused ja arutleda iga maamärgi juures, kuidas selles asukohas toimida sõjaolukorras. Machiavelli soovitab printsidel käia võimalikult tihti jahil, sest nii tutvub ta oma valdustega.
Näida omavat häid omadusi (heldus, ausus, heatahtlikkus jne) on parem kui päriselt omada neid omadusi. Ja muidugi kõige parem - julmused on soovitatavad, kuna hirmus tehtud lubadusi hoitakse enam kui neid, mis anti niisama. Siin räägib püha tarkus, sest ka tänapäeva eksperimentaalpsühholoogia on tõestanud, et kui tekitada katsealustes hirmu, siis nad loovad omavahel tugevamaid ühendusi.
Seda raamatut lugedes oli vahel raske tabada, milles kogu see poleemika. Machiavelli veenab osavalt ja tema argumentides tundub olevat tõtt. Kui õige on neid taktikaid kasutada, sellele on raske vastata. Küll aga kõneleb selle teose mõjust maailmale näiteks see, et Mussolini kirjutas sellest teosest arutluse (uuris seda sügavuti) ja Stalinil oli väidetavalt koopia öökapil.

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Real understanding of any scientific subject must include some knowledge of its historical growth; we cannot comprehend and accept modern concepts and theories without knowing something of their origins - of how we have got where we are. Neglect of this maxim can lead to that unfortunate state of mind which regard the science of the day as finality. (Cherry 1977: 32)

We should temper reading by writing, and reciprocally, so that the written composition gives body (corpus) to what has been obtained by reading. Reading collects orationes logoi (discourses, elements of discourse); we must make a corpus of them. (Foucault 2005: 359)

The existence of the inner book, along with unreading or forgetting, is what makes the way we discuss books so discontinuous and heterogeneous. What we take to be the books we have read is in fact an anomalous accumulation of fragments of texts, reworked by our imagination and unrelated to the books of others, even if these books are materially identical to ones we have held in our hands. (Bayard 2007: 85-86)

The post-Cubist function of quotations in collages emerges with particular clarity in the early notes of Eisenstein, who wrote in 1928 that "an entire treatise can be made by composition of quotations." In his later works, in which compositions of quotations are often used, he himself explains them (in the spirit of the "linear style" of quotations) by a desire for "minimal distortion." (Ivanov 1976b: 323)

A person may be interested in scientific statements for their own sake (interested in collecting them as a person may be interested in collecting butterflies); a person may have knowledge and the increase of knowledge as his goal. (Morris 1949: 128)

In non-literate society, of course, there are usually some individuals whose interests lead them to collect, analyse and interpret the cultural tradition in a personal way [but] it is still evident that the literate individual has in practice so large a field of personal selection from the total cultural repertoire that the odds are strongly against his experiencing the cultural tradition as any sort of patterned whole. (Goody & Watt 1963: 335)

A different language is too often taken for stammering, a nonconformist virtuosity is misinterpreted as formlessness, exquisite variability is confused with cruelty, intentional enigmatic indefiniteness is deplored as the disappointing obscurity or fragmentariness of a mere neglected sketch, and in the stupendous interplay of symmetry and disequilibrium onesided critics are prone to overlook the harmony and to observe nothing but chaos. (Jakobson 1981[1967b]: 498)

I am convinced that there must still be a number of other concepts or models of potentially systemic generality scattered in some (un)fairly unknown works of disappeared or living researchers. We should dive for them in the deeps of literature. (François 1999: 217)

The selections included are of such a nature that readers who feel that the study of the history of systematic social theory is a waste of time will have occasion to ponder how thoroughly our predecessors have plagiarized many of our best ideas. (Meyer 1956: 166)

This, we may conceive, would be no small Advantage to the Knowledge of a thinking Man, if all his past Thoughts and Reasonings could be always present to him. (Locke 1741a: 115)

blogger visitor counter