 |
|
Title: Words We Live By, The: Your Annotated Guide to the Constitution (Stonesong Press Books)
ISBN: 078688620X
Author:
Linda R. Monk
Publicate Date: 2004-02-18
Publish: 2004-02-18
List Price: $14.95
Average Customer Rating: 4.0
Format: Paperback
 |
|
|
|
|
Amazon Lowest New Price: $6.00
Amazon Lowest Used Price: $2.83
Amazon Merchant Price: $10.17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Customer Review: |
|
1: had to buy more
Originally purchased as gift for husband as accompaniment to B&N hardcover Constitution & Bill of Rights. He thought it was such a great gift that he had me buy another set to give to his dad...and I bought another one for my grandfather. They all loved it.
|
2: Great beginning
The information in this book is invaluable for anyone of any age wanting to understand more clearly just what our Constitution is all about, especially how it affects our daily lives. The explanations are written well, neither writing down to the reader or getting lost in pretended legalities.
I recommend this to readers of just about any age who are interested in the real principles on which our country was founded because it clearly shows just what we've been losing by being "politically correct." It also makes clear the limits to which government should adhere.
|
3: 80% of the way there.
This is an impressive compilation. For a one-volume commentary on the United States Constitution, this book achieves its purpose. It is written on the high-school level, with a USA Today-type layout of images and text, sidebar vocabulary and definitions, and boxed "For further consideration" essays that round out the discussion of the ideas. Clearly popular writing, Linda R. Monk also makes this book enjoyable and entraining.
However, I say 80% of the way there for several reasons. The main problem is that she begins the discussion with a jackrabbit start. There is five introductory paragraphs, then the core discussion begins. The book could have used a section of preliminaries. One chapter would have dealt with the rule of law, discussing the Magna Charta, Federalist 15, and Thomas Paine's statement in Common Sense, The Rights of Man and Other Essential Writings of Thomas Paine (Signet Classics) "THE LAW IS KING."
Another chapter would deal with the Declaration of Independence, treating it in the same fashion as she does the rest of the Constitution. The Declaration and the Constitution are twin documents, both twin pillars of American's freedom. In fact, the Constitution is the culmination of the Declaration's spirit, intent, and ideals. It is our first Bill of Rights.
Then a third chapter would be a conclusion, dealing with the Gettysburg Address and all things Lincoln. In his speeches, Lincoln both reinvented and revitalized the Declaration of Impendence and the Constitution. The way we see both the Declaration and the Constitution in many ways was shaped by Lincoln's ideals. Read Monk's commentary on Amendment XIV. This amendment is pure Lincoln.
The second area of concern has to do with the commentary. First, she should have used more quotes from The Federalist Papers (Signet Classics). This is like biographising Moses, but neglecting the Stone Tables. Of course using Ted Nugent and Michael Moore adds spice to discussion, but who is a better authority on the Constitution--James Madison or Oprah? Celebrities are just high-profile loudmouths, not experts.
Case in point 1: In discussing the Necessary and Proper Clause, Monk neglected to include Hamilton's commentary in Federalist 33. He explained that the Elastic Clause was tied to Art. VI, Section 2, that it was just a redundancy saying that Congress haw power to enact laws, but that the powers were limited to the enumerated powers. "In pursuance thereof."
Case in point 2: The section on Amendment X is wonderful. However, Monk never cites Madison's commentary on the division of labor of Federal and State government:
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State." (Federalist 45).
Some the sidebar quotes were rather strange. On page 153, they have an oddball rant that suggests the only reason why people own guns is to exercise a right to homicide. Then Lawrence H. Tribe's article on page 97 contains five fallacies--furtive, circular reasoning, well-poisoning, and false analogy Historians' Fallacies : Toward a Logic of Historical Thought.
However, she gets it right in two sidebar quotes. The Alex Haig "I am in control here" (259) is classic. And Clinton's "is" quote on page 87 is quintessentially Bill. Including both of these gives this book another coveted Amazon.com rating star. By the way, to see what "is" means, read Aristotle's Metaphysics, book IV The Basic Works of Aristotle (Modern Library Classics).
Three nitpicks:
* She titles the preface as "The Constitution as Conversation." Well, it is no such thing. It is high-order philosophizing. It is law. Forget Oprah-sponsored group therapy, but remember that behind all political wrangling is an assessment on how to use the coercive and capital force of the Government.
* The book was published in 2003. But the Kelo v. New London (2005) ruling changes eminent domain discussion. Now government can take land to increase the tax base. We have become serfs!
* Page 34, dealing with impeachment say "Only twice . . ." Get real--there will be more presidential impeachments. Write, "So far . . . "
Despite these critiques, this book is a gem. No wonder it is mandatory reading at Brigham Young University. Use it for High School Civics or for Home Schooling.
|
4: a wonderful resource
Considering how often people refer to the Constitution when arguing over controversial issues, it's amazing how little many of us really know about what it says, why it says it, and what it means. This annotated guide seems like a great place to start for those who want to learn more about these and other aspects of the Constitution. Each chapter presents an article or ammendment (each in order), followed by descriptions that include photos and cartoons, consideration of relevant historical issues, notable quotes and definitions. The organization and style make it great for both browsing and reading cover to cover. I would have really benefitted from having a basic text on the Constitution as interesting and entertaining as this when I was in school. It may not be the most engrossing book for everyone, and may be a bit too basic for those with previous training in Constitutional law, but for many people who are at least somewhat curious about the topic and motivated to acquire a good basic background on the Constitution, this book will be highly enjoyable and well worthwhile.
|
5: Some Words to Start on
The Words We Live By is a readily accessible, quick reference analysis of the Constitution of the United States of America. It makes use of a functional format (that resembles a text book) as well as interesting little anecdotes that restore a portion of the textual and historical romance that you naturally lose in any abridgment. It presents the analytical and background material in a manner that easily correlates to the corresponding text within the Constitution. Taking a "one bite at a time" type of approach, The Words We Live By briefly examines our Constitution in multiple contexts--a refreshing little jaunt, through a critical piece of our heritage.
Linda Monk employs an informative method in her writing; it kind of resembles a letter that you'd write home, describing your new surroundings. She tells things, quite technically, "how they are," and then proceeds to give some necessary background. In her own words, "the Constitution is also the product of an ongoing conversation among Americans about the meaning of freedom in their daily lives."(Monk 9) Frequently she goes beyond glossary or the bare minimum historical information to reveal glimpses of the fascinating complexity of it all. I didn't always feel edified by the sidebar comments made, but they were varied and presented a broad spectrum of things one wouldn't normally have considered. I didn't find this book to be constructed to lead the reader to any one opinion. While personally I don't care too much for her type of voice, she did employ her method very well, and it effectively brought out appealing details of the study of our history.
The book begins by establishing some common ground with a general introduction, as does each section. The chapters begin with the section of the Constitution that is to be analyzed. Linda Monk then breaks that section down into a few lines of the text which she explicates in a few paragraphs. It's easy to find reference for difficult or uncommon terms, as they are set aside with a brief explanation in the margins, near to where they are discussed in the main body of the text. The pictures and comics, on most of the pages, make it easy to interpret or find specific points in the ongoing discussion. Strewn throughout the chapters are these lovely, little, purple boxes that contain examples, outside opinions, or related historical/current events. This leads us to the second, main characteristic of the book
One strength to Monk's analysis is the variety in connections it makes between the constitutional text and our history and current events. The comparisons made tend to be objective, for the most part, as well they should be. She doesn't come out and say, "Here's an example of the elastic clause, and by the way, this is what the answer is by the Constitution!" Rather, she presents specific examples and then connects the reader with what parts of the constitution they pertain to. A complaint I had of this, was that I felt certain issues presented were connected to more sections of the Constitution than were mentioned. Considering the scope of this work, though, Monk's analysis meets reasonable expectations. Even though I didn't find that all of the tidbits presented by Monk were necessarily helpful or appropriate to the current discussion, they did serve their purpose well. Without such tangents, an analytical breakdown of this legal document would have not been as engaging, to say the least. I found this aspect to be the book's greatest strength as well as weakness.
Monk's conversational manner brings out the richness of our heritage in an interesting way. Her discussion holds a bit of a story telling air to it but puts an atypical tilt on things. While not quite as dramatic as a pure historical narrative would have been, it sheds some additional light on our views as a culture. It follows a form comparative to a philosophical narrative; that is, it tells the story of the message or idea that defines America rather than looking over a complete, chronological sequence of events. This development leads us to ponder what the motivation is exactly for our political and ethical convictions. The text evokes an honest question: "Did we do the right things in the past?" and based on the answer to that, "What parts of our history and Constitution can we look to as `words to live by?'" There seems to be a popular trend in America to dig up the dirt in our past. I found Monk's questions to be quite refreshing compared to the historical mud-slinging I've seen so often. I didn't find her sheltering any skeletons in our closet, and her questions/observations posed were respectful and fair.
A theme throughout the book is how our Constitution has changed--hopefully towards liberty and justice. In addition to the original constitution, all of the amendments are annotated. In most cases a brief history is given that explains the context pertinent to that given amendment. Then, (in some cases more than others) Monk attempts to address some of the arguments for and against that amendment. Numerous Supreme Court rulings are used which partially illustrate the aftermath of the amendments. This is also done within the analysis of the main body of the Constitution, though, I am a little disappointed that very little of the general aftermath is discussed. The analysis on the amendments section seemed, to me, to be more interpretive than critical or informative. Very little time is spent, in most cases, on how a specific amendment changed the political scene. In all fairness to the author, though, it would be difficult to make any general statement like that without expressing bias.
The book has very little in the way of a formal conclusion; it lasts less than one page. Most of that one page is quotations from other authors. It shouldn't come as a surprise to the reader that Linda Monk doesn't pass any final judgment. She makes two statements in summary of what she tried to do with her book. First, an inquiry about the future: "What amendments might come next in the U. S. Constitution?" What will the future hold, and how much of that will rely on us. Stemming off this thought she closes, leaving us with the charge "To decide for ourselves what freedom is. That is the greatest gift that our Constitution gives us--a way to decide, along with our fellow citizens, what words we will live by." (Monk 263) That seems to summarize The Words We Live By in my mind. While I did want to see more in the way of history and general, macro analysis, I can't deny that this book served its purpose as stated from these sentences. I would recommend this book to anyone approaching voting age or who feels that they don't have an interest in this nation. Most people who read this book will come away with an increased sense of their responsibility and power to make a difference. It will increase one's desire to be aware and be actively engaged in the future formation of our law.
|
|
|
|
|
