Machiavelli The Prince
A book that has been read by some o f the world’s most famous leaders, from kings and ministers to Hitler, this book The Prince, is considered today as a must read for political power. Machiavelli was believed to have first written this book about five years before his death in 1532. It is believed that he never sought to have it published, but a friend found it about five years after his death and had it published. Machiavelli served many years in public life, but with the change of leaders he was no longer needed and was sent home to a small farm, where he was very unhappy, to spend the remainder of his days. In an effort to return to public life, a friend helped him get a job with a small annual salary, to write the history of Florence. While in this position he also wrote The Prince. This book was written to the current prince of Florence at the time, Lorenzo de’ Medici. It was meant as a guide for Medici. However, Medici not agree with some of the ideas in the book, so Medici had the book banned. Although this book was written in the 1500’s in Italy it has been read and used all over the world even here in the United States. I think if you are curious about political leadership, this is a book that you must read.
One theme that I found in this book was human nature. Machiavelli conveys his own philosophy on human nature. Shakespeare construed Machiavelli’s thoughts on human nature as observations more than he saw them as critics. Shakespeare stated that Machiavelli saw humans as they are, not as they ought to be. When writing this book to his friend prince, Machiavelli wrote on the subjects of such things as ambition, happiness, trustworthiness, and loyalty. Theses thing showed how Machiavelli personally felt on what political views were towards the citizens.
This story, The Prince, took place in Florence, Italy in the early 1500. At the time of this story Italy very divided and changing rulers often. Because of this Machiavelli lost his position in public service. With the lost of job he was left bored and unhappy. Public service gave him a life in the city with much entertainment. Then he found himself back on a farm with little to do. When he was given a chance to write a book, he took the opportunity to write to the prince and give him advice on ruling Florence successfully. Although Machiavelli never sent it to Lorenzo de’ Medici, when the price do read it he strongly disagreed with it and banned the book. This book was later used as a guild for many leaders in many different counties the future. I thank that if this book been written in a different time and place, for example China, it would never have been published and the author would have been killed. As a matter of fact, I wonder if a person in China would have even have had these thoughts, because their government has been based on what is best for the country and not on human rights.
The two characters that I think changed in the book are Machiavelli and his friend. According to the history in the book, they seemed to be friends of equal or similar positions. As a result, they were both very happy at the being of the book, but one of them lost his job, Machiavelli. Machiavelli’s friend changed because now he feels sorry for Machiavelli. Later the friend is able to get Machiavelli commissioned to write about the history of Florence. This gave Machiavelli some relieve, but he thought it was more important that the prince become a successful ruler of Florence.
I think that the way the structure of this book was written made it very difficult to read. The 30 page prologue gives a very complex history of the book that was tedious. For example, the reactions some readers had of the book, the American scholar’s opinion of the book and how the name Machiavelli became and evil household name given by different people thought out history around the world just from their assumption of the book. Also, the old English style of writing, along with the inverted syntax, and higher level vocabulary was so off putting. For example, on page 72 “I say, therefore, that the arms by which a prince fends his possessions are either his own, or else mercenaries, or auxiliaries, or mixed.” I will say that some of the vocabulary, after looking it up, made Machiavelli points very descriptively and made confusing to read but clear to understand. I think that sometimes he contradicted himself. For example when Machiavelli, began his writing as a gift for the prince, he said that he did not want his massage to get lost in large words or wordy sentences, but to me as he was stating this he was also calling the prince unintelligent. Finally, the book being written like a note book was probably the most useful tool used by Machiavelli, because it allows the reader to read the book in no particular order and still take from it, the massage I think, Machiavelli was trying to convey.
When I analyzed the effects of the author’s syntax, I choose three sentences from the book. The first comes from chapter 8 pg 59:“Nevertheless, his wickedness was accompanied by such vigour of mind and body that, having joined the militia, he rose through its ranks to be praetor of Syracuse.”
In this sentence, the syntax used is an old English style of writing and made many uncommon historical references. When the author refers to words like “wickedness”, it is a gesture of the time period in which the book was written. The next sentence comes from Chapter 7 pg 55:“And as the part is worthy of note and of imitation by others, I wil not omit mention of it.”This sentence begins with “And” which is a taboo in modern day English, but this action shows that the author is not as concern with grammar as much as he is in getting his point across to the prince. Also the author uses the phrase “worthy of note” instead of “noteworthy” which is an example of inverted syntax. The author also had some incorrect spelling or it may have just been a publishing typo. Finally, the third sentence I analyzed comes from Chapter 24 pg 118:“For men are much more taken by present that by past things, and when they find themselves well off in the present, they enjoy it and seek nothing more; on the contrary, they will do all they can to defend him so long as the prince is not in other things deficient. “The syntax in this sentence is very old faction, for example, the use of the phrase “on the contrary” is not seen much in modern literature unless the author is trying to intentionally sound old fashion. I also think that the phrase “For men are …taken by preset that by past things,” is another statement that shows the time period of this literature and some very good examples of inverted syntax.
The first major event in this book was caused when Machiavelli lost his position in public serve. Because of this, he was sent to live in the country away the from the city life that he so enjoy. He was left very unhappy. This event causes a friend to seek employment for Machiavelli to give him some fulfillment. The second major event was caused when Machiavelli wrote a letter of advice to the prince. When it was completed Machiavelli decided not to give it to the prince, but a friend later found it and published it as a book. As a result, the prince, with advice from the church, banished the book. The third major event was when the book was still being read for many years by scholars who sometimes agreed with it and sometime criticized it. Some historical political figures even tried to desecrate Machiavelli as a writer, but this only cause the book’s popularity to spread and to be read by even leaders of modern time.
I strongly agree with all the statements I have pull from Stephens review on this book. Even thou, the quotes do not capture the just of Stephen’s total review, these three points share some of the positive thoughts I have towards this wonderfully insightful book. First Stephen states, “Ground-breaking and brilliantly insightful, especially for its time. So much of what Machiavelli says is now an ingrained part of political thinking that it comes across as DUH when you read it”. Second he states, the book “is interesting and fun to read, but basically worthless for anything other than historical perspective. Last, he states, “Machiavelli discusses numerous examples of sovereigns who either benefitted from following such advice or, conversely, who suffered calamity for adhering to a sense of virtue”
In conclusion I found this book to be a political guide on how to conduct a polity. Either you want to read this book or you don’t want to read this book. When you pick it up, this mean you have some curiosity towards the content inside based on prior knowledge about the book. You should not read this unless you want to know Machiavelli’s thought on how to be a good ruler learning from others mistakes and or their successes.
One theme that I found in this book was human nature. Machiavelli conveys his own philosophy on human nature. Shakespeare construed Machiavelli’s thoughts on human nature as observations more than he saw them as critics. Shakespeare stated that Machiavelli saw humans as they are, not as they ought to be. When writing this book to his friend prince, Machiavelli wrote on the subjects of such things as ambition, happiness, trustworthiness, and loyalty. Theses thing showed how Machiavelli personally felt on what political views were towards the citizens.
This story, The Prince, took place in Florence, Italy in the early 1500. At the time of this story Italy very divided and changing rulers often. Because of this Machiavelli lost his position in public service. With the lost of job he was left bored and unhappy. Public service gave him a life in the city with much entertainment. Then he found himself back on a farm with little to do. When he was given a chance to write a book, he took the opportunity to write to the prince and give him advice on ruling Florence successfully. Although Machiavelli never sent it to Lorenzo de’ Medici, when the price do read it he strongly disagreed with it and banned the book. This book was later used as a guild for many leaders in many different counties the future. I thank that if this book been written in a different time and place, for example China, it would never have been published and the author would have been killed. As a matter of fact, I wonder if a person in China would have even have had these thoughts, because their government has been based on what is best for the country and not on human rights.
The two characters that I think changed in the book are Machiavelli and his friend. According to the history in the book, they seemed to be friends of equal or similar positions. As a result, they were both very happy at the being of the book, but one of them lost his job, Machiavelli. Machiavelli’s friend changed because now he feels sorry for Machiavelli. Later the friend is able to get Machiavelli commissioned to write about the history of Florence. This gave Machiavelli some relieve, but he thought it was more important that the prince become a successful ruler of Florence.
I think that the way the structure of this book was written made it very difficult to read. The 30 page prologue gives a very complex history of the book that was tedious. For example, the reactions some readers had of the book, the American scholar’s opinion of the book and how the name Machiavelli became and evil household name given by different people thought out history around the world just from their assumption of the book. Also, the old English style of writing, along with the inverted syntax, and higher level vocabulary was so off putting. For example, on page 72 “I say, therefore, that the arms by which a prince fends his possessions are either his own, or else mercenaries, or auxiliaries, or mixed.” I will say that some of the vocabulary, after looking it up, made Machiavelli points very descriptively and made confusing to read but clear to understand. I think that sometimes he contradicted himself. For example when Machiavelli, began his writing as a gift for the prince, he said that he did not want his massage to get lost in large words or wordy sentences, but to me as he was stating this he was also calling the prince unintelligent. Finally, the book being written like a note book was probably the most useful tool used by Machiavelli, because it allows the reader to read the book in no particular order and still take from it, the massage I think, Machiavelli was trying to convey.
When I analyzed the effects of the author’s syntax, I choose three sentences from the book. The first comes from chapter 8 pg 59:“Nevertheless, his wickedness was accompanied by such vigour of mind and body that, having joined the militia, he rose through its ranks to be praetor of Syracuse.”
In this sentence, the syntax used is an old English style of writing and made many uncommon historical references. When the author refers to words like “wickedness”, it is a gesture of the time period in which the book was written. The next sentence comes from Chapter 7 pg 55:“And as the part is worthy of note and of imitation by others, I wil not omit mention of it.”This sentence begins with “And” which is a taboo in modern day English, but this action shows that the author is not as concern with grammar as much as he is in getting his point across to the prince. Also the author uses the phrase “worthy of note” instead of “noteworthy” which is an example of inverted syntax. The author also had some incorrect spelling or it may have just been a publishing typo. Finally, the third sentence I analyzed comes from Chapter 24 pg 118:“For men are much more taken by present that by past things, and when they find themselves well off in the present, they enjoy it and seek nothing more; on the contrary, they will do all they can to defend him so long as the prince is not in other things deficient. “The syntax in this sentence is very old faction, for example, the use of the phrase “on the contrary” is not seen much in modern literature unless the author is trying to intentionally sound old fashion. I also think that the phrase “For men are …taken by preset that by past things,” is another statement that shows the time period of this literature and some very good examples of inverted syntax.
The first major event in this book was caused when Machiavelli lost his position in public serve. Because of this, he was sent to live in the country away the from the city life that he so enjoy. He was left very unhappy. This event causes a friend to seek employment for Machiavelli to give him some fulfillment. The second major event was caused when Machiavelli wrote a letter of advice to the prince. When it was completed Machiavelli decided not to give it to the prince, but a friend later found it and published it as a book. As a result, the prince, with advice from the church, banished the book. The third major event was when the book was still being read for many years by scholars who sometimes agreed with it and sometime criticized it. Some historical political figures even tried to desecrate Machiavelli as a writer, but this only cause the book’s popularity to spread and to be read by even leaders of modern time.
I strongly agree with all the statements I have pull from Stephens review on this book. Even thou, the quotes do not capture the just of Stephen’s total review, these three points share some of the positive thoughts I have towards this wonderfully insightful book. First Stephen states, “Ground-breaking and brilliantly insightful, especially for its time. So much of what Machiavelli says is now an ingrained part of political thinking that it comes across as DUH when you read it”. Second he states, the book “is interesting and fun to read, but basically worthless for anything other than historical perspective. Last, he states, “Machiavelli discusses numerous examples of sovereigns who either benefitted from following such advice or, conversely, who suffered calamity for adhering to a sense of virtue”
In conclusion I found this book to be a political guide on how to conduct a polity. Either you want to read this book or you don’t want to read this book. When you pick it up, this mean you have some curiosity towards the content inside based on prior knowledge about the book. You should not read this unless you want to know Machiavelli’s thought on how to be a good ruler learning from others mistakes and or their successes.