hey scepticalscribe, I can say that it was a very good read and I enjoyed it. She's one of the most interesting (and influential) women of the 20th century, so that helps a lot of course, too. It tries to bring her into perspective / context and doesn't go into much detail on her writings in particular, there are brief introductions into the main ideas of i.e. Heidegger or Jaspers woven into the text, which are necessary to understand her development and individuation, I think. Not very deep and complex but a very good and easy read if one isn't acquainted with her or knows primarily her texts.
With your magical speed-reading techniques, I guess it's a day or two maximum for you. Hope you enjoy it as much as I did, if you are going to read it.
Thanks a lot for the thoughtful review. I'm a big fan of her writing as well. Actually, as a philosophical writer and thinker, she was a lot more politically 'engagé' than some of the older school philosophers who believed in distance and what they called objectivity, (in time, place, and indeed, any sort of emotional or political involvement with the subject under discussion).
She believed that philosophers needed to engage with what was (is) happening in the world, and, as such she also wrote in a very insightful way, on contemporary political matters. For example, she is the author of the famous observation (made while reporting on the trial of Adolf Eichmann) about 'the banality of evil', which has since become a cliché in its own right.
In any case, thanks for replying; I'll order it, but I doubt I'll manage to get around to reading it for another few weeks.
hehe
