Excruciatingly ambitious, this work is truly a feat that leaves one in awe. However, it is also excruciating to read. It's as if a powerful chemical paint-stripper is being applied, flaying the human mind off the planet's face. The author's genius is undeniable, with ideas and concepts that are far-reaching and revolutionary. But the way it is presented makes it borderline unreadable. The language is complex, the structure convoluted, and the ideas are so abstract that they require a great deal of effort and concentration to understand. It's a work that demands a lot from the reader, but at the same time, it offers little in the way of immediate gratification. It's a challenging read, but for those who are willing to put in the effort, it may just be a rewarding one.

Let me begin by making it crystal clear that my review is founded entirely and is aimed solely at the abridged version of RURD.

Consequently, I have wavered between 2 and 5 stars. For me, Vollman's writing is truly remarkable, and his way of contemplating violence and its justification is extremely eye-opening in a manner that few things I've ever read can match.

This is most especially due to his discussion of specific conflicts through his conversations with rather ordinary people who are caught up in those conflicts.

On the flip side, I believe that the abridgment has stripped the work of its coherence.

What I will state (and this is ultimately the reason for my awarding 4 stars) is that while I had thought that despite my fondness for Vollman's other books, I would never have imagined reading the full seven-volume version.

Now, it is most definitely on my bucket list.

Let's face it:

The heft of this book (and this is the abridged version), Vollman's sadsack writing style and even more sadsack photo, and the huge portions of the book devoted to detailing in excruciating detail the "moral calculus" of the author do not bode well. It seems rather intimidating and off-putting at first glance.

But in spite of the pompousness and excess, this is an amazing book, or compilation, or whatever one may call it. Vollman takes us through his life as a witness of war zones and poverty, bravely attempting to figure out a rational philosophy of when it's moral to fight back. He's no pacifist, and there are indeed occasions when fighting is the right thing to do. If Gandhi had written this book, it would've been less dynamic, for sure.

I didn't really go through the flowchart style "moral calculus" as it seemed unnecessary at the time. I'm still pretty sure I'd find it unnecessary now. Also, I don't think some of Vollman's better essays are included here, but I can't remember exactly which ones are missing.

I think this book is rather rare, but if nothing else, you should read one of Vollman's essays (I highly recommend "They Came Out Like Ants!") from McSweeney's. If you like it, then search this book out and buy it. Or else William T. Vollman has the right to kill you, because "not buying my book" is a valid excuse for murder in his moral calculus. Which was quite shocking. And my review "humor" seems to be getting stupider and lazier as I go along.

This is a very difficult review.

Certainly, it is an intense and violent book, the result of years and years of experience, reflection, rereading, and the construction of a structured point of view on the topic of the legitimacy of violence, both as a weapon of offense and defense.

On the other hand, it is an inevitably engaging read (it's almost a thousand pages), at times exhausting (I carried it forward for almost three months), which requires a certain knowledge of certain events and historical passages to best savor its philosophy.

It is not a friendly or gentle read; rather, if it can, it will hit you with fists. And despite this, despite requiring a great deal of commitment and constancy, it does not always offer a true and proper return, often leaving you dissatisfied or with a sense of incompleteness.

Overall, this book is a complex and challenging work that demands a lot from the reader but may not always deliver the expected rewards. It forces you to grapple with difficult ideas and question your own beliefs about violence and its place in society. However, for those who are willing to invest the time and effort, it can also be a thought-provoking and eye-opening experience.

Imagine that one of the French Encyclopedists had been reborn 50 years ago.

He is a strange character with a wierd gun fetish. His obsession with guns borders on the creepy, and he gives off an air that might make one suspect he could be a serial killer.

Despite his oddities, he has a deep need for companionship. However, due to his strange nature, he resorts to hiring prostitutes for this purpose.

This is the book that such a guy would write. It would likely be a disturbing and unconventional work, delving into the dark recesses of his mind and his unusual lifestyle.

Perhaps it would explore his gun fetish in detail, along with his experiences with the prostitutes he hires. It might also touch on his sense of isolation and the lengths he goes to in order to find some form of connection.

The book would be a unique and thought-provoking read, challenging readers to confront their own prejudices and assumptions about human nature.

I'm finally done with this. It took me nearly four years to complete. There are several reasons for this. Firstly, the books are quite heavy, and I didn't want to carry them around all the time. Secondly, it was such a huge project that I often found myself asking 'why bother?' as it was going to take an extremely long time. And thirdly, to be honest, the essays at the end were often rather boring, long, and lacking in context. It just felt like Vollmann was aimlessly bumming around, trying to investigate but not really getting anywhere.

I believe the strength of this collection lies in the first four volumes. I absolutely love his historical investigation into when, if ever, violence is justified. Looking at these historical instances is truly fascinating.

On the other hand, the essays at the end, which were collected from his journalistic articles for various magazines, are supposed to demonstrate how difficult it is to apply these ideas to real-world scenarios. And that's a great idea. However, because these essays were originally written for magazines with different intentions, there is often very little context or in-depth analysis, which I would have really appreciated. In other words, if these essays had been rewritten specifically for this mega project, I think he would have added more and said something like "here is an example where it is difficult to apply X because of Y and Z". And don't get me wrong, we do sometimes get such examples, but they are few and far between. This is probably also why I really enjoyed the introductions to the various country sections, as he directly discusses the Moral Calculus and its applications or the difficulties in applying them.

Actually, I much preferred "Europe Central" as an example where you can see people in incredibly complex moral scenarios and understand how difficult it is for them to make the decisions they do. Although, once again, this is more of a historical account than real-world reportage.

In conclusion, I think this work could really benefit from a rewrite or editing of the essays at the end... if this book ever gets another edition.

For those who are wondering whether they should bother reading the abridged version or invest in the seven volumes, I would suggest first reading the abridged one. If you like the reportage more than the historical analysis, then try to get hold of the last two volumes. If you enjoyed the historical analysis, try to obtain the first four volumes. If you loved both, then yes, you'll probably get a lot of enjoyment from the full set. If it was just so-so for you, then you're not really missing out on much. I guess what I mean is that I don't feel like I gained a whole lot from reading the full collection of reporting... But I do feel like I benefited from reading the full collection of historical analyses.

For interested readers who don't have access to the unabridged, six-volume Rising Up and Rising Down and are not satisfied with the abridgment, there are a few more items that can be combined for a more complete understanding of the RURD project.

For the first four volumes, which develop the Moral Calculus through an ethical questioning of various Moral Actors, we have to rely on the selections in the RURD abridgment as that material is not covered extensively elsewhere in his corpus. However, the journalistic pieces in volumes six and seven, which were often shortened in their original periodical appearances, can be seen reworked in some of Vollmann's other books. He does have a tendency to recycle materials for different purposes.

The Atlas contains fictionalized versions of many of his world-travel experiences. Poor People explores similar themes under the question, "Why are you poor?" You Bright and Risen Angels addresses the issue of revolution. Europe Central would not have been possible without the prior writing of RURD. An Afghanistan Picture Show is where the entire project began.

His journalistic travels also appear in other works like The Butterfly Boy. But the above five books, along with the abridgment, might be a close substitute for having access to the entire RURD.

Following is the text of a letter sent by Bruce Trigger to William T Vollmann regarding the Moral Calculus portion of Rising Up and Rising Down. Trigger was a professor in the Department of Anthropology at McGill University. Vollmann consulted him during the writing of Fathers and Crows and also relied on him for parts of RURD. The letter, dated 14 September 2002, can be found on page 120 of volume MC of RURD.

From a Letter of Comment from Prof. Bruce Trigger

Trigger mentions that there is something missing that Vollmann may or may not address in another book. He used to think the negative version of the Golden Rule was better, but now he believes an underlying consensus about how modern societies should be run is needed. He points to The Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a remarkable statement of ideals that we should strive to meet. He believes that if people can agree on such issues, Vollmann's calculus will have a stronger foundation for judging human conduct. However, the question remains how to get these issues discussed.

[end Trigger's letter]

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights can be read here :: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

The whole is greater than its constituent parts, but even those parts are rather commendable.

Each part plays a vital role in contributing to the overall functionality and value of the whole. It's like a complex machine where every cog and wheel has its significance.

The annotations I wrote will eventually be electronically transcribed and accompanied by a review. This process ensures accuracy and provides an opportunity for further analysis and improvement.

Whilst it might've been preferable to read it without interruptions, certain investigations were prompted by parallels. These parallels can offer new insights and connections that might otherwise have been overlooked.

By exploring these parallels, we can gain a deeper understanding of the subject matter and enhance our knowledge and perspective.

In conclusion, although the whole is of utmost importance, we should not underestimate the value and significance of its individual parts.

Subtitle: Some Thoughts on Violence, Freedom, and Urgent Means.

I read the abridged version, which is a mere 700+ pages long. The original was an astonishing 3500 pages spread across seven volumes. At this point, you might be wondering if you read that correctly, unless you knew that the original publisher was Dave Eggers, in which case it all makes sense.

It turns out that reading 700 pages on the history of violence is, however, enough.

This doesn't mean I regret reading it. Quite the contrary. Vollmann covers a vast range of topics, including the Russian revolution, John Brown, Abraham Lincoln, the former Yugoslavia, Somalia, gang-ruled ghettos in Jamaica, Gandhi, and much more. For nearly every one, he has many insightful observations to make, which gave me something new and significant to think about. It is just not easy reading.

Vollmann attempts to create a "moral calculus" to determine when violence is and is not justified. Most people, on the other hand, have what one might characterize (or perhaps caricature) as a moral algebra, which amounts to either:

1) violence isn't justified

2) violence is justified if it's the good guys doing it

Vollmann takes neither of these paths, and that is where he gives you something to think about, rather than just something to get angry or depressed about. He poses difficult questions such as: Is violent resistance to an oppressive government justified? What if that government is a democracy? What if that democracy condones slavery, and you're fighting to end it? What if your violent acts have no reasonable prospect of ending slavery? What if there's no reasonable prospect of ending slavery without violence? (Think John Brown and Abraham Lincoln.)

Is violence justified on the basis of ethnicity? What if your society is so fractured by civil war that assuming someone of a different ethnicity is hostile (rather than actually waiting for them to shoot at you) is the only way of staying alive?

Vollmann deliberately seeks out the hardest cases to judge, just as a good physicist will seek out those experiments where the existing theories do not give the right answer, because that's where you can find the right questions to ask and make a better model. When the topic is violence, freedom, and morality, though, the requisite background reading on Russian children starving to death on a diet of clay can sometimes make the reader feel as if they've been beaten up every time they finish a chapter.

In the end, though, I was never tempted to stop, because you know that Vollmann's text is really more like doing a hard regimen of physical exercise, only in the moral and spiritual arena instead. Almost any code of ethics, religious or otherwise, can give you the right answers in easy situations. Reading about people in real, but pathological situations is the best way to rigorously test what you believe in and why. Reading of any kind should give your brain a workout of some sort. Sometimes it's a fun workout. This one was not. Give your soul a workout. Read this book.

But do yourself a favor and read the condensed version.

This is the abridged version of a truly massive series of books that consists of 4000 plus pages.

It offers a comprehensive analysis of violence, employing hundreds of examples of violence that have occurred throughout time. The aim is to understand when violence is justifiable and when it clearly is not.

One particularly interesting chapter focuses on the Bosnian war and the siege of Sarajevo. Reading about this was truly captivating.

There is also a huge section dedicated to the invasion of South America by the Spanish and some of the atrocities that were committed there. There are simply too many examples to mention.

This is an impressive book that is not only well-written but also provides valuable insights into the complex topic of violence. It is a must-read for anyone interested in understanding the history and nature of violence.

Overall, this abridged version manages to capture the essence of the original series and presents it in a more accessible format. It is a great resource for scholars, students, and anyone else who wants to learn more about this important topic.

He said it all.

His words carried a weight that couldn't be ignored. Every syllable seemed to hold a deeper meaning, as if he was revealing the essence of a truth that had long been hidden.

His voice was steady, yet there was a hint of passion within it. It was as if he had been waiting for this moment to express himself fully.

As he spoke, the listeners hung on his every word, captivated by the power of his message. They could sense that what he was saying was not just ordinary talk, but something that had the potential to change their perspectives.

When he finished, there was a moment of silence. The impact of his words lingered in the air, leaving everyone with much to think about.

He truly had said it all.

"AS WE GO UP WE GO DOWN"

This will be a long exploration.

EXPOSITION
"Rising Up and Rising Down" had been sitting on my Vollmann shelf for six months, its four-plus feet length taking up space and taunting me with a gap of black that grinned sickeningly like missing teeth in a bully's smile. It seemed to say, "You're not up to this." And indeed, I had made the fatal error of relegating it to aesthetic rather than artistic value. Only now, after reading 3298 pages, do I realize what a disservice and even a dishonor I did it by putting it off. You deserved better, WTV.
APOLOGIA
In the footsteps of my predecessors and betters like Nathan, Hadrian, Mark Sacha, Brian Dice, etc., I have to admit that I cannot add anything to the meritorious dissection of this rare undertaking. The attempt to reify violence and create a moral calculus required WTV to call upon more disciplines than I can name. So, for a truly helpful review, I recommend you search the encomiums of these far more erudite readers. Their painstaking analyses have added to the conversation that "RURD" should engender. I can only share my personal testimony and experience.
AN OBSERVATION
It's funny that we Vollmanists refer to "Rising Up and Rising Down" as "RURD," given his stated dislike of acronyms. But what the fuck are you going to do when it's such a long title?
EXPOSITION CONTINUED
So why did I finally pick it up? It was a combination of things. First, Friend RB, to whom I owe a great deal of gratitude, questioned why I had owned it for so long and still it sat. Secondly, seeing ATJG's progress made me feel guilty. Why was I sitting on this highly sought-after collection when so many would give their eyeteeth for a chance to read it, much less own it? And so, late one Friday night/Saturday morning, I read the first few pages and reappeared here 18 days later. My entire self had been given over to "RURD," and now I feel a sense of listlessness. What am I to do now that I can't unsee what WTV made so brilliantly clear to me?
AN ASIDE
I've never called WTV by his Christian name in my previous reviews of his books. I didn't know him and didn't feel we were on a first name basis. But now, after this experience, I reserve the right to call our beloved author by his common name, as he holds nothing back and I feel welcomed into his embrace. So thank you, Bill.
"WHAT MAKES A MAN START FIRES?"
So what does it all mean? In a word, everything. I've never had such a transformative reading experience. I stand in awe and prostrate now that I'm finished. "When is violence justified?" is like trying to count the sand at the beach. The uninitiated need to understand that "RURD" attempts to synthesize its impossible task from every possible angle. At 3300 pages, it's too brief. It could benefit from doubling its size to give Vollmann more room to expand and expound his truly guileless endeavor.
The first four volumes deal with theoreticals, and the last two with case studies. Which you prefer will depend on your personal taste. This is truly an embarrassment of riches, a veritable "Choose-Your-Own-Vollmann" as all of his many styles make appearances. If you're higher minded than I, you'll revel in his analysis of, say, Robespierre. I'll be at the salad bar with the whores and the White separatists.
AN ASIDE (CONTINUED)
We Vollmannites often marvel at how genuine a human being he is. "RURD" is the last word on that subject. His endless self-effacement and acknowledgement of both his project and his own shortcomings are the standard-bearer for how to comport oneself with dignity. Conversely, the dignity he affords others is enough to bring tears.
WHICH REMINDS ME
I've never cried reading a book. But the photo essay of the children in Iraqi hospitals and the essay regarding Francis in Bosnia made my eyes well up. I don't doubt that many of you will have similar experiences. It's good that we're reminded of this all-too-real suffering.
AN ASIDE (TERMINUS)
I hazard a guess that we Vollmanniks live lives far different than those covered in the "Consequences." But it's strange to find one essay taking place less than 15 minutes from my house. No matter how much we try to ensconce ourselves behind our battlements, "RURD" lives everywhere as it is the essence of violence.
EPILOGUE: SANGUINE MARGINALIA
Blood, so much blood - rising up and down like a river in the rainy season. This new Season of Blood. To read it as quickly as I did, I sacrificed work, family, friends, and sleep. I would stay up long after the family went to bed, smoking and devouring the book, only to wake up too soon. I paid a toll for my obsession.
On the 14th day of reading, after having had a maximum of 4 hours of rest for too many nights in a row, I rolled out of bed so dead asleep that I smashed my face open on the nightstand. Blood gushed from my nose, dying the front of my t-shirt. After stuffing cotton balls up my nostrils, I finally stopped the bleeding after over an hour. I went out to smoke and, of course, grabbed Volume V of "RURD" on my way.
After reading for a while, a purpled diamond of blood fell from me and landed on the margin of the page. Had this happened in Volume I or II, I would have been crestfallen. But now, I simply watched as the bloodflower blossomed into an idiosyncratic mark of beauty. After all of my voyeurism of others' suffering, it seemed a small price to pay. "RURD" earned it, and I did in turn. Blood attracts blood, seeking its own level as it rushes through the world. I must remember to un-clot my senses and take in the savage beauty of existence before I go under evermore.