The reason that transformed this from a five-star book to a four-star one has scant connection to the book's actual worth. Vollmann performs a magnificent task of presenting a moral calculus for dealing with violence. When is it right? When is it wrong? He informs you, and as far as I can perceive, he is correct. He surely achieved his objective.

My issue with this book is that it almost entirely forgets about the reader. There are hundreds of pages dedicated to the formulas of violence with little consideration for the reader's desire for entertainment. Had Vollmann taken a bit more care regarding what a reader would be willing to endure, I would hope that he would have rethought some of his decisions. He pays such meticulous attention to tiny details that you almost wish he would ease up a little.

I'm certain that the reason he did this is likely because he knew that discussing a subject like violence and its possible solutions would make him a target of sorts for critics. This, I think, would be very unjust considering the depth that Vollmann brought to this work and the amount of effort that led him to write this novel over a period exceeding two decades.

I must state that where Vollmann excels, he outshines almost any other living novelist. The sections where he relates personal experiences with violence are written in the same style as his fiction, and it's incredible. I am a very patient reader, but this book was almost too much even for me (and this was the abridged version!). This doesn't mean that Vollmann has disappointed me. He hasn't. But I think I may stick to his works of fiction from now on. That's where he really gets me excited.

Never thought I'd say it, but after reading the 700 pages of the abridgment, I truly believe this book might very well deserve the 3,300-page unabridged edition. The editing decisions made by Ecco to reduce the book to a more manageable length have, in my opinion (having not read the original text outside of this abridgment), seriously eroded the process of discourse and documentation that Vollmann is aiming for here. I can only impatiently wait until I can get my hands on the full text to offer a more comprehensive assessment.

As for Vollmann himself, although he acknowledges that his perspective is inherently influenced by his white, Western, and male identity, he still falls into the pitfalls of regrettable discourse, especially in Section II (his case study accounts). These moments serve as reminders of those red-flagged passages that are commonly regarded as colonialist and pandering. While these instances are isolated and often expressed through stretched similes, they are nevertheless present and require discussion, as I'm certain Bill would concur.

**UPDATE: Checks in the mail on the 7-volume edition. This has now become a to-read of the highest priority.**

**Volume 1: Meditations Introduction Definitions (Apr 21 - Apr 24, 2013)**

William Vollmann has spent 17 years delving into the realm of violence, seeking to understand its true meaning. He asks if there is a moral calculus for violence, and attempts to sift through history's bloodshed and grief to find the building blocks of our darker natures. This book is not an easy read, but it is an important one, as it forces us to grapple with the terrible parts of our humanity. I have been reading it for three days and have had terrible dreams, but I believe it is essential to embrace both the best and worst bits of ourselves.

**Volume 2: Justifications for Violent Defense, Part 1 (Apr 28 - Sep 28, 2013)**

Vollmann's non-fiction is like a masterful juggling act, with him seamlessly integrating diverse lines of thought and reason. Even if we don't always agree with him or can't keep up with his arcane references, he never shies away from driving the train. In this volume, he explores justifications for violent defense, such as honor, class, authority, race, culture, and creed. He also offers an important update to the Golden Rule: the Empath's Golden Rule. I have learned a great deal from this volume, and I look forward to being challenged by Vollmann in the next one.

**Moral Calculus Volume (Oct 5 - Oct 14, 2013)**

As I read Vollmann's moral calculus on violence, I found myself asking, "Just who the fuck is this guy?" I came to this book wanting to learn, and I have been taught a great deal by Vollmann's first-hand experiences with violence and death. However, his work has also forced me to face my own personal filters and come to grips with my own moral calculus on violence. There is a time for violence, and I need to be prepared for that possibility. I took a break from this series to think about my approach to violence, and I am now ready to continue with Vollmann's next volume.

**Volume 3: Justifications for Violent Defense, Part 2 (Jan 5 - Dec 16, 2014)**

In 2014, I decided to take a more measured approach to reading Vollmann's work, sipping from the River Vollmann rather than wading in it. This course proved fruitful, as I was able to explore the paths off the main trail and increase my education on violence. Volume 3 encompasses Vollmann's take on justified violence in defense of war aims, homeland, ground, the earth, animals, gender, traitors, and revolution. His section on the defense of animals is my favorite so far, as he struggles with his moral calculus and presents an honest and empathetic view. My copy of Volume 3 has traveled with me across three continents and has taught me a great deal, and I look forward to continuing my journey with Vollmann in the next volume.

**Volume 4: Justifications for Violent Defense, Part 3; Evaluations (October 17, 2015 - April 11, 2016)**

Volume IV completes Vollmann's exploration of violent justifications, including deterrence, retribution, revenge, punishment, sadism/masochism, moral yellowness, and inevitability. I spent the most time in the deterrence, retribution, and revenge section, especially on the concept of Tu Quoque. Vollmann's statement that Tu Quoque is only a justified defense if the acts have been consensualized into an ethos of acceptability was the most difficult concept for me to grapple with. The last two sections of this volume offer important evaluations on safeguards and victims, and Vollmann posits four safeguards for the justification of violence in self-defense. I have taken a long break from RURD to read other things, but I look forward to completing the series and continuing to learn from Vollmann's work.

The key takeaway from this book is that, first and foremost, this is a violent world where life seems to be of little value. Indeed, all of this book consists of "some thoughts." It is not presented in a systematic or highly thoughtful manner. Vollmann travels to violent locations such as Kingston, Jamaica, and Afghanistan, and portrays the violence in those areas by interviewing people. He has even written a seven-volume version of this book. I simply cannot fathom reading the entire thing.

It makes one wonder about the true nature of violence and how it impacts the lives of those living in such places.

The book may offer some insights, but its lack of system and depth leave room for further exploration and understanding.

Nevertheless, it does draw attention to the harsh realities of a violent world and the need for greater efforts to promote peace and understanding.

Whew, that was a real slog. But overall, it was mostly worth it. I really have a hard time imagining what the unabridged version would be like. However, Vollman always manages to impress me. His accounts of those unbelievable first-hand experiences are truly captivating. Then there's his self-deprecating honesty. It might just be a guise for self-aggrandizing honesty, but really, who cares? Mostly, I'm drawn to his thoughtful, sometimes refreshing, and always inconclusive moralizing. When I first read a few things by him just after college, I found them quite unappealing. But now, he is rapidly ascending to become one of my favorite writers. I'm really looking forward to reading "The Ice Shirt" (thanks Bay!).

I can't claim to have read it all, perhaps more than half.

I spend a somewhat aimless summer in my backyard, grilling and reading various volumes borrowed from a friend.

It's difficult to know where to start. It's about violence and justification, and a great deal of it is simply about Vollman, his personal life and experiences. Most of these involve him traveling from mass grave to warzone as a journalist, and in his spare time, attempting to understand why people kill each other and when it is more or less justified.

This series will likely not save your life or anyone else's. It is an expensive series of books that demands an enormous amount of time to read. It is a work of art, and if you read it, you will be transformed.

It offers a unique perspective on the human condition, delving deep into the darkest aspects of our nature.

While it may not provide easy answers or solutions, it forces us to confront the uncomfortable truth about ourselves and the world we live in.

Reading this series is not for the faint of heart, but for those willing to embark on this journey, it can be a life-changing experience.

Death is a profound and often perplexing topic that has intrigued and troubled humanity throughout the ages. William T. Vollmann, in his work "Rising Up and Rising Down," delves deep into the nature of death and the justifications for violence that are so closely intertwined with it.

As Vollmann walked through the Paris catacombs, filled with the bones and skulls of the deceased, he was confronted with the various ways in which people met their end. Some died peacefully of natural causes, while others fell victim to accidents or the violence of murder and suicide. The question of what happens to consciousness after death looms large, and it has led to many justifications for violence, as seen in wars and persecutions over religious beliefs.

The morality of death is a complex issue. When death is natural or accidental, there is grief and a struggle for survival. But when murder is unjustified, as in the case of a sociopath taking an innocent life, there is rage. The question of whether murder can ever be justified is a central theme in Vollmann's work. He meditates on the justifications for violence and murder in the bloody history of the world, exploring the different ways in which violence expresses itself and the reasons why people are driven to commit acts of destruction upon their fellow human beings.

Vollmann also examines the possibility of defending our rights through nonviolent means, as demonstrated by leaders like Gandhi and Martin Luther King. However, he acknowledges that in some situations, counter-violence may be justified if nonviolence fails to stop the aggression. The use of weapons and the aestheticization of violence in warfare are also explored, as Vollmann tries to make sense of man's seemingly endless justifications for murder.

Overall, Vollmann's exploration of death and violence in "Rising Up and Rising Down" is a thought-provoking and challenging read that forces us to confront the darker aspects of human nature and the difficult questions that surround the morality of our actions.

This book seems to be more about power than violence itself. However, I think power is simply the ability to impose violence on others, as some skinhead might have said in one of WV's other books, perhaps "13 Stories and 13 Epitaphs".

In his other nonfiction works, Vollmann has shown an endless ability to talk to people who have no idea what's going on. For example, in "Poor People" and "Riding Toward Everywhere", and to a lesser extent in "Atlas". "Poor People" was the extreme example of this, and Vollmann admitted it from the start: if you're extremely poor, your perspective is likely to be very limited. Perspective is a luxury for those with money.

But the abridged "Rising Up Rising Down" is different in this regard. When Vollmann talks to people directly involved in inflicting violence, they actually have a good understanding of what's going on, usually because they have a well-developed set of justifications for their actions (and also because their lives may depend on their decisions). There is an anti-nihilist thrust to Vollmann's argument, supported by a long-ish quote from Solzenhitzen: for Vollmann, there is always a reason for violence (even Columbine is seen as a corrupted form of self-defense).

There is a flood of quotations from big names supporting this or that view, which often makes the writing seem stilted and/or dizzying. There is also a lot of randomness in the series of paragraphs (which will be familiar to WV fans), and some paragraphs seem like: "Oh yeah, and Ghandi also said this. Come to think of it, that's kind of like what Lincoln said, which is very different from Trotsky's stance. Then there's what John Brown thought...." and so on. Most of it has to do with ideologies and justifications for violence.

In fiction, such a chaotic flood can be exciting and can mimic the complexities of thought and existence in a more realistic way (for example, "Fathers and Crows" and "Europe Central" are magnificent examples of this). But in WV's nonfiction, it sometimes seems lazy or just like unedited ramblings (or, more likely, it's just that he's a guy who works on at least three insanely long works at a time, for at least twelve hours a day).

It seems as if WV has no guiding perspective at all, that he is pulled around by one view after another. Of course, on some level, this is to his credit; he is not an ideologue and thus does not promote a totalizing metaphysics that ignores the nuances of actual situations.

And yet he does draw conclusions from his case studies, but then there can always be another case study or instance added, so there is no real end to the conclusions that can be drawn. Hmm, I'm not sure if this is a criticism, since I can't clearly explain how the overall thrust of this book seemed to be lacking. I guess I don't know what I expected.

Anyway, the above helps to explain why the best parts of RURD are the sketches of actual places where Vollmann spent time, because within these he is free from the attempt to draw conclusions (which is really against his way of writing and thinking) and can focus on violence as a part of daily life, without abstractions and ideas. For example, when a priest from the US first moved to a not-very-pleasant ghetto in Kingston, Jamaica, he said something like: "When I first moved here they didn't really like me. Now and then they'd throw a dead body into my backyard."

The sketches of Kingston and the Balkans are excellent, fascinating, and depressing pieces of writing, and WV, with his big heart and sometimes-outlandish sense of humor, is a great voice for these things. There are no lists, rules, or quotes from big shots in this section, and you're left with WV's frantic descriptions of the crazy situations he puts himself into.

The introduction gave me the impression that I was capable of handling the 700-page abridgment. However, unfortunately, when I reached approximately 200 pages, I came to the realization that reading this was rather like being guided through a dense forest by a guide who carried pamphlets filled with exquisite descriptions of all the flora and fauna, yet left the trail map at home.

It was as if I was lost in a maze of words, trying to make sense of the complex narrative without a clear direction. The detailed descriptions were interesting, but without the context provided by the overall structure, it was difficult to fully understand the significance of each part.

I found myself constantly referring back to previous sections, hoping to find some clue that would help me piece together the story. Despite my initial confidence, I now felt a sense of frustration and confusion, wondering if I would ever be able to successfully navigate through this literary forest.

This book is extremely long. It has a plethora of pages crammed between its covers.

Not only that, but nearly all of those pages are overflowing with words. Similar to "War and Peace" and "2666", it is lengthy and has a spinal width that defies all reasonable ideas of modesty. It is a tome almost identical to "Infinite Jest", another thick book shamelessly filled with numerous words and pages. David Foster Wallace? This tome is also highly tome-like and strongly reminiscent of the Pulitzer Prize-defying book "Gravity's Rainbow". It is a doorstop, capable of stopping even a very heavy door, like the hefty stainless steel ones on my Working Man's barn out back, just like "Ulysses" and "The Oxford English Dictionary", which are both very long and composed of precious tree-flesh.

Much like Adam Levin's "The Instructions", this book is something not so much to be read as to be fashionably lugged along, like a kettle weight or a broken leg, on various public transit systems and raised, with trembling and deception barely hidden, upon the aching wrists of insincere bandwagon-hoppers.

Oh, indeed, this book is big, long, and a tome. Tome, tome, tome. All tomes are created equal, of course. At one's local bookshop, one would head to the Long Books section to find this book among other such Mandatory Slogs. The Literary Elites insist that you read such books. "The Holy Bible" and "The Recognitions" are also nearly indistinguishable from the pure bluster of such contemporary postmodern exercises in excess.

Also, this book weighs too much. It broke my bathroom scale when I was staring at it while taking an ordinary person's shit one day.

Why won't the big, bad Cabal of Literary Elites just leave us good, normal, down-to-earth folks alone and stop forcing us at pen-point to endure these over-hyped, naked-Emperor-exposing bricks of words? They are merciless in their insistence. Just yesterday, I was accosted by a wild pack of academics and professional writers who nearly bled me to death from the many paper cut wounds they inflicted with their MFA certificates. They are snarling, pompous, bloviating monsters, one and all.

Was it "Underworld" by Don DeLillo or E.O. Wilson's "Sociobiology" that I was last forced to read under such duress? I can't remember because they are all more or less exactly the same in their overwrought thickness. Did I mention that such books could stop a door? Well, they could, and I'm so clever to point this out.

These books, while as long as the Nile and Amazon combined, are as shallow as the glistening sheen of spittle-mist left upon the buttock of one of their "genius" authors by their fawning acolytes. We true down-to-Earthers know what's up, however: there is no real substance there. Aha! We've seen through the bullshit and have worn out our sturdy pseudo-Blue Collar backs from so much self-patting. If only the DFWs, DeLillos, and Vollmans of the world could be just as humble and matter-of-fact as we! The snobs. Well, it's a good thing that those of us with a heavily calloused finger firmly placed on the pulse of what real literature is can take the piss out of all these intellectual con-artists. It's all nonsense, mates.

Mr. Vollmann's "opus" recalled "The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders" much like "Against the Day" strongly reminded me of "The Bhagavad Gita" because they all took more than a few hours to read. I think that the so-called "American Psychiatric Association" is only slightly less self-indulgent than Vollman, Pynchon, Ancient Indian Religious Authorities, etc., though just as verbose, egomaniacal, and overpraised by snooty lit-fic types.

So what's this book about? Lengthy, flashy White Male Narcissism? Yeah, that's probably its filthy little secret for us plain and no-bullshit readers to decipher. Or is it "a history of and series of meditations upon violence" or some such silly elitist hot-air musings? Who knows. I can't be bothered to find out because lifting the thing is a serious test of my tendons and the first page doesn't immediately make me ejaculate with pure harmonious Entertainment Value.

Sorry, Vollmann. Call me when you write an easily digestible feather-weight pamphlet about sexual adventures and/or rock 'n' roll music, you pretentious twat.

Vollman strips back the complex calculus of self-defense and the brutal practice of war.

By presenting a wealth of historical examples and detailed, explicit logical diagrams, he endeavors to vividly demonstrate the intricate causes, far-reaching effects, and often controversial justifications of violence in society.

What he uncovers is truly disheartening. The reality he portrays is far from pretty, and the behavior of mass violence is nothing short of abhorrent.

It forces us to confront the harsh truth about the darker side of human nature and the consequences that follow when violence is unleashed.

Vollman's work serves as a powerful reminder of the need for us to strive for peace and understanding, and to find alternative ways to resolve conflicts rather than resorting to the destructive path of violence.

This was a slow read, not because of the writing, but because I needed to think about it.

I didn't want to rush over it. Instead, I wanted to absorb every word and idea. I really enjoyed the journalistic approach used in most of it. It made the content more engaging and accessible.

The moral calculus presented was also quite interesting. While I wished it could have been more developed, I'm not entirely sure how the author could have achieved that. Nevertheless, I still wanted it to be more in-depth and was a bit disappointed that it was relatively informal.

The development of the golden rule through the presentation of numerous derivations felt important. It provided a comprehensive understanding of this fundamental moral principle. I would highly recommend reading these derivations to someone who is not yet ready to commit to the entire book but just wants to get a taste of it.

It was good to hear the author's thoughts on violence, freedom, and urgent means. His perspectives have made me think more deeply about these issues. My own thoughts have evolved a bit since I started reading. Although I still don't own a handgun for personal protection, I might consider it in the future. I'm still in the process of thinking and weighing the pros and cons.

Overall, I would recommend this book to those who are interested in moral philosophy. It offers valuable insights and stimulates critical thinking.