He also advises his prince that more and more spending should be made for defense of a mixed principality as mercenaries or local people can not be trusted. For a private citizen who becomes prince Prince of a civil principality by the support of his fellow citizens, he suggests that such kind of prince it is necessary to have the people friendly, otherwise he has no medication in the time of danger. He directs his prince to be kind with his subjects so that they will stand with him even in the time of siege when their own assets will in danger or at stake.
On discussing the types of military, his study provides a brief account how a state should manage its defense either with mercenary soldiers or with auxiliary force? Another important reason, for which he recommends that mercenaries or auxiliary forces should not be trusted for defense of state, is lack of professional military training. This make defense of a state vulnerable and a wise king should avoid knights, mercenaries or self developed auxiliary forces that have their loyalty with king personally.
So prince, himself, should be the captain of his armies. Here, he also floats the idea of mixed army i. He focuses that only war is the art that a prince should be mastered. And if a prince is not aware of art of war, its order and discipline then he cannot be respected by his soldiers. He says that a prince should prepare for war not only in the times of hostilities but also in the time of peace this practice must be carried out more enthusiastically and with full fervor.
For him, two modes are very important for preparation of war, one with deeds and other with minds. His revelation discloses that he want to see his prince as a perfect military General. This knowledge is useful in two modes. Above all he should do as some excellent man has done in the past who found someone to imitate who had been praised and glorified. For this he should not hesitate to impose heavy taxes either it may make annoy his subjects or make happy few people. To keep subjects united and faithful, prince should take every cruel action that makes sure their loyalty with him.
For this he should not afraid of his notorious reputation. If one has to make a choice between love and fear for his citizens, he should prefer to be feared than loved. In nutshell, the wise prince should avoid earn ill repute if he can, otherwise hatred for him is best option.
Another magnificent piece of intellect for a king is that he should act like a fox to recognize nooses and as lion to frighten the wolves at internal front vicious forces that can harm the society and at external front invaders to secure the boundaries of state or principality.
Machiavellian hard core realism depicts from this kind of guidance for prince that he should be a perfect deceiver. But, he discourages the building of castles if king fears from foreigners. Here Machiavelli added a valuable suggestion for king. When you see a minister thinking more of himself than of you, and in all actions looking for something useful to himself, one so made will never be a good minister; never will you be able to trust him, because he who has someone's state in his hands should never think of himself but always of the prince, and he should never remember anything that does not pertain to the prince.
Prince should take counsel but act according to his own will. Since he is a sort of book-worshipper, he won't I don't know how come I never reviewed this one but recently I was visiting this friend of mine in south India, Pramod yes, the one from Goodreads , when he showed me this not-so-popular smaller piece, allegedly written by the author in his last days, 'Le Gente' and never published - for common people about how they can succeed in social life using diplomacy.
Since he is a sort of book-worshipper, he won't let me touch it. Needless to say, I stole it before starting on my return journey. If he finds about this review, he might unfriend me and sue me for theft - so this review won't be here too long. Anyway, in case of a legal action, I can always take shelter in points 14, 16 and 17 below. Ever since my return, I have been made to understand that critics believe these copies to be forgeries, none of these copies completely agree amongst themselves.
Moreover, the writing style and some of the words used, suggest a later day authorship. That being said, I think mine or Pramod's made some good points, although they weren't all so original. It will seem them that past and present owners of these copies have been quoting them without mentioning their source. Since document is medieval and vague, I have been able to translate it only partially.
Google translator helps only so much. Honesty might win you friends, but not the powerful ones. The later will be your enemies. If you delay it to the last moment and pretend to be anxious, one of your friends will come in and want to help you finish the project.
Best way to half your workload. Tell them an obvious lie to begin with. This will make them think that you are a bad lier and they will be inclined to believe in your more-cleverly told lies. If you hate doing something - do it wrong the first time, they won't ask you to do it again.
Honesty is a terrible policy, that is, unless you put it on auction, or, Character doesn't buy food - not unless you get a good price for it. Always pretend to be extremely religious. It creates a halo effect and makes people invest in you, virtues you don't have. Always say 'God willing' whenever you make a promise - the best way to shrug off responsibility if you don't want to honor your promise.
A clever person always appreciates polite friends. They will let you walk all over them and take credit for their hard work. Nothing like them. Never be on time. Let them wait for you. Lying shows lack of art. The cleverness lies in telling people the selective truth.
Still, if you have to lie, do. Scientists say there are alternative worlds in which almost everything is the truth. Any show of your real sentiments is a weakness. Never ever let the underdogs fool you into kindness. Be quiet, and they will think of you as very wise. Be too talkative, and they will think of you as fools.
A clever disguise both ways. If you say it repeatedly and are loud enough, it will become a truth. The only crime is being caught. So, make sure you are never get caught at anything. At the end of the day, most advocates belong to Devil. And if you happen to come across a righteous one, Devil also happens to have most of the judges.
However looking for a legal loophole before you leap is still more beneficial economically. If you owe a bank five thousand dollars, the bank owns you. If you owe a bank five million dollars, you own the bank. Gangsters and soldiers are boys. Managers, Lawyers, priests and politicians are women. Nothing helps in creating money like an unhealthy conscience.
There are four kinds of people the order is such that ones lower in the order have a better chance at being successful ; - those who are good, and are seen by others as good, - those who are good but are seen by others as wicked. View all 14 comments. In this book, Machiavelli makes his purpose clear: how to get power and keep it. No happiness. No warm and fuzzy pats on the back. Definitely no hugs.
No words of encouragement. Definitely nothing about being nice. Being nice, in politics, in war, in struggles for power, often ends with one person winning and the other person being in prison, disgraced, exiled, or dead. That was the context in which Machiavelli wrote this book.
Italy at the time was a collection of warring states, not united. On In this book, Machiavelli makes his purpose clear: how to get power and keep it. One power would seize control, and then it would be lost when that ruler died, or, worse, made a horrible mistake. Machiavelli did the best thing he could - he took a step back, observed, took notes, and then presented his findings to the person he felt had the most promise at the time.
I love reading reviews about how the books is so this and that, so diabolical and evil and mean, and yet how so many people divorce it from the context it was written in, as if it was created in a vacuum. Remember, people - in his time, if you were a leader, you had some seriously scary decisions to make, and there was no room for emotion, for warmth, nor for sentimentality. Sure, it might sound like a really screwed up and horrible way to live and think, but when you are a leader of a nation beset on all sides by those who would like nothing more than to invade your country, raze it, and then subject your people to being occupied or worse , you do what you need to do in order to survive.
When you are fighting for survival, all ends do justify the means because the goal is survival. Machiavelli understood this, and the product was this book. There is a damn good reason why so many people started calling him "the devil. The book makes no promises about being nice or this or that.
It delivers on what it promises - how a person can gain and acquire power and keep it, and the sometimes ruthless actions necessary to maintain it and protect one's own self. View all 6 comments. Jun 29, Michelle rated it did not like it. So, it seems there has been a bit of a mix up. I had no idea what this was about, I just assumed I was going to read a fairly raucous fictional story about a Prince. So you can imagine my shock when I read the opening chapter.
I feel bad for giving this a one star as this is entirely my fault however it meets all the criteria, I had to drag myself through, I understood little and the only satisfaction I received was reaching the end. Sorry Machiavelli.
Michelle Joshua wrote: ""Pay attention to me, please I need attention. It's literally life and death out there, so you can't voice an opinion or comment on a s Joshua wrote: ""Pay attention to me, please I need attention. It's literally life and death out there, so you can't voice an opinion or comment on a site set up to include comments and ratings. Ratings for me, no Someone sounds upset and is hitting back in personal remarks.
Troll on. There is no place for you here. How to run things and hopefully remain popular but not give a monkey's if they hate you. How to instil enough fear in people that they at least show respect to your face. Plenty of good lessons here for a politician, but adaptable by anyone if you don't mind being thought evil by your nearest and dearest. And I don't. View 2 comments. I am now on my third copy of this book which, alas, I can only read in English.
The George Bull translation as reprinted in is the version I currently refer to. I first read this book when studying economic history at high school in the second half of the last century. I next read the book when looking more generally at political models and at Renaissance history.
It also provides some valuable contextual setting for those interested in the Medici. What can we learn from a treatise that was dedicated to Lorenzo de Medici - but not published until , some five years after Machiavelli himself was dead? Specific settings and circumstances may change: general human psychology and motivation does not.
There is politics involved in all management. The chasm between management theory and practice is occupied by politics in all senses and complicated by the affairs, aspirations and expedient alliances of people. Jennifer Cameron-Smith View all 3 comments. I think this was the first time that I read this book from cover to cover rather than dipping in and out of it, I feel that it's reputation is bleaker than it's bite, it seems no more cynical than observing to oneself, when an American political figure says something, that there is an election coming up, and it is far less cynical, or brutally practical than The Memoirs of Philippe de Commynes in my opinion.
It stands out perhaps on two grounds, one it completely avoids conventional Christian mor I think this was the first time that I read this book from cover to cover rather than dipping in and out of it, I feel that it's reputation is bleaker than it's bite, it seems no more cynical than observing to oneself, when an American political figure says something, that there is an election coming up, and it is far less cynical, or brutally practical than The Memoirs of Philippe de Commynes in my opinion.
It stands out perhaps on two grounds, one it completely avoids conventional Christian morality or conventional Christian moral authorities but then as far as I recall so does Commynes , and more interestingly he makes the point that for the Prince, private virtues make for public vices, or as one observes of boy scouts, there is no point in doing a good deed unless they are certain that they are going to be observed and that a favourable report will reach the ears of the troop leader.
My overall impression of this short, readable study of how Machiavelli considered politics was conducted during his lifetime in Italy mostly from Rome northwards is that it is the work of a political pundit view spoiler [ to use a good old Hindi word hide spoiler ]. And as it often the case with political pundits he has his favourite themes Cesara Borgia, colonies, and a state maintaining it's own militia which rather obscure his own analysis, also one can read him inside out.
Machiavelli's great topic is the weakness of 'Italy' and it's exposure to 'barbarian' foreigners namely the French, Spanish, and Swiss, and the need for an ambitious prince in search of glory and wealth to follow his advise in order to be successful. But his advice from an inside out perspective reveals the weakness of his analysis and perhaps explains the weakness of the Italian dynasts of this period perhaps this is always the case with political pundits - through what they don't say or consider they reveal the blindspots and failings of their times.
Written in exile to advertise his skills to the Florentine Medici regime in the hope of returning to political office Machiavelli recommends that a prince keeps two key groups on side: the people, and the nobles, in order to keep the people on side he recommends that you don't rob them too much and to avoid dishonouring their women.
Tellingly though the only time the people in his analysis rise up in support of their Prince is when he is already dead. There seems to me as well to be more than a whiff of republicanism in his emphasis on citizen militias, and presumably there were reasons why such armed forces were not maintained by Italian states, precisely I guess because they were a threat to the power of the Italian Princes and their very ambitions that Machiavelli addresses himself to.
It struck me, perhaps not very surprising from a man who was tortured, that he believes more in terrorism and treachery than in trust and theatre. Even in his own account we see that the terrorism of the Borgias, although it blazed a bloody trail across central Italy, could sink no deep roots, unlike the careful theatricality of some of their contemporaries.
Overall I felt that this was not so much realpolitik as fantasiepolitik, but perhaps that is always the case, and one senses that Machiavelli's vision of power politics was captivated by the drama of violence. I was curious to note that although addressed to the Medicis, he doesn't lard on the praise of that family until the last few pages of his book and he never addresses the roots of their power - as bankers, instead as I said, he only has eyes to see violence as a means to gain and maintain power, not that I would want to claim that the Medici were non-violent, but the dagger was not the only tool in their political workshop, and as a result they managed to endure deep into the eighteenth century when they became extinct through natural causes.
Jan 31, Simon Clark rated it it was amazing. In many ways it feels like a truly evil book. Stalin, for example, kept an annotated copy of it. It reads as the blueprint for tyrants, despots, and politicians around the world - a guide to how the world of the powerful and the powerless truly works.
But, sadly, it does work. It is not evil insofar as it is clearly correct in its observations. Which raised several questions in the process of reading it about how I live my life. The book falls into a category known as 'Mirrors for Princes', being books designed to educate the children of powerful men how to rule. The Prince in particular is written as a letter from Machiavelli to Lorenzo de Medici in 26 sections. Each section contains a few nuggets of information, supported by evidence from contemporary politics or from the ancient world.
While some of the language and style reviewing the translation by George Bull is definitely archaic, in many ways it feels very modern. To begin with these sections focus on defining, conquering, and subjugating principalities, with practical advice for princes on how to make, and hold on to, territorial gains. Later however the text shifts, and focuses more on the nature of being a ruler and how to play the political game.
The jist of the book can be summarised as 'effective truth is more important than any ideals, and power and survival justify any means, even if they are immoral'. As such after getting over frankly rather tiresome advice on whether or not to live in a newly-conquered territory or to govern from abroad, or the benefits of mercenaries versus a civilian army, the book takes a decidedly evil turn.
Machiavelli praises men who do terrible, violent, underhanded deeds in the name of retaining power, and worst of all as a reader you can't help but see the logic to it all. These are the unspoken rules of how men like Tywin Lannister and Walter White in fiction stay at the top of the pyramid, and how men like Stalin and Saddam Hussein ruled with an iron fist. To see the rules of the game laid bare in front of you is a disconcerting experience, and makes you ask yourself: why do I not do this?
While not a totally satisfying answer, perhaps I erroneously? I have read discussion that The Prince may have been written as a satire from the preface: 'to comprehend fully the nature of the people, one must be a prince, and to comprehend fully the nature of princes one must be an ordinary citizen' but to me this book is a comprehensive primer on how to rule and be feared. It is dangerous, fascinating, and demands to be read.
View 1 comment. I decided it was time to find out for myself what Machiavelli was about. After all, he is one of a small group of writers who have lent their names to an adjective in the English language Dickens, Orwell and Kafka are others I can think of. Fair enough, but it does result in some archaic language. I suppose a translation in the style of this edition is truer to the period than one rendered into modern English. I understand that, despite his theorising, in his own time Machiavelli was rather unsuccessful as a diplomat.
View all 16 comments. This book is the perfect representation between the best and the worst of House Slytherin in the Harry Potter verse, and that is how I presented it to my class. I got an A on the paper, so it does make sense. Here is my reasoning about Slytherin and The Prince: Slytherin House, which is known for cunningness, astuteness, ambition, thirst for power, self-preservati This book is the perfect representation between the best and the worst of House Slytherin in the Harry Potter verse, and that is how I presented it to my class.
Here is my reasoning about Slytherin and The Prince: Slytherin House, which is known for cunningness, astuteness, ambition, thirst for power, self-preservation, but also fraternity, and that was the one point which drew me away from his way of thinking. He speaks of being cunning and virtuous to keep a principality, but in doing so, one must betray even their own friends, because one cannot trust even those closest to you. To avoid contempt and hatred one must avoid taking the property or women of his subjects, he must also possess virtues for which he shall not be criticized, he must not rob the honour of his people, a prince must not be effeminate or cowardly, he shall try his best to be an heir, he must be wary of insurrection within his subjects, and external threats, so he must have a good army and good allies, one coming paired with the other, all of these so as to secure his place in the world.
These are the basics of being a good prince, or so says Machiavelli, but I only see him and this book as a walking contradiction. Machiavelli basically says that it is all a matter of luck in the end, for as no matter which of these rules you follow, if you have no luck on your side you can end up assassinated just like all others before you, so his points can only be used if you are lucky; and to be lucky you have to follow his steps, which makes the steps and luck mutually exclusive, indicating that one cannot happen without the other.
Machiavelli's last name is now a symbol of evilness, because of his politics, written down in this book. The Red Wedding? As immoral as his views are, they do seem to make some sense, if you are a psychopath with a thirst for power that can hide your evilness with some cunning and charm.
Basically I will recommend this book for a good laugh and fantastic quotes, not because I want anyone to implement his logic into real life. I am quite certain most horrible dictators have at least skipped through this book. View all 10 comments. The Prince is a political treatise written by a Florentine diplomat, Niccolo Machiavelli. In a time of foreign invasion and rule of the different parts of Italy, Machiavelli wrote this treatise and dedicated it to Lorenzo di Piero de' Medici of the Medici family in the hope that one strong ruler will emerge from that powerful house and drive the foreign rulers away from Italy.
This treatise is mainly concerned with the acquisition and preservation of power. It contains Machiavelli's detailed a The Prince is a political treatise written by a Florentine diplomat, Niccolo Machiavelli. It contains Machiavelli's detailed advice to the Princes on how to gain power and preserve it, enabling them to rule the kingdom for a lifetime and in glory.
Machiavelli, being a former diplomat and also a military commander for the Florentine Republic, wrote this based on his personal expertise. Thus one can see a comprehensive account of all the areas of concern that a ruler should consider when he comes to power, for according to Machiavelli, gaining power is easier than preserving it. However, the advice given by this treatise is controversial, for it advocates that to achieve glory the Prince must acquire power, and to survive being in power need to resort to any means of conduct, even though they would be base and immoral.
For example, Machiavelli says that the Prince must only be careful not to be hated and despised and that if he should choose between love and fear of his subjects that he should choose fear, for that will help him more to be in power. He also says what appears to the eyes of the subjects is what matters and to keep the appearance of being good, merciful, and religious.
Machiavelli further says a good prince should be a good liar and a deceiver! Reading The Prince I wondered if all the leaders around the world had read this 16th-century treatise and taken Machiavelli's advice to heart. As a normal "subject", I don't agree with Machiavelli's views. Then again, I'm no politician or any big shot who thinks of acquiring power.
I'm only a disinterested reader. Nevertheless, from an objective point of view, there is some truth in Machiavelli's wisdom. Overall, it was an interesting read despite its contents and I really enjoyed reading the many historical events referred to in it.
Nov 17, David rated it really liked it Shelves: audiobook , politics , history. I didn't know exactly what to expect, when starting this classic treatise. As it turns out, the book is very accessible. Machiavelli turns out to have a very pragmatic, and practical approach to governing. One of the most important recommendations he has, is that a governing prince should keep his subjects happy.
At least, don't do too many things to make them unhappy. If a governor finds himself with a population that is unhappy with him, then it is very vulnerable to attacks from the outside. W I didn't know exactly what to expect, when starting this classic treatise. What also struck me, was Machiavelli's vast knowledge of history.
So much of the book recalls historical events from all over Europe. It is just amazing, how much detail he has learned about history and historical figures over the centuries of the Middle Ages. Dec 12, Loretta rated it did not like it Shelves: myreading-challenge , classic , one-star-reads , december Kudos to all Goodread members who thought this book deserved five stars. View all 12 comments. This book really opened my eyes to the way true power is exercised. Should be a 'foundational book' for anyone hoping to build a 'knowledge library' they can go back to throughout life.
The same can be said for the book in general. Besides the fact that history has always been one of my favourite subjects, as a dual citizen who has spent a lot of time in Italy, I felt like I would benefit from reading this to understand a little bit more about where my family comes from with regards to the important people and political events that have helped shape it.
This book had more to do with practices that get you ahead versus what the right or nice course of action to take is, and although Machiavelli intended for his advice to be applied in the political world, it can be applied in ordinary circumstances, too. It does require full and undivided attention, but if you are able to focus on it you will leave the book more knowledgeable than when you started it.
Definitely, this book is highly recommended If you've watched Game of Thrones. I was really shocked by how grea "Leader should be loved and feared at the same time I was really shocked by how great and frank this book is, because I have known very little about this book before opening it, and my knowledge about it was limited to the idea that Machiavelli was the intellectual twin of Vlad the Impaler!.
It is genius, foxy, practical, pragmatic and even more, it is foundational for those who want to gain and remain in power. I think many people -especially Arabs- over-make Machiavelli unfairly as the symbol of evilness, and few works of literature have as well misunderstood him because of his politics.
Turned out to be an easier and more entertaining a read than expected from a political treatise. After having read Walden, Civil Disobedience and now The Prince one after the other, I now feel equipped enough to take on heavy weights like Nietzsche and heavier tomes.
I hesitated to read this. I thought it would be difficult. This proved to be untrue. Perhaps this is due to a good translation by W. The book is preceded by a short and informative introduction. It provides a concise overview before you begin. Machiavelli writes of how to achieve good leadership. The latter is not relevant in modern times—countries with different political leanings s I hesitated to read this.
The latter is not relevant in modern times—countries with different political leanings should be able to coexist! This can most certainly be debated! In The Prince , a political treatise, he voices his views. Much of what Machiavelli proclaims is common sense! Often that which is proclaimed is obvious. Some of what he says is highly debatable!
Guiding rules collide with each other. One guiding principle may need to be prioritized over another. This will depend upon the given circumstances and situation. If I may be so bold and voice an opinion, in reality, it is not a matter of following principles but in choosing between them, weighing one against another, evaluating which is the most essential. The ability to clearly see all the components of a given situation is a talent and must be acknowledged too.
Machiavelli does recognize, in passing, that some men are more talented at this than others. I see it as having an historical significance, and for this reason I am glad to have "tasted" it, to have read it, to know what it is about. Grover Gardner gives a very good narration.
He is not hard to follow and the words are clearly spoken. Four stars for the audio narration. I highly recommend W. It is historical fiction and is about Machiavelli and what he wrote. I gave it five stars. View all 19 comments. Oct 20, Laura Noggle rated it it was amazing Shelves: must-reads , psychology-philosophy , nonfiction. Mandatory reading for Earthlings. Incredible insights on humanity, experience, perception, glory and honor, power and survival.
Will re-read. View all 9 comments. Libertine magazine issue 3 has a quote down the spine: it is the common good, and not private gain, that makes the cities great I like to quote this to friends and play the yes-no game at guessing who said it. Everyone is stunned that it was Machiavelli. Mar 07, Saadia B. CritiConscience rated it really liked it.
Talks about power and how to maintain it. View all 4 comments. Sound Advice for a Budding Ruler 2 August Having now read this book three times I sort of wonder how Machiavelli's name came to represent a sort of politics that involved deceit, manipulation, and backstabbing, because for those who claim that this is what the Prince is about have probably read the wrong book, or probably not read the book at all.
Somebody even suggested that The Prince was satire because they could not imagine that anybody would suggest such actions to anybody, especially i Sound Advice for a Budding Ruler 2 August Having now read this book three times I sort of wonder how Machiavelli's name came to represent a sort of politics that involved deceit, manipulation, and backstabbing, because for those who claim that this is what the Prince is about have probably read the wrong book, or probably not read the book at all.
Somebody even suggested that The Prince was satire because they could not imagine that anybody would suggest such actions to anybody, especially if that person was seeking to live a virtuous life. To the person who claims that The Prince is satire my response is that Machiavelli is deadly serious.
He was not laughing when he wrote this book, and his audience were not laughing when they were reading it. As for the person who claims that the book is about scheming and manipulation, I respond by asking them to show me where it says that because after the third time I struggle to actually find anything of the sort.
Further, in response to them, I will also suggest that if you are a ruler then you ignore Machiavelli's advice at your own peril. Before I go further to expound upon what Machiavelli is advising in this book we must first look at the context in which it was written. I say this because if we apply Machiavelli's principles to the modern day you will probably find yourself in The Hague being charged with war crimes. To be blunt, we simply cannot apply Machiavelli's advice as written to the modern world, in the same way that we cannot act in the way Joshua of the Bible fame acted when the Israelites invaded the promised land.
Now, Machiavelli was writing to a Florentine Prince in 14th Century Italy which puts us right in the middle of the Renaissance.
The Little Prince is a book for child, but this is also a book for the child every adult has inside. The little prince is a unusual beautiful tale, but it is unusual for realistic observations about life and human nature. However, it tells us something much important related to love and responsibility. He is a simple, yet mystical, creature from asteroid B One day a seed arrives on his planet and blooms into a beautiful flower. Though the flower is lovely, it is vain and irritates the Prince.
Finally he leaves his planet, to escape the flower. After visiting several asteroids, the Little Prince reaches Earth, where he meets the narrator in the Sahara Desert. Antagonist The problem, or antagonist, of the Little Prince is his thirst for answers. He visits many planets and meets many people, whom he questions about life. In particular, he wants to understand the existence and pastimes of adults on Earth. He tries to find his answers from a snake, a fox, and the narrator.
Climax The climax of the plot occurs when the Little Prince decides to return to his planet and care for his special flower. He has learned from the fox that the important things in life cannot be seen with the eye, only felt with the heart. This lesson eventually makes the Little Prince realize that the flower from which he has fled is really very special. After meeting the narrator and explaining all that he has learned since he left his planet, the This book actually has more in it than meets the eye.
Throughout the book the author uses symbolism to get his messages across to the adult reader. With or without the embedded symbolism, this short novel is still a fascinating read for the young and the young at heart. The narrator is Saint-Exupery himself and as such is one of the major characters. Early in the book he explains his distaste for grown-ups and finds them to be rather boring with no taste for adventure. Saint-Exupery obviously has not lost his youthful zest for life and finds the adult world suffocating.
To get above and beyond this suffocating world, he learns to fly airplanes and becomes a pilot. Here is where the story starts as the narrator-author begins telling the tale of the one time he found himself in the middle of the vast Sahara Desert. The Prince Narrates His Life, how he was taking care of his home planet, not to be overrun by bad seeds which can turn into baobabs, The Prince also narrates his 6 neighbors and when he went to his last neighbor, the Geographer, he was asked to venture Earth.
Anything essential is invisible to the eyes. It is now the Eighth day of the narrator in the remote desert, and they set on a journey to look for a well The author dedicated the novella to his friend Leon Werth and simultaneously apologized to kids for making the dedication to an adult. The entire novella is a critique of adult tendencies and a celebration of the innocence and inquisitive nature of children. Exupery uses proverbs and metaphors to help simplify life lessons. It is through these simple observations that Antoine de Saint Exupery exposes the ridiculous tendencies of adults to get caught up in matters of little or no consequence.
The Little Prince teaches lessons on how to live life to the fullest, but more importantly he teaches people how to love. The Little Prince has all the necessary components of a great story. It is easy to read, it is funny, it leaves a lasting impression on the reader and it encourages people to lead better, more Sign Up. Sign In. Sign Up Sign In. Continue Reading Please join StudyMode to read the full document. Book Report Read More.
A Report on the Little Prince Essay The dedication declares Machiavelli's intention to discuss in plain language the conduct of great men and the principles of princely government. He does so in hope of pleasing and enlightening the Medici family. The book's 26 chapters can be divided into four sections: Chapters discuss the different types of principalities or states, Chapters discuss the different types of armies and the proper conduct of a prince as military leader, Chapters discuss the character and behavior of the prince, and Chapters discuss Italy's desperate political situation.
The final chapter is a plea for the Medici family to supply the prince who will lead Italy out of humiliation. Hereditary principalities, which are inherited by the ruler Mixed principalities, territories that are annexed to the ruler's existing territories. New principalities, which may be acquired by several methods: by one's own power, by the power of others, by criminal acts or extreme cruelty, or by the will of the people civic principalities.
Ecclesiastical principalities, namely the Papal States belonging to the Catholic church. A prince must always pay close attention to military affairs if he wants to remain in power. Machiavelli lists four types of armies:. Mercenaries or hired soldiers, which are dangerous and unreliable Auxiliaries, troops that are loaned to you by other rulers—also dangerous and unreliable.
Native troops, composed of one's own citizens or subjects—by far the most desirable kind. Mixed troops, a combination of native troops and mercenaries or auxiliaries—still less desirable than a completely native army. It is better to be stingy than generous. It is better to be cruel than merciful.
It is better to break promises if keeping them would be against one's interests.