资源描述：
《Clausewitz and Contemporary War》由会员上传分享，免费在线阅读，更多相关内容在学术论文-天天文库。
1、AntulioJ.EchevarriaII.2007.ClausewitzandContemporaryWarIntroduction‘Despitethemanuscript'sincompleteform,Ibelieveanunbiasedreader,whothirstsaftertruthandconviction,willnotfailtorecognizeinthefirstsixbooksthefruitsofmanyyearsofconsideringanddiligentlystudyingwar;perhapshewi
2、llevenfindinthemtheprincipalideasfromwhicharevolutioninmilitarytheorymightemerge.’1Clausewitz'sprefatorynotetoOnWar,dated10July1827BernardBrodie,therenownedAmericanscholarofstrategicthinking,onceclaimedthatOnWar'sideas,‘thoughdenselypackedin,aregenerallysimpleandareforthe2
3、mostpartclearlyexpressedinjargon-freelanguage’.PerhapsnootherstatementregardingCarlvonClausewitz'sworkhasbeensocompletelymisleading.UnderstandingOnWarisadifficultandattimesgenuinelyfrustratingtask.Mostofitsideasarenotsimple,butcomplex;likeafinelywovencloth,thesignificanceo
4、feachthoughtdependsonitsrelationtotheothers.Attimestheoverallpatternisambiguous,indicatingthatClausewitzhimselfwasnotalwayssurewherehestood.Atothertimes,thepatternchanges,sometimesabruptlyandatothersmoresubtly,leavingreaderswithconflictingimpressions.Thelanguageheusedtodev
5、elophisthoughts,moreover,isattimessewntogetherwithanoutmodedphilosophicaljargon,allbutimpenetrabletomodernreaders.However,thatjargon,likehisfrequentuseofmetaphor,servesimportantpurposes,forheconsideredtheformof3anexpressionasessentialasthecontent.Overlookingformforsubstanc
6、ethusrunstheriskofmisinterpretingOnWaraltogether.Inshort,takingClausewitz'sideastobesimpleandjargon-freeisasuresteptowardmisunderstandingthem.ThisisnottosaythatClausewitz'smasterworkistoodifficulttograsp:itisnot.However,Brodie'smiscuesunderscoretheneedforanapproachthatoffe
7、rsreadersanintroductoryknowledgeofOnWar'sform,itspurpose,andmethodology.AsClausewitzhimselfwarned,unlessone'sobservationsarerenderedintheproperform,readersmayunderstandtheindividualconcepts,‘buttheoverallthoughtwill4remainincomprehensible’.Tobesure,severaleffortstoguiderea
8、dersthroughOn5War'sconceptsalreadyexist.However,noneofthemexplainsthebook'sformadequately
