دسترسی نامحدود
برای کاربرانی که ثبت نام کرده اند
دانلود کتاب Blood of Paradise
دانلود کتاب خون بهشتی
مشخصات کتاب
Blood of Paradise
ویرایش:
نویسندگان: David Corbett
سری:
ISBN (شابک) : 0812977335, 9780812977332
ناشر: Ballantine Books
سال نشر: 2007
تعداد صفحات: 0
زبان: English
فرمت فایل : EPUB (درصورت درخواست کاربر به PDF، EPUB یا AZW3 تبدیل می شود)
حجم فایل: 660 کیلوبایت
قیمت کتاب (تومان) : 66,000
کلمات کلیدی مربوط به کتاب خون بهشتی: ایالات متحده آمریکا آفریقایی آمریکایی کلاسیک آسیایی گلچین ها درام طنز اسپانیایی زبان بومی شعر ادبیات داستانی هیجان انگیز تعلیق جنایت مالی تاریخی حقوقی پزشکی نظامی روانشناختی جاسوسان سیاست فراطبیعی تکنوتریلرهای معمایی هیجان انگیز
در صورت تبدیل فایل کتاب Blood of Paradise به فرمت های PDF، EPUB، AZW3، MOBI و یا DJVU می توانید به پشتیبان اطلاع دهید تا فایل مورد نظر را تبدیل نمایند.
توجه داشته باشید کتاب خون بهشتی نسخه زبان اصلی می باشد و کتاب ترجمه شده به فارسی نمی باشد. وبسایت اینترنشنال لایبرری ارائه دهنده کتاب های زبان اصلی می باشد و هیچ گونه کتاب ترجمه شده یا نوشته شده به فارسی را ارائه نمی دهد.
توضیحاتی درمورد کتاب به خارجی
El Salvador: America’s great Cold War success
story and the model for Iraq’s fledgling democracy–if one
ignores the grinding poverty, the corruption, the spiraling
crime, and a murder rate ranked near the top in the hemisphere.
This is where Jude McManus works as an executive protection
specialist, currently assigned to an American engineer working
for a U.S. consortium.
Ten years before, at age seventeen, he saw his father and two
Chicago cop colleagues arrested for robbing street dealers. The
family fell apart in the scandal’s wake, his disgraced dad died
under suspicious circumstances, and Jude fled Chicago to join
the army and forge a new life.
Now the past returns when one of his father’s old pals appears.
The man is changed–he’s scarred, regretful, self-aware–and he
helps Jude revisit the past with a forgiving eye. Then he asks
a favor–not for himself, but for the third member of his dad’s
old crew.
Even though it’s ill-considered, Jude agrees, thinking he can
oblige the request and walk away, unlike his father. But he
underestimates the players and the stakes and he stumbles into
a web of Third World corruption and personal betrayal where
everything he values–and everyone he loves–is threatened. And
only the greatest of sacrifices will save them.
“This big, brawny novel runs on full throttle from first to
last page. Brutal and heartrendering, eloquent and important,
this is a fully engrossing read.”
–Michael Connelly
“A Quiet American for the new century. Angry and impassioned,
Blood of Paradise is that rare beast: a work of popular fiction
that is both serious and thrilling.”
–John Connolly, New York Times bestselling author of
Every Dead Thing
“David Corbett is a supremely gifted writer and Blood of
Paradise reminds me of a Robert Stone novel. Its lyrical prose
and exotic setting filled with damaged souls grasping for
redemption any way they can combine in a tour de force that
will haunt you long after you reach the end.”
–Denise Hamilton, nationally bestselling author of Prisoner
of Memory
“If you’re looking for the best in contemporary crime fiction,
this is it.”
–The Washington Post, on Done for a Dime
_________________________________________________________________
THE MORTALIS DOSSIER- BONUS FEATURE FROM DAVID
CORBETT
FROM TROY TO BAGHDAD (VIA EL SALVADOR)
The Story's Genesis
I conceived Blood of Paradise after reading
Philoctetes, a spare and
relatively obscure drama by Sophocles. In the original, an
oracle advises
the Greeks that victory over the Trojans is impossible
without
the bow of Herakles. Unfortunately, it’s in the hands of
Philoctetes,
whom the Greeks abandoned on a barren island ten years
earlier,
when he was bitten by a venomous snake while the Achaean
fleet
harbored briefly on its way to Troy.
Odysseus, architect of the desertion scheme, must now
return,
reclaim the bow, and bring both the weapon and its owner to
Troy.
For a companion, he chooses Neoptolemus, the son of his
slain
archrival, Achilles.
Neoptolemus, being young, still holds fast to the heroic
virtues
embodied by his dead father, and believes they can appeal
to
Philoctetes as a warrior. But Odysseus–knowing Philoctetes
will
want revenge against all the Greeks, himself in
particular–
convinces Neoptolemus that trickery and deceit will serve
their
purposes far better. In essence, he corrupts Neoptolemus, who
subsequently
deceives Philoctetes into relinquishing his bitterness to
reenlist in the cause against Troy.
The tale has an intriguing postscript: It turns out to be the
corrupted
Neoptolemus who, by killing King Priam at his altar
during
the sack of Troy, brings down a curse upon the Greeks even as
they
are perfecting their victory.
This story suggested several themes, which I then molded to
my
own purposes: the role of corruption in our concept of
expedience,
the need of young men to prove themselves worthy in the eyes
of
even morally suspect elders (or especially them), and the curse
of a
hard-won ambition.
Why El Salvador?
I saw in the Greek situation a presentiment of America’s
dilemma at
the close of the Cold War: finally achieving unrivaled
leadership of
the globe, but at the same time being cursed with the hatred of
millions.
Though we have showered the world with aid, too often we
have done so through conspicuously corrupt, repressive, even
murderous
regimes, where the elites in charge predictably siphoned
off
much of that aid into their own pockets. Why did we look the
other
way during the violence and thievery? The regimes in question
were
reliably anticommunist, crucial to our need for cheap oil, or
otherwise
amenable to American strategic or commercial interests.
We live in a dangerous world, we are told. Hard, often
unpleasant
choices have to be made.
It’s a difficult argument for those who have suffered under
such
regimes to swallow. They would consider it madness to suggest
that it
is envy of our preeminence, or contempt for our freedom, that
causes
them to view America so resentfully. Rather, they would try to
get us
to remember that while their hopes for self-determination,
freedom,
and prosperity were being crushed, America looked on with
a
strangely principled indifference, often accompanied by a
fiercely patriotic
self-congratulation, not to mention blatant hypocrisy.
Not only have we failed to admit this to ourselves, but the
New
Right has embraced a resurgent American exceptionalism as the
antidote
to such moral visitations, which such conservatives
consider
weak and defeatist. Instead, they see a revanchist America
marching
boldly into the new century with unapologetic military power,
uninhibited
free-market capitalism, and evangelical fervor–most
immediately
to bring freedom to the Middle East.
The New Right’s historical template for this proposed
transformation
is Central America–specifically El Salvador, trumpeted as
“the final battleground of the Cold War,” and championed as one
of
our greatest foreign policy successes: the crucible in which
American
greatness was re-forged, banishing the ghosts of Vietnam
forever.
There’s a serious problem with the New Right’s
formulation,
however: It requires an almost hallucinatory misreading of
history.
Misremembering the Past
In their ongoing public campaign to justify the Iraq war,
many
supporters and members of the Bush
Administration–including
both Vice President Dick Cheney and former defense secretary
Donald
Rumsfeld–have singled out El Salvador as a shining example
of
where the “forward-leaning” policy they champion has
succeeded.
Mr. Cheney did so during the vice presidential debates,
contending
that Iraq could expect the same bright future enjoyed by El
Salvador,
which, he claimed, is “a whale of a lot better because we
held
free elections.”
What Mr. Cheney neglected to mention:
• At the time the elections were held (1982), death
squads
linked to the Salvadoran security forces were murdering
on average three to five hundred civilians a month.
• The death squads targeted not just guerrilla supporters
but priests, social workers, teachers, journalists, even
members of the centrist Christian Democrats–the party
that Congress forced the Reagan Administration to back,
since it was the only party capable of solidifying the
Salvadoran middle.
• The CIA funneled money to the Christian Democrats to
ensure they gained control of the constituent assembly.
• Roberto D’Aubuisson, a known death squad leader,
opposed the Christian Democrats as “Communists,” and
launched his own bid to lead the constituent assembly,
forming ARENA as the political wing of his death squad
network. His bid was funded and supported by exiled
oligarchs and reactionary military leaders, and managed
by a prominent American public relations firm.
• “Anti-fraud measures” proved intimidating. For example:
ballots were cast in glass jars. Many voters, who had to
provide identification, and who suspected the government
was monitoring their choices, feared violent reprisal if
they were observed voting “improperly.”
• ARENA won thirty-six of sixty seats in the assembly,
and
D’Aubuisson was elected its leader.
• This was perceived by all concerned as a disastrous
failure for American policy. When D’Aubuisson tried
to appoint one of his colleagues as assembly president,
U.S. officials went to the military and threatened to cut
off aid. D’Aubuisson relented, but it was the only
concession he made to American demands.
In short, there was American influence, money, and
manipulation
throughout the process, putting the lie to the whole notion
the
elections were “free”–though Mr. Cheney was arguably
correct
when he stated that “we” held them. Unfortunately, all that
effort
came to naught, as what America wanted from the elections lay
in
shambles. Even when, in the following year’s election, a great
deal
more money and arm-twisting resulted in Washington’s
candidate
being elected president, he remained powerless to reform the
military,
curtail the death squads, or revive the economy, measures
Washington knew to be crucial to its counter-insurgency
strategy.
By 1987, the Reaganites decided to abandon the decimated
Christian
Democrats for ARENA–the party it had spent five years and
millions of dollars trying to keep from power.
As for Mr. Rumsfeld’s remarks, he made them in the course ...
