As a historian I'm pretty much in the likelihood of this happening. I'd do L Bradford Prince as a study in developing capitalism in the Am West
Results 1 to 20 of 28
If you had to write someones biography, whos would you write?
If you were forced to, or offered good pay for.
You have to write a 500-page biography as best you can.
Who would you choose to write about?
As a historian I'm pretty much in the likelihood of this happening. I'd do L Bradford Prince as a study in developing capitalism in the Am West
I want to write Mao's biography, do you think it's stupid?
I feel kind of stupid if people find out I'm writing a Mao biography. Like 'why?'
I'm interested in Mao and China but also want to do it as a mental exercise. Hone my writing skills.
Probably Stalin. Because he was a very interesting/mysterious person and most people know next to nothing about him.
If he existed Tony Soprano, apart from that maybe Huey Newton
John Reed sounds like a cool guy.
THE REV-LEFT STUDY GUIDE PROJECT
Contribute today and help facilitate the spread of revolutionary knowledge.
I dunno.
HCM or Marx or Engels one of those guys
Nah Man.
Ain't nothing wrong with writing about Mao. The more you write the more you learn the more you learn the more you know. It would be good to know about China and the Chinese Revolution at this date and time.
Yes, we want to make your wife a radical feminist lesbian, we want to forcibly gay marry you to a leatherclad bear, we want to send your kids into white slavery at the court of a black communist dictator, we want to paint your church red with the blood of christian babies, we want to set fire to your ikea and your SUV, we want to rape your labrador with the broken pieces of your white picketed fence.
We want to wage nuclear war on the nuclear family.
why? because we are pinko freedom hating commienazi atheist bastards, its just what we do.
~psycho
I would write Franz Fanonipants's biography.
Robert Anton Wilson. I don't think that's been done already either.
Stolypin probably, because I'm a nerd for late Tsarist Russia and cos I read shitloads about the guy for an essay I wrote on him
huey newton , lacan, also someone should make a film about socrates he was so fucking cool
Formerly zenga zenga !
Jenny Marx, Farabundo Marti (a Salvadoran revolutionary who was comrades with my great-grandmother), John Reed (an American hero), Tito (LOL), Hoxha, or Stalin.
I would write about me.
I'm worth it.
[FONT=Georgia][FONT=Verdana]"The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion." - [/FONT][FONT=Verdana]Albert Camus[/FONT]
[/FONT]
I have literally fabricated primary srcs about myself to be a slippery historical subject
Mandukhai, the Mongolian empress who sought to reunite the central asian tribes and reconquer china:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandukhai_Khatun
She got about as far as Temurlane did, and just as Temurlane planned an invasion of China, Mandukhai saw re-establishing the Yuan dynasty with her as empress as her aspirations. Unlike Temurlane she posed a genuine threat to the nascent Ming Empire.
I think it's obvious why she is such a fascinating subject. She carved out an empire in a dominion that was a man's world, and challenges our understanding of woman's roles. She also was a major player at a unique juncture in history, when Chinese, and hence world, history could have taken a very, very different path under a female ruler of a cosmopolitan empire. Finally, I think what attracts us to someone like Mandukhai is that unlike perhaps Elizabeth or Isabel, she had a real potential to set her own rules - that is, as a warlord, she wasn't constrained by male institutions the way other female monarchs of her time were.
I've often thought of going back to write more about Mandukhai's story. This thread has definitely inspired me.
百花齐放
-----------------------------
la luz
de un Rojo Amanecer
anuncia ya
la vida que vendrá.
-Quilapayun
I'd seriously write 'bout Hoxha, not because I like Hoxha (although that's obviously a major factor), but because there is no biography of him in English, although there are biographies of him in Serbo-Croatian, French, Italian and (obviously) Albanian.
* h0m0revolutionary: "neo-liberalism can deliver healthy children, it can educate them, it can feed them, it can clothe them and leave them fully contented."
* rooster: "Supporting [anti-imperialism] is reactionary. How is any nation supposed to stand up [to] the might of the US anyway?"
* nizan: "Fuck your education is empowerment bullshit, education is alienation, nothing more. You indulge in a dying prestige for a role in a bureaucratic spectacle deserving of nothing beyond contempt."
* Alexios: "To the Board Administration: Ismail [...] needs to be eliminated from this forum."
Napoleon or Stalin.
Stalin!
The queen. Purely because of the oppertunities to piss off monarchists.
My reasoning is that if you right a leftist biography about a leftist then only fellow leftist will read it. wheras if you do a leftist biography of a bastion of the right, the screams of rage will be heard halfway to the moon and everyone will read it to see what the fuss is about.
"It is better to die on your feet, than to live on your knees"
John Maclean, because the only one I've been able to find so far has been out of print for thirty years.
COMMUNISM !