Notepad
The notepad is empty.
The basket is empty.
Free shipping possible
Free shipping possible
Please wait - the print view of the page is being prepared.
The print dialogue opens as soon as the page has been completely loaded.
If the print preview is incomplete, please close it and select "Print again".

Product description

The Russian anarcho-communist author Peter Kropotkin published The Conquest of Bread, also known as The Bread Book, in 1892.
Kropotkin contends that since all intellectual and useful property was produced via social labor, it should be considered common property. Since every person depends on the intellectual and physical labor of those who came before them as well as those who created the environment around them, every individual product is fundamentally the work of everyone.
Kropotkin creates an illustration of what he imagines an anarcho-communist society may be. He cites the enormous levels of productivity attained by current industrial civilization as proof that such a society is feasible. He contends that sufficient amounts of the necessities are generated to meet everyone's wants; if only they were correctly distributed, no one would have any unfulfilled demands.
According to Kropotkin, if given the opportunity to labor independently and the assurance of material security, people will work freely in cooperative factories that produce clothing or in communal gardens. He warns against the concentration of industry by the state, advises against more authoritarian socialism, and asserts that any revolution must ensure that workers and revolutionaries have access to food and freedom.
Read more

Details

Additional ISBN/GTIN9789357481335
Product TypeE-book
BindingE-book
FormatEPUB
FormatReflowable
Publishing date02/01/2023
LanguageEnglish
File size924808 Bytes
Article no.12916488
CatalogsVC
Data source no.4753516
Product groupBU140
More details

Ratings

Recommendations for similar products

Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
This novel is unjustly very obscure, a fact that the new reissue from Dörlemann is hopefully helping to change. Originally published in 1926, it tells the story of unmarried auntie Lolly who, out of the blue, vacates her post as an unpaid housemaid to her brother's family, to move to an obscure village in northern England. For the first time in her life, and much to her family's consternation, Lolly does what she wants and it involves cats, midnight dances, a very peculiar village and - Satan.
Utterly charming and uplifting, the novel's lighthearted treatment of such themes as the lack of prospects for women, loneliness and ageing is borne out by Lolly's esprit and its just rewards. It's a classic of early lesbian literature and should absolutely be read more.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
A short and comparatively easy-to-read British classic from 1886 about the duality of human nature. Stevenson's linguistic eloquence is a pleasure to consume!
It's admittedly slightly too late for this recommendation, but then again the Italian April is arguably more equal to the German May. An absolutely delightful holiday novel about four women escaping to a romantic Italian castle for some time to themselves - only to be literally spellbound by it. Read it for the lush Italian gardens and the irresistible spring airs - maby skim over some of the more dated romantic version of musical chairs.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
In diesem französischen Klassiker versucht die Hauptfigur Emma sich aus den engen Fesseln der französischen Gesellschaft zu befreien und ein selbstbestimmtes, glückliches Leben zu führen. Flaubert gibt wie niemand vor ihm jeder Figur ihre eigene Sprache und ihren eigenen Ausdruck. Bewundert von seinen Zeitgenossen und Nachfolgern wie Sartre und Perec liegt hier einer der ersten realistischen Romane der Weltliteratur in der preisgekrönten Übersetzung von Elisabeth Edl vor. Inklusive sehr aufschlussreichen Fußnoten und Kommentaren der Übersetzerin über die Entstehung des Werks.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
In diesem französischen Klassiker versucht die Hauptfigur Emma sich aus den engen Fesseln der französischen Gesellschaft zu befreien und ein selbstbestimmtes, glückliches Leben zu führen. Flaubert gibt wie niemand vor ihm jeder Figur ihre eigene Sprache und ihren eigenen Ausdruck. Bewundert von seinen Zeitgenossen und Nachfolgern wie Sartre und Perec liegt hier einer der ersten realistischen Romane der Weltliteratur in der preisgekrönten Übersetzung von Elisabeth Edl vor. Inklusive sehr aufschlussreichen Fußnoten und Kommentaren der Übersetzerin über die Entstehung des Werks.
A classic I ran across on my neverending to-read pile and finished within a few hours. The simple writing style made it enjoyable and easy to read, even if it was first published in 1900 and the language is somewhat rigid. It becoming a classic is well deserved - though I must say I'm not interested in the volumes that follow after this first one.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.
Jane Austen is a writer ruined by TV adaptation (before you all start writing letters, I know there are good ones). Despite two centuries of inclusion in the canon, there are still many (and I am afraid they are mostly men) who dismiss her as 'frivolous', 'saccharine' or 'unserious'. This means it is only worth continuing to discuss Austen with people if they either don't use any of the aforementioned adjectives or if, by the latter, they mean, she is one of the funniest writers in English (full stop). If you don't know this already, the first page of 'Persuasion' will convince you, and then her biting, satirical commentary on Georgian society will show you that far from reverently writing about it out of admiration, she irreverently lambasts it and its eccentric snobbish hierarchy (people who write her off will probably say John Oliver likes Trump because both wear suits). If you don't believe me (and even if you do), read her (and start with 'Persuasion') before you watch her.

Author

Subjects

BIC