Let me first dispense with the weakness of this book: It is a collection of 23 articles by Tony Judt that were published between 1994 and 2006 in several journals -- many in the form of expanded book reviews and the vast majority being in either "The New York Review of Books" or "The New Republic". Although Judt makes an effort to bring them all together under one tent as, to quote the sub-title, "Reflections on the Forgotten Twentieth Century", that's a pretty lame and generally unsuccessful effort. The book has the usual weaknesses of virtually any collection of essays on wide-ranging topics published over a dozen years: there is, inevitably, a measure of disjointedness, and the stronger essays lose some of their punch and distinctiveness from having to rub shoulders with the weaker or more esoteric ones.
But this weakness is, for me, more than offset by the strengths of the book. Tony Judt is an independent, clear-headed thinker, who writes knowledgeably and lucidly on a wide range of contemporary subjects of an historical/political nature. Few -- correction, probably no one -- will agree with him on every point. His views on Israel are particularly likely to raise hackles, at least here in the U.S. (They led "The New Republic" to treat him as persona non grata.) But his opinions are well-grounded in history and well thought out. They are not, most emphatically, the received strictures of an ideologue -- which, of course, is what irritates so many who fancy themselves liberals about Judt. Then again, what George Orwell said about nationalists is equally applicable to ideologues: "If one harbors anywhere in one's mind a nationalistic loyalty or hatred, certain facts, though in a sense known to be true, are inadmissble."
Tony Judt is cut from the same cloth as Orwell. He does not write quite as straightforwardly, and I don't know if his empathy for the common man is as intense, but his historical knowledge is deeper and broader. I recommend REAPPRAISALS, unreservedly, to anyone who cares about the current global political landscape and (a) is uninvested, psychologically or intellectually, in any particular ideological or nationalistic perspective, or (b) is sincerely willing to have their ideological or nationalistic beliefs challenged.