I hope that Robert Adams's narrative voice got clearer and more organized with his later books. This one is full of illogical jumps, cuts, and lacks of transition. I keep getting confused while reading, because he suddenly changes place or time without the slightest attempt to let the reader know what's happening.

The what-ifs presented by the author are great. The books have multilple plots and charactors that always keep you interested. I was led to this series by Adams Horseclans series and have proceded to try to acquire all the books in both. I have most of them but would like to obtain a check list for both series. If anyone has one, please let me know.

I have read over 2,200 SF novels in my life thus I claim some degree of expertise in this arena. This novel has potential but lacks depth and brevity. It moves slow with an over abundance of character build up. However, it does drive you to continue. The failing of this novel is in its non-plausable science and abrupt ending that leaves the reader asking the question of...........

The protagonist of "On" lives on a world with an interesting twist that changes everything about it (except human nature, of course). The book is believable, exciting, a little gory here and there, driven by both plot and character. It doesn't have a typical ending, but the ending makes sense when you think about it, and the author's dedication at the end mentions the theme that the ending fits into. A short appendix lays out the science behind this world if you missed the clear info dumps from one of the characters. I liked this book a lot.

I was looking foward to reading and enjoying the early work of Robert Adams. The essay and photographs work very well together but the cover images are the only ones that are reproduced with any quality. If you compare the tonal range of the inside reproductions with the cover work you will be disappointed. I kept the book because I did enjoy the essay and I collect books by Robert Adams. Too bad the reproductions are so weak.

The Horseclan series could be more accurately described as an epic narative of the history of the ficticous world Robert Adams has created. There are often times several completely unrelated events going on during any given book and these plots might not get resolved until a few books later in the series.

This book really had three different short stories going on at the same time. The main story was a flashback to the younger days of Bili the Axe. The backdrop for this story was actually begun in "Horseclan Odyssey" (HC #8) and it was in my opinion the most intriguing . After an good build up the climax was glossed over which I found dissappointing. RA did however put into motion some subplots in this part of the book that are played out in later novels.

The second plot concerns the 20th Century survivors known as the Withcmen and is a continuation of the events of "Savage Mountains" (HC #5) and does not reach any sort of ending, but I'm sure will be addressed somewhere later in the series. It's an interesting story line, but it's hard to keep straight when it's only addressed intermittenly throughout the series.

Lastly, there was a plot with the savage Ganiks that just kinda stopped... not really sure if this has any future potential. This was also an interesting plot, although, I was at a loss to see how it fit into the big picture. The Ganiks are a barbarian people and RA does a good job of illustrating that fact.

Despite the lack of closure on the plots, the book was well written and as always in this series, the charachters are interesting. The key piece of data for anyone thinking of picking up the Horseclan books is that it's not the type of series you just pick up a book here or there, but you've got to read 'em all to get the full enjoyment and impact out of Mr. Adams work.

Anyone picking up this book should know from the start that this is as about as unobjective a biography as one is bound to find. Henry Adams has multiple scores to settle, on behalf of John Adams and John Quincy Adams (his great-grandfather and grandfather, respectively), with John Randolph of Roanoke (who never had a kind word for either of the Adams presidents). The reader would be strongly advised to read both the introduction by Robert McColley, as well as the notes on the text (located at the end of the book) which deals with specific matters of interpretation in the book.

Adams uses this book to savage Randolph at every opportunity. The bulk of the book follows Randolph in his congressional career up through 1806, when he broke with the Jefferson administration over the administration's attempt to pay France two million dollars to secure Western Florida from Spain. Up until 1806, as Adams puts it, Randolph was the "spoiled child of his party and recognised mouthpiece of the administration." (p. 118) Randolph was in the thick of things up to that point, including the Louisiana Purchase, the approval of which he helped shephard through the House of Representatives. He was also given the responsibility for the February 1805 impeachment of Samuel Chase, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. At that point in history, the question of the Executive Branch's authority over the Judicial Branch was far from settled. A successful prosecution of Justice Chase might well have changed the history of Executive-Judicial relations, but Randolph botched the job thoroughly. Adams can barely contain his glee when describing how unequal to the task Randolph was.

The bungled Chase impeachment increasingly made Randolph an embarrassment to the Jefferson administration. Randolph's political prospects were damaged beyond repair after 1806, and from that point on, as he became increasingly erratic, was on the periphery of the American political scene. He quarrelled, at one point or another, with every administration from Jefferson to Andrew Jackson. Adams devotes only 70 pages to Randolph's life from 1806 until his death in 1833. It is evident at this point that Adams is more interested in directing criticism at Jefferson and his successors in the Virginia Dynasty than he is at studying the life of Randolph.

Adams does make good points in his book, especially regarding the notions of states' rights. Coventional wisdom holds that Randolph was one the early advocates of the states' rights philosophy that John C. Calhoun subsequently embraced, but Adams argues persuasively that actions such as the Louisiana Purchase and the protection by the federal government of slavery (such as the Fugitive Slave Act) were in themselves encroachments on the rights of individual states and helped further the centralization of government in the United States. Far from being a traditional states' rights advocate, Adams contends, Randolph did a great deal to undermine the notion of states' rights as it existed in 1789.

Despite the rather venomous nature of the book, it is none the less a wonderful piece of literature that is worth reading. Adams' skills as a writer are evident throughout. The three stars represents a dual rating: 5 stars for the quality of the writing, 1 star for the utter lack of objectivity...although what could the reader seriously expect anyway?

Mildred Downey Broxon, Lin Carter, Marylois Dunn, George Alec Effinger, Gregory Frost, Joseph Green, Linda Haldeman, R.A. Lafferty, Shariann Lewitt, Brad Linaweaver, A.R. Major, Mary H. Schaub, and Lynn Ward.

The idea behind this book is a good one: Moynihan attempts to bring light to the ethnic troubles that plagued the world at the time of publication in the early 1990s (which seem to have become even more acute now) by delving into some of the origins of this problem. He essentially focuses on two themes: ethnicity, ethnic identity and the persistence and predominance of ethnic loyalties (as opposed to class loyalties); and national self-determination, particularly how to define this term and the international legal conundrums this concept has caused since it first became a part of mainstream political parlance about a century ago. In its initial sections, the book does succeed in shedding some light on the role of ethnicity and self-determination in the political history of the last hundred or so years, and how essential they have been to international relations, even if often ingored by mainstream scholarship-especially during the cold war-which tended to focus almost exclusively on ideology and political "realism" a la Henry Kissenger (which, as Moynihan points out, was far from realistic). Perhaps the best thing about this book is that is offers a good introduction to the problems of ethnicity in international politics, and provides an excellent reference list of sources for further reading on the subject. As an introduction, however, it suffers from being superficial at times. At times it seems as though Moynihan implicitly accepts the "primordial" thesis on ethnicity and nationalism, for he cites without critical commentary the all-too-common lament of many journalists and other armchair experts who bewail the "ancient ethnic hatreds" burning in some remote corners of the world. He doesn't really look into the fact that ethnicity politics and the ensuing nationalism tend to be the product of contemporary political agitation which often have little to do with historical fact. Although he mentions the general multiethnic harmony of certain pre-nationalist communities, e.g. in Central Europe, he doesn't really go anywhere with this. This the general fault of this book: its disjointed approach. At times Moynihan goes into excessive detail on certain examples while skimming over other cases. In addition, the text is riddled with extensive quotations (some as long as two to three pages) of other works or his own previous works on this subject. Since the book was based on a lecture delivered at Oxford in 1991, I can only assume that he rather hurriedly adapted the text for publication. This is unfortunate, for this could have been a really top-notch work on a very important subject.

This was rather informative on the actual workings of the UN. Firstly, how it functions - six principal organs established by the Charter: General Assembly, Security Council, Secretariat, International Court of Justice, Trusteeship Council, Economic and Social Council. Secondly, its attitude towards force and conflict - it will intervene if there is a threat to international peace (Chapter VII); states can only use force for individual or collective self-defence (under Articles 2(4), 51); in practice, general support for national liberation movements and self-determination struggles (Zimbabwee, Namibia); in practice, growing humanitarian intervention since 1991 (Somalia, Rwanda, Bosnia). Thirdly, the means by which it responds to conflict - peacekeeping operations (an ad hoc mechanism - maintaining cessation of hostilities as well as postconflict peacebuilding); sanctions (under Article 41) - versus how it's supposed to - to have armed forces on call (under Article 43); to have an effective Military Staff Committee (under Article 47).

Where it falters is on the actual analysis. It brings up the idea of the self-interest of states limiting the UN (nothing new); and the UN working within an inter-state system instead of superceding it as a supranational government, but does not provide elaboration or explanation. It also brings up the idea of the symbolic role of the UN and the conference of legitimacy to the principles it espouses. Otherwise, this book is prone to sweeping statements and rhetoric about the 'fundamental divisions' in the world, the greater variety of problems the UN will face post-Cold War, the need for 'streamlining and rationalization within and beyond the UN system'. All general terms - which tell us nothing about what the problems are and how they arise; how they can be solved; what reform should be undertaken, how and why.

A text for a calculas course should not include this one. Although there are good examples, for a general understanding how calculas works with some applications. This is not recommended for applied mathematics.

I was very surprised to see the poor score of this book. I think it is great. It is very well set out and cleverly leads the reader by the hand to ideas and theories of calculus. The chapters read well and diagrams illustrate the ideas effectively. I have used it throughout my maths degree and is also helpful for other maths topics such as linear programming. All my class mates agree that it is a classic text!

I am surprised at the poor reviews of this text. Though some complain that there is a "lack of explanation" in proofs and in exercises in the study guide, I prefer Adams's approach as it forces the reader to think while reading. Working through a proof or example should not be done in order to memorize one line of thought but rather to *learn* the concepts and as an exercise in itself. I do not think that Adams is overly demanding--he pushes the reader, but not too hard. The exercises are well thought out and often challenging, and the text is extremely helpful. I do admit that some problems and examples took me quite some time to figure out, but the time invested was well worth it. I would suggest that you take a look at the book and study guide for yourself and not to take the reviews of it too seriously (borrow it from your university library). This text is especially suitable for an honours class in first year calculus. It is perhaps in between something like Edwards and Penney and Spivak: not as easy as the former, but not as demanding as the latter.

I love the 2001 Star Trek Ships of the Line calendar; I am disappointed with the 2002 calendar. There are only one or two shots that I like, with an additional one or two that are "acceptable". I thought the title should dictate what you should expect to see. Instead, you get some partial shots of ships and the so-called action shots are just plain blurry. If I had taken a photo that turned out like that, I would've thrown it away. Hopefully the 2003 calendar, if there is one, will get back to the standards set by the 2001 calendar.

The previous calendar was, well, a work of true art! However, in this version, Foundation has added, haze, fog, blurriness, black & white . . anything to hide the true beauty. Only the picture for Jan 2002 is fantastic.

Not only that, Foundation messed up on the Galaxy class ship in the center fold out. It was labeled Challenger but someone forgot to delete the "enterprise" name & registry from the rest of the picture.

I sure hope they fix their problems. This calendar is a "pass" in my book.

It's a pretty good calender, but some of the image choices are dissapointing... extra images in the back are nice.