I have mixed opinions on this one... To be honest, you can probably get an even better bang for the buck by purchasing the full version of Hanon's Virtuoso Pianist and practising the exersizes with swing feel (play chords in your LH and the patterns in your RH), then you could then go out and get some of David Baker's Bebop Pattern books and dig down even deeper... (If you don't know what swing time and swing feel is, you should probably sit in a few lessons with a Jazz improv instructor anyway... sometimes it doesn't come through in writing anyway.) - - Of course what's most important is being able to take the pattern concepts, and applying them to the scales and modes that fit in with different chords, so for that purpose, you should definitely get your hand on a good Jazz Improv book... and also be sure to learn them in all keys... whatever the case, the most important thing to realize is that this is a TECHNIQUE book... not an improv book... hence,you should use this book for the purpose of building your dexterity not for solo ideas... If you're looking for a good HOW TO PLAY JAZZ book, check out my AMAZON list on Essential Jazz Learning Resources.

Don't throw away your old Hanon! This book is not tied to the successfull formula of the origional Hanon. It replaces the repetition and drill-like nature with a set of short, progressive jazz studies. But while initially misled by the title, I find this different approach successfull. With little explanation or theory I've been able to progress significantly just by working my way through the book -- moving on to the next exercise as soon as I feel comfortable with the last. For those of us who feel a little like a fish out of water in Jazz, this is a great way to learn to breathe air.

The Hanon are great exercises, but it's important to do a variety of exercises. Going through 50 Hanon Exercises each day may be a little overkill and somewhat unbalanced, especially if you're playing them all at the same tempo.

I couldn't play at all unless I warmed up for 45 minutes. What I learned was, in addition to "exercises" it's important to play some tunes...

Try some of these:
-Hanon 1st exercise, all keys quarter note 100
-All Major scales, 4 octaves, various tempi

-Apreggios - same
-Pick one or two a day of the following:
Brahms 51 exercises
Pischna
Schmitt Preparatory Exercises
Bach Two Part Inventions
Chopin Etudes, Waltzes (anything really)
Scott Joplin rags
Blues - in various keys
Tunes you'd play on gigs in different keys each day

just mix it up and don't spend more time on exercises than you do playing tunes.

This book was givin to me by my Father who recieved it from Ret. Col. Dentino. Recently grdauating from the 52nd Trooper Youth Week class run by the NJ State Police, I saw how diverse and highly trained NJ Troopers are. It does give a good history of the NJSP, but after reading half the book, the stories don't seem to be as interesting. If you are interested in the NJSP, this is the book for you, but don't expect to pick it up twice and finsih it.

Coakley did his best to include an overview of the relevant aspects of New Jersey State Police history and lore.Any one topic of the book deserves a book in and of itself.Well done and well worth reading.It reminded me of what it took to become the best of the best.

I have read this book many times over the years. The stories told reflect greatly upon the storied past of the New Jersey State Police and the sacrifices that have been made from the beginning up to the date of publication. Proud to be a part of the Blue and Gold.

This is what happens when you take esotericism too far. Lampert should have better heeded Strauss' warning that textual clues must be supportable in some measure by the text itelf--or else pondered Strauss' argument that "the problem inherent in the surface of things . . . is the heart of things."

I spent some time checking out the claims of this book--which, in brief, are that the mature Strauss was a covert Nietzschean nihilist who believed in a politically significant order of rank among men--and I was totally unconvinced. If you're going to argue that a man secretly harbored beliefs directly at odds with ideas he dedicated 30 years of his life to advancing, you have to make a better case than this.

Similar things have been written about Strauss and Machiavelli, and they are similarly unbelievable. Memo to would-be esotericists: the device is almost never used directly to contradict a surface argument. Rather, it is used to conceal, while at the same pointing to, the deepest implications of that argument.

Nonetheless, I give this book two stars because it is not deviod of insight into Nietszche.

Despite the disputations of many Straussians, the connections between Strauss and Nietzsche are clear and, to the reader of both, undeniable. As Lampert points out on several occasions with a quote from Strauss in a letter to Karl Lowith, Nietzsche was to say the least indespensible to Strauss's early development. "Nietzsche so dominated and charmed me between my 22nd and 30th years that I literally believed everything I understood of him." (p 5) Thus considering the not so veiled attempt of most Straussians to distance their man from Nietzsche it is not surprising they would claim that Strauss himself should not be read esoterically (least of all by someone seeking to 'blow his cover'). A cursory review of two prominent but very different Straussians, Stanley Rosen (who is not so concerned with protecting Strauss's image) and Harvey Clafin Mansfield (who is), is enough to lend credence to Lampert's thesis. Rosen states plainly the connection between Strauss and Nietzsche in his 'Hermeneutics as Politics': "...Strauss is almost Nietzschean but not quite.." (p 125). As for Mansfield, his studies of Machiavelli are more Nietzschean than Strauss himself. Just try this on for size as a Nietzschean quote: "To us, Machiavelli contributes a clear view of politics unobstructed by abtract claims for equality and unreasonable demands for justice." 'Machiavelli's Virture,' University of Chicago Press, 1996. p. xiv

Lampert's work is a thorough and insightful reading of Strauss's essay "Note on the Plan of Nietzsche's 'Beyond Good and Evil'." Lampert's approach is definitely more Nietzchean than Straussian, which is to say it is not as nuanced or sufficiently ambiguous as Straussians--especially of the theistic flavor--like. But it is in a word outstanding and will hopefully embolden a few of Struass's more reticent students to step out of the shadows and into the Noon sunlight, in more Zarathustrian fashion.

"Leo Strauss and Nietzsche" is the 3rd book from the great Laurence Lampert, who is probably the greatest living Nietzsche scholar in the English speaking world. It seeks to examine the following possibility: that Strauss, himself the rediscoverer of the art of "esoteric" writing, whereby one produces philosophical works in a subtle way that masks one's real teachings so as to not arouse the fury of established ideology, may himself have been an esoteric writer, and more specifically, an advocate of Nietzscheanism. At first glance, nothing would seem to be further from the truth - Strauss is widely thought of as being a sort of Platonist, at least in political philosophy. But the question needs to be asked - would he have ignored the tool he himself rediscovered? What might be found if he was subjected to the very analysis he performed on others?

This is what Lampert does, using a 17 page essay called "Not on the Plan of Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil", in Strauss' "Studies in Platonic Political Philosophy". Lampert eventually accumulates a significant argument in favor of his two theses, namely, that Strauss was a covert Nietzschean who felt that he could not speak aloud what he himself believed and who therefore took cover under the traditional garb of a philosopher (which both Nietzsche and Strauss took to be the cassock of a priest); and that Strauss himself is the best interpreter of Nietzsche the world has yet seen. Anyone who is interested in either man should read this book. It will provide a powerful incentive to rethink stereotypes about both men and their works, and it gives a fine summary of what Nietzsche actually was trying to communicate.

For Tolstoi, this qualifies as an "O. Henry surprise-type ending" since you aren't expecting the wealthy merchant to sacrifice his own life for that of his lowly serf. This seems especially true since Tolstoi gives you several examples throughout the story of how the master undervalues his loyal servant.

For example, Tolstoi tells you that he is underpaid even for a serf. Also, his shrewd master always manages to manipulate and maneuver the servant into buying his goods from him, instead of from the store in the village, by making it look like he is doing him a favor in the process. This way he can overcharge for everything and thereby takes back what little money he is paying his servant anyway. The servant is well aware of this but is resigned to the situation.

Another interesting thing is how they get into a life-threatening situation in the first place. The workaholic merchant decides to press on at night in a severe blizzard, rather than remain safe in a farmhouse they have happened on in the snow, because he is impatient to get on to his next deal, and doesn't want to miss out on a possible opportunity.

I thought the time-obsessed businessman was primarily a late 20th century invention, but not so. The wealthy landowner and businessman regards even a few lost moments of time as unacceptable, and so they venture out into the fatal storm. They get lost in the driving and trackless snow on the way to the next town.

Tolstoi describes this poignantly. At several points, the master is certain they have come back to where they started and so are just going in circles, but the snow is coming down so hard that the horse carriage's tracks have already been covered up, and so he can't be sure. At that point he realizes the situation is hopeless.

Finally, the master parks the horse and carriage under a tree and they huddle together and try to survive until morning. But only the servant survives, his wealthy master in the end sacrificing his own life for that of his servant, by deciding to keep his servant warm instead of himself.

I, too, have to disagree with this 'english class' in their dull-assesment of this story. This must be a very young class of students who haven't experienced enough of human nature to fully appreciate and understand the complexity and beauty of the 2 characters in this wonderfully touching story. This is the first story that has ever made me weep openly while reading. The second, also by Tolstoy, was Strider: The Story of a Horse. If you liked Master and Man, you must find this one! That's why I'm here today; looking to replace my lost copy.

I felt I had to respond to the above comment by saying that this is a masterfully written short story and a moving account of a Master who makes the ultimate sacrifice, whether knowing it or not, to his lowly, faithful servant. The story contrasts well the attitudes and lives of rich masters and their voluntary slaves.

Tolstoy was a great writer, and his late period of "saintly" simplicity and "solidarity" with the Russian peasants (whom he continued to use on his land) is important to understand as an example of something--I'm not sure what. Maybe as an example of the contradictions of that kind of utopianism (see Isaiah Berlin's great essays on Tolstoy). Also, What is Art?, which dates from this last period, makes some important reminders about the social context of art. BUT ...

It is also the classic example of Philistinism, casually dismissing great works of art because they don't conform to St. Leo's late ideal of simple, straightforward form and content. The previous reviewers make clear the dangers of this kind of attitude--when they don't understand a painting or poem, it couldn't possibly be because there's something lacking in their response. It must be because the work is decadent or wrong. Such an attitude ultimately leads not to the simple purity Tolstoy envisioned, but to the sort of dumbing down we have in American television, cinema, and "beach" novels. "I know what I like" has become the manifesto of boorishness, adding self-righteousness to poor taste.

Tolstoy's What is Art? is worth reading, but keep in mind that his descriptions of music by Wagner or Beethoven, various novels, etc., are ridiculous caricatures that have little to do with the real thing. Furthermore, it's difficult not to see "St. Leo" as incredibly hypocritical, staying in all summer reading the latest novels while his peasants work in his fields, and then criticising the novels because they're remote from the common life of the peasants.

If...you've ever been baffled by a Monet exhibit or a Beethoven sonata, it doesn't mean that these are no good and you may as well go back to your sitcoms and soaps. It means you need to look and listen again, and maybe think a bit. The rewards are there if you're willing to get off your intellectual butt.

Do you have thoughts like "well, maybe it's just me... They say Monet is great, but perhaps I just don't understand it..." I say, maybe it's your own gut that tells you what is the true art and what is not!

This work by Tolstoy is a summary of his 15 year spiritual journey and research of art and what it's all about. And who is the author! A genius himself! In this piece he tells us in plain language that the whole art of his century (with a few exceptions) is a product of a rotten class of people, a select few, whose main concerns were far from being common with the feelings of any normal human being. "Art, nowadays, is for pleasure, not for bringing moral values in the form of genuine feelings to a reader". This is basically the general idea of the work. At first, you feel dumbfounded reading this, but after a few pages, his statements start to make sense. Only a true moral feeling expressed in the right form, not necessarily beautiful, but understandible and to the point, is a true piece of art.

Now, let's go back and think for minute: do I really like Sheakspeare or is it the literary criticism the makes me feel that I am not a fully cultured person unless I acknowledge Sheakspeare as the greatest of all, or at least one of the greatest writers (playwrights) ever? Even if I think that he was too verbose and vague to begin with? That sometimes you read him and whole paragraphs go by without you fully understanding what he's talking about? Mind you, he wrote for the theater, which means characters' sentences need to be pretty concise and clear, so that the audience could follow them. Anyway, Tolstoy will help you understand this problem.

His main idea, again, is for art to convey the feelings of fraternity and love to the reader, not sexual desires, fake patriotism, shovinism or those exquisite feelings of the upper class. Art is about compassion, love, oneness of all people and good healthy humor. I totally agree with that.

One more thing: in this work, Tolstoy confronts the idea of goodness with the idea of beauty, saying that for the sake of beauty, the contemporary artists disregard goodness. This a very controversial statement, in my opinion, but there is a point there...

Also recommended: of course, War and Peace, Anna Karenina, Resurrection, Childhood, Boyhood & Youth, as true standards of literature, by which you can judge the works of others. All other fiction by Tolstoy is just as great and easy to read, especially his short stories, such as "Master and Man", "The Forged Coupon", etc. His other less known works that are revolutionary by their essence, are "My Confession", "What is My Belief (Religion)" and especially (really hard to find) "Critique of Dogmatic Theology", where he expounded his views on religion and traditional Church Christianity with all its absurd, useless dogmas, which only divert your attention from what Christ really taught. This is a very controversial work, which was prohibited in Russia of his day, but which is certainly worth reading. By the way, why doesn't Everyman's Library publish it?

Tolstoy unleashes an intellectual argument as only he can as he provides a classical insight into the definition of art. Filled with lashings against Church Christianity and praise for true Chrisitanity, and more lashings against universal art that is unoriginal and full of sexual erotica, Tolstoy argues that true art is reflective of the religious consciousness of the age and is measured by its degree of infectuousness to the consumer. It is valued by having particularity, clarity, and sincerity of feeling from the artist. Keep in mind this was written at the end of his life in the 19th century. Tolstoy also argues that governmental endowments given to art that only satisifes the sensual desires of the upper class is a great abuse of the millions of common people that work hard but will never even see the art, art that was produced at incredible expense using their money. In summary, Tolstoy offers a timeless definition of art.

When I got this book from the libary, I was excited to read it, but when I was on about the second chapter, I kinda got bored. It had a good plot, but it kinda dragged on. I reccomend it for at the cottage type book. Because when you pick it up you won't forget the story. Chow...

Trust me on this i HATE books!! H-A-T-E books. book are my enemy. But some how this book became my favorite by coincidence im a gemini. This book go to worse to really worse. and freaky to really freaky. This is my favorite book of all times, i also love every other zodiac chiller. i also recomend my 2nd favorite book Pices Drowning. I read this book in 2 days thats a record for me! My last record before this was 1 month. Please read this book if youre into freaky book. If your into gory books like me try stephen King!

those other people are strange, I think the book was great and kept me guessing. It was a zodiac mystery/adventure. It was a definite thriller.

While I definitely count myself as a Groucho fan, I was fairly disappointed by this book. By "has not aged especially well", I'm referring both to the subject matter (very tame) and the writing style (very dated). Frankly, I wonder if he would be at all surprised that it hasn't aged well: it looks to me as if he dashed it off in a hurry, perhaps for a quick paycheck. I found The Groucho Letters to be a bit better, but it likewise is no side-splitter. Perhaps his best writing was confined to the movies.

It's almost impossible to read MEMOIRS OF A MANGY LOVER without hearing the distinct voice of Groucho Marx echoing in your head. The writing style in evidence here is very close to Groucho's unique manner of speaking that was so prevalent in his movie, radio, and television careers. His train of thought weaves dangerously, one moment he'll be discussing romance in the dark ages, the next he'll be looping back to earlier sentences, picking apart his own grammar or dragging a double entendre from the brink of reason. The narrative moves quickly and easily, but the reader should be careful, as speedy perusal will cause you to miss some of the subtler jokes.

The subject matter is very much a product of its era and its author. Most of the jokes revolve around how terrible it is to be married, how much of a pain one's wife is, and how much men like to sit around playing poker. Not to say that the anecdotes and remembrances aren't hilarious, because some of them are painfully funny, but the subject matter is fairly limiting. Fortunately, Groucho is clever enough to keep the jokes moving so that it doesn't feel like the same story repeated endlessly. The book is just the right length for the amount of material. Any longer and it would have seemed repetitious, any shorter and it would have been insubstantial.

Not surprisingly, my favorite stories of the bunch were the ones that included cameos from the author's famous siblings. Harpo and Chico do put in short appearances here, which would give one the impression that some of the stories that are written about here actually happened. To be honest, most of the anecdotes seem to have been fairly embellished, so to differentiate between what is reality and what is the result of Groucho's mad mind is a game that simply can't be won. If you're looking for an in-depth and accurate biography of Groucho Marx, then there are loads of other books you should be investigating. This tome may not tell you much about Groucho Marx, but it wasn't meant to. It's a cliché to say that a really funny book will cause one to laugh out loud in embarrassingly public places, but clichés like that come about because of hilarious books like MEMOIRS OF A MANGY LOVER.

Fans of the Marx Brothers know that chasing women was a part of their comedy routines. Though Groucho didn't go "honking" after them like Harpo, he got the job done with rich widows (Margaret Dumont). In this book, Groucho tells about his own real life amorous adventures and gives us his priceless look at the history of love.
I'm a relatively new fan of the Marx Bros. and I absolutely fell in love with this book. Its a quick read, but extremely entertaining. Of course, there is plenty of humor throughout the book and I laughed out loud several times. Groucho's view of the opposite sex would be considered politically incorrect today, but it is hilarious (and I'm a woman!). He recounts a few stories about anonymous friends and their exploits, a few of his own exploits, as well as a few stories that aren't related to love but are still funny.
I recommend this collection to anybody that loves witty books (and isn't afraid of a few puns) and has an absurd sense of humor. Its a must for any Groucho fan.

This book could be excellent. The table of contents offers an appealing mix of important topics. The writing is clear. Unfortunately, the authors don't know their subject. They are a couple of buy-side professionals who know the lingo but not the mathematics that goes behind it. They think that assets are priced based upon expectations, which is precisely the notion Black and Scholes dispensed with in 1973. In their discussion of OAS, they claim that option spreads reflect risk premiums. No, they reflect the cost of maintaining a replicating portfolio. What is really startling is their misperceptions regarding principal components. Applying PCA to yield curve modeling, they have invented a concept of "Most Representative Shock." This will make your eyes roll back into your head.

I wish I could give a better review. I really had great expectations when I ordered this book, and it is clear the authors have put a lot of effort into their writing. They simply lack the expertise to make a substantive contribution.

A truly excellent and useful book, although I can see why uninitiated (like Ms. Jane in the review below) won't understand it. The authors possess a wealth of practical knowledge of the fixed income markets and analytics. They rely on both theoretical models and subjective judgement, without which no investment activity can be successful. Their ideas are innovative and rigorous. I especially liked discussions on Value-at-Risk and existing parametric measures of risk. Highly recommend!

A book written with an amazing transparency of thoughts and intelligence.A "must read" book for anyone who is involved in institutional risk management. ... must own before it becomes a "industry's best kept secret".

I read the entire set in an afternoon and it did not capture my attention as I'd hoped. Obviousley written written to an elementary school level (well it seemed that way to me, but I'm a genius). I definately recommend it for a decent short read as it only has a little over 6000 pages it shouldn't take anyone longer than a couple of hours. luckily the material and scientific content are so easy to understand.

This is an essential reference collection for any chemistry library. It has tons of organic reagents listed alphabetically, with typical applications schemes and specific references to procedures and particular uses. It has MODERN reagents and most of the references are from the 1980s and later, so you can actually easily find the referenced articles and follow the reported procedures exactly, since they won't be obsolete. It is easy to read, it gives structures, physical data, handling and storage information for every single one of the listed reagents.
I used it regularly throughout my graduate student career and I could not imagine a chemistry library without one. I would buy my own copy if only I could afford it!

Day by day we need to improve and redesign formulas; this encyclopaedia gives you the chance to generate and to confirm new alternatives of doing that.

This book serves as a good tool for quick reference, but falls short when it comes to details. Due to the great number of subjects and people covered in this mini "encyclopedia", the descriptions are superficial and lacking in depth.
I also found that quite a few important figures of the time were missing, whereas less important ones were abundant.
The book, if done properly, would have been at least twice its current size and a far more accurate tool of reference. Still, good intentions, right?

This book covers most of the important people, events and ideas behind the Third Reich. As with any good encylopedia, it is fairly comprehensive. Most listings are easy to find, although Snyder refers to German names more often than English ones. I found one minor fault with this book, at least in the 1993 edition. Snyder frequently lists dead people as still living. In a few cases, individuals may have passed since publication, but not usually. Albert Speer, for instance, is listed as still living, even though he died in 1981! I know this is true of many others ( some were born in the 19th century). But this is a small flaw in an otherwise fine book.

Anyone interested in Nazi Germany and want to be well-armed in knowledge of that era can look no further than Louis L. Snyder's Encyclopedia of the Third Reich. Major entries are very detailed. Most of them are two to three pages, such as Goebbels, Goering, Hess and the Hess flight together, the July Plot, and the Katyn Massacre. Hitler himself takes up ten full pages, if that's any indication of the detail of the entries. Considering how the book is 388 pages minus bibliography and the number of entries, that isn't too bad.

Apart from Hitler and friends, there are also events and people of the Weimar Republic, such as Paul von Hindenburg, who named Hitler chancellor, as well as Hitler's predecessors, such as Heinrich Bruning, Franz von Papen, and Kurt von Schleicher. After all, Weimar's downfall caused Hitler's rise.

There are also organizational charts throughout, such as the Hierarchy of the NSDAP and the ranks in the Third Reich. This latter entry lists the army ranks of the German Army, and the equivalent ranking in the SS, NSDAP, German Police, and United States Army. For example, a general in the German Army has a rank equal to an SS-Obergruppenfuehrer, a NSDAP Gauleiter, the General der Polizei in the German Police, and a General in the US Army. Tables are also included, such as the list of Gaus (districts) under the third reich and the Gauleiter in charge.

Key conferences and attendees include the Rastenburg Conference, where Hitler and his military advisors were on 20 July 1944, which is the day of the bomb plot, and the Wannsee Conference, where Reinhard Heydrich chaired a meeting detailing the Endlosung or Final Solution.

Many entries are concepts in the original German. So for the entry Night and Fog Decree, it will say See Nacht- Und Nebel Erlass, where the data will be.

Acronyms usual have See the full name. E.g. NSAG. See Nationalsozialistische Arbeitgemeinschaft. Looking up that entry, one will find it's English for National Socialist Working Association. Damn, those Nazis really liked long words, didn't they?

Trial results include that of the Frankfurt Trial, for the chief SS officers at Auschwitz, the Doctor's Trial, for those doctors who experimented on prisoners of war, and of course, the Nuremberg Trials. Each has the defendant, DOB or age, position, verdict and punishment.

As for actual documents, there are Hitler's Last Will and Political Testament. There are also general essays on art, architecture, film and theatre (especially Triumph Of The Will, which has an entry all its own), music, and education. Other things of interest: the lyrics and translation of the Horst Wessel anthem and "Lili Marlene."

At the beginning, there is a chronology of key dates in history, with the exact day. Under 1933, there is an entry January 30. Appointment of Hitler as Chancellor.

I have the 1989 edition, so Albert Speer and Rudolf Hess had died, but according to the book, they are still alive. Why the lack of corrections, especially when the discovery of bones in Brazil in 1985 presumably of Josef Mengele, is listed in the entry for Josef Mengele? Still, a minor quibble in this extremely invaluable reference work on a very infamous period in history.

Any student of the Third Reich will have a definite advantage over others with this book.