Some of the short stories in this collection are very good. "Soft" by F. Paul Wilson and "Metastasis" by Dan Simmons are excellent examples. Others like "The Vaults of Yoh Vombis" and "The man with a thousand legs" (sorry last reviewer) are exceedingly bad. My advice: if you find it on sale or used, pick it up and read a story or two in your spare time between novels.

Most of the stories that were chosen for this anthology were masterpieces of horror and wonder, such as "Colour Out of Space" by H.P. Lovecraft, or "Orange is For Anguish, Blue For Insanity" by David Morrell, and so I must give high praise for this terrifying collection of horror's finest. But there are also some exceptionally bad stories that were included for reasons unknown, like the preposterous "The Man With a Thousand Legs," by Frank Belknap Long, and a so-called Sci-fi story that excludes any real science called "The Vaults of Yoh-Vombis," by Clark Ashton Smith. The inclusion of these two leaves me no choice but to deduct a star from what would otherwise have been a perfect rating. Four Stars. A must read, nonetheless.

I just got done reviewing the "Sceince Fiction Hall of Fame" which I think is the first best anthology of all time. But this even though it's quite a bit newer is a close second. Don't Listen to the first reviwer "man with a thousand legs" was a great storey and "vault of Yoh Vombis" was even better. Most of the stories in this anthology are spectacular including "Hell-fire" which in my opinion is one of the best short fiction storey's I have ever ever ever read. "Nightmare Gang" was another great storey especially since I have NO respect for Koontz but with this storey credit and quite a lot is due to him, a very good piece.

Definitly a must buy!!!

Since I tend to be a person one would describe as hot-headed or ill-tempered, I thought this the perfect gift. Honestly, I believe that much of what Dr. Rubin purports to be true: that many psychological problems stem from our inability to connect to our anger.

However, I found that the book's main points are made in the first several chapters while the balance is spent reiterating those points continually. In my opinion, Dr. Rubin should've spent more time helping the reader with excercises aimed at connecting WITH the anger rather than understanding its many faces.

Maybe he is setting us up for "The Angry Book II". I think I will pass -- I'm a bit angry that I got this book as a gift.

When I was dealing with "inappropriate" anger (over-reacting to a situation)I read this book to help me. This author spoke about deep seated anger that was never resolved; in my case from childhood abuse. He said that this unspoken anger can "accumulate" so that when you might get angry for some small thing - all this "old" anger comes out in an over-reaction. Learning about this made me want to finally deal with the old anger in order to live a more normal life. I felt that this book was instrumental in my life by showing me that I had choices about my anger. I have become a much nicer person.

It's an excellent book. Simple and straight to the point. Each topics are about 2-4 pages long and it explains what does each "sickness" supposed to do, how it builds up, etc.

This book should be shelved next to "The Bible Codes". The Bible codes claimed to find meaningful patterns in the way letters are distributed through the bible; Kikawada and Quinn claim to find a meaningful pattern in the repetitions and contradictions of the biblical text. They claim this is the author's art, rather than evidence of separate texts having been sutured together.

Their reading is simply not convincing. The repititions in Genesis do not look like the similar repititions in other Near Eastern literature. They have a different quality, which is evident to any reader who is willing to look at the texts as historical documents rather than as some kind of lifeline to God.

The documentary hypothesis lives. Kikawada and Quinn are forgotten by all but a handful of tenacious Christians. Do a websearch and see who supports their theory - evangelical Christian organizations.

I am surprised that this book has never attracted the attention it should have. Quinn and Kikiwada, two Berkeley scholars, make a compelling case for reading Genesis 1-11 as a unified text. The documentary thesis, with the sometimes convoluted efforts to separated out even fragments of verses to various author,s was very much a product of late romanticism and the belief in the representation of time and progress in natural phenomena--from the discovery of time differentiation in sedimentary rocks to the awareness that star gazing was a look into different times simultaneously. This same documentary thesis was popular among Greek scholars at the same time. Few critics now argue that Homer's Iliad is a mere patchwork, yet the documentary thesis of the composition of Genesis remains.

With an extensive knowledge of linguistics, rhetoric, and literary theory as well as the careful use of the evidence used to jsutify the documentary thesis, Quinn and Kikiwada produce a reading of the first eleven chapters of Genesis which reveals a sophisticated and elegant construction that is far from being a patchwork or mosaic. Genesis 1-11 is a layering of chiasmus upon chiasmus, with each reinforcing the general themes of dispersion, a theme whic runs counter to that other closely related Near Eastern narratives of creation and the flood.

The late Arthur Quinn died prematurely, but it is time that biblical commentators and biblical scholars paid these two men their due.

In this fairly short and tightly reasoned book (unfortunately not now in print), Isaac Kikawada and Arthur Quinn argue very convincingly that the "documentary hypothesis" has had its day. Their thesis: that a hundred-odd years of scholarship inspired by Wellhausen's theory has _itself_ produced the very evidence which proves it false. In order to support this contention, the authors examine the portion of the Bible at which support for the "documentary hypothesis" seems strongest: the story of Noah and the Flood. And true to their aim, they deftly show that the very features of the text which seem to support multiple authorship can, when viewed slightly differently, also be seen as evidence that the text is the work of a single author capable of great brilliance and subtlety. It is this last point that I think deserves the greatest emphasis. Too often, the stories of the Jewish scriptures are written off as "primitive" or "barbaric," and superficial contradictions or immoralities are taken as evidence of the unsophistication of the text's author(s) and target audience. Recognizing and questioning our hidden assumption here is an essential step toward recognizing the possibility that -- as Kikawada and Quinn put it -- if we think we spot an error in the text, it is more likely we who are at fault. For consider: since the "documentary hypothesis" requires a "redactor" who was not unduly concerned about obvious "contradictions," why do we rule out the possibility that a _single_ author might have been similarly unconcerned? And if the latter possibility is _not_ ruled out, why do we assume that these apparent "contradictions" are not stylistic contrivances that are intended for a more sophisticated audience than we have thus far considered? And in that case, might not the very features of the text revealed by proponents of the "documentary hypothesis" be themselves evidence of a deeper unity and design? Why, rather than look for such unity and design, do we assume the "redactor" must have been so stupid as to be unable to recognize difficulties that are obvious to any child (and indeed were discussed in the Talmudic literature at least two millennia ago)? Kikawada and Quinn have laid waste to the "documentary hypothesis" by accepting what is good in it and showing that it undermines itself. This little book will be of interest to all who wish to defend the integrity of Scripture, and especially to readers of Umberto Cassuto's _The Documentary Hypothesis_ (unfortunately not now in print either).

So, it may not be the best story ever written, but it does carry on the Asimov Robots storyline. If you can quote the three laws of robotics, you gotta read this whole series. It will not knock your socks off or anything, but you will enjoy it.

A good work. If you are Asimov's fan you will find a new murder investigation involving the 3 robotics laws of Asimov, this time in a new planet inhabited exclusively by robots. There is other interesting themes: New alliens species, a radical tool for stelar traveling (more radical and without technical explanations- or speculations). If you are a new asimovian robots reader, you will enjoy this book and will find a good introduction for the 3 robotics laws.
The more i liked: A amnesiac man interacting with unknown robots who can not lie and with a attractive girl.
Te murder resolution is not so good like in asimov books.

This was the first sci-fi book I read ever, in fact it's the first "real" book I read when I was young. I fall in love with Asimov at this very moment. I love the story. This was my first contact with the three laws of robotics I love so much. I think it's a good book to learn more or introduce you to Asimov style. I lose my original copy of this book 10 years ago al least. I just brought this electronic copy. I start read it and feel the same joy today. A must read.

What are we to make of a New York City mayor who packs a Glock, wrestles corrupt cops and crooked politicians at the same time he is running as second banana in a presidential campaign? You get Issac Sidel, a.k.a. the Big Guy, a.k.a. the Citizen, and the funhouse world created by Jerome Charyn, once of the Bronx, now of Paris.

"Citizen Sidel" is a small book -- less than 220 pages -- but Sidel's a loose cannon who runs everywhere except off the page. He barely keeps ahead of the other characters, who are equally bizarre: the 12-year-old daughter of his running mate, the love of his life who's in bed with the president, and the son of a police officer, once thought dead, who resurrects himself as the protector of an inner-city neighborhood, accompanied by a large rat named Raskolnikov. Sidel himself is a thoroughbred on amphetimines, barely keeping ahead of those who want to see his campaign derailed. He moves in a shadow world of plots and counter-plots that may or may not have a tenuous link in reality.

A lot of "Citizen Sidel" has that feeling of unrealism. Watch Sidel lose a fistfight against a political operative, then give his acceptance speech on national television, see him fly over the streets of New York, looking for a 12-year-old tagger, see him campaign in America's heartland, one voter at a time, without anyone from the media nearby. He tries to rescue a World War II Romanian dictator from an asylum and his running mate's daughter from kidnappers and accuses nearly everybody of secretly working for someone else.

In the end, "Citizen Sidel" reads like an art house movie that seems profound until you walk out of the theater and try to make sense of it.

Finding a new Author is good, finding an Author that has written several dozen books that extend the new find is fantastic. The first work I read by Mr. Jerome Charyn was, "The Black Swan". That particular work was the second volume of his memoirs documenting his youth in the Bronx, and it was great reading. "Citizen Sidel", is a work of fiction that takes place around the Democratic Convention and its aftermath in New York City. The book is irreverent, has razor sharp rapid-fire dialogue, and gives no quarter to any of the topics it harpoons.

Any scandal that has taken place in the political arena is tame in comparison to the variety of activities, up to and including Capital Crimes that this Presidential run includes. There is a hitter stalking one of the Burroughs by the name of Tolstoy. A notorious Rumanian octogenarian is living in luxury in Virginia, as a guest on one of the competing US Agencies, and these are only two of several dozen outrageous characters. A 12 year old who is a speech script doctor, a potential First Lady who loathes her Daughter, as the latter is more popular.

Add to the individuals a FBI that makes Hoover's version seem like a child's game, and then toss in The CIA, The Secret Service, New York City's Finest, Gangs, and self-proclaimed super-heroes, and you begin to get an idea of this tale. While it is said that all humor contains some truth, this book is a great deal of fun to read. Jerome Charyn is a very talented writer with an insightful savage wit. Enjoy!

Charyn's idiosyncratic adventure crosses the headlong rush of a classic noir thriller with the earnest fantasy of a 12 year old kid. The result is delightful, if you're ready to come out and play, but no doubt frustrating for fans of gritty realism. If you enjoyed Martin Amis' Night Train or Paul Auster's New York Trilogy, you should try the Sidel books.

The classic title story of this collection of short fiction, Nightfall, was voted the best science fiction short story of all-time. It is a classic of the field, and a masterpiece of atmosphere. Anyone who calls theirself a science fiction fan and has not read it is merely posing. This book, for most readers, then, is worth picking up for that story alone. That said, despite its classic status, the rest of this collection, though it does have its moments, does not reach the high standards set by the title story. Other winners include the classic and oft-anthologized It's Such A Beautiful Day and the rendering and chilling "Breeds There A Man...?" There are other stories of quality in this book, but, unfortunately, they are not among Asimov's best. Like his contemporary Grand Master, Arthur C. Clarke, as Asimov got further and further into his writing career, though his novels remained excellent, his short stories began to falter: many of them seem infected with an over-eager attempt at cleverness. While this often makes for some amusing stories (Strikebreaker, What If..., What Is This Thing Called Love?), it does not often make for classics. Thus, while this collection is certainly good - and the title story is an absolute must-read - it is not Asimov's best short story collection (try Nine Tomorrows or one of the Robot anthologies for that.) If you are a die-hard Asimov fan, I recommend picking this up; however, if you are a casual reader, or new to the good Doctor, or perhaps just want to read Nightfall, then I suggest you pick up a more wide-ranging collection such as The Complete Stories.

What an incredible book. Filled to the brim with terrific short stories, Asimov completely engrosses you in the lives and situations of the characters in these stories in only 30 pages. Some have twist endings that truly surprise and thrill. Others are good looks at technology and the like in a nutshell, developed too far.
I would absolutely recommend Nightfall & Other stories- Nightfall is the classic about a world who never sees darkness- surrounded by numerous suns, and how it affects its inhabitants. A must read for any science fiction fan- Asimov doesn't disappoint!

In the past century there have been countless anthologies in the field of SF. This one is the paramount. The Grand Master of SF assembeles tales that range from cynical humor to predictions of the future, to just generaly great stories. From the tile story Nightfall to my personal favorite Sally, this book will hold you captivated not just once, but over and over again.

I really can't read this book. The text does not flow like Asimov's books. It reads like something else. It is a littlke too fast paced, with too little dialogue and I think there is not enough reflection on the background and the possibilities.

The basic premise has got something wrong with it. It's not tied in too well to other things.If Asimov would use any of these ideas,he would offer some explanation. Asimov also, by the way,often had some short third person narration interspersed in

his books and this is totally missing.

Robert Silverberg expanded a few Isaac Asimov stories into books and he did it in keeping with Asimov's style. Robert Tiedemann is no Robert Silverberg. If Asimov had been alive, I don't thinmk he would have approved of this, except if he decided not to care

I give it two stars because at least this is a try. Also, I only have this book,not its predecessor.

Tiedemann recently resurfaced with this, his second attempt at new robot mysteries. And again, he's done an impressive job.

Asimov's original robot novels were generally straightforward. While not predictable by any stretch of the imagination, the mysteries themselves were fairly simple. Tiedemann has taken Asimov's "universe" but made the mysteries more complex and expanded the scope of the setting to fully explain political situations, alliances, development of society in settler and spacer worlds...many of the things Asimov himself never fully developed. This all amounts to a fairly complex mystery novel set in Asimov's vision of the future.

The novel is not without problems. One criticism I had of Tiedemann's first novel still holds true - two of the main characters have an extensive past together yet Tiedemann makes no mention of this fact. Some of the ideas in Chimera also come across as a bit far-fetched in the context of the setting that Asimov established.

All-in-all, Chimera is an entertaining read. If you're a fan of Asimov's original robot novels, its definitely worth picking up. If you've not had exposure to the originals, however, start with them.

Sometimes sticking too close to the way something was originally done is a good way to damage a new piece of work. Tiedemann doesn't seem to make that mistake in Chimera. Instead, as in Mirage, he updates the basic material, bringing it more in line with contemporary information about nanotech and AI. He takes what Asimov did and makes it his own.

More than that, though, he's done a thoroughly excellent job of creating fully-fleshed, believable characters, real people with real problems. He places them in a fast-paced thriller plot that flows logically and answers questions both about the action of the story and the larger issues nesting within the Robot universe Asimov created. Rather than do a straight imitation of Asimov's style, he has written his own kind of narrative, matched to the content of his storyline.

The creation of Bogard in Mirage was a masterful twist on the 3-Law scenario. Tiedemann continues to play with the limitations and implicit possibilities in Asimov's original structure in this book.

The Caves of Steel in Chimera are both creepier and more plausible, the psychologies of the various habitues matched against each other in elegant dialogues and plot twists (as in one character's surprise visit to a Spacer party in the open air!). Tiedemann displays a deft hand at depicting the inner realm of the human condition, a trait he displays much more fully in his own original novels.

More! More!

"Just a Note to Say ...: The Perfect Words for Every Occasion" is a wonderful concept, however many situations were omitted and the "notes" are sparse for the occasions presented. More glaringly however, was the misspelling of "congratulations" on page 82. Spelling incorrectly in the introduction to the section ("congradulations"), it was fortunately corrected within the examples given. In an age where spelling checks are typically routine, a book published in 1996 sadly falls short of basic editorial practice. Clarkson Potter Publishing certainly drops the ball.

I have this book myself, and I just purchased a copy for a friend. Much of the information is common sense, but it is great for inspiration. It was a great help when I was filling out our wedding thank-you cards.

At first I thought this might be too simplistic a guide to social and personal notes, then I found myself getting choked up in the chapter on "Writing Notes for Difficult Moments." The author is straightforward, friendly, and sensible, and she blends sensitivity with emotion in just the right mix, facing illness, AIDS, cancer, and impending death with clarity and compassion. She also gives snappy suggestions for graduation, holiday, and congratulatory notes, and devotes additional attention to writing to children and teenagers. The book gives such heartfelt, meaningful examples of short notes that if you keep a copy on your writing desk you need never be at a loss for words again.

After reading the terriffic "Without Reservation", I egarly anticipated getting another detailed view of how this "tribe" became what it is today. Unfortunately, I got a "soft" account of what happened in this author's view and IMO completely whitewashed the story behind the story: how government at all levels engaged in dereliction of duty and gross negligence in allowing this group to gain the recognition and power it has secured.

While the author does an OK good job of linking many of the favorable aspects of the court rulings to the "tribes" generous gifts to the DNC and Bill Clinton, he fails to delve into the corruption and naivite of the State and Federal governments and how this was a direct driver of the final outcome.

In fact, the author whitewashes a fundamental aspect of this "sovergn nation"- whether they acutally qualify as an Indian tribe according to clear Federal criteria on the subject.

If you want a "soft" and relatively "warm" view on the birth of the Foxwoods windfall, one that is short on details and long on political-correctness, you might enjoy this read. If you want a much more compelling and believable account of this situation, I suggest you read Mr. Benedict's "Without Reservation". You'll be glad you did.

This is the book I wish I had written -- but I never would have spent the time and effort on research that the writer did. As a Ledyard-based reporter in the early 1970s, I knew about that part of town referred to as the Indian Reservation, and I'd heard of the only old lady who lived there in a trailer, and her occasional grandchildren. Trouble is, in four years I never had the slightest inclination to write about her or the land or the story behind either. Nonetheless, as the casino developed, I was pleased that someone was beating city hall. In painstaking detail the author tells how it happened, including a good bit of history. It's a serious book, not just a compilation of gossip. An interesting part of Americana. But as Ledyard today tries to deal with all the traffic and tourists, I can't help but remember the hundreds of meetings I sat through where the town fathers agonized over how to attract visitors and to expand the town's economic base. The leader of the Historical Society was sure that restoring the vertical saw mill would do draw crowds. He never could have imagined that the answer could have been found in that trailer on that reservation at the far end of town!

I always wondered how Foxwoods came to be. Now I know thanks to this witty and ironic account, which the Boston Globe says is far more accurate and attentive to the facts than the other book on the topic. Also contains a lot of good insight into gambling, why people gamble, and unlike a lot of non fiction, it doesnt bog you down. Great book!

I read this book because it won the Pulitzer Prize for History in 1983. It is, I believe, the least intersting and most esoteric book I have ever read. It reminded me of my reading of Fin-de-Siecle Vienna, which won a Pulitzer Prize in 1981, and which I long wanted to read and then when I read it I found it a chore to read, and greatly welcomed the last page. The last chapter of Transformation made no sense for me at all, and reading this book's only significance is that I have read another Pulitzer Prize winner in history. I thought I should warn persons who might be overly influenced by the other 3 reviews and might think this would be a great book to read.

I first encountered this book in graduate school, where it was assigned to our class. Many of us debated the merits of the book and concluded it really failed to deliver any type of lasting impression. Yet it won a Pulitzer Prize.

All through the book I kept waiting for Virginia to "transform" as the title indicates it did. While Isaac presnts a lot of detailed information, it never really deliverd a convincing argument. "Stillborn" is one term that comes to mind. In comparison to Edmund S. Morgan's "American Freedom American Slavery" (or vise versa) Isaac book misses the mark. Morgan's work shows a definite transformation in how Virginia became a principal player in the establishment of slavery.

Isaac's book is not a total waste, as it does cover a shorter period of time in greater detail than Morgan, but Morgan remains a master historian while Isaac has more work to do.

As you would expect from a book that captured the Pulitzer Prize in History, this is an outstanding book. The writing is clear and cogent. As the other reviewers stated, it brings Colonial Virginia to life for the reader. It's going a bit far to suggest that it explains Colonial "America," though, since each colony was disparate. The New England experience does not parallel that of Virginia at all, for example. The book's best contribution is the use of non-written sources to bring to life the world of the unliterate, both free and slave.