Dr. Lynn Alexander's recently published book, Women, Work, and Representation, asks why needleworkers represent working women in Victorian fiction and art. She explores the reasons readers do not see female mill workers in literature and art, and why, in an age that prized femininity and domesticity, women were working. Alexander's research and writing took a little more than five years, both in the United States and England.

The simple answers are that the economy was bad, so some families needed more than the male head of the household could provide, and some women had lost their husbands and had to provide for their families.

The Victorian period was an age of men providing for the women, but where there was little or no income in a family where there were marriageable females, there was no dowry and few prospects for a good marriage. Thus the wives and daughters had to work. The only acceptable positions for a female were as governess or needleworker; however, a governess had to be well educated, and many females did not have the necessary qualifications. No one wanted to think that a woman from an upper or middle class family had to work and certainly not in a mill or as a prostitute. Being a needleworker was seen as an extension of femininity and the family; it did not blend the spheres of men and women, thus posing no threat to the men or to the family as it was perceived. Women did work in the mills, but in doing so, they developed muscles and attitudes similar to the men, which made the men feel their way of life was threatened.

Alexander also explores the fact that being a neeleworker was a deadly occupation. The book cites statistics showing the age and cause of death for needleworkers. Consumption, blindness, asthma, and allergies were common, as was death in the mid-twenties from these things. Writers and artists who began to note the long hours, sometimes as much as 72 hours at a time, low pay, and resulting illnesses of the needleworkers slowly triggered the need for reform in conditions of the working class women.

Although the target audience for Women, Work, and Representation is academics and students working with the Victorian novel and art, anyone with an interest in history and women's issues should like this book.

This is an excellent book for those who wish to study the original language, and Anglo-Saxon verse. The editor does not include a lot of distracting material, nor are there deep discussions of the theological, allegorical, sociological, etc etc, implications of the poem.

Instead, what you have is a book which has the original text on the left pages, and glosses on right pages. Not 100% of the words are glossed, such as "and". The glosses are all standardized as nom. singular nouns and inf. verbs. This means that the reader should know, or perhaps will learn from reading, the grammar of the language.

A lot of people seem to know about Beowulf, but have no clue what it is. A lot people also consider Old English to be some quaint "high mode" of english, spoken by Knights in Shining Armor.

Some are "forced" to study the poem, in school. And there are those who want to study the poem, for whateve reason.

This book should be useful to all who are interested, or need to be interested.

Hi! I am a freshman in high school. I too, have suffered through countless reading the required books/poetry for Honors English. Beowulf really got my attention. It is a beautiful poem and the language is mellifluous to read aloud. The composer cut out a lot of fluff that many poets thrith on. It was short and to the point, but had strong themes to leave me spellbound afterwards. It is a beautiful epic poem.

Professor Alexander is quite simply the world's greatest authority on Old English Literature, and this edition of Beowulf brings the poem to life. I am not interested in the audio version - David Rintoul may be very good but all he did was read it. The only things to be praised here are the masterful editing skills or Prof. Alexander. All I can say is he must have gone to Oxford University.

I ran across a reference to Postmodern Pooh about a week ago, and I decided to read Crews' first Pooh satire before reading the latest. What a gas! Crews takes the prevalent methods of literary criticism leading up to the 1960s and apes them with a deft touch. One of my favorite moments was when "C. J. L. Culpepper, D.Litt., Oxon.," after determining the Christic nature of Eeyore, declares that Christopher Robin is a stand-in for God the Father. He proves this simply: "Christopher Robin" is an anagram for "I HOPE CHRIST BORN. R." ("I take this to be a decree in the hortatory imperative, dispatched to the Heavenly Host, urging the speedy fulfillment of the Incarnation and signed 'R' for REX.")

Admittedly, the book does drag at times, but only rarely, and probably due to Crews' too perfect mimicry of the rather dry literary personae being roasted over the flames. Not many books make me laugh out loud on every page -- this is one of them.

This is a brilliant send-up of the pretentious critiques that has masqueraded as literary criticism since pseudo-intellectualism was first invented by which mental-nonentities could parade as our moral superiors. Just read it. Absolutely convincing, and a breath of fresh air. You will love it - unless you are one of the poseurs, of course. But it will still be devastatingly funny.

A remarkably funny, yet substantial introduction to literary criticism through the works of A A Milne

I love travel narratives that take me on slow, relaxing journeys to unusual places. This author takes a journey to find the sources of famous poetic fragment, trying to locate Xanadu. This is a pleasant, slow read, and it was intriguing to find that the one part of this search led her back to a neighborhood of her own childhood.

Travel book that not only details the author's journeys around the world, but also back in time, to find the origin of Coleridge's famous poem about Xanadu. Very interesting and readable, I have read it three or four times now, always with pleasure. Readers who like "The Road to Ubar" (another fabulous travel/detective story) will like the "Way to Xanadu."

I've just started War and Peace.....and already it promises to be as satisfying as Anna Karenina, so I can't wait to really get 'stuck in'. It is incredibly readable, lovely to get lost in, time flies by while you're reading it. His characters are so richly drawn, his ancedotes about each one are filling and often funny. I only wish that a translation by Pevear and Volokhonsky were available as they bring a fresh modern voice to translation (I can't wait to read their translation of Anna K. and 'The Idiot' by Dostoevsky).

So why am I writing a review of W&P if I've just started it? Well, first to share the fun I'm having and encourage others to give this great book a try.....and to invite others who have read the book or are reading it to write to me and share your comments. One of the best things about writing reviews on Amazon.com is that I occasionally hear from other reviewers or readers with comments on my reviews or recommendations of their own.....and I love it.

And I love Tolstoy! I think he's the best writer in the world. Although....quite honestly, the most memorable literary passage I've ever read was found in Dostoevsky's "Crime and Punishment". But you'll have to write to me to find out which one I'm referring to!

Happy reading!

Although my blind urge to read the Great Classics has (thankfully) faded somewhat over the years in favor of reading whatever I damn please, I finally decided it was time to give War and Peace a try. After all, how can anyone who enjoys novels resist the lure of "the greatest novel of all time"? And Tolstoy himself was an unusually interesting man -- not a screwed-up genius but one who seemed to eventually figure it all out. It took me maybe a hundred pages to get into the rhythm of the book and figure out who all those characters with multisyllabic Russian names were. After that, it was totally engrossing and surprisingly easy reading. There's no point giving you a book report on what happens -- you're supposed to read it yourself -- but I do disagree with some of the other reviewers who didn't care for the sections describing Tolstoy's philosophy of history. I found those sections (a very small proportion of the book) fascinating, albeit a change of pace. This is part of what makes the book great. War and Peace is not just a story of what happens to a bunch of made-up people, but a major work of art expressing the wisdom of a great man.

Few novels have the breadth and scope of detail as "War and Peace". This is a novel that took years to write and may take the average reader up to a year to finish. It is well worth the effort.

Tolstoy has successfully mastered the arts of military and romantic literature. Often times when these elements are combined in a novel the author is not particularly strong in both areas. That is certainly not Tolstoy's weakness. Tolstoy's one weakness is his tendency to engage in long-winded narration about his system of philosophy. I've always believed that if the author wants to bring his personal philosophies into a book, they should be woven into the fabric of the work and not kept as separate parts that break up the flow of the story. Fortunately these narrations do little damage to the overall story.

I have read many non-English language books from German, French, Russian, etc. authors that have been translated into English. "War and Peace" was the first and only one of those books which made me want to learn a foreign language. Translated works, no matter how hard the translator tries, can never stay completely true to the original work. Through the translations of Tolstoy's work one gets the sense that he had a command of the Russian language equal to Dickens' or Shakespeare's command of English.

One piece of advice: if you feel that it may take you longer than six months to finish the novel, you may want to keep track of the families on a separate sheet of paper like a family tree. In can get rather confusing with all of the marriages and child births that occur in the course of these family's lives.

Pygmalion is a brilliant success by George Bernard Shaw to modernize the legendary Greek tale of a sculptor who falls in love with his artsitic creation and wishes to bring her to life. The rags-to-riches tale of Eliza Doolittle captivates the reader with its fast paced storyline, and witty dialogue. Shaw fascinates the reader with complicated characters such as Henry Higgins, Doolittle, and Colonel Pickering. Set in England, during a period of sophistication and elegance, Higgins and Pickering were faced with the seemingly impossible task of transforming a filthy flower girl (Eliza) into a beautiful duchess. The outrageous antics that ensue are both humorous and entertaining. Shaw's playful dialogue and timeless plot have been updated to fit the social and cultural standards of our time. For example, Alan Jay Lerner's My Fair Lady is an internationally acclaimed musical adaptation of Shaw's classic play. 1999 brought yet another adaptation of Pygmalion, in the form of the film She's All That, penned by R. Lee Fleming Jr. This teen comedy brings a new twist to the classic characters of Shaw's play. Pygmalion is a quick read and an enjoyable way to spend the day, and the characters in the story will remain with you forever.

This is an enchanting film for which George Bernard Shaw won an Oscar (which I believe he displayed proudly) for best screenplay after adapting the play "Pygmalion." It is true that the movie lacks the grand production values of "My Fair Lady," but it is much closer to the drama that Shaw had in mind. The dialogue is much richer than "My Fair Lady," which still managed to keep much of the language of the play and some of the movie.

Like many of Shaw's plays, it is built around his pet ideas -- here (in a simple form) the notion that class distinctions are not genuine and could be overcome through education. Unlike some of Shaw's plays which read like socialist tracts, this one has very human characters who keep your interest throughout (in contrast to "Major Barabara" which was a rather tedious movie).

For me, Wendy Hiller make a marvelous Eliza Doolittle. Although Leslie Howard is very good (and presumably what Shaw had in mind), it is hard to forget the bluster Rex Harrison -- a great actor himself -- brought to the role of Professor Higgins. Hiller brings a wonderful dignity and pathos to the role of Eliza Doolittle. The rest of the cast is very good and the sets are very authentically set in Edwardian England.

This is definite buy if you like Shaw, theatre in general, good movies from the 30s, or want to see a richer version of "My Fair Lady."

It started out as a play by George Bernard Shaw based on the Greek myth of a man who created a statue and then fell in love with it. The play, which was a spoof on the British upper class, was an immediate success and several movie versions followed. This 1938 version, in black and white, was nominated for four academy awards in 1939 and won an Oscar for best screenplay. Later, it was adapted to the musical hit, "My Fair Lady." The rest, as they say, is history. But Pygmalion should certainly not be forgotten.

The cast is excellent. Leslie Howard is perfect as Henry Higgins, the professor of dialects who transforms a flower girl into a lady. And Wendy Hiller is sensational as Eliza Doolittle. There's a certain regal freshness and her British authenticity comes across beautifully. Even though "the rain in Spain" is spoken, rather than sung, it still keeps the same quality. And there is music throughout as background, lively original music created especially for the film. The supporting cast was excellent too. I particularly loved the performance by Wilfrid Larson as Eliza's father. The film moved fast and kept me totally captivated. The costumes were wonderful and the timing for the comedic moments perfect. I found myself laughing out loud in places and smiling to myself throughout. Certainly, this film has stood the test of time and even though it will always be compared to the musical we all know and love, I must say that Pygmalion can definitely stand on its own. Give yourself a treat and check it out. Highly recommended.

The selection of poems in this anthology, although it includes many of the great poems of English literature, is very poor. About a third of the book is devoted to relatively mediocre 20th century poetry, written by poets practically unknown now, who will be completely forgotten 50 years from now. The book could be much lighter and hopefully less expensive if it included fewer of these poems, which are not really appropriate in a book intended as a survey of English poetry (that is, poetry in English, of course). There must be better anthologies.

Another annoying thing is that the editors have given glosses to explain the simplest concepts and terms. These glosses interrupt one's reading of a poem, and for people who do not know the words explained, a dictionary would be much more useful.

It's hard to assign an appropriate number of stars to a book like this, since of course many of the poems are great ones. However, as an anthology of poetry this book fails in many respects.

First of all, nearly half of the book consists of relatively mediocre 20th century poetry. The book could be cut in two at the middle, and the first half sold as a meagre anthology of poetry up to the 20th century, and the second as a comprehensive collection of 20 century poems. The 20th century is one of the worst in terms of the poetry it gave to the world. Many of the poets in the second half are practically unknown now, and will have been entirely forgotten fifty years from now. Although the book dutifully includes many of the great poems of English literature and is therefore not entirely useless, the selection is otherwise a very curious one for a book intended as a general survey of English poetry. A large percentage of the poems in this book could be cut out and it would be as good as it is now, only a great deal lighter and hopefully cheaper.

Another irritating thing is the footnotes. The editors seem to have assumed that they need to define and explain the simplest terms and concepts. For example, on page 215, they give a gloss for the word "clod," defining it as "Lumps of earth or clay." That's all very well, but "clod," a common English word, does not require explanation. It's distracting to the reader that knows it to have his attention called to the footnote. One's reading of the poem is thereby interrupted. Anyone who does not know the meaning of "clod" could perfectly well turn to a dictionary.

Are you remotely interested in poetry then you should buy The Norton Anthology of Poetry by Margaret Ferguson(Editor), et al. This book is a wonderfull presentation into world of poetry and presents a wast array of poets, i.e., everyhting Anna Laeitta Barbauld to William Shakespeare. Being a fan of the older style of poetry, e.g., William Shakespeare, John Milton and Geofrey Chaucer, I was happy to see that these parts had the space that they righly deserve. The index is very well developed and it was an excellent idea to pu each poem under the name of poet since otherwise finding a particular poem would have ben almost impossible. The font selected is very easy to read. The only downside is the quality of the paper; being almost 2000 pages long in paperback the quality of the paper is so-so and next time I will buy it in hardcover.

On the plus side, this book contains loads of stuff by Lewis Carroll as well as the two Alice books. Not much is of the same quality, but quite a lot is well worth having. However, be aware that the title is misleading. Quite a lot that Lewis Carroll wrote is not here, as can be seen by doing a search for books by "Carroll, Lewis" and comparing that with the contents. It includes some material that appeared under his real name or pseudonyms other than Lewis Carroll, but few will grumble at that. Although all the wonderful illustrations by Tenniel for the Alice books are here (albeit not always clearly reproduced), no other illustrations are included. For some works, such as The Hunting of the Snark, the illustrations commissioned by Carroll are excellent and their omission is a serious drawback. However, for all lovers of the Alice books who want to read more by the author, this is a fair and inexpensive starting point.

All of Lewis Carroll's books are great. And finaly you can have all of them together in one big book. A must have for everybody!

This book would normally get a "10" for providing us with the shorter poems of Edmund Spenser, but it is marred by overediting. The collective ego of Yale comes through on almost every page. I can see one footnote that begins, "There is irony here." I ask, is there any poem without irony? Why point it out? A footnote should be providing the student with factual information, references to allusions, etc., and not providing interpretation. So, buy the book; Spenser is so great a poet that philosophy textbooks sometimes devote pages to him; but ignore the editing.

If you are in any way responsible academically for Spenser's shorter works, this is the book. Editing, of course, refers to how the text of the poems is managed with regard to conflicts in early editions, etc. Here, decisions on text are made consistently and all changes vs. early texts are listed in the Appendices. Also useful, even though it's now more than 12 years out of date, is the annotated bibliography, which provides a good starting point for additional literary research.

This is a great edition of the prologue, the illustrations really accent the story very well.