This is a wonderful revisionary view of a bunch of authors who put me to sleep in high school. Peyser pulls the pants down on the "old grey ladies" of American literature. Someone had to do it (I guess) and I'm glad it was him and not me, but I'm also glad to have this rather strange and wondrous book.

Up until now, Peyser has been known mostly for his uproarious commentaries on NPR, and for his notorious flipping off of Cokie Roberts on the old David Brinkley show. (He has never been invited back.) I have to admit that when I first saw this book I just assumed it was another of his spoofs, but it turns out that Peyser is a bona fide literary critic. There is some very funny stuff about the vastly overrated Charlotte Perkins Gilman--Peyser cuts the old trog down to size--but mostly this is very smart and very down-to-earth cultural criticism. We have to be grateful for this book, but I for one cannot help but feel a little sad, too, since it would seem that with its publication P. has shed his youthful guise of hilarity, and that he has now stepped into full manhood, revealing what most of us have always suspected underlay the shimmering surface of his speech: knowledge of what Matt Arnold named "the eternal note of sadness."

You know, this is not the sort of book I would normally read. But there it was, suddenly, on the coffee table one night. How it got there I have no idea. Just curious, I began to leaf through the pages, and the words began to resonate with me. Unable to sleep, I read it through in one sitting by candlelight. The next morning, I began to look at things around me differently. First, I removed several unessential appliances from the house in an effort to simplify my existence. Then it became time to de-clutter and I threw out several items I realized I had no more use for. Then, and this all seemed so logical in light of the things I'd read, I divorced the wife and sent her on her why. Sure, she cried a bit, but I knew I was doing the right thing. And I've never regretted it. This is, indeed, one of the best books I've read all year.

Every Christmas Eve, I set aside a few minutes to listen to my CD of Dylan reading "A Child's Christmas" in Wales, placing the special emphasis only he can on the frustrated Mr. Prothero trying to put out a fire in his house, the neighborhood St. Bernards who bellow "Excelsior!" over the town, and the churchgoers who, with taproom noses, go scooping over the ice. The older I get, the more I need this little piece. As friends and family are, for one reason or another, lost with the passing years, it gets harder and harder to laugh, even at Christmas, but Dylan Thomas gives me a good giggle every time.

Growing up, my father had a copy of the original vinyl recording of this from the 1950's. Every Christmas it came out and was played, and now I can't think of Christmas without it. After being unavailable for decades, I'm delighted to see this record once again available. Few people know that Dylan Thomas gained fame in his lifetime as a radio personality, and the dry, droll voice of his takes his fantastic prose and breathes a life into it that the simple words themselves cannot demonstrate. A classic, recommended to all.

Dylan Thomas has, well, how can I put it - a way with words. This is a delightful and extremely droll prose poem, without which Christmas just wouldn't be the same for me. And the author's reading voice is nothing short of magnificent.

Hey everyone! Don't even bother paying ANY attention to the ...peter kline spouted in his horrendous review of The Spanish Tragedy. Shakespeare wrote Kyd's masterpiece? Give me a break! And I suppose you're also going to say that Shakespeare secretly wrote Marlowe's plays as well, right? Kudos to Mr. Richard for being a well-informed reader of the English Classics! And as for Mr. Kline, you should do some research ...

J.R. Mulryne's edition of *The Spanish Tragedy* is without a doubt the best that may at present be bought: informative, helpful, intelligent and accurate in introducing the text, presenting it, and glossing difficult words and phrases where necessary. The play is among the most exciting and artistic of its period. Kyd writes, and constructs his plot, with a level of skill comparable to that of Shakespeare, who was much influenced by *The Spanish Tragedy*, particularly in writing *Hamlet*, which is possibly yet "richer", but undoubtedly less clear and focused. Kyd shows us in an extremely sophisticated way the workings of revenge, both at an earthly and at a supernatural level. From the beginning the audience knows, in a way that the characters do not, that the supernatural world will insist on revenge. The pain of those who suffer injustice here on earth and clamour for revenge is painful to behold. Ultimately, however, in a baffling way, evildoers are punished: Hieronimo, the main character, manages to take matters into his own hands after exhausting all other possibilities, and thus ironically enacts the wishes of the higher powers. The FORM of Hieronimo's revenge is extraordinarily interesting: under the cloak of art - of a theatrical plot - he manages to kill his evil opponents quite easily. The tension between "art" and "life" is thus handled by Kyd in a very innovative fashion which still shocks modern spectators and readers. The role of language, too, is called into question: much of the play demonstrates that in real life finally action does speak louder than words, which often do not make their point or simply get ignored. Any reader who wants to get a notion of the superb quality of plays written by Shakespeare's contemporaries is certain to admire and enjoy this striking work of art. - Joost Daalder, Professor of English, Flinders University, South Australia

I reviewed this play a year ago; my purpose here is only to correct some of the astonishing misinformations given by Mr. Kline for fear that some students or others interested in Kyd might be misled.

First of all, there is no evidence that Shakespeare wrote a word of this. The play was ascribed to Kyd by Thomas Heywood in 1612, when Shakespeare was still living. The Spanish Tragedy is not mentioned in Francis Meres's list of Shakespeare's plays made in 1598; and at the very latest The Spanish Tragedy was in existence by 1592, when it was published, and performed as an old play by Henslowe. And how anyone who has read Shakespeare could possibly think the style of The Spanish Tragedy is his is beyond me; both Kyd and Shakespeare possess very distinctive styles, to neither's demerit.

The existence of the earlier version of Hamlet is not doubted. It is mentioned by Henslowe in 1594 as an old play, and alluded to by Thomas Nashe in 1589 and by Thomas Lodge in 1598 (I think). Nashe links the old Hamlet to Thomas Kyd. The fact that its text did not survive is not extraordinary; most plays in the Elizabethan period have been lost as well. The date of Shakespeare's Hamlet is almost universally accepted to be 1600 or 1601.

It is incredibly absurd to even suggest that Henry V may have been written at the same time as TST. Because of a reference to the Earl of Essex's expedition to Ireland, Henry V can be securely dated to the spring or summer of 1599. The Spanish Tragedy was at least 7 years old by then, and probably 12.

I agree that the Spanish Tragedy is worthy of frequent theatrical performance. Just don't pass it off under the mock-guise of Shakespeare.

Costain does a great job with this overview of the first named Edwards to lord it over the English throne. From the fierce but just Edward I ("Hammer of the Scots") to the effete and ineffectual Edward II to the long-reigning and erratic Edward III, the author sustains our interest with anecdotes and thorough reporting of the times. Costain has a delightful habit of suddenly focusing on a historical figure one doesn't generally hear about and then presenting the reader with yet another biography to get excited about. Well done, well written. well read.

This is one of a quartet that Costain wrote describing the monarchs and key events in European history from William the Conqueror to the War of the Roses. The history is accurate. It is always clear where Costain is speculating and where he is drawing on traditional sources, such as the various chronicles of the era. However, he weaves them together so smoothly that the reader needs concern her/himself with documentation only when it pleases. Costain is first and foremost a good story teller and an elegant writer.

Costain combines an eye for detail and accuracy in a very readable style

Incredible. Everything you've ever wanted from a band that time forgot, but never get. Really well written, with the ring of truth and a great sense of humor. Some great cold war stuff too. Maybe this is what Johnny Rotten was refering to when he talked about going under the Berlin Wall. Such a strange, interesting story, that now I've read the book, listened to the CDs over and over, even saw one of the guys walking around NYC with a baseball cap on and still have a hard time believing all this really happened. But right there in the book is a photo of a tonsured Dave Day comparing notes with a spit-curled Bill Haley; and there's even a German poster advertising, in clockwise order, an album from The Who, Hums of The Loving Spoonful, Fresh Cream, and lo and behold, black monk time.

After reading this book and listening to the CD of the same name, readers/listeners will say "The Velvet who?" This is rock and roll at its strangest, most twisted and rebellious. Mr. Shaw's story borders on the fantastic, but it really happened! Five GIs shaving their heads and dressing in black and pumping out punk music a decade before the Sex Pistols, the Clash et al. Who woulda thunk it? This is truly an essential addition to any rock musicologists library.

Eddie Shaw's book, BLACK MONK TIME, is an in-depth look at the mutation of a standard 60s rock n roll group into the first punk band. As bassist for the Monks, he is able to give readers an inside look at the dynamics of a working rock n roll group. His prose really starts to catch fire, appropriately enough, when the band begins to undergo radical changes; both musically and satorially. Fans of the Velvet Underground to the Sex Pistols should give both the book and the Monks sole album (entitled BLACK MONK TIME also) a whirl.

This is one of the best biographies ever written. A wonderful piece about an interesting man.

Take a fascinating subject-- Edward Bennett Williams. Add a highly-skilled author with remarkably deep interviewing and archival research skills-- Evan Thomas. Put in a lot of hard work. And presto-- you have Thomas' "The Man To See," one of the most thorough biographies ever written (I have read many hundreds).

Edward Bennett Williams was one of the most dynamic men of the 20th Century-- a great figure of destiny whose life would have seemed emptier had not Evan Thomas been his biographer. EBW was a self-made man in the days where one could still achieve that accolade. He was no spoiled yuppie of family money. Bright, hard-working, forward-thinking, compassionate and disciplined-- and a wonderful rogue!-- this was Edward Bennett Williams. Warts and all, Evan Thomas presents the larger-than-life lawyer who pioneered criminal law practice in postwar America, bringing the constitution into the 20th Century. He sought power for the purpose of doing good, after doing well. Thomas interviewed practically every living person with whom EBW had a conversation or situation.

I am re-reading "The Man to See" for the fourth time in ten years. It remains fresh and fun. What a brilliant book!

This is one of the best biographies I have ever read. It is a great story about a great man. I read a lot of biographies and I can tell when the author is fauning over his subject - just read some of Robert Slater's books on Jack Welch. Thomas book did none of that. Thomas made you feel that he was giving an accurate and true account of Williams life. Of couse Thomas was helped by selecting a subject that was larger than life, a one of a kind person both in legal talent and raw personality. This book is right up there with "Vince", Michael O'Brien's biography of Vince Lombardi. Interestingly, Lomardi and Williams were very much alike - both very religious yet profane, and above the rest of their competitors in their chosen fields. They were also both like to drink, were emotional and quick to say exactly what they thought or felt about something. I recommend this book to anyone who likes to read biographies about great men.

I used the 23rd edition of Stobo for my internal medicine rotation as a 3rd year medical student and also as a quick reference for several other rotations. I think it is the best mid-size medicine text I have seen. The content is broken down into bite-size chunks that are easy to read in one sitting--the short chapters make it easier to retain the material. Each section begins with an introductory chapter that gives a concise overview of the approach to take when evaluating a problem with a particular organ-system. Each chapter also ends with a list of summary points that are very helpful. Excellent tables are easy to reference. The actual information contained in the book is in more than enough depth for MS3 level, and the text emphasizes pathophysiology in many chapters, which helped me learn to integrate what I had learned in basic sciences and apply it to seeing patients in the clinical setting. The last section also has some good summary chapters for things that fall outside the realm of each organ-system section. This is a truly outstanding book. I highly recommend it, and I can't wait for the next edition.

Easy to read, contains pertinent info in a concise fashion. Great to study from, easily read during a clerkship.

I started my 3rd year medicine rotation with Appleton and Lange's Current Medical Diagnosis and Therapy but soon found this book to be more appropriate. It clearly and concisely explained pathophysiology of disease as well as clinical aspects, such as presentation, diagnosis and treatment. I also really enjoyed how each organ system began with a general approach to the patient. I am now using this books counterpart for my surgery rotation.

When I ordered the Encyclopedia, I resigned myself to slugging through mountains of information and end up "What did that say again?"

Well, I am pleased to say that there was the mountain of information and more often than not I knew what it was saying. The definitions in were to the point, crisp and relevant to the times. Rev. P. Stravinskas had the insight to include information an ordinary Catholic needed at 7PM Sunday in a mad rush to complete an assignment.

Where the encyclopedia lost me were in some definitions that were necessarily lengthy. Obviously, some white space could have saved me time in re-reading the whole passage. But, with the value of the information included, I believe the Encyclopedia is an excellent resource for those of us who are not scholars in the catechism of the Catholic Church.

Those who know Fr. Stravinskas know that he likes to keep things short and to the point, so that the average person can understand what he's teaching without getting lost in detail. On another note, Our Sunday Visitor has a reputation for printing only the best quality of Catholic books. This collaboration brings out the best traits of both.

It is faithful to the Church's basic teaching since the Second Vatican Council, it fits into one large volume using a print size that will not strain your eyes, it is wonderfully organized to cover a wide variety of topics relevant to the Catholic faith, and its entries are informative while being written at a level the average Catholic can understand.

For these reasons, this is simply one of the best modern Catholic Encyclopedias on the market. Every Catholic family and college student who is interested in their faith should own one.

If you want to know what the Catholic Church teaches this is a great reference book. Father Stravinskas teaches what the Church teaches, and not just his own personal opinion. I'd recommend anything he wrote. It's wonderful to know you won't be misled. Nice book for dipping into, too!

Solzhenitsyn's three-volume record (although I read only the first) is deeply moving for the description of its intensity. Having won the author a Nobel prize for Literature, I half expected some unapproachably haughty Kunderesque crypto-novel, but nothing could be farther from the truth. Archipelag Gulag is the 'island chain' of the concentration camps that streched throughout the most remote and uninhabitable regions of the Soviet Union. Through his own eyes, and those of 227 fellow survivors, he relates in a deeply sarcastic yet sympathetic way the movement and experience of the individual through the system with such beauty and so completely that one feels one can almost begin to understand. One suspects that his sense for black humor must have helped him survive. I was relieved not to find here any simpering gushy 'forgiveness' of his opressors-- Solzhenitsyn knows them and understands how they were able to exact such terror, and he fully holds them accountable.

I would most emphatically persuade you to read this.

What ever faults "Gulag Archipelago" may have, it is a monumental and important work. For anyone who does not know the meaning of the title, "Gulag" is the Russian word for prison, and an archipelago is, of course, a chain of islands. The idea behind this is that the Soviet concentration camp system under Lenin and Stalin were like an island of prisons spread all over the Soviet Union.

The content of "Gulag Archipelago" is quite extraordinary. Solzhenitsyn includes countless anecdotes of prisoners and their families in various phases of arrest, interrogation, imprisonment, slave labor, death, or release. He buttresses these stories with statistics, and with his own personal narrative of his years in the Gulag. The information in this book is simply staggering, not only for the cruelty and evil it describes but also the folly. The Soviet government murdered indiscriminately across all lines of race, class, and gender. In many cases, it murdered the most brilliant and productive members of its society--the very people who could have built it into something great.

Many people take umbrage with Solzhenitsyn's style, which involves a lot of ranting and run-on footnotes. Personally, I find his narrative interesting and invigorating. Solzhenitsyn's narrative is vigorous, untrammeled and loaded with sarcasm. While many find this gimmicky or uncultured, it helped buoy me through the unbearable sadness of the book's subject matter.

Obviously this book isn't for everybody and it requires a considerable degree of fortitude to get through it. But I think it is essential in all our lives to read this book or one similar to it.

This is Solzhenitsyn's massive indictment of the former Soviet Union's system of justice as told from the author's personal experiences and from the oral and written accounts of survivors and others familiar with many of the incidents related in the book. While reading "The Gulag Archipelago" I had to keep reminding myself that this is not the product of the author's imagination but that of events that really happened. Solzhenitzyn writes with a poisoned pen steeped in anger and bitterness, albeit with God guiding his hand. Stalin's system, born under Lenin, resulted in the deaths of millions of patriotic Soviet citizens, many of them loyal Communists and earlier supporters of Lenin, and many of whom were directly involved in the events leading to the overthrow of the tsarist regime. Many of the accusers (as the government prosecutors were called in the Lenin era), interrogators, prison officials, and even judges were themselves later swept up under Stalin.

It was Article 58 of the broad-sweeping Soviet Criminal Code that resulted in the execution or imprisonment of the millions whom Stalin called counterrevolutionaries. Article 58 included acts ranging from crimes against the state (e.g. a prisoner weakened from illness or malnutrition could be shot for being unable to work), to consorting with foreigners to economic sabotage, called "wrecking." Examples of wrecking included a peasant's making a bad decision that resulted in crop failure or a factory employee's machine accidentally catching on fire.

Aptly referred to by Solzhenitsyn as the Soviet Union's "sewerage disposal system," some of the horrifying methods utilized by the Stalin regime to rid itself of "undesirables" include those of a suspect being arrested while undergoing surgery for repair of an ulcer, men and women under interrogation being beaten and tortured and deprived of sleep for days on end, camp internees' dying from being deprived of food and water, and contracting typhus and other diseases from massive overcrowding and unsanitary conditions. Prisoners, denied bathroom facilities or even buckets, were forced to lay in their own urine and excrement or to eat their meager rations from unwashed pails which previously contained coal or human waste. Solzhenitsyn recounts the bizarre but true history of a man, mistakenly believing he was Tsar Mikhail (the successor to Nicholas II), who was given a long prison sentence for having composed and then having read a proclamation to the Soviet citizenry promising better times under his own reign. Most sickening of all, at least to me, were those Russian soldiers who became German POWs and who were imprisoned after the allied victory by their own government for allegedly humiliating their motherland by failing to elude their German captors.

Considering the millions who disappeared during the Stalin regime, it is amazing that there was anyone left, especially someone as gifted a writer as Solzhenitsyn, to chronicle these horrors.

Reporters have been known, now and then, to play fast and loose with the facts to entertain their readers or elevate themselves. This phenomenon is not limited to our own age. For proof, look no further than Lowell Thomas' fanciful volume, With Lawrence in Arabia. In 1917, Thomas was a 25-year-old part-time instructor at Princeton, a "fledgling showman from Ohio who had knocked about North America in search of fame, fortune and adventure," according to historian David Fromkin (A Peace to End All Peace). Thomas then raised enough money to travel to Britain and the Middle East front as a World War I cameraman. With his coverage began the Lawrence of Arabia myth.

Eight copies of Seven Pillars of Wisdom were published by Oxford in 1922 (six still exist). The first limited edition was followed in 1926 with the private publication of 211 copies of the book. In 1935 another limited run was published. But the same year, Seven Pillars was reprinted at least four more times. Now, there have probably been dozens, if not hundreds of printings.

This work assured T. E. Lawrence a place in history as 'Lawrence of Arabia'. It is a military history, colorful epic and lyrical exploration of Lawrence's mind.

Nevertheless, it is largely fiction. Fromkin writes that when poet and scholar Robert Graves proposed to describe the liberation of Damascus in a biography of Lawrence, the subject himself warned Graves, "I was on thin ice when I wrote the Damascus chapter...."

A onetime junior officer in the Cairo Arab Bureau, Lawrence admitted that Seven Pillars of Wisdom included a false tale of Arab bravery to aggrandize the followers of Sharif Hussein of Mecca and his son Feisal. Indeed, as early as 1818, reputable newsmen reported that the Australian Light Horse division liberated Damascus from Ottoman control, not Feisal's Arab troops, who marched in afterwards, for show.

By 1921, Fromkin writes, Winston Churchill was in charge of Britain's Arab policy in Mesopotamia and tapped John Evelyn Shuckburgh to head a new Middle East department and Foreign Office man Hubert Winthrop Young to assist him. They arranged transport and supplies for Feisal's Arab army, earning hearty endorsement from Churchill's Masterson Smith committee, which simultaneously took grave exception to T.E. Lawrence as a proposed Arab affairs adviser. The committee considered Lawrence "not the kind of man fit to easily fit into any official machine."

Fromkin reports that Lawrence was frequently insubordinate, went over his superiors and in 1920 publicly disparaged Britain's Arab policy in the London Sunday Times as being "worse than the Turkish system." He also accused Britain of killing "a yearly average of 100 Arabs to maintain peace." This was of course untrue.

Efraim and Inari Karsh write, in Empires of the Sand, that Lawrence's Damascus victory was "less heroic" than he pretended. Feisal was "engaged in an unabashed exercise in duplicity and none knew this better than Lawrence, who whole heartedly endorsed this illicit adventure and kept most of its contours hidden from his own superiors." Yet Lawrence basked in the limelight Thomas created in London, attending at least five of the showman journalist's lectures.

As an unfortunate result of Lawrence's subterfuge, he had a large hand in shaping the modern Middle East.

Bad enough, we suffer to this day the consequences of Lawrence's fabrications.

Worse, a new generation of readers seems to accept as gospel the Lawrence of Arabia myth that stemmed from Lowell Thomas' hype and Lawrence's own Seven Pillars of Wisdom. While few seem to know it, this was long ago debunked. Those who want to know what really happened should at minimum also consult Fromkin's A Peace to End All Peace and the Karsh's Empires of the Sand. Alyssa A. Lappen

Those who enjoyed David Lean's magnificent "Lawrence of Arabia" and picked this book up wanting to gain a deeper insight into T E Lawrence will be sorely disappointed if they expected to see the film reflected clearly in the book. True, the main incidents in the film are there in the book, albeit in a totally different context: you begin to realise how freely Robert Bolt (and presumably Lean himself) adapted Lawrence's account to make the film hang together more dramatically.

Many of the previous reviewers have commented that the book is a rewarding if demanding read, that it doesn't really "get going" until about 100 pages in, and that the constant shifts of scene and entrances and exits of characters are sometimes difficult to follow. All that is true - a friend of mine advised that Lawrence is easier to read about than to read. But I felt that choppy nature of the narrative was inevitable when one considers the type of warfare Lawrence describes: hit-and-run guerilla action undertaken by (often mutually antagonistic) Bedouin tribes. Just as Lawrence's raiding parties would emerge at unexpected places out of the desert, so the reader must be prepared for the text to jump from location to location, event to event, and must I suppose be prepared for much of the text (particularly the first 100 pages) to be devoted to how Lawrence managed to muster support both from the Arabs and from the British.

Parts of the book will remain with me for a long time - for example - Lawrence's descriptions of how he dug his camel out of the snow, the descriptions of the Bedouins' eating habits, the non-romantic description of life in the desert (defecating camels, infestations of lice and so on). However, what does come over is Lawrence as a tortured soul: he both loves and despises the Bedouin; professes that he knew from the start that the British (and therefore he himself) were merely using the Arabs against the Turks and would not honour their promises at the end of the War; is both proud (particularly of Allenby) and ashamed of the British; and is both spiritually and physically attracted to the Bedouin men, yet embarrassed by this.

It helps to have even a superficial knowledge of the Middle East campaigns in World War One: I felt that the danger of not having that overview is that one would tend to think that Lawrence's campaign was the pivotal factor in those campaigns rather than a contributory one (Allenby's campaigns are referred to only obliquely by Lawrence, even though in the later stages of the book he does emphasise the supportive role he was playing). Fair enough, as Lawrence was not writing a general history of the campaigns, but I feel (as my friend advised) that reading about Lawrence now that I have read him would be interesting.

Absolutely fascinating account of the Arab Revolt of World War I, and of the Mind of one of its orchestrators (that being TE Lawrence). I don't know much about WWI or II history but I'd recommend this as a great place to start. It has all the elements of a great war story -- strategies, battles, troop movements, intra-battling amongst Arab tribes, Arab history and culture, plus Lawrence's inner conflict about his knowledge that the Brits were merely using the Arabs as a pawn in the greater scheme of WWI. The relevance to modern times is staggering -- if we had not made the horrible mistakes we did then (not giving the Arabs the indepence they worked so hard for), the world would certainly be a better place today. Also, this book is beautifully written and contains absolutely wonderful descriptions of the Arabian terrain. My only criticism is that Lawrence tends sometimes to get a little too abstract and pontifical, but that's okay. Excellent work of literature in the form of a non-fiction memoir.