This book, as a blend of the contemporary subdivisions of anthropology, psychology, and religion, suffers greatly from an all too common error for such trans-disciplinary writings. Simply put, the author may know his anthropology (and I'm not even sure about that, not being an anthropologist myself), but has only a rudimentary grasp of psychology and certain Eastern religions. The end result is something like what might happen if an electronics expert with only a basic knowledge of metallurgy and ship-building attempted to build a modern battleship. The ship simply won't float. His frequent use of Jungian concepts to support his thesis ignores the fact that Jungian psychology is all but dead and buried (it may make for interesting reading, but has been experimentally and pragmatically supplanted by many other, more viable, theoretical approaches in psychology). His understanding of Eastern practices like Zen Buddhism and yoga is sadly misinformed--He may have studied yoga for a few years, and dabbled in Zen, but his descriptions of the goal of these approaches, the nature of enlightenment, and their supposed dangers clearly indicate that he didn't progress much in his practice (and his equation of Zen consciousness with the rational formulations and pseudo-objective detachments of the scientist is laughable). No historical account of the shaman is presented in the book either. I was originally attracted to this book by Joseph Campbell's praise of it as an excellent introductory text for shamansism. Unfortunately, its abuses of credible psychology and the nature of Eastern religions like Zen Buddhism make it a harmful exercise in fantasy.

Having read it some time ago, it is with extreme pleasure that I make use of this oportunity to review such a broad-spanning, extensively researched book. I recommend it to all of those which have interests in the subject of Shamanism or as an, extremely enticing and didactic, first book on the matter. I have to thank Stephen Larsen for enabling me to write that, if properly undertaken, "The Shaman's Doorway: Opening Imagination to Power and Myth" may become a traveled personal path, bringing its' reader to the gateway of a spiritual tomorrow.

There is a bit of interesting information in this book (calculating the lifetime value of a customer), however it tends to be a bit simplistic. I would be surprised if the author uses this book in advising senior executives of larger companies as advertised. There is a very basic set of common sense good ideas, but it's not much of a cookbook for those interested in working on significant customer satisfaction problems.

This book gives a nice and simplistic view of customer loyalty. The book could serve as a start for a small scale customer loyalty program. Unfortunately the book is somewhat artificially practical. Implementing a program needs a lot more than a sample letter to request benchmarking. You may came up with new ideas and enthusiasm to begin your own program, but the provided examples don't take you too far. This is a good book if you want to get a brief overview of customer retention and if you want to identify where to start. If you are looking for a more advanced wisdom, please get something else.

I'm not surprised to find that in three years this book has been ignored. Would that I had done so!

This is nothing more than an inventory. Ms. Altner does nothing to educate, enlighten or entertain. True, she has accumulated a great many books, but this is really just a reading list, her reading list!

I'd advise you to take a walk down to your local bookstore to get the same information. At least then you could say you got some exercise and fresh air. Or, if it's raining, stay on this site and browse for yourself.

I had no idea there was such a variety of vampire inspired novels and short stories. I was especially happy to find several novels with romance themes.

I hate this book immensely, and it doesn't dominate whatsoever

I first read this book several years ago when it was on the local school reading list. I found it was a beautiful book that stirred the imagination. It's about a fifteen year old girl who becomes enchanted with an old man's garden and who soon finds herself linked to a dangerous teen who wants the man's land for his own family, to build a garage if I remember rightly. As Kitty and the teen continue to run into each other, they begin to find out that maybe they're just two sides of the same coin.

Thanks to this book, it will probably be a long time before Bernstein can really be apprediated for what he was: a musician. One could read a generous portion of this book and never know that Bernstein was a musician, so obsessive is Peyser's interest in his personal life. Bernstein was not perfect; sure, it's the easiest thing in the world to smear and smear until biography becomes gossip. You can pick apart Bernstein's sex life, his politics, his manners, or whatever you please. But that was not what Bernstein was about. What must be remembered - and what Ms. Peyser seems to forget in the course of this book - is that Bernstein was above all a musician, and one of the greatest in history. Sure, Peyser can write all she likes about how Bernstein's personal life, and some of it (all to rarely) is even interesting. But in the final analysis, Peyser royally misses the point. The question is not "How much dirt can we get on this guy?", but "What was it that made him, in spite of all his obvious faults, such a powerful and good presence in his time?"

This is the one question you will never hear Peyser answer, nor any other Bernstein biographer for that matter. There is nothing worth knowing in this book that one would not know from hearing Bernstein's conducting and compostitions, from seeing his "Young People's Concerts' and 1973 Norton Lectures, or from reading his "The Joy of Music". This is the real Bernstein, and is an eloquent testimony on Bernstein's behalf that the efforts of all the gossip-columnist biographers like Peyser are rendered irrelevant in light of Bernstein's extrordinary artistry, and his unparalleled ability and desire to communicate.

He lives on in spite of all the Joan Peysers in the world, and let us hope to God that he continues to do so.

This book is one big gossip column about Bernstein 1) being bi-sexual or 2) Bernsteins apparent motivation to constantly undermind other people and turn the focus of anything to himself. Bernstein certianly had an ego, but this book is simply not accurate. In the introduction the author says, "The crevices of character have to e explored as fully as the peaks of achievements to understand...." She certianly explored the "crevices." Instead of spending $18 on this go buy the National Enquirer.

While this much maligned biography may indeed dwell a little too much on Bernstein's personal life (how many times do we really need to be told he was gay? this gets tiresome after awhile...) Peyser does include a wealth of competently researched background on the life of this most American of musicians. If you aren't offended by the cheap and trashy (but rarely explicit) parts, it's worth a read. Keep your nose in joint and take this biography for what it is and you'll probably learn a few things!

Overall, Royal Bride is a pleasant enough Regency Period story, possessing a fairy tale quality that will appeal to many readers. However, those who prefer more depth to their romance reading may wish to look elsewhere.

Royal Bride wasn't a bad read so much as a dissatisfying one. It was a good book that could have been great if only the author had taken the story and heroine to the places they begged to go. Unfortunately, neither the characters nor the plot quite lived up to their potential.

Many readers found the beginning characterization of Charity Beaufort as a 'girl' distasteful because it hinted at pedophilia. However, in defense of poor Gus, who, at twenty-seven, can hardly be considered "old", it must be remembered that at that time in history, sons and daughters of the aristocracy were expected to improve the family fortunes through marriage at a much younger age. It wasn't unheard of for the daughters to be married off as young as thirteen or fourteen years of age -- a practice that existed even as late as the 18th century! To be fair, a female at seventeen is considered a young woman not a child, regardless of her height or bra size!

It was the author's failure to fully realize Charity's character that left a bad taste in this reader's mind. Charity seemed to be a mere bystander rather than an active participant. If she had been allowed to flourish as a woman later on, readers would have been more willing to overlook the age difference presented in the beginning. Unfortunately, too much effort was placed on establishing Charity's innocence and girlish personae in the first part of the story; not enough was focused on her transformation into womanhood in the second. Charity just didn't DO enough in this story to justify, to the reader's satisfaction, her growth from "girl" to woman.

"Royal Bride" fails on several other fronts. First, the author chose to tell her story from a kind of passive point of view. The characters Do and Say a lot, but the thoughts and emotions of the hero and heroine are never really explored. Introspection - when characters contemplate their own thoughts and feelings - is held to a minimum here which keeps the reader from connecting with them on an emotional level. Connecting emotionally with the hero and heroine is the lifeblood of the romance novel.

Second, the obstacles that confronted Augustus as he struggled with the intrigues of court were overcome almost as soon as they were introduced to the plot. Gus foiled the villain's nefarious schemes far too easily. These easy resolutions were just plain boring.

Ultimately, the story fails because Charity takes a back seat to the plot. The focus should have been on her. I wanted to get to know this intelligent, enchanting person. I wanted to watch her mature, have adventures, conquer the hero, and save the day. I needed the author to prove to me that regardless of her age, Charity had the spunk to enthrall a "battle-scarred" prince. To convince me I needed to experience the story through Charity's eyes. Unfortunately, this heroine struggles through it wearing blinders.

Mediocre Joan Wolf romance, not as good as the Guardian or the Deception, but will satisfy whose looking for romance in written form.
"Middle-European" Prince needs British aristocratic "HEROINE" virgin to marry quickly so to qualify for country's expectations. Ho hum!

It was not Joan Wolf's best book I've read, but it was exciting. From the beginning I thought that Charity was the herion. It started off good. What honest "innocent" wife will actually take back their huband after he cheated on her?? The book portrayed her as "innocent" and girlish. It was like His Highness just advantage of her good nature. He also needs to GROW UP! You can't always expect your mother to fix all you mistakes. Prince or not. But I can tell you this I though that her other book
"The arrangment" was great....

This book is rather interesting--if you're wanting entertainment and don't mind if it's a true continuation of the book--this is for you. My main criticism is that there is no love story! I call this sacrilege in an Austen sequel. I think it would have been a sweet story for Maria to marry Colonel Fitzwilliam. Pity she decides he's a rake and refuses to marry him.
It has the exact beginning of Sanditon--a carriage overturns, drastically affecting the plot.
This book is rather inconsistent--the story lines that seem to be developing at the beginning have disappeared by the end. For example, Anne de Bourgh is attracted to Mr. Delaval, leading her to be more animated than usual. A bit later, Mr. Delaval sees her laughing and thinks how much better it makes her look. However, all this is soon forgotten and Anne marries no one, and doesn't even think of getting married. I think it would have been plausible for her to have ran away from her mother's tyranny and married the half-gypsy garden boy. Pity he turns out to be her sister.
The characters aren't quite the same as they were in Pride and Prejudice--they are manipulated to fit this bizarre plot. I personally remember nothing of Lady Catherine constantly putting Anne down in Pride and Prejudice. On the contrary, she was always bragging about Anne--which was really funny because there wasn't much to brag about. Anne is not at all sickly in this book, which is quite a contrast from P&P. I find it completely inconsistent with the Maria Lucas of Pride and Prejudice to refuse Colonel Fitzwilliam and become Lady Catherine's housekeeper. Also, if she was such a great pianist, why does Mary Bennett play at the party at Lucas Lodge in P&P? You'd think Sir William would want to show off his daughter's amazing talent. I personally saw no reason to work in Mrs. Jennings--but if Aiken found it necessary, you would hope that she would make an attempt to keep her character the same as it was in Sense and Sensibility. Mrs. Jennings would NOT advise a young girl not to be hasty about getting a husband because it really wasn't that important. Also, it seems that Mrs. Jennings would leave 50,000 extra pounds to one of the Dashwood girls or a grandchild--the idea of her leaving it to Maria Lucas is just a stupid way to give Maria some money--which really adds nothing to the story.
What is the point of Anne's long lost brother turning into a long lost sister at the very end of the book? There was no buildup to this, except for it being rather odd that a boy would have the middle name "Joscelyn." It seems unlikely that Joss's nurse would keep pretending she was a boy after she had moved away from everyone she knew and had no more money to gain from this lie--she was no longer being paid to nurse her.

Joan Aiken is the only writer whose Jane Austen sequels I enjoy reading. Her "Jane Fairfax" was superb. This one was something of a disappointment, though. For one thing, it's a little book of 172 pages that can easily be read in an afternoon or evening, yet it's priced like books twice its size. For another, the writing is sometimes sloppy--highly unusual for Aiken. For example, a key plot point has Lady Catherine and her brother working to ensure that their sister-in-law's inheritance from her father-in-law stays in the family. Well, her sister-in-law's father-in law could only be Lady Catherine's own father, right? So that makes no sense. Elsewhere in the book Maria Lucas mentions having heard that other characters had met while staying with "a Mr. Bingley," a phraseology which implies Maria doesn't know Bingley, one of the key characters in "Pride and Prejudice." Impossible. It also surprises me to see Aiken having unrelated characters calling each other by their first names. And, as another reviewer mentioned, in P&P, Lady C considered her daughter perfection itself, so the turnabout here is jarring. Nonetheless this little book was fun to read, just not up to Aiken's usual standards. And it certainly won't deter me from trying other Aiken Austen sequels. (P.S. If you're adult who hasn't outgrown fairy tales, try Aiken's fabulous "Shadows and Moonshine.")

A novel by Joan Aiken, one of my favorite writers. It's a continuation of Pride and Prejudice, and I know, I know, one oughtn't mess about with a classic, but...This one is just really good fun, and Aiken is talented far beyond the skills of other Austen emulators. The story centers around the stuffy, opinionated Lady Catherine de Bourgh, disappointed that her nephew Darcy has gone and married that Bennett woman...and what with carriage accidents, relatives visiting, inheritances, long-secreted scandals, lost heirs and plots within plots, we're in for a lively, pleasureable read. No, it's not Austen. It can't be Austen, and she doesn't claim so. It's a modern novel with Austen-esque sensibilities, and Aiken is really good at 'em. She takes minor characters and fleshes them out, fantasizing over what happened after the happily-ever-after endings of the original novels.

Aiken has written a shelf-ful of Regency romances, all of which are clever, entertaining, and vastly better than anything one finds in the romance paperback section these days. And her Austen homages are uniformly excellent--my favorite is probably Jane Fairfax, the Emma story told from a very different point of view.

This is a very badly written negative book. The author did not research the topics very well and she seems to dwell on any negative thing that can happen to a woman. I had to stop reading the book because it was depressing me and turning me into a pessimist about my own fertility.

I did not care for this book at all. I found that the author's chapter on infertility was on the insulting side.

I completely disagree with the other reviewer - I wanted facts and information, not a feel good puff piece and I got exactly what I needed. It sounds like the other reviewer wants to be reading emotional self help books rather than informative medical books.

I now know that they don't coordinate these series beforehand. Having the authors write books in a series independently and apparantly simoultaneously is a big rip off. Hope the publishers read these reviews and change this practice.

Some of the earlier books in this series weren't bad. The same can't be said of this book. It was a stupid story, badly told.

This was a good conclution to the Wyndham search for the long lost prince. John Colton thought he didn't need anybodies help with his son. And Laura Bishop though John was being pigheaded and selfish thinking he didn't need any ones help. But he learns that was all he needed. Help rasing his son and help figuring out who he was. And where he belonged. Very go read.:)

The book served to merely list what one needed to know for the AP exam, but it did not write out in detail what one needed to know. Also, the practice tests were not as useful.

If you are looking for a book that will help you review for the AP European History test, this is not your book. It only goes as far to give you a timeline and a list of important people for each chapter. It does have some pratice tests, but overall, it was a bad review choice.

Do not buy this book expecting a lengthy review of the subject as did I. It only goes as far as to give a cursory timeline of each time period and a list of UNDEFINED names and events for each.

I did up my rating to a 3 only because the book does have some excellent example essays and DBQ's as well as tips on how to score the max on each. The two practice tests are relevant to the AP test and each answer is explained in detail at the end--but THAT is as far as the review goes.