I love a book that is not afraid to slow down to actually teach you something. The authors have done everything successfully, from grouping the topics, to ordering the flow of the chapters, to the code itself. The tips and pitfalls provide sanity checks for common mistakes, and to the attentive reader should save lots of time.

True, this book may not delve deeply into all the obscurities that C/C++ has to offer, but for its purposes as 1) a tutorial, 2) an introduction to programming, and 3) an accessible treatment of 95% of C/C++, it works! (It is probably advisable to avoid the abstruse 5% anyway.) I still reference this book occasionally, so it's an enduring text.

Other books, such as the 21 Days series, gloss over the details and give the reader the false notion s/he has achieved some sort of quick mastery. Afterwards, you may as well throw it out because it is useful only once. On the other end of the spectrum, is the C++ Primer, written by Stanley Lippman. That text reeks of loftiness and obscurity. After you've programmed C/C++ for a few years, put that book on your shelf to impress others.

But if you like learning and want to experience the fun that is C/C++ programming, go with Deitel & Deitel.

The book is really easy to understand. It is straight forward and to the point. Most of all technical terminology is defined for the beginner.

I especially appreciate the fact that the authors have mentioned that they have tried to present C in such a way to be the first computer language for beginners, despite in traditional terms, Pascal being taught as the first programming language because of it's known structured programming discipline.

In my lower years of education, I have had experiences with QBasic and a little of Visual Basic. However, as a student, I would think that skipping Pascal is a plus since I tend to ask myself, "When am I ever going to use it in life..." Students tend to question the applicable use of something that is learned.
These days, Pascal is seldom used as C++ predominantly takes the stage.

In sum, learning C as a foundation and first language seems to be something that will pay off. This book also includes tips and points out common pitfalls such as common programming errors, good programming practices, performance tips, and software engineering observations, which are all really helpful. If you are new to programming, this book is a must.

This book was the very first book I bought on computers programming (ok it was the second -- the first one I bought when I was 10...but this was the first serious one). I bought it when I was 12 years old, and the examples and text were very clear to me! If a 12 year old can understand this, think how easy it will be for you! This book does a great job of explaining every detail of OOP and programming, starting the book off with the basics of computer programming. You don't need to have any programming experience in order to read this book. I was a little disappointed in the actual result of it's claim to teach both C *and* C++ in the same book. It had very little on how to use C-specific things, not even mentioning how to use printf(). Thsi book is also great for those of you who know C and want to learn C++. You will have the easiest time learning OOP. The book also has some great reference information in the back, such as the C standard library, number systems, etc.

Brent Bishop is like most teenagers. He struggles daily trying to be "popular." He gets his chance to prove himself when he is allowed to go to "cool guy Chaz's" party. Unfortunately, his chance for popularity is ruined that night since he is humiliated in front of everyone by the girl he has a crush on. He leaves the party and his life changes forever. In the process of trying to kill himself, he kills an innocent 18-year-old girl. As punishment he is told to build whirligigs in her honor and place them in the four corners of the country so that her spirit can live on. In this process he learns that there is more to life than he ever imagined. I liked the book okay although it was somewhat depressing throughout until you reach the ending. It made me think about how trivial some things in life are. It also made me think about how the things you do effect many other peoples lives. I recommend this for people who want to read it by their interest in what I wrote above.

When I read the book Whirligig, I realized how precious life is. Before I read it, I had a very narrow mind when it came to seeing the beauty of life. The author, Paul Fleischman, did a great job with his style of writing. He wrote the book so that you could easily pull one of the many lessons out. In the beginning of the story, you meet Brent. He seems to be an average teenager, but he has a lot of emotional issues. Because of the fact that his family is always moving, he has a hard time fitting in, so he is always trying to be cool. When Brent goes to a party dressed wrong, and gets put down by a girl he likes, he attempts suicide. However, Brent does not succeed in his quest. Instead, he does something much worse. His actions cause someone that he hurt to ask him of one request; he has to build a whirligig in each in each corner of the United States. Though the task seemed unusual, Brent set off to keep the memory of all that he had taken, alive. As you read on, you follow Brent on his journey across the country as he meets new friends, makes new whirligigs, and discovers the meaning of life. In a way, the author wrote this book as if it were a whirligig itself. Like a whirligig, it has many different parts to it. It is colorful, sad, and beautiful. It will, and has touched many lives, and like a whirligig, I am sure that it will never cease to live.

Brent Bishop can never fit in, so he tries to kill himself. Driving home from a party where he is totally humiliated, Brent deliberately crashes his car. He lives, but takes another's life. A young woman, Lea, dies in the accident, & her mother wants only one thing from Brent. He must build four whirligigs in Lea's likeness & place them in the four corners of the United States.

Brent makes his whirligigs much like Paul Fleischman constructs his heartwarming novel. The story moves seamlessly back & forth between Brent's journey to piece his life together, & glimpses into the lives of the fragile people who encounter each whirligig. Their stories in each simple chapter build a satisfying & uplifting whole, just like Brent's creations. This tale of redemption & restoration is a thing of beauty that will bring any reader joy.

The Keep revolves around a Nazi Officer and his men who are stationed in the Romanian Mountains, charged with setting up a base in an small abandoned Castle, the "Keep" of the book's title. When a greedy soldier disturbs some of the Keeps unorthodox architecture, and soldiers start dying, an elite SS troop is sent in to stop the killings. And things get worse....

A romanian folklore expert is brought in to decipher strange writing found at the scene of one of the murders, a frail old man who just happens to be Jewish....so you can imagine how he feels about keeping Nazis alive. Throw in the old man's daughter, a mysterious man carrying a mysterious package, and one of the nastiest monsters in horror novel history, and you've got all the ingredients for a "keeper" (HAHAHA...) of a book.

Does Wilson deliver? You betcha....Molosar is one of the nastiest pieces of work this vampire fan has ever encountered, and the way that Wilson explains the vampiric mythology of crucifixes and garlic and mirrors is nothing short of fascinating. I spent much of the book trying to puzzle out his many little riddles, such as why Molosar fears the Cross when Cuza wields it, but kills a Nazi who is holding a cross. Wilson deftly keeps the reader guessing, and in this day of saw-the-ending-coming -a mile-away books, that's something special. I'm looking forward to reading the second book of "The Adversary Cycle", The Tomb.

F. Paul Wilson's fine thriller "The Keep" combines so many horror elements that eventually one expects a good old fashioned ghost to be thrown in for good measure. These men are indeed haunted, but it's by much more than a ghost. The underlying, supreme evil of the vampire appears to be so indestructible, especially after it squashes a Nazi regiment with the ease of a rabid wolf in a flock of sheep, readers will find themselves wondering what the resolution of this tale could possibly be.

A Nazi regiment moves into an ancient castle in the Transylvanian Alps during World War II, accidently unleashing an evil force that apparently inspired ancient vampire legends. Needless-to-say, these German warriors are picked off one by one. When an SS extermination squad arrives on the scene to "fix" the problem, all hell literally breaks loose.

"The Keep" is the beginning of Wilson's Adverary Cycle (including "The Tomb" and "The Touch"), but it stands alone as a terrific tale combining elements of horror, vampire legend, fantasy, H.P. Lovecraft and, of course, our fear/fascination with the ruthless evil of the Nazi legacy. Readers will instantly identify with Theodore Cuza, an ederly Jewish professor brought to the castle to solve the horrible murders. He secretly seeks to communicate with the vampire, using it's power to conquer the Nazi war machine. Yet another character appears at the castle - a mysterious red-haired man known as Glenn. His purpose is to keep the vampire within the confines of the castle - we think. Naturally, Cuza has a beautiful young daughter strangely attracted to Glenn.

It's almost impossible to put this book down. If you've experienced the greatness of the Christopher Lee/Peter Cushing Hammer vampire films of the 1960s, you will absolutely love this tale. Sure, parts of this book are cheesy and at times it has the feel of an energetic video game. But "The Keep" also establishes multiple tragic characters, among them Captain Klaus Woermann. A veteran German commander (and anti-Nazi) who simply wants to save his rank-and-file men from the growing evil of the castle, his emotional conflicts will create an unueasy tension throughout the novel. We actually care for Woermann and can even identify with the uncomfortable moral choice Cuza must face.

What will enthrall fans of horror about "The Keep" is the standoff between imagined ultimate evil (the vampire) versus realistic ultimate evil (Nazi soldiers). It is a fascinating contrast. In fact, the unusual combination was so tempting talented film director Michael Mann decided to make this novel into a muddled 1983 film. The misguided effort eventually became bogged down in incoherent evil vs. evil symbolism. But don't judge "The Keep" by that nearly forgotten film. It is a finely detailed horror/fantasy novel which fans of this type of genre will absolutely gorge themselves upon.

A friend asked me to describe THE KEEP. I had to tell him I couldn't say too much about this complex novel for fear of giving away vital plot lines before he could read for himself.
Set in World War II, THE KEEP follows a German Army troop as they move into a Romanian mountain fortress to protect a strategic entry point from enemies. Then 'something' starts picking them off one by one. Reinforcements arrive by way of an SS extermination squad which is no more successful in vanquishing the unseen foe. Then we're introduced to Professor Cuza, his daughter, Magda, and Glenn, the mysterious stranger. What ensues is one of the most uniqe vampire stories I have ever read. The power struggle between Captain Woermann and SS Major Kaempffer provides constant tension and conflict throughout the story. Molasar, the resident vamp, is so evil and fascinating; I'd like to see more of him. But he's not your garden-variety vampire; Wilson throws in a few twists to the traditional vamp tale. This novel brilliantly combines history, military strategy and politics, vampire myth, and suspense to create one incredible story. Some Nazis get disposed of along the way which, in my opinion, is never a bad thing.
This is a great read. I couldn't put it down, and I can't wait to move on to the next in the series.

Creative people are aleays interesting and this book reveals much about both the author Paul theroux and his subject V. S. Naipaul. Theroux brings his strong sense of people and place, which make him such an acomplished travel writer, to this very personal narrative. The result is an interesting though frustrating book. Theroux describes his long running friendship with The distinguished prize winning author V.S. Naipaul. The author's relationship is that of pupil mentor, which oftens happens with a younger man seeking encouragement and knowledge from someone just a few years older and more advanced in his chosen field. Naipaul accepts the mentor's role, and though the author regards their relationship as mutual friendship it is clear from his own narrative that that aspect of their relationship is one sided. Vidia Naipaul comes ascross as a sometimes brilliant, larger than life obnoxious eccentric. This is a pose often used by people in the arts to draw attention to themselves. The frustrating part of this book is that Theroux, usually an astute judge of character, never sees through the act, and the real Naipaul remains hidden.

This is the story of Paul Theroux's thirty-year friendship with his fellow-novelist V. S. Naipaul. Part social history, part biography, part autobiography, it is above all a beautifully written and fascinating study of a writer's craft and life.

Both men are prolific and accomplished writers. Naipaul has written novels set in all five continents. His novels include 'Guerrillas', 'In a Free State' and 'A House for Mr Biswas'. He has also written a history of Trinidad, 'The Loss of El Dorado'. Theroux is the author of 'The Mosquito Coast', 'The Great Railway Bazaar' and many other stories, novels and travel books.

Both men are remarkably self-contained; both are wandering scholars. Naipaul is famously rude and difficult. As a visiting professor in New York, he refused to give any classes. He once boasted, "I hate all music." He appears to disparage all contemporary novelists, and most past ones: he said that he hated Jane Austen, Thomas Hardy and Henry James. (He did at least admit to admiring Thomas Mann's 'Death in Venice' and Rudyard Kipling's 'Plain Tales from the Hills', and he does have a justified contempt for George Orwell.)

Theroux writes, "the best writers are the most fanatical." (Perhaps excellence at any work demands a certain fanaticism?) Certainly, Naipaul's uncompromising attention to his craft, his hatred of cant, of poses and affectation, of style, reveal the monomania necessary, but not sufficient, to creativity. The results in his work are uneven, but Theroux believes that Naipaul has produced one undoubted masterpiece, 'A House for Mr Biswas': readers should judge for themselves.

Theroux too is obviously not an easy man: his wanderlust, his unpleasant sexual boasting and his tactless responses to Naipaul's second marriage show how difficult he finds it to form relationships. Consequently this rare long friendship must have meant much to both men: it finished only recently, spurring Theroux to write this account. The book ends in a haunting last encounter, full of confusion, pain and rejection.

Forget all the media feeding frenzy over the "betrayal" accusations of Theroux's book about his former mentor and friend. If you're fascinated by Naipaul the writer, and want to know who the man is, this is the book. I have read everything Naipaul's ever written (except, ironically, Theroux's early book about Naipaul's work, cause it can't be found anywhere). He is simply an extraordinary novelist, certainly a candidate for the Nobel Prize (were it not for the politcally correct, who command it, and would be pulverized by those who see Naipaul's frankness as having "racialist" overtones). In the book he is quirky, opinionated, nasty, angry, volcanic, weird, tormented, fearful--all the contradictory qualities found in any artist. And of course artists are seen as strange--particularly in a world of conformists. It is a terrific read if you have followed the writing careers of both men. Of course, Theroux is bitchy and hypocritical and repetitive in the hurts he's suffered, but he also makes it clear that he would perhaps not exist as a writer of some 40 books had it not been for Naipaul's support. If you're not a Naipaul follower, this book won't be of much interest..

Because this book deals with the timeless feelings of love, obsession, and vulnerablity, it doesn't feel outdated, even though it's set in a time period much different from the current one. Especially interesting is Paul's relationship with Miriam, and how he becomes angry that she is trying to consume his soul--but at the same time, he says that he is looking for a woman who can belong to him. It seems like a double standard, but Paul is so obviously dysfuctional that as a reader, I could easily excuse it. DH Lawrence did a great job of making the content of the book flow well. When I got to the end, I could just feel that he was going to have to work Miriam back into the story somehow--and sure enough he did. And I think that as a reader, when I am able to anticipate what the writer has left to say, that is really a great statement about the ability of the writer to bring his readers to the same line of thought about the characters and the plot that he has. And something that I especially enjoyed about this book is that it is almost entirely dialogue, and it doesn't spend pages describing the scenery and such. So if that's something you like too, then you will probably enjoy this book.

This is a perfect book for anyone who enjoys reading twentieth century British literature. I like the fact that D. H. Lawrence is able to realistically portray the emotions of the many characters in the book. I did not only learn Paul's side of the story, but I also gained insight into Gertrude's, Miriam's, and Clara's thoughts and feelings towards Paul and towards each other. This omniscient narration makes the story a more interesting study into human emotions. Lawrence deals very heavily with psychological motivations for each character's actions, making the characters more human and believable. This is a great story that goes far beneath the surface. Sons and Lovers is a thought-provoking tale of love, death, possession, vulnerability, and heartache. I would recomend it to anyone looking for a good book to read.

This book is amazing. When I first started reading it I was afraid the book might drag at times but this was not the case. I never found myself becoming bored during the book, in fact, there were many times where I found it hard to put the book down. I have recomended this book to everybody, including to the person reading this review.

Maybe the book is good for me because I can somewhat relate to Paul Morel's character at times. Now I am not saying that I am in love with my mother, but his akwardness in the earlier sections of the book really struck me. The scenes are so vivid in the book that a reader almost feels that they are there in England with Paul. I also loved how Lawrence would give the thoughts of the female characters as well as Paul. Again, I must say that the book was excellent and I look forward to reading it again soon.

This book is a practical guide to winning the "battle", whether that's a political campaign, a business, or anything.

The advice is organized into simplistic chapters, such as "Kiss Ass", "Kick Ass" and "Frame the Debate". The chapters use interesting and humorous anecdotes to explain the ideas. This is roll up the sleeves advice for how to make things happen. The context is political, the application much more universal.

As one might imagine, the book has strong liberal pro-Clinton leanings. YOU don't need to be card carrying democrat to get a lot from the book. If you're a Carville fan, you'll appreciate the editiorial comments more. If you're a die hard Republican, learn from these guys and get the last laugh. Read a chapter a day and you'll be better for it.

p.s. The chuckle from the name alone should be worth a few stars!

BUY TEN COPIES OF THIS BOOK AND GIVE IT TO EVERYONE YOU LOVE AS AN EASTER GIFT THIS YEAR. A book like this should be written everytime these two get 150 pages or so written. I don't care if it says...to be continued on the last page. I can hear them talking as I read. I have used their methods, and I'll be darn; they really work. Every step has a purpose. Especially admitting your mistake. It does make your opponet powerless. Their points should be taught in all schools in this country. They are basic, common sense, and decent suggestions by two good ole' Southern boys who had the ability to Buck Up, Suck Up and give up tricks of their trade to "Newbees" like me to the political world.

I have read and seen everything I can buy, borrow, or rent by Mr. Carville and Mr. Begala. These men are my mentors; especially James Carville; after all we are both Cajuns. I get anything he writes in hardback, out of loyalty and just to make sure it stays lucrative enough for him to continue sharing his "War Room" strategies.
Over the years I have watched and read about these two men working together and complimenting each other while orchestrating some of the most brillant politcal spins all around the world.
This book is proof of exactly how they do that "voodoo" they do, and if you don't believe me, read it yourself and post your comments. I am biased by the recipes. I have tried recipes from all of the different books, and they are wonderful as well.
I have been blessed to have been born in Texas by Cajun Parents and raised in Louisiana. I am a Democratic Precinctperson in a County in Kansas, and rely on these guys tremendously for rapid-response answers in this very conservative Republican state I live in. Mr. Carville, Mr. Begala...if you read this...help! We're drowning, democratically speaking, in Kansas!

This book by political consultants James Carville and Paul Begala is fun but also extremely valuable to anyone in a leadership position. For public officials and corporate execs, this book provides insights on how to deal with the everyday PR issues and moments of crisis you are sure to face. It is filled with lessons, advice, and anecdotes. Most important the book drives home several key central points: always be open, honest and aggressive when dealing in the public arena. I think those who are whining about this book either don't understand its purpose or are just trying to be negative toward the authors. Buy and read it; buy others and give to any of your friends who have to make decisions - they will benefit from it, regardless of their gender, party affiliation, or political philosophy.

The version I read is Kemp Smith's version, the old folk from Cambridge. I read it because I took a course in late Modern Philosophy. Before I get into this book, I want to give the fellow readers three suggestions.

My first suggestion to the readers is that I do not believe anybody can have a basic comprehension of this book if he/she does not take a course in Kant at the university. So, if you really want to know about Kant, take a Kantian philosophy course.

My second suggestion is that the best version to read is the original text in German. If you do not know any German, just like me, you would have a pretty hard time. The most important thing to do for the readers who read it in English is to crack down the complex sentences of Kant. As Kemp Smith points out, Kant tries to express so many ideas in the fewest sentences that the language allows .

Third, you must read it. As a philosophy major, I find that Kant is the only philosopher who truly convinces me. His Critique of Pure Reason alone gives me hope.

Here I should give you some ideas about the content of the book: All the things we can experience by our sensory faculty (eyes, ears, nerves..etc.) are not the reality of things themselves but their phenomenal appearances that occur in our mind, since all of our knowledge is derived from our experience, and our experience presupposes space and time.

Mathematics, for example, is derived from experience. According to Kant, we do not know "5+7=12" by born, until someone tells us the concepts of "5", "7", "+", "=" and "12". And we learn "5+7" functions to be "12". And we apply this to other numbers.

This experience presupposes space and time. When I tell you the number "5", you, the idea of "5" and me are all in space; when we talk about a thing, the pre-supposition is that it is in space. And in this process, your mind experiences two mental events: "not knowing 5" and "knowing 5". And from the sequence of the two mental events, we derive the idea of time. All our experience presupposes space and time, hence, it follow that we derive all our knowledge from space and time. Therefore, the definitions of space and time, says Kant, is beyond the possibility of our knowledge.

However, Kant opens the possibility that there might be some creatures, such as Martians or other non-carbon-based organisms, having different sensory faculties that are not limited by space and time, and they can truly see the reality of things themselves, when we human beings can not.

Therefore, in phenomenal world, the appearances of world that our sensory faculty is able to perceive, we seemingly do not have free will or evidence of the existence of God. But in noumenal world, that is, the reality of the world, God might exist and we might have free will, even though we can not perceive it in this phenomenal world. And that is how I find the hope of life from Kant. Finally, I must admit that I can only understand about 5% of this book. But you intelligent readers, the people of wisdom and good reason, I believe, will understand more than I do.

You can evidently tell from the title of my review that I liked the book. The Critique of Pure reason is a pretty important work screaming to be read by any curious person. The reason I like the book is because it is one of, if not the 1st book, to address the concept of human cognition. In this context, Kant discusses the possible, the necessary, time, and a few other very significant details of our human, corporeal existence. Yes the book is long and tedious but shows Kant's genius in developing a framework of human cognition (previously called 'the understanding' by some classical writers). If Kant's 'Critique of Pure Reason' doesn't begin to demonstrate, objectively, how the clever cognitve apparatus known as the brain weaves its fantastical web, then you were reading it upside down.

Among the many ideas put forward in this opus what stood out as the main thesis to me was the distinction between a real idea and a transcendental one; hence Kant's transcendental idealism. Humans have ideas of course, we have experiences, this is how we live in this world, by our ideas and experiences. Other thinkers, like Locke, would have our ideas be the results of our experiences. Not quite sayeth Kant. Some ideas are completely exclusive of experience. These are the tranascendental ideas, ideas that transcend experience. They're really not worth much, they might be, you can't (no pun intended) tell. Although transcendental ideas can arise independently of experience, they can only be verified by experience. Such an idea, the distinction between ideas proper and transcendental ones is the key idea here. The ultimate verification of either type of idea by some experience is why Kant is known as the father of the scientific method. Verifying ideas by experience is another term for what we now call experimentation. Not that Kant invented experimentation, but that he codified it (well really others did too, like Francis Bacon, but Kant gets the laurel).

Ideas help us to interpret the world, transcendental ones are apt to lead us off on paths we don't really want to go down, and for good reason. Cognitively, we might deduce far into the future and conclude that events meet somehwere up there on the horizon. Or we could reverse this process, looking back into the past, like we do with the 'big bang' concept. From where we are in the present, looking far into the future or far into the past, what we appear to see may look like a unity. Well maybe and maybe not. The meeting of events way off up or back there are simply impossible to confirm by experience. In such a case we are left to rely on circumstantial evidence, as with the big bang. For example, there is no overwhelming evidence that what astronomers call the universe actually represents the universe as it is. There are bits of evidence, like ubiquitous microwave background radiation and predominant red-shifting, but the idea of what the universe is in actuality is a transcendental idea; there is simply no empirical way to confirm the existence of such a thing as the universe. Within such cognitive phenomena Kant is our sage.

What is really true or false in this world? If you still think the idea of objective reality is feasible then this treatise by the father of the scientific method must not be missed. Don't be fooled by the ethical implorings of Kant's 'The Critique of Practical Reason.' That's an entirely different book. 'The Critique of Pure Reason' is an atheist's dream. After Kant thoroughly exposes the idea of the absolute being as transcendental pish-posh, he does attempt to backpedal some by imploring the faithful to remain vigilant, but too late; he has already pounded the stake into the withering heart of a deity who Nietzsche [my paraphrase] would later lament the passing of. One can never hope to aspire to even a modicum of philosophical being, indeed it's hard to imagine even beginning to think critically, til they've read this work. Buy it, suffer through it (then read Schopenhauer), and maybe, just maybe, you'll have a chance.

Many people have trouble reading the Critique of Pure Reason, and it truly is a very difficult book. But the fact is that it does all make sense, not just in some facile verbal way but logically -- and once you're used to certain idiosyncrasies (especially the old-fashioned scholastic terms and the seemingly artificial organization of the text), you'll be well able to find out for yourself what Kant's points were, and whether or not he really made them. So I won't talk about that here, I'll just give you some tips to help you get started with a minimum of pain and bafflement:

1. Read the Prolegomena first, or at the same time. That book, which is both clear and SHORT, is Kant's own account of what the Critique was meant to accomplish and what prompted him to write it. If you read the Prolegomena and think he's barking up the wrong tree, put off the Critique... until you change your mind. (The last bit doesn't apply to people taking a class, of course.)

2. Kant's lecture notes on Logic can also be useful because they show how he believed philosophical thought should be organized and expressed. Regardless of whether you take his so-called "logical method" seriously, no one denies that *Kant took it very seriously*, and once you can recognize it in the Critique, many passages become much easier to follow.

3. Don't expect a profound spiritual or aesthetic experience. I value this book as the first really satisfying rational explanation of why the world makes sense (turns out it has to!), but I won't claim it's any good as a guide to meditation, as a substitute Bible, as poetry, or even as prose. Contrary to his reputation, Kant is an excellent writer, but he's not trying to take you to a higher level here, or even to entertain you. At all. See also point 6, below.

4. Choose your text with care. Abridgments are tempting, but every sentence of the original is there for a reason. Make sure your translation includes the texts of both the first and second editions (Meiklejohn doesn't). Of the two translations I've read, I can recommend Kemp Smith's often loose rendering (St. Martin's Press) over the scrupulous but stilted Wood-Guyer (Cambridge), and both over either alone; but I've heard good things about Pluhar's Hackett translation too.

5. Don't skip the Introduction. Key points are made there, and key terms defined. The first time I tried to read the Critique I skipped to the first chapter of the main text (Transcendental Aesthetic) and it was like running headfirst into a brick wall. (It *is* all right to ignore the Prefaces on a first reading.)

6. Whichever parts you read, read every word. It's possible to skim through one of Kant's arguments and get an accurate feeling for the meaning, but the details of the argument do matter, because he very often appeals to them later on -- and also because, unlike so many other writers on the same subjects, he is trying to *prove*, not to cajole or enchant. Emphasis is important too, so you must read for context: does he mean "*synthetic* unity of the manifold", "synthetic *unity* of the manifold", or "synthetic unity of the *manifold*"? It's not that the concepts are different, but the author is pointing out something different about the concept depending on where and how he uses the phrase. Take the phrases, sentences, paragraphs out of context and they all sound like the same kind of hollow, pretentious, narrow-minded nonsense. I have found that the best way to preserve the logical connections is to READ ALOUD.

7. Question everything you read. You'll usually find that the statement was justified earlier (or, in some cases, will be explained in the next paragraph). Not only is this the safest way to read a book of Western philosophy, but it is the best way to *restore* the logical connections of the text once you have lost track of them, which will often happen.

There's more I could say, but that's plenty to be going on with. Best of luck!

I first saw Paul Loeb perform some of his miracles on TV last week, and could not believe how simple and effective his techniques were. We have two Pomperanians just over two years old and life has been hell ever since. They have destroyed most of the furniture in the two rooms they were confined to, countless magazines, plant moss around my trees (inside). They barked at every little sound. For the past two years, my legs and arms were covered with scabs and bruises from the biting - one dog even ripped by lip open. After employing just what I saw on TV, I stopped the incessant barking and biting in just a few tries. When my husband arrived home from work, he thought he was in the wrong house because the dogs were so well behaved. I knew I had to order this book immediately. After reading Paul Loeb's book, all I can say is his book ought to be mandatory reading for all dogs owners, vets, other animal care people, and anyone claiming to be a dog trainer. This man has given me more understanding than all the other trainers put together. His advice and training methods are the most humane, loving, and caring imaginable, and they work. This book replaces EVERYTHING else!

SMARTER THAN YOU THINK......Review

•We have read all of Paul Loeb's books about dog training. In addition we have had the pleasure of having him as our dog's trainer. As you will discover when you read Smarter Than You Think, Loeb approaches the practical matter of dog training without a lot of indulgent theories. Very simply he employs the best technique we have ever witnessed for housebreaking. You will see it in the book...the tether. It eliminates the confining cage, putting paper down or letting the puppy take over your house. The throwing technique works like a charm for initiating good behavior and correcting bad behavior....no it is not mean nor does it hurt....rather it surprises. His approach to food for the puppy and the grown dog employing fresh food is by far the best and it proves itself out as soon as you adopt it. His style is humorous and it will help any of you to break destructive habits like chewing or tearing up your favorite slipper and/or learning to live with your new puppy.

I first read this book two years ago when I was anticipating getting a new puppy. Since then I've read most all of the dog training books currently on the market -- from Bill Koehler to the New Skete monks to Karen Pryor, and everything in between. But I keep coming back to the principles and techniques Paul Loeb explains in this book. I have two Rhodesian Ridgebacks, which are big headstrong dogs and known to be difficult to train. This book has helped me more than any other I've read, and it also has the most palatable approaches for me. I want my dogs to be my buddies without being spoiled brats -- and this book really shows how to achieve that goal! Sure, I use some other techniques as well (for example, I do crate my young female; she doesn't mind and she's too strong to be tethered and left alone.) I have also used a paper match on a puppy to stimulate its "I-gotta-poop NOW" reflex when I have to train it to go on a tiny piece of ground in the city. That's an old show ring handler trick and doesn't hurt the dog at all -- just makes sure the dog eliminates before going into the ring so something like what happened on TV at Westminster last year doesn't occur! Loeb's advice on feeding is also excellent, simple, and follows the most recent alternative veterinary writings on the best diet for a dog. I HIGHLY recommend this book to anyone who is not comfortable with strict, military-like training techniques and yet wants a responsive and well-behaved companion.

The book "James, the Brother of Jesus," is one of the most poorly-written I have ever read, but the central idea is so compelling that I finished all one thousand pages. The text is extremely repetitive and could easily have been edited down to five or six hundred pages. Sentences often run over one hundred words, and multiple conventions for italics and capitalization emphasize every other word and make it impossible to understand many sentences on the first read-through. The author also assumes the reader has a knowledge of not just the bible, but the works of the Roman historian Josephus and the Dead Sea Scrolls as well. The author's premise relies heavily on early church writings and recently-discovered Gnostic gospels, but the lack of quotations make it hard to evaluate many of the author's linguistic arguments in context, and it would have been much easier to trust him if he hadn't made so many sloppy errors. For instance, he suggests that Alphaeus and Clopas could be the same person because scribes could have confused the greek alpha for a kappa, and backs up his assertion with a reference to a scholarly article on the observed confusion of alphas with lambdas (a capital lambda looks like an A without the central bar, a far more likely mistake). Sometimes this linguistic analysis is revelatory, as when the author suggests that "Nazorean" or "Nazirite," a member of a sect devoted to spiritual cleansing through ritual bathing in the wilderness, may have been corrupted to "Nazarean," one from the town of Nazareth. Other times, as when he suggests that Simeon and Simon and Peter and Cephas (the equivalent of the Greek "Peter" in Aramaic) and maybe even Clopas are all the same person, this analysis is more of a stretch. The author finds ways to negate any contrary evidence, saying that the New Testament was written by pro-Roman followers of James' bitter adversary Paul, and the histories of Josephus, similarly pro-Roman, likewise should not be trusted on any subject that might have offended Rome. As the author suggests that James (and by association, Jesus) would have been a member of a sect zealously opposing Roman influence, much of what we know about Christianity is thus set aside. This leaves the author to rely heavily on apocryphal gospels, some of which are quoted second- or third-hand, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, which he himself has translated and has a book to sell you. He also uses the well-known inconsistencies in the bible to throw the whole canon into doubt. The result is that the author can pick and choose the facts he needs to support his argument and rationalize away those that don't fit. This puts him more in the mold of an Erik von Daniken, author of the "Chariots of the Gods" books (although without the breezy readibility), or of director Oliver Stone's movie "JFK." In other words, this book works well as entertainment, and undoubtedly contains some previously unacknowledged elements of truth, but can only be considered as one interpretation of a hoplessly contradictory set of writings. Even if the reader is not convinced of the truthfulness of every part of the argument, there are plenty of insights into politics and religion at the time of Jesus. As this is the first book on the subject that I have read, I can not say if other books exist which could be recommended more highly. However, for anyone capable of critical analysis and wanting to know more about the Jewish origins of Christianity, looking for a more objective description of the Jerusalem Church, or seeking a connection between Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls, this book can be recommended.

The study of religion has been an major part of my life, and I feel that Eisenman's book is an important part of this continuing interest. I have a BA in Comparative Religion from Earlham College, and I remember my classes in the New Testament and early Christianity as being informative, but always lacking in clarity and historical accuracy. Just who were the Pharisees, Saduccees, Essenes, Sicarii, and Nazirites? What was Paul's relationship to the development of the early Church and its shift in focus from Palestine to Rome? And what is the significance of the family of Jesus, mentioned many times in the Gospels and in the Book of Acts, but obviously in conflict with the dogma of the Catholic Church? After graduating I read The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception, which although more condensed and accessible to the non-acedemic, did not do the subject justice (no pun intended) like James the Brother of Jesus. This book provides exhaustive detail and literaly invites one to enter into Eisenman's reconstruction of what the first century AD was truly like and the many religious and political figures that lived at that time. It pointed out things that were simply not metioned during my time studying religion in college. The conflict between Paul and the Jerusalem Assembly led by James is of crucial importance. And most importantly in light of Eisenman's work, this was not a struggle over the Judiazation of the Church as some might contend, for the simple truth of the matter is that the Church was already Judiazed, most liikely by Jesus himself! As Eisenman points out, Paul attacks Peter in Galatians for siding with some men sent from James on the subject of circumcision and table fellowship with Gentiles, and according to the Acts of the Apostles, Peter had never eaten anything non-kosher until he has his Pauline revelation on a rooftop in Jaffa. One must face the possibility that if both Peter and James adhered to Jewish law until well after Jesus' crucifixtion, that maybe this was truly the teaching of Jesus, and not the Pauline rejection of "the curse" of the Mosaic Law. But there really is no coincidence as to why these things were never pointed out, for they upset the traditional picture of what was occuring during the time of Jesus and the formation of Christianity. Instead of having peaceful Christians beset by law-obsessed Pharisees and violent revolutionaries, (and the Dead Sea Scrolls written by monk-like peaceful Essenes separate from the revolt against Rome) we see the development of Christianity and Judiaism as we know them tied directly to the popular Messianic and apocalyptic revolt against Rome that was supported by the overwhelming majority of the inhabitants of Palestine. The main survivors of this struggle were either the Pauline Christian converts or Pharisaic proto-Rabbinical Jews, boths groups having renounced political and apocalyptic messianic devotion. Yet for those who did not, like James and others following his movement, their legacy wound its way through various "heretical" groups (Ebonites, Nestorians, Mandeans, etc) and even into Islam. Yes, the book is long, at times redundant, and even for someone with a strong background in the study of religion it can be a bit confusing. But I have always loved books that I can sink into, read for days on end and become thoroughly involved in their subject matter. James the Brother of Jesus is one of those books, and it's subject is so fascinating and of such incredible importance that I will be rereading it for years to come.

To anyone raised on ideas of swearing on the Bible, gospel truth, and sermons taking biblical narratives as factual events, this book will be very disturbing. It literally sets traditional notions about Jesus and the early church on their heads, but to those who already find the biblical record unbelievable, the New Testament will become clear for the first time. First, the history of the first century of the common era as presented in the gospels and Acts is shown to be fatally flawed. Josephus is relied on for the larger framework, Paul's letters, rather than Acts, are relied on for the period 40-60CE, and all extant references to James fill in the details of the views of the first Christians. Extensive use is made of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Eisenman advances a controversial, but compelling case, at least to me, that the earliest, Jewish followers of Jesus were Essenes, who held the same hyper-observant, anti-establishment, eschatological views that prevailed at Qumran, and that the Teacher of Righteousness was, in fact, James, and that Paul was the Man of the Lie. To make his case, Eisenman analyses biblical materials minutely, on a year by year, name by name, sometimes word by word basis. This can be both exhausting and repetitious, but for me it worked. I spent a very long time reading this book, because I looked up every reference the author made to the Bible, Dead Sea Scrolls or Josephus (which he recommends the reader do), to be sure he wasn't misrepresenting the materials. It was worth it. This year, as I heard the Passion according to Luke read on Palm Sunday, for the first time in my life, I understood what I was hearing.

Being a huge fan of Marvel's Wolverine character, I really enjoyed this book. 'Origin' had the task of telling the beginnings of the character, and finally explaining what the up until now mysterious origins of the character were. This book tells a good story, throwing in some mildly obvious twists and tragedy to interest all readers. The art is beautiful, and gives the work an identity. The story itself seems to work better as an introduction, an feels unfinished. There is obviously so much more to tell of the characters beginnings, and anyone who picks 'Origins' up to read should understand it's not the complete origin of Wolverine, rather just the first chapter. A good read, and I can't wait for more.

Rumor has it that In the 1980s Jim Shooter (former EiC of Marvel Comics) wanted Wolverine's origin to be that an actual wolverine had been evolved into a wolverine-man... thank God they waited to tell this story.
A Tom Sawyer-esque tale gives way to a story of tragic lost innocence in this Paul Jenkins (Inhumans, The Sentry) penned tale illustated by Andy Kubert (X-Men) with AMAZING color by Richard Isanove.
Set in the late 19th century, ORIGIN begins as three children struggle with divisions imposed upon them by class structures set against the backdrop of a wealthy estate in British Columbia. One tragic night sets them apart with two on the run and creates a trauma that will continue to affect Logan for the next century, forging the man he becomes even more so than the Weapon X Program ever would decades later.
Everything Wolverine is can be traced back to these events even if he can't remember them. ORIGIN asks more questions than it answers focusing on telling a solid emotional story rather than a violent action epic. This book is for the hardcore Wolverine fanboy OR someone looking for a good coming of age story. I think the latter will be more satisfied but someone intrested in both will be knocked out by Origin.

Well let me start off and say I'm not a huge X-Men fan but no matter. I was in one of my comic shops and I ran across this book that had a preview of the first issue of Origin and then I looked closer and found out it was the true story of Wolverine. Wolverine has always fascinated me and I've always wanted to know his story and here I was reading it. The artwork is the best I have ever seen and the story is a multilayered pulls no punches tale of an awesome history of a very unique individual. It should be placed besides the great classics of literature and take my word for it. If you don't like X-men but have always been curious about Wolverine buy this. If you are in the mood for a page turner and one [heck] of a good story buy this book. Romance, Mystery, Drama, Conflict, Horror, Fist Fights this has it all and beats any movie. Thank you marvel for this awesome masterpiece of Logan otherwise known as Wolverine.