The poor, repetitious writing may be due to the fact that there was a "group effort" preparing and writing the book. There are a lot of good insights comparing the "old economy" labor force and the "new economy" labor force. The reader, however, must perservere to get through the repetition and disorganization. There are few short but interesting case studies in Chapter 3, and lots of left-wing policy recommendations throughout the book.

Paul Theroux is a very talented writer. He writes excellent stories, he's written some good novels, and he used to write good travel books too. I've enjoyed plenty of them over the years. Who am I ? I am just a reader out there in small town Massachusetts who's had a few experiences in life and who likes to read books about faraway places, or maybe about the human comedy. I'm not a hot-shot critic. I can't expound on the literary qualities of this or that writer with the expertise gleaned from English departments, because I didn't attend any courses in those English departments. But life is in the eye of the beholder. As Mr. Theroux has grown older, his view of life has become more and more pessimistic. Nothing gives him pleasure, everything leads to disappointment, failure, and frustration. He sees many people trying to make up for the nature of his world through lies, delusions, and retreat. He has become a man who sees only the garbage on the beach of life. All relationships must end badly in this world---they are disappointing right from the start usually. The maggot of indecision and betrayal always appears, it can be squeezed and ejected from under the skin as in the story "White Lies", but never avoided. Your closest friends and heroes will fall short of your expectations, your loves will fade, and nothing can replace them. Life---in these stories---is indeed a rotten, desperate situation. But at least, Theroux can write about it, tear it apart, and send it out in sad, unpleasant little pieces. Even if it's your old friend and mentor, you can turn on him and publish a whole book telling us what a rat he always was. Maybe he was. If I ever met Mr. Theroux, I'd make like "Roadrunner" and disappear in a flash, rather than risk winding up a crabbed, contemptible suburbanite in some story.

OK, these are my remarks. If you've read this far, then I can tell you that taking into account these feelings of mine, there are some excellent stories in this collection, though some are not up to his usual high standard. "The Odd-Job Man", about an American academic in England, "The Greenest Island", a long story about an inexperienced American youth in Puerto Rico, and "Clapham Junction", a short but powerful story about the depths of human foibles stand out. Personally, I think you'd do better with "The Consul's File" or with some of the earlier novels. If you already know Theroux and like his style, you'll probably find this collection excellent. I find his view of the world too jaundiced, too cynical, too negative. The brightest day, the happiest moment, the most beautiful scene always carries a vague menace and the seed of major failure. I agree that it is possible, but always ???

This is obviously aimed at pre-teens and is acceptable enough as such. However, emphasis is on violence and conflict without any underlying substance.

The basic X-MEN idea is on the relating between mutants and ordinary humans and the conflict between the mutants who want to control the world ruling or eliminating the rest of humanity and those mutants who want to co-exist with the rest of humanity. This book would've done better to give more depth to such aspects.

In the 70's I enjoyed reading this book to my three sons. Now I am a Grandmother and my sons insist that I read it to their children. Of course this involves doing all the voices for the four monsters. It is our favorite book and has weathered thirty years in our family. It is cute and enjoyable to read.

A few years ago, I bought Dr Goldfarb's great "SGML Handbook". I thought "The XML Handbook" would be something similar.

The book contains, roughly, 100 pages of introduction to XML; 250 pages of tutorials on XML and its subcultures; and almost 600 pages of corporate presentations, of varying quality, on various aspects of XML application and implementation.

The introduction and tutorials, although good, didn't have the depth I was looking for.

The corporate bit addresses a very broad range of interesting issues, with varying levels of detail, but never enough to "solve the problem".

So for me, the signal-to-noise ratio was pretty low.

Let me give an example of a major gap in the book's coverage: I had hoped to gain much more insight into the relative merits of using attributes as against using element content; but I finished the book no wiser than when I started (other than having seen some examples where I disagreed with the approach taken).

The CD-ROMs didn't add much value, either: the web has moved on very rapidly.

To add to my disappointment, the production of the book is not of a high standard.

- The rendering of low-level headings leaves a lot to be desired (Ex: I looked at 33.2.2.6.4 on page 480 for fully 30 seconds before understanding that it was a heading). So does that of block quotes, which appear to run on to the following paragraph.

- Many footnotes on a left-hand page with callouts on the previous page make reading a chore (Ex: fn #2 on pp 59 and 60). There is a general disdain for any attempt to keep figures on the same left-right page pair as their references.

- It might have been less irritating, too, to use a single numbering space for all Figures, Examples, Tables, and Spec Excerpts, rather than obliging the reader to work out the sometimes subtle difference between "Example 8-1" and "Figure 8-1".

This book, I understand from the Preface, was itself prepared using XML. Unfortunately, good markup for publishing is of little use without excellent rendering. I got a strong impression of unseemly haste to get the book out before getting the rendering up to scratch. So readability was badly crippled (unlike The SGML Handbook).

One last damn. So far, I've read the book just once. Although I'm kind to books, the cover is already dog-eared and de-laminating. It probably doesn't matter, because, in contrast to "The SGML Handbook", reading this book a second time won't add anything. That's another reason I think it wrong to call it a Handbook.

More in sorrow than in anger, then: two stars for Dr. Goldfarb, zero for Prentice-Hall.

I too bought this book thinking that it would bring me into the world of XML. I had no previous recommendation and I thought hey! it's by the creator. After reading 70 odd pages on the background and the application of XML I was chomping at the bit for some syntax diagrams but no, you gotta wait for chapter 31 (page 423). Hmmm. If you want to learn XML and XML only buy another book. If you want a complete run-down on XML use in the industry plus the XML spec then go ahead and buy this.

Goldfarb and Prescod know their subject, as well as how to communicate their knowledge. They set the stage by providing a historical backdrop to the evolution of XML (Goldfarb was one of the original authors of IBM's GML and then SGML; Prescod is part of the W3C XML Working Group). The authors develop the notion of why the web needs XML. After these appetizers, they give you a tiny taste of XML (syntax), XSL (style), and XLL (linking). And then they start cooking! Application Stew -- roughly 25 chapters of specific, real-world examples from 14 sponsor companies, each with enough detail to give you a good flavor of the product (or freeware). All the technical details of XML, XSL, and XLL are presented at the _end_ of the book (perhaps so non-techies don't have to skip over 130 pages to get to the meat?). And for dessert, they serve up 55 freeware, shareware, or trial versions of XML applications, with links to their respective web sites. Goldfarb and Prescod's handbook ! should appeal to managers and programmers, as well as to web content developers. Excellent resource and true to its title!

For MBAs or others interested in getting a peek inside McKinsey & Company, just read Rasiels previous book, the McKinsey Way. With some experience working as an Associate (consultant) in New York office, he is eloquent in pointing out the basic consulting skills and some nice-to-have insights into how McKinseyites work. Actually I would recommend Pyramid Principles by Barbara Minto for any MBA student trying to understand how McKinsey consultants think and reason (it will help you in job interviews too), though it is not very reader-friendly and may take you quite some work to understand it.

I agree with a previous reviewer that there are no additional insights on how McKinsey works. I would say Rasiel tried but failed miserably. Like a two-year GE manager trying to describe how Welsh ran GE, Rasiel bit off more than he could chew by trying fathom how McKinsey partners or senior people work and run the firm. 60% of his comments are totally wrong and the worst thing is it would be difficult for outsiders to tell which is right from wrong. Rasiel also tried to stay very high-level and common sensical which basically made most of the book useless.

Skip this one. Dont waste your time and money.

If you really want to get an insider's view about McKinsey and some of the basic consulting skills instilled and refined into the work style of its consultants, buy the McKinsey Mind. The author has worked in the firm for some time, and therefore he can at least describe what he learned adequately.

However the author really bit more than he could chew in trying to flesh out how McKinsey partners and senior consultants really solve problems and build their practices. In this book many of his points are simply wrong, based more on personal bias and wrong perceptions. It is like a junior manager trying to 'imagine' how the CEOs think and run their businesses. I think the author knew his limits and therefore tried to stay very 'high level' and common-sensical, which made the whole book useless. It would be great if the author was consistently wrong. But he was only 60% wrong and it would be hard for readers to see which part of his comments are wrong.

I hope there would be a great book on strategy consulting and McKinsey out in the market (especially when the industry experiences its toughest two years in the past three decade, and therefore some quality consultants should be available to write), but before that happens, do yourselves a favor and skip this one.

This book is more talk and no walk. The book itself does not detail anything new and is very similar to their previous book (The McKinsey Way). Infact the authors themselves (in the introductory section of the first chapter) mention that they cannot delve into McKinsey methodologies, but have gone on to describe methodologies that are _like_ the ones used at McKinsey.

If you have read the contents page, you have read the book (this may sound harsh, but its true). Also the book is brand leveraged and does not even talk about the McKinsey ways. All the authors do, is interview some ex McKinsey consultants and get high level opinions from them. Extremely superficial read.

Do yourself a favor - go get a quantitative business analysis book like:
1. Quantitative Business Analysis: Text and Cases by Bodily, et al
2. Quantitative Analysis for Management by Bonini, et al

- and you will have learnt much more than this book can offer. You can then realize what you learnt into daily decision making.

Not recommended. Save your money.

This is an well crafted, well researched novel by the master storyteller Lord Jeffrey Archer that I decided to read immediately because of its special interest to me. It is a tale of destiny and fortune that spans the last half of the twentienth century, and is fast paced and foreboding. It is set in Connecticut, with the birth of two twins who are separated at birth and raised in disparate circumstances by parents who are unaware of the switch which occurred in the hospital nursery. (Of course, the reader's knowledge of the situation and desire to to see how the resultant issues are finally resolved is one of the compelling aspects of the book.)

Nathaniel Cartwright grows up with his middle class parents, an insurance salesman and schoolteacher. They all believe that his twin brother Peter died shortly after birth. Meanwhile, only two individuals are aware of the fact that the baby who leaves the hospital as Fletcher Andrew Davenport, son of a millionaire and major benefactor of the hospital, is in reality Peter Cartwright. We follow their lives as they grow up in CT.

Nat wins a scholarship to Taft, meets his lifelong friend Tom Russell, attends the University of Connecticut and eventually serves in Vietnam. Also, while at Taft Nat first opposes Ralph Elliot for school president, whose cunning and manipulative ways will influence both Nat's and Fletcher's lives in unforeseen ways. Meanwhile, Fletcher attends rival Hotchkiss, meets Jimmy Gates, son of a state Senator and eventually goes to Yale and studies law. Their stories seem to alternately move in parallel and then diverge as their fortunes rise and fall. After initial careers in NYC they both return to CT., Nat as a banker and Fletcher as a criminal defense attorney; as befitting a saga of this type they both become devoted husbands and fathers as well. As their careers proceed, it seems inevitable they they will both eventually run for public office.

This is a story that does a very good job of capturing the era. In fact, it is divided into seven books, and the very aptly chosen titles clearly indicate the author's intent for this to be a major literary work - GENESIS, EXODUS, CHRONICLES, ACTS, JUDGES, REVELATION, and NUMBERS. This book is of special interest to me. I was born and raised in CT, won a scholarship to a New England prep school and also attended college There. And now my wife and I once again live there, in close proximity to Taft and Hotchkiss. The narrative rings true to the time and locale. Even the politics are relatively accurate.

It took me a short while to get used to a story written totally in the third party, but after a few chapters I was completely involved. The story moves rapidly and continually between the two protagonists' lives; I almost hesitated to start the book (503 pages, not 400 as indicated), but it read very rapidly. The juxtaposition of the lives is very effective, but be warned, this is story, not a book of personal reflection and psychological insights.

I became increasingly involved, and several of the climactic developments during during the last few sections took me by complete surprise. I was tremendously impressed by the author's ability to weave a tale. If, I had had to guess at my rating with twenty pages to go it probably would have been five stars. Then, total disppointment. The last section seems excruiatingly slow, totally predictable, and completely unsatisfying and unrealistic. It is inexplicable; perhaps Sir Archer felt the story had been so good that the reader would accept a conclusion that basically says life goes on, but that is not the mark of a great story teller.

A few other minor complaints. First, for as meticulous research as was done, it is surprising that two of the towns involved in political events were Ipswich and Chelsea, both of which are in reality in Massachusetts rather than CT. (Any map or atlas would have shown this.) Second, at a crucial point the vote for the two candidates on page 498 is sloppily transposed. Last, the final election scenario is riduculous for 1992, and the consultation regarding the election outcome indicates an utter lack of knowledge of the difference between federal and state authority in elections. (This is too bad since I am quite a political junkie and most of the political background and maneveuring and mind numbing attention to detail of political campaigns was very accurately portrayed.)

So, if you like good stories of a broad sweep, read and enjoy SONS OF FORTUNE. You will be entertained (and surprised), but I suspect that like me you will also feel that the conclusion is an anticlimax. However, perhaps you won't care, especially if you are a confirmed Jeffrey Archer fan.

For those who have read "Kane & Abel" and "As the Crow Flies" -five star novels-it'll be very disappointing to find repetitive elements of these two books in "Sons of Fortune" (e.g., the hero's child suicide and heros' lifelong friends). The plot is weak and utterly unrealistic and the characters are plainly dull, but Archer still manages to make it readable and even enjoyable by means of his unique narrative flair. Also a bit disappointing is the fact that Archer seems to be even more fed up of Britain as he chose to develop the novel again in an American setting, just as he did with "The Eleventh Commandment". I'm still an Archer's fan, therefore I would like him to write another masterpiece based on an up-to-date theme, such as Mr Blair adventures in the UK or the Bush-Gore confrontation to the White House.

Ace voice performer Paul Michael gives a compelling reading to British author/politician Jeffrey Archer's latest foray into the lives of men and a nation.

Action begins in Hartford, Connecticut, when twin brothers are born and then abruptly separated. It is the 1950s, and one boy, Nat Cartwright, is sent home with his mother, a school teacher, and his insurance salesman father. Apparently beginning life on an entirely different path, his brother, Fletcher Davenport, becomes the son of a wealthy man and his society wife.

As the years pass, Nat attends a state university which he leaves to serve in Vietnam. Upon the end of the war he returns to college to earn an MBA. Fletcher, on the other hand, has gone to Yale where he earned a law degree. Success as a criminal lawyer comes easy for him, as does a later Senate race.

Each survives the ups and downs that life has to offer before they both contemplate running for governor, still totally unaware that they are brothers.

Will they discover the truth and, if so, how will they be affected?

- Gail Cooke

How Knowles has achieved any popularity at all is beyond me. His "reviews" are about as in-depth as listening to a conversation among third graders. His extent and knowledge about Hollywood is limited to what is told to him on the publicity tours offered to him by studios (please, don't be fooled by Knowles's constant attempts to label himself as an insider of the business).

Save your money and visit his website. A few viewings of his reviews there should tell you all you need to know.

How Knowles is taken seriously by anyone is beyond me. The man's knowledge of movies is limited to sitting on his couch and repeatedly watching "Soldier" so he can find new things to complain about. His obsession with Paul Andersen and venison is disturbing, and he constantly references these things in his book. Don't even ask about his writing style. Shoppers, if you're looking for inside information on the movie industry, it's probably not a good idea to look to a man whose only experience with Hollywood is renting videos at Blockbuster.

I picked up on the Harry Knowles phenomenon pretty late -- only about the time he started appearing with Roger Ebert. Since then, I've enjoyed reading his reviews both for their soap-opera quality about his life and his unbridled, geeky love of movies. His scatalogical "Battlefield Earth" review made me laugh out loud; his "Toy Story 2" review made me weep a little. He and Web site compatriot Moriarty keep me abreast of many of the films I care about.
So I ordered his book off the Amazon link from his Web site, and I finished it in about three days (this isn't heavy reading). I was troubled by the two co-authors -- why does someone who writes for a living need help? Nevertheless, the book is a reasonable facsimile of his singular writing voice. Essentially, the book is half-memoir, half-rant. The memoir part, especially the chapter about his bizarre, sad mother and grandmother, is fascinating. I just wish there had been more of it. He lets us in to how movies affected him in his childhood, but I wanted more detail. Maybe I wanted too much -- another "Ghost Light," Frank Rich's marvelous exploration of what it is to love theater. I did enjoy, however, the rundown of his Web site "spies," whom he cares a lot about and owes a lot to. His blow-by-blow account of the growth of his Web site is a little sketchy and self-congratulating.
The rest of the book is a jeremiad about the sorry state of Hollywood. The rant is long, windy and not all that original. What's more, his reviews undercut his arguments. In the book, he rails against badly plotted, unoriginal explosion-fests, yet he's liked some of the worst culprits -- "X-Men" for one. He does hit on one big factor -- how many people feel shut out of movies. I go through weeks during the summer when there simply isn't anything for me to see. I remember going to the movies with my parents when I was in elementary school to see big-screen epics that could entertain adults and kids -- "Lawrence of Arabia," "Ben-Hur," the original "Planet of the Apes." Now movies are either gross or dumb or both. Harry Knowles wants better movies, but I'm not sure we want the same better movies. Certainly there must be room for both of us.
So do I recommend the book? Sure, why not. It's fun spending three days inside Harry's head. For his next book, perhaps, I'd like to see him explore movie themes the way he does in the back -- his top 10 and bottom 10 movie lists are absorbing and insightful.

The Scarlet Letter was assigned reading in my English class. I found that the best way to understand the book was to read it aloud. The Cliff Notes did not help me on the quiz. They are completely plot summary. I was able to use Monarch notes since they provided much more detail

If anyone is going to read this book, they should first like reading or they will not like this book. In The Scarlet Letter, Hawthorn goes into a lot of detail about well...everything! Most of my class mates did not like this book because they said the descriptions were too long and he should just get to the point. But that is what really gets you into the story. There are never any questions about a relationship between two people or how the father is tormented with guilt. I recomend this book for open minded readers who will apreciate how he gets you into the story. It really makes you want to keep reading. There are a couple of chapters near the beginning that are hard to get through but when you finish the book, there is that much more understanding about what the characters represtented in the story and all the lessons that can be learned.

The Scarlet Letter is a literary masterpiece. It is a classic, and therefore, though the language and setting are old-fashioned, the plot is wonderfully simple and symbolic while at the same time the characters are intertwined and complex. If you read the book you will understand that the language and setting do not detract in any way from the story and symbolism. The themes of isolation, sin, and society's hypocritical contempt for sin can be translated even to this day. As a result, The Scarlet Letter remains a timeless and beautiful romance.

I very much enjoyed "Kowloon Tong" but then I am a big fan of Paul Theroux's writing. This one of his better novels I think.

The characters in this novel are typical of Theroux, they are strong and evoke a strong reaction. The novel has been criticized for how it depicts the Chinese. Having visited Hong Kong a number of times and studied Mandarin in Bei Jing I found one side of the Chinese character well described and represented. I would say though that another side of the Chinese personality is perhaps not so well represented. Many of the Chinese people whom I know are also very warm and delightful people.

The British I don't now so well but they do seem to lend themselves to being made fun of. If you enjoyed this part of "Kowloon Tong" try Theroux's "Emerald Kingdom"!

The story in "Kowloon Tong" is exciting and difficult to put down. This is a novel well worth reading.

Amid the hoopla and (often forced) pagentry of the Hong Konghandover, Paul Theroux deserves some credit for this courageouscontemplation of the darker side of the historic change in rule. In this decided politically incorrect view of the handover, the British, particularly in the form of the very Thatcherlike character of Betty Mullard, are portrayed as bitterly turning their backs on the Hong Kong people. Worse still, Chinese officaldom is personified as a greedy, lecherous PLA thug. Such characterizations have earned Theroux the label of racist, but those accusations have to be put alongside the sight of Jiang Zemin and Li Peng, unelected leaders who ordered the tanks to roll in Tiananmen Square, accepting the mantle of Hong Kong sovereignty from the British.
It's clear from the start of the book that Theroux's story has a rather cynical point: That Hong Kong was little more than a commercial plaything for two governments, both with little regard for the people who live there. The novel presents the British as social elitists--looking down on the Chinese who really make Hong Kong the economic engine it is. The Communist Chinese, on the other hand, are political and economic elitists--coldly removing anyone or anything that stands in their path to power. Kowloon Tong is not a travelogue nor a story of personal journey. It's a commentary on the political attitudes that, if you watched the Handover ceremony, were all clearly on view. It is unfortunate that Theroux missed some of the factual and geographical detail that he is otherwise renowned for, because this dampens the affect of the novel. But for its sheer strength of conviction--that the Hong Kong people deserve better then they got from all parties--it deserves to be read.

I first read Kowloon Tong while living in Stanley, Hong Kong, just a few months before the Hand-over. I have found its rendering of attitudes of expatriates and chinese by far the most accurate account of the Hong Kong I experienced on a day to day basis. Theroux is equally fair (and equally blunt) about British, Chinese and American residents in Hong Kong - I encountered the boorish behaviour described here everyday - that was Hong Kong, a place where people went to make money, or to escape from China (or both). Not everyone, of course, was like Bunt and Hung, but these are recognizable types.
The plot is that of Graham Greene thriller, with the sarcasm of Evelyn Waugh and Gore Vidal thrown in. I should add that I find many of the comments on this page highly evocative of the Hong Kong I knew, too - the novel was banned in China and was a painful read for some Hong Kong British, Chines and Americans I knew (especially the types well-described here -chiefly long-term residents). The detached reader should enjoy a good read that's also highly accurate in its description.
The Hong Kong I knew was about the most un-literary place on the planet. "Criticism" of Hong Kong was thought of as a pamphlet from the Tourist Bureau, an announcement from the Government Publicity Office, or the Website of a company wanting to do business in China. But that is not what novelists do.