I bought Dogwalker. I opened Dogwalker. I read Dogwalker. I want more! The characters in Dogwalker are some of the best and oddest I've ever encountered. They make you laugh out loud and would probably make you cry if they were not so damned emotionless. It is the lack of emotion in the characters of Dogwalker that allow Bradford to write in his simple, unassuming, mutant-dogs-are-an-everyday-occurence style. For those who have been dissapointed with Bradford's simple prose, I think that it is the perfect style for his stories and characters. Beautiful prose and long flowing sentences would have buried the unique characters that he invented. Bradford is friends with and received glowing back-cover blurbs from Dave Eggers, David Sedaris, Zadie Smith, David Foster Wallace and Matthew Klam. For an added treat, check out Bradford's website...and listen to him perform "Rosalyn's Dog" or see him at a live reading.

DOGWALKER is a gently surreal book that is refreshingly different from anything other fiction being written right now. Bradford brings back some welcome influences -- Denis Johnson of course, but also Richard Brautigan, fanciful Pynchon, sedated Palahniuk -- and, like these writers, allows himself to be goofy in a rare, un-self-conscious way. It's too bad he's been lumped in with the Eggers & Co -- makes for some good blurbs on the back of the book (from some great & appropriate writers, i.e. Zadie Smith & DFW), but obscures the fact that something going on in these stories that's much more original and affecting than anyone else contributing to McSweeney's (Eggers included). Bradford has a distinct, original voice with a perfect, carefully cultivated flatness. Occasionally it begins to sound like it might be coming from a narrator a few bong hits past, um, sharp, and that in turn sometimes comes off as laziness on Bradford's part, but I think a word like lopiness is more appropriate -- it's not in a hurry and it's not showing off, but eventually this writing's going to take you somewhere you've never been in fiction. And if you have a chance to see Bradford read in person, take it.

This is a wonderul collection of stories. David Foster Wallace hits the nail on the head when he says that reading Bradford is like having lunch with the part of you that dreams at night. Strange things occur and exceedingly pleasant, non-neurotic first-person narrators react as you would in a dream: they note the odd situations they find themselves in but then move on (with wonderful results). It's like being able to slow your dreams down--not to mention remember them--and savor all the strange details. The writing is also blissfully clean. I noticed one of the comments above mentioned Bradford's sideburns. I saw a reading and let me tell you: his gums are not to be believed (let's pray he keeps his teeth). See a reading if you can, and enjoy the book, it's well worth a read.

Anytime an individual takes the risk of putting so much of his personal life on paper for all to read, he is to be commended. Although I first came to admire John Denver in the early 70s for his music, it was his work later as a naturalist, environmentalist and advocate for children that will remain with me as well. After reading his book, I had a better understanding of the events in his life that may have lead him in this direction. A look at his video self-portrait will also help fans learn more about him and the thoughts behind some of his most popular hits.

As a big fan of John Denver, I find it hard to fault a book about his life, his career, and his growth as a human being. I found John to be a good story-teller and many of the stories did not show him in his best light. I think this book is honest and straight-forward; John doesn't try to sugar-coat any of his actions. I would recommend this book to anyone who enjoys John Denver's music - there is a wealth of insight into his motivatin for writing many of his popular hits and lesser known works, also

From 1978 on I was a fan of John Denver, not because he was hip, not because he was dazzling, but because he was genuine, honest, and straight-forward. What I loved about his music and what I loved about his live performances is it was not a show. It came from the heart. This autobiography is just like his performances, it hides nothing. It is difficult to name autobiographies that paint an ugly picture of their author. I think people misunderstand how this book was written as much for John as it was for us. There is a lesson to be learned here about what works and doesn't work in living life. I am thankful to John for sharing with me what doesn't work. I learned from reading this book. I played his songs when I came to chapters that the songs coincided with. For such beauty to be created in the midst of a normal, flawed, human life, "it amazes me!"

Think about your life story, all the stuff you did you are proud of, and all the stuff you did you are ashamed of. If you could imagine allowing everyone in to read about it all, then maybe you can begin to appreciate what it took to write this book. Remember he published this before his death.

If you loved the man, you should read this book to know the false front he put on, and the dark face he now reveals.

God bless you, John.

Unless you are a corporate bean counter and have a firm foundation of the Enron debacle, I suggest you read Robert Bryce's *Pipe Dreams: Greed, Ego, and the Death of Enron* before reading "Whistle-blower" Sherron Watkins' story, here with the help of Texas Monthly's Mimi Swartz. *Power Failure* is focused more on Enron's people and personalities than The Big Picture. If you are clueless about "Mark to Market" accounting, return to *Pipe Dreams* and do not collect your now worthless Enron-backed Pension.

The photos are more plentiful here and the personalities come alive in their wicked glory. There are no footnotes, and few quote attributions - which can lead to credibility issues. What was her motivation? What did she know and when did she know it? Why wait so late? There is one cool -and it's even attributed- quote, which, unfortunately, Azon's "editors" will not let me quote here in its entirety. It goes something like this: Senator Peter G. Fitzerald to Kenny-Boy (Pres. G.W.'s pet name for him) Lay: You're perhaps the most accomplished confidence man since Charles Ponzi. I'd say you were a carnival barker, but that wouldn't be fair to carnival barkers.
Reviewed by TundraVision

Imagine the life of Sherron Watkins: a posh job with one of the most successful energy companies in the world, all of the amenities that come with wining-and-dining important contacts while negotiating deals worth millions --- and a nagging suspicion that something within the company you're working for isn't quite right. There were thousands of Enron employees, all with the same upward mobility and satisfying salaries that Sherron Watkins possessed. So what set Watkins apart from them? It was the fact that she was willing to risk sacrificing it all to expose the corrupt practices that had made Enron so profitable.

In POWER FAILURE, the entire history of Enron is explored, from its inception in 1985 to its demise in 2001. Written by Mimi Swartz with assistance from whistle-blower Sherron Watkins, this book will take the reader on a journey that includes Enron's earliest successes and failures, the super-charged management conferences, the politically incorrect Enron trading floors and the Senate Hearing Room's investigation and subsequent trial.

But POWER FAILURE is much more than just an expose on a corrupt corporation. It also provides a frightening view on what the big-business atmosphere has become. The story of Enron shows how delicate the balance of politics, money and business practices is, and how thin the line between legal and illegal can be.

Swartz and Watkins effectively tell the story of Enron without a hint of tabloid exploitation. And with all the exploitations that occurred within Enron, that's nothing short of a miracle. They give an accurate, honest perspective on all of the events that took place in the history of the corporation and portray the characters of Enron without bias. That's not to say that there's no negative statements made about people throughout the book --- just that they're given in a diplomatic manner. The book is written in an informative yet entertaining manner, complete with entertaining sidebars and humorous anecdotes to keep the reader's attention. And they have included plenty of pictures to point out just who the evildoers are. This is a must read for business people, tax evaders, anyone who plans to cheat the system, or the average Joe who wants to know what really happened at Enron.

--- Reviewed by Melissa Brown

April 23, 2003
I'm just finished 'Power Failure' the inside story of Enron's failure. The book is by Mimi Swartz and Sherron Watkins of Enron fame. It is a very well written and entertaining: I was pleasantly surprised. Sherron was a key part in the rise and later fall of 'Enron'.

Sherron actually ran some of the 'Off-Balance-Sheet' for Andy Fastnow. The book brought up lots pertinent history of 'Corporate America's' use of 'Off-Balance-Sheet' stuff and other revenue recognition policies and how the accounting firms aided and abetted. The book gave rise to one important question, how was it able to happen: it's evident that there is more fraud to be discovered.

It's my opinion that this book will be included in the other now famous period pieces like: 'Where are the Customers' Yachts?' By Fred Schwed, 'The Great Crash' by John Kenneth Galbraith and
'Reminiscences of a Stock Operator' by Edwin Lefevre

What happened at Enron reminds me of a 'Tom Clancy 'book, lots of movement and bad people.

Mary Bellanova comes home from work one day to find her boyfriend dead. She starts to track down his old girlfriends and finds she doesn't know as much about him as she thought. What follows is hilarious and touching while staying a frighteningly real look at life in the East Village of NYC. Arthur Nersesian develops a great (and occasionally-insane) female character that anyone can identify with. I picked up the book based on its front cover and my familiarity with the Tompkins Square Dog Run where a bit of the action takes place, but now I'm hooked on Nersesian's work. With my having just moved away from the East Village, this book is like coming home.

I found this book a little typical (single 30 something living in NYC, trying to find a job, a guy, a roommate, etc.), yet it was highly entertaining. I believe the reason for this is because Nersesian takes this typical character throws in odd twists all over the place. To get the list of her newly dead boyfriends ex-lovers, she has to go to strip clubs and join a indie-rock band. We see her scraping up the dogrun for human ashes and getting her feet licked by a man who has a fetish over her cowboy boots. It's a typical story, with some excellent twists. I would suggest reading it just for the enjoyment of the impossible.

I just finished reading this book and I loved it. I don't normally read more humorous books, because I think I won't get very much out of them, but I was very wrong. Dogrun has changed me forever. Nersesian had me laughing all the way through this woman's journey of love. With every twist of bad luck, you couldn't help but smile and say, that's life. This book is truly the book of life, with all of it's ups and downs, it tells the story of us, humans. The narrator of the story, Mary is a 29 year old temp worker and hopeful writer, who discovers her boyfriend of 6 months, dead in her apartment one day after work. From this spins an uncontrolable tale of finding out about someone's past and finding out who you really are. Mary's search for answers in her life, makes the reader ponder questions in their lives. Like why are we in the relationships we are in? Along the way you meet crazy characters that all seemed linked to Mary's dead boyfriend, the most memorable being a hard rocker and ex-stripper named Sue Wott. If you want a fast paced, remarkable book, that will leave you laughing but thinking, read this book. I have now become one of Arthur Nersesian's biggest fans! You won't regret buying this book.

This book is an alright book to read, if you were acting it out in Drama. If the book was written in regular form, then it would be good for the classrooms. This book was interesting to read but hard to understand. You had to some what jump back and forth between people talking. I feel for the people who had to be put in the concentration camps, and were forced to work against their will just to keep their family members alive. I do not think that people have a right to degrade other humans beings of their own kind or culture.

First off, the way the Crucible relates to the post-war era and the 1950 McCarthy trials make it a prime choice of reading material for high school students. As a high school student myself, I found the book very interesting as a psychoanalysis of human nature. Arthur Miller has explored the concepts of guilt and hypocrisy in a very unique fashion.

The theme of how a repressed society reacts to hysteria is perused in this drama. My personal belief is that people who entrust their lives to unproven dogma find themselves trapped in a form of repression. This includes the conservative outlook posted by the former reviewer of this book.

Lies, hypocrisy, and lust are themes that teenagers begin to encounter in high school. To refuse them the liberty to have complete access to literature is to lock down the developing, free and independent thinking mind. Thus, the banning and removal of books deemed "inappropiate" by biased standards results in the formation of a repressed society much like the Puritans in the early 1600's.

Ignorance may be bliss for you, but don't punish others because of your biased, uproven religious dogma. Our society will succeed if the next generation is given a chance to use their BRAINS. Our society will fail if the conservative coalition destroys independent thinking.

Conformism is your enemy.

Arthur Millers, The Crucibal, is a wonderfully written dramatic play. It is intersting and absorbing. The history of the play begins from the communist "witch-hunts", which inspired Miller to write the book. An easy reader, but very thought provoking. Worth reading at any age!

I'm astounded by those who rate this book five stars. Whyte has created an interesting approach to the Arthurian legend in placing it within a remnant of Roman Britain but the writing is at best ordinary and, at least this particular book, needs significant editing. (At over 700 pages this one just drags on and on.)

I keep reading the series because I enjoy variations on the legend and Whyte may have created something more historically "accurate" than any of the other authors but I don't recommend The Saxon Shore to anyone other than Arthur junkies. Certainly reviews here that claim this is five star literature are overblown.

To get the full power of the Camaloud Cronicles, you must start from the beginning (The Skystone) and read them all in sequence. Wonderfull tale!

I only review books that I like. It seems to me childish and petty to attack an author's work simply because you don't like it. I usually don't bother to finish books I don't like, let alone waste time reviewing them. Why would anyone continue to read a book that bores them?

I have bought and read all six of Jack Whyte's Camulod Chronicles: The Skystone; The Singing Sword; Eagle's Brood; The Saxon Shore; Fort at River's Bend and The Sorcerer. It is a great series, and I enjoyed each one of them.

It is to be expected that Whyte departs from the (rather sketchy) history Aavailable of the period, in a fiction series. And yet he has done his research, obviously, which is important to me in historical novels.

There have been several very good books written about the pre-Arthurian period in England, many of which I've read. Jack Whyte's worked ranks right at the top, with me. I am familiar with what history is available, having read much of the period, and his research effort is obvious.

He begins with a couple of Roman legionaires as his protagonists, before the Legions pulled out of England: Publius Varrus and Caius Brittanicus. The series then follows their lives and their family's lives through a series of gripping adventures, as they strive to maintain order and peace on the colony they have created in the South of England.

Publius Varrus, a blacksmith, creates a great and beautiful sword from a meteorite before he dies, which he names Excalibur, King Arthur's famous blade. Of course, eventually the series chronicles the lives of Merlyn (Merlin) and Arthur.

I was caught up in the story, and I strongly recommend it. It is entertaining and a delightful way to learn a bit of history. Buy them, you won't be sorry.

Joseph Pierre,
author of THE ROAD TO DAMASCUS: Our Journey Through Eternity

I am very impressed with _Arthur Marx's Groucho: A Photographic Journey_. All photos are of high quality and most have not seen print before. I believe that over half were taken by Arthur Marx himself. The book weighs something like six pounds. The only reason that this is relevant to all but the infirm, and perhaps the hapless mail carrier, is because it denotes the quality of the paper used; more specifically: the high-glossy type of presentation that makes this coffee table book so unique within the realm of Marx Brothers books. Arthur Marx and editor Frank Ferrante (and the book designer, whose name is simply not handy just now) are to be commended on their efforts. Nicely done. Why my vote of "four stars" and not "five"? Most realtively-new Marx enthusiasts might likely give the book five stars. I guess that my lone reservation revolves around the fact that the editorial content (that meaning Arthur Marx's written observations), albeit generous in both tone and length, offer little _new_ insight to this jaded reader than, well, I guess, the fact that Groucho's breakfast consisted of half a grapefruit, two pieces of toast, and coffee). There may a few other brand-new insights that I've forgotten. (But again, I write as a long-time student of the Marxes.) At the same time, Arthur's text does serve nicely as a son's loving reminiscences of his father, and I'll take that over the transcriptions of "The Bank of America v. Erin Fleming" any day. (Besides all of that, the transcriptions do not include any photographs whatsoever. Perhaps fortuitously.) Regardless, most dyed in the wool Groucho fans will relish this expertly-executed new book on Groucho (a new book on Groucho is, obviously, reason enough for celebration). Newbies are likely to delight in it even more-so (even if, perhaps, most cannot actually afford a coffee table upon which to place it; my advice to them is "fake it"). I thereby recommend it highly. (I only wish this site allowed a vote of four-and-one-half stars. Ah well.) Kudos to all involved in this project.

I'm a comedy buff and this book reminded me why I fell in love with the Marx Brothers when I was a kid. Arthur Marx's take on his father is warm and funny. The photography is top notch. Thank you, Mr. Marx, for this hilarious tribute. I needed the laugh.

Until this week, I had no idea what I was going to get my mother for Mother's Day, my father for Father's Day. Now I know. I have read every comedy, Groucho and Marx Brothers book out there. And now comes along an unbelieveably intimate look at comedy's best - "Arthur Marx's GROUCHO: A Photographic Journey." 'Arthur Marx's GROUCHO' succeeds where no other book has in portraying the private Groucho behind the public genius... because for the first time we actually see the man. These are absolutely pheneomenal photographs of Groucho and the Marx Brothers - most of which I've never seen. Many of these photos were taken by Groucho's son Arthur in the mid-1930's and capture Groucho through the years. And they completely shatter the image of the great Groucho brooding at home. Here he is playing with his kids, celebrating holidays, laughing while making "A Day at the Races" with his brothers. Incredible stuff. This coffee table book itself is as stunning and classy as the subject matter. Gold embossed title, highest quality paper. Obvious care was taken in design and structure. Arthur Marx writes loving and humorous commentary on his legendary family. It is packed with Groucho one-liners, new stories and celeb photos. I can't say enough about it. Comedy and Marx fans will not be disappointed. You bet your life!

This book must be a good candidate for being the most important book of the 21st century. British psychologist Richard Lynn and Finnish political scientist Tatu Vanhanen find that recent IQ data from scores of countries world-wide show really strong correlations, of around r = .65, with national prosperity -- whether Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is estimated for 1820 or for the 1990s. Quite contrary to the theorizing of most Western economists of the past fifty years, the underdeveloped (later, 'developing') countries of fifty years ago have not generally closed the gap with the help of ongoing Western handouts and advice. Clearly, several East Asian countries have in that time made enormous strides -- as may also happen soon in the ex-Communist countries of Eastern Europe; but in the countries of sub-Saharan Africa (i.e. largely Black Africa), mean IQ estimates hover around 70 and progress has been slight. Of the world's 21 countries which steadily tripled their GDP from 1983 through 1990 and 1993 to 1996, none was on or near the African mainland; whereas of the 27 countries whose GDP decreased by 50%, ten were African (Angola, Burkina Faso, Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Libya, Madagascar, Somalia, Sudan, Zambia and Sao Tome & Principe).

Yet will L&V prove persuasive about causation? Doubters will raise four particular problems.
First, IQ and the Wealth of Nations is published by an American mail order house which charges £70 for the book. Terrorized by the politically correct, mainstream Western 'publishers' have for ten years been entirely unwilling to bring out books that touch on race - whether by Arthur Jensen, Phil Rushton or myself. Recently, it turned out that top psychologist Steven Pinker (Massachusetts Institute of Technology), who had converted to hereditarianism after hearing from friends how a second child was often very different from a first, felt he had to remove a chapter about race from the final draft of his new pro-heredity book, The Blank Slate. L&V are not alone in finding themselves up against the Zeitgeist, and the reception of their book has not so far been auspicious. L&V's reply will have to be that such repression indicates that the liberal-left consensus (which in 1950 persuaded the United Nations to declare all races to be of equal intelligence) is a hysteria that must one day lift.

Secondly, some will doubtless try to quibble with the IQ estimates that are the central novelty of IQ and the Wealth of Nations. L&V typically present some three 'normative' IQ studies for each of the countries they discuss; they do not provide details of social sampling; and they estimate IQ's for some nations by taking the average of the IQs in neighbouring countries - e.g. crediting Afghanistan with IQ 83 as an average of India's 81 and Iran's 84. Surprisingly, L&V maintain that the mean IQ in Israel is only 94 - ignoring the possibility that Sephardic Jews, like other Africans, may have special deficits in the visuo-spatial abilities that are needed to do well on 'culture-fair' intelligence tests like the famous Raven's Matrices. None of this is ideal. However, L&V have a very strong reply from both the general consistency of their IQ estimates and the sheer strength of IQ's correlations with national productivity. If workers had seriously confounded their assessments of national IQ, L&V would simply have had to present the usual miserably low correlations of around .25 that obtain throughout psychology and the social sciences. As it is, L&V have plainly struck gold.

Thirdly, there is the question of cause and effect. Can L&V convince us that IQ actually causes national wealth, rather than vice versa? The literature on the causal importance of IQ is only partially covered here, and L&V settle rather easily for the view that IQ and wealth will both tend to cause each other. This concession will weaken their case in the eyes of those who already deplore the idea that IQ is causal. L&V would have done better to point to the exceedingly slight IQ advantages accruing to Black children in the USA even when their fathers are seriously rich, and to the failure of the American Black-White gap in intelligence to decrease despite many billions of American dollars being thrown at the problem for the past forty years. Even a century of national impoverishment does not lower IQ -- as shown by the cases of mainland China, Poland and Russia in L&V's own data. By contrast, IQ correlates .50 with individual upward social mobility, relative to the position of the testee's father (Touhey, 1972). The simple truth is that a normal national IQ is necessary though not sufficient for prosperity; and that a low IQ holds whole countries back even if individuals can compensate for dullness by good looks or hard work. Neglecting such points, as also the full range of arguments that race differences are of substantially genetic origin ... L&V will have partly themselves to blame if their book is set aside.

Lastly, L&V show remarkable modesty about the implications of their findings. This may have been intended as placatory; but it, too, will win them few friends. Rather than stress the need for eugenics in Africa, L&V conclude their book with two bizarrely half-hearted recommendations. The first is that the West should recognize continuing IQ differences and thus continue pumping subsidies into Africa as a matter of "ethical obligation." The second is that some fraction of this conscience money should be spent not on eugenics but on "improvements in nutrition and the like." No change there, then, for this is what the West has been doing ever since it abandoned the responsible idea of empire! It is remarkable that L&V should have troubled to write a 'controversial' book which cannot be published by a mainstream publisher only to come to such feeble practical recommendations. L&V have provided a way of forgetting their book which social-environmentalist ideologues will be desperately eager to take.

This book must be a good candidate for being the most important book of the 21st century. British psychologist Richard Lynn and Finnish political scientist Tatu Vanhanen find that recent IQ data from scores of countries world-wide show really strong correlations, of around r = .65, with national prosperity -- whether Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is estimated for 1820 or for the 1990s. Quite contrary to the theorizing of most Western economists of the past fifty years, the underdeveloped (later, 'developing') countries of fifty years ago have not generally closed the gap with the help of ongoing Western handouts and advice. Clearly, several East Asian countries have in that time made enormous strides -- as may also happen soon in the ex-Communist countries of Eastern Europe; but in the countries of sub-Saharan Africa (i.e. largely Black Africa), mean IQ estimates hover around 70 and progress has been slight. Of the world's 21 countries which steadily tripled their GDP from 1983 through 1990 and 1993 to 1996, none was on or near the African mainland; whereas of the 27 countries whose GDP decreased by 50%, ten were African (Angola, Burkina Faso, Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Libya, Madagascar, Somalia, Sudan, Zambia and Sao Tome & Principe).

Yet will Lynn and Vanhanen (L&V) prove persuasive about causation? Doubters will raise four particular problems.

First, 'IQ and the Wealth of Nations' is published by an American mail order house which charges £70 for the book. Terrorized by the politically correct, mainstream Western 'publishers' have for ten years been entirely unwilling to bring out books that touch on race - whether by Arthur Jensen, Phil Rushton or myself. Recently, it turned out that top psychologist Steven Pinker (Massachusetts Institute of Technology), who had converted to hereditarianism after the birth of his second child, felt he had to remove a chapter about race from the final draft of his new pro-heredity book, 'The Blank Slate'. L&V are not alone in finding themselves up against the Zeitgeist, and the reception of their book has not so far been auspicious. L&V's reply will have to be that such repression indicates that the liberal-left consensus (which in 1950 persuaded the United Nations to declare all races to be of equal intelligence) is a hysteria that must one day lift.

Secondly, some will doubtless try to quibble with the IQ estimates that are the central novelty of 'IQ and the Wealth of Nations.' L&V typically present some three 'normative' IQ studies for each of the countries they discuss; they do not provide details of social sampling; and they estimate IQ's for some nations by taking the average of the IQs in neighbouring countries - e.g. crediting Afghanistan with IQ 83 as an average of India's 81 and Iran's 84. Surprisingly, L&V maintain that the mean IQ in Israel is only 94 - ignoring the possibility that Sephardic Jews, like other Africans, may have special deficits in the visuo-spatial abilities that are needed to do well on 'culture-fair' intelligence tests like the famous Raven's Matrices. None of this is ideal. However, L&V have a very strong reply from both the general consistency of their IQ estimates and the sheer strength of IQ's correlations with national productivity. If workers had seriously confounded their assessments of national IQ, L&V would simply have had to present the usual miserably low correlations of around .25 that obtain throughout psychology and the social sciences. As it is, L&V have plainly struck gold.

Thirdly, there is the question of cause and effect. Can L&V convince us that IQ actually causes national wealth, rather than vice versa? The literature on the causal importance of IQ is only partially covered here, and L&V settle rather easily for the view that IQ and wealth will both tend to cause each other. This concession will weaken their case in the eyes of those who already deplore the idea that IQ is causal. L&V would have done better to point to the exceedingly slight IQ advantages accruing to Black children in the USA even when their fathers are seriously rich, and to the failure of the American Black-White gap in intelligence to decrease despite many billions of American dollars being thrown at the problem for the past forty years. Even a century of national impoverishment does not lower IQ -- as shown by the cases of mainland China, Poland and Russia in L&V's own data. By contrast, IQ correlates .50 with individual upward social mobility, relative to the position of the testee's father. The simple truth is that a normal national IQ is necessary though not sufficient for prosperity; and that a low IQ holds whole countries back even if individuals can compensate for dullness by good looks or hard work. Neglecting such points, as also the full range of arguments that race differences are of substantially genetic origin, L&V will have partly themselves to blame if their book is set aside.

Lastly, L&V show remarkable modesty about the implications of their findings. This may have been intended as placatory; but it, too, will win them few friends. Rather than stress the need for eugenics in Africa, L&V conclude their book with two bizarrely half-hearted recommendations. The first is that the West should recognize continuing IQ differences and thus continue pumping subsidies into Africa as a matter of "ethical obligation." The second is that some fraction of this conscience money should be spent not on eugenics but on "improvements in nutrition and the like." No change there, then, for this is what the West has been doing ever since it abandoned the responsible idea of empire! It is remarkable that L&V should have troubled to write a 'controversial' book which cannot be published by a mainstream publisher only to come to such feeble practical recommendations. L&V have provided a way of forgetting their book which social-environmentalist ideologues will be desperately eager to take.

Anyone who spends time watching TV news or reading any publication is struck by the amount of poverty and uneven development in the world. According the U.S. World Factbook, many nation in Africa have life expectancy little above 40 years old. Half of the population of India is illiterate and a majority of the populations of China still live in the rural countryside with annual incomes in the hundreds of dollars.

What causes the great differences in wealth and poverty between the world's nations. I personally have wondered many of these questions over the years, as I am sure many others, of the wealth and poverty of nations. That's why Professor Lynn and Professor Vanhanen book seems to be a bolt of lightning out of the blue on the issue of Wealth of Poverty of Nations. Book is pricey but definitely worth the cost.

The Wealth of Nations can be assessed on three areas:

1.Natural Resources. Land, Oil, Diamond, Agriculture, Fishing, etc.
2.Planned versus Market Economies. Planned, controlled economies have brought poverty to North Korea, Russia, Eastern Europe, Cuba, China. Professor Lynn compares North to South Korea where income in south is 15 times higher than the north. In fact, there is now famine in North Korea.
3.National IQ of population.

IQ and Wealth of Nations dwells on the third component between National IQ and Economic Development. The author's ideas are original and are to be commended for a doing a full academic study.

The UK IQ of 100 is used as standard measure. The lowest measured is in Guinea (IQ, 59), Nigeria (IQ, 67) and highest in Japan (IQ, 105) and Hong Kong (IQ, 107).

Of note, readers will find IQ interesting if not debatable such as India (IQ, 81) Iraq (IQ, 87) Mexico (IQ, 87) US (IQ, 98) and Israel (IQ, 94). You would think India with so many engineers would have a higher IQ.

The highest average IQs are of the East Asian nations of North East Asia (IQ, 104), European nations (IQ, 98), and white populations of North America and Australasia (IQ, 98), South and Southwest Asia from the Middle East through Turkey to India and Malaysia (IQ, 87), South East Asia and the Pacific Islands (IQ, 86), Latin America and the Caribbean (IQ, 85), and Africa (IQ, 70).

Many readers of the 1994 The Bell Curve will be interested in the authors' finding of IQ of 70 for the native African population in Africa. The African-American IQ is usually 85 in U.S., Jamaica (IQ, 72). The Africans in U.S. have a higher IQ of 85 compared to Africa of 70. This will be of note to historians.

Of concern to American reader are the IQ of it's neighboring countries. Canada (97), Mexico (87), Cuba (85), Jamaica (72), Haiti (72) in the news Russia (96) Afghanistan (83). The numbers may be incorrect but nonetheless are worthy areas of debate and data for additional research.

Of China (100) and India (81), two nations in the billion people range affecting the future of the world. China (IQ, 100) compared with U.S.A. (98). China has five times as many people as U.S. The IQ of 100 may be depressed because of poverty. If it is 107 like the Chinese in Hong Kong, China seems to be a nation destined to rule the 21st. century. China has ten times more people than Japan (IQ, 105).

The IQ on China seems to be of world-historical, world-economic importance if they have such a high IQ. Sitting here in Austin, Texas, this bit of information makes me think. Not will they provide cheap labor, they will also provide the brains for the world.

The author posits an IQ of 90 is needed for a technology-based society. Only 20% of the world population have IQ above 90. Africa (IQ, 70) and India (IQ, 81), Latin America (IQ, 85) raises the impossibility of technical development there. This is depressing news. People who work in aiding the Third World really needs to look at these IQ numbers. If the IQ of 70 is correct for Africa, there going to be endless poverty.

Having read the book twice, this book really raises unsettling questions about he future of the world. Professor Lynn is expert on IQ with 20 years of scholarly research behind him. Both are not cranks nor pseudo-scientist. Both are professor-academics laying out an academic argument.

This maybe the book of the decade if not century. It raises unsettling, alarming, incredible, amazing, tough questions. Has the "missing element" in economic development been IQ after all. Will China (IQ, 100 or 107) dominate the world. Is IQ of Africa 70. Is the world average IQ equal to 90 and only 20% of the world's population above 100. Are nations doomed to poverty because of their IQ. More research and studies to confirm or deny the IQ and theories in this book is needed.

This book is a must buy, must read and must book for talk and analysis. Granted this is the first scholarly analysis of IQ and world development. Presumably more books and articles will follow and the IQ of individual nations will be researched and debated.

I urge all readers to buy book and read it for themselves. It will keep you thinking for a long, long time as it did for me. If the IQ numbers correlate with economic development, this maybe the book of the decade. Period.

Originally, I bought this book as a gift for my girlfriend, because she is a big fan of philosophy. I wasn't expecting much, but thought it might be a fun read.
Our first impression of Mr. Ledeen was that he was way out there. He has very strong opinions of how the world works. He loves Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher for instance. LOVES them. But after reading the book through, and then reading the original Machiavelli's "the prince," we determined that Michael Ledeen knew exactly what he was talking about!
We also decided to learn more about Michael Ledeen, so we went online. We went to a web site about him and learned that the man has a double Phd in Philosophy and history respectively. We found his e-mail address and send him a note, expressing our enjoyment of his book. He promptly replied BACK to us and explained his views on the George W. Bush presidency.
This book is fun, interesting, true to Machilavelli completely, and Mr. Ledeen makes a good comparison of the modern time with the time in which Machiavelli lived.

Machiavelli on Modern Leadership by Michael A. Ledeen is one of the most entertaining and instructive books I've read. It's one that I am going to keep at hand because I am sure to be going back to it time and again. It's also the perfect book to buy for your friends-and your enemies. Ledeen serves up Machiavelli's thoughts on the makings of a leader in easily digestible morsels, garnished with wonderful (good and bad) examples from the modern world of politics, government, military life, business, sports, religion. He has so much fun at this game that you inevitably start playing along with him, applying Machiavelli's rules to all the "bosses" you've ever known in your own life. With this book in hand you can also gain a new perspective on all the political figures you have learned to love and hate. Many world figures have already been dispassionately dissected for you by Ledeen, but you will find yourself looking around for others on whom Machiavelli would have conferred his seal of approval or disapproval.

Looking back over my own life, I found many classic Machiavellian examples, especially of the "bad" prince, in that terrible Communist world I left behind in 1978. Machiavelli tells us that, because men are more disposed toward evil than toward good, the supreme leaders are bloody minded; that is exactly how Nikita Khrushchev, one of my "supreme bosses" from my other life, looked to me, both when he was sober and when he was drunk. The Machiavellian man uses change and flexibility to stay on top, but the Soviet bloc leaders I knew were increasingly dogmatic and inflexible, culminating with Leonid Brezhnev, who acted like a mechanical puppet (as does Boris Yeltsin today). Or take another of Ledeen's points, in which Machiavelli recommends avoiding the mistake of believing that all men are the same, no matter where they may live. When given a private tour of Macy's department store in New York, my former Romanian boss, Nicolae Ceausescu, believed the displays had been specially set up for him, because that was what he would have done to impress a foreign visitor to his Communist Romania. Today, when Yeltsin appointed the bloody KGB general Sergey Stepashin as prime minister of Russia, I pondered the fact that in the last four centuries all Russian/Soviet tsars have turned to their political police to defend their thrones. When I looked into Ledeen's book to see if Machiavelli also had an answer for that, there it was: "Machiavelli very badly wants to believe that a great leader can almost always be confident about his ability to win, provided that he has studied history carefully."

During the 20 years that Michael Ledeen has been my friend, we have often worked together to fight the evils of Soviet Communism-and today's crypto-Communism-by using Machiavelli's weapons, and I have always been sure he would some day write the ultimate contemporary book on Machiavelli. Ledeen has so admired this eminent mind of the Italian Renaissance that he has himself become the perfect American Machiavelli.

Ion Mihai Pacepa (former adviser to Ceausescu and acting chief of his espionage service)

This book is not just for leaders, but anyone living in a democracy, simply because you get to vote for your leaders. This book gives one a whole new outlook on what a good leader should be like - not kind and caring as Greek Gods and kings of lore and old history were, but tough and pragmatic.
Numerous examples of this are given throughout the book, noting modern leaders from Winston Churchill to Pope John Paul II.
I liked the author's easy-to-read style as well, and the book is itself so encouraging that by the end of the first few chapters I was itching to read The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli, and dying to play a game of bridge (read the book - you'll find out).

I found it particularly interesting that Kubrick's very adult final movie was based on a short story written back in 1926. Kubrick fans know his movies are full of interesting camera angles and great characters, but underlying all his movies are a combination of temptation and agony. He was a master of titillating the senses and arousing curiousity but not quite giving you what you wanted to see. I was a little surprised, then, when his final movie seemed to leave little to the imagination.

I was surprised by the other reviews on this site that claimed the original story was overly risque. While the story was similar in concept, I found it rather tame compared to the movie. One reviewer said the main character had an infatuation with underage minors. Were we reading the same story here?

I enjoyed the movie but critics complain the movie was too focused on overt sexuality and shock value. Perhaps that's true. It's unlike his previous works which left more to interpretation of the viewer. I do agree that Kubrick attempted to solve the mysteries that were left unanswered in the story. I believe the movie would've received higher acclaim if he remained focused on the tension regarding the affairs of the heart.

One final note, as another reviewer noted, the screenplay differs from the final work. As he/she correctly pointed out, many of Kubrick's works were written "on the fly" as additional ideas and modifications to the original script were incorporated during production.

Anyone confounded by Kubrick's unsuccessful, if interesting, final film should take a look at the book on which it was based. It's one of the greatest books from this century that I've read. It is unfortunate that Kubrick could not transform it into a better movie, as maybe he could have at the height of his powers. The screenplay (or shooting script, anyway) is also included here, and after reading them both, it's easy to see why he failed. Kubrick's movie is basically a transcript of the exterior action that takes place in a book that deals mostly with the internal. Kubrick tries to illuminate the internal struggle with music, set design and mindscreen shots, and while all this adds to the unsettling atmosphere of the film, the core of the book, and the meaning of the events are lost. This is not helped by a sloppy job of updating the novel to 1990s New York. Most of Kubrick's movies (if not all) were based on novels (some great, some not so great), and one of his greatest talents was always to single out what he found to be the core of the novel, and the ability to shape it into his own vision (and in the process, infuriating some of the original writers). But in this case, Kubrick has updated the novel only superfically, and ultimately, he missed the point of the book. It's a shame, because it should have made a marvellous movie, and I feel it could have been one of his greatest achievements. Despite all this, Schnitzler's book stands on its own, and if nothing else, perhaps the movie will lead to something of a rediscovery of this masterpiece.

This is an incredible book. To read the original story, "Traumnovelle," is an enthralling experience. To think that it was written in 1926 adds to its mystique. The screenplay was worth looking at, though at times I felt it was more of a transcription than a screenplay. The narrative follows the final movie cut's directing instructions too closely, though there are some very minor deviations. I'd rather read the original script rather than a shooting script. The short story differs from the movie greatly. It a captivating read, and I can see why Stanley Kubrick spent most of his life wanting to see it on the screen. I think reading the short story gave me an appreciation of what Mr. Kubrick added to it to make it a remarkable film. The structure from the original story is vastly improved in that there is a confrontation of what the main character witnessed. In the short story, it is left up in the air as to the true nature of what he saw, with the strongest suggestion being that it was harmless debauchery of aristocrats. One aspect of the short story that was not explored (and thankfully so) in the movie was the main character's obsessive longings after extremely young women (including the young daughter of the rental costume owner). You'll have to see "American Beauty" for those scenes.