This book is out of date and is an inaccurate reference for up to date stage work. The majority of diagrams are at least twenty years old and the techniques demonstrated in the book are no longer used in modern technical theater.

This book is thorough for secondary level. The corresponding workbook asks questions for which some answers cannot be found in the textbook. Together these books are a very good resource for a teacher who wants to write his or her own curriculum. These books could be used as they are but caveats must be expressed to studetns before the material is assigned as printed.

Koestler led an interesting life, but here is perhaps the duller part of his life. The biography is quite clearly unfinished, and unpolished. Cynthia, his wife who wrote the second part of the book is quite obviously besotted and under the control of Koestler (Koestler's relations with women were seldom sympathetic). It talks of the more mundane middle class lifestyle that Koestler got into, perhaps compensating for all the upheavals of his younger days. But by the time this was written most of Koestler's creativity was over and done, with even on scientific matters and capital punishment. Euthanasia and suicide was his last cause and one that overshadows this book... as it does unconsciously his relations with females...
Both Arthur and his wife, died in a suicide pact while this book was being written. AK was greatly dehabilitated and in pain at the end, but the controversy remains as to why Cynthia joined him in death and did AK bully her into it?

I first encountered Arthur Koestler after watching a video about a month ago on the Beach Boys' Brian Wilson, made in 1995, titled "I just wasn't made for these times." Wilson mentions a book written by Koestler on creativity. Koestler was of the World War II generation, but I have probably ignored him to my
own detriment. Still, I doubt that anyone will read this review. Most of his books are now in storage at my public library. He was an eclectic writer particularly in his later life, and his early life was extremely interesting and perilous. But he has since been replaced by other contemporary authors of high intellect,men like Stephen Hawking or Carl Sagan, to name two. He was born in Hungary and lived in several different countries in the years leading up to World War II. He was an intellectual journalist, particularly interested in science, who was an early opponent of Naziism, but an early supporter of Communism in the 1930's, later abandoning his faith in Stalin. From this era came his most famous book, "Darkness At Noon" also a successful play on Broadway. He supported the Communists and was imprisoned during the Spanish Civil War, and was later placed in a dentention camp by the French. Later he travelled to Jerusalem, but he spent most of the World War II years as a soldier in Britain. As I recall, he was married twice before meeting Cynthia, who worked as his secretary. He met most of Europe's leading intellectuals including Sartre, Camus,de Beauvoir, Bertrand
Russell, Dylan Thomas, and was frequently involved in and wrote about intellectual causes which would most accurately be described as pacifist or in the interest of worldwide intellectual freedom and peace following World War II. In the 1950's as described in the book he supported a British movement to abolish the death penalty and later supported a euthanasia movement.
He lived in Paris, in London, and also in the United States for several years. He wrote several volumes of an autobiography which was quite complex. In his latter years, beyond the scope of this book, he became interested in research in the sciences, some of which one might describe as obscure, such as parapsychology, others such as psychological theory were merely current. His wrote historical biographies of famous scientists. All in all an interesting life,and though he was a writer by trade, his life was perhaps more like a movie star, perhaps Elizabeth Taylor. He had many female companions , and part of Cynthia's role was to protect him and his interests. The book alternates chapters in part one between Koestler and Cynthia; part two is written entirely by Cynthia.

Not much good can be said about this collection of essays, speeches and reminiscences from science fiction colossus Arthur C. Clarke. Only one piece of fiction is included: the short short "When the Twerms Came" which could be considered clever, perhaps even cute, but hardly memorable. Not surprisingly, most of the offerings deal with space, or space travel, or predictions about future technological developments (many of which involve space and space travel), with the predictable result that as one gets further into the book, the essays begin to have a vague familiarity about them. Moreover, this volume closes with a piece written in 1977, so most of the collection is 25 years old or older; as a result, much of this material is sorely dated, although Clarke tries to rectify this by revisiting each subject in his introductions. All that aside, it's probably safe to say that the essay is not really Clarke's strong suit. His greatest gifts are his encyclopedic knowledge of science and its history, his almost poetic descriptions of nature, and his rarely seen but always pointed sense of humor. Many of these pieces demonstrate the first of these qualities, but very few take advantage of the latter two, much to the book's detriment. Clarke is at his most eloquent when describing his adopted country, Sri Lanka, (once known as Serendip, thus the title), or when he's discussing his passion for the world under the sea. So much of Clarke's work is borderline philosophical that he rarely indulges himself in humor, but when he does, he is usually very effective with it. (Does anyone remember his Tales from the White Hart? A classic of science fiction humor.) In this volume, he pokes fun at his competition in "Introducing Isaac Asimov" and gives a fascinating account of life in Sri Lanka in "Servant Problem - Oriental Style", but the rest of the book is pretty dry reading. Even die-hard fans of Clarke's work will find very little to get excited about in this one.

Everyone knows Arthur C. Clarke as one of the best -- many would say THE best -- science fiction writer of all-time, but it is often forgotten nowadays that, at least up until the 1970's, Clarke was also one of the best and most prolific popularizers of science. Early in his career, before he ever really got into writing fiction per se, and certainly before he started writing novels, the majority of Clarke's output consisted of technical science pieces and popular science journalism. This collection of such pieces, which appeared in the last 70's, was one of his last of the kind before he began concentrating solely on novel writing and before he retired -- and came back -- and retired again... and so on (anyone who is a writer knows that a writer can never "retire".) The pieces themselves consist mostly of space articles (mainly projections of future society), a few articles about Clarke's home, Sri Lanka (once called Serendip, hence the title), a handful of speeches, autobiographical fragments, exactly one piece of fiction, and a smattering of various other types of articles. As the lifeblood of the book is a series of essays giving future projections for years that have now passed us by, it is easy to dismiss this book as dated, as most have; and, indeed, it will probably never again be in general circulation. However, there is a certain fascination about these articles when looked back upon with hindsight. It is always interesting to see where Clarke was dead-on (describing the internet in almost exact detail nearly 40 years ago, for instance), and where he was wholly off-target (predicting stellar conolization by the end of the 20th century). Few futurists have been as compelling -- and frequently accurate -- as Clarke, and these pieces always make for interesting reading. The two articles on Sri Lanka are very informative and make for great reading, infused with the love and admiration that Clarke obviously has for his home. These pieces, and some of the others, are of a very personal nature, which is quite unusual for the guarded and normally abstract Clarke -- quite a treat for long-time fans of the author who will probably never get an autobiography. His light piece about the perils of hiring domestic servants in the East is one of the most hilarous things I have ever read, reminding us once again that Clarke has a killer, if bone-dry, sense of humor that few other than his hard-core fans ever ackwnoledge. His classic diss "Introducing Isaac Asimov" is included here in full, as is the good Doctor's schintillating comeback. The one piece of fiction is a minor throwaway, and the remainder of the essays and speeches range from very good to moderate. The reason the book is not a superlative collection is because several of the essays are somewhat similar and, as always with a Clarke omnibus, many of them have been printed elsewhere. If you are a Clarke nut, you have probably already some, if not much of what is included here; if you are not, you will probably not even be interested. If you are that hard-core ACC reader, then it will be worth you while to track this long-out-of-print book down in order to read the pieces in it that are not available elsewhere. If you are a casual fan of his non-fiction writing, or a fan of his fiction and looking to get acquainted with the other side of Clarke, I highly reccommend the recent giant collection, "Greetings, Carbon-Based Bipeds!" which collects the majority of Clarke's major essays into one large collection.

I bought this volume for only two reasons, that it had the french with unobstrusive footnoted translations; and that it was cheaper than the fowlie.

This has turned out to be quite a mistake. I had thought that "Collected Poems" meant that every known poem would be included. Well, this volume doesn't. I couldn't find avertissment (ces ecritures ci sont des un toute jeune homme...) anywhere in it, and wondered if it was by some other French author. I later found it in the Fowlie edition.

If you have a good deal of French, this may not be too bad an introductory edition, but if you had any French, you'd want a complete edition. Don't buy this book.

It's a scandal that Penguin are keeping Oliver Bernard's lame translations in print. His are the worst translations of Rimbaud that I've ever read - lazy, limp and boring, and Rimbaud in French is _never_ boring.

If you want a more-or-less complete and faithful translation of Rimbaud, try the Wallace Fowlie edition. But don't waste your money on Bernard.

This book collects Rimbaud's poetry focusing mainly on the original French poems. The English translations are placed below the French poems in smaller type. This allows the reader to view Rimbaud's work as he wanted it seen. And the translations are placed more like footnotes (although still easily read). The translations are also some of the best. Although Schmidt did do a good job, as well as Varese, Oliver Bernard's translation comes closest to the orginal French as possible. I recommend this book if you would like to see Rimbaud's work as he originally wrote it with translations added as an addition to the work. (Also, there are helpful footnotes that aid in finding meanings in some of Rimbaud's writing as well as a biography of the poet.)

I had waited sooo long for this novel to come out, and when its all been read and done, it was bad. boring and slow, with no intrest at all the novel just never hit it off. I love Barbara Michaels, but this just was not her.

The paranormal novel, Other Worlds, is a step away from what Barbara Michaels (Aka Elizabeth Peters) normally writes, which is romantic suspense, and maybe that's why it isn't up to her normal talented standards. Since I listened to the abridged audio, some of the Michaels drama may have been missing. I can't say for sure, but this may be why I came to this conclusion. Don't get me wrong, I still enjoyed it, but it just didn't have the Michaels suspense that her other titles are blessed with. Another attribute of Ms. Michaels that is missing is the romance, but I don't think it would have been appropriate anyway.

There is a meeting at an exclusive men's club. At this cozy get together is Frank Podmore of the Society for Psychical Research, magician Harry Houdini, Arthur Conan Doyle, Nandor Fodor, former director of the International Institute for Psychical Research. In this meeting, two stories are presented. One is a story of a witch ghost that haunts the Bell family of Tennessee for several years... As a supernatural ghost tale, the book held it's own, with the exception that the characters were not taking it seriously, and this seemed to keep me from taking it seriously. The analysis and criticism after each story didn't bothered me, but some of the individuals' opinions did. Maybe it's just me, but some of the attitude's came across more as sexist than actually debunking. But, all in all, because it is a Barbara Michaels work I would still recommend it to those who know her work and those who don't, after all it was an interesting concept.

When listening to an audio, I like to make mention on how it appealed to me. When I see Barbara Rosenblat's name as the narrator, I pretty much expect a good read, and this one was, but I wonder if the story would have been a little more engaging with a male narrator. Don't let my wonderings stop you from trying the audio or the book. It was an interesting paranormal read.

I had not read any of her works as either Barbara Michaels or Elizabeth Peters before, so this was my introduction to her work. This mystery is actually two stories in one, with each story around 100-120 pages long. I preferred the first to the second; both dealt with families being tormented by a spirit of some kind or poltergeist activity. At the close of each story, the ghostly gentleman's club - including Harry Houdini and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle - draw various conclusions. Thus there is not just one right answer, but instead various opinions and scenarios. Good work, quick read, fun for classic mystery / poltergeist fans.

It appears I'm the only person not from ithaca to review this book. I assume they're using this text at Cornell, or ithaca college, but I used this text at Texas A&M. Perhaps it was the instructor, but i didn't think that this book was that bad. Some of the proofs and explainations and examples were pretty lousy, but the assignment problems were pretty diverse, and i thought most of the explainations and examples were adequate. What i'm trying to say is that this text isn't that bad....

Granted, the semester is young, but so far this book's not too bad. Especially considering last semester I had to endure part of the McCallum/Hughes-Hallet series of calculus books for Multivariable/Vector Calculus. In comparison, this book has far more practice problems where you just work out the equations, rather than having to contend with applications and word problems while still wrestling with the concepts. While the examples are a little convoluted, at least they draw parallels to the problems, something the McCallum et al. series does not. In short, this may not be the best math book, but it could be a lot worse.

This is the required text for a math class I am currently taking. While the book is not spectacular, it is written at an elementary level and it is not mired in proofs, so one can learn the material simply by opening the book and reading. A definite strength of this book is that it covers a wide range of problems, from ordinary DE's to some PDE's. But it also includes whole chapters on applications to mechanical and electrical systems(circuits), as well as numerical methods and Laplace Transformations. The book is clearly written as an introductory text, but it covers a broad range of material applicable to higher level courses.

I am currently using this book for a college physics course and I am very dissapointed in it. There equations given are difficult to understand becuase few or no example problems are given to show how to use the equation. Also, the answers in the back of the book seldom correlate well with the information given in the chapter. Finally, no solutions manual is provided with the book. Since the chapters themselves are lacking you'd think they would at least provide a solutions manual to help explain, but no. These and many other reasons make this book a poor choice. Shop around and find another one.

Hmm...where do I start. This book is absolutely terrible. Just as one of the other reviewers of this text, I too was required to use this book in a college physics course. The book lacks in many aspects. The first problem is that this book is only black and white...there are no color illustrations--the use of color illustrations and pictures would be very helpful in illustrating and describing certain concepts. Also, the book is very lacking in example problems. The example problems shown in the book are nothing like the practice problems at the end of chapters. There are many cases in which a section of a chapter gives no example problems, yet at the end of the chapter there are practice problems for that particular section. Apparently Arthur Beiser doesn't realize that example problems are helpful and sometimes necessary to complete the end-of-chapter problems. All these factors, combined with the relatively high price, make this book an extremely bad choice for reference, or in my case, as a use as a collge physics text. If I could have given this book 0 stars I would have done so.

This book lacks behind many other physics text books that are used in colleges. The price would not help either. If you have a choice, buy another physics book by a different auther.

Both Against the Fall of Night and The City and the Stars are wonderful stories, beautifully written

Gregory Benford's "sequel" is incoherent mishmash. I kept jumping paragraphs hoping the story would get clearer. It didn't.

Forget this book entirely and get the original Arthur C Clarke story (Against the Fall of Night) combined with The Lion of Comarre.

I've never read a Gregory Benford story before and this turned me off so much I don't plan to read another.

'Against the fall of night', and 'City and the Stars' were one of the best stories ACC wrote.

It is a pity that Mr Benson didn't read either of them.

'Beyond the fall of night' takes some of the characters of ACC's book and reduces them. In fact, he appears to change so much of the original story that it is virtually unrecognisable. I find it difficult to believe that this is an 'authorised' sequel, since it contradicts much of what is written in the first book. The packaging of the book (putting the original in with the sequel) means that the contradictions are glaring (how come the moon was restored to completeness when it was destroyed by the weapon at Shalmarine?). The magnificence of the original novel has been lost in a hodgepodge of characters, ferris wheels and a pineapple spaceship. What?

Not recommended for anyone who has read the original. I think it was a mistake for Mr Benson to write this novel, and a mistake for Mr Clarke to let him.

I read "Against the Fall of Night" about six times in the last sixteen years. It is by far my most favorite sci-fi book. I can't say the same for Mr. Benford's continuation.

The great fun of Clarke's portion is the sense of wonder it gives you. He never goes in great depths about the technology or history of this universe. He gives you a general idea and goes no further. Since this story is placed billions of years in the future, this is fine. Could one of us really understand such a world? Benford goes to great lengths to explain the workings of technologies. In doing so, he takes out the fun. He also de-humanizes many of the original characters. Clarke left it to us (mostly) to determine what these people are like. Benford turns them into bubble-headed aliens.

Another problem I have with Benford's novella is massive inconsistencies. As an example, Clarke sets up a future where the moon was destroyed long ago when it began to fall out of orbit. Flip over to Benford's tome and the protagonist visits the moon and it is inhabited!! Never does Benford explain why the moon suddenly exists.

If you have never read "Against the Fall of Night", you should get this book. However, I wouldnt waste my time reading the second half.

In my opinion, since 1 Star is the lowest Rating that can be given, then I find a 1 Star Rating appropriate, because I personally find the introduction by Julian Bond to be demeaning to the principles of the Nation of Isalm because the Nation believes in PURE BLACK BLOOD. From the appearance of Julian Bond, in my opinion, it sure be a looking like a he be a having "some crackers in there somewhere".

As his title suggests, Magida structures his account around the biography of Farrakhan, telling about his growing up in Boston, succeeding as an entertainer, joining the NOI, competing with Malcolm X, involving himself in Malcolm's murder, and, to his disappointment, not succeeding to the leadership of the NOI upon Elijah Muhammad's death in February 1975. Farrakhan then felt increasingly alienated as the movement moved rapidly toward Sunni Islam; in November 1977, he finally announced the resurrection of the NOI. Since then, he has been the organization's top theologian, administrator, and spokesman. Magida reviews some of Farrakhan's record over the subsequent years (for example, his efforts to court mainstream black leaders), but focuses mostly on his complex relations with Jews. In addition to the well-known anti-Semitic comments (Judaism is a "dirty religion"), Farrakhan also shows the typical anti-Semite's fascination with things Jewish (for example, structuring the Million Man March along the lines of a Yom Kippur atonement).

Middle East Quarterly, March 1997

Prophet Of Rage by Arthur J. Magida, Julian Bond presents as rare and exclusive into the life and leadership of Louis Farrakhan. Louis Muhammed Farrakhan, was born in New York, to a West Indian mother. His birth name was Louis Euegene Walcott. As a child and an young man he was a track star, musician, and college student in North Carolina.

Arthur J. magida, and Julian Bond tells the readers how Farrakhan went from being "The Charmer" to being the National represenative of Elijah Muhammed's Nation Of Islam. After the bitter split between Malcolm X and Mr. Muhammed, Louis Farrakhan became Elijah's biggest supporter. Farrakhan charged with being a hypocrite. He is noted for saying in his speeches that Malcolm X was "A triator worthy of death, and would have meet his death if it was not for the Honorable Elijah Muhammed".

From Malcolm death (Febuary 21, 1965) and before the death of Elijah Muhammed in 1975, Farrakhan became the National represenative of the NOI. Mr. Muhammed praised Farrakhan for his faithfulness, and appointed him as the New York Minister. Louis Farrakhan in a sense was the "new Malcolm", and there is no doubt the he patterned his talking style to his former mentor.

The death of Elijah Muhammed lead Farrakhan to evaluate his direction and purpose, then build a new nation based on the teachings of Elijah Muhammed. On Febuary 26, 1975 the Nation of Islam celebrated it's Savior's Day Celebration. "Master" Farad Muhammed birthday ( Febuary 26) is celebrated as Saviors Day. On Savior's Day 1975, the Nation of Islam announced Wallace D. Muhammed as it's new leader. Farrakhan vowed his loyality to the new Leader. Inspite of his plague of devotion to Wallace, the new leader made far to many changes for Farrakhan to handle. Wallace Muhammed had rapidly moved the Nation of Islam to Orthodox Islam. Wallace also denounced his father, and refuse to reconize Farad as "G-d in person". Wallace also destroyed the Nations race based policy. He changed the organizations name twice first it was the "World Community of Al-Islam in the West", and the "American Muslim Mission". It is clear that Wallace's decision proved to be heavy for Farrakhan. Farrakhan left Wallace's leadership to seek his own platform.

Louis Farrakhan with fellow Muslims who also left Wallace Muhammed, built the "Nation of Islam". The Nation of Islam, headed by Farrakhan was based on the old mystical teaching of Elijah Muhammed. Farrakhan brought back the Fruit of Islam army, the Muslim girls trianing, dress code, and everything that was first created by his Mr. Muhammed.

The wild, crasy, and unorthodox speeches and positions of Louis Farrakhan made him the controversal leader that he is today. In the late 1980's Farrakhan began to attack the Jewish community. He charged them as the "Most powerful people in the World". He has even denounced fellow black leaders as cowards, who are always bowing down the the white man. He has also called himself the "only freed Black man in America". He is also one of the most complex, and has proven to be the most complex.

The arthurs have done an excellent job in there presenation of Louis Farrakhan. It should be required reading for anyone who wants to understand him, and the Nation of Islam.

These cards are essentially worthless. If you are expecting to learn anything from them, be prepared to be disappointed. They look like someone went through a medical dictionary and put words on one side and the definitions on the other, which I suspect is what happened. Only very marginally useful as a quick review of material you already know. Very low yield, and unfortunate, as they had so much potential.

The accompanying pathology review book in the BRS series is excellent, as is generally the case for all of the books in the series, so I had high hopes for the flash cards (which are not prepared by the same authors as the pathology book). Unfortunately, the content of the flash cards is very minimal and superficial. As a result, I anticipate that almost no one will find the flash cards to be of much use, which is unfortunate since the concept of pathology flash cards seems to be a good one. Oh well ...

I think the cards are a unique approach to studying the subject. Many "Flashcards" out there are not really flash cards at all, rather textbooks on small pieces of paper. These cards help me quickly refresh material before an exam in an active manner rather than reading the material over and over again. Though I think the cards are a rather poor way to learn the material, they are a great way to review.