Perhaps regrettably obscured behind Nabokov's famous novels and even his Lectures on Russian Literature and his controversial work on Eugene Onegin lies this short critical biography of Nikolai Gogol. The main thrust of the book is to portray Gogol as a masterful, if troubled and inconsistent, writer whose work is valuable not at all for its portrayal of Russia or for any seeming advocacy of social change, but rather exclusively for its artistic merit. Nabokov takes us rather briskly through Gogol's youth and his earlier works; provides detailed, quote-filled discussions of The Inspector General and the first volume of Dead Souls; summarizes the last ten years of Gogol's life, during which he attempted to write the second volume of Dead Souls but saw his artistic creativity fading; and gives a short exposition of Gogol's most famous short story, "The Overcoat."

Nabokov's essays on The Inspector General, Dead Souls, and "The Overcoat" are all quite illuminating and entertaining. He escorts us through each work, discussing the numerous ways in which each innovatively reflects Gogol's unique and charming quirks, and including, with annotations, numerous passages (each translated by Nabokov himself) which demonstrate Gogol's excellent prose. His emphasis is not at all on the plots of the works (which he only grudgingly included at the end of the book at the request of his publisher) but rather on their style, which he successfully shows to be a much more fundamental aspect of Gogol's works than any satire that one may choose to read in to them.

At times, though, it seems that Nabokov gets a little too caught up in his own dogma. Most critics nowadays would agree with Nabokov that Gogol was much more important as an artist than as a social commentator, but it's pushing it awfully far to say, as Nabokov does, that Dead Souls is no more authentically a tale about Russia than Hamlet is authentically about Denmark. Also, Nabokov confines almost all of his attention to just three works, which put together, if memory serves, wouldn't come to much more than 300 pages. He dismisses Gogol's numerous Ukrainian tales (the last of which were written when Gogol was 25; The Inspector General, by contrast, was written at the ripe old age of 26) as "juvenilia" which are emphatically not "the real Gogol," and pays little more than lip service to any of Gogol's other acclaimed short stories. The one other slightly irritating aspect of Nabokov's book that I can think of is that in the long passages that he quotes he insists on interjecting his own comments [in brackets] mid-sentence, thus ruining the flow of the prose that he took the trouble of translating so very well.

But these are all minor quibbles, and I hope you won't let them discourage you. Nabokov makes his point very entertainingly and very well, and although it might have been nice if he'd broadened his study to more of Gogol's work, his discussions of Gogol's three most important works are really excellent. Since it would be hard for me to think of a 20th-century author more suited to writing about Gogol than Nabokov, I had high expectations for this book, and I was not at all disappointed.

In this short, witty book about Nikolai Gogol, Nabokov captures perfectly the most important aspect of his writing: the dreamlike, irrational, surrealistic absurdity. My favorite book of all time is Gogol's "Dead Souls" (translated by Andrew R. MacAndrew, Signet Classics). Nabokov's book is a perfect tribute to Gogol. I haven't even read "The Inspector-General"- now I'm going to. At the time Nabokov wrote this book, there apparently weren't good English translations of "Dead Souls" so there is a somewhat pessimistic or despondent feeling that an English-speaker wouldn't be able to access Gogol. I don't speak Russian, so I can't vouch for this translation, but I have a feeling it would be all right with Nabokov. Anyway, this is a wonderful book.

It can be a bit discouraging to open The Other Side of the Moon and find a page devoted to the Cast of Characters that reads like a family tree. But don't let it divert your attention from this book.

Every character plays an important role in the way the story comes together. It is an adventure through many mysterious and exotic lands. Croydon Bates sets off to discover the secrets of his past and, along the way, discovers the secrets his family has hidden.

Croydon is haunted by visions of his dead mother. His great grandfather helps him understand these mysteries and helps him locate Croydon's estranged father.

As more characters are introduced, the narration changes points of view but the storylines continue to play off each other well like pieces of a puzzle coming together. The Cast of Characters list in the beginning of the book can come in handy when jumps in narration are made because the story flashes back from past to present so much and the characters take on new names from their reincarnations and past lives as these dimensional travels take place.

This novel themes around Christianity, reincarnation and the links between the teachings of Christianity and other religious beliefs. It also demonstrates how when one evil is expelled another evil will spawn in the world's cycle. Croydon tries to break the cycle and save them all from destruction and restore the world order.

The Other Side of the Moon is likely to break your aversion to the sci-fi genre so dip a toe into a distinctive piece of fiction with this novel.

Deftly written by Vladimir Chernozenmsky, the Bulgarian-American author of "The Lion of the Balkans", The Other Side of the Moon is a fascinating and imaginative novel about the transmigration of human souls throughout history, from the Pharaohs who ruled Egypt in days of yore, to the rise of Christianity and the tumult of the new millennium. An emotional, forceful, sometimes disturbing tale of the best and worst of human nature through the ages, The Other Side of The Moon is a unique and attention engaging read from first page to last.

Vapnik and Chernovenkis extended the Glivenko-Cantelli Theorem in their work on classification and statistical learning. Vapnik in recent texts has described a form of nonparametric statistical inference based on approximating functions and the Vapnik-Chernovenkis dimension.

In an earlier book published by Springer-Verlag he develops the basics of the theory. However to keep the mathematical level excessible to computer scientists and engineers he avoided the mathematical proofs needed for mathematical rigor. This text is an advanced text that provides the rigorous development. Although the preface and chapter 0 give the reader a idea of what is to come the rest of the text is difficult reading.

The theory has been quite successful at attacking the pattern recognition/ classification problem and provides a basis for understanding support vector machines. However Vapnik sees a much broader application to statistical inference in general when the classical parametric approach fails.

If you have a strong background in probability theory you should be able to wade through the book and get something out of it. If not I recommend reading section 7.9 of "The Elements of Statistical Learning" by Hastie, Tibshirani and Friedman. That will give you an easily understandable view of the VC dimension. Also sections 12.2 and 12.3 of their text will give you some appreciation for support vector machines and the error rate bounds obtainable for them based on the VC dimension.

This book aims at rigorours and deep treatment of statistical learning and is divided into three parts :

(I)THEORY OF LEARNING AND GENERALIZATION;

(II)SUPPORT VECTOR ESTIMATION OF FUNCTIONS;

(III)STATISTICAL FOUNDATION OF LEARNING THEORY'

For anyone intending to dive into this topic intriguing readers shull find their task rather not simple when exploring this mathematical exposition.This is because of the mature nature behind the basic theory .In order to gain most of the benefit ,interested and even involved researchers are urged and should assume all the requirements for a vast and solid mathematical background.

I Think the book constitutes a respectful and organized 'exhibition' that you will not find in any other place. Althought there are excellent books discussing SVMs and Machine-Learning/ Intelligence,eventually all emenate from the theory.Regarding the book rating it is was not rated upon how much you retrieve as concepts, but how well the propositions offer a precious appreciation of the substantial theory.In otherwords, this book is not the place for a first time learning, but it is serves as a bridge between interrelated elements of such incredibly growing area.

For the book: "The Nature of Statistical learning Theory" also by Vapnik you can find a review by Vladimir Cherkassky in The IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NEURAL NETWORKS VOL. 8, NO. 6, NOVEMBER 1997 .

While mostly confined to the movie posters that the Stenberg Brothers produced in the early years of the Soviet Union, this book still includes enough general history to help the reader view them in the context in which they were produced. Well-illustrated (most illustrations are in full color) with easy to comprehend text, this would be a valuable volume for anyone interested in graphic design. It will also appeal to students of the Constructivist movement.

There have been many great graphic artists in the past several decades. In my opinion, The Stenberg Brothers produced some of the finest graphical works of art in this Century. The Stenberg Brothers lived and produced their Art in 1920's...and 1930's. Fueling the Soviet propaganda machine. Look beyond the thorns of the Soviet era propaganda machine. If you are a true graphic artist, you will definately appreciate the fantastic talents of the Stenberg Brothers and Soviet-era art. The Stenbergs were Masters of the Graphic Arts. This book should not be listed as a "book". Rather, it should be listed as an artists' portfolio. This "portfolio" of Soviet artwork is a MUST for everyone with an interest in appreciating the graphic arts. The Stenberg Brothers were truly MASTERS of their medium. This BOOK is packed FULL of high quality, premium-paper-stock reproductions of the best works these brothers have ever produced. I recommend it wholley!

My attitude towards the real nature of Ada has changed with time and "distance" from my original reading. When I first read it, I was seduced by the novel's fictional "authors" Ada and Van Veen. On the surface it is the romantic and dashing story of two incestuous lovers, whose love overcame all obstacles. Ada and Van, who write their own story, are far from objective portrayers of their own story, polishing to a sheen their own virtues and talents, while almost obscuring their moral depravity and cruelty. Those who fall by the wayside, are written off by the couple, and made to play bit parts supporting their "grand romance".

Coming back to the novel ten years later, I can see why Nabokov said "I despise Van Veen",the novel's "hero". In fact, the Veens are much subtler Humberts, but much more effective. While few readers would gush about the romantic Humbert, it is easy to brush of Van and Ada's faults,and "buy in" to their interpretations of

their lives. Now, with maturity, I see that Nabokov presented me with a story of moral depravity, daring me to find the true story behind the Veens'gloss,and to use my independent moral judgement.

In his "Strong Opinions" Nabokov suggested that future generations may come tounderstand him as a fierce moralist. This is not easy to see, because most of his narrators are in fact depraved. In Lolita, King Queen Knave, Ada, and Pale Fire, this is very much the case. Nabokov was a moralist in the negative sense. He typically showed the immoral, and assumed that his readers would draw the appropriate conclusions. Like an artist who charcoals a canvas, and draws with an eraser. He was probably amused that leftist literary types in America liked Lolita BECAUSE of Humbert's depravity, and felt more disdain for the American motels and roadside diners described in the novel than they did for Humbert's actions.

The novel gets only four stars, because I didn't like it as much as Pale Fire or Invitation to A Beheading. The novel was unnecessarily difficult, which was of course part of the purpose of the Veens, but Nabokov created them, so he still gets some blame. For moralistic books I much prefer a positive rather than a negative presentation, in the way that Ayn Rand presents morality in The Fountainhead, or Atlas Shrugged.

Speak, Memory was Nabokov's arcane and perhaps irreverent foray into the field of autobiography. That book I assume got Nabokov thinking in depth about the imaginative nature of memory. Nabokovs autobio. disregards the obvious choice of chronology as the organizing principle(too obvious), instead he groups selected memories together according to his various interests. Its a one of a kind collage of an autobio. and after that he wrote Ada which reads like an even more imaginative version of his fictively "remembered" life...perhaps more accurately it is his life as it might(could) have been. Ada is a beautiful book about young love,with romantic and mystical musings about that subject( and insight into the true nature of it), but it is also a meditation on time(perhaps parodic at Proust's expense)as the story takes place in an alternative world, one thats history is similar to ours up to a point but one that took a distinctly different course than our own. Nabokov has said regarding his fiction, "I am not sincere," so chances are if you think he is kidding , well ... Still there is a very high beauty in this book as well as stabs of sorrow. It gives off a very rare light, a beautiful mandarin twilight perhaps as this is Nabokov's last major work. It really is not a book that lends itself to summary, it is perhaps among many other things Nabokovs chance to let all of his literary fetishes(lots of play with literal allusions) have their frolic in his literary never never land in the Russian woods and at sea. A fairy tale for very literate adults with a taste for highbrow and poignant laughter in the dark. A book lovers book.

Nabokov has written novels with better plots, better word-play and puzzles, more acute looks into single characters, but Ada brings it all together in an attenuated amalgam of all things Nabokov. The overall impression is as of watching an epic movie through a gauze curtain on a breezy day. Hints of vivid scenes and characters show through occasionally, but are obscured by a veil of history, language, and diversions. This book belongs in another era, but still challenges the concepts with which we define modernity.
This was easily the most difficult of his books that I've read, and is second in my mind only to Pale Fire. But where Pale Fire only hints at alternate reality and history, Ada plunges in. Where Lolita ultimately exposes the sticky-sweet banality of the nymphette obsession, Ada's poignant and heart-breaking love story challenges our assumptions of propriety. Nabokov seamlessly blends intellectual depth and playfulness with the pure physicality of the human body and its needs and desires.

Its well written but its a waste of money if you know about the site verion of All Music Guide which really is one of the best sites on the internet.Not only does the site version have everything the book does and has pictures but also the lists of artists,albums,music styles and reviews are seemingly endless and gloriously delightful.

I wish the word "comprehensive" wasn't used on the cover of this book because it isn't comprehensive. Some groups, that weren't obscure in their time at least, aren't here. And many of the groups that are here don't have all their albums reviewed. They may have a review of a group's "Greatest Hits CD" and that's it. This book has 5 star reviews of music I think sounds awful and 2 star reviews of music I think sounds good, so it's all in the ear of the listener. As a guide it's good, but I'll bet you haven't heard of half the groups here, so if you buy something by one of these groups based on the review, don't be shocked if it doesn't sound as good as you were led to believe. Also, if you hear something by a group you like but aren't familiar with and want to buy some of their music you may not see it all listed here. They could at least tell you all album titles a group had. Still, it's one of the best guides I've seen, I'm not sorry I got it, and actually recommend it.

I read about this book in 'Mojo Magazine', where they stated that this guide was "the most useful single volume your money can buy." I ran right out and bought it and am glad I did. This is the best book on rock I have seen and I have read them all. Not only does it cover all major artists and albums, but there are dozens of essays, music maps, references, etc. What does not fit between the covers can be found on their web site at AllMusic.com.

It is unfair but perhaps inevitable that a writer's minor works should forever labour in the shadows of their more successful siblings. Had The Defense been Nabokov's only novel, I believe Nabokov would have been greatly respected, if not celebrated, for his achievement. As it is, we must now see this story as an imperfect expression of the astonishing vision that only found true realisation in Lolita, Pale Fire and Pnin. In those works Nabokov perfected the art of seeing man as simultaneously comic and tragic - sublime and menacing. The Defense, which tells the story of a Russian Grand Master unable truly to understand anything other than the game of chess, provides an early inkling of this vision, but does not bring it wholly to life. Luzhin, our hero, whilst at times effectively comic and at others compellingly tragic, is too often a remote, incomprehensible figure - almost a freak - to sustain the reader's ongoing interest. Indeed there is something cold and controlled about the entire book; it recalls a classical tragedy in its remorseless, inevitable design. What is lacking is a sense of the unpredictable and the giddy - to name just two qualities that Nabokov, in his later American novels, became unrivalled at capturing. Nowadays, I suppose, only those with a genuine passion for Nabokov will find the book an ultimately satisfying read.

The correct title is The Luzhin Defence, referring to a chess manoeuvre; the shortened title culpably fails to convey this, and is as reprehensible as The Ogre for Tournier's The Erl-King, or Magister Ludi for Hesse's The Glass Bead Game. According to Nabokov in his trademark snooty introduction, the protagonist "has been found lovable even by those who know nothing about chess and/or detest all my other books". I know next to nothing about chess and dislike only one of Nabokov's other books among the half-dozen or so I have read (Bend Sinister it was), so perhaps I may be forgiven for finding Luzhin merely amusing. From the very beginning, in his lovingly detailed childhood of the first four chapters, he's an almost completely hopeless creature - sullen, overweight, patronised and overborne not only by those around him - his parents, his "chess father" Valentinov, his wife - but also, most especially and exquisitely, by his Olympian and stratosphere-nosed creator. The only thing that inspires him is chess, the abstract joys of which account for some of the best descriptive passages in what Nabokov justifiably refers to as "this attractive novel". Even those of us who are ignorant of everything but the colours and the pieces can enjoy the recurrence of black and white squares, the weird little Knight Moves of plot or gesture, and the verve and dexterity of Nabokov's prose. This was his third novel, written in Berlin, 1929, and Russian; translated by Michael Scammell and the author, it shows Nabokov starting to scintillate. Except for the final few pages, the last couple of chapters are a bit of a letdown, as Nabokov slackens the plot and indulges in some crude and unnecessary Bolshevik-baiting ("I am not satirical," he declares elsewhere; quite true, but unfortunately it doesn't seem to have stopped him from trying now and then); but for the most part this is a magnificent frolic.

The Luzhin Defence is the story of a little boy who loses his first name, and becomes a great genius who ultimately loses everything. It is a biography, spanning A. Luzhin's early childhood recollections; his isolation from society and the love affair that breaks temporarily through that; and his development to a Grandmaster inexorably moving towards the most crucial confrontation of his career.

Nabokov skilfully portrays Luzhin's life becoming like a reflection trapped between two mirrors, finally coming to an inevitable vanishing point. The moments in his life begin to echo and re-echo previous moments, like some recurring melody in the violin music that is a motif in the novel. His actions are like moves in a chess game, particularly in the first half of the novel, where the moments Nabokov castles, then brings out his queen, can be pinpointed.

If this does not sound like a particularly gripping tale, fear not: Nabokov writes about his characters with such elusive, unsentimental humanity, that the reader is infused with warmth or compassion for them all.

And of course, the real reason for ever reading Nabokov is the exquisite rapture of his language. Another reviewer has said here that once known, Nabokov can become as essential as the fresh ocean air; he realises worlds so deeply and so richly through the fullness of his language that the 'real' world risks seeming like a drab faded photocopy in comparison.

Though completely different in style - completely - this book at times reminded me of Samuel Beckett's work, in that in flashes it circumscribes the outer reaches of existential loneliness.

I did not give this 5 stars because the novel seemed falter slightly in its purpose towards the end. Even though this is a staggeringly good novel, it just isn't as scintillatingly brilliant as Lolita.

Vladimir Putin's "First Person" is a biography in question and answer format. It gives a great insight into the man who is the leader of the largest country in the world. There are questions and answers from not only Putin himself, but also his old school teachers, KGB collegues and his wife and two daughters. Even so, this biography does not give a 'full picture' of the president as a person and much of his past (for example KGB) is not mentioned in great detail (that's why I took off a star) and does not give a deep insight as the book implies. This aside, and all considered, this is a good read and a good introduction to Pres. Putin.

First Person is a transcription of a series of interviews conducted by three Russian journalists with Vladimir Putin, his wife and daughters, friends, teachers, and colleagues. The book is written in a question-answer format which is usually effective but occasionally leaves the reader in doubt as to who is answering a particular question: Putin or one of the other interviewees.

Don't read this book expecting deep insight into Putin's political philosophy or details of his experience in the KGB. With that said, First Person is a useful and interesting account of Putin's life, family, and experiences. An occasional bit of insight either slips or is inserted into the conversations. (It's hard to believe that someone as in-control as Putin would really let something slip. I don't mean to be suspicious or derogatory, I'm just recognizing that Putin is a successful politician who climbed one of the most difficult -and dangerous- ladders in the world.) One bit of possible insight is the fact that Putin was KGB station chief in Dresden, East Germany, at the time that the Berlin wall was pulled down. He shared a facility with the Stasi, his East German counterparts. When mobs approached the Stasi facility. Putin cabled Moscow for help and direction. He received neither and left active duty with the KGB soon after his (premature?) return from that assignment. I'm sure he was a bit disillusioned by this experience, but the degree and nature of the disillusionment is not developed. No surprise here; successful politicians don't intentionally walk into mine fields.

Overall, the book was an interesting and light read. Putin describes himself as a hooligan in his youth who mended his ways primarily to achieve his goal of going to law school in preparation for a career in the KGB. He chose that career path after seeing a movie entitled the Sword and the Shield (the KGB logo) which prompted him to walk uninvited into the local KGB office in Leningrad to seek employment. The officer who met him advised him that the KGB seldom considered walk-in applicants and that he should attend university and study law as a means of preparing himself. Rather amazingly, he did exactly that and was recruited immediately upon graduation.

The book also contains numerous details about Putin's early political life in the administration of Anatoly Sobchak, the reform-minded mayor of Leningrad, and his subsequent steady rise in the national government as well as numerous anecdotes from his family life.

Once upon a time, there was a belief in America that anyone could rise from the humblest of beginnings -- such as Abraham Lincoln, born in a cabin he built with his own hands -- to become President.

In Russia, without political opinion polls, focus groups or special interest funding, Vladimir Putin rose from a rat-infested cold water apartment to become President of his nation. This book is about a man who spent his professional life assessing people and situations, and thus is not afraid to make tough decisions. In Russia, for the immediate future, tough decisions are needed.

Putin's hero, Czar Peter the Great, used his regal power to make Russia a great, rich and powerful nation. Putin intends to provide similar dynamic leadership with democratic principles. An example may be Singapore, a mix of authority, discipline and prosperity.

The question-and-answer format of this book is based on six four-hour interviews by three journalists. Putin admits he was, ". . . a pure and utterly successful product of Soviet patriotic education." He was smart, dedicated, hard-working and very good in his chosen career with the KGB. He wasn't a old cloak-and-dagger "sneak and peek" spy; he spent his time reading reports, assessing East German officials and skillfully pushing paper.

Trained as a lawyer, he was appalled at how Communist officials assumed they were the law simply because they were Party members. Putin was never a dissident, he was the ultimate Organization Man whose goal was a richer, happier, stronger and freer Russia. He worked hard to become an insider, and as such saw the total incompetence of the Party.

His wife says, "He always lived for the sake of something. There are some people who work hard for money, but he works hard for ideas." When first married, they had a 10-foot by 12-foot room in his parents' 275-square foot apartment. Try and think of any American president since Lincoln -- another idea man -- who lived in any similar conditions.

Like Lincoln, whose greatest idea was "to preserve the Union," the prime challenge for Putin is to preserve Russia. His practical experience taught him that a free market economy is far superior to the chaos, conniving and cronyism of communism. He says the Soviets failed because they ". . . had a terminal disease without a cure -- a paralysis of power."

Two things are clear; Putin is not afraid to act, and he will never betray Russia. He learned from his father's World War II experience, ". . . there are always a lot of mistakes made in war. That's inevitable. But when you are fighting, if you keep thinking that everybody around you is always making mistakes, you'll never win. You have to take a pragmatic attitude." He approaches life in that fashion.

His political heroes also rebuilt shattered nations. Charles DeGaulle saved France from itself; while in Germany, Ludwig Erhard succeeded because ". . . his entire conception for the reconstruction of the country began with the creation of new moral values for society." The Soviet collapse created a similar challenge for Putin. This book explains what his "effective authority" is all about. It's the best book available this year about a politician with new ideas.

This is a refreshingly candid portrait of the soul of the new President of Russia, a fascinating contrast to "personality politics" that mask any inner feelings of American politicians. Putin trusts the Russian people enough to be honest; our politicians hire spin doctors to create "centrist" or "moving to the right" or "compassionate conservative" images. The contrast is ominous.

Then, stop and think. Does America really need tough, effective authority? Or are we better off with superficial candidates and trivial issues? If Putin succeeds, he will outdo Peter the Great. In America, do we need a great crusade? or merely to be left alone? Another Lincoln? or a Shrub?

"Pnin" is a short,but well-written novel (no less, perhaps, than one would expect of Nabokov). In a sense, not much actually happens in the novel - and the overall pace is slow. Yet, I read it as a reflective novel, as if Nabokov were trying to elicit feelings of empathy with his main character, rather than trying to "entertain" the reader by use of plot.

What Nabokov did well for me was to create a sense of appreciation of the life of the emigre - Pnin has had several lives, all disrupted by the tides of history. Although he appears to be a slightly comic, bumbling middle-aged academic, struggling to come to terms with American society (and the English language), this masks the internal tragedies Pnin struggles with on a day-to-day basis, as parts of his past bubble up in his memory.

To be read with sympathy rather than for thrills.

With Pnin, Nabokov does what he has done elsewhere -- he spoofs middle-class, middle-century America, exploding its pretensions quite handily. But the subject matter here is a bit closer to home, as Pnin deals with the plight of Russian expatriates adrift in exile after the Revolution. One imagines Nabokov identified more than a little with his lovable, excitable protagonist, and at times the satire parts to reveal aching sadness.

The last two pages of Chapter Five, in which Pnin ruminates on the memory of a lost love who died in World War II, contain some of my favorite writing in the English language. I will quote here an exquisite paragraph:

"Pnin slowly walked under the solemn pines. The sky was dying. He did not believe in an autocratic God. He did believe, dimly, in a democracy of ghosts. The souls of the dead, perhaps, formed committees, and these, in continuous session, attended to the destinies of the quick."

In passages such as this, Nabokov walks an astonishing tightrope between caustic comedy and heartbreaking tragedy.

The only recommendation I had for this book was the ever-evolving readers' list that Random House is keeping on-line, which tallies the votes of what readers believe are the 100 best English language novels of the 20th Century. "Pnin" showed up near the bottom of the list, but with a respectable number of votes. Having always wanted to get past the Nabokov of "Lolita" fame, I took the plunge. What I found knocked my socks off. If you know ANY Russian intelligencia emigres, you know Timofei Pnin. Pnin is an unsubtle chucklehead with a heart of gold who manages to live a great deal of his life in an academic cocoon, as utterly clueless about how he is being arbitrarily protected by his dean as he is clueless about the comic effect he has on others. Doesn't sound promising? Believe me, Nabokov's deft brush turns this slender thread of an idea into a veritable War-and-Peace of an exercise in how we react to others in our life. Dare we laugh at others? We certainly laugh at Pnin. We howl. How dare we? I place this book among the top five percent of the many books I've read over the last five years.

"Ten Days That Shook The World" is the account by John Reed of what he saw during the Russian Revolution. Reed was an American Communist and journalist who is the only American known to be buried in the Kremlin. Throughout this book we read a series of observations and dialogues reported by Reed, virtually without comment, although his bias is apparent. We read his reports of political meetings, encounters with minor officials and his observations of events occurring during those turbulent revolutionary days in Petrograd.

This book is a classic case of missing the forest for the trees. The view is too up close to permit the reader to see the big picture. One does not look here for the history of the Revolution. We look here for its spirit. Here we see the swirling chaos, hear the repeated buzz words and get a feeling for the competing factions which fashioned the Communist tyranny which emerged from the Revolution.

In writing this book, Reed gives the reader a view of himself and other American Communists who saw in the Revolution the future that worked. His view can best be summarized in his comment that, while watching a funeral, he realized that the Russian people no longer needed priests to pray them into heaven because they were building a world brighter than any which heaven promised. This hope is in stark contrast to the now known Communist record.

Overall I enjoyed this book as it taught me some more about the Russian Revolution than I had learned from other books which I had read. (See my Amazon review of "The Russian Revolution" by Alan Moorehead.) For that it was worth reading.

Although Ten Days That Shook the World is clearly totally biased towards the Bolsheviks, it is still an interesting read. It does an excellent job of revealing the dramatic side of the Russian Revolution, and it gives the events of the revolution the sort of immediacy that can only be achieved by on-the-spot reporting. There are also many facinating quotes and interviews with leaders, like Trotsky. It is an engaging and exciting book, and it is very well written.

However, it is not really ideal (never mind ideal, it is pretty useless) for a research project or for real information. Unless you are pretty familiar with the events of the revolution, it would probably be confusing (he uses many terms without really explaining them and is VERY detailed). Furthermore, the book was written by a dedicated believer in the regime right after the event occured. Reed did not have the benefit of hindsight in writing his book - and he was blinded by his faith in socialism. Some of the events in the book are somewhat inaccurate, and Lenin and Trotsky are totally idealized! One thing that shows how biased Reed was towards the Bolsheviks is that Lenin himself states that the book is an accurate depiction of the revolution. This would seem like a good thing, but actually, when the revolution is depicted in way that is favorable to Lenin, one thing is for sure: it is completely inaccurate! For instance, the book leaves the reader with the impression that the Bolsheviks had planned the revolution much more carefully than they did in reality (it was more a lucky break than anything else).

Nevertheless, this book is irreplaceable as a first-hand illustration of what the revolution was like. Even though some of the information cannot be trusted completely, it is still a facinating book!

Having just finished John Reed's great work of historical journalism I would call it compelling, articulate, a page-turner, etc. It is unfortunate that Reed died so young and was unable to see what his idealistic heroes set loose upon Russia and later the world. Reed was undoubtedly a good man and I don't mean to discredit his character, just his logic.

That aside, this work is fascinating in that it presents so many of the pivotal events in the formation of the Soviet Socialist system from the point of view of someone who was right there while it happened. Add to this the fact that he was an American and thus understood the American sensibility and you have a work of near genius. For the average American reader, this work must have been illuminating for reasons of its style as well as its content.

Reed does have obvious bias in favor of the Bolsheviki, indeed Trotsky is portrayed as a demigod, but he is able to sympathetically depict the plight of the nation of Russia near the close of WWI and enlighten the reader to the numerous causes of the Revolution, and why it must have seemed so inevitable and right to those who experienced it.

Overall a stunning work of journalism and history, highly worth your time.