This book was on the required reading for my English Graduate School Comprehensive Exams in the area on Literary Criticism. Brian Mcrea thoroughly repeats his same point several times within this text almost to the level of a reader's perplexity with his obsessive observations concerning the change in the world between the seventeeth to the eighteenth century literary styles and the postmodern era up until our current time. Certainly it is not surprising news to any English graduate student that Addison and Steele are no longer the literary icons for journalistic and literary practices used in the late 20th and beginning of the 21st centuries. For forty dollars, however, you get alot of repetition of Mcrea's observations on this "phenomenom."

This book is a good source of information by the author as objective member of a university English Department in the fragmented postmodern modern world of today. Professional expectations and specialized suject areas now dominate the scene for graduate studies and new professors. McCrea relates the loss of interest in the public literary style Addision and Steel as members of the current literary canon and critical reviews which have dwindled to significanty none at all in periodicals since 1957. He traces the history of the canon back to the seventeenth century London and proceeds to Saussaure and Derrida as the leaders in the study of the new literary criticism and its canon in the twentieth and tweny-first century. Most of his comments are of interest historically and socially in respect to literature and its ever growing but selective group of isolated critics who only entertain a narrow and main focus of study. Is Derrida right, wrong, or both? This question gets a bit confusing in the last chapter on the New York mutes who are "signing" as they communicate enthuisiastically inside a restaurant as McCrea and his children watch. Is Derrida wrong, or is writing insubordinated by a system of signs that do not indicate the signified? Read this book for McCrea's comments that may initiate some questions of your own questions concerning the democratization of literature by the postmodern critics and new English Department professionalism.

... not sure how much of the book actually is of substance. We used it in a research project to document Canon's success over Xerox, and I did not get anything out of it as I had hope for. The information also appears quite outdated.

Instead, if you're interested in Canon, search some business article databases at your local library, or online.

Not recommended.

This book co-written by a top japanese manager, gives a view most people should have about Japan, before even thinking about going/talking or doing business with Japan. It is a must to help you out with the Japanese culture, or the lack of it.

Though the selections in this book are excellent and unexpected, Birkerts seems in his analyses to be overly elementary. He draws too many concrete inferences from ambiguous material and situations. I'm quite dissapointed with his analyses..... they seem much better suited as introductory high school texts than college ones. His analyses and writings about his chosen subject seem rather dry. I reccomend this text only for its selection of international authors whom I may not have discovered had it not been for this text. The content of discussion is dismissible, however. As an alternative, I suggest Ciardi's "How Does A Poem Mean?" He covers basically the same territory, but does so with passion and an obvious joy in the unnailable. A much more thoughtful treatment, ultimately leaving the task of determining meaning & appreciation of a piece (or Performance, as he explains) to the reader.

Birkerts' conception here is to demonstrate how texts form part of a continuous cultural discourse. To do so, he presents for instance Oedipus Rex, followed by Hamlet, then reproduces Freud's comments on the Oedipal Complex as well as Frances Fergusson's article on tragedy as the inheritor of the role of ritual sacrifice. This allows a teacher to present differing critical views and contexts for each work. This approach works well, generally, and I've used this book for an Advanced Placement high school literature course for several years. It would be an excellent general anthology for college use.

The range of selections is generous to a fault--the book is unusually broad in its inclusiveness, including in its selection of criticism--and several mini-anthologies (a selection of Gary Snyder's poetry, for instance) within the text make for interesting case studies amid the more general assortment.

Chapters on poetic devices and prosody are also complemented with chronologically-arranged anthologies of stories and poems, and the selections in drama are both adventurous in their newer titles and safely within the classics. Highly recommended!

This book offers some good information for considering different aspects about the new testament literature. However, I'd recommend "Fortress Introduction to the Gospels" by Mark Allan Powell as a place to start, rather than this book.

Patzia sometimes makes incredible statements of fact, which in reality are points of debate among scholars. For example, in one half sentence, Patzia declares (with no backing) that the Gospel of John was written in Ephesus in the late 1st Century. Contrast that with Powell's two page discussion of the when and where questions of that same gospel.

Basically, there is not enough discussion of the reasoning of the scholars on particular points. In one odd twist, the Patzia states that the authorship of some of Paul's letters is questioned. This includes, among others, 2 Thessalonians. A couple of pages later, though, he makes the statement that "Paul himself" gives (in 2 Thessalonians) an explanation about how to tell that the letter is authentic. Of course, if Paul didn't write 2 Thessalonians, then the explanation is bogus, a point that Patzia seems to miss.

I have to admit that I was surprised that the book didn't contain more information about the decision making process for what was considered canon. This work only gives the Council of Carthage of 397 brief treatment.

The book does contain some valuable information, but it wouldn't be my first choice. It's too bad the author (or editor) didn't spend a little extra time refining the material.

Actually, I rather enjoyed the book. It didn't look as though Patzia is so concerned with making a strong position as he is with expressing a summary and the different positions on the topics he covers. The glossary looked helpful and I really appreciated the extensive end notes and annotated bibliographies included in them. I thought there was a lot of good information here for someone wanting an introduction to the issues.

Kathy Rudy's book is subtitled, Gender, Homosexuality and theTransformation of Christian Ethics. From that one might think thatthe thrust of the book would be about how the Church can transform her moral sexual ethics. However, half the book is spent on analyzing the position of the Christian Right. While this part seemed well documented, one wonders whether that should have been given as much space given the stated focus of the book. Only in the last chapter does Rudy actually deal with complementarity, unitivity and her addition to the ethic, hospitality.

Her detailed analysis of the Christian Right is perceptive, but that same attention to detail is skipped in the last chapter.

The book was disappointing in the sense that the title and subtitle seemed to suggest another kind of approach. END

Rudy's take on gender theology and how we as Christians can move past it are at once liberating and a little bit scary. I wholeheartedly agree with her call to return to the community of the Christian church, that our relationships should be based around baptism, not family, and that how we relate to God and to each other should be not be based on our gender or sexuality. Her concept of what constitutes moral sex, though, needs to be studied with care. To base the morality of the sex act on community needs and hospitality invites a misread that would sanction all sorts of irresponsible sex acts under the guise of "communal sex." I don't necessarily disagree, but I think a more thorough explanation of what exactly this version of moral sex does and does not look like would have been in order.

In spite of the low rating, I'd still suggest it to an inexperienced photographer who got an s100 or s110 as a first camera. It covers the details of good shooting (framing, exposure, composition) with very concrete examples, and will certainly help someone find reasons to try all of the nifty features of the camera.

However, the S200 is the "current" camera in that line, and the book needs an update, though the general features are still applicable.

The *real* disappointment is that this is a black-and-white printing, with velobind-style binding -- nice in that it lays flat, but I can do as well or better in any copy shop off of a web page. The example pictures do lose a lot (the captions indicate that the authors are aware of this, and explain in words, but really, I want a book, not excuses.)

I can't fault the writing - I just wish it had been produced with more quality; magazine style, perhaps...

This book starts out by explaining some of the basics of general photography, and then uses that knowledge to explain all of the features of the Canon Digital Elph S100. I, being a beginner photographer, found that with the S100 as my first camera ever I had a lot to learn about the camera before I could take good pictures. This book explains everything about photography and then applies it specifically to the S100 with detailed instructions on how to use the manual features of the camera to get better quality photographs. It has definitely helped me in my approach to taking pictures and told me tricks to use in order to get the best picture possible out of the camera. If you're going to buy the S100 you should know a little about photography and this book explains all the connections between the two.

This book covers all of the features of the Canon S100. It is a very good book for the beginner as well as for the seasoned photographer who is looking to get more out of the equipment. The author speaks in detail about all of the different options and controls on the camera as well as how to get the results you want with them. I found it especially helpful when he details how to do advanced photographic techniques with some of the more limited options. I highly recommend this book.

The work is pooly researched and based on an unauthentic manuscript, which the author refers to as the Goindval Pothis. Before selecting and basing one's thesis on a primary source, it behooves a scholar to ensure that it is authentic. Gurinder Mann has failed to do so. Scholarly analysis, _Early Sikh Scriptural Tradition: Myth and Reality_, by Balwant Singh Dhillon (Amritsar: Singh Brothers, 1999) shows that Gurinder Mann's _The Goindval Pothis_ and subsequent works are highly problematic. They are based on his pooly written PhD thesis. Dhillon's aforementioned work is a definitive refutation of all of Gurinder Mann's research. Save your money and purchase Dhillon's work which provides a much better understanding of the Sikh cannon and also gives insight into work by fading scholars such as Gurinder Mann.

I would highly recomend this book to any one who is interested in the Sikh History, particularly the history of Sikh Scriptures.

Gurinder Singh Mann's work is by far the most detailed study of the Goindval Pothis, two sixteenth-century Sikh manuscripts, to appear in print. It is divided into three sections. In the opening section, Mann introduces the history and textual issues related to these manuscripts. The second section gives a detailed table of contents of these texts. The third section presents the compositions that are available here but did not make it to the Adi Granth, the Sikh sacred text. Given the fact that only a handful of scholars, less than six as Mann claims, have been permitted access to these early manuscripts, Mann has done great service to the field by telling the world what is contained in these texts. His research fully supports the Sikh traditional understanding regarding the role of the Goindval Pothis in the compilation of the Adi Granth, but does it with hard textual evidence. Mann is a rare breed of scholars who brings a very high degree of scholarly rogor to his work without losing a deep sympathy for the traditional beliefs. I would strongly recommend this book to any one who is interested in early Sikh history or more specifically the history of Sikh Scripture.

mr. levine's book, though balanced and thoroughly researched, is by no means an adequate response to bloom's controversial CLOSING OF THE AMERICAN MIND. mr. levine is a historian skilled at manipulating quotes and thereby giving us a convincing (but distorted) picture of the conservative critics in higher education, while, alas, avoiding the central question. he simply ignores the real issues troubling campuses all over the country today. he makes his best point by demonstrating that, historically, the canon has been fluid and changing; but that hardly justifies what is being taught in college courses today. it's not so much that the multiculturalist "canon" is wrong or that it would corrupt the old values--the real problem is that almost all of the new books are weak and boring and customer-friendly. THE ESSENTIAL PARADOX, FOR ANYONE WHO HAS PAID ATTENTION TO TODAY'S COLLEGE EDUCATION, IS THAT IN THE ATTEMPT TO OPEN THE MINDS OF STUDENTS, THE "ISTS" HAVE IN FACT CLOSED AND NARROWED MANY, ALL TOO MANY, WITH BOOKS THAT HARDLY EVER STUMULATE A BRAIN CELL. whatever bloom's faults and prejudices may be, his book is written with genuine passion and concern, and ten years after its publication it disturbs us still, because so much of what it says applies to what we see everyday on every american campus. mr. levine is the typical academic star of today, always correct and smooth, but he has to do better than this to meet bloom's challenge.

From a liberal's point of view, the only thing wrong with this book is that it lacks the corrosive name-calling and histrionic forecasting that have made the writings of Levine's critics (and targets of criticism) such potent shelf commodities. This is not a call to arms in Pat Buchanan's "cultural war"; it is a level-headed reminder of the longevity and redundancy of a war which we have always fought--the much-politicized war over education. Everyone wants to know: are children these days being taught well? Are they reading enough Shakespeare? Have our schools turned to mush? In his answer to the last question, Levine would argue that no, they haven't. His opponents would say, Yes, and it's all because of the PC, resentful, tribalistic, Marxist lemmings (see Harold Bloom's "The Western Canon"; Bloom has a fascination with lemmings which borders on the unholy) who have infiltrated our schools and turned our children away from the great classics of literature which every young scholar must read. Levine's point is that, historically, no one has ever really been able to agree on which books are classics and which books are necessary. Politics have always been involved in this debate, just as reactionary thinking has always been the powerful enemy of "advocates" of inclusive reading. Levine explores the history of our reactions to changes in curriculum and course-reading as a way of exposing the snobbery at hand. He does not, alas, call attention to himself by labeling the more prominent snobs "fascists" or "regressive poopoo-heads." That is why his work does not measure up, in its appeal, to the writings of today's conservative critics: because there is no bloodshed in it, no goring of the enemy. Grace don't sell a million, which is why the Blooms in this world don't bother to be graceful. Sorry, Prof. Levine; next time, cuss

Levine's book was one of the only things I could bear to read after Sept. 11. It is a book that looks at what is right with this country. Of course, on one level, it is about the 'culture wars' but on another level it is about what it means to be an American. Do we define it with apple pie and stars and stripes? Or with an understanding of the development of our polyglot, mongrel culture that challenges and infuriates? Are we just not very good Europeans, or are we something different? This book made me proud, for the first time in my life, to be an American, seeing it as an actual identity, rather than the lack of any real culture. It is a gift to understand our history through this lense. Strongly recommend!

I'm sure that Ms. Gruzen has the best of intentions behind this book but I'm afraid that is will not be helpful to interfaith couples. First I must object to the term 'Jewish/Christian' as it's inaccurate for the majority of children. Most of us are, and just prefer to be called the religion we practice i.e. Jewish, Cathloic, Mormon, etc. as is our right. Each has a definition that includes those of mixed backgrounds and that can be a definition itself for those who don't have a set faith.

She shys away from the really sticky issues like the questions if grandma believes you're going to Heaven like she is, even if you don't believe in Christ or that the other grandma wont accept you as being Jewish even if you're practicing. Just 'talking about G-d' wont cut it with kids. She also has really young children so she hasn't faced any of their hard questions they'll be sure to ask in the future.

I wont claim that I have any answers either but it is more than just what decorations to use in December. There are better books on the subject out there for couples that tackle these issues with a little more insight.

I found this book to be one of the first I discovered that truly examined the option of raising a child to know and respect BOTH religions of the parents. Up until I read this book I was saddened that all advice I'd read said, "Pick one religion and stick with it..."

This seemed too simplistic It would necessarily exclude one parent from sharing their own childhood faith with their kids in a meaningful way. We intend to raise our own children as Jews, but I also want them to have a sense of respect and knowledge of my own religion.

Now in a completely revised, expanded and updated second edition, Lee Gruzen's Raising Your Jewish/Christian Child: How Interfaith Parents Can Give Children The Best Of Both Their Heritages continues to be an invaluable compendium of keen observation and sound advice for interfaith parenting. All of the problems and challenges confronting a Jewish/Christian family are drawn from hundreds of interviews as well as Gruzen's extensive professional research and personal experience. The issues covered wide range from beginning talking with children about God, and moving on to planning ceremonies, celebrating holidays, relationships with grandparents, developing and sense of self, and more. Raising Your Jewish/Christian Child is enthusiastically recommended and invaluable reading for anyone in an interfaith marriage and seeking to instill values and an appreciation of heritage within the character of their children.

For reasons of political and religious correctness the Americans have issued their own versions of these pocket books. The British ones are much better.

Beautiful little series of books which I was coveting (mea culpa) long before I bought them. It seems awfully unfair for the people below to give the book such a low rating becase 'nick cave' didn't introduce the chapter. Who cares?

I enjoyed the format, design and lush language of the book.

I gather from the other extremely negative reviews that the British edition of this book has an introduction written by Nick Cave. While I'm sure Nick Cave's commentary on Mark is wonderful, so is the introduction by Barry Hannah in the American edition. Barry Hannah, a hilarious and rough-cut Southern novelist whose ability to craft a startling sentence is nearly unsurpassed, is drawn to Mark for reasons likely similar to those that drew Cave (or to those that led Borges to write an astounding story called "The Gospel According to St. Mark"): Mark is the strangest, least comforting of the Gospels, forging a dim and demanding Christianity out of the disquieting words and acts of Jesus with a minimum of explanation. God seems distant and truly ungraspable here; Mark is a million miles from the cloying certitude of the Pauline epistles, or from, say, the more prosaic Matthew. Hannah, a self-described "bad Christian" (again, not so different from Nick Cave, at least by my lights), manages to bring these qualities out beautifully in his introduction. (Hannah also makes "bad Christian" seem like probably the best thing anyone can hope to be.) By all means, get the British edition with Cave's introduction (as I now plan to do), but don't let that keep you from reading Barry Hannah's introduction too.