THIS BOOK IS ONE OF THE
BEST BOOKS I HAVE READ
TRUE TO THE GAME AND B-MORECAREFUL
MIXED UP IN ONE DO NOT EVEN
COME NEAR THIS BOOK

What I particularly liked about this book is that Goines exposes the manipulative tactics of post-Dr. King "Civil Rights" leaders in his character of Prince. Followers of people like Marion Barry would do well to read Goines' description of Prince's plan to manipulate the emotions of the masses in the ghetto for his own selfish gain.

I THINK THIS BOOK IS RELLY GOOD ESPECIALLY FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE GROWING UP IN THE HOOD LIVING THE GANGSTERIOUS LIFE THAT EVERY TEENAGE BOY OR NOW DAYS GIRL WANTS TO LIVE. I WOULD RECOMMEND THIS BOOK TO ANYONE THAT GOIMG THROUGH STREET LIFE ISSUE.

I love my black entertainers, I love the way these women shaped entertainment, and how they pathed the way for today's black stars. But come on why why would you call a book TOM,S COONS, MULATTOES, MAMMIES, AND BUCKS. Names we detested, nicknames whites gave us because they thought were stupid. But there's has to be a better book written, all he does throughout the book to me is make racist/bigot comments. He's a black man, but he sounds worse then a white person making bigot comments. All throughout the book he talks about, "Awww, because she's mulatto she drinked, oh, she did this because she was dark, she smoked, she dated bad men, oh because she was mulatto or because she was light she had a rough life, skin-color is no reason to drink and smoke, and do bad things, I know racism hurted people. But that's not a reason to do bad things. He acts like because a person was light-complected, nothing bad should of happen to them, but if their dark, he acts like the bad things should of happen. I don't care if you light, brown or dark, we're all black, we've all faced racism, we don't like it if whites think their better, because their lighter, so why should lights be better then the darker ones. Blacks need to learn how to get along first, before we stop whites from being racist. You have to understand, you found very few black truly proud of their race back then. There was no role models aying "HEY I'M BLACK AND I'M PROUD, OR BLACK IS BEAUTIFUL. Role models in those eras were just being made. So we believed back then, what whites thought was beauty, being close to their color, and now its still in the black race and some blacks still believe it after all we overcame. Blacks back then couldn't look back and be proud, now we can. If whites didn't give blacks a chance in entertainment, then that's their lose. If you read the Fredi Washington chapter, about a black woman who was light enough to pass for white, white producers and Hollywood urged her to pass, they promised her a great future, she could of been like Kay Francis, Jean Harlow, Myrna Loy, Joan Crawford, but she didn't pass, because she was proud, she had guts, because in the 1920s and 1930s if you were light enough to pass you did it, she didn't, he writes like he wish she would of passed or something. Or in the other chapters, he doesn't tell why some actresses and entertainers didn't go far, but he uses skin color as an excuse because he really doesn't know. Like for my favorite Nina Mae McKinney, if you look at her, you'll wonder why she didn't make it, I wondered for years, and if you read his book, you'll think because of her skin-color she didn't go far, she didn't go far because of her I'm sorry to say, bad attitude, she lost a lot of jobs because of it, she could be remembered more like Lena Horne and others if it wasn't for that. He also acts like he scared to call a dark-complected, or a brown woman beautiful. A white person could write a better book then this. I understand race had a lot to do with being in entertainment back then, but don't use it as an excuse and don't use it now. I'm sure I can speak for all of us that we want to hear, What type of people were they? Tell us about their career? Their ups and downs? Their later years? All he talks about his skin-color half through the book, we know how it was back then, we want to hear happy stuff. I hope someone come and write a better book, I might just have to do it. I wouldn't recommend this book, but I would recommend it for the pictures, there's some nice pictures in this book. This author also wrote another book called coons and mulattos and mammies, which I think is very stupid, using the names racist whites gave us in slavery. All I have to say is black is beautiful, beauty comes in all complexion, God isn't wrong, he has a reason for everything. We're all God's children. Keep an eye out on my book.

This book is very interesting and valuable. Mr. Bogle is one of the authorities on African Americans in films. He put a lot of examples in his book. Toms, Coons, Mulattoes, Mammies, and Bucks, all images in American films, are history of the race and culture in the U.S.

With the well-deserved and timely wins of Halle Berry and Denzel Washington in their respective Oscar categories, those unfamiliar with past black actors need to pick up a copy of Bogle's well-researched and entertaining book.

I read it upon it initial printing and still find it to be an invaluable resource for those of us interested in ALL of moviemaking.

More than just a coffee-table book, the work is an insightful and fitting homage to the predecessors of the current crop of blacks in film.

Boy, what these old school thespians had to endure just to get a "piece of the pie". It's enough to make you cry.

As historian and novelist Balzac paints a picture of post Napoleonic France through the eyes of an impoverished family, and the trials of their lives. After a series of emotional hits, Balzac takes the reader through a contest of wits, set amidst a web of intrigue, and a very contorted family tree. The end result is an excellent story with a sophisticated plot which at times gives too accurate a portrait of the detachment of man. The Black Sheep also contains a short social commentary on New York, which though written 150 years ago, is still exceptionaly accurate.

Another occasion to live again an exceptionnal human adventure with Balzac.
A lot of emotion and intelligence ...

Donald and Mary Grant, two well paid journalists living in New York City, decide to do a career change in their late 50's. They purchase a cottage sitting on three or four acres, later to become 11 acres, and live off the land. They visit the local Irish Pub on Saturday nights, chat about farm animals, and throughout the year entertain friends from their previous life who thought them totally "bunkers". Donald for added income writes a column for an American newspaper describing their new life. At a time when Americans have had to make career changes late in life, I would highly recommend this book. I think they added to the success of their endeavor by choosing Ireland, for it is definitely a country where nature has it's way. Untamed, perhaps, but also unspoiled. I believe in my heart that the troubles in Ireland should not be and Great Britian should give Northern Ireland it's freedom just as Donald Grant felt after living there. The Irish are unique, pleasantly unique, and should remain so

I may be guilty of a little bit of nepetism (Mary Grant being an aunt, a bit removed and seldom seen), but this book has been a family treasure around the house for years. Anyone looking for an inspiring story about a simpler life should look into this one for sure.

If this is what post-modern lit is all about, I'd rather be a pre-classicist. This book is essentially one big chapter about a hundred brothers reuniting for a dinner. What follows is a series of squabbling between brothers that is at most incoherent. The prose is really bad, with exaggerations and flowery words (more like a Venus flytrap). Donald Antrim seems to have written the book in one night, because the events don't make sense. My advice is start with one brother, and go up from there. Leave this bin of mumbo jumbo for graduate students and intellectual snobs. Post-modernism is reserved for you after you're dead.

Donald Antrim is profoundly original, as he continues to take the novel to a new place in literature. Not always a easy read but always fun and full of insights. I do like 'The Verificationist' and 'The Elect Mr. Robinson' better, but as in all his books it is unlike any book one has ever read.Each brother gave me thoughts on myself my family and the world.I love his dark humor. I'm looking forward to his next book.

In the post colonial imagination, Donald Antrim's phenomologically astute and wonderfully presumptuous masterpiece, The Hundred Brothers, shifts the mode of discourse and the construction of subjectivity. As Freud has said, "Repetition is the mother of invention." We will never look at the "eye" in the "I" or the "I" in the "eye" the same way again. Indeed, in Antrim's (re)reading of the intertextual interstices of familiar familial patterns, it is possible to detect a devout, entymological humanism. In a world where the anxiety of influence can lead to the paradise of delirium, the best one can hope for is voyeuristic narrative pleasure. In all his novels Antrim is clearly determined to unlock the poststructuralist connundrum/enigma. Because Antrim so successfully navigates the narrative of despair the reader is left with not only metaphorical satiation, but the full realization of the global nature of narrative promise. As Freud has said, "repetition is the mother of invention."

After a more thorough review, I realize now that I gave this edition of the New American bible a rating which was too high. Really it should get 2 stars, perhaps 3 at best. A much better edition of the New American Bible would be the St. Joseph's Edition, Classic edition. The St. Joseph's Edition and the Catholic Study Bible have the same introductions and notes, except that the additional materials in the St. Joseph's Edition are better. The Catholic Study Bible's reading guides and the guide to the lectionary reflect current trends among some popular theologians, but do not do much to illuminate the Church's teachings. The material in these reading guides one can get out of a decent introduction to the Bible. In addition to the good introductions and decent notes of the New American Bible, the St. Joseph's Edition provides a bible dictionary, a biblical/doctrinal index with citations to key texts supporting Catholic doctrine, and helpful illustrations and maps. The St. Joseph's Edition also contains the text of the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation from Vatican II and a helpful guide to reading the Bible. I would say that the St. Joseph's Edition is, for the money, a much better buy and a safer guide to reading the Bible from an orthodox Catholic perspective.

This is, overall, a good study bible, but difficult for me to rate. I give it 4 stars, but really I would prefer to give it 3.5 stars. In addition to extensive notes and good introductions to the biblical books, it includes a lengthy reading guide which can serve as an introductory textbook to the bible. Really, this is a bible and bible commentary built into one handy volume. The addition of the Latin Rite 3 year lectionary is also a nice touch.

Weaknesses: The New American translation is fairly good and it is the official english translation for Latin Rite Roman Catholics in the United States (Eastern Catholics use the Revised Standard Version). But it is at times excessive in its use of inclusive language and is not as literary as the Revised Standard Version. The notes are for the most part good, but tend to rely too much on modern historical criticism with not enough attention to how the Tradition has interpreted passages of scripture. I would recommend that Catholics get the New Jerusalem Bible to use with this study Bible. The notes in the New Jerusalem Bible are more thorough and more explicitly Catholic. The New Oxford Annotated Bible is also recommended (the 1977 Revised Standard Version, not the NRSV). This edition includes the entire Canon of Scripture as accepted by the eastern Churches as well as the Western Canon. The Revised Standard Version is a literal and elegant translation that has not been infected with the "political correctness" of inclusive language. The notes to the Oxford Annotated Bible are fairly good, but relect a liberal protestant bias. However, read with the Catholic Study Bible and the New Jerusalem Bible, the three make for a nice group of texts to use for bible study. Catholics should also consider the Christian Community bible commissioned by the bishops of the Phillipines. This Bible has excellent notes which combine current scholarship, devotional exegesis, and a third world concern for social justice into one package.

The beauty of this NAB is that it offers two services in one. First, it is a faithful translation of the ancient and ever-new inspired scriptures. This is the product of the finest Catholic Biblical scholars in the English-speaking world today. Secondly, it provides helpful footnotes and excellent introductory articles which offer readers an orientation to the Bible ingeneral, contemporary study and scholarly conclusions, as well as a sketch of the issues and background that concern each book of the Bible. I differ with the two other reviewers above in regard to this Bible. I believe it is not only for the serious scholar, but indeed can help the new Bible reader and the "average" reader appreciate the Scriptures more deeply. This version of the Bible can help support Catholic Christians, and Christians of any denomination by helping them to appreciate the important place of the Bible in their life of faith, and to incorparate this timeless wisdom into their everyay life more faithfully. I have found it helpful personally in my own study, and I always recommend it to people who ask what Bible they might purchase.

Because I am black that doesn't mean I have to deal with the problems of all black people. That's
not my sole responsibility...all TV is divorced from reality.
-Diahann Carroll, circa 1968

Taken simply as a catalogue of appearances by African Americans on television over the past sixty years, this book is perhaps adequate. It takes an exhaustive (sometimes exhausting) look at the role of black actors on primetime television, decade by decade. Bogle seems to have watched every episode of every TV show that ever featured blacks, from Beulah and Amos n' Andy in the early days, to the slew of UPN shows now, with stops along the way for hits like Julia,Sanford and Son, and The Cosby Show and the many all too brief series like Get Christie Love. He discusses all of them, not just the shows in general, but individual episodes, plus TV movies and black-themed episodes of white shows. Every snippet of TV history is held up and examined like an important fossil in the hands of a paleontologist. But, unfortunately, the various pieces never add up to a coherent whole; the book suffers from the lack of a thesis, from an unrelenting earnestness, and from a woeful absence of perspective.

The overarching problem is that Bogle does not seem to be operating from a defined principle. Is this a story about how African American images on television have evolved and gotten better, or at least more realistic, or is it about how things have really not improved ? How should blacks be portrayed on TV ? Have portrayals of Black America on television been better or worse than the reality of the times ? Have those portrayals been more stereotyped and less realistic than those of whites and other ethnic groups ? These are some of the questions that the author should have asked himself before he began writing and which the reader should expect will be answered by the end of the book. He did not ask and they are not answered.

As a result, Bogle's assessments and criticisms of each show occur in an intellectual vacuum and are often contradictory. Some shows are taken to task because they offered an unrealistic portrait of blacks as living in nuclear, middle class, nonpolitical families. Others are criticized for falling back on societal stereotypes of single parent households, poor families, involvement in crime, etc. If a police show has a black captain, that's unrealistic because blacks weren't put in positions of power. If the cop is black, it's unrealistic because he's middle class and an authority figure. If the crooks are black, that's a stereotype, placing blacks in a bad light.. Well, what the heck were the producers supposed to do ? And doesn't the mere fact that roles were being created for black actors mean something, on some level ?

At times, Bogle's lack of perspective, his blind focus on African Americans, comes across as almost laughable. In his discussion of the show The White Shadow, while complaining that the theme of a white coach having to lead troubled black youths is offensive, and worrying that the players were too often caricatures, he mentions the cast of characters and, without further comment, notes that the token white player was named Salami. Suppose the sole black player on a white team had been nicknamed Watermelon ? People would have been outraged, and rightly so. Had he paused for a moment to consider this one instance of insensitivity to another ethnic group, Bogle might have stumbled upon some of the larger truths about television : it's all caricature, stereotypes, and fundamentally unrealistic situations.

(...)TV, with the unique pressures of its weekly schedule and the need to appeal to a mass audience, has always tended toward banality. In the effort to supply escapist entertainment, it has relied heavily on the mindless, the unchallenging, the consciously non provocative. Bogle stumbles upon this fundamental truth in his discussion of The Cosby Show, whose various problems he is seemingly constrained from criticizing because it is probably the most popular African American show of all time :

The audience understood that The Cosby Show was not about contemporary politics. Rather it was
about culture.

You probably have to read the book to get a feel for how jarring a note this strikes after 300 pages of complaining that innumerable marginal shows were insufficiently political. But it's important to note that Cosby, who had the #1 show on television, actually had the leeway necessary to turn his show into the kind of political platform that Bogle seems to think African American shows should have tried to be, and he did not take advantage of it. Why then expect the many minor and largely forgotten shows that he criticizes throughout the book--shows staffed by actors, writers, directors and producers who were after all just doing their jobs and which were just looking for an audience--to have engaged in some kind of exercise in black empowerment ?

In the end, this book is so limited in scope that, though Bogle does a workmanlike job of describing various African American series, it's hard for the reader to figure out what his point was in writing the book in the first place. It takes on the feel of a reference book, with encyclopedic entries, rather than a coherent narrative. It's occasionally fun reading about some of the old shows (including one of my favorites, The Young Rebel

Although I initially intended on simply reviewing Bogle's masterwork, I feel that along with a personal reflection on the book, it is necessary to contradict statements made by an earlier reviewer.

Yes, the book is "exhaustive" but never is it boring. Every profile of African-American actors on the tube is carefully detailed and extensively covered, with little asides that make for intriguing reading. To this reader, it is clear that Bogle feels that there have been significant improvements in the representation of Blacks on television, but there are still some significant inroads, in front of and behind the camera, that need to be made. By covering as thoroughly as he has the entirety of those African-American pioneers and trendsetters, the author satisfies those that have longed to see such a mammoth undertaking published.

I, for one, savor the profiles of such underrated performers as Rosalind Cash, Joe Morton, Shirley Hemphill, Juano Hernandez, James Edwards, and a slew of others that labored with many less-than-distinguished parts and managed to create something memorable. It is further refreshing to see the author give the backgrounds of the more familiar African-American superstars like Bill Cosby, Cicely Tyson, and Diahann Carroll.

While I do not particularly care for the programs that have a "monochromatic cast" (Friends, Martin, and the various UPN "black-block" shows), I understand and appreciate Bogle's belief that television shows have a responsibility to inform and present a realistic portrayal of society, be that program a sitcom or a drama.

It is true that television is primarily entertainment; however, in that entertainment, thought-provoking writing and occasional commentary on society is warranted. That is one of Bogle's premises that he eloquently expresses.

This is a top-notch historical/editorial reference that makes for great reading and a worthwhile addition to the library of any fan of the "boob tube."

PRIMETIME BLUES is an excellent history of African-Americans
on primetime television,from the days of "Beluah" to "The Parkers".Smart,honest,and very,very,very insightful,PRIMETIME
BLUES makes you want to read even more.But if I had to put in
some complaints,it'd be Donald Bogle's political bias.Suggesting
that all Blacks live rough and that any Black show that wants to
show a normal,calm Black family is phony.And at times,PRIMETIME
BLUES comes off a textbook as well.But anyway,buy this book
for excellent coverage of Blacks on your TV screen!

Although the general approach and anecdotal content of Bad Boys, Bad Men were quite interesting, Dr. Black's approach seems simplistic and he takes inexcusable liberties in attempting to "dumb" down" the book for its intended audience. For example, how can it possibly be true that "[e]very antisocial leaves a trail of disruption, deceit, and even violence...." Mistakes in grammar and usage, such as "to loan" instead of "to lend" and "pled" instead of the proper legal usage of "pleaded", also undermined the credibility of this work.

The book's anecdotal content reflects the limitations of the sources from which they were drawn and have a decided bias toward lower-class, violent antisocials. Although a brief and rather superficial chapter discusses "successful" antisocials, the text constantly returns to the extreme and violent end of the scale.

Throughout the book, a tone of subtle condescension toward the lay-reader and the antisocial is detectable, albeit disguised in simple vernacular. When serial-killer Gacy responded to the author that he was filing their correspondences under "People Up to No Good", the author seems to find this a humorous anecdote which he rather smugly posits as an example of Gacy's pathology. Perhaps Gacy may have recognised that the author, like so many others, had intended to exploit him in order to produce a work that would be sold for financial reward and for personal benefits to career and reputation.

Are there some people who simply make it their mission to be bad? The psychiatric circle is now beginning to believe so. In this groundbreaking look at Anti-social Personality Disorder (ASP) psychiatrist Donald Black charts the process and problems of men (for they are primarily men) who know no conscience and simply refuse to obey the rules. Typically, these men are white and working class, who go through jobs, money, homes, prisons, and family with a virtual disgregard for those around them. They may have come from poor families and broken homes, they are likely to have been juvenile delinquents, their parents may have been antisocials as well. But the Antisocial is a very dangerous person who comes in any size, shape, or form.

At the risk of seeming like another attempt to plead pity for criminals, Donald Black insists that these men be held responsible for their actions, and avoids placing blame on anyone but them for the destruction they seem to willfully cause. He discusses various causes for the disorder (ie: genetics, brain trauma, abuse, poverty), the history of its discovery, and gives us case studies of men who he has tracked down more than twenty years after their initial hospitalization and diagnosis with ASP, often with unsettling results.

I liked this book for its scholarly treatment of this psychiatric subject. It was complex and in-depth, but at the same time, still accessible to me as a non-psychiatrist. I was fascinated with the descriptions of personalities that he gave, and riveted by the petrifying account he gave of the sociopath John Wayne Gacy. At the same time, I did have some problems with this book. At times, it did not hold my attention and would read like a textbook. I also found that Dr. Black's treatment of the antisocial was rather contemptuous and seemed to emphasize the fact that these people are virtually impossible to treat, rather than trying to show optimism or enthusiasm. I don't think you can help somebody (no matter how unlikeable they may seem at face value) recover if you attack them. There is a difference between holding someone responsible and beating them up over their bad choices. (Or perhaps this shows I didn't get as much out of this book as I should have.) Along the same lines, Dr. Black did not support his descriptions of antisocial behavior with the responses of the patients. He told us antisocials have no remorse, but I don't feel he really articulated that in telling the stories of follow-up interviews.

Overall, I felt that this was a pretty good book, and an important introduction to a disorder which has extreme ill-effects on society (poverty, crime, etc.). Hopefully, over the years, their can be more research to define a way to treat these individuals.

After I read this book, I began my research on psychopaths, sociopaths, serial killers and how it all gets started. I feel that they are drawn to positions of power because perhaps somewhere at some point in their lives, maybe after being dominated or abused at a very young age, they decide that as soon as they are able, they will never let anyone else tell them what to do. And the profession they come up with that will allow them to accomplish their objective would be one of power, often law enforcement. Scary. I just found out that my neighbor also escaped, but not with her children, as I did. Turns out that her ex husband, also violent, and also a psychopath, was also highly educated. A court appointed psychiatrist, even. So, it wasn't until five years ago when he finally landed in prison, did anyone start listening to her about this charming man. Who had of course had everyone convinced she was crazy. Invalidation, I find, is one of the most insidious forms of abuse that they use. Pretty soon, you start beginning to doubt your own thoughts and feelings, and eventually you stop having them altogether.

In The Behavior of the Law (1976), As for the quantity of law Donald Black attempts to formulate propositions that "explain the quantity and style of law in every setting (pp. 6)." (which he defines as governmental social control), he argues that it can be measured by the amount and scope of legal prohibitions-and obligations-to which people are subject. As Black says, any "initiation, invocation, or application" of law can be considered an increase (Black, pp. 3). In this regard, the theory is meant to explain the law without reference to the individual. 1. Stratification 2. Morphology 3. Culture 4. Organization 5. Social Control With law as his dependent variable, Black asserts that there are five independent variables that can provide us with an understanding of the amount, scope, and style of law in human affairs-at any time and place. These independent variables are: (1) Stratification, (2) Morphology, (3) Culture, (4) Organ! ization, and (5) Social Control.

Black (1976) argues that each of these variables are independent of the others and that it is possible to apply all of them at once when explaining the behavior of the law (ibid., pp. 2). Black defines these crucial variables as follows: Stratification is the vertical aspect of social life, or any uneven distribution of the conditions of existence, such as food, access to land or water, and money. Morphology is the horizontal aspect, or the distribution of people in relation to each other, including their division of labor, integration and intimacy. Culture is the symbolic aspect, such as religion, decoration, and folklore. Organization is the corporate aspect, or the capacity for collective action. Finally, Social Control is the normative aspect of social life, or the definition of deviant behavior and the response to it, such as prohibits, accusations, punishment, and compensation (Black, pp. 1 ~ 2, 1976, bold type-face added).

Us! ing these five variables, Black argues that-"all else being! constant"-the following will occur: more stratification will result in more law (a positive correlation), increased morphology will result in more law-but only to a point, at which time the effect is reversed (a curvilinear correlation), More culture will result in more law (another positive correlation), more organization will result in more law (a positive correlation), and more social control will result in less law (a negative correlation). Finally, from these five independent variables, Black identified a myriad of similar correlations (he calls them "propositions") which go beyond the scope of this brief summary.

Black explains us how law - that supreme controller of our behavior - itself behaves (or variates) through history and across the world! Actually he is only telling us some of the basic findings of the sociology of justice, but his crisp and courageously reductive way to present his generalizations is really stimulating. The behavioral space of law (so to speak) - from pure anarchy to an all-pervading rule of law - is structured with few central variables (stratification, culture, other forms of social control...) Simple conceptualization is however coupled with short yet interesting, often colorful, examples about respective rules. But Black doesn't try to do too much with his generalizations (certainly no absolute quantification is attempted), so I found them in no way unduly simplistic. An interesting and originally crafted map to (at least some of) the basics of the sociology of justice.

This is a clear and engaging introduction to the epistemology and model with which Black revolutionizes the discipline of sociology. It can be read and benefitted from in merely a few settings, but is so intense and unique that it takes years to digest and appreciate fully. Anyone interested in sociology, in theory, in law, or in science should engage this work and reconsider much of what they think - about those topics, and about reality in general. Tremendous accomplishment!!

I love my black entertainers, I love the way these women shaped entertainment, and how they pathed the way for today's black stars. But there's has to be a better book written, all he does throughout the book to me is make racist/bigot comments. He's a black man, but he sounds worse then a white person making bigot comments. All throughout the book he talks about, "Awww, because she's mulatto she drinked, oh, she did this because she was dark, she smoked, she dated bad men, oh because she was mulatto or because she was light she had a rough life, skin-color is no reason to drink and smoke, and do bad things, I know racism hurted people. But that's not a reason to do bad things. He acts like because a person was light-complected, nothing bad should of happen to them, but if their dark, he acts like the bad things should of happen. I don't care if you light, brown or dark, we're all black, we've all faced racism, we don't like it if whites think their better, because their lighter, so why should lights be better then the darker ones. Blacks need to learn how to get along first, before we stop whites from being racist. You have to understand, you found very few black truly proud of their race back then. There was no role models aying "HEY I'M BLACK AND I'M PROUD, OR BLACK IS BEAUTIFUL. Role models in those eras were just being made. So we believed back then, what whites thought was beauty, being close to their color, and now its still in the black race and some blacks still believe it after all we overcame. Blacks back then couldn't look back and be proud, now we can. If whites didn't give blacks a chance in entertainment, then that's their lose. If you read the Fredi Washington chapter, about a black woman who was light enough to pass for white, white producers and Hollywood urged her to pass, they promised her a great future, she could of been like Kay Francis, Jean Harlow, Myrna Loy, Joan Crawford, but she didn't pass, because she was proud, she had guts, because in the 1920s and 1930s if you were light enough to pass you did it, she didn't, he writes like he wish she would of passed or something. Or in the other chapters, he doesn't tell why some actresses and entertainers didn't go far, but he uses skin color as an excuse because he really doesn't know. Like for my favorite Nina Mae McKinney, if you look at her, you'll wonder why she didn't make it, I wondered for years, and if you read his book, you'll think because of her skin-color she didn't go far, she didn't go far because of her I'm sorry to say, bad attitude, she lost a lot of jobs because of it, she could be remembered more like Lena Horne and others if it wasn't for that. He also acts like he scared to call a dark-complected, or a brown woman beautiful. A white person could write a better book then this. I understand race had a lot to do with being in entertainment back then, but don't use it as an excuse and don't use it now. I'm sure I can speak for all of us that we want to hear, What type of people were they? Tell us about their career? Their ups and downs? Their later years? All he talks about his skin-color half through the book, we know how it was back then, we want to hear happy stuff. I hope someone come and write a better book, I might just have to do it. I wouldn't recommend this book, but I would recommend it for the pictures, there's some nice pictures in this book. This author also wrote another book called coons and mulattos and mammies, which I think is very stupid, using the names racist whites gave us in slavery. All I have to say is black is beautiful, beauty comes in all complexion, God isn't wrong, he has a reason for everything. We're all God's children. Keep an eye out on my book.

I have had this book since I saw the PBS special several years ago. This is an outstanding book filled with wonderful beautiful pictures. Many of the stories are sad, because many black entertainers did not get their just "due" for all of the contributions they made. By reading this book, you can see what music and entertainment was, and what it really needs to be again! Great Book!

I purchased this book during the mid-80's, in hardback. I still have the original edition. It remains one of my keepsakes along with my family photo album! Every black woman should have this book. Whenever you think you are having a hard time, this book shows each lady's up and down. The Black woman tries to distinguish herself and positively represent other Black Americans under the evil Hollywood eye of racism in the entertainment industry from the 1920's to present.

This book really enlightened me about early performers such as Ethel Waters, Lena Horne, Moms Mabley, Bessie Smith and many others. Thank you so much Donald Bogle for tackling a tough and inspiring subject with excellent journalism and research.