Stories about particular bears and events in the southwest, from the 1820s to the present. Shows the changing attitude toward bears. Written by David Brown, who also wrote the very good book "The Grizzly in the Southwest: Documentary of an Extinction".

I could not put this book down!!! Wonderful stories about the Great Bear that roamed so much of the American West. This is really a history lesson about how our ancestors exterminated the Grizzly mainly due to not fully understanding this animal. Let this be a lesson for present and future generations on how to preserve the American Grizzly.

"How can you print a piece of your own soul," Dickinson, p. 51

This is the 2nd in the Krull and Hewitt's "Lives of ..." series. The book contains 19 chapters on 20 writers in birth order: Murasaki Shikibu (973?-1025?), Miguel de Cervantes (1547-1616), William Shakespeare (1564-1616), Jane Austen (1775-1817), Hans Christian Andersen (1805-1875), Edgar Allan Poe (1809-1849), Charles Dickens (1812-1870), Charlotte & Emily Bronte (1816-1855 & 1818-1848), Emily Dickinson (1830-1886), Louisa May Alcott (1832-1888), Mark Twain (1835-1910), Frances Hodgson Burnett (1849-1924), Robert Louis Stevenson (1850-1894), Jack London (1876-1916), Carl Sandburg (1878-1967), E. B. White (1899-1985), Zora Neale Hurston (1901?-1960), Langston Hughes (1902-1967), Isaac Bashevis Singer (1904-1991)

This is a perfect book for young adolescents and pre-teens who as they grow and mature frequently feel awkward. Krull introduces us to the idiosyncrasies of the literary. Some of the authors were loners, eccentric, a wee bit peculiar. Michael Jackson's behaviors might seem normal when held in comparison. Some retreated into themselves. Some sought out adventures. Some as adults were unsuccessful at the ordinary.

Some worked at a young age to support the family. Some took daily walks, very long daily walks. Some were not healthy and therefore wrote in bed. There were some similarities and some differences, but they all shared a singular conviction to write and write they each did well.

Hewitt's delightful portraits of the writers are precious. My favorite portrait is of Frances Hodgson Burnett of "The Secret Garden" fame. Her hat is the secret garden.

Given the high price of the book, I was surprised that Krull did not include a list of the authors' books and/or poems and the publication years. END

This book is a fun and informative book. The pictures are filled with humorous meanings and hidden information. The book keeps the reader's attention by keeping the included information short and simple, but also makes sure that the reader gets as much possible about the author. This book is great for kids and students to use as a report source as it is filled with great information. Kids would rather use this book as an information source rather than an encylopedia since the information is easy to understand. Authors in there are some you may not know, ( Murasaki Shikibu) and some well know ones ( Charles Dickens). I am glad I purchsed this book. I really liked the pictures which are so vibrant with color. This would make a great buy.

I have recently read "The Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet" in school. I enjoyed reading this play as I felt it provided me with a different outlook because of its vocabulary. The plot of the story was very romantic, but in the end the play became dramatic. It tells a story of true love between two resented families, Montague and Capulet.
Romeo Montague and Juliet Capulet risk their lives to be together and nothing could get in the way of their feelings of true love. Even though their families hated each other, they still found a way be married, although it was not easy because of all the tragedies throughout the play. Romeo's best friend, Mercutio and Juliet's cousin, Tybalt both died. Also, Juliet's father was forcing her to marry Paris, another man. There were many more tragedies, which kept the two lovers away from each other. The name of both houses was the main reason why Romeo and Juliet could not be together. As Juliet said, "What's in a name?" If it were not for the significance of the names there would be no tragedy.
Without William Shakespeare's acts of irony, love, hate tragedy and pride the story would not have been worth reading. The way he twisted the story when they got married was unusual too, as getting married can make life different in a good way, but in this story, not.

This book is a story tells a story about true love. The characters Romeo and juliet has been a role model for many people in their love life.This story includes all the elements to prove that love that Romeo and Juliet had was true love. William Shakespeare uses tragedy,love, hate, pride, and irony.

Romeo, from house the house of Montagues,is best described as a love. He does things for Juliet even though it risks his life. But no matter the consequences, he went with hs feelings. Juliet, from house of Capulets, is a lover at will. She had never loved a man as much a Romeo. But though they were from opposing families, she finds a way to marry him.

There were many tragedies. Two being Mercutio and Tybalts death. There were many more tragedies that happened and one main reason why they happened which was the fact that the two house were against each other. This caused all the tragedies because if they were not, both lovers would live happily. One thing that kept the family against each other was the pride in their name. If it were not for the name then all would not end in tragedy.

One ironic part in this story was when the two lovers got married. Getting married usually makes life better but in this marraige, it made thing worse and turned the story into a different direction.

This story must have been the best story i have ever read. It is love story that makes me think of how far i would go for a girl. Though it is hard to read, I enjoyed it very much and i suggest the book to all the lovers out there but could be enjoyed by all.

Romeo and Juliet are the two most known lovers created by William Shakespeare. Their love story is one to be cried for, and it really shows the true meaning of what love is. Many people have claimed and agreed it is the most sad but romantic play ever written, and it really is.
They're a pair of star crossed lovers, who fall in love at first site. Their hopless love is denied from the very beginning: their families have an awful hatred towards each other which has been everlasting. They go through many tests for them to prove they really love each other: Romeo's best friend dying; Romeo's exile after murdering Mercutio, Juliet's cousin; and finally Romeo learning his dear lover's "death".
Although it has a tragic ending, many people say this story is actually happy, for they both die at the same time, and their love is kept together, for eternity.

The Client by John Grisham is most definitely the kind of book you can't just stop reading, even if your tired. From the very first chapter, the plot is enticing to the point that you find yourself just having to read on to find out what will happen next.
The main character, 11 year old Mark, starts the story by trying to be a good guy. Ironically enough, his good intentions only lead him to trouble with both the authorities and the outlaws. And the more he runs from one side, the closer he comes to the other. Finally, as he twists and turns to escape from the situation all together, he finds himself forced to make the impossible choice between life on the run or life in prison. In addition to attention-grabbing, I also found the story to be funny in certain parts and still touching at others.
However, by the end of the story, I thought the actions and emotional stability of the boy became too unrealistic given he was supposed to be only 11 years old. I also felt that although the boy's dilemma was resolved, certain other important characters and their situations where not dealt with to full conclusion. I suppose Grisham could have wanted to leave room for speculation, but, more likely, I suspect he thought the implications he gave to the conclusions of these other affairs were sufficient. I think, though, the book would have been better had he followed through with every aspect of the plot and its characters. Hence, I rate the book at 3 stars despite the fact that in all honesty I couldn't put it down until I finished it.

I have read two of Grisham's books before this one, The Testament and The Firm, and this one is just as entertaining. It starts off with the young but wise character of Mark Sway who has a lousy home life. One day, he and his brother stumble upon a man trying to commit suicide in the woods and Mark tries to stop him. Unfortunately for him, however, he learns too much in the process. Because of this newly obtained information, he has a dangerous Mob member hot on his trails. This murdering criminal wants the boy to keep quite while authorities want him to tell all. Caught in the middle with no way out Reggie Love, a sassy lawyer with spunk, guts, and determination, tries to bring this case to safe ending. She lays it all on the line.
The plot starts off quite exciting in the beginning but varies in intensity throughout the whole novel. At times, the pages can go on about legal matters and be slow to get through, but before you know it, it has suddenly picked back up to its exhilarating pace. I think that this book is so much fun and easy to read because of its fast tempo. Things happen so quickly that you can't put it down. Also, I think the characters in Grisham's works are all very realistic and their actions are relative to the way most of us would react in their given situations. This, too, is another reason why Grisham keeps bouncing back with success upon success. He has all the key ingredients that would appeal to all readers. This is a book you should not pass up on the shelves.

Okay, I'm not a completely qualified Grisham fan having only read half (six) of his novels, but this one ranks near the top of my list, anyway, just below the sensational The Rainmaker and slightly above The Pelican Brief. I imagine this book will stay the near the top of that list for quite some time.

I found the book good on several levels. The plot is simplistic, but one of those "what if" scenarios that I'm sure many writers had thought about before but never voices. What if a child overheard important information in a criminal case and refused - for whatever reason - not to tell. In this case, that child is Mark Sway, an eleven-year-old trailor-trash type with a single mother who struggles to make ends meet for Mark and his eight-year-old brother Ricky. Mark and Ricky stumble across a man on the verge of committing suicide, try to save him, and the man spills the beans on why he's committing suicide - he's the lawyer of a much-sought and dangerous Mafia man who's hidden the body of a dead senator. The lawyer tells Mark where the body is and then proceeds to kill himself, just as he'd intended to long ago.

Perhaps what I liked about this book so much was that the main character wasn't a lawyer. Usually, Grisham's novels (at least the one's I've read) have had a lawyer as the main character, and it's told through a lawyers eyes. Here, we see everything with a child's innocence. Mark may be very mature for his age (having helped his mother file for divorce from his abusive father, among other things), but he still has that inner child that adds something to every scene - the questioning about whether to lie or not, the regret afterwards, the thoughts of his mother and his brother (who went into shock after seeing the suicide) and wishing he was back on a playground where things were simple, even the more mature thoughts of who he could trust. It's very easy to care for this child. I was with him the entire way.

The Client kept me interested. It wasn't predictable. Many of the scenes were quite funny, actually. Grisham develops fantastic dynamics between several of the parties involve - Reggie and the FBI, Harry the Judge and the FBI, even the mob members don't get along. And it doesn't dwell too much on the legal aspect of it, I'm sure everyone'll be happy to hear, and whenever it is used, it's brought down the child's level. Still, assuming Grisham actually knows what he's talking about, I did learn a little bit about the "system", as I would hope to from a novel that uses it. But it's only there to propel the stories and the characters forward.

Overall, I recommend this to any Grisham or non-Grisham fan out there. I started reading The Rainmaker last summer thinking I would set it down within half an hour, but I ended up finishing it in under a week. I'm not normally a fan of legal thrillers, but he's a fabulous, concise and easy-to-read author who has a knack for creating original and compassionate characters. Every once in a while you'll find a good moral, too, although he never preaches it to you. For this novel: Watch you say.

I read the book My Brother Sam is dead for a school project. It only took me seven nights to complete this book I'm in 8th grade and I'm not a very fast reader. This book starts out when Sam comes home from Yahle and tells his family that he is going to fight in the war against his country( he wants to be free from England). Sam and Tim's dad was in a war and does not want his son to fight because he knows how hard a soldgers life can be. Sam and his dad get in a fight and Life (dad) kicks sam out sam went to live with tom he snuck back into the house one night to get the Brown Bess (gun) a couple of days later tim found out that Sam stole the gun adn tried to get it back but sam wouldn't let him. Well if you want to find out what happens, you will have to read this excellent book.

Victoria Schott
Sam Meeker is off to fight in the Revolutionary War on the American's side. His family are Tories and they live in Redding Ridge. His father is outraged by Sam's decision, but cannot stop him. This leaves his younger brother, Tim, and his mother ad father to work in the tavern and tend to the crops. Life is not easy with the war going on, but is manageable. Sam pays visits to Redding often.
British and American troops march into Redding frequently. This does not interfere with the Meeker family. Until, one night Sam was paying a visit to his family. He saw that the cows were being stolen, so he went outside to stop them. The men captured Sam...Find out what happens when you read "My Brother Sam is Dead." If you like historical fiction this is the book for you!

My brother Sam is dead is a outstanding story of the hardships of war. The main character(Tim) has to grow up fast. During this war Tim is torn between his father, a loyalist,or person who was loyal to the king of England, and his brother, a young ambitious man who supports the Rebel cause. His brother runs away with the family waepon to go haelp in the war, and his father is captured , and put on a British ship. During this time Tim has to run the family buisness. I highly recommend this book for you peolpe who love to learn about U.S history. I know I do

Lex & Yacc are extremely powerful programming tools. They are also difficult to master. This book provides a good start. You may need to read it several times and work through the examples before things begin making sense. I also recommend the FSF's book "The Bison Manual" for indepth info on the most common Yacc-compatible parse generator.

In general this book is very good, and I would highly recommended it for anybody using tools like lex and yacc. It covers all the areas (both good and bad) of these tools. However, I find that the book is frustrating and incomplete in two ways :- (1) when it comes to solving some of the problems reported by such tools as lex and yacc, there is not enough of examples, especially less-trivial examples, and some of the more potentially obscure problems that can occur. (2) it is very frustrating that the page numbers listed in the index are out by 1 or 2 pages. In this era of technology this should not happen.

Firstly there are not many books on Lex & Yacc.
Unix programming by Kernighan & Pike provides
some necessary information but it is not sufficient
to write a complex parser or scanner. In these circumstances
this book acts like a God given gift for compiler developers.

The examples which introduce the tools are very good.
But the theory behind these examples is not well explained.
Probably NFA/DFA concepts add more strenght to the
book. Adding more and more concepts and examples
will make this as a unique book in the Market.

Many guys who desire jobs as compiler developers
follow this book. So some contemporary examples that
I expect from future editions of this book are
A) Parsing a Gate level design
B) A small simulator which simulates an analog/digital design
C) An assembler etc
D) Relational algebra tutor etc.

Hope the authors can consider this request.

This is Shakespeare's 2nd last play. Yet, nothing indicates that he was running out of steam. The images are beautiful. Stephano, Caliban, and Trinculo are memorable as the bumbling conspirators. Miranda and Ferdinand are fine as the two young lovers. Ariel is striking as Prospero's loyal servant. Prospero is a magnificent creation. Not only does he offer several beautiful and memorable passages, but he is well drawn as a character who was unfairly forced into exile. He also makes his prison his paradise. In addition, he is a fine representation of Shakespeare himself: "Knowing I loved my books, he furnished me / From mine own library with volumes that / I prize above my dukedom" (1.2.166-168). His speeches in 4.1 and 5.1 also reflect how Shakespeare himself was contemplating the end of his career. The story itself is very well drawn. Shakespeare grabs our attention with a storm at sea. He offers us a reflection of himself, comical touches, beautiful images, profound passages, beautiful language, young lovers, comical villains, and deep messages. If you like this, be sure to read his final play "Henry VIII."

I took this play with me out on my morning walks this week, and I feel that at the same time I was excercising my body I was also giving my mind and my imagination a pretty good workout.

Like any form of excercise, reading Shakespeare isn't always easy, especially when you're just getting started. But if you stick with it, you're apt to find that it gets easier and the benefits become more apparent. Shakespeare's metaphorical language forces your mind to stay nimble and alert and his rich imagery gives you no other choice than to reconnect your soul to the world around you.

"The Tempest" is a lot of fun to read and it's not as weighty or ponderous as some of Shakespeare's dramas. It's a good choice to start with if you haven't read Shaksepeare before, or if you haven't read him since high school. The story involves Prospero, a duke who has been banished to a deserted island, along with his young daughter, Miranda. Propsero uses his magic to shipwreck a party of ex-compatriates who were originally responsible for his ousting. The ensuing drama deals with issues of loyalty, treachery, forgiveness, freedom, and the mind and body dichotomy. But the best part of it all is the vivid imagery. In the play's best moments, the words glow on the page.

Compared to some other works of William Shakespeare, "The Tempest" may be the deepest in meaning. To Shakespeare's credit, this play is also, unlike many of his others, largely original and of his creation. The characters are bloody well developed and the interloping themes bring you into the play. It is also amazing to follow the metaphorical parallelisms in the character of Prospero that reflect on Shakespeare himself. Essentially, Shakespeare announces the end to his writing days in this play. Read how Shakespeare went out like a champ! "The Tempest" is a universal story and its ideals can be placed in our contemporary society and culture.

I am of two minds about The Social Life of Information. John Seely Brown and Paul Duguid try to tackle several large topics, and end up somewhere in between them. Much of the book is spent trying to convince the reader, in short, that technology isn't all it's cracked up to be. As if we needed them to tell us that! The work also delves into some interesting and insightful discussions about where technology and social structures, such as education and learning, intersect one another.

The first portion of the book disappointed me. The first four chapters present a series of examples of touted technology "fads" and demonstrated how each of them hasn't lived up to its "promise" in terms of changing our everyday lives. However, the examples are, by and large, peripheral to mainstream applications of technology. As a reader, I just wasn't able to buy in to the idea that the failure of "agents" and "bots" to revolutionize contemporary life proves that technology in general is somehow "overblown." This part of the book was, in my opinion, quite weak, and didn't really draw me into the authors' message. In an age where technology innovations carry with them a host of important, and interesting, issues like privacy, encryption, and 1st amendment rights, the author's choices of topics for the early chapters seem almost trivial.

In fact, after I'd finished the first four chapters, I almost put it down and moved on to the next book in my "to read" pile. The second half of the book made me glad I'd finished it. The authors seemed to run out of ground in their original thesis and move on to more interesting territory. And, while I didn't feel like the authors succeeded in driving home any particular point in this part of the book, they did cover some new ground and make me think about topics I hadn't addressed before. Chapter 5 was a worthwhile investigation of learning in an organization, Chapter 8 painted an interesting picture of a possible future of education in a technology-driven world, and Chapter 6 was a fairly insightful and fresh (if cursory) look at how organizations are changing in light of the changes around them.

While the second half of the book doesn't redeem the first, to me it made the book as a whole worth the read. If you're thinking about reading this book, you won't be wasting your time. But lay down your expectations at the door, because this book probably won't be what you expected.

Despite their protestations to the contrary, Brown and Duguid's book comes across primarily as a critical rather than constructive commentary. Not that this is a bad thing. Powerful criticism of warped thinking and its implementation in strategy and business processes can be highly valuable. The usefulness of this book's criticism of "info-enthusiasts" would have been heightened had the authors presented a clear, actionable framework for implementing their thoughts, but this is frustratingly lacking. Early on the authors target Alvin Toffler as a prime representative of those who see everything through the lens of information. This lens produces a tunnel vision that shuts out social practices and other aspects of life that the authors insist cannot be reduced to information. Toffler provides an ideal target, explicitly presenting his "6-D vision" of demassification, decentralization, denationalization, despacialization, disintermediation, and disaggregation. These six forces, according to Toffler, have been unleashed by information technology, and will break down society into its basic constituents of individuals and information. Whether or not the authors are overly harsh on Toffler, their book does a superb job of showing the shortcomings of an entirely infocentric view.

In eight chapters, Brown and Duguid explore the limits to information and to the reductive focus on it, the limitations of software agents or "bots", the mistakes in thinking that information technology means the end of the traditional location-based workplace, the dangers of re-engineering around information processes without considering social practices and communities, and the limitations of info-centric thinking about learning, organizational innovation and knowledge management, and education.

All of this is well worth reading and paying close attention to. Yet this reviewer got the feeling that the authors often set up straw men to more easily make their points such as taking the most extreme statements of information technologists and futurists then presenting them as universal views among those groups. In some places they weave their arguments out of flimsy material that makes for a good story rather than for solid evidence. For example, they tell the story of how the scent of vinegar on old paper revealed information not contained in the words themselves. The point is well made, but the reader is left wondering how broadly this applies and why the authors do not mention information technology that at least attempts to achieve similar results (such as versioning, and meta-commentary Web tags). Some of the shortcomings of the info-centric view may also result from the immaturity of the technology. Certainly the authors have strong points about the value of physical proximity, though many workers are already finding technologies that allow remote work, and as broadband and eventually virtual reality become pervasive, more of the social cues currently missing may return to our tech-mediated interactions. Overall, this is an important book that identifies a real problem in thinking. In an infotech-saturated world, the authors may be forgiven for going too far in the other direction.

This book is a thought-provoking look at the limits of information. I liked the book because it focused on many things that I don't normally think about, and raised important questions about my own use of information. For example, how can a software program find my preferences on the Web when I'm not sure what I'm looking for? How should I compare offers when I know very little about the people making the offers?

Many aggressive pundits who favor the development of electronic communication and information tend to project that certain products and services will be totally replaced. For example, I have read forcasts that predict the end of printed books, universities, and various kinds of retail outlets in the next few years.

The authors point out that many solutions and institutions will continue because they offer a social context that makes information more valuable. A historical analogy of the telephone is described in the book. Bell first put telephones in hotel rooms so people could call the front desk, a convenience over walking to the front desk to have the conversation. Later, he put telephones next to the counter in diners so that people could watch others using the telephone to learn how and why people were using it.

Many people who see distance learning as replacing the university are forgetting that much education takes place outside of lectures, writing papers and taking tests. The university's social context will continue to be helpful with these other types of learning. How can that context to added to distance learning?

One of the most interesting ideas in the book was the way that structure and structurelessness in information and uses of information can complement each other in creating bodies of perspective and experimentation. Normally, each of use thinks that only by adding more and more structure can more be achieved. This book makes the case for a more balanced approach is a persuasive way.

The issues and examples are compelling, interesting, and thought-provoking.

If you want to examine how you should adapt your own actions and those of your organization to the Internet, this book is essential reading! After you finish enjoying this book, I suggest you consider how you can structure the way you communicate to be more accessible to others. In doing so, be sure to consider how to make things looser to encourage imagination, as well as tighter to ensure understanding.

This play can be read as anti-semitic. In fact, it's pretty hard to defend it from such charges. Shylock is a pretty rotten character and the fact that he is jewish is difficult to overlook (particularly since the other characters mention it on pretty much EVERY page). However, I think it is important to mention that the "heroes" of this play do not necessarily have to be interpreted as heroes. They are by no means perfect and there are many subtle (and some not-so-subtle) instances within the text in which their biases against ANYONE unlike them is illustrated. If one reads the play this way, then Shylock becomes more of a tragic figure rather than an absolutely heartless villain. I don't know. My feelings about this are mixed. There are a few funny parts of this play and the language is, as always, beautiful. The theme of putting a price on human beings is one which has been explored numerous times since. Overall, it is enjoyable, but perhaps not so much so as some of the other comedies. Do not read this play without having read a few others by Shakespeare first. It is an excellent play, but not his best and not his most enjoyable either.

After reading most of the other reviews here, I am fully aware that most of the reviewers didn't read carefully enough (or watch carefully enough if they saw the play.) Now, I'm not saying its not open for different interpretations, but there is one thing I would really like to get straight.

I read MoV for a Bar Mitzvah project on Anti-Semitism. Naturally, my sympathies went to Shylock. However, even if i were Christian, i still would've favored Shylock. What many people believe is that Shylock is a cold hearted ruthless person and only wanted to get back at Antonio because Antonio was a Christian.

Not true. Shylock specifically says something along the lines off, "Why should I lend money to you? You spit on me, and call me a Jewish dog!" I'm not saying that Shylock was a good guy, but I am saying that he is not the villain.

In fact, the "Merchant of Venice," in this story is actually Shylock, not Antonio, contrary to popular belief. My thoughts on the story was that Shylock requested a pound of Antonio's flesh because he did not trust Antonio. Who would trust someone that spat on him? The fact is, Antonio doesn't pay him back in the end.

Now, there's always something else we have to put into consideration. Would the judge had given the "spill one ounce of Christian blood" verdict at the end if Shylock were not a Jew?

This is the mark of a great play. A play that really gets you thinking. But I encourage you, I beg of you, that when you read it or see it, please do not hold Shylock up to being a cold hearted villain. Hold Antonio up to that image. (joking, of course, Antonio's not a bad guy, he's just not a good guy.)

This is a wonderful play - and unless you have seen it or read it you don't know it at all. That's because everything the popular culture tells us about this play is false (for example; how many of you think this play is about a merchant named Shylock? ;-)

The Merchant of Venice is a lively and happy morality tale. Good triumphs over bad - charity over greed - love over hate.
There is fine comedy. Portia is one of Shakespeare's greatest women (and he ennobled women more than any playwright in history). There are moments of empathy and pain with all the major characters. There is great humanity and earthiness in this play. These things are what elevate Shakespeare over any other playwright in English history.

Plays should be seen - not read. I recommend you see this play (if you can find a theater with the courage and skill to do it). But if it is not playing in your area this season - buy the book and read it.

'Antony and Cleopatra' is a great tragedy about two personalities who were larger than life, and therefore shared a love fitting to their stature. Anthony is torn between the high seriousness & order of the Roman Empire (embodied in Caesar) and the sensuality & licentiousness of Ancient Egypt (embodied in Cleopatra)- worlds which are perfectly evoked by Shakespeare as he chronicles the political wheeling & dealing of the time, which ultimately led to the suicides of the two lovers. I don't think Shakespeare favours one world view over the other, and to read the play moralistically and say Rome = virtue = good and Egypt = vices = bad is to to do it a disservice.

The language in this play is often romantic and lush, a grand language suited to rulers of the world. Cleopatra's "O, my oblivion is a very Anthony,/ And I am all forgotten" has to be some of the most erotic stuff that the Bard ever wrote.

Cleopatra is a very passionate woman and a great role-player, but she is always herself, never inauthentic. What she feels may change from moment to moment, but while she's feeling it, it's REAL. I find her to be the more mature one in her and Anthony's relationship. Notice how she never yells at him for marrying Octavia, which is certainly a terrible betrayal. She accepts that he did what he had to do and is only glad that Anthony is again united with her. Her love for him is beyond judgement.

The relationship between Anthony and Caesar is a very complicated one, and one that fascinated me almost as much as that of Cleopatra and Anthony. Caesar admires Anthony, but he betrays himself as having contempt for him in the way he expresses that admiration. Dodgy man, that little Caesar.

Anthony and Cleopatra is one of Shakespeare's difficult plays, and so I suspect the ratings on the play are low because it's a more mature play than Romeo and Juliet. Here we have two middle age lovers who part of the time are foolish with lust/love and the rest of the time are tough minded heads of state. The "tragedy" is that they can't be both and survive. This is not a play for the young folks, I'm afraid. But if you want some heavy drama where the characters are spared nothing and given no slack, read Anthony and Cleopatra (hint: Cleopatra's suicide is more political statement than a crazy wish to die with Antony). Better yet see it performed by some real actors some time.

Cleopatra may be a somewhat ambiguous female character, but I totally loved her, and Bill's portrayal of her. I don't know if he expected the reader to judge her, but I suspect not. The harshest criticism of her comes from Octavius Caesar, who himself doesn't do a single noble thing throughout the whole play. She is fully aware of the fact that she is a sensual, passionate woman- which has no negative effect on her ability to rule Egypt. Her biggest faults are her violent temper (which I suspect is just part of her passionate nature) and her tendency to lie when it suits her (either for sport or for serious politics). Antony (I feel) is actually kind of a loser compared to her. His insincerity runs deep- he marries Caesar's sister in a political move, although he had repeatedly pledged his undying love for Cleopatra. She forgives him, because she truly loves him, even though he doesn't do anything to deserve forgiveness. Antony never fully allows himself to love Cleopatra. He constantly is overreacting to the slightest indication that she might be betraying him or whatever. It is one of these overreactions (combined with an ill-timed lie on Cleo's part) that ends up destroying them both. Even in the end, Cleopatra's death is more dignified and better conceived than Antony's messy and fumbling suicide.