Barbara Chase-Riboud, one of the most amazing artists of the twentieth century, challenged many assumptions about what constitutes art, interrogating the viewer with complex and unforgettable images. Unfortunately, the male writers of this book seem unable to properly celebrate this brilliant artist; they do little other than catalogue her "influences", which one might better describe as the incredibly rich variety of artistic discourses of the past, which Chase-Riboud used subversively and excitingly. African and Egyptian influences are obvious, but she was also engaged with baroque art and Surrealsim (but *always* making it her *own*). Perhaps a better book will someday be written. This is an artist all Women should be able to study from, if only she were to become better known.

Barbara Chase-Riboud is one of the most significant and original sculptors of her generation. Her dramatic explorations of literary and historical themes earned her a presence in major museums throughout American and Europe. Barbara Chase-Riboud: Sculptor is a richly illustrated presentation and overview of her 30 hear career as a sculptor and draftsman. Peter Selz and Anthony Janson are distinguished art historians who draw upon their considerable expertise to reveal how history, archaeology, spiritualism, the Baroque tradition, and Chase-Riboud's parallel career as a poet-novelist worked together to influence her work, from the Malcom X, Tantra, Zanzibar, and Cleopatra series to her recent monument Africa Rising -- the award-wining New York City landmark commemorating an African-American burial ground from the colonial slave-era. Barbara Chase-Riboud: Sculptor is a superb and informative addition to any personal, academic, or community library art history collection.

The stories are straight Lovecraft, with all of the pros and cons that drags with it. Good creepy fiction, some poor plots and some poor choices of wording.

The main problem that I had with this book though was the annotations. Almost every one of them was mediocre, some were truly bad, many were useless (especially the ones about names...only someone interested in genealogy would care, and they don't frequently use fiction as a source), and one that I saw foretold the ending in such a fashion as to destroy part of the ending. Hence, the annotations were rather poor. The illustrations were worse. There were two useful illustrations in the entire book. Other "luminary" illustrations are things like the pictures of three famous poets' graves. Why? The picture of Paul Revere's house. So? Etc. These occur throughout the book and are quite distracting as you expect them to matter, and are greatly disappointed.

My recommendation is to simply buy a normal version of these works. It is probably cheaper and definately more useful. The stories are decent (although I personally think that they are overrated), but the annotations are frequently annoying and almost always useless.
Harkius

While there are some rare nuggets of interesting information in the annotations, I find aspects of this collection to be disorganized, haphazard, and perplexing. The stories, 10 in all, represent a hodgepodge of Lovecraft's greater and lesser writings, arranged chronologically from 1920's "The Picture in the House" to 1935's "The Haunter of the Dark." The editors apparently want to show the evolution of Lovecraft's writing over the years and choose not to build a collection based on any particular theme. This makes for some interesting story selections: "Herbert West--Reanimator" is included, which somewhat surprised me since Lovecraft largely disavowed this work (the idea and format being prescribed by someone other than himself). "The Horror At Red Hook," a strangely unsuccessful story to my way of thinking, as well as the rather formulaic "The Shunned House" can also be found here.

On the plus side, some real classics are given the annotated treatment. "The Picture in the House" is particularly welcome here, as it is perhaps Lovecraft's most horrifying short piece of fiction, and a copy of the referenced infamous picture is included for the reader to view. "The Hound" is an effective if rather traditional horror tale, the annotations for which provide some important information on the French Decadents and other outre movements referenced in the story. "Cool Air" is one of the author's most recognized stories, and the notes stress the fact that the story was written before air conditioning made its way into housing units. "Pickman's Model" is still a disturbing read, even though the ending lacks the punch today it probably had in Lovecraft's time. The three real jewels of this collection are the seminal works "The Call of Cthulhu," "The Thing on the Doorstep," and "The Haunter of the Dark" (one of Lovecraft's final stories and one often given less attention than I feel it deserves). The annotations are very useful in a complex work such as "The Call of Cthulhu," but in many cases they seem forced, contrived, and tiresome. Much of the time, the notes simply define terms such as cyclopean or eldritch, point out obvious concepts and alternate spellings, and endlessly reference other notes in this and the first collection of annoted Lovecraft stories. Worst of all, this book has no table of contents, and one can only see for sure what stories are included by leafing through the pages of the text.

The comments on antiquarian concepts and literary references makes this book worthwhile, but I found it to be less enlightening than I expected. Most of the annotations are unfortunately useless or repetitive. Even the pictures included in these pages, largely of old churches and cemeteries, do not correspond exactly with Lovecraft's settings The many quotes from Lovecraft's letters are interesting, but the letters can and should be read in their entirety in order to avoid mistaken impressions due to missing context. The book is also afflicted with a number of typos, which is something I am sure Lovecraft himself would have railed against. What matters are Lovecraft's stories, when it comes right down to it, and this collection does include some (but certainly not all) of his best fiction. The annotations are welcome additions to the texts, but their usefulness varies widely from page to page.

Let it be said up front: this volume makes you ask for more, but more because of the meager offering than of a whetting of appetite, like "Annotated Lovecraft" did. This venture into Lovecraft, although with Joshi and Cannon at the helm, fails to make a lingering impression for various reasons that are closely associated, I believe.
Let us begin with the selection of tales. In the preceding volume we had such interesting tales as At the Mountains of Madness, The Colour out of Space, and The Rats in the Walls, but this follow-up (and I don't know if there's another planned sequel?) has stories that are, in my opinion, less impressionable, such as Herbert West - Reanimator, The Horror at Red Hook, The Thing on the Doorstep, and The Shunned House.
Sure enough, these tales, although not all of them equal in quality, are interesting for the Lovecraft scholar to see annotated, but I think it a just a tad too much of mediocrity for a single volume. Rather I'd seen The Whisperer in Darkness, The Case of Charles Dexter Ward, The Dream Quest of Unknown Kadath, or another long piece (the annotated Shadow over Innsmouth has been published by Necronomicon Press, and The Shadow out of Time's definitive text has only recently surfaced) supplemented by shorter works, as the case was with the first volume.
Another thing is that there are far less annotations than in its predescent, sometimes whole pages going by without any footnote. What is worse, is that some footnotes are totally unnecessary, oneliners, or explanations of words that one can glean from any good dictionary. Again, this is not necessarily bad, it's just that it would have been better had there been one or two thoroughly explored (major) tales, and some others as dessert.
Yet not all is lost. I still recommend this one as a must-have for the inclusion of The Haunter of the Dark, The Call of Cthulhu, and Pickman's Model, and more so for the additional photographs of the sites Lovecraft mentions than for the footnotes - if you're an above average reader of Lovecraft and Lovecraft studies you'll know most of the knowledge handed already anyway. And, let's face it, anything on Lovecraft that has been done by either Cannon or Joshi is worth buying for collector's sake.
The bottom line is: get it, but don't freak out with a joyous expectation of anything remotely as "The Annotated Lovecraft". It's okay, nothing more, certainly nothing less.

This book by professor Irons is fascinating. Very well written, tells a tale about the workings of power and Institutions in the U.S.; the devices and remedies that, from time to time, were instrumented by the Supreme Court of Justice, in the past 200 years, to limit or reaffirm the constitutional rigths of the people, according to the evolution of legal and political thought of the justices of the Court and the changes in public opinion and the mores, regarding fundamental issues at stake. It is a very interesting approach because not only provides sketches of the justices that constituted the soul of that body, but also deals with the persons that provided its food. The individuals that took a stand and fought for their rigths, are also portraited, and thus the history of the evolution of Constitutional law and the Supreme Court, aquires a meanigful and intimate perspective that you will not find in other books related with this subject. This book could be a nice introductory text to U.S. Constitutional law for students, but since it is a very accessible reading of fundamental issues that concern all citizens, I would recommend it strongly to the lay man, the common person in the street, so that he can better understand those that came before him, and those that will follow....

This book is not nearly as poignant as its inspiration, Zinn's A People's History of the United States. While Zinn's title will anger friends of the corporate world, millionaires, and the hopelessly-stuck-in-the-middle-class individuals who amazingly follow them, Iron's book is more objective.

The major strengths of the book are: the short biographies and stories of the people involved in the cases and the justices (how many people actually know who Plessy was?); a professional and informative, but not academic, writing style that will not alienate 99% of the public (hint: if you see a history book written by a professor, put it down and look for another - they write for other professors and themselves, not to add anything significant to the field of history); and the introduction detailing how the Constitution was created -- quite possibly the best telling of the story I have ever read.

Overall, a very good book and an ideal introduction to a history of the Supreme Court.

Peter Iron's book, A People's History of the Supreme Court, was a joy to read through all the many hours I was engrossed in this immense book. He puts his ideological cards on the table in the introduction and then, if you have any spark of liberal spirit inside you, you go along for the ride as Irons takes the reader through over two hundred years of siginificant cases of the Supreme Court. The great pleasure of this book is that it also allows the reader to see the personalities of both the court and the petitioners before the court. Dred Scott becomes more than the name of the decision. It is fascinating, too, how politics and legal decisions are weaved together in this epic book as they are in the actual decisions themselves. It was a wonderful book that demonstrated that the Constitution is for the people and the story of the Constitution is the story of the people.

After seeing Monday Night Mayhem I bought the Hardcover version of the book. I bought it used, but it was in like new condition.

It was a good read. Cosell was at a point in his life where he could afford to be especially candid. The title "I never played the game" incidentally refers to both that he never played sports but also he never played the game with ABC executives or the sports hype.

Cosell is right in that he never got the respect he deserved from the public and the other sports commentators. Cosell was just the type of guy people loved to hate, but deep down I think most people loved cosell. He always brought out the emotion in any sporting event. He always had the uncanny ability to draw people in without hyping. Monday Night Football was never better when Cosell was the announcer in the early 70's.

After recently watching the Howard Cosell HBO documentary, I felt compelled to read of Howard in Howard's words. I graduated from high school in 71 and my interest in sports overlaid Cosell's rise to prominence.

This book is good and bad. The bad part is that Howard writes it and therefore Howard covers only what he wants. He picks out about 5 themes and covers the story from his perspective while overlaying his importance and how these events may have led to his eventually leaving network sports. For example, the first quarter of the book is an in-depth analysis of the Raiders leaving Los Angeles and Al Davis' fight with the NFL. Howard does a good job covering this issue from an intelligent standpoint but feels compelled to consistently drop names and inform you of his importance in the story. The most compelling part of this subject, which is further covered later with the section on the Jets and Giants leaving New York, is how it plays out in today's culture of sports franchises still successfully blackmailing cities and states. At least in that perspective, Howard was correct.

In addition to NFL franchise moves, the other big story is NFL Monday Night Football. Fans today have no idea how big this was for football to be carried on the weeknight. Howard Cosell was perfect for the role. He was clearly the most hated man in America. Brass, cocky, controversial but always wanting to open his mouth and have everyone listens to him. My fondest memories of Monday Night Football is Don Meredith and his comedy. It was worth watching just to listen to Don. Frank Gifford was the ballast, the middleman compromise between Frank and Don who made everything run smoothly. Howard was like the nerd who never fit in but felt like he needed to lead the show. And actually he was pretty good at it at times. Eventually Howard self-implodes. Struggling because all the print media hates him, his partners don't like him, but self-delusionally believing it's everyone else's fault, he asks to be removed from the show. And with this change, Howard leaves the spotlight but doesn't seem to ever get comfortable without the light on him.

Howard was an intelligent, complex man who had a huge desire to be loved. Probably what he should be known for most is his complete devotion to his wife. When she died in the mid-90s, Howard was just lost. Basically his life was over except for dying.

Other stories covered in this book are his reason for walking away from boxing coverage as well as his personal history with Ali, Ray Leonard and O.J. Simpson. In summary, this is a book of stories that are interesting to Howard, not a biography. But it does give good insight into the man. I recommend this book for anyone with interest in sports, the 70s, or television history.

I never heard Howard Cosell do a broadcast. If it is anything like he reads this book, then I truly missed out! This is an excellent addition, especially for anyone who enjoyed the recent film "Monday Night Mayhem", depicting the rise of Monday Night Football and Cosell. This fills in much of what the movie may have been unable to cover. Plenty of signature Cosell lines, said by the man himself!

For lovers of great photography, one of the real gaps for a long time has been a monograph on this master of Euorpean street photography, whose images of Paris in the 30's in particular are among the greatest of their kind. Since the unfortuante deletion of the magnificent mid-80's reissue of PARIS BY NIGHT there has literally been nothing available except an over-priced paperback from Germany (I beleive) that has made its way to US museum bookshops and the like. What great news it was that Abrams, who are one of the best houses for this sort of thing, was publishing a major catalogue to accompany the travelling exhibit now at the National Gallery in Washington. The book was delayed several times earlier this year (no doubt to the chagrin of the museums the exhibit has already passed through) and has finally arrived in time for Christmas.

It is sad indeed to report that the book is a total disappointment- at least so far as the images themselves are concerned:

One: The source material and printing of the picutres are truly second-rate - without richness, luster, or dimension. Many look like photocopies from magazines or other books. They are oddly glossy but flat. Compare these to the incredible matte reproductions in PARIS BY NIGHT and the contrast between what can be done with with what is here is nearly heartbreaking.

Second: What is with the recent tendency to print photographs in an oversized, right-to-the-edges format with no sense of border or space to let the composition breathe and no sense of frame lines. The bleed-over simply kills the impact of many of these photogrpahs. It's a ruinous way to present great imagery. (It afflicts Abrams' new Bill Brandt book as well but to a lesser extent because the printing of that book is so much better.)

Third: There is very little that is new here. For such a major undertaking it comes across as a routine collection of well-known images, a greatest hits, that ends up delivering little emotional punch or insight into this great artist. Compare this to Abrams' own exhaustive works like Walker Evans: The Hungry Eye and you'll see what I mean.

With so many great photographers receiving deluxe treatment in the past few years from Abrams' W. Eugene Smith book last year to Bulfinch's Lartigue mongraph, it is a real shame that someone as seminal but poorly represented in print as Brassai should receive such a well-intentioned but unsatisfactory tribute. PLEASE BRING BACK PARIS BY NIGHT!

I am surprised that this book has gotten such mixed reviews here -- it is the definitive book on the subject. The essays are full of new information and elegantly presented. The design of the book, bleeds and all, remind me of the particular way Brassai made his books (which is why we care about Brassai today). The reproductions look like the original prints! The book is smart and real.

I saw this exhibition at the National Gallery of Art and bought the book. The exhibition blew me away and so did the book! It is the best exhibition book on photography I have seen. The print quality of the photographs is superb and the text is excellent. This book is a lesson in photography, political science, and sociology.

I found the book quite useful, especially the last section was very good, but I think there are better ways to use your money (Kurz - strecthing scientically). I expected more thorough treatment of the principles of flexibility, but something was lacking.

I am a professional artist who must sustain prolonged static positions often resulting in muscular stiffness and discomfort. Having talked with the authors of this book three years ago, I saw how senible their method of active stretching is. I purchased the book and the video FLEXIBILITY SETS YOU FREE! which I use almost daily and particularly when things go awry. I like the personal control I have over what I am doing, understanding why force involved in other methods is counterproductive. Retaining my mobility, agility if you will, prompts my giving this method top ratings.

I find this book and the video amazingly effective. The principles that Peters put forth break with traditional static stretching methods and that will jar some people. Their approach on the video is an almost Yoga-like set of exercises designed to smoothly transition from one to the next. If you are open to that, then the program will yield results.

I am not naturally flexible and using this program I was able to see tangible results, more than any static program yielded previously. I'd tried various martial art approaches but never without pain. I was never able to see lasting results.

I still use the stretches several times a week and I purchased this book nearly 7 years ago.

Yes, this is a very good tale, written in a wry and captivating manner and most of the illustrations are lovely. HOWEVER, I bought this at my daughter's request for a "beautifully illustrated fairytale" for her 9th birthday. Thank goodness I decided to give it a look before I gave it to her. The evil princess displays the decapitated heads of her suitors outside her bedroom window, ravens pluck out the eyes and dine on decayed flesh. The witch's table is carved with a couple engaged in sexual intercourse and the princess is fond of wearing completely see-through gowns. I don't think these are things most parents want their children contemplating in a bed-time story.

In regards to this book not being for children, I found this book in my school's library as an eight or nine year old. The story, but especially the illustrations, caught my imagination. Each illustration is a work of art with amazing details that you can get lost in. This book inspired my own sensabilities as an artist, and for years I wanted nothing else than to be as great an illustrator as Trina Schart Hyman.

Depending on your child, this book could be an inspiration. Too bad it is so difficult to find these days.

The combination of Pyle's amusing prose and Hyman's lovely artwork makes this rags-to-riches tale a joy to read. Warning: It is definitely not politically correct; feminists will probably by totally appalled.

Deadlock: The Inside Story of America's Closest Election is a workmanlike and emotionless recollection of the events surrounding the most controversial election of the past 100 years. It is a well organized, easy to follow and not visibly biased view of the relevant events leading up to and following the November 7 Presidential election. Seemingly accurate and double checked to a fault, reading this book left me with the impression that I had just read an excellent 275 page newspaper article and not much more. With almost no humor, lacking any sidebar comments, it is a book Joe Friday would be proud to call his own. While I am a Texan and Bush supporter, I much preferred Jake Tapper's Down & Dirty: The Plot to Steal the Presidency. I guess this means that like most people, when push comes to shove, I'd rather be entertained than informed. I do regret this intellectual weakness and like some of the votes in Florida I may change. But probably not in the next 36 days.

Two things struck me while reading this book, the first is that I doubt there is a book out there that is truly balanced and not somewhat biased. The second thing was that Gore really got the shaft, not so much by the recount wars, but by the election official that came up with the Butterfly Ballot. In the history of the USA this decision ranks up there with new Coke and the XFL, what a mistake. As far as the reporting in the book it was not bad for a review of all the articles they had in the paper, but it did not really dig into the particular issues very deeply. I wanted more detail and behind the scenes with both the candidates. I also wanted more details on the court cases; I felt like the sky-high overview of the issues of the cases did not do such an important issue justice.

In reading the book I think a little bit of a democratic bias comes out, just a little, but enough to notice. I also thought it interesting that they had far more details of the Gore group then the Bush camp, it follows the perception that the Post is somewhat liberal in its views. The book is an overview that came out almost 10 minutes after Gore hung up the phone on the second concession call so there are a few more details out now that they did not get in the book. Overall it is a good effort and a readable book, but not the end all be all on the subject.

I personally think the Washington Post and NY Times are liberal rags that are generally not worth the paper they are printed on. However, in fairness, when they do well I think they should be commended. I read the NY Times "36 Days" and still think that book was not worth the paper it was printed on. It was nothing more than a reprint of their articles.

Conversely, though, Deadlock was a well-written book. Two passages are worth noting. The first is about the book itself. About one-third of the way into the first chapter the book says: "These are the ... decisions, alliances, power plays, snap judgments and personality flaws revealed when a flukishly close election is played out for staggering high stakes. Both sides were nimble and brilliant and occasionally shady; both sides were also capable of miscalculations, divisions and blame. The best and worst of politics were on displayed in those 36 days, and both sides trafficked in each. This is how it happened." Although the Post endorsed Al Gore (no surprise) they tried to be equal in their appraisal of how the two campaigns sought resolution in their favor.

As for the two sides' strategy one only has to look within the first three pages of Chapter 2 where the Post records that the Democrats enlisted the services of three authors who wrote "The Recount Primer". The book reads: "Anyone who read and heeded the booklet could predict how the two sides would play America's closest president election -- at least in the broad outlines. Gore would gamble; Bush would stall. Gore would preach a doctrine of uncounted ballots; Bush would extol the dependability of machines. Gore needed more: more counting, more examination, more weighing and pondering of more ballots. Bush needed it over while he was still ahead." The only trouble for the Gore forces with this gospel was that the Republicans knew the same gospel. The book attempted to show how the two sides played out the roles assigned them.

For a behind the scenes objective look at the two sides, I think the Post did a very decent job. This could have been a... job on the Republicans and conservatives, but generally it was not (though I expected it). It could have been a... job on the Democrats and liberals, but it was not (nor did I expect it). I am not accustomed to this degree of fairness from the liberal Washington Post nor do I expect to see it very often in the future.

Howard Hughes died when I was only 12 so I knew next to nothing about him prior to the "recluse" years and I found this book extremely interesting. History has dealt somewhat harshly with HH but this book managed to shed some sympathetic light on the mysteries surrounding him. His strange relationship with his mother, his drive to control and collect, his grand scale successes and equally grand failures touched a chord with me. How sad to have so much but ultimately be so unfulfilled and lonely. Whether you find him an eccentric genius or a man tortured by mental illness, you must agree he left behind a significant legacy.

The only minor complaint I have with this book is chronologically it was occasionally hard to follow since a chapter regarding business deals would then be followed by a chapter on personal affairs that were conducted during the same period of time. It was easy to get confused regarding timeframes.

We can call him a womanizer, low life, skirt chaser or many other names. The fact remains the person was a genius and has opened many doors for the traveler of today. Hughes was a very self centered individual and had feeling only for his self gratification. I found this book difficult to put down, even though I could not like the main character.

Hughes was a man who accomplished most of what he did before my time, so I've only remembered him as a billionaire, eccentric, and recluse, before reading this book. During his time he was a go-getter who tried many adventurous things professionally and both personally and privately.

This book brings to light the details of of the younger Hughes' extraordinary personal life, which I found more interesting than the business side of it. He spent notable time in Southern California and Los Angeles. Many tales bring Old Hollywood and Los Angeles to light. His involvement in the movie business producing films, influenced in part, as an avenue to get to the ladies of the screen. Details of his relationships with the stars of the day are illuminated. Taking dates to the mounted cross atop one of the Hollywood Hills, overlooking the flatlands and lights of LA. He even crashed a plane into 3 houses in Beverly Hills.

His 3rd plane crash, occurred while performing a flying stunt during the shooting of a movie (the stunt pilots refused to do the stunt because they considered it too dangerous). As a result of that crash he was in the hospital with critical life-threatening injuries. This was when HH was introduced to Codeine for the severe pain, something he would become addicted to for most of the rest of his life.

The book later progresses in the latter years of Hughes. Today, it is apparent to contemporary psychologists that Hughes was likely suffering from a form of the Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. Nowadays, OCD is more understood and highly treatable with medication. In HH's time, it was not thought of in biological and physiological terms.

Hughes' first break came when he entered a screening room and stayed in it for 5 full months. He didn't bathe, watched the same movies 30 times over, and survived on a diet of candy bars. Hughes consciously and voluntarily turned over his business affairs to competent managers. These were employees, and were people who made prudent decisions and looked out for HH's best interests. During this time, other sharks started to gather. Such is the case when large amounts of money is involved. Bill Gay, one of Howard's chauffeur, made crafty and cunning political moves to ascend over the years. He got Howard's ear, and became more influential on him. Gay eventually took the reigns of control over Huges' wealth. He then deftly purged the other business managers who served Hughes with dedication and integrity. The former chauffeur and his fellow Mormon henchman took over Hughes and his affairs, isolated him, and squeezed out those who cared for Hughes and wanted the best for him.

It's sad, for during the latter decades of Hughes life it seemed that no one was really there for him, if he had wanted anyone to to be there.

In death, over one thousand--yes, 1000--people came out of the woodwork to lay claim to Howard Hughes wealth after his passing.

To this day, We're still not sure if his death was natural, self-induced, or the intentional doings of others....

First off, I should say that "Shadowlands" and "Ghost Story" were two of my first forays into horror and that Peter Straub has always been near the top of my list of favorite horror writers. But...

I found this book a tough read, with a confusing opening and cartoonish characters. It only becomes interesting with the introduction of Dick Dart who energizes things around page 160. But this leads to one of the fundamental flaws of this book.

As described in other reviews, the main character, Nora, is raped by Dart in a vividly written scene. Yet even though Nora starts the book still unable to cope with her being raped during military duty decades earlier, she doesn't even spend ONE PAGE dealing with this new assault.

It is with the characters that Straub lets us down here. Why Nora cares about anything but killing Dart is a mystery. And Straub doesn't seem to really know what to do with Dart himself, smart and one step ahead of everyone for most of the book. He provides two small glimpses at an Achille's heel, but doesn't really follow up on it. Nora's husband is possibly the character who gets the worst treatment. The reader never really gets a grip on who this person is.

The story itself concerns the origins of a beloved fantasy trilogy. Think Lord of the Rings. And yet, as seen through the eyes of Nora, Straub doesn't encourage us to have the same good feelings toward this book that many characters have. The followers of the books are given full geek/nerd treatment for the most part, which undermines the reader caring about who ultimately wrote these classics.

A few years back I was pleasantly surprised by listening to the audio version of Koko, a genuinely creepy and intricate novel. After that I read The Throat, which was more of the same. The I read Mystery, which contained some of the same characters and situations as the first two, but was childish, poorly sewn together and neither scary nor suspenseful. Peter Straub, I guess, can write hot or cold. The Hellfire Club is best consumed on a hot day, because it is definitely in the latter category. The sad thing about this book is that there's a great set up. Straub sets the stage for a weird and mysterious drama. The tension in the early part of the book is terrific. Then pieces start falling into place and the answers to mysteries are all anticlimactic. The best example is the title itself - is the Hellfire Club a satanic cult? An evil ancient society? A turkey, ham and Tabasco sandwich? Well, it doesn't really matter because the club is ancillary to the rest of the book. The story is really about a fairly straightforward and uninteresting serial killer. For a good chunk of the book I assumed, then later just hoped, that he was a distraction. He seemed too unimportant and uninteresting to be at the heart of the mystery. But as the book progressed it becomes clear that most of secrets were revealed fairly early on. I suppose we are expected to be entertained by the villain's antics and his interaction with the protagonist. I wasn't. Too bad. It had potential for a while.

I didn't know what to expect after reading KOKO and hating it! I'm addicted to Straub now. Hellfire Club made me root for one of the strongest and most complex heroines I've seen in a long time. I went back to the prolouge of this book about 15 times, trying to figure out how it all tied together. The book within the book, the story of Pippin,at the beginning of each chapter is also worth re-reading. Hellfire Club is an intelligent book, something I'm not used to when reading mystery books, always figuring out the plot half-way through it...I hate that! I'm on MYSTERY now, and can't put it down, again Straub putting over-drive thought into the characters, and the plot.