The one problem I had with "Achilles in Vietnam" was that it did not seem to offer much in the way of solutions. "Odysseus in America" provides the answers to the ugly problems outlined in the first book. I'm not sure exactly what Dr. Shay intended but these books are relevant for far more than combat PTSD. They are very helpful for an overall understanding of "moral injury" and "psychological injury", to use terms he seems to have invented.

I think all therapists should read these books. They are very useful to understanding child abuse also. If you are working on your problems from child abuse or other psychologically traumatic incidents, they are very good.

READ THIS BOOK, because no movie or book has ever captured as vividly and realistically the combat veterans painful re-entry into normal civilian life as Jonathan Shay's "Odysseus in America".

READ THIS BOOK and learn that Homer's "Iliad" and "Odyssey" are true stories of combat veterans. This will surprise and delight anyone who enjoys the classics or war stories.

READ THIS BOOK and understand what the American combat veteran experiences on his return home. Anyone involved in the helping professions will enjoy and benefit. Anybody who has a combat veteran in their family will learn and be better for it.

READ THIS BOOK and you will understand the great sin that we all commit against our veterans; especially Vietnam vets. Every woman who has a son will want to read this.

READ THIS BOOK and you will finally understand Homer.

Dr. Jonathan Shay has shown that it is as true today as it was thousands of years ago that warfare makes men different. He is a psychiatrist who works with veterans in the Boston VA. In his first book "Achilles in Vietnam" he explained the cycle of trauma and pain that is inflicted by combat. This sequence is --betrayal of what's right by commanders (a common Vietnam story), a soldier's rage at this injustice, their withdrawal into a circle of the closest comrades, then the loss of these comrades with accompanying deep guilt and the growing feeling of being already dead, and then the ice cold berserker state and loss of fear in combat. Then veteran is whisked from the killing ground and immediately plunked down in America. He comes home the way he was in Vietnam. Shay explains that Odysseus doesn't trust anybody, tells a lot of lies, gets into a lot of dangerous and foolish situations, conceals himself, disguises himself, and emotionally is as cold as ice to those closest to him. This is realistic of combat veterans at home. He is forever different.

How do I know this? I am a Vietnam veteran and served in the 101st Airborne and 1st Infantry Divisions. When I read "Achilles in Vietnam" I said, "He's captured what happened to us and the way we felt." Now Shay has captured our struggles to live normal lives. And, I my true life experiences are part of "Odysseus in America".

Shay has one other story in "Odysseus in America". That is prevention of the destruction of our soldiers' psyche. He has ignited a debate for reform. And, Senator John McCain and Max Cleland (both Vietnam veterans) to voice their agreement with Shay. His plan for reform consists of ending the "individual replacement system." Shay explains that, "These kids go into the military and give their total trust and lives to the Army. Then the Army breaks this bond by immediately sending them into combat without the support of anyone they know. They fight alone, and they die alone. This is the consequence of the "individual replacement system" started in World War I, continued in WW II, Korea and Vietnam. We need to change this "individual replacement system" in the military to a "unit replacement system". We need to recognize the need for cohesion and community and, therefore, maintenance of trust throughout the military, right into combat. And then keep them together right out the other side. This is the single most important need for reform to prevent psychological and moral injury in the military."

Every parent with kids who may end up serving will want to read this argument for reform. Our country is mis-using our children and needs to change the military's stupidity. READ THIS BOOK to save your child. We are probably going to live with some level of warfare for the next few decades and we need a military reform.

I would pay to hear Emma Fielding read the dictionary. If anything is pure viagra, it is her wondrous, beautiful voice.

I had to read this book for class. When the teacher said that it could be offensive, I shrugged it off. How offensive could an 18th cent. piece of literature be, right. This book is porn. Not the soft stuff, but hard core. There is a story and the novel is presented well. I think it paints a good depiction of the hardships of a woman at the time, yet is completely inaccurate on the life of a prostitute. ...

I once reviewed Matthew Lewis' 1796 novel "The Monk" and said that it should be rated "R". Well, having just had the experience (and it is an experience) of reading John Cleland's 1748-9 novel, "Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure," everything else just seems like children's literature. Cleland's "Memoirs" was simultaneously reviled and a best seller, declared obscene and yet continued to be published illegally througout the 18th century. In the aftermath of the public frenzy for and against Samuel Richardson's ultra-famous novels "Pamela" and "Clarissa" and Henry Fielding's equally famous responses, "Shamela," "Joseph Andrews," and "Tom Jones," Cleland's novel strikes out into wholly uncharted moral and aesthetic territory.

Similarly to Defoe's "Moll Flanders," Cleland's novel begins with its heroine, Fanny Hill, an innocent, uneducated country girl, thrown at a very early age into the cruel world of London and forced into a life of prostitution. As an innocent virgin, the madam whose house she live in is saving Fanny for a noble customer whom they expect daily, but learns about sexual commerce by watching other prostitutes in the house. Eloping with a beautiful, wealthy young man named Charles before she engages in any sexual activity, the novel concerns Fanny's sexual awakenings and her life with and without her first love, Charles. The way that the novel refigures fidelity in the relationship between Fanny and Charles is astounding.

Cleland's master-stroke, if you will, linguistically, is to write a whole-heartedly pornographic novel and couch everything in such a rich variety of metaphors. Graphic scenarios can be found on almost every page, but there is a marked and remarkable absence of graphic language. Structurally, Cleland's plotting of Fanny Hill's escapades is exquisitely balanced and even-handed. Morally and aesthetically, "Memoirs" comes straight out of the strain of 18th century moral philosophy associated by turns, with Shaftesbury and David Hume. From Shaftesbury, Cleland takes the idea that aesthetics and morality should be judged on an equal form in works of art. From Hume, he takes the radical stance that vices and luxuries are not inherently evil, and even acceptable when not carried to extremes. Cleland makes judicious use of these structural and philosophical elements in creating one of the strongest and most liberated heroines in English literature.

Among other points of interest in the novel, there is the prevalence and even propriety of expressions of feminine desire, agency, power, and control over self and circumstances. Aside from her first entrance into London and her various periods as a kept-mistress, Fanny Hill is educated by the prostitute Phoebe, and the procuress Mrs. Cole to be an independent, self-regulating subject. Related to this is the rather revolutionary notion inferred that sexual education predicates all other sources of knowledge, and is at heart, the basis and foundation of human interaction, at least in the semi-utopic world of the novel.

There are so many fascinating things about Cleland's "Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure," it would take forever to puzzle through them all. All the same, I've only been able myself to think critically about the novel at some distance of remove from reading it. Reading this novel was an interesting, but frustrating, and at times impossible task. It's not a difficult novel to read in terms of prose, but for a 188 page novel, it tends to overwhelm everything else while you're reading it. Like I said, reading "Memoirs" is an experience - I often had to look at the cover to recall that this is no simple work of pornography, but an acknowledged work of classic literature. By all accounts, a captivating novel. It gets five stars just because it is so amazing and outlandish. Aside from the Marquis de Sade, who belongs properly to the excesses of the Romantic Era, I had no idea that there was anything even remotely like this in the 18th century. To quote that immortal philospher, Stephon Marbury, Cleland's novel is "all nude...but tastefully done."

this is one of the classics of victorian erotica and definitelyworth reading. it depicts a womans path to prostitution with none ofthe attached moral lectures and is a good buy.

This little book amazed me the first time I read it, for it is a delightful mix of erotica and story-telling in olde English. Sensuality with style and elegance, without being vulgar or hackneyed, or boring. With an excellent portrayal of the title character, this book deals in detail a very sexual theme, taking you to a different time. Shows how love, passion, and pleasure survive every age and time. Delightful.

I have just finished reading Fanny Hill, and I was really surprised at just how explicit the novel was! I was expecting a story that made much of a few kisses behind the pantry door or a bared ankle or two, but I was certainly wrong about that.

Cleland manages to write a steamy story without ever being crass or resorting to using filthy language to get a reaction. It's hard to belive that it was published in 1749. Everything about the people in the novel seems so modern and no one ever thinks that the people of Cleland's time even had thoughts or lives like he describes.

Yet this novel has it's problems too.

The plot is an old one, young innocent country girl goes to the big city to seek her fortune and falls in the hands of some disreputable people. It's a story that's as old as the profession the book is about. At one point in the novel I wondered if maybe the people who wrote the script for Pretty Woman had been reading Fanny Hill for plot ideas.

Cleland starts a very nice love story for our heroine, but then it fades out for most of the novel and returns without warning or explanation at the end. In fact, the end of the novel seemed rushed in this readers opinion, and rendered the whole story a bit silly. Not to mention a couple of holes in the plot that are big enough to drive a Mack truck through.

Overall, it's a good book, and should be read if for no other reason than to see for yourself just how erotic it really is. No matter what expectations you have when you pick the book up, it will surprise you, and probably pleasantly so.

Question: What does John Cleland have in common with D. H. Lawrence, James Joyce and Aristophanes?

Answer: The Comstock Law

All four writers (and a host of others) have had their novels banned in USA for years under the Comstock Law of 1873. Officially known as the Federal Anti-Obscenity Act, this law banned the mailing of "lewd", "indecent", "filthy", or "obscene" materials. The Comstock laws, while now to some extent unenforced, remain for the most part on the statute books today. The Telecommunications Reform Bill of 1996 even specifically applies some of these outdated and outmoded laws to computer networks (without much success, it is noted).

So what's my message here? Simple - if we continue to allow censors to dictate what we can and cannot read, we stand the chance of being robbed of some of the world's finest written works - and we're not talking exceptions here. Consider, for example Candide, Voltaire's critically hailed satire - Jean-Jacques Rousseau's autobiography Confessions - Chaucer's Canterbury Tales - Boccaccio's Decameron - Defoe's Moll Flanders, and various editions of The Arabian Nights. All were banned at various times in the US. That noble book 'Ulysses' by James Joyce was recently selected by the Modern Library as the best novel of the 20th century yet, like Aristophanes' Lysistrata, Cleland's 'Fanny Hill' and Lawrence's 'Lady Chatterley', it was banned for decades from the U.S.

Fanny Hill is no longer distinguished for the once-shocking treatment of the sexual activity of one 'loose' woman. Now that we're used to hearing and reading about sex, it's apparent that the novel is memorable for better reasons: namely, that Cleland was a masterful writer whose intelligent descriptions take us bodily into the world of his characters. The book's moderate language on an immoderate subject make it a unique, original work - a triumph of passion and eroticism over sterility.

The next time you hear that something has been censored, question whether it is really to protect public morals (where the pornography of senseless war, and starvation appear to be more acceptable than freedom of sexuality), or whether it is to protect the censors' own frustrated identities! Fanny Hill is yet another powerful reminder that all the censors have ever succeeded in doing is to ban outstanding literature in the name of public morality.