I long ago determined that the world of those interested in the Classical Literature of the Ancient Greeks that when it comes to Homer's epic poems there are those who prefer the "Iliad" and those who prefer the "Odyssey." My choice is for the story of the rage of Achilles. From Achilles's fateful confrontation with Agamemnon over Briseis of the lovely arms to the magnificently emotional ending where King Priam comes to beg for the body of his slain son, Hector, from the man who killed him, I find this story has greater resonance than the tale of Odysseus. The epic story also seems to me to be more classically Greek, with the great hero who acts out of anger, comes to regret his folly, and seeks to make amends with a great deed. Achilles is similar to Hercules in this regard, and although they are both strictly considered demi-gods, the Achaean hero ultimately seems more human. Plus, Achilles stature is enhanced by his opposition to the noble Hector; acknowledging the better warrior does not take away from recognizing the greater hero. Add to this the fact that all the gods and goddesses of Olympus are actively involved in the proceedings and I am convinced the "Iliad" is the more worthy book for inclusion into most classes dealing with Classical Mythology or the Ancient Greeks.

The main question with using the "Iliad" is class is picking a worthy version in English. The Lattimore translation is certainly above average, but I think the Fagles translation is far and away the best available (hence the one star deduction for this translation, which I have been compelled to use in the past) and I would not really consider using anything else in my Classical Greek and Roman Mythology course. I also like to use the "Iliad" as part of a larger epic involving the plays of Euripides, specifically "Iphigenia at Aulis" and "Trojan Women," as well as relevant sections from the "Aeneid" and other sources on the Fall of Troy. But the "Iliad" remains the centerpiece of any such larger tale, mainly because of the final dramatic confrontation when King Priam goes to weep over the bloody hands of Achilles. Not until Steinbeck writes "The Grapes of Wrath" is there anything in Western Literature offering as stunning an end piece.

very good rendition. pace of reading is good and passionate without being melodramatic. very entertaining for long commutes or car trips. however, if you haven't read the book or are not somewhat familiar with the story already, it can be difficult at times to keep all the characters straight. however, there is a brief synoptic insert that comes with the CD and will help to read quickly before listening.

It's the first piece of history in the world. It shows how the Greek/Trojan war began. Paris, a trojan prince, runs off with the queen of Greece which started the war. Her husband wanted to force her back. Achillies, a demi-god, has to choose between two fates. A boring long unmemorable life, or a glamorous short one that will change the war. This books has gods, ghosts, destiny, dreams fortelling the future, and betrayal among all.

Walter Lippmann's vision of a cooperative America in 1914 has withstood the test of time as a paradigm for retaining our humanity during industrialization. His emphasis on science, communication, labor organization, and the women's movement has uncannily mirrored the intervening 90 years. Although a few of his sentiments and observations are outdated, the majority of his recommendations are still applicable to today's society.

The title is the clearest indication of the timeless pertinence of this work. In all eras of change, drift has been of the utmost importance. In today's world of exponentially progressing technology and corporate mechanization, we often feel helpless against the tides of nation-wide change. Mastery, then, is the ability to band together and set those changes on the course of prosperity without sacrificing our individuality.

Lippmann outlines the problems, solutions, and repercussions of mastery. Despite some aspects of the text being idealistic or anachronistic, much of what he predicted has come to pass. Although the average reader like myself may not be able to put Lippmann's ideas into direct action, his concepts still ought to help understand our responsibilities as citizens.

This is Walter Lippmann's erudite and often perspicuous examination of the "progressing" American society of the early twentieth century. For Lippmann society is in a constant state of drift and confusion. The confusion is promulgated throughout society by means of the large scale shift from pre-modern industrialism to modern industrialism. In order to obtain mastery what new forms of cohesion have to emerge? Lippmann rejects laissez-fair, William Graham Sumner's brand of individualism, and aligns himself with men like Herbert Croly (his soon to be partner at the New Republic). Society needs cohesion. Lippmann's answer, similar to Croly's, is pluralism (this is mastery). He does not buy the totally homogenous vision of society. Instead his vision is pluralist - large interest groups are emerging and social order can be achieved if a balance or common principle can be met between these common interest groups. In Drift and Mastery Lippmann discusses organized labor (in which he welcomes unions distinguishing himself from Croly), the consumer movement (the importance of objective consumer advice), the women's movement, and corporate managers (Lippmann had already abandoned his previous attraction to socialism). For Lippmann socialism was no longer needed because the robber barons were being replaced by socially minded managers who wanted to establish market share. Ownership is being democratized by the share of stock.
The book is rooted in actual observation allowing its readers to identify with it immediately. In it they observe the new modern era that is taking shape. How will the problems be solved? Lippmann sees science replacing religion as the primary device for solving peoples' problems. Science is the discipline of democracy. Science is no longer a threat. Instead it is a good thing in the Progressive Era. Lippmann even uses the word diagnose (a word with explict scientific conotations) in the subtitle.

This is Walter Lippmann's erudite and often perspicuous examination of the "progressing" American society of the early twentieth century. For Lippmann society is in a constant state of drift and confusion. The confusion is promulgated throughout society by means of the large scale shift from pre-modern industrialism to modern industrialism. In order to obtain mastery what new forms of cohesion have to emerge? Lippmann rejects laissez-fair, William Graham Sumner's brand of individualism, and aligns himself with men like Herbert Croly (his soon to be partner at the New Republic). Society needs cohesion. Lippmann's answer, similar to Croly's, is pluralism (this is mastery). He does not buy the totally homogenous vision of society. Instead his vision is pluralist - large interest groups are emerging and social order can be achieved if a balance or common principle can be met between these common interest groups. In Drift and Mastery Lippmann discusses organized labor (in which he welcomes unions distinguishing himself from Croly), the consumer movement (the importance of objective consumer advice), the women's movement, and corporate managers (Lippmann had already abandoned his previous attraction to socialism. For Lippmann socialism was no longer needed because the robber barons were being replaced by socially minded managers who wanted to establish market share. Ownership is being democratized by the share of stock.
The book is rooted in actual observation allowing its readers to identify with it immediately. In it they observe the new modern era that is taking shape. How will the problems be solved? Lippmann sees science replacing religion as the primary device for solving peoples' problems. Science is the discipline of democracy. Science is no longer a threat. Instead it is a good thing in the Progressive Era.

I expected more from this movie than I actually got out of it, but it was entertaining at times. It seemed that a couple of the characters were too stereotypically gay (especially the part played by Jason Alexander), but overall seemed to be an accurate portrayal of eight gay friends and how they related to one another. If you want to get through this life without catching a glimps of Alexander's bottom...close your eyes during the volleyball scene!

I was not luck enough to see this wonderful movies when it was a play but i am forever grateful that i had a chance to see and the later purchase this wonderful movie. LVC shows us whats its like to have a group of friends so close that sharing ones feelings and needs need not be an exercise in terror. Yes there are sterotypes but hey i know myself i identified with a few of the characters. LVC has it all honesty laughs and a great cast. Jason alexander as buzz made me laugh and cry and John Glover doing dual rolls omg how incredible. This is a must see

Who are we kidding? These characters are as close to real gay men in all their arrogance, vanity, and promiscuity as I've ever seen in a film. Yes, the stereotypes and cliches exist in the film. But what gay man doesn't display at least a couple of them? The romance between Jason Alexander and John Glover highlights how hard it is to find true and honest love in the gay world. It takes a man dying from AIDS complications to see that a lovable and worthwhile man exists inside of someone without a washboard stomach. It takes a a fat gay man to see the same in a man dying of AIDS complications. Who can honestly tell me that any of the other cuties in the film would've given either of the already mentioned characters a chance for romance? C'mon on guys, lets look in the mirror that this film is and ask, "If we don't like ourselves behaving this way, how can we change that?"

George Ella has written an interesting tome (700+ pages) in dedication to and in defense of the 18th century poet, hymnist, and close friend of John Newton - William Cowper (pronounced "COO-PER"). I say "in defense of" because apparently biographers and historians both inside as well as outside the confessing Church have grossly misunderstood and in some cases even slandered the man. William Cowper (author of such hymns as "There is a Fountain Filled with Blood") is notoriously known for his lifelong struggle with believing God had cast him out of his fold, as well as for his suicide attempt (which contrary to popular opinion was attempted prior to his conversion, not after). Sadly, most of his friends, such as John Newton, were unable to understand how a man of such deep faith and love for Christ could possess such violent inner turmoil. One result of so many people's inability to come to grips with such paradoxes in Cowper's heart and life has been for historians and biographers to place the blame on his Calvinist convictions. This is one of the many myths that Ella intended to correct.

One aspect of the book that I appreciated was that it made portrayed Cowper as a full and complex human being. Ella reproduces countless letters as well as quotes from Cowper's poems that, along with secondary sources and Ella's commentary, give the reader a solid sense of the poet's inner and outer life. I found that in this sense, the book was wonderful to read. So often, we assume that our heroes of faith are much different from us - that they are somehow immune to the barbs and arrows of the Fall, that they do not struggle with things like doubt, depression, and seasons when they do not experience the love of Christ in their hearts. Knowing that such a man as William Cowper was alive and was not immune to such throes in his life was definitely encouraging to read.

Ella's affection for Cowper is obvious. He seems to love and understand his subject so well, that at times I got the distinct impression that Ella felt every slanderous statement made against Cowper as though they were directed at himself! For such a sensitive and maligned man as Cowper, it is invaluable that his biographer be someone like Ella who writes more like a compassionate and forgiving friend than as a cold and detached scholar.

Another interesting part of the book had to do with Cowper's role in First Great Awakening. Cowper was, at the time that George Whitefield, John Wesley and Jonathan Edwards were preaching in America and England, becoming a popular poet in the English-speaking world. Cowper's passion in life was primarily to see Christ glorified in the world and for people to come to believe in Him. Though he was not a preacher, Cowper nevertheless longed to use his gifts and calling to contribute to the continual spread of the gospel. Ella argues, along with other historians, that Cowper's long poem "The Task" (a highly evangelistic poem) was so popular that it was more influential in the spreading of the gospel than any of the efforts by other prominent preachers of that time. Cowper preached the gospel to men and women who would have never dared set foot into a church.

Yet despite all this, there were some parts to the book that I found lacking. One of the main criticisms I had about the book was Ella's bad habit of becoming "preachy" when trying to apply Cowper's opinoins about culture to 20th century problems. For instance, when recounting Cowper's views on education, Ella tended to use Cowper's views as a platform to express his own frustration with our current educational system in the English-speaking world. Though I probably agreed with some of his criticisms themselves, I found his habit of interjecting his own opinions and criticisms somewhat annoying. It gave the impression that Cowper would've simply parroted his criticisms were he living amongst us today. So often, people claim to possess secret insight into how a previous thinker would feel on current problems. The PCA (Presbyterian Church of America) has been going through this recently with its discussion on what the Westminster Divines thought about the length of the six days of creation - whether they were normal 24-hour days or not. Removing men from their historical context and forcing them to have an opinion on our culture seems misguided, for it does not give them the opportunity of examining our problems, complete with a whole set of nuances and complexities, afresh. More than likely, the differences between two seemingly similar situations spanning history and culture are too great to simply compare in that way. This is not to say the dead cannot or should not comment on the present, but that we must also recognize the differences, and not just the similarities, between the two periods. Ella's habit of interrupting his discussion of Cowper with his opinions about 20th century culture was slightly annoying, but not so much as to devalue the book as a whole. All in all, I found the book incredibly interesting, and I recommend it to anyone.