This self-help book allows the reader to understand in layman terms certain powers and provisions needed for wills, proxies, etc without the need for an attorney. The forms in the back are easy to understand and can be copied which is beneficial to the user. The forms are also humorous in nature as well. This do-it-yourself handbook is a necessary tool for anyone looking for quick and helpful information.

Have you ever been drawn into a book because you felt like the author was writing especially for you? *On Becoming A Counselor* is warm, human and engaging. It is written for ANYONE who, without extensive psychological training, comes in contact with troubled or anxious people. This contact may be in a work setting, or across the back yard fence: the confused, the suffering, the immature who so often look to others for help.

Mr. Kennedy writes that most of the counseling today is done, not be trained counselors, but by folks like you and me, who find ourselves "chosen" by another to hear a painful story, like it or not; that troubled individuals intuitively know how to seek out those who will listen. The work is especially helpful because it answers the one essential question: What can we really do for another?

From the introduction, Mr. Kennedy writes: "There is no disgrace in not being able to remake people...There is every honor, however, in helping persons move even a few inches closer to self-responsibility, in assisting them to turn in a new a healthier direction in life. The curse of the "amateur" therapists is their determination to change people at all costs, and they frequently blunder, trampling on the sacred places of others' personalities in the process."

*Counselor* provides us with the tools we need to respond to other people's problems with compassion and intelligence, and offers advice on how to take care of ourselves in the process. The added bonus is that Mr. Kennedy is a wonderful writer with a gentle sense of humor. The chapter about people who are resistant to help is called, "I Won't Dance, You Can't Make Me."

Mr. Kennedy has written several books about Catholicism and he is not afraid to ask the tough questions. Please don't discount his wisdom because he is a religious writer. *Counselor* is both secular and intensely spiritual. Kennedy's humanity and compassion come through every word of his remarkable 433 page book.

If you are in any field of counseling, or come across troubled souls, then this book is for you. A real treasure house of wisdom for all of us.

This book is one of a number of Professor Challenger adventures of Sir A. C. Doyle. A noted zoologist (Challenger) has come across evidence that there is a plateau in South America that can be reached from deep in the Amazon rain forest in which prehistoric animals still exist. An expedition of four (Challenger, a sceptical zoologist named Summerlee, a noted hunter (Lord John Roxton), and Edward Malone, a journalist) sets out to verify this report. The arguing and interactions between the academics is interesting in that little seems to have changed in the last 87 years! It should be noted that Doyle isolates the plateau so that there is minimal interaction with the rest of the rain forest (thus, the dinosaurs can't escape). But, why couldn't the ptereodactyls spread out? This story was one of the earliest "Lost World" tales and has been made into a film a number of times. Other stories in this sub-genre owe much to Doyle and Challenger.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle created a classic dinosaur adventure story when he wrote The Lost World in 1912. The tale's narrator, Ned Malone is a newspaper reporter who joins an expedition to the wilds of the Amazon to impress his girlfriend. However, he scarcely anticipates the dangers he will confront when the expedition's leader, zoology professor George Challenger takes them to a plateau filled with dinosaurs and ape men.
Doyle's human characters are described much more richly than Michael Crichton's minimally interesting protagonists in Jurassic Park (1990), so the story hinges as much on Challenger's eccentricities as it does on dinosaur attacks or Ned Malone's quest for validation of his masculine bravado. A weakness is the lack of female characters worthy of more than passing note. Ned's fickle and heartless girlfriend makes only brief and displeasing appearances at the beginning and end of the tale. Crichton does no better with females.
Hopp's Dinosaur Wars, published in 2000, does a much better take on genders, giving equal weight to a young male/female pair who brave the dangers of dinosaurs loose in modern-day Montana. It seems that even dinosaur fiction has evolved over the years.

Professor Challenger, a protagonist as unique and eccentric as Sherlock Holmes, "challenges" the London Zoological Society to send a team of impartial judges to verify his claims that dinosaurs live on a plateau in the Brazilian rain forest. Professor Summerlee, a staunch foe of Challenger, accepts the challenge. Lord John Roxton, a soldier and big game hunter, agrees to go along, and Edward Malone, a star rugby player and journalist, goes as their scribe.

The world they find is every bit as captivating as Michael Crichton's Jurassic Park, and the danger is every bit as exhilarating. The characters are more engaging, and the story contains a good deal of humor as the four strong personalities clash a number of times on a number of levels.

There are no velociraptors to menace the adventurers, who have become hopelessly marooned, but a tribe of ape men serves quite well to provide the danger. It is a pleasure to have the English language used so well in describing the adventures of the four.

"The Lost World" is obviously the inspiration for Crichton's "Jurassic Park." Crichton may have modernized the story, but he certainly didn't improve it. Unfortunately, "The Lost World" reflects the ethnic insensitivity and "classism" of the Victorian Era, but if you can overlook that flaw, you will thoroughly enjoy the story.

Readers should note that this site does not distinguish between the various editions of Shakespeare, so the reviews you read may be for audiotapes, modern translations, etc. I am reviewing the Kenneth Branaugh BBC Radio recording of Hamlet. It is adequate, which I consider high praise for this challenging play. Like Branaugh's movie a few years later, it includes the entire text of the play, which is a nice way to remind yourself of some issues you may have forgotten.

The performances are pretty good, and include Branaugh (of course) as Hamlet and Derek Jacobi as Claudius, giving us a hint of the performances they would later give in the movie. No one's performance really blew me away, although Jacobi was excellent.

Ultimately, the play loses quite a bit when transferred to audio only. There's a lot to be conveyed with stage placement, physican action, expression, etc. Somehow, listening to the play limited my imagination on those issues, preventing my from using my "mind's eye" to the fullest.

Hamlet is considered, by many scholars, the pinnacle of Shakespeare's dramas. If you haven't read it yet this this Case Studies in Contemporary Criticism edition would be a great place to begin.

The text notes that are included with the play are very helpful to understand some of the more difficult language nuances that are inevitable with any Shakespeare. The structure is well laid out and conclusive. It complements the complexity of Hamlet very well.

Of course Hamlet is one of the great paradoxes and mysteries every written. The search of finding yourself and what it is that fuels the human spirit. Hamlet can be a very confusing play because of the depth of substance. However, the critical essays that suppliment the reading make it very accessable.

Each of the critical essays are of different schools of literary criticism: Feminist Criticism, psychoanalytic criticism, post-structuralist (deconstuctionist) criticism, Marxist critism, and finally a New Historicist criticism. Before each critism there is clearly written introduction to explain the motives and histories of that type of criticism.

This edition of Hamlet will not only introduce the reader to more Shakespeare, but also explain the play and help to familiarize the reader with literary criticism too. It is a beautiful volume that cannot be more recommended if you are wanting to buy a copy Hamlet.

Hamlet has always been thought of as one of the classics of literature. I could not think of another book which deserves this title more. The story of a Danish pricne who learns from his fathers ghost that his father, the king, was murdered by his brother, Hamlet's uncle, who then went on to marry Hamlet's mother. Hamlet is overcome by a longing for revenge, but also indecisive. Shakespeare creates a great amount of tension between the chatacters with powerful confrontatoins and biting language. It is a suspenseful tragedy, filled with anguish.

William Shakespeare was a genious when it came to breaking down the human psyche, and Hamlet is perhaps one of the most complex plays when it comes to human emotions. It is undoubtably one of his finest works, full of very complex, interesting characters, and a wonderfully chaotic plot. There are innumerable theories on Hamlet, why he is so indecisive, and if it all comes down to an oedipus complex. whatever way you interpret it, everyone can get something out of it. I feel like I am priveleged to have read such a wonderful play.

Hamlet is a character that I can relate to in some ways, being a very indecisive person myself. I felt I could connect with him better than many Shakespeare characters, MacBeth, Ceasar, Juliet, Helena or Hermia. That is one of the reasons that I enjoyed Hamlet so very much. I wish that everyone could love Hamlet as much as I did, but I know, especially being a high-school student, that it is a little much for general reading. For high school students, like me, I very strongly recommend this book, if you really like Shakespeare, and aren't looking for a quick read. Otherwise, it might be a little to much to tackle, if you don't really enjoy Shakespearian tragedies. For anyone who has time required to comprehend such a complex work, and is looking for a masterpiece of literature that will keep them thinking, Hamlet is the book for you.

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.