Is there anything more comforting, more appealing, and more illuminating than Peggy Noonan's words. If you've heard her speak the experience is increased ten fold as you can actually 'hear' her soft tone express the desires we all felt after that day in September 2001. Anger, resentment, pride, hope, a feeling of loss, and feeling of gain...it's all here. I was so amazed that I had to share it with my wife and family.

You'll want to too.

This Book is a collection of Ms. Noonans essays from 9-11-01 to 9-11-02. It is not a geo-political interpretation of events, but a cultural & an almost spiritual one. It will be wonderful reading for those not yet born, or too young to remember that horrible day of 2001.

The back cover of Henry Miller's novel "Tropic of Cancer" notes that the book was first published in Paris in 1934, but banned as obscene in the United States for 27 years until a historic court ruling was made. Thus, "Tropic of Cancer" is significant as a historical artifact in addition to being a literary work of art. The book tells the story of an American writer named Henry Miller who lives in Paris. Henry definitely lives in the seedy underbelly of the city; the book follows him to the bars, cafes, and whorehouses and details his encounters with a number of colorful characters.

"Tropic of Cancer" opens on a grungy note as the narrator discusses the lice infestation of his friend's armpits. Early on the narrator promises that this will not be a polite book: "This is libel, slander, defamation of character [...] a prolonged insult, a gob of spit in the face of Art." Miller largely succeeds to deliver on this promise. The book is full of profanity, and there are frank discussions of sex, sexually transmitted diseases, and other such topics.

The book has a crude charm and energy throughout, even though at times the prose seems wildly self-indulgent. Miller depicts Paris as a magical place, a pilgrimage site for artists and wanderers. The narrator often reflects on writing and literature in general, and on his own artistic goals and theories in particular. There is also reflection on America and American identity. Miller's prose sometimes attains a Whitmanesque revelatory quality.

To me the main question about this book is thus: Is it merely an important historic artifact, or does it still sing as a work of living literature? My own reply to this question: the book does still sing, delivering (to quote the book itself) "bloated pages of ecstasy slimed with excrement." If you like it, also check out the writing of Charles Bukowski.

The uncensored autobiographical adventures of young wannabe writer Henry Miller in 1930's Paris, "Tropic of Cancer" is an important document in the history of literature, if only for the infamous (and quite stupid, if you ask me) book-banning crusade it inspired. It wasn't quite as innovative as a lot of people have claimed, though. It strongly resembles "Hunger" by Norwegian novelist Knut Hamsun (one of Miller's favorite writers and an acknowledged influence on his work), with the difference, of course, that Miller makes absolutely no concessions to public decorum.

Miller doesn't have the remarkable ability to describe psychological states that distinguished early Hamsun, or his nicely limpid style. Instead, he's fond of unleashing lots and lots of baroque philosophical bombast upon the page, which sometimes gets tiresome. "To fathom the new reality it is first necessary to dismantle the drains, to lay open the gangrened ducts which compose the genito-urinary system that supplies the excreta of art." Uh, whatever you say, Henry.... Largely due to outpourings like this, the protagonist remains a somewhat shadowy figure. We hear much about his homegrown philosophy--not to mention his escapades with prostitutes--but you wouldn't be able to recognize him on the street. Never has anyone said so much about himself while revealing so little.

It may be that I simply became used to Miller's flamboyant prose, but this book seems to get better as it goes on. Certain parts have a raw beauty; Miller very convincingly portrays what it means to live without hope but also without despair. As a paean to Life, it is both maddening and touching. Perhaps Miller, fond of the warts-and-all approach, wanted it that way. And if he is right when he claims, late in the novel, that a book with only one great page is still worth reading, then there's certainly enough here to make the trip worthwhile.

Henry Miller invigorates the mind and soul with his love and zest for life. His positivity and sense of humor shine throughout this free-spirited, innovative, & unrestricted stream of consciousness autobiographical landmark novel. Inspiring and refreshing it is that Miller maintains his positvity despite being in the midst of The Great Depression and living a desperate and destitute existence at times throughout the novel.

Having read Miller's fellow expatriate Hemingway, I liken Tropic of Cancer to The Sun Also Rises - albeit as an NC-17 version. I found Tropic of Cancer to be highly compelling reading despite its lack of structure and organization. This book, above any other, makes me yearn to be a writer. I admire Miller - not for his nihilistic and chaotic lifestyle - but for his ingenuity, his passion for his writing, and his resiliency which allowed him to write such an uncompromising work under no paramaters or publisher constraints whatsoever - which would go on to influence many future writers as well as serve as the blueprint for the autobiographical novel. Si vous pouvez lire francais, c'est tres utile pour ce livre.

I ordered Tropic of Cancer to see what all of the fuss was about - and I wasn't disappointed. This is truly an underrated novel and understandably one that is primarily read for pleasure as opposed to assigned class reading - definitely not one for Billy Bob and Sue Ann in high school. I've never met anyone who has read this book and those who know about it refer to it as "trashy". Oftentimes perception becomes reality, but not here. It is sometimes sick and perverted & sometimes nasty(the ubiquity of the lice and roaches is enticing). But, overall it is Miller's infectious enthusiasm and overwhelming love of life(and women) that inspires and invigorates the soul. I recommend Tropic to anyone who is in need of a literature experience that will prove anything but ordinary.

David Paul Henry, The Early Development of the Hermeneutic of Karl Barth As Evidenced by His Appropriation of Romans 5:12-21 (National Association of Baptist Professors of Religion Dissertation Series, 1985)

Karl Barth is something of an enigma: a self-styled Roman Catholic "simple country preacher" before and during World War I who took up the task of theological hermeneutics (at its most simplistic level, hermeneutics is simply the interpretation of text) as a means to the end of finding a more effective way to get the Christian message across to his parishoners. He ended up as, basically, the voice of Pauline thought acorss the Christian religion by the time of his death in 1968. David Paul Henry, in his doctoral dissertation, looks at the differences between the first two editions of Barth's book _Der Romerbrief_, published in 1917 and 1920, in an effort to trace the development of Barth's interpretive skills and methods during this period-- in which, it can be inferred, Barth's theological underpinnings did more changing than they did at any other time during his life. Henry also includes an epilogue pertaining to Barth's 1959 release Christ and Adam, which is in many ways a second revision of the original Der Romerbrief.

Barth as a subject is an endlessly fascinating person. His writings, on the other hand, can be something of a trial for the casual reader (I've heard they're actually worse in the original German). Thus, when Henry starts his book with a forty-page excerpt of the first edition of Der Romerbrief (Henry's own translation of the work-- which, in his own words, "attempts to render Barth's phrases in literal English equivalents." Oh, the pain and suffering.), the reader can get the feeling of being quite overwhelmed, even if he has been immersed in the writings of Barth before. Henry's translation does, however, achieve his stated goal of allowing the forcefulness of Barth's personality and conviction to come through; Barth, compared to most of today's well-known American evangelists, comes off as the Mephistopheles to a legion of wan, undernourished Fausts.

The remaining hundred-fifty-odd pages of the book are Henry's own writing, which is quite a bit more readable than Barth, and the book picks up speed. Henry first devotes two separate chapters to the two steps Barth took in his exegetical writing-- the historical interpretation of the text first, and then the (as J. T. Beck put it) "pneumatic exegesis," best described in cimplestic terms as the spiritual interpretation of the text. The fourth and last chapter compares the differences in the second edition-- not so much differences in text as differences in Barth's thinking that led him to rewrite the manuscript (the textual differences are, for the most part, differing translations of the original Greek which Biblical scholars have been arguing over for centuries, are still arguing, and will likely never stop arguing).

If you're a fan of understanding methods of textual interpretation, you don't need me to tell you it's fascinating stuff. Trying to get at the thought processes of a writer makes for great history. Henry had an inroad that most authors don't, in that Barth left two distinct editions of one work in his corpus, and so Henry's book is more cpaable than most of tracing those thoughts. As this is his intention, he also stays away (until the last few paragraphs of chapter four) of value judgments of the work itself, a refreshing change from most exegetical histories.

This isn't light reading, and those completing the book are likely to crack a smile at the irony of Henry's last sentence in Chapter Four: "The task of theological hermeneutics, as Karl Barth recognized, is not simple." Indeed. But that doesn't make Henry's work any less worth reading. I would suggest, however, that novices to the intriguing world of exegesis (either of original texts or exegetic texts such as Barth's) find a slightly less difficult subject to address first, e.g. Stanley Fish's exegesis of Milton, _Surprised by Sin: The Reader in Paradise Lost_. If you find it to your liking, Henry should be right up your alley. (Tackling Henry before tackling Barth is much advised.) *** 1/2

It is a shame that this is out of stock. I recently read this book and it helped me understand the basic tenets of Marxism more clearly. It does this in an interesting way: a dialogue between three people with varying positions on Marxism and history. Very good introduction to Marxism.

"Where we got the Bible" is a very Catholic History of the bible, that will no doubt make many Protestants uncomfortable. However, thier is little in this book the can realy be disputed on a factual basis.

The Right Reverand Henery G Graham Dispells myht after historical myth about the Catholic Church and the bible. Some of these myths are so ingrained in society that even a large percentage of Catholics belive them. For example many people belive the Catholic Church in the middle ages prevented lay people from reading the bible and that the wycliff bible was the first English translation of the bible widely available this as Reverand Graham points out is just not true.

This book was origially written in 1911 and as a result some of the material is dated, for instance he states that no origal text dating prior to about the third century were known to exist which was true in 1911, 36 years before the dead sea scrolls were found. He also states that the Douay Rheims Bible was the only English translation still in circulation that was autherized for Catholic use again this was true in 1911 but many English versions have been approved since then including my personal favorite the Saint Joesph Edition of the New American Bible.

Even if you can't except the conclusions of this book, it is a fun read if only for the dated and often quaint and politicaly incorrect passages. An example of this is when he defends the crusaders as a group of highly motivated Christians willing to lay down thier lives for the Church and for Christ. This is at best a strech, many of course were in it for the money and or travel/adventure. It is however interesting to picture a time not long ago when one could defend the crusaders and not be labeled a right wing extremist Christian bigot or some such nonsense.

This is a worth while book for all Catholics and open minded Protestants who are interested in the real history of the bible and how it came to be as we know it.

An accurate and concise account on how the Bible came to be. Shows how the Catholic Church has defended holy scripture throughout the ages, despite the accusations of protestants and the Church's enemies. Accurately describes the rise and fall of badly translated protestant Bibles such as Tyndale's Bible (the english translation of Luther's Bible), the sinner's Bible (ommitted the word 'not' from some of the ten Commandments), etc. The English Crown ordered these versions burned or destroyed by decree when the errors were found. Errors and additions that have been handed down until this day (such as the addition of the word 'alone' by Luther to maneuver justification, and the addition of 'for thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory.....'). This book is a must have for anyone wishing to learn which books were originally contained in the Canon of scripture and who put them there. Shows why the books of the Septuagint (referred to as the Apocrypha by protestants) are included in the Bible, and were in the Jewish Canon during the time of Jesus.

Reverend Henry G. Graham provides a compelling examination of Scripture and how it came to be as we now know it. The picture that emerges is that while divinely inspired it is the work of human tradition.

This excellent resource explains how the Church compiled the New Testament Canon, the work of the Monks of the early Church, refutes the Protestant argument of the "Bible alone", and explains some of the erroneous Protestant versions of the Bible.

The book also includes Reverend Graham's own conversion story "From the Kirk to the Catholic Church" which the original version does not contain.

No religious bookshelf can be complete without this title.

Although not credited, I served as a freelance editor on the reprinting of this book.