A great book that shows one does not have to negate who they are in order to be successful. In fact, it even helps understand how to proudly embrace a Latino background as part of one's identity. I would recommend this book for Latinos looking to enter the business world in the US, anyone interested in the Latino experience in the US, and anyone that has experienced the embarrasing moment of standing in front of a large group of clients having said something that sounded "dirty" because of accent inflections - yes, there is still success after that (check out the story of the executive that prefers to use the word "bedding" instead of sheets). I believe the authors' met their goal by compiling great stories that offer lessons learned and successes along the way to the top. Truly inspiring!

Like the other three Holmes novels, this book is a masterpiece. Sure, it is old (over 100 years, in fact) but, being Holmes, it will always be as fresh and exciting as it was the day it was released. Although all the Holmes stories are great, and you will have a good time reading any of them, I reccommend reading the books in chronological order (this can be conveniently done with the omnibus The Complete Sherlock Holmes), it will only serve to make you like the stories even more.

Anyways, this is the second Holmes story, and it is a page-turner, full of suspense. Also, it delivers the kind of intrigue and "how did he know that! " disbelief that only a Sherlock Holmes story can generate. It is because of this, and the stunning detail in which he is described throughout the 60 Holmes stories, that the hardcore readers of the Holmes stories cannont alltogether accept him as fictional. No character in the history of fiction has ever been more real to his readers, and none ever will be. Many Holmes fans have been known to feel remorse, even sadness upon visiting the Rickenback Fall (where Doyle originally tried to kill Holmes). That may sound fanciful, but indulge yourself in the 60 Holmes stories (including this one-one of the best) and see if you fall into that category.

As the second full-length story of Doyle's Holmes series, this book is a classic. It lacks the landmark status of A Study in Scarlet and the overall drama of The Hound of the Baskervilles, but nevertheless is a must-read for all Holmes fans and is strongly recommended to fans of detective fiction. The crime scene is a classic -- "Watson, when you have eliminated all other possibilities, the remaining possibility, no matter how seemingly improbable, is nevertheless likely".... or something like that.

While A Study in Scarlet deals rather unmercifully with the Mormon colony in Utah, A Sign of Four presents what would now be considered a strikingly politically incorrect perspective on India. It's an historically interesting British viewpoint from late in the last century.

Whether you read a public copy or get it from the University of Virginia on-line archive, I strongly recommend A Sign of Four. It's a quick read, and certainly a better option for spare time than Holmes' seven percent solution.

A classic Holmes novel, this book is perhaps one of Sherlock's most puzzling mysteries. As told by Dr. Watson, this mystery may have been one of Holmes's toughest cases yet.

As Sherlock is injecting cocaine into his blood system, he sits down with placid relief, until there is a knock at the door. In enters the beautiful Mary Morstan, whom Watson immediately takes a fancy to. While Watson observes her beauty, Holmes observes her problem. It seems that she is a rather middle-class woman, with style and father in the military, who is currently stationed in India. He had recently wrote to her saying that he would come to visit. However, he never showed up when she went to pick him up. That was ten years ago. But starting six years ago, four years after his disappearance, Miss Morstan had been receiving mysterious packages containing pearls of great value, one a year. Having been contacted by her mysterious complimentor, should she go and meet him? Or should she stay home? The truth lies with in the book.

This book is a triumph for the celebrated novelist Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, and I believe that many people would enjoy this book. Just to be specific, it would mainly be for people who are in the age group of around: 13 or older, and also those who are fond of the mystery novels and thrillers and anyone who could use a good book.

If you are interested in the political history of Vermont, this is the definitive book on the subject. Well researched and easy to read, it gives a broad overview of the events and individuals that have shaped the history of the Green Mountain state. This is also one of the best sources for locating more in depth material, with a comprehensive bibliography included. Ironic that this book describing the politics of the most left-wing state in the Union is written by one of the most prominent Republicans in Vermont, the senior State Senator, Bill Doyle.

I am lucky enough to have Bill Doyle as one of the three senators that represents me in Montpelier.

Anyone looking for an intro to the fascinating and unique topic of Vermont's political history MUST read this book - it is excellent. Of particular interest is the tale of Matthew Lyon, a 19th century US Representative who was reelected while serving time in a Vergennes, VT prison (other quirky tales abound).

The one and only criticism about this book is that at times Doyle leaves out critical analysis, such as the election of Consuelo Bailey as Lieutenant Governor in the 1950's - the first woman in the nation elected in her own right. The reasons behind this win were not discussed.

In all, this book is informative and interesting - you will not be disappointed!

With over thirty years in the Vermont State Senate Senator Doyle can be looked upon as the foremost political historian in the state. He gives great narrative from the days of Ethan Allen, right up to the Democratic awakening of modern age. This is a must read for anyone interested in State politics. It is also a great way for Vermonters who have ventured elsewhere to connect with the history of this great state.

The "saskatoonguy" description of the book dated 24 April 01 pretty much nailed it on the head. The book is more about the personal and management styles of Presidents Roosevelt through Clinton. The reference to tape recordings is more of a come-on to attract readers. The recordings are more of a sidelight in this description of the administrative styles of the referenced presidents.

In fairness, though, recordings were used minimally by Presidents Roosevelt, Truman, and Eisenhower and the post-Nixon administrations shied away from recordings as well (although video recordings of certain events started under President Reagan). Only Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon made extensive use tape recordings and the first two still exercised control over what was recorded -- a practice that Nixon did not adopt and later regretted. The most memorable examples used were a couple of Johnson's recordings. A somewhat humorous recording, in spite of the tragic circumstances, was President Johnson's arm twisting his mentor, Senator Richard Russell of Georgia, into serving on the Warren Commission. Senator Russell despised Earl Warren. The second was a meeting to determine whether the Administration would commit 200,000 more troops to Vietnam where President Johnson finally decided to reverse his policy and start pulling back from that unpleasant and costly adventure.

As for the descriptions of the administrations themselves, the book, in my opinion, is a testimonial to how too much emphasis is put on "qualifications" to be President. Each individual who has served in the Oval Office, including the current occupant and his successors, will have certain strengths and weaknesses that may prepare them well for the challenges that confront them, or not prepare them well at all. I always felt that in terms of "qualifications", Herbert Hoover was one of the most qualified men to serve as President. Under normal circumstances, his qualifications may have been adequate. But an economy plunging into a depression is not "normal". As much as I disliked President Carter, there is no disputing his intelligence. But he was so bogged down in learning what to do that he scarcely did anything at all (I do not agree with Mr. Doyle's revisionist attempt to portray the Carter Administration as being more than what it was, a failure). As Hoover was replaced by a visionary, so too was Carter. In terms of intellect, President Reagan does not rank very high. But he was successful in ways that his more "qualified" successor, George Bush Sr., could never understand. I also do not attribute the Clinton's Administration lack of cooperation with investigators to poor management practices that resulted in evidence being lost and unavailable until, conveniently, the investigation was over. I think deliberate obstruction of justice was a bigger factor.

Although I supported George W. Bush in 2000 and would never, ever even consider voting for his opponent, I am not one of those who now claim how fortunate we are that he was president on 11 September 2001 and not Al Gore. I doubt anybody knows how a Gore Administration would have responded -- even Al Gore himself. No knock intended as it even took some time for the Bush Administration to recover and respond. If Al Gore was president, people would find certain aspects about his background and style that would be right for that crisis -- just as they did for George W. Although his response may have been different, the public would have supported his response if it was a strong response -- something considerably stronger than lobbing a few cruise missiles at an aspirin factory in a third world country.

Bottom line: A good summary of the administrative and personal styles of Presidents Franklin Roosevelt through Clinton. However, if you are looking for more substance in terms of recordings, you will be disappointed.

After reading and listening to "Taking Charge," which was about LBJ's secret tapes, I was expecting the audio version of "Inside the Oval Office" to use many more actual recordings. Instead, the reader reads transcripts of conversations. The tapes contain a few actual recordings but very few, about one per president. Inexplicably, it presents no actual recordings of Reagan, Bush or Clinton. This was a disappointment since I knew from listening to "Taking Charge" that actual recordings contain great insights into the men who inhabited the White House. A reader cannot possibly capture the nuances of language used by our 20th century presidents. There is a great difference between hearing a president's actual words and having them read from transcripts. However, the content of the book and audiotapes provide a facinating glimpse inside the oval office.

This is a terrific book and rewards the reader with insight into the modern presidency. It talks about each President's strengths and how each of them got themselves into trouble and it illustrates its points using each President's own words. Because it is less than 400 pages long it is hard for Doyle to support all the claims he makes, but it is still worth reading. More than that, it is worth owning and re-reading. The only reason I didn't give it five stars is that I think the book could have gone a bit deeper into each presidency without adding too much length. It was just a bit too much this side of a tourist's guide to each presidency.

But there are so many wonderful and new insights that I feel guilty for not giving it five stars. So, if you want, just imagine that I did give it the full five with this little caveat.

There is of course a daunting amount of literature on the French Revoloution which often means that first-time students are often faced with a lottery concerning the book they choose. This book has no pretentions whatsoever to being all encompassing or a psycho-sociological analysis of the revoloution itself. Dealing with the pre 1789 period it is an admirably clear re-examination of the fall of the ancient regime. Comprehensively written and free of academic snobbery it charts the relaxation of rigid absoloutism and the development both of coherent political opposition and a relevant public opinion, both concepts that were unheard of in the archetypal monarchy of Loius XIV. Seditious pamphlets that had traditionally been confined to exile in the Netherlands found their way back into France and criticism of the establishment grew in a crescendo: the street and the parlements echoing one another and feeding in confidence off of one another. Doyle thus lands us in the years immediately prior to 1789 and guides us through the domino series of economic ministers, victims of the sustained, and now infamous financial crisis that so relentlessly exposed the dire infrastructure of French government. Finally we are presented with a synopsis of events that led to the walls of the Bastille and a conclusion: all in all less than 200 pages. This is a very businesslike book with no room for sentiment, philosophy or lyricism but in its digestible form, leaves the reader clear on the major points, a task many other histories have failed in. Reccomended for anyone looking for a clear explanation for the end of the ancien regime.

Origins of the French Revolution is a comprehensive review of the corrupted and doomed Bourbon regime. It is rich in detail and facts about the reigns of Louis XIV through Louis XVI. The book is divided into three parts: Writings on Revolutionary Origins Since 1939, The Breakdown of the Old Regime, and The Struggle for Power. And in each of these sections important chapters are introduced for discussion. Doyle takes the three sectors of society during that time--the nobility, clergy, and bourgeoise--and analyzes their individual roles in bringing the revolution about. Both the good and bad sides of these sectors of society is clearly revealed and their strengths and weaknesses also. Doyle covers the posiiton of the nobility especially well. He offers an interesting view on the nobility that is usually not seen in other books discussing the French Revolution. The other sections of this book is great in detail also, such as the chapters discussing the government organization and the ministers who tried to implement reform. The book is somewhat difficult to understand because of the wealth of detail within it, but one can clearly say that without drastic reform the French government was hopeless. Overall it was a dry read but for people who are interested in the details of the revolution this will be a great read.

This first of the Sherlock Holmes stories, A Study in Scarlet introduces Watson and Holmes and narrates the beginning of their ongoing partnership. Holmes' genius and his theory of deductive reasoning, which he presents in an article ambitiously titled "The Book of Life," is proven effective when he solves the case of a murder whose links extend as far as the Mormons in Utah. Detective connoisseurs will enjoy Holmes' humorously arrogant references to the fictional detectives of Poe and Gaboriau, among the first authors in the genre and influential for the Holmes stories. Though Doyle pitches some of the morbidity and philosophical profundity in his inheritance from authors like Poe, the reader who enjoys a good story - detective or not - will be pleased to find surprises, intrigue, and a little art jargon in the unraveling of the scarlet thread that runs through life and underlies the mysteries of the human mind.

A Study in Scarlet is a good detective story, but certainly not Doyle's greatest. But it bears the distinction of being the novel which introduced the world to the legendary Sherlock Holmes. First appearing in 1887, it was not to be the greatest story about Sherlock Holmes, but it was the first. Doyle first introduces us to John H. Watson, a medical doctor recovering from duty in Afghanistan. Watson needs a room-mate, and a mutual acquaintance introduces both him and us to Holmes. So we come to know both Holmes, Watson, and the memorable 221B Baker Street.

Watson's first impressions of Holmes are merely that he is a man enshrouded in mystery and eccentricity, and Watson politely restrains his curiosity by avoiding asking too many intrusive questions, despite the parade of strange individuals that come to their apartment to consult Holmes, and despite his bemusement at Holmes' passion for playing the violin and his egotism. Watson's perplexation at Holmes' character and profession is slowly unravelled in the second chapter which Doyle appropriately titles 'The Science of Deduction'. Watson observes that 'his zeal for certain studies was remarkable, and within eccentric limits his knowledge was so extraordinarily ample and minute that his observations have fairly astounded me 'His ignorance was as remarkable as his knowledge. Of contemporary literature, philosophy and politics he appeared to know next to nothing ' That any civilized human being in this nineteenth century should not be aware that the earth travelled round the sun appeared to me to be such an extraordinary fact that I could hardly realize it.'(p11). Holmes apparently is brilliant at identifying a stain on your trousers, but completely ignorant about the most elementary contemporary political events.

Ironically, Watson's inability to deduce Holmes' profession proves that he lacks the very ability that he is seeking to uncover in Holmes: deduction. For Holmes doesn't just excel in specialized knowledge, but especially in the science of deduction and logic. By utilizing the skills of observation and analysis Holmes asserts that logic could solve all virtually all problems. In his words: 'From a drop of water, a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other. So all life is a great chain, the nature of which is known whenever we are shown a single link of it. Like all other arts, the Science of Deduction and Analysis is one which can only be acquired by long and patient study, nor is life long enough to allow any mortal to attain the highest possible perfection in it. Before turning to those moral and mental aspects of the matter which present the greatest difficulties, let the inquirer begin by mastering more elementary problems. Let him, on meeting a fellow-mortal, learn at a glance to distinguish the history of the man, and the trade or profession to which he belongs. Puerile as such an exercise may seem, it sharpens the faculties of observation, and teaches on where to look and what to look for. By a mans' finger-nails, by his coat-sleeve, by his boots, by his trouser-knees, by the callosities of his forefinger and thumb, by his expression, by his shirtcuffs ' by each of these things a man's calling is plainly revealed. That all united should fail to enlighten the competent inquirer in any case is almost inconceivable.' (p14-15). Watson calls this science of deduction 'ineffable twaddle', but as we know, this is the vintage Holmes we love and the very core of his being. Not only does he prove it to Watson by remarkably deducing that Watson had served duty in Afghanistan, but by collaring the criminal in a murder case.

The story itself consists in two parts: the first part introduces us to Holmes and Watson, and describes the murder of Enoch Drebber and his secretary Joseph Stangerson, and several failed attempts of Scotland Yard detectives to solve it, concluding with Holmes unmasking the real perpetrator, to the complete astonishment of all present. The second part is a flashback, explaining the background and motives for the murder, as finally Holmes relates the observations and deductions that led him to solving it. In short, 'the crime was the result of an old-standing and romantic feud, in which love and Mormonism bore a part.' (p103)

But what is fascinating about 'A Study in Scarlet' is not so much the mystery, but the man: Holmes himself. Doyle would later learn to eliminate some of the excess baggage present in this story (such as the extended flashback) and focus on Holmes and his deductions. The characterization of Holmes as an eccentric man driven by logic is wonderfully created for the first time in this novel. Already here is the foundation of the Sherlock Holmes that would become so successful in all of Doyle's later stories. A few quotes illustrate how the tone of the deductive Holmes is set: 'In solving a problem of this sort, the grand thing is to be able to reason backward. That is a very useful accomplishment, and a very easy one, but people do not practise it much.' (p99-100) 'There is no branch of detective science which is so important and so much neglected as the art of tracing footsteps.' (p100) 'You see, the whole thing is a chain of logical sequences without a break or flaw.' (p102)

Here the successful formula is already established: Scotland Yard is baffled, so is his foil the bumbling doctor Watson, and so are we the readers. Holmes has long solved the mystery before we have even begun identifying red herrings, and it is when he sits by the fire and explains to Watson the process of deduction that we curl up in delight. The partnership between the super-sleuth Holmes and his beloved side-kick Watson all starts here, and if you love Sherlock Holmes, you won't want to miss it!

This is where it all began, the very first Sherlock Holmes story. If you want to read all 60 Holmes adventures in chronological order (as you should) then by all means make this the first Holmes book that you ever read. They are all literary masterpieces, and this was the first one! Out of the 4 Holmes novels, I would rank this third, behind the Valley of Fear and the Hound of the Baskervilles. I will spare you the plot details, you can do that elsewhere. Just get and read this book and it will start you on a fascinating and extremely entertaining journey through Conan Doyle's world of Sherlock Holmes, one of the most widely recognized, and best, figures in all of literature.

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.

This is a faithful reprinting of the greatest mystery book(s) ever written. It is well written, powerful, captivating, and puts the Hardy Boys to shame. Holmes solves mysteries in a believable (if difficult) fashion that never fails to grip someone from start to finish. The stories are so well written, in fact, that when Sherlock Holmes "died" fans responded by rioting in the streets of London. The Queen insisted that Conan Doyle bring back his famous character, and so here he is. While we might not be willing to riot in the streets if Holmes died today, we can still feel loyalty towards the famous character, and the legacy that Conan Doyle left behind in these books.

I rate this book 4 stars because it reel you in on a hook and it will not let go until you have read the whole thing. Its a keeper any person thats read it would say. It on the egde, exciting, and most of all it is very clever. Did I tell you that it is also Adventurous.

The book is about two main people. One is the great Sherlock Holmes and his ever faithful Dr. Watson. They go on Adventures together and make there murder look like a fool for even thing to fool the great team.

A quick example from the book is a evil uncle and two women in the house that the woman own. One day one woman was found dead and the local law enforcement had no clue until the great team of Sherlock and Watson were on the case. ...
That is just one of the many stories told. So if you want a fast pace book. Read The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes.

Did you know that Holmes never, ever said "Elementary, my dear Watson" in any of the sixty stories Arthur Conan Doyle wrote?

The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes were initially published in "The Strand" magazine as a series of 24 short stories. These stories saw publication between 1891 and 1893. When they were published in book form, the first twelve were published as "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes" and the last twelve were called "The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes." Today, when we speak of the original "Adventures," we usually refer to the first twelve Holmes short stories. These twelve stories include some of the best of Holmes: "The Speckled Band," "The Red Headed League," "A Scandal in Bohemia." Doyle continued his Holmes saga with other collections of short stories: "The Return of Sherlock Holmes," "Reminiscences of Sherlock Holmes," "His Last Bow," and finally "The Casebook of Sherlock Holmes." Almost every Holmes short story bears the title "The Adventure of . . ." One of my favorite Holmes stories is "The Problem of Thor Bridge." Not only is it a very good yarn, it is a "Problem" and not an "Adventure!" Although Conan Doyle ran out of Holmes stories, the public did not run out of its appetite for new Holmes stories, and production of pastiches continues to this day.

To me, the most satisfying way to relive the adventures of Sherlock Holmes, both original and pastiche adventures, is through the medium of audiotaped radio plays. There are at least four collections of adventures currently available. "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes," a publication of BBC shows starring Clive Merrison, reprises the original twelve adventures. This is probably the best radio collection of adventures. National Public Radio has published four "Adventures of Sherlock Holmes" consisting of four one hour productions starring various actors as Holmes. The quality is uneven. "Smithsonian Historical Performances: The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes" has twelve stories, four of which are original. Edith Meiser wrote the pastiches, and John Stanley starred as a rather disagreeable Holmes. Some stories are very good; others are woeful. Simon and Schuster publishes a series of six "New Adventures of Sherlock Holmes." Each collection has eight Holmes stories. Of the pastiches, these are the best. Nigel Bruce stars as a loveable, bumbling Watson, and Basil Rathbone portrays the archetypical Holmes. Anthony Boucher and Dennis Green wrote the scripts and did a very good job. Holmesaholics will also want to listen to "More New Adventures of Sherlock Holmes," published by the Brilliance Corporation, and starring Tom Conway as Holmes and Nigel Bruce as Watson. These stories are on the whole better than the Smithsonian Historical Performances, but not as good as the Rathbone/Bruce "New Adventures." They also have the drawback of being published as individual cassettes. The avid collector can run to some expense getting all of these.

Holmes survived Conan Doyle's attempt on his life at the Reichenbach Falls; he has survived his creator 80 years without showing any signs of loss of vitality. The latest (and quite enjoyable) addition to the Adventures of Sherlock Holmes is the BBC Television series starring Jeremy Brett.

This book gives what appears to be an almost complete and factual account of the events of the enrollment of James Meredith at Ole Miss. Having first hand experience of being there as a staff member in the Office of the Registrar, I was drawn to this book and find it flows well and coordinates time lines in an understandable format. It can easily be read in two evenings and makes you feel as though you were there. A must for anyone interested in history.

William Doyle has written an excellent account of the events surrounding Meredith's entry into Ole Miss. Particularly noteworthy is his detailed account of the behind the scenes negotiations between the Kennedys and Mississippi's segregationist governor, Ross Barnett. The book's depiction of the riot is also rich: Doyle vividly potrays the chaos that reigned in Oxford during the riot. The narration is gripping and this book is an entertaining read.

I thought the book was not nearly as strong in the final 30 pages. There is no clear direction to the book's "conclusion." Doyle sort of vasillates between providing updates on the book's main characters and attempting to place the riot into a historical perspective. While both are interesting, this portion of the book drags on.

Overall, a very enjoyable read.

I spent the night of September 30-October 1 in the middle of the Ole Miss Campus. There were four of us who were barricaded in the Student Union Building. We watched the fightining swirl below through the night, but I did not know -- until I read this book -- how close to the abyss we really were. I think this a very balanced account that is basically accurate. There were no bars in Oxford in 1962 for Mississippi was legally dry until 1966! A few other slips like that do not detract from the totality of the book. This is the third or fourth book I have read on the subject and the first that really places the blame for what happened on both sides. It has always seemed to me -- and I have said so -- that the most foolish thing one could have done was what the Federal Government did by surrounding the Lyceum Building late on Sunday afternoon, thus giving a focal point for returning students and invading strangers . . . and the oncoming cover of darkness. In hindsight, it would have been so much better to lay low until early Monday, slip onto the campus and register James Merideth in the early morning, and face the daylight hours rather than the night. However, the men in the field had to deal with the situation that the Governor and the President had permitted to be created . . . and they cannot really be blamed for lack of foresight when those in a much higher position had shown the same lack of foresight.

An excellent book . . . that scares the wits out of someone who was really there!

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.