This book was great. The concept is so realistic and simple but the actual sessions seem unbelievable. I would love to experience them myself. If you have any trainings. let me know, I want to tell my therapist about ERP.

Thanks,

I had to write and tell you that I bought the book and found it very provactive. As a substance abuse counselor, the book was right on the money. It talks about the reality of the addiction and makes clients look at how their drug use encircles all aspects of their lives. Nice job! I reccommend this book to anyone working in the field who has an open mind to change. ...

Thanks You;
TM

I saw your book in the bookstore a few days ago. I did not buy it right away because after reading it in the store I thought it was not for me due to my recent arrival back into AA. Your approach is radicle but after a few days I thought about it and decided to buy this book. I have been battling this disease for years now and I decided I had to give it another chance. I will apply all the tools I could find because after many attempts to stay clean, I kept returning back to the bottle. I am optimistic about this attempt to stay clean because I do like the realtity of this concept. Even though it is not oriented on a twelve-step approach it does allow the freedom for me to incoropate my current tools and enhance them with the exercises and more importantly ERP.

Thank you and keep the information coming.

This book is just perfect. It's very well written. Conrad shows an understanding of the predicament of women of his time. Conrad advances the plot though the voice of the characters, who tell a story, which involves another character telling a story, etc. At one point the tale is six levels deep; but such is the skill of Conrad that you do not notice and are never lost. One of Conrad's two or three best. A book I was sad to end because I was enjoying it so much.

I cannot believe that there are no customer reviews already for this spectacular novel - full of intruiging situations and wonderful characters - certainly the best Conrad female character I have read. Conrad is a wonderful writer in style and the manner in which he tells a yarn - how then has this novel become so 'lost'? It has wonderful lines ('Don't be in a hurry to thank me,' says he. 'The voyage isn't finished yet.' p22 Oxford World Classics), great insights (women respond to the smallest things, which immediately had me nodding in agreement from my own experience), spectacular descriptions ('Yes, I gave up the walk [along a cliff top with the intention of killing herself],' she said slowly before raising her downcast eyes. When she did so it was with an extraordinary effect. It was like catching sight of a piece of clear blue sky, of a stretch of open water. And for a moment I understood the desire of that man to whom the sea ans sky of his solitary life had appeared suddenly incomplete without that glance which seemed to belong to both of them. p231). The characters are admirable in behaviour sometimes, victims sometimes, regrettable in behaviour sometimes, or just plain confused - just like real people. But one thing I really like is the way the narrator of the story is an observer, barely a participant of the events being described.

This may not be the perfect novel, but I urge you not to miss it. The chapter 'On the Pavement' by itself is worth the read!

Robin Wood is the Preeminent Authority on Hitchcock. Robin Wood is without question the greatest authority on the cinematic works of Sir Alfred Hitchcock. Years ago after seeing many films as I was growing up I decided to do some reading on the role of the Director. By pure chance I picked up and purchased Robin Wood's original edition of this book. Obviously it was at that time, myself still being in school very challenging reading for me. However, I was able to recognize brilliance over hypocrisy. Robin Wood has ever since remained the preeminent authority on Hitchcock's films. He has honestly admitted that his perspectives on some of his analysis have changed. This is not an outright statement that has had a change of heart or acquired a new taste in the aesthetics of Hitchcock's films. On the contrary, through ongoing analysis he has come even closer to the secret of Hitchcock's mastery of his art. An artist creates a work. A great portion of that work is constructed with conscious deliberate thought, some is intuitive and a small portion may be subconscious. Robin Wood, I believe has showed a continuum in his analysis of Hitchcock's work. Wood continues to explore the avenues of the intuitive and subconscious nature of Alfred Hitchcock, which manifests itself in his films. To this end I believe Wood has devoted a good portion of his life. The methods of the great pioneers have often puzzled conventional minds. I am not a great pioneer. I am puzzled. And what the heck does conventional mean? Happy reading!

Robin Wood is without question the greatest authority on the cinematic works of Sir Alfred Hitchcock. Years ago after seeing many films as I was growing up I decided to do some reading on the role of the Director. By pure chance I picked up and purchased Robin Wood's original edition of this book. Obviously it was at that time, myself still being in school very challenging reading for me. However, I was able to recognize brilliance over hypocrisy. Robin Wood has ever since remained the preeminent authority on Hitchcock's films. He has honestly admitted that his perspectives on some of his analysis have changed. This is not an outright statement that has had a change of heart or acquired a new taste in the aesthetics of Hitchcock's films. On the contrary, through ongoing analysis he has come even closer to the secret of Hitchcock's mastery of his art. An artist creates a work. A great portion of that work is constructed with conscious deliberate thought, some is intuitive and a small portion may be subconscious. Robin Wood, I believe has showed a continuum in his analysis of Hitchcock's work. Wood continues to explore the avenues of the intuitive and subconscious nature of Alfred Hitchcock, which manifests itself in his films. To this end I believe Wood has devoted a good portion of his life.

If you want to know the story of Montana, this is where you start. It's written by the best journalist-writer who ever lived in the state (excluding Bud Guthrie, of course, who chose fiction instead). It must be understood that it is not a "definitive history" as Howard himself stated, but a personal narrative of what matters. In the past two decades, a cottage industry of Howard-bashing has emerged in Montana, by historians eager to establish their own reputations. Yes, some of what Howard wrote was incorrect. Other aspects of his writings now seem outmoded (the colonial economy thing). But to say modern history proves Joe Howard was wrong is like saying Lewis and Clark are disproven by Rand-McNally. Howard was the visionary who showed the way to what Montana should and could be. But 50 years later, this remains the best non-fiction book that will ever be written about Montana.

I first read this book back in the early 60's when I was stationed in Montana. I found it full of facts that you don't find in history books. The characters are real and believable; makes you wish you had a time machine to go back and witness the action. A must for history buffs.

My father, Keith H. Ellis, was one of the co - authors of this book. So of course I think it's great! Unfortunately it's way above my head, so no I have not read it. I work with computers mostly. However, I do know that my father and the other authors are extremely intelligent men and I'm sure it is as eloquently written as possible for rather technical law material. As for how useful this book will be to you I'm not sure, I just wanted to be the first person to have reviewed this book.

Nobel prize-winning author George Stigler provides insight into the working of a great mind and the notorious "Chicago School" of economics. Worthwhile for its presentation of the human side of the "dismal science" as well as its clear explanation of basic concepts of Stigler's economic theory. Stigler holds nothing back and delivers a frank and modest account of his life and dealings with other prominent economists

the student mastering counterpoint cannot go through without 'The study of Counterpoint' by Joseph Fux

ray.sant

This is a really fun book. It teaches counterpoint, yet I could read it for leisure reading. It is written as a conversation between an instructor and a student, and there are many, many examples... based on these teachings and recieved great feedback on them.
A highly recommended read for anyone who has ever written a song.

[reprint -- sorry]

At one point in the text, Aloysius pretty much says it all: "These lessons are not worked out for actual use but for exercise. If one know how to read one need no longer bother with spelling; similarly, the species of counterpoint are given only for purposes of study."

I have been working out of this book (which is really an excerpt of a larger book called _Steps to Perfection_) with a private tutor for a year, and it has been a difficult but rewarding experience. Essentially, the species provide a platform to learn how to compose concurrent melodic lines. Each following species builds upon the knowledge of the previous. Rules that begin absolute slowly become contextual. While the book's original title is anachronistic, the program within encourages steps towards the understanding of basic tonal principles that have formed the foundation of the grand tradition of western music.

I'd recommend keeping an open mind about the rules. These are treated as the "rules," but are expected to be broken with time and experience. After all, the rules are no more than the collected general tendancies of the great composers.

Another thing to keep in mind is that Fux's book provides an introduction to composition based upon the limitations--and, accordingly, the beauty--of the human voice. This book does not deal with the embellishments and ornaments possible on all instruments.

More caveats: One, I would recommend studying this book with an experienced teacher. It's like a beginning yoga text: basic, but someone with experience will put things in perspective. Two, the exercises, especially for three and four voices, are difficult and require commitment and discipline. (Again, like yoga.) There is no need to rush through the exercises. Three, Fux's book should be part of an integrated tonal curriculum that at least includes four-part writing and ear-training.

And Fux's book is hardly the last word even on counterpoint! At the very least, study 18th century and 20th century counterpoint, because those broad styles used Fux's treatise as their basic foundations. Those who criticize this text do so because it does not immediately apply to modern music situations. But they often fail to see how the text fits beautifully within the broad spectrum of composition. This book reflects the basics of tonal architecture. No more, no less

Regardless of one's feelings about the egomania of author Bogdanovich (and it certainly bleeds through every page), he provides the creative world a great service by sharing his many years of interviews with some of the masters of American Film.

Contained within these pages is a critical access to the creative process. Each director interviewed (obviously some more than others) provides invaluable insight into the nuts and bolts of film directing. Bogdanovich has compiled with this book, an indispensable historical document that does much to inspire, educate and guide any aspiring film director.

I particularly valued Alan Dwan's insights into the importance of communicating character relationships into the narrative. I have incorperated much of the late director's invaluable advice into my attempts at stage direction.

All in all a must have for anybody interested in directing or gaining insight into the creative process.

Peter Bogdanovich pioneered the director interview in English, and this wonderful collection will give endless pleasure to film buffs. The book-length interview with Allan Dwan alone is worth the price of admission. Bogdanovich always did vast amounts of study before sitting down to talk with his subjects, and his expertise and enthusiasm encouraged them to open up in a way they usually did not with other interviewers. Anyone writing about the careers of the directors Bogdanovich interviews has to start with his work on them. A fitting companion piece is Bogdanovich's encyclopedic interview book "This Is Orson Welles."

The title was suggested by Howard Hawks who once observed, "...I liked almost anybody that made you realize who in the devil was making the picture...Because the director's the storyteller and should have his own method of telling it." Hawks is one of the 16 "legendary film directors" represented in this volume. It is important to keep in mind that these are conversations rather than interviews such as those conducted by Robert J. Emery in The Directors: Take One and its sequel, The Directors Take Two, as well as interviews conducted by Richard Schickel in The Men Who Made the Movies. It is also worth noting that Bogdanovich is himself a distinguished director of films such as The Last Picture Show, What's Up, Doc?, They All Laughed (a personal favorite of mine), and Texasville. As a result of his own background, Bogdanovich's questions and comments reflect somewhat different interests and perspectives than do those of Emery and Schickel.

I rate all of these books Five Stars but probably enjoyed reading Bogdanovich's book the most because the conversations ramble along somewhat messily, as most of my own conversations tend to do, and also because Bogdanovich is more actively involved in the interaction than Emery and Schickel are. As a reader, I feel as if I were really an eavesdropper as 16 directors casually share their opinions, information about specific films and actors, gossip, "war stories," and overall evaluations of their careers' various successes and failures. At no time does Bogdanovich seem intrusive or manipulative. Moreover, perhaps to an extent he did not realize when writing this book, he also reveals a great deal about himself...much of it endearing and some of it admirable. His passion for film making and his appreciation of the great directors are almost palpable. Readers' interests about various directors and their respective films obviously vary. I include myself among those who are die-hard film buffs and so I enjoyed reading every chapter and every word in each chapter. Indeed, each conversation was for this amateur "gourmet" a feast to be consumed with delight and, yes, gratitude.

Nabokov, in his Lectures on Russian Literature, suggested that Dostoevsky be knocked off the canon of Russian writers, especially in favor of Turgenev, whom Dostoevsky hated. The reason was that Nabokov was against the "novel of ideas" because, he would say, it managed to achieve neither.

Demons is, of Dostoevsky's novels, the most ideological, yet still it is masterfully pulled off. Let it be known, however, that at times, the plot suffers at the expense of ideology, just as one has to expect, BUT THE IDEAS!

This book, although in my opinion it has the nuance of neither, is a perfect bridge between Notes From the Underground and The Brothers Karamazov. The intelligentsia, you suspect, are trying to build the positivistic paradise that the Underground man railed against, but as the novel progresses, you realize that the idealist vision has already been lost by Stepan Trofimovich, that all that remains is his desire to feel alive, even if that means inflicting every sort of pain. This is the same type of monster that Ivan warns against, and identifies himself with--if he were to act--in the Grand Inquisitor.

Also, please note, I tried once to read it in an older translation, and gave up somewhere in the 100s. This one I plunged through with little trouble.

Dostoevsky's tackling political novel is given new life in this fresh translation. This work has been unilaterally been praised for capturing Dostoevsky's power and subtlety. This story is about the political and philosophical ideas that swept Russia in the second half of the 19th century. These demons, then, are ideas, that legion of -isms that came to Russia from the West: idealism, rationalism, empiricism, materialism, utilitarianism, positivism, socialism, anarchism, nihilism, and, underlying them all, atheism.'' Dostoevsky, taking as his starting point the political chaos around him at the time, constructs an elaborate morality tale in which the people of a provincial town turn against one another because they are convinced of the infallibility of their ideas. Stepan Trofimovich, an affable thinker who does little to turn his liberal ideas into action, creates a monster in his student, Nikolai Stavrogin, who takes his spiritual father's teaching to heart, joining a circle of other nihilists who will justify any and all violent excesses for the sake of their ideas. Stavrogin aims for a systematic corrupting of society and all its principles so that out of the resulting destruction he may raise the banner of rebellion. A chilling foreshadowing of Stalinist years. This is a work of art in literature!

Dostoevsky, as the great historian of Russia Richard Pipes notes, hated Socialism and Socialists more than all else under the sun. This is a continuation of his bombardment of collectivists and utopianists that began with "Notes from Underground" and continued with "Crime and Punishment." Dostoevsky, a Christian and a Russian patriot (in the best -- Roger Scrutonian -- sense of the word) -- rejected anything and everything that would make men and women into mere social ciphers, cogs in the machine of history, into "means" rather than "ends" (to use the terminology of Kant).

Dostoevsky's primary inspiration for this novel came from an absolutely horrid novel by one Nikolai Cherneshevsky called "Chto Eto", or "What is to be Done?" An early bit of Russian utopianism, it was a precursor of the vicious theories Lenin/Stalin would deploy to "drag" Russia into the 20th century (indeed it was Lenin's favorite novel). The fact that some 66 million would be killed on the grand march to utopia was irrelevant (as the lunatic Shigalyov states in Dostoevsky's novel, "from unlimited freedom, I ended with unlimited despotism. . ." the solution] to the problems of mankind is to grant absolutely freedom to one-tenth and turn the remaining nine-tenths into a herd).

This echoes, of course, the magisterial "dialogue" between Christ and the Grand Inquisitor on the nature of human freedom in The Brothers Karamazov. But this novel is relevant for more than its attack on socialism and communism -- both of which, outside of Cuba, China, and a couple of bookstores in New York City and maybe California -- have collapsed precisely because they could do no more than create misery and murder. What makes The Demons -- indeed, the entire Dostoevsky corpus -- particularly relevant in this first decade of the 21st century is his take on the Russian intelligentsia/liberals of the 1840s -- a group characterized by out and out hatred for their country, which created the conditions for the rise of nihilism, terrorism, and bolshevism in the 1860s-1890s. Those 1840s intellectuals, like the "intelligentsia" of today's America, adopted a "blame Russia first" attitude toward all internal and external problems -- glorying in Russia's humiliations, and cursing her victories. It's not a far leap from Dostoevsky's Stepan Verkhovensky to the likes of Lapham, Vidal, and Moore. The real threat to one's community, Dostoevsky argues, is not the farmer or the factory worker who attends church, votes Republican, and drinks his beer in a tavern, whose sons and daughters march to war because they believe it their duty to the country that bore and sustained them, but those who, cloaking themselves in the false-prophet mantle of "dissent," spit and sneer at the foundations of community, or what Russians would call sobernost -- the things that makes Russia Russia, the things that make America America. Dostoevsky's work is both warning and antidote. It's no wonder he was banned by Lenin; one doubts he is discussed around the smart parties of Manhattan today.

Conrad is a real star, I'm rather fond of him. Under Western Eyes is about living in a time of revolutionary urgency, individual fragility in a delicate system, and personal honor.

To summarize; Razumov, the 'Hero' is a university student in Russia post 1905 but pre 1917 who keeps to himself and has no real family and no close friends. A fellow student and a revolutionary, Victor Haldin, assasinates a local oppressive Tsarist autocrat. He then takes a chance and takes momentary asylum with Razumov, asking him to help him get out of the city. Razumov is an evolutionary progressive, not a revolutionary. Not willing to risk association with a radical like Haldin and destroy his entire life, Razumov turns him in to the police, and Haldin is subsequently hung.

The rest of the novel deals with Razumov's struggle with himself- he betrayed, and he has to live with a lie. Complicating things, he falls in love with Haldin's sister in exile. Raz can't bear it though, and eventually he does the right thing, but things get messy.

Thats the general plot, but the real meat of the novel is in the characters and the ideas underlying the conversations between them. The idea of how you justify revolution, the chaos of revolution vs the order of gradual reform, the unwillingness and helplessness of the individual caught in it all. And there's a continual theme of the diference between East and West.

Razumov reminds me a bit of Crime and Punishment's Raskolnikov- an isolated university student waxing the time away in a single apartment, brooding over Big Ideas and being slowly crushed by a powerful conscience. The stuff of modernity. Dostoyevsky was a little bit better, so thats why Under Western Eyes only gets 4 stars.

If you are familiar enough with Conrad's writing you will know he has a few favorite words - like "inscrutable" and "destiny". They reflect I believe Conrad's literary outlook. He likes to take characters, give them a haunted past with some shameful secret, emphasize a fatal weakness, introduce some culminating stimulae, and watch the tragic unfold. I think he could have written a brilliant biography of Richard Nixon. But to the point..."Under Western Eyes" is a quintessentially Conradian book. But unlike many of his other novels - Lord Jim, Nostromo, Victory - "Under Western Eyes" treats of period politics (namely the revolutionary movement on the rise in Europe) as he weaves his tale of betrayal and tragedy. There are no heroes in this book (save perhaps one) but only a motley collection of victims, fools, and eccentrics. There is not much action, despite its subject matter. I don't want to give away too much. The story unfolds in Moscow and Geneva, not around political machinations but around the tragedy of the central character, a young Russian thrown into the revolutionary movement entirely against his will. The saga of the young man's anger, self-loathing, and attempts to extricate himself from his "situation" form one salient plot of the novel. The ultimate solution to his unsought conundrum also serves to redeem him in his own eyes, if not those of others.

"Under Western Eyes" is also an attempt by Conrad to explore the peculiarities of the "Russian character". This is another line of development in the work. I put this in partentheses because such notions of racial character are naturally not so well received now as in Conrad's day. Whether you agree or not, Conrad (who himself was Polish) offers some interesting personal insights into the nature of the "inscrutable" Russian soul - its ability to persevere, its mysticism, its ultimate radicalism. Such issues were particular relevent to the time the book was written (1908), as Russia was then already breaking out in revolutionary violence. The story's narrator - a retired English bachelor - are the "Western eyes" under which Russia is regarded.

I might label "Under Western Eyes" a comic-tragedy, in that the primary factor behind the story's tragic chain of events is a misunderstanding. It is ultimately for the book's central character a journey of personal redemtion. Within the context of this, however, Conrad details some of his views on Russia, its people, and the nature of the revolutionary movement. I did not find it as engaging as some of Conrad's other works but anyone interested in the Russian revolutionary movement, or radical politics of the period in general, or with a bent for stories of betrayal, tragedy, and love should take a look.

"Perhaps life is just that," reflected Razumov, pacing to and fro under the trees of the little island, all alone with the bronze statue of Rousseau. "A dream and a fear." It is on this small space of remote land that young Razumov finds what we all seek after--a place for quiet contemplation (reminds me of Hemingway's "A Clean Well-Lighted Place"). And in this very thought-provoking Rousseau-inspired environment Razumov stumbles upon the thesis that all of life is but a dream--a dream full of constant fear. The taciturn, exiled, young Razumov reminds us of Joyce's Stephen Dedalus, and even more so Dostoevsky's Raskolnikov. Indeed, Conrad attempted to continue the legacy of the great Russian novelists, by forcing an eclectic grasp on some of Dostoevsky's themes (like the need for, and final apparent conclusion of, man's suffering) whilst straying away from other Dostoevskyian qualities. All in all, Under Western Eyes is about ideas--as Conrad repeatedly suggests-an ideal gripping psychological tale of a young intellectual's suffering for choosing the path of the czarist leaders. If Razumov, like Stephen Dedalus, was more skeptical, more prone to the need for exile (not the exile he indeed does embark on to Geneva via the Councilor's strategic plan) would he have ultimately had his eardrums smashed by a revolutionary brute? Certainly, Razumov must confess for his betrayal of Haldin; Razumov realizes the intelligence, love, and raison d' étre of Haldin altogether too late. Razumov, who knowingly understands that because of his actions Haldin lost his life, gives up his own body for lifelong suffering. And by doing so, Razumov seems to willingly accept his punishment, and further he lives no longer in fear. Upon completion of this wonderful novel, we can bask in the warm sunny glow of Conrad's wit that shines upon us--"Peter Ivanovitch (or any person who opposes despotic cruelty) is an inspired man." Joseph Conrad is an inspired man.