Richard Congress has championed the music of the late Yank Rachell, one of the few blues artists to record extensively on the mandolin. Congress has made available some of rachell's hard to fine post-war recordings on his Random Chance label as well as put together Rachell's oral history. The first 100 or so pages are devoted to Rachell's recollections and if some parts are sketchy, its because Rachell's death prevented Congress from fleshing out more details. Rachell's association with John Estes and others in the neglected Jackson, Tennessee music scene is discussed as is his life as a travelling musician, as well as his pursuits of daytime employment unlike others he played with. He recounts playing in St. Louis and then recording, Big Joe Williams and John Lee "Sonny Boy Williamson" and his early recordings as well as moving up to Indianopolis for the last years of his life. The oral history is supplemented by Rich Delgrosso's discussion of Yank's mandolin style, David Evans' distillation of Yank's guitar playing and recollections of those who came under Yank's spell including Henry Townsend and Charlie Musselwhite. A full discography of Yank's recordings, both as a leader and an accompanist is provided. In summary, this is a very nicely put together volume that provides us with a window into a slice of the blues past often neglected.

Richard Congress' Blues Mandolin Man provides a biography of the life and music of Yank Rachell, a 1960s blues mandolin performer. This is his first biography, and one of the few books to discuss the mandolin instrument's contributions to blues.

Evans is a fascinating man to listen to. He is a decorated veteran, but shuns the recognition he rightly deserves. He admits that some of his actions during the heat of combat "might have been foolhardy." Evans was not interested in medals, only in trying to keep his men alive. As Evans' Third Army Com mander, General George S. Patton remarked, "No one ever won a war by dying for his country. He won by making the other poor bastard die for his country."

Evans met several truly historical figures. First and foremost was Patton. After the first day of the Battle of Arracourt, Patton visited Evans' command post to commend him on a job well done. That was just the first of many encounters with General Patton. After hostilities ceased in 1945, Evans was assigned to a Prisoner of War camp near Landshut, Germany. There, while interrogating prisoners, he briefly met General Vlasov, another larger-than-life individual. Vlasov was a former White Russian officer who was convinced (some say coerced) to help the Nazis against the Soviet Union on the Eastern Front. Later, in Switzerland, Evans was able to get a glimpse of a compound full of Nazi war criminals, most notable of whom was Herman Goering.

Evans was also fortunate to have been able to participate in the design, testing and eventual combat deployment of the M18 "Hellcat" tank destroyer. The United States Army found that its antitank capabilities were woefully inadequate against the masses of German armor, so a new tank destroyer was desired. Evans, along with a handful of other armor officers from various posts around the US, was invited to Detroit to the Buick Division of General Motors, to offer suggestions for the design of this new vehicle. There are precious few times in a soldier's career that he is given the opportunity to impact upon the equipment he will use in the performance of his duty. Evans and these other officers seized the moment and helped to design one of the most effective combat vehicles ever. In ju! st a few short months the M18 went from the drawing board to the maneuver field and then the European Theater of Opera tions.

Professor Evans recounts the events of the Irving trial, with the accuracy that is typical of his historical work. With a good amount of detail, obviously not as complete as the trial transcripts (which would take thousands of pages), Evans takes us through some of the evidence that helped prove beyond any reasonable doubt what Lipstadt had said in her book: Irving is not a historian, he regularly lies, and distorts facts for the benefit of his anti-semite, right wing agenda. A great book for all those who are interested in dismantling the Holocaust denial lies, and for those who took interest in the Irving trial in 2000.

Filled with unique illustrations of the brain in an imaginative manner, combined with powerful information regarding the clinical anatomy of our CPU, this is a must read for those working with brain injured individuals or who would just like to understand the magic that is our mind.

The most striking aspect of the authors'work is the magnificent way in which the various layers of the brain/consciousness are paired with the drawings evoking our ancient evolutionary history. Rather than a modern suburban house built on a scraped lot, the brain is portrayed as a ruin with succeeding layers built on top of each other. I believe the book succeeds in conveying a sense of mystery as to how we are able to function as modern homo sapiens while carrying around with us the results of milennia of evolution: the hope and the danger as it were. And yet, this is all achieved in a very light-hearted and entertaining manner.

A really great introduction to the workings of the brain. Truly memorable illustrations: so much better than those dry, factual diagrams you get in most textbooks. This book is an easy read, and keeps a lively pace. Its only drawback is that it is a little dated, but any book on a subject under such intensive research is likely to be a bit out of date by the time it reaches the lay-reader. Highly recommended though.

The authors both are long-time consultants for Visa and it is very apparent in this book. The discussion of MasterCard, Discover, and American Express is limited. The treatment of various legal actions (Nabanco, US DOJ, WalMart, duality) is one sided. There is minimal study of the economics of the business from vantage points (consumer, merchant, acquirer, Issuer, co-branding partner, etc.) other than the card association.

It's clear from some of the statistical material prsented that Visa particpated in the book.

Ever see JAG? It's about a real portrayl of the Navy & Marine Corp as this is of the card industry.

I picked up this book because I have always been interested in the history of money and the power of gold as currency. If you are fascinated by the concept of money and how it makes the world go round, Paying With Plastic will whet your appetite.

To many a layperson, paper money has intrinsic value ostensibly because it is backed by gold. That, is furthest from the centre of gravity. Since Bretton Woods, paper money has not been backed by gold and has absolutely no value. The "value" of paper money is perceived and has "value" only because governments say so and because we believe in it. In fact, paper money forms only a very small portion of the money that is in circulation. These days, money is in the form of digits, bits and bytes - expressed as numbers in some computer harddisk.

Paying With Plastic explores a new form of money and how credit cards are the latest form of money - evolving from metal coins, bills of exchange, and paper money. The book traces the early and painful development of what was initially a clumsy mode of payment to what is today one of the most effecient, organised and widespread form of payment.

Paying With Plastic is the leading book of its kind - thorough, yet readable. If you are interested in the concept of money and how the credit card system works, then this book is for you.

The authors bring disciplined methodology to the study of "industrial development," using credit cards as a case study. The book is useful not just for its anecdotal review of how credit cards got started & how they are used; and not just for the wealth of statistics it provides on how card & other payment usage has changed over the years; but most importantly, by putting some structure around all that material so that we can understand it coherently. So many books on banking & on industrial development (like things by guru Tom Peters) are just so many anecdotes strung together for 100s of pages, with no "system" for understanding what's being talked about. This book's strength is that it provides the reader with a way of interpreting not only what's in the book but with a way of understanding the incessant new developments in the industry that we read about in the trade press every day. I recommend this book highly to anyone in banking or interested in what's going on in the payments system.

Professor Evans was one of the expert witnesses in one of the most important trials in history--the libel case brought by David Irving against Penguin Books. Irving claimed that Penguin, by publishing a book critical of Irving's methods and motives in books about WWII and Nazi Germany, had damaged his reputation.

This book is a compelling account of Evans' role in showing that so-called "historian" David Irving had been manipulating, mischaracterizing, and misusing historical evidence for virtually his entire career of writing about the Second World War and Nazi Germany. And Evans is devasatingly convincing in showing just what really went on in the trial, as well as how widely the trial itself and Irving's work were misunderstood by even intelligent and sophisticated commentators in the world press (some of whom thought that Irving was being somehow prosecuted for his creativity or unpopular views).

Evans' book is eminently readable, well organized, and powerful without being polemical. At the very beginning, he warns the reader that the Irving case was about more than Irving's contention that he had been libeled by being labeled a "Holocaust denier" among other things by Penguin's author Deborah Lipstadt. That is really important and seems to be Evans' larger purpose: to show that there really are some historical "truths" and that the tendency in social sciences to dismiss objective truth and to excuse wild theories by citing the preconceptions or political beliefs of the historian in question is dangerous.

Among the book's strengths are the evident sincerity of the author and his ability to describe how Irving's deception worked and fooled so many people, from professionals to laymen.

Evans is excellent in portraying how historical research is done, what standards are expected of serious historians, and how Irving's work did not meet those standards. He is also convincing in demonstrating Irving's apparent racism and anti-semitism, and he is also subtle in explaining partly the motivations of "Holocaust deniers", though doing so fully would be outside the scope of this book.

I found few weaknesses, one being the inconsistency sometimes in explanations of detail. (For example, a brief explanation in Chapter 2 of what the Nazi party tribunals that reviewed events of November 1938, so-called "Kristallnacht", were doing would be more important than identifying the proper pronunciation of one proper name in a later chapter). Another weakness is the all-too-common failure to include illustrations. It is frustrating to read descriptions of documents, or in the case of Irving, physical appearance, and not be able to see a few photographs that are surely readily available from press accounts.

But those are minor complaints (and the book publishers are apparently cutting costs like everyone else). The most important theme of the book is how this case shows that there really are truths in historical analysis, and that historians should not shrink from taking on those who would question such truths as the overwhelming evidence of the mass and systematic destruction of Jews and other minorities in Nazi Germany. Historians themselves can be dangerous actors in human history if people like Evans and Penguin do not take courageous stands as they did here.

All in all, wonderfully concise and a great read.

Since David Irving's disastrous libel suit against Penguin books, some highly disingenuous commentary has been written by people who clearly neither attended the trial nor understood it (some, for example, apparently not realising that Irving was the plaintiff, not the defendant). Richard Evans, who was an expert witness for the defence, puts the record straight in an important work. Much of the book is devoted to a devastating assessment of Irving's work as a historian; he demonstrates (with, most damningly, a detailed account of Irving's fabrications concerning the bombing of Dresden) that dishonesty has been at the heart of Irving's work since the 1960s. This done, Evans is in a powerful position to substantiate his judgement: the Irving libel suit went to the heart of what history - a contingent process of testing hypotheses - actually means. Irving subordinated historical inquiry to his neo-Nazi sympathies, in an egregious violation of the scholarly ethic.

The only substantial criticism I have of this salutary and important book is where, in his final chapter, Evans in my view deviates from the discipline of history and ventures some rather more speculative and tentative political judgements. He draws a sharp contrast between Irving's Holocaust denial and the work of those writers who have recently criticised the 'Holocaust industry', who at least do not doubt the historicity of the Holocaust. I'm not so sure. Evans describes the work of Peter Novick and Norman Finkelstein as displaying "widely differing degrees of detail and accuracy", implying - quite rightly - that Novick's book has a claim to scholarship whereas Finkelstein's polemic does not. Yet Finkelstein (and even more so his associate Noam Chomsky) display very similar characteristics to David Irving: an agenda of extreme anti-Zionist agitation in preference to scholarship; an adherence to conspiracy theories about Jews; documented links with neo-Nazis (Chomsky, for example, described one Holocaust denier whom Evans refers to, Robert Faurisson, as "a sort of relatively apolitical liberal"); and a willingness to fabricate source material (see Arthur Schlesinger's destruction, in his collection The Cycles of American History, of Chomsky's fabrication of quotations by President Truman). The Irving phenomenon is an extreme one, but it has its counterparts elsewhere on the political spectrum.

This book is an outcome of the libel trial brought by David Irving against Penguin Books (in general) and Deborah Lipstadt (specifically). A historian and modern social commentator, Deborah Lipstadt had referred to Irving as a Holocaust denier (and a poor historian) three or four times in a nearly 600-page book. Irving took exception and sued her for libel. He waited to sue her in England where the burden of proof is on the defendant, not the Plaintiff. Evans was one of the many historians asked, by the defense, to prove that Lipstadt was not committing libel when she called Irving a Holocaust denier.

Evans has consequently built up a massive body of evidence to show that Irving continually, and with knowledge, suppressed historical facts and documents to support his position. Evans presents both the process of his investigation and the conclusions that he reached. Evans makes a formidable case. He points successfully to incident after incident where Irving knew that information was incorrect and still used it. Evans also points out that Irving's "mistakes" were all in one direction, not chaotic as one might expect from a researcher that didn't have enough time on his hands or was uncertain about his material.

Lying About Hitler clarifies a number of issues, the first being that Irving was not the defendant (I thought so when I first heard about the case). Irving was suing Lipstadt, not the other way around. It was Lipstadt's freedom of speech (and Penguin Books') that was under attack. If Irving had won, he and others like him would have been able to stop (or attempt to stop) anyone who called them liars or disagreed with their position.

Another issue Evans deals with is the "but history is so hard to interpret" argument. Evans points out, again and again, that this trial was not about the interpretation of historical facts but the misuse of historical documentation (either invented or avoided). Evans' chapter on Irving's research of the bombing of Dresden is fascinating in this regard.

This kind of book confirms the importance of historical research for its own sake. History is so easily (and so often) manipulated for political purposes (on both sides of the fence). It is so much more important to figure out what happened and why as objectively as possible than to "prove" political agendas.

Recommendation: Buy it in paperback or hardcover. If you don't have the cash, take it out of the library. It is definitely worth a read.