Julie Kavanagh's biography of Frederick Ashton has been splendidly reviewed below, but there are one or two things I should like to add.

This biography of Sir Frederick Ashton is a panorama of 20th century dance in Britain and, in some aspects, America also. It is, and will remain so for future generations, a marvellous "Who's Who" of the British ballet establishment.

I confess I started to skip the love letters to and from the boys. A little love letter goes a long [long] way. Was Ashton really so creatively tied to such people as Martyn Thomas? His choreographic talent was such that I am left wondering how very much greater Ashton's work might have been without the sturm and drang of those relationships. Was Ashton 'passionately lazy' or did he, I wonder, suffer from undiagnosed depression from most of his life because he could not be the great dancer he longed to be? His attempts to 'keep the slate clean' as far as having a good war record and not get caught out in his homosexuality at a time when it was illegal in the UK are commendable, but how stultifying for him artistically! He could never let go and have a really life-enhancing grand passion. I have the feeling that secretly Ashton longed to be a voluptuously beautiful courtesan with the world at his feet. He had his world at his feet most of the time, and his palace was the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden, so there were compensations of course. The whole hypocritcal business of the illegality of homosexuality in the UK affected not only Ashton but Noel Coward, Cecil Beaton, Terence Rattigan and above all, Benjamin Britten. How much greater might their artistic output have been otherwise?

It doesn't matter that many of Ashton's ballets have not stood the test of time. Some of them certainly have, Les Patineurs and Les Rendezvous are great works for, beside, and because of, their choreographic content, they are wonderful for improving and strenghtening any corps-de-ballet - and how many ballets of the 20th century can one say that of? Symphonic Variations and Scenes de Ballet are masterpieces of their genre. Daphnis & Chloe was a marvellous realisation of the score, as was La Valse. I use the past tense deliberately.

Julie Kavanagh has captured the essence of the life Ashton led, and brings him to life with more sympathy than perhaps he deserves. Objectively, then, one should seperate the man from his choreography, and it's up to each reader to do so. One aspect of his art that Ms Kavanagh has captured is the man's 'theatrical theatricality.' Ashton was theatrical in the best sense of the word. It pervades his ballets and certain effects, such as the billowing curtain in Marguerite & Armand stay in the mind's eye, [well, it has in mine anyway], long after the image of the choreography has faded. That a man of Ashton's years could produce A Month in the Country is a testament to his genius, his theatricality and his self-revitalising humanity. As Ms Bonifaccio points out below in her review, should one judge a ballet for it's revivability? No. Ballets are here and now. I am reminded by this by a friend of mine who knew Mme Karsavina in old age. He once said to her: "I'd love to see Le Pavillon d'Armide revived." Mme Karsavina laughed, and replied, "Believe me, you wouldn't."

Julie Kavanagh's book is here and now, but I do see great 'researcher trouble' ahead. Some of the prose is misleading because she assumes, rightly, that we KNOW what she is writing about. I can just see a post graduate student doing their thesis in say, Kansas in 2050, and writing about Dame Ninette de Valois longing to jitterbug with a handsome negro at the Caribbean Club. [Page 305]. This is because Barbara Ker-Seymer tells Billy Chappell that 'Madame was in charge... She longed to be whirled into a jutterbug.. but nobody asked her to dance. Maybe it was her WAAF's uniform that put them off.' 'Madame', 'she' and 'WAAF' all in one sentence are going to be read by the uninitiated as though Dame Ninette de Valois was present in uniform when she was, clearly, no-where near the place. [And how I do agree with Sir John Drummond that calling Dame Ninette de Valois 'Madam' was a fearful practise.] That irritating habit [bad theatricality this time] of referring to men as 'she' pervades this book. [Jocelyn Bowlan, a dancer in the English National Opera Movement Group in the 1980'S once complained to the ENO's Head of Dance, Nicky Bowie; "DO the boys have to always call each other SHE?" Ms Bowie replied: "Jocelyn, I joined London Festival Ballet when I was 18 years old and since then everyone's been SHE."] On page 435 'Debo' is mentioned. She is, of course, the Duchess of Devonshire, but you won't find this in the index. Little things, they may seem quibbles, like this are a minefield for future generations who will be hard put to understand where Ashton and The Royal Ballet establishment stood in relationship to the British upper classes. In fact, Ms Kavanagh captures the glorius postwar collision between the Brideshead generation and the Establishment. The whole situation, outlining Ashton's artistic predicament, is wonderfully and accurately summed up by Lincoln Kirsten to Cecil Beaton on page 438. This alone is worth the price of the book.

A wonderful wonderful book!!

The most amazing thing about Ms Kavanagh's book is that it NOT a hatchet job on what seems to be a rather unpleasant man. Underneath the many layers of Ashton's exhibitionism, egocentricity, tightfistedness and manipulative scheming Kavanagh reveals a rather sad, but talented, figure, whom one feels a certainy sympathy for.

Was Ashton a great choreographer? Probably he was. Future generations will be hard pushed to know though, as his ballets are massacred by the Royal Ballet in the UK. One should, I feel, never judge a ballet by it's revivability. Those of us present at the first night of "Enigma Variations" or "A Month in the Country" knew we were in the presence of greatness. In many ways Ashton was a choreographic Somerset Maugham, who managed to evoke a lost world in a few steps of a short ballet, very like Somerset Maugham's short stories. Who knows whether they will stand the test of time?

I can't help feeling that Ashton wasn't a very pleasant person, though not as unpleasant as the snarlingly awful Antony Tudor with his chips on his shoulders and his deep seated inverted snobbery. Ashton's sexual politics within the Royal Ballet would be considered highly politically incorrect, [while his treatment of some of the dancers would be considered sexual harassment and, if pursued through the courts would have won huge payouts], in this day and age. The whole set up sounds [and probably was] terribly incestuous. Ms Kavanagh quotes extensively from Ashton's love letters to and from young men, letters which, in most cases, are too foolish and should have been submitted to a strong editorial hand.

It's bizarre to read that Dame Ninette de Valois retired from the Royal Ballet in 1964 for she wielded enormous influence there even 30 years later. In fact there was no real reason for her to retire then at all, as her retirement caused a choreographic block in Ashton. Her shoddy politics in the affair do not show her in a good light at all. It's also bizarre to think that the cradle of British ballet as such was in the hands of these people, who were little more than dilettantes, and who lost in the early post-war period the two great influences on them; Constant Lambert and Sophie Fedorovitch. What was the alternative? Marie Rambert? I think not! Page 476, Ashton to Kavanagh: "There are things I have to say about Ninette....but I'm not going to tell you while she's alive." Did he ever say them? I bet he did!

I do have some small issues with Ms Kavanagh's approach. She talks about the men of the early post-war Royal Ballet as having good techniques. This is nonsense. Believe me, until the advent of Nureyev British male dancing was of a pretty poor standard as there were no outstanding male teachers at the Royal Ballet School in those days. For instance, there was no male variation for the Prince in Sleeping Beauty until just before the Royal Ballet's Russian tour in 1961 and no coda to the pas-de-deux until well into the late sixties. There were one of two plausible dance-actors, Alexander Grant being one of them, but he was miscast in any thing remotely classical, i.e. The Two Pigeons. Michael Somes [and what a fearful baddie he turned out to be, his behaviour bordering on psychotic!] simply could not dance by today's standards. He couldn't even walk properly onstage and was really just a 'porteur' for Margot Fonteyn. I never in my life saw David Blair [page 446] perform eight en dehor turns consecutively onstage, and I saw him often. Nureyev's arrival at the Royal Ballet did not really wipe out a whole generation of British male dancers [page 471n] because there weren't any who could be remotely compared to Nureyev. Certainly not the gormless looking Christopher Gable who, with Lynn Seymour, nightly mistook barnstorming for acting. Which reminds me: There is a myth that is gaining circulation [page 485] that Seymour and Gable were deposed from the first night of Romeo and Juliet. There would never have been any question of them doing the first night whilst Fonteyn and Nureyev were in the offing. When the press announcement of Romeo and Juliet was made [if memory serves] in late December 1964 it's opening two performances, February 9th and 11th 1965, had Fonteyn cast as Juliet with Nureyev as Romeo. Think about this: If Nureyev had been around in 1960, "La fille mal gardee" would have been for Fonteyn and Nureyev, not Nerina and Blair. Nadia Nerina, [page 472], should keep this in mind when criticising "Marguerite and Armand." If one Ashton ballets survives it will be "La fille mal gardee" and Nerina, for all her bitterness at not being Fonteyn's successor, will be remembered as the first Lise in Ashton's production. [Mercifully preserved in a complete black and white kinescope.]

Despite my quibbles Julie Kavanagh has produced a great book. I hope she's planning a companion piece, the life of Dame Ninette de Valois! That will be something to look forward to.

With so many self-help books on the market today, it's easy to forget that perhaps the greatest lessons come not from today's hottest new talkshow guest, but from those who have weathered history's darkest times. Frederick Talbott has captured the essence of one of history's greatest speakers simply by letting him speak for himself. Winston Churchill's words, spoken in the most trying of times, can give a person a great deal of courage and motivation to cope with today's daily battles.

Talbott gives a brief background with each quotation to put the words into context. And that is enough. The beauty and power of Churchill's words and character come through without any additional analysis or insight. And that is the beauty of this book.

A must for any Churchill fan or anyone whose daily battles sometimes seem too harsh to bear.

This is the best biography in print of the enigmatic king of Prussia, Frederick II (The Great), who transformed his nation from a second-rate military power into a formidable nation at the expense of the Hapsburg monarchy of Maria Theresa. Duffy, the world's foremost authority on the Seven Years' War, brings his years of research into full blossom in this study of Prussia's brilliant soldier-king. Using his knowledge of military science, Duffy shows how Frederick was consistantly able to score victories over his opponents through superiior drill and tactics even though constantly outnumbered strategically. Through his adroit maneuvers, Frederick was able to increase the size of his territory significantly, yet without bankrupting his country. Duffy also elaborates on Frederick's often tempestuous relationships with his generals as well as his attitudes toward the common soldier. Frederick's many contributions toward the art of war are also showcased. This book is highly recommended for those who want a greater understanding of the rise of Prussia as a nation. -James J. Mitchel

What strikes me most, what attracts me greatly in this book is that unlike Thomas Carlyle, the celebrated British historian in 19th-Century, who, with unbounded admiration, wrote the extensive and titanic biography about Frederick the Great, which is charged with a full accounts about this extraordinary and great historical personality and his time based on his unparalleled sweeping knowledge of history, the author G.P.Gooch concentrates his book much on revealing the inner world of the great King by providing comprehensive correspondence of this remarkable historical giant. Except for Carlyle, I do not see any other author who ever employs so many precious writings of Frederick the Great as G.P. Gooch. Under his pen, we see such a great King as an emotional and tender man, whose passion was so touching that I was always reduced to the captive of it when I was reading the book : Tears could hardly be checked but rolling down on my cheeks, as a philosopher whose thoughts were of profound and of universal magnificence, as a man of letters whose compositions shone beautiful elegance, effused strong and touching emotion, as a political stateman whose statements always emitted his intelligence and charming wits, his power and strengh, his assurance and confidence, vividly displaying on paper. Unlike most of biographies which express history according to chronology, this one singls out the first Silesian War as its beginning which immediately arrests readers. The author does not put much ink on the campaigns themselves, but paints how the war was an ordeal for both the King and his country by citing what the King passionately described in his correspondence with Voltaire, with his other close friends and with his beloved sister, which always showed his unconquerable will, his steel-iron stoicism, and his overwhelming determination, although sometimes mingled with thrilling lament about his misfortune. The author states Frederick the Great as an eminent diplomat by depicting how he wisely dealt with the heads of Austria, France and Russia by employing his exquiste diplomatic skills and wisdom. The author spent a length of space, running three chaptes, to unfold the amazing relationship between the King and the famous French poet Voltaire, their mutual love and respect, their harmony and conflicts. The author draws us a special attention to the unique passionate relationship between the King and his beloved sister,Wilhelmina, who was three years senior his age: Their mostly deep and moving affection which drew them close for decades and occaionally discord which shadowed them for short time. The author also records the respectable but a kind of cool relationship between the King and his yourger broher Henry who distinguished himself as a trascendent general and diplomat of his century. The author places a special chapter for the King's magnificent political works which have laid the foundation for the unification of Germany one hundred years later, and his important military writings which even today are still ranked as brilliant military classic works. Overall, this is one of the best biographies of Frederick the Great I have ever read, which has engraved such an impression and affection in me so deeply and magnificently that I could scarcely not to give rein to my stirred feeling when I read it, that I can not persuade myself not to rank myself to those who highly recommend this marvelous book which by its unique way portraits such a unsurpassed great historical giant.

This work is the study of a society as reflected in the life of Frederick the Great. The subject of interest is not so much the man per se but rather his interactions with the society he did so much to shape. Ritter's treatment allows the reader to learn about Frederick but not to know him as a man. In fact, the work serves largely to sublimate Frederick the man to the Prussian state. The reader sees Frederick as having succeeded not through divine placement but by luck, reason, and a commitment to the state above all personal and worldly considerations. But despite all Frederick's realism, as revealed by Ritter, he remains an enigma. Indeed, as Paret alludes to in his introduction, certain events of European history and aspects of Frederick's life are not explored in Ritter's European-oriented presentation. Certainly my own lack of understanding of the complicated alliance patterns of early modern Europe detract from my understanding of the book.

Frederick's reign seems to have marked a crucial turning point in history-- one toward the development of the modern European nation-state. Frederick utilized the French designs of emerging nationality to bring to life a state whose purpose was to further the good of all its inhabitants rather than to serve as an instrument of the prince's vainglory. From the mediaeval throes of dynamism was born the modern state. To a large degree, Frederick the Great was Prussia; he raised her to a level of power that would not long outlive him. This is what makes Ritter's biography history.

There was a certain ambivalence evidenced in Frederick's conception of warfare. He only pursued war to further the state, and he learned from war--especially his initial invasion of Silesia. Always, Prussia in the end seemed to prosper from her ruler's military actions. Central in Frederick's conception of the state was the need for a vigilant standing army. To oversee this grand army, Frederick developed a program for proto-modern statehood--in all aspects to be overseen by him personally. In his state, he sought to utilize the nobility in a paternalistic system. Patriotism was his goal; his military leaders were not to fight for him but for Prussia. Frederick was deeply involved in military strategy; as a soldier-king he demanded discipline and controlled aggression among his men. Significantly, over time he came to see the value of statecraft over military action; after his Silesian invasion, his wars seemed more defensive in nature; often no decisive victor emerged from battle. He came to realize that warfare was constrained by the state's national resources. As Ritter describes it, Frederician warfare was defined by maneuverability and limited aggression. It is the birth of patriotism in the form of Frederician absolutism that lies at the heart of Ritter's study. Compelled by the rise to power of Naziism, Ritter seeks to show how such German nationalism had originally been born.

THE NANTUCKET BOOK is one good read! There are well-researched chapters on the Island's history, and culture. Did you know that Nantucket has more toally preserved buildings in the National Register of Historic Places than Boston, Salem, or Plymouth? And that it was a refuge for escaping slaves and free blacks after slavery on the island was abolished in 1770? The book is also chucked full of lodging, eating, shopping, environmental, and recreational information. I used it to plan my summer vacation. But its a great read for armchair travelers too.

This is the best collection of shortstories related to flying in the market. It is a fantastic collection of stories from authors such as Frederick Forsyth, Len Deighton, Edgar Allen Poe, Capt. W. E. James, etc. You should definitely read this book

As the books run through, page by page, volume by volume, I am so taken by the author's thorough, rich and comprehenseive knowledge of the history of 18th-Century, militarily, politically, diplomatically and geographically. The author sets the whole stage of European history of that century in front of readers. The power and strength lie in this titanic biography, which turns out to consist of six volumes which totaling more than three thousand pages long, is not only on its sweeping and extensive knowledge of the history in detail, but also on the fact that the author possesses a vast, wide and precious first-hand materials of the King's age, which range from newpapers to memoirs, from documents to correspondences. This is really a comprehensive accounts about this great King in every field, in every turn of history : His stern, unhappy and strict self-trained youth which is astoundingly different from any princes in history, his tremendous merits in military which ranked him to the transcendent generals of the world, his remarkable achievements in domestic reform and reconstruction which hailed him as a great ruler in 18th- Century, his grand attainments in diplomacy which made him known as a prominent diplomat of his time, and his sensational accomplishment in literature which enlisted him as an extraordinarily intellectual prince and man of letters in his century. The author reveals many excellent personalities and qualities of Frederick the Great which will hardly not enormously increase your admiration for this great King: His generosity, his humanity, his unselfishness, his toleraion, his modest, his self-discipline, his standard of morality, his delicacy taste, his hard woking, his steel-iron nerve, his indefatigable will, his exceptional equanimity when facing danger, his talent, his prodigious memory, his arts of conversation, his unfailing enegy and strength, his charming wisdom, his extensive appetite for knowledge, and his impeccable private life. Unlike other authors who write history of their subjects, this author blends his own feeling into his writing with his whole sympathy tipping to his hero and unlimited admiration for the King. You can feel the author loves his hero too profoundly and too much not to defend the King, defend his reputation, defend his honor : He spoke for the King for his shortly running away from the battle field due to his generals constant begging for his leave when the battle was heavily clouded; He refuted the rumor that the King had homosexual liaison by giving the powerful evidence that the King was so noble and so proud of himself that he strongly loathed his body be exposed to any person, even when he was void of consciousness because of being wounded in the battle; and so on. The author also fills his book with many amazing and interesting anecdotes of the King[.] .... Overall, with my whole heart, I highly recommend this book which is really one of the best biographies about Frederick the Great, who is one of the greatest, the most extraordinary and influential histoical figures in the world, which is full of valuable and interesting historical sources.

A classic biography detailing the careers of three "old time" style goalies (Terry Sawchuk, Glenn Hall and Jacques Plante). Also features a selection of photos and illustrations. Book is long out of print and has become quite a sought after reference work by hockey memorabilia collector's.

A loving, meticulously researched, and critical biography of Frederick William "Peter" Twort by his son, Antony Twort. The elder Twort, working with George Ingram, was the first to publish (1912) a method for isolating and culturing the extremely fastidious Mycobacterium paratuberculosis, the bacterium that causes Johne's disease, or chronic dysentery of cattle. He was also the independent co-discoverer, along with Félix d'Hérelle, of bacteriophage (viruses that prey upon bacteria), and the first to publish a report (1915) on the subject. After these initial successes, which earned him a Fellowship in the Royal Society, he spent the rest of his increasingly unhappy professional life trying to find conditions under which viruses, which he thought to be a primitive life form, would grow independently of their host cells, and engaging in endless skirmishes with the bureaucracy that funded his research. He was forced into retirement after his laboratory was bombed during World War II. Supplemented with 25 pages of black-and-white photos, one drawing, a facsimile reproduction of the 1915 paper "An Investigation on the Nature of Ultra-Microscopic Viruses," and an excellent index. For a biography of Félix d'Hérelle see Félix d'Hérelle and the Origins of Molecular Biology by William C. Summers (Yale University Press, 1999).