An intesting book about the story of the narrow minded puritans fighting back against the british army ,once a great powerful one. A great book espescilly when the army are made out to be fools. A well written book of life in 1777.

THE DOCTOR'S DILEMMA is one of Shaw's most biting critical commentaries...this time on doctors. Shaw hated doctors, as a result of a botched operation on his foot, so here he portrays them as a group of ignorant, bull-headed windbags. All, that is, except for one doctor, who has actually found a cure for tuberculosis. The "dilemma" in the title is whether to use the cure on a talented young painter who is a moral and ethical sleazebag, or on an upstanding middle-aged physician who is a good soul, albeit a boring and relatively mundane one. All this is complicated by the fact that the doctor is in love with the painter's wife! The biggest problem with the play is that it has lost some of its impetus in the last century. Antibiotics can now cure tuberculosis, and the medical profession is far more restricted in its use of "experimental" treatments than it was then. However, Shaw's wit and invective is still poignant even at the end of the twentieth century. A must-read for Bernard Shaw enthusiasts....

Community Playhouse in Long Beach did the show this August. As it played, the plot didn't come through, but the wit of Shaw did. The playhouse didn't have the costumes of the military men, nor the actors to carry-off the pomp and bravado of these would-be heroes. In a time when G.W. Bush is fighting his own phantasmic enemies this play should have lapooned the whole spectre of military madness. George Bernard Shaw gave us the theme it will take some imagination and talent to make it contemporary and equal to the madness of our times. Anon

George Bernard Shaw takes the title for this play from the opening life of Virgil's epic poem the "Aeneid," which begins "Of arms and the man I sing." Virgil glorified war and the heroic feats of Aeneas on the battlefield. However, Shaw's purpose in this play is to attack the romantic notion of war by presenting a more realistic depiction of war, devoid of the idea that such death and destruction speaks to nobility. Still, "Arms and the Man" is not an anti-war drama, but rather a satirical assault on those who would glorify the horrors or war.

Shaw develops an ironic contrast between two central characters. The play begins with accounts of the glorious exploits of Major Sergius Saranoff, a handsome young Bulgarian officer, in a daring cavalry raid, which turned the war in favor of the Bulgarians over the Serbs. In contrast, Captain Bluntschil, a professional soldier from Switzerland, acts like a coward. He climbs up to a balcony to escape capture, he threatens a woman with a gun, and he carries chocolates rather than cartridges because he claims the sweets are more useful on the battlefield.

In the eyes of Raina Petkoff, the young romantic idealist who has bought into the stories of battlefield heroism, Saranoff is her ideal hero. However, as the play proceeds, we learn more about this raid and that despite its success, it was a suicidal gesture that should have failed. Eventually Saranoff is going to end up dead if he continues to engage in such ridiculous heroics. Meanwhile, we realize that Bluntshcil has no misconceptions about the stupidity of war and that his actions have kept him alive.

"Arms and the Man" is an early play by Shaw, first performed in 1894, the same year he wrote "Mrs. Warren's Profession." The ending is rather tradition for comedies of the time, with all the confusion between the lovers finally getting cleared up and everybody paired up to live happily ever after. The choice of a young woman as the main character, who ultimately rejects her romantic ideals to live in the real world, is perhaps significant because serving in the army and going to war is not going to happen. Consequently, her views are not going to be colored by questions of courage in terms of going to war herself. I also find it interesting that this play understands the horrors of war given that it was the horrors of World War I that generally killed the romantic notion of war in Britain.

A starving, exhausted soldier running for his life bursts into a young woman's room, finds outrage, criticism, solace, chocolate creams, and unexpected love -and that's just the opening scene. This clever, witty, subtle, and surprising treat from the author of Pygmalion still holds up well more than 100 years after its writing. Shaw fashions the subjects of false ideals, heroism, romanticism, and the fake glories of war into a well-constructed farce which sustains through the very last line. Can't wait to see a new production of the play, and a great read meanwhile....

The author leads his reader slowly and methodically through the twists and turns of Roman, French and English history, dealing with conflicting and biased sources in a balanced manner. His descriptions of the decisive battles against Attila the Hun in France ( or Gaul ) in 451AD and against King Harold of England at Hastings in 1066AD are particularly well done. The stage is carefully set, and the action explained in dramatic detail. In contrast, some of his meticulosly documented tracing of Alan place names and family names throughout Western Europe would put an insomniac to sleep. No one would confuse this with a novel, but it gets a difficult job done in a scholarly way. This book will serve as an excellent referrence for the serious student of Ancient European history and culture, and for writers of Adventure/Fiction looking for authentic Action Super-Heros. Roland ( who served Charlemagne ) and Alan Fergant ( who fought against and then with William the Conqueror )! are two of my favorites.