If you've read one John O'Hara short story, you've read them all. All characters are obsessed with their status in life, and if a man and a woman are alone together, you just have to wait until one will try to get the other in the sack. If you had a 95 year old grandmother in a scene with an 18 year old male high school student, you could almost expect that one would make a pass at the other. THE DOCTOR'S SON is the best O'Hara short story I've read. It is excellent. Read that one, enjoy it. But you need read no more, since everything in that story is in every other O'Hara story.

If John O'Hara isn't one of our greatest American writers, who is? O'Hara, along with writers like John Cheever and Irwin Shaw, chronicle the American suburban experience during the middle part of the twentieth century and we should not miss out on their observations. But what do you see when you go to Barnes & Noble or Borders? Racks and racks of ridiculous drivel hoisted on us by greedy publishers and other fast-buck artists. Mindless entertainment rules while O'Hara, Cheever, Shaw and their like are pushed off the book shelves and out of circulation. The tone and empathy of these Masters will forever provide an insight into our American experience that you won't get from the trash that we now seem to be preoccupied with. OK, OK, OK. I read some of this current trash, too, but I haven't forgotten the great American Triumvirate.... O'Hara, Cheever and Shaw!

George Knight relates a story in the prologue: There was an old British radio show that frequently had guests of all kinds. At one point they had a theologan on. The host asked him what 12 books of the Bible he would bring if he were stranded on a desert island. "Well, I certainly wouldn't bring Leviticus," was the theologan's reply. That is the case with many Christians. To them, many of the Old Testament books "just aren't important," but they ALL are still the word of God.

George Knight gives us a very readable and practical commentary on the book of Leviticus (a manuel for Israel's priests and a "Holiness Code"--moral commands--for the people). The book consists of a half-chapter (give or take) of Scripture followed by Knight's commentary. Knight often gives some very insightful commentary showing what this type of animal sacrifice shows about God's personality or explaining why the people could only have one type of crop in a given field.

Although Knight succeeds in making a normally dull book (especialy when compared with Genesis, Joshua, 2 Samuel, the Gospels, etc) seem exciting, there do exist some faults with the book. One chapter in Leviticus deals with rules agains homosexuality. Instead of coming right out and saying what he believes Leviticus says about the subject, Knight tip-toes and tap-dances so much, I'm still not really quite sure WHAT he believes about it. I'm not sure if he's delicately trying to say that God is wrong about gay folk or if he's just a little afraid to actually condemn homosexual practices.

There are other places in the commentary where Knight does a similar tap-dance routine, but overall, this is an extremely good commentary that really aided in my understanding of Leviticus.

This book provides an in-depth analysis of Leviticus with reflections on our times and our issues.

In many cases we read Genesis and Exodus then run right to the New Testament failing to understand Leviticus and are uncomfortable defending the Word of God as expressed in the images of a B.C. nomadic people; their rituals; and their sacrifices.

As you read each of these pages the images become clearer to us as the same images are seen in our world today and God's Word and its meaning becomes clearer.

Read this book and then move on through the Word of God without lingering doubts and know His Word truly holds the answers to our life.

Thank you George Knight for such an illuminating book.

This book has marvelous images of just some of the fine works that George Ohr created. The summaries of his life are correct to some extent but it failed to provide any deatails of his offspring or how they may have carried on the innate artist abilities, this is why I only give it four stars.

this man was a a head of his time. i have never seen anythig that has come out of the 1800's that looked any thing like this.The photography is great and the biography is good , but the pottery is the best i have ever seen he had great form and great glaze you could not ask any more from a potter

This is a remarkable look at the untamed American West of 1834-1837 through the eyes of a young naturalist. Despite its age, this account is quite readable. The smaller segments describing Townsend's visits to Hawaii, Tahiti and Chile are also enjoyable.

Since this is a diary, it does have some flat spots (not every day can be an adventure), but mostly Townsend fills his descriptions with details and color that bring his encounters alive. You can sense Townsend maturing as the journey goes on. One suggestion to the editors: If a new edition is produced, it would be nice to include a map of Townsend's travels, because in some places it's hard to tell where he is.

A tip to the reader: Skip the introduction, since it's mostly just a summary of what you'll be reading. It does, however, contain a description of what happened to Townsend after the book, so go back and read that once you finish.

hi everyone, please buy, read and cherish this book! you would not believe how much work went into this - I know because I'm the author's daughter. BUY BUY BUY! :) thanks

This book is excellent for teachers of theatre, or really for anyone who is interested in the inner workings of a playwright. Its only down-fall is that the playwrights themselves were sometimes less than forth-coming with answers we all want to know: HOW DOES THE PLAY GET ON THE PAGE??? However, it is very interesting in that we get into the heads of some very famous playwrights and shows us a personal side. I could barely put it down because I've read and taught these playwrights for years, but now have personal insight into their work and lives.

I bought this series of interviews in hopes of discovering more about these playwrights' points of view on writing. I was pleasantly startled to find that their stories were inspiring, as well. As a young playwright, I find the business of theatre rather disheartening. Egos are batted around much like cricket birdies, while fad and fashion dictate what is theatrically acceptable. These playwrights coped with the same obstacles, with great success. I found it interesting that each playwright had his/her own particular challenges to confront, and that one theme, throughout all the interviews, was constant: writing a play is akin to facing one's own soul, and a playwright has to confront the mirror dead-on and keep going.

A wonderful read.

Having read H.G. Wells' classics WAR OF THE WORLDS, THE INVISIBLE MAN, THE FIRST MEN IN THE MOON, THE TIME MACHINE, and THE ISLAND OF DR. MOREAU, I looked forward to reading what is often claimed to be his "best" work. TONO-BUNGAY is completely different than any of his Sci-Fi classics. TONO-BUNGAY is more of a study of class structure and class struggle in England during the late 1800s and early 1900s. The story follows the life of a young man, George, and his Uncle Edward. Edward invents an elixir called TONO-BUNGAY and hires his nephew George to help build the company. As the book goes George and Edward become quite wealthy. Throughout the book George makes numerous comments on his varying places on the social ladder. It seems that no matter how wealthy George becomes, he will never be accepted in certain circles because he is newly rich and not "old money." The story is well written and is generally easy to follow. I would, however, recomm! end the World's Classics edition of this book (published by Oxford U. Press and available from Amazon.Com) because there are some instances in which Wells makes comments about European literature, art, languages, colleges and phrases that may be of little meaning to the average reader, but for the six pages of end notes provided in the World's Classics edition. The World's Classics edition also claims to be the most accurate edition of the story, taking into account all of Wells' revisions of the story, many of which were made after the book was initially published in 1909 (TONO-BUNGAY was revised by Wells and re-released in 1925).

"Tono-Bungay" is an alleged tonic with dubious medical benefits; and the story is one of the brief fortunes of someone who manages to turn the worthless substance into a formidable fortune - for a while. By the time Wells wrote this novel he had already written books which might or might not be science fiction (witness "The War in the Air") and, all in all, "Ton-Bungay" probably isn't science fiction. But I should mention a substance called "quup" which is introduced towards the end of the book. (I'm not giving anything important away.) "Quup" is the first mention I know of of what we would now call radioactive waste, except that it's naturally occurring, and ... well, perhaps I should be discrete, but I can say that the scenes involving quup have a peculiar flavour which writers would find impossible to capture nowadays.

So you get an excellent double deal with this book: the best of Wells's social fiction of the 1910s, plus a dollop the fresh science fiction he wrote the previous century.

This book (and its second volume: Military Operations since 1871) are both required texts for my Military History class. Most students claim to only rapidly skim required reading for classes, but I've managed to read everything so far (if that tells you anything). As far as material is concerned, this text is both wide-ranging and thourough, describing the invention and development of military techniques as well as discussing the society and government of the time, and how all these factors influence eachother. Highlighted areas include the Thirty Years War and the development of limited war, and the progression though the Napoleonic Wars to almost complete total war during the War Between the States. This book does an excellent job in tying all these early battles together and showing the overall development of warfare. However, if you are interested in nitty-gritty facts on Waterloo or Gettysburg, find a book specific to that battle instead of the sweeping panoramic view this book provides.

This book is the result of the collaboration of a number of the best military historians in the US today, including Mark Grimsley, George Herring, John Lynn, and many others, skilfully tied together by the editors (who are also major contributors), Professor Ira Gruber of Rice University and Colonel Robert A. Doughty of West Point. The result is an outstanding survey of modern Western military history designed for undergraduate history courses, but easily accessible to the general reader as well. The prose is exceptionally clear and the ideas lucidly presented. These two volumes are definitely focussed on the operational level of the "military art" (i.e. on the planning and conduct of campaigns), with some treatment also of strategy, tactics, and technology, but very litte material on "war and society" subjects (i.e. how wars and military developments have affected society and vice-versa). This makes it especially useful for ROTC military history classes, but it is also a very good introduction to the "sharp end" of military history for scholars or students whose main interests lie in the effects of war, rather than its conduct.

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.

If you could read only one thing in your lifetime Hamlet should be that one thing. It is Shakespeare's best work by far, and within its pages is more meaning than you could find within the pages of an entire library full of books, or plays as the case may be. A mere review, a couple words, cannot do Hamlet justice. At times I realize that the language of Shakespeare can be difficult that is why I recommend the Folger version because it helps to make the images expressed by Shakespeare's characters clear to the reader, and allows them to get their own deep personal meaning from Hamlet, Shakespeare's greatest work, with out being bogged down in trying to decipher and interpret his antiquarian English. Don't just listen to what I say, or read what I write, read the play on your own outside the cumbersome restraints of a classroom and see for yourself what I mean.

If you're not familiar with Hamlet, a pox on you! Hamlet is the most famous failed law student in Western culture. Go see a live production. Read the play. Or get a video, or listen to an audio version. Do all four. Versions of Hamlet have been done by Laurence Olivier, Nicol Williamson, Mel Gibson, Kenneth Branagh, Derek Jacobi, or the unattainable version done by Baylor University Theater in the 1950s - the film version won a world film festival in Brussels in 1957. (Yes, I know Jacobi plays the King in Branagh's version, but Jacobi himself played Hamlet - - about the time when Branagh was 15 years old. It's better than his I, Claudius.)

Hamlet, like Shakespeare's other plays, has created a huge cottage industry of scholars, actors, theaters and books. The force of Hamlet's personality dwarfs all others, however. To see a man driven mad, and while mad, feign madness, is one of the most clever story twists of world literature. The mind and heart of Hamlet has been thrown into great, tortured pain by several levers -- the death of his father, the overhasty marriage of his mother to his uncle, the usurpation of his throne by his uncle, the threat to the entire kingdom from Fortinbras, the horrifying appearance of the ghost of his father in purgatory torments, the news of the murder of his father from a supernatural phenomenon. The rejection by his lover, Orphelia, and his ensuing mistrust of her, adds nuclear fission to the fire.

You must experience Hamlet. Oh, for a true friend like Horatio!

I like Julie of the Wolves, because it is exciting. It is realistic fiction. Julie, the main character, has to go to school one day. Her father has to go to war. When she was thirteen, she married Daniel.
Daniel goes crazy, so Julie runs away in the Alaskan Tundra, the setting. She finds some wolves, and she watches them for a few weeks. Then she becomes a member of the pack. One day she knows she has to leave.
One day Julie leaves, but the pack follows her. She likes their company. Julie remembers about the letter from Amy her pen pal. She decieds to go live with Amy.
Amy lives in San Francisco. She was close to the ship that was going to bring her to San Francisco, when she said to her self that I have a choice to live like an Eskimo or like a plain girl.
I recommend this book to all readers!

Julie, an Inuit Eskimo from Alaska, is born with the name Miyax. Because her mother dies when Miyax is barely four years old, Miyax's father, Kapugen, brings her up in the traditional Eskimo ways and teaches her a life of co-existence with the natural world. When Miyax is nine years old, her Aunt takes her away from her father because Julie is suppose to go to school. There she is around Americanized Eskimos, who call her Julie, and she starts to believe that she has lived a strange life with her father in the Alaskan wilderness. At thirteen, Julie finds herself in a bad situation and attempts to run away to San Francisco where her pen pal lives. Even though Julie is running away from her Eskimo upbringing, she winds up depending on the ways of her people. Out in the wilderness, she learns a lot about who she is. This book is about discovery and acceptance as Julie defines herself through her own culture and becomes Miyax again. Jean Craighead George interprets a particular culture, Inuit Eskimo, and defines it throughout the story. Julie, as a young girl, learns the importance of her culture and the process of identifying herself within it. However, Julie, as an adolescent, rebels against her culture because it has become out-of-date and is considered old fashion to live as the traditional Eskimo's once did. Julie learns from the American Eskimo kids about the modern world and about a life that is much different than what she is used to. Julie also has a pen pal who lives in San Francisco who has been sending Julie pictures of her home and telling her about strange and beautiful things that Julie wants to see. She begins to believe that the way she was brought up was, indeed, very strange and therefore not the way that she wants to live anymore. However, on her quest to live in San Francisco, Julie finds herself lost and she has nothing but herself and the wilderness to keep her alive. Drawing on her Inupiat Eskimo upbringing and believing in the Eskimo ways of intelligence, fearlessness, and love, Julie learns to see her people's ways as the way she wants to live. Julie becomes Miyax again, and talks to the wolves, as her father taught her, and gains their trust so that they help her to survive. Julie realizes that she doesn't want to live in San Francisco with all their modern ways and searches to find a traditional Eskimo settlement. Miyax discovers that her father is alive and that he was the man in the helicopter who killed Amaroq, the dominant wolf, for sport. At first when Miyax came across the Eskimo settlement, that her father is living at, she is excited to go back to her heritage. However, she discovers that he is living with a Gussak, an American Eskimo, and that he is no longer living the life of a traditional Eskimo but has become Americanized, and she learns the truth about the man who killed Amaroq. Miyax feels betrayed and leaves her father's home, only to realize that she has no other choice but to live as the people of the Eskimo Settlement do. I believe that Jean Craighead George does a fantastic job of portraying a young girl who is trying to find herself and in doing so, Julie explores her culture and is able to define herself within it. Julie figures out what she really wants and why because of this. In the beginning of the book, Julie is running away from her upbringing and running toward a modern new world. Julie chooses, in the end, to embrace her traditional upbringing and finds peace within herself and an acceptance of herself that she so needs. An acceptance that is so strong that even the thought of living in a village that desecrates many of the thinks Inuit Eskimos believe in, she is still strong enough to know who she is inside and decides to live with her father. Living as an Americanized Eskimo cannot brake down her beliefs or take away her true heritage, which she has gained strength from and a sense of herself.

This book Julie of the Wolves is an exciting adventure story of a 13 year-old Eskimo girl named Miyax, also known by the English name Julie. She is running away from an unhappy arranged marriage. She decides to go to San Franscisco to live with her pen pal Amy. She sets out across the tundra and finds a deep connection with nature. She loses her way and has a thrilling struggle for survival. She finds a pack of wolves and tries to learn their language in hopes that they will accept her into their pack and give her food. When she tries to communicate with the leader of the wolves Amaroq, he ignores her. While trying to get Amaroq's attention, she struggles with an inner conflict between her old Eskimo traditions and the new ways of modern living. "She says that she is an Eskimo, an as an Eskimo she must live. She would live with the rhythm of the beasts and the land." The only problem is that "the seals are scarce and the whales are almost gone." As she tries to resolve this conflict, she faces many challenges. Does Miyax starve to death on the tundra? Does she make it to San Franscisco to live with her pen pal Amy or does she return to her husband Daniel? Will she have to choose between the old ways and the new? Read Julie of the Wolves to find the answers. You will be glad that you did!

This is the central question explored by Conrad in Lord Jim. Jim is ultimately a character who inspires our sympathy due to his inability to find reconcilliation for his one tragic moment of weakness. In him we find a person of tremendous potential that remains unrealized as the tragic circumstances of his abandoning his post aboard the Patna continually haunt him and the associated guilt drives him to isolation.
Conrad successfully explores the concepts of bravery, cowardice,guilt and the alternative destinies that an individual may be driven to by these qualities.
The narrative can be a bit confusing at times as Marlowe relates the tale by recalling his encounters with Jim. The book reminded very much of Somerset Maugham's THE RAZOR"S EDGE" in style. However I believe that Maugham did a much better job of incorporating the narrator into the flow of the story. Overall LORD JIM is a wonderful classic novel that I highly recommend.

This is the fifth book I have read by Conrad, and through these readings I have come to deeply appreciate his literary power and the perfection of his stories. Conrad has the skill to border about several similar subjects, without repeating himself. "Lord Jim" is truly a Shakespearean tragedy, mainly because of the Shakespearean nature of the main character. Jim is a young naval officer with high hopes of heroism and moral superiority, but when he faces his first test of courage, he miserably fails. While 800 Muslim pilgrims are asleep aboard the ship "Patna", Jim discovers that the boat is about to sink. There are not sufficient lifeboats for everybody. Should he wake them up or not? He gets paralyzed with fear and then sudenly jumps into a boat being set up by the rest of the officers. He is taken to trial and disposessed of his working licence.

Ashamed and humiliated, Jim dedicates the rest of his life to two things: escape the memory of that fateful night, and redeem himself. This agonizing quest to recover his dignity in front of his own eyes leads him to hide in a very remote point in the Malayan peninsula, where he will become the hero, the strong man, the wise protector of underdeveloped, humble and ignorant people. Jim finds not only the love of his people, but also the love of a woman who admires him and fears the day when he might leave for good. The narrator, Captain Marlow (the same of "Heart of Darkness") talks to Jim for the last time in his remote refuge, and then Jim tells him that he has redeemed himself by becoming the people's protector. Oh, but these things are never easy and Jim will face again the specter of failure.

Conrad has achieved a great thing by transforming the "novel of adventures" into the setting for profound and interesting reflections on the moral stature of Man, on courage, guilt, responsibility, and redemption.

Just as in "Heart of Darkness" the question is what kinds of beings we are stripped of cultural, moral and religious conventions; just as in "Nostromo" the trustworthiness of a supposedly honest man is tested by temptation, in "Lord Jim" the central subject is dignity and redemption after failure.

A great book by one of the best writers.

After reading this book (along with several other of Conrad's books) I am under the impression that Joseph Conrad may very well be my favorite author. Here is another masterpiece, a deeply incisive study of character of the motivation and the ultimate failure of all high-minded ideals. Granted my own personal world view falls directly in line with this realization and therefore prejudices me towards anything the man might write, but, when considering such a lofty title as 'favorite author' one must regard other aspects of the novelist's creation. As with the others, Conrad wins by the power of his stories.

Lord Jim is my least favorite of the the four books I have read by Conrad. The story is rather scattered: a righteous young man does something wrong that he holds himself far too accountable for and the public shame the action brought him exaggerates the reality of his failure and makes him believe the rumors swirling around about his so-called cowardice. He spends the remainder of his life trying to reclaim his self-regard, mostly exaggerating his own importance in matters he hardly understands. His goal is to liberate the primitive people of the jungle paradise he inadvertantly finds himself in (due to an effort to escape every particle of the world he once inhabited) and his once high-minded ideals and regard for himself lead him to allow those people to consider him almost a God.

Jim likes being a God and considers himself a just and fair one. He treats everyone equally and gives to his people the knowledge of modern science and medicine as well as the everyday archetecture and understanding of trade that those primitive folks would otherwise be years from comprehending.

Of course everything ends in failure and misery and of course Jim's restored name will be returned to its demonic status, but the whole point of the novel seems to me that one can not escape their past. Jim, for all his courage in the line of fire has tried to avoid all memory of the once shameful act of his former life and by doing so becomes destined to repeat his mistakes.

Lord Jim is far more expansive than the story it sets out to tell, ultimately giving a warning on the nature of history and general humanity that only a writer of Conrad's statue could hope to help us understand.

If there is a flaw it is not one to be taken literally. Conrad was a master of structural experimentation and with Lord Jim he starts with a standard third person narrative to relate the background and personalities of his characters and then somehow merges this into a second person narrative of a man, years from the events he is relating, telling of the legend of Jim. It is a brilliant innovation that starts off a little awkward and might lead to confusion in spots as the story verges into its most important parts under the uncertain guidence of a narrator who, for all his insight into others, seems unwilling to relate his personal relevence to the story he is relating.

Nevertheless (with a heartfelt refrain), one of the best books I have ever read.