Aztecs Under Spanish Rule is an in-depth study of the evolution of the historical relationship between the Native Mexicans and the Spaniards in Colonial Latin America. The story begins with the cultural differences between the two groups after the Spaniard's conquering effort over the Aztecs, 1519-1521. The social-cultural alterations and reorganizations that took place during the process of their co-existence within the Mexican mesa central from that point until Mexico's bid for independence, in 1821, are the general themes within the topics of each chapter. Gibson begins with a brief historical sketch of the landscape and human occupation of the Valley of Mexico, and each following chapter covering such historical topics as settlement patterns, land use, politics, religion and social structures literally has the potential of being its own disquisition. The author unleashes a flood of data, references and Indian names that cascade over the pages; unless the reader is in firm command of the Mexican Indian terminology, the glossary will become a welcomed reference bookmark. The overall effect of subjugation by the Imperial Spanish over the once Imperial Aztecs is visible in nearly all facets of life. This transformed society becomes the foundation for modern-day Mexico City and the greater Mexican society. The typical form of the chapters is a chronologically based essay. Beginning at or close to the point conquest, and traversing through the next three centuries, stopping at important junctions, at which point Gibson provides connecting vignettes that illuminate this region and inhabitant's path of history. Thus the scholarly Aztecs Under Spanish Rule is not overwhelming and is a quite digestible text that lay persons with interest in Mexican or Latin American history will find most agreeable. Even though the structuring of the chapters and their content is consistent and readable, Gibson's work is essentially a historical text that suffers from a lack of narration. The people and their situations do not come alive; they are presented in a flat, matter of fact manner, negating Aztecs Under Spanish Rule's potential as a page-turner. The most commendable list of primary sources permits the author to introduce an enviable texture, however, the fine combing does not occur, which would have produced a more human connected story. It is hard to imagine that the plethora of letters in the bibliography did not allow for the inclusion of longer, more personable and illuminating quotes. The very strength of each chapter as its own tractate, in this reviewer's opinion, becomes the book's undoing. At the conclusion of each topical chapter, we are back in the starting gate once again. That is not to say that Gibson's work is anything less than exemplary, rather simply that its topical structure somewhat takes away from author's ability to maintain the reader's imagination and focus as the story begins, unfolds, begins then unfolds, and begins and unfolds yet again and again. Once transported back in time, a connection is made, and an anticipation of the unfolding of the story builds. Severing this association repeatedly disconnects the reader from the flow of history. This could however be a matter of personal taste. Gibson states in his preface that he spent nearly twelve and one-half years researching and assembling this extraordinary piece of historical scholarship. His extensive appendixes, notes and bibliography speak well of his not brief dedication in compiling this work. For those aroused by the subject and feel the need to go deeper, this is a great starting point. The selection of maps and plates further illuminate this recommended history of Mexico. Try to remeber as well, that this work really stirred the waters when it came out, portraying the Spanish Conquest as, well, what a conquest is really all about.

Aztecs Under Spanish Rule is an in-depth study of the evolution of the historical relationship between the Native Mexicans and the Spaniards in Colonial Latin America. The story begins with the cultural differences between the two groups after the Spaniard's conquering effort over the Aztecs, 1519-1521. The social-cultural alterations and reorganizations that took place during the process of their co-existence within the Mexican mesa central from that point until Mexico's bid for independence, in 1821, are the general themes within the topics of each chapter. Gibson begins with a brief historical sketch of the landscape and human occupation of the Valley of Mexico, and each following chapter covering such historical topics as settlement patterns, land use, politics, religion and social structures literally has the potential of being its own disquisition. The author unleashes a flood of data, references and Indian names that cascade over the pages; unless the reader is in firm command of the Mexican Indian terminology, the glossary will become a welcomed reference bookmark. The overall effect of subjugation by the Imperial Spanish over the once Imperial Aztecs is visible in nearly all facets of life. This transformed society becomes the foundation for modern-day Mexico City and the greater Mexican society. The typical form of the chapters is a chronologically based essay. Beginning at or close to the point conquest, and traversing through the next three centuries, stopping at important junctions, at which point Gibson provides connecting vignettes that illuminate this region and inhabitant's path of history. Thus the scholarly Aztecs Under Spanish Rule is not overwhelming and is a quite digestible text that lay persons with interest in Mexican or Latin American history will find most agreeable. Even though the structuring of the chapters and their content is consistent and readable, Gibson's work is essentially a historical text that suffers from a lack of narration. The people and their situations do not come alive; they are presented in a flat, matter of fact manner, negating Aztecs Under Spanish Rule's potential as a page-turner. The most commendable list of primary sources permits the author to introduce an enviable texture, however, the fine combing does not occur, which would have produced a more human connected story. It is hard to imagine that the plethora of letters in the bibliography did not allow for the inclusion of longer, more personable and illuminating quotes. The very strength of each chapter as its own tractate, in this reviewer's opinion, becomes the book's undoing. At the conclusion of each topical chapter, we are back in the starting gate once again. That is not to say that Gibson's work is anything less than exemplary, rather simply that its topical structure somewhat takes away from author's ability to maintain the reader's imagination and focus as the story begins, unfolds, begins then unfolds, and begins and unfolds yet again and again. Once transported back in time, a connection is made, and an anticipation of the unfolding of the story builds. Severing this association repeatedly disconnects the reader from the flow of history. This could however be a matter of personal taste. Gibson states in his preface that he spent nearly twelve and one-half years researching and assembling this extraordinary piece of historical scholarship. His extensive appendixes, notes and bibliography speak well of his not brief dedication in compiling this work. For those aroused by the subject and feel the need to go deeper, this is a great starting point. The selection of maps and plates further illuminate this recommended history of Mexico. Try to remember that this work was groundbreaking in its time.

This is a great book for anyone who likes the fashons of the late 1800's, Gibson girl, or just well drawn pictures! Gibson was a great artist, and you can tell from his captions he had a sense of humor. Every page in the book is filled with beautiful, clear, large sized drawings of Gibson Girl and her friends. I was delighted with my copy!! It even includes Gibson's "comic" book, "The Education of Mr. Pipp", and a brief but interesting biography of Mr. Gibson.

This book is really good. Some of the words are a little hard for young kids, but if your parents can help you it's enjoyable. Kingsley's style and allegorical references make this a delight to the senses, not only as a story, but as an example of a writer who truly enjoys his craft.

This book was a wonderful novel to read. It showed how little kids were treated durning this time period. Once the faries found Tom his life changed forever. The author explained how he started out as little boy and saying bad words to how he changed and in to a understanding boy. The book is a wonderful read because it shows what happens to others who don't know what it's like. Not all of this is true because it is a fairy tale. The author's one quote that stayed with me the most is "You're not supposed to belive all of this because it's a fairy tale even if you do believe. This is a powerful story and should be read to little children. It will show them that being bad is not the way to go. If kids learn tpo be nice when they are young then it can stop hatred and people being mean in future years.

The Water Babies is an excellent example of British Literature that should be promoted just as much as the works of Lewis Caroll or Dickens. Charles Kingsley's work was banned for quite a while. There is no question that this cleverly written fairy tale has a lot of hidden information to explore. Makes one wonder if one can still be an Anglican minister and promote evolution? Perhaps, one can. Mr. Kingsley has other wonderful works to explore and in addition, there is his niece, Mary Kingsley who wrote on Africa.

"You will be haunted by Three Spirits." So forewarns Jacob Marley's ghost to Mr. Ebenezer Scrooge, a miser of stingy, unfavorable traits. And so begins the enduring Christmas classic distinguished by almost everyone. Come along on an erratic journey with the Ghosts of Christmas Past, Present, and Future, all of whom attempt to point Scrooge onto a virtuous path. Meet the most notable characters ever introduced in literature: Bob Cratchit, angelic Tiny Tim, and good-natured Fred. With vivid descriptions of Victorian England and enlightening dialogue, 'A Christmas Carol' will enrapture both the young and old throughout the year with a vital lesson on hope and benevolence for humanity. This, I find, is treasured most of all in this brief story marvelously crafted by the creative Charles Dickens. No matter how many adaptations of the book one has seen on television or as films, the real source is highly recommended and should not be missed. For if you do pass the book up, you are being just a Scrooge (metamorphically speaking, of course!).

It's hard to think of a literary work that has been filmed and staged in more imaginative variations than Charles Dickens' "A Christmas Carol"--there's the excellent George C. Scott version, the delightful Muppet version, the charming Mr. Magoo version, etc., etc. But ultimately true "Carol" lovers should go back to Dickens' original text, which remains a great read.

"Carol" tells the story of cold-hearted miser Ebenezer Scrooge, who despises the Christmas holiday and scorns all who celebrate it. But a visit from a series of supernatural beings forces him to reevaluate his attitude--and his life.

With this simple plot Dickens has created one of the enduring triumphs of world literature. It's a robust mix of humor, horror, and (most of all) hope, all leavened with a healthy dash of progressive social criticism. One thing I love about this book is that while it has a focus on a Christian holiday, Dickens puts forth a message that is truly universal; I can imagine this story resonating with people of any religious background, and also with more secular-oriented people.

This is a tale of greed, selfishness, regret, redemption, family, and community, and is enlivened by some of the most memorable characters ever created for English literature. Even if Dickens had never written another word, "A Christmas Carol" would still have, I believe, secured his place as one of the great figures of world literature.

Master storyteller and social critic, Charles Dickens, turns this social treatise on shortcomings of Victorian society into an entertaining and heartwarming Christmas ghost story which has charmed generations and become an icon of Christmas traditions. Who, in the Western world has not heard, "Bah, Humbug!" And who can forget the now almost hackneyed line of Tiny Tim, "God bless us, every one!" or his cheerfully poignant observation, that he did not mind the stares of strangers in church, for he might thus serve as a reminder of He who made the lame, walk and the blind, see. Several movie versions: musical, animated, updated, or standard; as well as stage productions (I recall the Cleveland Playhouse and McCarter Theatre`s with fondess.) have brought the wonderful characterizations to the screen, as well as to life. This story of the redemption of the bitter and spiritually poor miser, and the book itself; however, is a timeless treasure whose richness, like Mrs Cratchit`s Christmas pudding, is one that no production can hope to fully capture.

ALTHOUGH I FOUND SOME OF HIS WORDS MISUSED,THIS TEXT IS VERY INFORMATIVE AND TRULY REVEALS THE OTHER SIDE OF THE "CONQUISTADORES" STORIES.

This book was the text for a college course and I found it to be excellently written and chock-full of useful, detailed information. It is a shame that it is out of print.

The temptation to finish the tale seems irresistible. In the beginning, everything seems to lead toward a predictable solution - but then the plot thickens. After some digressions that shrewdly delay the action and raise the level of suspense, and after some florid editorializing (e.g.,on professional philanthropy, on female intuition vs. male obtuseness, etc.) Dickens introduces some new characters, and the mystery deepens: Who is Datchery? Is he one of the previous players in disguise, or a Sherlock Holmes-like figure? Who is Tartar? What is Bazzard up to? What does the opium dealer know or suspect? Who is the "fellow traveller"? Did Jasper murder (or try and fail to murder) Drood - or did he commit the deed only in an opium dream?
My own hunch is that Drood is not dead. There is no body - at least not yet; and it would seem so much more like Dickens to have a man given up for dead re-emerge triumphantly after many trials and tribulations, and after much dissimulating on the part of characters "in the know" (cf."Our Mutual Friend"). But since we don't know what Dickens planned, we are free to spin our own yarn and weave our own tapestry. Isn't that a lot more fun?

It is so strange to see a long, well-plotted novel suddenly come to a dead stop. (Of a projected twelve episodes, Dickens wrote six before his death.) The title character is either murdered or missing, and a large cast of characters in London and Cloisterham (Dickens's Rochester) are involved in their own way in discovering what happened to Edwin Drood.

There is first of all John Jasper, an opium addict who suspiciously loves Drood's ex-fiancee; there is a nameless old woman who dealt him the opium who is trying to nail Jasper; there is a suspicious pile of quicklime Jasper notices during a late night stroll through the cathedral precincts; there is Durdles who knows all the secrets of the Cathedral of Cloisterham's underground burial chambers; there is the "deputy," a boy in the pay of several characters who has seen all the comings and goings; there are the Anglo-Indian Landless twins, one of whom developed a suspicious loathing for Drood; there is the lovely Rosebud, unwilling target of every man's affections; and we haven't even begun talking about Canon Crisparkle, Datchery, Tartar, and a host of other characters. All we know is that the game is afoot, but we'll never know the outcome.

It would have been nice to know how Dickens tied together all these threads, but we can still enjoy THE MYSTERY OF EDWIN DROOD because -- wherever Dickens was heading with it -- it is very evidently the equal of his best works. Life is fleeting, and not all masterpieces are finished.

It is a tribute to Charles Dickens' reputation that to this day this unfinished novel, a mystery no less, still garners such speculation as to who allegedly murdered Edwin Drood. There are organizations created for the sole purpose of analyzing the novel and to theorizing whom the culprit may have been, if indeed there really was a culprit. After all, only Drood's watch and his shirt pin are produced, not his body.

As in all of Dickens' novels, the characterizations are the thing. You have the innocent young woman with the somewhat eccentric guardian and his Bob Cratchitlike assistant. There is the dark, possibly unfairly accused, but hot headed antagonist of Drood. Then there is Drood's brooding choirmaster uncle, John Jasper, who frequents opium dens, and who may or may not have ulterior motives in his seeking revenge. Durdles, the stone mason, and a somewhat weird character, provides some chilling comic relief in cemetery scenes with his stone throwing assistant. There are also the typical Dickensian characters, which includes a snooty older woman, a class conscious, spinsterish school mistress, and in a hilarious restaurant scene, an unappreciated, hard working "flying waiter" and a lazy, wise acre "stationary waiter."

It is a shame that Dickens died before he could complete "Edwin Drood." What is here are the beginnings of an exploration of man's dual nature, a journey into "the heart of darkness" so to speak.

This is Dickens' book (and some would say lecture) on the theme of selfishness. Martin Chuzzlewit is structured around the three variations on this theme: personal selfishness in all its many manisfestations, institutional selfishness by way of an insurance scam, and national selfishness in the form of hypocrisy served up American-style.

To illustrate the theme of personal selfishness, Dickens' parades his usual circus of colorful characters before us, each representing some aspect of the theme. There is hypocrisy appearing in the persons of Pecksniff and Mrs Gamp, thoughtlessness dressed up as young Martin Chuzzlewit and Mercy Pecksniff, suspiciousness and distrust disguised as old Martin Chuzzlewit, greed and villainy personified by Jonas Chuzzlewit and Tigg Montague (or Montague Tigg), and so on. There are also the usual cast of good characters to set off the bad.

The American interlude takes young Martin and his sidekick, jolly Mark Tapley, to the U-nited States where they meet various members of the American establishment: media moguls, literary luminaries, the American aristocracy, multifarious military men. One and all, they extol the virtues of Democracy and Freedom, American style. Unfortunately, the young travellers' experiences don't quite live up to the advertising. Not to give the story away, but let's just say they find themselves going up a river without the proverbial paddle.

The insurance scam illustrates the idea selfishness when it grows in stature to encompass more than those in one's immediate environs. It's dreamt up by Tigg Montague, but quickly takes on a life of its own and swallows up the likes of Pecksniff and Jonas Chuzzlewit.

On the whole, these themes are convincingly illustrated. The problem with the book is not the structure, but the tone of the narrative, or how Dickens tells the tale. When dealing with personal selfishness, Dickens takes a caustic, condemnatory tone, frequently obtruding in the narrative to rain insults on his poor characters. Pecksniff, in particular, is the unhappy recipient of a lot of this authorial abuse. By contrast, when Dickens narrates the American episode, he takes a combative, indignant tone, and far from obtruding, he is happy to hold his pen and let his characters incriminate themselves.

It's this inconsistency in the narrative that mars this book, particularly Dickens' habit of interjecting his moral imprecations. Indeed, the narrative is sometimes so earnestly didactic that it feels like a lecture. A more artistic way to get your points across is to let your characters make them. After all, that's what they're for.

Not a bad book, especially the American episode, but clearly the work of a still maturing Dickens. If you are new to Dickens and are looking for a place to start, look elsewhere. Come back to MC when you've read two or three of his other books.

If nothing else, one can come away with images of use in your daily lives. Read this book to understand the hypocrisy of Pecksniff and Mrs. Prigg's interesting friend, Mrs. Harris. These two things pop up as literary references all over the place. Now I finally understand the "Harris" reference in Murder on the Orient Express!

There are all sorts of deceptions and selfishness going on in this book, but by far, Seth Pecksniff is the most perfect character to be found of all Dickens' comic characters. There is a darkness in the profile of Mr. Pecksniff, but he is made to ridiculed, and Dickens does not let a chance pass to ridicule Pecksniff.

I want to digress a moment, for Dickens did as well -- there is a section where young Martin Chuzzlewit tries his fortune in America. And there is quite a bit of anti-American sentiment to be found in these parts (a fact which caused emnity between Dickens and the American public until he made his 2nd and final tour in 1870 or so). There are two reasons for this: first, Martin Chuzzlewit simply did not have the sales figures of previous novels. Anti-American books seemed to be "the thing" (just like diet books are popular today) in Britain, so he went for that. Secondly, Dickens had just been on a rather contentious tour of the U.S. in which he had been trying to make a case for international copyright. You see, the U.S. was the China of that day -- infamous for pirating works of people from other countries. Publishers in America had been printing their own copies of Dickens novels at cut rates (because they weren't paying Dickens or his British publishers anything!) When Dickens tried to make his plea for intellectual property rights, these same publishers of newspapers did a hatchet job of Mr. Dickens' reputation. So, basically, Dickens had an axe to grind.

In any case, feel free to skip all the Chuzzlewit in America bits. There is a moment of self-realization for young Martin, but it's not essential. All the essential action is going on in England, and Martin will return to finish business. There's also a pyramid scheme-like scam going on as part of a subplot, so now we've got two things involved in this novel that people think are debates of modern origin: intellectual property rights and bad financial info. Just remember, Napster and Internet stock tips are only the latest manifestation of old themes; at the very least, this book will remind you of that.

Martin Chuzzlewit gets its start much like any other Dickens novel--we are introduced to the rather blase main characters and the amusing minor characters, and Dickens slowly--and I mean slooowly--weaves the web of his drama. We meet the Chuzzlewit brothers, Mr Pecksniff and his daughters, and (among others) the lovable Tom Pinch, who is utterly devoted to Mr Pecksniff. "Another middle-period Victorian comedy of manners," we presume, and read a few pages at a time, until BAM! the novel kicks into high gear. I won't spoil the unforgettable final half of the novel for you, but suffice it to say that I read it ALL in one day, spellbound. Any would-be author of pageturners could learn a lot from the story of Jonas Chuzzlewit, masterfully spun by the greatest novelist in the Englsih language. Enjoy it, one and all!

Almost as good as Bleak House. Two shortcomings, though. One, the poetry of the language never reaches the same heights. Dickens just doesn't seem as inspired here, and there are moments when he even seems tired and to be suffering from the same disappointment his characters complain of. Two, the mystery theme is pushed to the background and is lame in comparison. Otherwise, the structure is excellent, weaving the themes of the Circumlocution Office and self-imprisonment relatively seamlessly through the story.

One reviewer here has commented that "Little Dorrit" is not without Dickens' trademark humor, and, with one qualification, I would agree. Mr F's Aunt, Mrs Plornish, and Edmund Sparkler in particular are all quite funny. Characters like William Dorrit and Flora Finching, however, who would have been funny in earlier books (eg, Wilkins Micawber and Dora Spenlow in "David Copperfield" it can be argued, are younger - and more romantic - versions of Dorrit and Flora) are only pathetic in this one. It is a sign of the change in Dickens that he can no longer see the lighter side of these characters.

BTW, there is another little joke for those versed in Victorian Lit. The comedic couple Edmond Sparkler and Fanny Dorrit are a play on an earlier couple, Edmond Bertram and Fanny Price in Jane Austen's "Mansfield Park". The joke is that Dickens has taken the names and inverted the characters. Fanny Dorrit couldn't be more different than Fanny Price, and likewise Edmond Sparkler and Edmond Bertram. I'm sure this is not an accident. Dickens had a thing for the name Fanny, using it for two of his less appealing "temptresses", Fanny Squeers (in "Nicholas Nickleby") and of course Fanny Dorrit. Funny stuff.

And speaking of Fanny Dorrit, I have one last comment. It is often said of Dickens that he couldn't create good female characters. This puts me in mind of Chesterton who related a similar complaint made by Dickens' male contemporaries that he couldn't describe a gentleman. As Chesterton deftly pointed out, however, what these gentlemen really meant was that Dickens couldn't (or wouldn't) describe gentlemen as they wished themselves to be described. Rather, Dickens described gentlemen as they actually appeared. I might say the same thing about the women who complain about Dickens' female characters. It's not so much that Dickens couldn't (or wouldn't) describe good female characters. Rather, it's that the kinds of characters he did describe aren't the ones the complanaints wish to see. Women praise the Elizabeth Bennetts of the book-world not because the real world is full of Liz Bennetts (it's not), but because that's the way they themselves wish to be seen. Truth is, however, there are far more Fanny Dorrits and Flora Finchings and Dora Spenlows than there are Liz Bennetts. The women who complain of these characters, though, would rather ignore this unflattering little fact. Whatever. The truth will out, and there's far too much truth in Dickens characters to be so lightly dismissed.

4 1/2 stars

Dickens' last novels (with the exception of the unfinished EDWIN DROOD) really form a group all to themselves: exceptionally concerned with the excesses of social institutions and the cruelties of high society, they in some ways read more like Trollope and Thackeray than they do Dickens' own earlier works, although they retain Dickens's fine gift for character and bite. LITTLE DORRIT is proabbly my favorite of the later works: its multiple stories are extremely gripping, and his satire at its sharpest and most necessary. Many people say these later novels are not as funny as his earlier works, but DORRIT is to me an exception: there are few funnier (or more dear) characters in Dickens' repertoire than the breathless, kindhearted Flora Finching, and I find myself almost helpless with laughter whenever Flora's senile and hostile charge, Mr F's Aunt, makes her perfectly doled-out appearances in these pages. (Arguably the funniest scene Dickens ever wrote is the scene with this "most excellent woman" and Arthur Clennam and the crust of bread). This is a great Dickens novel even for people who tend not to like Dickens (and yes, there are some of them, as hard as that may be for the rest of us to believe).

Little Dorritt is not light reading. While it is in many ways a very entertaining work, it is not for those seeking pure entertainment. It is a very rich work, full of social commentary [church bells ringing, "They won't come."; the Circumlocution Office], humor [can anyone resist laughing out loud and Flora Finching?], several memorable characters, and a very powerful statement on personal salvation.

Yes, the novel does drag from halfway to the three quarters mark; but what 900 page Dickens novel doesn't? When you read Dickens, you should expect that. It is during that time that he typically starts to resolve many of the issues raised in the first half and also sets up his exciting finale. While the finale of Little Dorritt is not exciting in the Hollywood sense, it is very fulfilling.

The major theme that spans the entire work, something I haven't seen others discuss, is that of Old Testament vs. New Testament thinking. It is the Old Testament thinking of Arthur's mother that keeps her in her wheelchair. It is only when she gets a dose of New Testament thinking from Amy Dorritt that Arthur's mother walks. Dickens was a Unitarian who had a strong belief in the redemptive power of Christ. While he often ridiculed both the Church ("They won't come.") and religious hypocrites (Borriohoola-Gha in Bleak House), it is through Little Dorritt that he presents this redemptive power. Entertainment becomes a treatise on right living.

"Oliver Twist" was my introduction to Charles Dickens. His style of writing is difficult at first and I found myself looking up words in the dictionary in the first half of the book. He uses some words in a totally different ways; however I was still able to follow the story. This book was probably as realistic as it could get in the 19th century but since I am living in the 20th century the characters seem phony. They speak in flowery phrases. Very Victorian English,by Jove! "Pray, dear, do come and release the trouble that ails you so." Some characters, like the thieves, speak to intelligently. Even Oliver seems linguistly gifted for an undereducated,malnourished, physically and mentally abused orphan; and the ugly sexual elements are missing (not that I want it in there though.) I like happy endings and this book had one.Loose ends were tied and the antagonists got their just reward. A shiny, happy 19th century story. I am glad I read it. Its nice to read different sytles of writing. Now I can say " Yeah, I've read Dickens."

Yeah, I said it was long and boring before but actually, it's not. I guess you just have to have the right version - I must have gotten the original, unedited copy at my first attempt. OLIVER TWIST was the first book on our reading list for English this year and I knew I'd have to make it through. I've seen movie adaptions of this story so it wasn't exactly new; of course Disney always changes the plot a bit, so I still had some surprises.

The basic idea of the book is this: Oliver Twist is a poor orphan cast to the most depressing scenes, struggling against the menace and corruption of lower London. Dickens wrote this book, not only to criticize the failed government poor laws, but to reflect on his own early childhood, of the poverty and loneliness he had faced. Oliver meets a wide cast of characters, in a wide range of good and evil. At the bottom rests Fagin, the greedy and malicious Jew that manipulates children to steal for him. He has a network of thieves about him, and innocent Oliver seems trapped. However, he manages to escape to some wealthy and very kind people, who coincidentially are tied to his mysterious birth.

This book is very suspenseful and touching and a pretty good one for class study (I usually like book selecions for English). My advice is to read in attention and speculation - be sure to pay attention to the chiming of bells. ...If you're reading for fun, it's great entertainment too, and a lot less work. Have patience and a good attitude! ;-)

The creative novel Oliver Twist, written by Charles Dickens in 1838, defines a classic of all times. This intense story reflects a young boy's life in London with no family or place to go. The novel begins with Oliver's mother dying, while giving birth to her son and the father remains unknown. Throughout the novel we learn about Oliver's struggles on living on his own. The young boy is befriended on the way and taken in my Fagin. Fagin along with the Artful Dodger invite Oliver to stay with them and become one of them, a thief. While going on one of the adventures of pick pocketing Oliver is caught by Mr.Brownlow who instead of reprimanding the young lad, decides to rise him. Throughout the book Oliver searches for the answers to his past while trying to stay alive on the streets of London. Miraculously, Oliver's family lay right under his nose the whole time. The theme of Oliver Twist examines the importance of a family. Oliver plays a forsaken child, abandoned by all-parental support and thrown into the cruel world at a very young age to live on his own. Oliver's early years taught him to fend for himself and he suffers from never experiencing a loving and nurturing childhood. The tone throughout the novel focused on abandonment and how to live and survive on your own. The setting of the book plays a powerful part as the story unfolded. Dickens describes the setting of London and all the places that Oliver stays very descriptively. "The street was very narrow and muddy, and the air was impregnated with filthy order. The walls and ceiling of the room were perfectly black with age and dirt..." (page. 56). Dickens explains the facilities that were available to poor Oliver, and makes them sound unbearable. He does an excellent job making the setting come alive and feel the characters thoughts. I would recommend this novel because I found it very moving and towards the end you are only hoping for the best for poor Oliver.

As a younger person in the nineties, I dipped into the plays of Shakespeare, and this book let me get into the classic stuff. It was interesting, put into kids' stories so as not to intimidate the younger enthusiast, and altogether, it was a good book. I suppose you have to be in to Shakespeare to enjoy it wholly though....

A gentle, relaxing dip into Shakespeare. I'll give two stars.

Tales from Shakespeare was one of the few books that attracted me by its title. I've heard a lot about William Shakespeare, however, I never really got to listen or read his stories. I think they're really special because everyone knows who he is and they say his stories are wonderful.
In this book, there are many, many stories, so I decided to read two of them I was interested in: ¡¥The Tempest¡¦ and ¡¥A Midsummer Night's Dream¡¦. But I'll only tell you about The Tempest.
The Tempest was the first story of the book. It was about a man and his daughter, Miranda, a young girl living on an island with spirits, and no other humans. However, before they decided to side there, there lived before them, a witch name Sycorax. She prisoned all the good spirits, including the leader, Ariel. When Miranda's father decided to side on the island, he defeated Sycorax, and Ariel, as the head of all good spirits promised to serve Miranda's father in any way he can.
As Miranda grew older, she became more beautiful. Her father thought that it was time for her to get married. He sent Ariel to carry Fernando, a prince to marry his daughter. At first, he was so angry at Miranda's father for doing such a thing, but once he saw Miranda, he decided to marry her. As they were getting married, Miranda's father had some revenge on his brother.
What I like about this book is that, Shakespeare has a lot of good ideas.
What I dislike about this book, is that, his stories are too confusing for me to understand. And every time I finish a story, I don't see the point of it.
But I really enjoy reading his stories though.

Although this book is written for children it is great for all ages and is great to get the basic story line before you go to a play. I read most of the plays in this book (I have not yet read all of them) when I was 11. Now that I have been reading the actual plays of Shakespeare I always start by reading the short version of the play in this book and than read the actual play. I can understand what is going on much better that way. I also recommend "Beautiful Stories from Shakespeare for Children" by Edith Nesbit which gives about ten page versions of each story verses the thirty pages per story in this book and also has a smaller vocabulary which makes it better for younger children.