In this story Grip is bred from a champ. fighting dog. His master wants to fight him to be just like his father but Grip turns tail everytime. After being set free Grip lives with some childern but they are forced to give Grip up to his rightful owner. On the way room Grip, his master and their new friends are caught in a fight with Grip's father, Madman. Can Grip defeat Madman?

I enjoyed this book. The relationship between the two brothers is a typical relationship. This book is adventurous and fun. You are always wandering what dinosaur you will run into next. This is a book I would definitely put on a booklist for students to read.

As the mother of a 5yr old who is a serious dinosaur enthusiast, it is sometimes challenging to find stories about the subject that can hold his interest and that don't repeat the same old facts. Dinosuar Habitat was a wonderful tale that combined an exciting adventure with the normal struggles of being the older sibling. Even as an adult, I found myself eager to get to the next chapter, as I was reading one or two each night to my sons before bedtime. I was unsure of the book when I saw its title; thinking that it was more about different types of dinosaurs and the environment in which they lived. However this is a great fantasy story with the prehistoric facts woven in. Two brothers find themselves mysteriously within the terrarium that belongs to the younger brother, Ryan. This isn't just an ordinary terrarium, but one in which Ryan has placed small toy dinosaurs to create a dinosaur habitat. Ryan is thrilled once he realizes he and his brother are back in dinosaur time.

The plot is not just about the two boys finding their way through the habitat and trying to get home. Rather, it also describes the usual rifts that can occur between brothers and the love that is between them despite the frustrations and disagreements with each other. Ms. Griffith's portrayal of the two brothers was right-on; from the way they spoke to each other and interacted, to Nathan's own musings as the older brother. When we finished the book, we found ourselves wishing for a sequel adventure back to the terrarium.

This large collection of excerpts spans the field and contains writings from authors and theorists dealing with "The Occasion for Speaking" (Lamming), "Can the Subaltern Speak?" (Spivak), Colonialist Criticism (Achebe), "Figures of Colonial Resistance" (Sharpe), and other topics in this burgeoning field--or rather, in these fields and their multiple perspectives.

However, some of the essays are so packed with the usual postmodern and post-colonial jargon that they sound alike in both style and turgidity. After a Preface and an Intro full of apologies for the selection itself, we come to sentences like this: "Faced with an incomprehensible and multifaceted alerity, the European theoretically has the option of responding to the Other in terms of identity or difference." Or this: "The process of describing the colonized [in Ireland] and inscribing them in the discourse as second-order citizens in comparison with the colonizers commenced with the invocation of the judicial and military power of the State...." Can you tell the difference between these sentences, written by authors of different cultural backgrounds? Me neither.

It would be nice to see a collection in which the authors speak in their own voices without inscribing, discoursing, deconstructing, alerity-ing, or counter-hegemonying themselves--and us--into numbness. The field is really too promising, too important, to leave to yet another jargonized and specialized vocabulary that does the authors' obviously thoughtful experience no justice and some harm.

This is a useful and comprehensive book, and it gives one a good insight into what was being discussed in postcolonial theory at the turn of the millenium. But why is there no mention of Russia in this volume (except for Thomas Macaulay's silly comments)? Russia colonies, while not separated from ethnic Russia by a body of salt water, were and are among the most exploited and least heard from. Russian colonialism is alive and kicking, and the so-called 'second world' (a.k.a. the communist-transformed Russian empire) is still only beginning the process of decolonization. A great many issues discussed in this book (hybridity, re-colonization, nationalism, language, education, history) beg to be applied to the Russian context. If it were not for this omission, I would have given this book five stars. It persuasively argues for the 'right to speak' of nations and territories that have been prevented from doing so by economic greed and desire for dominance originating in first world countries.

This is one of the best cultural-theoretical "readers" on the marketplace today, and should be indispensable addition to course syllabi for those wanting to teach postcolonial culture. All of the big names are here (Said, Anderson, Spivak, Bhabha, Fanon), and they've been helpfully redacted down to facilitate their accessibility--Spivak's and Bhabha's notoriously pompous and prolix styles have been edited to the point where students can actually discover the important points hidden away in the mire of verbiage.

My only disappointment with this reader is that so much has been included into it that it's price is somewhat steep--I think Ashcroft et. al. could've kept the price down by being a little less inclusive. But this is a terrific resource for anyone who wants to bring postcolonial theory into a class.

I havent read it in a long time, but my memories are good. I dont really like how it started out, it was harsh and rather slow, but the end was nice. i like how it was an as-its-happening sorta thing not looking back or a patched human observation.