I was hoping for a factual/investigative account of the tragedy of the Atlanta child murders. Instead, this book seemed to be an essay written on the problems of racial injustice and ignorance in Atlanta, America, and the world. Nothing wrong with that, but then I take into account that the essay was written in a most meandering and disjointed fashion, full of incomprehensible references, with an overwhelming tone of arrogance. Baldwin is right, everyone else is wrong and to blame. Not persuasive, just a waste of time.

This is a difficult read because Baldwin's thoughts come across like a man too perplexed to ask "Why?". And so there are many crosscurrent thoughts, parentheticals that are not in parenthesis, and sheer rage. The question: who could be murdering the children in Atlanta? And has the years of systematic oppression and racism made it possible for a black man to be become that cruel? Has the oppressed become the oppressor?

And I can understand Baldwin's great perplexity...he wants to point the finger at the American way of life. How years and years of being considered not human has affected the mindset of the average person of color. And of having to come through identity crises, legal crises, social crises to be confronted with who...? A person who is this insane enough to be killing innocent kids? Why have we struggled so much, Baldwin seems to be asking, to create this monster?

And so, it is another probing we received from the always philosophical, questioning, always provocative Baldwin.

Why read the book now? Well, although this murderer has been found and given punishment based on the fullest extent of the law, the questions remains.

How have we come to this?

this book should has a CD, I will buy this book if it includes CD

I liked it, yes, but, I liked "Hollywood Lesbians" a bit better. It is a wonderful premise, talking to stars about their homosexuality, but, I believe that it should not have been written unless it was a bit more revealing in it's topic. Kudos to Mr. Hadleigh who is a knowledgable writer. I would have liked to know more though (a lot was hidden even still. the reader is told this. that right there gave me a sign that all is not right with this book).

Books like The Celluloid Closet and Hollywood Babylon abound with rumors about the sexual appetites of Hollywood stars. Boze Hadleigh's Gays in Hollywood, however, seeks to provide first-hand reports. An entertainment journalist since the 1960's, Hadleigh conducted volumes of off-the-record interviews with celebrities reputed to be gay or bisexual such as Cary Grant, Paul Lynde and Anthony Perkins, as well as less well-remembered actors like Randolph Scott and William Haines. In these interviews, often given only with the understanding that they would not be published during the star's life, Hadleigh attempts to get normally secretive actors to speak about their guarded sexual lives. The results vary widely, but even the "unsuccessful" interviews can be fascinating. Some stars like Paul Lynde, James Coco and Cesar Romero, speak freely and provide valuable accounts of what it was like to be gay in an industry filled with double lives and convenience marriages. Others like Cary Grant and Anthony Perkins are more elusive, but not without revelations about co-workers and peers. And one in particular is not so kind: at the end of his interview, an exceptionally ruffled Liberace expels Hadleigh from his mansion with imperial fury. Like his earlier volumes Conversations With My Elders and Lesbians in Hollywood, Hadleigh's work is somewhat journalistically suspect. He claims that for most of these interviews, he was not allowed to tape record or take notes, and frequently the questions seems stiltedly reconstructed and retroactively self-righteous. Still, the interviews are highly entertaining and provide an important alternative view of the film industry's social history. Recommended for both general readers and scholars of gay history / film studies.

Many reviewers seem quite upset by Grant's "out-ing," but if he wasn't at least bisexual, then PLEASE let me know why he lived with Randolph Scott--rather than his wives--throughout all five of his marriages (Only one of which lasted more than 5 years). He shared a house with his (male) lover fom 1933, a year before his first marriage, until his death in 1986--most straight pairings don't last that long--his didn't! And, while you're at it, explain photos of the two topless men hanging all over each other by their swimming pool. Being gay was as much of a career-booster as being communist in his Hollywood. There's a reason the man has two Oscars....