Peter Brooks' book, "The Melodramatic Imagination," would be helpful even due only to its serious examination of the structural and philosophical underpinnings of traditional French melodramatic theatre. However, what makes this study necessary reading is its convincing argument that melodrama exists as a driving force, not a distracting or somehow 'lower' element, in the creation of the modern novel. The melodramatic structure, shaped by high moral conflict and determined by its motion towards a final revelation of virtue as innocence, and is held together by a system of characters, images and actions become part of a signifying code that opens onto a moral world more cohesively meaningful than the literal world that can be represented by a more straightforward, perhaps more materialist realism. Authors of the nineteenth century novel needed this structure to retain urgency and significance in works from which motivations based on the sacred or the mythic had been discarded, and to make 'interesting' stories seeking to represent the lives of human beings in time rather than the explanatory deeds of timeless, imortal figures. A willingness to historicize a bit more, to relate an explanation of changing modes of representation to changing modes of production, would have made this work even stronger.

This book was fun reading -- or should I say, browsing, because that's what I found myself doing. I would thumb through the book at random, finding interesting facts. The pictures that accompany the timeline are the book's streingth, though. The book is excellently designed, and the pictures alone are worth the price of the book. It would make a great gift for anyone who is either historically or visually oriented.

For those who admire the style of the later Henry James, and enjoyed the final three "big" novels - The Ambassadors, The Wings of the Dove and the Golden Bowl - this much shorter and lighter novel - almost a short story by James' standards - will be a very pleasant diversion.

Obviously adapted from his play without much attempt to disguise this fact, the novel is driven by the characters' sharp and often witty dialogue. The characters are well drawn, and the story is unusually straightforward for James. While there remain the usual elliptical phrases and circumlocutions we've come to expect in his later novels, these have been toned down in the interests of dramatic momentum and the book is actually an easy read.

While it is certainly not one of the great James novels, it is nevertheless recommended to those who enjoy reading this author.

After introducing the medieval period by discussing the fall of Rome, the age of Charlemagne, the Vikings, Plantagenets, Capets, City States of Italy, the rise of the Church and the rise of Russia, the author divides this book into his main themes: 1. Castles, Nobles and Knights; 2. Town and Country; 3. Houses of God; 4. The Secluded Life; and 5. Into Battle. The author covers each of these sections with short essays, beautiful illustrations, gatefolds that picture a sight in its present state and then illustrates the sight as it would appear during the medieval period. This is a well written, beautifully illustrated book, although it is rather short (120 pages).

This is an unclassified version of a study originally done by OSS psychologists on the selection of personnel suitable for clandestine operations. This means those in which the individual is inserted into enemy territory and then left alone to live under deep cover, always living in a state of stress and tension.
Compare this with covert operations in which groups of individuals are inserted for the purpose of operational support to indigenous forces or for independent raids and sabotage. On covert ops there is usually a safe zone where some can relax and unwind while others watch and the individual is not only armed but often uniformed as well. Wearing a uniform does not protect one from summary execution as a spy if captured but it does gives a valid claim to POW status and one can hope it will be granted.
Thus, it takes a very special mental state to operate alone and to expect nothing but torture and death if captured. And hope that execution will be swift. Few can stand the tension that results from being alone in a hostile environment.

hand tools, safety procoution, uses of the hand tools.

In What Is Truth?, James Emery White presents an insightful examination of the concept of truth as it finds expression in the theological systems of five prominent Evangelical theologians: Cornelius Van Til, Francis Schaeffer, Carl F. H. Henry, Millard Erickson, and Donald Bloesch.

White rightly realizes the enormous challenge that postmodernism presents to Christianity, especially its Evangelical stream. Post-foundationalist thought tends to challenge not only objectivity in man's grasping and appropriation of truth, but even the very ontological reality of truth. While even so hardened a relativist as Richard Rorty admits the self-defeating nature of such a claim, it continues to garner support from many sectors of philosophy. White helpfully draws a clear distinction between the metaphysical and epistemological aspects of. This is his book's major contribution to the debate. He concludes that the metaphysical and ontological reality of truth as it is expressed in the traditional correspondence theory of truth is basic to Christian theology, indeed to all thought. The epistemological aspect of truth is a bit more problematic, though, as debate soon becomes mired in debates over epistemic justification, the nature of starting points, evidentialism vs. presuppositionalism, etc.

White provides incisive critiques of the five major thinker's systems. He appropriately questions Van Til's jihad against univocity, his attendant rejection of the necessity of the law of contradiction, and his claims that his system provided objective certainty and absolute proof for Christian theism.

The chapter on Schaeffer is rather well done. Schaeffer's shortcomings as a philosopher and historian (he claimed only to be a simple evangelist) are discussed. The best portion of the chapter deals with Schaeffer's failure to provide positive proof for Christianity. He failed to realize that disproving atheistic nihilism does equal proving Biblical Christianity. Schaeffer also tended to stress the pragmatic aspect of truth-claims, asserting that a worldview could not be true if it did not explain the 'mannishness of man,' not realizing that his values existed within his worldview and thus could not be a criterion for choosing a worldview.

Carl Henry likewise placed too much faith in the power of rational argumentation to prove the truth of Christianity. Henry is to be credited, though, for championing the universality of logic, and the propositional nature of reality and Scripture.

Millard Erickson is one Evangelical who has engaged in serious dialogue with postmodernism and post-liberal theology. He has attempted a synthesis which preserves the historic orthodoxy of the Reformation while incorporating the insights of recent trends in theology, including existentialism, structuralism, and narrative theology. While his synthesis tends more toward the former tradition than the latter, he has nonetheless been influenced by contemporary thought more than other thinkers. This influence is evident in his nuanced formulation of inerrancy, his emphasis on personal revelation, his coalition with evidentialism and its emphasis on empirical verification, and his openness toward progressive hermeneutical methods.

The last thinker examined, Donald Bloesch, can hardly be classed an Evangelical. He is a Barthian through and through. He embraces the dialectical theology of the neo-orthodox irrationalists and vitiates the doctrine of the authority of Scripture. Positively, though, he steers Evangelicals toward an appreciation of the theological implications of the Incarnation, as well as the concept of revelation as an event as well as a body of truth. Furthermore, his rejection of autonomous philosophy is a strong antidote to the Enlightenment strands in Evangelical thought.

White's book is well worth reading. White provides a good overview of the concept of truth in the thought of the thinkers he covers. I do have some gripes, though. First, numerous misspellings and typos mar the text. Second, White makes the same mistake he accuses most thinkers of making: that of confuting the metaphysical and epistemological aspects of truth. He does this when he asserts a dichotomy between the correspondence and coherence theories of truth. He wrongly portrays the latter as an ontological description of truth. Coherence and correspondence cannot be so easily dichotomized. Coherence proponents such as Gordon Clark and Cornelius Van Til believed in the ultimate unity of the two. Truth corresponds to the mind of God, which is completely coherent. Third, the book contains no index! Fourth, the selection of Van Til, Schaeffer, Henry, Bloesch, and Erickson is questionable. The issue is primarily philosophical. I would have selected Van Til, Gordon Clark, Arthur Holmes, Alvin Plantinga, and Norman Geisler.

When Iain Softley's 'The Wings Of The Dove' was released in 1997, critics predictably complained that it was impossible to recreate on film the interiority, ambiguity, complexity or elusiveness of Henry James' late novels. An exasperated and mischievous Robin Wood suggests these citics bluffed a cultural knowledge they didn't possess, failing, for instance, to notice that the film was in no way a literal adaptation, but a radical reworking of a difficlt novel: 'the film's brilliance lies in its ability to stand as an autonomous work, and an intensely CREATIVE one, while remaining faithful to what might be called the novel's core'. With the exception of three scenes, every sequence in the film is the inspired invention of screenwriter Hossein Amimi, and even these three are very different in context, content and meaning to their originals.

Wood prefaces his typically enlightening monograph with a cri de coeur against dullards who moan about the lack of 'fidelity' of films taken from classic books. Their idea of faithfulness is a synoptic replication of the plot. Softley's film offers a more interesting alternative. Wood starts with a helpful introduction to the characteristics of James' late style, and the difficulties it presents for any adaptor; followed by a brief look at other 90s James films (Jane Campion's 'Portrait of a Lady'; Agniezcka Holland's 'Washington Square'). The bulk of the study is a minute scene-by-scene analysis of the film, showing how Softley and Amini tried to find cinematic equivalents for these characteristics, for instance by displacing psychology onto mise-en-scene, or by the invention of pregnant set-pieces that don't make immediate narrative sense, but which catch the Jamesian intuition of shadowy, unconscious forces manoeuvring seemingly (self-) conscious behaviour.

Wood is an enthusiastic and attentive guide, his analysis that of a patient teacher, pointing out important details or the meaning of particular stylistic choices. Wood, one of the first great auteur critics, famously rejected the move of film criticism in the 60s and 70s into the jargon-filled realm of theory, so his is a humanistic interpretation, firmly centred on character and narrative. He gives a greater centrality to the film's actors in the creation of meaning than more rigidly theoretical writers would allow. Because Softley is such an unquantified persona as an auteur, Wood is free to concentrate on text text text, a freedom he clearly relishes.

Because his empirical method is so focused on what is on the screen, it is easier to argue with his interpretationd and to point out the surprising errors of detail. With endearing modesty, he admits that he finds it increasingly difficult to pin down for the reader precisely the merits of the film, and acknowledges his uncertainty whether his own interpretations are correct. His main aim is to convey his own enthusiasm and love for this under-rated film - which he calls a 'flawed masterpiece', the imprecise role of Merton Densher being the film's least satisfactory element - and to look for ourselves. A film lover can ask for no greater gift.

When I began to read "The Turn Of The Screw" by Henry James, I made the assumption this book would be different from all other books which I have read. I thought it would be different because it is considered an American literature classic. Although Henry James is among many great authors, he is without a doubt, a one of a kind.
In this book his unique writing style has me wondering why such thoughts went through his mind. His wordy and elaborate writing style presented his strange subject matter in a style that could be accepted in his time. While it is sometimes difficult to follow the story it allowed James to express what would have been a controversial topic.
At times in this story you become anxious and excited, while at other times you are left picking and choosing what you think is going on, and when you least expect something to happen you become surprised, and become more interested in the book.
The ending surprised me. What I thought was going to be a happy ending turned into a perverse finale and a total tragedy. From beginning to end, Henry James wrote a book that is different from all other books.

I had long heard of Henry James and his short novella, The Turn of the Screw and decided to read it, thinking that at only 88 pages long, it would not take more than one evening. Three evenings later, I finished the text and I must admit slightly confused. I had to reread the ending several times to truly understand what had happened. Thankfully, I had the critical edition, which included several essays on the story, one in particular by Edmund White which profoundly changed my opinion of the story.
A simple ghost story on the face of it, but in reality a pre-Freudian tale of sexual repression. Narrated by an unnamed governess who ventures to a country house to take charge of two young orphaned children, it soon becomes a tale of ghosts, mysteries and secrets. Always alluded to and never talked about at face value, the governess becomes convinces that the ghosts are after the children and she alone can save them. But are there really ghosts? The reader must go beyond the plot and carefully read the language...all the language. James writes like no other author I have ever read. The best word to describe it is "dense". With almost no dialogue, the narrator can spend pages describing her thoughts and feelings, yet these are so "coded" as to decipher her real meaning takes much concentration on the part of the reader. I know that James himself thought the story an amusement only, but the critical essays I read after the book deeply impressed me that the story has hidden depths which make it all the more interesting.
I would recommend this novella to anyone with the patience to read it thoroughly and with an open mind as to its meaning. I would strongly recommend the critical edition which helps the reader better understand the story's meaning and importance in literature.

I had been informed, before reading The Turn of the Screw, that it would not provide many answers to the questions it provoked. After finishing the novel, I would pass this along to future readers as well. The Turn of the Screw is an excellent story with wonderful details and an extremely creative plot. It is the first book I have ever read that has caused me to be frightened. Many times while reading the story late at night, I would find myself with my hand on my chest, holding my breath because I was so intrigued with the story line. Although it had a wonderful plot, Henry James does leave many questions unanswered. This allows the reader to interpret the events in whatever manner they choose. The complexity of the story depends on the complexity of the thought the reader puts into it. The Turn of the Screw is an excellent book and I would strongly recommend it to anyone. It is a clever novel for a clever reader.