...What would you do if someone left a baby boy on your doorstep? Would you keep them? Send them up for adoption? Try to find their parents? Well, a family from England kept him, and named him Spider for the way he walks. They found some interesting facts about him. He can mimic animal's calls perfectly; one of his only phrases is "Good un!", he walks weirdly, and can't learn any thing.
His friends make fun of him for the way he walks, how he can't learn, and how he does not go to school. His parents also worry about how he acts. The people on the farm make fun of him behind his back, but none of this matters to him because he does not understand any of it. His parents try to make him act normally but they notice that he is happy, so it does not matter.
This great fiction book is set in World War II! This book is terrific for anyone, especially because it teaches you about a boy who is different then most kids. This book is interesting because you can learn a lot about kids who have disabilities like Spider does. This book is a page turner. I highly recommend it to anyone.

This book is so subtle but somehow kept me gripped. The imagery is superb and I felt I really knew Spider as I neared the end. The ending was beautiful- everytime I read it I am left in tears of sadness. I'd reccomend it to anyone as you can read it over and over again.

A simple, beautiful story, Spider Sparrow will definitely leaveyou in tears (the good kind). I highly recommend this book - all ofthe characters are real and likable, and Outoverdown Farm is somewhere I would love to live, as Spider did. And "simple" Spider has many things to teach us...wonderful book!

Shakespeare portrays King Richard III as a hunchbacked thoroughly evil man. While based upon the historical Richard III, the play is a dramatization. Although classed as a history, remember that Shakespeare's histories aren't historically accurate biographies. Richard is a power-hungry brother of a king who murders, schemes, marries, and plots to usurp the throne from rightful heirs. Richard gets his due when he meets Henry Tudor on the field of battle and the reign of the Yorkist kings comes to an end. Written under the rule of a Tudor monarch (Elizabeth I), the play paints the brutal Richard in an especially unfavorable light. After all, the rise of the Tudors depended upon the death of Richard III. The treatment of women in the play has been criticized, especially the speed under which Anne accepts Richard III -- with her dead father in law in the scene, no less. The play compresses 14 years or so of real history into 5 acts. It is hard to go wrong with Shakespeare. A good but dark read.

Let's get one thing clear from the start: when I rate Shakespeare, I rate it against other Shakespeare; otherwise, the consistently high ratings would not be very informative. If I was rating this against the general run of literature available, it would unquestionably rate 5 stars.

So what brings it down to 4, as compared to other Shakespeare? Primarily a few places where it demands a bit too much suspension of disbelief; the language is some of Shakespeare's best, and is comparatively easy for a modern reader (I found most of the footnotes to be sufficiently unnecessary to be actually more distraction than help). But for one thing, if Richard is withered, hunchbacked, and deformed, how is it that he has been able to kill so many of his victims in battle? For another thing, is it REALLY plausible that Princess Anne would be persuaded as she was by someone with nothing more going for him than Richard? To paraphrase the scene,

Anne: You killed my husband and his father! I hate you I hate you I hate you!

Richard: But I only did it 'cause I'm hot for you, babe! Wanna marry me?

Anne: Welll...maybe. Let me think about it.

(And, in fact, she marries him. Just like that.)

Also, there are virtually NO characters in this play that are sympathetic, save perhaps for the two murdered children and Richmond, and we really don't see enough of them to feel much connection; it dilutes the effectiveness of the portrayal of Richard's evil when almost all of the other characters are, if not just as bad, certainly bad enough.

Richard III is the most well crafted satanic character in all of Shakespeare's writing. What can get frightening is that you see his evil, and yet you like him. The play is dramatically frightening from one scene to the next. To this day, I never could forget the scene where Hastings is sentenced to death or when Richard is haunted by the 11 ghosts. But the virtuous Henry VII also offers captivating passages (especially his passage that announces the end of the War of the Roses.) It is also interesting to see how carefully Shakespeare had to handle Henry VII, seing his granddaughter Elizabeth was in the audience. To be sure, Richard III is blamed for several things he did not do. The dramatic irony is that whatever he was innocent of, all the circumstancial evidence says he murdered his nephews.(Rumors that he killed them continued to spread like fire. Not only did he start losing England's loyalty, but many of his own followers in a rage abandoned him and joined Henry VII. France began to humiliate Richard by broadcasting official accusations and Richard never so much as denied having done it. If he could have produced the princes, his troubles would have been over.)This one vile deed made it possible for Shakespeare to make Richard this monster from hell and convincingly pile a slew of vile deeds upon him of which he was innocent. But all that aside, women such as Richard's furious mother and the raging former Queen Margaret add to the drama and chills. The gradual unfolding of Margaret's curses adds a charming orginizational bonus to this masterpiece. If you want to enjoy this play all the more, make sure you read "3 Henry VI" first. Richard's demonic nature is heavily prepared in this preceeding play.

...However, I've never really liked the KQ companion series of books. I just prefer to make up my own backstories for the events that occur in the games.

This book does exactly what it claims. It walks you through the King's Quest series step by step ensuring you get maximum gaming from the series. It also adds a story version to each setup. If you want the fast way to solve the series, I'd definately buy this book.

The Kings Quest Companion Is Excellent! It's #1! If You Play The Games, Or If You Are In Need Of A Great Thing To Read, The Kings Quest Companion's More Than A Guide, It Details Each Game In Novels! Read It!

When reading some historians of ancient Greece and Rome, you get the sense that they are impatient with those fool ancient writers. Peter Green, in this eminently entertaining and solidly-researched history of the campaigns of Marathon, Salamis, and Plataea, treats Herodotus, Plutarch, Thucydides and the rest as equals, giving them respect where merited and skepticism where necessary. Green, for some years a resident of Greece, is not afraid to use more current history (political and military) to cast light upon events and motivations of the past. Where he has a good theory, he says so; where he just doesn't know, he also says so. One aspect of academic writing endemic to ancient history is the criticism of other authors. Green, thankfully, puts most of his in the notes. In doing so, he keeps the story of the wars moving along, allowing the reader to appreciate the effect of local politics on the course of both Greek and Persian strategy. Unhesitantingly recommended to anyone with an interest in ancient Greek or military history, and to students of national strategy.

My one complaint is that I would have prefered more illustrations.

That said, Peter Green does a tremendous job telling the story of the Greco-Persian Wars while keeping the subject academic. Green breathes life into the ancient characters, Themesticles, Miltiades, Leonidas, to name a few. And he doesn't fall into the trap of stereotyping the Persians and Persian Kings. He also tells you when he's basing his interpretations on thin or very little evidence, so that you can form your own opinion while reading. This is refreshing when compared to many historical authors who hand down their interpretations as if they are Moses on the mountain top. Greco-Persian Wars is a well written, scholarly, and entertaining book. I enthusiastically recommend it.

The Greco-Persian Wars reads like a novel, but presents its' thesis in a most thorough, analytical manner. Green is, perhaps, the most easily read scholar on ancient Greece which is evident in this effort as well as his "Alexander of Macedon". The Greco-Persian Wars masterfully recounts Xerxes' march through Greece, the heroic battle of Thermopylae, the miraculous Greek naval victory at Salamis, and the subsequent withdrawal of Persian forces. Interwoven among this narrative is excellent insight into the political machinations present among the vying city-states of Greece.

Green resurrects Themistocles, in all his martial splendor, from the elitist dismissals of Herodotus, to show that Themistocles' naval genius and personal courage saved the day despite the intense and ongoing city-state rivalries and a monied and powerful Athenian majority which preferred a Marathon-like ground engagement. The Greco-Persian Wars, despite its' generic title, is an outstanding tale of heroism, bravery, and perserverence that deserves the attention of any history connoisseur. Read this book. It is outstanding!

These two novels by Steven King (one under his Richard Bachman psuedonym) are based on an interesting idea. Take the same set of characters, and put them into two completely different and totally unrelated stories. Not only are the human characters the same, the evil being they must fight, Tak, is the same in both stories, and both stories involve the town of Desperation, Nevada and the suburb of Wentworth, Ohio to a greater or lesser degree. By unrelated here, I mean one story is not the continuation of the other, it's as if they happen in parallel universes.

In Desperation, the humans are trapped in a small western mining town in Nevada where Tak has taken over and killed off most of the town's residents. Tak has apparently selected a random group of humans to keep alive to be used for it's own purposes, but it is unaware of the fact that one of these humans, a young boy, has a connection to a higher power than itself (i.e. God) which is intent on thwarting it's plans. In the story, King attempts to wrestle with serious theological questions, particularly with the problem of evil and suffering. While not overly profound, the book does have some moral and spiritual depth to it and is surprisingly Christian friendly.

In the Regulators, the creature Tak takes over the mind of a young autistic boy, and then uses images in his mind, gleaned from old western movies and Saturday morning cartoons to terrorize and demolish a suburban Ohio neighborhood. While The Regulators could be seen as a commentary on the effects of popular media and television, there really isn't the same kind of pointed moral and spiritual questioning that is found in Desperation. It's just an entertaining story.

Though I think Desperation is the better of the two books, I enjoyed them both, and found them both to be gripping reads. King really is a good story teller with some interesting ideas, and is also good at creating a sense of place and mood. He is also good at creating interesting, realistic, sympathetic characters. Both stories are pretty violent, especially The Regulators, and some readers may be put off by a fair amount of bad, sometimes sacreligious language and crude subject matter. The stories are still interesting and enjoyable though, and Desperation especially carries a sense of moral weightiness that, for me, helps to define good writing. If you read one and enjoy it, you'll probably want to read the other one as well to see how the different characters fair in both stories.

After reading some of the reviews listed on Amazon I couldn't believe anyone who enjoys Stephen King did not enjoy The Regulators and Desperation. Someone wrote that he showed no imagination by using the same names. It simply showed the genius of his writing. One book was written under Bachmann, the other written by King. Two books written like parallel worlds, mirror images of each other. I couldn't put either one down.

Desperation was the first Stephen King book i read, a few years ago, and since then I've gone on to read `Salems Lot, The Stand, Bag of Bones, and, of course, The Regulators. Although i can't say, like someone already rated, that the plot jumped around so much that you couldn't follow. Desperation was my first King book and i found it very enthraling, and The Regulators simply added to it all! Yes, he uses the same characters and a few more, but there's a different setting, a new "host" for Tak, and an entirely new form of writing involved. If you have not read either of these books, i suggest to start with Desperation, and if you are a fan of King's older works, i am almost certain you won't be disappointed.

Actually.....nil stars.

Only buy it if you are the sort of person who buys timeshare, the Eiffel Tower, etc...

For those who are unaware, the "MacCathy Mor" discussed in the book was really an imposter.

The reality of an indigenous Irish nobility is not much understood or accepted inside Ireland itself, much less in the rest of the world. As the victors write the history, too much Irish history has omitted any reference to the fact that Ireland had its own kings and nobles well before the Norman-English intruded on the scene. To this day the claims of persons such as the MacCarthy Mor to royal status are met with skepticism; relevant to this book, one individual expressed this skepticism so openly as to warrent a suit before the Italian courts. This lawsuit offered the MacCarthy Mor to present to a court of experts his credentials as Head of the Royal House of Munster, as Chief of his Name, and as rightful bearer of the coat of arms of the MacCarthy Mor. The Court carefully reviews and expounds on the evidence presented, and the ruling presents in detail the Court's rationale for fully supporting the MacCarthy Mor's claims. This book is a must read for any student of Irish history, modern aristocracy, chivalry, or heraldry. A word of warning, though: this is a legal document, and it reads like one -- don't expect light reading, but do expect to be educated!

If you thought that the Gaelic Nobility died out in 1601, or even 1691, this book is for you. This book documents the present situation of one of the Royal lines of Ireland. It documents the present views of two European powers towards the rights and prerogatives of the current representative of the Royal Eoghanacht Dynasty. This Royal line ruled over the southwest quarter of Ireland for more than a thousand years. The last regnant King was Donal IX, King of Desmond, who died in 1596.

Yet the dynasty, with it's rights and priveleges, survives! Contained in the book are the transcripts of two Italian Court rulings, a translation of a Certification from the Kingdom of Spain, and copies of various supporting documents that were made available for the Italian and Spanish authorities. This book will be of special interest to those who study the Gaelic history of Ireland, and those who claim descent from the MacCarthy family.

I either agree or sympathise with all of the previous reviewers. This is a difficult book from the standpoint that without some exposure to the London Underground transit system, one is reading the story from a slight disadvantage. Mind you, it is only a slight obstacle--don't avoid the chance to read this book and enjoy Barbara Vine's fascinating tale of the emotionally disenfranchised denizens of Jarvis Stringer's sheltering old brick home, the former Cambridge School.

If you have read this far, you know the basic plot and are aware of the major players in the drama. So I will leave you with this enticement. It is, in a very odd way, a fun read that goes by all too quickly. As in all of Barbara Vine's novels, justice is served up sooner or later (usually later) and, as always, it is never polite justice. Barbara Vine delivers the kind of justice that one dreams of but rarely ever sees. The last page of this novel is well worth the wait.

A word of warning to the readers who are squeamish around the subject of feeding the animals. The hawk belonging to Jed, Abelard, is especially fond of a certain delicacy that is very hard to envision without a lurching of the stomach. Not for the faint of heart!

On that note, if Ruth Rendell ever reads her reviews on Amazon, and she really should, I hope that they will serve as a justification for no imminent retirement from the world of writing. It would be so hard to live knowing that there wouldn't be another Barbara Vine novel to consume with my usual gusto!

I either agree or sympathise with all of the previous reviewers. This is a difficult book from the standpoint that without some exposure to the London Underground transit system, one is reading the story from a slight disadvantage. Mind you, it is only a slight obstacle--don't avoid the chance to read this book and enjoy Barbara Vine's fascinating tale of the emotionally disenfranchised denizens of Jarvis Stringer's sheltering old brick home, the former Cambridge School.

If you have read this far, you know the basic plot and are aware of the major players in the drama. So I will leave you with this enticement. It is, in a very odd way, a fun read that goes by all too quickly. As in all of Barbara Vine's novels, justice is served up sooner or later (usually later) and, as always, it is never polite justice. Barbara Vine delivers the kind of justice that one dreams of but rarely ever sees. The last page of this novel is well worth the wait.

A word of warning to the readers who are squeamish around the subject of feeding the animals. The hawk belonging to Jed, Abelard, is especially fond of a certain delicacy that is very hard to envision without a lurching of the stomach. Not for the faint of heart!

On that note, if Ruth Rendell ever reads her reviews on Amazon, and she really should, I hope that they will serve as a justification for no imminent retirement from the world of writing. It would be so hard to live knowing that there wouldn't be another Barbara Vine novel to consume with my usual gusto!

This story is told quite brilliantly. All the characters are wonderfully drawn, and all are INCREDIBLY interesting. From Jed, the loner who lives on the top floor of the house and keeps his hawk in the garden. To Jarvis, the owner of the house who is obsessed by underground systems and is writing a book chronicling them. To Alice, the young mother who has run away from her humdrum life, leaving her daughter and husband behind. And then there is Tom, the busker who once aimed to study at a musical college, but is now content to play for the armies of people who walk through London's cavernous Tube. Then there is young Jasper, who, along with his friends, finds his thrills amid the bustle of the dangerous underground. And then, Axle. The enigmatic, strange man whom little is known about, and whose secret will cast shadows over all their lives.

The story is told brilliantly, as i say. All the charaters living in the old schoolhouses each have a different part in the story, and rarely do their own seperate stories interact, until the end. It is like watching several little planets revolving around the sun (in this story the sun is the london underground system). Their orbits do not cross, but still they revolve around the main body of the story, until they are finally drawn together.

Rendell skips between each persons's story (each persons story varies greatly) wonderfully, while the reader hardly notices the transition.

The climax is not completely unexpected, but i often find that that is the beauty of Vine/Rendell. You can sometimes see or tell what is going to happen, and you know that absolutely nothing any of the characters can do to prevent the inevitable awfullness.

At first i thought the ending was shocking, and powerful but anticlimatic. Then i realised it is shocking and powerful BECAUSE it is anticlimatic. (Rather like when we meet Hannibal Lecter...we are shocked by him because we were expecting a monster.)

Speaking as someone who has lived through the Troubles since 1984, and lived through 8 bombings, including the world trade center, I can fully identify with the characters and the predicaments they find themselves in.

If anyone wants to grasp just a few of the reasons why the struggle has gone on so long, and how human rights can so easily be denied people even in the late 20th century, even at the present time, they must read this book.

My only complaints are that he has not quite got the 'dialect' of Belfast totally correct, and some of the speeches, rather than the dialogue, go on for far longer than they should. The book lacks a certain visual richness one would expect from a novel about Ireland, Belfast in particular, with the gorgeous loch and hills and some of his geography is a bit off. Also, I am not so sure that making the main character commit an atrocity herself was necessary, given the huge success she has later in telling the world about the atrocities the British carry out.

Still, a remarkable achievement which reminds us that we can never take freedom for granted.

Pete King, in this wonderful novel, tells of the struggles of those seeking freedom from oppression in the North of Ireland. He fights for Northern Ireland because that is his heritage. He fights for America because this is his home. I wish that all leaders would display the same courage, integrity and honor that Congressman King displays. I highly recommend this novel.

Peter King does a great job of giving the reader a tase of life in northern Ireland by focusing mainly on the story of one family. The book offered tremendous perspective on the troubles. Also, the use of language was well done and gave the reader a taste of the local dialect. Very enjoyable.

Thomas doesn't know why he isn't making any progress with lovely academic Jacqueline Kirby. Personally, I think it's because he's sort of patronizing, and because he checks out 20-year-olds in front of her face. But what do I know?

Anyway, he invites her to a Ricardian party. He and a group of friends are avid fans of Richard III, and they are meeting to re-enact their favorite historical characters from the time period of his reign. As an added bonus, their host, Richard Weldon, promises to reveal a long-lost letter exonerating Richard III of the murders of his nephews.

We meet the guests. In order to follow the story, we have to remember all of these folks' names--both first and last, since some of them are referred to by their first name in one sentence and their last name in the next. We also have to remember all their complex soap-operatic relationships. On top of that, to follow the story, we also have to keep track of which character they are impersonating, *and* how that person died. All of this, IMHO, is a pretty big outlay of brain cells for a 200-page "light read".

A prankster begins staging fake "murders" based on the deaths of the various historical figures. These include such unlikely pranks as knocking a man out, then rigging up a pulley to dangle him headfirst into an empty wine barrel, thus referring to the Duke of Clarence's drowning in a cask of wine. That's a lot of trouble to go to. When I got to the end, I couldn't believe the culprit had gone to that much trouble for his/her goal. Several of the pranks are unrealistically complex.

But they escalate, until Thomas and Jacqueline begin to suspect real danger at the manor. Will they figure out who is behind them before somebody really ends up dead?

Overall, this is a contrived, unrealistic mystery which gets way too headache-inducing with all the different names one must remember--and I was *still* able to figure out the culprit fairly early on because only one person seemed to have a motive. I wondered why I had bothered trying to keep track of all the characters.

In addition, the book is fraught with errors: proofreading errors ("King Richarad"), editing errors (something referred to on the back cover never actually happens), and continuity errors (a man admires a woman's tan one day, and her aristocratic pallor on the next). I do not recommend this book.

The house party mystery is a classic format. Here, Peters takes the format and applies a liberal dose of history as the guests are a group dedicated to clearing the name of Richard III. (Richard is the king whose image is that of the one who killed his nephews.) And while this book is hardly a technical treatise on Richard's innocence, it is an entertaining pitch for that argument. (Josephine Tey's "The Daughter of Time" is a more convincing fictional argument - also a great read.)

As the guests wander around in costume and are generally being eccentric, accidents start to happen. Most assume it is just a "joker" trying to disrupt the meeting but Jacqueline Kirby is suspicious. It's a fun, light entertainment as she considers each of the guests as potential suspects -- and then saves the day.

Bottom-line: This is the second in Peter's Kirby series. Reading of the first book isn't necessary. This book is a good (not great) read for fans of English history who can appreciate a cast of overblown characters. Amelia Peabody fans may find the book too different for their tastes.

I throughly enjoyed this book on cassette. Carmen Lynne Williamson does an excellent job bring the characters to life with her reading. Elizabeth Peters weaves the mystery of Richard III into the mystery of the party prankster/murderer. Although she has many sterotypical characters of an english mystery she manages make this a farce instead of a folly. As a librarian I really liked the portrayal of a librarian as attractive, witty and intelligent. I recommend this to all mystery fans.

This is the best modern introductory book for Atlantic Salmon fishing, and the one least likely to lead you astray. That said it has some severe limitations, mostly from brevity - works by Joe Bates, Charles Phair, and Lee Wulff would be worthwhile to explore.

Bodo removes much of the mystery (and some of the mystique) from fly fishing for Atlantic salmon in a straightforward and virile style. As one getting started (at last!) I found this book very helpful, especially in times of year, access, equipment, flies, and the basics of fishing with classic methods. I expect to become aware of the more arcane subtleties involved in persuading a salmon to take a fly, but I think I can at least begin on a solid footing--without spending a king's ransom for flies and other equipment. The mysteries can come later, on the water.

This book covers all aspects of Atlantic Salmon fishing with clear and experienced explanations .

A must for advanced and beginners !