I'm reading this book for an lower division undergraduate course in East Asian History. It's better for an upper division course. The book is well indexed, however, there is no bibliography. The only extra is a section that acknowledges the illustrations, which is not very helpful for me. There is a timeline of the dynasties of each country in the back of the book, but it is so tiny it is not helpful. Anyone know of an East Asian wall chart timeline? The topics of each dynasty focus on economics, arts and literature, military, Buddhism and Confucianism, growth and development, declines and failings. East Asian history is interesting. However, there is way too much information in this one book which makes it very difficult to follow, recall, and understand. If instructors choose to use this book, please provide additional optional resources (like a timeline wall chart) because this book does not point the reader to seek other resources. A good book will have a bibliography. Since this book does not, I conclude the authors think this is the only book one needs to read, which it is not.

I remember buying this textbook back in the '80's for a course at Harvard taught by the professors themselves. Back then, the book cost [money]. I can't believe they now want over [money]for it. That's insane. Sure, it's full of factual information, but it's hardly unique information -- these are historical facts available anywhere, with very little opinion or perspective or even personality woven in. (Indeed, the book is as dry as the Gobi Desert.) Furthermore, they first wrote this book back in 1975. Updating it could not have required that much labor, particularly since Harvard already pays these profs to do nothing but talk about Asia. Professors are getting away with extortion knowing they have a captive audience (students) required to buy their textbook. Yes, it's a good textbook. Is it worth over [money]? Not for a Chinese minute. Here's hoping that they're donating their royalties to North Korean famine relief.

This is a fine book, one I have assigned for years in my introductory classes along with de Bary's Sources of Chinese Tradition Vol. 1. Now, however, there is a new edition of Sources using the newer pinyin romanization system. Reischauer still uses the old Wade-Giles system. So I can't assign it any longer - I can't expect my students to have the two basic books in the course use different romanizations. Could not Houghton-Mifflin redo Reischauer using pinyin? It could be done with no effort by using a simple replace function on a computer.

I will admit right off that I am biased because, as Public Affairs Officer in the U.S. Interests Section, I hosted James Michener's stay in Havana while he collected data for "Caribbean" and later collaborated with John Kings on the photography used in the book. Despite his glowing praise for my services (page 27), Michener was an old hand at adapting to circumstances and hardly needed me to orient him. He arrived with a fixed agenda and stuck with it. We departed from the agenda from time to time as his curiosity grew and Cuban contacts of mine beguiled him. As for his impressions, they are lucid, provocative, insightful and of course superficial. To know Cuba requires years of delving into the psychology of the quixotic Cuban people and their turbulent history. Michener's kitchen Spanish was adequate in restaurants but hardly up to a good conversation. I wondered how his early masterpiece "Iberia" could be so complete without a solid knowledge of Spanish? Anyway, he asked me to take 1000 photos of Havana which I did happily under the watchful eyes of Cuban security forces. His editors selected 70 or so of mine and 12 of Kings for inclusion. (No reference to my photopgraphy is given in the book by my own request as a diplomat shouldn't be caught moonlighting for the presses). I believe Michener used them for references to his quick glimps into Cuban society. His light comments tell the tale of a tourist abroad who is infected with the aura of Cuban life under the tyrant...,excuse me "comandante en jefe" Castro. Not a bad read for someone who likes their rum with coke--better known as a Cuba Libre. Viva Michener! Comments to jerrywscott1@cs.com

"Six Days in Havana" is Michener's companion volume to the novel "Caribbean." Though the narrative is rather short, Michener's tradition of never failing to please holds up here, and the brevity is more than made up for by John Kings' absolutely fantastic color photos of Cuba. This volume serves both as a behind-the-scenes tour of the Cuban chapters of "Caribbean" and as the closest tour of Cuba an American is likely to get anytime soon. Perfect for the almost-complete Michener collection. (Also features a short section by Kings.)

I am not sure who this book the 'committee' wrote this for, but I can think of no one. More like a hodge-podge collection of Internet clippings somewhat related to Java & Macs, interspersed with useless code. It is sad because the Mac market needs a Java book covering getting started and the many options and tools Apple has provided the Java student & developer.

I am sorry I wasted my money & was responsible for the deaths of the trees that made it!

This is probably the worst technical book that I have read. Its more a collection of papers than anything else, and much of the content is trivial. Beginning progrmmers would find nothing in here. Advanced programmers will probably find a few nuggets of information that are useful, but they are few and far between.

If you are looking for an excellent book on Java on the new Macintosh operating system OS X, this is one to get. The writing style is well done and the book, in terms of content, is well thought out. I am enjoying the authors coverage of pure Java vs Mac OS X specific issues in particular. Keep up the good job.

This book is absolutely horrible. I bought it on SALE in a local comic shop and thank God it was discounted! I went home and read it and haven't reread it since. I wouldn't re-open this graphic novel if I was super-bored! This is absolutely the worst Superman trade paperback (well, The Marriage of Superman is also Horrendous) so ONLY buy this if it is discounted. I am not a fan of Dan Jurgen's Superman. He killed Superman, remember? And brought him back. He married Superman. And he killed Clark Kent? Geez, if he's trying to make his mark on Superman, I'd suggest he come up with something creative. Now, he's not the prime writer in this trade paperback, but you can see the indecision around here. There is no unity or solid storytelling with this whole group of writers. Superman never looked so confusing and lost and the writers go off and kill his identity?? This is a major no buy. Buy it if you are a die-hard Superman fan. Buy it if you are missing these issues and cannot find them in the .50 cent bin. Buy this if you are a collector of graphic novels. Buy this if you are curious. But if you are looking for a great read, I'd suggest you look elsewhere (ie, anything NON-Dan Jurgens)

After you have already killed the man of steel, had his funeral, and then brought him back to life, what do you do for an encore? You "kill" his alter ego or secret identity of course.

When the villianous Conduit learns that Superman and Clark Kent are the same person, the life of our hero is turned upside down, and the lives of those closest to him are put in danger, as a form of blackmail. Therefore: Kent must die. At face value, the story is an interesting idea, but the way it unfolds left me disappointed. One of the things that bothered me about the story was its villian. Quite frankly, using Conduit, was a bad idea. The back cover of the trade paperback proclaims that he is one of "his greatest foes". While a certain amount of hyperbole is fine to describe charaters in comics, in the story, he hardly came across as "great The character seemed like one big cliche. In the end it was like so what let's move on. The story didn't have the impact that I think the Superman writers were hoping for. Due in large measure, to a poorly realized foe--the story would have worked had Luthor or Brainiac been the main catalyst. The story seemed to go on much longer than it needed to.

The Superman artists did a nice job on the muti part story As usual the work of Dan Jurgens, Brett Breeding, the legendary Gil Kane, and Dennis Janke stand out here, among all the artists who worked on the saga

The trade paperback collects all 12 parts of the story and includes reprints of the covers as well The book has 319 pages. Who knows? With a better villian and a shorter length, things may have turned out much more enjoyable than they did. Buy this book only at a discount if you must-otherwise don't bother Read The Death Of Superman instead

Now don't get me wrong. It was as enjoyable as any other mediocre comic book, but not worth the money. Read the 'Death of Superman' et al series if you really want to see Clark die! ...and die he does!

it seems like all the people reviewing this book has taken diffe at rice university, and no other universities have assigned this book. fortunately, i did not attend professor polking's section (i sat in on the first day and quickly switched sections). professor polking is a nice guy, and offers help when you need it (having said that, hopefully i won't feel so bad in my subsequent bashing). however, the book, like the second reviewer said, has very confusing proofs. the book is mostly just talk, and it's hard to tell what the key points (key equations) of each section are. it's also confusing because the sections aren't "sectioned" off--what leads to which key point? rather, it just seems to be one big blob of text, with the equations interspersed throughout. sure, buy it if it's required, but keep attend all lectures (if you are a college student) and keep another differential equations book handy, as you will undoubtedly not have a clue what polking is talking about.

As a student forced to buy Professor Polking's textbook, I feel that the only reason he publishes it is to punish students with more of his drivel. It isn't enough that he teaches the course poorly, his book is absolutely horrible, filled with mistakes. The proofs are confusing, and the book is less than helpful about the subject of differential equations. The problems are frequently unrelated to the material covered in sections, and are overly difficult, adding little to the student's knowledge of differential equations. I was very dissappointed after Professor Polking lined his pockets with the proceeds of this abysmal book.

I loved this book. The examples are clear, the proofs are easy to follow, and the book has a major applications aspect regarding applying what you learn on the computer and Matlab. My only complaint is that ch 5 (Laplace Transformations) is a little too terse, but besides that it is perfect. This and Lay's Linear Algebra book are my favorite mathematics books I've used so far.

I recently read a much more informative book "Albert Einstein: The Incorrigible Plagiarist" by Christopher Jon Bjerknes which tells the truth about Einstein and the 1905 papers Einstein's wife Mileva Maric wrote for him. The Bjerknes book is a scholarly book, and it presents the facts. Anyone interested in the 1905 papers should know the truth. Max Born said of the 1905 relativity paper, "It gives you the impression of quite a new venture. But that is, of course, as I have tried to explain, not true." The truth is that the theory belongs to Boscovich, Lange, Voigt, Fitzgerald, Larmor, Lorentz, Palagyi, and Poincare, among many others. The 1905 paper on special relativity did not give a single reference to these men.

If you're looking for a good book to learn a bit about Einstein's theories of relativity, you'd be better served reading his "The Meaning of Relativity." "Einstein's Miraculous Year," being a compilation of translated versions of his original 1905 papers, is more suited for the seasoned physicist who already understands the material but is curious about how Einstein really did it all. In the latter case, of course, one could turn to the professional physics literature, but it's nice to have all his 1905 papers in one place. The extra commentary is a nice addition, since it provides the necessary historical context. Too bad the book doesn't include Einstein's papers on his general theory of relativity but, of course, that would fall out of the miraculous year of 1905.

I am a nonscientist, general reader, but have read many popular accounts of special relativity. I have always felt shortchanged, though, just at the point where things get most interesting. I think that is because the real physics does lie in the equations, and verbal metaphors fall short. For me, here, for the first time, I see where the science is: just beyond the metaphors. Although I do not follow all the math by any means, so it is partly like listening to a foreign language, I recognized enough of the concepts to get a glimmer: and it is stunning. Here is Einstein himself, deriving E=mc2 in paper 4; so briefly, so lucidly (although another reader from California seems to have missed it). Paper 3 on special relativity is, even to this nonscientist, dazzling.

Writting a book based upon exagerated assumptions, Al Gore humiliating enviormentalist, such as myself, making us appears as deranged uneducated alarmists. He states that: "The most lasting impact of biotechnology on the food supply may come not from something going wrong, but from all going right...we're far more likely to accidentally drown ourselves in a sea of excess grain."

Someone must whack Al Gore back to reality and ask: The World population expected to double in 20 yrs, how else can we support so many people?

Finally, a book about environmental issues written by scientists! I like to base my opinions on facts, and this book gave me the facts needed to develop an informed opinion about some of today's environmental issues. Everyone should read this book.

My niece saw this book here in Amazon, had her heart set on it.
but never really looked over the accompanying info.

In my opinion, the publisher has committed a travesty. this book has only 28 readable pages including the table of contents.
It has 6 black and white photos, and the print is all large
print. any "big star" to allow such a book to be sold for this
price is pathetic. DO NOT PURCHASE THIS BOOK!!!!

I never knew how talented this guy was until I read this book. It is chock fullof information and a great read for kids who have an interest in the business or just in Anthony. I'd like to read and see more books like this!

I feel the major parts of the some of the creeds and confessions were ommitted for doctrinal reasons. I do know that there were some parts that were not in the other copies of the creeds that I have read. Otherwise it was a very educational book.

I've read this book twice. Once when it came out and once again recently. Both times I thought little of it. It is better suited in a tabloid than a bookstore.

Truly, it is the rumors and gossip that are treated as fact in this book that ruins it. The bisexual stuff, I mean, he can't possibly know if any of that is true and yet he seems to have no problem with dispensing it.

He looks at Lennon very negatively- the cup is always half empty and I'll give you a perfect example. The story about the creation of "I Want to Hold your Hand." John and Paul were writing this and they were trying to find the chord that would give structure to the song. They were running through ideas and Paul hits a chord. John said he stopped and shouted "That's it! Do that again!" Thus the song was on it's way to being what it is. Now, in other books, John is praised for recognizing this chord and is given credit for doing so. Goldman, however, in his referencing the song, all he says about it is Paul was responsible for finding the chord that made "I want to Hold Your Hand." That's it. He doesn't really tell the story, he leaves it at that, leaving the reader to assume Paul did it all by himself.

And that's what this whole book is. A bunch of half-stories. It's garbage.

Okay, here's the thing with this book.

A)How do you know that what Goldman says isn't true? You're not the one who did six years of research. B)As much as I admire John Lennon, it was refreshing to read a book that was the opposite extreme of all the sappy, fan-clubby stuff that's written about him, and C)with brutal honesty, it sheds light on the fact that Lennon vacillated between a need for commercial success and a need for artistic integrity in his work, something that all artists go through but no one wants to admit to it, especially about the great artists like John Lennon because it's much easier to slap the label "genius" on them and move on.

Yeah, the book is mean, but for the most part, I find the meanness necessary in light of all the other sappy tripe that's been written about him- and maybe it'll pave the way for more middle of the road approaches. The only thing I don't like is, he totally takes these cheap shots at Yoko Ono... yeah, Goldman, like THAT'S really original. I happen to like Yoko Ono.

I read this book when it was first released in the 80's and could not put it down, enjoying it even more than his previous book, ELVIS. Since Elvis had no pretensions about his public image vs. private (he's been called "the Howard Hughes of show business"), he received a harsh treatment from Goldman and it did feel like, as one reviewer said, Goldman "was picking on the rube." But looking at John Lennon, Goldman ventures behind the Lennon-Ono "myth machine" to expose a mad couple's packaging of themselves and the weird reality they really lived. I liked Lennon and loved his wicked sense of humor, but I also have to admit that madness also fueled his genius and Goldman's book filled me with more pity than anything else.
The only thing missing from the new edition is the article Goldman wrote about the persecution he endured for writing about Lennon in the first place (only Penthouse would publish it at the time!). By taking on the cult of rock stars, he ended up enduring the wrath of America's mass media and the rock establishment itself (Rolling Stone dedicated an entire issue to defaming him and U2, those peace-loving ambassadors of goodwill, wrote a song that included lyrics calling for his death!).