There are lots of cats and crime novels out there...crime solving cats are almost a cliche. But in Dymmoch's first mystery novel, cats are metaphors for human behavior: independent, intelligent, and irrepressible. Dymmoch writes about them well...in fact, Dymmoch is an excellent writer in general. "The Man Who Understood Cats" is well written, and fairly well constructed, though I felt it a bit repetitive: the sequence of murders seemed similarly devised (suicides made to look like murders) and the ultimate discovery of the murder was an anticlimax: he was the least developed of characters and his motives remain unclear.

However, I enjoyed the setting and the partnership of cop and shrink, and I am looking forward to reading the next book in this series.

Don't let the title of this mystery fool you into thinking that this is one of those cute mysteries in which man and cat solve crime. This riveting first mystery features Chicago detective John Thinnes and psychiatrist Jack Caleb, neither of whom believe that Dr Caleb's patient, Allan Finley, an obsessive but otherwise unremarkable accountant, committed suicide.
The plot is complex and suspenseful, but what makes this book special is the relationship between Detective Thinnes who is near burnout and the openly gay Dr. Caleb. Each man is forced to reassess what he thinks of the other as they work together to solve the crime.
As a psychotherapist, I found Dr Caleb very believable. He is a skilled, well-trained professional not a mind reader. Dymmoch understands, as many writers don't, that a good pyschiatrists and detectives have a lot in common with the ideal writer of fiction who in the words of Henry James is "a person on whom nothing is lost."

There is a new edition for this title which is A History of the World's Religion by David S. Noss.

I have used the 8th edition of this book (with David Noss) as the basis for my lectures on world religion since 1989. It is an excellent overview of the great religions placing them in three categories based on three possible reponses to the natural world. I use these grouping in my classes: religions of India, religions of east Asia, and religions of the Middle East. I particularly like the balance between history and belief systems.

I have often recommended this book to others and now I realize that I'll have to let them know that it is out of print. Our local library had copies of various editions but they have been stolen!

Sorry to hear that a book I thought of as a friend is gone.

Fighting against the whole regiment on one of the Hawaiian islands with automatic weapons for mass destruction became so bored and a highly unlikely scenario. Mr. Clarkson should go back to his first Devlin book, letting the hero use his body and mind to do the fights

Clarkson has a talent for writing 'action' novels. Sure the story may be overdone a bit in some places but who cares ? You read for excitement, for a rush. I couldn' put this one down either, just like his other two books. You'll enjoy this one,it's a lot of fun. michael

Let met start by saying that I've read this at least four times, so obviously I love it. But the title is deceptive. If you are looking for a story about a falsely imprisoned man bravely escaping and getting revenge on those who did him wrong, you should think twice about buying this book. Hollywood has for years tried to turn this novel into such an "escape" story, based mainly on its title, so that's the impression people have of the book.

If you're looking for such a story, I'd highly recommend The Count of Monte Cristo (Oxford has an edition that runs upward of 1,000 pages - which is daunting - but Bantam has an abridgement that is 450 pages and is quite entertaining. That may be the exact book you're looking for!).

The Man in the Iron Mask tells a different story, one based on historic facts. In 1661, King Louis XIV of France had his minister of finances - Nicolas Fouquet - arrested for embezzlement. Also in that year, Louis successfully wooed a young handmaiden named Louise, which caused some stir. In this novel, Dumas gives us the secret history behind these facts, and it is no surprise that the story involves his famous Four Musketeers.

More specifically, Aramis becomes privy to the fact that Louis has a twin brother languishing in the Bastille, and he attempts to switch the two. The novel details his fascinating and rather intricate plot to pull this off, as well as how the other Musketeers fit into the plan.

However, the first couple of hundred pages concern mainly the aforementioned historic events, and its a bit of reading before you get to the meat of the action.

I can't recommend this book highly enough - it seems to have become part of my life, the way some good books can - but don't let the title create a false expectation. You'll be dissappointed - instead, read The Count of Monte Cristo.

But if you love literature, if you love stories of complex intrigue, and especially if you love the Four Musketeers, you HAVE to read this book at least once in your life!

This is the last part of Alexandre Dumas' Musketeer Cycle, so do read the first four books first. (Oh, all right, you can read this one first if you want to. I did, to be honest. But it is made all the more powerful by the backstory.) Also, do yourself a favor and get an edition of The Man in the Iron Mask that matches your edition of Louise de la Valliere and Le Vicomte de Bragelone. Different publishers cut into the story (the three novels were intended to be one novel) at different chapters.

I cried and stayed awake all night the first time I read this one. It depressed me for a week-- but it is beautiful novel, and the action writing is as good as any Dumas ever does. Would you expect any less in D'Artagnan's last adventure? The tale, by the way, is that of D'Artagnan and his friends. The title character is for the most part a plot device. (AND NO, NONE OF THE MOVIES HAVE MUCH TO DO WITH THE BOOK! THE BOOK IS BETTER!)

Long live Athos, Porthos, Aramis, and D'Artagnan.

I was inspired to read The Man in the Iron Mask after seeing the movie (the one with DiCaprio). I hadn't realized that the Musketeers were part of the story and was very intrigued. Which plot lines were in the original and which were developed by Hollywood? Wow! Was I in for a surprise! The movie and the book tell different stories, but both are excellent, entertaining, and thought-provoking.

I appreciate books/series which show how the characters have aged and developed. Dumas does this with the musketeer series. D'Artagnan is no longer the wide-eyed "Gee, what could happen to me next?" hero of The Three Musketeers. He has to deal with questions of loyalty vs. friendship, support for the king vs. honor vs. love of his friends. There are still adventures and swordfights, but also more character conflicts. There is no simple nasty villain for the "good guys" to fight.

When I first read The Man in the Iron Mask (the movie tie-in edition), I was confused about who many of the characters were. The beginning didn't make much sense since it came in part-way through the story. The first line of the first chapter in particular confused me since it referred to events which I as the reader knew nothing about. The book makes a lot more sense when read as part of the whole series (The Three Musketeers, Twenty Years After, The Vicomte de Bragelonne, Louise de la Valliere, The Man in the Iron Mask).

I STRONGLY suggest reading the Oxford World Classics edition, which starts with earlier chapters than other published versions and includes scenes that make the story more understandable: Athos confronts the King, Aramis reveals himself as a Jesuit and scopes out the Bastille, D'Artagnan confronts the King... These are some of the best scenes in the book, and it is a shame that other publishers don't include them.

No doubt it is true. A must for everyone who has seen the movie 'Ghost & the Darkness'. Story of two man eating lions slaughtering railway construction workers in Tsavo, then the British East Africa and how they were eliminated. If you have ever hunted or had a brush with wild cats in the wild you will get the same feeling of nervousness and helplesness again. It is also very informative regardng african tribes and the customs we rarely see even on television these days. The movie was good the book just makes it better.

The Man-Eaters of Tsavo is an exciting account of the author's pursuit of 2 man-eating lions that are disrupting the progress of a British railway. While I was disappointed the lions were dispatched early into the book (all suspense ruined by the chapter title "death of the first man-eater"),the rest of the book shows us a bit more about Lt. Colonel Patterson, Africa, and the era Man-Eaters of Tsavo was written in. Even if the man-eaters are dead, Patterson still manages to recount other hunts and adventures he has in Africa while the railroad is being built.
Also of note are the stunning photographs of the wildlife, land, and natives. They add immensely to the book, although it can be argued a good book needs no pictures. The pictures, in addition to the large font, make this book a short, but enjoyable read.

You don't have to be a hunter to enjoy this book--I'm not, and I loved it. Contrary to the title's suggestion, this book is not merely about the Lions of Tsavo. In fact, both lions are dispatched fairly early in the book. Nevertheless, Patterson's account of their carnage, and efforts to kill them, are detailed and exciting, and probably unlike anything that will ever be written again.

This book is also gives a micro-social look at British imperialism in Africa around the turn of the century...an interesting slice of Africana, especially through our arguably hypersensitive, politically-correct modern eyes.

Generally, an easy read, filled with local color, hunting, and excitement.

In my opinion there is but very vague references to the word. You will see a scripture and then a chapter made around this point. I would have liked to see more scriptural references to validate his points. Inside my heart felt caution and just wanted to see it validate through a biblical story or passage. I have seen this book go around and seems that many women want to read it as a manual to understand men, its not very good for that understanding. It seems the ones that have a passion for the word have issues with this book. I am just saying be cautious and make sure it all lines up with the word. I might have well missed something in this book. But overall as I feel there is a possibility to be cautious of a lack of biblical references to support his writing.

This book seems to be one of many that seems to want to wake people up to new thinking that isn't traditional in Christianity. Old thinking doesn't sell as well. There is nothing new about the Gospel and old truths are still truths. Dont let your ears be tickled just make sure its backed with the word. The word will make you WILD at Heart.

John Eldredge's WILD AT HEART is one of the most refreshing and radical books that I have read. Why are so many men unhappy, un-fulfilled, in jobs they hate, and in marriages that are dead? WILD AT HEART seeks to answer those questions and restore the passion and God-given masculinity that so many men in today's world, and church, are missing.

Some wrongly criticize WILD AT HEART, believing Eldredge is offering up macho, dim-witted masculine bravado, or they believe that this work will be a free pass for men to leave marriages in the dust on a search for lost dreams. Eldredge will have none of that, and says himself in the book that such men are "deceived about what it is they really want, what they are made for." Don't be fooled by the various criticisms that ignore Eldredge's real meaning. A real man's desires are shaped by the Lord.

Instead, WILD AT HEART is about restoring a Godly dream in the soul of a man. A desire to truly be a man, rather than a softened-neutered-nice-but-restrained-guy that the world has somehow dictated that Christian males should be. Nice men may be socially acceptable but in creating them we have snuffed out the very fire that God would have us fan in our pursuit of Him.

This is an attempt to re-kindle that flame. To restore the three longings that are at the core of each man: a battle to fight, an adventure to live, and a beauty to rescue. Eldredge's arguments are firmly planted in Biblical principles, as well as his past personal experience. His writing style is very easy going, and he uses a lot of illustrations from popular culture, which makes the reading fun. I believe this book is an awesome wake up call to the church. For too long men have weakened themselves by ignoring our God-created passions. WILD AT HEART shows us how to restore them, and challenges us to take the right risks and live the adventure. It may be a bit scary (after all, did God give Abraham a risk-free offer on his call to leave Ur?), but there's no other way to reach the real fulfillment that God would have us find. I'm not a big fan of "men's books," but this is one that I am so glad that I did not miss. You shouldn't either. FIVE STARS.

The Truth hurts! It does not surprise me that there are a number of negative reviews about this book. Doesn't the Bible take a beating: picked at, dissected, shoved under a thick glass lens in order to find fault and in hopes to discredit it.
Men really are weak; milking from the wound that John makes so plain to see. Funny, the very thing John puts on the page, men prove through their ridiculous comments. Any man who thinks that John is advocating danger and foolish endeavors suffers from a lack of living. They are the pew potatoes of our nation that squeal like pigs at a challenge to get off of their duffs and make a difference in their world. They hide behind their wives (or mother's) skirt and stick out their tongues at any man willing call a spade a spade. They would rather live their lives through sport's heroes and film stars than risk losing a comfortable place on the couch. They live, only waiting to die.
You don't have to join the service, fight in war, or kill anyone to be a man, but do have to follow the Commander of our spiritual war into battle when He calls you to put on the whole armor of God. Most men haven't a clue that there is a war. Too many action movies and video games have desensitized our nation into believing that it's all make believe anyway. Wake up, Men, or the Enemy will leave you alone to live a useless life and die a slow death.

At first I was forced to read "The Mayor of Casterbridge" in school more than 12 years ago. Reading it slowly made an impact on my life. This book always served a special purpose in my life. It introduced me to the wide world of Literature. It sort of enlighten my interest and liking for English literature. Now re-reading it not only brought back fond memories of my yester school days but also renewed my liking to one of the greatest writer of all time Thomas Hardy.

Through this novel I came to the understanding of Irony and oxymoron. Hardy totally wrote with a sense of awareness of human characteristic and he had a amazing style of mixed humour with tragedy.

His protagonist,Michael Henchard's life was under the microscope of Hardy.

I love the way the story began I quote:"ONE evening of late summer, before the nineteenth century had reached one-third of its span, a young man and woman, the latter carrying a child, were approaching the large village of Weydon-Priors, in Upper Wessex, on foot. " I love the Englishness and the sense of intriguing events that would follow...

In brief, Michael Henchard was a drunk who sold his wife and daughter at the fair. Later he realised his mistakes he work real hard and eventually became the mayor of Casterbridge. His life took another twist 20 years later when his wife and daughter came back to his life plus a few more other characters adding on the complexity of his life.Soonafter events unfolded and many things became to go against his way and then came his downfall. Indeed Michael Henchard's rise and fall were filled with compelling details and his encounters with numerous intestering people.

What I love most about this novel was the way Hardy depicted Henchard's behaviours and thoughts and totally enhanced his weak character and irresponsibleness with dashes of ironies. His sardonic literary style were brilliant and at the same time he also vividly described the scenery and situations. Another greatest of Hardy was his ability to create innovative characters still account for in modern contemporary days and he was a pioneer in analysising human's weakness and blended it into his creation. It's a vintage classic,psychoanalytic and intriguingly written ,a must read for all books lover.

I remember having read this book in high school. I immediately fell in love with Hardy. (I was also fond of Hardy Boys at that time, so in my opinion the name Hardy acquired a special significance.) Unfortunately, though, I never liked another book by him quite so much. I've read Tess of the d'Urbvilles, Under the Greenwood Tree, Far from the Madding Crowd(which was perhaps his second best novel, as others here have affirmed), and perhaps a few others. It is strange, or perhaps significant that I remember the exact circumstance when I was reading this book. It must have been about ten in the night. I had cleared my study desk, and unlike my common practice of lying on my stomach on my bed to enjoy a book into the night, I sat down on the straight-backed chair at the desk to read it. Very soon, I was overwhelmed by the narrative of Mr. Hardy. My father came in to see what I was up to, saw the tears streaming down my face as I turned the pages of my book, and quietly went away. I have never before owned any story books- my parents told me to read out of libraries. But now I am 22, and have started earning some money of my own, and I'm going to start a little collection of my most beloved books, to pass on to my children, perhaps? And this is among my very best.

I read this novel in English class, like most people probably did. It was one of the best assigned to us.

Hardy is a gifted author. He writes in a clear style with vivid descriptions that really bring the setting alive, without making the reader (at least this reader) feel inundated with borning, unnecessary detail.

The thing that I look for most in a novel, however, is quality characterizeations, and this book had them in spades. Dialogue was used effectively to flesh out characters. These are not stock characters, either. These people have flaws and shades of grey. They seem as though they could be real. I found that I could relate to the characters, and I did empathize with them, even when I didn't agree with their choices. Everyone had clear motivations. The characterization of Henchard shows that Hardy clearly understood the notion of the tragic flaw and the tragic hero/anti hero.

Students who have to read this book as part of their English class may find it a bit on the long side. I would urge you to stick with it; once you get through the initial chapters the book will pick up (a commonality that all British classics seem to share). The book is easy to follow and understand. It is a key novel that marks the shift from Romantic Age to the Victorian Age, so it's an important read for anyone who has a serious interest in English Literature.

Don't get me wrong: I'm a BIG Lawrence Block fan. I've read every book he's published since Matt Scudder's drinking days. But he's gotten soft and complacent in recent books. Yes, all his characters talk exactly the same: they all go into these silly off-topic tangents and have a wry humor that is just fine for Bernie, but is way off the mark for Matt or Keller. Block has drifted far away from his noir roots. Keller is not a cold blooded hit man, he's a transparent piece of cardboard. A real killer would have speculated about killing the kids playing basketball in the driveway, if that's what it took to carry out his contract. This is the first Block book in twenty years that I have put aside unfinished. A major disappointment.

Keller is a paid assassin, a professional killer, who defies the classic stereotype. Instead, his lifestyle is that of the traveling businessman who is just another Manhattan single male when he is home. He does the Times crossword every morning while sipping his coffee. He has tried therapy and purchased a dog to help him with his growing loneliness. However, the therapy made him even more introspective and the dog left him for his former girl friend. He never cooks (even with a microwave) as he lives on take out or dining out. His lonely existence is only broken by his high paying jobs at various locations around the country. When he is not on the job, he reflects on his life and wonders about his victims' families.

HIT MAN is a short story collection about one of the best characters to arrive on the urban crime noir scene in years. Instead of being a hero, Keller is an anti-hero. The stories are all trademark Lawrence Block: gritty, exciting, and entertaining. However, what makes this terrific book so appealing is that Keller could be the guy next door taking out your sister on a date. To make matters even more interesting, Keller, despite his profession, is a likeable character. Let's hope for more Keller works in the near future. He is fascinating!

Harriet Klausner

The book the Hit Man by Lawrence Block is a book that is full of enthusiastic drama that makes you want more. This story's main character, J.P. Keller, is a contract hit man. In this book, Keller deals with many problems about his life and has many adventures in doing what he does, which is killing people. This is a great book of short stories about a hit man's personal and impersonal life. Keller is confused and doesn't know whether he should keep his job, that has him killing people, or leave it and live a normal man's life. As a hit man, he sometimes has to kill people that he likes. How does Keller deal with it? What would you do if that were you? Well to find out and to know more about what goes on in a hit man's mind read this book. I give Hit Man a 5 and recommend this book to any body that likes to read exiting short stories.

I will not argue the fact that Joyce is a master of the English language. Nor will I argue that at times he has very good insight into the psychological motivations of art, religion, and sociology. He possesses both of these talents. However, the manner in which they are presented in this book is simply disappointing. I am an avid reader and can appreciate thick philosophy woven artistically into an intriguing story. This book has sparse bits of philosophy and an occasional artistic stitch, but by and large fails to create a fabric that sparks my interest. Throughout this book, I found myself hopelessly holding onto the idea that, "this is one of the greatest books ever written in the English language," and was left there holding onto that hope afterwards because it failed to deliver anything more.

The story drags at the beginning, and while the minutia of Stephen's life is important to understand where he ends up, its focussed on way too much; the first 80 pages are useless and will leave you rolling your eyes for relief. Next, while a certain degree of specificity is important in terms of describing a scene, the precision to which he describes things, largely irrelevant things, can only be construed as "filling" to make this very short book acceptably long. Say something. Repeat it for emphasis. But don't fixate on it for pages and pages and pages. Lastly, the "meat" of the book, that being what actually made the man into an artist, is so sparse and loosely hung on the frail skeleton of plot, that any person reading this book hungry for some sort of insight or depth is ravishing and unsatisfied at the end, anxious to be filled up by some other book.

Kundera is much better at doing what this "master" was intending to do. He cuts off the fat and leaves raw, creative, chiseled, philosophical muscle on the bone for a reader to savor. I wish I would have spent my time rereading something of his instead of deciding to pick up a book about the very slow and boring progression of this artist's perception.

"Portrait" is arguably Joyce's best work, truly a masterpiece from the greatest writer of the 20th century if not ever. Even if you are not a writer (I'm an engineer), after reading Joyce you will want to write--albeit sadly not as well as Joyce, but you will want to write nonetheless. As for the rare bad review that you may see on this forum, well, there's no accounting for taste! More seriously, it can be a tough read and people often get more out of it the second time through (for fellow members of the Television Generation, we call that "replay value"). So give the heretics who scored it two or three stars a few years for their tastes to mature, and we'll see what they say when they read it again.

When I first read Joyce, I did not catch many of the nuances of Portrait, so I understand how some may find this a challenging book. Hence, I highly recommend buying a copy of the "The Dubliners"--the Dover Thrift edition costs $1.50, though it has no notations. (Also, if you are a busy person, a taste of Joyce may help motivate you.) Dubliners is a collection of short (4-10 page) stories that, beyond being excellent in themselves, will help you get acclimated to Joyce. And for a little more than a buck, you can afford to throw it in to some order to get a nice preview of Joyce before spending the time to read Portrait. (Not that Portrait takes a long time--it's just over 200 pages.)

"A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man" is an impressionistic, semi-autobiographical work in which Joyce, through the character of Stephen Dedalus, relates the events and impressions of his youth and young adulthood. The novel flows effortlessly from Stephens first memories as "baby tuckoo" to his final journal entries before embarking on a promising literary career in Paris. In the pages between, Joyce's virtuosity of prose explodes in passages with frightening intensity. Even those who dislike Joyce's confusing, sometimes-infuriating style, should be awestruck by his undubitable writing ability.

However, as anyone reading this review should already know, despite his virtuosity, Joyce is not for everyone. He is simultaneously one of the most beloved and despised writers of the twentieth century. For those of you who are unfamiliar with his work and hesitantly contemplating becoming acquainted with it, here is some food for thought: first, start with "Portrait," it is far more accessible than his subsequent works and a better introduction to them than the also-excellent "Dubliners" is. Second, do not try to judge "Portrait" by the same standards as other books. Joyce is not trying to tell an amusing story here, he is trying to relate the impressions of a young man torn between two existences: a religious or an aesthetic. If you are a meat-and-potatoes type of reader, meaning the kind of reader who prefers a "story," Joyce will not be your cup of tea. Lastly, Joyce's reputation perhaps does his works injustice. Yes, he is extremely encyclopedic and takes on many themes in his works. But perhaps too many readers get sidetracked from the aesthetic merits of his works by concentrating solely on the intellectual values. It is his prose which can be universally appreciated, whether you understand the ideas it portrays or not. His prose is his bread-and-butter. Some people pompously brag of their "getting" Joyce without actually appreciating what he does. I don't claim to be a bonafied Joyce scholar, but it is my experience that to enjoy Joyce is to appreciate "literature for literature's sake." If you enjoy literature, poetry or prose, than you should enjoy the style with which Joyce writes, that is to say, all styles. And he has seemingly mastered all styles. That is not to say that the many thematic levels in which his novels succeed are to be ignored, for their expression is not seperate from the means with which Joyce does it, but congruous with it.

To read Joyce is to revel in the limits of artistic creation and then to read on as the limits are then stretched further.

Bon Apetite!

I borrowed this book from my brother about four years ago. Four years later I have been married for three years and decided to finally read the book.

Summary:
The basic idea of the book is that there are five stages to the dating process:
1. Attraction
2. Uncertainty
3. Exclusivity
4. Intimacy
5. Engagement

The rest of the book is a collection of insights on how to make relationships successful or how to recognize when it is time to end a relationship.

My Comments:
First, I must admit that being involved in a traditional relationship (I am a married heterosexual) the insights in the book seemed fairly relevant and well designed. But, this is also one of the problems I see with the book. The book is designed exclusively for traditional, heterosexual relationships. If you are not a man or a woman looking for someone of the opposite sex to marry, then this isn't the book for you. The ultimate goal, as defined in the book, is marriage. If you are not looking to get married, then this isn't the book for you.

The book is written from a very traditional perspective. With the increase in non-traditional relationships (homosexuality, bisexuality, cohabitation, etc.) this book could alienate a lot of people. Also, there are continual references to God throughout the book. These references often coincide with a concept the author calls 'soul mates'. There is a trend in American society away from the traditional view of God, specifically seeing God as an active force in people's lives. As a result, this book could also alienate those people that don't believe in God or don't feel that God is active in their lives. And the idea of soul mates (as Dr. Gray outlines it in the book it is the idea that there is one special person for you out there) is, in my humble opinion, very outdated. Perhaps Dr. Gray isn't arguing that there is only ONE person that you could marry, but he seems to think that there aren't very many - if there is more than one - and that they are hard to find.

Another major problem with this approach to relationships is that Dr. Gray presents relationships in a very functional sense. Let me explain... Instead of saying that perhaps the way people approached romantic relationships in the past (pre 1990) may not have been the best way to do it (men calling women, being responsible for everything that takes place, women being receptive rather than aggressive, etc.), Dr. Gray incorporates all of these things into his theory about how relationships and dating are supposed to work. He seems to argue that because these behaviors exist they must be necessary. This is a circular argument from which one cannot escape. They are necessary so they must exist. They exist because they are necessary. I would argue that the traditional dating patterns of bygone ages are outdated and anti-modal. Sure, he offers ideas and thoughts where men and women can change, but he also seems to be arguing that a lot of things should just plain stay the same. I disagree out right with this idea. We live in a different time.

I should also mention that the version I read is 370 pages long. It could have been condensed to about 150 pages and still covered everything he wanted to say adequately.

On the positive side, because I am in a heterosexual relationship, I did find some of Dr. Gray's insights helpful. However, the one's that I found applicable to my relationship I found by sifting through the broad, sweeping claims he makes about genders and in between comments about how God will help us find our partner and how we can find a soul mate; all of which I thought was worthless trash.

Overall, this book would be useful to someone that firmly believes in God, wants a traditional relationship with a woman, and believes that the old way of dating/courting is still the right way. If this describes you (it probably describes over 60% of the U.S. population, meaning Dr. Gray understands there is a market for this type of stuff) then this would be a good book. If you don't meet this criteria, look elsewhere.

Mars and Venus On A Date is indeed a very enriching read. Many but not all romantic relationships do fall into John Gray's five stages of Attraction, Uncertainty, Exclusive, Intimacy, and Marriage. The attraction levels of Physical, Emotional, Intellectual, and Spiritual are explained quite well from both the Venus and Mars perspective.

Common arguments are discussed in great detail. Never try to solve a woman's problem and never offer unsolicated advice to a man. Also to either sex, just apologize without making excuses. Admit your faults and the other party will be more forgiving.

I don't necesarilly agree with Gray's assessment that a woman should not reach over to open the car door for a man early in the dating process. Truthfully its a minor issue and its not worth the emphasis that it was given.

Good emphasis on what men and women need in a partner and their lives. Men like to feel that what they have to offer is needed. Its Ok to use men to a point. Women don't want to have to do it all. They get depressed if they realize that they have to do everything themselves.

Some good analysis and common sense. Overall it gets my seal of approval.

Heard the taped version of MARS AND VENUS ON A DATE
by John Gray . . . extremely informative (at least to me) tour
of the five stages of dating: attraction, uncertainty, exclusivity, intimacy, and engagement.

Gray presents ideas on how to find your soul mate, as well
as thoughts on how to create a loving and mutually fulfilling
relationship . . . he has the ability to make sense out
of ordinary situations that appear easy to handle, yet in
reality are anything but that.

I know I liked the material, in that I had to get a copy of
the book (after listening) so that I could share just a
few of the many memorable passages . . . among them:

* When you [a man] make a mistake, use a negative
adjective--a "nadjective"--to describe yourself or what
you did. These are a few examples:

I'm sorry that I was late. . . . I was really inconsiderate.

I'm sorry about the things I said yesterday . . . I thought
about it and realized that I was overreactive.

I'm sorry I didn't call you back sooner. You're right; I was
really insensitive.

I'm sorry that I forgot to get the tickets. It was really
selfish of me.

I'm sorry you felt excluded at the party. . . I was
inconsiderate, it was really mean.

I am really sorry about the things I said. I was really
being defensive.

* Women will appreciate any sincere compliment, but when
a man puts a little more thought into his words, she
will like it more. . . . The more special the adjective, the
more special she feels. These are some examples:

PLAIN COMPLIMENT (PC) vs. JUICY COMPLIMENT (JC)
PC, That is a nice picture. JC, You are incredibly artistic.
PC, You look good tonight. JC, You look magnificent tonight.
PC, You have a nice smile. JC, You have a radiant smile.
PC, You look good. JC, You are so gorgeous.
PC, You look nice. JC, You are so lovely.
PC, You look nice. JC, You look beautiful.
PC, That is a nice dress. JC, You look so exquisite in that dress.
PC, You have nice eyes. JC, You have such a special sparkle in your eyes.

Even a plain compliment can be juiced up with any of these
five simple words: so, really, very, always, and such.

[For example, to juice up the most basic compliment, "You look nice."]
1. You look so nice. (attraction)
2. You look really nice. (interest)
3. You look very nice. (enthusiasm)
4. You always look nice. (familiarity)
5. You have such a nice look. (pride)

To express more feeling in a compliment, he can just repeat
any of these words or combine them like this:
1. You look so, so nice
2. You really look so nice.
3. You look very, very nice.
4. You always look so nice.
5. You really have such a nice look.

Women can also use these five words to express more
feeling in their indirect compliments to a man. Let's apply
these five words to one of the most basic compliments that
any man loves to hear, "I am happy we did this."

1. I am so happy we did this.
2. I am really happy we did this.
3. I am very happy we did this.
4. I am always happy to do this.
5. I am so happy; I had such a good time.

* When a woman talks about problems, a man mistakenly
assumes that she is asking him what to do about them.