Golding is an incredible wordsmith. With stark realism and deep insight, he probes one man's outer and inner struggles for survival after washing up on a rock in the mid-Atlantic. I found the psychological portrail wholly believable, but I had a difficult time sympathizing with this character. He's a womanizer, a self-centered egotist. With near-animal drive, he carves out meager existence on the rock. I found very little emotional connection with Martin, and read on primarily because of Golding's narrative power.

Essentially, Golding seems to say that, brought to our lowest common denominator in a fight for life, we are all self-centered, that greed takes over. I found the argument weak because we discover that Martin was this way already. I would've liked to see a selfless person's fight for existence and the consequences of his actions.

Or maybe that's Golding's point: Martin's self-centeredness eventually corrodes his ability to survive because the motivations run shallow. Numerous true-life accounts show the struggle of men and women to rise above their base needs and extend life heroically to others. Selflessness often leads to the survival of the group, it seems, but in this book we have only one character's survival to consider.

A second reading might reveal to me more of Golding's intentions in this story, but the fact remains: Golding knows how to build word upon word until you are trapped within the dwelling of his character's minds. That alone lifts this book above the volumes of so-called literature stacked on most shelves.

Based on Golding's own standards from his other books, I cannot highly recommend this as a great story, but only as a great example of powerful wordage and characterization. I think Golding sells us short here on the premise of survival. I finished the last page with little emotional or intellectual reaction. I felt, like Martin, only blank disillusionment.

One star taken away only because some of the material is dated. I'm an ex sailor and was enthralled from first page to last. I felt the motion of the boat, the bite of the weather and the stark reality of the island. This book proved to me Mr. Golding is a master story teller.

Golding proves he is a master of probing man's psychology when in the greatest of danger. The plight of the stranded naval officer is vivid and frightening. Riveting, exciting and thoughful, the story displayes Golding's awesome and expansive imagination in such a confined environment. Take heed that the book is about the TWO deaths of Christopher Martin.

Readers should note that this site does not distinguish between the various editions of Shakespeare, so the reviews you read may be for audiotapes, modern translations, etc. I am reviewing the Kenneth Branaugh BBC Radio recording of Hamlet. It is adequate, which I consider high praise for this challenging play. Like Branaugh's movie a few years later, it includes the entire text of the play, which is a nice way to remind yourself of some issues you may have forgotten.

The performances are pretty good, and include Branaugh (of course) as Hamlet and Derek Jacobi as Claudius, giving us a hint of the performances they would later give in the movie. No one's performance really blew me away, although Jacobi was excellent.

Ultimately, the play loses quite a bit when transferred to audio only. There's a lot to be conveyed with stage placement, physican action, expression, etc. Somehow, listening to the play limited my imagination on those issues, preventing my from using my "mind's eye" to the fullest.

Hamlet is considered, by many scholars, the pinnacle of Shakespeare's dramas. If you haven't read it yet this this Case Studies in Contemporary Criticism edition would be a great place to begin.

The text notes that are included with the play are very helpful to understand some of the more difficult language nuances that are inevitable with any Shakespeare. The structure is well laid out and conclusive. It complements the complexity of Hamlet very well.

Of course Hamlet is one of the great paradoxes and mysteries every written. The search of finding yourself and what it is that fuels the human spirit. Hamlet can be a very confusing play because of the depth of substance. However, the critical essays that suppliment the reading make it very accessable.

Each of the critical essays are of different schools of literary criticism: Feminist Criticism, psychoanalytic criticism, post-structuralist (deconstuctionist) criticism, Marxist critism, and finally a New Historicist criticism. Before each critism there is clearly written introduction to explain the motives and histories of that type of criticism.

This edition of Hamlet will not only introduce the reader to more Shakespeare, but also explain the play and help to familiarize the reader with literary criticism too. It is a beautiful volume that cannot be more recommended if you are wanting to buy a copy Hamlet.

Hamlet is, by far, the most complex of Shakespeare's many plays. Many of the themes covered are love vs hate, action vs non-action, revenge, and jealousy. Hamlet discovers that "something is rotten in the state of Denmark" when he encounters the ghost of his father, the King, who has recently been killed in battle. From here, Hamlet goes on a search for the discovery of what happened to his father. However, Hamlet not only uncovers secrets of the past, but also the depths of his own being.

The Folger Edition of Hamlet is a great edition to buy, especially for those who are studying this play in high school or college, because it is relatively cheap in price and is very "reader-friendly" with side notes and footnotes that accompany each page of each scene. So, even if you aren't a Shakespeare lover or if Shakespeare is just a little intimidating (we all know how this feels), this version at least allows you to get the gist of what is going on. Also, there are summaries of each scene within each act, to let you know in layman's terms what is taking place. I highly recommend this edition.

Cymbeline was a British king in Roman times ( Augustus Caesar's time).
Devices used in the Play:
1) a woman plays a man/ boy role ( several of his plays : As You Like it,
Twelfth Night))
2) a deception by a villain to lie the virtue of a Lady ( Much Ado about
Nothing)
3) Princes kidnapped and brought up as common men ( I don't know if he
uses this in other plays)
4) poison that causes a coma ( Romeo and Juliet)
5) a Prince who is a vile fool ( used in his historical plays)
6) a Queen who is a plotter and evil ( Macbeth)
7) a Prince who kills another Prince and it redeemed by his hidden
identity
8) a Prince sentenced to hang by mistake
9) a King who condemns his daughter wrongly ( King Lear)
One wonders how much of this is historical fact and how much pure fiction.
With all this scheming in the plot , it should be a very successful
play.
It is a total flop!
What it comes out is seeming unreal and contrived.
You get that happy ending feel that is so much in his comedies
but it has a very false feeling to it.
That's probably why Cymbeline isn't performed much.
If he hadn't gone for all these at once it might have worked, but the
result is that you see the playwright as ....
If anyone wants to take the air out of a Shakespeare pedant,
this is the play to do it with! He makes Shaw and Eugene O'neil l
look good. He even make Rogers and Hammerstein and Gilbert and
Sullivan look better, ha, ha...
This play is not Shakespeare's finest hour!

"Cymbeline" is my favourite Shakespeare play. It's also probably his loopiest. It has three plots, managing to drag in a banishment, a murder, a wicked queen, a moment of almost sheer pornography, a full-on battle between the Romans and the British, a spunky heroine, her jealous but not-really-all-that-bad husband, some fantastic poetry and Jupiter himself descending out of heaven on an eagle to tell the husband to pull his finger out and get looking for his wife. Finally, just when your head is spinning with all the cross-purposes and dangling resolutions, Shakespeare pulls it all together with shameless neatness and everybody lives happily ever after. Except for the wicked queen, and her son, who had his head cut off in Act 4.

"Cymbeline" is, then, completely nuts, but it manages also to be very moving. Quentin Tarantino once described his method as "placing genre characters in real-life situations" - Shakespeare pulls off the far more rewarding trick of placing realistic characters in genre situations. Kicking off with one of the most brazen bits of expository dialogue he ever created, not even bothering to give the two lords who have to explain the back story an ounce of personality, Shakespeare quickly recovers full control and races through his long, complex and deeply implausible narrative at a headlong pace. The play is outrageously theatrical, and yet intensely observed. Imogen's reaction on reading her husband's false accusation of her infidelity is a riveting mixture of hurt and anger; she goes through as much tragedy as a Juliet, yet is less inclined to buckle and snap under the pressure. When she wakes up next to a headless body that she believes to be her husband, her aria of grief is one of the finest WS ever wrote. No less impressive is her plucky determination to get on with her life, rather than follow her hubby into the grave.

Posthumus, the hubby in question, is made of less attractive stuff, but when he comes to believe that Imogen is dead, as he ordered (this play is full of people getting things wrong and suffering for it), he rejects his earlier jealousy and starts to redeem himself a tad. There's a vicious misogyny near the heart of this play, as Shakespeare biographer Park Honan observed, kept in balance by a hatred of violence against women. The oafish prince Cloten, who lusts after Imogen, is a truly repellent piece of work, without even the intelligence of Iago or the horrified panic of Macbeth; his plan to kill Posthumus and rape Imogen before her husband's body is just about as squalid and vindictive as we expect of this louse, and when a long-lost son of the king (don't even _ask_) lops Cloten's head off, there are cheers all round.

Shakespeare sends himself up all through "Cymbeline". I wonder if the almost ludicrously informative opening exposition scene isn't a bit of a gag on his part, but when a tired and angry Posthumus breaks into rhyming couplets, then catches himself and observes "You have put me into rhyme", we know that Shakespeare is having us on a little. Likewise, the final scene, when all is resolved, goes totally over the top in its piling-on "But-what-of-such-and-such?" and "My-Lord-I-forgot-to-mention" moments.

Yet the moments of terror and pity are deep enough to make the jokiness feel truly earned. When Imogen is laid to rest and her adoptive brothers recite "Fear no more the heat o' the sun" over her body, it's as affecting as any moment in the canon. That she isn't actually dead, we don't find out until a few moments later, but it's still a great moment.

Playful, confusing, enigmatic, funny and shot through with a frightening darkness, this is another top job by the Stratford boy. Well done.

A combination of "Romeo and Juliet," "Much Ado About Nothing," "As You Like It," and "King Lear?" Well somehow, Shakespeare made it work. Like "Romeo and Juliet" we have a protagonist (Imogen) who falls under her father's rages because she will not marry who he wants her to. Like "Much Ado About Nothing," we have a villain (Iachimo) who tries to convince a man (Posthumus) that the woman he loves is full of infidelity. Like "As You Like It," we have exiled people who praise life in the wilderness and a woman who disguises herself as a man to search for her family in the wilderness. Like "King Lear," we have a king who's rages and miscaculated judgement lead to disastorous consequences. What else is there? Only beautiful language, multiple plots, an evil queen who tries to undermind the king, an action filled war, suspense, a dream with visions of Pagan gods, and a beautiful scene of reconciliation at the end. While this is certainly one of Shakespeare's longer plays, it is well worth the time.

For fans of pop music history, and especially for those interested in recording science, this book is a must read. George Martin, the Beatles' producer, tells the detailed account of how the group's most famous album was created, from the beginning creative germs to the cover art.

For those in the recording industry, Martin's detailed explanations of how he created some of the now-famous effects on that album, at a time when recording science was still somewhat primitive, is quite interesting.

If you don't like the Beatles' music, you probably won't be able to sit through the sometimes technical recording talk, but anyone for whom the Beatles marked the culture of their youth should find it fascinating.

An excellent account of the making of the greatest rock'n'roll album ever produced: Sgt Pepper, written by the man who put it together. There's been a lot of claptrap about who, if anyone, could be considered "the fifth Beatle". I say it's George Martin. Why? The Beatles are about music, and outside of the four, no one had a hand with their material as Martin did. If you loved the Sgt Pepper album, you'll like this book.

It is a well accepted fact that two of the best produced pop/rock albums to date are Sgt. Peppers and Pet Shop. The reason for owning this album is to gain an inside look into the master mind of one of these most important albums. It may be true that our recording equipment has improved our flexability but nothing can replace a truly great producer and great musicianship. George Martin is one of the truly great hero's of our ART and this book gives us a wonderful look into one of his master pieces. I am a big Beatles fan but this book is really directed to producers rather than The Beatles fan base...and I love it. This book has become very hard to get a hold of but it is a MUST HAVE for the library of every producer.

The first third of the book contains articles & biographies relating to children and science-fiction book authors, along with 3 chapters on the history of a religious group/cult (7th Day Adventist).

The first chapter ("Wandering Jew") was promising, once one makes peace with it being a history of the consequences of poor scholarship without actually correcting the scholarship. However, it was spoiled in the end by vitriol.

The last two-thirds contain book reviews; two chapters on the Wizard of Oz (more than most would care to know), the "Christian Science" cult, a look at social constructivist claims about mathematics, etc.

The book tends to undermine itself; gratuitous phrases like "moronic" and "tin brains" suddenly pop up. It seems like the author just can't get over the existence of human fallibility: the compulsion to instruct people on proper right-thinking seems irrepressible.

The common thread is that the attacks are directed only at people who challenge human-based authority. The modus operandi is to seek deviant examples for caricature and hope it carries over as a generalization in the reader's mind. Thus the extensive coverage of Jim and Tammy Faye Baker, bizarre religious cults, and so on. The innocent reader would never guess brilliant modern religious thinkers and writers like Alvin Plantinga, William Lane Craig, Norman Geisler, Gary Habermas or Kelly James Clarke exist -- not even a whisper about their work. Someone might find out thoguhtful and powerful answers exist to humanist charges. Analysis of Augustine or Aquinas or Calvin? No. Any serious knowledge of church history? No. Just a spotlight for the deviant.

For all the overt and covert attacks on religion, the book seems mostly informed on the subject by "60 minutes" or "20/20" segments and the garish cast of characters who show up there. The goal seems to be how long a sneer can be sustained.

There seems dissatisfaction that individuals cannot be prevented from wrestling with issues of God and existence. However, the topic can't be controlled like mathematics: restricted to an elite 1 out of a 100000. People with of all sorts of intellects and cognitive skills and sinful natures are drawn to these issues. I would think a person who claims an intellectual life would seek out the best thought, not dwell on the weakest. One can't help but think of the junior high-school student who likes to pick on the 3rd graders. Trying someone at his own level or higher means the risk of getting creamed.

There are dozens of thoughtful, brilliant volumes one could profitably spend time with. Why the author avoids them is an open question:

"6 Modern Myths About Christianity and Western Civilization" (Sampson). "Christianity on Trial: Arguments Against Anti-Religious Bigotry" (Carroll),"Inventing the Flat Earth" (Russell), "How Now Shall We Live" (Colson), "Church History in Plain Language" (Shelley), "Atheism and the Erosion of Freedom" (Morey), "Reasonable Faith" (Craig), "Christian Apologetics" (Geisler),"New Evidence That Demands a Verdict" (McDowell).

With all that is happening in the world, "The Wandering Jew" could leave one thinking the biggest problem out there is that someone somewhere might be taking an herb not approved by the FDA/AMA and "who-knows-what-might-happen-if-he-thinks-it-works?". Trivial stuff and a waste of the author's (and reader's) time.

Martin Gardner has done it again: Another fabulous jewel in his crown of critical and thought-provoking works.

I have been a fan of Gardner's since "Fads and Fallacies (In the Name of Science)". His strength is in taking an unflinching look at the foibles and farces that most people would prefer to pretend don't exist in our civilized world... But they do, and they're ugly, and they need to be looked at -- acknowledged -- as a first step to fixing them, much as an alcoholic or drug addict first needs to admit they have a problem.

Sure, Gardner packs a modicum of vitriol -- but in that, he merely mirrors what the masses actually feel when confronted by the nonsense that Gardner takes on. He's a brave, bold and straight-shooting warrior in the war for common sense, reason and rationality, and I wish him long life and many more books.

Interestingly the "reader from Pasadena", the only negative reviewer, gives himself (or herself) away by the list of books quoted as being "thoughtful, brilliant volumes one could profitably spend time with": This person obviously suffers from the Religion-is-the-only-correct-viewpoint syndrome. I find it even more interesting that this reviewer states that Gardner's "attacks are directed only at people who challenge human-based authority". "Human-based" as opposed to what? God-based? Yes, we certainly wouldn't ever want to question Jim and Tammy Faye Baker, now, would we? Or any other God-based authority, would we? I can only guess the reader from Pasadena means that religious-minded people should be allowed to "challenge" secular viewpoints, but never the reverse. How sad... and how eloquent a reminder that the world needs Martin Gardner, now more than ever.

Here's a tip: Whenever you're feeling like the world is a crazy, hopeless place, pick up a Martin Gardner book and start reading. It's always a nice feeling to know that there's at least one other sane person out there.

Long Live Martin Gardner!

Gardner is amazing! Each of his collections of essays is a marvel. This volume consists of ten essays and nineteen book reviews or introductions on a stunning variety of topics.

Gardner is known as a mathematical puzzler and a sceptic and debunker of pseudo-science. He is also a philosopher and literary scholar of impressive breadth and depth. This book exhibits depth of analysis on a stunning array of topics, from Christian Science to The Wizard of Oz.

Highly recommended, but if you are new to Gardner anthologies, his collection, The Night is Large, is a better introduction to his breadth of thought.

I started to use the companion free software "visualization toolkit" back to the first edition of this book. My goal was to write a Windows application called "3D Groundwater Explorer" for the 3D Visualizaiton of data and results from groundwater flow and contaminant transport simulations. It was a tough time, partly because this book focuses on algorithms and does not explain how to use the Toolkit in details (maybe the Toolkit is too "big" to be explained in details). Despite of the rather high learning curve, the Toolkit provides virtually everything that one might need in creating impressive and informative visualization image. The Visualization Toolkit is a real tremendous accomplishment.

This book is poorly titled, because it discusses the algorithms and techniques of visualization much more than the use of the Visualization Toolkit software. However, it is a good introduction to scientific visualization, and the free software included on the CD is an extremely powerful and useful tool. However, if you only wish to learn to use the software, The Visualization Toolkit User's Guide would be much more appropriate for you.

This book is great for gaining an in-depth understanding of the underlying visualization algorithms used in the Visualization Toolkit.

If you would like understand how to use the VTK software, you should purchase The Visualization Toolkit User's Guide. This companion book is updated for each major release of VTK, and contains many detailed examples.

This play can be read as anti-semitic. In fact, it's pretty hard to defend it from such charges. Shylock is a pretty rotten character and the fact that he is jewish is difficult to overlook (particularly since the other characters mention it on pretty much EVERY page). However, I think it is important to mention that the "heroes" of this play do not necessarily have to be interpreted as heroes. They are by no means perfect and there are many subtle (and some not-so-subtle) instances within the text in which their biases against ANYONE unlike them is illustrated. If one reads the play this way, then Shylock becomes more of a tragic figure rather than an absolutely heartless villain. I don't know. My feelings about this are mixed. There are a few funny parts of this play and the language is, as always, beautiful. The theme of putting a price on human beings is one which has been explored numerous times since. Overall, it is enjoyable, but perhaps not so much so as some of the other comedies. Do not read this play without having read a few others by Shakespeare first. It is an excellent play, but not his best and not his most enjoyable either.

This is a wonderful play - and unless you have seen it or read it you don't know it at all. That's because everything the popular culture tells us about this play is false (for example; how many of you think this play is about a merchant named Shylock? ;-)

The Merchant of Venice is a lively and happy morality tale. Good triumphs over bad - charity over greed - love over hate.
There is fine comedy. Portia is one of Shakespeare's greatest women (and he ennobled women more than any playwright in history). There are moments of empathy and pain with all the major characters. There is great humanity and earthiness in this play. These things are what elevate Shakespeare over any other playwright in English history.

Plays should be seen - not read. I recommend you see this play (if you can find a theater with the courage and skill to do it). But if it is not playing in your area this season - buy the book and read it.

After reading most of the other reviews here, I am fully aware that most of the reviewers didn't read carefully enough (or watch carefully enough if they saw the play.) Now, I'm not saying its not open for different interpretations, but there is one thing I would really like to get straight.

I read MoV for a Bar Mitzvah project on Anti-Semitism. Naturally, my sympathies went to Shylock. However, even if i were Christian, i still would've favored Shylock. What many people believe is that Shylock is a cold hearted ruthless person and only wanted to get back at Antonio because Antonio was a Christian.

Not true. Shylock specifically says something along the lines off, "Why should I lend money to you? You spit on me, and call me a Jewish dog!" I'm not saying that Shylock was a good guy, but I am saying that he is not the villain.

In fact, the "Merchant of Venice," in this story is actually Shylock, not Antonio, contrary to popular belief. My thoughts on the story was that Shylock requested a pound of Antonio's flesh because he did not trust Antonio. Who would trust someone that spat on him? The fact is, Antonio doesn't pay him back in the end.

Now, there's always something else we have to put into consideration. Would the judge had given the "spill one ounce of Christian blood" verdict at the end if Shylock were not a Jew?

This is the mark of a great play. A play that really gets you thinking. But I encourage you, I beg of you, that when you read it or see it, please do not hold Shylock up to being a cold hearted villain. Hold Antonio up to that image. (joking, of course, Antonio's not a bad guy, he's just not a good guy.)

This book reveals the extensive role the U.S. government, organized crime, civilians, played in the assasination of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King. William F. Pepper had, through years of investigation, wrote a book that tells us the truth of the assasination. Theres not much for me to say except that if a student, from Singapore, who had nothing to do with the one of the most prominent figure in the history of the United States, bothered to post a review about a book which narrates events leading up to his murder and afterwards, surely tells a lot about the book.

This is a very revealing book, exhaustively researched and written in a style that is reasonably easy to read. Read it if you are open to the possibility that the government doesn't always tell us the whole truth about things and you think that, in theory at least, it may do some evil things quite deliberately. Otherwise, don't bother.

As someone who reads widely and often, I can honestly say this: Very few books I have ever read have had as profound an impact upon me as Dr. William Pepper's meticulously and exhaustively researched "Orders To Kill". Dr. Pepper spent upwards of 18 years researching the facts behind the King Assassination and is probably the world's leading authority on the subject. "Orders To Kill" contains the results of those 18 years of investigation.

What he found is chilling and disturbing, and should make us wonder what happened to our "democracy": The government of the United States, among others, was deeply involved in the killing. And in a testament to Dr. Pepper's tenacity and skill as an investigative journalist, many of those responsible for King's political murder have actually admitted their complicity in the book (These facts do not 'give away' the plot, since this information is contained on the outside back of the book and because it takes a book of over 500 pages like this one to fully explain the enormity of the event it describes).

In fact, one of the men implicated in the assassination, witnessed the shooting himself and names the individual who actually fired the bullet that killed Dr. King (Hint: it is not James Earl Ray). Of course, this individual named names only after being assured by Dr. Pepper that he would be immune from prosecution for his role in the killing.

Dr. Pepper, through sheer persistence, an iron will, and a burning desire for the truth, has written a book that will grab the reader from page one, and not let go until the bitter (very) end.

The tale it so skillfully tells is a tragic one and is of epic proportions. But it is a tale that must be told, for if truth is to prevail in this world, as I believe it must, then books like this one must be written. I cannot recommend a book more highly than I recommend this one. Read it and prepare to be disgusted, frightened, saddened, and in the end, amazed and hopefully glad that the truth has finally prevailed.

I bought this book for its snappy cover and intro on Hammett's fascinating life. But the stories themselves are mostly a let-down. Hammett really hit his stride with the novels, and it's hard to tell from these early magazine pieces how good a writer he'd become. Still, the violence, corruption and sexy seediness that make his other work so much fun are here in embryo. If you're already a Hammett fan, reading these stories is like watching an all-star's warm up swings before he nails a home run. If not, let "The Maltese Falcon" or "Red Harvest" knock your socks off before you make the trip to Nightmare Town.

As a long-time fan of 'classic' noir/detective fiction (Hammett, Chandler, MacDonald, Thompson) and it's stylistic roots in the pulps, I have to say I'm somewhat disappointed with this volume. There's alot here in terms of sheer number of stories, but aside from the very worthwhile Sam Spade shorts (which bump it to 3 stars), it's very uneven in quality. Your taste buds will like the delicious descriptive and atmospheric elements (particularly for hard-core Chandler fans like me...his inspirations via Hammett are in good supply) but the story construction leaves much to desire. The better part of the book is made up of hastily conceived vignettes that will remind you just as to why most of 'pulp' writing was considered disposable.

These stories were printed in the 1920s by "Black Mask" magazine, one of the monthly pulp magazines that entertained America before radio and television. Some of the stories were repeated in later works ("Who Killed Bob Teal") and never reprinted in Samuel Dashiell Hammett's lifetime. The stories are still entertaining today, and also provide a glance at a life that few of us know.

SDH worked as a Pinkerton detective for years, seeking fun, travel, adventure. The stories reflect his life as a private detective would see it: a world of crime and corruption. Would this work damage an operative expecially when de didn't have a normal family and home life? Does this reoccur today?

How can I write a review of something I haven't recieved.

Russell Windle

My husband was diagnosed with prostate cancer last winter, and we were given a copy of this book by a friend. We read and re-read it over and over. It was an excellent way to learn and discuss what was happening, and to learn what was going to happen. I highly reccommend it to anyone in this situation.

Bill Martin does an excellent job of describing the events one encounters when diagnosed with PC. He does it in layman terms and with subtle humor. I've been there.