I thought that it lacked a lot! Could have used a little tweaking here and there!

This is a useful survey of Shelley's philosophical thought. There are few poets whose philosophical thought is so central to their work, or so important in its own right.

_Destroyer and Preserver_ is a high-water mark in one strand of Shelley criticism, and a necessary and valuable one. It emphasises, rightly, that Shelley was a tough-minded and realistic thinker, in many respects firmly in the Humean tradition.

And it is a corrective to the mid-20th century picture of Shelley the Platonist, a portrayal that is in a direct line of descent from the "harmless" de-sexed and de-politicised Shelley of the Victorian imagination.

I might have given the book four stars rather than five, were it not for the empty one-line, one-star review that I'm following: "needs tweaking" indeed! I could dock the book a notch for what it doesn't do: the hard but necessary task (not yet accomplished) of re-integrating Shelley's Platonic thought with the sceptical Shelley.

That's a project which has importance not only for Shelley studies, but it may even have some contemporary philosophical use and application. I'm not sure that Shelley managed to marry Platonic and Humean thought into a coherent philosophy. That's an extremely hard question to answer. He doesn't in the prose; but the late poetry has depths I certainly haven't plumbed yet, and nor does this book. There are still things to be learned from Shelley; and he had a knack for asking the right questions.

This book is a fine examination of one of the two major parts (the most important part, in my view, but not the _only_ part) of Shelley's thought.

Laon

Cross examination may be a lost art, but this booklet does little to help the reader find it. The chapters are mostly short, superficial pieces that are correct insofar as they go, but they do not go far enough. For example, the chapter on "Tests for Credibility" consists of a list of twelve "tests" covering a page and a half. Nowhere does it give any hint as to how to go about applying those tests. Ehrlich waxes most eloquent when he holds forth on the "fallibilities" of eyewitness testimony. It is almost as though Ehrlich hopes that someday a reader of his book will become a juror in a criminal case that Ehrlich is defending. For the best, most inexpensive practical advice on how to conduct a cross examination, read Francis Wellman's "The Art of Cross Examination."

This slim volume raises many helpful points about cross-examination and the courtroom dynamics, but falls short in that it is presented more as an outline than in-depth information. It is a good read to get an idea of what lawyers have to consider when cross-examining a defendant,but not as instructive as one would expect from Ehrlich. Providing a greater array of actual cases and their dialogue would have been of benefit. For a general reader, it presents interesting information and some amusing anecdotes on what can be a tedious subject.

I would recommend this volume for all casual students and readers of Shelley. It is inexpensively priced, and I believe it contains all the pieces printed in Mary Shelley's 1839 version of her husband's "complete works," along with their corresponding prefaces (rarely provided in more insipid 'best of' collections of Shelley). However, I am unable to award this book a higher rating because it is plagued by some very glaring typographical errors and misprints (example: "and if the spark with which Heaven lit my spirit/Had been with purer nutriment supplied" from "The Triumph of Life" is presented as "purer sentiment" in the Wordsworth edition). Nevertheless, at less than 5 bucks, this book is a great introduction to the unjustly neglected poetic achievement of Shelley, in my opinion the supreme genius of the great triad of the younger Romantics.

Personally, I thought the Poetry itself wasn't too bad. Unfortunately the print was way too small, making reading difficult. For that reason, it didn't hold my interest too well. I hope to return to the book again later, once I get my new prescription specs.

P. Deift and McLaughlin did a great job writing this state-of-the-art derivation of the continuum limit of the Toda Lattice, but I think the work is too unaccessible without weeks of study of the paper.

This prequel to Baroness Orzcy's Scarlet Pimpernel series interested me for I love that series. I would seriously suggest to read at least the Scarlet Pimpernel and Eldorado first. The story follows Sir Percy's father or great grandfather in an adventure that starts his wedding day and takes him far away from his bride and her traitorous brother. The novel mainly follows the acts of the brother, Nicholaus, as he becomes more and more corrupt. His feelings are very detailed and his character is thoroughly analyzed. Gilda is obviously just a clone of Marguerrite, and Sir Percy is never much like the man that will be named after him. All in all a good read but I would not suggest this be the first book you buy or read in the series.

Though "History of a six weeks' tour" does not come close to Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein," it is still a necessity if you want to understand the woman behind "Frankenstein." Mary's published journal of her six weeks' tour contains picturesque descriptions of the European scenery she encountered on her travels, as well as some shocking biases against the strangers she met. In reading "History," it becomes evident how tightly knit Mary, her sister Claire, and her lover Percy became as well as how desperate they were for money. I would definately recommend this to anyone wishing to understand the mind of Mary Shelley more, but would not press upon it anyone who wanted to kick back with a cup of tea and a riveting novel.

The author generally accepts the "great man" theory of history, so the emphasis of this very readable volume is on the key individuals of the ultimately far-flung Stuart family. From Alan, the "dapifer" or steward of Dol in Normandy in the 12th century, to Robert II, first Stuart King of Scots, to Henry Stuart, Cardinal of York, who was proclaimed "Henry IX" by his adherents and who died childless in Rome in 1807, the Stuart dynasty had probably a greater impact on the social and political develop-ment of Great Britain than any other of its ruling houses. Lacking notes and other scholarly apparatus, this is recommended simply as a first reader on the House of Stuart.

I found this book very interesting. Shelley is an excellent poet, yet filled with bitterness toward monarchists. The notebook is an excellent collections of Shelley's wooks and includeds pictures as well as comments. A great book to read.

This is the worst book in the Snappy series, but it is still cute. Peter Penguin is jealous of his new sister, who never gets a name in this book. He goes running away and gets lost. He loves to chat to himeself and his baby sister chats back and finds him. Then he returns home and they chitter chatter all day long together. Simple story, cute drawings. The problem i have with it is the baby sister does not get a name. My 9-month-old does like to chew on Peter's round black head though. Not a bad book, but other's in this series are a lot better like Penny Polar bear, Lucy Lobster and Tiny Tyanasourous.

wrh;mw;hjklmmhj w;khtrmk