A great book which changed the way we look at poetry produced by an oral tradition. Based on fieldwork by Milman Parry Lord shows the structure behind the improvisation and applies the theory to Serbo Croation epic tradition, Homer and French medieval poetry.

A groundbreaking book which redefined the way we look at oral tradition. Oral-formulaic theory developed on Milman Parry's fieldwork applied to Serbo-Croatian singing, Homeric poetry and medieval French epic. I used the book during research on scottish ballads. Now finally a second edition with a wonderful cd.

Like many graduate students in Classical Studies, I had to read _The Singer of Tales_ in a course on Homeric poetry. What I found in it completely altered my understanding of Homer and of epic, and even today it's almost impossible for me to read the _Iliad_ and _Odyssey_ as anything other than oral poems. I did a research paper on another book edited by Albert Lord (_The Wedding of Smailagic Meho_), an epic sung by a Yugoslav Muslim and recorded by Parry in the 1930s. The similarities, both in plot and in formulaic style, between this epic and Homer's are unmistakable. I highly recommend this book; it's much more accessible than Parry's collected papers.

One of the stressors of my life, and I suspect of many other people's lives is the nagging feeling that somehow we're approaching love wrongly. On the one hand, we want to experience it and we want to believe that the experience is real. On the other hand, our own experience and the experience of other's around us inclines us to feel as though it's a little bit foolish past the age of 16 to believe *too* much in the idea of enduring passion.

Does passion always fade? Do we need to choose relationships at the base of the pyramid of needs-- passionless but sustaining, predictable but safe? Can we ever sustain that passion that we feel at the beginning of a relationship?

What Mitchell says (with quiet authority that makes me believe him) is that yes, we can, if we are brave enough to really want that to happen. What he argues is that passion, while desirable, is ultimately quite threatening and that it takes both personal mastery and courage to be willing to let it into your life. Mitchell asserts that it is not romance which is the illusion, it is safety which is the illusion. Romance is the thing which brings the reality of the world to us-- with all its danger and complexity. Safety is a veil which we throw over others potentially close to us to keep them from coming close enough to hurt.

Mitchell created a readable book which should appeal to professionals in the field as well as ordinary folk looking for some answers to complicated problems. He builds his arguments carefully using a combination of prior work and original thinking derived from his practice and patients.

Very impressive, thought provoking, and blessedly free from overly complicated language.

How can love survive despite the vagaries of hectic schedules, work and parenting pressures, aging, and boredom? That is one of the many questions Stephen Mitchell attempts to answer in Can Love Last? While considering the oft-posed questions about "chemistry," real love, and soul mates, he looks at whether you can determine if you've found "the one"; and how to keep them if you have.

Dr. Mitchell, who died suddenly in 2000 at the age of 54, founded the journal Psychoanalytic Dialogues and was renowned for his work in relational psychoanalysis, which features a more collaborative approach than traditional psychoanalysis. As Mitchell's widow, Margaret Black, C.S.W., points out in her foreword to the book, when it comes to his analysis of relationships, "Freud's formulations have not been particularly helpful, certainly not very optimistic."

A shame, really, since it is love, according to Mitchell, that makes life worth living. But nurturing love is no easy task since, as he points out in his introduction, "Modern life, at all points on the socioeconomic scale, is difficult, draining, and confusing." That's where his book comes in, offering guidance on how to look at the differences between love and desire, and how to have both in a relationship; doing so with prose that is often illuminating and even poetic. Describing the need for both security and adventure in a relationship, Mitchell writes, "Romantic passion emerges from the convergence of these two currents," which are "at once both erotic and sacred."

Based on modern divorce rates, Mitchell argues modern relationships are "based on fantasies of permanence." Although we seek committed relationships for security, in reality, rather than safe, these relationships are actually dangerous. "Love, by its very nature, is not secure;" Mitchell concludes, although "we keep wanting to make it so." The key to Mitchell's approach to making love last lies in acknowledging this danger exists and harnessing its energy to restore desire and passion through spontaneity and romance.

He makes a good point when he argues it is curious how separated couples often resolve to recover their "lost youth" through reckless abandon, when in reality, during their youth they longed for commitment and security. Hence, one's youth was not "lost," but willfully abandoned. And when he takes this premise one step further, it stands to reason that within a relationship, we actually avoid adventure for fear of destabilizing our comfort and security. Subconsciously, it's a Catch-22 situation.

The book can be slow going at times, but only because Mitchell's theories - understandably so, given the complexity of human dynamics - are complicated. But if you take the time to sort through them, the rewards could be significant.

It's a fantasy most of us have shared: the-knight-in-shining-armour boy meets his girl-princess; girl marries boy and they live happily ever after. But in the real world, "back in our imagined castle, both the knight and the damsel, alas, often lose their allure." The most common reaction is to deduce that we have been deceived - that the knight was no knight, or the princess was no princess - which is often the "safest" recourse since blaming the other partner precludes the need to look at oneself.

When a patient not named Carl entered therapy with Dr. Mitchell, he discovered that although he still cherished his wife's many admirable qualities he could no longer tell her so since doing so would leave him vulnerable. To him, it would feel like "begging" because "He had come to feel that his stalwart performance as husband had earned him the right to her love. To approach her appreciatively or seductively would be to renounce those claims."

Coming back to the "danger" in a long-term relationship theme, Mitchell explains "falling out of love" with your partner can be a defense mechanism, and "What is so dangerous about desiring someone you have is that you can lose him or her." Especially revealing is the fact that our "ever-intensifying fascination with celebrities seems to feed our hunger for idealization and our fear of its consequences by glorifying and then exposing and destroying our 'stars.'"

At least one age-old question ("Why do opposites attract?") is finally answered here. According to Mitchell, "Opposites attract because they are inversions of each other, the same thing in different forms." If Harry is attracted to Sally because she is outgoing while he is shy, it could be because Harry also has a desire to be outgoing but has suppressed that desire.

When it comes to other advice, Mitchell says it's okay to be "made for each other" as long as you don't take it too far, for "fantasies of perfect harmony and synchrony can be enormously destructive if taken too seriously, as a steady expectation, rather than a transient, episodic connection." But the answers Mitchell offers to his question, "Can love last?" aren't always altogether romantic; especially his advice that "the capacity to love over time entails the capacity to tolerate and repair hatred."

At last, he suggests that instead of doing something to improve our relationships, "Time might be better spent on reflecting on what one is already doing!" "Spontaneity," he notes, is discovered not through action but through refraining from one's habitual action and discovering what happens next." And although "Desire and passion cannot be contrived," they "occur in contexts, and we have a good deal to do with constructing contexts in which desire and passion are more or less likely to arise."

Many of the case studies in the book - although sometimes perverse - are utterly fascinating, and Mitchell has taken relationship theory to a new level.

Dr. Stephen Mitchell was a respected psychoanalyst in New York City prior to his untimely death following the publication of CAN LOVE LAST? THE FATE OF ROMANCE OVER TIME. In this book, Mitchell explores the nature of romantic love -- the love two individuals unrelated by blood can have for each other but lose over time. These couples can be hetero, homo, married or not.

Mitchell suggests most relationships don't last because of romantic love. If romantic love exists at all in a long-term relationship, most of the time it does so in spite of other key factors that hold the couple together. In other words, there are many 'ties that bind' and most if not all kill romantic interest.

The most common motivation for coupling is the perceived need for security most people associate with connectedness to another person. Romance is not associated with security, however, it is associated with risk and unknowing. In the end, the need to acquire security via knowing all the details about the beloved, i.e. objectivity or elimination of the 'unknown', overwhelms romantic love. Generally, individuals who grew up in chaotic situations have an excessive need eliminate the unknown and are therefore very likely to kill romantic love.

Dr. Mitchell provides a number of case histories in his book to illustrate his key points -- ideas others have explored that he presents in a fresh and unique way. In the end, he seems to side with the existentialist Sarte who suggested that security is an illusion since death intervenes in every life. Dr. Mitchell asks, will you regret the things you did or did not do in your effort to secure your life? To truly live, one must work past the last illusion.

Once you read this book, everything that the news media do will become clear to you. It turns out that, other than minor differences in grammar and presentation, the actual writing and distribution of news hasn't changed since the earliest days of news.

Telling example, from the book: arguably, the very first newspaper dates back to ancient Rome, where scribes copied it onto the back of the minutes of Senate meetings that were going to the various officals outside the city. Other than the mandatory government notices, what were the three "departments" of "Annals of the City of Rome"? Crime, sports, and celebrities.

Stephens gives example after example from over two thousand years of journalism to demonstrate what we mean when we call something "news," and why journalists write it up the way they do. The writing is a bit dry, and there were times when I was ready to concede his point but he kept hammering us with more examples, but it is seriously worth it to read this book.

If you want to understand the news that you read, and understand why and how it got to you looking like it does, you must read _A History of News_. (And then, while you're at it, go on to Noam Chomsky's _Manufacturing Consent_.)

My dog is named Coco. He likes to run away from home all the time. I keep a journal of his behavior. It is filled with instances of when I have given him dog biscuits and he ate them on my bed leaving crumbs all over the sheets.

But not in this case. This book is a fabulous journalistic quamire of slow witted old English types wondering why the news has been covering nothing but Joe Dimaggio and nothing about Stanley Kubrick's recent death.

The major thrust of this book is exploring the world of psychoanalysis in a new light. In the traditional Freudian view, the psychoanalysis was meant to explore completely objective principles. Certain idic impulses were causing a person problems, and once these regressional idic impulses were destroyed the person was now free to live life in a healthy, though not necessarily happy, manner.

Because of this objective thrust, the psychologist was seen as a very remote and impersonal figure. The new turn in psychology that is being explored is that the psychologist now should help the patient explore the subjective world. This includes analyzing dreams, (though popular in Freud's day, has since fallen from grace), thoughts, feelings, and perceptions. All of these things are also subjected to change. The new view that is being supported is that the relationship between two groups must become better known, and this is where the psychoanalytic process takes place, not in replacing libidinal impulses.

Mitchell was the real deal, a psychoanalyst who could speak to a broad discerning audience about hopes and dreads of being alive.

This book is honest about human nature, unflinchingly so, and it offers very specific, well-reasoned arguments about what human relationships can do for people (and for that matter, can't), and how that happens.

How sad that he died just as he seemed to be entering a prolific period.

This book is one of the most enlighting, in today's psychoanalytic field. It integrates the modern thoughts in viewing the human mind and the clinical process, to gether with a critical and learned look on the traditional way. Mr. Mitchell is a brilliant representative of a modern psychoanalist who remembers where we came from, but has the courage to go further.

An astounding piece of synthetic analysis of a very, very complicated field, this book has rightly been referrred to by scores and scores of subsequent writers in the field of psychoanalysis and personality theory. The authors have critically scrutinzed the various schools of thought in the post-Freudian landscape and astutely determined their theoretical similarities and differences. The writing is direct and persuasive, albeit intended for an audience familiar with psychological terminology. It is amazing work and one of the best books in any field over the last 20 years.

This book is necessary in developing a full understanding of Object Relations Theory.

This book is cited in virtually every book written on object relations theory since its publication. It gives a thorough background to the theories of all of the major contributors to object relations theory. It is brilliantly written and understandable with a basic knowledge of psychoanalytic jargon. An essential work.

Having been interested in Neruda since seeing the movie "Il Postino," I've glanced at several collections for over 3 years, but never took a book home for my own. Looking for a collection that contained "Ode to Laziness" (one of my favorite subjects), I found and purchased Full Woman, Fleshly Apple, Hot Moon. I sat down in a big chair on a Sunday afternoon and opened it to the first page and the love affair started there. Usually, I read a book of poems randomly, just flipping here and there, looking for whatever surprizes me. For some unknown reason, I started this book from the beginning with Mitchell's introduction, then read the first poem. I couldn't help myself as I read one poem and then another till I had carefully read almost every one. Pure spirit, pure soul. Each poem is a love poem to the most simple, everyday, ordinary things of this world--his suit, his socks, his watch--engaging us to see a sheer web of grace that runs through out our lives. Put another way, Neruda sees and shows us a world that shimmers and loves us as fully as we love it.

Many thanks to S. Mitchell for creating this collection.

Stephen Mitchell translates an assortment of Neruda's lesser known poems that rank among his personal favorites. You can tell Mitchell truly loves these works as Neruda's voice almost literally sings off the page in English. The book itself is beautifully constructed with a painting by Gaugin adorning the cover. When you hold it in your hands, you will know you have discovered something truly special. You may also be interested in Mitchell's lovely translations of Rilke.

Stephen's writing is polished and clear--very refreshing for this type of book. This is an interesting read, one wishes they could sit next to the fire and chat with Jo Moro. A must for anyone's bookshelf!

What a rare find! What a loss for those who never knew Mora

Mitchell's book opens up psychoanalysis to various perspectives, seeking to integrate a variety of theories without sacrificing their specificity and unique contributions.

Mitchell cares deeply about pain -- so deeply, in fact, that he eschews jargon where he can, to speak to directly to laymen and experts alike. Particularly helpful here are his explorations of Hans Loewald, whose humane and idiosyncratic vision offers great comfort to those whose deepening investigation of psychonalaysis doesn't always seem to offer more enlightenment, only more confusion. Mitchell, with an eye to that confusion, finds clarity and hope.

This is the final book published by Dr. Mitchell's during his tragically shortened lifetime, and it is a gem.

The main theme is his attempt to integrate contributions from a variety of relational psychoanalysts whose approaches are extremely different from one another. He does this by pointing to the many possible dimensions that simultaneously coexist in any given relationship, and how these various authors focus differentially on one or another aspect. He highlights what he calls the four modes of relatedness, defined as (1) nonreflective interchanges reflecting patterns of interpersonal influence, (2) deeply felt shared emotions where boundaries seem to melt away, (3) roles recognized as conforming to earlier models of the self and important figures, and (4) intersubjective exchanges between individuals recognizing each others' distinct individuality.

He critically and appreciatively reviews the work of major authors, including Loewald, Bowlby, Fairbairn, and others, and attempts to fit their contributions into his heuristic scheme.

As with all of Dr. Mitchell's writing, discussion of theory is interspersed with pithy and compelling clinical examples. This is an excellent book and an important contribution to current psychoanalytic thinking. I found his heuristic device of Modes 1,2 3, and 4 a bit confusing and somewhat off-putting at times, but it serves his purpose well enough.

Those of us who have cherished Dr. Mitchell's work over the years will savor this book and imagine what might have followed.

This title, in two volumes, covers the vast sweep of Asia Minor's history, from Alexander to the height of the Byzantine Empire. The first volume concentrates on two major periods; the early part of the 3rd century BC when Celtic tribes settled throughout the interior, and the coming of the Romans and their colonisation of the eastern flank of their empire. Mr Mitchell has crafted an enormously readable history of the region. The detail is extraordinary but the prose never becomes turgid or obtuse. By examining the intertwined complexities of people's relations to the land and their Gods, Mr Mitchell has broken new ground and produced a book that is that most unusual of beasts, both readable and scholarly.