this book is jam-packed with primary sources concerning the life and works of r.b. woodward: journal articles, unpublished speeches, photographs of the man, drafts of his papers bearing hand-written corrections. it also includes some commentary from colleagues and family. an excellent resource for anyone interested in the history and process of organic chemical (and scientific, in general) research.

To find this book of photographs by Ormerod - already several years old - at a bargain price was a happy event. The book is roughly evenly divided between colour and black and white work. The hair-sharp colour prints, like most colour photos, you feel you've seen before (Ormerod is somewhere between Eggleston and Misrach), but a handful of the black and whites stand out for their quiet interest in a world that is clearly foreign to the English-born photographer. Here is the photographer I would like to be - direct but unobtrusive. However, both critical essays included with the works in the book feel compelled to explain its relative lack of human figures (the cover image is uncharacteristic of most in this collection), as though this is an embarrassing oversight of the photographer: a weakness about which one must be exceedingly respectful and polite. One of the two writers actually atones for the missing persons by talking about 'the implied presence' of human beings in the pictures. Why can't people bear to contemplate photos in which some fragment of their own compulsive sociality is not reflected? There is a superb floating quality in these Ormerods that is completely deferential to the need of the viewer to travel into the picture and experience parts unknown without interference. Despite the tendency of all photographers to minimise distances and to destroy exoticism because they are always in reality debt and must go, like Muhammad, to the mountain, Ormerod's pictures tell me something exquisite about the largeness of the world, like graffiti on a public statue whose authors are utterly removed from oneself. Whole country towns seen from a hilly rise: you will never know them, never see them except through him. An intense, dreamy abstract romanticism operates here that neither critic seems to see at all; no, he is just a social commentator like the rest, that dull worthy animal. Whereas Ormerod tells his viewers clearly that people as such, people as characters, are of no interest to him at all, the critics respond in an absurdly tenacious way that Ormerod must be making oblique 'allusions' to political contingency, poverty, social unrest, a nation's failed dreams, and so on - idiotically personalising his lonely, lovely car wrecks with a broken radiator-grimace. You may of course agree with the critics that this collection is depressingly devoid of signs of human life. What is the basic difference between the critics and me? Why do we see Ormerod's collection so differently? Desire and isolation, exception, endless roaming are all the one thing to me. The 'implied presence' is always erotic to me. To others, eroticism inheres in people, in overflowing gatherings and exchanged glances; to me it inheres in people's deliciously frustrating absence, their reticence and refusals. If you have always viewed photographs as opportunities to travel while imagining the forms of human life that go on elsewhere, this collection will hold great appeal. Photographic representations of absence will make the average critic think there is something polemical in the artist's intentions (rusting ploughshares in superannuated fields lead to pieties of the 'throwaway society' sort). Lonely places make them think of the great, dry political themes - hardly a turn-on. They judge accordingly. I urge you to see for yourself whether these rather restricted criteria do Michael Ormerod justice.

Morris' writing is clear, interesting, and for the most part convincing. It's a good introduction covering the problems with fossil fuels, an introduction to nuclear energy, waste disposal issues, air pollution, comparitive environmental effects of nuclear versus fossil fuels, the risks of our current situation, the risks of nuclear power, and otehr alternatives. That is, a broad introduction covering a number of angles (medical, political, scientific, etc). There are two non-trivial problems with the book, however.

First, Morris' logic in certain places is so apparently flawed that it seems to discredit him. On page 89, he states about potential meltdown or explosion in a nuclear facility, "The risk of either one of the ... accidents must be very low, because neither one has occurred to date." Now, I'm all for past behavior being a predictor of future behavior, but aging nuclear facilities and changing geopolitical climates make his statements unclear at best and possibly even misleading!

His leaps of logic and inclusion of only certain information (for example a very positive take on the Three Mile Island incident and a sort of conspiratorial explanation of why the media cares about nuclear waste) lead to a second problem: he comes off like a very biased author.

It's worth reading, but I'd include a second volume by another author in there somewhere if you're serious about the topic.

If your interested in reading only one book which refutes many of the fallacies made by the anti-nuclear movement then this book is for you. It's particularly good for the layperson as it doesn't require a lot of technical knowledge on the part of the reader.

This book is a very convincing case for the use of Nuclear Power. One major point of the book is that nuclear power is extremely safe and clean compared to its fossil fuel based alternatives. It also debunks the many falsehoods and myths the anti-nuclear power movement have succeded to spread. The book is fact filled, detailed, honest, and the author is careful to provide references to all his sources.

The book convincingly paints a very frightening future in the event we don't start using Nuclear Power to a greater extent soon. Thus it introduces a rational fear while dispelling irrational fears of Nuclear Power. The author does not say nice things about anti-nuclear activists. However, I was a teenager in Sweden 1980 when Sweden held its national referendum on Nuclear Power, and I participated in and listened to the debates. The way anti-nuclear activists were misinforming, lying, spreading rumors, scaring people, and even persecuting and defaming those who dared to disagree with them convinced me for all time that we should fear anti-nuclear activists, not nuclear power. This book scientifically demonstrated what I long have felt and suspected since that tragic year of 1980.

This book is an interesting look at the Morris Canal, but it's style and layout owe a lot to James Lee's previous (and superior) illustrated histories of the Morris Canal. Seek those out if you can find them.

Bob Goller has captured the essence of the Morris Canal in 128 pages of informative text and superb photographs. It is a wonderful compendium for both Canal Fans and local historians alike. Although I had read several books on the canal previously, it was nice to find out in Bob's work that the ruins of a stone building that I pass on Route 80 everyday are all that's left of the brakeman's house and inclined plane east of Waterloo. A wonderful volume with Arcadia's typical high quality production. A MUST for North Jersey historians.

Overall i think the book is a good read. Hempstone does a good job of telling the times as the they were during his term in office in Kenya. Some of the things maybe slightly exaggerated but i think the important thing is that it tells what was in our minds during this time but we as kenyans were unable to say. He also does an excellent job of describing Moi; dictator, vicious, illiterate, corrupt etc. (probably would explain why Moi is suing him)
There were several things that i didn't like about the book. Everytime Hempstone mentions a person he has to tell us what tribe that person belongs to...urrrgh....if there could be a reason for banning this book in kenya..this would be it! The other thing i noticed was that Hempstone does an amazing job of making himself look good in the book. The book is filled with notes of important people or not praising him for this or that....it struck me as very self promoting. Some of the stuff about locals was absolutely untrue. For example...at one pt he says the Samburu are know to diet on meat, milk and urine like the maasai. The urine part is an outright lie, i say this a maasai born + bred deep in maasai land...maasai do not drink urine...yaaak....blood we drink urine is a no-no!
The last and minor thing is the endless repeatations in the book. Several statements are repeated over + over again through the book...i got the impression that maybe a pt was being drum into my head.
Nevertheless, this book gives an interesting insite into the political issues in kenya as well as most likely alot of the other african countries. I was kind of disappointed that the book didn't go more into depth on the sudan crisis --- that region of africa needs serious help!

Whilst the book is certainly a useful and informative perspective, and covers a fascinating and deeply perturbing subject, it's difficult to overlook the author's pomposity and self-righteousness; so much so, that, given his rose-tinted and deeply erroneous belief in wondrous US foreign policy, one begins to wonder whether his views upon events in Kenya at the time are equally skewed.

Having only lived in Kenya a very short while, and not during the time he describes, I cannot have my own understanding of events to corroborate what he says, and Hempstone certainly makes little attempt to back up any of the stories about the nefarious Biwott and megalomaniac Moi, beyond saying that he got them from reliable sources... Which is a real pity, because it would be so nice to see him truly skewer the indubitably corrupt and malignant politicians.

As a memoir it's certainly entertaining enough, as long as you learn to flip through Hempstone's self-promoting blather, which at times begins to sound like a curriculum vitae. It gives you plenty of fascinating historical background, and a decent understanding of the beautiful country Kenya is, but as reliable reference material, however... Who could say?

I was in Kenya when Amb. Hempstone was there and all included in the book is highly accurate. It is a very good read about life in Kenya during those years.

Zane Grey's Light of the Western Stars is the 2nd Zane Grey book I've read. The first was Rider's of the Purple Sage, which I absolutely loved. Western Stars is not as good a book as Riders of the Purple Sage in terms of plot, setting, characters, and character development, nor does it offer much new. Many of the characters are very similar to the characters in ROTPS....
Majesty hearkens to Jane Withersteen, Gene Stewart hearkens to Lassiter, etc...

If you love Zane Grey, then you will like this book as it is written in the same spirit, albeit a bit of a retread. If you are looking to read your first Zane Grey or first Western, then you might want to try Riders of the Purple Sage first.

I found this book of interest for essentially one reason: I was a student at Southern from 1950-60. My studies were interrupted by Navy active duty (1951-53); I received the BSEd (History) in '56 and the MSEd (History) in '60. In a very real sense I lived the heart of the "Morris Years". Dr. Harper has written a book essentially about the administrative history of the university: personalities, policies, struggles, obstacles, politics and, above all, the dominant (and domineering) personality of Delyte W. Morris. Harper traces the rise and fall of a man about whom it may accurately be said: "His reach exceeded his grasp" (and, unfortunately, it may be said about Southern as well). The man and the institution were so closely connected that whatever fate befell one would affect the other. There are I think a number of lessons to be learned from Southern's story during the Morris years, and Dr. Harper has done a good job of providing a narrative history from which may be gleaned both the triumphs and the tragedy. This book could be profitably added to the reading list in a course entitled, "The History of Higher Education in 20th Century America".

I was reluctant to pick up this book because of it's title, but I decided to read it because I had it in my collection. I was somewhat entertained, and finished the book very quickly due to the short length. It is a tragedy in which almost all are killed in the end. I did not care much for the plot, which involves an incestuous relationship between brother and sister. After reading part of the book, it was rather easy to predict the ending. It is not a tremendously detailed and emotional story. I'm not sure if this is a title that would often come up in conversations between friends or colleagues, but avid readers might want to pick up the title to have read it.

This play is an excellent example of incest in the Renaissance. It's also fairly short and very readable. Bergetto is an interesting character and provides much needed comic relief in this play which is ultimately quite tragic. The title is misleading in many ways, but female sexuality is problematic throughout.

I chose to read this play because firstly, Anthony Burgess mentioned it in his book "English Literature" (1857) and secondly, because it was a short play. Or maybe even thirdly - the central theme [incest] it deals with is treated in an entirely different manner from other literary works. The nature of the incest is frank and horrifying. The intensity of the unlawful relationship is compromised by the coarsening of Giovanni's love for Annabella; their ethereal relationship gradually loses its innocence in the course of the play, culminating in Annabella's pregnancy and finally her death in Giovanni's hands.

While we certainly cannot put Ford in the ranks of Shakespeare, he deserves credit for a play whose themes of sexual jealousy, revenge, violence and incent intertwine in a most heartrending way.