Unreadable. The guy writes in short choppy bursts that say absolutely nothing. Don't even bother.

I wanted to like this novel based on its favorable reviews. I did not; I abandoned it after 100 pages. The characters were stereotypes, the style was rambling and the storyline was transparent.

I was hoping that the tale would finally resemble some sort of entertainment as I struggled through each paragraph while trying to sort out the characters and their contibutions to the plot. On and on I was dragged back and forth through confused text that resembled the efforts of numerous authors. I felt cheated because I wasted my time hoping that things would improve as the four star ratings of reviewers suggested. And the ending, a weak and undocumented afterthought to a really terrible novel.

This is a good summary of what was happening in the European Christian church during the period mentioned in the title (although in the interests of context it does look at events that occur either side of the dates). In particular, this book is strongest when it analyses the impact that changes in society were having upon the Church. The basic format is for each chapter to focus on one particular country for one section of the period.

One of my criticisms of the book is that 5 of the 15 chapters (plus an introduction and an epilogue) focus on England and 2 focus on France. Of the 8 remaining chapters; Germany, Scotland, Russia (and the Eastern churches) and the New World rate a chapter each, while the other 4 look at the impact of specific cultural changes. It does come across as being very Anglo-centric.

Another negative about the book is that the writing style can be a little pedestrian at times. Yes, this is history, but there are plenty of history books around that make it clear that you can write history (and remain accurate and factual) while still being a page-turner.

While this sounds quite critical, I did enjoy reading the book. The period (between the enormous changes of both the Reformation and the French Revolution) is a fascinating one and there is much in this book that has prompted me to want to read more. Cragg's footnotes and bibliography point in some good directions for doing so. In reality, if there were half stars I would rate this one 3 1/2, but my criticisms mean that I have to lean toward the 3.

To read a book about the Ford Administration today you are either a die-hard political junky or a relative of someone who worked there. I have no such relatives. The book is actually just like the Ford administration, the most interesting parts all deal with Nixon, whether it is his late night file get away, the pardon or the staff that just did not quite understand that Nixon was not still running the show, these were the parts of the book that had the most weight. Reading the book I kept hoping that the author would provide some facts that would eliminate my view that Ford was lucky to stumble through 3 years and the USA was lucky nothing serious happened on his watch. It just seemed like Ford had short timers syndrome, just riding out his term so that he could collect his pension and get good tee times.

And by the way, is there any book that Al Haig shows up in that he is not roundly bashed, did no one like this guy? One of the interesting parts of the book is the staff that Ford had, it could be called the gangs all here. There is Bush 1, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Scowcroft, Greenspan, Gergen, Buchanan and Speaks. This bunch must travel in a pack from one administration to the next. It is a credit to the author that he was able to make the most politically boring time in recent American history somewhat enjoyable and interesting. Although many of the items I found interesting had to do with the old Nixon guard still causing trouble. Overall the book is probably more of an interest to someone interested in the Nixon administration more then Ford.

First, let me explian why I give this text 3 stars. The book is written particularly for individuals within some aspect of the Political Science discipline. Therefore, its appeal, I believe, is not toward the mass public. Although not a text that mass quanities of the American public would flock to read that does not signify a bad book. Erikson, Wright, and McIver present a very intriguing thesis. In sum, they demonstrate a strong connection between public opinion and policy in American states. Simply, liberal states produces liberal policies and conservative states produce conservative policies. Their methods of obtaining data to conclude this fact is extremely interesting. For that reason I recommend the text to anyone intrigued by the study of public opinion or State Government. For example, they examine state-level opinions surveys toward issues like welfare, Medicaid and education and then examine the ideology of state polices on those specific issues. In return, the data demonstrated the stated thesis, for example, a strong conseravtive public attitude toward educational spending produced a conservative public policy. I thank the authors for the exhausative amount of information and evidence. This book is a good example of the way in which political research is to be completed.

I read this book for a college lit. class. I don't even know what to say, this is a waste of paper!!

Yea this is a good book. Yea it makes a lot of sense too.

... but it's also one of the most outstanding examples of Native American (American Indian, or "Indian," as Sherman Alexie calls himself) literature. Gerald Viezenor is a professor of literature at Berkeley, and his contribution to the Indian Lit scene is one of the least-known, most overlooked, and best-constructed books available in this growing field. While it hasn't shared the commercial success of Alexie's books - partly because not many people are AWARE of Viezenor's book, and partly because it is not your average "pick up and read it on the plane" sort of book - "The Heirs of Columbus' is one of the most original novels in years, Indian or otherwise.

The "action" centers around one Stone Columbus, Native American captain of the Santa Maria Casino. Every year, he and the other descendents of Columbus (who actually descended from Jewish Indians who immigrated to the 'Old' World) get together and tell tales, and what follows is the result. It would ruin the book to discuss it too much plot-wise, but it's Viezenor's constructs that really set "The Heirs of Columbus" apart.

Indian literature was the first to really mess around with notions of time, narrative, history, and place, all of which have become staples of the po-mo establishment (how's THAT for an oxymoron). Viezenor almost seems to thumb his nose at the anti-establishment that has now become the trendy establishment, tongue firmly in cheek, saying both that "we Indians thought of it FIRST" and "you don't do it RIGHT, let me show you HOW." It's a nice change of pace from the usual blah-blah that most po-mo writers seem to think anyone with a latte will lap up.

The only fault is that "Heirs of Columbus" references a LOT of things that those unfamiliar with Native American culture (indeed, most non-Indians) simply won't understand. Furthermore, Viezenor offers little to no explanation of what these things are, and almost taunts the non-Indian reader with the deluge of them. It violates one of the cardinal rules of literature - that you don't have to explain everything as you go, and that it should be, at least somewhat, universal no matter what culture the reader comes from. But that doesn't detract from the book's overall beauty and fun. If you're interested in Indian literature, "The Heirs of Columbus" is indispensable for your reading list and collection.