The French classic is preceded by a fine introduction by James Naremore, after which things quickly go downhill. Either the publisher doesn't have any editorial staff or the translator is inexperienced or both. ". . . the subjects pose themselves questions of which the least that can be said is that they are far from being trite . . The absurdity of a derisory destiny--such is the conclusion of this work by John Huston, his first" (The Maltese Falcon). "And this film is a sort of frenetic adieu on the threshold of a ten-year exile, since Sternberg will not direct again until 1951" (The Shanghai Gesture). That's a sample from one page (35). I want my money back.

After all the controversy over the constitution of film noir, it can only be edifying to read the perspective of classic-period French critics. Indeed, it was Gallic mentality that first recognized and recorded the phenomenon, and--if these writers are representative of their ethnic mainstrem--surmised that noir was born of an infusion of angst into the cinematic puritanism of the Anglo nations. While American scholars have often seen noir as a reaction to good times (as comedy is a reaction to bad), the authors site only the related relevance of World War II in its capacity to desensitize audiences to stark screen violence. Furthermore, they label only a handful of films as true noir and assess many other features--such as police and psychological dramas--as merely possessing qualities of noir. The book discusses a myriad of these movies in a colorful but easily comprehended style that avoids becoming parched with pedogogic discourse. A lengthy, up-to-1979 filmography, which also includes non-American films, has been added to the text--and is of particular interest in listing features not commonly called noir, such as cartoons and sci-fi thrillers. (I always knew Soylent Green was black!) Digression aside--for those with amour de noir, this book is de rigueur!

Succinctly translated into English by Paul Hammond, A Panorama of American Film Noir 1941-1953 is a remarkable and collaborative work by Raymond Borde and Etienne Chaumeton which was originally published in France in 1955. A Panorama Of American Film Noir offers unique insights into the dark surrealism and ambivalent atmosphere of Hollywood's film noir glory days. A brilliant critique of classic movies and the American culture that created them; as well as a film noir chronology and filmography enhance this masterful work which is strongly recommended for personal, professional, and academic Cinematic Studies reference collections and supplemental reading lists.

I decided to give this book a try a couple months after the passing of my father. His image never appeared to me in the mirror, and I had no success whatsoever for several nights. Then one night after having been unsuccessful at the mirror gazing, I had the most memorable dream of my life. I'm a little shy to admit this, but the dream was lit up by a bright shining light and telepathic communication. It was better than any sci-fi movie. To this day I keep asking mysyelf, "Was it really just a dream?" Anyway, different strokes for different folks. Judging from the reviews, this is a book you'll either love or hate. I enjoyed it very much.

Raymond Moody, one of the fathers of the modern-day metaphysical resurgence continues to share his learned insight through this book, Reunions. Life After Life, Moody's preliminary look into the afterlife was expanded in Reunions by Moody's look into the use of the Psychomantium both historically and currently.

After covering The Nature of Visions in Chapter I, Moody gives a quick and informative review of not only the Greek's use of their underground psychomantiums in Chapter II, Gazing Through History, he also delightfully touches on other gazing forefathers such as the Tungus shamans in Siberia with their copper mirrors, the Malagasy of Madagascar, the Pawnee Indians of North America, the Africans of Fez, and the Nkomis tribe of Cap Lopez to name a few.

After grounding the reader in the history of gazing, Moody shares his own experience in selecting property and adapting a gristmill in Alabama into his own therapeutic psychomantium. He relays personal experiences as well as those of his visitors/patients and left this reader with the impression that the use of a psychomantium, wisely done and well directed, could easily lead to lessening of grief and an increase of spiritual insight. Thank you, Dr. Moody.

I was surprised at the few poor reviews, and can only suggest that people who don't like this well-written, courageous and informative book are those who are consciously or unconsciously afraid of the unknown, don't trust people who aren't, or who need a narrower definition of reality to feel secure. That is fine for them, but this book deserves a more open minded look. It is an unusual topic and as such is certainly not for everyone. But Reunions is well balanced between science and the mystical, and Moody's generous and well thought out suggestions for reproducing the experiences he reports offer hope for those who are interested in what can be a healing if not mind-expanding experience. Moody goes out on a limb here and I applaud him for doing it, and doing it so well. This book should be considered a classic in its field, and one I a glad to have on my bookshelf. I have recommended it to many.

Grover Cleveland is portrayed in this book as an unbendingly honest and upright individual while many of the most significant "compromises" which he made during his two non-consecutive terms in the Presidency as well as his overall inefficiency and inflexibility are overlooked. Jeffers glides by the wholesale firing of tens of thousands of Republican office holders and replacement of them with "good Democrats" in a Spoils System run wild during 1885 and 1893, and also Cleveland's undiplomatic handling of the gold/silver issue which divided his own party and secured Republican control of the Presidency for 16 years following his terms. Jeffers swallows the self-promotional image of "unshakable integrity" put forth by the Cleveland Administration to unsophisticated voters of the day, but neglects to give sufficient attention to Cleveland as an effective, deal-cutting politician who manage to get his party's presidential nomination three times in succession. Even more ludicrous is the silly attempt by Jeffers to sanctify Cleveland at the expense of Bill Clinton without giving the slightest attention to the vast differences in the respective eras and the overall results of their two term administrations. --- At best, this is a pleasant "coffee table" book which draws almost exclusively from secondary, published sources and is not recommended for serious research and study. Cleveland was a good and important president. He deserves attention such as that provided in Richard E. Welch's excellent piece of scholarship entitled "The Presidencies of Grover Cleveland" (1988, University Press of Kansas).

H. Paul Jeffers's biography of Grover Cleveland is readable, but I found myself thinking of the famous Walter Mondale phrase, "Where's the Beef?" Checking in at a brief 350 pages, made all the shorter by the interspersion of photographs throughout the text, this book is a good bare bones account of Cleveland's life in which the reader never really gets to know the man. Cleveland is a vastly underrated President, mostly because didn't serve at a time of great national crisis. So the recent interest in him (no less than two biographies published in 2000) is a good thing. Jeffers's book did much to enlighten me, but left me wanting more. I also found a couple of glaring factual errors. Overall, Jeffers's book is a good introduction to its subject, and that's probably all most casual readers will want to know.

H. Paul Jeffers' biography of Grover Cleveland is really a great read. If you're interested in American history, you'll enjoy this book about a fascinating and remarkable figure in U.S. politics who is largely ignored by modern writers. If your knowledge of the American "Gilded Age" is limited to your high school or college classes, you'll do yourself a favor by reading this book. Jeffers does a good job in bringing the era and personalities to life, but his writing of Cleveland's years as president often seems to be merely listing his official schedule of activities. Don't let this criticism dissuade you, however; my test for any book while reading it is "when can I get time to read more?" This book definitely passes the test.

this was a not a good book they was alot of stupid things in this book they were trying to tell about plants to eat and not to eat and they had very poor black and white pictures of the plants most of the book is made up of unwanted infromation

Alot of the same info.Which has already been written before in previous American books.

I don't really go outdoors much, but I'd like to. This book was interesting, but I haven't read any books like it to compare it to another. I wouldn't want to get lost without it.

Back in its heyday, the "Choose Your Own Adventure" series was one of the best, most exciting series for kids there was. Especially good were the ones by Edward Packard. His colleague R.A. Montgomery wrote less successful efforts. This one displays his fondness for negative and often arbitrary endings, as well as for a sort of new agey bizarreness. Ace illustrator Grainger is always good, though I wonder to think that anyone would ever pay for a hardcover of this light text, when a paperback would do.

The Abominable Snowman is a great book.You have to find a yeti to proove that he really exists.On your way you'll find a friend to come along.But you never know what will happen next.You have to choose your own advenure.You could find the yeti and become rich and famous, or you find a city you will live in.Or you get scared before you even find the yeti and return back home.

I have read this book on loan from a friend. It is my sincere opinion that the author does not speak nor can he write in English.The information is very vague at best. The pictures are of such poor quality that it is beyond reproach.No real technique is demonstrated against any attacks,there are only poses.My favorite is where the author slashes a man standing absolutley still with a knife for no apperant reason and calls it combative technique. Quite a poor choice for one of intellect.

This book covers the basics of the street fighting style of Savate, called Danse de Rue Savate. It is a system that incorporates the techniques of savate, boxe-francaise, lutte parisseine, chausson, zipota and la canne et baton d'armes. If you want to see what savate really is, when it isn't reduced to a sport, this book is for you. The kicking, striking, weapon techniques and grappling are discussed as part of an intergrated whole. Clear explanations and lots of photos illustrate the techniques. A long history section traces the development of savate out of the wide variety of western martial arts, most of which are no lnger practiced.

This book introduces one to the European Martial Art of Savate Danse de Rue. Savate is known for its kicking techinques but the book also reveals the use of weapons, grappling, and other techniques of the art. It shows the basic techniqes clear, although the photos are a little dark, and explains how they are preformed. It is one of the few books in English on Savate and the only one to discuss la canne, baton, foue, and lutte to my knowledge

The reviewer below is utterly right-- this book is a waste of everybody's time. What he fails to note is that Runyon's "thesis" is itself unacceptable. Who could buy for one second the idea of Carver "arranging" his stories? Anybody who's done the research understands that Carver's stories were arranged FOR him. Runyon's premise-- and book overall-- is preposterous. The "correspondences" he finds are belabored, contrived, unsubstantiated and unsubstantiatable, outrageous, insane.

The introductory essay by Dobyns is delightful but the rest of the book is truly bad. The author has a thesis -- that Carvers' stories are interconnected and purposefully arranged in the books -- and that's all he deals with. Once you accept the thesis, what else is there to say? Not much, but the author spins his wheels trying. The book is a waste of money and will add nothing to your understanding or appreciation of Carver.

Author Runyon provides an insightful interpretation of Raymond Carver's short stories collection from the books, "Will You Please be Quiet, Please", "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love", "Cathedral" and "The Last Seven Stories". He labels this insight "intratextuality", where the strategic placement and sequence of text makes a connection to other stories. As he says, "- and this is the thesis of my book -to the interstices between the stories as well."

If you are new to Raymond Carver's stories and poems, you may overlook this as you become ensconced into what has become known as Carver Country. Ruyon astutely explains these connections. An example: In the story "Intimacy", the last line, the narrator sees the need to pick up the leaves strewn, while the beginning of the next story, "Menudo", the narrator is unable to put up with the accumulation of leaves.

In Carver's story "Collectors", narrator Slater, waiting for the mailman, would "look through the curtain" while the next "What Do in San Francisco?", the narrator becomes the mailman who tells that the resident, Marston, would be "looking out at me through the curtain".

This is, indeed, an excellent book that not only gives us this insight, but it has interpretation of the stories we, as readers, may or may not agree with. There isn't a need to search for these connections, but the noted premise doesn't hurt. Excellent reference material. ....MzRizz.

I believe the first edition of this book was published in the late sixties. Well before the 1982 publication of Frank MacShane's gigantic tome "The Selected Letters of Raymond Chandler", and Robert B. Parker's "Poodle Springs" in which he would complete "The Poodle Springs Story" But now that those books exist (one of which has been reprinted in two seperate editions to tie in with HBO's 1998 telvision movie "Poodle Springs") they make "Raymond Chandler Speaking" obsolete and as such 99.99% useless. All of the essays that are reprinted are also reprinted in the stellar Library of America volume "Later Novels and Other Writings" All of the added together means that the sole reason to purchase "Raymond Chandler Speaking" is the short story "A Couple of Writers". Why no one else has reprinted it is beyond me. And another thing, how can a whole section be devoted to Raymond Chandler on famous crimes and not include Chandler's 1948 article for "Cosmopolitan" "The Ten Greatest Crimes of the Century"??? In which case "Raymond Chandler Speaking would only be 99.98% useless as this article has not been published in book form. I obtained my copy from the public library in the form of a grainy photocopy. As near as I can tell, this paperback copy was published in '97 which would have given them more than enough time from the publication of Macshane and Parker's books to revise this new edition to include more relevant items.

Originally published in 1962, this collage of excerpts from Chandler's letters, essays and drafts today is a rather unsatisfactory way to begin dabbling in Chandler's non-fiction. A much better book is the Selected Letters of Raymond Chandler, and I understand a new book of the man's correspondance will be published in early 2001. The problem with Raymond Chandler Speaking is that everything is sliced, diced and presented in a very artificial order. You have a sections such as "Raymond Chandler on Cats," Raymond Chandler on Detective Novels," and "Raymond Chandler on Writers." Most of the material is excerpted from letters--letters which appear in full and in chronological order in the Selected Letters of RC. In this book, just as Chandler's rhythm starts to click in, just as the writing's beginning to get interesting, the snippet ends. Editor Dorothy Gardiner has made a good first attempt at giving readers a feel for the author, but its been done much better since then. Of course, you get some good oddball selections from RC, like a short story ("A Couple of Writers"), the "Writers in Hollywood" essay and RC's contribution to Poodle Springs, a 12-page start to a novel that Robert B. Parker would later finish and publish as a post-mortem collaboration. There's enough here to warrant a Chandler completist to include in his/her collection, but if you want to read something with a little more momentum and that gives you a better sense of RC as a person, read the Selected Letters first.

A "page turner" is a term I usually reserve for compelling and dramatic fiction, but in this case it is apt for "Raymond Chandler Speaking," the closest thing we have to a memoir or autobiography from the most influential mystery writer of the 20th century. Although not a particularly prolific novelist, Chandler was, nevertheless, an inveterate letter writer, and his words, penned in the haunting hours of the night and probably often in an alcoholic stupor, provide wonderful insight into this man who turned a low-brow fictional form into poetry. If you've enjoyed his novels, but not gotten around to this collection of letters and a few other writings (including the first four chapters of his last novel, "Poodle Springs"), then you're in for a treat: the colorful phrase, the scintillating simile, the terse but punchy sentence-all trademarks of his groundbreaking fiction-are found in abundance here, as Chandler waxes philosophically on Hollywood, agents, writers, publishers, and cats (the feline kind). You will find something in this small volume that you could not possibly anticipate on a topic you would think would be off turf: for me it was Chandler writing on the dysfunctional effects of television, as he saw it in 1950; with pen cynically dripping with sarcasm, he wrote: "Television is really what we have been looking for all our lives.... You turn a few knobs, a few of those mechanical adjustments at which the higher apes are so proficient, and lean back and drain your mind of all thought.... You don't have to concentrate. You don't have to react. You don't have to remember. You don't miss your brain because you don't need it." Fifty years later, a good portion of the sum of academic and professional criticism of television are mere extensions of Chandler's intuitive judgment about the medium. Chandler's matchless mind and personality could have led him to many successful careers, if he controlled his personal demons; but he chose detective fiction over business, academics, politics or social/cultural criticism. This volume of letters and writings give us insight into his complex mind with its deep secrets and doubts. Little wonder this book, first published in 1962, remains (with updated introductory material) in print and a staple for libraries and the personal collections of people who like exploring the treads of genius that launched a new literary form.

This book is an interesting look at the theme of justification, the law, and salvation in the New Testament. Seifrid combines both traditional Protestantism and the New Reformation perspective together in this complex subject. In chapter 1, Seifrid deals with Paul's life, before and after conversion. How and why Paul persecuted the Church and his subsequent conversion to Christianity. Seifrid denies the newer understanding of Paul's opposition and solution to the Jewish problem by arguing that Paul did not see the Jewish problem due to its continuing exile or because of its nationalism through the symbolic elements of the Law. Paul opposed the Jewish "gospel" because it demanded that people do works of the law to gain salvation. Chapter 2 is a short commentary on Romans 1-8. However, I do take exception to Seifrid's contention that Romans 2:13 refers to justification by works at the Final Judgment FOR believers. Chapters 3 and 4 are about Paul's understanding of justification and the Law. I do object to his view that justification is a "renewal/transformation" of creation. However, he does an excellent job proving that the Law is a whole unit, not a tripartite entity. In chapter 5, Seifrid does a good job explaining what "obedience of faith" means. Contrary to some scholars (e.g., Garlington and Schreiner), the phrase does not mean "doing works" but putting faith in the risen Christ for salvation. However, he still believes that final justification for believers will be based on their works (but not as a reflection of saving faith). Chapter 6 is the best chapter of the book. Seifrid goes over the history and fall of physical Israel and why God ordained them to fall. The author's contention is that God ordained the fall of Israel so that He can display His gracious soteric acts from the condemnation of the masses. God's glory and grace can only be manifested in darkness. Justification can only come when there is condemnation. Though there are only a "remnant" of Israelites being saved throughout history, the author makes an excellent case for the full conversion of physical Israel at the Second Coming (pp. 158-168). Chapter 7 is the only chapter I have a problem with. Seifrid's position on justification is more along the views of Schlatter, Kasemann, and Stuhlmacher, and proposes for the "recreational" view of justification rather than the purely forensic (traditional Protestantism). He even criticizes Protestants for making too much of forensic justification and imputation of Christ's righteousness. Therefore, he significantly departs from traditional Protestant soteriology. On page 181, he even states that justification is by works alone (his understanding of James 2:14-26)! Many evangelical Protestants will have a hard time agreeing with Seifrid's view on justification (as a result, Seifrid sides with so-called evangelical scholars like Fuller, Hafemann, Schreiner, Garlington, and Thielman). The first 6 chapters are good; the final chapter is bad. Overall, an interesting look at the Law and Justification.

This was very unique. As two popular foltailers came to life to play baseball. Paul Bunyan {Stong Giant} and John Henry {Steel Worker} play America's favorite sport with a blind umpire. It has...interesting results.