Perkins dares to throw away laymen's theories about creativity, and supports his case with theoretical considerations as well as with examples from reality. Do not expect a simple book. Perkins discusses in great length scientific research in the creativity field, as opposed to the many "creativity cookbooks" you'll find.

If one disregards the fact that this book requires an expert reader, Perkins made one of the most complete compilations in the topic of literary history. There are no introductory essays, so it requires some previous knowledge on the discussions present in the book. Behler's article is a very insightful approach to the issue of modernity, Valdez Moses offers one of the most aticulate critics to the Third World-Poscolonial paradigm, while Klancher exposes one of the most interesting theories of transmission I have read. Any researcher in the topic will find useful references. My only objection is that some topics, such as the Lovejoy-Wellek debate, are not very pertinent today, but they are still brilliant essays.

David Perkins is one of the authorities on literary history, but this book is not quite a masterpiece on the topic. One of the main distinctions(encyclopedic vs. narrative literary history) seems an obvious one, but it does not give a clear insight.The "encyclopedic literary history" is also narrative, so the classification seems too artificial. Still, the book is a very good introduction to the topic, before entering the complex works of the most influential authors in the topic, namely, Hayden White.

A book written by a bunch of North Carolina authors, each writing one chapter. As a NC native I had to see what this book was all about. The book lacked depth and jumped around. However, it was worth the read just to see how this large a group of authors work with one another. Also, if you live or have lived in the Triangle area, you'll recognize the scenery of this novel.

A book about innovation - without any innovation whatsoever

Perkins is convinced that his model for creative thinking is powerful and unique. It is trivial, unoriginal and useless. He compounds this problem by applying the model to various situations and spends 3 chapters assessing whether evolution "thinks" using his model and whether it "thinks" better than humans. Like the rest of his book, entirely irrelevant.

I never read "science" books. I bought the book because when I think "breakthrough thinking" I think about transformational work. I was pleasantly surprised to find out a lot of cool things about problem solving that I had never considered before.

Yes, he gets scientific in the end, and the book doesn't quite flow, but, on the other hand I gained a perspective on why my life sometimes goes through bumps and spurts, and have gained valuable information in my daily troubleshooting life.

The other two reviewers missed the whole point of the book. This is a well balanced book of problem solving theory, and practical examples. "The Klondike", is a good model to explain why people have trouble solving difficult problems. Yes, I have found some of this material in other books. However, I think this is presented in a more understandable and cohesive manner. I do agree with the other reviewers the book does not end well. But the first 80% is money well spent.

I liked it, yes, but, I liked "Hollywood Lesbians" a bit better. It is a wonderful premise, talking to stars about their homosexuality, but, I believe that it should not have been written unless it was a bit more revealing in it's topic. Kudos to Mr. Hadleigh who is a knowledgable writer. I would have liked to know more though (a lot was hidden even still. the reader is told this. that right there gave me a sign that all is not right with this book).

Books like The Celluloid Closet and Hollywood Babylon abound with rumors about the sexual appetites of Hollywood stars. Boze Hadleigh's Gays in Hollywood, however, seeks to provide first-hand reports. An entertainment journalist since the 1960's, Hadleigh conducted volumes of off-the-record interviews with celebrities reputed to be gay or bisexual such as Cary Grant, Paul Lynde and Anthony Perkins, as well as less well-remembered actors like Randolph Scott and William Haines. In these interviews, often given only with the understanding that they would not be published during the star's life, Hadleigh attempts to get normally secretive actors to speak about their guarded sexual lives. The results vary widely, but even the "unsuccessful" interviews can be fascinating. Some stars like Paul Lynde, James Coco and Cesar Romero, speak freely and provide valuable accounts of what it was like to be gay in an industry filled with double lives and convenience marriages. Others like Cary Grant and Anthony Perkins are more elusive, but not without revelations about co-workers and peers. And one in particular is not so kind: at the end of his interview, an exceptionally ruffled Liberace expels Hadleigh from his mansion with imperial fury. Like his earlier volumes Conversations With My Elders and Lesbians in Hollywood, Hadleigh's work is somewhat journalistically suspect. He claims that for most of these interviews, he was not allowed to tape record or take notes, and frequently the questions seems stiltedly reconstructed and retroactively self-righteous. Still, the interviews are highly entertaining and provide an important alternative view of the film industry's social history. Recommended for both general readers and scholars of gay history / film studies.

Many reviewers seem quite upset by Grant's "out-ing," but if he wasn't at least bisexual, then PLEASE let me know why he lived with Randolph Scott--rather than his wives--throughout all five of his marriages (Only one of which lasted more than 5 years). He shared a house with his (male) lover fom 1933, a year before his first marriage, until his death in 1986--most straight pairings don't last that long--his didn't! And, while you're at it, explain photos of the two topless men hanging all over each other by their swimming pool. Being gay was as much of a career-booster as being communist in his Hollywood. There's a reason the man has two Oscars....

I have bought almost all of the SNMP/RMON books and they are really nothing more than the RFC's a bit better formated and indexed. I had great hopes for this book, because Perkins "Understanding SNMP Mibs" was excellent. However, this book is no different from the dozen others that I have read. If you want a nice reference book and already have an understanding of RMON this book is nice. If your looking for insight or more explanation than the RFC's you will not find it here.

Like most other books published by Sam's, Teach yourself Visual J++ in 21 days really lacks any learning value. Subjects are often incomplete, wordy or skip important explainations. In addition to it's lack of quality, this book has several mistypes or mistakes. I would not recommend this book even to an experienced OOP programmer wanting to get a grasp on J++.

You would think, with an editor (Patrick Winters, who should keep his day job), that this book would have less than the usual number of errors and typos found in a computer book. Instead, it has just as many, if not more. How frustrating! O'Reilly and a few others do it right; why not Sams?

Errors aside, the book has that 'written by a committee' feel, and I found myself consulting other books to figure out concepts that made no sense in this one.

The new edition of the book was scheduled for release in January 1999; it still hasn't seen the light of day, over a year later. What does that say?

This was the first Java book I bought. Once I realized that the book was incredibly buggy and that it wasn't me screwing something up, I was able to learn a small bit about Java (just because I had to go digging in another manual to find out why my applets didn't work after following the examples). In a nut shell, this book taught me how bad Visual J++ is. I was determine to stick with Microsoft products but I just couldn't stands no more.

technical skill activity invention for creitve thinking of middle school student