Eliot Porter's beautiful photographs of wildflowers, trees, and mountain streams are an interesting juxtaposition to the often caustic prose of Edward Abbey, who writes the main body of the text, and Harry Caudill, who writes the epilogue. This book is Abbey at his best, showing that he can write well about a landscape other than the American southwest. He describes the landscape of the Southern Appalachians in their stark reality: the billboards and phony saloons of industrial tourism, the abandoned stores and churches, the paved roads catering to the rich and sedentary, the forsaken Cherokees. His story is a truthful and compassionate account of the tragedies of the region, as well as a powerful argument that capitalism has failed. This is not the place to start with Abbey--"Desert Solitaire" or "Abbey's Road" would be a better choice--but for those who are already familiar with him, this book will not be a disappointment.

Among historians in Kentucky the name Thomas D. Clark is almost as important as Simon Kenton. Clark has had a remarkably long and fruitful career as a historian in Kentucky. Too many historians after a long career of teaching and writing history will retire into anonymity, but not Thomas Clark. Many years after the age when most people retire, Clark wrote a book about a frontiersman who first came into Kentucky when it was known as the Hostile West. This story of Kenton will not only come alive for adults, but could also be enjoyed by younger readers due to the audience that Clark had in mind when putting this history together. When first learning about the history of our nation, Kentucky students learn about the great military leaders of Virginia, and the men of the North East who dared to dream of being great political leaders, etc; It is hard to find a book that a young reader can sit down with and read about a person who will forever be known as a great Kentuckian. The life of Simon Kenton was not polished up by Clark and made into a politically correct story that will fit perfectly into our historical revisionistic modern textbooks. Clark doesn't cover up the fact that Kenton killed Indians, stole horses and guns, and took land away from people who certainly had rights to this beautiful hunting ground; this is REAL history, and it is written for an audience that may not otherwise hear this story. All young people, not only those who live in Kentucky, should learn about the life of Simon Kenton. Like Simon Kenton, Thomas D. Clark will forever be known as a great Kentuckian.

E.P. Alexander, Longstreet and Lee's Chief of Artillery, wrote two books. This book, his first, was written while Alexander was in Central America, without access to the Official Records, etc. Thus, he wrote primarily from memory. Alexander started the work at the urgings of his children and did not intend the work to be published. It was meant for his family only. As a result, it is a very personal account of his life during the Civil War. He does go into detail regarding battles in which he participated and freely offers his opinions about various strategies, tactics and leaders. (If no one but his family was to read it, then there was no one to offend.) In his opinions Alexander comes across as scrupulously honest and straight-forward, not to mention intelligent. Later Alexander decided to write a 2nd book; and at first he used these recollections as the basis for that book (whose title I forget). He then gave up this tactic and wrote his 2nd book from "scratch". So now, Gary Gallagher has once again come to the rescue and pieced together Alexander's first writings - which is this particular book......Overall, I found this to be one of the most interesting and enjoyable books I have read. It is very funny at times; then often sad. It contains much information about battles; and also insights into the leaders of those battles. But while his 2nd book is a strict military tract about the Civil War, this 1st book also gives the reader a "feel" for the people involved. It was a joy to read - one great book!

I think that as time goes by, Porter Alexander's personal memoirs, written for his family and thus very candid, will come to be seen as an outstanding work both of historical reminiscence and of 19th century writing. The Introduction, in which Alexander tells of some incidents from his boyhood, is worth the entire book. But, there is more. Alexander worked either as signals officer, ordnance officer or artillery commander for virtually everybody in the Army of Northern Virginia, including Beauregard, J.E. Johnston, Stonewall Jackson, Longstreet, and Lee. He participated in virtually every major battle. He has the rare ability to desribe events in a fresh and modern manner, so that the reader is there with him in the thick of things. I can only imagine the thrill that the editor must have had when he found these papers at UNC in 1989. Alexander apparently wrote a more formal history of the Civil War published in 1907 with which I am not familiar. Although the frontispiece shows an unremarkable face, the writing shows the glowing intelligence and enthusiasm that must have impressed his superiors and led to his being given one responsible assignment after another. By being present, but a generation younger than the ANV leaders, he is able to give both intimate, but also critical pictures of them. This book is indispensible to anyone with an interest in the Civil War in the Eastern Theater. A true classic.

One of the most enjoyable memoirs I've ever read. I disagree with the reviewer who said Alexander tended to bragg about his accomplishments. If anything, I thought this book rather modest. However, Alexander is not shy about sharing his opinions, but this did not impress me as bragging. His vignettes of the leaders he had personnal dealings with are priceless and add a dimension to my impressions of men such as Lee and Longstreet. The book left me wanting to know about Alexander the man. No good biography of him exists to my knowledge. I read one account a number of years ago in 'Civil War Times Illustrated' that stated he had a rather nasty temper. I was unable to form a mental picture of the man from reading his book because the narrative is that of a good-natured fellow teling the openly honest story of his war service. I was left wanting to get to know this person a little better. This is a must read.

Michael Golay is a master story-teller. Thus he instantly enthralls his audience by inter-weaving the lives of one of America's greatest heroes: Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, and an American traitor: Edward Porter Alexander, into one, seamless story. Golay takes dry, dead history and makes it live, so that the seemingly formidable task of reading 345 pages passes quickly and enjoyably.

This is a great book to read if you are looking for a little fun, or if you wish to share information with a friend or family member unfamiliar with the details of America's 19th century, intramural tragedy.

However, a double biography is an artificial construct, at best. Golay's choice to tie together the lives of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain and Edward Porter Alexander emphasizes just how artificial that structure can be.

Chamberlain was a genuine American hero: a civilian academic, past the age when he would have been expected to serve, he rushed to his country's defense at the beginning of the Civil War. Serving brilliantly, at great personal cost, Chamberlain is creditted by many with turning the Battle of Gettysburg, contributing significantly during the Battle of Five Forks, and beginning the process of national healing with his chivalrous gesture at the Surrender Triangle of Appomattox Court House.

Alexander, on the other hand, was a graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point, and a regular Army officer. Like all regular Army officers, he had sworn "to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic." In order to participate in the insurrection, he violated his sacred oath: he lied. The nation expected better of the man, and should have had its expectations fulfilled.

In an age when values are, again, viewed as important, we must clearly state that, ultimately, despite the shared battles, hardships, and adventures, the lives of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain and Edward Porter Alexander were not parallel. Chamberlain's life is to be emulated, and Alexander's rejected.

This book works. It is simply flawed by its structure.

Golay writes a very good book on both Alexander and Chamberlain. There are better books on each man though. Klein's book on Alexander comes to mind as does Wallace's book on Chamberlain or Trulock's book on Chamberlain. I think though the previous reviewer is too quick to judge Alexander. To understand Alexander better I highly reccomend his book "Fighting for the Confederacy" which gives his motives for fighting and his experiences in the Civil War. I think it is very easy to judge a 140 years after the fact. I personally think Alexander was a good and brave man. He fought for his home. Chamberlain and Alexander believed in different things let us respect them for that.

This book, unlike Alexander's more recently discovered personal memoir, is only for the serious scholar. His account of strategy, tactics and troop movements is almost completely unleavened with anecdotes or personal reactions. I found it to be very dry, very hard to maintain interest in. That isn't to say it's not an important book -- it is, very much so. There are areas where Alexander's knowledge falters and he should not be taken as a sole source of information, but in general, this is a very detailed and worthwhile account by an intelligent participant. But recreational reading? Not on your life. I'd recommend the author's Fighting for the Confederacy instead.

I believe this to be the most accurate, and honest, first-hand account of the Army of Northern Virginia. After reading this book, your perception of certain battlefields will never be the same. Not only was Alexander a true soldier, but also a fine scholar.

Alexander's memoirs is perhaps the best of any officer from the North and South. His narrative is brutally honest when it comes to the strategies of the Army of Northern Virginia. He is also not shy when it comes to pointing out mistakes made, even when made by Lee, Jackson, and others of the high command. Alexander writes in a very clear, and understandable way. He starts out with his being on the West Coast when the Southern states begin to secede from the Union. When his home state leaves, he reports to Lt. McPherson, later to become an admired officer in the Union army, that he must go with his state.

From here, Alexander gives his first-hand experience in nearly every battle fought in the Virginia vicinity, as well as Chickamauga in the west. You may also be surprised to find out that he writes in detail about the Army of the Potomac as well, giving its officers and strategies both praise and criticism. He always uses their reports, as well as the South's, when it comes to their accounts of the battle, and their casualty lists, giving credence and respect to both sides.

Alexander was one of Lee's most valuable officers, and perhaps his best artillerist. He was a man Lee could not spare. Longstreet and Jackson both appreciated his great knowledge and value. This book will not disappoint you. Many historians have given great praise and due credit to Alexander's scholarly narrative. I highly recommend this book to any Civil War buff.

Although the idea of Holmes taking on an apprentice is a rewarding difference from other Holmes mysteries, it seems as though he (Porter) hasn't accomplished anything by the time Holmes has arrived. Many elaborate details give a good idea of what the land looks like but almost made me forget what the case was. All in all a relativly good story.

Lloyd Biggle, who has done some spectacularly odd SF works (see 'The Still, Small Voice of Trumpets'), has shined Sherlock's eye over the poverty-stricken subnation of Wales, roughly a century ago. Holmes' companion (not Dr. Watson, who couldn't make this trip) tells us richly of the milieu, and Holmes finds the most telling clues right in plain sight. The rural Welsh characters are as real as Dickens' London townsfolk, and just as pinched. I loved it! Watson didn't write the tales this well...

I taught from an earlier edition of this book at Ivy Tech in Bloomington, Indiana while working on a PhD at Indiana University. Ivy Tech had already selected this text. Too bad. While that was around 1994, I can still recall a number of FACTUAL ERRORS. I had to tell my students that the text was wrong. Among the errors: The clear implication (though not explicitly stated) that the algebraic numbers included all the reals - that is they didn't even seem to be aquainted with the transedentals; there was another error regarding conditional probabilities... I can't recall exactly, but I can remember showing the errors to fellow doctoral students (now at UN, Reno and UC, Davis) for a good laugh. What were the reviewers doing? I guess they're a bunch of incompetents as well. To the publisher: Have some real mathematicians review math books.

I have been teaching out of Angel & Porter for the last three years. It has quite a few good examples, though I agree with the first reviewer's comment that it does need more challenging problems.

Among the topics I have covered are: inductive reasoning, set concepts, symbolic logic, truth tables, algebra, applied geometry, probability, statistics, and mathematics of finance. Though the examples are laid out fairly well for those who are mathematically inclined, the teacher who happens to have quite a few students with weak mathematical skills is often finding himself or herself in situations of having to create ways to become an effective expositor of mathematical theorems and applications. In other words, by trying to explain what the authors are providing in their examples, the instructor is frequently shouldering the added burden of making this book come to life not only from a mathematical perspective but also from a communicative standpoint.

On a positive note, however, there are several excellent applications, and the range of topics is quite broad. Oftentimes there is a gap between the level of advanced high school mathematics and that of a four-year university that is so serious that even a student who performed A's in high school will struggle in the type of college math course he or she is placed in. Fortunately, Angel and Porter have been able to fill in quite a few of the missing pieces.

This book does the job of teaching some mathematics to those with liberal-arts majors. However, over at Wayne State, we are constantly bemoaning the lack of extra problems for students to practice what they have learned (especially in light of the fact that we cover only half of the chapters of this book in a single one semester course). This is especially apparent with the probability and statistics chapters. Overall I can see this text being a commendable effort on the part of Angel and Porter to bring mathematics to those who would normally shun it.

I enjoyed the idea of Holmes taking on a former Irregular as an assistant though Porter seems somewhat narrow-minded when it comes to describing Watson and other charcters. But it is a good mysteries.