GBS wrote play with "approaching audiences as citizens capable of thought and prompting them to think imaginatively to some purpose" in mind, as Margery Morgan says. And there are plenty for one to think seriously about in Major Barbara.

The most interesting is his conviction that no money is untainted. That's interesting because it means the donations and public fundings the environmentalists take in come from no less than the evil polluters themselves, perhaps feeling, which GBS rightly agreed, as the Salvation Army would that they "...will take money from the Devil himself sooner than abandon the work of Salvation." But GBS also wrote in the preface that while he is okay to accept tainted money, "He must either share the world's guilt or go to another planet." From what I can gather from the preface and play, GBS believed money is the key to solve all the problems we have, hence his mentioning of Samuel Butler and his "constant sense of the importance of money," and his low opinion of Ruskin and Kroptokin, for whom, "law is consequence of the tendency of human beings to oppress fellow humans; it is reinforced by violence." Kropotkin also "provides evidence from the animal kingdom to prove that species which practices mutual aid multiply faster than others. Opposing all State power, he advocates the abolition of states, and of private property, and the transforming of humankind into a federation of mutual aid communities. According to him, capitalism cannot achieve full productivity, for it amis at maximum profits instead of production for human needs. All persons, including intellectuals, should practice manual labor. Goods should be distributed according to individual needs." (Guy de Mallac, The Widsom of Humankind by Leo Tolstoy.)

If GBS wasn't joking, then the following should be one of the most controversial ideas he raised in the preface to the play. I quote: "It would be far more sensible to put up with their vices...until they give more trouble than they are worth, at which point we should, with many apologies and expressions of sympathy and some generosity in complying with their last wishes, place them in the lethal chamber and get rid of them." Did he really mean that if you are a rapist once, you can be free and "put up with," but if you keep getting drunk (a vice), or slightly more seriously, stealing, you should be beheaded?

Shaw can be absolutely captivating even when he is being an evangelist for political philosophies that the twentieth century has proven to be nothing but vehicles for repression and mass murder (Communism - Shaw approved of Lenin even when the evidence showed him to be pure evil). This play-among his best (if you can see the movie with Rex Harrison, do not miss it)- has such brilliant dialogue and sparkling humor that it is easy to forget that one is being preached to. Shaw thinks human evil is due to socially deprived environments. Ergo, pour money into poor neighborhoods and social evils will vanish. Unfortunately for Shaw's argument, poverty and human evil are two different things entirely and only intersect occasionally and coincidently. The poor can be poor due to lack of opportunity or due to a culture of self-destructiveness (illegitmacy, drug/alcohol use, disdain for values that lead to achievement, disdain for skills that lead to steady employability). It is difficult to sustain an argument that the poor in the USA are so due to a lack of opportunity when recent immigrants have pretty much taken the available opportunities and ran with them, rapidly entering the middle classes within a generation of arriving here. Shaw simply cannot believe that anyone would choose to remain poor. Well, they can and do, when getting ahead means putting in 40+ hours a week, and not loafing all day on a street corner in an inebriated/stoned condition. Accepting that fact would have saved millions of lives that were sacrificed in the last century in the attempt to build a perfect "worker's paradise".
Leaving the silly premise behind the play aside, Shaw has crafted a startling piece of theatre and uses his magisterial command of the English language to amuse, provoke, and amaze the audience.

The playwright uncovers the debate about war and pacifism. Shaw also illuminates the poverty industry, and shows that all money is tainted. The play is a vehicle for a debate on philosophies, the burning issues of the day. Shaw shows that the audience can laugh and think, in the same play. Probably Britain's best known playwright, after Shakespeare, Shaw shines in Major Barbara

This is not the typical golf book such as an uncritical biography of a wooden tour pro or a rhapsodic elegy to the history and beauty of the sport. Alan Shipnuck's "Bud, Sweat and Tees" gets below the shiny veneer of the PGA tour. Although the title implies that the book is simply about the raucous off-the-course antics of the golfers, the author insightfully examines what it takes to break into and succeed on the tour. Most authors can only gain a reader's interest by writing about the tour's most famous golfers but Alan Shipnuck cleverly tells his story through the exploits of a journeyman golfer, Rich Beem, and his caddie, Steve Duplantis. His youthful, energetic style makes "Bud, Sweat and Tees" a great read.

Bud, Sweat, and Tees is a great book, entertaining, endearing, and full of the humorous turns we've come to expect from Alan Shipnuck. More that just the Inside Scoop on the PGA Tour--though it certainly is that, and revealingly so--the book exposes a pair of leading men straight out of central casting. There is the Salty Caddie, young but wise from experience, equipped with just enough game to know how golf works between the ropes, and plagued by personal struggles off the course. And there is the Young Gun, loaded with potential, shining in the bright light of a breakthrough moment, scratching to turn that flash of brilliance into the sustained glow of a Tour career. The obvious affection and inevitable tension between Beem and Dupantis anchors Shipnuck's book in the human dimensions of a compelling storyline. In the end, you should know that any book capable of invoking the epochal figure Spicoli from Fast Times at Ridgemont High on the first page will deliver in a big way. Oh by the way, contrary to certain claims, Shipnuck uses the word "comprise" in exactly the right way. "Beginning" writers may think that the parts comprise the whole, but careful scribes know that the whole comprises--or includes--the parts. The Point: This book comprises a number of compelling tales. Try it; you'll like it.

I consider myself something of a buff when it comes to golf books. My library includes everything from Wind to Darwin to Dobreiner to Feinstein to Samson. I was given B, S & T as a present; when I saw the cover art I was dubious as to its merits, but after reading it I have come away most impressed by the author, a young sportswriter named Alan Shipnuck. His prose is so lively as to almost jump off the page; he writes with both affection of his protagonists - the PGA Tour newcomer RIch Beem, and his veteran caddie Steve Duplantis, both talented if erratic characters - and a keen-eyed critique of their misadventures. The book enlightens as it entertains. Despite my knowledge of the subject, I learned a lot about the culture of the PGA Tour, and the goings-on of its players. What most impressed me was the intimate portrayal of the Beem and Duplantis. It is the rare book - golf of otherwise - that gets so close to its subjects. You become so involved in the stories of Beem and Duplantis as to want to stop the narrative at times and give them a good admonishing. I had heard of neither before cracking the spine of this fine book, and I now follow both of their careers closely. That is the highest compliment I can pay Alan Shipnuck. He has made me love professional golf just a little bit more.

I first heard about Copeland's book a few years ago in a college English composition class, where we had to read a section of the book and write a reader response. The chapter we read was called "How we Listen," and I was immediately struck by how clearly Copeland addressed such a complicated subject, and admired his candidness and honesty.

"What to Listen for in Music" is excerpted from Copeland's series of lectures at the New School in New York City in the late 1930s, lectures that were open to the general public. As such, Copeland's goal was to cover a wide range of musical topics that appealed to musicians and non-musicians alike, from general music theory and harmony to how composers work and the differences in operatic forms, with the premise that one can enjoy music better if he understands the underlying technical aspects better.

Copeland's ideas are very interesting, especially when he talks about the methodological differences between several well-known composers. He talks matter-of-factly about music and the creative process; even comparing a musician's working method to a plumber's so as to de-mystify it. Indeed, Copeland's is a fresh perspective about a subject that has become bogged-down in jargon and egos since its invention. The only forgettable sections of the book come toward the end where Copeland discusses opera and music drama, and some of the fundamental forms such as sonatas and fugues. Frankly, his descriptions become too detailed and I lost interest, feeling like a student in a lecture hall. But, for my intents and purposes, Copeland's work was done.

Anybody who has any interest in music owes it to themselves to read this book. In this definitive guide to musical enjoyment, Aaron Copeland takes a look at how to listen to music intelligently. Two questions are addressed in this interesting, in-depth study: Are you hearing everything that is going on? Are you really being sensitive to it?

It doesn't matter what kind of music you enjoy, everyone can get something out of this book. Though relating more closely to classical music, Aaron Copeland's ideas for listening to music will give the reader a better appreciation and understanding of whatever music they listen to.

From reading this book you will gain insight into the creative process of a composer. In laymen's terms, the book describes the way composers write music as well as how they actually listen to it. It explains that there are three separate planes upon which music is listened to. They are the sensuous plane, the expressive plane, and the sheerly musical plane. Copeland goes on to tell how music is heard on each plane and explains how each works, which I found very interesting.

Overall, Aaron Copeland's What To Listen For In Music is a good book that I recommend to anyone who has an interest in music or enjoys listening to it. A whole new level of listening ability can be gained from reading this book. It explains music from the composer's point of view, giving you insight into how music is composed, and how to listen to it, which gives you a deeper appreciation of music.

. . . for the listener who enjoys and wants to deepen her understanding of orchestral music.

Aaron Copland built much of his career on writing modern "classical" music that could be enjoyed and appreciated by the common listener. He felt that modern music should communicate to the non-musician, as well as the more experienced one. He knew that if the listener understood what made up the basics of musical composition and structure, that the experience of listening would be tremendously enhanced. This book is in the spirit of that goal, and like his most accessible music, Copland achieves this with a brilliant, conversational eloquence that is neither pandering nor pretentious. I found this book to live up to its title, "What to listen for in music." Copland takes the reader on a step by step journey of what components make up a piece of music; from the different type of composers, through the creative process and the individual elements that support the musical architecture. These elements include rhythm, melody, harmony and tone/texture. Once these are clear, he then is able to talk about a musical work as a whole, which includes its structure the different forms that it takes (eg. sonata form, synphony, opera, etc.) One does not need a musical backround to understand and enjoy this book, and yet the seasoned musician will also find a refreshing review of the basics of music. Copland loved music and this is always obvious in his joyful presentation. All one need to have to benefit from this book is a curiosity of music and its mysterious ability to move mountains.

The authors have one good point about high-het-worth psychologythat is repeted over and over again. The book is written for loweducation readers. It is written double spaced just to increase the number of pages (?). I would not recommend this book to a friend.

As a managing director of a botique money management firm catering to private clients and smaller institutions I have never before found anything with the insights contained in High-Net-Worth Psychology. The most powerful feature of the book is its practicality. It lays out how to be successful in the private client business. It's not about running the money. It's about running the clients. The only drawback is that the authors are a little long winded. Aside from that, it's a great read and I highly recommend it.

This book explains how to do the right kind of job with clients. It lays out the best ways to connect with them. I've just started using the ideas and already I'm closing more business.

but Heim is confusing in spots - pg 291 -"the testimony of the religions is essential for internal Christian life." Hmmmmm? I am sure Peter tells us that in Christ we have everything we need in order to have a thriving internal Christian life. Does Heim mean that until I study other religions my Christian life won't be all it can be? This is ludicrous.

As someone who has studied, written, and taught in the area of interreligious dialogue for the last decade, I judge Dr. Heim's most recent work of great significance. He offers a theological model that presents a way beyond the current exclusivist-inclusivist impasse in discussions about the relative truth of major world religions. The focus is on the goal or "end" of the various religions. While explicitly Christian in perspective, Dr. Heim's analysis presents non-Christian traditions in a manner that would be acceptable to their "insiders." While challenging for those without at least some academic theological background, the author's wonderful use of concrete examples should make the work accessible to a patient reader. This is a "must read" for those involved in interreligious dialogue, and for serious seekers with the requisite background. The author presents an exceptionally clear, nuanced description of the ultimate "destination(s)" possible in major world religious traditions. My hope is that his next work will be on "how to get there."

I enjoyed the story of Chi Chi Rodriguez and how he over came illness & poverty, however, I lost interest when I read vulgar quotes from a gay recording mogul. I should not have to pay to be offended. I will not buy anything from these authors again.

This is one of the best personal-finance books that you could read. "Rags to Riches" takes you beyond the usual advice, while including useful wisdom of wealth accumulation. The authors provide something much more compelling than the standard retelling of how to save, grow and protect your money. The best thing about "Rags" is that it brings the reader face-to-face with real success stories, told with a true feeling for the people behind the pocketbooks. For those of us who hope to succeed, the stories in this book are inspirational. And what's even better, these successful people are just like you and me. There's an affinity there that can't be matched by headlines about Donald Trump or George Soros. This book makes a perfect gift for college or B-school grads, mid-career folks and even someone nearing retirement age. These strategies could even work for those second- or third-career folks.

Finally, I found a book about real people, including some celebrities, and the innovative ways they made their millions. Their climb to financial independence is told with interesting anecdotes and in their own words. Most compelling are the stories about Jay Thiessens, who overcame illiteracy; Lisa G. Redshaw, who once lived in and chased rats in a parking garage and now operates a $28 million dollar string of Maryland parking garages, and Joe L. Dudley, born black with a speech impediment and failed to pass two grades but managed to create a multi-million-dollar cosmetic company. It's a fast, inspiring read.

This classic of basic definitions has a new edition that came out in 1999. Although I have not yet read that one, I do suggest that you skip this one.

The book is filled with discussions of how investors value stocks that few serious investors would recognize. There is almost nothing about investing outside the United States. NASDAQ gets almost no mention. The information about discount brokers is wrong. The terminology for describing many types of stocks was never correct, as best as I can recall.

The facts that are correct relate mostly to trivia, like what the number on a stock certificate means. It could help you answer a question on Do You Want To Be a Millionaire? but has little other practical use. Many of these facts (such as how to read the stock tables) can be garnered by simply reading the footnotes in The Wall Street Journal or Barron's.

This book is a good example of the communication stall. We tend to believe everything that we read from what should be reliable sources, even when the information is often faulty.

Donald Mitchell....

This book is excellent for people who are new to investing and managing their own money. It is colorful, easy to read, gives great real-life examples and provides a great index to the book can be used as a referrence manual. The book can be read rather quickly to give someone a feel for understnading stocks, bonds, mutual funds, futures and money in general. It's a must read prior to investing money.

References were readable but lacked depth, width and a modicum of height. However overall clarity was sharp with only bluntness at the edges. Whilst all the comments were pertinent was the pertinence too compartmentalised or too open? Dang me if I didnt just whoop and holler at finding the late neo-classicists described as New Classic Latecomers

While not a definitive work on any of the composers featured here, this book quickly gets you where you need to be to get a handle on what makes these musical whackos tick. Good blend of biographical data, quotes, photos and graphics. If you don't want to spend a lot of time flipping pages checking out those who've pushed the musical envelope in the past century, this is a worthwhile read.