Normally, I wouldn't bother with a book that was based on a television screenplay. However, I bought this one by mistake (thinking I was getting MacKinlay Kantor's Andersonville) and decided to punish myself for carelessness by reading it.

It must be admitted that the book reads quickly. This is because it is written at about a third grade level. Unfortunately, this picturesque effect is spoiled by the language and content, which seem to indicate that Vaughn thought he was writing for adults.

The characters are invaribly one-dimensional; the noble ones are totally noble, the evil ones purely evil. About the only one who seemed even remotely human was the commandant Wirz, who seemed to at least have some inkling that the prisoners were being mistreated. But he was able to excuse himself because he was just following orders, and, besides, if the prisoners would just show some discipline and obey the rules, everything would be fine.

Wirz's dialect is a scream, as is the accent of the Confederate soldiers. Oddly enough, they seem to be unaware of it; when one Union soldier (Gleason) escapes and makes his way home by temporarily joining up with the Confederates, he continues to speak his good unaccented Pennsylvanian and nobody seems to notice.

This whole Gleason adventure, by the way, is totally irrelevant to the story, seeming no more than an excuse for a sex scene with a Confederate widow.

There are many moral and philosophical issues arising from the Andersonville experience that Vaughn does touch on briefly, for example, to what extent does our environment excuse our actions? But the development of these ideas never scratches the surface, and there is no closure; the ending is incredibly weak and unsatisfying.

One never really gets the sense of what Andersonville was really like, but then, it would be impossible to make a really true film about it. Get a history book with some pictures of Andersonville captives, and you'll see why.

If you want to read a good novel about Andersonville, get Kantor's. It's not as easy to read as this book--and you'll probably have to skip a television show or two to get through it--but it's well worth the effort.

Robert Vaughan's Andersonville brings to life the horrors that the union prisoners had to deal with on a daily basis. This is not meant to be a historically accurate novel telling the reader all the events that took place in the prison. The book shows the reader what the average prisoner had to go through. Vaughan does a good job showing the savage attacks of the Raiders, a group that attacked new prisoners and robbed them of their supplies. Vaughan also does a great job showing the boredom that filled the prisoners lives. The conflict that man has with himself by not drinking the water and by going a couple of days with out food. This book is a quick read and keeps the reader on the edge of their seat with unique twists in the story line. I recommend this book to Civil war Buffs and anyone who is looking for a good book to read on an airplane or a train.

Andersonville was a most serious death camp for captured Northern Soilders. When I saw the movie it broke my heart to see the way we were treated by southerns. The account was well written and the part where the Raiders were on trial and then the part where they were hung. Showed that there was some justice being served,espically with Wirtz holding them while trial was being readied. The real test was shown with the escape and recapture, it is known now that the first duty of any military personnel is to escape from the enemy. My heart really goes out to those who fought and were captured by the Rebels. In the end of the book the tomestone of Martin Blackburn was a good way to close this book. It os sad to know that Those who died in this conflict put there lives down to defend this country. I pray that we never have a consentration camp here in America with Americans held in it ever again.

Thank you S.R. Haldeman, Scott M. Great Lakes Naval Hospital

David W. Rintels' "Clarence Darrow: A One-Man Play" had the virtue of being performed by Henry Fonda. Indeed, which is based on Irving Stone's biography "Clarence Darrow for the Defense," is dedicated to both Fonda and John Houseman, who directed the original stage production. A taped performance, directed by John Rich (noted for his television work on "All in the Family") was aired as "IBM Presents Clarence Darrow" on September 4, 1974 on NBC. Rintels won the 1974-75 Emmy for Outstanding Writing in a Special Program--Drama or Comedy--Adaptation for his reworking of the play for television. This play focuses on Darrow as the champion of the underdog, a longer who fights for causes with every breath in his body. Obviously Darrow is a man from the past, because he represents a time when the practice of the law was a noble profession. The two acts are built around the great court cases that were the defining moments of Darrow's legal career.

Of course, my primary interest is how the play deals with the subject of the Scopes "Monkey" Trial, which is covered in the second act and deals almost exclusively with Darrow's celebrated cross-examination of William Jennings Bryan. Since Bryan is not there to speak on his behalf, Darrow's questions and comments provide the only clues as to what the Great Commoner was "saying." Rintels does stick to the topics Darrow actually quizzed Bryan about on that hot afternoon in Dayton, Tennessee way back in 1925, but he takes extreme liberties with Bryan's various positions. For examples, Bryan had immediately declared it was the earth and not the sun God had halted, then refusing to explain the apparent error. Rintles also has Bryan holding to Bishop Usher's calculations as to the date of the flood and then creates a brand new joke, "Any idea who Noah threw the rope to when he docked the ark?" Of course, Rintels is following the lead of "Inherit the Wind," with Darrow forcing Bryan to declare his belief that the 24-hour days of creation were not necessarily 24-hour days, ignoring Bryan's preemptive point on the length of days before the sun was created. However, the Scopes trial is not given the final word in this particular play. That is reserved for Darrow's eloquent plea in the Loeb-Leopold case. Ultimately, it is Fonda's performance more than anything else then ennobles Darrow's character.