I just finished this book and was mightily impressed. My esteemed predecessor in these reviews has summarized the book very well, leaving me the opportunity to comment on a single important aspect of the book. When you mention Weill's name, people think of only one thing (if they know him at all). The Three Penny Opera. This book emphatically puts his '20 something work with Brecht in perspective, showing that he continued to grow and develop throughout his career. The narrative is keen and passionate. The details of the creative periods and production periods of various works are gripping. My net response is: there is a lot more to this man's creative output than just The Three Penny Opera and Mahagony (son of 3-penny?). He deserves to be heard; will he?

Biographies (especially those of people from the entertainment industry) have become a fad since the early 80's, and most of them, however entertaining, don't add much to our knowledge of their subject and time. One admirable exception is this account about Kurt Weill and his lifetime by Ronald Sanders. Since the very beginning, Mr. Sanders manages to give us a vivid portrait of how was Germany since the years before Weill was born, how was life like in those days for Jewish people there, and the great composer's musical roots: his father was a Cantor, and many of his ancestors were professional or amateur musicians. To say only that Mr. Sanders' account is full of painstainkingly researched details would be unjust, for he goes far beyond that. He uses all these details to make us understand and feel in depth the makings of a remarkable career that unfortunately didn't last so long (Weill died prematurely, at 50). Mr. Sanders not only treats us to an unforgettable tour of 20th Century's troubled first half but also gives us a thorough knowledge of how music evolved from the days of Ferrucio Busoni and Gustav Mahler to Kurt Weill's works in the U.S., with lots of information about other great artists like Arnold Schoenberg, Bertolt Brecht, Lotte Lenya, how Weill created such masterpieces as "Dreigroschenoper", "Knickerbocker Holiday", "Lady in the Dark", and so on. You can say that this is a cliché, but, if you are, like me, interested in anything related to the best music that was produced in the 20th Century, don't miss "The Days Grow Short". And if you are already a fan of Kurt Weill's, this book will make you even more appreciative of him and his music. I recommend that you read this biography with your CD player on. You'll enjoy it even more when Mr. Sanders speaks of Weill's perennial creations, like "Mack the Knife", "September Song", "Speak Low", "Lost in the Stars", "My Ship"...

Very often, scholarship on Kurt Weill tends to favor his German works such as "The Threepenny Opera" or "Mahagonny," however Sanders account spans the entire length of Weill's career. From his beginnings in Berlin with Busoni, to his German hits with Brecht, to his flight to America and "Johnny Johnson," to his Broadway successes with "Knickerbocker Holiday," "Lady in the Dark," and "One Touch of Venus." Sanders presents each era of Weill's life with the same objectivity. He calls for an approach to Weill that encompasses Weill's entire career.

If you are thinking of doing any research on Kurt Weill, THIS is the place to start.

I read this book twenty years ago when it first came out but its impact was so profound that it left an indelible mark. Every American should read this. The part about the Mayflower and the charter myth of the New Canaan, wherein genocide is made out to be a commandment from God, has shaped U.S. foreign policy ever since. This book, if read in conjunction with Jonathan Kozol's work "The night is dark and i'm far from home", Howard Zinn's "People's History of the United States", and the book in French, "L'Entaille Rouge" should rouse everyone in the U.S. from their deep slumber and help them understand something crucial: the New Canaan myth, which found expression in the genocide of the Indians, has shaped their national psyche. The U.S. was born as a haven for the Puritans, and the Puritans were anything but "nice", in fact, to borrow a phrase from the current Puritan in the White House, they were evil. Indulge in a little psychoanalysis and face the dark side in your national character... read this book!

Ronald Sanders' The Lower East Side Jews was formerly titled "The Downtown Jews": its reprint returns a classic to new audiences, providing a factual narrative which reads like fiction yet includes many important facts. Recommended for any library seeking a regional focus on Jewish populations.

I have to say that for once I have no problem whatsoever in giving a book a five star rating. This book delivers and delivers and delivers. It's nothing less than a great survey of all of socialist thought which means that in this book you'll find many extremely thought provoking essays by authors that are very out of print and hard to come by. If your just getting interested in socialism and you really want to find a 'reader' that won't rip you off go no further. Note:the one section that's deficient is the Marx/Engels section. There are plenty of good M&E readers out there so don't despair. Anyways, one of the secrets of this book which is the argument put forth that M&E are very, very far from being the be all and end all of socialism. Enjoy!

This text was assigned as required reading for a public administration course. I found the book to be easy to read and it gave a great deal of information on the NPR. I found it well worth the time.

This book contains no-holds barred debate among advocates of 3 answers to the question, "Is Jesus the Only Savior?" John Sanders defends the inclusivist belief that conscious belief in Jesus is not necessary for salvation while another author claims that salvation is possible after physical death. Ronald Nash defends the belief that Jesus is the only Savior, a position he defends in greater detail in his book titled "Is Jesus the Only Savior?" also available from amazon.

Three differing views of the fate of those who experience physical death without hearing the Gospel of Jesus Christ is fascinating, but limited. Again, as it seems to be, not all Christian views are presented.

Certainly, we who hold the Lutheran confession would side with Nash, who easily out of the three represented does the most exemplary job of using God's Word correctly. Nash is correct in his chastisement of his two opponents for not lack of good exegesis of the Bible. It is truly sad but commonplace to find such poor, hurried exegeis as exemplified by Sanders and Fackre.

It would have been good to have one argue: univesal grace, grace alone, the means of grace, and the mystery of why some saved and others not? This would have given the complete Biblical picture. This is not demonstrated by any of the three in this book.

However, as exemplary as Nash is with his defense of restrictivism by not only showing the proper exegesis and hermeneutic of the other two sides, he has some glaring weaknesses himself. As those of the Reformed are bent to do, they always want to let logic and reason dominate, rather than letting God's Word suffice.

Or as Luther would say, "What is not spoken of in God's Word must be left to the heavenly academy for resolution." We do not have all the answers to all mysteries in God's Word!" As Moses said so profoundly on his deathbed, "The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever." (Deut. 29:29)

Nash suffers, as Sanders catches him, on Double Predestination. Calvinists cannot say that Christ died for all, but only for the elect. This is the classic error of Calvin. As well, they hedge the truth of God's Scriptures of the Real Presence in the Sacrament. Sanders does not confess the B.C. Means of Grace as St. Paul does in 1 Cor. 10:1-11, that Christ was present with them, but most did not have faith and were disallowed into Promised Land. This typology extends throughout OT, allowing OT saints the same (Romans 4) as we NT saints, faith in Promised Messiah (Christ).

However, to deny infant sin (Age of Accountability) that Nash puts forth is unbiblical (Ps. 51:5) Furthermore, Nash is wise to attack inclusivism on premise that grace is with all until rejection of Christ and Gospel, and he shows forth Biblical attack to destory this false teaching.

Nash certainly is far and away the more faithful Biblical presenter, aside from the errors already identified. Further, he does not profess Christ's descent into hell as for what it was: Christ's victorious announcement of victory over the demon angels, nor is he correct is declaring Luke 16:19ff as being a parable. It does not necessarily have to be interpreted as parabolic, see Art Just's Commentary, Volume II, pg. 630ff.

Cudos to Nash for calling the other two's hand for not showing the Biblical evidence for their positions, while discounting his opponents Biblical proofs and offering restrictivist passages, Nash has provided the debate with the sure foundation of what God says about this controversial topic.

Contrary to Sanders and Fackre, Nash did an excellent job refuting both inclusivism and PME, and presented his case for restrictivism well. Though I don't agree totally with Nash's restrictivism (since I hold to unlimited atonement), he does a good job presenting a very persuasive case for the traditional evangelical understanding of the destinies of the unevangelized. Sanders' inclusivism leads to the heresy of works-salvation (unbelievers who positively respond to God's light and walk in His ways will be saved even without knowledge of Christ). Such heresy leads to another heresy: that Christians also must do good works to earn or maintain their salvation. His interpretation of Romans 2 on pp. 46-7 is horrible (he follows the interpretation of the "new perspective" that Paul was not opposing Jewish works-salvation but Jewish nationalism). ... Overall, a good book for those who want to be convinced of the truthfulness of restrictivism.