All Gold Canyon is a story of a man's journey in pursuit of gold. We travel with him through his everyday explorations and realize the depth of his greed and the effects this has on the earth.
This story provides an important message to people worldwide regarding human greed and the effects on natures well being. As the human race expands, we pay less attention to our destruction of mother nature. It also can lead the reader to an insight into their own life and the ways that we destroy things without even realizing it, only to fulfull our self pleasures.
In other ways, the story is interesting because the reader follows this man's pursuit towards happiness. Both the journey and the reward get the reader involved with their own fantasy of pursuing the dream of mining for gold, unfortunately, disregarding the effects our fantasy may have on our much needed surroundings.

Jack London has for sometime been a favorite author of mine, mostly because of his easy and clever style of laying out a tale. The naturalist slant to his works leaves the reader plenty of thought-provoking moments at the end of each reading.

Jack's reputation of setting many of his stories in the harsh northland is overcome with the diversity of his writings in this collection of short stories.

I use a pocket pc to read e-books. When I have an open spot in my day, I quite enjoy proping my feet up near a fireplace and get a little injection of one of Jack London's tales.

The cold Alaskan air could burn anybody's skin and heart, but not this wolf named Buck. He showed he had heart in everything that he did. One of the many things Buck did during his three thousand miles was earning ownership from all the dogs on the team and from all of the men and women who owned him. He showed courage by pulling twenty five-pound sacks of flour for one hundred yards all by himself. This book is a good one to read if you love adventure, excitement and danger. I would recommend this book to anybody, but mostly the younger children because of its many fun adventures.

This review is by a family of three kids. Our mom read this book aloud to us. Here are our opinions:
Anne (12): I think this was a really moving book, but some of the writer's opinions, I didn't quite agree with. Jack London says that we are shaped by our society, but I believe that we can change ourselves, because we have free will.
Michelle (11): It was a great book, but I didn't like the middle portion, because White Fang was all hatred, killing all the dogs he met.
John (9): The best part was when White Fang was sitting at the shore as boats came up, waiting to kill all the dogs. I think White Fang was good and bad. He would be a good guard dog. But he was bad because he tried to kill. He never let any dog retreat to save themselves.
Mom: This was really a good book, but I recommend it as a read aloud. The reading level is way above my kids heads, but they understood it in context as a read aloud. There are some very ferocious parts that I skipped as I read, because I thought them too graphic. But the book did inspire us to discuss the idea that we are shaped by our surroundings, and that we have free will to make our way. But also, we shape other's lives by our own choices -- so we are responsible before God to others.

London's near epic tail of a wolf struggling to adapt to civilization is one marked by adventure, excitement and emotion. London flawlessly depicts the nature of wild beasts and the environment in which they live.
The storyline follows a young gray cub called White Fang, who is thrown into the midst of human culture against his will. The young cub develops into a dominant wolf and experiences confrontations beyond his vivid imagination. White Fang possesses unique and distinctive qualities for a wolf which is wonderfully detailed in the characters countless struggles.
This is truly a well-written book, with more than enough excitement to keep any apathetic reader intrigued. Although an interesting and insightful look at the nature of animals, the book's beginning can be considered a toil to accomplish and perhaps even tedious for some.
Fortunately, with the introduction of mankind, the story sweeps into action as White Fang strives to fuse with society, and the domesticated animals that come along with it. White Fang's Possession changes multiple times during the novel, keeping readers enthused and captivated. Be advised however, the exhilaration reaches a climax only halfway into the book, and never achieves the high level of excitement at any point afterward.
Despite the less absorbing material in the first and last parts of the book, Jack London's timeless account of a ferocious wolf molded by the fingers of civilization is well worth the read. The emotional attachment one attains from reading the pages of White Fang is more than enough to engage readers of all types. Don't miss out on this book.

This is probably the greatest play ever written for RADIO! It's a medium rarely thought of for such things today, and theater people repeatedly come a cropper in trying to put it on the stage. I've seen several stage productions and one TV version, and the piece simply does not work that way. Dylan Thomas takes the LISTENER inside the characters' dreams and thoughts. Once they are concretized or thingified on a stage or screen, they are destroyed. Don't read it. Close your eyes and LISTEN. It's magnificent - funny, sweet, moving.

On November 7th, Dylan Thomas collapsed in his hotel room. On the 9th, he died. This was only a few days after the final performance of "Under Milk Wood", a special play with no acting but voices, the sort of work Thomas believed would replace the poetic impulse he feared had dried up. Although believed by many to be unfinished, "Under Milk Wood" seems perfect as it is. A journey through the events of a single day in a small town, "Under Milk Wood" is a must for Dylan Thomas fans, but also would be appreciated by fans of Garrison Keillor and other radio-storytellers. The written text cannot compare with the lively, laughter-ridden performance. Listen to the real thing, and you will, as Dylan Thomas instructed his actors, "love the words."

I first heard this recording over 30 years ago while an undergraduate student. I was stunned. It is the full theatrical experience on tape -- Dylan Thomas wrote the play for voices alone, and this recording was made with the actors simply sitting on folding chairs while delivering the lines. You can note some similarities with both Spoon River Anthology and Our Town, but Under Milk Wood contains more humor and really a more complete picture of the people and the subject town than either of those. I strongly recommend it.

Ok, this might just be me, but I found this book extremely boring. The author did an OK job on making it bearable for girls, yet I would definitely classify this as a "boy book." I found it impossible to enjoy, although guys may like it. I don't like reading about animals. I like reading about people, and how they react to different situations, a position no animal could fulfil. My favorite books are The Phantom of the Opera and A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. If you like those books, you will probably not like this one.

I have to admit that I have not really given Jack London his proper due up to now. Perhaps it is because I don't by my nature like outdoor adventure type stories, or perhaps it is because I associate White Fang and "To Build a Fire" with my youth. The fact is that Jack London is a tremendously talented writer. His understanding of the basics of life matches his great knowledge of the snow-enshrouded world of the upper latitudes. The Call of the Wild, despite its relative brevity and the fact that it is (at least on its surface) a dog's story, contains as much truth and reality of man's own struggles as that which can be sifted from the life's work of many other respected authors. The story he tells is starkly real; as such, it is not pretty, and it is not elevating. As an animal lover, I found parts of this story heartbreaking: Buck's removal from the civilized Southland in which he reigned supreme among his animal kindred to the brutal cold and even more brutal machinations of hard, weathered men who literally beat him and whipped him full of lashes is supremely sad and bothersome. Even more sad are the stories of the dogs that fill the sled's traces around him. Poor good-spirited Curly never has a chance, while Dave's story is made the more unbearable by his brave, undying spirit. Even the harsh taskmaster Spitz has to be pitied, despite his harsh nature, for the reader knows full well that this harsh nature was forced upon him by man and his thirst for gold. Buck's travails are long and hard, but the nobility of his spirit makes of him a hero--this despite the fact that his primitive animal instincts and urges continually come to dominate him, pushing away the memory and reality of his younger, softer days among civilized man. Buck not only conquers all--the weather, the harshness of the men who harness his powers in turn, the other dogs and wolves he comes into contact with--he thrives. The redemption he seems to gain with the fortunate encounter with John Thornton is also dashed in the end, after which Buck finally gives in fully to "the call of the wild" and becomes a creature of nature only. While this is a sad ending of sorts, one also feels joy and satisfaction at Buck's refusal to surrender to nature's harsh trials and his ability to find his own kind of happiness in the transplanted world in which he was placed. This isn't a story to read when you are depressed. London's writing is beautiful, poignant, and powerful, but it is also somber, sometimes morose, infinitely real, and at times gut-wrenching and heartbreaking.

The other stories are also powerful tales of survival (or demise) in the face of nature's harshness. I feel I am not alone in saying that I cannot recall most of the stories I had to read in school in my younger years but I distinctly recall "To Build a Fire." London's real, visceral language and description is hard to forget, as is the human pride and stupidity that characterizes the protagonist--London seems to be saying that we must respect and understand nature in order to survive and prosper. The protagonist's demise is more comical than tragic because of his lack of understanding and appreciation for the harsh realities of his environment. All of the stories bear the same general themes as the two I have mentioned. In each, man or beast is forced to battle against nature; survival is largely determined by each one's willingness or freedom to recede into primitiveness and let the blood of his ancestors rise up within his veins. Those who refuse to give in to their lowest instincts and who do not truly respect nature do not survive. I feel that London sometimes went a little overboard in "The Call of the Wild" when describing Buck's visions and instinctual memories of his ancestors among the first men, but his writing certainly remains compelling and beautiful, an important reminder to those of us today who are soft and take nature for granted that nature must be respected and that even her harshest realities are in some ways beautiful and noble, and that the law of survival applies just as much to us as it does to the beasts of the field.

The Call of the Wild is about a dog and his adventures. The writing of it and the action that takes place is excellent.

Eight good stories by Jack London, about the people and places of the south Pacific in 1908. Also a good long introduction by A. Grove Day which should (like all too many "introductions") only be read *after* reading the stories.

Most of the people in these stories are, of course, either victims or perpetrators (or both) of one of those long painful Western exploitations of a less civilized ("less civilized") part of the world. London knows that that's what's going on, and he writes with sympathy for all concerned, and without the more self-conscious bemoaning that would be expected of a XXIst century writer. To the modern reader, then, he can sometimes seem cold-blooded, but seldom disturbingly so.

The prose is fine and spare most of the time, and never gets in the way of the tale. The places and the tales are memorable. There is not a great variety of character and setting; the eight stories together could almost be a single novel. His voyage on the Snark (which inspired these stories) clearly left him with a strong and single impression of this place and these people, and he conveys that impression skillfully along to us.

Definitely worth reading.

Not a bad book, although there are a few rather blatant editing errors, such as the date of the first Zionist Congress. However, Sinclair approaches the history of Jerusalem from the traditional European perspective, one which sheds a less positive light on the Muslims and Palestinians. Read Armstrong's Jerusalem instead.

Sinclair's "Jerusalem" reminded me of Stoppard's "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead." Both center on subjects that are often at the edge of the main drama. Sinclair attempts to tell much of world history from the perspective of Jerusalem.

If you're looking for a book to read while flying traveling for business, this would be a great one.

Quite tiresome reading, too long and drawn out for my tastes. This is the story of a man calling himself Gog walking, mostly, from Edinburgh to London, with little memory of a past, and a penchant for hallucination involving much British history as it pertains to war, politics, and religion.

Slowly we learn who Gog really is, as well as the true identity of his recurring nemesis, Magog. Gog also has a wife named Maire who shows up at intervals, driven about by her mysterious chauffuer Jules, a woman masquerading as a man. Maire specializes in taunting and torturing Gog, while at the same time filling in the details of his life he has forgotten. Many other oddball characters circulate throughout this surreal road-trip: the Bagman, Maurice, Cluckitt, Evans, and even Gog's illegitimate son. Most of these people have at least one personal obssession that consumes them, most have more than one name or identity, and most of them don't mean Gog any good, either accidently or on purpose. The book is a series of fantastical mini-adventures, real and dreamed, that offer up much religious allegory, war satire, and a lot of jolting metafictional elements, like the narrative suddenly turning into play-script, questionable historical documentation, or poetry.

I confess I got much confused the longer it all went on. This became the sort of book where I would pick it up and resume reading, not really recalling what had just gone on before. I think the effect was deliberate, so I didn't try to fight it; I just put myself in the author's hands and let Gog wander to his final destination, where, yes, the dreams slowly give way to the reality of who and where "Gog" is. Acres of religious and political metaphor packed into a repetitive fantasy behemoth, I have now discovered, do not create my favourite type of reading experience. I haven't had such a hard time with a never-ceasing, symbol-laden, fantastical quest since Moby Dick. This is an imaginative extravaganza, no doubt, but I found it very tough to keep my mind from wandering away from it all; I got to the end on automatic-pilot, accepting my own ultimate inability to get excited about all Gog's search for himself while walking a torturous dream version of British history.

I enjoyed this book. Let me quote from the review by the Wall Street Journal, blurbed on the paperback:

"Mr. Sinclair's novel is wild, confusing, but fascinating. The author displays an explosive, overspilling talent...laughter, horror,violence, and lust are all facets of Gog's unconcluded quest-journey which may be long remembered."

I second.

Andrew Sinclair obviously knows his material and I found the book excellenty researched with tons of facts, names and dates. it did tend to drag sometimes but never for any long period of time. My only problem with the book is that the author tends to dismiss some alternative theories a little too easily.

The thesis of Sinclair (a decendent of the line of Templar Sinclairs of Rossyln Castle fame) is that there was a 'missing scroll' that was stolen by Carter from the tomb of Tutankhamun. Carter's admission of this came in an outburst in which he claimed that the scroll showed that the Jews were kicked out of Egypt in shame. Up to this part - the investigation, the book is a fantastic read and a good value buy for it's own sake. The next part however - Sinclair's 'guess' as to what the scroll might have said is disappointingly weak to the point of being suspicious, as it doesn't even begin to relate to anything slightly shameful. Sinclair has the Jews being kicked out of Egypt for nearly the same reasons that they claim they left of their own accord anyway and are the heros of the story. This fits neither with Carter's claim nor with the round of 'assassinations' of people who might have known of it's 'dangerous' contents, which Sinclair details in his book. The Old Testament is full of some very weird things - The Judean King Hezekiah "...brake in pieces the brazen serpent that Moses had made: for unto those days the children of Israel did burn incense to it" - Kings 18.4, What was really in the Ark of The Covenant : "Ye have born the tabernacle of your Moloch" - Amos 8.26, Was it more likely that the Jews were kicked out of 'civilised Egypt'in shame for being a tribe of serpent worshipping child sacrificers : "Thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors: the firstborn of thy sons though shalt give unto me", Ezekiel 20.25 : " I gave them also statutes that were not good and judgements whereby they should not live... that they caused to pass through the fire all that openeth the womb". Sinclair, if you must speculate about the contents of a missing ancient scroll then make it match the claims of the people who have seen it, what is known already... and interesting.