I didn't even read the book,because I found the projects horrible.I gave it to one of my friends who also gave it to somebody else because she found it also horrible.It shows lots of projects from different people,very modern and abstract.Definetely not what I was looking for.Don't get me wrong,I like modern art and I'm very open-minded.I just found it ugly to my taste.I even feel bad of talking like that about someone else's work.I'm sorry,I really hope someone likes it.

It is extremely refreshing to see a volume that showcases serious fiber artists' work - NOT someone who is doing "crafts" (i.e., Sunbonnet Sue or Quilt-in-a-Day). Perhaps that is why the previous reviewer was so disillusioned. I really am stumped by her view that it was "horrible". She claims to be open-minded and liking modern art, but but I'm not sure I would call someone with that attitude "open-minded".

This book shows a broad range of work from nearly 100 artists from the US and Canada. There are profiles of each one, explaining their technique and motives behind the work. The amazing array of images brings traditional needlework to new levels of interest. I find it to be extremely inspiring.

Barbara Lee Smith does a wonderful job weaving art and technique. The book highlights the work of about a dozen needlework artists. In each highlight is a discussion of the art itself, a review of special techniques used, and collection of tips from the artists on a number of topics (e.g., where they get design ideas, how they proceed from paper to canvas). The book is a wonderful introduction to needlework "art" for needleworkers who know the basics and are just beginning to design their own "serious" work. The best methods book I own.

Hi there in my opinion this book doesn't even deserve one star & my reason for that is the story on page 53 Haunted in High Level. This story is so untrue it's not even funny. OK examples 35 km east of High Level there is no house and never was so how could the house be Haunted if it wasn't even there, ok maybe there was a mistake on how far it was out of town, but how do you explain that the people in the book those names never lived around there, how do I know this, I know this because 35km out East of High Level is Rocky Lane & I have lived there my hole life these people do not exsist. Ok again maybe names were changed but here is my final proof the story is untrue, and that is if the km were wrong in the book say it was 36 or 37 km east of High Level well that would mean then that those people were my neighbours & our house was the one that was only 1km away from them, these people that live there have lived there since 1991 story happens in 1992 theses people were family friends, people in book don't exsist, if it was true we would have known because we were family friends. But if it was a few km shorter than 35km say anywhere from 30 - 34 km it had absolutely no possible way of being true because this apparently happened in a house and 30 km - 34 km there are only trailers no house and it says in the story theres an atic hmm not possible in a trailor. And as I said before there is no house or trailor at 35 km east of High Level. In conclusion if you are going to wright a story make sure it is true and not just a bunch of baloney.

How does one get in touch with Barbara Smith? I believe she would be interested in the recent ghost incidents at the Medalta National Historic District in Medicine Hat, Alberta -specifically in the old Medalta Potteries and in the Hycroft China sites. Can one contact her by e-mail?

I haven't read this book yet, but I plan to. I would really like to get a hold of the author, Barbara Smith, as I have a ghost story from Edmonton for her. Can someone email me back with her email address or her address or her phone #...thank you!

The teacher who teaches this is an enviromentalist wacko and this book can be used solely for that purpose.

The authors obviously put a lot of work into making science accessible and interesting! The information in the book is up-to-date, and the approach is balanced. Great text!

This text is a clearly defined study of environmental science. It is full of content and each chapter offers extensional learning through the use open-ended presentations of current events applicable to the content. There are loads of interesting topics and there are also references to Online sources for additional information. This is an excellent book for the study of environmental science.

Thurston Twigg-Smith has a family stake in getting his view of Hawaii's history out--his grandfather was Lorrin Thurston, one of the key people in the movement that toppled Hawaii's monarchy. Smith begins his book by acknowledging this relationship and personalizes it by telling a story about a little boy asking him, "Why did your granpa steal my land?" as his mother looked on and smirked. Thurston Twigg-Smith has a very different take on the annexation period than many other historians. He sees himself as a voice of reason calling against a rush of historical revisionists. Though I do not always agree with his take on historical events, I find him a readable and persuasive author. My problem with his work is that I sometimes find him defensive of the annexationists and too dismissive of charges made against them. Smith seems determined to describe the revolt against the monacrchy as a gentle process. He frequently refers to the overthrow of the monarchy as a "Bloodless Revolution." I doubt that Leialoha, the policeman shot at point-blank range by John Good, considered the revolution "bloodless." In Chapter 5 he defends revolution as follows: "Those who led the revolt were changing a form of government by a method with long historical and legal precedent." Legal and historical precedent? Was V. Lenin exercising a legal precedent when he toppled the Romanovs? Would he extend that same justification to Ho Chi Min and Fidel Castro?
A more prescient question would be, "Does Smith extend that same view to Robert Wilcox, the very colorful gentleman who led an unsuccessful counter revolt against the Lorrin Thurston and the Provisional Government he helped set up after displacing Hawaii's royalty?"
My overall impression of Hawaiian Sovereignty: Do the Facts Matter is that it is a well-written and well-researched book with a somewhat pre-determined agenda. That said, I still recommend Smith's book. It is worth noting that there are two sides to this historical debate. Agree or disagree with his interpretation, Smith has a legitimate point of view and he defends it eloquently.

This reveralation will not sit well to those who want to turn back time based on twisted facts. How refreashing to read history from the point of view of a non-revisionist. As a resident of the state we see the raceist retorict of the radicial supported by the very paper that was founded by Twigg-Smith founded. May be there is an agenda here? Wouldn't it be nice to say 'get over it and get a job' however, this would be difficult to the lagerst welfare state in the US. Again there is insight to the real position of the US goverment and motives of the overly revered Queen in the reveolution. What a insight to the real feeling of the citizens in the early 1900. All the facts make the moderen day wineing of the sovereignty movement foundless. "The race problem solvers do not want the patient to get well' B. T. Washington-1911

Emma, Lady Wortham, is struggling to support her six-year-old daughter and her grandfather, so she's turned to crime: disguised as the Bond Street Burglar, she robs the houses of men who fleece her grandfather at cards. She's risking scandal, and worse, if she gets caught - but then, she's already the subject of scandal. For she is the estranged, cast-off wife of Lucas Coulter, Marquess of Wortham, the wife he discovered was already pregnant when he married her seven years earlier.

And now Lucas is back, and Emma wants a divorce, so she can marry someone else.

But Lucas has never forgiven Emma her betrayal of his love and trust, or the fact that she tried to deceive him and make him father another man's child. So he's not about to give her what she wants, especially not if it means that she will drag his family name through the mud yet again. So he refuses to give her a divorce. However, having seen her again, he is reminded of her beauty, and of the fact that he's never actually taken her to bed. So he offers her a bargain: live with him again and bear him an heir, and then he'll divorce her.

But what Lucas doesn't know is that Emma was actually raped. Her daughter Jenny is the child of her rapist, and Emma herself has never recovered from the trauma and pain of her one experience in men's passion. So, although she steels herself to accept Lucas, when it actually comes to letting him sleep with her, she panics.

To Lucas's credit, he believes her about the rape, and from then on he is kindness itself when it comes to giving Emma time to get accustomed to his touch and to being intimate with him. Dawson handles this aspect of the book very well; contrary to the other reviewer's comment, I didn't find the sensual element of the book at all frustrating. Emma is getting over being raped violently; of course she's not going to throw herself into lovemaking with Lucas in an abandoned manner the first time they're together!

I don't know what it was about the book which left me with a lukewarm response; I just know that, well-researched and -written though it is, this book didn't engage me in the way a story by Balogh or Beverley or Putney or a couple of other writers do. However, this book is certainly a good read, and I'll keep an eye out for others by this writer.

... a beautiful lady and her handsome lord learn that true love conquers all.

Well, that's the premise of the story.

Emma, Lady Wortham, the exiled wife of the Marquess of Wortham, goes to see her newly returned husband to ask for a divorce. She wants to end their farce of a marriage in order to give her daughter a father who will love her. The Marquess, Lucas Coulter, has his own reasons for wanting the marriage to continue, at least for awhile. Number one on that list is the all-important heir. And Lucas intends to make sure that Emma provides him with one.

ONCE UPON A SCANDAL is an entertaining book. The characters are well-drawn, and the plot moves quickly. But this book could have been improved. Lucas and Emma's relationship seems to be a series of building up to a sex scene, then breaking it off, and building back up again. Although the reason behind the break-offs and retreats is very understandable and believable, the constant cycles of up and down left me feeling like I was on a roller coaster (and getting off a roller coaster is *not* a pleasant feeling for me).

I also found it distasteful that Ms. Smith made the law officer in this book such a repulsive toad. Emma had been stealing jewels to support her family. Granted that she was in need, but because of the utter repulsiveness with which the Bow Street Runner was presented, Smith made it seem like the law shouldn't even have been questioning Emma's second-story work. It would have been much more interesting to see the Runner as someone who was simply doing his job, and then finding that maybe Emma's was a case that shouldn't be prosecuted.

ONCE UPON A SCANDAL is good, but it could have been better.

You get amazing twists and turns from the characters of this book. You feel as if you are standing on the sidelines watching the entire story unfold. I got attached to the characters because Barbara Dawson Smith gives a uniqueness to her characters which is a welcome change from the ordinary. I am going on my 3rd book written by B D Smith and can't decide which one to read first!

Having read the criticism by another online reviewer that "Saint Joan" is misleading, I wondered if we had read the same play. So I had a look at this book and the problem is obvious: no prefaces! Shaw's plays are meant to be read with his prefaces and they shouldn't be separated. Shaw himself intentionally wrote in that mode, noting at one point, "I would give six of the plays that Shakespeare did write for one of the prefaces he ought to have written." That's a little extreme, but the point is taken, and I believe that the general reasoning is valid. Shaw's complete plays with prefaces run to six volumes or so. Take that kind of route if you can; you'll be well rewarded with edification and entertainment.

While Shaw may have been a gifted playwright, his "Saint Joan" did an enormous disservice to the subject: the view it presents of Joan of Arc conflicts with the historical evidence on nearly every point, echoing instead the propaganda of her enemies. In truth, her trial was orchestrated by the English and their clerical allies (and even Shaw admits that the Inquisition overturned the verdict in 1456, shortly after the English were finally driven out of Rouen); nor was Joan a "rebel" except in the minds of her political opponents. By dredging up this fraudulent view of La Pucelle, Shaw's play was among the first popular works to undermine the efforts of countless scholars whose research had brought a more truthful view of the issue to light.

shaw liked nietzsche, ok. as long as you are fine with that read away at MAJOR. it is the retelling and literary covering of the Ubermensch. Hilarious, I can just see the protagonist standing cross-armed throughout the majority of the text while the daught beats away . . .

You know, typically people don't make you pay to read their advertisements. This is an exception. Each of the self-serving articles in this book is followed by a 1-2 page advertisement for the author that, not surprising, offers a service to solve the problem outlined in the article. How convenient! This book is a glorified collection of vendor-sponsored white papers.

This book was a valuable resource. Many tid bits of info that can really make a big difference for your success.

There is a rather peculiar book. Thompson's main goal is to criticize consequentialism but it appears that most consequentialists don't even accept the consequentialism that is her target, namely some kind of view that says we should promote *goodness simpliciter*, NOT goodness for sentient beings, goodness for persons, other states that are intrinsically good or whatever. Thompson has an odd target and even if she refutes it, it's not clear what difference it makes to most other consequentialist theories. (Thompson's view seems like it could be classified as a consequentialism anyway).

Four people give comments on Thompson's main text but two of them are't even philosophers (I think they are from English departments!??). Nussbaum's comments interesting though.

Some of Thompson's articles on these topics are a bit better than this book. I'd recommend checking them out first.

This book tells the story of Sammy, a shy little boy whose dog runs away. To find Sparky, Sammy asks a number of grownups (people he would ordinarily be too shy to talk to) if they have seen his dog. This pays off, and Sammy finds his pet. The experience of approaching people and asking for help is meant to provide a successful model: The child hearing or reading the story is supposed to learn that talking to people doesn't have terrible consequences. The story and illustrations are appealing, and may be helpful to some shy children. There is also a brief essay to provide adults with information about shyness in children; it includes exercises parents can use. There is, however, one problem with the book: The fact is that talking to grownups DOES sometimes have terrible consequences for children. Kids who are trusting and approach adults are at increased risk of becoming victims of child molesters. (In fact, one tactic molesters use to lure children away is to ask them for help in finding a lost pet-- a situation very close to the one in the story.) There are, in other words, good reasons for children to be wary of adults. Parents will have to ask themselves whether their child's shyness is so severe that they need to intervene, or whether to be glad that the child is behaving in a way that may make him safer in a dangerous world.

This little book presents a series of tales from the seven seas, the best of which include a very interesting account of cannibalism due to shipwreck on a desert island, and story of the disaster of the Lexington. All the stories include only the original narrative, and therefore the language is at times very old fashioned, but overall this adds to the originality and the general appeal. Not all the stories, in my opinion, are worth reading, but some are striking.