Augusta E. Stetson, C.S.D., refutes the statement of Mr. Clifford P. Smith that she is not a Christian Scientist. Mrs. Stetson expounds "Genuine Christian Science as Promulgated by Mary Baker Eddy" (Cover title). Also includes: "Mary Baker Eddy's Demonstration" and "There Is No Death," both by Mrs. Stetson. Written in 1927, this is Augusta Stetson's final published statement. In all her volumes Mrs. Stetson explains the genuine practice of Christian Science. Perfect-bound booklet; illustrations and color portraits; 48 pages; reprint of the 1927 edition.

Hansel and Gretel and Little Brother and Little Sister have always been two of my favorite fairy tales because they tell of siblings working together and succeeding. Consequently, I am happy Barefoot Books has published this new collection of brother and sister tales gathered from around the world. These stories make great bedtime reading to or for siblings. The illustrations are also beautiful and enhance the stories by showing native settings. This would make a great gift to some of your favorite siblings or young children who are just learning how to work together. The strengths and weaknesses of each sibling complement the other sibling, ensuring the success they might not accomplish by themselves. Families are universal and this collection proves it.

Wondurful book! A entry for every week of the year and room for you to write your own obsevations. It has entrys about evreything from ticks to blackberry pie. If you want to know more about the N.C piedmont, this is the book for you!

I was dying of curiosity; I wanted to know what happened to Emma Smith. This book tells you in detail--it even gives you the details of her children and her role in the mormon community during and after the prophets life. I am not a mormon; however, I have mormon history and I find Emma Smith fascinating. She believed her husband and followed him through so much. She never questioned his teachings except for the polygamy issue; how betrayed she must have felt when those women so very close to her were "chosen" to be Joseph's wives and "hid it all behind her back." I fail to see what is so holy about that, life threatening or not. I see those women as enamoured by Joseph Smith and his position of power, status and celebrity in the Church---"groupies" basically. It seems Emma has proved she was not impressed so much by his authority, but of her human husband. Capable of much folly and error, yet wholly human. The authors paint Mr. Smith as just such a man. I feel they have Emma's personality down right. She had an unlucky time with her husbands. For a woman of such wit and intelligence, as this book proves, it is too bad. The authors show us also how Emma was seen by the Church and its members after Josephs death. I feel the book was not biased, for it seems an effort was made to keep it objective. I appreciate that it was not an attempt to convert me or prove "mormonism" to me at all, either. It was simply a good, researched, interesting book. Truly, Emma Smith was an "enigma."

Perhaps the most accurate biography of Emma Smith. The authors, one a member of the LDS (Mormons,) and the other a member of RLDS (Reorganized LDS), represent the events of Emma's life with a respectable balance of sensitivity and scholarly detachment.

Without resorting to theological conclusions or endorsements, Mormon Enigma presents the difficutlies associated with Emma's marriage to the charismatic religous leader, Joseph, and gives insights into the turmoil that accompanied her throughout her life. Her opposition to polygamy, ridicule by Joseph and his companions, and her influence on the evolving culture of the church are all well discussed.

A reader's perspectives and beliefs can be challenged, but the integrity of the authors cannot. A highly recommended read for those interested in the history of the early Mormon church.

This biography is first rate. Along with Thomas Alexander's biography of Wilford Woodruff, this is where prospective Mormon biographers should look for an example. It is balanced and even handed. When I finished the book, I felt like I knew WHO Emma Smith was and what she had gone through. All too often, Mormon biographies provide us with a lot of facts and experiences about a persons life, but leave us wondering who someone really was, not just what they did.

The biographers masterfully handle the extremely complex world of polygamy. They don't choose the easy way out of victimizing Emma and demonizing Joseph, or the other way around. They show the difficulties faced by both without passing judgment on either one.
Anyone who reads this marvelous book will have a greater appreciation of Emma Smith and a much greater understanding of early Mormonism.

The title "Economic Sentiments" is intriguing. How can "sentiments" be "economic"? Is "sympathy" economic? Or "greed"? Or maybe the "desire to better one's conditions," which is neither greed nor thrift nor entrepreneurial adventurism, but maybe a little of each. Unfortunately Ms. Rothschild does not deliver on the promise of the book's title. She is very learned and obviously knows her stuff, but most readers will likely be disappointed by the slighting of Smith in a book that, judging by its title, presumably would treat Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments. But close textual analysis is not Rothschild's bag (as Austin Powers might put it). There is, however, an extended discussion as to why Smith's "invisible hand" is just a big joke, but that is not a verifiable argument, nor can Rothschild draw on her considerable learning to make it. After all, how can you prove that a joke is a joke? And nothing prevents a joke from being both ironic and true. Emma invokes the reductio ad inegalitarium to argue that Smith could never have believed in an "invisible hand." It is argument by proximity. I know Smith, Smith is a friend of mine, and the Smith I know could never have assumed the inegalitarian vantage of the omniscient observer. Ergo the "invisible hand" is a joke. Is that convincing? She then launches on an extended comparision of Smith and Hayek that attempts to assimilate Smith to Hayek--as if Smith were not difficult enough to understand on his own. For a scholar who clearly thinks that historical context is the greater part of intellectual history, Rothschild's eagerness to make Smith relevant is at odds with her method. There is an interesting book here that Rothschild did not write, a book about Smith's portrait of this new man, economic man, the man who Smith in fact depicts in the Theory of Moral Sentiments. Unfortunately Rothschild has written a book that is half learned exposition, half contemporary polemic, and a whole lot less than the sum of its parts.

First, a romantic note - Rothschild dedicates this book to her husband Amartya Sen, and Sen dedicated his last book ('Development as Freedom') to her. So these books will lie side by side on my shelf. Both are well worth reading.

There is more than just a familial connection. Sen clearly used his wife's research on Smith and Condorcet in the writing of 'Development as Freedom' since the Adam Smith that appears in his book is not the cold and callous economist of myth. One suspects that Rothschild's perception of Smith and Condorcet had been coloured by Sen as she presents them as more than just economists as we understand the term, but concerned with a far wider range of phenomena in politics and sociology. In fact they were exactly as much an 'economist' as Sen himself is. As any reader of Sen knows, he covers an extremely broad range of factors in his work, not just GDP and income.

Rothschild argues that Smith's example of the 'invisible hand' that regulates free markets would have as easily been meant as a malign as a benign regulator. Traders who influence markets by bribery or trickery are as much an 'invisible hand' as an imagined self-regulating mechanism. In fact, the beneficient invisible hand was very much a product of later economists. Smith was not as negative on government regulation as he was made out to be by later writers, though strongly against price-fixing by government fiat, guilds which prevented fair competition, and over-zealous regulation of trade and commerce by insiders, profiteers and parasites.

Condorcet comes across as a very attractive human being, passionate and commited to his beliefs. Accused of Utopianism, he struggled with his conviction that he had no right to dictate opinion to others. Yet he believed that his liberal philosophy was best.He was concerned with the 'ordinary man in the street', and rejected any idea that he/ she should be indoctrinated with the 'right' ideas by a state-supported educational system. He wrote for the rights of women, believing that all humanity were entitled to equal rights.

I have to say the book is dense and quite difficult at times. However, it is the ideas that are difficult, not the presentation. It will probably repay a second reading.But I feel after reading this that I have had an excellent introduction to two first-class and important (in a world-historical sense) intellects.

To their enemies the Marquis de Condorcet was the epitome of the worst elements of the French Enlightenment, fatuously optimistic, subtly intolerant and dangerous utopian with his emphasis on the "perfectability" of man, while the notoriously absent-minded Adam Smith was the architect of a notoriously callous and philistine economic theory. Aside from that, the enthusiastic and idealistic Condorcet does not appear to have much in common with the quiet and discreet Smith. Emma Rothschild is the husband of the nobel prize winning economist A. Sen, whose most famous work shows the devastating effect dogmatically applied free market rules can have on worsening famines. Yet this book is a defense of the two from the critics of the Enlightenment.

To a surprising extent she succeeds. Conservatives will be unpleasantly surprised to read that in the decade after his death, mentioning your support of Smith did not prevent Scottish democrats from being transported to Australia by reactionary Scottish judges. For many years Tories did not view Smith as the great economist or philosopher. Instead Smith was the man whose account of his friend, the atheist philosopher David Hume on his deathbed, enraged the pious for showing Hume's complete calm, class and lack of fear of eternal damnation. Rothschild notes how the great economist Carl Menger noted how prominent socialists quoted Smith against their enemies. (Oddly enough she does not quote the passage in CAPITAL where Marx cites an enraged prelate angry at Smith for classifying priests as "unproductive labor.) Smith was an opponent of militarism, a supporter of high wages, and a supporter of French philosophy (and not unsympathetic to the French Revolution,either). Reading of his relations with Turgot and Condorcet, it will be much harder to defend the view of a sharp distinction between a good sensible Protestant Enlightenment, and a bad, Nasty, atheist one on the continent.

In discussing Turgot and Condorcet's support for the free trade in grain, which Smith also supported, Rothschild helps remind us that laissez faire did not simply mean watching while people starved. Confronted with the threat of famine in Limousin in 1770, Turgot preserved the freedom of the corn trade. But he also provided workshops for the poor, increased grain imports from other regions, reduced taxes for the poor, and protected poor tenants from eviction. Condorcet and Smith were both sympathetic to these policies. Rothschild also devotes a whole chapter to Smith's metaphor of the "invisible hand." She points out how rarely it was used in Smith's work, and how on the centennial of the publication of the Wealth of Nation almost no-one mentioned it, even at a special celebration organized by William Gladstone. She then goes into how the concept is used in Smith's works. The concept is complex, and in my view not entirely convincing. But she is successful in pointing out how Smith did not follow Hayek in viewing pre-existing structures as the product of an infallible "organic" wisdom. In contrast to the cant of a Calhoun or a Kendall, Smith realized that the most tyrannical acts of government are those that are local and unofficial.

One should point out the defense of Condorcet as well. In an age where Francois Furet, Keith Michael Baker, Mona Ozouf and others have castigated the French Revolutionary tradition as inherently totalitarian, it is good to be reminded that Condorcet is firmly in the liberal tradition. Like Smith, Condorcet was a great supporter of public education, in contrast to the conservative critics of both. Rothschild discusses his views as an economist, and as a theorist of proportional representation. Surprisingly she does not discuss what were Condorcet's most admirable views, his support for female emancipation and suffrage. But she is excellent in pointing out how Condorcet opposed the crassness of the utilitarians. She notes how Condorcet had a view of the limits of truth and scientific inquiry that would have been approved by Karl Popper himself. She notes that he did not believe that voting could or should create a General Will, in the Rousseauean Sense. He did not believe in using education as a form of propoaganda in civic studies, while his opinions were closer to the reservations of a Herder, a Holderin or a Kant than previously believed.

The book is not perfect. Although studiously documented, most of the quotes are from Smith and Condorcet themselves. More historical context could have been provided. There should have been more about actual historical studies of famines, and more on the political and social context of modern Scotland would have been very informative. And her defense of Condorcet would have been stronger if Rothschild had confronted the well-deserved reputation of Condorcet's colleagues in the Gironde for hypocrisy and demagoguery. But this is an important work, and it helps link one of the most familiar of "english" minds into a full international context. That in itself is praise enough.

I want to coments this lin

Shakespeare shalt always be my favourite.. The tragedies are just too good...Just need to read a couple'a times juss for gettin hold of it... Watchin the movie also helps..

I was attracted to the concept, I have a four year old daughter who is beginning to really enjoy poetry, but very disappointed with the execution. Some of the poems are well over the head of a 4-5 year old (I found them very un-inspiring), and other poems my daughter will interupt to correct the grammer ("Then is when I does feel a dread, Then is when I does jump into me bed" - pg 13). This book could have been so much more. A definite don't buy (IMO). For the 4-5 year old age group try "The Dragons Are Singing Tonight", my daughter loves it.

My five year old son asked me to purchase this book after he heard it on his first sleep over. I read it and found it to be very well put together. I know some people moan about the grammer, but I think that it's cute. I highly reccomend this to anyone that has a 4 to 5 year old child. Its lovely.

This seems to be a first person remniscence, or slightly fictionalized remniscence, of the adventures of a group of Engish high school girls operating a cargo carrying canal boat on the inland waters of England during World War II. There is some interesting history and information on canal boats, a straight forward narrative, and some character development. It is an interesting look at a culture, pre-war England, that was about to undergo drastic change.
It is promoted as a YA for girls, I picked it up due to my interest in boats. I believe the author meant it as a simple narrative story, and as such, it stands on it's own. I would recommend Maiden's Trip to anyone old enough to read. It's a good story, and Miss Smith comes across as an interesting person.

This book attempts to deify Joseph Smith, by glossing over the negatives and even leaving out major portions of his life. In particular, the book not only ignores polygamy, but actually pretends it doesn't even exist, even though it was a major part of the last decade of Joseph Smith's life, and factored heavily into his death. The book even discusses some of the women married to Joseph Smith without ever once mentioning those marriages.

To give the author the benefit of doubt, though, she comes from the RLDS church which maintained from its very beginnings that Joseph Smith never practiced polygamy. Still, given that it has been clearly documented repeatedly over the last 150 years, it is an incredible failing on the part of the author to not address this major aspect of Joseph and Emma's lives.

A basic history of the LDS Church as it particularly surrounds Joseph Smith. The author attempts to include Emma, but with little documentation the author bogs down the reader with overly cheerful assumptions about Emma's opinions or involvement's. "Surely Emma must have felt..." "One can fantasize that Emma..." Sadly the author avoids most difficult issues to the point of presenting a skewed history. As an LDS and a mild Church history enthusiast I found little in this book I hadn't found in other books and struggled to finish the book due to the warped presentation and overt avoidance of anything that presented Emma and Joseph in a negative light.

First of all, this book is not a history of the life of Joseph Smith. The book focuses more on Emma, thus the title "Emma and Joseph." The book is written by the great-great-grandaughter of Joseph and Emma (through their son Alexander Hale Smith). She writes as anyone else writing about their family would and as a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (not RLDS). She discusses all the highlights and good times, while skirting around the contreversial issues. If you want to read a good book with many facts concerning the relationship between Emma, Joseph and the beginings of Mormonism, this is a good book. If you want all the details dealing with the contreversial aspects of early Mormonism, read something else. Give this book a try , you will enjoy it and you will learn something new about Emma and Joseph Smith.